ML20211H693
| ML20211H693 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/13/1999 |
| From: | Mcgaffigan E NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Vietticook A NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20211H674 | List: |
| References | |
| SECY-99-175-C, NUDOCS 9909020149 | |
| Download: ML20211H693 (5) | |
Text
r
\'
- l. NOTATION VOTE I 1
RESPONSE SHEET TO: Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary FROM: COMMISSIONER MCGAFFIGAN
SUBJECT:
SECY-99-175 - PROPOSED RULE: 10 CFR PART 72 -
CLARIFICATION AND ADDITION OF FLEXIBILITY Approved Y Disapproved Abstain Not Participating COMMENTS:
See attached comment and edits.
l SIGNATURE
) lh PU h h (3 '
Il DATE '
. Entered on "AS" Yes No Ta' !8te E 7c CORRESPONDENCE PDR pu@\%
r Commissioner McGsRFgan's Comments on SECY-99175 l approve publication of the proposed amendments for Part 72, " Clarification and Addition of Flexibility to Part 72." I suggest that the staff establish points of contact within the Department of Energy (DOE) to inform DOE of all Part 72 rulemakings and solicit comments from DOE ora such rulemakings.
. Suggested edits to the draft Congressional letters and press release are indicated on the attached pages.
~ ./ f *th
- . UNITED STATES !
g s* j NUCLEAR REGUMTORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20666-0001 i
l
\...../ Ahl cWp m m,u
{
j
-+ s. 7q. % \d n. l The Honorable James M. Inhofe, Chairman Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property and Nuclear Safety Committee on Environment and Public Works l United States Senate Washington, DC 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Enclosed for the information of the Subcommittee is a copy of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to be published shortly in the Federal Register. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend its regulations to specify those sections in 10 CFR Part 72 that apply to general licensees, specific licensees, certificate holders, and K
applicants for a specific license or a certificate of compliance to allow these entities to we cleat determine which sections of the regulations apply to their activities. In addition, these amendments would incorporate flexibility into 10 CFR Part 72 by specifying the conditions y
under which an applicant for a specific license may use an NRC-approved cas Madditional NRC license hearingspEid the conditions under which early%ask ryio fabrication may take placeger 4. natic. groat . y These amendments would eliminate regulatory uncertainty, reduce the regulatory burden on applicants for a 10 CFR Part 72 license, ar:d provide increased flexibility to manufacturers of spent fuel storage casks. This proposed change would have no detrimental impact on public ri aA d health and b off ubd b 1 safetg M 4heK is ( d e gk+ /r i b p b h. 4e w eA e cu r_ hr ki$. Sincerely, Dennis K. Rathbun, ONector Off;ce of Congressional Affaim
Enclosure:
Federal Register Notice cc: Senator Bob Graham O
- 1
[ %c {<o orcd ruk wodd relro / W C y e W .l o f d e d ]
'I
%sunu Groyan keSote. cask &Nr% em twnencq.,
J ,
DRAFT l
(For SECY paper) j NRC PROPOSES CHANGES TO REGULATIONS ON SPENT FUEL CASK FABRICATION, HEARING SCOPE d f l P
\0
$ \
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is proposing to amend its regulation onN 1 i storage of spent fuel from nuclear power plants to allow -t:-- cask manufacturers to y begin fabrication-at their own risk-before NRC approves sg oh % cas k. . }
The proposed amendments would also provide that proviously approved cask designs could not be challenged during a licensing hearing.
These changes would reduce the regulatory burden and provide additional flexibility for both applicants and licensees.
NRC has two processes for approving spent fuel storage: (1) a specific license for an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI), in which NRC conducts a detailed
{
review of an application to build and operate the installation on a specific site and (2) a general license, in which a nuclear power plant licensee may use storage casks previously approved ts/ the NRC, without having a specific license or detailed review by NRC (although certain site-specific issues are examined).
The NRC anticipates that it may receive applications for specific licenses for ISFSI's that will propose using casks already approved by the NRC for use under a general ilconse. Under current regulations, the adequacy of the design of these J previously approved casks could be at issue during a licensing hearing.
1 The proponed -ule, states that if a specific license application for an ISFSI incorporates information on the design of an NRC-approved spent fuel storage cask, the l
- r r
scope of any public hearing held to consider the application will not in design issue's previously addressed by the Commission.
This would eliminate the need for repetitious reviews by a hearing board. I addition, the public would have already had an opportunity to comment design before it was approved for use under a general license, since issues a Federal Register notice seeking public comments before decidi en uM hwe *d M incorporate a design into its regulations as approved for use, e cAN x4. y With regard to cask fabrication, current regulations prohibit an appli f
approval of a cask design for use under a general license from be the ' cask before the NRC issues a certificate of compliance. Applican license for an ISFSt,In contrast, are permitted to begin early fabricat the license is issued. The proposed revisions to the regulations wou differing NRC treatment between general and specific licensees.
Early fabricatkm would be at the risk of the appilecnt, who wou NRC costs of any actions required to conform a fabricated cask to the cond certificate of compliance. '
i interested persons are invited to submit comments within 75 day j
of a Federal Register notice on this subject, which is expected shortly.
comments should be sont to the Secretary, Nuclear Regulatory Comm
! Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudica h Comments may also be submitted electronically via the NRC's inte d
ll li rutomaking web site at hite://www.nrc.aov/NRC/ rule.html.
j!c.
?
w, p
i 3
h iT f , .
e I
.