List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Transnuclear, Inc. Standardized Advanced NUHOMS® Horizontal Modular Storage System; Certificate of Compliance No. 1029, Amendment No. 3, 3147-3153 [2015-01031]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
This rule invites comments on a
change to the salable quantity and
allotment percentage for Native
spearmint oil for the 2014–2015
marketing year. Any comments received
will be considered prior to finalization
of this rule.
After consideration of all relevant
material presented, including the
Committee’s recommendation, and
other information, it is found that this
interim rule, as hereinafter set forth,
will tend to effectuate the declared
policy of the Act.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also
found and determined upon good cause
that it is impracticable, unnecessary,
and contrary to the public interest to
give preliminary notice prior to putting
this rule into effect and that good cause
exists for not postponing the effective
date of this rule until 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register
because: (1) This rule increases the
quantity of Native spearmint oil that
may be marketed during the marketing
year, which ends on May 31, 2015; (2)
the current quantity of Native spearmint
oil may be inadequate to meet demand
for the 2014–2015 marketing year, thus
making the additional oil available as
soon as is practicable will be beneficial
to both handlers and producers; (3) the
Committee recommended these changes
at a public meeting and interested
parties had an opportunity to provide
input; and (4) this rule provides a 60day comment period, and any
comments received will be considered
prior to finalization of this rule.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 985
Marketing agreements, Oils and fats,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Spearmint oil.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 985 is amended as
follows:
PART 985—MARKETING ORDER
REGULATING THE HANDLING OF
SPEARMINT OIL PRODUCED IN THE
FAR WEST
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 985 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
2. In § 985.233, revise paragraph (b) to
read as follows:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
§ 985.233 Salable quantities and allotment
percentages—2014–2015 marketing year.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Class 3 (Native) oil—a salable
quantity of 1,280,561 pounds and an
allotment percentage of 54 percent.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Jan 21, 2015
Jkt 235001
Dated: January 15, 2015.
Rex A. Barnes,
Associate Administrator, Agricultural
Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2015–01002 Filed 1–21–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 72
[NRC–2013–0271]
RIN 3150–AJ31
List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage
Casks: Transnuclear, Inc. Standardized
Advanced NUHOMS® Horizontal
Modular Storage System; Certificate of
Compliance No. 1029, Amendment No.
3
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is amending its
spent fuel storage regulations by
revising the Transnuclear, Inc. (TN)
Standardized Advanced NUHOMS®
Horizontal Modular Storage System
(NUHOMS® Storage System) listing
within the ‘‘List of Approved Spent Fuel
Storage Casks’’ to include Amendment
No. 3 to Certificate of Compliance (CoC)
No. 1029. The NRC published a direct
final rule on this amendment in the
Federal Register on April 15, 2014. The
NRC also concurrently published an
identical proposed rule on April 15,
2014. The NRC received significant
adverse comments on the direct final
rule; therefore, the NRC withdrew the
direct final rule on June 25, 2014, and
is proceeding, in this Federal Register
notice, to address the comments on the
companion proposed rule.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
February 23, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2013–0271 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of
information for this action. You may
obtain publicly-available information
related to this action by any of the
following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2013–0271. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422;
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3147
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. To begin the search, select
‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then
select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. For the
convenience of the reader, instructions
about obtaining materials referenced in
this document are provided in the
‘‘Availability of Documents’’ section of
this document.
• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
purchase copies of public documents at
the NRC’s PDR, Room O–1F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gregory R. Trussell, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001, telephone:
301–415–6445, email: Gregory.Trussell@
nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Discussion of Changes
III. Public Comment Analysis
IV. Voluntary Consensus Standards
V. Agreement State Compatibility
VI. Plain Writing
VII. Finding of No Significant Environmental
Impact: Availability
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
IX. Regulatory Analysis
X. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
XI. Backfitting and Issue Finality
XII. Congressional Review Act
XIII. Availability of Documents
I. Background
Section 218(a) of the Nuclear Waste
Policy Act (NWPA) of 1982, as
amended, requires that ‘‘the Secretary
[of the Department of Energy] shall
establish a demonstration program, in
cooperation with the private sector, for
the dry storage of spent nuclear fuel at
civilian nuclear power reactor sites,
with the objective of establishing one or
more technologies that the [Nuclear
Regulatory] Commission may, by rule,
approve for use at the sites of civilian
nuclear power reactors without, to the
maximum extent practicable, the need
for additional site-specific approvals by
the Commission.’’ Section 133 of the
NWPA states, in part, that [the
Commission] shall, by rule, establish
procedures for the licensing of any
technology approved by the
E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM
22JAR1
3148
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Commission under Section 219(a) [sic:
218(a)] for use at the site of any civilian
nuclear power reactor.’’
To implement this mandate, the
Commission approved dry storage of
spent nuclear fuel in NRC-approved
casks under a general license by
publishing a final rule in part 72 of Title
10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR), ’’Licensing Requirements for
the Independent Storage of Spent
Nuclear Fuel, High-Level Radioactive
Waste, and Reactor-Related Greater
Than Class C Waste,’’ which added a
new subpart K within 10 CFR part 72
entitled, ‘‘General License for Storage of
Spent Fuel at Power Reactor Sites’’ (55
FR 29181; July 18, 1990). This rule also
established a new subpart L within 10
CFR part 72 entitled, ‘‘Approval of
Spent Fuel Storage Casks,’’ which
contains procedures and criteria for
obtaining NRC approval of spent fuel
storage cask designs. The NRC
subsequently issued a final rule (68 FR
463; January 6, 2003) that approved the
Standardized Advanced NUHOMS®
Cask System design and added it to the
list of NRC-approved cask designs in 10
CFR 72.214, ‘‘List of approved spent
fuel storage casks,’’ as CoC No. 1029.
II. Discussion of Changes
On December 15, 2011, Transnuclear,
Inc. submitted an application to amend
the NUHOMS® Storage System.
Amendment No. 3 adds a new
transportable dry shielded canister
(DSC), the 32PTH2, to the NUHOMS®
Storage System; and makes editorial
corrections. The NUHOMS® 32PTH2
system is designed to accommodate up
to 32 intact (or up to 16 damaged and
the balance intact) pressurized water
reactor (PWR), Combustion Engineering
(CE), 16 × 16 class spent fuel assemblies,
with or without control components.
The NUHOMS® 32PTH2 system also
consists of a modified version of the
Standardized NUHOMS® Advanced
Horizontal Storage Module (AHSM),
designated the AHSM–HS (high burnup
and high seismic).
Numerous sections of the Technical
Specifications (TSs) were revised to add
and update characteristics,
specifications, and requirements related
to the 32PTH2 DSC and the AHSM–HS
storage module. Additional changes
were made to definitions and other
sections to improve completeness,
consistency, and clarity. Revised
sections are indicated by side bars in the
TSs.
As documented in the Safety
Evaluation Report (SER) (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14317A616), the NRC
staff performed a detailed safety
evaluation of the proposed CoC
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Jan 21, 2015
Jkt 235001
amendment request. There are no
significant changes to cask design
requirements in the proposed CoC
amendment. Considering the specific
design requirements for each accident
condition, the design of the cask would
prevent loss of containment, shielding,
and criticality control. If there is no loss
of containment, shielding, or criticality
control, the environmental impacts
would be insignificant. This amendment
does not reflect a significant change in
design or fabrication of the cask. In
addition, any resulting occupational
exposure or offsite dose rates from the
implementation of Amendment No. 3
would remain well within the limits of
10 CFR part 20, ‘‘Standards for
Protection Against Radiation.’’
Therefore, the CoC changes will not
result in any radiological or nonradiological environmental impacts that
significantly differ from the
environmental impacts evaluated in the
environmental assessment supporting
the July 18, 1990, final rule (55 FR
29181) that amended 10 CFR part 72 to
provide for the storage of spent fuel
under a general license in cask designs
approved by the NRC. There will be no
significant change in the types or
significant revisions in the amounts of
any effluent released, no significant
increase in the individual or cumulative
radiation exposure, and no significant
increase in the potential for or
consequences from radiological
accidents from those analyzed in that
environmental assessment.
This final rule revises the NUHOMS®
Storage System listing in 10 CFR 72.214
by adding Amendment No. 3 to CoC No.
1029. The amendment consists of the
changes previously described, as set
forth in the revised CoC and TSs. The
revised TSs are identified in the SER.
The amended NUHOMS® Storage
System design, when used under the
conditions specified in the CoC, the
TSs, and the NRC’s regulations, will
meet the requirements of 10 CFR part
72; therefore, adequate protection of
public health and safety will continue to
be ensured. When this final rule
becomes effective, persons who hold a
general license under 10 CFR 72.210,
‘‘General license issued,’’ may load
spent nuclear fuel into NUHOMS®
Storage Systems that meet the criteria of
Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1029
under 10 CFR 72.212, ‘‘Conditions of
general license issued under § 72.210.’’
III. Public Comment Analysis
The NRC received 17 comments from
private citizens, and 1 comment from 2
attorneys representing 20 environmental
organizations and individuals. The NRC
received two comments from private
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
citizens after the public comment period
ended.
The NRC has not made any changes
to the Proposed rule as a result of the
public comments NRC has received. The
following is a summary of the comments
and the NRC responses.
Comment:
Several commenters stated that the
NRC should not lower safety standards
by approving this new canister. No
specifics were provided.
Response:
The NRC is not lowering its safety
standards. The staff performed an
independent safety evaluation of
Amendment No. 3 to the Standardized
Advanced NUHOMS® System to ensure
that it meets the regulations in 10 CFR
part 72. The results of the staff’s
independent safety evaluation are
described in the SER (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14317A616).
The comment is not substantive
enough to aid the NRC in understanding
any impact upon the NRC’s safety
review, the technical specifications, or
the NRC’s conclusions on this particular
amendment. Additionally, the NRC staff
concluded that there would be no
significant environmental impacts as
confirmed in the direct final rule,
Section VII, ‘‘Finding of No Significant
Environmental Impact: Availability.’’
This comment does not challenge that
finding because, as the environmental
assessment explained, this amendment
to the rule will not result in any
significant change in the types or
significant revisions in the amounts of
any effluent released, no significant
increase in the individual or cumulative
radiation exposure, and no significant
increase in the potential for or
consequences from radiological
accidents. This amendment continues to
ensure that the Commission’s
regulations regarding dose rates, found
in 10 CFR part 20, are maintained.
Comment:
Two commenters demanded that the
NRC should ‘‘get rid’’ of stored spent
fuel. No specifics were provided.
Response:
The NRC staff reviewed the
comments, and concluded that they are
not significant and adverse as defined in
NUREG/BR–0053, Revision 6, ‘‘United
States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Regulations Handbook’’ (hereinafter
‘‘Regulations Handbook’’) (ADAMS
Accession No. ML052720461), as they
are beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
Instead, these comments raise generic
concerns regarding the use of any spent
fuel storage casks and are not specific to
any issue or concern with the
amendment to the cask certificate that is
the subject of this rulemaking effort.
E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM
22JAR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Comment:
One commenter stated that under no
circumstances should nuclear
regulations be lowered for the sake of
increasing the density of stored high
spent fuel and saving money.
Response:
The NRC is not lowering its nuclear
regulations. The staff performed an
independent safety evaluation of
Amendment No. 3 to the Standardized
Advanced NUHOMS® System to ensure
that it meets the regulations in 10 CFR
part 72. The results of the staff’s
independent safety evaluation are
described in the SER (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14317A616). The
comment is not substantive enough to
aid the NRC in understanding any
impact upon the NRC’s safety review,
the technical specifications, or the
NRC’s conclusions on this particular
amendment. Additionally, the NRC staff
concluded that there would be no
significant environmental impacts as
confirmed in the direct final rule,
Section VII, ‘‘Finding of No Significant
Environmental Impact: Availability.’’
This comment does not challenge that
finding because, as the environmental
assessment explained, this amendment
to the rule will not result in any
significant change in the types or
significant revisions in the amounts of
any effluent released, no significant
increase in the individual or cumulative
radiation exposure, and no significant
increase in the potential for or
consequences from radiological
accidents. This amendment continues to
ensure that the Commission’s
regulations regarding dose rates, found
in 10 CFR part 20, are maintained.
Comment:
One commenter stated the high burn
up fuel is an extremely ‘‘hot’’ type of
spent fuel, would require re-casking,
which has never been attempted, and
that approval should be given only after
re-casking is achieved.
Response:
The NRC staff reviewed this comment
and concluded it is not a significant
adverse comment as defined in the
Regulations Handbook, as it is beyond
the scope of this rulemaking. Instead,
this comment raises a generic concern
regarding the safety of high burnup fuel
and its storage in spent fuel storage
casks, and is not specific to any issue or
concern with the amendment to the cask
certificate that is the subject of this
rulemaking. Although the ability of the
Standardized Advanced NUHOMS®
storage system to store high burnup fuel
has not been previously authorized (it is
now being authorized in the 32PTH2
DSC), the ability of a similar TN system,
the Standardized NUHOMS® system
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Jan 21, 2015
Jkt 235001
(CoC No. 1004), to store high burnup
fuel for 20 years was authorized in
Amendment No. 6. The final rule
approving that amendment was
published in the Federal Register on
December 17, 2003 (68 FR 70121).
Comment:
Several commenters stated that the
NRC should not approve storing 32 fuel
assemblies in a space originally
designed for 24 fuel assemblies, with
some of the comments raising concerns
about a potential increased risk
associated with the increased number of
fuel assemblies.
Response:
The 32PTH2 is a new design,
specifically intended to store 32 fuel
assemblies. It is not a modification to
the 24PT1 or 24PT4 for storage of 32
spent fuel assemblies in a 24 assembly
cask. Although the ability of the
Standardized Advanced NUHOMS®
storage system to store 32 PWR
assemblies has not been previously
authorized (it is now being authorized
in the 32PTH2 DSC), the ability of a
similar TN system, the Standardized
NUHOMS® system (CoC No. 1004), to
store 32 PWR assemblies in the 32PT
DSC for 20 years was authorized in
Amendment No. 5. The final rule
approving that amendment was
published in the Federal Register on
January 7, 2004 (69 FR 849). A similar
DSC, the 32PTH1, was also approved
under CoC No. 1004, and authorized in
Amendment No. 10. The final rule
approving that amendment was
published in the Federal Register on
June 10, 2009 (74 FR 24769). In
addition, the ability of another similar
TN system, the NUHOMS® HD
Horizontal Modular System is
authorized to store 32 PWR assemblies
in the 32PTH DSC for 20 years. The
final rule approving the initial
certificate was published in the Federal
Register on December 11, 2006 (71 FR
71463). For every system authorized,
whether it is for storage of 24 PWR
assemblies, 32 PWR assemblies, or 37
PWR assemblies (for example), staff
performs a comprehensive review to
ensure that the system maintains subcriticality, provides adequate radiation
shielding and confinement, provides
adequate heat removal, and can store
the spent fuel safely during the
approved storage term; in accordance
with the requirements of 10 CFR part
72.
Comment:
One commenter noted that the
definition of damaged fuel has been
changed for the 32PTH2.
Response:
With the addition of the 32PTH2 DSC,
a definition for a damaged fuel assembly
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3149
specific to the 32PTH2 was added. The
new definition is the same as the
existing definition, for the 24PT1 and
the 24PT4, except that it adds a
requirement that the damaged fuel
assembly must be able to be handled by
normal means. According to the TS, all
damaged fuel assemblies loaded in
24PT1 or 24PT4 DSCs are required to be
encapsulated in failed fuel cans, and are
limited to specific loading zones. In
contrast, the damaged fuel assemblies
loaded in the 32PTH2 must be able to
be handled by normal means because
they are not required to be encapsulated
in failed fuel cans. Instead, the DSC fuel
compartments that can store damaged
fuel assemblies in the 32PTH2 are
provided with top and bottom end caps,
and the damaged fuel assemblies are
limited to specific fuel compartments.
Note that in both cases, fuel assemblies
with damage greater than the definition
are not authorized for storage.
Comment:
One commenter stated that storage
ought to be above ground, so that we all
remember to keep replacing the
encasements.
Response:
The Advanced Standardized
NUHOMS® Dry Storage System is an
above ground system. Note also that all
approved dry storage systems are
required to be monitored, and that any
system that is renewed is also subject to
aging management programs which
monitor and control age related
degradation to the structures, systems
and components important to safety.
Comment:
Two attorneys stated, on behalf of 20
environmental organizations and
individuals, that in publishing this
direct final rule, the NRC violated the
requirements of the Atomic Energy Act
and the Administrative Procedures Act
for public participation in the NRC
decisions affecting public safety and the
environment. They also stated that the
direct final rule Federal Register notice
is grossly misleading, and appears
designed to lull the public into a false
sense of confidence.
Response:
The NRC has not violated the
requirements of the Atomic Energy Act
and the Administrative Procedures Act
for public participation. As explained in
the Regulations Handbook, the direct
final rule process may be used where
the agency believes a rule is
noncontroversial and significant adverse
comments will not be received. This
process allows the agency to issue the
rule without having to go through the
review process twice, at the proposed
and final rule stages, while at the same
time offering the public the opportunity
E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM
22JAR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
3150
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
to challenge the agency’s view that the
rule is noncontroversial. The NRC
published, on the same day as the direct
final rule, a Federal Register notice for
a proposed rule on the CoC amendment
in the event the NRC did receive
significant adverse comments on the
rule. The NRC has, for many years,
adhered to this procedure in all its CoC
direct final rules, and as demonstrated
in this instance, this process does
provide the ability of the public to
participate in this process.
Comment:
The same commenters also stated that
contrary to the NRC assurances that the
rule is limited, routine,
noncontroversial, and protects the
public and the environment from
radiological accidents, the rule approves
a significant and unprecedented change
in the permissible use of 32PTH2 DSC:
the transportation of high burnup fuel.
Response:
The rule does not approve the
32PTH2 DSC for transportation of high
burnup fuel. The direct final rule is for
approval of the 32PTH2 DSC for storage
only. While TN’s naming convention of
including a ‘‘T’’ in the DSC type
designator indicates its intention that
the 32PTH2 could eventually be
authorized for transport, it in no way
indicates that the 32PTH2 has been
approved for transport. In order for the
32PTH2 DSC to be approved for
transportation of high burnup fuel, or
any other spent fuel, TN would have to
submit an application to the NRC under
10 CFR part 71, which would need to
be reviewed and approved in a new and
entirely separate process from the
current subject approval for the storage
of spent nuclear fuel. The 32PTH2 DSC
has not been reviewed and approved for
spent fuel transportation under 10 CFR
part 71. Transnuclear, Inc., does have
approved transportation certificates that
authorize transportation for some of its
DSCs (not including the 32PTH2) under
this storage CoC (No. 1029) and others,
and some of those DSCs are approved
for transportation of high burnup fuel
(CoCs 71–9255 and 71–9302). However,
this is a completely separate review and
approval process.
The SER has been revised to explicitly
state that the 32PTH2 DSC has not been
certified under 10 CFR part 71 for use
in transportation.
Comment:
Many of the comments were related to
the potential use of the new 32PTH2
DSC at the San Onofre Nuclear
Generating Station (SONGS). The
commenters were generally opposed to
storage of spent nuclear fuel in the
32PTH2 DSC at SONGS, some because
of the higher number of fuel assemblies
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Jan 21, 2015
Jkt 235001
that could be stored in this DSC; SONGS
is currently using the 24PT1 and 24PT4
DSCs (already approved under CoC No.
1029), which hold 24 fuel assemblies
each. Other commenters in this group
prefer that the spent fuel not be stored
onsite at all; they recommend instead
that the spent fuel be transported off site
immediately. One commenter in this
group expressed concerns about
accident analyses used for review and
approval of spent fuel storage systems in
relation to conditions at SONGS, and
recommended leaving the spent fuel in
spent fuel pools, rather than moving it
to dry storage. A supplement to this
comment also considered storing the
spent fuel in the reactor containment
building. Several of the commenters
also expressed concerns about the wild
fires in California in relation to SONGS
spent fuel storage, and one commenter
requested that the approval of the
32PTH2 DSC for storage be amended to
specifically preclude its use at SONGS.
Response:
The NRC staff reviewed the comments
in this group, and concluded that they
are not significant and adverse
comments as defined in the Regulations
Handbook, as they are beyond the scope
of this rulemaking. Instead, these
comments raise a generic concern
regarding potential use of the 32PTH2
DSC at a single, particular site SONGS,
and do not raise any specific issue or
concern with the amendment to the cask
certificate that is the subject of this
rulemaking. The NRC staff is aware that
SONGS has expressed interest in storing
spent nuclear fuel in the 32PTH2 DSC,
once it is approved. The regulations for
the general license in 10 CFR part 72
allow the use of any approved canisters
under 10 CFR 72.214 by any general
licensee, however, the cask used by the
general licensee must conform to the
terms, conditions, and specifications of
a CoC or an amended CoC listed in
§ 72.214. Additionally, under 10 CFR
72.212, a general licensee is required to
perform evaluations that document that
the chosen cask, once loaded, will meet
the requirements of the CoC and TS, and
that the reactor site parameters
(including analyses of earthquake
intensity and tornado missiles) are
enveloped by the cask design bases as
described in the applicant’s safety
analysis report and the staff’s SER.
Further, the cask storage areas must be
designed to adequately support the
static and dynamic loads of the stored
casks, considering possible earthquake
effects, and the general licensee must
protect the stored spent fuel against the
design basis threat of radiological
sabotage.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
IV. Voluntary Consensus Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104–113) requires that Federal agencies
use technical standards that are
developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies unless the
use of such a standard is inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. In this final rule, the NRC
revises the NUHOMS® Storage System
design listed in 10 CFR 72.214. This
action does not constitute the
establishment of a standard that
contains generally applicable
requirements.
V. Agreement State Compatibility
Under the ‘‘Policy Statement on
Adequacy and Compatibility of
Agreement State Programs’’ approved by
the Commission on June 30, 1997, and
published in the Federal Register on
September 3, 1997, this final rule is
classified as Compatibility Category
‘‘NRC.’’ Compatibility is not required for
Category ‘‘NRC’’ regulations. The NRC
program elements in this category are
those that relate directly to areas of
regulation reserved to the NRC by the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,
or the provisions of 10 CFR. Although
an Agreement State may not adopt
program elements reserved to the NRC,
it may wish to inform its licensees of
certain requirements via a mechanism
that is consistent with the particular
State’s administrative procedure laws,
but does not confer regulatory authority
on the State.
VI. Plain Writing
The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub.
L. 111–274), requires Federal agencies
to write documents in a clear, concise,
well-organized manner that also follows
other best practices appropriate to the
subject or field and the intended
audience. The NRC has attempted to use
plain language in promulgating this rule
consistent with the Federal Plain
Writing Act guidelines.
VII. Finding of No Significant
Environmental Impact: Availability
A. The Action
The action is to amend 10 CFR 72.214
to revise the Transnuclear, Inc.
NUHOMS® Storage System listing
within the ‘‘List of Approved Spent Fuel
Storage Casks’’ to include Amendment
No. 3 to CoC No. 1029. Under the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended, and the NRC’s
regulations in subpart A of 10 CFR part
51, ‘‘Environmental Protection
Regulations for Domestic Licensing and
Related Regulatory Functions,’’ the NRC
E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM
22JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
has determined that this rule, if
adopted, would not be a major Federal
action significantly affecting the quality
of the human environment and,
therefore, an environmental impact
statement is not required. The NRC has
made a finding of no significant impact
on the basis of this environmental
assessment.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. The Need for the Action
This final rule amends the CoC for the
Transnuclear, Inc. NUHOMS® Storage
System design within the list of
approved spent fuel storage casks that
power reactor licensees can use to store
spent fuel at reactor sites under a
general license. Specifically,
Amendment No. 3 adds a new
transportable DSC, 32PTH2, to the
NUHOMS® Storage System; and makes
editorial corrections.
C. Environmental Impacts of the Action
On July 18, 1990 (55 FR 29181), the
NRC issued an amendment to 10 CFR
part 72 to provide for the storage of
spent fuel under a general license in
cask designs approved by the NRC. The
potential environmental impact of using
NRC-approved storage casks was
initially analyzed in the environmental
assessment for the 1990 final rule. The
environmental assessment for this
Amendment No. 3 tiers off of the
environmental assessment for the July
18, 1990, final rule. Tiering on past
environmental assessments is a standard
process under the National
Environmental Policy Act.
NUHOMS® Storage Systems are
designed to mitigate the effects of design
basis accidents that could occur during
storage. Design basis accidents account
for human-induced events and the most
severe natural phenomena reported for
the site and surrounding area.
Postulated accidents analyzed for an
Independent Spent Fuel Storage
Installation, the type of facility at which
a holder of a power reactor operating
license would store spent fuel in casks
in accordance with 10 CFR part 72,
include tornado winds and tornadogenerated missiles, a design basis
earthquake, a design basis flood, an
accidental cask drop, lightning effects,
fire, explosions, and other incidents.
Considering the specific design
requirements for each accident
condition, the design of the cask would
prevent loss of containment, shielding,
and criticality control. If there is no loss
of containment, shielding, or criticality
control, the environmental impacts
would be insignificant. This amendment
does not reflect a significant change in
design or fabrication of the cask. There
are no significant changes to cask design
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Jan 21, 2015
Jkt 235001
requirements in the proposed CoC
amendment. In addition, because there
are no significant design or process
changes, any resulting occupational
exposure or offsite dose rates from the
implementation of Amendment No. 3
would remain well within the 10 CFR
part 20 limits. Therefore, the proposed
CoC changes will not result in any
radiological or non-radiological
environmental impacts that significantly
differ from the environmental impacts
evaluated in the environmental
assessment supporting the July 18, 1990,
final rule. There will be no significant
change in the types or significant
revisions in the amounts of any effluent
released, no significant increase in the
individual or cumulative radiation
exposure, and no significant increase in
the potential for or consequences from
radiological accidents. The staff
documented its safety findings in an
SER which is available in ADAMS
under Accession No. ML14317A616.
D. Alternative to the Action
The alternative to this action is to
deny approval of Amendment No. 3 and
end the final rule. Consequently, any 10
CFR part 72 general licensee that seeks
to load spent nuclear fuel into
NUHOMS® Storage Systems in
accordance with the changes described
in proposed Amendment No. 3 would
have to request an exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 72.212 and
72.214. Under this alternative,
interested licensees would have to
prepare, and the NRC would have to
review, a separate exemption request,
thereby increasing the
administrativeburden upon the NRC
and the costs to each licensee.
Therefore, the environmental impacts
would be the same or less than the
action.
E. Alternative Use of Resources
Approval of Amendment No. 3 to CoC
No. 1029 would result in no irreversible
commitments of resources.
F. Agencies and Persons Contacted
No agencies or persons outside the
NRC were contacted in connection with
the preparation of this environmental
assessment.
G. Finding of No Significant Impact
The environmental impacts of the
action have been reviewed under the
requirements in 10 CFR part 51. Based
on the foregoing environmental
assessment, the NRC concludes that this
final rule entitled, ‘‘List of Approved
Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Standardized
Advanced NUHOMS® Horizontal
Modular Storage System, Amendment
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3151
No. 3,’’ will not have a significant effect
on quality of the human environment.
Therefore, the NRC has determined that
an environmental impact statement is
not necessary for this final rule.
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain any
information collection requirements
and, therefore, is not subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
Public Protection Notification
The NRC may not conduct or sponsor,
and a person is not required to respond
to, a request for information or an
information collection requirement
unless the requesting document
displays a current valid Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) control
number.
IX. Regulatory Analysis
On July 18, 1990 (55 FR 29181), the
NRC issued an amendment to 10 CFR
part 72 to provide for the storage of
spent nuclear fuel under a general
license in cask designs approved by the
NRC. Any nuclear power reactor
licensee can use NRC-approved cask
designs to store spent nuclear fuel if it
notifies the NRC in advance, the spent
fuel is stored under the conditions
specified in the cask’s CoC, and the
conditions of the general license are
met. A list of NRC-approved cask
designs is contained in 10 CFR 72.214.
The NRC issued a final rule (68 FR 463;
January 6, 2003) that approved the
Standardized Advanced NUHOMS®
Cask System design and added it to the
list of NRC-approved cask designs in 10
CFR 72.214 ‘‘List of approved spent fuel
storage casks,’’ as CoC No. 1029.
On December 15, 2011 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML120040478),
Transnuclear, Inc. submitted an
application to amend the NUHOMS®
Storage System.
The alternative to this action is to
withhold approval of Amendment No. 3
and to require any 10 CFR part 72
general licensee seeking to load spent
nuclear fuel into the NUHOMS® Storage
Systems under the changes described in
Amendment No. 3 to request an
exemption from the requirements of 10
CFR 72.212 and 72.214. Under this
alternative, each interested 10 CFR part
72 licensee would have to prepare, and
the NRC would have to review separate
exemption requests, thereby increasing
the administrative burden upon the
NRC and the costs to each licensee.
Approval of this final rule is
consistent with previous NRC actions.
Further, as documented in the SER and
E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM
22JAR1
3152
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
the environmental assessment, the final
rule will have no adverse effect on
public health and safety or the
environment. This final rule has no
significant identifiable impact or benefit
on other Government agencies. Based on
this regulatory analysis, the NRC
concludes that the requirements of the
final rule are commensurate with the
NRC’s responsibilities for public health
and safety and the common defense and
security. No other available alternative
is believed to be as satisfactory, and
therefore, this action is recommended.
X. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the NRC
certifies that this rule will not, if issued,
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
This final rule affects only nuclear
power plant licensees and Transnuclear,
Inc. These entities do not fall within the
scope of the definition of small entities
set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act or the size standards established by
the NRC (10 CFR 2.810).
XI. Backfitting and Issue Finality
The NRC has determined that the
backfit rule (10 CFR 72.62) does not
apply to this final rule. Therefore, a
backfit analysis is not required. This
final rule revises the CoC No. 1029 for
the Transnuclear, Inc. NUHOMS®
Storage System, as currently listed in 10
CFR 72.214, ‘‘List of Approved Spent
Fuel Storage Casks.’’ The revision
consists of Amendment No. 3 which
adds a new transportable DSC, 32PTH2,
to the NUHOMS® Storage System; and
makes editorial corrections.
Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1029
for the Transnuclear, Inc. NUHOMS®
Storage System was initiated by
Transnuclear, Inc. and was not
submitted in response to new NRC
requirements, or an NRC request for
amendment. Amendment No. 3 applies
only to new casks fabricated and used
under Amendment No. 3. These changes
do not affect existing users of the
NUHOMS® Storage System, and the
current Amendments continue to be
effective for existing users. While
current CoC users may comply with the
new requirements in Amendment No. 3,
this would be a voluntary decision on
the part of current users. For these
reasons, Amendment No. 3 to CoC No.
1029 does not constitute backfitting
under 10 CFR 72.62, 10 CFR
50.109(a)(1), or otherwise represent an
inconsistency with the issue finality
provisions applicable to combined
licenses in 10 CFR part 52. Accordingly,
no backfit analysis or additional
documentation addressing the issue
finality criteria in 10 CFR part 52 has
been prepared by the staff.
XII. Congressional Review Act
In accordance with the Congressional
Review Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801–808),
the NRC has determined that this action
is not a rule as defined in the
Congressional Review Act.
XIII. Availability of Documents
The documents identified in the
following table are available to
interested persons through one or more
of the following methods, as indicated.
ADAMS Accession No./Federal
Register citation
Document
Application from Transnuclear Inc. for the Advanced Standardized NUHOMS® Dry Storage System
Amendment No. 3, December 15, 2011.
Safety Evaluation Report for the Transnuclear Inc. Advanced Standardized NUHOMS® Dry Storage System, Amendment No. 3.
The Transnuclear Inc. Advanced Standardized NUHOMS® Dry Storage System CoC No. 1029, Amendment No. 3.
The Transnuclear Inc. Advanced Standardized NUHOMS® Dry Storage System Technical Specifications,
Amendment No. 3.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 72
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Administrative practice and
procedure, Criminal penalties,
Manpower training programs, Nuclear
materials, Occupational safety and
health, Penalties, Radiation protection,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures, Spent
fuel, Whistleblowing.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble and under the authority of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended;
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,
as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553,
the NRC is adopting the following
amendments to 10 CFR part 72.
PART 72—LICENSING
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT
NUCLEAR FUEL, HIGH-LEVEL
RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND
REACTOR-RELATED GREATER THAN
CLASS C WASTE
1. The authority citation for part 72
continues to read as follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Jan 21, 2015
Jkt 235001
Authority: Atomic Energy Act secs. 51, 53,
57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 161, 182, 183, 184, 186,
187, 189, 223, 234, 274 (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073,
2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201,
2232, 2233, 2234, 2236, 2237, 2239, 2273,
2282, 2021); Energy Reorganization Act secs.
201, 202, 206, 211 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842,
5846, 5851); National Environmental Policy
Act sec. 102 (42 U.S.C. 4332); Nuclear Waste
Policy Act secs. 131, 132, 133, 135, 137, 141,
148 (42 U.S.C. 10151, 10152, 10153, 10155,
10157, 10161, 10168); Government
Paperwork Elimination Act sec. 1704, (44
U.S.C. 3504 note); Energy Policy Act of 2005,
Pub. L. 109–58, 119 Stat. 788 (2005).
Section 72.44(g) also issued under Nuclear
Waste Policy Act secs. 142(b) and 148(c),(d)
(42 U.S.C. 10162(b), 10168(c),(d)). Section
72.46 also issued under Atomic Energy Act
sec. 189 (42 U.S.C. 2239); Nuclear Waste
Policy Act sec. 134 (42 U.S.C. 10154). Section
72.96(d) also issued under Nuclear Waste
Policy Act sec. 145(g) (42 U.S.C. 10165(g)).
Subpart J also issued under Nuclear Waste
Policy Act secs. 117(a), 141(h) (42 U.S.C.
10137(a), 10161(h)). Subpart K also issued
under Nuclear Waste Policy Act sec. 218(a)
(42 U.S.C. 10198).
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ML120040478.
ML14317A616.
ML13290A176.
ML13290A182.
2. In § 72.214, Certificate of
Compliance No. 1029 is revised to read
as follows:
■
§ 72.214 List of approved spent fuel
storage casks.
*
*
*
*
*
Certificate Number: 1029.
Initial Certificate Effective Date:
February 5, 2003.
Amendment Number 1 Effective Date:
May 16, 2005.
Amendment Number 2 Effective Date:
Amendment not issued by the NRC.
Amendment Number 3 Effective Date:
February 23, 2015.
SAR Submitted by: Transnuclear, Inc.
SAR Title: Final Safety Analysis
Report for the Standardized Advanced
NUHOMS® Horizontal
Modular Storage System for Irradiated
Nuclear Fuel.
Docket Number: 72–1029.
Certificate Expiration Date: February
5, 2023.
E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM
22JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Model Number: Standardized
Advanced NUHOMS® –24PT1, –24PT4,
and –32PTH2.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day
of January, 2015.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
Mark A. Satorius,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 2015–01031 Filed 1–21–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2014–0924; Directorate
Identifier 2014–NM–228–AD; Amendment
39–18067; AD 2014–25–51]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and
A321 series airplanes. This emergency
AD was sent previously to all known
U.S. owners and operators of these
airplanes. This AD requires revising the
airplane flight manual to advise the
flightcrew of emergency procedures for
abnormal Alpha Protection (Alpha Prot).
This AD was prompted by a report of
Angle of Attack (AoA) probes jamming
on an in-service Airbus Model A321
airplane. Jamming of the two AoA
probes during climb is attributed to
water freezing under the AoA vane
slinger, and led to activation of the
Alpha Prot while the Mach number
increased, which resulted in an airplane
pitch down per design. We are issuing
this AD to ensure that the flightcrew has
procedures to counteract the pitch down
order due to abnormal activation of the
Alpha Prot. An abnormal Alpha Prot, if
not corrected, could result in loss of
control of the airplane.
DATES: This AD is effective February 6,
2015 to all persons except those persons
to whom it was made immediately
effective by Emergency AD 2014–25–51,
issued on December 10, 2014, which
contained the requirements of this
amendment.
We must receive comments on this
AD by March 9, 2015.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Jan 21, 2015
Jkt 235001
You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail
address above between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
ADDRESSES:
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2014–
0924; or in person at the Docket
Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations Office (phone:
800–647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in
the AD docket shortly after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM–116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1405;
fax 425–227–1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
On December 10, 2014, we issued
Emergency AD 2014–25–51, which
requires revising the airplane flight
manual to advise the flightcrew of
emergency procedures for abnormal
Alpha Prot. This emergency AD was
sent previously to all known U.S.
owners and operators of these airplanes.
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European
Union, has issued Emergency
Airworthiness Directive 2014–0266–E,
dated December 9, 2014 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the
MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition
on all Model A318, A319, A320, and
A321 series airplanes. The MCAI states:
An occurrence was reported where an
Airbus A321 aeroplane encountered a
blockage of two Angle of Attack (AoA) probes
during climb, leading to activation of the
Alpha Protection (Alpha Prot) while the
Mach number increased. The flightcrew
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3153
managed to regain full control and the flight
landed uneventfully.
When Alpha Prot is activated due to
blocked AoA probes, the flight control laws
order a continuous nose down pitch rate that,
in a worst case scenario, cannot be stopped
with backward sidestick inputs, even in the
full backward position. If the Mach number
increases during a nose down order, the AoA
value of the Alpha Prot will continue to
decrease. As a result, the flight control laws
will continue to order a nose down pitch
rate, even if the speed is above minimum
selectable speed, known as VLS.
This condition, if not corrected, could
result in loss of control of the aeroplane.
To address this unsafe condition, Airbus
* * * [has] developed a specific Aircraft
Flight Manual (AFM) procedure, which has
been published in AFM Temporary Revision
(TR) No. 502.
For the reasons described above, this AD
requires amendment of the applicable AFM
[to advise the flightcrew of emergency
procedures for abnormal Alpha Prot].
This is considered to be an interim action
and further [EASA] AD action may follow.
FAA’s Determination and AD
Requirements
This product has been approved by
the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation
in the United States. Pursuant to our
bilateral agreement with the State of
Design Authority, we have been notified
of the unsafe condition described in the
MCAI and service information
referenced above. We are issuing this
AD because we evaluated all pertinent
information and determined the unsafe
condition exists and is likely to exist or
develop on other products of the same
type design.
FAA’s Determination of the Effective
Date
An unsafe condition exists that
requires the immediate adoption of this
AD. The FAA has found that the risk to
the flying public justifies waiving notice
and comment prior to adoption of this
rule because an abnormal Alpha Prot, if
not corrected, could result in loss of
control of the airplane. Therefore, we
find that notice and opportunity for
prior public comment are impracticable
and that good cause exists for making
this amendment effective in less than 30
days.
Comments Invited
This AD is a final rule that involves
requirements affecting flight safety and
was not preceded by notice and an
opportunity for public comment.
However, we invite you to send any
written data, views, or arguments about
this AD. Send your comments to an
address listed under the ADDRESSES
section. Include the docket number
FAA–2014–0924 and Directorate
E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM
22JAR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 14 (Thursday, January 22, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3147-3153]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01031]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 72
[NRC-2013-0271]
RIN 3150-AJ31
List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Transnuclear, Inc.
Standardized Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] Horizontal Modular Storage System;
Certificate of Compliance No. 1029, Amendment No. 3
AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its
spent fuel storage regulations by revising the Transnuclear, Inc. (TN)
Standardized Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] Horizontal Modular Storage System
(NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System) listing within the ``List of Approved
Spent Fuel Storage Casks'' to include Amendment No. 3 to Certificate of
Compliance (CoC) No. 1029. The NRC published a direct final rule on
this amendment in the Federal Register on April 15, 2014. The NRC also
concurrently published an identical proposed rule on April 15, 2014.
The NRC received significant adverse comments on the direct final rule;
therefore, the NRC withdrew the direct final rule on June 25, 2014, and
is proceeding, in this Federal Register notice, to address the comments
on the companion proposed rule.
DATES: This final rule is effective on February 23, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2013-0271 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may
obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of
the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0271. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. For
the convenience of the reader, instructions about obtaining materials
referenced in this document are provided in the ``Availability of
Documents'' section of this document.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O-1F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory R. Trussell, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone: 301-415-6445, email:
Gregory.Trussell@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Discussion of Changes
III. Public Comment Analysis
IV. Voluntary Consensus Standards
V. Agreement State Compatibility
VI. Plain Writing
VII. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
IX. Regulatory Analysis
X. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
XI. Backfitting and Issue Finality
XII. Congressional Review Act
XIII. Availability of Documents
I. Background
Section 218(a) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) of 1982, as
amended, requires that ``the Secretary [of the Department of Energy]
shall establish a demonstration program, in cooperation with the
private sector, for the dry storage of spent nuclear fuel at civilian
nuclear power reactor sites, with the objective of establishing one or
more technologies that the [Nuclear Regulatory] Commission may, by
rule, approve for use at the sites of civilian nuclear power reactors
without, to the maximum extent practicable, the need for additional
site-specific approvals by the Commission.'' Section 133 of the NWPA
states, in part, that [the Commission] shall, by rule, establish
procedures for the licensing of any technology approved by the
[[Page 3148]]
Commission under Section 219(a) [sic: 218(a)] for use at the site of
any civilian nuclear power reactor.''
To implement this mandate, the Commission approved dry storage of
spent nuclear fuel in NRC-approved casks under a general license by
publishing a final rule in part 72 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), ''Licensing Requirements for the Independent
Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and
Reactor-Related Greater Than Class C Waste,'' which added a new subpart
K within 10 CFR part 72 entitled, ``General License for Storage of
Spent Fuel at Power Reactor Sites'' (55 FR 29181; July 18, 1990). This
rule also established a new subpart L within 10 CFR part 72 entitled,
``Approval of Spent Fuel Storage Casks,'' which contains procedures and
criteria for obtaining NRC approval of spent fuel storage cask designs.
The NRC subsequently issued a final rule (68 FR 463; January 6, 2003)
that approved the Standardized Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] Cask System
design and added it to the list of NRC-approved cask designs in 10 CFR
72.214, ``List of approved spent fuel storage casks,'' as CoC No. 1029.
II. Discussion of Changes
On December 15, 2011, Transnuclear, Inc. submitted an application
to amend the NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System. Amendment No. 3 adds a new
transportable dry shielded canister (DSC), the 32PTH2, to the
NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System; and makes editorial corrections. The
NUHOMS[supreg] 32PTH2 system is designed to accommodate up to 32 intact
(or up to 16 damaged and the balance intact) pressurized water reactor
(PWR), Combustion Engineering (CE), 16 x 16 class spent fuel
assemblies, with or without control components. The NUHOMS[supreg]
32PTH2 system also consists of a modified version of the Standardized
NUHOMS[supreg] Advanced Horizontal Storage Module (AHSM), designated
the AHSM-HS (high burnup and high seismic).
Numerous sections of the Technical Specifications (TSs) were
revised to add and update characteristics, specifications, and
requirements related to the 32PTH2 DSC and the AHSM-HS storage module.
Additional changes were made to definitions and other sections to
improve completeness, consistency, and clarity. Revised sections are
indicated by side bars in the TSs.
As documented in the Safety Evaluation Report (SER) (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14317A616), the NRC staff performed a detailed safety
evaluation of the proposed CoC amendment request. There are no
significant changes to cask design requirements in the proposed CoC
amendment. Considering the specific design requirements for each
accident condition, the design of the cask would prevent loss of
containment, shielding, and criticality control. If there is no loss of
containment, shielding, or criticality control, the environmental
impacts would be insignificant. This amendment does not reflect a
significant change in design or fabrication of the cask. In addition,
any resulting occupational exposure or offsite dose rates from the
implementation of Amendment No. 3 would remain well within the limits
of 10 CFR part 20, ``Standards for Protection Against Radiation.''
Therefore, the CoC changes will not result in any radiological or non-
radiological environmental impacts that significantly differ from the
environmental impacts evaluated in the environmental assessment
supporting the July 18, 1990, final rule (55 FR 29181) that amended 10
CFR part 72 to provide for the storage of spent fuel under a general
license in cask designs approved by the NRC. There will be no
significant change in the types or significant revisions in the amounts
of any effluent released, no significant increase in the individual or
cumulative radiation exposure, and no significant increase in the
potential for or consequences from radiological accidents from those
analyzed in that environmental assessment.
This final rule revises the NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System listing
in 10 CFR 72.214 by adding Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1029. The
amendment consists of the changes previously described, as set forth in
the revised CoC and TSs. The revised TSs are identified in the SER. The
amended NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System design, when used under the
conditions specified in the CoC, the TSs, and the NRC's regulations,
will meet the requirements of 10 CFR part 72; therefore, adequate
protection of public health and safety will continue to be ensured.
When this final rule becomes effective, persons who hold a general
license under 10 CFR 72.210, ``General license issued,'' may load spent
nuclear fuel into NUHOMS[supreg] Storage Systems that meet the criteria
of Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1029 under 10 CFR 72.212, ``Conditions of
general license issued under Sec. 72.210.''
III. Public Comment Analysis
The NRC received 17 comments from private citizens, and 1 comment
from 2 attorneys representing 20 environmental organizations and
individuals. The NRC received two comments from private citizens after
the public comment period ended.
The NRC has not made any changes to the Proposed rule as a result
of the public comments NRC has received. The following is a summary of
the comments and the NRC responses.
Comment:
Several commenters stated that the NRC should not lower safety
standards by approving this new canister. No specifics were provided.
Response:
The NRC is not lowering its safety standards. The staff performed
an independent safety evaluation of Amendment No. 3 to the Standardized
Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] System to ensure that it meets the regulations
in 10 CFR part 72. The results of the staff's independent safety
evaluation are described in the SER (ADAMS Accession No. ML14317A616).
The comment is not substantive enough to aid the NRC in
understanding any impact upon the NRC's safety review, the technical
specifications, or the NRC's conclusions on this particular amendment.
Additionally, the NRC staff concluded that there would be no
significant environmental impacts as confirmed in the direct final
rule, Section VII, ``Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact:
Availability.'' This comment does not challenge that finding because,
as the environmental assessment explained, this amendment to the rule
will not result in any significant change in the types or significant
revisions in the amounts of any effluent released, no significant
increase in the individual or cumulative radiation exposure, and no
significant increase in the potential for or consequences from
radiological accidents. This amendment continues to ensure that the
Commission's regulations regarding dose rates, found in 10 CFR part 20,
are maintained.
Comment:
Two commenters demanded that the NRC should ``get rid'' of stored
spent fuel. No specifics were provided.
Response:
The NRC staff reviewed the comments, and concluded that they are
not significant and adverse as defined in NUREG/BR-0053, Revision 6,
``United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulations Handbook''
(hereinafter ``Regulations Handbook'') (ADAMS Accession No.
ML052720461), as they are beyond the scope of this rulemaking. Instead,
these comments raise generic concerns regarding the use of any spent
fuel storage casks and are not specific to any issue or concern with
the amendment to the cask certificate that is the subject of this
rulemaking effort.
[[Page 3149]]
Comment:
One commenter stated that under no circumstances should nuclear
regulations be lowered for the sake of increasing the density of stored
high spent fuel and saving money.
Response:
The NRC is not lowering its nuclear regulations. The staff
performed an independent safety evaluation of Amendment No. 3 to the
Standardized Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] System to ensure that it meets the
regulations in 10 CFR part 72. The results of the staff's independent
safety evaluation are described in the SER (ADAMS Accession No.
ML14317A616). The comment is not substantive enough to aid the NRC in
understanding any impact upon the NRC's safety review, the technical
specifications, or the NRC's conclusions on this particular amendment.
Additionally, the NRC staff concluded that there would be no
significant environmental impacts as confirmed in the direct final
rule, Section VII, ``Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact:
Availability.'' This comment does not challenge that finding because,
as the environmental assessment explained, this amendment to the rule
will not result in any significant change in the types or significant
revisions in the amounts of any effluent released, no significant
increase in the individual or cumulative radiation exposure, and no
significant increase in the potential for or consequences from
radiological accidents. This amendment continues to ensure that the
Commission's regulations regarding dose rates, found in 10 CFR part 20,
are maintained.
Comment:
One commenter stated the high burn up fuel is an extremely ``hot''
type of spent fuel, would require re-casking, which has never been
attempted, and that approval should be given only after re-casking is
achieved.
Response:
The NRC staff reviewed this comment and concluded it is not a
significant adverse comment as defined in the Regulations Handbook, as
it is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. Instead, this comment raises
a generic concern regarding the safety of high burnup fuel and its
storage in spent fuel storage casks, and is not specific to any issue
or concern with the amendment to the cask certificate that is the
subject of this rulemaking. Although the ability of the Standardized
Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] storage system to store high burnup fuel has
not been previously authorized (it is now being authorized in the
32PTH2 DSC), the ability of a similar TN system, the Standardized
NUHOMS[supreg] system (CoC No. 1004), to store high burnup fuel for 20
years was authorized in Amendment No. 6. The final rule approving that
amendment was published in the Federal Register on December 17, 2003
(68 FR 70121).
Comment:
Several commenters stated that the NRC should not approve storing
32 fuel assemblies in a space originally designed for 24 fuel
assemblies, with some of the comments raising concerns about a
potential increased risk associated with the increased number of fuel
assemblies.
Response:
The 32PTH2 is a new design, specifically intended to store 32 fuel
assemblies. It is not a modification to the 24PT1 or 24PT4 for storage
of 32 spent fuel assemblies in a 24 assembly cask. Although the ability
of the Standardized Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] storage system to store 32
PWR assemblies has not been previously authorized (it is now being
authorized in the 32PTH2 DSC), the ability of a similar TN system, the
Standardized NUHOMS[supreg] system (CoC No. 1004), to store 32 PWR
assemblies in the 32PT DSC for 20 years was authorized in Amendment No.
5. The final rule approving that amendment was published in the Federal
Register on January 7, 2004 (69 FR 849). A similar DSC, the 32PTH1, was
also approved under CoC No. 1004, and authorized in Amendment No. 10.
The final rule approving that amendment was published in the Federal
Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 24769). In addition, the ability of
another similar TN system, the NUHOMS[supreg] HD Horizontal Modular
System is authorized to store 32 PWR assemblies in the 32PTH DSC for 20
years. The final rule approving the initial certificate was published
in the Federal Register on December 11, 2006 (71 FR 71463). For every
system authorized, whether it is for storage of 24 PWR assemblies, 32
PWR assemblies, or 37 PWR assemblies (for example), staff performs a
comprehensive review to ensure that the system maintains sub-
criticality, provides adequate radiation shielding and confinement,
provides adequate heat removal, and can store the spent fuel safely
during the approved storage term; in accordance with the requirements
of 10 CFR part 72.
Comment:
One commenter noted that the definition of damaged fuel has been
changed for the 32PTH2.
Response:
With the addition of the 32PTH2 DSC, a definition for a damaged
fuel assembly specific to the 32PTH2 was added. The new definition is
the same as the existing definition, for the 24PT1 and the 24PT4,
except that it adds a requirement that the damaged fuel assembly must
be able to be handled by normal means. According to the TS, all damaged
fuel assemblies loaded in 24PT1 or 24PT4 DSCs are required to be
encapsulated in failed fuel cans, and are limited to specific loading
zones. In contrast, the damaged fuel assemblies loaded in the 32PTH2
must be able to be handled by normal means because they are not
required to be encapsulated in failed fuel cans. Instead, the DSC fuel
compartments that can store damaged fuel assemblies in the 32PTH2 are
provided with top and bottom end caps, and the damaged fuel assemblies
are limited to specific fuel compartments. Note that in both cases,
fuel assemblies with damage greater than the definition are not
authorized for storage.
Comment:
One commenter stated that storage ought to be above ground, so that
we all remember to keep replacing the encasements.
Response:
The Advanced Standardized NUHOMS[supreg] Dry Storage System is an
above ground system. Note also that all approved dry storage systems
are required to be monitored, and that any system that is renewed is
also subject to aging management programs which monitor and control age
related degradation to the structures, systems and components important
to safety.
Comment:
Two attorneys stated, on behalf of 20 environmental organizations
and individuals, that in publishing this direct final rule, the NRC
violated the requirements of the Atomic Energy Act and the
Administrative Procedures Act for public participation in the NRC
decisions affecting public safety and the environment. They also stated
that the direct final rule Federal Register notice is grossly
misleading, and appears designed to lull the public into a false sense
of confidence.
Response:
The NRC has not violated the requirements of the Atomic Energy Act
and the Administrative Procedures Act for public participation. As
explained in the Regulations Handbook, the direct final rule process
may be used where the agency believes a rule is noncontroversial and
significant adverse comments will not be received. This process allows
the agency to issue the rule without having to go through the review
process twice, at the proposed and final rule stages, while at the same
time offering the public the opportunity
[[Page 3150]]
to challenge the agency's view that the rule is noncontroversial. The
NRC published, on the same day as the direct final rule, a Federal
Register notice for a proposed rule on the CoC amendment in the event
the NRC did receive significant adverse comments on the rule. The NRC
has, for many years, adhered to this procedure in all its CoC direct
final rules, and as demonstrated in this instance, this process does
provide the ability of the public to participate in this process.
Comment:
The same commenters also stated that contrary to the NRC assurances
that the rule is limited, routine, noncontroversial, and protects the
public and the environment from radiological accidents, the rule
approves a significant and unprecedented change in the permissible use
of 32PTH2 DSC: the transportation of high burnup fuel.
Response:
The rule does not approve the 32PTH2 DSC for transportation of high
burnup fuel. The direct final rule is for approval of the 32PTH2 DSC
for storage only. While TN's naming convention of including a ``T'' in
the DSC type designator indicates its intention that the 32PTH2 could
eventually be authorized for transport, it in no way indicates that the
32PTH2 has been approved for transport. In order for the 32PTH2 DSC to
be approved for transportation of high burnup fuel, or any other spent
fuel, TN would have to submit an application to the NRC under 10 CFR
part 71, which would need to be reviewed and approved in a new and
entirely separate process from the current subject approval for the
storage of spent nuclear fuel. The 32PTH2 DSC has not been reviewed and
approved for spent fuel transportation under 10 CFR part 71.
Transnuclear, Inc., does have approved transportation certificates that
authorize transportation for some of its DSCs (not including the
32PTH2) under this storage CoC (No. 1029) and others, and some of those
DSCs are approved for transportation of high burnup fuel (CoCs 71-9255
and 71-9302). However, this is a completely separate review and
approval process.
The SER has been revised to explicitly state that the 32PTH2 DSC
has not been certified under 10 CFR part 71 for use in transportation.
Comment:
Many of the comments were related to the potential use of the new
32PTH2 DSC at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS). The
commenters were generally opposed to storage of spent nuclear fuel in
the 32PTH2 DSC at SONGS, some because of the higher number of fuel
assemblies that could be stored in this DSC; SONGS is currently using
the 24PT1 and 24PT4 DSCs (already approved under CoC No. 1029), which
hold 24 fuel assemblies each. Other commenters in this group prefer
that the spent fuel not be stored onsite at all; they recommend instead
that the spent fuel be transported off site immediately. One commenter
in this group expressed concerns about accident analyses used for
review and approval of spent fuel storage systems in relation to
conditions at SONGS, and recommended leaving the spent fuel in spent
fuel pools, rather than moving it to dry storage. A supplement to this
comment also considered storing the spent fuel in the reactor
containment building. Several of the commenters also expressed concerns
about the wild fires in California in relation to SONGS spent fuel
storage, and one commenter requested that the approval of the 32PTH2
DSC for storage be amended to specifically preclude its use at SONGS.
Response:
The NRC staff reviewed the comments in this group, and concluded
that they are not significant and adverse comments as defined in the
Regulations Handbook, as they are beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
Instead, these comments raise a generic concern regarding potential use
of the 32PTH2 DSC at a single, particular site SONGS, and do not raise
any specific issue or concern with the amendment to the cask
certificate that is the subject of this rulemaking. The NRC staff is
aware that SONGS has expressed interest in storing spent nuclear fuel
in the 32PTH2 DSC, once it is approved. The regulations for the general
license in 10 CFR part 72 allow the use of any approved canisters under
10 CFR 72.214 by any general licensee, however, the cask used by the
general licensee must conform to the terms, conditions, and
specifications of a CoC or an amended CoC listed in Sec. 72.214.
Additionally, under 10 CFR 72.212, a general licensee is required to
perform evaluations that document that the chosen cask, once loaded,
will meet the requirements of the CoC and TS, and that the reactor site
parameters (including analyses of earthquake intensity and tornado
missiles) are enveloped by the cask design bases as described in the
applicant's safety analysis report and the staff's SER. Further, the
cask storage areas must be designed to adequately support the static
and dynamic loads of the stored casks, considering possible earthquake
effects, and the general licensee must protect the stored spent fuel
against the design basis threat of radiological sabotage.
IV. Voluntary Consensus Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (Pub.
L. 104-113) requires that Federal agencies use technical standards that
are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies unless
the use of such a standard is inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. In this final rule, the NRC revises the
NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System design listed in 10 CFR 72.214. This
action does not constitute the establishment of a standard that
contains generally applicable requirements.
V. Agreement State Compatibility
Under the ``Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility of
Agreement State Programs'' approved by the Commission on June 30, 1997,
and published in the Federal Register on September 3, 1997, this final
rule is classified as Compatibility Category ``NRC.'' Compatibility is
not required for Category ``NRC'' regulations. The NRC program elements
in this category are those that relate directly to areas of regulation
reserved to the NRC by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or
the provisions of 10 CFR. Although an Agreement State may not adopt
program elements reserved to the NRC, it may wish to inform its
licensees of certain requirements via a mechanism that is consistent
with the particular State's administrative procedure laws, but does not
confer regulatory authority on the State.
VI. Plain Writing
The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-274), requires Federal
agencies to write documents in a clear, concise, well-organized manner
that also follows other best practices appropriate to the subject or
field and the intended audience. The NRC has attempted to use plain
language in promulgating this rule consistent with the Federal Plain
Writing Act guidelines.
VII. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability
A. The Action
The action is to amend 10 CFR 72.214 to revise the Transnuclear,
Inc. NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System listing within the ``List of
Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks'' to include Amendment No. 3 to CoC
No. 1029. Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as
amended, and the NRC's regulations in subpart A of 10 CFR part 51,
``Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and
Related Regulatory Functions,'' the NRC
[[Page 3151]]
has determined that this rule, if adopted, would not be a major Federal
action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment
and, therefore, an environmental impact statement is not required. The
NRC has made a finding of no significant impact on the basis of this
environmental assessment.
B. The Need for the Action
This final rule amends the CoC for the Transnuclear, Inc.
NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System design within the list of approved spent
fuel storage casks that power reactor licensees can use to store spent
fuel at reactor sites under a general license. Specifically, Amendment
No. 3 adds a new transportable DSC, 32PTH2, to the NUHOMS[supreg]
Storage System; and makes editorial corrections.
C. Environmental Impacts of the Action
On July 18, 1990 (55 FR 29181), the NRC issued an amendment to 10
CFR part 72 to provide for the storage of spent fuel under a general
license in cask designs approved by the NRC. The potential
environmental impact of using NRC-approved storage casks was initially
analyzed in the environmental assessment for the 1990 final rule. The
environmental assessment for this Amendment No. 3 tiers off of the
environmental assessment for the July 18, 1990, final rule. Tiering on
past environmental assessments is a standard process under the National
Environmental Policy Act.
NUHOMS[supreg] Storage Systems are designed to mitigate the effects
of design basis accidents that could occur during storage. Design basis
accidents account for human-induced events and the most severe natural
phenomena reported for the site and surrounding area. Postulated
accidents analyzed for an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation,
the type of facility at which a holder of a power reactor operating
license would store spent fuel in casks in accordance with 10 CFR part
72, include tornado winds and tornado-generated missiles, a design
basis earthquake, a design basis flood, an accidental cask drop,
lightning effects, fire, explosions, and other incidents.
Considering the specific design requirements for each accident
condition, the design of the cask would prevent loss of containment,
shielding, and criticality control. If there is no loss of containment,
shielding, or criticality control, the environmental impacts would be
insignificant. This amendment does not reflect a significant change in
design or fabrication of the cask. There are no significant changes to
cask design requirements in the proposed CoC amendment. In addition,
because there are no significant design or process changes, any
resulting occupational exposure or offsite dose rates from the
implementation of Amendment No. 3 would remain well within the 10 CFR
part 20 limits. Therefore, the proposed CoC changes will not result in
any radiological or non-radiological environmental impacts that
significantly differ from the environmental impacts evaluated in the
environmental assessment supporting the July 18, 1990, final rule.
There will be no significant change in the types or significant
revisions in the amounts of any effluent released, no significant
increase in the individual or cumulative radiation exposure, and no
significant increase in the potential for or consequences from
radiological accidents. The staff documented its safety findings in an
SER which is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML14317A616.
D. Alternative to the Action
The alternative to this action is to deny approval of Amendment No.
3 and end the final rule. Consequently, any 10 CFR part 72 general
licensee that seeks to load spent nuclear fuel into NUHOMS[supreg]
Storage Systems in accordance with the changes described in proposed
Amendment No. 3 would have to request an exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 72.212 and 72.214. Under this alternative,
interested licensees would have to prepare, and the NRC would have to
review, a separate exemption request, thereby increasing the
administrativeburden upon the NRC and the costs to each licensee.
Therefore, the environmental impacts would be the same or less than the
action.
E. Alternative Use of Resources
Approval of Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1029 would result in no
irreversible commitments of resources.
F. Agencies and Persons Contacted
No agencies or persons outside the NRC were contacted in connection
with the preparation of this environmental assessment.
G. Finding of No Significant Impact
The environmental impacts of the action have been reviewed under
the requirements in 10 CFR part 51. Based on the foregoing
environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that this final rule
entitled, ``List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Standardized
Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] Horizontal Modular Storage System, Amendment
No. 3,'' will not have a significant effect on quality of the human
environment. Therefore, the NRC has determined that an environmental
impact statement is not necessary for this final rule.
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain any information collection requirements
and, therefore, is not subject to the requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Public Protection Notification
The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a request for information or an information collection
requirement unless the requesting document displays a current valid
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
IX. Regulatory Analysis
On July 18, 1990 (55 FR 29181), the NRC issued an amendment to 10
CFR part 72 to provide for the storage of spent nuclear fuel under a
general license in cask designs approved by the NRC. Any nuclear power
reactor licensee can use NRC-approved cask designs to store spent
nuclear fuel if it notifies the NRC in advance, the spent fuel is
stored under the conditions specified in the cask's CoC, and the
conditions of the general license are met. A list of NRC-approved cask
designs is contained in 10 CFR 72.214. The NRC issued a final rule (68
FR 463; January 6, 2003) that approved the Standardized Advanced
NUHOMS[supreg] Cask System design and added it to the list of NRC-
approved cask designs in 10 CFR 72.214 ``List of approved spent fuel
storage casks,'' as CoC No. 1029.
On December 15, 2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML120040478),
Transnuclear, Inc. submitted an application to amend the NUHOMS[supreg]
Storage System.
The alternative to this action is to withhold approval of Amendment
No. 3 and to require any 10 CFR part 72 general licensee seeking to
load spent nuclear fuel into the NUHOMS[supreg] Storage Systems under
the changes described in Amendment No. 3 to request an exemption from
the requirements of 10 CFR 72.212 and 72.214. Under this alternative,
each interested 10 CFR part 72 licensee would have to prepare, and the
NRC would have to review separate exemption requests, thereby
increasing the administrative burden upon the NRC and the costs to each
licensee.
Approval of this final rule is consistent with previous NRC
actions. Further, as documented in the SER and
[[Page 3152]]
the environmental assessment, the final rule will have no adverse
effect on public health and safety or the environment. This final rule
has no significant identifiable impact or benefit on other Government
agencies. Based on this regulatory analysis, the NRC concludes that the
requirements of the final rule are commensurate with the NRC's
responsibilities for public health and safety and the common defense
and security. No other available alternative is believed to be as
satisfactory, and therefore, this action is recommended.
X. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the
NRC certifies that this rule will not, if issued, have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final
rule affects only nuclear power plant licensees and Transnuclear, Inc.
These entities do not fall within the scope of the definition of small
entities set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the size
standards established by the NRC (10 CFR 2.810).
XI. Backfitting and Issue Finality
The NRC has determined that the backfit rule (10 CFR 72.62) does
not apply to this final rule. Therefore, a backfit analysis is not
required. This final rule revises the CoC No. 1029 for the
Transnuclear, Inc. NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System, as currently listed
in 10 CFR 72.214, ``List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks.'' The
revision consists of Amendment No. 3 which adds a new transportable
DSC, 32PTH2, to the NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System; and makes editorial
corrections.
Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1029 for the Transnuclear, Inc.
NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System was initiated by Transnuclear, Inc. and
was not submitted in response to new NRC requirements, or an NRC
request for amendment. Amendment No. 3 applies only to new casks
fabricated and used under Amendment No. 3. These changes do not affect
existing users of the NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System, and the current
Amendments continue to be effective for existing users. While current
CoC users may comply with the new requirements in Amendment No. 3, this
would be a voluntary decision on the part of current users. For these
reasons, Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1029 does not constitute
backfitting under 10 CFR 72.62, 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1), or otherwise
represent an inconsistency with the issue finality provisions
applicable to combined licenses in 10 CFR part 52. Accordingly, no
backfit analysis or additional documentation addressing the issue
finality criteria in 10 CFR part 52 has been prepared by the staff.
XII. Congressional Review Act
In accordance with the Congressional Review Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C.
801-808), the NRC has determined that this action is not a rule as
defined in the Congressional Review Act.
XIII. Availability of Documents
The documents identified in the following table are available to
interested persons through one or more of the following methods, as
indicated.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADAMS Accession No./Federal
Document Register citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application from Transnuclear Inc. for the ML120040478.
Advanced Standardized NUHOMS[supreg] Dry
Storage System Amendment No. 3, December
15, 2011.
Safety Evaluation Report for the ML14317A616.
Transnuclear Inc. Advanced Standardized
NUHOMS[supreg] Dry Storage System,
Amendment No. 3.
The Transnuclear Inc. Advanced Standardized ML13290A176.
NUHOMS[supreg] Dry Storage System CoC No.
1029, Amendment No. 3.
The Transnuclear Inc. Advanced Standardized ML13290A182.
NUHOMS[supreg] Dry Storage System
Technical Specifications, Amendment No. 3.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 72
Administrative practice and procedure, Criminal penalties, Manpower
training programs, Nuclear materials, Occupational safety and health,
Penalties, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures, Spent fuel, Whistleblowing.
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization
Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, the NRC is adopting
the following amendments to 10 CFR part 72.
PART 72--LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF
SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL, HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND REACTOR-
RELATED GREATER THAN CLASS C WASTE
0
1. The authority citation for part 72 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Atomic Energy Act secs. 51, 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69,
81, 161, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187, 189, 223, 234, 274 (42 U.S.C.
2071, 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233,
2234, 2236, 2237, 2239, 2273, 2282, 2021); Energy Reorganization Act
secs. 201, 202, 206, 211 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846, 5851);
National Environmental Policy Act sec. 102 (42 U.S.C. 4332); Nuclear
Waste Policy Act secs. 131, 132, 133, 135, 137, 141, 148 (42 U.S.C.
10151, 10152, 10153, 10155, 10157, 10161, 10168); Government
Paperwork Elimination Act sec. 1704, (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); Energy
Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109-58, 119 Stat. 788 (2005).
Section 72.44(g) also issued under Nuclear Waste Policy Act
secs. 142(b) and 148(c),(d) (42 U.S.C. 10162(b), 10168(c),(d)).
Section 72.46 also issued under Atomic Energy Act sec. 189 (42
U.S.C. 2239); Nuclear Waste Policy Act sec. 134 (42 U.S.C. 10154).
Section 72.96(d) also issued under Nuclear Waste Policy Act sec.
145(g) (42 U.S.C. 10165(g)). Subpart J also issued under Nuclear
Waste Policy Act secs. 117(a), 141(h) (42 U.S.C. 10137(a),
10161(h)). Subpart K also issued under Nuclear Waste Policy Act sec.
218(a) (42 U.S.C. 10198).
0
2. In Sec. 72.214, Certificate of Compliance No. 1029 is revised to
read as follows:
Sec. 72.214 List of approved spent fuel storage casks.
* * * * *
Certificate Number: 1029.
Initial Certificate Effective Date: February 5, 2003.
Amendment Number 1 Effective Date: May 16, 2005.
Amendment Number 2 Effective Date: Amendment not issued by the NRC.
Amendment Number 3 Effective Date: February 23, 2015.
SAR Submitted by: Transnuclear, Inc.
SAR Title: Final Safety Analysis Report for the Standardized
Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] Horizontal
Modular Storage System for Irradiated Nuclear Fuel.
Docket Number: 72-1029.
Certificate Expiration Date: February 5, 2023.
[[Page 3153]]
Model Number: Standardized Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] -24PT1, -24PT4,
and -32PTH2.
* * * * *
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of January, 2015.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mark A. Satorius,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 2015-01031 Filed 1-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
