ML20077B889
| ML20077B889 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/30/1991 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0936, NUREG-0936-V10-N01, NUREG-936, NUREG-936-V10-N1, NUDOCS 9105150343 | |
| Download: ML20077B889 (156) | |
Text
. - -. -
~.
NUREG-0936 Vol.10, No.1 XRC Regu atory Agenc a Quarterly Report January-March 1991 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Of0cc of Administration f * "'*%,
Ea8"E8Rn '2 0936 R PDR:
l AVAILABILITY NOTICE Availability of Reference Materials Cited in NRC Publications j
Most documents cited in NRC publications will be available from one of the following sources:
1, The NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW, Lower Level, Washington, DC 20555 2.
The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 37082, 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 memoranda; NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement bulletins, circulars,-information notices, inspection and investi-gation notices; Licensee Event Reports; vendor reports and correspondence; Commission papers; and applicant and licensee documents and correspondence.
The following documents in the NUREG series are available for purchase from the GPO Sales I
Program: formal NRC staff and contractor reports, NRC sponsored conference proceed-Ings, and NRC booklets and brochures Also available are Regulatory Guides,- NRC regula-tions in the Code of Federal Regulations, and Nuclear Regulatory Commitsion issuances.
Documents available from the National Technical information Service include NUREG series reports and technical reports prepared by other federal agencies and reports prepared by.
the Atomic Energy Commission, forerunner agency to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Documents available from public and special technical librarios include all open literature items, such as books, Journal and periodical articles, and transactions. Federal Register notices, federal and state legislation, and congressional reports can usually be obtained from those libraries.
Documents such as theses, dissertations, foreign reports and translations, and non-NRC conference proceedings are available for purchase from the organization sponsoring the publication cited.
Single copies of NRC draft reports are available free, to the extent of_ supply, upon written request to the Office of Information Resources Management, Distribution Section, U.S.
-Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
Copies of industry codes and standards used in a substantive manner in the NRC regulatory.
process are maintained at the NRC Library, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, Maryland, and are _available thoro for reference use by the public. Codes and standards are usually copy-righted and may be purchased from the originating organization or, if they are American National Standards, from the American National Standards institute,1430 Broadway, Now York, NY 10018.
i
NUREG JJ936 Vol.10, No.1 NRC Regu atory Agenda Quarterly Report January-March 1991 Manuscript Completed: April 1991 Date Published: April 1991 Division of Weedom ofInformation and Publications Services Omce of Administration U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
,f"' *%,
1 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I - RULES (A) Rules on which final action has been taken since December 31, 1990 RA9e Procedures Applicable to Proceedings for the Issuance of Licenses for the Receipt of High-Level Radioactive Waste at a Geologic Repository (Part 2).............................
1 Assistance to Prospective Petitioners (Part 2)..................
2*
Access. Authorization Fee Schedule for Licensee Personnel (Parts 11, 25)................................................
3 Operations Center Area Code Telephone Number Change (Parts 20, 50)................................................
4 ASNT Certification of Industrial Radiographers (Phase I)
(Part 34).........................................
5 (B) Proposed Rules Procedures Involving the Equal-Access to Justice Act:
Implementation (Parts 1, 2)...................................
7 Revisions to Procedures to Issue Orders (Part 2)................
8 Revisions to Procedures to Issue Orders:
Challenges to
' Orders that.are Made Immediately Effective (Part 2)...........
9 Options and Procedures-for Direct Commission Review of Licensing Board Decisions (Part 2)............................
10 Operator's Licenses (Parts 2, 55)...............................
11 Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal (Parts 2, 50, 54)...........
12 Material Control and Accounting Requirements for Uranium Enrichment Facilities Producing Special Nuclear Material of Low Strategic Significance (Parts 2, 40, 70, 74)...........
13 Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act-(Part 13)......................
15 Salary offset Procedures for Collecting Debts Owed by Federal Employees to the Federal Government (Part 16).................
16 Licenses and Radiation Safety Requirements for Large Irradiators-(Parts 19, 20, 21, 30, 36, 40, 51, 70, 170).......
17 lii
.. ~.
Pace TStandards for; Protection Against-Radiation-(Part 20.)............
19
~
Disposal!of Waste oil by Incineration from Nuclear Power Plants;(Part 20)...................-.......................-....
21-Notifications of Incidents (Parts 20, 30,-40,-70).....-........-...
23
/ Proposed Revisions to-the Criteria and Procedures for the Reporting-of Defectstand Noncompliance and-Conditions of Construction Permits (Parts 21, 50)...................-.......-.
25 l
Fitness-for-Duty Programs:. Nuclear Power Plant Personnel (Part 26)........................_.............................._
27 Willful' Misconduct by Unlicensed Persons (Parts 30, 40, 50, 60,-61, 70, 72, 110,-150)...............-.......................
28 Basic Quality Assurance Program, Records-and Reports of Misadministrations or-' Events-Relating to the Medical Use
. 29 of. Byproduct Material (Part 35)..-,.............................
IFracture ToughnessLRequirements for-Protection Against
~
~
> Pressurized 1 Thermal Shock Events-(Part.50).....................
31-L nsuring:the Effectiveness of Maintenance Programs for. Nuclear E
Power; Plants (Part-50).........................................
33-Emergency Response Data: System (Part 50).....,......-.............
35 I
Codes and Standards'for. Nuclear Power Plants (ASME Code, l1986/1987/1988_-Addenda, 1989 Edition): (Part 50).......,........-
37 j
Primary Reactor; Containment Leakage' Testing for Water-Cooled _
PowerLReactorsL(Part 50).....-..................................-
39' Amendment ~to-10 CFR 51.511and-51.52,oTables S-3 and'S-4,1
- (
l Addition'ofLRadon-222 and. Technetium-99 Radiation Values,_
and1 Addition of1 Appendix B,- " Table.S-3 Explanatory An'alysis" (Part-51)...........................................
41
- Elimination ofEInconsistencies Between NRC_ Regulations and EPA
'HLW Standards (Part7.60)...........
1
'43 1 Minor Amendments to-the Physical Protection Requirements
- ( Pa r t s ' 7 0 ',.7 2, _- 7 3,. 7 5 )................... -....................... - 45 l
Transportation Regulations:
Compatibility-With the t
l
- International Atomic Energy. Agency (IAEA)-(Part 71)...........
46 Criteria for anLExtraordinary Nuclear Occurrence (Part 140).....
48 IV
( --
1.
=-
Pace 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 Wactes (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 Reinvestigation Program for Licensee Personnel (Parts 11, 25).......................................
65*
Clarification of Statutory Authority for Purposes of Criminal Enforcement (Parts 19, 20, 21, 25, 26, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 39, 40, 50, 55, 61, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 95, 110, 150)..........................................................
67 V
Pace Change in Commercial Telephone Number for Region V (Parts 20, 21, 73)............................................
68*
Residual Radioactivity Criteria for Unrestricted Release of Lands and Structures (Part 20)................................
69 Low-Level Waste Manifest Information and Reporting (Parts 20, 61)................................................
71 Fitness-for-Duty Programs for Category I Fuel Facilities and Shipments (Part 26).......................................
73 Decommissioning Regulations:
Recordkeeping and Termination for Decommissioning, Documentation Additions (Parts 30, 40, 50, 70, 72)...................................................
75 Timeliness in Conduct of Lecommissioning of Material Facilities (Parts 30, 40, 70, 72).............................
77 Requirements for Possession of Industrial Devices (Part 31).....
79 Restrict Maximum-Air Gap Between the Device and the Product for General Licensed Devices (Part 32)........................
80 Iridium-192 Wire for Interstitial Treatment of Cancer (Part 35)......................................................
81 Use of Radiopharmaceuticals.for Medical Research, Use of Biologics Containing Byproduct Material, and Compounding Radiopharmaceuticals (Part 35)................................
82
-Uranium Enrichment Regulations (Parts 40, 50, 51, 70, 75, 140, 150, 170)................................................
83*
Training and Qualification of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel
.(Part 50).....................................................
84 Safety Related and Important to Safety in 10 CFR Part 50 (Part 50).....................................................
85
-Fracture Toughness and Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Requirements (Part 50)........................................
86 Change to Part 50 to Update Source Term and Replace Dose Calculation (Part 50).........................................
88*
Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants (ASME Code, Section-XI, Division 1, Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL)
(Part 50)......................................................
90 Clarification of Emergency Preparedness Regulations (Part 50)...
92 vi
Page Emergency Telecommunications System Upgrado (Part 50)...........
93 Emergency Planning Regulations for Part 52 Licensing (Part'50).....................................................
94 Change to Part 100 to Add Site Critoria, Update Appendix A and Remove Dose Calculations; Interim Change to Part 50 to Add Source Term and Dose Calculations (Parts 50, 100).........
95*
Repository Operations Criteria (Part 60)........................
97 Fee Schedules for Facilities and Materials Licenses, Transportation. Package Suppliers, and Annual Fees for i
Operating Power Reactor Licenses (Parts 71, 170, 171).........
98 Personnel Access Authorization Program (Part 73)................
99 Night Firing Qualifications for Security Guards at Nuclear Power Plants ~(Part 73)........................................
101 Reinvestigation of Individuals Granted Unescorted Access to Nuclear Power Plants (Part 73)................................
102 Day Firing Qualifications and Physical Fitness Programs for Security Personnel at Category I. Fuel Cycle Facilities (Part'73).....................................................
104
-Seismic and Geological Siting Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants ~(Part 100).............................................
106*
Import and Export of Nuclear Equipment and Material (Part-110)....................................................
107 SECTION II - PETITIONS FOR RULEMAKING (A) Petitions incorporated into final rules or retitions denied since December 31, 1990 Charles Young (PRM-50-50).......................................
109 (D) Petitions for which a notice of denial has been prepared and is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register next quarter None vil
EASE (C) Petitions incorporated into proposed rules None (D) Petitions pending staff review The Rockefeller University (PRM-20-17)..........................
111 The Rockefeller University-(PRM-20-18)..........................
112 GE Stockholders' Alliance (PRM-20-19)...........................
113 Amersham Corporation (PRM-35-8).................................
114 American College of Nuclear Physicians and the Society of Nuclear Medicine (PRM-35-9)...................................
115 Free Environment, Inc., et al.
(PRM-50-20)......................
117 The Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy (PRM-50-53)............
318 Public1 Citizen (PRM-50-54)......................................
120 Yankee Atomic Electric Company (PRM-50-55)......................
123
'i Department of Energy (PRM-60-3).................................
122 States of Washington and Oregon (PRM-60-4)......................
123 Sierra Club, North Carolina Chapter (PRM-61-1)..................
124
-Nuclear Control Institute and-the Committee to Bridge the Gap (PRM-73-9)............................................
125*
(E) Petitions with_ deferred action None Viii
Preface The Regulatory Agenda is a quarterly compilation of all rules on which the NRC has recently completed action or has proposed, or is considering action and of all petitions for rulemaking that the NRC has received that are pending disposition.
Oraanization of the Acenda The agenda consists of two sectior.s that have been updated through March 29, 1991.
Section I,
" Rules," includes (A) rules on which final action has been taken since December 31, 1990, the closing date of the last NRC Regulatory Agenda; (B) rules published previously as proposed rules on which the Commission has not taken final action; (C) rules published as advance notices of proposed rulemaking for which neither a proposed nor final rule has been issued; and (D) unpublished rules on which the NRC expects to take action.
Section II, " Petitions for Rulemaking," includes (A) petitions denied or incorporated into final rules since December 31, 1990; (B) petitions for which a notice of denial has been prepared and is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register next quarter; (C) petitions incorporated into proposed rules; (D) petitions pending staff review, and (E) petitions with deferred action, In Section I of the agenda, the rules are ordered from the lowest to the highest part within Title 10, Chapter I, of the Code of Federal Regulations (Title 10).
If more than one rule appears under.the same part, the rules are arranged within that part by date of most recent publication.
If a rule-amends multiple parts, the rule is listed under the lowest affected part.
In-Section II of the agenda, the petitions are ordered from the lowest to the highest part of Title 10 and are identified with a petition for rulemaking (PRM) number.
If more than one petition appears'under the same CFR part, the petitions are arranged by PRM numbers in consecutive order within that part of Title 10.
A Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) has been added to each rulemaking agenda entry.
This identification number will make it easier for the public and agency officials to track the publication history of regulatory actions.
1 The dates listed under the heading " Timetable" for scheduled j.
action by the Commission or the Executive Director for Operations (EDO) on particular rules or petitions are considered tentative and are not binding on the Commission or its staff.
They are included for planning purposes only.
This I
ix
Regulatory Agenda is published to provide the public carly
~
notice and opportunity to participate in the rulemaking process.
However, the NRC may consider or act on any rulemaking proceeding even if it is not included in this Regulatory Agenda.
Rulemakinas Approved by the Executive Director for Operations
_(EDO)
The Executive Director for Operations initiated a procedure for the review of the regulations being prepared by staff offices that report to him to ensure that staff resources were-being allocated to achieve most effectively NRC's regulatory priorities.
This procedure requires EDO hpproval before staff resources may be expended on the development of any new rulemaking.
Furthermore, all existing rules must receive EDO approval prior to the commitment of additional recources.
Those unpublished rules whose further development has been terminated will be noted in this edition of the agenda and deleted from subsequent editions.
Rules whose termination was directed subsequent to publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking will be removed from the agenda after publication of a notice of withdrawal.
Rules and Petitions for Rulemaking that appear on the agenda for the first time are identified by an asterisk (*).
Public Particination in Rulemaking Comments on any rule in the agenda may be sent to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention:
Docketing and Service Branch.
Comments may also be hand delivered to One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,_ Maryland, between 7:30 a.m.
and 4:15 p.m.,
Federal workdays.
Comments received on rules for which the comment period has closed will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given except as to comments received on or before the closure _ dates specified in the agenda.
The agenda and any comments received on any rule listed in the 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 i
_ ~. _
Additional Rulemakina Information For further information concerning NRC rulemaking procedures or the status of any rule listed in this agenda, contact Betty Golden, Regulations Specialist, Regulatory Publications Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 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.
4 Xi
wm-aw unswmssvn.
- mew, w
,-r
-m an.
\\ ss-.m m maa s-
=
m s s. 2a.a.
9--smeA6..--*.mM-g m-w 4 Ag a ---
MMaa Mu Ao 6A4 m-Awwo MA Mws 4 AM, _.4 6M M,hib J,at e & a.h4 A w---
m -,4 W,6s n n Nasa a 4,,-
L ua nmam.a l
l I
i j
i, h
i e
a
(A)RulesonWhichFinalActionHasBeenTaken Since December 31, 1990 f
a
.gAaJA,-
^-_.44%LM a Jae3.4.4.e.4 A=wMema4# -4 m.m Am m a a m,.ea mm..we
-- m-mar.m s, m mm ae.m um m en,. emeaw.m.4 a em %_-w ma-mi.e,r
,,.,m,,
,,m_au-,,
a 4
1 l
0 4
l.
b h,.
I e
d l.
4 I
b I
-(
i d
d d,
I
?
.l, I
i a
4 f
4!-
TITLE:
Procedures Applicable to Proceedings for the Issuance of Licenses for the Receipt of High-Level Radioactive Waste 6t e Geologic Repository RIN:
3150-ADF7 CFR CITATION:
The final rule accnds the commission's regulations governing the licensing proceeding on the disposal of high-level radioactive waste at a geclogic repository (ItLW proceeding).
The revisions are necessary to facilitate the Commission's ebility to comply with the schedule for the Cerrmission's decision on the construction authori-zation 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 final rule est6blishes a new standard for the admission of initiai ccntentions, defines " late contenticrs" as any certention proposed after the initici contentions were submitted, establishes a compulsor) Feering schedule, and eluainates sua sponte
~~~
~
review by the Commission's adjudicatory board.
TIMETAELE:
Final Action Published 02/2f/91 56 FR 7787 Final Actier. Effective 03/28/91 LEGAL AlnHORITY:
42 tiSC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SliALL BUSINESS AND OTitER EllTITIES: fic AGLt!CY CONTACT:
Kathryn Winslerg Nuclocr Regulatory Ccrimission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 001 492-1637 1
TITLE:* Assistance to Prospective Petitiontrs RIN:
3150-AD84 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2 ABSTRACT:
The final rule amends the Consission's regulations concerning its procedures for filing a petition for rulemaking with the Nuclear Regulatory Coratission. The final rule is necessary to clarify the type of NRC staff assistence that may be previced to a prospective petitioner.
Tit 1ETABLE:
final Action Published 03/12/91 56 FR 10359 Final Action Effective 03/12/91 LEGAL AUTil0RITY:
42 USC 2201; 47. USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTilER EllTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT
- David L. Heyer lluclear Regulatory Commission Office of Administration Washington, DC 20555 201 492-7086 2
TITLE:.
Access Authorization Fee Schedule for Licensee Personnel
-Rllii 3150 A076.
CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 11; 10 CFR 25 ADSTRACT:
The final rule amends the Commission's regulations by changing the rate charged to licensees by the NRC f or conoucting access authorization background investigations.
The final rule affects only the approximately 29 licensee or license related facilities who have personnel cleared for access to Special Nuclear Material
-or classified information.
TIMETABLE:
Final Acticn Published 2/14/91 56 FR 5926 Final Action Effective 02/14/91 LEGAL AUfMORITY:
42 USC-2165; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2273; 42 USC 5841; E.0.
10865; E.0. 12356 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
ho AGENCY CONTACT:
Duane G. Kidd-Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Aoministration Washington, DC 20555 301'492-4127 3
5 TITLE:
Operations Center Area Code Telephone tiumber Change RIN:
3150-AD79 CFR CITAT10ti:
10 CFR 20; 10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The final rule amends the Commission's regulations to change the current connercial aree code teiephone nur.6er at the itRC Operations Center f rom (202) to (301).
This action was necessary to implement a change initiottd by the C&P Telephone Company to accommodate the increasing deniand for telephone numbers in the metropolitan Washington, DC area. The arcr.6uent provides the correct commercial telephone number for iicensecs to contact the NRC Operations Center.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 01/10/91 56 FR 944 Final Action Effective 01/10/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY; 4? USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 LFFECTS ON SMALL BUSillESS AND OTHFR ENilTIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Markley Au fluclear Regulatory Commission Office' of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3749 4
. ~..
TITLE:
ASNT Certification of Industrial Radiographers (Phase 1)
RIN:
3150-AD35 CFR CITATION:
l 10 CFR 34 ABSTRACT:
The final rule amends the Commission's regulations on licenses for radiography and radiation safety requirements for radiographic operations to permit applicants for a license to indicate that all of their active radiographers are certified in radiction safety by the American Society for Hondestructive Testing (ASNT).
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 03/19/91 56 FR 11504 Final Action Effective 04/18/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42.USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Donald hellis
~ Nuclear Regulatory Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3628 5
5 (B).ProposedRules i
k h
4 i.
O i
4 B
1..
')
4
'(
1.
=
4:
1 B
I
(
a s
ew------------.-.--.--.----___--___
l
TITLE:
Procedurcs involving the Equal Access to Justice Act:
Implementation RIN:
3150-AA01 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 1; 10 CfR 2 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would implement the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) by providing for the payment of fees and expenses to certair, cligible individuals and businesses that prevail in agency adjudications when the agency's positiert is determined not to have been substbutially justified.
This proposed regulation is n;odeled af ter rulcs issued by the Adniinistrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) and has been modified to conform to NRC's establishtd rules of practice.
The proposed rule would further the EAJA's intent to develcp government-widc, " uniform" agency regulations and would describe NRC procedures end recuirements for the filing and disposition of EAJA applications.
A draft final rult was sent to the Consission in June 1982, but Commission action was suspended pending a decisior by the Comptroller Gent.rol en the availtbility of funds to pcy awards to intervenor parties.
This issue was also the subject of litigation in Putiness and Professional People for the Public Interest v. MRC, 793 F.2d 1366 (D.C. Cir. 1986).
Aoditionally, in August 1985, the President signed into law, Fub. L. No. 99-80, en enactment renewing and revisir.s the EAJA af ter its expiraticr under a statutory sunset requirenient. The rule is being reevaluated to determine the agency adjudications that fall within the EAJA's coverage.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/28/81 46 FR 53189 Proposed Action Comment Period Er.ds 11/28/81 Next Action Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
-5 USC 504 EffECib ON SMALL BUSiliESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY C0hTACT:
i John Cho l
Huclear Regulatory Commission Officc of the General Courisel L
Washington, DC 20555 t
301 492-1585 7
TITLE:
Revisions to Procedures to Issue Orders RIN:
3150-ADE3 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2 ADSTRACT:
The proposed rule wotic amend the Conn,ission's procedures for issuing orders to ir.clude persons not licensed by the Constission but who are otherwise subject to the Commission's jurisdiction.
The proposed revisions would more accurately reflect the Commission's existing statutory authority to issue orders than is presently the case. The proposed revision alsc would identify the types of Commission orders to which hearir.g rights attach.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 04/03/90 55 fR 12370 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 06/18/90 Final Action Published Undetermineo LEGAL AUTHOR 11Y:
cP USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SHALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Mary E. Wagner Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Nashington, DC 20555 3C1 ag2-1683 8
l TITLE:
Revisions to Procedures to 1ssue Orders:
Challenges to Orders that are Made treediately Effective 1
klN:
3150 AD60 CFR CITAT10ti:
10 CFR 2 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Connission's regulations governing orders to provide for the expeditious consioer6 tion of challenges to orders that are made inuediately effective. The proposed amendments specifically allow challenges to the innediate effectiveness of an order to be irade at the outset of a proceeding cnd provide procedures for the expedited consideration and disposition of these challenges.
The proposed emendments would also require that challenges to the merits of an innediately effective order be heard expeditiously, except where good cause exists for delay.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 07/05/90 55 FR 27645 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 09/04/90 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
John Cho Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Gener61 Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1585
(
9
TITLE:
Options and Procedures for Direct Commission Revicw of Licensing Board Decisions Rik:
3150-AD73 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2 ABSTRACT:
1 The proposed rule wot d amend the Commission's regulations to i
provice rules of procedure for direct Consission review of the J
initial cecisions of presiding officers in all formal and informal adjudicetory aroceedings.
These reguNory changes are necessitated by the Coonission's decis Nn to abolish the Atonite Cafety and Licensing Appeal Panel whiri: aow provides an intermediate level of review of initial decisions ;f pret.iding cfficers in Connissionadjudicationt..
The two broad alterr,atives for a new agency appellate review system are mandatory review, in which the Cor, mission will review initial decisions on the merits on the appeal of a party (as appeal beards presently co) or discretion 6ry review, in which the Commission will consider petitions for review and, in its discretion, take or reject review (as the Consission presently does with respect to appealboarddecisions),
if the latter alternativt is selected, the rule will need to include a standard for taking review.
The rule also suggests the establishrerit of an independent Opinion Kriting Office to assist the Consission in conducting its adjudicatory functions.
T!!1ETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/24/90 55 FR 42947 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 12/10/90 Final Action Published 06/00/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS OH SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Heil Jensen Nuclear Regulatcry Commission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1634 10
11TLE:
Operator's Licenses RIN:
3150-AD55 CFR Cll A110N:
10 CFR 2; 10 CFR SL ABS 1kACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Conniscion's regulations to require that con;pliance with the conditions and cut off icvels of fitness-for-duty programs (10 CFR Part 26) be a condition of an operator license or e senior operator license.
The proposed rule would also matt-a conf orming modification to the Connission's enf orcement policy, Appendix C to 10 CFR Part 2.
This proposed rule, initiated in response to a stof t requirements memorandum dated March 22, 1989, would give operators full noticc of the gravity of any violation of the cutoff levels for substances described in Part 26 ard would reflect enforcement sanctions for operators who violate these cutoff levels.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed kule Published 04/17/90 55 FR 14200 Proposeu Action' Comment Period Ends 07/02/90 Comp 1tte Analysis of Connents 01/11/91 lin61 Rule to EDO 03/28/91 Final Action Published Undeterniined LEGAL AUTHOR 11Y:
~
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SHAul BUSINESS AND OTIIER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTAC1:
David J. Lange Nuclear Regulatory Conunission Office of Nuclear hebetor Regulation Vashington, DC 20555 S01 492-3172 11
TITLE:
Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal RIN:
3150-A004 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2; 10 CFR 50; 10 CFR 54 ABSTRACT:
This rulemaking is scheduled for completion prior to the anticipated submittel cf license renewal applications for Yankee Rowe and Monticelio.
The rule will provide the basis for development and review of these two " lead plant" applicetions 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 stebility desired by utilities in determining whether to prepare for license renewal or pursue alternative sources of gercreting capacity.
License renewal rulemaking to provide regulatory requirements for extending nuclear power plant licenses beyond 40 years was initiated in response to the Counission's 1980 and 1987 policy and planning guidance.
Current regulatory provisions permit license renewal but do not provide requirements for the form and content of a license renewal application nor the standards of ecceptability against which the application will be reviewed.
TlHET/BLE:
AtlPFF Published 08/29/88 53 FR 32919 ANPRM Connent Period Ends 10/28/68 Prt; posed Action Published 07/17/90 55 FR 29043 Froposed Action Coment Period Ends 10/15/90 Final Action to ACRS 03/08/91 Final Action to CRGR 03/20/91 Final Action to EDO 05/01/91 Final Action to Cona15sion 05/15/91 Final Action Published 06/28/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL El:51 NESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
George Stge Nuclear Regulatory Cornission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-5917 12
. ~ - -. -..
Ti1LE:
Material Contt01 and Accounting Requirements 1or Urenium Enrichment FacGities Producing Special Nuclear floterial of Lew Strategic Si,nificance t
Rlli:
5150-AD56 CfR CITATION:
10 CfR 2; 10 CFP. 40; 10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 74 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule wnld amend the Commission's regulations to establish mattiial control and accounting reovirements 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 comme ciel interebt in the construction and operation of a g6s centrifuge plant that would produce low-tnriched uranium for the comercial market. Such a plant would te licensed chiefly under Parts 40 and 70.
Although the plant wuuld be authorized to produce only low enriched uranium, the interest of the common defense and security demands thot the NRC regulate the plant so as to assure with highest confidence that no centrifuge machine is used to produce utznium in an enrichment higher than that authorized.
This is a new and unique prcblem never before f aced by the NRC.
Accordingly, no NRC regul6ticr. is explicitly designed to deal with the problem.
A new l 74.33, Nuclear Material Control and Accounting for Special fluclear Material of Low Strategic Significance at Uranium Enrichment Plant 5, will be developed.
The new i 74.33 will include material control and accour,tability requirenients similar to those now required under i 74.31, together with new requirements to assure that no enrichment f acility is used.to enrich uranium above a specified limit.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 07/30/90 Proposed Action to Comission (SECY-90-277)08/09/90 Proposed Action Published 12/17/90 55 FR 51726 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 03/04/91 Final Action to EDO 06/21/91 Final Action to Consnission 07/12/91 Final Action Published 09/27/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No 13
TITLE:
liaterial. Control and Accounting Requir ments for Uranium Enrichicent Facilities Producing Special kuclear f4aterial of Low Strategic Significance ACENCY CONTACT:
Gordon Gunderson Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Rese6rch Washington, DC 205S5 301 492-3003 14
TITI. E:
Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act RIN:
3150-A071 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 13 ABSTRACT:
The proposed t ule would amend the Coir. mission's regulations to int uaent the Program Fraud Civil Rectdies Act of 1986. The Act 1
authorices certain federal cgencies, including the Nuclear ikgulatory Commission, to impose, through administrative adjudication, civil penaltics and assessments agriest any person who makes, submits, or presents a false, fictitious, or fraudulent cl6im er written statemcnt to the agency. These regulations would estaliish.the procedtre the Commissicr. would follow in implemtnting the provisions of the Act ano specifies the hearing crd appeal rights of persons subject to penalties ord essessments under the Act.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Fublished 09/25/90 55 FR 39158 Proposed Action Comment Pericc~ Ends 11/24/90 Fintl Iction to Commission (SECY-90-403) 12/14/90 Final Action Publishtd 05/0C/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 4? USC 5841 EFFECTS CI: SitALL BUSINFSS AtID OlliER ENTITIES:
l'c AGEllCY CCf; TACT:
Jcho Cho
!!uclear Regulatory Comission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7535 l
15
'I i
TITLE:Salary Offset Procedures for Collecting Debts Owed by Federal Employees to the Federal Goverr.n.ent Ritt:
3150-AD44 CFR CITAT10!i:
10 CFR 16 ABSTRACT:
The aroposed rule would amcrd the Commission's regulations to esta)lish collection procedures enabling the itRC to recover certain debts (by deductions f rom pay) which are owed by Federal en.ployees to the tiRC and other Fedcral agencies. The proposed rule is necessary to conform NRC regulatior.s to the Debt Collcr. tion Act cf 1962 which requires each agency te establish a salary offset progran for the collection of these debts. The proposed action is intendeo 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 rio suitable alternative to rulemaking for this action.
TIMETABLE:
Sinff Review Completed 05/30/90 Lubmitted to OPh for Review 05/30/90 CPM Review Completed 07/18/90 Preposed Action Published 09/26/90 55 FR 39E85 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 10/26/90 Final Action Published 06/00/91 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 Sl/.ALL BUSillESS AhD CTHER ENTITIE!:
No AGENCY C0tiTACT:
Diene B. Dandois fluclear Reptistory Connission Office of the Control'cr Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7558 16
TITLE:
Licenses and Radiation Safety Requirements for Large Irradiators R1H:
3150-AC98 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 19; 10 CFR 20; 10 CFR 21; 10 CFR 30; 10 CFR 36; 10 CFR 40; 10 CFR 51; 10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 170 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would devclop regulations to specify radiation stfety requirements and license requirements for the use of licensed radioactive materials in large irradiators.
Irradiators use ganna radiation to irradiate products to change their characteristics in some way. The requirements would apply to large panoramic irradiators (thosc in which the radioactive sources ard the material I
being irradiated are in a room that is accessible to personnel while thesourceisshielded)andcertainlargeself-containedirradiators in which the source c1vays remains under water.
The rule rould not cover small self-contained irradiators, instrument calibrators, medical uses of sealed sources (such as teletherapy), or non-destructive tcsting (such as industrial radiography).
The alternatisc to a regulation is continuing to literse irradiators en a case-by-case basis using license conditions. The formalization would make the NRC's requirements better understood and possibly speed the licensirg of irradiators.
Til1ETABLE:
Proposed Action to ACRS 01/18/89 Office Centurrence on Proposed Action Completed 03/06/89 Proposed Action to EDO 07/19/89 Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-89-249) 08/15/89 Revised Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-90-211) 06/14/90 Proposed Action Published 12/04/90 55 FR 50008 Preposed Action Coniment Period Ends 03/04/91 Proposed Action Comment Period Extended to 04/15/91 Final Acticn to ED0 08/30/91 Final Action to Cormission 09/15/91 Final Action Published 11/01/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2073; 42 USC 2093; 42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2232; 42 USC 2233; 42 USC 2273; 42 USC 5842 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Yes 17 l
4
. TITLE:
Licenses and Radiction Safety Requirttnents f or Large Irradiators AGENCY CONTACT:
Stephen A. McGuire Nuclear Rtgulatory Conunission Office of Huclear Regulatery Research llashington, DC 2CE55 301 492 3757 4
+
18
TITLE:
Standaros for Protcetion Against Radiation RIN:
3150-AA38 CFR CITATION:
10 CFF 20 ABSTRACT:
The final rult would aniend Part 20 cf the Commission's regulations to include n(w standards of prctection against radiation.
Radiation prctection philcsophy and technology have changed markeoly since the Part 20 was prcn.ulgated nearly 30 years ago.
Because Part 20 contains the NFC standards for protect 1or, against radiation that.are used by all licensees and effects exposures ci workers and merttrs of the public, it should be the most basic of the flRC's reguletions.
How-ever, becausc the present Part 20 has become outdated, most radiation protection actions occur through lictusing actions inacpendent of Part
- 20. A complete new set of standards is necessary to provide better assurance of protectior, against radiation; establish a clecr beelth protecticn basis for the limits; reflect current information on health risk, dosin,etry, and radiation protectior, practices and experience; provide flRC with a health prctection barc f roni which it may cor, sider other regulatory actions talcr to protect public health be consistent with recernendations of world authorities (International Consission on Radiological Protection); and apply to all licensees in a (crsistent bla nner.
TIMETABLL:
AtiPhM C3/20/80 45 FR 10023 AllPRM Consent Period Ends _06/1f./80 45 iR 18023 Propnsed Action Published 12/20/65 50 FR 51992 Proposed Action Comment Pcriod Ends 05/12/06 51 FR 1092 P"oposcd Action Comtrent Period Extended tc 10/31/86 final Action for Civision Review 03/15/88 Final Action to Offices for Concurrence 06/30/88 Final Action lack &ge to E00 09/E7/88 Final Action to Conur,ission (SECY-CD-315) 11/03/88 Rt. vised Final Action to Commission.(SECY-69-267) 08/29/89 Revised Backfit Analysis to EDO C3/01/90 kevisions to Commission (SECY-90-l37) 01/05/90 final Action to E00 11/16/90 linal Action to Cerrdssion (SECY-90-337) 11/26/90 Concission Vote 12/13/90 final Action Published 05/00/91 19
..-.-.~.-. -..-. -
TITLE:
Stendards f or Protection Against Radiation LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2073; 42 USC 2093; 42 USC 2095; 42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2133; 42 USC 2134; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2273; 42 USC 584); 42 USC 5842 EFFECTS ON SMALL DVS!!iESS AND OTHER ENT111ES: Yes AGENCY CCflTACT:
Harold T. Peterson liuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, CC 205b5 301 492-3640 4
I 20
TITLE:
Disposal of Waste Oil by lucinerttion from Huclear Power Plants RIN:
3150-AC14 CFR CITA110N:
10 CFR 20 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule, which wcs initiated in partial response to e pctition filed by Ediscn Electric Irstitute and Utility I;uclear Waste Panagement Group (PRM 20-15, dated July 31,1984), would amend HRC regulations to allow onsite incineration of waste oil at nuclear pcwer plants sub,iect to specified conditions.
Currently, the only approved disposal method for low-level, radioactively contaminated wastt cil frcm nuclear power plants involves absorption or solidification, transportetion to, and burial at a licensed disposal site. There is a clear need to allow, for very low activity levt1 wastes, the use of alternative disposal methods which are more cost effective from a raciological health and safety standpoint and which conserve the limited disposal capacity of low-1cvel waste burial sites.
Increased savings to both the public and the industry could thereby be achieved without imposirg tdditional risk to the public hetith and saftty.
Alternatives to this rulemaking action are to maintain the status que 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 E00 06/21/88 Proposed Action Published 08/29/88 53 FR 32914 i
Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 10/28/88 Final Action to Offices _for Concurrence 12/15/89 Final Action to EDO 10/05/90 Revised Final Action to ED0 03/21/91 Final Action to Commission 04/25/91 Final Action Published 05/24/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2167; d2 USC 2073 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No L
I 21 a----
w
TITLE:
Disposal of Waste Oil by incineratiorf frem Nuclear Power Plants AGENCY CONTACT:
Catherine R. Mattsen huclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, t,C 10555 301 492-3638 4
l
'22 m.-.
.._,.L_..
, _,,,,..... -,.. _,....m,___.y.
R T11LL:
A Notific6tions of Incidents RIN:
3150-AC91 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20; 10 CFR 30; 10 CFr. 40; 10 CFR 70 ABS 1kACT:
This rulemaking would amend 10 CFR 20.403(a) tr.d (b) to revise the licensees' reporting requirtinents for materiel licensees and research and test reactors.
In addition, new sections will tt developeo ar.c; odded to Parts 30, 40, and 70.
While10CfR20.403(a) und (b) fire reasonably clear in terms of licensee reporting requiremwnts for events involving " exposures" cr.d " releases" of radioactive materials, these sections are not clear concerning events involving " loss of operation" and " damage to property."
The staff believes these criteria cre not indicative of events that pose a hazard to public health and safety or the environment.
The periodic loss of operation of a f acility due to age or normal wear is exptcted at,d utually poses no additionel hazard to the public or environment.
The same is true for the cost of repairing darage which may be high because of extenuating circumstances and not due to the extent of the damage or its effect on any licensed material.
The deleted sections will be replaced with new criteria which will be added to Parts 30, 40, and 70.
The staf f belitves the new requirements to these parts are more ir,dicative of potentially significant events affecting the health and safety of the public 6nd tFc environment, in eddition, the rulcmaking also defines "immediate" in attual 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 requircraents.
This rulemaking action will revise a current Commission regulation; thtre is no other appropriate procedure to accommodate the clarification. This rulemaking activity is eersidered to be a high priority item by NMSS.
The health and safety of the public will be better protected because improved reporting requitements will reduce the potential risk of exposure to radiation.
Revising the reporting require-ments will also simplify reguiatory functions and f ree the staf f frore unnecessary additional investigation and, at the some time, protect-the inaustry from unneccssary and unexpected fines.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 09/13/89 Proposed /,ction to EDO 03/16/90 Proposed Action Published 05/14/90 55 FR 19890 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 07/30/90 Fin 61 Action to EDO 04/15/91 Final Action Publishcd C5/15/91 23
- ~ -
i TITLE:
Notifications of Inc1 dents LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Joseph J. Mate Nucli sr Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492 3795 i
l' i
a 3
24
TITLE:
Prcposed Revisions to the Criteria and Procedures for the Reperting of Deiects ar.d Ncncompliance and Conditions of Construction Permits klN:
3150-AA68 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 21; 10 CFP 50 l
i ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule wocid amend Part 21 and $50.55(e), both of which recuire the reporting of safety defects by operating license (OL) holders and construction perr.it (CP) holders.
In addition, Part 21 requires reporting of safety defects by non-licensee vendors.
The proposed amendments were prompted by the TMI Action Plan lask II.J 4 and NLC staff experience with Part 21 and 650.55(e) reporting. The main objectives of the rulemaking effort are:
(1) reduction cf duplicate evaluation and reporting of safety defects; (2) establishment of a consistent threshold for safety defect reportirg in Part 21 and $50.5E(e); (3) establishment of a consistent, unif erir content of reporting under Part 21 end 550.55(e); and (4) cstablishment 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. Approxim6tely 750 550.55(e) reports are submitted 6nnually.
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), thesc reports have formed thc basis for NRC issuance of numerour NPC peneric communications.
j The prcposed rulemaking will reduce duplicate reporting and evaluation of safety defects which now exists.
The rulemaking will establish a more coherent regulatory f ramework that is cxPected to reduce the industry reporting and evaluation burden significantly
~
without any reduction in rcported safety defect information.
Alternatives to this approach that were considered ranged from establishment of a single rule for all reporting of safety defects cnd operating reactor events to maintaining the status quo for safety defect reporting. All other alternatives were rejected because they would not substantially in. prove the current safety defect reporting situation.
I Current annual costs of reporting under Part 21 and 650.55(e) are estimated at approximately $6 million dollars for industry and i
i 25 i
a.
.-r.
-,-..-_ - + -
TITLE:Proposed Revisiens to the Criteria and Procecures fer the Reporting, cf Defects and Ner.cunpliance and Conditions of Construction Permits Ab5 TRACT:
(C0!il) 1EEO,000 for NRC evaluations, It is ar,ticipated thct the enr.uc1 industry rtvorting burden si,culd be reduced t'y apprvximately
$1 million while t1e NRC burden wiii Le slightly reduced.
TIliETABLE:
Proposed Initial Action to Commissien 12/16/85 Commission kejected PrcPesed Action 10/20/86 Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-88-72) 03/12/88 Propostt Action to Connission (SECY-88-250) 09/12/88 Revised Frtposed Action Iublished 11/04/06 53 Fk 44b94 Public Cornerit Period Ends 01/03/89 Fir 61 Oraft Rule Office Concurrence Coraplete 06/89 lete 07/12/89 Final Drtft Rule CRGR review Comp (SECY-89-246)
Final Draft Rule to Commission 06/14/89 Redraf t of Final Rule to EDO 09/28/90 OlG Report 16 sued 11/30/50 Redraf t of Final kule to Connission 05/20/91 Final Action Published To be determined by Connission action LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2282; 42 USC 5041; 42 USC 5846 EFFECTS Otl SMALL BU$lt4ESS AtID OTHER ENTITIES:
14 0 AGENCY C0HTACT:
William R. Jones Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Analysis and Eveluation of Operational Data West.ington, DC 20555 301 492-4442 26
l TITLE:
Fitness-for-Duty Prograras:
Nuclear Power F16rt Personnel Rlil:
3150 AD61 CfR CITATION:
1 10 CfR 26 1
ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would cueno the Connission's regulations to clarify the Connission's intent concerning the unacceptability of taking action against an individual based solely on preliininary drug test results. The proposed rule would inf orta i1censee u.an6gement that preliminary test tesults cannot be used as a basis ior management actior absent corroborative evidence of irpairment or safety hazard.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Actior, fublished 08/31/90 55 FR 35048 Propcsed Action Coument h riod Ends 10/3C/90 Complete Analysis of Comments 12/31/90 Final-Rule to EDO 01/10/91 final _ Action to Consission (SECY-91-048) 02/21/91 Final Action Published Uncetermined LLGAL AUTH0h1TY:
4? USC 5841; 42 USC 5842; 42 USC 5840 EFFECTS ON SPALL BU51 NESS AND OlhEh LilTITIES:
No AGLkCY C0llTAC1:
Loren Eush i
Nuclear Regulatory Commissico Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washingtor., DC 20555 301.492-0944 l
27 E
TITLE:
Willful Hisconduct 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 cn notice that they nicy be held accountable for willfully causing violations of the Commission's requirements or for other willful misconcuct that arises out of activities within the Consnission's jurisdiction and placcs in question the NRC's reasonable assurance that licensed activities will be cchducted in a manner that provides adequate protection to the public health and saf ety.
The proposed rule would subject a perscn who violates the substantive prohibition to enforcement betion under existing regu.
lations.
The proposed rule will enable the Commission to better address willf ul nisconduct that undermines, ur calls into question, odequate protection of the public htcith and safety.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 04/03/90 55 FR 12374 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 06/18/90 Final Action Published Undeterniined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER LNTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTAC1-.
Geoffrey Cart Huclear Regulatory Commission Office of Enforcement hathington, DC -20555 301 492-3283 28
~.
T11LE:
liasic Quality Asturance Program, Records and Reports of Misedn;inistrations or Events Relating to the Medical Use (,1 Byproduct heterial k1k:
3150 AC65 CFR CITATION:
l 10 CFR 35 ACSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations concerr.ing the adrrir.istration of byproduct material for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.
The proposed errendments would require Part 35 licensees to establish and implement 6 written basic ovality assurance program to-preytnt, detect, and cortret the cause of trrors in the administration of byprcduct material.
The proposed action is riecessary to provide for adequate patient safety. The pro te prevent errors in inedical use, posed amendo,ent, which is intended would primarily affect hospitals and clinics Podification of reporting and recordkeeping requircrunts for both diagnostic and therapy events or raisaaministrations are also proposed in this rulemaking.
This amendment would be a matter of compatibility f or Agreement States.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/02/87 52 FR 56942 Proposed Action Ccmment Period Ends 12/01/87 Options Paper to Office for Concurrence 05/13/88 Options Paper on QA Ru1(making to EDO 05/26/88 Revised Options paper on QA Rulemaking to EDO 05/31/88 Option Paper to Conunission (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 Ecsic OA Rule and Drof t Regulatory Guide 01/30-31/89 Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 03/29/89 Proposed Action to E00 06/01/89 l
Proposed Action to Connission (SECY 89-171) 06/07/89 Revised Proposed Action to E00 08/11/89 Revised Proposed Action to Connission (SECY-89269) 08/30/89 Proposed Action Fublished 01/16/90 55 FR 1439 Correction to Proposed Action Published 02/06/90 55 FR 4049 l
Proposed Action Conraent Period Ends 04/12/90 1.
Pilot Program Completed 11/90 Final Action to E00 04/22/91 Final Action to Connission 04/29/91 Final Action Published 06/30/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 29
i TITLE:
basic Ovality Assurar,ce Frograni Records and Reports of Misacin.ihistrations or Lvents Fetating to the 146 dical Use 01 Byproductliaterial EllECTS O!! Sl4ALL BUS!!!ESS AhD OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Anthony Tse fluclear Regulatory Connaission Of fice of Nuclot r Regulatory Rescarch bethington, DC 20!5E u
501 492-3797 j
5 30
?
~... _ _......, _.. _ _ _ _ _.. ~.. ~. _ _.
... ~...
_.._....,.,,-...__2
1 TITLE:
J Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection 1.cainst Pressurized Thertrcl Shock Events Rift:
3150-A001 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABS 1RACT:
The proposed rule revises the Pressurized Thermal Shock (PTS) rule, published on July 23, 1985, which established a screenirg criterion, a limit on the degree of radiation enbrittleraent of PWR reactor vessel beltline meterials beyond which operation cannct continue without ec'ditional )lant-spccific analysis.
The rule prescribet how to calcu'.hte t1e degree of ernbrittlement as :. f unction of the ccpper and nickel contents of the controlling material and the neutron fluer.cc.
The proposed amendinent revises the calculative procedures to be consistent with that given in Revisior 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.99.
This guide, which was published in final f orra 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 embrittlerLent is worse now than predicted using the PTS rule.
A number of PWRs will reach the screening criterion sooner than previously thcught, and three plants will need to make plant-specific analyses in the ncxt 10 years.
Therefore, a high priority is being given to this effort.
An unacceptable elternative to this emendment from the safety standpoint is to leave the present PTS rule in place.
A plant-by-plant analyses by the NRC staff founc 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 l
to exist when the present rule was published.
Another unacceptable titernative thct has been evalut.itd is to change the calculative i
procecure 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 c;ependent on the plant configuration and the scenario chosen.
Furthermore, the screening criterion was based on a variety of considerations besides the probabliistic analysis.
Reoponing_the question cf where to set the screening criterion was not consideted l
arcductive beceuce of plant-to-plant differences.
It is better to l
1 ave a conservative " trip wire that triggers plant-specific analyses.
31
11TLE:fracture Tcughness Requirements for Prottetion Against Pressurized Thermal Shett Events ALSTRAC1: (CONT)
It.nediate 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 interir ord using the new procedure for calculating RT/ PTS.
In addition, three to five plants will need to taake the erf enditure
' an estimated 2.5 million dollars for the plant-specific analysis in the 1990s instead of 10 to 15 years later.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 11/28/69 Proposed Action Published 12/26/09 64 FR 52946 Proposed Action Fublic Comment Period Ends 03/12/90 Final Action to CRGR 10/24/90 Final Action to E00 02/2S/91 Final Action to Commission (SECY-91-062) 03/06/91 Final Action Published 04/00/91 LEGAL AUTH0klTY:
42 USC 2133; 42 USC 2134; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS OF St4ALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: Po AGENCY CONTACT:
Allen L. Hiser, Jr.
Iluclear Regulatory Consission Office of Nucicar Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3988 32
l TITLE:
Ensuring the Efiectiveness of Paintenance Programs for Nuclear Powar Plants klH:
3150-A000 CFR CITA110N:
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,luid be applicable to existing and future plants. The final rule would also require each licensee to develop, implement, and maintain a maintenance program.
By memorandum dattd May'23, 1990, the Commission directed the staff to prepare two i
separate rulemaking packages.
Thus, should the Consnission deterinine that a rule is r. ceded, these two options will be available for their consideration. The first rulemaking packagt will include the programmatic criteria deteribed in the Commissions's policy statement. The second rulemaking package will include a reliability-based, results-criented approach.
4 TINETABLE:
Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 09/06/88 Proposed Action to EDO 09/26/88 Proposed Action to Commission (SECY-88-277) 09/30/88 Proposed Action Published 11/28/88 53 FR 47822 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 01/27/69 Proposed Action Public Corment Period Extended to 02/27/89 53 FR 52716 Final Action to Offices for Concurrence 04/10/89 Final Action to E00 04/21/89 l
Final Action to Commission (SECY 89-143) 04/28/89 Revised Policy Statement Published 12/08/89 54 FR 50611 i
Final Action to ACRS 03/15/91 Final Action to CRGR 03/27/91 Final Action to E00 04/19/91 l
Final Action to Commission 04/26/91 Final Action Published 06/28/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
l 42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5842 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No i
i 33 l
I
f TITLE:
Ensuring the Effectiveness of Maintenance Programs for Nuclear Power Plants AGENCY CONTACT:
Robert Riggs Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washin ton, DC 20555 301 49 -3732 4
34
TITLE:
Emergency Response Data System RIN:
3150-AD32 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRliCT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations by requiring the implementation of the NRC-approved Emergency Respcnse Data System (ERDS) at all licensed nuc1cer power plants.
1he primary role of the Nkt during on emergency at a licensed nuclear powet facility is ont of monitoring the licensee to assure that appropriate reccmendations are rede with respect to necessary offsite actions to protect public htelth and softty.
In order to adequately perform its rcle during on emerger.cy, the NRC rtquires accurate and timely data on four types of parentters:
(1)the reactor core and coolant system conditions to assess the extent or likelibcod of core damage; (?) the conditions inside the containment building to assess the likelihood of its 1611urt; (3) the radioactivity release rates to assess the immediacy and degree of public danger; er.u (4) the data frera the plant's metccrological tower to assess the distributier. cf potential or actual impact on the public.
The Emergency pesponse Data tystem is a licensec-activated computer data link betwecn the electronic data systems at licensed nuclear pcwor faciiities end a central couputer in the NRC Operations Center.
Current experience with a voice-only emergency cons.unication link, utiliito for data transmission, bat denonstrated it to be slow and inaccurate.
Simuleted site tests of the Ents concept in emergency planning exercises have demonstrated that ERDS is effective between the Nkt Operations Center and affecttd licensecs.
The rule would rtcpire that the licensees provide the required hardwaie and sof tware to transmit the data in a f eriaat specified by the NRC.
The NRC would requitt that the licensee activate the LRDS es soon as possible f ollowing the declaration of an alert condition.
Lated on a site sursty of 80 percent of licensed fecilities, the current (stinates of 'icensee costs are $20K-50K for software ano $0-100K for hardware.
The current estimated cost to hhC is $2.6 million.
i 35
i i
T11LE:
Einergency Response Data Systoni TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to CRGR 06/06/90 Proposed Action to ACRS 06/08/90 Proposed Action to EDO 07/09/90 Propcsed Action to Cone.ission (SECY-90-256) 07/19/90 Proposed Action Fublished 10/09/90 55 FR 41905 Proposed Action Public Consnent Period Ends 12/24/90 1
Final Action to EDO 05/15/91 Final Action to Connission 05/31/91 Final ution Published 07/30/91-LEGAL AUTFORITY:
42 USC 2131; 42 USC 2133; 42 CSC 2134; 42 USC 2135; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2032; 42 USC 2233; 42 USC 2236; 42 USC 2239; 42 USC 2262; 42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5843; 42 USC 5846 EFFECTS UH SHALL EUSINESS AND OTHEk EhT1 TIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Markin Au Nuclear Regulatory Cornission Of fice cf Nuclear Reguletcty Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492 3749-(
36
~
I Tilt E :
Codes and Standerds for Nuclear Power Plants (ASHE Ccde, 1986/1987/
1988 Addu.aa, 1989 Edition)
RIN:
3150-ALOS CFR CITA110N:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would incorporate by ref erence the 1986 Addenda, the 1087 Addenda, the 1958 Addenda, and the 1969 Edition of Section 111, Division 1, and Section XI, Division 1, with a specified modification, of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Loiler and Pressure yessel Code (AshE Code). Also, the proposed emcndment would impose augmented enmination uf reactor vessel shell welds and would separate the requiremente for inservice testing from those for inservice inspecticr. t,y placing the requirc=
ments for inservice testing in a separate paragraph. The AShE Ccde previdus 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 thcse 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 r.ethods for the csstruction, inservico inspection, and inservict testing of nuclear power plant compontnts.
Incorporating by reference the latest addenda of the ASME Code would save applicants /licensecs and the NRC staff both time and effort by providing uniform detailed criteria against
-which the staff could review any single submission.
In addition, the proposed rule would require licensees to augment their reactor vessel examination by implerrcnting the expanded reactor vessel shell weld examinations specified in the 1989 Edition of Section XI und would clarify the visting requirements in the regulation for inservice intpection and inservice testing.
This action will be handled as a routine upoating of 10 CFR 50.55a of the NRC regulations.
There is no reasonable alternative to rulemding action.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Submitted for Division Review 09/27/88 Proposed Action to CRGR 10/09/90 Prcposed Action to EDO 01/14/91 Proposed Action Published 01/31/91 56 FR 3796 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 04/16/91 Final Action Published 12/30/91 37
TITLE:
Codes and Standards for i;uclear Power Plants ( ASME Code,196E/1987/
1988 Addenda, 1989 Edition)
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201, 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Gilbert C. Millear, liuclear Regulatcry Conunission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Resear ch Washington, DC 20555 SCI 492-3848 t
38
TITLE:
Primery Reactor Containment Lcakage Testing for Water-Cooled Powtr Reactors-RIH:
3150-AA86 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50; Appendix J ABS 1RACT:
The proposed rule would update and revise the 1973 criteria for preoperational and-periodic pressure testing for leakage of priinary contairn.ent boundaries of water-cooleo pcwer reactors.
Problems have developed in tpplication and interpretation of the existing rule.
These result from changes in testing technology, test criteria, and a relevant natioral standard that needs to be reccgnized. The proposed revisions would make the rule current and irrprove its usefulness.
The revision is urgently needed to resolve continuirg 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 eliruination of inconsistencies and obsolete recuirements, and the addition of greater usefulness and a higher confidence in the leak-tight inte.grity of contair,rcent system boundaries trier post-loss of coolant accident conditions.
The majority of the ef f ort needed by HRC to issuc the rule has already been expended.
A detailec arelysis 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 cccupational exposure of less than 1 percent per year per plant due to increaseo testing.
TIMETABLE:
-Proposed Action Published 10/?9/86 51 FR 39538 Proposcd Action Cominent Feriod Extended 04/14/87 52 FR 2416
-CRGR Briefings 10/24/90,01/23/91,02/12/91 Final Action to ED0 06/14/91 Final Action to Connaissinn - 07/19/91 Final Action Published 06/13/91 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 ANE lER ENTITIES: ho AGENCY CONTACT:-
Gunter Arndt Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research W6shington, DC 20555 301 492-3814 4
40
l l
TITLE:Amendment to 10 CFP 51.51 and 51.52, Tables S-3 and S 4, Addition of Raden-I.22 and Technetium-99 Radiation Values, and Aodition of Appendix b, "lable S-3 Explanatory Analysis" klh:
3150-AA31 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 51 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule arnends the Table of Uranium Fuel Cycic Environmental Data (Table S-3) by edding new estirrates for potential releases of technetium-99 and radon-222, and by updatir.g(other ettimates. The proposed rule's Apper> dix B to Subpart A narrative explanation), also describes the batis for the values contained in Table S-3, explains the environmental efiects of these potentiel reletses from the LWR fuel Cycle, and postulates the potential radiation doses, bu.ith effects, and environmental impacts of these potential releases.
The proposed rule also amends 10 CFR 51.52 to modify the enrichment value of U-235 and the maximum level of average fuel irraciation (burnup in megawatt-days of thermal powcr per metric ton of urar,iun). The narrative explanation also addresses important fuel cycie impacts and the cumulative impacts of the nuclear fuel cycle for the whole nuclear power industry sc that it may be possible to consider these impacts generically rather than repeatedly in individual licensing proceedings, thus reducing potential litigation tire and costs for both NRC and applicants.
The preposed revision of 10 CFR 51.51 and the addition of Appendix E was published for public review and comment on March 4, 1981 (46 FR 15154). The final rullmaking was deferred pending the outccme of a suit (haturel Resources Defense Council, et al. v. HRC, No. 74-1486) in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The U.S. Court of Appeals (D.C. Circuit) decision of April 27, 1982, invalidated the entire Table S-3 rule. The Supreme Court reversed this decision on June 6, 1983.
The proposed rule to provide an explanatory narrative for Table S-3 has been revised to reflect new modeling developments during the time the rulemaking was deferred.
Final action on the Table S-3 rule was held in abeyance until new values fcr radon-222 and technetium-99 could be added to the table and covered in the narrative explanction.
The rule is being reissued as a proposed rulc because the scope has been expanded to include raciation values for radon-222 and technetium-99 and the narrative explanation has oeen extensively revised from that published on March 4,1981(46FR15154).
41
TITLE:
Amendment to 10 CFR 51.b1 and 51.52, Tables S-3 and S-4, Addition of Radon.2E2 and Technetium-99 Radiation Values, and Addition of Appendix B, " Table S-3 Explanatory Analysis" TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 03/04/81 46 FR 15154 Proposed Action Coment Period Ends 05/04/81 Proposed Action for Division Review 05/27/88 Proposed Action to EDO Undetermined Proposed Action Published Undetermined LEGAL. AUTHORITY:
t2 USC 2011; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 4321; 42 USC-5841; (2 USC 5842 i
EFFECTS ON-S!iALL BUSINESS AND OTHER Ehl! TIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Stanley Turel Nucicer Regulatory Consission Office of Nuclear-Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3739 42 l
TITLE:
Elimination of Inconsistencies Between NRC Regul6tions and EPA HLW Standards RIN:
3150-AC03 CFR C11 A110H:
10 CFR 60 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would eliminate several incor.sistencies with the EPA star.dards to be developed for the dispesal of HLW in deep (talPA) geologic repositories.
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 directs NRC to promulgate criteria for the licensing of HLW geologic repositories.
Section 121 (c) of this act states that the criteria for the licensing of HLW geologic rcpositories must be consistent with thcse standards. The proposed rule is needed in order to eliminate several inconsistenties with the EPA standards, thus fulfilling the statutcry requirenent.
Because the tNPA directs NRC to eliminate inconsistencies between Ptrt 60 and the EPA standard, the alternatives to the proposed action are limited by statute.
The public, industry, and NRC will terefit from eliminating inconsistencies in Federal HLW regulations.
NRC resources necced would be several staff-years but will not include contract resources.
Because the Fedtral Court invalioated the EPA standards, action on this rule, which is in response to the EPA standards, is undetermined.
The proposed rule entitled, " Amendments to Port 60 to Delineate Anticipated Processes and Events and Unanticipated Processct and Events," was incorpcrated into this proposed rule on June 19, 1990.
The objective of the rulemaking is to improve the licensing process for the geologic repository program.
TIMETABLE:
Propcsed Action Pubiished 06/19/8f> 51 FR 22266 Proposed Actinn Corrment Period Erds 08/18/86 Final Action to Offices for Concurrence 07/15/87 Fine' Action to EDO 07/20/87 Revised Proposed Action Fullished Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AU1h0RITY:
42 USC 10101 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER EhlITIES:
No 43
l TITLE:
I Elimination of Inconsistencies Between NRC Regulations and EPA HLW Standards AGENCY CONTACT:
Melvin Silberberg/ Clark Prichard liuclect Regulatory Corciission Office of Huclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC E0555 301 492-3810/3884 44
TITLE:
Minor Amendments to the Physical Protection Requirements l
3150-AD03 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 72; 10 CFR 73; 10 CFR 75 t'PSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Connission's regulations dealing with physical protcction requirements that are out of date, susceptible to differing interpretations, cr in need of clarification.
These problems were identified by a systematic review of the agency's safeguards regulations and guidance documents conducted by the Safeguards Interoffice Review Group (SIRG).
In addition, the staff had identified other areas in the regulations where minor changes are warr6nted.
In response to these efforts, specific amendments to the regulations are being proposed.
The proposed changes would:
add definitions for common terms not currently defined; delete action dates that no longer apply; (3) 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 minor cmendments affect the public, industry and the NRC only in so far as they make the regulations casier to understand, implement, and enforce.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to E00 06/27/89 Proposed Action Published 08/15/89 54 FR 33570 Proposed Action Connent Period Ends 09/29/89 Final Action to E00 undetermined Final 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 Regulatory Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3739 45 l
l
TITLE:Transportation M gulations: Comp 6tibility With the international Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
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 Statt.s Feoeral regulations for the safe transportation of radioactive material consistent with those of the International Atomic Energy Agency (I AEA). The IAEA regulations can be founo in IAEA Safety Series No. 6 " Regulations for the St.fe Transport cf Radioactive Material," 1985 Edition.
Consistency in transportation regulations throughout the worlo ftcilitates the ft(c movement of rcdioactive materials between countries f or 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 stanoaros and guidance (those of the IAEA) from which individual countries can develop their dociestic reguictions.
In additiun, the accident experience of every country that bases its dotaestic regulations on those of the IAEA can be applied by every other country with consistent regulations to iroprove its safety program. The action will be handled as a routine updating of hRC transportation regulations.
There is nn reasonable titernative to rulemaking action. These changes should result in a minimal increase in costs to affected litersees.
Proposed changes to 10 CFR Part 71, based on current IAEA regulations, have been issued for public consent.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Fublished 06/08/88 53 FR 215E0 Proposed Action Comment Period Cxtended to 03/06/89 53 FR 51281 Proposed Action Conment Period Extended to 60 days af ter publicaticn of 00T proposed rule 04/04M9 58 FR 13528 DOT Proposed Rule Published 11/14/89 54 FR 4/454 Proposed Action Comment Period Ends 02/09/90 Final Action to EDO Uncetermined Final Action to Cocmission Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined 46
F F[
If TITLE:
Transportation Regulations: Compatibility With the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
LEGAL. AUTil0RITY:
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 OTitER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
I Donald R. Hopkins L
Nuclear Regulatory Conunission Office of liuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3784 47
TITLE:Criteria for an Extraordinary Nuclear Occurrence RIN:
3150-AB01 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 140 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would revise the criteria for an extraordinary nuclear occurrence (ENO) to elinintte the problems that were er. countered in tht Three Mile Island ENO cetermination.
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 Ef;0 criteria are already embodicd in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 140. Tbc only way to modify these criteria, as this rule seeks to do, is thrcugh rulemaking.
There is no safety impact on put*lic health or safety.
The EN0 criteria provide legal waivers of defenses, Industry (insurers and utilitics) claims that a reduction in the ENO criteria could cause increases in insurance premiums.
The final _rulc wi;l also be responsive to PRM-140-1.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 04/09/85 50 FR 13978 Proposed Action Comment Period Er:ds 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 Conmission Undeternined Final /.ction Published Uncetermined LEGAL'AUTH0 PITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2210; 42 USC 5841; 42 050.5842 EFFECTS ON SHALL BUSINESS AND OTHER Ef;TillES: No AGENCY CONTACT; Harold Peterson t:uclear Regulatory Commission Of fice of Nuclear Rtgulatory Research Washington, DC 20E55 201 492-3640 48 i
L
?
I TITLE:
Reasserting hRC's Sole Authority for Approving Onsite Lcw-level Waste Disposal in Agreement States RIN:
3150-AC57 CFR CllATION:
10 CFR 150 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would establish NRC as the solc 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 authorize ore agency (the NRC) to regulate all onsite disposal of very low-level waste in order to provide a comprehensive regulatory review, to ensure that sufficient records of disposals are retaired, to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort, and to provide greater assurance that the site can be released for unrestricted use upon deconsissioning.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to ED0 06/10/88 Proposed Action Published 08/22/88 53 FR 31880 Proposed Action Comment 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 Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3634 l
49
TITLE:NRC Acquisition Regulation (NRCAR)
Rltl:
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 NkC concerning the acquisition of goods and services. The NRC Acquisition Regulatien is necessary to implement and supplement the government-wide Federal Acquisitiot Regulation. This action is necessary to ensure that the regulations governing the procurement of goods and servicts within tht NPC satisfy the r:ecds of the agency. The NRC Acquisition Regulation implemer.ts the Federal Acquisition Regulation within the agency and ir.ludes additional policies, procedures, solicitation provisions, or contract clsuses needed to meet specific NRC needs.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published 10/02/89 54 FR 40420 Proposed Acticn Comment Perico Ends 12/01/89 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHOR 11Y:
41 USC 401 et seq.; 42 USC 2201 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSlhESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Mary Lynn Scott Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Administration Washington, DC 20555 301 492-8788 50
..~
t
-(C)- Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemaking i
-I i
f.-
w 7.wnW6w-4,ha.m.
'r&-+46-7
.aae-mi.aL.e.wam-.wu_,p,h-----use.Am.E._wmas.
.&._*be, a_.mmnw - _ 36 MM h 9.s
-Med.4+
hah 44.h->W.dmeA.
Ann, h ed ha44wmawJ4.A.mmB i. hA,.a.,M.m4.__JetmA.dmAA.
I l, -
t
+
w m
l 1
ETr ;:
Radioactive-Waste Below Regulatory Concern; Generic Rulemaking
- t RIN:
J 3150-AC35' j
y LCFR CITATION:.
-10 CFR 2; 10 CFR 20
-ABS 1RACT:
-The advance.nctice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) sought comments on-
- 6. proposal:to amend.NRC regulations to address disposal of radioactive wastes-that contain sufficiently-low quantities cf radionuclides that their. disposal does'not need to be regulated asfradioactive.
l The NRC has' already published a policy stctement providing guidance.
~
for filing petitions for_rulemaking to exempt individual waste streams (August 29, 1986;.51 FR 30839).
It is believeo-that generic rulemaking could provide a more. efficient and offective means of dealing +1th disposal of wastes below reguletory concern.
Generic rulemaking would supplement the policy statement which was a response to Section:10 of'the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Polity Amendments!Act of 1985 (Pub. L. 99-E40). The.public wasiasked
-to. comment'onL14'qucstions. The ANPRH requested public. consnent on several citernative: approaches the NRC could take.
The evaluation:
1
-of Lpublic comment together with' the results f rcm a. research contract -
i and a Below Regulatory Concern censensus building effort will help to-i determine whether and how NRC should proceed.on the ratter, TIMETABLE:-
.ANPRM 12/02/66:=51'FR 43367 AllPRM Comment: Period Ends 03/02/87. 51 FR 43367 f
= Proposed Action Published Undetermined Final ActionLPublished Undetermined LEGAL AltTHORITY:
1 Pub. L.99-240 o
EFFECTS Of SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: Undeterminid-AGENCY' CONTACT:.
Robert:Meck-
' Nuclect Regulatory Coninmicsion-0ffice cf Nuclear Regulatory Research; Washington, DC 20555; L301 49? 3737 51
TITLE:
Comprehensive (us11ty Assurance in Medical Use and a Standard of Care RIN:
3150-AC42 CFR CITAT10ti:
10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
The aoverte notice of proposed rulemaking (ItJPRM) would etc4nd the Commission's regulations to require a comprehensive quality assurance program for medical licensees using byproduct raterials.
The purpose of this ruleniakir:g action is tc eddress each source cf error thet can lead to a misadninistration.
An AhPRM was publisted to request public connent on the extent to which, in addition to the basic Quality assurar.ce procedures (being addressed by another ruleniaking action, entitled Besic Quality Assurance Prcgt au for tiedical Usc cf Byproduct IIcteriai), a more comprehensive quclity ossurance requircr;ent is needed and invites advice and recommenda-tions on about 20 questions thet wili have to be addrested in the ruleniaking process.
TIMETABLE:
ANPRit Action Published 10/02/87 52 FR 36949 ANPRM Conmcrit Period Ends 12/31/87 52 FR 36949 Options Pcrer to Offices for concurrence 05/13/88 Cptions Paper or CA F,ulemaking to EDO 05/26/88 Revised Options Fcrer on Rulemaking to ED0 05/31/88 Option Paper Completed 06/03/88 SECY-88-156 Staff Requirements tier,torcrdum Issued 07/12/68 Proposed Action Published Undetermineo LEGAL AUTFORITY:
42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSIliESS AtID OThER EhTITIES:
No AGEliCY C0kTACT:
Anthony Tse liuclear Regulatory Ccamission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3797 52
. TITLE:
Medical Use of Byproduct Material: Training and Experience Criteria RlH:
3150-AC99 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
The advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANFRP) discussed aniending Consission regulations ccccerning training and_ experience criteria for individuals involved in the medical use of byproduct materi6l.
Rulemaking may be needed to reduce the chance of misedministration.
The Conmission raay proceed with rulemaking, assist in the development of nationc1 voluntary training standards, or issue a policy statenient recommending increased licensee attention to training.
If the Conmission proceeds with rulcraaking, the NRC could publish criteria in its regulations or recognize medical specialty certificates. The Cen.niission requested cost / benefit comments in the ANPRM, published May 25, 1988. The contractor study of training, accreditation, and certification programs that are now in place has been coinpleted. The NRC staff has snelyzed the comments received in response to the ANPRM and the contractor report. The staff analysis and proposed course of action were provided to the. Advisory Ccmmittee on Medical Uses of Isotopes (ACMUI) as an agenda item at their meeting on July 10, 1990. The ACMUI responded that the information which the l_
staff had gathered does not support the premise ~that training and experience is a factor in misadministretions.
The ACMul suggested that additional information be gathered which includes the training and experience of the person concitting tht' violation.
The-staff will nodity its collection perameters, and continue to collect data.
The staff is currently preparing a Consission Paper recommending that NRC not proceed with ruleniaking on this issue et this time.
TIMETABLE:
ANPRM Published 05/25/88 53 FR 18845 ANPRM Comment Period Ends 08/24/88 Proposed Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42.USC 5841 EFFECTS Oh SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No 53
I TITLE:
liedical Use of Byproduct Material:
Training and Experience Criteria AGENCY CONTACT:
Larry Camper Nuclear Regulatory Corinission Of fice of Nuclear Peterial Safety arid Safeguards Washington, DC 20555 501 492-3417 54
TITLE:
Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nucicar Pcwer Plant Structures, Systems, and Components Rlh:
3150-AD10 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The advance notice of proposed rulemaking (AllPRM) would develcp regulations requiring enhanced receipt inspection and testing of products purchased for use in nuclear power plant structures, sy:tems, and components. These regulations are believed to be necessary to provide an acceptabit level of assurance that products purchased for use in nuclear power plants will perform as expected to protect' the public heelth and safety. This ANPN4 was published to solicit pubile concents on the need for additional regulatory rcquirements and to obtain an improved understanding of alternatives to regulatory requirements.
TIMETABLE:
ANPRii Published 03/06/89 54 FR 9229 ANPRM Comment Period Ends 07/05/89 Analysis of Comments 11/30/89 Proposed Action Published Undetermined L
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC.2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS OH SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Yes AGENCY C0f; TACT:
Uldis Potapovs Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Poactor Regulation Washington, DC 20555 501 492-0961 55
l TITLE:
License Renewal for Nuclear Power Plants; Scope of Environmentol Effects RIN:
3150-AD63 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 51 ABSTRACT:
The advance notice of proposed rulemaking (Al4PRM) would amend the Connission's regulations to add provisions concerning the scope of environmental etfects which would be addressed by the Consnission in conjunction with applications for license renewal for nuclear power plants.
Changes to Part 51 will be based on the finoings of a generic environmental impact statement (GEIS). The NRC is soliciting comments on the scope of environmental iscuos to be covered in the rulemaking and GEIS and on the ways the results of the Gels would be incorporated into the rulemaking on Part 51.
NRC believes that a generic Part 51 rulemaking could address potential environmental impacts from the relicensing and extended o)eration of nuclear power plants. This rulemaking would define tie potential environmental impacts which need to be reviewed as part of the relicensing of irdividual nuclear power plants. The NRC is, therefore, undertaking a study to assess which environmental impacts may occur, under what circumstances, and their possible level of significance.
TIMETABLE:
ANPRM to EDO 5/30/90 ANPRM to Commission (SECY-90-208) 06/08/90 ANPRM Published 07/23/90 55 FP,29964 AhPRM Connent Period Ends 10/22/90 Proposed Action to CRGR 05/14/91 Proposed Action to E00 06/19/91 Proposed Action to Commission 06/28/91 Proposed Action Published 08/09/91 Final Action Published 06/30/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 !!SC 2201; 42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5842 EFFECTS 011 SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Donald P. Cleary Nuclear Regulatory Concission Officc of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3936 56
TITLE:
Import and Export of Radioactive Wastes RIN:
3150-AD36 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 110 ABSTRACT:
The advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANFRM) would consider amending the Comission's regulations by reexamining the existing NRC regulations for the import and export of radioactivc wastes.
This action is necessary to respond to concerns that international transfers of radioactive wastes, in particular low-level radio-active wastes, mLy not be properly controlled.
Various options for esteblishing a Comission policy on the import and export of radio-active wastes are being censidered.
The Commission published this ANPRM to seek comments from the public, industry, and other govern-ment agencies on varicus regulatory options and issues developed thus far. Thirty-cne comments were received on this ANPRM.
The comments were received from several different sources.
~
TIMETABLE:
ANPRM Action Published 02/07/90 55 FR 4181 tJPRH Public Comment Period Extended to 04/24/90 03/23/90 l
55 FR 10786 Proposed Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841
, EFFECTS ON St</LL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITILS:
Undetermined AGENCY CONTACT:
Morton Fleishman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatcry Research Washington, DC 20EES 301 492-3794 57
(D) Unpublished Rules
a,_.J4..d
@s 4ae44 w W.
,a.h.__
Je4h4 4-45 de Me.aeea44.,2,.p
,,,,eya4q.gm a ae-,a,s.g2..A,ap..g i,a.ag..g g6g, A m4_A.2,
,-.na. sam..4.e. ase.as,g -- '_ A mm.m e.p w m s u v awa -u a pue-a e y,.eara yA%#4 e
a f
I h
v i
I J
- l 1
i l
l q
l
TITLE:
Revised Rules of practice for Doniestic Licensing proceedings Rift:
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 applic:ble 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 t.djudicatory offices, to render decisions in a more timely _ fashion, eliminate the stylistic complexity of the existing rules, and reduce the burden and expanse to the parties participating in agency proceedings, in 1987, the Commission deferred consideration of this proposal, which would have revised the Consnission'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 Chairnan Zech requested that l
this proposed rule be updated and re-submitted for re-consideration l
by the Commission.
Til1ETABLE:
l
. Proposed Action published 09/00/91 Final Action published 12/00/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
4? USC 2201; 42 USC 2231; 42 USC 2241; 42 USC 5841; 5 USC 552 1
EFFEC,3 ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No 1
-AGENCY CONTACT:
Lee S. Dewey l
Huclear Regulatory Commission Atomic S6fety and Licensing Board Panel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7787 59
i l
TITLE:Availability of Official Records RIN:
3150-AC07 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 2 ABSTRACT:
The ]roposed amendment would conform the NRC's regulations pertaining to t1e availability of official records to existing case law and agency practice.
The amendment would reaffirm that the terms of 10 CFR 2.790(c) provide submitters of information a qualified right to have their informttion returned upon request. This amendment informs the public of two additional circumstances 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 advisory committee meeting, and information that is subject to a pending Freedom of Information Act request.
Additionally, the proposed amendment would add a notice statement to 10 CFR Part 2 that submitters of documents and information to the NRC should be careful in submitting copyrighted works.
The agency in receiving subnittals and making its normal distributions routinely photocopies submittals, makes microfiche of such submittals and ensures that these fiche are distributed to the PDR, LPDRs, all appropriate internal offices, and to the National Technical Information Service Center - This broad distribution and reproduction is made to satisfy the congressional mandate of Section 142(b) of the Atomic Energy Act by increased public understanding of the peaceful uses of atomic energy.
Accordingly, copyright owners are on r.otice that their act of submitting such works to the agency will be considered as the granting to the NRC an implied license to reproduce and distribute according to normal agency practice.
Naturally, this noticedoesnotpreventsubmittersfromapplying10CFR2.790(b)(1) procedures to information that contains trade secrets or privileged or confidential commercial or financial information !propr.etary information) and it is recognized that some information in those categories may be copyrighted. The key f actor is that it is their proprietary information status that exempts them from public disclosure and not their copyright designation.
Lastly, this implied license is not applicable to fair use of copyrighted works or the incorporation by reference of copyrighted works in agency submittals, e.g., the referencing of a copyrighted code or standard in a submittal does not affect the copyright of that standard.
A proposal is being prepared to submit to agency staff for comment.
60 y
TITLE:-
Availability of Officiel Records TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Fut.lished 05/31/91 LEGAL AUTHOR 11Y:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSillESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Catherine Holzle Nuclear. Regulatory Commission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20553 301 492-1560 61'
TITLE:
Discrimination on the Basis of Sex RIN:
3150-A050 CFR CITATION:
The final rule would amend the Comission's regulations dealing with discriutination against persons who, on the grounds of sex, are excluded f rom participation in, denied the benefits oi, or subjected to discriminatior ur. der any program or activity licensed by the NRC. The Comission has decided that Section 401 of the Energy Reorganization Act, which prohibits sex discrimination, applies only to the Comission and does not apply to NRC licensees and/or a)plicantt.
Since this decision invalidates 10 CFR 19.32 and 10 CrR 2.111, action is being taken to amend these sections and to ire.orporate appropriate language to clarify that these sections do not apply to licensee employees.
TIMETACLE:
Final Action published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON S!!ALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY C0t: TACT:
l',arkley L. Au Nuclear Regulatory Comission 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 scrding. 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 recongnendations and renort of the American BerAsscciation(ABA).
Since the pre-1965 wording of the definition of meeting is fully adequate to permit the types of non-Sunshine Act discussions that the NRC believes would be useful, the proposal calls for the NRC to reinstitute its pre-1985 definition of meeting, with the intention of conducting its non-Sunshine Act discussions in accordance with the guidelines reconnended by the ABA.
TIMETABLE:
Next Action Undeternintd LEGAL AtlTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL LUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Peter G. Crane Nuc1ter Regulatory Consnission Office of the General Counsel Washington, DC 20555 301 492-1634 63
Ti1LE:
Pevision of Sp(cific Exemptions Ritl:
3150-AD83 CFR CITA110H:
10 CF R 9 ABSTRACT:
The final rule would ament the Commission's regulations pertaining to specific exemptions cited in the I:RC's Privacy Act Systems of Records.
This final rule would reflect the addition of ti,e Privacy Act (j)(2) exenption 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 systeni of records to the trecific exemption (s) of the Privacy Act under which the system is exempt.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Fublished Undetermined LEGAL AUTil0RITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY C0HTACT:
Sarah Wigginton Nuclear Regulatory Conunission Office of Administration Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7752 64
TITLE:
- Access Authorization Reinvestigation program for Licensee Personnel RIN:
3150-ADS 6 j
CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 11; 10 CFF 25 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule establishes a reinvestigation program for licensee personnel with-NRC "Q" and "L" access autterizations. The amendment is necessary to ensure uniformity in the' investigative requittinents for "Q" and "L" access authcrizations.
Currently, NRC requires a reinvestigation every five years for its employees, i
consultants, experts and panel men 6ers with "Q" end "L" access authorization, but no routine reinvestigation for licensee personnel with the same level of access-authorizations.
A L
recommendation was made in the 1988 GAO Report, *NRC's Security Clearance program Can Be-Strengthened," and amplified in 1989 hearings before Congressn.an Synar, that NRC have a reinvestigation i
program for its "L" cleared em)1oyees, consultants, experts and panel members.
The rationale yehind that recommendation applies equally to cleared licensee personnel.
There is no alternative to rulemaking that would accon.plish the requirement of a reinvestigation progran. for licensee personnel with "Q" or "L" access authorization.
The proposed rule will establish the requirement that licensee personnel whose access authorizations were granted five or more years ago would be subjcct to a reinvestigation similar in scope to that required for NRC employees.
This will have no known impact on the public since only licensee personnel who require access to classified National Security inferw:N cr Restricted Data for a-period of five years or more will be affecu. This will affect approximately 20 licensees or' license applicants who have personnti with such access
-authorizations. The impact on such licensees will be limited-because _(1) not all. employees rcquiring accest to classified information require such access for a cortinuous period exceeding five years, and.(2) many of the people who would be affected by this proposed rule are covered by a 00E' reinvestigation program for its contractors and those reinvestigations would be l
acceptable as meeting NRC's requirements.
The benefit of the l
proposed rule would be to establish consistency in the requirements L
for all personnel, NRC and licensee, who_have_"Q" and "L" access authorization _ which will help assure continued eligibility for such authorization. This action will also_ provide increased assurance-of the continuing trustworthiness of.affected personnel.
L 65.
T11LE:
- Access Authorization Reinvestigation Program for Licensee Personnel TlHETABLE:
Proposed Action for Division Review 03/31/91 Office Cencurrence Completed 04/26/91 Proposed Action to EDO 05/01/91 Proposed Action Publishtd 05/24/91 LEGAL AUTH0kITY:
42 USC 2165; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2273; 42 USC 5B41; E.O.10865; E.O. 12356 EFFECTS ON SMI,LL BUSlHESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
ho AGENCY CONTACT:
Duane G. Kidd Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Administration Washington, DC 20555 301 492-4127 66
TITLE:
Clarification of Statutory Authority for Purposes of Criminal Enforcement RIN:
3150-AD62 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 19; 10 CFR 20; 10 CFR 21; 10 CFR 25; 10 CFR 26; 10 CFR 30; 10 CFR 31; 10 CFR 32; 10 CFR 33; 10 CFR 54; 10 CFR 35; 10 CFR 39; 10 CFR 40; 10 CFR 50; 10 CFR 55; 10 CFR 61; 10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 71; 10 CFR 72; 10 CFR 73; 10 CFR 74; 10 CFR 75; 10 CFR 95; 10 CFR 110; 10 CFR 150 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations by revising the authority citations accompanying some of the regulations in order to eliminate uncertainty concerning the authority for application of criminal sanctions under Title 10.
These authority citations need to be amended to more clearly identify those violations which, if willfully violated, may subject the violator to potential criminal penalties.
The NRC has been unable to refer some cases to the Department of Justice (D0J) or the D0J has had difficulty in prosecuting cases as a result of the gaps and inconsistencies in the existing authority citations.
The proposed rule wculd create no r.tw potential liabilities. The proposed rule would specify which regulations were issued under su) paragraph "b",
"i", or "ce af Section 161 of the Atomic Energy Act. These amendments would ensure that persons subject to the Conmission's regulations are put on notice as to which regulations, if willfully violated, may subject them to criminal sanctions pursuant to Section 223 of the Atomic Energy Act.
There is no alternativt ether than correcting these probitms through rulema king.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to Commission 06/01/91 Propcsed Action Published 09/01/91 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT Geoffrey Cant Nuclear Reguletory Commission Office 01 Enforcement Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3283 67
I TITLE:
- Cher.ge in Commercial 1elephone Number for Region V Ritt:
3150-AD88 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20; 10 CFR 21; 10 CFR 73 ABSTRACT:
The final rule would amend the Commission's regulations to iridicate a change in the commercial telephone number for the NRC's Region V office located in Walnut Creek, California.
These amendments are necessary to inform the public of these administrative.hanges to NRC regulations.
TIMETABLE:
Final Action Published 04/25/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSillESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
David L. Meyer Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Administration Washington, DC 20555 301 492-7086 68
l TITLE: Residual Radioactivity Criteria for Uniestricted kelease of Lands and Structures RIN:
3150 A065 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 20 APSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to codify the basic principles and criteria which would c.110w residually contaminated lands and structures to be released for unrestricted public use. The rule would reflect Connission vims as defined in the Below Regulatory Concern Policy Statenient which was published in the Federal Register on July 3,1990(55FR27522).
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 dote criteria and other policy conditions.
In the final rule on General Requirements for Deconmissioning Nuc1 car Facilities (53FR2401P.)datedJune 27, 1988, the need and urgency for guidance with respt:ct to residual contamination criteria was expressed. At that time, it was anticipated that an interagency werking group organized by the Environmental Prctection Agency would oevelop 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 deconmissionings.
The rule would codify the basic principles and criteria expressed in a staff requirements niemorandum dated March 19, 1991. Measurables, in the form of surf ace 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 f ramework upon which deconnissionir.g activities and license terminations can be accomplishe.d. 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 CRGR 10/31/91 Propcsed Action to ACHW 10/31/91 Proposed Action to ED0 01/15/92 Proposed Action to Conmission 01/30/92 Proposed Action Published 02/00/92 Final Action Published 02/00/93 69
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:
James Malaro Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regul6 tory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3764 1
4 70
TITLE:Low-Level Waste Manifest Information and Reporting RIN:
3150-AD33 CFR CITAT10M:
10 CFR 20; 10 CFR 61 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Cornission's regulations to:
(1) improve information contained in manifests accompanying shipments of waste to low-level waste (LLW) disposal facilities licensed under Part 61; (2) develep a uniform manifest for national use; (3) require that operators of these disposal facilities store portions of this manifest information in onsite computer recordkceping systems; and (4) require that operators periodically submit, in an electronic f ormat, reports of shipment manifest information.
To ensure safe disposal of LLW, the HRC 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 G 20.311, a manifest must accompany cach shipment of LLW to a disposal facility. Unfortunately, existing manifests do not describe the waste in detail sufficient to ensure compliance with Part 61 performance objectives.
In addition, NRC's regulations do not require that disposal site operators develop and operate computer systems for storage and manipulation of shipment manifest information. The NRC believes that such onsite computer systems are necessary for safe disposal facility operation.
The NRC also believes that a national data base is needed which contains information on LLW disposed at all sites.
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 ability to perform safety and environmental assessments, and to monitor compliance with rcgulations and license conditions.
71 1
TITLE:
Low-Level Waste Manifest Information and Reporting ABSTRACT:
(CONT)
The rulemaking will help ensure the availability of a complete, detailed national LLW computcr data base, operatt.d 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 Agreernent States. The rulemaking, through development of a uniferir manifest, wculd also improve safe 6nd expeditious movement of LLW from generators through processors er collectors to disposal facilities.
.mergency accident procedures would be enhanced through use of a single uniform manifest.
We expect that the rulemaking will slightly increase dis)osal costs. The rulemaking is a budgeted activity cited in tie NRC 5-year plar..
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to ACNW 04/09/90 Proposed Action to CRGR 04/09/90 Proposed Action to EDO 07/30/91 Proposed Action to Comission 08/30/91
)
Proposed Action Published 09/30/91 Final Action Published 09/30/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Yes AGENCY CONTACT:
Mark Haisfield/W. Labs -
Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3877/0509 72 l
l TITLE:
Fitness-for-Duty Programs for Category 1 Fuel Facilities and Shipments klN:
3150-AD68 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR E6 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Congnission's regulations to include Category I fuel facilities and Category I shipments in the fitness-for-duty programs.
This action is necessary to ensure fitness fer duty of employees:
(1) who have direct access to large quantities of special nuclear material (SN!4); (2) who are responsible for the protection of the material; and (3) who transport the material. The proposed rule is expected to lead to compatibility with equivalent DOE programs.
The central issue for Category 1-type facilities and shipments is the risk of thef t or diversion of high-cnriched SHl4 due to drug-related causes which, in turn, could pose a significant risk to the health, safety, or security of a large population. Current regulations only cover nuclear power plants and need to be expanded to include Category I facilities and shipments with requirements reflecting the differences between the nuclear power plants and the Category I facilities and shipments. There is no alternative to rulemaking which would accomplish the objectives of the rulemaking.
The rulemaking will address the fitness-for-duty programs as they pertain to the type of facility or mode of shipment.
The rulemaking will address the following aspects of the fitness for duty programs--
general performance objectives, program elements and procedures, records and reports, audits, and enforcement.
The impact of the rule on the NRC licensing, inspection, and enforce-ment program will be approximately 1 FTE per year.
The NRC resources rcquired to develop the rulemaking are estimated to be 0.5 FTE per year for 2 years. The cost to industry will include chemical testing end operating costs.
TIMETABLE:
Options Paper for Office Concurrence 04/15/91 Proposed Action to E00 05/24/91 Proposed Action to Commission 06/07/91 Proposed Action Published 08/19/91 Final Action Published 06/30/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 73
TITLE: Fitness-for-Duty Progranis for Category 1 Fuel Facilities and Shipments EFFECTS ON Sl4ALL BUSiliESS AND OTHER EllTITILS:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Stanley Turel Nuclear Reguietory Commission Of fice cf Nuclear Rogblatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3739 74
l TITLE:
Decounissioning Regulations:
Recordleeping and Termination for Decommissioning, Documentation Additions RlH:
3150-AD67 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 30; 10 CFR 40; 10 CFR 50; 10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 72 ABS 1RACT:
The proposed rule, in conjunction with the decommissioning rule published on June 27,1988 (53 FR 24018), would modify the Conrnission's decommissioning regulations to make them more specific and more easily implemented. Current regulations require recordkeeping provisions as well as termination plans or their equivalent to be filed with thc Commission at cessation of operations. However, no explicit requir>ments arc specified in current rules pertaining to a listing of the land, structures, and equipment of the licensed f acility; nor are any explicit requirements specified pertaining to submittal of an operating history at the time of submittal of final plans as weil as prior to license termination. This type of information is inportant to ensure that all features and aspects of the facility and its attendant activities that could have potential for resulting in radioactive contamination have been dealt with in the deconnissioning process and that a record exists that can be stored for future reference which cor.tains the reltvant features of the license termination process requirements.
There does not appear to bc eny reasonable citernative to rulemaking action. However, it is expected that most of the information explicitly required in the pro minimal effort, be available (posed amendments w'11 tit eady, or with based on the existing rule record-keepingtoquirements). While proposed amendments will affect all licensees, it is anticipated that the requirements will place minimal burden on them. Moreover, ensuring that the infornation is explicitly available should help expdite NRC approval of licensee deconmiissioning activitics and may reduce the overall licensee and NRC efforts required to terminate a license.
Proposed changes to the regulations will be issued for public connent.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to ACRS 06/21/91 Freposed Action to CRCR C6/21/91 Proposed Action to E00 07/30/91 Proposed Action Published 09/06/91 Final Action Published 04/30/92 75 I
I 111LE:
Decommissioning Regulations:
Recordkeeping end Termin6 tion for Decounissicning. Documentation Additions LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON DIALL BUSINESS AND OThER ENTITIES: Yes AGENCY CONTACT:
Carl Feldman Nuclear Regulatory Conraission Offict of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington DC 20555 301 49e-3883 76 g
TITLE:Tintliness in Conduct of Octommissionir,9 of Material facilities RIN:
3150-ADC6 CIR CITAT1014:
10 CFR 30; 10 CFR 40; 10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 72 ABSTRACT:
The pr0 posed rule woule anend the Commission's regulations to require decontan.ination and decourissioning of material f acilities within a fixed period of time af ttr cessation of operations.
Current regulations allow material licenseus considerable discretion as to the timing of decontamination and decommissioning. This has allcwed some licensees to remain inactive without decommissioning on the besis that operations may resume sometir4 in the future.
Similarly, licensees are not required to deconteminate promptly, in step-by-step f ashion, portions of their facilities that become inactive as their operations evolve. This allows licensees to pcstpone heavy decounissioning costs by simply continuing sufficient controls, monitoring, and surveillance to meet minimal safety requirements.
The proposed rule would require decontamination and decommissioning of materials facilities within a fixed period of time (e.g.
2-3 years) after cessation of operations.
This requirement would be acconipanied by a provision for the licensee to seek a variance if completion of decontamination or decommissicning within the required times is not technically achievable or if 0 laying decontamination or decommissioning would reduce risk to public bcalth and safety or the environment.
The rulemaking will result in publication of specific criteria for timeliness in the decontamination and deconmissioning of material facilities. This rulemaking will provide a more substantial planning base for the industry and result in timely decentamination and decommissioning of material facilities. The resulting timely decontamination and decongnissioning of materials f acilities will reduce the potential radiological risk to the public and the environment from contaminated materials sites. The rulemaking is not expected to substantially affect licensee costs.
TIMETABl.E :
Proposed Action to EDO 04/30/91 Proposed Action to Commission 05/31/91 Proposed Action Published 06/28/91 Final Action Published 04/30/92 77 l
TITLE:
Timeliness in Conduct of Decommissioning of Heterial facilities LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 6841 EFFECTS ON SMALL LUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGEkCY CONTACT:
James Malcro Nuclear Regulatory Counission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washin ton DC 20556 301 49 -3764 i
78 e.
m
TITLE:
Requirenients for Possession of Industrial Levices RIN:
3150-A034 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 31 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations for the possessicn of industrial dtvices containing byproduct material to require device users to report to the f2C on a periodic basis.
The prososed report would indicate that the device is still in use or to w1om the device has been transferred. The proposed rule would be the most efficient method, corsidering the number of general licensees and the number of devices currently in use, for assuring that devices are not imprcperly transferred or inadvertantly discardcd. The proposed rule is necessary to evoid unnecessary radiation exposure to the public that may occur when sn improperly discarded device is ir,cluded in a batch of scrap metal for reprocessing. The proposed rule would also avoid the unnecessary expctse involved in retrieving the manufactured items fabricated from contaminated netal.
The proposcd rule would impose a small burden on device users and the llRC.
TIMETABLE:
froposed Action to EDO 06/01/90 I!evised Propostd Action to ED0 01/31/91 F,evised Proposed Action to EDO 02/27/91 Proposed Action lubilshed 05/00/91 Final Action Published 02/00/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2114; 42 USC 2201 EFFECTS ON 5 HALL CUSINESS AND OTHER EllTITIES:
Yes AGEt!CY CONTACT:
Joseph J. f< ate Nuclear Rtpulatory Commission Office of huclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3795 79
.. ~.
TITLE:
Restrict Maximum Air Gap Betsten the Device and the Product for Gentral Licensed Devices RIN:
3150-ADB2 CFR CITATION:
10 CFP 32 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to preytnt unnecessary radiation exposurc to individuals resulting from the use of gauging devices containing radioactive sources.
These devices are routinely used for measuring material density, level, weight, moisture, and thickness.
The proposed rule would require specific design criteria or other prescribed methods to prevent personnel eccess to a radiation field in exctss of 10 CFR Part 20 limits for unrestricted areas.
Centrolling devices found to have unacceptable air gaps under a specific license would require licensees to provide.more stringent controls over these devices and make licensees subject to routine inspections.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 09/16/91 Proposed Action to Connission 10/15/91 Proposed Action Published 12/16/91 Final Action Published Undetermined 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:
Undetermined AGENCY CONTACT:
Harvey Scott Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3632 80
TITLE:
Iridiur-192 Wire for Interstitial 1reatment of Cancer RlH:
3150-AD46 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would araeno the Convaission't regulations governing the medical uses of byproduct mater 1ai. The proposed amendment would add iridium-192 wire to the list of brachytherapy sources permitted for use in interstitini treatment of cancer.
Under current NRC regulations, users must have their licenses amended ttfore they may use this brachytherapy source.
The proposed rule has been developed in response to a petition for ruleniaking (Docket No. PRM-35-8) tutinitted by Araersham Corporation.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to Of fices for Concurrence 03/16/90 Proposed Action Published Undetermined final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 LFFECTS ON SMALL BUSlkESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Anthony N. Tsc Huclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3797 81
I TITLE:
Use of Radiopharmaceuticcis f or Medical Research, Use_ of Biologics Containing Byproduct Material, and Compounding Radiopharmaceuticals RIN:
3150-ACE 9 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 35 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would examine the Commission's regulations related to the compounding of radiopharmaceuticals, the use of biologics containing byproduct material, and the medical research uses of radiorh6rmaceuticals. The NRC's response to the petition for rulemaking submitted by the American College of Nucicar Physicians arid the Society of Nuclear Medicine (PRM-35-9) could result in denial or proposed rulemakirg for all or part of the petition. This task is expe.ted to consume about 2 staff-years of effort.
TlHETABLE:
Proposed Acticn Fublished Undetcrmined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY C0hTACT:
Anthony Tse llucicar Regulatcry Commission Of fice of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3797 82
TITLE:
- Uranium Enrichment Regulations RIN:
3150-AD90 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 40; 10 CFR 50; 10 CFR 51; 10 CFR 70; 10 CFR 75; 10 CFR 140; 10 CFR 150; 10 CFR 170 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations governing tbc licensing of uranium enrichment facilities to conform to the Solar, Wind, Waste, and Geothermal Power Production incentives Act of 1990, which amended the Atomic Energy Act (the Act).
The principal araendment changed the definition of a production facility to exclude uranium enrichment.
Licensing of uranium enrichment plants will be performed pursuant to 10 CFR Parts 40 and 70, rather than 10 CFR Part
- 50. A new $ection 193 of the Act revised the requirements for licensing of enrichment facilities with respect to environmental review, adjudi-catory hearings, inspection and operation, insurance and decommissioning, and indemnification. The proposed rule presents a number of admini-strative and conforming changes to 10 CFR Chapter I necessary to implement the requiremer.ts of the Act.
TlHETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 07/05/91 Propcsed Action to Connission 08/05/91 Proposed Action Published 09/05/91 Final Action Published 05/07/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
Sections 53, 63,161b,193 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended LFFECTS ON SMALL EUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
14 0 AGENCY CONTACT:
Charles Nilsen Nuclear Regulatory Consnission Office of Nuc1 car Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3834 83
L TITLE:
Training and Qualification of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel
- RIN:
- 315l-AD80-CFR CITATION:
.20 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Cor.nission'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 esta>11sh qualification requirenents-for those personnel.
The-objectives of.the proposed rule are to codify existing industry practices related to personnel training and qualification, and to meet-the directives contained 11n Section 300 of the' Nuclear Waste Policy Act _ of 1982 (Pub.- L.97-425).
TIMETABLE:'
Proposed Action to_CRGR 02/14/91 Proposed Action to ACRS 02/14/91
- Proposed Action to EDO. 04/22/91 Proposed Action to Commission 05/01/91 Proposed Action Published 07/01/91 Final Action Published 06/30/92.
LEGAL AUTHORITY:~
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No
- AGENCY CONTACT:
Mary Louise Roe Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of? Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC _20555 7
- 301 492-3745
~?
.1)
I
.f 84 s
v e
e n- - ree-,
.-emw,.
2
---*+w
%,,-e'-w
-,-.-w-ew---d--i
TITLE:Safety Related end Important to Saf ety in 10 CFR part 50 RIN:
3150-ABB8 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would clarify in the Commission's regulations the use of the terms "important to scfety" and " safety related" by adding definitions of these two terms and of " facility licensing documents" to 10 CFR Part 50 and by discussing how these definitions would be applied in NRC licensing reviews.
Significant issues concerning the meaning of these terms as they are used in this part have arisen in Commission licensing proceedings. This proposed rule would define these terms and clarify the nature and extent of their ef fect on quality assurance requirements, thereby resolving these issues.
Rulemaking was chosen as the method of resolving this issue as a result of the Commission's directive to resolve the issue by rulemaking contained in the Shoreham licensing decision (CL1-84-9, 19 NRC 1323, June 5, 1984).
A position paper requesting approval of the staff proposed definitiuns and additional guidance from the Commission was signed by the ED0 on May 29, 1986.
In addition to rulemaking, the position paper discusses the alternative of the Commission issuing a policy statement concerning the definitions and their usage.
Since the proposed rule is only clarifying existing requirements, there is no impact on the public or the industry as a result of this rulemaking.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to Commission 05/29/86 Commission Decision on SECY 86-164 Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 5841; 42 USC 5842; 42 USC 5846 EFFECTS Oil SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Owen Gormley Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3743 85 l
l
TITLE:
fracture Toughness and hecctor Vessel Material Surveillance Requirements RIN:
3150-AD57 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50, Appendices G and H ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend 10 CFR Part 50 of the Commission's regulations.
Appendix G, fracture Toughness Requirements, arovides the basis for calculating the pressure-temperature limits t16t appear in the Technical Specifications for every plant.
By coincidence, the ASME Boiler and pressure Vessel Code Appendix the.t t
4 is incorporated by referenct it also Appendix G.
The additional requirements given in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, are principally thoi,e needed to include thc effects of neutron radiation embrittitrent in the estimetes of fractute toughness of the reactor vessel beltline as the vess(1 ages and accumulates neutron flut.nce. To inonitor the latter, Appendix h contains requirsents for a reactor vessel material surveillance program.
It incorporates ASTM Standard Practice E 105 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 tht final balloting stages.
Another purpose is to change the ASME C
't.
Appendix that is refereticed in Appendix 0,10 CFR Part 50, ficm Aapendix G cf Section 111, the construction code, to Appendix G in tie 1989 Edition of Section XI, the intervice inspection ccde.
At present the two appendices are idenU cal. The reason for adding an Appendix G in the 1989 Edition of Section XI was to put it under the jurisdicticn of a workin0 group whose members were taking an active interest in fracture iscues as a consequence of working with the problems of c prating plants. Updating is expected to include adve.,ces in fracture analysis, because the original Apper. dix G cf Section 111 has been in use since 1972.
The pacing item in the list of proposed amendn.ents is to clarify the NRC's position on pressure testing as agt eed by the CRGR at their metting on November 29, 1989. This requires that some words be deleted from paragraph IV.A.6 of Appendix G, 10 CFR Part 50, and
- c. 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 ccciant system be essentially water sclid during the test.
I The aroposed rule vould also delete paragraph IV.6 of Appendix G, wiich requires that reactor vessels be designed to permit ar.nealing if they are predicted to undergo embrittlement to 86
1 TITLE:
1 Fracture Toughness and Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Requirements ABSTRACT:
(CONT) specified levels. This action is needed to conform to the Comission's position as stated in the Supplementary Information for the FTS rule published in 1986.
Finally, an amendment is proposed that will delete a general requirement from Apper. dix 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.
Til4ETABLE:
Proposed Action to E00 Undetermined Proposed Action Published Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGEf4CY CONTACT:
Allen L. Hiser, Jr.
11uclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3988 87
l TITLE:
- Change to Part 50 to Update Source Term and Replace Dose Calculation RIN:
3150-AD91 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule wovid amend the Commission's regulations regardirg the decoupling of source term and dose calculations from reactor sitir.g and the use of updated source term insights for future light water reactors. The hRC is >resently in the process of reviewing advanced reactor designs. Tae DOE has also indicated that it intends to seek review for en early site permit, as permitted by 10 CFR Part 52, by Early 1993. Therefore, this rulemaking is viewed as having a high priority. The only alternative to rulemaking would be to continue present staff practice utilizing an outdated source termformulationderivedfromTechnicalInformationDocument(TID) 14844, issued in 1962, coupled with the use of the guideline dose values in 10 CFR Part 100, not only for reactor siting, but for plant design as well.
This rulemaking action comprises two phases. The first phase is described in the proposed rule titled, " Change to Part 100 to Add Site Criteria, Update Appendix A and Remove Dose Calculations; inte-im Change to Part 50 to Add Source Term and Dose Calculations (3150-AD92)." The second phase will consist of a final revision of 10 CFR Part 50 to incorporate updated source term and severe accident research insights into plant design requirements for future light water reactors.
The intent of this second phase of rulemaking is expected to provide additional requirements for future light water reactors regarding severe accident prevention ard uitigation, and is expected to substantially reduce the risks f rom such events.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action tc ACRS 07/01/92 Proposed Action to CRGR 08/01/92 Proposed Action to EDO 08/15/92 Proposed Action to Comission 09/15/92 Proposed Action Published 10/30/92 Final Acticn Published 08/31/93 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND 01HER ENTITIES: Undetermined 88
.._m_._.-._.____...
1 TITLE:
Change to Part 50 to Update Source Term and Replace Dose Calculation AGENCY CONTACT:
Leonard Soffer Nuclear' Regulatory Consnission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3916 l
o l'
v l'
l 89 1
TITLE:CodesandStandardsforNuclearPowerPlants(ASMECode,Section XI, Division 1, Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL)
RiN:
3150 AC93 CFR CITATION:
10-CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would incorporate by reference Subsection lWE,
" Requirements for Class MC Components of Light-Water Cooled Power Plants," and Subsection IWL, " Requirements for Class CC Concrete Components of Light-Water Cooled Power Plants," of Section XI (Division 1) of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code). Subsection IWE provides the rules and requirements for inservice inspection, repair, and replacement of Class MC pressure retaining components and their integral attachments, and of metallic shell and penetration liners of Class CC pressure tetaining components and their integral attachments in light-water cooled power plants. Subsection IWL provides the rules and requirements for ins:rvice inspection and repair of the reinforced concrete and post tensioning systems of class CC components.
Incorporation by referenra of Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL will provide systematic examination rules for containment structure for meeting Criterion o3 of the General Design Criteria (Appendix A of 10 CFR Part 50) ar.d Appendix J of 10 CFR Part 50. Age-related degradation of cc."tainments has occurred, and additional and potentially more serious degredation mechanisms can be anticipated as nuclear power plants age.
If the NRC did not take action to endorse the Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL rules, the NRC position on examination practices for containment structure would have to be established on a case-by-case basis and improved examination practices for steel containment structures might not be implemented. The other alternatives of incorporating these detailed examination requirements into the American Natienal Standard ANSI /ANS 56.8-1981 or into Appendix J ore 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 prcviding uniform detailed criteria against which the staff can review any single submission.
Adoption of the proposed amendn.ent would permit the use of improved methods for containment inservice inspection.
90
TITLE:Codes and Standards for Nuclear Power Plants ( ASME Code,Section XI, Division 1, Subsection IWE and Subsection IWL)
TIMETABt.E:
Prcposed Action to CRGR 06/13/89 Propostd 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 301 492-3005 91
I 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 i 50.47(a) and 16 planning standards outlined in s 50.47(b).
In addition, the rulemaking will clarify the term " range of protective actions."
Other issues to be clarified include monitoring of evacuees, actions for recovery and reentry, notification of the public, evacuation time estimates, and exercise frequency, in a December 23, 1988, memoranduin to the ED0 from SECY, the staff was directed to review the "...NRC's emergency plannirg 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 E00 to the Commission dated June 29, 1989.
TlHETABLE:
Proposed Action to CRGR/ACRS 04/03/91 Proposed Action to ED0 05/15/91 Proposed Action to Commission 06/03/91 Proposed Action Published 08/30/91 Final Action Published 05/15/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Michael T. Jamgochian Nuclear Regulatory Counission Office of Huclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3918 92
4 TITLE:
Emergency Telecommunications: System Upgrade
-RIN:
3150-AD39 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would anend the Conmission's regulations to require-
.the. implementation of -the NRC's Emergency Telecommunications System (ETS) upgrade at all licenseo nuclear power plants and selected: fuel-cycle f acilities. The NRC's primary role. in an emergency at a j
licensed nuc1cer facility is one of monitoring the licensee to ensure that appropriotc recommendations are nade with respect to offsite-1 actions to protect public health and safety, in order to adequately perform this function, the NRC requires reliabic communications 1with the~ licensee and the regional offices.
Experience with the currently installed ETS has' indicated that a sufficient nur.ber of problems exist to warrant -a system upgrade.
The ETS upgrade will b'e comprised of a satellite network to transmit between tie NRC Operations Center, the Regions, the Technical Training.
1 Center-(TTC),tand:thelicenseesiteswithaland-basedtelephone exchange backup system.: This. design is expected to provide the necessary emergency telecons.unications functions with suffic'ient i
redundancy to ensure availability:even-under the challenging communication conditions that were existing during a nuclear-emergency. The licensees will be~ required to provide the hardware, logistics, operationalfandl maintenance-support to implement the ETS' upgrade at_their sites.
TIMETABLE:-
-Proposed Action Published Undetermined
. Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42-USC 5841
.i
-EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY; CONTACT:
~,
Markley Au
. Nuclear. Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Rcgulatory Research Washington, DC 20555
-301=492-3749 93
- n :- - e
.n
TITLE:
Emergency Pierning Regulations f or Part 52 Licensing RIN:
3150-AD48 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Conmission's regulations concerning those portions of emergency plans which cennot be exercised prior to issuance of a Part E2 combined license. This rulemaking will be accomplishto on a "high priority basis" as directed in a staff r(quirements memorandum dated Septcmber 12, 1989.
It is estimated that 2 staff-years of ef fort over 2 ye6rs will be required f or this rulemaking, T1tiETABLE:
Proposed Action to CRGR/ACRS 01/15/90 Proposed Action to EDO 03/07/90 Proposed Action to Con. mission (SECY-90-103) 03/20/90 Proposed Action published 06/18/91 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 LFFECTS ON SMALL BUSillESS AND OTHER EtiTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT; Michael T. Jangochian tiuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nucient Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3918 94
1 l
TITLE:
- Change to Part 100 to Add Site Criteria, Update Appendix A and Remove Dose Calculations; Interim Change to Part 50 to Add Source Term and Dose Calculations Riti:
3150-AD92 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 50; 10 CFR 100 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations regarding the decoupling of source term and dose calculations from reactor siting and the use of uptated source term insights for future light water reactors.
The NRC is presently in the process of reviewing advanced reactor designs, and the DOE has also indicated that it intends to seek review for an early site permit, as permitted by 10 CFR Part 52, by early 1993.
Therefore, this rulemaking is viewed as having a high priority.
The only alternative to rulemakir.g would be to continue present staff practice utilizing an outdated source term formulation derived from Technical Information Document (TlD) 14844, issued in 1962, coupled with the use of the guideline dose values in 10 CFR Part 100, not only for reactor siting, but for plant design as well.
This rulemaking action comprises two phases.
In the first phase, Part 100 will be revised by removing source term and dose criteria and addir.g site criteria (e.g., exclusion area size and population density).
Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 100 will also t3e revised to update understanding of geologic and seismic knowledge regarding reactor siting. Source term and dose calculatioris will continue to be used for assessment of plant systems and will be placed in an interim change to 10 CFR Part 50. The second phase of this rulemaking action is described in the proposed rule titled, " Change to Part 50 to Update Source Term and Dose Calculations (3150-AD91)."
The intent of this first phese of rulemaking is basically to codify present staff criteria, expressed in Regulatory Guide 4.7.
This represents no substantive change in MRC criteria.
it will make NRC's siting criteria more explicit and understandable, especially in regard to the Connission's Saf ety Goal Policy.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to ACRS 10/01/91 Proposed 1.ction to CROR 11/01/91 Proposed Action to EDO 12/16/91 Proposed tction to Connission 12/30/91 Proposed Action Published 01/30/92 Final Action Published 12/31/92 95
-,m----__--_---__
TITLE:* Change to Part 100 to Ado Site Criteria, Update Appendix A arid Remove Dose Calculations; Interim Change to Part 50 to Add Source Term anc Dost. Calculations LEGAL AUTHCRITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Undetermined AGENCY CONTACT:
Leonard Soffer Nuclear Regulatory Conunission Office of Nuclect Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3916 96
l l
TITLE:
Repository Operations Criteria RIN:
3150-AD51 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 60 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations concerning additional preclosure regulatory requirements for high-level waste geologic repositories.
Several issues associated with preclosure r(gtlatory requirements have been raised due to dif f erent interpretations of the rulenaking 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 the milestones niandated 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 frem NRC on these matters to enable DOE to proceed with the siting of a geologic repository.
The proposed amcndments would require the establist.ent of a controlled-use crea, based on radiation dose criteria, for the siting of geologic repositorics.
In addition, a new definition of structures, systems, and components important to safety would be added that would be similar to one in 10 CFR Part 72.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published Undetermined Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
Public Law 97-425, 42 USC 10101 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
llorton Fleishman Nuclear Regulatcry Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3794 97 1
1
TITLE: Fee Schedules for facilities and Materials Licenses, Transportation Package Suppliers, and Annual Fees for Operating Power Reactor Licenses RIN:
3150-ADS 7 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 71; 10 CFR 170; 10 CFR 171 ABSTRACT:
The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 requires the NRC to coliect approxin,ately 100 percent of its budget authority through fces for the next five fiscal years (FY 1991-1995).
The law saccifies that annual fees shall be established by rule to recover tie portion of the NRC budget that is not recovered from appropriations received frca the Huclear Waste Fund and monies recovered through fees assessed under Part 170 for licensing and inspection activities. Therefore, Parts 71, 170, and 171 will be revised in FY 1991. This rulemaking effort is required to comply with Pub. L. 101-508. There is to suitable alternative to rulemaking for this action.
TlHETABLE:
Pclicy Paper to Commission 01/22/S1 Commissien Made Policy Decisions 03/08/91 Propused Action Published 05/00/91 Final Action Publishea 06/00/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841; Pub. L. 101-508 EFFECTS CH SHALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Yes AGENCY CONTACT:
C. James Holloway, Jr.
Nuclear Regulatory Consission Office of the Controller Washington, DC 2055E 301 492-4301 98
TITLE:
Personnel Access Authorization Program 3
RIN:
3150-AA90 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 73 ABSTRACT:
The Comission has concluded that it is appropriate for each licensee that operates a nuclear power plant to establish an access authorization program to ensure that individuals who require unescorted access to protected areas or vital areas of their facilities are trustworthy, reliable, emotionally stable, and do not pose a threat to comit radiological sabotage. Accordingly, the NRC published a proposed rule 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 Resource Comittee (NUMARC was submitted as a public coment on this proposed rule.
The alternative 3roposed a voluntary industry commitment to implement an access autlorization program at nuclear 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.
The public comments favored a rule over a policy statement.
On April 19, 1989, the Comission requested the staff to develop a final rule which would require all licensees to have an access authorization program and would specify the major attributes of the program. The rule would be accompanied by a regulatory guide which would endorse, with appropriate exceptions, the applicable industry guidelir.es, as an acceptable way of complying with the rule.
TIMETABLE:
Office Concurrence on Proposed Policy Statement Completed 10/30/87 Proposed Policy Statement / Guidelines to E00 12/07/87 Proposed Policy Statement / Guidelines to Commission 12/15/87 l
99
TITLE:
Personnel Access Authorization Program TIMETABLE:
(CONT)
Proposed Policy Statement Published 03/09/88 53 FR 7534 Proposed Policy Statement Comment Period Ends 05/09/88 Options Paper to E00 (SE0Y-89-98) 03/22/89 Revised Final Action to CRGR 12/5/89 Revised Final Action to ACRS 12/14/89 Final Action to E00 06/18/90 Revised Final Action to ED0 01/17/91 Final Action to Cocmission (SECY-91-029) 02/05/91 Final Action Published 05/30/91 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SHALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Sandra Frattali Nuclear Regulatory Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3773 100
...,m..
.g..w.
t LTITLE:
' Night Firing Qualifications for Security Guards at Nuclear Power Plants RIN:
3150-AC88 CFR CITATION:-
3 10 CFR 73 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would ensure that security force effectiveness at nuclear; power 1 plants is_not dependent on the time of_ day.. Security
. guards currently-;are required to perform night firing-_for familiarization only..There:is no.requircment_for: standards to
! measure their effectiveness. :The proposed rule woulafchange'that by requiring that-security guards at nuclear power' plants qualify for night firing.
The_ only alternative to rulemaking is to retain the currentL sta tus..
Part 73, Appendix B, Part IV, will be amended to' require reactor.
security guards _toLqualify: annually in an, NRC-approved night firing course with1their assigned weapons.
The proposed aniendment wili standardize training and cualification in. night firing and prepare powet reactor guard forces to respond more cffectively;in the event Li of an incident. occurring in limited lighting conditions. :The cost
-to industryEshculd be relatively niodest since licenseesLalready r
operate: daylight _ firing training and qualification f acilities and
- programs.
Tne' costs to NRC will also be minimal because it will only require minor licensing, inspection and other regulatory actions.
There;is no occupational exposure.
i TIMETABLEi
-Proposed' Action Published Undetermined.
4
-Final: Action. Published Undetermined j
i LLEGAL' AUTHORITY.:
l 42_USC 2201; 42:USC 5841 EFFECTS Oil SMALL -BUSINESS.AND' OTHER ENTITIES:- No-AGENCYLCONTACT:-
- Sher Bahadur Nuclear Regulatory Commission-
.0ffice.of Nuclear _ Regulatory Research Washington, DC.20555, 301.492-3775 101
~-
TITLE:
Reinvestigation of Individuals Granted Unescorted Access to Nuclear Power Plants RIN:
3150-AD49 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 73 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to require periodic updates of FBI fingerprint checks for reinvestigation of individuals granted unescorted eccess to nuclear power plants or access to safeguards information.
The current regulations require each licensee who is authorizcd to operate a nuclear power plant under Part 50 to submit fingerprint cards to the NRC for those individuals uho are permitted unescorted access to a nuclear power facility or to safeguards information and who are not exempted under 10 CFR 73.57(b)(2).
Fingerprints are used to secure a review of the individual's criminal history record by the FBI.
Information received frcm 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 reinvestigation element.
In order to address the question cf periodic reinvestigation, 10 CFR 73.57, " Requirements for Criminal History Checks of Individuals Granteo Onescorted 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 f(r unescorted access would be retained by an individual pending results of the criminal history check on that individual's fingarprints. The alternative is to allow the status quo to continue, with no reinvestigation of utility personnel required.
This rulemaking will have a minimal impact on the NRC because of the NRC's limited participation in processing the reinvestigations.
The impact on industry will include the cost of fingerprinting and submitting fingerprint caras through the NRC to the FBI for criminal history checks. The current regulation requires payment of $21 per investigation, payable by the industry.
It is expected that this rate would also apply for each reinvestigation and would constitute full reimbursement to the government.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action Published Undetermined l
Final Action Published Undetermined 102 5
TITLE: Reinvestigation of Individuals Granted Unescorted Access to Nuclear Power Plants LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SliALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCY CONTACT:
Sandra Frattali Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3773 103
TITLE:
Day Firing Qualifications and Physical Fitness Programs for Security Personnel at Category I Fuel Cycle Facilities RIN:
3150-A030 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 equivalent for handguns and ar. NRA or nationally recognized course for semiautomatic weapons. A firing course specified for shotguns is in need of revision..Recent amendments to Part 73 added a requirement for night firing qualification using specific, designated firing courses.
To ensure uniformity, the current day firing requirements should be compatible.
Additionally, current regulations specify that security personnel have no-physical weaknesses that would adversely affect their performance of assigned ;)ob 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 facilities for security personnel need to be added to the regulations in order to provide a uniform, enforceable program.
Guidance will be developed to ensure that such a program will not, at the same time, endanger the health of those participating in it.
The proposed rule would amend 10 CFR Part 73, Appendix H, to include day firing qualification courses in each type of required weapon as well as a standardized physical fitness training course 6nd fitness standards for security personnel. Alternatives to the rulemaking would be to allow the status quo to continue.
Standardization of day firing courses to be consistent with those established for night firing would be of negligible cost to the 3-4 affected licensees and to the NRC because day firing qualification using a variety of firing courses is already being done.
Physical fitness training programs would incur moderate costs to the licensees in the area of personnel time and limited physical fitness equipment. The cost to the NRC would be in the area of licensing and inspection activities. Neither area of rulemaking affects occupational exposure.
104
TITLE:
Day Firing Qualifications and Physical Fitncss Prograrns for Security Personnel at Category 1 Fuel Cycle Facilities TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to EDO 05/31/91 Proposed Action to Consnission 06/28/91 Proposed Action Published 07/31/91 Final Action Published 11/30/92 LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTilER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
H. Tovmassian Nuclear Regulatory Cornmission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3634 105 l
TITLE:* Seismic and Geological Siting Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants RIN:
3150-AD93 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 100 ABSTRACT:
The proposed rule would amend Appendix A to Part 100 of the Commission's regulations concerning earth science issues in the licensing of nuclear power plants. The proposed rule is intended to increase the ef ficiency of regulatory actions associated with any resurgence of licensing activity.
There is a renewed sense of urgency in light of the current and future staff review of advanced reactor seismic design criteria.
The proposed revision would help avoid unnecessary delays in the licensing process. The proposed revision to Appendix A would provide general guidance with more detailed information presented in supporting regulatory guides or standard review plan previsions.
Criteria not associated with site selection or establishment of the safe shutdown earthquake will be codified in 10 CFR Part 50. The proposed revision to the regulations would be for future licensing actions. The revised regulations will not be backfitted.
TIMETABLE:
Proposed Action to CRGR 09/16/91 Proposed Action to ACRS 09/16/91 Proposed Action to EDO 10/15/91 Proposed Action to Commission 11/15/91 Proposed Action Published 12/16/91 Final Action-Published 12/31/92 LEGAL AUTEORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
Undetermined AGENCY CONTACT:
P.. McMullen/R. Kenneally huclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC 20555 301 492-3808/492-3893 106 n
TITLE:
Import and Export of Nuclear Equipment and Material RIN:
3150-AD64 CFR CITATION:
10 CFR 110 ABSTRACT:
The propesed rule would amend the Connission's regulations governing the import and export of nuclear equipment and material.
Miscellaneous changes are proposed in several areas of 10 CFR Part 110. The Commission has reviewed its processing of nuclear export license applications and has determined that (1) license applications for the export of any quantity of heavy water to Canada do not raise issues that require Connission 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 aetermined that for these license applications Executive Branch review will not be required.
In addition, the NRC has identified several other areas where minor changes are warranted. These proposed changes would:
(1) permit the expedited import and export of certain nuclear material where no significant proliferation risks are involved, (2) clarify the wording cf the coverage of son nuclear commodities, (3) streamline the procedures for public participation in NRC's licensing process, (4) delete from the list of restricted destinations those countries that recently have signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty, (5) add Namibia to the general license for the imp (6) add definitions for terms not currently defined, andort into the Unite any form, (7) make other minor changes. There is no acceptable alternative to rulemaking because the amendments to the regulations are necessary to Ensure the orderly and efficient administration of NRC's import and export responsibilities without incurring any national security or proliferation risks.
The rule should benefit the NRC, industry, and the public by making the regulations easier to understand, implement, and enforce and by expediting the review process for certain kinds of applications.
TIMETABLE:
Rulemaking Initiation Date (Division Review) 06/22/90 Proposed Action to Offices for Concurrence 04/15/91 Proposed Actior. Published 06/01/91 Final Action Published Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:
42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 107 l
TITLE:
Irnport and Export of Nuclear Equipment and Material EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:
No AGENCY CONTACT:
Elaine 0. Henby Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Governmental and Public Affairs Washington, DC 20555 301 492-0341 108
(A) Petitions Incorporated into final Rules or Petitions Denied Since December 31, 1990
--m-
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
P RM-50-50 PETITIONER: Charles Young PART:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: August 26,1988(53FR32624)
January 17, 1991 (56 FR 1749)
SUBJECT:
Technical Specifications
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requested that the Commission amend its regulations to rescind the provision that authorizes nuclear power plant operators to deviate from technical specifications during an emergency.
TIMETABLE: A notice of denial of this petition for rulemaking was p(ublished in the Federal Register on January17, 1991 56 FR 1749).
CONTACT: Norton R. Fleishman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3794 109
(B) Petitions for Which a Notice of Denial Has Been Prepared and is Scheduled to be Published in the Federal Register Next Quarter None
A
5 (C) Petitions Incorporated into Proposed Rules s
None
( -.
l
.i
1
t (D) Petitions Pending Staff Review i.
I l
I f
9
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-20-17 PETITIONER: The Rockefeller University PART:
20 OTHER AffECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: October 21,1988(53FR41342)
Correction published November 1, 1988
($3 FR 44014)
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 disaosal is permitted.
Specifically, the petitioner requests t1at the NRC add Sulfur-35, Calcium-45, Chromium-51, lodine-125, and lodine-131 in concentrations not exceeding 0.01 microcurie /g to the list of radioactive isotopes set out in 10 CFR 20.300(b). The petitioner also requests that the NRC make the unregulated dispos 61 of these wastes a matter with which all jurisdictions must comply.
TlHETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for September 1991.
CONTACT:
S. Klementowicz huclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3793 111
__._..R....
a PETITION DOCLET NUMBER:
PRM-20-18 PETITIONER: The Rockefeller University PART:
20 OTHER AFFECTED FAPTS:
None FEDERAL. htGISTER C11AT10H: October 31,1988(53FR43896)
SUBJECT:
Disposal of Solid BiomedicL1 Weste Containing Small Amounts of P.adioactivity
$UMMARY: The petitioner requests th6t 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 20.300 to classify the disposal of wastes such as paper, glass, end plastic trash containing small amounts of Hydrogen-3 and Carbon-14 as below regulatory concern. The petitioner would then be able to dispost of this material on-site in a currently operating, controlled-air incinerator. The petitioner believes this to be a reasonable, cost-effective alternative to burial of these wastes at a commercial low-level radioactivt waste site.
TIMETABLE: Resolution of the petition is scheduled for September 1991.
CONTACT:
S. Klementowicz Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3793 112
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-20-19 PETIT 10t:ER:
GE Stockholders' Alliance PART:
20 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
50 FEDERAL REGISTER CITAT10ti:
February 1,1989 (54FR5089)
SURJECT:
Injection of Detectable Odor in Ernissions of Nuclear Power Plants and Other Nuclear Processes SUPPARY: The petitioner requests that the Connission 4.tnend Part 20 to require that a detectable oder be injected into the ernission of nuclear poser plents and other nuclear processes over which the NRC has jurisdiction.
The petitioner believes that this action would iniptove the health and $6fety of the public by providing for early detection of radiation leaks.
A detectable odor would give the public notice of the need to tale health protective incasures.
The public connent period closed April 3,1989. The NRC will review public connents, prior steff work on this issue, and develop reconr.endatior.s regarding resolution of the petition.
TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for Septernber 1991.
CONTACT: Catherine Mattsch Nuclear Regulatory Connissien Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3638 O
113
i PETITION DOCKET NO:
FRM-35-8 PETITIONER:
Amersham Corporation PART:
35 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: May 5,1989 (54 FR 19378)
SUBJECT:
Iridium-192 Wire f or the Interstitial Treatment of Cancer
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission amend its regulations concerning the medical use of byproduct r.aterial to include Iridium-192 wire for interstitial treatment of cancer in the provisions of 10 CFR 35.400 which governs the use of sources for brachytherapy.
Under current NRC regulations, a potential user would be required to request and obtain a license amendment before using Iridium wire in brachytherapy treatments. The petitioner requests this amendment so that each medical use licensee that intends to use Iridium 192 wire for the interstitial treatment of cancer may do so without having to request and obtain a specific amendment to its license.
TIMETABLE:
A proposed rule entitled, " Iridium-192 Wire for Interstitial Treatment of Cancer (RIN 3150-AD46)," has been developed to address this petition.
Action on the proposed rule is expected in the near future pending final resolution of potential safety issues.
CONTACT: Anthony Tse Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (301)492-3797 114
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-35-9 PET 1110NER:
American College of Nuclear Fhysicians and the Society of Nuclear Ptdicine PART:
35 OTHER AFFECTED PAT,TS:
30, 33 FEDERAL REGISTER C11A11CH:
September 15, 1989 (54FR38239)
SUBJECT:
Use of Radiopharmaceuticals
SUMMARY
The petitioners request that the Commission revise its regulations to give coonizance 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 u.e of radiopharmaceuticals. According to the petitioners, granting of this petition would allow nuclear physicians and nuclear pharmacists to reconstitute non-radio-active kits difforently from the method recommended by the manufacturer; allew nucicar physicians and nuclear pharmacists to prepare radiopharmaceuticals whose manufacture and distribution are purposefully not regulated by FDA; and permit nuclear physicians to determine appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic applications of radioplarmaceuticals, as is their professional obligation.
The petitioners are interested in the requested 6ction because, under current NRC regulations, members of the petitioning organizations believe they cannot appropriately practice their professions. The petitioners state that authorized user physicians cannot prescribe certain radiopharmaceuticals or 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, nucitar 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 (see rulemaking, "Use of Radiopharmaceuticals for Medical Research, Use of Biologics Containing(Byproduct Material, and Containing Radiopharmaceuticals" RIN 3150-AD69)
(Part 35).
115
,I PETITION DOCKET NUl4ER:
PRM-35-9 00k1ACT:
Anthony Tse Nuclear Regulatory Conuniss, ion Of fice of Nuclear Regulatory Rescarch 301 492-3797 116
PETITION DOCKET HUMBER: PRM-50-E0 PETITIONER:
Free Environment, Inc., et al.
PART:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PAkTS:
100 FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: May 19, 1977 (AT FR 25785)
SUBJECT:
Reactor Safety Measures
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the Con. mission amend Part 50 before proceeding with the processing of license applications for the Central lowa Nuclear Project to reouire that:
(1) all nuclearreactorsbelocatedbelowgroundlevel;(2)allnuclear reactors be housed in sealed buildings within which permanent heavy vacuums are maintained; (3) a full-time Federal en.ployee, with full authority to order the pltnt to be shut down in case of any operational abnormality, always be present in all nuclear generating stations; and (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 constructicn 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 Connission's regulations.
The connent aeriod closed July 18, 1977. Three comments were Description section above) ptrts of the petition (see received. TTe first three were incorporated with PRM-50-19 for staff action purposes. A notice of denial for the third part of the petition was published in the Federal Register on February 2,1978(43FR4466).
A notice of denial for the first two parts of the petition was published April 19, 1978 (43FR16556).
TIMETABl.E: The staff is planning to prepare a Federal Pepister notice which will contain a denial for the remaining issue (Item 4) in this petition.
The notice of denial is expected to be submitted to the E00 in June 1991.
CONTACT:
H. Tovmassian Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office cf Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3634 117
l l
\\
PETITION DOCKET tlVMBER:
PRM-50-53 PETITIONER:
The Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy F/fT:
50 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS: None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
July 25,1989 (54 FR 30905)
SUBJECT:
Request for Reopening of ATWS Rulerr.aking Proceeding
SUMMARY
The petitioner requests that the NRC reopen the Anticipated Transients Without Scram (ATWS) rulemaking proceeding. This request was one portion of a request by the Ohio Citizens for Responsibit Energy (OCRE) that hRC take a number of actions to relieve allegea undue risks posed by the thermal-hydraulic instability of boiling water reactors. On April 27, 1989, the Director, NRR, responded to the OCRE request for action in a 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 fcr rulemaking under 10 CFR 2.802.
T h petitioner suggested that resolution of the ATWS probicm 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 transraitted report NE00-31709,
" Average Core Power During large Core Thermal Hydraulic Oscillations in a BWR" the EWROG concluded that previous ATWS evaluations are valid and that existing ATWS provisions and actions are appropriate. The staff review of NED0-31709 concluded thet the NE00 analyses, and other analyses performed by the BWROG contractors, were not sufficient to support their Conclusions.
NRC Staff and contractors studies cf ATWS scenarios were performed to determine if the potential power oscillations could be significant enouoh to warrant an ATWS rule change, modification of operator actions, or possible equipment /
systems changes.
Several of the ATWS scenarios revealed the neco for more cetailed studies nf the automatic responses end emergency procedures guidelints (EPG's) used by plant operators, 118
-. - - - - - ~
.-.. -.._. - - ~. - - - _
i PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM 50-53
SUMMARY
(CONT)
The staff requested that the BWROG address the questions raised by 1
the staff relative to eperator actions and instrumentation adequacy i
for an ATWS with oscillations and the timing of the boron injection and water level reduction as effective means to control such transients. The BWROG studies are expected to be completed in January 1991. The staff will review the BWROG analysis eno determine the adequacy of the results.
Therefore, the staff corsicers it prudent to hold in abeyance, pending their review of the BWROG an61ysis and information discussed above, a i
1 response to the petitioners request to reopen the ATWS rulemaking proceedings.
TIMETABLE:
Resolution of the petition is scheduled for June 1991.
CONTACT:.Moni Dey.
- Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3730 r
119
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-50-54 PETITIONER:
Public Citizen PART: 50 OTHER AFFEC1ED PAkTS:
hone FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: March 12,1990 (55 FR 9137)
SUBJECT:
Regulation of Indeptodent Power Producers
SUMMARY
The petitioner requests that the Commission promulgate rules governing the licensir.g of independent power producers (IPPs) to construct or operate cornercial nuclear power reactors.
The petitioner also requests that these rules include specific criteria for financial qualifications for an IPP seeking a construction permit or an operating license for a commercial nuclear power reactor. The petitioner believes that there is a growirg rovement towards non-utility IPPs owning, constructing, 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 120
PET 1110H DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-50-55 PETIT 10hlR: Yankee Atomic Electric Company PART: 50 OTHER AFFECTED PAkTS: None FEDERAL REGISTER CITA110N: May 3, 1990 (55 FR 18608)
SUSJECT: Schedulitig Final Safety Aralysis Report Updates
SUMMARY
- The petitioner requests that the NRC change the requirement that nuclear power plant licensees file revisions to the final saf ety analysis report not less than once a ycar.
The petitioner also requests that the regulations require that revisions be filed no later than six raonths af ter completion of each planned ref uelir g outage for a licensee's f acility.
TIMETABLE: Resolution of the petitier, is scheduled for llay 1991.
CONTACT: Moni Dey Nuclear Regulatory Connission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3730 1
121
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-60-3 PETITIONER:
Department of Energy PAR 1:
60 OTHER AFFECTED PARTS:
Hone FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION:
July 13, 1990 (55 FR 28771)
AL;;;i 10, 1990 (55 FR 32639)
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 wastes in geologic repositories to include a specific cose 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 November 1991.
CONTACT: Morten Fleishman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3794 122
PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM 60-4 PETITIONER:
States of Washington and Oregon PAR 1: 60 OlHER AFFECTED PARTS:
None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: December 17, 1990 (55 FR 5173?)
SUBJECT:
Definition of the Term "High-level Radioactive Waste"
SUMMARY
The petitioner requests the Commission to amend its regulations to revise the definition of the term "high-level radioactive waste" so as to establish a procedural framtwork and substantive standards by which the Connission will determine whether reprocessing waste, including in particutar 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 Cornission's licensing authority.
TIMETABLE: Resolution of this petition is scheduled for December 1991.
CONTACT:
Clark Prichard Nuclear Regulatory Commission Of fice of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3884 123 i
PETIT 10!, bOCKET NUMPER:
PRM.61-1 PETITIONER: Sierra Club, North Carolina Chapter PART:
61 OTHER AFFECTED PAkTS: None FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION: April 12, 1990 (55 FR 13797);
June 7, 1990 (55 FR 23206)
SUBJECT:
Design and Construction of Zero-Release Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility SUMPARY: The petitioner requests the Commission to adopt a regulation to permit the design and construction of a zero-release low-level radioactive waste disposal facility in a saturated zone. The petitioner states that the regulation is necessary in order fer the General Assembly of North Carolina to consider a waiver of a North Carolina statute which requests that the tiottom of a low-level waste facility be at least seven feet from above the seasonal high water table.
TIMETABLE: Resolution of the petition is scheduled for June 1991.
CONTACT: Mark Haisfield Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301 492-3877 124
I PETITION DOCKET NUMBER:
PRM-73-9 PETITIONER:
Nuclear Control Institute and the Comittee to Bridge the Gap PART:
73 j
OTHER AFTEC1ED PARTS: None l
FEDERAL REGISTER CITA110N:
January 29, 1991 (56 FR 3228)
SUBJECT:
Upgrade design basis threat for radiological sabotage of nuclear reactors
$l'Mt'ARY:
The petitioner requests thtt the Commission revise its regulations to upgrade the design basis threat for radiological ~ sabotage of nuclear power reactors. The petitior.crs believe that the design basis threat for radiclogical sabotage must be revised to include explosives-leden vehicles such as truck and boat bombs and to reflect the possibility of an attack by a larger number of ettackers using more sophisticated weapons.
TIMETABLE:
Resolution of this petitier, will be accomplished on an expedited basis.
CONTACT:
Carl B. Sawyer Nuclear Regulatory Comission Officc cf Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards 301 492-0360 125
(E)PetitionswithDeferredAction None
O
,j -,
I N:.c eone nb u s Nuc6E AH HEcut AtoHy coMwmon i a Puni Nuvei k l
',% oa.
"L".'MMCf.'.,7 " ~
dw". m BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET ts
,ns,we,on, on es,,,,,,,)
NUREC-0936 Vol. 10, No. 1
- a. m tt ANu s; : itt NRC Regula*.ory Agenda Q.arterly Raport 3
03,i nipon,puet,3nio Lanuary - March 1991 j
.i.a ua i..
April 1991 s
4 FIN oH GH ANT NUMBLH U T Hoh lb) 6 TYPE of HtPONT Quarterly
- r. Pt Hivo covi H t o ny
,m. o.,,,,
January - March 1991
- e. Pt.H.s o..nmwo.. oho.ANiz A1 ion - N AM e AN o aopH t ss n, =nc.
. o..- or,.<. - a a u a ~-., a. w.n c..~
- uw.**,. u..,.. e.,...
a,.
.o Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services Office of Administration U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conunission Washington, DC 20555 e i Po.NSoRING oH G ANil A11oN - N AM L ANo AoDH E 55 m Nac. t.
's.*i... em..r. es n.,irer e.. p<wm 4oc o d.m ou w
u,ne.aa..o n e, A.,e v i 4 e.e., a.p.,s.rm co,=, e Same as item 8. above.
- 10. SUPP6 E ME NT AR Y Not t 5
- 11. ABST H Act uoo,*.r mus The NRC Regulatory Agenda is a compilation of all rules on which the NRC has recently completed action or has proposed, or is considering action and all petitions for rulemaking which have been received by the Commission and are pending disposition by the Commission.
The Regulatory Agenda is updated and issued each quarter, i2 n t y woHo5/ot scH e t oH s a...,.,,.,
.a.,
u n =..,. n,
o *va.
- iuri stattui i Unlimited Compilation of rules
- i. Se cono, c6,.ss...c.1 o Petitions for ru1emaking g,,
Unclassified e u. a n>
Unclassified ib NUMGLH Of PAGE5 16 PHict sACFORW336 (7 991
I THIS DOCUMENT WAS PRINTED USING RECYCLED PAPER.
- 'S E EUitD E
- NUCLEAR RE TORY MMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555
,,,]"[,,,
[.6300 f(c4>ps233
- 1-RULES Section 1 - Rules og y r ~p r%y ffEb@R-N00ffL1CA1 ions 1 1r o un svc~
Action Completed Rules oc e c 7,3 g Proposed Rules M
Advance Notice - Proposed Rulemaking Unpublished Rules Section ll - Petitions for Rulemaking Petitions - Final or Denied Petitions - Scheduled for Pubilcation in the Federal Register Petitions - Incorporated into Proposed Rules Petitions - Pending Petitions - Deferred Action