ML20030B840
| ML20030B840 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/13/1981 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8108240349 | |
| Download: ML20030B840 (11) | |
Text
.,.,
e a
s
..FRIGu h
0,
- f. 1- 'j Transcript of Proceedings
~
O f NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5,
i I
I l
l AFFIRMATION / DISCUSSION SESSION 81-30 (Open to Public Attendance) i August 13, 1981 l
1 f
f l
i s
1 1
i Pages 1-8
)
Prepart.d by:
i C. H. Br:,wn Office of the Secratary 1
8108240349 810813 PDR 10CFR PDR PT9-7
i.
l I
1.
1 l
(,.
i;,.
DISCLAIMER i
l l
This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on August 13, 1981 in the Commission's offices at 1717 H Street, N.
W.', Washington, D. C.
The meeting was open to public attendance and observation.
This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected, or edited, and it may contain inaccuracies.
The transcript is intended solely for general informational purposes.
i l
As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal or informal l
record of decision of the matters discussed.
Expressions of opinion in
[.
l this transcript do not necessarily reflect ficial determinations or 7,
l beliefs.
No pleading or other paper may be. filed with the Commission in Lj,.g any proceeding as the result of or addressed to any statement or argument (r..-
contained herein, except as the Commission may authorize.
. c. "
. a,:
~
l
- .r
~
Y.-
l
,. r 'y N
's~ (
l C ',
b i
l i
1 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2-
. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
l j
5 AFFIRMATION SESSION 81-30 l
6 (Open to Ftblic Attendance) l 7
l l
~ 8 j
9 10 l
Commissioners' Conference Room
~
l 3,
1717 H Street, N.W.
j Washington, D.
C.
I 12
~
l Thursday, August 13,.1981 13 The Commission met, pursuant to notice, at 3:35 p.m.,
3 4 l
I Nunzio J. Palladino, Chairman of the Commission, Presiding.
la, 16 PRESENT:
17 Chairman Palladino 18 Commissioner Bradford l
Commissioner Ahearne l
19 Commissioner Roberts l
20 ALSO PRESENT:
21 J.
Hoyle, Acting Secretary L.
Bickwit, General Counsel i
22 23 t
24 25 l
l
2 l
1 PROCEEDINGS CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Good afternoon ladies and f.
gentlemen.
This meeting is an Affirmation / Discussion meeting 4
of the Commission.
There are four items to be taken up this 5
afternoon, one of which is on-short notice, and when we get 6
to that one, we will have to get the Commission's permission l
l-7 to proceed on short notice.
l l
8 Mr. Hoyle, would you proceed and guide us through 9
these items.
10 MR. HOYLE:
All right, Mr. Chairman.
11 The first paper is SECY-81-449.
In this paper the t
12 Commission is being asked to approve publication of a final 1
i 13 rule that would clarify NRC jurisdiction policies and f'
regulations regarding byproduct source and special nuclear 14 materials in certain offshore waters.
15 I have affirmative votes from the four of you
,6 present, to approve this final rule.
Commissioner Gilinsky y7 is n t participatingin this matter.
May I have your affirmative 18 votes, please?
g I
(Chorus of ayes. )
i 20 MR. HOYLE: The second item is SECY-81-454.
21 The Commission is being asked to approve an order l
22 that would grant the General Public Utilities request that i
23 the management qualifications of GPU Nuclear be examined in 24 the re-start proceeding, rather than the Metropolitan Edison 25 Company.
The Order, as proposed by staff had also a triefing 1
0
1 schedule in it.
2 The votes on this item are as follows:
I have votes 3
from thc Chairman; from Commissioner Ahearne; from Commissioner 4
Roberts that on the first matter the Order could go forward.
5 This is changing the name from Metropolitan Edison to GPU 6
Nuclear.
Commissioner Bradford does not support that Order going 7
forward that way.
8 On the issue of the schedule, I huve Commissioners 9
expressing a preference to discuss that matter, and I have 10
'entatively scheduled a meeting next week to discuss the 11 scheduling portion.
Commissioner Gilinsky would not participate 12 on the issue of changing the name, if that is the direction the 13 Commission wishes to go on.
14 So I ask you whether you wish to affirm the votes 15 that you have expressed regarding the first portion of the 16 Order, that is, changing the name from Met Ed to GPU?
17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Aye.
yg COMMISSIONER ROBERTS:
Aye.
C MI N N PA M DINO:
Aye.
19 Y"
- E#
20 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, mine is -just the one that I noted on the vote sheet.
I just wouldn't have a Commission Order on an issue that could be s'cn to shade o
23 over on to the management qualifications issue until we actually conclude the proceeding.
,_to 1
l
!]
1 J
1 In the mean time, I have no objection to instructing 2
the Board and the Staff to go forward on an iterim basis 3
for their analysis, treating GPU as the end operating company, 4
but it just seemea to me a better tracitional technique for 5
the Commission to leave it alone until we approved whatever 6
final Order we may approve that would come at the end of t a 7
proceeding.
g CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: What is the affect of changing 9
the name by Order?
Doesn't that accomplish the purpose you 10 were seeking?
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, it certainly -- it 11 accomplishes a little more than the purpose.
12 MR. BICKWIT: Mr. Chairman, if we are going to have 13 a discussion of the matter, I would suggest that it be in g
closed session.
What you might consider doing is moving on to the other items and then, if you want to discuss the matter
,,LO at the end of the session, we could close the session.
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: What is your pleasure, to vote on it or ---
19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I would be just as willing 20 to go to the end and let Len then just discuss it.
23 CHAIRA1AN PALLADINO:
Okay.
We will bypass this 99 then and discuss it in closed sessics after we are through 23 with the other items.
24 MR. HOYLE:
All right, Mr. Chairman.
25 i
9 I
.h L
r 5
I 1
The next item scheduled on the Commission's agenda 2
is a proposed order regarding a petition to intervene in the 3
Philippines export matter.
4 The Commission is being asked in this Order to --
5 is asked to issue an order responding to an outstanding 6
petition to intervene in a proposed license to export low 7
enriched uranium to the Philippines.
8 The Chairman, Commissioners Ahearne and Roberts have 9
approved a draft Order which would deny that petition.
I 10 understand that Commissioner Gilinsky has some additional 11 questions on tha export itself, and would prefer to wait for 12 affirmation -- wait for action on this Order until he has had 13 a chance to review responses.
14 I understood prior to the meeting that perhaps Commissioner Bradford would prefer to hold over until 75 Commissioner Gilinsky felt more comfortable with the replies.
16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, I hadn't voted because 7
I did understand that Commissioner Gilinsky had requested a g
deferral.
19 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO: Well, I would propose that due to the fact that there is a sense of no particular urgency on 21 this side, that we hold it off for ---
22 e
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
May I ask two questions?
23 1
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Sure.
24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: There are two separate Orders, i
I 25 are there not?
l I
i i
I 6
1 COMMISSIONER ^ BRADFORD:
Yes.
2 MR. BICKWIT:
There is an Order and a license.
3 MR. HOYLE:
Yes.
4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
An Order and a license.
5 Well, can you -- can SECY at some point either 6
combine the two or separate the two, call i t " A" and "B" if 7
you like?
l 3
MR. HOYLE:
All righ?., sir.
9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Second, can the rest of us 10 find out what Commissioner Gilinsky's question er questions are, I 11 so that we can also be brought abreast of what the other 12 issues are?
13 MR. HOYLE:
Yes, sir.
I don't have those questions 14 here at the table, but I can get them and circulate them to 15 the other Comrissioners.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Fine.
16 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
And we would put this on, 17 hopefully, for next week.
18 MR. HOYLE:
I would tenatively put it on for next g
week, sir.
,0 Okav, the next item ia the add-on item, Mr. Chairman, 21 l
and I would ack you to vote a short notice.
22 l
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
All right.
l 23 l
In order to add the next item, it is necessary for 24 us to agree to act on this on less than one week's notice.
25 l
1 i
e is a
o 7
1 May I have your ---
2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
As soon as I know what it is?
3 I'm sure I will be glad to do it, but I'm not sure which one it s'
is.
5 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
It is SECY-476, staffing for 6
Commissioner Roberts' office.
7 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Yes, fine.
3 (Chorus of ayes.)
9 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
We have four " ayes."
10 MR. HOYLE: This one is SECY Paper 81-476 and it 11 involves a request for a 145B, determination, for two staff 12 members to have access to National Security Information and 13 Restricted Data prior to the completion of the security 14 j
investigation.
These two staff members would be employed l
in the office of Commissioner Roberts.
15 16 I have approvala from the four of you here present.
17 Commissioner Gilinsky is not participating in this matter.
M y I have you affirm your votes, please?
13 (Chorus of ayes. )
g MR. HOYLE:
That completes the item, Mr. Chairman, once through, if you want to return to the other item.
CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
Well, I wone'.er if at this point we can arrange to have the meeting closed so that we can 23 discuss SECY-81-454, 24 MR. BICKWIT:
I think you ought to ask the Commission j 25 i
t l
l l
l
F5 l
8 l
1 to vote.to close the-meeting.
-2 CHAIRMAN PALLADINO:
May I get a vote on closing the meeting.
l 4
i (Chorus of~ ayes.)
O MR. HOYLE: Could we recess for two minutes to clear 6
the room.
7 (Whereupon, the Commission recessed at 3:45 and 8
then proceeded into clos,ed session.)
9 l
10 11
-12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19-20 21
.I 22 I-23 24 25 t
l 1
.l
e i f ncy RULEMAKING ISSUE (Affirmation) l July 24, 1981 SECY-81-449 For:
The Commissioners From:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
NRC JURISDICTION C!ER ACTIVITIES IN CERTAIN OFFSH0kE WATERS Pur g e-To obtain Commission approval of a Federal Register notice announcing a final regulation to clarify NRC's jurisdiction vis-a-vis that of Agreement States over persons performing offshore radiographic, well-logging, and other operations using byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials.
Discussion:
Background
i On October 30, 1980, the Commission published in the l
Federal Register (45 FR 71807) a proposed rule that would clarify NRC's jurisdiction over persons using byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials in offshore waters beyond Agreement States' territorial waters.
(See SECY-80-365, 80-365A and 80-365B.) Additionally, tne proposed rule was sent to all the Agreement States and, by them, to their licensees.
Further, the proposed rule was discussed with the representatives of the Agreerent States at various meetings.
During the comment period, ncne of the Agreement States (including Texas and Louisiana), their licensees or NRC's licensees commented on the proposed rule. The Department of Justice was the sole commenter.
(Enclosure 2.)
It agreed with the proposal, and suggested several word changes to clarify the meaning of "of fshore waters," as well as several other changes to reinTorce these changes.
In essence, it suggested that " offshore waters" should be defined as "those waters beyond Agrc sent States' Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction ano above the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf," rather than, as defined in the a
. Dorian, OELD hf hmb M7 '
492-8690
O 4
I The Commicsioners proposed rule, "those waters beyond Agreement States' territorial waters and within the area of the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf."
After further discussions with the Department, with its concurrence (Enclovire 3), ws refined the definition it originally suggested to make c1:ar that " offshore waters" means "that area of land and water, beyond Agreement States' Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction, on or above the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf." As pointed out by the Department, and noted in the final rule (Enclosure 1),
this area is depicted on large-scale nautical charts of the United States published by the Department of Commerce, and people operating in it are well aware of the boundaries.
The Problem Shortly af ter the comment period ended, Louisiana and an iendependent consuitant notified us (Enclosure 6 and 7) that, though they agreed with the principal substantive provisions of the proposed rule (that is, that NRC has the requisite jurisdiction over persons in the defined l
offshore waters), nonetheless, they and many licensees were concerned about two minor procedural requirements the proposed rule would have imposed upon licensees.
Both requirements have now been changed, as discussed later. One would have required Agreement Sta,te licensees (working in the offshore area under the proposed NRC general license) to file NRC-241 forms to enable us to track their activities in order to perfonn inspecticns.
The second would have required them to apply for specific licenses af ter 180 days (measured cumulatively over a calendar year) of operating under the general license.
The Solution We (ELD, IE and SP) met with Louisiana on May 13, 1981, to resolve its concerns. At the meeting, we learned that it and Texas (which together have about 90% of the total U.S. offshore radiography) would new like to regulate in this area. After furcher discussions, Louisiana agreed to continue to perform inspections for vs.
(Louisiana I
is presently authorized to perfonn inspectioris for us under a so-called section 2741. agreement, discussed in the rule, more fully disci:ssed in Enclosure 3 of SECY-80-365, and set out in Appendix 2 of U.at enclo-su re. ) Texas agreed in principle to perform inspections, that is, we in fact have to negotiate a section 2741.
agreement with it. Additionally, we agreed to pennit
.4-The Ccmmissioners all the coastal Agreement States desiring to do so to perfom inspections on our behalf under section 2741.
agreements.
In light of these developments, we accommodated Louisiana's concerns by making two minor procedural changes to the rule.
First, with respect to the issue of NRC-241 forms, the final rule now p.ovides an option to the coastal Agreement States.
It requires these forms to be filed with us, unless an Agreement State is listed in the rule as agreeing to perform inspections for us under a section 2741. agreement.
Louisiana is the only State now listed in the rule because it already has the requisite agreement. However, California (which has an increasing amount of offshore radiography), as of this writing, has agreed in principle, like Texas, 20 negotiate a section 2741 agreement, further reducing our need to perform inspections. Moreover, we are discussing this option with the other States, and will provide a complete list in the rule as soon as we have the section 2741, agree-ments. Thus, the issues of offshore inspection and of the use of the NRC-241 fann have been resolved simul-taneously, not only allowing Agreement States to act as our surrogates in the offshore area, thereby simplifying our regulatory efforts, but also helping to avoid dual reporting, thereby removing additional Nperwork require-ments from licensees.
Se:ond, with respect to the 180-day issue, as presently dra 'ted, 9 150.20 grants a general license to a person with a specific license from an Agreement State to con-duct the licensed activity within non-Agreement States and limits the general license to 180 days, as previously described.
Presently, at the end of this pericd, the
. general license expires and the person needs a specific license from us to continue to engage in the activity in non-Agreement States.
The reason for obtaining such a license is described In the Matter of' Chem-Nuclear Systems, Inc., 10 NRC 865 (1979), namely, that long-term field operations should be controlled through specific licensing.
However, radiography operations in offshore waters are short tem and of a somewhat different nature than those on land (for example, radiography is performed on board barges laying pipe and moving back and forth between the shore, which is under an Agreement State's jurisdiction, and oil rigs in the defined offshore arN which is under our jurisdiction). Furthermore, simplifiea regulation is desirable in this area of dual licensing by coastal Agreement States and NRC. Therefore, a separate general license for offshore waters has been created.
It
4 The Commissioners is a modified version of the general license for activi-ties on land.
It allows persons operating in the offshore arca to do so under the general license without having to apply for a specific license after the 180-day period.
The specific licensing requirement can, of course, be reintroduced if experience makes this advisable.
Recommendations:
That the Commission:
(a)
Approve publication of the final rule (Enclosure 1) i that would clarify NRC jurisdiction, policies and regulations regarding byproduct, source, and special nuclear materials in certain offshore waters.
(b)
Note:
(1) Appropriate Congressional Committees will be informed of the rule.
(Enclosure 4)
(2) Coastal Agreement States, affected 1Wnsees, and other known interested persons w ~
receive a copy of the notice of final rulemaking by direct mail.
(3) A public announcement (Enclosure 5) will be issued when the final rule is filed with the 1
Office of the Federal Register.
(4) This rule is being submitted to OMB for review under the Paperwork Reduction Act, since it may extend an existing reporting requirement into a new area.
i Willi J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
Enclosures:
1.
Federal Register Notice of Final Rule 2.
Comment from Justice Department 3.
Agreement of Justice Department to Final Changes 4.
Congressional letters 5.
Public Announcement 6.
Letter from Louisiana 7.
Telegram from Mr. Roy Parker
i 4
The Comissioners l l
Commissioners' comments or consent should be provided directly to the Office of the Secretary by c.o.b. Morday, August 10, 1981.
Comission Staff Office comments, if any, should be submitted to the Cornissioners NLT August 3,1981, with an information copy to the Office i
of the Secretary.
If the paper is of such a nature that it requires adlitional time for analytical review and coment, the Commissior,ers and the Secretariat should be apprised of when comments may be expected.
This paper is tentatively scheduled for affirmation at an Open Meeting furing the Week of August 10, 1981.
Please refer to the appropriate Wekly Commission Schedule, when published, for a specific date and time.
DISTRIBUTION:
f Comissioners Comission Staff Offices f
Executive Director for Operations ACRS ASLBP Secretariat l
l l
l
4 4
-sur-4
'4 ENCLOSURE I t
4^
I
[7590-01]
i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
-10 CFR Parts 31 and 150 NRC's Jurisdiction Over Persons Using Byproduct, Source or Special Nuclear Materials in Certain Offshore Waters i
b AGENCY:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
i 1
ACTION:
Final rule.
SUttHARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is t. mending its regula-tions (1) to clarify that it has jurisdiction vis-a-vis Agreement States oter persuns using hyproduct, source, or special nuclear materials in cer-t tain offshore waters bounded by the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, (2) to recognize Agreement State specific licenses in an NRC general license cover-ing activities in these waters, and (3) to allow Agreement States to perform inspections and other functions for NRC in these waters, i
i EFFECTIVE DATE:
FOR FURTHER INFORitATION CONTACT:
Thceas F. Dorian, Esq., Office of the Executive Legal Director, U.S. Nuclear i
Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555 (Telephone:
301-492-8690).
L
\\
[7590-01]
, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORfiATI0ft:
The Problem Several incidents in the Gulf of Mexico involving actual or potential over-exposures to radiographers have disclosed to the Commission the need to clarify its jurisdiction vis-a-vis that of coastal Agreement States
- over offshore radiographic, well-logging, and other operations using byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials.
Licensing, regulatory, and enforce-ment problems have arisen because it has been unclear whether a person with a specific license from an Agreement State or from flRC, operating in off-shore waters, namely, in the area, beyond a coastal Agreement State's Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction (see 43 U.S.C.1301, et seq.) (that is, l
An Agreement State is a State with which f1RC has an agreement under section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act.
Section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act was enacted in 1959, to recognize the States' interest in atomic energy activities, to clarify the respective responsibilities of the States and the Commission under the Act, and to provide a statutory means by which the Commission can discontinue certain of its regulatory responsibilities with respect to byproduct, source, and special nuclear materials and by which the States can assume these responsibilities.
An agreement made pursuant to section 274b. carries out the basic Con-gressional intent that either the State or the Commission--but not both--should regulate a given atomic energy activity from the point of view of radiation protection.
One of the evils that Congress sought to avoid was " dual regulation." This means that, insofar as regulation of these materials by the State and the Comission is concerned, tne activities discontinued under the agreement will be regulated only by the State, and that the activities reserved by the Commission will be regulated only by the Commission.
1
e
[7590-01]
- 9 outside State boundaries which normally extend thrre miles or three marine leagues from the coastline), but on or above the Outer Continental Shelf, should be licensed and regulated by the Agreement State or by the Commission.
i The Comments On October 30, 1980, NRC publithed a proposed rule, in the Federal Register 1
(45 FR 71807) addressing the issue of jurisdiction including several concerns raised by Louisiana and Texas with respect to this issue.
During the comment period, the Department of Justice was the sole commenter on the proposed rule,** agreeing with the proposal and suggesting several word changes to clarify the concept of " offshore waters."
In essence, the Department sug-gested that " offshore waters" should be defined as those waters beyond Agreement States' " Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction and above the U.S. Outer l
Continental Shelf," rath,er than, as defined in the proposed rule, those waters beyond Agreement States' " territorial waters and within the area of the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf."
l The Submerged Lands Act (Pub. L. 31, 43 U.S.C. 51301, et seq.) was promul-gated in order to extend Federal jurisdiction and control to the submerged lands off the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf.
It deals, in pertinent cart, with the rights and claims of the States to the seabed and its resources Copies of ' comments are available for inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room at 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
Single copies may be obtained on request from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Con-mission, Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention:
Document Control.
-m
-n,
,c.
l
[7590-01]'
i o
i beyond historic State boundaries.
See House Report tio. 215, accompanying H.R.-4198, in 1953 U.S. Code Cong and Admin. News, at 1385.
The Commission has accepted the changes suggested by the Department of Justice, with some additional minor modifications discussed with it.
The l
modifications make clear tnat " offshore waters" include both the land and water areas, beyond Agreement States' Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction, on or above che U.S. Outer Continental Shelf.
Shortly af ter the comment period ended, Louisiana and an independent consul-tant notified the Commission ** that, though they agreed with the principal substantive provisions of the proposed rule (that is, that NRC has the requisite jurisdiction over persons in the defined offshore waters), none-theless, they and many licensees were ccocerned about two minor procedural requirementstheproposedrulewouldhaveimposeduponlicense$s.
The l
Commission learned that Texas was similarly concerned.
Both requirements have now been changed, as discussed later.
One would have required Agree-ment State licensees (working in the offshore area under the proposed NRC l
general license) to file NRC-241 foms. to allow T.he Commission to track l
their a.ctivities in order to make inspections.
The other would have required them to apply for specific licenses after 180 days (measured cumulatively over a calendar year) of operating under the general license.
Examination of the Jurisdictional Issue Three principles underlying the amendments should be made clear before a fuller examination of the jurisdictional issue.
First, the Agreement States
-[7590-01]
4 of Texas and Florida (on the Gulf of fiexico only) have Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction beyond the Federal territorial sea.
The Comission intends J
to recognize the jurisdiction of these States to the seaward limits of their seabed resources jurisdiction.
Second, the Outer Continental Shelf includes only the seabed underlying the sea beyond the limits of the Agreement States' seabed resource jurisdiction, not the superjacent water.
Third, the high seas begin at the limit of the Federal territorial sea and extend to another country's territorial sea.
After examining the issue of jurisdiction, the Commission has concluded that f1RC retains jurisdiction vis-a-vis coastal Agreement States over persons using byproduct, source, and special nuclear materials when these materials are used in the offshore waters previously described.
flRC's jurisdiction over persons using these materials extends seaward from the limit of the 4
States' jurisdiction, above the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, continues past the Shelf onto the high seas, and, in most instances, stops at another 4
country's territorial sea, as recognized by the United States.
This conciu-s!on is based on several considerations.
j i
The Comission's jurisdiction over persons using byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials is found in sections 81 and 82 (byproduct material),
62, 63, and 64 (source material), and 53, 54, and 57 (special nuclear material) of the Atomic Energy Act, as amended. ' These sections grant f1RC in rersonam jurisdiction, that is, jurisdiction over a person (when stating, "flo person may...").
[7590-01]
_s_
Until the tidelands and submerged lands dispute about the Outer Continental Shelf arose between the Federal Government and certain States, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) followed a personal, as opposed to a territorial, approach to offshore jurisdiction.
This allowed Agreement States, with AEC's acquiescence, to regulate their own citizens' offshore uses of materials within the purview of an agreement under section 34b. of the Atomic Energy Act (described in the footnote); in 1967, in light of the submerged lands controversy, this practice was changed in part because the Federal Government argued that things, such as oil drilling rigs, attached to the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf were subject to its exclusive jurisdiction; for the AEC, this meant that an Agreement State did not have jurisdiction to regulate possession and use of byproduct, source or special nuclear mate f als on sucii things as oil rigs in offshore waters, as previously described.
At the time of the submerged lands controversy, the AEC was negotiating a j
standard agreement with Louisiana pursuant to section 274b. of the Atomic Energy Act.
So as not to compromise the pending litigation between the Federal Government and Louisiana, the AEC and Louisiana also entered into a flemorandum of Understanding and an agreement under section 2741. of the Act.
t The flemorandum of Understanding, which is still in effect between NRC and Louisiana, states, in essence, that AEC (now NRC) retains regulatory author-ity over the disputed area. in the Gulf of flexico and that the agreement made pu uant to section 247b. of the Act shall not prejudice the position of eiu.er the United States or Louisiana in the pending litigation.
The agree-ment under section 2741. of the Act, which is also still in effect, invokes t
- [7590-01]
, the authority granted to the Commission under section 2741. of the Act to enter into agreements with States "to perfom inspections or other functions on a cooperative basis as the Commission deems appropriate." The agreement authorizes Louisiana to perfom certain inspections and other functions for and on behalf of the Commission.
This rule would allow Louisiana and f1RC to ter.inate the 11emorandum of Understanding and to enter into a revised agreement under section 2741. of the Act.
Tha Supreme Court in a series of cases has settled the Federal-State dispute over the Outer Continental Shelf in the Gulf of Mexico.
United States v.
Louisiana, 389 U.S. 155 (1967), 394 U.S. 1 (1969) (cited as the Texas Boundary Case), 394 U.S. 11 (1969) (cited as the Louisiana Boundary Case), and 404 U.S. 388 (1971) (also cited as the Louisiana Boundary Case).
It is now clear that the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act has placed the Outer Continental Shelf under exclusive Federal jurisdiction, extending the laws of the United States to the subsoil and seabed of the Shelf and to all artificial islands and fixed structures erected thereon (see 43 U.S.C.1331, etseq.).
It should be noted, however, thi; for some purposes State law is adopted as a surrogate for Federal law under the Act to tl ! extent that such State law is " applicable and not inconsistent with... other Federal laws."
43 U.S.C.1333(a)(2); Rodriguez v. _Aetna Casualty Co., 395 U.S. 352, 365 (1969); Union Oil Company v. Opoen. 501 F.2d 558, 561 (1974); Oppen v.
[7590-01]
o !
Aetna Insurance Co. 485 F.2d 252, 255, (1973).
It should also be noted that 1
the Act does not apply to the sea above the subsoil and seabed.
43 U.S.C.
1332(b).
It is thus clear as regards oil drilling rigs, for example, that NRC has jurisdiction over persons in offshore waters beyond an Agreement State's Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction using byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials on these rigs, for these rigs are attached to the Outer Continental Shelf and are considered fixed structures erected on the seabed.
'It is also clear that NRC has jurisdiction over persons in offshore waters beyond an Agreement State's Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction and above the Outer Continental Shelf using byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials on free-floating objects, such as lay barges or other vessels, or in offshore diving activities.
This view is based on the in personam jurisdiction argu-ment described before and supported by another argument.
Sections 274b. and 274d. of the Atomic Energy Act, under which NRC may either retain or discontinue certain parts of its regulatory authority, do not provide for discontinuance of the Commission's regulatory authority over byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials not "within a State".
- Thus, the Commission retains jurisdiction over persons using these materials and specifically licensed by the Commission or Agreement States when these persons are not within an Agreenent State.
This jurisdiction extends on the high
[7590-01]
9 seas seaward.from the limits of the States' jurisdiction, but normally stops when it would conflict with another country's territorial sea, as recognized by the United States.
Resolution of the Problem The General License Since the present problem is limited to incidents in offshore waters, and because the Commission has jurisdiction in these waters, it has extended its general licensing scheme to activities of specific. licensees of Agreement States in this land and water area.
It has done so in two compatible ways.
First, it has recognized Agreement State specific licenses in a new NRC general license (without a time limitation) covering activities in offshore waters.
(It should be noted, by the way, that NRC specific licensees cur-rently authorized to operate in offshore waters, of course, would not need to request a license amendment in order to continue to do so.)
Second, it has extended a reporting requirement (it already uses on land) to monitor the activities of these licer. sees--except that it would not impose this requirement when an Agreement State has an agreement with the Commission under section 2741. of the Atomic Energy Act to perform inspections for it.
The Commission believes that the regulation change will remove present ambiguities and go a long way toward providing administrative simplicity.
It.ierefore has broadened the scope of Parts 31 and 150 to provide for Commission regulatory authority in the fom of general licensing over l
l l
[7590-01]
, persons in offshore waters, namely, beyond Agreement States' Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction and on or above the Outer Continental Shelf.
As presently drafted, 99 31.6 and 150.20 grant a general license to a person with a specific license-from an Agreement State to conduct the licensed activity within non-Agreement States.
However, 915G.20 preseatly authorizes a person to engage in activities in non-Agreement States under NRC's general license for no more than 180 days (calculated cumulatively) in any calendar year.
Presently, at the end of th1s period, the general license expires and the person needs a specific license from the Commission to continue to engage in these activities in non-Agreement States.
The reason for obtaining such a license is described In the flatter of Chem-fluclear Systems, Inc.,
10 fiRC 865 (1979), namely, that long-tenn field operations should be con-trolled through specific licensing.
Operations in offshore waters, however, are short tem and of a somewhat different chvacter than those on land (for example, radiography is perfomed on board lay barges moving back ud forth between jurisdictions, i.e., between the shore and oil rigs far from the shore). Moreover, simplified regulation between flRC and Agreement States is desirable in this area.
Therefore, in response to the comments received, a new general license has been created for the offshore area.
It is a modified version of the general license for activities on land.
It allows persons operating in the offshore area to do so under the general license withcut having to apply for a specific license after the 180-day period.
[7590-01]
- s The NRC-241 Form As mentioned before, Louisiana questioned the need for Agreement State licensees (working in the offshore area under the NRC general license) to file NRC-241 forms, since similar forms are already filed with respect to its own inspections.
The Commission wanted to extend this requirement (presently used on land with respect to general licensees) to the offshore area to enable it to track the activities of its general licensees in order to make its own inspections. Af ter discussions with Louisiana, the Commis-sion has decided to continue to allow that State to perform inspections for NRC in the defined offshore area under the previously-describ.d 2741. Agree-ment and to update that Agreement.
Additionally, after discussions with tha other coastal Agreement States, the Commissior, has also decided to permit i
all these States to perfona instections for it under similar 2741. agreements.
commissicc In light of this development, the final rule now states that the requires the filing of the NRC-241 form, unless the licensee provides to the Agreement State that issued the specific license timely notification of its offshore activities and that State is listed in the rule as agreeing to perform inspections for NRC under a 2741. agreement.
Louisiana is the only State now listed in the rule because it already has the requisite agreement.
The rule will contain a complete list as soon as tne Commission has section 2741. agreenants with the other coastal Agreement States.
It is presently pursuing discussions with then toward that end.
Thus, the issues of off-shore inspection and of the use of the reporting forms have been resolved i
[7590-01]
, simultaneously by allowing Agreement States to perform inspections on NRC's behalf, thereby simplifying the Commission's reSulatory efforts and avoiding dual reporting for the defined offshore area.
Definitior p " Offshore Waters" it should be noted that the rule defines " offshore waters" as "that area of land and water, beyond Agreement States' Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction, on or above the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf" without specifying for each Agreement State the exact boundaries of these waters and the land area of the Shelf. The definition of offshore waters is designed to keep the pro-posed rule simple.
Aside from the fact that it is not feasible to draw cartographic lines in any regulation, it is unnecessary to do so.
The Supreme Court has decided the Federal-State dispute over the land areas of the Outer Continental Shelf and, as a matter of law, defined the necessary boundary lines.
Further, as a practical matter, the three-mile limit is depicted generally or large-scale nautical charts of the United States published by the National Ocean Survey of the Department of Commerce.
In addition, in the cases of Texas and Louisiana cited before, the Supreme Court defined the necessary boundary lines as a matter of fact.
Thus, in the case of Louisiana, for example, its jurisdiction over the seabed of the Shelf extends three nautical miles from its coastline; and, in the case of Texas, for exaraple (and the same is true for Florida), as a technical legal matter having to do with its admission as a State of the Union, its jurf s-diction over the seabed of the Shelf extends up to nine nautical miles from its coastline.
['i590-01] - Thus, the definition in the proposed rule is intended to cover, in an under-standable and simple fashion, the Commission's jurisdictica over persons operating beyond the Agreement States' nomal three-mile jurisdictional limit, just described, and using byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials on things, such as oil rigs, attached to the seabed of the Outer Continental Shelf as well as the Commission's jurisdiction over persons using these materials in diving activities or on free-floating objects, such as lay barges and other vessels, in the waters above the seabed of the Shel f.
It. should also be noted that the rule is focused on the Outer Continental Shelf area and not on the high seas beyond the Shelf.
Thus, beyond the Outer Continental Shelf, NRC will continue, as has been the case historically, its licensing authority over certain kinds of persons, such as the Navy using nuclear material on naval vessels, while Agreement States will retain their authority over other kinds of persons, such as, for example, those using nuclear materials on State-chartered research vessels.
In other words, the Comission acknowledges its present practice of regarding possession and use of nuclear materials on those high seas beyond the Shelf by certain citizens of littoral States as also subject to those States' regulatory authorities.
However, in light of the previous jurisdictional statement, the Commission reserves the right to alter or amend such practice at any time.
O
[7590-01]
. Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorgani-zation Act of 1974, as amended, and Sections 552 and 553 of Title 5 of the United States Code, the following amendments to Title 10, Chapter I, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 31 and 150, are published as a document subject to codification.
1.
The introductory paragraph of 5 31.6 is revised to read and the authority criteria for 6 31.6 is, as follows:
5 31.6 General license to install devices generally licensed in 5 31.5.
Any person who holds a specific license issued by an Agreement State author-izing the holder to manufacture, install, or service a device described in 6 31.5 within such Agreement State is hereby granted a general license to install and service such device in any non-Agreement State and a general license to install and service such device in offshore staters, as defined in 6150.3(f) of this chpter:
Provided, That:***
(Secs. 81,161b., 274, Pub. L.83-703, as amended, 68 Stat. 935, 948, 73 Stat. 688 (42 U.S.C. 2111, 220lb., 2021).)
2.
The title c? 10 CFR Part 150 is changed to read, " Exemptions and Continued Regulatory Authority in Agreement States and in Offshore Waters Under Section 274".
,y
-~
[7590-01]
. 3.
Section 150.1 is revised to read:
6 150.1 Purpose.
The regulations in this part provide certain exemptions to persons in Agree-ment States from the licensing requirements contained in Chapters 6, 7, and 8 of the Act and from the regulations of the Commission imposing require.
ments upon persons who receive, possess, use or transfer byproduct material, source, or special nuclear material in quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass; and to define activities in Agreement States and in offshore waters over which the regulatory authority of the Commission continues.
The provisions of the Act, and regulations of the Commission apply to all persons in Agreement States and in offshore waters engaging in activities over which the regulatory authority of the Commission continues..
4.
In 5150.3, a new paragraph (f) is added as follows and former paragraph (f) and subsequent paragraphs are relettered:
9 5 150.3 Definitions.
As used in this part:***
(f)
" Offshore waters" means that area of land and wai.er, beyond Agreement States' Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction, on or above the U.S. Outer Conti-a nental Shelf.
5.
A new neading is added after $ 150.5, to read as follows:
CONTINUED COMMISSION REGULATORY AUTHORITY IN OFFSH0RE WATERS 6.
A new 6 150.7 is added before the heading, "EXE!!PTIONS IN AGREEi1ENT STATES," to read as follows:
j
[7590-01]
, 4 5 150.7 Persons in offshore waters not exempt.
Persons in offshore waters are not exempt from the Commission's licensing and regulatory requirements with respect to byproduct, source, and special nuclear materials.
7.
Section 150.20(a) is revised to read:
5 150.20 Recognition of Agreement State licenses.
(a)
Subject to the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section, any person holding a specific license from an Agreement State where the licensee maintain: an office for directing the licensed activity, and at which radia-tion safety records are nomally maintained, is hereby granted a general license to conduct the same activity in non-Agreement States and a general license to conduct the same activity in offshore waters:
Provided, That the specific license does r.ot limit the activity authorized by either general license to specified installations or locations.
8.
The first paragraph of 5 150.20(b) is revised to read:
(b)
Notwithstanding any ' provision to the contrary in any specific license issued by an Agreement State to a person engaging in activities in a non-Agreement State or in offshore waters under the general licenses provided in j
this section, the general licenses provided in this section are subject to I
the provisions of 55 30.14(d), 30.34, 30.41, and 30.51 to 30.63, inclusive, of Part 30 of this chapter; 55 40.41, 40.51, 40.61 to 40.53 inclusive, 40.71, and 40.81 of Part 40 of this chapter; and SS 70.32, 70.42, 70.51 to 70.56 inclusive, 70.61, 70.62, and 70.71 of Part 70 of this chapter; and to the provisions of Parts 19, 20, and 71 and Subpart B of Part 34 of this chapter.
e
[7590-01]
, In addition, any person engaging in activities in non-Agreement States or in offshore waters under the general licenses provided in this section:***
9.
Section 150.20(b)(1) is revised to read:
(1)
Except as specified in paragraph (c) of this section, shall, at least 3 days before engaging in each such activity, file 4 copies of Form NRC-241 (revised), " Report of Proposed Activities in Non-Agreement States," and 4 copies of its Agreement State specific license with the Director of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspection and Enforcenent Regional Office listed in Appendix D of Part 20 of this chapter for the region in which the Agreement State that issued the license is located.
That Director may author-ize the licensee to begin the activity upcn notification by telephone of the licensee's intent to conduct the proposed activity under the general license:***
10.
Section 150.20(b)(2) is revised to read:
(2)
Shall not, in any non-Agreement State or in offshore waters, transfer or dispose of radioactive material possessed or used under the gencell licenses provided in this section, except by transfer to a person (i) spe-cifically licensed by the Commission to receive such material, or (ii) exempt from the requirements for a license for such material under 6 30.14 of this chapter;***
11.
Section 150.20(b)(3) is revised to read:
(3) Shall not, under the general license concerning activities in non-Agreenent States, possess or use radioactive materials, or engage in the
[7590-01]
l i I
~ activities authorized in paragraph (a) of this section, for more than 180 l
days in any ::alendar year, except that, tha general license in paragraph (a) l-concerning activities in offshore waters authorizes that person to possess or use radioactive materials, or engage in the activities authorized, for i
an unlimited period of time.
- 12. A new paragraph (c) is added to 5 150.20 to read as follows:
l (c) A person engaging in activities in offshore waters under the general l
l license provided for that purpose in paragraph (a) of this section need not l
file a Fonn NRC-241 (revised) under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, l
l Provided, That:
(1) at least 3 days before engaging in each such activity the person noti-fies the Agreement State that issued the specific license about the activity, including in the notification (1) a description of the activity, (ii) the location, (iii) the dates scheduled, (iv) a list of the sealed sources, or i
devices containing sealed sources, which will be possessed, used, installed, serviced, or tested, and (v) a description of the' type and quantity of radioactive material contained in each sealed source or device; and l
(2) the Agreement State that issued the specific license is listed in i
paragraph (d) of this section as having entered into an agreement to per-l fom inspections and other functions for the Comission.
13.
A new paragraph (d) is added to 9 150.20 to read as follows:
(d) The following Agreement State has entered into an agreement to perfom inspections and other functions for the Commission:
f
[7590-01]
O (Sections 150.1,150.3,150.7 and 150.20 are also issued under secs. 51, 53, 57, 62, 63, 81, 1610., 222, 223, 274, Pub. L.83-703, as amended, Pub. L.91-161, Pub. L.90-190. 68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 935, 948, 83 Stat.
444, C1 Stat. 575, 73 Stat. 688 (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2111, 22010., 2272, 2273, 2021); sec. 201, Pub. L.93-438, 88 Stat.1242 (42 U.S.C. 5841). )
Dated at this day of 1981.
FOR THE fiUCLEAR REGULATORY COMllISSI0ft Samuel J. Chilk Secretary of the Commission e
s'@
4-4 I
0 4
i l-
\\
l i
1 t
i l
t i
I f
l i
i e
EtiCLOSURE 2 i
L h
i I
r u.
>,r s
-q L_,ya g
9
U.S DepartmentofJustice Yazhington D.C. 20330 December 8, 1980 BCR MWR 90-4-03 Thomas F. Dorian, Fsq.
Office of the Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Tom:
Re:
NRC Regulations Governing Use of Nuclear Materials Above the Outer Continental Shelf Thank you for the opportunity to comment on your recent peoposed amendments on this subject.
They seem to me to accomplish your intended purpose.
There are three nrinciples which I may not have made clear in our conversations and which we believe could be mare accurately reflected on your proposal.
First, the States of Texas and Florida (on,the Gulf of Mexico only) have Submerged Lands Act j urisdiction beyond the territorial sea.
I believe from our discussions that you intended to recognize the nuclear jurisdiction of those states to the seaward limits of their seabed resources jurisdiction.
Second, the outer continental shelf is only the sea-bed underlying the sea bevond the limits o f the s tates ' seabed resource jurisdictic: not the sup<:rj acent water.
Third, the high seas begin at the limit of the federal (three mile) territorial sea and extend to another country's territorial sea.
They do not begin 9 niles off Texas and Florida nor do they begin at the seaward edge of the outer con-tinental shelf.
With these principles in mind, we would recommend a number of word changes in your proposal.
We do not believe that they affect your intention or result.
Rar.her than refer to columns and lines of text, I have keyed comments to numbers in the margin of the federal register draft, a copy of which is attached.
_DLtf e B.La5669373
4 2-December 8, 1980 Thomas F. Dorian, Esq.
1.
Delete " territorial waters" and substitute
" Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction" this will acknowledge Texas and Florida jurisdicF ion out to three leagues (nine nautical miles) even though t;.a territorial sea extends only three nau-tical miles.
2.
Delete "within the area" and substitute "above".
3.
Delete " territorial waters" and substitute "j uri s dic tion".
4.
Delete "begins outside these States' territorial waters off" and substitute " extends seaward from the limit of-state jurisdiction, above".
5.
We need to be nore specific about where the jurisdiction stops.
Nations may claim jurisdiction beyond their territorial sea for various purposes.
Under the con-vention on the territorial sea and contiguous zone, a nation may claim jurisdiction between 3 and 12 niles for customs and sanitation purposes.
Of course, nations have jurisdic-tion over their continental shelves out to the limit of their shelves under the convention on the Continental Shelf.
Customary interriational law recognizes the right of nations to claim exclusive jurisdiction over fishery resources out to 200 miles from their coasts which the United States has done through the Fishery Conservation and Management Act 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Likewise, the Third U.N. Conference on the Law of the Sea is about to propose a treaty recognizing i
significant jurisdiction of a coastal state out to 200 miles.
If the intention is to retain U.S. jurisdiction until reaching another countrv's territorial sea -delete " waters under another country's jurisdiction" and substitute "another countrv's
~!
territorial sea, as recognized by the United States."
It is our position of course, that where the statute is clear the jurisdiction of the United States may even apply to the actions of American citizens within the territory of a foreign nation.
6.
"than" should be 'that" 7.
Delete "in the Federal Government's favor"--
although accurate, this is not necessary to the point being made and may irritate coastal states.
8.
Delete "made the" and substitute "placed" and delete "part of the United States (43 U.S.C. 1332(a)]" -- as is, the language is a little too broad.
The " United States" is still bounded by the three mile territorial sea.
The outer continental shelf is merely an area over which we have extra-territorial jurisdiction.
3 1
,y
i s
I'..
[
Thomas F. Dorian, Esq. December 8, 1980 F
l-9.
Delete " territorial waters" and substitute "Sub -
merged Lands Act-jurisdiction".
i l
10.
Delete " territorial waters" and substitute "juris-diction".
11.
Delete "to the high seas" and substitute ("on the high seas seaward from the limits of state jurisdiction").
I think that this prevents any interpretation that the high seas
[
do not begin untti the edge of the continental shelf.
L l
12.
Delete "terri torial waters and within" and substi-tute " Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction and soove".
13.
Delete " territorial waters and within" and substi-tute " Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction and above".
14.
Delete "in the Federal Government's favor" again, l
just to avoid complaints from the states.
15.
Delete "about three miles from its coast" and substitute "three nautical miles from its coastliue."
i l
16.
Delete "about ten miles from its coast" and substitute "uo to nine nautical miles from its coastline".
17.
Delete "The definition of territorial waters above the seabed of the Shelf is also clear, coinciding with the U.S.,
three-mile territorial limit extending from the U.S. coastline.."
and substitute "The three-mile limit is depicted generally on large scale nautical charts of the United States published by the National Ocean Survey of the Department of Commerce.
18.
Following "high seas" insert "beyond the continen-tal shelf".
19.
Delete "with respect to the high seas" and substi-tute "beyond the continental shelf".
Actually as we construe your proposal, its sole concern is jurisdiction on the high seas, i.e.,
beyond the territorial sea.
20.
Delete " territorial waters and within the area of" l
and substitute " Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction and above".
21.
Delete " territorial waters and within the area of" and substitute " Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction and above".
L I-
.3 w
y. -,,
w
,,wr
,,-.,r,...-r-
,3.
e
.-c.-
+
, ~...
d 3
. Thomas F. Dorian, Esq. December 8, 1980 f
If you have questions about any of these comments, please give me a call.
Once again, we wish to thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely, Assistant Attorney General Land and Natural Resources Division
\\
\\.<
[c ' -
6 _%. _ _.,
By:
Michael W. Reed I
j Attorney, Marine Resources Section i
l I
I k
i t
4 4
(
6 4
7.-
,, - ~, -,.
,,r.
t 30, 1980 [ Proposed Rules 71807 hederal Cegister / Vol. 45. Nr. 212 / Thursday, Oct:ber
/
including several concerns raised by byproduct. source, and special nuclear Louisiana andTexas with respect to this approximately two fiscal periods
- materials in offshore waters beyond budgeted expenses. * *
- Agreement States
- territorial waters and I.icensing. regulatory, and issue.
- 10. Add a new I 965.44 to read.
within the area of the Outer Continental enforcement problems have arisen Shelf and (2) to recognize Agreement because it has been unclear whether a j $65.44 Contitbutions-The committee may accept voluntary State specific licmseda en NRC person with a specificlicense from an contributions but these shall only be general license coverity activities in Agreement State or from NRC, operating used to pay expenses incurred pursuant these waters.
in offshore waters beyond a coastal DATas: Comment period expires Agreement State's{erritorial water 3 to ) 9u48.Furthermore such contnbutions shall be free from any December 29,1980. Comments received (that is, outside State boundaries which encumbrances by the donor and the after December 29.1980 will be normally extend three miles or three committee shall retain complete control considered if it is practical to do so, but (marine league from the coastline assurance of consideration cannot be of their use.
- 11. Revise i 965.48 to read:
given except as to comments filed on nr Shelf). should Ilcensed and regulated before December 29.1960.
by the Agreement State er by the i ses 4e nesearch and development.
REssts-Interested penons are Commission.
The committee, with the approval of invited to submit written comments and After examining the issue of the Secretary, may establi.h or proside suggestions on the propsed jurisdiction, the Commission has for the establishment of production amendments or the supporting value.
cyncluded that NRC retains furisdict,on i
research, marketing research and impact analysis, or both, to the vis-a vis coastal Agreement States over development projects, and marketing Secretary of the Commission. U.S.
P'" ".s usmg byproduct. source. and promotion including paid advertismg Nuc! car Regulatory Ccmmission.
spectas nuclear materia!s when these designed to assist, improve, or promote Washington.D C.20555. Attention:
materials are used in offshore waters a
the.aarketing, distribution. and Docketing and Service Branch. Single beyond these States {t,erritorial water consurr.stion or efficient proAction of copiesof the value.lmpact analysis may NRC's jurisdiction our persons using tomatoes.The expenses of such pfojects be obtained on request from the Office these material egi s outside these n
shall be paid from funds collecteu of Executive Legal Director. Copies of States' territoria waters ofQhe U.S.
pursuant to l 965 42 or i 965.44.
the value.lmpact analysis and of the Outer Continental Shelf. continues past
- 12. Revise 1965 80(e) to read.
comments received by the Commission h
ma os nstan
- s. sto s a ter er j 965.60 inspection and coetsf6catfort p bli D c t
1 I t.
adummsMshunu N.W Washington. D.C.
conclusion is based on several le) The committee may recommend FOR FURTHER INFORM ATION COMTACT.
considerations.
and th-Secretary may require that no To
.Doia E The Commission's jurisdiction over handler rhall transport or cause the gg DI e persons using byproduct, source. or u
transportation of tomatoes by motor Regulatory Commission. Washington.
special nuclerar materials is found in schicle or by other means unless D.C. 20555 (Te ephone: 301-492-8690b sectior.,. 81 and 82 (byproduct material).
shipment is accompanied by a copy of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMt. TION:Several62.63 and 64 (scurce material), and 53.
the inspection certificate issued thereon, recent incidats in the Gulf of Mexico
- 54. and 57 (special nuclear materia!) of or such c'her documents as may be mvolving actual or potential the < tomic Energy Act, as amended.
required by the co...mittee. Such overexposures to radiographers disclos* These sections grant NRC m pe sonem a
certificates or documents shall be the need 9 clarify NRC's jurisdictio't jurisdiction, that is. jurisdiction os er a surrendered to proper authCies at viraMs that of coastal Agreement person (when stating. "No parson States over offshore radiographic. well-ma y * * * ").
such times and in such mantter as may 8
be designated by the committee with logging. and other operations using Until the :idelands and submerged that appros A of the Setretar'y.
byproduc:. source, or special nuclear
- nds dispute about the Outer m tw.- ro.a im.. q materials. T ne following discussion Continent s Shelf arose between the
,,m addresses the issue of lunsdictibn Feieral Gove-nment and certain States.
the Atomic Energy Commission ( AEC)
' ^8 ^a'"'"*d 58 * '*
- 9** * "h
- b'h NRC followed a personal, as opposed to a NUCLEAR REGULATORY
'5"$o$'oNl"$f[$*,
territonal. approach to offshore jurisdiction.Thts allowed Agreement COMMISSION on en.ci.a m in to mwen,ih, sun States. with AEC's acquiescence. to meerus m aronue nersy.%i..s to ci.nf> 19 10 CFR Parts 31 and 150 rnputn. m.mnaba.t.n or in. si.t...no th*
regulate their own citizens' offshore f mattrials within the puruew of commin = under the Aa.nd to prmde.
uses NRC's Juttsdiction Over Persons Using
.'.o'ntimme certam M it glaiory rnpoc.'bilif.e.
an agreement under section J"4b. of the M ** * " ' b
- h * C"* " *" * *
- Byproduct. Source and Special Nuclear Materialln Offshore Waters
.us r p.o i, b3pn,aoci..o,c
.no.p,osi 3,omic Energy Act { discussed in the d
na. r m ieri.1..no b,.hua the swe. c'*
footnote);in 1967,in light of tha Beyond Agreement States' Terr *torial
- mm. ibne rnpm..bennu An Ammnt made submerged sands Controversy. inis Waters purw.nt to ttion T45 c me avi the b.mc practice was changed in part because cug, mon i mmi th. wh., th, sw. or th, actNcy: Nuclear Reptatory Co**' mon-b.: nos bow.hoat mi.i.
- rwn the Federal Government argued that rI$(([n$,*((*o'n'7".$ N.I'$,$n.
thmgs. such as oil drt!!ing rigs. attached Commission.
' 4 to.soid wu dat twAne Ts. mee,to the Outer Contmental Shelf w ere action; Proposed rule.
subrect to its esclusive ; risdicM-for svMMmRv:The NWear Regulatory m.t m.,,rer u renon at ihe m.un.t. b, *.
Swe end comen.o... conc re.a. +..cnuna the AEC. this meant th an Agreen ent Commission (NRC) is considenne jy"7d*,'j*,s'jg,"l,*,.$*,,"*j State did not hase jurisdic:fon to a mendmg its regulatinns O) to danfy
~
regulate possession and use of
' hat it has junsd2ction vis-a.wis 3, r,,,v, won ~n b. % fed m S, ts, b> product. source or special nudear cami==
/,reement States over persons using
\\
5
-mm-,.mm..aw, r.
s
~
- 7180P, Federal Register / Vol. 45. Na 212 / Thursday. October 30, 1980 / Propos d Ruks materials on such things as oil rigs
- v. Oppen. 501 F.2d 558. 561 (1974); Oppen withi]the area of the Outer Continental outside an Agreement State's territorial
- v. Aetna Inscrunce Co. 485 F.2d 252. 255.
Shelf. As presently drafted, il 31.6 and w a ters.
(1973). It should also be noted that the 150.20 grant a generallicense to a At the time of the submerged lands Act does not apply to the se above the p-rson with a specific license from an controversy the AEC was negotiating a subsoil and seabed. 43 U.S.C.1332(b).
Agreement State to conduct the licensed standard agreement with Louisiana It is clear as regards oil dnlling rigs, activity within non. Agreement States. In pu*suant to section 274b. of the Atomic for example, that NRC has jurisdiction addition, i 15J.20 authorizes a person to Energy Act. So as not to compromise th, over persons in offshore waters beyond engage in activities in non-Agreement pendmg litigation between the Federal n Agreement State'(Ierritorial waters] States under NRC's general license for Covernment and Louisiana. the AEC using '.yproduct. source or special no more than 180 days in any calendar and Louisiana also entered into a nuclear materials on these r:e, for these year. At the end of this penod, the N
s Memorandum of Understanding and an rigs are attached to the Outer general license expires and the person 4')
agreement under section 2741. of the Continental Shelf.
would need a specific license from the jum.t is also clear that NRC has I
Atomic Energy Act.The Memorandum Commis ion to continue to engage in a
diction over persons in offshore these activities in rion. Agreement of Undcrstanding. which is stillin effe<.t i
between NRC and Louisiana, states. !n watera beyond an Agwement state s St.tes. The reason for obtaining such a essence, that AEC (now NRC) retains territorial water 3and within the area,of license is the same as that described In w
regulatory autharity over the disputed the Outer Continental Shelf using area in the Gulf of Mexico and that the byprodiact. source, or special nuclear gg,, gg,,yycf,,7 37,,,,,,
agreement made pursuant to section materials on free-floating ob ects, such Inc.10 NRC 865 (1979), namely that i
247b. of the Atomic Energy Act shall not as lay barges or other vessels, or in long. term field operations should be dice th f eith h'
offshore diving activities. This view is controlled through specific licensing.
nited States or u s ana in t e based on the in personam junsdiction it should be noted that the proposed pending litigation. The agreement under argument desenbed before and rule defines off:hore waters as those section 274i. of the Act, which is also supported by another argument.
waters beyond Agreement States, Secti ns 274b. and 274d. of the Atom g htonal waters and withil]the area of still in effect, invokes the authority granted to the Commission under Energy Act. under which NRC may trie U.S. Outer Continental S.. elf' section 274!. of the Act to enter into ei her retam or discontinue certain part.$
without specifying for each Agreement agreements with States "to perform fits regulat ry authority, do not State the exact boundaries of these,.
inspections or other functions on a provide for dist.ontinuance of the waters and the land area of the Shen.
cooperative basis as the Commission Cormnission s regulatory authority over The definition of orfshore waters is deems appropnate " The agreement byproduct. source. or special, nuclear designed to keep the proposed rule materials not within a State.'llius. the simple. Aside from the fact that it is not authorizes Louisiana to perform certain inspections and other functions for and Commission retains jurisdiction over feasible to draw cartographic lines in on behalf of the Commission.The persons specifically licensed by the any regulation, it is unnecessary to do proposed rule is not intended to affect nunisson or Agreement Statn us, g i i
- o. The Supreme Court has decided $
m either the Memorandum of these materials when these persons are the Federal Government's favo]r the Understanding or the agreement made n t within an Agreement State. Thi.
Federal-State dispute over theTand J
h jurisdiction extendQo the high seastbut d areas of the Outer Ccntinental Shelf under section 274i. of the Act.
n nnauya ps when, ould confet
- "" #Y ' urisdiction in it
,fmd. as a matter of!aw. defined the The Supteme Court in a.eries of necessary boundary lines. In addition. in cases has settle m the Federal-h Gosernment's favor he Federal. State
$n"e 'the present problem is limited to the cases of Texas and Louisiana cited dispute over the Ouier Continental Shelf incidents in offshore waters, and before, the Supreme Court defined the q
- n the Culf of Mexico. UnitedStates v.
because the Commission has jurisdiction necessary boundary lines as a matter of g
fact. nus, in the case of Lou,siana, for Lomsiana. 389 U.S.155 (1967). 3M U.S.1 n these waters. It proposes to extend its 9
i (1'm9)(cited as the Texas Doundary example, its j,urisdiction over the seabad generallicen*:ng scheme to activities of pof the Shelf extend (abo three f ;C-
\\
Case). 3M l' S.11 (19s)(cited as the specific licensees of Agreement States i Louisiana Boundary Case), and 4m U.S.
these waters. It would do so by (1)
_ fr m its@oasI]and,in th ase of Texas.
/
38a (1971)(also cited as the IAuisiana recognizing Agreement Stata specific for example, as a technical legal matter Boundary Case).
licenses in an NRC general license having to do with its admission as a It is now cicar that the Outer State of the Umon. its jurisdiction over Contmental Shelf Lands Act ha rmde] covering activities in these waters, and(2) extending a reporting te y
the Outer Continental She% art a the these licensees already use by NRC to t n niin from it6capThe derimtion h United States (43 U.S C.13J2(all under monitor their actisities. NRC specific o,erritorial waters aaose the seabed of exclusne Federal junsdiction U.S.C.
licensees currently authorized to oper. Q the Shelf is also clear. coinciding with 133ra;(1)). estendmg the laws of the in these offshore waters. of cours..
/the U.S. three-mile territorial limit United States to the rubsoil and seabed would not need to request a license extending from the U.S. coastline !n j
of 9e Shelf and to all artificialislands amendment in order to continue to do sum. the definition in the proposed rule avi fixed structures erected thereon (43 so.
is intended to cos er. in an U.S C.1333(a)(tll It should be noted.
The Commission believes that the understandable and simple fashion, the however, that for some purposes State proposed regulation change would Commission's junsdiction over persons law is adopted as a surrc' gate for remove present ambiguities and provide using beproduct. source. or special Federallaw under the Act to the extent umform regulation. It therefore proposes nuclean matenals on things. such as oil that such State law is " applicable and to broaden the scope of Parts 31 and 150 rigs, attached to the seabed of the Outer not inconsistent with * *
- other to provide for Commission regulatory Contmental Shelf as well as the Federal law s." 43 U.S C.1333(a)(2);
authority in the form of generallicensing Commission's junsdiction over persons Ra!ngues v. Aetna Cesualty Co. 395 vover persons in offshore waters beyond using these materials in divmg acti'.ities U S. 352. 365 (tW9); Umon Od Corr' pan Agreement StatesQrntonal waters and or on free floatmg objects, such as lay
-v-Federal Regl ter / Vol 45. No. 212 / Thursday. Octob2r 30.1980 / Propostd Rules 71809 barges and other vessels.in the waters
- 3. Section 150Li is amended to read; not limit the activity authorized by the license to specified installations or above the seabed.
IN PU'P*-
locations.
Finally,it should be noted that the proposed rule is focused on the Outer The regulations in this part provide Continental Shelf area and not nr. the certain exemptions to persons in i 150.20 [ Amended!
( Thigh seas,Thusfwith respect to t..e high Agreement Staks from the licensing
- 8. The first paragraph af i 150.20(b) is requirements contained in Chapters 6. 7 amended to read;
~ seagNRC wou!Tcontinue, as has been and 8 of the Act and from the '
f he case historically. its licensicg.
regulations of the Commission imposing (b) Notwithstanding any provisica to
~
authority over certain kinds of persons.
requirements upon perst.,ns who recetve.
the contrary in any specific bcense such as the Navy using nuclear material possess. use or transfer byproduct issued by an Agreement State to a on naval vessels, while Agreement material. source or special nuclear person who engages in activities in a States would retain their authority over materialin quantitles not suffir!ent to non-Agreement State or in offshore other kinds of persons such as, for f rm a entical mass and to define waters under a generallicense provided esample, those using nuclear materials
- ctivities in Agreement States and in in this section. the generallicense on State-chartered research vessels. In offshore waters over which the,,
provided in this section is subject to the other words, the Commission acknowledges its'present practice of regulatory authority of the Commission prowlsions of Il 30.14(d). 30 34. 30.41.
c ntinues. The provisions of the Act.
and 30.51 to 30.63, inclusive, of Pari 30 of regarding possession and use of and regulations of the Commission this chapter, il 40.41,40.51. 40.61 to agreement materials on the high seas by apply to all persons m, Agreement States 40.63 inclusive. 40.71. and 40.81 of Part the citizens of littoral States, which have and in offshore waters engagmg in 40 of this chapter, and il 70.32. 70.42.
. entered into agreements with the activities over which the regulatory 70.51 to 70.56 inclusive. 70.61. 70.62. ud Commission pursuant to section 274b. of authority of the Commission contmues.
70.21 of Part 70 of this chapter. and to the Atomic Energy Act, as subject to the
- 4. la i 150.3, a new paragraph (f) is the provisions of Parts 19,20. and 71 and regulatory authority assumed by such added as follows and former paragraph Subpart B of Part 34 of this chapter. In States pursuant to such agreements.
(f) and subsequent paragraphs are addition any person who engages in Ifowes er, the Commission reserves the relettered:
activities in non. Agreement States or in right to alter or amend such practice at offshore waters under a generallicense any time.
I 150.3 Definations.
provided in this section:
Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of As used in this part: * *
- 1954 as amended. the Energy (f)
- Offshore waters' means those i 150.20 (Amended) n ction 553 T t!
f the U it S*ates Code, notice is given hereby th g h','g*,.
"f,[8' am @ '. C-241(revised)is changed to read.
- 9. In i 150.20(b)(1), the title of Form
,n in the adoption of the following S the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf.
. Report of Proposed Actisities m Non-amendments to to CFR Parts 31 and 1 is contemplated.
I 150.5 [ Amended)
Agreement States or in Offshore Ib '
P ART 31-GENERAL DOMESTIC i1 to a
LICENSES FOR BY PRODUCT MATERIAL Continued Commission Regulatory 6 150.20 ( Amended)
Adority in OHshore Waters
- 10. Section 150.20(b)(2) is amended to
- 1. Section 31.6 is amended to read:
end:
- 6. A new I 150.7 is added before the l 31.6 General license to instatt devices heading "EXEMFIlONS IN (b) generaity licensed in i 31.5.
p i 4.b ACREEMENT STATF4." to read as (2) Shall not. in any non-Agreement State or in offshore waters. transfer or Any person who holds a general follows:
hcense issued by an AgreemeTt State dispose of radioactive material authorizing the holder to manufacture, i 150.7 Persona ln off shore waters not possessed or used under the general esempt.
license provided in this section except install. or service a device described in Persons in offshore waters are not by transfar to a person (i) specific !!y i 3t.5 within such Agreement State is hereby granted a generallicense to exempt from the Commission's licensing bcensed m the Commission to receive install and service such device in any and regulatory requirements with such matenal, er (ii) exempt from the non A'greement State or in offshore respect to byproduct. source. and requirements for a licen9' for such waters beyond Agreement States' s,,ecial ' clear materials.
m'aterial under i 30.14 of this chapter.
( [C Crrntorial waters and within the area o] rea. Sectio.1150.20(a)is amended to 7
d:
(Secs. 51. 53. 57,6:. si at.16to.. :::. :23 r4.
the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf:
Pub. L 83-703. as amended Pub. L 91-161.
Presided. That:
I 150.20 Recognition of Agreement state Pub L 90-190. 68 Stat. 9 9. 930. 911933. 935 UC '""
948. 83 Stat. 444. 81 Stat. 575. 73 Stat. Saa (42 ep ns d M C. m m :0 R 2092.:0 R 3 11.
PART 150--EXEMPTIONS AND paragraph (b) of this section. any person
- 201o. :: :. 22:3. 20:11. sec. 201. Pub. L 93-CONTINUED REGULATORY who holds a specific license from ar 43a. as Stat.1:4:(4:U.S.C.Sa4til Dated at washington.D c this':4th day of AUTHORITY IN AGREEMENT STATES eet tate w ere e censee AND IN OFFSHORE WATERS UNDER maintains an office for directmg the October.1960.
g g
licensed activity and at which radiation For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
- 2. The title of to CFR Part 1LO is safety records are normally maintained.
samuel j. Chilk.
changed to read. " Exemptions and is hereby granted a generallicense to SectvI3') o/the Commissica j
Contmued Regulatory Authonty in conduct the same actaity in non.
Agreement States and in Offshore Agreement States or in offshore waters; men e-mrru.n m..s...
Waters Under Section 274".
Provided.That the specific license does su.uno coce tswei-a
a b44
%y 4
= 4m M -@
d
- re 4
-e.e L
g +=
G ENCLOSURE 3 4
4
~
~
U.S. Department.-f Justice wanaron. o.c zosse February 20, 1981 1
MWR 90-4-03 Thomas F. Dorian, Esq.
. Office of the Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commiseion Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Tom:
Re:
NRC Regulations Governing Use of Nuclear Materials Above the Outer Continental Shelf Thanks for the opportunity to look over tce final draft of your proposed regulations.
It seems to incorporate all of our comments.
We would appreciate your keeping us in mind if you encounter questions of miritime jurisdiction in the futura.
Sincerely, Acting Assistant Attorney General Land and Natural Resources Division b
b
~
By:
Michael W. Reed Attorney, Marine Resources Section i
I aye 8.Lpsp69L7(o f
7.
T
.,. _..,e e-ww. _
eam am-
+ee
.-==*wwe-
..+ mew--=.-
=
e-
',0 0
ENCLOSURE 4 4
.. ~..
The Honorable Alan Simpson, Chairman The Honorable Richard L. Ottinger, United States Senate Chairman cc: Senator Gary Hart United States House of Representatives cc: Rep. Carlos Moorhead The Honorable Toby Moffett, Chairman United States House of Representatives cc: Rep. Joel Deckard The Honorable f* orris M. Udall, Chaiman Subconnittee on Energy and tae Environnent Comittee on Interior and Insular Af fairs United States I:ouse of Representatives Mas'iington, D.C.
20515
Dear fir. Chriman:
The Nuclear Pegulatory Connission (Do.C) is anending its regulations to clarify that it has exclusive.iurisdiction vis-a-vis Agreenent States over c rsons using hyproduct, scurce, or special nuclear natorials in certain o
offshore waters.
Several incidents in tne Gulf of i'exico involving actual or potential overexposures to radiographers disclose the need to clarify
(!RC's jurisdiction vis-a-vis that of coastal Agrecrent States over offshore radiographic, well-logging, and other operations using byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials.
1.icensing, regulatory and enforcment crablens have 2risan because it is unclear whether persons operating in offshore waters, beyond A3re'wnt States' Subnergad Lands Act jurisdiction (that is, outside Stata haundaries whicn nomally extend three nautical miles from the coastline), on or above the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, should be licensed and regulated 5y Jgree-nent States or by the Cornission.
After exanining the issue of jurisdiction, tha Connission has concluded that lip.C retains jurisdiction vis-a-vis Agreenent States over parsens using byproduct, sourca and snecial nuclear naterials in these offshore aa:ers.
As nore fully described in the enclosed Federal Register notice, the scope of ? arts 31 and 150 of T1tle 10 of the Code of Federal 7egulations has beca broadened to clarify that the Connission has regulatory authority over snecific licensees af Agreenent States in certain offshore uaturs.
As presently drafted, 55 31.G and 150.20 grant a genarsl license to a person with a specific licana froi an lgreenent Sate to coniuct the sane activity within non-Agrecuent States. The final rule extends this ;cneral license to specific licensees of ?.greenent States operating in the offshore aaters i
o...caql.
l t
.l.
.l..
.6.
so m ee.
I I
I i
i om g.
- e. mu m nam sacu am OFFICI Ai_ R ECO R D CCPY um e-nmo
The Honorable Morris K. Udall.
previously described.
It also permits Agreement States to perfom inspections for the Commission under Section 2741. of the Atomic Energy Act.
Sincerely, Howard K. Shapar Executive Legal Director
Enclosure:
Federal Register h'etf(J cc:
Rep. Manual Lujan A
1 i
4 4
4 d
e g
-+,
- ~ ~ _ -..._ __
.. ~.....
ENCLOSURE 5
m 3
t hI V i:
Public Announcement NRC CLARIFIES REGULATORY AUTHORITY IN CERTAIN'0FFSHORE WATERS The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is amending its regulations to clarify its authority to regulate the commercial uses of nuclear material in certain offshore waters.
-Specifically, the rule makes it clear that the NRC--and not coastal Agreement States--has the authority to regulate persons performing radio-graphic, well-logging and other operations involving the use of nuclear materials in offshore waters, be) d Agreement States' Submerged Lands Act jurisdiction, on or above the Outer Continental Shelf. There are.26 States-which, by agreement, have assumed part of the Commission's responsibility for regulating the commercial uses of nuclear materials; of these 15 are coastal States,
' At present, NRC regulations do not specify whether the NRC or an Agreement 2
State has regulatory authority in offshore waters beyond that State's l
. boundaries--normally extending three miles from the coastline. The result-ing regulatory and enforcement problems have been pointed up by a series of incidents involving exposures to radiation and the loss of sources con-3 taining radioactive material; there have been eight such incidents reported since mid-1978 involving radiographic operations in the Gulf of Mexico.
4 n,
..-....c...
.=
-s -
Clarification of the NRC's authority in this area would permit implementa-tion of a more comprehensive and effective program of regulaticn and enforce-ment and enhanced protection of workers from exposures to cadiation.
It also could aid the NRC in the resolution of some presently existing jurisdictional and logistic problems associated with regulation and enforce-ment of offshore activities. These include the Coast Guard's broad-based jurisdiction over all activities in these waters and the Occupational Safety
~
and Health Administration's worker safety-related jurisdiction ~over offshore
~
locations.
The logistics problems relate to the remoteness of offshore sites (often as much as 100 miles out at sea); the nautical fixes required to locate them; the time needed to achieve access by sea; the expense by air; and the inter-mittent nature of the operations at the various sites.
The rule also makes clear that Agreement States may agree to perfobm inspections for NRC in the offshore area.
jy
.hh g
' 6 O
I D
ENCLOSURE 6
~
1 1
c 4' !.
/n.
R.Q. 3lh f/J '^ C !
ruannA.isHAY,Jh.
Ill P,\\lfl \\t} N l I H % ) l 4,Il \\[ Ill.M 4 1 ( ) %
h.Jiu rgun g n
"'"""d""'
011 It s of I.u tito '.'.i *. I si s! I \\Illi StTi.I'\\n i Tl Itt.) 111\\ Islin April 10.19 fil a
\\
hir. Donslo A. Hu.<baumer 2
'T 7 Assbtont Director for state Agreements l'rogram Office of State Programs U.S.14uclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20S$5 bear Mr. liussbaumers ln response to your March 23, 1981, memorandum concerning NitC jurlediotton over activltles conducted in waters beyond Agreement States' territorial waters, the
- Nuclear Energy Division is plensed to provide the following comments.
1hese comments reflect only the Division's opinions on this matter and do not necessarily represent those of thir. state's administration.
'llte lack of comments from the State of temisinns previously on the proposed triemaking found in the Federn1 Itc3hte,r (45 rR 71807) It not because of lack of interest but because the document was not received. Indeed, the revised document was not seen by the undersigned until March 27, 1981.
by letter dated August 22,1980, the Nuclear Energy Division concurred in the need to clarify tire NitC's jurisdiction over activitics in the offshore area." This need was brought about because of rumors which hulicated that changes were beleg contemplated by the N it C.
Although the proposed document duct clarify the jurisdictional question, li also cicuds the issue in other ways, riamely, in procedural matters.
When ix>ulslana beenme an Agreement State in 1967, three documents were executed: an Agreement under Section 274 b. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; an Agreement under Section 27 41. of the name act, and a " Memorandum of Understanding." the latte-Joemnent beirq designed to facilitate the administration of the 274 b. Agrectnent without prejmlice to any peixiing litigation in the area offshore Louisiana. 'The 2741. Agreement perinittrd the Sinte of louitlann "to perform, for and on behalf of the Commission," certain functions including invections of Commis-Klen licenses to determine compliance with the Commiwlon's regulations in areas offshore this state.
I 1)abe 0148/4@4?'
s>.o. sox i+oo n Arow noucr;. t.ouc.ir.na veies ensr % umia
-l
6
-t-Prom conversations with Individuals present when these documents were negotiated,It has been learned that one Intent was to climinate the need for laulslana licensees having to file notices of reelprocity when moving from state to Federal weten or for havlig dual licensing and regulation, knelosure C to your March 23, 1981, memorandum to the States of Texas and laulslans, states on page 5 that the " Memorandum of Understandirg" between the HRC ard Lou!alana is silti in effect. Again, on page 6, it states that this rule is not Intended to affect either the " Memorandum of Understanding" or the agreement made under Section 2741. of the Act. It is presumed that the Memorandum of trnderstand-ing referred to in Enclosure C !s the one dated Aprl! 17,1967, which states, in part, "S ECON D: The Commission acknoxicdges its present practice of regard-ing possession and use of egreement materials on the high sens by the citir.cno of littoral States which have entered into agreements with the Commission pursuant to Sevtien 274 b. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, as properly subject to the regulatory authority assumed by such States pursuant to such agreements: provided, however, that nothing herein shall in any way be construed to affect or limit the right of the Commission to alter or amend such practice at any time. Should the Commivilon decide to climinate or alter or amend nuch practice, it will consult with the State before takhtg aetton to impicment such deelston offshore or the State."
Since the NRC proposes to honor this agreement, the Nuclear Energy Division i
i concludes that its licensees may continue to work in the offshore ares as in the past without the necessity of filirrg the NRC% Form 241 and without the necessity of obtaintry an NRC license, even though the work may exceed the NRC's ISO-day r
i reciprocity limit.
l l
The Division feels that this is the approprinte ewrse to take, since a large number of Loulslans lleensees are working in offshore waters which are under NRr' krisdiction, and many of them will exceed the 1BOL-day ree!procity limit. In addillon, it 13 unclear how these charges would affeet the well-Ingging Industry, but keeping up with days worked in Federal waters woulr! be most difficult for those setivities
. con uc et d on pipeline lay barycs, since the 3-mile limit refers to Louislanni coastline, d
whleh is most irregular.
In the l)ivlslon's opinion, filing the NRC Form 241 or obtaintry an nit 0 license would serve no useful purt ose related to health and safety for louisiana 1 *ensees, 11 most certainly would increase etnifusiers because of differences in regulations and license conditionn whie'c may occur.
Certain of Louisiana 4 requirements for Industrial radiography are more stringent than the NitC's--requirirg two (2) men et temporary job-sites and eliminating the "amistant radiographer" classifiention.
Louisinna is also mnking every effort to establish a statewide testing program for industrist radiographers in an effort to improve the training tltat is provided.
y g xm.
m
o TM } N *V I E '
M
' "M3. row rw Yr K imaK'gs E"a K W F M*J ;,. _2 22m:
I As matters stand, primArily because of rumors t!mt the NRC ls planning to make certain char.ges, many Loukiana licensees workirrg in offshore waters have been uncertain concerning the notifications which must be made and the proper agency to contact in 1:1e event of emergency. Unless advised by the NRC to the contrary, the toutstana Nuclear Energy Division plans to notify its licensees that they may resume working In offshore areas that are under the NF.C5 jurisdiction as they have in the past, that this work will he authorized under their 14ultiana lleente without the necessity of haviry to file Form NRC-241, and it is to be conducted in securdance with those Louisinna Hadiation Regulations whleh peria'n to activitics conducted ttnder the license.
Because of the complexity of the bsues invetved, Cie differences among the various states which are af fected and the Federal governinent, and the consequences of any changes made with regard to the exercise of authtrity in offshore areas, the Division proposes that additional tir.ie for study and cornment be allor ed.
"Ihe Division sincerely appreelstes the considef ation that im been given us in Ods nintter and thanks you for this opportunity to comment.
Should t.dditional clarification be needed, please do not hesitate to contact this offlee.
Sincer ely, William II. Spell Administrator Nucient Energy Division N!!S:RLW:mg
-=w e
O d
I ENCLOSURE 7 1
1
R C'r '. FAFKER, PFC b
j] {) '
t l
5061 BELIA CA i dH g / gH V y
SATCb AOLGE LA 70008 1 %,N t;x neb;;m: q cg,s;.nIE t0s g.
A
^
-s M % d o,, '. n
.2 i
/.:.
e:r s,q.ri m;i el 4j%@& _ _
.m C
u-C647835099 04/09/21 ICS IRPRbC2 CSF +EFe 5C49241G73 FGP TCRA EATCh RCOGE LA.3C1'04 09 1135F.EST 1
i'>
)
T CFAS F DCH IAN ESGLIFE, E)EC. LEGAL CRECTOF F
OFFICE--LS NLCLEAR REGLLATCF).C0kFISSIch
'[
MAFYLAND NATIChlL BahX ELOG FOCP 9704 3
7735 CLC GEORGETChh FC BETFESCA PC 200'W C
]
t J
r TFIS CCNFIFMS CLR TELEPFCAE.C0hvERSATICh Oh THL.RSCAY AFRIL 9 1981
]^
CChCERNIhG TFE FRCPCSEC'FLLE PERTAIAING TO NEC JLRISCICTICA Ib OFF5FCRE eATEFS ACJACENT TC.AGFEEPENT.5TATES. I INITIALLY FAISEC TWIb
(
ISELE IA A'FPRCXIFATELY l'9 65 IC A 1966.AS AT TFAT RIME T FE 'C IE EC TCF CF ~
q TFE LCLISIANA CIVISICh.CF 'F ACI A TICN 00hTRCL. TFE ISSLES FAISEC TFEh CGhCERNIbG PRACTICAL AAC REA50hAELE'FEAh! F0F.AN AGREEPEh7 5 TATE LICEhSEE T:C CCNCLCT ACTI%ITIES Ib FECERALiCFFSFCRE AFEAS FRCP AA s
(~
AGFEEPENT.! TATE haSE ARE PFCEaELY FCEE %ALIC TCCAY TP AN IN 1967 BECALSE(CF TFE INCREASEC FhECLENCY CF(CFERATICbS.
(
7 TFEFE IS NC CLESTICA CCNCEFhlNG TFE VALICITY CF TFE.LAns IhVCLVEC Ib TFE FRCPCSED RLLE, 9LT Ib~TP.E.5AECIAL CASE OF.Ah, AGREEkEhi ! TATE
(
LICENSEE CFERATING Ik ACJAC8bi CFFSFCFE FECERAL AREAS THE'RECIFACCITY
)
NCTIFICATICNS Ib TFE 180 CAT PER CALENCAF YEAR TIME.LIFITATICh MLST BE >AIVEC. ACTIVITIES IN CFF.!PCRE AREAS ARE AthCRMAL EXTENSICh CF OPEFATIchS IN CCASTAL AREAS,ANC TFEY ARE UNLIKE TFE:FECIFRCCAL
]
OPEFATIch5 CCh0LCTEC Ch.!bCEE IN CTFEF 5TATES. EXEFPTICN CF TFE NCTIFICATICN FHCCECUFE AhC TIFE LIFITATICA WCLLC Ih ib C W A Y 'C I Ll, T E FECERAL'JUFISCICTICN, BLT IT WILL REELLT Ih AiFCFE EFFECTIkE Abc EFFICIENT 'F ACI AT IC A 'FEGLL A TCE Y PFCGRAF tiY F Ih tP IZ Ih G TFE CChFL5ICA ANC REGLIFEMEhTS CA A LIC6hEEE h!TrCLT SACFIFICE CFltEALTF ANC SAFETY.
TFC FHCRLSEO ELLE WOLLCthEGATE TFE EFFECTS CF TFE CFFSFCRE COCFERATIVE PRGGR AP k'F I C F TFE CF AIRM Ah 'CF TFE'JCIAT.CCFFITTEE'Ch ATCPIC EhEEGY CETERMINEC Ih 19e7 *EREi>LTUALLY CESIRABLE TC THE CCFPISSICA, Tr E AGR EE P Eh i.! T A IE S ANC TFEIR LICENSEES.
I KILL St.BPIT A LEfTEF ELAECFATIhG FLFTFER Ch iFE REASCNS AhC BACMGRCubC FCh EXEMPTING TFE NCTIFICATICh PRCCECLRE ANC TFE RECIFRCCAL TINE LIFIT FRCP TFE PFCPCSEC RULE.
C.C Y A FARKER, FFC Scel AELLIA CR EATCN FOLGE LA 70dCE
%)b 0.
0 MGkCCMPtPGF c.
':1 :2.m: s:n Fca E3rEe. /..;. s c;;. Fazz o c.E waa;?s
-- e I((((
(,
((( _ (((( ( T ( ( (il
(
( '( ( 3 3_1 ( (_ k ( (-N- _ ( ( 1(((1 TRANSMITTAL TO:
/
Document Control Desk, 016 Phillips AD\\*.\\NCED COPY TO:
O The Public Document Room g:
DATE:
August 14, 1981 Q
j Attached are the PDR copies of a Commission meeting 6@
transcript /s/ and related meeting document /s/.
They are being foruarded for entry on the Daily Accession P
List and placement in the Public Document Room.
No P
other distribution is requested or required.
Existing DCS identification numbers are listed on the individual b
documents wherever possible.
a C
j 3
g 4
h 1.
Transcript of:
Affirmation / Discussion Session 81-30,-
Q August 13, 1981.
(1 copy) 9g a.
SECY-81-449, Rulemaking Issue (Affirmation) paper, q
dated July 24,~1981, Subj:
NRC Jurisdication 9@
Over Activities in Certain Offshore Waters.
c-(1 copy) e I]
i T
P7"the Secretary g{lf
/
o s l%
te s
n-h.,
o ge 9
R B
sammnammmunamammannna.
a