2024-22385. Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors

Document	ADAMS accession No./ Federal Register citation
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
Draft NUREG-2249, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors,” dated September 2024	ML24176A220.
Draft Guidance Documents
Draft Regulatory Guide DG-4032, “Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations,” dated September 2024	ML24176A228.
Draft Regulatory Guide DG-4032, “Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations,” Redline/Strikeout Version to Support Public Comment, dated September 2024	ML24176A229.
Energy and System Design Mitigation Alternatives White Paper Report, dated September 2024	ML21225A754.
Recommendations for an Applicant to Calculate Activity Data for Greenhouse Gases Estimates White Paper, dated September 2024	ML21225A768.
Draft Interim Staff Guidance, COL-ISG-030, “Environmental Considerations for New Nuclear Reactor Applications that Reference the Generic Environmental Impact Statement (NUREG-2249),” dated September 2024	ML24176A231.
Proposed Rule Documents
Draft Regulatory Analysis for the 10 CFR Part 51, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors Proposed Rule, dated September 2024	ML24176A218.
Draft Information Collection Clearance Package	ML21222A060.
Public Meetings
Summary of November 15 and 20, 2019, Public Meetings to Discuss Exploratory Process for Developing an Advanced Nuclear Reactor Generic Environmental Impact Statement, dated December 10, 2019	ML19337C862.
Workshop to Discuss the Environmental Information Needed to Develop a Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Advanced Nuclear Reactors, dated December 13, 2019	ML19347A733.
Summary of May 28, 2020, Advanced Reactor Generic Environmental Scoping Meeting, dated June 2, 2020	ML20161A339 (package).
Summary of October 1, 2020, Advanced Reactor Stakeholder Public Meeting, dated December 22, 2020	ML20350B457.
Summary of April 15, 2021, Advanced Reactor Stakeholder Public Meeting, dated August 24, 2021	ML21232A429.
Related Documents
Advanced Nuclear Reactor Generic Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Process—Summary Report, dated September 16, 2020	ML20260H180 (package).
Notice of Availability of Memorandum of Understanding Between U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Environmental Reviews Related to the Issuance of Authorizations to Construct and Operate Nuclear Power Plants, dated September 25, 2008	73 FR 55546.
NUREG-0586, “Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities,” Supplement 1, Vol. 1, “Regarding the Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors,” dated November 30, 2002	ML023470327 (package).
NUREG-1437, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,” Revision 2, dated August 2024	ML24087A133 (package).
NUREG-2157, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel,” dated September 30, 2014	ML14198A440 (package).
Agency Action Regarding the Exploratory Process for the Development of an Advanced Nuclear Reactor Generic Environmental Impact Statement, dated November 15, 2019	84 FR 62559.
Notice to Conduct Scoping and Prepare an Advanced Nuclear Reactor Generic Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 30, 2020	85 FR 24040.
SECY-20-0020, “Results of Exploratory Process for Developing a Generic Environmental Impact Statement for the Construction and Operation of Advanced Nuclear Reactors,” dated February 28, 2020	ML20052D175.
SRM-SECY-20-0020, “Results of Exploratory Process for Developing a Generic Environmental Impact Statement for the Construction and Operation of Advanced Nuclear Reactors,” dated September 21, 2020	ML20265A112.
SECY-21-0098, “Proposed Rule: Advanced Nuclear Reactor Generic Environmental Impact Statement (RIN 3150-AK55; NRC-2020-0101),” dated November 29, 2021	ML21222A044.
Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM)-SECY-21-0098, “Proposed Rule: Advanced Nuclear Reactor Generic Environmental Impact Statement (RIN 3150-AK55; NRC-2020-0101),” dated April 17, 2024	ML24108A199.

The NRC may post documents related to this rule, including public comments, on the Federal rulemaking website at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2020-0101. In addition, the Federal rulemaking website allows ( print page 80813) members of the public to receive alerts when changes or additions occur in a docket folder. To subscribe: (1) navigate to the docket folder (NRC-2020-0101); (2) click the “Subscribe” link; and (3) enter an email address and click on the “Subscribe” link.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 51

• Administrative practice and procedure
• Environmental impact statements
• Hazardous waste
• Nuclear energy
• Nuclear materials
• Nuclear power plants and reactors
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, the NRC is proposing to amend 10 CFR part 51:

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

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

Authority: Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 161, 193 (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2243); Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 202 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842); National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332, 4334, 4335); Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, secs. 144(f), 121, 135, 141, 148 (42 U.S.C. 10134(f), 10141, 10155, 10161, 10168); 44 U.S.C. 3504 note. Sections 51.20, 51.30, 51.60, 51.80. and 51.97 also issued under Nuclear Waste Policy Act secs. 135, 141, 148 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161, 10168). Section 51.22 also issued under Atomic Energy Act sec. 274 (42 U.S.C. 2021) and under Nuclear Waste Policy Act sec. 121 (42 U.S.C. 10141). Sections 51.43, 51.67, and 51.109 also issued under Nuclear Waste Policy Act sec. 114(f) (42 U.S.C. 10134(f)).

2. In § 51.50, amend paragraph (a) by adding a new second sentence, and add paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 51.50

Environmental report—construction permit, early site permit, or combined license stage.

(a) * * * For non-light-water reactors as defined in § 50.2, the environmental report shall contain the basis for evaluating the contribution of the environmental effects of fuel cycle activities for the nuclear reactor. * * *

* * * * *

(d) Application for a construction permit, early site permit, or combined license for a nuclear reactor. If an application is for a construction permit, an early site permit, or a combined license that does not reference an early site permit for a nuclear reactor, as defined in 10 CFR 50.2, and further, if the applicant chooses to rely upon the findings of one or more of the issues identified as Category 1 issues in appendix C to subpart A of this part, then, in addition to the information and analyses required in paragraph (a), (b), or (c) of this section, as appropriate, the applicant's environmental report will be subject to the following conditions and considerations:

(1) The environmental report must contain information to demonstrate that the values and assumptions in appendix C to subpart A of this part are met, and no new and significant information is identified in accordance with paragraph (d)(5) of this section, for each Category 1 issue for which the applicant relies on the finding for that issue.

(2) The environmental report is not required to contain analyses of the environmental impacts of any issue identified as a Category 1 issue in appendix C to subpart A of this part, provided that the environmental report contains the information specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

(3) The environmental report must contain analyses of the environmental impacts of the proposed action, including the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the proposed nuclear reactor, for:

(i) Any Category 1 issue for which the values and assumptions are not met or for which new and significant information is identified in accordance with paragraph (d)(5) of this section; and

(ii) Each issue identified as a Category 2 issue in appendix C to subpart A of this part.

(4) The environmental report must contain a consideration of alternatives for reducing adverse environmental impacts, as required by § 51.45(c), for all issues identified as Category 1 issues in appendix C to subpart A of this part for which the environmental report does not contain the information specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section, and for all issues identified as Category 2 issues in appendix C to subpart A of this part. No such consideration is required for Category 1 issues in appendix C to subpart A of this part that meet the applicable values and assumptions as specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

(5) The environmental report must contain any new and significant information of which the applicant is aware regarding the environmental impacts for all issues identified as Category 1 issues in appendix C to subpart A of this part for which the applicant relies on the findings for those issues.

(6) The environmental report must contain a description of the process used to identify new and significant information regarding the issues identified as Category 1 issues in appendix C to subpart A of this part for which the applicant relies on the findings for those issues.

§ 51.53

[Amended]

3. In § 51.53, amend paragraph (d) by removing the reference “§ 50.82 of this chapter” and adding in its place the references “§§ 50.82 and 52.110 of this chapter”.

4. In § 51.75, add paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 51.75

Draft environmental impact statement—construction permit, early site permit, or combined license.

* * * * *

(d) Construction permit, early site permit, or combined license for a nuclear reactor. If a draft environmental impact statement is being prepared in accordance with paragraph (a), (b), or (c) of this section, and if applicant's environmental report relied upon the findings of one or more of the issues identified as Category 1 issues in appendix C to subpart A of this part, the draft environmental impact statement must be prepared as a supplement to NUREG-2249, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors” (September 2024), which is available in the NRC's Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. In addition, the NRC staff must comply with 40 CFR 1506.6(b)(3) in conducting the additional scoping process as required by § 51.71(a). The draft supplemental environmental impact statement will incorporate the conclusions in NUREG-2249 for issues identified as Category 1 for which the applicant has demonstrated that the applicable values and assumptions have been met and for which neither the applicant nor the NRC identified any new and significant information. The draft supplemental environmental impact statement must contain an analysis for those issues identified as Category 1 for which the applicant could not demonstrate that the applicable values and assumptions were met or for which any new and significant information was identified by the applicant or the NRC, and for those issues identified as Category 2.

5. Add § 51.96 to read as follows:

§ 51.96

Final supplemental environmental impact statement relying on a generic environmental impact statement for licensing new nuclear reactors.

(a) In connection with a construction permit, an early site permit, or a ( print page 80814) combined license that does not reference an early site permit for a nuclear reactor, as defined in 10 CFR 50.2, and for which the NRC staff relied on any of the findings in appendix C to subpart A of this part in preparing a draft supplemental environmental impact statement in accordance with § 51.75(d), the NRC shall prepare a final supplemental environmental impact statement, which is a supplement to the Commission's NUREG-2249, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors” (September 2024), and available in the NRC's Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

(b) The final supplemental environmental impact statement required by paragraph (a) of this section must contain the NRC staff's recommendation regarding the environmental acceptability of approving the construction permit, the early site permit, or the combined license. In order to make recommendations and reach a final decision on the proposed action, the NRC staff, adjudicatory officers, and Commission shall integrate:

(1) The conclusions in NUREG-2249 for issues designated as Category 1 for which the applicant has demonstrated that the applicable values and assumptions have been met and for which neither the applicant nor the NRC staff identified any new and significant information with

(2) Information developed for those Category 1 issues for which the applicant could not demonstrate that the applicable values and assumptions were met and those Category 2 issues applicable to the plant under § 51.50(d) and any new and significant information.

(c) The final supplemental environmental impact statement required by paragraph (a) of this section shall address those issues as required by § 51.91 and shall be distributed in accordance with § 51.93.

(d) In connection with a combined license that references an early site permit for which the NRC staff relied on any of the findings in appendix C to subpart A of this part in preparing the supplemental environmental impact statement for that early site permit, the NRC shall prepare a supplement to that final supplemental environmental impact statement. The supplement must meet the requirements of § 51.92(e) and shall be considered a supplement to NUREG-2249.

(e) In connection with a combined license that references an early site permit for which the NRC staff relied on any of the findings in appendix C to subpart A of this part in preparing the draft supplemental environmental impact statement, the NRC staff shall prepare a supplement to the early site permit environmental impact statement. The supplement must be prepared in accordance with § 51.92(e) and shall be considered a supplement to NUREG-2249.

(f) In connection with the issuance of an operating license for which the NRC staff relied on any of the findings in appendix C to subpart A of this part in preparing the supplemental environmental impact statement for the construction permit for that nuclear reactor, the NRC shall prepare a supplement to the final supplemental environmental impact statement. The supplement must meet the requirements of § 51.95(b) and shall be considered a supplement to NUREG-2249.

6. Add appendix C to subpart A of part 51 to read as follows:

Appendix C to Subpart A of Part 51—Environmental Effect of Issuing a Permit or License for a New Nuclear Reactor

The Commission has assessed the environmental impacts associated with authorizing the construction, operation, and decommissioning of a nuclear reactor. Table C-1 summarizes the Commission's generic findings on the scope and magnitude of environmental impacts of such an authorization as required by section 102(2) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended. Table C-1 presents the results of the generic analysis of those environmental impacts associated with building,^[1] operating, and decommissioning a nuclear reactor that the staff has designated as Category 1, as well as listing the issues that could not be resolved generically, designated as Category 2. The use of this table by applicants will be in accordance with § 51.50(d), and the use by the staff will be in accordance with §§ 51.75(d) and 51.96. On a 10-year cycle, the Commission intends to review the material in this appendix and update it if necessary. A scoping notice must be published in the Federal Register indicating the results of the NRC's review and inviting public comments and proposals for other areas that should be updated.

Table C-1—Summary of Findings on Environmental Issues for Issuing a Permit or License for a New Nuclear Reactor ¹

Issue	Category 2	Finding 3	Plant parameter envelope/site parameter envelope values and assumptions 4
Land Use
Construction:
Onsite Land Use	1	SMALL	The proposed project, including any associated land uses, complies with applicable NRC siting regulations such as 10 CFR part 100. The site size is 100 ac (40.5 ha) or less. The permanent footprint of disturbance includes 30 ac (12 ha) or less of vegetated lands, and the temporary footprint of disturbance includes no more than an additional 20 ac (8.1 ha) or less of vegetated lands. The proposed project complies with the site's zoning and is consistent with any relevant land use plans or comprehensive plans. The site would not be situated closer than 0.5 mi (0.8 km) to existing residential areas or 1.0 mi (1.6 km) to sensitive land uses such as Federal, State, or local parks; wildlife refuges; conservation lands; Wild and Scenic Rivers; or Natural Heritage Rivers. The site does not have a history of past industrial use capable of leaving a legacy of contamination requiring cleanup to protect human health and the environment. The total wetland loss from use of the site, including use of any offsite rights-of-way (ROWs), would be no more than 0.5 ac (0.2 ha). Best management practices (BMPs) for erosion, sediment control, and stormwater management would be used. Compliance with any mitigation measures established through zoning ordinances, local building permits, site use permits, or other land use authorizations.
( print page 80815)
Offsite Land Use	1	SMALL	New offsite ROWs for transmission lines, pipelines, or access roads would be no more than 100 ft (30.5 m) in width and total no more than 1 mi (1.6 km) in length. No new offsite ROW would be situated closer than 0.5 mi (0.8 km) to existing residential areas or sensitive land uses such as Federal, State, or local parks; wildlife refuges; conservation lands; Wild and Scenic Rivers; or Natural Heritage Rivers. No existing ROWs in residential areas would be used or widened to accommodate project features. No ROW has a history of past industrial use capable of leaving a legacy of contamination requiring cleanup to protect human health and the environment. The total wetland loss from use of the entire project, including use of the site and any offsite ROWs, would be no more than 0.5 ac (0.2 ha). BMPs for erosion, sediment control, and stormwater management would be used. Compliance with any mitigation measures established through zoning ordinances, local building permits, site use permits, or other land use authorizations.
Impacts to Prime and Unique Farmland	1	SMALL	The site size is 100 ac (40.5 ha) or less. The site does not contain any prime or unique farmland or other farmland of statewide or local importance; or the site does not abut any agricultural land and is not situated in a predominantly agricultural landscape.
Coastal Zone and Compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.)	1	SMALL	The site is not situated in any designated coastal zone, or the applicant can demonstrate that the affected state(s) have or will issue a consistency determination or other indication that the project complies with the Coastal Zone Management Act.
Operation:
Onsite Land Use	1	SMALL	The proposed project, including any associated land uses, complies with applicable NRC siting regulations such as 10 CFR part 100. The site size is 100 ac (40.5 ha) or less. If needed, cooling towers would be mechanical draft, not natural draft; less than 100 ft (30.5 m) in height; and equipped with drift eliminators. Any makeup water for the cooling towers would be fresh water (less than 1 ppt salinity). BMPs for erosion, sediment control, and stormwater management would be used.
Offsite Land Use	1	SMALL	New offsite ROWs for transmission lines, pipelines, or access roads would be no more than 100 ft (30.5 m) in width and total no more than 1 mi (1.6 km) in length. BMPs for erosion, sediment control, and stormwater management would be used (wherever land is disturbed during the course of ROW management).
Visual Resources
Construction:
Visual Impacts in Site and Vicinity	1	SMALL	The site size is 100 ac (40.5 ha) or less. The site would not be situated closer than 0.5 mi (0.8 km) to existing residential areas or 1 mi (1.6 km) to sensitive land uses such as Federal, State, or local parks; wildlife refuges; conservation lands; Wild and Scenic Rivers; or Natural Heritage Rivers. The maximum proposed building and structure height is no more than 50 ft (15.2 m), except that the maximum height is 200 ft (61 m) for proposed meteorological towers and 100 ft (30.5 m) for transmission line poles/towers and mechanical draft cooling towers. The proposed project structures would not be visible from Federal or State parks or wilderness areas designated as Class 1 under Section 162 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7472); or as a Wild and Scenic River, a Natural Heritage River, or a river of similar State designation.
Visual Impacts from Transmission Lines	1	SMALL	New offsite ROWs for transmission lines, pipelines, or access roads would be no more than 100 ft (30.5 m) in width and total no more than 1 mi (1.6 km) in length. No transmission line structures (poles or towers) would be over 100 ft (30.5 m) in height. The new offsite ROWs would not be situated closer than 1 mi (1.6 km) to existing residential areas or sensitive land uses such as Federal, State, or local parks; wildlife refuges; conservation lands; Wild and Scenic Rivers; or Natural Heritage Rivers. Any proposed new structures on offsite ROWs would not be visible from Federal or State parks or wilderness areas designated as Class 1 under Section 162 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7472); or as a Wild and Scenic River, a Natural Heritage River, or a river of similar State designation.
Operation:
Visual Impacts During Operations	1	SMALL	The site would not be situated closer than 1 mi (1.6 km) to existing residential areas or sensitive land uses such as Federal, State, or local parks; wildlife refuges; conservation lands; Wild and Scenic Rivers; or Natural Heritage Rivers. The maximum proposed building and structure height would be no more than 50 ft (15.2 m), except that the maximum height would be 200 ft (61 m) for proposed meteorological towers and 100 ft (30.5 m) for proposed transmission line poles/towers and proposed mechanical draft cooling towers. The proposed project structures would not be visible from Federal or State parks or wilderness areas designated as Class 1 under Section 162 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7472); or as a Wild and Scenic River, a Natural Heritage River, or a river of similar State designation. If needed, cooling towers would be mechanical draft, not natural draft; less than 100 ft (30.5 m) in height; and equipped with drift eliminators. Any makeup water for the cooling towers would be fresh water (less than 1 ppt salinity).
Meteorology and Air Quality
Construction:
( print page 80816)
Emissions of Criteria Pollutants and Dust During Construction	1	SMALL	The site size is 100 ac (40.5 ha) or less. The permanent footprint of disturbance is 30 ac (12 ha) or less of vegetated lands and the temporary footprint of disturbance is an additional 20 ac (8.1 ha) or less of vegetated land. New offsite ROWs for transmission lines, pipelines, or access roads would be no longer than 1 mi (1.6 km) and have a maximum ROW width of 100 ft (30.5 m). Criteria pollutants emitted from vehicles and standby power equipment during construction are less than Clean Air Act de minimis levels set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) if the site is located in a nonattainment or maintenance area, or the site is located in an attainment area. The site is not located within 1 mi (1.6 km) of a mandatory Class I Federal area where visibility is an important value. The level of service (LOS) determination for affected roadways does not change. Mitigation necessary to rely on the generic analysis includes implementation of BMPs for dust control. Compliance with air permits under State and Federal laws that address the impact of air emissions during construction.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions During Construction	1	SMALL	Greenhouse gases emitted by equipment and vehicles during the 97-year greenhouse gas life-cycle period would be equal to or less than 2,534,000 metric tons (MT) of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 (e)). Appendix H of NUREG-2249, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors” contains the staff's methodology for developing this value, which includes emissions from construction, operation, and decommissioning. As long as this total value is met, the impacts for the life-cycle of the project and the individual phases of the project are determined to be SMALL.
Operation:
Emissions of Criteria and Hazardous Air Pollutants during Operation	1	SMALL	Criteria pollutants emitted from vehicles and standby power equipment during operations are less than Clean Air Act de minimis levels set by the EPA if located in a nonattainment or maintenance area. The site is not located within 1 mi (1.6 km) of a mandatory Class I Federal area where visibility is an important value. The LOS determination for affected roadways does not change. The generic analysis can be relied on without applying any mitigation measures. Compliance with air permits under State and Federal laws that address the impact of air emissions. Hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions will be within regulatory limits.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions During Operation	1	SMALL	Greenhouse gases emitted by equipment and vehicles during the 97-year greenhouse gas life-cycle period would be equal to or less than 2,534,000 MT of CO 2 (e). Appendix H of NUREG-2249, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors” contains the staff's methodology for developing this value, which includes emissions from construction, operation, and decommissioning. As long as this total value is met, the impacts for the life-cycle of the project and the individual phases of the project are determined to be SMALL.
Cooling-System Emissions	1	SMALL	If needed, cooling towers would be mechanical draft, not natural draft. Cooling towers would be equipped with drift eliminators. The site is not located within 1 mi (1.6 km) of a mandatory Class I Federal area where visibility is an important value. Mechanical draft cooling towers would be less than 100 ft (30.5 m) tall. Makeup water would be fresh (with a salinity less than 1 ppt). Operation of cooling towers is assumed to be subject to State permitting requirements. HAP emissions would be within regulatory limits. No existing residential areas within 0.5 mi (0.8 km) of the site.
Emissions of Ozone and Nitrogen Oxides during Transmission Line Operation	1	SMALL	The transmission line voltage would be no higher than 1,200 kV.
Water Resources
Construction:
Surface Water Use Conflicts during Construction	1	SMALL	Total Plant Water Demand Less than or equal to a daily average of 6,000 gpm (0.379 m3 /s). If water is obtained from a flowing water body, then the following plant parameter envelope/site parameter envelope (PPE/SPE) parameter and associated assumptions also apply: Average plant water withdrawals do not reduce discharge from the flowing water body by more than 3 percent of the 95 percent exceedance daily flow and do not prevent the maintenance of applicable instream flow requirements. The 95 percent exceedance flow accounts for existing and planned future withdrawals. Water availability is demonstrated by the ability to obtain a withdrawal permit issued by State, regional, or Tribal governing authorities. Water rights for the withdrawal amount are obtainable, if needed. If water is obtained from a non-flowing water body, then the following PPE/SPE parameter and associated value and assumptions also apply: Water availability of the Great Lakes, the Gulf of Mexico, oceans, estuaries, and intertidal zones exceeds the amount of water required by the plant. Water availability is demonstrated by the ability to obtain a withdrawal permit issued by State, regional, or Tribal governing authorities. Water rights for the withdrawal amount are obtainable, if needed. The Coastal Zone Management Act consistency determination is obtainable, if applicable, for the non-flowing water body.
Groundwater Use Conflicts due to Excavation Dewatering	1	SMALL	The long-term dewatering withdrawal rate is less than or equal to 50 gpm (0.003 m3 /s) (the initial rate may be larger). Dewatering results in negligible groundwater level drawdown at the site boundary.
Groundwater Use Conflicts due to Construction-Related Groundwater Withdrawals	1	SMALL	Groundwater withdrawal for all plant uses (excluding dewatering) is less than or equal to 50 gpm (0.003 m3 /s). Withdrawal results in no more than 1 ft (0.3 m) of groundwater level drawdown at the site boundary. Withdrawals are not derived from an EPA-designated Sole Source Aquifer (SSA), or from any aquifer designated by a State, Tribe, or regional authority to have special protections to limit drawdown. Withdrawals meet any applicable State or local permit requirements.
( print page 80817)
Water Quality Degradation due to Construction-Related Discharges	1	SMALL	The permanent footprint of disturbance includes 30 ac (12 ha) or less of vegetated lands, and the temporary footprint of disturbance includes no more than an additional 20 ac (8.1 ha) or less of vegetated lands. Adherence to requirements in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits issued by the EPA or State permitting program, and any other applicable permits. The long-term groundwater dewatering withdrawal rate is less than or equal to 50 gpm (0.003 m3 /s). Dewatering discharge has minimal effects on the quality of the receiving water body ( e.g., as demonstrated by conformance with NPDES permit requirements). There are no planned discharges to the subsurface (by infiltration or injection), including stormwater discharge.
Water Quality Degradation due to Inadvertent Spills during Construction	1	SMALL	The site size is 100 ac (40.5 ha) or less. The permanent footprint of disturbance includes 30 ac (12 ha) or less of vegetated lands, and the temporary footprint of disturbance includes no more than an additional 20 ac (8.1 ha) or less of vegetated lands. Applicable requirements and guidance on spill prevention and control are followed, including relevant BMPs and Integrated Pollution Prevention Plans (IPPPs).
Water Quality Degradation due to Groundwater Withdrawal	1	SMALL	Groundwater Withdrawal for Excavation or Foundation Dewatering The long-term dewatering withdrawal rate is less than or equal to 50 gpm (0.003 m3 /s) (the initial rate may be larger). Dewatering results in negligible groundwater level drawdown at the site boundary. Groundwater Withdrawal for Plant Uses Groundwater withdrawal for all plant uses (excluding dewatering) is less than or equal to 50 gpm (0.003 m3 /s). Withdrawal results in no more than 1 ft (0.3 m) of groundwater level drawdown at the site boundary. Withdrawals are not derived from an EPA-designated SSA, or from any aquifer designated by a State, Tribe, or regional authority to have special protections to limit drawdown. Withdrawals meet any applicable State or local permit requirements.
Water Quality Degradation due to Offshore or In-Water Construction Activities	1	SMALL	In-water structures (including intake and discharge structures) are constructed in compliance with provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 (33 U.S.C. 1344) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). Adverse effects of building activities controlled and localized using BMPs such as installation of turbidity curtains or installation of cofferdams. Construction duration would be less than 7 years.
Water Use Conflict Due to Plant Municipal Water Demand	1	SMALL	The amount available from municipal water systems exceeds the amount of municipal water required by the plant (gpm). Municipal Water Availability accounts for all existing and planned future uses. An agreement or permit for the usage amount can be obtained from the municipality.
Degradation of Water Quality from Plant Effluent Discharges to Municipal Systems	1	SMALL	Municipal Systems' Available Capacity to Receive and Treat Plant Effluent accounts for all existing and reasonably foreseeable future discharges. Agreement to discharge to a municipal treatment system is obtainable.
Operation:
Surface Water Use Conflicts during Operation due to Water Withdrawal from Flowing Waterbodies	1	SMALL	Total plant water demand is less than or equal to a daily average of 6,000 gpm (0.379 m3 /s). Average plant water withdrawals do not reduce discharge from the flowing water body by more than 3 percent of the 95 percent exceedance daily flow and do not prevent the maintenance of applicable instream flow requirements. The 95 percent exceedance flow accounts for existing and planned future withdrawals. Water availability is demonstrated by the ability to obtain a withdrawal permit issued by State, regional, or Tribal governing authorities. Water rights for the withdrawal amount are obtainable, if needed.
Surface Water Use Conflicts during Operation due to Water Withdrawal from Non-flowing Waterbodies	1	SMALL	Total plant water demand is less than or equal to a daily average of 6,000 gpm (0.379 m3 /s). Water availability of the Great Lakes, the Gulf of Mexico, oceans, estuaries, and intertidal zones exceeds the amount of water required by the plant. Water availability is demonstrated by the ability to obtain a withdrawal permit issued by State, regional, or Tribal governing authorities. Water rights for the withdrawal amount are obtainable, if needed. Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.) consistency determination is obtainable, if applicable.
Groundwater Use Conflicts Due to Building Foundation Dewatering	1	SMALL	The long-term dewatering withdrawal rate is less than or equal to 50 gpm (0.003 m3 /s) (the initial rate may be larger). Dewatering results in negligible groundwater level drawdown at the site boundary.
Groundwater Use Conflicts Due to Groundwater Withdrawals for Plant Uses	1	SMALL	Groundwater withdrawal for all plant uses (excluding dewatering) is less than or equal to 50 gpm (0.003 m3 /s). Withdrawal results in no more than 1 ft (0.3 m) of groundwater level drawdown at the site boundary. Withdrawals are not derived from an EPA-designated SSA, or from any aquifer designated by a State, Tribe, or regional authority to have special protections to limit drawdown. Withdrawals meet any applicable State or local permit requirements.
Surface Water Quality Degradation Due to Physical Effects from Operation of Intake and Discharge Structures	1	SMALL	Total plant water demand is less than or equal to a daily average of 6,000 gpm (0.379 m3 /s). Adhere to best available technology requirements of CWA 316(b) (33 U.S.C. 1326). Operated in compliance with CWA Section 316 (b) and 40 CFR 125.83, including compliance with monitoring and recordkeeping requirements in 40 CFR 125.87 and 40 CFR 125.88, respectively (40 CFR part 125). Best available technologies are employed in the design and operation of intake and discharge structures to minimize alterations due to scouring, sediment transport, increased turbidity, and erosion. Adherence to requirements in NPDES permits issued by the EPA or a given state. If water is obtained from a flowing water body, then the following PPE/SPE parameter and associated value also apply: The average rate of plant withdrawal does not exceed 3 percent of the 95 percent exceedance daily flow for the water body. If water is obtained from a non-flowing water body, then the following PPE/SPE parameters and associated values and assumptions also apply: Water availability of the Great Lakes, the Gulf of Mexico, oceans, estuaries, and intertidal zones exceeds the amount of water required by the plant.
( print page 80818)
Surface Water Quality Degradation Due to Changes in Salinity Gradients Resulting from Withdrawals	1	SMALL	Total plant water demand is less than or equal to a daily average of 6,000 gpm (0.379 m3 /s). If water is obtained from a flowing water body, then the following PPE/SPE parameter and associated assumptions also apply: Average plant water withdrawals do not reduce discharge from the flowing water body by more than 3 percent of the 95 percent exceedance daily flow and do not prevent the maintenance of applicable instream flow requirements. The 95 percent exceedance flow accounts for existing and planned future withdrawals. Water availability is demonstrated by the ability to obtain a withdrawal permit issued by State, regional, or Tribal governing authorities. Water rights for the withdrawal amount are obtainable, if needed. If withdrawals are from an estuary or intertidal zone, then changes to salinity gradients are within the normal tidal or seasonal movements that characterize the water body. If water is obtained from a non-flowing water body, then the following PPE/SPE parameter and associated values and assumptions also apply: Water availability of the Great Lakes, the Gulf of Mexico, oceans, estuaries, and intertidal zones exceeds the amount of water required by the plant. Water availability is demonstrated by the ability to obtain a withdrawal permit issued by State, regional, or Tribal governing authorities. Water rights for the withdrawal amount are obtainable, if needed. If withdrawals are from an estuary or intertidal zone, then changes to salinity gradients are within the normal tidal or seasonal movements that characterize the water body.
Surface Water Quality Degradation Due to Chemical and Thermal Discharges	2	Undetermined	The staff determined that a generic analysis to determine operational impacts on surface water quality due to chemical and thermal discharges was not possible because (1) some States may impose effluent constituent limitations more stringent that those required by the EPA, (2) limitations imposed on effluent constituents may vary among States, and (3) the establishment of a mixing zone may be required. Because all of these issues related to degradation of surface water quality from chemical and thermal discharges require consideration of project-specific information, a project-specific assessment should be performed in the supplemental environmental impact statement.
Groundwater Quality Degradation Due to Plant Discharges	1	SMALL	The plant is outside the recharge area for any EPA-designated SSA, or any aquifer designated to have special protections by a State, Tribal, or regional authority. The plant is outside the wellhead protection area or designated contributing area for any public water supply well. There are no planned discharges to the subsurface (by infiltration or injection).
Water Quality Degradation due to Inadvertent Spills and Leaks during Operation	1	SMALL	Applicable requirements and guidance on spill prevention and control are followed, including relevant BMPs and IPPPs. There are no planned discharges to the subsurface (by infiltration or injection), including stormwater discharge. A groundwater protection program conforming to currently applicable industry guidance is established and followed. The site size is 100 ac (40.5 ha) or less. Use of BMPs for soil erosion, sediment control, and stormwater management. Adherence to requirements in NPDES permits issued by the EPA or a given State, and any other applicable permits.
Water Quality Degradation due to Groundwater Withdrawals	1	SMALL	The long-term dewatering withdrawal rate is less than or equal to 50 gpm (0.003 m3 /s) (the initial rate may be larger). Dewatering results in negligible groundwater level drawdown at the site boundary. Groundwater withdrawal for all plant uses (excluding dewatering) is less than or equal to 50 gpm (0.003 m3 /s). Withdrawal results in no more than 1 ft (0.3 m) of groundwater level drawdown at the site boundary. Withdrawals are not derived from an EPA-designated SSA, or from any aquifer designated by a State, Tribe, or regional authority to have special protections to limit drawdown. Withdrawals meet any applicable State or local permit requirements.
Water Use Conflict from Plant Municipal Water Demand	1	SMALL	Usage amount is within the existing capacity of the system(s), accounting for all existing and planned future uses. An agreement or permit for the usage amount can be obtained from the municipality.
Degradation of Water Quality from Plant Effluent Discharges to Municipal Systems	1	SMALL	Municipal Systems' Available Capacity to Receive and Treat Plant Effluent accounts for all existing and reasonably foreseeable future discharges. Agreement to discharge to a municipal treatment system is obtainable.
Terrestrial Ecology
Construction:
Permanent and Temporary Loss, Conversion, Fragmentation, and Degradation of Habitats	1	SMALL	The permanent footprint of disturbance would include 30 ac (12 ha) or less of vegetated lands, and the temporary footprint of disturbance would include no more than an additional 20 ac (8.1 ha) or less of vegetated lands. Temporarily disturbed lands would be revegetated using regionally indigenous vegetation once the lands are no longer needed to support building activities. New offsite ROWs for transmission lines, pipelines, or access roads would be no more than 100 ft (30.5 m) in width and total no more than 1 mi (1.6 km) in length. The footprint of disturbance (permanent and temporary) would contain no ecologically sensitive features such as floodplains, shorelines, riparian vegetation, late-successional vegetation, land specifically designated for conservation, or habitat known to be potentially suitable for one or more Federal or State threatened or endangered species. Total wetland impacts from use of the site and any offsite ROWs would be no more than 0.5 ac (0.2 ha). Applicants would demonstrate an effort to minimize fragmentation of terrestrial habitats by using existing ROWs, or widening existing ROWs, to the extent practicable. BMPs would be used for erosion, sediment control, and stormwater management.
( print page 80819)
Permanent and Temporary Loss and Degradation of Wetlands	1	SMALL	Applicant would provide a delineation of potentially impacted wetlands, including wetlands not under CWA jurisdiction. Total wetland impacts from use of the site and any offsite ROWs would be no more than 0.5 ac (0.2 ha). If activities regulated under the CWA are performed, those activities would receive approval under one or more nationwide permits (NWPs) (33 CFR part 330) or other general permits recognized by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Temporary groundwater withdrawals for excavation or foundation dewatering would not exceed a long-term rate of 50 gpm (0.003 m3 /s). Applicants would be able to demonstrate that the temporary groundwater withdrawals would not substantially alter the hydrology of wetlands connected to the same groundwater resource. Any required state or local permits for wetland impacts would be obtained. Any mitigation measures indicated in the NWPs or other permits would be implemented. BMPs would be used for erosion, sediment control, and stormwater management.
Effects of Building Noise on Wildlife	1	SMALL	Noise generation would not exceed 85 dBA 50 ft (15.2 m) from the source.
Effects of Vehicular Collisions on Wildlife	1	SMALL	The site size would be 100 ac (40.5 ha) or less. The permanent footprint of disturbance would include 30 ac (12 ha) or less of vegetated lands, and the temporary footprint of disturbance would include no more than an additional 20 ac (8.1 ha) or less of vegetated lands. There would be no decreases in the LOS designation for affected roadways. The licensee would communicate with Federal and State wildlife agencies and implement mitigation actions recommended by those agencies to reduce potential for vehicular injury to wildlife.
Bird Collisions and Injury from Structures and Transmission Lines	1	SMALL	The site size would be 100 ac (40.5 ha) or less. New offsite ROWs for transmission lines, pipelines, or access roads would be no more than 100 ft (30.5 m) in width and total no more than 1 mi (1.6 km) in length. No transmission line structures (poles or towers) would be more than 100 ft (30.5 m) in height. Licensees would implement common mitigation measures.
Important Species and Habitats—Resources Regulated under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)	2	Undetermined	The NRC staff is unable to determine the significance of potential impacts without consideration of project-specific factors, including the specific species and habitats affected and the types of ecological changes potentially resulting from each specific licensing action.
Important Species and Habitats—Other Important Species and Habitats	1	SMALL	Applicants would communicate with State natural resource or conservation agencies regarding wildlife and plants and implement mitigation recommendations of those agencies.
Operation:
Permanent and Temporary Loss or Disturbance of Habitats	1	SMALL	Temporarily disturbed lands would be revegetated using regionally indigenous vegetation once the lands are no longer needed to support building activities. The total wetland loss from site disturbance over the operational life of the plant would be no more than 0.5 ac (0.2 ha). Any State or local permits for wetland impacts would be obtained. Any mitigation measures indicated in the NWPs or other wetland permits would be implemented. BMPs would be used for erosion, sediment control, and stormwater management.
Effects of Operational Noise on Wildlife	1	SMALL	Noise generation would not exceed 85 dBA 50 ft (15.2 m) from the source. There would be no decreases in the LOS designation for affected roadways. The licensee would communicate with Federal and State wildlife agencies and implement mitigation actions recommended by those agencies to reduce potential for vehicular injury to wildlife.
Effects of Vehicular Collisions on Wildlife	1	SMALL	Noise generation would not exceed 85 dBA 50 ft (15.2 m) from the source. There would be no decreases in the LOS designation for affected roadways. The licensee would communicate with Federal and State wildlife agencies and implement mitigation actions recommended by those agencies to reduce potential for vehicular injury to wildlife.
Exposure of Terrestrial Organisms to Radionuclides	1	SMALL	Applicants would demonstrate in their application that any radiological nonhuman biota doses would be below applicable guidelines.
Cooling-Tower Operational Impacts on Vegetation	1	SMALL	If needed, cooling towers would be mechanical draft, not natural draft; less than 100 ft (30.5 m) in height; and equipped with drift eliminators. Any makeup water for the cooling towers would be fresh water (less than 1 ppt salinity).
Bird Collisions and Injury from Structures and Transmission Lines	1	SMALL	The site size would be 100 ac (40.5 ha) or less. New offsite ROWs for transmission lines, pipelines, or access roads would be no more than 100 ft (30.5 m) in width and total no more than 1 mi (1.6 km) in length. No transmission line structures (poles or towers) would be more than 100 ft (30.5 m) in height. Licensees would implement common mitigation measures.
Bird Electrocutions from Transmission Lines	1	SMALL	New offsite ROWs for transmission lines, pipelines, or access roads would be no more than 100 ft (30.5 m) in width and total no more than 1 mi (1.6 km) in length. Common mitigation measures would be implemented.
Water Use Conflicts with Terrestrial Resources	1	SMALL	Total plant water demand would be less than or equal to a daily average of 6,000 gpm (0.379 m3 /s). If water is withdrawn from flowing water bodies, average plant water withdrawals would not reduce flow by more than 3 percent of the 95 percent exceedance daily flow and would not prevent maintenance of applicable instream flow requirements. Any water withdrawals would be in compliance with any EPA or State permitting requirements. Applicants would be able to demonstrate that hydroperiod changes are within historical or seasonal fluctuations.
Effects of Transmission Line ROW Management on Terrestrial Resources	1	SMALL	Vegetation in transmission line ROWs would be managed following a plan consisting of integrated vegetation management practices. All ROW maintenance work would be performed in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. Herbicides would be applied by licensed applicators, and only if in compliance with applicable manufacturer label instructions.
( print page 80820)
Effects of Electromagnetic Fields on Flora and Fauna	1	SMALL	Based on the literature review in the License Renewal Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS), the staff determined that this is a Category 1 issue and impacts would be SMALL regardless of the length, location, or size of the transmission lines. The staff did not recommend any mitigation in the License Renewal GEIS; hence, none is needed here. The staff did not rely on any PPE and SPE values or assumptions in reaching this conclusion.
Important Species and Habitats—Resources Regulated under the ESA of 1973	2	Undetermined	The NRC staff is unable to determine the significance of potential impacts without consideration of project-specific factors, including the specific species and habitats affected and the types of ecological changes potentially resulting from each specific licensing action.
Important Species and Habitats—Other Important Species and Habitats	1	SMALL	Applicants would communicate with State natural resource or conservation agencies regarding wildlife and plants and implement mitigation recommendations of those agencies.
Aquatic Ecology
Construction:
Runoff and sedimentation from construction areas	1	SMALL	BMPs would be used for erosion and sediment control. Temporarily disturbed lands would be revegetated using regionally indigenous vegetation once the lands are no longer needed to support building activities.
Dredging and filling aquatic habitats to build intake and discharge structures	1	SMALL	Applicant would obtain approval, if required, under NWP 7 in 33 CFR part 330. Applicant would implement any mitigation required under NWP 7 in 33 CFR part 330. Applicant would minimize any temporarily disturbed shoreline and riparian lands needed to build the intake and discharge structures and restore those areas with regionally indigenous vegetation suited to those landscape settings once the disturbances are no longer needed. BMPs would be used for erosion and sediment control.
Building transmission lines, pipelines, and access roads across surface waterbodies	1	SMALL	If activities regulated under the CWA are performed, they would receive approval under one or more NWPs (33 CFR part 330) or other general permits recognized by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Pipelines would be extended under (or over) surface through directional drilling without physically disturbing shorelines or bottom substrate. Access roads would span streams and other surface waterbodies with a bridge or ford, and any fords would include placement and maintenance of matting to minimize physical disturbance of shorelines and bottom substrates. No access roads would be extended across stream channels over 10 ft (3 m) in width (at ordinary high water). Any bridges or fords would be removed once no longer needed, and any exposed soils or substrate would be revegetated using regionally indigenous vegetation appropriate to the landscape setting. Any mitigation measures indicated in the NWPs or other permits would be implemented. BMPs would be used for erosion and sediment control.
Important Species and Habitats—Resources Regulated under the ESA and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.)	2	Undetermined	The NRC staff is unable to determine the significance of potential impacts without consideration of project-specific factors, including the specific species and habitats affected and the types of ecological changes potentially resulting from each specific licensing action. Furthermore, the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) require consultations for each licensing action that may affect regulated resources.
Important species and habitats—Other Important Species and Habitats	1	SMALL	Applicants would communicate with State natural resource or conservation agencies regarding aquatic fish, wildlife, and plants and implement mitigation recommendation of those agencies.
Operation:
Stormwater runoff	1	SMALL	Preparation, approval by applicable regulatory agencies, and implementation of a stormwater management plan. Obtaining and compliance with any required permits for the storage and use of hazardous materials issued by Federal and State agencies under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). BMPs would be used for stormwater management.
Exposure of aquatic organisms to radionuclides	1	SMALL	Applicants would demonstrate in their application that any radiological nonhuman biota doses would be below applicable guidelines.
Effects of refurbishment on aquatic biota	1	SMALL	BMPs would be used for erosion, sediment control, and stormwater management. Exposed soils would be restored as soon as possible with regionally indigenous vegetation.
Effects of maintenance dredging on aquatic biota	1	SMALL	If activities regulated under the CWA are performed, those activities would receive approval under one or more NWPs (33 CFR part 330) or other general permits recognized by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Any mitigation measures indicated in the NWPs or other permits would be implemented. BMPs would be used for erosion and sediment control.
Impacts of transmission line ROW management on aquatic resources	1	SMALL	Vegetation in transmission line ROWs would be managed following a plan consisting of integrated vegetation management practices. All ROW maintenance work would be performed in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. Herbicides would be applied by licensed applicators, and only if in compliance with applicable manufacturer label instructions. BMPs would be used for erosion and sediment control.
Impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms	1	SMALL	Intakes would comply with regulatory requirements established by EPA in 40 CFR 125.84 to be protective of fish and shellfish. Best available control technology would be employed in the design of intakes to minimize entrainment and impingement, such as use of screens and intake rates recognized to minimize effects.
Thermal impacts on aquatic biota	2	Undetermined	Staff would have to first review the discharge plume analysis (as described in Section 3.4) and the aquatic biota potentially present before being able to reach a conclusion regarding the possible significance of impacts to that biota.
( print page 80821)
Other effects of cooling-water discharges on aquatic biota	2	Undetermined	Staff would have to first review the discharge plume analysis (as described in Section 3.4) and the aquatic biota potentially present before being able to reach a conclusion regarding the possible significance of impacts to that biota.
Water use conflicts with aquatic resources	1	SMALL	If needed, cooling towers would be mechanical draft, not natural draft; less than 100 ft (30.5 m) in height; and equipped with drift eliminators. Any makeup water for the cooling towers would be fresh water (less than 1 ppt salinity). Total plant water demand would be less than or equal to a daily average of 6,000 gpm (0.379 m3 /s). If water is withdrawn from flowing waterbodies, average plant water withdrawals would not reduce flow by more than 3 percent of the 95 percent exceedance daily flow and would not prevent maintenance of applicable instream flow requirements. Any water withdrawals would be in compliance with any EPA or State permitting requirements. Applicants would be able to demonstrate that hydroperiod changes are within historical or seasonal fluctuations.
Important Species and Habitats—Resources Regulated under the ESA and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act	2	Undetermined	The NRC staff is unable to determine the significance of potential impacts without consideration of project-specific factors, including the specific species and habitats affected and the types of ecological changes potentially resulting from each specific licensing action. Furthermore, the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) require consultations for each licensing action that may affect regulated resources.
Important species and habitats—Other Important Species and Habitats	1	SMALL	Applicants would communicate with State natural resource or conservation agencies regarding aquatic fish, wildlife, and plants and implement mitigation recommendations of those agencies.
Historic and Cultural Resources
Construction:
Construction impacts on historic and cultural resources	2	Undetermined	Impacts on historic and cultural resources are analyzed on a project-specific basis. The NRC will perform a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis and a National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106 analysis, in accordance with 36 CFR part 800, in its preparation of the supplemental environmental impact statement. The NHPA Section 106 analysis includes consultation with the State and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, American Indian Tribes, and other interested parties.
Operation:
Operation impacts on historic and cultural resources	2	Undetermined	Impacts on historic and cultural resources are analyzed on a project-specific basis. The NRC will perform a NEPA analysis and a NHPA Section 106 analysis, in accordance with 36 CFR part 800, in its preparation of the supplemental environmental impact statement. The NHPA Section 106 analysis includes consultation with the State and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, American Indian Tribes, and other interested parties.
Environmental Hazards—Radiological Environment
Construction:
Radiological dose to construction workers	1	SMALL	For protection against radiation, the applicant must meet the regulatory requirements of: 10 CFR 20.1101 Radiation Protection Programs if issued a license 10 CFR 20.1201 Occupational dose limits for adults 10 CFR 20.1301 Dose limits for individual members of the public Appendix B to 10 CFR part 20 Annual Limits on Intake (ALIs) and Derived Air Concentrations (DACs) of Radionuclides for Occupational Exposure; Effluent Concentrations; Concentrations for Release to Sewerage Applicable NRC radiation protection regulations, such as: 10 CFR 50.34a Design objectives for equipment to control releases of radioactive material in effluents—nuclear power reactors 10 CFR 50.36a Technical specifications on effluents from nuclear power reactors Application contains sufficient technical information for the staff to complete the detailed technical safety review. Application will be found to be in compliance by the staff with the above regulations through a radiation protection program and an effluent release monitoring program.
Operation:
Occupational doses to workers	1	SMALL	For protection against radiation, the applicant must meet the regulatory requirements of: 10 CFR 20.1101 Radiation Protection Programs if issued a license 10 CFR 20.1201 Occupational dose limits for adults Appendix B to 10 CFR part 20 Annual Limits on Intake (ALIs) and Derived Air Concentrations (DACs) of Radionuclides for Occupational Exposure; Effluent Concentrations; Concentrations for Release to Sewerage Applicable radiation protection regulations, such as: 10 CFR 50.34 a Design objectives for equipment to control releases of radioactive material in effluents—nuclear power reactors 10 CFR 50.36 a Technical specifications on effluents from nuclear power reactors Application contains sufficient technical information for the staff to complete the detailed technical safety review Application will be found to be in compliance by the staff with the above regulations through a radiation protection program and an effluent release monitoring program.
( print page 80822)
Maximally exposed individual annual doses	1	SMALL	For protection against radiation, the applicant must meet the regulatory requirements of: 10 CFR 20.1101 Radiation Protection Programs if issued a license 10 CFR 20.1301 Dose limits for individual members of the public Appendix B to 10 CFR part 20 Annual Limits on Intake (ALIs) and Derived Air Concentrations (DACs) of Radionuclides for Occupational Exposure; Effluent Concentrations; Concentrations for Release to Sewerage Applicable radiation protection regulations, such as: 10 CFR 50.34a Design objectives for equipment to control releases of radioactive material in effluents—nuclear power reactors 10 CFR 50.36a Technical specifications on effluents from nuclear power reactors Application contains sufficient technical information for the staff to complete the detailed technical safety review Application will be found to be in compliance by the staff with the above regulations through a radiation protection program and an effluent release monitoring program.
Total population annual doses	1	SMALL	For protection against radiation, the applicant must meet the regulatory requirements of: 10 CFR 20.1101 Radiation Protection Programs if issued a license 10 CFR 20.1301 Dose limits for individual members of the public Appendix B of 10 CFR part 20 Annual Limits on Intake (ALIs) and Derived Air Concentrations (DACs) of Radionuclides for Occupational Exposure; Effluent Concentrations; Concentrations for Release to Sewerage Applicable radiation protection regulations, such as: 10 CFR 50.34a Design objectives for equipment to control releases of radioactive material in effluents—nuclear power reactors 10 CFR 50.36a Technical specifications on effluents from nuclear power reactors Application contains sufficient technical information for the staff to complete the detailed technical safety review Application will be found to be in compliance by the staff with the above regulations through a radiation protection program and an effluent release monitoring program.
Nonhuman biota doses	1	SMALL	Applicants would demonstrate in their application that any radiological nonhuman biota doses would be below applicable guidelines.
Environmental Hazards—Nonradiological Environment
Construction:
Building impacts of chemical, biological, and physical nonradiological hazards	1	SMALL	The applicant must adhere to all applicable Federal, State, local or Tribal regulatory limits and permit conditions for chemical hazards, biological hazards, and physical hazards. The applicant will follow nonradiological public and occupational health BMPs and mitigation measures, as appropriate.
Building impacts of electromagnetic fields (EMFs)	N/A	Uncertain	Studies of 60 Hz EMFs have not uncovered consistent evidence linking harmful effects with field exposures. Because the state of the science is currently inadequate, no generic conclusion on human health impacts is possible. If, in the future, the Commission finds that a general agreement has been reached by appropriate Federal health agencies that there are adverse health effects from EMFs, the Commission will require applicants to submit plant-specific reviews of these health effects as part of their application. Until such time, applicants are not required to submit information about this issue.
Operation:
Operation impacts of chemical, biological, and physical nonradiological hazards	1	SMALL	The applicant must adhere to all applicable Federal, State, local or Tribal regulatory limits and permit conditions for chemical hazards, biological hazards, and physical hazards. The applicant will follow nonradiological public and occupational health BMPs and mitigation measures, as appropriate.
Operation impacts of EMFs	N/A	Uncertain	Studies of 60 Hz EMFs have not uncovered consistent evidence linking harmful effects with field exposures. Because the state of the science is currently inadequate, no generic conclusion on human health impacts is possible. If, in the future, the Commission finds that a general agreement has been reached by appropriate Federal health agencies that there are adverse health effects from EMFs, the Commission will require applicants to submit plant-specific reviews of these health effects as part of their application. Until such time, applicants are not required to submit information about this issue.
Noise
Construction:
Construction-related noise	1	SMALL	The noise level would be no more than 65 dBA at site boundary, unless a relevant State or local noise abatement law or ordinance sets a different threshold, which would then be the presumptive threshold for PPE purposes. If an applicant cannot meet the 65 dBA threshold through mitigation, then the applicant must obtain a various or exception with the relevant State or local regulator. The project would implement BMPs, including such as modeling, foliage planting, construction of noise buffers, and the timing of construction and/or operation activities.
Operation:
Operation-related noise	1	SMALL	The noise level would be no more than 65 dBA at site boundary, unless a relevant State or local noise abatement law or ordinance sets a different threshold, which would then be the presumptive threshold for PPE purposes. If an applicant cannot meet the 65 dBA threshold through mitigation, then the applicant must obtain a various or exception with the relevant State or local regulator. The project would implement BMPs, including such as modeling, foliage planting, construction of noise buffers, and the timing of construction and/or operation activities.
Waste Management—Radiological Waste Management
Operation:
( print page 80823)
Low-level radioactive waste (LLRW)	1	SMALL	Applicants must meet the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR part 20 ( e.g.,10 CFR 20.1406 and subpart K), 10 CFR part 61, 10 CFR part 71, and 10 CFR part 72. Quantities of LLRW generated at a new nuclear reactor would be less than the quantities of LLRW generated at existing nuclear power plants, which generate an average of 21,200 ft3 (600 m3 ) and 2,000 Ci (7.4 × 1013 Bq) per year for boiling water reactors and half that amount for pressurized water reactors.
Onsite spent nuclear fuel management	1	SMALL	Compliance with 10 CFR part 72.
Mixed waste	1	SMALL	Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Small Quantity Generator for Mixed Waste.
Waste Management—Nonradiological Waste Management
Construction:
Construction nonradiological waste	1	SMALL	The applicant must meet all the applicable permit conditions, regulations, and BMPs related to solid, liquid, and gaseous waste management. For hazardous waste generation, applicants must meet conformity with hazardous waste quantity generation levels in accordance with RCRA. For sanitary waste, applicants must dispose of sanitary waste in a permitted process. For mitigation measures, the applicant would perform mitigation measures to the extent practicable, such as recycling, process improvements, or the use of a less hazardous substance.
Operation:
Operation nonradiological waste	1	SMALL	The applicant must meet all the applicable permit conditions, regulations, and BMPs related to solid, liquid, and gaseous waste management. For hazardous waste generation, applicants must meet conformity with hazardous waste quantity generation levels in accordance with RCRA. For sanitary waste, applicants must dispose of sanitary waste in a permitted process. For mitigation measures, the applicant would perform mitigation measures to the extent practicable, such as recycling, process improvements, or the use of a less hazardous substance.
Postulated Accidents
Operation:
Design Basis Accidents Involving Radiological Releases	1	SMALL	For the exclusion area boundary, the maximum total effective dose equivalent for any 2-hour period during the radioactivity release should be calculated. For the low-population zone, the total effective dose equivalent should be calculated for the duration of the accident release ( i.e., 30 days, or other duration as justified). The above calculations should demonstrate that the design basis accident doses satisfy the dose criteria given in regulations related to the application ( e.g.,10 CFR 50.34(a)(1), 10 CFR 52.17(a)(1), and 10 CFR 52.79(a)(1)), standard review plans ( e.g., standard review plan criteria, Table 1 in standard review plan Section 15.0.3 of NUREG-0800), and Regulatory Guides, ( e.g., Regulatory Guide 1.183), as applicable.
Accidents Involving Releases of Hazardous Chemicals	1	SMALL	Reactor inventory of a regulated substance is less than its Threshold Quantity. Threshold Quantities are found in 40 CFR 68.130, Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4; and Reactor inventory of an extremely hazardous substance is less than its Threshold Planning Quantity. Threshold Planning Quantities are found in 40 CFR part 355, Appendices A and B.
Severe Accidents	2	Undetermined	Based on the analysis in the Final Safety Analysis Report/Preliminary Safety Analysis Report regarding severe accidents, if a reactor design has severe accident progressions with radiological or hazardous chemical releases, then an environmental risk evaluation must be performed.
Severe Accident Mitigation Design Alternatives	1	SMALL	If a cost-screening analysis determines that the maximum benefit for avoiding an accident is so small that a severe accident mitigation design alternative analysis is not justified based on a minimum cost to design an appropriate severe accident mitigation design alternative.
Acts of Terrorism	1	SMALL	The environmental impacts of acts of terrorism and sabotage only need to be addressed if a reactor facility is subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Socioeconomics
Construction:
Community Services and Infrastructure	1	SMALL	The housing vacancy rate in the affected economic region does not change by more than 5 percent, or at least 5 percent of the housing stock remains available after accounting for in-migrating construction workers. Student:teacher ratios in the affected economic region do not exceed locally mandated levels after including the school age children of the in-migrating worker families.
Transportation Systems and Traffic	1	SMALL	The LOS determination for affected roadways does not change. Mitigation measures may include implementation of traffic flow management, management of shift-change timing, and encouragement of ride-sharing and use of public transportation options, such that LOS values can be maintained with the increased volumes.
Economic Impacts	1	Beneficial	The economic impacts of construction and operation of a new nuclear reactor are expected to be beneficial; therefore, this is a Category 1 issue. If, during the project-specific environmental review, the NRC staff determines a detailed analysis of economic costs and benefits is needed for analysis of the range of alternatives considered or relevant to mitigation, the staff may require further information from the applicant.
( print page 80824)
Tax Revenue Impacts	1	Beneficial	The tax revenue impacts of construction and operation of a new nuclear reactor are expected to be beneficial; therefore, this is a Category 1 issue. If, during the project-specific environmental review, the NRC staff determines a detailed analysis of tax revenue costs and benefits is needed for analysis of the range of alternatives considered or relevant to mitigation, the staff may require further information from the applicant.
Operation:
Community Services and Infrastructure	1	SMALL	The housing vacancy rate in the affected economic region does not change by more than 5 percent, or at least 5 percent of the housing stock remains available after accounting for in-migrating construction workers. Student:teacher ratios in the affected economic region do not exceed locally mandated levels after including the school age children of the in-migrating worker families.
Transportation Systems and Traffic	1	SMALL	The LOS determination for affected roadways does not change. Mitigation measures may include implementation of traffic flow management, management of shift-change timing, and encouragement of ride-sharing and use of public transportation options, such that LOS values can be maintained with the increased volumes.
Economic Impacts	1	Beneficial	The economic impacts of construction and operation of a nuclear reactor are expected to be beneficial; therefore, this is a Category 1 issue. If, during the project-specific environmental review, the NRC staff determines a detailed analysis of economic costs and benefits is needed for analysis of the range of alternatives considered or relevant to mitigation, the staff may require further information from the applicant.
Tax Revenue Impacts	1	Beneficial	The tax revenue impacts of construction and operation of a nuclear reactor are expected to be beneficial; therefore, this is a Category 1 issue. If, during the project-specific environmental review, the NRC staff determines a detailed analysis of tax revenue costs and benefits is needed for analysis of the range of alternatives considered or relevant to mitigation, the staff may require further information from the applicant.
Environmental Justice
Construction:
Construction Environmental Justice Impacts	2	Undetermined	Project-specific analysis would be necessary, including analysis of the presence and size of specific minority or low-income populations, impact pathways derived from the plant design, layout, or site characteristics, or other community characteristics affecting specific minority or low-income populations. In performing its environmental justice analysis, the NRC staff will be guided by the NRC's “Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions,” which was published in the Federal Register on August 24, 2004 (69 FR 52040).
Operation:
Operation Environmental Justice Impacts	2	Undetermined	Project-specific analysis would be necessary, including analysis of the presence and size of specific minority or low-income populations, impact pathways derived from the plant design, layout, or site characteristics, or other community characteristics affecting specific minority or low-income populations. In performing its environmental justice analysis, the NRC staff will be guided by the NRC's “Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions,” which was published in the Federal Register on August 24, 2004 (69 FR 52040).
Fuel Cycle
Operation:
Uranium Recovery	1	SMALL	Table S-3 as codified in 10 CFR 51.51 is expected to bound the impacts for new nuclear reactor fuels, because of uranium fuel cycle changes since WASH-1248, including: Increasing use of in situ leach uranium mining has lower environmental impacts than traditional mining and milling methods. Current light-water reactors (LWRs) are using nuclear fuel more efficiently due to higher levels of fuel burnup resulting in less demand for mining and milling activities. Less reliance on coal-fired electrical generation plants is resulting in less gaseous effluent releases from electrical generation sources supporting mining and milling activities. Must satisfy the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR part 40, Domestic Licensing of Source Material and 10 CFR part 71, Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material.
Uranium Conversion	1	SMALL	Table S-3 is expected to bound the impacts for new nuclear reactor fuels because of uranium fuel cycle changes since WASH-1248, including: Current LWRs are using nuclear fuel more efficiently due to higher levels of fuel burnup resulting in less demand for conversion activities. Less reliance on coal-fired electrical generation plants is resulting in less gaseous effluent releases from electrical generation sources supporting conversion activities. Must satisfy the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR part 40, Domestic Licensing of Source Material and 10 CFR part 71, Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material, and 10 CFR part 73, Physical Protection of Plants and Materials.
( print page 80825)
Enrichment	1	SMALL	Table S-3 is expected to bound the impacts for new nuclear reactor fuels, because of uranium fuel cycle changes since WASH-1248, including: Transitioning of U.S. uranium enrichment technology from gaseous diffusion to gas centrifugation, which requires less electrical usage per separative work unit. Current LWRs are using nuclear fuel more efficiently due to higher levels of fuel burnup resulting in less demand for enrichment activities. Less reliance on coal-fired electrical generation plants is resulting in less gaseous effluent releases from electrical generation sources supporting enrichment activities. Must satisfy the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR part 40, Domestic Licensing of Source Material, 10 CFR part 70, Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material, 10 CFR part 71, Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material, and 10 CFR part 73, Physical Protection of Plants and Materials.
Fuel Fabrication (excluding metal fuel and liquid-fueled molten salt)	1	SMALL	Table S-3 is expected to bound the impacts for new nuclear reactor fuels, because of uranium fuel cycle changes since WASH-1248, including: Current LWRs are using nuclear fuel more efficiently due to higher levels of fuel burnup resulting in fewer discharged fuel assemblies to be fabricated each year and due to longer time periods between refueling. Less reliance on coal-fired electrical generation plants is resulting in less gaseous effluent releases from electrical generation sources supporting fabrication. Must satisfy the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR part 40, Domestic Licensing of Source Material, 10 CFR part 70, Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material, 10 CFR part 71, Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material, and 10 CFR part 73, Physical Protection of Plants and Materials.
Reprocessing	1	SMALL	Table S-3 is expected to bound the impacts for new nuclear reactor fuels, because of uranium fuel cycle changes since WASH-1248, including: Current LWRs are using nuclear fuel more efficiently due to higher levels of fuel burnup resulting in fewer discharged fuel assemblies to be reprocessed each year. Less reliance on coal-fired electrical generation plants is resulting in less gaseous effluent releases from electrical generation sources supporting reprocessing. Reprocessing capacity up to 900 MTU/yr Must satisfy the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR part 40, Domestic Licensing of Source Material, 10 CFR part 50, Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,10 CFR part 70, Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material, 10 CFR part 71, Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material, 10 CFR part 72, Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and Reactor-related Greater Than Class C Waste, and 10 CFR part 73, Physical Protection of Plants and Materials.
Storage and Disposal of Radiological Wastes	1	SMALL	Table S-3 is expected to bound the impacts for new nuclear reactor fuels, because of uranium fuel cycle changes since WASH-1248, including: Current LWRs are using nuclear fuel more efficiently due to higher levels of fuel burnup resulting in fewer discharged fuel assemblies to be stored and disposed. Less reliance on coal-fired electrical generation plants is resulting in less gaseous effluent releases from electrical generation sources supporting storage and disposal. Waste and spent fuel inventories, as well as their associated certified spent fuel shipping and storage containers, are not significantly different from what has been considered for LWR evaluations in NUREG-2157. Must satisfy the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR part 40, Domestic Licensing of Source Material, 10 CFR part 70, Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material, 10 CFR part 71, Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material, 10 CFR part 72, Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and Reactor-related Greater Than Class C Waste, and 10 CFR part 73, Physical Protection of Plants and Materials.
Transportation of Fuel and Waste
Operation:
Transportation of Unirradiated Fuel	1	SMALL	The maximum annual one-way shipment distance does not exceed 36,760 mi (59,160 km). The annual shipments associated with the one-way shipment distance have been normalized to a net electrical output of 880 MW(e), i.e., 1,100 MW(e) with an 80 percent capacity factor from WASH-1238. The maximum annual round-trip shipment distance does not exceed 73,520 mi (118,320 km). The annual shipments associated with the round-trip shipment distance have been normalized to a net electrical output of 880 MW(e), i.e., 1,100 MW(e) with an 80 percent capacity factor from WASH-1238.
Transportation of Radioactive Waste	1	SMALL	The maximum annual round-trip shipment distance does not exceed 182,152 mi (293,145 km). The annual shipments associated with the round-trip shipment distance have been normalized to a net electrical output of 880 MW(e), i.e., 1,100 MW(e) with an 80 percent capacity factor and a shipment volume of 2.34 m3 /shipment from WASH-1238.
Transportation of Irradiated Fuel	1	SMALL	The maximum annual one-way shipment distance does not exceed 314,037 mi (505,393 km). The annual shipments associated with the one-way shipment distance have been normalized to a net electrical output of 880 MW(e), i.e., 1,100 MW(e) with an 80 percent capacity factor and a shipment capacity of 0.5 MTU/shipment from WASH-1238. The maximum annual round-trip shipment distance does not exceed 628,073 mi (1,010,786 km). The annual shipments associated with the round-trip shipment distance have been normalized to a net electrical output of 880 MW(e), i.e., 1,100 MW(e) with an 80 percent capacity factor and a shipment capacity of 0.5 MTU/shipment from WASH-1238. A maximum peak rod burnup of 62 GWd/MTU for UO2 fuel and peak pellet burnup of 133 GWd/MTU for TRi-structural ISOtropic (TRISO) fuel.
( print page 80826)
Decommissioning:
Decommissioning	1	SMALL	The environmental impacts for the following resource areas were generically addressed in NUREG-0586, Supplement 1, would be limited to operational areas, would not be detectable or destabilizing and are expected to have a negligible effect on the impacts of terminating operations and decommissioning: —Onsite Land Use. —Water Use. —Water Quality. —Air Quality. —Aquatic Ecology within the operational area. —Terrestrial Ecology within the operational area. —Radiological. —Radiological Accidents (non-spent-fuel-related). —Occupational Issues. —Socioeconomic. —Onsite Cultural and Historic Resources for plants where the disturbance of lands beyond the operational areas is not anticipated. —Aesthetics. —Noise. —Transportation. —Irretrievable Resource.
			The following issues were not addressed in NUREG-0586, Supplement 1, but have been determined to be Category 1 issues: —Non-radiological waste. —-Greenhouse Gases.
Decommissioning	2	Undetermined	The following two issues were identified in NUREG-0586, Supplement 1, as requiring a project-specific review: —Environmental justice. —Threatened and endangered species.
			Four conditionally project-specific issues identified in NUREG-0586, Supplement 1, will require a project-specific review if present: —Land use involving offsite areas to support decommissioning activities. —Aquatic ecology for activities beyond the licensed operational area. —Terrestrial ecology for activities beyond the licensed operational area. —Historic and cultural resources (archaeological, architectural, structural, historic) for activities within and beyond the licensed operational area with no current ( i.e., at the time of decommissioning) evaluation of resources for National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligibility.
			Additionally, the following two environmental resource areas are additional decommissioning impacts that require project-specific review: —Climate Change: the effects of climate change are location-specific and cannot, therefore, be evaluated generically (see Section 1.4.3.2.2, Category 2 Issues Applying Across Resources, of NUREG-2249, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors”). —Cumulative: must be considered on a project-specific basis where impacts would depend on regional resource characteristics, the resource specific impacts of the project, and the cumulative significance of other factors affecting the resource. (see Section 1.4.3.2.2, Category 2 Issues Applying Across Resources, of NUREG-2249, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors”).
Issues Applying Across Resources
Climate Change	2	Undetermined	The effects of climate change are location-specific and cannot, therefore, be evaluated generically. For example, while climate change may cause many areas to receive less than average annual precipitation, other areas may see an increase in average annual precipitation. Therefore, applicants and staff would address the effects of climate change in the environmental documents for new nuclear reactor licensing.
Cumulative Impacts	2	Undetermined	Applications must individually consider the cumulative impacts from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions known to occur at specific sites for proposed new nuclear reactors, and briefly present those considerations in supplemental NEPA documentation. The staff would explain whether these individualized evaluations of potential cumulative impacts alter any of the generic analyses and conclusions relied upon for Category 1 issues. The individualized cumulative impact analyses may also identify opportunities where staff might rely upon the generic analyses for some Category 1 issues for which certain of the PPE or SPE values and assumptions might be exceeded.
Non-Resource Related Issues
Purpose and Need	2	Undetermined	Must be described in the environmental report associated with a given application.
Need for Power	2	Undetermined	Must be described in the environmental report associated with a given application.
Site Alternatives	2	Undetermined	Must be described in the environmental report associated with a given application.
Energy Alternatives	2	Undetermined	Must be described in the environmental report associated with a given application.
System Design Alternatives	2	Undetermined	Must be described in the environmental report associated with a given application.
1  Data supporting this table are contained in NUREG-2249, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors” (September 2024).
2  The categories are defined as follows:
Category 1 issues—environmental issues for which the NRC has been able to make a generic finding of SMALL adverse environmental impacts, or beneficial impacts, provided that the applicant's proposed reactor facility and site meet or are bounded by relevant values and assumptions in the PPE and SPE that support the generic finding for that Category issue. ( print page 80827)
Category 2 issues—Environmental issues for which a generic finding regarding the environmental impacts cannot be reached because the issue requires the consideration of project-specific information that can only be evaluated once the proposed site is identified. The impact significance ( i.e., SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE) for these issues will be determined in a project-specific evaluation.
N/A—Issues related to exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) for which there is no national scientific agreement regarding adverse health effects.
3  A finding of SMALL impacts means that 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. For issues where probability is a key consideration ( i.e., accident consequences), probability was a factor in determining significance.
4  Because the Category 2 issues require a project-specific review, there are no associated values and assumptions of the plant parameter envelope and site parameter envelope. A brief summary explanation for the designation of the Category 2 issues is provided in lieu of values and assumptions.