[Federal Register: April 27, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 80)]
[Notices]               
[Page 22661-22662]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27ap99-100]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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