Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation, Virginia Electric and Power Company, Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2, 20440-20442 [2012-8111]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
20440
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 4, 2012 / Notices
IV. Further Information
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of
NRC’s ‘‘Rules of Practice,’’ final NRC
records and documents regarding this
proposed action are publicly available
in the records component of NRC’s
Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS). The
request for exemption dated July 21,
2011 (ML11208C453), as supplemented
September 28, 2011 (ML11286A143),
was docketed under 10 CFR 50, Docket
Nos. 50–338 and 50–339, and under 10
CFR 72, Docket No. 72–56. These
documents may be inspected at NRC’s
Public Electronic Reading Room at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. These documents may also
be viewed electronically on the public
computers located at the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR), O1F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR
reproduction contractor will copy
documents for a fee. Persons who do not
have access to ADAMS, or who
encounter problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, should
contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by
telephone at 1–800–397–4209, or (301)
415–4737, or by email to pdr@nrc.gov.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day
of March, 2012.
Jennie Rankin,
Project Manager, Licensing Branch, Division
of Spent Fuel Storage and Transportation,
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2012–8114 Filed 4–3–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 72–1030, 72–55, 50–280 and
50–281; NRC–2012–0085]
Independent Spent Fuel Storage
Installation, Virginia Electric and
Power Company, Surry Power Station
Units 1 and 2
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Issuance of an environmental
assessment and finding of no significant
impact.
AGENCY:
emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennie Rankin, Project Manager,
Division of Spent Fuel Storage and
Transportation, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555. Telephone:
(301) 492–3268; Fax number: (301) 492–
3342; email: jennivine.rankin@nrc.gov.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:28 Apr 03, 2012
Jkt 226001
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC or Commission) is considering
issuance of a one-time exemption to
Virginia Electric and Power Company
(Dominion or licensee) pursuant to 10
CFR 72.7 from the requirements of 10
CFR 72.212(b)(3) and the portion of
72.212(b)(11) which requires
compliance with the terms, conditions,
and specifications of the CoC. Dominion
submitted its exemption request by
letter dated July 21, 2011, as
supplemented September 28, 2011.
Dominion has loaded spent nuclear fuel
into Transnuclear, Inc. (TN) NUHOMS®
HD Storage System (HD–32PTH) dry
storage casks, under the Certificate of
Compliance (CoC or Certificate) No.
1030, Amendment No. 0. The licensee
inadvertently reversed the upper and
lower zones while preparing the dry
shielded canister (DSC) loading maps.
This resulted in five fuel assemblies
being loaded into four DSCs with decay
heat greater than the levels specified in
the CoC. Dominion requests a one-time
exemption to the 10 CFR Part 72
requirements to continue storage of the
affected DSCs with serial numbers
DOM–32PTH–001–C, –002–C, –003–C,
and –009–C in their current condition at
the Independent Spent Fuel Storage
Installation (ISFSI) associated with the
operation of Dominion’s nuclear power
reactors, Surry Power Station Units 1
and 2, located in Surry County, Virginia.
II. Environmental Assessment (EA)
Identification of Proposed Action: The
CoC is the NRC approved design for
each dry storage cask system. The
proposed action would grant Dominion
a one-time exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 72.212(b)(3) and
from the portion of 72.212(b)(11) that
states the licensee shall comply with the
terms, conditions, and specifications of
the CoC, to the extent necessary to
enable Dominion to continue storage of
the four DSCs in their current condition
at the ISFSI associated with Surry
Power Station Units 1 and 2. These
regulations specifically require storage
of spent nuclear fuel under a general
license in dry storage casks approved
under the provisions of 10 CFR part 72,
and compliance with the terms and
conditions set forth in the CoC for each
dry spent fuel storage cask used by an
ISFSI general licensee.
The TN NUHOMS® HD dry cask
storage system CoC provides
requirements, conditions and operating
limits in Attachment A, Technical
Specifications (TS). The TS restrict the
decay heat in lower Zone ‘‘1a’’ locations
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
to ≤ 1.05 kW and the upper Zone ‘‘1b’’
locations to ≤ 0.8 kW. The applicant
inadvertently reversed the upper and
lower zones while preparing the DSC
loading maps. This resulted in five fuel
assemblies being loaded into four DSCs
(serial numbers DOM–32PTH–001–C,
–002–C, –003–C, and –009–C) with
decay heat greater than specified in the
CoC. The maximum decay heat of the
misloaded fuel assemblies at the time of
loading was 0.806 kW, which exceeded
the Zone ‘‘1b’’ limit mentioned above by
six watts. Currently, the five affected
fuel assemblies have been in storage for
a minimum of 2.5 years and have
decayed to meet the required decay heat
limits of the CoC.
The proposed action would grant
Dominion a one-time exemption from
the requirements of 10 CFR 72.212(b)(3)
and the portion of 72.212(b)(11) which
requires compliance with the terms,
conditions, and specifications of a CoC,
in order to allow continued storage of
the four affected DSCs in their current
condition. This exemption approval is
only valid for DSCs with serial numbers
DOM–32PTH–001–C, –002–C, –003–C,
and –009–C, at the Surry Power Station
ISFSI.
Need for the Proposed Action:
Dominion requested this exemption in
order to continue storage of four asloaded DSCs containing five fuel
assemblies which exceeded the CoC
decay heat limits at the time of loading.
Dominion, with the assistance of TN,
has provided an evaluation and thermal
analysis which shows that the affected
DSCs remain bounded by the system’s
design basis limits and that the
continued storage of the fuel in the asloaded configuration is safe.
Dominion has considered an
alternative to the proposed action,
which would correct the condition by
reloading the affected DSCs to be in
compliance with CoC No. 1030. This
would involve retrieving each of the
DSCs from their Horizontal Storage
Modules (HSM), unloading the spent
fuel assemblies from the DSC,
performing inspections of various DSC
components, reloading the spent fuel
assemblies into the used DSC or a new
DSC (if there was damage noted on the
used DSC) in accordance with CoC No.
1030, performing the DSC closing
procedures, and transferring the DSC
back to the ISFSI for re-insertion into
the HSM.
Dominion estimates this alternative
action of loading and unloading
operations would increase personnel
exposures by 250 mRem per affected
DSC. In addition, Dominion states the
alternative to the proposed action would
generate radioactive contaminated
E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM
04APN1
emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 4, 2012 / Notices
material and waste during loading and
unloading operations and disposal of
the used DSCs if the DSCs were
damaged during the unloading process.
The licensee estimates the alternative to
the proposed action would cost an
estimated $300,000 for unloading and
reloading operations of each affected
DSC and also necessitate additional fuel
handling operations. If the DSC was
damaged during unloading, the licensee
estimates an additional $1,000,000 for
purchase of a new DSC and $200,000 for
disposal of the used DSC.
The proposed action is necessary to
document the acceptability and safety
basis for storage of the DSCs in the asloaded configuration, thus precluding
the need to unload the four DSCs.
Environmental Impacts of the
Proposed Action: The NRC staff has
determined that the proposed action
would not endanger life or property.
The potential impact of using the
NUHOMS® HD dry cask storage system
was initially presented in the
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the
rulemaking to add the TN NUHOMS®
HD Horizontal Modular Storage System
for Irradiated Nuclear Fuel to the list of
approved spent fuel storage casks in 10
CFR 72.214 (71 FR 25740, dated May 2,
2006 (Direct Final Rule), and 71 FR
71463, dated December 11, 2006 (Final
Rule)).
The licensee submitted TN
Calculation No. 10494–174, which
performed bounding thermal analysis
using ANSYS finite element software to
evaluate the misloading events. The
licensee concluded the maximum fuel
cladding temperature for the as loaded
DSCs remained below the fuel cladding
temperature limit used in the Updated
Safety Analysis Report dated October 2,
2009. The NRC staff performed an
independent safety evaluation of the
proposed exemption and determined
that loading of the spent nuclear fuel
with higher than allowable decay heat
loads did not exceed the structural and
shielding design basis and that the fuel
cladding temperatures are below the
temperature limit at the time of loading.
The fuel assemblies have since decayed
to meet the CoC limits. There are no
changes being made in the types or
amounts of any radiological effluents
that may be released offsite, and there
is no significant increase in
occupational or public radiation
exposure as a result of the proposed
activities. Therefore, there are no
significant radiological environmental
impacts associated with the proposed
action. The proposed action only affects
the requirements associated with the
fuel assemblies already loaded into the
casks and does not affect non-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:28 Apr 03, 2012
Jkt 226001
radiological plant effluents, or any other
aspects of the environment. Therefore,
there are no significant non-radiological
impacts associated with the proposed
action.
Accordingly, the Commission
concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
Alternative to the Proposed Action:
Because there is no significant
environmental impact associated with
the proposed action, alternatives with
equal or greater environmental impact
were not evaluated. As an alternative to
the proposed action, the NRC staff
considered denial of the proposed
action which would involve reloading
the affected DSCs as described
previously. Denial of the exemption
would result in an increase in
radiological exposure to workers, a
small potential for radioactive releases
to the environment due to radioactive
material handling, additional
opportunities for accidents, and
increased cost to the licensee. Therefore,
the NRC staff has determined that
approving the proposed action has a
lesser environmental impact than
denying the proposed action.
Agencies and Persons Consulted: The
environmental assessment associated
with this exemption request was sent to
Ms. Ellie Irons of the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality in
the Office of Environmental Impact
Review, by letter dated November 14,
2011 (ML113180499). The state
response was received by letter dated
December 14, 2011 (ML120030312). The
letter states that the proposed action is
unlikely to have significant effects on
ambient air quality, historic resources,
surface waters, and wetlands. The letter
also states that it is unlikely to adversely
affect species of plants or insects listed
by state agencies as rare, threatened, or
endangered. Furthermore, the Virginia
Department of Health considered the
alternative to the proposed action of
reloading the casks presents several
risks, namely additional radiation
exposure to workers and potential
accidents that may lead to dispersal of
radiation to the environment. Thus, the
Virginia Department of Health states
that it supports the exemption without
reservation. The NRC staff has
determined that a consultation under
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
is not required because the proposed
action will not affect listed species or a
critical habitat. The NRC staff has also
determined that the proposed action is
not a type of activity having the
potential to cause effects on historic
properties. Therefore, no consultation is
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20441
required under Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The environmental impacts of the
proposed action have been reviewed in
accordance with the requirements set
forth in 10 CFR part 51. Based upon the
foregoing Environmental Assessment,
the Commission finds that the proposed
action of granting the one-time
exemption from the requirements of 10
CFR 72.212(b)(3) and the portion of
72.212(b)(11) which requires
compliance with the terms, conditions,
and specifications of the CoC in order to
allow Dominion to store spent fuel
assemblies in DSCs with serial numbers
DOM–32PTH–001–C, –002–C, –003–C,
and –009–C in the as-loaded
configuration at the ISFSI associated
with Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2,
will not significantly impact the quality
of the human environment.
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined that an environmental
impact statement for the proposed
exemption is not warranted and that a
finding of no significant impact is
appropriate.
IV. Further Information
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of
NRC’s ‘‘Rules of Practice,’’ final NRC
records and documents regarding this
proposed action are publicly available
in the records component of NRC’s
Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS). The
request for exemption dated July 21,
2011 (ML11208B629), as supplemented
September 28, 2011 (ML11286A115),
was docketed under 10 CFR part 50,
Docket Nos. 50–280 and 50–281, and
under 10 CFR 72, Docket No. 72–55.
These documents may be inspected at
NRC’s Public Electronic Reading Room
at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. These documents may also
be viewed electronically on the public
computers located at the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR), O1F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR
reproduction contractor will copy
documents for a fee. Persons who do not
have access to ADAMS, or who
encounter problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, should
contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by
telephone at 1–800–397–4209, or (301)
415–4737, or by email to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day
of March, 2012.
E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM
04APN1
20442
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 4, 2012 / Notices
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jennie Rankin,
Project Manager, Licensing Branch, Division
of Spent Fuel Storage and Transportation,
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2012–8111 Filed 4–3–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND
HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION
Proposed Information Collection;
Comment Request
Occupational Safety and Health
Review Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Occupational Safety and
Health Review Commission (OSHRC)
invites the public and other Federal
agencies to comment on a proposed
information collection concerning
participation in conventional
proceedings as part of our review of the
OSHRC Settlement Part program.
OSHRC will submit the proposed
information collection request to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted on or before June 4, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit all written
comments, identified by the title
‘‘Paperwork Reduction Act Information
Collection—Conventional Proceedings’’,
by mail or hand delivery to John X.
Cerveny, Deputy Executive Secretary,
Occupational Safety and Health Review
Commission, 1120 20th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20036–3457, by fax to
202–606–5050, or by email to
pracomments@oshrc.gov.
SUMMARY:
emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for information or copies of the
proposed information collection
instrument should be directed to John
X. Cerveny, Deputy Executive Secretary,
Occupational Safety and Health Review
Commission, 1120 20th Street NW.,
Ninth Floor, Washington, DC 20036–
3457; Telephone (202) 606–5706; email
address: pracomments@oshrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OSHRC’s
Settlement Part program, codified at 29
CFR 2200.120, is designed to encourage
settlements on contested citations
issued by the U.S. Department of
Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) and to reduce
litigation costs. The program requires
employers who receive job safety or
health citations that include proposed
penalties of $100,000 or more in total to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:28 Apr 03, 2012
Jkt 226001
participate in formal settlement talks
presided over by an OSHRC
Administrative Law Judge. If settlement
efforts fail, the case would continue
under OSHRC’s conventional
proceedings, usually before a judge
other than the one who presided over
the settlement proceedings.
OSHRC has submitted for OMB
review a proposed information
collection from participants in the
Settlement Part program. A copy of that
information collection request (ICR)
with applicable supporting
documentation may be obtained from
the RegInfo.gov Web site, https://
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain,
or by contacting John X. Cerveny,
Deputy Executive Secretary,
Occupational Safety and Health Review
Commission, 1120 20th Street NW.,
Ninth Floor, Washington, DC 20036–
3457; Telephone (202) 606–5706; email
address: pracomments@oshrc.gov.
OSHRC proposes to conduct a second
voluntary survey of employer,
Department of Labor (OSHA) personnel
(decision makers), Authorized
Employee Representatives, and their
representatives, including attorneys,
who personally participated in OSHRC
cases between February 15, 2011 and
June 30, 2012, where a total proposed
penalty between $50,000 and $99,999
was involved and where OSHRC
Settlement Part Process procedures were
not used. The cases would include those
settled by the parties without an OSHRC
judge conducting a face-to-face
settlement proceeding, as well as any
cases within the above dollar range that
went to a trial on the merits. These cases
would be considered part of a control
group. Participant responses will be
used for comparative purposes and to
facilitate our understanding of the
efficacy of the Settlement Part program.
The proposed information collection
instrument is a written survey
consisting of a series of questions to
determine participants’ level of
satisfaction with OSHRC processes and
outcomes. They are intended to take a
respondent no more than 30 minutes to
complete. The respondents may skip
any questions that they do not feel
comfortable answering, and are
permitted to comment further on their
experiences at the end of the
questionnaire.
OSHRC will submit the proposed
information collection to the Office of
Management and Budget for review, as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
OSHRC invites comments on: (1)
Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
performance of the agency’s functions,
including whether the information will
have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of
the agency’s estimate of the burden of
the proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (4) ways to minimize the
burden of the information collection on
respondents, including through the use
of automated collection techniques,
when appropriate, and other forms of
information technology. Comments
submitted in response to this notice will
be summarized and included in the
request for OMB approval of this
information collection; they also will
become a matter of public record.
OMB Control Number: Not applicable,
new request.
Form Number: Not applicable.
Type of Review: Regular submission
(new information collection).
Title: Survey of Participants in
OSHRC Conventional Proceedings
where between $50,000 and $99,999 is
at issue.
Description: Information collection
required to evaluate the Review
Commission’s Settlement Part process.
Affected Public: Employer and
Department of Labor (OSHA) personnel
(decision makers), Authorized
Employee Representatives, and their
representatives, including attorneys,
who have personally participated in
OSHRC cases between February 15,
2011 and June 30, 2012, where a total
proposed penalty between $50,000 and
$99,999 was involved and where
OSHRC Settlement Part Process
procedures were not used.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
500.
Estimated Time per Response: 30
minutes.
Estimated Total Reporting Burden:
250 hours.
Obligation To Respond: Voluntary.
Dated: March 30, 2012.
Debra Hall,
Acting Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2012–8124 Filed 4–3–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7600–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Investment Company Act Release No.
30014; File No. 812–13778]
Sunwest Rollover Member LLC; Notice
of Application
March 29, 2012.
Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’).
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM
04APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 4, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20440-20442]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8111]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 72-1030, 72-55, 50-280 and 50-281; NRC-2012-0085]
Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation, Virginia Electric
and Power Company, Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Issuance of an environmental assessment and finding of no
significant impact.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennie Rankin, Project Manager,
Division of Spent Fuel Storage and Transportation, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555. Telephone: (301) 492-3268; Fax number: (301) 492-
3342; email: jennivine.rankin@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) is
considering issuance of a one-time exemption to Virginia Electric and
Power Company (Dominion or licensee) pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7 from the
requirements of 10 CFR 72.212(b)(3) and the portion of 72.212(b)(11)
which requires compliance with the terms, conditions, and
specifications of the CoC. Dominion submitted its exemption request by
letter dated July 21, 2011, as supplemented September 28, 2011.
Dominion has loaded spent nuclear fuel into Transnuclear, Inc. (TN)
NUHOMS[supreg] HD Storage System (HD-32PTH) dry storage casks, under
the Certificate of Compliance (CoC or Certificate) No. 1030, Amendment
No. 0. The licensee inadvertently reversed the upper and lower zones
while preparing the dry shielded canister (DSC) loading maps. This
resulted in five fuel assemblies being loaded into four DSCs with decay
heat greater than the levels specified in the CoC. Dominion requests a
one-time exemption to the 10 CFR Part 72 requirements to continue
storage of the affected DSCs with serial numbers DOM-32PTH-001-C, -002-
C, -003-C, and -009-C in their current condition at the Independent
Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) associated with the operation
of Dominion's nuclear power reactors, Surry Power Station Units 1 and
2, located in Surry County, Virginia.
II. Environmental Assessment (EA)
Identification of Proposed Action: The CoC is the NRC approved
design for each dry storage cask system. The proposed action would
grant Dominion a one-time exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR
72.212(b)(3) and from the portion of 72.212(b)(11) that states the
licensee shall comply with the terms, conditions, and specifications of
the CoC, to the extent necessary to enable Dominion to continue storage
of the four DSCs in their current condition at the ISFSI associated
with Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2. These regulations specifically
require storage of spent nuclear fuel under a general license in dry
storage casks approved under the provisions of 10 CFR part 72, and
compliance with the terms and conditions set forth in the CoC for each
dry spent fuel storage cask used by an ISFSI general licensee.
The TN NUHOMS[supreg] HD dry cask storage system CoC provides
requirements, conditions and operating limits in Attachment A,
Technical Specifications (TS). The TS restrict the decay heat in lower
Zone ``1a'' locations to <= 1.05 kW and the upper Zone ``1b'' locations
to <= 0.8 kW. The applicant inadvertently reversed the upper and lower
zones while preparing the DSC loading maps. This resulted in five fuel
assemblies being loaded into four DSCs (serial numbers DOM-32PTH-001-C,
-002-C, -003-C, and -009-C) with decay heat greater than specified in
the CoC. The maximum decay heat of the misloaded fuel assemblies at the
time of loading was 0.806 kW, which exceeded the Zone ``1b'' limit
mentioned above by six watts. Currently, the five affected fuel
assemblies have been in storage for a minimum of 2.5 years and have
decayed to meet the required decay heat limits of the CoC.
The proposed action would grant Dominion a one-time exemption from
the requirements of 10 CFR 72.212(b)(3) and the portion of
72.212(b)(11) which requires compliance with the terms, conditions, and
specifications of a CoC, in order to allow continued storage of the
four affected DSCs in their current condition. This exemption approval
is only valid for DSCs with serial numbers DOM-32PTH-001-C, -002-C, -
003-C, and -009-C, at the Surry Power Station ISFSI.
Need for the Proposed Action: Dominion requested this exemption in
order to continue storage of four as-loaded DSCs containing five fuel
assemblies which exceeded the CoC decay heat limits at the time of
loading. Dominion, with the assistance of TN, has provided an
evaluation and thermal analysis which shows that the affected DSCs
remain bounded by the system's design basis limits and that the
continued storage of the fuel in the as-loaded configuration is safe.
Dominion has considered an alternative to the proposed action,
which would correct the condition by reloading the affected DSCs to be
in compliance with CoC No. 1030. This would involve retrieving each of
the DSCs from their Horizontal Storage Modules (HSM), unloading the
spent fuel assemblies from the DSC, performing inspections of various
DSC components, reloading the spent fuel assemblies into the used DSC
or a new DSC (if there was damage noted on the used DSC) in accordance
with CoC No. 1030, performing the DSC closing procedures, and
transferring the DSC back to the ISFSI for re-insertion into the HSM.
Dominion estimates this alternative action of loading and unloading
operations would increase personnel exposures by 250 mRem per affected
DSC. In addition, Dominion states the alternative to the proposed
action would generate radioactive contaminated
[[Page 20441]]
material and waste during loading and unloading operations and disposal
of the used DSCs if the DSCs were damaged during the unloading process.
The licensee estimates the alternative to the proposed action would
cost an estimated $300,000 for unloading and reloading operations of
each affected DSC and also necessitate additional fuel handling
operations. If the DSC was damaged during unloading, the licensee
estimates an additional $1,000,000 for purchase of a new DSC and
$200,000 for disposal of the used DSC.
The proposed action is necessary to document the acceptability and
safety basis for storage of the DSCs in the as-loaded configuration,
thus precluding the need to unload the four DSCs.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: The NRC staff has
determined that the proposed action would not endanger life or
property. The potential impact of using the NUHOMS[supreg] HD dry cask
storage system was initially presented in the Environmental Assessment
(EA) for the rulemaking to add the TN NUHOMS[supreg] HD Horizontal
Modular Storage System for Irradiated Nuclear Fuel to the list of
approved spent fuel storage casks in 10 CFR 72.214 (71 FR 25740, dated
May 2, 2006 (Direct Final Rule), and 71 FR 71463, dated December 11,
2006 (Final Rule)).
The licensee submitted TN Calculation No. 10494-174, which
performed bounding thermal analysis using ANSYS finite element software
to evaluate the misloading events. The licensee concluded the maximum
fuel cladding temperature for the as loaded DSCs remained below the
fuel cladding temperature limit used in the Updated Safety Analysis
Report dated October 2, 2009. The NRC staff performed an independent
safety evaluation of the proposed exemption and determined that loading
of the spent nuclear fuel with higher than allowable decay heat loads
did not exceed the structural and shielding design basis and that the
fuel cladding temperatures are below the temperature limit at the time
of loading. The fuel assemblies have since decayed to meet the CoC
limits. There are no changes being made in the types or amounts of any
radiological effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no
significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure as a
result of the proposed activities. Therefore, there are no significant
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
The proposed action only affects the requirements associated with the
fuel assemblies already loaded into the casks and does not affect non-
radiological plant effluents, or any other aspects of the environment.
Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological impacts associated
with the proposed action.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Alternative to the Proposed Action: Because there is no significant
environmental impact associated with the proposed action, alternatives
with equal or greater environmental impact were not evaluated. As an
alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered denial of
the proposed action which would involve reloading the affected DSCs as
described previously. Denial of the exemption would result in an
increase in radiological exposure to workers, a small potential for
radioactive releases to the environment due to radioactive material
handling, additional opportunities for accidents, and increased cost to
the licensee. Therefore, the NRC staff has determined that approving
the proposed action has a lesser environmental impact than denying the
proposed action.
Agencies and Persons Consulted: The environmental assessment
associated with this exemption request was sent to Ms. Ellie Irons of
the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality in the Office of
Environmental Impact Review, by letter dated November 14, 2011
(ML113180499). The state response was received by letter dated December
14, 2011 (ML120030312). The letter states that the proposed action is
unlikely to have significant effects on ambient air quality, historic
resources, surface waters, and wetlands. The letter also states that it
is unlikely to adversely affect species of plants or insects listed by
state agencies as rare, threatened, or endangered. Furthermore, the
Virginia Department of Health considered the alternative to the
proposed action of reloading the casks presents several risks, namely
additional radiation exposure to workers and potential accidents that
may lead to dispersal of radiation to the environment. Thus, the
Virginia Department of Health states that it supports the exemption
without reservation. The NRC staff has determined that a consultation
under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act is not required because
the proposed action will not affect listed species or a critical
habitat. The NRC staff has also determined that the proposed action is
not a type of activity having the potential to cause effects on
historic properties. Therefore, no consultation is required under
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The environmental impacts of the proposed action have been reviewed
in accordance with the requirements set forth in 10 CFR part 51. Based
upon the foregoing Environmental Assessment, the Commission finds that
the proposed action of granting the one-time exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 72.212(b)(3) and the portion of 72.212(b)(11)
which requires compliance with the terms, conditions, and
specifications of the CoC in order to allow Dominion to store spent
fuel assemblies in DSCs with serial numbers DOM-32PTH-001-C, -002-C, -
003-C, and -009-C in the as-loaded configuration at the ISFSI
associated with Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2, will not
significantly impact the quality of the human environment. Accordingly,
the Commission has determined that an environmental impact statement
for the proposed exemption is not warranted and that a finding of no
significant impact is appropriate.
IV. Further Information
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of NRC's ``Rules of Practice,''
final NRC records and documents regarding this proposed action are
publicly available in the records component of NRC's Agencywide
Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The request for
exemption dated July 21, 2011 (ML11208B629), as supplemented September
28, 2011 (ML11286A115), was docketed under 10 CFR part 50, Docket Nos.
50-280 and 50-281, and under 10 CFR 72, Docket No. 72-55. These
documents may be inspected at NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. These documents may also be
viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR), O1F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor
will copy documents for a fee. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS,
or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS,
should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-
4209, or (301) 415-4737, or by email to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of March, 2012.
[[Page 20442]]
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jennie Rankin,
Project Manager, Licensing Branch, Division of Spent Fuel Storage and
Transportation, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2012-8111 Filed 4-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
