Consideration of Rulemaking To Address Prompt Remediation of Residual Radioactivity During Operations, 42074-42076 [2011-17913]
Download as PDF
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
42074
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2011 / Proposed Rules
firms. Assuming a normal distribution,
the majority of producers and handlers
of tart cherries may be classified as
small entities.
This action would change the grower
diversion regulations prescribed under
the order. This rule would suspend
indefinitely the regulations in § 930.158
establishing random row as a method of
grower diversion. With growers
consistently choosing other diversion
methods which offer more flexibility
and fewer potential problems, the Board
recommended this suspension to bring
grower diversion requirements in line
with current industry practices. The
authority for this action is provided for
in § 930.58 of the order. The Board
unanimously recommended this action
at a meeting on March 24, 2011.
This proposed rule would not impose
any additional costs on growers. The
grower diversion program under the
order is completely voluntary. In an
effort to stabilize supplies and prices,
the tart cherry industry uses
mechanisms under the order to attempt
to bring supply and demand into
balance. Under voluntary grower
diversion, growers can divert cherries
from production in exchange for Board
issued grower diversion certificates
stating the quantity diverted. Growers
can then present these certificates to
handlers who may redeem them as a
method of complying with their
restricted percentage obligation under
volume regulation. By diverting cherries
from production, growers can avoid the
costs of harvesting and transporting
fruit, reduce the supply, and mitigate
the downward pressure on prices that
result from oversupply.
This action would only suspend the
regulations that provide random row as
a method of grower diversion. The other
three options, whole lot, partial block,
and in-orchard tank, would remain
unchanged by this action. Random row
is the least utilized of the grower
diversion options, with the other three
options accounting for 97 percent of
diversion volume. Consequently, this
change would bring the regulations in
line with current industry preferences
and practices. Further, the remaining
grower diversion options offer the
grower some flexibility to control
quality, which in turn could increase
grower returns. The effects of this rule
are not expected to be
disproportionately greater or less for
small entities than for larger entities.
One alternative action considered by
the Board was to remove the regulations
pertaining to random row diversion.
However, the Board agreed that
suspension would be the most
appropriate action should the industry
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:39 Jul 15, 2011
Jkt 223001
determine it would like to reinstate
random row as a diversion option in the
future. Thus, termination was rejected
as an alternative.
This rule would not impose any
additional reporting or recordkeeping
requirements on either small or large
tart cherry 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.
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.
USDA has not identified any relevant
Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or
conflict with this proposed rule.
In addition, the Board’s meeting was
widely publicized throughout the tart
cherry industry and all interested
persons were invited to attend the
meeting and participate in Board
deliberations on all issues. Like all
Board meetings, the March 24, 2011,
meeting was a public meeting and all
entities, both large and small, were able
to express views on this issue. Finally,
interested persons are invited to submit
comments on this proposed rule,
including the regulatory and
informational impacts of this action on
small businesses.
A small business guide on complying
with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop
marketing agreements and orders may
be viewed at: https://www.ams.usda.gov/
MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide.
Any questions about the compliance
guide should be sent to Laurel May at
the previously mentioned address in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
A ten-day comment period is
provided to allow interested persons to
respond to this proposal. Ten days is
deemed appropriate because the 2011–
12 tart cherry crop harvest will begin in
mid to late July 2011. Also, growers
need to make their determinations as to
grower diversion prior to harvest.
Further, growers and handlers are aware
of this action, which was unanimously
recommended by the Board at a public
meeting on March 24, 2011. All written
comments timely received will be
considered before a final determination
is made on this matter.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 930
Marketing agreements, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Tart
cherries.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 930 is proposed to
be amended as follows:
PART 930—TART CHERRIES GROWN
IN MICHIGAN, NEW YORK,
PENNSYLVANIA, OREGON, UTAH,
WASHINGTON, AND WISCONSIN
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 930 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
§ 930.158
[Amended]
2. In § 930.158:
A. Suspend paragraph (b)(1)
indefinitely.
B. In paragraph (c)(3), redesignate the
first two sentences as paragraph (c)(3)(i)
and the remaining sentences as
paragraph (c)(3)(ii).
C. Newly redesignated paragraph
(c)(3)(ii) is suspended indefinitely.
Dated: July 12, 2011.
Rayne Pegg,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–17883 Filed 7–15–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 20
[NRC–2011–0162]
Consideration of Rulemaking To
Address Prompt Remediation of
Residual Radioactivity During
Operations
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of public Webinar and
request for comment.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (Commission or NRC) is
seeking input from the public, licensees,
Agreement States, non-Agreement
States, and other stakeholders on a
potential rulemaking to address prompt
remediation of residual radioactivity
during the operational phase of licensed
material sites and nuclear reactors. The
NRC has not initiated a rulemaking, but
is in the process of gathering
information and seeking stakeholder
input on this subject for developing a
technical basis document. To aid in this
process, the NRC is requesting
comments on the issues discussed in
Section III, ‘‘Specific Questions,’’ in the
Supplementary Information Section of
this document. Additionally, the NRC
will hold a public Webinar to facilitate
the public’s and other stakeholders’
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\18JYP1.SGM
18JYP1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2011 / Proposed Rules
understanding of these issues and the
submission of comments.
DATES: The public Webinar will be held
in Rockville, Maryland on July 25, 2011,
from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. (EDT). Submit
comments on the issues discussed in
this document by September 16, 2011.
Comments received after this date will
be considered if it is practical to do so.
ADDRESSES: Please include Docket ID
NRC–2011–0162 in the subject line of
your comments. Comments submitted in
writing or in electronic form will be
posted on the NRC Web site and on the
Federal rulemaking Web site, https://
www.regulations.gov. Because your
comments will not be edited to remove
any identifying or contact information,
the NRC cautions you against including
any information in your submission that
you do not want to be publicly
disclosed.
The NRC requests that any party
soliciting or aggregating comments
received from other persons for
submission to the NRC inform those
persons that the NRC will not edit their
comments to remove any identifying or
contact information, and therefore, they
should not include any information in
their comments that they do not want
publicly disclosed. You may submit
comments by any one of the following
methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for documents filed under Docket ID
NRC–2011–0162. Address questions
about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher,
telephone: 301–492–3668, e-mail:
Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
• Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey,
Chief, Rules, Announcements, and
Directives Branch (RADB), Office of
Administration, Mail Stop: TWB–05–
B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001.
• Fax comments to: RADB at 301–
492–3446.
You can access publicly available
documents related to this notice using
the following methods:
• NRC’s Public Document Room
(PDR): The public may examine and
have copied, for a fee, publicly available
documents at the NRC’s PDR, O1–F21,
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): Publicly available documents
created or received at the NRC are
available online in the NRC Library 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 the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:39 Jul 15, 2011
Jkt 223001
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 Draft
Proposed Technical Basis is available
electronically under ADAMS Accession
Number ML111580353.
• Federal Rulemaking Web site:
Public comments and supporting
materials related to this notice can be
found at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching on Docket ID NRC–2011–
0162.
Mr.
Chad Glenn, Office of Federal and State
Materials and Environmental
Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–
6722; email: chad.glenn@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
I. Background
The NRC recently published the
Decommissioning Planning Rule (DPR)
(76 FR 33512; June 17, 2011). The DPR
applies to the operational phase of a
licensed facility, and requires licensees
to operate in a way to minimize spills,
leaks, and other unplanned releases of
radioactive contaminants into the
environment. It also requires licensees
to check periodically for radiological
contamination throughout the site,
including subsurface soil and
groundwater. The DPR does not have a
mandatory requirement for licensees to
conduct radiological remediation during
operations. Within the Staff
Requirements Memorandum (SRM),
SRM–SECY–07–0177 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML073440549), that
approved the proposed DPR, the
Commission directed the staff to ‘‘make
further improvements to the
decommissioning planning process by
addressing remediation of residual
radioactivity during the operational
phase with the objective of avoiding
complex decommissioning challenges
that can lead to legacy sites.’’ Therefore,
the NRC staff is considering a potential
rulemaking requiring prompt
remediation during operations, and has
begun gathering information pertinent
to its considerations.
II. Discussion
Currently, there are no NRC
regulations that require licensees to
promptly remediate radiological
contamination. To enhance stakeholder
engagement in developing a technical
basis as a precursor to a proposed rule,
the NRC staff developed a Draft
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42075
Proposed Technical Basis to facilitate
discussion with, and to solicit input
from, interested stakeholders. The Draft
Proposed Technical Basis describes the
NRC’s preferred approach as a
rulemaking to require licensees to
promptly remediate radioactive spills
and leaks when certain threshold limits
are met. NRC’s preferred approach
contemplates using the NRC screening
values for soil and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
maximum contamination levels for
groundwater as the threshold limits.
The preferred approach would also
include a provision allowing licensees
to delay remediation when certain
conditions are met. To justify a delayed
remediation, licensees would be
required to perform analyses such as
dose assessment, risk-assessments and/
or cost-benefit analyses for the NRC’s
review.
In addition to the preferred approach,
the NRC staff considered the following
as alternative frameworks for requiring
prompt remediation during operations:
(1) Issuing a regulation that would
require licensees to conduct prompt
remediation of a spill or leak when
certain contaminant thresholds, such as
the restricted release limits in Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR), § 20.1403, are exceeded. Unlike
the preferred approach, this alternative
would not provide the licensee with the
opportunity to conduct an analysis to
justify delayed remediation.
(2) Issuing site-specific license
conditions requiring timely remediation
following identification of
contamination above some specified
volume or concentration.
(3) Issuing new guidance in the form
of a NUREG.
(4) No action (i.e., the NRC staff
would rely on existing regulations and
guidance documents to encourage
licensees to consider prompt
remediation after spills or leaks).
For more information on the preferred
approach and alternatives, please refer
to the Draft Proposed Technical Basis
(ML111580353).
III. Specific Questions
To assist the NRC in developing a
comprehensive technical basis
document for a potential rulemaking
requiring prompt remediation, the NRC
is seeking stakeholder input on the
following questions:
1. Should the NRC conduct
rulemaking to address remediation of
residual radioactivity during the
operational phase? Why or why not?
2. If the NRC implements a rule that
requires prompt remediation of
radioactive spills and leaks, what
E:\FR\FM\18JYP1.SGM
18JYP1
42076
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2011 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
concentration, dose limits, or other
threshold limits should trigger prompt
remediation? Should the thresholds
differ for soil versus groundwater
contamination? For example, should the
NRC screening criteria be used to
establish threshold levels for soil
contamination? Should the EPA’s
maximum contaminant levels be used
for drinking water?
3. Should the NRC allow licensees to
justify delaying remediation under
certain conditions when the
contaminant level exceeds the threshold
limit? If yes, then what conditions
should be used to justify a delayed
remediation?
4. Should factors such as safety,
operational impact, and cost be a basis
for delaying remediation?
5. If the NRC implements a rule that
allows licensees to analyze residual
radioactivity to justify delaying
remediation, then what should the
licensee’s analysis cover? For example,
what kind of dose assessment, riskassessments and/or cost-benefit analyses
should be performed to justify delayed
remediation? What other types of
analyses are relevant?
6. If the NRC implements a rule that
allows licensees to analyze residual
radioactivity to justify delaying
remediation, what role should the cost
of prompt remediation versus
remediation at the time of
decommissioning play in the analysis?
7. If the NRC implements a rule that
allows licensees to analyze residual
radioactivity to justify delaying
remediation, what standards or criteria
should a licensee use to demonstrate to
the NRC that a sufficient justification to
delay remediation has been met?
8. Are there any other alternatives
beyond those discussed in the Draft
Proposed Technical Basis document
that the NRC should have considered to
address prompt remediation?
9. What other issues should the NRC
staff consider in developing a technical
basis for a rulemaking to address
prompt remediation of residual
radioactivity during site operations?
IV. Public Webinar
To facilitate the understanding of the
public and other stakeholders of these
issues and the submission of comments,
the NRC staff has scheduled a public
Webinar, from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. (EDT).
Webinar participants will be able to
view the presentation slides prepared by
the NRC and electronically submit
comments over the Internet. Participants
must register to participate in the
Webinar. Registration information may
be found in the meeting notice
(ML111780802). The meeting notice can
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:39 Jul 15, 2011
Jkt 223001
also be accessed through the NRC’s
public Web site under the headings
Public Meetings & Involvement > Public
Meeting Schedule; see Web page
https://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/
public-meetings/index.cfm.
Additionally, the final agenda for the
public Webinar and the Draft Proposed
Technical Basis document will be
posted no fewer than 10 days prior to
the Webinar at this Web site. Those who
are unable to participate via Webinar
may also participate via teleconference.
For details on how to participate via
teleconference, please contact Sarah
Achten; telephone: 301–415–6009;
email: sarah.achten@nrc.gov or T.R.
Rowe; telephone: 301–415–8008; email:
t.rowe@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day
of July 2011.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Keith I. McConnell,
Deputy Director, Decommissioning and
Uranium Recovery, Licensing Directorate,
Division of Waste Management and
Environmental Protection, Office of Federal
and State Materials and Environmental
Management Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011–17913 Filed 7–15–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[REG–126519–11]
RIN 1545–BK41
Determining the Amount of Taxes Paid
for Purposes of the Foreign Tax Credit
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
by cross-reference to temporary
regulations.
AGENCY:
In the Rules and Regulations
section in this issue of the Federal
Register, the IRS is issuing temporary
regulations that provide guidance
relating to the determination of the
amount of taxes paid for purposes of the
foreign tax credit. These regulations
address certain highly structured
arrangements that produce
inappropriate foreign tax credit results.
The text of those temporary regulations
published in this issue of the Federal
Register also serves as the text of these
proposed regulations.
DATES: Written or electronic comments
and requests for a public hearing must
be received by October 17, 2011.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Send submissions to
CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–126519–11), room
5205, Internal Revenue Service, PO Box
7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington,
DC 20044. Submissions may be hand
delivered Monday through Friday
between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.
to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–126519–11),
Courier’s desk, Internal Revenue
Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20044, or sent
electronically, via the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov (IRS REG–126519–
11).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Concerning the regulations, Jeffrey P.
Cowan, (202) 622–3850; concerning
submissions of comments or a request
for a public hearing, Oluwafunmilayo
Taylor at (202) 622–7180.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
Background and Explanation of
Provisions
Temporary regulations in the Rules
and Regulations section of this issue of
the Federal Register contain
amendments to the Income Tax
Regulations (26 CFR part 1) which
provide rules relating to the
determination of the amount of taxes
paid for purposes of the foreign tax
credit. The text of those regulations also
serves as the text of these proposed
regulations. The preamble to the
temporary regulations explains the
temporary regulations and these
proposed regulations. The regulations
affect individuals and corporations that
claim direct and indirect foreign tax
credits.
Special Analyses
It has been determined that this notice
of proposed rulemaking is not a
significant regulatory action as defined
in Executive Order 12866. Therefore, a
regulatory assessment is not required. It
has also been determined that section
553(b) of the Administrative Procedure
Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply
to these regulations, and because the
regulations do not impose a collection
of information on small entities, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
chapter 6) does not apply. Pursuant to
section 7805(f), these regulations have
been submitted to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration for comment on its
impact on small business.
Comments and Requests for a Public
Hearing
Before these proposed regulations are
adopted as final regulations,
consideration will be given to any
electronic or written comments (a
E:\FR\FM\18JYP1.SGM
18JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 137 (Monday, July 18, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42074-42076]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17913]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 20
[NRC-2011-0162]
Consideration of Rulemaking To Address Prompt Remediation of
Residual Radioactivity During Operations
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of public Webinar and request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Commission or NRC) is
seeking input from the public, licensees, Agreement States, non-
Agreement States, and other stakeholders on a potential rulemaking to
address prompt remediation of residual radioactivity during the
operational phase of licensed material sites and nuclear reactors. The
NRC has not initiated a rulemaking, but is in the process of gathering
information and seeking stakeholder input on this subject for
developing a technical basis document. To aid in this process, the NRC
is requesting comments on the issues discussed in Section III,
``Specific Questions,'' in the Supplementary Information Section of
this document. Additionally, the NRC will hold a public Webinar to
facilitate the public's and other stakeholders'
[[Page 42075]]
understanding of these issues and the submission of comments.
DATES: The public Webinar will be held in Rockville, Maryland on July
25, 2011, from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. (EDT). Submit comments on the issues
discussed in this document by September 16, 2011. Comments received
after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so.
ADDRESSES: Please include Docket ID NRC-2011-0162 in the subject line
of your comments. Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form
will be posted on the NRC Web site and on the Federal rulemaking Web
site, https://www.regulations.gov. Because your comments will not be
edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC
cautions you against including any information in your submission that
you do not want to be publicly disclosed.
The NRC requests that any party soliciting or aggregating comments
received from other persons for submission to the NRC inform those
persons that the NRC will not edit their comments to remove any
identifying or contact information, and therefore, they should not
include any information in their comments that they do not want
publicly disclosed. You may submit comments by any one of the following
methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for documents filed under Docket ID NRC-
2011-0162. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher,
telephone: 301-492-3668, e-mail: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules,
Announcements, and Directives Branch (RADB), Office of Administration,
Mail Stop: TWB-05-B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555-0001.
Fax comments to: RADB at 301-492-3446.
You can access publicly available documents related to this notice
using the following methods:
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine
and have copied, for a fee, publicly available documents at the NRC's
PDR, O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC
are available online in the NRC Library 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 the 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 Draft Proposed Technical Basis is available electronically under
ADAMS Accession Number ML111580353.
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Public comments and
supporting materials related to this notice can be found at https://www.regulations.gov by searching on Docket ID NRC-2011-0162.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Chad Glenn, Office of Federal and
State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-
6722; email: chad.glenn@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The NRC recently published the Decommissioning Planning Rule (DPR)
(76 FR 33512; June 17, 2011). The DPR applies to the operational phase
of a licensed facility, and requires licensees to operate in a way to
minimize spills, leaks, and other unplanned releases of radioactive
contaminants into the environment. It also requires licensees to check
periodically for radiological contamination throughout the site,
including subsurface soil and groundwater. The DPR does not have a
mandatory requirement for licensees to conduct radiological remediation
during operations. Within the Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM), SRM-
SECY-07-0177 (ADAMS Accession No. ML073440549), that approved the
proposed DPR, the Commission directed the staff to ``make further
improvements to the decommissioning planning process by addressing
remediation of residual radioactivity during the operational phase with
the objective of avoiding complex decommissioning challenges that can
lead to legacy sites.'' Therefore, the NRC staff is considering a
potential rulemaking requiring prompt remediation during operations,
and has begun gathering information pertinent to its considerations.
II. Discussion
Currently, there are no NRC regulations that require licensees to
promptly remediate radiological contamination. To enhance stakeholder
engagement in developing a technical basis as a precursor to a proposed
rule, the NRC staff developed a Draft Proposed Technical Basis to
facilitate discussion with, and to solicit input from, interested
stakeholders. The Draft Proposed Technical Basis describes the NRC's
preferred approach as a rulemaking to require licensees to promptly
remediate radioactive spills and leaks when certain threshold limits
are met. NRC's preferred approach contemplates using the NRC screening
values for soil and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
maximum contamination levels for groundwater as the threshold limits.
The preferred approach would also include a provision allowing
licensees to delay remediation when certain conditions are met. To
justify a delayed remediation, licensees would be required to perform
analyses such as dose assessment, risk-assessments and/or cost-benefit
analyses for the NRC's review.
In addition to the preferred approach, the NRC staff considered the
following as alternative frameworks for requiring prompt remediation
during operations:
(1) Issuing a regulation that would require licensees to conduct
prompt remediation of a spill or leak when certain contaminant
thresholds, such as the restricted release limits in Title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Sec. 20.1403, are exceeded.
Unlike the preferred approach, this alternative would not provide the
licensee with the opportunity to conduct an analysis to justify delayed
remediation.
(2) Issuing site-specific license conditions requiring timely
remediation following identification of contamination above some
specified volume or concentration.
(3) Issuing new guidance in the form of a NUREG.
(4) No action (i.e., the NRC staff would rely on existing
regulations and guidance documents to encourage licensees to consider
prompt remediation after spills or leaks).
For more information on the preferred approach and alternatives,
please refer to the Draft Proposed Technical Basis (ML111580353).
III. Specific Questions
To assist the NRC in developing a comprehensive technical basis
document for a potential rulemaking requiring prompt remediation, the
NRC is seeking stakeholder input on the following questions:
1. Should the NRC conduct rulemaking to address remediation of
residual radioactivity during the operational phase? Why or why not?
2. If the NRC implements a rule that requires prompt remediation of
radioactive spills and leaks, what
[[Page 42076]]
concentration, dose limits, or other threshold limits should trigger
prompt remediation? Should the thresholds differ for soil versus
groundwater contamination? For example, should the NRC screening
criteria be used to establish threshold levels for soil contamination?
Should the EPA's maximum contaminant levels be used for drinking water?
3. Should the NRC allow licensees to justify delaying remediation
under certain conditions when the contaminant level exceeds the
threshold limit? If yes, then what conditions should be used to justify
a delayed remediation?
4. Should factors such as safety, operational impact, and cost be a
basis for delaying remediation?
5. If the NRC implements a rule that allows licensees to analyze
residual radioactivity to justify delaying remediation, then what
should the licensee's analysis cover? For example, what kind of dose
assessment, risk-assessments and/or cost-benefit analyses should be
performed to justify delayed remediation? What other types of analyses
are relevant?
6. If the NRC implements a rule that allows licensees to analyze
residual radioactivity to justify delaying remediation, what role
should the cost of prompt remediation versus remediation at the time of
decommissioning play in the analysis?
7. If the NRC implements a rule that allows licensees to analyze
residual radioactivity to justify delaying remediation, what standards
or criteria should a licensee use to demonstrate to the NRC that a
sufficient justification to delay remediation has been met?
8. Are there any other alternatives beyond those discussed in the
Draft Proposed Technical Basis document that the NRC should have
considered to address prompt remediation?
9. What other issues should the NRC staff consider in developing a
technical basis for a rulemaking to address prompt remediation of
residual radioactivity during site operations?
IV. Public Webinar
To facilitate the understanding of the public and other
stakeholders of these issues and the submission of comments, the NRC
staff has scheduled a public Webinar, from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. (EDT).
Webinar participants will be able to view the presentation slides
prepared by the NRC and electronically submit comments over the
Internet. Participants must register to participate in the Webinar.
Registration information may be found in the meeting notice
(ML111780802). The meeting notice can also be accessed through the
NRC's public Web site under the headings Public Meetings & Involvement
> Public Meeting Schedule; see Web page https://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/index.cfm. Additionally, the final agenda for
the public Webinar and the Draft Proposed Technical Basis document will
be posted no fewer than 10 days prior to the Webinar at this Web site.
Those who are unable to participate via Webinar may also participate
via teleconference. For details on how to participate via
teleconference, please contact Sarah Achten; telephone: 301-415-6009;
email: sarah.achten@nrc.gov or T.R. Rowe; telephone: 301-415-8008;
email: t.rowe@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of July 2011.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Keith I. McConnell,
Deputy Director, Decommissioning and Uranium Recovery, Licensing
Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection,
Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-17913 Filed 7-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P