ML20216D011

Requests Review & Concurrence on Attached Final Rule Parts 20,30,40,70 & 72, Termination or Transfer of Licensed Activities,Recordkeeping Requirements, & Memo to Transmit Fr Notice for Final Rule

ML20216D011
Person / Time
Issue date:	11/03/1995
From:	Morrison D NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES)
To:	Bangart R, Olmstead W, Paperiello C NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS), NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP), NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
Shared Package
ML20216C659	List: ML20216C653 ML20216C745 ML20216C835 ML20216C865 ML20216C918 ML20216D011 ML20216D051 ML20216D060 ML20216D078 ML20216D109 ML20216D132 ML20216D170 ML20216D318 ML20216D333 ML20216D369 ML20216D404 ML20216D432 ML20216D445
References
FRN-61FR24669, RULE-PR-20, RULE-PR-30, RULE-PR-40, RULE-PR-61, RULE-PR-70, RULE-PR-72 AF17-2-014, AF17-2-14, NUDOCS 9709090190
Download: ML20216D011 (91)

Text

s paucog /9 F l v ;>-

y*

.g

,j UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.

[-Mk

1. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20555 4 001

%4 ,&

• ...+ November 3, 1995 MEMORANDUM T0: Carl J. Paperiello, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

^

William J. Olmstead, Associate General Counsel for Licensing and Regulation Office of The General Counsel Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs James Lieberman, Director Office of Enforcement David L. Meyer, Chief Rules Review and Directives Branch Office of Administration Gerald F. Cranford, Director Office of Information Resources Management FROM: David L. Morrison, Director

• Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research -

r7prew

SUBJECT:

OFFICE REVIEW AND CONCURRENCE ON FINAL RULE PARTS 20, 30, 40, 70, AND 72 TERMINATION OR TRANSFER OF LICENSED ACTIVITIES: RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS Your concurrence is requested on the attached rulemaking and on the memorandum to transmit the Federal Register notice for the final rule. This final rule will regt. ire all licensees to transfer records pertaining to decommissioning to the new licensee or disposal site owner, and to forward these records to the cognizant regulatory body or party responsible for institutional control prior to license termination. It will also require licensees to forward.

records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination.

The OMB package and Regulatory Analysis are included for ycur information because substantive changes from the proposed rule, based upon public comment, were made with respect to the recordkeeping requirements of this final rule.

For ease of review, revised sections in the Regulatory Analysis have been highlighted. It is requested that the Office of State Programs inform the Agreement States of this rulemaking action.

Copies of this rulemaking are being sent to the Regional Offices for information and they may provide comments at their discretion.

9709090190 970904 PDR PR 20 61FR24669 PDR

T C. J.- Paperiello, et al. 2 The following is a summary of the request:

-1.

Title:

" Termination or Transfer of Licensed Activities: Recordkeeping Requirements"

2. RES Task Leaderi Mary L. Thomas, (301) 415-6230

3. Reauested Action: Review and concur.

4. Reauested Completion Date: November 15, 1995.

5. Backaround: The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, as approved by the Commission (SECY-94-252), was published in the Federal Register for public comment on December 28, 1994 (59 FR 66814). The comment period ended March 28, 1995. In all, six comment letters were received and considered.

6. Cognizant Individuals: NMSS: Timothy C. Johnson  !

Joseph E. DeCicco OGC: Geary S. Mizuno

7. Resources to complete this rulemaking are not currently included in the Internal Program / Budget Review FY 1995-1999. The FTE will be reprogrammed from other activities within the current budget. The rule is expected to become effective FY 1996. Resources will be reprogrammed during the next budget cycle. A copy of this concurrence package has been forwarded to the Office of the Controller for coordination of resource issues per the EDO memorandum of June 14, 1991.

Attachments: 1. Commission Paper w/encls.

2. Comment Letters

3. OMB Clearance Package

4. Daily Staff Notes

5. Approval for Publication cc w/att:

R. M.-Scroggins, OC L. J. Norton, IG W. Beecher, OPA C; W. Hehl, Region I B. A. Hallet, Region 11 C. D. Pederson, Region 111 R. A. Scarano, Region IV DOCUMENT NAME: 0:\ THOMAS \ RECORDS \ FINAL \0FFCON To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box "C" = copy without attachment / enclosure, "B" = copy with attachment / enclosure, "N" - No copy

• See previous concurrence >

/)

0FFICE: DRA/RPHEB B DRA/RPHEB C D/06 ALP.ES

, m D/RES ,M NAME: MLThomas* JGlenn* FBMMorris DLMorrison DATE: 10/25/95 10/25/95 19/ 7_,/95 1l/ }/95 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY RES #3A-3

i...,,,,.

4 DISTRIBUTION w/att:

RPHEB R/F - JEGlenn BMMorris

' HLThomas .

HTLesar, ADM TCJohnson, NMSS JEDeCicco, NMSS GSMizuno, 000

l i

i l

i l

l I

ATTACHMENT 1 i

COMMISSION PAPER i

1 FOR: The Commissioners FROM: James M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations

SUBJECT:

FINAL RULEMAKING - REVISION 10 10 CFR PARTS 20, 30, 40, 70, AND 72, RECORD RETENTION REQUIREMENTS PURPOSE:

To inform the Commission that the Executive Director for Operations (ED0) intends to publish a final rule amendir.g the requirements contained in 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 70, and 72 to require transfer of certain records to the new licensee when a license is transferred, assigned, or in any other manner terminated and another person continues licensed activities at the same site and to requite forwarding of records to the NRC before a license is terminated when all licensed activities have ceased.

BACKGROUND:

This rulemaking is in response to commitments made by former Chairmar, 'alin at the June 21, 1994, Congressional hearing concerning radioactive contamination at sewage treatment plants. While evaluating an incident involving some offsite contamination, the NRC was unable to determine how much radioactive material was released to a sanitary sewerage system because records of previous releases by the original holder of the license were not available.

In addition, current regulations do not require a licensee to transfer records pertaining to decommissioning to an entity that vill continue licensed-activities at the same site. Such records may be necessary to decommission the facility effectively. The existing regulations are unclear in regard to the final disposition of a previous licensee's records pertaining to decommissioning; public dose;and waste disposal when a license is transferred, assigned, or terminated.

CONTACT:

Mary L. Thomas, RES 415-6230

The Commissioners 2 DISCUSSION:

In selecting records to include in this rulemaking, the staff focused attention on information that could be needed by licensees and the NRC to evaluate offsite consequences from a previous licensee's operation or to conduct decommissioning effectively. The amendments will require that records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal be forwarded to the NRC prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination, and, if licensed activities will continue at the same site under a new or amended licens:, that records pertaining to decommissioning be forwarded to the new licensee. Prior to terminating the license and releasing the site for unrestricted use, the amendments will require the decommissioning records to be forwarded to the NRC.

Paragraphs 20.2107(b) and 20.2108(b) will be amended to state that there are additional requirements for disposition of the records required by these sections in 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72. A paragraph will be added to 55 30.51, 40.61, 70.51 and 72.80 to clarify that other records, such as public dose records, retained under 5 20.2107 and waste disposal records, retained under 5 20.2108 and the former 5 20.401(c)(3), must be forwarded to the NRC prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination. Also, paragraphs will be added to 55 61.30(a)(3) and 61.31(c)(1) to clarify that records required by 55 61.80(e) and (f) are to be transferred to the disposal site owner or to the party responsible for institutional control of the disposal site, respectively. To lessen the burden on licensees, the rule permits these records to be submitted electronically. Finally, a new paragraph will be added to 55 30.36, 40.42, 70.38, and 72.54 to state that a license will not be terminated until the NRC receives the records required by revised 55 30.35(g),

30.51, 40.36(f), 40.61, 70.25(g), 70.51, 72.30(d), and 72.80.

The enclosed rule does not constitute any major policy change; rather it provides more explicit requirements for licensees regarding the disposition of certain records when a license is transferred, assigned, or_ in any other manner terminated and another person continues licensed activities at the same site, and the disposition of certain records when a license is terminated and all licensed activities have ceased. For this reason, I believe this falls within the authority delegated to the EDO to publish this final rule.

RESOURCES:

Resources required to implement this rule will be re-programmed from the non-core inspection programs. The adjustment will be approximately 0.2 FTE spread among the regions to provide support for this rulemaking.

1

The Commissioners 3 RECOMENDATION:

That the Commission:

Hatt:

a. I intend tr 1 prove the Notice of the Final Rulemaking for publication nclosure 1) in the Federal Reatster. This approval will be issue ([d within 10 working days from the date of this pape unless otherwise instructed by the Commission;

b. The F r. story Analysis will be available in the Public Document Room O slosure 2);

c. The staff has not prepared an environmental assessment because of the categorica'i exclusion given in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(3)(ii),

rec.ordkeeping;

d. The Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration will be informed of the certification regarding economic impact on small entities and the reasons for it as required by the Regulatory flexibility Act;

e. The final rule contains information collection requirements that are subject it, review by OMB. Upon my approval, formal request for OMB review and clearance will be initiated;

f. The Agreement States will be sent a copy of the final rule upon my approval for publication;

g. A public announcement will be issued (Enclosure 3);

h. The appropriate Congressional committees will be informed (Enclosure 4); and

The Commissioners 4

1. Copies of the Federal Register notice of final rulemaking will be distributed to all licensees. The notice will be sent to other interested parties upon request.

James H. Taylor Executive Director for Operations

Enclosures:

As Stated (4)

The Commissioners 4 4

1. Copies of the Federal Register notice of final rulemaking will be distributed to all licensees. The notice will be sent to other interested parties upon request.

James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations

Enclosures:

As Stated (4)

RECORD NOTE: A draft copy of the final rule was sent to 016 for information on: .

Doc. Name Ot\ THOMAS \ RECORDS \COMPAPER v.m .... . .w.. w.:c..emonw.n --. c.c . .n - --.=.....

OFFICE RPHEB/DRA s

,B RPHEB/DRA li D/Df54RdS OGC NAME MLThomas N JEGlennO[ (t#40Yris SATreby DATE 10/25/95 10/25/95 56/7./95 10/ /95 0FFICE D/0E D/lRM D/SP D/NMSS NAME JLieberman GFCranford RLBangart CJPapertello DATE 10/ /95 10/ /95 10/ /95 10/ /95 0FFICE D/PA D/ADM 80 D/RES)[

NAME WBeecher DLMeyer DLMorrison JMTaylor 0FFICE 10/ /95- 10/ /95 1l/.3/95 10/ -/95 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY plI b) %~

o c ^*~ *~^^,

p MI i e

ENCLOSURE 1 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE

]-  !

i

[7590-01-P)

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72 RIN: 3150-AF17 Termination or Transfer of Licensed Activities: Recordkeeping Requirements AGENCY:_ Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

EFFECTIVE DATE: (90daysafterpublication).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary L. Thomas, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6230, e-mail MLT19NRC. GOV.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Background While evaluating'an incident involving some offsite contamination, the NRC identified a deficiency in the current recordkeeping requirements. The NRC was unable to determine how much radioactive material was released to a sanitary sewerage system because records of previous- releases by the original holder of the license were not available. In addition, the regulations were unclear with regard to;the final disposition of these records when licensed activities have ceased and the license is terminated. A proposed rule

i k 1

requiring licensees to forward certain records to the NRC once licensed activities ceased, or to a new owner if they would be taking over licensed activities, was published for comment in the fede;al Register on December 28, 1994, (59 FR 66814).

11. Discussion of comments and summary of requirements in the final rule This section includes a discussion of the significant issues raised by 3 public comment and how they were resolved. Six comment letters were received I on the proposed rule.

Public Comments Need for the rule and expected benefit.

l.

Commenti: Two commenters stated that the NRC has not demonstrated the need for the rule on the basis of one incident. They also stated that the NRC did not demonstrate how the proposed regulations and their commensurate costs

, would assist licensees, the NRC, and the Agreement States in the analysis of the environmental impact from the site. They requested that the NRC provide data that permits evaluation of the actual impact of these regulations.

These same commenters stated that the usefulness of the records in the decision-making process should also be demonstrated in each case. They referred to the Objective Section of the Draft Regulatory Analysis, which stated that these records "...will provide the NRC with the information needed to assess possible risks associated with licensed activities once a iicensee has terminated its license." They believed that this assumption is generally false, and that even if sewer release records were available, an independent 2

evaluation of the environment would still be required. These commenters went on to state that the NRC has failed to discuss the utility of records that are based on rough calculations.

Response: The intent of the proposed rule was to ensure that records that are retained by licensees during-licensed operations are available after license termination in the event that questions arise regarding any potential offsite consequences from licensed operations. The proposed rule specified that the records used by the licensee to demonstrate compliance with the public dose limits and limits on waste disposals were to be forwarded to the NRC-prior to license termination, or to the new owner if licensed operations were to continue at the site, under a new or amended license. While it is unlikely there will often be a need for such information, there may be circumstances where it will be necessary for the NRC or other government agencies to evaluate the effects of licensed operations on the environment.

While it is correct that other information would also be needed to perform an environmental analysis, access to such records would be useful in the evaluating potential sources of contamination. In response to concerns raised by the commenters that the costs of retaining these records was greater than any benefit derived, the final rule has been revised to only require the transfer of records needed for decommissioning to the new licensee in the event that licensed oportaions would continue at the site. Records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal, currently required under il 20.1207 and 20.2108, respectively, are to be forwarded to the NRC prior to license transfer, re-assignment, or termination.

Since these records are already required to be retained by each licensee until license termination, the burden to licensees to forward these records to the NRC would be minimal. This will 3

limit the burden on licensees that take over a site that has not been released for unrestricted use, in that, the new licensee will only be required to keep those records needed for decommissioning. Access 'to the records pertaining to decommissioning would be needed by the new licensee to develop a site characterization plan.

The NRC has re-evaluated the impact of this regulation in the Regulatory Analysis. The burden associated with this rulemaking will not be significant and the records required to be transferred are the records that the licensee is already required to retain until license termination. in addition, the final rule limits the number of licensees affected to only those licensees that are required to have decommissioning funding assurance (i.e. licensees that have a potential for significant contamination). Using this criteria the number of licensees affected by this rulemaking has decreased from 1,716 in the proposed rule to 330 in the final rule.

2. Agreement State Compatibility Comment: One commenter stated that there was-no basis for a Division 2-level- of compatibility. They referred to the Federal Register notice on the proposed rule, which states these rules are ".'..needed to provide sufficient information to a new itcensee and to evaluate offsite consequences from previous licensee activities and to decommission the site effectively." As stated in issue 1 above, this commenter also concluded that the utility of these records was questionable.

In addition, the commenter stated that other costs associated with the proposed rule have not been considered such as costs associated with 4

j

l

! Inspections, and while the NRC may be able to absorb these costs in "non-core portions of the inspection program," Agreement States do not have this luxury.

Responig: The Commission still believes that this rule sh:,uld be assigned a Division 2 compatibility level. Since the Commission has reduced the burden of this rule by limiting the records that need to be transferred to the new licensee and to those licensees required to have decommissioning funding assurance the inspection burden on the Agreement States should be minimized. The information in the records portaining to public dose and waste disposal would be useful to the Agreement State in the event they need to evaluate offsite consequences from a previous licensee's activities. With respect to the Paperwork Reduction Act Statement, the reporting burden reflects that the time required to index, review, and store the required records has been recalculated to be 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> per licensee submittal.

3. Regulatory Alternatives Comment: Two commenters stated that the NRC failed to identify regulatory alternatives that would be as effective as the proposed rule while placing less burden on licensees, the NRC, and Agreement States. As noted in issues 1 and 2 above, the commenters concluded that any benefit from the proposed rule is questionable. They stated that specific regulatory alternatives that should be considered include, but are not limited to:

a. Perform separate evaluations for the utility of requiring records for public dose and for waste disposal, and making independent judgments,

b. Consider limiting the scope of the rules to address only those facilities that possess unsealed sources with long half-lives.

5

c. Consider all records being provided to the NRC, rather than requiring Agreement States to maintain the records.

d. Eliminate transferring 10 CFR 20.2005 type records (disposal of

. specific wastes, in quantities less than or equal to 1.85 kilobecquerels per gram of tritium or carbon-14 in scintillation fluids or animal tissue).

Response: The Commission considered possible alternatives to rulemaking. These are addressed in the Regulatory Analysis that accompanies this rule. The following is provided with respect to the specific recommendations of the commenters:

(a) The final rule requires that records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal be forwarded to the NRC or the appropriate Agreement State prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination; rather than to the new licensee, as stated in the proposed rule. This will limit the burden on licensees that take over a site that has not been released for unrestricted use. However, the new licensee would need to keep all records pertaining to decommissioning.

(b)_ The NRC has evaluated the suggestion to limit the scope of the rule and.

has revised the rule and the Regulatory Analysis to reflect that the rule only affects those licensees who are required to have decommissioning funding assurance.- Hence, licensees that use and possess sealed sources with short half-lives are no longer affected by this rule. The criteria for whether a licensee.is required to have decommissioning funding assurance can be found in 10 CFR Parts 30.35, 40.36, 70.25, and 72.30.

(c) The purpose of this rulemaking was to assure that adequate records would be available to provide historical information of previous licensed operations in the event significant offsite contamination is detected after a licensee 6

has ceased operation of their facility. Since the NRC's regulatory authority has been delegated to the Agreement States for this material, it is appropriate that the Agreement States maintain these records, rather than the NRC.

(d) Records of waste disposals allowed by 6 20.2005 currently are required by 6 20.2108(b) to be retained until the Commission terminates each pertinent license requiring the record. The Commission is currently evaluating a petition for rulemaking that requests a revision to i 20.2005 pertaining to waste disposal. This petition is currently on hold until finalization of the rulemaking addressing radiological criteria for decommissioning.

7 l

4. Public Access To Information Comment: One commenter was concerned that the Commission overlooked the benefits which could result from simple, inexpensive-to-implement requirements enhancing public access to information. This commenter noted that enhanced public access to information is an important (though not the only) reason for record-keeping, in part because informed members of the public can play a significant role in ensuring that regulatory actions are appropriate and timely. This commenter urged the Commission to consider enhanced public access to information as part of a coherent policy to protect important documentary information from loss.

Response: This rulemaking addresses recordkeeping requirements for termination and transfer of licensed activities. This rule requires that records pertaining to decommissioning be transferred to a licensee that takes over a previous licensee's business and requires that records related to public dose and waste disposal be forwarded to the cognizant regulatory body prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination, thereby protecting these records for future access. Once these records are forwarded to the NRC, they will be available through the Freedom of Information Act process, provided they do not contain proprietary information.

5. Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations and 10 CFR 72.30(d)

Requirements Comment: One commenter stated that 10 CFR 72.30(d) addresses recordkeeping requirements for decommissioning for independent spent fuel storage installations and that the NRC has proposed changes to this paragraph to address the transfer of licensed activities. This commenter questions why 8

10 CFR 50.75(g), which contains the same type of recordkeeping requirements for decommissioning for production and utilization facilities, was not changed; the commenter believes this to be inconsistent and possibly inadvertent.

Responsg: This rule only addresses materials licensees. The Commission is currently evaluating the need for additional rulemaking to address the broad issue of transfers of reactor licenses. Any such rulemaking would also consider recordkeeping requirements.

Summary of Reouirements of the Final Rule:

The revised rule requires transfer of records pertaining to decommissioning to a licensee that takes over a site that has not been released for unrestricted use. The new licensee would need these records in order to perform a site characterization prior to decommissioning. Once the new entity is granted a license and accepts these records, they becomo subject to all regulations concerning termination and transfer. The amendments also require that records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal be forwarded to the NRC prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination. The final rule also requires licensees to forward records pertaining to decommissioning to the NRC prior to license termination. In selecting records to include in this rulemaking, the NRC focused attention on information that would be needed by licensees to conduct decommissioning effectively and for the NRC to evaluate offsite consequences from a licensee's operation.

Paragraphs 20.2107(b) and 20.2108(b) have been amended to state that there are additional requirements for disposition of the records required by 9

l these sections in 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72. Paragraphs 30.35(g),

40.36(f), 70.25(g), and 72.30(d) specify records that the Commission considers important to decommissioning. The NRC has revised the aforementioned paragraphs to require the transfer of records pertaining to decommissioning records to the new licensee. A paragraph has been added to il 30.51, 40.61, 70.51 and 72.80 to clarify that records pertaining to public dose records and waste disposal be forwarded to the NRC prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination. Also, paragraphs have been added to il 61.30(a)(3) and 61.31(c)(1) to clarify that records required by 66 61.80(e) and (f) are to be transferred to the disposal site owner or to the party responsible for -

institutional control of- the disposal site,:respectively.

To lessen the burden on licensees, the rule permits these records to be submitted electronically. Finally, a new paragraph has been added to il 30.36, 40.42, 70.38, and 72.54 to state that a license will not be terminated until the NRC receives the records required by revised il 30.35(g), 30.51, 40.36(f), 40.61, 70.25(g), 70.51, 72.30(d), and 72.80.

When records pertaining to decommissioning are transferred from one licensee to another because licensed activities will continue at the same site under a new or amended license, the new licensee will be responsible for maintaining these records until the license is terminated. it is expected that very few licensees will fall into this category. The estimated burden per licensee is expected to be low and is discussed in the Regulatory Analysis.

10

111. Agreement State Compatibility This rulemaking will be a matter of compatibility between the NRC and the Agreement States, thereby providing consistency of State with federal safety requirements.- The NRC has determined that a Division 2 level of compatibility should be assigned because the records required by this -

ru%. king are important to assure protection of public health and safety, and are important to ensuring that facilities in Agreement States are effectively decommissioned. Under this level of compatibility the Agreement States would be expected to adopt recordkeeping requirements that are as stringent as NRC's, but they would be permitted flexibility in their requirements based on their radiation protection experience, professional judgments, and community values.

1 IV. Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion The NRC has determined that this revised regulation is the type of action described as a categorical exclusion in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(3)(ii),

recordkeeping requirements. Therefore, neither an environmental impact statement nor an environmental assessment has been prepared for this revised regulation.

The revised action requires that records pertaining to public dose and waste disposals be forwarded to the NRC prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination. The revised action is directed to improving the regulatory,-

licensing, inspection, and enforcement framework relating to these facilities where licensed activities will continue and will ensure that adequate 11

information to decommission the facility effectively is retained after license termination.

V. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement This rulemaking amends information collection requirements that are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This rule has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for review and approval of the paperwork requirements.

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.

VI. Regulatory Analysis The NRC has prepared a regulatory analysis on this rulemaking. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the alternatives considered by the NRC. The regulatory analysis is available for inspection at the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW. (Lower level), Washington, DC. Single copies of the analysis may be obtained from Mary L. Thomas, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone: (301) 415-6230; email: MLT10NRC. GOV 12

I Vll. Regulatory Flexibility Certification In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C.

605(b)), the Commission certifies that this rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

The rulemaking imposes recorikeeping requirements on those licensees who are required to have decommissioning funding assurance and on licensees who are transferring their license to a new licensee. These changes require the transfer of records pertaining to decommissioning to the new licensee. In addition, the rule requires forwarding records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal to the NRC at license termination. These records are already required to be maintained until the license is terminated by the Commission, and are needed to provide historical information of the impact of a previous licensee activities on the environment and decommissioning.

Vill. Backfit Analysis The NRC has determined that the backfit tule, 10 CFR 50.109, does not apply to this rule and, therefore, that a backfit analysis is not required for this rule because these amendments do not involve any provisions that would impose backfits as defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1),

13

List of Subjects in Parts 20, 30, 40 61, 70, and--72 10 CFR Part 20 Byproduct material, Criminal penalties, licensed material, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Occupational safety and health.

Packaging and containers, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements Special nuclear material, Source material, Waste treatment and disposal.

10 CFR Part 30 Byproduct material, Criminal penalties, Government contracts, Intergovernmental relations, Isotopes, Nuclear materials,- Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

10 CFR Part 40 Criminal penalties, Government contracts Hazardous materials transportation, Nuclear materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Source material Uranium.

10 CfR Part 61 Criminal penalties, low-level waste, Nuclear materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Uaste treatment and disposal, 10 CFR Part 70 Criminal penalties, Hazardous materials transportation, Material control and accounting, Nuclear materials, Packaging and containers, Radiation 14

protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements Scientific equipment, Security measures, Special nuclear material.

10 CFR Part 72 9

Hanpower training programs, Nuclear materials, Occupational safety and health, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Spent fuel.

For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC is adopting the following amendments to 10 CfR Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72.

PART 20--STANDARDS FOR PROTECTION AGAINST RADIATION

1. The authority citation for Part 20 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: Secs. 53, 63, 65, 81, 103, 104, 161, 182, 186, 68 Stat. 930, 933, 935, 936, 937, 948, 953, 955, as amended, (U.S.C. 2073, 2093, 2095, 2111, 2133, 2134, 2201, 2232, 2236), secs. 201, as amended 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846).

2. In 6 20.2107, the text of paragraph (b) has been revised to read as follows:

6 20,2107 Records of dose to individual members of the public.

15

l (b) The licensee _shall retain the records required by paragraph (a) of this section until the Commission terminates each pertinent license requiring the record. Addttional requirements for disposition of these records are Spacified in il 30.51, 40.61, 61.80, 70.51, and 72.80 for activities licensed under these parts, s * * * *

3. In i 20.2108, the text of paragraph (b) is has been revised to read as follows:

ly_,.QPB Records of waste disoosal.

(b) The licensee shall retain the records required by paragraph (a) of this section until the Cornission terminates each pertinent license requiring the record. Additional requirements for disposition of these records are specified in il 30.51, 40.61, 61.80, 70.51, and 72.80 for activities licensed under these parts.

PART 30--RULES OF GENERAL APPLICABILITY TO DOMESTIC LICENSING OF BYPRODUCT MATERIAL

4. The authority citation for Part 30 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: Secs. 81, 82, 161, 182, 183, 186, 68 Stat. 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat 444,- as amended (42 U.S.C. 2111, 2112, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2236, 2282); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846).

16

Section 30.7 also issued under Pub. L.95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 as amended by Pub. L. 102-486, sec. 2902, 106 Stat. 3123, (42 U.S.C. 5851).

Section 30.34(b) also issued under sec. 184, 68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Section 30.61 also issued under sec. 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2237).

5. In i 30.35, the introductory text of paragraph (g) has been revised to read as follows:

i 30.35 Financial _ assurance and recordkeepino for decommissionina.

(g) Each person licensed under this part or parts 32 through 36 and 39 of this chapter shall keep records of information important to the decommissioning of a facility in an identified location until the site is released for-unrestricted use. Before licensed activities are transferred or assigned in accordance with I 30.34(b), those licensees required to have decommissioning funding plans in accordance with this section shall transfer all records described in this paragraph to the new licensee. In this case, the new licensee will be responsible for maintaining thesc records until the license is terminated. If records of relevant information are kept for other purposes, reference to these records and their locations may be used.

Information the Commission considers important to decommissioning consists o f --

17

.____J

i

6. In i 30.36, paragraph (j)(4) has been added to read as follows:

6 30.36 Exoiration and termination of licenses and decommissionina of situ and separate buildinas or outdoor areas.

(j) * * *

(4) Records required by 66 30.35(g) and 30.51(d) have been received.

7. In 6 30.51, paragraph (d) has been added to read as follows:

6 30.51 Records.

(d) The licensee shall retain each record that is required by the regulations in il 20.2107 and 20.2108 until the Commission terminates each pertinent license requiring the record. This includes records retained under the Standards for Protection Against Radiation in effect prior to January 1, 1994.' Before license transfer or assignment in accordance with 6 30.34(b), and before license termination, those licensees required by 6 30.35 to have decommissioning funding plans shall forward all records described in this paragraph to the appropriate NRC Regional Office.

PART 40--00MESTIC LICENSING OF SOURCE MATERIAL

8. The authority citation for Part 40 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: Secs, 62, 63, 64, 65, 81, 161, 182, 183, 186, 68 Stat. 932, 933, 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as amended, secs. 11e(2), 83, 84, Pub. L 95-604, see 5 20.4ol(c)(3) codified as of January-1, 1993.

18

_ . - - - - I

92 Stat. 3033, as amended, 3039, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C.

2014(e)(2),2092,2093,2094,2095,2111,2113,2114,2201,2232,2233,2236, 2282); sec. 274, Pub. L.86-373, 73 Stat. 688 (42 U.S.C 2021); secs, 201, as amended. 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, ss amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); sec. 275, 92 Stat. 3021, as amended by Pub. L.97-415, 96 Stat.

2067 (42 U.S.C. 2022).

Section 40.7 also issued under Pub. L.95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 as amended by Pub. L. 102-486, sec. 2902, 106 Stat. 3123, (42 U.S.C. 5851).

Section 40.31(g) also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152).

Section 40.46 also issued under sec. 184, 68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C.

2234). Section 40.71 also issued under sec. 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C.

2237).

9. In i 40.36, the introductory text of paragraph (f) has been revised to read as follows:

6 40.36 Financial assurance and recordkeepino for decommissioning.

(f) Each person licensed under this part shall keep records of information important to the decommissioning of a facility in an identified location until the site is released for unrestricted use. Before licensed activities are transferred or assigned in accordance with 6 40.41(b) those licensees required to have decommissioning funding plans in accordance with this section shall transfer all records described in this paragraph to the new licensee. In this case, the new licensee will be responsible for maintaining these records until the license is terminated. If records of relevant information are kept for other purposes, reference to these records and their 1

19

L locations may be used. Information the Commission considers important to decommissioning consists of --

10. In i 40.42, paragraph (j)(4) has been added to read as follows:

5 40.42 Exoiration and termination of licenses and decommissionina of sites add separate buildinal_or outdoor areas.

.{j) * *

• i (4) Records required by il 40.36(f) and 40.61(d) have been received.

11. In 6 40.61, paragraph (d) has been added to read as follows:

i 40.61 Records.

(d) The licensee shall retain each record that is required by the regulations in il 20.2107 and 20.2108 until the Commission terminates each pertinent license requiring the record. This includes records retained'under the Standards for Protection Against Radiation in effect prior to January 1, 1994.' Before license transfer or assignment in accordance with 6 40.41(b), and before license termination, those licensees required by I 40.36 to have decommissioning funding plans shall forward all records described in this paragraph to the appropriate NRC Regional Office, see $ 20.401(c)(3) codified as of January 1, 1993.

20

PART 61--LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND DISPOSAL OF RADIDACTIVE WASTE

12. The authority citation for Part 61 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: Secs. 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 81, 161, 182, 183, 68 Stat. 930, 932, 933, 935, 948, 953, 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233); secs. 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1244, 1246, (42 U.S.C.

5842, 5846); secs, 10 and 14. Pub. L.95-601, 92 Stat. 2951 (42 U.S.C. 2021a and 5851) and Pub. L. 102-486, sec. 2902, 106 Stat. 3123, (42 U.S.C. 5851).

13. In i 61.30, paragraph (a)(3) has beei amended-to read as follows:

I 61.30 Transfer of license.

(a)

(3) That any funds for care and records required by il 61.80(e) and (f) be transferred to the disposal site owner;.

14. In i 61.31, paragraph (c)(3) has been added to read as follows:

6 61.31 Termination of licensg.

(c) * * *

(3) That the records required by il 61.80(e) and (f) be forwarded to the party responsible for institutional control of the disposal site and a copy be sent to the Commission immediately prior to license termination; 21 a

i

15. In i 61.80, paragraph (f) has been amended as follows:

I 61.80 Maintenance of records. reports. and transfers.

(f) Following receipt and acceptance of a shipment of radioactive waste, the licensee shall record the date of disposal of the waste, the location in the disposal site, the condition of the waste packages as received, any discrepancies between materials listed on the manifest and those received, and any evidence of leaking or damaged packages or radiation and contamination levels in excess of limits specified in Department of Transportation and Commission regulations. The licensee shall briefly describe any repackaging operations of any of the waste packages included in the shipment, plus any other information required by the Commission as a license condition. The licensee shall retain each record that is required by the regulations in il 20.2107 and 20.2108 until the Commission terminates each pertinent license requiring the record. This includes records retained under the Standards for Protection Against Radiation in effect prior to January 1, 1994.'

PART 70--DOMESTIC LICENSING 0F SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL

16. The authority citation for Part 70 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: Secs. 51, 53, 161, 182, 183, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 948, 953, ,

954, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2282); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 204, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1245, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5845, 5846).

See 5 20.4ol(c)(3) codified as of January 1, 1993.

22

Sections 70.l(c) and 70.20a(b) also issued under secs. 135, 141 Pub. L.97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161). Section 70.7 also issued under Pub. L.95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 as amended by Pub. L.

102-486 sec. 2902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Section 70.21(g) also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152). Section 70.31 also issued under sec. 57d, Pub. L.93-377, 88 Stet. 475 (42 U.S.C. 2077).

Sections 70.36 and 70.44 also issued under sec. 184, 68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Section 70.61 also issued under secs. 186, 187, 68 Stat.

955 (42 U.S.C. 2236, 2237). Section 70.62 also issued under sec. 108, 68 Stat. 939, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2138).

17. In 6 70.25, the introductory text of paragraph (g) has been revised to read as follows:

6 70.25 Financial assurance and recordkeepino for decommissionina.

(g) Each person licensed under this part shall keep records of information important to the decommissioning of a facility in an identified location until- the site is released for unrestricted use. Before licensed activities are transferred or assigned in accordance with i 70.32(a)(3),

those licensees required to have decommissioning funding plans in accordance 4

with this section shall transfer all records described in this paragraph to the new licensee, in this case, the new licensee will be responsible for maintaining these records until the license is terminated, if records of relevant information are kept for other purposes, reference to these records and their locations may be used. Information the Commission considers important to decommissioning consists of --

23 J

i l

18. In 6 70.38, paragraph (j)(4) has been added to read as follows:

I 70.38 Exoiration and terminatior, of licenses and decommissionina of sites and separate buildinos or outdoor areas.

(j) * * *

(4) Records required by il 70.25(f) and 70.51(b)(6) have been received.

19. In 6 70.51, paragraph (b)(6) has been revised to read as follows:

6 70.51 Malerial balance. inventory. and records reouirements.

(b)

(6) The licensee shall retain each record that is required by the regulations in i 20.2107 and i 20.2108 until the Commission terminates each pertinent license requiring the record. This includes records retained under the Standards for Protection Against Radiation in effect prior to January 1, 1994.' Before license transfer or assignment in accordance with 6 70.32(a)(3), and before license termination, those licensees required by 6 70.25 to have decommissioning funding plans shall forward all records described in this paragraph to the appropriate NRC Regional Office.

See 5 20.4ol(c)(3) codified as of January 1, 1993.

24

l

20. In i 70.51, paragraph (c)(5) redes 19nate footnote 2 as footnote 3.

21. In 5 70.51, paragrtph (f)(4)(ii) redesignate footnote 3 as footnote 4.

PART 72--LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HICH-LEVEL RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE

22. The authority citation for Part 72 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: Secs. 51, 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 161, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187, 189, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 934, 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, is amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093,2095,2099,2111,2201,2232,2233,2234,2236,2237,2238,2282);

sec. 274, Pub. L.86-373, 73 Stat. 688, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2021); sec. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); Pub. L.95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. ,2951 as amended by Pub. L. 102-486, sec. 2902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec. 102 Pub. L.91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332). Secs. 131, 132, 133, 135, 137, 141, Pub. L.97-425, 96 Stat. 2229, 2230, 2232, 2241, sec. 148, Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat.

1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10151, 10152, 10153, 10155, 10157, 10161, 10168).

Section 72.44(g) also issued under secs.142(b) and 148(c), (d), Pub. L.

100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-232, 1330-236 (42 U.S.C. 10162(b), 10168(c), (d)).

Section 72.46 also issued under sec.189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239);

sec. 134, Pub. L.97-425, 96 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10154). Section 72.96(d) also issued under sec. 145(g), Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C.

10165(g)). Subpart J also . issued under secs, 2(2), 2(15), 2(19), ll7(a),

25

141(h), Pub._L.97-425, 96 Stat. 2202, 2203, 2204, 2222, 2244, (42 U.S.C.

10101,10137(a),10161(h)). Subparts K and L are also issued under sec. 133, 98 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10153) and Sec. 218(a), 96 Stat. 2252 (42 U.S.C.

10198),

23. In 5 72.30, the introductory text of paragraph (d) has been revised to read as follows:

1 72.30 Financial assurance and recordkeepino for decommissionina.

(d) Each person licensed under this part shall keep records of information important to the decommissioning of a facility in an identified location until the site is released for unrestricted use. Before licensed activities are transferred or assigned in accordance with 6 72.44(b)(1), the licensee shall transfer all records described in this paregraph to the new licensee. In this case, the new licensee will be responsible for maintaining these records until the license is terminated. If records of relevant information are kept for other purposes, reference to these records and their locations may be used. Information the Commission considers important to decommissioning consists of --

24. In i 72.54, paragraph (1)(3) has been added to read as follows:

1 72.54 Exoiration and termination of licenses and decommissionina of sites

-and separate buildinas or outdoor areas.

(1) 26

(3) Records required by ll 72.30(d) and 72.80(e) have been received.

25. In i 72.80, paragraph (e) has been added to read as follows:

I 72.80' Other records and reports.

(e) The licensee shall retain each record that is required by the regulations in il 20.2107 and 20.2108 until the Commission terminates each pertinent license requiring the record. This includes records retained under the Standards for Protection Against Radiation in effect prior to January 1, 1994.' Before license transfer or assignment in accordance with

! /2.44(b)(1), and before license termination, the licensee shall forward all records described in this paragraph to the appropriate NRC regional office.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

James M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations.

See S 20.401(c)(3) codified as of January 1, 1993.

27 I

l 4p i.IIiumi ENCLOSURE 2 REGULATORY ANALYSIS

REGULATORY ANALYSIS REVISION OF RECORDS RETENTION REQUIRENENTS

1. Statement of the Problem After evaluating an incident where some offsite contamination was found, the NRC identified _a deficiency in the current recordkeeping requirements.

The NRC was unable to determine how much radioactive material was released to a sanitary sewerage system because records of previous. releases by the original holder of the license were not available. The existinl regulations are unclear regarding final disposition of records pertaining to decommissioning, public dose, and waste disposal when licensed activities have ceased and the license is terminated. In addition, when a licensee transfers, assigns, or terminates a license, and another entity continues licensed activities at the same site, the original licensee is currently not required to transfer records to decommission the facility effectively to the new licensee.

Therefore, the NRC has revised its regulations pertaining to the disposition of certain records when a licensee terminates licensed activities or licensed activities are transferred or assigned to another licensee. The revised rule would req 0 ire a licensee to transfer records pertaining to decommissioning the facility to the new licensee if licensed activities will continue at the same site, and the site has not been released for unrestricted use. If the license is to be terminated the rule would require the licensee to forward records pertaining to decommissioning to the NRC. The rule would also require a licensee to forwar_d records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal to the NRC prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination. In 1

l addition, the NRC has revised its regulations pertaining to disposition of records concerning low-level waste facilities when the facility is closed and the license is transferred to the disposal site owner and when the NRC terminates the license and the party responsible for institutional control takes over the disposal site.

2. Objectives Retention of these records will ensure their future availability, and will-provide the NRC and Agreement States with the information needed to assess possible risks associated with licensed activities once a licensee has terminated its license. These revised amendments contain requirements that are intended to ensure that the applicable records will be available when ne,eded. The existing regulations do not provide for the transfer of records when a licensee transfers, assigns, or terminates a license' and another person continues licensed activities at the same site under a new or amended license and the site has not been released for unrestricted use. In addition to providing information to the NRC necessary to assess possible risks from a previous licensee's activities, transfers of the information to the new licensee are necessary to ensure that adequate information will be available to the new licensee to develop a site characterization to decommission the site effectively.

3.0 Alternatives In developing a solution to the identified problem of records availability, the following alternative regulatory approaches were considered:

2

1) no action; 2) amendment of licenses; 3) use of regulatory guides; and

4) amendment of regulations.

4.0 Consecuences

a. Cost and Benefits of Alternatives

1. No Action - The benefit of not changing the regulations would be minimal since records that would be needed by the NRC, the new licensee, the disposal site owner, or the party responsible for institutional control may be difficult to obtain. Without a consistent approach some of the needed records could be lost or destroyed inadvertently, resulting in additional costs to the new licensee, the disposal site owner, the party responsible for institutional control, or the NRC to make determinations of public risk.

2. Amendment of Licenses - The only benefit of amending licenses would be in the resources saved in promulgating a new regulation. The costs to amend licenses for the 330 NRC licensees could be higher than those needed for amending the regulation and could result in an inconsistent application of policy.

3. Use of Regulatory Guides - There would be little benefit in using a regulatory guide since a licensee could not be required to forward records to the new licensee, disposal site owner, party responsible for institutional control, or the cognizant regulatory body without additional action.

4. Amendment of Regulations - The benefit of codifying record retention requirements would result in the availability of the information necessary to assess possible risks from a previous licensee's activities and to develop a site characterization plan for decommissioning. Therefore, transfer of the information to the new licensee, the disposal site owner, the party

< 3

responsible for institutional control, or the cognizant regulatory body would ensure that adequate information will be available to carry out the aforementioned activities.

The costs of the revised rule would be incurred from transferring records to a new licensee, disposal site owner, party responsible for institutional control, or forwarding records to the cognizant regulatory body.

The records included in the revised rulemaking are already required to be maintained until license termination. In assessing these costs an assumption was made that all 330 NRC materials licensees would be affected by the rule although, in practice, the rule is expected to significantly impact only materials licensees that are required to have decommissioning funding assurance.

The NRC's License Management System (LMS), a database of NRC materials licensees, was queried to verify this assumption and determine the number cf NRC licensees that would be affected by this rule. Based on the information available for 1994 it was determined that an estimated 330 licensees were required to have decommissioning funding assurance and would therefore be affected by the rule. A second query was performed on the LMS to determine the number of affected licensees of this 330 that terminated or transferred their licenses in 1994, these numbers are 17 and 3 respectively. An assumption was made regarding the number of Agreement State (AS) licensees that would be affected by this rule using a two-to-one ratio of AS licensees to NRC licensees. Therefore the numbers of AS licensees that would terminate or transfer annually are 34 and 6,.respectively. If the number of affected NRC licensees is added to the number of affected AS licensees the annual totals are 51 and 9 respectively. It may be assumed that one low-level waste 4

I l

l licensee will terminate their license per year and that one low-level waste licensee will transfer records each year. A summary of the numbers of licensees affected by this rule is given in Table 1.

t 5

TABLE 1 ESTIMATED NUMBER OF NRC AND AGREEMENT STATE MATERIAL LICENSEES POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ANNUALLY BY THE TERMINATION OR TRANSFER OF LICENSED ACTIVITIES RULEMAKING l

Agreement State NRC All Licensees Licensees Licensees Transfer of Decommissioning Records to New Licensee 6 3 9 (30.35(g), 40.36(f), 70.25(g), 72.30(d))'

Forwarding of Decomnissioning Records to the NRC 34 17 $1 (30.p,(j)(4), 40.42(f)(4), 70.38(f)(4), 72.54(1)(3))'

Forwarding of Dose Records and Records of Waste 40 20 60 Disposal to the NRC (30.51(d), 40.61(d),

70.51(b)(6), 72.80(e))'

Transfer of Records Required by ll 61.80(e) and (f) to the Disposal site Owner l' I Transfer of Recos s Required by 16 61.60(e) and (f) l' 1 to the Party Responsible for Institutional care and a copy sent to the Comission Prior to License Termination

'There are no Part 72 Agreement State licensees.

' Licensee may be either Agreement State or NRC licensee, 6

The costs associated with transferring decommissioning records to the new licensee are incurred by the licensees. As can be seen from the Table 2 the total cost for the 9 affected licensees would be $1,674 or $186 per licensee.

TABLE 2 ESTIMATED COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH TRANSFERRING DECOMMISSIONING RECORDS TO NEW LICENSEE Licensee Action Hours / Licensees Technical Staff Clerical Staff Licensee Affected by Rule ($52/ hour) ($20/ hour)

Verify Required Records 1.5 9 102.00 to be Transferred Prepare Required Records 1.5 9 270.00 for Transfer '

Verify Records 1.5 9 702.00 Transferred Subtotal 1,404.00 270.00 Total 1,674.00 7

l

The costs associated with forwarding records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal to the NRC are incurred by the licensees. As can be seen from the Table 3 the total cost for the 60 affected licensees would be $6,480 or $108 per licensee.

TABLE 3 ESTIMATED COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH FORWARDING PUBLIC DOSE AND WASTE DISPOSAL RECORDS TO THE COGNIZANT REGULATORY BODY Licensee Action Hours / Licensees Technical Staff Clerical Staff Licensee Affected by Rule ($52/ hour) ($20/ hour)

Vertfy Required Records 1.5 60 4,680.00 to be Transferred Prepare Required Records 1.5 60 1,8?0.00 for Transfer Total 6,480g r

i 8

The costs associated with transferring records required by 10 CFR 61.80(e) and (f) to the new licensee or site owner are incurred by the licensees. Assuming that during a year's time only one low-level waste license transfers its license, the cost incurred would be $186, as can be seen from Table 4 below. This may be either an Agreement State or NRC low-level waste licensee.

TABLE 4 COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH TRANSFERRING RECORDS REQUIRED BY 10 CFR 61.80(e) & (f)

Licensee Action Hours / Licensees Technical Clerical Licensee Affected by Staff Staff Rule ($52/ hour) ($20/ hour)

Verify Required Records 1.5 1 78.00 to be Transferred Prepare Required Records 1.5 1 30.00 for Transfer Verify Records 1.5 1 78.00 Transferred subtotal 156.00 30.00 Total 186.00 9

i The costs associated with forwarding records required by 10 CFR 61.80(e) and (f) to the party responsible for institutional care or the NRC upon license termination are incurred by the licensees. Assuming that during a year's time only one low-level wa;'e license terminates its license, the cost incurred would be $186, as can be seen from Table 5 below. This may be either an Agreement State or NRC low-level waste licensee.

TABLE 5 COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH FORWARDING RECORDS REQUIRED BY 10 CFR 61.80(e) & (f)

Licensee Action Hours / Licensees Technical Clerical Licensee Affected by Staff Staff Rule ($52/ hour) ($20/ hour)

Verify Required Records to 1.5 1 78,00 be Transferred Prepare Required Records for 1.5 1 30,00 Transfer Verify Records Transferred 1.5 1 78.00 Subtotal 156.00 30.00 Total 186.00 10 l

The costs of forwarding records pertaining to decommissioning upon license termination are incurred by the licensee. Approximately 34 Agreement State licensees and 17 NRC licensees would be affected by this rule per year.

As can be seen from Table 6 below the total cost for the 51 affected licensees would be $5,508 or $108 per licensee.

TABLE 6 COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH FORWARDING DECOMMISSIONING RECORDS UPON LICENSE TERMINATION Licensee Action Hours / Licensees Technical Clerical L.tcensee Affected by Staff Staff Rule ($52/ hour) ($20/ hour)

Verify Required Records to 1.5 51 3,978.00 be Transferred Prepare Required Records for 1.5 51 1,530.00 Transfer lotal 5,508.00 11

i Once the records pertaining to decommissioning, public dose, and waste disposal are received by the cognizant regulatory body they will have to be indexed, verified for relevancy by technica' staff and then sent for storage, l As can be seen from Table 7 below the cost incurred by the cognizant regulatory body would be $304 per licensee affected by the rule or $18,848 for the 62 licensees annually affected by the rule.

TABLE 7 COSTS INCVRRED BY REGULATORY B0DY Cognizant Regulatory Body Hours / Licensees Technical Clerical Action Licensee Affected by Staff Staff Rule (152/ hour) (120/ hour)

Verify and Index Records 4.5 62 14,508.00 Received Prepare Records for 2.5 62 3,100.00 Transfer to Headauarters Prepare Records for Storage 1.0 62 1.240.00 Subtotal 14,508.00 4,340.00 Total 18,848.00 A summary of the costs of the above amendments for the affected licensees is estimated to be $16,320. This summary is presented in Table 8, The annual cost to the cognizant regulatory body to index, verify and store the records is estimated to be $18,848. It should be noted that the values presented in Table 8 are only in 1994 dollars for one year. Discounting the values at a 7% rate over a 25 year time period to illustrate the long term effect of this rule results in the a burden to the NRC of $219,579 allocated to cover the annual expenditure of $18,848. This value is expressed as a discounted flow of future funds. The burden for the licensees affected by 12

this rule would be $190,128 for the 62 licensees affected annually by this rule. Per licensee this burden is $3,066.

TABLE 8 TOTAL ANNUAL IMPLEMENTATION COSTS FOR THE NEW REQUIREMENTS (US DOLLARS)'

Agreement State NRC Licensees All Licensees Licensees Transfer of Decomissioning Records to New Licensee 1116 558 3,960 (30.35(g), 40.36(f), 70.25(g), 72.30(d))*

Forwarding of Decomissioning Records to NRC (30.36(j)(4), 3672 1836 5,508 40.42(j)(4). 70.3B(i)(4), 72.54(1)(3))*

Forwarding of Dose Records and Records of Waste Disposal to 4320 2160 6,480 NRC (30.51(d), 40.61(d), 70.51(b)(6), 72.80(e))*

Transfer of Records Required by il 61,80(e) and (f) to the 186' 186 Disposal Site Owner Transfer of Records Required by il 61,80(e) and (f) to the 186 186 Party Responsible for Institutional care and a copy sent to the Comission Prior to License Termination Total 9118 4926 16.320

'These values are only in 1994 dollars.

'There are no Part 72 Agreement State licensees.

' Licensee may either Agreement State or NRC licensee, 13

i

b. -Impacts on Other Requirements There may be a potential impact on the materials inspection program to accommodate the resources to review and index incoming records. Any re-allocation of inspection resources would be confined to the non-core portion of the inspection program. Sending the records to the NRC or Agreement State relieves the licensee of the burden of having to review, index, and store them,

c. Constraints None anticipated, 5.0 Decision Rationale i 5.1. No Action The lack of specificity as to whether licensees should transfer certain records to the new licensee if licensed activities will continue at the same site under a new or amended license and the sire has not been released for unrestricted use, and should forward certain records to the NRC prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination have resulted in instances where there have been insufficient records to accurately assess the risks from a

-previous-licensee's operation and to develop a site characterization to decommission the site effectively. For these reasons, the alternative-of no action is judged to be not viable.

-5.2 Amendment of licenses This alternative is not viable because issuance of license amendments for every licensee would result in repetitive efforts and inefficient use of 14 l

i Commission and licensee staff time. With approximately 330 licensees affected by this rule, including those in the Agreement States holding ,

materials licenses, the cost to the NRC to amend all 330 affected licensees t would be $18,480, as compared to $11,160 to index, review, and store the records. The $18,480 value is assuming 1.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> of clerical time at

$20/ hour and 0.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> technical time at $52/ hour to prepare and review each amendment. Each time a new license is issued this cost will have to be added to the preparation of the license and could result in inconsistent application of policy.

5.3 Use of Regulatory Guides As noted above, the lack of a firm regulatory basis for disposition of records increases difficulties associated with a case-by-case approach.

While regulatory guides could be developed regarding records disposition, regulatory guides do not have the force of regulation in compelling licensees to take the desired action.

5.4 Amendment of Regulations This alternative provides the most viable means to ensure that the applicable records will be available when needed at the least cost. The cost to the NRC to amend all 330 licenses affected by the rule is $18,480, as compared to $11,160, the cost of indexing, reviewing, and storing the records for the 62 licensees that may terminate or transfer their licenses each year.

For this reason, the staff believes that codifying records retention requirements for license transfers, assignments, and terminations provides the best assurance that licensees will retain / transfer the appropriate records.

15

6. Implementation

a. Schedule for the implementing the Revised Requirement The revision will be published in the [ederal Register. The final rule includes an effective date for implementation of the changes to allow licensees time to make the required changes.

b. Relationship to Other Existing Requirements Since these records are already maintained by licensees until license termination, the revised rule effects only their final disposition. The revised rule will require that these records be sent to the NRC or appropriate Agreement State for storage.

16 l

i ENCLOSURE 3 PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT s

ENCLOSURE 4 CONGRESSIONAL LETTERS

gs@ Mo_q v p- +4 UNITED STATES g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I]2 WASHINGTON, D.C. 206654001

'+9 * * * * + ,o The Honorable Lauch Faircloth, Chairman Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private '

Property and Nuclear Safety Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington, DC 20510

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The NRC has sent to the Office of the Federal Register for publication the enclosed revisions to the Commission's rules in 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72. The amendments address situations whereby a licensee terminates licensed activities or licensed activities are transferred to another licensee. Specifically, the revisions require licensees to transfer to a new licensee that will take over operations at the same site certain records that are necessary to decommission the facility effectively; to forward these records to the NRC prior to license termination; and to forward to the NRC records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal prior _ to license transfer, assignment, or termination.

Sincerely, Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs

Enclosures:

1. Public Announcement

2. Federal Register Notice cc: Senator Bob Graham

f The Honorable Lauch Faircloth, Chairman Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property _and Nuclear Safety

Committee on Environment and Public Works

-United States Senate Washington, DC 20510-

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The NRC has sent _to the Office of the Federal Register for publication the enclosed revisions to the Commission's rules in 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72. The amendments address situktions whereby a licensee terminates licensed activities or licensed activities are transferred to another licensee. Specifically, the revisions require licensees to transfer to a new licensee that will take over operations at the same site certain records that are necessary to decommission the facility effectively; to forward these records to the NRC prior to-license termination; and to forward to the NRC records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal prior to i license transfer, assignment, or termination.

Sincerely, Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs

Enclosures:

-1. Public Announcement

2. Federal Register Notice cc: Senator Bob Graham DISTRIBUTION:

RPHEB R/F - Subject File t . ... . ..., ., i, .u ni. .r . . . in. .:c.c ..is.oi . ,i,.n

.. . c . .iin .ii n oi, 4 .. u . w. . ,

OFFICE. RPHEB:DRA C RPHEB:DRA / p%Sk D:RES g fk D:OCA NAME MLThomas /k l 7 JEGlenn k NMorris DLMorr on DRathbun DATE 10/26/95 10/26/95 1p/7195 1h/7I95 10/ /95 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY RES#3A 3

.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ \

The Honorable Lauch Faircloth, Chairman Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property and Nuclear Safety Committee on Environment and Public Works J United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 q

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The NRC has sent to the Office of the F deral Register for publication 7

theenclosedrevisionstotheCommission'sr41esin10CFRParts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72. The amendments if adopted would address situations whereby a licensee terminates licensed activities o licensed activities are transferred to another licensee. Specifical\,the evised rule adds requirements for k

licensees to transfer to a new lice see hat will take over operations at the N

same site certain records that are nece s ry to decommission the facility effectively, to forward these records to e NRC prior to license termination, and to forward to the NRC records pertaini 1g o public dose and waste disposal prior to license transfe assignment, or termi ation.

Sincer ely, Denni K. Rath in, Director Offic of Congr ssional Affairs

Enclosures:

1. Public Announcement

2. Federal Register Notice cc: Senator Bob Graham DISTRIBUTION:

RPHEB R/F - Subject File /

T. . . . . .. m ne. in . mn. w:

/

c.c.. ~ .n nt - . r . co. .n=%. .n. . v . w. ...,

i OFFICE RPHEB:DRA C RPHES:DRA D:DRA D:RES D:OCA NAME MLThomas A4 JEGlenn h BMMorris DLMorrison DRathbun DATE 10/26/95 10/26/95 10/ /95 10/ /95 10/ /95 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY RES#3A-3

@ Ctay p- ~ '4 UNITED STATES l j p

j 2-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 2066tKm01

'S9

. . . . . ,o

• he Honorable Dan Shaefer, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Power Committee on Commerce United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The NRC has sent to the Office of the Federal Register for publication the enciesed revisions to the Commission's rules in 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72. The amendments address situations whereby a licensee terminates licensed activities or licensed activities are transferred to another licensee. Specifically, the revisions require licensees to transfer to a new licensee that will take over operations at the same site certain records that are necessary to decommission the facility effectively; to forward these records to the NRC prior to license termination; and to forward to the NRC records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination.

Sincerely, Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs

Enclosures:

1. Public Announcement

2. Federal Register Notice cc: Representative Frank Pallone

The Honorable Dan Shaefer, Chairman l Subcommittee on Energy and Power

! Committee on Commerce United States House of Representatives k'ashington, DC 20515 I

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The NRC has sent to the Office of the Federal Register for publication the enclosed revisions to the Commission's rules in 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72. The amendments address situations whereby a licensee terminates licensed activities or licensed activities are transferred to another licensee. Specifically, the revisions require licensees to transfer to a new licensee that will take over operations at the same site certain records that are necessary to decommission the facility effectively; to forward these records to the NRC prior to license t<trmination; and to forward to the NRC records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination.

Sincerely, Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs

Enclosures:

1. Public Announcement

2. Federal Register Notice -

cc: Representative Frank Pallone

] DISTRIBUTION:

RPHEB R/F - Subject File v.... .... m,... .. ...m m .< c .c .. .u.cnm ,u . c . c .. .n-nm . . n . u.....

OFFICE RPHEB:DRA C RPHEB:DRA j ptDPA/ D:RES jh D:OCA NAME l MLThomas h JEGlennl [ $9boIris DLMor[$n DRathbun DATE 10/26/95 10/26/95 1p/U95 1p/fl95 10/ /95 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY RES#3A-3 l

l

l i

The Honorable Dan Shaefer, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Power Committee on Commerce United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The NRC has sent to the Office of the Federal Register for publication theenclosedrevisionstotheComm/ ission's rules in 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72. The amendments if adopted would address situations whereby a licensee terminates licensed a tivities or licensed activities are transferred to another licensee. Specific 11y, the revised rule adds requirements for licensees to transfer to a nev{ licensee that will take over operations at the same site certain re rds tha~, are necessary to decommission the facility effectively, to forward (hese records to the NRC prior to license termination,

\

and to forward to the NRC regards pertaining to public dose and waste disposal prior to license transfer, as )gment,ortermination.

Sincerely, Den s K. Rathbun, Director Offi of Congressional Affairs

Enclosures:

1. Public Announcement

2. Federal Register Notice cc: Representative Frank Pallor le 1DISTRIBUT10N:

RPHEB R/F - Subject File

1. ~... ~ - .w . aim . c , uim .n _, m . c... .

OFFICE RPHEB:DRA C RPH B:DRA f D:DRA k D:RES D:OCA NAME MLThomas /k1 JEG$enn h BMMorris '\DLMorrison DRathbun DATE 10/26/95 10f26/95 % 10/ /95 1h/ /95 10/ /95 f0FFICIALRECORDCOPYRES#3A-3

ATTACHMENT 2 COMMENT LETTERS

J Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 ATTENTION: Docketing and Service Branch RE: TERMINATION OR TRANSFER OF LICENSED ACTIVITIES:

RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS

GENERAL COMMENT

S:

This letter is in response to the NRC Proposed Rule regarding recordkeeping,10 CFR 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72. Colorado believes that the NRC has not adequately considered viable alternatives, that the cost-effectiveness has not been adequately determined, and the proposed level of compatibility is not inappropriate under either existing or proposed Commission Policy.

While there is merit in requiring the transfer of certain records for particular types of licenses, the proposed rule is overly broad and the impacts have not 4

been- properly evaluated. Therefore, the proposed rules should be modified and

. reissued for comment. Colorado's specific comments are as follows:

SPECIFIC COMMENTS:

1. The NRC Has Not Demonstrated The Need for This Rule NRC states in the Background information that the need for these regulations was the result of one incident where the NRC could not determine the amount of material released into a sewer system. However, the NRC has not demonstrated that the proposed regulations, and their associated costs to licensees, the NRC and the Agreement States (See below), would elucidate the analysis of the environmental impact from the site. Prior to being able to evaluate the cost-benefit of the proposal, NRC must first provide data that permits evaluation of actual impact of these regulations.

While NRC has identified one case where this information may have been useful, it has not identified the frequency with which similar situations will arise.

Further, while there may be utility for having this type of information for licenses that have a reasonable potential for causing contamination and that may need to be remediated by a governmental agency, no need has been demonstrated for requiring the same information from licensees that possess only sealed sources or materials with short half lives.

2. NRC Has Not Demonstrated The Expected Benefit Of The Rule.

In addition to knowing how often the required records will be cor,sulted, their utility to the decision process must also be demonstrated. The Objective of the Regulatory Analysis states these records "...will provide the NRC with the information needed to assess possible risks associated with licensed activities once a licensee has terminated its license." This assumption is generally false.

For example, even if sewer release records were available, would not an independent evaluation of the environment also be required; and if remediation/ decontamination were required, would it not be on the basis of actual

survey data rather than on sewer release records? If actions are then based on l survey data, maintenance of sewer records, while nice information, do not contribute to the decision process. If they are not used in decisions, the costs for providing them to the NRC and Agreement States is not justified.

NRC has failed to discuss the utility of records that are based on gross calculations. Most facilities evaluate environmental releases based on assumptions that are both gross and conservative. It would not be appropriate to base any actions, other than routine compliance, on calculations that are not believed to be accurate. In the evaluation of the proposed regulations, NRC must estimate for those licensees that are required to submit records, what percentage would have accurate data that could be use. for those facilities that perform monitoring to estimate environmental releases, the results are often below minimum detection limits. As such, results can only be used to estimate maximum, rather than actual, releases and ex)osures. Their utility is limited. Again, '

the NRC-has failed to demonstrate w1y records of limited use are needed.

The Regulatory Analysis states that licensees possessing only sealed sources or materials with short half lives will not have many records. However, the NRC has not provided data, or even presented a plausible argument, as to why records for these type of licenses should be included in the proposed rule. Experience with remedial activities of the federal governe nt would indicate that many short-lived isotopes will decay to background before any federal agency can begin a remediation.

3. A Division 2 Level Of. Compatibility Has No Basis.

The Commission has proposed a Division 2 level of compatibility for the Agreement States. The federal Register notice states these rules are "...needed to provide sufficient information to a new licensee and to evaluate offsite consequences from previous licensee activities and to decommission the site effectively." As stated above, the utility of these records is questionable. Even were they to provide sufficient information to make a decision, actual survey results, by the NRC, an Agreement State or a new licensee, could be substituted.- Therefore, since the identified records are neither reliable nor actually needed, an Agreement State program can be adequate without the adoption of similar regulattons, further, the Commission has failed to demonstrate a national need for these records. Hence there adoption can not be a matter of compatibility under the Commission's proposed compatibility criteria.

4. NRC Has failed To identify Regulatory Alternatives That Would Be As Effective As The Proposed Rule While Place less Burden On Licensees, The NRC And Agreement States.

A valid discussion can not occur unless accurate information regarding- the effectiveness of the alternatives is available. As noted-in item 2 above, any benefit from the proposed rule is questionable. However, putting this issue aside, conspicuously absent are viable, regulatory alternatives that could provide comparable information at less cost.

The NRC has chosen to pnt forth three alternatives that do not involve regulatory changes and only one alternative that involves changes to the regulations. The analysis then concludes that the regulations must be adopted because modifying licenses is too expensive, and the non-regulatory actions can not be enforced.

Failure to even consider alternative regulations that may be as effective (if, in fact, the proposal would be effective) and less burdensome should be sufficient reason to withdraw the proposed rule.

Specific regulatory alternatives that should be considered include, but are not limited to:

a. Perform separate evaluations for the utility of requiring records for public dose and for waste disposal, and making independent judgements,

b. Consideration of limiting the scope of the rules to address only those facilities that possess unsealed sources with long half lives.

The regulatory analysis states that licensees possessing only materials with a short half live or sealed sources will not have many records. However no justification has been provide as to why the proposed regulations need to apply to these licensees,

c. Consideration of all records being provided to the NRC, rather than requiring Agreement States to maintain the records,

d. Elimination of transferring 10 CFR 20.2005 type records (disposal of specific wastes, sl.85 kBq-gm-1 of H-3 or C-14 in scintillation fluids or animal tissue). If the potential environmental impacts from these disposals are so important that records of their disaosal must be kept by the NRC and Agreement States in perpetuity, way is this type of disposal permitted in the first place?

5. The Regulatory Analysis is Flawed.

The Regulatory Analysis is flawed for several reasons. Because the analysis is flawed, the proposed rule should be withdrawn. Problems identified with the analysis are as follows:

a. Because the effectiveness of the proposed rule has not beer, demonstrated, either by data or by rational arguments, the cost of this or any other, similar proposal can not be compared to the implied benefit. At a potential impact of $1,120,000 per year to our licensees (see below), this type of analysis must be conducted.

b. The analysis is flawed is because potentially less costly, effective regulatory alternatives have not considered.

c. Other costs associated with the proposed rule have not been considered. Costs associated with inspections must be included.

While the NRC may be able to absorb these costs in "non-core portions of the inspection program", Agreement States do not have this luxury. (In reality, NRC licensees will still pay for these

_. _ = = =

inspections rather than something else; but the cost to NRC licensees should still be included in the analysis.) The real ANNUAL costs of the proposal should be calculated as follows:

AGREEMENT TOTAL STATES NRC COST RECORDKEEPING COSTS (from the FR notice)

Licensees $200,250 $100,800 $ 301,050 NRC & AS 305.242 154,636 760,938 INSPECTION COSTS 240,000 120,000 360,000 TOTAL ANNUAL COST $745,502 $375,436 $1,120,938 The above assumes 30% of all licenses are inspected each year; review of record retention will take 0.5 hour5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> / inspection; and the hourly cost per inspector (including fees and general funds for states) is $100. Of course, because states and the NRC charge fees, licensees will bear these costs.

Another item not considered in the analysis is whether or not states can add the necessary FTE to index, record, store and inspect as envisioned in the proposed rules.

6. The Transfer Requirements Proposed In 30.35(g) Are Appropriate.

Tl e proposed requirement for licensees requiring financial assurance who transfer their license to a new license is appropriate. However, for the 46 affected licensees per year, this requirement might be handled as a licensing issue, or as a new, limited regulatory proposal, rather than the existing proposal.

7. The Transfer Requirements Proposed In Part 61 Are Appropriate.

As above, we feel- that this requirement is appropriate, but consideration could be given to addressing the issue as a licensing matter, or in a new, limited regulatory proposal.

CONCLUSION:

The proposed regulations are generally flawed, incomplete and misleading. There is a dearth of information documenting the anticipated effectiveness of the rule.

While some of the proposed requirements have merit, the rest should be withdrawn until the documented benefit can be established.

if you have any questions or require additional information, please don not hesitate to contact me at (303) 692-3030.

Robert M. Quillin Director Radiation Control Division COLORADO DEPT OF PUBLIC HEALTH &

ENVIRONMENT 4300 CHERRY CREEK DR. S.

DENVER, COLORADO 80222-1530 cf: Richard Bangart Agreement States

STATE OF ILLIN0IS DEPARTMENT OF NUCLEAR SAFETY 1035 0 UTER PARK DRIVE SPRINGFIELD, ILLIN0IS 62704 217-785-9900 217-782-6133 (TDD)

Jim Edgar Thomas W. Ortciger Governor Director March 28, 1995 Secretary of the Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Attention: Docketing and Service Branch Re: 59 FR 66814-66818, 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70 and 72. Proposed Rule, "lermination or Transfer of Licensed Activities: Recordkeeping Requirements."

Gentlemen:

The 1111nois Department of Nuclear Safety (Department) hereby submits its comments on the referenced pro)osed rulemaking. The intent of the rule is to require licensees terminating t1eir license and transferring their activities or license to another entity to provide certain-records to the new facility owners or operators. Although many ownership transfers include an evaluation of potential liabilities, it may be beneficial to identify the records that may be of interest to NRC after transfer of ownership.

The pro)osed rule also indicates that if there is no subsequent owner identified, t.1e records identified in the rule must be transferred to the appropriate NRC regional office. NRC is proposing that this rule be assigned Division 2 level of compatibility to allow Agreement States "the flexibility to adopt similar or more stringent requirements."

The rule specifies that for facilities meeting the financial surety requirements of 10 CFR 30.35 30.35(g) must be transferred to (a),

thedecommissioning records new owners or to the NRC.required by 10 CFR In addition, for all licensees, records of doses to individual members of the public required by 10 CFR 20.2107 and records of waste disposal required by 10 CFR 20.2108 must be forwarded to new owners or the NRC. There is no exemption for records of disposal of materials with relatively short half-lives, and no exemption for records indicating no releases, or doses to members of the public in excess of the regulations. This could result in a large volume of records being transferred, especially for facilities that have been in existence for many years.

Page 2 1he Paperwork Reduction Act Statement in the Eederal Reaister notice indicates that the public average 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> per respons(emphasis added) e, yet there is no reporting estimate burden of burden is estimated to for Agreement States that would be required to collect, store and archive these records.

Since the potential resource implications for Agreement States have not been considered, the compatibility level should be changed from Division 2 to Division 3.

As indicated in the Federal Reaister, since our comments on the proposed rule address the potential information collection burden to Agreement States, a copy of this letter is being forwarded to-the Information and Records Management _ Branch and the desk officer, Office of Information and Regulatory

-Affairs.

Thank you for considering our comments. If you have any questions .

regarding these-comments, please contact me or Kathy Allen at (217)-785-9947.

Sincerely.

Steven C. Collins, Chief Division of RaJioactive Materials cc: Jim Lynch, State Agreements Officer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Richard Bangart Office of State Programs U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Information and Records Management Branch (T-6F33)

-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Pashington. D.C. 20555 Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Office of Management and Budget Washington. D.C. 20503

1.,

Clean Water fund of North Carolina Asheville Office: 291/2 Page Ave. Asheville, NC 28801 704-251-0518 Raleigh Office: P.O. Box 1008 Raleigh, NC 27602 919-832-7491 11 January 1995 Secretary US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555-0001 ATTN: Docketing & Se}vice Branch The Clean Water fund of North Carolina believes that additional record-keeping requirements are necessary to assure protection of the public health and safety, as discussed in the Commission's proposal noticed 28 December 1994 at 59 FR 66815.

However, the fund is concerned that the Commission's proposal overlooks the benefits which could result from simple, inexpensive-to-implement requirements enhancing public access to information.

The Clean Water fund of North Carolina does not approve of the current Commission policy, which appears to allow Commission licensees to retain private control of most information related to the licensed activity, including much information directly relevant to licensing and enforcement decisions.

The fund notes that enhanced public access to information is an important (though not the only) reason for record-keeping, in part because informed members of the public can play a significant role in ensuring that regulatory actions are appropriate and timely. Moreover, increasing public access to information can provide additional political pressures tending to protect the information from loss.

The Clean Water fund of North Carolina has noted with approval recent actions by the Energy Department, which would regard contractor-produced information as public documents. The fund urges the Commission to consider enhanced public access to information as part of a coherent policy to protect important documentary information from loss.

Carl Rupert, Ph.D., Raleigh Research Director The Clean Water Fund of North Carolina P.O. Box 1008 Raleigh, NC 27602

t.

March 15, 1995 COMMENTS Of OHIO CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE ENERGY, INC (*OCRE") ON PROPOSED RULE, " TERMINATION OR TRANSFER Of LICENSED ACTIVITIES: RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS," 59 FED, REG. 66814 (DECEMBER 28,1994)

OCRE supports this proposed rule, it is absolutely necessary to ensure that information needed for the decommissioning of licensed sites is available and is not lost or discarded when licenses are transferred or terminated.

It is especially important that the records concerning low-level radioactive waste disposal be transferred to the entity responsible for long-term care of the facility. In the Midwest Compact, amendments to the compact have been approved which would ensure that generators retain liability. It is essential to retain traceability of the waste packages to the responsible generator for the duration of the hazardous life of the waste. This proposed rule would ensure that this capability is maintained.

This proposed rule is essential for the protection of the public health and safety and should be adopted without delay.

Respectfully submitted, Susan L. Hiatt Director, OCRE 8275 Munson Road Mentor, OH 44060-2406 (216) 255-3158

March 28, 1995 VIRGINIA POWER Serial No. GL-94-090 NL&P/EJL Chief, Rules Review and Directives Branch Division of Freedom of Information and Publication Services Mail Stop T-6059 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Dear Sir:

10 CFR PARTS 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72 TERMINATION OR TRANSFER OF LICENSED ACTIVITIES: RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS PROPOSED RULE FEDERAL REGISTER / Vol. 59, No. 248/ DECEMBER 28, 1994/ p. 66814 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11, proposing to amend its regulations pertaining to the disposition of certain records when a licensee terminates licensed activities or licensed activities are transferred to another licensee. The proposed rule would require a licensee to transfer records pertaining to decommissioning the facility, and records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal, to the new licensee if licensed activities will continue at the same location, or recuire the licensee to forward records pertaining to public dose and waste cisposal to the NRC before the license is terminated.

We have reviewed the proposed rule. The new requirements appear to be reasonable. However, we do have one comment. 10 CFR 72.30(d) addresses recordkeeping requirements for decommissioning for independent spent fuel storage installations. The NRC has proposed changes to this paragraph to address the transfer of licensed activities. 10 CFR 50.75(g) contains the same type of recordkeeping requirements for decommissioning for production and utilization facilities. However, no changes have been proposed for this paragraph. This appears to be inconsistent and may have been inadvertent.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed rule.

Very truly yours, M. L. Bowling, Manager Nuclear Licensing & Programs l

o, STA1E Of WASHINGTON DEPARTHENT OF HEALTH DIVISION Of RADIATION PROTECTION Airdustrial Center, Bldg. 5 P.O. Box 17827 Olynspia, Washington 98504-7827 April 12, 1995 Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D C. 20555-0001 Attention: Docketing and Services Branch

Dear Secretary:

This letter is in response to the proposed Rule regarding Recordkeeping recuirements for terminated or transferred licensee activities. While we uncerstand that the comment period has officially closed we are none-the-less compelled to submit the following comments.

Our overall impression can be summarized as follows: This rulemaking can be viewed as " punishing everyone for the sins of a few".

We have reviewed the state of Colorado's specific comments on this rulemaking (provided to us draft) which point out that the required records to be '

transferred are of limited use for actual decommissioning of a facility, that short lived material and sealed sources should be excluded from the rule, that certain exempted waste disposals should be excluded, and the real annual cost of the proposal is significantly greater than documented in the analysis to the proposed rulemaking.

We agree with the state of Colorado that 1) the NRC has not demonstrated the need for this rule, 2) the NRC has not demonstrated the expected benefit of the rule, 3) the proposed level of compatibility is not reasonable, 4) the discussion of regulatory alternatives is inadequate, and 5) the regulatory.

analysis is generally flawed, in our opinion the proposed rule should be sent back for extensive reworking, it would be far better and cheaper to punish the guilty rather than the innocent.

Conceptually, we agree that it is a good idea to have some knowledge of the disposal practices of a licensee aside from their records. However, a better idea for gaining this knowledge would be have frequent routine inspections in which the NRC or Agreement State inspector documents disposal methods and assesses compliance with quantity limitations. In the rare event that a licensee should be confronted with a lack of records upon decommissioning of the facility the NRC or Agreement State license files would provide reasonable direction as to where to look for contamination. Since an effeccive decontamination and decommissioning of a facility relies heavily upon actual samples it is apparent that the type of records required to be transferred in this proposed rulemaking would little more than provide a backup to the inspector's documentation of waste disposal methods.

We are also concerned that the analysis of the proposed rule underestimates the associated costs, especially those associated with regulatory agency acceptance and storage of a potentially large volume of records transferred to the radiation control program. We would appreciate you consideration of these comments in the proposed rulemaking.

Sincerely, Terry C. Frazee, Supervisor Radioactive Materials Section TCT:amw CC: Richard L. Bangart, Director - Office of State Programs /NRC

ATTACHMENT 3 OMB CLEARANCE PACKAGE l

(7590-01)

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Documents Containing Reporting or Recordkeeping Requirements:

l Office of Management and Budget Review 1

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of information collection.

SUMMARY

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has recently submitted to OMB-for- review the following proposal for collection of information under the provision of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Revision.

2. The title of the information collection: 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72, Termination or Transfer of Licensed Activities:

Recordkeeping Requirements.

3. The form number if applicable: Not applicable.

4. How often is the collection required: A one-time forwarding to the cognizant regulatory body of records pertaining to

. decommissioning, public dose, and waste disposal once a license is terminated. A one-time transfer of records pertaining to

decommissioning if licensed activities are transferred or assigned in accordance with the terms of the license. In addition, there will be a one-time forwarding of records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal to the NRC prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination. There will also be a one-time

-forwarding of records pertaining to low-waste to the disposal site owner-once the facility is closed and the license transferred to the disposal site owner, and a one-time forwarding of records to the cognizant regulatory body and the party responsible for institutional control of the site once that body terminates the license.

5. Who will be required or asked to report: Part 20, 30; 40, 61, 70 and 72 NRC and Agreement State licensees who are terminating their licenses.

6. An estimate of the number of responses: 62 per year.

7. An estimate of the number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request: 468 hours0.00542 days <br />0.13 hours <br />7.738095e-4 weeks <br />1.78074e-4 months <br /> for all 62 licensees affected by the rule or 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> per licensee.

8. An indication of whether Section 3504(h), Pub. L.96-511 applies:

Not applicable.

2

9. Abstract: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has revised its regulations pertaining to the disposition of certain records when a licensee terminates licensed activities or when licensed activities are transferred or assigned to another licensee. The revised rule requires a licensee to transfer records pertaining to decommissioning to the new licensee if licensed activities will continue at the same site and the site has not been released for unrestricted use. if the license is to be terminated the rule would require the licensee to forward records pertaining to decommissioning to the NRC. The rule would also require a licensee to i9rward records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal to the NRC prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination. In addition, the revised rule requires that records concerning low-level waste facilities be transferred to the disposal site owner when the facility is closed and the license is transferred and to forward these records to the NRC or the party responsible for institutional control when the NRC terminates the license and the party responsible for institutional control takes over the disposal site.

Copies of the submittal may be inspected or obtained for a fee from the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW (Lower Level), Washington, DC 20555-0001.

3

l Comments and questions can be directed by mail to the OMB reviewer:

Troy Hillier Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0014, 3150-0017, 3150-0020, 3150-0009, and 3150-0132, 3150-0135)

NE08-10202 Office of Management and Budget Washington, DC 20503 Comments can also be submitted by telephone at (202) 395-3084.

The NRC Clearance Officer te Brenda J. Shelton, (301) 415-7233.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of , 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Gerald F. Cranford, Designated Senior Official for Information Resources Management.

4 .

Comments and questions can be directed by mail to the OMB ceviewer:

Troy Hillier Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0014, 3150-0017, 3150-0020, 3150-0009, and 3150-0132, 3150-0135)

NE08-10202 Office of Management and Budget Washington, DC 20503 Comments can also be submitted by telephone at (202) 395-3084.

The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda J. Shelton, (301) 415-7233.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of , 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Gerald F. Cranford, Designated Senior OfffcTaT for Information Resources Management.

DISTRIBUTION:

RPHEB R/F - JEGlenn Cir./Chron

'MLThomas GFehst, OGC GCranford, IRM BShelton, IRM BStehlin DOCUMENT NAME: G:\ THOMAS \ RECORDS \ FINAL \0MBPKG t.. . . . . u . . c . c . . - .u ,- ... r . c , .n -- .. v . ..,

OFFICE RPHEB:DRA Li RPHEB:DRA OGC IRM NAME MLThomas Au JEGlenn CIls, GFehst GCranford DATE /0/4 95 la /pl95 l //95 / /95 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY 5

i SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70 and 72 RECORD RETENTION REQUIREMENTS Description of The Information Collection The revised amendments to 10 CFR 20, 30, 40, 61, 70 and 72 will require licensees to transfer records necessary to conduct operations safely and to decommission the facility to the new licensee if licensed activities are transferred or assigned in accordance with the terms of the license if licensed activities will continue at the same site, if the license is to be terminated the rule would require the licensee to forward records pertaining to decommissioning to the NRC. The rule would also require a licensee to forward records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal to the NRC prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination. In addition, the rule would require that records concerning low-level waste facilities be transferred to the disposal site owner when the facility is closed and the license is transferred and to forward these records to the NRC or the party responsible for institutional control when the NRC terminates the license and the party responsible for institutional control takes over the disposal site.

A. JUSTlflCATION

1. Need for The Collection Of Information The existing regulations do not address the disposition of records when a licensee transfers, assigns, or terminates a license and another entity continues licensed activities at the same site under a new or amended license.

The revised amendments to 10 CFR 20, 30, 40, 61, 70 and 72 will require licensees to transfer records necessary to conduct operations safely and to decommission the facility to the new licensee if licensed activities are transferred or assigned in accordance with the terms of the license if licensed activities will continue at the same location. The revised rule also requires the licensee to forward records pertaining to decommissioning to the NRC. The rule would also require a licensee to forward records pertaining to public doso and waste disposal to the NRC prior to license transfer, assignment, or termination. In addition, the rule would require that records concerning low-level waste facilities be transferred to the disposal site owner when the facility is closed and the license is transferred and to forward these records to the liRC or the party res)onsible for institutional control when the NRC terminates the license and tle party responsible for institutional control takes over the disposal site, i 20,2107(b) currently requires licensees to retain dose records to demonstrate compliance with the dose limit for individual members of the public. This paragraph has been amended to include additional requirements for the disposition of the records required by this section in 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72 for certain licensees. This information is needed to assess possible risks associated with licensed activities once a license is l

.____m. .____.

l i

transferred, assigned, or terminated otherwise the information might not be available.

1 20.2108(b) currently requires licensees to retain records of waste disposal.

This paragraph has been amended to include additional requirements for t1e disposition of the records required by this section in 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72 for certain licensees. This information is needed to assess possible risks associated with licensed activities once a license is transferred, assigned, or terminated otherwise the information might not be available, bl 30.35(a). 40.36(f). 70.25(a), and 72.30(d) adds a requirement for the icensee to transfer all decommissioning records to the new licensee, and the new licensee to maintain the records until the license is terminated, if licensed activities will continue at the same site and the site has not been released for unrestricted use. This transfer of records is necessary to ensure that adequate information will be available to develop a site characterization plan to decommission the site effectively, il 30.36(j)(4), 40.42(j)(4). 70.38(j){4), and 72.54(1)(3) adds a requirement f or the licensee to forward all decommissioning records to the cognizant regulatory body prior to license termination. The burden for thn e records is covered under il 30.35(g), 30.51(d)(1), 40.36(f), 40.61(d)(1), 70.25(g),

70.51(b)(6)(i),72.30(d),and72.80(e)(1). This forwarding of records is necessary to ensure that adequate information will be available to evaluate offsite consequences, and ensure the site is decommissioned effectively, il 30.51(d). 40.61(d). 70.51(b)(6), and 72,80(e) adds a requirement for certain licensees to forward to the cognizant regulatory body records pertaining to public dose and waste disposal before the license is transferred, assigned, or terminated. This forwarding of records is necessa';

to ensure that adequate information will be available to evaluate offsite consequences, and ensure the site is decommissioned effectively.

5 61.30(a)L31 requires the licensee to transfer any funds for care and records required by ll 61.80(e) and (f) to the disposal site owner upon transfer of the license to-the disposal site owner. This transfer of funds and records is necessary to ensure that adequate funding and information will be available to maintain the disposal site, j 61.31(c)(3) requires the licensee to trantfer the records required by il 61.80(e) and (f) to the party responsible for institutional control of the disposal site and a copy be sent to the cognizant regulatory body immediately prior to license termination. This transfer of records is necessary to ensure that adequate information will be available after the disposal site has been closed.

6 61.80ff) requires the licensee to retain each record that is required by the regulations in f.i 20.2107 and 20.2108 until the cognizant regulatory body terminates each pertinent license requiring the record. This includes records retained under the Standards for Protection Against Radiation in effect prior 2

~ _

to January 1, 1994.' Retention of these records is necessary to ensure that adequate information will be available when the license for the disposal site is transferred or terminated.

2. Agency Use of Information.

Providing information on waste disposals, public dose records, and decommissioning to the cognizant regulatory body is necessary in the event it becomes necessary to evaluate offsite consequences after a license has been terminated.

3. Reduction of Burden Through information Technoloay.

There is no legal obstacle to the use of information technology. Moreover, the NRC encourages its use.

4. Effort to identify Duplication.

-The Information Requirements Control Automated System was searched-to determine duplication. No duplication was found.

5. Effort to Use Similar Information.

There is no similar information available to the NRC.

6. Effort to Reduce Small Business Burden.

Only a small number of the licensees expected to be affected by these requirements are classified as small businesses and the burden on these small businesses is small. The information actions are basic for all licensees and cannot be reduced any further.

7. Consequences of less Freauent Collection.

Required information is collected and evaluated only upon the intent of licensees to terminate their license. The schedule for collecting the information is-the minimum frecuency which will permit NRC to ensure that the public health and safety are acequately protected.

8. Circumstances Which Justify Variation from OMB Guidelines.

Contrary to OMB Guidelines licensees are being required to retain records for

.the life of the license. These records are required in order to ensure that NRC's health and safety regulations are being adhered to and that the public health and safety is being protected.

' See i 20.401(c)(3) codified as of January 1,1993, 3

9. Lonsultations Outside the Aaency.

The proposed rule was published in the federal Register for public comment.

10. Confidentiality of Information.

NRC provides no pledge of confidentiality for this collection of information,

11. Justification for Sensitive Questions.

These regulations do not pose sensitive questions.

12. Estimated Annualized Cost to the Federal Government.

The NRC is expected to receive about 62 responses annually as a result of this rulemaking. Assuming that the staff requires an average of 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> to index, verify, prepare for storage each licensee submittal, consisting of 3.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> of clerical time, at a cost of $45 per hour, and 4.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> of professional time, at a cost of $116 per hour, the annual cost to the NRC is estimated to be $84,258. This cost is fully recovered by fee assessments pursuant to 10 CFR Parts 170 and/or 171.

13. Estimate of Burden See Table 2. Total 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72 burden for recordkeeping is estimated to be 468 hours0.00542 days <br />0.13 hours <br />7.738095e-4 weeks <br />1.78074e-4 months <br />. Total cost for licensees is estimated at $40,975.50.

Reasons _for Change in Burden The change in burden is due to the revision of 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72.

Publication for Statistical Use This information is not published for statistical use.

B. COLLECTION OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS Statistical metho'is are not used in this collection of information.

4

l t

N N N N 7 7 -

o. O P. P% M^

. X -

2 u @

n v

n N 5 (.

O. O w

V w m. &

w m.

w M y N - - en em O y O. @ @ O O. g O.

M O

m O

M O

w y O n u M M ,

N W 7 -

T, T, t

, O a . t. T. M w

gg it e a e e- e O e. & V p

,,s it w %w w w w k D @ O sn O U M M M N M 3 D

h a

o O

M O

w a

O s

4 s

n 6, s .; $ 5, -

g W

-~ 4 -

3 -

WA 3 sg I.s I.> em 8 T.

I.> I. I..

I.

D .-

O O O O Q boN W U U U V W  %

u.J 4 - o g

g) ,

$ H, gu O

o.

O o.

O O.

O O.

O O.

O O.

O O.

O O.

O O.

O O.

O O.

O O.

O O.

O O.

O O.

O O.

O Q

O Q

O Q

(

O F o o o o O O o e W *t o 80 o e et O w. so r% @ & & 7 M  % W @ M et N d,q gr @ w 4 @

, m- . @. O. O. o. O. O. O. N. N. m.

o *= M M W w. - - N N ** - M M n ** N N @ C

,O a<

7

?N H

'5 T' 88 m

mu _l' eb 4 W"'

gdg hg H O O O O 4J O O O O O O O O O O O O O O q W W D O O O C 0 0 W D C C O O O O O O O -u ya Y

=~

b o A N., O b,, o O b O O h m o o * - - - M - - M tz W G. O. W. w M M @ @ M M W. a, 8

g s et .

p

[ Q 489 h N ** - @

g H -  %

g 4 O O. . J m

gg et. H

.m WO L

m. hal O W haJ OU 4 LE hsJ YE

-- 4 3

• H ,

o,j g E-

g ,,, o O e o e .o O e e e o e o e e o .

+*

C-u < ,m .

O M 4+J to M b N et haJ 48

• • LE J  %

%)

, is  %

o 4 9 o .

O 3 w b N N N @ N @ O @

[-

CW @ @

@ N N - 4 N W f'g1 - N #

et att W +

- A H WW  %

Q 3 wQ m.J L 4

• M eJ

_ taJ ,M M EW @

8o ue e'

3@ s n e m ~ m n m O

^ ^ W M M e

& w 9t M @ l'8")

g M w w w w w w

~ ~ n ~ ~ n n m n m m e n n n F N ED V e V 4 U Ch e-m & V m n. et a

gD O o o wD* wM w %w w w w %w

w. w -- w w

} s'g w

H

- - @ @ ** @ N ,= O e* O m e ** O w ow O -J W N. N. M. M. #. M. W. @ M. M.

O N. M. O. t*')

A.

- 4 .,* A 4.J o O O O O O O O

• • .* o O O

. O. m -  %

M N N M M

.= N N N 3 O +

M 4 4 4 @ @ @ N N A N N ts M H b.

. . . . . . , ,I

1 d

n r 2

7 2

F a o

,f

• g

. e. i n em

o. 0 di 7 t F. 3 C

rt t t r

e a 2

7 e. S w 1 av we rh o 0 w w 3 m sm oT D s 4 t t

e t i o f A e a s 0 0 o o r A

s t

3 3 s a

• o t

2 7 og. n e .

na w 0

7 s

P M e. w m e. o ri edr f

. n n w w w w a a r o o s o mw c s ra or 1

6 C s J 2 s 3 o o s a

t e

o 2

, 1 F 7 t f 0

4

- t. s. e - - r r w

w w

w e

w w

w w

w w

w f oe 0 e -

= r

=

e J.f 3 =

. s 0

_ mna 2

c c e c c c c.

s a t n c m n n m m r S u c M a o o m = . o a m t

a = o n

o o o o d

G mt e o O o c o 2 o e e e 4 2 e e e e e 5 T

R A

t o

c e.

s e.

3 1

s e

e s

7 1

e 3 M s e

e s

1 5

7 o.

e r o r

P t E 7 s 1 2 o af t T 3 d p 1

1 F

e r e rds C a pro r

0 e o c es .

1 o t rr D

c e u E

S i mfoh o I t V s n n 0 n n n n n n o n n n n u o n3 E u o o. 6 s. E o .e o o s o o o o n

o. o t l o R e e O 7 .o 7 7 e , e e r o e 0 E e 6 7 airo ct E

3 s 0 5

0 3 s e 7 2

7 3 3 3 a

o. e. 1 t 2 1 4 i T

H m s

s s 1

e r e, e pf ef F

O v

a l

c rt ea r dps S e n rl T o a oa N c E nf M o d ic n 2 RE i t eh at c E U I

L EQ B

w r

e n

o e

n o

9 2 d

E n

o o

o e

n n E

0 n

o o

7 n

o e

n o

e n

o s

n o.

o n

o o

n o.

2 o

e n n o

e n

o e

n o

e f i

ctote l 6 A s u 0 s 4 , t 1 4 l s T R 2 i 4 i a r a*

s et t

I A

t t

v?esee P o l en E

E t ab c

ec si E a c. E c a E c. e a a i

n al h h w R r o o o o 4 a. 1? o. 0 D

C t

s 4 3 4 o s a 3 3 4 o 4 4 o s c e rn se E w t R a c u u r od H ohn a T

I e

s f 5 M u e r D e e

m1 e it E m s T .o e A s onf e s

I C

O

'eeth ie n e

S s at c S

A nc eiro i

l s cf if a o J J 4 2 s E e . J 2 t 4 i

r e i t i

e e 4 4 a 2 4 2 t J l eh t a

C R

c e

r e

vca t S

U e B

r w ml o cs a t.

N s i r O e f n u c I r eh o a

T C w h ch t e sc E

r t5 c 9 L

L u r o or1 A O f f s 2 C 7 p s e i a

I t

n uio mn t r

a T oti t P A c w c sac o R

O a*e i e ef n

F N e I

msi inr r

a t ee cv e e

a w

a r

o w

s o w

. w t

s e

p w s

rw t

s e

w m W m e

t 84 4

R f

w m

m t

A L

T S i

h sil l a h r

e T t 1 6 t ff o 2 , o t o 5 e o a sa o o L T wc T ce i. 2 3 2 s. s 4 s a s. s l s. 6 J s c.

T e

A f

' ei nnh o

s or 0

m m o o o t t t o o o 2 2 2 u o Is 3 e s . e e e F r F 7 7 7 s T ec h a tt lill! _

ATTACHMENT 4 DAILY staff NOTES

l DAILY STAFF NOTES OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH Final Rule Sioned by E00 On , 1995, the Executive Director for Operations approved a fTn~il rule that wouTd' amend 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72, "Termi-nation or Transfer of Licensed Activities: Recordkeeping Requirements."

This notice informs the Commission that, in accordance with the rulemaking authority delegated to the EDO, the EDO has signed this final rule and proposes to forward it on to the Office of the Federal Register for publication, unless otherwise directed by the Commission.

C

ATTACllMENT 5 APPROVAL FOR PUBLICATION

3'd bl~

hi Approved for Publication The Commission delegated to the LD0 (10 CFR 1.31(c)) the authority to develop and promulgate rules as defined in the APA (5 U.S.C. 551 (4)) subject to the limitations in NRC Management Directive 9.17, Organization and Functions.

Office of the Executive Director for Operations, paragraphs 0213, 038, 039, and 0310.

The enclosed rule, entitled " Termination or Transfer of Licensed Activities:

Recordkeeping Requirements," will amend Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, 70, and 72 by providing ei. licit instruction regarding the disposition of certain records.

This final rule does not constitute a significant question of policy, nor does l

it amend regulations contained in 10 CFR Parts 7, 8, or 9 Subpart C concerning matters of policy. 1, therefore, find that this rule is within the scope of my rulemaking authority and am proceeding to issue it.

o

_\ Date James M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations, i

i E