ML24215A265
| ML24215A265 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 08/28/2024 |
| From: | Michele Sampson NRC/NRR/DNRL/NLRP |
| To: | Carr E Dominion Innsbrook Technical Center |
| Shared Package | |
| ML24215A220 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML24215A265 (10) | |
Text
1 RECORD OF DECISION U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET NUMBERS: 50-338 AND 50-339 SUBSEQUENT LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR NORTH ANNA POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 BACKGROUND The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received an application dated August 24, 2020 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Package Accession No. ML20246G703), from Virginia Electric and Power Company (Dominion) filed pursuant to Section 103 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 USC 2011 et seq.) (AEA);
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 51, Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions; and 10 CFR Part 54, Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants, for subsequent renewal of the renewed operating licenses for North Anna Power Station (NAPS) Units 1 and 2.
NAPS, Units 1 and 2, are two Westinghouse pressurized-water reactors located on approximately 1,803 acres (ac) (730 hectares (ha)) of land in Louisa County, Virginia. Each reactor is designed to produce a nominal core power rating of 2,940 megawatts thermal (with power uprate). On September 21, 2020 (85 FR 59334), the NRC staff published in the Federal Register (FR) a notice of receipt and availability of the license renewal application, including the environmental report (ER).
The AEA specifies that licenses for commercial power reactors can be granted for an initial period of up to 40 years. The NRC regulations permit these licenses to be renewed beyond the initial 40-year term for an additional period, limited to 20-year increments per renewal, based on the results of an assessment to determine whether the nuclear facility can continue to operate safely during the proposed period of extended operation. There are no limitations in the AEA or NRC regulations restricting the number of times a license may be renewed.
The existing renewed NAPS Unit 1 facility operating license (NPF-4) and the NAPS Unit 2 facility operating license (NPF-7) expire on April 1, 2038, and August 21, 2040, respectively.
The subsequently renewed licenses would authorize Dominion to operate NAPS, Units 1 and 2, until April 1, 2058, and August 21, 2060, respectively.
Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), directs that an environmental impact statement (EIS) be prepared for any major Federal action that has the potential to significantly affect the quality of the human environment. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.20(b)(2), the NRC prepares an EIS for the issuance of a renewed reactor operating license, regardless of the actions environmental impact significance. The NRCs Federal action is to decide whether to issue subsequently renewed operating licenses for NAPS, Units 1 and 2, authorizing operation until April 1, 2058, and August 21, 2060, respectively, as proposed in the application.
On October 15, 2020, the NRC staff published a notice of opportunity to request a hearing (85 FR 65438), and on October 23, 2020, the staff published a notice of intent to prepare a
2 supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) and conduct scoping (85 FR 67572) as corrected on November 3, 2020 (85 FR 69665). In addition, Federal, State, and local agencies, as well as Tribal governments, were notified and asked to provide comments on and to participate in the environmental scoping process and review. On November 4, 2020, the NRC staff held a public webinar to obtain public input on the scope of the NRCs environmental review of the NAPS license renewal application. In June 2021, the NRC issued a Scoping Summary Report (ML21181A127, ML21181A186).
On August 25, 2021, the NRC staff issued a draft supplemental EIS (SEIS) for public comment, providing the preliminary results of the NRC staffs environmental evaluation of the NAPS license renewal application review (ML21228A084); 86 FR 47525). A public comment period began on August 27, 2021, when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a notice of availability (86 FR 48139) of the draft SEIS to allow members of the public and agencies an opportunity to comment on the results of the environmental review. On September 28, 2021, the NRC staff held a public webinar to present the preliminary results of the environmental review, respond to questions, and accept public comments. The comment period ended on October 12, 2021.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT In accordance with 10 CFR 51.95(c), the NRC staff documents its environmental review of each license renewal application and publishes it as a site-specific supplement to NUREG-1437, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants (License Renewal GEIS, or LR GEIS), as revised. Dominion submitted its subsequent license renewal application under the NRCs 2013 LR GEIS, Revision 1, as codified in 10 CFR Part 51.
The 2013 LR GEIS documented the results of the NRC staffs systematic approach to evaluating the environmental consequences of renewing the licenses of individual nuclear power plants and operating them for an additional 20 years beyond the end of the current license term. The LR GEIS1 provides the technical bases for the NEPA issues and associated environmental impact findings for license renewal contained in Table B-1, Summary of Findings on NEPA Issues for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants, in Appendix B, Environmental Effect of Renewing the Operating License of a Nuclear Power Plant, to Subpart A, National Environmental Policy ActRegulations Implementing Section 102(2), of 10 CFR Part 51. In the LR GEIS, the NRC staff analyzed in detail and resolved those environmental issues that are considered generic and common to all or a distinct subset of nuclear power plants (Category 1 issues). For Category 1 issues, an SEIS would not need to include additional site-specific analysis unless new and significant information is identified. The LR GEIS also identifies site-specific issues (Category 2 issues). For Category 2 issues, an additional site-specific review is required, and the results are documented in the EIS. The NRC staffs August 2021 SEIS for North Anna subsequent license renewal (SLR) followed this approach.
As stated above, on August 25, 2021, the NRC staff issued a draft SEIS for comment; the draft SEIS evaluated the environmental impacts for site-specific (Category 2) issues, and relied upon the determinations in the 2013 GEIS for generic (Category 1) issues. On February 24, 2022, the Commission issued three memoranda and orders that addressed the NRC staffs environmental reviews in SLR proceedings for five nuclear power plants: Commission Legal Issuance (CLI) 02, CLI-22-03, and CLI-22-04. In these decisions, the Commission concluded that the 2013 LR GEIS, on which the NRC staff had relied, in part, to meet its obligations under 10 CFR Part 51 1
NUREG-1437, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Revision 1, Volumes 1-3, issued June 2013 (ML13106A241, ML13106A242, and ML13106A244).
3 and NEPA for its environmental reviews for the affected nuclear power plant SLR applications, did not consider SLR. Therefore, the Commission determined that the staffs SLR environmental reviews, including the environmental review for the NAPS SLR application, were incomplete.
In CLI-22-03, the Commission directed the NRC staff to update the LR GEIS so that it considers nuclear power plant operation during the SLR period of extended operation (PEO). The Commission stated that it believed the most efficient way to proceed would be for the NRC staff to update the LR GEIS and then take appropriate action with respect to pending SLR applications to ensure that the environmental impacts of SLR are considered. Alternatively, the Commission provided an option for SLR applicants to submit a revised ER providing additional information about environmental impacts during the SLR PEO, in which they must evaluate, on a site-specific basis, the environmental impacts for Category 1 (generic) issues. For SLR applicants that provide such information, the NRC staff was directed to address the environmental impacts of these issues in site-specific EISs.
Consistent with CLI-22-03, on September 28, 2022, Dominion submitted ER Supplement 1 (ML22272A041), providing a site-specific analysis of the environmental impacts of the continued operation of NAPS during the SLR period. That analysis supplemented the ER that was included as part of Dominions SLR application and addressed, on a site-specific basis, each environmental issue that was previously dispositioned as a Category 1 issue in the ER.
On November 15, 2022, the NRC staff issued a notice of intent to prepare a site-specific environmental impact statement (EIS) and to conduct a related scoping process (87 FR 68522),
consistent with the Commissions orders.
On December 28, 2023, the NRC staff issued a draft site-specific EIS (ML23339A047; 87 FR 68522), which superseded the 2021 draft SEIS. In the draft site-specific EIS, the NRC staff evaluated each Category 1 (generic) issue on a site-specific basis, and re-issued its August 2021 draft SEIS findings on Category 2 (site-specific) issues, revised and updated to include any significant new information that had arisen following the issuance of the August 2021 draft SEIS. Also in December 2023, the NRC issued a Scoping Summary Report (ML23326A100),
also cited in Appendix A of the draft site-specific EIS (89 FR 960 and 89 FR 3653). The NRC staff held a public webinar on January 30, 2024, and on February 6, 2024, held an in-person public meeting near the NAPS in Louisa County, Virginia to present the preliminary results of the environmental review, respond to questions, and accept public comments. The comment period ended on February 22, 2024.
On July 22, 2024, the NRC staff issued the final site-specific EIS, providing its evaluation of the environmental impacts of NAPS subsequent license renewal; the notice of issuance was published in the Federal Register on July 31, 2024 (ML24204A104; 89 FR 61506). On July 26, 2024, the EPA published a notice of availability of the final site-specific EIS ((89 FR 60616).2 Appendix A to the final EIS discusses all comments received during both the 2021 and the 2023 draft EIS comment periods. After consideration of those comments and its independent review, the NRC staff concluded that the adverse environmental impacts of subsequent license renewal for NAPS are not so great that preserving the option of SLR for energy planning decision makers would be unreasonable. This recommendation is based on (1) information provided in 2The EPA notice of availability established a 30-day cooling off period (89 FR 60616) (ML24206A043),
which expires on August 26, 2024. No comments on the final site-specific EIS have been received to date from the EPA; such comments are due on or before August 26, 2024. If any such comments are received, they would be addressed by the NRC staff prior to issuing the North Anna subsequent renewed licenses.
4 the ER, as supplemented, and other documents submitted by Dominion, (2) the NRC staffs consultations with Federal, State, local, and Tribal agencies, (3) the NRC staffs independent environmental review, and (4) the NRC staffs consideration of public comments received during the scoping process, on the draft SEIS and on the draft EIS.
After issuance of the final site-specific EIS in July 2024, the NRC staff identified new information with the potential to affect the staffs environmental impact analyses presented in the final site-specific EIS. The staff presents its review and consideration of this new and emerging information, and its determination as to whether this information is new and significant, in the Record of Decision (ROD) section titled Consideration of Emerging Information. The NRC staff has determined that none of the information is both new and significant, and therefore, no supplement to the NAPS final EIS is required in accordance with 10 CFR 51.92(a).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.102(b) and 51.103(a)(1)-(5), the NRC staff has prepared this ROD to accompany its Federal action on the NAPS subsequent license renewal application. This ROD incorporates by reference materials contained in the final site-specific EIS, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.103(c).
The EIS evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Federal action. The NRC designates these environmental impacts as SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE.
SMALL: Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource.
MODERATE: Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, important attributes of the resource.
LARGE: Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.
The NRC staffs recommendation in the site-specific EIS is that the adverse environmental impacts of SLR for NAPS (i.e., the continued operation of NAPS for a period of 20 years beyond the expiration dates of the initial renewed licenses) are not so great that preserving the option of SLR for energy-planning decision-makers would be unreasonable.
DECISION Pursuant to 10 CFR 54.29, Standards for issuance of a renewed license, a renewed license may be issued if the Commission finds, in part, that the license renewal application satisfies the requirements of 10 CFR Part 54, and any applicable requirements of Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51 have been satisfied; pursuant to 10 CFR 51.102, this includes the completion of the ROD.
The final site-specific EIS, which is incorporated by reference herein, documents the staffs recommendation that the adverse environmental impacts of subsequent license renewal for NAPS are not so great that preserving the option of [license renewal] for energy-planning decisionmakers would be unreasonable, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.103(a)(5). In the 1996 final rule amending 10 CFR Part 51 (61 FR 28467), the Commission explained the following:
Given the uncertainties involved and the lack of control that the NRC has in the choice of energy alternatives in the future, the Commission believes that it is reasonable to exercise its NEPA authority to reject license renewal applications
5 only when it has determined that the impacts of license renewal sufficiently exceed the impacts of all or almost all of the alternatives that preserving the option of license renewal for future decision makers would be unreasonable.
In making its licensing decision on the proposed Federal action to authorize the continued operation of NAPS, Units 1 and 2, through April 1, 2058, and August 21, 2060, respectively, the NRC must make a favorable safety finding. The purpose of the NRCs safety review is to determine whether the applicant has adequately demonstrated that the effects of aging will not adversely affect the intended functions of any safety structures or components as specified in 10 CFR 54.4, Scope, and 10 CFR 54.21, Contents of applicationtechnical information. The applicant must demonstrate that the effects of aging will be adequately managed so that the intended functions will be maintained during the license renewal period. The staff documented the results of its safety review in Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Subsequent License Renewal of North Anna Power Station Units 1 and 2, dated January 4, 2022 (ML21354A174).
The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards provided its independent review and report (ML22046A065) to the Commission in accordance with 10 CFR 54.25, Report of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, regarding the application for subsequent renewal of the operating licenses for NAPS, Units 1 and 2.
A request for hearing and petition to intervene with one contention concerning the March 2011 Mineral, VA earthquake, was filed by three petitioners in response to the notice of opportunity for hearing that was published on October 15, 2020 (85 FR 65438). The petition was accompanied by a petition for waiver of certain rules in 10 C.F.R. Part 51 to allow the petitioners to challenge the NRCs generic determinations on Category 1 environmental issues. An Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board) was appointed, and an adjudicatory proceeding was commenced. On March 29, 2021, the Board denied the petitions and terminated the proceeding, in LBP-21-04, 93 NRC 179 (2021). The Petitioners filed a petition for Commission review of that decision, and later filed a motion to reopen the proceeding and to amend the contention that had been rejected. On February 24, 2022, the Commission issued CLI-22-03 (discussed above), in which, inter alia, it dismissed, without prejudice, the pending appeals and motions in five pending SLR proceedings (including the NAPS SLR proceeding).
Following the Commissions issuance of CLI-22-03, Dominion filed a site-specific supplement to its ER. The staff then issued a notice of its intent to conduct scoping and prepare a site-specific EIS, and later issued the draft site-specific EIS and a related notice of opportunity for hearing.
Two petitioners then fled a petition to intervene, with three proposed contentions. After conducting oral argument on the petition and considering the petitioners views, the Board denied the petition in LBP-24-07 (100 NRC ___ (July 10, 2024) (slip op.)). The petitioners then filed an appeal of that decision, which is pending before the Commission at this time.3 PURPOSE AND NEED The purpose and need for the proposed Federal action (issuance of subsequent renewed licenses for NAPS, Units 1 and 2) is to provide an option that allows for power-generation capability beyond the term of the current renewed nuclear power plant operating licenses to meet future system-generating needs. Such needs may be determined by energy-planning decision-makers such as State regulators, utility owners, and Federal agencies other than the 3 The NRC staffs notice of availability of the final site-specific EIS was published on July 31, 2024 (89 FR 61506). To date, the NRC staff is not aware of any petitions to intervene or new or amended contentions having been filed regarding the final site-specific EIS.
6 NRC. This definition of purpose and need reflects the Commissions recognition that, unless there are findings in the NRCs safety review (required by the AEA) or findings in the NRCs environmental analysis (required by NEPA) that would lead the NRC to reject a license renewal application, the agency does not have a role in energy-planning decisions as to whether a particular nuclear power plant should continue to operate. Ultimately, the appropriate energy-planning decision-makers and Dominion will decide whether NAPS will continue to operate based on factors such as the need for power or other matters within the States jurisdiction or the purview of the owners. The issuance of a renewed license is one of the requirements that Dominion must address to operate its nuclear power plant during the renewal term.
NRC EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES In license renewal environmental reviews, the NRC considers the environmental consequences of the proposed action (i.e., renewing the operating licenses, the environmental consequences of the no-action alternative (i.e., not renewing the operating licenses), and the environmental consequences of reasonable alternatives for replacing the nuclear power plants generating capacity. Section 102(2)(C)(iii) of NEPA and the NRCs regulations require the consideration of alternatives to the proposed action in the EIS. In this case, the proposed action will authorize the applicant to operate NAPS Units 1 and 2 for an additional period of 20 years beyond the expiration date of the current licenses, as requested in the application. Chapter 2 of the site-specific EIS, Environmental Consequences and Mitigating Actions, presents the NRC staffs evaluation and analysis of the environmental impacts of the proposed action and alternatives to license renewal. The evaluation considered the environmental impacts of each alternative across the following impact areas: land use and visual resources, air quality and noise, geologic environment, water resources, terrestrial resources, aquatic resources, special status species, historic and cultural resources, socioeconomics, human health, environmental justice, and waste management.
As explained in the purpose and need for the proposed Federal action, outside of the safety and environmental reviews, the NRC does not have a role in the energy planning decisions as to whether a particular nuclear power plant should continue to operate. Should the operating license not be renewed, and the nuclear plant shuts down at the end of its current license, the appropriate energy planning decisionmakers will decide how best to replace the nuclear power plants generating capacity. In evaluating alternatives to license renewal in the EIS, the NRC staff considered energy technologies or options in commercial operation, as well as technologies not currently in commercial operation but likely to be commercially available by the time the current North Anna Units 1 and 2 renewed operating licenses expire.
The NRC staff evaluated the environmental issues that are applicable to NAPS SLR. For some of these issues (site-specific or Category 2 issues), the NRC staff performed site-specific analyses and reached conclusions specific to NAPS. For the remaining environmental issues (generic or Category 1 issues), the NRC staff initially relied upon the analyses and conclusions of SMALL impacts in NUREG-1437, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Revision 1, Final Report (LR GEIS) (NRC 2013a), and considered any new and significant information that might change those conclusions. The staff concluded preliminarily that the impacts of these issues would be SMALL for NAPS SLR. However, as explained in Chapter 1 of the site-specific EIS, the Commission later determined that the LR GEIS did not consider SLR and, therefore, the NRC staffs environmental review for NAPS SLR was incomplete in its evaluation of the Category 1 issues. The site-specific EIS addresses the
7 Commissions determination by providing the NRC staffs analysis of the environmental issues that were previously addressed as generic Category 1 issues.
For a replacement power alternative to be considered reasonable, it must be both (1) commercially viable on a utility scale and (2) operational before the reactors operating license expires or (3) expected to become commercially viable on a utility scale and operational before the expiration of the reactors operating license. The current renewed operating licenses for NAPS Units 1 and 2 expire on April 1, 2038, and August 21, 2040, respectively. Therefore, to be considered in this evaluation, reasonable alternatives had to be available (i.e., constructed, permitted, and connected to the grid) by those dates. To determine whether alternatives were reasonable, or likely to be commercially suitable to replace NAPS, the NRC staff reviewed energy-relevant statutes, regulations, and policies; the state of technologies; and information on energy outlook from sources such as the Energy Information Administration, other organizations within the U.S. Department of Energy, industry sources and publications, and information submitted by Dominion in its environmental report.
Table 1 provides summary (comparison) of Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives. As summarized in Table 1, each of the two reasonable replacement power alternatives have environmental impacts in at least four resource areas that are greater than the environmental impacts of the proposed action of subsequent license renewal. Based on the NRC staffs review, the staff concludes that the environmentally preferred alternative is the proposed action of subsequent license renewal.
Table 1:
Summary of Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives Impact Area (Resource)
North Anna Subsequent License Renewal (Proposed Action)
No Action Alternative New Nuclear Alternative (Small Modular Reactor)
Combination Alternative (Solar, Offshore Wind, Small Modular Reactor, and Demand-Side Management)
Land Use SMALL SMALL SMALL to MODERATE SMALL to LARGE Visual Resources SMALL SMALL SMALL to MODERATE SMALL to LARGE Air Quality SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL Noise SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL to MODERATE Geologic Environment SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL to MODERATE Surface Water Resources SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL to MODERATE
8 Groundwater Resources SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL Terrestrial Resources SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL to LARGE Aquatic Resources SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL to LARGE Special Status Species and Habitats SEE NOTE(a)
SEE NOTE (b)
SEE NOTE (c)
SEE NOTE (c)
Historic and Cultural Resources SEE NOTE (d)
SEE NOTE (e)
SEE NOTE (f)
SEE NOTE (f)
Socioeconomics SMALL SMALL to MODERATE MODERATE to LARGE MODERATE to LARGE Transportation SMALL SMALL MODERATE to LARGE MODERATE to LARGE Human Health SMALL(g)
SMALL(g)
SMALL(g)
SMALL(g)
Environmental Justice SEE NOTE (h)
SEE NOTE (h)
SEE NOTE (h)
SEE NOTE (h)
Waste Management and Pollution Prevention SMALL(i)
SMALL(i)
SMALL SMALL (a) May affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, northern long-eared bat, tricolored bat, and monarch butterfly. No effect on essential fish habitat. No effect on sanctuary resources of National Marine Sanctuaries.
(b) Overall, the effects on federally listed species, critical habitat, and essential fish habitat (EFH) would likely be smaller under the no-action alternative than the effects under continued operation but would depend on the specific shutdown activities as well as the listed species, critical habitats, and designated EFH present when the no-action alternative is implemented.
(c) The types and magnitudes of adverse impacts to species listed in the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; TN1010), designated critical habitat, and EFH would depend on the proposed alternative site, nuclear power plant design and operation, as well as listed species and habitats present when the alternative is implemented. Therefore, the NRC staff cannot forecast a level of impact for this alternative.
(d) Based on the location of historic properties within and near the area of potential effect, Tribal input, Dominions administrative procedures, a site-specific cultural resource management plan, and no planned physical changes or ground-disturbing activities, the proposed action (SLR) would not adversely affect historic properties.
(e) Until the post-shutdown decommissioning activities report is submitted, the NRC staff cannot determine whether historic properties would be affected outside the existing industrial site boundary after the nuclear power plant is shut down.
(f) The impact determination of this alternative would depend on the specific location of the new facility. The Virginia Department of Historic Resources would need to be consulted prior to any ground-disturbing activities in undisturbed land areas at North Anna.
9 MITIGATION MEASURES The NRC has taken all practicable measures within its jurisdiction to avoid or minimize environmental harm from the alternative selected. Continued operation of NAPS would have SMALL environmental impacts in all resource areas. The NRC is not imposing any license conditions in connection with mitigation measures. However, NAPS is subject to requirements, including permits, authorizations, and regulatory orders, imposed by other Federal, State, and local agencies governing facility operation. For example, the Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (VPDES) permit issued to Dominion imposes requirements to ensure that impacts to water quality and aquatic life are minimized. The Commission is not requiring any new environmental monitoring programs outside those required for the VPDES permits or otherwise mandated under NRC regulations, as discussed in the final EIS.
Regarding Severe Accident Mitigation Alternatives (SAMAs) to address mitigation measures, as stated in the EIS, there is no new and significant information regarding any potentially cost-beneficial SAMA that would substantially reduce the risks of a severe accident at North Anna during the SLR term.
CONSIDERATION OF EMERGING INFORMATION NRCs Update to the Commissions 2013 Findings on the Environmental Effects of Renewing the Operating License of a Nuclear Power Plant On August 6, 2024, the NRC amended its environmental protection regulations by updating the Commissions 2013 findings on the environmental effects of renewing the operating license of a nuclear power plant. This final rule redefines the number and scope of the environmental issues that must be addressed during the review of each application for license renewal, and specifically considers the environmental effects of subsequent license renewal. As part of this update, the NRC issued Revision 2 to NUREG-1437, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (LR GEIS), to account for new information and to address the impacts of initial license renewal as well as one 20-year period of subsequent license renewal. The LR GEIS, Revision 2, provides the technical basis for the final rule. The final rule will become effective 30 days following publication in the Federal Register (i.e.,
September 5, 2024). Compliance by license renewal (LR) and SLR applicants is not required until 1 year from the date of publication (i.e., August 6, 2025).
As discussed previously in 2022, Dominion submitted its ER Supplement 1, providing a site-specific analysis of the environmental impacts of the continued operation of NAPS during the SLR period. That analysis supplemented the ER that was included as part of Dominions SLR (g) The chronic effects of electromagnetic fields on human health associated with operating nuclear power and other electricity generating plants are uncertain.
(h) With the exception of the no-action alternative, there would be no disproportionate and adverse impacts to minority and low-income populations. For the no-action alternative, the loss of jobs and income could have an immediate socioeconomic impact. This could disproportionately affect minority and low-income populations that may have become dependent on these services.
(i) NUREG-2157, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel (NRC 2014-TN4117), discusses the environmental impacts of spent fuel storage for the time frame beyond the licensed life for reactor operations.
10 application, and addressed, on a site-specific basis, each environmental issue that was previously dispositioned as a Category 1 issue in the initial ER. The NRC staff reviewed this information and prepared a site-specific EIS. Further, the final site-specific EIS included Appendix G, Environmental Issues and Impact Findings Contained in the Proposed Rule, (10 CFR Part 51, Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions). Appendix G provides the NRC staffs consideration of the (then) proposed Part 51 rulemaking effort to ensure that the proposed rule was given appropriate consideration in the final site-specific EIS. As stated in Appendix G, all of the issues in the proposed rule and the 2023 draft LR GEIS have been addressed in the final site-specific EIS.
The NRC may issue the subsequent renewed licenses for NAPS Units 1 and 2 before the final rule goes into effect, but the staff has verified that the final site-specific EIS is consistent with the findings in the revised LR GEIS and the final rule.
DETERMINATION Based on the NRC staffs (1) independent review, analysis, and evaluation contained in the final site-specific EIS, (2) careful consideration of all of the identified social, economic, and environmental factors, (3) input received from other agencies, organizations, and the public, and (4) consideration of mitigation measures, the NRC has determined that the standards for the issuance of a subsequently renewed operating license, with respect to the environmental matters as described in 10 CFR 54.29(b), have been met and that the requirements of Section 102 of NEPA, as prescribed in 10 CFR 51.103, Record of decisiongeneral, have been satisfied. The NRC has determined that the adverse environmental impacts of issuing subsequent renewed operating licenses for NAPS, Units 1 and 2 are not great enough that preserving the option of subsequent license renewal for energy-planning decision-makers would be unreasonable.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of August 2024, APPROVED BY:
/RA/
Michele Sampson, Director Division of New and Renewed Licenses Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation OFFICIAL RECORD COPY