ML20056D995

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Fr Notice Announcing NRC Amended Policy on Cooperation W/States.Amend Allows State Representatives in Adjacent States to Observe NRC Insps at Licensed Facilities
ML20056D995
Person / Time
Issue date: 02/27/1992
From: Kammerer C
NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP)
To:
GENERAL
Shared Package
ML20056C038 List:
References
NUDOCS 9308190154
Download: ML20056D995 (7)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:QUESTION 72 .f / 'o UNITED STATES ~,, 4 !"36 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g

E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 k.,

8 February 27, 1992 ....+ STATE LIAISON OFFICERS PUBLICATION OF NRC'S AMENDED POLICY ON COOPERATION WITH STATES AT COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS AND OTHER NUCLEAR PRODUCTION OR UTILIZATION FACILITIES (SP-92-041) Enclosed is the Federal Reaister Notice announcing NRC's amended policy on Cooperation With States. The amendment allows State representatives in adjacent States to observe NRC inspections at licensed facilities. " Adjacent States" are defined as States within the plume exposure pathway (within approximately a 10-mile radius) Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) of a licensed facility in another State. A Carlton Kammerer, Director Office of State Programs

Enclosure:

As stated i 8 4 9308190154 930802 PDR STPRC ESGGEN PDR

~~ ~ ~ 'r. ~' + k f M T*d"*l R*glater / Vol. sF. No. 3F / Tweeday. Febay as, test / Rules and ResulaWone 4 7. 1 i i U e t l .s t t i 1 1 -l 1^: .i 1 i i .i t -i j i Deted. February 1s.2est Come hkNary. - i Comminioner.!mmigration and Naturalisation semce. - PR Dor. at 4ast %d 8-31421012 em) - sume seus me.me ] i NUCLAAR REGULATORY i COMMIS$3ON . 10 CFR Part se ' cooPwesen wnh states et CommatialNuclear Poww Mante one OeNor Nuoleer Production or Utmastion Fooluties; Policy Statement asence. Nuclear Regulatory. Commission. l.>,:- E 4 '. c

Federal Register / Vol. 57. No. 37 / Tuesday. February 25. 1992 / Rules and Regulations 6463 action: Amendment to policy which was generally supportive of the Therefore. it was felt those States with r statement. amendment. OCRE did suggest. the most critical response efforts donng however. that an adjacent State be emergency situations. and those with suvuAmy:The Nuclear Regulatory defined as one which is within the more immediate pubhc health and Corrmission (NRC)is revising and plume exposure pathway EPZ or within safety risks should be the States an;endmg its Policy on Cooperation a 10-mile radius of a nuclear facihty allowed to obserse NRC mspections. With States at Commercial Nuclear located in another State. They claim this These States would therefore become Power Plants and Other Production or addition is necessary due to the periodic more familiar with plant safety issues. Utihzation Facihties (54 FR 7530t pohtical proposals to reduce the plume Comment: A sirr.ilar comment was February 22.1989) The amendment to exposure pathway EPZ from its current received from the New York State the pohc3 statement allows State 10 rnile radius to some smaller area.. Energy Office. which requests representatives in adjacent States to perhaps as small as 2-5 miles or even broadening the definition of " adjacent obsen e NRC inspections at licensed limited to the site boundary. State" to include reciprocity for faciht.es facihties. Adjacent States"are defined Response: EPZs are the designated further than the ten mile f adius around a as States withm the plume exposure areas for which planning is plant to perhaps a fifty-mile radius. pathw ay (within approximately a 10-recommended to ensure that prompt and Analysis:For the reasons stated mile radius) Eme gent) Plannmg Zone effective actions can be taken to protect abose.NRC does not believe the plur c IEPZ) of a bcensed facility in another the public in the event of an accident. exposure pathway or the definition of State. NRC licensees. State and local adjacent State should be changed. terECTIVE DATE: February 25.1992. governments and petitioners for Furthermore, inclusion of all States FoR FURTMER INFoRMATioN CoWTACT: rulemaking haVe often questioned the which are within a fifty mile raius of a Frederick Combs. Assistant Director for exact size and configuration of the reactor in another State would grea'!y State. Local and Inian Relations Office plume exposure pathway EPZ.The increase the number of States el g.b:e of State Programs.U.S Nuclear Commission answered these questions for observation of NRC inspections and Reguleory Commission. Washington. in a policy statement (Long Island also increase the administrative burden DC 20555. (301) 5M-2325. Lighting Company. Shoreham Nuclear on the NRC, especially for high!y visible Pow er Station. Unit 1. CLI-69-12. 26 inspection efforts. The impact on NRC of suPPLtutWT Amy woRMATION: NRC 383. 364. 365) as follows: having large numbers of requests for 1repbcat in the concept of adeq:. ate observations in inspections could On February 22,1989 (54 FR 7530), the protective measures"is the fact that become burdensome and negatively Commission pubhshed the policy emergency planning will not ehnunate. in impact our own inspection program. and statement " Cooperation With States at ever) con (th able accident the possibthty of could advenely tmpact licensees. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants and un us hann to the pubhc. Emngency Comment:The Nuclear Management planning can, however. be expected to reduce and Resources Council (N%iARC) Other Nuclear Production or Utilization Faciht.es? The pobey statement w as QNf",fe;$n$,*, remains concerned if State intended to proside a uniform basis for circumstances.it is entirely reasonable and representatives are allowed to carr) out NRC/ State cooperation as it relates to appropnate for the Commission to hold that NRC inspection responsibihties. They the regulator) oversight of commercial the rule precludes adjust:nents on safety also reiterated their previous concern nuclear power plants and other nuclear grounds to the size of an EP2 that is *about with the original policy. that allowing production or utilization facilities.The to miles in redrus."In the Commissinn's State representatsves, whether from a policy statement allows State o!Ticials to view. the preper intepretation of the rule State in which a plant is located or an accompany NRC on inspections and.

    • jz f

h ar [ adjacent State within the plume exposure pathway, to conduct NRC under certain circumstances. enables administrative considerst>ons as avoiding States to enter instruments of EPZ boundar:es that run through the middle inspections could result in a situation cooperatien [MOUs) which would allow of schools or hospitals, or that arbitrarily where a licensee could be subjected to States to participate in NRC inspection carse out small portiona of govemmental dual. and perhaps conflicting. regulation activities. junsdictions.The goalis merely planning by a State through this mechanism. Ano/ sis:On August 26.1991 (56 FR simpbcity and avoidance of ambiguity as to NUhMRC does believe that it is J the location for the boundaries-appropriate for the NRC and States to 419G8). the Commission published for comment a proposed amendment to the As stated in the original Faderal work tc.gether to coordinate the exercise policy statement on Cooperation With Register notice (February 22.1989) of their complementary responsibilities. States This amendment would allow during the comment period.NRC's but feels that State representatives State repesentatives to observe NRC reasoning behind limiting adjacent State should not conduct NRC inspections. inspections at hcensed facilities in observation to those States within the &sponse The concern of NUhMRC a djacent States. " Adjacent States" are plume exposure pathway EPZ was regarding State representatives defined as States within the plume twofold. First. a h'mit had to be set to conducting NRC inspections was exposure pathway (within allow Regionn! offices to manageably previously submitted and add:essed in approximately a 10-mile radius) handle requests to observe inspections the summary of comments and NRC Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) of a which might be made by host States and response section of the Federal Register licensed facility in another State. adjacent States. Second, the plume notice adopting the final pohey The Commission received seven exposure pathway EPZ was determined statement (54 FR 7532. February 22. comments on the proposed amendment: to be that ares (approximately 20 miles) 1989).There has been no change three from utilities. one from a utihty requiring possibly prompt action in the proposed to that aspect of the policy. crf anization. two from States and one event of an accident to reduce risk to the This proposed change to the policy from a public citizen's group. public. It is unlikely that any immediate concerns only observations of Com: ents One comment was protective actions would be required inspections by representatives of receised from Ohio Citizens for beyond the plume exposure pathway adjacent States. not participation in Respo*sible Energy Inc. ("OCRE") EPZ. inspection by these representatives. It f

I 6464 Federal Register / Vol. S7. No. 37 / Tuesday Febniary 25, 1992 / Rules and Re#tions was decided that NRC does not have should be the same as for State required. In the MOUs a provision is' enough expenence with participataan observations. Release of information included for the State to abide by NRC agreements between the NRC and host concerning the inepection should not protocol by not publicly disclosing States to eapand that arene to adjacent occur before review by the NRC and inspection findings prior to the release States at this time. NRC will continue to issuance of the NRCinspection report. of the NRC inspection report. monitor closely the implementation of The third comment expressed concern Regarding NHY s third comment this policy statement to ensure that it is over a.mbfguity in the language regarding relating to the number of State not misapphed and that unintended the number of State inspectors from the inspectors to observe an inspection. results do not occur. host and adjacent States.The NRC believes the policy is clearly Comment:The Vermont Yankee Discussion indicates that the number of stated. Although the protocol states that Nuclear Power Corporation commented observers should normally be limited to normally one observer will be allowed that they endorse the concept of the the number of NRC inspectors and that to observe an NRC inspection. some current pobey of NRC cooperation with team inspections should normally have amount of discretion is needed to allow State ges ernments. however they no more than one observer from each more inspectors to attend under special behese that the host state deserves State.The second bullet of the State circumstances. There are a sufficient special consideration where requests for Protocol sets a norm of one observer per number ofinspections which are e observations are concerned. They NRC inspection. hHY believes that this related or have attracted significant request NRC to encourage the adjacent language could lead to public interest. to which States may States to communicate with host state misunderstandings and the the want to send mon than one obsen er. representaines on matters pertaining to Statement of Pobey shocid clearly set The pohey does not address the number the operataon of host state nuclear forth the NRC's expectations on the total of State inspectors allowed to power plants. number of observers from the host and participate in an NRC inspection. lt is Response in the yederal Register adjacent State including the case wher' expected the State will utilize only the notice. NEC commitled to hmit team the host State is actually participating in inspections to normally no more than the inspection-minimum number of inspectors it needs one observer from each State. When The fourth ccmment stated that NNY to accomplish the best possible there is a conflict. preference would be beheves that State observations of coverage of the inspection activity. in this regard. the MOUs under a gn en to the host state for routine routine inspections by the NRC Resident mspections. but the NRC Regional Inspectors should be limited to one participation arrangement affirm that Adm.nistrator should make the final indwidual from the host State, and that the State will submit monthly inspection determination as to whether more than if States feel additional observers are recommendations to the NRC Resident one State observer should be involved needed this should be taken up as a Inspector (or Regional Office)in in the inspection. In addition, the special case. sufficient time to allow NRC review protocol agreementin Appendix A of ne fifth comment states that HWY before preparation of the inspection the yederal Register notice has been believes the State Protocol should plan NRC will review the State's revised to accommodate a request from clearly state that observers must obtain recommendations and inform the State an adjacent State.,s trongly encourage approval from the licensee as well as of any activities that appear to irnpose communication with the host State, and the NRC before removing any material an undue burden on the licensee.De F:ve preference to the host State should from the site.his could be State will make adjustments to the State a confhet exist. NRC will adhere to this accomplished by simply having the f,8 d ' policy and endorse two-way observer formally submit a request for m ry ddns: C e mments. ication at every stage of the ocuments to the licensee through the c m g' te oQ oj " e Comment. New Hampshire Yankee in their final comment. HWY inspecdone by NRC Resident inspectors. (NHY) transmitted several comments. requested that Maine be removed from has already been addressed Requests One comment concerned the possible the table listin adjacent States since for observations of routine inspectione misinterpretation of the roles of host they do not fahwithin the stated by the Resident will be treated the same States and adjacent States NHY states definition of the plume exposure as any other inspection. that the Discussion section makes it pathway emergency planning zone. NRC also agrees that the State clear that adjacent States should be Response: NRC apees there may be observer should obtain licensee or NRC hmited to an observation role whereas a some ambiguity regardmg the roles of approval befon removing material imm host State. under certain conditions, adjacent and host States in the policy the site. We have modified the protocol may actually participate in inspections. statement.nerefore, we are amendmg to incorporate this change. The Statement of Policy, however, does the second paragraph under Regarding NHY's final comment, we not exphcitly state these distinctions " Implementation." to read. *NRC will have deleted Maine from the table of and hmita. Similarly. under consider hoer State (emphasis added) ediscent States since it does not fall Implementation the first sentence of the participation in inspections and the within the Sesbrook Station's to-mile second paragraph states that the *NRC inspection entrance and exit meetings. plume exposun pathway emergency will consider State panicipation in where the State-proposed as eement lP anning zone.ne table is reprinted inspections * * '"(emphasis added) Identifies the specific inspections they t>elow. without specifying that this refers to wish to assist NRC with and provides a Comment Both Philadelphia Electric host States. program containing those elements as Company and the State of Arkansas The second comment stated that NHY described in the policy statement." ne commented that they support NRC's believes that the State Protocol should modifica tion clarifies NRC's intent to efforts to amend the policy, be changed to reflect that where an allow only host States to participate in ne following list of best States and MOU allows actual host State NRC inspections. 4djacent States within the 14 mile plume exposure (pathway emergency participation in inspections. or even With regard to the second comment. observa tions. the protocol for publicly NRC enters into MOUs for particfpation planning rene) along with these NRC-is releasing or commenting on the results where more deta!!ed cooperation is licensed facilities could be affected by "4

Fcderal R:gista / Vol. 57. No. 37 / Tuesday. February 25, 1992 / Rules cnd Rrgulations 6465 /, the proposed policy revision: In section III. Statement of Policy (54 interactions with the States, the public R 7530 at 7538. February 22,1989). the and NRC licensees. lg,, l A$ece,i third sentence in the third paregraph is Accordingly. the NRC will contir.ue to ,,.a revised to read as follows: keep Governor-appointed State Liaison State participation in NRC progras..: would Officers routinely informed on mat'ers SC NC allow quahf.ed State representatives imm ofinterest to the States.The NRC will Bea<ee Va4er. . PA O 4. wV Ca:ses Coope'. l tvE wo 5:stes m which an NRC-htensed faciht) is respond in a timely manner to a Statc's

face, q At Ga lacated. either indnideath or as a member of requests for information and its a team, to, conduct epecific inspection recommendations concerning mattcrs it Co o.m

. _..q hE m LA G 5 act.vities m accordante with NRC standards. within the NRC's regulatory jurisd;cten. (a ' I" I " n w th the y' If requested. the NRC will routinely 'C7 . "3 inform State Liaison Officers of Publ.c oe P"" Mo* F^ In section IV. Implementation (54 FR meetings between NRC and its licensees Q'c's'aN 7530 at 7538. February 22.1989). the fifth, and applicants in order that State ~h oc sae and fmal sentences in the first representatives may attend as se w

u ua paragra;h are revised to read as observers. Additionally, at the State's w.e
cm wa o

M A ** follows: request, representatives from a State in l5Q8llee 1g Hest State or adjacent State which the NRC-licensed facility is l wi

zic, i it represer.tatnes are free to attend as located (the host State) and frem a State observers any pubbe inecting between the within the plume exposure pathway A toal of 17 ut:ht.es and 25 States NRC and its applicants and bcensees.

emergency planning zone (FPZ) (with:n could be affe:ted by the pohcy revision. Ecques:n frcm host States and adiacent approximately a 10 mile radius) of an Papemork Reduction Act Statement sfect en ert anc and NRC-licensed facility loc ted in another t treet r s State (the adjacent State) will be able to cenducted b3 the NRC req.are the app osal This fmal pohey statement amends of the apprepnate Regional Admimtrator. obserse specific inspections and/cr information coilection requirements that mspection entrance and exit meetmgs are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Also, in section IV. Implementation, where State representatises are Act of 1980 (44 U.S C. 3531 et seg ). the first sentence in the second knowledgeable in radiological health These regurements were approsed by paragraph is revised to trad as follows: P e s n rec gn!zes that the ancy ppoIln inft Is n'n rpIioe t r3 63 involvement of qualified State et The public reperting burden for this and eut ineetzgs. where the State-proposed representatives in NRC radiological col:ection of information is estimated to as eernent identies the inspections they health and safety prograrns has the aserage 20 hours per response,includmg wish to assist NRC with and provides a the time fer re'.iewing instruction. program containing these elements as potential for providing additional safety searching exist;rg data sources. described in the pobey statement. benefit.Therefore, the NRC will consider State proposals to enter into gathering and maintaining the data In Appendix A-Protocol Agreement ins'ruments of cooperation for State needed, and comp!cting and reviewing for State Observation of NRC parucipation in inspections and the collection of information. Send Inspections. the State Protocol Section, inspect,on entrance and exit meetmgs. comments regarding this burden the eighth bullet is revised to read as State participation in NRC programs estimate or eny other aspect of this fo!!aws: would allow quahfied State collection of information. including + An bsener will not be prmided with representatives from States in which an suggestions for reducing this burden, to $,I,"$'nMi nh'de y,'N"ny,,,, NRC-licensed facility is located, either the Information and Records individually or as a member of a team. Managernent Branch (MNErrm4).llS. the site without NRC or bcensee appmvat. to conduct specific inspection activities Nucleer Regulatory Commission. .The full text of the Policy Statement in accordance with NRC standards. Washmgton. DC 00555. and to the Desk with new wording is reprinted below. regulations. and procedures in close Officer. Office of Information and Dated at Rockville, m th:s 28th day of cooperation with the NRC. State Regulatory Affairs. NEOB-3019 (3150-0163). Office of Management and rebruary soc 2 activities will normally be conducted B.idget. Washmgton, DC 20503. For the Nuclear Regulatory Cornmission. under the oversight of an authorized Samuel J. ch!!L. NRC representative with the degree of Tisal Amendments to the Policy M ofzAe Commission. oversight dependent upon the activity Statement involved. In the propesal to enter into an Statement of Policy instrument of cooperation, the State in section III. Sta tement of Policy (54 TR 7530 at 7538. February 22.1989). the It is the NRC's policy to cooperate must iden'ify those activities for which fmal sentence in the second paragraph fully with State governments as they cooperation with the NRC is desired. is revised to read as follows: seek to respondlo the expectations of Tbe State must propose a program that: their citizens that their health and safety (1) Recognizes the Federal Government, Ad?tionalh. at the State's request. representaines f em a State in which th, be protected and that there be minimal primarily NRC as having the exclusive NRC-licensed facility is located Ithe host impact on the environment as a result of authority and responsibility to regulate State) and from a State within the plume activities licensed by the NRC.The NRC the radiological and national security exposure pathway emergency planning sone and the States have complementary aspects of the construction and IEPZ)-{within appmximately a ten-mde responsibilities in protecting public operation of nuclear production or eNIIbe health and safety and the environment. utilitation fac!!ities except for certain In a S$t Furthermore, the NRC is committed to authority over air emissions granted to d nt S able to observe specific mspection: and/or the full and timely disclosure of matters States by the Clean Air Act:12)is in mspect.on entrance and exit meetints wher, State npmentatives are knowledgaable in affecting the pubhc and to the fair and accordance with Tedeal standards and ra diolc s. cal health and safety metters. uniform handling of all agency regulations:(3) specifies minimum 1 -.,ar~ ~ ~~. .m a g

e 2 6466 Fed:ral Regist:r / Vol. 57. No. 37 / Tuesday. February 25. 1992 / Rules and Regulations educa tion. experience. training. and States to observe ins,.<ctions and/or Appendix A-Protocol Agreement for quahfications requirements for State inspection entrance and exit rneetings State Obsecration of NRC Inspections representatnes which are patterned conducted by the NRC require the after those of NRC inspectors. (4) approval of the appropriate Regional NRCProtocol contains prosisions for the findings of Administra tor. State representatives to be transmitted ggh'[j8["*

  • M'i,ad idwal to NRC for disposition;(5) would not NRC will consider host State responsible for tracka requests for Sate impose an undue burden on the NRC participation in inspections and the obsen ation. assunna consistency regardmg and its licensees and applicants. and (6) inspectior entrance and exit meetings.

these requests. and for advising the Reronal abids by NRC protocol not to pubhcly where the State. proposed agreement Admmistrator o's the d. position of thes-d:sclose inspection findings pnor to the identifies the speciDe inspections they requesa ne appropnate technical release of the NRCinspection report, wish to assist NRC with and provides a "F'"wn or Dwision Dinctor m W Ccnsistent with section 274c of the PrC'Fm MM"8 h he u ' * *""*' " ""h 'h' b " 'Ib ' Act. the NRC will not consider State described in the policy statement. NRC inm concemma the inspectionfs) . Requnts for obsenstions of i proposals for instruments of cooperation may develop inspection plans along Headquarterstned inspections w:!1 also be that do not include the elements listed with qualified State representatives coordmated through the RSLO above. which are designed to ensure using applicable procedures in the NRC Headqurten bned inspections should be close cooperation and consistency with inspection Manual. Qualified State refernd through the RSLO to a techmcal the NR" nspection pregam. As a representatis es may be permitted to Mpn rta des a ed b t e Re 1 praeticai matter, the NRC is concerned perform inspections in cooperation with. that mdependent State inspection and on behalf of the NRC under the Regioul Administrator through the Safe propa=s could direct an apphcant's or oversight of an authonzed NRC Unison Omcer (St4 Requests should ident:fy the type ofinspection actirny and hcensee's attention to areas not representative.The degree of oversight facilay the State wishes to obsene. I consistent with NRC safety pnorites. provided would depend on the activity.

  • Limits on ecope end duration of the misinte pret NRC safety requtrements.

For instance. State representatives may observation penod may be irr. posed if. in the or she the perception of dual regulation. be accompanied by an NRC view of the Regional Admirustrator.they For purposes of this pohey statement. an representative initiaDy. in order to comp omin the emciency onnecinmu of independent Stste inspection pregam is

  • h' '"' P'**" "'8 '"' ' h *"Id N

i one in which State representatives assess the State inspectors

  • would conduct inspections and assess preparedness to conduct the inspection oded f m ob ena s

NRC. regulated activities on a State a inividually. Other activities may be . Sta tes wW be irJo. m, ' hey enust not own initiative and authority without conducted as a team with NRC taking relene infonnstion concamms the see and close cooperation with, and oversi ht the lead. All enforcement action will be purpose of unannounced impections F by, an authonzed NRC representative. undertaken by the NRC.

  • ne Region will make it clear to the Instruments of cooperation between The Commission wlU decide policy hcensee that the State views are not the NRC and the States, approved prior snatters related to speements proposed necenarily endorsed by NRC.ne Region to the date of this policy statement will under this policy statement. Once the will also make it clear that only NRC has regu! story authority for supection imdmps continue to be honored by the NRC.ne Commission has decided the policy on a and enforcement actaou regardmg NRC strongly encourages those States specific type of apeement similar State. radiological health and safety.

holdmg these ag eements to consider proposed aperments may be approved, store hotocol rnoddymg them. if necessary, to bnng consistent with Commission policy by them into conformance with the the F.xecutive Director for Operataons A

  • A state wW male edrence arrangements provisions of this policy statement.

State-proposed instrument of with the Leesee for site access tramms and badeng (subieet to fitneu for duty g cooperation will be documented in a -requirement }. p,ior to the actual msperiton fonnal MOU signed by NRC and the

  • Normally. no more than one indwedsel As provided in the policy statement State.

the NRC will routinely keep State wW be allowed to obsene an NRC Liaison Officers informed on matters of Once the NRC has deci *ed to enter inspectim. interest to the States. In general. all into an MOU for State involvement in a ne State wm bunponMe int State requnts should come imm the NRC inspections. a formal review. not etemuning the & cal and prMeneonal competence ofits representatnes mho I'" th"" 8 2 3th8 8fI'I C State Usison Officer to the appropriate NRC Regional Office. The NRC will date, wtH be erformed by the NRC to accompany NRC inspectors.

  • An observer's communication with rn6ke every effoM to res nd as fully as evalus e imp ementation of the MOU licence with be through the appropnate NRC possible to su re9ursts m States for and resolve any problems identified.

team member. usually the senior resident informalion on matiers conmrdng Final aprements wn! be subject to inspector or the team leader. periodic reviews and may be amended

  • When informed of an unarmounced

]od!Tyn an may d upon writ nage t by P a a af t w n d ys. C ,n ' tj'a"id pp work to achieve a timely response to ts pa State recommendations relating to the upon 30 days written notice by either

  • An observer wW remain in the company i

anfe operation of nuclear production or party. of NRC personnel throughost the course of i the tupecs,on. 4 utihzation facihties Host State or Additionally, once State involvement

  • Stata ob.ervation mer be termmated by

{ adjacent State representatives are free in NRC activities at a nuclear the NPC if the observer's conduct interferes i to attend as observers any public prodaction or utilization facuityla with a fair and orderly impecuon. i rnecting between the NRC and its approved by the NRC. the State is

  • An obemer wW oot be pmnded mich epplicant and licensees. De appropriate responsible for meeting all requirements @

g3 d* '",'Q % l Regional Office will routinely inform of an NRClicensee and applicant State Usison Officers <>f the scheduling related to personal safety and the she without NRC or licenace appmul, of pubhc meetings upon request. unescocted access of State . ne State observer. in accompanyms the NRC w -w, does so at his or her own r s Requests from host States and adjacent representatives at the alte. risk NRC wili not be responsible for injunes I ses 5

Federal Register / Vol. 57. No. 37 / Tuesday. Februrry 25. 1992 / Rules cnd ReFulations 6467 4 or esposu es to ha'mful substances which FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE DOARD OEce of nnance or the existing rights .. g of holders of FIIGank consohdated rna) occur to the accompanying ind.vidual d anns the inspection and will assume no 12 CFR Part 900 obligations. 1A14 for sey incidena a, socia'ed with tbc 192 4 41

2. Prior Delegations of Authority acccmpaniment.

Section 40t(h)(2) of the Fmancial j

  • Tte 5:ste ebsmer m;:!t,e espa tied to Delegation of Authority tolasue Institutions. Reform.Reco ery and i

Consolidated obligationa I [ect hrnpecto Enforcement Act of1989.which l accompturent. Actwcy:Fedetal Housing Finance Mplaced th her FHGB wMe

  • !!ine State obse ver natens am Board.

overseer of the FHGanks."prosided the ep; cent non-confovence wd. safety or ACTsow: Final rule-eg. evy requ rements dur.ng th, all FHGB resolutions and o-ders .f irnertion. heIste wit! man e ' hose suumany:ne Fedetal Housing nnance continued in effect until superseded by cbses ations promptly known m the NRC Board (nnance Board)is amending its the nnance Board.103 Stat 163.356 te&~ leader or lead mspectar. ldewise. regulations relating to Delegation of mhen oserall eoncluuone or views of the Authority to the Office of Anance.nc (1989) codified at 12 U.S C.1437 note. i' S:aie obserser a*e substantirP3 d.ffe ent purpose of this action is to amend the ne Fmance Board has relied en this f:o r.those of the NRC inspectors. the State delegation of authority to issue Federal authority to continue in effect all the delegations of authority to the OEce of m; : advise the team leader or lead inspector Home Iman Bank (FHGank) ds or notes Finance issued by either the FHGB s r nd form ard those views. In arty to the consohdated debentures. bon NEC F eren This will allom MC to take any (censchdated obligations) on behsif of three member governing Board or by recersa y ngusto y actons. the Fmance Board under section 11 of FHGB Chairman's Ordem nts f

  • Under no circu r. stances should S:ste the Federal Home Loan Bank Act (Bank regulationis intended to be the co nplete cor.mecation regard.ng these inspectio" Act)(12 U.S Ca431) His amendment codification of the delegation cf d t rs tre reseased to the pubbe or the hcensee reflects the new structure of the OEte to the OEce of Fmance. Accord.ng':.. all

= befo e they are res,ewed by the NEC and the of Finance. THLBB resolutions and all FHGB EFFECTtyt Daft: February 13.1M2 Chairman's Orders purporting to er a a) b.ade p Abcly delegate any authority to the OBcc of FOR FURTMEA 888 FORMAT 10N CONT Act: as ailabte, similar to NRC mopechon reports. Charles Szlenker. Attorney. Office of nnance are superseded and s ord. sfier they have been t ansmitted to and General Counsel. Federal Housing effective as of the first meetmg of ste l' reuemed b) NRC Finance Board.1777 F Street. NW~ Office of nnance Board of Directoro l 40.ccent Stote Protocol Washington.DC 20006. f

  • An adjacent State is a S; ate wittan the SUPPLEsAENTARY INFORedaTION:

pume exposure pathma) emergency planning ne Finance Board is adopting this

1. Overview reFulation as a final rule, effects e on sene EpZl(within app oumately a so. mile radius) of sn NRC-Lceued factht} located in De Bank Act authorizes the Unance February 13.1992.ne Finance Board I

another S:ste. A best State is a State in Board to issue FHLBank consolidated notes that the notice and comment f which an NRC-hceued facihty is located. An obligations.ne proceeds raised by requirements of the Administrative I ed acent State tcay request permission to issuing the consolidated obligations are Procedures Act ("APA*^)(5 U.S C 553) i c$!Iy o t$atj' used by the FHGanks to make may be auspended when the agency

  • t NRC-li
  • ed advanm to thm inembem ne finds good cause that such requirements l

+ The aJacent State Sho rnust me bers in turn use those funds to are meessary and incorporates its communaste hulher request for obsersation finding with the rulemaking 5 U.S C. at "' 8 to the Ryiout Administrator for the region 4 d( (5 I 553[b)(3)(B). in which the facility is located. Finance Board delegates the ministerial ne Dnance Board finds that notice r

  • ne adscent State SID must also duties of sell;ng the obligations to the and comment are unnecessary for iwo communicate his/ht request tc the host Office of Finance, a joint othee of the reasons. Hist, this regulation is a 3

State SID so that s. h State is aware of the Federal Home Iman Banks. created technical amendment that does not other s intentions. pursuant to section 2B(b)(2) of the Bank affect the rights of any member of the i

  • If a host State and an ediacent State Act (12 U.S C 1422b(b)(2) (Supp.11989)). public. Second, the public altrady l This delegation to the Omce of e Re a dm tor u Finance is memorialized in a regulation.

received an opportunity to comment on l final determination on the number of State 56 R 67158 (Dec. R 1991)(12 CFR issues raised in the Omce of Fmance i observers wha nnay attend the tupection if 900.30). Specifically, that provision restructuring since the regulation that there is a need to hmit the number of delegated the authority to the Director of created its Board of Directors proddes observers, the Regional Administrater will the Office of nnance.ne Rnance for a comment period.See 57 m 2832 toutme!y give preference to the host State Board recently promulgated regulations ' (Jan. 24.1992).He delegation created by. l observers. reorganizing the Omce of nnance.See this rulemaking does not raise any

  • Adjacent State observers wit! abide by the same protocolin allaspects c,f the S7 E 2832 (Jan. 24.1992)(12 CS M1.1-additionalissues so no additional

[ inspection as host States under this M1.12) Consequently, the authority to comment period is necessary. Inaue the consolidated obligations will ag*eement. be specifically delegated to a newly Regulatow Mexiblitry Act i created Omce of nnance Board of Because no notice of proposed siguture of State Observer Directors.nis rule is a tech tical amendrnent to the D.isnce Board's rulemaking is required for this e Date regulations to reflect the new structure rulemaking.the provisions of the l [FR Doc. 9:-4248 Lled 2-26-82. 8 45 a.m.) of the Omce of Finance.and does not Regulatory Mexibihty Act (5 U.S C. 601 suma come resus.es alter the recent reorganization of the et seq.) do not apply. u}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20056D995&oldid=4482854"