ML20055A270

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Response Denying Licensee Request for Exemption from 820201 Prompt Notification Sys Deadline.Related Info Encl
ML20055A270
Person / Time
Site: 05000000, Fort Saint Vrain
Issue date: 01/28/1982
From: Schwartz S
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To: Clark R
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20049H237 List:
References
FOIA-82-216 NUDOCS 8207160048
Download: ML20055A270 (9)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:5 " ' '. A}..w umt r o sT Air s NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION ansmnason o c w.1 (N, < .i!$gl .j f g s, e January 2C, 1982 MEMORANDtJ4 FOR: Robert A. Clark, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Sheldon A. Schwartz, Acting Chief FROM: Emergency Development and Response Branch Division of Emergency Preparedness Office of Inspection and Enforcement LICENSEE'S REQUESTS FOR EXEMPTION FROM PROMPT NO

SUBJECT:

SYSTEM DEADLINE Effective December 30, 1981, the Commission approved the rule change to l change the deadline for implementation of a Prompt Notification System to Ft. St. Vrain has requested an exemption from this l February 1, 1982. deadline and for the reasons given in the attached response, it was denied. I hereby request that you forward the attached response to the licensee as soon as possible. e 7 d!(,p' M-(v Sheldon A. Schwart, Acting Chi Emergency Develop ent and Response Branch Division of Emergency Preparedness Office of Inspection and Enforcement

Attachment:

As stated N 8207160048 820528 PDR FOIA l WATKINS82-216 PDR I

Docket flo. 50-267 Public Service Company of Colorado ATTN: Don W. Marembourg ibnager, fluclear Production 16805 UCR 19 1/2 Platteville, Colorado 80651-9298

Dear ?!r. Uarembourg:

This is id response to your January 8,1982 letter, requesting relief from the February 1,1982 deadline for implementation of your prompt notification system. The final rule establishing this deadline, which became effective i does not specifically address reouests for exemption December 30, 1981, or relief from the February 1,1982 implementation date. However, pursuant to 10 CFR 550.12, your request for exemption was determined not to be As noted in the proposed rule (46 FR 46587), the Commission meritorious. stated that in its judgment, prompt public notification is an important consideration in the offsite protection of the public in the event of a The emergency planning rule is premised on reducing, to nuclear accident. the extent possible and to the extent the flRC can regulate, the time required for and the uncertainty associated with each step in the prompt public Therefore, timely implementation of a prompt notifi-notification process. cation system is considered to be beneficial to the health and safety of the In view (See 46 FR 46587146 FR 63031 for additional information). pu bl ic. of the forgoing, it has been deternined that granting an extension of time would not be in the public interest. ~'--- s

Public Service Company. of Colorado However, the Commission recognizes that there may be mitigating circumstances beyond your control that should be weighed in determining what enforcement action should be taken. Specifically, these considerations are: (1) whether the licensee demonstrated diligence in attempting to fulfill the reouirements; (2) whether or not the NRC was kept infomed of the steps taken to fulfill the requirements of the rule; (3) when those steps were taken, and any signifi-cant problems encountered; and (4) an updated timetable established to achieve full conpliance with the prompt public notification capability reouirement. The many items of correspondence submitted between September 19, 1979, and January 8,1982, uill be taken into considenation in determining what enforcement action is appropriate. You have kept the NRC informed and although you did not proceed to implement a prompt public notification system, necess;+v A= - - + ; <T e d ; e l you attempted to elicit a ruling on the size of ycur cmc.gency/o-o r* planning zone-s te m sy(-E42-) because of your unique situation as the only HTGR nuclear power facility. At the December 15, 1981 meeting, we discussed in detail the rationale for prompt notification systems and concluded that although HTGR's are different than LWR's, the need for a notification system was still present. This conclusion was derived from the premise that, although it may be several hours into an accident before the situation warrants notifying the public, l once that decision has been made, a rapid means must be available. This is true regardless of the type of reactor. In regard to your statement that the size of your EPZ classification was based only on size-of-plant l considerations, the itay 19, 1980 letter to you from Robert L Tedesco i l Your letter to Brian K. Grimes dated April 1,1980, states otherwise.

Public Service Company - of Colorado specifically recuested the EPZ sizes which were approved in the itay 19,1980 letter, to you. Concerning your request for a waiver of enforcement action, this item will be addressed in a separate correspondence. Sincerely, i Robert A. Clark, Chief Operating Peactors Branch #3 Division of Licensing, NRR a

i Federcl Registxr / Vol. 48. No.182 / Mondsy. September 21. 1981 / Proposrd Rults 46587 1 j 10 CFR Part 50 By July 1.19st. the nuclear power reactor the extended time period for i licensee shall demonstrate that Compliance. I Emergency Planning and administrative and physical means beve been Preparedness for Production and established for alertms and providing prompt De Commission's decision to defer Utlitzation Facilities instructions to the public withis the plume tl e date for requiring full i exposure pathway EPZ.The design objective implementation of the prompt public AMMCv: Nuclear Regulatory shall be to have the capability to essentially notification capability requirement was Commission. complete the initial notification of the public made, as described above, after i ACTiosa: Notice of proposed rulemaking. Within the plume exposure pathway EPZ additional consideration of industry. within about 15 minutes. ) wide difficulty in acquiring the suuuany:ne Nuclear Regulatory The NRC staff has evaluated the level necessary equipment, permits, and i Commission is proposing to amend its of compliance by the industry and noted clearances.nis proposed deferral does regulations to extend the date by which that only about 12% of NRC power not represent any fundamental ) prompt public notification systems must reactor licensees have been able to meet departure from the rationale the be operational around all nuclest power fully the July 1.1981 date for installation Commission used in adopting and plants.De proposed extension is based of a prompt public notification system sustaining the public notification on industry. wide difficulty in acquiring which meets the criteria in 10 CFR 50.47 capability requirement. See Final Rule thenecessary equipment. permits and 50.54. and Appendix E to Part 50.The on Emergency Planning. 45 FR 55402. clerrances.lf adopted the proposal licensees inability to meet the July 1. 55407 (Aug.19.1980), reconsideration would extend the comoliance date for 1981 date has been attributed to the denied. CU-ao-40.12 NRC 636 (1980). It these systems from July 1.1981 to no unforeseen difficulties and uncertainties is the Commission's continued judgment i later than February 1.1982. surrounding the designing, procuring, that prompt public notification is an omits: Comment period expires October. and lastemne of the prompt notificatime important consideration in the offsite 21.1981. Comments received after this systems. In establishing the protection of the public in the event of a date will be considered if it is practieel Implementation date the Commission nuclear accident.%is offsite protection to do so,but assurance of consideration was concerned that these factors would of the public includes a number of cannot be gived except as to comments inhibit the ability to comply with a short separate stepe-eeoognition of t he l t received on or before this date. schedule and set the July 1981 date with potential severity of the accident by the Aoontsses: Interested persons are this in mind (45 FR 55407). utility, communication of the perceived invited to submit written comments and While licensees

  • compliance with the threat to offsite authorttles, decision by suggestions on the proposal to the prompt notification requirement has offsite ofGcials on the need foe Secretary of the Commission. U.S.

been delayed, the NRC considers that protective action,capabnity to spread Nuclear Regulatory Commission, emergency plans and preparedness have public warnmg. and actual response by l. Washington. D.C. 20555. Attention: significantly improved within the last the public. He emergency pf anning rule l\\ Docketing and Service Branch. Copies of year at and around every nuclear power is premised on reducing to the extent comments received by the Commission plant site.%is insignificant possible--and to the extent the NRC can may be examined in the Commission's improvement has been confirmed by regulate-the time required for and the Public Document Room at 1717 H Street NRC teams who have visited a number uncertainty associated with each step. l NW Washington, D.C. of plant sites to evaluate the licensees

  • Every aspect of the rule, including the FCR FURTHER INFORM ATION CONTACT:

compliance with the upgraded prompt notification system,is still Brian K. Crimes. Director. Division of emergency planning regulations of required. In ^=a-ta= the Emergency Preparedness. Office of August 1980. In addition. the Federal implementation date of the prompt inspection and Enforcement. U.S. Emergency Management Agency public notification capability Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (FEMA) and the NRC have monitored requirement. the Commission recognizes Wa shington. D.C. 20555 (telephone: 301-numerous nuclear emergency exercises the continued need for this requirement 492-4814). Involving State and local governments and expects all utilities to complete the and the licensees, and again have ir.stallation of this system as soon as SUPPLEssENTARY INFORM ATIOfC witnessed a siginficant improvement on practicable but not later than February 1.ne Proposed Rule onsite and offsite emergency 1.1982. However, the Commission On August 19.1980, the Nuclear preparedness, intends to take appropriate enforcement Regulatory Commission published in the Based on the above information and action against licensees who did not. Federal Register (45 FR 55402) on a recognition that there exist prior to July 1.1981. notify the amendments to its regulations (10 CFR customary warning systems (police. Commission of their inability to meet part 50 and Appendix E) concerning the radio, telephone) which are viewed as the July 1.1981 deadline. ~ upgrading of emergency preparedness. sufficiently effective in many postulated The effective date of these regulations accident scenarios, the Commission is Significant licensee performance was November 3.1980. Among other proposing to defer the implementation strengths and weaknesses are evaluated thin 8s the regulations required licensees date of the prompt pu'blic notification in the NRC Systematic Assersment of to subrait upgraded emergency plans by capability requirement from July 1.1981 Ilcensee Performance (SALP).*Fhe SALP january 2.1981. submit implementing to February 1.1982. In view of the program specifically includes evaluation procedures by March 1.1981 and above, the Commission finds that there oflicensee performance in emergency implement the emergency plans by April exists sufficient reason to believe that' preparedness. Accordingly, a licensee's 1.1981. appropriate protective measu es can efforts in attempting to meet the July 1. One element that must be and will be taken for the protection of 1961 date for instelling the prompt demonstrated in an seceptable the health and safety of the publicin the public notification capability will be a licensee *s emergency plan is that: event of a radiological emergency during factor in that licensee's SALP.

46588* F dsral Register / Vcl. 48. No.182 / Mond2y. September 21. 1981 / Proposed Rules II. Proposed Application of the nnel Imal rule. when effective, will be 1244.1248.142 U.S C ss41,5842. sa4el. unless applied to ongoing licensing proceedings otherwise noted. Section 50.7s also issued ae Commiss. ion also is proposing in now pending and to issues or under sec.122. ea Stat. 23s [42 USC 2152). this rula that the four. month period for contentions therein. Union of Concerned section so.7s-saat also inued under sec.184. correcting deficiencies, provided in Sciennsts v. 499 F. 2d 1069 @C. es Stat. es4. as amended (42 U.S.C 2234). i 50.54(s)[2). should not apply to any Cir.1974). Sections 50.100-s0.1o2 issued under sec. teos ea Stat. sss (42 U.S.C 22381. For the purposes licanste not in compliance with the Regulatory Mexibility Certification of sec. 223. sa Stat. nsa. as amended (42 pubh.c n2tification system requirernent In accordance with the Regulatory ea Stat. see (42 U.S C 2201(ill: il 50.70. 50.71, U.S.C 2273). I so.41[i] tssued under sec.161L by February 1.1982. the new deadlme Flexibility Act of 1980. 5 U.S.C. 605(b). and so.7a issued under sec.leto, sa Stat. eso. dat2. If a licensee is not in compliance the Commission concludes that this rule s amended (42 U.s C 2201(o). and the laws with this requirement by February 1 will not. if promulgated. have a referred to in Appendices. 1982 the Commission will consider significant economic impact on a

1. Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E to t tzking appropriate enforcement act, ions substantial number of small entities. ne Part so is revised to read as follows:

promptly at that time. In determining proposed rule concerns an extension of cppropriate enforcement action to, to the operational date for public ^Pp x fann. eNo initiate, the Commission will take m ha notification systems for nuclear power cccount, among other factors, the plants licensed pursuant to Sections 103 Facilib demonstrated diligence of the licensee and 104b of the Atomic Energy Act of in attempting to fulfill the prompt public 1954, a s amended. 42 U.S.C. 2133. 2134b. D & nfetodon h e h n:tification capability requirement. The The electric utility companies owning Commission will consider whether the and operating these nuclear power

3. A licensee shah have the capability to licensee has kept the NRC informed of plants are dominant in their service n y resPomMe State and local tfin steps that it has taken when those areas and do not fall within the 7,',7c',

g7,Y,', gin ,Ye steps were taken and any sigmficant definition of a small business found in shall de:nonstrate that the State / local probtrme encountered. and the, updated Section 3 of the Small Business Act.15 officials have the capability to make a public timit:ble tvhich the hcensee expects U.S.C. 632. or within the Small Business notificatwo decision promptly on beins will be met in achieving full compliance Size Standards set forth in 13 CHL Part informed by the licensee of an emergency with the prompt public notification 121. In addition since the amendment condition. By February 1.1982, each nuclear capability requirements. extends for one year the date by which [';',',,',,',",'nd p$sie h* With resped to requests for the pubhc notifical on systems are to be e ns be , exemptions that NRC has received from operational, the busmesses and state established for alerting and providing prompt g car power reactor licensees and local governments mvolved in the Instructions to the public within the plume erning the prompt pubhc manufacture and installation of these exposure pathway EPZ.ne four-month period in to CHL 5054(s)(2) for the correction afication requirement and deadlines. systems are not economically affected in of emergency plan deficiencies shall not for installation and operational any significant manrier. Accordingly, apply to deficiencies in the initial installation capability the Cc mission has decided there is no significant economic impact of this public notification system that is 13 deny these requests in light of the on a substantial number of small required by February 1.1982. The design proposed extension of the July 1.1981 dits. Anylicensee not able to meet the entities, as defined in the Regidatory objective of the prompt public notification Fledbihty Act of1710. system shall be to have the, capability to nrw deadline date of February 1.1982 essentially complete the trutial notification of } will be subject to enforcement penalties Paperwork Reductiou Act Statement the public within the plume exposure l citzt the new date.His provision will Pursuant to Q.e provisions of the '[; g;

  • i m about I nut s e

alim, mate unnecessary and costly Paperwork Re& action Act of1980(Pub. ! cdministratise actions needed to L 96-511). the NRC has made a from immediate notification of the pubhc [within 15 rninutes of the time that State and ! consider prtsent exemption requests determination that this proposed rule local officials are notified that a situation thtt will essentially become moot by the does act impose new recordkeeping. exists requiring urEent action) to the more proposed extension of the July 1.1981 information collection, or reporting likely events where there is substantial time dits. This approach will also permit the requirements. available for the State and local NRC to focus its consideration upon a Pursuant to the Atomic EnerEy Act of governmental officials to make a judgment reduced number of noncompliance 1954, as amended, the Energy whether or not to a:tivate the public situations which rem,ain at the time of Reorganization Act of1974 as amended. " ' ['C "]" 'g*[,'l, " the new deadline. lt is expected that the and Section 553 of Title 5 of the United most efficient use of NRC resources will and local officials will determine whether to States Code, notice is hereby given that activate the entire notification system br cchieved by this treatment of present adoption of the following amendment to simultaneously or in a graduated or siaged exemption requests relating to the July 1. 10 CFR Part 50. Appendix E is manner. ne responsibility for activating 1981 cperational date requirement. contemplated. such a public notification system shall remain if the proposed rule is subsequently promulgated as a final rule. it is the with the appropriate govemment authorities. Commisston s present intention to make PART 50-DOMESTIC LICENSING OF it effective immediately upon PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION , publication, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. FACll.lTIES Dated at Washington. D.C., this leth day of 553(d)(1). since the rule is expected to ne authority citation for Part 50 September 1981. I .e the obligation of certain reads as fo!!ows: For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 3 , ices with respect to the present Authority: Secs.103.104.161.182.183.189. p.,1.1981 deadline for operational 68 Stat. 936,937,948,953. 954. 955,956. a e Secretary of the Commissiott. public notification systems. In that amended (42 U.S.C. 2133. 2123. 22cn. 2232. !" Da' 'W52' W ** "5 "1 rzgard, the Commission notes that the 2233. 2233), secs. 201. 202. 206. 88 Sta t.1243, sec cooc Hooes-as l

am Rules and Reguistions red-i w*i-Vol. 46. No. :30 Wednesday. December 30. 1981 TNs se::cn of the FEDERAt. REGISTER On August II 1981. the Commission nis decision is based on a contains regAtory documents having discussed possible actions because rcccgnition that emergency plans and general acpea:Ary arys legal effect, most licensees failed to co= ply with the July preparedness have significantly o ]c{ a p\\e ed to a 1.1981 requirement contained in 10 CFR improved within the last year at and j e e in g p, 50.47(b)(5) and 10 CFR 50. Appendix E. around every nuclear power plant sit. pt.:%shed under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. Section IV.D.3. The licensees' failure to Tius sigmficant improvement has be.- The Coce of Federal Regulations is sold meet the July 1.1981 date was attributed confirmed by NRC teams who have t)y tne Su:enntendent of Documents. to unforeseen difficulties and visited a number of plant sites to Pnces of new books are I6sted in th9 uncertainties surrounding the design, evaluate the licensecs' compliance w.fi fkst FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each procurement and installation of the the upgraded emergency planning

  • C'""

prompt notification systems. regulations of August 1980. In additior At the August 11.1981 meeting, the the Federal Emergency Management Commission approved publication of a Agency (FEMA) and the NRC have NUCLEAR REGUt.ATORY proposed rule change which would monitored numerous nuclear emergerry COMMISSION provide an extension of the July 1.1981 exercises involving State and local date to February 1.1932. (See 46 FR governments and the licensees. and 10 CFR Part SO 46587). Dat Federal Register notice again have witnessed a significant requested public comment dtiring a 30 improvement on onsite and offsite Emergency Planning and day period ending October 21.1981. emergency preparedness. Prepareoness for Production and To date comments have been The decision to delay the Utilization FacilitJes received from four NRC licensees, five implementation data is also based on AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory individuals or organizations in the the recognition that there exist Commission. nuclear industry, one from the general customary warning systems (police. A cTion: Final rule. public, three from environmental radio, telephone) which are viewed as, organizations. one from a mass transit sufficiently effective in many postulateo suuuARY:The Commission is making system director, and one from a State accident scenarios. In view of the above. two changes to its emergency planning govemor. The comments received from the Commission finds that there exists. regulations. The change to 10 CR Part the general public and from the sufficient reason to believe that

53. Appendix E delays the date by which environmental organizations were appropriate protective measures can prompt public notification systems mu.tt against delaying the implementation and will be taken for the protection of ba operational around all nuclear power date to February 1982.The letters from the health and safety of the public in the plants. The change to i 50.54 clarifies the other commenters generally agree event of a radiological emergency during tha language of the rule to conform with with extending the implementation date the extended time period for tha Commission's intent at the time of along with additional suggestions.

c mpliance. promulgation. One suggested modificatida to the II.The Amendment to 10 CFR 50.54 EFFECTIVE oATE: Decembes 30.1981. proposed rule change, which has been l 3CCepted and inCIuded In these IinaI Additionally.10 CFR 50.54(s)(2), FOR FuRTHER INFORMATION CONTAC'r. hiichael T. lamgochian. Human Factors amendments, y not :o eliminate the "NNEM Branch. Office of Nuclear Regulatory I ur-m nth penod for correction of any For operating power reactors. the licensee. Research. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory deficiencies identified during the initial state. and local emergency response plane Commis sion. Washington. D.C. 20555 testing of the prompt notification shall be implemented by Apn!1.1981, except (telephone 301-443-5942). system. De Commission now believes as provided in Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E that the elimination of this four-month of this part. tf after Apnl1.1981. the NRC SuPPt.EM ENTARY INFORM ATION period would be inconsistent with the finds that the state of emergency 1.He Amendment to la CFR Part 50, need to perfurm a reasonable test of the Preparedness does not provide reasonable Appendix E system and make any needed changes assurance that adequate protective measures as indicated by the test results.The. enn and will be taken in the event of a On August 19,1980 the NRC enclosed effective regulation radiological emergency and if the deficiencies published a revised emergency planm.ng incorporates this concept The are not conected within four months of that regulation which became effective ort installation date, however. remains finding. the Commission will determine November 3.1980. The rule required February 1.1982, and any licensee not whether the reactor shall be shut down until irensees to demonstrate, among other things. by July 1.1981: completing the installation by that date such deficiencies are remedied or whether would be subject tornforcement action. other enforcement action is appropriate." that administratise and physical means After evaluating all public comment it has come to the Commission's tiers received. the Commission has attention that because this section of the o d ng pro np nsin tio s a the public caded I publish. as immediately regulation was written as one ithias the plume esposure pathway EpZ. The .esirn objective sha!! be to have the effective, a final rule change to 10 CFR paragraph. it can be interpreted to meals capabihty to essentially complete the initial part 50. Appendix E which will delay the that the four-month period for the natification of the pubhc within the plume implementation date for the prompt correction of emergency preparedness esposure pathway EPZ withirt about 15 public notification systems from July 1. deficiencies does not apply to "Section minutes." 1981 to Fchruary 1.1982. IV.D.3 of Appendix E."

e)22 Feder:!.~. yr / Vol. 46. No. 250 / Wed::sily. Cuccmber 30. 1081 / Rules and Rcpu:. g Th.s is a mis:nter;rc:at:an of the Regulstory Tiesibility Act Statement U..TJt:!':cuca P m ce i te' C:mmission's intent. which was that the Pursuant to the Replatory Flexibility four.rncnth period is to apply to any Act of 1980. Pub. L 9:r.354. the NRC has 3 ^ I' C" '"

  • U h '" ' ' P '

def;ciencies identified in the emergency deter:nined:(1) That the dclaymg of the .[*[,l pians. The Ccmmission is therefore g, ne s i 5 mi utes implementation date for the prompt after declaring an emergency. The ther.sei mocifying { 50.54(s)(2) to morc clearly public notification systems will not have shad de=cnstrate that the State / local reflect that intent. The four. month a significant economic impact on a of5cials have the capability to make a pub period provided in i 50.54(s)(2), wiH not substantial nu=ber of small entities, notificanon decision prornp'Jy on being apply to any licensee for the instaUation and i utial test of the public notification pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility infer =ed by the licensee of an e=ergency Act of1930, section 605(b) and (2) that coniton. By Tectuary 1.1952, each nucle: sysicm by February 1.1982. If a licensee the rule change to { 50.54(s)(2)is not p wr nactor1:censee shall de=enst ate t is not in co=pliance with this subject to the provisions of the ad=,m:strauve and physical means have b requirement for installation and testin3 Regulatory flexibility Act of1980. , h." I

[ f-b>l rebruary 1.1932, the Commtssion because the Co
:n.ission has deter =ined erposu$ h6w ay EPZ. De four e

.*h p,,, ij wtB consider taking appropriate ' pursuant to 5 US.C. 553 that a notice of pened in to CFR 50.54(s)[:} for the t mect: enforcement actions pro =ptly at that proposed rule =aking for { 50.54 (s)(2) of e=ergency plan denciencies shar. :st time.In determining appropriate need not be issued and that the rule cay apply to the initialinstanation of tho ;;bh enforcement action to initiate, the be pro:nu] rated in final for=2 and notincat:en system that is required Commission win take into account, become effective on December 30.1931. February 1.1982. The /our-month er::d m P atnong other factors, the demonstrated opply to correction of deficiencies ic*e:::ifie diligence of the licensee in attempting to Paperwork Reduction Act Statement dr.:fing tA,initiclinstallerion endin ti.y of fulfill the prompt public notification Pursuant to the provisions of the the PmmPtP@ D.oufccqn syse es capability requirement. The Commission Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (Pub. {' ] fg will consider whether the licen.see has L SG-51.1). the NRC has =2nde a kept the NRCinformed of the steps that determination that this final rule does public notincatics system shau be to Ecve the capability to essentially complete the it has taken when those steps were not impose new recordkeeping. Initial notification of the public within the taken and any significant problems information ccDection, or reporting plu=e exposure pathway EPZ within aben: encountered, and the updated timetable requirements. 8 15 cunutes.ne use of 6is notiDeation which the licensee expects will be met Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of capability will rarge frem icunediate in achieving full compliance with the igm. as amended. the Energy notiscauon of the public (within is rninutes prompt public notification capability Reorganization Act of1974. as amended, of the time that State and local of5ci Is are requirements. The four. month period and section 553 of title 5 of the United a cEed that a situation ensts requiring will, however, apply to correction of States Code, the foUowing amendments ,"[ '3 to e deficiencies identified during the m, :tf al to 10 CFR Part 50 are published as - ,t dI lable im the State and local governmental ofncials to 'i test of the prompt public notification documents subject to codification: make a judgment whether or not to activata systems as well as those deficiencies the public notification system. Where there. discovered thereafter. PART 50- DOMESTIC LICENSING OF a decision to activate the notincation ryste:: Because the amendment to PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION the State and local efficials wiD detes:Jne i 50.54(s)(2)is interpretative and of a FACILITIES whether to activate the c:: tire notificctivo minor nature. simply resolving.an The authon.ty citation for Part 50 system simultaneously orin a graduatul or staged manner.ne responsibility for am iguity m. e rules to e reads as follows: Commission,s intended me~aning at the activating such a public notificatica sy Je::: .me of promulgation, the Commission shan remain wie 6e appropriate finds good cause to dispense with Stat. 938. 937. 94 953. 951. 955. 58, as governmental authorities, 0 amended (4:USC:133.:134.2:ct.2232 advance notice and opportun2ty for

233. :2391: secs. :01. :c*. :06. sa St a t.1243, pubhc comment thereon as unnecessary.

1:44.1:46 (42 U.S C. 5841. 5842. 58481 unless

2. i 50.54[s)(2) is revised to read as For this reason. this change shall be otherwise noted.Section 50. a also issued I U #3' effective as a final rule on December 30, under sec. 3::. 68 Stat. 939 (42 USC 215:1 1981.

Sectioa so,;840.st atso issued under sec I 50.54 Conditions oflicenses. Likewise, the Commission is 1s4. 6a stat 954. as ameoded (42 USC :23:1 i sections 50.20040.20.2.ssued under sec.188. (s) * * * ),Y-M*sh, ,,'m dedf4[ es (2)( ) For operating power reactnrs, th4 u art 50 ppe dix E e ding e irnplementation date for the installation USC:273). t 50 4 tfil inued under sec. 2e11. licensee. Sta te. and loca1 emergency of a prompt public notification system} 68 Stat 949 (42 USC. 2001[i)): 11 50.70.50.71. response plans shall be implemented by as effective immediately upon and 50.75 issued under sec 1610. 68 Slat. 950. April 1.1981. except as prov,ided in publication, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. as amended (c U.S C ::m(oll. and the las Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E to this $53(d)(1), since the rule is expected,to referred to in Appeo6cs_a. part. relieve the obligation of certain (ii) If aher April 1,1981, the NRC finda Appendix E IAmended] licensees with respect to the present that the state of emersency preparedness I" S*'t. n IV.D.3 of Appendix E t July 1.1981 deadline for operational does not provide reasonable assurance Part 50 is revised to read as follows: public notdication systems. In that that adequate protective measures can regard, the Commission notes that the final rule, when effective, will be Appcodit E-Ernevncy P!mening and and will be talen in the event of a en.pman,ss for Production end Utaintioa radiological emergency (meludmg applied 1o ongoing licensing proceedings recilities. findings based on requirements of now pending and to issues or Appendix E Sec!1on IV.D.JJ and if the contentions therein. Union of Concerned Scientists v. AEC. 499 F. 2d 2009 (D.C. .n, 9,, a., %,g m co, p m,,, e.,ge pNH n the TWeral Kerister on Cir.1974). '.o sho-ing caryn t-.xn ce p weed rule Sepiccaber r2.1941.

Federal Rc:;istcr / Vc!. 46. No. 250 / Wecnesday. Decemb:: -{.031 / Rules and Regulati:ns G.'9 ti i dehe:c'ncies (including deficiencies applits 1o the applicatiert Dated at Bethesda. Mary!znd. :his 11th ria' 1 based on requirements ofAppendix E. recordkeeping. and reportmg of Dece=ber.1sa1. j Section tv.D.31 are not corrected within requirements contained in NRC For the Nudear Regulatory Cc..missi' four months of that finding. the regulations. WI!!I m J.Dtrc h. Commission will determine whether the On October 30,19a1. the NRC Lecutive Directorfor Operocor.s. reactor shall be shut down until such obtained OMB reapproval for the grx o n.mo ru us.nms

  • dzficiencies are remedied or whether information collection requirements sw a tooc rue.es-=

l other enforcement action is appropriata. contained in 10 Cr3 Part 50. This In determining whether a shutdown or amendment adds a new i 50.8 to Part 50 ether enforcement action is appropriate, setting out the OhG approval number. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY the Commission shall take into account. the expiration date of the current amoog other factors, whether the approval, and a list of sections within 10 CFR Part 503 licensee can demonstrate to the Part 50 that contain an approved Comission's sat.Isfaction that the information collection requirement. This [D eket No. ERA-R-81461 dzficiencies in the plan are not amendment also re= oves the note Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use significant for the plant m question.ur concerning the expired GAO clearance of 1978; Final Rules thtt adequate mterim compensating that follows i 50.110. tctions have been or will be taken Because this is a nonsubstantive Correci/on promptly. or that that there are other amentment dealing Mth a minor In FR Doc. 81-34770 appearing on c:mpelling reasons for continued procedural matter, good cause exists for page 59872 in the issue of Monday. cperation. finding that the notice and comment December 7.1981. make the followint procedures of the Administrative corrections: Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) are Dated a Washiraton D.C. this 23rd day of (1) 1n i 503.6(c)(2), the following line December.1981. unnecessary and for making the were inadvertently omitted above the amen For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. equali n on page 59906: d o e 9 Srmuel J. Cha* as amended. the Energy Reorganization EQ4 DELTA = COST Secretary of the Commission-Act of1974. ae amended, and 5 U.S.C. (ALTERNATE)-COST (OIL) where tra on. ei-mi rm smo.=1 552 and 553. the following amendments COST (ALTERNATE) and COS' ROIL) owwo coor 7smi-as to 10 CFR Part 50 are published as a are determmed by: document subject to codification. The (2)In i 503.36(a), paragraph (5) was 13 CFR Part 50 authority citation for this documentis: incorrectly designated as (b); therefore. on page 59914. first column. in the 30th Rzporting Recordkeeping, and PART 50-DOMESTIC LICENSING OF .line. "(b) For powerplants..." should Application Requirements; Approval PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION have read "(5) For powerplants...". ACENCY: Nuclear Regulatory FACILITIES awwc cooc nos.45.as Commission. Authority: Sec.1st. Pub.1. 8;t-703. es Stat. ACTION: Final rule. 948 [4:U.S C. r.all FEDERAL HOME LOAN 8ANK BOARD . Section 50.8 is added to read as

SUMMARY

The Nuclear Regulatory 12 CFR Parts 522 and 545 Commission is amending its regulations en the domestic licensing of production j 50.8 Reporting. recordkeeping, and

[No. 81M and utili:ation facilities to indicate appucation requirements: OMB approveL Payrnent of IJtigation Expenses of Office of Management and Budget (a) the Nuclear Regulatory Federal Home Loan Bank Officers, approval of the information co!!cction Commission has submitted the Directors, and Employees r quirements contained in the information collection requirements regulations.~ Ibis action is required by contained in this part of the Office of Da t ed: December 17.1981. tha Paperwork Reduction Act of19GO. Management and Budget (OMB) for AGENCY: Federal Home lean Bank EFrECT:VE D ATE: December 30.1981. approval as required by the Paperwork Board. 0 ACTION: Final rule. FCR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: approved the. formation collection us. Stave Scott, Chief. Document Management Branch Dmsion of requirements on October 30.1981. SUM M ARY:The Federal Home Loan Bank Technical Information and Document (1) The OMB approval number is Board is amending the Regulations for 3150-0011. the Federal Home loan Bank System to Control. Office of Admuustration. (2) OMB approval expires April 30 liberalize the terms on which the Banks Tc!cphone: (301) 492-8585. . 1982. may pay expenses of officers, directors. SUPPt.EM ENT ARY INFO R M ATION: The

  • (b) The approved information and employees involved in litigation Paptrwork Reduction Act of1900 (Pub.

collection requirements include the arising out of their Bank duties.The L 96-511; 44 U.S.C. Cha pter 35) application. recordkeeping. and amendment will alluw the Federal Home transferred the responsibility for reporting requirements contained in IAan Banks to establish their own appr.ing the information collection ii 50.30. 50.33,50.33a. 50.34(b). (c). (d). policies regarding litigation expenses. requirements imposed by the Nuclear (f). 50.34a. 50.35(b). 50.38. 50.3Ba 50.48 EFFECTTVE DATE: December 17.1981. Ragulatory Commission [NRC) on the 50.54(f). (p). (q). (r). (s) (t). (u). 50.55(e). public from the Cencral Accounting 50.55a. 50.59(b). (c). 50.71(a). (b). (c). (d). FOR FURTHER INFORF.tATION CONTACT: "Jffice (CAO) o the Office of (e) 50.72(a). (b). 50 80. 50 82. 50.90. and James C. Stewart ((202) 377-6457). Office

  • Management and Budget (OMB). The Appendices A. B. C. E. C. H. J. K. and R.

f General Counse!. Federal Home Loan - Act requires that each existing Bank Board.1700 C Street. NW. inf rmation collection requirement be j 50.110 (Amended] Wa shington, D.C. 70552. raapproved by OMB as existing CAO

2. ne note following I 50.110 is SUPPt EMENTARY INFORM ATIOPC 'Ihe cIcarances expire. This requirement removed.

Federal Home Loan Bank Board is I}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20055A270&oldid=4489854"