ML20056B074
| ML20056B074 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/31/1990 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0936, NUREG-0936-V09-N02, NUREG-936, NUREG-936-V9-N2, NUDOCS 9008140487 | |
| Download: ML20056B074 (153) | |
Text
..
'k>
~ s:
s 1
'NUREG-0936 i
Vol. 9, No. 2 L XRC Regulatory Agenda J
.i ll Q
uarterly Report April-June 1990
.i y
U.S. ' Nuclear Regulatory Commission i:*
L:-
.Omce of Administration j
f* "*%
.y 9008140487 900731 PDR NUREC PDR 0936 R
. ~,....,.,
E i
' hi
- v AVAILABILITY NOTICE Availability of Reference Materials Cited in NRC Publications Most documents cited in NRC publications will be available from one of the following i
1 sources:
1.
The NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW, Lower Level, Washington, DC 20555 2.
The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 37082,
,I Washington, DC 20013-7082 h
3.
The National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA ' 22161 Although the listing that follows represents the majority of documents cited in NRC publica-tions, it is not intended to be exhaustive, Referenced documents available for inspection and copying for a fee from the NRC Public Document Room include NRC correspondence and intemal NRC memoranda; NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement bulletins, circulars, information notices, inspection and investi-3 gation notices; Licensee Event Reports; vendor reports and correspondence; Commission papers; and applicant and licensee documents and correspondence.
The following documents in the NUREG series are available for purchase from the GPO Sales j
Program; formal NRC staff and contractor reports, NRC-sponsored conference proceed-
)
ings, and NRC booklets and brochures. Also available are Regulatory Guides NRC regula-E
- tions in the Code of Federal Regulations, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission lasuances.
Documents available from the National Technical Information Service include NUREG series 1
l l.
reports and technical reports prepared by other federal agencies and reports prepared by the Atomic Energy Commission, forerunner agency to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Documents available from public and special technical libraries include all open literature 3
items, such as books, journal and periodical articles, and transactions. Federal Register j
notices, federal and state legislation, and congressional reports can usually be obtained i
L i
from these libraries, J
Documents such as theses, dissertations, foreign reports and translations, and non-NRC conference proceedings are available for purchase from the organization sponsoring the publication cited.
Single copies of NRC draft reports are available free, to the extent of supply, upon written request to the Office of Information Resources Management, Distribution Section U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Washington, DC 20555.
Copies of industry codes and standards used in a substantive manner in the NRC regulatory process are maintained at the NRC Library,7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, Maryland, and are available there for reference use by the public. Codes and standards are usually copy.
righted and may be purchased from the originating organization or, if they are American National Standards, from the American National Standards Institute,1430 Broadway, 4
New York, NY 10018.
]
L
r 3-4--
Vol. 9, No. 2 4
fi-a
)s.
(i q
r:
NRC Regulatory Agenda t
i a
j.
Quarterly Report
-April-June 1990-1, Manuscript Completed: July 1990
' Date Published: July 1990
.{
t J Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services Omce of Administration i U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
=1
' Washington, DC 20555 i
fr
)
i-kp
@..e6) f r
F.
.c.
TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I - RULES (A) Rules on which final action has been taken since March 30, 1990 Pace i
i Stabilization and Decontamination Priority, Trusteeship Provisions, and Amount of Property Insurance Requirements (Part 50).....................................................
1 i
Amendments to Part 60-to Delineate Anticipated Processes and Events and Unanticipated Processes and Events (Part 60).....................................................
2 Standard Specifications for the Granting of Patent Licenses (Part 81).....................................................
3 i
Export of Heavy Water to Canada (Part 110)......................
4 l
Revision of Fee Schedules:
Radioisotope Licenses (Part 170)....
5 (B) Proposed Rules
. Procedures Involving the Equal Access to Justice Act:
Implementation (Parts 1, 2)...................................
7 i
Informal Hearing Procedures for Nuclear Reactor Operator
-Licensing Adjudications (Part 2)..............................
8 Procedures Applicable to Proceedings for the Issuance of Licenses for the Receipt of High-Level Radioactive Waste i
at a Geologic Repository (Part 2).............................
9
-Revisions to Procedures to Issue Orders (Part 2)................
10 Operator's Licenses (Parts 2, 55)...............................
11 Enforcement of Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Federally Assisted Programs (Part 4).......................
12 A
Debt Collection Procedures (Part 15)............................
13 Standards for Protection Against Radiation (Part 20)............
14 Disposal of Waste Oil by Incineration from Nuclear Power Plants (Part 20)..............................................
16 Notifications of Incidents (Parts 20, 30, 40, 70)...............
18 lii
g Pace Proposed Revisions to the Criteria and Procedures for the a
Reporting of-Defects and Noncompliance and Conditions of Construction Permits.(Parts 21, 50)............................
20
- Willful Misconduct by Unlicensed Persons (Parts 30, 40, 50, 60, 61, 70, 72, 110, 150).......................................
22 ASNT Certification-of. Industrial Radiographers (Phase I)
-(Part 34).......................................................
23 Basic Quality-Assurance Program, Records and Reports of Misadministrations or Events Relating to the Medical Use of Byproduct Material (Part 35)...............................
25 1
Custody'and Long-Term Care of Uranium and Thorium Mill U
. Tailings Disposal Sites-(Part 40)......................
27 Ensuring the Effectiveness of Maintenance Programs for Nuclear Power Plants (Part 50)........................................
28 j
l
- Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against
- l Pressurized Thermal Shock Events (Part 50)....................
30 l
Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel.in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor' Sites (Parts 50, 72, 170)............
32 j
'i i
i
.Pr mary Reactor Conta nment Leakage Test ng'for Water-Cooled Power Reactors (Part 50)..............................-........
34 Amendment to.10 CFR 51.51 and 51.52,' Tables S-3 and S-4, Addition of Radon-222.and. Technetium-99 Radiation Values, 1
and Addition of Appendix B,
" Table S-3 Explanatory An a ly s i s " - ( P a r t. 51 )...........................................
36 l
l Consideration of Environmental Impacts of Temporary Storage of Spent Fuel After Cessation of Reactor Operation
.(FartL51).....................................................
38 Elimination of Inconsistencies Between NRC. Regulations and-q g
EPALHLW Standards-(Partl60)....................................
39 l
o a
(
Minor' Amendments to the' Physical Protection Requirements L'
(Parts 70, 72, 73, 75)........................................
41 Transportation Regulations:
Compatibility With the International 1 Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (Part 71)...........
42 Criteria for an Extraordinary Nuclear Occurrence (Part 140).....
44 i
IV l.
L l
i
e Page t
' Reasserting NRC's Sole Authority for Approving Onsite Low-Level Waste Disposal in Agreement States (Part 150).......
45 NRC Acquisition Regulation (NRCAR) (48 CFR Chapter 20, Parts 1-52).........................................................
46 (C)-Advance Notices of' Proposed Rulemaking Radioactive Waste Below. Regulatory Concern; Generic Rulemaking (Parts 2, 20).................................................
47-
-Comprehensive _ Quality Assurance in Medical Use and a Standard of Care (Part 35)..............................................
48 Medical Use of Byproduct Material:
Training and Experience Criteria (Part 35)............................................
49 Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures, Systems, and Components (Part 50)...........
50 L
Nuclear. Power Plant License Renewal (Part 54)...................
51 Import'and Export of Radioactive Wastes (Part 110)..............
52 (D) Unpublished Rules Conduct of Employees; Miscellaneous Amendments (Part 0)...
53 Revised Rules.of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings (Parts 0, 1,
2, 9,
50).........................................
54 p
L L
Revisions to Procedures to Issue Orders:
Challenges to E
Orders that are Made Immediately Effective (Part 2)...........
55*
L
. Availability.of Official Records (Part 2).......................
56 Discrimination on the Basis of Sex (Parts 2, 19)................
58
-1 Freedom of Information Act, Privacy Act, Production or Disclosure in Response to Subpoena or Demands of Courts or j
Other Authorities; Office of the Inspector General (Part 9)...
59 i
Revision of Definition of Meeting (Part 9)......................
60 Salary Offset Procedures for Collecting Debts Owed by Federal Employees to the Federal Government (Part 16).........
61 V
l5p Pace Clarification.of Statutory Authority for Purposes of Criminal Enforcement (Parts 19, 20, 21, 25, 30, 31, 32, 33,-34, 35, 39, 40,f50, 55, 61, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 95, 110, 150).....
62*
Residual' Radioactivity Criteria for Unrestricted Release of Lands and-Structures-(Part 20)................................
63*
Low-Level Waste Manifest Information and Reporting (Parts 20, 61)................................................
65 Fitness-for-Duty-Programs (Part 26).............................-
67*'
Fitness-for-Duty Programs for Category I Fuel Facilities and Shipments (Part 26)'.......................................
68*
' Timeliness in Conduct of Decommissioning of Material o
Facilities (Parts 30, 40, 70, 72).............................
70*
Decommissioning Regulations:
Recordkeeping and Termination for. Decommissioning, Documentation Additions (Parts 30, 40, 50, 70, 72)...................................................
72*
Requirements for Possession of Industrial Devices (Part 31).....
74' Material Approved for Incorporation by Reference; Maintenance and Availability (Parts-34, 35, 50, 73)...........
75*
Use of.Radiopharmaceuticals for Medical Research, Use of Biologies Containing Byproduct Material, and Compounding Radiopharmaceuticals (Part 35)................................
76 Iridium-192 Wire for Interstitial Treatment of Cancer (Part 35).....................................................
77 Authorization to Prepare Radiopharmaceutical Reagent Kits and Elute Radiopharmaceutical Generators; Use of Radiopharmaceuticals for Therapy (Part 35)....................
78*
Licensing and Radiation Safety' Requirements for Large Irr adiator s - ( Part 3 6 ).........................................
79 Emergency Planning Regulations for Part 52 Licensing (Part 50)................'.....................................
80
- Emergency Telecommunications System Upgrade (Part 50)...........
81 Clarification of Emergency Preparedness Regulations
-(Part 50)..................
83 vi
Page Safety-Related and Important to Safety in 10 CFR Part 50 (Part 50).......................................-..............
84 Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants (ASME Code,Section XI, Division 1, Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL)
(Part 50)..................'...................................
85 y
Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants.(ASME Code,.
t 1986/1987/1988 Addenda) (Part 50).............................
87 4
' Emergency Response Data System (Part 50)........................
-89 Fracture Toughness and Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance l
Requ rements (Part=50)........................................
91 s
License Renewal for-Nuclear Power Plants; Scope of Environmental Effects (Part 51)...............................
93*
Repository Operations Criteria (Part 60; 94 l
Night Firing Qualifications for Security Guards at Nuclear I
Power Plants (Part 73)........................................
95 1
Day Firing Qualifications and Physical Fitness Programs for Security Personnel at Category I Fuel Cycle Facilities (Part'73).................................................'....
96 j
Personnel Access Authorization Program (Part 73)................
98 Reinvestigation of Individuals Granted Unescorted Access to Nuclear Power Plants.(Part 73)................................
100 Material Control and Accounting Requirements for Uranium Enrichment Plants (Part 74).................................... 102 t
Import and Export of Nuclear Equipment and Material (Part 110)....................................................
104*
Export of Specially Designed or Prepared Gaseous Diffusion L
Enrichment Plant Components (Part 110)........................
106*
i~
l l
SECTION II - PETITIONS FOR RULEMAKING (A) Petitions incorporated into final rules or petitions denied since March 30, 1990 Sierra Club (PRM-40-23)........................................
107 vii 1
l i
t 1
PAqn (B) Petitions for which a notice of denial.
u has been prepared and is scheduled-to be-published in the Federal Register next g
quarter None (C)-Petitions incorporated into proposed rules None (D) Petitions pending staff review The Rockefeller University (PRM-20-17)..........................
109 The Rockefeller University (PRM-20-18)..........................
110 GE Stockholders' Alliance l(PRM-20-19)...........................
111 Amersham Corporation (PRM-35-8).................................
112 i
tAmerican Colleges of Nuclear Physicians and the Society of
- Nuclear-Medicine.(PRM-35-9)...................................
113 Free-' Environment, Inc., et al.
(PRM-50-20)......................
114 Charles. Young (PRM-50-50).......................................
115 Marvin~ Lewis (PRM-50-52)........................................
116
' The Ohio, Citizens'for Responsible-Energy.(PRM-50-53).............
117 I
- Public Citizen (PRM-50-54).......................................
119 i
Yankee Atomic Electric Company (PRM-50-55)......................
120*
.i Sierra Club, North Carolina Chapter (PRM-61-1)..................
121*
(E) Petitions with deferred action None i
vili
i Preface The Regulatory-Agenda is a quarterly compilation of all rules
)
on which the NRC has recently completed action or has proposed,
,or is considering action and of all petitions for rulemaking that the NRC has received that are pending disposition.
Oraanization of the Aaenda The agenda consists of two sections that have been updated l:
through June 29, 1990.
Section I,
" Rules," includes (A) rules l
on which final action has been taken since March 30, 1990, the l
closing date of the last NRC Regulatory Agenda; (B). rules published previously as proposed rules on which the Commission I
has not taken final-action; (C) rules published as advance L
notices of proposed rulemaking for which neither a proposed nor final rule has been issued; and (D) unpublished rules on which the NRC expects to take action.
Section II, " Petitions for Rulemaking," includes (A) petitions denied or incorporated into final rules since March'30, 1990;
-(B) petitions for which a notice of. denial has been prepared and is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register next quarter; (C) petitions incorporated into proposed rules; (D) j petitions pending staff review, and (E) petitions with deferred action.
1 In Section I of the agenda, the rules are ordered from the lowest to the highest part within Title 10, Chapter I, of the-Code of Federal-Regulations-(Title 10).
If more than one rule appears under the same part,-the rules are arranged within that part by date of most recent publication.
If a rule amends multiple parts, the rule is listed under the. lowest affected part.
In Section II of the agenda, the petitions are ordered fro:a the lowest to 'the highest part of Title 10 and are identified with a petition for rulemaking (PRM) number.
If more than one petition appears under the same CFR part, the petitions are arranged by PRM numbers in consecutive cruer within that part of Title 10.
^ Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) has been added to each 11emaking agenda entry.
This identification number will make
.t easier-for the public and agency officials to track the publication history of regulatory actions.
The dates listed under the heading " Timetable" for scheduled action by the Commission or the Executive Director for Operations (EDO) on particular rules or petitions are considered tentative and are not binding on the Commission or its staff.
They are included for planning purposes only.
This
u Regulatory Agenda'is published to provide the public early notice and opportunity to participate in the rulemaking
' process.
However, the NRC may consider or act on any i
rulemaking proceeding even if it is not' included in this
. Regulatory Agenda.
Rulemakinas ADoroved by the Executive Director for ODerations (EDO)
The Executive Director for Operations initiated a procedure for the review of the regulations being prepared by staff offices that. report to him to ensure that staff resources were being allocated to achieve most effectively NRC's regulatory priorities.
This procedure requires EDO approval before staff resources may be expended on the development of any.new
~rulemaking. -Furthermore, all existing rules must receive EDO approval prior to the commitment of additional resources.
Those unpublished rules whose further development has been terminated will be noted in this edition of the agenda and deleted from subsequent editions.
Rulsc Whose termination was directed subsequent to publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking will be removed from the agenda after publication of a notice of withdrawal.
Rules and Petitions for Rulemaking that appear on the agenda for the first time are identified by an asterisk (*).
i Eublic Particioation in Rulemakina comments on any rule in the' agenda may be sent to the Secretary of.the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention:
Docketing and Service Branch.
1 Comments may also be hand delivered to One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland,.between 7:30 a.m.
~
L
.and 4:15 p.m.,
Federal workdays.
Comments received on rules.
for which the comment period has closed will be considered if i.
it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot l
be given except as to comments received on or before the closure dates specified in the-agenda.
The agenda and any comments. received on any rule listed in the agenda are available for public-inspection, and copying for a fee, at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Public Document Room, 2120'L Street, NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC, between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m.
X
.~
.~.
'l Additional Rulemakina Information h
- For further information concerning NRC rulemaking procedures
'or the status of any rule listed in this agenda,-contact Betty Golden, Regulations Specialist, Regulatory Publications Branch, Division of' Freedom of Information and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,-
Washington, DC 20555, Telephone (301) 492-4268 (persons outside-j the. Washington, DC metropolitan area may call toll-free:
800-368-5642).
For further information on the' substantive content.
of any rule listed in the agenda, contact the individual lis ed under the. heading " Agency. contact" for that rule.
I i
l t
1.
i i
n Xi l
a m, m N
,w. 4 #4 ash.-4 eentaamwmzaww.
c--
-'--e,J.---aa-6.,A.a,4.JK4w..mM6 MM 4w. ahwwmas u.a a w am W ee 4maec m um dw#.m4 h_wwwa maud--w-'-
1 I, '
l 6
9 I
f 4
I 4
1 i
l b
6 f
w 4
I i
i h
i f'
i k
i r
b i.
I t
t Y
I I
e e
,,--c
-<-m-wmeyww-w ww-ee--=awww
_--w-m--e.v,,..ww-----.=e,.,-,ew,w,w.,--y-w,+ee-ye--
3 i
(A) Rules on Which Final Action Has Been Taken Since March 30, 1990 D
+
P i
1
~
n
l-l l
1 i
TITLE:
Stabilization and Decontamination Priority, Trusteeship 1
Provisions, and Amount of Property Insurance Requirements i
RIN:
3150-AD19 i
CFR CITATION.
ABSTRACT:
The final rule amends the Cosmission's regulations on property 1
insurance as they apply to commercial power reactor licensees.
This rule, which is in response to three petitions for rulemaking (PRM-50-51.PRN-50-51A,PRM-50-51B):
(1)clarifiesthescopeand timing of the stabilization and decontamination processes after an accident at a covered reactor; (2) specifies that the insurance is required to ensure that commercial power reactor licensees will have sufficient. funds to carry out their obi.gations to clean up and decontaminate after an accident; and (3) eliminates the requirement that insurance proceeds after an accident are paid to an independent trustee.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 04/02/90 55 FR 12163 Final Action Effective -04/02/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Robert Wood Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1960
TITLE:Amendments to Part 60 to Delineate Anticipated Processes and Events and Unanticipted Processes and Events RIN:
3150-AD31 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 60 ABSTRACT:
In 10 CFR Part 60, licensing requirements for disposal of radioactive wastes in geologic repositories, certain performance requirements for the repository are based on an assumption of the occurrence of anticipated processes and events. The specific meaning and use of this term, and unanticipated processes and events, needs further clarification. This rulemaking would modify the definition of these terms in i 60.2, modify i 60.113, which describes the use of these terms, modify the definition of
" geologic setting" in 6 60.2, and modify the use of that term in i 60.102.
The objective of the rulemaking is to improve the licensing process for the geologic repository program.
It would have no adverse effects on the licensee or the public.
It is expected that the resources expended by NRC on the rulemaking would be more than offset by resources saved during the licensing process. The amendments that were under consideration in this rule will be considered as part of the proposed rule entitled, " Elimination of Inconsistencies Between NRC Regulations and EPA HLW Standards" (RIN:
3150-AC03).
TIMETABLE:
Terminated 06/19/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 10101; Public Law 97-425 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Melvin Silberberg/ Clark Prichard Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3810/3884 2
TITLE:
Standard Specifications for the Granting of Patent Licenses RIN:
3150 AD54 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 81 ABSTRACT:
The final rule amends the Comission's regulations regarding Office of Management and Budget (OMB) clearance pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 06/08/90 55 FR 23422 Final Action Effective 06/08/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Ronald M. Smith Office of the Ger.eral Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1640 i
s l
3
i TITLE:
i Export of Heavy Water to Canada l
RIN:
3150-A020 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 110 ABSTRACT:
The final rule would amend the Commission's regulations concerning the import and export of nuclear equipment and material in 10 CFR Part 110.
This rulemaking has been incorporated into the proposed rule entitled ' Import and Export of Nuclear Equipnent and Material (RIN3150-AD64)." The proposed rule is scheduled to be published in October 1990.
TIMETABLE:
Terminated 06/25/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
44 USC 3201; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 j
EFFEC 15 ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No 1
AGENCY CONTACT:
Elaine 0. Hemby Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
Office of Governmental and Public Affairs Washington, DC 20555 301 492-0341 4
TITLE:
Revision of fee Schedules: Radioisotope Licenses RIN:
3150-A023 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 170 ABSTRAC1:
The final rule amends the Commission's regulations governing licensing and inspection fees for radioisotope licenses (small 1
programs licensed under the provisions of 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, l
and70).
The final rule establishes a ceiling of $50,000 for l
Topical Reports, updates the schedule of fees for small byprodur,t l
material applicatious for decommissioning, changes the cost per I
professional staff hour for NRC services based on the FY 1990 budget, deletes certain exemption provisions and clarifies others for ease of administration, adds a new exemption to provide that Indian tribes and Indian organizations will be exempt from the payment of fees, and requests that bills in excess of $5,000 be paid by electronic fund transfer in accordance with U.S. Department l
of the Treasury cash management initiatives.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 05/23/90 55 FR 21173 Final Action Effective 07/02/90 l
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
31 USC 9701; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Lee Hiller Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Controller Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7351 1
S I'
(B)ProposedRules I
1
Elm
1 i
i TITLE:
Procedures Involving the Equal Access to Justice Act:
J Implementation i
RIN:
l 3150-AA01 CFR CITATION:
The proposed rule would implement the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) by providing for the payment of fees and expenses to certain eligible individuals and businesses that prevail in dgency adjudications when the agency's position is determined not to have been substantially justified.
This proposed regulation is modeled af ter rules issued by the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) and has been modified to conform to NRC's established rules of practice. The proposed rule would further the EAJA's intent to develop government-wide, " uniform" l
agency regulations and would descrfae NRC procedures and requirements for the filing and disposition of EAJA applications.
A draft final rule was sent to the Commission in June 1982, but Commission action was suspended pending a decision by the Comptroller General on the availability of funds to pay awards l
to intervenor parties.
This issue was also the subject of litigation in Business and Professional People for the Public Interest v. NRC. 793 F.2d 1366 (D.C. Cir. 19857 l
Additionally, in August 1985, the President signed into law.
Pub. L. No. 99-80, an enactment renewing and revising the EAJA af ter its expiration under a statutory sunset requirement.
The rule is being reevaluated to determine the agency adjudications that fall within the EAJA's coverage.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/28/81 46 FR 53189 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 11/28/81 46 FR 53189 Next Action Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
5 USC 504 l
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No 1
AGENCY CONTACT:
John Cho Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel 1
Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1585 l
o P
TITLE:
1 Informal Hearing Procedures for Nuclear Reactor Operator Licensing Adjudications i
RIN:
3150-AD17 CFR Cl \\ TION:
10 CFR 2 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend NRC regulations to provide rules of procedure for informal adjudicatory hearings in nuclear power reactor operator licensing proceedings.
The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 requires that the NRC, in any proceeding for the granting, suspending, revoking, or amending of an NRC license, including licensing as an operator or senior operator at a nuclear power plant, afford an interested person, upon request, a " hearing."
This proposed rule would amend an existing rule which provides for informal hearing procedures for materials licensing proceedings to include reactor operator licensing proceedings as well.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 04/26/89 54 FR 17961 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 06/26/89 Final Action Published 07/00/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY' CONTACT:
Roger Davis Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1607 8
l
~._
i TITLE:
Procedures Applicable to Proceedings for the Issuance of Licenses for the Receipt of High-Level Radioactive Waste at a Geologic Repository RIN:
3150-AD27-L CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2 l
l ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Comission's regulations j
governing the licensing proceeding on the disposal of high-level radioactive waste at a geologic repository (HLW proceeding). The proposed revisions are intended to facilitate the Comission's ability to comply with the schedule for the Comission's decision on the construction authorizatin for the i
repository while providing for a thorough technical review of the license application and the equitable treatment of the I
parties to the hearing. The proposed rule would establish a i
new standard for the admission of initial contentions, would define "le:e contentions" as any contention proposed after the inithi contentions were submitted, would require parties to present direct testimony on contentions, would establish a compulsory hearing schedule, and would eliminate sua sponte review by the Comission's adjudicatory boards.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 09/26/89 54 FR 39387 r
Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 11/27/89 Final Action Published 07/31/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Kathryn Winsberg Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1637 1
L 9
l
n i
TITLE:
Revisions to Procedures to Issue Orders RIN:
3150-AD53 l
CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2 l
ABSTRACT The proposed rule would amend the Commission's procedures for issuing orders to include persons not licensed oy the Commission but who are otherwise subject to the Commission's jurisdiction.
r The proposed revisions would more accurately reflect the Commission's existing statutory authority to issue orders than is presently the case.
The proposed revision also would identify the types of Commission orders to which hearing rights attach.
TIMETABLE:
Prope-sed Action Published 04/03/90 55 FR 12370 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 06/18/90 Final Action Published Undetermined J
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
l 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Mary E. Wagner Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1683 l.
l l
10 l
TITLE:
4 Operator's Licenses RIN:
3150-AD55 t
CFR CITATION:
The proposed. rule would amend the Commission's regulations to i
j require that compliance with the conditions and cut off levels of fitness-for-duty programs (10 CFR Part 26) be a condition of i
l an operator license or a senior-operator license. The proposed rule would also make a conforming modification to the Commission's i
enforcement policy. Appendix C to 10 CFR Part 2.
This proposed rule was initiated in response to a staff requirements memorandum dated March 22, 1989.
The proposed amendments would give operators l
full notice of the gravity of any violation of the cutoff levels 1
i for substances described in Part 26 and would reflect enforcement I
sanctions for operators who violate these cutoff levels.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Rule Published 04/17/90 55 FR 14288 l
Proposed Action Comment Period Ends- 07/02/90 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
David J. Lange Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3172 S
b 11 i
i
-o
< ~
v me v
m
u TITLE:
Enforcement of Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Federally Assisted Programs RIN:
3150-AC64 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 4 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations concerning enforcement of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, in Federally assisted programs or activities to include a cross-reference to the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS). Because some facilities subject to new construction or alteration requirements under Section 504 are also subject to the Architectural Barriers Act, government wide reference to UFAS will diminish the possibility that recipients of Federal financial assistance would face conflicting enforcement standards.
In addition, reference to UFAS by all Federal funding agencies will reduce potential conflicts when a building is subject to the Section 504 regulations of more than one Federal agency. The U.S.
Department of Justice (D0J) is the lead agency in proposing this amendment. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is joining D0J and other Federal agencies in the proposed rule.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 03/08/89 54 FR 9966 Proposed Action Comunent Period Ends 05/08/89 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
i Edward E. Tucker Nuclear Regulatory Cossnission Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization and Civil Rights Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7106 12 l
TITLE:
Debt Collection Procedures RIN:
3150-AC87 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 15 ABSTRACT:
j The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations concerning the procedures that the NRC uses to collect its debts. The proposed 1
amendments are necessary to conform NRC regulations to the amended procedures contained in the Federal Claims Collection Standards issued by the General Accounting Office and the U.S. Department of Justice.
The proposed action is intended to allow the NRC to improve the collection of debts due to the United States.
Because the proposed regulation is racessary to implement the Debt Collection Act of 1982, there is no suitable alternative to rulemaking for this action. No comments were received on the proposed rule.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/07/88 53 FR 39480 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 11/21/88 Final Action Published 07/00/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
31 USC 3711; 31 USC 3717; 31 USC 3718; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Graham D. Johnson Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Controller Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7535 13 l
--w
-n m
-r
~-
TITLE:
Standards for Protection Against Radiation RIN:
3150-AA38 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20-ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would revise Part 20 of the Comission's regulations in its entirety.
Radiation protection philosophy and technology have changed markedly since the present Part 20 was promulgated nearly 30 years ago. Because Part 20 contains the NRC standards for protection against radiation that are used by all licensees and affects exposures of workers and members of the public, it should be the most basic of the NRC's regulations. However, because the present Part 20 has become outdated, most radiation protection actions occur through licensing actions independent of Part 20. A complete revision is necessary to provide better assurance of protection against radiation; establish a clear health protection basis for the limits; reflect current information on health risk, dosimetry, and radiation protection practices and experience; provide NRC with a health protection base from which it may consider other regulatory actions taken to protect public health; be consistent with recommendations of world authorities (InternationalCommissiononRadiologicalProtection);
and apply to all licensees in a consistent manner.
Alternatives to the complete revision considered were no action, delay for further guidance, and partial revision of the standards.
These were rejected as ignoring scientific advancements, being unresponsive to international and national guidance, and correcting only some of the recognized problems with the present Part 20.
Benefits would include updating the regulations to reflect contemporary scientific knowledge and radiation protection philosophy; implementing regulations which reflect the ICRP risk-based rationale; reducing lifetime doses to individuals receiving the highest exposures; implementing provisions for summation of doses from internal and external exposures; providing clearly identified dose limits for the public; and providing an understandable health-risk base for protection.
The cost of implementing the revision is estimated to be $33 million for all NRC and Agreement State licensees in the initial year and about $8 million in each subsequent year. This cost does not include any savings which might also be realized by the revision.
14 l
1
i TITLE:
Standards for Protection Against Radiation TIMETABLE:
ANPRM 03/20/80 45 FR 18023 ANPRM Comment Period Ends 06/18/80 45 FR 18023 Proposed Action Published 12/20/85 50 FR 51992 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 05/12/86 51 FR 1092 Proposed Action Comment Period Extended to 10/31/86 Final Action for Division Review 02/15/88 Final Action to Offices for Concurrence 06/30/88 Final Action Package to EDO 09/27/88 FinalActiontoCommission(SECY-83-315) 11/03/88 RevisedFinalActiontoCommission(SECY-89-267) 08/29/89 Revised Backfit Analysis to EDO 03/01/90 Final Action Publisheo 08/30/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2073; 42 USC 2093; 42 USC 2095; 42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2133; 42 USC 2134; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2273; 42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5842 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: Yes AGENCY CONTACT:
Harold T. Peterson Nuclear Regulatory Commisrion Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3640 1
l
f l
TITLE:
Disposal of Waste Oil by Incineration from Nuclear Power Plants RIN:
3150-AC14 CFR CITATION 10 CFR 20 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule, which is being initiated in partial response to a petition filed by Edison Electric Institute and Utility Nuclear Waste ManagementGroup(PRM20-15,datedJuly 31,1984), would amend NRC regulations to allow onsite incineration of waste oil at nuclear power plants subject to specified conditions.
Currently, the only approved disposal method for low-level, radioactively contaminated waste oil i
from nuclear power plants involves absorption or solidification, transportation to, and burial at a licensed disposal site. There is a clear need to allow, for very low activity level waster, the use of l
alternative disposal methods which are more cost effective from a radiological health and safety standpoint and which conserve the limited disposal capacity of low-level waste burial sites.
Increased savings to both the public and the industry could thereby be achieved without imposing additional risk to the public health and safety.
Alternatives to this rulemaking action are to maintain the status quo or to wait until the Environmental Protection Agency develops standards on acceptable levels of radioactivity which may be released to the f
environment on an unrestricted basis.
It is estimated that approximately 1-2 person years of NRC staff time will be required to process this rule.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 06/21/88 Proposed Action Published 08/29/88 53 FR 32914 Proposed Action Coment Period Ends 10/28/88 Final Action to Offices for Concurrence 12/15/89 Final Action to EDO 10/05/90 Final Action to Comission 10/19/90 Final Action Published 11/30/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2167; 42 USC 2073 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No f
16
TITLE:
Disposal of Waste Oil by Incineration from Nuclear Power Plants AGENCY CONTACT:
Catherine R. Mattsen Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3638 l
5 17
~
TITLE:Notifications of Incidents RIN:
3150-AC91 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20; 10 CFR 30; 10 CFR 40; 10 CFR 70 ABSTRACT:
This rulemaking would amend 10 CFR 20.403(a) and (b) to revise the licensees' reporting requirements for material licensees and research and test reactors.
In addition, new sections will be developed and added to Parts 30, 40, and 70. While10CFR20.403(a) and (b) are reasonably clear in terms of licensee reporting requirements for events involving " exposures" and " releases" of radioactive materials, these sections are not clear concerning evet:ts involving " loss of operation" and " damage to property."
The staff believes these criteria are not indicative of events that pose a hazard to public health and safety or the environment.
The periodic loss of operation of a facility due to age or normal wear is expected and usually poses no additional hazard to the public or environment. The same is true for the cost of repairing damage which L.f be high because of extenuating circumstances and not due to the extent of the damage or its effect on any licensed material.
The deleted sections will be replaced with new criteria which will be added to Parts 30, 40, and 70. The staff believes the new requirements to these parts are more indicative of potentially significant events affecting the health and safety of the public and the environment.
In addition, the rulemaking also defines "immediate" in actual time, e.g., within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />, for reporting requirements.
This rulemaking action will revise a current Commission regulation; there is no otler appropriate procedure to accommodate the clarification. This rulemaking activity is considered to be a high priority item by NMSS.
The health and safety of the public will be better protected because improved reporting requirements will reduce the potential risk of exposure to radiation. Revising the reporting require-ments will also simplify regulatory functions and free the staff from unnecessary additional investigation and, at the same time, protect the industry from unnecessary and unexpected fines.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 09/13/89 Proposed Action to EDO 03/16/90 Proposed Action Published 05/14/90 55 FR 19890 Proposed Action Connent Period Ends 07/30/90 Final Action to ED0 12/31/90 Final Action Published 02/28/91 18
?
l TITLE:
Notifications of incidents LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Joseph J. Mate Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3795 1
l e
6 19
I TITLE:
Proposed Revisions to the Criteria and Procedures fo" the Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance and Conditions of Construction Permits RIN:
3150-AA68 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 21; 10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend Part 21 and $50.55(e), both of which require the reporting of safety defects by operating license (OL) holders and construction permit (CP) holders.
In addition, Part 21 requires reporting of safety defects by non-licensee vendors.
The proposed amendments were prompted by the TMI Action Plan Task II.J 4 and NRC staff experience with Part 21 and $50.55(e) reporting.
The main objectives of the rulemaking effort are:
(1) reduction of duplicate evaluation and reporting of safety defects; (2) establishment of a consistent threshold for safety defect reporting in Part 21 and $50.55(e); (3) establishment of a consistent, uniform content of reporting under Part 21 and
$50.55(e);and(4)establishmentofconsistenttimeframesfor reporting of defects in Part 21 and $50.55(e).
i Approximately 200 reports are submitted to the Commission annually under Part 21. Approximately 750 550.55(e) reports are submitted annua lly. These reports identify both plant-specific and generic i
safety defects requiring further NRC evaluation and regulatory action.
Under the current Part 21 and $50.55(e), these reports have formed the basis for NRC issuance of numerous NRC generic communications.
The proposed rulemaking will reduce duplicate reporting and evaluation of safety defects which now exists. The rulemaking will establish a more coherent regulatory framework that is expected to reduce the industry reporting and evaluation burden significantly without any reduction in reported safety defect information.
Alternatives to this approach that were considered ranged from establishment of a single rule for all reporting of safety defects i-and operating reactor events to maintaining the status quo for safety defect reporting. All other alternatives were rejected I
because they would not substantially improve the current safety defect reporting situation.
CurrentannualcostsofreportingunderPart21and$50.55(e)are estimated at approximately $6 million dollars for industry and 20 I
TITLE:
Proposed Revisions _to the Criteria and Procedures for the Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance and Conditions of Construction Permits ABSTRACT:
(CONT)
$680,000 for NRC evaluations.
It is anticipated that the annual industry reportin9 burden should be reduced by approximately
$800,000 while the NRC burden will be slightly reduced.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Initial Action to Comission 12/16/85 Commission Rejected Proposed Action 10/20 ProposedActiontoCommission(SECY-88-72)/86 03/12/88 ProposedActiontoCommission(SECY-88-258) 09/12/88 Revised Proposed f.ction Published 11/04/88 53 FR 44594 Public Action Comment Period Ends 01/03/89 Final Draft Rule Office Concurrence Complete 06/89 Final Draft Rule CRGR Review Complete 07/12/89 Final Draft Rule to Commission (SECY-89-246) 08/14/89 Proposed Redraft of Final Rule to ED0 08/20/90 Proposed Redraft of Final Rule to Commission 08/27/90 Final Action Published To be determined by the Commission LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2282; 42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5846 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
William R. Jones Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Analysis and Evaluation of Operational D6ta i
Washington, DC 20555 301 492-4442 l
1 i
i 21 1
I l
-B
.a TI1LE:Willful Misconduct by Unlicensed Persons j
i 1
RIN:
3150-AD38 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 30; 10 CFR 40; 10 CFR 50; 10 CFR 60; 10 CFR 61; 10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 72; 10 CFR 110; 10 CFR 150 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to put licensed persons on notice that they say be held accountable for willfully causing violations of the Commission's requirements or for
)
other willful misconduct that arises out of activities within the Commission's jurisdiction and places in question the NRC's reasonable assurance that licensed activities will be conducted in a manner that provides adequate protection to the public health and safety. The proposed rule would subject a person who violates the substantive prohibition to enforcement action under existing regulations. The proposed rule will enable the Commission to better address willful misconduct that undermines, or calls into question, adequate protection of the public health and safety.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 04/03/90 55 FR 12374 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 06/18/90 Final Action Published Undetermined L
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Geoffrey Cant Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Enforcement Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3283 22
i TITLE:
ASNTCertificationofIndustrialRadiographers(PhaseI)
RIN:
3150-AD35 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 34 ABSTRACT:
j The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations on licenses for radiography and radiation safety requirements for radiographic operations to permit applicants for a license to j
indicate that all of their active radiographers are certified in
)
radiation safety by the American Society for Nondestructive Testing (ASNT).
Current NRC sealed source radiography licensing requirements specify that an ap)licant will have an adequate program for j
training radiograpiers and will submit a schedule or description of the program including initial training, periodic retraining, on-the-job training, and the means to be used by the licensee to determine the radiographer's knowledge and understanding of, and ability to comply with, Commission regulations and licensing requirements, and the operating and emergency procedures of the applicant.
The NRC is proposing to permit applicants to affirm, in lieu of submitting descriptions of their initial radiation safety trairing and radiographer qualification program, that all individuals acting as radiographers are or will be certified in radiation safety through the Industrial Radiography Radiation Safety Personnel Program of the ASNT. Contingent upon an analysis of costs and benefits and demonstrated success of the ASNT certification program, the NRC is planning to initiate a subsequent rulemaking which would require third-party certification of all radiographers.
The large radioactive sourt.es used in industrial radiography pose serious hazards if radiation safety procedures are not rigorously adhered to.
Investigations by the NRC and Agreement State programs have indicated that inadequate training is often a major contributing factor to rLdiography accidents. The staff believes that voluntary participation in the ASNT certification program has the potential to significantly improve safety awareness and t
performance.
The ASNT program will offer certification for both isotope and x-ray users. Certification would be valid for 5 years, with retesting required for renewal.
The staff expects that use of a l
certification program by licensees will not affect licensee training costs since the ASNT eligibility requirements include documented 23 1
4
. TITLE:ASNTCertificationofIndustrialRadiographers(PhaseI)
ABSTRACT: (CONT) l training. Some small reduction in cost will be associated with the applicatter, process because, if a radiography licensee applicant
)
elects to have his or her staff certified, he or she will not have l
to submit a detailed description of a planned radiation safety J
training and testing program.
It is currently estimated that as many as 10,000 radiographers could be involved in certification at an average cost of $600 per radiographer. Thus, the total cost to the industry would be $6 million over a 5-year certification period, or $1.2 million per year.
It is estimated that 0.3 staff-years of effort over 18 months will be required for this rulemaking, i
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 09/15/89 j
Proposed Action Published 11/09/89 54 FR 47089 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 02/17/90 Final Action to EDO 10/02/90 Final Action Published 11/15/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Donald Nellis Nuclear Regulatory Comission-
[
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 311 492-3628 k
24 l
y, i:
TITLE:
4 Basic Quality' Assurance Program, Records and Reports of Misadministrations or Events Relating to the Medical Use of Byproduct Material RIN:
3150-AC65 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Comission's -egulations concerning c
the medical use of byproduct material.
The p Q osed amendments would require medical use licensees to establish and itplement a written basic quality-assurance program to prevent, detect, and correct i
the cause of errors in the administration of byproduct material.
The oroposed action is necessary to provide for improved patient se n y.- The proposed amendment, which is intended to prevent error:
in M ical use, would p?imarily affect hospitals, clinics, and individual physici m.,
Modification of reporting and recordkeeping p
requirements for W 9eastic and therapy events or misadministration are also proposed in chis rulemaking. This amendment would be a matter of compatibility for Agreement States.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/02/87 52 FR 36942 j
Proposed Action Coment Period Ends 12/01/87 Options Paper to Office for Concurrence 05/13/88 Options Paper on QA Rulemaking to ED0 05/26/88 i
Revised Options Paper on QA Rulemaking to ED0 05/31/88 Option Paper to Comission (SECY-88-156)06/03/88 SRM. Issued Directing Re-Proposal of Basic QA Rule 07/12/88 Proposed Action for Division Review 12/05/88 Workshop on Basic QA Rule and Draft Regulatory Guide 01/30-31/89 Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 03/29/89
-Proposed Action to ED0 06/01/89 i
Proposed Action to Comission (SECY-89-173)06/07/89
(
Revised Proposed Action to ED0 08/11/89 Revised Proposed Action to Comission- (SECY-89-269) 08/30/89 Proposed Action Published 01/16/90 55 FR 1439 Correction to Proposed Action Published 02/06/90 55 FR 4049 Proposed Action Coment Period Ends 04/12/90 Final Action to E00 02/15/91 Final-Action to Lomission 03/15/91 Final Action Published 04/16/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 25
J 1
TITLE:
Basic Quality Assurance Program, Records and Reports of Misadministrations or Events Relating to the Medical Use of.
Byproduct Material-EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Anthony Tse Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3797-5
.i l
26 L
\\
t L
TITLE:,
Custody and Long-Term Care of Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings Disposal Sites RIN:
.</.
3150-AC56 CFR CITATION:
ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to include a procedure for licensing a custodian for the post-closure, 2
long-term control of uranium mill tailings sites required by the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (UMTRCA).
This amendment would establish a general license for custody and long-term care of uranium mill tailings by the Department of Energy, other designated Federal agencies, or States when applicable.
The general license would be formulated so that it would become effective for a particular site when:
(1) NRC concurs in the determination that the site has been properly reclaimed or closed; and (2) a Long-Term Surveillance Plan that meets the requirements of the general I
license has.been received by NRC.
No significant impact to the public or. industry is expected as a result of this proposed action.
1 TIMETABLE:
I Proposed Action for Division and Office Review 11/09/87 Office Concurrence on Proposed Action Completed 02/10/88 Proposed Action to ED0 02/10/88 Proposed ~ Action to Commission (SECY-88-83)03/17/88
-ANPRM to SECY 08/12/88 ANPRM Published 08/25/88 53 FR 32396 ANPRM Comment Period Ends 10/24/88 Proposed Action for Division and Office Review 03/06/89 Proposed Action to ED0 07/26/89 Proposed. Action to Commission (SECY-89-233) 08/03/89 Proposed Action Published 02/06/90 55 FR 3970 Proposed Action Public Comment Period Ends 04/23/90 Final Action to ED0.07/16/90 Final Action to Commission 08/01/90 Final Action Published 09/03/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5842; 42 USC 5846 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Mark Haisfield Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3877 27
L 11TLE:
Ensuring-the Effectiveness of Maintenance Programs for Nuclear Power Plants-PIN:'
3150-AD00 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The final rule,-if adopted, would provide requirements for the maintenance of nuclear power plants. -The final rule would apply to all components, systems, and structures important to safety for nuclear power plants and would be applicable to existing and future plants.
The final rule would also requ're each licensee to develop, implement, and maintain a maintenance f'ogram.
The Commission has
-further directed the staff by memorandum dated May-23,1990, to
. prepare two separate rulemaking packages.
Should the Commission determine that a rule is necessary these two options will be available for their consideration.
The scope.of maintenance activities addressed in either version of the final rule will be within the framework of the Commission's-Policy Statement on Maintenance of Nuclear-Power Plants, issued on March 23, 1988 (53 FR 9430) and revised on December 8, 1989 (54 FR 50611).
Programmatic guidance will be included in the first rulemakir.g package. -The second rulemaking package will be similar to the first, but it will not contain any programmatic guidance.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 09/06/88 Proposed Action to EDO 09/26/88 Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-88-277) 09/30/88 Proposed Action Published 11/28/88 53 FR 47822
-Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 01/27/89 Proposed Action Public Comment Period Extended to 02/27/89 53 FR 52716 Final Action to Offices for Concurrence 04/10/89 Final Action to EDO 04/21/89
. Final. Action to Commission (SECY-89-143)04/28/89 Revised Policy Statement Published 1F.?08/89 54 FR 50611 Final Action to ACRS 03/25/91 Final Action to CRGR 03/29/91 Final Action to ED0 05/31/91 Final Action to Commission 06/08/91 Final Action Published 06/28/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 IISC 5841; 42 USC 5842 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No 28 l
TITLE:.
Ensuring!the Effectiveness of Maintenance Programs for. Nuclear Power Plants-1 AGENCY CONTACT:.
Robert Riggs Nuclear Regulatory Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3732 l
i
,4, 29 u-
TITLE:
Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against Pressurized Thermal Shock Events RIN:
3150 AD01 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule revises the Pressurized Thermal Shock (PTS) rule, published on July 23, 1985, which established a screening criterion, a limit on the degree of rodiation enbrittlement of PWR reactor vessel beltline materials beyond which operation cannot continue without additional plant-specific analysis.
The rule prescribes how to calculate the degree of embrittlement es a function of the copper and nickel contents of the controlling material and the neutron fluence.
The proposed amendment revises the calculative procedures to be consistent with that given in Revision 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.99.
This guide, which was published in final form in May 1988, provides an updated correlation of embrittlement data.
The need to amend the PTS rule to be consistent with the guide became apparent when it was found that some medium-copper, high-nickel materials embrittlement is worse now than predicted using the PTS rule. A number of PWRs will reach the screening criterion sooner than previously thought, and three plants will need to make plant-specific analyses in the next 10 years.
Therefore, a high priority is being given to this effort.
An unacceptable alternative to this amendment from the safety standpoint is to leave the present PTS rule in place.
A plant-by-plant analyses by the NRC staff found four plants whose reference temperatures are 52 to 68 F higher than previously thought, based on the present rule. This is beyond the uncertainties that were felt to exist when the present rule was published. Another unacceptable alternative that has been evaluated is to change the calculative procedure for the reference temperature and also change the screening criterion.
Failure probabilities for the most critical accident scenarios in three piants, when recalculated using the new embrittlement estimates, were somewhat lower, but were quite dependent on the plant configuration and the scenario chosen.
Furthermore, the screening criterion was based on a variety of considerations besides the probabilistic analysis.
Reopening the question of where to set the screeniag criterion was not considered productive because of plant-to-plant differences.
It is better to have a conservative " trip wire" that triggers plant-specific analyses.
30
k n'
-TITLE:
s' Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against Pressurized Thermal. Shock Events ABSTRACT: (CONT)
.Immediate costs to industry will be those required for each utility
' to update the January 23, 1986, submittal required by the PTS rule,
- using fluence estimates that take account of flux reduction efforts in the interim and using the new-procedure for_ calculating RT/ PTS.
In addition, three to five plants will need to make the expenditure
~
.of an estimatcS 2.5 million dollars for the plant-specific analysis
.in the 1990s instead of 10 to 15 years later.
' TIMETABLE:
Proposed Act on to EDO-11/28/89 Proposed Action Published 12/26/89 54 FR 52946 j
Proposed Action Public Comment Period Ends 03/12/90 Final Action-to CRGR 07/16/90
. Final Action to EDO 08/15/90 t
Final Action ~ Published 10/15/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2133; 42 USC 2134; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS OF SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:-
Pryor-N. Randall Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of-Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3842 i-L i
1 t
31 1
i
\\l
m
]
y
{y u
V l
TITLE:
- Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites
~ RIN:
3150-AC76 CFR CITATION:-
10 CFR 50; 10 CFR 72; 10 CFR 170 ABSTRACT:~-
The proposed rule 1*; in res)onse to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) section 218 (a) whic1 states, in part, that the Secretary
'l of DOE shall establish a demonstration program, in cooperation with the private sector, for dry storage of spent nuclear fuel at civilian nuclear power reactor sites.
The objective of this parogram is establishing one or more technologies that the Comission may, by rule, approve for use at sites of civilian nuclear power reactors.- The NWPA also requires that the NRC establish procedures for the licensing of any technology approved by the Comission under-section 218(a) for use at the site of any civilian nuclear power j
reactor.
f The staff anticipates a significant increase in the demand for
}
use of dry spent fuel storage casks starting in the early 1990s, j
thus processing of this rulemaking is timely. NRC resource ti requirements are anticipated to be about 2 staff-years.
{
' TIMETADLE:
f Proposed Action for Division Review -03/02/88 i
Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 07/26/88 t
Proposed Action to ED0 02/14/89
' Proposed Action to Comission (SECY-89-084) 03/08/89
' Proposed Action Published 05/05/89 54 FR 19379 Proposed Public Action Coment Period Ends 06/19/89 Final Action to ACNW 01/24/90 Final Action to CRGR' 02/26/90 Final Action to ED0 05/08/90 Final Action to Comission (SECY-90-178) 05/15/90 Final Action Published 07/27/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 10153; 42 USC 10198 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No i
32 m
m.
m
T.
jf
}-
TITLE:
Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at c
Nuclear Power Reactor Sites -
- AGENCY CONTACT:
John-Telford' Nuclear Regulatory Comission i
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3796
]
i i
I I
_\\_'.
33 k
y 9
TITLE:
Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors RIN:
3150-AA86 CFR CITATION:-
10 CFR 50; Appendix J ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would update and revise the 1973 criteria for preoperational and periodic pressure testing for leakage of primary containment boundaries of water-cooled power reactors.
Problems have developed in application and interpretation of the existing rule.
These result from changes in testing technology, test criteria,.and a relevant national standard that needs to be recognized.
The proposed revisions would make the rule current and improve its usefulness.
The revision is urgently needed to resolve continuing conflicts oetween-licensees and NRC inspectors over interpretations, current regulatory practice which is no longer being reflected accurately by the existing rule, and endorsement in the existing regulation of an obsolete national standard that was replaced in 1981.
The benefits anticipated include elimination of inconsistencies and obsolete requirements, and the addition of greater usefulncss and a higher confidence in the leak-tight integrity of containment system boundaries under post-loss of coolant accident conditions.
The majority of the effort needed by NRC to issue the rule has already
(
been expended.
1 J
A detailed analysis of-costs, benefit',, Tnd occupational exposures
.is available in the Public Document R c.., and indicates possible savings to induatry of $14 million to $300 million and an increase
-in occupational exposure of less than l' percent per year per plant due to increased testing.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/29/86 51 FR 39538 Proposed Action Comment Period Extended 04/24/87 52 FR 2416 Final Action to CRGR/ACRS 08/03/90 1
Final Action to ED0 09/14/90 Final Action to Commission 10/17/90 Final Action Published 11/19/90 t
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2133; 42 USC 2134; 42 USC 5841 34
TITLE:
Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors--
-EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Gunter Arndt i
Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regu'latory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3814 i
'\\
l 1
1:
L i
35 j
0
~
5
's TITLE:'
i Amendment.to 10 CFR 51'.51 and 51.52, Tables S-3 and S-4, Addition 1
of Radon-222 and Technetium-99 Radiation Values, and Addition of Appendix B. " Table S-3 Explanatory Analysis"
]
RIN:
f 3150-AA31 l
CFR CITATION:
1 10 CFR 51 ABSTRACT:
The proposed -rule amends the Table of Uranium Fuel Cycle i
Environmental Data (Table S-3) by adding new estimates for releases i
of technetium-99 and radon-222, and by updating other estimates.
The proposed rule's Appendix B to Subpart A (narrative explanation),
also describes the basis for the values contained in Table S-3, explains tha environmental effects of these potential releases from the LWR Fuel Cycle, and postulates the potential radiation doses, health effects, and environmental impacts of these releases. The
. proposed rule also amends 10 CFR 51.52 to modify the enrichment value of U-235 and the maximum level of average fuel irradiation (burnup in megawatt-days of thermal power per metric ton of uranium).
l The narrative explanation also addresses important fuel cycle impacts and the cumulative impacts of the nuclear fuel cycle for the whole nuclear power industry so that it may be possible to consider these impacts generically rather than repeatedly in individual licensing proceedings, thus reducing litigation time and costs for both NRC and applicants.
The proposed revision of-10'CFR 51.51 and the addition Marcb,;endixBwaspublishedforpublicreviewandcommenton of A' H
4, 1981 (46 FR 15154). The final rulemaking was deferred pending the outcome'of a suit-(Natural Resources-Def
- e Council, et al. v. NRC, No. 74-1486) in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
TheU.S.CourtofAppeals(D.C. Circuit)decisionof' April 27, 1982,. invalidated the entire Table S-3 rule. The Supreme Court reversed this decision on June 6, 1983.
The proposed rule to provide an explanatory narrative for Table S-3 has been revised to reflect new codeling developments during the time the rulemaking was deferred.
Final action on the Table S-3 rule was held in abeyance until new values for radon-222 and technetium-99 h;
could be added to the table and covered in the narrative explanation.
D The rule is being reissued as a proposed rule because the scope has-been expanded to-include radiation values for radon-222 and P. _
technetium-99 and the narrative explanation has been extensively revised from that published on March 4,1981(46FR15154).
f-36 l
i E
w k
TITLE:
a n i Amendment to 10 CFR 51.51 and 51.52, Tables S-3 and S-4, Addition
!j of Radon-222'and Technetium-99 Radiation Values, and. Addition of.
1 Appendix B, " Table S-3 Explanatory Analysis" l
[
. 03/04/81 46 FR 15154
-TIMETABLE:'
4 Proposed Action Published 6 i Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 05/04/81 1
Il Proposed. Action for Division Review 05/27/88 I
l-
. Proposed Action to ED0 Undetermined Proposed Action Published' Undetermined J
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2011; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 4321; 42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5842 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
. Stanley Turel 1
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3739 i
i
}
b s
i.
1.
2, L
1
.y-
]
-TITLE *
- Consideration of Environmental Impacts of Temporary Storage
.l
.of Spent Fuel After Cessation of Reactor Operation RIN:
- 3150-AD26 '
CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 51 ABSTRACT:
The proposed-rule would amend the Commission's regulations by revising the generic determination concerning the timing of availability of a geologic repository for commercial high-level radioactive waste and spent fuel and the environmental impacts f*
of storage of spent fuel at reactor sites after the expiration of reactor operating licenses. The proposed amendments reflect proposed findings of the Comission reached in a five-year update-
. and supplement to its 1984 ~ " Waste Confidence" rulemaking proceeding which was published in the Federal Register on September 28, 1989 (54 FR 39767).
TIMETABLE:
-Proposed Action Published 09/28/89 54 FR 39765 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 12/27/89 Final Action Published 07/00/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
1 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Kathryn Winsberg m
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General-Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1637 i
h 38
f g
TITLE:
Elimination of Inconsistencies Between NRC Regulations and EPA HLW Standards 4
RIN:
3150-AC03 CFR CITATION:
4 10 CFR 60 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would eliminate several inconsistencies with the i
EPAstandardstobedevelopedforthedisposalofHLWindeep(NWPA)_
geologic repositories.
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 directs NRC to promulgate criteria for the licensing of HLW geologic repositories.
Section 121-(c) of this act states that-the criteria for the-licensing of HLW geologic r3positories must be
- consistent with these standards. Thc proposed rule is needed i
in order to eliminate several inconsistent:tes with the EPA standards, thus fulfilling the statutory requirement.
Because the NWPA directs NRC to el4Jnate inconsistencies between Part 60 and the L 'A standard, the alternatives to the proposed action are limitet by statute.
The public, indust y, and NRC will benefit f rom eliminating inconsistencies in Federal HLW regulations.
NRC resources needed would be several st aff-years but will not include contract resources.
Because the Federal Court. invalidated the EPA standards, action on this rule, which is~in response to the EPA standards,.is undetermined.
The proposed rule entitled, " Amendments to Part 60_to Delineate Anticipated Processes and Events and Unanticipated Processes and Events," was incorporated into this proposed rule on June 19, 1990.
The objective of the rulemaking is to improve the licensing process for the geologic repository program.
TIMETABLE:
' Proposed Action Published 06/19/86 51 FR 22288
' Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 08/18/86 Final Action to Offices for Concurrence 07/15/87 Final Action to E00 07/20/87 Revised Proposed Action Published Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 10101 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTilER ENTITIES: No 39
I ITITLE:..
Elimination of Inconsistencies Between NRC Regulations and EPA HLW Standards-T AGENCY CONTACT:'
Melvin Silberberg/ Clark Prichard
. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington,:DC 20555 301 492-3810/3884 i
i
~5
(.'
f y
t 1
2 !.
l'
.)
- y.
p l-y n
40 l
l-i1 ',
I.
?
TITLE:
Minor Amendments to the Physical Protectio; Requirements -
RIN:
3150-AD03 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 72; 10 CFR 73; 10 CFR 75
-ABSTRACT:
L The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations dealing i
with physical protection requirements that are out of date, susceptible to differing interpretations, or in need of clarification. These problems were identified by a systematic review of the agency's safeguards regulations and guidance documents conducted by the.
Safeguards Interoffice Review Group (SIRG).
In addition, the staff had identified other areas in the regulations where minor changes are warranted.
In response to these efforts, specific amendments to the regulations are being proposed. ~The proposed changes would:
(1)adddefinitionsforcommontermsnotcurrintlydefined; l
(2) delete action' dates that no longer apply; (3) correct outdated y
terms and cross references; (4) clarify wording that is susceptible -
to differing interpretations; (5) correct typographical errors; and (6)makeotherminorchanges.
The alternative to rulemaking would be to allow the status quo to continue.
These minor amendments affect the public, industry and the NRC only in so far as they make the regulations easier to understand, implement, and enforce.
It is estimated that 0.4 staff-years of NRC effort over 2 years will be required for the-rulemaking.
TIMETABLE:.
Proposed Action to ED0 06/27/89 Proposed Action Published' 08/15/89 54 FR 33570 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 09/29/89 Final Action to ED0 Undeterminea.
9 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No
- AGENCY CONTACT:
Stan Dolins Nuclear Regulatory Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3745 41
)(
, TITLE:
Transportation Regulations: Compatibility With the International
- Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
RIN:
3150-AC41 CFR CITATION:
10:CFR 71 ABSTRACT:
The p.ososed rule would, in conjunction with a corresponding rule change )y the U.S. Department of Transportation, make the United States: Federal regulations for the safe transportation of radioactive material consistent witi' those of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The IAJA regulations can be found in IAEA Safety Series No. 6. "Regulaticns for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material," 1985 Edition.
Consistency in-transportation regulations throughout the world facilitates the free movement of radioactive materials between countries for medical, research, industrial, and nuclear fuel cycle purposes.
Consistency of transportation regulations throughout the world also contributes to safety by concentrating.the efforts of the world's experts on a single set of safety standards and guidance (those of the IAEA) from which individual countries can develop their domestic regulations.
In addition, the accident experience of every-country that bases its domestic regulations on those of the IAEA can be applied by every other country with consistent regulations-to improve its safety program.
The action will be handled as a routine updating of NRC transportation regulations.
There is no reasonable alternative to rulemaking action. These changes should result in a minimal increase in costs to affected licensees. -Proposed changes to 10 CFR Part-71, based on current IAEA regulations, have been issued for public comment. The task will consume 2-3 staff-years of effort depending on the number and difficulty-of conflicts to be resolved.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 06/08/88 53 FR 21550 Proposed Action Comment Period Extended to 03/06/89 53 FR 51281 Proposed Action Comment Period Extended to 60 days after publication of DOT propowd rule 04/04/89 54 FR 13528 D0T Proposed. Rule Published 11/14/89 54 FR 47454 Proposed Action-Connent Period Ends 02/09/90 Final Action to ED0 Undetermined Final Action to Commission Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined 42 l
[
c
. ~1 1
i eep 1
1'!,y:
- ~
f' TITLE:.Transportation Regulations: Compatibility With the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
j L
42 USC 2073; 42 USC 2093; 42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2232; 42 USC 2233; 42 USC 2273; 42 USC 5842 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: 'No AGENCY CONTACT:
Donald R. Hopkins Nuclear Regulatory-Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3784 t
i c
?
43
s i
t TITLE:'
Criteria forL an Extraordinary Nuclear Occurrence RIN:
3150-AB01 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 140-ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would revise the criteria for an extraordinary nuclear occurrence (EN0) to eliminate the problems that were encountered in the Three Mile Island EN0 determination.
It is i
desirable to get revised criteria in place in the event they are needed.z There are no alternatives to this rulemaking, as the current ENO criteria 'are already embodied in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 140. The-only.way to modify these criteria, as this rule seeks to do, is through rulemaking.
There is no safety impact on public health or safety. The ENO-criteria provide legal waivers of defenses.
Industry (insurers and utilities) claims that a reduction in the EN0 criteria could cause
-increases in insurance premiums. The final rule will also be responsive to PRM-140-1.
It is estimated that approximately 1.0 staff year of NRC time will i
be required to process the final rule.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 04/09/85 50 FR-13978
-Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 09/06/85 Final Action For Division Review 02/17/87 Office Concurrence on Final Action Completed 11/25/87 Final Action to ED0 Undetermined Final Action to Commission Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2210; 42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5842 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS-AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Harold Peterson Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Wash'ington, DC-20555 301 492-3640 44
&{
l
' TITLE:-
Reasserting NRC's Sole Authority for Approving Onsite Low-Level Waste Disposal in Agreement States RIN:
3150-AC57
.C5R CITATION:
ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would establish NRC_ as the sole authority.
for approving onsite disposal of very low-level waste at all NRC-licensed reactors and.at Part 70 facilities. After further evaluation of the. issues and consideration of the public comments received..the NRC-believes that the decommissioning issue is more a
. long term recordkeeping function than a health'and safety issue.
l
- Consequently, the reassertion of NRC's authority for onsite disposal in Agreement States does not appear to be necessary.
Therefore..the proposed rule is being withdrawn. The notice of
. withdrawal.is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register in' August'1990.
TIMETABLE:-
Proposed Action to E00 06/10/88 Proposed Action Published. 08/22/88 53 FR 31880 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 10/21/88 Withdrawal Published 08/00/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2021; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND'0THER ENTITIES:
No
. AGENCY CONTACT:
Harry S. Tovmassian Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington; DC 20555-301 492-3634 45
TITLE:
NRC Acquisition Regulation (NRCAR)
RIN:
3150-AC01 CFR CITATION:
48 CFR Chapter 20, Parts 1-52 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to establish provisions unique to the NRC concerning the acquisition of goods and services.
The NRC Acquisition Regulation is necessary to implement and supplement the government-wide Federal Acquisition Regulation. This action is necessary to ensure that the regulations governing the procurement of goods and services within the NRC satisfy the needs of the agency.
The NRC Acquisition Regulation implements the Federal Acquisition Regulation within the agency and includes additional policies, procedures, solicitation provisions, or contract clauses needed to meet specific NRC needs.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/02/89 54 FR 40420 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 12/01/89 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
41 USC 401 et seq.; 42 USC 2201 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Mary Lynn Scott Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Administration Washington, DC 20555 301 492-8788 46
A 8',
j r
?
I 4
L (C) Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemaking I
\\.
I
+
i ;:,
s i
i
)
s i
C
.{
t "E
l \\
.)
- )
- \\
'l
?
s i
a.
)
i j,
i
- f-1
li 3
t
, h.
1 i
1
TITLE:
Radioactive Waste Below Regulatory Concern; Generic Rulemaking RIN:
3150-AC35 CFR CITATION:
110 CFR 2; 10 CFR 20 ABSTRACT:
The advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) sought comments on a proposal to amend NRC regulations to address disposal of_ radioactive i
wastes that contain sufficiently low quantities of radionuclides that their disposal does not need to be regulated as radioactive.
The NRC' has already-published a policy statement providing guidance for filing petitions for rulemaking to exempt individual waste streams (August 29, 1986; 51 FR 30839).
It is believed that generic rulemaking could provide a more efficient and effective means of-dealing with disposal of wastes below regulatory concern.
Generic rulemaking would supplement the policy statement which was a
' response to.Section 10 of the Low-Level-Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (Pub. L.99-240). The public was asked to comment on 14 questions. The ANPRM requested public comment on several alternative approaches the NRC could take. The evaluation of public-comment together with the results from a proposed research contract will help to determine whether and how NRC should proceed on the matter. The action on this rule is dependent on the issuance-of a broad Commission policy statement on exemptions from regulatory control.
TIMETABLE:
ANPRM 12/02/86 51 FR 43367
'ANPRM Comment. Period Ends 03/02/87 51 FR 43367 Proposed Action Published Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined' LEGAL AUTHORITY:
' Pub. L.99-240 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: Undetermined AGENCY CONTACT:-
Robert Meck' Nuclear Regulatory Commmission Office lof Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3737 47 l
l
s' i
?
TITLE:.
Comprehensive Quality Assurance in Medical Use and a Standard of Care
.RIN:
'I 3150-AC42 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR'35 ABSTRACT:
The advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) would amend the 4
-Commission's regulations to require a comprehensive quality i
assurance program for medical licensees using byproduct materials.
The purpose of this rulemaking action is to address each source of l-error that can lead to a misadministration. -An ANPRM was published to request pub'ic-comment on the extent to which, in addition to the basic qualityJassurance procedures (being addressed by another rulemaking action, entitled " Basic Medical Use of Byproduct Material")Q,uality Assurance Program for 1
a more comprehensive quality-assurance requirement is needed and invites advice and recommenda-tions on'about 20 questions-that will have to be addressed in the rulemaking process.
TIMETABLE:
10/02/87 52 FR 36949 ANPRM Action Published
' ANPRM Conenent Period. Ends ' 12/31/87 52 FR 36949 Options Paper to Offices for Concurrence 05/13/88 1
E
' Options Paper on QA'Rulemaking to ED0 05/26/88 Revised Options: Paper on Rulemaking to EDO 05/31/88 Option Paper Completed 06/03/88 SECY-88-156 lj Staff Requirements Memorandum Issued 07/12/88 Proposed Action Published Undetermined o
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
t b
42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 u
L EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
' Anthony Tse Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 1
Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3797 t
48 i
t TITLE:
Medical Use of Byproduct Material: Training and Experience Criteria RIN:
3150-AC99 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
ine advance notice of. proposed rulemaking (ANPRM)-would amend the Comission's regulations concerning training and experience criteria for individuals involved in medical use of byproduct material.
Rulemaking may be needed to reduce the chance of misadministrations.
The Comission may proceed with rulemaking, assist in the development of national voluntary training standards, or issue a policy statement recommending increased licensee attention to training.
If the
.Comission proceeds with rulemaking, the NRC could publish training and experience criteria in its regulations or indicate that it will recognize medical specialty certificates. The NRC requested cost /
benefit comments as part of the May 1988 ANPRM. The contractor study of training, accreditation, and certification programs that are now in place has been completed. The NRC has analyzed the contractor's report and the comments received in response to the ANPRM. This analysis will be presented to the Advisory Comittee on Medical Uses ofIsotopes'(ACMUI)forcommentonthebenefitsandimpactsof changing or extending NRC regulations on training and experience criteria. = The NRC will then make recomendations on proceeding with -
rulemaking, or some other course of action, based on its analysis of the ACMUI coments, ANPRM comments, and the contractor's report.
TIMETABLE:
ANPRM Published 05/25/88 53 FR 18845 ANPRM Coment Period Ends 08/24/88
. Proposed Action Published Undetermined-LEGAL AUTHORITY:-
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Larry Camper Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3417 49
TITLE:
Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures, Systems,-and Components
- RIN:
3150-AD10
. CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The advance notice of proposed raiemaking (ANPRM) would develop regulations requiring enhanced receipt inspection and testing of products purchased for use 19 nuclear power plant structures, systems,-and components. These regulations are believed to be necessary to provide an acceptable level of assurance that products purchased for use in nuclear power plants will perform as expected to protect the public health and safety. This ANPRM was published to solicit public comments on the need for additional regulatory requirements and to obtain an-improved understanding of alternatives to regulatory. requirements.= Tte staff intends to withdraw this ANPRM in July:1990.
TIMETABLE:
ANPRM Published- 03/06/89 54 FR 9229 ANPRM Comment Period-Ends 07/05/89 Analysis of Comments 11/30/89 Withdrawal Notice Published 07/00/90 LEGAL' AUTHORITY:-
42.USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER CNTITIES: Yes AGENCY-CONTACT:
Phil Cota Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, DC -20555 301 492-1225' 50 4
Q L
TITLE:
Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal RIN:
[
3150-AD04 CFR CITATION:
e 10 CFR 54 ABSTRACT:
7 This rulemaking is scheduled for completion prior to the anticipated submittal of license renewal applicaticns for Yankee Rowe and honticello.
y The rule will provide the basis for development and review of these two " lead plant" applications and the concurrent development of implementing regulatory guidance.
Timely completion of the rule is critical for establishing standcrds for continued safe operation of power reactors during the license renewai term a M provioing th's g'
regulatory stability desired by utilities in determining whether to prepare for license renewal or pursue alternative sources cf g
generating capacity.
License renewal rulemaking to provide regulatory requirements i;r 3
r extending nuclear power plant licenses beyond 40 years was g
initiated in response to the Commission's 1986 and 1987 policy and planning guidance. Current regulatory provisions permit license renewal but do not provide requirements for the form and content of a license renewal application nor the standards of acceptability Against which the application will be reviewed.
TIMETABLC:
ANrRM Published 08/29/88 53 FR 32919 AhPRM Comment Period Ends 10/28/88 Proposed Action to ACRS 03/07/90 Proposed Action to CRGR 03/14/90
)
Proposed Action to E00 04/30/90 Proposed Action to Commission 05/03/90 Proposed Action Published 07/20/90 T
Final Acticn Published 06/21/91
-~
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
g 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No E
AGENCY CONTACT:
George Sege g
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3917 a
E S1 amill
l
[
TITLE import and Export of Radioactive Wastes RIN:
3150-AD36 CFR CITATION:
10 CFk 110 ABSTRACT:
The advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) would consider amending the Comission5 regulations by reexamining the existing NRC regulations f9r the import and export of radioactive wastes.
This action is necessary to respond to concerns that international transfers of radioactive wastes, in particular low-level radioactive wastes, may not be properly controlled.
Various options for establishing a Comission policy on the import and export of radioactive wastes are being considered. The Comission is publishing this ANPRM to seek comments from the public, industry.
and other government agencies on various regulatory options and issues developed thus far.
TIMETABLE:
ANPkM Action Published 02/07/90 55 FR 4181 ANPRM Public Coment Period Extended to 04/24/90 03/23/90 55 FR 10786 Proposed Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 i
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Undetermined AGENCY CONTACT:
William R. Lahs Nuclear Regulatory Comission l.
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington -DC 20555 301 492-3774 l
l l
l i
l 52
t J
Na e
iy f
i a
f (D)UnpublishedRules 3
i 1
l
}
4 l
I I
J I
t, C
f ft h
I i
I 3
5 r
x l
i s
r f
k 8
h s
N%"'N%rN*Suws. ~;a.., ga.,, 86,
.w
,)'
i
(
TITLE:
Condu:t LT Employees; Miscellaneous Amendments RIN:
3150-AD15 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 0 ABSTRACT:
The rule would clarify and correct typographical errors in 10 CFR Part 0 concerning acts affecting a personal finan';ial interest; confidential statement of employment and financir,1 interests; and restriction against ownership of certain security interests by Commissioners, certain staff members, and other related personnel.
This rule is on hold pending the development of new regulations by the Office of Government Ethics and their review of the NRC regulations in 10 CFR Part O.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHEP. ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Susan Fonner Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1632 n
53
I TITLE:Revised Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings RIN:
3150-AB66 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 0; 10 CFR 1; 10 CFR 2; 10 CFR 9; 10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would shorten and simplify existing Comission procedural rules applicable to domestic licensing proceedings by comprehensively restating, revising and reorganizing the statement of those rules to reflect current practice.
The changes in this proposed rule would enable the Comission, directly and through its adjudicatory offices. to render decisions in a more timely fashion, eliminate the stylistic complexity of the existing rules, and reduce the burden and expense to the parties participating in agency proceedings.
In 1987, the Comission deferred consideration of this proposal, which would have revised the Comission's procedural rules governing the conduct of all adjudicatory proceedings other than export licensing proceedings under 10 CFR Part 110, pending consideration of other, more limited revisions to the rules of practice.
In 1989, former Chairman Zech requested that this proposed rule be updated and re-submitted for re-consideration by the Comission.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 07/00/90 Final Action Published 10/00/90 L
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2231; 42 USC 2241; 42 V',C 5841; 5 USC 552 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No i
1 AGENCY CONTACT:
C. Sebastian Aloot Nuclear Regulatory Comission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7787 I
3
p i
1 l
TITLE:
- Revisions to Procedures to Issue Orders:
Challenges to Orders that are Made Imediately Effective RIN:
3150-AD60 CFR CITATION:
i 10 CFR 2 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations governing orders to provide for the expeditious consideration of challenges to orders that Are made imediately effective.
The i
proposed amendments specif;cally allow challenges to the imediate effectiveness of an order to be made at the outset of a proceeding and provide procedures for the expedited consideration and disposition of these challenges.
The proposed amendments also recuire that challenges to the merits of an immediately effective orcer be heard expeditiously, except where good cause exists for delay.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 07/00/90 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
John Cho Nuclear Ragulatory Comission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1585 55
r TITLE:
I Availability of Official Records i
~
RIN:
3150-AC07 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2 ABSTRACT:
The proposed amendment would conform the NRC's regulations pertaining to the availability of official records to existing case law and i
agency practice. The amendment would reaffirm that the terms of 10CFR2.790(c)providesubmittersofinformationaqualifiedright to have their information returned upon request.
This amendment informs the public of three exceptions to the the right to withdraw pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(c) of the NRC's regulations, i.e.,
information submitted in a rulemaking proceeding that subsequently forms the basis for the final rule, information which has been made available to an advisory committee or was received at an advisory committee meeting, and information that is subject to a pending Freedom of Information Act request.
Additionally, the proposed amendment would add a notice statemer.t i
to 10 CFR Part 2 that submitters of documents and information to the NRC should be careful in submitting copyrighted works.
The agency in receiving submittals and making its normal distributions routinely photocopies submittals, makes microfiche of such submittals and ensures that these fiche are distributed to the PDR, LPDRs, all appropriate internal offices, and to the National Technical Information Service Center. This broad distribution and reproduction is made to satisfy the congressional mandate of Section 142(b) of the Atomic Energy Act by increased public understanding of the peaceful uses of atomic energy. Accordingly, copyright owners are on notice that their act of submitting such works to the agency will be considered as th4 granting to the NRC an implied license to reproduce and distribute according to normal agency practice.
Naturally, this noticedoesnotpreventsubmittersfromapplying10CFR2.790(b)(1) procedures to information that contains trade secrets or privileged or confidential commercial or financial information (proprietary information)anditisrecognizedthatsomeinformationinthose categories may be copyrighted.
The key factor is that it is their proprietary information status that exempts them from public disclosure and not their copyright designation.
Lastly, tnis implied license is not applicable to fair use of copyrighted works or the incorporation by reference of copyrighted works in agency submittals, e.g., the referencing of a copyrighted code or standard in a submittal does not affect the copyright of $ hat standard.
A proposal is being prepared to submit to age.ncy staff for comment.
56 r
~
TITLE:Availability of Official Records TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
J 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 i
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND 0THER ENTITIES:
No j
AGENCY CONTACT:
Catherine Holzle Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1560 b
d 57
i d
I TITLE:
Discrimination on the Basis of Sex RIN:
3150-AD50 l
CFR CITATION:
ABSTRACT:
j The final rule would amend the Commission's regulations dealing with discrimination against persons who, on the pecunds of sex, are i
excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination under any program or activity licensed by the NRC. The Commission has decided that Section 401 of the Energy Reorganization Act, which prohibits sex discrimination, applies only to the Commission and does not apply to NRC licensees and/or applicants. Since this decision' invalidates 10 CFR 19.32 and 10 CFR 2.111, action is being taken to amend these sections and to incorporate appropriate language to clarify that these sections do not apply to licensee employees.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER EMTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Anthony DiPalo Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear degulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 1
301 492-3758 l-1 I
58 l
=
l TITLE:
Freedom of Information Act, Privacy Act Production or Disclosure in Response to Subpoena or Demands of Courts or Other Authorities; Office of the Inspector General RIN:
3150-AD45 L
CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 9 ABSTRACT:
The final rule would amend the Coinnission's regulations to reflect i
the establishment of the Office of the Inspector General. This amendment will permit the Office of the Inspector General to make it.:'ep=3 dent disclosure determinations on (1) recoro; originating in I
its off1ce that are responsive to Freedom of Informatie Act requests, and (2)- records located in its office that are re:,nonsive i
to Privacy Act requests.
The final rule would also require.
personnel in the Office of Inspector General to obtain the Inspector Genaral's approval, instead of the General Counsel's approval, before responding to subpoenas or demands of courts or other autiorities for the production or disclosure of NRC information.
TIMETABl.E:
Final Action Published 09/00/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
i 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No i
AGENCY CONTACT:
Donnie H. Grimsley Nuclear Regubtory Connission Office of '.dministration Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7211 F
59 L
l
i 4
TITLE:Revision of Definition of Meeting RIN:
3150-AC78 o
CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 9 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would return the definition of " meeting" to its pre-1985 wording. The proposal is based on a study of comments submitted on an interim final rule published on May 21, 1985 (50 FR 20889) and the 1987 recommendations a.1d report of the American BarAssociation(ABA). Since the pre-1985 wording of the definition of meeting is fully adequate to permit the types of non-Sunshine Act discussions that the NRC believes would be useful, the proposal calls for the NRC to reinstitute its pre-1985 definition of meeting, with the intention of conducting its non-Sunshine Act discussions in accordance with the guidelines recommended by the ABA.
TIMETABLE:
Next Action Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Peter G. Crane Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492 1634 i
i i
4 60
TITLE:
Sa!ary Offsett Procedures for Collecting Debts Owed by Federal i
Employees to the Federal Government RIN:
3150-AD44 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 16 ABSTRACT:
The aroposed rule would amend the Comission's regulations to esta>lish collection procedures enabling the NRC to recover certain debts (by deductions from pay) which are owed ty Federal employees to the NRC and other Federal agencies.
The proposed rule is necessary to conform NRC regulations to the Debt Collection Act of 1982 which requires each agency to establish a salary offset program for the collection of these debts. The proposed action is intended to allow the NRC to improve its collection of debts due to i
the United States.
In August 1989, OPM alerted NRC that its proposed salary offset regulations had not been submitted for-review and approval and requested that they be submitted as soon as L
possible. The procedures must be submitted to OPM for review and approval prior to becoming a final rule.
Because the proposed regulation is necessary to implement the Debt Collection Act of i
1982, there is no suitable alternative to rulemaking for this action. The proposed rule has no impact on the public and negligible impact on NRC resources to implement.
TIMETABLE:.
Staff bview Completed 05/30/90 Submitteo +o OPM for Review 05/30/90 OPM Review umpleted 08/15/90
_ 1 Proposed Actio3 Published 09/00/90 N
l LEGAL AUTHORITY:
5 USC 5514; 31 USC 3711; 31 USC 3716; 31 USC 3717; 31 USC 3718; 42 USC 2201; 42 USt. 5841; l
EFFLCTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No i
AGENCY CONTACl?
Diane B. Dandois Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of the Controller Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7558 61
i i
TITLE-* Clarification of Statutory Authority for Purposes of Criminal l
Enforcement RIN:
3150-AD62 i
CFR CITATION:
l 10 CFR 19, 10 CFR 20, 10 CFR 21, 10 CFR 25, 10 CFR 30, 10 CFR 31, j
10 CFR 32, 10 CFR 33, 10 CFR 34, 10 CFR 35, 10 CFR 39, 10 CFR 40, 3
10 CFR 50, 10 CFR 55, 10 CFR 61, 10 CFR 70, 10 CFR 71, 10 CFR 72, 10 CFR 73, 10 CFR 74, 10 CFR 75, 10 CFR 95, 10 CFR 110, 10 CFR 150
]
ABSTRACT:
l The proposed rule would amend the Comission's regulations in order to eliminate uncertainty concerning the authority for application of criminal sanctions under Title 10.
The authority
(
citations accompanying some of the regulations need to be ainended to more clearly identify those violations which, if willfully violated, may subject the violator to potential criminal penalties.
The NRC has been unable to refer some cases to the Department of Justice (DOJ) or the D0J has had difficulty in prosecuting cases as
{
a result of the gaps and inconsistencies in the existing authority citations.
The proposed rule would create no new potential liabilities. The proposed rule would specify which regulations were issued under subparagraph "b", "i", or "o" of Section 161 of the Atomic Energy Act. These amendments would ensure that persons subject to the Comission's regulations are put on notice as to which regulations, if willfully violated, may subject them to criminal sanctions pursuant to Section 223 of the Atomic Energy Act.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to Commission 12/00/90 Proposed Action Published 04/00/91 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Geoffrey Cant Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Enforcement Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3283 62
o 1
TITLE:'
- Residual Radioactivity Criteria for Unrestricted Release of Lands and Structures RIN:
3150-AD65 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Comission's regulations to i
codify the basic principles and criteria which would allow residua 11y contaminated lands and structures to be released for unrestricted public use.
The rule would reflect Comission views as defined in the Below Regulatory Concern Policy Statement which was published in the Federal Register on July 3 1990(55FR27522).
For example,landsandstructureswouldbeconsIderedsuitableforrelease for unrestrictive use if the licensee demonstrates that the action will comply with the exemption policy's individual and collective dose criteria and other policy conditions.
In the final rule on General Requirements for Decomissioning Nuclear Facilities (53 FR 24018) dated June 27, 1988, the need and urgency for guidance with respect to residual contamination criteria was expressed. At that time, it was anticipated that an interagency working group organized by the Environmental Protection Agency would develop necessary Federal guidance.
- However, in the absence of significant progress by the interagency working group the Comission has directed that the NRC expedite a residual radioactivity rulemaking because the requirements, once final, will provide licensees with an incentive to complete site decomissionings.
The rule would codify the basic principles and criteria expressed in the anticipated Below Regulatory Concern Policy Statement.
Measurables, in the form of surfare and volume radioactivity
'1 concentrations and site radioactivity inventory values, would be provided in supporting regulatory guidance. These combined activities should benefit the public industry and the NRC by providing a risk-based framework u)on which decomissioning activities and license terminrtions can )e accomplished. The framework will assure adequate protet.cion of public health and safety and identify residual radioactivity criteria upon which licensecs can confidently develop reasonable and responsible decomissioning plans.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 09/30/91 Proposed Action to Comission 10/30/91 Proposed Action Published 11/29/91 Final Action Published 11/30/92 63 l
TITLE:* Residual Radioactivity Criteria for Unrestricted Release of Lands and Structures LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: Yes AGENCY CONTACT:
William Lahs Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3774 64
TITLE:-
Low-Level Waste Manifest Information and Reporting RIN:
l 3150-AD33 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20; 10 CFR 61 ABSTRACT:
1 The proposed rule would amend the Comission's regulations to:
(1) improve information contained in manifests accompanying shipments of waste to low-level waste (LLW) disposal facilities licensed under Part 61; (2) develop a uniform manifest for national use; (3) require that operators of these disposal facilities store portions of this manifest information in onsite computer recordkeeping systems; and (4) require that operators periodically su'mit, in an electronic format, reports of shipment manifest information.
To ensure safe disposal of LLW, the NRC must understand the mechanisms and rates by which radioactivity can be released from LLW and into the environment.
To do this, the NRC must understand the chemical, physical, and radiological characteristics of LLW.
This task is greatly complicated by the heterogeneous nature of LLW; it exists in a variety of chemical and physical forms and contains roughly 200 different radionuclides in concentrations that can range from a few microcuries to several hundred curies per cubic foot.
Each year there are thousands of shipments to LLW disposal sites.
Pursuant to 6 20.311, a manifest must accompany each shipment of LLW to a disposal facility.
Unfortunately, existing manifests do not describe the waste in detai' sufficient to ensure compliance with part 61 performance objectives.
In addition, NRC's regulations do not require that disposal site operators develop and operate computer systems for storage and manipulation of shipment manifest information. The NRC believes that such onsite computer systems are necessary for safe disposal facility operation. The NRC also believes that a national data base is needed which contains information on LLW disposed at all sites.
l A rulemaking that upgrades shipment manifests, provides for a uniform manifest, and requires disposal site computer recordkeeping systems will assure that technical information on LLW is available and in a form which can be used for performance assessments, technical analys% and other activities and would reduce confusion resulting from n e iple manifest forms. A requirement to report electronic manifest information will ensure that the regulatory staff, as well as the site operators, have the ability to perform safety and environmental assessments, and to monitor compliance with regulations and license conditions.
1 65 J
TITLE:Low-Level Waste Manifest Information and Reporting ABSTRACT:
(CONT)
The rulemaking will help ensure the availability of a complete, detailed national LLW computer data base, operated by DOE or the NRC if necessary, that contains information about waste disposed in all LLW sites, those regulated by NRC as well as by Agreement States. The rulemaking, through development of a uniform manifest, would also improve safe and expeditious movement of LLW from generators through brokers to disposal facilities.
Emergency accident procedurer would be enhanced through use of a single uniform manifest._
We expect that the rulemaking will slightly increase dis *1 sal costs. The rulemaking is a budgeted activity cited in the NRC 5-year plan.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 12/31/90 Proposed Action to Commission 01/18/91 Proposed Action Published 02/04/91 Final Action Published 02/01/92 LEGAL A0lHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND Oh!ER ENTITIES:
Yes AGENCY CONTACT:
Mark Haisfield/G. W. Roles Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3877/0595 66
(
TITLE:
- Fitness-for-Duty Programs RIN:
3150-AD61 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 26 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Comission's regulations to clarify the Comission's intent concerning the unacceptability
.of taking action against an individual based solely on preliminary drug test results.
The proposed rule would inform licensee management that preliminary test results cannot be used as a basis for management action absent corroborative evidence of 1mpairment or safety hazard.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 07/00/90 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5842; 42 USC 5846 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Loren Bush Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, DC 20555 301 492-0944 67
t t
l TITLE ** Fitness-for-Duty Programs for Category I Fuel Facilities and Shipments RIN:
3150-AD68 CFR CITATION:
ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Comission's fitness-for-duty regulations to include Category I fuel facilities and Category I shipments. This action is necessary to ensure fitness for duty of employees:
(1) who have direct access to larger quantities of special nuclear material (SNM); (2) who are largely res)onsible for the protection of the material; and (3) who transport tie material.
The proposed rule is expected to lead to compatibility with equivalent DOE programs.
The central issue for Category 1-type facilities and shipments is the risk of theft or diversion of high-enriched SNM due to drug-related pressures which, in turn,'could pose a significant risk to the health, safety, or security of large populations.
Current regulations only cover nuclear power plants and need to be expanded to include Category I facilities and shipments with requirements reflecting the differences between the nuclear power plants and the Category I facilities and shipments. There is no alternative to rulemaking which would accomplish the objectives of the rulemaking.
The rulemaking will address the fitness-for-duty programs as they pertain to the type of facility or mode of shipment.
The rulemaking will address the following aspects of the fitness for duty programs--
general performance objectives, program elements and procedures, inspections, records and reports, audits, and enforcement.
The. impact of the rule on the NRC licensing inspection and enforcement program will be approximately 1 staff-year per year.
The NRC resources required to develop the rulemaking are estimated to be 0.5 staff-years of effort over 2 years. The cost to industry will include chemical testing and operating costs.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 05/24/91 Proposed Action to Comission 06/03/91 Proposed Action Published 07/15/91 Final Action Published 06/30/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 i
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No 68
=
. =
I i
TITLE
- fitness-for-Duty Programs for Category I Fuel Facilities and Shipments e
AGENCY CONTACT:
Stanley Turel.
Nuclear Regulatory Comnission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3739 c
F i
i i
69 i.
TITLE:
- Timeliness in Conduct of Decomissioning of Material Facilities RIN:
3150-AD66 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 30; 10 CFR 40; 10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 71 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to require decontamination and decomissioning of material facilities within a fixed period of time after cessation of operations.
Current regulations allow material licensees considerable discretion as to the timing of decontamination and decommissioning. This has allowed some licensees to remain inactive without decomissioning on.the basis that operations may resume soreetime in the future.
Similarly, licensees are not required to decontaminate promptly, in step-by-step fashion, portions of their facilities that become inactive as their operations evolve.
This allows licensees to postpone heavy decomissioning cor.ts by simply continuing sufficient' controls, monit~ ring, and surveillance to meet minimal o
safety requirements.
The proposed rule would require decontamination and decomissioning of materia?s facilities within a fixed period of time (e.g., 2-3 years) after cessation of operations. This requirement would be accompanied by a provision for the licensee to seek a variance if completion of decontaminatics or decomissioning within the required times is not technically achievable or if delaying decontamination or decommissioning would reduce risk to public health and safety or the environment.
The rulemaking will result in publication of specific criteria for timeliness in the decontamination and decomissioning of material facilities. This rulemaking will provide a more substantial planning base for the industry and result in timely decontamination and decomissioning of material facilities. The resulting timely decontamination and decomissioning of materials. facilities will reduce the potential radiological risk to the public and the environment from contaminated materials sites. The rulemaking is not expected to substantially affect licensee costs.
It is estimated that 1.5 staff-years of effort and $100K in contractual assistance over 2 years will be required for the rulemaking.
70
x s i
TITLE:* Timeliness in Conduct of Decommissioning of Material Facilities TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 02/25/91 Proposed Action to Commission 03/29/91 Proposed Action Published 04/30/91 Final Action Published 04/30/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC $841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No j
AGENCY CONTACT:
James Malaro Nuclear Regulatory Cowmission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3764 h
F 7I i
TITLE:
- Decomissioning Regulations:
Recordkeeping and Termination for Decomissioning, Documentation Additions RIN:
3150-AD67 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 30; 10 CFR 40; 10 CFR 50; 10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 72 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule, in conjunction with the decomissioning rule published on June 27,1988 (53 FR 24018), would modify the Comission's decomissioning regulations to make them more specific and more easily implemented.
Current regulations require recordkeeping provisions as well as termination plans or their equivalent with the Comission at cessation of operations, r
However, no explicit requirements are specified in current rules pertaining to a listing of the land, structures, and equipment of the licensed facility; nor are any explicit '.'equirements specified )ertaining to submittal of an operating history at the time of su)mittal of final plans as well as prior to license termination. This type of information is important to ensure that all features and aspects of the facility and its attendant activities that could have potential for resulting in radioactive contamination have been dealt with in the decomissioning process and that a record i
exists that can be stored for future reference which contains the relevant features of the license termination process requirements.
There does not appear to be any reasonable alternative to rulemaking action. However, it is expected that most of the information explicitly required in the proposed amendments will already, or with minimal effort, be available (based on the existing rule record-t keeping requirements). While proposed amendments will affect all L
licensees, it is anticipated that the requirements will place minimal l
burden on them. Moreover, ensuring that the information is explicitly available should help expedite NRC approval-of licensee decomissioning l
activities and may reduce the overall licensee and NRC efforts required l
to terminate a license, t-l Proposed changes to the regulations will be issued for public j
comment. The task will consume 1-2 staffyears of effor't depending
[
on the number and difficulty of conflicts to be resolved.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to ACRS 11/30/90 Proposed Action to CRGR 11/30/90 Proposed Action to EDO 03/15/91 Proposed Action to Comission 04/15/91 Proposed Action Published 05/30/91 Final Action Published 04/30/92 72 l
i TITLE:
- Decommissioning Regulations:
Recordkeeping and Termination for Decommissioning, Documentation Additions LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Yes AGENCY CONTACT:
Carl Feldman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3883 6
i L
I l
73
TITLE:Requirements for Possession of Industrial Devices RIN:
3150-AD34 1
CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 31 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations for the possession of industrial devices containing byproduct material to require device users to report to the NRC on a periodic basis.
The proposed report would indicate that the device is still in use or to whom the device has been transferred.
The proposed rule would be the most efficient method, considering the number of general licensees and the number of devices currently in use, for as;uring that devices are not improperly transferred or inadvertantly discarded. The proposed rule is necessary to avoid unnecessary radiation exposure to the public that may occur when an improperly discarded device is included in a batch of scrap metal for reprocessing.
The proposed rule would also avoid the unnecessary expense involved in retrieving the manufactured items fabricated from contaminated metal.
The proposed rule would impose a small burden on device users and the NRC.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 06/01/90 Proposed Action to Commission Undetermined Proposed Action Published 07/30/90 Final Action to EDO 04/30/91 i
Final Action Published 06/29/91 ll LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2114; 42 USC 2201 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Yes AGENCY CONTACT:
l -
Joseph J. Mate Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 i-301 492-3795 it 74 l.
l L
l TITLE:
- Material Approved for Incorporation by Reference; Maintenance and Availability RIN:
3150-AD58 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 34; 10 CFR 35; 10 CFR 50; 10 CFR 73 ABSTRACT:
4 The final rule would amend the Commission's regulations to make a needed clarification to previously published requirements governing the availability of material approved for incorporation by reference.
The amendment clarifies that copies of material which has been approved for incorporation by reference are maintained and available for public inspection at the NRC Library.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 7/00/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
A'izonia W. Shepard
- Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Administration Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7651 3
3 75
4 TITLE:
Use of Radiopharmaceuticals for Medical Research, Use of Biologies Containing Byproduct Material, and Compounding Radiopharmaceuticals RIN:
3150-AD69 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations related to the compounding of radiopharmaceuticals, the use of biologies containing by)roduct material, and the medical research uses of radiopiarmaceuticals. A proposed rule would be promulgated in partial response to a petition for rulemaking submitted by the American College of Nuclear Physicians and the Society of Nuclear Medicine (PRM-35-9).
This proposed amendment may be necessary to allow health professionals to provide medical results not otherwise possible while continuing to protect public health and safety adequately. This task is expected to consume about 2 staff-years of effort depending on the number of public comments received and the difficulty of the issues to be resolved.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Anthony Tse Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 r
t L
301 492-3797 i
76
g l.
1 TITLE:
Iridium-192 Wire for-Interstitial Treatment of-Cancer RIN:
3150-AD46 CFR CITATICH:
10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Comission's regulations j
governing the medical uses of byproduct material. The proposed-amendment would add iridium-192 wire to the list of brachytherapy 1
sources permitted for use in interstitial treatment of cancer.
Under current NRC regulations, users must have their licenses amended before they may use this brachytherapy source. The pro psed rule has been developed in response to a petition for rulemaking (Docket No. PRM-35-8)-submitted by Amersham Corporation.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 03/16/90 Proposed Action Published Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC.2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Anthony N. Tse Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
= Washington, DC-20555 301 492-3797 t
77
-1 Q
j a
-TITLE:
L
- Authorization to Prepare Radiopharmaceutical Reagent Kits and Elute Radiopharmaceutical Generators; Use of Radiopharmaceuticals for Therapy RIN:
3150-AD43 CFR CITATION:
1 10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
The interim final rule would amend the Comission's regulations relating to the preparation of radiopharmaceuticals and the therapy uses of radiopharmaceuticals. The amendment would permit medical use litnsees:
(1) to depart from manufacturer's instructions for preparing radiopharmaceuticals from generators and reagent kits; and (2) to-depart from the package insert instructions regarding indications and method of administration for therapeutic use of radiopharmaceuticals, provided the licensee meets certain conditions y
and limitations. Current regulations specifically require that licensees follow package insert instructions for preparing and using certain radiopharmaceuticals.
There may be no reasonable alternative to rulemaking action.
The interim rule is being
~,
developed in response to certain issues raised in a petition for rulemaking submitted by the American College of Nuclear Physicians and the Society of Nuclear Medicine (Docket-No. PRM-35-9).
TIMETABLE:
Interim Final Action to ED0 05/28/90 Interim Final Action to Commission (SECY-90-193) 05/30/90 Interim Final Action Published 08/31/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201;.42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Anthony Tse Nucitar Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3797 f
78 i
i f
k i
- TITLE:. "1
~
t Licensirig and Radiation Safety Requirements for Large Irradiators
- RIN:.
3150-AC98 CFR CITATION:
4 10 CFR 36 I
ABSTRACT:
The; proposed rule would develop regulations to specify radiation safety requirements and license requirements for the use of licensed radioactive materials in large irradiators.
Irradiators use gamma l radiation to irradiate products to change their characteristics-in'some way. The requirenents would apply to large panoramic irradiators (those in which the radioactive sources and the material being irradiated are in a room that is accessible to personnel while the source is shielded) and certain-large self-contained irradiators in which the source always remains under water. The rule would not i
cover small self-contained irradiators, instrument calibrators, medical uses of sealed sources (such as teletherapy), or non-destructive testing (such as industrial radiography).
The alternative to a regulation is continuing to license irradiators on a case-by-case basis using license. conditions. 'The formalization would make the NRC's requirements better understood and possibly speed the-licensing of irradiators.
Development of the rule will require 2 staff-years.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to ACRS 01/18/89 Office Concurrence on Proposed Action Completed 03/06/89 Proposed Action to E00 07/19/89 Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-89-249) 08/15/89 Revised Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-90-211) 06/14/90 Proposed Action Published 08/14/90 l
Final Action Published 07/30/91 j.:
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2073; 42 USC 2093; 42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2232; 42 USC 2233;
'42 USC 2273; 42 USC-5842 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Yes
- AGENCY CONTACT:
Stephen A. McGuire Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory ReJearch Wa:hington, DC 20555 l
301 492-3757 79
l TITLE:-
Emergency Planning Regulations for Part 52 Licensing RIN:
3150-AD48 CFR CITATION:
10.CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations concerning those portions of emergency 'lans which cannot be exercised prior to issuance of a Part 52 combined license. This rulemaking will be accomplished on a "high priority basis" as directed in a staff requirements memorandum dated September 12,
-1989..
t It is estimated that 2 staff-years of effort over 2 years will be required for this tulemaking.
4 TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 03/07/90.
l ProposedAction'toCommission(SECY-90-103) 03/20/90 l
P*oposed Action Published 07/00/90 Final Action Published 06/00/91 LEGAL A!!THORITY:
42 ilSC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER-ENTITIES:
No l
AGENCY - CONT ACT:
,Michae1 T. Jamgochian l
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 t
301 492-3918 4
i 80
,. +
ny N!l is TITLE:
4 Emergency Telecommunications System Upgrade 1
P RIN:
g>
3150-AD39 CFR CITATION:
i ABSTRACT:'
i The proposed rule would amend the Comission's regulations to require the implementation of the NRC's Emergency Telecommunications System (ETS) upgrade at all licensed nuclear power plants and selected fuel cycle facilities. The NRC's primary role in an emergency at a licensed nuclear facility is one of monitoring the licensee to ensure that appropriate recommendations are made with respect to offsite actions to. protect public health and safety.
In order to adequately i
perform,this function, the IIRC requires reliable communications with the licensee and.the regional of# ices.
Experience with the-currently installed ETS has indicated that a sufficient number of problems exist
.to warrant a system upgrade.
The ETS upgrade'will be comprised of a satellite network to transmit between the NRC Operations Center, the Regions, the Technical Training Center (TTC), and the licensee sites with a land-based telephone exchange backup system.
This design is expected to provide the I
necessary emergency telecommunications functions with sufficient redundancy to ensure availability even under the challenging comunication conditions that were existing during a nuclear emergency.
The licensees will be required to provide the hardware, l'
logistics, operational and maintenance support to implement the ETS upgrade at their sites.
It-is estimated that about 2-3 staff-yeart of effort will be required.for this rulemaking action.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to CRGR/ACRS 11/30/90 Proposed Action to ED0 '03/29/91 Proposed Action to Comission 04/30/91 Proposed Action Published 06/28/91 Final Action Published 06/30/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL. BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No 81 g
m
_~
. TITLE:-
Emergency Telecommunications System Upgrade i
AGENCY CONTACT:
Markley L.- Au Nuclear Regulatory Commission ~
' Office of. Nuclear Regulatory Research' Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3749 l'.
g I.
82 a
. TITLE:
Clarification of Emergency Preparedness Regulations RIN:
3150-AD40 1
l CFR CITATION:
ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Comission's regulations by clarifying the linkage between the need for " reasonable assurance that acequate protective measures can and will be-taken in the i
event of a radiological emergency" indicated in i 50.47(a) and 16 j
planning standards outlined in 5 50.47(b). -In addition, the rulemaking will clarify the term " range of protective" actions.
Other issues to be clarified include monitoring of evacuees, i
actions for recovery and reentry, notification of.the public,
-l evacuation time estimates, and exercise frequency.
In a December 23, 1988, memorandum to the EDO from SECY, the staff
- t' was directed to review the "...NRC's energency planning regulations and propose = revisions designed to eliminate ambiguity and clarify I
the regulations to include what constitutes the exercise sco>e prior to the full power licensing...." The staff outlined tie proposed rulemaking in a memorandum from the EDO to the Comission dated June 29, 1989.
It is estimated that 2 staff-years of effort over 2 years will be required for this rulemaking.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to CRGR/ACRS 09/03/90 Proposed Action to E00 02/25/91 Proposed Action to Commission 03/03/91 Proposed Action Published 04/30/91 Final Action Published 12/02/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC.5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Michael T. Jangochian Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC -20555 301 492-3918 83 1
i t
. TITLE:
Safety Related and-Important to Safety in 10 CFR Part 50-RIN:
3150-AB88 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would clarify in the Comission's regulations the use of the terms "important to safety" and " safety related" by adding definitions of these two terms and of " facility licensing documents" to 10 CFR Part 50 and by discussing how these definitions would be applied'in NRC licensing reviews. Significant issues concerning the meaning of these terms-as they are used in this part have-arisen in Commission licensing proceedings. This proposed rule would define these terms and clarify the nature and extent of their effect on quality assurance requirements, thereby resolving these issues.
Rulemaking was~ chosen as the method of resolving this issue as a result of the Commission's directive to resolve the issue by rulemaking contained in the Shoreham licensing decision (CLI-84-9, 19 NRC 1323, June 5, 1984).
A position paper requesting approval of tie staff proposed definitions and additional guidance from the Commission was-signed by the EDO on May 29, 1986.
In addition to rulemaking, the position paper discusses the alternative of the Comission issuing a policy statement concerning the definitions and their usage.
Since the proposed rule is only clarifying existing requirements, there-is no impact on the public or the industry as a result of this rulemaking.
TIMETABLE:
1 Proposed Action to Comission- 05/29/86 Comission Decision on SECY 86-164 Undetermined
~
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5842; 42 USC 5846 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No L
AGENCY CONTACT:
Jerry N. Wilson Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3729 84
1 TITLE:.
Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants (ASME Code,Section XI, Division 1,SubsectionIWEandSubsectionIWL)
RIN:
-3150-AC93 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would incorporate by reference Subsection IWE,
" Requirements for Class MC Components of Light-Water Cooled Power Plants," and Subsection IWL, " Requirements for Class CC Concrete Components of Light-Water. Cooled Power Plants," of Section XI, (Division 1). of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code).
Subsection IWE provides the rules and requirements for inservice inspection, repair, and
~
replacement of Class MC pressure retaining components and their I
integral attachments, and of metallic shell and penetration liners of Class CC pressure retaining components and their integral attachments in light-water cooled power plants. Subsection IWL provides the rules and requirements for inservice inspection and repair of the reinforced concrete and post tensioning systems of class CC components.
Incorporation by reference of Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL will provide systematic examination rules for containment structure for meeting Criterion !J of the General Design Criteria (Appendix A.
of 10 CFR Part 50) and Appendix J of 10 CFR Part 50. Age-related degradation of containments has occurred. and additional and potentially more serious degradation mechanisms can be anticipated as nuclear power plants age.
If the NRC did not take action to endorse the Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL rules, the NRC position on examination practices for containment structure would have to be established on a case-by-case basis and improved examination practices for steel containment structures might not be implemented.
The other alternatives of incorporating these detailed examination requirements into the American National Standard ANSI /ANS 56.8-1981 or into Appendix J are not feasible.
Incorporating by reference the latest edition and addenda of Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL will save applicants / licensees and the NRC staff both time and effort by providing uniform detailed criteria-against which the staff can review any single submission.
Adoption of the proposed amendment would permit the use of improved methods for containment inservice inspection.
TIMETABLE:
Rulemaking Initiation Date (ED0 Approval) 06/09/88 Proposed Action for Division Review 07/01/88 85
.ct;: $
T y.
TITLE:
Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants (ASME Code Section-irc "
XI, Division 1,. Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL)
TIMETABLE: ~(cont)
Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 11/14/88 Proposed Action to CRGR 06/13/89 Proposed Action to EDO Undetermined Proposed Action Published. Undetermined i
Final Action Published Undetermined ~
LEGAL AUTHORITf:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCi CONTACT:
Wallace E. Norris Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Resea?ch Washington, DC. 20555 301'492-3805 i
r t
)
l a
l 86
y Y
TITLE:Codes-andStandards'forNuclearPowerPlants_(ASMECode, 1986/1987/
1988. Addenda).
RIN:
3150-AD05 CFR CITATION:
i 10 CFR 50 u
1 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would incorporate by reference the 1986 Addenda, the 1987-Addenda, the 1988 Addenda, and the 1989 Edition of Section~III, Division 1, and Section XI, Division 1, with a specified modification, of the American Society of Mechanical EngineersBoilerandPressureVesselCode(ASMECode). Also, the proposed amendment would impose augmented examination of reactor.
o vessel shell welds and would separate the requirements for inservice testing from those for inservice inspection by placing the require-ments for inservice testing in a separate paragraph. The ASME Code provides rules for the construction of light-wati.rgeactor nuclear power plant components in Section III, Division 1, and provides rules for the inservice inspection and inservice testing of those components in Section XI, Division 1.
i The proposed rule would update the existing reference to the ASME H
Code and would thereby permit the use of improved methods for the construction, inservice inspection, and inservice testing of nucie n power plant components.
Incorporating by reference the latest addenda of the ASME Code would save applicants / licensees and the NRC staff both time and effort by providing uniform detailed criteria against which-the staff could review any single submission.
In additior, the proposed rule would require licensees to augment their reactor vessel examination by implementing the expanded reactor vessel shell weld examinations specified-in the 1989 Edition of.Section XI and would clarify the existing requirements in the regulation for inservice inspection and inservice testing.
This action will be handled as a routine updating of 10 CFR 50.55a of the NRC regulations. There is no reasonable alternative to rulemaking action.. The proposed amendment will be issued for
.public comment. The task to develop and publish the proposed g
amendment is scheduled for a period of 7.5 months with an estimated-staff effort of 400 p-hrs. This is a priority A rulemaking.
l
. TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Submitted for Division Review 09/27/88 Proposed Action to CRGR 08/31/90 L
Proposed Action to ED0 09/28/90 Proposed Action Published 10/31/90 Final Action Published 10/31/91 87
p
-TITLE:
CodesandStandardsfor.NuclearPowerPlants(ASMECode, 1986/1987/
1988 Addenda) i LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42_USC 2201, 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No
.l AGENCY CONTACT:
Gilbert C. Millman Nuclear Regulatory Comission
~
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC. 20555 301 492-3848 i
i i
88 s-
1 TITLE:'
i Emergency Response Data System RIN:
3150-AD32 4
CFR CITATION:
j 10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations by requiring the implementation of the NRC-approved Emergency Response Data System (ERDS) at all licensed nuclear power plants. -The primary role of the NRC during an emergency at a licensed nuclear power facility is one of monitoring the licensee to assure that appropriate recommendations are made with respect to necessary offsite actions to protect public health and safety.
In order to adequately-perform its role during an emergency, the NRC requires accurate and timely data on four types of parameters:
(1)the reactor core and coolant system conditions to assess the extent or
-likelihood of core damage; (2) the conditions inside the containment building to assess the likelihood of. its failure; -(3) the radioactivity release rates to assess the immediacy and degree of public danger; and (4) the data from the plant's meteorological tower to assess the distribution of potential or actual impact on the public.
The Emergency Response Data System is a licensee-activated computer data link between the electronic data systems at licensed naclear power facilities and a central computer in the NRC Operations Center. Current experience with a voice-only emergency communication i
link, utilized for data transmission, has demonstrated it to be slow and inaccurate. Simulated site tests of the ERDS concept in emergency planning exercises have demonstrated that ERDS.is effective aetween the NRC-Operations Center and affected licensees.
.The rule would require that the licensees provide the required hardware and software to transmit the data-in a format specified by the NRC. The NRC would require that the licensee activate the ERDS as soon as possible following the declaration of an alert condition.
Based on a site survey of 80 percent of licensed facilities, the current estimates of licensee costs are $20K-50K for software and $0-100K for hardware.- -The current estimated cost to NRC is $2.6 million. The proposed changes to 10 CFR Part 50 C
will be issued for public comment. The rulemaking task will be scheduled over a 2-year period ending March 1991 and will consume 2-3 staff-years of effort depending on the number and difficulty of conflicts to be resolved.
89
1 TITLE:-
l' Emergency Response Data System TIMETABLE:.
Proposed Action to CRGR 06/06/90
-Proposed Action to ACRS 06/08/90 Proposed Action to-EDO 07/13/90-Proposed Action to Commission 07/30/90
' Proposed Action Published- 08/30/90 Final Action Published 07/30/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC'2131;.2 USC 2133; 42 USC 2134; 42 USC 2135; 42 USC 2201; 4
42.USC 2232; 42 USC 2233; 42 USC 2236;'42 USC 2239; 42 USC 2282; 42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5843; 42 USC 5846 EFFECTS'ON'SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Markley-L. Au-Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301.492-3749 e
)
90 4
, pp 1
i.
1 TITLE:
_ Fracture Toughness and Reactor Vesst:. Material Surveillance y
Requirements m
4
RIN: -
'3150-AD57 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50, Appendices G and H ABSTRACT:
l The proposed rule would amend 10 CFR Part 50 of the Commission's regulations. Appendix =G, Fracture Toughness Requirements, provides the basis for calculating the pressure-temperature limits that j
i appear in the Technical Specifications for every plant. By coincidence, the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Appendix that is. incorporated by reference is also Appendix G.
The additional i
requirements given in 10 CFR Part 60, Appendix G, are principally those needed to include the effects of neutron radiation embrittlement in the estimates of fracture toughness of the reactor vessel beltline as the vessel ages and accumulates neutron l
fluence. To monitor the.latter, Appendix H contains requirements for a reactor vessel material surveillance program.
It incorporates ASTM Standard Practice E 185 by reference.
The proposed rule would update the list of editions of E 185 that are incorporated to include the 1990 edition, which is now in the final balloting-stages. Another purpose is to change the ASME Code Appendix that is referenced in Appendix G, 10 CFR Part 50, from Appendix G of Section III, the construction code, to Appendix G in the 1989 Edition of Section XI, the inservice _ inspection code. At present_the two appendices are identical. The reason for adding an j
Appendix-G in the 1989 Edition of Section XI was to-put-it under the jurisdiction of a working group whose members were taking an active interest in fracture issues as a consequence of working with the problems of operating plants. Updating is expected to include advances in fracture analysis, because the original Appendix G of Section III has been in use since 1972.
!The pacing item in the list of proposed amendments is to clar.ify the NRC's position on pressure testing as agreed by the CRGR at their meeting on November 29, 1989.
This requires that some words be deleted from paragraph IV.A.5 of Appendix G, 10 CFR Part 50, and a sentence added to require that the pressure tests required by the ASME Code,Section XI, be performed oefore the reactor is taken critical following-a shutdowen and to require that the primary coolant system be essentially water solid during the test.
The aro)osed rule would also delete paragraph IV.B of Appendix G, w11c1 requires that reactor vessels be designed to permit annealing if they are predictert to undergo embrittlement to 91 l
1 l
2
I.'
i L
TITLE-Fracture Toughness and Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance a
Requirements' ABSTRACT:
(CONT)
.specified levels.. This action is needed to conform to the Commission's position as stated in the Supplementary Information:
i for the PTS rule published in 1985.
i Finally, an amendment is proposed that will delete a general requirement from Appendix G regarding the treatment of low upper-shelf energy and put in a specific requirement for acceptance criteria by reference to a new addition to the ASME Code,Section XI.
-l The added costs to licensees.to implement these changes in requirements will be minimal--even a cost savings in many' cases.
No significant increase in staff time to implement the changes introduced by these proposed amendments is anticipated.
It is
- estimated that 0.5 staff years of effort over 2 years will be required for. the rulemaking.
-TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to E00 Undetermined Proposed Action Published Undetermined Final: Action Published Undetermined
~ LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC.2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS'ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
'P. Randall Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office'of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3842 s
s
}
92 4
w
l TITLE:
- License. Renewal'for Nuclear Power Plants; Scope of Environmental Effects RIN:
3150-AD63'
-CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 51-
-ABSTRACT:'
L The' advance; notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) would amend the Comission's regulations to add provisions concerning the scope ~ of
- environmental effects which-would be addressed by the Comission in conjunction with applications.for license renewal for nuclear t
i power plants. Changes to Part 51 will be based on the: findings of a~genericenvironmentalimpactstatement(GEIS).
The NRC is soliciting comments on the scope of= environmental issues to be covered in the rulemaking and GEIS and on the ways the results of the' GEIS would be incorporated into the rulemaking on Part 51.
l NRC believes that a generic Part 51 rulemaking-could address potential environmental impacts from the relicensing and-extended
-o)eration of nuclear power plants.
This rulemaking would define t1e potential environmental impacts which need to be reviewed as part of the relicensing of individual nuclear power plants. The NRC -is, therefore, undertaking a study to assess which environmental impacts may occur, under what circumstances, and their possible. level of significance.
. TIMETABLE:
-ANPRM to EDO 5/30/90 ANPRM to Comission- (SECY-90-208) 06/08/90
-ANPRM Published- 07/00/90 Proposed Action to CRGR 03/04/91 Proposed Action'to ED0 04/01/91 Proposed Action to Comission 04/15/91 Proposed Action Published 05/24/91 Final Action Published 04/18/92
' LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5842 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
- Donald P. Cleary Nuclear Regulatory Comission
' Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3936 93
1 TITLE:
Repository Operations Criteria RIN:-
3150-AD51 CFR CITATION:=
10 CFR 60 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations concerning additional preclosure regulatory requirements for high-_ level waste geologic repositories. Several issues associated with preclosure regulatory requirements have been raised due to
'different interpretations of the rulemaking record for 10 CFR Part 60. These involve:
(a) the lack'of clearly prescribed requirements-for the establishment of a controlled-use area intended to_ protect public health and safety in the event of a postulated radionuclide release and'(b) the definition of structures,_ systems, i'
and components important to safety for which certain design and quality assurance criteria apply.
In order to meet the
~
milestones mandated by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of-1982,- as i
amended, and milestones pertaining to_D0E's production schedule in
.the Mission' Plan amendments, guidance is needed from NRC on these L
matters to enable DOE to proceed with the siting of a geologic repository.
-The proposed amendments would require the establishment'of a-controlled-use area, based on radiation dose criteria, for the siting of geologic repositories.
In addition, a new definition of structures', systems, and components important to safety would be added that.would be similar to one in 10 CFR Part 72.
It is estimated that 3.2 staffyears over a 2-year period will be required to complete l
the rulemaking.
L TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published Undetermined l
l Final Action Published Undetermined.
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
Public Law 97-425, 42 USC 10101 7-EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No
-AGENCY CONTACT:
Morton Fleishman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3794 94 s
TITLE.
Night Firing Qualifications for Security Guards at Nuclear Power Plants RIN:
3150-AC88 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR'73 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would ensure that security force effectiveness at nuclear-power plants is not dependent on the time of day.. Security guards currently are required to perform hight firing for familiarization only. There is no requirement for standards to measure their effectiveness. The proposed rule would change-that by requiring that security guards at nuclear power plants qualify-for night firing. The only alternative to rulemaking is to retain the current status.
Part 73, Appendix B, Part IV, will be amended to require reactor i
security guards to qualify annually in an NRC-approved night firing course with their assigned weapons. The proposed amendment will-
'i standardize training and qualification in night firing and prepare power reactor guard forces to respond more effectively in the event of an incident occurring in limited lighting conditions. The cost to industry should be relatively modest since licensees already operate daylight-firing training and qualification' facilities and programs. The costs to NRC will also.be minimal because it will only' require minor licensing, inspection and-other regulatory actions. There is no= occupational exposure.
It is estimated that 0.4 staff-years-of effort over 2 years by the NRC will be required for the rulemaking.
TIMETABLE:-
--Proposed Action Published Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Sher Bahadur
' Nuclear. Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 g
301 492-3775 95 1
k
y i
TITLE:
Day Firing Qualifications-and Physical Fitness Programs for Security Personnel at Category I Fuel Cycle Facilities t
RIN:
3150-AD30 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 73, Appendix H ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to require that security perscnnel qualify and requalify annually on specific
- standardized day firing courses using all assigned weapons. Current regulations' require day firing qualification using a national police course or equivalent for handguns and an NRA or nationally recognized course,for semiautomatic weapons. A firing course specified for shotguns.is in need of revision.
Recent amendments to Part 73 added a requirement for night firing qualification using specific, designated firing courses. To ensure uniformity, the current day firing requirements should be compatible.
Additionally, current regulations specify that security personnel
-have no physical weaknesses that would adversely affect their
. performance of assigned job duties. However, no regulatory standards exist.for. assuring that security personnel are physically -
1 fit to perform their duties. Requirements for a physical fitness program and fitness standards at Category I fuel. cycle facilities for security personnel need to be added to the regulations in order to provide a uniform, enforceable program.. Guidance will be developed to ensure that such a program will not, at.the same time, endanger the health of those participating in it.
The proposed rule would amend 10.CFR Part 73, Appendix H, to iralude day firing qualification courses in each type of required
.l weapon as well as a standardized-physical fitness training course r.
and fitness standards for security personnel. Alternatives to the rulemaking'would be to allow the status quo to continue.
Standardization of' day firing courses to be consistent with those established for night firing would be of negligible cost to the 3-4 affected licensees and to the NRC because day firing qualification i
. using a variety of firing courses is already being done.
Physical fitness-training programs would incur moderate costs to the licensees in the area of personnel time and limited physical fitness equipment. The cost to the NRC would be in the area of licensing and inspection activities.
Neither area of rulemaking affects occupational exposure.
It is estimated that 0.5 staff-years of effort over 2 years will be required for this rulemaking.
3 96
TITLE:
Day Firing Qualifications and Physical Fitness Programs for Security Personnel at Category I Fuel Cycle Facilities TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 11/30/90 Proposed Action to Commission 12/14/90 Proposed Action Published 02/15/91 Final-Action Published -02/28/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
H. Tovmassian Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3634.
i 97 L
[
I
. L
-.1 i
TITLE:
Personnel Access Authorization Program RIN:
3150-AA90 1
CFR CITATION:
h
-ABSTRACT:
The Comission has concluded that it is appropriate for each licensee
/
that operates a nuclear power plant to establish an access authorization i
program to ensure that individuals who require unescorted access to protected areas or vital areas of their facilities are trustworthy, reliable, emotionally stable, and do not pose'a threat to comit radiological sabotage. Accordingly, the NRC published a proposed rule on August 1, 1984, that would require an access authorization program at nuclear power plants (49 FR 30726).
An alternative proposal by)the Nuclear Utility Management and Resource Comittee (NUMARC was submitted as a public comment on this proposed rule. The alternative )roposed a voluntary industry comitment to implement an access aut1orization program at nuclear power plants based upon industry guidelines. Major provisions of i
this program include background investigation, psychological evaluation, and behaviorial observation.
On June 18, 1986, the Comission approved developing a policy statement endorsing industry guidelines as an alternative to the proposed rulemaking. Comitments to adhere to these guidelines would be formalized tnrough amendments to the physical security plans and be subject to inspection and enforcement by NRC.
On March 9, 1988, the NRC published a proposed policy statement 1
endorsing the NUMARC guidelines.
In the Federal Register notice, i
the Comission specifically requested public comments as to whether the access authorization program should be a rule or a policy statement.
On April 19, 1989, the Comission decided to go forward with a final rule which would require all licensees to have an access authorization program and would specify the major attributes of the program. The NRC would also issue a regulatory guide which would endorse, with appropriate exceptions, the applicable-industry guidelines, as an acceptable way of complying with the rule.
TIMETABLE:
Office Concurrence on Proposed Policy Statement Completed 10/30/87 Proposed Policy Statement / Guidelines to EDO 12/07/87 Proposed Policy Statement / Guidelines to Commission 12/15/87 Proposed Policy Statement Published 03/09/88 53 FR 7534 Proposed Policy Statement Coment Period Ends 05/09/88 98
b 3.,
t, 49<
.l/
e TITLE:
Personnel Access-Authorization Program TIMETABLE:
(CONT)
OptionsPapertoEDO(SECY-89-98) 03/22/89 Revised Final Action to CRGR 12/5/89 Revised Final Action to ACRS-12/14/89 Final Action to ED0 06/18/90 Final Action to Comission 07/20/90 Final Action. Published 0b/20/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Sandra Frattali
- Nuclear _ Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3773 I
I 99 l
l~
1 t
TITLE:.
Reinvestigation of Individuals-Granted Unescorted Access to
' Nuclear Power Plants RIN:
3150-AD49 CFR CITATION:-
10 CFR 73 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to require
.l periodic' updates of FBI fingerprint checks for reinvestigation of individuals granted unescorted access to nuclear. power plants or access to safeguards information. The current regulations require each licensee who is authorized to operate a nuclear power plant under Part 50 to submit fingerprint cards to the NRC for those individuals who are permitted unescorted access to a nuclear power facility or to safeguards information and who are not exempted under10CFR73.57(b)(2).
Fingerprints are used to secure a review of the individual's criminal history record by the FBI.
Information receivea from the FBI is reviewed by the licensee in order to determine whether further unescorted access to the facility. or to safeguards infor:aation should continue to be granted or denied.
The current regulations do not include a reinvestigation element.
In order to address the question of periodic reinvestigation, 10 CFR 73.57, " Requirements for Criminal History Checks of Individuals Granted Unescorted Access to a Nuclear Power Facility or Access to Safeguards.Information by Power Reactor Licensees," would be amended. The amendment would require ti.at= licensees who operate a nuclear' power plant submit fingerprint cards for applicable personnel to the NRC for criminal history checks every 5 years.
Authorization for unescorted access would be retained by an individual pending results of the criminal history check on that individual's tingerprints. The alternative is to allow the status quo to continue, with no reinvestigation of utility personnel required.
This rulemaking will have a minimal impact on the NRC because of the NRC's limited participation in processing'the reinvestigations.
The impact-on industry will include the cost of fingerprinting and submitting fingerpr, int cards through the NRC to the FBI for criminal history checks. The current regulation requires payment of- $21 per investigation, payable by the industry.
It is expected that this rate would also apply for each reinvestigation and would constitute full reimbursement to the government.
It is estimated that 0.5 staff-years of effort over 2 years will be required for the rulemaking.
100 4
s
i --
l i
f TITLE:
Reinvestigation of Individuals Granted' unescorted Access to
- i Nuclear Power Plants-TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 i
EFFECTS ON SMALL' BUSINESS AND OTHER-ENTITIES:
No l
l AGENCY C0dTACT*
Sandra Frattali Nuclear Regulatory Commission-Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301-492-3773--
1 101
l_
TITLE:--
Material Control and Accounting Requirements for-Uranium o
Enrichment Plants RIN:
3150-AD56 CFRCITATIONi 10 CFR 74 ABSTRACT:
1 The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to.
establish material control and accounting requirements for special nuclear material of low strategic significance at uranium enrichment plants, including requirements to detect and prevent enrichment above a specified maximum. There. appears to be serious commercial interest in the construction and operution-of a gas centrifuge plant that would produce low-enriched t.ranium for the commercial market.. Such a plant would be licensed' chiefly.
under Part 50. Although the plant would be authorized to produce only low-enriched uranium, the interest of the common defense and security demands that the NRC regulate the plant so as to assure with highest confidence that no centrifuge machine is used to produce uranium.in an enrichment higher than that authorized. This-is a new and unique problem never before faced by the NRC. Accordingly, no.NRC regulation is explicitly designed to deal with the problem, l
A new I 74.33, Nuclear Material Control and Accounting for Special Nuclear Material of Low Strategic Significance at Uranium Enrichment Plants, will be developed. The new I 74.33 will include material control and accountability requirements similar to those now required under 6 74.31, together with new requirements to assure that no enrichment facility is used to enrich uranium above a specified limit.
)
l TIMETABLE-Proposed Action to EDO 07/16/90 Proposed Action to Commission 07/30/90 Proposed Action Published 10/01/90 Final Action Published 07/30/91 g
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
c
-42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No 102 e
l ':
TITLE:
-Material Control and' Accounting Requirements for Vranium Enrichment Plants I
AGENCY CONTACT:.
j e'
G. Gundersen Nuclear Regulatory Commission Of_fice of Nuclear Regulatory Research i
Washington,-DC 20555 301 492-3803 i
t i
i s
i
-1 t
I 103 bl.
--(.
.)-
s j
li f
TITLE:-
g
- Import and Export of Nuclear Equipment and Material RV RIN:.
3150-AD64-0
~
CFR CITATION:
ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Comission's regulations governing the import and export of nuclear equipment and material.
Miscellaneous changes are proposed-in several areas of 10 CFR Part 110. The Commission has reviewed its processing of nuclear export license applications and has determined that (1) license applications for the export of any quantity of heavy water to Canada do not raise isaues that require Comission review, and (2) license applications for the export of low-enriched uranium to EURATOM and to Japan for enrichment to no more than 5% U-235. The Executive Branch agencies also reviewed their processing of nuclear export license applications and have determined that for these license applications Executive Branch review will not be required.
In addition, the NRC has identified several other areas where minor changes are warranted. These proposed changes would:
(1) permit the expedited import and export of certain nuclear material i
wherenosignificantproliferationrisksareinvolved,(2) clarify.
.the wording of the coverage of some nuclear-commodities, (3)
' streamline the procedures for public participation in NRC's
. licensing process, (4) delete from the list of restricted destinations those countries that recently have. signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty, (5) add Namibia to.the general license for the import into the United States of Namibian origin uranium in any form, (6) add definitions for terms not currently defined, and (7) make other minor changes. There is no acceptable alternative to rulemaking because.the amendments to the regulations are necessary to ensure the orderly and efficient administration of NRC's: import and export responsibilities without' incurring any national security or proliferation risks. The. rule should benefit the NRC, industry, and the public by making the regulations easier to-understand, implement, and enforce and by expediting the review process for certain kinds of applications.
TIMETABLE:
RulemakingInitiationDate(DivisionReview) 06/22/90 Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 08/31/90
't Proposed Action Published 10/19/90 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY-42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 104
i O
i:
i TITLE *
- ! aport and Export of Nuclear Equipment and Material l
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No L
AGENCY CONTACT:
j Elaine 0. Hemby-P'? clear Regulatory Commission Otfice of Governmental and Public Affairs e
Washington, DC 20555-301 492-0341 o
r
)
s 105
TITLE:* Export of S)ecitily Designed or Prepared Gaseous Diffusion Enrichment )lant Components RIN:
3150-AD59 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 110 ABSTRACT:
The final rule would amend the Commission's regulations to cover certain additional gaseous diffusion enrichment plant components.
)
This action is necessary to conform NRC's export regulations to the i
recent decision of the multilateral Non-Proliferation treaty Nuclear Exporters Group (Zangger Committee) to clarify its trigger list i
entry for gaseous diffusion enrichment plant components by adding i
ten new definitions.
The Zangger ".immittee's " Trigger List" is the internationally accepted export control list for nuclear equipment i
and materie.l.
Current NRC regulations define three specially designed or prepared components for gaseous Jiffusion enrichment planta. The Zangger Committee has determined that the new entries will give additional assurance that there are adequate export controls for this category of components.
This rule should benefit M
There is no acceptable alternative to this rulemaking.
the NRC and the public by further clarifying to U.S. exporters those components used in gaseous diffusion enrichment plants.
TIMETABLE:
Final Actirm rublished 07/00/90 1
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841; 44 USC 3201 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Elaine 0. Hemby Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Governmental and Public Affairs Washington, DC 20555 301 492-0344 106
m nx 3 0 3
+
,. /
+
/
'I k-
..:1 !. 4. c,
71..
s s
t 1... gd $' {D O jl_t ; <?,
,,!;n' ~-
b F
4 i
.o 1
3.). - ;
w>-- e
- /
.,.e q.
3, s
,,. a 0 37 n
i fi
~
t;_'-
i g
j4i.
4
'f.
%n'( ~
.. s
~,... -
g
. c.,e p
4l
[
Y E bI.
/'s, A
- i t-
. p f.cieg_
o3 q
m-
.s
-..-a S g-4 5-I4 Y
,e am?
v
+
, s-
- ~ v
.a, '
h5p T'
l
(.
w-4 1 i s
si. (A) Petitions. incorporated' into finalirules or:
5,.
y*; Y s,,,
. petitions denied since March 30,1990
'~
gl' f, t.'
4 W
1 i;,:
').J.
f.; j^ y., - )
. 1
'.n
- 1,
'4-
. i f
(
=
t
>2
+
- g-4 53
" h ?;_
t b
4 t
i i.5,,
e g!,,) rib i,.s: [ o.Y. ' 4 c
's n
_l N
t
,t..
-E 4
N f t
h, k i t
Ak-
{
t t
t '.
s +
9 Y
t a'lh_.
.' ; {\\ '.
1
- s. m' '.k p q
' ( t'
,.,4:
,m ' -
.,(_ 'f';
,r., ) !
-g-s.
.. g.J
" r 6
h.)
i gr e
1 a
1
.-q 7
}
_.U I
w~ J [!,.. fg4 r
p t
A
- i -
,. gi s
3
+
,L 3s
.- 4 4 i1,%,j
+.;
-y--
'.k_
?
5 t
- . r -.;
,,_I
(
1 (,~.4,4
f
.n s
- ~ h 1,.'*
s.
r 2
kk-f s
g c-
- v.,
.c.
[
.:f,
!i l,
m*.. t 3 -
ny p..,,.
%,0y;
-t
@e ('-
, y n y'--
?
1
+
D 'E /
y i f T
s
... j-1; p -.,
+t(_
a z.
g
_..s
-,'li
+,
4_
jag,
5 ; h-_
e ti& W
&;,n j \\' q.,
ws u w.a
? * '.p f '
J4(
A' L
em
'" 5
- $[g,'
I bi i
Y ~h x;
p t (:7. /
I i
m-s
'.)
-i
-. :. h ' l I-gt g.
- t s[E,'.
\\
?)
m%g'4g.=,
s
.l6 P4,j,M Ih[/n
'V u
-= n-,a m -a.s g g ~
,, a 3g,g eq 1 1 -,. - >
- J;g.1 N.1 d> s[e.
)
3 a d,'g'<
+
n h - n t'@3 3 i. r*d,.-.-sy,.
b
..g 11 h
L'
.:g>>
y w'gk a
t jN i N--.
i ' ;
jn
.T JW ' L W:e?ps.}i:,y w:e Lf:
v m
' &f.? gf&{y)-~, f.,
m n
' -ih =j' if:p o -- >
y f
k.dli,@L'Q-m,..
-R si
~
i -Q, cmsf t, A+
hlJ 3 jflu )suy %+pcv s a,m'
!a eca U. <_.
=
m 9
3 vd a:. J :-- :
e e-i g q,plu m r ry1 [Oy) i -
,a f
/jk ((-l y 5'T 59
(
A m
.ae k
,,3 l
i 1
l' l
l.
I l
i A
P f
I t
F l
1
l PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-40-23 i
PETITIONER:
Sierra Club PART: 40 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS: None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
February 25,1981(46FR14021);
l May 2, 1983 (48 FR 19722);
June 22,1990(55FR25670)
SUBJECT:
Licensing the Possession of Uranium Mill Tailings at Inactive Storage Sites.
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the Commission amend its regulations to license the possession of uranium mill tailings of inactive storage sites. The petitioner proposes the following regulatory action to ensure that the put,lic f ealth and safety is adequately protected: (1) repeal the licensing exemption for inactive uranium mill tailings sites subject to the Department of Energy's remedial programs; (2) require a license for the possession of byproduct material r
on any other property in the vicinity of an inactive mill tailings site if the byproduct materials are derived from the sites; or, in the alternative; and (3) conduct a rulemaking to determine whether a licensing exemption of these sites or byproduct materials constitutes an unreasonM:le risk to public health and safety. On March 23, 1983, the utitioner filed an amendment to the original petition, in tie amendment, the petitioner requests that, in the event that NRC denies I
the earlier requests NRC take further action to ensure T
l that the management of hyproduct material located on or l
derived from inactive wanium processing sites is conducted in a manner that protects the public health and safety and the environment.
The petitioner also requests that the NRC take action to govern the management of byproduct material l
not subject to licensing under Section 81 of the Atomic j
Energy Act.
The objective of the petition is to license the protection of uranium mill tailings at inactive storage sites or take other regulatory action to protect the public health and safety and the environment from the radiological and nonradiological hazards associated with the tailings.
The petitioner believes that this action is necessary if NRC is to adequately fulfill its statutory responsibilities under the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act. The comment period closed April 27, 1981.
Three comments were received, 107
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-40-23
SUMMARY
(CONT) all stating the petition should be denied.
The comment seriod on the amendment to the petition closed June 30, 1983.
'Jranium mill tailings are regulated under the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (Pub. L.95-604, 42 U.S.C. 7901, et seq.). Title I of the Act directs that the Department of Energy, in consultation with NRC, conduct a remedial action program at inactive uranium mill tailings sites. Title II of the Act authorizes NRC to regulate disposal of the tailings at active sites.
TIMETABLE:
Denial published in the Federal Register on June 22, 1990 (55FR25670).
CONTACT: Mark Haisfield Nuclear Regulatory Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3877 I
l 108
\\
(B)Petitionsforwhichanoticeofdenialhasbeen prepared and is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register next quarter
-None l
1
--,,n,--_-
www-m w-amsc u sw w.e-.sr---vasw-ewg.=-erz.-s m mm-4 +en av*.m
,,.u-AM Mb bs An A s aan. A. w. 6.ub-54m n.ek in -- ^
^ *
^M enuMM A MM m s
i i
r, 1
9 e
p s
t 1
h
.i l -
t I
I I
6 r
1-I I
I l
l i.
I b
?
t
" "~ *
=~e-
- ~,,,, nan,
..,,_,_.n_,
1 (C) Petitions incorporated into proposed rules i
None j,
I I
i i
I l
l
~
i a
\\
i (D)Petitionspendingstaffreyfw 1
1 i
l l
I a
i i
n.,,.
--y.
--a-,
-.a..a aenu..--*as-
- ~. a - a - w am a ~e m s.a. a..s m.+
L r amau mu-umn-,u==. e.m.m a. san e.s e-us.oa.-n..u n44+a-m. Ass yb h
a i
l 1
8 l
t>
f 7
1 i
I e
P I
9 f
l l.
h i
5 f
i o
e
- w
i l
I PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-20-17 PETITIONER:
The Rockefeller University PART:
20 OThER AFFECTED PARTS:
None i
FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: October 21,1988(53FR41342)
Correction published November 1, 1988 (53 FR 44014) i
SUBJECT:
Disposal of Animal Tissue Containing Small Amounts of Radioactivity
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the NRC amend its regulations under which a licenser may dispose of animal tissue containing small amounts of radi) activity without regard to its radio-activity by expanding the list of radioactive isotopes for which unregulated dia)osal is permitted.
Specifically, the petitioner requests t1at the NRC add Sulfur-35, Calcium-45, Chromium-51, Iodine-125, and Iodine-131 in concentrations not exceeding 0.01 microcurie /g to the list of radioactive isotopessetoutin10CFR20.306(b).
The petitioner also requests that the NRC make the unregulated disposal of these wastes a matter with which all jurisdictions must comply.
TIMdTABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for January 1991.
CONTACT:
Catherine Mattsen Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3638 1
109 1
i PETITION DOCKET NUMBER: PRM-20-18 PETITIONER:
The Rockefeller University PART: 20 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS: None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: October 31,1988(53FR43896)
SUBJECT:
Disposal of Solid Biomedical Waste Containing Small Amounts of Radioactivity
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the NRC amend its regulations to permit a licensee to dispose of solid biomedical waste containing small amounts of radioactivity without regard to its radioactivity.
The petitioner requests that the NRC expand the provisions of 10 CFR 20.306 to classify the disposal of wastes such as paper, glass, and plastic trash containing small amounts of Hydrogen-3 and Carbon-14 as below regulatory concern. The petitioner would then be able to i
dispose of this material on-site in a currently operating, controlled-air incinerator.
The petitioner believes this to be a reasonable cost-effective alternative to burial of these wastes at a comercial low-level radioactive waste site.
TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for January 1991.
l CONTACT:
Catherine Mattsen l
Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3638 i
=
l
o l
i,
)
I-1 PETITION DOCKET NUMBER: PRM-20-19 PETITIONER: GE Stockholders' Alliance i
PART:
20 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
50 FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
February 1,1989 (54FR5089) i
SUBJECT:
Injection of Detectable Odor in Emissions of Nuclear Power Plants and Other Nuclear Processes
SUMMARY
The petitioner requests that the Comission amend Part 20 to require that a detectable odor be injected into the emission of nuclear power plants and other nuclear processes over which the NRC has jurisdiction.
The petitioner aclieves that this action would improve the health and safety of the public by providing for early detection of radiation leaks. A detectable odor would give the public notice of the need to take health protective measures.
The public comment period closed April 3, 1989. The NRC will review public comments, prior staff work on this issue, and develop recommendations regarding resolution of the petition.
TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for September 1990.
CONTACT:
Catherine Mattsen Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3638 111 t
I
PETITION DOCKET NO:
PRM-35-8 PETITIONER: Amersham Corporation PART: 35 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS: None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: May5,1989(54FR19378)
SUBJECT:
Iridium-192 Wire for the Interstitial Treatment of Cancer
SUMMARY
The petitioner requests that the Nuclear Regulatory Connission amend its regulations concerning the medical use of byproduct p
material to include Iridium-192 wire for interstitial treatment of cancer in the provisions of 10 CFR 35.400 which governs the I
use of sources for brachytherapy. Under current NRC regulations, a potential user would be required to request and obtain a license amendment before using Iridium wire in brachytherapy treatments.
The petitioner requests this i
amendment so that each medical use licensee that intends to use Iridium-192 wire for the interstitial treatment of cancer may do so without having to request and obtain a specific amendment to its license.
TIMETABLE: A proposed rule entitled, " Iridium-192 Wire for Interstitial TreatmentofCancer(RIN3150-AD46),"hasbeendevelopedto address this petition. Action on the proposed rule is expected in the near future pending final resolution of potential safety issues.
CONTACT: Anthony Tse Nuclear Regulatory Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (301)492-3797 112 J
kf PETITION DOCKET NUMBER: PRM-35-9 a
PETITIONER: American College of Nuclear Physicians and the Society of 4
Nuclear Medicine PART: 35 OTHER AFFECTE] PARTS: 30, 33 FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
September 15, 1989 (54FR38239)
SUBJECT:
Use of Radiopharmaceuticals
SUMMARY
- The petitioners request that the Commission revise its regulations to give cognizance to the appropriate scope of the practice of medicine and pharmacy. The petitioners believe that 10 CFR Part 35 should be revised to recognize all the mechanisms that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) uses to authorize the use of radiopharmaceuticals. According to the petitioners, granting of this petition would allow nuclear physicians and nuclear pharmacists to reconstitute non-radioactive kits differently from the method reconsnended by the manufacturer; allow nuclear physicians and nuclear pharmacists to prepare radiopharmaceuticals whois manufacture and distribution are purposefully not regulated by.FDA; and permit nuclear physicians to determine appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic applications of radiopharmaceuticals, as is their professional obligation.
The petitioners are interested in the requested action because, under current NRC regulations, members of the petitioning organizations believe t
they cannot appropriately )ractice their professions.
The petitioners state that autiorized user physicians cannot prescribe certain radiopharmaceuticals or routes of administration for optimal patient care,-even though they are permitted to do so by FDA and by their state medical licenses. According to the petitioners, nuclear pharmacists have been disenfranchized as a professional entity because activities that are permitted by the FDA and the states are not allowed under NRC regulations. The petitioners believe that their professional activities are curtailed by the limitations imposed on nuclear physicians and pharmacists.
TIMETABLE: Partial resolution of the petition is scheduled for August 1990 (see rulemaking, " Authorization to Prepare Radiopharmaceutical Reagent Kits and Elute Radiopharma-ceutical Generators; Use of Radiopharmaceuticals for Therapy" (RIN 3150-AD43) (Part 35)).
CONTACT: Anthony Tse Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3797 113
t i
t PETIN 0N* DOCKET NUMBER: PRM-50-20 i
PETITIONER:
Free Environment, Inc., et al.
PART:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
100 FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: May19,1977(42FR25785)
SUBJECT:
Reactor Safety Measures
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the Commission amend Part 50
?
before proceeding with the processing of license applications for the Central lowa Nuclear Project to require that:
(1)all l
nuclear reactors be located below ground level; (2) all nuclear reactors be housed in sealed buildings within which permanent heavy vacuums are maintained; (3) a full-time Federal employee, with full authority to order the plant to be shut down in case of any operational abnormality, always be present in all nuclear generatingstations;and(4)theCentralIowaNuclearProject l
and all other reactors be sited at least 40 miles from major population centers.
The objective of the petition is to ensure that additional safety measures'are employed in the construction and siting of nuclear power plants. The petitioner seeks to have recommendations and procedures practiced or encouraged by various organizations and-some current NRC guidelines adopted as mandatory i
requirements in the Comission's regulations.
The comment )eriod closed July 18, 1977.
Three comments were received. T1e first three parts of the petition (see Description section above) were incorporated with PRM-50-19 for staff action purposes. A notice of denial for the third part of the petition was published ia the Federal Register on i
February 2,1978(43FR4466). A aotice of denial for the first two parts of the petition was published April 19, 1978 (43FR16556).
TIMETABLE:
The staff is planning to prepare a Federal Register notice.
whichwillcontainadenialfortheremainingissue(Item 4) in this petition. The notice of denial is expected to be submitted to the ED0 09/90.
CONTACT:
H. Toymassian l
Nuclear Regulatory Comission l-Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3634 g
i i
I14
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRN-bO-50 PETITIONER: Charles Young PART:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS: None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: August 26,1988(53FR32624)
SUBJECT:
Technical Specifications
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests the Commission to amend its regulations to rescind the provision that authorizes nuclear power plant operators to deviate from technical specifications during an emergency. The petitioner believes that nuclear power plants should be operated in accordance with the operating license and appropriate l
technical specifications and that requiring a senior operator to follow the technical specifications during an energency enhances plant safety, l
TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for November 1990, t
CONTACT: Morton R. Fleishman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3794 e
i
+ -
1 l
115 j
f-
i P
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER: PRM-50-52 PETITIONER: Marvin Lewis PART:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS: None j
FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: August 29,1988(53FR32913)
SUBJECT:
Financial Qualifications
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the Commission reinstate financial qualifications as a consideration in the operating license hearings for electric utilities.
The >etitioner believes that the financial condition of a utility siould be investigated during the licensing hearings.
The petitioner also believes that the current rule requires the assump'
-n of financial adequacy and that this assumption has res.
ed in several problems that could pose a danger to the k lic health and safety.
TIMETABLE: Resolution of this petition is scheduled for July 1990.
CONTACT: Darrel Nash Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 301 492-1256
?
I l
l16 q
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER: PRM-50-53 PETITIONER:
The Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy PART:
50 t
OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: July 25,1989 (54 FR 30905)
SUBJECT:
Request for Reopening of ATWS Rulemaking Proceeding
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the NRC reopen the Anticipated Transients Without Scram (ATWS) rulemaking proceeding. This request was one portion of a request by the Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy (OCRE) that NRC take a number of actions to relieve alleged undue risks posed by the thermal-hydraulic instability of boiling water reactors.
On April 27, 1989, the Director NRR, responded to the OCRE request for action in a I
Director s Decision under 10 CFR 2.206.
In the Director's Decision (DD-89-03),'theNRCdeniedallofthepetitioner's requests, except for the request to reopen the ATWS rulemaking proceeding, which would be more properly treated as a petition
{
I l
for rulemaking under 10 CFR 2.802.
The petitioner suggested l
that resolution of the ATWS problem depends on measures other l
than tripping the recirculation pumps to rapidly reduce reactivity.
In this regard, the petitioner specifically suggests the use of an automatic, high-capacity standby liquid control system.
In a letter from the P"" %ner's Group (BWROG), dated September 18, 1989, whit.
uusmitted report NED0-31709,
" Average Core Power During
~e Core Thermal Hydraulic Oscillations in a BWR" the b..a0G concluded that previous ATWS evaluations are valid and that existing ATWS provisions and actions are appropriate.
The staff review of NED0-31709 concluded that the NED0 analyses, and other analyses performed by the BWROG contractors, were not sufficient to support their conclusions.
NRC Staff and contractors studies of ATWS scenarios are currently being performed to determine if the potential power oscillations could be significant enough to warrant an ATWS rule change, modification of operator actions, or possible equipment / systems changes.
Several of the ATWS scenarios have revealed the need for more detailed studies of the automatic responses and emergency procedures guidelines (EPG's) used by plant operators.
1 i
117
i PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-50-53
SUMMARY
(CONT) i The staff plans to complete the detailed studies and to l
qualify the results by October 1990.
Concurrently, the BWROG is evaluating and addressing questions raised by the staff relative to operator actions and instrumentation adequacy for an ATWS with oscillations and the timing of the boron injection and water level reduction as effective means to control such transients.
Therefore, the staff considers it prudent to hold in abeyance, pending furtter results and information discussed above, a response to ;he petitioners request to reopen the ATWS rules' K;.7s ;;ocecoings.
TIMETABLE: Resolution of the petition is scheduled for October 1990.
CONTACT: Robert R. Riggs Nuclear RegulatJ ry Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3732 k
i PETITION DOCKET NUMBER: PRM-50-54 PETITIONER:
Public Citizen PART:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS: None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: March 12,1990(55FR9137)
SUBJECT:
Regulation of Independent Power Producers
SUMMARY
The petitioner requests that the Commission promulgate rules governing the licensing of independent power producers (IPPs) to construct or operate commercial nuclear power reactors. The petitioner also requests that these rules include specific criteria for financial qualifications for an IPP seeking a construction permit or an operating license for a commercial nuclear power reactor.
The petitioner believes that there is a growing movement towards non-utility IPPs owning, constructing, and/or operating nuclear reactors.
TIMETABLE: Resolution of the petition is sched" led for March 1991.
CONTACT:
Joseph Mate Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3795 119
l 5
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-50-55*
PETITIONER:
Yankee Atomic Electric Company PART: 50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS: None i
FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: May3,1990(55FR18608)
[
SUBJECT:
Scheduling Final Safety Analysis Report Updates
{
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the NRC change the requirement that nuclear power plant licensees file revisions to the final safety analysis report not less than once a year.
The petitioner also requests that the regulations require that revisions be filed no later than six months after completion of each planned refueling outage for a licensee's facility.
TIMETABLE: Resolution of the petition is scheduled for May 1991.
CONTACT: Stanley Turel Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3739 4
120 t
i PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-61-1*
PETITIONER: Sierra Club, North Carolina Chapter PART: 61 P
OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: April 12,1990(55FR13797);
June 7, 1990 (55 FR 23206)
SUBJECT:
Design and construction of a zero-release low-level radioactive waste disposal facility in a saturated zone
SUMMARY
The petitioner requests the Comission to adopt a regulation to permit the design and construction of a zero-release low-level radioactive waste disposal facility in a saturated zone.
The petitioner states that the regulation is necessary in order for the General Assembly of North Carolina to consider a waiver of a North Carolina statute which requests that the bottom of a low-level waste facility be at least seven feet from above the seasonal high water table.
TIMETABLE: Resolution of the petition is scheduled for June 1991.
CONTACT: Mark Haisfield Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3877 121
f.
)
I l
4 1
1 (E)Petitionswithdeferredaction h
None l'
(
i j
1 I
i
T l
1
(
l I
i d
t I
i f
D
=
l l
1 il
.J I
I I
I I
i r
h b
v n
I
\\ '?
I
~w gyg.w r
+
NRC #0ml 336 U.S. NUCLE AA Et GUL Af oAY CoMMIS560N I 4LPOdi hvMbt R NH E 1102, powmeers. sY,Y' w.am BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET NUREG-0936 tsee,,urruce.o,v en t,*,,,,wni V 1.
,, Noe 2
- a. mit ANo s.vBmti NRC Regulatory Agenda a.
DATE 9tPoRT PuBoisHto Quarterly Report uusta l
- 6. AVIHORI$)
6 T YPE OF REPORI Quarterly 1
- 1. I't RIOU COV E R L U tsaroeson veroso April June 1990 8, Pt R F ORMING oRG ANil AllON - N AM t AND ADDRib5 ist Nac. pro.no Osweseva, Orface er meevaa. v & hwmer neopaerery commessoa, e e medane serem se reenctes proe*
(
name enest msnmp ed$esLi Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services Office of Administration U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
- 9. EPONSoRING oRGANi2AllON - NAME AND ADDRt55 set Nac, type %mr es seen",4s tearterror. pro ** NaC Derteua. Or'are er Asema. ua hurmer nervaetary ce==<=.sa, eron eeume ed*eet.I Same as item 8. above.
- 10. SUPPLE ME NT ARY NOTE S I1. AS$1 R ACI (M wenn er km/
The NRC Regulatory Agenda is a compilation of all rules on which the NRC has proposed or is considering action and all petitions for rulemaking which have been received by the Commission and are pending disposition by the Commission. The Regulatory Agenda is updated and issued each quarter.
- 12. KL Y WORDS!DL SCR!P10R S ftdst eronn or phrears #Aer om same reseerraers es huelme rae secort.J 13 A* A8L A8'ui V 610 -tMihl Unlimited Compilation of rules iuecva i c6=wicatios Petitions for rulemaking r
dn,.,e,elassified
[
dnae,.,,, classified r
- 16. NVMBER OF PAGIS 16.PHICE hRC FORM 335 Q 896
^
WASH NGT 55 Section 1 - Rules m g ; g e g g g,,,
Action Completed Rules
.hfhyl 1 1AN187 U
DIV FOIA & PUBLICATIONS SVCS P R-NUREG Proposed Rules P-!23 WASHINGTON DC 20555 Advance Notice - Proposed Rulemaking Unpublishsd Rules Section ll - Petitions for Rulemaking Petitions - Final or Denied Petitions - Scheduled for Pubilcation ir the Federal Register
/
Petitions - Incorporated into Proposed Rules Petitions - Pending Petitions - Deferred Action 1
l
-