[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