Opinion ID: 3209079
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The GEIS Assesses the Cumulative

Text: Impacts of the Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel The NRDC argues that the GEIS fails to discuss the cumulative impacts of continued storage of spent nuclear fuel “when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions . . . .” 40 C.F.R. § 1508.7. We disagree. While it is true that NEPA requires an agency to consider “cumulative or synergistic environmental impact[s]” of related, concurrently pending proposals, Kleppe v. Sierra Club, 427 U.S. 390, 410 (1976), “the purpose of the cumulative impact requirement is to prevent agencies from dividing one project into multiple individual actions each of which has an insignificant environmental impact, but which collectively have a substantial impact,” Theodore Roosevelt I, 616 F.3d at 514 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). In this case, there are no concurrently pending proposals before the NRC because the NRC is not licensing any reactors. Instead, the NRC has codified the GEIS for use in future licensing proceedings. The GEIS also includes a detailed discussion of the cumulative impacts of continued storage of spent fuel over the lifetime of a licensed reactor. See J.A. 628-93. Pursuant to its “tiered” approach to assessing environmental impacts, see 40 C.F.R. § 1502.20, the NRC also considers the environmental impacts of waste disposal through 10 C.F.R. § 51.51, Table S-3, prior to any licensing action. See also J.A. 351, 1297. Because there is no 17 indication that the NRC has improperly segmented its environmental impact analysis, we deny the petitions on this issue.