Categorical Exclusions From Environmental Review, 24514-24516 [2021-09675]
Download as PDF
24514
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 87 / Friday, May 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules
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: Gregory.Trussell@
nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
should be supported by data that is
clearly quantified and explained.
Erin Morris,
Associate Administrator, Agricultural
Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2021–09642 Filed 5–6–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 51
[NRC–2018–0300]
RIN 3150–AK54
I. Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments
Categorical Exclusions From
Environmental Review
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking; request for comment.
AGENCY:
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.
SUMMARY:
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: Dawn.Forder@nrc.gov. For
technical questions contact the
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• Email comments to:
Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov. 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,
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:32 May 06, 2021
Jkt 253001
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 publiclyavailable 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 publiclyavailable 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 pdr.resource@
nrc.gov.
• 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 pdr.resource@nrc.gov 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
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 § 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
E:\FR\FM\07MYP1.SGM
07MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 87 / Friday, May 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules
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 § 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:32 May 06, 2021
Jkt 253001
longer meet the criteria for categorical
exclusion. Amending § 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
§ 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 § 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24515
• 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), § 274c., on termination by an
Agreement State of licenses for AEA
§ 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
§ 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, HighLevel Radioactive Waste, and ReactorRelated Greater than Class C Waste.’’
• Revisions to categorically exclude
approvals of certain long-term
E:\FR\FM\07MYP1.SGM
07MYP1
24516
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 87 / Friday, May 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules
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 § 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 § 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 (§ 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:32 May 06, 2021
Jkt 253001
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/publicmeetings/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
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
[EERE–2016–BT–STD–0004]
RIN 1904–AD61
Energy Conservation Program: Test
Procedures and Energy Conservation
Standards for Circulator Pumps and
Small Vertical In-Line Pumps
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Request for information.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Energy (‘‘DOE’’ or ‘‘the Department’’) is
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
restarting rulemaking activities to
consider potential test procedures and
energy conservation standards for
circulator pumps and small vertical inline pumps. Consensus
recommendations for test procedures
and energy conservation standards were
negotiated in 2016 by a stakeholder
working group of the Appliance
Standards Rulemaking Federal Advisory
Committee (‘‘ASRAC’’). Through this
request for information (‘‘RFI’’), DOE
seeks data and information regarding
development and evaluation of new test
procedures that would be reasonably
designed to produce test results which
reflect energy use during a
representative average use cycle for the
equipment without being unduly
burdensome to conduct. Additionally,
this RFI solicits information regarding
the development and evaluation of
potential new energy conservation
standards for circulator pumps and
small vertical in-line pumps, and
whether such standards would result in
significant energy savings and be
technologically feasible and
economically justified. DOE also
welcomes written comments from the
public on any subject within the scope
of this document (including those topics
not specifically raised), as well as the
submission of data and other relevant
information.
DATES: Written comments and
information are requested and will be
accepted on or before July 6, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Alternatively, interested persons may
submit comments by email to the
following address:
circpumps2016std0004@ee.doe.gov.
Include ‘‘Circulator Pumps RFI’’ and
docket number EERE–2016–BT–STD–
0004 and/or RIN number 1904–AD61 in
the subject line of the message. Submit
electronic comments in WordPerfect,
Microsoft Word, PDF, or ASCII file
format, and avoid the use of special
characters or any form of encryption.
Although DOE has routinely accepted
public comment submissions through a
variety of mechanisms, including postal
mail and hand delivery/courier, the
Department has found it necessary to
make temporary modifications to the
comment submission process in light of
the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. DOE is
currently accepting only electronic
submissions at this time. If a commenter
finds that this change poses an undue
hardship, please contact Appliance
Standards Program staff at (202) 586–
E:\FR\FM\07MYP1.SGM
07MYP1
Agencies
[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