ML20058F918
| ML20058F918 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/31/1990 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0936, NUREG-0936-V09-N03, NUREG-936, NUREG-936-V9-N3, NUDOCS 9011090217 | |
| Download: ML20058F918 (151) | |
Text
-
NUREG-0936 Vol. 9, No. 3 NRC Regulatory Agenda Quarterly Report July-September 1990 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Omce of Administration
@,ps aneoqi6) 2 38A298!al ' 2 0936 R PDR i
AVAILABILITY NOTICE Availabihty of Reference Materials Cited in NRC Pubhcotions l
Most documents cited in NRC publications will be available from one of the following 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, j
washington, DC 20013 7082 3.
The National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161 Although the listing that follows represents the majority of documents cited in NRC pubhca-tions, it is not intended to be exhaustive.
Referenced documents available for inspection and copying for a fee from the NRC Public j
Document Room include NRC correspondence and internal NRC memoranda; NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement bulletins, circulars, information notices, inspection and investi-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 Program; formal NRC staff and contractor reports, NRC-sponsored conference proceed-ings, and NRC booklets and brochures. Also available are Regulatory Guides, NRC regula-tions in the Code of Federal Regulations, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission issuances, Documents available from the National Technical information Service include NUPIG series reports and technica 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 items, such as books, journal and periodical articles, and transactions. Federal Register notices, federal and state legislation, and congressional reports ( an usually be obtained from these libraries.
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.
Copics 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 ere American National Standards, from the American National Standards Institute, 1430 Broadway, New York, NY 10018.
NUREG-0936 Vol. 9, No. 3 NRC Regulatory Agenda Quarterly Report July-September 1990 Manutcript Completed: October 1990 Date Published: October 1990 Division of Freedom ofInformation and Publications Services Omce of Administration U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
%,s>* '<.m)
r TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I - RULES f
(A) Rules on which final action has been taken since June 29, 1990 Page C nduct of Employees; Miscellaneous Amendments (Part 0).........
1 Informal Hearing Procedures for Nuclear Reactor Operator Licensing Adjudications (Part 2)..............................
2 Freedom of Information Act, Privacy Act, Production or Discionure in Response to Subpoena or Demands of Courts or Other Authorities; Office of the Inspector General (Part 9)...
3 D;bt Collection Procedures (Part 15)............................
4 M;terial Approved for Incorporation by Reference; Maintenance and Availability (Parts 34, 35, 50, 73)...........
5 Authorization to Prepare Radiopharmaceutical Reagent Kits and Elute Radiopharmaceutical~ Generators; Use of 1
Radiopharmaceuticals for Therapy (Part 35)....................
6 1
Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites (Parts 50, 72, 170)............
7 C nsideration of Environmental Impacts of Temporary Storage of Spent Fuel After Cessation of Reactor Operation (Part 51).....................................................
8 Fingerprint Cards:
Increase in Fee (Part.73)...................
9 Export of Components for Use in Gaseous Diffusion Enrichment Plants (Part 110).............................................
10 (B) Proposed Rules Procedures Involving the Equal Access to Justice Act:
Implementation (Parts 1, 2)...................................-
11 Procedures Applicable to Proceedings for the Issuance of Licenses for the Receipt of High-Level Radioactive Waste at a Geologic Repository (Part 2).............................
12 R3 visions to Procedures to Issue Orders (Part 2)................
13 R3 visions to Procedures to Issue Orders:
Challenges to Orders that are Made Immediately Effective (Part 2)...........
14 111 I
Page Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal (Parts 2, 50, 54)...........
15 Operator's Licenses (Parts 2, 55)...............................
16 Enforcement of Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Federally Assisted Programs (Part 4).......................
17 Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act (Part 13)......................
18*
Salary Offset Procedures for Collecting Debts Owed by Federal Employees to the Federal Government (Part 16).................
19 Standards for Protection Against Radiation (Part 20)............
20 Disposal of Waste 011 by Incineration from Nuclear Power Plants (Part 20)..............................................
22 4
Notifications of Incidents (Parts 20, 30, 40, 70)...............
24 Proposed Revisions to the criteria and Procedures for the Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance and Conditions of Construction Permits (Parts 21, 50)...........................
26 Fitness-for-Duty Programs:
Nuclear Power Plant Personnel (Part 26).....................................................
28 Willful Misconduct by. Unlicensed Persons (Parts 30, 40, 50, 60, 61, 70, 72, 110, 150).....................................
29 ASNT Certification of Industrial Radiographers (Phase I)
(Part 34).....................................................
30 i
Basic Quality Assurance Program, Records and Reports of Misadministrations or Events Relating to the Medical Use of Byproduct Material (Part 35)...............................
32 Custody and Long-Term Care of Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings Disposal Sites (Part 40).............................
34 Ensuring the Effectiveness of Maintenance Programs for Nuclear
[
Power Plants (Part 50)........................................
35
't Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against i
Pressurized Thermal Shock Events (Part 50)....................
37 Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors (Part 50)......................................
39 Amendment to 13 CFR 51.51 and 51.52, Tables S-3 and-S-4,
(~
Addition of Radon-222 and Technetium-99 Radiation Values, and Addition of Appendix B,
" Table S-3 Explanatory Analysis" (Part 51)...........................................
41 iv
t V
d Page Elimination of Inconsistencies Between NRC Regulations and EPA -
9 LW S ta nd a rds - (Part 6 0 ).......................................
43 o
- Minor Amendments to the Physical Protection Requirements (Parts 70, 72, 73, 75)........................................
45 Transportation Regulations:
Compatibility With the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (Part 71)...........
46
. Criteria for an Extraordinary Nuclear Occurrence (Part 140).....
48 Reasserting NRC's Sole Authority for Approving onsite Low-Leve] Waste Disposal in Agreement States (Part 150).......
49
- NRC Acquisition Regulation (NRCAR) (48 CFR Chapter-20, Parts 1-52).........................................................
50' l-(C) Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemaking o
1
' Radioactive Waste Below Regulatory Concern; Generic Rulemaking (Parts 2,H2O).................................-................
51 comprehensive Quality Assurance in Medical Use and a Standard of Care (Part 35).....................................-........
52
~
l!
Medical Use of: Byproduct Material:
Training and Experience Criteria (Part 35)............................................
53 l'
1 u
- Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power E
-Plant, Structures,JSystems, and Components (Part 50)...........
55 License Renewalifor: Nuclear Power Plants; Scope of.
' Environmental' Effects'(Part-51)...............................
56 d
Import land' Export of Radioactive Wastes-(Part 110)..............
57 l
(D): Unpublished-Rules J
i
. Revised Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing-Proceedings
~
7' (Parts 0,.1,.2,7 9, 50)........................................
.59 l
N LNvailability of Official. Records (Part 2).......................--
60, q
Discrimination on the Basis of Sex (Parts 2, 19)................
62 LRevision of Definition of Meeting (Part 9)......................
63 v
Page Clarification-of Statutory Authority for Purposes of Criminal Enforccment.(Parts 19, 20, 21, 25, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, l
39, 40, 50, 55, 61, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 95, 110, 150).....
64 Residual Radioactivity Criteria for Unrestricted Release of g
Lands and Structures (Part 20)................................
65
^
-Low-Level Waste Manifest Information and Reporting (Parts 20, 61)................................................
67 i
Fitness-for-Duty Programs for Category I Fuel Facilities and Shipments (Part 26).......................................
69
' Timeliness in conduct of Decommissioning of Material
- Facilities (Parts 30, 40, 70, 72).............................
71 Decommissioning Regulations:
Recordkeeping and Termination for Decommissioning, Documentation Additions (Parts 30, 40, j
50, 70, 72)...................................................
73 Requirements for' Possession of Industrial Devices (Part 31).....
75 Iridium-192 Wire-for Interstitial Treatment of Cancer
.(Part 35).-....................................................
76 Use'of Radiopharmaceuticals for Medical Research, Use of Biologics Containing Byproduct Material, and Compounding l
Radiopharmaceuticals1(Part 35)................................
77 Licensing and. Radiation Safety Requirements for Large Irradiators-(Part>36).........................................
78 Safety Related and Important to Safety-in 10 CFR Part 50 (Part 50).............................-........................
79 Emergency Planning Regulations for Part 52 Licensing V
l(Part 50)'.....................................................
80-1
, Emergency Telecommunications System Upgrade (Part 50)...........-
81 Clarification of Emergency Preparedness Regulations ~
(Part 50).'....................................................
82 Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants (ASME Code,Section XI,. Division 1, Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL)
(Part 50).....................................................
83 Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants (ASME Code, 1986/1987/1988 Addenda) (Part 50).............................
85~
Emergency Response Data' System (Part 50)........................
87 vi n.
'k h
i i
Page
-Fracture Toughness and= Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Requirements (Part 50)........................................
89 Submitting Applications for the Licensing of Test and
-Research Reactor Operators Directly to Headquarters (Part 55)............
91*
Repository Operations Criteria (Part 60)........................
92 Personnel Access Authorization Program (Part 73)-................
93 Night Firing-Qualifications for Security Guards at Nuclear Power Plants (Part 73)........................................
95 Day. Firing Qualifications and Physical Fitness Programs for
. Security l Personnel at Category I Fuel Cycle Facilities (Part 73).....................................................
96 Reinvestigation of Individuals Granted Unescorted Access to Nuclear Power Plants (Part 73)......................
98 L
Material Control and Accounting Requirements for Uranium Enrichment Plants-(Part 74)...................................
100 t,
-Import and Export of Nuclear Equipment and Material
.(Part-110)....................................................
102-SECTION II - PETITIONS FOR RULEMAKING (A) Petitions incorporated into final rules or petitions denied since June 29, 1990 Marvin Lewis (PRM-50-52)........................................
105 l
L (B) Petitions.for which a notice of denial has been prepared-and is scheduled to be L
published.in the Federal Register next p
quarter' l
V None L..
'(C) Petitions incorporated ~ into proposed 1 rules None vii
Paae (D) Petitions pending staff review The Rockefeller University (PRM-20-17)..........................
107 The Rockefeller University (PRM-20-18)..........................
108 GE Stockholders' Alliance (PRM-20-19)...........................
109 i
Amersham Corporation (PRM-35-8).................................
110 American1 College of Nuclear Physicians and the Society of Nuclear Medicine (PRM-35-9)...................................
111 Free Environment,_Inc., et al.
(PRM-50-20)......................
113 Ch a r l e s Y ou ng ( P RM-5 0 - 5 0 ).......................................
114 The Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy (PRM-50-53)............
115
.Public Citizen:(PRM-50-54)............................,.........
117 i
Yankee Atomic Electric Company (PRM-50-55)......................
118
'- Department of Energy (PRM-60-3).................................
119 Sierra Club, North Carolina Chapter (PRM-61-1)..................
120 (E) Petitions with deferred' action None 1
i l
s f
viii l
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 through September 28, 1990.
Section I,
" Rules," includes (A) rules on which final action has been taken since June 29, 1990, the closing date of the last NRC Regulatory Agenda; (B) rules published previously as proposed rules on which the Commission has not taken final action; (C) rules published as advance 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 June 29, 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) petitions pending staff review, and (E) petitions with deferred action.
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 from 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 order within that part of Title 10.
A Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) has been added to each rulemaking agenda entry.
This identification number will make it 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 ix
J 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 rulemaking proceeding even if it is not included in this 1
Regulatory Agenda.
I Rulemakinos Acoroved by the Executive Director for Operations (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.
Rules 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 (*)..
.Public Particioation-in Rulemakina Comments on any rule in the agenda may'be sent to the Secretary x
of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear. Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention:
Docketing and; Service Branch.
Comments may'also be hand' delivered to One White Flint North,.
11555'Rockville-Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30 a.m.
and 4:15.p.m.,-Federal workdays.-. Comments received on rules foriwhich the comment period has closed will'be considered if it-is-practical =to do so, but assurance of consideration'cannot "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 agendt. are available.for public inspection, and copying for a fee, Et 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
Additional Rulemakina Information 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,
~ (301) 492-4268 (persons outside
. Washington, DC 20555, Telephone 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 listed under-the heading " Agency Contact" for that rule.
I f
f 1
l l
xi
1, I
e k
e 6
i l
-l s
F 1
i i
6 (A)RulesonWhichFinalActionHasBeenTaken Since June 29, 1990 i
I i
(
2 f I t
t 1
i:.
l-
---i-- -i f
i
~ TITLE:
Conduct of Employees; Miscellaneous Amendments RIN:
3150-AD15 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 0 ABSTRACT:
The rule would have clarifed and corrected typographical errors in 10 CFR Part 0 concerning acts affecting a personal financial interest; confidential statement of employment and financial interests; and restriction against ownership of certain security interests by Commissioners, certain staff members, and other related personnel.
This rule is beig terminated because the Office of Government-Ethics-is developing government wide regulations which will supplant 10.CFR Part 0.
g r
l TIMETABLE:
Terminated: 09/20/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 p
-EFFECT DN SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Susan Fonner Nuclear Regulatory _ Commission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 R
301 492-1632
[
l I!
L I
(
TITLE:
-Informal Hearing Procedures for Nuclear Reactor Operator LicensingAdjudications
-RIN:
3150-AD17 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2 ABSTRACT:
The final rule amended 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 o plant, afford an interested person, perator at a nuclear power upon request, a " hearing."
This final rule amends an existing rule which provides for informal hearing procedures for materials licensing proceedings to include reactor operator licensing proceedings as well.
TIMETABLE: L Final Action Published 09/07/90 55 FR 36801 Final Action Effective 10/09/90 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 4
i 1
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-A045 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 9 ABSTRACT:
The final rule amended the Commission's regulations to reflect the establishment of the Office of the Inspector General.
This amendment permits the Office of the Inspector General-to make independent disclosure determinations on (1) records originating in its office that are responsive to Freedom of Information Act requests, and (2) records located in its office that are responsive to Privacy Act requests. The fir,s1 rule also requires personnel in the Office of Inspector General to obtain the Inspector General's approval, instead of the General Counsel's approval, before responding to subpoenas or demands of courts or other authorities for the production or disclosure of HRC information.
TIMETACLE:
Final Action Published 08/17/90 55 FR 33645 Final Action Effective 08/17/90 LEGAL AUTHCRITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Donnie H..Grimsley Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Administration Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7211 3
l
.-.-_-.m m.
J TITLE:
Debt Collection Precedures i
i RIN:
3150-AC87 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 15 ABSTRACT:
i The final rule amended the Commission's regulations concerning the procedures that the NRC uses to collect its debts.
This action is necessary to confore 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.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 08/09/90 55 FR 32375 Final Action Effective 09/10/90 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-Diane B. Dandois Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
Office of the Controller l
Washington..DC 20555 1
301 492-7558 l
i i
4
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:
The final rule would have amended the Commission's regulations to make a needed clarification to previously published requirements governing the availability of material approved for incorporation by reference. This rule was terminated by the Office of the Secretary on September 24, 1990.
TIMETABLE:
Terminated 09/24/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42'USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Alzonia W.' Shepard Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Administration Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7651' M
b 5
r
TITLE:'
Authorization to Prepare Radiopharmaceutical Reagent Kits and Elute Radiopharmaceutical Generators; Use of Radiopharmaceuticals j
for Therapy RIN*
i 3150-AD43 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
The interim final rule amended the Commission's regulations relating to the preparation of radiopharmaceuticals and the therapy uses of radiopharmaceuticals.
The amendment permits medical use licensees:
(1)-to depart from manufacturer's instructions for preparing radiopharmaceuticals from generators and reagent kits; and (2)Lto-depart from the package insert instructions regarding indications and method of administration for therapeutic use of
-l radiopharmaceuticals, provided the licensee meets certain conditions and limitations.
The interim rule was 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:.
i
' Interim Final Action Published 08/23/90 55 FR 34513 Interim Final Action Effective 08/23/90 to 08/23/93 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
l 42 USC 2201;-42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
' Anthony Tse
' Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3797-H 1
+
i l
6 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 f
ABSTRACT:
The final rule amended the Commission's regulations to provide for the storage of, spent nuclear fuel under a general: license on the site of-any nuclear power reactor provided the reactor licensee o
notifies the NRC.-only NRC-certified casks are used for storage,.
and the. spent fuel is stored under conditions specified in the cask's certificate of compliance.
This final rule also provides procedures and criteria for obtaining NRC approval of spent fuel storage cask designs.
)
TIMETABLE:
4 Final Action Published 07/18/90.55 FR'29181 Final' Action Effective 08/17/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 10153; 42 USC 10198-
-EFFECTS ON'SMALL: BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No j
AGENCY CONTACT:
John Telford' Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research~
LWashington, DC 20555
-l
--301 492-3796 L
l'
,i 7
1 i
-l TITLE:
Consideration of Environmental Impacts of Temporary Storage.
r of Spent Fuel After Cessation of Reactor Operation RIN:
'3150-AD26 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 51 i ABSTRACT:
The final rule amended the Commission's regulations by revising the generic determination concerning the timing of v'-
-availability of a geolo0ic repository for commercial high-level radioactive waste and spent fuel and the environmental impacts
'of storage of spent fuel at reactor sites after the expiration of reactor operating licenses.
The final amendments reflect.the findings reached by the Commission in an update and supplement to its 1984 " Waste Confidence" rulemaking proceeding which was published in the Federal Register on September 18, 1990 (55 FR 38474),
j TIMETABLE:
l Final Action' Published 09/18/90 55 FR 38472 Final Action Effective -10/18/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
-42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841-EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Kathryn Winsberg Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555.
301 492-1637
(
5 8
+.
TITLE:
Fingerprint Cards: ' Increase in Fee RIN:
3150-AD72 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 73 ABSTRACT:
The final rule amended the Commission's regulations to reflect an e
administrative change pertaining to an increase in the fee that is charged for processing nuclear power plant fingerprint cards which are associated with granting unescorted access to an operating reactor site or access to Safeguards Information.
This amendment
.is necessary,to reflect a fee schedule change imposed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 08/31/90 55 FR 35563 Final Action Effective 10/01/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
g
'42 USC-2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL' BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
R. B. Manili Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
-Washington, DC 20555 301 492-0940 L
p.
I i
E l
1_
9
~.
___m TITLE:-
Export of Components for Use in Gaseous Diffusion Enrichment Plants RIN:
3150-A059 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 110 ABSTRACT:-
The final rule amended 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-recent decision of the multilateral Non-Proliferation Treaty Nuclear Exporters Group l(Zangger Committee) to clarify its trigger list entry for gaseous diffue> ion enrichment plant components by adding ten new definitions.
The Zangger Committee's " Trigger List" is the internationally accepted export control list for nuclear equipment and material.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 07/26/90 55 FR 30449
. Final Action Effective 07/26/90 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 10 1
gpywwevvv
,l 0
l E
s t
i s
(B) Proposed Rules p
t 6
k 1:.
-a o
k i
<w 1
n 1
-l Y
h '.
g k
i b
m
-.-ummmenn--
mumii um-i iis i
i i 1
i l
i l'
i
- !1 i
1 l
t I
k
TITLE:-
Procedures Involving the Equal Access to Justice Act:
Implementation RIN:
3150-AA01 CFR CITATION:
The proposed rule would implement the Equal Access to Justice t
Act'(EAJA) by providing for the payment of fees and expenses to certain eligible individuals and businesses that prevail in k<
agency adjudications when the agency's position is determined not.to have been substantially justified.
This proposed regulation is modeled after 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" agency regulations and would describe NRC procedures and U
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
- 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. 1986).
Additionally, in August 1985, the President signed into law,
. Pub. L. No. 99-80, an enactment renewing and revising-the EAJA after its~ expiration under a statutory sunset requirement.
The rule is being reevaluated to determine the agency adjudications thatLfall within the EAJA's coverage.
- TIMETABLE:
Proposed. Action Published 10/28/81 46 FR 53189 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 11/28/81 Next Action Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
5 USC 504 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
John Cho
. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Washingtoi, 0". 20555 301 A92-1585 I1 E
l l
TITLE:
Procedures Applicable to Proceedings for the Issuance of Licenses for the Receipt of High-Level Radioactive Waste at a Geologic Repository i
RIN:
3150-A027 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2 ABS 1RACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations 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 Commissio'n's ability to comply with the schedule for the Commission's decision on the construction authorization for the repository while providing for a thorough technical review of the license application and the equitable treatment of the parties to the hearing..The proposed rule would establish a new standard for the admission of initial contentions, would define " late contentions" as any contention proposed after the initial 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 Commission's adjudicatory boards.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 09/26/89 54 FR 39387 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 11/27/89
- Final: Action Published 10/31/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC'5841 i
- l EFFECTS ON'SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Kathryn Winsberg Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office ~of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301.492-1637 l
12 1
=
TITLE:-
Revisions to Procedures to-Issue Orders RIN:
-3150-AD53 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's procedures for issuing orders to include persons not licensed by the Commission
- but who are otherwise subject to the Commission's jurisdiction.
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:
Proposed Action Published 04/03/90 55 FR 12370 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 06/18/90 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
'42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841-
-EFFECTS-ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
H Mary E. Wagner Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1683 13
TITLE:
Revisions to Procedures to Issue Orders:
Challenges to Orders that are Made Immediately Effective RIN:
3150-A060 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR-2 ABSTRACT:-
The proposed rule would amend the Consission's regulations governing orders to provide for the expeditious consideration of challenges to orders that are made immediately effective.
The proposed amendments specifically allow challenges to the immediate Sffectiveness 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 would also require that challenges to the merits of an immediately effective order be heard expeditiously, except where good cause exists for delay.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 07/05/90 55 FR 27645 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 09/04/90 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 Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel-Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1585 14
TITLE:
Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal RIN:
3150-AD04 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2; 10 CFR 50; 10 CFR 54 ABSTRACT:
This rulemaking is scheduled for completion prior to the anticipated submittal of license renewal applications for Yankee Rowe and Monticello.
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 standards for continued safe operation of power reactors during the license renewal term and providing the regulatory stability desired by utilities in determining whether to prepare for license renewal or pursue alternative sources of i
generating capacity.
. License renewal rulemaking to provide regulatory requirements for extending nuclear power plant licenses beyond 40 years was 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 thet application will ba viewed.
TIMETABLE:
i ANPRM Published 08/29/88 53 FR 32919 ANPRM Comment Period' Ends 10/28/88 Proposed Action Published 07/17/90 55 FR 29043 Proposed Action Comment ~ Period Ends' 10/15/90 Final Action Published 06/21/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841-EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No
' AGENCY CONTACT:
- George Sege '
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC -20555 301 492-3917 15 l
l-L
TITLE:
Operator's Licenses RIN:
i 3150-AD55 CFR CITATION:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to require that compliance with the conditions and cut off levels of fitness-for-ditty programs (10 CFR Part 26) be a condition of an operator license or a senior operator license.
The proposed rule would also make a conforming modification to the Commission's enforcement policy, Appendix C to 10 CFR-Part 2.
This proposed rule was initiated in response to a staff raquirements memorandum dated March 22, 1989.
The proposed amendments would give operators full notice of the gravity of any violation of the cutoff levels for substances described in Par + 26 and would reflect enforcement sanctions for-operators who vioiate these cutoff levels.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed _ Rule Published 04/17/90 55 FR 14288 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 07/02/90-Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 i
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:.No AGENCY CONTACT:
David J. Lange Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation-
-Washington DC 20555 301492-31Y2 i
16
TITLE:
Enforcement of Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Federally Assisted Programs RIN:
l 3150-AC64 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 4 ABSTRACT:
1he proposed rule would amend the Commissior, s regulations concerning enforcement of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of l
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 v:ould face conflicting enforcement standards.
In addition, reference to UFAS by all Federal funding agencies will re1uce potential conflicts when a building is subjer.t to the Section 504 regulations of more than one Federal agency.
The U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ) fs 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 Comment Per'od 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:
Edward E. Tucker Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization and Civil Rights Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7106 17
_M$
TITLE:
- Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act RIN:
3150-AD71 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 13 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule wou'd amend the Comission's regulations to implement the Program fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986. The Act authorizes certain Federal f.encies, including the Nuclear l
Regulatory Comission, to impose, through adininistrative adjudication, civil penalties 4::d assE5sments against any person who makes, submits, or presents a false, fi titious, or fraudulent claim.or written statement to the agency. These proposed regulations establish the procedure the Commission will follow in implementing-the provisions of the Act and specifies the hearing and appeal rights of persons subject to penalties and assessments under the Act.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 09/25/90 55 FR 39158 Propsed Action Coment Period Ends 11/24/90 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
John Cho Nuc~ eat Regulatory Comission Office of the. General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7535 18
~~
TITLE:
Salary Offset Procedures for Collecting Debts Owed by Federal Employees to the Federal Government RIN:
3150-A044 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 16 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to establish collection 3rocedures enabling the NRC to recover i.
[
certain debts (by deductions from pay) which are owed by 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 the United States.
Because the proposed regulation is necessary to
[
implement the Debt Collection Act of 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 Review Completed 05/30/90 Submitted to OPM for Review 05/30/90 OPM Review Completed 07/18/90 Proposed Action Published 09/26/90 55 FR 39285 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 10/26/90 Final Action Published 12/00/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
5 USC 5514; 31 USC 3711; 31 USC 3716; 31 USC 3717; 31 USC 3718; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841; EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTEER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Diane B. Dandois Nuclear Regulatory Commissien Office of the Controller Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7558 19 1
- - - - ~
TITLE:
Standards for Protection Against Radiation RIN:
3150-AA38 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would revise Part 20 of the Commission's regulations in its antirety.
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 actionsoccurthroughlicensingactIonsindependentofPart20.
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 (International Commission on Radiological Protection);
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 m r 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.
20 c
)
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 02/15/09 Final Action to Offices for Concurrence 06/30/88 Final Action Package to EDO 09/27/88 Final Action to Commission (SECY-88-315) 11/03/88 Revised Final Action to Commission (SECY-89-267) 08/29/89 i
Revised Backfit Analysis to EDO 03/01/90 Revisiuns to Commission (SECY-90-237) 07/05/90 Final Action Published 11/15/90 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 Commission Office of Nuclear P.egulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3640 7
21
TITLE:
Disposal of Waste Oil by Incineration from Nuclear Power Plants RIN:
3150-AC14 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20 A85 TRACT:
The proposed rule, which is being initiated in partial response to a petition filed by(Edison Electric Institute and Utility Nuclear Waste Management Group PRM 20-15, dated July 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 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 wastes, the use of 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 enviNnment on an unrestricted basis.
TIMETABLE:
I Proposed Action to E00 06/21/88 Proposed Action Published 08/29/88 53 FR 32914 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 10/28/88 Final Action to Offices for Concurrence 12/15/89 Final Action to EDO 10/05/90 Final Action to Commission 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
TITLE:
Disposal of Waste 011 by Incineration from Nuclear Power Plants AGENCY CONTACT:
Catherine R. Mattsen Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3638 I
23
l i
TITLE:
Motifications 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. While 10 CFR 20.403(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 concernin events involving " loss of operation" and " damage to property.g 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 l
or environment.
The same is true for the cost of repairing damage which may 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 hea~th and safety of the public and the environment.
In addition, the rilemaking 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 :urrent Commission regulation; there is no other appropriate procedu'e to accommodate the clarification.
This rulemaking activity is considered to be a hign priority item by NHSS.
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.
1 TIMETABLE:
09/13/89 Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence Proposed Action to E00 03/16/90 Proposed Action Published 05/14/90 55 FR 19890 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 07/30/90 Final Action to EDO 12/31/90 Final Action Published 02/28/91 24
i TITLE:Notifications of Incidents LEGAL AUTH0RITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Joseph J. Mate Nuclear Regulatory Consission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3795 4
25
TITLE:
Proposed Revisions to the Criteria and Procedures for the Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance and Conditions of Construction Permits RIN:
3150-AA68 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 21; 10 CFR 50 A8STRACT:
The proposed rule would amend Part 21 and $50.55(e), both of which require the reporting of safety defects by operating license (0L) 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 defect 3; (2) establishment of a consistent threshold for safety defect reporting in Part 21 and $50.55(e); (3) estabitshment of a consistent, uniform content of reporting u Wer Part 21 and 550.55(e); and (4) establishment of consistent time frames for reporting of defects in Part 21 and $50.55(e).
Approximately 200 reports are submitted to the Commission annually under Part 21.
Approximately 750 $50.55(e) reports are submitted annually.
These reports identify both plant-specific and generic safety defects requiring further NRC evaluation and regulatory action.
Under the current Part 21 and 550.55(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 i
establish a more coherent regulatory framework that is expected to reduce tl.a industry reporting and evaluation burden significantly i
without any reduction in reported safety defect information.
Alternatives to this approach that were c'r.sidered ranged from establishment of a single rule for all reporting of safety defects 1
and operating reactor events to maintaining the status quo for safety defect reporting, All other alternatives were rejected because they would not substantially. improve the current safety defect reporting situation.
Current annual costs of reporting under Part 21 and $50.55(e) are estimated at approximately $6 million dollars for industry and 26
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 reporting burden should be reduced by approximately
$1 million while the NRC burden will be slightly reduced.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Initial Action to Comission 12/16/85 Comission Rejected Proposed Action 10/20/86 Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-88-72) 03/12/88 Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-88-258) 09/12/88 Revised Proposed Action 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 Comission (SECY-89-246) 08/14/89 Proposed Redraft of Final Rule to EDO 09/28/90 Proposed Redraft of Final Rule to Comission 10/15/90 Final Action Published To be determined by the Comission 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 Comission Office of Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data Washington, DC 20555 301 492-4442 27 4
TITLE hitness-for-DutyPrograms:
Nuclear Power Plant Personnel RIN:
3150-AD61 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 26 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to clarify the Commission's intent concerning the unacceptibility 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 impairmen+. or safety hazard.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 08/31/90 55 FR 35648 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 10/30/90 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 Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, DC 20555 301 492-0944 i
28
TITLE:
Willful Misconduct by Unlicensed Persons i
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 unlicensed persons on notice that they may be held accountable for i
willfully causing violations of the Commission's requirements or for other willful misconduct that arises out of activities within l
theCommission'sjurisdictionandplacesinquestiontheNRC'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 regu-lations.
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 Sb FR 12374 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 06/18/90 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 inforcement Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3283 29
TITLE:
ASNT Certification of Industrial Radiographers (Phase I)
RIN:
3150-AD35 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 34 ABSTRACT:
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
[
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 applicant will have an adequate program for training radiographers and will submit a schedule or description of the program including initial training, periodic retraining, on-the-job trainirg, 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 prccedures of the applicant.
The NRC is proposing to permit applicants to affirm, in lieu of submitting descriptions of their initial radiation safety training 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 may initiate a subsequent rulemaking which would require third party certification of all radiographers.
The large radioactive sources used in industiial 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 radiography accidents.
The staff believes that voluntary participation in the ASNT certification program has the potential to significantly improve safety awareness and performance.
The ASNT program will offer certification for both isotope and x ray users.
Certification would be valid for 3 years, with retesting required for renewal.
The staff expects that use of a certification program by licensees will not affect licensee training costs since the ASNT aligibility requirements include documented 30 l
l m
TITLE:
ASNT Certification of Industrial Radiographers (Phase !)
ABSTRACT: (CONT) training.
Some small reduction in cost will be associated with the application process because, if a radiography licensee applicant elects to have his or her staff certified, he or she will not have i
to submit a detailed description of a planned radiation safety training and testing program.
It is currently estimated that as many as 12,000 radiographers could be involved in certification at an average cost of $1,000 per radiographer.
The cost to the industry i
would be approximately $1.2 million per year.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 09/15/89 i
Proposed Action Published 11/09/89 54 FR 47089 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 02/17/90 Final Action to EDO 11/30/90 Final Action Published 12/31/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Donald Nellis Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washincton, DC 20555 301 192-3628 i
3l 1
l TITLE:
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 Commission's regulations concerning the administration of byproduct material for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.
The proposed amendments would require Part 35 licensees to establish and implement a written basic. quality assurance program to prevent, detect, and correct the cause of errors in the administration of byproduct material.
The proposed action is necessary to provide for adequate patient safety.
The propored aendment, which is intended to prevent errors in medical use, would oifmarily affect hospitals and clinics. Modification of reporting and recordkeeping requirements i
for both diagnostic and therapy events or miadminhtrations are also proposed in this rulemaking.
This amendment wvild be a matter of compatibility for Agreement States.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/02/87 52 FR 36942 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 12/01/87 Options Paper to Office for Concurrence 05/13/88 4
Options Paper on QA Rulemaking to EDO 05/26/88 J
Revised Options Paper on QA Rulemaking to EDO 05/31/88 Option Paper to Commission (SECY-88-156) 06/03/88 SRM !ssued 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 EDO 06/01/89 Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-89-171) 06/07/89 Revised Proposed Action.to EDO 08/11/89 Revised Proposed Action to Commission (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 Comment Period Ends 04/12/90 Final Action to EDO 03/01/91 Final Action to Commission 03/15/91-Final Action Published 05/16/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 l
[
32
I 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 33
t TITLE:
Custody and Long-Term Care of Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings i
Disposal Sites RIN:
3150-AC56 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 40 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Cornission's regulations to include a procedure for licensing r, custodian for the post-closure, 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-Tern Surveillance Plan that meets the requirements of the general license has been received by NRC.
No significant impact to the public or industry is expected as a result of this proposed action.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action for Division and Office Review 11/09/87 Office Concurrence on Proposed Action Completed 02/10/88 Proposed Action to EDO 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 EDO 07/16/90 Final Action to Commission (SECY-90-282) 08/10/90 Final Action Published 11/00/90 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 j
301 492-3877 34
TITLE:
Ensuring the Effectiveness of Maintenance Programs for Nuclear Power Plants RIN:
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 require each licensee to develop, implement, and maintain a maintenance program.
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 wii; 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 rulemaking 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 Concurren 34/10/89 Final Action to EDO 04/21/89 Final Action to Commission (SECY-89-143) 04/28/89 Revised Policy Statement Published 12/08/89 54 FR 50611 Final Action to ACRS 03/25/91 Final Action to CRGR 03/29/91 Final Action to EDO 05/31/91 Final Action to Commission 06/08/91 Final Action Published 06/28/91 i
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5842 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No 35 l
L
TITLE:
Ensuring the Effectiveness of Maintenance Programs for Nuclear Power Plants AGENCY CONTACT:
Robert Riggs Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3732 i
l 1
36
TITLE:
Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against Pressurized Thermal Shock Events RIN:
3150-AD01 CFR CITATION:
)
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 radiation 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 as 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 plants, 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 screening 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.
37
i TITLE:
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 procedute for calculating RT/ PTS.
In addition, three to five plants will need to make the expenditure of an estimated 2.5 million dollars for the plant-specific analysis in the 1990s instead of 10 to 15 years later.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 11/28/89 Proposed Action Published 12/26/89 54 FR 52946 Proposed Action Public Comment Period Ends 03/12/90 Final Action to CRGR 10/01/90 Final Action to EDO 10/15/90 Final Action Published 12/17/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2133; 42 USC 2134; 42 USC 5641 EFFECTS OF SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
i Allen L. Hiser, Jr.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 L
301 492-3988 l
38
TITLE:
Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors RIN:-
3150-AA86 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50; Appendix J A8STRACT:
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 between 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 9n obsolete national standard that was replaced in 1981.
The benefits anticipated include elimination of inconsistencies and obsolete requirements, and the addition of greater usefulness and a
. higher confidence in the leck-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.
A detailed analysis of costs, benefits, and occupational exposures is available in the Public Decument Room, and indicates possible savings to industry of $14 million to $300 million and an increase in occupational exposure of less than 1 percent per year per plant due to increased testing.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/29/86 51 FR 39538 l.
Proposed Action Comment Period Extended. 04/24/87 52 FR 2416 i
Final Action to CRGR/ACRS 09/26/90 Final Action to E00 10/15/90 Final 4ction to Commission 10/30/90 Fina' Action Published 11/30/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2133; 42 USC 2134; 42 USC 5841 l
39
TITLE:
Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Gunter Arndt Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3814 p
i 40 l
l
TITLE:
Amendment to 10 CFR 51.51 and 51.52, Tables S-3 and S-4, Addition of Redon-222 and Technetium-99 Radiation Values, and Addition of Appendix B. " Table S-3 Explanatory Analysis" RIN:
3150-AA31 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 51 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule amends the Table of Uranium Fuel Cycle Environmental Data (Table S-3) by adding new estimates for potential releases 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 the environmental effects of these potential releases from the LWR Fuel Cycle, and postulates the potential radiation doses, health effects, and environmental impacts of these potential 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). 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 potential litigation time and costs for both NRC and applicants.
The proposed revision of 10 CFR 51.51 and the addition of Appendix B was published for public review and comment on March 4, 1981 (46 FR 15154).
The final rulemaking was deferred pending the outcome of a suit (Natural Resources Defense Council, et al. v. NRC, No. 74-1486) in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The U.S. Court of Appeals (D.C. Circuit) decision of 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 modeling 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 could be added to the table and covered in the narrative explanation.
The rule is being reissued as a proposed rule because the scope has been expanded to include radiation values for radon-222 and technetium-99 and the narrative explanation has been extensively revised from that published on March 4, 1981 (46 FR 15154).
41 i
TITLE:Amendment to 10 CFR 51.51 and 51.52, Tables S-3 and S-4, Addition of Radon-222 and Technetium-99 Radiation Values, and Addition of Appendix B, " Table S-3 Explanatory Analysis" 4
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 03/04/81 46 FR 15154 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 05/04/81 Proposed Action for Division Review 05/27/88 Proposed Action to EDO Undetermined Proposed Action Published Undetemined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2011; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 4321; 42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5842 I
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CDNTACT:
Stanley Turel i
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3739 l
t i
l 42 l'
t
TITLE:
Elimination of Inconsistencies Between NRC Regulations and EPA HLW Standards RIN:
3150-AC03 i
CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 60 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would elim'nate several inconsistencies with the EPA standards to be developed for the disposal of HLW in deep geologie. repositories.
Tne Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA) directs N?C to promulgate criteria for the licensing of HLW geologic repositorits.
Section 121 (c) of this act states that the criteria for the licensing of HLW geologic repositories must be consistent with these standards.
The proposed rule is needed in order to eliminate several inconsistencies with the EPA standards, thus fulfilling the statutory requirement.
Because the NWPA directs NRC to eliminate inconsistencies between Part 60 and the EPA standard, the alternatives to the proposed action are limited by statute.
The public, industry, and NRC will benefit from eliminating inconsisten:.ies in Federal HLW regulations.
NRC resources needed would be several staff 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 EDO 07/20/87 Revised Proposed Action Published Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 10101 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No U
1 l
TITLE:Elimination of Inconsistencies Between NRC Regulations and EFA HLW Standards l
AGENCY CONTACT:
Melvin Silberberg/ Clark Prichard Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 i
301 492-3810/3884 t
I 44 l
l l
TITLE:
Minor Amendments to the Physical Protection Requirements
- i r
RIN:
3150-AD03 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 72; 10 CFR 73; 10 CFR 75 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations dealing with physical protection requirements that are out of date, susceptible-to differing interpretations, or in need of clar-ification.
These problems were' identified by a systematic review of the agency's i
safeguards regulations and guidance documents conducted by the I
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 i
to the regulations are being proposed.
The proposed changes would:
(1) add definitions for common terms not currently defined; (2) delete action dates that no longer apply; (3) corrt?t outdated-terms and cross references; (4) clarify wording that is susceptible ~
i to differing interpretations; (5) correct typographical errors; and
-(6) make'other minor crences.
The alternative to rul'emaking would be to allow-the status quo to d
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.
TIMETABLE:
l Proposed Action to EDO= 06/27/89-Proposed Action Published 08/15/89: 54 FR 33570 Proposed Action ~ Comment-Period Ends ~ 09/29/89 Final Action to EDO Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined 1
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
l 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841-EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No
' AGENCY CONTACT:
Stanly: P. Turel Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 205;5 301 492-3739 45
4 TITLE:Transportation Regulations: Compatibility With the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
RIN:
3150-AC41 l
CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 71 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would, in conjunction with a corresponding rule change by the U.S. Department of Transportation, make the United States Federal regulations for the safe transportation of radioactive material consistent with those of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The IAEA regulations can be found in IAEA Safety Series No. 6, " Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material," 1985 Edition.
Consistency in transportation regulations throughout the world facilitates the l
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.
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. proposed rulv 04/04/89 54 FR 13528 00T Proposed Rule Published' 11/14/89 54 FR 47454 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends- 02/09/90 Final Action to E00 Undetermined Fit $1 Action to Commission Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined b
46 x
=
TITLE:
Transportation Regulations: Compatibility With the International Atomic Energy ACency (IAEA)
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:
No l
AGENCY CONTACT:
Donald R. Hopkins Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3784 i
i k
47
TITLE:
Criteria for an Extraordinary Nuclear Occurrence RIN:-
3150-AB01 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 140 ABSTRACT:
i The proposed rule would revise the criteria for an extraordinary nuclear occurrence (ENO) to eliminate the problems that were encountered in the Three Mile Island EN0 determination.
It is desirable to get revised criteria in place in-the event they are needed.
There are no alternatives to this rulemaking, as the current EN0 criteria are already embodied in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 140. The only way to modify the;e criteria, as this rule seeks t*> 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 ENO criteria could cause increases in insurance premiums.
The final rule will also be responsive to PRM-140-1.
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 EDO 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 Washington, DC 20555
'301 492-3640 48
n TITLE:
Reasserting NRC's Sole Authority for Approving Onsite Low-Level Waste Disposal in Agreement States RIN:
3150-AC57 CFR CITATION:
}
10 CFR 150 ABSTRACT:
l The proposed rule would establish NRC as the sole authority for approving onsite disposal of very low-level waste at all l
L NRC-licensed reactors and at Part 70 facilities.
After further l'
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.
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 December 1990.
TIMETABLE::
4
-Proposed Action to EDO 06/10/88 Proposed Action Published 08/22/88 53 FR 31880 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 10/21/88 Withdrawal Published 12/00/90 i
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2021; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Harry S. Tovmassian Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3634
+
49
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 t.nique 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 i
Regulation..This action is necessary to ensure that the a
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 i
Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 12/01/89 Final Action Published-Urdetermined 3
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 i
50
(C)AdvanceNoticesofProposedRulemaking
1' 1
TITLE:
Radioactive Waste Below Regulatory Concern; Generic Rulemaking RIN:
3150-AC35 CFR CITATION:
The advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) sought comments on a proposal to amend NRC regulations to address disposal of radioactive 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 r
streams (August 29, 1986; 51 FR 30839).
It is believed that
[
generic rulemaking could provide a-more efficient and effective i-"
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 ceuld take. The evaluation of public comment together with the resub s 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 of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3737 5I I
l TITLE:
Comprehensive Quality Assurance in Medical Use and a Standard of Care RIN:
3150-AC42 CFR CITATION:
1 10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
.The advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) would amend the Commission's regulations to require a comprehensive quality assurance program for medical licensees using byproduct materials.
The purpose of this rulemaking action is to address each source of error that can lead to a misadministration.
An ANPRM was published to request public comment on the extent to which, in addition to the basic quality assurance procedures (being addressed by another
- rulemaking action, entitled " Basic Quality Assurance Program for Medical Use of Byproduct Material"), 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:
ANPRM Action Published 10/02/87 52 FR-36949 ANPRM Comment Period Ends 12/31/87 52 FR 36949 Options Paper to Offices for Concurrence 05/13/88 Options Paper on-QA Rulemaking to EDO 05/26/88 Revised Options Paper on Rulemaking to EDO 05/31/88 Option Paper Completed 06/03/88 SECY-88-156 Staff Requirements Memorandum Issued 07/12/88 Proposed Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS OH-SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Anthony Tse Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3797 52
TITLE:Medical Use of Byproduct Material: Training and Experience Criteria RIN:
3150-AC99 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
The advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) would amend the Commission's regulations concerning training and experience criteria for individuals involved in the medical use of byproduct material.
Rulemaking may be needed to reduce the chance of misadministrations.
The Commission 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 Commission proceeds with rulemaking, the NRC could publish criteria in its regulations or recognize' medical specialty certificates.
The NRC requested cost / benefit comments as part of the May 1988 ANPRM.
The contractor stu<ty 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.
The staff analysis and proposed course of action was provided to the
. Advisory Committee on Medical Uses of Isotopes (ACMUI) as.an agenda item at their meeting on July 10, 1990. The ACMUI responded that the information the staff had gathered does not support the premise that training and experience is a factor in misadministrations.
The ACMUI suggested that additional information be gathered which includes the training and experience of the person committing the violation. The staff will modify its collection parameters, and continue to collect data.- The staff has reviewed and plans to include information concerning the Department of Health and Human
' Services Training Standards in the next revision of Regulatory Guide 10.8. Although the staff is not prepared to pursue rulemaking at this time, they will make their recommendation following the collection, review, and analysis of the more extensive information they are now gathering.
TIMETABLE:
ANPRM Published- 05/25/88 53 FR 18845 ANPRM Comment Period-Ends 08/24/88 Proposed Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 341 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND t, ?CR ENTITIES:
No 53
TITLE:
Medical Use of Byproduct Material:
Trai'ing and Experience Criteria AGENCY CONTACT:
Larry Camper
' Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3417 i
54 l
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 rulemakic.7 (ANPRM) would develop regulations requiring enhanced receipt inspection and testing of products purchased for use in nuclear power plant structures, These regulations are believed to be systems, and components.
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. The staff intends to withdraw this ANPRM in October 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 10/00/90 LEGAL-AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:Yes AGENCY CONTACT:
Phil Cota Nuclear Regulatory Commission-Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
. Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1280-55 4
TITLE:
License Renewal for Nuclear Power Plants; Scope of Environmental Effects RIN:
3150-AD63 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 51 ABSTRACT:
The advance notice of proposed'rulemaking (ANPRM) would amend the Commission's regulations to add provisions concerning the scope of environmental effects which would be addressed by the Commission in conjunction with applications for license renewal for nuclear power plants.
Changes to Part 51 will be based on the findings of a generic environmental impact statement (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.
NRC believes that a generic Part 51 rulemaking could address potential environmental impacts from the relicensing and extended 9
operation of nuclear power plants.
This rulemaking would define the 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 Commission (SECY-90-208) 06/08/90 ANPRM Published 07/23/90 55 FR 29964 ANPRM Comment Period Ends 10/22/90 Proposed Action to CRGR 03/04/91 Proposed Action to EDO 04/01/91 Proposed Action to Commission 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 Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555
-301 492-3936 56 s
TITLE:
Import and Export of Radioactive Wastes RIN:
3150-AD36 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR-110 ABSTRACT:
The advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) would consider amending the Commission s regulations by reexamining the existing NRC regulations for the import and export of radioactive wastes.
l This action is necessary to respond to concerns that international transfers of radioactive wastes, in particular low-level radio-active wastes, may not be properly controlled.
Various options for establishing a Commission policy on the import and export of radio-active wastes are being considered.
The Commission published this ANPRM to seek comments from the public, industry, and other govern-ment agencies on various regulatory, options and issues developed thus far.
Thirty-one comments were received on this ANPRM. The comments were received from several different sources.
TIMETABLE:
ANPRM Action Published 02/07/90 55 FR 4181 ANPRM Public Comment Period Extended to 04/24/90 03/23/90 55 FR 10786 Proposed Action Published Undetermired LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Undetermined AGENCY CONTACT:
Robert Meck Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3737 L
57
--s-,..
,~~~,,--,.-,,-m.,_m__
',W %, ' f A l@V),
t.1,.?
-.)+,p p_q,_ ym pg i
Dt h
h'k
^
)
e-r s
3 i
l 4
i E
i 1
ap (D). Unpublished Rules 3:.
1
\\
'. f 4.g
.e t
s'b
,k'.'
w O'
f'
}'-
- .gg
'g,
y f :I e,'
h.E
.f '
i
$.u '.
b jg =
?
s
- 9. -
J.
c'LL-Me it g'
- d.
6 f
r; c
- f r i
f.-
g, i
r, 2
g5, m;.
b:
f r
f f
rf.
Ie,,.
~ vus
...u.
=
2 I
h k
9 A
s2 i
E r
af
..i TITLE:-Revised Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings s
s~
~ 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 Commission
. procedural rules applicable to domestic licensing proceedings by j
comprehensively: restating, revising and reorganizing the statement i
of those rules to reflect current practice.
The changes in this
-proposed rule would enable the Commission, directly and through its i
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 I
agency proceedings..In 1987, the Commission deferred consideration l
, of this proposal, which would have revised the Commission's procedural rules governing the conduct of all adjudicatory proceedings:other than export licensing proceedings under 10 CFR-1 Part 110,'-pending consideration of.other, more limited revisions to the rules of practice..In 1989, former Chairman Zech requested that J
this proposed rule be updated and re-submitted for re-consideration i
by the Commission.:
j i
- TIMETABLE:
01/00/91 Proposed Action Published.
Final Action Published 03/00/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:-
- 42 USC-2201; 42 USC 2231; 42 USC 2241; 42 USC 5841; 5 USC 552 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND 0THER ENTITIES
No AGENCY. CONTACT:
B.EPaul Cotter, Jr.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission r
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
' Washington, DC 20555
'301 492-7814 j
l 1
i i
59
TITLE::
Availability of Official Records 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 agency practice.
The amendment would reaffirm that the terms of 10 CFR 2.790(c) provide submitters of,information a qualified right-to have their information returned upon request.
This amendment informs the public of two additional circumstances where information will not be returned to the applicant, i.e2, ir. formation which has been made available to an advisor.v comittee or was received at an advisory committee meeting, and information that is sub g t to a pending Freedom of Information Act request.
Additionally, the proposed amendment would-add a notice statement 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-POR, 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 the granting;to the NRC an implied license to reproduce and distribute according to' normal agency practice.
Naturally, this notice does not prevent submitters from applying 10 CFR-2.790(b)(1)
' procedures to information that contains trade secrets or privileged or confidential commercial or financial;information (proprietary information) and it is recognized that some information:in those
. 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,.this 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 that standard.
A proposal is being prepared to submit to agency staff for comment.
60
=
TITLE:Availability of Official Records-TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS'ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No
' AGENCY CONTACT:
catherint Holzle Nuclear heg:alatory Commission
-Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1F60
- i.
~
k 4
Y 1
61
i TITLE:
Discrimination on the Basis of Sex 1
RIN:. 3150-AD50 CFR CITATION:
-10 CFR 2; 10 CFR 19-ABSTRACT:
The. final rule would amend the Commission's regulations dealing-with discrimination against persons who, on the grounds of sex, are excluded from participation in, denied the' benefits of, or subjected to discrimination under any program or activity licensed -
1
-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 g
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201;f42 USC 5841 I
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND'OTHER ENTITIESi No
+
- AGENCY CONTACT.
Anthony DiPala Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
- Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3758
.4 r
i 62 i
9--
e m ------- -
a-
- TITLE.:.
Revision of Definition of Meeting
'RIN:c 3150-AC78 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR-9 4
ABSTRACT:
o 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 and report of the American Bar Association (ABA).
Since the pre-1985 wording of the definition c.
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 1 Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
3 42.USC 2201; 42-USC 5841 4
. EFFECTS ON SMALL. BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No
,[
AGENCY CONTACT:-
Peter G. Crane.
Nucle'ar: Regulatory Commi',sion -
Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1634 o
',)[*~.
. [
6 63
tj TITLE:
Clarification of Statutory Authority for Purposes of Criminal Enforcement RIN:
3150-AD62 CFR' CITATION:
10 CFR 19, 10 CFR 20. 10 CFR 21, 10 CFR 25, 10 CFR 30,-10 CFR 31,
.10 CFR 32, 10 CFR %, 10 CFR 34, 10 CFR 35, 10 CFR 39, 10 CFR 40, 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 L-ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations i
L in order to eliminate uncertainty concerning the authority for L
' application of criminal sanctions under Title 10.
The' authority citations accompanying some of the regulations need to be' amended n
to more clearly identify'those. violations which, if willfully u
violated, may subject ~ the violator to potential criminal penalties.
l The NRC has been unable to refer some cases to the Department of.
Justice (D0J) or the D0J has had difficul_ty 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 s ecify which regulations were issued under subparagraph "b". "i", or =p'o" of Section 161 of the Atomic Energy Act.
These amendments would ensure that personsLsubject to the Commission'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:-
a Proposed Action to Commission-12/00/90
)
' Proposed Action Published 04/00/91 5
Final' Action. Published ~ Undetermined
(
LEGAL' AUTHORITY:
-_42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841
. EFFECTS ON SMALL' BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: :No e
C AGENCY CONTACT:
1 l-
.Geoffrey Cant f
in
. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l,
Office of Enforcement Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3283 l'.
1 i
64 i
.. ~
h TITLE:
~
Residual Radioactivity Criteria for Unrestricted Release of Lands and Structures RIN:
1 3150-AD65 e,
L CFR. CITATION:
10 CFR 20 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to u
1 codify the basic principles.and criteria which would allow k
residua 11y contaminated lands and structures to be released for unrestricted public use.
The rule would reflect Commission views as defined in the Below Regulatory Concern Policy Statement which was t
published-in 'the Federal Register on July 3, 1990 (55 FR 27522).
For example, lands and structures would be considered suitable for release 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 i
K Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities (53 FR 24018) dated i
June 27, 1988,.the need and urgency for guidance with respect to residual contamination criteria was. expressed.
At that time, it:was anticipated
.i that an interagency, working group organized by the Environmental Protection Agency would develop necessary Federal guidance. - However, in.the -absence of cignificant progress-by the interagency working group, the Commission has ~ directed that the NRC expedite.a residual radioactivity rulemaking because the requirements, once final, will provide licensees
'with an incentive to complete site decommissionings.
l The rule would codify the basic principles and criteria expressed inLthe Below Regulatory Concern Policy Statement.
Measurables, in the form-of-surface >and volume radioactivity 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 upon which decommissioning activities and license terminations can be..
accomplished. The framework.will assure adequate protection of public.
- l health and safety and identify residual radioactivity criteria upon
.which licensees.can confidently develop rea:,onable and responsible decommissioning plans.
3 o
TIMETABLE:
[
Proposed. Action to EDO 04/30/92~
Proposed Action to Commission 05/31/92
. Proposed Action Published 06/30/92-Final Action Published 06/30/93
' I 65 i
L
L I :
9 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:
Robert Meck
- Nuclear' Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research i
Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3737
- c i
I e
)
i lv 66 m
v v
i
. TITLE:
Low-Level Waste Manifest,Information and Reporting i
RIN:
3150-AD33 CFR CITATION:
P 10 CFR 20; 10 CFR 61 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's. regulations to:
L (1) improve information contained in manifests accompanying shipments of waste to low-level waste (LLW) disposal facilities L
licensed under Part 61; (2) develop a uniform manifest for national use; (3) require that operators of these disposal E
facilities store portions.of this manifest information in-onsite computer recordkeeping systems; and (4) require that 4
operators periodically submit, 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 I
-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, j
Pursuant to S-20.311, a manifest must accompany each shipment of LLW to a disposal facility.
Unfortunately, existing manifests do not j
describe the waste in detail sufficient to ensure compliance with Part'61 performance objectives.
In additir n.. 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 i
believes that a national data base is needed which contains information 1
on LLW disposed at all sites.
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,
- .J technical analyses, and other activities and would reduce confusion h
resulting from multiple 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 j
q regulations and license conditions.
y i!w, l
v
.I w
w
~
i.lg
t TITLE:Low-Level-Weste 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 ;r the NRC if necessary, that contains information about waste 'asposed 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 procedures would be enhanced through use of a single uniform manifest.
We expect that the rulemaking will slightly increase disposal costs.- The rulemaking is a budgeted activity cited in the NRC 5-year plan.
TIMETABLE:'
~.
Proposed Action to EDO 03/19/91 Proposed Action to Commission 04/30/91 Proposed-Action Published 05/31/91 Final Action Published 05/31/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC-2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER-ENTITIES:
Yes AGENCY CONTACT:-
Mark Haisfield/G.'W. Roles'_
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory _Research 0ffice of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Washingtur., DC 20555-301 492-3877/0595-t r
E p
9
$6
F TITLE:
Fitness-for-Duty Programs for Category I Fuel Facilities and Shipments RIN:
3150-AD68 i
CFR CITATION:
l.
10 CFR 26 ABSTRACT:
l The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to include Category I fuel facilities and Category I shipments in the fitness-for-duty programs.
This action is necessary to ensure fitness for duty of employees:
(1) who have direct ac ess to large quantities of special nuclear material (SNM); (2) who are responsible for the L
protection of the material; and (3) who transport the material.
The l
proposed rule is expected to lead to compatibility with equivalent L
DOE programs.
The central issue for Category I-type facilities and shipments is the risk of theft or diversion of high-enriched SNM due to drug-related causes which, in turn, could pose a significant risk to L
the health, safety, or security of a large population.
Current regulations only cover nuclear power plants and need to be expanded to include Category I facilities and shipments with requirements I
reflecting the differences between the nuclear power plants and the Category I facilities and shipments.
There is no alternative to rulemaking which wculd 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, records and reports, audits, and enforcement.
The impact of the rule.on the NRC licensing, inspection, and enforce-ment program will be approximately 1 FTE per year.
The NRC resources required to develop the rulemaking are estimated to be 0.5 FTE per year for 2 years.
The cost to industry will include chemical testing and operating costs.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO '05/24/91 Proposed Action to Commission 06/07/91 Proposed Action Published 08/09/91 Final Action Published. 06/30/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841
'FFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No 69
TITLE: Fitness-for-Duty Programs for Category I Fuel Facilities and Shipments AGENCY CONTACT:
Stanley Turel Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington,DC 20555 301 492-3739 s
70
TITLE:
Timeliness in Conduct of Decommissioning of Material Facilities RIN:
3150-AD66 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 30; 10 CFR 40; 10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 72 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to require decontamination and decommissioning of material fa::ilities within a fixed period of time efter cessation of operations.
I Current regulations allow material licensees considerable discretion as to the timing of decontamination and decommissioning.
This has allowed some licensees to remain inactive without decommissioning on the basis that operations may resume sometime in the future.
Similarly, licensees are not required to decontaminate promptly, in step-by-step fashion, portions of their facilities that become inactive es their operations evolve.
This allows licensees to postpone heavy decommissioning costs by simply continuing sufficient controls, monitoring, and surveillance to meet minimal safety requirements, j
The proposed rule would require decontamination and dect,mmissioning of materials 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 A entamination or decommissioning within the required times is not tukically achievable or if delaying decontamination or decommissioning would reduce risk to public health and safety or the environm6.t.
The rulemaking will result in publication of specific criteria for timeliness in the decontamination and decommissioning of material facilities.
This rulemaking will provide a more substantial planning base for the industry and result in timely decontamination and decommissioning of material facilities.
The resulting timely decontamination and decommissioning 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.
TIMETABLE:
Prop' sed ktion to EDO 02/28/91 Proposed Action to Commission 03/29/91 Proposed Action Published 04/30/91 Final Action Published 04/30/92 71
TITLE:
Timeliness in Conduct of Decommissioning of Material Facilities LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMAll. BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
James Malaro Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reguistory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3164 72
I TITLE:
Decommissioning Regulations:
Recordkeeping and Termination for Decommissioning, Documentation Additions i
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 decommissioning rule published on June 27, 1988 (53 FR 2',018), would modify the
~
i l
Commission's decommissioning regulations to make them more specific and more easily implemeated.
Current regulations require recordkeeping provision 4 as well as termination plans or their equivalent with the Coimission at cessation of operations.
However, no explicit requirements are specified in current rules pertaining to a listing of the lind, structures, and equipment of the licensed facility; nor are any explicit requirements specified pertaining to submittal of an operating history at the time of submittal of final plans as well as prior to license i
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 decommissioning process and that a record exists that can be stored for future reference which contains the ulevant features of the license termination process requirements, l
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 pro minimal effort, be available (posed amendments will already, or with based on the existing rule record-keeping requirements). While proposed amendments will affect all licensees, it is anticipated that the requirements will place minimal burden on them.
Moreover, ensuring that the information is explicitly available should help expedite NRC approval of licensee decommissioning activities and may Nduce the overall licensee and NRC efforts required to terminate a license, l
Proposed changes to the regulations will be issued for public comment.
TIMETABLE:
)
Proposed Action to ACRS 03/29/91 Proposed Action to CRGR 03/29/91 i
Proposed Action to EDO 05/30/91 1
Proposed Action to Commission 06/28/91 Proposed Action Published 07/30/91 i
Final Action Published 04/30/92
- l 73
l TITLE:
Decommissioning Regulations:
Recordkeeping and Termination for Decommissioning, Documentation Additions LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 J
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 74
TITLE:
Requirements for Possession of Industrial Devices RIN:
3150-A034 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 assuring 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 l
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 Revised Proposed Action to EDO 10/19/90 Proposed Action Published 12/14/90 Final Action Published 10/29/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2114; 42 USC 2201
^
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Yes AGENCY CONTACT:
Joseph J. Mate Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3795 75 I
i TITLE:
Iridium-192 Wire for Interstitial Treatment of Cancer RIN:
3150-AD46 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations governing the medical uses of byproduct material.
The proposed amendment would add iridium-192 wire to the list of brachytherapy 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 proposed 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 Vadetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Anthony N. Tse Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3797 i
e 76
TITLE:
Use of Radiopharmaceuticals for Medical Research, Use of Biologics Containtrig Byproduct Material, and Compounding Radiopharmaceutice!:
RIN:
3150-A069 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would examine the Commission's regulations related to the compounding of radiopharmaceuticals, the use of biolo2ics containing byproduct material, and the medical research uses of radiopharmaceuticals.
The NRC's response to the petition for rulemaking submitted by the American College of Nuclear Physicians and the Society of Nuclear Medicine (PRM-35-9) could result in denial or proposed rulemaking for all or part of the petition. This task is expected to consume about 2 staff years of effort.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed 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 301 492-3797 77 I
TITLE:
Licensing and Radiation Safety Requirements for Large Irradiators RIN:
3150-AC98 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 36 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 radiation to irradiate products to change their characteristics in some way.
The requirements 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 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 EDO 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 11/15/90 Final Action Published 11/01/91 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 Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3757 78
_2___._m
TITLE:
Safety Related anJ Important to Safety in 10 CFR Part 50 RIN:
3150-AB88 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would clarify in the Commission's regulations the use of the terms "important to safety" and " safety related" by addin definitions of these two terms and of " facility licensing documents"g 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 the staff proposed definitions and additional guidance from the Commission was signed by the E00 on May 29, 1986.
In addition to rulemaking, the position paper discusses the alternative of the Commission 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:
Proposed A9 tion to Commission 05/29/86 Comrission 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 AGENCY CONTACT:
Jerry N. Wilson Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3729 79
TITLE:Emergency Planning Regulations for Part 52 Licensing RIN:
3150-AD4B CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations concerning those portions of emergency plans 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.
It is estimated that 2 staff-years of effort over 2 years will be required for this rulemaking.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 03/07/90 Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-90-103) 03/20/90 Proposed Action Published 12/17/90 Final Action Published 09/30/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Michael T. Jamgochian Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3918 4
80
I TITLE:
Emergency Telecommunications System Upgrade RIN:
3150-A039 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to require the implementation of the NRC's Emergency Telecommunications System (ETS) upgrade at all licensed nuclear power plar.ts 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 appropridte recommendations are made with respect to offsite actions to protect public health and safety.
In order to adequately perform this function, the NRC requires reliable communications with the licensee and the regional offices.
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 necessary emergency telecommunications functions with sufficient redundancy to ensure availability even under the challenging communication conditions that were existing during a nuclear emergency.
The licensees will be required to provide the hardware, logistics, operational and maintenance support to implement the ETS upgrade at their sites.
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:
Markley L. Au Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3749 8I l
1
TITLE:
Clarification of Emergency Preparedness Regulations RIN:
3150-AD40 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Comission's regulations by clarifying the linkage batween the need for " reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency" indicated in S 50.47(a) and 16 planning standards outlined in S 50.47(b).
In addition, the rulemaking will clarify the term " range of protective" actions.
Other issues to be clarified include monitoring of evacuees, actions for recovery and reentry, notification of the public, evacuation time estimates, and exercise frequency.
In a December 23, 1988, memorandum to the EDO from SECY, the staff was directed to review the "...NRC's emergency planning regulations and propose revisions designed to eliminate ambiguity and clarify the regulations to include what constitutes the exercise scope prior to the full power licensing...." The staff outlined the proposed rulemaking in a memorandum from the EDO to the Comission dated June 29, 1989.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to CRGR/ACRS 12/03/90 Proposed Action to EDO 02/25/91 Proposed Action to Comission 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. Jamgochian Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3918 82
.__._...m__
TITLE:
I Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants (ASME Code,Section XI, Division 1, Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL) i 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 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 53 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 (EDO Approval) 06/09/88 Proposed Action for Division Review 07/01/88 83 1
l TITLE:
Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants (ASME Code,Section 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 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Wallace E. Norris Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3805 l
84
TITLE:Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants (ASME Code, 1986/1987/
1988 Addenda)
RIN:
3150-A005 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 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 Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code).
Also, the proposed amendment would impose augmented examination of reactor ve.sel 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 lig1t-water-reactor 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.
The proposed rule would update the existing reference to the ASME-Code and would thereby permit the use of improved methods for the construction, inservice inspection, and inservice testing of nuclear 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
-thich the staff could review any single submission.
In addition, v.he 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 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.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Submitted for Division Review 09/27/88 Proposed Action to CRGR 10/09/90 Proposed Action to EDO 12/24/90 Proposed Action Published 01/31/91 Final Action Published 12/30/91 85 1
TITLE:
Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants (ASME Code, 1986/1987/
1988 Addenda)
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201, 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Gilbert C. Millman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3848 86
TITLE:
Emergency Response Data System RIN:
3150-A032 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations by requiring the implementation of the NRC-approved Emergency Response l
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 nuclear power facilities and a central computer in the NRC Operations Center.
Current experience with a voice-only emergency communication 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 between 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 will be issued for public comment.
The rulemaking task will be scheduled over a 2 year period ending March lob and will consume 2-3 staff years of effort depending on the numoet and difficulty of conflicts to be resolved.
87
TITLE:
Emergency Response Data System TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to CRGR 06/06/90 Proposed Action to ACRS 06/08/90 Proposed Action to EDO 07/09/90 Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-90-256) 07/19/90 Proposed Action Published 10/00/90 Final Action Published 07/30/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2131; 42 USC 2133; 42 USC 2134; 42 USC 2135; 42 USC 2201; 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 1
l-88
TITLE:
Fracture Toughness and Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Requirements RIN:
3150-A057 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50, Appendices G and H ABSTRACT:
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 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 requirements given in 10 CFR Part 50, 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 fluence.
To monitor the latter, Appendix H contains requirements for a reactor vessel mater W 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 p.opose 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 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 SectionIIIhasbeeninusesInce1972.
The pacing item in the list of proposed amendments is to clarify 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 before the reactor is taken critical following a shutdowen and to require that the primary coolant system be essentially water solid during the test.
The proposed rule would also delete paragraph IV.B of Appendix G, which requires that reactor vessels be designed to permit annealing if they are predicted to undergo embrittlement to 89
s TITLE:
Fracture Toughness and Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Requirements ABSTRACT:
(CONT) specified levels.
This action is needed to conform to the Commission's position as stated in the Supplementary Information for the PTS rule published in 1985.
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.
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 estis.ated that 0.5 staff years of effort over 2 years will be required for the rulemaking.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 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:
Allen L. Hiser, Jr.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3988 l
90 l
TITLE:
- Submitting Applications for the Licensing of Test and Research Reactor Operators Directly to Headquarters RIN:
3150-AD75 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 55 ABSTRACT:
The final rule would amend the Commission's regulations to require that test and research reactor facility applications for operator and senior reactor operator licenses be submitted to the i
responsible Headquarters office.
This action is necessary to improve efficiency and consistency of examination and licensing of test and research reactor operators by having a central office monitor the issuance and renewal of licenses.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 10/00/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5B41 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
David J. Lange Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1031 9I
....._ _E
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 pcstulated radionuclide release and (b) the definition of structures, systems, and components important to safety for which certain de,ign and quality assurance criteria apply.
In order to mea'. the milestones mandated by the Nuclear Waste Policy Ac', of 1982, as amended, and milestones pertaining to DOE'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.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
Public Law 97-425, 42 USC 10101 l
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 92
TITLE:
Personnel Access Authorization Program i
RIN:
3150-AA90 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 73 ABSTRACT:
The Commission has concluded that it is appropriate for each licensee that operates a nuclear power plant to establish an access authorization 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 commit 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 Committee (NUMARC) was submitted as a public comment on The alternative pro.c;eo a voluntary industry this proposed rule.
n commitment to implement an access as:tnorization program at nuclear power plants based upon industry guidelines.
Major provisions of this program include backgrouno investigation, psychological evaluation, and behaviorial observation.
On June 18, 1986, the Commission approved developing a policy statement endorsing industry guidelines as an alternative to the proposed rulemaking.
Commitments to adhere to these guidelines would be formalized through 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 endorsing the NUMARC guidelines.
In the Federal Register notice, the Commission specifically requested public comments as to whether the access authorization program should be a rule or a policy statement.
On April 19, 1989, the Commission 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 Comment Period Ends 05/09/88 93 1
l
t TITLE:
Personnel Access Authorization Program TIME'i ABLE:
(CONT) i Options Paper to EDO (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 EDO 06/18/90 Pevised Final Action to EDO 11/30/90 Final Action to Commission 01/31/91 Final Action Published 03/29/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Sandra Frattali Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3773 i
t i
94 1
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 night 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 9, will be amended to require reactor security guards to qualiry annually in an NRC-approved night firing cour:e with their assigned weapons.
The proposed amendment will 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.
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 301 492-3775 95
l TITLE:
i Day Firing Qualifications and Physical Fitness Programs for Security Personnel at Category I Fuel Cycle Facilities RIN:
3150-A030 CFR CITATION.
l 10 CFR 73, Appendix H ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to require that security personnel 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 speciiied 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.
AdditionallyIcalweaknessesthatwouldadverselyaffecttheircurrent. reg have no phys performance of assigned job duties.
However, no regulatory l
standards exist for assuring that security personnel are physically l
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 include day firing qualification courses in each type of required weapon as well as a standardized physical fitness training course 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 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 tie NRC would be in the area of licensing and inspection activities.
Neither area of rulemaking affects occupational exposure.
96 i
TITLE:
Day Firin.
Qualifications and Physical Fitness Programs for Security ersonnel at Category I Fuel Cycle Facilities TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 03/30/91 Proposed Action to Commission 04/30/91 Proposed Action Published 05/31/91 Final Action Published 08/31/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTNER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
H. Tovmassian Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research j
Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3634 l
i i
97
lq 4
TITLE:
Reinvestigation of Individuals Granted Unescorted Access to Nuclear Power Plants RIN:--
.t 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 i
each licensee who is' authorized to operate a nuclear power-plant
- under Part 50 to submit _ fingerprint cards to the^NRC-for-those-indi',iduals who are permitted unescorted access to a-nuclear power-under 10 CFR 73.57(guards information and who are not exemptedFinge
-facility or to safe b)(2).
of.the individual's criminal history record by the FBI.: Information 1
received from the FBI is reviewed by the licere in order to determine whether further unescorted access tc W facility or to-safeguards information should continue to be granted or.enied.
d The current regulations do not' include.a reinvestigation element.
w In' order:to address the' question of periodic reinvestigation, j
~
s 10 CFR 73.57, " Requirements for Criminal History Checks of Individuals.
j Granted Unescorted Access to a Nuclear Power Facility or Access to-j Safeguards Information by Power Reactor Licensees," would be n
amended. The acendment would require that. licensees who' operate'a
-nuclear power 11 ant submit-fingerprint = cards for applicable l
. personnel:to tie NRC for criminal history _ checks every 5 years.
Authorization for unescorted access would be retained by'an 4
individual l
. individual'pending results of the criminal history check on.that,s finge quo to continue. with no reinvestigation of utility personne1' 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 fingerprint cards through the NRC to the FBI-for criminal
- i history checks. Ths 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 1 full reimbursement to the government.
TIMETABLE:-
Proposed Action Published' Undetermined Final: Action Published Undetermined i
98
+
i
1-TITLE:
Reinvestigation of Individuals Gra.iteit Unescorted Access to Nuclear Power Plants LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL-BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Sandra Frattali Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555
-301 492-3773-
',e O
i k'
4
-7.-
d 99
TITLE:
Material Control and Accounting Requirements for Uranium Enrichment Plants RIN:
3150-AD56 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 74 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Comission'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 operation of l
a gas centrifuge plant that would produce low-enriched uranium for the comercial market.
Such a plant wculd be licensed chiefly under Part 50.
Although the plant would he authorized to produce only low-enriched uranium, th interest of the comon defense and security demands that the NRC regulate the plant so as to assare with highest confidence that no centrifuge machine is used to produce uranium in an enrichme-t 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.
A new S 74.33, Nuclear Material Control-and Accounting for Special Enrichment Plants, will be developed. The new S 74.33 will include Nuclear Material of Low Strategic Significance at Uranium material, control and accountability requirements similar to those now required under S 74.31, together with new requirements to assure that no enrichment facility is used to enrich uranium above a specified limit.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 07/30/90 Proposed Action to Comission (SECY-90-277) 08/09/90 L
Proposed Action Published 11/16/90 L
Final Action Published 07/30/91 l-LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 L
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No 14
?
L i
l00 l~
TITLE:
Material Cortrol and Accounting Requirements for Uranium Enrichment ;-lhnts AGENCY CONTACT:
G. Gundersen Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 205SS 301 492-3803:
1 i
i 4,
'l l
101 1
s TITLE:
Import and Export of, Nuclear Equipment and Material RIN:
3150-AD64 CFR CITATION:
'10 CFR 110 ABSTRACT:
1 The proposed rule would amend the Commission'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 i
license applications and has determined that (1) license applications
.for the export of any quantity of heavy water to Canada do not raise issues that require Commission 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 where no significant proliferation risks are. involved, (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 c
to rulemaking because the amendments to the regulations are necessary to ensure the orderly and efficient administration of s
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,Jand enforce and by expediting the review process for certain kinds of applications.
TIMETABLE:'.
06/22/90 Rulemaking Initiation Date (Division Review)
Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 10/15/90 Proposed. Action Published 01/01/91 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 102
.--. ~ _ _ -. _
TITLE:
Import and Export of Nuclear Equipment and Material 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_
i 301 492-0341
{'
g
!~
i
]
1
\\
s l
l 103
.su.4 a_w m e-amhm m Aheme-m a.J..+e a Jg m as-4...J u mh4eM444.4.e.wwg--
g h a 4, de.o 46n A em J.,
.Am g A A _m 2 J.E 45M-J w
a ah.SM A. A.Le A.Js+4de 6s.m aL N-4 l -
se r
i
' S i
[>
l l
9 I
i.
i.'
l 1
f 1i, w
l l-'. ~..
e-w,-,,,,
(A)PetitionsIncorporatedintoFinalRulesor Petitions Denied Since June 29, 1990
-..-.,-w.-.-wa.---n.,
.n n.~,,
.~. _.-,,
a.-.u
-a,
. =, - -n..
-m a-s
., - -,e.a..m..awa-.------.
I '
i 5.
i 1
i 1'
I I
1.
i J
( '-
u m
m
.-ne--
p e
w s.
w
.e-'
wy-w T
u-et
- - - - > = -
m.,,,,
,e f'
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-50-52 PETITIONER: Marvin' Lewis PART:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL' REGISTER CITATION: August 29,1988(53FR32913)
SUBJECT:
Financiti Qualifications SUPMARY: The petitioner requests that the Commission reinstate financial qualifications as a consideration in the operating license-hearings for electric utilities. The petitioner believes that the financial condition of a utility should be investigated during the licensing hearings. The petitioner also believes-that the current rule requires the assumption of financial adequacy and that this assumption has resulted in several problems that could pose a danger to the public health and safety. This. petition is being denied because it raises no issues that were not previously considered in the rulemaking process that resulted in the Commission's adoption on September 12,1984 (49 FR 35747) of a final rule entitled.
Elimination of Review of Financial Qualification of Electric Utilities in Operating License Review and Hearings for Nuclear Power Plants " and because no new circumstances have arisen to warrant a change in the current regulation.
TIMETABLE: A denial of this petition was published in the Federal Register on August 22,1990(55FR342650).
[
CONTACT: Morton Fleishman Nuclear Regulatory Cmmission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3794 105
1 1
1 l
(B) Petitions for Which a Notice of Denial Has Been Prepared and is Scheduled to be Published in the Federal Register Next Quarter NONE t
l l.
l-i Ii
{'
t L.
a;
..i
k i
l
?
t.
1 i
i, 1
's
~ i 1
1 i
i i
a i
k l
(C)PetitionsIncorporatedintoProposedRules NONE
.,1 c
1 i
+-ua
-a.
s'
- '-=
A=
++AMian
.-,ane-aceA m 6m-m's vno.:
m ae b
&e=-+A
,Aa-s-e&-MM--
=-MA-OhE msa A 2-
"'s.6
&W4As-@ mm Je A-M A e 4-EsG+4 eh, e"^-*
4 M
s k
h k
t L
(
3 i-ih
)
d f3 i
4 P*.
(.(
I tl/
I
.i i
l--
1 L
I (D)PetitionsPendingStaffReview i
i i
- j 1
i 3
I i
I i
i -
- mm a'
W,uA,-%-em-*aa
=a-.
As-,6mmsA^
'-~'s"u@
oA&MJA-an+a.m'me--amman--ae.s A
-An a
2 n.w e mV-, e A1AM -m m m44.a onmri nnama.--a--- ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - -
r l.
l
(
1 1
i i
l l
1
+
4 I
y l
D
PETITION-DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-20-17 PETITIMER:
The Rockefeller University PART:
20 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: October 21, 1988 (53 FR 41342)
Correction published November 1,1988 (53 FR 44014)
SUBJECT:
Disposal' of Animal Tissue Containing Small Amounts of Radioactivity i.
SUPO4ARY:' The petitioner requests that the NRC amend its regulations
. under which a licensee may dispose of animal tissue containing small amounts of radioactivity without regard to its radio-activity by expanding the list of radioactive isotopes for.
which unregulated disposal'is permitted.
Specifically, the 1
. petitioner requests-that the NRC add Sulfur-35, Calcium-45, H
Chromium-51, Iodine-125, and Iodine-131 in concentrations not exceeding 0.01 microcurie /g to the list of radioactive isotopes. set out in 10 CFR 20.306(b).
The petitioner also requests that the NRC make the unregulated disposal of these wastes a matter with which all' jurisdictions.must comply.
1 TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for September 1991..
CONTACT:
S..Klementowicz.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3793 l
1 l
I q
107
l
-l PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-20-18 PETITIONER: The Rockefeller University PART:
20-l OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None i
- FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: October 31,1988(53FR43896)
L
SUBJECT:
' Disposal of Solid Biomedical Waste Containing Small Amounts of Radioactivity J
P
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the NRC amend its regulations to i
permit a licensee to dispose of solid biomedical waste l
~ 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 regulat<ry concern.. The petitioner would then be able to 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 commercial low-level. radioactive waste site.
TIMETABLE:
ResolutionLof the petition is scheduled for September 1991.
L CONTACT:
S. Klementowicz t
Nuclear. Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
1 301 492-3793 i
L 108 w
a
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-20 PETITIONER: GE Stockholders' Alliance PART:
20 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:- 50 FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
February 1, 1989 (54 FR 5089)
SUBJECT:
Injection of Detectable Odor in Emissions of Nuclear Power Plants and Other Nuclear Processes I-
SUMMARY
The petitioner requests that the Commission 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 believes 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 coment period closed April 3,1989.
The NRC will review public comments, prior staff work on this issue, and develop recomendations regarding resolution of the petition.
TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for September 1991.
3 CONTACT:
Catherine Mattsen
-Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office:of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3638
-1 109 1
p L
ls
a PETITION DOCKET NO:
PPN-35-8 l
PETITIONER: Amersham Corporation PART:
35 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
May 5, 1989 (54 FR 19378)
SUBJECT:
Iridium-192 Wire for the Interstitial Treatment of Cancer SlM4ARY: The petitioner requests that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission amend its regulations concerning the medical use of byproduct material to include Iridium-192 wire for interstitial treatment of cancer in the provisions of 10 CFR 35.400 which governs the 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 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 te its license.
TIMETABLE:. A proposed rule entitled, " Iridium-192 Wire for Interstitial Treatment of Cancer (RIN 3150-AD46)," has been developed to 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 Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
.(301) 492-3797 i10 1
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-35-9 PETITIONER:
American College of Nuclear Physicians and the Society of Nuclear Medicine PART:
35 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
30, 33 FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
September 15, 1989 (54 FR 38239)
SUBJECT:
Use of Radiopharmaceuticals SUPMARY:
The petitioners request that the Commission revise its regulations to give cognizance to the appropriate scope of the i
practices 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 i
petitioners, granting of this petition would allow nuclear physicians and nuclear pharmacists to reconstitute non-radio-active kits differently from the method recommended by the manufacturer; allow nuclear physicians and nuclear pharmacists to prepare radiopharmaceuticals whose manufacture and distribution are purposefully not regulated by FDA; and permit I
l:
nuclear physicians to determine appropriate diagnostic and-I therapeutic applications of radiopharmaceuticals, as is their I
professional obligation.
The petitioners are interested in the requested action because, under currut NRC regulations, members of the petitioning organizations believe they cannot appropriately practice their professions.
The petitioners state that authorized user physicians cannot prescribe certain radiopharmaceuticals or 1
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 L
activities that are permitted by the.FDA and the states are not. allowed' under NRC regulations.
l TIMETABLE:
An interim final rule was published in-the Federal Register l-on August 23, 1990 (55 FR 34513), as a partial resolution of the petition (see rulemaking, " Authorization to Prepare Radiopharmaceutical Reagent Kits and Elute Radiopharma-j ceutical Generators; Use of Radiopharmaceuticals for 1:
Therapy" (RIN 3150-AD43) (Part 35)).
The staff is working L
to resolve the remaining issues of the petition.(see L
rulemaking, "Use of Radiopharmaceuticals for Medical l
Research, Use of Biologics Containing Byproduct Material, and Containing Radiopharmaceuticals" (RIN 3150-AD69) i l
(Part 35).-
l 1II l
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-35-9 CONTACT: Anthony Tse Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3797 n2 L
L
PRM-50-20 PETITION DOCCT fiOMBER:
PETITIONER:
Free Environment, Inc., et al.
~
. PART:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
100 FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
May 19, 1977 (42 FR 25785)
SUBJECT:
Reactor Safety Measures SUMARY:
The petitioner requests that the Commission amend Part 50 before proceeding with-the processing of license applications for the Central Iowa Nuclear Project to require that:
(1) all i
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 L
of any operational abnormality, always be present in all nuclear generating stations; and (4) the Central Iowa Nuclear Project 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 4
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 requileants in the Commission's regulations.
The comment period closed July 18, 1977. 'Three comments were received. -The 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 in the Federal Register on February-2, 1978 (43 FR 4466).
A notice of denial for the first two parts of the petition was published April 19, 1978-(43 FR 16556).
TIMETABLE:
The staff is planning to prepare a Federal Register notice which will contain-a denial for the remaining issue (Item 4).
in this petition.
The notice of denial is expected to be submitted to the 500 12/90.
CONTACT:
H. Tovmassian Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3634 113
i PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-50-50 PETITIONER:
Charles Young i
PART:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None
=
FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
August 26, 1988 (53 FR 32624)
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 technical specifications and that requiring a senior operator to follow the technical specifications during
-an emergency enhances plant safety.
b
. TIMETABLE:= Resolution of the petition is scheduled for November 1990.
CONTACT:
Morton R. Fleishman Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Office of' Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3794 U~
t 114
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-50-53 PETITIONER: The Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy PART:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
July 25, 1989 (54 FR 30905)
SUBJECT:
Request for Reopening of ATVS Rulemaking Proceeding SUPNARY: 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 therinal-hydraulic 1
instability of boiling water reactors.
On April 27, 1989, the Director, NRR, responded.to the OCRE request for action in a
-Director's-Decision under 10 CFR 2.206.
In the Director's Decision (DD-89-03), the NRC denied all of the petitioner's L
requests, except for the request to reopen the ATWS rulemaking proceeding, which would be more properly treated as a petition for rulemaking under 10 CFR 2.802.
The petitioner suggested
-that resolution of the ATWS problem depends on measures other than tripping the recirculation pumps to rapidly reduce i
reactivity..In~this regard, the petitioner specifically suggests-the use of an automatic, high-capacity standby liquid l
control system.
In 'a letter fw-i.iie BWR Owner's Group (BWROG), dated 1
September 18, 1989, which transmitted report NE00-31709,
" Average Core Power During.Large Cora Thermal Hydraulic Oscillations in a BWR" the'BWROG concluded that previous ATWS
-evaluations are valid and that existing ATWS provisions and
. actions-are. appropriate.
The staff review of NE00-31709-concluded.that the NEDO analyses, and other analyses performed i
by the BWROG contractors,'.were not sufficient to support their conclusions.
NRC Staff and contractors studies of ATWS scenarios were 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 revealed the need for more detailed studies of the automatic responses-and emergency procedures guidelines (EPG's) used by plant operators.
L I15
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-50-53
SUMMARY
- . (CONT)
The staff requested that the BWROG address the 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 ef fecti'!a maans to contr ol such transients.
The BWROG studies are expected to be ccapleted in January 1991.
The staff will review the BWP0G analysis and determine the adequacy of the resul?.s.
Therefore, the staff considers it prudent to hold it: abeyance, pending their review of the BWROG analysis and information d3scussed above, a response to the petitioners request to reopen the ATWS rulemaking proceedings.
TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for June 1991.
CONTACT:
Robert R. Riggs Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3732 i
1o I16 l'
i
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-50-54 PETITIONER:
Public Citizen PART:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
March 12, 1990 (55 FR 9137)
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 scheuuled for June 1991.
CONTACT:. Joseph Mate Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3795-l
,f '
117
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-50-SS PETITIONER:
Yankee Atomic Electric Company PART:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
May 3, 1990 (55 FR 18608)
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 1
118 1
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER: PRM-60 3 PETITIONER: Department of Energy PART:
60 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS: None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
July 13, 1990 (55 FR 28771) )
August 10, 1990 (55 FR 32639
SUBJECT:
Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Waste
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the Commission amend its regus tions pertaining to the disposal of high-level radioactive wastes in geologic repositories to include a specific dose criterion for design basis accidents. The petitioner believ s this would facilitate the development and licensing of a geologic repository for high-level radioactive waste.
TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for November 1991.
CONTACT: Morton Fleishman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3794 119 m
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER: PRM-61-1 PETITIONER:
Siena Club, North Carolina Chapter PART:
61 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: April 12, 1990 (55 FR 13797);
June 7, 1990 (55 FR 23206)
SUBJECT:
Design and Construction of Zero-Release low-level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility
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 The petitioner states that the regulation is necessary zone.
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 P
120
=
1 s
P (E)PetitionswithDeferredAction NONE L
h 6
~
(
l 1
1,
=
1
Ivec eonw 336 U S. Nucti Aft HIGUL A1084 Y COMMis&.ON
- i. 8,6 PuM1 twWtst M Nad 1907, h
yi BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET m nn
(
rs,e i,anwr.,. o,, v., ie, sci NUREC-0936 7111L% AND butsf at ta Vol. 9. No. 3 NRC Regulatory Agenda j
Quarterly Report 3
oAir atromt evhuswin July - September 1990 l 1990 J
f October j
~~
4 i W 04 Gn ANT NUVBt H l
6 Avinoaisi
,i,pgo,neron, Quarterly l
F. Pt RIOD COVt HL D H=ekaww twes.
July - September 1990 I
I e.e,t,st.unu ma..ons.ANiin i eon e,Aut ANo AuDut a tu =ac.,,.
v.- on., a,- u s n...,.
,w., c--
u o
1 Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services J
- Of fice of Administ ration
'U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nashington, DC 20555 l
9.srONLONING ONGANii AllON - N AME AND AoDH t LS tt,4.c. tre, %mr sh...r. 4, es u.cwe p,. vee **c O====. One.., ne,en u s m.,*, m.m.wo,y conmemma.
ap a
. *ead Same as item 8. above.
- 10. $UPPt t Mt NT Asty Not(3 14 A551H ACI troow.,m., ems
- The NRC Regulatory Agenda is a compilation of all rules on which the NRC has recently cotopleted action or 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.
- u. At y wunDset sen:riuss a.
.u ea, -.<i,
o a m ai.oissiaiewam Unlimited Compilation of_ rules Petitions for rulemaking Unelassifled au.. a n
Unclassified 1b. NUMBL H of FAbt s l6 PRict haC f OHW 3M p 891
NUCLEAR REQU T Y
M2SION
- $[s#UttYYE"
.oe"C WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 PERMT No, 0-47
. 1-atAI.E$
Section 1 - Rules
,,J;g= k.
Action Completed Rules 6! Rylfdg1 1 innlarica
?Q "SM.RJyljticoron avcs Proposed Rules
" 'd G "
oc eosss M.
Advance Notice - Proposed Rulemaking Unpublished Rules Section ll - Petitions for Rulemaking Petitions - Final or Denied Y
Petitions - Scheduled for Publication in the Federal Register Petitions -Incorporated into Proposed Rules Petitions - Pending Petitions - Deferred Action
.,.,