Document: NRC Regulatory Guide
Document ID: f0baf50b-5bb7-4783-b2f9-9586e09c97e1
Document Type: regulatory_guide
Title: Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations + HISTORY - HISTORY 02/2017 – DG-4026 , Proposed Revision 3 09/2014 – Periodic Review of Revision 2 – Revise (Rev. 3)
Source: NRC Regulatory Guide Division 4
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1611/ML16116A068.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 
Section ID: RG-4.2
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
te License Applications (Subsequent applications not considered an expansion of the existing site) An applicant may request a license for a certain number of modules without the siting analysis and ER considering additional modules at that site as reasonably foreseeable. The ER (and the NRC’s EIS) will only consider the modules requested. If an applicant submits a subsequent application for additional modules, the ER will have to address all of the issues in this RG including alternative sites and alternative energy. C.5 Scenario 4: ESP and COL Application An applicant may request an ESP for all planned modules and then request COLs for only those modules it plans to build in the short term. In this scenario, the information that should be supplied in the ER for the ESP review should include consideration of all of the modules that are planned. If the proposed site is found acceptable by the NRC staff, the issue of alternative sites would be resolved for any future COLs referencing the ESP. The issues of alternative energy and need for power (if addressed in the ESP application and EIS) would also be resolved unless the NRC staff identified new and significant information on these issues in its review of the COL application referencing the ESP. Consideration of the various modules (i.e., those for which licenses are requested and those planned in the future) in the COLs would follow the same steps as described above for Scenario 2. DG-4026, Appendix C, Page C-3 C.6 Summary of Licensing Scenarios All of the scenarios described above are valid approaches. The outcome of Scenario 1 is that the NRC staff would have completed its environmental analysis for all modules, the licensing action would have been taken, and no further environmental analysis would be required. The outcome of Scenario 2 is that, if the applicant applies for licenses for future modules, the NRC would prepare a supplemental EIS that would tier off the EIS prepared for the initial modules in which