C.F.R. » Title 10 » CHAPTER I—NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION › PART 51—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION REGULATIONS FOR DOMESTIC LICENSING AND RELATED REGULATORY FUNCTIONS › Subpart A—National Environmental Policy Act—Regulations Implementing Section 102(2)

10 C.F.R. § 51.23

Environmental impacts of continued storage of spent nuclear fuel beyond the licensed life for operation of a reactor

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The Commission has generically determined that the environmental impacts of continued storage of spent nuclear fuel beyond the licensed life for operation of a reactor are those impacts identified in NUREG-2157, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel.”

(b) The environmental reports described in §§ 51.50, 51.53, and 51.61 are not required to discuss the environmental impacts of spent nuclear fuel storage in a reactor facility storage pool or an ISFSI for the period following the term of the reactor operating license, reactor combined license, or ISFSI license. The impact determinations in NUREG-2157 regarding continued storage shall be deemed incorporated into the environmental impact statements described in §§ 51.75, 51.80(b), 51.95, and 51.97(a). The impact determinations in NUREG-2157 regarding continued storage shall be considered in the environmental assessments described in §§ 51.30(b) and 51.95(d), if the impacts of continued storage of spent fuel are relevant to the proposed action.

(c) This section does not alter any requirements to consider the environmental impacts of spent fuel storage during the term of a reactor operating license or combined license, or a license for an ISFSI in a licensing proceeding.

[49 FR 34694, Aug. 31, 1984, as amended at 55 FR 38474, Sept. 18, 1990; 72 FR 49509, Aug. 28, 2007; 75 FR 81037, Dec. 23, 2010; 79 FR 56260, Sept. 19, 2014]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1977–2024 · leading case: New York v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 681 F.3d 471 (D.C. Cir. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
New York v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 681 F.3d 471 (D.C. Cir. 2012). · cites it 5× “23, 2010); 10 C.F.R. § 51.23 (a). Petitioners challenge the amended 10 C.”
New York v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 824 F.3d 1012 (D.C. Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “See 10 C.F.R. § 51.23 (b); 79 Fed. Reg. at 56,243.”
McGinnis v. Kansas City Power & Light Co., 647 P.2d 1313 (Kan. 1982). “Although these regulations establish no specific criteria regarding the siting of electric transmission lines, the regulations at 10 C.F.R. § 51.23 (c) (1982), require compliance with standards and requirements which have been imposed by federal, state, and local agencies having…”
Beyond Nuclear, Inc. v. NRC, 113 F.4th 956 (D.C. Cir. 2024). “See 10 C.F.R. § 51.23 . The Commission rejected these claims because Holtec did “evaluate[] the site-specific environmental effects associated with the construction and operation” of the 17 facility and no NRC regulation required Holtec to have a dry transfer system, so there…”
Concerned Citizens v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 430 F. Supp. 627 (D.R.I. 1977). · cites it 2× “GSA by NRC’s EIS preparation before GSA has completed its EIS; and (4) a violation of 10 CFR § 51.23 by commencing NRC hearings before local authorities have ever controlled the NALF.”
Nevada v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 199 F. App'x 1 (D.C. Cir. 2006). · cites it 2× “Petitioner claims that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Waste Confidence Rule, 10 C.F.R. § 51.23 (1984) — which, for our purposes, refers also to the incorporated Waste Confidence Decision, 49 Fed.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.