ML20217Q239
| ML20217Q239 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/13/1998 |
| From: | Cool D NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Bangart R, Gray J, Meyer D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM), NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP), NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20217Q233 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-WM-5 NUDOCS 9805070290 | |
| Download: ML20217Q239 (24) | |
Text
_
n "touq k
UNITED STATES f
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'g 2
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 April 13, 1998 MEMORANDUM TO: Those on Attached List FROM:
Donald A. Cool, Director
/
Divisicn of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety, NMSS[-
(
SUBJECT:
DRAFT NMSS POLICY AND PROCEDURES LETTER 1-XX.
PROCEDURES FOR PREPARATION AND REVIEW OF RULEMAKING PACKAGES The attached Draft Policy and Procedures Letter 1-xx provides the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) draft procedures for preparation and review of rulemaking packages and is being issued for review and comment. In an SRM dated December 5,1997, the Commission directed the staff to transfer the rulemaking activities that had beea in the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research to NMSS and to the Office of Nuclear Peactor Regulation. This transfer was completed as of February 27,1998. Overall responsibility for preparation of rulemaking packages in NMSS has been placed in the new Rulemaking and Guidance Branch (RGB) in the Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety.
The attached draft procedures describe the process for preparing rulemaking packages which includes preparation of rulemaking plans and preparatioa and issuance of proposed and final rules. The draft procedures also include an appendix which describes the coordination activities between RGB and staff and management in other divisions and offices to ensure incorporation of division and office input and timely concurrences in rule packages. The attached draft and its appendix were prepared based on Management Directive 6.3 and on the Regulations Handbook, NUREG/BR-0053, Rev. 4. Flow charts (Figures 1 and 2 of the attachment) illustrate the rulemaking preparation and coordination process, and include a timeline with estimated durations for the rulemaking activities.
Comments should be submitted by May 1,1998, to Patricia Holahan (e-mail PKH; (301)415-8125). Please indicate if additional specific procedures should be considered.
Attachment:
Procedures for Preparation and Review of Rulemaking Packages cc: C. Paperiello, NMSS W. Kane, NMSS 9805070290 980501 PDR WASTE WM-5 pg
J. R. Gray et al Addressees - Memorandum dated:
Apri1 13, 1998 Joseph R. Gray, Associate General Counsel For Licensing and Regulation Office of the General Cc,ansel David L. Meyer, Chief Rules and Directives Branch Division of Administrative Services Office of Administration Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs James Lieberman, Director Office of Enforcement Samuel J, Collins, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Jesse L. Funches Chief Information Officer Brenda J. Shelton, Chief Information and Records Management Branch Office of Information Resources Management Elizabeth Q. Ten Eyck, Director Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, NMSS Charles J. Haughney, Director Division of Spent Fuel Project Office, NMSS John T. Greeves, Director Division of Waste Management, NMSS John J. Lineham, Director Program Management, Policy Development, and Analysis Staff, NMSS L
NMSS Policy and Procedures Letter 1-xx April 1998 (Draft)
NMSS PROCEDURES FOR PREPARATION AND REVIEW OF RULEMAKING PACKAGES Puroose:
The following procedures have been prepared to define the role and responsibilities of the NMSS Headquarters Divisions in initiating rulemaking activities, developing rulemaking packages, and in subsequent review and approval of the packages. This document also includes procedures for input, review and concurrence by other NRC Offices and by the Regions, as appropriate. These procedures were prepared based on Management Directive 6.3 and on the Regulations Handbook, NUREG/BR-0053, Revision 4.
Resoonsibilities Rulemaking generally takes place in response to an event or directive that indicates a need for further regulation (see Section A, below). The rulemaking process consists of preparation of rulemaking plans (see Section B, below) and (after approval of the plan by the Commission and/or the EDO) preparation and issuance of proposed and final rules (.see Section C, below.
The Rulemaking and Guidance Branch (RGB), Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety (IMNS), NMSS, has the overall responsibility for preparation of rulemaking plans and proposed and final rule packages. Other divisions in NMSS and other NRC offices have responsibility for programmatic and technicalinput in their respective areas of expertise and responsibility (including preparation of OMB packages) and for review and concurrence in the rule packages, as appropriate.
The following provides the roles and responsibihties of these groups throughout the rulemaking process. Appendix A provides details on these roles and responsibilities and Figures 1 and 2 I
provide schematics of the rulemaking process.
A. Need for Rulemakino A request for a rulemaking action is generally made in one of the following ways. Specific responsibit Hes in response to these requests are as noted.
Program Divisions and Branches are responsible for involving RGB anytime a package is in preparation which discusses or references the need for rulemaking.
- 1. Petition for rulemaking.
2
- a. A request for a rulemaking action may come from submittal of a petition for rulemaking from an interested person under 10 CFR 2.802 (e.g., an individual, a private organization or company, a NRC licensee, a government agency, etc.).
- b. Procedures for handling a petition for rulemaking are described in Part 11 of the Regulations Handbook (NUREG/BR 0053, Revision 4; September 1997) except that RGB will be responsible for handling petitions related to NMSS areas of responsibility.
Specific steps for handling petitions in accordance with NUREG/BR-0053, including scheduling of a meeting with the NMSS Office Director and cognizant Division Directors regarding recommendations on granting or denying the petition, are described in Attachment 1.
- 2. User-need memo from NMSS programmatic divisions,
- a. The need for a rulemaking action may be indicated by a user-need memo from the director of an NMSS programmatic division to the IMNS Division Director,
- b. The user need memo should provide priority for the rulemaking and should also provide sufficient technical basis for the rulemaking or, if the technical basis is not developed, should send a user-need memo to RES to develop the technical basis.
L 3.
EDO or Commission directive.
a A rulemaking action may be initiated as directed by either the EDO or by the Commission, as for example in a Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) 4.
Congressional Mandate / Executive Branch Order
- a. dulemaking may be initiated in response to Congressional promulgation of a new statute requiring new regulatory requirements.
Once a request for a rulemaking is received, RGB is responsible for the rulemaking from preparation of the rulemaking plan through issuance of the final rule (see items B and C, below).-
B. Draft and bnal Rulemakina Plans.
Generally, once a request for a rule is received, a plan for the rulemaking is developed. A rulemaking plan may not be necessary in certain situations, in particular if the rule is purely I
administrative or if there is sufficient urgency to proceed to preparation of a rule package (see f
Regulations Handbook, Section 1.5.e). Such a determination would be made based on discussion between RGB and the NMSS programmatic division.
(
RGB has overall responsibility for preparation of the rulemaking plans. Procedures for
' developing draft and final rulemaking plans are described in MD 6.3 and in Part 1 (Sections 1.7 and 1.9) of the Regulations Handbook (NUREG/BR-0053, Revision 4; September 1997) except
l l.
3 8
(
e that RGB is responsible for developing rulemaking plans for actions related to NMSS responsibilities. RGB also has responsibility for coordinating input from other divisions and offices. Specific responsibilities for the Task Leader in RGB and for working group members in i-L other offices are as follows. Specific steps for preparing rulemaking plans are described in l'
Section 8 of Appendix A.
- 1. The RGB Task Leader has responsibilities listed below, in carrying out these l
responsibilities, the RGB Task Leader works with WG members from other divisions and l
offices to prepare the materials noted.
1
- a. Develops schedules for preparing the rulemaking plan, and, as part of the plan, develops schedules and resource estimates for preparing proposed and final rule packages (the rule package generally inc'ades the Commission paper, Federal l
Register notice, and Congressional letters, as well as supporting documents as
- appropriate such as the regulatory analysis, OMB package, and environmental l
assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS)).
The schedules for the rulemaking plans and for the rule packages should be generally consistent with the steps and estimated time intervals in Appendix A, Figures 1 and 2, respectively.
l In estirnating the time needed to prepare the rule package (Step 1 of Figure 2),
consideration should be given to such factors as whether contractor effort is needed, the extent of enhanced public participation, whether an EA or EIS will be prepared, etc.
In addition, where associated guidance (including licensing, inspection, and enforcement guidance) is to be prepared along with the rule, consideration should be given to the time needed to prepare the guidance so that final guidance will be available at the time the rule is implemented.
- b. Identifies need for contractor support. Monitors resulting task orders and reviews contractor reports.
L
- c. Schedules briefings for the Division and Office Directors to discuss the rulemaking plan, and prepares materials for briefings.
- d. Prepares the rulemaking plan (using the guidelines of MD 6.3 and NUREG/BR-0053) which includes a preliminary regulatory analysis. In preparing the plan, coordinates with staff contacts in other divisions and offices, as needed, and addresses comments received during the review of the plan.
IMNS Division Director sends the rulemaking plan for review to other Branches,
' Divisions, HQ Offices, Regions, and Agreement States, as appropriate.
I e Ensures that the rulemaking plan is on schedule, and notifies RGB Section Leader or i
Branch Chief about potential problems that would cause slip in schedule.
3 i
1
4 4
t
- 2. Working Group Members from other divisions or offices have responsibilities as follows.
- a. Work with the RGB Task Leader to develop the rulemaking plan and preliminary regulatory analysis (including the schedules and resources noted in Section B.1.a, above), address comments on the plan, and assist in preparing briefing materials.
- b. Keep branch managers apprised of the rulemaking and obtain comments and input on policy decisions from branch managers.
C. Direct Final. Prooosed. and Final Rula RGB has primary responsibility for preparing rule packages and coordinating that preparation with other divisions and offices. RGB also has responsibility for tracking rulemaking actions to ensure that these actions are on schedule. Specific responsibilities for the RGB Task Leader, for RGB, IMNS, and NMSS management, and for staff and management in other divisions and offices are as follows. Specific steps for preparing rule packages are described in Section C of Appendix A.
- 1. The RGB Task Leader has responsibilities listed below. In carrying out these responsibilities, the RGB Task Leader works with WG members from other divisions or offices to prepare the materials noted.
- a. Develops milestones for preparing the rule package (as noted above, the rule package generally includes the Commission paper, Federal Register notice, Congressional letters, regulatory analysis, OMB package, and EA or EIS) to meet the proposed schedule developed as part of the rulemaking plan.
Where associated guidance is to be prepared with the rule, the RGB Task Leader assists \\Norking Group Members, as necessary, in preparing the guidance.
- b. Identifies need for contractor support. Monitors resulting task orders and reviews t
contractor reports.
- c. Prepares the rule package and addresses comments received during review of the rule package. Also, prepares materials for Division or Office briefings, if needed.
IMNS Division Director sends the draft rule prckage for review to other Branches, Divisions, HQ Offices, and Regions, as appropriate.
- d. Estimates the information collection burden and sends it to OClO for review, and, when needed, develops the OMB supporting statement.
l
- e. Ensures that the task is on schedule, and notifies RGB Section Leader or Branch Chief about potential problems that would cause slip in schedule.
l l
[
i' l
5 I
2.
Working Group Members from other divisions or offices have responsibilities as follows.
l
- a. Work with the RGB Task Leader to develop the rule package, address comments, estimate information collection burden, review contractor reports, assist in preparing briefing materials, and complete final rule package.
- b. Keep branch managers apprised of the rulemaking action and obtain comments from branch managers. Notify branch managers of potential problems or policy issues.
l
- c. Prepare associated guidance (including licensing, inspection, and enforcement guidance), as appropriate, and develops milestones for its preparation so that final guidance will be available at the time the rule is implemented.
l 3.
RGB and NMSS Programmatic Branch Management r
l
- a. RGB Management is responsible for:
- 1) Assigning a task leader from RGB to the WG.
- 2) Ensuring that the rulemaking action is on schedule.
- 3) Notifying IMNS Director about potential problems that would cause slip in schedule.
I
- 4) Scheduling monthly meetings with IMNS management and programmatic division management to review status of rulemakings.
- b. NMSS Programmatic Branch Management is responsible for
(
- 1) Assigning a staff member to work on rule package with RGB Task Leader l
- 2) Ensuring that the rulemaking action is technically sound.
- 3) Meeting due dates for input 4.
IMNS and NMSS Programmatic Divisions l-
- a. IMNS is responsible for notifying the NMSS Director about potential problems that i
would cause slip in schedule.
1 b; NMSS Programmatic Divisions are responsible for ensuring that the rulemaking action is consistent with Division goal and mission, and for identifying and developing necessary guidance concurrently with the rule package.
6
- 5. ~ NMSS, Other HQ Offices, and Regional Offices
- a. NMSS is responsible for ensuring that the rulemaking action is consistent with NRC policy.
- b. OGC is responsible for providing a "no legal objection" and ensuring that the rulemaking action is legally sufficient and consistent with previous legal decisions and current rules, statutes, and Commission policy.
- c. OSP is responsible for
- 1) Identifying an OSP staff member to assist with Agreement State compatibility issues and providing assistance to ensure that statements in the rulemaking actions regarding Agreement State compatibility are consistent with NRC policy.
- 2) Providing assistance, if needed, to the RGB Task Leader and Working Group regarding coordination with Agreement States and, if needed, non Agreement States (procedures for coordination with Agreement States are under development).
- d. ClO is responsible for:
- 1) Ensuring that impacts related to information technology have been properly addressed.
- 2) Ensuring that the RGB Task Leader is notified expeditiously on whether, based on the estimate of information collection burden for a rulemaking action, an OMB approval package is necessary.
- 3) Ensuring that the OMB approval package, if needed, is consistent with OMB requirements and is submitted to OMB on time.
- e. ADM is responsible for:
- 1) Ensuring that the rulemaking complies with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Federal Register Act, and 1 CFR Chapters I and 11.
- 2) Ensuring that the FR notice is consistent with the Office of FR requirements.
- f. Od is responsible for:
- 1) Ensuring that the statements in the rulemaking actions regarding enforcement are consistent with enforcement policy.
- 2) Providing statements to be included in the FR notice, if needed, regarding the j
modification of enforcement policy.
i
7
- g. NRR is responsible for review for technical content and consistency in areas where NRR would be affected.
- h. OPA is responsible for ensuring that the press release is consistent with NRC policy.
- l. Regions are responsible, as appropriate, for ensuring that the requirements in the rulemaking are sufficient to allow clear licensing and inspection activities.
- j. CFO is responsible for ensuring that resources have been properly addressed.
- k. OlG is responsible for ensuring that the rulemaking is consistent with OlG policy.
D-4 9
4 t
i i
Appendix A (Draft)
DESCRIPTION OF SPECIFIC STEPS IN PREPARATION AND REVIEW OF RULEMAKING PACKAGES A. INTRODUCTION As discussed in NMSS Policy and Procedures Letter 1-xx, rulemaking generally takes place in response to an event or directive that indicate? a need for further regulation (e.g., a petition for rulemaking from an interested person). In response to the indicated need, the rulemaking process consists of preparation of rulemaking plans, and preparation and issuance of proposed and final rules. NMSS Policy and Procedures Letter 1-xx contains an outline of overall responsibilities for preparing and reviewing rulemaking plans and proposed and final rule packages.
This Appendix contains a description of the steps in the rulemaking process to give further guidance as to how the responsibilities listed in NMSS Policy and Procedures Letter 1-xx will be carried out as the rulemaking process unfolds. It also describes the need for preparation of certain documents at each step, for example the OMB package, and the rationale for those needs. Specifically, Sections B and C of this Appendix describe the steps for preparation and review of rulemaking plans, and for preparation and review of draft and final rule packages, respectively. Attachment 1 of this Appendix describes the steps for receipt and response to petitions for rulemaking. Figures 1 and 2 provide a schematic of the steps in the rulemaking process. Figure 3 provides a schematic of the steps in the petition process.
This Appendix was prepared based on Management Directive 6.3 and on the Regulations Handbook, NUREG/BR-0053, Revision 4.
f 1
i
2 B. PREPARATION OF RULEMAKING PLANS Figure 1 is a schematic of the steps in the process for preparing a rulemaking plan. The Rulemaking and Guidance Branch (RGB) has the overall responsibility for preparation of the plan; other NMSS divisions and NRC offices have responsibilities for providing input into preparation of the plan and for review of the plan.
The discussion below follows the schematic in Figure 1 and provides discussion as to what actions need to be taken at each step of the process by the RGB Task Leader, by RGB, IMNS, and NMSS management, and by staff and management in other divisions and offices.
- 1. Sten 1 - Branch Review of Draft Rulemakina' Pian in this step:
- a. RGB Task Leader prepares a draft rulemaking plan package (the package generally includes a Commission paper and the rulemaking plan; the content of a rulemaking plan is described in Chapter 1.7 of NUREG/BR-0053, Rev.4). In preparing the draft rulemaking plan, the RGB Task Leader works with Working Group Members from other Divisions or Offices, j
i
- b. RGB Task Leader submits the draft rulemaking plan package to RGB Section Leader and Branch Chief for review.
j
- c. RGB Task Leader sends the rulemaking plan package to NMSS Programmatic Branch (via the WG Member) and OGC WG Member for review.
NMSS Programmatic Branch reviews the rulemaking plan package to ensure that the rulemaking action is technically sound. Working Group Members work to obtain comments from branch managers and notify branch managers of potential problems or policy issues that should be addressed in their comments.
- 2. Steo 2 - Division Review of Draft Rulemakino Plan in this step:
- a. RGB Task Leader addresses comments from RGB management and from the Programmatic Branch and prepares a revision of the draft rulemaking plan package, in addressing the comments, the RGB Task Leader works with WorkinD Group Members from other Divisions or Offices.
- b. RGB Branch Chief sends the draft rulemaking plan package to IMNS management and to other NMSS divisions.
I,=
l 3
IMNS management and NMSS programmatic divisions review the rulemaking plan l
package to ensure that the rulemaking action is consistent with Division goals and missions. Working Group Members in other divisions work to coordinate with their division management.
- c. RGB Task Leader schedules briefing for Division Directors and prepares briefing sheets.
- 3. Steo 3 - Office Review of Draft Rulemakina Plan in this step:
- a. RGB Task Leader addresses comments from IMNS and from NMSS Programmatic divisions and prepares a revision to the draft rulemaking plan package. In addressing the comments, the RGB Task Leader works with Working Group Members from other Divisions or Offices.
- b. IMNS Division Director sends the draft rulemaking plan package to other NRC Offices.
These offices review the package as follows.
- 1) OGC - for legal sufficiency and consistency with previous legal decisions and with l
current rules and Commission policy.
l q'
- 2) OSP - for consistency with NRC policy regarding Agreement State compatibility.
- 3) 0010 - to ensure that impacts related to information technology have been properly addressed, including whether there are information collection l
requirements that will require submittal of a package to the OMB.
- 4) ADM - to ensure that implications related to regulatory flexibility and small businesses are addressed.
- 5) OE - to ensure that the rulemaking plan is consistent with enforcement policy l
- 6) CFO - to ensure that resource impacts have been properly addressed.
affected.
Director, OPA, OlG, and ACRS, ACNW, and ACMUI, as appropriate.
l L
4 LEteo 4 - Anrpement State Review of the Draft Rulemakina Plan (if aooronriate. i.e.. if the rulemakina would imoact Aareement States)
In this step
- a. After the NRC offices have concurred in the package
- 1) OSP sends the draft rulemaking plan to the Agreement States, marked " pre.
decisional" (note: OSP should not send out the rulemaking plan to the Agreement l
States until an information copy of the plan is provided to the Commission (see item 4.a.2, below)
- 2) The draft rulemaking plan package is forwarded to the NMSS Correspondence Analyst for NMSS Office Director concurrence. The RGB Task Leader prepares briefing sheets for briefing NMSS management. Subsequently, NMSS sends an information copy of draft rulemaking plan package to EDO to provide to the Commission with an indication that it is being sent to the Agreement States for comment. The RGB Task Leader notifies the Council Chair of the CRCPD of the rulemaking plan.
- b. The Agreement States have a 45 day comment period.
- 5. Steo 5 - Submittal of Final Rulemakina Plan to the Commission for Acoroval in this step:
- a. The RGB Task Leader addresses comments from the Agreement States and CRCPD and, in consultation with Working Group Members and Division and Office Management from appropriate NRC offices and OGC, prepares the final rulemaking plan package (if the Agreement States provide substantive comments and/or if the final rulemaking plan has significant changes from the draft, IMNS will reissue the package to the appropriate Offices for concurrence in the rnanner of Step 3, above).
The final rulemaking plan package consists of a Commission paper and the rulemaking plan and includes a discussion of the staff's disposition of Agreement State comments.
- b. RGB Task Leader delivers final rulemaking plan to Cathy Poland for NMSS Office Director concurrence
- c. If deert ed necessary (i-.e., if there are substantive changes from the draft rulemaking plan), (he RGB Task Leader prepares briefing sheets for briefing NMSS management and briefs NMSS management on the final rulemaking plan.
- d. After concurrence by EDO, the final rulemaking plan package is submitted by EDO to the Commission for approval.
L 5
l-
- 6. Steo 6 - Actions subseauent to EDO/ Commission Acoroval of the Final Rulemakina Plan In this step:
- a. RGB provides the rulemaking plan electronically to ADM, who makes the approved rulemaking plan available on the electronic rulemaking bulletin board system.
l l
- b. RGB prepares an entry for the Regulatory Agenda and forwards it to ADM for inclusion l
in the next NRC Regulatory Agenda.
- c. OSP notifies the Agreement States of the Commission's approval (or disapproval) of the Rulemaking Plan.
- d. Participating offices implement the final rulemaking plan as approved by the EDO (see Section C, below) l
6 4
C. PREPARATION OF PROPOSED AND FINAL RULE PACKAGES Figure 2 is a schematic of the steps in the process for preparing a proposed or a final rule. The Rulemaking and Guidance Branch (RGB) has the overall responsibility for the preparation of proposed and final rule packages, as well as supporting documents as appropriate such as regulatory analyses, OMB packages, environmental assessments or environmentalimpact statements, and regulatory g'Adance; other NMSS divisions and NRC offices have responsibilities for providing input for preparation of these documents and for their review.
The discussion below follows the schematic in Figure 2 and provides discussion as to what actions need to be taken at each step of the process by the RGB Task Leader, by RGB, IMNS, and NMSS management, and by staff and management in other divisions and offices.
- 1. Steo 1 - Branch Review of rule oackaae in this step:
- a. RGB Task Leader prepares a draft rule package (the rule package generally includes
{
the Commission paper, FR notice, regulatory analysis, environmental assessment or l
impact statement, and Congressionalletters). In preparing this draft package, the RGB Task Leader works with Working Group Members from other Divisions or Offices.
Where associated guidance (including licensing, inspection, and enforcement guidance) is to be prepared along with the rule, the RGB Task Leader assists Working Group Members, as necessary, in preparing the guidance so that final guidance will be available at the time the rule is implemented.
- b. RGB Task Leader gives rule package to RGB Section Leader and Branch Chief for review
- c. RGB Task Leader estimates the information collection burden and sends it, and the draft rule package (via E-mail) to OClO. In preparing the burden estimate, the RGB Task Leader works with Working Group Members.
OClO reviews the draft package to determine whether, based on the estimate of information collection burden for a rulemaking action and if the rule is controversial, an OMB approval package is necessary. OCIO notifies the RGB Task Leader expeditiously on its decision so that a OMB package can be prepared as part of the next redraft of the rulemaking package.
- d. RGB Task Leader sends draft rule package to NMSS Programmatic Branch (via the WG Member) and OGC Working Group Member for review NMSS Programmatic Branch reviews rule package to ensure that the rulemaking action and associated guidance is techr;ically sound. Working Group Members work
)
7 c
to obtain comments from branch managers and notify branch managers of potential problems or policy issues that should be addressed in their comments.
l
- e. For final rules only, RGB Task Leader completes Small Business Regulatory l
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) form and provides the form to the RGB Technical Assistant.
I
- 2. Steo 2 - Division Review of Rule Packaae (note: Aareement State review orocedures at this sleo and in Steo 3 are under develooment by OSP)
In this step:
- a. RGB Task Leader addresses comments from RGB management and from the Programmatic Branch and prepares a revised draft of the rule package. In addressing the comments, the RGB Task Leader works with Working Group Members from other Divisions or Offices.
- b. RGB Branch Chief sends the draft rule package to IMNS management and to other NMSS Programmatic divisions.
IMNS management and NMSS Programmatic divisions review rule package to j
ensure that the rulemaking action is consistent with Division goals and missions. IMNS management notifies the NMSS Director about potential problems that would cause slip i
in schedule. Working Group Members in other divisions work to coordinate with their division management.
- c. RGB Task Leader prepares briefing sheets and briefs IMNS management and Programmatic divisions on the rule package.
- d. RGB Branch Chief sends OMB package,if needed, to OClO.
OClO reviews content of OMB package
- e. RGB Branch Chief sends rule package to ADM to review.
- 3. Steo 3 - Office Review of Rule Package in this step:
- a. RGB Task Leader addresses comments from IMNS and NMSS Programmatic divisions and from ADM and prepares a revised draft of the rule package. In addressing the comments, the RGB Task Leader works with Working Group Members from other Divisions or Offices.
i I
i
~
8
- b. IMNS Division Director sends the draft rule package to other NRC Offices (including OGC, OSP, OE, ADM, AEOD, NRR, OClO, OCFO) and to the Regions, as appropriate.
In addition, IMNS Division Director provides an information copy of the draft rule package to ACMUI, ACRS, ACNW, CRGR, OlG, and OPA, as appropriate, and to the NMSS Office Director and NMSS Deputy Office Director.
These groups review the package es follows.
- 1) OGC - for legal sufficiency and consistency with previous legal decisions and with current rules and Commission policy.
- 2) OSP - for consistency with NRC policy regarding Agreement State compatibility.
- 3) OClO - to ensure that impacts related to information technology have been properly addressed and that the OMB approval package, if needed, is consistent with OMB requirements and is submitted to OMB on time.
- 4) ADM - to ensure that the rulemaking complies with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Federal Register Act, and 1 CFR Chapters I and 11, and that the FR notice is consistent with the Office of FR requirements.
- 5) OE - to ensure that the statements in the rule are consistent with enforcement policy.
- 6) OPA - to assist in the preparing press release for rule package.
- 7) CFO - to ensure that resources impacts have been properly addressed.
- 9) Regions - to ensure that the requirements in the rulemaking are sufficient to allow clear licensing and inspection activities.
- 10) OlG - to ensure that the rulemaking is consistent with OlG policy.
- 11) ACRS, ACNW, CRGR, and ACMUI(as appropriate)- to review and provide comment if rule package falls within their purview
- c. RGB Task Leader schedules a meeting with tne cognizant offices to resolve any outstanding concerns for the day prior to the due date of the office concurrences. If all concurrences have been received, the meeting will be canceled.
9
- 4. Steo 4 - NMSS concurrence in Rule Package in this step
- a. RGB Task Leader addresses comments from NRC offices from Ster 3 and prepares a final draft of the rule package. In addressing the comments, the RGB Task Leader works with Working Group Members from other Divisions or Offices,
- b. RGB Task Leader schedules briefing of NMSS Office Director, provides draft package prior to the briefing, and prepares briefing sheets.
- c. The final rule package is forwarded to the NMSS Correspondence Analyst for NMSS Office Director concurrence
- 5. Steo 5 - EDO/Commissign Review of Package in this step:
- a. The rule package is sent to EDO. Any comments from the EDO, either editorial or technical, that require return of the package for changes are to be discussed with IMNS and programmatic division management. A copy of the EDO markup and the appropriate NMSS form are to be provided to the NMSS Correspondence Analyst within one working day of receipt by the RGB Task Leader. If requested changes are major, IMNS management will discuss them with the NMSS Office Director or NMSS Deputy Office Director within one working day of receipt.
- b. After concurrence by EDO, the package is provided to the Commission. If the rule can be issued under EDO's authority, it is signed by EDO and sent to ADM.
- 6. Steo 6 - Issuance of Rule in this step:
- a. RGB Task Leader addresses comments from the Commission and prepares the package forissuance.
- b. RGB sends final rule package to ADM. ADM sends final rule package to SECY for deFvery to the OFR. If the rule package is being issued under EDO's authority, the rule is sent by ADM to the OFR.
- c. RGB Task Leader sends OMB package, if needed, to OClO. OClO sends OMB package to OMB for approval.
F 10 ATTACHMENT 1. RESPONSE TO PETITIONS A rulemaking action may se requested by submittal of a petition for rulemaking from an interested person (e.g., an individual, a private organization or company, a NRC licensee, a government agency). Figure 3 contains a schematic of the steps in the process for responding to a petition for rulemaking.
Procedures for handling a petition for rule: making are described in Part 11 of the Regulations Handbook (NUREG/BR-0053, Revision 4; September 1997). Part 11 of NUREG/BR-0053 draws its basis from 10 CFR 2.802 which codifies the actions that a member of the public would take, the contents of the petition, and the actions that the NRC would take to respond to the petition.
ADM has the overall responsibility in the agency for receiving petitions and tracking them. The Rulemaking and Guidance Branch (RGB) has the overall responsibility in NMSS for developing the appropriate response to the petitions. Other NMSS Programmatic divisions and NRC offices also have responsibilities for preparation and review during the process.
The discussion below follows the schematic in Figure 3 and provides a discussion as to what actions need to be taken at each step of the process by the RGB Task Leader, by RGB, IMNS, and NMSS management, and by staff and management in other divisions and offices. The flow path shown in Figure 3 is for the case where a petition is accepted and a rulemaking plan is developed; however, as noted below and in the EDO block in Figure 3, denial of a petition would necessitate a FRN and/or a letter to the petitioner.
L.Sleo 1 - Receiot of Petition and Review for Comoleteness In this step (see Section 11.11(a) of NUREG\\BR-0053).
- a. SECY receives petition, logs it in, and se nds to ADM.
- b. ADM, together with OGC, RGB, and the NMSS Programmatic division, as appropriate, makes a determination as to whether the document meets the threshold requirements for a petition for rutemaking set out in 10 CFR 2.802(c). ADM forwards an advance copy of the petition to RGB and,other offices involved in the determination decision.
- 2. Steo 2 - Docketino of Acceotable Petition-In this step either item 2a or 2b would occur (see Section 11.11(b) of NUREG/BR-0053).
- a. If it is determined in Step i that the petition meets requirements for a petition based on 10 CFR 2.802(c), ADM then:
- 1) assigns a docket number to the petition.
I
+
11
- 2) sends a copy of the petition to RGB with a formal reauest for a decision on whether the petition should be processed routinely or handled as a " fast track" petition.
- b. If it is determined in Step 1 that the petition does N_DI meet requirements for a petition based on 10 CFR 2.802 (c), then:
- 1) ADM sends the decision to EDO with a recommendation that the petition is deficient
- 2) EDO makes a final decision on the acceptability of the petition and if it is found to be deficient, sends a letter to the petitioner informing of the decision.
- 3. Steo 3 - Review for " Routine" or " Fast track" orocessina of oetition In this step (see Section 11.17 of NUREG/BR-0053):
- a. RGB, in consultation with Working Group Members in other divisions, makes a determination as to whether a petition that meets the minimum threshold is also adequate enough to permit " fast track" processing. Under fast track processing, NRC would not publish a FRN requesting comment on the petition as received, but would instead proceed directly to preparation of a rulemaking plan and a proposed rule package (see Sections B and C or this Appendix).
- b. RGB prepares briefing sheets for briefing NMSS management, and, if necessary, briefs NMSS management on the petition for rulemaking r
- 4. Steo 4 - Processina of Petitions 4.A. FAST-TRACK PETITIONS in this step (see Section 11.19 of NUREG/BR-0053)
- a. ADM notifies petitioner and provides petitioner with name of staff contact
- b. RGB proceeds with development of rulemaking plan and subsequent proposed rule package per Sections B and C of this Appendix.
4.B. ROUTINE PETITIONS In this step (see Section 11.21 of NUREG/BR-0053)
- a. ADM notifies petitioner and provides petitioner with name of staff contact
12
- b. ADM prepares a FRN containing a draft notice of receipt of petition for rulemaking describing the content of the petition and allowing a 75 day public comment period
- c. RGB,in consultation with Working Group Members of NMSS Programmatic divisions and other offices, including OGC, concurs in FRN prepared by ADM
- d. Public comment period on the FRN is for 75 days
- e. After public comment period, RGB Task Leader, in consultation with Working Group Members of NMSS Programmatic divisions and other offices, including OGC, summarizes the public comments and prepares briefing for cognizant Division Directors, the NMSS Office Director, and OGC, on recommendations for resolution of the petition. Following this briefing, a recommendation is made to the EDO on whether to grant or deny the petition.
- f. if it is determined in item 4.B.e, above, that the petition should be granted,
- 1) RGB proceeds with development of a rulemaking plan and subsequent proposed rule package per Sections B and C of this Appendix
- g. If it is determined in item 4.B.e, above, that the petition should not be granted
- 1) ADM sends the decision to EDO with a recommendation that the petition be denied
- 2) EDO makes a final decision on whether the petition should be denied. If a denial is appropriate, RGB prepares a notice of denial and a letter to the petitioner for EDO signature. After the EDO signs the FRN announcing the denial, ADM sends the letter informing the petitioner of the decision and forwards the FRN to the OFR for publication.
l l
l 1
!l t
l n
t 2 g
e n
g e
mn ei Ra a
mF n
6 el
- d o
e -
lpP n
o lpn Me nb S
im e
r lae rla Dg t
i p AA PW
- ,I I
ll1li!l l
,l;,I I
illlI!
n n
e o
o c
I is is f
i f
Ois s
Or 5
Dm m
St i
o E m m
O S c o
e e
o o
D Mi r tS C
C E
ND
,I
- ,I I
iiiII!
I iilIi!
n t
t o) n s
v n
e e a e
is y y
sp mRd m/D o
S e
n ete5 e sP imc eteC mo a4 r
r a
4 gt gtaR o n f
AS ASC Ci lP p
(
e p
t g
S u
Gk e cI o
n llI tIIIi!
We r
i G
k Uw 7IllIlIIII!
a T1 n
g m
i f
k e
r
/Ol o
s P
ewk l
E l
R icee SCO W
u ive OO/
/r f
O fOew
/ /
e r
R CMFR 3
3 d
o GDCR a
f o
OAON e
e L
S tS k
k e
Ge cI llIlIIII!
s r
e u
Ww a
T d
U
',I 1,
T Ill IIIllIl1III!
1 e
C n n i
v r
k oie Dy Di o
o p
n r
isis e S o o
(
2 P
iv w S c S0
.i p
v ie gs e
D R1 Mfo N ie i
ov t
r r i S
Nin B
PD 1
f e
Gs Wk
~
i llI!l lIIIllIlIIII!
r w
l u
l t
a T 2
.I!llIIIllIlIIIi!
iF C
h s
h wk B
cn c ee U
a ni r
a v e S
BGe r
ew B
b rBR gWm 2
G o ae R
r ivM 1
P l
pe
.I! lji,tl8 I'
t
~
S
)s g
ie ikn ra e
a Gv r
We a
m t
pf en Uim eal r r u la T(
PDRP t
lfll l
5 g
"e e
o Af o
n d
o t
)
o P (i e f
t d
it i(
t a
Ob s e
/ e o OBd 6
ic Y
MA I
e D C W p )e cme CR o
lb ol e
u EF r u OOn S
P SO I
AO& p r t
l!
i8 lIi! l 3!lI l8 liIli'sIi!
n n
o io is s
s s
5 im im I
o Om m
O e
Do o
D E
tS EC C
8i I
Ililiili!Ii!
I Ii ili I!
r ec o
t r k i r c f
u f
S u e Ocre) t Sc e ig s s Mnow S nDn Sey o. f S cf i S r la NC1 r
e MiOri Mon f
r 4
ND( B NCA s
p ie,el:
I!
e G
e k
t p
a S
Ww
,I l,li ilii8 ilII!
i ill il u
/
a L1 o
r k
T G
!I C
s n
g a
o o
n
/O/i i
s f
P E g k
Pl
)
e wk n
v r
e iciee i
o SCOe o
f v e o
OO/R W
//O/
u Oew S
' c f
l S y
' o CMFR R 3 p
/r R
3 Mo GDCR e
fn r
o N c
^
i(
OAON da
!l o
e e
t ili ill.i8 il ellilfI!
L f
S Gk nI I
k s
e e
We s
8lII!
a I
,i ill.Ilil7I Uw J
r T
u T1
!l d
gn e
c ie c
it n i b
)
nwk a
f O
2
( d e e m
og s e o
r isi e o
t mn k
p P
e lt
)
epd So iv I o t
ivew e
le n
ao t
h Bd m
S DR1 M
r is i
gi S
e f
v 2
D ie ov
. Me ge r
r i e
A B
PD bon Ad u
Gs r
rI lilfI!
a Wk ei!
a ll elliIlil w
i
/
7I I
al F
L lill,Ilil, 2
,il T
!1 p
m C
e) n r
h ed
, e o
s B
c.
k e
f h wk U
r
( ir leb E
s nd or A
cee nie S
r t
u F
ep ew B
BGb p v
a
(
r h
BR 2 G
gMma S M )t RB R
o aeiv
. Rs S
r iMD BI e 1
P v
l p
I_
Ill li
,I i
ilr3l l-e tS
)sie r
e a
e g
r Gv a
a We pek c
m el r ua
/L i PRP T (t l
I
i i
,I
,lT
'Y lat o
r N
er y
N i r Nt e g1 A
- n E
n t
e;n Ren ing R
n e D
et reg Fl/o t
k i G
oD d e nis F
Ri i/
l o
F it S a t
S m-st
/
it e
Mle n Oin BNiO M Op c a t
a Der GReD D
r p EDG RF pE Atoo ul N
t
~
~l R
ll il O
s n
/
o S
/
i MSC tite DMG P
ANO 4
f p
o e
g t
n S
is g
t n e s
eie n
k e
eN r
s r
lcmR S a a c
S p m - )1 o
i mF Mr l
ag b
ee n P
K u on C
P c o N (p u lpF i
r AR K
T CA E
R N
T I
T S
T
/S
/
U MS S
MS O
DM A
DM F
R AN lli!l~lI AN
~
~
r e
s o
i f c
n t k f
s c f i o
aa O
g, d
)
/
i F rT S( i e t
n it r
SCf d oe e
3 f
ee MGie n
r P
o wi nob n t
o S
ie u e
o
~
r t
veR
~
s lili' f
R e
~
r d r 9
/
u 2
nO y
t
/S d
a f
o po O
o MSC cn n
e e
g er e D
DMG t
n r ei r
C S
it o
e t ic E
o ANO Pt r
k Nefe
~
L P
cR D
,l l
l~lill~
oD F
~
~
3 y
t e
ib
/
li i
u a
/S MSC t
a p
e DMG iF c
ANO c
1 A
~
f
~
a o
e n
tS io m
ta o
r in sf m
en voY r
MiieiC e
t te DcteE e
D Ar pS
-