ML20155B608
Text
f.~
kAIR PD2
'4 UNITED STATES t
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
. j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
. i s,*****/
December 9, 1983 MEMORANDUM FOR: Thomas F. Dorian Office of the Executive Legal Director FROM:
Joseph T. Cawley, 11 Rules and Procedures Branch Division of Rules and Records Office of Administration
SUBJECT:
DRR REVIEW 0F FINAL RULE CONCERNING NOTICE AND STATE CONSULTATION AND NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION Enclosed are pages from t'ie Federal Register notice which contains the final rule noted above with recuired format changes indicated.
Since many documents are referenced throughout the Federal Register notice, you should include additional information in the ADDRESSES section (page two) which explains how the public can obtain copies of the documents through the mail.
The Paperwork Reduction Act Statement (page 80) should be revised as shown.
Herb Parcover, TIDC, has supplied the revised language for this final rule.
The Regulatory Analysis Statement and the List of Subjects (pages 81 and 82) should be relocated as shown. Note that the term " Incorporation by Reference" has been added to the List of Subjects for Part 50.
In the final rule the citations of authority for 10 CFI Parts 2 and 50 are revised to eliminate the temporary operating license authority which expires December 31, 1983.
I have supplied additional amendatory instructions for both Parts 2 and 50 which would revoke the temporary operating license provisions themselves which are now codified in NRC regulations in the belief that this is what you intended.
If you wish to keep this temporary operating license text in NRC regulations, you should disregard these additional amendatory instructions.
Minor format revisions have been supplied for amendatory instructions, regulatory text, and elsewhere in the Federal Register notice.
06o4160289 06 W t Dij5[g{g49 g PDR
\\
/'...
Thomas F. Dorian Two revisions have been supplied for the citation of authority for 10 CFR Part 50 (Page 85).
Please call me on extension 24269 if you have any questions concerning the matters discussed above, trd,5 sh;b 4
/
dosaphT.Cawley,II iRules and Procedures Branch Division of Rules and Records Office of Administration
Enclosures:
As stated
._ g.
ADDRESSES:
Copies of coments received on the amendments and of the other documents described below may be examined in the Comission's Public Document JltuI Room at 1717 H Street, N.W., WasYd6gton, D C. d" 3J% & po A
m ro u9 md 0MA qlet k u d Ka w ;I O LU w ~TlD(,-
OUD -%K on et},4f Availdil.*bt a t doen[&
f FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONiACT:
Thomas F. Dorf an, Esq., Of fied of the Executive Legal Director, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washingt6n, D.C.
20555. Telephere: (301)492-8690.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
INTRODUCTION Public Law 97-415, signed on January 4, 1983, among other things, directed NRC to promulgate regulations which establish (a) standards for determining whether an amendment to an operating license involves no significant hazards consideration, (b) criteria for providing or, in emergency situations, dispensing with prior notice and public coment on any such determination, and (c) r,rocedures for consulting on such a determination with the State in which the facility involved is located.
See Conf. Rep. No.97-884, 97th Cong.. 2d Sess. (1982).
The legislation also authorired NRC to issue and make imediately effective an amendment to a license, upon a determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration (even though NRC has before it a request for a hearing by an interested person) and in advance of the holding and completion of any required hearing.
The two interim final rules ruulished in the FEDLRAL hLISTER on April 6, 1983 (48 FR 14864) and (48 FR 14873) responded to the statutory directive that
+ -..c The Comission's practice with regard to license amendments involving
.nosignificanthazardsconsideration(unless,asamatterofdiscretion, l
prior notice was given) was to issue the amendment and then publish in the FEDERAL REGISTER a " notice of issuance."
? i 2.106.
In such a case,
' interested members of the public who wished to object to the amendment and L
request a hearing could do so, but a request for a hearing did not, by' itself, suspend the effectiveness of the amendment. Thus, both the notice and hearing, if one were requested, occurred after the amendment was issued.
It is important to bear in mind that there is no intrinsic safety significance to the "no significant hazards consideration" standard, f__
Neither as a notice standard nor as a standard about when a hearing may be held does it have a substantive safety significance. Whether or not 1
an action requires prior notice or a prior hearing, no license and no amendment may be issued unless the Comission concludes that it provides reasonable assurance that the public health and safety will not be endangered and that the action will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
See, e.g.,
550.57(a).
In short, the no significant hazards consideration" standard is a procedural standard which governs whether an opportuni for a prior.
A hearing must be provided before action is taken by the Comission, and whether prior notice for public comment may be dispensed with or shortened in some limited circumstances.
l l
..~
.4,., -...
~...
_ _ _- g~
$M Fid ib}
criteria shall take into account the exigency of the need for the-N'))
amendment involved; and (iii) procedures for consultation on any g,%g such determination with the State in which the facility involved is
?.i located.
MQ Section 12(b) of that law specifies that:
g@@
(b) The authority of the Nuclear Regulatory Comission, under the provisions of the amendment made by subsection (a), to issue and Q
to make immediately effective any amendment to an operating license shall take effect upon the promulgation by the Comission of the Q
regulations required in such provisions.
. s, y
Thus, as noted above, the legislation authorizes NRC to issue and make imediately effective an amendment to an operating license upon a
,w M
determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards
.M
]S3 considerations, even though NRC has before it a request for a hearing from an interested person.
In this regard, the Conference Report states:
't The conference agreement maintains the requirement of the
~
~
- y current section 189a. of the Atomic Energy Act that a hearing on M
~
the license amendment be held upon the request of any person whose
?j interest may be affected. The agreement simply authorizes the Comission, in those cases where the amendment involved poses no 7
significant hazards consideratfor., to issue the license amendment 4
and allow it to take effect before this hearing is held or y
completed.
The conferees intend that the Comission will use this 7
authority carefully, applying it only to those license amendments M
which pose no significant hazards consideration.
Conf. Rep.
~I No.97-884, 2d. Sess., at 37 (1982).
7 ij And the th Senate has stressed:
es 6
its strong desire to preserve for the public a meaningful right to e
participate in decisions regarding the comercial use of nuclear
' J.
power.
Thus, the provision does not dispense with the requirement for a hearing, and the NRC, if requested [by an interested person],
Z must conduct a hearing after the license amendment takes effect, y
See S. Rep. No.97-113, 97th Cong., 1st Sess., at 14 (1981).
n 4
-?
+
e e4 e[
... +..
m 3.nm
. s
, -a, 4
M
~
~
N
~i'o proposed rule and in the interim final rule.
In addition, a list of examples 4
have been used of amendments likely to involve, and not likely to involve,
-3 significant hazards considerations when the stahdards are applied.
These M
A
(
examples have been employed by the Comission in developing both the proposed rule and the interim final rule. The notice of proposed rulemaking contained standards proposed by the Commission to be incorporated into Part 50, and the j
statement of considerations contained examples of amendments to an operating 1q license that are considered "likely" and "not likely" to involve a signif-N g
icant hazards consideration.
The examples were samples of precedents with q
which the staff was familiar; they were representative of certain kinds of 5
circunstances; however, they did not cover the entire range of possibilities; nor did they cover every facet of a particular situation.
Therefore, the standards ultimately must govern a determination about whether or not a proposed amendment involves significant hazards considerations.
The three standards proposed in the notice of proposed rulemaking were whether the license amendment would: (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, (2) create the possibility of an accident of a type different from any evaluated previously, or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The interim final rule did not change these standards.
4
[*
~'
35 -
l l
8 1.5 Coments One commenter points out that the three standards are virtually identical to the criteria in i 50.59 for determining whether unreviewed M
safety questions exist, and states that this similarity is appropriate.
j Another commenter makes the same point but notes an important
-1 4
3 difference in 5 50.59, namely, that the word "significant" is absent in paragraphs (a)(2)(1) to (a)(2)(iii) of that section.
It suggests that j
$ 50.59 should be amended to make it identical with i 50.92(c).
i f
Response
Sections 50.59 and 50.92 serve two different purposes.
The criteria in % 50.59(a)(2) are used to decide whether a proposed change, test, or.
experiment involves an "unreviewed safety quettion." Section 50.59 is used to decide, in part, whether the licensee of an operating reactor may make changes to it or to the procedures as descrii>ed in the safety analysis report, or whether it may conduct tests or experiments, not described in the safety analysis report, without prior Comission approval.
The licensee may not make a change without such approval, if the change involves an'unreviewed safety question.
To insert the term "significant" into the criteria would obviouslj raise the threshold for making a detemination.
It would permit licensees to exercise far greater discretion in judging which changes require Comission review.
Among Wide variations totucc., licensees might be expected.
If the Comission
~
has not reviewed an issue, it should deliberate and decide whether its
]
A
Response
In the unlikely situation noted by the comenter, as required by the legislation, the Comission will p'rovide notice of an opportunity for a prior hearing.
It will expedite this notice to the best of its ability.
However, these procedures apply only to applications for amendments to operating licenses and do not affect the Comission's authority to issue orders or rules.
If there is an iminent danger to health or safety, it can issue, of course, an immediately effective order or a rule as explained before. Anewi50.91(a)(7)hasbeenadded to clarify this point.
G.
Exigent Circumstances 1.1 Coments One comenter suggest*, that the two examples of exigent circumstances are unnecessarily narrow because both involve potentially lost opportunities to implement improvements in safety during a plant outage. The comenter recommends that the Comission make clear that these examples were not meant to be limiting and that exigent circum-stances can occur whene'ver a proposed amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and the licensee can demonstrate that avoiding delay in issuance will provide a significant safety, environmental, reliability, economic or other benefit.
j Another comenter requests that exigent circumstances include i
situations (1)wherealicensce'splantisshutdownandthelicensee L
.~
l i
i content, placement)andtimingofthenoticetobe$easonablycalculatedto
^
allow residents of the area surrounding the facility an adequate opportunity e
to formulate and submit reasoned comments."
r In the interim final rules, the Comission stated its belief that extraordina situations may arise, short of an emergency, where a licensee and the Comission tg must act quickly and where time does not permit the Comission to publish a
+
q FEDERAL REGISTER notice soliciting public coment or to provide 30 days Q
disj _
ordinarily allowed for public comment.
It gave as examples two circumstances
-im g
@i involving a net benefit to safety.
One circumstance might occur-when-a t);j w 4 A reAche sha <lom licenseehhMh, *i h i t
- for a short time wishes to add some component --
L clearly more reliable than one presently installed; and another circumstance m
dd might occur when the licensee wishes to use a different method of testing a[
some system and that method is clearly better than one provided for in itsf/
Fm
. f, technical specifications.
In either case, the licensee may have to request y
an amendment, and, if the Comission determines, among other things, that no
,Ji significant hazards consideration is involved, it may' wish to grant the request before the licensee starts the plant up and the opportunity to u.N
[.d improve the plant is lost.
.7;
-.j The Comission noted in the interim final rules that in circumstances such as 25 the two just described, it may use medi) other than the FEDERAL REGISTER, for e'
example, a local newspaper oublished npr the licensee's facility, widely read e
by the residents in the area surrounding the facility, to infonn the public of O
?**"4'
= egg +g es g.,
=
eg
y
. *.f
~ -
e issue a media notice.
It will consult with the licensee on a proposed l
l release and the geographical area of its coverage and will inform it of the State's and'the public's comments.
If a system of mailgrams or overnight express is workable, it will use that as opposed to a hotline; however, it will not rule out the use of a hotline.
If it does use a hotline, it may m
. tape the conversations and may transcribe thepee, as necessary, and may send them to licensees.
As with its provisions on emergency situations, the Comission explained in the interim final rules that it would use these procedures sparingly and that it wants to make sure that its licensees will not take advantage of these procedures.
It stated that it will use criteria, somewhat similar to the
-w ones it uses with respect to emergency situations, to decide whether it will shorten the coment period and change the type of notice nonnally provided.
It also stated in connection with requests indicating an exigency that it expects its licensees to apply for license amendments in a timely fashion.
It will not change its normal notice and public coment practices where it determines that the licensee has failed to use its best efforts to make a timely application for the amendment in order to create the exigency and to take advantage of the exigency provision. Whenever a licensee wants to use this provision, it has to explain to the Comission the reason for the exigency and why the licensee cannot avoid it; the Commission,will assess the licensee's reasons for failure to file an application sufficiently in advance of its proposed action or for its inability to take the action at some later time.
- L *.:. '
' ' ~ '
1:
- ..= -: ~.=.... w := --.'.. L.. ':
.~.
, 3'-
~ '
- f. j;W%
~ ~
'b im
.y 3
- W.
, y-sg e<
.~x 7;z.
'I 80 -
~
x
. yw p
.i r<
~
~'
Finally, in light of the legislative history, though the Comission gives careful consideration to the coments previded to it by the affectad State
\\
'?.
on the question of no significant hazards consideration, the State coments y_
are advisory to the Comission; the Comission remains responsible for 4
making the final administrative decision on the question. The final rule r
g has been clarified to make clear that a State cannot veto the Comission's f.
proposed or final determination. Second, State consultation does not alter 33s present provisions of law that reserve to the Comission exclusive respon-
- Q
{i sibility for setting and enforcing radiological health and safety requirements for nuclear power plants.
$reri R64 VLMToRT ANMMM UMMIUh d
.a.
gbCs
[
SM C
,J W p
, aperwork Reduction Act Statement v
\\
3.be oI d)
~
~
[j G h d
Tl Y q}&"y snw 3
nic rule :cr.teins ; = reperting iequiremet _which-the-Offke of-iianagement
_and Budg + n y s acr OS Nc. 2150-0011 fer -the %..Jssion4-use-throttgh j.
-April" 0, 1995.
3 Regulatory Flexibility Certification h
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.'C'. 605(b),
}
the Comission' certifies that this rule does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule affects only fij the licensing and operation of nuclear power plants and testing facilities.
The companies that own these plants do not fall Within the scope of the 3
s This final rule amends information collection requirements that are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 A
et seq.). These requirements were approved by the Office of Management and Budget approval number 3150 Coy.
--*N*
w.1 g
..,m
definition of "small entities" set.forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the Small Business Size Standards set out in regulations issued by the Small Business Administration at 13 CFR Part 121. Since these companies
'are dominant in their service areas, this rule does not fall within the purview of the Act.
C-D Regulatory Analysis
@ pm ; ww c&)
The Comission has prepared 'a Regulatory Analysis on these amendments, assessing the costs and benefits and resource impacts.
It is contained in i
SECY-83-16B and it may be examined at the address indicated above.
l J
' h'T DSB RT LIST O ;2 S'v8)RTI /-/15dh Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, and sections 552 and 553 of Title 5 of the United States Code, notice is hereby given that the following amendments to 10 C.F.R. Parts 2 and 50 are published as a document subject to codification, ist of Subjects in 10 C.F.R. Parts 2 and 50.
h0VL@
Part 2 Administrative practice and procedure, Antitrust, Byproduct material, Classified information, Environmental protection, Nuclear materials, f
Nuclear power plants and reactors, Penalty, Sex discrimination, f
Source material, Special nuclear material, Waste treatment and disposal.
, - =... _..... - =,.,,..
_,,_,.,.__-o w-._,.;..,.,
M :~
+ +};~g...:.
.:w:
=
~ - ~
~
.(
~ Jt ?
ti _
, - 82.-
OM Part 50 Incwp3rha h Refervnce.
Antitrust, Classified information, Fire prevention, (Inter-1\\
governmental relations, Nuclear power' plants and reactors, Penalty, Radiation protection, Reactor siting criteria, Reporting requirements.
PART 2 -- RULES OF PRACTICE FOR DOMESTIC LICENSING PROCEEDINGS 1.
The authority citation for Part 2 is revised to read as follows:
AUTHORITY:
Secs. 161, 181, 68 Stat. 948, 953, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2231); sec. 191, as amended, Pub. L.87-615, 76 Stat. 409 (42 U.S.C. 2241);
~ ~ ~
~
sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); 5 U.S.C. 552.
Section 2.101 also issued under secs. 53, 62, 63, 81, 103, 104, 105, 68 Stat. 930, 932, 933, 935, 936, 937, 938, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2092, 2093, 2111, 2133, 2134, 2135); sec. 102, Pub. L.91-190, 83 Stat.
853, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332); sec. 301, 88 Stat. 1248 (42 U.S.1 5871). Sections 2.102, 2.10.3, 2.104, 2.105, 2.721 also issued unu I
secs. 102, 103, 104, 103, 183, 189, 68 Stat. 936, 937, 938, 954, 955 as amended (42 U.S.C. 2132, 2133, 2134, 2135, 2233, 2239).
Section 2.105 also issued under Pub. L.97-415, 96 Stat. 2073 (42 U.S.C. 2239) m
_____m_._m__m_____._
. /
Sections 2.200-2.206 also issued under secs. 186, 234, 68 Stat. 955, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2236, 2282); sec. 206, 88 Stat.1246 (42 U.S.C. 5846). Sections 2.600-2.606 also issued under sec.102, Pub.L.91-190,83' Stat.853,asamended(42U.S.C.4332). Sections 2.700a, 2.719 also issued under 5.U.S.C. 554. Sections 2.754, 2.760, 2.770 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 557. Sections 2.790 also issued under sec.103,'68 Stat. 936, as amended (42 U.S.C 2133) and 5 U.S.C. 552.
Sections 2.800 and 2.808 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553.
Section 2.809 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553 and sec. 29, Pub. L.85-256, 71 Stat. 579, as amended.
(42 U.S.C.2039). Appendix A also issued under sec. 6 Pub. L.91-580, 84 Stat.
1473 (42 U.S.C. 2135).
2.
In 5 2.105, paragraphs (a)(4) [threugh-fa)(8)-are-redesignated-as paragraphs-(a)(5)-threugh-(a)(9)i-a-new-paragraph-(a)(4}-4s-added, and b cad redesigRated-paragraph](a)(6) are revise as follows:*
l 5 2.105 Notice of proposed action.
l (a)
(4) An amendment to an' operating license for a facility licensed under 5 50.21(b) or 5 50.22 or for a testing facility, as follows:
)
(1)
If the Comission determines under 5 50.58 that the amendment I
t involves no significant hazards consideration, though it will provide notice i
- Additions are underlined; deletions are in brackets and scored through.
, /
l
/
of opportunity for a hearing pursuant to this section, it may make the amendment imediately effective and grant a hearing thereaf ter; or (ii) If the Commission determines under 6 50.58 and % 50.91 that an emergency situation or exigent (situatiea] circumstances exists and that the amendment involves no significant hazards considerations, it will provide notice of opportunity for a hearing pursuant to 5 2.106 (if a hearing is requested, it will be held after issuance of the amendment);
An amendment to a license specified in paragraph (a)(5) of this (6) section, or an amendment to a construction authorization granted in proceedings on an application for such a license, when such an amendment would authorize actions which may significantly affect the health and safety of the public; or U~- -
SA rY C
'5 YeNohd -
(dlk3 -
P L
f.
g.-
PART 50 -- DOMESTIC LICENSING OF PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION FACILITIES y, '%
The authority citation for Part 50 is revised to read as follows:
AUTHORITY:
Secs. 103, 104, 161, 182, 183, 186, 189, 68 Stat. 936, 937, 948, 953, 954, 955, 956, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 1244, as amended
-(42U.S.C.2133,2134,2201,2232,2233,2236,2239,2282); secs.201,202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, 1244, 1246, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846),
unless otherwise noted.
Section 50.7 also issued under Pub. L.95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Sections 50.58, 50.91 and 50.92 also issued under Pub.
j L.97-415, 96 Stat. 2073 (42 U.S.C. 2239).
Section 50.78 also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152). Sections 50.80-50.81 also issued under sec. 184, 68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Sections bt 50.100-50.102 also issued under sec.186, 68 'J.C.;a 955 (42 U.S.C 2236).
For the purposes of sec. 223, 68 Stat. 958, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2273),
5550.10(a),(b),and(c), 50.44, 50.46, 50.48, 50.54, and 50.80(a) are issued under sec. 161b, 68 Stat. 948, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(b))
il 50.10(b) and as amended (42 U.S.C.
(c) and 50.54 are issued under sec. 1611, 68 Stat. 949,60.13 2201(i));and5550.55(e),50.59(b),50.70,50.71,50.72, fan,d50.78areissued under sec. 161o, 68 Stat. 950, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(o)).
.~.-.n.... -, -..
' p. ; c..
R7 y
fn u;.
R7
.p gs.
For the purposes of sec. 223, 68 Stat. 958, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2273),
55 50.10(a), (b), and (c), 50.44, 50.46, 50.48, 50.54, and 50.80(a) are
~
issued under sec.161b, 68 Stat. 948, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(b));
il 50.10(b) and (c) and 50.54 are issued unaer sec. 1611, 68 Stat. 949, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(i)); and M 50.55(e), 50.59(b), 50.70, 50.71, 50.72, and 50.78 are issued under sec. 1610, 68 Stat. 950, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(o)).
1 g44% 6. L 560.67, 'gwoofayh @ IS YMDb 8, N In 9 50.58, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
550.58 Hearings and report of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards.
(ti)(1) The Comission will hold a hearing after at least 30-days' notice and publication once in " e FEDERAL REGISTER on each application for a construction permit for a production or utilization facility which is of a type described in $50.21(b) or $50.22 of this part, or which is a testing facility.
l (2) When a construction permit has been issued for such a facility following the holding of a public hearing and an application is made for an operating license or for an amendment to a construction permit or operating license, the Comission may hold a hearing after at least 30-days' notice and publication once in the FEDERAL REGISTER, or, in the absence of a request therefor by any person whose interest may be affected, may issue an operating license or an amendment to a construction permit or operating license without a hearing, upon 30-days' notice and publication once in the FEDERAL REGISTER of its intent to do so.
__-__.___.____________m_
~^
im__.
m
7 4', ~
, "? y '. ' '
P j-3;
,is.
~
~7 l
a
~; -
N Yev; sed f.h Section [A-new-5]50.91 is [added-te-part-50).amendais to read as
. follows:
$50.91 Notice for public coment; State consultation.
The Comission will use the following procedures on an application [ received after-May-6 -1983] requesting an amendment to an operating license for a 5
facility licensed under 5 50.21(b) or i 50.22 or for a testing facility:
(a) Notice for public coment.
(1) At the time a licensee requests an amendment, it must provide to the Comission its reasoned analysis, using the standards in 5 50.92, about theissueofnosignificanthazardsconsiheration.
(2) The Comission may publish in' the FEDERAL REGISTER under 6 2.105 -
[either] an individual notice of proposed action as to which it makes a i
proposed determination that no significant hazards consideration is involved, or, at least once every 30 days, a monthly notice of proposed actions which identifies each amendment issued and each amendment proposed to be issued since the last such monthly notice, or both.
For each amendment proposed to be issued, [either] the notice will (i) contain the staff's proposed determina-tion, 'under the standards in % 50.92, (ii) provide a brief description of the amendment and of the facility involved, (iii) solicit public comments on the proposed determination, and (iv) provide for a 30-day coment period. The coment period will run from the first such notice, and, normally, the amendment will not be granted until after this coment period expires.
(3) The Comission may inform the public about the final disposition of an amendment request where it has made a proposed detennination on no significant hazards consideration either by issuing an individual notice of issuance under s 2.106 or by publishing such a notice in its monthly a
.... ~. - -....
~
.+ +
3
~
T e
~
, 90 -
a licensee requesting an amendment must explain why this emergency situation occurred and why it could not avoid this situation, and the Comission will assess the licensee's reasons for failure to file an application sufficiently in advance of that event.
(6) Where the Comission finds that exigent circumstances exist, in that a licensee and the Comission must act quickly and that time does not permit the Comission to publish a FEDERAL REGISTER notice allowing 30 days for prior public coment, and it also determines that the amendment involves no significant hazards considerations, it will:
(i)
Either issue a FEDERAL REGISTER notice or use local media as notice to provide an opportunity for a hearing and to allow two weeks from the date of the notice for prior public comment; [44-will-Wse-lesal-media-te-infeFm-the'
~
~~
pWblie-4R-the-aFea-SWFFeWRding-a-14EeRSee15-faEil4ty-ef-the-14EenSee15 t
amendment-and-ef-its-pFepesed-deteFminatieR-85-deSEF4 bed-4n-paFagFaph-(8)(2h ef-this-seet4ent]
(ii)
Provide for a reasonable opportunity for the public to coment, using its best efforts to make available to the public whatever means of communication it can for the public to respond quickly and to make a record of any ' communications received; (iii) Publish,a notice of issuance under 9 2.106. [pFev4 ding-an eppeFtWRfty-feF-a-heaf 4Rg-8Rd-fer-pWbl46-Ee meRt-afteF-45SW8REey-4f-it deteFmines-that-the-ameRdment-4Rvelves-ne-significant-hazaFds-eensideFatien]
(iv) Provide a hearing after issuance, if one has been requested by a person with the requisite interest A
s..~.
(-#7#L
- y
_[(4v)] M Require an explanati'n from the licensee about the reason for o
the exigency and why the licensee cannot avoid it, and use its nonnal public notice and comer, procedures in paragraph (a)(2) of this section where it determines that the licensee has failed to use its best efforts to make a timely application for the amendment in order to create the exigency and to take advantage of this procedure ud (7) Where the Comission finds that significant hazards considerations are involved, it will issue a FEDERAL REGISTER notice providing an opportur.ity for a prior hearing and for public coment.
It will issue this notice even in an emergency situation, unless it finds an iminent danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 C.F.R. Part 2.
-(b) State consultation.
1 (1) At the tiw a licensee requests an amendment, it must notify the State in which its facility is located of its request by providing to that State a copy of its application and its reasoned analysis about no signifi-cant hazards considerations and indicate on the application that it has done so.
(The Comission will make available to the ' licensee the name of the appropriate State official designated to receive such amendments.)
(2) The Comission will advise the State of its proposed detemination about no significant hazards consideration normally by sending it a copy of the FEDERAL REGISTER notice at the time it sends that notice to the FEDERAL REGISTER for publication.
-~=ie
.e mm-Me m _a *.-a a
.M2 at 4_ _. --, -
~h5-
+".5~.'
I" a*e
'r_Nyae+<%es-
i.
..i t
.1
.e 1.~.
[
(2) To a hearing on the determination before the amendment becomes Ii
~
f
.q effective; or 4N (3) To insist upon a postponement of the determination or upon issuance
,y 9)g of the amendment;
- u m.j 2
yygg (4) Nor do these procedures alter present provisions of law that fh reserve to the Connission exclusive responsibility for setting and enf5rcing uw h{Jk(3d radiological health and safety requirements for nuclear power plants.
WWK wau kkbIN WWsed -
p$$Ud S,&: Section [59,91-is-redesignated-as-5] 50.92 [and-revised] is
-@ ded
- .fi
/\\
?.: Et!a to read as follows:
mah
'.2.
7:?cm
-59
% 50.92 Issuance of amendment.
w p.
- A?;
tz 9:i w-r;-L s g; '
(a)
In detemining whether an amendment to a license or construction pemit will be issued to the applicant, the Comission will be guided by the
'.qZ,.
[
considerations which govern the issuance of initial licenses or construction c::.
- "/ _:
pemits to the extent applicable and appropriate. If the application involves c e..
the material alteration of a licensed facility, a constructior. pemit will y-
._; e be issued [ prier-te] before the issuance of the amendment to the license.
If
- ]. 4 the amendment involves a significant hazards consideration, the Comission will 77.g give notice of its proposed action (1) pursuant to 9 2.105 of this chapter sJ before acting thereon and [Be-setiee-will-be-isswed] (2) as soon as practicable
- w. u
...-r 9@
after the application has been docketed.
3g
.,.m 3
,g,-
T"':,,W
).-
4..
=
M 4"
4 ca.
- - __-