NRC Enforcement Policy; Proposed Plan for Major Revision, 3429-3431 [E7-1088]
Download as PDF
ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 16 / Thursday, January 25, 2007 / Notices
which is available at the Commission’s
PDR, located at One White Flint North,
Public File Area O1F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland. Publicly-available records
will be accessible from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System’s (ADAMS) Public Electronic
Reading Room on the Internet at the
NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/
reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a
request for a hearing or petition for
leave to intervene is filed by the above
date, the Commission or a presiding
officer designated by the Commission or
by the Chief Administrative Judge of the
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel, will rule on the request and/or
petition; and the Secretary or the Chief
Administrative Judge of the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board will issue a
notice of a hearing or an appropriate
order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a
petition for leave to intervene shall set
forth with particularity the interest of
the petitioner in the proceeding, and
how that interest may be affected by the
results of the proceeding. The petition
should specifically explain the reasons
why intervention should be permitted
with particular reference to the
following general requirements: (1) The
name, address and telephone number of
the requestor or petitioner; (2) the
nature of the requestor’s/petitioner’s
right under the Act to be made a party
to the proceeding; (3) the nature and
extent of the requestor’s/petitioner’s
property, financial, or other interest in
the proceeding; and (4) the possible
effect of any decision or order which
may be entered in the proceeding on the
requestor’s/petitioner’s interest. The
petition must also identify the specific
contentions which the petitioner/
requestor seeks to have litigated at the
proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a
specific statement of the issue of law or
fact to be raised or controverted. In
addition, the petitioner/requestor shall
provide a brief explanation of the bases
for the contention and a concise
statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion which support the contention
and on which the petitioner intends to
rely in proving the contention at the
hearing. The petitioner/requestor must
also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the
petitioner is aware and on which the
petitioner intends to rely to establish
those facts or expert opinion. The
petition must include sufficient
information to show that a genuine
dispute exists with the applicant on a
material issue of law or fact.
Contentions shall be limited to matters
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:58 Jan 24, 2007
Jkt 211001
within the scope of the amendment
under consideration. The contention
must be one which, if proven, would
entitle the petitioner to relief. A
petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy
these requirements with respect to at
least one contention will not be
permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become
parties to the proceeding, subject to any
limitations in the order granting leave to
intervene, and have the opportunity to
participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing.
If a hearing is requested, the
Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no
significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide
when the hearing is held. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards
consideration, the Commission may
issue the amendment and make it
immediately effective, notwithstanding
the request for a hearing. Any hearing
held would take place after issuance of
the amendment. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards
consideration, any hearing held would
take place before the issuance of any
amendment.
Nontimely requests and/or petitions
and contentions will not be entertained
absent a determination by the
Commission or the presiding officer of
the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
that the petition, request and/or the
contentions should be granted based on
a balancing of the factors specified in 10
CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (viii).
A request for a hearing or a petition
for leave to intervene must be filed by:
(1) First class mail addressed to the
Office of the Secretary of the
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express
mail, and expedited delivery services:
Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor,
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852,
Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; (3) e-mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV; or (4)
facsimile transmission addressed to the
Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC, Attention: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff at (301) 415–1101,
verification number is (301) 415–1966.
A copy of the request for hearing and
petition for leave to intervene should
also be sent to the Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3429
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, and it is requested that copies be
transmitted either by means of facsimile
transmission to 301–415–3725 or by email to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy
of the request for hearing and petition
for leave to intervene should also be
sent to Jeffrie J. Keenan, Esquire,
Nuclear Business Unit—N21, P.O. Box
236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038,
attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for
amendment dated January 18, 2007,
which is available for public inspection
at the Commission’s PDR, located at
One White Flint North, File Public Area
O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publiclyavailable records will be accessible from
the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading
Room on the Internet at the NRC Web
site, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. Persons who do not have
access to ADAMS or who encounter
problems in accessing the documents
located in ADAMS, should contact the
NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone
at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or
by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day
of January, 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Richard B. Ennis,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch I–2, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7–1087 Filed 1–24–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
NRC Enforcement Policy; Proposed
Plan for Major Revision
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed revision;
solicitation of written comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is examining its
Enforcement Policy (Enforcement Policy
or Policy) and plans a major revision to
clarify use of enforcement terminology
and address enforcement issues in areas
currently not covered in the Policy,
including, for example, the agency’s use
of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
in enforcement cases. The NRC requests
comments on (1) what specific topics, if
any, should be added or removed from
the Policy; and (2) what topics currently
addressed in the Policy, if any, require
additional guidance. The NRC is
soliciting written comments from
E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM
25JAN1
3430
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 16 / Thursday, January 25, 2007 / Notices
ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
interested parties including public
interest groups, states, members of the
public and the regulated industry, i.e.,
both reactor and materials licensees,
vendors, and contractors. This request is
intended to assist the NRC in its review
of the Enforcement Policy; NRC does
not intend to modify its emphasis on
compliance with NRC requirements.
DATES: The comment period expires
March 26, 2007. This time period allows
for the public to respond to the specific
questions posed above in this notice as
well as the opportunity to provide
general comments on the revision of the
Policy. Comments received after this
date will be considered if it is practical
to do so, but the Commission is able to
assure consideration only for comments
received on or before this date.
ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed
revision submitted in writing or in
electronic form will be made available
for public inspection. Because your
comments will not be edited to remove
any identifying or contact information,
the NRC cautions you against including
information such as social security
numbers or other sensitive personal
information in your submission. You
may submit comments by any one of the
following methods:
Mail comments to: Michael T. Lesar,
Chief, Rulemaking, Directives, and
Editing Branch, Division of
Administrative Services, Office of
Administration, Mail Stop: T6D59, U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001.
E-mail comments to: nrcrep@nrc.gov.
Hand deliver comments to: 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852,
between the hours of 7:45 am and 4:15
pm, Federal workdays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Maria E. Schwartz, Office of
Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555;
mes@nrc.gov, (301) 415–1888.
SUPPLEMENTARY BACKGROUND:
I. Background
The NRC Enforcement Policy contains
the enforcement policy and procedures
that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) uses to initiate and
review enforcement actions in response
to violations of NRC requirements. The
primary purpose of the Enforcement
Policy is to support the NRC’s overall
safety mission, i.e., to protect the public
health and safety and the environment,
and to assure the common defense and
security. Because it is a policy statement
and not a regulation, the Commission
may deviate from this statement of
policy as appropriate under the
circumstances of a particular case.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:58 Jan 24, 2007
Jkt 211001
The Enforcement Policy was first
published in the Federal Register on
October 7, 1980 (46 FR 66754), as an
interim policy. The Commission
published a final version of the Policy
on March 9, 1982 (47 FR 9987). The
Enforcement Policy has been modified
on a number of occasions to address
changing requirements and additional
experience and on June 30, 1995 (60 FR
34381), a major revision of the Policy
was published. The NRC maintains the
Enforcement Policy on its Web site at
https://www.nrc.gov; select What We Do,
Enforcement, then Enforcement Policy.
The goal of the Policy is to support
the NRC’s safety mission by
emphasizing the importance of
compliance with regulatory
requirements, and encouraging prompt
identification, and prompt,
comprehensive correction of violations.
Revisions to the Policy have
consistently reflected this commitment:
For example, in 1998, the NRC changed
its inspection procedures to address the
Reactor Oversight Process (ROP)
initiative. This has been reflected in the
Policy’s use of risk insights to assess the
significance of violations whenever
possible. While this may result in fewer
Notices of Violation being issued
(because of a greater emphasis on the
use of non-cited violations), it has not
reduced the agency’s emphasis on the
importance of compliance with NRC
requirements. Another example
involves the NRC’s development of a
pilot program in 2005 which focuses on
the use of Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) for certain kinds of
enforcement cases. The NRC
enforcement staff has used ADR to
resolve reactor, fuel facility, and
materials enforcement cases. While the
use of ADR in enforcement raises
unique issues, it emphasizes creative,
cooperative approaches to handling
conflicts in lieu of adversarial
procedures.
The NRC is again considering a major
revision of its Enforcement Policy. As
discussed above, since it was first
published in 1980, sections of the Policy
have been updated and additional
sections have been included. Terms
used under conventional enforcement
are now associated with the significance
determination process (SDP) performed
under the ROP as well; therefore, the
use of these terms must be clarified. In
addition, there are areas that are not
directly addressed in the Supplements
of the Enforcement Policy, such as the
enforcement issues associated with
combined licenses for the proposed new
reactors and the construction phase of
proposed fuel facilities as well as
recently promulgated requirements in
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the safeguards and security area. These
areas must be addressed either by
adding them to the text of the existing
Policy and Supplements or by revising
the Policy and developing new
Supplements. Finally, the format of the
Enforcement Policy may need to be
reorganized to reflect the changes that
have been made to it.
II. Proposed Plan
The NRC envisions revising the
Enforcement Policy so that the policy
statement and Supplements addressing
conventional enforcement would be
followed by sections addressing the
enforcement processes that differ in
some way from conventional
enforcement. For example, currently the
discussion in the Policy addressing
Predecisional Enforcement Conferences
(PECs) contains information regarding
attendance by a whistle blower. In fact,
third party (whistle blower) invitations
are unique to discrimination cases and
could reasonably be addressed, along
with all of the other unique
discrimination issues, in a selfcontained section addressing
discrimination enforcement cases.
Providing self-contained sections would
make it easier to add (and potentially
delete) them in the future, if necessary.
Under this approach, the ROP would be
the first ‘‘variation’’ on conventional
enforcement. If the agency takes this
approach, Sections IV through VII or
VIII of the current Enforcement Policy
could be combined in the conventional
enforcement process which would be
followed by the NRC’s policy regarding
the use of the ROP in enforcement, etc.
The following draft Table of Contents
would be consistent with the approach
outlined above:
Preface
Background and Definitions
I. Introduction and Purpose.
II. Statutory Authority and Procedural
Framework.
III. Responsibilities.
IV. The Enforcement Process.
A. Assigning Severity Level (Remove
section IV.5 which discusses ROP).
B. Severity Level vis-a-vis Activity Areas.
C. Predecisional Enforcement Conferences
(Remove discussion involving
discrimination cases).
D. Disposition of Violations (Remove
section VI.A.1 and combine reactor noncited violations (NCVs) with all other
NCVs such that there is one discussion
of NCVs. Put the reactor cases associated
with ROP in the ROP section.)
1. Wrongdoing.
2. Inaccurate and Incomplete Information.
E. Formal Enforcement Sanctions.
1. Notices of Violation.
2. Civil Penalties.
3. Orders.
E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM
25JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 16 / Thursday, January 25, 2007 / Notices
ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
F. Administrative Enforcement Sanctions.
1. Demands for Information.
2. Confirmatory Action Letters.
3. Letters of Reprimand.
G. Exercise of Enforcement Discretion.
1. Escalation of Enforcement Sanctions.
2. Mitigation of Enforcement Sanctions.
3. Notices of Enforcement Discretion
(NOEDs) for Power Reactors and Gaseous
Diffusion Plants.
4. The Use of Discretion During the
Adoption of New Requirements.
H. Public Disclosure of Enforcement
Actions (existing Sections XII).
I. Reopening Closed Enforcement Actions,
(existing Section XIII).
V. Enforcement and the Reactor Oversight
Process (ROP): Operating Reactors.
VI. Enforcement Actions Involving
Individuals (Incorporate existing Section
XI, ‘‘Referrals to the Department of
Justice’’ into this Section.)
VII. Discrimination.
VIII. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).
IX. Follow up with any additional subject
areas that may warrant a few paragraphs
segregated from the main policy
discussion, e.g., security/safeguards, the
lost source policy, interim enforcement
regarding certain fire protection issues.
X. Supplements.
A. Health Physics.
B. Reactors.
1. Operating reactors.
2. Part 50 Facility Construction.
3. Part 52 Combined Licenses.
4. Fitness for Duty.
C. Facility Security and Safeguards—
1. Physical Protection of Plants and
Materials.
2. Facility Security Clearance and
Safeguarding of National Security
Information and Restricted Data.
D. Fuel Cycle and Materials Operations.
1. Gaseous Diffusion Plants.
2. Gas Centrifuge Uranium Recovery
Facilities.
3. Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication
Facility.
E. Materials Safeguards.
F. Emergency Preparedness.
G. Transportation.
H. Waste Disposal.
I. Miscellaneous Matters.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:58 Jan 24, 2007
Jkt 211001
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Cynthia A. Carpenter,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E7–1088 Filed 1–24–07; 8:45 am]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETINGS: Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
DATE: Week of January 29, 2007.
PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference
Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland.
STATUS: Public and closed.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Advisory Committee on Nuclear
Waste; Meeting on Planning and
Procedures; Notice of Meeting
The Advisory Committee on Nuclear
Waste (ACNW) will hold a Planning and
Procedures meeting on February 15,
2007, Room T–2B1, 11545 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire
meeting will be open to public
attendance, with the exception of a
portion that may be closed pursuant to
5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss
organizational and personnel matters
that relate solely to internal personnel
rules and practices of ACNW, and
information the release of which would
constitute a clearly unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy.
The agenda for the subject meeting
shall be as follows:
Sunshine Act Federal Register Notice
ADDITIONAL MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED
Week of January 29, 2007
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
The Committee will discuss proposed
ACNW activities and related matters.
The purpose of this meeting is to gather
information, analyze relevant issues and
facts, and formulate proposed positions
and actions, as appropriate, for
deliberation by the full Committee.
Members of the public desiring to
provide oral statements and/or written
comments should notify the Designated
Federal Official, Mr. Antonio F. Dias
(Telephone: 301/415–6805) between
8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. (ET) five days prior
to the meeting, if possible, so that
appropriate arrangements can be made.
Electronic recordings will be permitted
only during those portions of the
meeting that are open to the public.
Further information regarding this
meeting can be obtained by contacting
the Designated Federal Official between
8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. (ET). Persons
planning to attend this meeting are
urged to contact the above named
individual at least two working days
prior to the meeting to be advised of any
potential changes in the agenda.
1:30 p.m.
Discussion of Security Issues
(Closed—Ex. 1).
*
*
*
*
*
* The schedule for Commission
meetings is subject to change on short
notice. To verify the status of meetings
call (recording)—(301) 415–1292.
Contact person for more information:
Michelle Schroll, (301) 415–1662.
*
*
*
*
*
The NRC Commission Meeting
Schedule can be found on the Internet
at: https://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/
policy-making/schedule.html.
*
*
*
*
*
The NRC provides reasonable
accommodation to individuals with
disabilities where appropriate. If you
need a reasonable accommodation to
participate in these public meetings, or
need this meeting notice or the
transcript or other information from the
public meetings in another format (e.g.,
braille, large print), please notify the
NRC’s Disability Program Coordinator,
Deborah Chan, at 301–415–7041, TDD:
301–415–2100, or by e-mail at
DLC@nrc.gov. Determinations on
requests for reasonable accommodation
will be made on a case-by-case basis.
*
*
*
*
*
This notice is distributed by mail to
several hundred subscribers; if you no
longer wish to receive it, or would like
to be added to the distribution, please
contact the Office of the Secretary,
Washington, DC 20555 (301–415–1969).
In addition, distribution of this meeting
notice over the Internet system is
available. If you are interested in
receiving this Commission meeting
schedule electronically, please send an
electronic message to dkw@nrc.gov.
Dated: January 18, 2007.
Antonio F. Dias,
Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.
[FR Doc. E7–1086 Filed 1–24–07; 8:45 am]
Dated: January 22, 2007.
R. Michelle Schroll,
Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 07–337 Filed 1–23–07; 12:53 pm]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
The Commission is aware that
enforcement actions deliver regulatory
messages. Based on this tenet, the goals
of this revision are to ensure that the
Enforcement Policy (1) continues to
reflect the Commission’s focus on
safety, i.e., the need for licensees to
identify and correct violations, to
address root causes, and to be
responsive to initial opportunities to
identify and prevent violations; (2)
appropriately addresses the various
subject areas that the NRC regulates; and
(3) provides a framework that supports
consistent implementation, recognizing
that each enforcement action is
dependent on the specific
circumstances of the case.
Dated at Rockville, MD this 17th day of
January, 2007.
3431
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
Thursday, February 15, 2007—8:30
a.m.–9:30 a.m.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM
25JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 16 (Thursday, January 25, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3429-3431]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-1088]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
NRC Enforcement Policy; Proposed Plan for Major Revision
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed revision; solicitation of written comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is examining its
Enforcement Policy (Enforcement Policy or Policy) and plans a major
revision to clarify use of enforcement terminology and address
enforcement issues in areas currently not covered in the Policy,
including, for example, the agency's use of Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) in enforcement cases. The NRC requests comments on (1)
what specific topics, if any, should be added or removed from the
Policy; and (2) what topics currently addressed in the Policy, if any,
require additional guidance. The NRC is soliciting written comments
from
[[Page 3430]]
interested parties including public interest groups, states, members of
the public and the regulated industry, i.e., both reactor and materials
licensees, vendors, and contractors. This request is intended to assist
the NRC in its review of the Enforcement Policy; NRC does not intend to
modify its emphasis on compliance with NRC requirements.
DATES: The comment period expires March 26, 2007. This time period
allows for the public to respond to the specific questions posed above
in this notice as well as the opportunity to provide general comments
on the revision of the Policy. Comments received after this date will
be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able
to assure consideration only for comments received on or before this
date.
ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed revision submitted in writing or
in electronic form will be made available for public inspection.
Because your comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or
contact information, the NRC cautions you against including information
such as social security numbers or other sensitive personal information
in your submission. You may submit comments by any one of the following
methods:
Mail comments to: Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rulemaking, Directives,
and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of
Administration, Mail Stop: T6D59, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001.
E-mail comments to: nrcrep@nrc.gov.
Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD
20852, between the hours of 7:45 am and 4:15 pm, Federal workdays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maria E. Schwartz, Office of
Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555;
mes@nrc.gov, (301) 415-1888.
SUPPLEMENTARY BACKGROUND:
I. Background
The NRC Enforcement Policy contains the enforcement policy and
procedures that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) uses to
initiate and review enforcement actions in response to violations of
NRC requirements. The primary purpose of the Enforcement Policy is to
support the NRC's overall safety mission, i.e., to protect the public
health and safety and the environment, and to assure the common defense
and security. Because it is a policy statement and not a regulation,
the Commission may deviate from this statement of policy as appropriate
under the circumstances of a particular case.
The Enforcement Policy was first published in the Federal Register
on October 7, 1980 (46 FR 66754), as an interim policy. The Commission
published a final version of the Policy on March 9, 1982 (47 FR 9987).
The Enforcement Policy has been modified on a number of occasions to
address changing requirements and additional experience and on June 30,
1995 (60 FR 34381), a major revision of the Policy was published. The
NRC maintains the Enforcement Policy on its Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov; select What We Do, Enforcement, then Enforcement Policy.
The goal of the Policy is to support the NRC's safety mission by
emphasizing the importance of compliance with regulatory requirements,
and encouraging prompt identification, and prompt, comprehensive
correction of violations. Revisions to the Policy have consistently
reflected this commitment: For example, in 1998, the NRC changed its
inspection procedures to address the Reactor Oversight Process (ROP)
initiative. This has been reflected in the Policy's use of risk
insights to assess the significance of violations whenever possible.
While this may result in fewer Notices of Violation being issued
(because of a greater emphasis on the use of non-cited violations), it
has not reduced the agency's emphasis on the importance of compliance
with NRC requirements. Another example involves the NRC's development
of a pilot program in 2005 which focuses on the use of Alternative
Dispute Resolution (ADR) for certain kinds of enforcement cases. The
NRC enforcement staff has used ADR to resolve reactor, fuel facility,
and materials enforcement cases. While the use of ADR in enforcement
raises unique issues, it emphasizes creative, cooperative approaches to
handling conflicts in lieu of adversarial procedures.
The NRC is again considering a major revision of its Enforcement
Policy. As discussed above, since it was first published in 1980,
sections of the Policy have been updated and additional sections have
been included. Terms used under conventional enforcement are now
associated with the significance determination process (SDP) performed
under the ROP as well; therefore, the use of these terms must be
clarified. In addition, there are areas that are not directly addressed
in the Supplements of the Enforcement Policy, such as the enforcement
issues associated with combined licenses for the proposed new reactors
and the construction phase of proposed fuel facilities as well as
recently promulgated requirements in the safeguards and security area.
These areas must be addressed either by adding them to the text of the
existing Policy and Supplements or by revising the Policy and
developing new Supplements. Finally, the format of the Enforcement
Policy may need to be reorganized to reflect the changes that have been
made to it.
II. Proposed Plan
The NRC envisions revising the Enforcement Policy so that the
policy statement and Supplements addressing conventional enforcement
would be followed by sections addressing the enforcement processes that
differ in some way from conventional enforcement. For example,
currently the discussion in the Policy addressing Predecisional
Enforcement Conferences (PECs) contains information regarding
attendance by a whistle blower. In fact, third party (whistle blower)
invitations are unique to discrimination cases and could reasonably be
addressed, along with all of the other unique discrimination issues, in
a self-contained section addressing discrimination enforcement cases.
Providing self-contained sections would make it easier to add (and
potentially delete) them in the future, if necessary. Under this
approach, the ROP would be the first ``variation'' on conventional
enforcement. If the agency takes this approach, Sections IV through VII
or VIII of the current Enforcement Policy could be combined in the
conventional enforcement process which would be followed by the NRC's
policy regarding the use of the ROP in enforcement, etc.
The following draft Table of Contents would be consistent with the
approach outlined above:
Preface
Background and Definitions
I. Introduction and Purpose.
II. Statutory Authority and Procedural Framework.
III. Responsibilities.
IV. The Enforcement Process.
A. Assigning Severity Level (Remove section IV.5 which discusses
ROP).
B. Severity Level vis-a-vis Activity Areas.
C. Predecisional Enforcement Conferences (Remove discussion
involving discrimination cases).
D. Disposition of Violations (Remove section VI.A.1 and combine
reactor non-cited violations (NCVs) with all other NCVs such that
there is one discussion of NCVs. Put the reactor cases associated
with ROP in the ROP section.)
1. Wrongdoing.
2. Inaccurate and Incomplete Information.
E. Formal Enforcement Sanctions.
1. Notices of Violation.
2. Civil Penalties.
3. Orders.
[[Page 3431]]
F. Administrative Enforcement Sanctions.
1. Demands for Information.
2. Confirmatory Action Letters.
3. Letters of Reprimand.
G. Exercise of Enforcement Discretion.
1. Escalation of Enforcement Sanctions.
2. Mitigation of Enforcement Sanctions.
3. Notices of Enforcement Discretion (NOEDs) for Power Reactors
and Gaseous Diffusion Plants.
4. The Use of Discretion During the Adoption of New
Requirements.
H. Public Disclosure of Enforcement Actions (existing Sections
XII).
I. Reopening Closed Enforcement Actions, (existing Section
XIII).
V. Enforcement and the Reactor Oversight Process (ROP): Operating
Reactors.
VI. Enforcement Actions Involving Individuals (Incorporate existing
Section XI, ``Referrals to the Department of Justice'' into this
Section.)
VII. Discrimination.
VIII. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).
IX. Follow up with any additional subject areas that may warrant a
few paragraphs segregated from the main policy discussion, e.g.,
security/safeguards, the lost source policy, interim enforcement
regarding certain fire protection issues.
X. Supplements.
A. Health Physics.
B. Reactors.
1. Operating reactors.
2. Part 50 Facility Construction.
3. Part 52 Combined Licenses.
4. Fitness for Duty.
C. Facility Security and Safeguards--
1. Physical Protection of Plants and Materials.
2. Facility Security Clearance and Safeguarding of National
Security Information and Restricted Data.
D. Fuel Cycle and Materials Operations.
1. Gaseous Diffusion Plants.
2. Gas Centrifuge Uranium Recovery Facilities.
3. Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility.
E. Materials Safeguards.
F. Emergency Preparedness.
G. Transportation.
H. Waste Disposal.
I. Miscellaneous Matters.
The Commission is aware that enforcement actions deliver regulatory
messages. Based on this tenet, the goals of this revision are to ensure
that the Enforcement Policy (1) continues to reflect the Commission's
focus on safety, i.e., the need for licensees to identify and correct
violations, to address root causes, and to be responsive to initial
opportunities to identify and prevent violations; (2) appropriately
addresses the various subject areas that the NRC regulates; and (3)
provides a framework that supports consistent implementation,
recognizing that each enforcement action is dependent on the specific
circumstances of the case.
Dated at Rockville, MD this 17th day of January, 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Cynthia A. Carpenter,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E7-1088 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P