ML20013K002

Requests That Commission Actions Be Implemented by Arranging for Publication of Encl Proposed Rule in Fr.Regulatory Analysis for Forwarding to PDR & Congressional Ltr Package for Transmittal to OCA Also Encl

ML20013K002
Person / Time
Issue date:	05/27/1998
From:	Piccone J NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:	Meyer D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
References
FRN-63FR31364, RULE-PR-72-MISC AF80-1-063, AF80-1-63, AF80-1-64, NUDOCS 9806080166
Download: ML20013K002 (34)

Text

.. _ _ _

i May 27, 1998 s

MEMORANDUM TO:

David L. Meyer, Chief Rules and Directives Branch Division of Administrative Services Office of Administration FROM:

Josephine Piccone, Chief M#rialsf n::!by 2

Rulemaking and Gu; dance Branch l

Division of industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

SUBJECT:

IMPLEMENTATION OF MAY 8,1998, SRM. PROPOSED RULE:

MISCELLANEOUS CHANGES TO 10 CFR PART 72, LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH-LEVEL WASTE On May 8,1998, the Comminion approved for publication of the notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Reaister for a 7 bey comment period. The changes to meet the requirements of the SRM have been made.

Please implement the Commission's actions by arranging for publication of the attached proposed rule in the Federal Reaister.

Also attached is the Regulatory Analysis for forwarding to the PDR and the Congressionalletter package for transmittal to OCA.

Attachments:

1. Federal Rcgister Notice of Proposed Rule

+ 3 Copies & Diskette j

2. Regulatory Analysis

3. Congressional Letters CONTACT: Mark Au, NMSS/IMNS (301)415-6181 l

i Distribution: RGordon/RF; IMNS/ Central File; NMSS Dir R/F; NRC Central File; CPoland (NMSS No. 980241; HThompson; EDO/RF; MBridgers EDO No. (9600162) l DCool; PHolahan; CHaugney; FYoung; NJensen i

LRiani; DMendiola; CGallagher DOCUMENT NAME:[O:\\autpt72ttranms.pr CF Y

N PD Y

N R

33 FOCS*W9 8 CDpu Of th45 dDCument, bdeCate h the bOE" *C' = Copy WRh0VT Bff8Chmentienclosure

'E" = COpp wqh eff achmentienclasse

• N* = NO Copy 0FFICE RAG j

,RQ m n l

~

MAu f//,t M fj kPilLMh@ ~

NAME DATE 6/-7/98 6 /d798 i

0FFICIAL RECORD COPY

)

)

[ 'l D-q k-/d

~

1 LI ii

'2l

.;t&

p 9806000166 980527

~

CF SUBJ L-4-IPT72STOR CF

[

I t

UNITED STATES O*j y

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

'f WASHINGTON, D C. 2055! 4 001 o

$+,.,g,/

May 27, 1998 MEMORANDUM TO:

David L. Meyer, Chief Rules and Directives Branch Division of Administrative Services t

Office of Administration FROM:

Josephino Piccone, Chief

'e Rulemaking and Guida e ran Division of Industrial d edical Nuclear Safety Office of Nuclear Mat al Safety and Safeguards i

SUBJECT:

IMPLEMENTATION OF MAY 8,1998, SRM: PROPOSED RULE:

j MISCELLANEOUS CHANGES TO 10 CFR PART 72, LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH-LEVEL WASTE On May 8,1998, the Commission approved for publication of the notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Reaister for a 75-day comment period. The changes to meet the requirements of the SRM have been made.

Please implement the Commission's actions by arranging for publication of the attached proposed rule in the Federal Recister.

Also attached is the Regulatory Analysis for forwarding to the PDR and the Congressional letter package for transmittal to OCA.

Attachments:

1. Federal Register Notice of Proposed Rule

+ 3 Copies & Diskette

2. Regulatory Analysis

3. Congressional Letters CONTACT: Mark Au, NMSS/IMNS (301) 415-6181 I

a a

_L 4.

--.mmsa AL

._.4.a.m-.hEb a

- --~~- - - - - - -- * - -.

M--e d

ATTACHMENT 1 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE MISCELLANEOUS CHANGES TO 10 CFR PART 72 LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE F

I q

[7590-01-P]

NUCLEAR REGULA1ORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 72 RIN 3150-AF80 Miscellaneous Changes to Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of i

l Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY

The Nuc! ear Regulatory Commission is proposing to amend its regulations to correct severalinconsistencies and to clarify certain sections of the regulations. The amendments y;ould difierentiate the requirements for the storage of spent fuel under wet and i

dry conditions, clarify requirements for the content and submission of various reports, and specify that quality assurance (QA) records must be maintained as permanent records.

DATES: The comment period expires (75 days after publication). 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 on or before tius (.' ate.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulaiory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Ru!amakings and Adjudications Staff.

l I

i

?

l l

Deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm on Federal workdays.

i You may also provide comments via the NRC's interactive rulemaking web site through

(

l the NRC home page (http://www.nre. gov). This site provides the availability to upload l

comments as files (any format) if your web browser suppo:ts that function. For information 1

about the interactive rulemaking site, contact Ms. Carol Gallagher, (301) 415-6215, e-mail CAG@nrc. gov.

l Certain documents related to this rulemaking, including comments received may be j

examined at the NRC Public Document Room. 2120 L Street NW., (Lowe. Level), Washington.

DC. These same documents also may be viewed and downloaded electronically via the interactive rulemaking website established by NRC for this rulemaking.

j J

l FOR FURTHER INFORM ATION CONTACT: M. L. Au, Office of Nuclear Material Sa:ety and l

t Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D7 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6181, e-mail mia@nm. gov.

I SUPPLEMENTARY INFOPMATICN:

l

Background

l The Commission's licensing requirements for the independent storage of spent nuclear I

j fuel and high-level radioactive waste are codified in 10 CFR Part 72. The NRC experience in 1

i 2

]

i i

~

- - =

s applying Part 72 has indicated that the regulations are not adequate in some respects and that certain additions and clarifications to the regulations are necessary. This proposed rule would make eight miscellaneous changes to 10 CFR Part 72. These changes would ensure that necessary information is included in reports and that Qual'ty Assurance records are maintained permanently when identified with activities and items impurtant to safety. These reports and I

records are needed to facilitate NRC inspection to verify compliance with regulatory reporting requirements to ensure the protection of public health and safety, and the environment.

Discussion of Proposed Arnendments

1. Mo. ry @@ 72.1 and 72.2 to include spent fuel storage cask and remove the superseded information.

l The purpose (@ 72.1) and scope (@ 72.2) were not modified when the Commission amended Part 72 on July 18,1990 (55 FR 29181) to include a process for providing a general license to a reactor licensee to store spent fuel in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) at power reactor sites (Subpart K) and a process for the approval of spent fuel storage casks (Subpart L). Although the language in these sections may be read to include the genera; license provisions of Subpart K, the approval process for spent fuel storage casks in Subpart L is not referenced. This rulemaking would make the purpose and scope sections complete by specifically referencing the Subpart L cask approval process. This rulemaking also would i

remove information in the purt ud scope sections regarding the Federalinterim storage J

prog.*am since the time for its implementatiori has enirsd (61 FR 35935; July 9,1996).

3

2. Change the requirement for making ;aitial and written reports in @S 72.4 and 72.216.

This change would be made to @ 72.4 to provide that, except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports are to be addressed to NRC's Document Control Desk (DCD) rather than to the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS). Three current regulations govern the submission of v-reports under Part 72 (SS 72.75,72.216(b),

and 50.72(b)(2)(vii)(B) that is referenced in 72.216(a)). Under S 72.75(d)(2) a report is sent to the DCD. However $$ 50.72(b)(2)(vii)(B) and 72.216(b) indicate that the report De sent as instructed in 72.4, to the Director, NMSS. To achieve consistency, 72.4 is being revised to instruct that reports be sent to the DCD. Licensing correspondence forwarded to the NRC's DCD would ensure proper docketing and distribution. Also, S 72.216(c) is being cnanged to correct an error. The current regulation references @S 72.75(a)(2) and (3); the reference should be revised to S 72.75(b)(2) and (3).

3. Change the requirement for submittal of dry cask storage effluent report in Q 72.44.

Currently, 72.44(d)(3) requires that a dry cask storage effluent report be submitted to the appropriate NRC regional office within the first 60 days of each year. Section 50.36a(a)(2) requires that a similar report be submitted to the Commission once each year specifying liquid and gaseous effluents from reactor operations.

I The proposed revision would permit reactor licensees to submit their dry cask storage effluent report to the NRC once each year at the same time as the effluent report from ree.ctor operations. The time between submission of these reports would be no longer than 12 months.

4

4 However, after the effective date of the final rule, the licensee may submit the first report for a shorter period of time to get on the same reporting schedule as the annual reactor effluent report.

4

4. Clarify the reporting requirements for specific events and conditions in @ 72.75.

Section 72.75 contains reporting requirements for specific events and conditions, including the requirement in @ 72.75(d)(2) for a follow-up written report for certain types of emergsncy and non-emergency notifications. The proposed rule would clarify the specific information required to meet the intent of the existing reporting requirement. A comparable reporting requirement already exists for similar reactor type events in 5 50.73(b). The proposed rule would incorporate t% format and content outlined in 50.73(b) into 72.75(d)(2) to clearly i

inform licensee' of the information necessary for the NRC staffs review. Since the reporting requirement already exists, no significant increase in the licensee's reporting burden will occur by clanfying the format and content.

i

]

5. Clarify the requirement for capability for continuous monitoring of confinement storage i

systems in S 72.122(h)(4).

Currently, @ 72.122(h)(4) requires the capability for continuous monitoring of storage confinement systems. The meaning of " continuous"is open to interpretation and does not differentiate between monitoring requirements for wet and dry storage of spent fuel. Wet

]

storage requires active heat removal systems that irwolve a monitoring that is " continuous" in the sense of uninterrupted. Because of the passive nature of dry storage, active heat removal 5

O systems are not needed and monitoring can be less frequent. This proposed rule would clarify that the frequency of monitoring can be iifferent for wet and dry storage systems. As part of the NRC approval process, the periodicity of monitoring is specified in the Certificate of Compliance.

6. Clarify the requirement specifying instrument and control systems for monitoring dry spent fuel storage in S 72.122(i).

Section 72.122(i) requires that instrumentation and control systems be provided to monitor systems important to safety but does not distinguish between wet and dry storage systems. For wet storage, systems are required to monitor and control heat removal. For dry storage, passive heat removalis used and a control system is not required. This proposed r

change would clarify that control systems are not needed for dry storage systems.

7. Clarify the requirement for dry spent fuel storage cask on methods of criticality control in S 72.124(b).

Section 72.124(b) requires specific methods for criticality control, including the requirement that where solid neutron absorbing matenais are used, the design must provide for positive means to verify their continued efficacy. This requirement is appropriate for wet spent fuel storage systems but not for dry spent fuel storage systems. The potentially corrosive environment under wet storage conditions is not present in dry storage systems because an inert environment ;s maintained. Under these conditions, there is no mechar. ism to significantly i

l degrade the neutron absorbing materials. In addition, the dry spent fuel storage casks are i

sealed and it is not practical to penetrate the integrity of the cask to make the measurements for l

6

verifying the efficacy of neutron absorbing materials. This proposed rule would clarify that positive rr $ns for venfying the continued efficacy of solid neutron absorbing meterials are not required for dry storage systems, where the efficacy is demonstrated at the outset.

8. Clarify the requirements in S 72.140(d) concerning the previously approved rma!ity assurance program in conformance with Appendix B of 10 CFR Part 50.

I Section 72.174 specifies that quality assurance (QA) records must be maintained by or under the control of the licensee until the Commission terminates the license. However, Q 72.140(d) allows a holder of a Part 50 license to use its approved Part 50, Appendix B, QA program in place of the Part 72 QA requirements, including the requirement for QA records.

Appendix B allows the licensee to determine what records will be considered permanent records, using Regulatory Guide 1.28. Thus, Part 50 licensees using an Appendix B, QA program could choose not to make permanent all records generated in support of Part 72 activities. This proposed rule would require these licensees to follow the Part 72 requirement io maintain QA recoros until termination of the license.

I Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion The NRC has determined that Items 1,5,6, and 7 of tiie proposed rule are the types of action described as a categorical exclusion in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(2) and items 2,3,4 and 8 of the proposed rule are the types of action desented as a categorical exclusion 1.110 CFR l

51.22(c)(3). Therefore, neither an environmental nipact statement nor an environmental l

assessment has been prepared for this proposed regulation.

7 I

l

i i

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement i

l This proposed rule amends information collection requirements that are subject to the j

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et r,eq). This rule has been submitted to the l

l Office of Management and pdget (OMB) for review and approval of the information collection requirements.

l The public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 38 hours4.398148e-4 days <br />0.0106 hours <br />6.283069e-5 weeks <br />1.4459e-5 months <br /> per j

response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the information i

collection. The NRC is seeking public comment on the potential impact of the information collrtion contained in the proposed rule and on the following issues:

i

~

1.

Is the proposed information collection necessary for the proper performance of f

the functions of the NRC, including whether the information will have practical j

utility?

I 2.

Is the estimate of burden accurate?

i 3.

Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the informatior to be f

co;!ected?

4.

How can the burden of the information collection be minimi7ed, including the use of automated collection techniques?

8

~.-

___....________m.__________.__....._.__

I j

1 I

a i

c f

Send comments on any aspect of this proposed information collection, including suggestions for l

1

]

reducing the buro'en, to the Records Management Branch (T-6 F33), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

{

l Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by Internet electronic mail at BJS1@NRC.GGV; i

and to the Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, NEOB-10202, (3150-i 0132), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503.

?

i i

Comments to OMB on the information collections or on the above issues should be submitted by i

(insert date 30 days after publication in the Federal Reaister). Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments received after this date.

l Public Protection Notification l

i If an information collection doe; not display a currently valid OMB control number, the NRC may

\\

not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, the information collection.

Regulatory Analysis The NRC has prepared a regulatory analysis on this regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the alternatives considered by the NRC and concludes that the proposed rule results in an incremental improvement in public health and safety that outweighs the smallincremental cost associated with this p r posed change. The analysis is available for inspection in the NRC Public Document Room 2120 L Street, NW (Lower Level), Washington.

9 1

~~

I

i j

j Single copies of the analysis may be obtained from M. L. Au, Office of Nuclear Material Safety

[

1-l and' Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone f

i j

(301)415-6181.

i' 1

1 Regulatory Flexibility Certification l

j in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 as amended 5 U.S.C. 605(b),

the Commission certifies that this proposed rule will not, if adopted, have a significant economic l

)?

impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect only the a

^

}

operators of independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI). These companies do not fall within the scope of the definition of "small entities" set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or i

i the Small Business Size Standards set out in regulations issued by the Small Business

{

Administration at 13 CFR Part 121.

l Backfit Analysis i

j The NRC l as determined that the backfit rule,10 CFR 72.62, does not apply to this rule, t

j because these amendments do not involve any proviens that would impose backfits as defined i

in 10 CFR 72.62(a). Therefore, a backfit analysis is not required for this proposed rule.

l l

i j

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 72 i

~1-Manpower training programs, Nuclear materials, Occupational safety and health, i

Reporting ad recordkeeping requirements, Secunty measures, Spent fuel.

I j

10 i

l 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. 553, i

the NRC is proposing to adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR Part 72.

PART 72 - LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STOR.\\GE OF SPENT NUOLEAR FUEL AND HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE i

1.

The authcrity citation for Part 72 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: Secs. 51,53,57,62,63,65,69,81,161,182,183,184,186,187,189,68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 934, 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as amended, sec. 234,83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2234, 2236,2237,2238,2282); sec. 274, Pub. L.86-373,73 Stat. 688, as arended (42 U.S C. 2021);

sec. 201, as amended, 202,206,88 Stat.1242, as amended, 1244 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842,5846); Pub. L.95-601. sec.10,92 Stat. 2951 as amendec oy Pub. L. 102-486, sec. 7902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec.102, Pub. L.91-190,83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332); secs. 131,132,133,135,137,141, Pub. L. s7-425,96 Stat. 2229,2230,2232,2241, sec.148, Pub.

L.100-203,101 Stat.1330-235 (42 U.S.C.10151,10152,10153,10155,10157,10161,10168).

Section 72.44(g) also issued under secs.142(b) and 148(c), (d), Pub. L. 100-203,101 Stat.1330-232,1330-236 (42 U.S.C.10162(b),10168(c), (d)). Section 72.46 also issued under sec.189,68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239); sec.134, Pub. L.97-425,96 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C.

10154). Section 72.96(d) also issued under sec.145(g), Pub. L.100-203,101 Stat.1330-235 (42 U.S.C.10165(g)). Subpart J also issued under secs. 2(2), 2(15), 2(19),117(a),141(h), Pub.

L.97-425,96 Stat. 2202,2203,2204,2222,2224 (42 U.S.C.10101,10137(a),10161(h)).

11

Subparts K and L are also issued under sec.133,98 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C.10153) and sec. 218(a), 96 Stat. 2252 (42 U.S.C.10198).

2. Section 72.1 is revised to read as follows:

6 72.1 Puroose.

The regulations in this part establish requirements, procedures, and criteria for the issuance of licenses to receive, transfer, and possess power reactor spent fuel and other i

radioactive materials associated with spent fuel storage in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) and the terms and conditions under which the Commission will issue these licenses. The regulations in this part also establish requirements, procedures, and criteria for the is once of licenses to the Department of Energy (DOE) to receive, transfer, package, and possess power reactor spent fuel, high-level radioactive waste, and other radioactive materials associated with the spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste storage, in a monitored retrievable storage installation (MRS). Furthermore, the regulations in this part also establish requirements, procedures, and criteria for the issuance of Certificates of Compliance approving si.ent fuel storage casks.

i

3. In 72.2, paragraph (e) is removed, paragraph (f) is redesignated as paragraph (e),

and a new paragraph (f)is added to read as follows:

G 72.2 Sgnag 12

(f) Certificates of Compliance approving the use of spent fuel storage casks shall be issued in accordance with the requirements of this part as stated in @ 72.236.

4. Section 72.4 is revised to read as follows:

1 6 72.4 Communications.

Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part and applications filed under them should be addressed to the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

5. In 72.44, paragraph (d)(3) is revised to read as follows :

6 72 44 License conditions.

(d)

[

f (3) An annual report be submitted to 'he U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN:

f Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555-0001, specifying the quantity of each of the principal radionuclides released to the environment in liquid and in gaseous effluents during the previous 12 months of operation and such other information as may be required by the Commission to estimate maximum potential radiation dose commitment to the public resulting from effluent releases. On the basis of this report and any additionalinformation that the Commission may obtain from the licensee or others, the Commission may from time to time 13

l require the licensee to take such action as the Commission deems appropriate. The time between submission of reports must be no longer than 12 months.

6. In S 72.75, paragraph (d)(2) is revised, and paragraphs (d)(3), (d)(4), (d)(5), (d)(6) and (d)(7) are added to read as follows:

6 72.75 Reoortino recuirements for soecific events and conditions.

(d)

(2) Written report. Each licensee who makes an initial repod required by paragraph (a) or (b) of this section shall submit a written follow-up report withia 30 days of the initial report.

Written reports prepared pursuant to other regulations may be submitted to fulfill this requirement if the reports contain all the necessary information and the appropriate distribution is made. These written reports must be sent to the U.d. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN:

Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555-0001. These reports must include the following:

(i) A brief abstract describing the major occurrences during the event, including all component or system failures that contributed to the event t, id significant corrective action taken or planned to prevent recurrence; (ii) A clear, specific, narrative description of what occurred so that knowledgeable readers conversant with the design of ISFSI or MRS, but not familiar with the details of a particular

)

1 14 4

l 3--we, n-w-r y.-

w

facility, can understand the complete event; and the narrative description must include the following specific information as appropriate for the particular event:

(A) ISFSI or MRS operating conditions before the event; (B) Status of structures, components, or systems that were inoperable at the start of the event and that contributed to the event; (C) Dates and approximate times of occurrences; (D) The cause of each component or system failure or personnel error, if known; (E) The failure mode, mechanism, and effect of each failed component, if known; (F) A list of systems or secondary functions that were aise affected for failures of components with multiple functions; i

(G) For wet spent fuel systems storage only, after failure that rendered a train of a safety l

system inoperable, an estimate of the elapsed time from the discovery of the failure until the train was returned to service; (H) The method of discovery of each r,omponent or system failure or procedural error; (1)W Operator actions that affected the course of the event, including operator errors, procedural deficiencies, or both, that contributed to the event;

@ For each personnel error, the licensee shall discuss:

{d Whether the error was a cognitive error (e g., failure to recognize the actual facility condition, failure to realize which systems should be functioning, failure to recognize the true nature of the event) or a procedural error; l

(iQ Whether the error was contrary to an approved procedure, was a direct result of an error in an approved procedure, or was associated with an activity or task that was not covered by an approved procedure; l

15 l

li -

- ~ ~.

.~..- - - -. -.

{!id Any unusual characteristics of the work location (e.g., heat, noise) that directly contributed to the error; and

{iyj The type of personnel involved (e.g., contractor personnel, utility-licensed operator, utility nonficensed operator, other utility personnel);

(J) Automatically and manually initiated safety system responses (wet spent fuel storage systems only);

(K) The manufacturer and model number (or other identification) of each component that failed during the event; 4

(L) The quant; ties and chemical and physical forms of the spent fuel or HLW involved; (3) An assessment of the safety consequences and implications of the event. This assessment must include the availability of other systems or components that could have performed the same function as the components and systems that failed during the evard, (4) A description of any corrective actions planned as a result of the event, including those to re Pace the probability of similar events occurring in the future; (5) Reference to any previous similar events at the same plant that are known to the licensee; (6) The name and telephone number of a person within the licensee's organization who 1

is knowledgeable about the event and can provide additionalinformation concerning the event and the plant's characteristics; (7) The extent of exposure of individuals to radiation or to radioactive materials without i

identification of individuals by name, j

7. In 72.122, paragraphs (h)(4) and (i) are revised to read as follows:

2 1

16 4

i 4

.,r

.-r p

.m

..m sm. w2

,e 2

4 6 72.122 Overall Recuirements.

(h)

(4) Storage confinement systems must have the capability for continuous monitoring in a manner such that the licensee will be able to determine when corrective action needs to be taken to maintain safe storage conditions. For dry storage, periodic monitoring is sufficient provided that periodic monitoring is consistent with the cask design requirements. The monitoring period must be based upon the cask design requirements.

(i) Instrumentation and controlsystems. Instrumentation and control systems for wet spent fuel storage must be provided to monitor systems that are important to safety over anticipated ranges for normal operation and off-normal operation. Those instruments and control systems that must remain operational under accident conditions must be identified in the Safety Analysis Report. Instrumentation systems for dry spent fuel storage casks must be provided in accordance with cask design requirements to monitor conditions that are important to safety over anticipated ranges for normal conditions and off-normal conditions. Systems that are required under accident conditions must be identified in the Safeti Analysis Report.

i

8. In 72.124, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:

6 72.124 Criteria for nuclear criticality safely.

]

i 17

(b) Methods of criticality control. When practicable the design of an ISFSI or MRS must be based on favorable geometry, permanently fixed neutron absorbing materials (poisons), or i

both. Where solid neutron absorbing materials are used, the design must provide for positive means of verifying their continued efficacy. For dry spent fuel storage systems, the continued efficacy may be confirmed by a demonstration and analysis before use, showing that significant degradation of the neutron absorbing materials cannot occur over the life of the facility.

9. In S 72.140, paragraph (d)is revised to read as follows:

6 72.140 Quality assurance recuirements.

(d) Previously approvedprograms. A Commission-approved quality assurance program i

which satisfies the applicable criteria of Appendix B to Part 50 of this chapter and which is established, maintained, and executed with regard to an ISFSI will be accepted as satisfying the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section except that a licensee using an Appendix B quality assurance program also shall meet the requirement of @ 72.174 for recordkeeping. Prior to initial use, the licensee shall notify the Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, of its intent to 18

apply its previously approved Appendix B program to ISFSI activities. The licensee shall identify the program by date of submittal to the Commission, docket number, and date of Commission approval.

10. In S 72.216, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:

6 72 216 Reoorts.

(c) The general licensee shall make initial and written reports in accordance with

@9 72.74 and 72.75, except for the events specified by Q 72.75(b)(2) and (3) for which the initial reports will be made under paragraph (a) of this section.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of

,1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John C. Hoyle Secretary of the Commission.

j I

19 1

Doc. Name: O:%U\\P72HPRDA.PR6 2/13/98 i

j 20

=

ATTACHMENT 2 REGULATORY ANALYSIS i

._ __ _~___ _

DRAFT REGULATORY ANALYSIS Miscellaneous Changes to 10 CFR Part 72 Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of -

Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste Statement of the Probl m 9

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is proposing to amend its regulations to ensure that Part 72 requirements would include maintaining quality assurance (QA) records (prescribed in G 72.174) as permanent records for those licensees who adopted an Appendix B to Part 50 Quality Assurance Program.

Obiectives The intent of this proposed rulemaking is to clarify that requires that all Part 72 licensees, including those licensees under an Appendix B, QA program, maintain QA records permanently until termination of the license.

Cost and Benefit of Attemative All Part 72 licensees, including those who have adopted an Appendix B to Part 50 QA program, currently maintain the QA records that are prescribed in S 72.174 as permanent records. However, the maintenance of QA records beyond those required under Appendix B is voluntary on the part of licensees who have adopted an Appendix B, QA program. Permanent

QA records retention is needed to ensure traceability of systems or components for future use to determine root cause of accidents and analysis of failure. For general Part 72 licensee, records are needed if the license is converted to specific license and records are needed to ensure proper decommissioning of the facility. Because there is no assurance that these additional records would continue to be maintained in the future, NRC's regulatory analysis policy prescribes that for base case cost-benefit calculations, it is appropriate to give no credit for those voluntary actions and to view this as an incremental burden of the proposed regulatory action. The staff estimates that the 20-year present worth cost to a reactor licensee to maintain all permanent records is on the order of $100,000 per licensee. This assumes an average one-time cost of $40,000 for a vault or cabinet, an annuallabor cov of $6000 to maintain the records, and an annual storage fee of 5500. The present worth of the annual cost is based on a 7 percent real discount rate over a 20-year period which corresponds a he life of the license.

Based on discussion with NRC staff directly involved in oversight of 72.174 requirements, it is estimated that the permanent independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) records represent no more than 5 percent of the total permanent records required to be maintained by a reactor licensee. Thus, it is estimated that the 20-year incremental burden resulting from this rule change is $5000 per licensee. This figure is equally applicable to both reactor and non-reactor licensees stonng spent fuel. Given that there are about 50 licensees currently relying on the Appendix B, QA program in lieu of G 72.142, the life-time incremental burden for the affected licensee population is approximately $250,000.

For sensitivity analysis purposes, it is useful to recognize that this new regulatory requirement is currently being met under existing licensee practices, and in terms of real dollt outlay there is no change in burden associated with this regulatory action. This presumes, however, that absent this proposed change licensees using an Appendix B, QA program would 2

continue to permanently maintain all records generated in support of Part 72 activities. The emphasis on making reports with the necessary information and maintaining permanent QA records until termination ohe hcense would be on those a'/.ivities and items that are identified as being important to safety.

The benefits associated with these rule changes are that necessary information !'

included in reports and QA records are maintained permanently when identified with acnities and items important to safety. In the staffs view, this incremental benefit exceeds the relatively smallincremental cost associate 4 with this proposed change.

a i

3

Doc. Name: O:%UU'72RA6.oR6 5/27/98 1

J

\\

l 4

A g

D ATTACHMENT 3 CONGRESSIONAL LETTERS

i

./p uo y*

UNITED STATES j

E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIGN

{

%E WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001

[

S...../

[

g L

t

~

The Honorable Dan Schaefer, Chairman

[

Subcommittee on Energy and Power Committee on Commerce United States House of l

Representatives Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has sent to the Office of the Federal Register, for l

publication, the enclosed proposed amendments to the Commission's rule in 10 CFR Part 72.

l 4

The proposed amendments would differentiate the requirements for the storage of spent fuel under wet and dry conditions, clarify requirements for the cor' tent and submission of various j

reports, and specify that Quality Assurance (QA) records must be maintained as permanent I

records. The proposed rule, if promulgated, would also correct severalinconsistencies and I

clarify certain sections in this regulation.

't The Commission is issuing the proposed rule for public comment.

i Sincerely, i

i Dennis K. Rathbun, Director i

j Office of Congressional Affairs l

l l

Enclosure:

Federa_1 Reaister Notice cc: Representative Ralph Hall i

i i

i 1

J 1

1 I

l

. _ _ _l t

j 4.

I The Honorable Dan Schaefer, Chairman

{

Subcommittee on Energy and Power l

Committee on Commerce United States House of l

Representatives l

Washington, DC 20515

{

Dear Mr. Chairman:

l The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has sent to the Office of the Fedeml Register, for publication, the enclosed proposed amendments to the Commission's rule in 10 CFR Part 72.

l The proposed amendments would differentiate the requirements for the storage of spent fuel under wet and dry conditions, clarify requirements for the content and submission of various

{

reports, and specify that Quality Assurance (QA) records must be maintained as permanent records. The proposed rule, if promulgated, would also correct severalinconsistencies and l

clarify certain sections in this regulation.

The Commission is issuing the proposed rule for public comment.

l Sincerely,

)

r

.t i

l Dennis K. Rathbun, Director l

Office of Congressional Affairs

?

l

Enclosure:

Federal Reaister Notice 3

cc: Representative Ralph Hall Distnbution:

IMOB Sub t/f NMSS 9700565/EDO 9600162 NJensen, OGC CPoland IMOB r/f MBndgers FYoung NMSS FCombs l

Central f/c CGallagher, RES l

MLesar, ADM DMendiola l

LRiani OCA r/f NMSS Dir. R/F DOCUMENT NAME: O$AU\\P72CNGHS.PR6*

To recerve e copy of this document, indicate in the box: *C" = Copy wrthout attachment / enclosure E" = Copy wrth attachmenti.nclosure "N" = No copy

• See previous concurrence OFFICE IMOB'IMNS l

IMOB.IMNS l

D:IMNS l

D NMSS l

OCA l

l NAME MAu*

JPiccone*

DCooI*

CPapenello DRathbun DATE il 28 /98 1/2a /98 1/18/98

/

19 8

/

/97 f

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY l

(NMSS File Code) NMSS 4

1 t

v

~

. ~ _. _. - -. -.. ~,

{

4

>SEECp

[

e O

p

-4 UNITED STATES i

j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i

f g-WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 o

• • ,.....,o*

I The Honorable James M. Inhofe, Chapman i

Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property and Nuclear Safety l

Committee on Environment and Public Works l

United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 l

l

Dear Mr. Chairman:

l l

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has sent to the Office of the Federal Register, for publication, the enclosed proposed amendments to the Commission's rule in 10 CFR Part 72.

The proposed amendments would differentiate the requirements for the storage of spent fuel under wat and dry conditions, clarify requirements for the content and submission of various l

reports, and specify that Quality Assurance (QA) records must be mainte:

1 as permanent records. The proposed rule, if promulgated, would also correct severalin-

._.stencies and clarify certain sections in this regulation.

)

The Commission is issuing the proposed rule for public comment i

Sincerely, l

i l

Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs

Enclosure:

Federal Register Motice cc: Senator Bob Graham i

)

)

l l

4

4 The Honorable James M. Inhofe, Chairman Subcommittee,

", lean Air, Wetlands, Private Property and Nuclear Safety Committee on Environment and PublicWorks United States Senate Washington, DC 20510

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has sent to the Office of the Federa! Register, for publication, the enclosed proposed amendments to the Commission's rule in 10 CFR Part 72.

The proposed amendments would differentiate the requirements for the storage of spent fuel under wet and dry conditions, clarify requirements for the content and submission of various reports, and specify that Quelity Assurance (QA) records must be maintained as permanent records. The proposed rule, if promulgated, would also correct severalinconsistencies and clarify certain sections in this regulation.

The Commission is issuing.1e proposed rule for public comment.

Sincerely, Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs

Enclosure:

Federa_1 Reaister Notice cc: Senator Bob Graham Distnbution:

IMOB Sub r/f NMSS 9700565/EDO 9600162 NJensen OGC CPoland IMOB r/f MBndgers FYoung. NMSS FCombs Central t/c CGallagher RES MLesar, ADM DMendiola LRiant OOA r/f NMSS Dir. R/F DOCUMENT NAME: OAAUiP72CNC,.PR6*

To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy wit".out attachment / enclosure

E" = Copy with attachment / enclosure "N" = No copy

• See previous concurrence OFFICE IMOB.lMNS l

IMOB IMNS l

D IMNS l

DNMSS l

OCA l

NAME MAu*

JPiccone*

DCoot*

CPapenello DRathbun DATE il2B 19B 1/2B/98 1 / 28 /98

/

19B

/

198 OFFIClAL RECORD COPY (NMSS File Code) NMSS 1

fiay 27, 1998 I

MEMORANDUM TO:

David L. Meyer, Chief Rules and Directives Branch Division of Administrative Serv,ces Office of Administration FROM:

Josephine Piccone, Chief 5'afnal SI n::Iby 3

Rulemaking and Guidance Branch j

Division of industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety i

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

SUBJECT:

IMPLEMENTATION OF MAY 8,1998, SRM: PROPOSED RULE:

MISCELLANEOUS CHANGES TO 10 CFR PART 72, LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH-LEVEL WASTE

'ei May 8,1998, the Commission approved for publication of the notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Reaister for a 75-day comment periol The changes to meet the requirement.e. of the SRM have been made.

Please implement the Commission's actions by arranging for publication of the attached proposed rule in the Federal Reaister.

I Also attached is the Regulatory Analysis for forwarding to the PDR and the Congressionalletter package for transmittal to OCA.

Attact1ments:

1. Federal Register Notice of Propo ed Rule i

+ 3 Copies & Diskette

2. Regulatory Analysis

3. Congressional Letters l

CONTACT: Mark Au, NMSSnMNS (301) 415-6181 Distribution: RGordon/RF; IMNS/ Central File; NMSS Dir R/F; NRC Central File; CPoland (NMSS No. 980241; HThompson; EDO/RF; MBridgers EDO No. (9600162)

DCool; PHolahan; CHaugney; FYoung; NJensen LRiani; DMendiola; CGallagher DOCUMENT NAME:[O:tautpt72ttranms.pr CF Y

N PD Y

N P

O

., cope.t m. o com.ni, we.t. in m. t.or *c - cony..mout it.cnment.ncioso,e r - cone -.m.tt.chmani encionar.

N - No enpy 0FFICE RAG

,R$p m n l

l l

l ~

NAME MAu ////fM fM11ddh@~

DATE l5/-t/98 6 /d798 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY

<