NRC Enforcement Policy Revision, 60485-60487 [2010-24561]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 189 / Thursday, September 30, 2010 / Notices
employer/affiliation information (name
of institution, address, country,
telephone); title/position of attendee. To
expedite admittance, attendees with
U.S. citizenship can provide identifying
information 3 working days in advance
by contacting Peter Meister via e-mail at
peter.g.meister@nasa.gov or by
telephone at (202) 358–1557.
Dated: September 24, 2010.
P. Diane Rausch,
Advisory Committee Management Officer,
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010–24485 Filed 9–29–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2008–0497]
NRC Enforcement Policy Revision
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Policy statement.
AGENCY:
The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC or Commission) is
publishing a major revision to its
Enforcement Policy (Enforcement Policy
or Policy) to clarify the use of terms and
update the Policy, removing outdated
information and adding information
addressing enforcement issues in areas
that are not currently directly addressed
in the Policy.
DATES: This revision is effective on
September 30, 2010. The NRC intends to
solicit comments on this revised Policy
approximately 18 months after the
effective date.
ADDRESSES: NRC’s Agencywide
Document Access and Management
System (ADAMS): Publicly available
documents created or received at the
NRC are available electronically at the
NRC’s Electronic Reading Room at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. From this page, the public
can gain entry into ADAMS, which
provides text and image files of NRC’s
public documents. If you do not have
access to ADAMS or if there are
problems in accessing the documents
located in ADAMS, contact the NRC’s
PDR reference staff at 1–800–397–4209,
301–415–4737, or by e-mail to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
The NRC maintains the Enforcement
Policy on its Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov; select Public Meetings
and Involvement, then Enforcement,
and then Enforcement Policy. The
Enforcement Policy is also accessible
via ADAMS accession number
ML093480037.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Sep 29, 2010
Jkt 220001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Doug Starkey, Office of Enforcement,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555;
Doug.Starkey@nrc.gov, 301–415–3456.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On January 25, 2007 (72 FR 3429), the
NRC published a notice announcing that
the NRC was undertaking a major
revision of its Enforcement Policy. On
September 15, 2008 (73 FR 53286), the
NRC published a notice of availability of
draft and request for comments on its
proposed revised Policy. A corrected
proposed revised Policy was published
(73 FR 61442) on October 16, 2008. The
public comment period for the revised
Policy ended on November 14, 2008. On
June 8, 2009 (74 FR 27191), the NRC
published a notice of availability and
request for comments on additional
proposed revisions to Section 6.0,
Supplements—Violation Examples, of
the proposed revised Policy. The June 8,
2009, Notice of Availability and request
for comments applied only to additional
proposed revisions to Section 6.0 of the
proposed revised Policy. The public
comment period for the proposed
revised Supplements ended on July 8,
2009.
As discussed in the Supplementary
Information of the September 15, 2008
(73 FR 53286) document, the NRC, in
developing the revised Policy, in many
instances proposed to reword, delete, or
move (i.e., move to the NRC
Enforcement Manual, an NRC staff
guidance document) some of the
information in the current Policy. In
addition, the NRC had also planned to
add detailed violation examples to the
Enforcement Manual to serve as further
guidance to NRC inspectors. However,
based on public comments received in
response to the September and October
2008 publications of the proposed
revised Enforcement Policy, the NRC
reconsidered its original plan to have
abbreviated violation examples in the
revised Policy and detailed violation
examples in the Enforcement Manual.
The NRC will continue its past practice
of providing violation examples in the
Enforcement Policy. These revised
violation examples cover a broad range
of circumstances in each of the four
severity levels in each of 14 activity
areas. Also, much of the material that
the NRC had originally planned to
remove from the revised Policy was
subsequently retained based in part on
comments received during the 2008 and
2009 public comment periods.
A summary of the comments and the
NRC’s responses associated with the
2008 and 2009 Notices are available at
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60485
the NRC’s Electronic Reading Room at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html (ADAMS Accession
Numbers ML091830260 and
ML092650309, respectively).
Summary of Major Revisions to the
Enforcement Policy
1. Revisions to Table of Base Civil
Penalties
Regulatory requirements have varying
degrees of safety, security, or
environmental significance. For that
reason, the NRC imposes various base
civil penalties depending on the specific
circumstances. Section 8.0, Tables A
and B, of the revised Enforcement
Policy set forth the base civil penalties
for various reactor, fuel cycle, material,
and vendor programs. The NRC uses a
graded approach in assessing civil
penalties based on the severity level of
the violation and on the class of
licensee, vendor, or other person. Base
civil penalties generally take into
account the significance of a violation as
the primary consideration, whereas the
licensee’s ability to pay is a secondary
consideration. The NRC reviews each
proposed civil penalty on its own merits
and, after considering all relevant
circumstances, may adjust the base civil
penalties in Table A for Severity Level
I, II, and III violations as reflected in
Table B of the Enforcement Policy (i.e.,
100 percent for Severity Level I
violations, 80 percent for Severity Level
II violations, and 50 percent for Severity
Level III violations). However, in no
instance would a civil penalty for any
one violation exceed the current
statutory limit, which is presently
capped at $140,000 per day per
violation. In consideration of the above,
the following revisions have been made
to the Table of Base Civil Penalties:
a. Geologic Repository for Spent Fuel
and/or High-Level Waste Repository
The Table of Base Civil Penalties in
the current Enforcement Policy has no
provisions that address a geologic
repository. Therefore, the NRC is
revising the civil penalty table in the
revised Policy to include geologic
repositories to ensure that, if the need
arises, the NRC has the appropriate tools
to take enforcement actions.
Based on the potential nuclear
material inventory involved at a
geologic repository and the
corresponding safety consequences that
could arise at the site (specifically to
employees), the NRC determined that
the statutorily allowed maximum base
civil penalty for a Severity Level I
violation is appropriate. In determining
the base civil penalty that should be
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
60486
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 189 / Thursday, September 30, 2010 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6
applied to a geologic repository, the
NRC also considered that the licensing
criteria used in developing 10 CFR Part
60, ‘‘Disposal of High-Level Radioactive
Wastes in Geologic Repositories,’’ and
10 CFR Part 63, ‘‘Disposal of High-Level
Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic
Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada,’’
were comparable to the criteria applied
to reactors and spent fuel facilities. The
NRC has included this information in
Table A of the revised Policy under the
generic heading ‘‘High-Level Waste
Repository’’ to address the possibility of
any future engineered underground
disposal facilities used for the storage of
HLW.
b. Uranium Enrichment Facilities
The current Enforcement Policy only
provides a base civil penalty for gaseous
diffusion plants (GDPs) and does not
address other enrichment facilities such
as gas centrifuge or laser enrichment
facilities. The NRC has issued licenses
for two gas centrifuge uranium
enrichment facilities with enrichment
levels of up to 5 weight percent
uranium-235 (U–235) and 10 weight
percent U–235 and licensed a pilot laser
enrichment facility. Currently, NRC is
performing the licensing review for a
third uranium enrichment facility with
an enrichment level of 5 weight percent
uranium-235. Therefore, the NRC
believes that it is appropriate to provide
a base civil penalty for these types of
facilities at this time.
In developing a base civil penalty for
uranium enrichment facilities, the staff
compared the radiological, chemical
hazards of licensed materials, criticality
and security hazards of these facilities
with both gaseous diffusion plants
(GDPs) and Category III fuel fabricators
and, through an overall comparison,
provided an appropriate base civil
penalty. Both enrichment facilities and
Category III fuel fabricators have
Category III special nuclear material
(i.e., these facilities are limited to
enrichments of less than 20 percent of
U–235 (special nuclear material of low
strategic significance)). In addition, the
radiological and chemical risks of gas
centrifuge uranium enrichment facilities
are considered very similar to Category
III fuel fabricators. Therefore, the
necessary physical protection and
material control and accounting
requirement (based on the category of
facility) for uranium enrichment
facilities are similar to those required
for Category III fuel fabricators. For
these reasons, the staff believes that the
base civil penalty for Severity Level I
violations at uranium enrichment
facilities in Table A should be
established at $35,000, the same as the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Sep 29, 2010
Jkt 220001
amount already established for Category
III fuel fabricators. For these reasons, the
staff believes that the base civil penalty
for Severity Level I violations at
uranium enrichment facilities in Table
A should be established at $35,000, the
same as the amount already established
for Category III fuel fabricators.
c. Uranium Conversion Facilities
The staff proposes to increase the base
civil penalty for enforcement activities
associated with uranium conversion
facilities to $70,000 from the current
amount of $14,000. Presently, the only
operating uranium conversion plant in
the United States is the Honeywell
facility located in Metropolis, IL.
Currently, uranium conversion
facilities are in the same base civil
penalty category as test reactors and
industrial radiographers with a base
civil penalty amount of $14,000. The
staff compared the radiological,
chemical hazards of licensed materials,
criticality hazards of a conversion
facility to similar hazards at GDPs and
Category III fuel fabricators and
concluded that the radiological and
chemical hazards at uranium conversion
facilities are similar in comparison to
those of GDPs. However, the criticality
risk present at a GDP and Category III
fuel fabricators is not a major risk factor
at a uranium conversion facility.
The staff also considered the security
implications associated with the
operation of uranium conversion
facilities as compared to the operation
of GDPs and to Category III fuel
fabricators. That comparison indicates
that the security and safeguards
measures necessary at a uranium
conversion facility are similar to or less
than those of Category III fuel fabricators
and GDPs. However, because of the
large number of potential chemical
hazards associated with licensed
materials and certain radiological
hazards, protection against potential
criminal activities is required to protect
worker and public health and safety.
In comparison, the overall
radiological hazards and chemical
hazards associated with licensed
materials for uranium conversion
facilities are much more significant than
those of test reactors and industrial
radiographers and Category III fuel
fabricators but less than those of GDPs.
For these reasons, the staff believes that
the base civil penalty for violations at
uranium conversion facilities in Table A
should be established at $70,000, which
is the same amount established for fuel
fabricators authorized to possess
Category I or II quantities of special
nuclear material.
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2. Other Major Revisions to the
Enforcement Policy
a. Interim Enforcement Policy Regarding
the Use of Alternative Dispute
Resolution
The Interim Enforcement Policy on
the Use of Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) was established to set
forth an interim Policy that the NRC
would follow while undertaking a pilot
program to test the use of ADR. Because
the ADR pilot program has been
successfully completed and the ADR
program has since been fully
implemented, the staff has revised the
Policy statement on ADR to reflect this
change.
b. Violation Examples
The violation examples have been
reorganized and expanded from the 8
activity areas contained in the current
Enforcement Policy to 14 activity areas
in the revised Policy. These changes
were made for clarification and ease of
use; in other cases, the activity areas
reflect changes made to NRC
regulations. For example, the NRC
rewrote the facility construction
violation examples to include licensees
under 10 CFR Part 52, ‘‘Licenses,
Certifications, and Approvals for
Nuclear Power Plants,’’ and fuel cycle
facilities. Fuel cycle and materials
operations were reorganized into
separate activity areas. New activity
areas were added for reactor and fuel
facility security, materials security,
information security, and fitness for
duty.
c. Addition of a Glossary
A Glossary, containing many of the
terms commonly used throughout the
NRC enforcement process, has been
added to the revised Policy.
d. Terminology Change
The revised Enforcement Policy
includes a change to previous Policy
Statement terminology that was
published in the Federal Register on
December 18, 2000 (65 FR 79139).
Specifically, the NRC has replaced the
term ‘‘sealed source or device’’ with the
term ‘‘regulated material’’ both in the
body of the revised Policy, Section
2.3.4, and in the Table of Base Civil
Penalties, Table A, category f. The term
‘‘sealed’’ was deleted from this section
since the same enforcement approach is
used for both sealed and unsealed
sources. The term ‘‘regulated material’’
captures all present and future NRC
regulated material.
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 189 / Thursday, September 30, 2010 / Notices
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
Procedural Requirements
Paperwork Reduction Act
This policy statement does not
contain new or amended information
collection requirements subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing
requirements were approved by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), approval number 3150–0136.
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.
Congressional Review Act
In accordance with the Congressional
Review Act of 1996, the NRC has
determined that this action is not a
major rule and has verified this
determination with the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs.
Dated at Rockville, MD, this 24th day of
September 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–62981; File No. SR–CBOE–
2010–086]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change To Modify the Fees
Schedule for the CBOE Stock
Exchange
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6
September 23, 2010.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on
September 14, 2010, the Chicago Board
Options Exchange, Incorporated (the
‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘CBOE’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and
III below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
2 17
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Sep 29, 2010
Jkt 220001
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
self-regulatory organization included
statements concerning the purpose of
and basis for the proposed rule change
and discussed any comments it received
on the proposed rule change. The text
of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below.
The Exchange has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below,
of the most significant parts of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
[FR Doc. 2010–24561 Filed 9–29–10; 8:45 am]
1 15
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange proposes to modify the
Fees Schedule for its CBOE Stock
Exchange (‘‘CBSX’’). The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange’s Web site (https://
www.cboe.org/legal), at the Exchange’s
principal office, and at the
Commission’s Public Reference Room.
1. Purpose
CBSX proposes to adopt the Trading
Permit Holder Application Fees that
apply to CBOE. The purpose of the
proposed rule change is to offset some
of the expenses incurred by the
Exchange in connection with CBSX
Trading Permit Holder applicants and
existing CBSX Trading Permit Holders.
A description of the application fees is
provided below.
The Individual Applicant Fee
(Trading Permit Holder) is payable by a
new individual applicant for Trading
Permit Holder status on the Exchange.
The applicant’s Fingerprint Processing
Fee is included as part of this fee. The
New Trading Permit Holder Orientation
& Exam Fee is payable by each applicant
seeking Trading Permit Holder status,
which requires a trading function.
The TPH Organization Application
Fee (Corporation/Partnership/LLC) is
payable by an applicant that desires to
be a TPH organization on the Exchange.
This fee encompasses the TPH
Organization Application and related
documentation, one Responsible
Person’s Orientation & Exam Fee and
Fingerprint Fee associated with the TPH
Organization Application, and
Associated Person(s) Fees that are part
of this TPH Organization Application.
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60487
The TPH Organization Renewal Fee
(Corporation/Partnership/LLC) is
payable by a former trading firm
member or TPH organization that
reapplies for Trading Permit Holder
status within nine months of its Trading
Permit Status termination date and
becomes an effective TPH organization
within one year of its Trading Permit
Status termination date. This fee
encompasses the TPH Organization
Application and related documentation
and one Responsible Person who is a
former Responsible Person who
reapplies within nine months of his
termination date and becomes an
effective Responsible Person within one
year of his termination date.
The Associated Person Fee is payable
for the addition of certain individuals
on a TPH organization’s Form BD. This
fee includes the related Fingerprint
Processing Fee. This fee is payable by
each executive officer, general partner,
or LLC Manager. Additionally, this fee
is payable by each principal shareholder
that has 5% or more direct ownership
of a class of a voting security of a TPH
organization corporation, limited
partner who has the right to receive
upon dissolution, or has contributed,
5% or more of the partnership’s capital,
and LLC member who has the right to
receive upon dissolution, or has
contributed, 5% or more of the LLC’s
capital. This fee is also payable by any
person classified as a ‘‘Control Person’’
of the TPH organization.
The Fingerprint Processing Fee will
be assessed for employees of Trading
Permit Holders and any other individual
requesting the Exchange to process a
fingerprint, electronically or otherwise,
excluding fingerprint requirements for
Individual Applicants, individuals
applying for Renewal/Change of Status,
and Associated Persons.
The Renewal/Change of Status Fee is
payable by a former individual Trading
Permit Holder who reapplies for
Trading Permit Holder status within
nine months of his Trading Permit
Holder status termination date and
becomes an effective Trading Permit
Holder within one year of his Trading
Permit Holder status termination date. A
former individual Trading Permit
Holder or former individual member
who reapplies for Trading Permit
Holder status within nine months of
termination from Trading Permit Holder
status will be assessed the Renewal/
Change of Status fee at the time of
submission of the application. If that
person becomes an effective Trading
Permit Holder more than one year after
his Trading Permit Holder status
termination date, the person will then
be charged an additional fee equal to the
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 189 (Thursday, September 30, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60485-60487]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24561]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2008-0497]
NRC Enforcement Policy Revision
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Policy statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) is
publishing a major revision to its Enforcement Policy (Enforcement
Policy or Policy) to clarify the use of terms and update the Policy,
removing outdated information and adding information addressing
enforcement issues in areas that are not currently directly addressed
in the Policy.
DATES: This revision is effective on September 30, 2010. The NRC
intends to solicit comments on this revised Policy approximately 18
months after the effective date.
ADDRESSES: NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System
(ADAMS): Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC
are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, the public
can gain entry into ADAMS, which provides text and image files of NRC's
public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are
problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's
PDR reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
The NRC maintains the Enforcement Policy on its Web site at https://www.nrc.gov; select Public Meetings and Involvement, then Enforcement,
and then Enforcement Policy. The Enforcement Policy is also accessible
via ADAMS accession number ML093480037.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Starkey, Office of Enforcement,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555;
Doug.Starkey@nrc.gov, 301-415-3456.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On January 25, 2007 (72 FR 3429), the NRC published a notice
announcing that the NRC was undertaking a major revision of its
Enforcement Policy. On September 15, 2008 (73 FR 53286), the NRC
published a notice of availability of draft and request for comments on
its proposed revised Policy. A corrected proposed revised Policy was
published (73 FR 61442) on October 16, 2008. The public comment period
for the revised Policy ended on November 14, 2008. On June 8, 2009 (74
FR 27191), the NRC published a notice of availability and request for
comments on additional proposed revisions to Section 6.0, Supplements--
Violation Examples, of the proposed revised Policy. The June 8, 2009,
Notice of Availability and request for comments applied only to
additional proposed revisions to Section 6.0 of the proposed revised
Policy. The public comment period for the proposed revised Supplements
ended on July 8, 2009.
As discussed in the Supplementary Information of the September 15,
2008 (73 FR 53286) document, the NRC, in developing the revised Policy,
in many instances proposed to reword, delete, or move (i.e., move to
the NRC Enforcement Manual, an NRC staff guidance document) some of the
information in the current Policy. In addition, the NRC had also
planned to add detailed violation examples to the Enforcement Manual to
serve as further guidance to NRC inspectors. However, based on public
comments received in response to the September and October 2008
publications of the proposed revised Enforcement Policy, the NRC
reconsidered its original plan to have abbreviated violation examples
in the revised Policy and detailed violation examples in the
Enforcement Manual. The NRC will continue its past practice of
providing violation examples in the Enforcement Policy. These revised
violation examples cover a broad range of circumstances in each of the
four severity levels in each of 14 activity areas. Also, much of the
material that the NRC had originally planned to remove from the revised
Policy was subsequently retained based in part on comments received
during the 2008 and 2009 public comment periods.
A summary of the comments and the NRC's responses associated with
the 2008 and 2009 Notices are available at the NRC's Electronic Reading
Room at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (ADAMS Accession
Numbers ML091830260 and ML092650309, respectively).
Summary of Major Revisions to the Enforcement Policy
1. Revisions to Table of Base Civil Penalties
Regulatory requirements have varying degrees of safety, security,
or environmental significance. For that reason, the NRC imposes various
base civil penalties depending on the specific circumstances. Section
8.0, Tables A and B, of the revised Enforcement Policy set forth the
base civil penalties for various reactor, fuel cycle, material, and
vendor programs. The NRC uses a graded approach in assessing civil
penalties based on the severity level of the violation and on the class
of licensee, vendor, or other person. Base civil penalties generally
take into account the significance of a violation as the primary
consideration, whereas the licensee's ability to pay is a secondary
consideration. The NRC reviews each proposed civil penalty on its own
merits and, after considering all relevant circumstances, may adjust
the base civil penalties in Table A for Severity Level I, II, and III
violations as reflected in Table B of the Enforcement Policy (i.e., 100
percent for Severity Level I violations, 80 percent for Severity Level
II violations, and 50 percent for Severity Level III violations).
However, in no instance would a civil penalty for any one violation
exceed the current statutory limit, which is presently capped at
$140,000 per day per violation. In consideration of the above, the
following revisions have been made to the Table of Base Civil
Penalties:
a. Geologic Repository for Spent Fuel and/or High-Level Waste
Repository
The Table of Base Civil Penalties in the current Enforcement Policy
has no provisions that address a geologic repository. Therefore, the
NRC is revising the civil penalty table in the revised Policy to
include geologic repositories to ensure that, if the need arises, the
NRC has the appropriate tools to take enforcement actions.
Based on the potential nuclear material inventory involved at a
geologic repository and the corresponding safety consequences that
could arise at the site (specifically to employees), the NRC determined
that the statutorily allowed maximum base civil penalty for a Severity
Level I violation is appropriate. In determining the base civil penalty
that should be
[[Page 60486]]
applied to a geologic repository, the NRC also considered that the
licensing criteria used in developing 10 CFR Part 60, ``Disposal of
High-Level Radioactive Wastes in Geologic Repositories,'' and 10 CFR
Part 63, ``Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic
Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada,'' were comparable to the criteria
applied to reactors and spent fuel facilities. The NRC has included
this information in Table A of the revised Policy under the generic
heading ``High-Level Waste Repository'' to address the possibility of
any future engineered underground disposal facilities used for the
storage of HLW.
b. Uranium Enrichment Facilities
The current Enforcement Policy only provides a base civil penalty
for gaseous diffusion plants (GDPs) and does not address other
enrichment facilities such as gas centrifuge or laser enrichment
facilities. The NRC has issued licenses for two gas centrifuge uranium
enrichment facilities with enrichment levels of up to 5 weight percent
uranium-235 (U-235) and 10 weight percent U-235 and licensed a pilot
laser enrichment facility. Currently, NRC is performing the licensing
review for a third uranium enrichment facility with an enrichment level
of 5 weight percent uranium-235. Therefore, the NRC believes that it is
appropriate to provide a base civil penalty for these types of
facilities at this time.
In developing a base civil penalty for uranium enrichment
facilities, the staff compared the radiological, chemical hazards of
licensed materials, criticality and security hazards of these
facilities with both gaseous diffusion plants (GDPs) and Category III
fuel fabricators and, through an overall comparison, provided an
appropriate base civil penalty. Both enrichment facilities and Category
III fuel fabricators have Category III special nuclear material (i.e.,
these facilities are limited to enrichments of less than 20 percent of
U-235 (special nuclear material of low strategic significance)). In
addition, the radiological and chemical risks of gas centrifuge uranium
enrichment facilities are considered very similar to Category III fuel
fabricators. Therefore, the necessary physical protection and material
control and accounting requirement (based on the category of facility)
for uranium enrichment facilities are similar to those required for
Category III fuel fabricators. For these reasons, the staff believes
that the base civil penalty for Severity Level I violations at uranium
enrichment facilities in Table A should be established at $35,000, the
same as the amount already established for Category III fuel
fabricators. For these reasons, the staff believes that the base civil
penalty for Severity Level I violations at uranium enrichment
facilities in Table A should be established at $35,000, the same as the
amount already established for Category III fuel fabricators.
c. Uranium Conversion Facilities
The staff proposes to increase the base civil penalty for
enforcement activities associated with uranium conversion facilities to
$70,000 from the current amount of $14,000. Presently, the only
operating uranium conversion plant in the United States is the
Honeywell facility located in Metropolis, IL.
Currently, uranium conversion facilities are in the same base civil
penalty category as test reactors and industrial radiographers with a
base civil penalty amount of $14,000. The staff compared the
radiological, chemical hazards of licensed materials, criticality
hazards of a conversion facility to similar hazards at GDPs and
Category III fuel fabricators and concluded that the radiological and
chemical hazards at uranium conversion facilities are similar in
comparison to those of GDPs. However, the criticality risk present at a
GDP and Category III fuel fabricators is not a major risk factor at a
uranium conversion facility.
The staff also considered the security implications associated with
the operation of uranium conversion facilities as compared to the
operation of GDPs and to Category III fuel fabricators. That comparison
indicates that the security and safeguards measures necessary at a
uranium conversion facility are similar to or less than those of
Category III fuel fabricators and GDPs. However, because of the large
number of potential chemical hazards associated with licensed materials
and certain radiological hazards, protection against potential criminal
activities is required to protect worker and public health and safety.
In comparison, the overall radiological hazards and chemical
hazards associated with licensed materials for uranium conversion
facilities are much more significant than those of test reactors and
industrial radiographers and Category III fuel fabricators but less
than those of GDPs. For these reasons, the staff believes that the base
civil penalty for violations at uranium conversion facilities in Table
A should be established at $70,000, which is the same amount
established for fuel fabricators authorized to possess Category I or II
quantities of special nuclear material.
2. Other Major Revisions to the Enforcement Policy
a. Interim Enforcement Policy Regarding the Use of Alternative Dispute
Resolution
The Interim Enforcement Policy on the Use of Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) was established to set forth an interim Policy that
the NRC would follow while undertaking a pilot program to test the use
of ADR. Because the ADR pilot program has been successfully completed
and the ADR program has since been fully implemented, the staff has
revised the Policy statement on ADR to reflect this change.
b. Violation Examples
The violation examples have been reorganized and expanded from the
8 activity areas contained in the current Enforcement Policy to 14
activity areas in the revised Policy. These changes were made for
clarification and ease of use; in other cases, the activity areas
reflect changes made to NRC regulations. For example, the NRC rewrote
the facility construction violation examples to include licensees under
10 CFR Part 52, ``Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear
Power Plants,'' and fuel cycle facilities. Fuel cycle and materials
operations were reorganized into separate activity areas. New activity
areas were added for reactor and fuel facility security, materials
security, information security, and fitness for duty.
c. Addition of a Glossary
A Glossary, containing many of the terms commonly used throughout
the NRC enforcement process, has been added to the revised Policy.
d. Terminology Change
The revised Enforcement Policy includes a change to previous Policy
Statement terminology that was published in the Federal Register on
December 18, 2000 (65 FR 79139). Specifically, the NRC has replaced the
term ``sealed source or device'' with the term ``regulated material''
both in the body of the revised Policy, Section 2.3.4, and in the Table
of Base Civil Penalties, Table A, category f. The term ``sealed'' was
deleted from this section since the same enforcement approach is used
for both sealed and unsealed sources. The term ``regulated material''
captures all present and future NRC regulated material.
[[Page 60487]]
Procedural Requirements
Paperwork Reduction Act
This policy statement does not contain new or amended information
collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing requirements were approved by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), approval number 3150-0136.
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.
Congressional Review Act
In accordance with the Congressional Review Act of 1996, the NRC
has determined that this action is not a major rule and has verified
this determination with the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs.
Dated at Rockville, MD, this 24th day of September 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-24561 Filed 9-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P