ELV-00674, Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement

Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement

ML20247F423
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch, Vogtle, 05000000
Issue date:	07/07/1989
From:	Hairston W GEORGIA POWER CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
References
FRN-54FR19379, RULE-PR-170, RULE-PR-50, RULE-PR-72 54FR19379-00256, 54FR19379-256, ELV-00674, ELV-674, HL-628, NUDOCS 8907270150
Download: ML20247F423 (3)

Text

. . . . ._

^

. . ~J- .

..,. Georgit Power Company !l

'I

- 333 hedrnont Avenue /

Atttnta. Georgia 30308 O l Telephore 404 526 3195 lk MailinD Address. ()0CKET NUMBER g en r7N-g ggy

[ g y p g M 3 } d ;'j f/ 0 fo#We% *i/'4""***v PROPOSED RUl.E. j 3s2m U.*pTU$*E"IIs

'89 JJL14 pa :22 f

w. c. Howson, iii  % y o g recY0p OFM? ,

T N ht* 8 f

s Senior Voei President Nuclear herations July 7,1989 00 m m 3 - : a.:

IRua l

HL-628 ELV-00574 Docket Nos. 50-321 50-424 50-366 50-425 j

.i Certified Mail i Secretary {

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 ATTN: Docketing and Service Branch Comments on the Proposed Rule: Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites Reference Federal Reaister Paaes 19379-19387.

Dear Sir:

On May 5,1989, the NRC issued for public comment a proposed trule in the Federal Register entitled " Storage of Spent Fuel in NRC Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Reactor Sites". Georgia Power Company wishes to make the following comments on the proposed changes to 10CFR72:

(1) Proposed Subpart K to 10CFR72, General 1.icense for Storage of Spent Fuel at Power Reactor Sites, issues a general license for the storage of spent fuel in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) at power reactor sites to persons authorized to operate nuclear power reactors under Part 50. However, existing Section 72.6 (c) of Subpart A states that except as authorized in a soecific  !

license issued by the Commission in accordance with the regulations in Part 72, no person may acquire, receive, or possess spent fuel for the purpose of storage in an ISFSI.

Although Section 72.6 (a) provides for issuance of general licenses for storage of spent fuel, Section 72.6 (c) might be interpreted to disallow storage of spent fuel in an ISFSI by a licensee under such a general license, unless the holder of such a license also has a specific license for that purpose.

Therefore, we suggest that existing Section 72.6 (c) be revised or clarified to provide for storage of spent fuel under a general license, without the requirement for a specific ISFSI license, as long as the provisions of proposed Subpart K are met.

72fy1DO090707 d $

50 54FR19379 PDR

b .,.. . _ . . .- ..-- - _ _ _ .. , , _ . . . - _ . . _ . . _ . . , , _

~

,,r i

Page Two (2) The proposed rule Section 72.212(b)(4) requires the general licensee determine, pursuant to 10CFR50.59, whether activities under that license involve any unreviewed safety question. Section 10CFR50.59 (a)(2) states that a proposed change shall be deemed to involve an unreviewed safety question "... if a possibility for an accident or malfunction of a different type than any evaluated previously in the safety analysis report mcy be created." Storage of spent fuel in an approved cask at the re&ctor site may create the possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment that is not related to the other licensed activities at the site. However, we expect that the potential accidents and malfunctions involving use of the cask for storage, but not related to other plant specific activities such as loadirg and movement of the cask prior to storage, would have been addressed by the cask vendor and the NRC in the cask certification process. ,

We interpret Section 72.212(b)(4) as requiring the 10CFR50.59 analysis only for those issues relating to systems and components used both for reactor operations and spent fuel storage activities, such as cask handling and moven,ent of the cask prior to storage. But, because the wording of Sectia 72.212(b)(4) is not completely clear, we suggest that either 72.212(b)(4) be revised appropriately or that clarifying language be included in the Supplementary Information for the final rule.

(3) We do not understand the technical basis for the proposed rule's use of the renewal process for storage cask Certificates of Compliance to establish the dates (after the initial 20 year storage period) when the general licenses would expire. We interpret the proposed rule to mean that, Certificates of Compliance are the cask vendor's permission to manufacture spent fuel storage casks. The time interval covered by a certificate's approval or reapproval does not necessarily correspond to the total time for which fuel storage in the cask can be safely accomplished. The fuel storage time interval which is justified in a cask's Topical Safety Analysis Report would be a more technically sound basis for establishing the expiration date of the general license to use that cask.

(4) The proposed rule is unclear as to when the general license for ,

storage of spent fuel would terminate in cases where the cask model has been reapproved by NRC, following use of the cask by a licensee for a period of up to twenty years. We believe that the first sentence under proposed Section 72.212,(a)(2) should read:

"The general license for the storage af spent fuel in each cask  ;

fabricated under a Certificate of Compliance shall terminate either 20 years after the date that the cask is first used by the licensee to store spent fuel, or if the cask model is reapproved for storage of

i

~

1  !

I l

o l Page Three fuel for more than 20 years, at the conclusion of this newly-approved l storage period, beginning on the date that the cask is first used by I the licensee to store spent fuel." l

'the existing wording in this sectiore ties expiration of the general !

license to "the revised certification date", which could, in fact, be i earlier than the original 20 years. The proposed revision would meet I I

the intent of the rule to extend use of approved casks fnr as 1cng as each cask design is certified for storage, but for at least 20 years after initial use of each cask.

i We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this proposed rule. We are confident that the NRC will consider and respond appropriately to these matters.

Sincerely, h.k Y W. G. Hairston, III WGH,III:KGT/ls c: Georoit Power Comnany Mr. J. T. Beckham, Jr., Vice President - Plant Hatch Mr. H. C. Nix, General Managar - Nuclear Plant (Hatch)

Mr. C. K. McCoy, Vice President - Nuclear, Plant Vogtle Mr. G. Bockhold, Jr., General Manager - Plant Vogtle G0 NORMS U. S. Nuclear Reaulatory Commission. Washinoton D. C.

Mr. L. P. Crocker, Licensing Projec; Manager - Hatch Mr. J. B. Hopkins, Licensing Project Manager - Vogtle U. 9. Nog.]n_rJeoulhtory Commission. Reaion II Mr. S. D. Ebneter, Regional Administrator Mr. J. E. Menning, Senior Resident Inspector - Hatch Mr. J. F. Rogge, Senior Resident Inspector, Operations - Vogtle

- _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - - _ .