[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 146 (Friday, July 31, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38117-38140]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18284]


========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2009 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 38117]]



NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 51

RIN 3150-AI42
[NRC-2008-0608]


Revisions to Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear Power 
Plant Operating Licenses

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend 
its environmental protection regulations by updating the Commission's 
1996 findings on the environmental impacts related to the renewal of a 
nuclear power plant's operating license. The Commission stated that it 
intends to review the assessment of impacts and update it on a 10-year 
cycle, if necessary. The proposed rule redefines the number and scope 
of the environmental impact issues which must be addressed by the 
Commission in conjunction with the review of applications for license 
renewal. As part of this 10-year update, the NRC revised the 1996 
Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for License Renewal of 
Nuclear Plants. Concurrent with the amendments described in this 
proposed rule, the NRC is publishing for comment the revised GEIS, a 
revised Regulatory Guide 4.2, Supplement 1, Preparation of 
Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal 
Applications, and a revised Environmental Standard Review Plan, 
Standard Review Plans for Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power 
Plants, Supplement 1: Operating License Renewal.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule, its information collection 
aspects and its draft regulatory analysis should be submitted by 
October 14, 2009. Comments on the revised GEIS (NUREG-1437, Revision 
1); Regulatory Guide (RG) 4.2, Supplement 1, Revision 1; and 
Environmental Standard Review Plan (ESRP), Supplement 1, Revision 1 
(NUREG-1555), should be submitted by October 14, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by letter or electronic mail and 
will be made available for public inspection. Because comments will not 
be edited to remove any identification or contact information, such as 
name, addresses, telephone number, e-mail address, etc., the NRC 
cautions against including any personal information in your submissions 
that you do not want to be publicly disclosed. The NRC requests that 
any party soliciting or aggregating comments received from other 
persons for submission to the NRC inform these persons that the NRC 
will not edit their comments to remove any identifying or comment 
information, and therefore, they should not include any information in 
their comments that they do not want publicly disclosed.
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and 
search for documents filed under Docket ID [NRC-2008-0608]. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher, (301) 492-3668; e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1a597b687576345d7b76767b7d727f685a746879347d756c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="cc8fadbea3a0e28bada0a0adaba4a9be8ca2beafe2aba3ba">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.
    E-mail comments to: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0c5e796069616d6765626b224f6361616962787f4c627e6f226b637a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5d0f283138303c3634333a731e3230303833292e1d332f3e733a322b">[email protected]</span></a>. If you do not 
receive a reply e-mail confirming that we have received your comments, 
contact us directly at (301) 415-1677.
    Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 
(301) 415-1101.
    Publicly available documents related to this rulemaking may be 
accessed using the following methods:
    NRC's Public Document Room (PDR): Publicly available documents may 
be examined at the NRC's PDR, Public File Area O1-F21, One White Flint 
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The PDR reproduction 
contractor will copy documents for a fee.
    NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS): 
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are 
available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this link, the public can gain 
entry into ADAMS, which provides text and image files of NRC's public 
documents. If problems are encountered accessing documents in ADAMS, 
contact the NRC's PDR reference staff at (800) 397-4209, or (301) 415-
4737, or by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#306074621e4255435f45425355705e42531e575f46"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="643420364a1601170b11160701240a16074a030b12">[email protected]</span></a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jason Lising, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001; telephone (301) 415-3220; e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a6ecc7d5c9c888eacfd5cfc8c1e6c8d4c588c1c9d0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8fc5eefce0e1a1c3e6fce6e1e8cfe1fdeca1e8e0f9">[email protected]</span></a>; or 
Ms. Jennifer Davis, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone (301) 415-
3835; e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fab09f9494939c9f88d4be9b8c9389ba948899d49d958c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="82c8e7ececebe4e7f0acc6e3f4ebf1c2ecf0e1ace5edf4">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Public Comments
IV. Discussion
V. Proposed Actions and Basis for Changes to Table B-1
VI. Section-by-Section Analysis
VII. Specific Request for Comments
VIII. Guidance Documents
IX. Agreement State Compatibility
X. Availability of Documents
XI. Plain Language
XII. Voluntary Consensus Standards
XIII. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact
XIV. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
XV. Regulatory Analysis
XVI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
XVII. Backfit Analysis

I. Introduction

    The NRC is proposing to amend Title 10, Part 51, ``Environmental 
Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory 
Functions,'' of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 51) by 
updating Table B-1 in Appendix B to Subpart A of ``Summary of Findings 
on NEPA Issues for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,'' and other 
related provisions in Part 51 (e.g., Sec.  51.53(c)(3)), which 
describes the requirements for the license renewal applicant's 
environmental report. These amendments are based on comments received 
from the public on NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement 
for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' (May 1996), referred to as the 
``1996 GEIS,'' and its Addendum 1 (August 1999), a review of plant-
specific supplemental environmental impact statements (SEISs) completed

[[Page 38118]]

since the GEIS was issued in 1996, lessons learned, and knowledge 
gained from the preparation of these SEISs. The NRC staff has prepared 
a draft revision to the 1996 GEIS, referred to as the ``revised GEIS,'' 
which updates the 1996 GEIS based upon consideration of the above 
described factors. The revised GEIS provides the technical basis for 
this proposed rule.
    In the 1996 GEIS and final rule (61 FR 28467, June 5, 1996), which 
promulgated Table B-1 and related provisions in Part 51, the Commission 
determined that certain environmental impacts associated with the 
renewal of a nuclear power plant operating license were the same or 
similar for all plants and as such, could be treated on a generic 
basis. In this way, repetitive reviews of these environmental impacts 
could be avoided. The Commission based its generic assessment of 
certain environmental impacts 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 GEIS improved the efficiency of the license renewal 
process by (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 
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.
    As stated in the 1996 final rule that incorporated the findings of 
the GEIS in Part 51, the NRC recognized that the assessment of the 
environmental impact issues might change over time, and that additional 
issues may be identified for consideration. This proposed rule is the 
result of the 10-year review conducted by the NRC on the information 
and findings currently presented in Table B-1 of Appendix B to Part 51.

II. Background

Rulemaking History

    In 1986, the NRC initiated a program to develop license renewal 
regulations and associated regulatory guidance in anticipation of 
applications for the renewal of nuclear power plant operating licenses. 
A solicitation for comments on the development of a policy statement 
was published in the Federal Register on November 6, 1986 (51 FR 
40334). However, the Commission decided to forgo the development of a 
policy statement and to proceed directly to rulemaking. An advance 
notice of proposed rulemaking was published on August 29, 1988 (53 FR 
32919). Subsequently, in addition to a decision to proceed with the 
development of license renewal regulations focused on the protection of 
health and safety, the NRC decided to amend its environmental 
protection regulations in Part 51.
    On October 13, 1989 (54 FR 41980), the NRC published a notice of 
its intent to hold a public workshop on license renewal on November 13 
and 14, 1989. One of the workshop sessions was devoted to the 
environmental issues associated with license renewal and the possible 
merit of amending 10 CFR Part 51. The workshop is summarized in NUREG/
CP-0108, ``Proceedings of the Public Workshop on Nuclear Power Plant 
License Renewal'' (April 1990). Responses to the public comments 
submitted after the workshop are summarized in NUREG-1411, ``Response 
to Public Comments Resulting from the Public Workshop on Nuclear Power 
Plant License Renewal'' (July 1990).
    On July 23, 1990, the NRC published an advance notice of proposed 
rulemaking (55 FR 29964) and a notice of intent to prepare a generic 
environmental impact statement (55 FR 29967). The proposed rule 
published on September 17, 1991 (56 FR 47016), described the supporting 
documents that were available and announced a public workshop to be 
held on November 4 and 5, 1991. The supporting documents for the 
proposed rule included:
    (1) NUREG-1437, ``Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement for 
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' (August 1991);
    (2) NUREG-1440, ``Regulatory Analysis of Proposed Amendments to 
Regulations Concerning the Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear 
Power Plant Operating Licenses: Draft Report for Comment'' (August 
1991);
    (3) Draft Regulatory Guide DG-4002, Proposed Supplement 1 to 
Regulatory Guide 4.2, ``Guidance for the Preparation of Supplemental 
Environmental Reports in Support of an Application To Renew a Nuclear 
Power Station Operating License'' (August 1991); and
    (4) NUREG-1429, ``Environmental Standard Review Plan for the Review 
of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants: Draft Report 
for Comment'' (August 1991).
    After the comment period, the Commission directed the NRC staff to 
discuss concerns raised by a number of States that certain features of 
the proposed rule conflicted with State regulatory authority over the 
need for power and utility economics. To facilitate these discussions, 
the NRC developed an options paper entitled, ``Addressing the Concerns 
of States and Others Regarding the Role of Need for Generating 
Capacity, Alternative Energy Sources, Utility Costs, and Cost-Benefit 
Analysis in NRC Environmental Reviews for Relicensing Nuclear Power 
Plants: An NRC Staff Discussion Paper.'' A Federal Register document 
published on January 18, 1994 (59 FR 2542), announced the scheduling of 
three regional workshops in February 1994 and the availability of the 
options paper. A fourth public meeting was held in May 1994 to address 
proposals that had been submitted after the regional workshops. After 
consideration of all comments, the NRC issued a supplement to the 
proposed rule on July 25, 1994 (59 FR 37724), to resolve concerns about 
the need for power and utility economics.
    The NRC published the final rule, ``Environmental Review for 
Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses,'' on June 5, 1996 
(61 FR 28467). The final rule identified and assessed license renewal 
environmental impact issues for which a generic analysis had been 
performed and therefore, did not have to be addressed by a licensee in 
its environmental report or by the NRC staff in its SEIS. Similarly, 
the final rule identified and assessed those environmental impacts for 
which a site-specific analysis was required, both by the licensee in 
its environmental report and by the NRC staff in its SEIS. The final 
rule, amongst other amendments to Part 51, added Appendix B to Subpart 
A of Part 51. Appendix B included Table B-1, which summarizes the 
findings of NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for 
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,'' May 1996 (1996 GEIS).
    On December 18, 1996 (61 FR 66537), the NRC amended the final rule

[[Page 38119]]

published in June 1996 to incorporate minor clarifying and conforming 
changes and add language omitted from Table B-1. This amendment also 
analyzed comments received specific to the treatment of low-level waste 
storage and disposal impacts, the cumulative radiological effects from 
the uranium fuel cycle, and the effects from the disposal of high-level 
waste and spent fuel requested in the June 1996 final rule.
    On September 3, 1999 (64 FR 48496), the NRC amended the December 
1996 final rule to expand the generic findings about the environmental 
impacts resulting from transportation of fuel and waste to and from a 
single nuclear power plant. This amendment permitted the NRC to make a 
generic finding regarding these environmental impacts so that an 
analysis would not have to be repeated for each license renewal 
application. The amendment also incorporated rule language consistent 
with the findings in the 1996 GEIS, which addressed local traffic 
impacts attributable to continued operations of the nuclear power plant 
during the license renewal term. The Generic Environmental Impact 
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Main Report Section 
6.3--``Transportation,'' Table 9.1, ``Summary of Findings on NEPA 
Issues for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,'' Final Report 
(NUREG-1437, Volume 1, Addendum 1), published in August 1999, provides 
the analysis supporting the amendment.
    The current proposed rulemaking began in June 2003 when the NRC 
issued a notice of intent to update the 1996 GEIS in the Federal 
Register (68 FR 33209). The original comment period began in June 2003 
and ended in September 2003. In October 2005 the scoping period was 
reopened until December 30, 2005 (70 FR 57628).

III. Public Comments

Scoping Process

    On June 3, 2003 (68 FR 33209), the NRC solicited public comments 
which provided the public with an opportunity to participate in the 
environmental scoping process, as defined in Sec.  51.26. In this 
notice, the NRC announced the intent to update the 1996 GEIS. The NRC 
conducted scoping meetings in each of the four NRC regions for the GEIS 
update. The scoping meetings were held in Atlanta, Georgia (July 8, 
2003), Oak Lawn, Illinois (July 10, 2003), Anaheim, California (July 
15, 2003), and Boston, Massachusetts (July 17, 2003). The public 
comment period closed in September 2003 and the project was inactive 
for the next two years due to limited staff resources and competing 
demands. On October 3, 2005 (70 FR 57628), the NRC reopened the public 
comment period and extended it until December 30, 2005. All comments 
submitted in response to the 2003 scoping request have been considered 
in preparing the revised GEIS and are publicly available. No comments 
were received during the 2005 public comment period.
    The official transcripts, written comments, and meeting summaries 
are available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public 
Document Room (PDR) or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) 
component of NRC's document system under ADAMS Accession Nos. 
ML032170942, ML032260339, ML032260715, and ML032170934. All comments 
and suggestions received orally or in writing during the scoping 
process were considered.
    The NRC has prepared a scoping summary report that is available 
electronically for public inspection in the NRC PDR or from the PARS 
component of ADAMS under Accession No. ML073450750. Additionally, the 
scoping summary is located in Appendix A in the revised GEIS.

IV. Discussion

1996 GEIS

    Under the NRC's environmental protection regulations in Part 51, 
which implements Section 102(2) of the National Environmental Policy 
Act of 1969 (NEPA), renewal of a nuclear power plant operating license 
requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS). To 
help in the preparation of individual operating license renewal EISs, 
the NRC prepared the 1996 GEIS.
    In 1996 and 1999, the Commission amended its environmental 
protection regulations in Part 51, to improve the efficiency of the 
environmental review process for applicants seeking to renew a nuclear 
power plant operating license for up to an additional 20 years. These 
amendments were based on the analyses reported in the 1996 GEIS.
    The 1996 GEIS summarizes the findings of a systematic inquiry into 
the environmental impacts of continued operations and refurbishment 
activities associated with license renewal. The NRC identified 92 
environmental impact issues. Of the 92 environmental issues analyzed, 
69 issues were resolved generically (i.e., Category 1), 21 would 
require a further plant-specific analysis (i.e., Category 2), and 2 
would require a site-specific assessment by the NRC prior to issuance 
of a renewed license (i.e., uncategorized). As part of a license 
renewal application, an applicant submits an environmental report to 
the NRC, and the NRC prepares a plant-specific SEIS to the 1996 GEIS.
    The GEIS assigns one of three impact levels (small, moderate, or 
large) to a given environmental resource (e.g., air, water, or soil). A 
small impact means that the environmental effects are not detectable, 
or are so minor that they will neither destabilize, nor noticeably 
alter, any important attribute of the resource. A moderate impact means 
that the environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but 
not to destabilize, important attributes of the resource. A large 
impact means that the environmental effects are clearly noticeable, and 
are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.
    Table B-1 in Appendix B to Part 51, summarizes the findings of the 
analyses conducted for the 1996 GEIS. Issues and processes common to 
all nuclear power plants having generic (i.e., the same or similar) 
environmental impacts are considered Category 1 issues. Category 2 
issues are those issues that cannot be generically dispositioned and 
would require a plant-specific analysis to determine the level of 
impact.
    The 1996 GEIS has been effective in focusing NRC resources on 
important environmental issues and increased the efficiency of the 
environmental review process. Currently, 51 nuclear units at 29 plant 
sites have received renewed licenses.

Revised GEIS

    The GEIS revision evaluates the environmental issues and findings 
of the 1996 GEIS. Lessons learned and knowledge gained during previous 
license renewal reviews provided a significant source of new 
information for this assessment. Public comments on previous plant-
specific license renewal reviews 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 1996 GEIS 
remain valid. In doing so, the NRC considered the need to modify, add 
to, or delete any of the 92 environmental issues in the 1996 GEIS. 
After this evaluation, the staff carried forward 78 impact issues for 
detailed consideration in this GEIS revision. Fifty-eight of these 
issues were determined to be Category 1 and would not require 
additional plant-specific analysis. Of the remaining twenty issues, 
nineteen were determined to be Category 2 and one remained 
uncategorized. No

[[Page 38120]]

environmental issues identified in Table B-1 and in the 1996 GEIS were 
eliminated, but several were combined or regrouped according to 
similarities.
    Environmental issues in the revised GEIS are arranged by resource 
area. This perspective is a change from the 1996 GEIS in which 
environmental issues were arranged by power plant systems (e.g., 
cooling systems, transmission lines) and activities (e.g., 
refurbishment). The structure of the revised GEIS adopts the NRC's 
standard format for EISs as established in Part 51, Appendix A to 
Subpart A of Part 51--``Format for Presentation of Material in 
Environmental Impact Statements.'' The environmental impacts of license 
renewal activities, including plant operations and refurbishment along 
with replacement power alternatives, are addressed in each resource 
area. The revised GEIS summarizes environmental impact issues under the 
following resource areas: (1) Land use and visual resources; (2) 
meteorology, air quality, and noise; (3) geology, seismology, and 
soils; (4) hydrology (surface water and groundwater); (5) ecology 
(terrestrial ecology, aquatic ecology, threatened, endangered, and 
protected species and essential fish habitat); (6) historic and 
cultural resources; (7) socioeconomics; (8) human health (radiological 
and nonradiological hazards); (9) environmental justice; and (10) waste 
management and pollution prevention. The proposed rule revises Table B-
1 in Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 51 to follow the organizational 
format of the revised GEIS.
    Environmental impacts of license renewal and the resources that 
could be affected were identified in the revised GEIS. The general 
analytical approach for identifying environmental impacts was to (1) 
describe the nuclear power plant activity that could affect the 
resource, (2) identify the resource that is affected, (3) evaluate past 
license renewal reviews and other available information, (4) assess the 
nature and magnitude of the environmental impact on the affected 
resource, (5) characterize the significance of the effects, (6) 
determine whether the results of the analysis apply to all nuclear 
power plants (whether the impact issue is Category 1 or Category 2), 
and (7) consider additional mitigation measures for adverse impacts. 
Identification of environmental impacts (or issues) was conducted in an 
iterative rather than a stepwise manner. For example, after information 
was collected and levels of significance were reviewed, impacts were 
reexamined to determine if any should be removed, added, recombined, or 
divided.
    The Commission would like to emphasize that in complying with the 
NRC's environmental regulations under Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(iv) applicants 
are required to provide any new and significant information regarding 
the environmental impacts of license renewal of which the applicant is 
aware, even on Category 1 issues. The proposed amendments would not 
change this requirement.
    The revised GEIS retains the 1996 GEIS definitions of a Category 1 
and Category 2 issue. The revised GEIS discusses four major types of 
changes:
    (1) New Category 1 Issue: These issues would include Category 1 
issues not previously listed in the 1996 GEIS or multiple Category 1 
issues from the 1996 GEIS that have been combined into a Category 1 
issue in the revised GEIS. The applicant does not need to assess this 
issue in its environmental report. Under Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(iv), 
however, the applicant is responsible for reporting in the 
environmental report any ``new and significant information'' of which 
the applicant is aware. If the applicant is not aware of any new and 
significant information that would change the conclusion in the revised 
GEIS, the applicant would be required to state this determination in 
the environmental report. The NRC has addressed the environmental 
impacts of these Category 1 issues generically for all plants in the 
revised GEIS.
    (2) New Category 2 Issue: These issues would include Category 2 
issues not previously listed in the 1996 GEIS or multiple Category 2 
issues from the 1996 GEIS that have been combined into a Category 2 
issue in the revised GEIS. For each new Category 2 issue, the applicant 
would have to conduct an assessment of the potential environmental 
impacts related to that issue and include it in the environmental 
report. The assessment must include a discussion of (i) the possible 
actions to mitigate any 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: 
These would include issues that were considered as Category 2 in the 
1996 GEIS and would now be considered as Category 1 in the revised 
GEIS. An applicant would no longer be required to conduct an assessment 
on the environmental impacts associated with these issues. Consistent 
with the requirements of Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(iv), an applicant would only 
be required to describe in its environmental report any ``new and 
significant information'' of which it is aware.
    (4) Existing Issue Category Change from Category 1 to Category 2: 
These would include issues that were considered as Category 1 in the 
1996 GEIS and would now be considered as Category 2 in the revised 
GEIS. An applicant that previously did not have to provide an analysis 
on the environmental impacts associated with these issues would now be 
required to conduct an assessment of the environmental impacts and 
include it in the environmental report.

V. Proposed Actions and Basis for Changes to Table B-1

    The revised GEIS which is concurrently issued for public comment 
and publicly available (ADAMS Accession No. ML090220654) provides a 
summary change table comparing the ninety-two environmental issues in 
the 1996 GEIS with the seventy-eight environmental issues in the 
revised GEIS. The proposed rule amends Table B-1 in Appendix B to 
Subpart A, ``Summary of Findings on NEPA Issues for License Renewal of 
Nuclear Power Plants,'' to reflect the changes made in the revised 
GEIS. The changes to Table B-1 are described below:

(i) Land Use

    (1) Onsite Land Use--``Onsite land use'' remains a Category 1 
issue. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding 
column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (2) Offsite Land Use--The proposed rule language combines two 
Category 2 issues, ``Offsite land use (refurbishment)'' and ``Offsite 
land use (license renewal term)'' reclassifies this combined issue as a 
Category 1 issue, and names it, ``Offsite land use.'' The finding 
column of the current Table B-1 for ``Offsite land use 
(refurbishment)'' indicates that impacts may be of moderate 
significance at plants in low population areas. The finding column of 
the current Table B-1 for ``Offsite land use (license renewal term)'' 
indicates that significant changes in land use may be associated with 
population and tax revenue changes resulting from license renewal. As 
described in the 1996 GEIS, environmental impacts are considered to be 
small if refurbishment activities were to occur at plants located in 
high population areas and if population and tax revenues would not 
change.
    Significant impacts on offsite land use are not anticipated. 
Previous plant-specific license renewal reviews conducted by the NRC 
have shown no requirement for a substantial number of additional 
workers during the license renewal term and that refurbishment

[[Page 38121]]

activities, such as steam generator and vessel head replacement, have 
not required the large numbers of workers and the months of time that 
was conservatively estimated in the 1996 GEIS. These reviews support a 
finding that offsite land use impacts during the license renewal term 
would be small for all nuclear power plants.
    (3) Offsite Land Use in Transmission Line Rights-of-Way (ROWs)--The 
proposed rule renames ``Powerline right of way'' as ``Offsite land use 
in transmission line rights-of-way (ROWs);'' it remains a Category 1 
issue. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding 
column of Table B-1 for this issue.

(ii) Visual Resources

    (4) Aesthetic Impacts--The proposed rule language combines three 
Category 1 issues, ``Aesthetic impacts (refurbishment),'' ``aesthetic 
impacts (license renewal term),'' and ``aesthetic impacts of 
transmission lines (license renewal term)'' into one new Category 1 
issue, ``Aesthetic impacts.'' The 1996 GEIS concluded that renewal of 
operating licenses and the refurbishment activities would have no 
significant aesthetic impact during the license renewal term. Impacts 
are considered to be small if the visual appearance of plant and 
transmission line structures would not change. Previous license renewal 
reviews conducted by the NRC show that the appearance of nuclear plants 
and transmission line structures do not change significantly over time 
or because of refurbishment activities. Therefore, aesthetic impacts 
are not anticipated and the combined issue remains a Category 1 issue.
    These three issues are combined into one Category 1 issue as they 
are similar and combining them would streamline the license renewal 
process.

(iii) Air Quality

    (5) Air Quality (Non-Attainment and Maintenance Areas)--The 
proposed language renames ``Air quality during refurbishment (non-
attainment and maintenance areas)'' as ``Air quality (non-attainment 
and maintenance areas)'' and expands it to include emissions from 
testing emergency diesel generators, boilers used for facility heating, 
and particulate emissions from cooling towers. The issue remains a 
Category 2 issue.
    (6) Air Quality Effects of Transmission Lines--``Air quality 
effects of transmission lines'' remains a Category 1 issue. There are 
no changes for this issue.

(iv) Noise

    (7) Noise Impacts--The proposed rule renames ``Noise'' as ``Noise 
impacts''; it remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule makes minor 
clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.

(v) Geology and Soils

    (8) Impacts of Nuclear Plants on Geology and Soils--The proposed 
language adds a new Category 1 issue, ``Impacts of nuclear plants on 
geology and soils,'' to the impacts of continued power plant operations 
and refurbishment activities on geology and soils (i.e., prime 
farmland) and to determine if there is new or significant information 
in regard to regional or local seismology. New seismological conditions 
are limited to the identification of previously unknown geologic faults 
and are expected to be rare. Geology and soil conditions at all nuclear 
power plants and associated transmission lines have been well 
established during the current licensing term and are expected to 
remain unchanged during the 20-year license renewal term. The impact of 
continued operations and refurbishment activities during the license 
renewal term on geologic and soil resources would consist of soil 
disturbance for construction or renovation projects. Implementing best 
management practices would reduce soil erosion and subsequent impacts 
on surface water quality. Best management practices include: (1) 
Minimizing the amount of disturbed land, (2) stockpiling topsoil before 
ground disturbance, (3) mulching and seeding in disturbed areas, (4) 
covering loose materials with geotextiles, (5) using silt fences to 
reduce sediment loading to surface water, (6) using check dams to 
minimize the erosive power of drainages, and (7) installing proper 
culvert outlets to direct flows in streams or drainages.
    No information in any plant-specific SEIS prepared to date, or in 
the referenced documents, has identified these impacts as being 
significant.

(vi) Surface Water

    (9) Surface-Water Use and Quality--The proposed rule combines two 
Category 1 issues, ``Impacts of refurbishment on surface water 
quality'' and ``Impacts of refurbishment on surface water use,'' and 
names the combined issue ``Surface-water use and quality.'' These two 
issues were combined because the impacts of refurbishment on both 
surface water use and quality are negligible and the effects are 
closely related.
    The NRC expects licensees to use best management practices during 
the license renewal term for both continuing operations and 
refurbishment activities. Use of best management practices will 
minimize soil erosion. In addition, implementation of spill prevention 
and control plans will reduce the likelihood of any liquid chemical 
spills. If refurbishment activities take place during a reactor 
shutdown, the overall water use by the facility will be reduced. Based 
on this conclusion, the impact on surface water use and quality during 
a license renewal term will continue to be small for all plants. The 
combined issue remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule makes 
minor clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this 
issue.
    (10) Altered Current Patterns at Intake and Discharge Structures, 
(11) Altered Salinity Gradients, (12) Altered Thermal Stratification of 
Lakes, and (13) Scouring Caused by Discharged Cooling Water--``Altered 
current patterns at intake and discharge structures,'' ``Altered 
salinity gradients,'' ``Altered thermal stratification of lakes,'' and 
``Scouring caused by discharged cooling water'' remain Category 1 
issues. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding 
column of Table B-1 for each of these issues.
    (14) Discharge of Metals in Cooling System Effluent--The proposed 
language renames ``Discharge of other metals in waste water'' as 
``Discharge of metals in cooling system effluent''; it remains a 
Category 1 issue. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to 
the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (15) Discharge of Biocides, Sanitary Wastes, and Minor Chemical 
Spills--The proposed rule combines two Category 1 issues, ``Discharge 
of chlorine or other biocides'' and ``Discharge of sanitary wastes and 
minor chemical spills'' as ``Discharge of biocides, sanitary wastes, 
and minor chemical spills.'' The combined issue remains a Category 1 
issue. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding 
column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (16) Water Use Conflicts (plants with once-through cooling 
systems)--``Water use conflicts (plants with once-through cooling 
systems)'' remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule makes a minor 
clarifying change to the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (17) Water Use Conflicts (plants with cooling ponds or cooling 
towers using make-up water from a river with low flow)--``Water use 
conflicts (plants with cooling ponds or cooling towers using

[[Page 38122]]

make-up water from a river with low flow)'' remains a Category 2 issue. 
The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding column 
of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (18) Effects of Dredging on Water Quality--The proposed rule adds a 
new Category 1 issue, ``Effects of dredging on water quality,'' that 
evaluates the impacts of dredging to maintain intake and discharge 
structures at nuclear power plant facilities. The impact of dredging on 
surface water quality was not considered in the 1996 GEIS and is not 
listed in the current Table B-1. Most plants have intake and discharge 
structures that must be maintained by periodic dredging of sediment 
accumulated in or on the structures.
    This dredging, while temporarily increasing turbidity in the source 
water body, has been shown to have little effect on water quality. In 
addition to maintaining intake and discharge structures, dredging is 
often done to keep barge slips and channels open to service the plant. 
Dredged material is most often disposed on property owned by the 
applicant and usually contains no hazardous materials. Dredging is 
performed under a permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and 
consequently, each dredging action would be subject to a site-specific 
environmental review conducted by the Corps.
    Temporary impacts of dredging are measurable in general water 
quality terms, but the impacts have been shown to be small.
    (19) Temperature Effects on Sediment Transport Capacity--
``Temperature effects on sediment transport capacity'' remains a 
Category 1 issue. There are no changes to this issue.

(vii) Groundwater

    (20) Groundwater Use and Quality--The proposed rule renames 
``Impacts of refurbishment on groundwater use and quality'' as 
``Groundwater use and quality.'' The issue remains a Category 1 issue. 
The NRC has concluded that use of best management practices would 
address any wastes or spills that could affect groundwater quality. The 
proposed rule updates the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue to 
include a statement identifying best management practices and makes 
other minor clarifying changes to the finding column.
    (21) Groundwater Use Conflicts (Plants that Withdraw Less Than 100 
Gallons per Minute [gpm])--The proposed rule renames ``Ground-water use 
conflicts (potable and service water; plants that use <100 gpm)'' as 
``Groundwater use conflicts (plants that withdraw less than 100 gallons 
per minute [gpm]).'' The issue remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed 
rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 
for this issue.
    (22) Groundwater use conflicts (plants that withdraw more than 100 
gpm including those using Ranney Wells)--The proposed rule combines two 
Category 2 issues, ``Groundwater use conflicts (potable and service 
water, and dewatering; plants that use >100 gpm)'' and ``Ground-water 
use conflicts (Ranney wells)'' and names the combined issue 
``Groundwater use conflicts (plants that withdraw more than 100 gpm 
including those using Ranney wells).'' The combined issue remains a 
Category 2 issue. Because Ranney wells produce significantly more than 
100 gpm, the Ranney wells issue was combined with the general issue of 
groundwater use conflicts for plants using more than 100 gpm of 
groundwater. The proposed rule makes clarifying changes to the finding 
column of Table B-1 for this combined issue.
    (23) Groundwater Use Conflicts (Plants With Closed-Cycle Cooling 
Systems that Withdraw Makeup Water from a River)--The proposed rule 
renames ``Ground-water use conflicts (plants using cooling tower 
withdrawing make-up water from a small river'' as ``Groundwater use 
conflicts (plants with closed-cycle cooling systems that withdraw 
makeup water from a river).'' The combined issue remains a Category 2 
issue. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding 
column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (24) Groundwater Quality Degradation Resulting from Water 
Withdrawals--The proposed rule combines two Category 1 issues, 
``Ground-water quality degradation (Ranney wells)'' and ``Ground-water 
quality degradation (saltwater intrusion)'' and names the combined 
issue ``Groundwater quality degradation resulting from water 
withdrawals.'' The combined issue remains a Category 1 issue. The two 
issues were combined as they both consider the possibility of 
groundwater quality becoming degraded as a result of the plant drawing 
water of potentially lower quality into the aquifer. The proposed rule 
makes clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this 
combined issue.
    (25) Groundwater Quality Degradation (Plants with Cooling Ponds in 
Salt Marshes) and (26) Groundwater Quality Degradation (Plants with 
Cooling Ponds at Inland Sites)--``Groundwater quality degradation 
(plants with cooling ponds in salt marshes)'' and ``Groundwater quality 
degradation (plants with cooling ponds at inland sites)'' remain, 
respectively, Category 1 and Category 2 issues. The proposed rule makes 
clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for each of these 
issues.
    (27) Groundwater and Soil Contamination--The proposed rule adds a 
new Category 2 issue, ``Groundwater and Soil Contamination,'' to 
evaluate the impacts of the industrial use of solvents, hydrocarbons, 
heavy metals, or other chemicals on groundwater, soil, and subsoil at 
nuclear power plant sites during the license renewal term. Review of 
license renewal applications has shown the existence of these non-
radionuclide contaminants at some plants. This contamination is usually 
regulated by State environmental regulatory authorities or the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In addition, this new Category 2 
issue has been added because each specific site has its own program for 
handling waste and hazardous materials, and no generic evaluation would 
apply to all nuclear power plants.
    Industrial practices at all plants have the potential to 
contaminate site groundwater and soil through the use and spillage of 
solvents, hydrocarbons, heavy metals, or other chemicals, especially on 
sites with unlined wastewater lagoons and storm water lagoons. Any 
contamination by these substances is subject to characterization and 
clean-up by State and EPA regulated remediation and monitoring 
programs.
    (28) Radionuclides Released to Groundwater--The proposed rule adds 
a new Category 2 issue, ``Radionuclides released to groundwater,'' to 
evaluate the potential impact of discharges of radionuclides, such as 
tritium, from plant systems into groundwater. The issue is relevant to 
license renewal because virtually all commercial nuclear power plants 
routinely release radioactive gaseous and liquid materials into the 
environment. A September 2006 NRC report, ``Liquid Radioactive Release 
Lessons Learned Task Force Report,'' documented instances of 
inadvertent releases of radionuclides into groundwater from nuclear 
power plants (ADAMS Accession No. ML062650312).
    NRC regulations in Parts 20 and 50 limit the amount of 
radioactivity released into the environment to be ``As Low As is 
Reasonably Achievable'' (ALARA) to ensure that the impact on public 
health is very low. Most of the inadvertent liquid release events 
involved tritium, which is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen. However, 
other

[[Page 38123]]

radioactive isotopes have been inadvertently released into the 
environment. An example is leakage from spent fuel pools, where leakage 
from the stored fuel would allow fission products to be released into 
the pool water.
    The most significant conclusion of the NRC report regards public 
health impacts. Although there have been a number of events where 
radionuclides were released inadvertently into groundwater, based on 
the data available, the NRC did not identify any instances where the 
health of the public was impacted. The NRC did identify that under the 
existing regulatory requirements, the potential exists for inadvertent 
radionuclide releases to migrate offsite into groundwater.
    Another factor in adding this new Category 2 issue is the level of 
public concern associated with such inadvertent releases of 
radionuclides into groundwater. The NRC concludes that the impact of 
radionuclide releases to groundwater quality could be small or 
moderate, depending on the occurrence and frequency of leaks and the 
ability to respond to leaks in a timely fashion.

(viii) Terrestrial Resources

    (29) Impacts of Continued Plant Operations on Terrestrial 
Ecosystems--The proposed rule renames ``Refurbishment impacts'' as 
``Impacts of continued plant operations on terrestrial ecosystems;'' it 
remains a Category 2 issue. The analysis in the revised GEIS expands 
the scope of this issue to include the environmental impacts associated 
with continued plant operations and maintenance activities in addition 
to refurbishment. The proposed rule revises the finding column of Table 
B-1 for this issue accordingly.
    (30) Exposure of Terrestrial Organisms to Radionuclides--The 
proposed rule adds a new Category 1 issue, ``Exposure of terrestrial 
organisms to radionuclides,'' to evaluate the issue of the potential 
impact of radionuclides on terrestrial organisms resulting from normal 
operations of a nuclear power plant during the license renewal term. 
This issue was not evaluated in the 1996 GEIS. However, the impact of 
radionuclides on terrestrial organisms has been raised by members of 
the public as well as Federal and State agencies during previous 
license renewal reviews.
    The revised GEIS evaluates the potential impact of radionuclides on 
terrestrial biota at nuclear power plants from continued operations 
during the license renewal term. Site-specific radionuclide 
concentrations in water, sediment, and soils were obtained from 
Radiological Environmental Monitoring Operating Reports from 15 nuclear 
power plants. These 15 plants were selected to represent sites with a 
range of radionuclide concentrations in the media, including plants 
with high annual worker dose exposure values for both boiling water 
reactors and pressurized water reactors. The calculated radiation dose 
rates to terrestrial biota were compared against radiation-acceptable 
radiation safety guidelines issued by the U.S. Department of Energy, 
the International Atomic Energy Agency, the National Council of 
Radiation Protection and Measurement, and the International Commission 
on Radiological Protection. The NRC concludes that the impact of 
radionuclides on terrestrial biota from past and current operations 
would be small for all nuclear power plants and would not be expected 
to change appreciably during the license renewal term.
    (31) Cooling System Impacts on Terrestrial Resources (Plants with 
Once-Through Cooling Systems or Cooling Ponds)--The proposed rule 
renames ``Cooling pond impacts on terrestrial resources'' as ``Cooling 
system impacts on terrestrial resources (plants with once-through 
cooling systems or cooling ponds).'' This issue remains a Category 1 
issue. The analysis in the revised GEIS expands the scope of this issue 
to include plants with once-through cooling systems. This analysis 
concludes that the impacts on terrestrial resources from once-through 
cooling systems, as well as from cooling ponds, is of small 
significance at all plants. The proposed rule revises the finding 
column of Table B-1 for this issue accordingly.
    (32) Cooling Tower Impacts on Vegetation (Plants with Cooling 
Towers)--The proposed rule combines two Category 1 issues, ``Cooling 
tower impacts on crops and ornamental vegetation'' and ``Cooling tower 
impacts on native plants'' and names the combined issue ``Cooling tower 
impacts on vegetation (plants with cooling towers).'' The combined 
issue remains a Category 1 issue. The two issues were combined to 
conform to the resource-based approach used in the revised GEIS and to 
simplify and streamline the analysis. With the recent trend of 
replacing lawns with native vegetation, some ornamental plants and 
crops are native plants, and the original separation into two issues is 
unnecessary and cumbersome. The proposed rule makes clarifying changes 
to the finding column of Table B-1 for this combined issue.
    (33) Bird Collisions with Cooling Towers and Transmission Lines--
The proposed rule combines two Category 1 issues, ``Bird collisions 
with cooling towers'' and ``Bird collision with power lines'' and names 
the combined issue ``Bird collisions with cooling towers and 
transmission lines.'' The combined issue remains a Category 1 issue. 
The two issues were combined to conform to the resource-based approach 
used in the revised GEIS and to simplify and streamline the analysis. 
The proposed rule makes clarifying changes to the finding column of 
Table B-1 for this combined issue.
    (34) Water Use Conflicts with Terrestrial Resources (Plants with 
Cooling Ponds or Cooling Towers Using Makeup Water from a River with 
Low Flow)--The proposed rule adds a new Category 2 issue, ``Water use 
conflicts with terrestrial resources (plants with cooling ponds or 
cooling towers using make-up water from a river with low flow)'' to 
evaluate water use conflict impacts with terrestrial resources in 
riparian communities. Such impacts could occur when water that supports 
these resources is diminished either because of decreased availability 
due to droughts; increased water demand for agricultural, municipal, or 
industrial usage; or a combination of these factors. The potential 
range of impact levels at plants, subject to license renewal, with 
cooling ponds or cooling towers using makeup water from a small river 
with low flow cannot be generically determined at this time.
    (35) Transmission Line ROW Management Impacts on Terrestrial 
Resources--The proposed rule combines two Category 1 issues, ``Power 
line right-of-way management (cutting and herbicide application)'' and 
``Floodplains and wetland on power line right-of-way'' and names the 
combined issue ``Transmission line ROW management impacts on 
terrestrial resources.'' The combined issue remains a Category 1 issue. 
The two issues were combined to simplify and streamline the analysis.
    The scope of the evaluation of transmission lines in the revised 
GEIS is reduced from that of the 1996 GEIS--only those transmission 
lines currently needed to connect the nuclear power plants to the 
regional electrical distribution grid are considered within the scope 
of license renewal. Thus, the number of and length of transmission 
lines being evaluated are greatly reduced. The revised GEIS analysis 
indicates that proper management of transmission line ROW areas does 
not

[[Page 38124]]

have significant adverse impacts on current wildlife populations, and 
ROW management can provide valuable wildlife habitats. The proposed 
rule makes clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for 
this combined issue.
    (36) Electromagnetic Fields on Flora and Fauna (Plants, 
Agricultural Crops, Honeybees, Wildlife, Livestock)--``Electromagnetic 
fields on flora and fauna (plants, agricultural crops, honeybees, 
wildlife, livestock)'' remains a Category 1 issue. There are no changes 
to this issue.

(ix) Aquatic Resources

    (37) Impingement and Entrainment of Aquatic Organisms (Plants with 
Once-Through Cooling Systems or Cooling Ponds)--The proposed rule 
combines two Category 2 issues, ``Entrainment of fish and shellfish in 
early life stages (for plants with once-through cooling and cooling 
pond heat dissipation systems)'' and ``Impingement of fish and 
shellfish (for plants with once-through cooling and cooling pond heat 
dissipation systems)'' and one Category 1 issue, ``Entrainment of 
phytoplankton and zooplankton (for all plants)'' and names the combined 
issue ``Impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms (plants with 
once-through cooling systems or cooling ponds).'' The combined issue is 
a Category 2 issue.
    For the revised GEIS, these issues were combined to simplify the 
review process in keeping with the resource-based approach and to allow 
for a more complete analysis of the environmental impact. Nuclear power 
plants typically conduct separate sampling programs to estimate the 
numbers of organisms entrained and impinged, which explains the 
original separation of these issues. However, it is the combined 
effects of entrainment and impingement that reflect the total impact of 
the cooling system intake on the resource. Environmental conditions are 
different to each nuclear plant site and impacts cannot be determined 
generically. The proposed rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 
for this issue accordingly.
    (38) Impingement and Entrainment of Aquatic Organisms (Plants with 
Cooling Towers)--The proposed rule combines three Category 1 issues, 
``Entrainment of fish and shellfish in early life stages (for plants 
with cooling tower-based heat dissipation systems),'' ``Impingement of 
fish and shellfish (for plants with cooling tower-based heat 
dissipation systems),'' and ``Entrainment of phytoplankton and 
zooplankton (for all plants)'' and names the combined issue 
``Impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms (plants with cooling 
towers).'' The combined issue remains a Category 1 issue. The three 
issues are combined given their similar nature and to simplify and 
streamline the review process. The proposed rule revises the finding 
column of Table B-1 for this issue accordingly.
    (39) Thermal Impacts on Aquatic Organisms (Plants with Once-Through 
Cooling Systems or Cooling Ponds)--The proposed rule combines four 
Category 1 issues, ``Cold shock (for all plants),'' ``Thermal plume 
barrier to migrating fish (for all plants),'' ``Distribution of aquatic 
organisms (for all plants),'' and ``Premature emergence of aquatic 
insects (for all plants),'' and one Category 2 issue ``Heat shock (for 
plants with once-through and cooling pond heat dissipation systems)'' 
and names the combined issue ``Thermal impacts on aquatic organisms 
(plants with once-through cooling systems or cooling ponds).'' The 
combined issue is a Category 2 issue.
    The five issues are combined given their similar nature and to 
simplify and streamline the review process. With the exception of heat 
shock, previous license renewal reviews conducted by the NRC have shown 
that the thermal effects of once-through cooling and cooling pond 
systems have not been a problem at operating nuclear power plants and 
would not change during the license renewal term, so future impacts are 
not anticipated. However, it is difficult to differentiate the various 
thermal effects of once-through cooling and cooling pond systems in the 
field. Different populations may react differently due to changes in 
water temperature. For example, if a resident population avoided a 
heated effluent, the 1996 GEIS would have identified this issue as 
``distribution of aquatic organisms;'' however, had this population 
been migrating, the issue would have been considered under ``thermal 
plume barrier to migrating fish.'' If individuals had remained in the 
heated effluent too long, the issue would have been considered under 
``heat shock;'' or, if the individuals then left the warm water, the 
issue would have been considered under ``cold shock.'' Using the 
resource-based approach in the revised GEIS, each of these issues would 
be considered a thermal impact from once-through and cooling pond 
systems. Environmental conditions are different at each nuclear plant 
site and impacts cannot be determined generically. The proposed rule 
revises the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue accordingly.
    (40) Thermal Impacts on Aquatic Organisms (Plants with Cooling 
Towers)--The proposed rule combines five Category 1 issues, ``Cold 
shock (for all plants),'' ``Thermal plume barrier to migrating fish 
(for all plants),'' ``Distribution of aquatic organisms (for all 
plants),'' ``Premature emergence of aquatic insects (for all plants),'' 
and ``Heat shock (for plants with cooling-tower-based heat dissipation 
systems)'' and names the combined issue ``Thermal impacts on aquatic 
organisms (plants with cooling towers).'' The combined issue is a 
Category 1 issue.
    The five issues are combined given their similar nature and to 
simplify and streamline the review process. The proposed rule revises 
the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue accordingly.
    (41) Effects of Cooling Water Discharge on Dissolved Oxygen, Gas 
Supersaturation, and Eutrophication--The proposed rule combines three 
Category 1 issues, ``Eutrophication,'' ``Gas supersaturation (gas 
bubble disease),'' and ``Low dissolved oxygen in the discharge,'' and 
names the combined issue ``Effects of cooling water discharge on 
dissolved oxygen, gas supersaturation, and eutrophication.'' The 
combined issue is a Category 1 issue.
    The three issues are combined given their similar nature and to 
simplify and streamline the review process. The proposed rule revises 
the finding column of Table B-1 for this issue accordingly.
    (42) Effects of Non-Radiological Contaminants on Aquatic 
Organisms--The proposed rule renames ``Accumulation of contaminants in 
sediments or biota'' as ``Effects of non-radiological contaminants on 
aquatic organisms;'' it remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule 
makes clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for this 
issue.
    (43) Exposure of Aquatic Organisms to Radionuclides--The proposed 
rule adds a new Category 1 issue, ``Exposure of Aquatic Organisms to 
Radionuclides,'' to evaluate the potential impact of radionuclide 
discharges upon aquatic organisms. This issue has been raised by 
members of the public as well as Federal and State agencies during the 
license renewal process for various plants.
    The revised GEIS evaluates the potential impact of radionuclides on 
aquatic organisms at nuclear power plants from continued operations 
during the license renewal term. A radiological assessment was 
performed using effluent release data from 15 NRC-licensed nuclear 
power plants chosen based on having a range of radionuclide 
concentrations in environmental media.

[[Page 38125]]

Site-specific radionuclide concentrations in water and sediments, as 
reported in the plant's radioactive effluent and environmental 
monitoring reports, were used in the calculations. The data is 
representative of boiling water reactors and pressurized water 
reactors. The calculated radiation dose rates to aquatic biota were 
compared against radiation acceptable radiation safety guidelines 
issued by the U.S. Department of Energy, the International Atomic 
Energy Agency, the National Council of Radiation Protection and 
Measurement, and the International Commission on Radiological 
Protection. The NRC concludes that the impact of radionuclides on 
aquatic biota from past and current operations would be small for all 
nuclear power plants, and would not be expected to change appreciably 
during the license renewal term.
    (44) Effects of Dredging on Aquatic Organisms--The proposed rule 
adds a new Category 1 issue, ``Effects of dredging on aquatic 
organisms,'' to evaluate the impacts of dredging on aquatic organisms. 
Licensees conduct dredging to maintain intake and discharge structures 
at nuclear power plant facilities and in some cases, to maintain barge 
slips. Dredging may disturb or remove benthic communities. In general, 
maintenance dredging for nuclear power plant operations would occur 
infrequently, would be of relatively short duration, and would affect 
relatively small areas. Dredging is performed under a permit issued by 
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and consequently, each dredging action 
would be subject to a site-specific environmental review conducted by 
the Corps.
    (45) Water Use Conflicts with Aquatic Resources (Plants with 
Cooling Ponds or Cooling Towers using Make-Up Water from a River with 
Low Flow)--The proposed rule adds a new Category 2 issue, ``Water use 
conflicts with aquatic resources (plants with cooling ponds or cooling 
towers using make-up water from a river with low flow)'' to evaluate 
water use conflict impacts with aquatic resources in instream 
communities. Such impacts could occur when water that supports these 
resources is diminished either because of decreased availability due to 
droughts; increased water demand for agricultural, municipal, or 
industrial usage; or a combination of these factors. The potential 
range of impact levels at plants, subject to license renewal, with 
cooling ponds or cooling towers using makeup water from a small river 
with low flow cannot be generically determined at this time.
    (46) Refurbishment Impacts on Aquatic Resources--The proposed rule 
language renames ``Refurbishment'' as ``Refurbishment impacts on 
aquatic resources;'' it remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule 
makes minor clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 for 
this issue.
    (47) Impacts of Transmission Line ROW Management on Aquatic 
Resources--The proposed rule adds a new Category 1 issue, ``Impacts of 
transmission line ROW management on aquatic resources,'' to evaluate 
the impact of transmission line ROW management on aquatic resources. 
Impacts on aquatic resources from transmission line ROW maintenance 
could occur as a result of the direct disturbance of aquatic habitats, 
soil erosion, changes in water quality (from sedimentation and thermal 
effects), or inadvertent releases of chemical contaminants from 
herbicide use. As described in the revised GEIS, any impact on aquatic 
resources resulting from transmission line ROW management is expected 
to be small, short term, and localized for all plants.
    (48) Losses from Predation, Parasitism, and Disease Among Organisms 
Exposed to Sublethal Stresses and (49) Stimulation of Aquatic Nuisance 
Species (e.g., Shipworms)--``Losses from predation, parasitism, and 
disease among organisms exposed to sublethal stresses'' and 
``Stimulation of aquatic nuisance species (e.g., shipworms)'' remain 
Category 1 issues. The proposed rule does not change the finding column 
entries of Table B-1 for these issues.

(x) Threatened, Endangered, and Protected Species and Essential Fish 
Habitat

    (50) Threatened, Endangered, and Protected Species and Essential 
Fish Habitat--The proposed rule renames ``Threatened or endangered 
species'' as ``Threatened, endangered, and protected species and 
essential fish habitat'' and expands the scope of the issue to include 
essential fish habitats protected under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 
Conservation and Management Act. The issue remains a Category 2 issue. 
The proposed rule makes clarifying changes to the finding column entry 
of table B-1 for this issue.

(xi) Historic and Cultural Resources

    (51) Historic and Cultural Resources--The proposed rule language 
renames ``Historic and archaeological resources'' as ``Historic and 
cultural resources;'' it remains a Category 2 issue. The proposed rule 
language more accurately reflects the National Historic Preservation 
Act requirements that Federal agencies consult with State Historic 
Preservation Officer and appropriate Native American Tribes to 
determine the potential impacts and mitigation.

(xii) Socioeconomics

    (52) Employment and Income, Recreation and Tourism--The proposed 
rule adds a new Category 1 issue, ``Employment and income,'' and 
combines it with the ``tourism and recreation'' portion of a current 
Table B-1 Category 1 issue, ``Public services: public safety, social 
services, and tourism and recreation.'' These issues are combined given 
the similar nature and to streamline the review process. The revised 
GEIS provides an analysis of this issue and concludes that the impacts 
are generic to all plants undergoing license renewal.
    (53) Tax Revenues--The proposed rule adds a new Category 1 issue, 
``Tax revenues,'' to evaluate the impacts of license renewal on tax 
revenues. Refurbishment activities, such as steam generator and vessel 
head replacement, have not had a noticeable effect on the value of 
nuclear plants, thus changes in tax revenues are not anticipated from 
future refurbishment activities. Refurbishment activities involve the 
one-for-one replacement of existing components and are generally not 
considered a taxable improvement. Also, new property tax assessments; 
proprietary payments in lieu of tax stipulations, settlements, and 
agreements; and State tax laws are continually changing the amounts 
paid to taxing jurisdictions by nuclear plant owners, and these occur 
independent of license renewal and refurbishment activities.
    (54) Community Services and Education--The proposed rule language 
reclassifies two Category 2 issues, ``Public services: Public 
utilities'' and ``Public services, education (refurbishment)'' as 
Category 1 issues, and combines them with the Category 1 issue, 
``Public services, education (license renewal term),'' and the ``Public 
safety and social service'' portion of the Category 1 issue, ``Public 
services: Public safety, social services, and tourism and recreation.'' 
The combined issue, ``Community services and education,'' is a Category 
1 issue.
    The four issues are combined as all public services are equally 
affected by changes in plant operations and refurbishment at nuclear 
plants. Any changes in the number of workers at a nuclear plant will 
affect demand for public services from local communities. Nevertheless, 
past environmental

[[Page 38126]]

reviews conducted by NRC have shown that the number of workers at 
relicensed nuclear plants has not changed significantly because of 
license renewal, so impacts on community services are not anticipated 
from future license renewals. In addition, refurbishment activities, 
such as steam generator and vessel head replacement, have not required 
the large numbers of workers and the months of time that was 
conservatively analyzed in the 1996 GEIS, so significant impacts on 
community services are no longer anticipated. Combining the four issues 
also simplifies and streamlines the NRC review process. The proposed 
rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 accordingly.
    (55) Population and Housing--The proposed rule language combines a 
new Category 1 issue, ``Population,'' and a Category 2 issue, ``Housing 
impacts,'' and names the combined issue, ``Population and housing.'' 
The combined issue is a Category 1 issue. The two issues are combined 
as the availability and value of housing are directly affected by 
changes in population and to simplify and streamline the NRC review 
process.
    As described in the revised GEIS, the NRC has determined that the 
impacts of continued operations and refurbishment activities on 
population and housing, during the license renewal term, would be 
small, are not dependent on the socioeconomic setting of the nuclear 
plant, and are generic to all plants. The proposed rule revises the 
finding column of Table B-1 accordingly.
    (56) Transportation--The proposed rule reclassifies the Category 2 
issue, ``Public services, transportation,'' as a Category 1 issue and 
renames it ``Transportation.'' As described in the revised GEIS, the 
NRC has determined that the numbers of workers have not changed 
significantly due to license renewal, so transportation impacts are no 
longer anticipated from future license renewals. The proposed rule 
revises the finding column entry of table B-1 for this issue 
accordingly.

(xiii) Human Health

    (57) Radiation Exposures to the Public--The proposed rule combines 
two Category 1 issues, ``Radiation exposures to the public during 
refurbishment'' and ``Radiation exposure to public (license renewal 
term)'' and names the combined issue, ``Radiation exposures to the 
public.'' The combined issue is a Category 1 issue. These issues are 
combined given the similar nature and to streamline the review process. 
The proposed rule revises the finding column of Table B-1 accordingly.
    (58) Radiation Exposures to Occupational Workers--The proposed rule 
combines two Category 1 issues, ``Occupational radiation exposures 
during refurbishment'' and ``Occupational radiation exposures (license 
renewal term)'' and names the combined issue, ``Radiation exposures to 
occupational workers.'' The combined issue is a Category 1 issue. These 
issues are combined given their similar nature and to streamline the 
review process. The proposed rule revises the finding column of Table 
B-1 accordingly.
    (59) Human Health Impact from Chemicals--The proposed rule adds a 
new Category 1 issue, ``Human health impact from chemicals,'' to 
evaluate the potential impacts of chemical hazards to workers and 
chemical releases to the environment.
    The evaluation addresses the potential impact of chemicals on human 
health resulting from normal operations of a nuclear power plant during 
the license renewal term. Impacts of chemical discharges to human 
health are considered to be small if the discharges of chemicals to 
water bodies are within effluent limitations designed to ensure 
protection of water quality and if ongoing discharges have not resulted 
in adverse effects on aquatic biota.
    The disposal of essentially all of the hazardous chemicals used at 
nuclear power plants is regulated by Resource Conservation and Recovery 
Act or National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, 
thereby minimizing adverse impacts to the environment and on workers 
and the public. It is anticipated that all plants would continue to 
operate in compliance with all applicable permits and that no 
mitigation measures beyond those implemented during the current license 
term would be warranted as a result of license renewal.
    A review of the documents, as referenced in the GEIS; operating 
monitoring reports; and consultations with utilities and regulatory 
agencies that were performed for the 1996 GEIS, indicated that the 
effects of the discharge of chlorine and other biocides on water 
quality would be of small significance for all power plants. Small 
quantities of biocides are readily dissipated and/or chemically altered 
in the body of water receiving them, so significant cumulative impacts 
to water quality would not be expected. Major changes in the operation 
of the cooling system are not expected during the license renewal term, 
so no change in the effects of biocide discharges on the quality of the 
receiving water is anticipated. Discharges of sanitary wastes and heavy 
metals are regulated by NPDES. Discharges that do not violate the 
permit limits are considered to be of small significance. The effects 
of minor chemical discharges and spills on water quality would be of 
small significance and mitigated as needed.
    (60) Microbiological Hazards to the Public (Plants with Cooling 
Ponds or Canals or Cooling Towers that Discharge to a River)--The 
proposed rule renames ``Microbiological organisms (public health) 
(plants using lakes or canals, or cooling towers or cooling ponds that 
discharge to a small river)'' as ``Microbiological hazards to the 
public (plants with cooling ponds or canals or cooling towers that 
discharge to a river);'' it remains a Category 2 issue. The proposed 
rule makes minor clarifying changes to the Table B-1 finding column 
entry for this issue.
    (61) Microbiological Hazards to Plant Workers--The proposed rule 
renames ``Microbiological organisms (occupational health)'' as 
``Microbiological hazards to plant workers;'' it remains a Category 1 
issue. There are no changes to the Table B-1 finding column entry for 
this issue.
    (62) Chronic Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs)--The proposed 
rule renames ``Electromagnetic fields, chronic effects'' as ``Chronic 
effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs);'' it remains an uncategorized 
issue. The proposed rule revises the Table B-1 finding column entry for 
this issue.
    (63) Physical Occupational Hazards--The proposed rule adds a new 
Category 1 issue, ``Physical occupational hazards,'' to evaluate the 
potential impact of physical occupational hazards on human health 
resulting from normal nuclear power plant operations during the license 
renewal term. The impact of physical occupational hazards on human 
health has been raised by members of the public as well as Federal and 
State agencies during the license renewal process. Occupational hazards 
can be minimized when workers adhere to safety standards and use 
appropriate protective equipment; however, fatalities and injuries from 
accidents can still occur. Data for occupational injuries in 2005 
obtained from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics indicate that the 
rate of fatal injuries in the utility sector is less than the rate for 
many sectors (e.g., construction, transportation and warehousing, 
agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, wholesale trade, and 
mining) and that the incidence rate for nonfatal

[[Page 38127]]

occupational injuries and illnesses is the least for electric power 
generation, followed by electric power transmission control and 
distribution. It is expected that over the license renewal term, 
workers would continue to adhere to safety standards and use protective 
equipment, so adverse occupational impacts would be of small 
significance at all sites. No mitigation measures beyond those 
implemented during the current license term would be warranted.
    (64) Electric Shock Hazards--The proposed rule renames 
``Electromagnetic fields, acute effects (electric shock)'' as 
``Electric shock hazards;'' it remains a Category 2 issue. The proposed 
rule revises the Table B-1 finding column entry for this issue by more 
accurately summarizing the discussion in the GEIS which focuses 
attention on the potential of electrical shock from transmission lines.

(xiv) Postulated Accidents

    (65) Design-Basis Accidents and (66) Severe Accidents--``Design-
basis accidents'' and ``Severe accidents'' remain Category 1 and 2 
issues, respectively. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes 
to the Table B-1 finding column entries for these issues.

(xv) Environmental Justice

    (67) Minority and Low-Income Populations--The proposed rule adds a 
new Category 2 issue, ``Minority and low-income populations,'' to 
evaluate the impacts of nuclear plant operations and refurbishment 
during the license renewal term on minority and low-income populations 
living in the vicinity of the plant. This issue is listed in the 
current Table B-1, but it was not evaluated in the 1996 GEIS. The 
current Table B-1 finding column entry states that ``[t]he need for and 
the content of an analysis of environmental justice will be addressed 
in plant-specific reviews.''
    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629; February 16, 1994) initiated the 
Federal government's environmental justice program. The NRC's ``Policy 
Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC 
Regulatory and Licensing Actions'' (69 FR 52040, August 24, 2004) 
states ``the NRC is committed to the general goals of E.O. 12898, it 
will strive to meet those goals through its normal and traditional NEPA 
review process.'' Guidance for implementing Executive Order 12898 was 
not available prior to the completion of the 1996 GEIS. To accomplish 
these goals, NRC requires the assistance of applicants in identifying 
minority and low-income populations and communities residing in the 
vicinity of the nuclear power plant and determining whether there would 
be any disproportionately high and adverse human health and 
environmental impacts on these populations from continued power plant 
operations and refurbishment activities during the license renewal 
term.

(xvi) Solid Waste Management

    (68) Low-Level Waste Storage and Disposal--``Low-level waste 
storage and disposal'' remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule 
makes clarifying changes to the Table B-1 finding column entry for this 
issue.
    (69) Onsite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel--The proposed rule 
renames ``On-site spent fuel'' as ``Onsite storage of spent nuclear 
fuel;'' it remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule does not 
change the finding column entry of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (70) Offsite Radiological Impacts of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-
Level Waste Disposal--The proposed rule renames ``Offsite radiological 
impacts (spent fuel and high level waste disposal)'' as ``Offsite 
radiological impacts of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste 
disposal.'' It remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule summarizes 
the lengthy discussion in the finding column of Table B-1 for this 
issue, and incorporates specific dose limits obtained from the recent 
docketing by the NRC of the application for the proposed repository at 
Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
    (71) Mixed-Waste Storage and Disposal--``Mixed-waste storage and 
disposal'' remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed rule revises the 
Table B-1 finding column entry for this issue by more accurately 
summarizing the discussion in the GEIS.
    (72) Nonradioactive Waste Storage and Disposal--The proposed 
language renames ``Nonradiological waste'' as ``Nonradiological waste 
storage and disposal;'' it remains a Category 1 issue. The proposed 
rule makes minor clarifying changes to the finding column of Table B-1 
for this issue.

(xvii) Cumulative Impacts

    (73) Cumulative Impacts--The proposed rule adds a new Category 2 
issue, ``Cumulative impacts,'' to evaluate the potential cumulative 
impacts of license renewal. The term ``cumulative impacts'' is defined 
in Sec.  51.14(b) by reference to the Council on Environmental Quality 
(CEQ) regulations, 40 CFR 1508.7, as ``the impact on the environment 
which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to 
other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions 
regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes 
such other actions.''
    For the purposes of analysis, past actions are considered to be 
when the nuclear power plant was licensed and constructed, present 
actions are related to current plant operations, and future actions are 
those that are reasonably foreseeable through the end of plant 
operations including the license renewal term. The geographic area over 
which past, present, and future actions are assessed depends on the 
affected resource.
    The NRC requires the assistance of applicants in identifying other 
past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, such as the 
construction and operation of other power plants and other industrial 
and commercial facilities in the vicinity of the nuclear power plant. 
Therefore, this environmental impact is considered a Category 2 issue.

(xviii) Uranium Fuel Cycle

    (74) Offsite Radiological Impacts--Individual Impacts from Other 
than the Disposal of Spent Fuel and High-Level Waste--``Offsite 
radiological impacts--individual impacts from other than the disposal 
of spent fuel and high-level waste'' remains a Category 1 issue. The 
proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the findings column of 
Table B-1 for this issue.
    (75) Offsite Radiological Impacts--Collective Impacts from Other 
than the Disposal of Spent Fuel and High-Level Waste--The proposed rule 
renames ``Offsite radiological impacts (collective effects)'' as 
``Offsite radiological impacts--collective impacts from other than the 
disposal of spent fuel and high-level waste''; it remains a Category 1 
issue. The proposed rule summarizes the discussion in the Table B-1 
finding column entry for this issue.
    (76) Nonradiological Impacts of the Uranium Fuel Cycle--
Nonradiological impacts of the uranium fuel cycle'' remains a Category 
1 issue. The proposed rule makes minor clarifying changes to the 
finding column of Table B-1 for this issue.
    (77) Transportation--``Transportation'' remains a Category 1 issue. 
The proposed rule revises the Table B-1 finding column entry for this 
issue by retaining the significance level assigned to this 
environmental issue as applicable to the uranium fuel cycle. The 
specific technical discussion supporting these findings is retained in 
the GEIS.

[[Page 38128]]

(xiv) Termination of Nuclear Power Plant Operations and Decommissioning

    (78) Termination of Nuclear Power Plant Operations and 
Decommissioning--The proposed rule combines one new Category 1 issue, 
``Termination of nuclear power plant operations'' with six other 
Category 1 issues, ``Radiation doses,'' ``Waste management,'' ``Air 
quality,'' ``Water quality,'' ``Ecological resources,'' and 
``Socioeconomic impacts,'' listed in the 1996 GEIS under the resource 
area, ``Decommissioning'' and names the combined issue, ``Termination 
of plant operations and decommissioning.'' This combined issue is a 
Category 1 issue.
    The 1996 GEIS analysis indicates that the six decommissioning 
issues are expected to be small at all nuclear power plant sites. The 
new issue addresses the impacts from terminating nuclear power plant 
operations prior to plant decommissioning. Termination of nuclear power 
plant operations results in the cessation of activities necessary to 
maintain the reactor, as well as a significant reduction in plant 
workforce. It is assumed that termination of plant operations would not 
lead to the immediate decommissioning and dismantlement of the reactor 
or other power plant infrastructure.
    These environmental issues and the termination of nuclear power 
plant operations issue would be combined into one Category 1 issue to 
simplify and streamline the NRC review process. These issues are also 
addressed in the ``2002 Generic Environmental Impact Statement on 
Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities: Regarding the Decommissioning of 
Nuclear Power Reactors,'' NUREG-0586, which is incorporated by 
reference in the revised GEIS. The proposed rule revises the findings 
column of Table B-1 accordingly.

VI. Section-by-Section Analysis

    The following section-by-section analysis discusses the proposed 
modifications to the Part 51 provisions.

Proposed Sec.  51.14(a)

    The proposed rule adds to Sec.  51.14(a) a definition for the term 
``historic properties.'' The term is intended to be an overarching term 
that includes those historic, archaeological, and Native American 
traditional religious and cultural properties (districts, sites, 
buildings, structures, objects, artifacts) that are covered by the 
various Federal preservation laws, including the National Historic 
Preservation Act, and where applicable, the Archaeological Resources 
Protection Act and the Native American Graves Protection and 
Repatriation Act.

Proposed Sec.  51.53(c)(2)

    The NRC proposes to clarify the required contents of the license 
renewal environmental report which applicants must submit in accordance 
with Sec.  54.21 by revising the second sentence in this subparagraph 
to read, ``This report must describe in detail the affected environment 
around the plant, the modifications directly affecting the environment 
or any plant effluents, and any planned refurbishment activities.''

Proposed Sec. Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(A), (B), and (E)

    For those applicants seeking an initial license renewal and holding 
either an operating license, construction permit, or combined license 
as of June 30, 1995, the environmental report shall include the 
information required in Sec.  51.53(c)(2), but is not required to 
contain analyses of the environmental impacts of certain license 
renewal issues identified as Category 1 (generically analyzed) issues 
in Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 51. The environmental report must 
contain 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 (plant specific 
analysis required) issues in Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 51 and 
must include consideration of alternatives for reducing adverse impacts 
of Category 2 issues. In addition, the environmental report must 
contain any new and significant information regarding the environmental 
impacts of license renewal of which the applicant is aware. The 
required analyses are listed in Sec. Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(A)-(P).
    The proposed language for Sec. Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(A), (B), and 
(E) consists of changes to conform to the proposed changes in Table B-
1, which in turn, reflects the revised GEIS. The NRC proposes to modify 
these paragraphs to more accurately reflect the specific information 
needed in the environmental report that will help the NRC conduct the 
environmental review of the proposed action.
    Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(A) is revised to incorporate the findings 
of the revised GEIS and to require applicants to provide information in 
their environmental reports regarding water availability and competing 
water demands and related impacts on instream (aquatic) and riparian 
(terrestrial) communities.
    Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(B) is revised to replace ``heat shock'' 
with ``thermal changes'' to reflect the proposed changes made in the 
revised Table B-1 as described earlier in this document under ``(ix) 
Aquatic Resources,'' environmental impact issue, ``(39) Thermal Impacts 
on Aquatic Organisms (Plants with Once-Through Cooling Systems or 
Cooling Ponds).''
    Section 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(E) is revised to expressly include power 
plant continued operations within the scope of the impacts to be 
assessed by license renewal applicants. The paragraph is further 
revised to expand the scope of the provision to include all Federal 
wildlife protection laws and essential fish habitat under the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

Proposed Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(I)

    The NRC proposes to remove the language in Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(I) 
to conform with the proposed changes made in the revised Table B-1 and 
to reserve the paragraph. These Category 2 issues were changed to 
Category 1 because significant changes in housing availability, land-
use, and increased population demand attributable to the proposed 
project on the public water supply have not occurred at relicensed 
nuclear plants. Therefore, impacts to these resources are no longer 
anticipated from future license renewals. In addition, refurbishment 
activities, such as steam generator and vessel head replacement, have 
not required the large numbers of workers and the months of time that 
was conservatively analyzed in the 1996 GEIS. As such, significant 
impacts on public schools are no longer anticipated from future 
refurbishment activities. Applicants would no longer need to assess the 
impacts of the proposed action on housing availability, land-use, and 
public schools (impacts from refurbishment activities only) within the 
vicinity of the plant. Additionally, applicants would no longer need to 
assess the impact of population increases attributable to the proposed 
action on the public water supply.

Proposed Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(J)

    The NRC proposes to remove the language in Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(J) 
to conform with the proposed changes made in the revised Table B-1 and 
to reserve the paragraph. This Category 2 issue, ``Public service, 
Transportation'' was changed to Category 1, ``Transportation,'' and 
remains under resource area, ``Socioeconomic'' because refurbishment 
activities, such as steam generator and vessel head replacement,

[[Page 38129]]

have not required the large numbers of workers and the months of time 
that was conservatively analyzed in the 1996 GEIS; therefore 
significant transportation impacts are not anticipated from future 
refurbishment activities. Applicants would no longer need to assess the 
impact of the proposed action on local transportation during periods of 
license renewal refurbishment activities.

Proposed Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(K)

    The proposed language for Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(K) deletes the 
phrase, ``or archaeological.'' This term is encompassed by the use of 
the term ``historical,'' as defined in the proposed rule language under 
Sec.  51.14, ``Definitions.''

Proposed Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(N)

    The NRC proposes to add a new paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(N) in Sec.  
51.53 to conform with the proposed changes made in the revised Table B-
1. A new Category 2 issue, ``Minority and low-income populations'' 
under resource area, ``Environmental Justice'' addresses the issue of 
determining the effects of nuclear plant operations and refurbishment 
on minority and low-income populations living in the vicinity of the 
plant. This issue is listed in the current Table B-1, but was not 
evaluated in the 1996 GEIS. The finding stated that: ``The need for and 
the content of an analysis of environmental justice will be addressed 
in plant-specific reviews.'' Guidance for implementing E.O. No. 12898, 
``Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority 
Populations and Low-Income Populations,'' (Section 1-101) (59 FR 7629) 
and dated February 16, 1994 was not available before the completion of 
the 1996 GEIS.
    In August 2004, the Commission issued a policy statement on 
implementation of E.O. 12898: NRC's Policy Statement on the Treatment 
of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing 
Actions (69 FR 52040). As stated therein, ``the NRC is committed to the 
general goals of E.O. 12898, it will strive to meet those goals through 
its normal and traditional NEPA review process.'' To accomplish these 
goals, NRC requires the assistance of applicants in identifying 
minority and low-income populations and communities residing in the 
vicinity of the nuclear power plant and determining if there would be 
any disproportionate and adverse human health and environmental impacts 
on these populations. The NRC will then assess the information provided 
by the applicant.

Proposed Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(O)

    The NRC proposes to add a new paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(O) in Sec.  
51.53 to conform with the proposed changes made in the revised Table B-
1. A new Category 2 issue has been added to the GEIS to evaluate the 
potential contamination of soil and groundwater from industrial 
practices at nuclear plants. Industrial practices at all plants have 
the potential to contaminate site groundwater and soil through the use 
and spillage of solvents, hydrocarbons, heavy metals, or other 
chemicals, especially on sites with unlined wastewater lagoons and 
storm water lagoons. Any contamination by these substances is subject 
to characterization and clean-up by EPA and State remediation and 
monitoring programs. NRC requires the assistance of applicants to 
assess the impact of the industrial practices involving the use of 
solvents, hydrocarbons, heavy metals, or other chemicals where there is 
a potential for contamination of site groundwater, soil, and subsoil.

Proposed Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(P)

    The NRC proposes to add a new paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(P) in Sec.  
51.53 to conform with the proposed changes made in the revised Table B-
1. A new Category 2 issue has been added to the GEIS to evaluate the 
potential cumulative effects of license renewal and refurbishment at 
nuclear plants. Cumulative impacts was not addressed in the 1996 GEIS, 
but is currently being evaluated by the NRC in plant-specific 
supplements to the GEIS. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), in 
40 CFR 1508.7, defines cumulative effects as ``the impact on the 
environment which results from the incremental impact of the action 
when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future 
actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person 
undertakes such other actions.'' The NRC considers potential cumulative 
impacts on the environment resulting from the incremental impact of 
license renewal when added to other past, present, and reasonably 
foreseeable future actions.
    The NRC requires the assistance of applicants in identifying other 
past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, such as the 
construction and operation of other power plants and other industrial 
and commercial facilities in the vicinity of the nuclear power plant.

Proposed Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii)(Q)

    The NRC proposes to add a new paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(Q) in Sec.  
51.53 to conform with the proposed changes made in the revised Table B-
1. A new Category 2 issue has been added to the GEIS to evaluate the 
potential impact of discharges of radionuclides, such as tritium, from 
plant systems into groundwater. The issue is relevant to license 
renewal because virtually all commercial nuclear power plants have 
spent fuel pools, liquid storage tanks, and buried piping that contain 
liquids with radioactive material that have a potential over time to 
degrade and release radioactive liquid into the groundwater. The NRC 
has investigated several cases where radioactive liquids have been 
inadvertently released into the groundwater in an uncontrolled manner. 
Any residual activity from these inadvertent releases of radioactive 
material is subject to characterization and possible remediation by the 
licensee in order to comply with NRC requirements. NRC requires the 
assistance of applicants in assessing the impact of any inadvertent 
releases of radioactive liquids into the groundwater.

Proposed Sec.  51.71(c)

    The proposed language for Sec.  51.71(c) deletes the term 
``entitlement'' and ``entitlements.'' These terms are not applicable in 
a license renewal context.

Proposed Sec.  51.71(d)

    The proposed language for Sec.  51.71(d) consists of minor 
conforming word changes to clarify the readability and to include the 
analysis of cumulative effects. Cumulative impacts were not addressed 
in the 1996 GEIS, but are currently being evaluated by the NRC in 
plant-specific supplements to the GEIS. The NRC proposes to modify this 
paragraph to more accurately reflect the cumulative impacts analysis 
conducted for environmental reviews of the proposed action.

Proposed Sec.  51.95(c)

    The proposed language changes for Sec.  51.95(c) is administrative 
in nature, and replaces the reference to the 1996 GEIS for license 
renewal of nuclear plants with a reference to the revised GEIS.

Proposed Sec.  51.95(c)(4)

    The proposed language for Sec.  51.95(c)(4) consists of minor 
grammatical word changes to enhance the readability of the regulation.

VII. Specific Request for Comments

    The NRC seeks comments on the proposed Part 51 provisions described 
in this document and on the regulatory

[[Page 38130]]

analysis and the information collection aspects of this proposed rule.
    The NRC also seeks voluntary information from industry about 
refurbishment activities and employment trends at nuclear power plants. 
Information on refurbishment would be used to evaluate the significance 
of impacts from this type of activity. Information on employment trends 
would be used to assess the significance of socioeconomic effects of 
ongoing plant operations on local economies.

Refurbishment

    Table B.2 in the 1996 GEIS lists major refurbishment or replacement 
activities that the NRC used to estimate environmental impacts. The NRC 
recognizes that the refurbishment impact analysis in the 1996 GEIS may 
not accurately reflect industry experience performing the activities 
identified in Table B.2. Please provide (1) the estimated frequency for 
each activity (e.g., annually, once in the lifetime of a power reactor, 
as-needed based on inspections, etc.), (2) the duration (in weeks), (3) 
the peak number of project workers in full-time equivalents (FTEs), (4) 
the timing of these activities (e.g., during planned refueling or 
maintenance outages), and (5) whether the period of extended operation 
(i.e., license renewal term) has triggered a need for these activities.

Employment Trends

    Please provide data on the annual average number of permanent 
operations workers (in FTEs by year) after commencement of nuclear 
plant operations. If possible, the information should include a short 
non-proprietary discussion about general employment trends and include 
reasons for any significant changes in employment.

VIII. Guidance Documents

    In addition to issuing the revised GEIS for public comment, the NRC 
is also issuing a revised RG 4.2, Supplement 1, Revision 1 and a 
revised ESRP, Supplement 1, Revision 1. Both documents are being 
published concurrently with these proposed amendments. Revised RG 4.2, 
Supplement 1, Revision 1, provides general procedures for the 
preparation of environmental reports, which are submitted as part of an 
application for the renewal of a nuclear power plant operating license 
in accordance with Title 10, Part 54, ``Requirements for Renewal of 
Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants,'' of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR Part 54). More specifically, this revised 
regulatory guide explains the criteria on how Category 2 issues are to 
be addressed in the environmental report, as specified in the proposed 
amendments to Part 51.
    The revised ESRP, Supplement 1, Revision 1 provides guidance for 
NRC staff on how to conduct a license renewal environmental review. The 
ESRP parallels the format in RG 4.2, Supplement 1, Revision 1. The 
primary purpose of the ESRP is to ensure that these reviews focus on 
those environmental concerns associated with license renewal as 
described in Part 51. Additionally, in order to enhance public 
openness, the NRC committed to issuing for public comment with the 
proposed rule, the RG 4.2, Supplement 1, Revision 1 and ESRP, 
Supplement 1, Revision 1.

IX. Agreement State Compatibility

    Under the ``Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility of 
Agreement States Programs,'' approved by the Commission on June 20, 
1997, and published in the Federal Register (62 FR 46517; September 3, 
1997), this rule is classified as compatibility category ``NRC.'' 
Agreement State Compatibility is not required for Category ``NRC'' 
regulations. The NRC program elements in this category are those that 
relate directly to areas of regulation reserved to the NRC by the 
Atomic Energy Act or the provisions of 10 CFR. Although an Agreement 
State may not adopt program elements reserved to NRC, it may wish to 
inform its licensees of certain requirements via a mechanism that is 
consistent with the particular State's administrative procedure laws, 
but does not confer regulatory authority on the State.

X. Availability of Documents

    The NRC is making the documents identified below available to 
interested persons through one or more of the following methods, as 
indicated.
    Public Document Room (PDR). The NRC Public Document Room is located 
at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    Regulations.gov (Web). These documents may be viewed and downloaded 
electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov Docket number NRC-2008-0608.
    NRC's Electronic Reading Room (ERR). The NRC's public electronic 
reading room is located at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html.

________________________________________________________
                Document                       PDR        Regs.gov         Web        ERR (ADAMS)     NRC staff
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Draft NUREG-1437, Vols. 1 and 2,                    X             X             X      ML090220654            X
 Revision 1--``Generic Environmental
 Impact Statement for License Renewal of
 Nuclear Plants''.......................
Draft Regulatory Guide (RG) 4.2                     X             X             X      ML091620409            X
 Supplement 1, Revision 1--``Preparation
 of Environmental Reports for Nuclear
 Power Plant License Renewal
 Applications''.........................
Draft NUREG-1555, Supplement 1, Revision            X             X             X      ML090230497            X
 1--``Standard Review Plans for
 Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power
 Plants, Supplement 1: Operating License
 Renewal''..............................
Draft Regulatory Analysis for RIN 3150-             X             X             X      ML083460087            X
 AI42 Proposed Rulemaking Revisions to
 Environmental Review for Renewal of
 Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses.
Draft OMB Supporting Statement for RIN              X             X             X      ML090260568            X
 3150-AI42 Proposed Rulemaking Revisions
 to Environmental Review for Renewal of
 Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses.
Summary of Public Scoping Meeting to                X             X             X      ML032170942            X
 Discuss Update to the Generic
 Environmental Impact Statement for
 License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,
 Atlanta, GA............................
Summary of Public Scoping Meeting to                X             X             X      ML032260339            X
 Discuss Update to the Generic
 Environmental Impact Statement for
 License Renewal of Nuclear Plants
 (NUREG-1437), Oak Lawn, IL.............
Summary of Public Scoping Meeting To                X             X             X      ML032260715            X
 Discuss Update to the Generic
 Environmental Impact Statement for
 License Renewal of Nuclear Plants
 (NUREG-1437), Anaheim, CA..............

[[Page 38131]]

 
Summary of Public Scoping Meeting to                X             X             X      ML032170934            X
 Discuss Update to the Generic
 Environmental Impact Statement for
 License Renewal of Nuclear Plants
 (NUREG-1437), Boston, MA...............
Liquid Radiation Release Lessons Learned            X             X             X      ML062650312            X
 Task...................................
NUREG/CP-0108, ``Proceedings of the                 X   ............  ............  ..............            X
 Public Workshop on Nuclear Power Plant
 License Renewal'' (April 1990).........
NUREG-1411, ``Response to Public                    X   ............  ............  ..............            X
 Comments Resulting from the Public
 Workshop on Nuclear Power Plant License
 Renewal'' (July 1990)..................
``Addressing the Concerns of States and             X   ............  ............  ..............            X
 Others Regarding the Role of Need for
 Generating Capacity, Alternate Energy
 Sources, Utility Costs, and Cost-
 Benefit Analysis in NRC Environmental
 Reviews for Relicensing Nuclear Power
 Plants: An NRC Staff Discussion Paper''
NUREG-0586, ``2002 Generic Environmental            X   ............  ............  ..............            X
 Impact Statement on Decommissioning of
 Nuclear Facilities: Regarding the
 Decommissioning of Nuclear Power
 Reactors''.............................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

XI. Plain Language

    The Presidential memorandum dated June 1, 1998, entitled ``Plain 
Language in Government Writing'' directed that the Government's writing 
be in clear and accessible language. This memorandum was published on 
June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31883). The NRC requests comments on the proposed 
rule specifically with respect to the clarity and effectiveness of the 
language used. Comments should be sent to the NRC as explained in the 
ADDRESSES heading of this document.

XII. 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 using such a standard is inconsistent with 
applicable law or is otherwise impractical. The NRC is not aware of any 
voluntary consensus standard that could be used instead of the proposed 
Government standards. The NRC will consider using a voluntary consensus 
standard if an appropriate standard is identified.

XIII. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact

    The NRC has determined that this proposed regulation is the type of 
action described in categorical exclusion Sec.  51.22(c)(3). Therefore, 
neither an environmental impact statement nor an environmental 
assessment has been prepared for this proposed regulation. This action 
is procedural in nature in that it pertains to the type of 
environmental information to be reviewed.

XIV. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

    This proposed rule would contain new or amended information 
collection requirements that are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq). This proposed rule has been submitted 
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval of 
the information collection requirements.
    Type of submission, new or revision: Revision.
    The title of the information collection: 10 CFR Part 51 
Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant Operating 
Licenses, Proposed Rule.
    The form number if applicable: Not applicable.
    How often the collection is required: Once per license renewal.
    Who will be required or asked to report: Applicants for license 
renewal.
    An estimate of the number of annual responses: Six.
    The estimated number of annual respondents: Six.
    An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to 
complete the requirement or request (net one-time reporting): 1,944.00 
hours
    Abstract: 10 CFR Part 51 specifies information to be provided by 
applicants and licensees so that the NRC can make determinations 
necessary to adhere to the policies, regulations, and public laws of 
the United States, which are to be interpreted and administered in 
accordance with the policies set forth in the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969, as amended.
    The NRC is seeking public comment on the potential impact of the 
information collections contained in this proposed rule and on the 
following issues:
    1. Is the proposed information collection necessary for the NRC to 
properly perform its functions? Does the information have practical 
utility?
    2. Is the burden estimate accurate?
    3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of 
the information to be collected?
    4. How can the burden of the information collection be minimized, 
including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of 
information technology?
    A copy of the OMB clearance package may be viewed free of charge at 
the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 
Pike, Room O-1F21, Rockville, MD 20852. The OMB clearance package and 
rule are available at the NRC worldwide Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.htm for 60 days after the 
signature date of this notice.
    Send comments on any aspect of these proposed information 
collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden and on the 
above issues, by October 14, 2009. Comments received after this date 
will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of 
consideration cannot be given to comments received after this date. 
Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made 
available for public inspection. Because your comments will not be 
edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC 
cautions you against including any information in your submission that 
you do not want to be publicly disclosed. Comments submitted should 
reference Docket No. NRC-2008-0608. Comments can be submitted in 
electronic form via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by search for Docket No. NRC-2008-0608. Comments 
can be mailed to NRC Clearance Officer, Tremaine Donnell (T-5F52), U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

[[Page 38132]]

Washington, DC 20555-0001. Questions about the information collection 
requirements may be directed to the NRC Clearance Officer, Tremaine 
Donnell (T-5 F52), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001, by telephone at (301) 415-5258, or by e-mail to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#eca5a2aaa3afa3a0a0a9afb8bfc2be899f83999e8f89ac829e8fc28b839a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f8b1b6beb7bbb7b4b4bdbbacabd6aa9d8b978d8a9b9db8968a9bd69f978e">[email protected]</span></a>. Comments can be mailed to the Desk 
Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, NEOB-10202, 
(3150-0021), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503, or 
by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d093b8a2b9a3a4b9beb58f9afe8f9ba9bdb190bfbdb2feb5bfa0feb7bfa6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f1b29983988285989f94aebbdfaeba889c90b19e9c93df949e81df969e87">[email protected]</span></a> or by telephone at (202) 
395-4638.

XV. Regulatory Analysis

    The Commission has prepared a regulatory analysis on this proposed 
regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the 
alternatives considered by the NRC. The two alternatives considered (a) 
No Action--no change to applicable license renewal portions of Part 51 
regulations, including Table B-1, which would require applicants 
seeking license renewal to comply with the existing provisions; or (b) 
review and update the environmental impact issues and findings and 
amend applicable license renewal portions of Part 51 and Table B-1. The 
conclusions of the regulatory analysis show substantial cost savings of 
alternative (b) over alternative (a).
    The NRC requests public comments on this regulatory analysis. 
Information on availability of the regulatory analysis is provided in 
Section X of this document. Comments on the regulatory analysis may be 
submitted to the NRC as indicated under the ADDRESSES heading of this 
document.

XVI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the 
Commission certifies that this rule would not, if promulgated, have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
This proposed rule would only affect nuclear power plant licensees 
filing 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 (Sec.  2.810).

XVII. Backfit Analysis

    The NRC has determined that the requirements in this proposed rule 
do not constitute backfitting as defined in Sec.  50.109(a)(1). 
Therefore, a backfit analysis has not been prepared for this proposed 
rule.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 51

    Administrative practice and procedure, Environmental impact 
statement, 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. 553; the NRC is proposing to 
adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR Part 51.

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

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

    Authority: Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as amended, sec. 1701, 106 
Stat. 2951, 2952, 2953 (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2297f); secs. 201, as 
amended, 202, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 
5842); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note). Subpart A 
also issued under National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, secs. 
102, 104, 105, 83 Stat. 853-854, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332, 4334, 
4335); and Pub. L. 95-604, Title II, 92 Stat. 3033-3041; and sec. 
193, Pub. L. 101-575, 104 Stat. 2835 (42 U.S.C. 2243). Sections 
51.20, 51.30, 51.60, 51.80, and 51.97 also issued under secs. 135, 
141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241, and sec. 148, Pub. L. 100-
203, 101 Stat. 1330-223 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161, 10168). Section 
51.22 also issued under sec. 274, 73 Stat. 688, as amended by 92 
Stat. 3036-3038 (42 U.S.C. 2021) and under Nuclear Waste Policy Act 
of 1982, sec. 121, 96 Stat. 2228 (42 U.S.C. 10141). Sections 51.43, 
51.67, and 51.109 also issued under Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 
1982, sec. 114(f), 96 Stat. 2216, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10134(f)).

    2. Section 51.14(a) is amended by adding the term Historic 
properties in alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec.  51.14  Definitions.

    (a) * * *
    Historic properties means any prehistoric or historic districts, 
sites, buildings, structures, or objects included in, or eligible for 
inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places maintained by 
the Secretary of the Interior. This term includes properties of 
traditional religious and cultural importance to an Indian Tribe or 
Native Hawaiian organization and that meet the National Register 
criteria. The term also includes archaeological resources, such as 
artifacts, records, and remains, that are related to and located within 
such prehistoric or historic districts, sites, buildings, or 
structures.
* * * * *
    3. Amend Sec.  51.53 to revise the second sentence of paragraph 
(c)(2), revise the first sentence of paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(A), revise 
the second sentence of paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(B), revise paragraph 
(c)(3)(ii)(E), to remove and reserve paragraphs (c)(3)(ii)(I) and (J), 
to revise paragraph (c)(3)(ii)(K) and to add paragraphs (c)(3)(ii)(N), 
(O), (P), and (Q) to read as follows:


Sec.  51.53  Postconstruction environmental reports.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * * This report must describe in detail the affected 
environment around the plant, the modifications directly affecting the 
environment or any plant effluents, and any planned refurbishment 
activities. * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (A) If the applicant's plant utilizes cooling towers or cooling 
ponds and withdraws make-up water from a river whose annual flow rate 
is less than 3.15x10\12\ ft\3\/year (9x10\10\m\3\/year), an assessment 
of the impact of the proposed action on water availability and 
competing water demands, the flow of the river, and related impacts on 
instream (aquatic) and riparian (terrestrial) ecological communities 
must be provided. * * *
    (B) * * * If the applicant can not provide these documents, it 
shall assess the impact of the proposed action on fish and shellfish 
resources resulting from thermal changes and impingement and 
entrainment.
* * * * *
    (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 threatened or endangered species in accordance with Federal 
laws protecting wildlife, including but not limited to the Endangered 
Species Act, and essential fish habitat in accordance with the 
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.
* * * * *
    (I) [Reserved]
    (J) [Reserved]
    (K) All applicants shall assess whether any historic properties 
will be affected by the proposed project.
* * * * *
    (N) Applicants shall provide information on the general demographic 
composition of minority- and low-income populations and communities (by 
race and ethnicity) residing in the immediate vicinity of the plant 
that could be affected by the renewal of the

[[Page 38133]]

plant's operating license, including any planned refurbishment 
activities, and ongoing and future plant operations.
    (O) If the applicant's plant conducts industrial practices 
involving the use of solvents, hydrocarbons, heavy metals, or other 
chemicals and has unlined wastewater lagoons, the applicant shall 
assess the potential for contamination of site groundwater, soil, and 
subsoil. The applicant shall provide an assessment of dissolved 
chemical and suspended sediment discharge to the plant's wastewater 
lagoons in addition to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 
(NPDES) compliance data collected for submittal to the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or designated State agency. A 
summary of existing reports describing site groundwater and soil 
contamination should also be included.
    (P) Applicants shall provide information about past, present, and 
reasonably foreseeable future actions occurring in the vicinity of the 
nuclear plant that may result in a cumulative effect. For example, the 
applicant should include information about the construction and 
operation of other power plants and other industrial and commercial 
facilities in the vicinity of the nuclear plant.
    (Q) An applicant shall assess the impact of any inadvertent 
releases of radionuclides into groundwater. The applicant shall include 
in its assessment a description of any groundwater protection program 
for the site, including a description of any monitoring wells, leak 
detection equipment, or procedures for the surveillance of accessible 
piping and components containing radioactive materials. The assessment 
shall also include a description of any past inadvertent releases, 
including information on the source of the release, the location of the 
release within the plant site, the types of radionuclides involved, 
including the quantities, forms, and concentrations of such 
radionuclides, and the projected impact to the environment during the 
license renewal term, including the projected transport pathways, 
concentrations of the radionuclides, and potential receptors (e.g., 
aquifers, rivers, lakes, ponds, ocean).
* * * * *
    4. Amend Sec.  51.71 to revise paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  51.71  Draft environmental impact statement--contents.

* * * * *
    (c) Status of compliance. The draft environmental impact statement 
will list all Federal permits, licenses, and approvals which must be 
obtained in implementing the proposed action and will describe the 
status of compliance with those requirements. If it is uncertain 
whether a Federal permit, license, or approval is necessary, the draft 
environmental impact statement will so indicate.
    (d) Analysis. Unless excepted in this paragraph or Sec.  51.75, the 
draft environmental impact statement will include a preliminary 
analysis that considers and weighs the environmental effects, including 
any cumulative effects, of the proposed action; the environmental 
impacts of alternatives to the proposed action; and alternatives 
available for reducing or avoiding adverse environmental effects. 
Additionally, the draft environmental impact statement will include a 
consideration of the economic, technical, and other benefits and costs 
of the proposed action and alternatives. The draft environmental impact 
statement will indicate what other interests and considerations of 
Federal policy, including factors not related to environmental quality, 
if applicable, are relevant to the consideration of environmental 
effects of the proposed action identified under paragraph (a) of this 
section. The draft supplemental environmental impact statement prepared 
at the license renewal stage under Sec.  51.95(c) need not discuss the 
economic or technical benefits and costs of either the proposed action 
or alternatives except if benefits and costs are either essential for a 
determination regarding the inclusion of an alternative in the range of 
alternatives considered or relevant to mitigation. In addition, the 
supplemental environmental impact statement prepared at the license 
renewal stage need not discuss other issues not related to the 
environmental effects of the proposed action and associated 
alternatives. The draft supplemental environmental impact statement for 
license renewal prepared under Sec.  51.95(c) will rely on conclusions 
as amplified by the supporting information in the GEIS for issues 
designated as Category 1 in appendix B to subpart A of this part. The 
draft supplemental environmental impact statement must contain an 
analysis of those issues identified as Category 2 in appendix B to 
subpart A of this part that are open for the proposed action. The 
analysis for all draft environmental impact statements will, to the 
fullest extent practicable, quantify the various factors considered. To 
the extent that there are important qualitative considerations or 
factors that cannot be quantified, these considerations or factors will 
be discussed in qualitative terms. Consideration will be given to 
compliance with environmental quality standards and requirements that 
have been imposed by Federal, State, regional, and local agencies 
having responsibility for environmental protection, including 
applicable zoning and land-use regulations and water pollution 
limitations or requirements issued or imposed under the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act. The environmental impact of the proposed action 
will be considered in the analysis with respect to matters covered by 
environmental quality standards and requirements irrespective of 
whether a certification or license from the appropriate authority has 
been obtained.\3\ While satisfaction of Commission standards and 
criteria pertaining to radiological effects will be necessary to meet 
the licensing requirements of the Atomic Energy Act, the analysis will, 
for the purposes of NEPA, consider the radiological effects of the 
proposed action and alternatives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Compliance with the environmental quality standards and 
requirements of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (imposed by 
EPA or designated permitting states) is not a substitute for, and 
does not negate the requirement for NRC to weigh all environmental 
effects of the proposed action, including the degradation, if any, 
of water quality, and to consider alternatives to the proposed 
action that are available for reducing adverse effects. Where an 
environmental assessment of aquatic impact from plant discharges is 
available from the permitting authority, the NRC will consider the 
assessment in its determination of the magnitude of environmental 
impacts for striking an overall cost-benefit balance at the 
construction permit and operating license and early site permit and 
combined license stages, and in its determination of whether the 
adverse environmental impacts of license renewal are so great that 
preserving the option of license renewal for energy planning 
decision-makers would be unreasonable at the license renewal stage. 
When no such assessment of aquatic impacts is available from the 
permitting authority, NRC will establish on its own, or in 
conjunction with the permitting authority and other agencies having 
relevant expertise, the magnitude of potential impacts for striking 
an overall cost-benefit balance for the facility at the construction 
permit and operating license and early site permit and combined 
license stages, and in its determination of whether the adverse 
environmental impacts of license renewal are so great that 
preserving the option of license renewal for energy planning 
decision-makers would be unreasonable at the license renewal stage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    5. Amend Sec.  51.95 to revise the introductory text of paragraph 
(c), and the second sentence of paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows:


Sec.  51.95  Postconstruction environmental impact statements.

* * * * *
    (c) Operating license renewal stage. In connection with the renewal 
of an operating license or combined license

[[Page 38134]]

for a nuclear power plant under parts 52 or 54 of this chapter, the 
Commission shall prepare an environmental impact statement, which is a 
supplement to the Commission's NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental 
Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' [(Month 
20XX)], which is available in the NRC Public Document Room, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
* * * * *
    (4) * * * In order to make recommendations and reach a final 
decision on the proposed action, the NRC staff, adjudicatory officers, 
and Commission shall integrate the conclusions in the generic 
environmental impact statement for issues designated Category 1 (with 
the exception of offsite radiological impacts for collective effects 
and the disposal of spent fuel and high level waste) with information 
developed for those open Category 2 issues applicable to the plant 
under Sec.  51.53(c)(3)(ii), and any new and significant information. * 
* *
* * * * *
    6. In Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 51, Table B-1 is revised to 
read as follows:

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

* * * * *

  Table B-1--Summary of Findings on NEPA Issues for 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 the
                                                 license renewal term
                                                 would be a small
                                                 fraction of any 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
                                                 from continued
                                                 operations and
                                                 refurbishment
                                                 associated with the
                                                 license renewal term.
Offsite land use in transmission             1  SMALL. Use of
 line rights-of-way (ROWs).                      transmission line ROWs
                                                 from continued
                                                 operations and
                                                 refurbishment
                                                 associated with the
                                                 license renewal term
                                                 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 the
                                                 license renewal term.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Air Quality
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air quality (non-attainment and              2  SMALL, MODERATE, or
 maintenance areas).                             LARGE. Air quality
                                                 impacts of continued
                                                 operations and
                                                 refurbishment
                                                 activities associated
                                                 with the license
                                                 renewal term are
                                                 expected to be small.
                                                 However, emissions
                                                 during these activities
                                                 could be a cause for
                                                 concern at locations in
                                                 or near air quality
                                                 nonattainment or
                                                 maintenance areas. The
                                                 significance of the
                                                 impact cannot be
                                                 determined without
                                                 considering the
                                                 compliance status of
                                                 each site and the
                                                 activities that could
                                                 occur. These impacts
                                                 would be short-lived
                                                 and cease after
                                                 projects were
                                                 completed.
                                                Emissions from testing
                                                 emergency diesel
                                                 generators and fire
                                                 pumps and from routine
                                                 operations of boilers
                                                 used for space heating
                                                 would not be a concern,
                                                 even for those plants
                                                 located in or adjacent
                                                 to nonattainment areas.
                                                 Although particulate
                                                 emissions from cooling
                                                 towers may be a concern
                                                 for a very limited
                                                 number of plants
                                                 located in States that
                                                 regulate such
                                                 emissions, the impacts
                                                 in even these worst-
                                                 case situations have
                                                 been small.
Air quality effects of                       1  SMALL. Production of
 transmission lines.                             ozone and oxides of
                                                 nitrogen 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 the
                                                 license renewal term.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Geology and Soils
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impacts of nuclear plants on                 1  SMALL. Impacts on
 geology and soils.                              geology and soils would
                                                 be small at all nuclear
                                                 plants if best
                                                 management practices
                                                 were employed to reduce
                                                 erosion associated with
                                                 continued operations
                                                 and refurbishment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Surface Water
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface-water use and quality....            1  SMALL. Impacts are
                                                 expected to be
                                                 negligible if best
                                                 management practices
                                                 are employed to control
                                                 soil erosion and
                                                 spills. Water use
                                                 associated with
                                                 continued operation and
                                                 refurbishment projects
                                                 for license renewal
                                                 would not increase
                                                 significantly or would
                                                 be reduced if a plant
                                                 outage is necessary to
                                                 accomplish the action.
Altered current patterns at                  1  SMALL. Altered current
 intake and discharge structures.                patterns 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.

[[Page 38135]]

 
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            1  SMALL. Effects on
 lakes.                                          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                1  SMALL. Scouring effects
 cooling water.                                  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               1  SMALL. Discharges of
 system effluent.                                metals have not been
                                                 found to be 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 as part of
                                                 the National Pollutant
                                                 Discharge Elimination
                                                 System (NPDES) permit
                                                 process.
Discharge of biocides, sanitary              1  SMALL. The effects of
 wastes, and minor chemical                      these discharges are
 spills.                                         regulated by State and
                                                 Federal environmental
                                                 agencies. Discharges
                                                 are monitored as part
                                                 of the NPDES permit
                                                 process. These impacts
                                                 have been small at
                                                 operating nuclear power
                                                 plants.
Water use conflicts (plants with             1  SMALL. These conflicts
 once-through cooling systems).                  have not been found to
                                                 be a problem at
                                                 operating nuclear power
                                                 plants with once-
                                                 through heat
                                                 dissipation systems.
Water use conflicts (plants with             2  SMALL or MODERATE.
 cooling ponds or cooling towers                 Impacts could be of
 using make-up water from a river                small or moderate
 with low flow).                                 significance, depending
                                                 on makeup water
                                                 requirements, water
                                                 availability, and
                                                 competing water
                                                 demands.
Effects of dredging on water                 1  SMALL. Dredging to
 quality.                                        remove accumulated
                                                 sediments in the
                                                 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.
Temperature effects on sediment              1  SMALL. These effects
 transport capacity.                             have not been found to
                                                 be a problem at
                                                 operating nuclear power
                                                 plants and are not
                                                 expected to be a
                                                 problem during the
                                                 license renewal term.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Groundwater
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Groundwater use and quality......            1  SMALL. Extensive
                                                 dewatering is not
                                                 anticipated from
                                                 continued operations
                                                 and refurbishment
                                                 activities associated
                                                 with the license
                                                 renewal term. The
                                                 application of best
                                                 management practices
                                                 for handling any
                                                 materials produced or
                                                 used during activities
                                                 would reduce impacts.
Groundwater use conflicts (plants            1  SMALL. Plants that
 that withdraw less than 100                     withdraw less than 100
 gallons per minute [gpm]).                      gpm are not expected to
                                                 cause any groundwater
                                                 use conflicts.
Groundwater use conflicts (plants            2  SMALL, MODERATE, or
 that withdraw more than 100 gpm                 LARGE. Plants that
 including those using Ranney                    withdraw more than 100
 wells).                                         gpm could cause
                                                 groundwater use
                                                 conflicts with nearby
                                                 groundwater users.
Groundwater use conflicts (plants            2  SMALL, MODERATE, or
 with closed-cycle cooling                       LARGE. Water use
 systems that withdraw makeup                    conflicts could result
 water from a river).                            from water withdrawals
                                                 from rivers during low-
                                                 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              1  SMALL. Groundwater
 resulting from water withdrawals.               withdrawals at
                                                 operating nuclear power
                                                 plants would not
                                                 contribute
                                                 significantly to
                                                 groundwater quality
                                                 degradation.
Groundwater quality degradation              1  SMALL. Sites with closed-
 (plants with cooling ponds in                   cycle cooling ponds
 salt marshes).                                  could degrade
                                                 groundwater quality;
                                                 however, because
                                                 groundwater in salt
                                                 marshes is brackish,
                                                 this is not a concern
                                                 for plants located in
                                                 salt marshes.
Groundwater quality degradation              2  SMALL, MODERATE, or
 (plants with cooling ponds at                   LARGE. Sites with
 inland sites).                                  closed-cycle cooling
                                                 ponds could degrade
                                                 groundwater quality.
                                                 For plants located
                                                 inland, the quality of
                                                 the groundwater in the
                                                 vicinity of the ponds
                                                 could be affected. The
                                                 significance of the
                                                 impact would depend on
                                                 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.
Groundwater and soil                         2  SMALL or MODERATE.
 contamination.                                  Industrial practices
                                                 involving the use of
                                                 solvents, hydrocarbons,
                                                 heavy metals, or other
                                                 chemicals and unlined
                                                 wastewater lagoons have
                                                 the potential to
                                                 contaminate site
                                                 groundwater, soil, and
                                                 subsoil. Contamination
                                                 is subject to State and
                                                 Environmental
                                                 Protection Agency
                                                 regulated cleanup and
                                                 monitoring programs.
Radionuclides released to                    2  SMALL or MODERATE.
 groundwater.                                    Underground system
                                                 leaks of process water
                                                 have been discovered in
                                                 recent years at several
                                                 plants. Groundwater
                                                 protection programs
                                                 have been established
                                                 at all operating
                                                 nuclear power plants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 38136]]

 
                          Terrestrial Resources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impacts of continued plant                   2  SMALL, MODERATE, or
 operations on terrestrial                       LARGE. Continued
 ecosystems.                                     operations,
                                                 refurbishment, and
                                                 maintenance activities
                                                 are expected to keep
                                                 terrestrial communities
                                                 in their current
                                                 condition. Application
                                                 of best management
                                                 practices would reduce
                                                 the potential for
                                                 impacts. The magnitude
                                                 of impacts would depend
                                                 on the nature of the
                                                 activity, the status of
                                                 the resources that
                                                 could be affected, and
                                                 the effectiveness of
                                                 mitigation.
Exposure of terrestrial organisms            1  SMALL. Doses to
 to radionuclides.                               terrestrial organisms
                                                 are expected to be well
                                                 below exposure
                                                 guidelines developed to
                                                 protect these
                                                 organisms.
Cooling system impacts on                    1  SMALL. No adverse
 terrestrial resources (plants                   effects to terrestrial
 with once-through cooling                       plants or animals have
 systems or cooling ponds).                      been reported as a
                                                 result of increased
                                                 water temperatures,
                                                 fogging, humidity, or
                                                 reduced habitat
                                                 quality. Due to the low
                                                 concentrations of
                                                 contaminants in cooling
                                                 system effluents,
                                                 uptake and accumulation
                                                 of contaminants in the
                                                 tissues of wildlife
                                                 exposed to the
                                                 contaminated water or
                                                 aquatic food sources
                                                 are not expected to be
                                                 significant issues.
Cooling tower impacts on                     1  SMALL. Impacts from salt
 vegetation (plants with cooling                 drift, icing, fogging,
 towers).                                        or increased humidity
                                                 associated with cooling
                                                 tower operation have
                                                 the potential to affect
                                                 adjacent vegetation,
                                                 but these impacts have
                                                 been small at operating
                                                 nuclear power plants
                                                 and are not expected to
                                                 change over the license
                                                 renewal term.
Bird collisions with cooling                 1  SMALL. Bird collisions
 towers and transmission lines.                  with cooling towers and
                                                 transmission lines
                                                 occur at rates that are
                                                 unlikely to affect
                                                 local or migratory
                                                 populations.
Water use conflicts with                     2  SMALL or MODERATE.
 terrestrial resources (plants                   Impacts on terrestrial
 with cooling ponds or cooling                   resources in riparian
 towers using make-up water from                 communities affected by
 a river with low flow).                         water use conflicts
                                                 could be of moderate
                                                 significance in some
                                                 situations.
Transmission line ROW management             1  SMALL. Continued ROW
 impacts on terrestrial resources.               management during the
                                                 license renewal term is
                                                 expected to keep
                                                 terrestrial communities
                                                 in their current
                                                 condition. Application
                                                 of best management
                                                 practices would reduce
                                                 the potential for
                                                 impacts.
Electromagnetic fields on flora              1  SMALL. No significant
 and fauna (plants, agricultural                 impacts of
 crops, honeybees, wildlife,                     electromagnetic fields
 livestock).                                     on terrestrial flora
                                                 and fauna have been
                                                 identified. Such
                                                 effects are not
                                                 expected to be a
                                                 problem during the
                                                 license renewal term.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Aquatic Resources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impingement and entrainment of               2  SMALL, MODERATE, or
 aquatic organisms (plants with                  LARGE. The impacts of
 once-through cooling systems or                 impingement and
 cooling ponds).                                 entrainment are small
                                                 at many plants but may
                                                 be moderate or even
                                                 large at a few plants
                                                 with once-through and
                                                 cooling-pond cooling
                                                 systems, depending on
                                                 cooling system
                                                 withdrawal rates and
                                                 volumes and the aquatic
                                                 resources at the site.
Impingement and entrainment of               1  SMALL. Impingement and
 aquatic organisms (plants with                  entrainment rates are
 cooling towers).                                lower at plants that
                                                 use closed-cycle
                                                 cooling with cooling
                                                 towers because the
                                                 rates and volumes of
                                                 water withdrawal needed
                                                 for makeup are
                                                 minimized.
Thermal impacts on aquatic                   2  SMALL, MODERATE, or
 organisms (plants with once-                    LARGE. Most of the
 through cooling systems or                      effects associated with
 cooling ponds).                                 thermal discharges are
                                                 localized and are not
                                                 expected to affect
                                                 overall stability of
                                                 populations or
                                                 resources. The
                                                 magnitude of impacts,
                                                 however, would depend
                                                 on site-specific
                                                 thermal plume
                                                 characteristics and the
                                                 nature of aquatic
                                                 resources in the area.
Thermal impacts on aquatic                   1  SMALL. Thermal effects
 organisms (plants with cooling                  associated with plants
 towers).                                        that use cooling towers
                                                 are small because of
                                                 the reduced amount of
                                                 heated discharge.
Effects of cooling water                     1  SMALL. Gas
 discharge on dissolved oxygen,                  supersaturation was a
 gas supersaturation, and                        concern at a small
 eutrophication.                                 number of operating
                                                 nuclear power plants
                                                 with once-through
                                                 cooling systems but has
                                                 been satisfactorily
                                                 mitigated. Low
                                                 dissolved oxygen was a
                                                 concern at one nuclear
                                                 power plant with a once-
                                                 through cooling system
                                                 but has been
                                                 effectively mitigated.
                                                 Eutrophication
                                                 (nutrient loading) and
                                                 resulting effects on
                                                 chemical and biological
                                                 oxygen demands have not
                                                 been found to be a
                                                 problem at operating
                                                 nuclear power plants.
Effects of non-radiological                  1  SMALL. Best management
 contaminants on aquatic                         practices and discharge
 organisms.                                      limitations of NPDES
                                                 permits are expected to
                                                 minimize the potential
                                                 for impacts to aquatic
                                                 resources. Accumulation
                                                 of metal contaminants
                                                 has been a concern at a
                                                 few nuclear power
                                                 plants but has been
                                                 satisfactorily
                                                 mitigated by replacing
                                                 copper alloy condenser
                                                 tubes with those of
                                                 another metal.
Exposure of aquatic organisms to             1  SMALL. Doses to aquatic
 radionuclides.                                  organisms are expected
                                                 to be well below
                                                 exposure guidelines
                                                 developed to protect
                                                 these aquatic
                                                 organisms.
Effects of dredging on aquatic               1  SMALL. Effects of
 organisms.                                      dredging on aquatic
                                                 resources tend to be of
                                                 short duration (years
                                                 or less) and localized.
                                                 Dredging requires
                                                 permits from the U.S.
                                                 Army Corps of
                                                 Engineers, State
                                                 environmental agencies,
                                                 and other regulatory
                                                 agencies.
Water use conflicts with aquatic             2  SMALL or MODERATE.
 resources (plants with cooling                  Impacts on aquatic
 ponds or cooling towers using                   resources in instream
 make-up water from a river with                 communities affected by
 low flow).                                      water use conflicts
                                                 could be of moderate
                                                 significance in some
                                                 situations.
Refurbishment impacts on aquatic             1  SMALL. Refurbishment
 resources.                                      impacts with
                                                 appropriate mitigation
                                                 are not expected to
                                                 change aquatic
                                                 communities from their
                                                 current condition.

[[Page 38137]]

 
Impacts of transmission line ROW             1  SMALL. Application of
 management on aquatic resources.                best management
                                                 practices to ROW near
                                                 aquatic systems would
                                                 reduce the potential
                                                 for impacts.
Losses from predation,                       1  SMALL. These types of
 parasitism, and disease among                   losses have not been
 organisms exposed to sublethal                  found to be a problem
 stresses.                                       at operating nuclear
                                                 power plants and are
                                                 not expected to be a
                                                 problem during the
                                                 license renewal term.
Stimulation of aquatic nuisance              1  SMALL. Stimulation of
 species (e.g., shipworms).                      nuisance organisms has
                                                 been satisfactorily
                                                 mitigated at the single
                                                 nuclear power plant
                                                 with a once-through
                                                 cooling system where
                                                 previously it was a
                                                 problem. It has not
                                                 been found to be a
                                                 problem at operating
                                                 nuclear power plants
                                                 with cooling towers or
                                                 cooling ponds and is
                                                 not expected to be a
                                                 problem during the
                                                 license renewal term.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Threatened, Endangered, and Protected Species and Essential Fish Habitat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Threatened, endangered, and                  2  SMALL, MODERATE, or
 protected species and essential                 LARGE. The magnitude of
 fish habitat.                                   impacts on threatened,
                                                 endangered, and
                                                 protected species and
                                                 essential fish habitat
                                                 would depend on the
                                                 occurrence of listed
                                                 species and habitats
                                                 and the effects of
                                                 power plant systems on
                                                 them. Consultation with
                                                 appropriate agencies
                                                 would be needed to
                                                 determine whether
                                                 special status species
                                                 or habitats are present
                                                 and whether they would
                                                 be adversely affected
                                                 by activities
                                                 associated with license
                                                 renewal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Historic and Cultural Resources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historic and cultural resources..            2  SMALL, MODERATE, or
                                                 LARGE. Continued
                                                 operations and
                                                 refurbishment
                                                 associated with the
                                                 license renewal term
                                                 are expected to have no
                                                 more than small impacts
                                                 on historic and
                                                 cultural resources
                                                 located onsite and in
                                                 the transmission line
                                                 ROW because most
                                                 impacts could be
                                                 mitigated by avoiding
                                                 those resources. The
                                                 National Historic
                                                 Preservation Act (NHPA)
                                                 requires the Federal
                                                 agency to consult with
                                                 the State Historic
                                                 Preservation Officer
                                                 (SHPO) and appropriate
                                                 Native American tribes
                                                 to determine the
                                                 potential impacts and
                                                 mitigation. See Sec.
                                                 51.14(a).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Socioeconomics
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employment and income, recreation            1  SMALL. Although most
 and tourism.                                    nuclear plants have
                                                 large numbers of
                                                 employees with higher
                                                 than average wages and
                                                 salaries, employment
                                                 and income impacts from
                                                 continued operations
                                                 and refurbishment are
                                                 expected to be small.
                                                 Nuclear plant
                                                 operations, employee
                                                 spending, power plant
                                                 expenditures, and tax
                                                 payments have an effect
                                                 on local economies.
                                                 Changes in plant
                                                 operations, employment
                                                 and expenditures would
                                                 have a greater effect
                                                 on rural economies than
                                                 on semi-urban
                                                 economies.
Tax revenues.....................            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 from
                                                 continued operations
                                                 and refurbishment is
                                                 not expected to change,
                                                 since the assessed
                                                 value of the power
                                                 plant, payments on
                                                 energy production and
                                                 PILOT payments are also
                                                 not expected to change.
Community services and education.            1  SMALL. Changes to local
                                                 community and
                                                 educational services
                                                 would be small from
                                                 continued operations
                                                 and refurbishment
                                                 associated with the
                                                 license renewal term.
                                                 With no increase in
                                                 employment, 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.
                                                 Changes in employment
                                                 and tax payments would
                                                 have a greater effect
                                                 on jurisdictions
                                                 receiving a large
                                                 portion of annual
                                                 revenues from the power
                                                 plant than on
                                                 jurisdictions receiving
                                                 the majority of their
                                                 revenues from other
                                                 sources.
Population and housing...........            1  SMALL. Changes to
                                                 regional population and
                                                 housing availability
                                                 and value would be
                                                 small from continued
                                                 operations and
                                                 refurbishment
                                                 associated with the
                                                 license renewal term.
                                                 With no increase in
                                                 employment expected
                                                 during the license
                                                 renewal term,
                                                 population and housing
                                                 availability and values
                                                 would not be affected
                                                 by continued power
                                                 plant operations.
                                                 Changes in housing
                                                 availability and value
                                                 would have a greater
                                                 effect on sparsely
                                                 populated areas than
                                                 areas with higher
                                                 density populations.
Transportation...................            1  SMALL. Changes to
                                                 traffic volumes would
                                                 be small from continued
                                                 operations and
                                                 refurbishment
                                                 activities associated
                                                 with the license
                                                 renewal term. Changes
                                                 in employment would
                                                 have a greater effect
                                                 on rural areas, with
                                                 less developed local
                                                 and regional networks.
                                                 Impacts would be less
                                                 noticeable in semi-
                                                 urban areas depending
                                                 on the quality and
                                                 extent of local access
                                                 roads and the timing of
                                                 plant shift changes
                                                 when compared to
                                                 typical local usage.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Human Health
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radiation exposures to the public            1  SMALL. Radiation doses
                                                 to the public from
                                                 continued operations
                                                 and refurbishment
                                                 associated with the
                                                 license renewal term
                                                 are expected to
                                                 continue at current
                                                 levels, and would be
                                                 well below regulatory
                                                 limits.

[[Page 38138]]

 
Radiation exposures to                       1  SMALL. Occupational
 occupational workers.                           doses from continued
                                                 operations and
                                                 refurbishment
                                                 associated with the
                                                 license renewal term
                                                 are expected to be
                                                 within the range of
                                                 doses experienced
                                                 during the current
                                                 license term, and would
                                                 continue to be well
                                                 below regulatory
                                                 limits.
Human health impact from                     1  SMALL. Chemical hazards
 chemicals.                                      to workers would be
                                                 minimized by observing
                                                 good industrial hygiene
                                                 practices. Chemical
                                                 releases to the
                                                 environment and the
                                                 potential for impacts
                                                 to the public are
                                                 minimized by adherence
                                                 to discharge
                                                 limitations of NPDES
                                                 permits.
Microbiological hazards to the               2  SMALL, MODERATE, or
 public (plants with cooling                     LARGE. These organisms
 ponds or canals or cooling                      are not expected to be
 towers that discharge to a                      a problem at most
 river).                                         operating plants except
                                                 possibly at plants
                                                 using cooling ponds,
                                                 lakes, or canals that
                                                 discharge to rivers.
                                                 Impacts would depend on
                                                 site-specific
                                                 characteristics.
Microbiological hazards to plant             1  SMALL. Occupational
 workers.                                        health impacts are
                                                 expected to be
                                                 controlled by continued
                                                 application of accepted
                                                 industrial hygiene
                                                 practices to minimize
                                                 worker exposures.
Chronic effects of                     N/A \4\  Uncertain impact.
 electromagnetic fields (EMFs)                   Studies of 60-Hz EMFs
 \5\.                                            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 is of small
                                                 significance if the
                                                 workers adhere to
                                                 safety standards and
                                                 use protective
                                                 equipment.
Electric shock hazards...........            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
                                                 each nuclear plant
                                                 transmission line
                                                 conformance with NESC
                                                 criteria, 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.................            2  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. However,
                                                 alternatives to
                                                 mitigate severe
                                                 accidents must be
                                                 considered for all
                                                 plants that have not
                                                 considered such
                                                 alternatives.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Environmental Justice
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minority and low-income                      2  SMALL or MODERATE.
 populations.                                    Impacts to minority and
                                                 low-income populations
                                                 and subsistence
                                                 consumption will be
                                                 addressed in plant-
                                                 specific reviews. See
                                                 NRC Policy Statement on
                                                 the Treatment of
                                                 Environmental Justice
                                                 Matters in NRC
                                                 Regulatory and
                                                 Licensing Actions (69
                                                 FR 52040).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Solid Waste Management
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-level waste storage and                  1  SMALL. The comprehensive
 disposal.                                       regulatory controls
                                                 that are in place and
                                                 the low public doses
                                                 being achieved at
                                                 reactors ensure that
                                                 the radiological
                                                 impacts to the
                                                 environment would
                                                 remain small during the
                                                 term of a renewed
                                                 license.
Onsite storage of spent nuclear              1  SMALL. The expected
 fuel.                                           increase in the volume
                                                 of spent fuel from an
                                                 additional 20 years of
                                                 operation can be safely
                                                 accommodated onsite
                                                 with small
                                                 environmental effects
                                                 through dry or pool
                                                 storage at all plants,
                                                 if a permanent
                                                 repository or monitored
                                                 retrievable storage is
                                                 not available.
Offsite radiological impacts of              1  For the high-level waste
 spent nuclear fuel and high-                    and spent-fuel disposal
 level waste disposal.                           component of the fuel
                                                 cycle, the EPA
                                                 established a dose
                                                 limit of 15 millirem
                                                 (0.15 mSv) per year for
                                                 the first 10,000 years
                                                 and 100 millirem (1.0
                                                 mSv) 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.

[[Page 38139]]

 
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             1  SMALL. No changes to
 disposal.                                       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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Cumulative Impacts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumulative impacts...............            2  Cumulative impacts of
                                                 license renewal must be
                                                 considered on a plant-
                                                 specific basis. Impacts
                                                 would depend on
                                                 regional resource
                                                 characteristics, the
                                                 resource-specific
                                                 impacts of license
                                                 renewal, and the
                                                 cumulative significance
                                                 of other factors
                                                 affecting the resource.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Uranium Fuel Cycle
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offsite radiological impacts--               1  SMALL. The impacts to
 individual impacts from other                   the public from
 than the disposal of spent fuel                 radiological exposures
 and high-level waste.                           have been considered by
                                                 the Commission in 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--               1  There are no regulatory
 collective impacts from other                   limits applicable to
 than the disposal of spent fuel                 collective doses to the
 and high-level waste.                           general public from
                                                 fuel-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               1  SMALL. The
 uranium fuel cycle.                             nonradiological impacts
                                                 of the uranium fuel
                                                 cycle resulting from
                                                 the renewal of an
                                                 operating license for
                                                 any plant would be
                                                 small.
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              1  SMALL. License renewal
 and decommissioning.                            is expected to have a
                                                 negligible effect on
                                                 the impacts of
                                                 terminating operations
                                                 and decommissioning on
                                                 all resources.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Data supporting this table are contained in NUREG-1437, Revision 1,
  ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of
  Nuclear Plants'' (XX 20XX).
\2\ 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 collective off site
  radiological impacts from the fuel cycle and from high level waste and
  spent fuel disposal); 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.
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.
For issues where probability is a key consideration (i.e., accident
  consequences), probability was a factor in determining significance.
\4\ NA (not applicable). The categorization and impact finding
  definitions do not apply to these issues.
\5\ 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.



[[Page 38140]]

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of July 2009.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. E9-18284 Filed 7-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>