Standard Format and Content of Transportation Security Plans for Classified Matter Shipments, 23015-23016 [2014-09442]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 80 / Friday, April 25, 2014 / Notices
electronically due to insecure email
transmissions; but individuals may
complete the forms, save and retrieve
the data on their personal computers.
The waiver packet consists of four pages
(the employee’s application and release
of liability statement and the employer’s
endorsement and release of liability
statement). It is in paper form and is
only sent to those individuals who are
found not physical qualified and who
specifically request to be considered for
a waiver (less than 2%). It is not made
available for download from any of the
Web sites previously cited.
6. Estimate of Burden: Public
reporting burden for this collection of
information varies according to the
amount of time the participant takes to
read the instructions and mandatory
reading material, the overall health of
the individual, the amount of research
required to complete the forms, the time
it takes to make an appointment, take
the examination and schedule and
complete any follow-up medical, dental
or psychological requirements and the
time involved in providing additional
information, when it is needed. The
estimated processing time is up to six
weeks from the time the individual
receives the forms until he or she is
notified by the contractor of his or her
final clearance status. An additional
period of up to eight weeks may be
required for the individual, who was
disqualified, to be notified of the
disqualification, to request and receive
the waiver packet, to obtain employer
support and complete the waiver
request, to do any follow-up testing, to
return the waiver request plus any
follow-up information to the contractor,
for the contractor to forward the
completed packet to NSF, and for NSF
to make and promulgate a decision.
In addition to NSF Forms, the
contractor prepares and sends a tailored
transmittal email to each participant,
based on the participant’s employing
organization. This email transmits (1)
the medical forms; (2) mandatory
reading materials and provides specific
instructions for the participants and
their personal physicians to follow; and
(3) an unnumbered personalized
checklist of all laboratory, shots and
specialized exam requirements specific
to that individual.
7. Respondents: All individuals
deploying to the Antarctic and certain
Arctic areas under the auspices of the
U.S. Antarctic Program or the Arctic
Program must complete these forms.
There are approximately 3,300
submissions per year.
Estimated Number of Responses per
Form: There is only one form with
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:57 Apr 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
several parts. Responses range from 2 to
approximately 238 responses per Part.
8. Estimated Total Annual Burden on
Respondents: The total annual burden
in hours, broken down by form varies
according to the individual’s ready
access to the required information.
However, a minimum of 6,600 hours
annually is required if all requested
information is available at the time the
individuals fill out the forms and if all
individuals use the electronic version of
the form to provide the data. The form
is programmed not to print until all data
fields have been answered. An
additional 27,000 hours is required to
gather the data; read all the mandatory
and instructional materials; make and
keep examination appointments; and
travel to and from those appointments.
9. Frequency of Responses:
Individuals must complete the forms
annually to be current within 12 months
of their anticipated redeployment dates.
Depending on an individual’s medical
status some persons may require
additional laboratory results to be
current within two to six-weeks of
anticipated deployment.
Dated: April 22, 2014.
Suzanne H. Plimpton,
Reports Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2014–09418 Filed 4–24–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2014–0081]
Standard Format and Content of
Transportation Security Plans for
Classified Matter Shipments
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Draft regulatory guide; request
for comment.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing a new
draft regulatory guide (DG), DG–7005,
‘‘Standard Format and Content of
Transportation Security Plans for
Classified Matter Shipments.’’ This new
guidance describes a method that NRC
staff considers acceptable for use in the
development of classified matter
transportation security plans, which
identify the correct measures to protect
classified matter while in transport.
DATES: Submit comments by June 24,
2014. Comments received after this date
will be considered if it is practical to do
so, but the NRC is able to ensure
consideration only for comments
received on or before this date.
Although a time limit is given,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23015
comments and suggestions in
connection with items for inclusion in
guides currently being developed or
improvements in all published guides
are encouraged at any time.
ADDRESSES: The document will be
available for those who have established
a ‘‘need-to-know’’ and possess access
permission to Official Use OnlySecurity Related Information (OUO–
SRI). To review and provide comments
on the document, contact: Al Tardiff,
telephone: 301–287–3616 or email:
Al.Tardiff@nrc.gov.
For additional direction on accessing
information and submitting comments,
see ‘‘Accessing Information and
Submitting Comments’’ in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mekonen Bayssie, Office of Nuclear
Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–251–
7489; email: Mekonen.bayssie@nrc.gov
or Al Tardiff, Office of Nuclear Security
and Incident Response, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–001, telephone: 301–287–
3616 or email: Al.Tardiff@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Accessing Information and
Submitting Comments
A. Accessing Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2014–
0081 when contacting the NRC about
the availability of information regarding
this document. Draft regulatory guide,
DG–7005, is withheld from public
disclosure but is available to those
affected licensees and cleared
stakeholders who can or have
demonstrated a need to know. The
‘‘Backfitting and Issue Finality’’ section
describes previously issued guidance on
this subject entitled, Interim Staff
Guidance (ISG) DSP–ISG–01, Staff
Review Procedure for Transportation
Security Plans for Classified Matter
Shipments (July 7, 2006). This
document also contains OUO–SRI
information.
Those who have a need to know or
believe they have a need to know
should contact Al Tardiff to obtain
information about accessing these
documents.
B. Submitting Comments
Please coordinate with Al Tardiff
(telephone: 301–287–3616 or email:
Al.Tardiff@nrc.gov) regarding the
drafting and transmission of comments
in order to protect comments that
contain OUO–SRI information. Please
include Docket ID NRC–2014–0081 in
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
25APN1
23016
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 80 / Friday, April 25, 2014 / Notices
the subject line of your comment
submission to ensure that the NRC
reviews any comment submission
appropriately.
II. Additional Information
The NRC is issuing for comment a
draft guide in the NRC’s ‘‘Regulatory
Guide’’ series. This series was
developed to describe such information
as methods that are acceptable to the
NRC staff for implementing specific
parts of the NRC’s regulations,
techniques that the staff uses in
evaluating specific problems or
postulated accidents, and data that the
staff needs in its review of applications
for permits and licenses.
The DG, entitled, ‘‘Standard Format
and Content of Transportation Security
Plans for Classified Matter Shipments,’’
is temporarily identified by its task
number, DG–7005. Draft regulatory
guide, DG–7005, is a proposed new
guide in the NRC’s ‘‘Regulatory Guide’’
series. This is a new guide that contains
the procedures and measures that the
applicant or licensee can describe in a
classified matter transportation security
plan to comply with NRC requirements.
The regulatory framework that the NRC
has established for security plans for the
transportation of classified matter is set
forth in § 95.39(e) of Title 10 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
III. Congressional Review Act
This regulatory guide is a rule as
defined in the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801–808). However, the
Office of Management and Budget has
not found it to be a major rule as
defined in the Congressional Review
Act.
IV. Backfitting and Issue Finality
Draft regulatory guide, DG–7005,
provides guidance on development of
transportation security plans to protect
classified information while such
information is in transport, in order to
meet the requirements of 10 CFR part
95. The staff has previously issued
guidance on this subject in DSP–ISG–
01, Staff Review Procedure for
Transportation Security Plans for
Classified Matter Shipments (July 7,
2006). The staff will use the guidance in
the review and approval of new and
amended transportation security plans
submitted to the NRC. Current licensees
with NRC-approved transportation
security plans may continue to use
DSP–ISG–01, which the NRC has found
acceptable for complying with 10 CFR
part 95 regulations as long as the
licensees do not change their NRCapproved transportation security plans.
However, if a licensee makes changes to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:57 Apr 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
or proposes to amend such plans, then
the staff will use the guidance in DG–
7005 to evaluate the acceptability of the
change or proposed amendment, unless
the licensee provides sufficient basis
and information that the licenseeproposed alternative to DG–7005
complies with applicable NRC
regulations.
Issuance of the DG, if finalized, and
NRC use of the DG as described above,
would not constitute backfitting under
any of the backfitting provisions in 10
CFR Chapter I, nor would it be regarded
as backfitting under Commission and
Executive Director for Operations
guidance. In addition, issuance of the
DG, if finalized would not otherwise be
inconsistent with the issue finality
provisions in 10 CFR part 52. The staff’s
position is based upon the following
considerations.
1. Part 95 applies to materials
licensees and other entities transporting
(or placing into transport) classified
security information, and contains
requirements governing such transport.
Although some of these materials
licensees are protected by backfitting or
issue protection provisions in 10 CFR
part 52, these backfitting and issue
finality protections do not extend to the
procedures governing transport of
classified information. For example,
under the definition of backfitting in 10
CFR 50.109(a)(1) protection is accorded
to nuclear power plant licensees against
changes in, or new requirements and
guidance on, inter alia, ‘‘procedures or
organization required to . . . operate a
facility.’’ Procedures governing the
transportation of materials off of the
facility site cannot reasonably be viewed
as constituting such facility operating
procedures. The backfitting and issue
finality provisions applicable to other
materials licensees are written in an
analogous fashion. Therefore, changes to
the guidance on compliance with 10
CFR part 95—even if imposed on these
materials licensees who are protected by
backfitting or issue protection
provisions in 10 CFR part 52 (see the
discussion in item 2)—would not
constitute backfitting or a violation of
issue finality provisions under 10 CFR
part 52.
2. Even if the NRC were to conclude
that materials licensees are accorded
backfitting protection with respect to
procedures governing transportation of
classified information, changes in
guidance would not constitute
backfitting as defined in the various
NRC backfitting provisions unless
imposed on materials licensees. As
described earlier, the NRC staff does not
intend to impose or apply the draft
guidance in DG–7005, if finalized, to
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
existing licensees who already have
NRC-approved transportation security
plans (the exception is where a licensee
makes changes to or proposes to amend
such plans; the backfitting and issue
finality implications are discussed in
item 3 below). Given this current lack of
staff intention to impose the guidance in
DG–7005, the issuance of the draft
regulatory guide in final form would not
constitute backfitting or a violation of
issue finality provisions under 10 CFR
part 52. If, in the future, the staff seeks
to impose a position in the draft
regulatory guide (if finalized) on holders
of already issued holders of licenses in
a manner which constitutes backfitting
or does not provide issue finality as
described in the applicable issue finality
provision, then the staff must make the
showing as set forth in the applicable
backfitting provision or address the
criteria for avoiding issue finality as
described applicable issue finality
provision.
3. A licensing basis change
voluntarily initiated by a licensee is not
considered to be backfitting. In such
cases, the policy considerations
underlying the NRC’s backfitting
provisions, viz. regulatory stability and
predictability concerning the terms of
an NRC approval, are not applicable
where the licensee itself voluntarily
seeks a change to its licensing basis.
This rationale is reflected in a July 14,
2010, Letter from the NRC General
Counsel to NEI’s General Counsel
(ADAMS Accession No. ML101960180).
4. Even if the NRC were to conclude
that materials licensees are accorded
backfitting protection with respect to
procedures governing transportation of
classified information, applicants and
potential/future applicants for such
materials licenses are not, with certain
exceptions not relevant here, protected
under either the various NRC backfitting
provisions or the issue finality
provisions under 10 CFR part 52. This
is because neither the backfitting
provisions nor the issue finality
provisions under 10 CFR part 52 were
intended for every NRC action which
substantially changes the expectations
of current and future applicants.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day
of April, 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Thomas H. Boyce,
Chief, Regulatory Guidance and Generic
Issues Branch, Division of Engineering, Office
of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
[FR Doc. 2014–09442 Filed 4–24–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
25APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 80 (Friday, April 25, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23015-23016]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09442]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2014-0081]
Standard Format and Content of Transportation Security Plans for
Classified Matter Shipments
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Draft regulatory guide; request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing a new
draft regulatory guide (DG), DG-7005, ``Standard Format and Content of
Transportation Security Plans for Classified Matter Shipments.'' This
new guidance describes a method that NRC staff considers acceptable for
use in the development of classified matter transportation security
plans, which identify the correct measures to protect classified matter
while in transport.
DATES: Submit comments by June 24, 2014. Comments received after this
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is
able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before
this date. Although a time limit is given, comments and suggestions in
connection with items for inclusion in guides currently being developed
or improvements in all published guides are encouraged at any time.
ADDRESSES: The document will be available for those who have
established a ``need-to-know'' and possess access permission to
Official Use Only-Security Related Information (OUO-SRI). To review and
provide comments on the document, contact: Al Tardiff, telephone: 301-
287-3616 or email: Al.Tardiff@nrc.gov.
For additional direction on accessing information and submitting
comments, see ``Accessing Information and Submitting Comments'' in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mekonen Bayssie, Office of Nuclear
Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-251-7489; email: Mekonen.bayssie@nrc.gov or
Al Tardiff, Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-001, telephone:
301-287-3616 or email: Al.Tardiff@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Accessing Information and Submitting Comments
A. Accessing Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014-0081 when contacting the NRC
about the availability of information regarding this document. Draft
regulatory guide, DG-7005, is withheld from public disclosure but is
available to those affected licensees and cleared stakeholders who can
or have demonstrated a need to know. The ``Backfitting and Issue
Finality'' section describes previously issued guidance on this subject
entitled, Interim Staff Guidance (ISG) DSP-ISG-01, Staff Review
Procedure for Transportation Security Plans for Classified Matter
Shipments (July 7, 2006). This document also contains OUO-SRI
information.
Those who have a need to know or believe they have a need to know
should contact Al Tardiff to obtain information about accessing these
documents.
B. Submitting Comments
Please coordinate with Al Tardiff (telephone: 301-287-3616 or
email: Al.Tardiff@nrc.gov) regarding the drafting and transmission of
comments in order to protect comments that contain OUO-SRI information.
Please include Docket ID NRC-2014-0081 in
[[Page 23016]]
the subject line of your comment submission to ensure that the NRC
reviews any comment submission appropriately.
II. Additional Information
The NRC is issuing for comment a draft guide in the NRC's
``Regulatory Guide'' series. This series was developed to describe such
information as methods that are acceptable to the NRC staff for
implementing specific parts of the NRC's regulations, techniques that
the staff uses in evaluating specific problems or postulated accidents,
and data that the staff needs in its review of applications for permits
and licenses.
The DG, entitled, ``Standard Format and Content of Transportation
Security Plans for Classified Matter Shipments,'' is temporarily
identified by its task number, DG-7005. Draft regulatory guide, DG-
7005, is a proposed new guide in the NRC's ``Regulatory Guide'' series.
This is a new guide that contains the procedures and measures that the
applicant or licensee can describe in a classified matter
transportation security plan to comply with NRC requirements. The
regulatory framework that the NRC has established for security plans
for the transportation of classified matter is set forth in Sec.
95.39(e) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR).
III. Congressional Review Act
This regulatory guide is a rule as defined in the Congressional
Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808). However, the Office of Management and
Budget has not found it to be a major rule as defined in the
Congressional Review Act.
IV. Backfitting and Issue Finality
Draft regulatory guide, DG-7005, provides guidance on development
of transportation security plans to protect classified information
while such information is in transport, in order to meet the
requirements of 10 CFR part 95. The staff has previously issued
guidance on this subject in DSP-ISG-01, Staff Review Procedure for
Transportation Security Plans for Classified Matter Shipments (July 7,
2006). The staff will use the guidance in the review and approval of
new and amended transportation security plans submitted to the NRC.
Current licensees with NRC-approved transportation security plans may
continue to use DSP-ISG-01, which the NRC has found acceptable for
complying with 10 CFR part 95 regulations as long as the licensees do
not change their NRC-approved transportation security plans. However,
if a licensee makes changes to or proposes to amend such plans, then
the staff will use the guidance in DG-7005 to evaluate the
acceptability of the change or proposed amendment, unless the licensee
provides sufficient basis and information that the licensee- proposed
alternative to DG-7005 complies with applicable NRC regulations.
Issuance of the DG, if finalized, and NRC use of the DG as
described above, would not constitute backfitting under any of the
backfitting provisions in 10 CFR Chapter I, nor would it be regarded as
backfitting under Commission and Executive Director for Operations
guidance. In addition, issuance of the DG, if finalized would not
otherwise be inconsistent with the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR
part 52. The staff's position is based upon the following
considerations.
1. Part 95 applies to materials licensees and other entities
transporting (or placing into transport) classified security
information, and contains requirements governing such transport.
Although some of these materials licensees are protected by backfitting
or issue protection provisions in 10 CFR part 52, these backfitting and
issue finality protections do not extend to the procedures governing
transport of classified information. For example, under the definition
of backfitting in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1) protection is accorded to nuclear
power plant licensees against changes in, or new requirements and
guidance on, inter alia, ``procedures or organization required to . . .
operate a facility.'' Procedures governing the transportation of
materials off of the facility site cannot reasonably be viewed as
constituting such facility operating procedures. The backfitting and
issue finality provisions applicable to other materials licensees are
written in an analogous fashion. Therefore, changes to the guidance on
compliance with 10 CFR part 95--even if imposed on these materials
licensees who are protected by backfitting or issue protection
provisions in 10 CFR part 52 (see the discussion in item 2)--would not
constitute backfitting or a violation of issue finality provisions
under 10 CFR part 52.
2. Even if the NRC were to conclude that materials licensees are
accorded backfitting protection with respect to procedures governing
transportation of classified information, changes in guidance would not
constitute backfitting as defined in the various NRC backfitting
provisions unless imposed on materials licensees. As described earlier,
the NRC staff does not intend to impose or apply the draft guidance in
DG-7005, if finalized, to existing licensees who already have NRC-
approved transportation security plans (the exception is where a
licensee makes changes to or proposes to amend such plans; the
backfitting and issue finality implications are discussed in item 3
below). Given this current lack of staff intention to impose the
guidance in DG-7005, the issuance of the draft regulatory guide in
final form would not constitute backfitting or a violation of issue
finality provisions under 10 CFR part 52. If, in the future, the staff
seeks to impose a position in the draft regulatory guide (if finalized)
on holders of already issued holders of licenses in a manner which
constitutes backfitting or does not provide issue finality as described
in the applicable issue finality provision, then the staff must make
the showing as set forth in the applicable backfitting provision or
address the criteria for avoiding issue finality as described
applicable issue finality provision.
3. A licensing basis change voluntarily initiated by a licensee is
not considered to be backfitting. In such cases, the policy
considerations underlying the NRC's backfitting provisions, viz.
regulatory stability and predictability concerning the terms of an NRC
approval, are not applicable where the licensee itself voluntarily
seeks a change to its licensing basis. This rationale is reflected in a
July 14, 2010, Letter from the NRC General Counsel to NEI's General
Counsel (ADAMS Accession No. ML101960180).
4. Even if the NRC were to conclude that materials licensees are
accorded backfitting protection with respect to procedures governing
transportation of classified information, applicants and potential/
future applicants for such materials licenses are not, with certain
exceptions not relevant here, protected under either the various NRC
backfitting provisions or the issue finality provisions under 10 CFR
part 52. This is because neither the backfitting provisions nor the
issue finality provisions under 10 CFR part 52 were intended for every
NRC action which substantially changes the expectations of current and
future applicants.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of April, 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Thomas H. Boyce,
Chief, Regulatory Guidance and Generic Issues Branch, Division of
Engineering, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
[FR Doc. 2014-09442 Filed 4-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P