Draft NUREG: Environmental Evaluation of Accident Tolerant Fuels With Increased Enrichment and Higher Burnup Levels, 60507-60510 [2023-18966]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 169 / Friday, September 1, 2023 / Notices
and on the NRC’s public website at
https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html.
To comply with the procedural
requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the
participant should contact the Office of
the Secretary by email at
Hearing.Docket@nrc.gov, or by
telephone at 301–415–1677, to (1)
request a digital identification (ID)
certificate, which allows the participant
(or its counsel or representative) to
digitally sign submissions and access
the E-Filing system for any proceeding
in which it is participating; and (2)
advise the Secretary that the participant
will be submitting a petition or other
adjudicatory document (even in
instances in which the participant, or its
counsel or representative, already holds
an NRC-issued digital ID certificate).
Based upon this information, the
Secretary will establish an electronic
docket for the proceeding if the
Secretary has not already established an
electronic docket.
Information about applying for a
digital ID certificate is available on the
NRC’s public website at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/
getting-started.html. After a digital ID
certificate is obtained and a docket
created, the participant must submit
adjudicatory documents in Portable
Document Format. Guidance on
submissions is available on the NRC’s
public website at https://www.nrc.gov/
site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A
filing is considered complete at the time
the document is submitted through the
NRC’s E-Filing system. To be timely, an
electronic filing must be submitted to
the E-Filing system no later than 11:59
p.m. ET on the due date. Upon receipt
of a transmission, the E-Filing system
time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an email confirming
receipt of the document. The E-Filing
system also distributes an email that
provides access to the document to the
NRC’s Office of the General Counsel and
any others who have advised the Office
of the Secretary that they wish to
participate in the proceeding, so that the
filer need not serve the document on
those participants separately. Therefore,
applicants and other participants (or
their counsel or representative) must
apply for and receive a digital ID
certificate before adjudicatory
documents are filed to obtain access to
the documents via the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using
the NRC’s adjudicatory E-Filing system
may seek assistance by contacting the
NRC’s Electronic Filing Help Desk
through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located
on the NRC’s public website at https://
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:24 Aug 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html, by email to
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a tollfree call at 1–866–672–7640. The NRC
Electronic Filing Help Desk is available
between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., ET, Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Participants who believe that they
have good cause for not submitting
documents electronically must file an
exemption request, in accordance with
10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper
filing stating why there is good cause for
not filing electronically and requesting
authorization to continue to submit
documents in paper format. Such filings
must be submitted in accordance with
10 CFR 2.302(b) through (d).
Participants filing adjudicatory
documents in this manner are
responsible for serving their documents
on all other participants. Participants
granted an exemption under 10 CFR
2.302(g)(2) must still meet the electronic
formatting requirement in 10 CFR
2.302(g)(1), unless the participant also
seeks and is granted an exemption from
10 CFR 2.302(g)(1).
Documents submitted in adjudicatory
proceedings will appear in the NRC’s
electronic hearing docket, which is
publicly available at https://
adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded
pursuant to an order of the presiding
officer. If you do not have an NRCissued digital ID certificate as
previously described, click ‘‘cancel’’
when the link requests certificates and
you will be automatically directed to the
NRC’s electronic hearing dockets where
you will be able to access any publicly
available documents in a particular
hearing docket. Participants are
requested not to include personal
privacy information such as social
security numbers, home addresses, or
personal phone numbers in their filings
unless an NRC regulation or other law
requires submission of such
information. With respect to
copyrighted works, except for limited
excerpts that serve the purpose of the
adjudicatory filings and would
constitute a Fair Use application,
participants should not include
copyrighted materials in their
submission.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for license
amendment dated August 10, 2023
(ADAMS Accession No. ML23222A037).
Attorney for licensee: Jon P.
Christinidis, DTE Electric Company,
Expert Attorney—Regulatory, 1635
WCB, One Energy Plaza, Detroit, MI
48226.
NRC Branch Chief: Jeff Whited.
Dated: August 29, 2023.
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60507
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Surinder S. Arora,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III,
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2023–18920 Filed 8–31–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2023–0113]
Draft NUREG: Environmental
Evaluation of Accident Tolerant Fuels
With Increased Enrichment and Higher
Burnup Levels
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Draft report; request for
comment.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing for public
comment draft NUREG–2266,
‘‘Environmental Evaluation of Accident
Tolerant Fuels with Increased
Enrichment and Higher Burnup Levels.’’
This study evaluates the reasonably
foreseeable impacts of near-term
accident tolerant fuel (ATF)
technologies with increased enrichment
and higher burnup levels to 8 wt%
uranium-235 (U–235) and up to 80
GWd/MTU, respectively, on the
uranium fuel cycle, transportation of
fuel and waste, and decommissioning
for light-water reactors (LWRs) (i.e., a
bounding analysis).
DATES: Submit comments by October 31,
2023. Comments received after this date
will be considered if it is practical to do
so, but the Commission is able to ensure
consideration only for comments
received before this date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods;
however, the NRC encourages electronic
comment submission through the
Federal rulemaking website:
• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2023–0113. Address
questions about Docket IDs in
Regulations.gov to Stacy Schumann;
telephone: 301–415–0624; email:
Stacy.Schumann@nrc.gov. For technical
questions, contact the individual listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document.
• Mail Comments to: Office of
Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7–
A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, ATTN: Program Management,
Announcements and Editing Staff.
For additional direction on obtaining
information and submitting comments,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\01SEN1.SGM
01SEN1
60508
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 169 / Friday, September 1, 2023 / Notices
see ‘‘Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments’’ in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donald Palmrose, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone:
301–415–3803, email:
Donald.Palmrose@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2023–
0113 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 Website: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2023–0113.
• 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
‘‘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, at
301–415–4737, or by email to
PDR.Resource@nrc.gov. The draft
NUREG, ‘‘Environmental Evaluation of
Accident Tolerant Fuels with Increased
Enrichment and Higher Burnup,’’ is
available in ADAMS under Accession
No. ML23240A756.
• NRC’s PDR: The PDR, where you
may examine and order copies of
publicly available documents, is open
by appointment. To make an
appointment to visit the PDR, please
send an email to PDR.Resource@nrc.gov
or call 1–800–397–4209 or 301–415–
4737, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern
time (ET), Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
B. Submitting Comments
The NRC encourages electronic
comment submission through the
Federal rulemaking website (https://
www.regulations.gov). Please include
Docket ID NRC–2023–0113 in your
comment submission.
The NRC cautions you not to include
identifying or contact information that
you do not want to be publicly
disclosed in your comment submission.
The NRC will post all comment
submissions at https://
www.regulations.gov as well as enter the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:24 Aug 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
comment submissions into ADAMS.
The NRC does not routinely edit
comment submissions to remove
identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating
comments from other persons for
submission to the NRC, then you should
inform those persons not to include
identifying or contact information that
they do not want to be publicly
disclosed in their comment submission.
Your request should state that the NRC
does not routinely edit comment
submissions to remove such information
before making the comment
submissions available to the public or
entering the comment into ADAMS.
II. Discussion
To support efficient and effective
licensing reviews of new accident
tolerant fuels (ATFs) and to reduce the
need for a complex site-specific
environmental review for each ATF
license amendment request, this study
evaluated the likely impacts of nearterm ATF technologies with increased
enrichment and higher burnup levels on
the uranium fuel cycle, transportation of
fuel and waste, and decommissioning
for light-water reactors (LWRs) (i.e., a
bounding analysis). Near-term ATF
technologies are coated cladding, doped
pellets, and (iron-chrome-aluminum)
FeCrAl cladding. Other long-term ATF
technologies are not a part of this study.
The NRC staff evaluated the impact of
increased enrichment and higher
burnup levels by assessing and applying
NRC-sponsored ATF technology reports,
prior environmental reviews,
transportation studies, and new or
updated data sources to determine the
bounding (generic) environmental
impacts of deploying ATF technologies
with increased enrichment and higher
burnup levels in LWRs.
The NRC initially considered the
environmental impacts of the uranium
fuel cycle in WASH–1248 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14092A628). There
have been significant changes to the
front-end processes and NRC-licensed
facilities since the publication of
WASH–1248. The most notable
examples of these changes are extracting
uranium from the ground using in situ
recovery instead of traditional mining,
performing all enrichment with gaseous
centrifuges instead of gaseous diffusion,
and electricity generation moving
significantly away from the use of coal.
The result of these various changes is to
significantly reduce the environmental
effects from the front-end of the
uranium fuel cycle. Thus, the
environmental effects of the front-end of
the uranium fuel cycle from the
deployment and use of ATF with
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
increased enrichment is bounded by the
environmental effects provided in Table
S–3 under title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) section 51.51.
Regarding the back-end of the
uranium fuel cycle, the current practice
of long-term storage and management of
spent nuclear fuel (SNF) would still
apply to the deployment and use of ATF
with increased enrichment and higher
burnup levels. Consistent with NRC
regulations and thermal loading
requirements for licensed spent fuel
storage cask systems, specific cooling
times in a spent fuel pool would be
necessary prior to transferring the spent
fuel to an Independent Spent Fuel
Storage Installation (ISFSI).
A benefit from deployment and use of
ATF with increased enrichment and
higher burnup levels would be the
longer times between refueling
operations, which would lessen the
average annual rate at which licensees
place spent ATF assemblies into the
spent fuel pools and ultimately transfer
spent ATF assemblies to an ISFSI
relative to the rate for traditional spent
fuel. This could, in turn, lessen the
overall amount of SNF stored at a site
and lengthen the time before licensees
need to expand an ISFSI relative to
facilities using fuel with lower
enrichments and lower burnup levels.
This lessens the environmental impacts
compared to what would occur with
current fuel, which would be consistent
with prior NRC environmental
evaluations. Spent ATF storage would
be consistent with earlier published
analyses, would not require any
significant departure from certified
spent fuel shipping and storage
containers, and would continue under
an approved aging management
program.
In conducting the generic analysis in
the Continued Storage Generic
Environment Impact Statement (GEIS)
of NUREG–2157, Volume 1 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14196A105) and
NUREG–2157, Volume 2 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14196A107), the NRC
staff applied conditions and parameters
that are sufficiently conservative to
bound the impacts such that any
variances that may occur from site to
site are unlikely to result in
environmental impact determinations
that are greater than those presented in
the Continued Storage GEIS. Therefore,
with respect to ATF storage, including
spent ATF with increased enrichment
and higher burnup levels, the storage
period beyond the licensed life for
operation of a reactor for spent ATF
would conform with the analysis of the
Continued Storage GEIS, and
accordingly, the Continued Storage
E:\FR\FM\01SEN1.SGM
01SEN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 169 / Friday, September 1, 2023 / Notices
GEIS would bound the impacts from
deployment and use of ATF.
The analysis of the transportation of
ATF and ATF waste with increased
enrichment and higher burnup levels is
based on shipment of low-level
radioactive waste, unirradiated, and
spent ATF, including with increased
enrichments and higher burnup levels,
by legal weight trucks in certified
transport packages. The transportation
impacts are divided into two parts. The
first part considers normal conditions,
or incident-free, transportation, and the
second part considers transportation
accidents.
Shipments that take place without the
occurrence of accidents are routine,
incident-free shipments and the
radiation doses to various receptors
(exposed persons) are called incidentfree doses. The vast majority of
radioactive shipments are expected to
reach their destination without
experiencing a transportation accident
or incident or releasing any cargo (to
date, there have been no shipments of
spent fuel resulting in a release of
radioactive material to the
environment). As previously noted,
deployment and use of ATF with
increased enrichment and higher
burnup levels could result in
lengthening of the time between
refueling operations, leading to an
overall reduction of the number of spent
fuel assemblies needing to be shipped
offsite on an annual basis. Such
reduction would have the effect to
lessen the environmental impacts
compared to what would occur with
current fuel and refueling operations
due to transportation of spent fuel. The
incident-free impacts from these
normal, routine shipments arise from
the low levels of radiation that are
emitted externally from the shipping
container.
Incident-free legal weight truck
transportation of spent ATF, including
spent ATF with increased enrichment
and higher burnup levels, has been
evaluated by considering shipments
from six representative LWR sites to a
postulated permanent geological
repository for SNF in the western
United States. As a surrogate for such a
postulated permanent geologic
repository, the NRC has used the
proposed Yucca Mountain, Nevada site
for the transportation analysis. The six
LWR sites from which the shipments
originate include:
• Brunswick Steam Electric Plant;
• Columbia Generating Station;
• Dresden Nuclear Power Station;
• Enrico Fermi Nuclear Generating
Station Unit 2;
• Millstone Power Station; and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:24 Aug 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
• Turkey Point Nuclear Plant.
For each LWR site, the NRC staff
considered and evaluated both boiling
water reactor (BWR) and pressurized
water reactor (PWR) spent ATF
shipments, including with increased
enrichment and higher burnup levels,
for the purpose of impact comparison
owing to the different release fractions
for BWR and PWR fuel designs.
Environmental impacts from these
shipments would occur to persons
residing along the transportation
corridors between the reactor sites and
the repository, to persons in vehicles
passing the spent fuel shipments in the
same and opposite directions, to
persons at vehicle stops (such as rest
areas, refueling stations, inspection
stations, etc.), and to transportation
crew members. For the purposes of this
analysis, the transportation crew for
truck spent fuel shipments consisted of
two drivers. The regulatory maximum
crew dose rate of 2 millirem(s) per hour
(mrem/hr), and regulatory maximum
transport package surface dose rate of 10
mrem/hr at 2 meters is conservatively
used in the analysis. The characteristics
of specific shipping routes (e.g.,
population densities, shipping
distances) influence the normal
radiological exposures.
The accident risks are the product of
the likelihood of an accident involving
a spent fuel shipment and the
consequences of a release of radioactive
material resulting from the accident.
The likelihood of an accident is directly
proportional to the number of fuel
shipments. Accident risks also include
a consequence term. Consequences are
represented by the population dose from
a release of radioactive material given
that an accident occurs that leads to a
breach in the shipping cask’s
containment systems. Consequences are
a function of the total amount of
radioactive material in the shipment,
the fraction that escapes from the
shipping cask, the fraction of the release
from the shipping cask that is
aerosolized, the fraction of the release
that is respirable, the dispersal of
radioactive material to humans, and the
characteristics of the exposed
population. The NRC staff used the
shipping distances and population
distribution information for the regions
pertaining to the sites used for the
evaluation of the impacts of incidentfree transportation for accident impact
evaluations. The NRC staff used the
most recent available data on accident
rates, release fractions, aerosolized
fractions, and respirable fractions in this
evaluation.
The transportation impact evaluation
includes the use of the NRC maintained
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60509
NRC-Radioactive Material Transport
(NRC–RADTRAN) transportation risk
code package, pertinent fuel
radionuclide inventory (source term)
data, and external and accidental release
characteristics, routing distance
information, and population density by
State along the route. The staff obtained
routing information by running the
Web-Based Transportation Routing
Analysis Geographic Information
System (WebTRAGIS) code. While the
population density considered in
WebTRAGIS is for the year 2012, based
in part on the 2010 U.S. Census data,
the staff extrapolated the population
density to 2022 based on each State’s
growth rate using 2010 and 2020 U.S.
Census data. The staff compiled
information with respect to vehicle
daily traffic count, vehicle speed,
vehicle accident, fatality, and injury
rates from U.S. Department of
Transportation data base and used that
information in the NRC–RADTRAN
analysis to determine single shipment
impacts. To determine annual
transportation impacts, the staff applied
the normalized (annual) truck
shipments of 52 shipments and 30
shipments estimated spent ATF from a
BWR and PWR, respectively.
The NRC staff found the maximum
normal conditions (i.e., incident-free)
cumulative worker dose per year was
bounded by the 4 person-rem value of
Table S–4. This worker dose would be
managed with multiple drivers available
as the transportation crew so that the
individual worker dose would be below
the U.S. Department of Energy
administrative limit of 2 rem per year
and the NRC’s occupational exposure
annual limit of 5 rem per year. PWR
shipment cumulative public doses were
at or slightly higher than the 3 personrem per year specified in the Table S–
4. The NRC staff found the cumulative
population dose per year for the BWR
shipments to be higher than 3 personrem per year. However, both the BWR
and PWR results are not significant
when the related average individual
dose is considered. Namely, the average
individual doses along all routes and
fuel types are well below 1 mrem per
year, a small fraction of the average
annual natural background radiation
exposure of approximately 310 mrem,
and within the Table S–4 range of doses
to exposed individuals. These results
are conservative because they are based
on the transport package with the least
capacity. Applying a transport package
with a greater capacity would reduce
the number of shipments resulting in a
lower cumulative dose that would be
less than the 3 person-rem of Table S–
E:\FR\FM\01SEN1.SGM
01SEN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
60510
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 169 / Friday, September 1, 2023 / Notices
4 as shown by the rail sensitivity case
in this study (e.g., the GA–4 truck spent
fuel transport can hold four PWR fuel
assemblies, which would reduce the
PWR cumulative doses by a factor of 4).
The NRC staff found total accidental
population risk per year due to transport
of spent ATF, including spent ATF with
increased enrichment and higher
burnup levels, continued to demonstrate
the low risks from both radiological and
nonradiological accidents and is
consistent with past transportation
studies. The greater risk to a member of
the public would be physical harm from
an actual vehicle collision involving a
spent ATF shipment, if such an event
ever happens. While the nonradiological
risk is the greater risk, the results of this
study demonstrate that those risks
would still not be significant and are
less than the common (nonradiological)
cause environmental risks of Table S–4.
The results for spent ATF with
increased enrichment and higher
burnup are consistent with the
environmental impacts associated with
the transportation of fuel and
radioactive wastes to and from currentgeneration reactors presented in Table
S–4 of 10 CFR 51.52.
Based on the results of the impact
analysis, shipment of near-term ATF
technologies with enrichments of up to
8 (wt%) uranium-235 (U–235) and
higher burnup levels of up to 80
gigawatt days per metric ton of uranium
(GWd/MTU) would not significantly
change the potential impacts of either
incident-free or accident transportation
risk. Hence, the transportation impacts
of spent ATF are bounded by Table S–
4. Therefore, the results of this analysis
could serve as a reference in helping to
address the environmental impacts of
ATF licensing without a detailed sitespecific transportation analysis, as long
as the ATF is within the enrichment and
burnup levels with the associated fuel
assembly radionuclide inventory and
parameters applied in the analyses of
this proposed NUREG.
In the case of decommissioning, the
expected impacts from deployment and
use of ATF with increased enrichment
and higher burnup levels would be the
same as or slightly less than those from
decommissioning nuclear power plants
operating with the existing fuel.
Additionally, the expected
Decommissioning GEIS and guidance
updates could build upon the analysis
from this study to specifically address
the decommissioning of a LWR
deploying and using ATF.
Therefore, based on findings in this
study, the NRC staff concludes that the
reevaluated findings addressing nearterm ATF technologies (i.e., coated
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:24 Aug 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
cladding, doping, and FeCrAl cladding)
indicate the environmental effects
associated with deploying and using
ATF would be bounded by the NRC
staff’s prior analysis with enrichments
up to 8 wt% U–235 and extending peakrod burnup to 80 GWd/MTU for the
uranium fuel cycle, transportation of
fuel and waste, and decommissioning.
Additionally, if in a future licensing
action, the enrichment and burnup
levels are greater than 8 wt% U–235 and
80 GWd/MTU, respectively, and for the
deployment and use of long-term ATF
technologies, the study could provide
guidance for completing the needed
revised analysis.
As the NRC staff continues to prepare
to review license applications related to
ATF technologies and fuel with
increased enrichment and higher
burnup levels, the NRC staff will
evaluate new industry developments
and other activities before publishing
the final NUREG to consider further
refinements of the ATF environmental
evaluation. For example, such new
information could include results from
ongoing licensing actions regarding the
use of higher enrichment levels in fuel
fabrication (ADAMS Accession No.
ML22175A070).
III. Specific Requests for Comments
The NRC is seeking advice and
recommendations from the public on
the draft NUREG. We are particularly
interested in comments and supporting
rationale from the public on the
following:
Transportation Accident Release
Fractions
1. Previous transportation accident
analyses have relied upon the use of
release fractions in Table 7.31 from
NUREG/CR–6672, ‘‘Reexamination of
Spent Fuel Shipment Risk Estimates,’’
(ADAMS Accession No. ML003698324)
for burnup levels up to 60 GWd/MTU.
By subjecting LWR nuclear fuel to
higher burnup levels, the radionuclide
inventory available to be released is
greater and material issues such as
cladding embrittlement, fuel
fragmentation, and additional
diffusional release of fission products
are expected to result in greater release
fractions than assessed in NUREG/CR–
6672. Therefore, Appendix B of the draft
NUREG assessed the potential effects
due to higher radiological material
release fractions from the physical
effects of higher burnup levels on the
fuel pin cladding and the uranium fuel
pellets.
The NRC is seeking comment on the
use of release fractions developed in
Appendix B of the draft NUREG for
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
higher burnup levels than previously
considered under transportation
accident conditions.
Dated: August 29, 2023.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John M. Moses,
Deputy Director, Division of Rulemaking,
Environmental, and Financial Support, Office
of Nuclear Materials Safety, and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2023–18966 Filed 8–31–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. CP2022–75; CP2022–91]
New Postal Products
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Commission is noticing a
recent Postal Service filing for the
Commission’s consideration concerning
a negotiated service agreement. This
notice informs the public of the filing,
invites public comment, and takes other
administrative steps.
DATES: Comments are due: September 6,
2023.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
electronically via the Commission’s
Filing Online system at https://
www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit
comments electronically should contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section by
telephone for advice on filing
alternatives.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at
202–789–6820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Docketed Proceeding(s)
I. Introduction
The Commission gives notice that the
Postal Service filed request(s) for the
Commission to consider matters related
to negotiated service agreement(s). The
request(s) may propose the addition or
removal of a negotiated service
agreement from the Market Dominant or
the Competitive product list, or the
modification of an existing product
currently appearing on the Market
Dominant or the Competitive product
list.
Section II identifies the docket
number(s) associated with each Postal
Service request, the title of each Postal
Service request, the request’s acceptance
date, and the authority cited by the
Postal Service for each request. For each
E:\FR\FM\01SEN1.SGM
01SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 169 (Friday, September 1, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60507-60510]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18966]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2023-0113]
Draft NUREG: Environmental Evaluation of Accident Tolerant Fuels
With Increased Enrichment and Higher Burnup Levels
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Draft report; request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing for
public comment draft NUREG-2266, ``Environmental Evaluation of Accident
Tolerant Fuels with Increased Enrichment and Higher Burnup Levels.''
This study evaluates the reasonably foreseeable impacts of near-term
accident tolerant fuel (ATF) technologies with increased enrichment and
higher burnup levels to 8 wt% uranium-235 (U-235) and up to 80 GWd/MTU,
respectively, on the uranium fuel cycle, transportation of fuel and
waste, and decommissioning for light-water reactors (LWRs) (i.e., a
bounding analysis).
DATES: Submit comments by October 31, 2023. Comments received after
this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the
Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received
before this date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods;
however, the NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the
Federal rulemaking website:
Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2023-0113. Address
questions about Docket IDs in Regulations.gov to Stacy Schumann;
telephone: 301-415-0624; email: [email protected]. For technical
questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document.
Mail Comments to: Office of Administration, Mail Stop:
TWFN-7-A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, ATTN: Program Management, Announcements and Editing Staff.
For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting
comments,
[[Page 60508]]
see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Palmrose, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3803, email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2023-0113 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 Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2023-0113.
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 ``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, at 301-415-4737,
or by email to [email protected]. The draft NUREG, ``Environmental
Evaluation of Accident Tolerant Fuels with Increased Enrichment and
Higher Burnup,'' is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML23240A756.
NRC's PDR: The PDR, where you may examine and order copies
of publicly available documents, is open by appointment. To make an
appointment to visit the PDR, please send an email to
[email protected] or call 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, between 8
a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern time (ET), Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
B. Submitting Comments
The NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the
Federal rulemaking website (https://www.regulations.gov). Please
include Docket ID NRC-2023-0113 in your comment submission.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at
https://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions
into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove such information before making the comment submissions available
to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.
II. Discussion
To support efficient and effective licensing reviews of new
accident tolerant fuels (ATFs) and to reduce the need for a complex
site-specific environmental review for each ATF license amendment
request, this study evaluated the likely impacts of near-term ATF
technologies with increased enrichment and higher burnup levels on the
uranium fuel cycle, transportation of fuel and waste, and
decommissioning for light-water reactors (LWRs) (i.e., a bounding
analysis). Near-term ATF technologies are coated cladding, doped
pellets, and (iron-chrome-aluminum) FeCrAl cladding. Other long-term
ATF technologies are not a part of this study. The NRC staff evaluated
the impact of increased enrichment and higher burnup levels by
assessing and applying NRC-sponsored ATF technology reports, prior
environmental reviews, transportation studies, and new or updated data
sources to determine the bounding (generic) environmental impacts of
deploying ATF technologies with increased enrichment and higher burnup
levels in LWRs.
The NRC initially considered the environmental impacts of the
uranium fuel cycle in WASH-1248 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14092A628).
There have been significant changes to the front-end processes and NRC-
licensed facilities since the publication of WASH-1248. The most
notable examples of these changes are extracting uranium from the
ground using in situ recovery instead of traditional mining, performing
all enrichment with gaseous centrifuges instead of gaseous diffusion,
and electricity generation moving significantly away from the use of
coal. The result of these various changes is to significantly reduce
the environmental effects from the front-end of the uranium fuel cycle.
Thus, the environmental effects of the front-end of the uranium fuel
cycle from the deployment and use of ATF with increased enrichment is
bounded by the environmental effects provided in Table S-3 under title
10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) section 51.51.
Regarding the back-end of the uranium fuel cycle, the current
practice of long-term storage and management of spent nuclear fuel
(SNF) would still apply to the deployment and use of ATF with increased
enrichment and higher burnup levels. Consistent with NRC regulations
and thermal loading requirements for licensed spent fuel storage cask
systems, specific cooling times in a spent fuel pool would be necessary
prior to transferring the spent fuel to an Independent Spent Fuel
Storage Installation (ISFSI).
A benefit from deployment and use of ATF with increased enrichment
and higher burnup levels would be the longer times between refueling
operations, which would lessen the average annual rate at which
licensees place spent ATF assemblies into the spent fuel pools and
ultimately transfer spent ATF assemblies to an ISFSI relative to the
rate for traditional spent fuel. This could, in turn, lessen the
overall amount of SNF stored at a site and lengthen the time before
licensees need to expand an ISFSI relative to facilities using fuel
with lower enrichments and lower burnup levels. This lessens the
environmental impacts compared to what would occur with current fuel,
which would be consistent with prior NRC environmental evaluations.
Spent ATF storage would be consistent with earlier published analyses,
would not require any significant departure from certified spent fuel
shipping and storage containers, and would continue under an approved
aging management program.
In conducting the generic analysis in the Continued Storage Generic
Environment Impact Statement (GEIS) of NUREG-2157, Volume 1 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14196A105) and NUREG-2157, Volume 2 (ADAMS Accession
No. ML14196A107), the NRC staff applied conditions and parameters that
are sufficiently conservative to bound the impacts such that any
variances that may occur from site to site are unlikely to result in
environmental impact determinations that are greater than those
presented in the Continued Storage GEIS. Therefore, with respect to ATF
storage, including spent ATF with increased enrichment and higher
burnup levels, the storage period beyond the licensed life for
operation of a reactor for spent ATF would conform with the analysis of
the Continued Storage GEIS, and accordingly, the Continued Storage
[[Page 60509]]
GEIS would bound the impacts from deployment and use of ATF.
The analysis of the transportation of ATF and ATF waste with
increased enrichment and higher burnup levels is based on shipment of
low-level radioactive waste, unirradiated, and spent ATF, including
with increased enrichments and higher burnup levels, by legal weight
trucks in certified transport packages. The transportation impacts are
divided into two parts. The first part considers normal conditions, or
incident-free, transportation, and the second part considers
transportation accidents.
Shipments that take place without the occurrence of accidents are
routine, incident-free shipments and the radiation doses to various
receptors (exposed persons) are called incident-free doses. The vast
majority of radioactive shipments are expected to reach their
destination without experiencing a transportation accident or incident
or releasing any cargo (to date, there have been no shipments of spent
fuel resulting in a release of radioactive material to the
environment). As previously noted, deployment and use of ATF with
increased enrichment and higher burnup levels could result in
lengthening of the time between refueling operations, leading to an
overall reduction of the number of spent fuel assemblies needing to be
shipped offsite on an annual basis. Such reduction would have the
effect to lessen the environmental impacts compared to what would occur
with current fuel and refueling operations due to transportation of
spent fuel. The incident-free impacts from these normal, routine
shipments arise from the low levels of radiation that are emitted
externally from the shipping container.
Incident-free legal weight truck transportation of spent ATF,
including spent ATF with increased enrichment and higher burnup levels,
has been evaluated by considering shipments from six representative LWR
sites to a postulated permanent geological repository for SNF in the
western United States. As a surrogate for such a postulated permanent
geologic repository, the NRC has used the proposed Yucca Mountain,
Nevada site for the transportation analysis. The six LWR sites from
which the shipments originate include:
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant;
Columbia Generating Station;
Dresden Nuclear Power Station;
Enrico Fermi Nuclear Generating Station Unit 2;
Millstone Power Station; and
Turkey Point Nuclear Plant.
For each LWR site, the NRC staff considered and evaluated both
boiling water reactor (BWR) and pressurized water reactor (PWR) spent
ATF shipments, including with increased enrichment and higher burnup
levels, for the purpose of impact comparison owing to the different
release fractions for BWR and PWR fuel designs.
Environmental impacts from these shipments would occur to persons
residing along the transportation corridors between the reactor sites
and the repository, to persons in vehicles passing the spent fuel
shipments in the same and opposite directions, to persons at vehicle
stops (such as rest areas, refueling stations, inspection stations,
etc.), and to transportation crew members. For the purposes of this
analysis, the transportation crew for truck spent fuel shipments
consisted of two drivers. The regulatory maximum crew dose rate of 2
millirem(s) per hour (mrem/hr), and regulatory maximum transport
package surface dose rate of 10 mrem/hr at 2 meters is conservatively
used in the analysis. The characteristics of specific shipping routes
(e.g., population densities, shipping distances) influence the normal
radiological exposures.
The accident risks are the product of the likelihood of an accident
involving a spent fuel shipment and the consequences of a release of
radioactive material resulting from the accident. The likelihood of an
accident is directly proportional to the number of fuel shipments.
Accident risks also include a consequence term. Consequences are
represented by the population dose from a release of radioactive
material given that an accident occurs that leads to a breach in the
shipping cask's containment systems. Consequences are a function of the
total amount of radioactive material in the shipment, the fraction that
escapes from the shipping cask, the fraction of the release from the
shipping cask that is aerosolized, the fraction of the release that is
respirable, the dispersal of radioactive material to humans, and the
characteristics of the exposed population. The NRC staff used the
shipping distances and population distribution information for the
regions pertaining to the sites used for the evaluation of the impacts
of incident-free transportation for accident impact evaluations. The
NRC staff used the most recent available data on accident rates,
release fractions, aerosolized fractions, and respirable fractions in
this evaluation.
The transportation impact evaluation includes the use of the NRC
maintained NRC-Radioactive Material Transport (NRC-RADTRAN)
transportation risk code package, pertinent fuel radionuclide inventory
(source term) data, and external and accidental release
characteristics, routing distance information, and population density
by State along the route. The staff obtained routing information by
running the Web-Based Transportation Routing Analysis Geographic
Information System (WebTRAGIS) code. While the population density
considered in WebTRAGIS is for the year 2012, based in part on the 2010
U.S. Census data, the staff extrapolated the population density to 2022
based on each State's growth rate using 2010 and 2020 U.S. Census data.
The staff compiled information with respect to vehicle daily traffic
count, vehicle speed, vehicle accident, fatality, and injury rates from
U.S. Department of Transportation data base and used that information
in the NRC-RADTRAN analysis to determine single shipment impacts. To
determine annual transportation impacts, the staff applied the
normalized (annual) truck shipments of 52 shipments and 30 shipments
estimated spent ATF from a BWR and PWR, respectively.
The NRC staff found the maximum normal conditions (i.e., incident-
free) cumulative worker dose per year was bounded by the 4 person-rem
value of Table S-4. This worker dose would be managed with multiple
drivers available as the transportation crew so that the individual
worker dose would be below the U.S. Department of Energy administrative
limit of 2 rem per year and the NRC's occupational exposure annual
limit of 5 rem per year. PWR shipment cumulative public doses were at
or slightly higher than the 3 person-rem per year specified in the
Table S-4. The NRC staff found the cumulative population dose per year
for the BWR shipments to be higher than 3 person-rem per year. However,
both the BWR and PWR results are not significant when the related
average individual dose is considered. Namely, the average individual
doses along all routes and fuel types are well below 1 mrem per year, a
small fraction of the average annual natural background radiation
exposure of approximately 310 mrem, and within the Table S-4 range of
doses to exposed individuals. These results are conservative because
they are based on the transport package with the least capacity.
Applying a transport package with a greater capacity would reduce the
number of shipments resulting in a lower cumulative dose that would be
less than the 3 person-rem of Table S-
[[Page 60510]]
4 as shown by the rail sensitivity case in this study (e.g., the GA-4
truck spent fuel transport can hold four PWR fuel assemblies, which
would reduce the PWR cumulative doses by a factor of 4).
The NRC staff found total accidental population risk per year due
to transport of spent ATF, including spent ATF with increased
enrichment and higher burnup levels, continued to demonstrate the low
risks from both radiological and nonradiological accidents and is
consistent with past transportation studies. The greater risk to a
member of the public would be physical harm from an actual vehicle
collision involving a spent ATF shipment, if such an event ever
happens. While the nonradiological risk is the greater risk, the
results of this study demonstrate that those risks would still not be
significant and are less than the common (nonradiological) cause
environmental risks of Table S-4. The results for spent ATF with
increased enrichment and higher burnup are consistent with the
environmental impacts associated with the transportation of fuel and
radioactive wastes to and from current-generation reactors presented in
Table S-4 of 10 CFR 51.52.
Based on the results of the impact analysis, shipment of near-term
ATF technologies with enrichments of up to 8 (wt%) uranium-235 (U-235)
and higher burnup levels of up to 80 gigawatt days per metric ton of
uranium (GWd/MTU) would not significantly change the potential impacts
of either incident-free or accident transportation risk. Hence, the
transportation impacts of spent ATF are bounded by Table S-4.
Therefore, the results of this analysis could serve as a reference in
helping to address the environmental impacts of ATF licensing without a
detailed site-specific transportation analysis, as long as the ATF is
within the enrichment and burnup levels with the associated fuel
assembly radionuclide inventory and parameters applied in the analyses
of this proposed NUREG.
In the case of decommissioning, the expected impacts from
deployment and use of ATF with increased enrichment and higher burnup
levels would be the same as or slightly less than those from
decommissioning nuclear power plants operating with the existing fuel.
Additionally, the expected Decommissioning GEIS and guidance updates
could build upon the analysis from this study to specifically address
the decommissioning of a LWR deploying and using ATF.
Therefore, based on findings in this study, the NRC staff concludes
that the reevaluated findings addressing near-term ATF technologies
(i.e., coated cladding, doping, and FeCrAl cladding) indicate the
environmental effects associated with deploying and using ATF would be
bounded by the NRC staff's prior analysis with enrichments up to 8 wt%
U-235 and extending peak-rod burnup to 80 GWd/MTU for the uranium fuel
cycle, transportation of fuel and waste, and decommissioning.
Additionally, if in a future licensing action, the enrichment and
burnup levels are greater than 8 wt% U-235 and 80 GWd/MTU,
respectively, and for the deployment and use of long-term ATF
technologies, the study could provide guidance for completing the
needed revised analysis.
As the NRC staff continues to prepare to review license
applications related to ATF technologies and fuel with increased
enrichment and higher burnup levels, the NRC staff will evaluate new
industry developments and other activities before publishing the final
NUREG to consider further refinements of the ATF environmental
evaluation. For example, such new information could include results
from ongoing licensing actions regarding the use of higher enrichment
levels in fuel fabrication (ADAMS Accession No. ML22175A070).
III. Specific Requests for Comments
The NRC is seeking advice and recommendations from the public on
the draft NUREG. We are particularly interested in comments and
supporting rationale from the public on the following:
Transportation Accident Release Fractions
1. Previous transportation accident analyses have relied upon the
use of release fractions in Table 7.31 from NUREG/CR-6672,
``Reexamination of Spent Fuel Shipment Risk Estimates,'' (ADAMS
Accession No. ML003698324) for burnup levels up to 60 GWd/MTU. By
subjecting LWR nuclear fuel to higher burnup levels, the radionuclide
inventory available to be released is greater and material issues such
as cladding embrittlement, fuel fragmentation, and additional
diffusional release of fission products are expected to result in
greater release fractions than assessed in NUREG/CR-6672. Therefore,
Appendix B of the draft NUREG assessed the potential effects due to
higher radiological material release fractions from the physical
effects of higher burnup levels on the fuel pin cladding and the
uranium fuel pellets.
The NRC is seeking comment on the use of release fractions
developed in Appendix B of the draft NUREG for higher burnup levels
than previously considered under transportation accident conditions.
Dated: August 29, 2023.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John M. Moses,
Deputy Director, Division of Rulemaking, Environmental, and Financial
Support, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety, and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2023-18966 Filed 8-31-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
