sider, for example, the long-term environmental impact of the facility after ultimate decommissioning and any other long-term effects to which this facility may contribute.

2.7 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES

As indicated by the Council's Guidelines, the applicant should discuss any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented. This requires the applicant to identify the extent to which the action curtails the range of beneficial uses of the environment. The applicant should consider, for example, the significance of any lands which may be submerged and the significance of operation of the facility with respect to the depletion of uranium resources.

3.0 APPLICANT'S ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT-OPERATING LICENSE

STAGE

Environmental Reports submitted by applicants in conjunction with operating license applications should discuss the same environmental considerations as at the construction permit review stage, but only to the extent that they differ significantly from those discussed in the applicant's Enivronmental Report previously submitted with the application for a construction permit, if any. Environmental considerations which were related to the facility in the interim period should be identified and resolved in this Report.

If no Environmental Report had been submitted at the construction permit stage, a full discussion of environmental aspects is required at the operating license review stage. In order to assist in evaluating the range of feasible alternatives in this case, the amount of money expended on the project to date should be indicated and photographs of construction in progress should be provided.

1. Discuss the results of all studies that were not completed during the pre-construction review and which were specified to be completed before the pre-operational review. Indicate how the results of these studies were factored into the design and proposed operation of the facility.

2. Discuss any significant differences in the projected environmental impact of the facility (including both those which would degrade and those which would enhance environmental amenities) from those discussed in the applicant's Environmental Report-Construction Permit Stage either as a result of changes in plans, the availability of new or more detailed information, or other factors such as a change in surrounding land use on zoning classifications.

3. Describe in detail the monitoring programs which will be undertaken to determine the effects (including thermal, chemical, radiological, biological and mechanical effects) of the operating plant on the environment. A specific listing of sample types, frequencies and analyses should be provided and the locations described and indicated on a map of the area.

19

AEC ADOPTS NEW REGULATIONS TO IMPLEMENT COURT DECISION ON NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT

AEC PLANS NO APPEAL OF COURT DECISION

The Atomic Energy Commission will issue new regulations- -perhaps next week-implementing a July 23 Court of Appeals decision in the Calvert Cliffs case directing changes in the AEC's implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPÁ). The AEC will not appeal that decision.

In announcing the Commission determination today, AEC Chairman James R. Schlesinger said:

"The AEC will not seek reconsideration of the Calvert Cliffs decision by the Court of Appeals, and we will recommend to the Justice Department that the Government not seek Supreme Court review. Instead we are drafting revised regulations to implement the Court's decision which we will issue soon, hopefully next week.

"The effect of our revised regulations will be to make the Atomic Energy Commission directly responsible for evaluating the total environmental impact, including thermal effects, of nuclear power plants, and for assessing this impact in terms of the available alternatives and the need for electric power.

"We intend to be in a position to be responsive to the concerns of conservation and environmental groups as well as other members of the public. At the same time, we are also examining steps that can be taken to reconcile a proper regard for the environment with the necessity for meeting the nation's growing requirements for electric power on a timely basis."

The Commission's Director of Regulation Harold Price and Acting General Counsel Marcus Rowden met at Germantown, Maryland, today to discuss the preliminary staff draft of revised regulations with interested representatives of conservation and environmental groups, utilities, nuclear industry organizations and state agencies.

AEC SUMMARY ANALYSIS OF APPENDIX D TO 10 CFR PART 50

The procedures in Appendix D apply to licensing proceedings for nuclear power reactors; tesing facilities; fuel reprocessing plants; and other production and utilization facilities whose construction or operation may be determined by the Commission to have a significant impact on the environment. The procedures also apply to proceedings involving certain specified activities subject to materials licensing. Revised Appendix D is divided into five sections. Section A deals with the basic procedures for implementing NEPA in future licensing

68-699-72- -14

actions, including an identification of the information required of applicants, the circulation of environmental reports and detailed statements for comment, the NEPA determination to be made by the Director of Regulation in regard to the proposed AEC licensing action (including the underlying cost-benefit assessment), and the role of Atomic Safety and Licensing Boards in the adjudicatory phase of the environmental review process.

Section B deals with procedures applicable to the specified facility and materials licenses issued during the period from January 1, 1970, the date of enactment of NEPA, to the effective date of the new NEPA regulations (September 9, 1971). It provides for a supplemental NEPA review, applying the relevant provisions of Section A, and makes provision for a hearing on NEPA issues at the instance of the licensee or affected members of the public upon completion of that review.

Section C deals with the procedures applicable to construction permits for the specified facilities issued prior to January 1, 1970, for which operating licenses have not been issued. A supplemental NÉPA review is directed, and opportunity for hearing on NEPA matters by the permit holder or affected members of the public is provided for at the review's completion.

Section D deals with the procedures applicable to pending hearings to be conducted in the near future. It makes provision for NEPA review and hearing opportunity on NEPA matters following such review and also provides for possible authorization of fuel loading and limited operation of nuclear power reactors, consistent with appropriate regard for environmental values, during the period of ongoing NEPA environmental review. Operation beyond twenty percent (20%) of full power would require the specific prior approval of the Commission and would not be authorized except in emergency situations or other situations where the public interest so requires. (Counterpart provisions for certain materials licensing actions are contained in Section A.) In determining whether interim limited operation should be authorized, the AEC would consider and balance the following factors: the nature and extent of the resulting environment impact; its redressability should the ultimate licensing determination call for license modification, suspension, or termination; whether limited operation would foreclose later adoption of alternatives in facility design or operation; and the public interest factors militating for immediate facility operation.

Section E sets forth the factors which will be considered by the Commission in determining whether to suspend, pending the required NEPA environmental review, permits or licenses of the specified types issued during the period from January 1, 1970, and the effective date of this revision and construction permits for the specified facilities issued prior to January 1, 1970, for which operating licenses have not been issued. These factors parallel, in substance, those described in connection with Section D, above.

Sections B, C, and D provide that the Commission or the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, as appropriate, may prescribe the times within which the proceedings subject to those sections will be completed.

United States Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. AEC ADOPTS NEW REGULATIONS TO IMPLEMENT COURT DECISION ON NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT, AUGUST 26, 1971

The Atomic Energy Commission has adopted a revised statement of policy to comply with a July 23 Federal Court of Appeals decision concerning the AEC's implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the licensing of nuclear power plants and other facilities. The revised policy statement, effective immediately upon publication in the Federal Register, follows the Court's mandate by broadening the consideration of environmental matters in AEC licensing actions.

The Commission, in issuing its revised statement of policy, noted it intended to be more responsive to the concerns of conservation and environmental groups as well as other members of the public. The Commission added it also was examining steps which can be taken to reconcile a proper regard for the environment with the necessity for meeting the Nation's growing requirements for electric power on a timely basis.

It appears that, as of September 1, the Court's decision will directly affect 63 licensing applications involving 91 nuclear power reactors. Also affected will be five nuclear power reactors for which operating licenses were issued after the January 1, 1970, effective date of NEPĂ and three fuel reprocessing facilities. Interim guidance has been provided to licensees and applicants concerning possible modification that may be required in environmental reports.

The Commission's revised policy statement, which also applies to the licensing of testing facilities and to other installations which the AEC determines may have a significant environmental impact, will be incorporated as revised Appendix D to the Commission's facility licensing regulations (Part 50). The five sections of this statement are:

1. Basic Procedures for Broadened Implementation of NEPA: This section identifies the information required from applicants on the environmental impact of the proposed facility and prescribes the circulation of environmental reports and agency environmental impact statements for comment and the preparation of a cost-benefit analysis. It also outlines the role of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Boards in the environmental review process.

2. Procedure Applicable to Permits and Licenses Issued Since January 1, 1970 (Effective Date of NEPA): This section requires the submission of supplemental information by the licensees, the preparation of a supplemental detailed environmental statement by the AEC staff, and recirculation of the new environmental satement for comment by other Governmental agencies and interested persons on an expedited basis. In the case of construction permits for power and test reactors and fuel reprocessing plants, a public hearing will be scheduled to consider the additional environmental matters and whether the permit should be continued, terminated, modified, or conditioned. Opportunity will be offered for a public hearing on these matters in the case of other affected facilities.

3. Procedures Applicable for Construction Permits Issued Before January 1, 1970, for which Operating Licenses Have Not Been Issued: The same procedures outlined above for submission of supplemental information and preparation and circulation of a new environmental statement will apply to these facilities. After review of the environmental impact of the facility, it will be determined whether the permit should be continued, terminated, modified, or conditioned, and a notice will be published providing opportunity for the applicant or affected members of theh public to request a hearing.

4. Pending Hearings and Cases to be Noticed for Hearing in the Near Future: This section provides guidance to AEC licensing boards to proceed expeditiously with hearings on aspects of the application related to licensing requirements under the Atomic Energy Act pending completion of the AEC staff's NEPA review. Licensing boards are authorized to grant a license for the loading of fuel into the reactor and limited low-power operation of the plant upon satisfaction of specified licensing requirements and hearing steps. Any such license would be conditioned to reflect that the authorization would be without prejudice to any subsequent licensing action which may be taken by the Commission with respect to the environmental aspects of the facility. In a case where no hearing was requested, the Commission may issue a license for fuel loading and limited low-power operation upon a showing that the specified licensing requirements have been met. Such a license would also be conditioned as noted above.

5. Factors to be Considered in Determining Whether to Suspend Permits or Licenses Pending Expanded NEPA Review: Within 40 days each permit holder or licensee affected by the Court decision will be required to submit information to the Commission showing why his permit or license should not be suspended in whole or in part pending completion of the ongoing NEPA review. The Commission's decision regarding whether or not to suspend permits or licenses will be published, and licensees and affected members of the public will have the opportunity to request a hearing on this determination. Considerations involved in such a determination will include whether there is a significant adverse impact on the environment and its nature and extent; whether continued operation or construction during the period of the NEPA review would foreclose subsequent adoption of alternatives in facility design or operation; and the effect of delay in facility construction or operation on the public interest, such as the need for power, alternative sources of power and costs of delay to the licensee and the consumer.

On August 27, members of the AEC staff met with representatives of environmental and conservation groups, state agencies, and the nuclear industry to discuss a revision to Appendix D in draft form. The Commission has taken the comments of these groups into account in adopting this revised Appendix D which will be effective immediately upon publication in the Federal Register. Persons wishing to submit comments or suggestions concerning the effective revision may send them to the Public Proceedings Branch, Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C., 20545, within 60 days. These comments and suggestions will be considered by the Commission in developing any subsequent revisions to the regulations. SEPTEMBER 1, 1971.