[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 215 (Friday, November 6, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60027-60029]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-29787]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Dockets 72-1008 and 72-1014]


Holtec International; Issuance of Environmental Assessment and 
Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding the Request for Exemption 
From Certain Regulatory Requirements

    By letter dated August 3, 1998, as supplemented on September 4, 
1998, Holtec International (Holtec or applicant) requested an 
exemption, pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7, from the requirements of 10 CFR 
72.234(c). Holtec, located in Marlton, New Jersey, is seeking Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) approval to procure 
materials for four MPC-68 canisters, four HI-STAR 100 overpacks, four 
HI-STORM 100 overpacks and one HI-TRAC transfer cask (for use with the 
HI-STORM 100 system) prior to receipt of Certificates of Compliance 
(CoCs) for either the HI-STAR or the HI-STORM cask systems.

[[Page 60028]]

In addition, Holtec seeks an exemption to authorize fabrication of four 
MPC-68 canisters and four HI-STAR 100 overpacks. Together, the MPC-68 
canisters and the overpacks are one configuration of the HI-STAR 100 
cask system. The casks are intended for use under the general license 
provisions of Subpart K of 10 CFR Part 72 by Southern Nuclear Operating 
Company (Southern Nuclear) at the Hatch Nuclear Station (Hatch) in 
southern Georgia.
    Separately, 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 verify continued efficacy of neutron absorbing 
materials.

Environmental Assessment (EA)

Identification of Proposed Action

    By letter dated October 23, 1995, as supplemented, and pursuant to 
10 CFR Part 72, Holtec submitted an application to NRC for a CoC for 
the HI-STAR 100 cask system. Separately, on the same date, Holtec 
submitted an application for a CoC for the HI-STORM cask system which 
includes the HI-TRAC transfer cask. These applications are currently 
under consideration by the NRC staff. The applicant is seeking 
Commission approval to procure materials for four MPC-68 canisters, 
four HI-STAR 100 overpacks, four HI-STORM 100 overpacks, and one HI-
TRAC transfer cask prior to the Commission's issuance of CoCs for 
either the HI-STAR or the HI-STORM cask systems. In addition, Holtec 
seeks an exemption to authorize fabrication of four MPC-68 canisters 
and four HI-STAR 100 overpacks. Together, the MPC-68 canisters and the 
overpacks are one configuration of the HI-STAR 100 cask system. The 
casks are intended for use under the general license provisions of 
Subpart K of 10 CFR Part 72 by Southern Nuclear at Hatch in southern 
Georgia. The applicant requests an exemption from the requirements of 
10 CFR 72.234(c), which state that ``Fabrication of casks under the 
Certificate of Compliance must not start prior to receipt of the 
Certificate of Compliance for the cask model.''
    As stated above, the staff is also 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 verify continued efficacy of neutron 
absorbing materials.
    The proposed action before the Commission is whether to approve 
procurement of the materials and whether to grant these exemptions 
pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7.

Need for the Proposed Action

    Holtec requested the exemption to 10 CFR 72.234(c) to ensure the 
availability of storage casks so that Southern Nuclear can maintain 
full core off-load capability at Hatch. Hatch Unit 1 will lose full 
core off-load capability in August 2000. Hatch has proposed an initial 
cask loading in September 2000. To support training and dry runs prior 
to the initial loading, Southern Nuclear requests the delivery of the 
first cask by February 2000. Holtec states that to meet this schedule, 
purchase of cask components must begin promptly and fabrication must 
begin by November 1998.
    The HI-STAR 100 and HI-STORM applications, dated October 23, 1995, 
are under consideration by the Commission. It is anticipated that, if 
approved, the HI-STAR 100 CoC may be issued in late 1999 and the HI-
STORM 100 by Summer of 2000. Southern Nuclear's preferred storage cask 
for Hatch is the HI-STORM, but Southern Nuclear is willing to use the 
HI-STAR 100, if the HI-STORM is not available when needed. Therefore, 
in recognition of the schedular differences in the certification 
process for the two cask systems, Holtec is requesting approval for 
procurement of materials for the interchangeable MPC-68 as well as for 
the HI-STAR, HI-STORM, and HI-TRAC. In its request, however, Holtec 
confirms that its current plans are only to fabricate four HI-STAR 
units. The proposed procurement and fabrication exemption will not 
authorize use of any Holtec cask to store spent fuel. That will occur 
only when, and if, a CoC is issued. NRC approval of the procurement and 
granting of the fabrication exemption request should not be construed 
as an NRC commitment to favorably consider any Holtec application for a 
CoC. Holtec will bear the risk of all activities conducted under the 
exemption, including the risk that the four casks Holtec plans to 
construct may not be usable because they may not meet specifications or 
conditions placed in a CoC that NRC may ultimately approve.
    The exemption to 10 CFR 72.124(b) is necessary to ensure that the 
certification process for the HI-STAR, HI-STORM, and HI-TRAC casks 
takes into account previous staff conclusions that fixed neutron 
poisons in the similar storage casks will remain effective over the 20-
year period of the license. Periodic verification of neutron poison 
effectiveness is not possible for these Holtec casks and, consistent 
with the staff's conclusion described above, is not necessary.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    Regarding the procurement approval and fabrication exemption, the 
Environmental Assessment for the final rule, ``Storage of Spent Nuclear 
Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites'' (55 
FR 29181 (1990)), considered the potential environmental impacts of 
casks which are used to store spent fuel under a CoC and concluded that 
there would be no significant environmental impacts. The proposed 
action now under consideration would not permit use of the casks, but 
only procurement and fabrication. There are no radiological 
environmental impacts from procurement or fabrication since cask 
material procurement and cask fabrication do not involve radioactive 
materials. The major non-radiological environmental impacts involve use 
of natural resources due to cask fabrication. Each MPC-68 canister 
weighs approximately 44 tons and is made of steel. Each HI-STAR 100 
overpack weighs approximately 77 tons and is fabricated mainly from 
steel. Each HI-STORM overpack weighs approximately 100 tons and is 
constructed of metal and concrete. The HI-TRAC transfer cask weighs 
approximately 125 tons and is made of structural steel and lead. The 
amount of materials required to fabricate these casks is expected to 
have very little impact on the associated industry. Fabrication of the 
metal components would be at a metal fabrication facility, not at the 
reactor site. While fabrication of the concrete overpacks is not 
contemplated at this time, it should be noted that concrete overpacks 
would be partially fabricated at the same fabrication facility, with 
only the concrete pours being done at the reactor. Fabrication of these 
casks is insignificant compared to the amount of metal and concrete 
fabrication performed annually in the United States. If the casks are 
not usable, the casks could be disposed of or recycled. The amount of 
material disposed of is insignificant compared to the amount of steel 
and concrete that is disposed of annually in the United States. Based 
upon this information, the fabrication of

[[Page 60029]]

these casks will have no significant impact on the environment since no 
radioactive materials are involved, and the amount of natural resources 
used is minimal.
    Regarding the second exemption, in NRC's September 30, 1998, draft 
safety evaluation of the HI-STAR 100 cask Topical Safety Analysis 
Report, the NRC staff concluded that fixed neutron poisons in the HI-
STAR 100 cask will remain effective for the 20-year storage period. The 
staff concluded that the criticality design for the HI-STAR 100 cask is 
based on favorable geometry and fixed neutron poisons. An appraisal of 
the fixed neutron poisons has shown that they will remain effective for 
the 20-year storage period. In addition, the staff concluded 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).
    Consistent with the staff conclusions in the safety evaluation, the 
applicant did not propose any verification of the continued efficacy of 
the HI-STAR 100 cask's neutron absorber.

Alternative to the Proposed Action

    Since there is no significant environmental impact associated with 
the proposed actions, any alternatives with equal or greater 
environmental impact are not evaluated. The alternative to the proposed 
actions would be: (a) to deny approval of the exemption and, therefore, 
not allow cask fabrication until a CoC is issued and (b) to deny 
approval of the 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.
    Given that there are no significant differences in environmental 
impacts between the proposed action and the alternatives considered and 
that the applicant has a legitimate need to procure materials and 
fabricate the casks prior to certification and is willing to assume the 
risk that any fabricated casks may not be approved or may require 
modification, the Commission concludes that the preferred alternative 
is to approve the procurement request and grant the exemption from the 
prohibition on fabrication prior to receipt of a CoC. Similarly, the 
Commission concludes that since there is no significant difference in 
the environmental impacts between the proposed action and the 
alternatives for the elimination of the requirement to verify the 
continued efficacy of neutron absorbing materials, the Commission 
concludes that the preferred alternative is to grant that exemption.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    An official from the State of Georgia Department of Environmental 
Protection was contacted 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 
(1) approving procurement of materials for four MPC-68 canisters, four 
HI-STAR 100 overpacks, four HI-STORM 100 overpacks, and one HI-TRAC 
transfer cask, and granting an exemption from 10 CFR 72.234(c) so that 
Holtec may fabricate four MPC-68 canisters and four HI-STAR 100 
overpacks prior to issuance of a CoC will not significantly impact the 
quality of the human environment and, (2) granting an exemption from 10 
CFR 72.124(b) so that Holtec need not verify the continued efficacy of 
the neutron absorbing material in storage 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 exemptions.
    The request for the exemption to 10 CFR 234(c) was filed on August 
3, 1998, and supplemented on September 4, 1998. For further details 
with respect to this action, see the applications for CoC for the HI-
STAR 100 and HI-STORM 100 cask systems, both dated October 23, 1995. On 
September 30, 1998, a preliminary Safety Evaluation Report and a 
proposed CoC for the HI-STAR 100 cask system were issued by the NRC 
staff to initiate the rulemaking process. These documents are available 
for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L 
Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of October 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William F. Kane,
Director, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety 
and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 98-29787 Filed 11-5-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P