StoreFUEL 164, April 3, 2012 - UxC

Apr 3, 2012
A monthly
publication of
Ux Consulting
www.uxc.com
Vol. 13 No. 164
…and Decommissioning Report
Is the NRC Imposing New Requirements Regarding Secondary
Impact Considerations
The NRC is investigating the emerging issue of “secondary
impact considerations” in transportation system certification,
including whether or not the Spent Fuel Storage and Transportation
(SFST) staff is addressing a possible generic issue
through the Request for Additional Information process. “Secondary
impact” consideration relates to the performance of the
spent fuel within a spent fuel transportation package under 10
CFR Part 71 hypothetical accident conditions (HAC). During
the course of transportation package reviews, the NRC has
asked cask vendors to evaluate the gap between the fuel in
the cask and the canister. As part of the Part 71 approval
process, vendors must conduct drop tests or use computer
models to analyze the effects of a cask drop, but heretofore
the agency has not asked vendors to consider secondary
impacts.
The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) submitted a letter presenting
the industry position on this issue on February 28. NEI
wrote that the NRC “appears to be using Requests for Additional
Information (RAIs) associated with individual license
applications as a means to address generic concerns about
the potential for secondary impacts during transportation
accidents resulting in damage to spent fuel.” NEI explained
that secondary impacts “are postulated to occur as a result of
fuel sliding across the gap between the end of the fuel and the
canister during a cask drop scenario.”
NEI views the NRC’s “emerging new position” on secondary
impacts to be as follows:
“The initial conditions of the test configurations [hypothetical
accident conditions] should include a gap between the fuel
and canister, thus causing secondary impacts during the
canister drop. The NRC’s basis is that, if the loaded condition
results in a gap between the fuel and cask lid, then not including
this gap and considering secondary impacts would not
represent realistic as-shipped conditions.”
NEI stressed it is “inappropriate to impose a new generic
position via RAIs without appropriately communicating and
addressing the generic aspects of the issue.” The RAI process
was not intended for this purpose. NEI asserted that the
NRC’s “emerging new position on secondary impacts has
resulted in significant regulatory uncertainty that has adversely
affected several applications from 2008 through 2012 –
unnecessarily complicating and extending the review with
multiple rounds of RAIs, requiring considerable subsequent
work once the NRC raised the issue in the review of each
application, and reducing regulatory clarity and stability.”
NEI would like to see the NRC address this issue through a
new process the NRC that identifies and “appropriately” addresses
potentially generic issues that come up during license
application reviews. The NRC has committed to develop this
process.
Furthermore, NEI argues that the NRC’s position on secondary
impacts is “inconsistent with the agency’s existing
regulations,” which NEI maintains already ensure adequate
protection of public health and safety. Because the current
regulations are adequate, and because any safety benefit
achieved from the NRC’s position is unclear, NEI disagrees
that the “imposition of the NRC’s position on secondary impacts
is warranted.”
Anthony Patko, Director of Licensing at NAC International,
sought clarification of “an apparent new or changing regulatory
interpretation of 10 CFR Part 71” in a February 6 letter to
the NRC. Patko asked for clarification of the staff’s position
because the company anticipates that secondary impact
questions may arise as part of the pending review and ap-
Milestones Reached Last Month
• Holtec International: (1) Submitted HI-STORM 100
Amendment 10 on March 9; (2) Received an RAI for
HI-STORM FW Amendment 1; (3) No comments received
on HI-STORM Amendment 8 so it will take effect
May 2.
• NAC International: (1) Received 2 nd RAI for
MAGNASTOR Amendment 3 on February 22 and
submitted responses on March 21.
• Transnuclear, Inc.: (1) Amendment 3 to Standardized
Advanced NUHOMS CoC accepted for review and
schedule issued; (2) Submitted Amendment 13 RAI responses
on March 19.
• Calvert Cliffs ISFSI License renewal: NRC issued an
RSI on March 2, 2012.
April 3, 2012 • 1 • StoreFUEL 13-164

proval of NAC’s MAGNATRAN application. The question
already has come up, in fact. The issue of secondary impact
was the primary reason why NAC met with the SFST staff on
December 13, 2011 (see page 9). NAC pointed out at that
meeting that the requirement to consider secondary impact
was only introduced through the RAI process, and that previous
NRC-approved transport systems do not consider secondary
impacts.
Patko wrote that SFST “may have adopted a new or
changed regulatory requirement that ‘free drop’ testing in
accordance with Sections 71.71 and 71.73 of 10 CFR Part 71
requires the applicant to assume that transport cask contents
are oriented in a position that is not an orientation that could
be realistically expected to occur during the free drop (‘secondary
impact’ assumption).”
NAC has performed a detailed review and assessment of
this scenario, “but was unable to identify any support for applying
the secondary impact assumption…” Patko assured the
NRC that NAC is “committed to nuclear safety” and that if the
NRC concludes that the secondary impact assumption is a
safety issue that is required to be evaluated, NAC will address
it. NAC would expect the NRC, however, “to provide guidance
to the industry in order to ensure the safety issue is addressed
uniformly. This includes guidance for addressing the currently
loaded storage canisters that have approved and active NRC
licensed transportation casks which do not consider this secondary
impact assumptions.”
In a March 5, 2012 letter to Douglas Weaver, Acting Director
of the SFST, Charles Pennington, former Senior Vice
President at NAC International and now an Executive Advisor
for the company, pointed out that the NRC, through the RAI
process, appears to be imposing a new condition “that is
inconsistent with the laws of nature.”
Pennington wrote that the NRC’s position “appears to be
selectively applying gravity” for the drop test conditions. He
further explained that the initial hypothetical accident condition
“cannot be achieved under physical law,” so it would be impossible
to create a test condition with a gap between the fuel
and the canister – “making testing requirements under 71.41
unachievable…”
Pennington also asserted that the staff position is inconsistent
with 10 CFR Part 50. He pointed out that under the
regulations, the spent fuel package is a passive, safetyrelated
system, and the spent fuel comprises the contents of
the package. Under 10 CFR 50, the staff has approved many
reactor and plant systems that rely on natural forces such as
gravity and on the passive, safety-related systems and their
contents, which ensure safe shutdown even in the event of an
accident. Yet “The secondary impact initial condition assumption
for HACs requires that gravity must be ignored for the
spent fuel, but applied to the packaging acting as a passive,
safety-related system…Therefore, the SFST staff position on
the initial condition assumption for HACs is in conflict with
these Part 50 positions on passive, safety-related systems
and their contents regarding the acceptable application of
gravity effects.”
Jennie Rankin, Project Manager in SFST, told Patko in a
March 23 letter that the staff is “actively working to submit a
formal response to you on this topic.”
NRC proposes legislation that would ensure
Commissioner continuity
In a March 16 letter to Vice President Joe Biden, NRC Chairman
Gregory Jaczko provided a draft bill that would amend
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA) and the Energy Reorganization
Act of 1974. Jaczko said the proposed provisions
are intended to “streamline the NRC licensing process and to
improve its administrative efficiency.”
One key objective would be to authorize a Commissioner
whose term has expired to continue in office for a limited
period of time. This provision could be particularly important in
the coming months as Commissioner Svinicki’s term expires
on June 30. Senator Sessions (R-AL) and others have expressed
strong support for the re-nomination of Commissioner
Svinicki. During a recent congressional hearing, Senator Sessions
threatened to bring the Senate to “a grinding halt” if she
is not renominated. The proposed bill would add a paragraph
that states “A member of the Commission whose term of
office has expired may, subject to the removal power of the
President described in subsection (e), continue to serve after
the expiration of the term until the member’s successor has
taken office, but not beyond the end of the session of Congress
in which such fixed term of office expired.”
The amendment would authorize a Commissioner whose
fixed term has expired to continue in office until either: (1) the
Commissioner’s successor takes office, or (2) the end of the
session of Congress in which the Commissioner’s fixed term
would expire. It would also apply where a Commissioner
whose term has expired is re-nominated, but not in time for
the Senate to act before the term expires. This holdover provision
could result in the extension of a Commissioner’s term
for up to six months, but “rarely” longer than that.
The bill also would expand the NRC’s authority to issue civil
penalties, would authorize the NRC to permit criminal investigations,
expedite waiving of fingerprinting for criminal history
records checks, and authorize the Commission to require
fingerprinting of individuals not covered by existing fingerprinting
requirements. It would also strengthen criminal sanctions
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and would change the name
of NRC headquarters building from “One White Flint North” to
“Lando W. Zech, Jr. Building” in honor of a former Commission
chairman.
April 3, 2012 • 2 • StoreFUEL 13-164

Status of NRC oversight of ISFSI safety
On May 19, 2011 the NRC’s Inspector General released an
audit of the NRC’s oversight of independent spent fuel storage
installation (ISFSI) safety, which stated that improvement is
needed in the ISFSI safety inspection program in two areas:
training and frequency of routine ISFSI inspections (StoreFU-
EL June 7, 2011). The audit contained the following recommendations:
• Develop and implement a formalized agency-wide ISFSI
safety inspector training program;
• Modify inspection guidance to include a minimum inspection
frequency for conducting routine ISFSI safety inspections.
According to a March 26, 2012 letter from the Assistant Inspector
for Audits, Stephen Dingbaum, to Catherine Haney,
Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards,
the staff is working with the regions to develop ISFSI
overview training. This training should be developed by September
30, 2012. The staff has developed a qualification journal
specific to ISFSI inspectors, which was issued in November
2011 as an appendix to the Inspection Manual.
Regarding the second recommendation, the staff committed
to revise inspection guidance by September 30, 2011 to establish
a minimum frequency for conducting routine ISFSI
safety inspections. On September 30, 2011, the staff issued a
memo to the regions responsible for ISFSI inspections, with
interim guidance regarding a minimum frequency for conducting
routine ISFSI safety inspections to be “expected every two
years, not to exceed three years.” The revised Inspection
Manual Chapter was issued on March 9, 2012.
NRC revises guide for verifying compliance
with packaging requirements
The NRC has issued a revision to Regulatory Guide 7.7 “Administrative
Guide for Verifying Compliance with Packaging
Requirements for Shipment and Receipt of Radioactive Material.”
The guide describes an approach the NRC staff considers
acceptable for meeting the administrative requirements
associated with the shipment and receipt of radioactive materials.
This revised guide is available in the NRC public database,
ADAMS, using Accession No. ML112160407.
Revised NRC ISFSI map reflects Comanche
Peak operational status
The ISFSI at Luminant Generation’s Comanche Peak Nuclear
Power Plant is now operational after the first HI-STORM 100
dry storage cask was placed into on February 28, 2012. The
NRC has thus revised its map of US ISFSIs (ADAMS Accession
No. ML12073A368) to reflect the operational status of
Comanche Peak, which brings to 50 the number of operating
ISFSIs in the United States under a general license (see page
6). In addition, 15 sites are operating an ISFSI with a general
license, although four sites – North Anna, Surry, Robinson,
and Oconee – have storage pads with a general license and a
site-specific license. According to the map, eight sites – La-
Crosse, Perry, Cook, Crystal River, Vogtle, Nine Mile Point,
Fermi, and Zion – are pursuing a general license. Ten more
sites have not officially notified the NRC of their intention to
operate an ISFSI, although all of these utilities are in the early
stages of planning for dry storage. These sites include Clinton,
Callaway, Wolf Creek, Watts Bar, and V.C. Summer,
which already has a contract for dry storage with Holtec, and
which has met with the NRC to discuss ISFSI plans.
Thirty-three states now have an operating ISFSI. According
to data collected by UxC, approximately 1,560 dry storage
systems have been loaded, storing about 61,000 fuel assemblies
Cask Report
Transnuclear, Inc. (TN)
Representatives from Transnuclear, Inc. (TN) and AREVA
met with NRC staff on March 8, 2012 to discuss the upcoming
transfers of certificates of compliance (CoCs) from AREVA
NP, Inc. to TN. AREVA is realigning the roles and responsibilities
within its subsidiary companies, and as part of that realignment
will transfer all of the CoCs for which it is the certificate
holder to TN. AREVA will be a registered user of the
packages and will perform maintenance on the packages it
uses. TN will be the certificate holder, own the packages,
provide regulatory and certificate interface with the NRC, and
will manage the packaging fleet and coordinate the logistics
for all shipments.
The March 19 meeting summary noted that the CoC for the
ANF-250 package was transferred to TN when the certificate
was renewed.
AREVA plans to have package acceptance completed by
TN for all packages in May 2012 with applications to the NRC
to transfer the certificates shortly thereafter.
NUHOMS (CoC 1004) Amendment 11 – The SFST staff
forwarded the licensing documents for this amendment to the
NRC’s rulemaking ranch on January 12 for preparation of a
rulemaking package that will be published as a direct final rule
in the Federal Register. Amendment 11 includes two major
changes to the NUHOMS dry storage system: converting the
CoC and its associated Technical Specifications to the “Improved
Technical Specification format” consistent with
NUREG 1745; and obtaining NRC approval of the OS197L
lightweight transfer cask, to be used inside a supplemental
trailer shield, for use with a general license.
April 3, 2012 • 3 • StoreFUEL 13-164

During the course of the review, TN reduced the heat load
in the OS197L transfer cask to 13 kW, limited the OS197L
transfer cask to use only with the NUHOMS 61BT and
NUHOMS 32PT dry shielded canisters (DSCs), and removed
the restriction on using the OS197L transfer cask only with 75-
ton cranes.
NUHOMS Amendment 12 – Amendment no longer needed
because it was to include the Transportation, Aging, and Disposal
(TAD) canisters for use at Yucca Mountain.
NUHOMS Amendment 13 – The SFST staff issued the first
RAI for this amendment on February 14, 2012. The 18-page
RAI contains eight structural questions, 21 materials questions,
18 thermal questions, two shielding questions, four
criticality questions, and one confinement question. TN’s
responses were submitted on time, March 19. If no additional
RAIs are need, then the NRC staff could complete the SER,
the draft CoC, and the draft Technical Specifications by August
31, 2012.
TN submitted Amendment 13 on February 9, 2011 and originally
hoped to have the amendment effective by February 9,
2012 to support a client loading campaign that involves the
24PHB DSC changes to the authorized contents.
This amendment modifies the CoC as follows:
• Adds a 69BTH DSC;
• Adds a 37PTH DSC;
• Evaluates the 24PHB DSC to accommodate control components
other than burnable poison rod assemblies
(BPRAs), and allows for storage of damaged fuel assemblies
and other minor enhancements;
• Evaluates the 32PT DSC for incorporation of high burnup
fuel assemblies with and without control components;
• Evaluates the 61BTH and 24PTH DSCs for storage of
failed fuel;
• Evaluates the high-seismic horizontal storage module
(HSM) for storage of additional DSCs including the 61BT,
32PT, 24PTH, 61BTH, 69BTH, and 37PTH;
• Extends the use of metal matrix composites (MMC) as a
neutron absorber material in the 61BTH Type 1 and Type
2 DSCs for higher heat loads;
• Evaluates DSCs for the addition of Blended Low Enriched
Uranium (BLEU) and mixed oxide (MOX) fuel assemblies
as authorized contents;
• Evaluates HSM-H/HSM-HS inlet vent shielding design
modifications to achieve dose reductions;
• Evaluates the OS200 transfer cask to allow transfer of the
61BT, 32PT, 24PTH, and 61BTH DSCs;
• Allows for Type III cement to be used as an alternate
equivalent in HSM construction;
• Changes Technical Specification neutron absorber testing
and acceptance requirements to remain consistent
with similar requirements in other ongoing license actions,
plus certain new changes in this area.
The 69BTH DSC has been approved in a 10 CFR Part 71
transport application in the MP197, which is CoC 9302. The
37PTH is included in an amendment to the MP197HB transportation
system that was submitted on March 2, 2012. Both
the 37PTH and the 69BTH will be stored in already approved
HSMs – either the standard or the high-seismic version. No
design changes are included for the HSMs, although the
amendment will add some dose reduction hardware to them.
The 69BTH canister is designed to store and transport 69
high burnup BWR assemblies. In the storage certificate (72-
1004), the maximum heat load for the 69BTH is 35.0 kW per
canister. (The 2011 transport approval, however, only authorized
the transport of spent fuel with burnups below 45 GWd
per MTU.) In addition, intact MOX fuel and BLEU fuel will be
authorized. The 69BTH will be able to use borated aluminum,
MMC, and Boral as a neutron absorber. The 69BTH basket
design is similar to the 61BTH with solid aluminum rails for
enhanced thermal performance.
The 37PTH canister is designed to store and transport 37
high burnup PWR spent fuel assemblies. In the storage certificate,
the maximum heat load is 30 kW. Intact MOX and BLEU
fuel will be authorized, and borated aluminum, MMC, and
Boral will be approved neutron absorbers. The 37BTH basket
design is similar to the 32PT with solid aluminum rails for
increased thermal performance.
Amendment 13 will also enhance the authorized contents of
some of TN’s existing DSCs, including the 24PHB, the
24PTH, the 32PT, and the 61BTH.
For the 24PHB system, Amendment 13 will add missing
rods and control components other than BPRA and additional
fuel types as authorized contents.
For the 24PTH system, Amendment 13 will incorporate
PWR failed fuel cans.
For the 32PT, Amendment 13 will authorize the storage of
higher burnup fuel assemblies for certain fuel types.
For the 61BTH canister, the amendment will extend the application
of MMC for higher heat loads, and will incorporate a
BWR failed fuel can.
The two new canister designs, and all the other canisters,
will use either the OS200 transfer cask or the OS200FC transfer
cask for transferring the canister from the pool to the transfer
trailer. Some of the canisters, however, are smaller in
diameter than others, so for those smaller diameter canisters
– the 24PTH, the 32PT, the 61BT, and the 61BTH – TN is
April 3, 2012 • 4 • StoreFUEL 13-164

adding an aluminum sleeve to the OS200 transfer cask for
transport of these canisters in the MP197HB transport cask
when it is licensed for use.
NUHOMS HD (CoC 1030) Amendment 2 – This amendment
for PWR fuel, which TN plans to submit in the second
quarter of 2012, will increase the allowable fuel assembly
weight by 25 pounds (to a total weight per DSC of 800
pounds), will add as authorized contents additional fuel types
such as Blended Low Enriched Uranium (BLEU), control
components such as Wet Annular Burnable Absorbers
(WABA) and Flux Suppression Inserts (FSI), and will increase
the shielding effectiveness of the horizontal storage module,
the HSM-H. The changes to enhance the shielding effectiveness
do not “significantly” affect the air flow at the vents,
around the DSC or elsewhere in the HSM-H, TN said. Shielding
and thermal sensitivity calculations will be performed to
document the shielding effectiveness and to quantify any
impact on the HSM-H air flow. Those calculations will be provided
to the SFST staff.
The amendment will also add as authorized contents nonirradiated
non-fuel hardware that would be used to provide
additional fuel assembly structural support to allow handling of
the Westinghouse fuel with thimble tube sleeves susceptible
to intergranular stress corrosion cracking in the bulge joint
area just below the top nozzle. If allowed, TN will classify the
assembly as non-damaged fuel, thus obviating the need for
using damaged fuel end caps.
72.48 Evaluation for ITTRs – TN met with SFST staff on
December 16 to discuss a proposed approach to use the 10
CFR 72.48 evaluation process to allow the loading and storage
of fuel assemblies that have been fitted with Instrument
Tube Tie Rods (ITTRs), which some fuel assemblies have
added to ensure that top nozzles remain attached to the rest
of the assembly. These assemblies are classified as “modified.”
TN said that fuel assemblies with ITTRs are evaluated
for storage in its NUHOMS HD System under 10 CFR 72.48,
and as noted above, will be added to the authorized contents
of CoC 1030 through Amendment 2. The ITTRs are considered
to be sub-components of the modified fuel assemblies
and are evaluated for their effect on design functions. The
modified fuel assemblies will be bounded by the CoC parameters.
The CoC for the NUHOMS HD system requires that all contents
must meet fuel specifications as detailed in the Tech
Specs, and the modified fuel assemblies must meet all the
requirements of the CoC and the associated Tech Specs. The
ITTRs are non-separable constituents of the modified fuel
assembly, so TN maintains that no changes are required to
the CoC or the Tech Specs for qualification of the modified
fuel assemblies.
The 10 CFR 50.59 evaluation for the modified fuel assem-
Industry Calendar
• April 17-19
World Nuclear Fuel Cycle
http://www.nei.org/
Helsinki Congress Paasitorni
Helsinki, Finland
• May 7-10
Used Fuel Management Conference
http://www.nei.org/
The Renaissance Vinoy
St. Petersburg, FL, USA
• June 12-13
Fuel Cycle Information Exchange
www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/index.cfm
NRC Two White Flint North Auditorium
Rockville, MD
• July 15-19
INMM 53 rd Annual Meeting
http://www.inmm.org/
Renaissance Orlando Resort at SeaWorld
Orlando, FL, USA
• July 16-17
Nuclear Used Fuel Conference
http://www.euci.com/events
Chase Park Plaza
St. Louis, MO
Details are available at:
http://www.uxc.com/c/data-industry/uxc_calendar.aspx
blies ensure that the top nozzle is secured to the fuel assembly,
and that the fuel assemblies are handled by normal
means. Additional structural analysis is not required if the
maximum weight is less than or equal to 1585 pounds. The
criticality evaluation for fuel assemblies with ITTRs is bounded
by that for other control components.
TN proposes to change the Updated Final Safety Analysis
Report (UFSAR) by adding “Fuel assemblies modified using
nonfuel hardware that are positioned within the fuel assembly
after discharge from the core, such as Guide Tube or Instrument
Tube Tie Rods or Anchors, Guide Tube Inserts are also
acceptable for storage in 32PTH DSC as intact…” TN will also
add a description, outline the safety evaluation, and include a
criticality evaluation to the UFSAR.
TN stated at the meeting that it plans to complete the 72.48
evaluation in the early part of 2012.
Standardized Advanced NUHOMS (CoC 1029) Amendment
3 – TN submitted an application for Amendment 3 to
CoC No. 1029, the Standardized Advanced NUHOMS system,
on December 15, 2011. LAR 3 will add a new dry DSC,
the NUHOMS 32PTH2, and a new Advanced Horizontal Storage
Module (ASHM-HS) to the CoC.
TN requested a review schedule so the amendment could
become effective within 15 months of the submittal. “This is
needed to support a client loading campaign using the
April 3, 2012 • 5 • StoreFUEL 13-164

NUHOMS 32PTH2 system,” the cover letter stated. Southern
California Edison (SCE) wrote to the NRC on February 10,
2012 to state its desire to use the new 32PTH2 DSC at the
San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station in September 2014,
and asked for an effective date within 15 months of the application
submittal “to support operational schedules for use of
this system in September, 2014.”
On March 22, the NRC notified TN that after submitted RSI
information on February 24, the application contained enough
technical information for the staff to complete the detailed
review. The schedule allows for an RAI to be issued in early
June 2012, and a CoC/SER in December 2012, based on RAI
responses being submitted in August. The schedule assumes
a second round of RAIs will not be necessary, and that the
RAI responses do not include any additional changes to the
application.
The 32PTH2 canister is similar to the 32PTH1 approved
under the Standardized NUHOMS System, Amendment 10,
except the shell is thicker for better corrosion protection. The
ASHM-HS modules are similar to the HSM-HS approved
under the amendment 10, except the components have been
upgraded for higher seismic values – to 1.5g horizontal and
1g vertical. Amendment 3 does not include any changes to
the 24PT1 or 24PT4 canisters that are already part of the
Standardized Advanced NUHOMS system. No changes are
included to the existing AHSM modules, nor to the OS200FC
transfer cask, which will be used to transfer the DSCs to the
ASHM-HS.
The 32PTH2 basket will use a metal matrix composite with
three different boron contents for neutron poison material to
allow storage of various enrichment levels. The design is
similar to the 32PTH1 basket with solid aluminum rails for
enhanced heat rejection of up to 37.5 kW per canister, and
will be transferred to the AHSM-HS storage module in the
already licensed OS200FC transfer cask. The basket is designed
for CE 16 x 16 class of fuels only.
The AHSM-HS storage modules are based on the existing
HSM-H and HSM-HS storage modules but with added shear
keys and ties between bases for higher seismic loads. TN
added the use of optional dose reduction enhancement hardware
as well. The AHSM-HS storage modules can be coupled
to existing AHSM arrays.
TN is updating and clarifying the technical specifications to
achieve consistency and to enhance the staff’s review.
The authorized contents for the 32PTH2 include up to 32
CE 16 x 16 fuel assemblies with or without control components.
The maximum initial enrichment is 5.10 weight percent
U-235. Both intact and damaged fuel assemblies can be
stored in the DSC, but not failed fuel. The criticality analysis
April 3, 2012 • 6 • StoreFUEL 13-164

methodology is identical to what was employed for the
32PTH1 described in CoC 1004. It is based on favorable
geometry, credit for fix neutron absorbers in the basket and
credit for 2600 ppm soluble boron.
The spent fuel will be loaded per heat load zoning configurations,
as will the control components and the reconstituted
assemblies. Fuel assembly burnup cannot be greater than
62.5 GWd/MTU, with a minimum cooling time of five years.
The AHSM-HS has a maximum heat load of 37.2 kW. The
thermal evaluation methodology is the same that was used for
the 24PTH, the 61BTH and the 32PTH1 systems. The preliminary
results of the analyses show that the maximum concrete
temperature for all normal and off-normal conditions remains
below the limit of 300 degrees F. For the blocked vent accident
condition, the maximum concrete temperature remains
below 450 degrees F.
The OS200FC transfer cask imposes time limits for transfer
operations for heat loads greater than 31.2 kW. For heat load
between 32 kW to 37.2 kW, the time limit is 36 hours; for heat
load between 31.2 kW to 32 kW the time limit is 75 hours, and
no time limit is imposed for heat load of 31.2 kW or less.
Amendment 2 for this CoC was submitted but later withdrawn.
NUHOMS MP197 (CoC 9302) – TN submitted Revision 5 to
the NUHOMS MP197 transport package on March 2, 2012.
TN met with SFST staff on January 11 to discuss the licensing
and analysis approach for Revision 5 of this CoC. The NRC
issued Revision 4 in September, 2011, which authorized
some changes to the CoC, but not all the changes TN had
originally sought. Most of the meeting was closed to the public.
TN first submitted an application for a revision to this CoC
on April 14, 2009 to obtain NRC approval to add a modified
version of the NUHOMS MP197 transportation package to the
CoC. This modified transportation cask is the NUHOMS
MP197HB (HB for high burnup). The application also included
a request for various NUHOMS dry shielded canisters containing
authorized payloads to be placed in the new transportation
cask. The amendment requested approval of high
burnup fuel up to 70,000 MWd/MTU and nine DSC designs:
69BTH, 61BTH, 61BT, 37PTH, 32PTH, 32PTH1, 32PT,
24PTH, and 24PT4.
SFST staff had some unresolved technical issues related to
the high burnup fuel, so in September 2011, the staff approved
the revision, but limited the approved contents to low
burnup fuel (45,000 MWd/MTU or less) for four DSCs: the
69BTH (a new design), the 61BTH, the 61BT, and the 24PT4.
A new canister that allows the transport of Class B, C, and
greater-than-Class C (GTCC) waste was also approved.
In Revision 4, the 37PTH (a new design), the 32PTH,
32PTH1, 32PT, and 24PTH were not approved for transportation.
On November 2, 2011, the staff issued a letter of unresolved
issues for those portions of the original request that
were not approved. The NRC identified five unresolved issues
with the MP197HB revision request as follows:
1. Direct transport of high burnup fuel from the pool into the
MP197HB transportation package; staff has no objection
to this if the temperature conditions are met.
2. Transport of canisters containing high burnup fuel that
have been in storage. Two materials issues need to be
resolved. The first issue is to provide the materials properties
used to evaluate the behavior of high burnup fuel
need to be provided to justify the materials properties of
the high burnup cladding. Without these properties, it is
difficult to determine the behavior of the cladding for criticality
safety. Alternatively, TN may demonstrate moderator
exclusion. Secondly, TN must demonstrate that
canisters stored in a coastal environment have not sustained
damage so that the fuel has incurred gross
breaches due to oxidation, and that the neutron absorbers
or basket have not degraded sufficiently to impair
their ability to perform their safety function.
3. TN must independently validate the use of SAS2H code
for source term calculations for high burnup fuel. Alternatively,
TN may apply penalty factors and demonstrate
measurement programs during shipment to provide adequate
defense in depth against uncertainties. TN decided
to replace the SAS2H code with the TRITON
code.
4. TN included an isotopic depletion code validation methodology
that violates a key requirement of the principal
industry criticality safety consensus standard; the staff
finds this approach unacceptable, and asked TN to revise
the depletion code validation methodology to use
one or more of the approaches identified in NUREG/CR-
6811, Strategies for Application of Isotopic Uncertainties
in Burnup Credit.
5. TN should revise the misload analysis to perform a single
high-reactivity misload evaluation for all canisters using
burnup credit, or justify that the canister evaluated
for a single high-reactivity mislead is the most reactive.
The application stated that the NUHOMS 24PTH was
used to analyze the reactivity effect of a misload, but did
not state that this is the most reactive configuration. In
addition, the misload evaluation for multiple underburned
fuel assemblies should consider the fact that assemblies
of any initial enrichment/burnup/cooling time
combination allowed for storage in the pool may be misloaded
in the package.
April 3, 2012 • 7 • StoreFUEL 13-164

At the January 11 meeting, TN discussed the licensing approach
for obtaining approval for the five DSC designs that
were not approved in Revision 4. TN stated that the amendment
will incorporate burnup credit, including limited use of
the proprietary French fission product data to develop codeto-code
correction factors based on benchmarking TN codes
with other French codes. It will incorporate high burnup fuel
into a new inner canister. TN will use the moderator exclusion
approach. TN also plans to perform an isotopic depletion code
validation and a misload analysis. SFST staff expressed concerns
at the meeting regarding the knowledge of the condition
of the fuel and cladding for high burnup fuel, especially after
some period of storage. The meeting primarily focused on
burnup credit, moderator exclusion, and high burnup fuel.
According to a February 14 conversation record, TN agreed
to show in the application that after normal conditions of
transport there is “reasonable assurance that there is no loss
in geometry prior to unloading. This may be accomplished by
testing the canister before unloading.” Staff stated during this
conversation that a detailed review “will need to be made for
both high burnup fuel concerns and the moderator exclusion
approach.”
The MP197 and the MP197HB are designed to ship commercial
spent nuclear fuel (both BWR and PWR) and irradiated
and/or contaminated non-fuel-bearing solid materials.
TN-40HT – The TN-40HT, approved for use at the Prairie
Island site-specific-licensed ISFSI, accommodates up to 40,
14 x 14 PWR fuel assemblies with or without fuel inserts. The
maximum allowable initial enrichment of the fuel to be stored
in a TN-40HT cask is 5.0 weight percent U 235 . The maximum
bundle average burnup, maximum decay heat, and minimum
cooling time are 60,000 MWd/MTU, 0.80 kW/assembly, and
12 years, respectively. The cask is designed for a maximum
heat load of 32 kW. Only undamaged fuel will be stored in the
TN-40HT casks. TN plans to submit an application in 2012 for
a transportation certificate.
TN-LC transport cask – On June 7, 2011 TN submitted an
application for approval of a new transportation cask, the TN-
LC cask. An RAI was issued on November 22, 2011, with
responses due December 8. TN met with SFST staff on November
30 to clarify planned responses. TN notified the NRC
on December 22 that it is “working on a revised analytical
approach to address questions regarding the transportation of
high burnup fuel in the TN-LC transport packaging,” and that it
will submit the RAI responses, along with a revised application,
by April 15, 2012. If TN’s responses to that RAI are acceptable,
the CoC could be issued a few months later.
The TN-LC cask is designed to transport commercial LWR
fuel and research reactor fuel. The TN-LC has been developed
for exclusive-use transport of irradiated test, research,
and commercial reactor fuel in a closed transport vehicle or an
ISO container. The fuel to be transported is of three types –
highly enriched aluminum-uranium plate fuel, highly enriched
aluminum-uranium pin fuel, and commercial light water reactor
fuel assemblies and pins. The package can be used to
transport BWR, PWR, MOX, and EPR (evolutionary pressurized
reactor) fuel assemblies and/or fuel pins. Additional payloads
include National Research Universal Reactor (NRU),
National Experimental Reactor (NRX), Material Test Reactor
(MTR), and Training, Research, Isotope, General Atomics
Reactor (TRIGA) fuel assemblies and fuel elements. The TN-
LC transport package is limited to a maximum heat load of 3.0
kW, depending on the fuel and basket being transported.
TN had requested “expeditious processing of this application
so that this packaging may be used to perform transports
of irradiated material and commercial shipments for fuel postirradiation
examination.”
NAC International
MAGNASTOR (CoC 1031) The MAGNASTOR system is
designed to store up to 37 PWR or up to 87 BWR spent fuel
assemblies in each transportable storage canister (TSC) in
separate fuel basket assemblies. In addition to the TSC and
the concrete cask, the other principal component of the
MAGNASTOR system is the transfer cask.
MAGNASTOR Amendment 3 – The NRC issued a second
RAI for this amendment on February 23, 2011, with responses
due by March 22. NAC submitted its response document on
March 21. The amendment request initially included as authorized
contents PWR fuel assemblies with average burnup
up to 70,000 MWd/MTU; however, as part of the first RAI
response, NAC elected to withdraw this request. Amendment
3 will modify the MAGNASTOR CoC to:
• Revise the authorized contents to include PWR damaged
fuel contained in damaged fuel cans that are placed in a
Damaged Fuel basket. This change is needed to accommodate
fuel from the Catawba, McGuire, and Zion nuclear
plants.
• Revise the authorized contents to include PWR fuel assemblies
with nonfuel hardware per the expanded definition
in the application. This change is needed to accommodate
nonfuel hardware from the Zion plant.
• Revise the authorized contents to include PWR fuel assemblies
with up to five activated stainless steel fuel replacement
rods at a maximum burnup/exposure of
32,500 MWd/MTU. This change is needed to accommodate
Zion fuel.
• Revise the technical specifications to clarify that the maximum
design basis earthquake accelerations of 0.37g in
the horizontal direction (without cask sliding) and 0.25g in
the vertical direction at the ISFSI pad top surface do not
April 3, 2012 • 8 • StoreFUEL 13-164

esult in cask tip-over.
These systems have already been delivered to McGuire,
and are being fabricated for Catawba. NAC asked for issuance
of the draft CoC/SER in time to support fabrication and
equipment delivery schedules that are planned for this year
and next, with a desired final rule effective date of December
15, 2012.
MAGNATRAN (Docket No. 71-9356) – The MAGNATRAN
Transport Cask is a universal transport package capable of
transporting all NAC canisters, including the loaded
MAGNASTOR TSCs. It is designed to meet US NRC, DOT,
and IAEA (-96) requirements. The cask is designed to
transport a TSC containing up to 37 undamaged PWR fuel
assemblies or up to 87 undamaged BWR fuel assemblies.
The MAGNATRAN is also designed to transport up to four
damaged fuel cans (DFCs) in the damaged fuel basket assembly,
which has four enlarged fuel cells, each of which
accommodates a damaged fuel can.
NAC submitted an application for a CoC for the
MAGNATRAN Transport Cask on January 19, 2011.
Based mostly on their lengths, two categories of PWR fuel
assemblies and two categories of BWR fuel assemblies have
been evaluated for transport and both a long and short TSCs
have been designed. The principal components of the
MAGNATRAN Transport Cask are the TSC, the transport
cask, and the impact limiters.
The MAGNATRAN is also designed to transport a TSC that
contains up to 32,000 pounds of GTCC waste, and the spent
fuel inventory of the Zion Nuclear Station.
The NRC required supplemental information after the first
submittal, and suspended review of the application until that
information was submitted. Only one issue presented in the
RSI remained pending. That issue relates to considering internal
spent nuclear fuel secondary impact effects during
evaluation of the tests for hypothetical accident conditions.
NAC met with SFST staff on December 13, 2011 primarily
to discuss NAC’s path forward for submitting a revised application,
and NAC’s method to address the staff’s concerns
related to secondary impact of the contents within the canister.
NAC stressed that the requirement to consider secondary
impact was introduced during the RAI process. NAC pointed
out that structural evaluations of previously approved packages
have not considered this type of secondary impact, and
requested that the generic safety issue process as laid out in
NUREG-0933 (Resolution of Generic Safety Issues) be implemented.
The staff acknowledged the request and is evaluating
various processes to address the concern.
NAC plans to submit a revised application for the
MAGNATRAN spent fuel transport cask this month (April).
The revised application will include a plan for drop tests that
will benchmark the model to support the application as the
SFST staff has requested. The approach for using drop testing
input necessary to confirm the SAR analyses will be thoroughly
disclosed and discussed in the application, NAC has
said. A June 30, 2011 Conversation Record noted that NAC
proposes to perform two drop tests (end drop and 45 degree
drop) to benchmark the model. The side and shallow angle
drops are similar to previously approved designs and additional
test data is not needed, NAC stated. The staff noted,
however, that “due to the unique design, wood properties
modeling of the previously approved designs may need to be
revisited.” Testing is planned for 2012.
NAC has emphasized to the SFST staff that the ZionSolutions
project is very schedule driven, and before the Zion fuel
is loaded into the MAGNASTOR systems, a transport license
is desired. NAC anticipates the CoC being issued in 2013.
NAC-LWT (CoC 9225) – The NRC has approved NAC’s
November 10, 2011 request to amend the NAC-LWT transportation
package to authorize a one-time shipment of five
special fuel assemblies from the Dounreay Nuclear Facility in
Scotland to the Savannah River Site near Aiken, South Carolina.
The Dounreay shipment will consist of five special fuel
assemblies. The package loading schedule and the shipment
schedule will be established by the US Department of Energy’s
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Foreign
Research Reactor (FRR) program. A two-year authorization
period is granted because NNSA might not make the 2012
shipment plans, which would delay the shipment until 2013.
The authorization expires on December 31, 2013.
The shipment will use the currently approved metal test reactor
(MTR) with the center basket opening blocked to prevent
misleading. The MTR fuel basket, which can transport
seven 30-watt element (554,700 MWd/MTU/1,200 days
cooled) assemblies. The five special fuel assemblies consist
of three different types of fuel assemblies: EK-10 (three assemblies),
IRT-2M (one assembly), and TTR (one assembly).
NAC is also planning to use the NAC-LWT for an upcoming
shipment for the Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) for
reactors from the SLOWPOKE (Safe Low-Power Kritical Experiment)
research reactor.
The SLOWPOKE shipment will consist of U/A1 alloy fuel
material in A1 clad with some HEU material, >90% enriched.
Minimum cool time for the contents is 5100 days. The rods
may have been damaged during core disassembly. All fuel will
be placed into a screened aluminum canister. Total heat content
for the entire LWT SLOWPOKE fuel is less than 1 Watt, a
fraction of the licensed heat load of 1,260 Watts.
EnergySolutions
EnergySolutions met with SFST staff on January 19, 2012 to
discuss an upcoming submittal to renew the CoC No. 1007 for
April 3, 2012 • 9 • StoreFUEL 13-164

the VSC-24 spent fuel storage system. The CoC was initially
issued on May 7, 1993, and will expire on May 7, 2013. EnergySolutions
is planning to submit a CoC renewal application in
May 2012 to extend that expiration date to May 7, 2053. This
renewal application represents the first submitted for a generic
cask design.
EnergySolutions noted that 58 VSC-24 casks are in use at
three different independent spent fuel storage installations
(ISFSIs) in the United States. These systems were deployed
in the first ten years of the CoC, between May 1993 and June
2003 as follows:
• 18 casks at Palisades
• 16 casks at Point Beach
• 24 casks at Arkansas Nuclear One
Although a utility could choose to purchase a VSC-24 and
load it, no utility has plans to do so. The spent fuel stored in
these casks has low heat load and low burnup. The system is
licensed for a maximum heat load of 24 kW per cask, but
maximum initial heat load of the 58 loaded casks is less than
15 kW. The system is licensed to store assemblies that
achieved a burnup of up to 45,000 MWd/MTU, but highest
burnup of all the assemblies in the casks is less than 42,000
MWd/MTU.
The VSC-24 can store 24 pressurized water assemblies. It
consists of a ventilated concrete cask (VCC), a multiassembly
sealed basked (MSB), and an MSB transfer cask
(MTC). The VCC is a reinforced concrete shell with a coated
carbon steel liner, shield ring, lid, and ceramic tiles that support
the MSB. The MSB features a coated carbon steel construction;
the carbon steel is not relied on for corrosion protection.
The MSB shell coating is not relied on for corrosion protection.
EnergySolutions pointed out that there are no neutron
absorber plates in the MSB. Since the system is not certified
for transportation, no water intrusion is anticipated so no neutron
absorbers are needed.
The renewal application will be submitted according to the
guidance from NUREG-1927. It will include a scoping evaluation,
aging management review, time-limited aging analyses,
aging management program, and changes to the final safety
analysis report and technical specifications.
EnergySolutions explained the scooping evaluation process,
noting that it will include identifying the structures, systems,
and components (SSCs) that are in-scope. SSCs will be
categorized into either Important to Safety (ITS) or a component
that could prevent fulfillment of a function that is ITS. The
MSB, VCC, and MTC, as well as the spent fuel assembly
itself, are ITS. The fuel transfer and auxiliary equipment, the
ISFSI pad, and security equipment fall into neither category,
so are not included in the scope of the renewal application.
Components that will be part of the time-limited aging analysis
include a study of MSB corrosion, MSB fatigue, MSB
helium leakage, and fuel cladding creep. An extensive lead
cask inspection will be conducted, with the lead cask being
selected by time in service, heat load, location of the cask on
the pad, and site conditions. The company will perform visual
inspections of the MSB exterior and the VCC exterior and
interior cavity surfaces, including ducts and vents. The inspection
is currently scheduled for summer of 2012, shortly after
submittal of the renewal application. Lead cask inspection
results will be submitted within 30 days.
Holtec International
The NRC sent Holtec an RAI on March 26 regarding its biennial
report of changes, tests, and experiments implemented
for the HI-STORM 100 cask system under the provisions of 10
CFR 72.48. The NRC requested the information be provided
by April 20, 2012.
HI-STORM FW (CoC 1032) Amendment 1 – On October
13, 2011, Holtec submitted Amendment 1 to Certificate of
Compliance 72-1032 for the company’s HI-STORM FW multipurpose
canister (MPC) storage system. The review schedule
called for the staff to issue an RAI by March 1, 2012 and an
SER in July 2012. The RAI was issued on March 23, with
responses due by April 12.
The RAI contains three questions related to the thermal
evaluation, five questions related to shielding evaluation, and
one question related to radiation protection.
Amendment 1 seeks to: (1) add a new heat load pattern for
the MPC-37; (2) broaden the backfill pressure range for both
the MPC-37 and the MPC-89; and (3) update certain definitions
related to fuel classification, including undamaged fuel
assembly, grossly damaged spent fuel rod, and repaired/reconstituted
fuel assembly. The amendment also
makes editorial changes and clarifications to the CoC and TS.
Approval of this amendment will authorize the storage of
high burnup spent fuel assemblies that have been cooled in a
spent fuel pool for as few as three years. The HI-STORM FW
contains one regionalized heat load pattern for the MPC-37
(for PWR fuel) and one for the MPC-89 (for BWR fuel), but the
new amendment proposes heat load patterns for the HI-
STORM FW to accommodate reactors that have loaded spent
fuel systems with mostly low decay heat fuel assemblies over
the years and, as a result, have depleted the number of cold
fuel assemblies in their spent fuel pool inventory.
Holtec’s preliminary safety analyses results show that fuel
assemblies with decay heat at 2 kW (PWR fuel), and 0.9 kW
(BWR fuel) can be stored in the MPC-37 and MPC-89, respectively,
with peak fuel cladding temperatures in the range
of 715 degrees F. Holtec said this is “essentially in the same
range” as the maximum peak fuel cladding temperature for
April 3, 2012 • 10 • StoreFUEL 13-164

the currently licensed heat load patterns and “well below the
752 degrees F regulatory limit for normal long-term storage.”
Holtec was prompted to develop this amendment to allow
the earlier transfer of spent fuel into dry storage because of
the events at the Fukushima Daiichi plant in Japan and the
subsequent calls for a more rapid movement of spent fuel in
wet storage to dry storage.
The use of METAMIC-HT as the basket material is what
Holtec says makes possible the ability to load high-burnup
spent fuel into dry storage after just three years in a spent fuel
pool. Holtec requested an expedited review since the submittal
involves only a thermal review.
HI-STORM SUBTERRA-16 –Holtec plans to submit a license
application in 2012 for a newly designed underground
system that will be able to store all previously licensed MPCs
in a high density underground configuration. This new design
will be called the HI-STORM SUBTERRA-16, which Holtec
said is based on a recent patent granted to the company.
Holtec’s letter to John Goshen, NRC Project Manager, states
that the modular system is “particularly suitable for sites with
limited land area and/or a large quantity of used fuel; and we
expect HI-STORM SUBTERRA-16 will be an ideal candidate
design for implementing the regional interim storage strategy
recommended by the Blue Ribbon Commission.”
HI-STORM 100 (CoC 1014) Amendment 8 – The NRC
published in the February 17 issue of the Federal Register a
direct final rule and a concurrent proposed rule that would
amend the NRC’s spent fuel storage regulations by revising
the HI-STORM 100 storage system to include Amendment 8
to this CoC. The final rule will take effect May 2, 2012 because
no significant adverse comments were received by
March 19, 2012.
Amendment 8 modifies the HI-STORM 100 system to:
• Add a new MPC, the 68M, to the approved models presently
included in the CoC with two new boiling water reactor
fuel assembly/array classes;
• Increase the authorized enrichment content for BWR fuel
up to 4.8 weight percent without any burnable poison
credit; the MPC-68 is currently limited to storing BWR fuel
with a maximum enrichment of 4.2 weight percent;
• Add a new PWR fuel assembly array/class (15 x 15I) to
the CoC for loading into the MPC-32; this array class is
also included in the HI-STORM FW application.
• Clarify that a Cask Transfer Facility (CTF) is an optional
facility and modify the definition of a CTF to clarify that it
could be used in lieu of 10 CFR Part 50 controlled structures
for cask transfer evolutions.
Holtec submitted the application on November 28, 2009.
HI-STORM 100 Amendment 9 –HI-STORM 100 Amendment
9 was submitted to the NRC on September 13, 2010. On
February 10, 2012 received the draft proposed CoC and preliminary
SER for review. The proposed CoC, technical specifications,
and Safety Evaluation Report were forwarded to the
NRC’s Rulemaking Branch on February 22 for preparation of
a rulemaking package to be published in the Federal Register.
The amendment will:
• Broaden the subgrade requirements for the HI-STORM
100U (underground) ISFSI portion of the HI-STORM 100
dry storage system;
• Update the thermal model and methodology for the HI-
TRAC transfer cask from a two-dimensional thermalhydraulic
model to a more accurate three-dimensional
model.
In the original 100U application (LAR 1014-6), Holtec considered
the support foundation pad, the top surface pad, and
the Vertical Ventilated Module (VVM) interface pad as “proximate
structures” that were not fully analyzed in the LAR submittal
because they were not considered a direct part of the
100U system. In the absence of an analysis for these interfacing
components, some restrictions were imposed in the 100U
CoC. The restrictions included the requirement that the support
foundation pad must rest on bedrock, or on substrate with
a minimum shear wave velocity of 3,500 ft/s, and that no
excavation activities associated with the construction of new
VVMs could take place within a distance from the Radiation
Protection Space equal to ten times the planned excavation
depth.
This amendment “will extend the acceptance of underground
MPC [multi-purpose canister] storage to those sites
with subgrade shear wave velocity as low as 450 ft/s (weak
soil),” Holtec said. Furthermore, the “free field Design Basis
Earthquake has been set at zero period acceleration levels
that bound all existing nuclear plant sites in the United
States.”
The preliminary SER states that the amendment includes a
re-analysis of short-term operations involving the HI-TRAC
transfer cask, which include vacuum drying of the MPC, onsite
transfer of the dry MPC, and time to boil calculations.
Because of this change in methodology, there is no longer a
need for a supplemental cooling system to maintain peak
cladding temperatures below the Interim Staff Guidance 11,
Rev. 3 guidance limits; the decay heat thresholds for vacuum
drying increased for both unlimited and time restricted vacuum
drying; and time-to-boil limits for various decay heat loads and
initial spent fuel temperatures have been added. The amendment
also includes a re-analysis of the accident scenarios
involving the HI-TRAC transfer cask, such as fire and loss of
water in the water jacket.
April 3, 2012 • 11 • StoreFUEL 13-164

The draft SER states that the staff reviewed the soil structure
interaction (SSI) analysis illustrating the ISFSI with excavations
down to the support foundation pad and subjected to a
design basis event. The staff also reviewed the quasi-static
structural evaluation of the same condition, and concluded
that in both cases, Holtec “has demonstrated reasonable
assurance that the conditions evaluated for a bounding earthquake
and bounding soil properties will not adversely impact
the structural or operational performance of the retaining wall.”
Any excavation below the support foundation pad, however,
will require review and approval by the NRC as part of a CoC
amendment to address a specific site design not bounded by
CoC No. 1014, Amendment 9. “Since the existence of a large
open pit excavation near the ISFSI can potentially create
unanalyzed loading conditions, this scenario must be evaluated
in a new amendment request. A license condition has been
added to the CoC to provide this requirement.”
HI-STORM 100 Amendment 10 – On March 9, 2012, Holtec
International submitted a license amendment request to
amend the HI-STORM 100 CoC. This amendment modifies
the CoC as follows:
• Revises the helium backfill requirements for all MPC-24,
MPC-32, and MPC-68 models permitted for storage in the
aboveground HI-STORM 100. Holtec said the current helium
backfill pressure bands required for the higher heat
load canisters (>28.74 kW for the MPC-24, MPC-32, and
MPC-68) are too restrictive (3 psi) when considering instrument
uncertainties.
• Adds definitions of undamaged fuel assembly, grossly
breached spent fuel rod, and repaired/reconstituted fuel
assemblies for the MPC-68M model only. This is to extend
undamaged fuel in the MPC-68M to include low enriched
and channeled BWR with potential cladding defects
larger than pinhole leaks or hairline cracks but without
gross breaches, and to clarify that repaired or reconstituted
assemblies are also covered by the undamaged
fuel definition. It will provide further clarity to the user and
consistency with the guidance on classifying fuel given in
ISG-1, Revision 2. In addition, these definitions will serve
some BWR users who have older, low enriched, channeled
BWR fuel that they wish to load in the MPC-68M.
With this proposed change, they can load the fuel without
damaged fuel containers and without restriction on
amount or location in the MPC-68M.
• Modifies requirements for certain properties of Metamic-
HT for the MPC-68M model;
• Makes clarifications and editorial suggestions to the
FSAR.
Holtec would like to have the technical review and approval
process complete by spring 2013 to support an effective
amendment date by the end of 2013.
HI-STORM UMAX – Holtec will meet with the NRC staff on
April 19 from 1:00 to 4:00 to discuss a proposed new high
capacity underground storage system, the HI-STORM UMAX.
Loading Briefs
(Note: all ongoing dry storage plans are included in the
Loading Briefs; those reactors whose information has
changed since last month are in blue and have an asterisk
(*) before the information.)
Ameren Corporation: Ameren Corp., owner and operator
of the Callaway Nuclear Plant in Callaway County, Missouri, is
planning to implement dry storage as early as 2016 but no
later than 2019. The spent fuel pool, with a usable capacity of
2,330 assemblies, will lose full-core discharge capability in
2019.
American Electric Power (AEP): DC Cook is expected to
begin dry storage operations in July 2012. Ten HI-STORM
100 systems, with the MPC-32 canister, are scheduled to be
deployed. AEP estimates that future cask loadings will take
place every two to three years. Cook will need 90 casks to
provide storage capacity through the end of the operating
licenses in 2037, plus an additional 112 casks for decommissioning,
for a total of 202 casks.
The Cook spent fuel pool will lose full-core discharge capability
in 2013, and the plant would have to shut down in 2015
without additional storage capacity. Cook 1 and 2 share a
common spent fuel pool with a combined licensed and installed
capacity of 3,613 assemblies.
The site selected for the ISFSI pad accommodates 94
casks (Phase 1), which is enough to provide ample storage
capacity until the end of the operating licenses. The pad will
also accommodate 80 additional casks (Phase 2 construction)
needed for decommissioning, which is just short of the space
required to accommodate all casks needed for decommissioning.
*Arizona Public Service (APS): APS has loaded 94 NAC-
UMS spent fuel systems (2,256 assemblies) at Palo Verde
since the first cask was deployed in March 2003. The ISFSI
has sufficient capacity for all the spent fuel that will be generated
through the end of the plant’s operating licenses. Palo
Verde has ordered a total of 104 UMS systems for use at Palo
Verde. Hardware and cask construction for the most recent
order of 20 UMS systems is scheduled to be completed in
2012. The plant will eventually transition to the MAGNASTOR
system.
*Constellation Energy: Calvert Cliffs has 48 NUHOMS
24P and 21 NUHOMS 32P systems on the ISFSI, for a total of
69 DSCs in storage. Three open HSMs are available of the 72
that are currently installed. Those three will be loaded in the
April 3, 2012 • 12 • StoreFUEL 13-164

second half of 2012. Another 24 storage modules will be added
to the facility by 2013. These will be the HSM-H design,
and loading of those modules will begin in 2014. The
NUHOMS 32PHB DSC will be used.
The site-specific licensed ISFSI has a capacity of 120 storage
modules, and is authorized to load spent fuel that has
achieved burnup as high as 52,000 MWd/MTU in the 32P
DSC. The current license expires on November 30, 2012. On
September 17, 2010, the utility submitted a renewal application.
Constellation submitted RAI responses for this application
on December 15, 2011. As part of the license renewal,
Constellation is seeking approval to store a total of 132 HSMs
instead of the 120 allowed under the current license. This
capacity will be sufficient for continued power plant operation
through the plants’ 60-year operating license period. The 132
HSMs will be composed of 48 modules containing 24 assemblies
in the NUHOMS 24P DSC, and 84 modules containing
32 assemblies in both the NUHOMS 32P and NUHOMS
32PHB DSCs. A license amendment request was submitted
on December 8, 2011 to authorize the use of the 32PHB.
On March 2, 2012, the NRC issued a Request for Supplemental
Information (RSI) for the license renewal application.
The NRC asked for results of the lead canister inspection,
which Constellation has delayed conducting in part to facilitate
the Electric Power Research Institute inspection effort being
Assemblies in Dry Storage in the U.S.
Dry Storage Systems Loaded in the U.S.
performed as part of the stainless steel stress corrosion cracking
issue. The NRC found that delay to be acceptable, but
determined that it “cannot complete the safety analysis report
for the licensee’s renewal application until the inspection results
are provided.” A lead canister inspection is scheduled for
June. EPRI is involved in the effort, which is being expanded
to include inspections in support of stress corrosion cracking
in a marine atmosphere. The issue has generic implications.
The license amendment request to authorize the storage of
higher burnup fuel (submitted December 8, 2011) will also
authorize the use of recent Westinghouse and AREVA Combustion
Engineering (CE) 14 x 14 fuel designs, higher fuel
enrichments and discharge burnups, shorter cooling times,
and the use of the NUHOMS 32PHB canister design. The
32PHB DSC is designed for a maximum heat load of 29.6 kW,
and fuel that has reached a burnup of up to 62,000 MWd/MTU
with a maximum fuel assembly average initial enrichment of
5.0 weight percent U-235 can be stored in the 32PHB DSC
and the HSM-HB. The current license authorizes the site to
load spent fuel that has achieved burnup up to 52,000
MWd/MTU in the 32P DSC.
The utility hopes to have the LAR approved in March 2013.
The first NUHOMS 32PHBs are scheduled to be delivered to
the site in 2015.
Future phases of HSMs that will be built at Calvert Cliffs will
use the high-burnup HSM design, known as the HSM-HB,
which is designed to provide protection and shielding for the
32PHB DSC. The HSM-HBs will be prefabricated and assembled
at the Calvert Cliffs ISFSI. Calvert Cliffs plans to use a 2
x 12 array.
At Nine Mile Point, the ISFSI project includes building a
storage pad with a capacity for 80 HSMs, and future expansion
capability to 200 HSMs. Nine Mile Point will use the
NUHOMS 61BT when it implements dry storage under a general
license. The first campaign is planned to begin in August
2012, when 6 DSCs are scheduled to be loaded. Thirty modules
have been constructed on site, and thirty (30) 61BT
DSCs are being acquired. TN built 30 HSM-102s at Nine Mile
Dual Purpose Concrete Systems Currently Deployed
April 3, 2012 • 13 • StoreFUEL 13-164

Assemblies in Dry Storage (Vendor Shares)
hold 49.99% shares in Calvert Cliffs,
Nine Mile Point, and R.E. Ginna.
*Dairyland Power Cooperative:
Dairyland Power Cooperative (DPC)
is planning to transfer all 333 spent
fuel assemblies from the LaCrosse
BWR (LACBWR) spent fuel pool into
dry storage. DPC designed and installed
seismic restraints, which was
“a challenge,” according to the utility.
DPC expects to begin the operations
in April, using NAC International’s
MPC-LACBWR storage system,
which is designed to store 68 La-
Crosse-specific spent fuel assemblies
per canister. The fuel inventory included
155 damaged fuel assemblies
Dual Purpose Concrete Systems (Vendor Shares)
that will be placed into damaged fuel
cans. The fuel has been cooled at
least 24 years. Some of the dry runs
have been completed. TriVis, Inc. will
be conducting the loading campaign.
The NRC plans to conduct two inspections
at LACBWR through December
2012 to evaluate spent fuel
pool safety and related routing decommissioning
activities. Region 3
will also conduct about four onsite
inspections to evaluate preoperational
and operational related ISFSI activities.
Point, all of which will be loaded between 2012 and 2015. On
Detroit Edison: Detroit Edison (DTE Energy) has again
May 25, 2011, the NRC issued the Order that modifies the postponed Fermi 2’s initial dry storage campaign to summer
Nine Mile Point general license. Constellation must demonstrate
its ability to comply with the required Additional Security forced to withstand the impact of a fully loaded cask tipover
of 2013 because the reactor building floor needs to be rein-
Measures for ISFSIs no later than one year from the date of
event should a cask tip over while the cask is being transferred
to the storage pad. The spent fuel pool lost full-core
the Order or 90 days before the first day that spent fuel is
initially placed into the ISFSI, whichever is earlier.
reserve in August 2010. The Fermi core contains 764 assemblies,
and the spent fuel pool capacity is 3,500 fuel bundles.
The ISFSI at the general-licensed R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power
Plant is designed for 30 HSMs, 12 of which are in place. Currently, approximately 2,840 assemblies are in the spent
Six NUHOMS 32PT systems are in use at Ginna. The first fuel pool, and after the spring 2012 refueling outage approximately
3,020 fuel bundles will be stored in the pool.
four 32PT canisters were deployed in October 2010, and two
more were loaded in October 2011. No more loadings are Fermi 2 will utilize Holtec’s HI-STORM 100 Version B cask
planned at Ginna until 2016. Nine Mile Point and Ginna will
system, including the MPC-68 canister for the Fermi plant. In
share the transfer cask and other loading equipment.
December 2007, DTE Energy contracted with Holtec for 12
Exelon completed its merger with Constellation Energy on systems, which will provide storage capacity through 2016.
March 12, 2012. The two companies are combining operations
immediately. Exelon already owned the largest nuclear expanded to store all the spent fuel generated through the
The ISFSI will accommodate a total of 64 casks, but could be
fleet in the US prior to completing the merger with Exelon, and plant’s renewed operating license in 2045.
it now gains majority control of the Calvert Cliffs, Nine Mile An August 1, 2011 NRC Inspection Report stated that two
Point, and R.E. Ginna nuclear power plants. EDF continues to
violations of very low safety significance were identified. Be-
April 3, 2012 • 14 • StoreFUEL 13-164

cause Detroit Edison entered these violations into their corrective
action program, the NRC treated them as non-cited violations
(NCVs).
Part of the inspection included the pre-operational testing of
the ISFSI. The scope included a review of the crane and
heavy loads program with regard to operations in 2010 as
documented in previous inspection reports. Inspectors also
reviewed seismic restraints that were planned for use during
placement of the HI-TRAC transfer cask on top of the HI-
STORM storage cask during MPC transfer operations in the
reactor building.
The report noted that Detroit Edison discovered that the reinforced
concrete floor beams, which support the reactor
building first floor rails, “would exceed design code allowable
values under a design basis seismic event when a HI-STORM
storage cask loaded with spent nuclear fuel is placed on top of
a low profile transporter at certain locations on the rails.” No
HI-STORM has been brought into the reactor building yet, but
Detroit Edison delayed its ISFSI operations pending resolution
of this issue.
On July 18, 2011, DTE Energy notified the NRC that it intends
to submit an application for license renewal of the Fermi
2 operating license in the second quarter of 2014. The current
license expires on March 20, 2025. DTE Energy has also
submitted a construction and operating license (COL) to the
NRC to preserve the option to build another nuclear plant in
the future. Fermi Unit 3 would be built on the same site as
Unit 2.
*Dominion Energy: Dominion operates four ISFSIs – Surry,
North Anna, Millstone, and Kewaunee.
At Surry, 55 metal storage casks are in place on two pads,
utilizing five different cask designs and storing 1,470 assemblies.
All planned cask loadings are completed for the sitespecific
license.
A third pad at Surry is operating under a general license,
utilizing Transnuclear’s NUHOMS HD system (CoC 1030),
which now has 15 NUHOMS 32PTH canisters deployed. This
pad is designed for 40 modules and has the capacity to accept
spent fuel for storage until approximately 2020.
North Anna also has one ISFSI with a site-specific license
and a second ISFSI that operates under a general license.
The first pad (with the site-specific license) has 27 TN-32
casks in use, storing 864 fuel assemblies. All planned cask
loadings are completed for the site-specific license.
The general licensed ISFSI uses Transnuclear’s NUHOMS
HD system. Twenty-six HSMs are in place, with 13 NUHOMS
32PTH canisters now on the pad. The storage pad is designed
for a total of 40 storage modules.
NRC approves exemptions – On July 21, 2011, Dominion
submitted two requests for a one-time exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 72.21(b)(3) and (b)(11) for the
NUHOMS HD DSC due to a non-compliance with the terms
and conditions of the CoC when casks were loaded at both
Surry and North Anna. The NRC issued Environmental Assessments
(EA), which included a Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) for these exemptions on March 26, and published
the EA and FONSI in the April 2, 2012 issue of the
Federal Register.
The exemptions are needed because at the time of loading,
four NUHOMS 32PTH DSCs at Surry, and seven NUHOMS
32PTH DSCs at North Anna were not loaded with correct heat
loads. The 32PTH DSC is designed for zoned loading with
respect to decay heat, but it was discovered in March 2011
that five fuel assemblies distributed over four DSCs at Surry,
and 12 fuel assemblies distributed over seven DSCs at North
Anna had been placed in canister locations where their decay
heat at the time of loading slightly exceeded the limits established
by the technical specifications. The affected fuel and
DSCs have been verified to be within a safe limit.
The five assemblies affected at Surry have been in dry
storage for at least 2.5 years and all now meet their DSC
location specific decay heat limit. At North Anna, Dominion
also verified that all DSC loadings were below the total heat
load limit for the DSC, and that only the decay heat limit for
the individual fuel cell was exceeded at the time of loading for
the seven DSCs that were affected. The 12 affected fuel assemblies
have been in storage for at least 1.3 years, and all
now meet their DSC location-specific decay heat limit. The
seven DSCs therefore are considered operable and are performing
their intended safety functions.
Since loading fuel assemblies outside of location-specific
heat load CoC limits is not allowed, Dominion requested these
exemptions in order to document the acceptability and safety
basis for allowing the affected DSCs to remain loaded in their
current configuration. The alternative would be to unload the
DSCs, but Dominion does not believe that to be a prudent
course of action. In the environmental reports the NRC requested,
Dominion estimated that unloading the DSCs would
cost about $1.5 million per DSC – $150,000 for unloading,
$150,000 for reloading, $1,000,000 for purchasing a new
DSC, and $200,000 to dispose of the old DSC.
Earthquake impacts on ISFSI – As a result of the August
23, 2011 earthquake near the nuclear plants, 25 of the 27 TN-
32 casks moved slightly from their placement on the concrete
pad. Any TN-32 cask with a total decay heat above 27.1 kW
requires a minimum of 16 feet of spacing. After the earthquake
some of the casks did not meet this spacing requirement;
however, all casks were determined to be below the
27.1 kW limit. Following the earthquake, the shortest distance
observed between the casks was 15 feet, 3 ½ inches. The
April 3, 2012 • 15 • StoreFUEL 13-164

storage pad was not damaged.
For the NUHOMS modules, some slight damage was identified
around the outlet vents and some surface cracking indications
were noted. The NRC determined that the damage observed
on the HSMs would not impact the structural integrity
or radiation shielding capability of the HSMs. With the exception
of 2 HSMs, damage to the modules was limited to unloaded
HSMs.
NRC staff believes there “is no immediate safety issue including
earthquakes. The cask designs are robust and consider
severe natural phenomena. As expected, the casks
withstood the earthquake at North Anna.” Both Dominion and
Transnuclear will continue to assess the casks to be sure
regulatory requirements continue to be met.
During a November 22, 2011 conference call with the NRC,
Dominion stated it would consult with SFST on the possibility
of a license amendment to allow for sliding of the TN-32s and
to address the deviation of a 16 foot cask spacing requirement
so the casks would not have to be returned to the original 16
feet separation.
Planned actions include modifying the license to include a
provision that the casks not be returned to the original 16 feet
separation, and to permit cask shifting such that a minimum
allowable separation be established based on thermal effects
calculations. This license amendment is expected to be submitted
in the second half of 2012. Seismic monitoring equipment
will be installed at the storage pads by the end of 2012.
Dominion also plans to examine five of the 25 overpressure
monitoring systems by removing access covers.
Kewaunee loaded two DSCs in August 2011 and now has
eight NUHOMS 32PT canisters deployed. Kewaunee and
Millstone share NUHOMS transfer equipment.
The Millstone ISFSI is operating under a general license,
also with the NUHOMS 32PT dry storage system. Fourteen
NUHOMS 32PT canisters have been loaded on Pad 1 at
Millstone to date. Nineteen HSMs have been installed. None
of the spent fuel in dry storage is from the shuttered Unit 1.
Duke Power: At Catawba, 24 NAC-UMS systems are on
the storage pad. The two-unit Catawba plant has two spent
fuel pools, each with 1,421 storage cells. Catawba has two
ISFSI pads. Both pads are capable of supporting various dry
storage systems, either horizontal or vertical. NAC provided
24 systems for Catawba.
At McGuire, 10 TN-32 and 28 NAC-UMS systems are currently
storing spent fuel. Duke will begin using NAC International’s
MAGNASTOR system at McGuire Nuclear Station in
2012, but has not yet deployed any of those systems. The
campaign is expected to take five weeks. NRC-observed dry
runs are expected to take place this spring.
At Oconee, 84 NUHOMS 24P systems have been loaded –
40 at the ISFSI with a site-specific license and 44 at the general
licensed ISFSI. In addition, approximately 38 NUHOMS
24PHB systems have been deployed under Duke’s general
license ISFSI, bringing the total number of dry storage systems
in use at Oconee to 122. This data is based upon Duke’s
cask registration letters (dated August 12, 2011), which state
that the cask model is the NUHOMS 24PHB. Oconee is
switching from an 18-month cycle to a 24-month cycle. The
fuel to be loaded will be enriched to 4.57% U-235. Oconee 3
will load this new fuel at the spring 2012 refueling outage;
Oconee 1 will load it at the fall 2012 refueling outage. This fuel
will allow for a higher burnup, and 72 assemblies will be discharged
at the end of each cycle rather than the current 68
assemblies.
Oconee’s site specific ISFSI license has been renewed until
January 31, 2050. The licensed capacity is 88 NUHOMS 24P
storage units, with an enrichment limit of 4 percent U 235 , a
burnup limit of 40,000 MWd/MTU, and a decay heat limit of
0.66 kW per assembly.
Energy Northwest (EN): Twenty-seven (27) Holtec HI-
STORM 100 storage systems are currently in service at the
Columbia Nuclear Generating Station. Two separate pads
have been built, each of which can hold 18 casks. Nine additional
casks will be loaded on these existing pads in 2014.
Three more pads are scheduled for construction in 2016.
Once complete, the total cask capacity will be 90, which is
enough to store all the spent fuel the plant may generate
through more than 60 years of operation.
Energy Northwest has invested nearly $57 million thus far
to build and operate the ISFSI. The spent fuel pool can accommodate
2,654 fuel assemblies. The company began construction
of the ISFSI in 2001, and deployed the first five
casks in April 2002. Additional loadings were successfully
completed in 2004 and 2008.
Energy Northwest is considering the use of mixed oxide
(MOX) fuel at its Columbia Generating Station, and could
begin testing experimental rods as early as 2013.
Energy Northwest has discussed a three-phased approach
to integrating MOX fuel into the reactor, beginning with the
use of 10 to 20 fuel pins in the 2013 to 2015 timeframe, followed
by the use of up to eight “lead use” assemblies around
2019, with loading of up to 30 percent of the reactor’s core
with MOX fuel beginning around 2025. Each step would require
license amendments approved by the NRC.
On July 8, 2011 a federal court awarded Energy Northwest
$48.7 million in damages for its lawsuit against DOE to build
and license the ISFSI at Columbia, including costs incurred
from 1998 to August 2006. The company reportedly has filed
a second lawsuit to cover the cost of storing fuel from August
April 3, 2012 • 16 • StoreFUEL 13-164

2006 to the present.
*Entergy Nuclear: Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO) has 24
VSC-24 casks and 38 Holtec HI-STORM 100s (using both the
MPC-24 and MPC-32) in use. ANO had planned to load three
MPC-24s from the Unit 1 pool in 2011, but that campaign was
cancelled due to the seismic restraint/stackup issue. ANO is
able to maintain full-core offload capability without this
planned loading. The site will load three MPC-24s from the
Unit 1 pool, and three MPC-32s from the Unit 2 pool in 2012,
for a total of six HI-STORM 100 systems to be deployed in
2012 at ANO. This campaign is scheduled to begin in May.
Grand Gulf completed a five-cask loading campaign in
summer 2011, which brought the number of HI-STORMs with
the MPC-68 deployed at Grand Gulf to 17. No casks will be
loaded in 2012 at Grand Gulf. Entergy has submitted a license
renewal application for Grand Gulf. The current operating
license expires in 2024.
River Bend has 15 HI-STORM 100 systems (MPC-68) in
service. No casks were loaded in 2011, but River Bend plans
to load four casks beginning in July 2012. The ISFSI has a 44-
cask capacity, with the capability to expand if needed.
Waterford began its initial dry storage in late October 2011
and will load a total of 9 HI-STORM 100s during the initial
campaign. Three casks were loaded in 2011, with six more to
be loaded during the first half of 2012, one of which has been
loaded as of the end of March, for a total of 4 casks as of
press time. The ISFSI has a 72-cask capacity.
The Indian Point ISFSI is sized to accommodate a sufficient
number of casks to allow Units 2 and 3 to operate with fullcore
discharge capability through an additional 20-year period
beyond the end of the current operating licenses, and also to
store the five casks with the 160 Unit 1 assemblies which
have all been loaded into HI-STORM 100 systems.
Indian Point 2 loaded four MPC-32 canisters in fall 2011,
which makes 14 HI-STORM 100 systems loaded with Unit 2
fuel on the storage pad. Including the five casks with Unit 1
fuel, the Indian Point ISFSI now has 19 HI-STORM systems
deployed.
Indian Point 3 plans to transfer used fuel from the Unit 3
spent fuel pool to the Unit 2 spent fuel pool using a 12-
assembly newly designed shielded transfer canister (STC)
and an external shield cask (the HI-TRAC). From there, Entergy
intends to transfer the spent fuel to the ISFSI that is
already established at the site. The STC will be placed into
the Unit 3 pool, where the fuel will be loaded and the lid installed.
The STC will then be removed from the pool and
placed in the HI-TRAC transfer cask, at which time the STC
lid will be bolted shut. The HI-TRAC solid top lid will then be
installed. Using air pads, the HI-TRAC will be moved outside
of the Unit 3 fuel storage building (FSB), and moved with the
Vertical Cask Transporter (VCT) into the Unit 2 FSB with the
existing low-profile transporter (LPT). The HI-TRAC top lid will
be removed, then using the Unit 2 gantry crane, the STC will
be lifted and placed into the spent fuel pool cask handling
area. The STC lid will be removed, and fuel moved to Unit 2
racks. Then Unit 3 fuel will be transferred from the Unit 2 pool
to the ISFSI.
The first fuel transfer campaign will move 96 assemblies in
eight, 12-assembly moves. In a separate, later campaign, the
96 Unit 3 assemblies would be moved from the Unit 2 spent
fuel pool and placed into dry storage using three HI-STORM
100 cask systems.
Entergy submitted amendment applications July 8, 2009 to
obtain NRC approval for this plan. Entergy responded to the
most recent RAI on March 2, 2012.
Indian Point has relocated the protected area fence to support
fuel transfer inside the protected area at all times. This
was completed in February of this year. The 40-ton crane has
been upgraded to single-failure proof. The schedule of remaining
major milestones is as follows:
• Late 2012 transfer 192 assemblies from pool to pool;
• May through December 2013 load six casks of Unit 3 fuel
out of Unit 2 pool.
At the James A. FitzPatrick plant, 15 HI-STORMs with
MPC-68 canisters are on the storage pad. None are planned
for 2012.
At Pilgrim, Entergy plans to begin cask loading activities in
2013 or 2014, and load three HI-STORM 100 systems using
the MPC-68 cask. Pad construction will begin this year.
Vermont Yankee now has nine HI-STORM 100 systems
with the MPC-68 deployed, after loading four casks systems
in summer 2011. Four more are planned for 2012, with the
campaign currently scheduled to begin in May. Vermont Yankee’s
ISFSI has the capacity to store 36 systems.
Palisades has 18 VSC-24 systems that were loaded between
1993 and 1999. Palisades also has 11 NUHOMS 32PT
systems and now 13 NUHOMS 24PTH systems in use. Palisades
plans to continue using the higher heat load NUHOMS
24PTH DSCs for all remaining casks that have not yet been
installed. Three more 24PTH canisters will be deployed during
the next campaign.
*Exelon: At Braidwood, the initial campaign began in late
October, 2011, at which time three casks were placed on the
storage pad. Braidwood is using the HI-STORM 100 system
with the MPC-32 canister under Amendment 3 to the CoC.
Braidwood’s contract is for 24 HI-STORM 100 systems, ancillaries
and all associated engineering analyses. No casks will
be loaded at Braidwood in 2012.
April 3, 2012 • 17 • StoreFUEL 13-164

At Byron, seven HI-STORM 100 systems are in use; with
the first cask of this campaign having been moved to the pad
on March 26. Byron plans to deploy eight casks in 2012. Byron’s
contract is for 24 HI-STORM 100 systems, ancillaries
and all associated engineering analyses.
The Dresden station has 45 HI-STORM 100 systems and
four HI-STAR 100 systems for a total of 49 Holtec systems
deployed. The most recent loading campaign ran from late
March through late May 2011 and consisted of four HI-
STORM 100 systems. Dresden uses the MPC-68 canister in
the overpack. Dresden plans to load four more casks beginning
in April 2012. All spent fuel from the Dresden 1 reactor
has been transferred either to dry storage or to the Dresden 3
spent fuel pool.
*At LaSalle, six HI-STORMs with the MPC-68 have been
loaded. Additional casks that were planned for 2011 were not
loaded because of the need to resolve HI-TRAC stability issues
resolved, resource requirements for rack insert installation
and new fuel receipt. The site had planned to load eight
casks beginning in late May or early June 2012, although this
campaign might be cancelled. LaSalle’s contract is for 24 HI-
STORM systems ancillaries and all associated engineering
analyses.
On December 29, 2011, Exelon completed the installation
of NETCO-SNAP-IN spent fuel pool rack inserts in the Unit 2
pool. LaSalle installed the inserts to free up more storage cell
locations that are currently unusable due to Boraflex degradation
(original application submitted October 5, 2009). The rack
inserts are used as replacement for the neutron absorbing
properties of the existing Boraflex panels.
Quad Cities now has 35 HI-STORM 100S systems with the
MPC-68 canister in use, after loading ten systems in summer
2011. Four additional casks were planned for the second
quarter of 2012, but that campaign has been cancelled.
Exelon plans to submit a license amendment request in
June 2012 to use NETCO-SNAP-IN spent fuel pool rack inserts
at Quad Cities to permanently resolve the spent fuel
pool Boraflex degradation issue without crediting Boraflex.
Exelon will ask for the amendment to be approved by June
2013. The inserts will be installed in Unit 1 between 2012 and
2015, and in Unit 2 between 2013 and 2016. No credit will be
taken for the inserts until the amendment is approved by the
NRC.
The Zion Nuclear Power Station is permanently shut down
and has been defueled. It is in SAFSTOR condition, with all
the spent fuel in wet storage. The site transitioned to active
decommissioning status in 2011, is pursuing a general license,
and plans to build a pad in 2012, with fuel transfer
operations beginning in February 2013. Pad construction is
scheduled to begin this spring and be completed by the end of
the year.
Zion will deploy NAC International’s MAGNASTOR storage
system. NAC is providing 65 storage systems to Zion – up to
61 will be for fuel and four for GTCC waste (2 per unit). Zion
generated 2,226 spent fuel assemblies during its operating
life, all of which must be placed into dry storage. Sixty-five
percent of those (1,454) have top nozzle stress corrosion
cracking issues, which will have to be repaired before they
can be handled. ZionSolutions plans to reinforce all of these
assemblies with Instrument Tube Tie Rods (ITTRs), and to
transfer 15 loose “guide tube” rods into an assembly skeleton
cage. All fuel has been cooled at least 14 years, but 36 assemblies
achieved a burnup greater than 45,000 MWd/MTU,
and the pool inventory contains some high reactive fuel that
was not fully burned due to the premature plant shutdown,
and thus had a higher initial enrichment than most of the
spent fuel in the pool.
Limerick now has 16 NUHOMS 61BT systems in use after
completing a campaign that began in June. The site currently
plans to load six more casks beginning in June 2012, although
the number of casks is under review and could be reduced.
Exelon contracted for 24 – 61BTH systems in 2005.
Oyster Creek has 19 NUHOMS 61BT systems loaded;
twenty HSMs have been installed. Four additional DSCs are
scheduled to be deployed beginning in April 2012. The first
four DSCs were loaded in 2002 (244 assemblies), the next
four in 2003 (244 assemblies), three more were loaded in
2004 (183 assemblies), five more in 2005 (305 assemblies),
and the last three (183 assemblies) this year, for a total of
1,159 assemblies in dry storage. The site is expanding its
ISFSI and installing additional HSMs. Exelon announced
December 8, 2010 that the Oyster Creek Station will be retired
in 2019, even though the unit is licensed to operate until 2029,
after Exelon successfully obtained a license renewal in April
2009.
Peach Bottom now has 53 TN-68 systems in use after
completing a five-cask campaign in mid-June 2011. Fifty-four
casks have been loaded, but Cask 1 was unloaded due to the
helium leak in the main lid seal, and remains empty on the
Unit 2 refueling floor. The site has ordered 20 more casks for
delivery by 2012; six are scheduled to be loaded beginning in
April 2012.
Exelon submitted a license amendment request on November
3, 2011 to obtain NRC approval for the use of NETCO-
Snap-In rack inserts in the Peach Bottom spent fuel pool.
Global Nuclear Fuel will conduct the criticality analysis. The
installation schedule is being optimized, based on insert approval
and projected degradation of the racks. Bounding dates
have been established, however, which include:
• Unit 2 – 2013-2017
April 3, 2012 • 18 • StoreFUEL 13-164

• Unit 3 – 2014-2018
The estimated cost of installation is approximately $45 million.
Rack inserts will first be installed in the rack modules with
the worst degradation. The racks are made of an Al-1100/B 4C
composite, provided by Rio Tinto Alcan, formed into a chevron-shaped
rack sleeve. Peach Bottom will use a higher B 4C
loading. The racks are installed via a custom tool from the
refueling bridge. Once installed, the inserts are an integral
part of the rack modules. The inserts supplement the neutron
poison in the existing racks, and fuel can be moved in and out
of the storage locations as usual. Exelon was asked to submit
supplemental information related to the structural analysis by
December 28, 2011 so that the staff could complete its detailed
technical review.
At the Clinton site, Exelon plans to begin construction of an
ISFSI in 2012, and begin operations in 2014 or 2015. The
spent fuel pool would run out of storage space in 2016, and
would lose full-core discharge capability in 2015 without the
transfer of spent fuel into dry storage.
Exelon completed its merger with Constellation Energy on
March 12, 2012. The two companies are combining operations
immediately. Exelon already owned the largest nuclear
fleet in the US prior to completing the merger with Exelon, and
it now gains majority control of the Calvert Cliffs, Nine Mile
Point, and R.E. Ginna nuclear power plants. EDF continues to
hold 49.99% shares in Calvert Cliffs, Nine Mile Point, and R.E.
Ginna.
FirstEnergy: FirstEnergy will use Holtec’s HI-STORM systems
at the Perry Nuclear Plant under a contract for 16 HI-
STORM 100S overpacks and 16 MPC-68 canisters. Holtec
will also provide all associated engineering services and an
on-site transporter. The first campaign will load six casks, and
was scheduled to begin in November 2010 but has been
delayed until summer 2012 due to concerns by NRC Region 3
inspectors related to the stacking of the HI-TRAC with the HI-
STORM during vertical transfer of the MPC. As a result of the
delay, Perry will lose full-core discharge capability after the
next refueling outage. Up to 74 additional systems will be
added as needed. The ISFSI is 347 feet long, 75 feet wide,
and 2 and ½ feet thick, designed to provide storage capacity
for 80 casks. The pad is supported by a 4-inch thick concrete
mat foundation set on top of approximately 14 inches of structural
fill.
FirstEnergy’s Beaver Valley plant is reracking its Unit 2
spent fuel pool to provide additional storage space. On April
29, 2011, the NRC approved a license amendment that will
modify the Beaver Valley Power Station Unit 2 technical
specifications to support the installation of high density fuel
storage racks in the Beaver Valley 2 spent fuel pool, which will
increase the total storage locations from 1,088 cells in 15
racks to 1,690 cells in 15 high density freestanding racks
designed by Holtec International. The amendment authorizes
the replacement of the existing Boraflex neutron absorber fuel
storage racks in the spent fuel pool with new high-density,
Metamic neutron absorber storage racks manufactured by
Holtec International. Transnuclear, Inc. will supply the dry
storage for Beaver valley when it is needed.
FirstEnergy’s Davis-Besse plant has three NUHOMS 24P
systems in use. The company announced August 30 it has
submitted an application to the US NRC for renewal of the
Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station operation license. The
current operating license expires in 2017, so if approved, the
plant would be authorized to operate for an additional 20
years, until 2037.
Florida Power and Light (FP&L): St. Lucie has 14
NUHOMS 32PTH systems deployed under the NUHOMS-HD
certificate. St. Lucie will need to procure additional modules
for future storage.
Turkey Point began initial dry storage operations in late July
2011 and completed it in early December. Turkey Point loaded
288 assemblies (9 DSCs) out of each pool, for a total of
576 assemblies into 18 NUHOMS HD 32PTH systems.
Turkey Point loaded under Amendment 1 to the NUHOMS
HD CoC. According to an April 8, 2011 NRC inspection report,
the ISFSI at Turkey Point currently contains 14 horizontal
storage modules (HSMs).
Seabrook also has six NUHOMS 32PTH DSCs in use, storing
192 used fuel assemblies. The ISFSI at the Seabrook
Station was designed and sited to allow expansion for plant
operation through the year 2050. Seabrook’s current operating
license expires on March 15, 2030, but FPL submitted a
license renewal application on May 28, 2010.
Twenty (20) NUHOMS 61BT systems are in use at the
Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC), storing 1,220 used fuel
assemblies. Seven systems were loaded in 2011 between
October and December under Amendment 9 to the NUHOMS
storage system. In December 2010, the NRC renewed the
operating license for DAEC for an additional 20 years. The
original 40-year license was set to expire in 2014; the new
license will expire on February 21, 2034.
At Point Beach, 16 VSC-24 systems, storing 384 used fuel
assemblies, and 14 NUHOMS 32PT systems, storing 448
used fuel assemblies, have been deployed. FPL’s objective is
to maintain a full-core reserve in each spent fuel pool. The
licensed storage capacity is 1,502 assemblies.
*Luminant Generation Company: Luminant Generation
Company, owner and operator of the 2,300 MWe Comanche
Peak Steam Electric Station, now has three HI-STORM 100s
Version B systems deployed at Comanche Peak under a
general license. Comanche Peak is loading under Amendment
7 to the HI-STORM system. The first cask was placed
April 3, 2012 • 19 • StoreFUEL 13-164

on the storage pad on February 28, 2012. Twenty-one fuel
assemblies were loaded from the Unit 2 spent fuel pool and
11 from the Unit 2 spent fuel pool. Fuel loading of the first
canister took about 15 hours. Comanche Peak plans to load
12 systems during this initial campaign. Holtec is providing
loading services. The Comanche Peak ISFSI is designed to
hold up to 84 storage casks. The pad is approximately 102
feet wide, 262 feet long, and 25 inches thick.
The NRC conducted an inspection of the Comanche Peak
ISFSI between February 20 and February 28, 2012 in order to
confirm compliance with the requirements of the Holtec cask
system during the loading of the first HI-STORM 100 storage
cask. No violations were identified.
During the inspection a team of inspectors observed “the
critical evolutions associated with the first cask loading, from
first grapple of a fuel assembly to placement of the HI-STORM
storage cask onto the ISFSI.” The March 30 NRC inspection
report noted that Comanche Peak is now the 16 th operational
ISFSI in NRC Region IV.
According to the report, the Comanche Peak ISFSI has the
capacity to hold 85 HI-STORM 100S Version B storage overpacks
that contain the MPC-32 multi-purpose canister design.
During the loading of the first canister, beginning on February
20, 2012, the NRC provided 24-hour coverage of the loading
operations for all critical casks, including fuel movement,
heavy lifts of the loaded canister, radiation surveys of the
loaded transfer cask and storage cask, welding of the lid and
port cover plates, forced helium dehydration drying, helium
backfill of the canister, and transportation of the HI-STORM
storage cask to the storage pad. “Workers were knowledgeable
of their assigned tasks and had been well trained. Problems
and issues were quickly identified and effectively resolved.
Shift supervision provided good oversight of work
activities. Procedures were closely followed and good communication
between the workers was exhibited.”
The total head load of the first canister loaded was 17.813
kW; the heat load limit of the canister is 34 kW. The first canister
was loaded using a regional loading plan. The highest
fuel assembly burnup value loaded was 42,278 MWd/MTU.
The 130-ton fuel building overhead crane lifted and transported
the HI-TRAC transfer cask containing a canister loaded
with fuel and water without problems. The weight of the lift
was calculated to be 127.9 tons. The smooth operation was
credited to “extensive effort of preventative maintenance the
licensee performed on the crane.”
A seismic restraint was used to restrain the HI-TRAC transfer
cask while it was positioned on top of the HI-STORM storage
cask.
The campaign was originally planned to start in July 2011
but a failure of a wheel hub on the vertical cask transporter
occurred, which delayed the loading campaign. The preliminary
analysis concluded that the slopes associated with the
Comanche Peak haul path placed high stresses on the vertical
cask transporter wheels and were a significant contributor
to the failure of the hub assembly. A new replacement wheel
hub was designed and manufactured. Holtec said that the
improvements would allow the cask transporter to fulfill its
intended function for the first loading campaign of 12 casks.
An additional review is being performed to see if any limitations
would be appropriate for future campaigns, although an
independent analysis found that the redesigned hub “should
provide a long service life.”
Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD): Cooper Nuclear
Station (CNS) activated its dry cask storage program in 2010
when it loaded eight NUHOMS 61BT systems between October
2010 and January 2011 under Amendment 9 to the
NUHOMS system. The ISFSI pad is designed to support 52
loaded horizontal storage modules. The next dry storage
campaign is scheduled for March 2013. On September 16,
2011, NPPD submitted a license amendment request to transition
from 18 to 24 month fuel cycles to support the fall 2012
refueling outage.
NPPD announced July 15, 2011 that it signed a settlement
agreement with DOE to cover the costs of dry storage. Under
the terms of the agreement, NPPD will initially receive nearly
$60.6 million, which covers the costs through 2009 that NPPD
incurred for constructing the Cooper ISFSI. Costs for on-site
storage from 2010 through 2013 will be submitted annually to
DOE, and “settlement payments will be determined accordingly.”
NPPD is also storing 1,054 spent fuel assemblies in the
General Electric wet-pool ISFSI in Morris, Illinois.
Omaha Public Power District (OPPD): OPPD has ten
NUHOMS 32PT systems deployed at the Fort Calhoun Nuclear
Power Station, which completes the original ten-canister
contract with Transnuclear. The next campaign will not occur
until 2015, at which time OPPD is planning to conduct another
10-canister campaign. No decision has been made on the
contract for the next campaign.
*Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E): Diablo Canyon has 23
HI-STORM 100 systems, using the MPC-32 canister deployed,
which equates to 608 assemblies in dry storage, after
completing seven cask loading campaign between January
and March of 2012. Holtec delivered 12 additional cask systems
in June 2011. In addition, PG&E is ordering 10 more
systems for delivery at the end of 2012, which will make 38
casks purchased from Holtec.
The initial ISFSI phase has capacity for 1,280 assemblies,
or up to 40 storage casks, which is sufficient through nearly
the end of the operating license; subsequent phases could
April 3, 2012 • 20 • StoreFUEL 13-164

add capacity for an additional 3,136 assemblies. The ISFSI is
planned for as many as seven concrete pads (up to 138
casks), although only two have been constructed, which is
sufficient pad space for the 38 casks procured thus far, plus
two spare slots. PG&E will need to expand the number of pad
foundations in the 2012-2013 timeframe to accommodate the
continued movement of spent fuel from wet to dry storage.
The utility expects to add three more pad foundations at that
time.
The NRC issued a license amendment on January 19, 2012
that modifies the site-specific ISFSI license for Diablo Canyon
to authorize the storage of higher burnup fuel (up to 68,200
MWd/MTU to accommodate the spent fuel pool inventory),
assemblies with instrument tube tie rods, and neutron source
assemblies. The changes are minimized by maintaining the
existing heat load limits, the same regionalized loading
scheme, the same minimum cooling time (five years), and the
same cask backfill pressures. Other technical specification
changes include the removal of the vacuum drying option,
since Diablo Canyon has only used the Forced Helium Dehydration
(FHD) system, and to add supplemental cooling requirement.
In a November 22, 2011 supplement, PG&E modified the
request to limit the loading of high burnup fuel to less than or
equal to a 24 kW heat load based on a uniform loading of 750
W fuel assemblies, and provided supplemental information in
support of the modification.
In a January 9, 2012 Licensee Event Report, PG&E informed
the NRC that one of sixteen anchor stud nuts on a HI-
STORM 100SA storage cask at Diablo Canyon was not secured
in accordance with the ISFSI Final Safety Analysis
Report (FSAR). PG&E notified the NRC on January 9, 2012.
Plant personnel retensioned the loose nut and verified the
tension of the 15 remaining anchor nuts of that particular cask
cask. Additional inspection of the anchor stud nuts for each of
the remaining HI-STORM casks identified two additional loose
nuts were found, which the plant also reported to the NRC.
These anchor stud nuts were retensioned, and the tension
was verified correct on the remaining 238 anchor stud nuts.
This work was completed on January 19, 2012.
The apparent cause, according to the Licensee Event Report,
was inadequate cleanliness prior to final tensioning. The
report stated that during processing of the first cask in the
third loading campaign, which began in January 2012, a “significant
amount of dirt and debris had collected on the underside
of the HI-STORM units.” The report noted that a “medium-grade
grain of sand in the bearing area could create a
condition that would prevent long-term maintenance of the
stud tension forces.” A review of the installation procedure
concluded that the procedures did not specify final cleanliness
actions immediately prior to the positioning of the HI-STORM
cask on the steel embedment ring, and did not verify final stud
tension after removal of the cask transporter. The procedures
have been revised to require a final cleaning swipe of the
embedment ring and HI-STORM underside just prior to the
final positioning of the cask, and to verify the stud tension
after the cask transporter has been moved away from the HI-
STORM.
The Diablo Canyon ISFSI FSAR specifies that each spent
fuel storage cask is compressed against an embedment plate
using 16 anchor studs, each of which is preloaded to approximately
157,000 pounds force. The Diablo Canyon design and
installation of the fuel storage casks are unique within the
industry; this design is only used at Diablo Canyon.
Humboldt Bay has five HI-STAR 100 HB systems in use,
storing all 390 spent fuel assemblies that were generated
during the 13 years the plant operated. All the spent fuel was
transferred into dry storage between August 2008 and December
2008. A sixth cask will store GTCC waste. Each system
can accommodate 80 Humboldt Bay spent fuel assemblies.
The spent fuel pool has now been drained; decommissioning
began in May 2009.
On September 8, 2010, PG&E submitted an amendment for
the Humboldt Bay ISFSI license. PG&E proposed to add
process wastes to the chemical and/or physical form description
of GTCC waste that is authorized at the Humboldt Bay
ISFSI. These wastes will be stored inside one dry, welded,
stainless steel container, which will be placed in another container
(a process waste container or PWC) that is used to
stabilize the welded container inside the cask. The GTCC
cask contains a GTCC Waste Container (GWC), which is
equivalent to a MPC within a spent fuel cask.
According to a November 23, 2011 conversation record, the
NRC staff informed PG&E that it intended to include a restriction
in the amended license that would require PG&E to
vent the GWC prior to shipment because it “was not a good
practice to ship radioactive material with flammable and/or
explosive levels of hydrogen.” PG&E explained that since the
containment building in which both the GWC and spent fuel
canisters had been vented after loading would have been
dismantled by the time the waste was shipped offsite, they
would have no method of venting the GWC without endangering
workers, the public, and/or the environment. The material
would have come from contamination in the pool water, which
was transferred to the inner surface of the GWC. PG&E
planned to discuss the development with Holtec (GWC vendor)
and develop another solution to loading the GTCC waste.
PG&E thus asked for a second RAI letter to be issued to justify
making future changes to the site Safety Analysis Report.
PG&E has completed the process of analyzing options and
has decided to section the reactor vessel for removal. The
licensee has issued a request for proposal for this effort which
April 3, 2012 • 21 • StoreFUEL 13-164

is scheduled to begin during 2012.
Decommissioning of the adjacent fossil plants, Units 1 and
2 is underway and is projected to be completed in fall 2011.
Once these units are decommissioned, that area will serve as
a lay-down area for continuing work on Unit 3.
PPL Susquehanna: Susquehanna has 27 NUHOMS 52B
systems storing 1,404 assemblies and 40 NUHOMS 61BT
systems storing 440 assemblies. Susquehanna is loading
under Amendment 9 to the NUHOMS system. Susquehanna
did not load any modules in 2011, but plans to load 8 systems
in 2012 and 11 in 2013.
Progress Energy: Progress Energy has 22 NUHOMS systems
loaded at the H.B. Robinson plant– eight of the 7P systems
and 14 NUHOMS 24PTH systems. The ISFSI is designed
to provide life-of-plant storage.
The Brunswick site has eight NUHOMS 61BTH canisters on
the storage pad. Another campaign is expected in 2012 after
a Brunswick refueling outage. Cask loadings will likely take
place every two years for the life of the plant.
Crystal River had planned to implement dry storage in
2013, but with the extended shutdown of the plant, this date
will be delayed. Crystal River has been shut down since September
2009 when damage to the concrete at the periphery of
the containment building was discovered during a refueling
and maintenance outage. When dry storage is deemed necessary,
Crystal River will deploy the NUHOMS 32PTH1 system.
The ISFSI will have a capacity of 80 NUHOMS HSMs,
with one row of 2 x 21 modules and one row of 2 x 19 modules.
The ISFSI project scope includes site development for the
ISFSI pad, including a protected area security fence and berm
expansion, substantial storm water management construction,
procurement of long lead time equipment (the NUHOMS
DSCs and the HSMs). Progress Energy will lease the loading
equipment from TN. Auxiliary building modifications will need
to be made (including the crane replacement), and new or
relocated buildings due to berm expansion will need to be
completed. TN is providing the dry storage systems, Hitachi
Zosen is manufacturing the canisters, Bayshore Products is
manufacturing the horizontal storage modules, Morris Material
Handling is the cask handling crane vendor, and Enercon is
handling the ISFSI design. ACI Nuclear Energy Solutions is
providing licensing support and third party reviews.
Dry storage is not needed at Harris for the foreseeable future
because it has four spent fuel pools.
On December 2, 2011, the NRC approved the transfer of
indirect control of Progress Energy’s nuclear plants to include
Duke Energy on the parent corporation on the licenses for
these facilities. The action was pursued as part of the proposed
merger of Duke and Progress Energy in which Progress
Energy will become a wholly owned and direct subsidiary
of Duke Energy. Progress Energy will continue to operate
the ISFSIs it currently owns, and the proposed license transfers
will not result in any change to the operation of the
ISFSIs. To date, the two companies have received mergerrelated
approvals from, or met the requirements of, the US
NRC, the Kentucky Public Service Commission, and the
shareholders of both companies.
PSEG: PSEG began moving spent fuel into dry storage in
2006 when the first casks were loaded at Hope Creek. Spent
fuel from Salem was added to the ISFSI in 2010. The ISFSI is
designed to store 200 casks – 89 of these will be for Salem
spent fuel and the rest for Hope Creek fuel. The ISFSI is
comprised of three separately constructed, reinforced structural
concrete pads. Two of the pads will store 68 casks each
in a 2 x 17 array, and one pad will store 64 casks in a 2 x 16
array.
Hope Creek has 16 HI-STORM 100 systems with MPC-68
canisters deployed. No casks were loaded at Hope Creek in
2011 and none are planned for 2012.
Salem now has nine (9) HI-STORM 100 systems on its
storage pad after completing a five-cask campaign that took
place between July 11 and August 16, 2011. All spent fuel
transferred thus far has been from the Unit 1 pool. The initial
loading from the Unit 2 pool is planned to be in summer of
2012 and will consist of deploying seven casks. The Salem
PWR uses the MPC-32 canister inside the HI-STORM overpack.
For both Salem and Hope Creek, the welding of the MPC
canisters has typically been done by PCI under subcontract
from Holtec.
The NRC has renewed the operating licenses for Salem 1
and 2 for an additional 20 years; the renewed license for Unit
1 will expire on August 13, 2036, and for Unit 2 on April 18,
2040.
South Carolina Electric & Gas (SCE&G) – The V.C.
Summer Nuclear Station will deploy Holtec International’s HI-
STORM FW systems beginning in 2015. SCE&G signed a
contract with Holtec for pool to pad services for three separate
loading campaigns at the V.C. Summer station, with the first
loading campaign of four HI-STORM FWs scheduled to be
deployed in January 2015. The second and third campaigns,
each of which will load seven more systems, are scheduled
for 2019 and 2022. The contract also includes the supply of
one HI-TRAC transfer cask and all associated ancillary
equipment that is necessary.
Representatives from SCE&G met on July 20, 2011 with
SFST staff in a pre-application meeting to discuss the siting of
the Summer ISFSI.
SCE&G needs to transfer spent fuel into dry storage be-
April 3, 2012 • 22 • StoreFUEL 13-164

cause without such transfer, the spent fuel pool will lose fullcore
offload capability in 2017. Although the utility did not say
what the current pool inventory is, by the end of the plant’s
operating license in 2042, 2,766 fuel assemblies will have
been discharged. SCE&G estimates that approximately 75 of
the HI-STORM FW systems will be required to put all spent
fuel generated through the end of the operating license –
including emptying the spent fuel pool prior to decommissioning
the plant.
The Shaw Group is the architect engineer, and as such, will
perform project management, design, and implementation of
the storage pad. PaR Nuclear (a Westinghouse subsidiary)
will design, test, and install a single failure proof cask handling
crane. SCE&G said that to maintain a full core reserve in the
pool, at least four MPCs will need to be loaded every other
cycle (about once every three years); however, a typical loading
campaign will likely consist of eight MPCs to optimize
mobilization and demobilization costs. The first campaign will
load four MPCs to accommodate a learning curve, although
the amount of MPCs loaded the first campaign might be adjusted.
SCE&G anticipates loading and transferring one MPC
to the ISFSI pad per week.
On March 30, the NRC approved SCE&G and Santee
Cooper’s application to build two new reactors at the V.C.
Summer site. The two units are expected to be completed in
2017 and 2018.
V.C. Summer ISFSI Activity
Date
Fuel characterization complete February 2012
Replace FHB crane trolley May 2012
Complete FHB upgrades June 2013
Complete underground modifications July 2013
Complete haul path construction July 2013
Complete ISFSI construction October 2013
Complete security modifications April 2014
Delivery of Holtec equipment June 2014
Complete loading training November 2014
Complete NRC dry runs December 2014
Start loading first 4 canisters January 2015
Southern California Edison (SCE): The San Onofre Nuclear
Generating Station (SONGS) has 55 Advanced
NUHOMS Horizontal Storage Modules (AHSMs) on the ISFSI
pad, with 46 NUHOMS DSCs deployed, of both the 24PT1
and 24PT4 models; 45 of the DSCs store spent fuel and one
stores GTCC waste from the shuttered Unit 1 reactor.
Sixteen (16) canisters have been loaded with Unit 2 spent
fuel, 12 have been loaded with Unit 3 spent fuel, and 17 of the
24PT1 systems are filled with 395 assemblies from Unit 1.
One of the 24PT1 systems stores Unit 1 GTCC waste. The
first canister was loaded into the ISFSI on October 3, 2003.
The advanced aspect of the AHSM was developed for use at
high seismic sites.
A 2011 loading campaign was to load up to six 24PT4 canisters
with Unit 2 fuel. According to NRC cask registrations,
four 24PT4 canisters have been filled out of this campaign.
The NRC conducted a routine inspection of spent fuel storage
activities at SONGS from April 19-21, 2011. Much of the
information below is from the May 20, 2011 inspection report.
Unit 1 – By September 2004, all the spent fuel from Unit 1
had been removed from that pool and placed into dry storage.
Subsequently, all Unit 1 spent fuel that was stored in the Units
2 and 3 spent fuel pools was placed into dry storage. All Unit
1 spent fuel was placed into 24PT1 canisters, which are approved
for shipment in the MP187 transportation cask. Of the
17 DSCs that contain Unit 1 spent fuel, 10 were fully loaded
with 24 assemblies, one was loaded with 23 assemblies, and
six were loaded with 22 assemblies. Nine canisters contain 27
Unit 1 failed fuel assemblies (Westinghouse 14 x 14 fuel). The
24PT1 has a limit of four failed fuel cans.
In addition, 270 Unit 1 spent fuel assemblies are in wet
storage at the GE Morris facility in Illinois.
Unit 2 – This fuel is loaded into 24PT4 DSCs, with the first
fuel placed into dry storage in March 2007. The 24PT4 DSC is
included in the application for Amendment 3 to the MP197
transportation cask CoC, which is under review by the NRC.
Four canisters contain 46 Unit 2 failed fuel assemblies (CE 16
x 16 fuel). The 24PT4 has a limit of 12 failed fuel cans.
Unit 3 – This fuel is also loaded into 24PT4 DSCs, with the
first fuel placed into dry storage in March 2008. Two canisters
contain 22 Unit 3 failed fuel assemblies (CE 16 x 16 fuel).
SCE said in a February 20, 2012 letter to the NRC that it
plans to use a new DSC in September 2014, the 32PTH2
canister that is currently under review as part of Amendment 3
to the Standardized Advanced NUHOMS CoC.
SCE fabricates its own canisters at a fabrication shop located
on the Mesa across the highway from the ISFSI. The fabrication
shop constructs the canisters for use at the site under a
license issued by the NRC to Areva Transnuclear.
The ISFSI pad consists of two adjacent pad areas. The first
pad area is 43.5 feet wide and holds 31 canisters in a single
row, with a shield wall on each end of the row. The second
pad area is 60.5 feet wide and is designed to hold a double
row of canisters. There were 24 AHSMs on this pad area, for
a total of 55 ASHMS on the pad.
The inspection report noted that SCE is considering using
the 32-assembly version of the NUHOMS system. With the 24
assembly canisters that are in use now, 38 more AHSMs can
be added to the current pad for a total of 93 AHSMs. If the 32-
assembly canisters are used in the future, then the ISFSI will
April 3, 2012 • 23 • StoreFUEL 13-164

hold up to 89 AHSMs.
SONGS 2 and 3 are shut down until the NRC is satisfied
that SCE has completed the corrective actions necessary to
ensure that the steam generator tubes can maintain their
structural integrity after indications earlier this year of a steam
generator tube leak.
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in an August
23, 2011 ruling, affirmed a June 2010 Claims Court decision
that awarded Southern California Edison (SCE) $142
million to recover the cost of building and operating an ISFSI
at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS).
Southern Nuclear Company (SNC): The Farley plant now
has 15 HI-STORMs deployed.
The Hatch plant has a total of 47 loaded casks on its ISFSI,
three of which are HI-STAR 100 systems. Hatch loaded five
HI-STORM systems in 2011.
The Vogtle plant will implement dry storage in 2013. Vogtle
will use the HI-STORM 100S storage overpack, the HI-TRAC
125D transfer overpack, the MPC-32 inner canister, a vertical
cask transporter, a low-profile transporter, and will employ the
Forced Helium Dehydration system (FHD). Vogtle plans to
conduct its first used fuel outage in 2013 in which four HI-
STORM systems will be loaded. No casks will be loaded in
2014, but in both 2015 and 2016, six casks are planned to be
loaded, then eight casks more casks in 2018. The two-unit
Vogtle plant operates on 18-month cycles, which means that
every third year both units have a refueling outage. Vogtle
plans to load eight casks every year beginning in 2018 except
for the years that both units refuel. By 2035, 80 casks are
expected to be loaded.
Major plant modifications that are being undertaken include
auxiliary building modifications, construction of haul roads, a
cask transfer facility, the ISFSI pad, and replacement of the
spent fuel cask crane trolley. SNC is constructing a small
ISFSI pad sized for 20 casks in a 4 x 5 array onto which the
first 16 casks will be placed. Four spaces will remain open.
Later, SNC will build a larger ISFSI. The cask transfer facility
will be near the small pad, but a cask fabrication facility
will be built near the location of the future larger pad.
Vogtle ISFSI Activity Timeframe
Design Work 2010-2011
Construction 2011-2012
Holtec equipment delivery 4 th quarter 2012
Internal dry runs 1 st quarter 2013
NRC demonstration 2 nd quarter 2013
First four casks on pad 3 rd quarter 2013
16 th cask on the pad 3 rd quarter 2016
*TVA: The Sequoyah Nuclear Plant now has 32 HI-STORM
TVA ISFSI Status
BFN SQN WBN Total
Pad Capacity 96 90 TBD
System Type HI-STORM HI-STORM TBD
2004 0 3 N/A 3
2005 3 0 N/A 3
2006 0 5 N/A 5
2007 1 6 N/A 7
2008 0 6 N/A 6
2009 12 0 N/A 12
2010 9 3 N/A 12
2011 0 9 N/A 9
Total 25 32 N/A 57
TVA ISFSI Loading Plans
2012 5/15 0 N/A 20
2013 5 10 N/A 15
2014 10 5 10 25
2015 5 0 0 5
2016 10 6 6 22
2017 5 5 6 16
2018 10 0 0 10
2019 5 5 5 15
2020 10 6 5 21
Total Planned 80 37 32 149
Grand Total 105 67 32 206
systems with the MPC-32 canister currently deployed after
loading six MPC-32s into HI-STORM overpacks during the
last quarter of 2011. Sequoyah will not load any systems in
2012. The Sequoyah ISFSI has capacity for 90 casks. By
2028, TVA plans to add a second pad if needed.
The Browns Ferry plant has 30 HI-STORM 100s loaded
with the MPC-68 for a total of 2,040 assemblies in dry storage.
Browns Ferry completed a five-cask loading campaign
between January and mid-March 2012. Fifteen more MPC-
68s will be loaded beginning in June 2012. The Browns Ferry
ISFSI is capable of accommodating 96 casks (92 casks plus
four spares). A second pad could be built in 2018 if necessary.
At Watts Bar, TVA had planned to re-rack the spent fuel
pools by 2013, and build an ISFSI by 2020. TN announced
October 15, 2010 that it was awarded a contract to provide
used and new fuel wet storage racking systems for Watts Bar,
employing TN’s NUSTOR technology. Because of the impact
of Fukushima, however, TVA has decided to forego the
re-rack of the Watts Bar pools and implement dry storage
earlier than originally planned. TVA now plans to deploy dry
storage at Watts Bar by 2014, loading 10 systems that first
year.
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Company (WCNOC): The
April 3, 2012 • 24 • StoreFUEL 13-164

Wolf Creek Generating Station expects to have an ISFSI
operational no later than 2019, and possibly 2016 if the regulations
are changed to require spent fuel to be moved out of
pools and into dry storage as early as possible. The Wolf
Creek plant can maintain a full-core reserve in its spent fuel
pool until approximately 2023, which is one operating cycle
short of the plant’s original licensed lifetime.
In 2010, the US Court of Federal Claims awarded the three
joint owners of Wolf Creek $10.6 million in damages.
Xcel Energy: Prairie Island now has 29 TN-40 casks currently
in service. On October 20, 2011, Xcel Energy submitted
an application to renew the ISFSI license. Details of the meeting
were included in the January 2012 issue of StoreFUEL.
The original Prairie Island 20-year site specific license expires
on October 31, 2013. The license specified the use of
Transnuclear, Inc.’s TN-40 cask design, which the NRC certified
for transport on June 10, 2011. In August 2010 the ISFSI
license was amended to allow the use of the TN-40HT cask
design, which the site intends to begin using in 2012. The TN-
40HT cask can store fuel of up to 60 GWd/MTU, and fuel with
an initial enrichment up to 5.0 weight percent U-235. Transnuclear
plans to submit an application to certify this cask design
for transport.
The Prairie Island ISFSI has two pads, each of which can
hold 24 casks. In December 2009 the Minnesota Public Utilities
Commission authorized the storage of up to 64 casks in
the Prairie Island ISFSI, and in 2010 approved Xcel Energy’s
plan to expand the Prairie Island ISFSI to accommodate up to
35 additional casks to support the continued operation of the
two units until 2033/2045, which is when the renewed licenses
will expire for Unit 1 and 2, respectively. If both units operate
for 60 years, and all the spent fuel is stored in casks of a
similar cask design as is currently being used, then 64 casks
will be needed, and the ISFSI will need to be modified to support
that number of cask; however, that is not part of the license
renewal application.
At Monticello, Xcel has 10 NUHOMS 61BT systems loaded.
Approximately 30 storage systems are expected to be required,
and the facility has room to add up to 35 more if needed
when the plant is decommissioned. Monticello is scheduled
to place 10 HSMs on the ISFSI in mid-2013.
Coming Up
EnergySolutions
• Receive CoC/SER for HI-STORM 100 Amendment 9
• Submit new application for HI-STORM SUBTERRA-16
(2012)
• Submit new application for HI-STORM UMAX (2012)
NAC International
• Receive proposed CoC/SER for MAGNASTOR Amendment
3
• Submit revised MAGNATRAN application
Transnuclear, Inc.
• Receive final CoC/SER for NUHOMS Amendment 11
• Receive approval of NUHOMS Amendment 13
• Submit NUHOMS HD Amendment 2 (2nd quarter 2012)
• Submit RAI responses for TN-LC transport cask (April
2012)
• Submit Part 71 application for TN-40HT (2012)
• Submit 10 CFR 72.48 evaluation to allow the use of instrument
tube tie rods in the NUHOMS HD CoC
Constellation Nuclear
• Receive Calvert Cliffs ISFSI renewed license (2012)
Xcel Energy
• Receive review schedule for Prairie Island ISFSI renewal
NRC
• Issue an updated draft Standard Review Plan (SRP) for
dry cask storage systems, NUREG-1536 (March 2012)
• Issue an updated draft SRP for spent fuel storage facilities,
NUREG-1567
• Issue revised Standard Format and Content for Technical
Specifications, NUREG-1745
• Issue Federal Register notice to solicit formal comments
on regulatory licensing improvements (summer 2012)
• Issue a letter or generic communication regarding resolution
of the Regulatory Issues Resolution Protocol regarding
top nozzle and marine atmosphere stress corrosion
cracking
• Issue a response regarding secondary impacts in Part 71
applications
• Submit renewal application for the VSC-24 Certificate of
Compliance (May 2012)
Holtec International
• Receive final CoC/SER for HI-STORM Amendment 8
April 3, 2012 • 25 • StoreFUEL 13-164

Decommissioning Report
Decommissioning technical session at the RIC
From March 13 to 15, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
held its annual Regulatory Information Conference (RIC).
Included in the program was a technical session titled “Decommissioning
Planning, Including Funding Assurance: A
Discussion on Policies and Practices for Implementing the
Decommissioning Planning and License Termination Rules;
Regulatory Guides 4.21 and 4.22,” which discussed current
issues and policies associated with decommissioning in the
United States. The session was chaired by Thomas Fredrichs,
Sr. Level Advisor for Licensee Financial Policy, Division of
Inspection and Regional Support, NRC Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation; and James Shepherd, Project Engineer,
Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection,
NRC Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental
Management Programs.
Fredrichs presented “Decommissioning Funding Basics and
Looking Forward.” Fredrichs listed four steps for power reactors
to achieve reasonable assurance: certification, minimum
amount, methods, and report & update, as defined in 10 CFR
50.75(a). He discussed the basics of a decommissioning fund
status report: certification amount, trust balance, collection
schedule, assumptions, contracts, modification of methods,
and trust changes. Fredrichs mentioned the Decommissioning
Planning Rule that will take effect on December 17, 2013,
which will require new status reports of reactors and revised
decommissioning funding plans from materials licensees,
among other changes.
Shepherd presented “Decommissioning Planning Including
Funding Assurance,” which featured a discussion of Reg
Guide 4.22. Shepherd said the “essence of decommissioning
planning” was to, during operation, define the extent of contamination
through monitoring and sampling and then estimate
the cost of remediation. Then, the decision can be made
to remediate soon to limit financial assurance, or increase
financial assurance and remediate later. Shepherd also discussed
the forthcoming Decommissioning Planning Rule,
specifying that it will necessitate the minimizing introduction of
contamination, monitoring the site including the subsurface,
keep in decommissioning records, and update financial assurance.
Edward O'Donnell, Senior Geologist in the Division of Engineering
at NRC/RES, presented “Reg Guide 4.21 – Life Cycle
Planning for Decommissioning.” Reg Guide 4.21, which applies
to license applications and certifications submitted after
August 20, 1997, requires applications to describe how facility
design and operation will facilitate decommissioning and minimize
contamination of the facility, contamination of the environment,
and generation of waste, with the intent of avoiding
legacy sites. O’Donnell said a frequent question his office
received was how a licensee knows when they are “done.” He
said this was a matter of demonstrating compliance, which is
accomplished through sound engineering and science and by
applying the guiding principles of prevention, early detection,
and prompt correction.
Finally, Kevin O’Sullivan, Acting Branch Chief of the Division
of Materials Safety and State Agreements with the NRC’s
Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental
Management Programs, presented “The Rulemaking Process.”
O’Sullivan reviewed the mechanisms that can start the
rulemaking process and the steps of which the rulemaking
process consist. He said that public involvement is vital for
rulemaking to be successful. O’Sullivan said the Decommissioning
Planning Rule has followed accepted procedures and
included outreach to stakeholders.
Self-Employed
Many years ago, my friend worked for a large business. It was his
lifetime employment, but he wasn't happy there. He wanted to go into
business for himself. He saved his money and finally had enough so
that he could quit and start his own business.
A few years later, I was on vacation passing through the town where
my friend's business was located. I stopped by for a visit. I said to him,
"I heard that the first year is the hardest for a new business."
"Yeah, the first year was pretty rough, but we're doing pretty well
now. In fact, I'm getting to where I only have to work half a day."
"Wow! That's pretty nice! Maybe I should think about going into
business for myself."
"Yeah, and the nicest part of it is that it doesn't matter which twelve
hours you work."
StoreFUEL Subscription Details
StoreFUEL and Decommissioning Report is now published the first Tuesday of every month, 12 times a year, by The Ux Consulting Company, LLC (UxC). The cost of a one
year subscription is U.S. $1,600.00. StoreFUEL and Decommissioning Report presents information gathered through the activities of the publisher. Although great effort is
dedicated to show accuracy, data are sometimes obtained from sources believed by UxC to be reasonably accurate; therefore, no warranties, express or implied are made,
nor any liabilities assumed by UxC for the accuracy, effect or usefulness of any data contained in StoreFUEL and Decommissioning Report.
The Ux Consulting Company, LLC Phone: (770) 642-7745 Carlyn Greene
1501 Macy Drive Fax: (770) 643-2954 Managing Editor
Roswell, GA 30076, USA Internet: http://www.uxc.com/ carlyn.greene@uxc.com
For subscription information, please contact Shirley Rodrigues (shirley.rodrigues@uxc.com) at (203) 740-8947.
© 2012 The Ux Consulting Company, LLC, All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication is strictly prohibited.
April 3, 2012 • 26 • StoreFUEL 13-164

Planned ISFSIs Sorted by First Load Date
Licensee Vendor System Chosen Date Signed or
Announced
First Load
Dairyland – LaCrosse NAC MPC-LACBWR March 2008 April 2012
FirstEnergy – Perry Holtec HI-STORM 100 August 2007 2012
American Electric – DC Cook Holtec HI-STORM 100 Early 2008 July 2012
Constellation – 9 Mile Point Transnuclear NUHOMS 61BT Unknown 2012
DTE Energy – Fermi 2 Holtec HI-STORM 100 December 2007 2013
Southern Nuclear - Vogtle Holtec HI-STORM 100 Unknown 2013
Entergy – Indian Point 3 Holtec HI-STORM 100 Early 2009 2013
ZionSolutions – Zion NAC MAGNASTOR October 2010 2013
Progress Energy – Crystal River Transnuclear NUHOMS 32PT Unknown 2014 (est)
Entergy – Pilgrim Holtec HI-STORM 100 Unknown 2014
TVA – Watts Bar TBD TBD TBD 2014
Exelon – Clinton Reviewing bids Reviewing bids Not applicable 2015
South Carolina Electric & Gas – V.C.
Summer
Holtec HI-STORM FW February 2011
(announced)
AmerenUE -- Callaway TBD TBD Not Applicable 2016 - 2019
WCNOC – Wolf Creek TBD TBD Not applicable 2016 - 2019
FirstEnergy – Beaver Valley Transnuclear Unknown Unknown Unknown
2015
Planned ISFSIs Sorted by Licensee
Licensee Vendor System Chosen Date Signed or
Announced
First Load
AmerenUE – Callaway Not determined Not determined Not Applicable 2016 - 2019
American Electric – DC Cook Holtec HI-STORM 100 Early 2008 July 2012
Constellation – 9 Mile Point Transnuclear NUHOMS 61BT Unknown 2012
Dairyland Power NAC MPC-LACBWR March 2008 April 2012
Detroit Edison – Fermi 2 Holtec HI-STORM 100 December 2007 2013
Entergy – Indian Point 3 Holtec HI-STORM 100 Early 2009 2013
Exelon – Clinton Reviewing bids Reviewing bids Not applicable 2015
Entergy – Pilgrim Holtec HI-STORM 100 Unknown 2014
FirstEnergy – Beaver Valley Transnuclear Unknown Unknown Unknown
FirstEnergy – Perry Holtec HI-STORM 100 August 2007 2012
Progress Energy – Crystal River Transnuclear NUHOMS 32PT Unknown 2014 (est)
South Carolina Electric & Gas – V.C.
Summer
Holtec HI-STORM FW February 2011
(announced)
Southern Nuclear - Vogtle Holtec HI-STORM 100 Unknown 2013
TVA – Watts Bar TBD TBD TBD 2014
WCNOC – Wolf Creek TBD TBD TBD 2016 - 2019
ZionSolutions – Zion NAC MAGNASTOR October 2010 2013
2015
April 3, 2012 • 27 • StoreFUEL 13-164

Dry Cask Storage in the U.S. by Vendor
Vendor System Type Reactor Type Utility Casks Assemblies
BFS/ES FuelSolutions VSC-24 ANO PWR Entergy 24 576
FuelSolutions W150 Big Rock Point 1,3 BWR Consumers 8 441
FuelSolutions VSC-24 Palisades PWR Entergy 18 432
FuelSolutions VSC-24 Point Beach PWR FPL 16 384
Total BFS/ES 66 1833
DOE Foster Wheeler MVDS Ft. St. Vrain HTGR PS Colorado 1464
GNB Castor V/21 and X33 Surry PWR Dominion 26 558
Holtec HI-STAR MPC-68 Dresden BWR Exelon 4 272
HI-STAR MPC-68 Hatch BWR Southern Nuclear 3 204
HI-STAR MPC-80 Humboldt Bay 3 BWR PG&E 5 390
HI-STORM MPC-24 ANO PWR Entergy 22 528
HI-STORM MPC-32 ANO PWR Entergy 16 512
HI-STORM MPC-32 Braidwood PWR Exelon 3 96
HI-STORM MPC-68 Browns Ferry BWR TVA 30 2040
HI-STORM MPC-32 Byron PWR Exelon 7 224
HI-STORM MPC-68 Columbia BWR Energy Northwest 27 1836
HI-STORM MPC-32 Comanche Peak PWR Luminant 3 96
HI-STORM MPC-32 Diablo Canyon PWR PG&E 23 736
HI-STORM MPC-68 Dresden BWR Exelon 45 3060
HI-STORM MPC-32 Farley PWR Southern Nuclear 15 480
HI-STORM MPC-68 Fitzpatrick BWR Entergy 15 1020
HI-STORM MPC-68 Grand Gulf BWR Entergy 17 1156
HI-STORM MPC-68 Hatch BWR Southern Nuclear 44 2992
HI-STORM MPC-68 Hope Creek BWR PSE&G 16 1088
HI-STORM MPC-32 Indian Point 1 3 PWR Entergy 5 160
HI-STORM MPC-32 Indian Point 2 PWR Entergy 14 448
HI-STORM MPC-68 LaSalle BWR Exelon 6 408
HI-STORM MPC-68 Quad Cities BWR Exelon 35 2380
HI-STORM MPC-68 River Bend BWR Entergy 15 1020
HI-STORM MPC-32 Salem PWR PSE&G 9 288
HI-STORM MPC-32 Sequoyah PWR TVA 32 1024
HI-STORM MPC-68 Vermont Yanke BWR Entergy 9 612
HI-STORM MPC-32 Waterford PWR Entergy 4 128
TranStor cask MPC-24E/EF Trojan PWR Portland GE 34 780
Total Holtec 458 23978
NAC NAC-MPC MPC-26 Conn Yankee 2,3 PWR Ct. Yankee 43 1019
NAC-MPC MPC-36 Yankee Rowe 2,3 PWR YAEC 16 533
NAC-UMS UMS-24 Maine Yankee 2,3 PWR Maine Yankee 64 1434
NAC-UMS UMS-24 Catawba PWR Duke 24 576
NAC-UMS UMS-24 McGuire PWR Duke 28 672
NAC-UMS UMS-24 Palo Verde PWR APS 94 2256
NAC-I28 NAC-I28 Surry PWR Dominion 2 56
Total NAC 271 6546
TN NUHOMS 61BTH Brunswick BWR Progress 8 488
NUHOMS 24P Calvert Cliffs PWR Constellation 48 1152
NUHOMS 32P Calvert Cliffs PWR Constellation 21 672
NUHOMS 61BT Cooper BWR NPPD 8 488
NUHOMS 24P Davis-Besse PWR FirstEnergy 3 72
NUHOMS 61BT Duane Arnold BWR FPL 20 1220
NUHOMS 32PT Fort Calhoun PWR OPPD 10 320
NUHOMS 32PT Ginna PWR Constellation 6 192
NUHOMS 12T INEEL PWR DOE 29 177
NUHOMS 32PT Kewaunee PWR Dominion 8 256
NUHOMS 61BT Limerick BWR Exelon 16 976
NUHOMS 32PT Millstone PWR Dominion 14 448
NUHOMS 61BT Monticello BWR Xcel Energy 10 610
NUHOMS 32PTH North Anna PWR Dominion 13 416
NUHOMS 24PHB Oconee PWR Duke 38 912
NUHOMS 24P Oconee PWR Duke 84 2016
NUHOMS 61BT Oyster Creek BWR Exelon 19 1159
NUHOMS 24PTH Palisades PWR Entergy 13 312
NUHOMS 32PT Palisades PWR Entergy 11 352
NUHOMS 32PT Point Beach PWR FPL 14 448
NUHOMS 24PT Rancho Seco 1 PWR SMUD 22 493
NUHOMS 24PTH Robinson PWR Progress 14 336
NUHOMS 7P Robinson PWR Progress 8 56
NUHOMS 32PTH Seabrook PWR FPL 6 192
NUHOMS 24PT1 SONGS 1 1,3 PWR Southern Cal Edison 18 395
NUHOMS 24PT4 SONGS 2, 3 PWR Southern Cal Edison 28 672
NUHOMS 32PTH St. Lucie PWR FPL 14 448
NUHOMS 32PTH Surry PWR Dominion 15 480
NUHOMS 52B Susquehanna BWR PPL 27 1404
NUHOMS 61BT Susquehanna BWR PPL 40 2440
NUHOMS 32PTH Turkey Point PWR FPL 18 576
TN Metal Casks TN-32 McGuire PWR Duke 10 320
TN Metal Casks TN-32 North Anna PWR Dominion 27 864
TN Metal Casks TN-68 Peach Bottom BWR Exelon 53 3604
TN Metal Casks TN-40 Prairie Island PWR Xcel Energy 29 1160
TN Metal Casks TN-32 Surry PWR Dominion 26 832
Total TN 748 26958
Westinghouse MC-10 MC-10 Surry PWR Dominion 1 24
1
One cask is storing GTCC w aste is in use. 3 All spent fuel from the shutdow n plant. Totals: 1570 61361
2
CY has 3 casks storing GTCC w aste; Yankee Row e has one and Maine Yankee has four casks
April 3, 2012 • 28 • StoreFUEL 13-164

Dry Cask Storage in the U.S. by Utility
Utility Reactor Type Vendor Cask System
Canister
Type
Total
loaded
Assemblies
Stored
APS Palo Verde PWR NAC NAC-UMS UMS-24 94 2256
Constellation Calvert Cliffs PWR TN NUHOMS 24P 48 1152
Constellation Calvert Cliffs PWR TN NUHOMS 32P 21 672
Constellation Ginna PWR TN NUHOMS 32PT 6 192
Consumers Big Rock Point 1 BWR BFS/ES FuelSolutions W150 8 441
Ct. Yankee Conn Yankee 1 PWR NAC NAC-MPC MPC-26 43 1019
DOE INEEL TN NUHOMS 12T 29 177
Dominion Kewaunee PWR TN NUHOMS 32PT 8 256
Dominion Millstone PWR TN NUHOMS 32PT 14 448
Dominion North Anna PWR TN TN Metal Casks TN-32 27 864
Dominion North Anna PWR TN NUHOMS 32PTH 13 416
Dominion Surry PWR GNB Castor V/21 and X33 26 558
Dominion Surry PWR NAC NAC-I28 NAC-I28 2 56
Dominion Surry PWR TN NUHOMS 32PTH 15 480
Dominion Surry PWR TN TN Metal Casks TN-32 26 832
Dominion Surry PWR W MC-10 MC-10 1 24
Duke Catawba PWR NAC NAC-UMS UMS-24 24 576
Duke McGuire PWR NAC NAC-UMS UMS-24 28 672
Duke McGuire PWR TN TN Metal Casks TN-32 10 320
Duke Oconee PWR TN NUHOMS 24P 84 2016
Duke Oconee PWR TN NUHOMS 24PHB 38 912
Energy Northwest Columbia BWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-68 27 1836
Entergy ANO PWR BFS/ES FuelSolutions VSC-24 24 576
Entergy ANO PWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-24 22 528
Entergy ANO PWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-32 16 512
Entergy Fitzpatrick BWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-68 15 1020
Entergy Grand Gulf BWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-68 17 1156
Entergy Indian Point 1 PWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-32 5 160
Entergy Indian Point 2 PWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-32 14 448
Entergy Palisades PWR BFS/ES FuelSolutions VSC-24 18 432
Entergy Palisades PWR TN NUHOMS 24PTH 13 312
Entergy Palisades PWR TN NUHOMS 32PT 11 352
Entergy River Bend BWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-68 15 1020
Entergy Vermont Yankee BWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-68 9 612
Entergy Waterford PWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-32 4 128
Exelon Braidwood PWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-32 3 96
Exelon Byron PWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-32 7 224
Exelon Dresden BWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-68 45 3060
Exelon Dresden BWR Holtec HI-STAR MPC-68 4 272
Exelon LaSalle BWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-68 6 408
Exelon Limerick BWR TN NUHOMS 61BT 16 976
Exelon Oyster Creek BWR TN NUHOMS 61BT 19 1159
Exelon Peach Bottom BWR TN TN Metal Casks TN-68 53 3604
Exelon Quad Cities BWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-68 35 2380
FirstEnergy Davis-Besse PWR TN NUHOMS 24P 3 72
FPL Duane Arnold BWR TN NUHOMS 61BT 20 1220
FPL Point Beach PWR BFS/ES FuelSolutions VSC-24 16 384
FPL Point Beach PWR TN NUHOMS 32PT 14 448
FPL St. Lucie PWR TN NUHOMS 32PTH 14 448
FPL Seabrook PWR TN NUHOMS 32PTH 6 192
FPL Turkey Point PWR TN NUHOMS 32PTH 18 576
Luminant Comanche Peak PWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-32 3 96
Maine Yankee Maine Yankee 1 PWR NAC NAC-UMS UMS-24 64 1434
NPPD Cooper BWR TN NUHOMS 61BT 8 488
OPPD Fort Calhoun PWR TN NUHOMS 32PT 10 320
PG&E Diablo Canyon PWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-32 23 736
PG&E Humboldt Bay BWR Holtec HI-STAR MPC-80 5 390
Portland GE Trojan PWR Holtec TranStor cask MPC-24E/EF 34 780
PPL Susquehanna BWR TN NUHOMS 52B 27 1404
PPL Susquehanna BWR TN NUHOMS 61BT 40 2440
Progress Brunswick BWR TN NUHOMS 61BTH 8 488
Progress Robinson PWR TN NUHOMS 7P 8 56
Progress Robinson PWR TN NUHOMS 24PTH 14 336
PS Colorado Ft. St. Vrain HTGR DOE Foster Wheeler MVDS 1464
PSE&G Hope Creek BWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-68 16 1088
PSE&G Salem PWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-32 9 288
SMUD Rancho Seco 1 PWR TN NUHOMS 24PT 22 493
Southern Cal Edison SONGS 1 1,2 PWR TN NUHOMS 24PT1 18 395
Southern Cal Edison SONGS 2 PWR TN NUHOMS 24PT4 28 672
Southern Nuclear Farley PWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-32 15 480
Southern Nuclear Hatch BWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-68 44 2992
Southern Nuclear Hatch BWR Holtec HI-STAR MPC-68 3 204
TVA Browns Ferry BWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-68 30 2040
TVA Sequoyah PWR Holtec HI-STORM MPC-32 32 1024
Xcel Energy Prairie Island PWR TN TN Metal Casks TN-40 29 1160
Xcel Energy Monticello BWR TN NUHOMS 61BT 10 610
YAEC Yankee Rowe 2 PWR NAC NAC-MPC MPC-36 16 533
1
Includes GTCC w aste 2 All the spent fuel from the shuttered Unit 1 Totals: 1570 61361
April 3, 2012 • 29 • StoreFUEL 13-164