ML23156A043
| ML23156A043 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/01/1996 |
| From: | NRC/SECY |
| To: | |
| References | |
| PRM-072-002, 61FR03619 | |
| Download: ML23156A043 (1) | |
Text
DOCUMENT DATE:
TITLE:
CASE
REFERENCE:
KEYWORD:
ADAMS Template: SECY-067 02/01/1996 PRM-072-002 - 61 FR03619 - PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY; RECEIPT OF PETITION FOR RULEMAKING PRM-072-002 61FR03619 RULEMAKING COMMENTS Document Sensitivity: Non-sensitive - SUNSI Review Complete
DOCKET NO. PRM-072-002 (61FR03619)
In the Matter of PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY; RECEIPT OF PETITION FOR RULEMAKING DATE DOCKETED DATE OF DOCUMENT TITLE OR DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT
11/08/95 11/02/95 LTR FM STEPHEN QUENNOZ, PGE, SUBMITTING PETITION FOR RULEMAKING TO AMEND 10 CFR 72 01/26/96 01/26/96 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE - RECEIPT OF PETITION FOR RULEMAKING 03/28/96 03/22/96 COMMENT OF CONSUMERS POWER CO (PATRICK M. DONNELLY) (
- 1) 04/16/96 04/16/96 COMMENT OF NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (LYNNETTE HENDRICKS) (
- 2) 04/17/96 04/16/96 COMMENT OF YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC CO (JANE M. GRANT) (
- 3) 04/18/96 04/16/96 COMMENT OF VIRGINIA POWER (M.L. BOWLING) (
- 4) 04/18/96 04/12/96 COMMENT OF PECO NUCLEAR (G.A. HUNGER, JR.) (
- 5) 04/29/96 04/23/96 COMMENT OF SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT (JERRY DELEZENSKI) (
- 6)
SMUD DOCKE E(l SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT O 6201 S Street, P.O. Box 15830, Sacramento CA 95852-18ij6 R; '452-3211 AN ELECTRIC SYSTEM SERVING THE HEART OF CALIFORNIA NQA96-040 April 23, 1996 Secretary U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Attn: Docketing and Service Branch Docket No. 50-312 Rancho Seco Nuclear Station License No. DPR-54
'96 APR 29 P 3 :oa OFFIU:: OF SErRE rA,
DOCKET!. J &
~vie BRA C PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY PETITION FOR RULEMAKING REGARDING 10 CFR 72 AND GREATER THAN CLASS 'C' WASTE
Reference:
Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22, Pages 3619 to 3621, Docket No. PRM-72-2
Dear Mr. Chilk:
The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (the District) provides the following comments in support of Portland General Electric's (PGE) subject petition for rulemaking. This rulemaking would amend 10 CFR 72 and permit isolation and storage of Greater Than Class 'C' (GTCC) waste in a licensed Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI).
The District is currently (1) decommissioning its Rancho Seco nuclear facility in accordance with a NRC issued Decommissioning Order and (2) licensing an on-site ISFSI. The District is also evaluating the benefits of pursuing dismantlement and decontamination activities once all spent nuclear fuel is placed at the ISFSI. Commencing dismantlement activities following spent fuel placement at the ISFSI would result in the District generating GTCC waste beginning in 1998.
The District is very concerned with the disposition of GTCC waste. In order to complete decommissioning at Rancho Seco, interim storage of GTCC waste is necessary. Current NRC regulations do not specifically address the interim,
storage of GTCC waste. Clarification to the regulations, as proposed by PGE, is essential to permit successful decommissioning.
RANCHO SECO NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION 14440 Twin Cities Road, Herald, CA 95638-9799; (209) 333-2935
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATOOY COMMISS10h oocvrn G SERVICE SECTION OFF C
,c SECRETARY CC ~r... \\SSION
[
Postmark o,
~a~
9 lP Copies Re
,\\dd'I Ccples R~
'-\\-
Speclal Distribu
Mr. Chilk NQA 96-040 The District believes amending 10 CPR 72 to include GTCC waste is appropriate because:
- 1.
10 CPR 61 contemplates GTCC waste disposal in a geologic repository, similar to spent nuclear fuel disposal requirements;
- 2.
To temporarily store GTCC waste at an ISPSI, the GTCC waste must meet the spent nuclear fuel 10 CPR 72 interim storage requirements;
- 3.
Based on NRC and licensee evaluations, ISPSis provide an interim safe storage method for highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel, until permanent disposal in a geologic repository;
- 4.
Storing GTCC waste at an ISPSI would provide for safe interim storage consistent with protecting public health and safety;
- 5.
Including GTCC waste in 10 CPR 72 would provide safe interim storage and isolation from the environment similar to spent nuclear fuel; and
- 6.
Including GTCC waste in 10 CPR 72 would facilitate eventual transfer of GTCC waste to an approved disposal facility.
The District provides the above comments in support of the PG E's petition for rulemaking and urges the NRC to adopt regulations that appropriately address interim storage of GTCC waste.
Sincerely,
-.......,m, Delezenski Superintendent 2----
Quality Assurance/Licensing/ Administration cc:
L. J. Callan, NRC, Arlington, Texas R. Dudley, NRC, Rockville
PECO NUCLEAR DOCKETED USNqc i\\ U,\\/JT ()/ PECO EM!?(,\\'
'96 APR 18 P 3 :5 3 OFFICE OF SECRETAR Y DOCKt. l L1.; & :;lHV,C BRANCH PECO Energy Company Nuclear Group Headquarters 965 Chesterbrook Boulevard Wayne, PA 19087-5691 April 12, 1996 DOCKET NUMBER Mr. John C. Hoyle Secretary of the Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 PETITION RULE PRM
_ ~
(lo\\ FR..3b\\9)
Subject:
Comments Concerning Portland General Electric Company Petition for Rulemaking (61FR3619)
Dear Mr. Hoyle:
This letter is being submitted in response to the NRC's request for comments published in the Federal Register (i.e., 61FR3619, dated February 1, 1996) concerning a Petition for Rulemaking filed by Portland General Electric Company. This Petition requested that the NRC amend its regulations (i.e., 1 0CFR72) governing the independent storage of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste to specifically include radioactive waste produced from reactor operations pending its transfer to a permanent disposal facility.
PECO Nuclear appreciates the opportunity to comment on this Petition for Rulemaking filed by Portland General Electric Company. PECO Nuclear agrees that this rulemaking effort would clarify the process for interim storage of radioactive waste produced from reactor operations pending transfer to a disposal facility. Therefore, we fully support Portland General Electric Company's rulemaking petition, and recommend its promulgation as a final rule.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Very truly yours, 1,.q~&.:t1 *J1.
Director - Licensing
. APR_ 2 9 1995~
A\\cknowledged by eard """'"'""'"'".. """'""'"
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIOt-.
DOCKETING & SERVICE SECTION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE COMMISSION Document Statistics Postmark Date ~~~ ---
Co~es Received. _ _.__ _____ _
,\\dd'l Copies Reprod
&d Special Distribution
DOCKETED USN~C
'96 APR 18 P 3 :Q6 April 16, 1996 OFFI E O. !.i~CRETi RY DOCKET!,.
'. E R'./iCF Secretary U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 BRA~ 1'I mnsorook Technical Center 5000 Dominion Boulevard Glen Allen, Virginia 23060 VIRGINIA POWER Serial No. GL 96-017 NL&OS/EJL Attention: Docketing and Services Branch DOCKET NUMBER TITION RULE PRM
Dear Sir:
( G;, \\ F~ ~-k,-\\ q'""'l).e:::i.:.:,~
G)
PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY PETITION FOR RULEMAKING 10 CFR PART 72, LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE FEDERAL REGISTER / Vol. 61, No. 22 / FEBRUARY 1, 1996 / p. 3619 This letter provides Virginia Power's comments regarding the subject petition for rulemaking. The petitioner has requested that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) amend its regulations which govern independent storage of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste to specifically include radioactive waste produced from reactor operations pending its transfer to a permanent disposal facility.
Specifically, the petitioner requests that 10 CFR Part 72 be amended to include radioactive waste that exceeds the concentration limits of radionuclides established for Class C waste in 10 CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv). This material is commonly referred to as "greater than Class C" (GTCC). 10 CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv) requires that this type of waste must be disposed of in a geologic repository unless the N RC authorizes disposal at another licensed site. The petitioner has suggested that the need to provide interim storage for GTCC waste is a generic issue, and the regulations in 1 O CFR Part 72 should be amended to explicitly provide for the isolation and storage of GTCC waste in a licensed ISFSI.
We are in full agreement with the purpose and intent of the petitioner. The need to provide temporary storage for GTCC waste is a generic issue that could potentially confront a significant number of commercial power reactor licensees. We also agree with the petitioner's conclusions that the proposed amendments to 10 CFR Part 72 would clarify the process for interim storage for GTCC waste, and would also ensure safe interim storage of this waste pending permanent disposal.
The petitioner's specific proposed amendments to 10 CFR Part 72 would broaden the Purpose (§ 72.1) and Scope (§ 72.2) of the rule to include not only power reactor spent fuel and other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel storage, but also
U.S. NU"Li:.A:-, 1 t __...,...A1GRY COMMISSIOI\\
DOCKc TtNG & SERVICE SECTION OFFIC OF THE SECRETARY OF THE COMMlSSI
[)(ICument Statistics
- os1m k Date ~
~
~ ----
Copl s Recei _,d_...,__ _____ _
- dcfl Copies Reprodue,oo --4--- ---
Special Distribution~.-..-b ;~o,O,.,
~
--~
~..,
Petition for Rulemaking 10 CFR Part 72 Serial No. GL 96-017 page 2 of 2 GTCC waste.
Additionally, the proposed amendments would also broaden the definition of "Spent Fuel" (§ 72.3) to include GTCC waste. The petitioner has stated that the proposed amendments would avoid the costs associated with preparation of multiple requests for handling GTCC by licensees and the review of those requests by NRC. While we are in full agreement with the purpose and intent of the petitioner, we are concerned about the effect of the requested amendments to the rule.
More specifically, we are concerned that the NRC may interpret the requested amendments to require licensees I applicants to address GTCC waste issues even in cases where the licensees / applicants intend only to store spent fuel and not to store GTCC waste.
We suggest that the amendments to the rule be constructed in such a way that it is clear that licensees / applicants need address GTCC waste issues only if they are specifically seeking approval from the NRC to store GTCC wastes.
Finally, we fully endorse the comments sent separately to the NRC by the Nuclear Energy Institute. We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on this petition for rulemaking.
Very truly yours, JN£4 M. L. Bowling, Manager Nuclear Licensing & Operations Support cc: Ms. Lynette Hendricks Director, Low-Level Waste Nuclear Energy Institute Suite 400 17761 Street NW Washington, DC 20006-3708 Ms. Margaret Megehee Dry Cask Project Manager Portland General Electric Company Trojan Nuclear Power Plant 71760 Columbia River Highway Lanier, Oregon 97048
YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC C(Wf~Nr Telephone (508) 779-6711 TWX 710-380-7619 US.RC 580 Maim§#re'-.pft3pfforp !J11JfJachusetts 01740-1398 C\\Co f\\PI"- \\7 p '5~ lo\\-~ ~
OF IC(C'~-~:,?f.ET1\\RY April 16, 1996 OOC KE I lt*u ~ *. _,,ERV ICE FYC 96-01 BRAl'H.,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 DOCKETNUM PETITION RULE PRM
( G:il FR. ~ -:-b-1 C\\~~2' Attention:
Subject:
Mr. John C. Hoyle Office of the Commission Portland General Electric Company Petition for Rulemaking - 10 CFR Part 72, PRM-72-2 (61 FR 3619)
Dear Mr. Hoyle:
Yankee Atomic Electric Company (Yankee) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the subject rulemaking petition. Yankee is the owner of the Yankee Nuclear Power Station in Rowe, Massachusetts and provides engineering and licensing services to nuclear power plants in New England. Because the Yankee station in Rowe is permanently shut down and is in the process of being decommissioned, Yankee is vitally concerned about regulations that govern the process for interim storage of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste pending removal by the Department of Energy. We offer the following comments for your consideration in this matter.
Also, we support the Nuclear Energy Institute' s comments on the subject rulemaking petition.
The subject rulemaking petition requests that 10 CFR Part 72, "Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste," be amended to include radioactive waste that exceeds the concentration limits of radionuclides established for Class C waste in 10 CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv). In 1985, Congress assigned the federal government responsibility for disposal of waste that exceeds 10 CFR Part 61 Class C limits (i.e., greater-than-Class-C (GTCC) waste). The GTCC waste comprises a small volume of radioactive material that the NRC has determined by regulation (10 CFR 61.55) to be generally unsuitable for near surface disposal due to the presence of long-lived radioisotopes. In the absence of a currently available disposal facility, licensees must store GTCC waste until the DOE removes the waste to an interim storage facility and/or disposes ofit in a geologic repository. The DOE is currently storing some commercial and noncommercial GTCC waste at several of its facilities in the United States.
Commercial reactor GTCC waste is primarily activated material containing curie concentrations of one or more long-lived radioisotopes specified in NRC regulations ( e.g., Niobium-94, Nickel-59, Carbon-14). The quantity ofGTCC waste is small relative to the amount of spent fuel fAPR 1 8' 1998
4cknow1edged by card
"'**~,
~ '-' 1
- -~*'""'
, ~v u'\\ 1 uHY \\,,0tv1MISSI0fl.
D0CKETlNG & ERVICE SECTION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE C0MMlSSI0N Document Statistics PoS1mark Date clL~* (1-\\11o\\c,.~
Copios Received__.. ______ _
.\\dcrt Coples Rep
Letter, YAEC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April 16, 1996 Page2 generated at a reactor site. In Yankee's case, the quantity represents about 2% of the spent fuel assembly volume discharged.
Comments Yankee supports the subject rulemaking petition and offers the following comments for consideration by the Commission in developing a final rule change:
Legislation that is currently pending floor action in the U.S. Senate (S.1271, "The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1996") has recognized that in order for nuclear power plants to complete decommissioning, a means for interim storage and repository disposal of GTCC waste must be identified. Toward this end, S. 1271 specifically includes GTCC waste within the Bill's definition of High-Level Radioactive Waste in Section 2(12)(B) and
- states, "lllGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE -- The term 'high-level radioactive waste' means -
"(A) the highly... ; and
"(B) other highly radioactive material that the Commission, consistent with existing law, determines by rule requires permanent isolation, which includes Greater than Class C low-level waste as defined in Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 61."
Additionally, Section 204(1) of the Bill requires the NRC to establish, by rule, criteria for storage of GTCC waste in the interim storage facility established under the legislation.
Accordingly, this rulemaking is timely and necessary given the Congressional intent under S. 1271.
The petitioner's proposal at Section 72.3, "Definitions," recommends that GTCC waste be included within the definition of"Spent Nuclear Fuel." We recommend that because GTCC waste is not spent fuel, but typically irradiated metal, that GTCC waste be defined separately as high level radioactive waste. This would be consistent with Senate legislation which also proposes to define GTCC waste within the definition of "High-Level Radioactive Waste." The Commission should adopt the same definitional approach in 10 CFR Part 72 to ensure a consistent treatment of GTCC waste under law and regulation, something that has been lacking and, therefore, a problem in the past.
The conditions and requirements set forth in Section 72.236 for spent fuel storage cask approval encompass and can be applied to GTCC waste. Therefore, 10 CFR 72 Subpart L, "Approval of Spent Fuel Storage Casks," should include the certification of GTCC
Letter, YAEC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission April16, 1996 Page3 waste under the general license conditions should a licensee wish to include this material within the certificate.
Commercial reactor GTCC waste is less hazardous than spent nuclear fuel. Criticality is not a concern and the decay heat generation rate is lower than spent fuel on a comparable weight basis. Nearly all gamma activity derives from short-lived radioisotopes, and the associated radiological source term declines rapidly.
The Yankee GTCC material consists of the activated 304 stainless steel core baffie structure, which has been segmented into long thin strips, and the dross from segmentation. Because of its location immediately adjacent to the reactor core, the core baffie received a high neutron fluence over the life of the reactor. The core baffie has been characterized for radioisotope content, radiological source term, and decay heat generation and is currently stored in spent-fuel-sized containers in the spent fuel pool.
These canisters are individually marked and are thus readily distinguishable from the spent fuel assemblies.
Summary Yankee agrees with the petitioner that the proposed amendments to 10 CFR Part 72 will clarify the process for interim storage of GTCC waste pending ultimate disposal in a geologic repository.
Further, we agree that these proposed amendments provide identical public health and safety, and environmental protection as that required for spent fuel storage.
Yankee appreciates the opportunity to comment on the subject rulemaking petition and urges that the proposed changes to 10 CFR Part 72, as modified by our comments above, be adopted.
c:
M. Fairtile, NRC, NRR Sincerely, YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMP ANY ager, Regulatory and Industry Affairs Department
DOC ETED US, C NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE April 16, 1996 Mr. John C. Hoyle Secretary US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Attention:
Docketing and Services Branch
'96 APR 16 P3 :59 OFFICE ~1::- SEC.RE TAl~Y OOCKET lr~G & 3ERV! CE BRANCH Lynnette Hendricks
- DIRECTOR, LOW-LEVEL WASTE DOCKET NUMBER.,
PfTITfON RULE PAM~
( ~I f'"R...c<c.19)
SUBJECT:
Portland General Electric Petition for Rulemaking, Docket PRM-72-2, Federal Register 22, Vol. 61, February 1, 1996, Request for Comments
Dear Mr. Hoyle:
NEI fully supports Portland General Electric's (PGE's) petition to revise 10 CFR Part 72 to explicitly include provisions for the safe, temporary storage of radioactive waste that exceeds the concentration limits of radionuclides established for Class C in 10 CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv), hereafter referred to as "greater than C" waste, at an independent spent fuel storage facility. NEI respectfully recommends that NRC revise Part 72 to implement the amendments proposed in PGE's petition because the issue is generic in nature, i.e., it is an issue that most current holders of Part 50 licenses will have to address when their facilities are decommissioned. Absent regulatory change, NRC will be required to review multiple requests with no benefit to public health and safety. The performance requirements in Part 72 adequately address the storage of this waste, hence making additional case by case reviews for this generic issue an unnecessary expenditure of agency and licensee resources.
An encumbered decommissioning regulatory process is not in the best interest of the public, NRC, or licensees. NRC is currently revising several sections of the regulations covering reactor operations because NRC recognized that burdening the agency and licensees with tedious exemption processes for the many requirements that no longer apply to permanently shut down reactors, wastes resources, can lead to inconsistent application of requirements and is not a good basis for the smooth transition of facilities from shutdown to decommissioning phases. NEI believes a clear predictable, well thought out regulatory environment could have a positive impact on safety. NEI further suggests public confidence is enhanced if NRC aggressively pursues regulatory changes that address necessary practices, thereby 1 776 I STRt:.t: f NW SUITE 400 W ASH INC3 I ON, DC 2D006-3 /O H PHO NE 202 /39 8000 I AX 2 02 / 85 4019
U.S. NUCLEAR REl3ULATORY COMMISS/Of'-.
DOCKETING & SERVICE SECTION OFF/CE JF THE SECRETARY OF THE COMMISSION Document Statistics Postmark Date~~
=
Co~s Received.-4-* -~ ------
.\\ckfl Copes Reprod~ ed Speda Oislrllxnion?"", 9fi'--~,
Mr. John C. Hoyle April 16, 1996 Page 2 avoiding the need for licensees to request specific reviews or to seek formal exemptions. This will engender smoother, more predictable compliance with the regulatory requirements, thereby enhancing protection of public health and safety.
NRC has determined that material with concentrations of long lived radionuclides exceeding the concentrations permitted for Class C waste is not acceptable for near surface disposal. Currently, no option exists to dispose of the very small volumes of these materials. A study performed by DOE (DOE/LLW-114) predicts the total volume of greater than Class C waste generated by all utilities over the lifetime of their plants, including decommissioning waste, will be about 134 7 cubic meters based on estimates of total volumes generated to the year 2055. Because of the very small total volumes of all greater than Class C wastes the report also recommends DOE not establish a separate disposal facility for this material. Logically, DOE will dispose of the material along with the spent fuel in the same deep geologic disposal facility. Consequently, it makes sense to provide for storage of greater than Class C waste commensurate with on site storage or in a central storage facility along with spent fuel and high level waste.
Performance requirements in Part 72 in addressing spent fuel storage issues are more than adequate for safe storage of greater than Class C waste. This waste cannot go critical in any configuration, generates less heat per gram than spent fuel, and will decay more quickly than spent fuel, i.e., 90% of the activity comes from short-lived nuclides. Part 50 contains adequate provisions for safe storage of greater than Class C waste in the course of reactor operations. As more facilities shift into the decommissioning phase and terminate their Part 50 licenses it is important that appropriate regulations are in place.
In summary, NEI believes that NRC should act quickly to establish the most appropriate regulatory basis for temporary storage of greater than Class C waste in independent spent fuel storage facilities. We believe adoption of the amendments proposed by PGE would meet this objective. In so doing, NRC establishes a clear predictable regulatory structure that is more than adequate to protect the public health and safety.
If we can be of any assistance to you as you review these comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at (202 739-8109), or Paul Genoa at (202 739-8034).
Sincerely,
~~
Lynnette Hendricks
consumers Power PDWERINli
/I/IICHlliAN'S PRDliRESS DOCKETED USNRC
'96 HAR 28 P 3 :49 Patrick M Donnelly Plant Manal!,er Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant, 10269 US-31 North. Charlevoix, Ml 49720
. T Ry OFFICE m SF 'Rt. f-March 22, 1996 Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Docketing and Service Branch Washington, D.C.
20555 OOCKE l ING &,.,l: F,* I 'E BRMffH DOCKET NUMBER PETITION RULE f~M la-~
( Col FR._~(o \\ 9)
CD DOCKET 50-155 - LICENSE DPR BIG ROCK POINT PLANT - COMMENTS ON PETITION CONCERNING 10 CFR 72 (FEDERAL REGISTER VOLUME 61 DATED FEBRUARY 1, 1996)
This correspondence is in response to requests for public comment on a petition for rulemaking filed by the Portland General Electric Company concerning 10 CFR Part 72, as published in the Federal Register, Volume 61, No. 22, pages 3619-3621, February 1, 1996.
Consumers Power Company supports the petition to include radioactive materials which exceed the radionuclide concentrations of Class C wastes in the Scope and Definitions of 10 CFR Part 72.
The proposed revisions add significant clarification as to the status of greater than Class C wastes with respect to independent spent fuel storage installations and monitored retrievable storage facilities.
Irradiated nuclear fuel, if evaluated to 10 CFR Part 61.55 criteria, would itself fall in the classification of greater than Class C waste.
Neither safety nor the intent of the regulations is compromised by the proposal to handle both fuel and greater than Class C wastes in similar fashion.
Nearly all materials classified as greater than Class C waste at nuclear power facilities consist of stainless steel, zirconium and other corrosion resistant alloy structures. These materials will resist environmental degradation under all foreseen storage and disposal MAR 1 *r 199f Acknowl8dged by card................ ""..........,...
A CMS' ENERGY COMPANY
U.S. NUCLEAfl r UULATORY COMMISSIOI\\
DOCKETING & SERVICE SECTION OFFICE OF THE SECRET ARY OF THE COMMISSION Document Statistics Postmark Date 3ja.s\\q<o Co~esReceived-r-
'""1-1 _ ___
Adcfl Copies Reproduced - ----,,_,---
Special Distribution~ooCM:,. ~o~ >..,
- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIG ROCK POINT PLANT COMMENTS ON PETITION CONCERNING 10CFR72 March 22, 1996 conditions, and do not pose the safeguards concerns associated with spent fuel.
Storage and disposal under the same requirements as fuel is a highly conservative approach, but is necessitated by the requirement of 10 CFR Part 61 that greater than class C waste "is not generally acceptable for near-surface disposal". This leaves no current option but deep geological disposal, along with spent fuel, for this material.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
'l
£) Cf'/
/2
-/(
. /2
-* *,-;Z-zf 1/f7 ~ ~
Patrick M Donnelly Plant Manager CC:
Document Control Desk, USNRC/NRR Administrator, Region III, USNRC NRC Resident Inspector - Big Rock Point 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 72
[Docket No. PRM-72-2]
Portland General Electric Company; Receipt of Petition for Rulemaking AGENCY:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION:
Petition for rulemaking; Notice of receipt.
DOCKETED
[ ~ e1-P]
'96 J~N 26 P 2 :SO OFF JC oor. 1* F-.
DOCKET NUMBER PETITION RULE PRM *,
(lei FR...~fc:.\\9
SUMMARY
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has received and requests public comment on a petition for rulemaking filed by the Portland General Electric Company.
The petition has been docketed by the Commission and has been assigned Docket No. PRM-72-2.
The petitioner requests that the NRC amend its regulations which govern independent storage of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste to specifically include radioactive waste produced from reactor operations pending its transfer to a permanent disposal facility.
The petitioner believes that its proposal would clarify the process for interim storage pending transfer for disposal of this class of material.
~
lCoJ 10.C\\(p, DATE:
Submit comments by P5 says follewiR§ publ ieatioR iR t~ Federal Register).
Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given except as to comments received on or before this date.
ADDRESSES:
Submit comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
Attention: Docketing and Service Branch.
Deliver comments to 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:45 am and 4:15 pm on Federal workdays.
For a copy of the petition, write: Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
2 For information regarding electronic submission of comments, see the language in the "Supplementary Information" section of this notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael T. Lesar, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
Telephone:
301-415-7163 or Toll Free:
800-368-5642.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission received a petition for rulemaking dated November 2, 1995, submitted by Portland General Electric Company.
The petition was docketed as PRM-72-2 on November 8, 1995.
The petitioner is an NRC-licensed public utility authorized to possess the Trojan Nuclear Plant (TNP).
The petitioner requests that the NRC amend its regulations in 10 CFR Part 72 entitled, "Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste." Specifically, the petitioner requests that 10 CFR Part 72 be amended to include radioactive waste that exceeds the concentration limits of radionuclides established for Class C waste in 10 CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv).
The petitioner anticipates that it will need to dispose of radioactive waste categorized in 10 CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv) as generally unsuitable for near-surface disposal during decommissioning activities at TNP.
This material is commonly referred as greater than Class C" (GTCC) waste because it exceeds the radionuclide concentration limits of Class C waste.
10 CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv) requires that this type of waste must be disposed of in a geologic repository unless the NRC authorizes disposal at another licensed site.
The petitioner indicates that its TNP decommissioning plan, submitted to
3 the NRC on January 26, 1995, specifies plans for transfer of spent reactor fuel currently being stored in the spent fuel pool to an onsite Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI).
The petitioner believes that because the ISFSI will be licensed under the requirements of 10 CFR Part 72, these regulations should be clarified to explicitly provide for storage of GTCC waste produced from reactor operations pending its transfer to a permanent disposal facility.
The NRC is soliciting public comment on the petition for rulemaking submitted by the Portland General Electric Corporation that requests the changes to the regulations in 10 CFR Part 72 as discussed below.
Discussion of the Petition The petitioner notes that the regulations in 10 CFR Part 72 establish requirements, procedures, and criteria for the issuance of licenses to store spent fuel and other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel storage in an ISFSI.
The petitioner believes that, based on evaluations by the NRC and other licensees, an ISFSI provides a safe, interim method to store highly radioactive spent fuel assemblies pending their transfer to a permanent repository.
The petitioner's TNP Decommissioning Plan, submitted to the NRC on January 26, 1995, provides for the transfer of spent nuclear reactor fuel, currently being stored in the TNP spent fuel pool, to an onsite ISFSI.
The petitioner suggests that, because the need to provide interim storage for GTCC waste is not specific to TNP and is generic, the regulations in 10 CFR Part 72 should be amended to explicitly provide for the isolation and storage of GTCC waste in a licensed ISFSI.
The petitioner also believes that the NRC must address this issue because decommissioning activities will involve a need to transfer or store
4 before transfer other radioactive materials classified as GTCC, and because GTCC waste is not generally acceptable for near-surface disposal as specified in 10 CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv).
The petitioner anticipates that GTCC waste, like spent fuel and other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel, would be stored in the ISFSI pending the disposal in a geologic repository.
The petitioner notes that the design criteria currently provided in 10 CFR Part 72, Subpart F, entitled "General Design Criteria," establish design, fabrication, construction, testing, maintenance, and performance requirements for structures, systems, and components important to safety.
The petitioner also indicates that 10 CFR 72.122 encompasses quality standards, protection against environmental conditions, performance of confinement barriers, and the ability to retrieve radioactive waste for processing or disposal.
Criteria are also currently provided for nuclear criticality safety, radiological protection, waste handling, and decommissioning.
The petitioner believes that the proposed amendments to 10 CFR Part 72 would address the consideration of radioactive waste which is beyond the scope of 10 CFR Part 61 and would serve as an interface between these regulations.
The petitioner has concluded that the proposed amendments would prevent repetitious NRC staff reviews of individual requests to authorize storage and disposal of GTCC wastes.
The petitioner also has concluded that the inclusion of GTCC waste under 10 CFR Part 72 would facilitate the eventual transfer of GTCC waste to a Department of Energy or other approved facility for proper disposal.
The Petitioner's Proposed Amendments The petitioner requests that 10 CFR Part 72 be amended to overcome the
5 problems the petitioner has itemized and recommends the following revisions to the regulations:
- 1.
The petitioner proposes that§ 72.1 be revised to read as follows:
§ 72.1 Purpose.
The regulations in this part establish requirements, procedures, and criteria for the issuance of licenses to receive, transfer, and possess power reactor spent fuel, other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel storage, and radioactive waste which exceeds the radionuclide concentrations of Class C waste defined in§ 61.SS(a) as provided for in Part 61 of this chapter in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) and the terms and conditions under which the Commission will issue such licenses, including licenses to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for the provision of not more than 1900 metric tons of spent fuel storage capacity at facilities not owned by the Federal Government on January 7, 1993, for the Federal interim storage program under Subtitle B--Interim Storage Program of the Nuclear Waste Policy of 1982 (NWPA).
- 2.
The petitioner proposes that§ 72.2, paragraphs (a)(l), (a)(2), and (c) be revised to read as follows:
§ 72.2 Scope.
(a)
(1)
Power reactor spent fuel to be stored in a complex that is designed and constructed specifically for storage of power reactor spent fuel aged for at least one year, other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel storage, and radioactive waste which exceeds the radionuclide concentrations of Class C waste defined in§ 61.SS(a) as provided for in Part 61 of this
6 chapter, in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI); or (2)
Power reactor spent fuel to be stored in a monitored retrievable storage installation (MRS) owned by DOE that is designed and constructed specifically for storage of spent fuel aged for at least one year, high-level radioactive waste that is in solid form, other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel or high-level radioactive waste storage, and radioactive waste which exceeds the radionuclide concentrations of Class C waste defined in§ 61.55(a) as provided for in Part 61 of this chapter.
The term "Monitored Retrievable Storage Installation" or "MRS," as defined in§ 72.3, is derived from the NWPA and includes any installation that meets this definition.
(c)
The requirements of this regulation are applicable, as appropriate, to both wet and dry modes of (1) spent fuel in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) and (2) spent fuel and solid high-level radioactive waste, and radioactive waste which exceeds the radionuclide concentrations of Class C waste defined in§ 61.SS(a) as provided for in Part 61 of this chapter in a monitored retrievable storage installation (MRS).
- 3.
The petitioner proposes that the definition of "Spent Nuclear Fuel or Spent Fuel" in§ 72.3 be revised to read as fo 11 ows:
§ 72.3 Definitions.
"Spent Nuclear Fuel" or "Spent Fuel" means fuel that has been withdrawn from a nuclear reactor following irradiation, has undergone at least one year's decay since being used as a source of energy in a power reactor, and
7 has not been chemically separated into its constituent elements by reprocessing.
Spent fuel includes the special nuclear material, byproduct material, source material, and other radioactive materials associated with fuel assemblies.
As used in this part, spent fuel shall also be deemed to include other radioactive materials which exceed the radionuclide concentrations of Class C waste defined in§ 61.SS{a) of this chapter.
The Petitioner's Conclusion The petitioner has concluded that the proposed amendments to 10 CFR Part 72 would clarify the process for interim storage, pending transfer for disposal of waste that exceeds the limits for Class C waste, and would also ensure safe interim storage of this waste pending permanent disposal.
The petitioner believes that the proposed amendments would provide identical public health and safety, and environmental protection as required for spent fuel located in an ISFSI.
The petitioner has also concluded that the proposed amendments to 10 CFR Part 72 would avoid the costs associated with preparation of multiple requests for handling GTCC by licensees and the review of those requests by the NRC.
Electronic Submission of Comments Comments may be submitted electronically, in either ASCII text or WordPerfect format (version 5.1 or later), by calling the NRC Electronic Bulletin Board (BBS) on FedWorld.
The bulletin board may be accessed using a personal computer, a modem, and one of the commonly available communications software packages, or directly via Internet.
Background documents on this rulemaking are also available for downloading and viewing on the bulletin board.
8 If using a personal computer and modem, the NRC rulemaking subsystem on FedWorld can be accessed directly by dialing the toll free number
{800) 303-9672.
Communication software parameters should be set as follows:
parity to none, data bits to 8, and stop bits to 1 (N,8,1).
Using ANSI or VT-100 terminal emulation, the NRC rulemaking subsystem can then be accessed by selecting the "Rules Menu" option from the "NRC Main Menu."
Users will find the "FedWorld Online User's Guides" particularly helpful.
Many NRC subsystems and data bases also have a "Help/Information Center option that is tailored to the particular subsystem.
The NRC subsystem on FedWorld can also be accessed by a direct dial phone number for the main FedWorld BBS, (703) 321-3339, or by using Telnet via Internet: fedworld.gov.
If using (703) 321-3339 to contact FedWorld, the NRC subsystem will be accessed from the main FedWorld menu by selecting the "Regulatory, Government Administration and State Systems," then selecting "Regulatory Information Mall."
At that point, a menu will be displayed that has an option "U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission" that will take you to the NRC Online main menu.
The NRC Online area also can be accessed directly by typing "/go nrc" at a FedWorld command 1 ine.
If you access NRC from FedWorld's main menu, you may return to FedWorld by selecting the "Return to FedWorld" option from the NRC Online Main Menu.
However, if you access NRC at FedWorld by using NRC's toll-free number, you will have full access to all NRC systems, but you will not have access to the main FedWorld system.
If you contact FedWorld using Telnet, you will see the NRC area and menus, including the Rules Menu.
Although you will be able to download documents and leave messages, you will not be able to write comments or upload files (comments).
If you contact FedWorld using FTP, all files can be
9 accessed and downloaded but uploads are not allowed; all you will see is a list of files without descriptions (normal Gopher look).
An index file listing all files within a subdirectory, with descriptions, is available.
There is a IS-minute time limit for FTP access.
Although FedWorld also can be accessed through the World Wide Web, like FTP, that mode only provides access for downloading files and does not display the NRC Rules Menu.
For more information on NRC bulletin boards call Mr. Arthur Davis, Systems Integration and Development Branch, NRC, Washington, DC 20555, telephone (301) 415-5780; e-mail AXD3@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this Jtf_~ay of January, 1996.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
~
ary of the Commission.
Portland General Electric Company Secretary Stephen M. Quennoz Trojan Site Executive U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555 Attention: Chiet: Docketing and Service Branch
Dear Mr. Samuel I. Chilk:
November 2, VPN-067-95 DOCKET NUMBER f'ETITJON RULE PAM (lc\\FR...~-b-l9J
_ l.,,l:i,~
Petition for Rulemaking to Amend IO CFR 72 Pursuant to IOCFR2.802, the enclosed Petition for Rulemaking is being submitted to amend the scope and purpose of Part 72, "Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel and ffigh-level Radioactive Waste," of Title 10 to the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (10CFR72) to explicitly include radioactive waste that exceeds the concentration limits of radionuclides established for Class C waste as discussed in 10CFR61.55(a)(2)(iv).
Waste exceeding the Class C limits, commonly referred to "as greater than class C" (GTCC), is produced as a direct result of normal operation of a nuclear reactor. Because GTCC waste is not generally acceptable for near-surface disposal, the regulations contemplate disposal in a geologic repository (see IOCFR61.55(a)(2)(iv)), similar to the disposal requirement for spent nuclear fuel.
The Trojan Nuclear Plant (TNP) Decommissioning Plan, submitted January 26, 1995 to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), delineates Portland General Electric' s plans for transfer of spent reactor fuel to an onsite Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) and the decontamination of systems, components and structural material. During decommissioning, the need for storage of GTCC waste is anticipated. Because the ISFSI will be licensed under the requirements of Part 72, PGE believes that Part 72 should be clarified to specifically provide for storage of GTCC waste.
71760 Columbia River Highway, Rainier,. OR 97048 503/556-3713
~Q: V d 8-
,iON ~.
J~NSO 0313~800
VPN-067-95 November 2, 1995 Page 2 of2 The petition proposes to modify Part 72 to address interim storage requirements for GTCC waste produced from reactor operations pending its transfer to a permanent disposal facility. This petition supports the safe storage of GTCC material for an interim period, promotes public health and safety, and minimizes impact on limited resources.
If you have any questions on this petition, please do not hesitate to call me or Ms. Margaret Megehee of my staff Enclosure cc:
M. T. Masnik, NRC NRR L.J. Callan, NRC Region IV L.L. Howell, NRC Region IV RA. Scarano, NRC Region IV D. Stewart-Smith, ODOE Document Control Desk Sincerely,
~~cD*.a~ 25 Stephen M. Quennoz Trojan Site Executive
PETITION FOR RULEMAKING FILED BY PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC INTEREST AND GROUNDS FOR PETITION The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations governing the disposal of radioactive material by nuclear power plant licensees are set forth in 10 CFR 20, Subpart K. Section 20.2001 of Subpart K specifies, among other things, that disposal of waste must be by transfer to an authorized, licensed recipient as provided in Section 20.2006 or in the regulations in parts 30, 40, 60, 61, 70, or 72. The Part 20 requirements specifically apply to low-level radioactive waste (LLW). The requirements of Parts 30 and 40, which pertain to disposal by transfer of byproduct and source materials, require the licensee to verify that the transferee is authorized to receive the material. Part 60 pertains to the receipt and storage of source, special nuclear, and byproduct material at a geologic repository operations area. Part 70 requirements are applicable specifically to special nuclear material. Part 72 is applicable to issuance oflicenses to receive, transfer, and possess power reactor spent fuel and other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel storage in an independent spent fuel storage installation.
In the performance of decommissioning activities at Trojan Nuclear Plant (TNP), Portland General Electric Company (PGE) anticipates the need to dispose of radioactive waste of the type categorized in 10 CFR Part 61 as unsuitable for near-surface disposal. This material is commonly referred to as "greater than Class C" (GTCC) waste. GTCC waste exceeds the radionuclide concentration limits of Class C waste. 10 CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv) indicates that waste in this category must be disposed of in a geologic repository unless the NRC authorizes disposal at another licensed site.
After reviewing the regulatory requirements applicable to the transfer and disposal of radioactive waste materials, PGE has concluded that the NRC regulations should be modified to clarify the process for handling GTCC waste. Therefore, PGE hereby submits this petition for rulemaking to specifically include GTCC waste under Part 72.
PETITION Based on the above grounds, PGE petitions the NRC to amend the regulations as described below in the section entitled "Scope of Proposed Changes." The information provided in the following section is provided in support of this petition.
Page 1 of 4
SUPPORT OF PETITION:
The regulations of Part 72 establish requirements, procedures, and criteria for the issuance of licenses to store spent fuel, and other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel storage in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI). As noted in the January 26, 1995 submittal of the Trojan Nuclear Plant (TNP) Decommissioning Plan to the NRC, PGE's plans provide for the transfer of the spent nuclear fuel, currently being stored in the spent fuel pool, to an onsite Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI). Based on previous evaluations by the NRC and other licensees, an ISFSI provides a safe, interim method to store highly radioactive spent fuel assemblies pending their ultimate transfer to a permanent repository.
PGE anticipates that performance of decommissioning activities will involve a need to transfer, or store prior to transfer, other radioactive materials of the type characterized as GTCC. Because such radioactive waste is not generally acceptable for near-surface disposal (see 10CFR61(a)(2)(iv)), PGE requests that the NRC clearly address this anticipated need. Because the need is generic in nature and not specific to TNP, the NRC regulations of 10 CFR Part 72 should be clarified to specifically provide for the isolation and storage of GTCC waste within a licensed ISFSI. This waste, like the spent fuel and other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel, would be stored in the ISFSI pending its ultimate disposal in a geologic repository.
Amending Part 72 to include GTCC waste would provide for its safe interim storage consistent with reasonable protection of public health and safety. By specifically including GTCC waste under Part 72 the NRC would be providing for the safe storage and isolation of this waste material from the environment in a manner similar to spent fuel. The design criteria currently provided under 10CFR72, Subpart F, "General Design Criteria," establish design, fabrication, construction, testing, maintenance, and performance requirements for structures, systems, and components important to safety. The overall requirements of§ 72.122 encompass quality standards, protection against environmental conditions, performance of confinement barriers, and the retrievableness of the radioactive waste for processing or disposal. Criteria are also currently provided for nuclear criticality safety, radiological protection, waste handling, and decommissioning.
The proposed revisions to Part 72 would address the consideration of radioactive waste which is beyond the scope of 10 CFR Part 61 and would serve as an interface between Part 61 and Part
- 72.
Acting in accordance with this petition potentially would avoid the need for NRC staff review of several individual requests to authorize storage and disposal of GTCC wastes.
Page 2 of 4
The inclusion of GTCC waste under Part 72 would also facilitate the eventual transfer of the GTCC waste to DOE or other approved facility for proper disposal.
SCOPE OF PROPOSED CHANGES:
The goal of this petition for rulemaking is to clarify the process for transfer and disposal of GTCC waste. This goal may be effected by revising portions of 10 CFR Part 72 as follows:
SECTION 72.1 "The regulations in this part establish requirements, procedures, and criteria for the issuance oflicenses to receive, transfer, and possess power reactor spent fuel.. and other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel storage, and radioactive waste which exceeds the radionuclide concentrations of CTass C waste defined in § 61. 55(a) as provided for in Part 61 of this chapter in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) and the terms and conditions under which the Commission will issue such licenses,... "
SECTION 72.2 (a)(l)
"( 1) Power reactor spent fuel to be stored in a complex that is designed and constructed specifically for storage of power reactor spent fuel aged for at least one year, -and other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel storage, and radioactive waste which exceeds the radionuclide concentrations of Class C waste defined in § 61. 55(a) as provided for in Part 61 of this chapter, in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI); or... "
SECTION 72.2 (a)(2)
"(l) Power reactor spent fuel to be stored in a monitored retrievable storage installation (MRS) owned by DOE that is designed and constructed specifically for the storage of spent fuel aged for at least one year, high-level radioactive waste that is in solid form, -and other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel or high-level radioactive waste storage, and radioactive waste which exceeds the radionuclide concentrations of Class C waste defined in § 61. 55(a) as provided for in Part 61 of this chapter,... "
Page 3 of 4
SECTION 72.2 (c)
"( c) The requirements of this regulation are applicable, as appropriate, to both wet and dry modes of storage of ( 1) spent fuel in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) and (2) spent fuel and solid high-level radioactive waste, and radioactive waste which exceeds the radionuclide concentrations of Class C waste defined in
§ 61.55(a) as provided for in Part 61 of this chapter in a monitored retrievable storage installation (MRS).... "
SECTION 72.3 "Spent Nuclear Fuel or Spent Fuel means fuel that has been withdrawn from a nuclear reactor following irradiation, has undergone at least one year's decay since being used as a source of energy in a power reactor, and has not been chemically separated into its constituent elements by reprocessing. Spent fuel includes the special nuclear material, byproduct material, source material, and other radioactive materials associated with fuel assemblies. As used in this part, spent fuel shall also be deemed to include other radioactive materials which exceed the radionuclide concentrations of Class C waste defined in
§ 61.55(a) of this chapter."
CONCLUSION This petition for rulemaking would clarify the process for interim storage, transfer, and disposal of waste that exceeds the limits for Class C LLW. The proposed changes would assure safe interim storage. Public health and safety and environmental protection would be provided to the same degree as for spent fuel located in an ISFSI. Furthermore, the proposed modifications to the regulations would avoid the costs associated with preparation by licensees of multiple requests for handling GTCC waste and the review of those requests by the NRC.
Page 4 of 4