ML20056C223
| ML20056C223 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/24/1993 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20056C222 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-58FR15810, FRN-58FR15884, RULE-PR-26 AE36-1-004, AE36-1-4, NUDOCS 9305110301 | |
| Download: ML20056C223 (5) | |
Text
-
~
AE36-1 PDR 1suo Proposed Rules re-Vol. 58. No. SS Wednesday. March 24.1M3 l
)
Thrs secton of the FEDERAL REGtLTER from the National Technical Information directly addroues the issue of whether con *.ains notces e the pu%c of N proposed Service. 5282 Pod Royal Road, reducing the random testing rate affects susance of rukes ast repadons ha Springfis!d.VA 22161. A co as allable for inspection and[ny is the deterrent effect of drug testing and pa pose of r.ese notcos as e pre mterested or copying prosented options for consideration by pe%ns an opoortnty e pa'towe m tw for a f~ in the NRC Pubhc Document the Comminion On Odober 20.1942.
r#e r.au; r.c ta t% aunn of tv te.a' R
0 Nm NW. kn W1 6 hinia bstructed the staff to I
"5 Washington. DC.
prepars a change to to CFR pan 26 that "Duld ermit hcensees to randomly test P
FOR FURTHER MOsutaTnood COWACT:
NUCLEAR REGULATORY Loren 1. Bush Jr.. Reactor Safeguards their employees at a rate equal to 50 COMMISSION Branch.Davision of Radiation Safety percent.
and Sahuards.Ofhce omudear 10 CFR Part 26 Discussion Reactor ReFulation. U.S. Nuclear RIN 3tSG-AE36 Regulatory Commission. Washington.
The p of random testing was DC 20555 telephone: (301) 5D4-2944.
discusse in the Federal Register in the rogt m equi e ents
$Uf%EWECARY MORMATCN:
P u
ed p
r 22.
BacL round 1988 (53 FR 36795 at 36810). An extract A0t e.cy: Nuclear Regulatory 6
Commission.
The NRC is proposing to amend its ACTom Pmposed rule.
regulations governing "Fatneu-for-Duty "Dep 7 pose of random (unannouncedl EUWMARY:The Nuclear Regulatory Pregrams," as part oiits continuing testing is to pmvide seasonable usurance Commission (NRC) proposes to amend eUon to improve its mgu stims.
that employees are Gt for duty by identifymg current users and by detemng drug its regulations to modify current The NRC has reviewed experiences users imm rther use or potentist users imm Fitness for Duty Program (FFD) gained sina publication of the current initial use. N frequency with w hich an requirements. The proposed rule on June 7.1959 (54 FR 24468) and individual is tested is rencvant to both the amendments would apply to all implementation by power reactor identincation and deterreuce goals of the heensees authonzed to construct or licensees on January 3.1990.The NRC drug testing prtysm. Generally. the more operate a nuclear power reactor has determined that it is appropriate to the deterrent e
in ng e{s pursuant to 10 CFR part 50.The Permit a reduction in the random testmg proposed rule is intended to permit rate for utility employees but maintain capauhtu heery Wat te may result in uneca tebir economic or hcensees to reduce the random testing the 100 percent random testing rate for socialcosts. Ahhou there is no research rate for hcensee employees but maintain contractors and vendors.
upon which the testieg frequency may be the 100 percent random testing rate for DurinE the FFD rulemaking process, based, it seems rouonable to assume that contr. actor and vendor employees the NRC had specincally invited the e Any form of unannounood anting would DATES:The comment period empires Public to comment on the rates of provide some level of deterrence.
June 22.1993. Comments received after random testing (53 FR 36795 at 36796;
- There would be httle deterrent if the this date will be considered if it is September 22,1988). Public comments tuting data were predictable and the drug practical to do so.but the Commission strongly opposed a p posed 300 user k.new be was not immediately as able to assure consideration only for Percent rate; the Nuc ear Management eusaptibleso another test.
comments received on or before this and Resources Council (NUMARC) and e Testing each dsy would provide more of
- date, rnost beensees proposed a 100 percent e 6,terrent than testmg once each week or ADDREssts: Mail comments to: The rate These commenters also month.especially if the daily octivity was Secretary of the Commission. U.S.
recommended that this rate be highty visible.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, reevaluated on the basis of utihty
. Deterrence is telsted to either the actua!
Wuhington.DC 20555. ATTN:
- Perience and be reduced to 25 or perceived probabihty of detection.
DocketinE and Service Branc.h.
percent. if warranted (54 FR 2446B at e N actual pmbabthry of detection is Dehver comments to: One White Flint 24472; june 7.1989). As a result, tne related to the type of drug. dose f equency North.11555 Rock ville Pik e. Rockville. Commission indicated that it would of use. rate of metabohsm and excretion fmm Maryland between 7.30 am and 4:15 pm consider reducing testing rates after the body, and the frequency of testmg on Federal work days.
eeveral years if it obtained information e The perceived pmbabihty of detection is Copies of SECW92-271.the draft that expenence in the industry with the related to the frequency of testmg. the regulatory analysis, and the comments existing rate had been positive (54 FR "pubhcity" given itive Ondmp and received may be examined at: the NRC 24468 at 24474;)une 7.1989). On annettons im
. and the abuser s Pubhc Dacument Room. 2120 L Street November 7.1991. the Commission knowledge o the rate of metabohsm and NW. (Lower level). Washington. DC.
directed the staff to report on work that actual probabihty of detection.
Copies of NUREG/CR-5758 [ Volumes has been done on the deterrent effect of The NRC recognizes that not all 1 and 2) and NUREG/CR-5784 may be different testing rates with workers are deterred and that random purchased from the Superintendent of recommendations of the applicability of testing does contribute significantly to Documents. U.S. Covemment Printing the work to the nuclear mdustry.
the detection of substana abuse by Office. P.O. Box 37082. Washington. DC SECW92-271 informed the those few who are not deterred.The 20013-7082. Copies are also available Commission that no research exists that workforce may be divided mto three R
301 930506 26 58FR15810 g
Fed:rel Register / Vol. 58. No. 55 / Wednesday March 24, 1993 / Propos:d Rules 15811 groups concerning the detenwnt effect of have e strong detenent effect on suggesting that a substantial number of random testing.
substance abuse. In addition. research those testing positive for drugs are not
. The vast mejority of workers do not on human decisionmaking and risk detened (Osborn & Sokolow.1990, abuse substances because of any of assessment suggwts that an individual's Stoloff.1985).
several reasons. usually concerns for perceptions of the risk of being tested The NRC considered several health. Random testing does not and the risk of drug une being detected altematives in determining the influence the behavior of this group.
are not based on rational calculations of appropriate random d.ug testing rate for There would be no detenent effect.
probabihties alone. Individuals tend to the nuclsar power industry.The NRC e A small percentere of workers are overestimate the hkelihood of low considered conducting a study that chronic abusers. Random testing would probabihty events (being selected for would reduos the random testing rate of hase httle,if any, influence on this testing) and tend Io incorporate into some litansees to 50 percent gruup There w culd be no detener.t their deer. making t!.e information (experimental sites) and analyze that eWrt Random testing would esentually that is most easily realled.
data against the dete of licensees who detect these people.
Detenencs is behaved to be a function would continue a 100 percent testing
- An unknown percentage of workers of the perceived risk of being detected.
rate (control sites). The experiment are. or could be tempted to be.
the seventy of the sanction, and the would have to run for several years to occasional users and mey be able to swiftness with which it is applied allow for delayed effects caused by abstam if properly encouraged.The compared with the gratification derived adjusted testing rates and to obtain a detenence effect of random testmg from the illicit behavior. Several sufficient number of test results. The would cause them to refrain from mitial conclusions may be drawn from review design of the stud and the analysis of use or to modify their behavior if they of the esailable htersture:
the results would.sve taken an are occasional users. Random testinE (1) The deterrent effect of random additional ear.The NRC has c'ecided would has e the greatest influence on drug and alcohol testing programs may not to con: uct such a study bouuse:(i) this group.
not be sensitive to mcremental The relatively long period of time The random testing rate has been en adjustments m random test rates. While required to collect and analyze the data issue with other Federally regulated or random testing remains enticalir' would deley the Commission's action admmistered random testmg pmgrams.
detening drug abuse,it is only one of on this issue. and (ii) variables from site The issue is the balancmg of program the forces acting to deter drug use. Other goals.The optimal random dru testinE important factors include the elements
'1ff e d
n test program is one that maximizes th of a broadbrush program (e g-,
groups in the smell absolute number of detection end deterrence of substance awareness training. pre-access and for-ebuse while minimizing monetary and cause testing behavioral observation.
R d
iconductmE en social costs (e F.. adverse impacts on counseling and remosals) as well as attitudinal study which would attempt employee morale). To maximize organizational and work force detection, other factors remaininE demographic factors and drug-specific to s,how worker attitudes toward, and their understending of, random testing.
constant. it is assumed that more testing factors.
will result in more detection. In f 21 Assaming equal testing rates and it was hoped that this study would maximizing detenence. random testing procedures, there will be a greater provide a better understandin of how rates have been influenced by deterrent effect when the nsks of drug this particular component of eE assumptions that the probabihty of abuse-including the probability of Program deters substance abuse and being selected for testmg would have e detection--are well understood than would help determine whether the detenent effect and that the higher the when they are not.
Perceived deterrent effect varies es the
^
testing rate the greater the deterrent (31 Some users will remain rate of random testing varies.The NRC effect (although the incremental undetened. Based on the findings of the has decided not to conduct this study deterrent effect would tilely diminish military and research on drunk drivers, because:
es test rates increase) These some part of the population continues to (i) The appreciable time that would be aswmptions are based on both intuition ebuse drugs or alcohol even when required to design and administer the and eerber efforts by the Department of detection and sanctions are highly survey and obtain OMB spproval would Defense that indicated a greater certain ReEardless of the random testing delay the Commission's action on the detenent effect at higher random testing rate, some users mey not cease their issue. (ii) the study would tap worker rates Irnninimizing monetary and drug use under any condition Thus, attitudes rather than their behavior. and social costs when establishing e other program elements, such as liii) the results of the sursey.by minimum random testing rate, factors behavioral obserntion, for-cause themselves. would not provide a sohd such as the level of intrusion on en testmg.and employee assistance basis for changes in the random testing individual's privacy and the programs.are important to provide rete-incremental costs of additional testing additional assurances to deted and The NRC also considered awaiting are considered in ettempting to remove chronic drug abusers from the and esaluating the results of the Federal establish optimal testing rates that are work force. However. e higher random Railroad Administration's test program reasoncble and consistent with each testing rate would more rapidly detect (55 FR 22905: May 17.1991) which is agency's unique needs. Federal agencies these undeterred users (see Appendix C now expected to be completed in late has e estabbshed programs with random to NUREG/CR-5784).
1993.The NRC has decided not to await testing rates that vary from 4 percent to Studies on random testing have found the results of this study because seseral 200 percent, that higher testing and discharge rates factors may limit the appbcation of the Perceptions of risk are beheved to may result in higher overall detection of study to the nuclear industry; play a le*ge role in deternng substance drug ebuse in the workforce (see Durbin.
(i) The railroad industry has fewer abuse For example, from studies of et al.1991). In terms of deterrence.
units (i.e., there are fewer carriers than drunk dnving and deterrence measures. continued drug use by identified users there are utilities) and more employees researchers conclude that the risk of has been shown to be e substantial per unit than the nuclear power incurring strong sanctions appears to factor in overall drug use rates, industry; I
i
15812 Federal Register / Vol 58. No. SS / No;dntsday, March 24. M3 / Proposed Rules bi) N Sex.ibihty provided in part 26 (iv) W reactly reported ran of 1%=e aus ployees, and that b rate of regardmg emoff krvela, sanctzoos, and so subetence abuse detected through positin random tuts for hornsee forth sagrests a puential f.or subr.antial random testing in the railrood industry earployms is not !aly to increase.
variatihty of the deterrent ensets within is guedtr.p'e that in the nudear power However, arper=w= with randoen the nudear poww bdustry.
indastry tepproximately 1 percent as testing gairmed airies publication of 6 (iiil A railline's employees are against 0.25 putact b ower rmetw rule beve shown czmtractor and vendor located ecoss the country and, thus. are
,$g7o
- E tthe rt n 8PProximately double thet for licensee subied to e range oflocal drug.use involved and b low rafe of itive peiterns and contexts. By ccntrast, the tests. 6 NEC Eu condu that emp oyees.Becruse of the higher rete of employees of a particular nudear power lowering the renders testing rate from Positive testa for contractor and vendor r Ut tend t,1 - 'o
.A w ahir a sirp m y w tto <.,o p. m.t % uld a w e
'"Y Y'" U'
- IdPP M
geopsphic region, with one presaihng hule if any decroue in b deterrent this time. to lower the rate for tLt t set of loal drug-use patterns; and effuct of random testing arbec appbed to population. En chut.
Ruoou TEsTwa 2 year b "' N PD***
?
1990 Flasts's t90t stosts/a aissare pom-runs poggn p,
(P*'-
c414 Lorpiarm Corn n::trnNon:Us tLt10044 7.5DG023 16.413007 0 81 Srort-Term Conr a:rn&oro:rs 39.596729 d5.277/267 64.873/496
.56 Ah Conesetoreserers --
44.50G*273 52.777/290 101 28 % 63 8.56 Licensee Empoyees -
100.237'277 101.04 t f220 Fe1.271MG7
'.25
'TN renpo tor cont actr &%--a cump CY 1991 was tietween 0% and t.53% sob 7 smes hewig raias greater ran tm.
8 The range tor moonoce ernperees o.mg CY 7991 was tesween 0% and 0 87%. with 5 mmes henn; tales regher r.an 0.5%
in conclusion the NRC behsves that certain positions critical to the safe Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
'the fitness-for-duty propam can be operstion of a nuclear poww plant. auch
~
revised to permit hcanwes to lower b as licensed reector operators, should be Es,uw, rule amends random tuung rate for licensee excluded from any reduction of the infontion cobaion requ.trements that employees wathout sip:if. cant impact random teshng re e.
are subjed to the paperwork Reduction a
on the ovusll effe.ctn sness of 6 Act of 1960 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seg ).
8
'P J This rule bee been submitted 1o the program. Therefore, the Commission is proposing that 5 26.24(aM2) be modif.ed Durbia. N., Mars. C., Grant. T., nemms Of5ce of Menegement and Budget for to perm 41 Jicenwes to randomly test Tant 3, Me-t ra. R. M.arpby. S~ Hawth, review and appreest cf the paperwork their ernployees at an annual rete equal J, Ma n. R, Battm. A Bear A, requirements.
1o at least 50 perccci. This would not l.k' Q, Since the proposed rule would reduce prechide beensees froco test 2ng the employee workforce, or portions Power Industry-A Review of the Tarst Yent the randocn drug kssdag rate for hoantee thereof et a higher rete. For the present. cf Prog am Portannacca aod an Update d the employees from 100 pertant to 50 Techracal issues INUREC/C3t-5764)."
Percent, pubhc reporting and the mansmum rate of testing for wg pg. Nh R@g recordleeM burden for b calledion contra:: tor and vendor employees, comme ofi&maden is expedad W whether una the bcensee s propam or Osbome. CE. 6 Sokobr.1 J. O rea01 "Dng rarbd. N resulbCE reduClieo in r
en spprovt.d contractc? or vendct W Trnds k e N& P m Fdr Dua b & h s h W tos w e M program w211 ramsin at 100 percent. The From e 5.nedo:n Soorning Progrars "Izi S.W.
boun pu sh trx.luding h Uma for NRC will cont 2nue to mon. tor Cust. J.M. Wahh, LB. Thor:ss. and D.)
reviewirrg instrudions, saarthing implementation of the rule and will Crouch. (Ea I.Drup is the Workpba; existing data sources.gethennF and modify the rule an respont.e to industry Research a.nd Evaluation Data. Yohasai!L Eh h n W.and expenenca, ad vances in technology, or NIDA Reseuch Mompaph Nct too m*m other considerations to ensure that the Rock vilje. MD Natew.al h, statute on Itr g txmpleting and reviewing the collection rule is actiering the general Abuw. 2u3.
ofinformation. Serrd comments j
performuace ob edives set forth in 10 Stoloft P.H. 0 9t.51. TLs Effectivene is of regndmg the esumated Mn t
CFR 2L10.
Unz.alysis as a Detenent to Drug Use. p t1, reduction or any other aspect of this Assumine that the deterrent effec of W8'hg n.DC Depanmt of the Navy.
cohcion ohnfomWntMnE fr" MII*'P M D N al p i bu e,
the o aden and be abo me s percer.t rate, the pmpor.ed rule could Records ManaEement handi ph resuh in a reducuan in the nurnber cf The NRC has dele =i -d that this 7714).U.S. Nuclear Regulatory car.cs of drug and alcohol use by pmpored rule is the type cd a: tion Commiss. ion. Washington. DC 20555 heens* employees detected each year described in categori5al exdusion 1D and to th-Dea Officer. Office of through random testing. F.acognir.ing CFR 51.22[cM21. Therekre, neither an Inforination and Regulatory Affas.
1:ris potential redocsion in indnidcals environmentalimpact statennet nor an hT.OS-3019.13150-014Eh Office of ICnE eteced, the NRCis speciScally environmental essessrwent has baan Managenerit and Badget. Washir;gton, d
iraterested in commer.ts es to whether prepared for this proposed rule.
DC 2c503.
i i
Federal Register / Vol. 58. No. 55 / Wednesday. March 24, 1993 / Proposed Rules 15813 Regulatory Analysia PART Nr--f1TNESS FOR DtJTY to detect fatigue cracking and repair or
+
The Commission has prepand a draft PROGRAMS nplacement, as commry, to ensure contmued airworthiness as these replatory analysis on this proposed 1.The authority citation for part 26 airplanes approach the manufacturer's ru.e. The analysis examines the benefits. continues to road as follows:
cost sagngs.and costs of the original fatigue design hie goal. This Annenry: secs 53. st.103.104.107.161 action would, among other things, alternatn es considercd by the..
Ccmmission. The draft anslysis is ss Stat. s30. e35. e36, e37. s30. 64e as revise the existin SID sampling amended 142 U.S C 2073. 2111. 2112. 2133.
erogram to inclu e some new available for a fee at the NRCPubh.c 2134. 2137. 2201), secs 201. 202. 206. 88 Inspection procedures for certain Document Room. 2120 L Street NW-Stat 124 2.1244.1246. as amended (42 tLSC Principal Structural Elements (PSE).
(Lower level). Washington. DC. Single 5641. 5s42. 584t;)
copies rney be obteirW by writing to the This propoulis prompted by new data resised to read as fo[llows:2 h 4. ;r 24 ;w rej'h (3)[2]is submitti J 1:3 the rmf f.x U $.LC 2. p..wwy Commas 2un, Washington. DC 20555. Single copies of indicating that certain rmslons to the the analysis may be obtained from Loren g 25.24 Chemical sostine.
SID program am necessary in order to increase the confidence level of the L. Bush. Jr.. Office of Nuclear Reactor (a) * *
- statistical prc gnm to ensure timely Regulation. U S. Nuclear Regulatory (2) Unannounced drug and alcohol detection of latigue entks in PSE'a. The Commission. Washington, DC 20555.
tests imposed in a statistically random actions specified by the proposed AD The Commission requests public and unpredictable manner so that all are intended to prevent fatigue cracking comment on the draft rqulatory persons in the population subject to that could compromise the structural analysis. Comments on the draft testing have an equel probabihty of integnty of these airplanes, anal) sis may be submitted to the NRC being selected and tested. ne tests DATES: Comments must be received by as indicated under the aDDRES$fS must be administered so that a person y,y 37, ggg3, headmg.
completing a test is immediately eligible Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification i r another unannounced test. As a ADDRESSES: Submit comments in tri licate to the Federal Aviation A[ ministration (FAA). Transport minimurn, tests rnust be administered In socordance with the Regulatory on a nommel weekly frequency and at Fleubahty Act of 1980 (5 U.S C. 605(bl). various times during the day. Random Airplane Directorate. ANM-103 Attention: Rules Docit et No. 92 hM-the Commission certifies that this rule testing of contractor and vendor will not has e a significant economic employees must be conducted et en 223-AD.1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton,Washin. on 98055-4056.
impact on a substantial number of small annual rate equal to at least 100 percent
, entities This proposed rule affects only of that workforce. Random testmg of Comments may inspected at this the licensing and operation of nuclear licensee employees must be conducted location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m..
power plants and activities associated at an annual rate equel to et least 50 Monday through Friday. etcept Fed.ral j
with the possession or transportation of percent of that workforce*
bolidays'vice infonnation referenced in Category I matenal. ne companies that The oer own these plants do not fall within the the proposed rule may be obtained from Deed at Rockville. Maryland.thi 18th day McDonnell Douglas oration. P.O.
scope of the definition ofsmall of Marth.1993.
Box 1771. Long B6sch, lifomia er.tities" set forth in the Regulatory For the k. lear Eepleory Commisdon-9084fr1771. Attention: Business Unit Fleobihty Act or the Smell Business samuel J. Chi 1L.
Size Standards issued by the Small Manager. Technical Pubhcations-l Business Admm, istrationin 13 CFR part secretary of the commission Technical Administrative Support.C1-121.
IFR Doc. BM680 Filed 3-21-93. a 45 aml L5B. This information may be examined at the FAA. Transport Airplane a com Backfit Analysis Directorate.1601 Lind Avenue. SW..
Renton. Washington: or at the les ba ft le 10 51 P s not DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTADON Angeles Aircraft Certification Office.
apply to this proposed rule, and 3229 East Spnng Street. Long Beach, therefore, that a backfit analys:s is not Federal Aviation Administration Cahfornia 90806-2425.
required for this proposed rule, because 14 CFR Part 39 Maureen Moreland. Aerospace P '
sir nF rt e
q irern on t
[ Docket No. Ir2-NWi-221-AD)
Engineer. Airframe Branch. ANM-121L.
Part 50 jicent.ees.
FAA.'Iransport Airplane Directorate.
Altworthineas Directives; McDonnell Los Angeles Aircraft Certification List of Subjects in 10 CFR Pari 26 Dougtsa Model DC-10 Series Airplanea Office,3229 East Spring Street, Lor g Alcohol abuse, Alcohol testing, and KC-10A (Military) Airplanea Beach, Cahfornia 9080tr2425; Appeals. Chemical testing. Drug abuse.
AGtwer: Federal Aviation teleP one (310) 988-5238; fax (310),
h Drug testinF. Employee assistance Administration. DOT.
988-5210.
programs.F4tness for duty. Management Action: Notice of proposed rulemaking suPesistwrARY paoauaisoN:
actions. Nuclear power reactors.
(gppM Protection of information. Reporting and Cmds biW recordkeepmg requirements. Sanctions. suuuARY: nis document proposes the Interested persons are invited to For the reasons act out in the supersedure of an existing airworthiness participate in the making of the preamble and under the authority of the directive (AD), applicable to McDonnell proposed rule by submitting such Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. Dougles Model DC-10 series airplanes written data, views, or arguments as the Energy Reorganir.ation Act of 1974 and KCc10A (military) airplanes. that they may desire. Communications sha!!
as amended, and 5 U.S C. 553 the NRC currently requires the implementation identify the Rules Docket numter en J is proposing to adopt the following of a StructuralInspection Document be submitted in triphcate to the edduss amendrnent 1o 10 CFR pen 26 (SID) program of structural inspections specified above. All communications
D.. M AE36-1 " '
PDR~
15884 Federal Register / Vol. Se, No. '55 I Wednesday. March 24, 1993 / Noticos secuen 55fb of title 5. United States 2.%e title of the information Casaments can also be submitted by Code.
collection: Proposed Rule,"10 CFR part telephane et (202) 395-3064.
Any person smey obserw nuestings.or 26:Modtflation to the Random 4
he NRC h OfLow is Brenda pordons thereof,of edvisory panels Testin1t Rate for Ucanoes F.mp Jo Shahon.(301) 4e2-4132.
which are open to the publ6c.and mey 3.%e form museerif appl le:Nd be permitted to part6cipete in the applirsble.
Desedsea n p umryneng.gu,esik 4,y I
panel's disenes6ees et the disoeuen of
- 4. How ohen the colleedon is of Mare. sees.
b panel chelrman and with the recjulmd: On aa-lon.
per she Nudeer "", r o--L w.
epproval of the full 4fme Federal
- a. Who wHl be trod to mport:
Geeld F. Creature. '
'C".'"is.tF_"
"a CCofS Me ad.ums of
- c e,8 - Es & # -
due to e disabllf tv.p! sos contact the reports annually: A reduction of 50.000 OILce of Special Constituencies, drug tests and maanedeied records.
Im Doc pas N F23-43.s es al National Endowment for the Arts.1100
- 7. An esimete of the total ambw of emme sus meme Pennsylvania Avenus.NW.,
hous.:ooeded annually to com the
[
g gy) of 46 hours5.324074e-4 days <br />0.0128 hours <br />7.60582e-5 weeks <br />1.7503e-5 months <br /> of AppunctionIera Usense To Esport a dabrior to the meetings burde mduction pw altel ULHW FW arinformeGon with pierenos to
- 8. An indamuon of whe&aradna this meet 2ng con be obtamed from Ms.
3504(h).Public Lew 96-511 applias:
Pursuant to 10 CFR 110.70lb) **gblic
^f Yvonne M. Sabine, ramittes gg that Nuc g-ig,gg;,s,,,,,
re,a.u m s m nese & y,,g 1.io,y Commanion ses re. lear y
ed b W mW 2 aM n
DC 20506. or call (202) 682-5439.
res com m e authoriand to construd or aparete a Ucense XR137. A copy of th@e I.'**" M' 8*I h"J""*p"**e Arts.
- aucJear power plant pursumt to Part 50 amendment requestis on Als to the
'*"8 h
Nmntfw 1o isoplesnent Etnese for<luty programs Nuclear Regula Commisalan's to assure that In Doc. as-es2r md s-23-43 s 4s am) g gag},,,,,,peroommel are not under Public Document located at 2120 g,y 9,danar or L Street.NW., Washington,D.C.
esmo som meme mentally a physical ly impalmd.to mtsin canain needs MM with A request for a beastag er petiuon for leone to intervene may be Aled within C
ON esF Register Anyreq for eWcent meats. A proposed amendment ao this segulation would bearing or potluon for leave to intervene h Containing Reporung or eall b sweed b sequedar w Recordkooping Requlmments; Omco Permit liceasses to reduce the randoen pedu m upon appMbh of Management and Budget (OMS);
- ""8 "
of the Cenosal e-maan US Nuclear Rev6ew d'"8'and 50 P"*"
Regulatory C===-a. Washington.
mahitain es IN percent random tasang DC 20555; the Secsstery, US Naciser AGDeev:US Nuclear Regulatcry rate fbr centsecaerand sendor Comminim m y
e-* ed b omg ab M aal me be Rascosties Secretary. UA Departuset of in e
on' in8Pected er obtained for a ise Gross the State. Washington.DC 30520.
NRC Public Document Roosa.2120 L in hs mview of a to amend e l
suse6Any:no NRC has recently Street.NW.Geeserlavo!) Wemblaston.
b" "" to oNPort a uti facility as den"ned in 10 CPR part 110 and not6and submitted to the OMB forreview the DC 20555.
following proposal for the collection of Fammanaa and questions abould be besota,the Commission dess not l
informatson under the provis!ons of the directed to abo OMB reviewer: Ronald evaluate the bontth.sefaty or Paperwork Reduction Act of1960 (44 Minsk. Office ofinformation and environmental eflects in the recipient USC. depter 35).
Regulatory Affairs (3150-4146). NEDB-antion of the indlity to be exported.%e 1.T)pe of submission, new, revinan. 3019. Office of "--., r and Budget, leformation eenostning this request to or extension: Revision.
Washlagton.DC20503 amend follows-Name o sopunt. ease of r
i appt, esse roosewed. apps-Dee:stpebn tantwo Eref aos
~
,c,,,,,y g I
canon unreer
,,,,,,,n ABB Comtsmewi Erg. 03/
33.700.000.000 4:28 WWI. Aniended to Iresease pseer to 415 Hwt Tehert 0993, tW11193. XR137/
Tahren Power
(-1360 MWe); tiesemos 8 tefue torn 02.
hcdeer Unfis.
3000.000.000 t 83.7nn non ern ghange Lasip'ien 1 arWI somos Dom Tatuen Peuer helaar unas 7 t
ans e to Taimen New stanser ums Lasipmen 1 and 2; and soutes desenpean of amme maestred tw eoart i
e
__-