Raymond A. West; Consideration of Petition in Rulemaking Process, 18303-18304 [E9-9197]
Download as PDF
18303
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 74, No. 76
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 50
[PRM–50–89; NRC–2007–0018]
Raymond A. West; Consideration of
Petition in Rulemaking Process
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Closure of petition for
rulemaking.
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) has received a
petition for rulemaking dated December
14, 2007, and revised on December 19,
2007, filed by Raymond A. West
(petitioner). The petition was docketed
by the NRC and has been assigned
Docket No. PRM–50–89. The petitioner
is requesting that the NRC amend the
regulations that govern domestic
licensing of production and utilization
facilities at nuclear power plants.
Specifically, the petitioner is requesting
that the regulations that govern codes
and standards at nuclear power plants
be amended to provide applicants and
licensees a process for requesting NRC
approval of changes or modifications to
American Society of Mechanical
Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Code (ASME Code) cases that are listed
in the relevant NRC-approved regulatory
guides cited in the current regulations.
The petitioner believes that the current
requirements do not allow changes or
modifications to be proposed as
alternatives to NRC-approved ASME
Code cases. This action provides notice
that the NRC will consider the
petitioner’s request in the NRC’s
rulemaking process.
DATES: The petition for rulemaking
docketed as PRM–50–89 is closed on
April 22, 2009.
ADDRESSES: The NRC is not soliciting
comments at this time. Further NRC
action on the issues raised by this
petition will be accessible at the federal
rulemaking portal, https://
www.regulations.gov, by searching on
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:55 Apr 21, 2009
Jkt 217001
rulemaking docket ID: [NRC–2007–
0018].
You can access publicly available
documents related to this petition for
rulemaking using the following
methods:
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for documents filed under the following
rulemaking docket ID: [NRC–2007–
0018].
NRC’s Public Document Room: The
public may examine, and have copied
for a fee, publicly available documents
at the NRC’s Public Document Room
(PDR), Public File Area, Room O1F21,
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
NRC’s Agencywide Document Access
and Management System (ADAMS):
Publicly available documents created or
received at the NRC are available
electronically at the NRC’s Electronic
Reading Room at https://www.nrc.gov/
reading-rm/adams.html. From this page,
the public can gain entry into ADAMS,
which provides text and image files of
NRC’s public documents. If you do not
have access to ADAMS or if there are
problems in accessing the documents
located in ADAMS, contact the PDR
reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–
415–4737, or by e-mail to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: L.
Mark Padovan, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555. Telephone: 301–415–1423 or
Toll-Free: 1–800–368–5642 or by e-mail:
Mark.Padovan@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The NRC has received a petition for
rulemaking dated December 14, 2007, as
revised on December 19, 2007,
submitted by Raymond A. West
(petitioner). The petitioner requests that
the NRC amend 10 CFR Part 50,
‘‘Domestic Licensing of Production and
Utilization Facilities.’’ Specifically, the
petitioner requests that 10 CFR 50.55a,
‘‘Codes and Standards,’’ be amended to
permit licensees and applicants to
directly request approval of an
alternative for changes to NRC-approved
ASME Code cases.
The NRC determined that the petition
met the threshold sufficiency
requirements for a petition for
rulemaking under 10 CFR 2.802. The
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
petition was docketed by the NRC as
PRM–50–89 on December 26, 2007.
II. Discussion of the Petition
The petitioner states that 10 CFR
50.55a currently provides no defined
provisions to allow applicants or
licensees to request changes or
modifications to ASME Code cases
listed in NRC Regulatory Guides 1.84,
1.147, or 1.192 that NRC has approved
for use under §§ 50.55a(b)(4), (b)(5), and
(b)(6).
The petitioner states that
requirements in § 50.55a(a)(3) for
proposing alternatives to the
requirements in § 50.55a(a) are limited
to the requirements in paragraphs (c),
(d), (e), (f), and (g) of that section. The
petitioner further states that alternatives
to requirements in § 50.55a(b) are not
permitted. The petitioner believes that
although these requirements were
appropriate for many years, when
§§ 50.55a(b)(4), (b)(5), and (b)(6) were
added, § 50.55a(a)(3) could no longer be
used for ‘‘direct approval’’ of changes or
modifications to NRC-approved ASME
Code cases.
The petitioner notes that ASME Code
cases are written by ASME to provide
alternatives to existing requirements or
to introduce new technologies or
methodologies. The petitioner states
that it typically takes 4 years for a
particular ASME Code case to be
accepted for generic use by applicants
or licensees in regulatory guides. Most
applicants or licensees are willing to
wait for generic approval because of the
estimated minimum $12,000 cost to
request approval of a particular ASME
Code case before it is accepted for use
in a regulatory guide. The petitioner
states that, in many instances when an
attempt is made to use a newlyapproved ASME Code case, there are
one or two requirements in the code
case that cannot be met because:
(1) The need for the ASME Code case
has broadened beyond the scope of the
approved case,
(2) The committee that developed the
ASME Code case did not foresee all
possible uses of a particular case, or
(3) Limitations at a particular site may
preclude using an ASME Code case
without modification.
The petitioner is concerned that
problems occur when there is an
immediate need to use an ASME Code
case that contains most of the
requirements needed to resolve an issue
E:\FR\FM\22APP1.SGM
22APP1
18304
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 22, 2009 / Proposed Rules
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
but cannot be used without a
modification. The petitioner cites an
effort to mitigate primary water stress
corrosion cracking (PWSCC) in Alloy
82/182 welds after an ASME Code case
was approved by the NRC for use in the
appropriate regulatory guide for weld
overlay of stainless steel material but
not for austenitic nickel-based material
that was subject to potential PWSCC.
The petitioner states that this issue
resulted in licensees having to perform
a ‘‘work-a-round’’ by requesting usage of
some ASME Code cases with
modifications. The petitioner has
concluded that use of ASME Code cases
with modifications cannot be performed
under § 50.55a(a)(3).
The petitioner describes the ‘‘work-around’’ that is accepted by the NRC is
for an applicant or licensee to propose
an alternative to the governing ASME
Code requirements, such as using ASME
Code Section XI requirements, instead
of requesting usage of an ASME Code
case with a change or modification. The
petitioner states that the NRC allows
this type of alternative under
§ 50.55a(a)(3) because the provisions of
§ 50.55a(g) govern use of ASME Code
Section XI. The petitioner states that, if
the need for an alternative is urgent, the
only choice an applicant or licensee has
is to perform the ‘‘work-a-round’’
described above that the petitioner
states has been done routinely. The
petitioner has concluded that the NRC
has determined that no mechanism for
evaluating a licensee’s proposal to an
existing NRC approved voluntary
alternative is allowed by § 50.55a(a)(3)
because it would be ‘‘providing an
alternative to an alternative.’’
The petitioner has proposed draft
rulemaking text to address these issues.
The petitioner states that his proposed
amendments to § 50.55a will clarify this
regulation to correct administrative
issues associated with alternatives to
ASME Code cases when an urgent issue
arises that cannot be solved under the
current regulatory provisions.
III. NRC Review of the Petition
The NRC reviewed the issues raised
by the petitioner and determined the
following:
• Code cases often provide
alternatives that have technical merit
and, in many instances, are
incorporated into future ASME Code
editions.
• The ASME Code case process itself
constitutes a method of how a licensee
can seek to obtain ASME approval for a
variation of a previously-approved code
case. § 50.55a(a)(3) currently provides
specific approaches for obtaining NRC
approval of alternatives to ASME Code
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:55 Apr 21, 2009
Jkt 217001
provisions. Inasmuch as ASME Code
cases are analogous to ASME Code
provisions, it is not unreasonable to
provide an analogous regulatory
approach for obtaining NRC approval of
alternatives to ASME Code cases.
For these reasons, the NRC has
determined that the issues raised in this
petition should be considered in the
NRC’s Common Prioritization of
Rulemaking process. The NRC uses this
process to determine which rulemaking
actions to pursue based on available
resources and how the actions maintain
safety, ensure security of nuclear
facilities and materials, increase
effectiveness, and maintain openness
with stakeholders. Members of the
public can track the progress of the
issues raised in the petition as they go
through the rulemaking process via the
‘‘NRC Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual
Report (NUREG–0936),’’ or online at
https://www.regulations.gov; search on
rulemaking docket ID NRC–2007–0018.
The changes requested in the petition
may or may not be incorporated into 10
CFR 50.55a exactly as requested. With
this action, PRM–50–89 is considered
resolved and administratively closed.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day
of April 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
R.W. Borchardt,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. E9–9197 Filed 4–21–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 317
[Project No. P082900]
RIN 3084-AB12
Prohibitions on Market Manipulation in
Subtitle B of Title VIII of The Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007
Federal Trade Commission.
Revised notice of proposed
rulemaking; request for public
comment.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 811 of
Subtitle B of Title VIII of The Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007
(‘‘EISA’’),1 the Federal Trade
Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘FTC’’)
is issuing a Revised Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (‘‘RNPRM’’). The revised
proposed Rule in this RNPRM would
prohibit any person, directly or
indirectly, in connection with the
1 Section 811 is part of Subtitle B of Title VIII
of EISA, which has been codified at 42 U.S.C.
17301-17305.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
purchase or sale of crude oil, gasoline,
or petroleum distillates at wholesale,
from knowingly engaging in any act,
practice, or course of business—
including the making of any untrue
statement of material fact—that operates
or would operate as a fraud or deceit
upon any person, or intentionally failing
to state a material fact that under the
circumstances renders a statement made
by such person misleading, provided
that such omission distorts or tends to
distort market conditions for any such
product. Violations of the revised
proposed Rule, if such Rule is adopted,
would require proof by a preponderance
of the evidence. Anyone violating an
FTC rule promulgated under Section
811 of EISA, such as this revised
proposed Rule would be if adopted, may
face civil penalties of up to $1 million
per violation per day, in addition to any
relief available to the Commission under
the Federal Trade Commission Act
(‘‘FTC Act’’).2 The Commission invites
written comments on issues raised by
the revised proposed Rule and seeks
answers to the specific questions set
forth in Section IV.I. of this RNPRM.
DATES: Written comments must be
received by May 20, 2009. The
Commission does not contemplate any
extensions of this comment period.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are
invited to submit written comments
electronically or in paper form.
Comments should refer to ‘‘Market
Manipulation Rulemaking, P082900’’ to
facilitate the organization of comments.
Please note that your comment—
including your name and your state—
will be placed on the public record of
this proceeding, including on the
publicly accessible FTC website, at
(https://www.ftc.gov/os/
publiccomments.shtm).
Because comments will be made
public, they should not include any
sensitive personal information, such as
an individual’s Social Security Number;
date of birth; driver’s license number or
other state identification number or
foreign country equivalent; passport
number; financial account number; or
credit or debit card number. Comments
also should not include any sensitive
health information, such as medical
records or other individually
identifiable health information. In
addition, comments should not include
any ‘‘[t]rade secret or any commercial or
financial information which is obtained
from any person and which is privileged
or confidential,’’ as provided in Section
6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and
FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2).
2
15 U.S.C. 41-58.
E:\FR\FM\22APP1.SGM
22APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 76 (Wednesday, April 22, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18303-18304]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-9197]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 22, 2009 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 18303]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 50
[PRM-50-89; NRC-2007-0018]
Raymond A. West; Consideration of Petition in Rulemaking Process
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Closure of petition for rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has received a
petition for rulemaking dated December 14, 2007, and revised on
December 19, 2007, filed by Raymond A. West (petitioner). The petition
was docketed by the NRC and has been assigned Docket No. PRM-50-89. The
petitioner is requesting that the NRC amend the regulations that govern
domestic licensing of production and utilization facilities at nuclear
power plants. Specifically, the petitioner is requesting that the
regulations that govern codes and standards at nuclear power plants be
amended to provide applicants and licensees a process for requesting
NRC approval of changes or modifications to American Society of
Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code) cases
that are listed in the relevant NRC-approved regulatory guides cited in
the current regulations. The petitioner believes that the current
requirements do not allow changes or modifications to be proposed as
alternatives to NRC-approved ASME Code cases. This action provides
notice that the NRC will consider the petitioner's request in the NRC's
rulemaking process.
DATES: The petition for rulemaking docketed as PRM-50-89 is closed on
April 22, 2009.
ADDRESSES: The NRC is not soliciting comments at this time. Further NRC
action on the issues raised by this petition will be accessible at the
federal rulemaking portal, https://www.regulations.gov, by searching on
rulemaking docket ID: [NRC-2007-0018].
You can access publicly available documents related to this
petition for rulemaking using the following methods:
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and
search for documents filed under the following rulemaking docket ID:
[NRC-2007-0018].
NRC's Public Document Room: The public may examine, and have copied
for a fee, publicly available documents at the NRC's Public Document
Room (PDR), Public File Area, Room O1F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS):
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are
available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, the public can gain
entry into ADAMS, which provides text and image files of NRC's public
documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems
in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the PDR reference
staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: L. Mark Padovan, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555. Telephone: 301-415-1423 or Toll-Free: 1-800-368-5642 or by e-
mail: Mark.Padovan@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The NRC has received a petition for rulemaking dated December 14,
2007, as revised on December 19, 2007, submitted by Raymond A. West
(petitioner). The petitioner requests that the NRC amend 10 CFR Part
50, ``Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities.''
Specifically, the petitioner requests that 10 CFR 50.55a, ``Codes and
Standards,'' be amended to permit licensees and applicants to directly
request approval of an alternative for changes to NRC-approved ASME
Code cases.
The NRC determined that the petition met the threshold sufficiency
requirements for a petition for rulemaking under 10 CFR 2.802. The
petition was docketed by the NRC as PRM-50-89 on December 26, 2007.
II. Discussion of the Petition
The petitioner states that 10 CFR 50.55a currently provides no
defined provisions to allow applicants or licensees to request changes
or modifications to ASME Code cases listed in NRC Regulatory Guides
1.84, 1.147, or 1.192 that NRC has approved for use under Sec. Sec.
50.55a(b)(4), (b)(5), and (b)(6).
The petitioner states that requirements in Sec. 50.55a(a)(3) for
proposing alternatives to the requirements in Sec. 50.55a(a) are
limited to the requirements in paragraphs (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g)
of that section. The petitioner further states that alternatives to
requirements in Sec. 50.55a(b) are not permitted. The petitioner
believes that although these requirements were appropriate for many
years, when Sec. Sec. 50.55a(b)(4), (b)(5), and (b)(6) were added,
Sec. 50.55a(a)(3) could no longer be used for ``direct approval'' of
changes or modifications to NRC-approved ASME Code cases.
The petitioner notes that ASME Code cases are written by ASME to
provide alternatives to existing requirements or to introduce new
technologies or methodologies. The petitioner states that it typically
takes 4 years for a particular ASME Code case to be accepted for
generic use by applicants or licensees in regulatory guides. Most
applicants or licensees are willing to wait for generic approval
because of the estimated minimum $12,000 cost to request approval of a
particular ASME Code case before it is accepted for use in a regulatory
guide. The petitioner states that, in many instances when an attempt is
made to use a newly-approved ASME Code case, there are one or two
requirements in the code case that cannot be met because:
(1) The need for the ASME Code case has broadened beyond the scope
of the approved case,
(2) The committee that developed the ASME Code case did not foresee
all possible uses of a particular case, or
(3) Limitations at a particular site may preclude using an ASME
Code case without modification.
The petitioner is concerned that problems occur when there is an
immediate need to use an ASME Code case that contains most of the
requirements needed to resolve an issue
[[Page 18304]]
but cannot be used without a modification. The petitioner cites an
effort to mitigate primary water stress corrosion cracking (PWSCC) in
Alloy 82/182 welds after an ASME Code case was approved by the NRC for
use in the appropriate regulatory guide for weld overlay of stainless
steel material but not for austenitic nickel-based material that was
subject to potential PWSCC. The petitioner states that this issue
resulted in licensees having to perform a ``work-a-round'' by
requesting usage of some ASME Code cases with modifications. The
petitioner has concluded that use of ASME Code cases with modifications
cannot be performed under Sec. 50.55a(a)(3).
The petitioner describes the ``work-a-round'' that is accepted by
the NRC is for an applicant or licensee to propose an alternative to
the governing ASME Code requirements, such as using ASME Code Section
XI requirements, instead of requesting usage of an ASME Code case with
a change or modification. The petitioner states that the NRC allows
this type of alternative under Sec. 50.55a(a)(3) because the
provisions of Sec. 50.55a(g) govern use of ASME Code Section XI. The
petitioner states that, if the need for an alternative is urgent, the
only choice an applicant or licensee has is to perform the ``work-a-
round'' described above that the petitioner states has been done
routinely. The petitioner has concluded that the NRC has determined
that no mechanism for evaluating a licensee's proposal to an existing
NRC approved voluntary alternative is allowed by Sec. 50.55a(a)(3)
because it would be ``providing an alternative to an alternative.''
The petitioner has proposed draft rulemaking text to address these
issues. The petitioner states that his proposed amendments to Sec.
50.55a will clarify this regulation to correct administrative issues
associated with alternatives to ASME Code cases when an urgent issue
arises that cannot be solved under the current regulatory provisions.
III. NRC Review of the Petition
The NRC reviewed the issues raised by the petitioner and determined
the following:
Code cases often provide alternatives that have technical
merit and, in many instances, are incorporated into future ASME Code
editions.
The ASME Code case process itself constitutes a method of
how a licensee can seek to obtain ASME approval for a variation of a
previously-approved code case. Sec. 50.55a(a)(3) currently provides
specific approaches for obtaining NRC approval of alternatives to ASME
Code provisions. Inasmuch as ASME Code cases are analogous to ASME Code
provisions, it is not unreasonable to provide an analogous regulatory
approach for obtaining NRC approval of alternatives to ASME Code cases.
For these reasons, the NRC has determined that the issues raised in
this petition should be considered in the NRC's Common Prioritization
of Rulemaking process. The NRC uses this process to determine which
rulemaking actions to pursue based on available resources and how the
actions maintain safety, ensure security of nuclear facilities and
materials, increase effectiveness, and maintain openness with
stakeholders. Members of the public can track the progress of the
issues raised in the petition as they go through the rulemaking process
via the ``NRC Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Report (NUREG-0936),'' or
online at https://www.regulations.gov; search on rulemaking docket ID
NRC-2007-0018. The changes requested in the petition may or may not be
incorporated into 10 CFR 50.55a exactly as requested. With this action,
PRM-50-89 is considered resolved and administratively closed.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of April 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
R.W. Borchardt,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. E9-9197 Filed 4-21-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P