Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses-Environmental Review, 64166-64199 [2024-16643]

Agencies

• NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 151 (Tuesday, August 6, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64166-64199]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-16643]



[[Page 64165]]

Vol. 89

Tuesday,

No. 151

August 6, 2024

Part III





Nuclear Regulatory Commission





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





10 CFR Part 51





Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental Review; 
Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 6, 2024 / Rules 
and Regulations

[[Page 64166]]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 51

[NRC-2018-0296]
RIN 3150-AK32


Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental 
Review

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule and guidance; issuance.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its 
environmental protection regulations by updating the Commission's 2013 
findings on the environmental effect of renewing the operating license 
of a nuclear power plant. This final rule redefines the number and 
scope of the environmental issues that must be addressed during the 
review of each application for license renewal. As part of this update, 
the NRC is issuing Revision 2 to NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental 
Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' (LR GEIS), to 
account for new information and to address the impacts of initial 
license renewals, which the previous versions considered, as well as 
first subsequent license renewals. The LR GEIS, Revision 2, provides 
the technical basis for the final rule.

DATES: 
    Effective Date: This final rule is effective on September 5, 2024.
    Compliance Date: Compliance with this final rule is required by 
August 6, 2025.

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0296 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-2018-0296.
     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, at 301-415-4737, 
or by email to [email protected]. For the convenience of the reader, 
instructions about obtaining materials referenced in this document are 
provided in the ``Availability of Documents'' section.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents, by appointment, at the NRC's PDR, Room P1 B35, One White 
Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. To make 
an appointment to visit the PDR, please send an email to 
[email protected] or call 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, between 8 
a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern time (ET), Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays.
     Technical Library: The Technical Library, which is located 
at Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 
20852, is open by appointment only. Interested parties may make 
appointments to examine documents by contacting the NRC Technical 
Library by email at [email protected] between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. 
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yanely Malave-Velez, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301-415-1519, email: 
[email protected]; Jennifer Davis, Office of Nuclear Material 
Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301-415-3835, email: 
[email protected]; or Kevin Folk, Office of Nuclear Material 
Safety and Safeguards, telephone 301-415-6944, email: 
[email protected]. All are staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action

    The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA) authorizes the NRC 
to issue licenses to operate commercial nuclear power plants for up to 
40 years. The AEA and the NRC's regulations allow for the renewal of 
these licenses for up to an additional 20 years for each renewal term, 
which could either be an initial license renewal (initial LR) or 
subsequent license renewal (SLR). There are no limitations in the AEA 
or the NRC's regulations restricting the number of times a license may 
be renewed. The NRC's review of a license renewal application proceeds 
along two independent regulatory tracks: one for safety issues and 
another for environmental issues. The NRC's regulations for the license 
renewal safety review are set forth in part 54 of title 10 of the Code 
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), ``Requirements for Renewal of 
Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants.'' The NRC's environmental 
protection regulations are set forth in 10 CFR part 51, ``Environmental 
Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory 
Functions.''
    The license renewal application includes both general and technical 
information that demonstrate an applicant is in compliance with the 
NRC's regulations in 10 CFR part 54. During the safety review, the 
license renewal applicant must demonstrate that the effects of aging 
will be adequately managed so that the intended function(s) will be 
maintained consistent with the current licensing basis for the period 
of extended operation. Information in the application must be 
sufficiently detailed to permit the NRC staff to complete its review 
and develop the safety finding.
    Separate from the safety analysis, the applicant prepares an 
evaluation of the potential impacts to the environment of facility 
operation for an additional 20 years, which the NRC uses to inform its 
environmental analysis. Under the NRC's environmental protection 
regulations in 10 CFR part 51, which implement the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), renewal of a nuclear power plant 
operating license requires the preparation of an environmental impact 
statement (EIS). The NRC uses the phrase ``operating license'' to refer 
to an initial operating license as well as a renewed operating license. 
The term ``operating license'' in 10 CFR 51.53(c) and the terms 
``operating license'' and ``combined license'' in 10 CFR 51.95(c) are 
intended to have this meaning, encompassing initial licenses as well as 
those that have been previously renewed. To support the preparation of 
these EISs, the NRC issued a final rule in 1996 (61 FR 28467) and a 
supporting analysis in NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact 
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' (LR GEIS). The LR 
GEIS defines which impacts would essentially be the same at all nuclear 
power plants or a subset of plants (i.e., generic or Category 1 issues) 
and which impacts could be different at different plants and would 
require a plant-specific analysis to determine the impacts (Category 2 
issues). The determinations were codified in Table B-1, ``Summary of 
Findings on NEPA Issues for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,'' 
of appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR part 51 (hereafter referred to as 
``Table B-1'').\1\ For each license renewal

[[Page 64167]]

application, those impacts that require a plant-specific analysis must 
be analyzed by the applicant in its environmental report and by the NRC 
in a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) to NUREG-1437. 
The 1996 rule was amended in 2013 (78 FR 37281) by the issuance of an 
updated rule and publication of LR GEIS, Revision 1. In 2014, the NRC 
issued a final rule that addressed the generic determination of the 
environmental impacts of continued storage of spent nuclear fuel beyond 
a reactor's licensed life for operation (79 FR 56238). That rule 
amended 10 CFR part 51 by revising the findings of two environmental 
issues listed in Table B-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As stated in the introductory paragraph of appendix B to 
subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, the Commission has assessed the 
environmental impacts associated with granting a renewed operating 
license for a nuclear power plant to a licensee who holds either an 
operating license or construction permit as of June 30, 1995. See 61 
FR 28467.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This final rule redefines the number and scope of the environmental 
issues that must be addressed by the NRC and applicants during license 
renewal environmental reviews. These changes are based primarily on the 
lessons learned and knowledge gained from initial LR and SLR reviews 
performed by the NRC since development of the 2013 LR GEIS. The changes 
also address Commission direction in Staff Requirements Memorandum 
(SRM)--SECY-22-0024, ``Rulemaking Plan for Renewing Nuclear Power Plant 
Operating Licenses--Environmental Review (RIN 3150-AK32, NRC-2018-
0296),'' by thoroughly evaluating SLR in this review and update. In 
addition, new scientific research, public comments, changes in 
environmental regulations and impacts methodology, and other new 
information were considered in evaluating the nature and significance 
of impacts associated with license renewal.

B. Major Provisions

    In the 2013 rule, there were 78 environmental issues, 17 of which 
required a plant-specific analysis (Category 2 issues) during license 
renewal environmental reviews. In this final rule, there are 80 
environmental issues, 20 of which require a plant-specific analysis. 
The following points summarize the primary changes to the NRC's 
requirements in part 51:
    1. Several issues were consolidated, including some issues that 
were combined with other related Category 1 or Category 2 issues.
    2. One new Category 1 issue was added: ``Greenhouse gas impacts on 
climate change.''
    3. One issue was changed from Category 2 to Category 1: ``Severe 
accidents.''
    4. Two new Category 2 issues were added: ``Climate change impacts 
on environmental resources'' and ``National Marine Sanctuaries Act: 
sanctuary resources.''
    5. One Category 2 issue was divided into three separate Category 2 
issues: ``Endangered Species Act: federally listed species and critical 
habitats under U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service jurisdiction,'' 
``Endangered Species Act: federally listed species and critical 
habitats under National Marine Fisheries Service jurisdiction,'' and 
``Magnuson-Stevens Act: essential fish habitat.''

C. Costs and Benefits

    The NRC prepared a regulatory analysis to determine the expected 
quantitative and qualitative costs and benefits of the final rule and 
associated guidance. The regulatory analysis concluded that the final 
rule and associated guidance result in undiscounted total net savings 
of $89.5 million to the industry and $36 million to the NRC.
    The regulatory analysis also reflected qualitative factors to be 
considered in the NRC's rulemaking decision. Qualitative factors 
include regulatory stability, predictability, and clarity in the 
licensing process. The final rule reduces the cost to the industry of 
preparing environmental reports for license renewal applications by 
focusing resources on plant-specific analyses. The NRC also recognizes 
similar reductions in cost and will be able to better focus its 
resources on plant-specific environmental issues during reviews of 
reactor license renewal applications.
    For more information, see the regulatory analysis (available as 
indicated in Section XVI, ``Availability of Documents'' section of this 
document).

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. Environmental Review--Current 10 CFR Part 51 Regulations
    B. Rulemaking History
II. Discussion
    A. Amendments
    B. The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023
    C. Environmental Impacts To Be Reviewed
    D. Revised Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License 
Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants
    E. Actions and Basis for Changes to 10 CFR Part 51
III. Opportunities for Public Participation
IV. Response and Public Comment Analysis
    A. Overview
    B. Applicability of License Renewal Terms
    C. Summary of Comments Resulting in Substantive Changes to the 
Rule
    D. Summary of Other Public Comments
V. Section-by-Section Analysis
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
VII. Regulatory Analysis
VIII. Backfitting and Issue Finality
IX. Cumulative Effects of Regulation
X. Plain Writing
XI. National Environmental Policy Act
XII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
XIII. Congressional Review Act
XIV. Voluntary Consensus Standards
XV. Availability of Guidance
XVI. Availability of Documents

I. Background

    NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License 
Renewal of Nuclear Plants,'' (LR GEIS) is intended to streamline the 
NRC's license renewal environmental review by documenting a systematic 
approach that the NRC uses to evaluate the environmental impacts of 
renewing the operating licenses of commercial nuclear power plants. The 
LR GEIS also provides the technical basis for Table B-1, in appendix B 
to subpart A, and the Commission's other license renewal regulations in 
10 CFR part 51, ``Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic 
Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions.'' This ``Background'' 
section provides an overview of the environmental review process and 
the rulemaking history related to the license renewal process under 
which a power reactor licensee may apply for a renewal of its operating 
license.

A. Environmental Review--Current 10 CFR Part 51 Regulations

    As a Federal agency, the NRC must comply with the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by assessing the potential 
environmental effects (impacts) of a proposed agency action before 
approving or disapproving that proposed action. The regulations 
implementing the NRC's NEPA review are found in 10 CFR part 51.
    Under NEPA, Federal agencies prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) for any major Federal action significantly affecting 
the quality of the human environment. In addition, the Commission has 
identified at Sec.  51.20 certain categories of NRC proposed actions 
that require the preparation of an EIS, including the renewal of a 
license to operate a nuclear power reactor. For each plant-specific 
review, the NRC prepares a supplemental environmental impact statement 
(SEIS) to the LR GEIS.
    The NRC's provisions at Sec.  51.53(c) require an applicant for 
renewal of a

[[Page 64168]]

nuclear power plant license to submit with its application a separate 
document entitled ``Applicant's Environmental Report--Operating License 
Renewal Stage'' that describes in detail the affected environment 
around the plant, the modifications directly affecting the environment 
or any plant effluents, and any planned refurbishment activities. In 
addition, the report must address the environmental impacts of 
alternatives and any other matters described in Sec.  51.45, which 
include the following: (1) the impact of the proposed action on the 
environment, (2) any adverse environmental impacts that cannot be 
avoided, (3) alternatives to the proposed action, (4) the relationship 
between local short-term uses of the environment and maintenance and 
enhancement of long-term productivity, and (5) any irreversible or 
irretrievable commitments of resources. Within its environmental 
report, the applicant is required to include analyses of the 
environmental impacts of the proposed action, including the impacts of 
refurbishment activities, if any, associated with license renewal and 
the impacts of operation during the renewal term, for those issues 
identified as Category 2 issues in appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR 
part 51. Additionally, the applicant is required to provide any new and 
significant information of which it is aware in its environmental 
report. If there is no new and significant information for a Category 1 
issue, the applicant can rely on that Category 1 generic finding and 
analysis in the LR GEIS. The applicant's environmental report informs 
the NRC's independent evaluation.
    Before making a decision on a license renewal application for a 
nuclear power plant, the NRC is required to prepare and distribute, for 
public comment, a draft SEIS. The draft SEIS assesses the potential 
environmental impacts that may result from continued nuclear power 
plant operation and any proposed refurbishment activities during the 
renewal term (initial license renewal (initial LR) or subsequent 
license renewal (SLR)). In preparing the draft SEIS, the NRC staff will 
rely on the findings in Table B-1 for Category 1 issues and analyze the 
potential environmental impacts of the proposed action (license 
renewal) on the affected environment and specific environmental 
resources (e.g., groundwater) for Category 2 issues. Additionally, the 
NRC will consider any potentially new and significant information for 
Category 1 issues (such as any activity or aspect associated with the 
nuclear power plant operations that can act upon the environment in a 
manner or an intensity not previously recognized or quantified) and for 
uncategorized issues. An environmental issue may remain uncategorized 
where the impact level remains unknown or uncertain. Within each 
environmental resource area, the NRC staff will analyze issues that 
correspond to specific, potential environmental impacts at the specific 
site (e.g., within the groundwater resource area, groundwater quality 
degradation resulting from water withdrawals). In the draft SEIS, the 
NRC staff also will evaluate alternatives to the proposed action.
    After analyzing the potential environmental impacts for each issue, 
the NRC assigns one of the following three significance levels to 
describe its evaluation of those impacts on that issue in either the LR 
GEIS or a plant-specific SEIS:
    SMALL--The environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor 
that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important 
attribute of the resource. For the purposes of assessing radiological 
impacts, the Commission has concluded that those impacts that do not 
exceed permissible levels in the Commission's regulations are 
considered SMALL.
    MODERATE--The environmental effects are sufficient to alter 
noticeably, but not to destabilize, important attributes of the 
resource.
    LARGE--The environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are 
sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.
    In assessing the significance of environmental impacts for some 
environmental resources (e.g., federally protected ecological resources 
and historic properties that require interagency consultation with 
Federal agencies or Indian Tribes \2\), the NRC assigns the appropriate 
impact level (other than SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE) in accordance with 
the terminology used in the relevant statutes and their implementing 
regulations. The NRC conducts consultations under specific statutes, as 
appropriate.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Per 36 CFR 800.2(c)(2)(ii), the agency official will consult 
with any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization that attaches 
religious and cultural significance to historic properties that may 
be affected by an undertaking. The term ``Indian Tribes'' refers to 
Federally recognized Tribes as acknowledged by the Secretary of the 
Interior pursuant to the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act 
of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a).
    \3\ Plant-specific license renewal reviews may include 
consultations under the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
seq.), Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 
U.S.C. 1801 et seq.), National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 
1431 et seq.), and National Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. 
300101 et seq.). See NRC Tribal Policy Statement (82 FR 2402).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NRC will document its environmental review and analysis through 
the preparation of a draft SEIS that will be published for public 
comment in the Federal Register, with a minimum 45-day comment period, 
in accordance with Sec.  51.73. Further, as provided in Sec.  51.74, 
the NRC will distribute the draft SEIS to the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA), other Federal agencies that have a special 
expertise or jurisdiction with respect to any potential environmental 
impact that may be relevant to the proposed action, the applicant, and 
appropriate State, Tribal, and local agencies and clearinghouses.
    Following the public comment period, the NRC will analyze any 
comments received, revise its environmental analyses as appropriate, 
and then prepare the final SEIS in accordance with the requirements of 
Sec.  51.91. Under Sec.  51.93, the NRC will distribute the final SEIS 
to many of the same entities as the draft SEIS and to each commenter. 
The NRC also will publish a notice of availability for the final SEIS 
in the Federal Register. As set forth in Sec.  51.102 and following the 
preparation and distribution of the final SEIS, the NRC will prepare 
and issue the record of decision, which is a concise, publicly 
available statement that documents the agency's decision, as informed 
by the final SEIS and final safety evaluation report. The requirements 
for a record of decision are described in Sec.  51.103, and include 
stating the NRC's decision (e.g., the approval or disapproval of the 
license renewal application), identifying the alternatives (including 
the proposed action) considered by the agency, and a statement as to 
whether the NRC has taken all practicable measures within its 
jurisdiction to avoid or minimize environmental harm from the 
alternative selected and if not, to explain why those measures were not 
adopted. Further, the record of the decision will include a 
determination by the NRC as to whether or not the adverse environmental 
impacts of license renewal are so great that preserving the option of 
license renewal for energy planning decisionmakers would be 
unreasonable, which is the purpose and need of license renewal.

B. Rulemaking History

    In 1986, the NRC initiated a program to develop license renewal 
regulations and associated regulatory guidance in

[[Page 64169]]

anticipation of receiving applications for the renewal of nuclear power 
plant operating licenses. In 1996, the NRC published a final rule that 
amended the environmental protection regulations in 10 CFR part 51 to 
include provisions for applicants seeking to renew an operating license 
for up to an additional 20 years (61 FR 28467; June 5, 1996). The 1996 
final rule was based upon the analyses and findings of a May 1996 NRC 
environmental impact statement, ``Generic Environmental Impact 
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,'' NUREG-1437 (the 
``1996 LR GEIS'').
    Based upon the findings of the 1996 LR GEIS, the 1996 final rule 
identified those license renewal environmental issues for which a 
generic analysis had been determined to be appropriate (Category 1 
issues). Similarly, based upon the findings of the 1996 LR GEIS, the 
1996 final rule identified those environmental impacts for which a 
site- or plant-specific analysis was required, both by the applicant in 
its environmental report and by the NRC in its SEIS (Category 2 
issues). The 1996 final rule, among other amendments to 10 CFR part 51, 
added appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, ``Environmental Effect 
of Renewing the Operating License of a Nuclear Power Plant.'' Appendix 
B included Table B-1 which summarized and codified the findings of the 
1996 LR GEIS.
    In preparing the 1996 LR GEIS, the Commission based its generic 
assessment on the following factors:
    (1) License renewal will involve nuclear power plants for which the 
environmental impacts of operation are well understood as a result of 
lessons learned and knowledge gained from operating experience and 
completed license renewals.
    (2) Activities associated with license renewal are expected to be 
within this range of operating experience; thus, environmental impacts 
can be reasonably predicted.
    (3) Changes in the environment around nuclear power plants are 
gradual and predictable.
    The 1996 LR GEIS improved the efficiency of the license renewal 
process in the following ways: (1) providing an evaluation of the types 
of environmental impacts that may occur from renewing commercial 
nuclear power plant operating licenses, (2) identifying and assessing 
impacts that are expected to be generic (i.e., the same or similar) at 
all nuclear power plants or plants with specified plant or site 
characteristics, and (3) defining the number and scope of environmental 
impacts that need to be addressed in plant-specific SEISs to the 1996 
LR GEIS.
    As identified in the 1996 final rule, a Category 1 issue is an 
issue that meets the following criteria: (1) the environmental impacts 
associated with the issue have been determined to apply either to all 
plants or, for some issues, to plants having a specific type of cooling 
system or other specified plant or site characteristic; (2) a single 
significance level (i.e., small, moderate, or large) has been assigned 
to the impacts (except for certain issues discussed below in more 
detail); and (3) mitigation of adverse impacts associated with the 
issue has been considered in the analysis, and it has been determined 
that additional plant-specific mitigation measures are likely not to be 
sufficiently beneficial to warrant implementation. A Category 2 issue 
is defined as an issue where one or more of Category 1 criteria cannot 
be met, and therefore, additional plant-specific review is required.
    As stated in the 1996 final rule, the NRC recognized that 
environmental issues might change over time and that additional issues 
may need to be considered. As further stated in the introductory text 
to Table B-1, the NRC indicated that it intended to review the material 
in Table B-1 on a 10-year basis.
    On December 18, 1996 (61 FR 66537), the NRC amended the 1996 final 
rule to incorporate minor clarifying and conforming changes and to add 
language omitted from Table B-1.
    In 1999, the NRC amended 10 CFR part 51, including Table B-1, to 
expand the generic findings pertaining to the environmental impacts 
resulting from transportation of fuel and waste to and from a single 
nuclear power plant (64 FR 48496; September 3, 1999). This final rule 
also incorporated rule text consistent with the 1996 LR GEIS to address 
local traffic impacts attributable to the continued operations of a 
nuclear power plant during the license renewal term.
    In 2013, the NRC completed the first 10-year review and update of 
the 1996 LR GEIS and published a final rule (78 FR 37281; June 20, 
2013) that amended Table B-1 by updating the Commission's 1996 findings 
on the environmental impacts related to the renewal of nuclear power 
plant operating licenses and other NRC environmental protection 
regulations (e.g., 10 CFR 51.53, which sets forth the contents of the 
applicant's environmental report, 10 CFR 51.75, and 10 CFR 51.95). The 
2013 final rule redefined the number and scope of the environmental 
issues that must be addressed by the NRC and applicants during license 
renewal environmental reviews. These changes were primarily based on 
lessons learned and knowledge gained from license renewal environmental 
reviews conducted by the NRC since 1996. Together with the final rule, 
the NRC issued NUREG-1437, Revision 1 (the ``2013 LR GEIS''), as well 
as Revision 1 of Regulatory Guide (RG) 4.2, Supplement 1, ``Preparation 
of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal 
Applications,'' and Revision 1 to NUREG-1555, Supplement 1, ``Standard 
Review Plans for Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power Plants: 
Operating License Renewal.''
    On July 31, 2013 (78 FR 46255), the NRC issued a final rule to 
incorporate minor clarifying and conforming changes and revise the 
statutory authority that was cited in the authority citation for the 
final rule.
    In 2014, the NRC published a final rule titled ``Continued Storage 
of Spent Nuclear Fuel'' that revised the generic determination 
regarding the environmental impacts of the continued storage of spent 
nuclear fuel beyond a reactor's licensed life for operation and prior 
to ultimate disposal (79 FR 56238; September 14, 2014). The continued 
storage final rule also made conforming amendments to the 
determinations of environmental effects of renewing the operating 
license of a nuclear power plant. These changes addressed issues 
related to the onsite storage of spent nuclear fuel, both for the 
license renewal term and for the period after the licensed life for 
reactor operations, and offsite radiological impacts of spent nuclear 
fuel and high-level waste disposal. Specifically, the continued storage 
final rule revised two environmental issues in Table B-1: (1) ``Onsite 
storage of spent fuel'' and (2) ``Offsite radiological impacts of spent 
nuclear fuel and high-level waste disposal.''
    In August 2020, the NRC issued a notice of intent to review and 
potentially update the 2013 LR GEIS \4\ (i.e., the scoping notice) in 
the Federal Register (85 FR 47252; August 4, 2020). The comment period 
began in August 2020 and ended in November 2020. The scoping notice 
provided the public with an opportunity to submit comments and 
participate in the environmental scoping process, as defined in Sec.  
51.26. Specifically, the NRC invited the public to review the results 
of the NRC staff's

[[Page 64170]]

preliminary review of the 2013 LR GEIS, including a proposal to address 
SLR, and asked the public to provide comments and suggestions for other 
areas that should be updated. The NRC conducted four webinars where the 
staff received comments from the public. All comments provided during 
the 2020 scoping period were considered in preparing the draft revised 
LR GEIS and are publicly available. The official transcripts and the 
scoping summary report are available as indicated in the ``Availability 
of Documents'' section of this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Unless stated otherwise, references to the 2013 LR GEIS 
include the changes made to two environmental issues in Table B-1 as 
a part of the 2014 Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel final 
rule. These changes are discussed in Section 1.7.2 of the revised LR 
GEIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In July 2021, the staff submitted SECY-21-0066, ``Rulemaking Plan 
for Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental 
Review (RIN 3150-AK32; NRC-2018-0296),'' to request Commission approval 
to initiate a rulemaking to amend Table B-1 and update the 2013 LR GEIS 
and associated guidance. The rulemaking plan also proposed to remove 
the word ``initial'' from Sec.  51.53(c)(3), which, as described above, 
governs license renewal applicant's environmental reports; this change 
would have included applicants for SLR in the section's scope. The plan 
would have also made corresponding changes to the 2013 LR GEIS and the 
associated guidance.
    In February 2022, the Commission issued SRM-SECY-21-0066, 
``Rulemaking Plan for Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--
Environmental Review (RIN 3150-AK32; NRC-2018-0296).'' The Commission 
disapproved the staff's recommendation and directed the staff to 
develop a rulemaking plan that aligned with the Commission Order CLI-
22-03, and recent decisions in Turkey Point, CLI-22-02, and Peach 
Bottom, CLI-22-04, regarding the NEPA analysis of SLR applications. 
These orders concluded that the staff did not conduct an adequate NEPA 
analysis for the SLR period and further stated that the staff cannot 
exclusively rely on the 2013 LR GEIS for Category 1 issues in SLR 
environmental reviews. The SRM also directed the staff to include in 
the rulemaking plan a proposal to remove the word ``initial'' from 
Sec.  51.53(c)(3) and to revise the 2013 LR GEIS and Table B-1 and 
associated guidance to fully account for one term of SLR. The SRM also 
directed the staff to provide options for a future rulemaking effort 
regarding the 10-year regulatory update.
    In March 2022, the staff submitted SECY-22-0024, ``Rulemaking Plan 
for Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental 
Review (RIN 3150-AK32; NRC-2018-0296),'' to request Commission approval 
to initiate a rulemaking that would align with the Commission Order 
CLI-22-03 and recent decisions in Orders CLI-22-02 and CLI-22-04 
regarding the NEPA analysis of SLR applications, as well as to remove 
the word ``initial'' from Sec.  51.53(c)(3) and to revise the 2013 LR 
GEIS and Table B-1 and associated guidance to fully account for one 
term of SLR. The staff also proposed to update the 2013 LR GEIS to 
consider new technical data from completed environmental reviews, 
changes to environmental laws and regulations, and other information.
    In April 2022, the Commission issued SRM-SECY-22-0024, ``Rulemaking 
Plan for Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental 
Review (RIN 3150-AK32; NRC-2018-0296),'' approving the staff's 
recommendation to proceed with rulemaking.
    In April 2022, the staff submitted SECY-22-0036, ``Rulemaking Plan 
for Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--10-Year 
Environmental Regulatory Update (NRC-2022-0087)'' that provided options 
for a future rulemaking effort to incorporate further changes to the LR 
GEIS as part of the 10-year regulatory update to amend Table B-1. 
Because the current rulemaking would address all necessary issues, the 
staff recommended that a future rulemaking for updating the LR GEIS and 
Table B-1 be deferred, to begin no sooner than FY 2031. The staff 
further recommended that the current update of the 2013 LR GEIS 
constitute the update for this review cycle.
    In June 2022, the Commission issued SRM-SECY-22-0036 approving the 
staff's recommendation.

II. Discussion

A. Amendments

    The amendments to 10 CFR part 51 in this final rule revise the 
existing requirements for environmental reviews of applications for 
license renewal of operating nuclear power plants. The NRC uses the 
phrase ``operating license'' to refer to an initial operating license 
as well as a renewed operating license. The term ``operating license'' 
in 10 CFR 51.53(c) and the terms ``operating license'' and ``combined 
license'' in 10 CFR 51.95(c) are intended to have this meaning, 
encompassing initial licenses as well as those that have been 
previously renewed. The amendments codify the updated generic 
conclusions of the LR GEIS, Revision 2 (revised LR GEIS), for those 
issues for which a generic conclusion regarding the potential 
environmental effects (impacts) of issuing an initial or subsequent 
renewed license for a nuclear power plant can be reached. These 
conclusions have been updated to specifically account for one term of 
SLR as well as initial LR and other new information since the last 
(2013) LR GEIS update. These issues are identified as Category 1 issues 
in the revised LR GEIS. The Category 1 issues identified and described 
in the revised LR GEIS may be applied to any application for initial LR 
or first SLR for operating nuclear power plants covered by the revised 
LR GEIS and have been determined to have a SMALL impact for all plants 
or a subset of plants. Table B-1 in appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR 
part 51 summarizes and codifies the Commission's findings for all 
Category 1 issues. The revisions to Table B-1 account for one term of 
SLR; reflect lessons learned, knowledge gained, and experience from 
license renewal environmental reviews performed since development of 
the 2013 LR GEIS; consider changes to applicable laws and regulations; 
and factor in new scientific data and methodology with respect to the 
assessment of potential environmental impacts of nuclear power plant 
license renewal. In addition, the amendments include conforming changes 
to the provisions of Sec.  51.53(c)(3) and Sec.  51.95. These changes 
are intended to maintain the accuracy of the revised LR GEIS and ensure 
that future environmental reviews meet the ``hard look'' standard to 
fully account for the environmental impacts of initial LR and SLR, as 
documented in the revised LR GEIS.

B. The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023

    The NRC has made targeted changes to the revised LR GEIS to address 
amendments to the NEPA statute in the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 
(Pub. L. 118-5, 137 Stat. 10) (FRA). Among other things, these 
amendments add to NEPA a new section 107(e), which establishes page 
limits for environmental impact statements, including 300 pages for 
environmental impact statements for agency actions of ``extraordinary 
complexity.'' The NRC finds that, to the extent that section 107(e) 
applies to the revised LR GEIS, a 300 page limit is appropriate because 
the revised LR GEIS addresses a proposed action of ``extraordinary 
complexity'' in light of the complicated systems, structures, and 
components deployed in operating nuclear power plants; the number of 
resource areas addressed; and the variety of environments in which 
nuclear power plants operate. Thus, changes to the revised LR GEIS 
include the relocation

[[Page 64171]]

of certain text and other materials from Chapters 2, 3, and 4, and 
Chapters 6, 7, and 8 in their entirety, to the appendices to revise the 
document to be less than 300 pages (not including appendices, 
citations, figures, tables, and other graphics).
    The FRA also introduced a 2-year timeline for completing an EIS 
from when the agency identified a need for the EIS in section 107(g), 
although that timeline may be extended. As discussed in section I.B., 
the NRC concluded that the 2013 LR GEIS did not address SLR in February 
of 2022, when the Commission directed the staff to provide the 
rulemaking plan that led to the revised LR GEIS, which serves as the 
technical basis for this final rule. Therefore, to the extent that 
section 107(g) of NEPA may apply to this action, the NRC has extended 
the deadline for completing this EIS by 6 months to allow adequate time 
to prepare and publish the final revised LR GEIS.

C. Environmental Impacts Review

    In the revised LR GEIS, the NRC evaluated the Category 1 generic 
findings from the 2013 LR GEIS and determined that many of the 
environmental impacts of continued nuclear power plant operations and 
refurbishment during the renewal term (initial LR or SLR) would be 
SMALL. However, license renewal applicants in their environmental 
reports and the NRC staff in the SEIS would still need to evaluate 
whether new and significant information exists that would require a 
plant-specific analysis for that issue.
    In the revised LR GEIS, the NRC identified a total of 80 
environmental issues that may be associated with operation and 
refurbishment during the renewal term. Chapter 4 of the revised LR GEIS 
describes the impact findings and impact significance level of SMALL, 
MODERATE, or LARGE, or a range where applicable, for each Category 1 
and Category 2 issue. Of the 80 issues, the NRC identified 59 
environmental issues as Category 1 issues. Applicants and the NRC staff 
are to rely on the generic finding for each Category 1 issue as 
supported by the analysis in the revised LR GEIS, as codified in Table 
B-1, provided no new and significant information exists that would 
require a plant-specific analysis for that issue.
    The revised LR GEIS identifies 20 environmental issues as Category 
2 issues. These issues cannot be evaluated generically and must be 
evaluated by the applicant, in its environmental report, and the NRC 
staff, in the draft SEIS, using plant-specific information. For 
example, for the issue ``Surface water use conflicts (plants with 
cooling ponds or cooling towers using makeup water from a river)'' the 
revised LR GEIS concludes that impacts could be of SMALL or MODERATE 
significance based on site-specific factors that exacerbate consumptive 
water use by a nuclear power plant. The factors include increased water 
demand due to population growth; changes in water demand by industrial, 
agricultural, or other users of the same water source; drought and 
river low-flow conditions; and reduced water availability over time due 
to climate change. Therefore, the potential for water use conflicts 
must be addressed on a plant-specific basis.
    For one environmental issue, ``Electromagnetic fields (EMF),'' the 
revised LR GEIS identified the category as ``N/A'' (not applicable). 
Studies of 60-Hz EMFs have not uncovered consistent evidence linking 
harmful effects with field exposures. Because the state of the science 
is currently inadequate, no generic conclusion on human health impacts 
is possible. If, in the future, the Commission finds that a general 
agreement has been reached by appropriate Federal health agencies that 
there are adverse health effects from EMFs, the Commission will then 
treat this issue in a manner similar to a Category 2 issue and require 
applicants to submit plant-specific reviews of these health effects in 
their environmental report. Until such time, applicants are not 
required to submit information on this issue.

D. Revised Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal 
of Nuclear Power Plants

    This revision evaluates the environmental issues and findings of 
the 2013 LR GEIS and updates the analysis and assumptions to fully 
account for both initial LR and SLR. Lessons learned, knowledge gained, 
and experience from license renewal environmental reviews performed by 
the NRC since development of the 2013 LR GEIS provided an important 
source of new information for this assessment. This review included an 
examination of previous site-specific considerations of potential new 
and significant information for Category 1 issues. In addition, changes 
in environmental regulations and impact methodology and other new 
information from scientific literature and nuclear power plant 
operations were considered in evaluating the significance of impacts 
associated with initial LR and SLR. Public comments on previous plant-
specific license renewal environmental reviews were analyzed to assess 
the existing environmental issues and identify new ones. The purpose of 
this evaluation was to review the findings presented in the 2013 LR 
GEIS and to ensure that the analysis and assumptions support SLR 
environmental reviews. In doing so, the NRC considered the need to 
modify, add to, or delete any of the 78 environmental issues in the 
2013 LR GEIS and codified in Table B-1. This evaluation identified 80 
environmental issues for detailed consideration in LR GEIS, Revision 2. 
No environmental issues identified in Table B-1 and evaluated in the 
2013 LR GEIS were eliminated, but certain issues were consolidated, and 
one issue was subdivided into three separate issues. Two new Category 2 
issues and one new Category 1 issue were added.
    In the revised LR GEIS, the environmental impacts of continued 
nuclear power plant operations during the license renewal term (initial 
LR or SLR) and associated refurbishment activities are organized by 
environmental resource area. This analysis provides the technical basis 
for the 80 identified environmental issues. Additionally, the NRC also 
considered a range of replacement energy alternatives to the proposed 
action (license renewal) as described in the revised LR GEIS. This 
discussion of potential alternatives will inform the plant-specific 
alternatives analyses in the SEISs. The revised LR GEIS considers and 
evaluates the 80 environmental issues within the context of the 
following environmental resource (i.e., subject matter) areas: (1) land 
use and visual resources, (2) air quality and noise, (3) geologic 
environment, (4) water resources (surface water and groundwater 
resources), (5) ecological resources (terrestrial resources, aquatic 
resources, and federally protected ecological resources), (6) historic 
and cultural resources, (7) socioeconomics, (8) human health 
(radiological and nonradiological hazards and postulated accidents), 
(9) environmental justice, (10) waste management and pollution 
prevention (radioactive and nonradioactive waste and spent nuclear 
fuel), (11) greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, (12) 
cumulative effects, and (13) impacts common to all alternatives 
(uranium fuel cycle and termination of nuclear power plant operations 
and decommissioning). This final rule revises Table B-1 in appendix B 
to subpart A of 10 CFR part 51 to reflect the changes in the revised LR 
GEIS.
    In the revised LR GEIS, the NRC used the following general 
analytical approach to evaluate potential environmental impacts: (1) 
describe the

[[Page 64172]]

nuclear power plant activity or aspect of plant operations or 
refurbishment that could affect a resource; (2) identify the resource 
that is affected; (3) evaluate past license renewal reviews and other 
available information, including information related to impacts during 
a SLR term; (4) assess the nature and magnitude of the potential 
environmental impact (effect) from initial LR or SLR on the affected 
resource; (5) characterize the significance of the effect; (6) 
determine whether the results of the analysis apply to all or a 
specific subset of nuclear power plants, that is, whether the 
environmental issue is Category 1 (generic) or Category 2 (requiring 
plant-specific analysis); and (7) consider additional mitigation 
measures for reducing adverse impacts. Identification of environmental 
issues was conducted in an iterative rather than a stepwise manner. For 
example, after information was collected and the level of significance 
was reviewed, the NRC reexamined environmental issues and their 
associated impacts to determine if any issues should be removed, added, 
consolidated, or divided.
    The Commission would like to emphasize that in complying with the 
NRC's environmental regulations under Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(iv) and NEPA, 
applicants are required to provide any new and significant information 
regarding the environmental impacts of license renewal of which the 
applicants are aware, including for Category 1 issues and for 
uncategorized issues. The amendments in this final rule do not change 
this requirement.
    The revised LR GEIS retains the 2013 LR GEIS definitions for 
Category 1 and Category 2 issues. The revised LR GEIS discusses six 
major types of changes to the categorization of issues:
    (1) New Category 1 Issue: This is a Category 1 issue not previously 
listed in the 2013 LR GEIS. The applicant will not need to assess this 
issue in its environmental report. Under Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(iv), 
however, the applicant is responsible for disclosing in the 
environmental report any ``new and significant information'' of which 
the applicant is aware. The NRC has addressed the environmental impacts 
of all Category 1 issues generically for all plants or a specific 
subset of plants in the revised LR GEIS.
    (2) New Category 2 Issue: This is a Category 2 issue not previously 
listed in the 2013 LR GEIS. For the new Category 2 issue, the applicant 
will have to conduct an analysis of the potential environmental impacts 
related to the issue and include it in the environmental report. The 
analysis must include a discussion of (i) the possible alternatives for 
reducing adverse impacts associated with license renewal and (ii) the 
environmental impacts of alternatives to license renewal.
    (3) Existing Issue Category Change from Category 2 to Category 1: 
This is an issue that was considered as Category 2 in the 2013 LR GEIS 
and will now be considered as Category 1 in the revised LR GEIS. An 
applicant will no longer be required to conduct a plant-specific 
analysis on the environmental impacts associated with this issue. 
Consistent with the requirements of Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(iv), an applicant 
will be required to describe in its environmental report any ``new and 
significant information'' of which it is aware.
    (4) Consolidation of an Existing Category 1 Issue into an Existing 
Category 2 Issue: This is an Issue where an existing Category 1 issue 
in the 2013 LR GEIS has a similar scope as an existing Category 2 issue 
and has been consolidated into the Category 2 issue. Therefore, for the 
new, consolidated Category 2 issue, the applicant will have to conduct 
a plant-specific analysis of the potential environmental impacts 
related to that issue and include it in the environmental report. The 
analysis must include a discussion of (i) the possible alternatives for 
reducing adverse impacts associated with license renewal and (ii) the 
environmental impacts of alternatives to license renewal.
    (5) Consolidation of One or More Existing Category 1 Issues into an 
Existing Category 1 Issue: This is an issue that was considered 
Category 1 in the 2013 LR GEIS and will remain so. The issue has been 
revised by consolidating similar aspects of one or more Category 1 
issues, in whole or in part, into the existing Category 1 issue and 
which affect the same environmental resources. Consistent with the 
requirements of Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(iv), an applicant will only be 
required to describe in its environmental report any ``new and 
significant information'' of which it is aware.
    (6) Subdividing an Existing Category 2 Issue into Multiple Category 
2 Issues: This is an existing Category 2 issue in the 2013 LR GEIS that 
has been divided into multiple, new Category 2 issues in order to more 
clearly address specific categories of environmental resource impacts. 
For the new, separate Category 2 issues, the applicant will have to 
conduct analyses of the potential environmental impacts related to each 
separate issue, as applicable, and include them in the environmental 
report. The analyses must include a discussion of (i) the possible 
alternatives for reducing adverse impacts associated with license 
renewal and (ii) the environmental impacts of alternatives to license 
renewal.

E. Actions and Basis for Changes to 10 CFR Part 51

Appendix B to Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51
    This final rule revises the introductory paragraph in appendix B to 
subpart A of 10 CFR part 51 to indicate the applicability to initial LR 
and one term of SLR and to update the findings on environmental issues 
with the data supported by the analyses in the revised LR GEIS.
    This final rule modifies the language of the introductory paragraph 
to clarify that Table B-1 is applicable to nuclear power plant 
licensees that held an operating license, construction permit, or 
combined license as of June 30, 1995.
    This final rule renames the title of Table B-1, ``Summary of 
Findings on NEPA Issues for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,'' 
as ``Summary of Findings on Environmental Issues for Initial and One 
Term of Subsequent License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,'' to 
reflect the applicability to initial LR and SLR environmental reviews.
    The revised LR GEIS provides a summary change table comparing the 
78 environmental issues in the 2013 LR GEIS with the 80 environmental 
issues in the revised LR GEIS. This final rule amends Table B-1 to 
reflect the changes made in the revised LR GEIS. As documented in the 
revised LR GEIS, for each of the 80 environmental issues, the scope has 
been expanded to fully account for the impacts of continued nuclear 
power plant operations and any refurbishment during the initial LR or 
SLR term. The changes to Table B-1 are described below:
(i) Land Use
    (1) Onsite Land Use, (2) Offsite Land Use, and (3) Offsite Land Use 
in Transmission Line Right-of-Ways (ROWs)--``Onsite land use,'' 
``Offsite land use,'' and ``Offsite land use in transmission line 
right-of-ways (ROWs)'' are Category 1 issues. There are no changes to 
the finding column of Table B-1 for these issues.
(ii) Visual Resources
    (4) Aesthetic Impacts--``Aesthetic impacts'' is a Category 1 issue. 
There are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.

[[Page 64173]]

(iii) Air Quality
    (5) Air Quality Impacts--This final rule renames ``Air quality 
impacts (all plants)'' as ``Air quality impacts''; it is a Category 1 
issue. The final rule makes minor clarifying changes and revisions to 
the order of the topics discussed in the finding column of Table B-1 
for this issue.
    (6) Air Quality Effects of Transmission Lines--``Air quality 
effects of transmission lines'' is a Category 1 issue. This final rule 
makes minor clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for 
this issue.
(iv) Noise
    (7) Noise Impacts--``Noise impacts'' is a Category 1 issue. There 
are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(v) Geologic Environment
    (8) Geology and Soils--``Geology and soils'' is a Category 1 issue. 
This final rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding column of 
Table B-1 for this issue.
(vi) Surface Water Resources
    (9) Surface Water Use and Quality (Non-Cooling System Impacts), 
(10) Altered Current Patterns at Intake and Discharge Structures, (11) 
Altered Salinity Gradients, (12) Altered Thermal Stratification of 
Lakes, (13) Scouring Caused by Discharged Cooling Water, (14) Discharge 
of Metals in Cooling System Effluent, (15) Discharge of Biocides, 
Sanitary Wastes, and Minor Chemical Spills, and (16) Surface Water Use 
Conflicts (Plants with Once-Through Cooling Systems)--``Surface water 
use and quality (non-cooling system impacts),'' ``Altered current 
patterns at intake and discharge structures,'' ``Altered salinity 
gradients,'' ``Altered thermal stratification of lakes,'' ``Scouring 
caused by discharged cooling water,'' ``Discharge of metals in cooling 
system effluent,'' Discharge of biocides, sanitary wastes, and minor 
chemical spills,'' and ``Surface water use conflicts (plants with once-
through cooling systems)'' are Category 1 issues. There are no changes 
to the finding column of Table B-1 for these issues.
    (17) Surface Water Use Conflicts (Plants with Cooling Ponds or 
Cooling Towers Using Makeup Water from a River)--``Surface water use 
conflicts (plants with cooling ponds or cooling towers using makeup 
water from a river)'' is a Category 2 issue. There are no changes to 
the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (18) Effects of Dredging on Surface Water Quality--``Effects of 
dredging on surface water quality'' is a Category 1 issue. There are no 
changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (19) Temperature Effects on Sediment Transport Capacity--
``Temperature effects on sediment transport capacity'' is a Category 1 
issue. This final rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding 
column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(vii) Groundwater Resources
    (20) Groundwater Contamination and Use (Non-Cooling System 
Impacts)--``Groundwater contamination and use (non-cooling system 
impacts)'' is a Category 1 issue. This final rule makes minor 
clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (21) Groundwater Use Conflicts (Plants That Withdraw Less than 100 
Gallons per Minute [gpm])--``Groundwater use conflicts (plants that 
withdraw less than 100 gallons per minute [gpm])'' is a Category 1 
issue. There are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this 
issue.
    (22) Groundwater Use Conflicts (Plants That Withdraw More than 100 
Gallons per Minute [gpm]) and (23) Groundwater Use Conflicts (Plants 
with Closed-Cycle Cooling Systems That Withdraw Makeup Water from a 
River)--``Groundwater use conflicts (plants that withdraw more than 100 
gallons per minute [gpm])'' and ``Groundwater use conflicts (plants 
with closed-cycle cooling systems that withdraw makeup water from a 
river)'' are Category 2 issues. There are no changes to the finding 
column of Table B-1 for these issues.
    (24) Groundwater Quality Degradation Resulting from Water 
Withdrawals--``Groundwater quality degradation resulting from water 
withdrawals'' is a Category 1 issue. There are no changes to the 
finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (25) Groundwater Quality Degradation (Plants with Cooling Ponds)--
This final rule combines a Category 1 issue, ``Groundwater quality 
degradation (plants with cooling ponds in salt marshes),'' and a 
Category 2 issue, ``Groundwater quality degradation (plants with 
cooling ponds at inland sites),'' and renames it ``Groundwater quality 
degradation (plants with cooling ponds).'' The combined issue is a 
Category 2 issue. The two issues are combined because both issues 
consider the possibility of groundwater quality and beneficial use 
becoming degraded as a result of the migration of contaminants 
discharged to cooling ponds. Also, for the first issue, ``Groundwater 
quality degradation (plants with cooling ponds in salt marshes),'' the 
NRC found that the issue was relevant to only two nuclear power plants. 
The combined issue reflects lessons learned and knowledge gained and 
new and significant information from the Turkey Point SLR review that 
showed that cooling ponds can impact groundwater and surface water in 
ways not previously considered. This combined issue also considers the 
environmental effects of saltwater intrusion and encroachment on 
adjacent surface water and groundwater quality.
    As described in the revised LR GEIS, the NRC had previously 
determined that plants relying on cooling ponds in salt marsh settings 
were expected to have a small impact on groundwater quality. However, 
new information indicates that the impacts of groundwater quality 
degradation for plants using cooling ponds in either coastal (salt 
marsh) settings or at inland sites could be greater than SMALL (i.e., 
SMALL or MODERATE), depending on site-specific differences in the 
cooling pond's construction and operation; water quality; site 
hydrogeologic conditions (including the interaction of surface water 
and groundwater); and the location, depth, and pump rate of any water 
supply wells contributing to or impacted by outflow or seepage from a 
cooling pond. Therefore, the combined issue is a Category 2 issue. This 
final rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 accordingly.
    (26) Radionuclides Released to Groundwater--``Radionuclides 
released to groundwater'' is a Category 2 issue. There are no changes 
to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
(viii) Terrestrial Resources
    (27) Non-Cooling System Impacts on Terrestrial Resources--This 
final rule renames ``Effects on terrestrial resources (non-cooling 
system impacts)'' as ``Non-cooling system impacts on terrestrial 
resources.'' The issue is a Category 2 issue. This final rule makes 
clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue to 
more precisely describe the scope of issues and resources considered 
and for consistency with other ecological resource (e.g., aquatic and 
terrestrial) issues.
    (28) Exposure of Terrestrial Organisms to Radionuclides--``Exposure 
of terrestrial organisms to radionuclides'' is a Category 1 issue. This 
final rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding column of 
Table B-1 for this issue.
    (29) Cooling System Impacts on Terrestrial Resources (Plants with 
Once-Through Cooling Systems or Cooling

[[Page 64174]]

Ponds)--``Cooling system impacts on terrestrial resources (plants with 
once-through cooling systems or cooling ponds)'' is a Category 1 issue. 
This issue concerns the potential impacts of once-through cooling 
systems and cooling ponds at nuclear power plants on terrestrial 
resources during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR). Cooling 
system operation can alter the ecological environment in a manner that 
affects terrestrial resources. Such alterations may include thermal 
effluent additions to receiving water bodies; chemical effluent 
additions to surface water or groundwater; impingement of waterfowl; 
disturbance of terrestrial plants and wetlands associated with 
maintenance dredging; disposal of dredged material; and erosion of 
shoreline habitat.
    The NRC determined that the effects of once-through cooling systems 
and cooling ponds on terrestrial resources would be minor and would 
neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of 
populations of plants or animals during the license renewal term. This 
final rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue to 
more clearly describe the scope of issues and resources considered and 
for consistency with other ecological resource issues.
    (30) Cooling Tower Impacts on Terrestrial Plants--This final rule 
renames ``Cooling tower impacts on vegetation (plants with cooling 
towers)'' as ``Cooling tower impacts on terrestrial plants''; it is a 
Category 1 issue. This issue concerns the potential impacts of cooling 
tower operation on terrestrial plants during the license renewal term 
(initial LR or SLR). Terrestrial habitats near cooling towers can be 
exposed to particulates, such as salt, and can experience increased 
humidity, which can deposit water droplets or ice on vegetation; these 
effects can lead to structural damage and changes in plant communities.
    The NRC determined that the effects of cooling towers on 
terrestrial plants would be minor and would neither destabilize nor 
noticeably alter any important attribute of plant populations during 
the license renewal term. This final rule revises the finding column of 
Table B-1 for this issue to more clearly describe the scope of issues 
and resources considered and for consistency with other ecological 
resource issues.
    (31) Bird Collisions with Plant Structures and Transmission Lines--
``Bird collisions with plant structures and transmission lines'' is a 
Category 1 issue. This issue concerns the risk of birds colliding with 
plant structures and transmission lines during the license renewal term 
(initial LR or SLR). Tall structures on nuclear power plant sites, such 
as cooling towers, meteorological towers, and transmission lines, 
create collision hazards for birds that can result in injury or death.
    The NRC determined that the risk of bird collisions with site 
structures would remain the same for a given nuclear power plant during 
the license renewal term. Because the number of associated bird 
mortalities is small for any species, it is unlikely that losses would 
threaten the stability of local or migratory bird populations or result 
in a noticeable impairment of the function of a species within the 
ecosystem. This final rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 for 
this issue to more clearly describe the scope of issues and resources 
considered and for consistency with other ecological resource issues.
    (32) Water Use Conflicts with Terrestrial Resources (Plants with 
Cooling Ponds or Cooling Towers Using Makeup Water from a River)--
``Water use conflicts with terrestrial resources (plants with cooling 
ponds or cooling towers using makeup water from a river)'' is a 
Category 2 issue. This issue concerns water use conflicts that may 
arise at nuclear power plants with cooling ponds or cooling towers that 
withdraw makeup water from a river and how those conflicts could affect 
terrestrial resources during the license renewal term (initial LR or 
SLR).
    Nuclear power plant cooling systems may compete with other users 
relying on surface water resources, including downstream municipal, 
agricultural, or industrial users. For plants using cooling towers, 
while the volume of surface water withdrawn is substantially less than 
once-through systems for a similarly sized nuclear power plant, the 
makeup water needed to replenish the consumptive loss of water to 
evaporation can be significant. Cooling ponds also require makeup 
water. Water use conflicts with terrestrial resources, especially 
riparian communities, could occur when water that supports these 
resources is diminished by a combination of anthropogenic uses.
    The NRC identified water use conflicts with terrestrial resources 
at only one nuclear power plant. That nuclear power plant operator 
developed and implemented a water level management plan, which 
effectively mitigated the effects that downstream riparian communities 
might experience from the plant's cooling water withdrawals.
    The NRC determined that water use conflicts during the license 
renewal term depend on numerous site-specific factors, including the 
ecological setting of the plant; the consumptive use of other 
municipal, agricultural, or industrial water users; and the plants and 
animals present in the area. Water use conflicts with terrestrial 
resources would be SMALL at most nuclear power plants with cooling 
ponds or cooling towers that withdraw makeup from a river but may be 
MODERATE at some plants.
    This final rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 for this 
issue to more clearly describe the scope of issues and resources 
considered and for consistency with other ecological resource issues.
    (33) Transmission Line Right-Of-Way (ROW) Management Impacts on 
Terrestrial Resources--``Transmission line right-of-way (ROW) 
management impacts on terrestrial resources'' is a Category 1 issue. 
This issue concerns the effects of transmission line ROW management on 
terrestrial plants and animals during the license renewal term (initial 
LR or SLR).
    Utilities maintain transmission line ROWs so that the ground cover 
is composed of low-growing herbaceous or shrubby vegetation and 
grasses. Noise and general human disturbance during ROW management can 
temporarily disturb wildlife and affect their behaviors. Most nuclear 
power plants maintain procedures to minimize or mitigate the potential 
impacts of ROW management. The scope of transmission lines relevant to 
license renewal include only the lines that connect the nuclear power 
plant to the first substation that feeds into the regional power 
distribution system. Typically, the first substation is located on the 
nuclear power plant property within the primary industrial-use area or 
other developed portion of the plant site. Therefore, effects on 
terrestrial plants and animals are generally negligible.
    This final rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 for this 
issue to more clearly describe the scope of issues and resources 
considered and for consistency with other ecological resource issues.
    (34) Electromagnetic Field Effects on Terrestrial Plants and 
Animals--This final rule renames ``Electromagnetic fields on flora and 
fauna (plants, agricultural crops, honeybees, wildlife, livestock)'' as 
``Electromagnetic field effects on terrestrial plants and animals'' for 
clarity; it is a Category 1 issue. This issue concerns the effects of 
electromagnetic fields (EMFs) generated by electric transmission lines 
at nuclear power plants on terrestrial plants and animals, including 
agricultural crops,

[[Page 64175]]

honeybees, wildlife, and livestock, during the license renewal term 
(initial LR or SLR). Studies investigating the effects of EMFs produced 
by operating transmission lines up to 1,100 kV have generally not 
detected any ecologically significant impact on terrestrial plants and 
animals. Plants and animals near transmission lines have been exposed 
to many years of transmission line operation and associated EMFs. The 
scope of transmission lines relevant to license renewal include only 
the lines that connect the nuclear power plant to the first substation 
that feeds into the regional power distribution system. Therefore, the 
effects of EMFs on terrestrial plants and animals are generally 
negligible.
    This final rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 for this 
issue to more clearly describe the scope of issues and resources 
considered and for consistency with other ecological resource issues.
(ix) Aquatic Resources
    (35) Impingement Mortality and Entrainment of Aquatic Organisms 
(Plants with Once-Through Cooling Systems or Cooling Ponds)--This final 
rule combines a Category 2 issue, ``Impingement and entrainment of 
aquatic organisms (plants with once-through cooling systems or cooling 
ponds)'' and the impingement component of a Category 1 issue, ``Losses 
from predation, parasitism, and disease among organisms exposed to 
sublethal stresses,'' into one Category 2 issue, ``Impingement 
mortality and entrainment of aquatic organisms (plants with once-
through cooling systems or cooling ponds).'' This issue pertains to 
impingement mortality and entrainment of finfish and shellfish at 
nuclear power plants with once-through cooling systems or cooling ponds 
during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR). This includes 
plants with helper cooling towers that are seasonally operated to 
reduce thermal load to the receiving water body, reduce entrainment 
during peak spawning periods, or reduce consumptive water use during 
periods of low river flow.
    In the revised LR GEIS, the NRC renamed the issue to include 
impingement mortality, rather than simply impingement. This change is 
consistent with the EPA's 2014 Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 316(b) 
regulations and the EPA's assessment that impingement reduction 
technology is available, feasible, and has been demonstrated to be 
effective. Additionally, the EPA's 2014 CWA Section 316(b) regulations 
establish best technology available (BTA) standards for impingement 
mortality based on the fact that survival is a more appropriate metric 
for determining environmental impact than simply looking at total 
impingement. Therefore, the revised LR GEIS also consolidates the 
impingement component of the issue ``Losses from predation, parasitism, 
and disease among organisms exposed to sublethal stresses'' into this 
combined issue.
    As a result of the 2014 CWA Section 316(b) regulations, nuclear 
power plants must submit detailed information about their cooling water 
intake systems as part of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 
System (NPDES) permit renewal applications to inform the permitting 
authority's BTA determination. Some nuclear power plants have received 
final BTA determinations under the 2013 CWA Section 316(b) regulations. 
Many others have submitted the required information and are awaiting 
final determinations. The NRC expects that most operating nuclear power 
plants will have final BTA determinations within the next several 
years.
    When available, the NRC relies on the expertise and authority of 
the NPDES permitting authority with respect to the impacts of 
impingement mortality and entrainment. Therefore, if the NPDES 
permitting authority has made BTA determinations for a nuclear power 
plant pursuant to CWA Section 316(b) and that plant has implemented any 
associated requirements or those requirements would be implemented 
before the license renewal period, then the NRC assumes that adverse 
impacts on the aquatic environment would be minimized. In such cases, 
the NRC concludes that the impacts of either impingement mortality, 
entrainment, or both would generally be SMALL over the course of the 
license renewal term. In cases where the NPDES permitting authority has 
not made BTA determinations, the NRC analyzes the potential impacts of 
impingement mortality, entrainment, or both using a weight-of-evidence 
approach and determines the level of impact (SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE) 
that the aquatic environment is likely to experience over the course of 
the license renewal term.
    The potential effects of impingement mortality and entrainment 
during the license renewal term depend on numerous plant-specific 
factors, including the ecological setting of the plant; the 
characteristics of the cooling system; and the characteristics of the 
fish, shellfish, and other aquatic organisms present in the area (e.g., 
life history, distribution, population trends, management objectives, 
etc.). Additionally, whether the NPDES permitting authority has made 
BTA determinations pursuant to CWA Section 316(b) and whether the 
nuclear power plant operator has implemented any associated 
requirements is also a relevant factor.
    (36) Impingement Mortality and Entrainment of Aquatic Organisms 
(Plants with Cooling Towers)--This final rule combines a Category 1 
issue, ``Impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms (plants with 
cooling towers),'' and the impingement component of a Category 1 issue, 
``Losses from predation, parasitism, and disease among organisms 
exposed to sublethal stresses,'' into one Category 1 issue, 
``Impingement mortality and entrainment of aquatic organisms (plants 
with cooling towers).'' The issue pertains to impingement mortality and 
entrainment of finfish and shellfish at nuclear power plants with 
cooling towers that operate on a fully closed-cycle mode.
    In the revised LR GEIS, the NRC changed the title of this issue to 
include impingement mortality, rather than simply impingement. This 
change is consistent with the EPA's 2014 CWA Section 316(b) regulations 
and because assessing survival of impinged organisms is a more 
appropriate metric for determining environmental impact than simply 
looking at total impingement. Therefore, the revised LR GEIS also 
consolidates into this issue the impingement component of the issue 
``Losses from predation, parasitism, and disease among organisms 
exposed to sublethal stresses.''
    In the 2013 LR GEIS, the NRC found that that impingement and 
entrainment of finfish and shellfish at plants with cooling towers 
operated in a fully closed-cycle mode did not result in noticeable 
effects on finfish or shellfish populations within source water bodies, 
and this impact was not expected to be an issue during the license 
renewal term (initial LR or SLR). This finding is further supported by 
the EPA's 2014 CWA Section 316(b) regulations for existing facilities, 
which state that the operation of a closed-cycle recirculating system 
is an essentially preapproved technology for achieving impingement 
mortality BTA.
    The 2013 LR GEIS considered that impingement may result in 
sublethal effects that could increase the susceptibility of fish or 
finfish to predation, disease, or parasitism. However, only once-
through cooling systems were anticipated to be of concern for this 
issue as the lower volume of water required by nuclear power plants 
with cooling towers that

[[Page 64176]]

operate in a fully closed-cycle mode would minimize this potential 
effect. The NRC does not expect secondary effects of impingement to be 
of concern during the license renewal term at nuclear power plants with 
cooling towers, and sublethal effects of entrainment do not apply.
    In considering the effects of impingement mortality and entrainment 
of closed-cycle cooling systems on aquatic ecology, the NRC evaluated 
the same issues that were evaluated for nuclear power plants with once-
through cooling systems or cooling ponds. No significant impacts on 
aquatic populations have been reported at any existing nuclear power 
plants with cooling towers operating in a closed-cycle mode. As part of 
obtaining BTA determinations under CWA 316(b), permitting authorities 
may require some nuclear power plant licensees to implement additional 
plant-specific controls to reduce impingement mortality and 
entrainment. Implementation of such controls would further reduce or 
mitigate impingement mortality and entrainment during the license 
renewal term. The NRC determined that the impacts of impingement 
mortality and entrainment on aquatic organisms during the license 
renewal term would be SMALL for nuclear power plants with cooling 
towers operated in a fully closed-cycle mode. Therefore, the combined 
issue is a Category 1 issue. This final rule revises the finding column 
of Table B-1 accordingly.
    (37) Entrainment of Phytoplankton and Zooplankton--This final rule 
renames ``Entrainment of phytoplankton and zooplankton (all plants)'' 
as ``Entrainment of phytoplankton and zooplankton''; it is a Category 1 
issue. The NRC found that the effects of entrainment of phytoplankton 
and zooplankton would be minor and would neither destabilize nor 
noticeably alter any important attribute of populations of these 
organisms in source water bodies during the license renewal term 
(initial LR or SLR) of any nuclear power plants. As part of obtaining 
the BTA entrainment determinations under Section 316(b) of the CWA (33 
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), permitting authorities may require some nuclear 
power plants to implement additional site-specific controls to reduce 
entrainment. Implementation of such controls would further reduce or 
mitigate entrainment of phytoplankton and zooplankton.
    This final rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 for this 
issue to clarify the scope of issues and resources considered and 
indicate that the entrainment of phytoplankton and zooplankton would be 
mitigated through adherence to NPDES permit conditions established 
pursuant to CWA Section 316(b).
    (38) Effects of Thermal Effluents on Aquatic Organisms (Plants with 
Once-Through Cooling Systems or Cooling Ponds)--This final rule renames 
``Thermal impacts on aquatic organisms (plants with once-through 
cooling systems or cooling ponds)'' as ``Effects of thermal effluents 
on aquatic organisms (plants with once-through cooling systems or 
cooling ponds)'' for clarity and consistency with other ecological 
resource titles; it is a Category 2 issue.
    This issue pertains to acute, sublethal, and community-level 
effects of thermal effluents on finfish and shellfish from operation of 
nuclear power plants with once-through cooling systems and cooling 
ponds during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR). The NRC 
determined that the effects of thermal effluents on aquatic organisms 
would be SMALL at many nuclear power plants with once-through cooling 
systems or ponds, but that these impacts could be MODERATE or LARGE at 
some plants. The potential effects of thermal effluent discharges 
depend on numerous site-specific factors, including the ecological 
setting of the plant, the characteristics of the cooling system and 
effluent discharges, and the characteristics of the fish, shellfish, 
and other aquatic organisms present in the area. Additionally, whether 
the NPDES permitting authority has granted a CWA Section 316(a) 
variance is also a relevant factor.
    This final rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 for this 
issue to clarify the scope of issues and resources considered and for 
consistency with other ecological resource issues.
    (39) Effects of Thermal Effluents on Aquatic Organisms (Plants with 
Cooling Towers)--The final rule renames ``Thermal impacts on aquatic 
organisms (plants with cooling towers)'' as ``Effects of thermal 
effluents on aquatic organisms (plants with cooling towers)'' for 
clarity and consistency with other ecological resource issue titles; it 
is a Category 1 issue.
    This issue pertains to acute, sublethal, and community-level 
effects of thermal effluents on finfish and shellfish from operation of 
nuclear power plants with cooling towers operated in a fully closed-
cycle mode. The NRC found that the effects of thermal effluents on 
aquatic organisms at plants with cooling towers would be minor and 
would neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attributes 
of aquatic populations in receiving water bodies. As part of obtaining 
a variance under CWA Section 316(a), permitting authorities may impose 
conditions concerning thermal effluent discharges at some nuclear power 
plants. Implementation of such conditions would further reduce or 
mitigate thermal impacts during the license renewal term (initial LR or 
SLR).
    This final rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 for this 
issue to clarify the scope of issues and resources considered and for 
consistency with other ecological resource issues.
    (40) Infrequently Reported Effects of Thermal Effluents--This final 
rule combines two Category 1 issues, ``Infrequently reported thermal 
impacts (all plants)'' and ``Effects of cooling water discharge on 
dissolved oxygen, gas supersaturation, and eutrophication,'' with the 
thermal effluent component of a Category 1 issue, ``Losses from 
predation, parasitism, and disease among organisms exposed to sublethal 
stresses,'' into one, renamed Category 1 issue, ``Infrequently reported 
effects of thermal effluents.'' This issue pertains to interrelated and 
infrequently reported effects of thermal effluents, to include cold 
shock, thermal migration barriers, accelerated maturation of aquatic 
insects, and proliferated growth of aquatic nuisance species, as well 
as the effects of thermal effluents on dissolved oxygen, gas 
supersaturation, and eutrophication. This issue also considers 
sublethal stresses associated with thermal effluents that can increase 
the susceptibility of exposed organisms to predation, parasitism, or 
disease.
    As described in the revised LR GEIS, the NRC determined that the 
infrequently reported effects of thermal effluents would be minor and 
would neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute 
of aquatic populations in receiving water bodies of any nuclear power 
plants during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR). As part of 
obtaining a variance under CWA Section 316(a), permitting authorities 
may impose conditions through the NPDES permit process concerning 
thermal effluent discharges at some nuclear power plants. 
Implementation of such conditions would further reduce or mitigate 
thermal impacts during the license renewal term. The NRC concluded that 
infrequently reported effects of thermal effluents during the license 
renewal term would be SMALL for all nuclear power plants. Therefore, 
the combined issue is a Category 1 issue. This final rule revises the 
finding column of Table B-1 accordingly.

[[Page 64177]]

    (41) Effects of Nonradiological Contaminants on Aquatic Organisms--
``Effects of nonradiological contaminants on aquatic organisms'' is a 
Category 1 issue. This issue concerns the potential effects of 
nonradiological contaminants on aquatic organisms that could occur as a 
result of nuclear power plant operations during the license renewal 
term (initial LR or SLR). This issue was originally of concern because 
some nuclear power plants used heavy metals in condenser tubing that 
could leach from the tubing and expose aquatic organisms to these 
contaminants. Heavy metals have not been found to be of concern other 
than a few instances of copper contamination, and in all cases, the 
nuclear power plants eliminated leaching by replacing the affected 
piping.
    In addition to heavy metals, nuclear power plants often add 
biocides to cooling water to kill algae, bacteria, macroinvertebrates, 
and other organisms that could cause buildup in plant systems and 
structures. Nuclear power plants typically maintain site procedures 
that specify when and how to treat the cooling water system with such 
chemicals and best management practices to minimize impacts on the 
ecological environment. The NPDES permits mitigate potential effects of 
chemical effluents by limiting the allowable concentrations in effluent 
discharges to ensure the protection of the aquatic community within the 
receiving water body.
    The NRC determined that the effects of nonradiological contaminants 
on aquatic organisms would be minor and would neither destabilize nor 
noticeably alter any important attribute of populations of organisms in 
source water bodies during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR) 
of any nuclear power plants. Continued adherence of nuclear power 
plants to chemical effluent limitations established in NPDES permits 
would minimize the potential impacts of nonradiological contaminants on 
the aquatic environment. This final rule revises the finding column of 
Table B-1 for this issue, to more clearly describe the scope of issues 
and resources considered and for consistency with other ecological 
resource issues.
    (42) Exposure of Aquatic Organisms to Radionuclides--``Exposure of 
aquatic organisms to radionuclides'' is a Category 1 issue. This final 
rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 
for this issue.
    (43) Effects of Dredging on Aquatic Resources--This final rule 
renames ``Effects of dredging on aquatic organisms'' as ``Effects of 
dredging on aquatic resources''; it is a Category 1 issue. This issue 
concerns the effects of dredging on aquatic resources conducted to 
maintain the function or reliability of plant cooling systems as well 
as barge access during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR).
    Any dredging performed would be infrequent and would require the 
nuclear power plant operators to obtain permits from the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers under CWA Section 404. Best management practices and 
conditions associated with these permits would minimize impacts on the 
ecological environment.
    The NRC determined that the effects of dredging on aquatic 
resources would be minor and would neither destabilize nor noticeably 
alter any important attribute of the aquatic environment during license 
renewal term at any nuclear power plant. The NRC assumes that nuclear 
power plant operators would continue to implement site environmental 
procedures and would obtain any necessary permits for dredging 
activities. Implementation of such controls would further reduce or 
mitigate potential effects. This final rule revises the finding column 
of Table B-1 for this issue to more clearly describe the scope of 
issues and resources considered and for consistency with other 
ecological resource issues.
    (44) Water Use Conflicts with Aquatic Resources (Plants with 
Cooling Ponds or Cooling Towers Using Makeup Water from a River)--
``Water use conflicts with aquatic resources (plants with cooling ponds 
or cooling towers using makeup water from a river)'' is a Category 2 
issue. This issue concerns water use conflicts that may arise at 
nuclear power plants with cooling ponds or cooling towers that use 
makeup water from a river and how those conflicts could affect aquatic 
resources during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR). This 
issue also applies to nuclear power plants with hybrid cooling systems.
    Nuclear power plant cooling systems may compete with other users 
relying on surface water resources, including downstream municipal, 
agricultural, or industrial users. Water use conflicts with aquatic 
resources could occur when water that supports these resources is 
diminished by a combination of anthropogenic uses. To date, the NRC has 
identified water use conflicts with aquatic resources at only one 
nuclear power plant. The NRC concluded that water use conflicts would 
be SMALL to MODERATE for this nuclear power plant. The plant operator 
developed and implemented a water level management plan which 
successfully mitigated water use conflicts. The NRC has identified no 
concerns about water use conflicts with aquatic resources at any other 
nuclear power plant with cooling ponds or cooling towers. The NRC 
concluded that water use conflicts with aquatic resources would be 
SMALL at most nuclear power plants with cooling ponds or cooling towers 
that withdraw makeup water from a river but may be MODERATE at some 
plants.
    Water use conflicts during the license renewal term would depend on 
numerous site-specific factors including the ecological setting of the 
nuclear power plant; the consumptive use of other municipal, 
agricultural, or industrial water users; and the aquatic resources 
present in the area. This final rule revises the finding column of 
Table B-1 for this issue, to more clearly describe the scope of issues 
and resources considered and for consistency with other ecological 
resource issues.
    (45) Non-Cooling System Impacts on Aquatic Resources--This final 
rule renames ``Effects on aquatic resources (non-cooling system 
impacts)'' as ``Non-cooling system impacts on aquatic resources''; it 
is a Category 1 issue. This issue concerns the effects of nuclear power 
plant operations on aquatic resources that are unrelated to the 
operation of the cooling system. Such activities include landscape and 
grounds maintenance, stormwater management, and ground-disturbing 
activities that could directly disturb aquatic habitat or cause runoff 
or sedimentation.
    The NRC determined that the effects of site activities unrelated to 
cooling system operation would be minor and would neither destabilize 
nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the aquatic environment 
during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR) of any nuclear 
power plants. The NRC assumes that nuclear power plants would continue 
to implement site environmental procedures and would obtain any 
necessary permits for activities that could affect waterways or aquatic 
features. This final rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 for 
this issue, to more clearly describe the scope of issues and resources 
considered and for consistency with other ecological resource issues.
    (46) Impacts of Transmission Line Right-Of-Way (ROW) Management on 
Aquatic Resources--``Impacts of transmission line right-of-way (ROW) 
management on aquatic resources'' is a Category 1 issue. This issue 
concerns the effects of transmission line ROW

[[Page 64178]]

management on aquatic plants and animals during the license renewal 
term (initial LR or SLR).
    The transmission lines relevant to license renewal include only the 
lines that connect the nuclear power plant to the first substation that 
feeds into the regional power distribution system. Typically, the first 
substation is located on the nuclear power plant property within the 
primary industrial-use area and the in-scope transmission lines for 
license renewal tend to occupy only industrial-use or other developed 
portions of nuclear power plant sites. Therefore, effects on aquatic 
plants and animals are generally negligible.
    Most nuclear power plants maintain procedures to minimize or 
mitigate the potential impacts of ROW management. The NRC determined 
that the transmission line ROW maintenance impacts on aquatic resources 
during the license renewal term would be SMALL for all nuclear power 
plants. This final rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 for 
this issue to more clearly describe the scope of issues and resources 
considered and for consistency with other ecological resource issues.
(x) Federally Protected Ecological Resources
    (47) Endangered Species Act: Federally Listed Species and Critical 
Habitats Under U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Jurisdiction--This final 
rule divides a Category 2 issue, ``Threatened, endangered, and 
protected species and essential fish habitat,'' into three separate 
Category 2 issues, for clarity and consistency with the separate 
Federal statutes and interagency consultation requirements that the NRC 
must consider with respect to Federally protected ecological resources. 
When combined, the scope of the three issues is the same as the scope 
of the former ``Threatened, endangered, and protected species and 
essential fish habitat'' issue discussed in the 2013 LR GEIS.
    The first of the three issues, ``Endangered Species Act: federally 
listed species and critical habitats under U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service jurisdiction,'' concerns the potential effects of continued 
nuclear power plant operation and any refurbishment during the license 
renewal term (initial LR or SLR) on federally listed species and 
critical habitats protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and 
under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).
    Under the ESA, the FWS is responsible for listing and managing 
terrestrial and freshwater species and designating critical habitat for 
these species. Continued operation of a nuclear power plant during the 
license renewal term could affect these species and their habitat. 
Listed species are likely to occur near all operating nuclear power 
plants. However, the potential for a given species to occur in the 
action area of a specific nuclear power plant depends on the life 
history, habitat requirements, and distribution of the species and the 
ecological environment present on or near the plant site.
    The NRC may be required to consult with FWS under ESA Section 
7(a)(2); such consultations are required for license renewal actions 
that ``may affect'' federally listed species and critical habitats and 
to ensure that the actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of 
those species or destroy or adversely modify those habitats.
    The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant operation 
and any refurbishment during the license renewal term depends upon 
numerous site-specific factors, including the ecological setting of the 
plant; the listed species and critical habitats present in the action 
area; and the plant-specific factors related to operations, including 
water withdrawal, effluent discharges, and refurbishment and other 
ground-disturbing activities. Listing status is not static, and FWS 
frequently issues new rules to list or delist species and designate or 
remove critical habitats. Therefore, a generic determination of 
potential impacts on listed species and critical habitats under FWS 
jurisdiction during a nuclear power plant's license renewal term is not 
possible. The NRC will perform a plant-specific impact assessment for 
each license renewal environmental review to determine the potential 
effects on these resources and consult with the FWS, as appropriate. 
Consequently, this is a Category 2 issue.
    (48) Endangered Species Act: Federally Listed Species and Critical 
Habitats Under National Marine Fisheries Service Jurisdiction--The 
second of the three issues from the prior Category 2 issue on federally 
protected species, ``Endangered Species Act: federally listed specifies 
and critical habitats under National Marine Fisheries Service 
jurisdiction,'' concerns the potential effects of continued nuclear 
power plant operation and any refurbishment during the license renewal 
term (initial LR or SLR) on federally listed species and critical 
habitats protected under the ESA and under the jurisdiction of the 
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
    Under the ESA, NMFS is responsible for listing and managing marine 
and anadromous species and designating critical habitat of these 
species. Continued operation of a nuclear power plant and any 
refurbishment during the license renewal term could affect these 
species and their habitat. The potential for a given species to occur 
in the action area of a specific nuclear power plant depends on the 
life history, habitat requirements, and distribution of that species 
and the ecological environment present on or near the power plant site. 
In general, listed species and critical habitats under NMFS 
jurisdiction are only of concern at nuclear power plants that withdraw 
or discharge from estuarine or marine waters. However, anadromous 
listed species under NMFS jurisdiction may be seasonally present in the 
action area of plants located within freshwater reaches of rivers well 
upstream of the saltwater interface.
    The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant operation 
and any refurbishment during the license renewal term depend on 
numerous site-specific factors, including the ecological setting of the 
plant; the listed species and critical habitats present in the action 
area; and plant-specific factors related to operations, including water 
withdrawal, effluent discharges, and refurbishment and other ground-
disturbing activities. Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA requires that Federal 
agencies consult with NMFS for actions that ``may affect'' federally 
listed species and critical habitats. Additionally, listing status is 
not static, and NMFS frequently issues new rules to list or delist 
species and designate or remove critical habitats. Therefore, a generic 
determination of potential impacts on listed species and critical 
habitats under NMFS jurisdiction during a nuclear power plant's license 
renewal term is not possible. The NRC will perform a plant-specific 
impact assessment for each license renewal environmental review to 
determine the potential effects on these resources and consult with 
NMFS, as appropriate. Consequently, this is a Category 2 issue.
    (49) Magnuson-Stevens Act: Essential Fish Habitat--The last of the 
three issues from the prior Category 2 issue on federally protected 
species, ``Magnuson-Stevens Act: essential fish habitat,'' concerns the 
potential effects of continued nuclear power plant operation and any 
refurbishment during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR) on 
essential fish habitat (EFH) protected under the Magnuson-Stevens 
Fishery Conservation and Management Act (i.e., Magnuson-Stevens Act 
(MSA)).
    Under the MSA, the Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with 
NMFS, designate areas of EFH and manage marine resources within those 
areas. Within EFH, habitat areas of

[[Page 64179]]

particular concern (HAPCs) may be designated if the area meets certain 
additional criteria. Continued operation of a nuclear power plant and 
any refurbishment during the license renewal term could affect EFH, 
including HAPCs. The NRC may be required to consult with NMFS under MSA 
Section 305(b). In cases where adverse effects on EFH are possible, the 
NRC has engaged NMFS in EFH consultation as part of the plant-specific 
license renewal environmental review and obtained EFH conservation 
recommendations.
    The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant operation 
and any refurbishment during the license renewal term depends upon 
numerous site-specific factors, including the ecological setting of the 
plant; the EFH present in the affected area, including HAPCs; and 
plant-specific factors related to operations, including water 
withdrawal, effluent discharges, and any other activities that may 
affect aquatic habitats during the license renewal term. Section 305(b) 
of the MSA requires that Federal agencies consult with NMFS for actions 
that may adversely affect EFH. Additionally, EFH status is not static. 
The NMFS and the Fishery Management Councils frequently update 
management plans for EFH species and issue new rules to designate or 
modify EFH and HAPCs. Therefore, a generic determination of potential 
impacts on EFH during a nuclear power plant's license renewal term is 
not possible. The NRC will perform a plant-specific impact assessment 
as part of each license renewal environmental review to determine the 
potential effects on these resources and consult with NMFS, as 
appropriate. Consequently, this is a Category 2 issue.
    (50) National Marine Sanctuaries Act: Sanctuary Resources--This 
final rule adds this as a new Category 2 issue, ``National Marine 
Sanctuaries Act: sanctuary resources,'' to evaluate potential effects 
of continued nuclear power plant operation and any refurbishment during 
the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR) on sanctuary resources 
protected under the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA).
    Under the NMSA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration's (NOAA) Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) 
designates and manages the National Marine Sanctuary System. Marine 
sanctuaries may occur near nuclear power plants located on or near 
marine waters as well as the Great Lakes. Currently, five operating 
nuclear power plants are located near designated or proposed national 
marine sanctuaries.
    The potential impacts on marine sanctuaries are broad-ranging 
because such resources include any living or nonliving resource of a 
national marine sanctuary. With respect to ecological sanctuary 
resources, potential effects of particular concern include the 
following: (1) impingement (including entrapment) and entrainment, (2) 
thermal effects, (3) exposure to radionuclides and other contaminants, 
(4) reduction in available food resources due to impingement mortality 
and entrainment or thermal effects on prey species, and (5) effects 
associated with maintenance dredging. Additionally, the magnitude and 
significance of such impacts can be greater for sanctuary resources 
because--by virtue of being part of a national marine sanctuary--these 
resources are more sensitive to environmental stressors. Based on the 
foregoing, a generic determination of potential impacts on sanctuary 
resources during a nuclear power plant's license renewal term is not 
possible.
    Depending on the NRC's effect determinations, the NRC may be 
required to consult with ONMS under NMSA Section 304(d). The NMSA 
consultation is required when a Federal agency determines that an 
action ``is likely to destroy, cause the loss of, or injure'' a 
sanctuary resource. Federal actions subject to consultation may be 
inside or outside the boundary of a national marine sanctuary.
    In summary, the potential effects of continued nuclear power plant 
operation during the license renewal term depends upon numerous site-
specific factors, including the ecological setting of the plant; the 
sanctuary resources present in the affected area; and plant-specific 
factors related to operations, including water withdrawal, effluent 
discharges, and any other activities that may affect sanctuary 
resources during the license renewal term. Section 304(d) of the NMSA 
requires that Federal agencies consult with the ONMS for actions that 
may injure sanctuary resources. Additionally, national marine sanctuary 
status is not static. The geographic extent of existing sanctuaries may 
change or expand in the future, and NOAA is likely to designate new 
sanctuaries as additional areas of conservation need are identified and 
assessed. Therefore, a generic determination of potential impacts on 
sanctuary resources during a nuclear power plant's license renewal term 
is not possible. The NRC will perform a plant-specific impact 
assessment as part of each license renewal environmental review to 
determine the potential effects on these resources and consult with 
NMFS, as appropriate. Consequently, this new issue is being established 
as a plant-specific, or Category 2, issue.
(xi) Historic and Cultural Resources
    (51) Historic and Cultural Resources--``Historic and cultural 
resources'' is a Category 2 issue. This final rule revises the finding 
column of Table B-1 for this issue to make clarifying changes and 
include a discussion of impacts on cultural resources that are not 
eligible for or listed in the National Register of Historic Places that 
would also need to be considered during plant-specific license renewal 
environmental reviews.
(xii) Socioeconomics
    (52) Employment and Income, Recreation and Tourism--``Employment 
and income, recreation and tourism'' is a Category 1 issue. There are 
no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (53) Tax Revenue--This final rule renames ``Tax revenues'' as ``Tax 
revenue''; it is a Category 1 issue. There are no changes to the 
finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (54) Community Services and Education, (55) Population and Housing, 
and (56) Transportation--``Community services and education,'' 
``Population and housing,'' and ``Transportation'' are Category 1 
issues. There are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for 
these issues.
(xiii) Human Health
    (57) Radiation Exposures to Plant Workers and (58) Radiation 
Exposures to the Public--``Radiation exposures to plant workers'' and 
``Radiation exposures to the public'' are Category 1 issues. There are 
no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for these issues.
    (59) Chemical Hazards--This final rule renames ``Human health 
impact from chemicals'' as ``Chemical hazards'' for clarity and to 
reflect the fact that chemicals can have environmental effects beyond 
human health. Chemical hazards can have immediate human health effects 
as well as potential environmental impacts from nuclear power plant 
discharges and chemical spills. This issue is a Category 1 issue. There 
are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (60) Microbiological Hazards to Plant Workers--``Microbiological 
hazards to plant workers'' is a Category 1 issue. There are no changes 
to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.

[[Page 64180]]

    (61) Microbiological Hazards to the Public--This final rule renames 
``Microbiological hazards to the public (plants with cooling ponds or 
canals or cooling towers that discharge to a river)'' as 
``Microbiological hazards to the public'' because this issue is a 
concern wherever receiving waters are accessible to the public and as 
changes in microbial populations and in the public use of water bodies 
might occur over time. Specifically, members of the public could be 
exposed to microorganisms in thermal effluents at nuclear power plants 
that use cooling ponds, lakes, canals, or that discharge to publicly 
accessible surface waters. This issue is a Category 2 issue. This final 
rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue for clarity 
and to indicate that thermophilic microorganisms are a concern wherever 
waters receiving thermal effluents are accessible to the public.
    (62) Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs)--This final rule renames 
``Chronic effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs)'' as 
``Electromagnetic fields (EMFs)'' for clarity because this issue 
considers effects beyond those that are chronic in nature. This issue 
is an uncategorized issue. There are no changes to the finding column 
of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (63) Physical Occupational Hazards--``Physical occupational 
hazards'' is a Category 1 issue. There are no changes to the finding 
column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (64) Electric Shock Hazards--``Electric shock hazards'' is a 
Category 2 issue. There are no changes to the finding column of Table 
B-1 for this issue.
(xiv) Postulated Accidents
    (65) Design-Basis Accidents--``Design-basis accidents'' is a 
Category 1 issue. There are no changes to the finding column of Table 
B-1 for this issue.
    (66) Severe Accidents--This final rule reclassifies the Category 2 
``Severe accidents'' issue as a Category 1 issue. In the 2013 LR GEIS, 
the issue of severe accidents was classified as a Category 2 issue to 
the extent that only alternatives to mitigate severe accidents must be 
considered for all nuclear power plants where the licensee had not 
previously performed a severe accident mitigation alternatives (SAMA) 
analysis, or similar analysis, for the plant. In the revised LR GEIS, 
the NRC notes that this issue will be resolved generically for the vast 
majority, if not all, expected license renewal applicants because the 
applicants who will likely reference the revised LR GEIS have 
previously completed a SAMA analysis. The NRC provides a technical 
basis further supporting this conclusion in Appendix E of the revised 
LR GEIS. Although the NRC does not anticipate any license renewal 
applications for nuclear power plants for which a previous severe 
accident mitigation design alternative (SAMDA) or SAMA analysis has not 
been performed, alternatives to mitigate severe accidents must be 
considered for all plants that have not considered such alternatives, 
and consideration of mitigation alternatives would be the functional 
equivalent of a Category 2 issue requiring plant-specific analysis. 
Applicants are required to provide any new and significant information 
regarding severe accidents of which the applicant is aware.
    In license renewal applications, both internal and external events 
were considered for impacts from reactor accidents at full power when 
assessing SAMAs. The impacts of all new information in the revised LR 
GEIS were found to not contribute sufficiently to the environmental 
impacts to warrant further SAMA analysis because the likelihood of 
finding cost-effective significant plant improvements is small. This 
further analysis confirms the Commission's expectation that further 
SAMA analysis would not be necessary for plants that have already 
completed one.
    With regard to the severe accident impact finding, the NRC reviewed 
information from SEISs for both initial LR and SLR reviews completed 
since development of the 2013 LR GEIS and identified no new information 
or situations that would result in different impacts for this issue. 
The NRC's review of new information determined that the overall risk 
posed by severe accidents is less than originally stated in the 1996 LR 
GEIS by a significant margin. Therefore, the NRC concluded that the 
probability-weighted consequences of severe accidents during the 
initial LR or SLR terms are SMALL. This final rule revises the finding 
column in Table B-1 for this issue to reflect the fact that the 
probability-weighted consequences of severe accidents remain SMALL.
(xv) Environmental Justice
    (67) Impacts on Minority Populations, Low-Income Populations, and 
Indian Tribes--This final rule renames ``Minority and low-income 
populations'' as ``Impacts on minority populations, low-income 
populations, and Indian Tribes'' \5\ to reflect the scope of 
environmental justice concerns addressed in this issue. Continued 
reactor operations during the license renewal term (initial LR or SLR) 
and refurbishment activities at a nuclear power plant could affect 
land, air, water, and ecological resources, which could result in human 
health or environmental effects. Consequently, minority and low-income 
populations and Indian Tribes could be disproportionately affected. The 
environmental justice impact analysis determines whether human health 
or environmental effects from continued reactor operations and 
refurbishment activities at a nuclear power plant would 
disproportionately affect a minority population, low-income population, 
or Indian Tribe and whether these effects may be high and adverse.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``Indian Tribes'' refers to Federally recognized 
Tribes as acknowledged by the Secretary of the Interior pursuant to 
the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 
479a). Environmental justice communities can also include State-
recognized Tribes, those that self-identify as Indian Tribes, and 
tribal members. Tribal members can be part of an environmental 
justice community that has different interests and concerns than a 
Tribal government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NRC determined that environmental justice impacts during the 
license renewal term are unique to each nuclear power plant. Therefore, 
the issue is a Category 2 issue. This final rule revises the finding 
column of Table B-1 for this issue to add Indian Tribes and subsistence 
consumption to the scope of the finding and to make other minor 
clarifications.
(xvi) Waste Management
    (68) Low-Level Waste Storage and Disposal, (69) Onsite Storage of 
Spent Nuclear Fuel, (70) Offsite Radiological Impacts of Spent Nuclear 
Fuel and High-Level Waste Disposal, (71) Mixed-Waste Storage and 
Disposal, and (72) Nonradioactive Waste Storage and Disposal--``Low-
level waste storage and disposal,'' ``Onsite storage of spent nuclear 
fuel,'' ``Offsite radiological impacts of spent nuclear fuel and high-
level waste disposal,'' ``Mixed-waste storage and disposal,'' and 
``Nonradioactive waste storage and disposal'' are Category 1 issues. 
There are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for these 
issues.
(xvii) Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change
    (73) Greenhouse Gas Impacts on Climate Change--This final rule adds 
a new Category 1 issue, ``Greenhouse gas impacts on climate change,'' 
that evaluates the greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts on climate change 
associated with continued operation and refurbishment. The issue of GHG 
emissions on climate change was not

[[Page 64181]]

considered in the 2013 LR GEIS and was not included in Table B-1. At 
the time of publication of the 2013 LR GEIS, insufficient data existed 
to support a classification of the contribution of nuclear power plant 
GHG emissions on climate change, either as a generic or plant-specific 
issue. The 2013 LR GEIS, however, included a discussion summarizing the 
life cycle impacts of nuclear power plant GHG emissions and climate 
change. Furthermore, following the issuance of Commission Order CLI-09-
21, the NRC began to evaluate the direct and cumulative effects of GHG 
emissions and their contribution to climate change in environmental 
reviews for license renewal applications.
    Nuclear power plants, by their very nature, do not combust fossil 
fuels to generate electricity and, therefore, have inherently low GHG 
emissions. However, nuclear power plant operations do have some GHG 
emission sources including diesel generators, pumps, diesel engines, 
boilers, refrigeration systems, electrical transmission and 
distribution systems, as well as mobile sources (e.g., worker vehicles 
and delivery vehicles). Any refurbishment activities undertaken at the 
nuclear power plant site could also produce GHGs due to emissions from 
motorized equipment, construction vehicles, and worker vehicles. 
Collectively, these GHG emissions, when compared to different GHG 
emission inventories for other facilities, are minor.
    The NRC concluded that the impacts of GHG emissions on climate 
change from continued operation during the license renewal term 
(initial LR or SLR) and any refurbishment activities would be SMALL for 
all nuclear power plants. Therefore, this is a new Category 1 issue.
    (74) Climate Change Impacts on Environmental Resources--This final 
rule adds this new Category 2 issue, ``Climate change impacts on 
environmental resources,'' that evaluates the impacts of climate change 
on environmental resources that are affected by continued nuclear power 
plant operations and any refurbishment during the license renewal term 
(initial LR or SLR). Climate change is an environmental trend (i.e., 
reflected in changes in climate indicators, such as precipitation, air 
and water temperature, sea level rise over time) that could result in 
changes in the affected environment, irrespective of license renewal. 
The issue of climate change impacts was not identified as either a 
generic or plant-specific issue in the 2013 LR GEIS. However, the 2013 
LR GEIS briefly described the environmental impacts that could occur on 
resources areas (land use, air quality, water resources, etc.) that may 
also be affected by license renewal. In plant-specific initial LR and 
SLR SEISs prepared since development of the 2013 LR GEIS, the NRC 
considered climate change impacts for those resources that could be 
incrementally affected by license renewal as part of the cumulative 
impact analysis.
    As part of a comprehensive environmental review to meet its 
obligations under NEPA, the NRC must consider the impacts of climate 
change on environmental resource conditions that could also be affected 
by continued nuclear power plant operation and any refurbishment as a 
result of the proposed action (license renewal). License renewal 
environmental reviews conducted by the NRC have found that climate 
change effects on affected resources (e.g., water availability, sea 
level rise) can be equal to or greater than any direct effects 
associated with continued nuclear power plant operations during the 
license renewal term. Observed climate change has not been uniform 
across the United States. The accrued effects of climate change on 
environmental resource conditions can vary greatly based on site-
specific conditions and thus are plant-specific rather than generic in 
nature. In support of plant operation and in conformance with 
environmental permitting requirements, nuclear power plant licensees 
maintain systems and collect meteorological, water temperature, and 
other data that can inform the NRC's environmental review with respect 
to the impacts of climate change on environmental resource conditions.
    The impacts of climate change on environmental resources that are 
affected by continued nuclear power plant operations and refurbishment 
during the license renewal term are location-specific and cannot be 
evaluated generically. The effects of climate change can vary 
regionally and climate change information at the regional and local 
scale is necessary to assess the impacts on the human environment for a 
specific location. The NRC's climate change impacts analysis will focus 
on reasonably foreseeable climate change impacts and predicted (future) 
trends on the baseline affected environment (i.e., the effects of 
climate change on environmental resource areas). The NRC will need to 
perform a plant-specific impact assessment as part of each license 
renewal environmental review. Therefore, this is a new Category 2 issue 
that cuts across multiple resource areas, similar to the cumulative 
effects issue, which is currently in Table B-1.
(xviii) Cumulative Effects
    (75) Cumulative Effects--This final rule renames ``Cumulative 
impacts'' as ``Cumulative effects''; it is a Category 2 issue. This 
final rule makes minor editorial and clarification changes to the 
finding column of Table B-1 for this issue to be consistent with the 
definition of cumulative effects as provided in the Council on 
Environmental Quality's revised regulation at 40 CFR 1508.1(i)(3).
(xix) Uranium Fuel Cycle
    (76) Offsite Radiological Impacts--Individual Impacts from Other 
than the Disposal of Spent Fuel and High-Level Waste, (77) Offsite 
Radiological Impacts--Collective Impacts from Other than the Disposal 
of Spent Fuel and High-Level Waste, (78) Nonradiological Impacts of the 
Uranium Fuel Cycle, and (79) Transportation--``Offsite radiological 
impacts--individual impacts from other than the disposal of spent fuel 
and high-level waste,'' ``Offsite radiological impacts--collective 
impacts from other than the disposal of spent fuel and high-level 
waste,'' ``Nonradiological impacts of the uranium fuel cycle,'' and 
``Transportation'' are Category 1 issues. There are no changes to the 
finding column of Table B-1 for these issues.
(xx) Termination of Nuclear Power Plant Operations and Decommissioning
    (80) Termination of Plant Operations and Decommissioning--
``Termination of plant operations and decommissioning'' is a Category 1 
issue. There are no changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this 
issue.
    This final rule revises the footnotes to Table B-1 as follows:
    Footnote 1 is revised to reference the current revision of the LR 
GEIS.
    Footnote 2 is revised to indicate that for the ``Offsite 
radiological impacts of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste 
disposal'' issue, there is no single significance level to the impact.
    Footnote 3 is revised to indicate that resource-specific effects or 
impact definitions from applicable environmental laws and executive 
orders, other than SMALL, MODERATE, and LARGE, apply and are used where 
appropriate.
    Footnote 7 is added to indicate that for the ``Severe accidents'' 
issue, alternatives to mitigate severe accidents must be considered for 
all plants that have not already considered such alternatives and would 
be the functional equivalent of a Category 2 issue.

[[Page 64182]]

Section 51.53(c)(3), ``Postconstruction Environmental Reports''
    This final rule revises the introductory paragraph of Section 
51.53(c)(3) to replace the words ``an initial renewed license'' with 
the words ``a license renewal covered by Table B-1'' to reflect that 
the regulation governing postconstruction environmental reports for 
license renewal applies to applicants seeking either an initial or 
subsequent renewed license following this update of the LR GEIS. 
Additionally, this final rule revises the text ``and holding an 
operating license, construction permit, or combined license as of June 
30, 1995'' to read ``for a nuclear power plant for which an operating 
license, construction permit, or combined license was issued as of June 
30, 1995,'' in order to clarify that Watts Bar Nuclear Units 1 and 2, 
for which construction permits were issued by that date but are no 
longer held by the licensee, are within the scope of the revised LR 
GEIS and Table B-1. The revised language more clearly indicates that 
holders of renewed licenses for nuclear power plants within the scope 
of the revised LR GEIS and Table B-1 are within its scope during the 
license renewal term.
    This final rule revises Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(B) for clarity and 
consistency with the methodology in CWA Sections 316(a) and (b), 
including the 2014 CWA Section 316(b) regulations which establish the 
BTA criteria based on impingement mortality, rather than total 
impingement.
    This final rule revises Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(D) to delete the 
text ``is located at an inland site and,'' to reflect the consolidation 
of two issues from the 2013 LR GEIS: ``Groundwater quality degradation 
(plants with cooling ponds in salt marshes),'' a Category 1 issue, and 
``Groundwater quality degradation (plants with cooling ponds at inland 
sites),'' a Category 2 issue. The consolidated Category 2 issue in the 
revised LR GEIS, ``Groundwater quality degradation (plants with cooling 
ponds)'' reflects new information that cooling ponds can impact water 
quality at both inland and at coastal sites as a result of the 
migration of contaminants discharged to cooling ponds.
    This final rule revises Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(E) for clarity and 
consistency with the changes related to Federally protected ecological 
resources in Table B-1 and the revised LR GEIS. The changes in this 
paragraph correspond to the changes in Table B-1 where a Category 2 
issue, ``Threatened, endangered, and protected species and essential 
fish habitat'' was divided into three issues, for clarity and 
consistency with the separate Federal statues and interagency 
consultation requirements that the NRC must consider with respect to 
Federally protected ecological resources. Also included is a change 
reflecting the addition of a new Category 2 issue, ``National Marine 
Sanctuaries Act: sanctuary resources,'' which addresses the NRC 
consultation requirements under the Act.
    This final rule revises Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(G) for consistency 
with changes to the Category 2 issue, ``Microbiological hazards to the 
public.'' The updated finding for this issue states that public health 
is a concern wherever receiving waters associated with nuclear power 
plant thermal effluents are accessible to the public.
    This final rule revises Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(K) for clarity and 
consistency with the specific requirements of Section 106 of the NHPA, 
including the reference to NEPA, to reflect the requirement that 
Federal agencies must consider the potential effects of their actions 
on the affected human environment, which includes aesthetic, historic, 
and cultural resources.
    This final rule revises Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(N) for clarity and 
consistency with the changes in Table B-1 and the revised LR GEIS by 
adding consideration of Indian Tribes and revises the terminology to 
refine the scope of environmental justice concerns.
    This final rule revises Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(O) by removing the 
word ``future,'' for consistency with the revised terminology for 
``cumulative effects'' provided by the Council on Environmental 
Quality.
    This final rule adds a new Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(Q) for 
consistency with the changes in Table B-1 and the revised LR GEIS which 
includes the addition of a new Category 2 issue, ``Climate change 
impacts on environmental resources.'' The addition requires the 
assessment of the effects of climate change on environmental resources 
that are affected by continued nuclear power plant operations and any 
refurbishment. The new issue was identified to improve the efficiency 
of reviews, address lessons learned from plant-specific reviews and 
information provided in public comments, and to reflect analyses 
already being performed by the NRC staff in environmental reviews, 
consistent with the Commission direction provided in CLI-09-21.
Section 51.95, ``Postconstruction Environmental Impact Statements''
    The final rule revises Section 51.95(c), ``Operating license 
renewal stage,'' to remove the date of issuance of NUREG-1437. This 
change is made for clarity and to ensure that the regulation refers to 
the latest revision of the LR GEIS.

III. Opportunities for Public Participation

    The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on March 3, 
2023, for a 60-day public comment period (88 FR 13329). The public 
comment period closed on May 2, 2023. A public meeting notice was 
published in the Federal Register on March 10, 2023 (88 FR 14958). 
During the comment period, the NRC conducted six hybrid (in-person with 
virtual attendance option) public meetings to promote a full 
understanding of the proposed rule, the draft revised LR GEIS, and 
associated draft guidance documents, and to receive public comments. 
The NRC also conducted a public meeting on November 8, 2023, on 
cumulative effects of regulation (CER) to discuss the effective and 
implementation dates for the final rule. See the ``Cumulative Effects 
of Regulation'' section of this document for additional information on 
stakeholder engagement. The meeting summaries and official transcripts 
are available as indicated in the ``Availability of Documents'' section 
of this document. The public comments informed the development of this 
final rule.

IV. Response and Public Comment Analysis

A. Overview

    Appendix A, Section A.2, of Volume 2 of the revised LR GEIS (NUREG-
1437, Revision 2), is the NRC's analysis of and response to public 
comments received on the proposed rule (see section XVI ``Availability 
of Documents''). The NRC received 1,889 comment submissions during the 
public comment period that ended on May 2, 2023 (1,839 individuals 
submitted form letters that counted as one unique comment). A comment 
submission is a communication or document submitted to the NRC by an 
individual or entity, with one or more individual comments addressing a 
subject or issue. A total of 44 unique comment submissions were 
received during the comment period and six public meetings.
    The public comment submittals are available on the Federal 
rulemaking website under Docket ID NRC-2018-0296. NRC's response to the 
public comments, including a summary of how

[[Page 64183]]

NRC revised the proposed rule in response to public input, can be found 
in Appendix A.2 of the revised LR GEIS. The following sections 
summarize the major issues that resulted in substantive changes to this 
final rule and other issues raised for which no changes were made to 
this final rule.

B. Applicability of License Renewal Terms

    As directed by the Commission in Staff Requirements SECY-22-0109, 
``Proposed Rule: Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--
Environmental Review,'' the proposed rule requested comment on whether 
the applicability of the revised LR GEIS should be expanded beyond two 
license renewal terms (i.e., initial license renewal and one subsequent 
license renewal term). Several comments from industry supported 
expansion, citing an efficient use of resources, while a few members of 
the public opposed it, citing insufficient information on aging 
management.
    This final rule and revised LR GEIS remain applicable to one term 
of license renewal and one term of subsequent license renewal. Based on 
the public feedback received and the NRC's analysis of public input, no 
reason was found to deviate from the Commission's initial direction, 
due in part to the lack of public support, no immediate industry need, 
and scheduling impacts. The next review of the revised LR GEIS is 
scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2031 in accordance with SRM-SECY-22-
0036, ``Rulemaking Plan for Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating 
Licenses--10-Year Environmental Regulatory Update (NRC-2022-0087),'' at 
which point there will be another opportunity to consider expanding the 
scope of the revised LR GEIS to encompass multiple terms of SLR.

C. Comments Resulting in Changes to the Proposed Rule

    Two issues were raised during the public comment period that 
resulted in substantive changes to the proposed rule; these comments 
and NRC's changes are briefly discussed in the following paragraphs.
    Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change: The NRC received a 
comment stating, in part, that the NRC's proposal in 10 CFR 
51.53(c)(3)(ii)(Q) to consider mitigation measures for climate change 
impacts is unneeded and duplicative. One comment noted that the NRC 
already has guidance for the preparation of environmental reports that 
direct applicants to consider potential mitigation measures for issues 
such as drought, consumptive surface water use, and other issues 
affected by climate change. The comments also stated that there is no 
need for the proposed new Category 2 issue or Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(Q) 
to consider the additive or incremental effects of climate change or 
mitigation measures for purposes of the NRC's license renewal NEPA 
evaluation.
    NRC Response: The NRC disagrees that the new Category 2 issue and 
accompanying section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(Q) on climate change are 
unnecessary. However, with respect to mitigation measures, the NRC 
agrees with the comment to the extent that the NRC's regulations in 10 
CFR 51.53(c)(3)(iii) already require that environmental reports 
submitted by license renewal applicants contain a consideration of 
alternatives for reducing adverse impacts, as required by Sec.  
51.45(c), for all Category 2 license renewal issues in appendix B to 
subpart A of 10 CFR part 51. Therefore, the NRC has revised 10 CFR 
51.53(c)(3)(ii)(Q) in this final rule to eliminate this duplicative 
requirement specific to mitigation measures for climate change impacts. 
The NRC also made conforming changes to Section 4.12 in Regulatory 
Guide 4.2, Supplement 1, Revision 2, and Section 4.12.5 in NUREG-1555, 
Supplement 1, Revision 2. No changes were required in the revised LR 
GEIS as a result of the comment. See also the NRC's responses to 
comments on this topic in the ``Summary of Other Public Comments'' 
section of this document.
    Human Health (Microbiological Hazards): The NRC received a comment 
stating that the proposed addition to Section 3.9.2.2 of the revised LR 
GEIS regarding discharges to waters of the United States infers 
reference to the Clean Water Act, which has the potential to expand the 
scope of this issue if changes to the definition of ``waters of the 
United States'' ever occur in the future. In addition, the comment 
recommends limiting the scope to waters receiving discharges that are 
accessible to the public for recreational use.
    NRC Response: The NRC agrees in part and disagrees in part with the 
comment. The NRC agrees that reference to the Clean Water Act should be 
removed. Members of the public should be protected from microbiological 
hazards resulting from plant discharges into water bodies and not just 
to plant discharges into ``waters of the United States.'' However, the 
NRC does not agree that the scope of the Category 2 issue, 
``Microbiological hazards to the public,'' should be limited to waters 
receiving discharges that are accessible to the public for 
``recreational use.'' The NRC has modified the text in Section 3.9.2.2 
of the revised LR GEIS; Sections 3.9 and 4.9 of Regulatory Guide 4.2, 
Supplement 1, Revision 2; and Sections 3.9 and 4.9 in NUREG-1555, 
Supplement 1, Revision 2, to reflect that members of the public could 
be exposed to microbiological organisms in thermal effluents at nuclear 
plants that use cooling ponds, lakes, canals, or that discharge to 
publicly accessible surface waters. The NRC also has updated the text 
in Chapter 2 (i.e., Table 2.1-1), Section 4.9.1.1.3 of the revised LR 
GEIS, and in Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(G) and Table B-1 of this final 
rule for consistency.

D. Summary of Other Public Comments

    The NRC received comments on a variety of topics, including 
alternatives; meteorology, air quality, and noise; geologic 
environment; water resources (surface water and groundwater resources); 
ecological resources (terrestrial resources, aquatic resources, and 
federally protected ecological resources); historic and cultural 
resources; socioeconomics; human health (radiological and 
nonradiological hazards and postulated accidents); environmental 
justice; waste management and pollution prevention (radioactive and 
nonradioactive waste); greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate 
change; cumulative effects; uranium fuel cycle; termination of nuclear 
power plant operations and decommissioning; general environmental 
concerns; NEPA process; license renewal process and rulemaking; public 
participation; general opposition or support of the revised LR GEIS, 
rulemaking, or license renewal; out of scope: energy cost or need for 
power; out of scope: emergency preparedness; out of scope: nuclear 
plant safety; out of scope: security and terrorism; and out of scope: 
nuclear plant-specific issues. Some comments received were editorial in 
nature, and many comments were considered outside of the scope of the 
license renewal environmental review process as well as this 
rulemaking.
    Some of the more frequently mentioned issues and concerns in public 
comments, as well as the NRC's responses to those comments and any 
changes made in the final revised LR GEIS, are summarized in the 
following paragraphs. These summaries and responses are not intended to 
be comprehensive of detailed comments and responses contained in 
revised LR GEIS Volume 2, Appendix A, Section A.2.
    Alternatives to the proposed action. A number of comments 
questioned the adequacy of and basis for the NRC's

[[Page 64184]]

consideration of energy (replacement power) alternatives in the revised 
LR GEIS.
    The revised LR GEIS describes alternative energy sources that the 
NRC has identified as being potentially capable of meeting the purpose 
and need of the proposed action (license renewal). The NRC's analysis 
of replacement energy sources includes both baseload and non-baseload 
energy sources. The NRC further recognizes the ongoing changes in the 
nation's energy landscape, including continuing trends in the reduced 
use of many fossil fuels and the increased deployment of renewables and 
storage. The NRC revised Section 2.3 and Appendix D, Section D.3, of 
the revised LR GEIS to reflect the latest developments in these trends.
    Categorization of environmental issues. A substantial number of 
comments questioned the NRC's findings with respect to many of the 
Category 1 issues (i.e., in the areas of surface water resources, 
groundwater resources, terrestrial resources, and aquatic resources) 
evaluated in the revised LR GEIS and proposed rule (i.e., Table B-1 in 
appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR part 51). Many comments cited unique 
and site-specific information and examples from operating nuclear power 
plant sites to support the view that many Category 1 issues should 
instead be designated as Category 2, thus requiring a plant-specific 
environmental analysis.
    As detailed in the NRC's responses to specific comments, the NRC 
provides its specific reasoning for categorizing environmental issues 
analyzed and designated in this final rule as either Category 1 or 2 in 
the revised LR GEIS, based on the methodology and criteria stated in 
Section 1.5 of the revised LR GEIS. The NRC designated issues as 
Category 1 with an impact of SMALL because the environmental impacts 
were found to be the same or similar at all plant sites. In part, while 
the NRC recognizes the need to consider unique issues and potential 
impacts at nuclear power plant sites as part of the NRC's license 
renewal environmental reviews, the NRC's categorization of 
environmental issues as either Category 1 or 2 and associated findings 
were informed by lessons learned and knowledge gained from conducting 
initial LR and SLR environmental reviews since development of the 2013 
LR GEIS.
    The designation of an issue as a Category 1 issue does not mean 
that potential environmental impacts are not considered. During 
preparation of plant-specific supplements to the revised LR GEIS, NRC 
staff considers changes in nuclear power plant operating parameters and 
new and potentially significant information provided by the applicant, 
identified through public comments, or resulting from the NRC's due 
diligence in reviewing relevant information. Data are reviewed in part 
for information that could change the conclusion in the revised LR GEIS 
with regard to an issue. Thus, even though an issue is a Category 1 
issue, mechanisms are in place to conduct a full plant-specific review 
if new and significant information warrants such a review.
    Radiological human health. A number of comments expressed concerns 
regarding the lack of human health studies (e.g., cancer studies around 
nuclear power plants), citing in particular the NRC's cancellation of a 
proposed National Academy of Sciences's study to inform the NRC's 
Category 1 findings for human health issues.
    With respect to specific concerns regarding human health studies 
and cancer risk, several studies have been performed to examine the 
health effects around nuclear power facilities. These studies are 
incorporated by reference in Section 3.9.1.4 of the revised LR GEIS. 
The NRC is not aware of any studies that are accepted by the scientific 
community that show a correlation between radiation dose from nuclear 
power facilities and cancer incidence in the general public. Further, 
as the NRC states in SECY-15-0104, ``Analysis of Cancer Risks in 
Populations Near Nuclear Facilities Study,'' studies conducted by 
Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, Spain, and Switzerland since 
2008 have generally found no association between nuclear facility 
operations and increased cancer risks to the public that are 
attributable to the releases or radiation exposure. Regarding comments 
on the proposed National Academy of Sciences's cancer study, ``Analysis 
of Cancer Risks in Populations Near Nuclear Facilities: Phase 2 Pilot 
Planning,'' the NRC declined to continue the study because it was 
unlikely to be able to answer the basic question about risk. The NRC's 
regulatory limits for radiological protection are set to protect 
workers and the public from harmful effects of radiation on humans. 
Radiation dose limits in 10 CFR part 20 ensure adequate protection of 
workers and members of the public.
    Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate change. Several comments 
expressed general support for the NRC's consideration of GHGs and 
climate change in the revised LR GEIS and rule. A few comments, in 
part, indicated that the NRC's treatment of climate change should be 
expanded while other comments expressed concerns with the NRC's 
addition of the Category 2 issue, ``Climate change impacts on 
environmental resources.''
    Climate change is a subject of national and international interest 
and has been and continues to be a topic of broad public interest with 
respect to reactor license renewal. The implications of climate change 
and the high level of public interest have made this topic one that the 
NRC believes requires a ``hard look'' as required by NEPA. The NRC has 
concluded that the effects of climate change can vary regionally and 
climate change information at the regional and local scale is necessary 
to assess trends and the impacts on the human environment for a 
specific location. The NRC has appropriately limited the boundaries of 
its inquiry of climate change impacts and the scope of the new Category 
2 issue to matters germane to the NRC's proposed action. As further 
discussed in Section 4.12.2 of the revised LR GEIS, the Category 2 
climate change impacts issue considers those reasonably foreseeable 
effects on environmental resources that may also be directly affected 
by continued operation and refurbishment of nuclear power plants during 
the license renewal term. The NRC will consider climate change impacts 
in proportion to their significance and the magnitude of the impacts 
anticipated. The NRC will also use the best available climate change 
information and consensus reports (e.g., U.S. Global Climate Change 
Research Program) and will quantify climate change impacts to the 
extent possible.
    Postulated accidents. A large number of comments were received that 
were critical of various aspects of the NRC's analysis of postulated 
accidents, focused on severe accidents, and concerned the NRC's 
proposal to reclassify ``Severe accidents'' from Category 2 to Category 
1.
    The NRC has reclassified the issue of ``Severe accidents'' as a 
Category 1 issue to more accurately reflect the procedural posture of 
the vast majority of license renewal applicants expected to reference 
the revised LR GEIS. Under the previous (2013) LR GEIS, the NRC 
resolved the impacts of severe accidents generically but required an 
analysis of severe accident mitigation for applicants that had not 
previously conducted such an analysis. For applicants that had, the 
issue was the ``functional equivalent'' of a Category 1 issue. At this 
time, the NRC expects most, if not all, facilities that are the subject 
of license renewal applications will have had a previous severe 
accident mitigation analysis

[[Page 64185]]

completed. Therefore, the issue is most accurately characterized as 
Category 1. Moreover, the analysis in Appendix E of the revised LR GEIS 
further confirms the technical basis for the agency's policy of 
requiring only one severe accident mitigation alternatives (SAMA) 
analysis.
    However, designation of an issue as a Category 1 issue does not 
mean that potential impacts are not considered. Changes in nuclear 
power plant operating parameters and new and significant information 
provided by the applicant, identified through public comments, or 
resulting from the NRC's due diligence in reviewing relevant 
information are considered during preparation of plant-specific 
supplements to the revised LR GEIS. Data are reviewed in part for 
information that could change the conclusion in the revised LR GEIS 
with regard to an issue. Thus, even though an issue is considered to be 
a Category 1 issue, mechanisms are in place to conduct a full plant-
specific review if new and significant information warrants such a 
review.
    Historic and cultural resources. A few comments stated that the 
regulatory requirement to consult with Tribes under Section 106 of the 
National Historic Preservation Act does not adequately cover a Federal 
agency's responsibility to consult with Indian Tribes on any Federal 
action that might have an impact on a Tribe. Comments referenced 
requirements from Executive Order 13175 and stated that a Federal 
agency's responsibility to consult with Indian Tribes covers more than 
historic preservation issues. Additional comments stated that the NRC 
must recognize and abide by the unique trust obligations between the 
United States and federally recognized Indian Tribes, and that the 
Tribal Policy Statement (82 FR 2402) should be referenced in the final 
rule.
    The NRC acknowledges the comments and agrees that Tribal 
consultation for environmental reviews covers more than historic 
preservation issues. As an independent regulatory agency that does not 
hold in trust Tribal lands or assets or provide services to Federally 
recognized Tribes, the NRC fulfills its Trust Responsibility through 
implementation of the principles of the Tribal Policy Statement, by 
providing protections under its implementing regulations, and through 
recognition of additional obligations consistent with other applicable 
treaties and statutory authorities. The Tribal Policy Statement 
established a set of principles to guide the agency's government-to-
government interactions with Federally recognized Indian Tribes and 
Alaska Native Tribes, promote effective government-to-government 
interactions with Indian Tribes, and to encourage and facilitate Tribal 
involvement in the areas over which the Commission has jurisdiction. 
The NRC's Tribal Policy Statement is consistent with the principles 
articulated in Executive Order 13175. The Policy Statement also 
underscores the NRC's commitments to conducting outreach to Tribes, 
engaging in timely consultation, and coordinating with other Federal 
agencies.
    As a result of the comments, the NRC determined that the revised LR 
GEIS and staff guidance would benefit from a more detailed discussion 
of the NRC's Tribal Policy Statement. The NRC added a discussion 
(Section 1.8.7, Consultations) to Chapter 1 of the revised LR GEIS and 
a new section (Tribal Policy Statement) to the Executive Summary of 
NUREG-1555, Supplement 1, Revision 2.
    NEPA process. Many comments expressed concern about the adequacy of 
the LR GEIS revision and update process. The concerns expressed 
included, but were not limited to, such matters as the lack of a ``hard 
look'' and rigorous analysis of environmental impacts of license 
renewal as required by NEPA.
    The NRC recognizes that Federal agencies are required to take a 
``hard look'' at the potential environmental impacts associated with 
the agency's proposed actions. As noted in the proposed rule, the 
changes in the revised LR GEIS as well as to the NRC's regulations in 
10 CFR part 51 and the NRC's findings for environmental issues in Table 
B-1 in appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR part 51 are designed to 
maintain the accuracy of the LR GEIS and ensure that future 
environmental reviews meet the ``hard look'' standard to fully account 
for the environmental impacts of initial LR and SLR. The revised LR 
GEIS provides a thorough assessment of the potential environmental 
impacts (effects) of renewing the operating licenses of commercial 
nuclear power plants for an additional 20 years beyond the current 
license term, plus the number of years remaining on the current 
license, in accordance with applicable regulations.
    License renewal and rulemaking process. Numerous comments were 
received on the NRC's overall license renewal framework, as related to 
the process for revising the LR GEIS and this rulemaking. Comments 
specifically questioned why the NRC was considering SLR applications 
(allowing continued nuclear plant operations for up to 80 years). 
Comments also criticized the reasoning behind allowing license renewal 
applications to be submitted more than 10 years before an operating 
license expires.
    With respect to the timing of license renewal applications, Section 
54.17(c) of 10 CFR part 54 allows licensees to submit license renewal 
applications up to 20 years before the expiration of the licenses 
currently in effect. The Commission established this earliest date for 
submission of license renewal applications after soliciting and 
considering public comments (56 FR 64943).
    Facilities seeking license renewal have operated for more than 20 
years before the filing of their initial LR applications, and for more 
than 40 years before the filing of their SLR applications. Thus, the 
NRC and other affected stakeholders at all levels have had decades to 
gain a better understanding of the environmental equilibrium and 
impacts of plant operations. The NRC has determined that having at 
least 20 years of operating experience at each power reactor facility 
is sufficient for the NRC to assess the environmental issues and 
impacts at the site and make informed generic judgments on the impacts 
of many environmental issues.
    Public participation. A number of comments expressed concerns and 
disappointment with NRC's management of the public participation 
process. Many commenters requested extension of the comment period or 
stated that the comment period length was inadequate.
    The NRC will continue to look for ways to improve public 
notifications and opportunities to comment, including the NRC's virtual 
(webinar) and in-person public meetings. To facilitate public 
involvement, the staff hosted six hybrid public meetings with a 30-
minute open house prior to the start of the meetings where members of 
the public could speak directly with and ask questions of NRC staff who 
authored the draft revised LR GEIS and proposed rule.
    With regard to requests for extending the comment period on the 
draft revised LR GEIS and proposed rule, the 60-day comment period was 
appropriate for this rulemaking and consistent with NRC regulations 
(see 10 CFR 51.73). While the NRC believes that the provided 60-day 
comment period for the draft revised LR GEIS and proposed rule was 
appropriate, the NRC considered additional comments after the close of 
the comment period to the extent practicable.

[[Page 64186]]

V. Section-by-Section Analysis

    The following paragraphs describe the specific changes made by this 
final rule.

10 CFR 51.53, Postconstruction Environmental Reports

    In Sec.  51.53(c)(3), this final rule removes the text ``an initial 
renewed license'' and replaces it with ``a license renewal covered by 
Table B-1'', to indicate applicability to initial LR and SLR. 
Additionally, this final rule revises the phrase ``and holding an 
operating license, construction permit, or combined license as of June 
30, 1995'' to read ``for a nuclear power plant for which an operating 
license, construction permit, or combined license was issued as of June 
30, 1995,'' in order to clarify that Watts Bar Nuclear Units 1 and 2, 
for which construction permits were issued by that date but are no 
longer held by the licensee, are within the scope of the revised LR 
GEIS and Table B-1. The revised language more clearly indicates that 
holders of renewed licenses for nuclear power plants within the scope 
of the revised LR GEIS and Table B-1 are within its scope during the 
license renewal term (initial LR or SLR).
    This final rule revises paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(B) for clarity and 
consistency with the methodology in Clean Water Act (CWA) Sections 
316(a) and (b).
    This final rule revises paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(D) to remove the text 
``is located at an inland site and'', for consistency with 
consolidation of two issues related to groundwater quality degradation 
and corresponding updates in Table B-1.
    This final rule revises paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(E) for clarity and 
consistency with proposed revisions to Table B-1.
    This final rule revises paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(G) for consistency 
with revisions to Table B-1 related to the scope of the 
``Microbiological hazards to the public'' issue. Paragraph 
(c)(3)(ii)(G) was revised in response to a public comment, for reasons 
discussed in Sections II.E and IV.C of this final rule.
    This final rule revises paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(K) for clarity and 
consistency with the requirements of Section 106 of the National 
Historic Preservation Act and NEPA.
    This final rule revises paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(N) for clarity and 
consistency with revisions to Table B-1 related to the scope of 
environmental justice concerns.
    This final rule revises paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(O) by removing the 
word ``future,'' for consistency with the revised terminology for 
``cumulative effects'' provided by the Council on Environmental 
Quality.
    This final rule adds new paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(Q) to include an 
assessment of the effects of climate change in postconstruction 
environmental reports. Paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(Q) was revised in response 
to a public comment, for reasons discussed in Sections II.E and IV.C of 
this final rule.

Section 51.95, Postconstruction Environmental Impact Statements

    This final rule revises paragraph (c) to remove the date ``(June 
2013)'', to clarify the reference to the current revision of the LR 
GEIS (NUREG-1437, Revision 2).

Appendix B to Subpart A--Environmental Effect of Renewing the Operating 
License of a Nuclear Power Plant

    This final rule revises appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, 
to indicate the applicability to initial LR and one term of SLR and to 
update the findings on environmental issues with the data supported by 
the analyses in the LR GEIS (NUREG-1437, Revision 2). Footnote 3 was 
revised to provide clarification on the range of impact findings in 
Table B-1.

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 
605(b), the Commission certifies that this rule does not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
This final rule affects nuclear power plant licensees filing for 
license renewal applications. The companies that own these plants do 
not fall within the scope of the definition of ``small entities'' set 
forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the size standards 
established by the NRC (10 CFR 2.810).

VII. Regulatory Analysis

    The NRC has prepared a regulatory analysis for this final rule. The 
analysis examines the costs and benefits of the alternatives considered 
by the NRC. The regulatory analysis is available as indicated in the 
``Availability of Documents'' section of this document.

VIII. Backfitting and Issue Finality

    This final rule codifies in 10 CFR part 51 certain environmental 
issues identified in the revised LR GEIS. The final rule also revises 
Sec.  51.53(c)(3) to remove the word ``initial.'' The NRC has 
determined that the backfitting rule in Sec.  50.109 and the issue 
finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52 do not apply to this final rule 
because this amendment does not involve any provision that would either 
constitute backfitting as that term is defined in 10 CFR chapter I or 
affect the issue finality of any approval issued under 10 CFR part 52.

IX. Cumulative Effects of Regulation

    The NRC is following its cumulative effects of regulation (CER) 
process by engaging with external stakeholders throughout the 
rulemaking and related regulatory activities. Public involvement has 
included (1) the publication of a notice announcing information 
gathering through the public scoping process to support the review to 
determine whether to update the LR GEIS on August 4, 2020 (85 FR 
47252); (2) four public meetings conducted on August 19, 2020, and 
August 27, 2020 (two meetings on each day), to receive comments on the 
scope of the LR GEIS; (3) publication of the proposed rule on March 3, 
2023 (88 FR 13329) for comment; (4) six hybrid public meetings 
conducted between March 16, 2023, and April 6, 2023, to receive 
comments on the proposed rule, the revised LR GEIS, and associated 
guidance documents (88 FR 14958); and (5) a public meeting conducted on 
November 8, 2023, on CER to discuss the effective date and 
implementation date for this final rule.

X. 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).

XI. National Environmental Policy Act

    In support of the revisions to 10 CFR part 51 concerning initial LR 
and SLRs, the NRC prepared Revision 2 to NUREG-1437. With regard to the 
corresponding changes in requirements for applications for initial LR 
or SLR, the NRC has determined that this is the type of action 
described in Sec.  51.22(c)(3), an NRC categorical exclusion. 
Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental 
impact statement has been prepared for this final rule, as it is 
procedural in nature and pertains to the type of environmental 
information to be reviewed.

XII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

    This final rule contains new or amended collections of information 
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq.). The burden to the public for the information collections is 
estimated to average 8,562 hours per response, including the time

[[Page 64187]]

for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering 
and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 
information collection. The collections of information were approved by 
the Office of Management and Budget, approval number 3150-0021.
    The information collection is being conducted to fulfill the 
requirements of a future applicant that submits an initial LR or SLR 
license application. This information will be used by the NRC to 
fulfill its responsibilities in the licensing review of nuclear power 
plants. Responses to this collection of information are mandatory. 
Confidential and proprietary information submitted to the NRC is 
protected in accordance with NRC regulations at 10 CFR 9.17(a) and 10 
CFR 2.390(b).
    You may submit comments on any aspect of the information 
collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden, by the 
following methods:
     Federal rulemaking website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0296.
     Mail comments to: FOIA, Library, and Information 
Collections Branch, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Mail Stop: 
T6-A10M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001 
or to the OMB reviewer at: OMB Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs (3150-0021), Attn: Desk Officer for the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503.

Public Protection Notification

    The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to 
respond to, a collection of information unless the document requesting 
or requiring the collection displays a currently valid OMB control 
number.

XIII. Congressional Review Act

    This final rule is a rule as defined in the Congressional Review 
Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808). However, the Office of Management and Budget 
has not found it to be a major rule as defined in the Congressional 
Review Act.

XIV. Voluntary Consensus Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995, 
Public Law 104-113, requires that Federal agencies use technical 
standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies unless the use of such a standard is inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. In this final rule, the NRC 
revises various provisions of 10 CFR part 51. This action does not 
constitute the establishment of a standard that contains generally 
applicable requirements.

XV. Availability of Guidance

    To support implementation of this final rule, the NRC is issuing 
the following guidance: (1) Regulatory Guide (RG) 4.2, ``Preparation of 
Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal 
Applications,'', Revision 2, and (2) NUREG-1555, Supplement 1, Revision 
2, ``Standard Review Plans for Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power 
Plants, Supplement 1: Operating License Renewal.'' The guidance 
documents are available as indicated in the ``Availability of 
Documents'' section of this document. You may access information and 
comment submissions related to the guidance by searching on https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2018-0296.
    For more information, see the response to public comments 
(available as indicated in the ``Response and Public Comment Analysis'' 
section of this document).

XVI. Availability of Documents

    The documents identified in the following table are available to 
interested persons through one or more of the following methods, as 
indicated.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   ADAMS accession No./
                    Document                         Federal Register
                                                         citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Final Rule Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECY-24-0017, ``Final Rule: Renewing Nuclear                 ML23202A150
 Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental
 Review (RIN 3150[dash]AK32; NRC-2018-0296)''..
Regulatory Analysis for the 10 CFR Part 51,                  ML24152A224
 Generic Environmental Impact Statement for
 License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants.......
Supporting Statement for Information                         ML23205A028
 Collections Contained in the Renewing Nuclear
 Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental
 Review Proposed Rule..........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear
                         Power Plants (LR GEIS)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact                   ML24086A526
 Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
 Plants,'' Volume 1, Revision 2, August 2024...
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact                   ML24086A527
 Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
 Plants,'' Volume 2, Revision 2, August 2024...
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact                   ML24086A528
 Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
 Plants,'' Volume 3, Revision 2, August 2024...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Guidance Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NUREG-1555, Supplement 1, Revision 2,                        ML23201A227
 ``Standard Review Plans for Environmental
 Reviews for Nuclear Power Plants, Supplement
 1: Operating License Renewal,'' August 2024...
Regulatory Guide 4.2, ``Supplement 1,                        ML23201A144
 Preparation of Environmental Reports for
 Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal
 Applications,'' August 2024...................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Proposed Rule Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating                       88 FR 13329
 Licenses--Environmental Review, Proposed Rule,
 March 3, 2023.................................
SECY-22-0109, ``Proposed Rule: Renewing Nuclear              ML22165A004
 Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental
 Review (RIN 3150[dash]AK32; NRC-2018-0296),''
 December 6, 2022..............................
Draft Regulatory Analysis for the 10 CFR Part                ML23010A074
 51, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for
 License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,
 December 6, 2022..............................

[[Page 64188]]

 
Draft Supporting Statement for Information                   ML22208A002
 Collections Contained in the Renewing Nuclear
 Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental
 Review Proposed Rule, March 3, 2023...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Public Meetings
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating                       88 FR 14958
 Licenses--Environmental Review, Proposed Rule
 Public Meetings, March 10, 2023...............
03/16/2023 Meetings Summary: Rockville, MD,                  ML23100A211
 Public Meetings on Proposed Rule Renewing
 Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--
 Environmental Review..........................
03/28/2023 Meeting Summary: Naperville, IL,                  ML23100A213
 Public Meeting on Proposed Rule Renewing
 Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--
 Environmental Review..........................
03/30/2023 Meeting Summary: Westlake, TX,                    ML23100A203
 Public Meeting on Proposed Rule Renewing
 Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--
 Environmental Review..........................
04/04/2023 Meeting Summary: King of Prussia,                 ML23100A207
 PA, Public Meeting on Proposed Rule Renewing
 Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--
 Environmental Review..........................
04/06/2023 Meeting Summary: Decatur, GA, Public              ML23100A208
 Meeting on Proposed Rule Renewing Nuclear
 Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental
 Review........................................
11/08/2023 Meeting Summary: Cumulative Effects               ML23331A004
 of Regulations Public Meeting: Draft Final
 Rule Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating
 Licenses--Environmental Review................
Official Transcript of March 16, 2023:                       ML23082A151
 Rockville, MD, Public Comments-Gathering
 Meeting on PR-51--Renewing Nuclear Power Plant
 Operating Licenses--Environmental Review
 (Afternoon Session) (corrected)...............
Official Transcript of March 16, 2023:                       ML23082A152
 Rockville, MD, Public Comments-Gathering
 Meeting on PR-51--Renewing Nuclear Power Plant
 Operating Licenses--Environmental Review
 (Evening Session) (corrected).................
Official Transcript of March 28, 2023:                       ML23107A242
 Naperville, IL, Public Comments-Gathering
 Meeting on PR-51--Renewing Nuclear Power Plant
 Operating Licenses--Environmental Review
 (corrected)...................................
Official Transcript of March 30, 2023:                       ML23107A243
 Westlake, TX, Public Comments-Gathering
 Meeting on PR-51--Renewing Nuclear Power Plant
 Operating Licenses--Environmental Review
 (corrected)...................................
Official Transcript of April 4, 2023: King of                ML23107A244
 Prussia, PA, Public Comments-Gathering Meeting
 on PR-51--Renewing Nuclear Power Plant
 Operating Licenses--Environmental Review
 (corrected)...................................
Official Transcript of April 6, 2023, Decatur,               ML23107A245
 GA, Public Comments-Gathering Meeting on PR-
 51--Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating
 Licenses--Environmental Review (corrected)....
Official Transcript of November 8, 2023, Public              ML23331A005
 Meeting on Cumulative Effects of Regulations:
 Draft Final Rule Renewing Nuclear Power Plant
 Operating Licenses--Environmental Review
 (corrected)...................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Related Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Research Council, ``Analysis of Cancer              ML15035A132
 Risks in Populations Near Nuclear Facilities:
 Phase 1,'' 2012...............................
National Research Council, ``Analysis of Cancer              ML15035A135
 Risks in Populations Near Nuclear Facilities:
 Phase 2 Pilot Planning,'' 2014................
Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, Final               79 FR 56238
 Rule, September 29, 2014......................
Corrected Transcript for Public Scoping Meeting              ML20296A270
 to Discuss the Review and Potential Update of
 NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact
 Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
 Plants,'' August 27, 2020, 1:30 p.m...........
Corrected Transcript for Public Scoping Meeting              ML20296A271
 to Discuss the Review and Potential Update of
 NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact
 Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
 Plants,'' August 27, 2020, 6:30 p.m...........
Corrected Transcript for Public Scoping Meeting              ML20296A272
 to Discuss the Review and Potential Update of
 NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact
 Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
 Plants,'' August 19, 2020, 1:30 p.m...........
Corrected Transcript for Public Scoping Meeting              ML20296A273
 to Discuss the Review and Potential Update of
 NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact
 Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
 Plants,'' August 19, 2020, 6:30 p.m...........
Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Process               ML21039A576
 Summary Report, Review and Update of the
 Generic Environmental Impact Statement for
 License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (NUREG-
 1437), June 2021..............................
Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear                  61 FR 66537
 Power Plant Operating Licenses, Final Rule,
 December 18, 1996.............................
Executive Order 13175, ``Consultation and                    ML040070159
 Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,''
 November 6, 2000..............................
Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal, Final                   56 FR 64943
 Rule, December 13, 1991.......................
Notice of Intent to Review and Update the                    85 FR 47252
 Generic Environmental Impact Statement for
 License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, August 4,
 2020..........................................
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact                   ML040690705
 Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
 Plants,'' Volume 1, May 1996..................
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact                   ML040690738
 Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
 Plants,'' Volume 2, May 1996..................
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact                   ML13106A241
 Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
 Plants,'' Volume 1, Revision 1, June 2013.....
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact                   ML13106A242
 Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
 Plants,'' Volume 2, Revision 1, June 2013.....
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact                   ML13106A244
 Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power
 Plants,'' Volume 3, Revision 1, June 2013.....
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact                   ML19290H346
 Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear
 Plants: Second Renewal, Regarding Subsequent
 License Renewal for Turkey Point Nuclear
 Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4,'' Supplement 5,
 October 2019..................................
Revisions to Environmental Review for Renewal                78 FR 37281
 of Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses,
 Final Rule, June 20, 2013.....................
Revisions to Environmental Review for Renewal                78 FR 46255
 of Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses;
 Correction, Final Rule, Correcting Amendment,
 July 31, 2013.................................

[[Page 64189]]

 
SECY-15-0104, ``Analysis of Cancer Risks in                  ML15141A404
 Populations Near Nuclear Facilities Study,''
 August 21, 2015...............................
SECY-21-0066, ``Rulemaking Plan for Renewing                 ML20364A008
 Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--
 Environmental Review (RIN 3150-AK32, NRC-2018-
 0296),'' July 22, 2021........................
SECY-22-0024, ``Rulemaking Plan for Renewing                 ML22062B643
 Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--
 Environmental Review (RIN 3150-AK32, NRC-2018-
 0296),'' March 25, 2022.......................
SECY-22-0036, ``Rulemaking Plan for Renewing                 ML22083A149
 Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--10-
 Year Environmental Regulatory Update (NRC-2022-
 0087),'' April 25, 2022.......................
SRM-SECY-21-0066, ``Rulemaking Plan for                      ML22053A308
 Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating
 Licenses--Environmental Review (RIN 3150-AK32,
 NRC-2018-0296),'' February 24, 2022...........
SRM-SECY-22-0024, ``Rulemaking Plan for                      ML22096A035
 Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating
 Licenses--Environmental Review (RIN 3150-AK32,
 NRC-2018-0296),'' April 5, 2022...............
SRM-SECY-22-0036, ``Rulemaking Plan for                      ML22168A130
 Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating
 Licenses--10-Year Environmental Regulatory
 Update (NRC-2022-0087),'' June 17, 2022.......
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Memorandum                ML093070690
 and Order CLI-09-21, November 3, 2009.........
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Memorandum                ML22055A496
 and Order CLI-22-02, February 24, 2022........
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Memorandum                ML22055A521
 and Order CLI-22-03, February 24, 2022........              ML22055A526
                                                             ML22055A527
                                                             ML22055A533
                                                             ML22055A554
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Memorandum                ML22055A557
 and Order CLI-22-04, February 24, 2022........
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Tribal                     82 FR 2402
 Policy Statement..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NRC may post materials related to this document, including 
public comments, on the Federal rulemaking website at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2018-0296. In addition, the 
Federal rulemaking website allows members of the public to receive 
alerts when changes or additions occur in a docket folder. The 
following actions are needed to subscribe: (1) navigate to the docket 
folder NRC-2018-0296, (2) click the ``Subscribe'' link, and (3) enter 
an email address and click on the ``Subscribe'' link.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 51

    Administrative practice and procedure, Environmental impact 
statements, Hazardous waste, Nuclear energy, Nuclear materials, Nuclear 
power plants and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of 
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization 
Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, the NRC is amending 
10 CFR part 51 as follows:

PART 51--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION REGULATIONS FOR DOMESTIC 
LICENSING AND RELATED REGULATORY FUNCTIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 161, 193 (42 U.S.C. 
2201, 2243); Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 202 (42 
U.S.C. 5841, 5842); National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 
U.S.C. 4332, 4334, 4335); Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, secs. 
144(f), 121, 135, 141, 148 (42 U.S.C. 10134(f), 10141, 10155, 10161, 
10168); 44 U.S.C. 3504 note.

    Sections 51.20, 51.30, 51.60, 51.80, and 51.97 also issued under 
Nuclear Waste Policy Act secs. 135, 141, 148 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 
10161, 10168).
    Section 51.22 also issued under Atomic Energy Act sec. 274 (42 
U.S.C. 2021) and under Nuclear Waste Policy Act sec. 121 (42 U.S.C. 
10141).
    Sections 51.43, 51.67, and 51.109 also issued under Nuclear 
Waste Policy Act sec. 114(f) (42 U.S.C. 10134(f)).


0
2. Amend Sec.  51.53 by:
0
a. Removing in paragraph (c)(3) introductory text, the words ``an 
initial renewed license and holding an operating license, construction 
permit, or combined license as of June 30, 1995'' and adding in their 
place the words ``a license renewal covered by Table B-1 for a nuclear 
power plant for which an operating license, construction permit, or 
combined license was issued as of June 30, 1995'';
0
b. Revising paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(B);
0
c. Removing in paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(D), the words ``is located at an 
inland site and'';
0
d. Revising paragraphs (c)(3)(ii)(E), (G), (K), and (N);
0
e. Removing in paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(O) the word ``future''; and
0
f. Adding paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(Q).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  51.53  Postconstruction environmental reports.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (B) If the applicant's plant utilizes once-through cooling or 
cooling pond water intake and discharge systems, the applicant shall 
provide a copy of current Clean Water Act 316(b) Best Technology 
Available determinations and, if applicable, a 316(a) variance in 
accordance with 40 CFR part 125, or equivalent State permits and 
supporting documentation. If the applicant cannot provide these 
documents, it shall assess the impact of the proposed action on fish 
and shellfish resources resulting from impingement mortality and 
entrainment and thermal discharges.
* * * * *
    (E) All license renewal applicants shall assess the impact of 
refurbishment, continued operations, and other license renewal-related 
construction activities on important plant and animal habitats. 
Additionally, the applicant shall assess the impact of the proposed 
action on federally protected ecological resources in accordance with 
Federal laws protecting such resources, including but not limited to, 
the Endangered Species Act, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation 
and Management Act, and the National Marine Sanctuaries Act.
* * * * *
    (G) If the applicant's plant uses a cooling pond, lake, canal, or 
discharges to publicly accessible surface waters, an assessment of the 
impact of the proposed action on public health from thermophilic 
organisms in the affected water must be provided.
* * * * *
    (K) All applicants shall identify any potentially affected historic 
and cultural resources and historic properties and

[[Page 64190]]

assess whether continued operations and any planned refurbishment 
activities would affect these resources in accordance with the Section 
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and in the context of the 
National Environmental Policy Act.
* * * * *
    (N) Applicants shall provide information on the general demographic 
composition of minority and low-income populations and communities (by 
race and ethnicity) and Indian Tribes in the vicinity of the nuclear 
power plant that could be disproportionately affected by license 
renewal, including continued reactor operations and refurbishment 
activities.
* * * * *
    (Q) Applicants shall include an assessment of the effects of any 
observed and projected changes in climate on environmental resource 
areas that are affected by license renewal.
* * * * *


Sec.  51.95  [Amended]

0
3. In Sec.  51.95, in paragraph (c) introductory text, remove the words 
``(June 2013)''.

0
4. Revise appendix B to subpart A of 10 CFR part 51 to read as follows:

Appendix B to Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51--Environmental Effect of 
Renewing the Operating License of a Nuclear Power Plant

    The Commission has assessed the environmental impacts associated 
with granting a renewed operating license for a nuclear power plant 
for which an operating license, construction permit, or combined 
license was issued as of June 30, 1995. This assessment applies to 
applications for initial or a first (i.e., one term) subsequent 
license renewal. Table B-1 summarizes the Commission's findings on 
the scope and magnitude of environmental impacts of renewing the 
operating license for a nuclear power plant as required by section 
102(2) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended. 
Table B-1, subject to an evaluation of those issues identified in 
Category 2 as requiring further analysis and possible significant 
new information, represents the analysis of the environmental 
impacts associated with renewal of any operating license and is to 
be used in accordance with Sec.  51.95(c). On a 10-year cycle, the 
Commission intends to review the material in this appendix and 
update it if necessary. A scoping notice must be published in the 
Federal Register indicating the results of the NRC's review and 
inviting public comments and proposals for other areas that should 
be updated.

Table B-1--Summary of Findings on Environmental Issues for Initial and One Term of Subsequent License Renewal of
                                            Nuclear Power Plants \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Category
                   Issue                         \2\                            Finding \3\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Land Use
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onsite land use............................            1  SMALL. Changes in onsite land use from continued
                                                           operations and refurbishment associated with license
                                                           renewal would be a small fraction of the nuclear
                                                           power plant site and would involve only land that is
                                                           controlled by the licensee.
Offsite land use...........................            1  SMALL. Offsite land use would not be affected by
                                                           continued operations and refurbishment associated
                                                           with license renewal.
Offsite land use in transmission line right-           1  SMALL. Use of transmission line ROWs from continued
 of-ways (ROWs) \4\.                                       operations and refurbishment associated with license
                                                           renewal would continue with no change in land use
                                                           restrictions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Visual Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aesthetic impacts..........................            1  SMALL. No important changes to the visual appearance
                                                           of plant structures or transmission lines are
                                                           expected from continued operations and refurbishment
                                                           associated with license renewal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Air Quality
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air quality impacts........................            1  SMALL. Air quality impacts from continued operations
                                                           and refurbishment associated with license renewal are
                                                           expected to be small at all plants. Emissions from
                                                           emergency diesel generators and fire pumps and
                                                           routine operations of boilers used for space heating
                                                           are minor. Impacts from cooling tower particulate
                                                           emissions have been small.
                                                          Emissions resulting from refurbishment activities at
                                                           locations in or near air quality nonattainment or
                                                           maintenance areas would be short-lived and would
                                                           cease after these activities are completed. Operating
                                                           experience has shown that the scale of refurbishment
                                                           activities has not resulted in exceedance of the de
                                                           minimis thresholds for criteria pollutants, and best
                                                           management practices, including fugitive dust
                                                           controls and the imposition of permit conditions in
                                                           State and local air emissions permits, would ensure
                                                           conformance with applicable State or Tribal
                                                           implementation plans.
Air quality effects of transmission lines              1  SMALL. Production of ozone and oxides of nitrogen from
 \4\.                                                      transmission lines is insignificant and does not
                                                           contribute measurably to ambient levels of these
                                                           gases.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Noise
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noise impacts..............................            1  SMALL. Noise levels would remain below regulatory
                                                           guidelines for offsite receptors during continued
                                                           operations and refurbishment associated with license
                                                           renewal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Geologic Environment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geology and soils..........................            1  SMALL. The impact of continued operations and
                                                           refurbishment activities on geology and soils would
                                                           be small for all nuclear power plants and would not
                                                           change appreciably during the license renewal term.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 64191]]

 
                                             Surface Water Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface water use and quality (non-cooling             1  SMALL. Impacts are expected to be small if best
 system impacts).                                          management practices are employed to control soil
                                                           erosion and spills. Surface water use associated with
                                                           continued operations and refurbishment associated
                                                           with license renewal would not increase significantly
                                                           or would be reduced if refurbishment occurs during a
                                                           plant outage.
Altered current patterns at intake and                 1  SMALL. Altered current patterns would be limited to
 discharge structures.                                     the area in the vicinity of the intake and discharge
                                                           structures. These impacts have been small at
                                                           operating nuclear power plants.
Altered salinity gradients.................            1  SMALL. Effects on salinity gradients would be limited
                                                           to the area in the vicinity of the intake and
                                                           discharge structures. These impacts have been small
                                                           at operating nuclear power plants.
Altered thermal stratification of lakes....            1  SMALL. Effects on thermal stratification would be
                                                           limited to the area in the vicinity of the intake and
                                                           discharge structures. These impacts have been small
                                                           at operating nuclear power plants.
Scouring caused by discharged cooling water            1  SMALL. Scouring effects would be limited to the area
                                                           in the vicinity of the intake and discharge
                                                           structures. These impacts have been small at
                                                           operating nuclear power plants.
Discharge of metals in cooling system                  1  SMALL. Discharges of metals have not been found to be
 effluent.                                                 a problem at operating nuclear power plants with
                                                           cooling-tower-based heat dissipation systems and have
                                                           been satisfactorily mitigated at other plants.
                                                           Discharges are monitored and controlled as part of
                                                           the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
                                                           (NPDES) permit process.
Discharge of biocides, sanitary wastes, and            1  SMALL. The effects of these discharges are regulated
 minor chemical spills.                                    by Federal and State environmental agencies.
                                                           Discharges are monitored and controlled as part of
                                                           the NPDES permit process. These impacts have been
                                                           small at operating nuclear power plants.
Surface water use conflicts (plants with               1  SMALL. These conflicts have not been found to be a
 once-through cooling systems).                            problem at operating nuclear power plants with once-
                                                           through heat dissipation systems.
Surface water use conflicts (plants with               2  SMALL or MODERATE. Impacts could be of small or
 cooling ponds or cooling towers using                     moderate significance, depending on makeup water
 makeup water from a river).                               requirements, water availability, and competing water
                                                           demands.
Effects of dredging on surface water                   1  SMALL. Dredging to remove accumulated sediments in the
 quality.                                                  vicinity of intake and discharge structures and to
                                                           maintain barge shipping has not been found to be a
                                                           problem for surface water quality. Dredging is
                                                           performed under permit from the U.S. Army Corps of
                                                           Engineers, and possibly, from other State or local
                                                           agencies.
Temperature effects on sediment transport              1  SMALL. These effects have not been found to be a
 capacity.                                                 problem at operating nuclear power plants and are not
                                                           expected to be a problem during the license renewal
                                                           term.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Groundwater Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Groundwater contamination and use (non-                1  SMALL. Extensive dewatering is not anticipated from
 cooling system impacts).                                  continued operations and refurbishment associated
                                                           with license renewal. Industrial practices involving
                                                           the use of solvents, hydrocarbons, heavy metals, or
                                                           other chemicals, and/or the use of wastewater ponds
                                                           or lagoons have the potential to contaminate site
                                                           groundwater, soil, and subsoil. Contamination is
                                                           subject to State or U.S. Environmental Protection
                                                           Agency (EPA) regulated cleanup and monitoring
                                                           programs. The application of best management
                                                           practices for handling any materials produced or used
                                                           during these activities would reduce impacts.
Groundwater use conflicts (plants that                 1  SMALL. Plants that withdraw less than 100 gpm are not
 withdraw less than 100 gallons per minute                 expected to cause any groundwater use conflicts.
 [gpm]).
Groundwater use conflicts (plants that                 2  SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. Plants that withdraw more
 withdraw more than 100 gallons per minute                 than 100 gpm could cause groundwater use conflicts
 [gpm]).                                                   with nearby groundwater users.
Groundwater use conflicts (plants with                 2  SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. Water use conflicts could
 closed-cycle cooling systems that withdraw                result from water withdrawals from rivers during low-
 makeup water from a river).                               flow conditions, which may affect aquifer recharge.
                                                           The significance of impacts would depend on makeup
                                                           water requirements, water availability, and competing
                                                           water demands.
Groundwater quality degradation resulting              1  SMALL. Groundwater withdrawals at operating nuclear
 from water withdrawals.                                   power plants would not contribute significantly to
                                                           groundwater quality degradation.
Groundwater quality degradation (plants                2  SMALL or MODERATE. Sites with cooling ponds could
 with cooling ponds).                                      degrade groundwater quality. The significance of the
                                                           impact would depend on site-specific conditions
                                                           including cooling pond water quality, site
                                                           hydrogeologic conditions (including the interaction
                                                           of surface water and groundwater), and the location,
                                                           depth, and pump rate of water wells.

[[Page 64192]]

 
Radionuclides released to groundwater......            2  SMALL or MODERATE. Leaks of radioactive liquids from
                                                           plant components and pipes have occurred at numerous
                                                           plants. Groundwater protection programs have been
                                                           established at all operating nuclear power plants to
                                                           minimize the potential impact from any inadvertent
                                                           releases. The magnitude of impacts would depend on
                                                           site-specific characteristics.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Terrestrial Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-cooling system impacts on terrestrial              2  SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. The magnitude of effects of
 resources.                                                continued nuclear power plant operation and
                                                           refurbishment, unrelated to operation of the cooling
                                                           system, would depend on numerous site-specific
                                                           factors, including ecological setting, planned
                                                           activities during the license renewal term, and
                                                           characteristics of the plants and animals present in
                                                           the area. Application of best management practices
                                                           and other conservation initiatives would reduce the
                                                           potential for impacts.
Exposure of terrestrial organisms to                   1  SMALL. Doses to terrestrial organisms from continued
 radionuclides.                                            nuclear power plant operation and refurbishment
                                                           during the license renewal term would be expected to
                                                           remain well below U.S. Department of Energy exposure
                                                           guidelines developed to protect these organisms.
Cooling system impacts on terrestrial                  1  SMALL. Continued operation of nuclear power plant
 resources (plants with once-through                       cooling systems during license renewal could cause
 cooling systems or cooling ponds).                        thermal effluent additions to receiving waterbodies,
                                                           chemical effluent additions to surface water or
                                                           groundwater, impingement of waterfowl, disturbance of
                                                           terrestrial plants and wetlands from maintenance
                                                           dredging, and erosion of shoreline habitat. However,
                                                           plants where these impacts have occurred successfully
                                                           mitigated the impact, and it is no longer of concern.
                                                           These impacts are not expected to be significant
                                                           issues during the license renewal term.
Cooling tower impacts on terrestrial plants            1  SMALL. Continued operation of nuclear power plant
                                                           cooling towers could deposit particulates and water
                                                           droplets or ice on vegetation and lead to structural
                                                           damage or changes in terrestrial plant communities.
                                                           However, nuclear power plants where these impacts
                                                           occurred have successfully mitigated the impact.
                                                           These impacts are not expected to be significant
                                                           issues during the license renewal term.
Bird collisions with plant structures and              1  SMALL. Bird mortalities from collisions with nuclear
 transmission lines \4\.                                   power plant structures and in-scope transmission
                                                           lines would be negligible for any species and are
                                                           unlikely to threaten the stability of local or
                                                           migratory bird populations or result in noticeable
                                                           impairment of the function of a species within the
                                                           ecosystem. These impacts are not expected to be
                                                           significant issues during the license renewal term.
Water use conflicts with terrestrial                   2  SMALL or MODERATE. Nuclear power plants could consume
 resources (plants with cooling ponds or                   water at rates that cause occasional or intermittent
 cooling towers using makeup water from a                  water use conflicts with nearby and downstream
 river).                                                   terrestrial and riparian communities. Such impacts
                                                           could noticeably affect riparian or wetland species
                                                           or alter characteristics of the ecological
                                                           environment during the license renewal term. The one
                                                           plant where impacts have occurred successfully
                                                           mitigated the impact. Impacts are expected to be
                                                           small at most nuclear power plants but could be
                                                           moderate at some.
Transmission line right-of-way (ROW)                   1  SMALL. In-scope transmission lines tend to occupy only
 management impacts on terrestrial                         industrial-use or other developed portions of nuclear
 resources \4\.                                            power plant sites and, therefore, effects of ROW
                                                           maintenance on terrestrial plants and animals during
                                                           the license renewal term would be negligible.
                                                           Application of best management practices would reduce
                                                           the potential for impacts.
Electromagnetic field effects on                       1  SMALL. In-scope transmission lines tend to occupy only
 terrestrial plants and animals \4\.                       industrial-use or other developed portions of nuclear
                                                           power plant sites and, therefore, effects of
                                                           electromagnetic fields on terrestrial plants and
                                                           animals during the license renewal term would be
                                                           negligible.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Aquatic Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impingement mortality and entrainment of               2  SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. The impacts of impingement
 aquatic organisms (plants with once-                      mortality and entrainment would generally be small at
 through cooling systems or cooling ponds).                nuclear power plants with once-through cooling
                                                           systems or cooling ponds that have implemented best
                                                           technology requirements for existing facilities under
                                                           Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 316(b). For all other
                                                           plants, impacts could be small, moderate, or large
                                                           depending on characteristics of the cooling water
                                                           intake system, results of impingement and entrainment
                                                           studies performed at the plant, trends in local fish
                                                           and shellfish populations, and implementation of
                                                           mitigation measures.
Impingement mortality and entrainment of               1  SMALL. No significant impacts on aquatic populations
 aquatic organisms (plants with cooling                    associated with impingement mortality and entrainment
 towers).                                                  at nuclear power plants with cooling towers have been
                                                           reported, including effects on fish and shellfish
                                                           from direct mortality, injury, or other sublethal
                                                           effects. Impacts during the license renewal term
                                                           would be similar and small. Further, effects of these
                                                           cooling water intake systems would be mitigated
                                                           through adherence to NPDES permit conditions
                                                           established pursuant to CWA Section 316(b).

[[Page 64193]]

 
Entrainment of phytoplankton and                       1  SMALL. Entrainment has not resulted in noticeable
 zooplankton.                                              impacts on phytoplankton or zooplankton populations
                                                           near operating nuclear power plants. Impacts during
                                                           the license renewal term would be similar and small.
                                                           Further, effects would be mitigated through adherence
                                                           to NPDES permit conditions established pursuant to
                                                           CWA Section 316(b).
Effects of thermal effluents on aquatic                2  SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. Acute, sublethal, and
 organisms (plants with once-through                       community-level effects of thermal effluents on
 cooling systems or cooling ponds).                        aquatic organisms would generally be small at nuclear
                                                           power plants with once-through cooling systems or
                                                           cooling ponds that adhere to State water quality
                                                           criteria or that have and maintain a valid CWA
                                                           Section 316(a) variance. For all other plants,
                                                           impacts could be small, moderate, or large depending
                                                           on site-specific factors, including ecological
                                                           setting of the plant; characteristics of the cooling
                                                           system and effluent discharges; and characteristics
                                                           of the fish, shellfish, and other aquatic organisms
                                                           present in the area.
Effects of thermal effluents on aquatic                1  SMALL. Acute, sublethal, and community-level effects
 organisms (plants with cooling towers).                   of thermal effluents have not resulted in noticeable
                                                           impacts on aquatic communities at nuclear power
                                                           plants with cooling towers. Impacts during the
                                                           license renewal term would be similar and small.
                                                           Further, effects would be mitigated through adherence
                                                           to State water quality criteria or CWA Section 316(a)
                                                           variances.
Infrequently reported effects of thermal               1  SMALL. Continued operation of nuclear power plant
 effluents.                                                cooling systems could result in certain infrequently
                                                           reported thermal impacts, including cold shock,
                                                           thermal migration barriers, accelerated maturation of
                                                           aquatic insects, proliferation of aquatic nuisance
                                                           organisms, depletion of dissolved oxygen, gas
                                                           supersaturation, eutrophication, and increased
                                                           susceptibility of exposed fish and shellfish to
                                                           predation, parasitism, and disease. Most of these
                                                           effects have not been reported at operating nuclear
                                                           power plants. Plants that have experienced these
                                                           impacts successfully mitigated the impact, and it is
                                                           no longer of concern. Infrequently reported thermal
                                                           impacts are not expected to be significant issues
                                                           during the license renewal term.
Effects of nonradiological contaminants on             1  SMALL. Heavy metal leaching from condenser tubes was
 aquatic organisms.                                        an issue at several operating nuclear power plants.
                                                           These plants successfully mitigated the issue, and it
                                                           is no longer of concern. Cooling system effluents
                                                           would be the primary source of nonradiological
                                                           contaminants during the license renewal term.
                                                           Implementation of best management practices and
                                                           adherence to NPDES permit limitations would minimize
                                                           the effects of these contaminants on the aquatic
                                                           environment.
Exposure of aquatic organisms to                       1  SMALL. Doses to aquatic organisms from continued
 radionuclides.                                            nuclear power plant operation and refurbishment
                                                           during the license renewal term would be expected to
                                                           remain well below U.S. Department of Energy exposure
                                                           guidelines developed to protect these organisms.
Effects of dredging on aquatic resources...            1  SMALL. Dredging at nuclear power plants is expected to
                                                           occur infrequently, would be of relatively short
                                                           duration, and would affect relatively small areas.
                                                           Continued operation of many plants may not require
                                                           any dredging. Adherence to best management practices
                                                           and CWA Section 404 permit conditions would mitigate
                                                           potential impacts at plants where dredging is
                                                           necessary to maintain function or reliability of
                                                           cooling systems. Dredging is not expected to be a
                                                           significant issue during the license renewal term.
Water use conflicts with aquatic resources             2  SMALL or MODERATE. Nuclear power plants could consume
 (plants with cooling ponds or cooling                     water at rates that cause occasional or intermittent
 towers using makeup water from a river).                  water use conflicts with nearby and downstream
                                                           aquatic communities. Such impacts could noticeably
                                                           affect aquatic plants or animals or alter
                                                           characteristics of the ecological environment during
                                                           the license renewal term. The one plant where impacts
                                                           have occurred successfully mitigated the impact.
                                                           Impacts are expected to be small at most nuclear
                                                           power plants but could be moderate at some.
Non-cooling system impacts on aquatic                  1  SMALL. No significant impacts on aquatic resources
 resources.                                                associated with landscape and grounds maintenance,
                                                           stormwater management, or ground-disturbing
                                                           activities at operating nuclear power plants have
                                                           been reported. Impacts from continued operation and
                                                           refurbishment during the license renewal term would
                                                           be similar and small. Application of best management
                                                           practices and other conservation initiatives would
                                                           reduce the potential for impacts.
Impacts of transmission line right-of-way              1  SMALL. In-scope transmission lines tend to occupy only
 (ROW) management on aquatic resources \4\.                industrial-use or other developed portions of nuclear
                                                           power plant sites and, therefore, the effects of ROW
                                                           maintenance on aquatic plants and animals during the
                                                           license renewal term would be negligible. Application
                                                           of best management practices would reduce the
                                                           potential for impacts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 64194]]

 
                                    Federally Protected Ecological Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Endangered Species Act: Federally listed               2  The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant
 species and critical habitats under U.S.                  operation and refurbishment on federally listed
 Fish and Wildlife Service jurisdiction.                   species and critical habitats would depend on
                                                           numerous site-specific factors, including the
                                                           ecological setting; listed species and critical
                                                           habitats present in the action area; and plant-
                                                           specific factors related to operations, including
                                                           water withdrawal, effluent discharges, and other
                                                           ground-disturbing activities. Consultation with the
                                                           U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under Endangered
                                                           Species Act Section 7(a)(2) would be required if
                                                           license renewal may affect listed species or critical
                                                           habitats under this agency's jurisdiction.
Endangered Species Act: federally listed               2  The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant
 species and critical habitats under                       operation and refurbishment on federally listed
 National Marine Fisheries Service                         species and critical habitats would depend on
 jurisdiction.                                             numerous site-specific factors, including the
                                                           ecological setting; listed species and critical
                                                           habitats present in the action area; and plant-
                                                           specific factors related to operations, including
                                                           water withdrawal, effluent discharges, and other
                                                           ground-disturbing activities. Consultation with the
                                                           National Marine Fisheries Service under Endangered
                                                           Species Act Section 7(a)(2) would be required if
                                                           license renewal may affect listed species or critical
                                                           habitats under this agency's jurisdiction.
Magnuson-Stevens Act: essential fish                   2  The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant
 habitat.                                                  operation and refurbishment on essential fish habitat
                                                           would depend on numerous site-specific factors,
                                                           including the ecological setting; essential fish
                                                           habitat present in the area, including habitats of
                                                           particular concern; and plant-specific factors
                                                           related to operations, including water withdrawal,
                                                           effluent discharges, and other activities that may
                                                           affect aquatic habitats. Consultation with the
                                                           National Marine Fisheries Service under Magnuson-
                                                           Stevens Act Section 305(b) would be required if
                                                           license renewal could result in adverse effects to
                                                           essential fish habitat.
National Marine Sanctuaries Act: sanctuary             2  The potential effects of continued nuclear power plant
 resources.                                                operation and refurbishment on sanctuary resources
                                                           would depend on numerous site-specific factors,
                                                           including the ecological setting; national marine
                                                           sanctuaries present in the area; and plant-specific
                                                           factors related to operations, including water
                                                           withdrawal, effluent discharges, and other activities
                                                           that may affect aquatic habitats. Consultation with
                                                           the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries under
                                                           National Marine Sanctuaries Act Section 304(d) would
                                                           be required if license renewal could destroy, cause
                                                           the loss of, or injure sanctuary resources.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Historic and Cultural Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historic and cultural resources \4\........            2  Impacts from continued operations and refurbishment on
                                                           historic and cultural resources located onsite and in
                                                           the transmission line ROW are analyzed on a plant-
                                                           specific basis. The NRC will perform a National
                                                           Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106 review,
                                                           in accordance with 36 CFR part 800 which includes
                                                           consultation with the State and Tribal Historic
                                                           Preservation Officers, Indian Tribes, and other
                                                           interested parties.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Socioeconomics
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employment and income, recreation and                  1  SMALL. Although most nuclear plants have large numbers
 tourism.                                                  of employees with higher than average wages and
                                                           salaries, employment, income, recreation, and tourism
                                                           impacts from continued operations and refurbishment
                                                           associated with license renewal are expected to be
                                                           small.
Tax revenue................................            1  SMALL. Nuclear plants provide tax revenue to local
                                                           jurisdictions in the form of property tax payments,
                                                           payments in lieu of tax (PILOT), or tax payments on
                                                           energy production. The amount of tax revenue paid
                                                           during the license renewal term as a result of
                                                           continued operations and refurbishment associated
                                                           with license renewal is not expected to change.
Community services and education...........            1  SMALL. Changes resulting from continued operations and
                                                           refurbishment associated with license renewal to
                                                           local community and educational services would be
                                                           small. With little or no change in employment at the
                                                           licensee's plant, value of the power plant, payments
                                                           on energy production, and PILOT payments expected
                                                           during the license renewal term, community and
                                                           educational services would not be affected by
                                                           continued power plant operations.
Population and housing.....................            1  SMALL. Changes resulting from continued operations and
                                                           refurbishment associated with license renewal to
                                                           regional population and housing availability and
                                                           value would be small. With little or no change in
                                                           employment at the licensee's plant expected during
                                                           the license renewal term, population and housing
                                                           availability and values would not be affected by
                                                           continued power plant operations.
Transportation.............................            1  SMALL. Changes resulting from continued operations and
                                                           refurbishment associated with license renewal to
                                                           traffic volumes would be small.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 64195]]

 
                                                  Human Health
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radiation exposures to plant workers.......            1  SMALL. Occupational doses from continued operations
                                                           and refurbishment associated with license renewal are
                                                           expected to be within the range of doses experienced
                                                           during the current license term and would continue to
                                                           be well below regulatory limits.
Radiation exposures to the public..........            1  SMALL. Radiation doses to the public from continued
                                                           operations and refurbishment associated with license
                                                           renewal are expected to continue at current levels
                                                           and would be well below regulatory limits.
Chemical hazards...........................            1  SMALL. Chemical hazards to plant workers resulting
                                                           from continued operations and refurbishment
                                                           associated with license renewal are expected to be
                                                           minimized by the licensee implementing good
                                                           industrial hygiene practices as required by permits
                                                           and Federal and State regulations. Chemical releases
                                                           to the environment and the potential for impacts to
                                                           the public are expected to be minimized by adherence
                                                           to discharge limitations of NPDES and other permits.
Microbiological hazards to plant workers...            1  SMALL. Occupational health impacts are expected to be
                                                           controlled by continued application of accepted
                                                           industrial hygiene practices to minimize worker
                                                           exposures as required by permits and Federal and
                                                           State regulations.
Microbiological hazards to the public......            2  SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. These microorganisms are
                                                           not expected to be a problem at most operating plants
                                                           except possibly at plants using cooling ponds, lakes,
                                                           canals, or that discharge to publicly accessible
                                                           surface waters. Impacts would depend on site-specific
                                                           characteristics.
Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) \4\ \6\......      N/A \5\  Uncertain impact. Studies of 60-Hz EMFs have not
                                                           uncovered consistent evidence linking harmful effects
                                                           with field exposures. EMFs are unlike other agents
                                                           that have a toxic effect (e.g., toxic chemicals and
                                                           ionizing radiation) in that dramatic acute effects
                                                           cannot be forced and longer-term effects, if real,
                                                           are subtle. Because the state of the science is
                                                           currently inadequate, no generic conclusion on human
                                                           health impacts is possible.
Physical occupational hazards..............            1  SMALL. Occupational safety and health hazards are
                                                           generic to all types of electrical generating
                                                           stations, including nuclear power plants, and are of
                                                           small significance if the workers adhere to safety
                                                           standards and use protective equipment as required by
                                                           Federal and State regulations.
Electric shock hazards \4\.................            2  SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE. Electrical shock potential
                                                           is of small significance for transmission lines that
                                                           are operated in adherence with the National
                                                           Electrical Safety Code (NESC). Without a review of
                                                           conformance with NESC criteria of each nuclear power
                                                           plant's in-scope transmission lines, it is not
                                                           possible to determine the significance of the
                                                           electrical shock potential.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Postulated Accidents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design-basis accidents.....................            1  SMALL. The NRC staff has concluded that the
                                                           environmental impacts of design-basis accidents are
                                                           of small significance for all plants.
Severe accidents \7\.......................            1  SMALL. The probability-weighted consequences of
                                                           atmospheric releases, fallout onto open bodies of
                                                           water, releases to groundwater, and societal and
                                                           economic impacts from severe accidents are small for
                                                           all plants. Severe accident mitigation alternatives
                                                           do not warrant further plant-specific analysis
                                                           because the demonstrated reductions in population
                                                           dose risk and continued severe accident regulatory
                                                           improvements substantially reduce the likelihood of
                                                           finding cost-effective significant plant
                                                           improvements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Environmental Justice
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impacts on minority populations, low-income            2  Impacts on minority populations, low-income
 populations, and Indian Tribes.                           populations, Indian Tribes, and subsistence
                                                           consumption resulting from continued operations and
                                                           refurbishment associated with license renewal will be
                                                           addressed in nuclear plant-specific reviews.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Waste Management
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-level waste storage and disposal.......            1  SMALL. The comprehensive regulatory controls that are
                                                           in place and the low public doses being achieved at
                                                           reactors ensure that the radiological impacts on the
                                                           environment would remain small during the license
                                                           renewal term.
Onsite storage of spent nuclear fuel.......            1  During the license renewal term, SMALL. The expected
                                                           increase in the volume of spent fuel from an
                                                           additional 20 years of operation can be safely
                                                           accommodated onsite during the license renewal term
                                                           with small environmental impacts through dry or pool
                                                           storage at all plants.
                                                          For the period after the licensed life for reactor
                                                           operations, the impacts of onsite storage of spent
                                                           nuclear fuel during the continued storage period are
                                                           discussed in NUREG-2157 and as stated in Sec.
                                                           51.23(b), shall be deemed incorporated into this
                                                           issue.

[[Page 64196]]

 
Offsite radiological impacts of spent                  1  For the high-level waste and spent-fuel disposal
 nuclear fuel and high-level waste disposal.               component of the fuel cycle, the EPA established a
                                                           dose limit of 0.15 mSv (15 millirem) per year for the
                                                           first 10,000 years and 1.0 mSv (100 millirem) per
                                                           year between 10,000 years and 1 million years for
                                                           offsite releases of radionuclides at the proposed
                                                           repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
                                                          The Commission concludes that the impacts would not be
                                                           sufficiently large to require the NEPA conclusion,
                                                           for any plant, that the option of extended operation
                                                           under 10 CFR part 54 should be eliminated.
                                                           Accordingly, while the Commission has not assigned a
                                                           single level of significance for the impacts of spent
                                                           fuel and high-level waste disposal, this issue is
                                                           considered Category 1.
Mixed-waste storage and disposal...........            1  SMALL. The comprehensive regulatory controls and the
                                                           facilities and procedures that are in place ensure
                                                           proper handling and storage, as well as negligible
                                                           doses and exposure to toxic materials for the public
                                                           and the environment at all plants. License renewal
                                                           would not increase the small, continuing risk to
                                                           human health and the environment posed by mixed waste
                                                           at all plants. The radiological and nonradiological
                                                           environmental impacts of long-term disposal of mixed
                                                           waste from any individual plant at licensed sites are
                                                           small.
Nonradioactive waste storage and disposal..            1  SMALL. No changes to systems that generate
                                                           nonradioactive waste are anticipated during the
                                                           license renewal term. Facilities and procedures are
                                                           in place to ensure continued proper handling,
                                                           storage, and disposal, as well as negligible exposure
                                                           to toxic materials for the public and the environment
                                                           at all plants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greenhouse gas impacts on climate change...            1  SMALL. Greenhouse gas impacts on climate change from
                                                           continued operations and refurbishment associated
                                                           with license renewal are expected to be small at all
                                                           plants. Greenhouse gas emissions from routine
                                                           operations of nuclear power plants are typically very
                                                           minor, because such plants, by their very nature, do
                                                           not normally combust fossil fuels to generate
                                                           electricity.
                                                          Greenhouse gas emissions from construction vehicles
                                                           and other motorized equipment for refurbishment
                                                           activities would be intermittent and temporary,
                                                           restricted to the refurbishment period. Worker
                                                           vehicle greenhouse gas emissions for refurbishment
                                                           would be similar to worker vehicle emissions from
                                                           normal nuclear power plant operations.
Climate change impacts on environmental                2  Climate change can have additive effects on
 resources.                                                environmental resource conditions that may also be
                                                           directly impacted by continued operations and
                                                           refurbishment during the license renewal term. The
                                                           effects of climate change can vary regionally and
                                                           climate change information at the regional and local
                                                           scale is necessary to assess trends and the impacts
                                                           on the human environment for a specific location. The
                                                           impacts of climate change on environmental resources
                                                           during the license renewal term are location-specific
                                                           and cannot be evaluated generically.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Cumulative Effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumulative effects.........................            2  Cumulative effects or impacts of continued operations
                                                           and refurbishment associated with license renewal
                                                           must be considered on a plant-specific basis. The
                                                           effects depend on regional resource characteristics,
                                                           the incremental resource-specific effects of license
                                                           renewal, and the cumulative significance of other
                                                           factors affecting the environmental resource.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Uranium Fuel Cycle
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offsite radiological impacts--individual               1  SMALL. The impacts to the public from radiological
 impacts from other than the disposal of                   exposures have been considered by the Commission in
 spent fuel and high-level waste.                          Table S-3 of this part. Based on information in the
                                                           GEIS, impacts to individuals from radioactive gaseous
                                                           and liquid releases, including radon-222 and
                                                           technetium-99, would remain at or below the NRC's
                                                           regulatory limits.
Offsite radiological impacts--collective               1  There are no regulatory limits applicable to
 impacts from other than the disposal of                   collective doses to the general public from fuel-
 spent fuel and high-level waste.                          cycle facilities. The practice of estimating health
                                                           effects on the basis of collective doses may not be
                                                           meaningful. All fuel-cycle facilities are designed
                                                           and operated to meet the applicable regulatory limits
                                                           and standards. The Commission concludes that the
                                                           collective impacts are acceptable.
                                                          The Commission concludes that the impacts would not be
                                                           sufficiently large to require the NEPA conclusion,
                                                           for any plant, that the option of extended operation
                                                           under 10 CFR part 54 should be eliminated.
                                                           Accordingly, while the Commission has not assigned a
                                                           single level of significance for the collective
                                                           impacts of the uranium fuel cycle, this issue is
                                                           considered Category 1.
Nonradiological impacts of the uranium fuel            1  SMALL. The nonradiological impacts of the uranium fuel
 cycle.                                                    cycle resulting from the renewal of an operating
                                                           license for any plant would be small.

[[Page 64197]]

 
Transportation.............................            1  SMALL. The impacts of transporting materials to and
                                                           from uranium-fuel-cycle facilities on workers, the
                                                           public, and the environment are expected to be small.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Termination of Nuclear Power Plant Operations and Decommissioning
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Termination of plant operations and                    1  SMALL. License renewal is expected to have a
 decommissioning.                                          negligible effect on the impacts of terminating
                                                           operations and decommissioning on all resources.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Data supporting this table are contained in NUREG-1437, Revision 2, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement
  for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,'' August 2024.
\1\ The numerical entries in this column are based on the following category definitions:
Category 1: For the issue, the analysis reported in the Generic Environmental Impact Statement has shown:
(1) The environmental impacts associated with the issue have been determined to apply either to all plants or,
  for some issues, to plants having a specific type of cooling system or other specified plant or site
  characteristic;
(2) A single significance level (i.e., SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE) has been assigned to the impacts (except for
  offsite radiological impacts of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste disposal and offsite radiological
  impacts--collective impacts from other than the disposal of spent fuel and high-level waste); and
(3) Mitigation of adverse impacts associated with the issue has been considered in the analysis, and it has been
  determined that additional plant-specific mitigation measures are not likely to be sufficiently beneficial to
  warrant implementation.
The generic analysis of the issue may be adopted in each plant-specific review.
Category 2: For the issue, the analysis reported in the Generic Environmental Impact Statement has shown that
  one or more of the criteria of Category 1 cannot be met, and therefore additional plant-specific review is
  required.
\3\ The impact findings in this column are based on the definitions of three significance levels. Unless the
  significance level is identified as beneficial, the impact is adverse, or in the case of ``SMALL,'' may be
  negligible. The definitions of significance follow:
SMALL--For the issue, environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither
  destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource. For the purposes of assessing
  radiological impacts, the Commission has concluded that those impacts that do not exceed permissible levels in
  the Commission's regulations are considered SMALL as the term is used in this table.
MODERATE--For the issue, environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize,
  important attributes of the resource.
LARGE--For the issue, environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize important
  attributes of the resource.
These levels are used for describing the environmental impacts of the proposed action (license renewal), as well
  as for the impacts of a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed action. Resource-specific effects or
  impact definitions from applicable environmental laws and executive orders, other than SMALL, MODERATE, and
  LARGE, are used where appropriate.
For issues where probability is a key consideration (i.e., accident consequences), probability was a factor in
  determining significance.
\4\ This issue applies only to the in-scope portion of electric power transmission lines, which are defined as
  transmission lines that connect the nuclear power plant to the substation where electricity is fed into the
  regional power distribution system and transmission lines that supply power to the nuclear plant from the
  grid.
\5\ NA (not applicable). The categorization and impact finding definitions do not apply to these issues.
\6\ If, in the future, the Commission finds that, contrary to current indications, a consensus has been reached
  by appropriate Federal health agencies that there are adverse health effects from electromagnetic fields, the
  Commission will require applicants to submit plant-specific reviews of these health effects as part of their
  license renewal applications. Until such time, applicants for license renewal are not required to submit
  information on this issue.
\7\ Although the NRC does not anticipate any license renewal applications for nuclear power plants for which a
  previous severe accident mitigation design alternative (SAMDA) or severe accident mitigation alternative
  (SAMA) analysis has not been performed, alternatives to mitigate severe accidents must be considered for all
  plants that have not considered such alternatives and would be the functional equivalent of a Category 2 issue
  requiring plant-specific analysis.


    Dated: July 24, 2024.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carrie Safford,
Secretary of the Commission.


    NOTE: The following will not appear in the Code of Federal 
Regulations:

Separate Views of Commissioner Caputo on Renewing Nuclear Power Plant 
Operating Licenses--Environmental Review

    The purpose of the first license renewal generic environmental 
impact statement (LR GEIS) in 1996 was to improve regulatory 
efficiency in environmental reviews for license renewals ``. . . by 
drawing on the considerable experience of operating nuclear power 
reactors to generically assess many of the environmental impacts 
that are likely to be associated with license renewal'' resulting 
lower costs for both license renewal applicants and the agency.\6\ 
The use of the LR GEIS was expected to result in improved focus on 
significant case specific concerns a more effective NEPA review for 
each license renewal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant 
Operating Licenses; Final Rule, 61 FR 28467, June 5, 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today the Commission finalizes the rulemaking ``Renewing Nuclear 
Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental Review'' with all 
Commissioners agreeing that Revision 2 to NUREG-1437, ``Generic 
Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power 
Plants,'' appropriately considers the environmental impacts of 
license renewal of nuclear power plants licensed as of June 30, 
1995. Because of this, licensees of such plants may rely on the LR 
GEIS in the preparation of their environmental reports under Sec.  
51.53(c) in connection with their applications for license renewal 
and subsequent license renewal. In addition, the NRC must prepare a 
supplement to the LR GEIS as a part of the environmental review of 
those applications.
    This rulemaking was necessary because of the Commission's 
reversal in its adjudicative role of its prior holistic view of Part 
51 in favor of a plain language reading of the wording of a single 
paragraph in the regulations.\7\ This action disrupted two renewed 
licenses that had been issued.\8\ The

[[Page 64198]]

Commission then initiated a rulemaking to remove the word 
``initial'' to clarify the applicability of the LR GEIS for 
subsequent license renewals, dramatically increasing the staff's 
environmental review workload with the additional work of the LR 
GEIS revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Florida Power & Light Co. (Turkey Point Nuclear Generating 
Units 1 and 2), CLI-22-2, 95 NRC 26, 31-2 (2022) (ADAMS Accession 
No. ML22055A496) (holding the 2013 LR GEIS does not cover subsequent 
license renewal, stating section 51.53(c) narrows the scope only to 
those applicants seeking an initial renewed license, and 
acknowledging that there is language in the regulatory analysis for 
the 2013 revisions to Part 51 that would support a contrary 
interpretation).
    \8\ See Florida Power & Light Co., CLI-22-2, 95 NRC at 36 
(stating that the licensee could ``maintain its current subsequently 
renewed licenses, but with shortened terms to match the end dates of 
the previous licenses (i.e., July 19, 2032, and April 10, 2033, for 
Units 3 and 4, respectively) until completion of the NEPA 
analysis.''); Exelon Generation Co. (Peach Bottom Atomic Power 
Station, Units 2 and 3), CLI-22-4, 95 NRC 44, 46 (2022) (modifying 
the expiration date of the licenses for Units 2 and 3 to 2033 and 
2034, respectively).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This action also precluded any subsequent license renewal 
applicants from using the LR GEIS in their applications while under 
revision, injecting considerable uncertainty into the nuclear 
planning process. As applicants wrestled with this protracted 
uncertainty, some potential applicants delayed filing their 
applications pending completion of the revision in order to rely on 
it. Others initially chose to delay and then apparently 
reconsidered, choosing instead to revise their applications to 
include a complete environmental report without the benefit of the 
LR GEIS. As business decisions were revised to address continuing 
uncertainty, the staff's workload management was complicated 
further. As a result, the Commission has unjustifiably undermined 
the reliability of license renewal reviews and, thus, the stability 
of the nuclear operational and planning processes as noted in 
correspondence from Senators Capito and Ricketts:
    The Commission's misguided 2022 reversal of previously issued 
SLRs [subsequent license renewals] resulted in a cascading delay 
that impedes the ability for nuclear utilities to make long-term 
planning decisions and support those decisions with necessary 
investments.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Letter from Hon. Shelley Moore Capito, Ranking Member, 
Committee on Environment and Public Works and Hon. Pete Ricketts, 
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate, and Nuclear 
Safety, Committee on Environment and Public Works, to Chairman 
Christopher T. Hanson (Nov. 1, 2023), available at https://subscriber.politicopro.com/eenews/f/eenews/?id=0000018b-8b9a-da71-a98f-abff5d500000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Unfortunately, the decision enshrined in this final LR GEIS 
fails to learn from this mistake and misses the opportunity to 
establish the stability of environmental reviews for a future, third 
round of license renewals.
    In CLI-20-3, the Commission chose a holistic interpretation of 
the 2013 LR GEIS upholding its applicability for subsequent license 
renewal and, indeed, any license renewal.10 11 The 2013 
LR GEIS had long been expected to apply to subsequent license 
renewal since applications were anticipated in the near future. 
Indeed, the agency began receiving notices from the industry of the 
intent to file applications in 2015 \12\ with the first application 
filed in 2018.\13\ As noted above, one of the regulatory purposes in 
the initial codification of the LR GEIS was ``to promote efficiency 
in the environmental review process for license renewal 
applications.'' \14\ The reversal of CLI-20-03 strays from that 
regulatory purpose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Florida Power & Light Co. (Turkey Point Nuclear Generating 
Units 3 and 4), CLI-20-3, 91 NRC 133, 141 (2020) (agreeing with the 
Board's determination that the regulatory language in section 
51.53(c) is ambiguous and concurring that a holistic reading of Part 
51 supports the conclusion that section 51.53(c) applies to all 
applicants for license renewal).
    \11\ The Commission's decision in CLI-20-3 notes that ``the 
Board was guided by the Supreme Court's approach in Fed. Express 
Corp. v. Holowecki, 552 U.S. 389 (2008)[.]'' Florida Power & Light 
Co., CLI-20-3, 91 NRC at 140.
    \12\ See, e.g., Letter from Mark Sartain, Virginia Electric and 
Power Company, to NRC Document Control Desk (Nov. 5, 2015) 
(ML15314A078) (providing notification of intent to submit a second 
renewed operating license application for Surry Power Station Units 
1 and 2 in the first quarter of 2019).
    \13\ See Letter from Mano K. Nazar, Florida Power & Light Co. to 
NRC Document Control Desk, ``Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Subsequent 
License Renewal Application'' (Jan. 30, 2018) (ML18037A824).
    \14\ Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant 
Operating Licenses; Final Rule, 61 FR 28467, 28468 June 5, 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In SECY-22-0109, the staff had analyzed, recommended, and 
drafted the LR GEIS proposed rule to apply to any license renewal 
term (i.e., initial, first SLR, or a term beyond the first SLR), 
excepting issues related to the Continued Storage Rule.\15\ Contrary 
to this and despite the omission of a regulatory analysis regarding 
the impact of limiting LR GEIS applicability to a single subsequent 
license renewal term, my colleagues chose to limit the applicability 
of the LR GEIS to a single term of subsequent license renewal. In 
his response to the staff's recommendation, Chair Hanson stated the 
following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ ``Proposed Rule: Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating 
Licenses--Environmental Review (RIN 3150-AK32; NRC-2018-0296),'' 
Commission Paper SECY-22-0109 (Dec. 6, 2022), at 6 (ML22165A003 
(package)) (SECY-22-0109).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NRC's regulatory framework for renewal anticipates that the 
LR GEIS will be reviewed and updated every ten years to account for 
new information and lessons learned. It is at this ten-year review 
that it is most appropriate to consider whether the scope of the LR 
GEIS should be expanded to cover additional terms of license renewal 
beyond the first SLR.
    It benefits the agency and the public it serves to use the ten-
year review cycle of the LR GEIS as designed--to evaluate and 
incorporate new information gleaned from experience to generically 
address known impacts of continued operation.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Commission Voting Record, ``SECY-22-0109: Proposed Rule: 
Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental 
Review, (Dec. 20, 2022), at 1 (ML23023A231) (Chair Hanson's Notation 
Vote).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While this statement is true, the Commission had previously 
deferred the anticipated revision that should be underway in favor 
of addressing the consequences flowing from the Commission's 
reversal of CLI-20-3.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Staff Requirements--SECY-22-0036--Rulemaking Plan for 
Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--10-Year 
Environmental Regulatory Update (NRC-2022-0087) (June 17, 2022) 
(ML2216A130).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A concern has been raised that there is inherent uncertainty in 
estimating environmental impacts from continued contributions to 
onsite waste storage beyond the first term of subsequent license 
renewal. While this might be considered a potential inconsistency 
between the LR GEIS and the Continued Storage GEIS (NUREG-2157), I 
note that the staff's recommendation specifically excepted issues 
related to the Continued Storage Rule.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ SECY-22-0109 at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thereafter, in SRM-SECY-22-0109, the Commission directed the 
staff to ``modify the proposed rule and draft License Renewal GEIS 
to explicitly state that the scope of the GEIS is initial license 
renewal and one term of subsequent license renewal. . . but include 
in the Federal Register notice, a specific question asking whether 
the proposed rule should be expanded beyond two license renewal 
terms.'' \19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Staff Requirements--SECY-22-0109--Proposed Rule: Renewing 
Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses--Environmental Review (RIN 
3150-AK32; NRC-2018-0296) (Jan. 23, 2023) (ML23023A200 (package)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the Commission's direction in SRM-SECY-22-0109, 
the staff provided the draft final LR GEIS in SECY 24-0017, and 
described the significant work done to support this final version:
    Lessons learned, knowledge gained, and experience from license 
renewal environmental reviews performed by the NRC staff since 
development of the 2013 LR GEIS provided an important source of new 
information for this assessment. In addition, new scientific 
research, changes in environmental regulations and impact 
methodology, and other new information were considered in evaluating 
the significance of impacts associated with initial LR and SLR. 
Public comments on previous plant-specific license renewal 
environmental reviews also were analyzed to assess the existing 
environmental issues and identify new ones. The purpose of this 
evaluation was to determine if the findings presented in the 2013 LR 
GEIS remain valid for initial LR and to update the analysis and 
assumptions to support one SLR term. In doing so, the staff 
considered the need to modify, add to, or delete any of the 78 
environmental issues presented in the 2013 LR GEIS and codified in 
Table B-1. As a result of the detailed evaluation, the staff 
identified 80 environmental issues, which are considered in detail 
in the LR GEIS revision.

And:

    In the revised LR GEIS, the staff used the following general 
analytical approach to evaluate potential environmental issues and 
the impacts associated with continued operations and any 
refurbishment: (1) describe the nuclear power plant activity or 
aspect of plant operations or refurbishment that could affect the 
resource; (2) identify the resource that is affected; (3) evaluate 
past license renewal reviews and other available information, 
including information related to impacts during an SLR term; (4) 
assess the nature and magnitude of the potential environmental 
effect (impact) on the affected resource; (5) characterize the 
significance of the effect; (6) determine whether the results of the 
analysis apply to all or a specific subset of nuclear power plants, 
i.e., whether the issue is Category 1 (generic) or Category 2 
(plant-specific); and (7) consider additional mitigation measures 
for reducing adverse impacts.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ ``Final Rule--Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating 
Licenses--Environmental Review (RIN 3150-AK32; NRC-2018-0296,'' 
Commission Paper SECY 24-0017 (Feb. 21, 2024) at 3 (ML23202A179 
(package)).

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

[[Page 64199]]

    This is a nearly identical recitation of the description 
provided in SECY 22-0109 of the staff's effort which supported their 
recommendation that ``. . . the LR GEIS apply to any license renewal 
term.'' \21\ Hence, the work was nonetheless completed and supported 
the applicability to any license renewal, laying bare any concerns 
that addressing a third round of renewals in this revision wasn't 
practical given the urgent need to complete it. Clearly, the 
benefits of accepting the staff's sound technical judgement as 
expressed in SECY-22-0109 would have outweighed the costs of 
establishing the applicability of this LR GEIS to all SLR terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ SECY 22-0109 at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Nuclear Energy Institute, representing industry 
stakeholders, agreed that this revision should apply to any license 
renewal term and cited the proposed LR GEIS statement that ``[t]here 
are no specific limitations in the Atomic Energy Act [AEA] or the 
NRC's regulations restricting the number of times a license may be 
renewed.'' \22\ NEI also stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Letter from Jennifer Uhle, Nuclear Energy Institute, to 
Secretary of the Commission, NRC (May 2, 2023), at 3-4 
(ML23123A407).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We believe that the LR GEIS provides a reasonable analysis of 
the environmental impacts of 20 years of reactor operation, 
irrespective of the prior number of years of reactor operation. 
Every license renewal review, regardless of term, requires a site-
specific supplement to the LR GEIS (i.e., SEIS), in which the NRC 
evaluates any issues not resolved generically by the GEIS. The NRC 
also evaluates any new and significant information. In addition, the 
NRC updates the GEIS roughly every 10 years to incorporate material 
new information and lessons learned. This review cycle is reasonable 
given that ``changes in the environment around nuclear plants are 
gradual and predictable.'' There for, limiting the applicability of 
the proposed rule and GEIS to one SLR term is not necessary as a 
technical or legal matter, and contravenes the NRC's Principles of 
Good Regulation.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Id. at 4 (internal citations omitted).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to questions on the potential costs of limiting the 
applicability of the LR GEIS to one SLR, the staff identified 26 
licensees that would be eligible to apply for a second SLR prior to 
their projected completion of the next revision to the LR GEIS. 
While licensees are allowed to apply for a license renewal up to 20 
years in advance of the current license's expiration, the staff's 
projected completion date of the next LR GEIS revision in fiscal 
year 2034 would shorten the window for filing an application to as 
little as 10 years.\24\ In contrast, the first SLR application was 
filed in 2018, 14 years prior to license expiration and applying the 
LR GEIS finalized 5 years earlier. Given the uncertainty plaguing 
the 2013 LR GEIS that is finally being resolved 11 years later in 
this revision and the cascade of delays undermining the stability of 
nuclear operational and planning processes, a projected completion 
date for the next revision does not inspire confidence and any delay 
in completing the revision would drive a bow wave of applications 
awaiting completion of the LR GEIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ R.E. Ginna, Nine Mile Point, Unit 1, and Dresden, Unit 2, 
all operate under licenses that expire in 2029. The lack of an 
applicable LR GEIS in the first five years of their eligibility to 
apply for renewal and the timely renewal provision in Sec.  2.109(b) 
requiring application 5 years prior to license expiration result in 
this severe reduction of the window to apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its regulatory analysis of the rule, the staff estimated that 
it would need to review 44 applications for license renewal over the 
next 10 years. We have already seen delays in environmental reviews 
due to limited staff resources.\25\ In order to assist the agency in 
this area, Congress has worked to grant direct hiring authority in 
this area.\26\ My colleagues propose that having the staff monitor 
interest in further license renewals and proposing to the Commission 
the short-cycling of revision of the LR GEIS would meet the needs to 
address their arbitrary decision. In my opinion, the net result of 
this would be a costly revisiting of the staff's hard look that was 
already completed to support the recommendation in SECY-22-0109. 
Further, this is wholly unnecessary given the fact that 
``environmental impacts of license renewal are expected to be 
bounded by data from operating experience given that license renewal 
is twenty years of continued operation, and our understanding that 
changes in the environment around nuclear plants are gradual and 
predictable.'' \27\ This is not good stewardship of staff resources 
that are already overextended and may be exacerbated if the agency 
begins receiving more applications for new plants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See, e.g., Letter to Daniel Stoddard ``Revision of Schedule 
for the Environmental Review of the North Anna Power Station, Units 
1 and 2, Subsequent License Renewal Application (EPID Number: L-
2020-SLE-0000) (Docket Numbers: 50-338 AND 50-339)'' (Oct. 16, 
2023), at 1 (ML23278A064).
    \26\ See H.R. 6544, Atomic Energy Advancement Act, Sec.  103, 
``Strengthening the NRC workforce,'' as referred to the Senate on 
February 29, 2024.
    \27\ Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant 
Operating Licenses; Final Rule, 61 FR 28467, et seq., June 5, 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Licensee concerns with regulatory stability in this area are 
clearly demonstrated in the comments provided on this rulemaking. 
Duke Energy noted the status of the NRC's ongoing review of the SLR 
application for Oconee Nuclear Station, for which the current 
schedule includes finalization of the Supplemental EIS after the 
projected issuance of this final rule.\28\ In particular, Duke 
Energy expressed concerns that this could be construed as requiring 
further environmental reviews.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Letter from Thomas Ray, Duke Energy, to Secretary of 
the Commission, NRC (May 2, 2023), at (ML23122A311).
    \29\ Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I recognize concerns regarding aging management and that 
research into the safety of operating from 80-100 years continues. 
However, this is an area the staff must address in the safety review 
rather than the environmental review process and will have no effect 
on the environmental issues resolved as Category 1 in this final LR 
GEIS. The environmental review pertains to the plant's impact on the 
environment as distinct from the environment's impact on the plant 
which pertains to the safety review. There has been no sound 
argument presented that would link aging management to any of the LR 
GEIS issues. In addition, decades of operating experience since the 
first LR GEIS has demonstrated that experience has been consistent 
with the assumptions underlying license renewal.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Florida Power & Light Co. (Turkey Point Nuclear Generating 
Units 3 and 4), CLI-20-3, 91 NRC 133, 152 (2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion

    Our Reliability Principle of Good Regulation states:
    Once established, regulation should be perceived to be reliable 
and not unjustifiably in a state of transition. Regulatory actions 
should always be fully consistent with written regulations and 
should be promptly, fairly, and decisively administered so as to 
lend stability to the nuclear operational and planning processes.
    In the wake of the Commission decision to reverse its prior 
decision, there have been a series of ramifications that have 
undermined reliability, created uncertainty for all stakeholders, 
and resulted in a significant increase in workload for the staff. 
The Commission, though constituted differently than the one that 
issued the reversal in 2022, must own accountability for the 
consequences of that decision and should take all the steps 
necessary to ensure that the rule it issues here cannot be subject 
to a similar treatment in the future. It is my view that this final 
rule should be modified to encompass any license renewal period, as 
the staff recommended,\31\ and that the revised final rule be 
provided to the Commission at least 10 business days prior to 
publication in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See SECY-22-0109 at 6.

[FR Doc. 2024-16643 Filed 8-5-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P