[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 33 (Thursday, February 19, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8362-8363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-4146]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 33 / Thursday, February 19, 1998 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 8362]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. PRM-71-12]
International Energy Consultants, Inc.; Receipt of Petition for
Rulemaking
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; notice of receipt.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has received and
requests public comment on a petition for rulemaking filed by the
International Energy Consultants, Inc. The petition has been docketed
by the Commission and has been assigned Docket No. PRM-71-12. The
petitioner requests that the NRC amend its regulations that govern
packaging and transportation of radioactive material. The petitioner
believes that special requirements for plutonium shipments should be
eliminated.
DATES: Submit comments by May 5, 1998. 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: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff.
Deliver comments to 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland,
between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm on Federal workdays.
For a copy of the petition, write: David L. Meyer, Chief, Rules and
Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001.
You may also provide comments via the NRC's interactive rulemaking
website through the NRC home page (http://www.nrc.gov). This site
provides the availability to upload comments as files (any format), if
your web browser supports that function. For information about the
interactive rulemaking website, contact Carol Gallagher, 301-415-5905
(e-mail: [email protected]).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David L. Meyer, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001. Telephone: 301-415-7162 or Toll Free: 800-368-5642 or e-
mail: DLM1@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission received a petition for
rulemaking submitted by Frank P. Falci on behalf of the International
Energy Consultants, Inc. in the form of a letter addressed to the
Secretary of the Commission, dated September 25, 1997. The petitioner
believes that 10 CFR 71.63(b) should be eliminated. As an option, the
petitioner believes that 10 CFR 71.63(a) should also be eliminated.
This option would totally eliminate 10 CFR 71.63. The petitioner made
the same recommendation in a letter dated July 22, 1997, which he
provided as a comment in the Commission's proposed rulemaking amending
10 CFR 71.63(b) to remove canisters containing vitrified high-level
waste from the packaging requirement for double containment.
The petition was docketed as PRM-71-12 on October 22, 1997. The NRC
is soliciting public comment on the petition. Public comment is
requested on both the petition to eliminate 10 CFR 71.63(b), as well as
the option to eliminate 10 CFR 71.63 totally, as discussed below.
Discussion of the Petition
NRC's regulations in 10 CFR Part 71, entitled ``Packaging and
Transportation of Radioactive Material,'' include, in
Sec. 71.63, special requirements for plutonium shipments:
Sec. 71.63 Special requirements for plutonium shipments.
(a) Plutonium in excess of 20 Ci (0.74 TBq) per package must be
shipped as a solid.
(b) Plutonium in excess of 20 Ci (0.74 TBq) per package must be
packaged in a separate inner container placed within outer packaging
that meets the requirements of subparts E and F of this part for
packaging of material in normal form. If the entire package is
subjected to the tests specified in Sec. 71.71 (``Normal conditions of
transport''), the separate inner container must not release plutonium
as demonstrated to a sensitivity of 10-6 A2/h. If
the entire package is subjected to the tests specified in Sec. 71.73
(``Hypothetical accident conditions''), the separate inner container
must restrict the loss of plutonium to not more than A2 in 1
week. Solid plutonium in the following forms is exempt from the
requirements of this paragraph:
(1) Reactor fuel elements;
(2) Metal or metal alloy; and
(3) Other plutonium bearing solids that the Commission determines
should be exempt from the requirements of this section.
The petitioner requests that Sec. 71.63(b) be deleted. The
petitioner believes that provisions stated in this regulation cannot be
supported technically or logically. The petitioner states that based on
the ``Q-System for the Calculation of A1 and A2
Values,'' an A2 quantity of any radionuclide has the same
potential for damaging the environment and the human species as an
A2 quantity of any other radionuclide. The petitioner
further states that the requirement that a Type B package must be used
whenever package content exceeds an A2 quantity should be
applied consistently for any radionuclide. The petitioner believes that
if a Type B package is sufficient for a quantity of a radionuclide X
which exceeds A2, then a Type B package should be sufficient
for a quantity of radionuclide Y which exceeds A2, and this
should be similarly so for every other radionuclide.
The petitioner states that while, for the most part, the
regulations embrace this simple logical congruence, the congruence
fails under Sec. 71.63(b) because packages containing plutonium must
include a separate inner container for quantities of plutonium having
an activity exceeding 20 curies (0.74 TBq). The petitioner believes
that if the NRC allows this failure of congruence to persist, the
regulations will be vulnerable to the following challenges:
(1) The logical foundation of the adequacy of A2 values
as a proper measure of the potential for damaging the environment and
the human species, as set forth under the Q-System, is compromised;
(2) The absence of a radioactivity limit for every radionuclide
which, if
[[Page 8363]]
exceeded, would require a separate inner container, is an inherently
inconsistent safety practice; and
(3) The performance requirements for Type B packages as called for
by 10 CFR Part 71 establish containment conditions under different
levels of package trauma. The satisfaction of these requirements should
be a matter of proper design work by the package designer and proper
evaluation of the design through regulatory review. The imposition of
any specific package design feature such as that contained in 10 CFR
71.63(b) is gratuitous. The regulations are not formulated as package
design specifications, nor should they be.
The petitioner believes that the continuing presence of
Sec. 71.63(b) engenders excessively high costs in the transport of some
radioactive materials without a clearly measurable net safety benefit.
The petitioner states that this is so in part because the ultimate
release limits allowed under Part 71 package performance requirements
are identical with or without a ``separate inner container,'' and
because the presence of a ``separate inner container'' promotes
additional exposures to radiation through the additional handling
required for the ``separate inner container.'' The petitioner further
states that ``* * * excessively high costs occur in some transport
campaigns,'' and that one example ``* * * of damage to our national
budget is in the transport of transuranic wastes.'' Because large
numbers of transuranic waste drums must be shipped in packages that
have a ``separate inner container'' to comply with the existing rule,
the petitioner believes that large savings would accrue without this
rule. Therefore, the petitioner believes that elimination of
Sec. 71.63(b) would resolve these regulatory ``defects.''
As a corollary to the primary petition, the petitioner believes
that an option to eliminate Sec. 71.63(a) as well as Sec. 71.63(b)
should also be considered. This option would have the effect of totally
eliminating Sec. 71.63. The petitioner believes that the arguments
propounded to support the elimination Sec. 71.63(b) also support the
elimination of Sec. 71.63(a).
The Petitioner's Conclusions
The petitioner has concluded that NRC regulations in 10 CFR Part 71
which govern packaging and transportation of radioactive material must
be amended to delete the provision regarding special requirements for
plutonium shipments. The petitioner believes that a Type B package
should be sufficient for a quantity of radionuclide Y which exceeds the
A2 limit if such a package is sufficient for a quantity of
radionuclide X which exceeds the A2 limit. It is the
petitioner's view that this should be true for every other radionuclide
including plutonium.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of February 1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John C. Hoyle,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 98-4146 Filed 2-18-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
