Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 3147 

This rule invites comments on a 

change to the salable quantity and 

allotment percentage for Native 

spearmint oil for the 2014–2015 

marketing year. Any comments received 

will be considered prior to finalization 

of this rule. 

After consideration of all relevant 

material presented, including the 

Committee’s recommendation, and 

other information, it is found that this 

interim rule, as hereinafter set forth, 

will tend to effectuate the declared 

policy of the Act. 

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also 

found and determined upon good cause 

that it is impracticable, unnecessary, 

and contrary to the public interest to 

give preliminary notice prior to putting 

this rule into effect and that good cause 

exists for not postponing the effective 

date of this rule until 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register 

because: (1) This rule increases the 

quantity of Native spearmint oil that 

may be marketed during the marketing 

year, which ends on May 31, 2015; (2) 

the current quantity of Native spearmint 

oil may be inadequate to meet demand 

for the 2014–2015 marketing year, thus 

making the additional oil available as 

soon as is practicable will be beneficial 

to both handlers and producers; (3) the 

Committee recommended these changes 

at a public meeting and interested 

parties had an opportunity to provide 

input; and (4) this rule provides a 60- 

day comment period, and any 

comments received will be considered 

prior to finalization of this rule. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 985 

Marketing agreements, Oils and fats, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Spearmint oil. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 985 is amended as 

follows: 

PART 985—MARKETING ORDER 

REGULATING THE HANDLING OF 

SPEARMINT OIL PRODUCED IN THE 

FAR WEST 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 985 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. In § 985.233, revise paragraph (b) to 

read as follows: 

§ 985.233 Salable quantities and allotment 

percentages—2014–2015 marketing year. 

* * * * * 

(b) Class 3 (Native) oil—a salable 

quantity of 1,280,561 pounds and an 

allotment percentage of 54 percent. 

Dated: January 15, 2015. 

Rex A. Barnes, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–01002 Filed 1–21–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

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® 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®

Horizontal Modular Storage System 

(NUHOMS® 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: 

• 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: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For 

technical questions, contact the 

individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

document. 

• NRC’s Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable 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 pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 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. 

• 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: Gregory.Trussell@

nrc.gov. 

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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
3148 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

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®

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® Storage System. 

Amendment No. 3 adds a new 

transportable dry shielded canister 

(DSC), the 32PTH2, to the NUHOMS®

Storage System; and makes editorial 

corrections. The NUHOMS® 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 × 16 class spent fuel assemblies, 

with or without control components. 

The NUHOMS® 32PTH2 system also 

consists of a modified version of the 

Standardized NUHOMS® 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 nonradiological 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®

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® 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®

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 § 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® 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. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 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® 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®

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® 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®

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® 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® 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 subcriticality, 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® 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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
3150 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

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 

§ 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® 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® 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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 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® 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® 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® 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 tornadogenerated 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® 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® 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®

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®

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® 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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
3152 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

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®

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® Storage System; and 

makes editorial corrections. 

Amendment No. 3 to CoC No. 1029 

for the Transnuclear, Inc. NUHOMS®

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® 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. 

Document ADAMS Accession No./Federal 

Register citation 

Application from Transnuclear Inc. for the Advanced Standardized NUHOMS® Dry Storage System 

Amendment No. 3, December 15, 2011.

ML120040478. 

Safety Evaluation Report for the Transnuclear Inc. Advanced Standardized NUHOMS® Dry Storage System, Amendment No. 3.ML14317A616. 

The Transnuclear Inc. Advanced Standardized NUHOMS® Dry Storage System CoC No. 1029, Amendment No. 3.ML13290A176. 

The Transnuclear Inc. Advanced Standardized NUHOMS® Dry Storage System Technical Specifications, 

Amendment No. 3.

ML13290A182. 

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: 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). 

■ 2. In § 72.214, Certificate of 

Compliance No. 1029 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 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® Horizontal 

Modular Storage System for Irradiated 

Nuclear Fuel. 

Docket Number: 72–1029. 

Certificate Expiration Date: February 

5, 2023. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 14 / Thursday, January 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 3153 

Model Number: Standardized 

Advanced NUHOMS® –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 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0924; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–228–AD; Amendment 

39–18067; AD 2014–25–51] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and 

A321 series airplanes. This emergency 

AD was sent previously to all known 

U.S. owners and operators of these 

airplanes. This AD requires revising the 

airplane flight manual to advise the 

flightcrew of emergency procedures for 

abnormal Alpha Protection (Alpha Prot). 

This AD was prompted by a report of 

Angle of Attack (AoA) probes jamming 

on an in-service Airbus Model A321 

airplane. Jamming of the two AoA 

probes during climb is attributed to 

water freezing under the AoA vane 

slinger, and led to activation of the 

Alpha Prot while the Mach number 

increased, which resulted in an airplane 

pitch down per design. We are issuing 

this AD to ensure that the flightcrew has 

procedures to counteract the pitch down 

order due to abnormal activation of the 

Alpha Prot. An abnormal Alpha Prot, if 

not corrected, could result in loss of 

control of the airplane. 

DATES: This AD is effective February 6, 

2015 to all persons except those persons 

to whom it was made immediately 

effective by Emergency AD 2014–25–51, 

issued on December 10, 2014, which 

contained the requirements of this 

amendment. 

We must receive comments on this 

AD by March 9, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0924; or in person at the Docket 

Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this AD, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The street address for 

the Docket Operations Office (phone: 

800–647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES

section. Comments will be available in 

the AD docket shortly after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1405; 

fax 425–227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

On December 10, 2014, we issued 

Emergency AD 2014–25–51, which 

requires revising the airplane flight 

manual to advise the flightcrew of 

emergency procedures for abnormal 

Alpha Prot. This emergency AD was 

sent previously to all known U.S. 

owners and operators of these airplanes. 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Union, has issued Emergency 

Airworthiness Directive 2014–0266–E, 

dated December 9, 2014 (referred to 

after this as the Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

on all Model A318, A319, A320, and 

A321 series airplanes. The MCAI states: 

An occurrence was reported where an 

Airbus A321 aeroplane encountered a 

blockage of two Angle of Attack (AoA) probes 

during climb, leading to activation of the 

Alpha Protection (Alpha Prot) while the 

Mach number increased. The flightcrew 

managed to regain full control and the flight 

landed uneventfully. 

When Alpha Prot is activated due to 

blocked AoA probes, the flight control laws 

order a continuous nose down pitch rate that, 

in a worst case scenario, cannot be stopped 

with backward sidestick inputs, even in the 

full backward position. If the Mach number 

increases during a nose down order, the AoA 

value of the Alpha Prot will continue to 

decrease. As a result, the flight control laws 

will continue to order a nose down pitch 

rate, even if the speed is above minimum 

selectable speed, known as VLS. 

This condition, if not corrected, could 

result in loss of control of the aeroplane. 

To address this unsafe condition, Airbus 

* * * [has] developed a specific Aircraft 

Flight Manual (AFM) procedure, which has 

been published in AFM Temporary Revision 

(TR) No. 502. 

For the reasons described above, this AD 

requires amendment of the applicable AFM 

[to advise the flightcrew of emergency 

procedures for abnormal Alpha Prot]. 

This is considered to be an interim action 

and further [EASA] AD action may follow. 

FAA’s Determination and AD 

Requirements 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with the State of 

Design Authority, we have been notified 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are issuing this 

AD because we evaluated all pertinent 

information and determined the unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

FAA’s Determination of the Effective 

Date 

An unsafe condition exists that 

requires the immediate adoption of this 

AD. The FAA has found that the risk to 

the flying public justifies waiving notice 

and comment prior to adoption of this 

rule because an abnormal Alpha Prot, if 

not corrected, could result in loss of 

control of the airplane. Therefore, we 

find that notice and opportunity for 

prior public comment are impracticable 

and that good cause exists for making 

this amendment effective in less than 30 

days. 

Comments Invited 

This AD is a final rule that involves 

requirements affecting flight safety and 

was not preceded by notice and an 

opportunity for public comment. 

However, we invite you to send any 

written data, views, or arguments about 

this AD. Send your comments to an 

address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include the docket number 

FAA–2014–0924 and Directorate 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES