ML19330B834

Sub-Agreement 2 Between or Dept of Energy & NRC Re Resident Inspector Programs at Facility

ML19330B834
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	01/04/1980
From:	Frank L, Stello V NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE), OREGON, STATE OF
To:
Shared Package
ML19330B820	List: ML19330B819 ML19330B823 ML19330B825 ML19330B827 ML19330B828 ML19330B831 ML19330B834 ML19330B836
References
NUDOCS 8008070044
Download: ML19330B834 (3)

Text

,

L ),. '.

+-

s

• ^

~ {-. _

a

- r i

SUS-AGREEMENT 2 BETWEEN THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND THE

.U.-S.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t

1 1

l.

Booggyg(yyg j

.)

e t

SUB-AGREEMENT 2 BETWEEN THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND THE U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION RESIDENT INSPECTORS A.

Scope This sub-agreement covers the relationship between the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Oregon Department of Energy concerning their respective resident inspector programs at the Trojan Nuclear Facility (Trojan) located 30 miles northwest of Portland, Oregon, and oper ted by Portland General Electric Company (PGE).

During its 1979 Session, the Oregon Legislative Assembly enacted and the Governor signed Senate Bill 641 which requires the Oregon Department of Energy (0D0E) to maintain an inspector at the site of a nuclear-fueled thermal power plant.

Under the resident inspector program established by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the NRC's Office of Inspection and Enforcement has stationed its own resident inspector at Trojan.

This agreement will specify the relationship between the two programs.

B.

Training NRC will use its best efforts to make available space in its inspector training courses to accommodate any inspector or alternates hired by ODOE to be stationed at Trojan.

C.

Inspection Manuals NRC will make inspection manuals available to OD0E.

D.

Authority The parties agree that the 000E inspector will not have authority to direct PGE employees to take any action.

Under Oregon law, this is within the exclusive State jurisdiction of the Director of the Oregon Department of Energy or in his absence, the Governor.

The inspector will make his recommendations to the Director through the Administrator, Siting and Regulation.

The Director of the Oregon Department of Energy or in his absence, the Governor shall not require the operators of Trojan to take action contrary to NRC requirements.

If ODOE finds it necessary to direct the operators of Trojan to take action, ODOE shall obtain NRC's prior agreement that such action does not have an adverse effect on plant or public safety.

Nothing in this sub-agreement is intended to restrict or extend the constitutional or statutory authority of either NRC or the State.

t f

d E.

ODOE Inspector's Duties The ODOE inspector's duties include the following:

1.

Observing reactor plant maintenance, engineering, quality assurance, security, emergency planning and operation to evaluate compliance with Federal and State safety standards.

Specific aspects to be observed include the control of reactivity, 4

radiological protection and control, water chemistry control, system repair and preventive maintenance, in-service inspections and periodic testing, and compliance with plant security programs.

2.

Advising the State of Oregon about the significance of any incident at the plant, and whether the corrective action taken is prompt and complete, by reviewing engineering system design, sequence of events, and trouble-shooting.

This will include discussion of the incident with the plant management and off-site engineering managers.

3.

Reviewing changes in plant operating and maintenance procedures and system modifications for conformance with State and Federal requirements, compatibility with system design, and effect on safe plant operations.

4.

Researching plant conditions or practices to support ODOE engineering evaluation of the safe operation of the plant, including identification of as-built conditions, determination of historical performance of equipment, and review of operating practices.

F.

Working Relationships 1.

The 000E inspector will not attempt to duplicate the regulatory activities of the NRC, but will rather attempt to supplement the NRC regulatory activities.

To the extent possible, the ODOE and NRC insoectors will arrange their schedules and inspection activities so that their on-site activities complement each other, in order to provide the widest possible coverage of the plant and its operations.

2.

The ODOE inspector will cooperate with the assigned NRC resident inspectors.

The NRC. inspector will reciprocate.

3.

To the extent possible, the 000E inspector may observe NRC audits, reviews, inspections, investigations, drills and meetings at Trojan. In the same way, the NRC resident inspector may observe 000E audits, reviews, inspections, investigations, drills and meetings at Trojan.

The parties recognize that there will be occasions when, because of the sensitive nature l

of certain meetings, it may be necessary for the parties to conduct interviews privately and separately.

4.

The ODOE is invited to all NRC exit interviews.

In the same way, to the extent possible the NRC inspector may attend ODOE exit interviews.

PGE will advise the ODOE and NRC inspectors of the time, date and location of all exit interviews.

G.

Contacts The principal NRC contact under this sub-agreement shall be the Director of NRC's Region V office.

The principal State contact shall be the Administrator of Siting and Regulation, Oregon Depart-ment of Energy.

H.

Effective Date This sub-agreement shall take effect immediately upon signing by the Director of the Oregon Department of Energy and the Director of the Office of Inspection and Enforcement of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and may be terminated upon 30 days written notice by either party.

FOR THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

/

J

.j Men'29d Lynn FFa'nk v

Director p

Dated at

'AW This day a FOR THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

/

frictor 5f6Tlo Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement Dated at W, 'YMe'--[W This % day of

, //fd l

l

e a

u 75167 Proposed Rules r e iantar Vol 44. No. 245 Wednesday. December 19. 1979 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER significent for the nuclear power plant in automatically require nuclear power contains notices to the putme of the question, that altemative compensating plant shutdown for lack of concurrence proposed issuance of rules and actions have been or will be taken in appropriate State and local regufations. The purpose of these notices promptly, or that there are other government emergency response plans

[e ys,

compelling reasons for license issuance, on the date specified in the rule unless s

2. For nuclear power reactors already an exemption is granted by that date. It making pnor to the adopt!cn of the final licensed to operate. If appropriate State would:

rules.

andlocal emergency response plans 1.Requre NRC concurrence in the have not received NRC concurrence appropriate State and local govemment NtlCt. EAR REGtJLATORY within 180 days after the effective date emergency response plans prior to COMMISSION of this amendment or by January 1.1981, operating license issuance. However, whichever is sooner, require the the Commission can grant an exemption 10 CFR Part 50 Commission to determine whether to from this requirement if the applicant require the licensee to shut down the can demonstrate to the satisfaction of Emergency Plannin9 reactor.If at the time the Commission the Commhslon that deficiencies in the AGENCY:U.S. Nuclear Regulatory finds that the licensee has demonstrated plans are not significant for the plant in Commission.

that the deficiencies in the plans are not question that altemative comper sating Acnom Proposed Rule.

significant for the plant in question, that actions have been or will be taken altemative compensating actions have promptly, or that there are other sus MARY:The Nuclear Regulatory been or will be taken promptly, or that compelling reasons for license issuance.

Commission, after considering the public there are other compelling reasons for No such operating license will be issued record available concerning licensee, continued operation, then the licensee unless NRC finds that appropriate State and local government emergency may continue operation.

protective actions, including evacuation preparedness. and the need to enhance If at that time the Commission cannot when necessary, can be taken for any protection of the public health and make such a finding. then the reasonably anticipated population safety,is proposing to amend its Commission will order the licensee to within the plume exporsure EPZ.

tegulations to provide an interim show cause why the plant should not be

2. For nuclear power reactors already upgrade of NRC emergency planning shut down. In cases of serious licensed to operate, require a licensee to regulations. In a few areas of the deficiencies. the order to show cause shut down a reactor Inunediately if proposed amendments, the Commission will be made immediately effective and appropriate State or local emergency has identified two alternatives which it the licensee would be required to shut response plans have not received NF.C is considering. In each instance both down the reactor.

concurrence within180 days of the altematives are presented in the

3. For nuclear power reactors already effective date of the final amendments following summary cf the proposed licensed to operate,if appropriate State er by January 1.1981 whichever is changes and in the specific proposed and local emergency response plans do sooner. However, the Commission may rule changes presented in this notice.

not warrant continued NRC concurrence grant an exemption from this

'Ibe finalrule wi!! nct necessarily and the State or locality do not correct requirement if the licensee can incorporate all of the first altematives or the deficiencies within 4 months of demonstrate to the satisfaction of the all of the second altematives.That is,in notification by the NRC of withdrawal Commission that the deficiencies in the some instances the first altemative may ofits concurrence, require the plans are not significant for the plant in be adopted and in others, the second Commission to determine whether to question, that alternative compensating altemative may be adopted. Further require the licensee to shut down the actions have been or will be taken altematives may be adopted as a result reactor. Shut down may not be required promptly, or that there are other of consideration of public comments, if the Commission finds that the licensee compelling reasons for continued In one alternative (Alternative A), the has demon:trated that the denciencies operation. If there is no concurrence, proposed rule change would not in the plan are not significant for the and the plant is shut down, then it must automatically require suspension of plant in question, that altemative remain shut down until such an operations for lack of concurrence in compensating actions have been or will exemption is granted or until appropriate State and local government be taken promptly. or that there are concurrence is obtained.

i emergency response plans on the date other compe!!ing reasons for continued

3. For nuclear power reactors already specified in the rule, even if the operation.

licensed to operate, require a license to Commission by that date has not yet If at this time the Commission cannot shut down a reactor if apprcpriate State determined whether the reactor should make such a finding, then the or local emergency response plans do be allowed to continue to operate. lt Commission will order the licensee to not warrant continued NRC concurrence l

would:

show cause why the plant should not be and the State or locality does not correct

1. Require NRC concurrence in the shut down. In cases of serious the deficiencies within 4 months of appropriate State and local ovemment deficiencies, the order to show cause notification by the NRC of withdrawal S

emergency response plans prior to will be made immediately effective and of its concurrence. However, the operating license issuance, unless the the licensee would be required to shut Commission can grant an exemption to applicant can demonstrate to the down the reactor.

this requirement if the licensee can satisfaction of the Commission that In the other alternative (Alternative demonstrate to the satisfaction of the deficiencies in the plans are not B), the proposed rule change would Commission that the deficiencies in the

75168 Fed:rd Registir / Vol. 44. N:. 245 / Wtdn:sday. D:c;mb;r 19, 1979 / Proposed Rul;s plan are not significant for the plant in proposed rulemaking described in this to be submitted to and concurred in by question, that alternative compensating notice responds to that request, and has the!!RC as a condition of operating actions have been or will be taken been prepared on an expedited basis.

license issuance.

promptly, or that there are other Consequently, considerations related to compelling reasons for continued the workability of the proposed rule may Under one alternative being operation. If thera is no concurrence and have been overlooked and signincant considered. the proposed rule would the plant is shut down, then it must impacts to NRC. applicants. Licensees, require a determination on continued remain shut down until such an and State and local govemments may and local emergency response plans operation of plants where relevant State exemption is granted or until not ha ve been Identified. Therefore, the concurrence is regained.

NRC particularly seeks com=ents have not received NRC concurrence.

In both alternatives the proposed rule addressed to these points and intends to Shutdown of a reactor would not follow would:

bold workshops prior to preparing a automatically in every case. Under the

4. Require that emergency planning final rule to (a) present the preposed other alternative proposal, shutdown of considerations be extended to rule changes to State and local the reactor would be required

" Emergency Planning Zones."

5. Require that applicants' and governments, utiities, and other automatica))y where the appropriate licensees' detailed emergency planning interested parties and (b) obtain State and local emergency response comments concerning the costs. impacts

• plans have not received NRC implementing procedures be submitted and practicality of the proposed rule, i.oncurrence within the prescribed time for NRC review.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission periods. However, the Commission

6. Clarify and expand 10 CFR Part 50 is considering the adoption of could grant an exemption to this Appendix E," Emergency Plans for amendments to its regulation. " Domestic requirementif thelicensee can Production and Utilization Facilities."

Licensing of Production and Uti]Ization demonstrate to the satisfaction of the DATE3: Comments should be submitted Facilities." 10 CFR Part 50, that would Commission that the deficiencies in the on or before February 19,1980.

require that emergency response plan are not significant for the plant in AoDRESSES: Interested p6rsons are planning Considerations be extended to question, that alternative compensating invited to subm!! wTitten comments and Emergency Pfanning Zones (discussed in actions have been or will be taken suggestions on the proposed rule NUREG-0396. EPA 520/1-78-CIS.

promptly, or that there are other changes and/or the supporting value/

" Planning Basis for the Development of compelling reasons. lf there is no impact analysis to the Secretary of the State and Local Government concurrence and the plant is shut down, Commission. U.S. Nuclear Regu!atory Radiological Emergency Response Plans then the plant must remain shut down Commission. Washington, D.C. 20555, in Support of Light Water Nuclear until such an exemptionis granted or Attention: Docket!::g and Service Power Plants J. Both the Commission until concurrence is obtained.

Dranch Co les of the value/i= act and EPA have formally endorsed the The NRC presently requires that te o ssion be e a d

e 23 c obe 281 L additton, t a

a o ca e eg c w

Commission's Public Document Room at Nuclear Regulatory Commission is the ant k

ments 1717 H Street. NW., Washington. D.C.

considering revising 10 CTR Part 50 te,s a d g

nd at local Public Document Rooms

• Appendix E. " Emergency Plans for respond to accidents that m:. ht have b gle copies of the valae/ impact Production and Utilization Facilities."in consequences beyond the site boundary, g

an lysis, related regulatory guides, and order to clarify. expand. and upgrade this way a s e e e ency sp nse the NRC staff analysis of the public the Commission's emergency planning p

coornents received on the Advance regulations.8 Prior to the conchssion of licensing process.

No' ice of Proposed Rulemaking may be this rulemakm, g proceeding, the To aid State and Icoal governments in ob?ained on request.

Commission will give special attention the development and implementation of

, O 4 FURTHEA INFORMATIoN CONTACT to emergency planning matters, adequate emergency response plans the F

.1:. Michael T. Jamgochian. Office of including the need for concurred-in NRC. in conjunction with several other S'andards Development. U.S. Nuclear plans, on a case-by-case basis in Federal agencies has attempted, on a Regulatory Commission. Washington, accordance with the modified cooperstive and voluntary bas!s. to D.C. 20555 (Telephone:301 4 13-5966).

adjudicatory procedures of10 CFR Part provide for training and instruction of StJPPLEMENTARY INFORM ATION:InJune 2. Appendix B. Under that Appendix. no State and local government personnel 1979. the Nuclear Regulatory new license, construction permit, or and to establish criteria to guide the Commission began a formal limited work authorization may be reconsideration of the role of emergency issued without Commission preparation of emergency response plans.* However. In the past, the NRC planning in assuring the continued consideration ofissues such as this.s has not esde NRC concurrence in State l

protection of the pub!!c besith and Both versions of the proposed and local emergency response plans a safety in areas aroun amendments call for State and local condition of operatiart for a nuclear facihties.The Comnu,d nuclear power government emergency response plans powerplant: the proposed rule would do ssion had begun this reconsideration in recognition of the so, as exp!ained above.

need for more effective emergency iTwoNac tartsoiaancedocument a.erelated to ibte proposed e :te chanse. -Draft Emergency planning and in response to reports Achon Level Cuide!.nes for Nsclear Power P' ants *

'NRC starY ruidance for the prepara5cn and issued by respon.sible offices of NUREG-c610 was published for interun use and evaluation of State and local emersency response government and its Congressional comment on September 111979. It is expected that plans leadins to NRC concurrence is contained in oversight committees.

a Analversion of the acdonIcvelswdebnes based NUREG 7s/nl. "Cuade and Checklist foe By memorandum dated Jaly 31.1979,, on the pr.bl;c comments received. will be (soued in Development and Evaluation of Stata andLocal early 1ssa la addition. in e.ufy 19e0 apraded sad Covercreent Radioteccal Emergency Response the Commission requested that the NRC reused acceptance enteria for evaluauns Plans in Support of Fixed Nuclear Fac;hhes" sta!f undertake expedited rulemaking on emusency pnparednen plan win be issued for

[ December t 2774) and supplement s chareto dated the subject of State, local. and licensee con:rnent and may be meluded in ce commission,s mb n 1977. The adequcy of ma suidance is reseden.

beins reevaluated by the staff and em um oa cmergency response plans. The

'44 nt 65049 (November 9.12'9L win consider codtrcation of the upgraded cnteria in 13e0.

Federal Register / Vol. 44, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 19, 1979 / Proposed Rules 75169 In issuing this rule.NRC recognizes planning was conceived as a secondary In addition. the Commission the significant responsibilities assigned but additional measure to be exercised acknowledges the important to the Federal Emergency hianagement in the unlikely event that an accident contributions made this year by various Agency (FEh!A) by Executive Order would happen.The Commission's official commenters on the state of 12148 on July 15,19~9. to coordinate the perspective was severely altered by the emergency planning around nuclear emergency planning functions of unexpected sequence of events that facilities, whose views are included as executive agencies. In view of FEMA's occurred at Three Mile Island.The part of the basis for these reguations.

new role.NRC a greed on September 11.

accident showed clearly that the The first of these was the report of the 1979, that FEMA should henceforth chair protect!an provided by siting and General Accounting Office issued the Federallateragency Central engineered safety features must be coincident with the n!I accident which Coordinating Committee for bolstered by the ability to take explicitly recommended that no new Radiological Emergency Response protective measures during the course of nuclear power plants be permitted to planning and Preparedness (FICCC). In an accident.The accident also showed operate "unless offsite emergency plans addition. NRC and FEhiA have agreed clesrly that on-site conditions and have been concurred in by the NRC." as to exercise joint responsibility for actions, even if they do not cause a way to insure better emergency concurring in State emergency response significant off-site radiological protection. CAO Report, EhiD-78-110.

plans prior to NRC issuance of operating consequences, will affect the way the

" Areas Around Nuclear Facilities licenses. During the next few months various State and local entities react to Should Be Better Prepared for NRC and FEMA will centinue to protect the public from dangers, real or Radiologier.1 En ergencies" (March 30, reexamine intra-federal relationships imagined, associated with the accident.

1979). In addition. Se NRC and responsibilities regardin8 A conclusion the Commission draws Authorization Bill for FY 1980 (S. 582) radiological emergency response from this is that in carrying out its would amend the Atomic Energy Act to planning. However, the Commission statutory mandate to protect the public require a concurred-in State plan as a does not believe that the reexamination health and safety, the Commission must condition of operation. The policy should serve as a basis for delay in the be in a position to know that off-site consideration that underlies this proposed rule change.

governmental plans have been reviewed provision would be consistent with the At several places in the proposed and found adequate.The Commission Commission's views of the health and amendments, the Commission refers to the roles of State and local governments, finds that the public can be protected safety significance of emergency within the framework of the Atomic planning. One of the Commission's Indeed the main thrust of the proposed rule is that prior concurrence in State Energy Act only if additional attention is House Oversight Subcommittees and local emergency response plans will given to emergency response planning.

developed a comprehensive document be a condition for heensing and The Commission recognizes that the on the status of emergency planning operation of a nuclearpowerplant.The increment of risk involved in operation which recommended that NRC,in a Commission recognizes that it cannot of reactors over the prescribed times in leadership capacity, undertake efforts to direct any governmental unit to prepare the impicmentation of this rule does not upgrade its licensees' emergency plans a plan, much less compel its adequacy.

constitute an unacceptable risk to the and State and local plans. House Report However, the NR public health and safety.

No. 93-n3. " Emergency Planning li nse on the ex:,C can condition a The Commission recognizes that this Around U.S. Nuclear Power Plants,"

stence of adequate proposal, to view emergency planning as 96th Cong.,1st Sess. (August 8,1979).

Wh'ile the State and local equivalent to, rather than as secondary The Report's recommendstions were governments have the primary to, siting and design in public protection, significant and its findings about the responsibility under their constitutional departs from its pnor regulatory need for improved emergency police powers to protect their public, the appmach to emergency phnning.The preparedness !cnd support to the NRC's Commission, under authority granted to Commission has studied the various own efforts to cssure that the public is it by the Congress, also has an proposals and beheves that this course protected. Finally, the President's important responsibility to protect the is the best available choice. In reaching Commission on the Accident at Three public in matters of radiological health this determination, the Commission is Mile Island has recently recommended cnd safety. Accordingly, with an guided by the findings ofits Emergency approved State and local plans as a I

understanding ofits limitations and with planni% Task Force which found the condition for resuming licensing. This a sensitivity to the importance of all need forintensive effort by NRC over Commission's Report and its supporting levels of govern =ents working together, the next few years to upgrade the Staff Reports on emergency responses the Commission will commit to seek and regulatory pmgram in this area.The and preparedness are indicative of apply the necessary resources to make Commission has also endorsed the many of the problems which the NRC its part in this venture work.

findings of the epa-NRC Joint Task would address in this rule. In this regard Force for policy development in this the Commission notes that the already Rationale for Change area. Implementation of these reports by extensive record made on emergency The proposed rule is a edica'cd on the the NRCin its staff guidance is planning improvements will be Commission's conside:

7dgment in necessary for the NRC to be as effective supplemented by the report ofits own the aftermath of the accident at Three as possible in assisting those SpecialInquiry Group and other ongoing Mile Island that safe siting and design.

governmental units and those utilities investigations, by any requirements of cngineered features alone do not responsible for execution of the plans.

the NRC Authorization Act, and by the optimize protection of the public health The Commission acknowledges the public comments solicited by this and safety. Before the accident it was input of over one hundred commenters proposed rule.

thought that adequate siting in to date on the proposal to adopt new The proposed rule meets many of the accordance with existing staff guidance regulations.The staff evaluation of these concerns discussed in the above coupled with the defense.in-depth comments is incorporated by reference mentioned reports and publications.

cpproach to design would be the herein== nart of the record in this However, the Commission notes that the primary public protection. Emergency rulemaking proceeding.

proposed rule is considered as an

2 70 Feder21 R:gister / Vol. 44. No. 245 / Wcdn:sday December 19. 1979 / ProposId Rults interim upgrade of NRC emergency

!= mediate action. Under the other (g)If the applicationis for n planning regulations and,in essence, alternative (Alternative BJ, the licensee operating license for a nuclear power clanfies and expands areas that have would be required to shut down the reactor, the applicant shan submit been perceived to be deficient as a plant immediately in this circumstance.

radiological emergency response plans result of past experiences. Because the Unless and until an exemption is of State and local govemmental entities Commission anticipates that further granted, the licensee will not be allowed in the United States that are wholly or changes in the emergency plarming to operate the reactor.

partially within the plume exposure regulations may be proposed as more ne NRC contemplates that under pathway Emergency Planning Zone experience is gaiced with implementing Altemative A initial concurrence and (EpZ). as well as the plans of State these revised regulations, as the various subsequent withdrawal. If necessary, govemments wholly or partially within Three Mile Island investigations are would be noted inlocal newspapers.

the ingestion pathway EPZ.8 Cenerally, concluded, and as the results become Under Alternative B, public notice of the plume exposure pathway EPZ for available from efforts in such areas as any initial concurrence or withdrawal of nuclear power reactors shall consist of instrumentation and monitoring and concurrence would be made both in the an area about 10 miles in radius and the generic studies of accident models, these Federal Register and in local ingestion pathway EPZ shall consist of proposed rules n'ay require further newspapers. Notice in the Federal an area about 50 miles in radius.The modifications.Thus the proposed rule Register and in local newspapers will exact size and configuration of the EPZs changes should be viewed as a first step also be provided of any required surrounding a particular nuclear power in improving emergency planning.

suspension of operation, any request for reactor shall be determined in relation l

Publication of these proposed rule an exemption from this requirement, and to the emergency response needs and changes in the Federal Register any request that an operating license be capabilities as they are affected by such j

supersedes and thus eliminates the need exempt from the requirement for local conditions as demography, to continue development of the proposed concurred-in plans. Public comments topography, land characteristics, access i

i rule change to lo CFR Part 50. Appendix will be welcomed. If significant interest routes, and local jurisdictional J

E (43 FR 37473), published on August 23, in meeting with the staffis expressed, boundaries.The plcus for the ingestion 1978.regarding Emergency Planning the staff may hold public meetings in the pathway shall focus on such less j

considerations outside the Low vicinity of the site to receive and discuss immediate actions as are appropriate to j

Population Zone (LPZ).

comments and to answer questions.

protect the food ingestion pathway.

ne Commission is considering Accordingly,in the discharge ofits

2. A new $ 50.47 is added. Altemative whether construction permits which duties to assure the adequate protection versions of the first paragraph are have already been issued should be of the public health and safety, the presented.

reconsidered because of the emergency Commission has decided to issue p!anning considerations of this rule. For proposed rules for public comment. The

!W7 Emergency plans.

plants in operation. NRC teams are now proposed changes to 10 CFR 50.33. 50.47 (Alternative A:(a)No operating rr'eeting with licensees to upgrade and 50.54 apply to nuclear power license for a nuclear power reactor will bcensee. State and local emergency reactors only. However, the proposed be issued unless the emergency plans and implementing procedures.

Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50 applies to response plans submitted by the In developing these proposed rule production and utilization facilites in applicant in accordance with ! 50.33(g) changes, the Commission has general except as noted in the proposed have been reviewed and concurred in by considered the potential coissequences.

Appendix E. These propostls, the NRC.*In the absence of one or more social and economic, as well as safety, comments other official reports, and concurred-in plans, the applicant will of the shutdown of an operating nuclear views expressed at the public have an opportunity to demonstrate to power plant. Under both alternatives, workshops will be factored into the final the satisfaction of the Commissica that the substantive criteria to be applied in rule, which the NRC now anticipates def!ciencies in the plans are not evaluating whether or not a licenses will be published in early 1980, significant for the plant in question, that should be allowed to continue to Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of alternative compensating actions have operate the reactor are the same. Thus.

1954, as amended, the Energy been or will be taken promptly, or that both alternatives reflect the view that.

Reorganization Act of1974, and section there are other compelling reasons to while emergency planning is important 553 of title 5 of the United States Code, permit operation.] OR for public health and safety, the notice is hereby given that adoption of

[ Alternative B:(a) No operating increment of risk involve in permitting the following amendments to 10 CFR license for a nuclear power reactor will operation for a limited time in the Part 50 and Appendix E to 10 CFR Part be issued unless the emergency absence of concurred.in plans may not 50 is contemplated.

response plans submitted by the be undue in every case.

Copies of comments received on the applicant in accordance with I 50.33(g)

However, the alternative rule changes proposed amendments may be have been reviewed and concurred in by differ primarily in the course of action examined in the Commission's Public the NRC.8 An applicant may request an that would follow either non-Document Room at 1717 H Street. NW.,

exemption from this requirement based concurrence. lack of concurrence, or Washington. DC, and at local Public withdrawal of concurrence in relevant Document Rooms.

8 Emergency P!anning Zones (EPZs) are.liscuased State or local emergency plans. Under in WREGas. *Hannans Basis fonhe l

cne altemative (Altemative A) an order PART 50-DOMEST:C t.! CENSING OF E,"$f[c'j'$'nc'y"$ e "p'o'o',N'o, "*$p,,,,

l l

to show cause why the licensee should PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION of usht Water Nuclear Power Plants."

not shut down the plant may be issued FACILITIES 8NRC staff guidance for the preparation and in this circumstanee, but the order to show cause would not be made

1. Paragraph (g) of I 50.33 is revised to evaluation of State and tocal emersency response plans leadins to NRc concurrenc. is contained in read as follows:

WREC rs/111. "Culde and Checklist for immediately effective unless the Developreent and Evaluation of State and local Commission decided in the particular I $0.33 conter.ts of applications; general gveggologglEmarsenggPpase cases that the safety risks were information.

y (December s. ssrej and supp: seni s thereto dated sufficiently serious to warrant such March is, nn.

Federal Register / Vol. 44 No. 245 / Wednesday. December 19, 1979 / Prm,csed Rules 75171 upon a demonstration by the applicant been concurred in within ISO days of local government emergency response 8

that any deficiencies in the plans are not the effective date of the final plans do not warrant continued NTsC significant for the plant in question, that amendments or by January 1.1981, concurrence and such State orlocal alternative compensating actions have whichever is sooner, the Commission government fails to correct such been or will be taken promptly, or that will make a determination whether the deficiencies within 4 months of the date there are other co=peding reasons to reactor should be shut down.The of notification of the defects, the reactor permit operation. No such operating reacter need not be shut down if the in question will be shut dow.a.The license will be issued unless NRC finds licensee can demonstrate to the licensee may request an exemption from that appropriate protective acti ms, Commission's satisfaction that the this requirement based upon a including evacuation when met essary, deficiencies in the plan are not demonstration that any deficiencies in can be taken for any n asonab'/

significant for the plant in question, that the plans are not significant for the plant anticipated population within the plume alternative compensating actions have in question, that alternative exposure EPZ.]

been or wl!! be taken promptly, or that compensating actions have been or will (b) GeneraHy. the plume exposure there are other compelling reasons for be taken promptly. or that there are pathway EPZ for nuclear power plants continued operation.] OR (Alternative B: other compeHing reasons for continued shall consist of an area about to miles in If the plans submitted by the licensee in operation. However, unless and until radius and the ingestion pathway EPZ accordance with the subsection have this exemption has been granted by the shall consist of an area about 50 miles in not been concurred in by NRC within Commission, the plant shall be radius.The exact size and configuration ISO days of the effective date of this maintained in the shutdown condition.}

cf the EpZs surrounding a particular amendment or by January 1.1981.

(u) The licensee of a nuclear power nuclear power reactor shan be whichever is sooner, the reactor in reactor shall provide for the determined in relation to the emergency question will be shut down until the development, revision, implementation response needs and capabi!! ties as they concurrences have been obtained. The and mairenance ofits emergency i

cre affected by such local conditions as licensee may request an exemption from preparedness program.To this end, the demography, tcpography. land this requirement based upon a licensee shall provide for an characteristics, access routes, and local demonst ation that any deficiencies in independent review ofits emergency jurisdictional boundaries. The plans for the plans are not significant for the plant preparedness program at least every 12 the ingestion pathway shan focus on in question, that alternative months by licensee, employees, such less im=ediate actions as are compensating actions have been or win contractors or other persons who have appropriate to protect the food ingestion be taken promptly, or that there are no direct responsibility for pathway:

other compelling reasons for continued implementation of the emergency

3. Section 50.54 is amended by adding operation. However, unless and until preparedness program. The review shnll four new paragraphs (s), (t), (u) and (v).

this exemption has been granted by the include a review and audit oflicensee Alternative passages for paragraphs (s)

Commission, the plant shallbe dn2s. exercises, capabilities, and and (t) are provided:

maintained in the shutdown condition.}

precedures.The results of the review I 50.54 Conditions of IIconses.

(Alternative A:(t)If, after ISO days and audit, alo::g with recommendations following the effective date of these f rimprovements, shall,be documented.

e

+

+

+

(s) Each licensee who is authorized to amendments or January 1,1901,

1. {

afag p

e t,an ept vailab possess and/or operate a nuclear power whichever is sooner, and during the reactor shall submit within 60 days of operating hcense period of a nuclear at the plant for inspection for a period of five years the effective date of this amendment the power reactor the Commission (v) Within 180 days after the effective radiological emergency response plans determines that the appropriate State date of the final rules or by January 1, cf State and local governmental entities and local government emergency 1981, whichever is sooner, each licensee in the United States that are wholly or response plans do not warrant who is authorized to possess and/or partially within the plume exposure continued NRC concurrence and such operate a production or utilization pathway EPZ, as well as the plans of State or local government fails to correct facility shall have plans for coping with State governments whouy or partially such deficiencies within 4 months of the emergencies which meet the within the ingestion pathway EPZ.2 date of notification of the defects, the requirements of Appendix E of this Generally, the plume exposure pathway Commission will make a deternination Chapter.

EPZ for at riear power reactors shall whether the reactor shall be shut down 4.10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E,is consist of a, trea about to miles in until the plan is submitted and has again amended as foHows:

radius and thu ingestion pathway EPZ received NRC review and concurrence.

shall consist of an area about 50 miles in The reactor need not be shut down if the radius.The exact size and configuration licensee can demonstrate to the Appendix E--Emergency Phnning and l

cf the EPZs for a particular nuclear Commission's satisfaction that the Preparedans for Production and Ut31xation Facihun' l

power reactor shall.be determined in deficiencies in the plan are not relation to the emergency response significant for the plant in question, that I. Introduction needs and capabilities as they are alternative compensating actions have required bplicant fer a construction permit is Eachaa cffected by such local conditions as been or will be taken promptly, or that y I so.34(al to include in its demography, topography, and land there are other compelling reasons for j

characteristics, access routes, and local continued operation.] OR 8 NRC staff has developed three reselatory guides:

jurisdictional boundaries. The plans for

• (Alternative B:(t)If, after 180 days 28 ~h*'8"c7 M*nus for Nuclear Power the ingestion pathway shall focus on foHowing the effective date of these

(,*[c( # *,* M'."$#,",,*"[e"y'8 [L",'", Ni p

such less immediate actions as are amendments or after january 1,1981.

Cycle Facihties and Plants Ucensed Under 10 CFR appropriate to protect the food ingestion whicheveris sooner, and during the Parts so and Fo"; and NUREC-o6CDraft pathway.[Altarnative A:If the operating license period of a nuclear Eugency 14, vel Action Guidelines for Nuclear appropriate State and local government power reactor, the Commission

$",N*,(('pC'[/,7,I[',**

emergency response plans have not determines that the appropriate State or Footnotes conttnued on next paae

75172 Federal Register / Vol. 44. No. 245 / Wednesday, December 19, 1979 / Proposed Rules preliminary safety analysis report a offsite property; and the expected response, of an emergency to protect public health and l

discussion of preliminary plans for coping in the event of an emergency, of offsite safety withm the Emergency Planning Zones mith emergencies. Each applicant for an agencies] OR (EPZs).']

l cperating hcense is required by i So.34(b) to

[A!!arnative B: C. Protective measure to be

• C###'8#'/ M '"#708"#

i include in its final safety analysis report taken in the event of an accident wi$in the plans for coping with emergencies.

site beundary and within each EPZ to protect The applicant's emergency plans shall t

This appendix establishes minimum health and safety; procedures by which these contain, but not necess arily be !!mited to, the requirements for emergency plans for use in measures are to be carried out (eg. In the following elements: organization for coping attaining a state of emergency preparedness.

case of an evacustica, who authorizes the with radiation emergenciea, assessment These plans shall be described in the evacuation how the public is to be notifled action, activation of emergency organization.

preliminary safety analysis report and and instructed, how the evacuation is to be nott!Ication procedures, emergency facilities submitted as a part of the final safety carried out); and the expected response. In and equipment, training. maintaining analysis report. The potential radiological the event of an emergency,of offsite emergency preparedness, and recovery. The hazards to the public associated with the agenciesl:

applicant shall also provide an analysis of operation of research and test reactors are D. Features of the facility to be provided the time required to evacuate various secta considerably less than those involved with for onsite emergency first aid and and distances within the plume exposure nuclear power reactor. Consequently, the size decontamination, and for emergency pathway EPZ for transient and permanent of the EPZs for Research and Test reactors transportation of onsite individuals to offsite populations.

and the degree ;o which compliance with the treatment facilities:

A. Organization requitecents of this section and sections II.

E. Provisions to be made for emergency The organizadon for coping wa. h El. IV and V is necessary will be determined treatment at offsite facilities ofIndividuals radiol gical emergencies shall be desen, bed ou a case-by-case basis using Regulatory injured as a result oflicen. sed activities; including defhitions of authorities, Guide 2.5 as a standard for acceptance. State g,

og"6 resp nsibilities and duties ofindividuals and local government emergency response

,, j dir-oe assigned to licensee s emergency p!ans, which may include the plans of offsite d

organization. and the means of notification of support organizations, shall be submitted p,nsibil th nt Ian

mcy, such individuals in the event of an with the applicanti emergency plans.

and for other persons not employees of the emergency. Specifically, the following shall IT. The Prelbninary Safety Analysis Report licensee whose assistance may be needed in be included:

the event of a radiological emergency:

1. A description of the normal plant

'fhe Preliminary Safety Analysis Report G. Features of the facility to be provided to operating organizatien.

shall contain sufficient information to ensure ensure the capability for actuating onsite

2. A description of the onsite emergency the compatibility of proposed emergency pr tective measures and the capability for response organization with a detailed plans both for onsite areas and the EPZs with facility design features, site layout. and site facky reentry in order to mitigate the discussion of:

location with respect to such considerations consequences of an accident or. if

a. Authorities, responsibilities and du*ies of as access routes, surrounding population appropriate, to continue operation; the individual (s) who will take charge during distributions, and land use for the Emergency H. A preliminary analysis which projects an emergency:

t3e time and means to be employed in the

b. Plant staff emergency assignments:

1 Planninglones (EPZs).

notification of State and local governments

c. Authorities, responsibilities, and duties 8

As a minimum, the follow *ng items shall be described:

and the publicin the event of an emergency.

of an onsite emergency coordinator who shall A. Onsite and offsite organizations for A preliminary analysis of the time required to be in charge of the exchange ofinformation evacuate various sectors and distances with offsite authorities responsible for coping with emergencies, and the means for notdication. In the event of an emergency, of within the plume exposure pathway EPZ for coordinating and impelementing offsite persons assigned to tha emergency transient and permanent populations.

emergency measures.

3. A descriptian of thelicensee organizations; lif. The FinalSafety Analysis Report headquarters personnel that will be sent to B. Contacts and arrangements made and documented with local. State, and Federal The Final Safety Analysis Report shall the plant site to provide augmentation of the governmental agencies with responsibility for contain the emergency plans for coping with onsite emergency organization.

coping with emergencias, including emergencies.The plans shall be an

4. Identification, by position, of persons identification of the principal agencies, expression of the overall concept of within the licensee organization who will be

[ Alternative A: C. Protective measures to operation. which describe the essential responsible for making offsite dose be taken in the event of an accident within elements of advance planning that have been projections and a description of how these the site boundary and within each EPZ to considered and the provisions that have been projectior a will be made and the resulta protect health and safety; corrective made to cope with emergency situations. The transmitted to State and local authorities, measures to prevent damage to onsite and plans shallincorporate information about the NRC. FEMA and other appropriate emergency response roles of supporting governmental entities.

organizations ar,d offsite agencies. That

5. Identi5 cation, by positicn and function, Footnotes continued from last page information shall be sufficient to provide of other employees of the licensee with t 50.34 and t!ua Appendix for coptc3 with emergencies. Copies of the guides are evallable at assurance of Coordination among the special qualifications for coping with the Commission's Public Document Room. mf H supporting groups and between them and the emergency conditions which may arise. Other S:reet. NW., Washbgton, DC 2555. Copies of

licensee, persons with special qualifications, such as guides may be parchased from the Government

[ Alternative A:The plans submitted must consultants, who are not employees of the Pnnting Of5ce. tnformation on current prices may include a description of the elements set out licenses and who may be called upon for

$',dkf"(dns e{

l o

eg ory in Section IV to an extent sufficient to assistance for short-orlong-term

,y n,

dernonstrate that the plans provide emergencies shall also be identified.The Pubhcations Sales Manager,

• The size of de EPZs for a nuclear power pIsnt reasonable assurance that appropriate special qualifications of these persons shall sha!! be detennmed in relation to the emergency measures can and will be taken in the event be described.

response needs and capabilities as they are affected of an emergency to protect public health and

6. A description of the local offsite services by such local cen&uons as demography, safety and minimize damage to property to be provided in support of the licensee sopography. land characterf stics, access routes, and within the Emergency Planning Zones emergency organization.

local hns&ctional boundanes. Genere!!y. the plume (EPZs).8) OR 7.Ident fication of and expected assistance

[ Alternative B: The plans submitted must from appropriate State, local, and Federal g*l, ugh ter n c e,so&

Z a

include a description of the elements set out agencies with responsibilities for coping with radius and the tegestion pathway EPZ an area itt Section IV to an extent sufficient to emergenctes.

about 50 nules In radius. EPZs are discussed ta NilPIC-o39% The sire of the EPZ's for non-power demonstrate that the plans provide

8. Identificaticn of the State and/orlocal asetors shall be determined on a eseby. case reasonable assurance that apprcpriate of!Icials responsible for planning for, bas:s.

measures can and will be taken in the event ordering. notification of and controlling l

i

Federal Register / Vd. 44. N. 245 / W;dnisdty. D;c;mbir 19, 1979 Proposed Rules 75173 appropriate protective actions. including to the public within the plume exposure

a. Directors or coordinators of the plant evacuations when necessary.

pathway Emergency planning Zone. It is the emergency organization.

B. Assessment Actions applicant's responsibility to ensure that such

b. personnel responsible for accident

%e means to be provided for determinin8 Ns*re'q

'8 ent ers 1

e e of red onett terials sh D b E. Emergency Facilities and Equipment gR logi 1monit rms t s

described including emergency action levels Provisions shall be made and desenbed for that are to be used as enteria for determimng emergency facilities and equipment,

e. Repair and damage control teams.

the need for notification and participation of including:

E First aid and rescue teams.

local and State agencies and the Cbmmission

2. Equipment at the site for personnel

3. Local services personnel, s.g., local Civil and other Federal agencies. and the monitonng:

Defense, local law enforcement personnel,

""dI al emergency action levels that are to be used

2. Equipment for determining the magnitude

h. bedi di penons as criteria along with appropriate of and for continuously assessmg the release support p,,ou meteorologicalinformation for determining of radioactive materials to the environment; L Licusefs headquarters support when protective measures should be

3. Facilities and supplies at the site for

penonneg, considered within the outside the site decontamina tion of onsite individuals;

,QQe boundary to protect health and safety and

4. Facilities and medical supplies at the site ons for h prevent damage to property. The emeigency for appropriate emergency first aid treatment; conduct of yearly dri!!s and exercises to test action levels sha!! be based on in. plant

5. Anangements for the services of a the adequacy of timmg and content of conditions and instru=entation in addition to physician and other medical personnel implementing procedures and methods, to onsite and offsite monitoring. Rese qualified to handle radiation emergencies:

upcation ne d

or a d to ensure that emergency action levels shall be discussed

& Arrangements for transportation of and agreed upon by the applicant and State injured or contaminated individuls from the

{me{$orga ers nne a{ _,

a andlocal overnmentalauthorues and gite t treatment facilities outside the site 3g

, p shall spect5cally include participation by te we wt th a e an o A ra gements for treatment of off8ite personnel as desenbed above as well governmental authorities on an annual basis, individuals injured in support oflicensed as other State and local governmental C. Activation of Emergency Organization activities on the site at treatment facilities agencies. The plan shall also describe outside the site boundary; provisions for a joint exercise involving the The entire spectrum of emergency

8. One onsite technical support center and Federal, State, and local response conditions which involve t'e s!erting or one near. site emergency operation center organizations. The scope of such an exercise activation of progressively larger segments of from which effective direction can be given should test as much of the emergency plans the total emergency organization shall be and effective control can be exerdsed during as is reasonably achievable without involving described. The communication steps taken to an emergency.

full public participation. De!1nitive ciert or activate emergency personnel under

9. At least one onsite and one offsite performance criteria shall be estab!!shed for ssch class of emergency shall be descnbed.

commurications system. including redundant all levels of participation to ensure an Emergency action levels (based not ordy on power sources.This willinclude the objective evaluation. This joint Federal, onsite and offsite radiation monitoring communication arrangements for State, and local exercise shan be:

Information but also on readings from a emergencies, including titles and attematas

1. For presently operating plants, initially number of sensors that indicate a potential for those in charge at b.th ends of the withm one year of the effective date of this emergency such as the pressure in communication links and the primary and amendment and once every [ Alternative A:

containment and the response of the bachp means of communication. Where three years] or [ Alternative B: five years]

Emergency Core Cooling System) for consistent with function of the governmental thereafter.

notification of offsite agencies shall be agency, these arrangements will include:

3.For a plant for which aa operating desenbed. The existence, but not the details,

s. Provision for communications with license is issued after the effective date of of a message authentication scheme shallbe contiguous State / local governments within this amendment. initially within one year of noted for such agencies.

the plume exposure pathway Emergency the issuance of the operating license and D. Notification Ptocedures Plann;ng Zone. Such communications shall be once every [Altarnative A: three years] or tested monthly.

[ Alternative B: five years] thereafter.

1. Administrative and physical means for

b. Provision for communications with All training provisions shaU provide for notifying, and agreements reached with, Federal emergency response organizations.

formal critiques in order to evaluate the local. State, and Federal officials and Such communications systems shall be tested emergency plan's effectiveness and to correct agencies for the early warning of the public annually.

weak areas through feedback with emphasis and for public evacuation or other protective

c. Provision for communications between measures, should they become necessary, the nuclear facility. State and/or local on schedules, lesson plans. practical tralmng, and periodic examinations.

shall be described. This description shall emergency operations centers, and field includeidentification of the principal assessment teams. Such communications G. Maintaining Emergency Praparedness cfficials, by title and agencies, for the systems shall be tested annuaUy.

Provisions to be employed to ensure that Emergency Planning Zones '[EPZs).

F. Training the emergency plan, its implementing 7~ Provisions shad be desenbed for the procedures and emergancy equipment and y2arly dissemination to the public within the of mpfo sdre maintained up to date shall be

'up an e

g. y penodi j

plume exposure pathway EPZ of basic emergency plannmg information such as the drills, of radiation emergency plans to ensure that employees of the licensee are familiar 11 Recovery possibility of nuclear accidents, the potential human health effects of such r.ccidents and with their specific emergency response Criteria to be used to determir.e when to their causes, methods of notification. and the duties, and (2) the participation in the the extent possible, following an accident.

training and drills by other persons whose reent y of the facility is appropriate or when protective actions planned if an accident assistance may be needed in the event of a operation should be continuad.

occurs, as well as a listing oflocal broadcast radiation emergency shaU be desenbed. This network that will be used for dissemination tiinformation during an emergency.

shall include a description of specialized V. Implementing Procedures Initial trainir g and periodic retraining No less than 180 days prior to scheduled

3. Administrative and physical means, and programs to be pro.ided to each of the Isruance of an operating license.10 copies the time required, shall be desenbed for citerting and providmg prompt instructions

• following categoriet of emergency personnel:

each of :he applicant's detai!ed implementing procedures for its emergency plan shall be public within the plur's e7osure pathway PPZ aubmitted to NRC Headquarters and to the

'It is expected that the capability will be wtthus 15 minutes of tae notdicauon by the licensee appropriate NRC Regional Office: Provided provided to esseous!!y complete alerting of the oflocal and State of5cials.

that,in cases t*here the opersting license is l

l l

7S174 Federal Register / Vol. 44 No. 245 / Wednesday December 19, 1979 / Proposed Rules scheduled to Le issued less than 180 days FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 1 Board was aware that much of the after the effective date of this rule, such Benton F. Massell (Office of Regulations terminology of the regulation is common implementing procedures shall be submitted and Emergency Planning) Economic and legally recognized through its the e7! etivba cIce it Regulatory Administrauon, Room 7n2, condstexy we 6e Men i 50.34(v) with the revisefAppendix E, 2000 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

Commercial Code. Although language anc er licensees who are authorized to operate a 20461 (202) 254-7303.

Improvements were made to achieve nuclear power facility shall submit to copies

!ssued ia Washington, D.C., December 13, brevity and clarity, care was taken not each of the licensee's emergency plan

gg79, to alter legal concepts through stylistic implamenting procedures to NRC Headquarters and to the appropriate NRC F. Scott M change.

The Board notes that the revised Regional Office. As necessary to maintain AssistantAdralnistmtor. Regulatm.as and them up to date thereafter.10 copies each of EmergencyPlanning EcononucRegulatory material wa.s drafted to conform any changes to these imp!amenting Administmtion.

generally with the new part of procedures shall be submitted to NRC p m reassos rc.d is.27-ra sass ant Regulatbn J. Subpart C (Automated Headquarters and to the same NRC Re Clearing House Items) which the Board Office within 30 days of such changes.gional seno coog ese.es.u recently approved for public comment (Sec.161. Pub. L 83-703,68 Stat. 948 (42 (44 FR 67995). Only minor editorial U.S.C. 22o1):Sec. 201. as amended. Pub. L FEDERA1. RESERVE SYSTEM changes will be required to conform a 93-438,88 Stat.1242. Pub. L 94-79,89 Stal final version of Subpart C with the 413 (42 U.S.C. 5341).)

12 CFR Part 210 revised Subparts A and B.

Dated at Washington, D.C. this 13th day of This notice is published pursuant to December 1979.

[ Reg.J; Docket No. R-0266]

section 553(b) of Title 5. United States For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Samuel 1. Chilk, Co!!ection of Checks ano Other items Code, and i 232.2(a) of the rules of and Transfer of Funds procedere of the Board of Govemors.

Secretory of the Commission.

The propcsalis made under the p h roanaos rded 1s-ta-ra ass am]

ACENCY: Board of Covernors of the authority of sections 11 and is of the seno coca isso.ows Federal Reserve System.

Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 248 (J),

ACTION: Proposed rules.

(o)), which authorize the Board to DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

SUMMARY

By this action the Board promulgate rules governing the transfers proposes to clarify and simplify its of funds through Federal Reserve Banks.

Economic Regulatory Administration regulations on the collection of checks To aid in the consideration of this and other items and for wire transfers of material by the Board, interested 10 CFR Part 570 funds. It is not intended that any persons are invited to submit relevant data, views, comments. or arguments.

su s a e a s e ma e e

[ Docket No. ERA-R-79-54]

To implement its preposal, the Board j j g,

Staridby Gaso!!ne Rationing Plan forth in these regulatory provisions.

is considering amending Regulation J (12 CFR Part 210) as set fct:h below:

DATE: Comments must be received on or AGENCY: Economic Regulatory Administration. Department of Energy.

. bei re Febnicry 15,1980.

[ Reg.J)

ACTION: Notice of Additional Public ADDRESS: Comments, which should refer PART 210-COLLECT!ON OF CHECKS t Docket No. R-0260, may be mailed to AND OTHER ITEMS AND WlRE Hearing.

Theodore E. Allison, Secretary Board of TRANSFERS OF FUNCS

SUMMARY

On December 7,1979, the Governors of the Federal Reserve Economic Regulatory Administration System. 20th Street and Constitution Subpart A--Collection cf Checks and Other (ERA) of the Department of Energy Avenue, NW., Washington, D.C. 20551, items (DOE) issued a notice of proposed or delivered to Room B-2223 between see.

rulemaking and public hearings to 8:45 a.m. and 5:15 p.m. Comments 210.1 Authority, purpose, and scope.

receive comments on its proposed received may also be inspected at Room 210.2 Definitions.

Standby Gasoline Rationing Plan (44 FK B-1122 between 8:45 a.m. and 5:15 p.m.,

210.3 General provisions.

210.4 Sending items to Reserve Banks.

70799, December 10,1979). Public except as provided in section 281.S(a) of

• l*3 s

hearings are scheduled for Boston, MA, the Board's Rules Regarding Availability Re $e a eement: recovery by San Francisco, CA, Chicago, IL New ofInformation (12 CFR 261.8(a)).

210.6 Status, warranties, and liability of Orleans, LA and Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 1 Reserve Bank.

The purpose of this notice is to Lee S. Adams, Senior Attomey (202/

210.7 Presenting items for payment.

schedule a additional public hearing on 452-3594), Legal Division. Board of 210.5 Presenting noncash items for the proposed Standby Gasoline Governors of the Federal Reserve acceptance.

Rationing Plan in Seattle, WA.

System. Washington, D.C. 20551.

210.9 Payment.

DATES: Hearing January 3 and 4,1980, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:As part

$[r*or ca's !te n beginning at 9:30 a.m. Requests to speak ofits Regulatory Improvement Project.

210.11 Availability of proceeds of noncash must be received by December 28,1979.

the Board has reviewed the regulatory items: time schedule.

ADDRESSES: Hearing location:New framework for the collection of checks 210.12 Return of cash items.

Federal Building. 915 2nd Avenue, South and other items and for wire transfers of 210.13 Chargeback of unpaid items.

Auditorium (4th Floor) Seattle. WA funds that are set forth in Subparts A 210.14 Extension of time limits.

98174.

and B of Regulation J.The Board has Subpart B-Wire Transfer of Funds Requests to speak should be determined that, while substantive 210.25 Authuity, purpose, and scope, addressed to: Department of Energy, changes in the regulation were not 210.2s Definitions.

Attn: Janet Marcan,1992 Federal required. It was desirable to redrsit the 210.27 General provisions.

Building. 915 2nd Avenue, Seattle, WA regulation to clarify and simplify the 210.28 Media for transfer ite=s and 98174.

language. In redrafting Regulation J, the requests.