ML20135D715
| ML20135D715 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/03/1996 |
| From: | Cranford G NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9612100105 | |
| Download: ML20135D715 (11) | |
Text
. _ _..
4 5
[7590-01-P]
)
l U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
i Agency information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment request 4
i j
AGENCY:
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) i I
ACTION:
Notice of pending NRC action to submit an information collection request to OMB and solicitation of public comment.
}
i j
SUMMARY
- The NRC is preparing a submittal to OMB for review of continued approval of l
information collections under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of j
1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
1 i
information pertaining to the requirement to be submitted:
I
\\
i 1.
The title of the information collection:
t j
10 CFR Part 62 " Criteria and Procedures for Emergency Access to i
l Non-federal and Regional Low-level Waste Disposal Facilities" 2.
Current OMB approval number: 3150-0143 j'
o\\x mbO@
cu4 l 'pf fI b1 9812100105 961203 PDR ORO EUSOMB PDR
$-2 10
. 3.
How often the collection is required: Requests are made only when access to a non-federal low-level waste disposal facility is denied, which results in a threat to public health and safety and/or common defense and security.
4.
Who is required or asked to report: Generators of low-level waste who are denied access to a non-federal low 4evel waste facility.
5.
The number of annual respondents: No requests for emergency access have been received to date. It is estimated that up to one request would be made every three years.
6.
The number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request: It is estimated that 680 hours0.00787 days <br />0.189 hours <br />0.00112 weeks <br />2.5874e-4 months <br /> would be required to review the request, or approximately 227 hours0.00263 days <br />0.0631 hours <br />3.753307e-4 weeks <br />8.63735e-5 months <br /> per year.
i 1
7.
Abstract: 10 CFR Part 62 sets out the information which will have to be provided to the NRC by any low-level waste generator seeking emergency access to an operating low-level waste disposal facility.
The information is required to allow NRC to determine if denial of disposal constitutes a serious and immediate threat to public health and safety or common defense and security.
, Submit, by (insert date 60 days after publication in the Federal Reaister), comments that address the following questions:
)
{
1.
Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the NRC to properly perfonn its functions? Does the information have practical utility?
l 2.
Is the burden estimate accurate?
3.
Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected?
4.
How can the burden of the information collection be minimized, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology?
A copy of the draft supporting statement may be viewed free of charge at the NRC Public Document Room,2120 L Street NW, (lower level), Washington, DC. Members of the public who are in the Washington, DC, area can access this document via modem on the Public Document Room Bulletin Board (NRC's Advance Copy Document Library), NRC subsystem at FedWorld, 703-321-3339. Members of the public who are located outside of the Washington, DC, area can dial FedWorid, 1-800-303-9672, or use the FedWorld Intem
" %.w_,
address: fedworld. gov (Telnet). The document will be available on the bulletin board days after the signature date of this notice. If assistance is needed in accessi
4 4
4 i,
i j
Submit, by (insert date 60 days after publication in the Federal Reaister), comments that l
address the following questions:
i l
t 1.
Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the NRC to j
property perform its functions? Does the information have practical 1
}
utility?
?
i!'
[
2.
Is the burden estimate accurate?
4 i
3.
Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 4
4 information to be collected?
?
I 4.
How can the burden of the information collection be minimized, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of i
information technology?
t i
A copy of the draft supportmg statement may be viewed free of charge at the NRC Public 8
l 1
" Document Room,'2120 L 8treet NW, (lower level), Washington, DC. Members of the public
{
who are in the Washington, DC, area can access this document via modem on the Public -
l l
l
- Document Room. Bulletin Board (NRC's Advance Copy Document Library), NRC subsystem at FedWorld, 703-321-3339. Members of the public who are located outside of the j
Washington, DC, area can dial FedWorid, 1-800-303-9672, or use the FedWorld !ntemet i
j address; fedworld. gov (Telnet). The document will be available on the bulletin board for 30 f
days after the signature date of this notice. If assistance is needed in accessing the l
t j
7_.,
i 4
)
document, please contact the FedWorld help desk at 703-487-4608. Additional assistance in locating the document is available from the NRC Public Document Room, nationally at 1-800-i 397-4209, or within the Washington, DC, area at 202-634-3273.
f
- {
Comments and questions about the information collection requirements may be directed to j
the NRC Clearance Officer, Brenda Jo. Shelton, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, T-6 F33, Washington, DC,20555-0001, by telephone at (301) 415-7233, or by Intemet electronic i
j rnail at BJS1@NRC. GOV.
i Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of'u^,. 4md996.
4 4
4 For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
4 k
f l
/-
d / m Ji
' Gerald F. Cranford, Designadd Senior Official for Information Resources Management i.
i i
1 i
i T
i i
SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR i
10 CFR PART 62 CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS TO NON-FEDERAL AND REGIONAL LOW-LEVEL WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES j
(3150-0143)
I
~
EXTENSION REQUEST a
e j
Description of the Information Collection 4
10 CFR Part 62 sets out the information that will have to be provided to the Nuclear
}
Regulatory Commission (NRC) by any low-level radioactive waste (LLW) generator or State seeking emergency access to an operating low-level radioactive waste disposal facility pursuant to Section 6 of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 i
(PL 99-240, January 15,1986) (the Act).
i l
A.
Justification 1.
Need for the Collection of information The Act directs the States to develop their own LLW disposal facility or to form Compacts 3
and cooperate in the development of regional LLW disposal facilities, so that the new facilities will be in operation by January 1,1993. The Act establishes procedures and milestones for the selection and development of these dispcsal facilities. It also establishes a system of incentives for meeting the milestones, and penalties for failing to meet them. As "
provided by the Act, if States or Compacts without a LLW disposal facility fail to meet key milestones in the Act, the States or Compacts with operating non-Federal or regional LLW l
disposal facilities are authorized to demand additional fees for waste accepted for disposal j
from the LLW generators in the delinquent State or Compact, and ultimately to deny them j
further access to their facilities.
Section 6 of the Act provides that NRC can override denial of access decisions and grant l-generators " emergency access" to the operating non-Federal disposal facilities. To receive l
emergency access, a State or generator must request it and successfully demonstrata to NRC that access to LLW disposal is necessary in order to eliminate a serious and immediate threat to the public health and safety or the common defense and security, and that the threat cannot be mitigated by any attemative consistent with the public health and safety, j
including ceasing the activities that generate the waste. From the information provided by the requestor, NRC must be able to make both determinations prior to granting emergency access. NRC is also directed to grant extensions of emergency access and temporary i
emergency access under specified circumstances.
A j
j The Act also provides that as part of the overall decision to grant emergency access, NRC is to designate the operating LLW disposal facility / facilities which will receive the waste requiring emergency access. The requestor must submit the information necessary for NRC 1-to make sure that the LLW approved for emergency access disposal is compatible in form, 1
composition, waste package, radioactivity, etc., with the criteria established by the license or j
the licensing agreement of the facility designated to receive the waste.
i MD f~_
v t
-...m..
,. The Act provides that any requests for emergency access should contain all information and certifications the NRC may require to make its determinations.
The Commission has promulgated a rule (10 CFR Part 62) establishing the criteria and procedures to be used for granting emergency access to non-Federal and regional LLW disposal facilities. The rule sets out the information and certifications to be provided in a request for emergency access in order for NRC to dstermine whether emergency access should be granted and which disposal facilities should receive the wastes.
Section 62.11 specifies the number of copies that must be submitted with a request for emergency access. NRC requires that the original and nine copies be submitted with the request. This section also provides for publication in the Federal Reaister of a notice acknowledging receipt of a request for a determination and asking for public comment on the request to be submitted to the NRC within 10 days of the date of notice. Section 62.11 also provides that a copy of that notice be transmitted to specific potentially affected parties.
Section 62.12 specifies the information that must be provided to NRC in a request for emergency access. For each generator for which the request applies, general information identifying the generator of the LLW requiring emergency access, the activity responsible for generating the waste, a description of the waste including its composition, characteristics, volume, and packaging, is required. The NRC also requires that information conceming the circumstances which resulted in the need to request emergency access, and the impacts to the public health and safety or the common defense and security if emergency access is not gruted, be provided in requests for emergency access.
Section 62.13 specifies the information that must be provided to demonstrate that there are no mitigating attematives. Information detailing the process used by the requestor to identify, consider, and reject attematives to emergency access is required, as well as information conceming the actual attematives themselves.
Section 62.14 specifies the information that must be provided in a request for an extension of emergency access, including documentation that the generator of the LLW and the State in which the waste was generated have diligently acted to eliminate the need for emergency access (as is required by the Act).
Section 62.15 specifies that the Commission may require additional information from the requestor on any portion of the request for emergency access. Such additional information may be needed to clarify the material provided in the original request or to rectrfy deficiencies in the information submitted so that the NRC staff can make the necessary statutory findings.
This section also specifies that NRC will deny a request for emergency access if the information it needs is not provided by the requestor within 10 days.
2.
Aaency Use of Information The information required by NRC will be reviewed by the Division of Waste Management and other NRC offices and will enable NRC to make the required statutory findings:
that there is a serious and immediate threat to the public health and safety or the common defense and security, that there are no mitigating attematives available,
+
4
- i
. that a grant of emergency access to an operating non-Federal or regional LLW a
disposal facility is necessary, and 4
i which facility #acilities should receive the waste.
in case of requests for an extension of emergency access, the information required will also enable the Commission to determine whether the person making the request has diligently pursued attematives to emergency access.
i The Act directs the Commission to decide on requests for emergency access within 45 days i
i of their receipt. It is important if NRC is to be able to respond within this timeframe that all i
information necessary for making the required determinations be submitted as part of the j
initial request.
3.
Reduction of Burden throuah Infunr+R.6 Technalaav The regulation does not preclude the use of improved technology in information collection i
and recordkeeping. The approach used for Part 62 was to specify what information must be j
provided to NRC by the requestors but not to specify how the information must be maintained or presented, (For example, no application form is specified.) NRC anticipates that much of the information required by the rule would be collected and assembled as a part of the normal conduct of any business resulting in the continuing generation of LLW. Any advanced
{
technology employed by a generator to collect or manipulate such information could likely be j
applied to the Part 62 collection of information to reduce the associated burden.
4.
Effort to identify Duplication and Use Similar information a
j The information Requirements Control Automated System (IRCAS) was searched to j
determine duplication. None was found. It is probable that a person requesting emergency j
access will have general regulatory / licensing documents related to the activity on file with NRC which could contain similar information *o that required by the rule. NRC considered whether such information could be used in reviewing emergency access requests. However, because emergency situations will be involved, because NRC will have only a very short time 4
l to take necessary action (45 days), and because of the waste-specific and circumstance-i specific nature of the information required, NRC has concluded that it is not practical to j
attempt to search our files to assemble pertinent bits and pieces of information from j
tvidespMd sources when responding to requests for emergency access. Thus the usual practice of encouraging an applicant to incorporate information by reference is not suitable i
for emergency access requests.
in establishing the information requirements for requests for extensions of emergency access, 4
NRC has provided requestors with an opportunity to avoid some repetition in filing. Rather
}
than requesting the submittal of all new information, Section 62.14 specifies that requests for extensions of emergency access should include updates of the information provided in the q
original request.
5.
Effort to Reduce Small Business Burden Since access to LLW disposal may be denied to any generator of LLW, the rule could potentially affect both large and small generators. The generators of LLW are nuclear power plants, medical and acadmic facilities, radio-pharmaceutical manufacturers, fuel fabrication facilities and govemment licensees. Of these categories, all but the power plants, fuel
__._._.__._.m i
1
- 1 i
l fabrication facilities, and govemment licensees coM potentially include small entities.
However, since the generator itself triggers imp 5sition of the requirements of the rule by
~
requesting emergency access from NRC. mnw the information requirements are the same for both large and small entities, and si".a the total number of requests for emergency access is expected to be small, NRC does not believe it is possible to reduce the burden for small businesses either by less frequent or less complete information submittals.
6.
Conseauences to Federal Prooram or Pol;cv Activities if the Collection is Not Conducted or is Conducted Less Frecuently if the collection is not conducted, NRC will be unable to determine whether a serious and immediate threat to public health and safety or the common defense and security exists that warrants the granting of emergency access to the low-level waste disposal facility. NRC is not using Part 62 to impose a schedule for.a periodic collechon of information. The information mquirements set out in the rule will only apply when a LLW generator requests emergency access from NRC. Thus the frequency of collechon will not be controlled by NRC, but will be dictated by the needs of the generators.
7.
Circumstances Which Justify Variations from OMB Guidelines The rule contains two variations from OMB guidelines. The first is that the number of copies required for submittal of a request to NRC exceeds the number allowed by the guidelines.
The second is that the rule requires a person requesting emergency access to respond to requests for additional information in 10 days, which is less that the 30 days specified by the guidelines.
The rule requires that one original and nine copies of a request for emergency access be submitted to NRC to allow the Commission to complete the review mandated by Sechon 1
6(c)(1) of the Act in the short time provided. Requests for emergency access are likely to l
contain considerable amounts of detailed technicalinformation. In order to make the various determinations required of NRC within the 45 days provided in the Act, it will be necessary for several technical reviewers in the Division of Waste Management (DWM) to review requests concurrently with the reviewers in other NRC offices. The combination of the short review period, the many considerations involved in the evaluation of a request, the necessary complexity of NRC's review and decisionmaking process, and the need for concurrent review, dictate the requirements for filing multiple copies.
The following NRC staff organizations would require copies of a request:
1 Division of Waste Management (NMSS) 5 (LLWM Division Director 1)
(Project Manager Coordinating Review 1)
(One for Each of 3 Branches in Division 3)
Office of General Counsel 2
(Counsel for Rulemaking and Fuel Cycle 1)
(Counsel for Hearings & Enforcement 1)
I j
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1
or Division of Industrial and Medical y
Nuclear Safety i
or i
Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards t
{
Office of State Programs 1
=
I NRC Regional Administrator 1
i Total 10 As previously discussed, Section 62.15 allows a person requesting emergency access only j
10 days to provide NRC with any additional information identified by NRC as necessary for its j
review. This period of time is significantly shorter than the 30 days normally required for such information collection under the OMB guidelines. However, given that the request will I
be for an emergency situation, that NRC will have less than 45 days total to review requests for emergency access and arrive at its decisions, and given the complexity of the review and decisionmaking process, it would be impossible to accommodate a 30 day response time, and the 10 day response time for additional information is both necessary and reasonable.
8.
Consultations Outside NRC l
An opportunity to comment on the information collection requiremeno in 10 CFR Part 62 is l
being provided in the Federal Renister Notice published for this clearance extension.
f 9.
Payments or Gifts to Respondents Not applicable.
10.
Confidentiality of Information information collected will be a part of the legal file for each request and will be available to the public. The Commission has rules in place in 10 CFR 2.790 for processing and 1
protecting information impacting the national security. These rules would be applied to any information submitted to NRC by the requestor, by the Department of Defense (DOD), or the Department of Energy (DOE), under a claim of a serious and immediate threat to the common defense and security. Proprietary information will be adequately protected.
11.
Sensitive Questions None.
12.
Estimated Burden and Burden Hour Costs As previously explained, NRC is not actually imposing an annual burden on generators of LLW as a direct result of de rule. Congress intended emergency access to be used only under rare and unusual circumstances. A generator will only have tu develop the necessary information when submitting a request to NRC for emergency access. As a result, NRC
. -. - - -.. _ -. ~.. -. - - -. - -
l i j
expects that most LLW generators will not be burdened at all by the information collection
{
required by Part 62.
For those generators who must request emergency access, NRC estimates it will take 5 professional staff approximately 3 weeks (for a total of 600 hours0.00694 days <br />0.167 hours <br />9.920635e-4 weeks <br />2.283e-4 months <br />) to collect the information and perform the analyses necessary to support a request for emergency access. An i
additional 2 weeks of profess,ional staff and clerical time (80 hours9.259259e-4 days <br />0.0222 hours <br />1.322751e-4 weeks <br />3.044e-5 months <br />) will be required to process the paperwork necessary to complete a request for emergency access pursuant to j
the requirements set out in Part 62. Thus the total burden to submit a request would be 680 hours0.00787 days <br />0.189 hours <br />0.00112 weeks <br />2.5874e-4 months <br /> once every three years, or approximately 227 hours0.00263 days <br />0.0631 hours <br />3.753307e-4 weeks <br />8.63735e-5 months <br /> per year on an annualized basis.
I At $120 per hour, this would result in a cost of $27,240 per year. These numbers will vary depending on which kind of generators require emergency access and the circumstances involved.
l 13.
Estimate of Additional Costs l
None. For licensees under 10 CFR Part 62, it is most likely that purchases of equipment and services were made (1) prior to October 1,1995, (2) to achieve regulatory compliance with 3
requirements not associated with the information collection, (3) for reasons other than to l
provide information or keep records for the govemment, or (4) as part of customary and usual business or private practices.
14.
Estimated Annualized Cost to the Federal Govemment i
Because Congress intended that requests for emergency access be made only under rare i
and unusual circumstances, NRC may never receive a request for emergency access.
However, for the purposes of this clearance request, NRC estimates that we will receive one request every three years. Under this scenario, NRC has estimated the cost of responding to i
a single request for emergency access, and from that has estimated the annualized cost to i
i the Federal govemment associated with the implementation of the information collection i
required by Part 62.
l The following discusses the costs to the Federal govemment when only NRC resources are i
involved (a request based on a threat to the public health and safety) and then discusses the i
costs where it will be necessary to involve other agencies (a request based on a threat to the common defense and security).
a) Cost of responding to an individual request for emergency access submitted to NRC on 1
the basis of threat to the public health and safety:
As provided by Section 6 of the Act, NRC will have only 45 days to respond to each i
request for emergency access. NRC estimates that there will be approximately 30 l
working days available to conduct the review (45 calendar days = approximately 61/2 i
weeks = approximately 30 working days). NRC estimates that it will take 6 NRC staff j
to analyze the information submitted in a request for emergency access for a total of i
1440 hours0.0167 days <br />0.4 hours <br />0.00238 weeks <br />5.4792e-4 months <br /> per request. At $120 per hour, the cost for NRC to review a request for j
emergency access is projected to be $172,800. Thus, if one request is received every third year, the annualized cost to the Federal govemment will be approximately j
$57,600.
I
,eg-n m--.--
.y. _.
i
" 4 I
b) Cost of responding to a request for emergency access based on a threat to the common defense and security:
i The cost to the Federal govemment for the review of requests for emergency access based on a threat to the common defense and security would likely be higher than the j
above. For such requests, NRC intends to involve DOE and/or DOD in the decisionmaking process. NRC estimates that approximately five staff weeks would be 4
required for each emergency access request processed by DOE or DOD at a cost of
$24,000 (5 staff weeks = 200 hours0.00231 days <br />0.0556 hours <br />3.306878e-4 weeks <br />7.61e-5 months <br />, x $120/ hour). For each one submitted, NRC J
f estimates that the total cost to the Federal govemment could be approximately
$196,900. Thus, if one request is received every third year, the annualized cost to the j
Federal govemment could be approximately $65,600.
I NRC's costs are fully recovered by fee assessments to NRC licensees pursuant to 10 CFR Parts 170 and 171.
i 15.
Reasons for Chance in Burden 1
j There is no change in burden.
4 i
16.
Publication for Statistical Use None.
]
- 17. Egason for Not Disolavina the Evniration Dete The requirement is contained in a regulation. Amending the Code of Federal Regulations to i
display information that, in an annual publication, could become obsolete would be unduly burdensome and too difficult to keep current.
j 18.
Exceptions to the Certification Statement i
4 There are no exceptions.
i j
B.
Collection of Information Emolovina Statistical Methods j
Statistical methods are not usd in this collection of information.
l I
I i
l b
i f
i
_..