ML20211K219
| ML20211K219 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/06/1996 |
| From: | Morrison D NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES) |
| To: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20008B475 | List:
|
| References | |
| FRN-62FR6664, RULE-PR-2, RULE-PR-40, RULE-PR-70, RULE-PR-76 AF56-2-018, AF56-2-18, NUDOCS 9710090178 | |
| Download: ML20211K219 (9) | |
Text
September 6, 1996 MEMORANDUM T0:
James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations bk FROM:
David L. M,rrison, Director /s/ Joseph A. Murphy for @G@
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
SUBJECT:
RULEMAKING PLAN: USEC PRIVATIZATION ACT - AMENDMENT OF 10 CFR PARTS 40, 70, AND 76 (WITS-9600075)
The attached Commission Paper and rulemaking plan are provided for your review and transmittal to the Commission.
The.>e documents discuss proposed changes to 10 CFR Parts 40, 70, and 76 to bring these regulations into conformance with the new statutory requirements of the USEC Privatization Act.
4 We are pursuing this rulemaking on a high priority with a very aggressive schedule.
In order to meet this schedule, I propose to establish an interoffice management steering committee comprised of Nick Costanzi (RES),
Bill Brach (NMSS), Jim Lieberman (0E) and Stu Treby (0GC).
Nick Costanzi will chair the committee.
The management steering committee will meet to identify any issues that may impede the progresc of rulemaking, to resolve those issues, and to assess the overall progress, in accordance with Management Directive 6.3, "The Rulemaking Process," the committee members will be delegated the authority to deliver the views and concurrence of the participating offices. The members will be responsible to keep their respective line management informed.
The staffs of the concerned offices have been working closely together on the development of the rulemaking plan. NMSS has indicated that they would like the rule to be effective by mid December 1996, and 0GC has recommended direct final rulemaking. The schedule in the rulemaking plan has been developed in response to the above.
It should be noted that if the NRC receives significant adverse public comments, during the first 30 days folbwing publication of the direct final rule action, the full notice and comment rulemaking process will be completed based on the proposed rule and the schedule will be revised with the effective date to be determined by resolution of comments and final rulemaking action.
This approach has been agreed on by NMSS, OE and OC' If you have any questions, please call me (DLM3, 415-6641) or Sher Jahadur (SXB, 415-6226).
Attachments: As stated DISTRIBUTION:
Central f/c LRiani RDB r/f CGallagher PNorian DMendiola NCostanzi DOCUMENT NAME:0:\\NILSEN\\TA) LOR.CWN
- See previous concurrences 0FC RDB:pRA*
RDB:DRA*
/dD:RES, n ED0 Mkorris f
JMTaylor NAME phdMyw SBahadur DATE 09/0f/96 09/03/96 7/[/96 T '/T/[6$
/ /96
'/
OFFICE RECORD COPY 0
RES FILE CODE:
9710090178 971003 PDR PR 2 62FR6664 PDR J
MEMORANDUM 10:
James M. Taylor Execdive Director for Operations FRON:
David L. Morrison, Director Office of Nuclear. Regulatory Research i
SUBJECT:
RULEMAKING PLAN: USEC PRIVAT!ZA110N ACT - AMENDMENT OF 10 CFR PARTS 40, 70. A 76 (W115-9600075)
The attached Comission Paper and rulemaking plan are provided for your review and transmittal to the Comission.
These documents discuss proposed changes to 10 CFR Parts 40, 70, and 76 to bring these regulations into conformance with the new statutory requirements of the USEC Privatization Act.
We aro pursuing this rulgnaking on a high priority with a very aggressive schedule.
In order to m t this schedule, I propose to establish an interoffice management st ring committee comprised of Nick Costanzi (RES),
erman Nick Costanzi will The inanageme(OE) and Stu Treby (0GC).nt steering committee will me Bill Brach (NMSS), Jim Li chair the committee.
to identify eny issues that may impede the progress of rulemaking, to resolve those issues by making policy decisions, and to assess the overall progress.
In_accordance with SECY-94-141, " Improvement of the Rulemaking Process " the committee members will be delegated the authority to deliver the views and concurrence of the participating offices.
The members will be responsible to keep their respect (ve line management informed.
The staffs of the concerned offices have been working closely together on the development of the rulemaking plan.
HMSS has indicated that they would like the rule to be effective by mid December 1996, and OGC has recommended direct final rulemaking. The schedule in the rulemaking plan has been developed in response to the above, it should be noted that if the NRC receives significant adverse public comments, during the first 30 days following publication of the direct final rule action, the full notice and coment rulemaking process will be completed bas ~l on the proposed rule and the-schedule will be revised with the effect,ve date to be determined by resolution of comments and final rulemaking action.
This approach has been agreed on by NMSS, OE and OGC, if you have any questions, please call me (DLM3, 415-6641) or Sher Bahadur (SXB, 415-6226).
i Attachments:
As stated p!STRIgUTIONI
/
Centras f/c LRiani RDB r/f CGallagher PNorian DMendi01a NCostanzi DOCUMENT NAME:0:\\NILSEN\\ TAYLOR.CWN OFC RDB:DRA
)RDB:DRA D:DRA D:RES EDO NAME-MMw h SBahadur bP BMorris DLMorrison JMiaylor DATE
- // f/96 9 / 3 /96
/ /96
/
/96
/ /96 5
0FFICE RECORD COPY RES FILE CODE:
4// p.,
e I
l l
l COMMISSION PAPER
L 1
l f_QB:
The Comissioners FROM:
James M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
RVtEMAKING PLAN: USEC PRIVATIZATION ACT - CONFORMING CHANGES PURPOSE:-
To inform the Cemission that the EDO intends to approve the attached Rulemaking Plan to amend 10 CFR Parts 40, 70, and 76, to bring these regulations into conformance with the new statutory requirements of the "VSEC Privatization Act."
1}S}U1:
Public Law 104-134, by amending the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, changes the way uranium enrichment facilities are licensed and adds different procedural requirements.
The Comission's regulations must conform to these changes.
A direct final rule providing the necessary amendments.to the Comission's regulations should be published for public information and codified through the rulemaking process.
BACKGROUND:
On April 26, 1996 President Clinton signed into law li.R. 3019 (Public Law No.
104-134), legislation which provides FY 1996 appro1riations to a number of Federal agencies.
Included within the Act is a su) chapter entitled the "USEC Privatization Act," which among other things, directs the Board of Directors of the United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC) to sell the assets of the USEC to a private sector entity. The private sector corporation that CONTACT:
Charles W. Nilsen, RDB/DRA/RES (301) 415-6209
The Connissioners purchases the assets of the Corporation will be responsible for the operation of the two gaseous diffusion plants and the development of the atomic vapor laser isotope separation technology (AVLIS).
In addition, this legislation amended the Atomic Energy Act (the Act) with respect to the licensing of AVLIS and certification of Part 76 gaseous diffusion plants.
DISCUSSION:
The attached rulemaking plan would amend 10 CFR Parts 40, 70, and 76 as required to implement Section 3116 of Public Law 104-134.
To conform with the changes to the Act by Public Law 104-134, these amendments contain several new and/or revised licensing /ce.tification requirements specific to the Corporation and its successor's operation of gaseous diffusion plants.
Section 3116 of Public Law 104-134 amended the Act as follows:
An amendment to Section liv. of the Act provides that AVLIS may be e
licensed using the one-step licensing process set forth in Section 193 of the Act (the same provision that Louisiana Energy Services' application is being processed under).
Under the prior law, the traditional two-step licensing process of Part 50 would have been required for AVLIS.
An amendment of Section 193 of the Act mandates that the Commission not issue a certification of compliance to the USEC or its successor private corporation if the Commission determines that (1) the Corporation is owned, controlled or dominated by an alien, a foreign corporation, or a foreign government; (2) issuance would be inimical to the common defense or security of the United States, or (3) is inimical to the maintenance of a reliable and economical domestic source of enrichment services, Another amendment of Section 193 eliminates the requirement that the o
Connission certify that the Corporation is in compliance with NRC Instead, the Commission can determine how regulations each year.
frequently the Corporation must submit a recertification application to the NRC, provided that the NRC recertify Corporation compliance with its I
regniations at least once every 5 years, it is the staff's intent that the initial certification will be for 2 years to pcrmit most items of the compliance plan to be completed.
Subsequent, recertification will be based or. a number of considerations, including implementation status of compliance plans and certification regulatory experience.
It is The anticipated that recertification may be for. longer than 2 years.
Congress, however, did exact term will be specified in the certificate.
not eliminate the requirement found in Section 1701 (a) of the Act that the NRC shall report at least annually to the Congress on the status of health, safety, and environmental conditions at the gaseous diffusion
- plants, Section 3116 also modifies Section 234a of the Act to provide the o
Commission with the authority to issue civil penalties to the Corporation for violation of the provisions of the Act, regulations, orders and terms of the certificate.
The " General Statement of Policy
The Commissioners-and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Action," NUREG-1600, will be supplemented to provide examples of violations in each of the four severity levels as guidance in determining the appropriate severity level for violations-in the area of gaseous diffusion plant operations.
RECOMMENDATION:
Unless the Commission directs otherwise, 10 days from the date of this paper, I will approve the Rulemaking Plan-and direct the staff to begin development of a direct. final rule.
[QQRplNATION:
The Office of the General Counsel has no legal objection to the actions proposed in the Rulemaking Plan.
The Offices of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards, and Enforcement have concurred in the Rulemaking Plan.
James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations
Attachment:
Rulemaking Plan 1
)
G i
r RULEMAKING PLAN USEC PRIVATIZATION ACT
1 RULEMAKING PLAN FOR USEC PRIVATIZATiON ACT (PUBLIC LAW 104-134) l I
Lead Office:
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Staff
Contact:
C. W. Nilsen, RDB Concurrences:
wN Y /4 /ft
%drrison, RES Date 08/23/96 C. Paperiello, NMSS Date 08/19/96 by e-mail James Lieberman, OE Date 08/30/96 by e-mail Karen D. Cyr, OGC Date-Approval:
J. M. Taylor Date e
RULEMAKING PLAN FOR USEC PRIVATIZATION ACT (PUBLIC LAW 104-134)
Lead Office:
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Staff
Contact:
C. W. Nilsen, RDB 2
N I/4 /f4 Concurrences:
- 0. 9drrison, ES Date
/ /U d f' B /7 t
~
Date C. Paperi llo, fSS James Lieberman, OE Date Karen D. Cyr, OR Date L
Approval:
Date J. M. Taylor l
From Betty Summers To:
CWN Date 8/19/96 2:02pm
Subject:
Concurrence on Rulemaking Plan Jim Lieberman OE concurs on the memo dated 8/16 with the two noted changes.
is replacing Joe Gray as the OE representative on the Steering Group i
'K. ff$hA Q
. _ =
G.
rris UNITED STATES
/ps ete '%,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION fUB o
n i I Sell 3'
' 'g File 4, ASHINGTON. O C. 20666-0001 3
~I August 30, 1996 o
%,...../
j NG, Jr.
OFFICE OF THE Gt NERAL COUNSE L MEMORANDUM TO: David L.
Morrison, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research f'
i l
FROM:
Stuart A.
Treby
,MQra ed[<
Assistant General Counsel for Rulemc':ing and Fuel Cycle
SUBJECT:
RULEMAKING PLAN - USEC PRIVATIZATION ACT l
We have reviewed the draft Rulemaking Plan on the USEC Privatization Act and would request that the following statement be included under the heading "OGC Legal Analysis":
"The proposed rulemaking revisions are directly tied to the statutory directives of the USEC Privatization Act.
Furthermore, the nature of the statutory provisions do not provide the NRC with much discretion over how these provisions should be implemented.
Consequently, OGC believes that the use of a direct final rule is an appropriate mechanism for promulgating this rule.
However, as a general proposition for any direct final rule, the NRC cannot choose to issue a final rule for those provisions of the direct final rulemaking package that do not receive critical comment, while using the prcposed rule mechanism for those provisions that do.
The rulemaking provisions must be treated as a unified and indivisible package for purposes of the direct final rule concept. In all other respects, OGC has not identified any potential legal complications or known bases for a legal objection to the rulemaking."
In addition to inserting the above paragraph, we request the following change to the draft Plan.
The draft Plan now includes the statement that "[nlo changes are therefore required to Part 70 to license an AVLIS facility". This statement should be revised to indicate that conforming changes to 10 CFR Part 70 may be required to ensure that AVLIS is clearly included within the definition of " uranium enrichment facility" N T.7 ) p Q / 7 /
N