ML25149A256
| ML25149A256 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/20/2025 |
| From: | Doub J, Richmond M Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards |
| To: | |
| References | |
| Download: ML25149A256 (1) | |
Text
Incorporation by ReferenceIBR A Tool for Streamlining NEPA Documents
NEPA Tools-Meeting New Requirements 2
The Fiscal Responsibility Act On June 3, 2023, President Biden signed the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (FRA), which codified multiple best practices into NEPA to facilitate efficiency.
Key NEPA amendments relating to efficiency include:
Clarifying requirements for determining the appropriate level of NEPA review.
Clarifying roles and responsibilities of lead and cooperating agencies.
Calling for a single environmental document when more than one Federal agency is involved.
Setting page limits and deadlines for EISs (150 pages; 2 years) and EAs (75 pages; 1 year).
Establishing a process for Federal agencies to use another agency's categorical exclusions.
NEPA Tools-Tiering and Incorporation by Reference 3
Tiering and Incorporation by Reference are two key tools to reduce page length, preparation time, and redundant analysis.
§ 1501.11 Programmatic environmental documents and tiering.
(b) Tiering. Where an existing [NEPA document] is relevant to a later proposed action, agencies may employ tiering. Tiering allows subsequent tiered environmental analysis to avoid duplication and focus on issues, effects, or alternatives not fully addressed in a [NEPA document] prepared at an earlier phase or stage. Agencies generally should tier their [NEPA documents] when it would eliminate repetitive discussions of the same issues, focus on the actual issues ripe for decision, and exclude from consideration issues already decided
§ 1501.12 Incorporation by reference into environmental documents.
Agencies shall incorporate material, such as planning studies, analyses, or other relevant information, into environmental documents by reference when the effect will be to cut down on bulk without impeding agency and public review of the action.
Agencies shall cite the incorporated material in the document, briefly describe its content, and briefly explain the relevance of the incorporated material to the environmental document. Agencies shall not incorporate material by reference unless it is reasonably available for [public] review
- Appendix A to Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51-1. General(b) The techniques of tiering and incorporation by reference... of CEQ's NEPA regulations may be used as appropriate to aid in the presentation of issues, eliminate repetition...
NEPA Tools-Tiering and Incorporation by Reference 4
IBR is a necessary step in tiering, but tiering is not the same as IBR.
Tiering uses IBR; however, tiering specifically refers to previous EAs or EISs and use of IBR in a tiered document. That is, tiering is utilizing the coverage of general matters in broader NEPA documents in subsequent, narrower NEPA documents.
Tiering is appropriate when the analysis for the proposed action will be a more site-specific or project-specific refinement or extension of the existing NEPA document.
Use of NRCs Generic EISs is an example of tiering.
NEPA Tools-IBRThe Three Principles 5
There are three principles, identified in CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1501) and NRC (10 CFR Part 51, Appendix A), that must be adhered to:
- 1. Citation Specificity, Public Availability: Prior to the IBR of any document, assure it is publicly available. In instances where parts of a document are IBRd, specify the pertinent section(s), page numbers, figures, and tables when citing.
- 2. Summarize and Independently Verify: Prior to IBR, independently evaluate and verify the reliability of the information referenced. A brief summary of the content, in the context of the analysis at hand, along with the independent evaluation, must be provided in a manner that does not result in a loss of comprehension to the reader. The summary must be able to stand alone and provide sufficient analysis to allow the decision maker to arrive at a conclusion. No conclusions can be IBRd; this includes conclusions from an applicants environmental documents.
- 3. New Information and Relevance to Proposed Federal Action: In the evaluation, identify and discuss any new circumstances or information relevant to the environmental analysis which bears on the proposed Federal action or any potential impacts that were not considered in the documents being IBRd.
Best Practices-Staff Guidance on IBR 6
Staff Guidance on IBR Approach based on Three Principles:
Environmental reviewers are encouraged to IBR relevant information from other publicly available documents.
IBR is not limited to other NEPA documents. Staff may also IBR from special technical or professional studies and analyses prepared by the Federal, State, and local agencies; Tribal governments; or private interests.
Other technical documents usable for IBR may include cultural resource surveys; wetland surveys; ecological surveys; application information submitted for NPDES or air permit application; EPRI studies; or other third party contracted studies.
The staff must only IBR documents that are publicly available and that have been independently verified.
IBR from applicant documents (such as the ER and SAR) may be appropriate. The staff should not, however, incorporate by reference conclusions from the applicant.
10 CFR 51.41 states, in part, that [t]he Commission will independently evaluate and be responsible for the reliability of any information which it uses. As such, the staff is responsible for evaluating and verifying the reliability of IBR information.
Best Practices -
Cite and identify the material that is subject to IBR 7
Be specific.
Indicate the exact:
o Pages o Subsection or Section o Figure or Table Define the incorporated material as tightly as possible.
o Avoid IBR of entire multidisciplinary document o IBR only material that is specifically relevant o IBR of specific figures, tables, pages, or subsections is desirable o It should be immediately evident to the reader what material is relevant
Best Practices-Potential Sources to Consider for IBR Application Materials Environmental Report PSAR or SAR RCIs and Responses RAI Responses Application Updates Past Environmental Documentation
- Past EISs and EAs of Other Agencies Other Documents Document must be readily accessible to the general public Material IBRd must not contain any non-public information There must not be any copyright infringement
Best Practices-Do Not IBR Conclusions You as the SME must draw your own conclusions in each EIS or EA. Never IBR any conclusions or basis for those conclusions.
This is especially true for applicant-prepared information sources. You can IBR the applicants information but not conclusions.
Base your conclusions and rationale for your conclusions on relevant new information presented in the EIS or EA and on any relevant IBRd information. They are of equivalent utility.
Consider removing from the EIS or EA any information, whether new or IBR, that does not figure into your conclusions or rationale for your conclusions.
IBR Examples-IBR Example 1:
Hermes2 The two proposed Hermes 2 non-power test reactors would be built on the same site proposed for the Hermes non-power test reactor.
Baseline land use conditions on and around that site, designated as the Kairos site, were characterized in Section 3.1 of the Hermes CP EIS, which is incorporated by reference and was used to develop baseline land use conditions for Hermes 2 (NRC 2023-TN9771). The site consists of approximately 185 ac situated in the Heritage Center in the ETTP within the City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The site was previously included within the DOE ORR and accommodated two large buildings (i.e., Buildings K-31 and K-33) that were operated by DOE until 1985 as part of the ORGDP.
Notes:
- 1. Identifies a specific subsection that IBRs specific relevant information
- 2. States that the material is incorporated by reference
- 3. Indicates how the IBR material will be used
- 4. Provides a Citation allowing rapid access by a member of the general public
- 5. Follows the IBR with a brief summary of the IBR material
IBR Examples-IBR Example 2:
Hermes2 The applicant indicates in Chapter 3 of the ER (Kairos 2023-TN9774) that the ecological characterization provided for the site for Hermes is applicable to Hermes 2. The terrestrial and aquatic habitats surrounding the Kairos site are described in Section 3.4.1 of the Hermes CP EIS (NRC 2023-TN9771), which is incorporated by reference. The terrestrial habitat within the 185-ac site consists of 88 ac of developed land, 72 ac of herbaceous grassland,19 ac of deciduous forest, and 6 ac of mixed evergreen/deciduous forest. The developed land and herbaceous grassland areas largely correspond to areas previously occupied by industrial development. The forested areas only occur on the perimeter of the site and in riparian zones separating previously developed land from Poplar Creek. This border between Poplar Creek and the forest includes the only wetlands on the site. There are no aquatic habitats within the site, but it is adjacent to Poplar Creek. There is also a 17-ac holding pond approximately 700 ft west-southwest of the site.
Notes:
1.
Identifies a specific subsection that IBRs specific relevant information 2.
States that the material is incorporated by reference 3.
Indicates how the IBRd material will be used 4.
Provides a Citation allowing rapid access by a member of the general public 5.
Follows the IBR with a brief summary of the IBRd material
IBR Examples-IBR Example 3:
Palisades The NRC staff evaluated previous environmental documents and analyses with regard to terrestrial ecology along with their relevance to potential environmental effects of the proposed Federal actions at the Palisades site. Portions of the following environmental documents relevant to the subject area are incorporated by reference to support the NRC staffs significance effects determination for terrestrial ecology (see Table 1-2 of this EA):
2006 SEIS (NRC 2006-TN7346): Sections: 2.2.6, Terrestrial Resources; 2.2.7, Radiological Impacts; 3.0, Environmental Impacts of Refurbishment; 4.1, Cooling System; 4.2, Transmission Lines; 4.6, Threatened or Endangered Species N&S Report (Holtec 2023-TN10538): Sections: 2.1.1,..
Only a few small and scattered wetlands occur on the Palisades site. The 2006 SEIS (NRC 2006-TN7346: p. 2-34) notes that onsite wetlands encompass a total area of 9 ac (3.6 ha). The NRC staff accessed the online National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapper on June 14, 2024 (FWS 2024-TN10691) and downloaded Michigan NWI data for analysis.
The NWI mapper showed nine mapped wetlands onsite, The applicant proposes specific preparation activities to prepare for resumption of operation (HDI 2024-TN10670: RAI-GEN-1). The NRC staff reviewed these activities and associated shapefiles provided by the applicant and conducted an independent analysis of the terrestrial habitats to be disturbed. The activities would disturb approximately 11 ac (4.5 ha) of sparsely vegetated land outside of existing built areas (HDI 2024-TN10670:
RAI-GEN-1) (Table 3-1 of this EA). Preparation activities, including those in sparsely vegetated areas, are proposed only within areas of previously disturbed soils,..
Notes:
1.
Citation Specificity, Public Availability: Principle 1.
2.
Summarize and Independently Verify: Principle 2.
3.
New Information and Relevance to Proposed Federal Action: Principle 3
Final Thoughts
IBR can be a useful tool to reduce the page length and preparation costs of EISs and EAs, enabling faster and cheaper review schedules without sacrificing technical accuracy or thoroughness.
Remember that when you IBR, you are just as responsible for the accuracy of the IBRed material as you are for material you write yourself. You are basically adopting someone elses writing as your own.
IBR is more than just referencing or a citation. You are essentially placing the incorporated material into your own writing, making it as if you wrote the material yourself.
IBR judiciously. Incorporating too much material by reference is just as bad as writing too much new material. Do not make it hard for a reader to find and read the incorporated material. IBR is not a substitute for concise writing.
IBR as narrowly as possible. Identify specific figures, tables, text subsections, or pages. Ideally, each IBR will incorporate no more than one or two pages of directly relevant material. Do not make readers sift through irrelevant material to find the relevant material.
Include a brief yet meaningful explanation each piece of material you IBR. Ideally, a reader should be able to read the EIS or EA at a high-level without having to trace material subject to IBR.
If you IBR material that itself contains IBR, trace to the original (primary) source if possible. Verify the technical accuracy and timeliness of the original material and update or adjust accordingly. Do not assume that secondary sources that IBR an original source have necessarily completed necessary updates.
Questions?