ML101110205
| ML101110205 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/09/2010 |
| From: | Scott Flanders NRC/NRO/DSER |
| To: | Walters D Nuclear Energy Institute |
| Nash H, RENV/DSER/NRO, 415-4100 | |
| References | |
| Download: ML101110205 (3) | |
Text
June 9, 2010 Douglas J. Walters, Senior Director New Plant Deployment Nuclear Generation Division Nuclear Energy Institute 1776 I Street, NW Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006-3708
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE TO NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE COMMENTS ON ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN TEMPLATE
Dear Mr. Walters:
I am responding to your letter dated February 26, 2009, where you provided comments on the Office of New Reactors (NRO) template for an Environmental Protection Plan (EPP).
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 50.36b (10 CFR 50.36b) gives the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) authority to incorporate environmental conditions in a permit, authorization, or license. Although NRC regulations do not require an EPP, the NRC staff developed the EPP, which contains environmental conditions, as a vehicle for ensuring statutory and regulatory compliance.
Specifically, the NRC has obligations under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended. Such obligations are not new. If a Section 7 consultation results in an Incidental Take Permit for a specific nuclear power plant unit or site, the licensee is expected to comply with mandatory Terms and Conditions of the Incidental Take Permit.
Terms and Conditions typically include reporting requirements to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service. Such reports to other agencies are reportable to NRC within four hours per 10 CFR 50.72(b)(2)(xi). Additionally, NUREG-1022, Event Reporting Guidelines: 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73, Revision 2, includes an example of threatened or endangered species take as a reportable requirement under 10 CFR 50.72 because of notification to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and a State agency. The four-hour time period for such reports is already an NRC regulation; therefore, it would require a rulemaking to change the required reporting timeframe. However, in response to Nuclear Energy Institutes (NEI) concern, the NRC staff will revise the EPP template to include language to clarify when the clock would start for the four-hour reporting requirement. Also, in response to NEIs concern, the EPP template will be revised to clarify that the EPP does not expand the scope of reporting requirements under 10 CFR 50.72 In addressing the four-hour reporting requirement, the template will include language that explains that the clock starts at the time a decision is made to notify another agency or issue a press release. However, note that NUREG-1022 reporting guidance includes additional expectations for timely reporting. Section 2.5, Time Limits for Reporting, states, For the case
D. Walters of an event for which a news release is planned, as reported under 10 CFR 50.72(b)(2)(xi), the purpose of the report is to provide timely and accurate information so the NRC can respond to heightened public concern. Accordingly, it makes sense to provide the report by the time the news release is issued.
In the event that NRCs issuance of a permit, authorization, or license is not accompanied by issuance of an Incidental Take Permit, the NRC permit, authorization, or license would include an EPP to ensure NRCs ability to enforce future Terms and Conditions resulting from new or reinitiated Section 7 consultations concerning that permit, authorization, or license. While not all existing EPPs include such requirements, it is an important component of the EPP template, and it is in accordance with the ESA and 10 CFR 50.36b. You point out in your letter that while the NRC plans to include EPPs in all future combined licenses, not all current operating licenses contain EPPs. In our view, both the planned EPPs and the licensing bases for existing plants adequately ensure compliance with applicable environmental laws, including the ESA. The NRCs choice of a particular approach to ensure compliance with environmental laws in one context does not invalidate its decision to utilize a different method in another context.
A licensee commitment management program may have merit for reporting information related to environmental statutes other than the ESA. However, NRC is accountable for compliance with Terms and Conditions per the ESA, and in turn, NRC must ensure its licensees are complying with such Terms and Conditions. A licensees compliance with the ESA is not legally enforceable through a licensee commitment management program; the EPP is the vehicle NRC selected for enforcement of mandatory Terms and Conditions for new sites and new reactors.
This is consistent with 10 CFR 50.36b that environmental conditions be set out in an attachment and incorporated in and made a part of the permit or license.
The NRC staff does not have current plans to conduct another public meeting on this topic; however, if NEI needs further clarification regarding the statutory and regulatory bases of the EPP template, the NRC staff is available to discuss a potential path forward for the most efficient and effective mode of communication. If you have any questions, please contact Harriet Nash, Project Manager, at (301) 415-4100 or via e-mail to harriet.nash@nrc.gov.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Scott C. Flanders, Director Division of Site and Environmental Reviews Office of New Reactors
D. Walters of an event for which a news release is planned, as reported under 10 CFR 50.72(b)(2)(xi), the purpose of the report is to provide timely and accurate information so the NRC can respond to heightened public concern. Accordingly, it makes sense to provide the report by the time the news release is issued.
In the event that NRCs issuance of a permit, authorization, or license is not accompanied by issuance of an Incidental Take Permit, the NRC permit, authorization, or license would include an EPP to ensure NRCs ability to enforce future Terms and Conditions resulting from new or reinitiated Section 7 consultations concerning that permit, authorization, or license. While not all existing EPPs include such requirements, it is an important component of the EPP template, and it is in accordance with the ESA and 10 CFR 50.36b. You point out in your letter that while the NRC plans to include EPPs in all future combined licenses, not all current operating licenses contain EPPs. In our view, both the planned EPPs and the licensing bases for existing plants adequately ensure compliance with applicable environmental laws, including the ESA. The NRCs choice of a particular approach to ensure compliance with environmental laws in one context does not invalidate its decision to utilize a different method in another context.
A licensee commitment management program may have merit for reporting information related to environmental statutes other than the ESA. However, NRC is accountable for compliance with Terms and Conditions per the ESA, and in turn, NRC must ensure its licensees are complying with such Terms and Conditions. A licensees compliance with the ESA is not legally enforceable through a licensee commitment management program; the EPP is the vehicle NRC selected for enforcement of mandatory Terms and Conditions for new sites and new reactors.
This is consistent with 10 CFR 50.36b that environmental conditions be set out in an attachment and incorporated in and made a part of the permit or license.
The NRC staff does not have current plans to conduct another public meeting on this topic; however, if NEI needs further clarification regarding the statutory and regulatory bases of the EPP template, the NRC staff is available to discuss a potential path forward for the most efficient and effective mode of communication. If you have any questions, please contact Harriet Nash, Project Manager, at (301) 415-4100 or via e-mail to harriet.nash@nrc.gov.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Scott C. Flanders, Director Division of Site and Environmental Reviews Office of New Reactors DISTRIBUTION:
ADAMS RidsNroDserRenv NRO/RENV r/f NroRidsOgcMailCenter B Clayton RidsNroDserRap3 HNash MZobler, OGC ADAMS ACCESSION NO.: ML101110205 OFFICE PM:RENV//NRO LA:/NRO/LA PM:RAP2/NRO BC:RENV/NRO BC:IRIB/NRR OGC NLO DD:NRO w/changes NAME HNash GHawkins AKugler BClayton T. Kobetz JBiggins SFlanders
/hn/ /gdh/ /ak/ /bc/ Concurred by /jb/
phone/bc DATE 5/03/10 5/03/10 5 /03/10 5/10/10 5/13/10 5 / 19/ 10 6/9 /10 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY