Regulatory Guide 5.79: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
| page count = 2 | | page count = 2 | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{#Wiki_filter: | {{#Wiki_filter:REGULATORY ANALYSIS | ||
REGULATORY GUIDE 5.79 | REGULATORY GUIDE 5.79 PROTECTION OF SAFEGUARD INFORMATION | ||
Draft was issued as DG-5034, dated August 2009 Statement of the Problem Full compliance with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations for the protection of Safeguards Information (SGI) is required as of February 23, 2009. The regulations require protection of SGI for a larger number of licensees and other entities than under the previous regulations. Additionally, the previously published guidance document (NUREG 0794, Protection of Unclassified Safeguards Information, issued October 1981) is no longer considered appropriate for use, as the regulatory requirements have changed, and technology has advanced to the point of requiring new strategies. This regulatory guide should be used as a primary reference for implementation guidance on the existing regulation for the protection of safeguards information. | |||
Therefore, issuance of this regulatory guidance is necessary to provide regulated entities or other groups that may handle, possess, or disseminate SGI with appropriate methods to meet the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR 73.21, 73.22, and 73.23. | Therefore, issuance of this regulatory guidance is necessary to provide regulated entities or other groups that may handle, possess, or disseminate SGI with appropriate methods to meet the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR 73.21, 73.22, and 73.23. | ||
| Line 23: | Line 24: | ||
Objective The objective of this regulatory guide is to provide a means to assist licensees and other persons who possess SGI in establishing an information protection system that satisfies the requirements of 10 CFR 73.21, 73.22, and 73.23. | Objective The objective of this regulatory guide is to provide a means to assist licensees and other persons who possess SGI in establishing an information protection system that satisfies the requirements of 10 CFR 73.21, 73.22, and 73.23. | ||
Alternative Approaches The NRC staff considered the following alternative approaches: | Alternative Approaches The NRC staff considered the following alternative approaches: | ||
1. | 1. Do not revise NUREG-0794. | ||
2. | 2. Issue a new regulatory guide. | ||
Alternative 1: | Alternative 1: Do Not Revise NUREG-0794 Under this alternative, the NRC would not issue additional guidance, and the guidance in NUREG 0794 would be retained. If the NRC does not take action, there would not be any changes in costs or benefit to the public, licensees, or the NRC. However, the no-action alternative would not address identified concerns with the current NRC guidance. This alternative provides a baseline condition from which any other alternatives will be assessed. | ||
1 | |||
Alternative 2: Issue a New Regulatory Guide Under this alternative, the NRC would issue a new regulatory guide, taking into consideration the lessons learned from industry and guidance that has already been issued on the subject. One benefit of this action is that it would enhance understanding among the groups that handle SGI, as well as others who might handle SGI in certain situations (e.g., hearings). | |||
The impact to the NRC would be the costs associated with preparing and issuing the regulatory guide. The impact to the public would be the voluntary costs associated with reviewing and providing comments to the NRC during the public comment period. The value to the NRC staff and its applicants would be the benefits associated with enhanced efficiency and effectiveness in using a common guidance document as the technical basis for license applications and other interactions between the NRC and its regulated entities. | |||
Backfit Analysis The Commission has concluded, on the basis of the documented evaluation in the regulatory analysis, that none of the guidance in this regulatory guide are backfits as defined in | Conclusion Based on this regulatory analysis, the NRC staff recommends issuance of a new regulatory guide. The staff concludes that the proposed action will enhance understanding of the SGI requirements and increase information sharing among authorized parties, consistent with direction from the Executive Branch. It could also lead to cost savings for the industry, especially with regard to encouraging consistency of plans and procedures to handle SGI by reducing the inefficiencies of duplication or improper implementation. | ||
10 CFR 50.109(a)(4)(ii), 70.76(a)(4)(iii), 72.62 and 76.76(a)(4)(ii). | |||
Backfit Analysis The Commission has concluded, on the basis of the documented evaluation in the regulatory analysis, that none of the guidance in this regulatory guide are backfits as defined in | |||
10 CFR 50.109(a)(4)(ii), 70.76(a)(4)(iii), 72.62 and 76.76(a)(4)(ii). The Commission has also concluded that the guidance in this regulatory guide is necessary to ensure that the facilities and materials described in the regulatory guide provide adequate protection to the public health and safety and are in accord with the common defense and security as applicable. Therefore, a backfit analysis is not required and the cost-benefit standards of 10 CFR 50.109(a)(3), 70.76, | |||
72.62, and 76.76, do not apply. The documented evaluation in the regulatory analysis includes a statement of the objectives of and the reasons for the backfits that will be required by the regulatory guide and sets forth the Commissions conclusion that these backfits are not subject to the cost benefit standards of 10 CFR 50.109(a)(3), 70.76, 72.62, and 76.76. | |||
2}} | |||
{{RG-Nav}} | {{RG-Nav}} | ||
Latest revision as of 05:51, 13 November 2019
| ML103270227 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/30/2011 |
| From: | Richard Jervey NRC/RES/DE/RGDB |
| To: | |
| Ridgely J, RES/DE,301-251-7458 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML103270218 | List: |
| References | |
| DG-5034 RG 5.079 | |
| Download: ML103270227 (2) | |
REGULATORY ANALYSIS
REGULATORY GUIDE 5.79 PROTECTION OF SAFEGUARD INFORMATION
Draft was issued as DG-5034, dated August 2009 Statement of the Problem Full compliance with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations for the protection of Safeguards Information (SGI) is required as of February 23, 2009. The regulations require protection of SGI for a larger number of licensees and other entities than under the previous regulations. Additionally, the previously published guidance document (NUREG 0794, Protection of Unclassified Safeguards Information, issued October 1981) is no longer considered appropriate for use, as the regulatory requirements have changed, and technology has advanced to the point of requiring new strategies. This regulatory guide should be used as a primary reference for implementation guidance on the existing regulation for the protection of safeguards information.
Therefore, issuance of this regulatory guidance is necessary to provide regulated entities or other groups that may handle, possess, or disseminate SGI with appropriate methods to meet the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR 73.21, 73.22, and 73.23.
Objective The objective of this regulatory guide is to provide a means to assist licensees and other persons who possess SGI in establishing an information protection system that satisfies the requirements of 10 CFR 73.21, 73.22, and 73.23.
Alternative Approaches The NRC staff considered the following alternative approaches:
1. Do not revise NUREG-0794.
2. Issue a new regulatory guide.
Alternative 1: Do Not Revise NUREG-0794 Under this alternative, the NRC would not issue additional guidance, and the guidance in NUREG 0794 would be retained. If the NRC does not take action, there would not be any changes in costs or benefit to the public, licensees, or the NRC. However, the no-action alternative would not address identified concerns with the current NRC guidance. This alternative provides a baseline condition from which any other alternatives will be assessed.
1
Alternative 2: Issue a New Regulatory Guide Under this alternative, the NRC would issue a new regulatory guide, taking into consideration the lessons learned from industry and guidance that has already been issued on the subject. One benefit of this action is that it would enhance understanding among the groups that handle SGI, as well as others who might handle SGI in certain situations (e.g., hearings).
The impact to the NRC would be the costs associated with preparing and issuing the regulatory guide. The impact to the public would be the voluntary costs associated with reviewing and providing comments to the NRC during the public comment period. The value to the NRC staff and its applicants would be the benefits associated with enhanced efficiency and effectiveness in using a common guidance document as the technical basis for license applications and other interactions between the NRC and its regulated entities.
Conclusion Based on this regulatory analysis, the NRC staff recommends issuance of a new regulatory guide. The staff concludes that the proposed action will enhance understanding of the SGI requirements and increase information sharing among authorized parties, consistent with direction from the Executive Branch. It could also lead to cost savings for the industry, especially with regard to encouraging consistency of plans and procedures to handle SGI by reducing the inefficiencies of duplication or improper implementation.
Backfit Analysis The Commission has concluded, on the basis of the documented evaluation in the regulatory analysis, that none of the guidance in this regulatory guide are backfits as defined in
10 CFR 50.109(a)(4)(ii), 70.76(a)(4)(iii), 72.62 and 76.76(a)(4)(ii). The Commission has also concluded that the guidance in this regulatory guide is necessary to ensure that the facilities and materials described in the regulatory guide provide adequate protection to the public health and safety and are in accord with the common defense and security as applicable. Therefore, a backfit analysis is not required and the cost-benefit standards of 10 CFR 50.109(a)(3), 70.76,
72.62, and 76.76, do not apply. The documented evaluation in the regulatory analysis includes a statement of the objectives of and the reasons for the backfits that will be required by the regulatory guide and sets forth the Commissions conclusion that these backfits are not subject to the cost benefit standards of 10 CFR 50.109(a)(3), 70.76, 72.62, and 76.76.
2