Criminal Penalties; Unauthorized Introduction of Weapons, 52667-52675 [E9-24566]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
a public meeting and all entities, both
large and small, were able to express
views on the issues.
This rule does not impose additional
reporting or recordkeeping requirements
on either small or large Oregon and
Washington pear handlers. As with all
Federal marketing order programs,
reports and forms are periodically
reviewed to reduce information
requirements and duplication by
industry and public sector agencies. As
noted in the initial regulatory flexibility
analysis, USDA has not identified any
relevant Federal rules that duplicate,
overlap, or conflict with this rule.
AMS is committed to complying with
the E-Government Act, to promote the
use of the Internet and other
information technologies to provide
increased opportunities for citizen
access to Government information and
services, and for other purposes.
A proposed rule regarding this action
was published in the Federal Register
on August 26, 2009 (FR 74 43082).
Copies of the rule were made available
to all Oregon and Washington processed
pear handlers. The proposal was also
made available through the Internet by
USDA and the Office of the Federal
Register. A 30-day comment period
ending September 25, 2009, was
provided so that persons interested in
the proposal could respond. No
comments were received.
A small business guide on complying
with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop
marketing agreements and order may be
viewed at: https://www.ams.usda.gov/
AMSv1.0/ams.fetchTemplateData.do?
template=TemplateN&page=Marketing
OrdersSmallBusinessGuide. Any
questions about the compliance guide
should be sent to Jay Guerber at the
previously mentioned address in the
basis; (3) handlers are aware of this
action, which was recommended by the
PPC at a public meeting and is similar
to other assessment rate actions issued
in past years; and (4) a 30-day comment
period was provided for in the proposed
rule.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 927
Marketing agreements, Pears,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
■ For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 927 is amended as
follows:
PART 927—PEARS GROWN IN
OREGON AND WASHINGTON
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 927 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
2. In § 927.237, the introductory text
and paragraph (a) are revised to read as
follows:
■
§ 927.237
rate.
Processed pear assessment
On or after July 1, 2009, the following
base rates of assessment for pears for
processing are established for the
Processed Pear Committee:
(a) $8.41 per ton for any or all
varieties or subvarieties of pears for
canning classified as ‘‘summer/fall’’
excluding pears for other methods of
processing;
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: October 6, 2009.
Rayne Pegg,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. E9–24681 Filed 10–13–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
After consideration of all relevant
material presented, including the
information and recommendation
submitted by the PCC and other
available information, it is hereby found
that this rule, as hereinafter set forth,
will tend to effectuate the declared
policy of the Act.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also
found and determined that good cause
exists for not postponing the effective
date of this rule until 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register
because (1) The 2009–2010 fiscal period
began on July 1, 2009, and the order
requires that the assessment rate for
each fiscal period apply to all pears for
canning handled during such fiscal
period; (2) the PPC needs to have
sufficient funds to pay its expenses,
which are incurred on a continuous
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:31 Oct 13, 2009
Jkt 220001
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 73
[NRC–2008–0458]
RIN 3150–AI31
Criminal Penalties; Unauthorized
Introduction of Weapons
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
subject to the regulatory authority of the
NRC. This action is necessary to
implement section 229, ‘‘Trespass on
Commission Installations,’’ of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(AEA).
DATES: This rule is effective on April 12,
2010.
ADDRESSES: You can access publicly
available documents related to this
document using the following methods:
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for documents filed under Docket ID
[NRC–2008–0458]. Address questions
about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher at
301–415–5905, e-mail
Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR):
The public may examine and have
copied for a fee publicly available
documents at the NRC’s PDR, Public
File Area O1 F21, One White Flint
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland.
NRC’s Agencywide Documents 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 NRC’s
PDR reference staff at 1–800–397–4209,
301–415–4737, or by e-mail to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James E. Adler, Office of the General
Counsel, telephone 301–415–1656,
e-mail: james.adler@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Public Comments
III. Discussion of the Final Rule
IV. Voluntary Consensus Standard
V. Finding of No Significant Environmental
Impact: Environmental Assessment
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
VII. Regulatory Analysis
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
IX. Backfit Analysis
X. Congressional Review Act
XI. Agreement State Compatibility
I. Background
The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is amending its
regulations to authorize the imposition
of Federal criminal penalties on those
who, without authorization, introduce
weapons or explosives into specified
classes of facilities and installations
SUMMARY:
52667
Section 654 of the Energy Policy Act
of 2005, ‘‘Unauthorized Introduction of
Dangerous Weapons,’’ amended § 229 of
the AEA (42 U.S.C. 2278a) to authorize
the NRC to issue regulations that make
it a Federal crime to bring, without
authorization, weapons or explosives
into facilities designated by the NRC.
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
52668
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
This rule implements that legislative
provision.
In 1956, Congress added § 229 to the
AEA. That section made it a Federal
crime to bring weapons or explosives,
without authorization, into facilities
owned by the Atomic Energy
Commission. With the enactment of the
Energy Reorganization Act in 1974, this
provision covered facilities now owned
or occupied by the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) as well as the buildings
occupied by the NRC. Section 229 of the
AEA did not extend to facilities
regulated by the NRC. Over the years,
there were incidents where individuals
were successful in bringing weapons
into NRC-regulated facilities without
authorization. Fortunately, the
individuals were not terrorists or others
with malevolent intent and no damage
was done. In such circumstances, the
NRC had the ability to take action
against its licensee for violation of
security requirements, but could not
refer the matter to the U.S. Department
of Justice (DOJ) for criminal prosecution
of the individual; any criminal
sanctions had to be sought by the State
under State law. Beginning in the late
1980s, the NRC submitted legislative
proposals to Congress requesting that
Congress enact legislation that would
make it a Federal crime to bring
weapons or explosives, without
authorization, into NRC-designated
facilities.
Congress enacted the requested
legislation in § 654 of the Energy Policy
Act of 2005, amending § 229 of the AEA
(42 U.S.C. 2278a). This section
authorizes the NRC to
issue regulations relating to the entry upon
or carrying, transporting, or otherwise
introducing or causing to be introduced any
dangerous weapon, explosive, or other
dangerous instrument or material likely to
produce substantial injury or damage to
person or property, into or upon any facility,
installation, or real property subject to the
jurisdiction, administration, in the custody of
the Commission, or subject to the licensing
authority of the Commission or certification
by the Commission under this Act or any
other Act.
cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Section 229 also requires that ‘‘every
such regulation of the Commission shall
be posted conspicuously at the location
involved.’’
II. Public Comments
The NRC published a proposed rule
on September 3, 2008 (73 FR 51378) and
provided the opportunity for public
comment. The Federal Register notice
for the proposed rule identified certain
issues about which the NRC was
particularly interested in receiving
comments. These issues included:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:31 Oct 13, 2009
Jkt 220001
(1) Whether the rule’s scope should be
extended beyond the facilities listed in
the proposed rule to additionally cover
hospitals and other classes of facilities
licensed to possess nationally tracked
sources that are in the National Source
Tracking System;
(2) Whether terms used in the
proposed rule such as ‘‘dangerous
weapon,’’ ‘‘dangerous instrument or
material,’’ and ‘‘explosive’’ should be
further defined, and what such
definitions should be;
(3) Whether such definitions, if
provided at all, should be set forth in
the rule itself or in a guidance
document;
(4) Whether the proposed 90-day
implementation period provides
licensees sufficient time to acquire and
install the signs that the rule would
require licensees to post;
(5) Whether the proposed rule’s
language regarding sign location is
sufficient; and
(6) Whether the proposed rule’s
performance-based standard (i.e.,
‘‘easily readable day and night’’) should
be replaced with more detailed
requirements or with a reference to a
preexisting signage standard, such as
the standards promulgated under the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Seventeen comments were received.
A few commenters addressed the issue
of which facilities should be covered by
the rule. Some of these commenters
favored extending coverage to hospitals
and other facilities possessing nuclear
or radioactive material. Reasons given
by such commenters included:
(1) Anyone who introduces a
dangerous weapon, explosive, or other
dangerous material into such a facility
most likely intends to do harm;
(2) Anyone bringing such an item into
a hospital or other facility that stores
nuclear or radioactive material should
expect to be penalized for doing so;
(3) Signs will ensure that the rule is
not violated by accident, although
anyone who intends to cause harm in a
covered facility would likely not be
deterred by the rule anyway; and
(4) Those seeking to access nuclear or
radioactive materials in such facilities
for illicit purposes would likely be able
to locate those materials even if there
are no signs posted pursuant to this
rule. Thus, it is not valid to view such
signs as rendering sensitive materials
easier to find and therefore less secure.
Another commenter, however,
recommended against extending the
sign-posting requirement to these
facilities. This commenter (a major
medical institution) reasoned that:
(1) Signs would attract attention to the
location of nationally tracked sources,
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
thereby potentially rendering them less
secure, given that many licensees
currently try to avoid drawing attention
to the locations of such materials;
(2) The strong language in the posting
could be frightening to patients in
hospitals, who may already be in a
vulnerable state due to their medical
situations; and
(3) Persons with unescorted access to
facility areas of concern can simply be
trained both to understand the rule
themselves and to warn persons they
escort about the rule’s existence.
This commenter also noted that if the
National Source Tracking System is
expanded to include Category 3 and
1/10th Category 3 sources, an expansion
of the rule to cover hospitals or other
facilities would reach substantially
more facilities than it otherwise would.
Several of the comments
recommended that the NRC provide
definitions of terms such as ‘‘dangerous
weapon,’’ ‘‘explosive,’’ and ‘‘dangerous
instrument or material.’’ Commenters’
justifications for recommending
definitions of these terms included
promoting consistency in licensee
reporting of violations of this rule and
minimizing ambiguity in a rule whose
violation may result in criminal
prosecution. One commenter suggested
that the content of these definitions
should relate to the security capabilities
of licensees to avoid prohibiting
introduction of items that could not
realistically be used to overpower plant
security teams. Another commenter
recommended that definitions be
included in the rule itself, with further
information and illustrations provided
in a guidance document. Another
commenter recommended that the
posted notices identify any items that
ordinary persons would not expect to be
considered dangerous, but which
nonetheless pose special hazards in
light of the nature of the facility or the
material located at the facility. Lastly,
one commenter recommended that
another term used in the proposed rule,
‘‘introduce,’’ be defined more clearly to
ensure that the rule will apply to a
person who introduces a dangerous
instrument (e.g., a bullet) into the
protected area by some means that does
not require the person to pass beyond a
sign (e.g., by firing a gun from outside
the protected area).
As to the proposed 90-day
implementation period, two industry
commenters recommended that the
period be extended to 180 days to allow
sufficient time for sign procurement and
installation. No other commenters
expressed views on this issue.
A few comments addressed the issue
of sign location. One of these comments
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
recommended installing signs not only
at entrances, but also within protected
areas to serve as additional reminders.
Another comment sought clarification
regarding areas outside the protected
area but which nonetheless contain
nuclear or radioactive material, such as
licensee effluent treatment facilities,
low-enriched uranium storage facilities,
and radioactive waste storage facilities.
The comment recommended that the
posting requirement not apply to such
areas, in light of the fact that entrants to
such areas are not required to be
searched prior to entry. Lastly, one
commenter suggested allowing licensees
the option of posting notices on
roadways leading to facility checkpoints
or parking areas, in addition to the
notices required to be posted at vehicle
and pedestrian entrances, in order to
provide advance warning and thus
facilitate the avoidance of protected
areas by people carrying weapons.
Several commenters addressed the
issue of sign characteristics. Some
commenters recommended inclusion of
specific rules regarding text size and
color. One commenter suggested
requiring lighting to ensure readability
at night, while other commenters
preferred the more flexible performancebased standard (i.e., ‘‘easily readable
day and night’’) utilized in the proposed
rule. No commenters objected to the
requirement that the notices be readable
at night.
A number of comments also
addressed topics beyond those
specifically identified in the statement
of considerations for the proposed rule.
One commenter recommended that the
rule require establishment of temporary
weapons storage sites at pedestrian and
vehicle entrances, so that persons
lawfully carrying firearms can store any
weapons before entering and pick them
up when they leave. Another
commenter recommended that the rule
be harmonized with existing DOE
signage regulations to avoid confusion
or redundancy for those facilities that
would be required to comply with both
regulatory schemes. One commenter
recommended that the rule define the
term ‘‘willful’’ as ‘‘an intentional act
which may include evidence of
subterfuge, masking, or malevolent
intent.’’ Finally, the DOJ recommended
that the statement of considerations for
the final rule clarify that the Federal
Bureau of Investigation is not the only
Federal entity other than the NRC that
could potentially conduct investigations
of suspected violations of this rule.
All of these comments are discussed
and addressed in Section III below.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:31 Oct 13, 2009
Jkt 220001
III. Discussion of the Final Rule
The NRC is amending 10 CFR 73.81,
‘‘Criminal Penalties,’’ and adding
§ 73.75, ‘‘Posting,’’ to implement § 654
of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Under
the regulations, the unauthorized willful
introduction of any dangerous weapon,
explosive or any other dangerous
instrument or material likely to produce
substantial injury or damage to persons
or property upon the facilities or
installations subject to §§ 236a.(1) or (4)
of the AEA will be subject to the
criminal penalties set forth in § 229 of
the AEA. Consistent with the Energy
Policy Act § 654 requirement that the
regulation be posted conspicuously at
each location involved, § 73.75 will
require licensees to post notices at such
facilities or installations.
Facilities Covered
The NRC is primarily concerned with
dangers posed by the unauthorized
introduction of weapons or explosives
or other dangerous items when nuclear
material and radioactive material are
present. By listing these facilities in
section 236 of the AEA, Congress has
recognized the potential danger that
could result from sabotage of such
facilities; consequently, the NRC
believes it prudent to also make the
willful unauthorized introduction of
weapons or explosives into or upon
these facilities a Federal crime. The
covered facilities include production
and utilization facilities and uranium
enrichment, uranium conversion and
fuel fabrication facilities. The rule also
covers some of the facilities listed in
AEA § 236a.(2). Specifically, this rule
would apply to high-level waste storage
and disposal facilities and independent
spent fuel storage installations. The
remaining waste facilities and
installations listed in § 236a.(2) that are
subject to Agreement State jurisdiction
may be covered in a future rulemaking.
For other classes of licensees, the
unauthorized introduction of weapons
or explosives will continue to be
governed, absent other Federal
legislation, by State law.
The final rule accounts for the fact
that not all portions of the listed classes
of facilities will necessarily pose
sufficient security concerns to justify
imposition of criminal penalties.
Therefore, the rule’s application is
limited to areas within a facility or
installation’s protected area, as well as
portions of facilities or installations that
are not within a protected area per se
but for which security plans under 10
CFR part 73 must nonetheless be in
place. The term ‘‘protected facility or
installation’’ has also been added to the
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52669
final rule to refer solely to those
portions of facilities that the criminal
penalties are intended to protect. The
rule’s reference to security plan
requirements under Part 73, which was
not included in the proposed rule,
should resolve the ambiguity identified
by a commenter regarding certain
portions of facilities that are outside the
protected area but which nonetheless
contain nuclear or radioactive materials.
The NRC has limited the rule’s
applicability to the facilities listed in
§§ 73.75(a) and 73.81(c)(2)(i) because
the unauthorized introduction of a
weapon or explosive into these facilities
poses the greatest health and safety risk
and because the NRC already
pervasively regulates these facilities.
Other facilities—such as hospitals—that
contain radioactive materials are not as
extensively regulated by the NRC. In
order to apply § 73.81 to these other
facilities, the NRC would have needed
to interact with Agreement States and
other State and Federal regulators to
further assess the need for application of
§ 73.81 to these classes of facilities and
to determine the proper placement of
the required notices and the best way to
implement this regulation. As suggested
by a public comment, adding posted
notices—which, under the statute, is a
required complement to the imposition
of criminal penalties—to facilities such
as hospitals could raise substantial
policy and implementation issues.
While the NRC acknowledges the
recommendations of some commenters
that hospitals and other facilities be
addressed via this rule, the NRC
believes that such extension would raise
additional complexities that would be
best addressed in a separate rulemaking,
should the NRC determine at a future
date that expansion of the scope of this
rule is warranted.
The NRC is not including the
following facilities or materials even
though they are listed in § 236 of the
AEA:
• Subsection 236a.(3) covering any
nuclear fuel for a utilization facility
licensed under this Act, or any spent
fuel from such a facility. Section 229 of
the AEA specifically applies to
‘‘facilities and installations,’’ while this
subsection applies to ‘‘nuclear fuel’’ and
‘‘spent nuclear fuel.’’ Fuel is neither a
facility nor installation; therefore, § 229,
by its terms, is not applicable to this
subsection.
• Subsection 236a.(5) covering any
‘‘production, utilization, waste storage,
waste treatment, waste disposal,
uranium enrichment, uranium
conversion, or nuclear fuel fabrication
facility’’ during construction of the
facility, if the destruction or damage
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
52670
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
caused or attempted to be caused could
adversely affect public health and
safety. The NRC is primarily concerned
with dangers posed by the unauthorized
introduction of weapons or explosives
into facilities when special nuclear
material, byproduct material, or source
material is present. Therefore, § 73.81(c)
will apply only to those facilities
designated in § 73.81(c)(2)(i) upon the
receipt of such material. An
unauthorized introduction of a weapon
or explosive resulting in sabotage
covered by AEA § 236 before the receipt
of special nuclear material, byproduct
material, or source material already
constitutes a Federal crime. Although
the proposed rule utilized the terms
‘‘nuclear material’’ and ‘‘radioactive
material’’ instead of ‘‘special nuclear
material, byproduct material, or source
material,’’ the former terms are
potentially vague and imprecise.
Therefore, the final rule is using the
latter terminology in order to avoid
potential misinterpretation. This
change, which appears in §§ 73.75(b)(2)
and 73.81(c)(4), is intended to be
clarifying rather than substantive.
• Subsection 236a.(6) covering any
‘‘primary or backup facility from which
a radiological emergency preparedness
alert or warning system is activated.’’
These facilities do not contain special
nuclear material, byproduct material,
source material, or the controls needed
to operate a facility.
• Subsection 236a.(7) pertaining to
other materials or property that the NRC
designates by order or regulation. The
NRC is excluding this section because
the rulemaking implementing this
subsection of § 236 has not commenced.
The NRC may revisit this exclusion as
part of the rulemaking implementing the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 revisions to
§ 236, or in a separate rulemaking.
In response to a public comment, one
class of facilities and installations that
is exempted under the final rule
includes those facilities and
installations that already must comply
with similar signage requirements under
DOE regulations. DOE regulations
already criminalize the unauthorized
introduction of dangerous weapons,
explosives, or other dangerous
instruments or materials into or upon
various facilities and installations
within DOE’s jurisdiction and require
that such facilities and installations post
notices to that effect. The DOE
regulations, however, establish criminal
penalties that, while not substantially
different, are nonetheless not identical
to those being established by this rule.
Exempting these facilities from this rule
avoids establishing what would in effect
be identical crimes punishable by
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:31 Oct 13, 2009
Jkt 220001
different penalties with respect to those
facilities.
Criminal Penalties, Investigation, and
Prosecution
Under the final rule’s terms, whoever
willfully introduces, without
authorization, weapons or explosives
into or upon any protected facility or
installation (as defined in § 73.81(c)(2))
that is enclosed by a fence, wall, floor,
roof, or other barrier would be guilty of
a misdemeanor, and upon conviction,
could be punished by a fine not to
exceed $5,000, or imprisonment for not
more than one year, or both, as set forth
in section 229c of the AEA. Whoever
willfully introduces, without
authorization, weapons or explosives
into or upon any other protected facility
or installation would be, upon
conviction, punishable by a fine of not
more than $1,000, as set forth in section
229b of the AEA. The maximum
penalties would vary based upon
whether the facility in question is
enclosed by a fence, wall, floor, roof, or
other barrier. The proposed rule’s
version of 73.81(c)(1) was worded in a
manner that, when read in conjunction
with AEA sections 229b and 229c, was
circular and potentially confusing. The
final rule therefore contains a reworded
section 73.81(c)(1). This modification is
not, however, intended to change the
substance of the rule in any way.
This final rule does not interfere with
State prosecution of these crimes under
State law, but it does allow the Federal
Bureau of Investigation, the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and
Explosives, or other Federal law
enforcement agencies to investigate and
DOJ to prosecute in addition to, or
instead of, the State government.
The NRC is also not making violations
of § 73.75 criminally punishable under
AEA sections 229b and 229c. The
Commission’s objective in this
rulemaking, which the Commission
believes is consistent with the
Congressional intent, is to ensure that
the criminal penalties in sections 229b
and 229c apply to persons who
introduce weapons into facilities
without authorization. Furthermore, the
NRC has sufficient administrative
sanctions at its disposal to enforce the
posting requirements.
Regulatory Burden—Posting of Signs
This regulation would not impose any
burden on States. The only burden the
regulation would impose on licensees is
the statutorily mandated requirement
that signs containing the quoted text in
§ 73.75 be posted conspicuously at each
of the listed facilities. The rule requires
that these signs be posted at all
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
entrances to the protected area, as well
as all entrances to buildings not within
a protected area that nonetheless
contain special nuclear material,
byproduct material, or source material
(except with respect to buildings for
which security plans are not required
under 10 CFR part 73). The link
between the posting requirements and
the NRC’s security plan requirements
under part 73 has been added to the
final rule in response to a public
comment to ensure consistency between
the NRC’s security regulations and the
criminal penalties (and licensee posting
obligations) being established. The signs
may also include other prohibitions
already posted at the point of entry.
Although one commenter
recommended that additional signs be
posted within each facility or
installation to serve as further reminders
of the regulation’s criminal penalties,
any person who willfully brings a
prohibited item into the facility or
installation will have already committed
the crime by the time such reminder
signs are encountered. The posting of
such signs, therefore, will not be
required, but licensees are not
precluded from posting additional signs.
As the rule states, the signs must be
easily readable day and night by both
pedestrian and vehicular traffic. The
NRC, in response to comments, is
providing a 180-day implementation
period for this requirement to allow
licensees sufficient time to acquire and
install the appropriate signs.
The posting requirement is primarily
performance-based, stating that signs
should be ‘‘easily readable day and
night.’’ Accordingly, any design and
placement that renders the notice
‘‘easily readable day and night’’ will
satisfy this standard. Although one
commenter suggested requiring lighting
in order to ensure readability at night,
the NRC believes it is sufficient to rely
upon the performance-based standard
for night readability, because different
facilities, as well as different sign
locations at each facility, may have
different lighting needs.
Although the ‘‘easily readable day and
night’’ standard is primarily
performance-based, it is the NRC’s view
that compliance with an up-to-date
version of the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) signage standards
(currently set forth at 28 CFR part 36,
appendix A, section 4.30) will satisfy
the ‘‘easily readable day and night’’
standard with respect to those aspects of
sign design and placement that the ADA
standards address. In their present
version, for instance, the ADA standards
address topics such as character
proportion, character height, finish and
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
contrast, and mounting location and
height. Providing licensees the option of
relying upon the ADA standards to help
ensure compliance with the ‘‘easily
readable day and night’’ standard
should promote an appropriate balance
of flexibility and predictability. The
ADA standards may not, however,
address all aspects of the ‘‘easily
readable day and night’’ standard. For
example, the current ADA standards do
not address readability at night.
Therefore, the ADA standards may, in
practice, serve only as partial guidance
with respect to sign design and
placement.
One commenter recommended that
the rule require licensees to provide a
means for workers and visitors who
lawfully possess weapons to
temporarily store them at facility
entrances prior to entering, such that the
weapons could be retrieved later upon
exiting. In the NRC’s view, the presence
or absence of temporary weapons
storage for this purpose is primarily a
convenience and logistical issue of
potential concern to licensees, their
employees, and other plant visitors; it is
not an issue of significant regulatory
concern that the NRC must address.
Therefore, the final rule will neither
prohibit nor mandate the presence of
such temporary weapons storage at the
entrances to affected facilities or
installations.
Similarly, the posting of additional
notices on roadways leading to
checkpoints or parking areas is neither
required nor prohibited by the rule and
is, therefore, left to the licensee’s
discretion. It is important to note,
however, that the location of a posted
notice will define the point at which
introduction into the facility occurs for
purposes of this final rule, at least
where introduction occurs at a
traditional vehicle or pedestrian
entrance to the facility. Accordingly,
licensees wishing to post notices in
addition to those required by § 73.75,
such as to provide advance notice about
the § 73.81 criminal penalties to workers
or visitors who are approaching a
facility entrance or a courtesy storage
site for prohibited items, would be
advised to ensure that such notices will
not be mistaken for the notices required
to be posted at facility entrances under
§ 73.75. This could be accomplished, for
instance, by not using the precise
language on the ‘‘advance warning’’
notices that is required to be used on the
notices posted pursuant to § 73.75. Such
additional ‘‘advance warning’’ notices,
of course, would not take the place of
the notices that § 73.75 requires to be
posted at all vehicle and pedestrian
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:31 Oct 13, 2009
Jkt 220001
entrances to each protected facility or
installation.
Although the text of the final rule
does not specifically address such
situations, there may, as a practical
matter, be cases in which a covered
facility does not require its own posted
notices. This would seem most likely to
occur when one covered facility is
embedded completely within the
protected area of another covered
facility (for example, an independent
spent fuel storage facility located
entirely within a nuclear power plant’s
protected area). Because § 73.75(b)(1)
requires the posting of notices for
protected areas only at the protected
area’s entrances, the embedded facility
would not require its own notices if
none of the embedded facility’s
entrances serve as entrances to the
larger protected area.
One non-substantive change to the
§ 73.75 posting provision is that a new
subsection 73.75(a) has been added to
identify the categories of facilities to
which § 73.75 applies. This eliminates
an unnecessary cross reference to
§ 73.81(c). Another non-substantive
change involves § 73.81(c)(2) of the
proposed rule. The requirement found
in that provision was redundant, serving
merely to remind readers that there are
associated posting requirements in
§ 73.75. Because some of the definitions
in § 73.81(c) of the final rule perform a
similar reminder function by
referencing the § 73.75 posting
requirements, § 73.81(c)(2) is
unnecessary and has been removed.
Definitions of Key Terms
The unauthorized introduction—
whether by carrying, transporting,
discharging of a firearm, or otherwise—
of weapons, explosives, or other
dangerous instruments or materials into
or upon the area marked by the posted
notices will constitute a Federal crime
under this final rule. For purposes of
this final rule, ‘‘without authorization’’
means lacking authorization, as part of
one’s official duties, to carry the item in
question. Accordingly, the introduction
of weapons by security guards, peace
officers, or military personnel as part of
their official duties would be
‘‘authorized’’ and these individuals
would not be subject to criminal
sanctions under this rule. Additionally,
the introduction of potentially
dangerous industrial tools, machinery,
or other materials into a facility as part
of one’s job duties would likewise not
be subject to criminal sanctions under
this rule.
As noted above, a new term,
‘‘protected facility or installation,’’ has
been added to the final rule. This term,
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52671
which encompasses solely those
portions of facilities that the criminal
penalties are meant to protect, is
included to ensure that the posting
requirements under § 73.75 and the
criminal penalty provisions under
§ 73.81 will be consistent with one
another (a task previously performed by
the proposed rule’s definition of
‘‘introduce’’) and to create a simple
means of referring, in § 73.81(c)(1), to
the facility areas that provision is meant
to cover.
The terms ‘‘dangerous weapons,’’
‘‘dangerous instrument or material,’’
and ‘‘explosives’’ are not defined in the
statute that these regulations would
implement. In addition, the DOE
regulations referred to above utilize
these same terms to define comparable
criminal conduct but do not define
them. The NRC has determined,
however, that enforcement could be
enhanced by providing definitions for at
least some of these terms. Furthermore,
a number of public comments
recommended providing definitions to
promote clarity and consistency in the
rule’s implementation.
Accordingly, the NRC, after
consultation with DOJ, has adopted a set
of definitions from existing Federal
criminal statutes. A newly inserted
definition for the rule’s term ‘‘dangerous
weapon’’ references existing definitions
found at 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3) and 26
U.S.C. 5845(a) for the term ‘‘firearm’’
and the 18 U.S.C. 930(g)(2) definition of
the term ‘‘dangerous weapon.’’ 1
Although these relatively broad
incorporated definitions may overlap
with one another in many respects, the
rule references each of them in order to
ensure that no legitimately dangerous
items will be inadvertently left
uncovered by this rule. In addition, a
new definition for ‘‘explosive’’
incorporates the definition of
‘‘explosive’’ found at 18 U.S.C. 844(j).
The referenced ‘‘firearm’’ definitions do
provide exceptions for antique weapons,
certain recreational and sporting guns,
and army surplus ordnance. Those
exceptions, however, will have no effect
for purposes of this final rule, because
antique weapons, recreational and
sporting guns, and army surplus
ordnance still fall within the terms of
the 18 U.S.C. 930(g)(2) definition of
‘‘dangerous weapon,’’ which broadly
covers any ‘‘weapon, device,
instrument, material, or substance,
animate or inanimate, that is used for,
or is readily capable of, causing death or
1 Because the term ‘‘dangerous weapon’’ as used
in 18 U.S.C. 930(g)(2) does not expressly cover
firearms, the NRC believes it is appropriate to
incorporate definitions of ‘‘firearm’’ as well.
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
52672
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
serious bodily injury.’’ This is
appropriate because even the types of
weapons excepted under the ‘‘firearm’’
definitions are not appropriate for
introduction, without authorization,
into highly secure nuclear facilities.
The NRC does not plan to issue
guidance for licensees beyond what is
contained in this statement of
considerations to further define these
terms. The NRC considers extensive
guidance to licensees regarding the
reporting requirements associated with
this final rule to be unnecessary. The
purpose of the rule is to criminalize the
unauthorized introduction of items that
licensee security plans should already
be prohibiting as part of their existing
security efforts. Such items include
guns, explosives, and any other items
that would pose a legitimate security
threat if brought into a protected facility
without authorization. Unremarkable
personal items such as pocket knives
attached to key chains, butter knives in
lunch boxes, and so on are not intended
to be covered by this rule, and so would
not trigger any licensee reporting
requirements absent some further facts
(such as, for example, evidence of intent
to commit sabotage) which would
implicate some other criminal provision
or other basis for reporting the incident.
Indeed, the 18 U.S.C. 930(g)(2)
definition of ‘‘dangerous weapon,’’
which the final rule’s definition of
‘‘dangerous weapon’’ incorporates,
expressly excludes pocket knives with
blades less than 21⁄2 inches long. With
these principles in mind, as well as the
additional clarity provided by the
definitions of ‘‘dangerous weapon,’’
‘‘firearm,’’ and ‘‘explosive’’ that are
being incorporated from existing
Federal criminal statutes, the NRC
expects that licensees will be able to
comply with the reporting requirements
associated with this rule without
additional formal guidance. As
explained in the next section of this
statement of considerations, however,
the NRC, after consulting with DOJ, will
consider whether to adopt any
additional guidance that is submitted by
the regulated community to the NRC for
review.
As to the term ‘‘willful,’’ the NRC is
also declining a commenter’s
recommendation that the term be
defined. The NRC expects that
prosecutors and courts will define the
term as it is usually defined when used
in Federal criminal statutes. The U.S.
Supreme Court has stated that, ‘‘[a]s a
general matter, when used in the
criminal context, a ‘willful’ act is one
undertaken with a ‘bad purpose.’ ’’
Bryan v. United States, 524 U.S. 184,
191 (1998). One common way to prove
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:31 Oct 13, 2009
Jkt 220001
the existence of a ‘‘bad purpose’’ is to
show that the defendant ‘‘acted with
knowledge that his conduct was
unlawful.’’ Id. at 192. This is consistent
with one commenter’s suggestion that
the definition of willful should refer to
‘‘evidence of subterfuge, masking, or
malevolent intent,’’ because such
evidence would tend to indicate that the
defendant knew the conduct in question
was unlawful. Further, the easily
readable notices posted at all vehicle
and pedestrian entrances will help to
ensure that all visitors are aware of the
prohibition.
The definition of the term
‘‘introduce,’’ which was included in the
proposed rule, is replaced in the final
rule for clarification purposes with a
new § 73.81(c)(3), which serves to
define the entire phrase that is used in
§ 73.81(c)(1) (i.e., ‘‘carrying,
transporting, or otherwise introducing
or causing to be introduced’’). The new
§ 73.81(c)(3) removes any possible
suggestion that the terms ‘‘carrying,’’
‘‘transporting,’’ and ‘‘otherwise
introducing’’ should be analyzed
separately, rather than as a single
concept meant to cover any conceivable
method of introduction. The new
provision also more expressly accounts
for the fact that entrance to a protected
facility or installation might occur at a
location that is not a traditional vehicle
or pedestrian entrance, and which
therefore might not be in the vicinity of
a notice posted pursuant to § 73.75. For
instance, a perpetrator carrying a
prohibited item might try to enter the
facility by breaching a fence, wall, or
other barrier, or by some other means
that occurs away from the vehicle and
pedestrian entrances and any § 73.75
notices. Under the proposed rule’s
formulation, it could have been unclear
in these circumstances whether or when
an introduction has actually occurred,
because the proposed rule relied
entirely upon the location of the notice
to define when an ‘‘introduction’’
occurs. The new § 73.81(c)(3), therefore,
relies upon a common sense concept of
entering a facility for those instances
where entry does not occur at a
traditional ‘‘entrance.’’ When entrance
to the facility does occur at a traditional
vehicle or pedestrian entrance, however,
the § 73.75 notice will remain the
boundary marker for purposes of this
rule.
Relationship of Rule to Licensee
Security Procedures
As explained in the statements of
consideration for the proposed rule, this
rule should not require any changes to
licensee security procedures. Under
§ 73.71(b)(1) and paragraph I(d) of
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
appendix G to Part 73, licensees are
required to report within one hour,
followed by a written report within 60
days, ‘‘the actual or attempted
introduction of contraband into a
protected area, material access area,
vital area, or transport.’’ For purposes of
the final rule, weapons, explosives, or
other dangerous instruments or
materials that are introduced without
authorization would be ‘‘contraband.’’
Licensees should note that the purpose
of this rule is to broaden Federal
prosecutorial authority, not to change
licensee security practices.
With that said, licensees who suspect
they have uncovered actual or
attempted violations of this rule are
encouraged to promptly notify local or
Federal law enforcement authorities,
who may provide additional guidance
as circumstances warrant. Licensees
may also, of course, contact the NRC for
further guidance. The NRC does not
currently plan to issue any additional
guidance regarding the procedures that
licensees should employ upon
discovering actual or suspected
violations or attempted violations of this
rule. If licensees desire additional
guidance regarding the procedural steps
to follow after discovery of suspected or
actual violations or attempted violations
of this rule, the NRC is willing to review
and consider whether to adopt any
guidance that the regulated community
sees fit to propose. The NRC anticipates
that it would consult with DOJ before
endorsing any proposed guidance.
Finally, the NRC notes that the
preexisting responsibilities of licensees
to maintain the security of their
facilities are not altered by the fact that
this rule is now making one particular
class of security threat—the
unauthorized introduction into
protected facilities of dangerous
weapons, explosives, or other dangerous
instruments or materials—a Federal
crime.
IV. Voluntary Consensus Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act of 1995, Public
Law 104–113, requires that Federal
agencies use technical standards that are
developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies unless
using such a standard is inconsistent
with applicable law or is otherwise
impractical. In this final rule, the NRC
is establishing criminal penalties for the
unauthorized introduction of weapons
or explosives into or upon certain
facilities and installations subject to the
regulatory authority of the NRC. This
action does not constitute the
establishment of a standard that
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
contains generally applicable
requirements.
V. Finding of No Significant
Environmental Impact: Environmental
Assessment
The NRC has determined under the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended, and the NRC’s
regulations in Subpart A of 10 CFR part
51, that this rule is not a major Federal
action significantly affecting the quality
of the human environment and that,
therefore, an environmental impact
statement is not required. The basis for
this determination is as follows:
The Need for the Rule:
This final rule is needed to implement
§ 229 of the AEA. In § 654 of the Energy
Policy Act of 2005, Congress amended
§ 229 of the AEA, authorizing the NRC
to issue regulations making it a Federal
crime to, without authorization,
introduce weapons or explosives into
specified classes of facilities and
installations subject to the regulatory
authority of the NRC. Section 229 was
also amended to require that each such
regulation be posted conspicuously at
the location involved.
Environmental Impacts of the Rule:
The NRC has completed its evaluation
of the rule and concludes that it will not
cause any significant environmental
impact. The only action required by the
rule is the requirement in § 73.75 that
licensees place a notice at each entrance
to the protected area and to any
buildings not within a protected area
that contain special nuclear material,
byproduct material, or source material
and which are required to have security
plans under 10 CFR part 73. Licensees
already post notices at the entrances to
facilities, and this rule allows licensees
to combine the notice required in
§ 73.75 with these other notices. The
NRC requested public comments on the
environmental assessment included
with the proposed rule, which likewise
predicted that there would be no
significant environmental impacts, but
no comments on the topic were
received. The final rule includes
essentially the same posting
requirements that were found in the
proposed rule, with only minor
clarifications as to which buildings and
areas are, and are not, covered by the
posting requirements, as well as
additional information regarding
permissible sign formats. Therefore, the
NRC has concluded that there will be
little to no environmental impact of
creating and posting the notices
required by this final rule. Accordingly,
the NRC concludes that there will be no
significant environmental impacts
associated with this action.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:31 Oct 13, 2009
Jkt 220001
Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
As an alternative to the proposed
action, the NRC staff considered not
promulgating this rule (the ‘‘no-action’’
alternative). This would result in
leaving unfulfilled the congressional
authorization the NRC had sought.
Moreover, because implementation of
the rule would not result in any
significant environmental impacts, the
no-action alternative would not
significantly reduce environmental
impacts.
Accordingly, the NRC has determined
in this environmental assessment that
there will be no significant offsite
impact to the public from this action.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act
Statement
This rule does not contain
information collection requirements
and, therefore, is not subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). This rule does not establish any
reporting requirements. In addition, the
posting requirements contained in this
rule are not included in the definition
of information collection. This is
because the text to be printed on the
required notices is being completely
supplied by NRC regulation (10 CFR
73.75(b)(3)), and a requirement to
publicly disclose information that was
originally provided by the Federal
Government does not constitute an
‘‘information collection.’’ 5 CFR
1320.3(c)(2).
Public Protection Notification
The NRC may not conduct or sponsor,
and a person is not required to respond
to, a request for information or an
information collection requirement
unless the requesting document
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
VII. Regulatory Analysis
A regulatory analysis has not been
prepared for this regulation. Congress
authorized the NRC to implement by
regulation § 654 of the Energy Policy
Act of 2005, which establishes as a
Federal crime the unauthorized
introduction of weapons or explosives
into NRC-designated facilities. The AEA
requires that signs be conspicuously
posted to warn facility entrants of the
criminal prohibition. The only costs
associated with implementing the rule
are the costs to procure, post, and
maintain these signs since procedures
and organization required to protect
against the unauthorized introduction of
weapons are already required. The NRC
estimates these costs to be $50 per sign,
with an estimated average of six signs
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52673
per affected facility, for an average total
cost of $300 per facility. Based upon the
number of facilities that would be
covered by this rule if it were effective
today, the NRC views $50,000 as a
conservative industry-wide cost
estimate. The NRC considers this cost to
be reasonable because of the express
congressional requirement that any
facilities covered by regulations
promulgated under AEA § 229a.(1) post
such regulations ‘‘conspicuously,’’ and
because the signs are required to be
posted only at locations where entry
into covered facilities would ordinarily
occur.
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility
Certification
In accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the
NRC certifies that this rule does not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The companies that own the facilities
affected by this rule do not fall within
the scope of the definition of ‘‘small
entities’’ set forth in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act or the size standards
established by the NRC (10 CFR 2.810).
IX. Backfit Analysis
The NRC has determined that a
backfit rule, 10 CFR 50.109, 70.76,
72.62, 76.76, does not apply to this rule
and that a backfit analysis is not
required. A backfit analysis is not
required because the only actions
required by the rule are the procuring
and posting of signs. The conspicuous
posting of notices is expressly required
by § 229a.(2) of the AEA for any facility
covered by regulations promulgated
under § 229a.(1), and so the requirement
to post notices does not result from an
exercise of NRC discretion. In any event,
the posting of notices pursuant to this
rule does not require the modification of
or additions to systems, structures,
components, or design of a facility or
the design approval or manufacturing
license for a facility, or the procedures
or organization required to design,
construct, or operate a facility.
Likewise, the criminal penalties
established by this rule merely
authorize Federal prosecution of certain
crimes, and therefore do not require the
modification of or additions to systems,
structures, components, or design of a
facility or the design approval or
manufacturing license for a facility, or
the procedures or organization required
to design, construct, or operate a
facility.
X. Congressional Review Act
In accordance with the Congressional
Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801–808), the NRC
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
52674
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
has determined that this action is not a
major rule and has verified this
determination with the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
the Office of Management and Budget.
XI. Agreement State Compatibility
Under the ‘‘Policy Statement on
Adequacy and Compatibility of
Agreement State Programs’’ approved by
the NRC on June 30, 1997, and
published in the Federal Register on
September 3, 1997 (62 FR 46517), this
rule is classified as Compatibility
Category ‘‘NRC.’’ Compatibility is not
required for Category ‘‘NRC’’
regulations. The NRC program elements
in this category are those that relate
directly to areas of regulation reserved
to the NRC by the AEA, or the
provisions of Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. Although an
Agreement State may not adopt program
elements reserved to NRC, it may wish
to inform its licensees of certain
requirements via a mechanism that is
consistent with the particular State’s
administrative procedure laws but does
not confer regulatory authority on the
State.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 73
Criminal penalties, Export, Hazardous
materials transportation, Import,
Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants
and reactors, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security
measures.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble and under the authority of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended;
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,
as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553,
the NRC is adopting the following
amendments to 10 CFR part 73.
■
PART 73—PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF
PLANTS AND MATERIALS
1. The authority citation for part 73
continues to read as follows:
cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
■
Authority: Secs. 53, 161, 149, 68 Stat. 930,
948, as amended, sec. 147, 94 Stat. 780 (42
U.S.C. 2073, 2167, 2169, 2201); sec. 201, as
amended, 204, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended,
1245, sec. 1701, 106 Stat. 2951, 2952, 2953
(42 U.S.C. 5841, 5844, 2297f); sec. 1704, 112
Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); Energy
Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109–58, 119 Stat.
594 (2005). Section 73.1 also issued under
secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 97–425, 96 Stat. 2232,
2241 (42 U.S.C, 10155, 10161). Section
73.37(f) also issued under sec. 301, Pub. L.
96–295, 94 Stat. 789 (42 U.S.C. 5841 note).
Section 73.57 is issued under sec. 606, Pub.
L. 99–399, 100 Stat. 876 (42 U.S.C. 2169).
2. Section 73.75 is added to read as
follows:
■
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:31 Oct 13, 2009
Jkt 220001
§ 73.75
Posting.
(a) This section applies to:
(1) Production or utilization facilities;
(2) High-level waste storage or
disposal facilities and independent
spent fuel storage installations;
(3) Uranium enrichment, uranium
conversion, or nuclear fuel fabrication
facilities.
(b)(1) Licensees or certificate holders
operating facilities described in
paragraph (a) of this section that have a
protected area shall conspicuously post
notices at every vehicle and pedestrian
entrance to the protected area.
(2) Licensees or certificate holders
operating facilities described in
paragraph (a) of this section that include
buildings not within a protected area
that nonetheless contain special nuclear
material, byproduct material, or source
material shall conspicuously post
notices at the personnel and vehicle
entrances to each such building, except
with respect to buildings for which no
security plan is required under this part.
(3) The required notices must state:
‘‘The willful unauthorized introduction
of any dangerous weapon, explosive, or
other dangerous instrument or material
likely to produce substantial injury or
damage to persons or property into or
upon these premises is a Federal crime.
(42 U.S.C. 2278a.)’’
(4) Every notice posted under this
section must be easily readable day and
night by both pedestrian and vehicular
traffic entering the facility or
installation.
(5) These notices may be combined
with other notices.
(c) This section does not apply to
facilities that, in addition to being
regulated by the NRC under a license or
certificate of compliance issued by the
Commission, are also covered by U.S.
Department of Energy regulations
imposing criminal penalties, and
associated posting requirements, under
section 229 of the Atomic Energy Act
with respect to unauthorized
introduction of dangerous weapons,
explosives, or other dangerous
instruments or materials likely to
produce substantial injury or damage to
persons or property.
■ 3. In § 73.81, paragraph (b) is revised
and paragraph (c) is added to read as
follows:
§ 73.81
Criminal penalties.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) The regulations in part 73 that are
not issued under sections 161b, 161i, or
161o for the purposes of section 223 are
as follows: §§ 73.1, 73.2, 73.3, 73.4, 73.5,
73.6, 73.8, 73.25, 73.45, 73.75, 73.80,
and 73.81.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(c)(1) No person without
authorization may carry, transport, or
otherwise introduce or cause to be
introduced any dangerous weapon,
explosive, or other dangerous
instrument or material likely to produce
substantial injury or damage to persons
or property into or upon a protected
facility or installation. Willful violations
of this provision are punishable by the
criminal penalties set forth in sections
229b and 229c of the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954, as amended.
(2) As used in this section:
(i) ‘‘Protected facility or installation’’
means any production or utilization
facility, high-level waste storage or
disposal facility, independent spent fuel
storage installation, uranium
enrichment, uranium conversion, or
nuclear fuel fabrication facility, but does
not include those portions of such
facilities that are not required under
§ 73.75(b) of this part to be identified by
notices posted at their pedestrian and
vehicle entrances, and does not include
facilities described in § 73.75(c) of this
part.
(ii) ‘‘Without authorization’’ means
not authorized as part of one’s official
duties to carry the weapon, explosive, or
other instrument or material;
(iii) ‘‘Dangerous weapon’’ includes
any firearm, as defined in either 18
U.S.C. 921 or 26 U.S.C. 5845, or
dangerous weapon, as defined in 18
U.S.C. 930;
(iv) ‘‘Explosive’’ means any explosive
as defined in 18 U.S.C. 844(j).
(3) An item, such as a dangerous
weapon, explosive, or other dangerous
instrument or material, is considered to
have been carried, transported, or
otherwise introduced or caused to be
introduced into or upon a protected
facility or installation for purposes of
paragraph (c)(1) of this section once the
item has traveled past a notice posted
pursuant to § 73.75 of this part at a
vehicle or pedestrian entrance to the
protected facility, or once the item has
entered the protected facility or
installation at a location that is not a
vehicle or pedestrian entrance to the
facility, whether such entry is
accomplished through, over, under, or
around a fence, wall, floor, roof, or other
structural barrier enclosing the
protected facility or installation or by
any other means.
(4) For all protected facilities or
installations that do not possess special
nuclear material, byproduct material, or
source material as of the effective date
of this rule, this provision shall take
effect upon receipt of such material at
the applicable facility or installation.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day
of October 2009.
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9–24566 Filed 10–13–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection
19 CFR Parts 4, 122, 123, and 192
[CBP Dec. 09–39]
Technical Correction To Remove
Obsolete Compliance Date Provisions
From Electronic Cargo Information
Regulations
AGENCY: Customs and Border Protection,
Department of Homeland Security.
ACTION: Final rule; technical correction.
cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY: This final rule removes the
compliance date provisions of various
sections of the CBP regulations
pertaining to mandatory advance
electronic transmission of in-bound and
out-bound cargo information. As all the
provisions requiring advance electronic
transmission of cargo information are
now in effect because the various dates
or events described in the compliance
date paragraphs triggering the
compliance date have occurred, the
compliance date paragraphs are now
obsolete.
DATES: The rule is effective on October
14, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gregory Olsavsky, Director, Cargo
Control Division, Office of Field
Operations, 202–344–1049.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
As circumstances warrant, CBP
sometimes publishes a regulation (a
final or interim final rule) that delays its
compliance date, or the compliance date
for one or more of its provisions, until
a future date and/or the occurrence of
one or more specified events. When the
condition or conditions precedent has
been met, the provision becomes out of
date and obsolete. This final rule
removes several obsolete compliance
date provisions from several sections of
the CBP regulations.
Each compliance date provision being
amended in this technical correction
involves a final rule that was
promulgated pursuant to section 343(a)
of the Trade Act of 2002, as amended by
the Maritime Security Act (19 U.S.C.
2071 note) (hereafter, section 343(a) of
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:31 Oct 13, 2009
Jkt 220001
the Act). The final rule was published
in the Federal Register (68 FR 68140) on
December 5, 2003. Section 343(a) of the
Act mandates the collection of cargo
information through a CBP-approved
electronic data interchange system
before cargo is brought into or departs
from the United States by any mode of
commercial transportation (sea, air, rail,
truck). This requirement spawned new
sections of the regulations (19 CFR
122.48a, 123.91, 123.92, and 192.14)
and required amendment of an existing
section (19 CFR 4.7) to implement the
law. Four of the five sections pertain to
the advance electronic transmission
requirement for cargo arriving in the
United States by vessel carrier, air
carrier, rail carrier, and truck carrier,
and the fifth section pertains to this
requirement for cargo departing from
the United States onboard all modes of
transportation. Because some carriers
were not yet automated (with systems
capable of electronic transmission
through the appropriate CBP-approved
data interchange system) or CBP had to
upgrade its system, the new and
amended regulations were drafted to
contain a compliance date provision
that delayed the date the carriers would
be required to comply with the
mandatory electronic transmission
requirements. Over time, the
compliance dates for these five sections
of the CBP regulations have taken effect,
rendering these provisions obsolete.
Changes Made in This Final Rule
This final rule amends the following
five sections of the CBP regulations to
remove from each an obsolete
compliance date provision:
19 CFR 4.7
Under 19 CFR 4.7, applicable to
commercial vessels transporting cargo to
the United States, CBP must receive the
CBP-approved electronic equivalent of
the vessel’s cargo declaration 24 hours
before the cargo is laden aboard the
vessel at the foreign port (19 CFR
4.7(b)(2)). This section also sets forth
other requirements, such as information
to be transmitted, and a compliance
date. Under 19 CFR 4.7(b)(5), vessel
carriers (and non-vessel operating
common carriers electing to participate)
must comply with the requirement to
make electronic transmissions under
paragraph (b)(2) within 90 days of
December 5, 2003 (the date the
implementing final rule was published)
at all ports of entry in the United States.
Inasmuch as the compliance date has
passed, this final rule removes
paragraph (b)(5) from this section and
makes a conforming change to
paragraph (b)(2).
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52675
19 CFR 122.48a
Under 19 CFR 122.48a, applicable to
commercial air carriers transporting
cargo to the United States, CBP must
electronically receive from an inbound
air carrier (or from another party
authorized under paragraph (c)(1) of this
section) certain information concerning
incoming cargo. In the case of flights
departing directly to the United States
from any port or place in North
America, CBP must receive the
information no later than the aircraft’s
departure and, for flights departing from
any other foreign port or place, no later
than 4 hours prior to the aircraft’s
arrival in the United States. Section
122.48a sets forth other requirements,
including the information to be
transmitted and a compliance date.
Under 19 CFR 122.48a(e)(1), air
carriers must comply with the
requirement to transmit cargo
information to CBP electronically on
and after March 4, 2004. Under 19 CFR
122.48a(e)(2), CBP may delay the
compliance date set forth in paragraph
(e)(1) of this section in certain
circumstances (that need not be
specified here). Under this paragraph
(e)(2), CBP would announce any such
delays in the Federal Register. As the
March 4, 2004, compliance date was not
delayed, no announcements of delay
were published.
Inasmuch as the compliance date for
all air carriers has passed, this final rule
removes paragraph (e) from this section
and makes a conforming change to
paragraph (a).
19 CFR 123.91
Under 19 CFR 123.91, applicable to
U.S. bound railroad trains with
commercial cargo aboard, CBP must
electronically receive from the rail
carrier certain information concerning
the incoming cargo. CBP must receive
the information no later than 2 hours
prior to the cargo’s arrival at the first
port of arrival in the United States (19
CFR 123.91(a)). This section also sets
forth other requirements, including
exceptions, the information to be
submitted, and a compliance date.
Under 19 CFR 123.91(e), carriers are
required to comply with the section’s
electronic transmission requirements 90
days from the date that CBP publishes
notice in the Federal Register informing
carriers that the electronic data
interchange system for transmission of
cargo information is operational at the
affected port(s).
On April 12, 2004, CBP published a
notice in the Federal Register (69 FR
19207) providing a schedule of dates by
which the electronic data interchange
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 197 (Wednesday, October 14, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52667-52675]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-24566]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 73
[NRC-2008-0458]
RIN 3150-AI31
Criminal Penalties; Unauthorized Introduction of Weapons
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its
regulations to authorize the imposition of Federal criminal penalties
on those who, without authorization, introduce weapons or explosives
into specified classes of facilities and installations subject to the
regulatory authority of the NRC. This action is necessary to implement
section 229, ``Trespass on Commission Installations,'' of the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA).
DATES: This rule is effective on April 12, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You can access publicly available documents related to this
document using the following methods:
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and
search for documents filed under Docket ID [NRC-2008-0458]. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher at 301-415-5905, e-mail
Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine and have
copied for a fee publicly available documents at the NRC's PDR, Public
File Area O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland.
NRC's Agencywide Documents 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 NRC's PDR
reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James E. Adler, Office of the General
Counsel, telephone 301-415-1656, e-mail: james.adler@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Public Comments
III. Discussion of the Final Rule
IV. Voluntary Consensus Standard
V. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Environmental
Assessment
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
VII. Regulatory Analysis
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
IX. Backfit Analysis
X. Congressional Review Act
XI. Agreement State Compatibility
I. Background
Section 654 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, ``Unauthorized
Introduction of Dangerous Weapons,'' amended Sec. 229 of the AEA (42
U.S.C. 2278a) to authorize the NRC to issue regulations that make it a
Federal crime to bring, without authorization, weapons or explosives
into facilities designated by the NRC.
[[Page 52668]]
This rule implements that legislative provision.
In 1956, Congress added Sec. 229 to the AEA. That section made it
a Federal crime to bring weapons or explosives, without authorization,
into facilities owned by the Atomic Energy Commission. With the
enactment of the Energy Reorganization Act in 1974, this provision
covered facilities now owned or occupied by the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) as well as the buildings occupied by the NRC. Section 229
of the AEA did not extend to facilities regulated by the NRC. Over the
years, there were incidents where individuals were successful in
bringing weapons into NRC-regulated facilities without authorization.
Fortunately, the individuals were not terrorists or others with
malevolent intent and no damage was done. In such circumstances, the
NRC had the ability to take action against its licensee for violation
of security requirements, but could not refer the matter to the U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ) for criminal prosecution of the individual;
any criminal sanctions had to be sought by the State under State law.
Beginning in the late 1980s, the NRC submitted legislative proposals to
Congress requesting that Congress enact legislation that would make it
a Federal crime to bring weapons or explosives, without authorization,
into NRC-designated facilities.
Congress enacted the requested legislation in Sec. 654 of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005, amending Sec. 229 of the AEA (42 U.S.C.
2278a). This section authorizes the NRC to
issue regulations relating to the entry upon or carrying,
transporting, or otherwise introducing or causing to be introduced
any dangerous weapon, explosive, or other dangerous instrument or
material likely to produce substantial injury or damage to person or
property, into or upon any facility, installation, or real property
subject to the jurisdiction, administration, in the custody of the
Commission, or subject to the licensing authority of the Commission
or certification by the Commission under this Act or any other Act.
Section 229 also requires that ``every such regulation of the
Commission shall be posted conspicuously at the location involved.''
II. Public Comments
The NRC published a proposed rule on September 3, 2008 (73 FR
51378) and provided the opportunity for public comment. The Federal
Register notice for the proposed rule identified certain issues about
which the NRC was particularly interested in receiving comments. These
issues included:
(1) Whether the rule's scope should be extended beyond the
facilities listed in the proposed rule to additionally cover hospitals
and other classes of facilities licensed to possess nationally tracked
sources that are in the National Source Tracking System;
(2) Whether terms used in the proposed rule such as ``dangerous
weapon,'' ``dangerous instrument or material,'' and ``explosive''
should be further defined, and what such definitions should be;
(3) Whether such definitions, if provided at all, should be set
forth in the rule itself or in a guidance document;
(4) Whether the proposed 90-day implementation period provides
licensees sufficient time to acquire and install the signs that the
rule would require licensees to post;
(5) Whether the proposed rule's language regarding sign location is
sufficient; and
(6) Whether the proposed rule's performance-based standard (i.e.,
``easily readable day and night'') should be replaced with more
detailed requirements or with a reference to a preexisting signage
standard, such as the standards promulgated under the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Seventeen comments were received. A few commenters addressed the
issue of which facilities should be covered by the rule. Some of these
commenters favored extending coverage to hospitals and other facilities
possessing nuclear or radioactive material. Reasons given by such
commenters included:
(1) Anyone who introduces a dangerous weapon, explosive, or other
dangerous material into such a facility most likely intends to do harm;
(2) Anyone bringing such an item into a hospital or other facility
that stores nuclear or radioactive material should expect to be
penalized for doing so;
(3) Signs will ensure that the rule is not violated by accident,
although anyone who intends to cause harm in a covered facility would
likely not be deterred by the rule anyway; and
(4) Those seeking to access nuclear or radioactive materials in
such facilities for illicit purposes would likely be able to locate
those materials even if there are no signs posted pursuant to this
rule. Thus, it is not valid to view such signs as rendering sensitive
materials easier to find and therefore less secure.
Another commenter, however, recommended against extending the sign-
posting requirement to these facilities. This commenter (a major
medical institution) reasoned that:
(1) Signs would attract attention to the location of nationally
tracked sources, thereby potentially rendering them less secure, given
that many licensees currently try to avoid drawing attention to the
locations of such materials;
(2) The strong language in the posting could be frightening to
patients in hospitals, who may already be in a vulnerable state due to
their medical situations; and
(3) Persons with unescorted access to facility areas of concern can
simply be trained both to understand the rule themselves and to warn
persons they escort about the rule's existence.
This commenter also noted that if the National Source Tracking
System is expanded to include Category 3 and 1/10th Category 3 sources,
an expansion of the rule to cover hospitals or other facilities would
reach substantially more facilities than it otherwise would.
Several of the comments recommended that the NRC provide
definitions of terms such as ``dangerous weapon,'' ``explosive,'' and
``dangerous instrument or material.'' Commenters' justifications for
recommending definitions of these terms included promoting consistency
in licensee reporting of violations of this rule and minimizing
ambiguity in a rule whose violation may result in criminal prosecution.
One commenter suggested that the content of these definitions should
relate to the security capabilities of licensees to avoid prohibiting
introduction of items that could not realistically be used to overpower
plant security teams. Another commenter recommended that definitions be
included in the rule itself, with further information and illustrations
provided in a guidance document. Another commenter recommended that the
posted notices identify any items that ordinary persons would not
expect to be considered dangerous, but which nonetheless pose special
hazards in light of the nature of the facility or the material located
at the facility. Lastly, one commenter recommended that another term
used in the proposed rule, ``introduce,'' be defined more clearly to
ensure that the rule will apply to a person who introduces a dangerous
instrument (e.g., a bullet) into the protected area by some means that
does not require the person to pass beyond a sign (e.g., by firing a
gun from outside the protected area).
As to the proposed 90-day implementation period, two industry
commenters recommended that the period be extended to 180 days to allow
sufficient time for sign procurement and installation. No other
commenters expressed views on this issue.
A few comments addressed the issue of sign location. One of these
comments
[[Page 52669]]
recommended installing signs not only at entrances, but also within
protected areas to serve as additional reminders. Another comment
sought clarification regarding areas outside the protected area but
which nonetheless contain nuclear or radioactive material, such as
licensee effluent treatment facilities, low-enriched uranium storage
facilities, and radioactive waste storage facilities. The comment
recommended that the posting requirement not apply to such areas, in
light of the fact that entrants to such areas are not required to be
searched prior to entry. Lastly, one commenter suggested allowing
licensees the option of posting notices on roadways leading to facility
checkpoints or parking areas, in addition to the notices required to be
posted at vehicle and pedestrian entrances, in order to provide advance
warning and thus facilitate the avoidance of protected areas by people
carrying weapons.
Several commenters addressed the issue of sign characteristics.
Some commenters recommended inclusion of specific rules regarding text
size and color. One commenter suggested requiring lighting to ensure
readability at night, while other commenters preferred the more
flexible performance-based standard (i.e., ``easily readable day and
night'') utilized in the proposed rule. No commenters objected to the
requirement that the notices be readable at night.
A number of comments also addressed topics beyond those
specifically identified in the statement of considerations for the
proposed rule. One commenter recommended that the rule require
establishment of temporary weapons storage sites at pedestrian and
vehicle entrances, so that persons lawfully carrying firearms can store
any weapons before entering and pick them up when they leave. Another
commenter recommended that the rule be harmonized with existing DOE
signage regulations to avoid confusion or redundancy for those
facilities that would be required to comply with both regulatory
schemes. One commenter recommended that the rule define the term
``willful'' as ``an intentional act which may include evidence of
subterfuge, masking, or malevolent intent.'' Finally, the DOJ
recommended that the statement of considerations for the final rule
clarify that the Federal Bureau of Investigation is not the only
Federal entity other than the NRC that could potentially conduct
investigations of suspected violations of this rule.
All of these comments are discussed and addressed in Section III
below.
III. Discussion of the Final Rule
The NRC is amending 10 CFR 73.81, ``Criminal Penalties,'' and
adding Sec. 73.75, ``Posting,'' to implement Sec. 654 of the Energy
Policy Act of 2005. Under the regulations, the unauthorized willful
introduction of any dangerous weapon, explosive or any other dangerous
instrument or material likely to produce substantial injury or damage
to persons or property upon the facilities or installations subject to
Sec. Sec. 236a.(1) or (4) of the AEA will be subject to the criminal
penalties set forth in Sec. 229 of the AEA. Consistent with the Energy
Policy Act Sec. 654 requirement that the regulation be posted
conspicuously at each location involved, Sec. 73.75 will require
licensees to post notices at such facilities or installations.
Facilities Covered
The NRC is primarily concerned with dangers posed by the
unauthorized introduction of weapons or explosives or other dangerous
items when nuclear material and radioactive material are present. By
listing these facilities in section 236 of the AEA, Congress has
recognized the potential danger that could result from sabotage of such
facilities; consequently, the NRC believes it prudent to also make the
willful unauthorized introduction of weapons or explosives into or upon
these facilities a Federal crime. The covered facilities include
production and utilization facilities and uranium enrichment, uranium
conversion and fuel fabrication facilities. The rule also covers some
of the facilities listed in AEA Sec. 236a.(2). Specifically, this rule
would apply to high-level waste storage and disposal facilities and
independent spent fuel storage installations. The remaining waste
facilities and installations listed in Sec. 236a.(2) that are subject
to Agreement State jurisdiction may be covered in a future rulemaking.
For other classes of licensees, the unauthorized introduction of
weapons or explosives will continue to be governed, absent other
Federal legislation, by State law.
The final rule accounts for the fact that not all portions of the
listed classes of facilities will necessarily pose sufficient security
concerns to justify imposition of criminal penalties. Therefore, the
rule's application is limited to areas within a facility or
installation's protected area, as well as portions of facilities or
installations that are not within a protected area per se but for which
security plans under 10 CFR part 73 must nonetheless be in place. The
term ``protected facility or installation'' has also been added to the
final rule to refer solely to those portions of facilities that the
criminal penalties are intended to protect. The rule's reference to
security plan requirements under Part 73, which was not included in the
proposed rule, should resolve the ambiguity identified by a commenter
regarding certain portions of facilities that are outside the protected
area but which nonetheless contain nuclear or radioactive materials.
The NRC has limited the rule's applicability to the facilities
listed in Sec. Sec. 73.75(a) and 73.81(c)(2)(i) because the
unauthorized introduction of a weapon or explosive into these
facilities poses the greatest health and safety risk and because the
NRC already pervasively regulates these facilities. Other facilities--
such as hospitals--that contain radioactive materials are not as
extensively regulated by the NRC. In order to apply Sec. 73.81 to
these other facilities, the NRC would have needed to interact with
Agreement States and other State and Federal regulators to further
assess the need for application of Sec. 73.81 to these classes of
facilities and to determine the proper placement of the required
notices and the best way to implement this regulation. As suggested by
a public comment, adding posted notices--which, under the statute, is a
required complement to the imposition of criminal penalties--to
facilities such as hospitals could raise substantial policy and
implementation issues. While the NRC acknowledges the recommendations
of some commenters that hospitals and other facilities be addressed via
this rule, the NRC believes that such extension would raise additional
complexities that would be best addressed in a separate rulemaking,
should the NRC determine at a future date that expansion of the scope
of this rule is warranted.
The NRC is not including the following facilities or materials even
though they are listed in Sec. 236 of the AEA:
Subsection 236a.(3) covering any nuclear fuel for a
utilization facility licensed under this Act, or any spent fuel from
such a facility. Section 229 of the AEA specifically applies to
``facilities and installations,'' while this subsection applies to
``nuclear fuel'' and ``spent nuclear fuel.'' Fuel is neither a facility
nor installation; therefore, Sec. 229, by its terms, is not applicable
to this subsection.
Subsection 236a.(5) covering any ``production,
utilization, waste storage, waste treatment, waste disposal, uranium
enrichment, uranium conversion, or nuclear fuel fabrication facility''
during construction of the facility, if the destruction or damage
[[Page 52670]]
caused or attempted to be caused could adversely affect public health
and safety. The NRC is primarily concerned with dangers posed by the
unauthorized introduction of weapons or explosives into facilities when
special nuclear material, byproduct material, or source material is
present. Therefore, Sec. 73.81(c) will apply only to those facilities
designated in Sec. 73.81(c)(2)(i) upon the receipt of such material.
An unauthorized introduction of a weapon or explosive resulting in
sabotage covered by AEA Sec. 236 before the receipt of special nuclear
material, byproduct material, or source material already constitutes a
Federal crime. Although the proposed rule utilized the terms ``nuclear
material'' and ``radioactive material'' instead of ``special nuclear
material, byproduct material, or source material,'' the former terms
are potentially vague and imprecise. Therefore, the final rule is using
the latter terminology in order to avoid potential misinterpretation.
This change, which appears in Sec. Sec. 73.75(b)(2) and 73.81(c)(4),
is intended to be clarifying rather than substantive.
Subsection 236a.(6) covering any ``primary or backup
facility from which a radiological emergency preparedness alert or
warning system is activated.'' These facilities do not contain special
nuclear material, byproduct material, source material, or the controls
needed to operate a facility.
Subsection 236a.(7) pertaining to other materials or
property that the NRC designates by order or regulation. The NRC is
excluding this section because the rulemaking implementing this
subsection of Sec. 236 has not commenced. The NRC may revisit this
exclusion as part of the rulemaking implementing the Energy Policy Act
of 2005 revisions to Sec. 236, or in a separate rulemaking.
In response to a public comment, one class of facilities and
installations that is exempted under the final rule includes those
facilities and installations that already must comply with similar
signage requirements under DOE regulations. DOE regulations already
criminalize the unauthorized introduction of dangerous weapons,
explosives, or other dangerous instruments or materials into or upon
various facilities and installations within DOE's jurisdiction and
require that such facilities and installations post notices to that
effect. The DOE regulations, however, establish criminal penalties
that, while not substantially different, are nonetheless not identical
to those being established by this rule. Exempting these facilities
from this rule avoids establishing what would in effect be identical
crimes punishable by different penalties with respect to those
facilities.
Criminal Penalties, Investigation, and Prosecution
Under the final rule's terms, whoever willfully introduces, without
authorization, weapons or explosives into or upon any protected
facility or installation (as defined in Sec. 73.81(c)(2)) that is
enclosed by a fence, wall, floor, roof, or other barrier would be
guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction, could be punished by a
fine not to exceed $5,000, or imprisonment for not more than one year,
or both, as set forth in section 229c of the AEA. Whoever willfully
introduces, without authorization, weapons or explosives into or upon
any other protected facility or installation would be, upon conviction,
punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000, as set forth in section
229b of the AEA. The maximum penalties would vary based upon whether
the facility in question is enclosed by a fence, wall, floor, roof, or
other barrier. The proposed rule's version of 73.81(c)(1) was worded in
a manner that, when read in conjunction with AEA sections 229b and
229c, was circular and potentially confusing. The final rule therefore
contains a reworded section 73.81(c)(1). This modification is not,
however, intended to change the substance of the rule in any way.
This final rule does not interfere with State prosecution of these
crimes under State law, but it does allow the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and
Explosives, or other Federal law enforcement agencies to investigate
and DOJ to prosecute in addition to, or instead of, the State
government.
The NRC is also not making violations of Sec. 73.75 criminally
punishable under AEA sections 229b and 229c. The Commission's objective
in this rulemaking, which the Commission believes is consistent with
the Congressional intent, is to ensure that the criminal penalties in
sections 229b and 229c apply to persons who introduce weapons into
facilities without authorization. Furthermore, the NRC has sufficient
administrative sanctions at its disposal to enforce the posting
requirements.
Regulatory Burden--Posting of Signs
This regulation would not impose any burden on States. The only
burden the regulation would impose on licensees is the statutorily
mandated requirement that signs containing the quoted text in Sec.
73.75 be posted conspicuously at each of the listed facilities. The
rule requires that these signs be posted at all entrances to the
protected area, as well as all entrances to buildings not within a
protected area that nonetheless contain special nuclear material,
byproduct material, or source material (except with respect to
buildings for which security plans are not required under 10 CFR part
73). The link between the posting requirements and the NRC's security
plan requirements under part 73 has been added to the final rule in
response to a public comment to ensure consistency between the NRC's
security regulations and the criminal penalties (and licensee posting
obligations) being established. The signs may also include other
prohibitions already posted at the point of entry.
Although one commenter recommended that additional signs be posted
within each facility or installation to serve as further reminders of
the regulation's criminal penalties, any person who willfully brings a
prohibited item into the facility or installation will have already
committed the crime by the time such reminder signs are encountered.
The posting of such signs, therefore, will not be required, but
licensees are not precluded from posting additional signs.
As the rule states, the signs must be easily readable day and night
by both pedestrian and vehicular traffic. The NRC, in response to
comments, is providing a 180-day implementation period for this
requirement to allow licensees sufficient time to acquire and install
the appropriate signs.
The posting requirement is primarily performance-based, stating
that signs should be ``easily readable day and night.'' Accordingly,
any design and placement that renders the notice ``easily readable day
and night'' will satisfy this standard. Although one commenter
suggested requiring lighting in order to ensure readability at night,
the NRC believes it is sufficient to rely upon the performance-based
standard for night readability, because different facilities, as well
as different sign locations at each facility, may have different
lighting needs.
Although the ``easily readable day and night'' standard is
primarily performance-based, it is the NRC's view that compliance with
an up-to-date version of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
signage standards (currently set forth at 28 CFR part 36, appendix A,
section 4.30) will satisfy the ``easily readable day and night''
standard with respect to those aspects of sign design and placement
that the ADA standards address. In their present version, for instance,
the ADA standards address topics such as character proportion,
character height, finish and
[[Page 52671]]
contrast, and mounting location and height. Providing licensees the
option of relying upon the ADA standards to help ensure compliance with
the ``easily readable day and night'' standard should promote an
appropriate balance of flexibility and predictability. The ADA
standards may not, however, address all aspects of the ``easily
readable day and night'' standard. For example, the current ADA
standards do not address readability at night. Therefore, the ADA
standards may, in practice, serve only as partial guidance with respect
to sign design and placement.
One commenter recommended that the rule require licensees to
provide a means for workers and visitors who lawfully possess weapons
to temporarily store them at facility entrances prior to entering, such
that the weapons could be retrieved later upon exiting. In the NRC's
view, the presence or absence of temporary weapons storage for this
purpose is primarily a convenience and logistical issue of potential
concern to licensees, their employees, and other plant visitors; it is
not an issue of significant regulatory concern that the NRC must
address. Therefore, the final rule will neither prohibit nor mandate
the presence of such temporary weapons storage at the entrances to
affected facilities or installations.
Similarly, the posting of additional notices on roadways leading to
checkpoints or parking areas is neither required nor prohibited by the
rule and is, therefore, left to the licensee's discretion. It is
important to note, however, that the location of a posted notice will
define the point at which introduction into the facility occurs for
purposes of this final rule, at least where introduction occurs at a
traditional vehicle or pedestrian entrance to the facility.
Accordingly, licensees wishing to post notices in addition to those
required by Sec. 73.75, such as to provide advance notice about the
Sec. 73.81 criminal penalties to workers or visitors who are
approaching a facility entrance or a courtesy storage site for
prohibited items, would be advised to ensure that such notices will not
be mistaken for the notices required to be posted at facility entrances
under Sec. 73.75. This could be accomplished, for instance, by not
using the precise language on the ``advance warning'' notices that is
required to be used on the notices posted pursuant to Sec. 73.75. Such
additional ``advance warning'' notices, of course, would not take the
place of the notices that Sec. 73.75 requires to be posted at all
vehicle and pedestrian entrances to each protected facility or
installation.
Although the text of the final rule does not specifically address
such situations, there may, as a practical matter, be cases in which a
covered facility does not require its own posted notices. This would
seem most likely to occur when one covered facility is embedded
completely within the protected area of another covered facility (for
example, an independent spent fuel storage facility located entirely
within a nuclear power plant's protected area). Because Sec.
73.75(b)(1) requires the posting of notices for protected areas only at
the protected area's entrances, the embedded facility would not require
its own notices if none of the embedded facility's entrances serve as
entrances to the larger protected area.
One non-substantive change to the Sec. 73.75 posting provision is
that a new subsection 73.75(a) has been added to identify the
categories of facilities to which Sec. 73.75 applies. This eliminates
an unnecessary cross reference to Sec. 73.81(c). Another non-
substantive change involves Sec. 73.81(c)(2) of the proposed rule. The
requirement found in that provision was redundant, serving merely to
remind readers that there are associated posting requirements in Sec.
73.75. Because some of the definitions in Sec. 73.81(c) of the final
rule perform a similar reminder function by referencing the Sec. 73.75
posting requirements, Sec. 73.81(c)(2) is unnecessary and has been
removed.
Definitions of Key Terms
The unauthorized introduction--whether by carrying, transporting,
discharging of a firearm, or otherwise--of weapons, explosives, or
other dangerous instruments or materials into or upon the area marked
by the posted notices will constitute a Federal crime under this final
rule. For purposes of this final rule, ``without authorization'' means
lacking authorization, as part of one's official duties, to carry the
item in question. Accordingly, the introduction of weapons by security
guards, peace officers, or military personnel as part of their official
duties would be ``authorized'' and these individuals would not be
subject to criminal sanctions under this rule. Additionally, the
introduction of potentially dangerous industrial tools, machinery, or
other materials into a facility as part of one's job duties would
likewise not be subject to criminal sanctions under this rule.
As noted above, a new term, ``protected facility or installation,''
has been added to the final rule. This term, which encompasses solely
those portions of facilities that the criminal penalties are meant to
protect, is included to ensure that the posting requirements under
Sec. 73.75 and the criminal penalty provisions under Sec. 73.81 will
be consistent with one another (a task previously performed by the
proposed rule's definition of ``introduce'') and to create a simple
means of referring, in Sec. 73.81(c)(1), to the facility areas that
provision is meant to cover.
The terms ``dangerous weapons,'' ``dangerous instrument or
material,'' and ``explosives'' are not defined in the statute that
these regulations would implement. In addition, the DOE regulations
referred to above utilize these same terms to define comparable
criminal conduct but do not define them. The NRC has determined,
however, that enforcement could be enhanced by providing definitions
for at least some of these terms. Furthermore, a number of public
comments recommended providing definitions to promote clarity and
consistency in the rule's implementation.
Accordingly, the NRC, after consultation with DOJ, has adopted a
set of definitions from existing Federal criminal statutes. A newly
inserted definition for the rule's term ``dangerous weapon'' references
existing definitions found at 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3) and 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)
for the term ``firearm'' and the 18 U.S.C. 930(g)(2) definition of the
term ``dangerous weapon.'' \1\ Although these relatively broad
incorporated definitions may overlap with one another in many respects,
the rule references each of them in order to ensure that no
legitimately dangerous items will be inadvertently left uncovered by
this rule. In addition, a new definition for ``explosive'' incorporates
the definition of ``explosive'' found at 18 U.S.C. 844(j). The
referenced ``firearm'' definitions do provide exceptions for antique
weapons, certain recreational and sporting guns, and army surplus
ordnance. Those exceptions, however, will have no effect for purposes
of this final rule, because antique weapons, recreational and sporting
guns, and army surplus ordnance still fall within the terms of the 18
U.S.C. 930(g)(2) definition of ``dangerous weapon,'' which broadly
covers any ``weapon, device, instrument, material, or substance,
animate or inanimate, that is used for, or is readily capable of,
causing death or
[[Page 52672]]
serious bodily injury.'' This is appropriate because even the types of
weapons excepted under the ``firearm'' definitions are not appropriate
for introduction, without authorization, into highly secure nuclear
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Because the term ``dangerous weapon'' as used in 18 U.S.C.
930(g)(2) does not expressly cover firearms, the NRC believes it is
appropriate to incorporate definitions of ``firearm'' as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NRC does not plan to issue guidance for licensees beyond what
is contained in this statement of considerations to further define
these terms. The NRC considers extensive guidance to licensees
regarding the reporting requirements associated with this final rule to
be unnecessary. The purpose of the rule is to criminalize the
unauthorized introduction of items that licensee security plans should
already be prohibiting as part of their existing security efforts. Such
items include guns, explosives, and any other items that would pose a
legitimate security threat if brought into a protected facility without
authorization. Unremarkable personal items such as pocket knives
attached to key chains, butter knives in lunch boxes, and so on are not
intended to be covered by this rule, and so would not trigger any
licensee reporting requirements absent some further facts (such as, for
example, evidence of intent to commit sabotage) which would implicate
some other criminal provision or other basis for reporting the
incident. Indeed, the 18 U.S.C. 930(g)(2) definition of ``dangerous
weapon,'' which the final rule's definition of ``dangerous weapon''
incorporates, expressly excludes pocket knives with blades less than
2\1/2\ inches long. With these principles in mind, as well as the
additional clarity provided by the definitions of ``dangerous weapon,''
``firearm,'' and ``explosive'' that are being incorporated from
existing Federal criminal statutes, the NRC expects that licensees will
be able to comply with the reporting requirements associated with this
rule without additional formal guidance. As explained in the next
section of this statement of considerations, however, the NRC, after
consulting with DOJ, will consider whether to adopt any additional
guidance that is submitted by the regulated community to the NRC for
review.
As to the term ``willful,'' the NRC is also declining a commenter's
recommendation that the term be defined. The NRC expects that
prosecutors and courts will define the term as it is usually defined
when used in Federal criminal statutes. The U.S. Supreme Court has
stated that, ``[a]s a general matter, when used in the criminal
context, a `willful' act is one undertaken with a `bad purpose.' ''
Bryan v. United States, 524 U.S. 184, 191 (1998). One common way to
prove the existence of a ``bad purpose'' is to show that the defendant
``acted with knowledge that his conduct was unlawful.'' Id. at 192.
This is consistent with one commenter's suggestion that the definition
of willful should refer to ``evidence of subterfuge, masking, or
malevolent intent,'' because such evidence would tend to indicate that
the defendant knew the conduct in question was unlawful. Further, the
easily readable notices posted at all vehicle and pedestrian entrances
will help to ensure that all visitors are aware of the prohibition.
The definition of the term ``introduce,'' which was included in the
proposed rule, is replaced in the final rule for clarification purposes
with a new Sec. 73.81(c)(3), which serves to define the entire phrase
that is used in Sec. 73.81(c)(1) (i.e., ``carrying, transporting, or
otherwise introducing or causing to be introduced''). The new Sec.
73.81(c)(3) removes any possible suggestion that the terms
``carrying,'' ``transporting,'' and ``otherwise introducing'' should be
analyzed separately, rather than as a single concept meant to cover any
conceivable method of introduction. The new provision also more
expressly accounts for the fact that entrance to a protected facility
or installation might occur at a location that is not a traditional
vehicle or pedestrian entrance, and which therefore might not be in the
vicinity of a notice posted pursuant to Sec. 73.75. For instance, a
perpetrator carrying a prohibited item might try to enter the facility
by breaching a fence, wall, or other barrier, or by some other means
that occurs away from the vehicle and pedestrian entrances and any
Sec. 73.75 notices. Under the proposed rule's formulation, it could
have been unclear in these circumstances whether or when an
introduction has actually occurred, because the proposed rule relied
entirely upon the location of the notice to define when an
``introduction'' occurs. The new Sec. 73.81(c)(3), therefore, relies
upon a common sense concept of entering a facility for those instances
where entry does not occur at a traditional ``entrance.'' When entrance
to the facility does occur at a traditional vehicle or pedestrian
entrance, however, the Sec. 73.75 notice will remain the boundary
marker for purposes of this rule.
Relationship of Rule to Licensee Security Procedures
As explained in the statements of consideration for the proposed
rule, this rule should not require any changes to licensee security
procedures. Under Sec. 73.71(b)(1) and paragraph I(d) of appendix G to
Part 73, licensees are required to report within one hour, followed by
a written report within 60 days, ``the actual or attempted introduction
of contraband into a protected area, material access area, vital area,
or transport.'' For purposes of the final rule, weapons, explosives, or
other dangerous instruments or materials that are introduced without
authorization would be ``contraband.'' Licensees should note that the
purpose of this rule is to broaden Federal prosecutorial authority, not
to change licensee security practices.
With that said, licensees who suspect they have uncovered actual or
attempted violations of this rule are encouraged to promptly notify
local or Federal law enforcement authorities, who may provide
additional guidance as circumstances warrant. Licensees may also, of
course, contact the NRC for further guidance. The NRC does not
currently plan to issue any additional guidance regarding the
procedures that licensees should employ upon discovering actual or
suspected violations or attempted violations of this rule. If licensees
desire additional guidance regarding the procedural steps to follow
after discovery of suspected or actual violations or attempted
violations of this rule, the NRC is willing to review and consider
whether to adopt any guidance that the regulated community sees fit to
propose. The NRC anticipates that it would consult with DOJ before
endorsing any proposed guidance.
Finally, the NRC notes that the preexisting responsibilities of
licensees to maintain the security of their facilities are not altered
by the fact that this rule is now making one particular class of
security threat--the unauthorized introduction into protected
facilities of dangerous weapons, explosives, or other dangerous
instruments or materials--a Federal crime.
IV. Voluntary Consensus Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995,
Public Law 104-113, requires that Federal agencies use technical
standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies unless using such a standard is inconsistent with
applicable law or is otherwise impractical. In this final rule, the NRC
is establishing criminal penalties for the unauthorized introduction of
weapons or explosives into or upon certain facilities and installations
subject to the regulatory authority of the NRC. This action does not
constitute the establishment of a standard that
[[Page 52673]]
contains generally applicable requirements.
V. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Environmental
Assessment
The NRC has determined under the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969, as amended, and the NRC's regulations in Subpart A of 10 CFR
part 51, that this rule is not a major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human environment and that, therefore, an
environmental impact statement is not required. The basis for this
determination is as follows:
The Need for the Rule:
This final rule is needed to implement Sec. 229 of the AEA. In
Sec. 654 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Congress amended Sec. 229
of the AEA, authorizing the NRC to issue regulations making it a
Federal crime to, without authorization, introduce weapons or
explosives into specified classes of facilities and installations
subject to the regulatory authority of the NRC. Section 229 was also
amended to require that each such regulation be posted conspicuously at
the location involved.
Environmental Impacts of the Rule:
The NRC has completed its evaluation of the rule and concludes that
it will not cause any significant environmental impact. The only action
required by the rule is the requirement in Sec. 73.75 that licensees
place a notice at each entrance to the protected area and to any
buildings not within a protected area that contain special nuclear
material, byproduct material, or source material and which are required
to have security plans under 10 CFR part 73. Licensees already post
notices at the entrances to facilities, and this rule allows licensees
to combine the notice required in Sec. 73.75 with these other notices.
The NRC requested public comments on the environmental assessment
included with the proposed rule, which likewise predicted that there
would be no significant environmental impacts, but no comments on the
topic were received. The final rule includes essentially the same
posting requirements that were found in the proposed rule, with only
minor clarifications as to which buildings and areas are, and are not,
covered by the posting requirements, as well as additional information
regarding permissible sign formats. Therefore, the NRC has concluded
that there will be little to no environmental impact of creating and
posting the notices required by this final rule. Accordingly, the NRC
concludes that there will be no significant environmental impacts
associated with this action.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered
not promulgating this rule (the ``no-action'' alternative). This would
result in leaving unfulfilled the congressional authorization the NRC
had sought. Moreover, because implementation of the rule would not
result in any significant environmental impacts, the no-action
alternative would not significantly reduce environmental impacts.
Accordingly, the NRC has determined in this environmental
assessment that there will be no significant offsite impact to the
public from this action.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
This rule does not contain information collection requirements and,
therefore, is not subject to the requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This rule does not
establish any reporting requirements. In addition, the posting
requirements contained in this rule are not included in the definition
of information collection. This is because the text to be printed on
the required notices is being completely supplied by NRC regulation (10
CFR 73.75(b)(3)), and a requirement to publicly disclose information
that was originally provided by the Federal Government does not
constitute an ``information collection.'' 5 CFR 1320.3(c)(2).
Public Protection Notification
The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a request for information or an information collection
requirement unless the requesting document displays a currently valid
OMB control number.
VII. Regulatory Analysis
A regulatory analysis has not been prepared for this regulation.
Congress authorized the NRC to implement by regulation Sec. 654 of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005, which establishes as a Federal crime the
unauthorized introduction of weapons or explosives into NRC-designated
facilities. The AEA requires that signs be conspicuously posted to warn
facility entrants of the criminal prohibition. The only costs
associated with implementing the rule are the costs to procure, post,
and maintain these signs since procedures and organization required to
protect against the unauthorized introduction of weapons are already
required. The NRC estimates these costs to be $50 per sign, with an
estimated average of six signs per affected facility, for an average
total cost of $300 per facility. Based upon the number of facilities
that would be covered by this rule if it were effective today, the NRC
views $50,000 as a conservative industry-wide cost estimate. The NRC
considers this cost to be reasonable because of the express
congressional requirement that any facilities covered by regulations
promulgated under AEA Sec. 229a.(1) post such regulations
``conspicuously,'' and because the signs are required to be posted only
at locations where entry into covered facilities would ordinarily
occur.
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
605(b)), the NRC certifies that this rule does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The
companies that own the facilities affected by this rule do not fall
within the scope of the definition of ``small entities'' set forth in
the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the size standards established by the
NRC (10 CFR 2.810).
IX. Backfit Analysis
The NRC has determined that a backfit rule, 10 CFR 50.109, 70.76,
72.62, 76.76, does not apply to this rule and that a backfit analysis
is not required. A backfit analysis is not required because the only
actions required by the rule are the procuring and posting of signs.
The conspicuous posting of notices is expressly required by Sec.
229a.(2) of the AEA for any facility covered by regulations promulgated
under Sec. 229a.(1), and so the requirement to post notices does not
result from an exercise of NRC discretion. In any event, the posting of
notices pursuant to this rule does not require the modification of or
additions to systems, structures, components, or design of a facility
or the design approval or manufacturing license for a facility, or the
procedures or organization required to design, construct, or operate a
facility.
Likewise, the criminal penalties established by this rule merely
authorize Federal prosecution of certain crimes, and therefore do not
require the modification of or additions to systems, structures,
components, or design of a facility or the design approval or
manufacturing license for a facility, or the procedures or organization
required to design, construct, or operate a facility.
X. Congressional Review Act
In accordance with the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808),
the NRC
[[Page 52674]]
has determined that this action is not a major rule and has verified
this determination with the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget.
XI. Agreement State Compatibility
Under the ``Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility of
Agreement State Programs'' approved by the NRC on June 30, 1997, and
published in the Federal Register on September 3, 1997 (62 FR 46517),
this rule is classified as Compatibility Category ``NRC.''
Compatibility is not required for Category ``NRC'' regulations. The NRC
program elements in this category are those that relate directly to
areas of regulation reserved to the NRC by the AEA, or the provisions
of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Although an Agreement
State may not adopt program elements reserved to NRC, it may wish to
inform its licensees of certain requirements via a mechanism that is
consistent with the particular State's administrative procedure laws
but does not confer regulatory authority on the State.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 73
Criminal penalties, Export, Hazardous materials transportation,
Import, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization Act of
1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, the NRC is adopting the
following amendments to 10 CFR part 73.
PART 73--PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF PLANTS AND MATERIALS
0
1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 53, 161, 149, 68 Stat. 930, 948, as amended,
sec. 147, 94 Stat. 780 (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2167, 2169, 2201); sec. 201,
as amended, 204, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1245, sec. 1701, 106
Stat. 2951, 2952, 2953 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5844, 2297f); sec. 1704, 112
Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); Energy Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L.
109-58, 119 Stat. 594 (2005). Section 73.1 also issued under secs.
135, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C, 10155,
10161). Section 73.37(f) also issued under sec. 301, Pub. L. 96-295,
94 Stat. 789 (42 U.S.C. 5841 note). Section 73.57 is issued under
sec. 606, Pub. L. 99-399, 100 Stat. 876 (42 U.S.C. 2169).
0
2. Section 73.75 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 73.75 Posting.
(a) This section applies to:
(1) Production or utilization facilities;
(2) High-level waste storage or disposal facilities and independent
spent fuel storage installations;
(3) Uranium enrichment, uranium conversion, or nuclear fuel
fabrication facilities.
(b)(1) Licensees or certificate holders operating facilities
described in paragraph (a) of this section that have a protected area
shall conspicuously post notices at every vehicle and pedestrian
entrance to the protected area.
(2) Licensees or certificate holders operating facilities described
in paragraph (a) of this section that include buildings not within a
protected area that nonetheless contain special nuclear material,
byproduct material, or source material shall conspicuously post notices
at the personnel and vehicle entrances to each such building, except
with respect to buildings for which no security plan is required under
this part.
(3) The required notices must state: ``The willful unauthorized
introduction of any dangerous weapon, explosive, or other dangerous
instrument or material likely to produce substantial injury or damage
to persons or property into or upon these premises is a Federal crime.
(42 U.S.C. 2278a.)''
(4) Every notice posted under this section must be easily readable
day and night by both pedestrian and vehicular traffic entering the
facility or installation.
(5) These notices may be combined with other notices.
(c) This section does not apply to facilities that, in addition to
being regulated by the NRC under a license or certificate of compliance
issued by the Commission, are also covered by U.S. Department of Energy
regulations imposing criminal penalties, and associated posting
requirements, under section 229 of the Atomic Energy Act with respect
to unauthorized introduction of dangerous weapons, explosives, or other
dangerous instruments or materials likely to produce substantial injury
or damage to persons or property.
0
3. In Sec. 73.81, paragraph (b) is revised and paragraph (c) is added
to read as follows:
Sec. 73.81 Criminal penalties.
* * * * *
(b) The regulations in part 73 that are not issued under sections
161b, 161i, or 161o for the purposes of section 223 are as follows:
Sec. Sec. 73.1, 73.2, 73.3, 73.4, 73.5, 73.6, 73.8, 73.25, 73.45,
73.75, 73.80, and 73.81.
(c)(1) No person without authorization may carry, transport, or
otherwise introduce or cause to be introduced any dangerous weapon,
explosive, or other dangerous instrument or material likely to produce
substantial injury or damage to persons or property into or upon a
protected facility or installation. Willful violations of this
provision are punishable by the criminal penalties set forth in
sections 229b and 229c of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
(2) As used in this section:
(i) ``Protected facility or installation'' means any production or
utilization facility, high-level waste storage or disposal facility,
independent spent fuel storage installation, uranium enrichment,
uranium conversion, or nuclear fuel fabrication facility, but does not
include those portions of such facilities that are not required under
Sec. 73.75(b) of this part to be identified by notices posted at their
pedestrian and vehicle entrances, and does not include facilities
described in Sec. 73.75(c) of this part.
(ii) ``Without authorization'' means not authorized as part of
one's official duties to carry the weapon, explosive, or other
instrument or material;
(iii) ``Dangerous weapon'' includes any firearm, as defined in
either 18 U.S.C. 921 or 26 U.S.C. 5845, or dangerous weapon, as defined
in 18 U.S.C. 930;
(iv) ``Explosive'' means any explosive as defined in 18 U.S.C.
844(j).
(3) An item, such as a dangerous weapon, explosive, or other
dangerous instrument or material, is considered to have been carried,
transported, or otherwise introduced or caused to be introduced into or
upon a protected facility or installation for purposes of paragraph
(c)(1) of this section once the item has traveled past a notice posted
pursuant to Sec. 73.75 of this part at a vehicle or pedestrian
entrance to the protected facility, or once the item has entered the
protected facility or installation at a location that is not a vehicle
or pedestrian entrance to the facility, whether such entry is
accomplished through, over, under, or around a fence, wall, floor,
roof, or other structural barrier enclosing the protected facility or
installation or by any other means.
(4) For all protected facilities or installations that do not
possess special nuclear material, byproduct material, or source
material as of the effective date of this rule, this provision shall
take effect upon receipt of such material at the applicable facility or
installation.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of October 2009.
[[Page 52675]]
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9-24566 Filed 10-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P