The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is in the process of rescinding or revising guidance and policies posted on this webpage in accordance with Executive Order 14151 Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing, and Executive Order 14168 Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government. In the interim, any previously issued diversity, equity, inclusion, or gender-related guidance on this webpage should be considered rescinded that is inconsistent with these Executive Orders.

In-Scope versus Out-of-Scope Issues

On this page:

Why are there limits on the scope of the environmental review?

The scope consists of the range of actions, alternatives, and impacts to be considered in an environmental review. But there are a number of issues, as discussed below, that do not fall within the scope of the environmental review for a specific project either because the issue is not environmental, because it is not related to the current project, or because it has been precluded from consideration by rule. The purpose of scoping (performed before the NRC drafts an EIS) is to identify the significant issues related to a proposed action. Scoping also identifies and eliminates from detailed study those issues that are not significant or have been covered by a prior environmental review. Having a defined scope for the environmental review allows the NRC to concentrate on the essential issues of actions being considered rather than on issues that may have been or are being evaluated in different regulatory review processes, such as a safety review.

To top of page

What issues are precluded from consideration during an environmental review?

Several issues are not considered in the environmental review conducted by the NRC, including but not limited to:

  • changes to nuclear power plant cooling systems for operating power plants
  • disposition of spent nuclear fuel (see 10 CFR 51.23)
  • emergency preparedness
  • safeguards and security
  • seismicity, flooding, and other natural hazards
  • nuclear safety
  • operational issues at nuclear plants that require a separate NEPA review (such as an independent spent fuel storage installation)
  • economic feasibility

To top of page

Why is emergency preparedness outside of the scope of the environmental review?

In the United States, 92 commercial nuclear power reactors are licensed to operate at 54 sites in 28 states. Each site has onsite and offsite emergency plans to assure that adequate protective measures can be taken to protect the public in the event of a radiological emergency. Federal oversight of emergency preparedness for licensed nuclear power plants is shared by the NRC and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The NRC and FEMA have a Memorandum of Understanding (44 CFR Part 353 Appendix A), under which FEMA has the lead in overseeing offsite planning and response, and the NRC assists FEMA in carrying out this role. The NRC has statutory responsibility for the radiological health and safety of the public and retains the lead for oversight of onsite preparedness.

To top of page

Why are seismicity, flooding, and other natural hazards outside of the scope of the environmental review?

The NRC’s assessment of seismic and flood hazards for existing nuclear power plants is a separate and distinct process. Seismic and flood hazard issues are appropriately addressed by the NRC on an ongoing basis at all licensed nuclear facilities as part of its regulatory oversight activities. For new facilities, an assessment of seismic and flood hazards is included as part of the safety review.

Operating Reactors: Following the accident at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant resulting from the March 11, 2011, Great Tohoku Earthquake and subsequent tsunami, the NRC established the Near-Term Task Force as directed by the Commission on March 23, 2011, in COMGBJ-11-0002. In consideration of the lessons learned following the Fukushima Dai-ichi accident, the NRC staff developed an enhanced process to make sure that there is an ongoing assessment of information on a range of natural hazards that could potentially pose a threat to nuclear power plants. The framework developed as part of this process provides a graded approach that allows the NRC to seek, evaluate, and respond to new hazard information proactively, routinely, and systematically. In 2017, the Commission approved the staff’s process enhancements for an ongoing assessment of natural hazard information.

To top of page

Why are safety issues outside the scope of the environmental review?

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process focuses on environmental impacts rather than on issues related to operational safety. The regulations governing the environmental review are in 10 CFR Part 51 and the regulations covering the safety review are in various parts of NRC’s regulations depending upon the licensing action. For this reason, the environmental review is distinct and separate from the safety review. Because the two reviews are separate, operational safety issues are considered outside the scope for the environmental review, just as the environmental issues are not considered as part of the safety review. However, safety issues that are raised during the environmental review are forwarded to the appropriate NRC organization for consideration and appropriate action.

To top of page

Why are the effects of climate change on structures, systems, and components outside of the scope of the environmental review?

The environmental review focuses on the impacts of climate change on environmental resources that are affected by the proposed action. The effects of climate change on structures, systems, and components are outside the scope of the NRC staff’s environmental review. The environmental review documents the potential effects from continued nuclear power plant operation on the environment not vice versa. Site-specific environmental conditions are considered when siting nuclear power plants and other facilities. For nuclear power plants, site-specific conditions include the consideration of meteorological and hydrologic siting criteria as set forth in 10 CFR Part 100, “Reactor Site Criteria.” NRC regulations require that plant structures, systems, and components important to safety be designed to withstand the effects of natural phenomena, such as flooding, without loss of capability to perform safety functions. The NRC conducts safety reviews prior to allowing licensees to make operational changes due to changing environmental conditions. Additionally, the NRC evaluates nuclear power plant operating conditions and physical infrastructure to ensure ongoing safe operations under the plant’s initial and renewed operating licenses through the NRC’s Reactor Oversight Program. If new information about changing environmental conditions (such as rising sea levels that threaten safe operating conditions or challenge compliance with the plant’s technical specifications) becomes available, the NRC will evaluate the new information to determine whether any safety-related changes are needed at licensed nuclear power plants. This is a separate and distinct process from the NRC staff’s environmental review that it conducts in accordance with NEPA.

To top of page

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, October 29, 2024