ML19209A151
| ML19209A151 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/20/1978 |
| From: | Gossick L NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Jamarl Cummings, Kelley J, Pedersen K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTOR & AUDITOR (OIA), NRC OFFICE OF POLICY EVALUATIONS (OPE), NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19209A143 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-43FR41100, RULE-PRM-7-1 NUDOCS 7910030018 | |
| Download: ML19209A151 (4) | |
Text
.-
A +,' 7 0v
- / p matcy V
UNf TE D STATES a
..'4 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMM!sslON
[
- Np,
3 W ASHIN GTON, 0. C. 20155 M
o l
00V 2 01973 MEMORANDUM FOR: Office Directors FROM:
Lee V. Gossick Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
PROCEDURES FOR DIRECT DISTRIBUTION OF AMENDMENTS TO NRC REGULATIONS TO LICENSEES AND OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS I
Many of the regulations issued by the NRC have a significant impact on a
NRC licensees.
Yet, despite publication in the Federal Register, some l-licensees are not aware of a regulation until long after it is in effect i
or the comment period has expired.
bhile the NRC has en occasion sent the affected licensees a copy of a new proposed or effective regulation by direct mailing to assure that they are aware of its issuance, we have not done this in most cases.
Recently the Chairman of an ANSI Subcomittee brought to our attention the fact that not all licensees were aware of certain amendments published last year to improve safety in the use of sealed radicactive sourcas that produce very high levels of radiation.
In order to assure that affected licensees are aware of proposed and effective amendments to i
NRC regulations, all proposed and effective regulations of a substantive nature will be mailed to affected licensees and other known interested persons and organizations such as standards writing groups, trade associations, and public interest groups. This actio~n is expected to result in a broader spectrum of public comments on proposed regulations, and better assurance of licensee awareness of and compliance with effective regulations. This action is also in keeping with E.0.12044,
" Improving Government Regulations," which in section 2(c) provides that agencies give the public an early and meaningful opportunity to participate in the development of agency regulations, including notifying interested parties directly and sending notices of proposed regulations to publications likely to be read by those affected.
Procedures for implementing the new policy are enclosed.
These procedures j
may be supplemented, as necessary, within the various offices.
. signed) WiUlam J, Ms
(
j Lee V. Gossick Executive Director for Operations En cl os,ure:. As. stated 1088 140 e
h
~
)
L
POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR DIRECT DISTRIBUTION OF PROPOSED AND EFFECT.IVE REGULATIONS TO LICENSEES AND OTiiER INTERESTED PERSONS POLICh l
A.
All substantive proposed and effective regulations will be mailed to affected licensees and other known intererted persons.
" Interested persons" includes, for example, standards writing groups, trade associa-tiens, trade publications likely to be read by affected licensees, public interest groups, persons who commented on a proposed rule, and other persons who have expressed an interest in the regulation.
B.
Comission papers recomending proposed or effective regulations will contain a statement that affected licensees and other interested persons will receive a copy of the amendment by direct mail.
C.
The task leader responsible for the development of a regulation will be responsible for designating the addressees to whom the rule will be mailed and coordinating the mailing of the rule.
The task leader, in coordination with other affected offices and the Division of Technical Information and Document Control (DDC)2,.will develop a list of licensees and other interested persons who will receive the regulation by mail.
I !n those cases where the amendment is considered minor and does not affect the public health or safety, or NRC's regulatory requirements e.g.,
inconsequential grammar, address, or title changes, the task leader should seek his/her Division Director's approval to forego the direct mailing in the interest of economy.
DOC, in its Distribution Services Bra [ich (ADM/DSB), has a number of mailing lists, and the task leader may elect to use one or more of these lists and add addressees to these lists as appropriate for the particular regulation in question.
. _ J088 141
~
_2 D. In the case of a regulation affecting Agreement State licensees, the Office of State Programs will be prov,ided 45 copies of the regulation to make available to Agreement States.
PROCEDURES 1.
Af ter the rule change appears in the Federal Register, the task leader is responsible for notifying the Chief, Distribution Services Branch (DSB), telephone number 27566, that a direct mailing of a regulation is to be made to affected licensees and known interested persons.
2.
The task leader is responsible for indicating in general to whom the regulation will be mailed (i.e., type of licensee and category of interested parties).
Manual Chapter 3203 and NUREG-550 describe some of the computerized mailing lists available. However, more lists are available through computerized classification sorting than are shown, so the task leader should ask DSB what lists are available. Offices may also establish other routine lists with DSB to facilitate mailings.
3.
If the mailing list involves NMSS licensees (radiographers, radio-pharmacies, mills, etc.) the task leader should obtain the mailing labels from the Chief, Source Data Automation Unit, NMSS, telephone number 74224.
For other licenses, contact the DSB.
4.
The task leader is responsible for reviewing and correcting the distribution list to assure that it is complete and accurate.
5.
The task leader should prepare NRC Form 20 and have it delivered, together with a camera ready copy of the regulation to be reproduced and 1038 142
=
. _ _ _ ~
--n-
the mailing labels, to the Publications and Graphir,s Branch (PGB),
Room P-040 in the Phillips Building.
Explain that the direct mailing of a regulation is to be made, how many' copies of the regulati'on will have to be printed, and complete the sections on printing, graphics, and photography on the NRC Form 20.
6.
Enter in the special instructions section on NRC Form 20 the following:
" Send one copy to (your name), and all others to Distribution Services Branch. Do not distribute until after calling (your name)."
If the regulation is to be sent as a self-mailer and not in an envelope, the special instructions should include the following: "Please print on the last page the NRC logo and frank and return extra copies to (your 6ame and mail stop)."
After receiving and checking a copy of the printed regulation,'}the 7.
task leader is responsible for notifying OSB to make the distribution.
l e
1038 143,,
me
=4 n-+-
--wo.e w----.e---
== = = - -.
Office Directors James J. Cummings, IA
-',. j Kenneth S. Pedersen, OPE
"*r James L. Kelley, OGC Sanuel J. Chilk, SECY Joseph ~I. Fouchard, OPA Carlton C. Kammerer, OCA Daniel J. Donoghue, ADM Howard K. Shapar, ELD Learned W. Barry, CON Edward E. Tucker, EE0 Norman M. Haller, MPA James R. Shea, IP Robert G. RIyan, SP Robert B. Minogue, 050 Clifford V. Smith, Jr. NMSS Harold R. Denton, NRR 9
Saul Levine, RES i
John G. Davis, I&E i
I i088 144 I..._ _[
4 8
/
ENCLOSURE G 1088 145
ABSTRACTS OF COMMENTS AND STAFF RESPONSES REQUEST TO FORM REVIEW BOARD TO REVIEW ALL REGULATIONS PRIOR TO ISSUANCE DOCKET NO. PRM 7-1
Contact:
J. Henry, SD June 1979 443-5946 bbh f4h 1
INTRODUCTION By letter dated July 19, 1978, Walter P. Peeples, Jr., President, Non Destructive Testing Management Association, petitioned the Commission to form a review board made up of responsible members of industry to review all perti-nent regulations and to clarify positions of the industry prior to issuance of all new regulations.
A notice of filing of petition for rule niaking was published in the Federal Register on September 14, 1978 (43 FR 41100), allowing 60 days for public com-ments.
Four letters of comment have been received in response to the notice.
Abstracts of the comments and responses by NRC staff are set forth below.
ABSTRACTS OF COMMENTS AND STAFF RESPONSES 1.
John I. Riesland, Rockville, Md.
COMMENT.
"I agree with the petitioner's reasons for the need to review regula-tions.
However, establishing a Commission review board is an unnecessary addi-tion to the increasing staff of the Commission and should not be employed to clarify industry positions prior to issuance of a regulation.
This staff func-tion or overview board would be expensive to the taxpayer, would add to the regulatory confusion. and may result in confifct of interest concerns."
STAFF RESPONSE.
The staff agrees that establishing a Commission review board is an unnecessary addition in the sense that there would be duplication of effort by the review board and recommendations on regulations can be obtained from affected licensees and other interested persons through invitations to comment.
COMMENT.
" Industry, through the ASME or similar organization, should estab-lish their own review board for this purpose.
Such a review board could then work through the ACRS to assure their concerns regarding regulations are ade-quately considered before the regulation is issued.
Regulatory Guides should be treated in the same manner."
1088 147
STAFF RESPONSE.
The staff takes no position on whether industry, through ASME or any other organization, should establish its own review board.
The NRC provides ample opportunity for all interested persons, including industry, to comment publicly on proposed and effective regulations.
Comments on proposed regulations and staff respontes to the coments accompany the effective regulation through the NRC's rule making proceedings and are con-sidered by the ACRS and others who may be involved in the NRC's decisionmaking process.
Regulatory Guides and proposed substantive changes in Regulatory Guides are cir-culated to an extensive list for public coment.
All public coments on such proposed changes are considered by the NRC's Regulatory Requirements Review Committee and Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards.
The NRC Office Director will not take action on the Committee recommendations until after they have been made publicly available.
2.
James H. Taylor, Babcock & Wilcox, LynchNrg, Va.
COM4ENT.
"...we believe that we could contribute significantly in the develop-ment of regulations governing NDE techniques. We would certainly consider active participation in a review group such as that advocated by PRM-7-1."
STAFF RESPONSE.
The staff welcomes public comments from any interested person who submits statements, information, opinions, or arguments in the manner stated in notices of proposed rule making.
As a matter of practice, we are placing this comenter, the other commenters, and the petitioner on mailing lists to receive copies of proposed and effec-tive regulations concerned with industrie.'. ~=diography, gauging, well-logging, and other aspects of non-destructive examination.
3 1038 148 g..
-ww--
+ow-em-+
h +e - w+ e a m -*
=w
se 3.
E. L. Thomas, Air Transport Association, Washington, D.C.
COMMENT.
"A few ATA member airlines do not believe the proposed review board would be productive. A majority of the ATA member airlines, however, feel that such a review board would be beneficial.
"We assume that such a review board would have to comply with the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
If such an Advisory Committee is established, we request that ATA member airlines be given an opportunity to participate so unique airline radiographic problems can be considered."
STAFF RESPONSE. The staff agrees that such a review board would be covered by the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
Procedures for establishing and continuing an advisory committee are set out in 10 CFR Part 7.
10 CFR 7.6(b)(2) requires that the membership of an advisory committee be fairly balanced in terms of the points of view rcpresented and the functions to be performed.
4.
David A. Bossen, Measurex Corp., Cupertino, California.
CGMMENT.
"It has been Measurex' experience that within the past few years there has been an increasing number of proposed regulations which affect users and manufacturers of by product materials.
Measurex submits that these recent regulations are unnecessary and are perhaps promulgated by individuals unfamiliar with the industry."
STAFF RESPONSE. The staff agrees that there has been an increasing number of proposed (and effective) regulations that affect users and manufacturers of devices containing nuclear materials.
This reflects the complexities resulting from increasing numbers of users of larger numbers of products.
In many cases, it is more effective to add a licensing requirement as a new regulation than it is to continue a requirement as a license condition on numerous licenses.
The staff, in developing a regulation, takes into account the necessity from the viewpoint of public health and safety, environmental concerns, and obeying 4
1088 l49
. = *.
antitrust laws and considers the costs and administrative ourdens of recordkeep-ing and reporting requirements.
Under NRC policies and procedures for seeking public comments on its regulations, the industry has ample opportunity to make the staff completely familiar with the industry and its positions prior to issuance of new regulations.
COMMENT.
"The affect of these unnecessary regulations is to place an unwarranted economic burden upon the economy. This unwarranted economic burden is a restraint to the industry in providing meaningful and gainful employment to American citizens and is a handicap to the industry in competi-tion abroad."
STAFF RESPONSE. The staff agrees only to the extent that a truly unnecessary regulation would place an unwarranted economic burden on the economy.
There are many checks and balances within the NRC to review both the necessity of regulations and the subsequent economic burdens on affected licensees, the NRC, and the public.
Proposed and effective regulations must be matters of public rule making proceedings.
Regulations can be adopted in effective form only by the Commission or the Executive Director for Operations (under dele-gated authority) with the advice and councel of professional and legal staffs of the NRC.
COMMENT.
"Furthermore, these unnecessary regulations have interfered with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's effectiveness in that they have detracted the Commission from its true role in regulating areas where they are needed, as in the case of radioactive source materials."
STAFF RESPONSE. The staff does not agree with this opinion.
The staff is not aware that any regulation issued to date has interfered with the NRC's effec-tiveness.
The NRC regulates various areas - health and safety, environmental protection, and antitrust - commensurate with national policies and legislation.
5 1088 i50
.e, Any interested person may petition the NRC to issue or amend its regulations to exercise greater or lesser regulatory controls over byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials, or other areas of atomic energy.
In addition, the NRC may, upon application of any interested person or upon its own initiative, grant such exemptions from the requirements of its regulations as it determines are authorized by law and will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security and are otherwise in the public interest.
6 1 'o o o i ). 4 l
l I)UU
-..