ML20206E615
| ML20206E615 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/12/1984 |
| From: | Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Jennifer Davis NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8606230462 | |
| Download: ML20206E615 (10) | |
Text
ll DEC 12 W MEMORANDUM FOR:
John G. Davis, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards FROM:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
CONTROL OF NRC RULEMAKING By memorandum of February 13, 1984, " Control of NRC Rulemaking by Offices Reporting to the EDO," Offices were directed that effective April 1,1984, (1) all offices under ED0 purview must obtain my approval to begin and/or continue a specific rulemaking, (2) resources were not to be expended on rule-makings that have not been approved, and (3) RES would independently review rulemaking proposals forwarded for my approval.and make recommendations to me concerning whether or not and how to proceed with the rulenakings.
In accordance with my directive, the following proposal concerning rulemaking has been forwarded for my approval along with recommendations from RES con-cerning the proposal:
Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR Parts 40, 70, 150 concerning Material Balance Reports.
(Sponsored by NMSS - memorandum, Minogue to ED0 dated December 4, 1984.)
Continuation of this rulemaking is approved. The NRC Regulatory Agenda (NUREG-0936) should be modified to reflect the status of the proposal.
(Signed) William J.Dircks William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations cc:
V. Stello J. Roe H. R. Denton R. C. DeYoung R. B. Minogue P. G. Norry Distribution:
WJDi rcks VStello JHSniezek WSchwink 8606230462 841212 DEDR0GR cf EDO RM 40 PDR Central File ED0 rf J. Phillips b
0FC :ROGR/S
- ROGR/S
- ROG D
- DEDR GR
- EDO
__ _ _ _ :..g//_j, __:____________:----_______
_____:____J______:__h.4_k NAME :BGa 1
- WS in ezek o
- WJDire s'
_ _ _ _ _ :... l_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ : _ q
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ : _ _ _3_,8 4 DATE :12/10/84
- 12/tl/84
- 12/(VB4 212/l7
- 12// t/84
ELW ~ b;j y3 kto
- *%}
J UNITED STATES t
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e
WASHINGTON, D.
20555 b
+...+
DEC MEMORANDUM FOR:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations FROM:
Robert B. Minogue, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research j
SUBJECT:
CONTROL OF NRC RULEMAKING: RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW 0F ONGOING RULEMAKING Based on our independent review of the ongoing rulemaking, " Proposed Amendment of 10 CFR Parts 40, 70, 150 - Material Balance Reports", sponsored by NMSS, RES agrees with the recommendation of the Director, NMSS, that this rulemaking j
effort should be forwarded for ED0 signature.
The basis for our recommendation is as follows:
This specific ongoing rulemaking would eliminate the requirement for all 4
licensees with the exception of those reporting under the USA /IAEA Safeguards Agreement to report their inventories on DOE /NRC Form 742, " Material Balance Report". For all licensees other than nuclear reactors and those reporting under the USA /IAEA Safeguards Agreement, the proposed rule would eliminate the requirement to submit the Form 742C, " Physical Inventory Listing". An equivalent inventory report to Form 742C would instead be generated by the NRC and the accuracy of the report verified by the licensee. The amendment affects approximately 350 NRC and Agreement State licensees of which approximately 150 are small independent industrial manufacturers, each with an estimated annual gross income of less than $1 million and a staff of fewer than 500 people. As a i
result of this change, each affected special nuclear material licensee will file two less reports per year. Each affected source material licensee will submit one less statement per year. The cost of the verification of the NRC generated report should be less than the original generation and submission of the current reports and statement.
The rulemaking would:
Decrease the paperwork burden on 350 NRC and Agreement State o
licensees.
1 Not have a significant adverse impact on the domestic safeguards o
program.
1
1 W. J. Dircks 2
DE0 0 41984 o
Not have an adverse effect on the ability of the U.S. to satisfy international commitments.
A benefits and costs statement has been made and it was determined that the rulemaking will lessen the reporting burden _placed on some licensees with a minimal impact on the NRC.
The complete RES independent review package has been sent to OED0 (Attention:
DEDR0GR) and to the Director, NMSS (attachments 1 and 2).
M[
Robert B.'Minogue, Dire or Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
Enclosures:
As stated i
I I
\\
I 1
RES Independent Review Package l
r
\\
l Proposed Amendment of 10 CFR Parts 40, 70, 150 - Material Balance Reports, Sponsored by NMSS - Review of Rulemaking Review Package.
4 3
As per the memorandum of May 30, 1984 to Minogue from Dircks each rulemaking review package must contain the following documentation:
a.
The NRC Regulatory Agenda entry updated to give a clear indication of the current status of the rule.
b.
The rulemaking as it is currently proposed to be published in the Federal Register.
l l
c.
The office director's recommendations to the ED0 concerning whether and how to continue with the rulemaking. The re;ommendations must be
}
limited to 2 pages and must be self contained.
(See item e. for j
supporting documentation requirements.)
d.
The results of the sponsoring office review that, as a minimum, considers the following matters:
4 1
the issue to be addressed, i.e., the problem to be corrected; i
the necessity and urgency for addressing the issue; i
alternatives to rulemaking; how the issue will be addressed through rulemaking; i
i i
how the public, industry, and NRC will be affected as a result of rulemaking, including benefits and costs (risk, occupational exposure, and resources); and i
1
.m_.,m_.,.,
.,,,,-.._.,,-,,,m._,,_.%,,,,,,.-_.-..._..,-..~-,-._
i f
NRC resources and scheduling needed for the rulemaking.
e.
A copy of each Commission paper, regulatory analysis, CRGR package, or other underlying documcnts relied upon by the sponsoring' office-in conducting its office review.
i f.'
Any summary sheet, form, or other documentation requested by OEDO or f
others (involved in control of NRC rulemaking by offices reporting to the ED0) to assist in their review of the rulemaking.
Upon review of the rulemaking review package submitted by NMSS against the above criteria it was found that the package was complete.
l i
i l
i 3
1 5
1
Results of Independent Review of NMSS Submitted Final Rule - Proposed Amendment of 10 CFR Parts 40, 70, 150 - Material Balance Reports.
Based upon the RES independent review as detailed below it is recommended by this office that the subject ongoing rulemaking be continued.
The following criteria were considered.
1.
Is the rulemaking package complete?
The rulemaking package was found to be complete.
2.
Does technical data in preamble support rule?
As part of an evaluation of the safeguards data collection and processing requirements, the possibility of eliminating the requirements for licensees to report inventories of nuclear materials on Forms 742 (Material Balance Report) and 742C (Physical Inventory Listing) was examined. The conclusion was that with the exception of reporting under the US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement and persons licensed to operate nuclear reactors, the requirements for reporting inventories on Form 742 and 742C can be deleted. All technical data presented in the preamble describing this process does support the rule.
3.
Is rule adequately supported by accompanying statement of basis and purpose?
Yes. The need for the rule change was well documented by the statement of basis and purpose. The need is to reduce the reporting burden placed on NRC and Agreement State licensees while continuing to j
satisfy existing international and domestic safeguards commitments.
_.J
4 ".
Do'es rulemaking proceeding comply with APA?
Yes, in its entirety.
5.
Does rulemaking proceeding violate any of the Commission's rules for rulemaking?
No.
6.
Does the rulemaking package indicate resource impacts?
Yes.
7.
Are there significant errors in the regulatory drafting style or format?
No.
8.
Is the need of the rulemaking for an EIS or negative declaration consistent with the current revision of 10 CFR Part 51?
Yes Also considered were:
1.
The issue to be addressed.
After an assessment of the safeguards data collection and processing requirements, it was determined that the reporting burden on licensees could be lightened without compromising existing international and domestic safeguards commitments.
.-_m, 9-y
\\
2.
Necessity and urgency.
The proposed amendments will reduce the licensee reporting burden.
After ED0 signature the notice of proposed rulemaking will be published in the Federal Register 3.
Alternatives to rulemaking.
To reduce the reporting burden on licensees two alternatives were considered. The alternative that was not chosen was rejected because the timeliness of the US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement reports would be affected adversely and the elimination of form 742C for nuclear reactors would interfere with the domestic inspection program.
4.
How the issue will be addressed through rulemaking.
The reporting requirements will be reduced by amendments to 10 CFR Parts 40, 70, and 150.
5.
a) How public will be affected?
There will be no effect.
b)
How industry will be affected?
Compliance is expected to lessen the total cost of licensee reporting about $39,000 annually.
c)
How NRC will be affected?
No effect. The NRC generated material balance report will be generated by computer from already available transactional data.
i l
il 6.
NRC resources and scheduling need.
The proposed resources and scheduling were reviewed and found to be reasonable.
i
)
. _. _ _. _.