ML24222A403
| ML24222A403 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/13/2024 |
| From: | Patricia Holahan Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards |
| To: | Johnson G Prairie Island Indian Community |
| References | |
| LR GEIS, RIN 3150-AK32, NRC-2018-0296 | |
| Download: ML24222A403 (1) | |
Text
August 13, 2024
Grant Johnson Tribal Council President Prairie Island Indian Community 5636 Sturgeon Lake Road Welch, MN 55089
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE TO THE PRAIRIE ISLAND INDIAN COMMUNITY REGARDING THE RENEWING NUCLEAR POWER PLANT OPERATING LICENSES -
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROPOSED RULE
Dear President Johnson:
Thank you for your letter providing comments on the Renewing Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses - Environmental Review, (NRC-2018- 0296; RIN 3150- AK32) proposed rule. The purpose of this letter is to inform the Prairie Island Indian Community of how its comments were addressed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff in the final rule. The final rule was published in the Federal Register on August 2, 2024 (89 FR 64166). The NRC is committed to a government-to-government relationship with federally recognized Tribal Nations and appreciates the Prairie Island Indian Communitys (PIICs) comments.
By letter dated April 26, 2023, the NRC received your comments that focused on aspects of the proposed rule and which requested the following: clarification of the meaning of the term action area under the Endangered Species Act, acknowledgement of a federal agencys responsibility to consult with Indian Tribes, reasons for reclassification of severe accidents from Category 2 (plant-specific) to Category 1 (generic), and a description of the scope of alternatives to license renewal. The NRC staff considered these comments when developing the final rule. Detailed responses to comments are provided in Appendix A, Section A.2 of NUREG -1437, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Revision 2 (LR GEIS)
(ML24087A133).
Use of the term Action Areas
As noted in the LR GEIS, the NRC must consider the effects of its actions (e.g., license renewal) on ecological resources protected under Federal statutes, including the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq.), Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. § 1801 et seq.), and National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. § 1431 et seq.). The term action area is a regulatory term defined in Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 402.02 (regulations implementing the ESA) that includes all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the Federal action and not merely the immediate area involved in the action. The action area varies based on the species and/or habitat and the Federal action, and it must be defined through a site-specific evaluation. As part of ESA Section 7 Consultation, the NRC defines the action area for the proposed action. This step then considers the federally listed species and critical habitats relevant to the review and the potential impacts those species and habitats might experience.
G. Johnson 2
In response to the PIICs comments, the NRC staff added the definition of action area to Section 4.6.1.3.1 ( Endangered Species Act: Federally Listed Species and Critical Habitats Under U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Jurisdiction) of the LR GEIS. The term action area only applies to federally listed species and critical habitats protected under the ESA and does not apply to resources protected under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and National Marine Sanctuaries Act. As a result, the NRC staff removed the term action area from Sections 4.6.1.3.3 (Magnuson-Stevens Act: Essential Fish Habitat) and 4.6.1.3.4 (National Marine Sanctuaries Act: Sanctuary Resources) of the LR GEIS and replaced it with the term affected area. Accordingly, confo rming changes were made to the final rule and associated guidance in NUREG-1555, Supplement 1, Revision 2, Standard Review Plans for Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power Plants, Supplement 1: Operating License Renewal (ML23201A227); and Regulatory Guide 4.2, Supplement 1, Revision 2, Preparation of Supplemental Environmental Reports for Applications to Renew Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses (ML23201A144).
Federal Agencys Responsibility to Consult with Indian Tribes
The NRC agrees that Tribal consultation for environmental reviews covers more than historic preservation issues. As an independent regulatory agency that does not hold in trust Tribal lands or assets or provide services to Federally recognized Tribes, the NRC fulfills its Trust Responsibility through implementation of the principles of the Tribal Policy Statement (82 FR 2402), by providing protections under its implementing regulations, and through recognition of additional obligations consistent with other applicable treaties and statutory authorities. The Tribal Policy Statement established a set of principles to guide the agencys government-to-government interactions with Federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native Tribes, promote effective government-to-government interactions with Indian Tribes, and to encourage and facilitate Tribal involvement in the areas over which the Commission has jurisdiction. The NRCs Tribal Policy Statement is consistent with the principles articulated in Executive Order 13175 ( 65 FR 67249). The Policy Statement also underscores the NRCs commitments to conducting outreach to Tribes, engaging in timely consultation, and coordinating with other Federal agencies.
As a result of the PIICs comments, the NRC added a reference to the NRCs Tribal Policy Statement in the final rule and determined that the revised LR GEIS and staff guidance would benefit from a more detailed discussion of the NRCs Tribal Policy Statement. The NRC added a discussion (Section 1.8.7, Consultations) to Chapter 1 of the revised LR GEIS and a new section (Tribal Policy Statement) to the Executive Summary of NUREG-1555.
Reclassification of Severe Accident Mitigation Alternatives from Category 2 to Category 1
The NRC acknowledges the concerns raised by the PIIC regarding the potential impacts of a severe accident on the Tribal community and business interests. The PIIC also stated that the NRC has a trust obligation to ensure that people, lands and resources of the tribe are protected.
The NRC has reclassified the issue of Severe accidents as a Category 1, or generic, issue to more accurately reflect the procedural posture of the vast majority of license renewal applicants expected to reference the revised LR GEIS. Under the previous (2013) LR GEIS and rule, the NRC resolved the impacts of severe accidents generically but required an analysis of severe accident mitigation for applicants that had not previously conducted such an analysis. For applicants that had, the issue was the functional equivalent of a Category 1 issue. At this time, the NRC expects most, if not all, facilities that are the subject of license renewal applications will have had a previous severe accident mitigation analysis (SAMA) completed. Therefore, the G. Johnson 3
issue is most accurately characterized as Category 1. Moreover, the analysis in Appendix E of the revised LR GEIS further confirms the technical basis for the agencys policy of requiring only one SAMA.
However, designation of an issue as a Category 1 issue does not mean that potential impacts are not considered. During preparation of plant-specific supplements to the LR GEIS, the NRC staff considers changes in nuclear power plant operating parameters and new and significant information provided by the applicant, identified through public comments, or resulting from the NRCs due diligence in reviewing relevant information are considered during preparation of plant-specific supplements to the revised LR GEIS. Data are reviewed in part for information that could change the conclusion in the revised LR GEIS with regard to an issue. Thus, even though an issue is considered to be a Category 1 issue, mechanisms are in place to conduct a full plant-specific review if new and significant information warrants such a review.
As stated above, the NRC acknowledges that the Federal government has a Trust Relationship and Trust Responsibility to Indian Tribes in the agencys Tribal Policy Statement (82 FR 2402).
Under the Federal Trust Doctrine, the United States - and the individual agencies of the Federal government - owe a fiduciary duty to Indian Tribes. The nature of that duty depends on the underlying substantive laws (i.e., treaties, statutes, agreements) creating that duty. The NRC exercises its Trust Responsibility under its authorizing statutes, including the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1985, and the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, as amended.
Consideration of Alternatives
The NRC acknowledges the PIICs comments concerning the information presented in the proposed rule regarding environmental impacts of alternatives to the proposed action within the scope of Category 2 issues. In plant-specific license renewal environmental reviews, the NRC considers the environmental consequences of the proposed action, the no action alternative (i.e., not renewing the operating license), and the environmental consequences of various alternatives for replacing or offsetting the nuclear power plants generating capacity. The revised LR GEIS describes alternative energy sources that the NRC has identified as being potentially capable of meeting the purpose and need of the proposed action (license renewal). The NRCs analysis of replacement energy sources includes both baseload and non-baseload energy sources. The NRC further recognizes the ongoing changes in the nations energy landscape, including continuing trends in the reduced use of many fossil fuels and the increased deployment of renewables and storage.
Sections 7.1 and 7.2 of Regulatory Guide 4.2, Supplement 1, Revision 2 provides guidance to license renewal applicants and describes the types of alternatives to license renewal whose impacts should be considered in future project-specific environmental reviews. These include alternatives for replacing existing nuclear generating capacity with alternative energy sources, alternatives for offsetting existing capacity with other non-power generating approaches, and alternatives for reducing adverse impacts. Accordingly, the range of alternatives evaluated in depth in each nuclear plant -specific environmental review would be based on the reasonableness of alternatives specific to that plant.
The NRC appreciates the PIICs comments and looks forward to future engagement on NRC activities. If you have any questions regarding the final rule or revised LR GEIS, please contact, Yanely Malave, Rulemaking Project Manager, Jennifer Davis, Senior Environmental Project G. Johnson 4
Manager, or Kevin Folk, Senior Environmental Project Manager, or, at 1-800-368-5642, extensions 3835, 1519, or 6944 (respectively), or by email at Yanely.Malave@nrc.gov,
Jennifer.Davis@nrc.gov, or Kevin.Folk@nrc.gov.
Sincerely,
Patricia K. Holahan, Director Subsequent License Environmental Directorate Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
cc: Heather Westra, Consultant Prairie Island Indian Community 5636 Sturgeon Lake Road Welch, MN 55089
G. Johnson 5
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE TO THE PRAIRIE ISLAND INDIAN COMMUNITY - RENEWING NUCLEAR POWER PLANT OPERATING LICENSESENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, DATED: AUGUST 13, 2024
DISTRIBUTION:
YMalave, NMSS THolahan, NMSS IBerrios, NMSS BRogers, NMSS LGibson, NRR NMorgan, NMSS JDavis, NMSS KFolk, NMSS RHoffman, NMSS
ADAMS Accession No.: ML24222A403
- via e-mail OFFICE NMSS/SLED NMSS/SLED NMSS/MSST/TRT OGC NMSS/SLED NAME YMalave JDavis NMorgan* Msmith* PHolahan DATE 08/08/2024 08/08/2024 08/08/2024 08/09/2024 08/09/2024 OFFICIAL RECORD C OPY