[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 54 (Monday, March 22, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13826-13828]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-6905]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 72-20]
U.S. Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office; Issuance of
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding
the Proposed Exemption From Certain Regulatory Requirements of 10 CFR
Part 72
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) is
considering issuance of exemptions, pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7, from the
requirements of 10 CFR 72.82(e) and 72.124(b) to the U.S. Department of
Energy, Idaho Operations Office (DOE-ID or applicant). Exemption from
10 CFR 72.82(e) would release DOE-ID from the requirements to submit a
preoperational test acceptance criteria and test report prior to the
receipt of spent fuel at its proposed Independent Spent Fuel Storage
Installation (ISFSI). Exemption from 10 CFR 72.124(b) would provide
relief to DOE-ID from the requirement to verify the continued efficacy
of neutron absorbing materials. The proposed ISFSI is to be located at
the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL),
within the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) site
in Scoville, Idaho . The proposed ISFSI would store the spent nuclear
fuel debris created as a result of the Three Mile Island Unit 2 (TMI-2)
accident.
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Identification of Proposed Action
The applicant is seeking Commission approval to construct and
operate an ISFSI at INTEC. INTEC is an existing facility initially
constructed to both store and reprocess spent fuel and high-level waste
possessed by DOE. Pursuant to 10 CFR part 72, DOE-ID submitted an
application, including a Safety Analysis Report (SAR), for the ISFSI by
letter
[[Page 13827]]
dated October 31, 1996, as supplemented. NRC staff is currently
performing a review of that application. On February 12, 1999, DOE-ID
requested an exemption from the requirement of 10 CFR 72.82(e) to
submit a report of the preoperational test acceptance criteria and test
results at least 30 days prior to the receipt of spent fuel or high-
level radioactive waste. The staff is considering granting DOE-ID's
request.
On its own initiative, the staff is also considering issuance of an
exemption from the requirement of 10 CFR 72.124(b) which states: ``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
shall provide for positive means to verify their continued efficacy.''
Specifically, the staff is considering granting an exemption from the
requirement to provide positive means of verifying the continued
efficacy of neutron absorbing materials.
The proposed action before the Commission is whether to grant these
two exemptions pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7.
Need for the Proposed Action
The applicant is preparing to build and operate the TMI-2 ISFSI as
described in its application and SAR, subject to approval of the
pending licensing application. The exemption from 10 CFR 72.82(e) is
necessary because DOE is preparing to transfer the spent nuclear fuel
from its current location at the Test Area North (TAN) facility to the
INTEC facility, immediately following the completion of the
preoperational testing.
The exemption from 10 CFR 72.124(b) is necessary because, while
this requirement is appropriate for wet spent fuel storage systems, it
is not appropriate for dry spent fuel storage systems such as the one
DOE-ID plans to use for storage of the TMI-2 fuel debris. Periodic
verification of neutron poison effectiveness is neither necessary nor
practical for these casks.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
Section 72.82(e) currently requires that a Part 72 licensee submit
to NRC a report of preoperational test acceptance criteria and test
results at least 30 days before the receipt of spent fuel into an
ISFSI. As part of the review of the applicant's SAR, the staff
determined that the scope of the preoperational testing was adequately
described. In addition, the staff will be on site during the
preoperational testing to both observe and conduct inspections. This
allows the staff to conduct a direct observation and independent
evaluation as to whether the applicant has developed, implemented, and
evaluated preoperational testing activities. Therefore, the reports
required by 10 CFR 72.82(e) are not necessary to provide a hold-period
for NRC staff review. Further, on September 14, 1998, the Commission
issued a proposed rule (63 FR 49046) to eliminate 10 CFR 72.82(e).
Applicants for a license are currently required to submit information
on a preoperational test program as part of an SAR. The Commission's
current practice is to maintain an extensive oversight (i.e.,
inspection) presence during the preoperational testing phase of the
ISFSI; reviewing the acceptance criteria, preoperational test, and test
results as they occur. In the proposed rule, the Commission states that
it believes neither the report nor the 30-day hold period are needed
for regulatory purposes and taking this action will relieve licensees
from an unnecessary regulatory burden. A final rule to remove this
regulation has not yet been issued by the Commission.
Section 72.124(b) currently requires that where the design of an
ISFSI uses solid neutron absorbing material as a method of criticality
control, the design of the ISFSI shall provide a positive means to
verify the continued efficacy of the absorbing material. On June 9,
1998, the Commission issued a proposed rule (63 FR 31364) to revise 10
CFR 72.124(b). The Commission proposed that for dry spent fuel storage
systems, the continued efficacy of neutron absorbing material may be
confirmed by a demonstration and analysis before use, showing that
significant degradation of the material cannot occur over the life of
the facility. The Commission stated in the proposed rule that 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 material. Consequently, a
positive means for verifying the continued efficacy of the material is
not required. A final rule to revise this regulation has not yet been
issued by the Commission.
The review of the applicant's SAR showed that credit was taken for
only 75%of the original neutron absorbing material being present and
that the neutron flux produced by the spent nuclear fuel would deplete
only a small percentage of neutron absorbing material during several
thousand years of exposure; a time period that is well beyond the
expected life of this facility. The neutron absorbing material (poison)
is in a form that exposure to the ambient atmosphere of the DSC
interior will not cause a significant deterioration of the structural
properties of the material over the expected life of the facility.
Alternative to the Proposed Action
Since there are no significant environmental impacts associated
with either of the proposed actions, any alternatives with equal or
greater environmental impacts are not evaluated. The alternative to the
proposed actions would be to: (a) Deny approval of the 10 CFR 72.82(e)
exemption, and require the report of preoperational test acceptance
criteria and test results at least 30 days before the receipt of spent
fuel into an ISFSI and (b) deny approval of the 10 CFR 72.124(b)
exemption and, therefore, not allow elimination of the requirement to
verify the continued efficacy of neutron absorbing materials. These
alternatives would have the same or greater environmental impacts.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
On March 1, 1999, Mr. Alan Merritt of the State of Idaho, INEEL
Oversight Program, was contacted about the EA for the proposed actions
and had no concerns.
Finding of No Significant Impact
The environmental impacts of the proposed actions have been
reviewed in accordance with the requirements set forth in 10 CFR part
51. Based upon the foregoing EA, the Commission finds that the proposed
action of granting exemptions from 10 CFR 72.82(e) and 10 CFR 72.124(b)
will not significantly impact the quality of the human environment.
Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to prepare an
environmental impact statement for the proposed exemptions.
This application was docketed under 10 CFR part 72, Docket 72-20.
For further details with respect to this action, see the application
for an ISFSI license dated October 31, 1996, as supplemented, and the
request for exemption dated February 12, 1999, which are available for
public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L
Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555 and at the Local Public Document Room
at the INEEL Technical Library, 1776 Science Center Drive, Idaho Falls,
ID 83402.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of March 1999.
[[Page 13828]]
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
E. William Brach,
Director, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 99-6905 Filed 3-19-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
