```

[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 16, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3444-3448]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-1172]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 72

RIN 3150-AG54

List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: FuelSolutions Addition

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its 
regulations to add the FuelSolutions cask system to the list of 
approved spent fuel storage casks. This amendment allows the holders of 
power reactor operating licenses to store spent fuel in this approved 
cask system under a general license.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is effective on February 15, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stan Turel, telephone (301) 415-6234, 
e-mail [email protected] of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and 
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Section 218(a) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended 
(NWPA), requires that ``[t]he Secretary [of 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, ``[t]he 
Commission shall, by rule, establish procedures for the licensing of 
any technology approved by the Commission under Section 218(a) for use 
at the site of any civilian nuclear power reactor.''
    To implement this mandate, the NRC approved dry storage of spent 
nuclear fuel in NRC-approved casks under a general license, publishing 
a final rule in 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,'' containing 
procedures and criteria for obtaining NRC approval of dry storage cask 
designs.

[[Page 3445]]

Discussion

    This rule will add the FuelSolutions cask system to the list of 
approved spent fuel storage casks in 10 CFR 72.214. Following the 
procedures specified in 10 CFR 72.230 of subpart L, BNFL Fuel Solutions 
submitted an application for NRC approval with the Safety Analysis 
Report (SAR) entitled, ``Final Safety Analysis Report for the 
FuelSolutions Spent Fuel Management System.'' The NRC evaluated the 
BNFL Fuel Solutions submittal and issued a preliminary Safety 
Evaluation Report (SER) and a proposed Certificate of Compliance (CoC) 
for the FuelSolutions cask system. The NRC published a proposed rule in 
the Federal Register (65 FR 42647; July 11, 2000) to add the 
FuelSolutions cask system to the listing in 10 CFR 72.214. The comment 
period ended on September 25, 2000. Two comment letters were received 
on the proposed rule.
    Based on NRC review and analysis of public comments, the NRC has 
modified, as appropriate, the CoC, SER, SAR, and the Technical 
Specifications (TS) for the FuelSolutions cask system.
    The NRC finds that the FuelSolutions cask system, as designed and 
when fabricated and used in accordance with the conditions specified in 
its CoC, meets the requirements of 10 CFR Part 72, Subpart L. Thus, use 
of the FuelSolutions cask system as approved by the NRC will provide 
adequate protection of public health and safety and the environment. 
With this final rule, the NRC is approving the use of the FuelSolutions 
cask system under the general license in 10 CFR part 72, Subpart K, by 
holders of power reactor operating licenses under 10 CFR part 50. 
Simultaneously, the NRC is issuing a final SER and CoC that will be 
effective on February 15, 2001. Single copies of the final CoC and SER 
will be available by January 30, 2001 for public inspection and/or 
copying for a fee at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR),11555 Rockville 
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852 and electronically at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.
    Documents created or received at the NRC after November 1, 1999, 
are also available electronically at the NRC's Public Electronic 
Reading Room on the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html. The public can gain entry from this site into the NRC's 
Agency wide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which 
provides text and image files of the NRC's public documents. An 
electronic copy of the final CoC, Technical Specifications, and SER for 
the FuelSolutions cask system can be found in ADAMS under Accession No. 
ML003759247. However, because the NRC must incorporate the date of 
publication of this Federal Register notice into the CoC, these 
documents are not yet publicly available. The NRC will make these 
documents publically available by January 30, 2001. Contact the NRC PDR 
reference staff for more information. PDR reference staff may be 
reached at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail at [email protected].

Summary of Public Comments on the Proposed Rule

    The NRC received two comment letters from one commenter within the 
nuclear industry on the proposed rule. Copies of the public comments 
are available for review in the NRC Public Document Room, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852 and electronically at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.

Comments on the FuelSolutions Cask System

    The comments and responses have been grouped into four subject 
areas: Safety Evaluation Report (SER), Certificate of Compliance (CoC), 
Technical Specifications (TS), and Safety Analysis Report (SAR). The 
NRC's decision to list the FuelSolutions cask system within 10 CFR 
72.214, ``List of approved spent fuel storage casks,'' has not been 
changed as a result of the public comments. A review of the comments 
and the NRC's responses follow:

A: Safety Evaluation Report

    Comment A-1: The commenter requested that within the Draft Safety 
Evaluation Report, Section 4.1, under BFS Methodology for Calculating 
Maximum Allowable Cladding Temperature, a clarifying statement be 
added, stating that for PWR and BWR fuel assemblies with burnups under 
45,000 MWD/MTU cladding oxide thickness measurement is not required. 
The commenter remarked that the last sentence in the sixth paragraph of 
this section notes that the strain limit is defendable for spent fuels 
having oxide thicknesses less than 70 micrometers, irrespective of 
burnup. The last paragraph of this section states that for fuel with 
burnups between 45,000 and 60,000 MWD/MTU the cladding thickness must 
be measured. A statement that this is not required for fuels with 
burnups less than 45,000 MWD/MTU would clarify the requirements for 
lower burnup fuels.
    Response: The NRC agrees with the proposed clarification, and the 
SER has been revised to add a sentence stating that oxide measurements 
are not required for burnups below 45,000 MWD/MTU.
    Comment A-2: The commenter requested an editorial clarification 
within the Draft Safety Evaluation Report, Section 5.1.1, noting that 
in the first sentence of the first paragraph, the term ``steel-lead-
water-steel'' includes a redundant term ``steel.'' The composite 
shielding of the transfer cask includes the three materials listed 
(i.e., steel-lead-water).
    Response: The NRC agrees with the proposed clarification and the 
SER has been revised accordingly.
    Comment A-3: The commenter requested an editorial clarification 
within the Draft Safety Evaluation Report, Section 5.3.1, where under 
Adjoint Model, the word ``discrete'' is misspelled.
    Response: The misspelled word has been corrected.
    Comment A-4: The commenter stated that within the Draft Safety 
Evaluation Report, Section 8.1.4, the time values listed in the fifth, 
sixth, and seventh sentences are for the W21 canister. The values for 
the W74 canister are seven hours, four hours, and four hours, 
respectively. The commenter requested that the SER be revised either to 
clarify that the values shown are for the W21 canister or to report the 
values for both canisters explicitly.
    Response: NRC agrees with the comment. Section 8.1.4 of the SER has 
been revised for clarity. Values for both canisters have been stated 
explicitly.
    Comment A-5: The commenter stated that within the Draft Safety 
Evaluation Report, Section 8.3, the general actions for canister 
unloading listed in the second sentence are not in the actual sequence 
of operations as reported in the WSNF-200 SAR, Section 8.2.3. The 
commenter requested that to avoid confusion, the sentence be revised to 
list the actions in sequence, as follows:
    (a) Move the action ``lowering the cask into the pool'' to after 
the action ``removing the canister lid.''
    (b) Change ``removing the canister lid'' to ``removing the canister 
lids'' (note that there are two lids--inner and outer).
    (c) Add ``removing the shield plug'' before ``and removing the fuel 
assemblies from the storage basket.''
    Response: The NRC agrees with the comment and the SER has been 
revised to clarify the sequence of actions.
    Comment A-6: The commenter requested that within the Draft Safety 
Evaluation Report, editorial clarifications be made in Section 10.3.2, 
third paragraph as follows:
    (A) Fourth sentence--per WSNF-200 SAR Table 10.4-8, the dose rate 
listed

[[Page 3446]]

is calculated for one year. The dose for 30 days would need to be 
factored from the values presented as follows: Take \1/12\ of the 64 
cask accident direct and of the 63 cask normal release, then add the 1 
cask accident release (approx. 931 mrem for 30 days). This comment also 
affects the conclusion statement in the eighth sentence.
    (B) Fifth sentence--per WSNF-200 SAR Section 10.4.3, the maximum 
transfer cask loss of neutron shield accident dose is 25.3 mrem per 24 
hours, not per hour.
    (C) Sixth sentence--delete the words ``of the WSNF-200 SAR'' from 
the end of the sentence. The NRC staff's review is documented in the 
SER, not the WSNF-200 SAR.
    (D) Seventh sentence--the 751 mrem dose was calculated for the 
bone, not the lung.
    Response: The NRC agrees with the comments:
    (A) The dose rate was calculated for a one year period. The SER has 
been revised to state that the maximum dose at 100 meters is about 2900 
mrem from the storage cask array, assuming an individual is present for 
a year, for accident conditions. This sentence is now in agreement with 
the eighth sentence.
    (B) The SER has been revised to state that the maximum dose from 
the transfer cask for a loss of neutron shield accident is 25.3 mrem 
for a 24-hour period.
    (C) The SER has been revised to state that the NRC staff's review 
is discussed in Section 7 of the SER.
    (D) The SER has been revised to state that the 751 mrem dose was 
calculated for the bone.

B: Certificate of Compliance

    Comment B-1: The commenter requested that within the Draft 
Certificate of Compliance, in 1.b, second paragraph, that the statement 
``The ten unfueled guide tube positions are mechanically blocked to 
prevent loading in these positions'' be revised to read ``The ten 
unfueled cell locations are mechanically blocked to prevent loading in 
these positions.'' The commenter stated that this terminology agrees 
with that in the previous sentence, and reflects the fact that there 
are no guide tubes in the unfueled cell locations.
    Response: The NRC agrees with the comment and the CoC has been 
revised to clarify the statement.

C: Technical Specifications

    Comment C-1: The commenter requested that LCO 3.3.2 (Storage Cask 
Temperatures During Storage) for the W21 Canister be revised to modify 
REQUIRED ACTION B.2 to allow for the use of alternative means to be 
developed by the licensee to bring the CASK into compliance with the 
LCO. Alternatively, REQUIRED ACTION B.2 should be deleted and replaced 
with a requirement for the licensee to develop the means to meet the 
LCO and notify NRC of the action taken. The commenter's logic was that 
the specification of a specific method to meet the LCO when there are 
other alternatives available is overly restrictive and may not be 
feasible in some conditions. This will permit decommissioning 
facilities to meet the LCO in the absence of a spent fuel pool. In 
addition, the additional flexibility can better satisfy ALARA by 
mitigating the personnel exposure associated with the removal of spent 
fuel from the CANISTER.
    Response: The NRC disagrees with the comment. Currently, no 
alternative means of complying with the LCO have been proposed by the 
licensee or evaluated by the staff for acceptability. Any alternative 
means to meet the LCO shall be approved by the staff prior to 
implementation.
    Comment C-2: The commenter requested that LCO 3.3.3 (Storage Cask 
Temperatures During Horizontal Transfer) for the W21 Canister be 
revised to modify REQUIRED ACTION C.1 to allow for the use of 
alternative means to be developed by the licensee to bring the CASK 
into compliance with the LCO. Alternatively, REQUIRED ACTION C.1 should 
be deleted and replaced with a requirement for the licensee to develop 
the means to meet the LCO and notify NRC of the action taken. The 
commenter's logic was that the specification of a specific method to 
meet the LCO when there are other alternatives available is overly 
restrictive and may not be feasible in some conditions. This will 
permit decommissioning facilities to meet the LCO in the absence of a 
spent fuel pool. In addition, the additional flexibility can better 
satisfy ALARA by mitigating the personnel exposure associated with the 
removal of spent fuel from the CANISTER.
    Response: The NRC disagrees with the comment. Currently, no 
alternative means of complying with the LCO have been proposed by the 
licensee or evaluated by the staff for acceptability. Any alternative 
means to meet the LCO shall be approved by the staff before 
implementation.
    Comment C-3: The commenter requested that LCO 3.3.2 (Storage Cask 
Temperatures During Storage) for the W74 Canister be revised to modify 
REQUIRED ACTION B.2 to allow for the use of alternative means to be 
developed by the licensee to bring the CASK into compliance with the 
LCO. Alternatively, REQUIRED ACTION B.2 should be deleted and replaced 
with a requirement for the licensee to develop the means to meet the 
LCO and notify NRC of the action taken. The commenter's logic was that 
the specification of a specific method to meet the LCO when there are 
other alternatives available is overly restrictive and may not be 
feasible in some conditions. This will permit decommissioning 
facilities to meet the LCO in the absence of a spent fuel pool. In 
addition, the additional flexibility can better satisfy ALARA by 
mitigating the personnel exposure associated with the removal of spent 
fuel from the CANISTER.
    Response: The NRC disagrees with the comment. Currently, no 
alternative means of complying with the LCO have been proposed by the 
licensee or evaluated by the staff for acceptability. Any alternative 
means to meet the LCO would be approved by the staff prior to 
implementation.
    Comment C-4: The commenter requested that LCO 3.3.3 (Storage Cask 
Temperatures During Horizontal Transfer) for the W74 Canister be 
revised to modify REQUIRED ACTION C.1 to allow for the use of 
alternative means to be developed by the licensee to bring the cask 
into compliance with the LCO. Alternatively, REQUIRED ACTION C.1 should 
be deleted and replaced with a requirement for the licensee to develop 
the means to meet the LCO and notify NRC of the action taken. The 
commenter's logic was that the specification of a specific method to 
meet the LCO when there are other alternatives available is overly 
restrictive and may not be feasible in some conditions. This will 
permit decommissioning facilities to meet the LCO in the absence of a 
spent fuel pool. In addition, the additional flexibility can better 
satisfy ALARA by mitigating the personnel exposure associated with the 
removal of spent fuel from the CANISTER.
    Response: The NRC disagrees with the comment. Currently, no 
alternative means of complying with the LCO have been proposed by the 
licensee or evaluated by the staff for acceptability. Any alternative 
means to meet the LCO shall be approved by the staff prior to 
implementation.
    Comment C-5: The commenter requested that the Technical 
Specification for the FuelSolutions Storage System, Section 4.2.2.1 
(Storage Cask), be revised to add a note clarifying the requirements 
for site-specific pad designs that have different values from

[[Page 3447]]

those listed. The following is requested to be added at the end of 
Section 4.2.2.1: ``Any site-specific pad design with parameters that 
differ from those listed must be evaluated by the licensee to confirm 
that the design basis deceleration loads for the storage cask and 
canister are not exceeded. This evaluation must be performed using the 
same methodology as described in WSNF-200 SAR Section 3.7.3.1.''
    Response: The NRC agrees with the comment. The Technical 
Specification for the FuelSolutions Storage System, Section 4.2.2.1 
(Storage Cask) has been revised accordingly.
    Comment C-6: The commenter requested that the Technical 
Specification for the FuelSolutions Storage System, Section 4.2.2.2 
(Transfer Cask), be revised to add a note clarifying the requirements 
for site-specific pad designs that have different values from those 
listed. The following is requested to be added at the end of Section 
4.2.2.2: ``Any site-specific pad design with parameters that differ 
from those listed must be evaluated by the licensee to confirm that the 
design basis deceleration loads for the transfer cask and canister are 
not exceeded. This evaluation must be performed using the same 
methodology as described in WSNF-200 SAR Section 3.7.5.1.''
    Response: The NRC agrees with the comment. The Technical 
Specification for the FuelSolutions Storage System, Section 4.2.2.2 
(Transfer Cask) has been revised accordingly.

D: Safety Analysis Report

    Comment D-1: The commenter requested that editorially, within the 
Safety Analysis Report in WSNF-200 SAR Table 12.1-1, the following 
references to the Technical Specifications be revised:
    (a) Under Radiological Protection, 3.4.1 should be 5.3.5, and 3.6.1 
should be 3.5.1.
    (b) Under Structural Integrity, 3.5.1 should be 3.4.1.
    Response: The NRC agrees with the comment. The editorial 
corrections were made to Table 12.1-1.

Summary of Final Revisions

    Based on the responses above, the CoC, the TSs, the SAR, and the 
SER have been modified as follows:
    1. The SER has been revised (Comments A-1 through and including A-
6).
    2. The CoC has been revised (Comment B-1).
    3. The Technical Specification for the FuelSolutions Storage 
System, Section 4.2.2.1 (Storage Cask) has been revised. (Comment C-5).
    4. The Technical Specification for the FuelSolutions Storage 
System, Section 4.2.2.2 (Transfer Cask) has been revised (Comment C-6).
    5. Editorial corrections were made to Table 12.1-1 of the SAR 
(Comment D-1).

Agreement State Compatibility

    Under the ``Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility of 
Agreement State Programs'' approved by the NRC on June 30, 1997, and 
published in the Federal Register on September 3, 1997 (62 FR 46517), 
this rule is classified as compatibility Category ``NRC.'' 
Compatibility is not required for Category ``NRC'' regulations. The NRC 
program elements in this category are those that relate directly to 
areas of regulation reserved to the NRC by the Atomic Energy Act of 
1954, as amended (AEA), or the provisions of Title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations. Although an Agreement State may not adopt program 
elements reserved to NRC, it may wish to inform its licensees of 
certain requirements via a mechanism that is consistent with the 
particular State's administrative procedure laws, but does not confer 
regulatory authority on the State.

Voluntary Consensus Standards

    The National Technology Transfer Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113) 
requires that Federal agencies use technical standards that are 
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies unless the 
use of such a standard is inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical. In this final rule, th NRC is adding the FuelSolutions 
cask system to the list of NRC-approved cask systems for spent fuel 
storage in 10 CFR 72.214. This action does not constitute the 
establishment of a standard that establishes generally-applicable 
requirements.

Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability

    Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, 
and the Commission's regulations in Subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, the 
NRC has determined that this rule is not a major Federal action 
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment and 
therefore, an environmental impact statement is not required. This 
final rule adds an additional cask to the list of approved spent fuel 
storage casks that power reactor licensees can use to store spent fuel 
at reactor sites without additional site-specific approvals from the 
NRC. The environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact 
on which this determination is based are available for inspection at 
the NRC Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852 
and electronically at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. Single copies of the 
environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact are 
available from Stan Turel, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and 
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, 
telephone (301) 415-6234, e-mail [email protected].

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

    This final rule does not contain a new or amended information 
collection requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing requirements were approved by the 
Office of Management and Budget, approval number 3150-0132.

Public Protection Notification

    If a means used to impose an information collection does not 
display a currently valid OMB control number, the NRC may not conduct 
or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, the information 
collection.

Regulatory Analysis

    On July 18, 1990 (55 FR 29181), the Commission issued an amendment 
to 10 CFR part 72. The amendment provided for the storage of spent 
nuclear fuel in cask systems with designs approved by the NRC under a 
general license. Any part 50 nuclear power reactor licensee can use 
cask systems with designs approved by the NRC 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. In that rule, four spent fuel storage casks 
were approved for use at reactor sites and were listed in 10 CFR 
72.214. That rule envisioned that storage casks certified in the future 
could be routinely added to the listing in 10 CFR 72.214 through the 
rulemaking process. Procedures and criteria for obtaining NRC approval 
of new spent fuel storage cask designs were provided in 10 CFR part 72, 
subpart L.
    The alternative to this action is to withhold approval of this new 
design and issue a site-specific license to each utility that proposes 
to use the casks. This alternative would cost both the NRC and 
utilities more time and money for each site-specific license. 
Conducting site-specific reviews would ignore the procedures and 
criteria currently in place for the addition of new cask designs that 
can be used under

[[Page 3448]]

a general license, and would be in conflict with Nuclear Waste Policy 
Act (NWPA) direction to the Commission to approve technologies for the 
use of spent fuel storage at the sites of civilian nuclear power 
reactors without, to the maximum extent practicable, the need for 
additional site reviews. This alternative also would tend to exclude 
new vendors from the business market without cause and would 
arbitrarily limit the choice of cask designs available to power reactor 
licensees. This final rule will eliminate the above problems and is 
consistent with previous NRC actions. Further, the rule will have no 
adverse effect on public health and safety.
    The benefit of this rule to nuclear power reactor licensees is to 
make available a greater choice of spent fuel storage cask designs that 
can be used under a general license. The new cask vendors with casks to 
be listed in 10 CFR 72.214 benefit by having to obtain NRC certificates 
only once for a design that can then be used by more than one power 
reactor licensee. The NRC also benefits because it will need to certify 
a cask design only once for use by multiple licensees. Casks approved 
through rulemaking are to be suitable for use under a range of 
environmental conditions sufficiently broad to encompass multiple 
nuclear power plants in the United States without the need for further 
site-specific approval by NRC. Vendors with cask designs already listed 
may be adversely impacted because power reactor licensees may choose a 
newly listed design over an existing one. However, the NRC is required 
by its regulations and NWPA direction to certify and list approved 
casks. This rule has no significant identifiable impact or benefit on 
other Government agencies.
    Based on the above discussion of the benefits and impacts of the 
alternatives, the NRC concludes that the requirements of the final rule 
are commensurate with the Commission's responsibilities for public 
health and safety and the common defense and security. No other 
available alternative is believed to be as satisfactory, and thus, this 
action is recommended.

Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 
605(b)), the NRC certifies that this rule will not, if promulgated, 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. This rule affects only the licensing and operation of nuclear 
power plants, independent spent fuel storage facilities, and BNFL Fuel 
Solutions. The companies that own these plants do not fall within the 
scope of the definition of ``small entities'' set forth in the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act or the Small Business Size Standards set out 
in regulations issued by the Small Business Administration at 13 CFR 
part 121.

Backfit Analysis

    The NRC has determined that the backfit rule (10 CFR 50.109 or 10 
CFR 72.62) does not apply to this rule because this amendment does not 
involve any provisions that would impose backfits as defined in the 
backfit rule. Therefore, a backfit analysis is not required.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    In accordance with the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996, the NRC has determined that this action is not a 
major rule and has verified this determination with the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 72

    Criminal penalties, Manpower training programs, Nuclear materials, 
Occupational safety and health, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Security measures, Spent fuel.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of 
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization 
Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 553; the NRC is proposing to 
adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR part 72.

PART 72--LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF 
SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE

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

    Authority: Secs. 51, 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 161, 182, 183, 
184, 186, 187, 189, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 934, 935, 948, 953, 
954, 955, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 
2071, 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233, 
2234, 2236, 2237, 2238, 2282); sec. 274, Pub. L. 86-373, 73 Stat. 
688, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2021); sec. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 
Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); 
Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 as amended by Pub. L. 10d--
48b, sec. 7902, 10b Stat. 31b3 (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec. 102, Pub. L. 
91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332); secs. 131, 132, 133, 135, 
137, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2229, 2230, 2232, 2241, sec. 148, 
Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10151, 10152, 10153, 
10155, 10157, 10161, 10168).

    Section 72.44(g) also issued under secs. 142(b) and 148(c), (d), 
Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-232, 1330-236 (42 U.S.C. 10162(b), 
10168(c),(d)). Section 72.46 also issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 
955 (42 U.S.C. 2239); sec. 134, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2230 (42 
U.S.C. 10154). Section 72.96(d) also issued under sec. 145(g), Pub. 
L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10165(g)). Subpart J also 
issued under secs. 2(2), 2(15), 2(19), 117(a), 141(h), Pub. L. 97-
425, 96 Stat. 2202, 2203, 2204, 2222, 2244, (42 U.S.C. 10101, 
10137(a), 10161(h)). Subparts K and L are also issued under sec. 
133, 98 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10153) and sec. 218(a), 96 Stat. 2252 
(42 U.S.C. 10198).

    2. In Sec. 72.214, Certificate of Compliance 1026 is added to read 
as follows:

Sec. 72.214  List of approved spent fuel storage casks.

* * * * *
    Certificate Number: 1026.
    SAR Submitted by: BFNL Fuel Solutions.
    SAR Title: Final Safety Analysis Report for the FuelSolutions Spent 
Fuel Management System.
    Docket Number: 72-1026.
    Certificate Expiration Date: March 19, 2021.
    Model Number: WSNF-200, WSNF-201, and WSNF-203 systems; W-150 
storage cask; W-100 transfer cask; and the W-21 and W-74 canisters
* * * * *

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of December 2000.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John W. Craig,
Acting Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 01-1172 Filed 1-12-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
```