[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 80 (Tuesday, April 27, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22661-22662]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-10492]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Dockets 72-1021 and 72-1027]
Transnuclear, Inc.; Issuance of Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding the Proposed Exemption From
Certain Requirements of 10 CFR Part 72
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) is
considering issuance of an exemption, pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7, from the
provisions of 10 CFR 72.124(b) to Transnuclear, Inc. (TN or applicant)
for the TN-32 spent fuel storage cask. The requested exemption would
allow TN to confirm the efficacy of the cask's fixed neutron poisons by
analysis. TN, located in Hawthorne, New York, is seeking a Certificate
of Compliance (CoC) for the TN-32 dry spent fuel storage cask. The cask
is intended for use under the general license provisions of Subpart K
of 10 CFR Part 72 by Duke Power Company (Duke) at the McGuire Nuclear
Station (McGuire) located in Cornelius, North Carolina and Wisconsin
Electric Power Company (WEPCo) at the Point Beach Nuclear Power Station
(Point Beach) located in Two Rivers, Wisconsin. The TN-32 dry spent
fuel storage cask is currently used at Surry and North Anna Power
Stations under a site-specific license and an exemption to 10 CFR
72.124(b) was granted for these casks.
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Identification of Proposed Action: The staff is considering
issuance of an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 72.124(b)
which states, in part, that: ``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 use positive means to verify
continued efficacy of neutron absorbing materials. The proposed action
before the Commission is whether to grant this exemption under 10 CFR
72.7.
Need for the Proposed Action: The exemption to 10 CFR 72.124(b) is
necessary because, while this requirement is appropriate for wet spent
fuel systems, it is not appropriate for dry spent fuel storage systems
such as the TN-32. Periodic verification of neutron poison
effectiveness is neither necessary nor possible for these casks. It is
also necessary to ensure that the certification process for the TN-32
cask takes into account previous staff conclusions that fixed neutron
poisons in these storage casks will remain effective over the 20-year
period of the license. 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.
A final rule to revise this regulation has not yet been issued by the
Commission.
[[Page 22662]]
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: The TN-32 cask design
includes fixed neutron absorbers but does not provide for periodic
verification of neutron absorber efficacy. The staff previously
evaluated the efficacy of the TN-32 cask fixed neutron absorbers and an
exemption to 10 CFR 72.124(b) was granted for the casks currently in
use at the North Anna Power Station. In NRC's March 19, 1999, safety
evaluation of the TN-32 cask Safety Analysis Report, the staff
concluded that fixed neutron poisons in the TN-32 cask will remain
effective for the 20-year storage period and that the criticality
design for the cask is based on favorable geometry and fixed neutron
poisons. In addition, the staff deduced that there is no credible way
to lose the fixed neutron poisons; therefore, there is no need to
provide a positive means to verify their continued efficacy as required
by 10 CFR 72.124(b). The TN-32 CoC application dated September 24,
1997, as amended, is under consideration by the Commission. It is
anticipated, if approved, the TN-32 CoC may be issued in early 2000.
The Commission has completed its evaluation on the proposed action
and concludes that granting an exemption from the requirements of 10
CFR 72.124(b) will have no environmental impact because the staff has
determined that periodic verification of the neutron absorber efficacy
is not needed to assure that the fixed neutron poisons casks will
remain effective during the storage period. The proposed action will
not increase the probability or consequences of accidents. There are no
non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action.
Alternative to the Proposed Action: Since there is no environmental
impact associated with the proposed action, alternatives are not
evaluated other than the no action alternative. The alternative to the
proposed action would be to deny approval of the exemption (i.e., the
``no-action'' alternative). Denial of the proposed action would result
in greater exposures to plant workers due to the fact that the only
means to verify the continued efficacy of neutron absorbing materials
would require workers to periodically reopen the casks and remove at
least one fuel assembly. The environmental impacts of the alternative
action are greater than the proposed action.
Given that there are greater environmental impacts associated with
the alternative action of denying the approval for exemption, the
Commission concludes that the preferred alternative is to grant this
exemption.
Agencies and Persons Consulted: On March 8, 1999, Mr. Johny James
of the North Carolina Division of Radiation Protection and Ms. Sally
Jenkins of the Wisconsin Public Utility Commission were consulted about
the EA for the proposed action and had no concerns.
Finding of No Significant Impact
The environmental impacts of the proposed action 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 an exemption from 10 CFR 72.124(b) so that TN need not use
positive means to verify the continued efficacy of the neutron
absorbing material in these casks 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 exemption.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for CoC for the TN-32 cask system dated September 24, 1997,
as supplemented. These documents are available for public inspection at
the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20555; Local Public Document Room at the J. Murrey Atkins Library,
University of North Carolina at Charlotte, UNCC Station, Charlotte, NC
28223; Local Public Document Room at the Joseph Mann Library, 1516 16th
Street, Two Rivers, WI 54241; and Local Public Document Room at the
State Library of Pennsylvania, Walnut Street and Commonwealth Avenue,
Harrisburg, PA 17105.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of April 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
E. William Brach,
Director, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 99-10492 Filed 4-26-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
