ML20066J105
| ML20066J105 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/31/1991 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0936, NUREG-0936-V09-N04, NUREG-936, NUREG-936-V9-N4, NUDOCS 9102250195 | |
| Download: ML20066J105 (149) | |
Text
-
~
NUREG-0936 Vol. 9, No. 4 XRC Regulatory Agenda Quarterly Report October-December 1990 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Administration
>> nuauq, 8
i 5
l
%,...../
22 g g 910131 0936 R PDR
1 s
AVAILABILITY NOTICE Availability of Reference Matorials Cited in NRC Publications Most documents cited in NRC publications will be avahable frorr one of the following sourCos:
1.
The NRC Public Document Room, 2170 L Stroot, NW, Lower Lovel, Washington, DC 20555' 2.
The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Govemment Printing Office, P.O. Box 37082, 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 publica-tions, it is not intended to be exhaustive.
Referenced documents available for inspection and copying for a fee from the NRC Public Document Room includo NRC correspondence and Internal NRC memorandal NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement bulletins, circulars, information noticos, inspection and investi-gation noticos; Licensoo Event Reports; vendor reports and correspondence; Commission papers; and applicant and licensos documents and correspondence.
The following documents in the NUREG series are available for purchaso 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 Guidos, NRC regula-tions in the Code of Federal Regulations, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission issuances.
Documents available from the National Technical information Service includo NUREG series reports and technical reports prepared by other fodoral agenclos and reports prepared by the Atomic Energy Commission, forerunner agoney to the Nuclear Rogulatory Commission.
Documents available from public and special technical librarios include all open literature items, such as books, journal and ponodical articles, and transactions. Federal Register notices, federal and state logislation, and congressional reports can usually be obtained from those libraries.
Documents such as theses, dissertations, foreign reports and translations, and non NAC conference proceedings are available for purchase from the organization sponsoring the publication cited.
Singlo 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.
I Copies of industry codos and standards used in a substantive manner in the NRC regulatory process are meintelnod at the NRC Library, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, Maryland, and are available thero for reference use by the public. Codes and standards are usually copy-righted and may be purchased from the originating organization or, if they are American National Standards, from the American National Standards Institute,1430 Broadwsy, New York, NY 10018.
o
_--_-a
NUREG-0936 Vol. 9, No. 4 NRC Regulatory Agenda Quarterly Report October-December 1990 Manu.eript Completed: January 1991 Date Published: January 1991 Division of Freedom ofInformatlo : and Publications Services Omce of Adrainistration U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 f
~%,
13.96),,
1
TABLE OP CONTENTS SECTION I - RULES (A) Rules on which final action has been taken since September 28, 1990 Paqo Statement of Organization and General Information; Minor Amenaments (Parts 0, 1).......................................
1*
Interim Procedures for Agency Appellate Review (Part 2).........
2*
Enforcement of Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Federally Assisted Programs (Part 4)..........................
3 Custody and Long-Term Care of Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings Disposal Sites (Part 40)...................
4 Submitting Applications for the Licensing of Test and Research Reactor Operators Directly to Headquarters (Part 55)..........
5 (B) Proposed Rules Procedures Involving the Equal Access to Justice Act:
Implementation (Parts 1, 2)...................................
7 Options and Procedures for Direct Commission Review of Licensing Board Decisions (Part 2)............................
8*
Procedures Applicable to Proceedings for the Issuance of Licenses for the Receipt of High-Level Radioactive Waste at a Geologic Repository (Part 2).............................
9 Revisions to Procedures te Issue Orders (Part 2)................
10 Revisions to Procedures to Issue Orders:
Challenges to Orders that are Made Immediately Effective (Part 2)...........
11 Material Control and Accounting Requirements for Uranium Enrichment Plants (Parts 2, 40, 70, 74).......................
12 Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal (Parts 2, 50, 54)...........
14 Operator's Licenses (Parts 2, 55)...............................
15 Program Freud Civil Remedies Act (Part 13)......................
16 Salary Offset Procedures for Collecting Debts Owed by Federal Employees to the Federal Government (Part 16).................
17 iii
Eage_
Standards for Protection Against Radiation (Part 20)............
18 Disposal of Waste Oil by Incineration from Nuclear Power Plants (Part 20)..............................................
20 Notifications of Incidents (Parts 20, 30, 40, 70)...............
22 Proposed Revisions to the Criteria and Procedures for the Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance and Conditions of Construction Permits (Parts 21, 50)...........................
24 Fitness-for-Duty Programs:
Nuclear Power Plant Personnel (Part 26).....................................................
26 Willful Misconduct by Unlicensed Persons (Parts 30, 40, 50, 60, 61, 70, 72, 110, 150).....................................
27 ASNT Certification of Industrial Radit;raphers (Phase I)
(Part 34).....................................................
2P Basic Quality Assurance Program, Records and Reports of Misadministrations or Events Relating to the Medical Use of Byproduct Material (Part 35)...............................
30 Licenses and Radiation Safety Requirements for Large Irradiators (Part 36).........................................
32 Ensuring tha Effectiveness of Maintenance Programs for Nuclear Power Plants (Part 50)........................................
33 Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against Pressurized Thermal Shock Events (Part 50)....................
35 Emergency Response Data System (Part 50)........................
37 Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors (Part 50)......................................
39 Amendment to 10 CFR 51.51 and 51.52, 7 ables S-3 and S-4, Addition of Radon-222 and Technetita-99 Radiation Values, and Addition of Appendix B,
" Table S-3 Explanatory Analysis" (Part 51)...........................................
41 Elimination of Inconsistencies Between NRC Regulations and EPA HLU Standards (Part 60).......................................
43 7
Minor Amendments to the Physical Protection Requirements (Parts 70, 72, 73, 75)........................................
45 Transportation Regulations:
Compatibility With the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (Part '1)...........
46 iv
l 1
Pace Criteria for an Extraordinary Nuclear Occurrence (Part 140).....
48 Reasserting NRC's Sole Authority for Approving Onsite Low-Level Waste Disposal in Agreement States (Part 150).......
49 NRC Acquisition Regulation (NRCAR) (48 CFR Chapter 20, Parts 1-52).........................................................
50 (C) Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemaking Radioactive Waste Below Regulatory Concern; Generic Rulemaking (Parts 2, 20).................................................
51 Comprehensive Quality Assurance in Medical Use and a Standard of Care (Part 35).............
52 Medical Use of Byproduct Material:
Training and Experience Criteria (Part 35)............................................
53 Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures, Systems, and Components (Part 50)...........
55 License Renewal for Nuclear Power Plants; Scope of Environmental Effects (Part 51)...............................
56 Import and Export of Radioactive Kastes (Part 110)..............
57 (D) Unpublished Rules Revised Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings (Parts 0, 1,
2, 9,
50)........................................
59 Availability of Official Records (Part 2).......................
60 Discrimination on the Basis of Sex (Parts 2, 19)................
62 Revision of Definition of Meeting (Part 9)......................
63 Revision of Specific Exemptions (Part 9)........................
64*
Access Authorization Fee Schedule for Licensee Personnel (Parts 11, 25)................................................
65*
Clarification of Statutory Authority for Purposes of Criminal Enforcement (Parts 19, 20, 21, 25, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 39, 40, 50, 55, 61, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 95, 110, 150).....
66 v
I Eose Residual Radioactivity Criteria for Unrestricted Release of Lands and Structures (Part 20)................................
67 Operations Center Phone Number Change (Parts 20, 50)............
69*
Low-Level Waste Manifest Information and Reporting (Parts 20, 61)................................................
70 Fitness-for-Duty Programs for Category I Fuel Facilities and Shipments (Part 26).......................................
72 Timeliness in Conduct of Decommissioning of Material Facilities (Parts 30, 40, 70, 72).............................
74 Decommissioning Regulations:
Recordheeping and Termination for Decommissioning, Documentation Additions (Parts 30, 40, 50, 70, 72)...................................................
76 Requirements for Possession of Industrial Devices (Part 31).....
78 Restrict Maximum Air Gap Between the Device and the Product for General Licensed Devices (Part 32)........................
79*
Use of Radiopharmaceuticals for Medical Research, Use of 8
Biologics Containing Byproduct Material. and Compounding Radiopharmaceuticals (Part 35)................................
80 Iridium-192 Wire for Interstitial Treatment of Cancer (Part 35).....................................................
81 Emergency Planning Regulations for Part 52 Licensing (Part 50).....................................................
82 Clarification of Emergency Preparedness Regulations (Part 50).....................................................
83 Emergency Telecommunications System Upgrade (Part 50)...........
84 q
Safety Related and Important to Safety in 10 CFR Part 50 (Part 50).....................................................
85 Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants (ASME Code,Section XI, Division 1, Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL)
(Part 50).....................................................
86 Selection, Training and Qualification of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel (Part 50).....................................
88*
Fracture Toughness and Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Requirements (Part 50)........................................
89 vi l
1
Pooc Codes and Standards for Nnclear Power Plants (ASME Code, 1986/1987/1988 Addenda) (Part 50).............................
91 Repository Operations Criteria (Part 60)........................
93 Personnel Access Authorization Program (Part 73)................
94 Night Firing Qualifications for Security Guards at Nuclear Power Plants-(Part 73)........................................
96 Reinvestigation of Individuals Granted Unescorted Access to Nuclear Power Plants (Part 73)................................
97 Day Firing Qualifications and Physical Fitness Programs for Security Personnel at Category I Fuel cycle Facilities (Part 73)..........................................t 99 Import and Exoort of Nuclear Equipment and Material (Part-110)....................................................
101 Fee Schedules for Facilities and Materials Licenses and Annual Fees for Operating Power Reactor Licenses (Parts 170, 171)..............................................
103*
SECTION II - PETITIONS FOR RULEMAKING (A) Petitions incorporated into final rules or petitions denied since September 28, 1990 None (B) Petitions for which a notice of. denial has been prepared and is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register next quarter
?
Charles Young (PRM-50-50),......................................
105 (C) Petitions incorporated into proposed rules None vil
Paae (D) Petitions pending staff review 107 The Rockefeller University (PRM-20-17)........
The Rockefeller University (PRM
'"-18)........
108 GE Stockholders' Alliance (PRM-20-19)...............
109 110 Amersham Corporation (PRM-35-8)............
American College of Nuclear Physicians and the Society of Nuclear Medicine (PRM-35-9)...................................
111 Free Environment, Inc., et al.
(PRM-50-20),.....................
113 The Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy (PRM-50-53)............
114 Public Citizen (PRM-50-54)......................................
116 lankee Atomic Electric Company (PRM-50-55)......................
117 Department of Ene_gy (PRM-60-3).................................
118 States of Washington and Oregon (PRM-60-4)......................
119*
Sierra Club, North Carolina Chapter (PRM-61-1)..................
120 (E) Petitions with deferred action None 9
Viii I
m Preface The Regulatory Kgenda is a quarterly compilation of all rules i
n on which the NRC has recently completed action er han proposed,
?
or is considering action and of all petitions L's: rulemaking that'the NRC has received that are pendisq dispolition.
Oraanization of the Agenda
_The agenda consists of two sections that have been updated through December 31, 1990.
Section I,
" Rules," includes (A) rules on which: final action has been taken since September 28, 19 % :, the closing date of the last NRC Regulatory Agenda; (B) tules published previously as proposed rules. on which the' comrdssion has not taPen final action; (C) rules published as advance notices of proposed rulemaking for which neither a ptcposed 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 September 28, 1990;. '(B) petitions for which a notice of denial has oeen 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 dcforred action.
Yn Section I of the~ agenda, the rules.are ordered from the a
a-
. lowest to the highest part within. Title 10, Chapter I, of the Code ~of-Federal Regulations 1(Title 10).-
If more than one rule i
appears under the same part, the rules are arranged within that 1
. part by-date of mest.recent publication.
If a rule amends multiple parts, the rule is ))sted under the lowest affected
- part.1 In Section'II of the agenda, the petitions.are ordered.
c 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 agendn entry. LThis identification' number will'make it easier-for the.public and agency officials tottrack'the
- publication historyLof regulatory; actions.
-The datesElisted under the heading "Timetabic" for scheduled action by-.the Commission or-the Executive Director for Operations (EDO) on particular. rules or petitionr.'are considered' tentative and are not binding on the Commission or its staff.
They"are included for planning purposes only.
This ix t
,3
...,4m+-.,,
.m.
..m...
Regulatory Agenda is published to provide the public early notice and opportunity to participate in the rulemakirig process.-
However, the NRC may consider or act on any rulemaking proceeding even if it is not incluted in this Regulatory Agenda.
Eglemakinas Approved by the Executive Director for Ooorations
,IEDQl.
The Executive Director for Oparations initiated a procedure for
-the review of the regulations bejng prepared by staff offices that report to him to ensure that staff resources were being allocated to achieve most effectively NRC's regulatory prinrities.
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~ndditional resourcec.
Those unpublished rules wnose further aevelopment 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 Participation in Rulemakina Comments or,any rule in the agenda may be sent to the Secretary of the Comnission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Waehington, DC 20555, Attee> ton:
Docketing and Service Branch.
Comments may also.be hend 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 for which the comment perd nas closed ill be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance cf 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 agenda are available for public-inspection, and copying for a fee, at'the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC, between 7: 45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m.
X
6dditional 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 f Information and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Telephone (301) 492-4268 (persons outside 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, f
i Xi
a.
..s1
.m ug m a -asa,
v.ma_mam a
a m,
,an,,,.
u
,m,__t,._._m.s,sena,a
,r 4 n--
a2M e 4, m, A
,igaMA.A,AA, d
,:-g.M,J
,ax,eb.A,,,
a4
@_a si, xi.m,,,,rpILAAmae-m,,me%uh m ma4,m.m.K s kr f lI '.
l l
I I
i I
I l
I r
1 4
-n~
-m e---,,
..nn-
-,c-~*-
2-
1 (A) Rules on'Which Final Action Has Been Taken i
Since September 28, 1990 i
+
.e j
o
.i'I c
I
l 1
i TITLE:
- Statement of Organization and General Information; Minor Amendments RIN:
3150-A074 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 0; 10 CFR 1 ABSTRACT:
The final rule amends the Conunission's regulations to reflect the establishment of the Office of Inspector General (OlG) by formally removing references to the Office of Inspector and Auditor (01A) from its regulations. The authority and responsibility for 01A functions have been transferred to the OlG.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 11/15/90 55 FR 47740 Final Action Effective 11/15/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SfMLL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Donnie Grimsley Nuclear Regulatory Conmission Office of Administration Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7211 1
l
. T.lTLE :
- Interim procedures for Agency Appellate Review RIN:-
3150-AD77 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2 ABSTRACT:
.The final ruia amends the Commission's regulations by. putting into place a transition plan to handle all appeals from initial decisions of presiding officers.in all formal and informal agency adjudications, and certain other appellate and related matters,-which are filed from October M, 1990, until the effective date of a final rule to be issued pursuant to the Commission's ongoing rulemaking proceeding for. establishing procedures for direct agency appellate review by the Commission. A notice of proposed rulemaking in that proceeding was published on October 24, 1990 (55 FR 42947). The transition' plan implemented by this final rule provides that, with
~
certain exceptions, the Connission, rather than an appeal board, will provide agency appellate review for appellate matters filed in the interim period between October 25, 1990, and the effective date of the final appellate review rule. The Commission review, in this interim-period, will follow existing procedures.
Specific appellate matters which are pending before appeal bosrds on the date of this final rule will be decided by the appeal boards.
1 TIMETABLE:
55 FR 42944-
' Final Action Published 10/24/90 Final Action Effective '10/25/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841-7 EFFECTS ON SMALL-BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
E. Neil lensen
. Nuclear Regulatory Connission Office of t'e General Counsel
. Washington, DC '20555 301 492-1634 2
i
TITLE:Enforcement of Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Federally Assisted Programs RIN:
3150-AC64 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 4 ABSTRACT:
The final rule amends the Commission's regulations concerning enforcement of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, in Federally assisted programs or activities to include a cross-reference to the' Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS).
Because some facilities subject to new construction or alteration requirements under Section 504 are also subject to the Architectural Barriers Act, government-wide reference to UFAS will diminish the possibility that recipients of Federal financial assistance would face conflicting enforcement standards, in addition, reference to UFAS by all Federal funding agencies will reduce potential conflicts when a building is subject to the Section 504 regulations of more than one Federal agency. The U.S. Department of Justice (D0J) is the lead agency in this final cmendment. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has joined D0J and other Federal agencies in this final rule.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 12/19/90 55 FR 52136 Final Action Effective 01/18/91 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 "106 3
TITLE:
CustodyL and Long-Term Care of Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings Disposal: Sites RIN:
'3150-AC56 CFR CITATION:
j 10 CFR 40
-ABSTRACT:
.The final rule amends the Commission's regulations to include a procedure for licensing a 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 establishes 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, TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 10/30/90.55 FR 45591 Final Action Effective 11/29/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42-USC 5841; 42 USC 5842;-42 USC 5846
~
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:-
Mark Haisfield i
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington,.DC 20555 301 492-3877 i
s i
1.
L i
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 amends the Commission's regulations to require that test and research reactor facility applications for operator and senior reactor operator licenses be submitted to the responsible Headquarters office. This amendment improves ef ficiency 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 10/11/90 55 FR 41334 Final Action Effective 11/13/90 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201;-42 USC 5841 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 5
a
4 (B) Proposed Rules If s
(
l7 tI.
'[
l-i
. )
.l t
' i t
l
+!
I.
- g h
i I
l I
I h...-.-
4
TITLE:
l Procedures involving the Equal Access to Justice Act:
Implementation j
Ritt:
y 3150-AA01-CFR CITATION:.
l 10 CFR 1; 10 CFR 2 ABSTRACT:
=i The proposed rule would implement the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA-) by providing for the payment of fees and expenses to
~
certain eligible individuals and businesses that prevail in
-agency adjudications when the agency's position is determined M
-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 l
NRC's established rules of practice. The proposed' rule would further the EAJA's intent to develop government-wide, " uniform" i
agency regulations and would describe NRC procedures and requirements for the filing and disposition of-EAJA a'pplications.
A draft ~ final rule was.sent to the Commission in June 1982,_
l 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).
1 Additionally, in August 1985, the President signed into law, i
Pub
.L. No. 99-80, an enactrient renewing and revising the EAJA l
- af ter its expirationlmder e st4:itory sunset requirement. The-rule is being reevaluated to detemke-the agency adjudicatiom that. fall within the EAJA's coverags TIttETABLE:
Proposed. Action Published 10/28/8F.4b R 53189 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends h/28/B1 Next Action Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
5-USC 504:
EFFECTS ON SMALL: BUSillESS AND OTHER ENT171ES:
No oAGENCY CONTACT:
John Cho Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of,the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1585 7
l l
TITLE:
- 0ptions and Procedures for Direct Conmission Review of Licensing Board Decisions RIN:
3150-AD73 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to provide rules of procedure for direct Commission review of the initial decisions of presiding officers in all formal and informal adjudicatory proceedings. These regulatory changes are necessitated by the Commission's decision to abolish the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel which now provides an intermediate level of. review of initial decisions of presiding officers in Commission adjudications.
The Commissioners, themselves, will not review initial decisions. The two broad alternatives for a new agency appellate review system are mandatory review, in which the Commission will review initial decisions on the merits on the appeal of a party (as appeal boards presently do) or discretionary review, in which the Commission will consider petitions for review and, in its discretion, take or reject review (as the Commission presently does with respect to appeal board decisions).
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/24/90 55 FR 42947 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 12/10/90 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Neil Jensen Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1634 8
TITLE:
Procedures Applicable to Proceedings for the issuance of-Licenses for the Receipt of High-level Radioactive Waste -at a Geologic Repository RIN:
3150-AD27 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2
. ABSTRACT:
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 Commission'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 02/00/91 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 L
9
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 Comission but who are otherwise subject to the Comission'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 hering 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:
Mary E. Wagner Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel
-Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1683 to
TITLE:.
Revisions to Procedures to issue Orders:
Challenges to Orders
'that'are Made Immediately Effective t
RIN:-
3150-AD60 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations governing orders.to provide for the expeditious consideration of challenges to orders that are made immediately effective.
The proposed amendments specifically allow challenges to the immediate effectiveness of an order to be made at the outset of a proceeding and provide procedures for the expedited consideration and disposition of these challenges.
The proposed amendments 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:
L42 USC.2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON.SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
John Cho NuclearoRegulatory Commission' Office of the General Counsel 2ashington, DC 20555 301 49?-1585 11 1
TITLE:Material Control.and Accounting Requirements for Uranium Enrichment Plants RIN:
3150-A056 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2; 10 CFR 40; 10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 74 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to establish material control and accounting requirements for special nuclear material of low strategic significance at uranium enrichment plants, including requirements to detect and prevent enrichment'above a specified maximum. There appears to be serious commercial interest in the construction and operation of a gas centrifuge plant that would produce low-enriched uranium for the commercial market.- Such a plant would be licensed chiefly under Parts 40 and 70. Although the plant would be authorized to produce only low-enriched uranium, the interest of the common defense and security demands that the NRC regulate the plant so as to assure with highest confidence that no centrifuge machine is used to produce. uranium in an enrichment higher than that authorized.
This is,a new and unique problem never before faced by the NRC.
Accordingly, no NRC regulation is explicitly designed to deal with the problem.
A new 6 74.33, Nuclear Material Control and Accounting.for Special Nuclear Material of Low Strategic Significance at Uranium Enrichment Plants, will be deteloped.
The new 6 74.33 will include material control and accountability requirements similar to those now required under G 74.31, together with new requirements to assure i
that.no. enrichment f acility is used to enrich uranium above a specified limit, TIMETABLE:-
Proposed. Action to E00 07/30/90 Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-90-277)08/09/90 Proposed' Action Published 12/17/90 55 FR 51726 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 03/04/91 Final Action Published 09/27/91 u
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND.0THER ENTITIES: No l
I-12
- TITLE:
-Material-Control and Accounting Requirements for Uranium Enrichment. Plants AGENCY CONTACT:
G. Gundersen-'
Nuclear Regulatory Commission-Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3803 i
i i
t l
l.
13
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 cr pursue alternative sources of 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'tne standards of acceptability against which the application will be reviewed.
TIMETABLE:
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 to ACRS/CRGR 03/04/91 Final Action to E00 05/01/91 Final Action to Commission 05/15/91 Final Action Published 06/28/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
George Sege Nuclear Regulatory Commissicn Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3917 14
=
a zTITLE: 1 Operator's Licenses 1 3150-ND5'5 1
1 i
n; '
CFR'CITAT10NL 10-CFR'2;-10 CFR 55:
0 thBSTRACT: -
I
- The' proposed' rule would amend the Commission's regulations to 3
require that compliance with.the' conditions and cut-off levels
.f of a: fitness-for-duty programs.-(10 CFR Part 26) be-a condition of ten operatorilicense or.a' senior-operator; license. :The-proposed.
rule would also.makela conforming modification'to the:Commissi_on's-a
. enforcement policy, Appendix C to;10.CFR Part 2. - This proposed 1
Erule,: initiated in.-response-to a: staff-requirements memorandum-
-l
- dated March 22,51989, would give operators. full;n.otice of the' gravity' ofJ any violation!of ' the; cutof_f :levelsc for substances
.[
described;in Part 26 and would reflect enforcement' sanctions for o
operators wholviolatetthese cutoff' levels..
c
' TIMETABLE:
Proposed' Rule Published 004/17/90-f55 FR.14288.
Proposed ActionLCommentJPeriod' Ends.-07/02/90j H
- Complete L Analysis 3of: Comments, 01/11/91.
.i Final Rule:to EDO:'02/28/91:.
o
. Final-Action Published--Undetermined 9r
' LEGAL AUTHORITY:-
142.USC 2201; 42'USC 5841 J
IEFFECTS-ON SMALLLBUSINESS.AND OTHER ENTITIES:'.No'
~
AGENCY CONTACT:-
David J._Lange.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- 0ffice of: Nuclear. Reactor Regulation
. Washington,JDC 20555 L301 492-3172<
f 4
1 15 1
y wg-
-p g
~
y v-v
~
v e
,s-
+ -,
.-e*
a,e-=
e
<e
TITLE:
Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act RIN:
3150-AD71 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 13 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to implement-the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986. The Act authorizes certain Federal agencies, including the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to impose, through administrative adjudication, civil penalties and assessments against any person who makes, submits, or presents a false, fictitious, or fraudulent claim or written statement to the agency. These regulations would est6blish the procedure the Commission would-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 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 11/24/90 Final Action to Connission (SECY-90-403) 12/14/90 Final Action Published 02/00/91 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 301-492-7535 16
l TITLE:
Salary Offset Procedures for Collecting Debts Owed by Federal Employees to the Federal Government RIN:
3150-AD44 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 16 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to establish collection procedures enabling the NRC to recover certain debts (by deductions from pay) which are owed by Federal employees to the NRC and other Federal agencies. The proposed rule j
is necessary to conform NRC regul:tions to the Debt Collection Act L
of 1982 which requires each agency to establish a salary offset program for the co lection 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 03/00/91 i
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 OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Diane B. Dandois Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Controller Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7558 17
-TITLE:Standards for Protection Against Radiation RIN:
3150-AA38 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule wculd revise Part 20 of the Commission's regulations in its entirety. Radiation protection philosophy and technology have changed markedly since the present Part 20 was promulgated nearly 30 years ago.
Because Part 20 contains the NRC-standards for protection against radiation that are used by all licensees and affects exposures of workers and members of the public, it should be the most basic of the NRC's regulations.
However, because the present Part 20 has become outdated, most radiation protection actions occur through licensing actions independent of Part 20.
A complete revision is necessary to provide better assurance of protection against radiation; establish a clear health protection basis for the: limits; reflect current information on health risk, dosimetry, and radiation-protection practices and experience; provide NRC with a health protection base from which it may consider other regulatory actions taken to protect public health; be consistent with recommendations of world,Jthorities (Internatinnal 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 nvision of the standards. These were rejected as ignoring sc'.:ntific advancements, being unresponsive to international and national guidance, and correcting only some of the recognized pr.oblems with the present Part 20.
Benefits would include updating tne 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 unde standable health-risk base for protection.
The cost of implementing the revision is estimated to be $33 million for all NRC and Agreement State licensees in the initial year and about $8 million in each subsequent year.
This cost does not include any savings which might also be realized by the revision.
18
TITLE:
Standards for Protection Against Radiation TlHETABLE:
ANPRM 03/20/80 45 FR 18023 ANPRM Comment Period Ends 06/18/8C 45 FR 18023 Proposed Action Published 12/20/85 50 FR 51992 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 95/12/86 51 FR 1092 Proposed Action Comment Period Extenced to 10/31/86 Final Action for Division Review 02/15/88 Final Action to Offices for Concurrence 06/30/88 Final Action Package to E00 09/27/88 Final Action to Commission (SECY-88-315) 11/03/88 Revised Final Action to Commission (SECY-89-267) 08/29/89 Revised Backfit Analysis to E00 03/01/90 Fev(sions to Commission (SECY-90-237) 07/05/90 Final Action to E00_ 11/16/9D Final Action to Commission (SECY-90-387) 11/26/90 Commission Vote 12/13/90 Final Action Putilished 02/00/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY: 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-0THER ENTITIES: Yes AGENCY CONTACT:
Harold T. Peterson Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regu'tatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3640 19
-_u-________
___.-_____m____
i TITLE:
Disposal of' Waste Oil-by Incineration from Nuclear Power Plent.s R
l RIN:
3150-AC14-1 f
CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule, which is being initiated in partial response to a petition filed by Edison Electric Institute and Utility Nuclear Waste Management Group (PRM 20-15, dated July 31,1984), would amend NRC
]
regulations to allow onsite incineration of waste oil at nuclear power plants subjei.t to specified conditions. Currently, the enly approved 1
disposal method for low-level, radioactivelysconteminated 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 was+es the ese of alternativedisposalmethodswhicharemorecosteffectIvefroma radiological health and safety standpoint and which conserve the limited disposal capac:ty of low-level waste burial sites.
Increased savings.to both the public and the industry could thereby
' be achieved without imposing additional risk to ti,e puLlic health and safety.
Alternatives to this rulemaking action are to maintain.he states qm or to wait until. the Environmental Protection Agency develops standards on acceptable levels of radioactivity which may be released to the environment on an unrestricted basis.
TIMETABLE:
. Proposed Action to ED0 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 E00 01/25/91
~
Final Action to Conunission - 02/25/91 Final Action Published- 03/25/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2167; 42 USC 2073
'j EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS-AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No 20 l.
\\
l l
TITLE:
Disposal of Waste Oil by Incineration from Nuclear Power Plants AGTNCY CONTACT:
Catherine R. Mattsen Nuclear Regulatory Conmission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3638
(
1 21 N
f I
_._-_________._________________________..____m__._
TITLE:
Notifications of Incidents RIN:
3150-AC91
-CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20; 10 CFR 30; 10 CFR 40; 10 CFR 70 ABSTRACT:
This rulemaking would amend 10 CFR 20.403(a) and (b) to revise the licensees' reporting requirements for material licensees and research and test reactors.
In addition, new sections will be developed and added to Parts 30, 40, and 70.
While10CFR20.403(a) and (b) are reasonably clear in terms of licensee reporting requirements for events involving " exposures" and " releases" of radioactive materials, these sections are not clear concernir.g events involving " loss of operation" and " damage to property."
The staff believes these criteria are not indicative of events that pose a hazard to public health and safety or the environment.
The periodic loss of operation of a facility due to age or normal wear is expected and usually poses no additional hazard to the public or environment.. The.same is true for the cost of repairing damage i
which may be high buause of extenusting 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 IT, 40, and 70. The staff believes the new requirements to these parts are more indicative of potentially significant events affecting the health and safety of the public and the environment.
In addition, the rulemaking also defines "immediate" in actual time, e.g., within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />, for reporting requirements.
.This rulemaking action will revise a current Commission regulation; there is no other appropriate procedure to accommodate the clartfication. This rulemaking activity is considered to be a high priority item by NMSS.
= The health and safety of the public will be better protected because improved reporting requirements will reduce the potential risk of exposure to radiation.
Revising the rep _orting require-ments will also simplify regulatory functions and free the staff
-from unnecessary additional investigation and, at the same time, protect the industry from unnecessary and unexpected fines.
TIMETABLE:
proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 09/13/89 Proposed Action to E00 03/16/90 Proposed Action Published 05/14/90 55 FR 19890
-Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 07/30/90 Final Action to ED0 02/28/91 Final Action Published 04/29/91 22
l TITI.T Notifications of incidents LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMA. BUSINESS AND OTliER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Joseph J. Pete Nuclear Regulstory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3795 d
1 23
\\
TITLE:Proposed Revisions to the Criteria and Procedures f or the Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance and Conditions of Construction Permits RIN:
3150-AA68 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 21; 10 CFR 50 ABST RACT:
The proposed rule would amend Part 21 and $50.55(e), both of which require the reporting of safety defects by opertsting license (OL) holders and construction permit (CP) holders, in addition, Part 21 requires reporting of safety defects by non-licensee vendors. The proposed amendments a re prompted by the TM1 Action Plan Task II.J.4 and NRC staff experience with Part 21 and $50.55(e)
~eporting. The main objectives of the rulemaking effort are:
(1) reduction of duplicate evaluation and reporting of safety defects; (2) establishment of a consistent threshold for safety defect reporting in Part 21 and $50.55(e); (3) establishment of a consistent, uniform content of rcporting under Part 21 and
$50.55(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 750 650.55(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 $50.55(e), these reports have formed the basis for NRC issuance of numerous NRC generic connunications.
The proposed rulemaking will reduce duplicate reporting and evaluation of safety defects which now cxists. The rulemaking will establish a more coherent regulatory framework that is expected to reduce the industry reporting and evaluation burden significantly without any reduction in reported safety defect information.
Alternatives to this approach that were considered ranged from establishment of a single rule for all reporting of safety defects 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 LSO.55(e) are estimated e.t approximately 16 million dollars for industry and 24
T11LE:
Proposed Revisions to the Criteria and Procedures for the Reporting of Defects and Honcompliance 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.
TIMETA8LE:
Proposed initial or ' inn to Conanission 12/16/85 Connission Rejected
. posed Action 10/20/86 Proposed Action to Cunnission (SECY-88-72) 03/12/88 Proposed Action to Commiscion (SECY-88-258) 09/12/88 Revised Proposed Action Published 11/04/88 53 FR 44594 Public Comnent Period Ends 01/03/89 Final Draft Rule Office Concurrence Complete 06/89 Final Draft Rule CRGR Review Complete 07/12/89 Final Draf t Rule to Consnission (SECY-89-246) -08/14/89 Redraft of Final Rule to E00 09/28/90 Redraf t of Final Rule to Connission To be determined by results of OGC, EDO. Conanission action Final Action Published To.be determined by the Connission LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2282; 42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5046 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
William R. Jones Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Analysis and Evaluation of 0)erational Data Waslington, DC 20555 301 492-4442 1
f 25
TITLE:
Fitness-for-Duty Programs:
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 unacceptability of taking action against an individual based solely on preliminary drug test results. The proposed rule would inform licensee management that preliminary test results cannot be used as a basis for management action absent corroborative evidence of impairment or safety hazard.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Actior. Published 08/31/90 55 FR 35648 Proposed Action Convrent Period Ends 10/30/90 Complete Analysis of Comments 12/31/90 Final Rule to EDO- 01/10/91 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 26
TITLE:
Willful Misconduct by Unlicensed Persons 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 willfully causing violations of the Commission's requirements or for other willful misconduct that arises out of activities within the Commission's jurisdiction and places in question the NRC's reasonable assurance that licensed activities will be conducted in a manner that provides adequate protection to the public health and safety. The proposed rule would subject a person who violates the substantive prohibition to enforcement action under existing 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 55 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 Enforcement Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3283 27
l TITLE:
ASNTCertificationofIndustrialRadiographers(Phase 1) t RIN:
3150-AD35 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 34 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Connission'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 j
'(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 )rogram including initial training, periodic retraining, t
-on-tie-job. training, and the means to be used by the licensee to determine the radiographer's knowledge and understanding-of, and ability.to comply with, Connission regulations and licensing a
requirements, and the operating and emergency procedures of the applicant.
The NRC is proposing to permit applicants to affirm..in
~
lieu of submitting descriptions of their initial radiation safety 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 u)on an analysis of' costs and benefits and demonstrated success of tie 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 industrial radiography pose.
r 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 c certification program by -licensees will-not affect licensee training costs since the.ASNT eligibility requirements include documented 28
Ti1LE:ASNT Certification of Industrial Radiographers (Phase 1)
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 to submit a detailed description of a planned radiation safety training and testing program, it is currently estimated that as many as 7,000 radiographers could be involved in certification at an average cost of $350 per radiographer.
The cost to the industry would be approximately $250,000 per year.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 09/15/89 Proposed Action Published 11/09/89 54 FR 47089 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 02/17/90 Final Action to E00 12/31/90 Final Action Published 01/31/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Donald Hellis Nuclear Regulatory Commission Of fice of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3628 29
j TITLE:
4 Basic Quality As'surance Program, Records and Reports of Mi$ administrations 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 adminis.tration 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 proposed amendaent, which is intended to prevent errors in medical use, would primarily affect hospitals and clinics. Modification of reporting and recordkeeping requirements for both diagnostic and therapy events or misadministrations are also proposed in this rulemaking. This amendment would be a matter of compatibility for Agreement States.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/02/87 52 FR 36942 Proposed Action Coment Period Ends 12/01/87 Options paper to Office for Concurrence 05/13/88 Options Paper on QA Rulemaking to EDO 05/26/F8 Revised Options Paper on QA Rulemaking to E00 05/31/88 Option-Paper to Commission (SECY-88-156)06/03/88 SRM 1ssued Directing Re-Proposal of Basic QA Rule 07/12/88 Proposed Action for Division Review 12/05/88 Workshop on-Basi: QA Rule and Draft Regulatory Guide 01/30-31/89 Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 03/29/89 Proposed Action to E00 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 s
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 30 l
TITLE:
i Basic Quality Assurance Program. Records and Reports of Misadministrations or Events Reic'ing to the Medical Use of Byproduct Material EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTillES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
' i Anthony Tse-Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3797-a b
o
.U
-t b
31
= L I
,4
,..m_.
.z
.,m...
l l
l TITLE:Licenses 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 raddoactive 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 Conxnission (SECY-89-249) 08/15/89 Revised Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-90-211) 06/14/90 Proposed Action Published 12/04/90 55 FR 50008 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 03/04/91 Public Meeting 02/12-13/91
?inal Action Published 11/01/91 LEGAL AU"t10RITY:
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 32
TITLE:
Ensuring the Effectiveness of Maintenance Programs for Nuclear Power Plant:,
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 licen:,ce to develop, implement,- and maintain ' maintenance program. - The Commission has further directed the stati by memorandum dated May 23, 1990, to prepare two separate rulemaking pack ges.
Should the Conunission determine that a rule is nece two options will be available for their consider
.The scope of maintenance activities addressed in either version of the final rule will be within the framework of the Conrnission's Policy Statement on Maintenance of Nuc1 car 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 E00 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 10-02/27/89 S3 FR 52716-Final Action to Offices for Concurrence 04/10/89 Final Action to EDO 04/21/89-Final Action to Commission (SECY-89-143) 04/28/S9 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 ED0-05/31/91 Final Action to Commission 06/08/91 Final Action Published- 06/28/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC S841; 42 USC 5842 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No 33
TITLE:
Ensuring the Effectiveness of Maintenance Prograrns for Nuclear Power Plants AGENCY CONTACT:
Robert Riggs Neclear Regu'tatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washingtori. DC 20555 301 492-3732
/
h 34
TITLE:
Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against Pressurized Thermal Shock Events RIN:
3150-AD01 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule revises the Pressurized Thermal Shock (PTS) rule.
published on July 23, 1985, which established a screening criterion, a limit on the degree of radiation enbrittlement of PWR reactor vessel beltline materials beyrnd 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 ther *edicted using the PTS rule. A number of PURs will reach the s
- ning criterion sooner than previously thought, and three plant. 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 probabilitTes 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.
35
TITLE:
fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against Pressurized Thermal Shock Events A8STRACT: (CONT)
Immediate costs to industry will be those required for each utility to update the January 23, 1986, submittal required by the PTS rule, using fluence estimates that take account of flux reduction efforts in the interim and using the new procedure for calculating RT/ PTS.
In addition, three to five plants will need to make the expenditure of an estimated 2.5 million dollars for the plant-specific analysis in the 1990s instead of 10 to 15 years later.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to E00 11/28/89 Proposed Action Published 12/26/89 54 FR 52946 Proposed Action Public Coiament Perlod Ends 03/12/90 Final Action to CRGR 10/24/90 Final Action to EDO 12/21/90 final Action Published 02/21/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2133; 42 USC 2134; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS Of 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 36
1 iTITLE:-
Emergency Response Data System RIN:
3150-AD32 CFR CITATION:
-10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:'
j The' proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations by requiring the implementation of the NRC-approved Emergency Response DataSystem(ERDS)atalllicensednuclearpower. plants. The primary role of the NRC during an emergency at a. licensed nuclear l
power facility is one of monitoring the licensee to assure'that q
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 NRCLrequires-
-l 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 buildingtoassess-thelikelihoodofitsfailure;'(3)the l
radioactivity release rates to-assess the immediacy and degree of 1
publicdanger;-and(4)thedatafromtheplant'smeteorological y
tower to assess the distr.ibution' 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 l
power facilities and a central computer in the NRC Operations-H 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 alanning_ exercises have demonstrated that ERDS; is effective between the NRC Operations Center and affected licensees.
The rule would require that the-licensees provide the requircd I
hardware and software'to transmit the data in-a format specified by-i the NRC. The NRC would require that the'~ licensee activate the q
ERDS as soon.as possible following the-dechration of.an alert
-condition.- Based on a site survey of 80 pucent of licensed 1
facilities, the~ current estimates of licensee costs are $20K-50K 1
for software and;$0-100K for hardware. :The current estimated cost j
to NRC is $2.6 million. The proposed changes to 10 CFR-Part 50 D
will be issued for public comment. The-rulemaking task will be 1
scheduled over a 2-year _ period ending March 1991 and will consume j
l2-3: staff-years of-effort depending on the number and difficulty of a
conflicts to be resolved.
}
)
37 i
i s
TITLE:
Emergency Response Data System TlHETABLE:
Proposed Action to CRGR 06/06/90 Proposed Action to ACRS 06/08/90 Proposed Action to E00 07/09/90 Proposed Action to Conoiission (SECY-90-256) 07/19/90 Proposed Action Published 10/09/90 55 FR 41905 Proposed Action Public Comment Period Ends 12/24/90 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, OC 20555
-301 492-3749-6 38
TITLE:
Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors RIN:
3150-AA86 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50; Appendix J ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would update and revise the 1973 criteria for preoperational and periodic pressure testing for leakage of primary containment boundaries of water-cooled power reactors.
Problems have developed in application and interpretation of the existing rule. These result from changes in testing technology, test criteria, and a relevant national standard that needs to be recognized. The proposed revisions would make the rule current and improve its usefulness.
The revision is urgently needed to resolve continuing conflicts 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 an 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 leak-tight integrity of containment system boundaries under post loss of coolant accident conditions.
The majority of the effort needed by NRC to issue the rule has already been expended.
A detailed analysis of costs, benefits, and occupational exposures is available in the Public Document 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 Proposed Action Com 'nt Period Extended 04/24/87 52 FR 2416 Final Action '- CRGh/ACRS 09/26/90 Final Actit-
'0 05/15/91 Final Action to commission 06/14/91 Final Action Published 07/15/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2133; 42 USC 2134; 42 USC 5841 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 Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3814 40
~
t 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" i"
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 aotential releases of technetium-99 and radon-222, and by updating (otler 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-2351and the maximum level of average fuel irradiation (burnup in megawatt-days of thermal power per metric ton of uranium). -The narrative expir. tion also addresses 1 important fuel cycle impacts and the cumulative upacts 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, i
1982, invalidated the entire Table S-3 rule., The Supreme Court
. reversed this decision on4une 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 rulomaking.was deferred.
Final action ~on the Table S-3' rule was held in abeyance until new values ~for radon-222 'and technetium-99 '
.c could be added:to the table and covered in the narrative explanation.
s 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 i
revised from that published on March 4, 1981-(46 FR 15154).
i 41
--- a.--- - --
TITLE:Amendment to 10 CFR 51.51 and 51.52, Tables S-3 and S-4, Addition of Raden-222 and Technetium-99 Radiation Yalues, and Addition of Appendix 0, " Table S-3 Explanatory Analysis" TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 03/04/81 46 FR 15154 Proposed Action Consnent Period Ends 05/04/81 Proposed Action for Division Review 05/27/88 Proposed Action to EDO Undetermined Proposed Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2011; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 4321; 4E USC 5841; 42 USC 5842 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTilER ENTITIE!: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Stanley Turel Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Huclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3739 42
TITLE:
Elimination of Inconsistencies Between NRC Regulations and EPA HLW Standards RIN:
3150-AC03 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 60 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would eliminate several inconsistencies with the EPA standards to be developed for the disposal of HLW in deep (NWPA) geologic repositories. The Nuc1 car Waste Policy-Act of 1982 directs NRC to promulgate criteria for the licensing of HLW geologic repositories. Section 121 (c) of this act states that the criteria.
for the licensing of HLW geologic repositories must bc 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 climinate 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 inconsistencies 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 r
Anticipated Processes and Events and Unanticipated Processes and-Events," was incorporat-d into this proposed rule on June 19, 1990.
The objective of_ the rulemaking is to improvt._ 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 43
~.
. TITLE:Elimination of Inconsistencies Between NRC Regulations and EPA HLW Standards AGENCY CONTACT:
i Melvin Silberberg/ Clark Prichard Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3810/3884 i
4 1
1' 44
TITLE:
i Minor Amendments to the Physical Protection Requirements RIN:
3150-A003 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 i
to differing interpretations, or in need of clarification. These problems were identified by a systematic review of the agency's safeguards regulations and guidance documents conducted by the SafeguardsInterofficeReviewGroup(SIRG).
In addition, the staff had identified other areas in the regulations where minor changes are warranted..In response to these efforts, specific amendments to the regulations are being proposed.
The proposed changes would:
(1) add definitions for conunon terms not currentl (2) delete action dates that no longer apply; (3)y defined; correct outdated terms and cross references; (4) clarify wording that is susceptible to differing interpretations; (5) correct typographical errors; and (6) make other minor changes.
The alternative to rulemaking would be to allow the status quo to continue. These minst amendments affect the public, industry and the NRC only in so far as they make the regulations easier to understand, implement, and enf orce.
Tlf1ETABLE:
Proposed Action to ED0 06/27/89 Proposed Action Published 08/15/89 54 FR 33570 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 09/29/89 Final Action to E00 Undetermined F;nal Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Stanley P. Turel Nuclear Regulatery Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3739 45
TITLE:Transportation Regulations: Compatibility With the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) l RIN:
3150-AC41 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 1
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The IAEA regulations can be found in I AEA Safety Series No. 6, " Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material," 1985 Edition.
Consistency in transportation regulations throughout the world facilitates the free movement of radioactive materials between countries for medical, research, industrial, and nuclear fuel cycle purposes.
Consistency of transportation regulations throughout the world also contributes to safety by concentrating the efforts of the world's experts on a single set of safety standards and guidance (thoseoftheIAEA)fromwhichindividualcountriescandevelop 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 j
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 00T proposed rule 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 l
Final Action to Commission Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined l
46
TITLE:
Transportation Regulations: Compatibility With the International Atomic Energy Agency (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 AGENCY CONTACT:
Donald R. Hopkins Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3784 Y
t 47
TITLE:Criteria for an Extraordinary fluclear Occurrence RlH:
3150-AB01 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 140 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would revise the criteria for an ex'raordinary nuclear occurrence (ENO) to eliminate the problems that were er. countered 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 Ell 0 criteria are already embodied in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 140. The only way to modify these criteria, as this rule seeks to do, is through rulemaking.
There is no safety impact on public health or safety. The EN0 criteria provide legal waivers of defenses.
Industry (insurers and utilities) claims that a reduction in the Ell 0 criteria could cause increases in insurance premiums. The firal 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 E00 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 3 MALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Harold Peterson Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulator Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3640 48 a
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:
The proposed rule would establish NRC as the sole authority for approving onsite disposal of very low-level waste at all NRC-licensed reactors and at Part'70 facilities.
There is a need to amend i 150.15 to outhorize one agency (the h'C) to egulate all onsite disposal of very low-level w,ste in order r
.to provide a comprehensive regulatory review, to en: tare 'that sufficient records of disposals are retained, to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort, and to provide greater assurance that the site.can be released for_ unrestricted use upon decommissioning.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to E00 06/10/88 Proposed Action Published 08/22/88 53 FR 31880 Proposed Action Conment Period Ends 10/21/88 Final Action Published Undetermined 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 Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555-301 492-3634 e
l 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 unique to the NRC concerning the acquisition of goods and services.
The NRC Acquisition Regulation is necessary to implement and suppicment the government-wide Federal Acquisition Regulation. This action is necessary to ensure that the regulations governing the procurement of goods and services within the NRC satisfy the needs of the agency. The NRC Acquisition Regulation implements the Federal Acquisition Regulation within the agency and includes additional policies, procedures, solicitation provisions, or contract clauses needed to meet specific NRC needs.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/;2/89 54 FR 40420 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 12/01/89 Final Action Published Undetermined e
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 L
50
1.
(C) Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemaking 6
k
)
2
-w e
3
,y---,.
TITLE:
Radio 6ctive Waste Below Regulatory Concern; Generic Rulemaking RIN:
3150-AC35 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2; 10 CFR 20 ABSTRACT:
The advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) sought comments on a proposal to amend NRC regulations to address disposal of radioactive wastes that contain sufficiently low quantities of radionuclides that their disposal does not need to be regulated as radioactive.
The NRC has already published a policy statement providing guidance for filing petitions for rulemaking to exempt individual waste streams (August 29, 1986; 51 FR 30839).
I'. is believed that generic rulemaking could provide a more efficient and effective means of dealing with disposal of wastes below regulatory concern.
Generic rulemakin would supplement the policy statement which was a y
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 connent on several alternative approaches the NRC could take.
The evaluation of public comment together with the results from a proposed research contract will help to determine whether and how NRC should proceed on the matter.
TIMETABLE:
ANPRM 12/02/86 51 FR 43367 ANPRit 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 lieck Nuclear Regulatory Commmission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3737 51
TITLE:
Comprehensive Quality Assurance in Medical Use and a Standard.of Care RIN:
3150-AC42 CFR CITATION:
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 I
rulemaking process.
TIMETABLE:
ANPRM Action Published - 10/02/67-52 FR 36949 ANPRM Comment Period Ends 12/31/87 52 FR 36949 Options Paper to Offices for Concurrence 05/13/88 0ptions Paper on QA Rulemaking to EDO 05/26/88 Revised Options Paper on Rulemaking to E00 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 ON SMALL' BUSINESS:AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No l
AGENCY' CONTACT:
Anthony Tse Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3797 u
l
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) discussed amending Commission 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 misadministration.
The Commission may proceed with rulemaking, assist in the development of national voluntary training standards, or issue a policy r
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 Commission requested cost / benefit comments in the ANPRM, published May 25, 1988.
The contractor study of training,
-accreditatior., and certificatioh programs that are now in place has been completed. The NRC staff has analyzed the comments received in response to the ANPRM and the contractor report.
The staff analysis and. proposed course of a '.ic were provided to the Advisory Committee on Medical Uses of 1sotc s (' MUI) as an agenda item at their meeting on July 10, 1990. The At
.sponded that the information which the staff had gathered does not oopport 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 is currently preparing a Commission Paper recommending that NRC not proceed with rulemaking on this issue at this time.
-TIMETABLE:
A'!PRM 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 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No 53
TITLE:Medical Use of Byproduct Material: Training and Experience Criterie AGENCY CONTACT:-
Larry Camper Nuclear Regulatory Cammission Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3417 r
54
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 rulemaking (ANPRM) would develop regulations requiring enhanced receipt inspection and testing of products purchased for use in nuclear power plant structures, systems, and components. These regulations are believed to be necessary to provide an acceptable level of assurance that products purchased for use in nuclear power plants will perform as expected to protect the public health and safety. This ANPRM was published to solicit public comments on the need for additional regulatory requirements and to obtain an improved understanding of alternatives to regulatory requirements.
TIMETABLE:
ANPRM Published 03/06/89 54 FR 9229 ANPRM Comment Period Ends 07/05/89 Analysis of Cohiments 11/30/89 Proposed Action Published Undetermined 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 1
l
TITLE:
- Plants; Scope of Environmental License Renewal for Nuclear '
Ef f e' cts.
1RIN: __
3150-AD63L CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 51 ABSTRACT:
.The advance _ notice of ' proposed rulemaking ( ANPR$'.) _would amend the Commission's regulations to add provisions cor.cerning the scope of environmental effects which would be addressed by the Cone.ission 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 (Gels). 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 wou_id 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 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 4
impacts may occur, under what circumstances, and their possible level of significance.
Til1ETABLE:
ANPRM to:ED0 5/30/90.
ANPRM to Commission -(SECY-90-208) 06/08/90 ANPRM Published 07/23/90 55 FR 29964 1
ANPRM: Comment Period Ends' 10/22/90, Proposed Action to CRGR 03/04/91 Proposed Action to ED0 04/01/91 Pr.oposed Action to-Commissio1 04/15/91.
Proposed Action Published.05/24/91 Final Action Published 04/18/92 l
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 t
~
' TITLE:-
Import:and: Export of Radioactive Wastes
. RIN..
.i D3150-AD36:
CFR CITATION':
10;CFR 110-1 ABSTRACT:,
LThe advance noticeoof proposed rulemaking-(ANPRM) would consider amendingLthe Commission's regulations by reesamining the existing
! NRC Lregulations for1the import and export of : radioactive wastes, i
(This actiontis necessary.to respond to concerns that international 1
transfers;of radioactive' wastes, in particularLlow-levelcradio-active ; wastes,f may. not be properly contro11e'd.L Various options for '
4 establishing;a Commission policy on.the importzand export of radio-active westes;are being considered. 'The Commission; published this EANPRM-to seekLcomments:from the public, industry, and other: govern-
+: <
lnent: agencies: on Lvarious. regulatory options' and issues developed thus fer. : Thirty-one comments were received on this ANPRM. Theicomments were-received from severaludifferent sources _
iTIMETABLE:1
-w L
EANPRMLAction Published: 02/07/90. 55 FR 4181 j
'ANPRM:Public. Comment Period _ Extended to-04/24/90 03/23/90
- 551FR110786=
. Proposed ActionLPublished-1 Undetermined d
.f t
. LEGAL AUTHORITY::
- 42 USC~2201;;42 USC 5841 EFFECTS 0NLSMALL-BUSINESS AND OTHER EN ITIES:
Undetermined-AGENh: CONTACT::
~
'Morton'Fleishman-
' Nuclear _ Regulatory Commission Officelof-Nuclear Regulatory-Research:
. Washington, DCo20555T
^
'301 492-3794-
)
a 3
57 s
,.--,-..-. u.,
(0) Unpublished Rules e
A, JM _
_as a-@. - --.
_m 6 LS A m mkase,_m.$-
m-s-_,M i.,oAsmas s
m a
3 o
A im.,a.,
,e exx,u,-
emsm g ea_,uu-,em,m n maawa,me nam.n,
_w e
4 I
4 I
I 4
D 1
I l
l l
i i
I i
.m
TITLE:Revised Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings RIN:
3150-AB66 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 0; 10 CFR 1; 10 CFR 2; 10 CFR 9; 10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would shorten and simplify existing Commission procedural rules applicable to domestic licensing proceedings by comprehensively restating, revising and reorganizing the statement of those rules to reflect current practice. The changes in this proposed rule would enable the Commission, directly and through its adjudicatory offices, to render decisions in s more timely f ashion, eliminate the stylistic complexity of the existing rules, and reduce the burden and expense to the parties participating in agency proceedings.
In 1987, the Commission deferred consideration of this proposol, which would have revised the Commission's procedural rules governing the conduct of all adjudicatory proceedings other than export licensing proceedings under 10 CFR Part 110, pending consideration of other, more limited revisions to the rules of practice.
In 1989, former Chairman Zech requested that this proposed rule be updated and re-submitted for re-consideration by the Commission.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 03/00/91 Final Action Published 06/00/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2231; 42 USC 2241; 42 USC 5841; 5 USC 552 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSlHESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Lee S. Dewey Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7787 59
~
. -... - ~.-
-n l{
0
.TITLEh 1
- Availability of-Official Records.
' RIN:
3150-AC07'
.CFR-CITATION:-
10 CFR 2 ~
m
- 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_
. t to have'their'information returned upon request.. This' amendment informs the public_of two.additionalDcircumstances_where information will not be returned to the applicant,_i.e.,;information which has been made available to an advisory committee' or was received.at an
~ady,isory committee: meeting,' and informa. tion that is' subject to a.
{
-pending Freedom of Information Act request..
s
-Additionally,-the_ proposed amendment wou1d add a notice statement to 10 CFR *Part 2 that submitters of documents and -information to.
e the NRC'should be careful in submitting copyrighted works; The
- agency'_in: receiving submittals and' making its normal distr.ibutions routinely photocopies 6mittal1s, makes microfiche of such submittals and ensuresLthat thes:,iche~are distributed to the PDR, LPDRs, all- _
appropriate internal offices, and to the National' Technical Information:
Service Centu. 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-a's theLg' ranting?to the NRC an implied license'to reproduce and distribute according_to normal agency practice.
Naturally, this-
~
- notice does^not
- prevent submittersifrom applying'10'CFR 2.790(b)(.1) procedures tofinformation that contains' trade. secrets or. privileged or confidential-commercial or financial information (proprietary information)and-it_is~ recognized _thatsomeinformationtin-those W
categories may be copyrighted. The. key factor 'is that sit is their
- proprietary information status.that exempts-them from public disclosure and not;their copyright designation. ' Lastly, tFis J
implied license is not applicable to fair use of. copyrighted works
- or the incorporation:by-reference 'of apyrighted works in agency-submittals,- e.g.,- the. referencing of a copyrighted code or standard 11n a-l submittal does not affect the copyright of that standard..
i i"
- A proposal -is 'being prepared to submit to agency staff for comment.
,n i
60 e4 t
l' m,--
TITLE:
Availability of Official Records TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 02/28/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Catherine Holzle Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1560 6I
JTITLE:
Discrimination on the Basis of Sex.
RIN:
t
.3150-AD50 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2; 10 CFR 19 ABSTRACT:-
The final r'ule 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 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.
e TIMETABLE:.
Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SliALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Markley L. Au Nucient Regulatory Commission Office of-Nuclear Regulatory Research-Washington, DC 20555-301-492-3749 62
TITLE:Revision of Definition of Meeting RIN:
3150-AC78 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 9 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would return the definition of " meeting" to its pre-1985 wording.. The proposal is based on a study of comments submitted on an interim final rule published on May 21, 1985 (50 FR 20889) and the-1987 recommendations and report of the American Bar. Association (ABA).
Since the pre-1985 wording of the definition of meeting is fclly adequate to permit the types of non-Sunshine Act discussions that the NRC believes would be useful, the proposal calls for the NRC.to reinstitute its pre-1985 definition of meeting, with.
-the intention of conducting its non-Sunshine Act discussions in accordance with the guidelines recommended by the ABA.
TIMETABLE:
Next Action Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON.SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Peter G. Crane Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301-492-1634 63
TITLE:
- Revision of Specific Exemptions 4
RIN:
3150-A083 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 9 ABSTRACT:
The final rule would amend the Commission's regulations pertaining
-to specific exemptions cited in the NRC's Privacy Act Systems of Records.
This final rule would reflect the addition of the Privacy Act (j)(2) exemption to two NRC Systems of Records and to the regulations that describe these exempt systems of records. These amendments.are necessary so that the regulations clearly link each system of records to the specific exemption (s) of the Privacy Act under which the system is exempt.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGEllCY CONTACT:
Sarah Wigginton Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Administration Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7752 64 I
TITLE:
- Access Authorization Fee Schedule for Licensee Personnel RIN:
3150-A076 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 11; 10 CFR 25 ABSTRACT:
The final rule would amend the Commission's regulations by changing the rate charged to licensees by the NRC for conducting access ra authorization background investigations.
On October 1, 1990, OPM M
increased the rate they charge the NRC for conducting background investigations. The enabling legislation authorizing clearances for licensee personnel under 10 CFR Parts 11 and 25 requires licensees to reimburse the NRC for the costs of such clearances.
Appropriated funds may not be used for this purpose.
NRC must increase the rates charged licensees to cover its increased costs. There is no alternative to rulemakina that will accomplish this objective. The final rule would affect only the approximately 29 licensee or license related facilities who have personnel cleared for access to Special Nuclear Material or classified information.
It will have negligible effect on the general public. Since NRC is already conducting these clearance activities, the final rule will not affect the amount of NRC resources allocated to the program.
. TIMETABLE:
Final Action for Division Review 12/7/90 Office Concurrence on Final Action Completed 12/28/90 Final Action to E00 1/4/91 Final Action Published 2/00/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2165; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2273; 42 USC 5841; E.0.
10865; E.O. 12356 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Duane G. Kidd Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Administration Washington, DC 20555 301 492-4127 65
i cTITLE: -
,A Clarification of Statutory Authority for Purposes of Criminal Enforcement; q
r ERIN:
e
- 3150;AD62 r
CFR CITATION.
i 10 CFR 19 10' CFR 20,10 CFR 21,10 CFR 25, '10 CFR 30,_10 CFR 31, 10'CFR 32, 10 CFR 33, 10 CFR 34, 10 CFR 35, 10 CFR 39,.10.CFR 40, 10.CFR 50,'10 CFR 55,.10 CCR 61, 10 CFR.70,'10 CFR 71, 10 CFR 72,
.10 CFR;73, 10 CFR'74,.10 CFR 75, 10 CFR 95, 10 CFR 110, 10 CFR 150 ABSTRACT:
j' The_ proposed rule would' amend the Commission's regulations by.
revising the authority' citations accompanying some of the regulations sto;more. clearly _ identify _:those violations which, if willfully violated,.
may subject.the' violator to potential criminal penalties. The NRC-has
~
been unable to refer some cases to the Department of Justice (00J)_or-
-the 00J.has had difficulty in prosecuting cases as a result'of'the gaps and ' inconsistencies:in-the. existing authority citations. : The proposed rule ~ would.-_ create -no' new potential -11abil_ities. The proposed rule would
- specify which regulations were issued under subparagraph "b",
"i", or 5
"o".of Section 161:of-the Atomic Energy Act. :These amendments would
- l ensure that -persons'subjectL to:: the Commission's regulations are _put on 3
notice 'as to which _ regulations, if willfully violated, may subject them.
to criminal sanctions pursuant to SectionL223 of the Atomic Energy Act.
.TIttETABLE: -
Proposed Action:to Commission- 03/01/91
-Proposed; Action Published 06/01/91'
. Final Action _. Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42'USC!2201;.42--USC-5841~
' EFFECTS 0N:SilALL BUSINESS:AND OTHER ENTITIES:' No
s AGENCY' CONTACT:
.Geoffrey Cant Huclear. Regulatory Commission =
Office'.of Enforcement --
4 r
L Washington, DC'L20555=
I R
3014:492-3283' o
66
?
L
TITLE:
Residual Radioactivity Criteria for Unrestricted Release of Lands and Structures l-3150-A065 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to codify the basic principles and criteria which would allow residually codaminated lands and structures to be released for W=
unrestricted public use.
The rule would reflect Commission views as defined in the Below Regulatory Concern Policy Statement which was 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 Y
Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities (53 FR 24018) dated June 27, 1988, the need and urgency for guidance with respect to residual contamination criteria was expressed.
At that time, it was anticipated that an interagency working group organized by the Environmental Protection Agency would develop necessary Federal guidance.
- However, in the absence of significant progress by the interagency working group, the 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.
The rule would codify the basic principles and criteria expressed in the 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 health and safety and identify residual radioactivity criteria upon which licensees can confidently develop reasonable and responsible decommissioning plans.
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 67 l
f 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 Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3737
/
i L
4 l
l
(
68
TITLE:
- 0perations Center Phone Number Change RIN:
3150-AD79 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20; 10 CfR 50 ABSTRACT:
The final rule would amend the Commission's regulations to change the current commercial area code telephone number at the NRC Operations 1
Centerfrom(202)to(301). This action is necessary to implement a ' change initiated by the C&P Telephone Company to accommodate the increasing demand for telephone numbers in the metropolitan Washington, DC area.
The amendment will provide the correct commercial telephone number for licci. sees to contact the NRC Operations Center.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action to EDO 12/31/90 Final Action Published 01/10/91 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 69
.~
w 7 title':
Low-Level Waste Manifest Information and Reporting 4
RIN:-
3150-AD33
-l CFR CITATION:
'10 CFR 20; 10 CFR 61 ABSTRACT:
'The-proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to:
(1) improve information contained in manifests accompanying shipments of waste to low-level waste (LLW). disposal _ facilities licensedfunder Part 61; (2) develop a uniform manifest for national:Use; (3)' require that operators of these disposal-facilities-sto're portions of this manifest information in
-onsite computer recordkeeping systems; and (4) reouire that operators' per.iodically 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 greatly complicated by the heterogeneous nature of LLW;-it exists
~
in=a variety of chemical and physical forms and contains roughly.
200 different radionuclides in concentrations-that can range from a few microcuries to several hundred curies per cubic foot.
Each year there are thousands of shipments to LLW disposal sites.
Pursuant to i 20.311, a manifest must accompany each. shipment ~of LLW to a disposal facility. Unfortunately, existi.ng; manifests do not
-describe the' waste'in detail sufficient to ensure compliance with.
7 Part 61 performance objectives.- In addition, NRC's regulations i
computer systems: for storage and manipulation of. shipment: manifest j{
do not require that' disposal site operators develop and operate l
l information. The NRC believes that such-onsite computer systemt are necessary for. safe disposal facility; operation. The NRC also-
-believes that a national data base is needed which contains information on LLW disposed at'all sites.
A rulemaking that = upgrades shipment manifests, provides for a-
= uniform manifest, and requires disposal site computer recordkeeping systems will assure.that technical information-on LLW is available and in a form which can be used for performance assessments, technical analyses, and other activities?and would reduce confusion 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'abi.11ty to perform-safety and environmental assessments, and to monitor compliance with-regulations and license conditions.
70 1
,n....__.-.__-_
__ ~.,._
TITLE:
Low-level Waste Manifest Information and Reporting ABSTRACT:
(CONT)
The rulemaking will help ensure the availability of a complete, detailed national LLW computer data base, operated by DOE or the NRC if necessary, that contains information about waste disposed in all LLW sites, those regulated by NRC as well as by Agreement States.
The rulemaking, through development of a uniform manifest, would also improve safe and expeditious movement of LLW from generators through processors or collectors to disposal facilities.
Emergency accident procedures would be enhanced through use of a single uniform marifest.
We expect tha the rulemaking will slightly increase disposal costs. The rulemaking is a budgeted activity cited in the NRC 5-year plan.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to E00 05/15/91 Proposed Action to Commission 06/03/91 Priposed Action Published 07/19/91 Final Action Published 07/31/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 584'l EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Yes AGENCY CONTACT:
Mark Haisfield/G. W. Roles Nuclear Regulatory Conmission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3877/0595 71
.y.
+
1 i
1 NTLE:-
Fitness-for-Duty Programs for Category 1 Fuel Facilities and j
Shipmentsf I
17 ]
' _RIN:
i 1
2 3150 AD68' a
L
'CFR CITATION:-
-10 CFR:26-7 I ABSTRACT':
The proposed rule would:amendithe Commission's regulations to-include _
~ Category I fuel facilities and Category I shipments in the_ fitness-ifor,-duty programs.. This: action is necessary to ensure fitnessofor -
, -(1) who'have direct access to large quantities.
Lduty of employees:
3 fof :;peciaFnuclear material (SNM);-(2) who are' responsible for the y~:
protection:of the material;'and (3).who transport-the material.--The-1 proposed rule is;expectedito lead.to compatibility with. equivalent =
_00E programs.:
The l central: issue for Category :I-type facilities and shipments-is -
7 the risk ofjthef t or diversion -of high-enriched SNM due to drug-c related causes which,;in. turn, could pose a;significant' risk to ll
'the: health, safety, or security; of ailarge population'., Current
. regulations only cover -nuclear power. plants and need 'to be expanded
- to, include Category 1 f acilities and shipments with requirements
~
reflecting the differences betweenLthe nuclear power plants;andt the Category I f acilitie's and shipments. There is no alternative.to
-rulemaking whichlwould accomplish the objectives of the' rulemaking, 4
iThe rulemaking1will address :the fitness-for-duty; programs as-they-pertai.nf to'.the: type of;f acility or mode of shipment. The rulemaking.
=
will: address: the afollowing aspects of' thf fitness'_for' duty. programs--
s tgeneral; performance' objectives, program elements.and procedures, records.
.a
- andFreports, audits, and enforcement.
4
-:Jhe impact of -the rule on1the _NRC licensing,11nspectio_n, and; enforce-ment" program will;be approximately.1 FTE-per : year.. The NRC resources 1
required:to develop' the1rulemaking are estimated to be 0.5 FTE.per year -
a for42 years. ; The cost -to 1_ndustry wil.1 < include chemical ~ testing.and' foperati g costs.
n TIMETABLE:
. Proposed Action tof E00-05/24/91-1 Proposed-Action to Commissioni-06/07/91-j
. Proposed Action Published 08/19/91-
-l'
-Final. Action Published 06/30/92; LEGAL AUTHORITY:'..
- l.. _
4210SC 2201;142 USC 5841' EFFECTS ONESMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Nr 72
.m
TITLE:
Fitness-for-Duty Programs for Category I fuel facilities and Shipments AGENCY CONTACT:
Stanley Turel Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3739
]
73 1
TITLF:
i Timeliness in Conduct of Decommissioning of Material Facilities RIN:
3150-A066 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 facilities within a fixed period of time after cessation of operations.
Current regulations allow material licensees considerable discretion as to the timing of decontamination and decommissioning. This has allowed some licensees to remain inactive without 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 as their operations evolve. This allows licensees to postpcr.e heavy decommissioning costs by simply continuing suffic(tnt controls, monitoring, and surveillance to meet minimal
,.t safety requirements.
-The proposed rule would require decontamination and decommissioning of materials facilities within a fixed period of time (e.g., 2-3
. years) af ter cessation of operations. This requirement would be accompanied by a provision for the licensee to seek a variance if completion of decontamination or decommissioning within the required times is not technically achievabic or if delaying decontamination or decommissioning would reduce risk to public health and safety or the environment.
The rulemaking will-result in publication of specific criteria for timeliness in the decontamination and decommiseioning of material facilities. This rulemaking will provide a more substantial planning base for the industry and result in timely-decontamination and decorrmissioning of material facilities._ The resulting timely decontamination and decommissioning of materials facilities will reduce the potential r6diological risk to the public and the environment from contaminated materials sites. The rulemaking is not expected to substantially affect licensee costs.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to E00 '02/28/91 Proposed Action to Commission 03/29/91 Proposed Action Published 04/30/91-Finol Action Published 04/30/92 g
74
. 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 Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3764
.1 o
75 l
~
i
?
TITLE:'
Recordkeeping and Termination for Decommissioning Regulations:
4:
Decommiss hning, Documentation Additions RIN:.
3150-AD67 CFR CITAT10ft:
10 CFR 30; 10 CFR 40; 10 (fR 50; 10 CFR 70; 10 u s ALSTRACT:
The proposed rule, in conjunction with the decommissioning rule published on June 27, 1988 (53 FR 24018), would modify the Commission's decommissioning regulationt to make them more specific and more easily implemented.
Current regulations-require recordkeeping provf,sions as well as termination plans
"+ their equivalent to be filed with the Commission at cessation of operations. However, no explicit requirements are specified in current rules pertaining to a listing of the land, structures,.
and equipment of the licensed facility; nor are any explicit requirements s,'ecifiet' nertaining to submittal of an operating history at the time of w aittal of final plans as well as prior to license termination.
1his type of information is important
. to ensure that all features and aspects of the facility and its attendant activities that could have notential 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 relevant features of the license termination process requirements.
- There does' not appear to be any reasonable alternat,ve to rulemaking
~
action.
However, it is. expected that most of the information explicitly. required in the proposed amendments will already, or with i
minimal; effort, be available (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. 14oreover, ensuring that the information is exp1_icitly available should help expedite NRC approval of licensee decommissioning r
activities and may reduce the overall licensee and NRC efforts required-to terminate-a license.
Proposed changes to the regulations will be issued for public
- t comment.
i TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to ACRS 05/30/91 Proposed-Action to CRGR -05/30/91-Proposed Action to-E00--07/30/91 Proposed Action to Commission 08/30/91 Proposed Action Published 09/30/91 Final Action Published 09/30/92 76 I
k
+
-e w+v--wwr--,%
aw-+,,w-cy-,,-r-e,e-------w.,-,-v-<,e-
+
.- w e w c w
-w4v e --v e
v,-
-r-w
. = -
e-e wm -6
I
-TITLE:
Decommissioning Regulations:
Recordkeeping and Termination for Decoraissioning Documentation Additions LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 i
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Yes s
AGENCY CONTACT:
Carl Feldman Nuclear Regulatory Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 192-3883 l
7 L
s 77 iv w
gr
.43
- W 4
wmww+y w
y-wTar
-1 Pe r-Mw-w
-s-tn yw-wwa WW--1wv w
--+'*T*T*
f 1WW-W4 7'W'TT
TITLE:Requirements for Possession of Industrial Devices RIN:
3150-AD34 CfR CITATION:
10 CFR 31 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations for the possession of int 9strial 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 proposeo rule would be th; most efficient method, considering the number of general licenstes ano he number of devices currently in use, for assuring that devices are nct improperly transferred or inadvertantly discarded.
The proposed rule is necessary to avoid unnecessary cadiition exposure to the public that may occur when an improperly discarded device is included in a batch of scrap metal for reproct sing. 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 E00 06/01/90 Revised Proposed Action to EDO 01/31/91 Proposed Action Published 03/29/91 Final Action Published 01/31/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2114; 42 USC 2201 EFFECTS ON S:4ALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: Yes AGENCY CONTACT:
Joseph J. Mate Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3795 78
TITLE:
- Restrict Maximum Air Gap Between the Device and the Product for General Licensed Devices RIN:
3150-AD82 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR.32 ABSTRACT:
The final rule would amend the Commission's regulations to prevent unnecessary personnel radiation exposure from gauging devices containing_ radioactive sources.
These devices are routinely used for measuring material density, level, weight, moisture, and thickness.
Devices with unacceptable air gaps would be controlled under specific' licenses.
This would require licensees to provide more stringent controls over these devices and make licensees-Jubjtet to-routine inspections.
To achieve this goal, 6 32.51, and possibly 5 31.5, would be amended to require specific design criteria or other prescribed methods to prevent personnel access to a radiation field in excess of 10'CFR 20 limits for unrestricted areas.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action to EDO 08/01/91 Final Action to Ccmmission 09/02/91 Final Action Published 11/01/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2073; 42 USC 2093; 42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2232; 4 USC 2233; 42 USC 2273; 42 USC 5842 i
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Undetermined t
AGENCY CONTACT:
Harvey-Scott Nuclear. Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3632 79
TITLE: Use of Radiopharmaceuticals for Medical Research, Use of Biologics Containing Byproduct Material, and Compounding Radiopharmaceuticals RIN:
3150-AD69 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would examine the Connission's regulations related to the compounding of radiopharmaceuticals, the use of biologics 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 deniel 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 l
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841
)
rJFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS'AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Nn j
i AGENCY-CONTACT-Anthony Tse
?
Nuclear Regulatory Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3797 4
l l
80 i
g
TITLE:
leidium-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 Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Anthony N. Tse Nucitar Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
~ Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3797 81 l..
,_.. -.,...... ~,
TITLE5mergency Planning Regulations for Part 52 Licensing RIN:-
3150-AD48 CFR.C!TATION:
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.
TlHETABLE:
Proposed Actien to EDO U3/01/90 Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-90-103) 03/20/90 Proposed Action Published O't/18/91 Final Action Published 09/30/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841-EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINEJS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Michael T. Jamgochian Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3918 82
TITLE:
Clarification of Emergency Preparedness Regulations RIN:
3150-AD40 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations by clarifying the linkage between the need for " reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency" indicated in 5 50.47(a) and 16 planning standards outlined in i 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 Connission dated June 29, 1989.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to CRGR/ACR$ 04/03/91 Proposed Action to ED0 06/25/91 Proposed Action to Commission 07/03/91 Proposed Action Published 09/30/91 Final Action Published 05/15/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTiiER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:-
Michael T. Jamgochian Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3918 83 4
v
~
,,-.--,_s
TlTLE:
Emergency Teleconnunications System Upgrade RIN:
3150-AD39 CFR CITATION:
'0 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 plants and selected fuel l
cycle facilities. The NRC's primary role-in an emergency at a licensed nuclear facility is one of monitoring the licensee to ensure j
that appropriate 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 J
- necessary emergency teleconsnunications functions with sufficient redundancy to ensure availability even under the challenging consnunication conditions that were existing during e nuclear.
emergency.. The licensees will be required to provide the hardware, logistics, operational and maintenance support to implement the ETS upgrade at their sites.
l 1
-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 Consnission Office of Nucicar Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 l
301 492-3749 i
84 I
m-
__m_---_.___-________.m_
l TITLE:
Safety Related and Important to Safety in 10 CFR Part 50 RIN:
3150-AB88 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would clarify in the Commission's regulations the use of the terms "important to safety" and " safety related" by adding definitions of these two terms and of " facility licensing documents" to 10 CFR Part 50 and by discussing how these definitions would be applied in NRC licensing reviews.
Significant issues concerning t1e 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 rulemakingcontainedintheShorehamlicensingdecision(CLI-8t-9, 19NRC1323, June 5,1984).
A position paper requesting approval of the staff proposed l
definitions and additional guioance 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.
L TIMETABLE:
l Proposed Action to Commission 05/29/86 l
Commission Decision on SECY 86-164 Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
l; 42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5842; 42 USC 5846 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
i.
l-
-Owen Gormley l
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3743 85 t
I~
~
l TITLE:
Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants ( ASME Code,Section XI, Division 1, Subsection 1WE and Subsection lWL)
RIN:
3150-AC93
-CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The propost d rule would incorporate by refernce Subsection IWE,
" Requirements for Class MC Components of Liott-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 Societ,y of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code.(ASME CodeJ.
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 l
repair of the reinforced concrete and post tensioning systems of class CC-components.
l l
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 af nuclear power plants age.
If the NRC did not take action to endorse the Subsection IWC and Subsection IHL rules, the NRC position on examination practices for containment structure would have to be established on a case-by-case I
basis and-improved examination practices for steel containment structures might not be implemented. The other alternatives of incoroorating 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 detailtd criteria against which the staff can review any single tubmission.
Adoption of the proposed amendment would permit the use of improved methods for containment inservice inspection.
4 86 l
TITLE:
CodesandStandardsforNuclearPowerPlants(ASMECode,Section XI, Division 1, Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL)
TIMETABLE:
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 87 I
T 7
w--.
w a-w-+
w-we wW w
TITLE:
- Selection, Training and Qualification of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel RIN:
3150-AD80 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to require each applicant and holder of a license to operate a nuclear power plant to establish and use a systems approach in developing training programs for management, supervisory, professional, and technical workers who have an impact on the health and safety of the public. Licensees and applicants would also be required to establish selection and qualification requirements for those personnel. The objectives of the proposed rule are to codify existing industry practices related to personnel selection, training and qualification, and to meet the directives contained in Section 306 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (Pub. L.97-425).
The task is expected to require approximately 2 staff-years of effort.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to CRGR 02/01/91 Proposed Action to ACRS 02/01/91 Proposed Action to EDO 04/01/91 Proposed Action to Commission 04/16/91 Proposed Action Published 07/01/91 Final Action Published 06/30/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 'JSC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Mary Louise Roe Nuclear Regulatory Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3745 88
TITLE:
Fracture Toughness and Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Requirements RIN:
3150-ADB7 CFR CITATION:
I 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 offects 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 material surveillance program, it incorporates ASTM Standard Practice L 185 by reference.
The proposed rule would update the list of editions of E 185 that are incorporated to include the 1990 edition, which is now in the final balloting stages. Another purpose is to change the ASME Code Appendix that is referenced in Appendix G, 10 CFR part 50, from Appendix G of Section 111, the constructi a 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 Section 111 has been in use since 1972.
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 Novem)er 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 i
,-e c
~ ~.. - ;....-,
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 incrcase in staff time to implement tht t.hanges introduced by these proposed amendments is anticipated.
It is l
estimated that 0.5 staff years of effort over 2 years will b-required for the rulemaking.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to ED0 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
\\
f 90
TITLE:
Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants (ASME Code, 1986/1987/
1988 Addenda)
RIN:
3150-AD05 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 111, 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 vessel shell welds and would separate the requirements for inservice testing from those for inservice inspection by placing the require-ments for inservice testing in a separate paragraph.
The ASME Code provides rules for the construction of light-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 crit, la against which the staff could review any single submission, in addition, the proposed rule would require licensees to augment their reactor vessel examination by implementing the expanded reactor vessel shell weld. examinations specified in the 1989 Edition of Section X1 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 propo3eo amendment is scheduled for a period of 7.5 months with an estinated staff effort of 400 p-brs.
-TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Submitted for Division Review 09/27/88 Proposed Action to CRGR 10/09/90 Proposed Action to E00 12/24/90 Proposed Action Published 01/31/91 Final Action Published 12/30/91 91
--,-_,-_.7 w-,,,, -.,
,,_..m
-,,.w-
,..____._m_____
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 CONTACi Gilbert C t! ; anan Nuclear Regulatory Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3848 t
5 1
t
(
l e
92
+-
TITLE:
Repository Operations Criteria RIN:
3150-AD51 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 60 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Conunission's regulations concerning additional preclosure regulatory requirements for high-level waste geologic repositories.
Several issues associated with preclosure regulatory requirements have been raised due to different interpretations of the rulemaking record for 10 CFR Part 60.
These involve:
(a) the lack of clearly prescribed requirements for the establishment of a controlled-use area intended to protect.public health and safety in the event of a postulated radionuclide release and (b) the definition of structures, systems, and components important to safety for which certain design and quality assurance criteria apply.
In order to meet tne milestones mandated by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, and milestones pertaining to DOE's production schedule in the Mission Plan amendments, guidance is needed from NRC on these 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 definiti_on 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 3
EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND CTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Morton Fleishman Nuclear Regulatory Commission-Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3794 93 l..
i TITLE:Personnel Access Authorization Program RIN:
3150 AA90 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 73 ABSTRACT:
The Commission has concluded that it is appropriate for each licen"e that operates a nuclear power plant to establish nn 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 rale on August 1, 1984 (49 FR 30726), that would require an access authorization program at nuclear power plants.
An alternative proposal by)the Nuclear Utility Management and ResourceCommittee(NUMARC was submitted as a public comment on this proposed rule. The alternative aroposed a voluntary industry cemmitment to implement an access autlorization program at nucicar power plants based upon industry guidelines. Major provisions of this program include background 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 (53 FR 7534), 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 wot.ld endorse, with appropriate exceptions, the aaplicable industry guidelines, as an acceptable way of complying wit 1 the rule.
TIMETABLE:
Office Concurrence on Proposed Policy Statement Completed 10/30/87 Proposed Policy Statement / Guidelines to E00 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 94
-~.
TITLE:
Personnel Access Authorization Program TIMETABLE:
(CONT)
OptionsPapertoED0(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 Revised Final Action.to EDO 01/17/91 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 j
- l 95 1
TITLE:Night _ Firing Qualifications for Security Guards at Nuclear Power Plants-RIN:
1 i
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 i
night firing. The only alternative to rulemaking is to retain the current status.
Part 73, Appendix B, Part IV, will be amended to require reactor security guards to qualify annually in an NRC-approved night firing course with their assigned weapons. The proposed amendment will stcndardize 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 i
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 3
5 AGENCY CONTACT:
Sher Bahadur Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 i
301 492-3775 96
TITLE:.
Reinvestigation of Individuals Granted Unescorted Access to Nuclear Power Plants RIN:
3150-AD49 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 73 l
ABSTRACT:
-The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to require periodic updates of FBI fingerprint checks for reinvestigation of individuals granted unescorted access to nuclear power plants or access to safeguards information.
The current regulations require each licensee who is authorized to operate a nuclear power plant i
-under Part 50 to submit fingerprint cards to the NRC for those individuals who are permitted unescorted access to a nuclear power l
facility or to safe under 10 CFR 73.57(guards information and who are not exempted b)(2).
Fingerprints are used to secure a review of the-individual's criminal history record by the FBI.
Information received from the FBI is reviewed by the licensee in order to determine whether further unescorted access to the facility or to safeguards information should continue to be granted or denied.
The current regulations do-not include a ' ' vestigation element.
In order to address the question of periodic reinvestigation, 10 CFR 73.57, " Requirements for Criminal History Checks of Individuals Granted Unescorted Access to a Nuclear Power Facility or Access to Safeguards.Information by Power Reactor Licensees," would be amended.
The amendment would require that licensees who operate a nuclear power plant submit fingerprint cards for applicable personnel to the NRC for criminal history checks every 5 years.
Authorization for unescorted access would'be retained by an individual pending results of the criminal history check on that
+
individual's fingerprints.
The alternative is to allow the status quo to continue, with no reinvestigation of utility personnel required.
This rulemaking will have a minimal impact on the NRC because of the NRC's limited participation in processing the reinvestigations.
The impact on industry will include the cost of fingerprinting and l.
wbmitting fingerprint cards through the NRC to the FBI for criminal l
history checks.
The current regulation requires payment 07 $21 "er investigation, payable by the industry.
It is expected that this rate would also apply for each reinvestigation and would constitute full reimbursement to the government.
i TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published Undetermined 4
Final Action Published Undetermined 97 L
TITLE: Reinvestigation of Individuals Granted Onescorted 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 P
l l
98 t
1
. ~..
s
TITLE:
Day Firing Qualifications and Physical Fitness Programs for Security Personnel at Category i Fuel Cycle Facilities RIN:
i 3150-AD30 CFR CITATION:
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 equivalret for handguns and an NRA or nationally recognized course for semiaatcamatic weapons.
A firing course specified for shotguns is in need of revision.
Recent amendments to Part 73 added a requirement for night firing qualification using specific, designated firing courses.
To ensure uniformity, the current day firing requirements should be compatible.
Additionally, current regulations specify that security personnel have no physical weaknesses that would adversely affect their performance of assigned job duties.
However, no regulatory standards exist for assuring that security personnel are physically fit to perform their duties. Requirements for a physical fitness program and fitness standards at Category I fuel cycle f acilities 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 tr11ning course and fitness standards for security personnel. Alternatives to the rulemaking would be to allow the' status quo to continue.
Scandardization 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 j variety of firing courses is already being done.
Physical fitness training programs would incur moderate costs to the licensees in the area of personnel time and limited physical fitness equipment. The cost to the NRC'would be in the area of licensing and inspection activities.
Neither area of rulemaking affects occupational exposure.
99 m
TITLE:Day Firing Qualifications and Physical Fitness Programs for Security Personnel at Category I Fuel Cycle facilities TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to E00 03/30/91 Proposed Action to Commission 04/30/91 Proposed Action Published 05/31/91 Final Act'an Published 08/31/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No f,GENCY-CONTACT:
H. Tovmassian Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3634 100 l'
.~..
TITLE:
Import and Export of Nuclear Equipment and Material RIN:
3150-AD64 CFP CITATION:
10 CFR 110 ABSTRACT:
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 license applications and hes 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 expec'ited 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) s 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 Trehty, (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 j
(7) make other minor changes.
There is no acceptable alternative to rulemakng because the amendments to the regulations are necessary to ensure the orderly and efficient administration of NRC's import and export responsibilities witNut incurring any national security or proliferation risks. Tne rule should benefit the NRC, industry, and the public by making the regulations easier to understand, implement, and enforce and by expediting the review process for certain kinds of applications.
TitiETABLE:
RulemakingInitiationDate(DivisionReview) 06/22/90 Proposec Action to Offices for Concurrence 02/10/91 Proposed Action Published 04/01/91 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 101 i
i TITLE:
Import and Export of Nuclear Equipment and Naterial EFFECTS ON SilALL BUSINESS AND OTHER EllTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Elaine 0. Hemby tiuclent Regulatory Commission Office of Governmental and Public Affairs Washington, DC 20555 301 492-0341 D
1
\\
1 102
l TITLE:
- Fee Schedules for Facilities and Materials Licenses and Annual fees for Operating Power Reactor Licenses RIN:
3150-AD81 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 170; 10 CFR 171 ABSTRACT:
The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 requires the NRC to collect approximately 100 percent of its budget authority through fees for the next five fiscal years (FY 1991-1995).
The law specifies that annual fees shall be established by rule to recover s
the portion of the NRC budget that is not recovered from appropriations received from the Nuclear Waste Fund and monies recovered through fees assessed under Part 170 for licensing and revised in FY 1991.
This rulemaking effort is required to comply with Pub. L. 101-508. There is no suitable alternative to rulemaking for this action.
TIMETABLE:
Policy Paper to ED0 01/18/91 Proposed Action Published 04/15/91 Final Action Published 08/15/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
(.
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841; Pub. L. 101-508 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSlHESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
C. James Holloway, Jr.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Controller Washington, DC 20555 301 492-4301 i
103
~.___.
I 1
l l
l l
1 i
i l
l l
i l
l l
4 i
l I
L
'ID.
+
TtTIONS l
L
. =.
~
l (A) Pet.uonsincorporatedintoFinalRulesor
-l Petitions Denied-Since September 28, 1990 i
NONE i
f f
= 1 L
h i
l M
l L _ _ _. _ _ __- _ -_ __ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _
.. - = _ - ~ -.. _ ~. -.
(B). Petitions for Which a Notice of Denial.Has Been Prepared and is Scheduled to be Published in the Federal Register Next Quarter t
~5 I'.l; lL l
.t g
y L
=
l l
a m
W 2
...--+._ ~
a--
- aA+
-.fw.m l
l l
i.
n I
i i
t i-l l
r i-a i
I 1
e I
i
- s..
f
-v.-
s PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-50-50 PETITIONER: Charles Young 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 t
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.
TIMETABLE: The staff. plans to publish a notice of denial of this petition for rulemaking in the Federal Register in January 1991.
CONTACT:
Morton R..Fleishman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301'492-3794 i
w f
l l
l 105
)
4 l
(C) Petitions Incorporated into Proposed Rules i
f NONE 1
i i-
4aa-se g-
=a-.myaw4 4Aas.4..
a
.di.
.pm,_esea,.am JeA.
e 4..w,.-
.a A#
w 4
w ae*,4 4.m.,s. awe-w---
d l
i d
1 d'
l 1
I
'l i
1
-1
' 1
)
l i
I l
i I
i P
d l
1 I
I i
i.
i I
.?
's C
n i
i 1
J I
l l
r P
i t. 2,.
t i
(D) Petitions Pending Staff Review i
t i
I I
-t I
\\
+
r,
-m.--
am.s-s..y g,em,,45 asa,a,.
n gm s
.,w,,-
p
.i,II.m
_g a
g,.,u,4 4nAppsa4,,,a4
%se
,sp s
a, s 4
,_.m,sw.
A.
A.
m I
i 1
l l'
I k
I t.
I I
I t
l I
4 9.
h l
l I
s 9
. D'..
i l
l l,
I:
I I
I I
r t'S-W&
'+dFk w99gr--
wev+y--F-ry%.--t 3,.
.,e,-e e
e.eiv.-t
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER: PRM-20-17 PETITIONER: The Rockefeller University FART:
20 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
October 21, 1998 (53 FR 41342)
Correction putlished November 1, 1988 (53FR44014)
SUBJECT:
Disposal of Animal Tissue Containing Small Amounts of Radioactivity
SUMMARY
- 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 petitioner requests that the NRC add Sulfur-35, Calcium-45, Chromium-51, lodine-125, and Iodine-131 in concentrations not excteding 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.
TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for September 1991.
CONTACT:
S. Klementowicz Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulat-y Research 301 492-3793 lu7
i PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-20-18 i
PETITIONER: The Rockefeller University PAU: 20 OTHER /FFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: October 31, 1988 (53 FR 43896)
SUBJECT:
Disposal of Solid Biomedical Waste Containing Small Amounts of Radioactivity
'SUMMAF.Y : The petitioner requests that the NRC amend its regulations to permit a licensee to dispose of solid biomedical waste containing small amounts of radioactivity without regard to its radioactivity. The petitioner requests that the NRC expand the provisions of 10 CFR 20.306 to classify the disposal of wastes such as paper, glass, and plastic trash containing small amounts of Hydrogen-3 and Carbon-14 as below regulatory concern. The' petitioner would then be able to 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 j
wastes at a commercial low-level radioactive waste site.
TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for September 1991.
CONTACT:: S. Klementowicz Nuclear Regulatory Commission 9ffice of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3793 L
l:
l l
l L
108 l
L i-
3 PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-20-19 PETITIONER: GE Stockholders' Alliance PART: 20 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
50 FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
February 1, 1989 (54 FR 5089)
SUBJECi:
Injection of Detectable Odor in Emissions of Nuclear Power Plants and Other Nuclear Processes
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 comment period closed April 3, 1989. The NRC will review public comments, prior staff work on this issue, and develop recommendations regarding resolutior of the petition.
TIMETABLE: Resolution of the petition is scheduled for September 1991.
CONTACT: Catherine Mattsen Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3638 109
~.
,4.
" PETITION DOCKET N0:
PRM-35-8, 1
PETITIONERic Amersham' Corporation
=PART:- 35
.6 0THER AFFECTED PARTS:. None
! FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: May 5,1989 (54 FR 19378)
SUBJECT:
Iridium-192 Wire for the Interstitial Treatment of Cancer SOMMARY: lThe _ 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 1
=oficancer-in.the~provisionsof10'CFR35.400whichgovernsthe
=use.of'sourcesifor-brachytherapy.
Under current NRC_
regulations, a potential user would be, required to request and c
obtain a license amendment before using: Iridium wire =in
-~
' brachytherapy treatments; :The petitioner requests this
- i
. amendment so that each medical use licensee that intends to use11ridium-192' wire for the interstitial treatment of cancer
!)
may do'so'without having-to request and obtain a specific 1
amendment'to'itsilicense..
-I
-TIMETABLE:. A' proposed rule entitled, " Iridium-192 Wire'for Interstitial--
1 Treatment of Cancer (RIN 3150-AC46),'? has been -developed to O
f,,
address this petition.. Action on the proposed rule is.
4-
. axpected.in tM near future pending final resolution-of
. potential. safety.. issues.
1 CONTACT: Anthony Tse -
1 6
Nuclear' Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
- i
_(301)1492-3797?
+
l
'i 1
L i
.f r
110
. u
.; u... _. _
a
~. -
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
SUMMARY
The petitioners request that the Commission revise its regulations to give cognizance to the appropriate scope of the 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 radiopharmaceuticais. According to the petitioners, granting of this petition would allow nuclear physicians and nuclear pharmacists to reconstitute non-radio-active kits differently from the method recomended by the manufacturcr; allow nuclear physicians and nuclear pharmacists to prepare radiopharmaceuticals whose manufecture and distribution art. purposefully not regulated by FDA; and permit nuclehr physicians to determine appropriate diagnostic ar.1 therapeutic applications of radiopharmaceuticals, as is their professional obligation. The petitioners are interestad in the requested action because, under current NRC regulati s, members of the petitioning organizations believe they canno' appropriate'y practice their professions.
The petitioners state that authorized user physicians cannot prescribe certain radiopharmaceuticals or routes of administration for optimal patient care, even though they are permitted to do so by FDA and by their state medical licenses. According to the petitioners, nuclear pharmacists have been disenfranchized as a professional entity because activities that are permitted by the FDA and the states are not allowed under NRC regulations.
TIMETABLE: An interim final rule was-published in the Federal Register 23,(1990 (55 FR 34513), as a partial resolution of on August see rulemaking, " Authorization to Prepare the petition Radiopharmaceutical Reagent Kits and Elute Radiopharma-ceutical Generators; Use of-Radiopharmaceuticals for Therapy" (RIN 3150-AD43) (Part 35)). The staff is working to resolve the remaining issues of the petition (sce rulemaking, "Use of Radiopharmaceuticals for Medical Research, Use of Biologics Containing(Byproduct Material, and Containing Radiopharmaceuticals" RIN 3150-AD69)
(Part35).
l11
e LPETITIPii DOCKET NUMBER: PRM-35-9 t
-CONTACT: Antnony Tse
. Nuclear Regulatory Comission
.0ffice of Nuclear Regulatory Research
~
301 492-3797 i
e F
t
'. f d
e
.j
(
c y
112 j
}.
l r
1 PETITION r1CKET NUMBER:
PRM-50-20 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
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the Commission amend Part 50 before proceeding with the processing of license applications for the Central lowa Nuclear Project to require that:
(1) all nuclear reactors be located below g"ound level; (2) all nuclear reactors be housed in sealed buildings within which permanent heavy vacuums are maintained; (3) a full-time Federal employee, with full authority to order the plant to be shut down in case of any operational abnormality, always be present in all nuclear generating stations; end (4) the Central lowa 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 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 requirements in the Commissior,'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 purpo ws.
A notice of denial for the third part of the petition was publisI,ad 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 Jubmitted to the E00 in March 1991.
CONTACT:
H. Tovmassian Nuclear Regulatory Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3634 113 i
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)
C
SUBJECT:
Request for Reopening of ATWS Rulemaking Proceeding
SUMMARY
The petitioner requests that the NRC reopen the Anticipated Transients Without Scram (ATWS) rulemaking proceeding. This s
request was one portion of a request by the Ohio Citizens for j
Responsible Energy (OCRE) that NRC take a number of actions to relieve alleged undue risks. posed by the thermal-hydraulic instability of boiling water reactors. -0n 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 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 th_e ATWS problem depends on measures other than tripping the recirculation pumps to rapidly reduce reactivity.
In this regard, the petitioner specifically suggests.the use of an automatic, high-capacity standby liquid control system..
In a letter from the BWR Owner's Group (BWROG), dated September 18, 1989, which transmitted report NEDO-31709,
" Average Core Power During Large' Core Thermal Hydraulic Oscillations in a BWR" the BWROG concluded that previous ATWS evaluations are valid and that existing ATWS provisions and actions are.approprinte. The staff review of NED0-31709-concluded that the NED0 analyses, and other analyses performed by'the BWROG contractors, were not sufficient to support their conclusions.
-NRC Staff and contractors studies of.ATWS scenarios'were performed to determine if the potential power' oscillations cuuld be significant enough.to warrmt an ATWS rule change, l
modification of operator actions, or possible equipment /
systems. changes.
Several of the ATWS scenarius revealed the need for more detailed studies of the automatic responses and emergency procedures guidelines (EPG's) used by plant L
operators.
L L
114 i.
L
PETITION 00CyrT NUMBER:
PRM-50-53
SUMMARY
f.
Th st -
i auested that the BWROG address the questions raised by the stcaf relative to operator actions and instrumentation adequacy for an ATWS with oscillations and the timing of the boron injection and water level reduction as offective means to control such transients.
The BWROG studies are expected to be completed in January 1991. The staff will review the BWROG analysis and determine the adequacy of the results.
Therefore, the staff considers it prudent to hold in abeyance, pending their review of the BWROG analysis and information discussed 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 I15
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-50-54 PETITIONER:
Public Citizen PART:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: March 12,1990(55FR9137)
SUBJECT:
Regulation of Independent Power Producers
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the Commission promulgate rules governing the licensing of independent power producers (IPPs) to construct or. operate commercial nuclear power reactors. The petitiuner also raquests that these rules include specific criteria for finaccial 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, i
and/or operating nuclear reactors, TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is on hold pending availability of resources.-
CONTACT: -Joseph Mate Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory'Research 301 492-3795
]
i 116-
l PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-Su-55 l
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 raquests 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 117 m _ _
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER: PRM-60 PETITIONER: Department of Energy PART:
60 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None
. FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
July 13, 1990 (55 FR 28771)
August 10,1990(55FR32639)
SUBJECT:
Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Waste
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the Commission amend its regula-tions pertaining to the disposal of high-level radioactive wai.tes in geologic repositories to include a specific dose criterion for design basis accidents. The petitioner believes this would facilitate the development and licensing of'a geologic repository for high-level radioactive waste.
TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for Ncvember 1991.
CONTACT: Morton Fleishman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3794 118
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER: OPRM-60-4 PETITIONER:
States of Washington and Oregon PART: 60 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: December 17, 1990 (55 FR 51732)
SUBJECT:
Definition of the Term "High-Level Radioactive Waste"
SUMMARY
The petitioner requests the Commission to amend its
!k regulations to revise the definition of the term "high-level radioactive waste" so as to establish a procedural framework
'nd substantive standards by which the Conmission will cetermine whether reprocessing waste, including in particular certain waste stored at the U.S. Department of Energy's site at Handford, Washington, is high-level radioactive waste and therefore subject to the Commission's licensing authority.
TIMETABLE:
Resoluticn of this petition is scheduled for December 1991.
CONTACT:
Clark Prichard 4
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 4-301 492-3884 119
', Ali q
PETI' TION DOCKETJNUMBERi PRM-61-1:
PETITIONER: ' Sierra' Club,LNorth Carolina Chapter
~
\\<,
PART: 61
.0THER-AFFECTED PARTS:
None-L'
. FEDERAL 1 REGISTER. CITATION: (April 112, 1990 (55 FR 13797);
LJuneJ7,1990(55FR-23206) g(_.
SUBJECT:
Design and Construction ~ of Zero-Release Low-Level ~
Radioact'ive_ Waste Disposal Facility
?
SUMMARY
The'. petitioner requests;the' Commission to' adopt a regulation-J to permit the design and-construction of a zero-release-4 L
low-levelf radioactivef waste disposal-f acility:in a1 saturated -
.,7 zone.
The;petitioneristates tnet the regulation is necessary
- in order forsthe General Assembly of1 North Carolina to consider a waiverLof4a; North-Carolina statute which requests-that the.
bottom of aclow-level waste facility be at least seven feet-e
.from'aboveEthe' seasonal.high water table.-
g I
-TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled.for" June 1991.
a
. CONTACT: iM' ark Ha,isf.ield
- Nuclear Regulatory Comaission n
Office of' Nuclear Regulatory. Research
-301'492-3877 L
r i
s t
i 120 s#
a-
.y,
,,,I w
x-,
.,-,-r
-,.m
._,%.n.,
s -
.4m-r
..~..
-~
i i
i (E) Petitions with Deferred Action NONE f
't i
t
-i a
4
-q n
. 3 I
- h
-1
.J s
h 1'
g g
)
y rir s
y 1-.m sme t---+a
1 I
1 4
- nI b
.a NRC Fomu 336
+
U S. NUCLE AR REGUL AToRY Commit $loN
- 1. REPORT NUMBER
'i
!?.71. nat L'"' J'""L'."e.,7 @ ""-
h 320'. m TIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET l
(s= mmwrem on the,,v-w/
- 2. TITLE ANo SueTirLE Vol.
9, No. 4 N
NRC Regulatory Agenda 3
DATE REroRT PUBLISHED i-Quarterly Report October - December 1990 January j 1991 uoam viaa
- 4. FIN oR GR AN T NUMBE R
- b. AUTHOR (S)
- 6. TYPE of REPORT g,.
Quarter 1y
- 1. P E R 100 Coy E R E D (sarAou,e os,,,1 October - December 1990
- 6. PE RFoRMING oRGANIZATloN - N AME AND ADoRESS (if Nac,prwaar 0,rimen. Ovv none sans ese,esne emessI ere or Aepea, U.S Ahnrarer #epuderery conswaamoa. sad assusas emess. # eenwerror, amwm Division of Freedom of Informatior-Publications Services Of fice of Administration 1
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission q
Washington, DC 20555
- 9. ';PoNSoRING ORGANIZATION - NAME AND ADOR ESS (## NRC, tyw h es ecove. #costrumr. a sem sec 0=me otra,er #epea, ua mia*er me,vmwy ce==n woe.
and me.iw edeosst 9
-Nl Same as item 8. above.
1 j
- 10. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE 5 3
I
((
.) -
11, AGSTRACT (200 were er==>
i l
The NRC Regt:'.atory Agenda is a compilation of all rules on which the NRC has proposed or is considering action and all petitions for rulemaking which have been re:eived by the Commission and are pending disposition by the Commission. The Regulatory Agenda is updated and issued each quarter.
li i
'. i o
1
/}N f.
i
(\\<
i )
i s;
j j
j
- 12. K E Y wor OS/oESC R :PioR S (t er.orm er anreses mer enn esast erweener, e sore,sav ene repere.J t2 ava6LAseta ry ar ArtMANY Unlimited-h Compilation of rules il
$4 secumrv c'awncanca Petitions for rulemaking (rn rever
- i Unclassified
't irn av,=,.
Unclasaified b
q 16, NUMBER OF PAGES ie eRiCE NRC f ORM 336 (2 89)
-)
\\ $b I
h U
., s,u-,....- _.:m
.-. u_-,,GGD NUCLEAR REGU TORY COMMISSION
$[AY["rr?tN*AS#*
?
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555
'8 "
q PERMIT No. 3-67 j
1-RULES Section 1 - Rules
_gggusgg,,,
Si a
Action Completed Rules a
O 120555139531 1 1AN187 s
US NRC-0ADM Proposed Rules NE "05$-ku$ EPIC AM B
NS SVCS P-223 i
WASHINGTON OC 20555 r) d l
C Advance Notice - Proposed l
Rulemaking i
[
D' Unpublished Rules s.
j -.
g v-
.ll
- =
PETITIONS Section 11 - Petitions for Rulemaking l-1 e
r Petitions - Final or Denied
,i.
f.
B Petitionu - Scheduled for Publication in the Federal Register Y
Petitions - Incorporated into 1:
Proposed Rules l
t: -
[
Petitions - Periding
[
(.
Petitions - Deferred Action li t.
k.
- - -