[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 1, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11099-11100]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-4889]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 72-1026]


BNFL Fuel Solutions Corporation; Issuance of Environmental 
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding the Proposed 
Exemption From Requirements of 10 CFR Part 72

    By letter dated January 14, 2000, BNFL Fuel Solutions Corporation 
(BFS or applicant) requested an exemption, pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7, 
from the requirements of 10 CFR 72.234(c). BFS, located in Scotts 
Valley, California, is seeking Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or 
the Commission) approval to procure materials for and fabricate 14 
Wesflex W150 storage casks prior to receipt of a Certificate of 
Compliance (CoC) for the Wesflex Spent Fuel Management System (Wesflex 
System). The Wesflex storage cask is a basic component of the Wesflex 
System, a cask system designed for the dry storage of spent fuel. The 
Wesflex System is intended for use under the general license provisions 
of Subpart K of 10 CFR part 72 by Consumers Energy at the Palisades 
Nuclear Plant, located in Covert, Michigan, and at the Big Rock Point 
Nuclear Plant, located in Charlevoix, Michigan. The application for the 
CoC was submitted by BFS to the Commission on February 3, 1998, as 
supplemented.

Environmental Assessment (EA)

Identification of Proposed Action

    BFS is seeking Commission approval to procure materials for and 
fabricate 14 Wesflex W150 storage casks prior to receipt of the CoC. 
The applicant is requesting an exemption from the requirements of 10 
CFR 72.234(c), which states that ``Fabrication of casks under the 
Certificate of Compliance must not start prior to receipt of the 
Certificate of Compliance for the cask model.'' The proposed action 
before the Commission is whether to grant this exemption under 10 CFR 
72.7.

Need for the Proposed Action

    BFS requested the exemption to 10 CFR 72.234(c) to ensure the 
availability of storage casks so that Consumers Energy can maintain 
full core offload capability at the Palisades Nuclear Plant. Palisades 
will lose full core offload capability after its planned April 2001 
refueling outage. Currently, the Ventilated Storage Cask--24 (VSC-24), 
fabricated by Sierra Nuclear Corporation, is used at Palisades for the 
dry storage of spent fuel. However, the licensee requires another cask 
option because the storage capability of the VSC-24 is limited by its 
burnup and enrichment requirements. Beyond April 2001, a significant 
portion of the remaining and future spent fuel inventory at Palisades 
will not meet the VSC-24 burnup and enrichment limits. Already, there 
are nearly 250 spent fuel assemblies at Palisades that do not qualify 
for storage in the VSC-24.
    BFS is also requesting the exemption to ensure the availability of 
dry storage casks at Big Rock Point to support its decommissioning 
schedule. The Big Rock Point decommissioning schedule requires that all 
fuel be loaded into dry storage casks by 2002.
    To maintain full core offload at Palisades and to meet Big Rock 
Point's decommissioning schedule, Consumers Energy anticipates that 
fuel loading of Wesflex Systems would need to begin in 2001 at both 
sites. Thus, at both Palisades and Big Rock Point, the availability of 
the Wesflex System is needed in 2000 to support training and dry runs 
in anticipation of loading fuel in the following year. To meet this 
schedule, procurement of the W150

[[Page 11100]]

storage cask materials must begin promptly.
    The Wesflex System CoC application is under consideration by the 
Commission. It is anticipated that, if approved, the CoC would be 
issued in early 2001.
    The proposed procurement and fabrication exemption will not 
authorize use of the Wesflex System to store spent fuel. That will 
occur only when, and if, a CoC is issued. NRC approval of the 
procurement and fabrication exemption request should not be construed 
as an NRC commitment to favorably consider BFS's application for a CoC. 
BFS will bear the risk of all activities conducted under the exemption, 
including the risk that the 14 storage casks that BFS plans to 
construct may not be usable because they may not meet specifications or 
conditions placed in a CoC that NRC may ultimately approve.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    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 
Wesflex System, but only procurement and fabrication. There are no 
radiological environmental impacts from procurement or fabrication 
since the storage cask material procurement and fabrication does not 
involve radioactive materials. The major non-radiological environmental 
impacts involve use of natural resources due to fabrication. Each W150 
storage cask weighs approximately 127 tons and is made of reinforced 
concrete and steel. The amount of steel required for these storage 
casks is expected to have very little impact on the steel industry. 
Fabrication of the steel liner and guide rails would be at a metal 
fabrication facility, not at the reactor site. Fabrication of the 
storage casks is insignificant compared to the amount of metal 
fabrication performed annually in the United States. If the storage 
casks are not usable, they could be disposed of or recycled. The amount 
of material disposed of is insignificant compared to the amount of 
steel that is disposed of annually in the United States. Based upon 
this information, the procurement of materials and fabrication of the 
storage cask will have no significant impact on the environment since 
no radioactive materials are involved, and the amount of natural 
resources used is minimal.

Alternative to the Proposed Action

    Since there is no significant environmental impact associated with 
the proposed action, any alternatives with equal or greater 
environmental impact are not evaluated. The alternative to the proposed 
action would be to deny approval of the exemption and, therefore, not 
allow procurement of materials and fabrication of the storage cask 
until a CoC is issued. This alternative would have the same, or 
greater, environmental impact.
    Given that there are no significant differences in environmental 
impacts between the proposed action and the alternative considered and 
that the applicant has a legitimate need to procure materials and 
fabricate prior to certification and is willing to assume the risk that 
any material procured or any storage cask fabricated may not be 
approved or may require modification, the Commission concludes that the 
preferred alternative is to approve the procurement and fabrication 
request and grant the exemption from the prohibition on fabrication 
prior to receipt of a CoC.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    Mr. Lou Brandon, an official from the Michigan Department of 
Environmental Quality, was contacted on February 2, 2000, about the EA 
for the proposed action and had no comments.

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 72.234(c) so that BFS may procure 
materials for and fabricate 14 Wesflex W150 storage casks prior to 
issuance of a CoC for the Wesflex System 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.
    The request for the exemption from 10 CFR 72.234(c) was filed by 
BFS on January 14, 2000. For further details with respect to this 
action, see the application for a CoC for the Wesflex System, dated 
February 3, 1998, as supplemented. The exemption request and CoC 
application are docketed under 10 CFR part 72, Docket 72-1026. The 
exemption request and the non-proprietary version of the CoC 
application are available for public inspection at the Commission's 
Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of February 2000.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Susan F. Shankman,
Deputy Director, Licensing and Inspection Directorate, Spent Fuel 
Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 00-4889 Filed 2-29-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P