NRC Enforcement Policy, 48919-48923 [2011-20112]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Notices
and April 4, April 28, May 18, and June
28, 2011, provided additional
information that clarified the
application, did not expand the scope of
the application as originally noticed,
and did not change the staff’s original
proposed no significant hazards
consideration determination as
published in the Federal Register.
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendments is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated July 26, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: No.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
Date of amendment request: July 19,
2010, as supplemented by letters dated
September 24 and November 24, 2010,
and January 20, April 1, and April 14,
2011.
Brief description of amendment: The
amendment approved the cyber security
plan (CSP) and associated
implementation schedule, and revised
Paragraph 2.E of Renewed Facility
Operating License No. NPF–42 to
provide a license condition to require
the licensee to fully implement and
maintain in effect all provisions of the
NRC-approved Cyber Security Plan. The
proposed change is consistent with
Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 08–09,
Revision 6, ‘‘Cyber Security Plan for
Nuclear Power Reactors.’’
Date of issuance: July 27, 2011.
Effective date: This license
amendment is effective as of the date of
its issuance. The implementation of the
CSP, including the key intermediate
milestone dates and the full
implementation date, shall be in
accordance with the implementation
schedule submitted by the licensee on
April 1, 2011, and approved by the NRC
staff with this license amendment. All
subsequent changes to the NRCapproved CSP implementation schedule
will require prior NRC approval
pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.
Amendment No.: 197.
Renewed Facility Operating License
No. NPF–42. The amendment revised
the Operating License.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: October 12, 2010 (75 FR
62607). The supplemental letters dated
September 24 and November 24, 2010,
and January 20, April 1, and April 14,
2011, provided additional information
that clarified the application, did not
expand the scope of the application as
originally noticed, and did not change
the staff’s original proposed no
significant hazards consideration
19:06 Aug 08, 2011
Jkt 223001
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 28th day
of July 2011.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Louise Lund,
Deputy Director, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2011–19775 Filed 8–8–11; 8:45 am]
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating
Corporation, Docket No. 50–482, Wolf
Creek Generating Station, Coffey
County, Kansas
VerDate Mar<15>2010
determination as published in the
Federal Register.
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendment is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated July 27, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: No.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2011–0006]
Sunshine Federal Register Notice
Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
DATE: Weeks of August 8, 15, 22, 29,
September 5, 12, 2011.
PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference
Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland.
STATUS: Public and Closed.
AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETINGS:
Week of August 8, 2011
There are no meetings scheduled for
the week of August 8, 2011.
Week of August 15, 2011—Tentative
48919
Contact person for more information:
Rochelle Bavol, (301) 415–1651.
*
*
*
*
*
The NRC Commission Meeting
Schedule can be found on the Internet
at: https://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/
public-meetings/schedule.html.
*
*
*
*
*
The NRC provides reasonable
accommodation to individuals with
disabilities where appropriate. If you
need a reasonable accommodation to
participate in these public meetings, or
need this meeting notice or the
transcript or other information from the
public meetings in another format (e.g.
braille, large print), please notify Bill
Dosch, Chief, Work Life and Benefits
Branch, at 301–415–6200, TDD: 301–
415–2100, or by e-mail at
william.dosch@nrc.gov. Determinations
on requests for reasonable
accommodation will be made on a caseby-case basis.
*
*
*
*
*
This notice is distributed
electronically to subscribers. If you no
longer wish to receive it, or would like
to be added to the distribution, please
contact the Office of the Secretary,
Washington, DC 20555 (301–415–1969),
or send an e-mail to
darlene.wright@nrc.gov.
Dated: August 4, 2011.
Rochelle C. Bavol,
Policy Coordinator, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–20257 Filed 8–5–11; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
There are no meetings scheduled for
the week of August 15, 2011.
Week of August 22, 2011—Tentative
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
There are no meetings scheduled for
the week of August 22, 2011.
[NRC–2011–0176]
Week of August 29, 2011—Tentative
NRC Enforcement Policy
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
AGENCY:
9 a.m. Information Briefing on
Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and
Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC) Related
Activities (Public Meeting) (Contact:
Aida Rivera-Varona, 301–251–4001)
This meeting will be webcast live at
the Web address—https://www.nrc.gov.
SUMMARY:
Week of September 5, 2011—Tentative
There are no meetings scheduled for
the week of September 5, 2011.
Week of September 12, 2011—Tentative
There are no meetings scheduled for
the week of September 12, 2011.
*
*
*
*
*
*The schedule for Commission
meetings is subject to change on short
notice. To verify the status of meetings,
call (recording)—(301) 415–1292.
PO 00000
Frm 00131
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Solicitation of comments on
proposed revisions.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is soliciting written
comments from interested parties,
including public interest groups, States,
members of the public, and the
regulated industry (i.e., reactor and
materials licensees, vendors, and
contractors), on construction-related
topics addressed in this notice that the
NRC staff is evaluating for discussion in
an upcoming Commission paper that
will include recommended revisions to
the NRC Enforcement Policy. As such,
this request for comments is intended to
assist the NRC in revising its
Enforcement Policy and adequately
responding to the Commission’s request,
E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM
09AUN1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
48920
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Notices
described below. The NRC will also host
a public meeting to solicit public
comments on these construction related
proposed revisions to the Enforcement
Policy. The topics discussed in this
notice are not intended to represent all
the potential changes in the next
revision of the Enforcement Policy.
Before submitting the next Enforcement
Policy revision to the Commission for
approval, the staff intends to solicit
comments on other topics.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
September 8, 2011. Comments received
after this date will be considered if it is
practical to do so, but the Commission
is able to assure consideration only for
comments received on or before the
specified date.
ADDRESSES: Please include Docket ID
NRC–2011–0176 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–2011–0176. 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 document
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, Room O1–
F21, One White Flint North, 11555
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:06 Aug 08, 2011
Jkt 223001
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 Enforcement
Policy is available electronically under
ADAMS Accession Number
ML093480037.
• 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–
0176.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
´
Carolyn Farıa, Office of Enforcement,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone:
301–415–4050, e-mail to carolyn.fariaocasio@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Commission, in SRM–SECY–09–
0190, dated August 27, 2010 (ADAMS
accession number ML102390327),
approved a major revision to its
Enforcement Policy. The NRC published
a notice (75 FR 60485) announcing an
effective date of September 30, 2010, for
that revision to the Policy. The
Commission, in SRM–SECY–09–0190,
also directed the NRC staff (the staff) to
reevaluate the portions of the
Enforcement Policy associated with
construction activities (e.g., reactor or
uranium enrichment plants), including
under what conditions enforcement
discretion could be applied to cases
involving the holder of a Limited Work
Authorization (LWA) or Combined
License (COL). In addressing those
topics identified by the Commission, the
staff developed a number of approaches
that the staff believes appropriate to
present collectively to the Commission
for its consideration for possible
inclusion in the next Enforcement
Policy revision. What follows in bold
italics is the proposed wording for
proposed changes to the Enforcement
Policy along with background on those
topics evaluated by the staff. When
appropriate and necessary, the staff also
PO 00000
Frm 00132
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
discusses potential regulatory issues
associated with a particular topic.
Item 1: Revise Policy Sections for
Clarity
(A) Section 1.2, Applicability:
As new last paragraphs in the section,
add the following:
It is NRC policy to hold licensees,
certificate holders, and applicants
responsible for the acts of their
employees, contractors, or vendors
and their employees, and the NRC
may cite the licensee, certificate
holder, or applicant for violations
committed by its employees,
contractors, or vendors and their
employees.
The NRC may use the term
‘‘licensee’’ in this Policy when referring
to enforcement; however, in most
situations the term is applied
broadly for any of the above entities.
In some situations, the NRC intends
that the information applies
narrowly, only to license holders.
The context of the information
described in the Policy will
determine the usage of the term
‘‘licensee.’’
The foregoing language was
developed by staff to clarify the identity
of responsible entities within the
context of the Policy. However, the staff
does not intend with this proposed
language to change or alter any
enforcement practice as currently
implemented. The staff will ensure that
the final policy revision reflects the
scope of the term ‘‘licensee’’ in the
glossary.
(B) Section 2.2, Assessment Of
Violations:
In the first sentence of Section 2.2.1.a,
revise the sentence to read: ‘‘ * * *,
onsite or offsite radiation exposures,
onsite or offsite chemical hazard
exposures resulting from licensed or
certified activities * * *.’’
Add a new section, as follows:
Section 2.2.6
Construction
In accordance with 10 CFR 50.10,
no person may begin the
construction of a production or
utilization facility on a site on
which the facility is to be operated
until that person has been issued
either a construction permit under
10 CFR part 50, a combined license
under 10 CFR part 52, an early site
permit authorizing the activities
under 10 CFR 50.10(d), or a limited
work authorization under 10 CFR
50.10(d). Further, any activities
undertaken under the Changes
E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM
09AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Notices
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
during Construction (CdC)
Preliminary Acceptance Review
(PAR) Process, as developed in
Interim Staff Guidance (ISG)–025,
are at the risk of the licensee, and
the licensee is obligated to return to
the current licensing basis (CLB) if
the related license amendment
request (LAR) is subsequently not
approved by the NRC.
Also, in accordance with 10 CFR
70.23(a)(7) and 10 CFR 40.32(e),
commencement of construction
before the NRC finishes its
environmental review and issues a
license for processing and fuel
fabrication, conversion of uranium
hexafluoride, or uranium
enrichment facility construction
and operation is grounds for denial
to possess and use special nuclear
material in the plant or facility.
Additionally, in accordance with 10
CFR 70.23(b), failure to obtain
Commission approval for the
construction of the principal
structures, systems, and components
of a plutonium processing and fuel
fabrication plant before the
commencement of construction may
also be grounds for denial of a
license to possess and use special
nuclear material.
The revision to Section 2.2.1.a is to
ensure consistency with the staff’s
current process to disposition violations
related to chemical hazards exposures.
The staff believes that the addition of
Section 2.2.6 is necessary to broadly
address when and how the assessment
of violations during construction occur.
The staff is currently developing the
CdC PAR process, an elective precursor
to the license amendment review,
established via license condition.
Comments on the CdC PAR process will
be solicited under a separate FRN and
will not be addressed under this FRN.
(C) Section 6.0, Violation Examples:
Add a second paragraph to the
introduction of the section:
Many examples are written to
reflect the risks associated with the
use of radioactive or special nuclear
materials. However, violations
during construction generally occur
before the nuclear material and its
associated risk are present.
Therefore, the NRC will consider the
lower risk significance of violations
that occur during construction in
the areas of emergency
preparedness, reactor operator
licensing, and security and may
reduce the severity level for those
violations from that indicated by
the examples in those areas. The
staff must coordinate with the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:06 Aug 08, 2011
Jkt 223001
Office of Enforcement before
applying this lower risk
significance concept for violations
that occur during construction.
The staff developed this paragraph to
recognize that although certain rules
(i.e., requirements for emergency
preparedness, reactor operator licensing,
and security) apply generally during
construction activities, flexibility is
needed to factor in the lower risk
associated with certain violations that
occur during construction. The staff
believes that any applicable violation
examples in the remaining sections
would not likely warrant mitigation
during construction solely because there
is not nuclear material on site.
Item 2: Revise the Current Section 2.3,
Dispostion of Violations
Section 2.3.2 provides the Policy on
use of non-cited violations as a method
of dispositioning Severity Level IV
violations. The staff proposes to revise
this section as follows:
Section 2.3.2, Non-cited Violation
If certain criteria (described below)
are met, Severity Level IV (SL IV)
violations and violations associated
with green ROP findings (for operating
reactors) are normally dispositioned as
non-cited violations (NCVs). Inspection
reports or inspection records document
NCVs and briefly describe the corrective
action the licensee has taken or plans to
take, if known. Licensees are not
required to provide written responses to
NCVs; however, they may provide a
written response if they disagree with
the NRC’s description of the NCV and/
or dispute the validity of the NCV.
Typically all of the criteria described in
either 2.3.2.a. or b. must be met for the
disposition of a violation as an NCV.
For all SL IV violations identified
by the NRC at fuel cycle facilities
(under construction or in operation)
in accordance with 10 CFR part 70
or 10 CFR part 40 and reactors
under construction in accordance
with 10 CFR part 50 or 10 CFR part
52, before the NRC determines that
an adequate corrective action
program has been implemented, the
NRC normally issues a Notice of
Violation. Until the determination
that an adequate corrective action
program has been implemented,
NCVs may be issued for licensee/
applicant-identified SL IV
violations if the NRC has
determined that the applicable
criteria in 2.3.2.b. below are met:
a. Power Reactor Licensees
1. The licensee must place the
violation into a corrective action
PO 00000
Frm 00133
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48921
program to restore compliance and
address recurrence.
(Delete current footnote—‘‘For
reactor facilities under
construction in accordance with 10
CFR part 52, the corrective action
program must have been
demonstrated to be adequate.’’)
2. (Unchanged)
3. The violation must either not be
repetitive as a result of inadequate
corrective action, or, if repetitive, the
violation must not be NRC identified.
This criterion does not apply to
violations associated with green ROP
findings. Delete the rest of the
criteria: ‘‘AND VIOLATIONS ASSOCIATED
WITH FACILITY CONSTRUCTION UNDER 10
CFR PART 50, ‘DOMESTIC LICENSING OF
PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION FACILITIES,’
AND 10 CFR PART 52, ‘LICENSES,
CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS FOR
NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS.’ ’’
4. (Unchanged)
b. All Other Licensees (Unchanged)
Of note regarding this topic, on June
3, 2011, the NRC issued EGM–11–002,
‘‘Enforcement Discretion for LicenseeIdentified Violations at Power Reactor
Construction Sites Pursuant to Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations [10
CFR] part 52’’ (ADAMS Accession No.
ML11152A065). The purpose of this
enforcement guidance memorandum is
to clarify the guidance for exercising
enforcement discretion when the staff
dispositions as NCVs those SL IV
violations identified by licensees/
applicants at power reactors that are
under construction. To encourage
prompt identification and prompt
comprehensive correction of violations
at reactor construction sites, the staff is
authorized to disposition licensee/
applicant-identified SL IV violations as
NCVs before the agency determines that
the licensee’s/applicant’s corrective
action program (CAP) has been
demonstrated to be adequate. For
reactors, a method that NRC has found
acceptable to determine adequacy of the
CAP is for the licensee to commit to and
comply with the requirements
established by Appendix B, ‘‘Quality
Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power
Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants,’’ to
10 CFR part 50, ‘‘Domestic Licensing of
Production and Utilization Facilities.’’
For fuel cycle facilities, the NRC is
considering criteria for determining the
adequacy of a fuel cycle licensee’s CAP.
In addition, the remaining criteria of
Section 2.3.2.a of the NRC Enforcement
Policy must be met, and the licensee
must correct, or document its intent to
take specific actions to correct, the
violation within a reasonable time by
the end of the NRC inspection activity,
E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM
09AUN1
48922
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Notices
including both immediate corrective
action and any necessary action(s) to
reasonably prevent recurrence. EGM–
11–002 will be superseded with
implementation of this portion of the
Policy revision.
SRM–09–0190, Item 1.f requires staff
to ‘‘propose revisions to provide fuel
cycle licensees with credit for effective
corrective actions programs’’. The staff
acknowledges that further work being
done to address Item 1.f of SRM–09–
0190 has the potential to generate
additional changes to this section of the
Policy. The staff will ensure that the
final policy revision is coordinated to
reflect both initiatives.
Item 3: Revise Policy Sections on
Enforcement Discretion
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
A) Section 3.8, Notices of Enforcement
Discretion for Operation Power Reactors
and Gaseous Diffusion Plants:
Add a footnote to the section title that
states: ‘‘NOEDs will not be used at
reactors during construction before
the Commission’s 10 CFR 52.103(g)
or 10 CFR 50.57 finding, as
applicable.’’
The staff considered development of
an NOED process for use (1) After a COL
is issued but prior to the 10 CFR
52.103(g) finding (after which point, the
licensee’s Technical Specifications are
in effect), (2) after the issuance of a
construction permit pursuant to 10 CFR
50.50 but prior to the 10 CFR 50.57
operations finding, and (3) after the
issuance of an LWA but prior to the
issuance of a COL. The Enforcement
Policy states, in part, that:
The NRC may choose not to enforce the
applicable technical specification (TS)
limiting condition for operation (LCO) or
other license conditions, in circumstances
where compliance would involve an
unnecessary plant transient or the
performance of a test, inspection, or system
realignment that may not be the most
prudent action to take under the specific
plant conditions, or unnecessary delays in
plant startup, without a corresponding health
and safety benefit * * *.
The NRC will issue a notice of enforcement
discretion (NOED) only if the staff is clearly
satisfied that the action is consistent with
protecting the public health and safety or
security. The NRC staff may also grant
enforcement discretion in cases involving
severe weather or other natural phenomena,
based upon balancing the public health and
safety or common defense and security of not
operating against the potential radiological or
other hazards associated with continued
operation, and a determination that safety
will not be impacted unacceptably by
exercising this discretion * * *
Consequently, the NOED policy in its
current form is predicated upon the
expectation that public health and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:06 Aug 08, 2011
Jkt 223001
safety will be enhanced by the granting
of an NOED. In considering the time
periods associated with the three
situations under consideration, the staff
has not identified any plausible
scenarios where the risk to public health
and safety (or security) would be
exacerbated by the failure of the NRC to
grant such a licensee or permit holder
a NOED.
Moreover, the NOED process, as
applied to operating reactors, involves,
in essence, a preemptive request by a
licensee and an associated preemptive
determination by the NRC to permit the
licensee to exceed technical
specifications limiting conditions for
operations. However, technical
specifications limiting conditions for
operation are not applicable to new
reactors under construction until
issuance of the operating license under
10 CFR part 50 or the 10 CFR 52.103(g)
Commission determination under 10
CFR part 52, ‘‘Licenses, Certifications,
and Approvals for Nuclear Power
Plants.’’ As such, under the current
NOED policy paradigm, the staff does
not believe it appropriate to use the
NOED process for any of the situations
under consideration.
With that said, the staff could
consider a new paradigm for the
granting of NOEDs to COL holders
during construction, one premised upon
a finding that no adverse impact, or risk
increase, to public health and safety,
security, or the environment would
occur over the period of time
enforcement discretion was applied.
However, the staff believes the CdC
process, described in more detail in
Item 3.B, will provide an appropriate
licensing-based change process that will
address the vast majority of issues
identified during construction, by
allowing licensees to effect changes in
parallel with staff’s review of the
acceptability of the change.
In addition, the staff considered the
development of a NOED-like process
during construction under a Limited
Work Authorization (LWA). However,
given the limited use of LWAs and their
narrow scope, the staff believes that
development of an NOED process at this
time would require expenditure of
resources that would not be
commensurate with the benefit.
B) Add a New Section for Enforcement
Discretion
Add a new Section 3.9 that states the
following:
Section 3.9, Violations Involving
Certain Construction Issues
a. Fuel Cycle Facilities
The NRC may choose to exercise
discretion for fuel cycle facilities
PO 00000
Frm 00134
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
under construction (construction is
defined in 10 CFR 40.4 for source
material licensees and in 10 CFR
70.4 for special nuclear material
licensees) based on the general
enforcement discretion guidance
contained in Section 3 of this
Enforcement Policy.
b. LWA holders
The NRC may exercise discretion
for LWA holders during
construction using the general
enforcement discretion guidance in
Section 3 of the Enforcement Policy.
c. COL Holders (Reactor
Facilities)
The NRC may reduce or refrain
from issuing an NOV/NCV for a
violation associated with an
unplanned change that deviates
from the licensing basis that is
implemented during construction 1
without prior NRC approval (in the
form of a license amendment) when
all of the following criteria are met:
• The licensee identifies changes
implemented during construction
not previously approved by the NRC
that the staff would otherwise
disposition as a Severity Level IV
violation of NRC requirements 2,
• The licensee submits the
necessary information to the NRC so
that it can conduct a timely
evaluation of the change as part of
the license amendment review
process, and
• Either (1) the cause of the
deviation was not within the
licensee’s control, such that the
change was not avoidable by
reasonable licensee quality
assurance measures or management
controls, or (2) the licensee placed
the cause of the change in its
corrective action program to ensure
comprehensive corrective actions to
address recurrence.
For similar issues not identified
by the licensee, the NRC may refrain
from issuing an NOV/NCV on a caseby-case basis depending upon the
circumstances of the issue, such as
whether the requirements were
clearly understood or should have
1 The NRC may issue enforcement action for
the cause of these unplanned changes, such as
a failure to implement appropriate work
controls or quality control measures, or a
failure to adhere to procedures, processes,
instructions, or standards that implement
NRC requirements. This enforcement may be
appropriate for the actions that led to the CdC
issue.
2 NRC-identified violations that result in a
‘‘use as built’’ determination or a resultant
unplanned change or both will normally be
dispositioned as a cited or non-cited violation,
whether or not the unplanned change issue is
resolved by a subsequently approved license
amendment.
E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM
09AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Notices
been understood at the time, the
cause of the issue, and why the
licensee did not identify the issue.
In all such cases when a licensee
determines that an unplanned
change during construction
associated with a violation of
requirements meets the aboveoutlined criteria and timely submits
the necessary information for NRC
evaluation, the licensee’s continued
failure to meet the current licensing
basis will not be treated as a willful
or continuing violation while NRC
reviews the submittal. (Note: If NRC
subsequently denies a requested
license amendment change, or if the
NRC requires additional measures
to be taken for the change to be
considered acceptable, then a
separate NOV or order may be
issued to ensure appropriate
corrective actions, including
restoring the configuration to the
current licensing basis are taken).
The staff is currently developing the
CdC PAR process including the
development of interim staff guidance
and the endorsement of industry
guidance. The purpose of the CdC PAR
process is, as an elective precursor to
the license amendment review
established by a condition of license, to
determine if the NRC has any objection
to the licensee proceeding with
construction activities different from the
licensing basis while the NRC is
evaluating the related license
amendment request. The NRC will not
issue violations for licensee-planned
changes properly entered into the CdC
PAR process. Comments on CdC are
being solicited under a separate FRN
and will not be addressed under this
FRN.
Procedural Requirements
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:06 Aug 08, 2011
Jkt 223001
determined that this action is not a
major rule and has verified this
determination with the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Dated at Rockville, MD, this 27th day of
July 2011.
Roy Zimmerman,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2011–20112 Filed 8–8–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. A2011–36; Order No. 787]
Post Office Closing
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This document informs the
public that an appeal of the closing of
the Hoxie, Iowa post office has been
filed. It identifies preliminary steps and
provides a procedural schedule.
Publication of this document will allow
the Postal Service, petitioners, and
others to take appropriate action.
DATES: Administrative record due (from
Postal Service): August 15, 2011;
deadline for notices to intervene: August
29, 2011. See the Procedural Schedule
in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section for other dates of interest.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
electronically by accessing the ‘‘Filing
Online’’ link in the banner at the top of
the Commission’s Web site (https://
www.prc.gov) or by directly accessing
the Commission’s Filing Online system
at https://www.prc.gov/prc-pages/filingonline/login.aspx. Commenters who
cannot submit their views electronically
should contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section as the source for case-related
information for advice on alternatives to
electronic filing.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel,
at 202–789–6820 (case-related
information) or DocketAdmins@prc.gov
(electronic filing assistance).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is
hereby given that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C.
404(d), on July 29, 2011, the
Commission received a petition for
review of the Postal Service’s
determination to close the post office in
Hoxie, Arkansas. The petition was filed
by Lanny Tinker, Mayor of the city of
Hoxie (Petitioner) and is postmarked
July 22, 2011. The Commission hereby
institutes a proceeding under 39 U.S.C.
404(d)(5) and establishes Docket No.
A2011–36 to consider Petitioner’s
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00135
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48923
appeal. If Petitioner would like to
further explain his position with
supplemental information or facts,
Petitioner may either file a Participant
Statement on PRC Form 61 or file a brief
with the Commission no later than
September 2, 2011.
Categories of issues apparently raised.
Petitioner contends that: (1) The Postal
Service failed to consider whether or
not it will continue to provide a
maximum degree of effective and
regular postal services to the community
(see 39 U.S.C. 404(d)(2)(A)(iii)); (2) The
Postal Service failed to consider the
effect of the closing on the community
(see 39 U.S.C. 404(d)(2)(A)(i); and (3)
the Postal Service failed to adequately
consider the economic savings resulting
from the closure (see 39 U.S.C.
404(d)(2)(A)(iv)).
After the Postal Service files the
administrative record and the
Commission reviews it, the Commission
may find that there are more legal issues
than those set forth above, or that the
Postal Service’s determination disposes
of one or more of those issues. The
deadline for the Postal Service to file the
applicable administrative record with
the Commission is August 15, 2011. See
39 CFR 3001.113. In addition, the due
date for any responsive pleading by the
Postal Service to this notice is August
15, 2011.
Availability; Web site posting. The
Commission has posted the appeal and
supporting material on its Web site at
https://www.prc.gov. Additional filings
in this case and participants’
submissions also will be posted on the
Commission’s Web site, if provided in
electronic format or amenable to
conversion, and not subject to a valid
protective order. Information on how to
use the Commission’s Web site is
available online or by contacting the
Commission’s webmaster via telephone
at 202–789–6873 or via electronic mail
at prc-webmaster@prc.gov.
The appeal and all related documents
are also available for public inspection
in the Commission’s docket section.
Docket section hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, except on
Federal government holidays. Docket
section personnel may be contacted via
electronic mail at prc-dockets@prc.gov
or via telephone at 202–789–6846.
Filing of documents. All filings of
documents in this case shall be made
using the Internet (Filing Online)
pursuant to Commission rules 9(a) and
10(a) at the Commission’s Web site,
https://www.prc.gov, unless a waiver is
obtained. See 39 CFR 3001.9(a) and
3001.10(a). Instructions for obtaining an
account to file documents online may be
found on the Commission’s Web site or
E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM
09AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 153 (Tuesday, August 9, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48919-48923]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20112]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2011-0176]
NRC Enforcement Policy
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Solicitation of comments on proposed revisions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is soliciting
written comments from interested parties, including public interest
groups, States, members of the public, and the regulated industry
(i.e., reactor and materials licensees, vendors, and contractors), on
construction-related topics addressed in this notice that the NRC staff
is evaluating for discussion in an upcoming Commission paper that will
include recommended revisions to the NRC Enforcement Policy. As such,
this request for comments is intended to assist the NRC in revising its
Enforcement Policy and adequately responding to the Commission's
request,
[[Page 48920]]
described below. The NRC will also host a public meeting to solicit
public comments on these construction related proposed revisions to the
Enforcement Policy. The topics discussed in this notice are not
intended to represent all the potential changes in the next revision of
the Enforcement Policy. Before submitting the next Enforcement Policy
revision to the Commission for approval, the staff intends to solicit
comments on other topics.
DATES: Submit comments on or before September 8, 2011. Comments
received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do
so, but the Commission is able to assure consideration only for
comments received on or before the specified date.
ADDRESSES: Please include Docket ID NRC-2011-0176 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-
2011-0176. 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
document 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, Room 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 Enforcement Policy is available electronically under ADAMS
Accession Number ML093480037.
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-2011-0176.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carolyn Far[iacute]a, Office of
Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001; telephone: 301-415-4050, e-mail to carolyn.faria-ocasio@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Commission, in SRM-SECY-09-0190, dated August 27, 2010 (ADAMS
accession number ML102390327), approved a major revision to its
Enforcement Policy. The NRC published a notice (75 FR 60485) announcing
an effective date of September 30, 2010, for that revision to the
Policy. The Commission, in SRM-SECY-09-0190, also directed the NRC
staff (the staff) to reevaluate the portions of the Enforcement Policy
associated with construction activities (e.g., reactor or uranium
enrichment plants), including under what conditions enforcement
discretion could be applied to cases involving the holder of a Limited
Work Authorization (LWA) or Combined License (COL). In addressing those
topics identified by the Commission, the staff developed a number of
approaches that the staff believes appropriate to present collectively
to the Commission for its consideration for possible inclusion in the
next Enforcement Policy revision. What follows in bold italics is the
proposed wording for proposed changes to the Enforcement Policy along
with background on those topics evaluated by the staff. When
appropriate and necessary, the staff also discusses potential
regulatory issues associated with a particular topic.
Item 1: Revise Policy Sections for Clarity
(A) Section 1.2, Applicability:
As new last paragraphs in the section, add the following:
It is NRC policy to hold licensees, certificate holders, and
applicants responsible for the acts of their employees, contractors, or
vendors and their employees, and the NRC may cite the licensee,
certificate holder, or applicant for violations committed by its
employees, contractors, or vendors and their employees.
The NRC may use the term ``licensee'' in this Policy when referring
to enforcement; however, in most situations the term is applied broadly
for any of the above entities. In some situations, the NRC intends that
the information applies narrowly, only to license holders. The context
of the information described in the Policy will determine the usage of
the term ``licensee.''
The foregoing language was developed by staff to clarify the
identity of responsible entities within the context of the Policy.
However, the staff does not intend with this proposed language to
change or alter any enforcement practice as currently implemented. The
staff will ensure that the final policy revision reflects the scope of
the term ``licensee'' in the glossary.
(B) Section 2.2, Assessment Of Violations:
In the first sentence of Section 2.2.1.a, revise the sentence to
read: `` * * *, onsite or offsite radiation exposures, onsite or
offsite chemical hazard exposures resulting from licensed or certified
activities * * *.''
Add a new section, as follows:
Section 2.2.6 Construction
In accordance with 10 CFR 50.10, no person may begin the
construction of a production or utilization facility on a site on which
the facility is to be operated until that person has been issued either
a construction permit under 10 CFR part 50, a combined license under 10
CFR part 52, an early site permit authorizing the activities under 10
CFR 50.10(d), or a limited work authorization under 10 CFR 50.10(d).
Further, any activities undertaken under the Changes
[[Page 48921]]
during Construction (CdC) Preliminary Acceptance Review (PAR) Process,
as developed in Interim Staff Guidance (ISG)-025, are at the risk of
the licensee, and the licensee is obligated to return to the current
licensing basis (CLB) if the related license amendment request (LAR) is
subsequently not approved by the NRC.
Also, in accordance with 10 CFR 70.23(a)(7) and 10 CFR 40.32(e),
commencement of construction before the NRC finishes its environmental
review and issues a license for processing and fuel fabrication,
conversion of uranium hexafluoride, or uranium enrichment facility
construction and operation is grounds for denial to possess and use
special nuclear material in the plant or facility. Additionally, in
accordance with 10 CFR 70.23(b), failure to obtain Commission approval
for the construction of the principal structures, systems, and
components of a plutonium processing and fuel fabrication plant before
the commencement of construction may also be grounds for denial of a
license to possess and use special nuclear material.
The revision to Section 2.2.1.a is to ensure consistency with the
staff's current process to disposition violations related to chemical
hazards exposures. The staff believes that the addition of Section
2.2.6 is necessary to broadly address when and how the assessment of
violations during construction occur. The staff is currently developing
the CdC PAR process, an elective precursor to the license amendment
review, established via license condition. Comments on the CdC PAR
process will be solicited under a separate FRN and will not be
addressed under this FRN.
(C) Section 6.0, Violation Examples:
Add a second paragraph to the introduction of the section:
Many examples are written to reflect the risks associated with the
use of radioactive or special nuclear materials. However, violations
during construction generally occur before the nuclear material and its
associated risk are present. Therefore, the NRC will consider the lower
risk significance of violations that occur during construction in the
areas of emergency preparedness, reactor operator licensing, and
security and may reduce the severity level for those violations from
that indicated by the examples in those areas. The staff must
coordinate with the Office of Enforcement before applying this lower
risk significance concept for violations that occur during
construction.
The staff developed this paragraph to recognize that although
certain rules (i.e., requirements for emergency preparedness, reactor
operator licensing, and security) apply generally during construction
activities, flexibility is needed to factor in the lower risk
associated with certain violations that occur during construction. The
staff believes that any applicable violation examples in the remaining
sections would not likely warrant mitigation during construction solely
because there is not nuclear material on site.
Item 2: Revise the Current Section 2.3, Dispostion of Violations
Section 2.3.2 provides the Policy on use of non-cited violations as
a method of dispositioning Severity Level IV violations. The staff
proposes to revise this section as follows:
Section 2.3.2, Non-cited Violation
If certain criteria (described below) are met, Severity Level IV
(SL IV) violations and violations associated with green ROP findings
(for operating reactors) are normally dispositioned as non-cited
violations (NCVs). Inspection reports or inspection records document
NCVs and briefly describe the corrective action the licensee has taken
or plans to take, if known. Licensees are not required to provide
written responses to NCVs; however, they may provide a written response
if they disagree with the NRC's description of the NCV and/or dispute
the validity of the NCV. Typically all of the criteria described in
either 2.3.2.a. or b. must be met for the disposition of a violation as
an NCV. For all SL IV violations identified by the NRC at fuel cycle
facilities (under construction or in operation) in accordance with 10
CFR part 70 or 10 CFR part 40 and reactors under construction in
accordance with 10 CFR part 50 or 10 CFR part 52, before the NRC
determines that an adequate corrective action program has been
implemented, the NRC normally issues a Notice of Violation. Until the
determination that an adequate corrective action program has been
implemented, NCVs may be issued for licensee/applicant-identified SL IV
violations if the NRC has determined that the applicable criteria in
2.3.2.b. below are met:
a. Power Reactor Licensees
1. The licensee must place the violation into a corrective action
program to restore compliance and address recurrence.
(Delete current footnote--``For reactor facilities under
construction in accordance with 10 CFR part 52, the corrective action
program must have been demonstrated to be adequate.'')
2. (Unchanged)
3. The violation must either not be repetitive as a result of
inadequate corrective action, or, if repetitive, the violation must not
be NRC identified. This criterion does not apply to violations
associated with green ROP findings. Delete the rest of the criteria:
``and violations associated with facility construction under 10 CFR
part 50, `Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,'
and 10 CFR part 52, `Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for
Nuclear Power Plants.' ''
4. (Unchanged)
b. All Other Licensees (Unchanged)
Of note regarding this topic, on June 3, 2011, the NRC issued EGM-
11-002, ``Enforcement Discretion for Licensee-Identified Violations at
Power Reactor Construction Sites Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations [10 CFR] part 52'' (ADAMS Accession No.
ML11152A065). The purpose of this enforcement guidance memorandum is to
clarify the guidance for exercising enforcement discretion when the
staff dispositions as NCVs those SL IV violations identified by
licensees/applicants at power reactors that are under construction. To
encourage prompt identification and prompt comprehensive correction of
violations at reactor construction sites, the staff is authorized to
disposition licensee/applicant-identified SL IV violations as NCVs
before the agency determines that the licensee's/applicant's corrective
action program (CAP) has been demonstrated to be adequate. For
reactors, a method that NRC has found acceptable to determine adequacy
of the CAP is for the licensee to commit to and comply with the
requirements established by Appendix B, ``Quality Assurance Criteria
for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants,'' to 10 CFR part
50, ``Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities.''
For fuel cycle facilities, the NRC is considering criteria for
determining the adequacy of a fuel cycle licensee's CAP. In addition,
the remaining criteria of Section 2.3.2.a of the NRC Enforcement Policy
must be met, and the licensee must correct, or document its intent to
take specific actions to correct, the violation within a reasonable
time by the end of the NRC inspection activity,
[[Page 48922]]
including both immediate corrective action and any necessary action(s)
to reasonably prevent recurrence. EGM-11-002 will be superseded with
implementation of this portion of the Policy revision.
SRM-09-0190, Item 1.f requires staff to ``propose revisions to
provide fuel cycle licensees with credit for effective corrective
actions programs''. The staff acknowledges that further work being done
to address Item 1.f of SRM-09-0190 has the potential to generate
additional changes to this section of the Policy. The staff will ensure
that the final policy revision is coordinated to reflect both
initiatives.
Item 3: Revise Policy Sections on Enforcement Discretion
A) Section 3.8, Notices of Enforcement Discretion for Operation Power
Reactors and Gaseous Diffusion Plants:
Add a footnote to the section title that states: ``NOEDs will not
be used at reactors during construction before the Commission's 10 CFR
52.103(g) or 10 CFR 50.57 finding, as applicable.''
The staff considered development of an NOED process for use (1)
After a COL is issued but prior to the 10 CFR 52.103(g) finding (after
which point, the licensee's Technical Specifications are in effect),
(2) after the issuance of a construction permit pursuant to 10 CFR
50.50 but prior to the 10 CFR 50.57 operations finding, and (3) after
the issuance of an LWA but prior to the issuance of a COL. The
Enforcement Policy states, in part, that:
The NRC may choose not to enforce the applicable technical
specification (TS) limiting condition for operation (LCO) or other
license conditions, in circumstances where compliance would involve
an unnecessary plant transient or the performance of a test,
inspection, or system realignment that may not be the most prudent
action to take under the specific plant conditions, or unnecessary
delays in plant startup, without a corresponding health and safety
benefit * * *.
The NRC will issue a notice of enforcement discretion (NOED)
only if the staff is clearly satisfied that the action is consistent
with protecting the public health and safety or security. The NRC
staff may also grant enforcement discretion in cases involving
severe weather or other natural phenomena, based upon balancing the
public health and safety or common defense and security of not
operating against the potential radiological or other hazards
associated with continued operation, and a determination that safety
will not be impacted unacceptably by exercising this discretion * *
*
Consequently, the NOED policy in its current form is predicated
upon the expectation that public health and safety will be enhanced by
the granting of an NOED. In considering the time periods associated
with the three situations under consideration, the staff has not
identified any plausible scenarios where the risk to public health and
safety (or security) would be exacerbated by the failure of the NRC to
grant such a licensee or permit holder a NOED.
Moreover, the NOED process, as applied to operating reactors,
involves, in essence, a preemptive request by a licensee and an
associated preemptive determination by the NRC to permit the licensee
to exceed technical specifications limiting conditions for operations.
However, technical specifications limiting conditions for operation are
not applicable to new reactors under construction until issuance of the
operating license under 10 CFR part 50 or the 10 CFR 52.103(g)
Commission determination under 10 CFR part 52, ``Licenses,
Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants.'' As such,
under the current NOED policy paradigm, the staff does not believe it
appropriate to use the NOED process for any of the situations under
consideration.
With that said, the staff could consider a new paradigm for the
granting of NOEDs to COL holders during construction, one premised upon
a finding that no adverse impact, or risk increase, to public health
and safety, security, or the environment would occur over the period of
time enforcement discretion was applied.
However, the staff believes the CdC process, described in more
detail in Item 3.B, will provide an appropriate licensing-based change
process that will address the vast majority of issues identified during
construction, by allowing licensees to effect changes in parallel with
staff's review of the acceptability of the change.
In addition, the staff considered the development of a NOED-like
process during construction under a Limited Work Authorization (LWA).
However, given the limited use of LWAs and their narrow scope, the
staff believes that development of an NOED process at this time would
require expenditure of resources that would not be commensurate with
the benefit.
B) Add a New Section for Enforcement Discretion
Add a new Section 3.9 that states the following:
Section 3.9, Violations Involving Certain Construction Issues
a. Fuel Cycle Facilities
The NRC may choose to exercise discretion for fuel cycle facilities
under construction (construction is defined in 10 CFR 40.4 for source
material licensees and in 10 CFR 70.4 for special nuclear material
licensees) based on the general enforcement discretion guidance
contained in Section 3 of this Enforcement Policy.
b. LWA holders
The NRC may exercise discretion for LWA holders during construction
using the general enforcement discretion guidance in Section 3 of the
Enforcement Policy.
c. COL Holders (Reactor Facilities)
The NRC may reduce or refrain from issuing an NOV/NCV for a
violation associated with an unplanned change that deviates from the
licensing basis that is implemented during construction \1\ without
prior NRC approval (in the form of a license amendment) when all of the
following criteria are met:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The NRC may issue enforcement action for the cause of these
unplanned changes, such as a failure to implement appropriate work
controls or quality control measures, or a failure to adhere to
procedures, processes, instructions, or standards that implement NRC
requirements. This enforcement may be appropriate for the actions
that led to the CdC issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The licensee identifies changes implemented during
construction not previously approved by the NRC that the staff would
otherwise disposition as a Severity Level IV violation of NRC
requirements \2\,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ NRC-identified violations that result in a ``use as built''
determination or a resultant unplanned change or both will normally
be dispositioned as a cited or non-cited violation, whether or not
the unplanned change issue is resolved by a subsequently approved
license amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The licensee submits the necessary information to the NRC
so that it can conduct a timely evaluation of the change as part of the
license amendment review process, and
Either (1) the cause of the deviation was not within the
licensee's control, such that the change was not avoidable by
reasonable licensee quality assurance measures or management controls,
or (2) the licensee placed the cause of the change in its corrective
action program to ensure comprehensive corrective actions to address
recurrence.
For similar issues not identified by the licensee, the NRC may
refrain from issuing an NOV/NCV on a case-by-case basis depending upon
the circumstances of the issue, such as whether the requirements were
clearly understood or should have
[[Page 48923]]
been understood at the time, the cause of the issue, and why the
licensee did not identify the issue.
In all such cases when a licensee determines that an unplanned
change during construction associated with a violation of requirements
meets the above-outlined criteria and timely submits the necessary
information for NRC evaluation, the licensee's continued failure to
meet the current licensing basis will not be treated as a willful or
continuing violation while NRC reviews the submittal. (Note: If NRC
subsequently denies a requested license amendment change, or if the NRC
requires additional measures to be taken for the change to be
considered acceptable, then a separate NOV or order may be issued to
ensure appropriate corrective actions, including restoring the
configuration to the current licensing basis are taken).
The staff is currently developing the CdC PAR process including the
development of interim staff guidance and the endorsement of industry
guidance. The purpose of the CdC PAR process is, as an elective
precursor to the license amendment review established by a condition of
license, to determine if the NRC has any objection to the licensee
proceeding with construction activities different from the licensing
basis while the NRC is evaluating the related license amendment
request. The NRC will not issue violations for licensee-planned changes
properly entered into the CdC PAR process. Comments on CdC are being
solicited under a separate FRN and will not be addressed under this
FRN.
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.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Dated at Rockville, MD, this 27th day of July 2011.
Roy Zimmerman,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2011-20112 Filed 8-8-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P