Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2000 / Proposed Rules 3397

information requirements appropriate

for this type of transfer should be

established.

The Petitioner’s Conclusion

The petitioner believes that the NRC

should conduct a rulemaking that

would define and clarify responsibilities

for the effective control of depleted

uranium aircraft counterweights. The

petitioner believes that the rule should

specify at what point and under what

circumstances the licensing exemption

for these devices is no longer applicable;

the length of time counterweights for

which there is no demand or use may

be stored as exempt material; the

regulations that apply to aircraft that are

removed from service with depleted

uranium counterweights that can be

transferred to unlicensed parts dealers

and salvage operators; and, the need for

radiological surveillance of long-term

aircraft storage parks and facilities

where aircraft with depleted uranium

counterweights are regularly stored for

protracted periods under unmonitored

conditions. The petitioner believes that

the current rulemaking on generally

licensed devices should be expanded to

include depleted uranium

counterweights or that a separate

rulemaking along similar lines should

be initiated.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day

of January, 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Annette Vietti-Cook,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 00–1301 Filed 1–20–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 72

RIN 3150–AG32

List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage

Casks: NAC UMS Addition

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) is proposing to

amend its regulations to add the NAC

UMS Universal Storage System (NAC–

UMS) to the list of approved spent fuel

storage casks. This amendment will

allow the holders of power reactor

operating licenses to store spent fuel in

the NAC UMS cask system under a

general license.

DATES: The comment period expires

April 5, 2000. Comments received after

this date will be considered if it is

practical to do so, but the NRC is able

to assure consideration only for

comments received on or before this

date.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to:

Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001. Attention: Rulemakings and

Adjudications Staff. Deliver comments to 11555 Rockville

Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30

a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. You may also provide comments via

the NRC’s interactive rulemaking

website (http://ruleforumllnl.gov). This

site provides the capability to upload

comments as files (any format), if your

web browser supports that function. For

information about the interactive

rulemaking website, contact Ms. Carol

Gallagher, (301) 415–5905 (e-mail:

cag@nrc.gov).

Copies of any comments received may

be examined at the NRC Public

Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW

(Lower Level), Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stan

Turel, telephone (301) 415–6234, e-mail,

spt@nrc.gov of the Office of Nuclear

Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 218(a) of the Nuclear Waste

Policy Act of 1982, as amended

(NWPA), requires that ‘‘[t]he Secretary

[of the Department of Energy] shall

establish a demonstration program in

cooperation with the private sector, for

the dry storage of spent nuclear fuel at

civilian power reactor sites, with the

objective of establishing one or more

technologies the [Nuclear Regulatory]

Commission may, by rule, approve for

use at the sites of civilian nuclear power

reactors without, to the maximum

extent practicable, the need for

additional site-specific approvals by the

Commission.’’ Section 133 of the NWPA

states, in part, ‘‘[t]he Commission shall,

by rule, establish procedures for the

licensing of any technology approved by

the Commission under Section 218(a)

for use at the site of any civilian nuclear

power reactor.’’ To implement this mandate, the

Commission approved dry storage of

spent nuclear fuel in NRC-approved

casks under a general license,

publishing on July 18, 1990, a final rule

in 10 CFR Part 72 entitled, ‘‘General

License for Storage of Spent Fuel at

Power Reactor Sites’’ (55 FR 29181).

This rule also established a new Subpart

L within 10 CFR Part 72 entitled,

‘‘Approval of Spent Fuel Storage Casks’’

containing procedures and criteria for

obtaining NRC approval of dry storage

cask designs.

Discussion

This proposed rule would add the

NAC UMS Universal Storage System

(NAC–UMS) to the list of NRC-approved

casks for spent fuel storage in 10 CFR

72.214. Following the procedures

specified in 10 CFR 72.230 of Subpart

L, NAC International, Inc. (NAC)

submitted an application for NRC

approval with the Safety Analysis

Report (SAR): ‘‘Safety Analysis Report

for the NAC UMS Universal Storage

System.’’ The NRC evaluated the NAC

submittal and issued a preliminary

Safety Evaluation Report (SER) on the

NAC SAR and a proposed Certificate of

Compliance (CoC) for the NAC UMS

cask system.

The NRC is proposing to approve the

NAC UMS cask system for storage of

spent fuel under the conditions

specified in the proposed CoC. This

cask system, when used in accordance

with the conditions specified in the CoC

and NRC regulations, will meet the

requirements of 10 CFR Part 72; thus,

adequate protection of the public health

and safety would be ensured. This cask

system is being proposed for listing

under 10 CFR 72.214, ‘‘List of approved

spent fuel storage casks,’’ to allow

holders of power reactor operating

licenses to store spent fuel in this cask

system under a general license. The CoC

would terminate 20 years after the

effective date of the final rule listing this

cask in 10 CFR 72.214, unless the cask

system’s CoC is renewed. The certificate

contains conditions for use specific for

this cask system and addresses issues

such as operating procedures, training

exercises, and spent fuel specification.

The proposed CoC for the NAC UMS

cask system and the underlying

preliminary SER, are available for

inspection and comment at the NRC

Public Document Room, 2120 L Street,

NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC.

Single copies of the proposed CoC and

preliminary SER may be obtained from

Stan Turel, Office of Nuclear Material

Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Washington,

DC 20555, telephone (301) 415–6234,

email spt@nrc.gov.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments by

Section

Section 72.214 List of approved spent

fuel storage casks.

Certificate No. 1015 would be added

indicating that:

(1) The title of the SAR submitted by

NAC International, Inc. is ‘‘Final Safety

3398 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Analysis Report for the NAC UMS

Universal Storage System’’;

(2) The docket number is 72–1015;

(3) The certificate expiration date

would be 20 years after final rule

effective date; and

(4) The model number affected is

NAC–UMS.

Finding of No Significant

Environmental Impact: Availability

Under the National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the

NRC regulations in Subpart A of 10 CFR

Part 51, the NRC has determined that

this rule, if adopted, would not be a

major Federal action significantly

affecting the quality of the human

environment and, therefore, an

environmental impact statement is not

required. The rule is mainly

administrative in nature. It would not

have significant environmental impacts.

The proposed rule would add the NAC

UMS cask system to the list of approved

spent fuel storage casks that power

reactor licensees can use to store spent

fuel at reactor sites without additional

site-specific approvals by the NRC. The

environmental assessment and finding

of no significant impact on which this

determination is based are available for

inspection at the NRC Public Document

Room, 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level),

Washington, DC. Single copies of the

environmental assessment and finding

of no significant impact are available

from Stan Turel, Office of Nuclear

Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555, Telephone (301)

415–6234, email spt@nrc.gov.

Agreement State Compatibility

Under the ‘‘Policy Statement on

Adequacy and Compatibility of

Agreement State Programs’’ approved by

the Commission on June 30, 1997, and

published in the Federal Register on

September 3, 1997 (62 FR 46517), this

rule is classified as compatibility

Category ‘‘NRC.’’ Compatibility is not

required for Category ‘‘NRC’’

regulations. The NRC program elements

in this category are those that relate

directly to areas of regulation reserved

to the NRC by the Atomic Energy Act of

1954, as amended (AEA), or the

provisions of the Title 10 of the Code of

Federal Regulations. Although an

Agreement State may not adopt program

elements reserved to NRC, it may wish

to inform its licensees of certain

requirements via a mechanism that is

consistent with the particular State’s

administrative procedure laws, but does

not confer regulatory authority on the

State.

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

This proposed rule does not contain

a new or amended information

collection requirement subject to the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing

requirements were approved by the

Office of Management and Budget,

Approval Number 3150–0132.

Public Protection Notification

If a means used to impose an

information collection does not display

a currently valid OMB control number,

the NRC may not conduct or sponsor,

and a person is not required to respond

to, the information collection.

Voluntary Consensus Standards

The National Technology Transfer Act

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–113) requires that

Federal agencies use technical standards

that are developed or adopted by

voluntary consensus standards bodies

unless the use of such a standard is

inconsistent with applicable law or

otherwise impractical. In this proposed

rule, the NRC would add the NAC UMS

cask system to the list of NRC approved

casks for spent fuel storage in 10 CFR

72.214. This action does not constitute

the establishment of a standard that

establishes generally-applicable

requirements.

Plain Language

The Presidential Memorandum dated

June 1, 1998, entitled ‘‘Plain Language

in Government Writing,’’ directed that

the Government’s writing be in plain

language. The NRC requests comments

on this proposed rule specifically with

respect to the clarity and effectiveness

of the language used. Comments should

be sent to the address listed under the

heading ADDRESSES above.

Regulatory Analysis

On July 18, 1990 (55 FR 29181), the

NRC issued an amendment to 10 CFR

Part 72 to provide for the storage of

spent nuclear fuel under a general

license. Any nuclear power reactor

licensee can use NRC-certified casks to

store spent nuclear fuel if it notifies the

NRC in advance, spent fuel is stored

under the conditions specified in the

cask’s CoC, and the conditions of the

general license are met. In that rule, four

spent fuel storage casks were approved

for use at reactor sites and were listed

in 10 CFR 72.214. That rule envisioned

that storage casks certified in the future

could be added to the listing in 10 CFR

72.214 through rulemaking procedures.

Procedures and criteria for obtaining

NRC approval of new spent fuel storage

cask designs were provided in 10 CFR

Part 72, Subpart L. Subsequently,

additional casks have been added to the

listing in 10 CFR 72.214.

The alternative to this proposed

action is not to certify these new designs

and give a site-specific license to each

utility that proposes to use the casks.

This would cost the NRC and the

utilities more time and money because

each utility would have to pursue a new

site-specific license. Using site-specific

reviews would ignore the procedures

and criteria currently in place for the

addition of new cask designs and would

be in conflict with the NWPA direction

to the Commission to approve

technologies for the use of spent fuel

storage at the sites of civilian nuclear

power reactors without, to the

maximum extent practicable, the need

for additional site reviews. Also, this

alternative discourages competition

because it would exclude new vendors

without cause and would arbitrarily

limit the choice of cask designs

available to power reactor licensees.

Approval of the proposed rule would

eliminate the above problems and is

consistent with previous Commission

actions. Further, the proposed rule will

have no adverse effect on public health

and safety.

The benefit of this proposed rule to

nuclear power reactor licensees is to

make available a greater choice of spent

fuel storage cask designs that can be

used under a general license. The new

cask vendors with casks to be listed in

10 CFR 72.214 benefit by having to

obtain NRC certificates only once for a

design that can then be used by more

than one power reactor licensee. The

NRC also benefits because it will need

to certify a cask design only once for use

by multiple licensees. Casks approved

through rulemaking are to be suitable

for use under a range of environmental

conditions sufficiently broad to

encompass multiple nuclear power

plant sites in the United States without

the need for further site-specific

approval by NRC. Vendors with cask

designs already listed may be adversely

impacted because power reactor

licensees may choose a newly listed

design over an existing one. However,

the NRC is required by its regulations

and the NWPA direction to certify and

list approved casks. This proposed rule

would have no significant identifiable

impact or benefit on other Government

agencies.

Based on the above discussion of the

benefits and impacts of the alternatives,

the NRC concludes that the

requirements of the proposed rule are

commensurate with the NRC’s

responsibilities for public health and

safety and the common defense and

security. No other available alternative

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2000 / Proposed Rules 3399

is believed to be as satisfactory, and

thus, this action is recommended.

Regulatory Flexibility Certification

In accordance with the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 605(b)),

the NRC certifies that this rule will not,

if promulgated, have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. This proposed

rule affects only the licensing and

operation of nuclear power plants,

independent spent fuel storage facilities,

and NAC. The companies that own

these plants do not fall within the scope

of the definition of ‘‘small entities’’ set

forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or

the Small Business Size Standards set

out in regulations issued by the Small

Business Administration at 13 CFR Part

121.

Backfit Analysis

The NRC has determined that the

backfit rule (10 CFR 50.109 or 10 CFR

72.62) does not apply to this proposed

rule because this amendment does not

involve any provisions that would

impose backfits as defined in the backfit

rule. Therefore, a backfit analysis is not

required.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 72

Criminal penalties, Manpower

training programs, Nuclear materials,

Occupational safety and health,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Security measures, Spent

fuel.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble and under the authority of the

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended;

the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,

as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 553; the NRC

is proposing to adopt the following

amendments to 10 CFR Part 72.

PART 72—LICENSING

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE

INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT

NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH-LEVEL

RADIOACTIVE WASTE

1. The authority citation for Part 72

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 51, 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69,

81, 161, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187, 189, 68 Stat.

929, 930, 932, 933, 934, 935, 948, 953, 954,

955, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as

amended (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2077, 2092,

2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233,

2234, 2236, 2237, 2238, 2282); sec. 274, Pub.

L. 86–373, 73 Stat. 688, as amended (42

U.S.C. 2021); sec. 201, as amended, 202, 206,

88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42

U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); Pub. L. 95–601, sec.

10, 92 Stat. 2951 as amended by Pub. L. 10d–

48b, sec. 7902, 10b Stat. 31b3 (42 U.S.C.

5851); sec. 102, Pub. L. 91–190, 83 Stat. 853

(42 U.S.C. 4332); secs. 131, 132, 133, 135,

137, 141, Pub. L. 97–425, 96 Stat. 2229, 2230,

2232, 2241, sec. 148, Pub. L. 100–203, 101

Stat. 1330–235 (42 U.S.C. 10151, 10152,

10153, 10155, 10157, 10161, 10168).

Section 72.44(g) also issued under secs.

142(b) and 148(c), (d), Pub. L. 100–203, 101

Stat. 1330–232, 1330–236 (42 U.S.C.

10162(b), 10168(c),(d)). Section 72.46 also

issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C.

2239); sec. 134, Pub. L. 97–425, 96 Stat. 2230

(42 U.S.C. 10154). Section 72.96(d) also

issued under sec. 145(g), Pub. L. 100–203,

101 Stat. 1330–235 (42 U.S.C. 10165(g)).

Subpart J also issued under secs. 2(2), 2(15),

2(19), 117(a), 141(h), Pub. L. 97–425, 96 Stat.

2202, 2203, 2204, 2222, 2244, (42 U.S.C.

10101, 10137(a), 10161(h)). Subparts K and L

are also issued under sec. 133, 98 Stat. 2230

(42 U.S.C. 10153) and sec. 218(a), 96 Stat.

2252 (42 U.S.C. 10198).

2. In § 72.214, Certificate of

Compliance 1015 is added to read as

follows:

§ 72.214 List of approved spent fuel

storage casks.

* * * * *

Certificate Number: 1015.

SAR Submitted by: NAC

International, Inc.

SAR Title: Final Safety Analysis

Report for the NAC UMS Universal

Storage System.

Docket Number: 72–1015.

Certificate Expiration Date: [insert 20

years after the effective date of the final

rule].

Model Number: NAC–UMS.

* * * * *

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day

of December, 1999.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Patricia G. Norry,

Acting Executive Director for Operations.

[FR Doc. 00–1454 Filed 1–20–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–D

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

17 CFR Chapter II

[Release Nos. 33–7790, 34–42331, 35–27125,

39–2381, IC–24238, IA–1850; File No. S7–

02–00]

List of Rules To Be Reviewed Pursuant

to the Regulatory Flexibility Act

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange

Commission.

ACTION: Publication of list of rules

scheduled for review.

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange

Commission is today publishing a list of

rules to be reviewed pursuant to Section

610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

The list is published to provide the

public with notice that these rules are

scheduled for review by the agency and

to invite public comment on them.

DATES: Public comments are due by

February 15, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to submit

written comments should file three

copies with Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary,

Securities and Exchange Commission,

450 Fifth Street, NW, Room 6184,

Washington, DC 20549–0609. All

submissions should refer to File No. S7–

XX–00, and will be available for public

inspection and copying at the

Commission’s Public Reference Room,

Room 1026, at the same address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Anne H. Sullivan, Office of the General

Counsel, Securities and Exchange

Commission 202–942–0954.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Regulatory Flexibility Act (‘‘RFA’’)

codified at 5 U.S.C. 600–611 requires

agencies to review rules which have a

significant economic impact upon a

substantial number of small entities

every ten years. The purpose of the

review is to ‘‘to determine whether such

rules should be continued without

change, or should be amended or

rescinded * * * to minimize any

significant economic impact of the rules

upon a substantial number of such small

entities’’ (5 U.S.C. 610(a)).

The RFA sets forth specific

considerations that must be addressed

in the review of each rule:

• the continued need for the rule;

• the nature of complaints or

comments received concerning the rule

from the public;

• the complexity of the rule;

• the extent to which the rule

overlaps, duplicates or conflicts with

other Federal rules, and, to the extent

feasible, with State and local

governmental rules; and

• the length of time since the rule has

been evaluated or the degree to which

technology, economic conditions, or

other factors have changed in the area

affected by the rule (5 U.S.C. 610(c)).

The Commission particularly solicits

public comment on whether the rules

listed below affect small businesses in

new or different ways than when they

were first adopted. The Securities and

Exchange Commission, as a matter of

policy, reviews all rules which it

publishes for notice and comment to

assess not only their continued

compliance with the RFA, but also to

assess generally their continued utility.

When the Commission implemented the

Act in 1980, it stated that it ‘‘intend[ed]

to conduct a broader review [than that