20712 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 80 / Thursday, April 26, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

7 CFR part 15, subpart A—USDA 

implementation of Title VI of the Civil 

Rights Act of 1964, as amended. 

7 CFR part 331 and 9 CFR part 121—

USDA implementation of the 

Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act 

of 2002. 

7 CFR part 3015—USDA Uniform 

Federal Assistance Regulations, 

implementing OMB directives (i.e., 

OMB Circular Nos. A–21 and A–122) 

and incorporating provisions of 31 

U.S.C. 6301–6308 (formerly the Federal 

Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 

1977, Pub. L. 95–224), as well as general 

policy requirements applicable to 

recipients of Departmental financial 

assistance. 

7 CFR part 3017—USDA 

implementation of Governmentwide 

Debarment and Suspension 

(Nonprocurement) and 

Governmentwide Requirements for 

Drug-Free Workplace (Grants). 

7 CFR part 3018—USDA 

implementation of Restrictions on 

Lobbying. Imposes prohibitions and 

requirements for disclosure and 

certification related to lobbying on 

recipients of Federal contracts, grants, 

cooperative agreements, and loans. 

7 CFR part 3019—USDA 

implementation of OMB Circular A–

110, Uniform Administrative 

Requirements for Grants and Other 

Agreements With Institutions of Higher 

Education, Hospitals, and Other 

Nonprofit Organizations. 

7 CFR part 3052—USDA 

implementation of OMB Circular No. A–

133, Audits of States, Local 

Governments, and Non-profit 

Organizations. 

7 CFR part 3407—CSREES procedures 

to implement the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as 

amended. 

9 CFR parts 1, 2, 3, and 4—USDA 

implementation of the Act of August 24, 

1966, Pub. L. 89–544, as amended 

(commonly known as the Laboratory 

Animal Welfare Act). 

48 CFR part 31—Contract Cost 

Principles and Procedures of the Federal 

Acquisition Regulations. 

29 U.S.C. 794 (section 504, 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973) and 7 CFR 

part 15b (USDA implementation of 

statute)—prohibiting discrimination 

based upon physical or mental handicap 

in Federally assisted programs. 

35 U.S.C. 200 et seq.—Bayh-Dole Act, 

controlling allocation of rights to 

inventions made by employees of small 

business firms and domestic nonprofit 

organizations, including universities, in 

Federally assisted programs 

(implementing regulations are contained 

in 37 CFR part 401). 

§ 3403.16 Other considerations. 

The Department may, with respect to 

any research project grant, impose 

additional conditions prior to or at the 

time of any award when, in the 

Department’s judgment, such conditions 

are necessary to assure or protect 

advancement of the approved project, 

the interests of the public, or the 

conservation of grant funds. 

Done at Washington, DC, on this 22nd day 

of April, 2007. 

Colien Hefferan, 

Administrator, Cooperative State Research, 

Education, and Extension Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–7934 Filed 4–25–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–22–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

10 CFR Part 72 

RIN 3150–AH98 

List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage 

Casks: HI-STORM 100 Revision 3 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is amending its 

regulations by revising the Holtec 

International HI-STORM 100 cask 

system listing within the ‘‘List of 

approved spent fuel storage casks’’ to 

include Amendment No. 3 to Certificate 

of Compliance Number 1014. 

Amendment No. 3 revises Technical 

Specification (TS) 3.1.3, to eliminate 

cooling of the Multi-Purpose Canister 

(MPC) cavity prior to reflood with 

water, as part of cask unloading 

operations; TS 3.3.1, to allow linear 

interpolation between minimal soluble 

boron concentrations, for certain fuel 

enrichments in the MPC–32/32F; 

Appendix B, Section 1 to the CoC, to 

make modifications to the definitions of 

fuel debris, damaged fuel assembly, and 

non-fuel hardware; and Appendix B, 

Section 2 to the CoC, to permit the 

storage of pressurized water reactor fuel 

assemblies with annular fuel pellets in 

the top and bottom 12 inches of the 

active fuel length. Other changes are 

made to incorporate minor editorial 

corrections. This final rule allows the 

holders of power reactor operating 

licenses to store spent fuel in this 

approved cask in accordance with the 

revised conditions, under the NRC’s 

general license provisions. 

DATES: The final rule is effective on May 

29, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Publicly available 

documents related to this rulemaking 

may be viewed electronically on the 

public computers located at the NRC’s 

Public Document Room (PDR), Room 

O1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 

Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. 

The PDR reproduction contractor will 

copy documents for a fee. Selected 

documents can be viewed and 

downloaded electronically via the 

NRC’s rulemaking Web site at http:// 

ruleforum.llnl.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 site, 

the public can gain entry into the NRC’s 

Agencywide Document 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 any 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS, contact the NRC 

PDR Reference staff at (800) 397–4209, 

(301) 415–4737, or by e-mail to 

pdr@nrc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jayne M. McCausland, Office of Federal 

and State Materials and Environmental 

Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001, telephone (301) 415–

6219, e-mail: jmm2@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 218(a) of the Nuclear Waste 

Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA), as 

amended, requires that ‘‘[t]he Secretary 

[of the Department of Energy (DOE)] 

shall establish a demonstration program, 

in cooperation with the private sector, 

for the dry storage of spent nuclear fuel 

at civilian nuclear power reactor sites, 

with the objective of establishing one or 

more technologies that 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, that ‘‘[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 NRC 

approved dry storage of spent nuclear 

fuel in NRC-approved casks under a 

general license by publishing a final 

rule in 10 CFR Part 72 entitled ‘‘General 

License for Storage of Spent Fuel at 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 80 / Thursday, April 26, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 20713 

Power Reactor Sites’’ (55 FR 29181; July 

18, 1990). 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 spent fuel storage cask designs. The 

NRC subsequently issued a final rule on 

May 1, 2000 (65 FR 25241) that 

approved the HI-STORM 100 cask 

system design, and added it to the list 

of NRC-approved cask designs in 10 

CFR 72.214 as Certificate of Compliance 

Number (CoC No.) 1014. 

Discussion 

On November 7, 2005, and as 

supplemented on April 30, 2006, the 

certificate holder, Holtec International, 

submitted an application to the NRC to 

amend the HI-STORM 100 cask system. 

The application requested changes to 

eliminate cooling of the MPC cavity 

prior to reflood with water as part of 

cask unloading operations; changes to 

allow linear interpolation between 

minimal soluble boron concentrations 

for certain fuel enrichments in the 

MPC–32/32F; modifications to the 

definitions of fuel debris, damaged fuel 

assembly, and non-fuel hardware; 

changes to permit the storage of 

pressurized water reactor fuel 

assemblies with annular fuel pellets in 

the top and bottom 12 inches of the 

active fuel length; and other changes to 

incorporate minor editorial corrections. 

No other changes to the HI-STORM 100 

cask system were requested in this 

application. The NRC staff performed a 

detailed safety evaluation of the 

proposed CoC amendment request and 

found that an acceptable safety margin 

is maintained. In addition, the NRC staff 

has determined that there continues to 

be reasonable assurance that public 

health and safety and the environment 

will be adequately protected. 

The NRC published a direct final rule 

(71 FR 60659; October 16, 2006) and the 

companion proposed rule (71 FR 60672) 

in the Federal Register to amend the HISTORM 100 cask system listing in 10 

CFR 72.214 to include the changes 

requested by Holtec International as 

Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1014. The 

comment period ended on November 

15, 2006. One comment letter was 

received on the proposed rule. The 

comments contained within the letter 

were considered to be significant and 

adverse and warranted withdrawal of 

the direct final rule. A notice of 

withdrawal was published in the 

Federal Register on December 27, 2006 

(71 FR 77586). Additionally, the NRC 

staff is amending the TS to remove nonfuel hardware from the definition of fuel 

debris, as discussed in the response to 

Comment C.1 in the preamble. The 

safety evaluation report (SER) has been 

modified to describe the NRC’s staff’s 

determination. 

The NRC finds that the Holtec 

International HI-STORM cask system, as 

designed and when fabricated and used 

in accordance with the conditions 

specified in its CoC, meets the 

requirements of 10 CFR Part 72. Thus, 

use of the Holtec International HISTORM cask system, as approved by the 

NRC, will provide adequate protection 

of public health and safety and the 

environment. With this final rule, the 

NRC is approving the use of the Holtec 

International HI-STORM 100 cask 

system under the general license in 10 

CFR Part 72, Subpart K, by holders of 

power reactor operating licenses under 

10 CFR Part 50. Simultaneously, the 

NRC is issuing a final SER and CoC that 

will be effective on May 29, 2007. Single 

copies of the CoC and SER are available 

for public inspection and/or copying for 

a fee at the NRC Public Document 

Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

MD. Copies of the public comments are 

available for review in the NRC Public 

Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, 

Rockville, MD. 

Discussion of Amendments by Section 

Section 72.214 List Of Approved Spent 

Fuel Storage Casks 

Certificate No. 1014 is revised by 

adding the effective date of Amendment 

Number 3. 

Summary of Public Comments on the 

Proposed Rule 

The NRC received one comment letter 

on the proposed rule from Public 

Citizen and the Nuclear Information and 

Resource Service. Copies of the public 

comment letter are available for review 

in the NRC’s Public Document Room, 

O–1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 

Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. 

Comments on the Holtec HI-STORM 100 

Cask System Revision 3 

The commenters provided specific 

comments on Holtec’s TS. To the extent 

possible, the comments on a particular 

subject are grouped together. The listing 

of the Holtec HI-STORM 100 cask 

system within 10 CFR 72.214, ‘‘List of 

approved spent fuel storage casks,’’ has 

not been changed as a result of the 

public comments. A review of the 

comments and the NRC staff’s responses 

follow: 

A. Holtec’s Proposal To Eliminate 

Cooling of the MPC Cavity Prior to 

Reflood With Water as Part of Cask 

Unloading Operations 

Comment A.1: The commenters stated 

that if adequate cooling is not done 

prior to reflooding with water during 

cask unloading, the casks could 

experience brittle fracturing caused by a 

sudden temperature change from hot to 

cold. The fracturing could be in 

addition to the brittle fracturing already 

introduced into the casks by forced 

cooling during their original 

manufacture. The commenters stated 

that forced cooling violates NRC 

regulations and applicable ASME and 

ANSI codes. 

Response: The Holtec spent fuel 

canisters are fabricated from austenitic 

stainless steel. This is an extremely 

tough material with excellent ductility 

at all temperatures. Also, this material 

does not have a ductile-to-brittle 

transformation temperature that is 

typical of some other types of steel. 

Hence, this material and the casks 

which are fabricated from it are not 

susceptible to any kind of brittle 

fracture as suggested by the comment. 

For the design environmental 

temperatures, the range varies from -40 

degrees F to 775 degrees F for the MPC, 

and this range of temperatures formed 

the design bases for the MPC of the cask 

system. The structural analyses 

performed for the cask system 

considered this range of temperatures. 

There are no heating or cooling rate 

restrictions imposed by any regulatory 

or code requirement for this material or 

for this application. 

Comment A.2: The commenters stated 

that during welding, the strength of the 

material decreases dramatically with the 

increased temperature of the material. 

After welding, Federal regulations 

require cooling at 100 degrees F without 

forced cooling. They further stated that 

if the material does not cool properly, 

voids inside the heated zones caused by 

welding could remain and cause 

cracking in the future, and that these 

cracks may not be detected by testing 

that is performed immediately after 

cooling. The commenters believed that 

the potential delayed cracking is the 

reason why Federal regulations require 

specific tests to assess whether the 

material’s strength, which is reduced by 

welding, is returned to its original 

design strength. The commenters 

believed that such cracking is also why 

forced cooling, such as immersion in 

water baths or forced air fan cooling, is 

not allowed by NRC regulations and 

applicable ASME and ANSI codes. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
20714 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 80 / Thursday, April 26, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

Response: As stated in the response to 

Comment A.1, above, there is no 

regulatory or code requirement or 

restriction for heating or cooling rates 

for austenitic stainless steel, nor is there 

any need to impose such requirements. 

Further, cooling rates as alluded to by 

the commenters only apply during postweld heat treatment (PWHT). PWHT is 

not required by the ASME code for this 

material, nor is it desirable because of 

the deleterious effect the PWHT 

temperatures would have upon the fuel 

payload. 

The part of the cask which is welded 

while the cask is in the loading pool is 

some distance from the surface of the 

loading pool during welding of the 

closure lid. Any potential ‘‘forced 

cooling’’ effect by the pool water would 

be negligible compared to the normally 

occurring cooling effect which arises 

from the thermal mass of the structural 

lid which is being welded. Likewise, the 

inert gas purge which is employed 

during welding is just sufficient to 

displace any hydrogen which may 

evolve from the fuel payload. It also 

provides a backing gas to protect the 

root pass of the weld from oxidation. It 

is insufficient to provide any significant 

cooling effect. To provide any 

significant cooling would require a gas 

flow such that welding would not be 

possible. 

No credible delayed cracking 

mechanism exists for this material, 

unlike the situation for other types of 

steel. Given this, the excellent ductility 

of the material, and the lack of any kind 

of ductile-to-brittle transformation for 

the material, no suggested ‘‘brittle 

fracturing’’ mechanism is credible. 

Comment A.3: The commenters stated 

that nine quality assurance (QA) 

violations affecting Holtec casks at the 

U.S. Tool and Die factory in Pittsburgh, 

PA, were identified by a former senior 

lead QA inspector for Commonwealth 

Edison/Exelon and his QA team in June 

and July 2000. The major QA violations 

included regulatory code violations, 

weld flaws, design flaws, and 

manufacturing flaws that call into 

question the structural integrity of the 

Holtec shipping containers, especially 

under transport accident conditions. 

The commenters stated that an NRC 

Region III dry cask inspector shared the 

concerns about the QA violations, and 

that despite this, NRC failed to address 

these issues. 

Response: Region III forwarded the 

allegations raised by the former senior 

lead QA inspector for Commonwealth 

Edison/Exelon and his QA team in June 

and July 2000 to the former Spent Fuel 

Project Office (SFPO) at NRC 

Headquarters in memoranda dated 

February 20, 2002, and April 19, 2002. 

SFPO staff reviewed his allegations and 

concluded that there were no safetysignificant problems with Holtec’s QA 

program, and more importantly, that 

there were no identified defects in any 

casks previously manufactured. When 

the former senior lead QA inspector for 

Commonwealth Edison/Exelon asserted 

that NRC did not adequately address his 

issues, the NRC ’s independent Office of 

the Inspector General (OIG) conducted 

an investigation. The OIG report, dated 

July 27, 2004 (available on the NRC 

website: http://www.nrc.gov/readingrm.html), concluded that: (1) The NRC 

staff did not fail to provide adequate 

oversight of Holtec and U.S. Tool and 

Die; (2) the NRC appropriately inspected 

those companies, found deficiencies, 

and verified that corrective actions were 

taken; (3) NRC’s handling of the 

allegations from the former senior lead 

QA inspector for Commonwealth 

Edison/Exelon was appropriate; and (4) 

the NRC conducted a timely inspection 

and had a valid basis to determine that 

no safety significant problems existed. 

B. Holtec’s Proposal To Allow Linear 

Interpolation Between Minimal Soluble 

Boron Concentrations for Certain Fuel 

Enrichments in the MPC–32/32F 

Comment: The commenters stated 

that boron concentrations must be 

maintained very carefully given the risk 

of inadvertent criticality due to the 

fissile materials (such as U–235 and Pu239) still present in the irradiated fuel. 

They stated that the NRC should not 

allow rollbacks on criticality safety 

regulations. 

Response: During the review of the 

proposed amendment the staff carefully 

considered the additional risk of an 

inadvertent criticality given a 

corresponding reduction in the soluble 

boron levels based on enrichment. The 

original requirement to load any fuel 

over 4.1 weight percent uranium-235 as 

if it were 5.0 weight percent uranium235 fuel was extremely conservative. 

Based on the study performed in the 

license amendment request, staff finds 

that linear interpolation of the soluble 

boron levels is conservative in this 

instance and continues to provide an 

ample margin of safety against 

inadvertent criticality. 

C. Holtec’s Proposal To Modify the 

Definitions of Fuel Debris, Damaged 

Fuel Assembly, and Nonfuel Hardware 

Comment C.1: The commenters stated 

that fuel debris and damaged fuel 

assemblies are among the most risky 

high-level radioactive waste to handle, 

store, transport, and dispose of, because 

the integrity of the fuel cladding has 

been ruined. They stated that 

radioactive particles and gases and 

entire nuclear fuel pellets are able to 

escape the fuel rods, worsening 

contamination of the Holtec inner 

canister and cask systems. They 

believed this could increase radiation 

doses for nuclear workers and the 

public as well as increase criticality 

risks in certain accident scenarios such 

as underwater submersions. Thus, the 

commenters believe that the definitions 

of these terms should not be modified. 

Response: In its review of the final 

rule that added the Holtec HI-STORM 

100 cask system to the listing in 10 CFR 

72.214 (65 FR 25241; May 1, 2000), the 

staff found that fuel debris, as defined 

in that amendment, can be stored safely 

in the HI-STORM 100 cask system. The 

basis for the staff’s finding is explained 

in the SER for that final rule. The 

current amendment does propose, 

however, to expand the definition of 

fuel debris to include additional 

materials. 

In response to the comment, staff 

reevaluated this proposal and 

determined that expanding the 

definition of fuel debris to include 

containers or structures that are 

supporting intact or damaged fuel 

assembly parts is acceptable, as stated in 

the SER. However, staff determined that 

expanding the definition of fuel debris 

to include non-fuel hardware in order to 

permit storage of non-fuel hardware 

separately from (i.e., not within) a fuel 

assembly was not acceptable, and 

modified the Technical Specifications to 

remove non-fuel hardware from the 

definition of fuel debris. The SER has 

been modified to describe the staff’s 

determination. 

Comment C.2: The commenters stated 

that the nonfuel hardware is a 

hazardous material due to the 

radioactive contamination and 

radioactive activation it has experienced 

and presents a danger to workers and 

the public. 

Response: In its review of 

Amendment 1 to the HI-STORM 100 

cask system (67 FR 46369; July 15, 

2002), the staff found that non-fuel 

hardware, as defined in that 

amendment, can be stored safely in the 

HI-STORM 100 cask system. The basis 

for the staff’s finding is explained in the 

SER for that previous amendment. The 

current amendment proposes to add 

neutron source assemblies (NSA) to the 

definition of allowable non-fuel 

hardware and limits the number and the 

locations of NSAs to one per MPC 

stored in one of the four center-most 

fuel basket positions. Also, the staff 

found in its review that the shielding 

source term for an NSA is bounded by 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 80 / Thursday, April 26, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 20715 

the shielding source terms of the cask 

contents approved in the previous 

amendment. Thus, the staff finds the 

cask system can safely store non-fuel 

hardware as defined in the current 

amendment. 

D. Holtec’s Proposal To Permit the 

Storage of Pressurized Water Reactor 

(PWR) Fuel Assemblies With Annular 

Fuel Pellets in the Top and Bottom 12 

Inches of the Active Fuel Length 

Comment: The commenters expressed 

concern that permitting the storage of 

PWR fuel assemblies with annular fuel 

pellets in the top and bottom 12 inches 

of the active fuel length would risk 

increasing doses to nuclear workers and 

the public during cask loading, 

handling, storage, transport, and 

disposal operations. They stated that 

this storage should not be allowed by 

NRC. 

Response: The current amendment 

proposes to modify the allowable PWR 

contents to included PWR assemblies 

containing annular fuel pellets in the 

top and bottom 12 inches of the active 

fuel length. NRC staff considered the 

difference between annular and solid 

fuel pellets in this part of the fuel from 

two aspects—source term and 

shielding—and concluded that the effect 

would not be noticeable. The annular 

pellet would produce a smaller source 

term than the solid pellet, since there is 

less fuel in the annular pellet, though 

the difference would be small, 

considering the lower burnup that the 

ends of the active fuel experience and 

the fact that the majority of fissions 

occur in the outer portions of a fuel 

pellet. Also, while solid pellets may be 

more effective than annular pellets as 

shielding, the amount of shielding 

provided by the MPC lid and the cask 

lid would make this effect small. Thus, 

the staff finds that the cask system can 

safely store PWR assemblies with 

annular pellets in the top and bottom 12 

inches of the active fuel length. 

Summary of Final Revisions 

In Appendix B to the CoC, Section 

1.0, Definitions, the TS has been revised 

in response to Comment C.1. to remove 

non-fuel hardware from the definition of 

fuel debris. The SER has also been 

revised to document this change. 

Voluntary Consensus Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement 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 final rule, the NRC 

is revising the HI-STORM 100 cask 

system design listed in 10 CFR 72.214 

(List of NRC-approved spent fuel storage 

cask designs). This action does not 

constitute the establishment of a 

standard that contains generally 

applicable requirements. 

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 (AEA), as amended, or the 

provisions of 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. 

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. This final rule amends the 

CoC for the HI-STORM 100 cask system 

within the list of approved spent fuel 

storage casks that power-reactor 

licensees can use to store spent fuel at 

reactor sites under a general license. 

Amendment No. 3 modifies the present 

cask system design by revising TS 3.1.3 

to eliminate cooling of the MPC cavity 

prior to reflood with water as part of 

cask unloading operations; TS 3.3.1 to 

allow linear interpolation between 

minimal soluble boron concentrations 

for certain fuel enrichments in the 

MPC–32/32F; Appendix B, Section 1 to 

the CoC, to make modifications to the 

definitions of fuel debris, damaged fuel 

assembly, and non-fuel hardware; and 

Appendix B, Section 2 to the CoC, to 

permit the storage of pressurized water 

reactor fuel assemblies with annular 

fuel pellets in the top and bottom 12 

inches of the active fuel length. Other 

changes are made to incorporate minor 

editorial corrections. 

The environmental assessment (EA) 

and finding of no significant impact on 

which this determination is based are 

available for inspection at the NRC 

Public Document Room, 11555 

Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD. Single 

copies of the EA and finding of no 

significant impact are available from 

Jayne M. McCausland, Office of Nuclear 

Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001, telephone 

(301) 415–6219, e-mail jmm2@nrc.gov. 

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement 

This final 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 

The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, 

and a person is not required to respond 

to, a request for information or an 

information collection requirement 

unless the requesting document 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. 

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 in cask designs approved by the 

NRC. Any nuclear power-reactor 

licensee can use NRC-approved cask 

designs 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. A list of 

NRC-approved cask designs is contained 

in 10 CFR 72.214. On May 1, 2000 (65 

FR 25241), the NRC issued an 

amendment to Part 72 that approved the 

HI–STORM 100 cask system design by 

adding it to the list of NRC-approved 

cask designs in 10 CFR 72.214. On 

November 7, 2005, and as supplemented 

on April 30, 2006, the certificate holder, 

Holtec International, submitted an 

application to the NRC to amend the 

HI–STORM 100 cask system. The 

amendment revises TS 3.1.3 to 

eliminate cooling of the MPC cavity 

prior to reflood with water as part of 

cask unloading operations; TS 3.3.1 to 

allow linear interpolation between 

minimal soluble boron concentrations 

for certain fuel enrichments in the 

MPC–32/32F; Appendix B, Section 1 to 

the CoC, to make modifications to the 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
20716 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 80 / Thursday, April 26, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

definitions of fuel debris, damaged fuel 

assembly, and non-fuel hardware; and 

Appendix B, Section 2 to the CoC, to 

permit the storage of pressurized water 

reactor fuel assemblies with annular 

fuel pellets in the top and bottom 12 

inches of the active fuel length. Other 

changes are made to incorporate minor 

editorial corrections. The alternative to 

this action is to withhold approval of 

this amended cask system design. 

Withholding approval, in the absence of 

any safety reason for doing so, would 

not comply with the requirements of 

sections 218(a) and 133 of the Nuclear 

Waste Policy Act. 

Approval of the final rule is 

consistent with previous NRC actions. 

Further, the final rule will have no 

adverse effect on public health and 

safety. This final rule has no significant 

identifiable impact or benefit on other 

Government agencies. Based on this 

discussion of the benefits and impacts 

of the alternatives, the NRC concludes 

that the requirements of the final rule 

are commensurate with the NRC’s 

responsibilities for public health and 

safety and the common defense and 

security. No other available alternative 

is believed to be as satisfactory, and 

thus, this action is recommended. 

Regulatory Flexibility Certification 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the NRC 

certifies that this rule will not, if issued, 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

This final rule affects only the licensing 

and operation of nuclear power plants, 

independent spent fuel storage facilities, 

and Holtec International. 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 final rule 

because this amendment does not 

involve any provisions that would 

impose backfits as defined. Therefore, a 

backfit analysis is not required. 

Congressional Review Act 

Under the Congressional Review Act 

of 1996, the NRC has determined that 

this action is not a major rule and has 

verified this determination with the 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Office of Management and 

Budget. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 72 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Criminal penalties, 

Manpower training programs, Nuclear 

materials, Occupational safety and 

health, Penalties, Radiation protection, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, Spent 

fuel, Whistleblowing. 

■ 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. 552 and 553; 

the NRC is adopting the following 

amendments to 10 CFR Part 72. 

PART 72—LICENSING 

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE 

INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT 

NUCLEAR FUEL, HIGH-LEVEL 

RADIOACTIVE WASTE, AND 

REACTOR-RELATED GREATER THAN 

CLASS C 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. 102–

486, sec. 7902, 106 Stat. 3123 (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); sec. 

1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); 

sec. 651(e), Pub. L. 109–58, 119 Stat. 806–10 

(42 U.S.C. 2014, 2021, 2021b, 2111). 

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, 2224 (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 1014 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 72.214 List of approved spent fuel 

storage casks. 

* * * * * 

Certificate Number: 1014. 

Initial Certificate Effective Date: June 

1, 2000. 

Amendment Number 1 Effective Date: 

July 15, 2002. 

Amendment Number 2 Effective Date: 

June 7, 2005. 

Amendment Number 3 Effective Date: 

May 29, 2007. 

SAR Submitted by: Holtec 

International. 

SAR Title: Final Safety Analysis 

Report for the HI–STORM 100 Cask 

System. 

Docket Number: 72–1014. 

Certificate Expiration Date: June 1, 

2020. 

Model Number: HI–STORM 100. 

* * * * * 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day 

of April, 2007. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Luis A. Reyes, 

Executive Director for Operations. 

[FR Doc. E7–8033 Filed 4–25–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2007–27980; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–NM–066–AD; Amendment 

39–15033; AD 2007–09–03] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Learjet 

Model 45 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Learjet Model 45 airplanes. This AD 

requires deactivating the auxiliary 

power unit (APU), capping/plugging the 

fuel lines to the APU, and removing the 

APU fuel shutoff valve. This AD results 

from reports of fuel leaking from the 

APU fuel shutoff valve into a flammable 

fluid fire protection area that is also 

interconnected with the main landing 

gear’s wheel well bay. We are issuing 

this AD to prevent fuel leaking from the 

fuel shutoff valve of the APU, which 

could result in an uncontrollable fire 

and adversely affect the airplane’s 

continued safe flight and landing. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective May 

11, 2007. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES