[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 14 (Thursday, January 22, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3147-3153]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01031]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 72

[NRC-2013-0271]
RIN 3150-AJ31


List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Transnuclear, Inc. 
Standardized Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] Horizontal Modular Storage System; 
Certificate of Compliance No. 1029, Amendment No. 3

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its 
spent fuel storage regulations by revising the Transnuclear, Inc. (TN) 
Standardized Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] Horizontal Modular Storage System 
(NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System) listing within the ``List of Approved 
Spent Fuel Storage Casks'' to include Amendment No. 3 to Certificate of 
Compliance (CoC) No. 1029. The NRC published a direct final rule on 
this amendment in the Federal Register on April 15, 2014. The NRC also 
concurrently published an identical proposed rule on April 15, 2014. 
The NRC received significant adverse comments on the direct final rule; 
therefore, the NRC withdrew the direct final rule on June 25, 2014, and 
is proceeding, in this Federal Register notice, to address the comments 
on the companion proposed rule.

DATES: This final rule is effective on February 23, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2013-0271 when contacting the 
NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may 
obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of 
the following methods:
    <bullet> Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0271. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#89cae8fbe6e5a7cee8e5e5e8eee1ecfbc9e7fbeaa7eee6ff"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fab99b889596d4bd9b96969b9d929f88ba948899d49d958c">[email protected]</span></a>. For technical questions, contact 
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
    <bullet> NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and 
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, 
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#86f6e2f4a8f4e3f5e9f3f4e5e3c6e8f4e5a8e1e9f0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f6869284d88493859983849593b6988495d8919980">[email protected]</span></a>. For 
the convenience of the reader, instructions about obtaining materials 
referenced in this document are provided in the ``Availability of 
Documents'' section of this document.
    <bullet> NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O-1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory R. Trussell, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone: 301-415-6445, email: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#eaad988f8d859893c4be989f99998f8686aa849889c48d859c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0d4a7f686a627f7423597f787e7e6861614d637f6e236a627b">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Discussion of Changes
III. Public Comment Analysis
IV. Voluntary Consensus Standards
V. Agreement State Compatibility
VI. Plain Writing
VII. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
IX. Regulatory Analysis
X. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
XI. Backfitting and Issue Finality
XII. Congressional Review Act
XIII. Availability of Documents

I. Background

    Section 218(a) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) of 1982, as 
amended, requires that ``the 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 
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 [the Commission] shall, by rule, establish 
procedures for the licensing of any technology approved by the

[[Page 3148]]

Commission under Section 219(a) [sic: 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 by 
publishing a final rule in part 72 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR), ''Licensing Requirements for the Independent 
Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and 
Reactor-Related Greater Than Class C Waste,'' which added a new subpart 
K within 10 CFR part 72 entitled, ``General License for Storage of 
Spent Fuel at 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,'' which contains procedures and 
criteria for obtaining NRC approval of spent fuel storage cask designs. 
The NRC subsequently issued a final rule (68 FR 463; January 6, 2003) 
that approved the Standardized Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] Cask System 
design and added it to the list of NRC-approved cask designs in 10 CFR 
72.214, ``List of approved spent fuel storage casks,'' as CoC No. 1029.

II. Discussion of Changes

    On December 15, 2011, Transnuclear, Inc. submitted an application 
to amend the NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System. Amendment No. 3 adds a new 
transportable dry shielded canister (DSC), the 32PTH2, to the 
NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System; and makes editorial corrections. The 
NUHOMS[supreg] 32PTH2 system is designed to accommodate up to 32 intact 
(or up to 16 damaged and the balance intact) pressurized water reactor 
(PWR), Combustion Engineering (CE), 16 x 16 class spent fuel 
assemblies, with or without control components. The NUHOMS[supreg] 
32PTH2 system also consists of a modified version of the Standardized 
NUHOMS[supreg] Advanced Horizontal Storage Module (AHSM), designated 
the AHSM-HS (high burnup and high seismic).
    Numerous sections of the Technical Specifications (TSs) were 
revised to add and update characteristics, specifications, and 
requirements related to the 32PTH2 DSC and the AHSM-HS storage module. 
Additional changes were made to definitions and other sections to 
improve completeness, consistency, and clarity. Revised sections are 
indicated by side bars in the TSs.
    As documented in the Safety Evaluation Report (SER) (ADAMS 
Accession No. ML14317A616), the NRC staff performed a detailed safety 
evaluation of the proposed CoC amendment request. There are no 
significant changes to cask design requirements in the proposed CoC 
amendment. Considering the specific design requirements for each 
accident condition, the design of the cask would prevent loss of 
containment, shielding, and criticality control. If there is no loss of 
containment, shielding, or criticality control, the environmental 
impacts would be insignificant. This amendment does not reflect a 
significant change in design or fabrication of the cask. In addition, 
any resulting occupational exposure or offsite dose rates from the 
implementation of Amendment No. 3 would remain well within the limits 
of 10 CFR part 20, ``Standards for Protection Against Radiation.'' 
Therefore, the CoC changes will not result in any radiological or non-
radiological environmental impacts that significantly differ from the 
environmental impacts evaluated in the environmental assessment 
supporting the July 18, 1990, final rule (55 FR 29181) that amended 10 
CFR part 72 to provide for the storage of spent fuel under a general 
license in cask designs approved by the NRC. There will be no 
significant change in the types or significant revisions in the amounts 
of any effluent released, no significant increase in the individual or 
cumulative radiation exposure, and no significant increase in the 
potential for or consequences from radiological accidents from those 
analyzed in that environmental assessment.
    This final rule revises the NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System listing 
in 10 CFR 72.214 by adding Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1029. The 
amendment consists of the changes previously described, as set forth in 
the revised CoC and TSs. The revised TSs are identified in the SER. The 
amended NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System design, when used under the 
conditions specified in the CoC, the TSs, and the NRC's regulations, 
will meet the requirements of 10 CFR part 72; therefore, adequate 
protection of public health and safety will continue to be ensured. 
When this final rule becomes effective, persons who hold a general 
license under 10 CFR 72.210, ``General license issued,'' may load spent 
nuclear fuel into NUHOMS[supreg] Storage Systems that meet the criteria 
of Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1029 under 10 CFR 72.212, ``Conditions of 
general license issued under Sec.  72.210.''

III. Public Comment Analysis

    The NRC received 17 comments from private citizens, and 1 comment 
from 2 attorneys representing 20 environmental organizations and 
individuals. The NRC received two comments from private citizens after 
the public comment period ended.
    The NRC has not made any changes to the Proposed rule as a result 
of the public comments NRC has received. The following is a summary of 
the comments and the NRC responses.
    Comment:
    Several commenters stated that the NRC should not lower safety 
standards by approving this new canister. No specifics were provided.
    Response:
    The NRC is not lowering its safety standards. The staff performed 
an independent safety evaluation of Amendment No. 3 to the Standardized 
Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] System to ensure that it meets the regulations 
in 10 CFR part 72. The results of the staff's independent safety 
evaluation are described in the SER (ADAMS Accession No. ML14317A616).
    The comment is not substantive enough to aid the NRC in 
understanding any impact upon the NRC's safety review, the technical 
specifications, or the NRC's conclusions on this particular amendment. 
Additionally, the NRC staff concluded that there would be no 
significant environmental impacts as confirmed in the direct final 
rule, Section VII, ``Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: 
Availability.'' This comment does not challenge that finding because, 
as the environmental assessment explained, this amendment to the rule 
will not result in any significant change in the types or significant 
revisions in the amounts of any effluent released, no significant 
increase in the individual or cumulative radiation exposure, and no 
significant increase in the potential for or consequences from 
radiological accidents. This amendment continues to ensure that the 
Commission's regulations regarding dose rates, found in 10 CFR part 20, 
are maintained.
    Comment:
    Two commenters demanded that the NRC should ``get rid'' of stored 
spent fuel. No specifics were provided.
    Response:
    The NRC staff reviewed the comments, and concluded that they are 
not significant and adverse as defined in NUREG/BR-0053, Revision 6, 
``United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulations Handbook'' 
(hereinafter ``Regulations Handbook'') (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML052720461), as they are beyond the scope of this rulemaking. Instead, 
these comments raise generic concerns regarding the use of any spent 
fuel storage casks and are not specific to any issue or concern with 
the amendment to the cask certificate that is the subject of this 
rulemaking effort.

[[Page 3149]]

    Comment:
    One commenter stated that under no circumstances should nuclear 
regulations be lowered for the sake of increasing the density of stored 
high spent fuel and saving money.
    Response:
    The NRC is not lowering its nuclear regulations. The staff 
performed an independent safety evaluation of Amendment No. 3 to the 
Standardized Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] System to ensure that it meets the 
regulations in 10 CFR part 72. The results of the staff's independent 
safety evaluation are described in the SER (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML14317A616). The comment is not substantive enough to aid the NRC in 
understanding any impact upon the NRC's safety review, the technical 
specifications, or the NRC's conclusions on this particular amendment. 
Additionally, the NRC staff concluded that there would be no 
significant environmental impacts as confirmed in the direct final 
rule, Section VII, ``Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: 
Availability.'' This comment does not challenge that finding because, 
as the environmental assessment explained, this amendment to the rule 
will not result in any significant change in the types or significant 
revisions in the amounts of any effluent released, no significant 
increase in the individual or cumulative radiation exposure, and no 
significant increase in the potential for or consequences from 
radiological accidents. This amendment continues to ensure that the 
Commission's regulations regarding dose rates, found in 10 CFR part 20, 
are maintained.
    Comment:
    One commenter stated the high burn up fuel is an extremely ``hot'' 
type of spent fuel, would require re-casking, which has never been 
attempted, and that approval should be given only after re-casking is 
achieved.
    Response:
    The NRC staff reviewed this comment and concluded it is not a 
significant adverse comment as defined in the Regulations Handbook, as 
it is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. Instead, this comment raises 
a generic concern regarding the safety of high burnup fuel and its 
storage in spent fuel storage casks, and is not specific to any issue 
or concern with the amendment to the cask certificate that is the 
subject of this rulemaking. Although the ability of the Standardized 
Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] storage system to store high burnup fuel has 
not been previously authorized (it is now being authorized in the 
32PTH2 DSC), the ability of a similar TN system, the Standardized 
NUHOMS[supreg] system (CoC No. 1004), to store high burnup fuel for 20 
years was authorized in Amendment No. 6. The final rule approving that 
amendment was published in the Federal Register on December 17, 2003 
(68 FR 70121).
    Comment:
    Several commenters stated that the NRC should not approve storing 
32 fuel assemblies in a space originally designed for 24 fuel 
assemblies, with some of the comments raising concerns about a 
potential increased risk associated with the increased number of fuel 
assemblies.
    Response:
    The 32PTH2 is a new design, specifically intended to store 32 fuel 
assemblies. It is not a modification to the 24PT1 or 24PT4 for storage 
of 32 spent fuel assemblies in a 24 assembly cask. Although the ability 
of the Standardized Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] storage system to store 32 
PWR assemblies has not been previously authorized (it is now being 
authorized in the 32PTH2 DSC), the ability of a similar TN system, the 
Standardized NUHOMS[supreg] system (CoC No. 1004), to store 32 PWR 
assemblies in the 32PT DSC for 20 years was authorized in Amendment No. 
5. The final rule approving that amendment was published in the Federal 
Register on January 7, 2004 (69 FR 849). A similar DSC, the 32PTH1, was 
also approved under CoC No. 1004, and authorized in Amendment No. 10. 
The final rule approving that amendment was published in the Federal 
Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 24769). In addition, the ability of 
another similar TN system, the NUHOMS[supreg] HD Horizontal Modular 
System is authorized to store 32 PWR assemblies in the 32PTH DSC for 20 
years. The final rule approving the initial certificate was published 
in the Federal Register on December 11, 2006 (71 FR 71463). For every 
system authorized, whether it is for storage of 24 PWR assemblies, 32 
PWR assemblies, or 37 PWR assemblies (for example), staff performs a 
comprehensive review to ensure that the system maintains sub-
criticality, provides adequate radiation shielding and confinement, 
provides adequate heat removal, and can store the spent fuel safely 
during the approved storage term; in accordance with the requirements 
of 10 CFR part 72.
    Comment:
    One commenter noted that the definition of damaged fuel has been 
changed for the 32PTH2.
    Response:
    With the addition of the 32PTH2 DSC, a definition for a damaged 
fuel assembly specific to the 32PTH2 was added. The new definition is 
the same as the existing definition, for the 24PT1 and the 24PT4, 
except that it adds a requirement that the damaged fuel assembly must 
be able to be handled by normal means. According to the TS, all damaged 
fuel assemblies loaded in 24PT1 or 24PT4 DSCs are required to be 
encapsulated in failed fuel cans, and are limited to specific loading 
zones. In contrast, the damaged fuel assemblies loaded in the 32PTH2 
must be able to be handled by normal means because they are not 
required to be encapsulated in failed fuel cans. Instead, the DSC fuel 
compartments that can store damaged fuel assemblies in the 32PTH2 are 
provided with top and bottom end caps, and the damaged fuel assemblies 
are limited to specific fuel compartments. Note that in both cases, 
fuel assemblies with damage greater than the definition are not 
authorized for storage.
    Comment:
    One commenter stated that storage ought to be above ground, so that 
we all remember to keep replacing the encasements.
    Response:
    The Advanced Standardized NUHOMS[supreg] Dry Storage System is an 
above ground system. Note also that all approved dry storage systems 
are required to be monitored, and that any system that is renewed is 
also subject to aging management programs which monitor and control age 
related degradation to the structures, systems and components important 
to safety.
    Comment:
    Two attorneys stated, on behalf of 20 environmental organizations 
and individuals, that in publishing this direct final rule, the NRC 
violated the requirements of the Atomic Energy Act and the 
Administrative Procedures Act for public participation in the NRC 
decisions affecting public safety and the environment. They also stated 
that the direct final rule Federal Register notice is grossly 
misleading, and appears designed to lull the public into a false sense 
of confidence.
    Response:
    The NRC has not violated the requirements of the Atomic Energy Act 
and the Administrative Procedures Act for public participation. As 
explained in the Regulations Handbook, the direct final rule process 
may be used where the agency believes a rule is noncontroversial and 
significant adverse comments will not be received. This process allows 
the agency to issue the rule without having to go through the review 
process twice, at the proposed and final rule stages, while at the same 
time offering the public the opportunity

[[Page 3150]]

to challenge the agency's view that the rule is noncontroversial. The 
NRC published, on the same day as the direct final rule, a Federal 
Register notice for a proposed rule on the CoC amendment in the event 
the NRC did receive significant adverse comments on the rule. The NRC 
has, for many years, adhered to this procedure in all its CoC direct 
final rules, and as demonstrated in this instance, this process does 
provide the ability of the public to participate in this process.
    Comment:
    The same commenters also stated that contrary to the NRC assurances 
that the rule is limited, routine, noncontroversial, and protects the 
public and the environment from radiological accidents, the rule 
approves a significant and unprecedented change in the permissible use 
of 32PTH2 DSC: the transportation of high burnup fuel.
    Response:
    The rule does not approve the 32PTH2 DSC for transportation of high 
burnup fuel. The direct final rule is for approval of the 32PTH2 DSC 
for storage only. While TN's naming convention of including a ``T'' in 
the DSC type designator indicates its intention that the 32PTH2 could 
eventually be authorized for transport, it in no way indicates that the 
32PTH2 has been approved for transport. In order for the 32PTH2 DSC to 
be approved for transportation of high burnup fuel, or any other spent 
fuel, TN would have to submit an application to the NRC under 10 CFR 
part 71, which would need to be reviewed and approved in a new and 
entirely separate process from the current subject approval for the 
storage of spent nuclear fuel. The 32PTH2 DSC has not been reviewed and 
approved for spent fuel transportation under 10 CFR part 71. 
Transnuclear, Inc., does have approved transportation certificates that 
authorize transportation for some of its DSCs (not including the 
32PTH2) under this storage CoC (No. 1029) and others, and some of those 
DSCs are approved for transportation of high burnup fuel (CoCs 71-9255 
and 71-9302). However, this is a completely separate review and 
approval process.
    The SER has been revised to explicitly state that the 32PTH2 DSC 
has not been certified under 10 CFR part 71 for use in transportation.
    Comment:
    Many of the comments were related to the potential use of the new 
32PTH2 DSC at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS). The 
commenters were generally opposed to storage of spent nuclear fuel in 
the 32PTH2 DSC at SONGS, some because of the higher number of fuel 
assemblies that could be stored in this DSC; SONGS is currently using 
the 24PT1 and 24PT4 DSCs (already approved under CoC No. 1029), which 
hold 24 fuel assemblies each. Other commenters in this group prefer 
that the spent fuel not be stored onsite at all; they recommend instead 
that the spent fuel be transported off site immediately. One commenter 
in this group expressed concerns about accident analyses used for 
review and approval of spent fuel storage systems in relation to 
conditions at SONGS, and recommended leaving the spent fuel in spent 
fuel pools, rather than moving it to dry storage. A supplement to this 
comment also considered storing the spent fuel in the reactor 
containment building. Several of the commenters also expressed concerns 
about the wild fires in California in relation to SONGS spent fuel 
storage, and one commenter requested that the approval of the 32PTH2 
DSC for storage be amended to specifically preclude its use at SONGS.
    Response:
    The NRC staff reviewed the comments in this group, and concluded 
that they are not significant and adverse comments as defined in the 
Regulations Handbook, as they are beyond the scope of this rulemaking. 
Instead, these comments raise a generic concern regarding potential use 
of the 32PTH2 DSC at a single, particular site SONGS, and do not raise 
any specific issue or concern with the amendment to the cask 
certificate that is the subject of this rulemaking. The NRC staff is 
aware that SONGS has expressed interest in storing spent nuclear fuel 
in the 32PTH2 DSC, once it is approved. The regulations for the general 
license in 10 CFR part 72 allow the use of any approved canisters under 
10 CFR 72.214 by any general licensee, however, the cask used by the 
general licensee must conform to the terms, conditions, and 
specifications of a CoC or an amended CoC listed in Sec.  72.214. 
Additionally, under 10 CFR 72.212, a general licensee is required to 
perform evaluations that document that the chosen cask, once loaded, 
will meet the requirements of the CoC and TS, and that the reactor site 
parameters (including analyses of earthquake intensity and tornado 
missiles) are enveloped by the cask design bases as described in the 
applicant's safety analysis report and the staff's SER. Further, the 
cask storage areas must be designed to adequately support the static 
and dynamic loads of the stored casks, considering possible earthquake 
effects, and the general licensee must protect the stored spent fuel 
against the design basis threat of radiological sabotage.

IV. 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 revises the 
NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System design listed in 10 CFR 72.214. This 
action does not constitute the establishment of a standard that 
contains generally applicable requirements.

V. 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, this final 
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, or 
the provisions of 10 CFR. Although an Agreement State may not adopt 
program elements reserved to the 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.

VI. Plain Writing

    The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-274), requires Federal 
agencies to write documents in a clear, concise, well-organized manner 
that also follows other best practices appropriate to the subject or 
field and the intended audience. The NRC has attempted to use plain 
language in promulgating this rule consistent with the Federal Plain 
Writing Act guidelines.

VII. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability

A. The Action

    The action is to amend 10 CFR 72.214 to revise the Transnuclear, 
Inc. NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System listing within the ``List of 
Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks'' to include Amendment No. 3 to CoC 
No. 1029. Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as 
amended, and the NRC's regulations in subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, 
``Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and 
Related Regulatory Functions,'' the NRC

[[Page 3151]]

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 
NRC has made a finding of no significant impact on the basis of this 
environmental assessment.

B. The Need for the Action

    This final rule amends the CoC for the Transnuclear, Inc. 
NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System design 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. Specifically, Amendment 
No. 3 adds a new transportable DSC, 32PTH2, to the NUHOMS[supreg] 
Storage System; and makes editorial corrections.

C. Environmental Impacts of the Action

    On July 18, 1990 (55 FR 29181), the NRC issued an amendment to 10 
CFR part 72 to provide for the storage of spent fuel under a general 
license in cask designs approved by the NRC. The potential 
environmental impact of using NRC-approved storage casks was initially 
analyzed in the environmental assessment for the 1990 final rule. The 
environmental assessment for this Amendment No. 3 tiers off of the 
environmental assessment for the July 18, 1990, final rule. Tiering on 
past environmental assessments is a standard process under the National 
Environmental Policy Act.
    NUHOMS[supreg] Storage Systems are designed to mitigate the effects 
of design basis accidents that could occur during storage. Design basis 
accidents account for human-induced events and the most severe natural 
phenomena reported for the site and surrounding area. Postulated 
accidents analyzed for an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation, 
the type of facility at which a holder of a power reactor operating 
license would store spent fuel in casks in accordance with 10 CFR part 
72, include tornado winds and tornado-generated missiles, a design 
basis earthquake, a design basis flood, an accidental cask drop, 
lightning effects, fire, explosions, and other incidents.
    Considering the specific design requirements for each accident 
condition, the design of the cask would prevent loss of containment, 
shielding, and criticality control. If there is no loss of containment, 
shielding, or criticality control, the environmental impacts would be 
insignificant. This amendment does not reflect a significant change in 
design or fabrication of the cask. There are no significant changes to 
cask design requirements in the proposed CoC amendment. In addition, 
because there are no significant design or process changes, any 
resulting occupational exposure or offsite dose rates from the 
implementation of Amendment No. 3 would remain well within the 10 CFR 
part 20 limits. Therefore, the proposed CoC changes will not result in 
any radiological or non-radiological environmental impacts that 
significantly differ from the environmental impacts evaluated in the 
environmental assessment supporting the July 18, 1990, final rule. 
There will be no significant change in the types or significant 
revisions in the amounts of any effluent released, no significant 
increase in the individual or cumulative radiation exposure, and no 
significant increase in the potential for or consequences from 
radiological accidents. The staff documented its safety findings in an 
SER which is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML14317A616.

D. Alternative to the Action

    The alternative to this action is to deny approval of Amendment No. 
3 and end the final rule. Consequently, any 10 CFR part 72 general 
licensee that seeks to load spent nuclear fuel into NUHOMS[supreg] 
Storage Systems in accordance with the changes described in proposed 
Amendment No. 3 would have to request an exemption from the 
requirements of 10 CFR 72.212 and 72.214. Under this alternative, 
interested licensees would have to prepare, and the NRC would have to 
review, a separate exemption request, thereby increasing the 
administrativeburden upon the NRC and the costs to each licensee. 
Therefore, the environmental impacts would be the same or less than the 
action.

E. Alternative Use of Resources

    Approval of Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1029 would result in no 
irreversible commitments of resources.

F. Agencies and Persons Contacted

    No agencies or persons outside the NRC were contacted in connection 
with the preparation of this environmental assessment.

G. Finding of No Significant Impact

    The environmental impacts of the action have been reviewed under 
the requirements in 10 CFR part 51. Based on the foregoing 
environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that this final rule 
entitled, ``List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Standardized 
Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] Horizontal Modular Storage System, Amendment 
No. 3,'' will not have a significant effect on quality of the human 
environment. Therefore, the NRC has determined that an environmental 
impact statement is not necessary for this final rule.

VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not contain any information collection requirements 
and, therefore, is not subject to the requirements of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
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 current valid 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.

IX. 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, the 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. The NRC issued a final rule (68 
FR 463; January 6, 2003) that approved the Standardized Advanced 
NUHOMS[supreg] Cask System design and added it to the list of NRC-
approved cask designs in 10 CFR 72.214 ``List of approved spent fuel 
storage casks,'' as CoC No. 1029.
    On December 15, 2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML120040478), 
Transnuclear, Inc. submitted an application to amend the NUHOMS[supreg] 
Storage System.
    The alternative to this action is to withhold approval of Amendment 
No. 3 and to require any 10 CFR part 72 general licensee seeking to 
load spent nuclear fuel into the NUHOMS[supreg] Storage Systems under 
the changes described in Amendment No. 3 to request an exemption from 
the requirements of 10 CFR 72.212 and 72.214. Under this alternative, 
each interested 10 CFR part 72 licensee would have to prepare, and the 
NRC would have to review separate exemption requests, thereby 
increasing the administrative burden upon the NRC and the costs to each 
licensee.
    Approval of this final rule is consistent with previous NRC 
actions. Further, as documented in the SER and

[[Page 3152]]

the environmental assessment, the final rule will have no adverse 
effect on public health and safety or the environment. This final rule 
has no significant identifiable impact or benefit on other Government 
agencies. Based on this regulatory analysis, 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 therefore, this action is recommended.

X. 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 nuclear power plant licensees and Transnuclear, Inc. 
These entities do not fall within the scope of the definition of small 
entities set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the size 
standards established by the NRC (10 CFR 2.810).

XI. Backfitting and Issue Finality

    The NRC has determined that the backfit rule (10 CFR 72.62) does 
not apply to this final rule. Therefore, a backfit analysis is not 
required. This final rule revises the CoC No. 1029 for the 
Transnuclear, Inc. NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System, as currently listed 
in 10 CFR 72.214, ``List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks.'' The 
revision consists of Amendment No. 3 which adds a new transportable 
DSC, 32PTH2, to the NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System; and makes editorial 
corrections.
    Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1029 for the Transnuclear, Inc. 
NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System was initiated by Transnuclear, Inc. and 
was not submitted in response to new NRC requirements, or an NRC 
request for amendment. Amendment No. 3 applies only to new casks 
fabricated and used under Amendment No. 3. These changes do not affect 
existing users of the NUHOMS[supreg] Storage System, and the current 
Amendments continue to be effective for existing users. While current 
CoC users may comply with the new requirements in Amendment No. 3, this 
would be a voluntary decision on the part of current users. For these 
reasons, Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1029 does not constitute 
backfitting under 10 CFR 72.62, 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1), or otherwise 
represent an inconsistency with the issue finality provisions 
applicable to combined licenses in 10 CFR part 52. Accordingly, no 
backfit analysis or additional documentation addressing the issue 
finality criteria in 10 CFR part 52 has been prepared by the staff.

XII. Congressional Review Act

    In accordance with the Congressional Review Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 
801-808), the NRC has determined that this action is not a rule as 
defined in the Congressional Review Act.

XIII. Availability of Documents

    The documents identified in the following table are available to 
interested persons through one or more of the following methods, as 
indicated.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             ADAMS Accession No./Federal
                  Document                        Register citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application from Transnuclear Inc. for the   ML120040478.
 Advanced Standardized NUHOMS[supreg] Dry
 Storage System Amendment No. 3, December
 15, 2011.
Safety Evaluation Report for the             ML14317A616.
 Transnuclear Inc. Advanced Standardized
 NUHOMS[supreg] Dry Storage System,
 Amendment No. 3.
The Transnuclear Inc. Advanced Standardized  ML13290A176.
 NUHOMS[supreg] Dry Storage System CoC No.
 1029, Amendment No. 3.
The Transnuclear Inc. Advanced Standardized  ML13290A182.
 NUHOMS[supreg] Dry Storage System
 Technical Specifications, Amendment No. 3.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 72 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Atomic Energy Act secs. 51, 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 
81, 161, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187, 189, 223, 234, 274 (42 U.S.C. 
2071, 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233, 
2234, 2236, 2237, 2239, 2273, 2282, 2021); Energy Reorganization Act 
secs. 201, 202, 206, 211 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846, 5851); 
National Environmental Policy Act sec. 102 (42 U.S.C. 4332); Nuclear 
Waste Policy Act secs. 131, 132, 133, 135, 137, 141, 148 (42 U.S.C. 
10151, 10152, 10153, 10155, 10157, 10161, 10168); Government 
Paperwork Elimination Act sec. 1704, (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); Energy 
Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109-58, 119 Stat. 788 (2005).
    Section 72.44(g) also issued under Nuclear Waste Policy Act 
secs. 142(b) and 148(c),(d) (42 U.S.C. 10162(b), 10168(c),(d)). 
Section 72.46 also issued under Atomic Energy Act sec. 189 (42 
U.S.C. 2239); Nuclear Waste Policy Act sec. 134 (42 U.S.C. 10154). 
Section 72.96(d) also issued under Nuclear Waste Policy Act sec. 
145(g) (42 U.S.C. 10165(g)). Subpart J also issued under Nuclear 
Waste Policy Act secs. 117(a), 141(h) (42 U.S.C. 10137(a), 
10161(h)). Subpart K also issued under Nuclear Waste Policy Act sec. 
218(a) (42 U.S.C. 10198).


0
2. In Sec.  72.214, Certificate of Compliance No. 1029 is revised to 
read as follows:


Sec.  72.214  List of approved spent fuel storage casks.

* * * * *
    Certificate Number: 1029.
    Initial Certificate Effective Date: February 5, 2003.
    Amendment Number 1 Effective Date: May 16, 2005.
    Amendment Number 2 Effective Date: Amendment not issued by the NRC.
    Amendment Number 3 Effective Date: February 23, 2015.
    SAR Submitted by: Transnuclear, Inc.
    SAR Title: Final Safety Analysis Report for the Standardized 
Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] Horizontal
    Modular Storage System for Irradiated Nuclear Fuel.
    Docket Number: 72-1029.
    Certificate Expiration Date: February 5, 2023.

[[Page 3153]]

    Model Number: Standardized Advanced NUHOMS[supreg] -24PT1, -24PT4, 
and -32PTH2.
* * * * *

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of January, 2015.

    For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mark A. Satorius,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 2015-01031 Filed 1-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>