ML25120A069
| ML25120A069 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/2025 |
| From: | Mary Johnson NRC/NRR/DNRL/NLRP |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML25120A066 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML25120A069 (8) | |
Text
1 RECORD OF DECISION U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET NUMBER: 50-395 SUBSEQUENT LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 BACKGROUND The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received an application dated August 17, 2023 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Package Accession No. ML23233A179), from Dominion Energy South Carolina, Inc. (Dominion) filed pursuant to Section 103 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 USC 2011 et seq.) (AEA);
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 51, Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions, and 10 CFR Part 54, Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants, for subsequent renewal of the renewed operating license for Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (V.C. Summer). The application was supplemented by letters dated April 1, 2024 (ML24095A207), May 6, 2024 (ML24129A200), May 30, 2024 (ML24155A146), June 17, 2024 (ML24171A015), and October 24, 2024 (ML24302A144).
V.C. Summer is a pressurized water reactor located near Jenkinsville, SC. Dominion is authorized to operate the facility at reactor core power levels not in excess of 2,900 megawatts thermal. On November 3, 2023, the NRC staff published in the Federal Register (FR) a notice of receipt and availability of the subsequent license renewal application (SLRA) (88 FR 75627),
including the environmental report (ER).
The AEA specifies that licenses for commercial power reactors can be granted for an initial period of up to 40 years. The NRC regulations permit these licenses to be renewed beyond the initial 40-year term for an additional period, limited to 20-year increments per renewal, based on the results of an assessment to determine whether the nuclear facility can continue to operate safely during the proposed period of extended operation. There are no limitations in the AEA or NRC regulations restricting the number of times a license may be renewed.
The initial renewed V.C. Summer facility operating license, NPF-12, expires on August 6, 2042.
The subsequently renewed facility operating license would authorize Dominion to operate V.C.
Summer until August 6, 2062.
Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), directs that an environmental impact statement (EIS) be prepared for any major Federal action that has the potential to significantly affect the quality of the human environment. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.20(b)(2), the NRC prepares an EIS for the issuance of a renewed reactor operating license, regardless of the actions environmental impact significance. The NRCs Federal action is to decide whether to issue a subsequently renewed operating license for V.C. Summer, authorizing operation until August 6, 2062, as proposed in the application.
On October 16, 2023, the NRC staff published a notice of opportunity to request a hearing (88 FR 71384), and on November 3, 2023, the NRC staff published a notice of intent to prepare
2 a site-specific EIS and conduct scoping for the V.C. Summer SLRA (88 FR 75627). In addition, Federal, State, and local agencies, as well as Tribal governments, were notified and asked to provide comments on and to participate in the environmental scoping process and review. On November 9, 2023, the NRC staff held a public webinar and on November 14, 2023, the staff held an in-person public meeting to obtain public input on the scope of the NRCs environmental review of the V.C. Summer SLRA. On December 6, 2023, the NRC staff published a summary of both meetings (ML23331A789). In November 2024, the NRC staff issued a Scoping Summary Report (ML24278A042).
On November 26, 2024, the NRC staff issued a draft supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) (NUREG-1437, Supplement 15, Second Renewal) for public comment, providing the preliminary results of the NRC staffs environmental evaluation of the V.C.
Summer SLRA review (ML24330A271). A notice of availability of the draft SEIS was published in the FR on December 6, 2024 (89 FR 97077). A public comment period began on December 6, 2024, when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a notice of availability (89 FR 96960) of the draft SEIS to allow members of the public and agencies an opportunity to comment on the results of the environmental review. On January 23, 2025, the public comment period was reopened for an additional 19 days until February 11, 2025, to accommodate a rescheduled in-person public meeting and to provide additional time for members of the public to develop and submit comments (90 FR 8056). EPAs notice extending the comment period was issued in the FR on January 31, 2025 (90 FR 8715). On December 17, 2024, the NRC staff held a public webinar and on January 28, 2025, the staff held an in-person public meeting to present the preliminary results of the environmental review, respond to questions, and accept public comments. On April 29, 2025, the NRC staff published a meeting summary of both meetings (ML25115A041). The comment period ended on February 11, 2025.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT In accordance with 10 CFR 51.95(c), the NRC staff documents its environmental review of each SLRA and publishes it as a plant-specific supplement to NUREG1437, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants (License Renewal GEIS, or LR GEIS), as revised. The LR GEIS documents the results of the NRC staffs systematic approach to evaluating the incremental environmental effects (impacts) of renewing the operating licenses of commercial nuclear power plants. The LR GEIS1 provides the technical bases for the NRC staffs environmental impact findings on generic (Category 1) issues for initial and subsequent license renewal (SLR) contained in Table B-1, Summary of Findings on NEPA Issues for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants, in Appendix B, Environmental Effect of Renewing the Operating License of a Nuclear Power Plant, to Subpart A, National Environmental Policy ActRegulations Implementing Section 102(2), of 10 CFR Part 51. Category 2 issues are to be evaluated by license renewal (LR) and SLR applicants, and by the NRC staff, on a plant-specific basis.
On February 24, 2022, the Commission issued three memoranda and orders that addressed the NRC staffs environmental reviews in SLR proceedings: CLI-22-02, CLI-22-03, and CLI-22-04.
In these decisions, the Commission concluded that the 2013 LR GEIS, on which the NRC staff had relied, in part, to meet its obligations under 10 CFR Part 51 and NEPA for its environmental 1 The most recent revision of the LR GEIS was issued in August 2024, as NUREG-1437, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Revision 2, Volumes 1-3 (Aug. 2024) (ML24086A526, ML24086A527, and ML24086A528).
3 reviews for the affected nuclear power plant subsequent license renewal applications (SLRAs),
did not consider SLR.
In CLI-22-03, the Commission directed the NRC staff to update the LR GEIS so that it considers nuclear power plant operation during the SLR period of extended operation (PEO). The Commission stated that it believed the most efficient way to proceed would be for the NRC staff to update the LR GEIS and then take appropriate action with respect to pending SLRAs to ensure that the environmental impacts of SLR are considered. The Commission provided an option for SLR applicants to submit additional information about environmental impacts during the SLR PEO, in which they must evaluate, on a site-specific basis, the environmental impacts for Category 1 (generic) issues. For SLR applicants that provided such information, the NRC staff was directed to address the environmental impacts of these issues in a site-specific EIS.
Consistent with CLI-22-03, on August 17, 2023, Dominion submitted its ER (ML23233A174),
providing a site-specific analysis of the environmental impacts of the continued operation of V.C. Summer during the SLR period, for all Category 1 (generic) and Category 2 (site-specific) issues. On November 3, 2023, the NRC staff issued a notice of intent to prepare a site-specific EIS and conduct scoping (88 FR 75627), consistent with the Commissions orders.
On August 6, 2024, the NRC amended its environmental protection regulations by updating the Commissions 2013 findings on the environmental effects of renewing the operating license of a nuclear power plant. This final rule redefines the number and scope of the environmental issues that must be addressed during the review of each application for LR and specifically considers the environmental effects of SLR. As part of this update, the NRC issued Revision 2 to the LR GEIS to account for new information and to address the impacts of initial LR as well as one 20-year period of SLR. The LR GEIS, Revision 2, provides the technical basis for the final rule.
Compliance by LR and SLR applicants is not required until 1 year from the date of publication (i.e., August 6, 2025).
The final rule became effective for NRC staff on September 5, 2024. Accordingly, on October 1, 2024, the NRC staff noticed its intent to prepare a site-specific supplement to the LR GEIS for the V.C. Summer SLRA (89 FR 79975). The SEIS relies on the LR GEIS determinations for Category 1 (generic) issues that apply to all or a distinct subset of nuclear power plants. Plant-specific information will be considered only for Category 2 (plant-specific) issues and will be screened for new and significant information on Category 1 issues.
As stated above, on November 26, 2024, the NRC staff issued a draft SEIS (ML24330A271),
which was published in the FR for public comment on December 6, 2024 (89 FR 97077). The SEIS evaluated the environmental impacts for Category 2 (plant-specific) issues and relied upon the determinations in the 2024 LR GEIS for Category 1 (generic) issues. On January 23, 2025, the public comment period was reopened for an additional 19 days until February 11, 2025, to accommodate a rescheduled in-person public meeting (90 FR 8056). As discussed above, the NRC held two public meetings to present the preliminary results of the environmental review, respond to questions, and accept public comments. The comment period ended on February 11, 2025.
On May 8, 2025, the NRC staff issued its final SEIS, providing its final evaluation of the environmental impacts of V.C. Summer SLR; the notice of issuance was published in the FR on May 16, 2025 (ML25128A160; 90 FR 21082). On May 16, 2025, the EPA published a notice of
4 availability of the final SEIS (90 FR 21031).2 Appendix A to the final SEIS discusses the comments received during the draft SEIS comment period. After consideration of those comments and its independent review, the NRC staff concluded that the adverse environmental impacts of SLR for V.C. Summer are not so great that preserving the option of SLR for energy planning decision-makers would be unreasonable. This recommendation is based on (1) information provided in the ER, as supplemented, and other documents submitted by Dominion; (2) the NRC staffs consultations with Federal, State, local, and Tribal agencies; (3) the NRC staffs independent environmental review; and (4) the NRC staffs consideration of public comments received during the scoping process and on the draft SEIS.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.102(b) and 51.103(a)(1) - (5), the NRC staff has prepared this ROD to accompany its Federal action on the V.C. Summer SLRA. This ROD incorporates by reference materials contained in the final SEIS, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.103(c).
The SEIS evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Federal action. The NRC designates these environmental impacts as SMALL, MODERATE, or LARGE.
SMALL: Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource.
MODERATE: Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, important attributes of the resource.
LARGE: Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.
The NRC staffs recommendation in the final SEIS is that the adverse environmental impacts of SLR for V.C. Summer (i.e., the continued operation of V.C. Summer for a period of 20 years beyond the expiration date of the initial renewed license) are not so great that preserving the option of SLR for energy planning decision-makers would be unreasonable.
DECISION Pursuant to 10 CFR 54.29, Standards for issuance of a renewed license, a renewed license may be issued if the Commission finds, in part, that the LR application satisfies the requirements of 10 CFR Part 54, and any applicable requirements of Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51 have been satisfied; pursuant to 10 CFR 51.102, this includes the completion of the ROD.
The final SEIS, which is incorporated by reference herein, documents the NRC staffs recommendation that the adverse environmental impacts of SLR for V.C. Summer are not so great that preserving the option of LR for energy planning decision-makers would be unreasonable, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.103(a)(5). In the 1996 final rule amending 10 CFR Part 51 (61 FR 28467), the Commission explained the following:
Given the uncertainties involved and the lack of control that the NRC has in the choice of energy alternatives in the future, the Commission believes that it is reasonable to exercise its NEPA authority to reject LR applications only when it 2The EPA notice of availability established a 30-day cooling off period (90 FR 21031), which expired on June 16, 2025.
5 has determined that the impacts of license renewal sufficiently exceed the impacts of all or almost all of the alternatives that preserving the option of license renewal for future decision-makers would be unreasonable.
In making its licensing decision on the proposed Federal action to authorize the continued operation of V.C. Summer through August 6, 2062, the NRC must make a favorable safety finding. The purpose of the NRCs safety review is to determine whether the applicant has adequately demonstrated that the effects of aging will not adversely affect the intended functions of any systems, structures, and components specified in 10 CFR 54.4, Scope, and 10 CFR 54.21, Contents of applicationtechnical information. The applicant must demonstrate that the effects of aging will be adequately managed so that the intended functions will be maintained during the SLR period. The staff documented the results of its safety review in Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Subsequent License Renewal of Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Revision 1 dated March 4, 2025 (ML25062A234). The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards provided its independent review and report (ML25076A659) to the Commission in accordance with 10 CFR 54.25, Report of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, regarding the application for subsequent renewal of the operating license for V.C. Summer.
PURPOSE AND NEED The purpose and need for the proposed Federal action (issuance of a subsequent renewed license for V.C. Summer) is to provide an option that allows for power generation capability beyond the term of the current renewed nuclear power plant operating license to meet future system-generating needs. Such needs may be determined by energy planning decision-makers such as State regulators, utility owners, and Federal agencies other than the NRC. This definition of purpose and need reflects the Commissions recognition that, unless there are findings in the NRCs safety review (required by the AEA) or findings in the NRCs environmental analysis (required by NEPA) that would lead the NRC to reject an SLR application, the agency does not have a role in energy planning decisions as to whether a particular nuclear power plant should continue to operate. Ultimately, the appropriate energy planning decision-makers and Dominion will decide whether V.C. Summer will continue to operate based on factors such as the need for power or other matters within the States jurisdiction or the purview of the owners.
NRC EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES In LR environmental reviews, the NRC considers the environmental consequences of the proposed action (i.e., renewing the operating license), the environmental consequences of the no-action alternative (i.e., not renewing the operating license), and the environmental consequences of reasonable alternatives for replacing the nuclear power plants generating capacity. Section 102(2)(C)(iii) of NEPA and the NRCs regulations require the consideration of alternatives to the proposed action in the supplemental EIS. In this case, the proposed action would authorize the applicant to operate V.C. Summer for an additional period of 20 years beyond the expiration date of the current renewed licenses, as requested in the application.
Chapter 2 of the SEIS, Environmental Consequences and Mitigating Actions, presents the NRC staffs evaluation and analysis of the environmental impacts of the proposed action and alternatives to SLR. The evaluation considered the environmental impacts of each alternative across the following impact areas: land use and visual resources, air quality and noise, geologic environment, water resources, terrestrial resources, aquatic resources, special status species, historic and cultural resources, socioeconomics, human health, and waste management.
6 As explained in the discussion of purpose and need for the proposed Federal action, outside of the safety and environmental reviews, the NRC does not have a role in the energy planning decisions as to whether a particular nuclear power plant should continue to operate. Should the renewed operating license not be subsequently renewed, and the nuclear plant shuts down at the end of its current renewed license, the appropriate energy planning decision-makers will decide how best to replace the nuclear power plants generating capacity. In evaluating alternatives to SLR in the EIS, the NRC staff considered energy technologies or options in commercial operation, as well as technologies not currently in commercial operation but likely to be commercially available by the time the current V.C. Summer renewed operating license expires.
For a replacement power alternative to be considered reasonable, it must be both commercially viable on a utility scale and operational before the reactors operating license expires or expected to become commercially viable on a utility scale and operational before the expiration of the reactors operating license. The current renewed operating license for V.C. Summer expires on August 6, 2042. Therefore, to be considered in this evaluation, reasonable alternatives must be available (i.e., constructed, permitted, and connected to the grid) by those dates. To determine whether alternatives were reasonable, or likely to be commercially suitable to replace V.C. Summer, the NRC staff reviewed energy-relevant statutes, regulations, and policies; the state of technologies; and information on energy outlook from sources such as the Energy Information Administration, other organizations within the U.S. Department of Energy, industry sources and publications, and information submitted by Dominion in its ER.
Table 1 provides a summary (comparison) of environmental impacts of the proposed action and alternatives. As summarized in Table 1, the four replacement power alternatives have 10 identified environmental impacts that are greater than the impacts from the proposed action of SLR. Based on the NRC staffs review, the staff concludes that the environmentally preferred alternative is the proposed action of SLR.
Table 1:
Summary of Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives Impact Area (Resource)
V.C.
Summer Subsequent License Renewal (Proposed Action)
No-Action Alternative Natural Gas Alternative New Nuclear (Small Modular Reactor)
Alternative Natural Gas and Solar Combination Alternative New Nuclear and Solar Combination Alternative Land Use SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL MODERATE TO LARGE SMALL TO MODERATE Visual Resources SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL TO MODERATE Air Quality SMALL SMALL MODERATE SMALL SMALL TO MODERATE SMALL Noise SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL TO MODERATE SMALL
7 Impact Area (Resource)
V.C.
Summer Subsequent License Renewal (Proposed Action)
No-Action Alternative Natural Gas Alternative New Nuclear (Small Modular Reactor)
Alternative Natural Gas and Solar Combination Alternative New Nuclear and Solar Combination Alternative Geologic Environment SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL TO MODERATE SMALL SMALL TO MODERATE Surface Water Resources SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL TO MODERATE SMALL SMALL Groundwater Resources SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL Terrestrial Resources SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL MODERATE TO LARGE SMALL TO MODERATE Aquatic Resources SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL TO MODERATE SMALL TO MODERATE SMALL TO MODERATE Federally Protected Ecological Resources SEE NOTE(a) SEE NOTE(b) SEE NOTE(c) SEE NOTE(c) SEE NOTE(c) SEE NOTE(c)
Historic and Cultural Resources SEE NOTE(d) SEE NOTE(e) SEE NOTE(f) SEE NOTE(f) SEE NOTE(f)
SEE NOTE(f)
Socioeconomics SMALL MODERATE TO LARGE SMALL TO LARGE SMALL TO LARGE SMALL TO MODERATE SMALL TO LARGE Transportation SMALL SMALL SMALL TO LARGE SMALL TO LARGE SMALL TO MODERATE SMALL TO LARGE Human Health SMALL(g)
SMALL(g)
SMALL(g)
SMALL(g)
SMALL(g)
SMALL(g)
Waste Management and Pollution Prevention SMALL(h)
SMALL(h)
SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL (a) May affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, tricolored bat and monarch butterfly. No effect on essential fish habitat (EFH). No effect on sanctuary resources of National Marine Sanctuaries.
(b) Overall, the effects on federally listed species, critical habitat, and EFH would likely be smaller under the no-action alternative than the effects under continued operation, but that would depend on the specific shutdown activities as well as the listed species, critical habitats, and designated EFH present when the no-action alternative is implemented.
(c) The types and magnitudes of adverse impacts to species listed in the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), designated critical habitat, and EFH would depend on the proposed alternative site, nuclear power plant design and operation, as well as listed species and habitats present when the alternative is implemented. Therefore, the NRC staff cannot forecast a level of impact for this alternative.
(d) Based on the location of historic properties within and near the area of potential effect, Tribal input, Dominions administrative procedures, a site-specific cultural resource management plan, and no planned physical changes or ground-disturbing activities, the proposed action (SLR) would not adversely affect historic properties.
8 (e) Until the post-shutdown decommissioning activities report is submitted, the NRC staff cannot determine whether historic properties would be affected outside the existing industrial site boundary after the nuclear power plant is shut down.
(f) Impacts of this alternative would be dependent on the specific site location, plant design, layout of buildings, and vertical and horizontal depth of planned ground disturbance activities. The South Carolina Department of Archives and History (SCDAH) would need to be consulted prior to any activities to determine the presence or absence of historic properties. If historic properties are determined to be present, impacts would be assessed and, if applicable, mitigated with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the SCDAH, and consulting Tribes through the Section 106 process.
(g) The chronic effects of electromagnetic fields on human health associated with operating nuclear power and other electricity generating plants are uncertain.
(h) NUREG-2157, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, discusses the environmental impacts of spent fuel storage for the timeframe beyond the licensed life for reactor operations.
MITIGATION MEASURES The NRC has taken all practicable measures within its jurisdiction to avoid or minimize environmental harm from the alternative selected. Continued operation of V.C. Summer would have SMALL environmental impacts in all resource areas. The NRC is not imposing any license conditions in connection with mitigation measures. However, V.C. Summer is subject to requirements, including permits, authorizations, and regulatory orders, imposed by other Federal, State, and local agencies governing facility operation. The NRC is not requiring any new environmental monitoring programs outside what is required by V.C. Summers current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits and water quality certification or is otherwise required of the licensee under NRC regulations, as described in the V.C. Summer final SEIS.
DETERMINATION Based on the NRC staffs (1) independent review, analysis, and evaluation contained in the final SEIS; (2) careful consideration of all of the identified social, economic, and environmental factors; (3) input received from other agencies, organizations, and the public; and (4) consideration of mitigation measures, the NRC has determined that the standards for the issuance of a subsequent renewed operating license, with respect to the environmental matters as described in 10 CFR 54.29(b), have been met and that the requirements of Section 102 of NEPA, as prescribed in 10 CFR 51.103, Record of decisiongeneral, have been satisfied.
The NRC has determined that the adverse environmental impacts of issuing a subsequent renewed operating license for V.C. Summer are not great enough that preserving the option of SLR for energy planning decision-makers would be unreasonable.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30 day of June 2025.
APPROVED BY:
/RA/
Michele M. Sampson, Director Division of New and Renewed Licenses Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation