September 11, 2015 

MEMORANDUM TO: Chairman Burns 

Commissioner Svinicki 

Commissioner Ostendorff 

Commissioner Baran 

FROM: Mark A. Satorius /RA/ 

Executive Director for Operations 

SUBJECT: PROPOSED RULEMAKING ON SECURITY REQUIREMENTS FOR 

FACILITIES STORING SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH-LEVEL 

RADIOACTIVE WASTE 

This memorandum responds to Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM)-SECY-10-0114, 

“Recommendation to Extend the Proposed Rulemaking on Security Requirements for Facilities 

Storing Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste” (Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML103210025). The U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff is providing its technical approach and updated 

recommendation on the timeline for a proposed rule to develop security requirements for 

facilities providing interim storage of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste 

(HLW). As a result of stakeholder feedback and developments in the nuclear industry since the 

issuance of SRM-SECY-10-0114 and an earlier SRM-SECY-07-0148, “Independent Spent Fuel 

Storage Installation Security Requirements for Radiological Sabotage” (ADAMS Accession No. 

ML073530119), the staff is recommending that the Commission delay commencing this security 

rulemaking for up to 5 years. 

In SRM-SECY-07-0148, the Commission approved the staff’s recommendation to apply a 

radiological dose-based regulatory approach to all independent spent fuel storage installations 

(ISFSI) using release-fraction values specified by the NRC. Specifically, this dose-based 

approach would require licensees to demonstrate that the security at ISFSIs or monitored 

retrievable storage installations could effectively protect against releases, if any, resulting from 

specific security events bounded by the design basis threat for radiological sabotage, such that 

the estimated dose at the site boundary would not exceed 0.05 Sievert (5 rem). In addition, the 

Commission directed the staff to develop new, risk-informed performance-based security 

requirements applicable to all ISFSIs to enhance existing security requirements, and to develop 

ISFSI-specific regulatory guidance supporting the implementation of the new regulations. 

CONTACT: Susan H. Stuchell, NSIR/DSP 

 301-287-3609 
The Commissioners - 2 - 

As a result of stakeholder comments on the “Draft Technical Basis for Rulemaking Revising 

Security Requirements for Facilities Storing SNF and HLW, Notice of Availability and Solicitation 

of Public Comments” (74 Federal Register (FR) 66589) (ADAMS Accession No. 

ML093280743) issued on December 9, 2009, the staff requested additional time to further 

evaluate those comments. After obtaining Commission approval, the staff engaged 

stakeholders to resolve concerns surrounding the dose-based approach. This was a relatively 

lengthy process since the staff needed to identify and provide security clearances to 

stakeholders with a need-to-know so that these stakeholders could participate in multiple 

classified meetings to review and discuss additional information used to support the technical 

basis of the subject rulemaking. 

Based on the feedback from stakeholders, the staff conducted an additional review of the 

existing analyses and data, and determined that additional testing was necessary to complete 

the technical basis. Consequently, the staff conducted proof-of-concept testing to determine if 

certain postulated security scenarios were credible. Stakeholders with clearances were invited 

to observe the testing. Furthermore, the staff recorded the testing and held classified meetings 

with cleared stakeholders to present and discuss the testing and results. The proof-of-concept 

testing both confirmed the credibility of some scenarios and eliminated others from further 

consideration. The staff shared the results of this testing with the Commission in 2014. The 

staff is currently performing MELCOR analysis using the testing data to further analyze release 

scenarios. This work is projected to be completed by December 2015. 

Following completion of the additional stakeholder engagements and the proof-of-concept 

testing, several key developments in the nuclear power industry led the staff to reexamine the 

timing of this proposed rulemaking. After more than a decade without any power reactors 

permanently shutting down, operators of five power reactor units permanently ceased 

operations between 2013 and 2014. Case-by-case licensing exemption requests and 

stakeholder input as these reactors transitioned from operating status to decommissioned status 

prompted the Commission to issue SRM-SECY-14-066, “Request by Dominion Energy 

Kewaunee, Inc. for Exemptions from Certain Emergency Planning Requirements,” dated August 

7, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14219A366). In this SRM, the Commission directed the 

staff to complete a focused rulemaking that provides a set of transparent and effective 

regulations governing this transition process. The Commission further directed the staff to 

complete this decommissioning rulemaking without impacting staff’s ongoing regulatory 

activities associated with the reactors undergoing decommissioning. The staff’s evaluation of 

resources and expertise necessary to support both rulemakings revealed additional interface 

issues warranting further consideration. As an example, the question arose whether the dosebased regulatory approach for ISFSIs should be implemented while reactors are still in 

operation, at the beginning of the transition process, or towards the end of the transition process 

to minimize any operational impacts while providing high assurance of public health and safety. 

Concurrently, the environment for SNF storage and disposal continues to evolve. Aside from 

ISFSIs, two entities have expressed an interest in building centralized interim spent fuel storage 

facilities. Specifically, Waste Control Specialists has announced its intent to submit an 

application for a consolidated interim storage facility (CISF) by April 2016; and Holtec 

International has requested the staff to open a docket for interactions with the NRC on 

establishing a CISF. Although the staff remains confident that existing requirements ensure 

adequate protection, construction and operation of a CISF, if licensed, will require the staff to 

reexamine potential security scenarios to support the technical basis for the subject rulemaking. 
The Commissioners - 3 - 

Finally, in SRM-SECY-11-0032, “Consideration of the Cumulative Effects of Regulation in the 

Rulemaking Process,” dated October 11, 2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML112840466), the 

Commission directed the staff to seek and consider stakeholder feedback on the cumulative 

effects of regulation related to a proposed rule. Although the subject security rulemaking is not 

yet at the proposed rule stage, if the agency moves forward with the dose-based regulatory 

approach, in addition to requiring licensees to make permanent any temporary measures under 

the post-9/11 security orders, this rule would require licensees to perform dose calculations to 

demonstrate compliance with the 0.05 Sievert (5 rem) site boundary requirement discussed 

above. As recently as July 20, 2015, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) provided comments on 

the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions (FR Vol. 80, 35170, dated 

June 18, 2015; Docket ID NRC-2015-0071) questioning the need for the ISFSI security 

rulemaking. However, staff is aware that not all stakeholders would agree with NEI’s 

perspective. 

Consistent with the Commission direction in the recent SRM-SECY-15-0015, “Project Aim 2020 

Report and Recommendations,” dated June 8, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15159A234), 

the staff has reassessed the path forward based on the developments since the 2007 and 2010 

SRMs on the subject rulemaking. First and foremost, as stated previously, the existing security 

requirements for ISFSIs, together with the additional requirements in the post 9/11 security 

orders, provide continued high assurance of adequate protection of public health and safety 

regardless of the license type or location. These orders remain in effect even if the agency 

does not proceed with further rulemaking. Additionally, triennial security inspections for ISFSIs 

that commenced in 2012 ensure industry compliance with all current requirements. Not 

pursuing the subject rulemaking would leave in place two different licensing approaches for 

security of ISFSIs, general and specific. However, given the resources associated with any 

rulemaking, the technical approach of this rulemaking would greatly benefit from and likely need 

to be reanalyzed based on progress of the decommissioning rulemaking, completion of the 

ongoing MELCOR analysis, and further clarity on the development of the domestic spent 

nuclear fuel management strategy. Moreover, pursuing this rulemaking now would require 

guidance development to implement the dose-based approach, including development of 

release fractions for credible and reasonable scenarios and dose assessment methods. These 

expenditures need to be evaluated in light of competing agency priorities. Based on the benefit 

and resource impact evaluation described above, the staff’s recommendation is to not to pursue 

this rulemaking at this time. 

The staff will re-evaluate the technical approach for ISFSI security in 5 years to determine 

whether rulemaking is warranted. However, the staff may conduct a technical review sooner, if 

necessitated by external factors. Such potential factors include: (1) a need is identified to 

develop a clear interface between the new decommissioning power reactor security 

requirements and ISFSI security requirements; (2) a change to the threat environment affecting 

ISFSIs; (3) a need is identified for ISFSI security requirements to support a new national 

strategy utilizing a CISF, or (4) the staff’s Project Aim 2020 rebaselining effort recommends 

acceleration of the ISFSI security rulemaking. The enclosure provides the new timeline for this 

proposed rulemaking. Consequently, the staff is requesting to reset the WITS items to the new 

dates as identified in the enclosure.
The Commissioners - 4 - 

The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed this memorandum and has no legal objection. 

SECY, please track. 

Enclosure: 

Schedule for the Independent Spent Fuel 

Storage Installation and Monitored 

Retrievable Storage Installation Security 

Rulemaking 

cc: SECY 

 OGC 

 OCA 

 OPA 

 CFO 

 
The Commissioners - 4 - 

The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed this memorandum and has no legal objection. 

SECY, please track. 

Enclosure: 

Schedule for the Independent Spent Fuel 

Storage Installation and Monitored 

Retrievable Storage Installation Security 

Rulemaking 

cc: SECY 

 OGC 

 OCA 

 OPA 

 CFO 

 RES 

 NRR 

 

 

ADAMS Accession No.: ML15230A009 (Package); ML15229A231 (Memo) W201000265 

OFFICE NSIR/DSP NSIR/DSP QTE NSIR/DSP NMSS OGC NSIR EDO 

NAME SStuchell SWastler J. Dougherty MThaggard SMoore MDoane BHolian MSatorius 

 DATE 08/17/15 08/18/15 08/25/15 08/18/15 08 /24/15 08/25/15 08/21/15 9/11/15

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY