ML20035H721

Responds to Licensee Enclosing Ltrs from Three Constituents Expressing Concerns About Dry Cask Storage at Plant

ML20035H721
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades
Issue date:	04/27/1993
From:	Selin I, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:	Dingell J HOUSE OF REP.
References
CCS, NUDOCS 9305060316
Download: ML20035H721 (32)

Text

q

• % ' pna

[

UNITED STATES -

og NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION w

g g

WASHt NGTON, D. C. 20555 o%

/

April 27, 1993 CHAIRMAN The Honorable John D. Dingell Chairman, Comittee on Energy and Comerce U.S. House of Representatives Washington, D.C.

20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

I am responding to your April 1, 1993 letter enclosing letters from three constituents expressing concerns about dry cask storage at the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant.

Their concerns focused on the lack of a hearing, the need for an environmental impact statement, and the need for an economic analysis for the project.

On April 1,1993, the Comission approved a final rule that added the VSC-24 cask, designed by Pacific Sierra Nuclear, and selected by Consumers Power Corporation for use at that Palisades Nuclear Power Plant, to the list of-approved and certified spent fuel storage casks.

The proposed rule was-subject to a public coment period that was effectively 9 months long. During that period, we received a number of coments that were essentially identical-to those raised by your constituents.

I have enclosed the. April 7, 1993 Federal Reaister notice that published the Comission's approval of the final rule and included the analysis of public coments.

The Comission's responses to the three issues raised by your constituents are contained in responses 57, 61, and 62 of the enclosed Federal Reaister notice, pages 17962 through 17964.

For your convenience, I am also enclosing a separate. text of those three comments and responses.

As the Federal Reaister notice makes clear, a number of other technical and institutional issues were raised by comenters and addressed by the staff.

In dealing with these issues, the NRC has responded to other Members of Congress, the Michigan Attorney General, and private citizens and groups who have expressed concerns about this storage system.

The Comission-carefully considered all the views expressed in reaching our decision to add the VSC-24 cask to the list of approved and certified specific storage casks. We wil.1 continue to keep the public health and safety of the citizens of Michigan and all other states our paramount concern in these activities.

$0 No

]

5 P

r

.A 9

. r I hope the enclosed material will help to resolve your constituents' concerns.

If you have any further question, please contact me or Mr. Robert Bernero, Director of NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. Mr.

Bernero can be reached by telephone at (301) 504-3352.

Sincerely,

,o Ivan Selin

Enclosures:

1.

Federal Reaister Notice 2.

Text of three responses cc:

Representative Carlos J. Moorhead f

k i

I l

.=

-4, I

. 948 Fed 2ral Register / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wednesday. April 7,1993 / Ruiss and Regulations s

3 l

.i l

i I

t i

r k

i t

f t

I f

i b

i

~!

i i

J i

t i

t i

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

.{

COMMIS$40N 1

10 CFR Part 72 1

RIN 3190-AE1$

i Ust of Approved Spent Fuei 540 rope Cooks: Aeskions i

j AQDeCY; NuCIt&T Regulatory Commission, j

t

'l e.-

w

V Federa.1 Rec.ist2r / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wednzaday. April 7.1993 / Rules and Regubtions 17949 acno=: Fmal rule second cask ('1% 24) will be covered bundred and fifty-two assemblies a-e m separately in a subsequent nouce. In storage at Virgmia Power. 56 assemoi.es

~

The Nuclear Regulatory addition. the comment penod for the are m storage at CF&L. 96 assembles are suemARY:

Ccmmission (NRC) is amending its list June 26.1992, proposed rule on the in storage at Duke Power, and 1492 fiel g epproved spect fuel storaSe cssks to VSC-24 casi was reopened to provide elements are m storage at Public Servce s3:: e spent fuel storage cask to the opportunity for pubhc comment on the of Colorado. BGAE anticipates loadmg j,st of apprmed casks.This amendment additionalinformation (January 21.

fuel later m 1993. '

W1 allow holders of power reactor 1993. 58 FR 5301). His comment As a result of the groweg use of drv

erst

rg bcenses to store spent fuel in penod expired on February 22.1993.

storage technology exper:ence. NRC bas e.:s appretes cask under a general Further NRC rulemaking acuvities are Samed over 25 staff yean of expenence Mensa planned for the TN-24 cask which is, m the review and licens:ng of dry < pent tritemt cATE: May 7.1993-therefore, not covered in this notice of fuel storage systems, To further support tooatssts: Copies of the environmental final rule.

the NRC technical staff. Ge agencv ssessment and finding of no significant Section 218(a) of the Nuclear Waste draws upon the knowledge and

npact are as salable for inspecton and/ Pohey Act of 1982 (NWPAlincludes the expenence of outside scientists and et cepvmg for a fee at the NRC Pubhc following direct 2ve

"The Secetary (of engineers recognized as expens with.n D:>cument Room. 2120 L Street. NW.

DOE) shall estabhth a demonstration their respective fields m the i: cwer I.es ell. Washington. DC. Single program in cooperation with the pnvate performance of the independent safety cepes of the environmental assessment sector. for the dry storage of spent analysis of the systems and componen's and the findmg of no signi5 cant impact nuclear fuel at civilian nuclear power submitted by apphcants for dry caa are available from the individuals listed reactor sites with the obpctive of licenses or certification. Reviews of under the nart heading below.

establishing one or rnere technologies numerous applications. seeking either sea ruamtR pdORs&ATiON C04rACT: Mr.

that the (Nuclear Regulatory) site-specific ISFSIs. certificates of Gordon E. Gundersen. Office of Nuclear Commission may, by rule, approve for compliance or approval of a topical use at the sites of civilian nuclear power report, have been conducted over tne Eerulatory Research. U.S. Nuclear reactors without to de rnanmum past 7 years.

Feiulatcrv Commission. Washmgton.

DC 20555'. telepbone (301) 492-3803, or extent practicaMe,6e need for Section 133 of tne NWPA states m additional site specific approvals by the part, that "the Commission shall, by Mr James F. Schneider. Office of Nudear Matenal Safety and Safeguards. Commission." After subsequent DOE rule, establish procedures for the technical evalustions and based on a licensing of any technology approsed by C 5. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, full review f allavailable data,the the Commission under section 21Bla) for Washington. DC 20555. telephone (301) g-g~

Commiuion approved dry storage of use at the site of any civilian nuclear spent nuclear fuel in a final rule power reactor." This directive was sueettutwf aRY sooRMAToM:

published in the Federal Register on implemented on July 18,1990 (55 FR

Background

July 18,1990 (55 FR 29181). The final 29181) by the publication in the Federal rula established a new subpart K within Register of a Snal rule establishing a

_he NRC pubbsbed a notice of to CFR part 72 entitled General new subpart L within 10 CFR part 72 4

proposed ru.emaking m the Federal lacense for Storage of Spent Fuel at entitled "Approsal of Spent Fuel Register en June 26.1992 (57 FR 28645). Power Reactor Sites."

Storage Casks." As a result of cat 1990 The comment penod closed on Irradiated reactor fuel hu been rulemabng. four dry casks were hsted Semember 9.1992. but was handled under dry conditions since the in 5 72.214 of subpart K as approved by subsequently reopened, as discussed mid 1940's when arradiated fuel the NRC for storage of spent fuel at below The proposed rule would have examinations began in hot cells. Ught ower reactor sites under a general amended 10 CFR 72 214 to include two water reactor fuel has been examined facense additional spent fuel storage casks (i e..

dry in hot alls since 1pproximately The final rule adds one additional the Transnuclear. inc.."IN 24 cask and 1%0. Some of these fuels have been spent fuel storage cask. the VSC-24 the Pacific Sierra Nuclear Associates.

stored continuously in hot cells under cask,to the hst of approved casks m VSC-24 caski on the list of approved dry conditions for appronmately tw 5 72.214. The cask being epproved. the spent fuel storage casks that powt; decades. Expenencs with storage of VSC-24 cask. is discussed in further reactor bc+nsees may use under the spent fuelin dry casb is extensive. (54 detail below. in addition. based on prov:sions of a generallicense.

FR 19379 (19901). Further. as discussed public comments, the Safety Evaluaticn Subsecuent to the exptration of the below. the United States has extensise Report (SER) and Certificate of Septemoer 9.1992 public comment expenence m the hcensmg and safe Compliance for the VSC-24 were penod. de NRC took steps to operation of independent spent fuel modified Each modification is impiement the provision of 5 2.790fcl of storage installations (!SFS!'sl. At the discussed below as part of the " Anal)sts i

es regulatwns 141 FR 11808 (1976)) that begmning of 1993 five site specific of Public Comments" section of this p crides that information submitted to hcenses for dry cask storare had been Federal Register notice.

1 NRC m a ruiemakmg proceedmg which issued. They are Virginia Power's Surry Pacific Siena Nuclear Apociates I

subequer.t'y forms the basis for a final Station. issued July 2.1986; Caroline (PSNA) submitted a " Topical Report cn i

se ull not be withheld from pubhc Power and Light's [CP&L) HB Robinson the Ventilated Storare Cad System for d.sdosate ty NRC. Accordmgly, on Station. assued August 13.1986: Duse

}, radiated Fuel" for their VSC-24 cad i

January 21,1993, additional Power's Oconee Station. issued } ant:ary in February 1989. (VSC means

r.formaticn. which was previously 29.1990. Pubhc Service of Colorado a

" ventilated storase cesL" Twenty.four catesonzod as vendor propnetary Fort St. Vram facihty. issued November (241 refers to the number of mdivioual

~

nformattor*. was placed m the Pubbc 4.1991; and Baltimore Gas and spent fuel assembhes which the VSC-24 Document Room (PDR) and all Local Electnt's (BGaEl Calvert Chffs Station.

Pache Dccarnent Rooms. The additional issued Nosember 25.1992. All have g 3 m f,g ga mf ormatmn made available m the PDR commenced operation and loaded fuel rai oacca = tra i; 5 km.cwri 199u enr.

Ma'ec on.y to tre VSC-24 cast The with the exception of BGAE. Two as:

i i

e

7950 Fed:ral Register / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wednesday. Apnl 7,1993 / Rules and Regulatioru

s des:gned to hold.)he NRC Public Leeponses their waste eluwhere. or to sh ccmpleted its review and irsued its Safety Evaltauon Report (SER)in Apnl In twPonse to the June 26. m2, mi down the plant at Pahsades'-

1991 approving the Topical Report for Jamzary 21.1993. Federal 1sigiekr

-Concem wu erpreued that the efennca:g in a rite-spec 5c license rinces. 232 comments won mcsived review p<omsa might become t.naasonab}v deland and mthout apphcaten. PSNA later submrtted its from indmduala, pubbe interest groupa, approval for additiocal steregs

~

approved Topical Report in the form of environmental gmupa, assocanons, capacity. the Paheades pisnt a Safety Analysis Repott for the industry reprenootsuns.Congrwstonal ulumstely m!! be forced to shut Ventilated Storsp Cask System"in TePresentauves, and States. Although a down, a result that would han Ncrember 1991 requesung certificauon number of the comments wwe recetved sonous economic consequences for for use under a general lice ise. The aAer the respecia Septemba 9.1992 southwestern Michigan.

NRC conducted aditional evah>etions and Febmary 22.1993 mmnant closur* -The Federal govem nent's failure to ed issued a dn!t Cem5cate cf dates for 6 two noums.NRC has reso}ve quesucsas about th Compbence and draft SER. dated Apnl considered cements remind permanent stange of nuclear wastes r42. m support of the Notice of inchiding those recend sier the loans both the plant and public was hopesed Rulemaking published in the comment closure dates.

hmited optioca: additional stornp in Tederal Register on June 26.1992.

As a part of this rulernahog ecuon.

pools, addinonal storage m dry casis based on further staff review and NRC remived requests for furbe or plam ahutdown. The federal analp:s of public comments, with this CFPortunity to commeert end in govemment has an obbgatan to f nal rulemaking. NRC is approvirrg the Particular. for NRC to hold a pubhc assolve the issue of permanent or VSC-24 cask for use under a general haanrg to revrew the mertts of thrs interirn storage. it would bo dif5cuit Mense and is simultaneously issuing e action. One request was imm Frant J.

to overstate the need for dispatch m final Certificate of Comphance and SER. Kelley. Attorney General of the State of doing so, es hundreds of Amencan The paramount obtecuve of to CFR Michrgan, dated December 30.1992, communitias will eventually face th;s part 72 :s protecting h pubhc health which requested a public heartng.

problem, and safety, by providirg for the safe Chairman Sebn reeponded by letter of

-Ten years ago, there was an erreneous c:r.finement of the ful and preventing January 25,1993, and proposed a assumption that the search for and t..e cegradation of the fuelcledding.

transcnbed public meeting with the cmstruction of a Snal resting place Tne review cntene used by b NRC for Attomey Cenatal to discuss the dry im high-level waste would be much review and approval of dry cask storage spent fuel cask approval pmcess. to swihar than it has been. A under 10 CTR part 72 consider the answer questions and to provide

" demonstration" propam required by followmg: Siting design. quality opportunrty for interested members of law was suppend to have been for assurance. emergency planning.

the public to present comments. Det temporary storage. Because of the in.nmg. and physical protecnon of the pubhc meeting was held on Febmary societal ard technical obstacles which

'ul Included in the review of a specific 23,1993. from 9:30 a.m. until 12 noon radioactive waste disposal presents, sy s em. either for a cernficate of in Lansing. Michigan. The A'tomey even a temporary " demonstration" r:mphance or a site-specific bconse. are General. his staff, representatives of the fongerm is likely to have much rogra ee fdleweg: Earthquakes. high winds.

NRC staff. and approximately one term implications. Tempore.rv omados. tomado dnven misades hundred intarosted citizens attended the dry cask stmap in Michigan should

. Ih nmg. and floods. In addition, moeung. no meeting was tran:cribed not become de facto permanent

gphcants must demonstrate to NRC's and b transcnpt of that meeting, disposal snsfetion that their proposed dry cask including questions and comments of

-It is n t fair to the public of Michigan m em will resist man made events the Attorney General and citizens t

Cemmn Pwer Compann wh as explosions. fires and drop or attending and participating in the 8tt'mPts to contmue the safe storage f its nuclear fuel with the msistence

. p er accidents.2 meeting, has been considered b the NRC and is included in the anafysis of by others that we shut down Pehsades Tne V5C-24 cask. when used in comments. Additional wntten and every other nuclear plant in the i rcrdance with the conditions gecified in ris Ceruficate of comments received within five working country.

Lomphance. meets the requirements of days subsequent to the meeting have These ecmments deal with brosd D CFR part 72. Das conclusion is also been considered by the NRC and policy and propam issues relatmg to raecned after e detatled evaluation of are included in the analysis of the storage and disposal of high-level m VSC-24 caak by the NRC as comments below. (See comment radioscrive waste meludeg ths

ctmented m the NRC staffs SER.

response number 57 for information on Department of Energy's repository Thrs. : se of the VSC-24 cask, as NRC's response to request for a heanng ) propem. However, commenters wit eproved by the NRC. pmvides A number of comments were related End a mmmary chant haum y: equate protecton of the public health ed safety and the environment.

to disposal of high4evel waste, use of

• * *"I

""

• l' McBers of pow or reactor operstm dryWsig d-Q 6 p d responses to comments set out in response numben 41. 52. 61, and 69 m og g yg g,pec g g the followma analysis of comments neem under 10 CTR part 50 wil be germmed to stcre spent fuel m this cask by Casuers Pwer Cwpwation at the Many of 16e corriment letters

.rder a seneral bcense. A copy of the ahsadn Nuclear generaung Staum.

contatried comments that were s:milar xampies of each include:

Cer hate of Comphance rs available for in nature These comments have been

ubbe tnspection and copytng for a fee

--Consumen Power Company knew pouped as appropriate and addressed at tne NRC Pubhc Documect Rmm.

years in advance that 6 day would as smgle issues. ne NRC hes identified

=0 L Street. NW (Iower Levell, come when their spent fuel pool and responded to 75 separate issues that nhmrt on. DC would be full. They should have mclude the sigmficant poets reised by planned aheed of time for th2: day.

each commenter.

m =c e w e e.e. mow,

Commers Power should be required Manv commenten d2scussed topics m.oeumtocn an rr to build a new spent fuel pool, store thet were not the subwet of this

e Federal Erguter / Vol. 58. No. f>5 / Wehady. April 7.1993 / Rules and Regulations 17951 nam-g and thus were not ohhty oithe cusk to wrthstand drop and activities and possible load drop events spectically addreued by the staff as a tiporer ocadents.

ano structurst and radiolopcal pan of this final ruhemdag action.

1 Comment. Some commenters consequances an necasserv evaluanons nese comments expressed cppostoon

+

d concaen about the operational under 10 CFR 50.59.

to tha use of dry cr.sk pormp and safety cf the VSC-24 cast relanns to Fos example,the utility's specEc ecluoed suggestians such as the loe6ng the multi-assembly sealed analyses for load handhng acuntes et followeg-bedet (MSB)into the ventileted

& Palisades plant illustrate h type of (1) Nuclear plants genersting corante cnak (VCC) and twenenng it.

mandatory evalueuon by the cask user rs6cacuve waste should be shut Panicularly, the commenters contended ht NRC requires before 6 VSC-24 down.

that the losdmg procedure of placing cask can be used under 10 CFR part 72.

cl ne production of radioective the MSB transfer otsk (MIC) on top of subpart K. Among others. one spoofic waste should be stepped when the the VCC is pnranous a.nd the procedun event a.nslyzed is the evaluation of the ex: sung rpent fusi pool (and off-f r retnenng the MSB from the VCC is drop of a loaded MTC onto the VCC load-reactor capacity is full.

n t clearly explained. One cxrnmenter with tipover of the MTC cnto the load al A forrnal heanng eb)ould be indicated that than are unnnewed distnbution sycem in the track alley required at each site usmg dry safety issues a ed wt& handirig area. This analysis would encompas.s mg c,g.

utpment includ2ng the liftmg cablea, the upover scenano descnbed above by f 41 ne Psjtsades Nucisar Plant h mg yoka, lugs, and tn.nsfer vehicle.

the commenter who questioned wbether should be shut down'.

that need further renew. Anoker it would be part of a unhty's $ 50.59

{51 ne emhntilement cf the reactor c mmenter asked about the trammg and evaluauon.De result of this analysis pressun vessel at Palisades dictates versight of personnel performma these shows that the MSB would not fail and ocunbea. Anotaer asked. that if the that, while local yielding of the transfer that the phnt be shut down and no d

nal fu 1 transfer casiis on top of the VT in the cask may oaur the transfer cask would se of u lear p w r fuel handling building and a setsmic not fail and could be lifted back to the (6) e event coas causing tipover, would this pool for recovery of all spent fuel m the be stopned and eusting sites

'I'g " P type of event be considered in a $ 50.59 cask.

(7) The use of'storege only cr.sks at evaluation?

2. Cominent. One commenter Response. Use of the VSC-24 cask questioned whether if the PCC were Fahsades is a nolation of public trust and system innde the fuel handhng building hfied up by the MSB. the weight of the

~

(mcludmg use of the MTC to load and loaded MSB and the MTC would bear (81 A researdi and develonment progam should be concIucted on retneve the MSB from the VTl would on the MSB watids. Another commenter be conducted in amortience with h to questioned whether the MSB lifting proouctive uses of spent fuel and CFR pan 50 reactor operauvr's bcense.

nnrcs could support the weigbt of the on alternauve anstgy sources.

These cask handling operations.

MSB and MTC.

Tmady. many commeoters erprmsed includmg loading. r stneval and Response. The weight of the MSB and concstn over the abihty of dry c*w training, must be evalua.ted by h the MTC could be supporied by the storare designs to safely store epent fuel. general licensee. as required by 10 CFR MSB strucrural weld and the nngs Tne i he fchowing responses to those 72.212(b)(4), to ensun that h weld has been analyzed for this comments reflect a small but important procedures are clear and can be srtuation and was found to meet the perton of NRC's renew of health, conducted safely. The MTC and MSB design entena of paragraphs 4 2.11 and safety, and ecvtronmental aspects of the have been evaluated against the enteria 4 2.1.2 of ANSI N14.6.1%6. This VSC44 cask. to ensure that the cask is for controlling beavy loads found in standard, which is considered cessned to prende protectico of the NRC publication NUREG-0612 conservauve,is specifically wntten for pubhc heahh and safety and

(" Control of Heavy Loads et Nuclear speciallifting devices for shippmg ennronment under both normal Power Plants") and American National containers of radioecuve matenals. This cen6tions and severe.unhkaly. but Standards institute (ANST) N14 6.

situanon of httmg both the MSB and creeble ecodent con 6tions. Dry cask "Special Lifting Devices for Shipping MTC will not oxur under nonr..il stcrees systems an massive devices.

Contoners Weighing 10.000 Pounds or operating conditions. However. if it

& signed and analyzed to prende More "ne lifting yoke assocated with does occur, as discussed above. the sn.eling from direct exposun to N MTC is a specal purpose denm weld and the nngs can support the rn6 anon. conEne the spent fuelin a desi ned to ANSI N14 6 critene to weight of the MSP and MTC.

5 ufe sterege con 6 tion, and prevent ensure that the yoke can safely hft the

3. Comment. One commenter noted W. eases to the ennronment. They are wet MTC contoning the MSB oat of the that tiles at the bottom of 6 VCC could desymed to perform these tasks relytog spent fuel pool and can safely hft the break when the MSB is lowered onto en gssive usat removal and dry MTC and MSB 'o the top of the them.

tonfinement systems without moving VCC.

Response. Dere are numerous pans and with rnmimal reliance on ~

Spec 2fic requirements for hfting ceramic ties arraned on the base of the cuman interventon to safelv fulfill thetr yokes. cables, and lugs have been VCC which sern, as a separator berw*n func*:en for toe term of stcrase. ne idennfied in the Certificate of the flat bottom surface of the MSB and desmns mclude margms of safety under Complieace and SER and an not the parallel surface of the VCC hner to both normal and acudent con &uon to unreviewed safety issues. Put 72 prevent the possibihty of locahzed provide ed6tional esrursnee of requires that, pnor to the use of a cask corrosion Although these tiles ceu!d protecuan far h pubbe hesith and under the Eeneral hcense. the hcensee break, there is a substantial me 1nn of safety the commcri defenes and secunty determine whether activites related to safety to prevent breaker However,if and the environmeet, storage of spent fuel under the pneral some breakap occurs. the tiles w11! s9U bcense involve any unrenewed saferv perform thest functmo of prtrndmg e Annlyons af Public f%m" shsbt gep be* ween the MSB and the quesnons or change to the foolity A A nureer of commenters rmsed technical rpecificouons, as pronded VCC. Although it ts not necessarv. the issues reJanng to ecs1 handhng and the under to CFR 50 59. Imed handling Cerrifices of Comphance has been

,)

w 17952 Federal Retister / Vol. 58, No. 65 / Wednesday. Apnl 7.1993 / Rules and Regulations eusec to include a statement that the temperature is below 0 'F. and that the safety factor of 5 for a tube aga.nst preung procedures for handling the temperature in Michipn and Wisconsm buckhng Because of the conserutae MiB es er the VCC should include the is often below O 'F.

spproach m analyzmg a smgle h.ei anside stian fer reducmg the Response. The purpose of restncimg storsre tube rsther tnan the entire

...eLtood et fractunng the ceramic tiles VSC-24 cask movement to ambient basket. the NRC beheves that a higher

v :muct ! cad.

temperatures above 0 'F is to prevent safety factor would exist fcr the basket

' 4 Ccement. One commenter the possibihty of bntile fracture of the assembly. Thus, the NRC is not n.estoned why tne NRC allows an 80 MSB in the event of a drop accident.

departmg from previous design and un L! u.ght when a drop of over 18 There is a 50 *F margin of safety because licensing cntene.

r.ches may cause enough camage to de MSB matsnal mamtams ductile 8 Comment Some commenters now!

ampr: mise siaelding. Another properties at a test temperature of - 50 that the NRC allowed PSNA to use

mmenter mdicated that the operation

'T If a situsuen for return to the fuel Electne Power Researth bisutute iEPRh c f movmg the VSC-24 cask frorr the handhng buildmg anses while the report NP-4830 in their VSC-24 cask non caui t a.ier across a piece of ambient temperature is below 0 'F, a SAR.but did not allow vendors of rnetsi

• nege reel" to the storage pad icy option would be for the licensee to casks to reference this report in ther wunced dangeraus Ona'commenter determme that the actual MSB matenal S AR's.

so ste ed that 21 the MSB is not temperature is above 0 'F. In that event Response The concept set forth in centered mside the VCC. possible movement of the MSB could be EPRI Report No NP-4830 is to provide amage rould occur to the coaung of the accomplished safely without concern for conssderauon of the cask remforced VCC !mer or the ceramic tiles on the for bnttle fracture. The MSB would concrete beanng pad behaving as a pad bottom of the VCC.

most hkely be above O 'F because of the on an elastic foundation. In previous Fespen:e. The NRC evaluated a heat prodEced by the stored spent fuel.

simctural reviews of cask systems. Se

ossible drop of the cask and has At>other option available to a licensee beanng pad has been very eraN.shed conditions limiting the hft would be not to tuove the MSB until an conservat vely assumed to be infimtely Leght !ct ne VSC-24 cask.These ambient temperature above 0 'F is ngid. The response cf the pad to a an mens meiude a requirement to reached.

dropped or overturned cesk has an

.mpect the cask aRer any tipover or

6. Comment. Some commenters stated influence on the magmtude of the force crep from a height greater than 18 that a cask tipover accident while the the spent fuel support system and

ncnes and the prohibition agam,t VSC is on the pad was not considered, confinement envelope must resist. The mng the VSC-24 cask to a height even though this type of amident was NRC identified vanous issues related to g; eater than 80 inches. The purpose of considered for other casks. Some the details of the concept and its ine 80 mch hft condition is to ensure commenters also noted that drop apphcat:en by the applicant.

hat 1e MSB mamtsins its confinement evaluations of the MSB were performed Rather than relymg on the EPRI cap bihty esen m the event of a drop of for only one orientation, although the report. NRC independently calcu!sted ne VSC-24 cask. The MSB has been

. NRC requires multiple drop onentations the stresses experienced by the MSB des.gned io meet the Amencan Society for other designa.

dunng a drop accident. Based on these cf Mechanical Engmeers (AShE) Boiler Response. A cask tipover accident independent calculations. NRC mnd Pressure Vessel (BatPV) code under was not spectScally performed for the cor. firmed that the design of the MSB 5enme Level D conditions and a drop VSC-24 cask. However. PSNA will provide an ample margin of ss.fety f E3 mches snould only result at most. performed an engineenng analysis of dunng a drop acadent. nerefore. NRC m dentmg of the MSB shell.The cask drops from both vertical and concluded that the design of the MSB

apose of the mspection for any drop honzontal positions which represent was acceptable and that there was

":= a height greater than 18 mches is more severs accidents than a tipover.

reasonable assurance that the 9..uae that the shieldmg is not Therefore. NRC concluded it was not confmement mtegnty will be cmpror.4ed and that any damage is necessary te perform a tipover analysis.

maintamed even if the postulated drop mmecatch identified and repaired.

With mspect to drop onantation the accident does occur.

On-sae transport procedures with MSB was analyzed for both venical and in order to provide additional a tia v equ.pment such as the "bndge honzontal drop orientations.

information on the application of the oH ' descr. bed m the Safety Analysis

7. Comment. One commenter asserted concept of an elast c beanng ped 9-that the desi n of the MSB is such that spent. fuel casks. ti e NRC b%uttated F.epen iS ARI have been reviewed and F

e ccns. sered to be appropnate to the 2t is susceptible to buckling under a contract to conduct atop tests of casks

es:cn. satabie for use and to meet certam off. normal and acc dent from heights m the 18 to 80 inch range safety requirements which are not pan conditions The commenter further This should provide test data that

f the -culations m to CFR pan 72.

mdicated that this is a depanure from would be used to assess the capabihty Tas.b'e damepe to the ceramic tiles was previous spent fuel cask design and of the speanc ccmputational technique, drussed m the response to Comment hcansing cntena which allow no contamed m EPRI NP-4830 to predict

' mber 3 Fmallv, damage to the buckhng of the basket structure.

the behavior of dropped casks.

naimg of the VCC hner would not hase Fesponse. The NRC believes that this Followma this testeg. the NRC will ufen scficance because the liner a commenter refers to the fuel basket and consider the issue of the appbcabihty c t

et a confmement boundarv and does not the MSB shell. The MSB basket the EPRI repon. mcludmg its at ccn nbute stimificantly to shieldmg stnicture was analyzed and the NRC apphca%hty to a postulated drop of a

~.* pnnepal purpose of the VCC hner concluded that buckhng would not be a steel casi on conente pads.

, a provice en mner form for the safety concern as discussed below. The

9. Comment The efiect of a dvr.am.c nn: ete dunng fabncation.

cntical load for buckhng was calculated load factor (DLF) on the MSB was not 5 Ccmment. One commenter for a smgle storage tube and compared considered nor w as it shown to be nr.cated inat if the e were a problem to the actual load under a sertical insigmficant.

w m a VSC-24 casi. it could not be deceleration of 124 g that would result Fesponse. The effect of a DLF w as remosed to ine fuel handhng buildmg from a drop of 80 mches. The results of considered and found to be sagruficant recause that is not allowed when the the analysis mdicate that there is a The apphtant apphed a maximum i

1

sus'""""~

Fedecal Repsese / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wednesday. April 7. 2993 / Rules and Regulations 17953 e

pesmW DIS of 2.0 to the average CertificMe of Compliana,in Section NRC evaluanon documented in section 3ecelereoans actmg on the MSB. As a 12.5. "Maiemum MSB Removable 4.0 of the SER considemd temneran. e n.sult cf using a DIE of 2.0 b Surface Contamination" cxintains ertmnes for both bot and cold deceterauoos were mcreased from 62 g specifications for limiting the amount of condr* ions. Based on this analysis. the o 124 g and 22 g to 44 g roepectively, radioactive cot

• amination permrtted on NRC concludes no breach of the MSB i:r tr,e s ertical and bonsontal b ertemal surface of the MSB. Time confinement bamer or leak age imm the

nectauacs. As noted abovein specifications are conservetrve, and are MSB will occrr.

c:= ment response number 8. althocgh based. in p. on equivalent entene

14. Comment. Some cornmente s NEC staff did not endoese the methods used for tae safe transportation of

- speculated that a cates rophic release cf

. sed by ths vendar so determine these radioective matenal(see 10 CMt radiation may ocent from a possible

.:acs the NRCindependently 71.87(i)l. Hence, compliance with them explosion ceused by spontaneously rencluded that these design loadings are will ensure that off.rrte does hmits of flammable uranrum hydnde m the acceptable.

the NRC"s regulations will be met for presence of orYEen. It is postuietad dat

10. Comment. One commenter normal and o5 normal conditions ahke. the temperature tnside the casi mi! be provided a calculation of the rssults of The general licensee must also use the hot enough to rupture fuel rods wbch a typottencal acod, et involving a cask m accordance with the reactor will. in turn.cause the presence of VSC-24 cas. The conditions of 6 operstmg licer.se and the Certincate of hydrogen to creets uranium hydnde.

typotheucal ecodent weee a cask Compliance. The general licensee is also Response.h NRC does not behese nposar whde the cask was under mpocrsible for cornplyteg wrth other that an explosron inside e storare cesk mumum mternal pressure. The results Commission reguleuens regarding caused by flammable uramum hydnde m6cated that the welds of the MSB raic activity reiseee hmita. Derefore.

in the presence of crygen is credi!e for a culd be overstressed.

potential releases from the MSB when the following reasons. Oxygen Eas :s nM Response. The NRC renwed this combmed with routine releases from the expected to be present because a!! cr.ks calculauon and bued on that review.

reactor should not exceed dose limits at are designed to have an inert concbded the calculauon did not state the site boundary, atmosphere. Further, the formation cf the consequencas of the hypothetscal

12. Comment. Commenters indicated uranium hydnde is not credible due to a:cadect. Most importantly, the size and that casts pla&d close to the shore of the lack of a significant source of conEgurauco of the welds assumed in 12ke Michigan represent a senous threat hydrogen. Finally, all casks are desiped ee calculanon understated the strength to the environment, especially to the so that the internal temperature wd! r.ct f the welds and their abihty to Greet Lakes which have 20 percent of cause the fuel mds to rupture mthstand the hypothetical event. The the world's surfem fresh water.

Therefore, the conditions necessary for stungth of thwe welds, which meet Response. A utility's use of the this scenano to occur would not eiust.

ASME Botter and Pressure Vessel Code VSC-24. for the storage of spent fuel in

15. Comment. N SER states thzt cr:tena, has been thoroughly analyzed cuta et a reactor site, would te have there is no endible chain of events that by the appbcant and the NRC. Although a signi5 cant impact on the environment. could spreed contsmmation from the e casi tpover was not speciEcally This Ending is supported by the NRC MSB. Only air <oolant loss due to perfor=ed for the VSC-24 cask, a safety and environmental evaluations blockage wes considered. Cornme-ters honzontal drop accident more severe for the VSC-24 cask. including the irrdrcated that the SER should else than a t:pover, was analyzed as a apphcant's demoostretion of consider the effect of flooding of the he beun6ng case. nis analyris compliance of the cask with NRC cesk and steam lesion. A concem demonstrated that, under the conditions requtrements. es well as by the 1990 was also e regarding the cf a h:.rontal drop while the MSB is ruisensking on dry cask storoEe and the structuralintegntyof the pads wh::h under maumum internal pressure, the 1964 and 1989 waste con 5dencs may,in the case of Pahsedes, be bui!t ca

• e!ds would not be overstressed promechngs. While the VSC-24 cask is a sand dune eres that shifts.

3 A number of commenters rmsed being approved for use under a general Fesponse.The SER for the VSC-24 usues relatmg to releases of license. it can only be used by a heensee cask did consider the effects of floo6ng r:6occtmryfrom surfoce provided the reactor site parameters as well as air-coolant loss due to cormmmation andleakagefmzn the te g.. sverege ambient tempersture.

blockare of the vents. De analysis resis under normaland occident seismic accelerstions. flood water showed the release of contammanon cen6tions velocary, fires and explosions etc.), are from the extenor surface of the MSB due 11 Comment. Some commentars envelo' ed by the cask design basis as to flooding is possrble but the resultant p

np essed concern that there would be specified in the SAR and SER. Proper contammation would not be stemficant e sms!! release of radioactive use of a cerufied storage cask at any site Steem explosions mvolvmg water pariculates from the MSB exterior (whether nee.r Lake %chigsn. e nver, a contactmE moltec metal are not cre6b,e surface dunng off. normal conditions bay, or an ocean) with site parameeers under dry rpent fuel storage cond.uons and that the radioecuve relasses from that are bounded by the cesk design.

In addition. explosions due tc strem s:crece casis, when combined with would not have e signi5 cant impact on forming under floodme con 6tions n~

mer releases from the reactor, would the environment.

not considered cre6ble due to the fact net-d done hmsts at the reector site

13. Comment. Some commenters that if steem were to be formed. it would t.ouncarv ecoressed concem that extremes m be released non.vrolently thrmign the Fasponse N NRCinterprets this temperatures and humadate would cause vents.

c:mmant to mean thet dunng off-dry tasks to leak.

Wsth respect to the comment on normel con 6tsons there is the potential Nesponse. The VSC-24 cask design structural integnty of the pads. the

!ct release of red 2oect we contaminston was enalyzed for possible effects of certificate of comphance regmres. per hom the ex*enor rurfem of the MSB.

extremes m temperature and humidity 10 CFR 72.212fbl. that written The consecances of any release of These analyses showed no leakege will evaluations be performed by the antaminaoon from the MSB extenor ocrut as a result of temperature or hcensee pnor to cask use to estabhsh

< ur' ace t wNo.ner normal or off-normal) humidity re m.s The ther=:al that task storege pads and areas hase

.s ev aluated m the SAR. However. the analysis pmse~ed in the SAR and the been designed to adequately support ite

e=-

17954 Fed:ral Regista / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wednesday. Apnl 7.1993 / Rults and Regulations cauc load of the stored casks.

72.122(h)(4) which ree ds. "Stor:Fe Chapter 14 of the SER and in Section C:nsequently the structuralintegnty of confinement systems must have the 13.1 of the Ceruficate of Comphance. be the pads would have to be evaluated capabihty for continuous momtonng in required to venfy by a temper 3ture and venSed before the hcensee could a manner such that the licensee will be measurement, the can thermal t.se the VSC-24 at the Palisades site or able to determine when correcuve perfonnance on a da2ly basis to identify at anv site.

action needs to be taken to mamtain safe conditions which threaten to approach 6.' Comment. A number of comments storego conditions." and 10 CFR cask design temperature entena. The related to gaseous releases from dry 72.122[i] and 10 CFR 72.128(a)(1) which caak user will also be required to stcrage cans Commenters asked the require monitontg of systems and conduct a daily visual surveillance of followmg quesuons What happens to components that aJe important to safety the Cad att inletJ and outlets as nseous components of the decay cham? over antiapsted ranges of normal and required by Chapter 14 of the SER and Are they released to the environment? If off normal operauon. Also,one Section 1.3.1 of the Ceruficate of not, is pressure bmldup over time bemg commenter suggested that because the Compliance.

considered? A commenter expressed the VSC-24 cad requires suneillance to While the MSB and VCC us opimon dat cans should have ensure that the vents are not blocked.

considered components important to inda idual raionuchde emission the requirement that the cooling system safety that compnse the VSC-24 can r.omtoneg An issue wu raised about must be a passive system (10 CFR design. they are not considmd the effects of release of krypton-85 72.236(f)) is violated-operating systems in the same sense as

Kr-.85) gas en electnc conditions in the Response. NRC approval of the VSC-spent fuel pool coohng water systems er atmospbere.

24 cad system is not inconsistent mth ventilation systerns which may reqmre Response. The pseous components of 10 CFR 72.122(h)(4). 72.122(i) or other instrumentation and control

• e decay cham are orpected to be 72.128(a)(1). Although the cited sections systems to ensure proper ftmetiomng retamed withm the matnx of the spent of 10 CFR part 72. subpart F. refer to Hence,due to this passive design.

fuel or mthm the fuel rod. In the case "momtonng" or "conunuous temperature momtonng and

-f pmhcle leaks in the fuel rod momtonng." they do not specify the surveilluice acuvides are appropnate aeding.the MSB is designed as a details for paruculu momtonng and sufficient for this des:gn. they secondary confinement buner to retain programs to allow the NRC to require assure ad uste protection of the pubhc gaseous products. Therefore. because no momtonng programs that ue heale an safety, and meet the pseous components are released to the oppropriate for the paruculu storage requirements of $ 72.122 (i).

enuronment. no routme monitonng of system design. The NRC has and will

18. Comment. Semal commemen effluent from the outlet vents is consider contmuous monitonng where required The pnmary reason for it beheves contmuous monitonng is expressed concern related to the inlet requmng the use of ASME section III needed to determme when correcuve and outlet vents, on the VSC-24 cask.

mstead of other standuds is to ensure action needs to be taken. To date. under which ue necessary to allow coolmg of de confinement of fission products.

the general license. NRC has accepted the storage container by natural meuladon. Some commemen also Pressure build-up of gueous contmuous pressure monitonng of the mmponents in the MSB is not tnert behum atmospbers as an mdicator questioned the adequacy of the s:gndicant due to the age of tha fuel and of screptable performance of surveillance requirements for the \\,SC-miesnty of the fuel rod cladding mechanical closure seals for dry spent 24 cask and suggested that electromc howeser. the MSB has been analyzed for fuel storage casks.

conunuous momtonng and recordmg of a hypotheucal condition in which all The NRC does not consider such ur outlet temperatun should be

~

me bel rods rupture. The resulting continuous monitonng for the VSC-24 f* quired on each cask. Specific concerns pressure withm the MSB is neghgible cask double weld esals to be necessary include:

The purpose of mamtaimng an inert because:(1) There are no known long-(a) Vent blockage by bugs, webs, a*me. sphere m the MSB cavity is to term degradauon mechanisms which snow. and ice; ynsure tnat fuel rod claddmg would cause the seal to fail within the (b) Frequency of vent outlet cecracation does not occur thereby design life of the MSB and (2) the surveillance for blockage; prevent.ng gross fuel rod claddmg possibility of corrosion has been (c) Dnve-by or walk-through ruptu e In adiuon to ensunng that included in the design (See SER Section mspection is madequate to otserve new pm ho4e lesas do not develop m 5.3.1). These conditions ensun that the outlet blockage; and me fuel ckd dunng the storage penod.

internal belium atmosphere will remam.

(d) Cntical temperatures associated

'r.e hcensee is responsible for Therefore. an individual continuous wi6 6e VSC should be momtored.

monitormg the environment within the momtonng device for each MSB is not MSB pncr to 2ts openmg to ensure that neceasary. However, the NRC considers Fesponse. The NRC is requmng. as no i.nplanned release of radioacuve that othe'r forms of momtonng casks part of the VSC-24 Certificate of matenal tales place.He amount of Kr-mcludmg penodic surveillance.

Comphance that surveillance and a5 that could be potenually released mspection and survey reqmrements.

measurement of the thermal f cm c y casi sto ege is so small that it and application of preexisting Performance of the casi be conducec w ould not sigmf.cantly affect the radiological environmental momtonng by the licensee on a daily basis. The p hs sa.s or chemistry of the atmospher, programs of part 50 bcensees dunng the hcensee is responsible for estabbshes C A nu.%er of commen:s acre penod of use of the MSB catasters with the specific method of measurement. tra

.*cewed thof focused on momronng.

seal weld closures can adequatelv licensee can measure ite m!et and 5.;n edlance. cnd mspecton actmrses 6atisfy the requirements of to CFR oudet air annulus temperatures. or it

.:ssoc;ored with dry casi srcinge of 72122 (h)(4).

could also measun the MSB su-face spent feel. pomcularly as : hey refore to With respect to the issue of temperature, the VCCinner wall

te USC-N casi mstrumentauon and control systems to temperatum or perform other p Comment Some ccamente s momtor systems wnich are important to appropnote measurements. The methoc smested that. with respect to the VSC-safety (10 CFR 72122 bil. the user of the selected by the bcensee must pronce a 24 cask the NRC 6d not enforte 10 CFR VSC-24 can will. as provided m positive mdication of the approac.ti of

Fed ral Regist:r / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wednaday. Apnl 7.1993 / Rules and Regulations 17955 1

=stenals to cask design teoperature results indicate that the shear and lack of centenng of the MSB mside de entena.

beanng capacties of the concrete VCC. Therefore, no prec2se centenng of In addition. analyses of safety margins surroundmg the air inlet vents (per the MSB innde the VCC is needed.

cf components t=portant to safety show Amencan Conente Inst 2tute (AC)

However, the physical anangement of cat even assuming surveillance were entena 349-85) are not exceeded and no the system restncts lateral mes ement not conducted at the required daily dunage is expected. Therefore. there is and does not allow the MSB to be far f egosney, and both the inlet and outlet no need to inspect vents for damage from center as at is lowered into the vents were blocked for a 30 hour3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br /> penod. followmg use of the hydrauhc rolier VCC.

itsre would still be no loss of safety skid.

24. Comment. One commenter ra. sed f ncuan or any immediate threat to the

21. Comment. The general licenses the concern that the VCC concrete health and safety of the public. This must have spooSc plans for the temperatures do not comply with the conclusien is based on the adiabauc constant and careful monitormg of the AC-349 temperature cratens heatup thermal analysis of the VSG-24 casks and for the safeguardmg of the Response. The NRC has accepted c:sk. which assumes that all vents are waste to prevent catastrophic accidents deviat2ons from the AC-349 Code.

biccied. and no beat is nyected by the or terronsm.

Appendix A.4 for the concrete casi. ne concrete and claddmg Response. In accordance with 10 CFR temperature cntena. However while temperature entens that could be 72.212(b)(5), each reactor hcensee must accepting the deviation the NRC has exceeded under this conservative have e physical secunty organization identified a spec 25ed mammum thermal analysis, assummg complete blockage, and program to detect intrusion into the expansion coef5cient for fine and coarse s:gmfy the onset of very slow protected ama including acts of aggregates in the concrete which allow s degradauon mechanisms. not an terrorism, and to take any cornctive opersuon at higher temperatures. The immment loss of safety funcuen.

acuon. The phyncal secunty program, selection of specific fine and coarse The NRC also agrees with the as well as environmental monitonng aggregates in the concrete prevents comment that visual surveillance of and radiation protection programs for microcracking between the cement and extsnor air inlets and outlets may be each reactor facility, provide the aggregates m the antiopated madequate and may not lead to a necessary monitonng for the casks and temperature range of the VCC. Thus.

pos2tve determmaton of blockage safeguardin6 of the spent fuel. Thus, the deviation from the AC-349 temperature secause the design includes screens licensee will be able to determine when cntena is not a cause for concem and placed over the vents toprevent wildlife corrective action needs to be taken to does not compromise safety.

frcm entenng the VCC. Consequently, maintain safe storsgo conditions to

25. Comment. One commenter the NRC has revised the Certificate of protect the public health and safety.

claimed that NRC has used the Comphance surveillance mqturement to (Also see response to Comment Number unsupported assumption that 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> make the integnty of the screens be part 33 below).

is sufficient time to reach thermal of the visual surveillance. A phyncal D. A number of commenters ruised equilibnum for the irradiated fuel exa=mation of the vent is required ifits technicalissues related to the thermal assemblies (high level radioactive assocated screen shows any evidence of anclysis of the VSC-24 cask and waste) that have been removed from breach.

thermalperformance of the cask under watet storage and sealed in the metal 19 Comment. One commenter normal. off-norrnal. and ocesdent canister.

suggrsted that approval of the VSC-24 conditions.

Re5Ponse. no commenter refers to cask should be denied because the snow

22. Comment. One commenter the time penod allowed for a loaded shield was elimmated and that the questioned whether NRC intends to VSC-24 cask system to reach thermal analysis of air flow of the VSC took it establish 75 'F as a standard ambient equilibnum conditions. For the purpose into considerat2cn.

temperature criteria for all storage casks of thermal equihbrium, the VSC-24 cask Response The snow shield was and expressed concern that this system is considered to be placed in ehmmated because at was not temperature may not be applicable for service when the concrete cask cover censidered effective in resolving the the mabrity of power reactor sites.

plate is installed.

problem of vent blockage by snow. A Response. The NRC does not intend to It should be noted that the Certficate visual surveillance regiarement is establish 75 'F. or other standard of Compliance has been changed to considered more effecuve m addressing ambient condition entenon, for all cask require that the inlet and cutlet a2r

'he inue of vent blockage by snow.The designs. The cask vendor establishes temperatures, for all VSCs placed m Ceruficate of Compliance has been ambient temperature entens on which semce, be measured until the casi revised to a:id a duly surveillance the cash is designed. In the case of the reaches initial thermal equihbnum.

reoutrement. as discuued in Comment VSC-24 cask. PSNA chose 75 'F. Each Furthermore. a daily measurement of

18. which would include checking for reactor licensee can then only use those the thermal perfonnance of the VSC-24 snow blockage dunng penods of snow casks which have design bases that cask is required. Therefore. any accumulauon. In addiuon the inclusion envelop the reactor site ambient reference to assumed 48 hour5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> thermal cf a snow shield m the ongnal design temperatures. For example. if a power equilibnum is covered by the enhanted actuaBy d9 creased a:r flow and reactor site has an average annual surveillance requirements. The 48 heur therefore. its remos al mcreases the ambient temperature greater than 75 'F.

penod was selected to provide e basis Sermal effic2ency of the cask.

then that reactor hcensee cannot use a for basehne measurements. There is no 20 Ccement. Dne commenter cask with a 75 'F ambient deogn safety sigmficance if thermal questoned how the condition of the temperature.

equilibnum is achieved in a shoner or m!et vents is checked for damage after

23. Comment. One commenter longer time.

the hhng arms are msened mio the air questioned how heat transfer for the

26. Comment. One commenter noted inlets for transfer.

VSC-24 cask is affected by the fact that that m chapter 9 of the SER. the NRC Response Lifung the VSC-24 cask there are no provisions for centenns the usins the hydrawhc roller sud. which MSB tnnde the VCC.

staff found it necessary to impose a pre-operational test to venfy the heat evolves mwruon of h! ting arms mto Response. Heat transfer for the VSC-removal capsory of the VSG-24 casi 2e air inlets. has been analyzed. The 24 cask is not significantly affected by system. The commenter claimed that l

1

)

1

17936 Federal Recister / Vol. 58. No. 6S / Wednesday. Apnl 7,1993 / Rules and Regulations is was required because predicted fuel actual temperature will be lower than temperature testmg of the cask mtb a 24 clad temperarums an a mere" 4 'F the calculated tempersture, considering kW loading the hcensee would be abic below their design ettens on a 75 'F uncertalnues, and thervfore this 4 'F to load fuel at lower brmal ratmcs ambient day. It was funber asserted that margin below the fuel clad temperature without the need to provide NRC mth w:tt a predicted fuel clad temperature cntenon is screptable.

separate temperature test data and of 4 'F below design cnteria for the off.

27. Comment. One commenter additional analysis smce the 24 kW heat i

ncrmal condition hmit, even a questioned whether cladding failums loading is a bounding analysis.

< uccessful pre-operational test would would affect the temperature of the MSB However. because the cask vendor has not assure that the design entens is met or the VCC and the hwt removal not provided thermal analyses at lower wthm the bounds of statist 2 cal capacity cf the VSC-24 cask. Another beat loadings, the NRC believes that af t.ncensinty, particularly since the asked why helium was used to 611 the a licensee's Snt fuelloading has a heat cahbranon of their temperature sensing cask. The only helium cooled reactor in load less than 24 kW.the bcensee equipment bas a tolersace of plus or the country. n. St. Vrain, was should conduct both a temperature mmus 1 "F.

operational rnerely 15% of the time.

measurement and a thermal analysis.

Response The NRC has imposed a Response. Fuel claddmg failure is not The purpose of conducung both the test to benchmark the but removal expected to ocrur because the VSC-24 analysis and the measunment is to capacity for the first VSC-24 cask cask is designed to mamtain an inert measure system performance and to placed in-service. However. the 4 'F helium atmosphere inside the MSB to establish baseline data for the orpected morgm stated on page 9.-4 of chapter 9 prevent fuel cladding failure. However.

inlet and outlet temperature difference cf the SER cited by the commenter is fuel cladding failure would neither The Certificate of Compliance hs: been s :ypographical error. The correct affect the tempersture of the MSB or revised to this effect and the word r argin is 24 'F. as stated on page 4-7 VCC nor affect the heet removal "approximately" has been deleted. With c f the SER. This 24 'F margin is the capacity of the VSC-24 cask.The respect to the issue of aruficial thermal mfference between the maximum temperature of the MSB and the VCC loads, the NRC will scrept ahemate heat e.iowable fuel clad temperatun and the depends on the heet genersted by the loads other than spent fuel and the calculated fuel clad temperature.

fuel in the MSB which is not affected Certificate of Comphance has been s<summg an average annual ambient by a fuel cladding failure. In addition.

revised accordingfy. A hcensee could

emperatun of 75 'F for normal best removal capacity of the VSC-24 use such an artificial heet source to test contmucus conditions. For off-normal cask depends on the airflow on the an initial cask at a bounding heat load cenditions tnvolvmg higher ambient outside of the MSB which also is of 24 kW prior to loading fuel.

temperatures, a max 2 mum fuel clad unaffected by fuel conditions inside the

29. Comment. One commenter noted temperature of 708 'F was calculated MSB. Helium was chosen because it is that Page 4-1 of the SER for the VSC-assummg an ambient temperature of inert and it has good host transfer 24 cask states that the applicant will 100 'F. This temperature is 4 'F below charactenstics. The fact that the Ft. St.

remove any cask from service which has a acceptable fuel clad temperature Vrain reactor used helium as a coolant inlets and outlets blocked. It should say cntenon of 712 *F. The NRC ocrepted did not contnbute to its operauonal "or" insteed of "and."

trus margin on the basis of the following problems.

Response. The statement refers to e conservauve factors applied in the off.

28. Comment. One commenter wanted proposal made by the applicant and is r.ormal case analvred in the SAR:

clarification of"approximately 24 kW."

correct as quoted on page 4-1. However.

a The calculation assumes steady when refemng to the heat source loaded the NEC did not accept this proposal state conditions. it would take several into the first MSB for tests conducted by because the applicant did not provide dns of sustained 100 'F ambient the limnase to venfy best removal acceptable evidence that the cask will temperatum to approach the calculated capacity of the VSC system. The be adequately cooled in the event of a bel clad temperature value of 708 'F.

commenter also indicated that the full blockage of either allinlets or b The fuel temperature entenon is Certificate of Compliancs is overly outlets. Sections 1.3.1 and 1.3.4 of the based en pmvenuon of fuel failures due restnctive in requiring a 24 kW beat Certificate of Comphance require that a to long-term degrodauen mechanisms.

load for the first cask because some VCC be removed from service whenever Shon term vansuons in the average tsactors do not have spent fuel either all inlets or all outlets are found tempersture. such as when the daily assemblies which could make up the 24 to have blockage for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> and the summer everage temperatures exceed 85 kW host load.The commenter concrete temperature entenon of 350 'T

'F have no effect on the long term mcommended that the requirement be has been exceeded. This conclusion is decation mechanisms that affect the changed to require that the first cask be also stated on page 4-1 of the SER.

h.el cladina Therefore.the annual loaded with a hast load as high as

30. Comment. One commenter noted as erase 75 'F temperature would be a practicable (but not to exceed 24 kW) to that Table 4.1-1 of the November 1991 mre reahstic condition to use in the ven the calculated heat removal SAR for the VSC-24 cask fails to state cdculauon than the 100 'F temperature cape shty. Another commenter asked what the temperature difference would actually used m the calculauon.

why not test the cask with arufical be if allinlets were blocked over a lonp

c. Heat conducten in the axial thermalloads rather than with spent term.

d.mcuon is treated conservatively fuel.

Re5Ponse. The commenter is cormet.

because httle cmdst is taken for beat Response.The intent of the language.

However. a temperature cntenon of ransfer out of the encs of the MSB

'approomately 24 kW" was to provide 350 *F has been estabbshed for the canister.

some flexibihty to a potennal user concrete cask. Calculations mdicate that d h.el clad temperatum is treated because there is no way to ensure that a temperature of 350 'F could be tenservauvely because a peak heat the first fuel placed in the cask will reached after 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br /> if either all inlets uneranon rate rather than an average have a host load of exactly 24 kW that or all outlets are blocked. lf this

.as used m the calculabon.

was used in the thermal analysis. The situation is identified, the hcensee must These censervauve factors used in the purpose of the test is to measure the demonstrate that scrident temperature unculation of fuel cied temperatures cask performance and estabbsh baseline cntens have not been exceeded or is

made reasonable assurance that the data. Followmg losdmg and recuired to take the cask out of service.

fed;ra] Regist:r / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wednesday. April 7.1993 / Rules and R:gulations 17957

=

cc no:es that reaching 350 'F is not plan was required. They also stated that and secunty requirements for an ISFSI g: esafe con 6 ton with respect to the there is a lack of contmgency plannmg located withm the owner controlled cceamment mtegnty of the MSB or the for catastrophic events. They noted area of a hcensed power reactor site.

=

3.e.,d ful Rather it is a cntenon for those events could mclude but would Section 72.212(b)(5) requires that the nacing wLether to take the VCC out of not be hmited to:

spent fuelin the ISFSI be pmtected semce na acton is highly

a. Direct or indirect lightning stnkes agamst the design basis threat for censen sta e. smce only the onset of on the casks; radiological ubotage usmg provisions ury sica degradation occurs if the

b. Plane crash into the casks; and requirements comparable to those centree temperature reaches 350 *F. As

c. Sabotage; applicable for other spent fuel at the 1: cussed below. tn response to

d. Eartbquakes; assocated reactor subrect to certam Ccement Number 31. a conservative

e. Ftre; and additional cend tions and exceptions aiabauc heatup analysis determmed

f. Emergency planning for cask desenbed m to CFR 72.212. Each utihty tast it would take 7 days to reach malfuncuona.

hcensed to have an ISTS! at its reactor unaccsptable fuel clad temperatures The NRC considers that witnin this t2me A commenter wanted the utility to site is required to develop secunty piens notify either state or local ovemment and install a secanty system that f sme.tte beensee s enhanced daily surveillance program. which must before loading casts to ma e sure local Pmvides high assurance egamst services were aware and would know unauthonzed acuviueis which could mciude a component that venties the the mal performance of the cask, would how to respond if necessary under the constime an unmasonable nsk to the identfy the blockage and allow emergency plan.

Pubhc health and safety.The secunty R

so N Code of Fhl systems at an ISFSI and its assoaated suf5cient time for necessary corrective acuens to be taken.

Regulation.10 CFR pans 50 and 72 mector am similar m design features to

31. Comment. One commenter requires that nuclear plant structures.

ensure the detection and assessment of mic:ted that the sefety evaluation for systems and components important to unauthorized activities. All alarm ce t:pover of the \\ CC only considered safety shall be desiS"ed and annunastions at the ISFSI are a n d amic monitored by the secunty alum stations tue structural aspects of the acadent j'p y[r t at the mactor site. Response to mirusion and ignomd the thermal consequences.

The issue ra: sed was that the 5 SCr24 dnven missiles.that may result from is required. Each ISFSI is penodically cask uniqueiy mquires a vertical events and conditions outside the inspected by NRC and annually audited en:ntanon to edequately remove heat nuclear power unit. This includes the by the bcensee to ensure that the and that heat removalin the honzontal effects of possible airplane crashes.

secunty systems an operstmg within confipracon is degreded even if all The bcensee's site evaluation for a thett design hmits. He vah6ty of the vcets es unblockeit wbich should not nuctsar plant also considers the effect of threat is contmually reviewed. with a be assumed _

nearby transportation and military fonnel evaluation every six months by the NRC.

Besponse Thermal consequencas of e activities. A licensee proposing to use An adequate evacuation plan exists VSC-24 casi tipover were considered the VSC-24 cask is required to evaluate for the use of cerufied casks because cf and ee bounded by the adiabatic beat.

and verify that the SER for the facility the fact that the existmg reactor up analysis performed for the cask.

encompasses the design basis analysis emergency plan covers the entire site In Aiasaut haat-up is not affected by perfonned for the VSG-24 or any addition. contmgency plannmg for tne enentauon. either honzontal or vertical. cemfied cask. Generally, a cask's events desenbed above exists because The a6abanc analysis determined that inherent design will withstand tornado these events am covered within the it would take approumately seven days missiles and other design loads and emergency plans of the reactor faahties to reach unacceptab!e fuel clad thus, also provides protection against which will use the cask. In accordance temperatures The NRC considers that the collision forces imposed by bght with to CFR 72.212(b). the reactor wit $m this umeframe the hcensee general syistion aircraft (i.e. 1500-2000 licensee must review the emerFency would tale necessary corrective actions pounds) which constitute the maiority ple.n to ensure it provides adequate' to return the cask to an upnght posinen. of aircraft in operation today. NUREG-protection. The bcensee's emergency

32. Comment. One commenter stated 0800. Section 3.5.1.6 " Standard Review plan provides for responsive action if an that an anah sis based on Diffusion Plan for Light Water Reactors", contains event has happenend which has the Ccntrol:ec Cavity Growth (DCCG) has methods and acceptance cntena for possibihty of castmg an emersency or baen tte onlv method accepted by the determinmg if the probability of an after an actual emergency has 6ccured.

NRC to determme the mammum acadent mvolving larEer aircraft (both Through communications between the aSewable fuel claddeg temperature.

mihtary and civihan) exceeds the utihty and govemments, the centents cf

~ne commemer h.rther stated that it acceptable entenon. It is incumbent the emergency plan and the actions to was not appeent that en analysis based upon the licensee to determme whether be executed by each entity for vanous cn DCCG na: been performed in or not the reactor site parameters are situations are understood. In edition, euhatma macm:.m claddmg enveloped by the cask design basis as the utihty is required to conduct a N mpera:ure fcr the VSC-24 cask.

required by 10 CFR 72.212fb)(3) This penodic emergency exerase ms cives 1 espctm The NRC eg tes that DCCG woula mclude an evaluanon the unhty and government agencs s a:!

.s tne only cu ent method acceptable to demonstratmg that the requirements of

34. Ccmment One commenter sta ed ne NRC to deermme maumum 5 72106 have been met.

that there was no contmgency for slowab:e tal clad temperature The NRC reviewed potennel issues related acadents except to reload the spent f al VSC-24 casi wes evaluated by this to possible radiological sabotage of back mto the coolmg pool whmn ma,v mehod See Scion 5 3.3 of the SER storage casks at reactor site mdependent not be possible due to lati of poci E A nu ter of ccmmenters expressed spent fuel storage instalianons (ISFSIs) storage space or impact en the spent concem :bour eme gency plannmg ond m the 1990 ruiemaimg that added fuel due to the accident.

m;.erse tc conrerencies subparts K and L to 10 CFR part 72 (55 Response. Because of the dese 33 Cuent Some commenters FR 291811 NRC regulations m 10 CTR features as well as the procedures and up eue ccncem that no esact.auen pan 72 estabhsh physical protecton requirements 6scussed eisewnere m

i

~'

17958 Federal Register / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wednesday. April 7,1993 / Rules and Regulations this response and b anociated safety commenten stated that b VSC-24 had systems currently in opention. and analysis, the hkelihood of an seddent not been twted to the full range of during h construcuon of the first five occurnng which will require removal of chmatic conditions.

casks that are expected to be placed in de spent fuel from b cask is very Response. Although the volume of memco. Anohr queston was raned s nail. However. even if such an dets tnat is available to support pointing out that the vendor did not use ur.hkely acadeot ocrurs.h cask certi5 cation of the VSC-24 cask does weld inspectors quah5ed/ceru5ed to desip is required to have capabihty to not include results of full scale tests, the Amencan Weld Soaety D.1.1.

permit retneval. (10 CFR 72.122(1)).

available data is more than suf5cient to Response.N NRC ensures NRC does not requin a licensee to show that the use of the VSC-24 cask by compliance with 10 CFR 72.236 (il and namton a reserve capability in the a heensee will not placs power plant (kl through inspections, and ensures spant fuel pool. Many bcznsees may do workers, the pubhc. or the environment comphance with to CFR 72.236 (1) and 4

so. however. and they would. therefore. at any undue nsk. Also the crinditions (m) through h cask spproval process have the option of retuming the fuel to of use for the VSC-24 cask in the This process willidenufy different areas toe poolin the unhkely event of an Certi5cate of Comphance ensure that may need correcuen but that is the accident requinng removal of fuel from edequate protocuen of the workera, the purpose of an inspecuon program. If a Be cask. In addiuon, licensees will have public, and the ennronment. Further, violation of b requtrements is other opuons available to cover this the VSC-24 cuk has been dwiped and detectsid, the NRC can impose nalties.

unhkely contingency including will be fabncated to well estabhshed or even stop work. N NRC es note

emporary storsgo in a spare storage critens of the ASME BAFV and AC of the fact that problems noted by the cast or use of an ex$ sting certi5ed codes. In addition. it uses construction commenters were identified as a result transportanon cask.1.icensees would matenals which have well known and of NRC's inspecuon program dunng the F ave to consider these, and ohr documented propernes to provide the construction of spectSc cuks. This available options. in the unlikely event necessary structural strength and experience reemphasiass the need for an acadent occurs requinng removal of radiation shielding to meet tory close and continuing quality the fuel.

requirements. While the NRC not rurvetilance under vendor and user QA F Other comments which do not rehed on testing of 6 VSC-17 cuk (a programs dunng all VSC-24 and other spec fscollyfit those coregones above smaller version of the VSC-24 cask cask construction ocuvities. no NRC 5/ low below. These comments deel wrth design) for approval of the VSC-24 cuk, will continue to conduct the inspecuens a trood range of other technical and the VSC-17 cuk has been tested by of construction actinues in acrordance proceduralissues.

DOE at its Idaho National Engmoenng with NRC's inspecuan Procedures in

35. Comment. There are outstanding laboratory. h report "Performancs conjunction with vendor's quahty safety issues that the NRC arpects to Testing and Analysis of the VSC-17 assurancs (QAl program, spea 5 cations.

resolve m the fint test.

Ventilated Concrete Cask," EPRI TR-drawings, etc. to ensure quality work.

Respense. The NRC SER sddresses all 100305, dated May 1992, concluded that As to the speafic pomt of the sipi5 cant safety issuw. and there are b VSC-17 cuk can be safely used at quahfication of welds and inspectors, no outstandmg safety issues about the reactor sites. While b VSC-24 cask the NRC notes that the welds referenced VSC-24 cask that rema2n unnsolved.

approval does not rely on the VSC-17 were not structural welds and. as Accordmgly, the fint test does not cask. the designs are similar and many allowed by the vendor's fabncation

.nvolve any safety issue. Its purpose.

parallels in design and function can be specScauons, do not have to be rather. is to benchmara the best removal drawn. DOE testing of the VSC-17 qualified to the same extent as a capability of the VSC-24 cask.

demonstrates that ventilated storage structural weld.

36. Comment. One commenter e.sked cask technology can provide safe storage

40. Comment. Concem was orpressed that a requirement to submit a report to of spent fuel. Thus in new of the that the maiasurement of actual me NRC withm 15 days of the test and above, although the commenter's effectiveness of a technology in eraManon of the first cask and pnor to observation that the VSC-24 had not delivenng stated requirements must be construcuon of the second caak be been fully tested under climatic demonstrated empincally, and that the added to the VSG-24 cask Cernficate of conditions is technically conect. the NRC has not demonstrated the goal of Comphance Also the report and cuk has been designed for ambient this technology. defined screptance

~

subsequent NRC renew should be temperature extremes from - 40 'F to cntena or speaSed how comphancs is placed in NRC's Pubhc Dcrument

+100 'F and meets the ASME and AG demonstrated. Some commenters also Room.

requiremente.

exproued concern that the review of the Fesponse. A letter report summanzing

38. Comment. One commenter noted concrete cask was not done at the same the results of the thermal test and that Consumers Power does not have a level as that performed for metal casks evaluauon of the first cuk placed in plan to remove spent fuel stored under and that no independent cornputer sernce will be submitted to the NRC general license from the reactor site as analyses were performed for the design and placed in the Public Document required by 10 CFR 72.218.

event review. Some commenters noted Room The hcense may. at their own Response. The licensee is not required that the renew requires more than financal nsk, fabncate addibonal casks to have a plan to remove spent fuel bmited computer models.

pnor to usme the first cuk. If the first stored on site under the general license Response. For the issue of acceptance un does not perform as specified. the until an applicauon to terminate the cntens the NRC has established NRC would prevent une of the other reactor operating license is submitted to speafic requirements m to CFR part 72 cads or mod 2fy condit ons on how they the NRC. This reqmrement is found in that must be met m order to obtam a could be used.

10 CFR 72.21B(b) and to CFR 50.54(bb). Ceruficate of Comphance for a casa. The 37 Comment. It is unacceptable from

39. Comment. One commenter noted details of the renew and Lt.ci Sr the a pubhc health and safety standpoint to that the NRC does not speafically NRC concluamg that the cask meets the t oncuct the first full scale test of a VSG-require mspections egemst to CFR requirements of 10 CFR part 72 are 24 un at a tsactor site because it places 72 236hNml. Quesuons were raised pronded m the SER. The goal of dry tne power plant workers. the puohc.

renrdmg quahty assurance problems cask storage technology is to store spent anc the ennronment et nsk. Two encountered dunng the mspecuon of fuel safely. nat goal. and the

Federal Rarterer / Vol. 58, No. 65 / Wehiry. Apr0 7.1950 / Rules and Regulations 17959 meness of the tarb.rdogy, concrete module desysms as tha anal have confidence m the analyses wb><h

-.,iousiv has beer 2 demonstrated satpart K rule:

a.rs dorse or if the deoen rehes en bn,sincadv and expsu=actally.

A mrior recson ttst these nationally rocvgmand codes and pferect cua desgns may rgtare systems le g. NUHOM3: MoZet %t semge 8t8'edards Testmg se destruct >cn is en ar Vaun Dry c.asemat types cf EnglyJas to Skwel eincti are beang tunandured tw tt,e option that can be used te confirm menstruts taetr sahty, sad tharskwi n===inuca be use undar a punirsl 6 design adequecy. However. destructve s ra szt rsview methods imay be ar* not beme appmed at tam t=u a tw tests of an entire casir are not necessarv 3rcrr.ste to rasch that emch 6on. b 1"'y home n=rments tw aan eepsacam en e came tbe laval of ser:sw perkrmed

' * 'M P'*"*' ' d' *"* 8"S "

to evaluate e design wben other nr.n-N

• ** M

• destrucuve swees er dest aeti,e testmg cf

, est neeoed to pruride assa rancz of

'$'P'E' "PP the cornponewes will provide the

.3equce pretecaors of tbs pu.tu hmkh necessary rnlarwet>on to ersluste a g m.

Maremer, the NPRM iar.luded the design.

4: Cercert Scme cocmenter, staterneot that "&t)be Coe,== mon has 4 3. C a Scene ctmmenters c.a.2.c t:nat ps.rt 72 subpart K was evaluated ard appmwed. im speaEc expreseed cemcorns that fuel hanc;ir g crpraLy tmeeded to appiy to meul br

.as twoad ander 10 CDL pen 72 could be ur#v less than ideal ca su oniv. Caccrete cask syrtams were other types of dry storage moduW (and cendit>or.s and that storece could be r.ct ecetresoco m the ang:nel thee methods may be approved m b under barsh environmental condit:oris

~

watog.

future for use ausser a poneral hcecee."

Sites whors the VSC-24 cask is Arspone As dacussed besow. both 54 FR 19382. It also aosed that proposed for use would erpenence ;ew me laap. age and history of subpet K

"(s)torage cada cartsEad a the futur*

winter tem etures. f eeze-thew cvcies.

scow ther it oppim to any NRC.

will be rout 2neiy ma4=ri to the ketrag ta high hu

'tv. and menne conditions esproved dry caa secrege system 5 72.214 throug ruk-rv Corecern woe 'also exp eswd that hesh sc.uda.g conce<e cads systans. and procedures." 54 FR 193ac.

envimnmental conditions and demqe

== mantes a.rs tharsfore matuaa m These stummems cabecively shc" ta the MSB protecuve toenng will

'ne.r v.ew that a wu miendeo for metal the Commtsaaeo Scahy anv:uorn.d degrade the conearners u e resuit of U

asu m!v.

the possibihty of ce rulecneung b e, corrosion, ernbnttlemect. cracks. fat:gue N

Subpart K appbes "to caska appreved the prcodce NRC is now tesing) to add and or.her eging efforts which w~uld

er tee prtmsions of tha pan" w bacn concrete stcrage systsers to the h el aSect the abihty of the cesk to survue

rdudas casks approved by NRC undar approved spect Esel storage cask '

over extended penods.

10 CFR pan 72. subpan L Subpan L subput K. Consequently crocrete Response. Handhng of fuel and b

= tams NRC's approval conit,ons "for s:crage systems can be "r=4 = appmnd loechng of the cesk is performed ur. der h

NRC spent heel storage casu deegns" under the prtmsaans of this part" kr well control)ed condrtions m the j,

and would mclude coccete casas.

purposes of part 72. subpart K if. for reectoc's fuel bandling bmlding usi~g None of the approsal condiuons m cumpla they are not dependent cm written procedures deve)oped in j

s.1;ct L requires that the cask must site-specinc parsmessrs and therslocs do accordance with the reactor epers mg ae a r.etel cask design.

not requirs site-specshc spprtmls and if license. The VSG-24 system has been Adiuor. ally trare is mformuien en they conform to the approvaJ conditions evaluated for the possible effects cf Cncree storage technolopes m the of subpart L harsh envrrenmentel cend ' tons and the sut;an K rulemamg record that wodd Fmally.11 is notewcrthy that the MSB has been evaluated for the noss1;c ret support bmitmg it only to meal Den-cn adopted subparts E and L effects of cor eston due to humE and cuts Spec 5cally. & Cocauss>oo's for the axpress purpose elimplementmg manne environmental cond:trens As a nc*.ne of prepoe.ed rdetodmg (NPRM) certa.tn intenm stor:gre premssons cJ the result of the corroinon analysis of the F r subcan K refmaced the Canuk s'

.W-f a.=r Wane Pobey Ac of 19t2 that.

MSB. the NRC found the design t

e cf ' ecnc ete cans tahed siks" m significantly, a.re not h. uted to metal acceptable with the ccmsideretron of cesc. bag "the knowledge and cazis. 54 nt tu?9 (May 5.1989). b locahzed corrosion mechamrms b e.

npenence of d v spect fuel storne tn partscslar the Act astbortsed the pattmg. stress correston crack 2ag nncve rasu " 54 FR 133M 80 (May Ccm:mtssica to approve by rule "oce or crevice corrosion and galvanic 5 Iml The preposed rr.je s!.so more Isrcrsge) technologies" for use at corrosion) es weil es general corresen enced DOCS dmionstrataan of dry reactor sites. (Sec. 21%) (4 2 U.S C.

Localized corrosive attack on the MSE crate m sealed storage casks (SSC) 10198(a)). The Act also directed the surfaces is mmimited by choice of h:ct it descnbad u "an above-ground. Commission to establish procedures for marenals and design features such as "eevLr:ed remforord conerste cylmder the licznsing of "any technclogy" the wramic tiles b-tween the VCC Lner

~ usi " Id Fu:.ter. :t ated expenencs approved by the Comrmssicm under and the bottom rurface of the MSS coned f em spent fuel storene m section 218 (Soc.133 (42 U S C.

Furthermore, the NRC allcws no creit s'aiess s:eei camsters srcred inside 5 101531). Derefore. because the Act's for the ettnbutes of the pect.

arcre'e moeales at the H.B. Robinson provisions are not hrruted only to me+al Asnne issues stinbuted to fat:r.re Er sae * * *

'Id. If the Cornmission storere cask dasigns. it would be the MSB were evaluated eccorder to

.cd.ntended to hm t subpart K to metal mconsistent with the Commrssion s the ASME BAFV Code. Sartion PI ene

~

mas a wendd not have meluded dets purpm.e to hmit the application of it met 6cceptable standuds "cm c$cr dry store 9e sechnolones in subpans K and L to such desa;ns Temperature e strernes, such as 'mre-

'te raccrd suppertria its scnon' 42, Comment. One comrnenter thew cycles wh:ch cust m the Creet t

Altteue the Cc::rimss>on tas rme requested the p oceedirig be smpped 1A es re;non. wm consicered m tne Fres mus!y arprorud concrete storsae until the NRC revises all reg ! story evaluation c4 the VSC-:4 cast s) stems f or cans) teder subput L. :t regmrernents pertnimng to tte s*orere ef Accorine to the condtnons for casa opress:v non,d auct sys: ems might be high. level waste and spent fuel to use. ttre user cf the VSC-:4 system wi r

epproved (and therstry ined in require test:ng procedu es w+nch perferrn sne-spacific ansiyses to mnh-uprt K) m the futurs_ b ps ticulu.

mclude testme to destructen that the terepersture crn:htions ce U~m:smc aave the idlowmg Response De NRC does not reqmre assumed in the aneirs:s boua.d the i

t !

e u p.cza'an f;e mot approvitre czna m testmg to dastruction or other *evrs rf we tendrtrtrrs cosung et the s-te 1,

k L

O U960 Fed:ral Rcgist:r / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wedn:sday. April 7.1993 / Rules and Regulations The possibility of MTC and MSB the radioactive fuelloaded into the futures" and the language wh.ich the c acks was addressed as a pan of ferntic MSB. However, an additional margm of NRC uses in Table 1-1. Charactenste.s matenal considerations. Based on safety is provided because: (1) The of Spent Fuel to be Stored m the VSC-c.adence provided in ANSI N14.6 and welded pint is a double weld;(2) the 24 System. refernng to Fuel Claddmg n NUREG CR-1815 the NRC established weld joint has been analyzed according "2;ircaloy clad fuel with no knowTi or test end operaung hmits for the MTC to ASME Section III cntens for allload suspected gross cladding failures?

and tne MSB to preclude the possibihty conditions including accidental drop; Response. The NRC agrees that there cf bnttle fracture.

(3) the pressure inande the canister is an inconsistencv. Acceptabihty is F.nally. the VCC is designed and dunng normal storage operations is based on r.ircaloy clad fuel with no fdr.cated to Amencan Coocrete approximately atmospheinc, resulting in known or suspected pots claddma Ir. cute Code requirements which very low stress intensiues; and (4) the failuras. Section 1.2.1 of the Cert.ficate uns.dar durabihty under extreme confinement integnty is established by of Comphance has bean rened to con 6nons for extended penods. The ASME code test procedures, which "speci'y no known or suspected p ss c esk is also subrect to annual visual mclude dye penetrant testng of the root cladding failures." The intent of this surface mspections for chippmg.

and cover welds of both the mner sad spec 15 cation is to rely on the claddmg

+

spalhng. or other surface defects. Any outer welds. In addition. the NRC is to safely confine the UO: fuel mat =nal surface defects found can be easily requinng testing for bellum leaks pnor within the rods to preclude operational i

ccrrected. The fluence of the neutron to the placmg of the MSB in storage.

safety problems dunng its removal f om f:ux withm the spent fuelis Sve orders

46. Comment. A number of storage. Fuel cladding with pin hole of magnitude less than the fluence commenters questioned the lack of leaks is still capable of confinmg the encountered withm an operating transportabihty of casks and the fuel e.nd therefore is acceptable for reactor, and therefore embnttlement of apparent noncompliance with the storage. In addition the inen atmosphere ine MSB is not of concern.

requirement of to CFR 72.236(m) and fuel clad initial temperatures 44 Comment. A commenter asked Several commenters expressed concern provide assurance that the cladding 61 i

how the NRC will correct the problem that the VSC-24 cask is not compatible be protected dunng storage egamst w hen something goes wrong with the with transponation requirements.

degradation that leads to gross ruptu e VSC-24 cask In the event of a tipover Several commenters questioned bow the

48. Comment. Commenters stated 14 cr orop of a losded VCC.the commenter spent fuel will be transported to a there is no evidence that PSN beheves the hcensee should be required Federal Repository and what will be the considered the effects of wo st case to report the inadent to the NRC withm additional handling cost.

tolerance combinations in the structural 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and the NRC. rather than the Response. These casks are currently analysis.

hcenwe. should determine whether the approved for storage of spent fuel.not Response. There are several genenc MSB and/or the VCC should be reloaded off-site transportation. Therefore.there areas where improper tolerancs fer spent fuel storage.

is no need for the VSG-24 cask to be combinations could jeopardize the Fesponse. The hcensee is responsible compatible with transportatmn structural integnty of a design. These for correctmg problems when they requirements. These casks are only are n are:

occur. The NRC is responsible for moved between the fuel handling (1) Over-tolerance of weight which ensunng that the hcensee takes building and the storage pad at the site could result in unallowable stress lese:s apprepnate corrective action. These where the fuel will be stored. Although for some components:

u!es reflect eusting regulatory practice 10 CFR 72.236(m) states. "To the extent (2) Improper tolerances for dynamic and procedure. The regulations and practicable in the design of storage pans such as in machinery which could CeniScate of Compliance identify casks. consideration should be given to result in mterference and failure:

<peafic events and conditions where compatibility with removal of the stored (3) Improper tolerance for fuel ee hoensee would have to notify the spent fuel from a reactor site.

positionmg in the basket:

NRC.

transponation, and ultimate disposition (4) Improper tolerances of parts of an in actordance with 10 07 72116(a) by the Department of Energy " there is assembly which could lead to induced

'te hcensee is required to report cases no requirement that the storage cask sinsses from en interference fit or the

.nvolvmg any defect as a result of a itself be transportable off site. If the cask converse situation. i.e.. loose tolerances pover or a drop to the NRC withm 4 vendor wants to have its cask used for which could lead to an ill-defined load ncurs The bcensee would also have to the transponstion of spent fuel. it would path; and esWet and evaluate the MSB af.er any have to obtam a transportation (5) Improper tolerances which mght npover or drop of 18 mches or higher.

Certificate of Comphance issued by the cause a heat conduction path to eust or Based on that evaluation.the hcensee.

NRC under 10 CFR part 71.

not cost.

not be NRC. would be responsible for The mechanism for transporting the The NRC has reviewed and venfied cetermmmc contmuod use of that cask spent fuel from a reactor site to a that tolerances specified in the NRC's responsibihtv is to monitor and Federal Repository is unknown at this application would prohibit a weght merwe the hcensee s activities NRC time. However. it 'could be by truck. rail, which is above the load used in the has. howes er, the authenty to order the barge, or some combmatmn. Also, the calculation package The NRC also anwe to cease use of a cisk. if that han'dhng costs are unknown smco DOE reviewed speafied dimensionma.

wem determmed to be necessarv.

competibihty requirements are not which. when followed as required. wd!

45 Comment. One commente'r stated known e,nd rnulatory requirements at prohibit mterference and failure of the time cf tra' sfer could be different.

dynamic parts such u mathmerv or f.e, mat the double seal welds at the top of n

't.e MSB do not comply with the ASME

47. Comment. One commenter positwnmg in the basket. The NRC Code.Section III. Subs' cuon NC.

pomted oat the NRC mdicates that the reuewed the vendor's calculations to e

Fesponse. The double seal welds et analyses presented m the SAR are assure that the loeds which were ne top of the MSB meet all of the ASME " based on non-consohdated. 2.ircaloy-analyzed and best conduction paths requ.rements except the volumetnc clad fuel with no claddmg failures /

account for the range of tolerances For mspection requirement This mspection Please clanfv whether there eusts an these reasons. the NRC has concluced

s not possible due to the presence of mconsistency between "no claddmg ist tolerance combmations are

O Federal Nt / Vol 58. No. 65 / Wedaeedey. April 7,1993 / Rules and Regulations 17961

C

.g.ory addroened for the vendor's to produca assu6h bcihng for opcmurn wt % Uns in h spare feel pool ware

,.pd and the-mal analysts.

moderaboa That fore.NHC weald pieced La the MSB.

49. Cocunent. A mmmenter tn6cated accept a y of 0.9E for any cash Respense. The NRC e grees ht the cat is v5C44 wu exemptM imm genencally for than amant casa. but a borsnspa + ance to the certt5cate of j

o gushed cladding temperature y of o.g5 would apply otherwam. m Comphance for b VSC-24 casi may be 2

-tzra fx short term nortnel condition coo 6ucas of surt ar cnticahry, end h rertnct2ve m baron spect5 cation is eseou.as wbch the marimum fuel expenments that provide that consastaat wah b ma.xmum aRowable i

.ad6c; temperature hmet is excmeded inJcrimsuon can be end have been uranium ennchment (4.2 mt%). hased n as smch as 170 'F.

measured with a high degree of on the citicahty analpis presented m 3espc.me. The VSC-24 has not been accuracy, smco b 19Mrs b age of the SAR.The Certd.cate of Cc@am mePted from a short tar:s tampwature the chta is not angoiLcant. lt is desirable speafication far bcran concentranon m t.::ut for fuel clading. In compartne the that the h=uhk arperuzents water is a bounding conditmn wluch s::on-tarm and long-tean thertaal represent the sys arm under walua. tion was chosen to hmit reliancs on tvdroubt evaluauoc shown in Table as c.lessly as pasaAta m features or administrative controls to determme the 4 t-1 of the SAR the short-tana parameters tha.t are important to this proper required boron concentrauon for temperature will tr.csed the long.nerm purpose are h fuel compostban and each cask loading, A method hke inat temperature by as much as 170 'F. This ennchment. b geomwtry of h fuel proposed by the comraenter. to h.per ta==ratum however, is u a,j.iA rW h=a= and petch, determme the boron concentration y

acmp.able dunng the short-tors 2 whil*

clachitng type. and any asutren required, based on the mammum iniua1 2e Lai ta dned pnar to Elling h MSB absorbers an the ncmity of the fuel pma. Um enrichment of fuel at each reactor with c2 inert ps,s (beliurnl. we;d seahng Tbm parammus asust be propdy site, could be considered as a future the h&SB. and Enal placement of he consdared in the processing of nucles amendment to the Cemficate of t

MSB m the cask for intenm storage. b cmse secuoos used in enticabty Cephance.

NRC conserveuvely essumed that a2.r analysis so thet the h=.ehmek

52. Comment Some commentns was present dunng the drun-down and

,xp,'nments are used to detsruuna a mggested that the NRC should consicer crv-out penods and calculated th*

method b.na, or spiemstic error that limrtmg the cark storege nme and endsuon rate.W mnimum length of Lel exidatmo for deler!sve fuel was may result from the partcular set of expressed concem that ensk storere nuc!ser cross maren data that are used, c eld become permanent if the DOE dewr:nmed. The cladding stnun was or from b methods used to p-the mrght not eccept ftrei as they are esumated to be lema than 1 percant aou mcm h h Mod Mu is required to do. Commenters also noted

~?.erefore no defecs extecsson or fuel detenmand for b pe.rucular fws!

est se E requirement thet cask powdenng is anucipated. N abort viebili be evahiated for "et leest" 20 term mcreased tamparature is desirab,e p

, g #%, g io ecsum removal of moisture.

insecutrve to the macrocopic geometry I'"". on mm. in

. guarantee s

safety m the apparentiv hkely event the g * 'I5**

Fellowing dry-out and helium

~

casks remain years or ilecedes beyond mtroducuon. the temperature will drop ha is is not necessary est the the ongme.) entended durstion.

below h long term Imut.

gross or snacroaccpic Reornetry of b Response. By approval of the

.0. Comment. Some of the benchmark arperunsats be slmtlar to Ceru5cate of Comphance. the NRC has commenters tndicated that the SER fo, the VSC design as long as the method limited the cask storare ume to 20 vears.

1e VSC-24 cask allows L of 0.98 and bias has been dete mined ice th*

After the 20-year panod. the ceruficate i

tr.at tbs deviates from the normally appropnets fuel parmanesers. h BAW can be renewd w>th each renewel i

acceptsd h=ut of 0.95 specSed in NRC cntical expenments have been widsly panod not to exceed 20 yeavs. upon Rendatorv Guide 1.13. Proposed used for this purpose since they were demonstration of contmued protecuan a

Rehsion :i. " Spent Fuel Storage Facihty Performed usmg bght water reactnr fuel of the pubhc health and safeky and the Desum Essis." The commenter assemblies stan21ar to those used to environment. In the event that safe mdicated that NRC should allow other many light water tsactors.

storage of spent fuelin a particular cask undors to modify thetr cask to L of

51. Comment. One commenter canam be demons:reted beyond 20 0 95 One commenter expressed concurrn indicated that the Cert 2ficate of years, an altemate means of storere will that the benchmuk expenments that Comphance for the VSC-24 cask is be required. Finally. DOE is requtrod by we.re c2:ed in the analys4s dated to the unnecessanty restncuve an requinns the Nuclear Wa.ste Pohey Act of 1982 to m0's and because of their age wm that the MSB contain 2850 ppm boron meri pt spent fuel fnr ulttmate 6sposal.

tensidered mappropnate for use and solution while it is being loeded. This As one commeotar noted. DOE is ccmmented that thars was a difference concentration of boron would keep 6 propocng a new straterv m wench m the geocetry between 6 benchmark less than 0 95 even if all 24 storsge Congress woukd authona it to select a calculations and the VSC-24.

spaces in the MSB wm inaded with site m time to recmve spect fuel for Tiesporue. The k., of 0 95 is guidance fuel assemblies which everage 4.2 intensn storece by 199a.

nnd is thus. not a requirement. As such, weight percant (wt.%) U2w Some

53. Commerrt. Comnecters mdscated a hcaraes has Deutubty and may nuclear power plants do not have 4.2 that PSN moon an error m calculatmg propose an altarnative hrrut. Based upon wt.% Un, fusi on site. Therefore, there the dose rue at the pep between tne NRC review. NRC scrspted the is no pouiNbty of fuel contammg that MSB and MTC. PSN had 440 mrem /tr hansac s proposed use of a L of 0 96 concentrataan of Uns being loaded in a compared to NRC's calculated 4140 br it.e accoent case of mtsloodmg the MSB The ccamenter rec =mded mrem /hr. Why werun t these MSB with all frer.h fuel of rrauumum that the Caruf,cale of Comphance discrepanoes resoned? How would enchment and optimum moderation requirament for boron coocentration m welders be protocsed?

c:r.dsuces_ This accidant con 6 tion

& MSB cavity water be changed to Fe sponse. PSN chd not mak.e an error barders on the trandable rtnce a allow other concentreuons to tie used in thetr calcularron. Rather, they maae scarvs a mutually axthisava cond2 tion such that the boron concaotraboo used an error when truancnbtng a canculetec es :s. 24 untria6ared fal sisambhas would mamtam L less than 0.25 even value to am MR tabme. Thas 6screpancy ut r.ase has: ganaration rates sufLc.ent if h.ei asacnbhes contammg the h23baat is identified and resolved in the SER tpg

O 17962 Federal Register / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wednesday. Apnl 7.1993 / Rules and Resulations 6-121. With respect to protection of

56. Comment. Commenters beheved to elicit and fully consider public welders. Se cperstmg procedures and that PSN benchmarking cf shieldmg comments on the VSC-24 technology radiation protection program of the codes against measured does rates for Section 133 of the Nucleu Wute beensee w1!! mclude precautions so that the VSC-24 cuk was grossly in error.

Pohey Act of1982 authonzes NRC to ce exposure of penonnel working with Further. PSN did not benchmuk the approve spent fuel storage technolopes the system inside the fuel handling SKYSHINTAI calculation method. The by rulematmg. When it adopted the buildmf will be muntained within the NRC calculated direct and air-scattered Fenene proceu in 1990 for renew and dose hmits of 10 CFR part 20.

dose rates, at various distances from the approval of dry cui storage 54 Comment. Commenters stated that cask. which were many umes higher technoloces. the Comnusuon stated the reported dose of 130 mrem /hr for than the PSN calculated dose rates.

that " casks * * * (are to) be approved the VSC-24 cask sides is still 6 times Response. PSN's benchmarking of the by rulemakmg and any safety issues that higher than the stated limit /

ANISN and QAD computer codes for are connected with the casks am speofication of 20 mrem /hr.

dose rate calculations was found by the properly addressed in that rulemahng

' Response The limit of 20 mrem /hr NRC to be incomplete because it did not rather than m a heanng procedum." 55 stated m secuen 1.2.4 of the Ceruncate address differences in dose rates FR 29181 Uuly 18.1990). Rulemahng of Comphance opphes to the sides of the calculated by the ANISN and QAD under NRC rules of practice, descnbed VCC. at the pad. The 130 mrem /hr value computer codes. The NRC conducted in 10 CFR 2.804 and 2 805. provgdes full quoted in the comment refers to the independent confirmatory calculations opportunity for expression of puohc maumum oose rate at the sides of the to esumate the done levels assocated views,but does not use formal haanngs MTC w hen loaded with the MSB inside with the VSC-24 cask system for of the type requested by commenters.

the fuel handhng building. Because the companson with the vendor's la this proceed og rulemabng clearly MSB has not teen loaded into the VCC calculations. Based on that companson, prended adequate evenues for members casa at this pomt. it is not subtect to the the NRC concluded the design provided of the public to pronde their views regarding NRC's proposed approvsl of 20 mrem hr spec 25 cation, acceptable shieldmg.

55 Comment. Commenters believed Although PSN did not benchmark the the VSC-24 cui, m, cluding the t,o p cp eat PSN made several mistakes in SKYSHINFAI calculauon method, they PPo

,n um calculating how mucb redisuon might used that method to calculate site data, opinions and arguments. In this come off the surface of the VSC-24 cask. boundary dose rates. Based on review of connection. the NRC staff repared for Because the VSC-24 cask has never thett calculations and inde ndent NRC P

Pubbe examinston two separate.

b*n built. it is fair to say that no one calculations, the NRC conc ded that technical evaluations for the VSC-24 has anv definite idea of what the actual PSN had not calculated conservative ry cask s

m. each time mhg dose rates will be. In addition, some neutron and gamma dose rates at the detailed, ocumented findings of ccmmenters noted that conclusions site boundary. However, even with the compliance with NRC safety, secunty drawn from testmg a prototype are of NRC's more conservatively calculated dubious impon "wnen dealmg with the site boundary done retes, the NRC g "g"rst au di effects of radiation.

concluded that general hcensees using March 1991, renewed an proved the Respcnse As stated in section 6.3 of the VSC-24 cask will meet all VSC-24 for reference in a site-specific ie SER. a number of errors were applicable reFulatory requirements, application for an tndependent spent c:scovered m the vendor's shielding in addition, the NRC also requires any fuel storage inrtallation. In May 1992, ar.al) sis An adequate explansuon for VSC-24 user to measure the external the NRC staff reviewed the VSC-24. and

• 2.ese e ors w as offered by the vendor.

cask surface dose rates to ensure the approved the design for purposes of However, the NRC mode mdependent cask has been properly loeded and initiating this rulemaking to grant a

cnfirmatory calculations to esumate radiation momtonng to ensure genene approval of the desip. in me dose levels assoanted with the compliance with regulatory addition, the staff conducted a third VSC-24 system.The vendor's shielding requirements.

review in response to the pubhc des:p sad erpected dose rates along

57. Comment. A number of comments on the VSC-24 in this 2e surface of the VCC were determmed commenters requested a public heanng rulemakmg. egam Ending compliance to tie acceptable based on a companson on this rulemahng. Approximately half with NRC requirements as set font in mth the mdependent NRC calculauons. of the commenters requested that a full this notice of Snal rule and response to NRC erraes with the commenter that the public beanng be held at each reactor comments.

actual cose rates from spec 25c fuel facility site pnor to the use of dry casi in addition to reviewing acaded mto the cask cannot be exactly storage at that site.

systematically and in depth the cetermmed a pnon. However, dose Response. Consistent with the techmcalissues imponant to protectms c46.lations can readily predict applicable procedure, the NRC does not pubhc health, safety and the expected dose rates for the VSC-24 cask intend to hold formal public haanngs on environment, the NRC has taken extra wim sufSc:ect accuracy to assure that the VSC-24 cask rule or separate steps to obtam and fully consider pubhc NRC hmits w2il not ce exceeded. In heanngs at each reactor site pnor to use views on the VSC-24 technology, and addinon, these calculatwns tend to be of the dry task technology approved by has made eserv effon to respond to censervative and tend to overesumate the Commission m this rulemakmg.

pubhc contems and questions about the actual dose rates that would be Rulemaimg procedures. used by *he VSC-24 cask's comphance with NRC expenenced dunng actual operations.

NRC for Eenene approval of the VSC-24 safety, secunty and environmental Prototype tesung was not used in cask, mciuding the underlymg staff requirements. The manal pubhc esaluanon of *he adequacy of the shield technical reviews and the opportunity comment penod opened on June 26.

design for tne VSC-24 casi. Finally, the for public mput. are more than adequate 1992. and closed on September 9,1992 hcensee ws!! conduct surveys to ensure to obtam public mput and assure in addition. NRC received a number of comphance witn inulatory protection of the public health, safety comments after the close of that penod n ouirements and ti.e Certificate of and the environment. Further, m this all of which were fully considerec.

Comphance rulemaung.NRC has taken extra steps Subsequently. NRC extenced the pena

4 4

T Fed:ra.1 Regnet;r / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wednesday. April 7.1993 / Rules and Regulations 17963 r submission of public comments until Response.The NRC granted Pac 2fic storage at a reactor site is also the February 22.1993. Rus, the pubbe Sierra Nuclear Anoastes' request for an enntiunion of other NRC EA's for comment penod for this rule has exemption to fabncate a hmited number eSecunly been almost nine months. In of the casks before iuuancs of the prenously approved dry casks analyzed in earher rulemakmgs addresamg pan ad6 don. the NRC staff made every Certi6cate of Compbance under its NRC 72, and in the Commiuion's Waste eHort to consider comments received approved quabty assurance program.

Con 6dence decisions in 1984 (August a er Febre.ry 22.1993. Further, the and at its financal risk. The NRC's 31,1984; 49 FR 34658) and 1989 a

sis!! proposed and participated in a finding, band on the SAR for the VSC-(September 29.1989; 54 FR 39765). In pubhc meeting near one of the nuclear 24 cask and the NRC's SER. concluded the 1984 Waste Confidence deasion, the plants proposmg to use the VSC-24 cask that beennmg fabncation pnor to the Commission concluded there was b e. Pabsadul. with the Attorney inauance of the Certi6cate of reasonable assurance spent fuel can be Gensral of the State of Michigan, to Cornpliance would poes no undue risk safely stored at reactor sites without prende fu-ther opportunity for public to public hethh and safety. Un of these signi6 cant ennronmentalimpacts. for at input on the safety, secunty and casks is dependent on satisfactory least 30 years beyond expirauon of NTsC ennronmental compliancs tuuss in this completion of NRC's certification reactor operating Licenses. The 1989 r.demakmg NRC also partaapated in an procesa.

Waste Con 6dence decision renew earber meeting of the Van Buren County

61. Comment. Some commenters teaffirmed pnor Commission Commission near the plant site.

requested that the NRC prepare an conclusions on the abunce of Under these circumstances. formal ennronmentalimpact statement (US) beanngs would not apprecably add to and update the Genenc DS for the angnificant environmental impacts.

nua. given the Comminion's speofic NRC's effons to ensure adequate handling and storage of spent fuel. The consideration of the environmental protection of pubhc beelth, safety and US abould be subnutted to the impacts of dry storage summanzed the ennronment, and are unnecessary to En vironmental Protocuon Agency (EPA) above, and g2ven the absence of any new NRC's full understanding and and to the State of Michigan. Some information casting doubt on the consideration of public news on the commenters also requested that action cx>nclusion that such impacts are VSC-24 cask.

on this rule be delayed until the expected to be extremely small and not

58. Comment. Commenters believed Wisconsin EnvironmentalImpact environmentally significant, no that a full democrsue process is needed Statement is complete, meaningful environmental insights are in this decision.

Response. The potential hkely to be gained from funher Response. Because this rulemaking was conducted pursuant to the environmental impacts of unhties using preparation of wither an EIS or an the VSC-24 cask (or any of the other updated GDS for the dry storage precedures for approving dry storage spent fuel rade approved by NRC (10 methodology.

casks for use under a general license, as CFR 72.214)) have been fully considered The EA covering the proposed rule. as required by Congress in the Nuclear and are documented in a published well as the finding of no significant Wsste Policy Act of 1982. and pursuant Environmental Asmesment (EA) impact (FONSI) prepared and published to the public nouce and comment covering this rulemaking. Funber, as for this rulemaking. fully comply with 4

precedures of the Administrative descnbod below, the EA indicates that the NRC environmental regulations in Proc:dures Act, the resulting final rule use of the casks would not have 9 CFR part 51. Moreover, since the approving the VSC-24 cask to the significant environmental impacts.

Commission's environmental product of a process prescnbed by law.

Spect6cally, the EA notes the 30 plus regulauons in part 51 implement NEPA

59. Cornment. One commenter stated that the gap between the MSB and the years of exponence with dry storsge of and give proper consideration to the MTC is given as 0.5 inch in WEP-spent fuel. identifies the previous guidehnes of GQ, they assure that the 109 0014 and as 1.0 inch in Figure 5-extensive NRC analyses and findings EA and the mNSI conform to NEPA 5 of WEP-109 w13. This commentar that the environmentalimpacts of dry procedural requirements, and that also stated that the dose rate was not storage are small, and suconctly further analyses are therefore not legally cesenbos what im including the non pacts there are, reguired.

clear.

ra6ologicalimpacts-In connection with the EA and Fesponse. The 6fference in the referenced gap size is a consequence of of cask fabncation (i.e., the impacts MNSI. it bears emphastr.mg that to ttanges made as a result of earlier assoasted with the relatively small CFR part 72. subpart K already etnounts of steel, concrete and plastic authontes dry cask storage and already renews, The final design wu band on the 0 5 inch gap as in6cated in WD)-

used in the casks are expected to be approves dry casks for use by unhues to 139 0014. The calculation of WEP-insign!?icant) the radiologicalimpacts store spent fuel at reactor sites. See 10 of cask operations (i.e.. the incremental CFR 72.214 for a listing of information 009 0013. which uses a 1.0 inch gap. is offsite doses are expected to be a small on Cask Cert 25cate Nos.1000 through tr.erefore conservat2ve for shiel6ng fraction of and well within the 25 1003.The present rulemaking is calculations Because the gamma dose is mrom/yr limits in NRC regulations). the accordingly for the hmited purpose of more than 39 umes that due to neutrons, potentialimpacts of a possible dry cask adding one more cask to the hst of casis any small decease in the neutron dose accident (i e.. the impacts are expected already approved by NRC. Furthermere.

rate. due to a smaller gep. would not to be no greater than the impacts of an the cask, to be added to the NRC hst by safican*!y change the calculated acadent mvolving the spent fuel storage this rulemakmg will comply with all ceutron and gamma dose rates used to basml. and the potent 2alimpacts due to applicable NRC safety requirements assess ccrupational exposure. In possible sabotage (i.e.. the offsite dose is Finally, this rulemakmg opphes to 636uon. these calculations calculated to be about one rem). All of cask use by any power resctor hcensee conserveuvely neglect the shielding nng the NRC analyses collecuvely yield the within the United States. Therefore. it is which would further reduce dose rate.

smgular conclusion that the not dependent on any one mdividual 60 Comment Commenters erpressed environmental impacts and nsks are StatWs actions includmg preparaton of concem that VSC-24 casks were bemg expected to be extremely small.

a separate DS by any State. Further, cunt at the Pahsades Nuclear Plant The absence of significant nothmg in this rulemakmg would

~

before opprovai or cert:5 cation-environmental impacts from dry cask nreclude any State from amplemenung

" ~

j 4

d h

1'1964 Tadural Register / Vol. Se, No. 65 / Wedneedey. April 7.1993 / Itules and Regulations 1

i its envtronmental stalwees and NRC.He NRC's inspection pregnun to the provisions of 10 CF1t part 72 reguistions as smey oiberwise be -

hidades requusments to mopectibese whicf mdades la subpast K.the l

peransed by new.

procedures regulations relevant to the storage of E2. Casrrseemt. en===na-o behewed

65. Comment.Cesamenters metod thet spent fuel under a genatallicanse. A j

that a cast /h===As emetyees eheuld be the VLa4 le set a cask. De dowgner specAc referenc= to mech regulation prusared. One coarunamnar pmpa==A e called M a cas sessent secuan is, thernfare unnecessary, i

cost compensen farmela wtsich would Response.nsiNItCcenaders no be

68. Comment. One commenter wu l

escraste oosts a===r==a=4 with dry cmA cank.k is cated a cask system boosues levorable to the VSC-Z4 cask stating corses oeur the next 1000 yours.

it connases d sesormicapponents.

that it was cost-effecnve, made in the Response. A regadenary snahans.

et Comment. Commasters beleeve U.S.A.. edditional shielding could be I

wtuch consules tank t=-man a and that there is paar management at odded et low ccst if requued,the impacts af addtag the VSC-24 cask to C===- Power Compusy. NIIC welded closun requtma no menstenng.

i the be of NRC epproved casks as>dar to nadar=wism Ncanos thee anys they still and nsk is mimnnzed by weld seeling r

CFR part 72. mahymrt K.was m _ f a have a,._ - ' hr==== aAar 20 years. the MSB in the reactor fual bandling support dthis rd==d=g etzmn. M was Consumers Power Company bed eenous buildmg. Another commenter noted that 4

inclused as a part of the areir= af quality control violations, below evere9e this rulem is a positrve acnon proposed and as also operating supedry.end inuky whsd should cost and I

included in th2s rulemabag manr=

construcman at W-increase the safety of stanng fuel.

i This mguhtory analyes wn=rs= the n==y=== Akhoup iMs======* is Another commenter noted the Fahsades hmited omnaamme acope of thrs not disectly rehaed to this ru1===Ng.

spent foot poolis closer to take rulernab== The leap year cast which is ao puosids gemarte appsonal d Michigan than the cask pad.both m compensam admochd above assumes the VSC-H cask design that ta est terms of distance and elevation. ne 1000-year taasnm snareps at Pmhandes, ri=P==duit en sts =@ causadoration stosage of spent fuelin a poolinquires I

an assumpuan the NEC is oat proposung for any ame kr===== feC assas that its active systems for shieldmg. coohng and er adog ng in this ruleur.aking_ m Syuammatic Aammanuset of bcnname reacttvity control. The VSC is passiva.

NRC Weste CarJidanos dar===as Performamos (SA&l program es am requiring no pumps. valves. or hast f

concluded there is renaanahns assurenas integraamd souff aEast to counct avedable exchangers.

the Federal governmaat ordi been observations and dass en e panodic Response. None required.

a j

r cemng spent fuel kr dispoemi by basis and to evehmose br==e==

69. Cominent. Commenters behaved l

l 2025. Thus. the hkehhood of toes +sar rL w locledsag ca===ners that it is not acceptable to increase the

}

l mienm etasege at P=hm=daa is mesomety Power, an the tuumis of shie leformoboa number of approved cask designs. De

}

small.

The smast====* SA& sepost for goal omst be the function of the cask

63. Caminent. Chns counmenser wanted Pahandes, cesertag the period Ismeary 1.

itself to contem radioactivtty in high letter reports to the NBC deatninsed to 1991 through Masch 31,1982 eletes m concentretums and present it from load and stmas pe======r* sushortries summary. "Oserell L _ n= st the dispersmg into the biosphere as we!! as 7

and local hbrunas in the vicinary of Paheedes Nedear Posee Plant was to shield workers and others from l

fachtaes asujm tbe VSC-24 cast chasectorsned by geneselly steady or todistion exposure. Some suggested that Besponse. i ne NRC satsrpress this improving sesehe and sboused a altometree actions to dry cask storeEs ccmment as applyrng to htier separts conservenwe mid safe should be cxmsidered.

required by the Cartificens af philosophy. %s ose degree of Desponse.%e NEC. in irnplement2cg Comphance. letter separts samt to the managsenent attenoon and enscoveness the Nuclear Weste Patiey Act of 1982.

j NRC are ronunely plaomd in the Pubbe was ar=ya= Main all armes."Pinelly.the has en obligation to approve the use of Documem Room and Local Pudic Paliendes Muclear Plant was grarded a casks for the storege of spent fool, j

Document Rooms near enda facshey full term operet6eg honnes on February prov ded these casks meet applicable Local Pubbe Domm==* Roosts are 21.1991.

mguktory requimments.b NRC bcated in public, university, and The SAM report for the proceding agrees with the commenter that these i

speaal hbrunes. A d.trocsery of Local period from September 1.1999 through casks should contain redmactivity and j

3 Pubhc Ibcunant Rooms is published by December 31.1990 proe,ded etmilar protect workers, the public, and the i

the NRC as NUREG BR-44. N NRC conclusoons and stated.*the degree of enesmnment.The previous rulemahrg would respond to State sequesss for manaquessat ettention and effectivenees of 1990 (55 f1t 29151) found that spect 1

ceptes of such nepens throelb NRC's ranged imm counseendebk in some fuel stored in dry storage casks cesigned State Relations Prospam aroos to needing ettenti:,n in c6ers.

to meet the NRC regulatory

)'

64 Cnmment. Ccanamenters indicated Owrall.tk conduct of activitms was requirements ain contam radioactmty that operstmg proondwen. eralueoon a,peopnetely directed to ensursnce of safely. This rulemakseg adds one casi aper s. anc trs:atng prograres should safety. Management appeared proactive design, which meets the safety l

t,e submatted to the NRC, state and local and e5ective ta demonstrsong a requirements previously developed. The l

aovarrunect author: Des.and plarmd an conserveuve operatog philaeophy and previous responses to comments, as ami Laranes cear such fachnas.

establishmg high etendards of well es the detailed safety and hesponse. These documents expend performance in operatrons.

ensironmental analyses underlying S:s j

i en renencrJfy approwd procedures in meintenanos/ surveillance, and rulemakmg and desenbed elsewtere m

]

the S.ML CartJicate of Camphsmaa, or securstvf this notice s!! reveel that the VSC-24 m the case of the baron denarm:manon.

67. t".orntnaut. One commentar casi will conform to the NRC j

en nat2onal standanas. Ao acxmrdaram believed that the Certifsos6e of requirements, and that ris use sho.Jd atti the NRC requiremscts. litsemans Cornpliance should list all NRC not pose the potent 2al for srg:uficant are not requned to samrt thus regulations controllirm the use of the environtmmtal impacts.

1 micr netsan to the NBC or other VSC-24 cask forthe siorege of opent ne pnnapst attematives available to j

ses ernment etscharatsas. Rather. th2s fuel the NRC would be procedura!in natre.

j ir. formation is evelamand t y the br====

Response. De Cartinante of whereby dry casi spent fuel storare c.c is oesunbke far i aperrios by ame Coraphance contains e genersi r,6erervce could be appmeed tmder other costmg 4

V; t

4 P

Federal Engist:r / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wcdnesday. April 7,1993 / Rul s and Regulations 17965 x. ---

or ce* Pcts of title 10. Code of Feders!

rwiew and independent evaluation of radiation source term for other fuels that Sauons. Regardless of the method the applicant's safety evaluation report may be stored in the VSC-24 cask. NRC

,,l,c:,d to approve such dry cask spent and through this rulemaking action.

regulations prohibit Consumers Power i

,gej storsse. all would have similar NRC will assure that the cask meets pan from using the VSC-24 cask in violation J

,3,.ronmental impacts.

72 requirements and can be used by of the Ceruncate of Compliance spent ne NWPA directed that the NRC individual nuclear power plant fuel speciScauons, and Consumers

,pprove one or more technologies, that licensees with full assurance of Power must perform wntten evalusuons uve been developed and demonstrated protection of the public health and before usmg the cask that venfv all b DOE. for the use of spent fuel storsgo safety and the environment. The NRC Certificate of Comphance conditions are J tte utes of avilian nuclear power has expenenced no difficulty obtaining met.

e.ctors without, to the extent safety information or answers to its As is evident from this and other p scucsble.the need for additional site-questions from either firm, either before. responses to public comments.this spoofic review. The NWPA also or after the divesuture.

rulemaking provides NRC approval for c;rected that the NRC. by rulemaking.

Followmg the diveenture. Pacific storage of spent fuelin the VSC-24 at set forth procedures for licensing the Nuclear sent a letter containing any site in accordanm with the Fenenc technology. Regulations for comments on the VSC-24 design. The conditions and specifications in the l

accociphshing this are in place.

staff satisfactorily resolved and Cenificate of Complianca. As noted. it Thsafore. the no action alternative is answered these comments with a letter: does not consutute a site-specific i

not screptable.

both the Paci5c Nuclear and NRC letters approval of the VSC-24 cask for use by A!!emauve spent fuel storage are available in the Public Document Consumers Power at the Palisades plant.

i tecnnolopes ex2st. However. at this Room. The issues contained in this

72. Comment. A number of t=e. the NRC considers them neither exchange of letters and all other safety commenters requested that the comment sufficently demonstrated nor issues related to the design of the VSC-penod be extended principally atmg l

a pract2 cable for une under the general 24 are descnbod in the staffs SER.

the fact that NRC had released a large Lcense provtsions of subpart K of to

71. Comment. A commenter noted volume of highly technical matenal l

CMt part 72 without additional site-that Consumers Power's comments to associated with the VSC-24 cask and specfic reviews. If other storage the NRC dunng thic rulemaking indicate that the 30 day reopening of the technolopes become more amenable to that they do not have the kind of fuel comment penod which NRC had this type of action, they could be that was specified in the Certificate of provided was not a suffiaent time for 2

ccnsidered at a later ume.

Compliance for the casks at Palisades.

review and comment on the matenal.

'O Comment. Commenters expressed They noted it is hard to believe that the Commenters also questioned why the concam that Pacific Nuclear. Inc., the NRC does not know what kind of fuel information was not released earlier.

i 4'

onpnal designer and manufacturer of it is licensmg the cask for, but noted Response. NRC is not granting an the VSC-24 cask system, had ended its that appeared to be the case. The additional extension to the comment evelvement with the cask. Reasons commenter further noted that any penod. First. the new informauon that i

cted mcluded the issue of lisbility, approval given by the NRC would have was released is only an increment to negl' Fence issues that might surface in to be site s

'fic and not generic and that previously disclosed. In addition.

the future with the cask, the fact that the therefore.

's would require a hearing.

most of the individual pages released i

cngmal designers divested themselves Response.The type of fuel that is are computer output pnntouts. the due to canarn about the cask, and who being spproved for storage in the VSC-results of which were previously i

would be responsible in the event of 24 cask is specified in the vendor's available in various documents made l

4 ledage. Commenters also questioned Safety Analysis Report as well as in the available at the beginning of the public whetter NRC had attempted to ascertain Certificate of Compliance and SER comment penod. In the Federal Register ite reason for the divesuture action by prepared by the NRC staff. NRC Notice Canuary 21,1993: 58 FR 5301)

Faafic Nuclear to discover if the reason regulations require the vendor to specify announcing the comment period related to safety of the cask. liability, or the type of spent fuel to be stored in the extension. NRC made clear the limited.

any oder consequences.

cask before NRC approval, and NRC incremental character of the technical Fespcnse NRCis not aware of any thoroughly reviewed the vendor's SAR informauon.The mformauon of the casi safety. r.eghgence. liabihty or legal and spent fuel specifications and made vendor being disclosed at this uma ccncems which prompted Pacific them appropnate items for public added detail to the information NRC Nuclear. Incorperated to divest itself comment in this rulemaking.

previously placed in the Public f om the VSC-24 cask. The key Commenters are therefore mistaken m Document Room at the outset of this mdmdual involved in the design and saymg the type of fuel to be stored in rulemaking. It complements and development of the VSCe24 was also the VSC-24 cask is not known.

tupplements the design informatien e

mvched in the design and development The kind of fuel to be loaded into and Creedy discio ed, providing further l,

tf a new rnodular honzontal concrete cored in the VSC-24 cask at Palisades, de al on such matters as the vendor's spent fuel storage system (NUHOMS should Consumers Power proceed with d%ign alculations (often m the form of I

demnl and formed a new company, use of the VSC-24 cask. must be computer runs) and speafic data inputs l

Paafic Sierra Nuclear for the acceptable fuel for storare m the cask for models used by the vendor for such l

ccmn.eraal manufacture and marketing and must meet the Cenificate of calculations, as well as cask design cf'he VSC-24 st: rage system. NRC Comphance speafications mentioned details such as remfortmg steel samg focuses its effons on assunng safety and above for acceptable fuel which may be and shield lid thickness. The environmental protecuen through stored in the casi. In this regard. the information bemg disclosed there fare r= views ef apphcanons for licenses and Ceruficate of Compliance and SER have provides additional specifiaty for the safety anelysis reports. If a new been clanfied to speofically idenufy the pubhc about the technicalinfctmanon tempany apphes for a ceruficate of fuel assembly classes acceptable for that was considered by the NRC staff m tcmpliance. that new company must storege in the VSCr24 cask and to prepanng the pnncipal NRC document s meet all NFC requirements as would identify hmits for physical dimensions.

underlymg this rulemakmg These ey eusung company. Through NRC's weight. bumup, decay power, and documents mclude the proposed

a 179&&

Tederal Engsster / Vcl. 58. No. fas / Wadansday. Aprd 7.1923 / Rales and Eegnistinna Certificere of C4=en for the auk

75. N =-nr.hmm

-d-s eaked who inaped es which tlas detstraina.tlon se and the assocasted NEC sta5SER and wculd b respenaihis br owacksht of based is aradable far mspectina et the MataA EA. which were pnrnously fuel cased in canks maar NRC Pubhc Daramaru Room. 2120 L placed as the NRC PuMacn= - -at h= m *In= ef the r=="m.

Street. NW. limarr imall. Waahmqt on.

Roo:n at the outsat of this prope. sed ahlpmaat of the fuelc5.saa. And for DC. Single copies af 6 Ennronmental rulemaking.

decomminaian' dihe casks star Asseemseest and the Findmg of No Secoad, the trarial puhuc ncmant stomd fuel was e5-sta.

Sqpa6 cant in,paa are evadable fruas pened oposaed on June 2s. t992. and Responsa. In acmdann with ID CR Mr. Gardam E. Genda,=an. Of&m of h,ad no Sapische E.1991. W 50.544 bbl ell'y*rW nuclear power Wet,Egde&ary Research.U S.

comment penod was reopened on r=an-Scamane ese mquimd. on later Nuclant Repdatory Comou naaen.

January 21. 493 and emand on February than 5 years pnar to the ar= don of Washington, DC 2D555, isk.pbane 1301) 22.1991. la addauas,at the per

~ the operating licmaea, to proni, the G2-3601.

noeung head with the beidugen NRC. br mnew and approvsl. the Attorsey Geeeral on Febrwery 2.3.1963 bcansee's pmgman to manaina and Paperwerk todactram Act Statenwet NRC aneured thec en=rmeets rearsend Prende funding for the m----~

af This Enal rule does not contam a sew allirredamed het NRC's asnew d the or amended informatico coDad=

within 6w warams deye sAer bt meetmg would be candered. Ahmeb bcznwe's kel managemmat pregemm aqutrement suband to the Paperwork be comanent pe. sods hen cheadJAC will be

• 6 as part d-rih Reduction Ac of 1580 le4 U.S.C. 3501 ta m,m4,,,ed au comsneses noorved.

11~-

y under b pror=nna of part 50 et sogl Existing requirements wan hs. & puhrsc comcnent period for and part 72 of the Ger==ia-o's approved by the Ofice of U m st dis ruk has hy been h F'gulanana.

and Br.mBa appmval md=r 3150-mm meanes M b MC beineres Whh 2*spect to damn - h=iW the 0112.

corm *mes reoco then==Kdant tisse isr bonnese may W a -<n= *=:

Regulatory Asetyeis titernettre that wilh this D d rm 6rma

1. ADow antage af spent halin the On kly 18.1990 (55 R 29131) the

.,.3. Com:nent. Om - w spent bal pool a which caos the Commiannon isswed an asoendment to 10 Sm bee et b lacmeses w2D be repased to snanwa its Pan 72, w meded fo@

part 50 kan storage of spent nu ear fuel under a RMPease. Du w6mnad Cam 5

2. ADow storsgo of faalio a estined general Dcann. Any nuclear power caicuMes the dm sene es de WB h casl under the psonalans dpart 72 as ructor licensee can use these casts 10 I wed mno the E during trans6er.

lang as she part 30 hr.naa terma2ns in (t) hy notafy the NRC in advance.(21 Dose as sensestas et the ydnM efract;ee the spent kelis stared under the maumum exposure. thet is, et h ond'"

3. Anow starage in an oo-sita coedulons specu.ed in the cask's vent and the top of the VSC. Unds independent spent kel stosage CertiSante n! Complianca; and (3) the em ow-stances, the enen installarinn t.ader the site-speciEc other conditions of the saneral hcense distnbutton of radioective meterialin hmn= ng pronsoons of part 72.

are mat. As part of the 1990 chm US 1

the spent fuel assemblies wubwnin to For ny d the above ahm'nadves, b four spect hal Karage cashs were de dose M a tmnset fesMon3e licanese wfD be tes -

e for sa.!s approved far une al rencor sites. and assumpton that1be source is d redly storage of opent dunag the penod were listad in 10 CFR 72.214. ht fmm the oceve fuel whhd1 is ah3pwd of storega. Jor latar ahlpenent of, sate for rulamaling envisacned that sintage with de asr edmast is conomstve, further sinrage or disposal and ler Anal casis carti5md in the klurs could be since ft is the hrghest ud is sustamed decomnd--~'s= d b Tameene apent routinah added to the hsting in $ 72.214 for a short period af trne. Other N fuel pool, dry Q caak or ISFSI to through ryh=by precedetres.

E dt:n posruons durmg trusfe'r a level penmetting smsentlicted release of Pr==^v== and cruaria far ***q weald yicid smaller dose rates.

b site sad incusty. The septr=mara NRC approval of mw spent fual starsas Calculatsom demonstreted thet the does for d-=>- % are pmnded La 13 cask damps were pmndad in 10 CFK raw fr n gemma emitting redroactive CFR part 72.30 which dedenes 72.230.

ms+enal m de nozzle is three ordm of decamr=Jami*g yknntag N~ut The attemauve to thle proposed megnitde '.ess than the dose nie from asa.rsace and ncordka png scuan is to wuhhnu caru5catian of provism bse new designs and to conwiar the te act:ve fuel secton.

74 Comment. A commentar noted grancmg d a este.specinc !<== to each eat the gecmetry for dose cela11ations Finding d No 54=hne utihty that apphed for perunsaron m use was based on an earber design and nog Espi. = - al hopect A=,..

J these new casks. This abrneuve would en the latest configuradon.

Under the hatsonal Environmental be more costly and time entmasung Erspct:se The changes in design Policy Act d 1962, as amended, and the bac uam each sae-spectic laconse referred to by the cn=mentar ware slight f%-- h=n's segulecoes no subpart A spphceuon would requare e spect5c repouterungs of the inlet air dact. N of to CFR part 51.the Communes hae review. In addztaon, withholding monentation involves mmor rhagan of determined that this rule is not a mayor certiscauc,n would ignors &

i both the tornantal and vertical Federal acnom a Mea w h afhctmg the rulemakmg p ocmdures and cntene in onentsuon of the det but does not quahty d the buraam annranmant and.

10 CFR part 72. subpsits K and L kar d.arge the crcuitous path w'each thereinra, an sonronmental ilmpact the add: tron of new cask destgns.

or:trSutes to radiation protecimon. In statement is not requ2 red. TLs final rule Further. it is in confhc1 with tLe addmon,'.1.s analysis does not tain adds en addatacoalcask to the hat of Congresuonal direcuan m sectione 133 cmdit for the 0.5. inch sinal boer c4 the approved spent faal storage rad a that and '218 of the Nuck.ar Waste Pohn Act cuct wtics would odset any small power rasctor hcana es can use to stars of 1982 to asiahbsh promdares for the cr. ages m dm due Io reonentation of spem he3 at reacor utes witbout hcenatog of tarhanlopes br the use of de dact Tr.arsfore, the desigo rhanges additioneJ site-specinc approvals by b spent fuel stor=68 at th' 5'res of cmben do not vuJt m a ngnincent t.hacge m Commm mm The annronmental nuchear power rmactors watnour, to the tne red.ation dose rate calculauons.

assessmant and Ening of no sydLcant euent preamcatde.the s.eed br

G e Fed:ral Registar / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wednesday, April 7.1993 / Rul s and Regulations 17967 ddmonal a2te reviewa. Also, this issued by the Small Business 872.214 Wes of approved opern twed gernst:ve would exclude new vender ArMrdantuon at 13 CFR part 121.

noroge onesa.

a cast des;ps from the approved NRC list gg g, Cart! Scots Number. too7

+ -nr sucput K without cause and Cuid arbitranly hmit choice of cask The NRC has detartnined that the SAR Subcutted by: Paca$c Sierra Nicar es;cns available to power roector baclSt rule.10 CR 50.109. does not Associates e:isces under the general licetes, apply to this Enaj rule and,thus, a SAR Title. Safety Acalvsis Report for the entil ed to Cask System Th;s Enal rulemahng wiU elimirtate backfit analyals is not required for this Enal mie, because this amendment does tne abcse problems. Further, this act2on g

will have no adverse effect on the public not involve any provisions which would g g, g,p tealth and safety.

impose betL5ts u deEned in u

d The benent of this hal rule to 5 50.109(a)(1).

3 pri)3,83.

catizar power reactor licensees is to List of Subpoets la 10 CFR Part 72 Far the Nuclear RcEvlata y Commissica.

.ne asailable a greater cholas of spent Ma power training programs Nuclear lames R Sainak, n.es storsge cask destps which can be matenals. OccupationsJ safery and Atmg Exo:vem hetorfor Opersmns ued under a eneral hcense. However.

health. Reporung and recordkerpteg IFR Doc S3-4112 Filed a-6-93. 8 45 a nl n*3*ld s,"L',*7e" *og " '

T - t s==a'r==== S

- -~

desips m that power reactor licensen For the reasons set out in the FEDERAL ELECT 10N CCMtS$40N T n a k vendors with E

o 95 d

to bs hsted in 5 72.214 beneSt by being the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974.

11 CFR Part 110 able to cbtam NRC ceru5 cates once for u amended, and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, a casa desip wh2th can then be used the NRC is adopting the following

[Nosios 1ses-14) by many power reactor bcensees under amendments to 10 CFR part 72.

t*e gene sl hcense. Vendors with caak Transfers of Fund 8 from State to des ps already listed may be adversely PART 72 UCENSNG Federal Campaigns l

mpacted in that power reactor bcensees REQUIREMENTS FOR THE may ciocse e newly listed derp over INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT r

an ex:stmg one. However. the NRC is NUCLEAR FUEL AND M6GH4.IVEL Amet Federal Elvdon Commission.

req.: ired by its regulations and NWPA RADIOACTWE WASTE Action: Final rule: Announcement of requirements to establish a procedur, an:: to consider appbcations to cenify

1. The authority citation for part 72 effective date.

L continues to road as follows:

[

and list aEEroved casks. The NRC also SusesAARn On January 8.1993 the r

line5:5 because it wtU be able to certify Asakerity: Secs. 51.53.57.62.63.65.89.

Comi PubMed 6e W of a cask desip based on one generic 81.161.182.1&3.164.166.187.189.t.8 Stat.

rvvisi na to its rules governing transfers safetv and envtronmental review for 929.s20.s32, ass,as4 a25,648.e53.954, of funds from state to federal campaigns.

tse bv mu!cple hcensees.This Enal 855 ** *m*Sd*d **c 234. &3 Stat +44. u amended 142 U.5 C 2071. 2073. 2077. 2092.

58 FR 3474 (January 8.1993). The new

. *em'ai:ng nas no sigmgcast 7

2093.2095.2099.2111.2201,2232.2233.

nale prohibits the transfer of funds from Lenthable impact or beneSt en other 2234. 2236,2237. 2238. 2252h sec 274. Pub.

state to federal campaip commat*ees.

gerr. ment asent:es.

L 86-373. 73 Stat. 668. u amended (4 2 The Commission announces that this nosed cn ite above discuulon of the U.S.C 2021 h sec. 201, as amended. 2C2. 205.

new regulation will be effective July 1.

.cneCts anc impacts of the alternatives. 88 Stat.1242, as amended.1244.1246 (42 1993. Further information is provided in the NEC conciuoes tnst the U.S C 5441. 5442. 5646h Pub. L 95-601, sec. the supplementary information that requirernent5 of the Enalrule are

10. 92 Stat 2951 (42 U.S.C 585th sec.102.

gow s,.

tominensurete with the Commission's Pub. L 91-190. E3 S:st. 853 (42 U.S C 4332h secs.131.132,133,135.137,141. Pub. L 97-EFFECTFW DATE: July 1,1993.

resDons;tnhtles for protocuon of the 425. M M 2229. 2DO. 2232. 224L sec 148 m e mm mact

d.

hesjth end safe'y and the Pa. L 10NO3.101 Stat.133M35 (42 Ms. Suscn E. Propper. Assistant General tcmmon cefense and secunty. No other U-5 a.6Ja-Je alten.atise is beheved to be as f01 Counsel. 999 E Street. NW.,

sat.sfactcri' thus, ti..s actaon is s,,chon 72 44(g) also isNed under secs.

Washington. DC 20453 (202] 219-3690 or M 42 30.

rNctr.merwec.

14db) and 146(c). (d). Pub. L 100-203.101 I'

Eegulatory Fletabihty Act Cer-incation 10162(b).101r,&ic)(d)). Section 72 46 also Comm2 salon ts sanounting the effective

'n accordance with the Regt.latory ismed under sec.189. 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S C date of its new rule prohibitmg transfers 1.cobity Art. 5 U.S C 605'bl. the 2239); sec. u4. Pub. L 97-425. 96 Stat. 2230 of funds from state to federal campa2ps.

(42 U.S C 101541. Section 72 96rdi al*

See 11 CFR 110.3(c)(6). Section 438(d)

C;mmas.en ceru5es that tius rule, will 2

3'

r.,t heu a si2n:Ecant econo =;c impact

$'[

f3[j'5k fg3 of title 2. United States Code, requires that any rule or mgulat:en presenbed by en a sastcnual number of smaU Sabpart J also issued under esca. 2:21. 2a 51.

ent3ues This amendment s.ffects only 21191.1171sl.141ft). Pub L 97-425. 96 Stat.

the Commission to ca.rTy out the eensees ownmg and opereurg nuclear 2202. 2203. 2204. 2222. 2244 (42 U.S.C Proviamns of t2tle 2 be transmitted to pc wer :-attors and cask vencors. The 10101.1c137:s1.10161tha Subpa s K and L the Speaker of the House of twners of nuclear power plan's do not an aao issued unoer eac In. 98 Stat. 2230 Representauves and the President cf the faJ mt m tne scepe of the definition of 142 U.S.C 101531 and nec 218/sl. e6 sist.

Senate thirty legislative days before it is 2252 (42 U.S C tenel-EnaHy promulgated. These regulanons small enut-s" sct forth in act2cn 41f 3) of tne Reculatory Flex:1,thty Act.

2. In 5 72.214. CeM.2Ecate of were retransmitted to Congress on J U S C 632. or the Small Busmens Comphance 2007 ts added to rsad as January 5.1993 Thirty legislauve days ha Stansards set out m regtdatlons follows:

erptred in both the House of

Fed:rd Regist:r / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wednesday. Apnl 7.1993 / Rul:s and Regulations 17965 or:ew Parts of title 10. Code of Federal myiew and independent evalusuon of radiation source term for other fueis that piscons. Regardless of the method the applicant's safety evaluation mport may be stored in the VSC-24 cast NRC gected to sperove such dry cask spent and through this rulemaking acuen.

regulations prohibit Consumers Power b-storase. a[1 would have stmalar 5.el NRC will assure that the cask meets part from using the VSC-24 cask in violanon onmental impacts.

72 requirements and can be used by of the Ceruficate of Comphance spent ne NWPA dtacted that the NRC mdividual nuclear power plant fuel speoScauons and Consumers

,pprove one or more technologies, that licensees with full assurance of Power must perform wntten evalusuon; tsve been developed and demonstrated protection of the public health and before using is cask that venty all I

3 DOE. for the use of spent fuel storage safety and the environment. The NRC Certificate of Comphance conditions are sitne sites of emban nuclear power has expenenced no dif$culty obtaining met.

,, actors without, to the extent safety information or answers to its As is evident from this and other p scucable, the need for addinonal site-quesuons from either firm. either before. responses to pubhc comments. this

,ecific n. view. Re NWPA also or after the divesuture.

rulemak2ng provides NRC approval for e.rscted that the NRC. by rulemaking.

Followmg the divesuture. Pacific storage of spent fuelin the VSC-24 at j

ist ford procedures for licensmg the Nuclear sent a letter contunmg any site in accordance with the genenc technology. Regulations for comments on the VSC-24 desip. The condiuons and specifications in the j

ac::omphshing this are in place.

staff satisfactonly resolved and Certificate of Comphance. As noted it l

nzrefore, the no acuon alternauve is answered these comments with a letter; does not consutute a site-speafic not acceptable.

both the Pao 5c Nuclear and NRC letters approval of the VSC-24 cask for use by A!!emsuve spent fuel rterage are available in the Public Document Consumers Power at the Pahsades plant t:chnolopes sust. However, at this Room. no issues contained in this

72. Comment. A number of t =e. the NRC considers them neither exchange of letters and all other safety commenters requested that the comment suf5ciently demonstrated nor issues related to the design of the VSC-penod be extended pnnapally atmg p acucable for use under the general 24 are desenbed in the stsfFs SER.

the fact that NRC had nicased a large Lcense provtsions cf subpart K of to

71. Comment. A commenter noted volume of highly technical matenal CFR part 72 without additional site-that Consumers Power's comments to associated with the VSC-24 cask and specfic reviews. If other storage the NRC dunng this rulemaking indicate that the 30 day reopenmg of the tainolopes become more amenable to that they do not have the kind of fuel comment penod which NRC had this ty of action, they could be that was specified in the Ceruficate of provided was not a sufficent time for i

const.ered at a later ume.

Complianos for the casks at Fahsades.

mview and comment on the matenal.

73. Comment. Commenters expressed They noted it is hard to believe that the Commenters also questioned why the concem that Pacific Nucle.r. inc., the NRC does not know what kind of fuel informatioa was not released earher, onpnal designer and manufacturer of it is licensing the cask for. but noted Response. NRC is not granting an the VSC-24 cask system, had ended its that appeared to be the case. He additional extension to the comment mvolvement with the cask. Raasons commenter further noted that any penod. First, the new information that c:ted included the issue of liability, approval given by the NRC would have was released is only an increment to neghgence issues that might surface in to be site specfic and not generic and that previously disclosed. In addition.

de future with the cask, the fact that the therefore, this would require a heanng most of the individual pages nicased engmal designers divested themselves Response. The type of fuel that is are computer output pnntouts. the due to concern about the cask, and who being approved for storsge in the VSC-results of which were previously would be responsible in the event of 24 cask is specified in the vendor's available in vanous documents made

'eakase Commenters also questioned Safety Analysis Report as well as in the available at the beginnmg of the pubhc whether NRC had attempted to ascertain Certificate of Compliance and SER comment penod, in the f ederal Register 1e reason for the divesuture acton by prepared by the NRC staff. NRC Notice Canuary 2L 1993; 58 FR 5301)

Facific Nuclear to discover if ihe reason regulations require the vendor to specify announcmg the comment penod related to safety of the cask, habihty, or the type of spent fuel to be stored in the extension. NRC made clear the hmited.

any other consequences.

cask before NRC approval, and NRC incremental character of the technical hesponse. NRC is not aware of any thoroughly reviewed the vendor's SAR information. The information of de casi safety. neghgence. habihty or legal and spent fuel spoofications and made vender bemg disclosed at this time concerns which prompted Pacfic them appropnste items for public added detail to the information NRC Nuclear. Incorperated to divest itself comment in this rulemaking.

previously placed in the Pubhc

' rem the VSC-24 cask. The key Commenters sie therefore mistaken in Document Room at the outset of this mdividual mvolved in the design and saymg the type of fuel to be stored m rulemaking. It complements and ceselopment of the VSC-24 was also the VSC-24 cask is not known.

supplements the design mfonnancn mvolved m the design and development The kind of fuel to be loaded into and already disclosed. providmg funher cf a rew modular hontontal concrete stored in the VSC-24 cask at Palisades.

detail on such matters as the s endor's spent fuel storage system (NUHOMS shoulu Consumers Power proceed with design calculations (often m the form cf desel and formed a new company, use of the VSG-24 cask. must be computer runst and speafic data mputs Pacific Sierra Nuclear. for the acceptable fuel for storage in the cask for models used by the vendor for such ccmmeraal manufacture and marketing and must meet the Cert ficate of calculations, as well as cask desun cf1e VSC-24 st rsge system NRC Compliance specifications mentioned details sach as remfortms steel sa.mg focuses its efforts on assunng safety and above for acceptable fuel which may be and shield lid thickness. The environmental protecuon through stored in the casi. In this regard. the informauon bemg disclosed thertfge t-views cf appbcauons for licenses and Ceruficate of Compliance and SER have provides additional specifiaty fer tne safety analysis nports. If a new been clanfied to speafically ident fy the pubhc about the technical mfcrmation ccmpany apphes for a cernficate of fuel assembly classes acceptable for that was considered by the NRC staff m ccmphance. that new cornpany must stornee in the VSC-24 cask and to prepanng the pnncipal NRC documents meet all NRC :=qmrements as would idenufy limits for physical dimerisions.

underlymg this rulemaimg These ey ecstag company. Through NRC's we:ght, burnup. decay power and documents mclude the proposed

17968 Todaral Registe.r / Vol. 58. No. 65 / WaA===Aay. April 7.1M3 / Rales an.d Eagularkuna Carnicate of emNne= for the cad is, r~e. r--~- s ashd who impec en which thu detarmmauon se and the assocanned NBC sta65ER and would be resperaMa kar owemg 1 of based is avadahJe for mspecuan at the H. ad EA. which wars prena sly fuel stased in casks aAer NEC Pubuc narsrrant Room. 2120 L placed in the NRC PuWe nam--t daraad""i= ef the reactor.

Street. NW. ! Lower leveJ 1. Was h.n.p on Roc = at the osant of this prop:. sed shipmeat af the bloff-sata.and br DC. Single copies of the Ennrocanotal rulemai ng.

decommissaan' of the rad 2 ahar M-at and tM Fia&ng of No Seccad. the inmal puisac coc. ment stored fuel was e5-e6ts.

Sqpa6 cant hopea are evadabW frwa menod oyad on Jur.e 2s.1991, and Response. In acr:erdanra w2th 10 CFR Mr. Cardes E. Gee 6ersan. Off.as of hd no Septamber G.1991. N 50.5GbbL eZ1 ep-=H ng nuclaar power helaar Eclainry Researts. U S.

comment penod was reo ned on raam haenames ese reqsired. no later Nuclear Ee6 atory Carnauu on.

W january 21.1993 sad on February than 5 years paar to the arpmnon af Washmgton.DC 20555. te phne Do1) 22.1991. la addxsoa.at ne p4.c the opmting licensa. to prende the G2-3602.

nasung basd with the Mciupe NRC. Im myiew and appeal the Attorney Generei on Febnsory 2.3.1962 beenmee a propass to = anapa and Paperwart Redoctrae Act Stserment NRC M he comes rocasved provide fun &ng for the mana6araant of his Ent! rule does not centun a new

,,.tha (we workg deys sP.sr et allirre6 sand fuel NRC's esnew d the or amended Informwion cobe meetmg would be consedered Ahhotupb boensee's hl management pregpam requtrement subasc to the Ps perwcrk ie comment panods hen cheed. NRC wall be W' "a as part d'=0aH Reducuan Ad of 1980 (44 U.S C. 3501

{

g,, w gy ces,,,,,,,,,ourved.

'""-"$ t'nder the proe=nma of part sa et seq L Existmg requ2rements ware j

hs, h pubric armmaar period for and put 72 ef the Commtarian's approved by es Ofice of M mat tb d be h ben h regularsans and Bad 688 SPProval ru.ml.ar 3150-F me mesh M h MC h W'th inspect to decn-= +amnning de 0112.

co-irmrses snoes ihmo ousc$ent time br U"*" "** "8 7 *"3*C8 8 ""~'* "~" "2 Regulatory Ametyens altmeern est d

.* :'7P" d r=La =a 6 a

1. Allow storage of spesd bal la th On July 18,1990 (55 TR 29181) the

73. Comment. One axseessater spaat bl pool ta which mas ab Comm2=mn issud an unendment to 10 quesnomed h seM2ty d awgbding 1xammes wdl be W to snsunsam us UR put 72. which provided for tb gamma dose as de esas: sea; Caw 5 putSa b n storsgo of spent nuclec fuel under a Se5P**** N i -

2. Anow storsgo oflaalio a certiBed g neral11cenu. Any nuclear power caledetes th dow eene es the WB 6s cask ander she psonsaans dpart 72 as reactor licensee can use these cads if:

lowed mso se E darteg taask lang as she part 50 hn== sucumina tn (3) by naufy the NRC in advance.(2)

Dose is medowned et the pdan of

,fy,ct, er the spent bei is stared undar the maxrmum exposure, bt is. et h oudet

3. Allow storage in an on-aite conditions specud in the cad's sent and the top of b VSC. Under independset spant kal monage CertiAnste of Compliance; and 131 the thew crestances, se enn-e installation n=Aar the site-spedEc other con 6tions of the sansra.! bcanse

{

distnbuuon of rw60ective meterialin bnnng pronamns d part 72.

are met. As part of 61990 rulamaUng.

I 8

de spent fuel essemhhes contr :rutes to For say of the above ahernatives, tb four spent kal starage cads were ib dose in a trenetent faddon.The uc.n,wi73 w,,,

.No for safe approved far une at zoactor tites, and assumption thet the se=res is trectly smmy d soemt b deng b wm Usted in 10 CTR 72 214. ht frem me actrve fuel whrth is aligned d storsp.for later shipsnant

, age for rulamaling envisaoamd that sinnige mth tb er exheast is conserestrv'-

further storage or dispoeni and for f.nal casks cartiEsd in the kiurs could be smee it rs the brgbest and ts sustained daose-~'-- d b rencaur spent routinaly added so 6 Itating in 5 72.214 for a short penod af tsme. Other MSBf fuel pool, dry staenge mak or15F$2 to emugh rut-4ing precedures.

~

VT relstrve posrtions during transfer a level passetang uL

^-W rmleau d Prnmadures and cntersa br <br6ng wcruid yield smaller does retes.

b site and hcuay. N sequt==.aar.

NRC approval of new spant La! storage Calculsuons demonstreted that the does go, a.m,. u,: ~, m pMed is is cask daar= wm prended in 10 CE rem frt m gemme enntting redroectt" CFR part 72.30. whEh deines 72.230.

me enal m the ner.zie is three ardm of dacs==Moning planntag %-al N akema:lve to this prepnsad megmtude less than the does rate from assurance and recordiaspsg ection is to wirkhnlA cart 25cataan of thew new desi ns and to con <idar the ice act:ve fuel section.

6 provtsicaa.

74 Comtr ent. A commentar noted grantmg d a sete-s lean== to each met the geometry for does calculations Tinding of No SigspErans utihty that br per:macon to use was based on an eclier design a.4 not I8PriF***eestal hoped: A.,,"_i

&m new ces. nis herve wodd en the latest confiptretion.

Under the Naikna]Invirtsmestal be more costty and time o mg Fespanse. L champs in desJgn Pohcy Act d 1962, as amended and the h-raa== each sae-specic laconse efer ed to by the enmmanter ware sli ht f%--dm*s segulariose no subpert A apphcaboo would require e spectSc 6

repoutsorungs of the inlet air duct. W of to CFR part St. the Commimon has review. In ad6 tan, withholdmg reonentation icvolves mmor ch a tre of determined that this rule rs not a ma+ar cert 2hrma would ignore &

both the borunntal and verucal Fedaral acason sharmry afleting the rulemaking pmcodures and mtena m onentauon of the dt.ct but does not quality d the burnam ennronment sad.

to CFR pact 72. subparts K and L lor chnge the cucuitous path wbch therefars.an annronmental impact the addrtson of new cak desens.

antributes to rediation protacason. In statement is not requared. Ris final rue Further. it as m conflx2 with the editon, the analysis does not tale adds en additionalcask to the hst of Congreassonal directmo m sectaons 133 c edd for the 0.5-inch stes] hoer of the approved spant faal atora6e cads that and 218 of the Nuclear Waste Pohcy Act euct which would udset any small power raector hcannees can use to store of 1982 to establash procadares kar the

c..arges in dose due to reonectation af spent feel at rencor sites wahout hcenomg of technlopns br the une of 2e duct.hafore. the desigo changns additionei aife speclic approwals by h spent fel sr.orege at the urns of cmh*n do not esdt in a tgnificant chac,ge an Comr o-N anvironmental nuc6e.r power reactors wsthout to the the reistion dose rue calculadons.

assessmant and Ending of no aypni$ cant extent precuc.ahie. de need lur l

~_.

W e

h i,

Fed:ral Register / Vol. 58. No. 65 / Wednesday. April 7.1993 / Rules and Regulations 17967 2-edditional alte reviews. Also this issued by the Small Businees I 72.214 1.las et sensrweed apent twel I

a temauve would exclude new vendor Admfnistrauon at 13 CFR part 121.

Marece cosas.

casi des gns from the opproved NRC list A4eie Cert:Scate Number:1007 un32r subpart K without cause and i :

would arbitranly hmit choice of cask ne NRC has determined that the SAR Subnutted by: Pacdc Sierra N.acitar 4

backSt rule.10 CFR 50.109, does not Associates l

I s gns available to power nector e

e:hees under the generallitanse.

spply to this Ensi rule and, thus, a SAR

Title:

Safety Acalysis Report for the l

Lis Enal rulemahng will eliminate backEt analysis is not required for this Venulated Sr,se Cask System Enal rule, because this amendment does Ce\\S the above problems. Funber this action Nr W L m' m til have no adverse effect on the pubhc not involve any provtssons which would Model N'h VM health and safety.

impose backEts as denned in Dated at Rockvs!!e. MD. this 1st day of l

The benent of this final rule to

$ S0.109(s)(1).

April 19s3.

I cuc!w.r power nector licensees is to List of Sub, sets in to CFE Fort 72 Far the Nuc!aar Regulatory Comminston.

W s, N& James K. Snaesa.

l make available a greater cholos of spent f.el storage cask designs which can be matenals. Occupational safety and Actas Esec utw Duectorfor opemt:ons

+

I. n health. Reportmg and recordkeeping IFR Doc. 93-8112 Filed a4-93. 8 45 aml rcas ces m

ny Eave e advantage over the sicsting Qr"n*Dt8. S*Cun4 m**8uM8 S ent

(

P an2mie oose now.,

designs in that power roector licensen For the reasons set out in the FIDERAL ELECTION COMMISSAON sks The ne k vendors th a E

o 95 end.

to be bsted in 6 72.214 beneSt by being the Ene gy Reorganktion Act of 1974 11 CFR Part 110 able to obta:n NRC certi5 cates once for as amended, and 5 U.S.C. S52 s.nd 553, a cask desip which can then be used the NRC is adopting the following

[Menee 1ea5-14]

by many power reactor licensees under amendments to 10 CFR part 72.

the general license. Vendors with cask Transfers of Funds from State to

)

designs already hsted may be adversely PART M. UCENSNQ Federal Carnpaigns 4

tmpacted in that power reactor licensees REQUIREMENTS FOR THE may chocse e newly listed des'gn over INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT an custing one. However, the NRC is NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH4.EVEL AGsascy: Federal Election Commission.

I required by its regulations and NWPA RADIOACTIVE WASTE AcTioss: Final rule: Announcement of requirements to establish a procedure and to consider appbcations to certify

1. no authority citation for part 72 effective date.

and list approved casts. De NRC also continues to read as follows:

j

' benents becaua it will be ab! to certify Ausherwy. Secs. 51.53.57.62.63,65.es.

Co i

e cask design based on one generic st.161.1s2.183.164. t es.187.1s9. Sa Stat.

g g

8 g6 sa:ety and envtronmental review. for 929. s30. s32. 833. s34. 835, 64a. e53, a54 ne b'y muluple licenwas, his Enal 955. as amended. sec. 234. &3 Stat a44. as of funds from state to federsi campa2gns.

amended (42 US C 2071. 2073. 2077. 2092 58 FR 3474 (January 8,1993).The new

,i. emsun,.$.as no sig:ngcant e

2093.2095.2099.2111.2201.2232.2233.

rule prohibits the transfer of funds from I

adenthable impact or beneSt on other 2234. 2236,2237. 2238. 2242h sec. 274. Pub.

state to federal campaign committees.

r gc6 err. ment agences.

L 46-373. 73 Stat. 648, as amended (42 The Comminaion announces that this l

Basec on de above discussion of the U.S.C 2021h sec. 201. as amended. 202. 206, new mgulation will be eNective Jul 1.

I bene!.ts ud impects of the alternatives. 88 Stat.1242. as amended.1244.12a6 (42 1993. Further informetion is provi ed in l

the NRC concludes thet the US C 54 1. 5442. 56 ash Pub. L 95401. sec. th'suppI6mentary inkrestion da1 i

requirements cf the Enal rule sto

10. 92 Stat. 2951142 US.C 545t h sec.102, idIows.

commensurate with the Commission's Pub. L 91-19o.43 Stat.153 (42 US.C 4332h en 131.132.133.135.137. H1. Pub. L 97-EPPECTfvt EW.TE: July 1.1993.

respons:bthfies for protection of the 425. 96 Stat 2229. 2230. 2232. 2241. wc.148 Pom PunTMEA sponssafioN cowTACT-

~.:)Le health and safey and the bommon da.fense and becunty. No other C\\0

15. )D157*Ma. Susan E. Propper. Assistant General i

.10152.

53.1 Counsel. 999 E Street. NW..

at a: lab;e alter:.auve is believed to be as tou t.10164)'

Washington. DC 20463. (202) 219-3693 l

satsfactory;inus, tlas action la Section 72 44(4) also isued under secs.

recommencoc.

142'b) and 14s(c). Idl Pub. L 100-203.101 or (B00) 424-9530.

t Stat.1334232.1330-236 (42 US.C SuPPLEasENTARY pePons&AThoN: Today, the Regulatory Flexibility Ad CertiScation 10162(bl.101t.atcXdll. Section 72.46 also Commission is announctng the effecuve l

T!eubihty Act.5 U.S C 605(bl.the 2239h sec.134. Putt L 97-425. 96 Stat. 2230 of funds from state to federal campaips.

l.

l in accordants with the Regt.latory issued under sec.1s9.64 Stat. 955142 U.S.C date ofits new rule prohibiting transfers l

C mma-icn cerufes that tlus rule, will (42 U S.C 101541. Section 72 96fdi als See 11 CFR 110.3(c)(6). Section 438{d) i not have a sipiEcant economic impact 7,

$3jj'u2

~

f title 2. United States Code. requtres j

l d"

S 101 cn a substr.ntial number of small Sen Womeo * - 2t21. 2(15).

that any rule or regulauon prescnbed by i

entbes. This amendment sIfetts only 21191.11?fs).141(th Pub. L 97-425. 96 Stat.

the Commisalon to carry out the 8

4 ocensees ownmg and opereurg nucles.r 2202. 2203. 2204. 2222. 22a4 (4 2 U.S C provisions of1 t!e 2 be transmitted to l

Power reactors and cask vendors. The 10101.10137tsh 10161fh!). Subpa ta K and L the Speaker of the House of 1 i ewners of nuclear power plants do not are also tuued under sec.133, sa Stet. 2230 Representauves and the Pmsident cf the l l

! ail within tne scrpe of the definition of (42 US.C 10153) mod e c. 21 stet we Stat Senate thirty legislative days before it is "small enutes" sot forth in sect:en 2252 (42 U.S C 101981-finally promulanted. These regulauons l

X1f 31 of the Regulatory Flex 2tthty Act.

2. In 5 72.214. Certi5cate of wem retransnutted to Congress on Z U.S C 622. or the Small Bunness Comphance 1007 is added to rsed as January 5.1993. Atrty legtslauve days he Standards not out in regulauona follows:

erpared in both the House of l

1

f l

RESPONSES TO COMMENTS 57, 61, AND 62

57. Comment.

A number of commenters requested a public hearing on this rulemaking. Approximately half of the commenters requested that a full public hearing be held at each reactor facility site prior to the use of dry cask storage at that site.

j Response. Consistent with the applicable procedure, the NRC does not intend to hold formal public hearings on the VSC-24 cask rule or separate hearings at each reactor site prior to use of the dry cask technology approved by the Commission in this rulemaking.

Rulemaking procedures, used by the NRC for generic approval of the VSC-24 cask. including the underlying staff technical reviews and the opportunity for public input, are more than adequate to obtain public input and assure protection of the public health, safety and the environment.

Further, in this rulemaking, NRC has taken extra steps to elicit and fully consider public comments on the VSC-24 technology.

Section 133 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 authorizes NRC to approve spent fuel storage technologies by rulemaking.

When it adopted the generic process in 1990 for review and approval of dry cask storage technologies, the l

Commission stated that " casks... [are to] be approved by rulemakino and any safety issues that are connected with the casks are properly addressed in that i

rulemaking rather than in a hearing procedure." 55 FR 29181 (July 18, 1990).

Rulemaking under NRC rules of practice, described in 10 CFR 2.804 and 2.805, provides full opportunity for expression of public views, but does not use formal hearings of the type requested by commenters.

l In this proceeding, rulemaking clearly provided adequate avenues for members of the public to provide their views regarding NRC's proposed approval of the VSC-24 cask, including the opportunity to participate through the submission of statements, information, data, opinions and arguments.

In this connection, the NRC staff prepared for public examination two separate, technical evaluations for the VSC-24 dry cask system, each time making detailed, i

documented findings of compliance with NRC safety, security and environmental requirements. The staff's first evaluation, prepared in March 1991, reviewed and approved the VSC-24 for reference in a site-specific application for an independent spent fuel storage installation.

In May 1992, the NRC staff reviewed the VSC-24, and approved the design for purposes of initiating this rulemaking to grant a generic approval of the design.

In addition, the staff conducted a third review in response to the public comments on the VSC-24 in this rulemaking, again finding compliance with NRC requirements as set forth I

in this notice of final rule and response to comments.

l In addition to reviewing systematically and in depth the technical issues important to protecting public health, safety and the environment, the NRC has i

taken extra steps to obtain and fully consider public views on the VSC-24 technology, and has made every effort to respond to public concerns and j

questions about the VSC-24 cask's compliance with NRC safety, security and environmental requirements.

The initial public comment period opened on 1

I 2

June 26, 1992, and closed on September 9, 1992.

In addition, NRC received a number of comments after the close of that period, all of which were fully considered.

Subsequently, NRC extended the period for submission of public comments until February 22, 1993.

Thus, the public comment period for this rule has effectively been almost nine months.

In addition, the NRC staff made every effort to consider comments received after February 22, 1993.

Further, the staff proposed and participated in a public meeting near one of the nuclear plants proposing to use the VSC-24 cask (i.e., Palisades), with the Attorney General of the State of Michigan, to provide further opportunity for public input on the safety, security and environmental compliance issues in this rulemaking. NRC also participated in an earlier meeting of the Van Buren County Commission near the plant site.

Under these circumstances, formal hearings would not appreciably add to NRC's efforts to ensure adequate protection of public health, safety and the environment, and are unnecessary to NRC's full understanding and consideration of public views on the VSC-24 cask.

i 61.

Comment.

Some commenters requested that the NRC prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) and update the Generic EIS for the L

handling and storage of spent fuel.

The EIS should be submitted to the

[

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to the State of Michigan.

Some commenters also requested that action on this rule be delayed until the Wisconsin Environmental Impact Statement is complete.

Response. The potential environmental impacts of utilities using the VSC-24 cask (or any of the other spent fuel casks approved by NRC (10 CFR 72.214))

have been fully considered and are documented in a published Environmental Assessment (EA) covering this rulemaking.

Further, as described below, the EA indicates that use of the casks would not have significant environmental impacts.

Specifically, the EA notes the 30-plus years of experience with dry storage of spent fuel, identifies the previous extensive NRC analyses and findings that the environmental impacts of dry storage are small, and succinctly describes what impacts there are, including the non-radiological impacts of cask fabrication (i.e., the impacts associated with the relatively i

small amounts of steel, concrete and plastic used in the casks are expected to be insignificant), the radiological impacts of cask operations (i.e., the incremental offsite doses are expected to be a small fraction of and well within the 25 mrem /yr limits in NRC regulations), the potential impacts of a possible dry task accident (i.e., the impacts are expected to be no greater than the impacts of an accident involving the spent fuel storage basin), and the potential impacts due to possible sabotage (i.e., the offsite dose is calculated to be about one rem). All of the NRC analyses collectively yield the singular conclusion that the environmental impacts and risks are expected to be extremely small.

The absence of significant environmental impacts from dry cask storage at a reactor site is also the conclusion of other NRC EA's for previously approved dry casks analyzed in earlier rulemakings addressing Part 72, and in the Commission's Waste Confidence decisions in 1984 (August 31, 1984; 49 FR 34658) and 1989 (September 29, 1989; 54 FR 39765).

In the 1984 Waste Confidence decision, the Commission concluded there was reasonable assurance spent fuel

l 3

l can be safely stored at reactor sites without significant environmental impacts, for at least 30 years beyond expiration of NRC reactor operating licenses. The 1989 Waste Confidence decision review reaffirmed prior l

Commission conclusions on the absence of significant environmental impacts.

i Thus, given the Commission's specific consideration of the environmental i

impacts of dry storage summarized above, and given the absence of any new information casting doubt on the conclusion that such impacts are expected to be extremely small and not environmentally significant no meaningful environmental insights are likely to be gained from further preparation of either an EIS or an updated GEIS for the dry storage methodology.

j The EA covering the proposed rule, as well as the finding'of no significant

[

impact (F0NSI) prepared and published for this rulemaking, fully comply with the NRC environmental regulations in 10 CFR Part 51. Moreover, since the Commission's environmental regulations in Part 51 implement NEPA and give proper consideration to the guidelines of CEQ, they assure that the EA and the FONSI conform to NEPA procedural requirements, and that further analyses are therefore not legally required.

In connection with the EA and FONSI, it bears emphasizing that 10 CFR Part 72, Subpart K already authorizes dry cask storage and already approves dry casks for use by utilities to store spent fuel at reactor sites.

See 10 CFR 72.214 for a listing of information on Cask Certificate Nos. 1000 through 1003.

The present rulemaking is accordingly for the limited purpose of adding one more l

cask to the list of casks already approved by NRC.

Furthermore, the cask, to be added to the NRC list by this rulemaking will comply with all applicable NRC safety requirements.

Finally, this rulemaking applies to cask use by any power reactor licensee within the United States.

Therefore, it is not dependent on any one individual State's actions including prepar6 tion of a separate EIS by any State.

Further, nothing in this rulemaking would preclude any State from implementing its environmental statutes and regulations as may otherwise be permitted by law.

I 62.

Comment.

Commenters believed that a cost / benefit analysis should be prepared. One commenter proposed a cost comparison formula which would estimate costs associated with dry cask storage over the next 1000 years.

Response. A regulatory analysis, which considers both benefits and impacts of adding the VSC-24 cask to the list of NRC-approved casks under 10 CFR Part 72 Subpart K, was prepared in support of this rulemaking action.

It was included as a part of the notice of proposed rulemaking and is also included in this final rulemaking notice.

This regulatory analysis reflects the limited economic scope of this rulemaking.

The 1000 year cost comparison identified above assumes 1000-year interim storage at Palisades, an assumption the NRC is i

not proposing or adopting in this rulemaking.

The NRC Waste Confidence decisions concluded there is reasonable assurance the Federal government will begin receiving spent fuel for disposal by 2025. Thus, the likelihood of 1000-year interim storage at Palisades is extremely small.

l t

~

DestusuDMDtwpe CONGat38 JDMu D CmGELL tsCMirsam, tamansase wee,ev a wuman tatoonw.

tantes J toponutAD. CatsFesuma J."ett & CELiv. 04800!Wl..^**"""

W.6. Douse of Representatiber

%to M".=".com,,

AL Swrf. walenessTON MC "r,'.",* ";=f' C!'07 "Ar#

Committee on Energy anb Commerce i

. n o.-,

me

- -o "O'"."'1"JO M OT"*"1." "uA^ ""a Room 2125. Rarburn Dme ettia Nuitting 2 0 ".7'1 7a ""**

'"4 %"d" "*M.

Wastington, BC 20515-6115 c

1*la';LT.

"70%"=

i

OO= E"=

April 1' 1993 Co ao"SYEIE=

5 Y

= ?=l"21.1"

'O!!?s'O.* """~*

0"."4 "t=l'717;" '

~ :TL7,R' *

!":s%;'J'"

"a jaQQw.n-mma j.

'0".iT",!%"J'iL',"!O'.'J "?

The Honorable Ivan Selin Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555

Dear Chairman Selin:

Enclosed please find the letters of three Michigan residents expressing concerns regarding the dry cask storage project at the Palisades Nuclear Plant.

I understand that the Commission is in the process of considering comments on the project compiled during an extended public comment period which concluded on February 22, 1993.

The enclosed letters speak to serious concerns regarding the lack of a hearing, an environmental impact statement, and an economic analysis for the project.

I would appreciate your addressing the issues raised in this correspondence.

I share the concerns of these citizens and'of other individuals that the cask system should be protective of the public health and the environment.

Thank you for your attention to this' matter of importance to the residents of the State of Michigan.

With every good wish.

j Si

erely, i

t JOHN D. DINGELL CHAIRMAN i

Enclosure r

i f

l

g 1

1191 Brid Road Al1egan. M4 49010 Fecruary 27, 1993 k

The Honoracle Jonn Dingle Chair. House Energy anc Commerce Committee U.S. House of Representatives Wasnington. D.C. 20515

Dear Sir:

We strongly support a public hearing and environmental impact stucy on the proposed storage of nuclear waste on the snores of Lake Michigan at the Palisaces Nuclear Power Elant.

This is an issue on which we dare not make a mistake!

Yet questions about testing, safety, permanency, anc/or moni toring have not been answerec.

We hope that the House Energy and Commerce Committee wi11 request the public hearing that those of us who live in Micnigan are seeking.

Once all the facts are on the table anc there has been a careful study of the impact of the storage casks on the whole Lake Michigan ecosystem, then pernaps a cecision can be made that the public can support.

Meanwnile, we are terrifled about the potential for alsaster unien we foresee in al1 the as yet unanswerec questions.

Please help!

4 Yours truly, iarilyn and Donal Henkel

r

.r ll

/

i' 1

March 1, 1993 Rep. John Dingle Chairman, House Energy & Commerce Comm.

2328 Rayburn Bldg.

Washington, D.C.

20515

Dear Rep. Dingle:

It has come to my attention that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is in the process of approving the " temporary storage" site of the nuclear waste dry casks at the Consumers Power Co. 's Palisades Park Plant.

I have recently read numerous magazine and newspaper articles indicating that this nuclear waste dry casks storage may be approved without full Public Hearings or any Environmental Impact Statement or any cost benefit analysis.

I What disturbs me is that our federal government has not been able to resolve these issues and yet we are going to allow Consumers Power, who does not have the world's greatest _ record, stall

" temporary storage" on their local site.

I hava also read that the design of the casks in which the nuclear waste is to be housed is even suspect.

I have also read that Consumers is contemplating a passive drive-by inspection progr.am of the casks.

While this storage site is being constructed as " temporary storage", the casks that are being constructed are not designed to be transported.

Once these casks are placed in position and the nuclear waste is stored, it appears to me that we will have a tremendous problem of I

trying to dispose of this or to remove it from the site.

Consequently, I am asking that you allow a Public Hearing, an Environmental Impact Statement, and a cost benefit analysis so that we and our children, and our future children, will be able to continue to enjoy the lake and the Palisades area in its true grandeur.

5 5

[

w Sincerely, g

JI E T-

o.

~

O M

i i

^y#

f der Charles J.

e

-i e 27909 Shorewood Drive 2

Palisades Park, MI 49043 l

CJH/sdh i

os.

ROBERT MCCARTHY PALISADES PARK COUNTRY CLUB COVERT, MICHIGAN 49043 P.ECiOV E 0 J:33 FEB 23 Fil b G3 y '..

. o

w. v

in nci,-

February 18, 1993

'~

j Represenative John Dingle 2328 Rayburn Building Washington, D. C. 20515

Dear Sir,

This communication relates to the Consumers Power Company, Palisades t

Nuclear Power plant located in Covert, Michigan.

t It is my understanding that Consumers Power desires to gain approval for a dry storage cask system for the storage of spent fuel rods and other nuclear waste.

I wish to communicate my strong opposition to any approval of this storage system without ful' public hearings, enviormental impact state-l ments and cost benefit analysis.

Your return comments and positions relating to this matter will be greatly appreciated.

Very truly yours, A

~~)

R.\\ W. McCarthy t

e

)