[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 3, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9178-9180]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-4444]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 3, 2009 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 9178]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 72
[Docket No. PRM-72-6]; [NRC-2008-0649]
C-10 Research and Education Foundation, Inc.; Receipt of Petition
for Rulemaking
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; Notice of receipt.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has received and
requests public comment on a petition for rulemaking dated November 24,
2008, filed by the C-10 Research and Education Foundation, Inc.
(petitioner). The petition was docketed by the NRC and has been
assigned Docket No. PRM-72-6. The petitioner is requesting that the NRC
amend the regulations that govern licensing requirements for the
independent storage of spent nuclear fuel, high-level radioactive
waste, and reactor-related greater than class C waste. The petitioner
believes that the current regulations do not provide sufficient
requirements for safe storage of spent nuclear fuel in dry cask storage
or in independent spent fuel storage installations (ISFSIs). The
petitioner states that the NRC does not adequately enforce the current
regulations that govern dry cask storage by allowing manufacturers,
vendors, and licensees to use alternatives to the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code. The petitioner also states that the
NRC has not specified license requirements for multiple cask designs
under different expiration dates at the same ISFSI, has not adequately
considered age-related degradation of dry cask systems, and has no
requirements in place to address sabotage and adverse environmental
effects on ISFSIs and current and future dry cask storage systems.
DATES: Submit comments by May 18, 2009. Comments received after this
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of
consideration cannot be given except as to comments received on or
before this date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this petition by any one of the
following methods. Please include PRM-72-6 in the subject line of your
comments. Comments on petitions submitted in writing or in electronic
form will be made available for public inspection. Personal
information, such as your name, address, telephone number, e-mail
address, etc., will not be removed from your submission.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and
search for documents filed under Docket ID [NRC-2008-0649]. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher, 301-492-3668; e-mail
[email protected].
Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.
E-mail comments to: [email protected]. If you do not receive
a reply e-mail confirming that we have received your comments, contact
us directly at 301-415-1677.
Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland
20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays, telephone
number 301-415-1677.
Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at
301-415-1101.
Publicly available documents related to this petition may be viewed
electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's Public
Document Room (PDR), Room O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The PDR reproduction contractor
will copy documents for a fee. Selected documents, including comments,
may be viewed and downloaded electronically via the Federal eRulemaking
Portal http://www.regulations.gov.
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC, are
available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, the public can gain
entry into the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents.
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC PDR Reference
staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to
[email protected].
For a copy of the petition, write to Michael T. Lesar, Chief,
Rulemaking, Directives and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative
Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001. The petition is also available
electronically in ADAMS at ML083470148.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael T. Lesar, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555. Telephone: 301-492-3663 or Toll-Free: 1-800-368-5642 or E-mail:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The NRC has received a petition for rulemaking dated November 24,
2008, submitted by Sandra Gavutis on behalf of the C-10 Research and
Education Foundation, Inc. (petitioner). The petitioner requests that
the NRC amend 10 CFR Part 72, ``Licensing Requirements for the
Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level Radioactive
Waste, and Reactor-Related Greater than Class C Waste.'' The petitioner
requests that Part 72 be amended to require licensees to strictly
adhere to ASME code requirements for design and use of spent fuel
storage casks. The petitioner also requests that 10 CFR 72.42 be
amended to clarify requirements for ``renewal'' and ``reapproval'' of
certificates of compliance (CoCs) of spent fuel storage casks and to
address license requirements for multiple cask designs under different
expiration dates at the same ISFSI. The petitioner is also concerned
that NRC requirements allow 20-year CoCs for spent fuel storage casks
to be arbitrarily extended up to 60 years without adequate evaluation
for protection of public health and safety. The petitioner also states
that the NRC does not require control systems for dry cask storage
systems at ISFSIs and that the NRC allows licensees numerous exemptions
from design and construction requirements for dry cask storage systems
that result in unresolved
[[Page 9179]]
fabrication and performance issues. The petitioner is also concerned
that the requirements for spent fuel storage casks do not adequately
consider or address long term degradation of casks. Lastly, the
petitioner states that NRC regulations do not adequately specify
requirements for protection of ISFSIs and dry storage casks systems
from terrorist attacks or environmental elements.
The NRC has determined that the petition meets the threshold
sufficiency requirements for a petition for rulemaking under 10 CFR
2.802. The petition was docketed by the NRC as PRM-72-6 on December 11,
2008. The NRC is soliciting public comment on the petition for
rulemaking.
Discussion of the Petition
The petitioner states that because the Federal Government for over
50 years has not resolved the long-term need to protect the public from
exposure to irradiated nuclear fuel by creating a permanent high-level
waste repository, the States will inherit the responsibility to store
spent nuclear fuel indefinitely. The petitioner believes that the NRC
is proposing to change the Nuclear Waste Confidence rule so there is no
deadline for storage of spent nuclear fuel and that current NRC
regulations are inadequate and not properly enforced. The petitioner
states that the NRC allows licensees of dry cask storage systems to use
alternatives to ASME Code requirements and grants numerous exemptions
to cask designs instead of requiring strict compliance with current
ASME Code requirements. The petitioner states that required design
specifications have not been updated because no current complete
studies exist.
The petitioner also states that the renewal process for spent fuel
cask designs in 10 CFR Part 72 is unclear. Specifically, the petitioner
states that Sec. 72.42(a) clearly specifies that the initial term for
a site-specific ISFSI must be for a fixed term not to exceed 20 years
from the date of issuance. The petitioner states that an application
for reapproval of a spent fuel storage cask design implies that the NRC
would reevaluate the design basis of the original cask design with
current standards and code requirements for the 20-year CoC storage
cask license. The petitioner believes that current NRC practice under
Sec. 72.42 uses the term ``renewal'' which implies that the design
requirements remain the same as in the original CoC and ``simply
replaces the original license.'' The petitioner states that the NRC has
no clear requirements that distinguish between ``renewal'' versus
``reapproval'' and has not addressed what the license requirements are
for multiple cask designs under different expiration dates at the same
ISFSI.
The petitioner is also concerned that the NRC arbitrarily extends
CoCs for spent fuel casks beyond the 20-year term up to 60 years
without evaluating technical data or regulatory implications to
adequately protect public health and safety. The petitioner's chief
concerns are that NRC requirements have not been updated; manufacture
of spent fuel storage casks is not consistent with ASME Code
requirements; ISFSIs are not required to be built to withstand a
terrorist attack; and that spent fuel storage casks are not safeguarded
against accidents, adverse weather-related events, and leakage caused
by age-related degradation.
The petitioner states that although the NRC has determined that
spent fuel storage casks design and construction is as important as
that of a reactor vessel, the NRC makes distinctions between wet and
dry storage requirements. The petitioner cites Sec. 72.122(i) as an
example that requires instrumentation and control systems be provided
to specifically monitor and control heat removal, but states that the
NRC does not require control systems for dry cask storage systems at
ISFSIs. The petitioner also notes that Sec. 72.124(b) requires
specific methods for criticality control but that the NRC has concluded
that the potentially corrosive environment in wet storage conditions
does not apply to dry storage systems. The petitioner notes that in
1998 the NRC determined that because air and moisture are removed from
dry storage casks and replaced with helium, the spent nuclear fuel is
then inert and there is no reasonable basis to assume degradation will
occur. ``Miscellaneous Changes to Licensing Requirements for the
Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive
Waste'' (63 FR 31364, 31365; June 9, 1998). However, the petitioner
states that this determination is refuted by the May 1996 incident at
Point Beach, evidence from the reactor vessel inner seal failures at
the Surry facility, and NRC reports of corrosion resulting from salt
water air at other reactor sites.
The petitioner also states that vital adequate technical radiation
and heat monitoring data is not included in the regulations that govern
dry storage casks and that this data is needed to protect nuclear
workers and the public, and for future dry cask design and fabrication.
The petitioner is also concerned that a lack of vendor compliance with
ASME Code design requirements exists and that the NRC has allowed
exemptions to vendors. The petitioner states that the NRC's remedy for
this situation has been to simultaneously cite vendors and
manufacturers with numerous violations and later approve repeated
corrective actions. The petitioner believes that dry cask design,
fabrication, and performance issues remain unresolved by this practice.
The petitioner states that limited data exists to determine the
extent of the long-term degradation of dry storage casks and the fuel
cladding of the fuel in some dry cask designs. The petitioner notes
that the NRC did support a research program, ``The Dry Cask Storage
Characterization Project'' conducted at the Idaho National Engineering
and Environmental Laboratory; but that this study was never completed
because it was cancelled 15 years into the planned 20-year study
timeframe. According to the petitioner, this study revealed that
degradation of stored fuel was present when a dry cask at the Surry
facility was opened, but the NRC reported that the condition of the
stored fuel was acceptable. The petitioner believes that the study's
inconsistencies did not provide conclusive data for either the cask
integrity or condition of the stored spent fuel.
The petitioner also cites a videotape provided by the Union of
Concerned Scientists of an incident at the Point Beach facility; a copy
of the videotape was included with the petition. The petitioner states
that the video shows that the adverse effects of chemical reactions in
a cask could cause heat build up within the cask. The petitioner
suggests that a sampling of dry casks certified by the NRC should be
opened periodically and studied for at least 60 years because the NRC
has permitted extension of 20-year dry cask licenses up to 60 years.
The petitioner lists the following technical concerns regarding dry
storage casks: failure of cask materials over long periods of time;
inadequate ability to observe and detect those failures because there
is no active maintenance in place; difficulty assessing some
construction materials for long-term integrity; lack of a formal aging
management program; lack of dose rate and heat monitoring for increased
heat and radiation levels on ISFSIs and individual casks; and
vulnerability to weather-related deterioration and sabotage; and ISFSIs
and dry casks are outdoors in plain sight (unlike reactor vessels and
spent fuel pools) and are not designed to withstand various terrorist
attack scenarios. The casks are the only barrier between radioactive
nuclear fuel
[[Page 9180]]
and the public and the environment while reactor vessels are in a
containment building in a controlled environment with a trained team of
operators, inspectors, and maintenance staff.
The petitioner suggests that the NRC regulations be amended as
follows:
(1) Prohibit dry storage cask systems that do not meet NRC
certification requirements from being produced under what the
petitioner states is industry pressure to ``accept-as-is.''
(2) Base certification of casks on code requirements to include
design criteria and technical specifications on a 100-year timeframe
instead of the current 20-year design specification that the petitioner
views as inadequate. The petitioner also suggests that the NRC conduct
a regulatory review of an in-depth technical evaluation for public
comment at the 20 year CoC reapproval interval to address cask
deterioration issues.
(3) Approve a method for dry cask transfer capacity as part of the
original ISFSI certification process and construction license that will
allow for immediate and safe maintenance on a faulty or failing cask.
The petitioner states that stored irradiated fuel in dry casks
approaches approximately 400 degrees Fahrenheit while the irradiated
waste storage pool water is kept at 100 degrees Fahrenheit. The
petitioner subsequently asserts that the re-submersion of dry casks and
resultant steam flash threaten workers, and may thermally shock the
irradiated nuclear fuel rods. The petitioner also states that the
ability to perform maintenance safely should be a regulatory priority
and that procedures to act promptly in an emergency situation and
safely transfer spent fuel must be outlined in NRC regulations.
(4) Ensure that dry casks are qualified for transport at the time
of onsite storage approval certification. The petitioner states that
transport capacity of shipment offsite must be required if an
environmental emergency occurs or for security purposes to an
alternative storage location or repository as part of the approval
criteria. The petitioner suggests that Chapter 1 of the NRC's Standard
Review Plan (NUREG 1567) should clearly define the transport
requirements in Sec. Sec. 72.122(i), 72.236(h), and 72.236(m).
(5) Specify that the most current ASME codes and standards be
adopted for all spent fuel storage containers with no exceptions. The
petitioner states that the NRC should no longer issue ``justifications
and compensatory measures'' for ASME codes or allow the industry to
design or manufacture casks that conform to safety regulations to ``the
maximum extent practical'' instead of actual ASME Code requirements.
The petitioner also states that ASME Code requirements should be
enforced unconditionally, with no exceptions or exemptions.
(6) Require ASME code stamping for fabrication, which would specify
that an ASME-certified nuclear inspector, who is independent from the
manufacturer and vendor, must be onsite at the fabrication plant. The
petitioner also suggests that code stamping activities be subject to
unannounced NRC inspections.
(7) Require that all fabrication materials be supplied by ASME-
approved material suppliers who are certificate holders. The petitioner
is concerned that if a supplier who is not certified is used, material
certification under the NG/NF-2130 ASME standard is not possible and
means that material traceability is not achieved.
(8) Require that the current ASME Codes and standards for
conservative heat treatment and light tightness are adopted and
enforced.
(9) Require a safe and secure hot cell transfer station coupled
with an auxiliary pool to be built as part of an upgraded ISFSI
certification and licensing process. The petitioner states that the
licensee must have a dry cask transfer capability for maintenance and
during emergency situations after decommissioning for as long as the
spent fuel remains on site.
(10) Require real-time heat and radiation monitoring at ISFSIs at
all nuclear power plant sites and storage facilities that are not
located at reactor sites maintained by the utilities and that the
monitoring data be transmitted in real-time to affected State health,
safety, and environmental regulators.
(11) Require what the petitioner describes as ``Hardened Onsite
Storage'' to fortify ISFSIs and dry casks from terrorist attacks. The
petitioner cites a study by the National Academy of Sciences entitled,
``Safety and Security of Commercial Nuclear Fuel Storage,'' supported
by the NRC (Grant No. NRC-04-04-067). According to the petitioner, this
study states that the NRC should upgrade the requirements in 10 CFR
Part 72 for dry casks, specifically to improve resistance to terrorist
attacks. The petitioner also quotes from a paper describing the
potential of terrorist attacks on dry casks by Gordon Thompson, the
Director of the Institute for Resource and Security, entitled,
``Assessing Risks of Potential Malicious Actions at Commercial Nuclear
Facilities: A Case of a Proposed ISFSI at Diablo Canyon Site'' (June
27, 2007): ``the dry cask storage modules used at ISFSIs are not
designed to resist attack. At all recently established ISFSIs in the
USA, spent fuel is contained in metal canisters with a wall thickness
of about 1.6 cm. Each canister is surrounded by a concrete over pack,
but the over pack is penetrated by channels that allow cooling of the
canister by convective flow of air. Attackers gaining access to an
ISFSI could employ readily available skills and explosives to penetrate
a canister in a manner that allows free flow to the spent fuel, and
could use incendiary devices to initiate burning of fuel cladding,
leading to a release of radioactive material to the atmosphere.''
(12) Establish funding to conduct ongoing studies to evaluate the
effects of age-related material degradation on dry casks and to assess
the structural integrity of the casks and fuel cladding. The petitioner
has stated that these studies would gather the data necessary for the
management of future damage and to determine design specifications for
future irradiated nuclear waste storage.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day of February 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9-4444 Filed 3-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P