[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 249 (Thursday, December 26, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68070-68071]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-32755]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Policy and Procedure for Enforcement Actions; Policy Statement
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Policy statement: corrections.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document presents corrections to the revision of the
policy statement that was published December 10, 1996 (61 FR 65088).
This action is necessary to correct the inadvertent failure to change
two paragraphs of the Enforcement Policy concerning matters on which
the NRC staff must notify the Commission. These additional changes are
consistent with the other changes that were made in the revision as
published.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The revision became effective on December 10, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Lieberman, Director, Office of
Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555
(301) 415-2741.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 10, 1996 (61 FR 65088), the NRC
publised a revision to its ``General Statement of Policy and Procedure
for NRC Enforcement Actions'' (Enforcement Policy or Policy) to address
issues regarding consultation with the Commission and other subjects.
Sections III of the Policy was revised to reflect the new list of
circumstances in which the Commission would be consulted or notified.
However, two paragraphs in Section VII, Exercise of Discretion, were
not amended to reflect the changes adopted by the Commission. This
document modifies those two paragraphs to reflect the appropriate
policy as to notification to the Commission when the staff exercises
discretion in enforcement matters. These two paragraphs were
inadvertently omitted in the revision prepared for publication in the
Federal Register.
Accordingly, the NRC Enforcement Policy is corrected by revising
the first paragraphs in Sections VII.A.1. and VII.B. to read as
follows:
General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions
* * * * *
VII. EXERCISE OF DISCRETION
* * * * *
A. Escalation of Enforcement Sanctions
* * * * *
1. Civil penalties. Notwithstanding the outcome of the normal civil
penalty assessment process addressed in Section VI.B, the NRC may
exercise discretion
[[Page 68071]]
by either proposing a civil penalty where application of the factors
would otherwise result in zero penalty or by escalating the amount of
the resulting civil penalty (i.e., base or twice the base civil
penalty) to ensure that the proposed civil penalty reflects the
significance of the circumstances and conveys the appropriate
regulatory message to the licensee. The Commission will be notified if
the deviation in the amount of the civil penalty proposed under this
discretion from the amount of the civil penalty assessed under the
normal process is more than two times the base civil penalty shown in
Tables 1A and 1B. Examples when this discretion should be considered
include, but are not limited to the following:
* * * * *
B. Mitigation of Enforcement Sanctions
The NRC may exercise discretion and refrain from issuing a civil
penalty and/or a Notice of Violation, if the outcome of the normal
process described in Section VI.B does not result in a sanction
consistent with an appropriate regulatory message. In addition, even if
the NRC exercises this discretion, when the licensee failed to make a
required report to the NRC, a separate enforcement action will normally
be issued for the licensee's failure to make a required report. The
approval of the Director, Office of Enforcement, with consultation with
the appropriate Deputy Executive Director as warranted, is required for
exercising discretion of the type described in Section VII.B.1.b where
a willful violation is involved, and of the types described in Sections
VII.B.2 through VII.B.6. Commission notification is required for
exercising discretion of the type described in: (1) Section VII.B.2 the
first time discretion is exercised during that plant shutdown, and (2)
Section VII.B.6 where appropriate based on the uniqueness or
significance of the issue. Examples when discretion should be
considered for departing from the normal approach in Section VI.B
include but are not limited to the following:
* * * * *
Dated at Rockville, MD, this 18th day of December, 1996.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John C. Hoyle.
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 96-32755 Filed 12-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
