[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 87 (Friday, May 7, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24514-24516]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-09675]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 51

[NRC-2018-0300]
RIN 3150-AK54


Categorical Exclusions From Environmental Review

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; request for comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is publishing an 
advance notice of proposed rulemaking to obtain input from stakeholders 
on its plan to amend NRC regulations on categorical exclusions for 
licensing, regulatory, and administrative actions that individually or 
cumulatively do not have a significant effect on the human environment. 
The NRC will consider public comments received on its potential changes 
and on questions related to categorical exclusions to inform a 
rulemaking that is planned for publication in fiscal year 2022. The NRC 
will hold a public meeting during the comment period to facilitate 
public participation.

DATES: Submit comments by July 21, 2021. Comments received after this 
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is 
able to ensure consideration only for comments received before this 
date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0300. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Dawn Forder; telephone: 301-415-3407; 
email: [email protected]. For technical questions contact the 
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
     Email comments to: [email protected]. If you do 
not receive an automatic email reply confirming receipt, then contact 
us at 301-415-1677.
     Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and 
Adjudications Staff.
    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting 
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Trussell, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-6244, email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0300 when contacting the NRC 
about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain 
publicly-available information related to this action by any of the 
following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0300.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS 
Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public 
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or 
by email to [email protected].
     Attention: The PDR, where you may examine and order copies 
of public documents, is currently closed. You may submit your request 
to the PDR via email at [email protected] or call 1-800-397-4209 
between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. (EST), Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays.

B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0300 in your comment submission.
    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact 
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your 
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at 
https://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions 
into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to 
remove identifying or contact information.
    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons 
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to 
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be 
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should 
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to 
remove such information before making the comment submissions available 
to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

II. Background

    The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires 
Federal agencies to undertake an assessment of the environmental 
effects of their proposed actions prior to deciding whether to approve 
or disapprove the proposed action. There are three types of NEPA 
analyses: An environmental impact statement (EIS), an environmental 
assessment (EA), or a categorical exclusion. An EA is a concise 
document that provides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining 
whether to prepare an EIS or make a finding of no significant impact 
(FONSI). If an EA supports a FONSI, the environmental review process is 
complete. If the EA reveals that the proposed action may have a 
significant effect on the human environment, the Federal agency then 
prepares an EIS. An EIS documents an agency's evaluation of the 
environmental impacts of a major Federal action significantly affecting 
the quality of the human environment.
    A categorical exclusion, by contrast, falls into the category of 
actions that do not have a significant effect on the human environment, 
as defined by a Federal agency in its procedures implementing NEPA. If 
the Federal agency finds that actions in a given category have 
repeatedly been shown to have no significant effect on the human 
environment, either individually or cumulatively, then the agency may 
establish a categorical exclusion for that category of action. Once it 
has established a categorical exclusion, the agency is not required to 
prepare an EA or EIS for any action that falls within the scope of the 
categorical exclusion, unless the agency finds, for any particular 
action, that there are special (e.g., unique, unusual, or 
controversial) circumstances that would preclude use of the categorical 
exclusion.
    The regulations in Sec.  51.22 of title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR), ``Criterion for categorical exclusion; 
identification of licensing and regulatory actions eligible for 
categorical exclusion or otherwise not requiring environmental 
review,'' specify actions that the NRC has determined not to have 
significant

[[Page 24515]]

environmental impacts. On September 24, 2003, the Council on 
Environmental Quality (CEQ) National Environmental Policy Act Task 
Force published a report, ``Modernizing NEPA Implementation'' (Task 
Force Report), that recommended Federal agencies examine their 
categorical exclusion regulations to identify potential revisions that 
would eliminate unnecessary and costly EAs. The Task Force Report 
recommends the use of information from past actions to establish the 
basis for the no significant effects. It also provides that criteria 
for identifying new categorical exclusions should include: (1) 
Repetitive actions that do not individually or cumulatively have 
significant effects on the human environment; (2) actions that 
generally require limited environmental review; and (3) actions that 
are noncontroversial. The NRC last amended Sec.  51.22(c) in 2010 
(April 10, 2010; 75 FR 20248). On December 6, 2010, CEQ issued final 
guidance on categorical exclusions (75 FR 75628). Consistent with CEQ 
guidance, the NRC periodically reviews existing categorical exclusions 
to ensure their continued appropriate use and usefulness.
    Recently the NRC reviewed its environmental programs and 
organization to identify potential opportunities to continue to meet 
its NEPA obligations in different ways that would enhance the process, 
save time, and reduce resources. One of the opportunities identified 
was the possibility of creating new or revised categorical exclusions. 
By identifying those actions that do not have the potential to 
significantly affect the environment, the NRC will ensure that it is 
focused on those actions with possibly new or significant environmental 
impacts. Further, the review for categorical exclusions ensures the 
NRC's environmental review program is more aligned with CEQ's best 
practices.

III. Regulatory Objectives

    Categorical exclusions streamline the NEPA process, saving time, 
effort, and resources by eliminating the preparation of EAs for NRC 
regulatory actions that have no significant effect on the human 
environment. Through internal discussions, the NRC has identified 
potential new categorical exclusions, areas where the scope of existing 
categories could be clarified, and where ambiguity in the criteria has 
created inconsistencies between existing excluded categories. In 
addition, the NRC is evaluating existing categorical exclusions to 
determine if any are no longer necessary or have proven to no longer 
meet the criteria for categorical exclusion. Amending Sec.  51.22(c) 
would increase efficiencies and consistency in the implementation of 
categorical exclusions and ensure applicable NRC regulatory actions are 
completed in a more efficient, effective, and timely manner. Through 
this advance notice of proposed rulemaking, the NRC requests public 
input on potential revisions to Sec.  51.22(c).

IV. Specific Areas of Consideration and Questions

    The NRC is seeking stakeholder input on areas under consideration 
for potential change. The NRC asks that commenters provide the bases 
for their comments (i.e., the underlying rationale for the position 
stated in the comment) to enable the agency to have a complete 
understanding of the comments.
    The NRC is considering revisions to categorical exclusions on the 
following basis, unless otherwise specified in the next section:
    1. The NRC has identified recurring actions that may be eligible 
for categorical exclusion because these actions do not result in 
environmental impacts and that are considered noncontroversial.
    2. Other potential candidates for categorical exclusion include 
those where, after completing multiple EAs, the NRC has always 
concluded there are no findings of significant impacts and is not aware 
of any reason that future EAs would reach a different result.

Summary of Potential Rulemaking Changes to Sec.  51.22(c) Under 
Consideration

     Reorganization of the list of categorical exclusions to 
eliminate redundancy and add clarity.
     Revisions to eliminate distinctions in categorical 
exclusions between license amendments, exemptions, rulemaking, and 
other forms of NRC actions, to ensure that categorical exclusions are 
based on the activities that would be authorized rather than the 
administrative and legal differences between the different forms of NRC 
approvals. For example, the NRC might revise a categorical exclusion 
from ``Issuance of an amendment to a permit or license issued under 
this chapter which. . .'' to ``An action under this chapter that. . .''
     Revisions to consolidate categorical exclusions for 
exemptions into one category, for example, by moving the criterion for 
exemptions related to installation or use of a facility component 
located within the restricted area.
     Revisions to categorically exclude license terminations 
that are administrative acts that do not have the potential to affect 
the environment such as termination of licensees for which no 
construction or pre-construction activities have occurred or where all 
decommissioning activities have been completed and approved and license 
termination is a final administrative step.
     Revisions to categorically exclude the NRC's concurrence, 
under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA), Sec.  274c., on 
termination by an Agreement State of licenses for AEA Sec.  11e.(2) 
byproduct material where all decommissioning activities have been 
completed and approved and NRC's concurrence is a final administrative 
step.
     Revisions to categorically exclude issuance of exemptions 
to low-level waste disposal sites for the storage and disposal of 
special nuclear material regulated by Agreement States.
     Revisions to remove or clarify no significant hazards 
considerations criteria in existing categorical exclusions because 
these criteria are related to a process for some license amendments for 
reactor licenses (from Sec.  50.92, ``Issuance of amendment''), not 
environmental reviews, and are not relevant to materials licenses 
(e.g., 10 CFR part 30, ``Rules of General Applicability to Domestic 
Licensing of Byproduct Material,'' or part 40, ``Domestic Licensing of 
Source Material,'' licenses).
     Revisions to categorically exclude actions authorizing 
licensees to delay implementation of certain new NRC requirements, for 
example, where the new requirements were previously found to not result 
in an environmental impact.
     Revisions to categorically exclude approval of relief and 
alternative requests under 10 CFR 50.55a, ``Codes and standards.''
     Revisions to categorically exclude issuance of new, 
amended, revised, and renewed certificates of compliance for cask 
designs used for spent fuel storage and transportation (issued as 
amendments to 10 CFR 72.214, ``List of approved spent fuel storage 
casks'').
     Revisions to categorically exclude approval of 
decommissioning funding plans submitted under 10 CFR parts 30, 40, 70, 
``Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material,'' or 72, ``Licensing 
Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-
Level Radioactive Waste, and Reactor-Related Greater than Class C 
Waste.''
     Revisions to categorically exclude approvals of certain 
long-term

[[Page 24516]]

surveillance plans of decommissioned uranium mills. However, long-term 
surveillance plans that include groundwater monitoring might not be 
included in the categorical exclusion.
     Revisions to categorically exclude authorizations to 
revise emergency plans for administrative changes such as reduction in 
staffing.
     Revisions to categorically exclude approvals for 
alternative waste disposal procedures for reactor and material licenses 
in accordance with Sec.  20.2002, ``Method for obtaining approval of 
proposed disposal procedures.''
     Revisions to categorically exclude NRC actions during 
decommissioning that do not authorize changes to physical structures 
such as changes to administrative, organizational, or procedural 
requirements; and therefore, do not include activities that have 
environmental impacts.
     Revisions to include references to the definition of 
construction in Sec.  51.4, ``Definitions,'' after the phrase 
``significant construction impacts'' to clarify this term where it is 
used in various categorical exclusions.

Additional Questions

    Question (1) Are there licensing and regulatory actions that do not 
or have not resulted in environmental impacts that the NRC should 
consider as a categorical exclusion?
    Question (2) Are there any categorical exclusions that are listed 
in 10 CFR 51.22(c) that the NRC should consider modifying or 
clarifying? For example, are there categorical exclusions that 
licensees, applicants, or members of the public have found confusing?
    Question (3) Are there any current categorical exclusions (Sec.  
51.22(c)) that the NRC should consider removing? For example, are there 
categorical exclusions that are no longer in use, or are there 
activities listed that have been shown to have an environmental impact?
    Question (4) Are there aspects of NRC authorized changes to 
previously approved programs, such as emergency plans, cybersecurity 
programs, quality assurance programs, radiation protection programs, or 
materials control and accounting programs that the NRC should consider 
categorically excluding?
    Question (5) Is there anything else that the NRC should consider 
regarding its regulations for categorical exclusions?

V. Public Meeting

    The NRC will conduct a public meeting to discuss the potential 
rulemaking and answer questions. The NRC will publish a notice of the 
location, time, and agenda of the meeting on the NRC's public meeting 
website at least ten calendar days before the meeting. Interested 
members from the public should monitor the NRC's public meeting website 
for information about the public meeting at: https://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/index.cfm. In addition, the meeting 
information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov/ under Docket 
ID NRC-2018-0300.

VI. Plain Writing

    The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-274) requires Federal 
agencies to write documents in a clear, concise, and well-organized 
manner. The NRC has written this document to be consistent with the 
Plain Writing Act as well as the Presidential Memorandum, ``Plain 
Language in Government Writing,'' published June 10, 1998 (63 FR 
31885). The NRC requests comment on this document with respect to the 
clarity and effectiveness of the language used.

VII. Rulemaking Process

    The NRC does not intend to provide a detailed response to 
individual comments submitted on this advance notice of proposed 
rulemaking; however, the NRC will evaluate all public input in the 
development of a proposed rule. If the NRC determines a need for 
supporting guidance, the NRC will issue the draft guidance for public 
comment. The NRC will provide another opportunity for public comment 
for any subsequent proposed rule developed before it is finalized.

    Dated: April 30, 2021.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Margaret M. Doane,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 2021-09675 Filed 5-6-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P