[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 22, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33178-33184]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-15793]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 72
RIN 3150-AF80
Miscellaneous Changes to Licensing Requirements for the
Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive
Waste
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its
regulations to correct several inconsistencies and to clarify certain
sections of its regulations pertaining to the storage of spent fuel and
high-level radioactive waste. The amendments differentiate the
requirements for the storage of spent fuel under wet and dry
conditions, clarify requirements for the content and submission of
various reports, and specify that quality assurance (QA) records must
be maintained as permanent records when identified with activities and
items important to safety. These amendments are necessary to facilitate
NRC inspections to verify compliance with reporting requirements to
ensure the protection of public health and safety and the environment.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 23, 1999.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: M. L. Au, telephone (301) 415-6181, e-
mail mla@nrc.gov, of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Commission's licensing requirements for the independent storage
of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste are contained in
10 CFR part 72. NRC experience in applying Part 72 has indicated that
certain additions and clarifications to the regulations are necessary.
The NRC published a proposed rule in the Federal Register on June 9,
1998 (63 FR 31364).
When subpart L of part 72 was issued in 1990, the purpose and scope
of these regulations (i.e., to approve the design of spent fuel storage
casks and issue a Certificate of Compliance (CoC)) was not clearly
indicated in Secs. 72.1 and 72.2. Additionally, Sec. 72.2 referred to a
Federal Interim Storage Program; however, the statutory authorization
for this program has expired.
The current regulations contain information in multiple locations
on where to send part 72 reports and applications to the NRC. These
requirements were inconsistent and did not ensure that received
information was properly docketed.
The current regulations in Sec. 72.44 on reporting annual summaries
of radioactive effluents released from dry storage casks impose an
unnecessary regulatory burden on part 72 licensees by requiring
submittal of these reports on a schedule that is different from that
required by 10 CFR part 50. Most part 72 licensees are also part 50
licensees. Consequently, this regulation imposed an unnecessary
regulatory burden on part 72 licensees.
The current regulations in Sec. 72.75 on reporting requirements for
specific events and conditions are inconsistent with the reporting
requirements for similar reactor-type events contained in Sec. 50.73.
The current regulations in Secs. 72.122 and 72.124 on
instrumentation and neutron poison efficacy requirements are unduly
burdensome when applied to dry storage cask technology. The Commission
has received nine requests for exemption from these regulations over
the last three years.
The current regulations in subpart G (quality assurance (QA)
requirements) regarding retention of part 72 QA records differ from the
retention requirements imposed on part 50 license holders. However,
Sec. 72.140(d) currently allows a part 72 license holder to take credit
for its part 50 QA program in meeting the requirements of subpart G
with the result that differing retention requirements are imposed on
part 72 licensees.
Discussion
This final rule makes eight clarifying changes to Part 72. These
changes differentiate the requirements for the storage of spent fuel
under wet and dry conditions and ensure that necessary information is
included in reports and that QA records are maintained permanently when
identified with activities and items important to safety. These reports
and records are needed to facilitate NRC inspections to verify
compliance with reporting requirements to ensure protection of public
health and safety and the environment.
The following are a group of eight miscellaneous items of changes
to the regulations:
1. Modify Secs. 72.1 and 72.2 to include spent fuel storage cask
and remove superseded information.
The purpose (Sec. 72.1) and scope (Sec. 72.2) were not modified
when the Commission amended part 72 on July 18, 1990 (55 FR 29181).
Part 72 was
[[Page 33179]]
amended to include a process for providing a general license to a
reactor licensee to store spent fuel in an independent spent fuel
storage installation (ISFSI) at power reactor sites (subpart K) and a
process for the approval of spent fuel storage casks (subpart L).
Although the language in these sections may be read to include the
general license provisions of subpart K, the approval process for spent
fuel storage casks in subpart L is not referenced. This rulemaking
makes the purpose and scope sections complete by specifically
referencing the subpart L cask approval process. Additionally, this
rule removes information in the purpose and scope sections, regarding
the Federal interim storage program, because the statutory
authorization for the interim storage program has expired (61 FR 35935;
July 9, 1996).
2. Change the requirement for making initial and written reports in
Secs. 72.4 and 72.216.
The change to Sec. 72.4 provides that, except where otherwise
specified, all communications and reports are to be addressed to NRC's
Document Control Desk (DCD) rather than to the Director, Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS). Three current
regulations govern the submission of written reports under part 72
(Secs. 72.75, 72.216(b), and 50.72(b)(2)(vii)(B), which is referenced
in Sec. 72.216(a)). Under Sec. 72.75(d)(2), a report is sent to the
DCD. However Secs. 50.72(b)(2)(vii)(B) and 72.216(b) indicate that the
report be sent, as instructed in Sec. 72.4, to the Director, NMSS. To
achieve consistency, Sec. 72.4 is revised to instruct that reports
shall be sent to the DCD. Licensing correspondence forwarded to the
NRC's DCD ensures proper docketing and distribution. Also,
Sec. 72.216(c) is revised to correct an error in the paragraph
designation. The current regulation Sec. 72.75(a)(2) and (3) is revised
to read Sec. 72.75(b)(2) and (3).
3. Change the requirement for submittal of the dry cask storage
effluent report in Sec. 72.44.
Currently, Sec. 72.44(d)(3) requires that a dry cask storage
effluent report be submitted to the appropriate NRC regional office
within the first 60 days of each year. Section 50.36a(a)(2) requires
that a similar report be submitted to the Commission once each year
specifying liquid and gaseous effluents from reactor operations.
The revision permits reactor licensees, who also possess licenses
for ISFSIs, to submit their dry cask storage effluent report to the NRC
once each year, at the same time as the effluent report from their
reactor operations. The dry cask storage effluent report would be
submitted within 60 days after the end of the 12-month monitoring
period. However, after the effective date of this final rule, the
licensee may submit the dry cask report covering a shorter period of
time to synchronize the reporting schedule with the annual reactor
effluent report.
4. Clarify the reporting requirements for specific events and
conditions in Sec. 72.75.
Section 72.75 contains reporting requirements for specific events
and conditions, including the requirement in Sec. 72.75(d)(2) for a
follow-up written report for certain types of emergency and non-
emergency notifications. This rule clarifies the specific information
required to meet the intent of the existing reporting requirement. A
comparable reporting requirement already exists for similar reactor
type events in Sec. 50.73(b). This rule will provide greater
consistency between parts 50 and 72, on event notification
requirements. Since the reporting requirement already exists, a minimal
increase in the licensee's reporting burden will occur by clarifying
the format and content.
5. Clarify the requirement for capability for continuous monitoring
of confinement storage systems in Sec. 72.122(h)(4).
Currently, Sec. 72.122(h)(4) requires the capability for continuous
monitoring of storage confinement systems. The meaning of
``continuous'' is open to interpretation and does not differentiate
between monitoring requirements for wet and dry storage of spent fuel.
Wet storage requires active heat removal systems which involve a
monitoring process that is ``continuous'' in the sense of being
uninterrupted. Because of the passive nature of dry storage, active
heat removal systems are not needed and monitoring can be less
frequent. This rule clarifies that the frequency of monitoring can be
different for wet and dry storage systems.
6. Clarify the requirement specifying instrument and control
systems for monitoring dry spent fuel storage in Sec. 72.122(i).
Section 72.122(i) requires that instrumentation and control systems
be provided to monitor systems important to safety, but does not
distinguish between wet and dry spent fuel storage systems. For wet
storage, systems are required to monitor and control heat removal. For
dry storage, passive heat removal is used and a control system is not
required. Instrumentation systems for dry spent fuel storage casks must
be provided in accordance with cask design requirements to monitor
conditions that are important to safety over anticipated ranges for
normal conditions and off-normal conditions. This rule clarifies that
control systems are not needed for dry spent fuel storage systems.
7. Clarify the requirement for dry spent fuel storage casks on
methods of criticality control in Sec. 72.124(b).
Section 72.124(b) requires specific methods for criticality
control, including the requirement that where solid neutron absorbing
materials are used, the design must provide for positive means to
verify their continued efficacy. This requirement is appropriate for
wet spent fuel storage systems, but not for dry spent fuel storage
systems. The potentially corrosive environment under wet storage
conditions is not present in dry storage systems, because an inert
environment is maintained. Under these conditions, there is no
mechanism to significantly degrade the neutron absorbing materials. In
addition, the dry spent fuel storage casks are sealed and it is not
practical nor desirable to penetrate the integrity of the cask to make
the measurements verifying the efficacy of neutron absorbing materials.
This rule clarifies that positive means for verifying the continued
efficacy of solid neutron absorbing materials are not required for dry
storage systems, when the continued efficacy may be confirmed by
demonstration or analysis before use.
8. Clarify the requirements in Sec. 72.140(d) concerning the
previously approved QA program in conformance with appendix B of 10 CFR
part 50.
Section 72.174 specifies that QA records must be maintained by or
under the control of the licensee until the Commission terminates the
license. However, Sec. 72.140(d) allows a holder of a part 50 license
to use its approved part 50, appendix B, QA program in place of the
part 72 QA requirements, including the requirement for QA records.
Appendix B allows the licensee to determine what records will be
considered permanent records. Thus, part 50 licensees using an appendix
B, QA program could choose not to make permanent all records generated
in support of part 72 activities. This rule requires these licensees to
follow the part 72 requirement to maintain QA records until termination
of the part 72 license.
Summary of Public Comments on the Proposed Rule
The NRC received four letters containing nineteen comments
responding to the proposed rule published in the Federal Register on
June 9, 1998 (63 FR 31364). These
[[Page 33180]]
comments were considered in the development of the final rule. The
primary objective of this rulemaking is to clarify requirements for
certain sections of the regulations. The amendments differentiate the
requirements for the storage of spent fuel under wet and dry
conditions, clarify requirements for the content and submission of
various reports, and specify that QA records must be maintained as
permanent records. Copies of the public comments are available for
review in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW (Lower
Level), Washington, DC 20003-1527.
Four comment letters were received in response to the proposed
rule. One was from the Department of Energy (DOE) Idaho Operations
Office, one was from a private enterprise, and two were from nuclear
power plant licensees. All commenters were supportive of the proposed
rule.
Public Comments
1. Comment: One commenter believed that to ensure consistency with
existing regulations in part 72 and with another NRC proposed
rulemaking, ``Expand Applicability of Regulations to Holders of, and
Applicants for, Certificates of Compliance and Their Contractors and
Subcontractors'' (63 FR 39526; July 23, 1998), which proposes to define
a Certificate of Compliance (CoC) as a certificate approving the
``design'' of a spent fuel storage cask (as opposed to approving a
cask), changes should be made to Secs. 72.1 and 72.2(f).
Response: The Commission agrees with this comment. Changes have
been made to Secs. 72.1 and 72.2(f) to reflect the fact that
Certificates of Compliance are issued to approve spent fuel storage
cask designs rather than individual casks. In addition, in
Sec. 72.2(f), the phrase ``in accordance with the requirements of this
part as stated in Sec. 72.236'', which appears in the proposed rule,
has been changed to ``in accordance with the requirements of subpart L
of this part'' to reflect the fact that all the requirements of subpart
L pertain to the issuance of certificates of compliance.
2. Comment: One commenter noted that the proposed revision to
Sec. 72.4 removes existing language which provides the street address
for NRC's headquarters office. The commenter noted that this
information is necessary for persons who wish to either mail
communications to the NRC using a private courier service (e.g., FedEx
or UPS) or deliver their communication in person. Additionally,
Sec. 72.4 did not provide any guidance for instances in which the due
date for a report or written communication falls on a weekend or
holiday. In that regard the language in Sec. 50.4(e) should be used as
an example.
Response: The Commission agrees with this comment. The current
language in Sec. 72.4 containing the street address to be used for
personal delivery is being retained. In addition, the suggested changes
have been made for reports due on the weekend or a holiday. The Public
Docket Room at 2120 L Street NW, Washington, DC, has been removed from
the address listing because it is no longer receiving mail deliveries,
as all mail is now delivered to NRC Headquarters.
3. Comment: For Sec. 72.44(d)(3), one commenter was concerned that
allowing flexibility in the timing for submitting the annual report
could create ``ratcheting'' of the due date and result in the submittal
of each report earlier than required to avoid lateness. The change
proposed by the commenter to require that each report be submitted
within 60 days from the end of each monitoring period and not to exceed
the 12-month reporting interval would ensure timely submittal of these
reports.
Response: The Commission agrees that the language in the proposed
rule needs clarification. The Commission has added language in the
final rule to clarify that the report must be submitted within 60 days
after the end of the 12-month monitoring period. This change will allow
flexibility in timing of submitting the annual report without resulting
in the submittal of each report earlier than required to avoid
lateness.
4. Comment: Two commenters noted that current Sec. 72.75(d)(2)
requires a written follow-up report when an event or condition requires
an emergency notification under Sec. 72.75(a) or a non-emergency four-
hour report under Sec. 72.75(b), but that a written follow-up report is
not required when the event or condition requires a non-emergency 24-
hour report under Sec. 72.75(c). The second commenter suggested that
the NRC clarify its expectation for Part 72 licensees regarding the use
of NRC Form 366 and the format and guidance contained in NUREG 1022,
Revision 1, ``Events Reporting Guidelines 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73.''
Response: The Commission agrees with the comment on the first issue
and the suggested change has been made to require a written follow-up
report after a 24-hour oral notification. The written report is
required for documentation for future use and inspections. With respect
to the second issue, the Commission believes that use of NRC Form 366
and the guidance contained in NUREG-1022, Rev. 1, is an acceptable
method for preparing written event reports; however, licensees are not
required to follow this method if the written report contains all the
information required by Sec. 72.75(d)(2). Therefore, no change has been
made to address the second issue.
5. Comment: One commenter recommended not specifying the address
and addresses in different sections of the regulations where licensees
submit reports to NRC. Instead, the commenter recommended the use of
one initial location to indicate where reports are submitted to
simplify the regulations and ensure a consistent approach. Further, the
references in part 72 to the location where persons are to submit
information to the NRC should use the phrase ``in accordance with
Sec. 72.4'' instead of providing a specific address in each individual
section. This approach would be consistent with the approach taken in
other sections in part 72 as well as part 50. This would allow future
changes to the NRC receiving address to involve fewer sections of the
regulations. The commenter identified Secs. 72.44(d)(3), 72.75(d)(2)
and 72.140(d) as sections where this change should be made.
Response: The Commission agrees and has made the suggested changes
in the final rule.
6. Comment: One commenter noted that the proposed amendment to
Sec. 72.75 appears to be inconsistent with the advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPR) for 10 CFR 50.73 (63 FR 39522; July 23,
1998) concerning the format and content for reporting reactor events
and conditions.
Response: An objective of the Sec. 72.75 rulemaking was to make the
part 72 independent spent fuel storage installations (ISFSI) report
format and content requirements consistent with the current reactor
requirements in Sec. 50.73. The final proposed reporting requirements
for specific events and conditions in Sec. 72.75 are consistent with
the current requirements in Sec. 50.73. If the reporting requirements
in Sec. 50.73 should change, the staff will consider whether conforming
changes to Sec. 72.75 would be appropriate.
7. Comment: One commenter believed that the retention of QA records
until termination of the license for part 72 licensees, and the
addition of specific information to meet the existing reporting
requirement, do not comply with the Backfit Rule. The commenter
indicates that both of these amendments will introduce changes to
licensee procedures which are not justified by the substantial increase
in protection standard and asserts that the NRC appears to be applying
a new test; i.e.,
[[Page 33181]]
whether the changes are sufficiently trivial to ignore the Backfit
Rule.
Response: Under Sec. 72.62, ``backfitting'' includes the
modification, after the license has been issued, of procedures or
organizations required to operate an ISFSI or MRS. This backfitting
provision is very similar to the Backfit Rule in Sec. 50.109. The
Commission has determined that reporting and record keeping
requirements are not considered backfits even though they may result in
changes to procedures. If the reporting or record keeping requirements
had to meet the standards for a backfit analysis, the Commission would
have to find that the information would substantially increase public
health or safety or common defense and security without knowing the
results of the request. In addition, the existence or non-existence of
a record or report usually has no independent safety significance as
compared to actions taken by the licensee or NRC as a result of the
information contained in the record or report. It is this resulting
action that affects public health and safety or the common defense or
security that should be measured under the backfit standard and not the
method for obtaining or maintaining the information.
Nevertheless, the Commission also recognizes that imposing reports
or record keeping requirements may have a significant impact on a
licensee's resources. The standard for authorizing reporting or record
keeping requirements for NRC licensees that is contained in the Code of
Federal Regulations should be the same standard as the regulations
requiring the providing of information under 10 CFR 50.54(f). Namely,
before the staff either changes existing requirements or issues new
requirements affecting reporting or record keeping, a written analysis
should be prepared that contains (a) a statement that describes the
need for the information in terms of the potential safety benefit and,
if appropriate, a discussion of possible alternatives and (b) the
licensee actions required and the cost to develop a response to the
information request. In addition, the imposition of the new or modified
reporting or record keeping requirement should be approved by the
appropriate level of senior management (namely the Executive Director
for Operations or his or her designee) or the Commission itself in the
case of rulemaking. For rulemaking, the analysis justifying either
modifications to existing or new reporting and record keeping
requirements shall be contained in the regulatory analysis. The
regulatory analysis section of this rulemaking package adequately
addresses the Commission's standards for this specific record keeping
requirement.
8. Comment: One commenter recommended that the proposed change to
Sec. 72.140(d) should also include QA programs which satisfy the
requirements of subpart H of 10 CFR part 71. The commenter believes
that QA requirements in part 71 are equivalent to the QA requirements
in parts 50 and 72.
Response: While the staff agrees that the QA program requirements
in parts 50, 71, and 72 are equivalent, this comment is beyond the
scope of this rulemaking. This issue is being considered in a separate
rulemaking.
9. Comment: One commenter recommended that the wording in
Secs. 72.75(d)(2)(ii)(5) and (6) be revised to change the word
``plant'' to ``facility'' to be consistent with wording in
Sec. 72.75(d)(2(ii).
Response: The Commission agrees with this comment and the change
has been made.
10. Comment: One commenter recommended adding ``spent fuel
storage'' in the second and third sentences to better describe ``cask
design requirements'' in Sec. 72.122(h)(4).
Response: The Commission agrees with this comment and the change
has been made.
11. Comment: One commenter recommended replacing the terms
``systems'' and ``facility'' in the third sentence of Sec. 72.124(b)
with the term ``cask''.
Response: The Commission is not adopting this comment. The term
``facility'' includes casks but is not limited to casks. It is possible
that different noncask design configurations could be proposed. In
reviewing this comment, the staff recognized that a mistake had been
made in the proposed rule language in this section. The proposed rule
stated ``demonstration and analysis'', this has been corrected to read
``demonstration or analysis.''
12. Comment: One commenter recommended that the term
``notification'' be used in place of the term ``initial report'' in the
first sentence of Sec. 72.75(d)(2) to help distinguish between verbal
and written communications.
Response: The Commission agrees with the comment and the change has
been made.
13. Comment: One commenter stated that there is no provision in
part 72 for changes to NRC approved quality assurance programs
comparable to the part 50 provision at Sec. 50.54(a)(3) unless a
licensee has a Sec. 72.140(d) QA program incorporating an approved part
50 program. The commenter requests that a program change provision
similar to those found in Sec. 72.44(e) and 72.44(f) be provided to
allow for changes to a QA program without NRC approval in defined
circumstances.
Response: The proposed recommendation is beyond the scope of this
rulemaking action.
14. Comment: DOE requested that Sec. 72.80(b) be clarified to
exclude DOE from the requirement to submit a copy of its annual
financial report.
Response: The Commission agrees with the comment and Sec. 72.22(e)
has been revised to exclude DOE from financial assurance requirements.
Specific Changes in Regulatory Text
The following section is provided to assist the reader regarding
the specific changes made to each section or paragraph in 10 CFR part
72. For clarity and content, a substantial portion of a particular
section or paragraph may be repeated, while only a minor change is
being made. This approach will allow the reader to effectively review
the specific changes without cross-reference to existing material that
has been included for content, but has not been significantly changed.
Sections 72.1 (Purpose) and 72.2 (Scope): These sections are
revised to remove superseded information regarding the Federal Interim
Storage Program that has expired and to indicate that subpart L
provides requirements, procedures, and criteria for approval of spent
fuel storage cask designs and issuance of a Certificate of Compliance.
Sections 72.4 and 72.216: These revisions specify that all
communications and reports are addressed to the NRC's Document Control
Desk.
Section 72.44: This revision permits reactor licensees, who also
possess licenses for ISFSIs, to submit dry cask storage effluent report
once each year at the same time as the effluent report for reactor
operations, instead of submitting dry cask storage effluent report
within 60 days of the beginning of each year.
Section 72.75: This change incorporates specific format and content
information requirements comparable to reporting requirements that
already exist for similar reactor type events in Sec. 50.73(b).
Section 72.122(h)(4): This revision is made to state that periodic
monitoring instead of continuous monitoring is appropriate for dry
spent fuel storage.
Section 72.122(i): This section specifies the differences between
wet pool spent fuel storage instrumentation and control systems and dry
spent fuel storage cask instrumentation systems.
[[Page 33182]]
Section 72.124(b): This change is made to state that a positive
means for verifying the continued efficacy of solid neutron absorbing
materials is not required for dry storage systems, when the continued
efficacy is confirmed by demonstration or analysis before use.
Section 72.140(d): This change requires all licensees, including a
holder of a part 50 license using its approved part 50, appendix B, QA
program, to follow the requirement in Sec. 72.174 to maintain part 72
QA records until termination of the part 72 license.
Compatibility of Agreement State Regulations
Under the ``Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility of
Agreement State Programs'' approved by the Commission on June 30, 1997,
and published in the Federal Register (62 FR 46517, September 3, 1997),
this rule is classified as compatibility Category ``NRC.''
Compatibility is not required for Category ``NRC'' regulations. The NRC
program elements in this category are those that relate directly to
areas of regulation reserved to the NRC by the AEA or the provisions of
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, and although an Agreement
State may not adopt program elements reserved to NRC, it may wish to
inform its licensees of certain requirements via a mechanism that is
consistent with the particular State's administrative procedure laws,
but does not confer regulatory authority on the State.
Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion
The NRC has determined that Items 1, 5, 6, and 7 of this rule are
the types of action described as a categorical exclusion in 10 CFR
51.22(c)(2) and Items 2, 3, 4 and 8 of this rule are the types of
action described as a categorical exclusion in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(3).
Therefore, neither an environmental impact statement nor an
environmental assessment has been prepared for this regulation.
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
This final rule increases the burden on licensees by increasing a
record retention period from 3 years to life. The public burden for
this information collection is estimated to average 38 hours per
request. Because the burden for this information collection is
insignificant, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) clearance is not
required. Existing requirements were approved by the Office of
Management and Budget, approval number 3150-0132.
Public Protection Notification
If a means used to impose information collection does not display a
currently valid OMB control number, the NRC may not conduct or sponsor,
and a person is not required to respond, to the information collection.
Regulatory Analysis
The NRC has prepared a regulatory analysis on this regulation. The
analysis examines the costs and benefits of the alternatives considered
by the NRC and concludes that the final rule results in an incremental
improvement in public health and safety that outweighs the small
incremental cost associated with this proposed change. The analysis is
available for inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L
Street, NW (Lower Level), Washington, DC. Single copies of the analysis
may be obtained from M. L. Au, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, telephone (301) 415-6181; or e-mail mla@nrc.gov.
Regulatory Flexibility Certification
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
605(b)), the Commission certifies that this final rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This rule affects only the operators of independent spent fuel storage
installations (ISFSI). These companies do not fall within the scope of
the definition of ``small entities'' set forth in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act or the Small Business Size Standards set out in
regulations issued by the Small Business Administration at 13 CFR part
121.
Criminal Penalties
For the purpose of section 223 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(AEA), the Commission is issuing the final rule to amend 10 CFR part
72; 72.44, 72.75, 72.140, and 72.216 under one or more of section
161(b), (i), of (o) of AEA. Willful violation of the rule will be
subject to criminal enforcement.
Backfit Analysis
The NRC has determined that the backfit rule, 10 CFR part 72.62,
does not apply to this rule, because these amendments do not involve
any provisions that would impose backfits as defined in 10 CFR part
72.62(a). Therefore, a backfit analysis is not required for this rule.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
In accordance with the Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1966,
the NRC has determined that this action is not a major rule and has
verified this determination with the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs of OMB.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 72
Criminal penalties, Manpower training programs, Nuclear materials,
Occupational safety and health, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures, Spent fuel.
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization
Act of 1974, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, the NRC is adopting
the following amendments to 10 CFR part 72.
PART 72--LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF
SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE
1. The authority citation for part 72 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 51, 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 161, 182, 183,
184, 186, 187, 189, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 934, 935, 948, 953,
954, 955, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C.
2071, 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233,
2234, 2236, 2237, 2238, 2282); sec. 274, Pub. L. 86-373, 73 Stat.
688, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2021); sec. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88
Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846);
Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 as amended by Pub. L. 102-
486, sec. 7902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec. 102, Pub. L.
91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332); secs. 131, 132, 133, 135,
137, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2229, 2230, 2232, 2241, sec. 148,
Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10151, 10152, 10153,
10155, 10157, 10161, 10168).
Section 72.44(g) also issued under secs. 142(b) and 148(c), (d),
Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-232, 1330-236 (42 U.S.C. 10162(b),
10168(c), (d)). Section 72.46 also issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat.
955 (42 U.S.C. 2239); sec. 134, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2230 (42
U.S.C. 10154). Section 72.96(d) also issued under sec. 145(g), Pub.
L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10165(g)). Subpart J also
issued under secs. 2(2), 2(15), 2(19), 117(a), 141(h), Pub. L. 97-
425, 96 Stat. 2202, 2203, 2204, 2222, 2224 (42 U.S.C. 10101,
10137(a), 10161(h)). Subparts K and L are also issued under sec.
133, 98 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10153) and sec. 218(a), 96 Stat. 2252
(42 U.S.C. 10198).
2. Section 72.1 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 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
[[Page 33183]]
spent fuel and other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel
storage in an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) and
the terms and conditions under which the Commission will issue these
licenses. The regulations in this part also establish requirements,
procedures, and criteria for the issuance of licenses to the Department
of Energy (DOE) to receive, transfer, package, and possess power
reactor spent fuel, high-level radioactive waste, and other radioactive
materials associated with the spent fuel and high-level radioactive
waste storage, in a monitored retrievable storage installation (MRS).
The regulations in this part also establish requirements, procedures,
and criteria for the issuance of Certificates of Compliance approving
spent fuel storage cask designs.
3. In Sec. 72.2, paragraph (e) is removed, paragraph (f) is
redesignated as paragraph (e) and a new paragraph (f) is added to read
as follows:
Sec. 72.2 Scope.
* * * * *
(f) Certificates of Compliance approving spent fuel storage cask
designs shall be issued in accordance with the requirements of subpart
L of this part.
4. Section 72.4 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 72.4 Communications.
Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports
concerning the regulations in this part and applications filed under
them should be addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Written
communications, reports, and applications may be delivered in person to
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission at One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738 between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm
eastern time. If the submittal deadline date falls on a Saturday, or
Sunday, or a Federal holiday, the next Federal working day becomes the
official due date.
5. In Sec. 72.44, paragraph (d)(3) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 72.44 License conditions.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(3) An annual report be submitted to the Commission in accordance
with Sec. 72.4, specifying the quantity of each of the principal
radionuclides released to the environment in liquid and in gaseous
effluents during the previous 12 months of operation and such other
information as may be required by the Commission to estimate maximum
potential radiation dose commitment to the public resulting from
effluent releases. On the basis of this report and any additional
information that the Commission may obtain from the licensee or others,
the Commission may from time to time require the licensee to take such
action as the Commission deems appropriate. The report must be
submitted within 60 days after the end of the 12-month monitoring
period.
* * * * *
6. In Sec. 72.75, paragraph (d)(2) is revised, and paragraphs
(d)(3), (d)(4), (d)(5), (d)(6) and (d)(7) are added to read as follows:
Sec. 72.75 Reporting requirements for specific events and conditions.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(2) Written report. Each licensee who makes an initial notification
required by paragraphs (a), (b), or (c) of this section also shall
submit a written follow-up report within 30 days of the initial
notification. Written reports prepared pursuant to other regulations
may be submitted to fulfill this requirement if the reports contain all
the necessary information and the appropriate distribution is made.
These written reports must be sent to the Commission, in accordance
with Sec. 72.4. These reports must include the following:
(i) A brief abstract describing the major occurrences during the
event, including all component or system failures that contributed to
the event and significant corrective action taken or planned to prevent
recurrence;
(ii) A clear, specific, narrative description of the event that
occurred so that knowledgeable readers conversant with the design of
ISFSI or MRS, but not familiar with the details of a particular
facility, can understand the complete event. The narrative description
must include the following specific information as appropriate for the
particular event:
(A) ISFSI or MRS operating conditions before the event;
(B) Status of structures, components, or systems that were
inoperable at the start of the event and that contributed to the event;
(C) Dates and approximate times of occurrences;
(D) The cause of each component or system failure or personnel
error, if known;
(E) The failure mode, mechanism, and effect of each failed
component, if known;
(F) A list of systems or secondary functions that were also
affected for failures of components with multiple functions;
(G) For wet spent fuel storage systems only, after failure that
rendered a train of a safety system inoperable, an estimate of the
elapsed time from the discovery of the failure until the train was
returned to service;
(H) The method of discovery of each component or system failure or
procedural error;
(I)(1) Operator actions that affected the course of the event,
including operator errors, procedural deficiencies, or both, that
contributed to the event;
(2) For each personnel error, the licensee shall discuss:
(i) Whether the error was a cognitive error (e.g., failure to
recognize the actual facility condition, failure to realize which
systems should be functioning, failure to recognize the true nature of
the event) or a procedural error;
(ii) Whether the error was contrary to an approved procedure, was a
direct result of an error in an approved procedure, or was associated
with an activity or task that was not covered by an approved procedure;
(iii) Any unusual characteristics of the work location (e.g., heat,
noise) that directly contributed to the error; and
(iv) The type of personnel involved (e.g., contractor personnel,
utility-licensed operator, utility nonlicensed operator, other utility
personnel);
(J) Automatically and manually initiated safety system responses
(wet spent fuel storage systems only);
(K) The manufacturer and model number (or other identification) of
each component that failed during the event;
(L) The quantities and chemical and physical forms of the spent
fuel or HLW involved;
(3) An assessment of the safety consequences and implications of
the event. This assessment must include the availability of other
systems or components that could have performed the same function as
the components and systems that failed during the event;
(4) A description of any corrective actions planned as a result of
the event, including those to reduce the probability of similar events
occurring in the future;
(5) Reference to any previous similar events at the same facility
that are known to the licensee;
(6) The name and telephone number of a person within the licensee's
organization who is knowledgeable about the event and can provide
additional information concerning the event and the facililty's
characteristics;
(7) The extent of exposure of individuals to radiation or to
radioactive materials without identification of individuals by name.
[[Page 33184]]
7. In Sec. 72.122, paragraphs (h)(4) and (i) are revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 72.122 Overall requirements.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(4) Storage confinement systems must have the capability for
continuous monitoring in a manner such that the licensee will be able
to determine when corrective action needs to be taken to maintain safe
storage conditions. For dry spent fuel storage, periodic monitoring is
sufficient provided that periodic monitoring is consistent with the dry
spent fuel storage cask design requirements. The monitoring period must
be based upon the spent fuel storage cask design requirements.
* * * * *
(i) Instrumentation and control systems. Instrumentation and
control systems for wet spent fuel storage must be provided to monitor
systems that are important to safety over anticipated ranges for normal
operation and off-normal operation. Those instruments and control
systems that must remain operational under accident conditions must be
identified in the Safety Analysis Report. Instrumentation systems for
dry spent fuel storage casks must be provided in accordance with cask
design requirements to monitor conditions that are important to safety
over anticipated ranges for normal conditions and off-normal
conditions. Systems that are required under accident conditions must be
identified in the Safety Analysis Report.
* * * * *
8. In Sec. 72.124, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 72.124 Criteria for nuclear criticality safety.
* * * * *
(b) Methods of criticality control. When practicable, the design of
an ISFSI or MRS must be based on favorable geometry, permanently fixed
neutron absorbing materials (poisons), or both. Where solid neutron
absorbing materials are used, the design must provide for positive
means of verifying their continued efficacy. For dry spent fuel storage
systems, the continued efficacy may be confirmed by a demonstration or
analysis before use, showing that significant degradation of the
neutron absorbing materials cannot occur over the life of the facility.
* * * * *
9. In Sec. 72.140, paragraph (d) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 72.140 Quality assurance requirements.
* * * * *
(d) Previously approved programs. A Commission-approved quality
assurance program which satisfies the applicable criteria of appendix B
to part 50 of this chapter and which is established, maintained, and
executed with regard to an ISFSI will be accepted as satisfying the
requirements of paragraph (b) of this section, except that a licensee
using an appendix B quality assurance program also shall meet the
requirement of Sec. 72.174 for recordkeeping. Prior to initial use, the
licensee shall notify the Commission, in accordance with Sec. 72.4, of
its intent to apply its previously approved appendix B quality
assurance program to ISFSI activities. The licensee shall identify the
program by date of submittal to the Commission, docket number, and date
of Commission approval.
10. In Sec. 72.216, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 72.216 Reports.
* * * * *
(c) The general licensee shall make initial and written reports in
accordance with Secs. 72.74 and 72.75, except for the events specified
by Sec. 72.75(b)(2) and (3) for which the initial reports will be made
under paragraph (a) of this section.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day of June, 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 99-15793 Filed 6-21-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
