95-7563. Petition for Rulemaking; Procedure for Submission  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 28, 1995)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 15878-15881]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-7563]
    
    
    
    ========================================================================
    Proposed Rules
                                                    Federal Register
    ________________________________________________________________________
    
    This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
    the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
    notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
    the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
    
    ========================================================================
    
    
    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 28, 1995 / 
    Proposed Rules
    [[Page 15878]]
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    
    10 CFR Part 2
    
    RIN 3150-AF23
    
    
    Petition for Rulemaking; Procedure for Submission
    
    AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    
    ACTION: Proposed rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend 
    its regulations pertaining to petitions for rulemaking. The proposed 
    changes would provide incentive to submit sufficient supporting 
    information in petitions to facilitate more expeditious disposition by 
    the NRC, and would also improve openness of the petition for rulemaking 
    process by delineating priorities for review of the petitions.
    
    DATES: Comment period expires June 12, 1995. 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 this date.
    
    ADDRESSES: Mail written comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
    Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention: Docketing and Services 
    Branch.
        Deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 
    between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays.
        Copies of comments received may be examined at: the NRC Public 
    Document Room, 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: T.Y. Chang, telephone (301) 415-6450, 
    or Chris Rourk, telephone (301) 415-5865, Office of Nuclear Regulatory 
    Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Background
    
        NRC and industry resources are limited and becoming more so. 
    Inefficient regulations, i.e., regulations that are burdensome and have 
    a minimal safety benefit, could divert NRC and industry resources from 
    issues important to safety, thereby adversely affecting safety. While 
    maintaining its emphasis on safety, the NRC over the past 10 years has 
    initiated several programs designed to improve the efficiency of its 
    regulatory program. These efforts include notably the Marginal To 
    Safety (MTS) program, the Regulatory Review Group (RRG) and Cost 
    Beneficial Licensing Actions (CBLA) Task Force studies, and the 
    Technical Specification Amendments Screening Panel.
        These programs have identified a number of inefficient regulatory 
    requirements. They also enabled the NRC to conclude, among other 
    matters, that (1) an expanded role for the public, including the 
    industry, to participate in the process of improving regulations 
    through petitions for rulemaking is highly desirable and should be 
    encouraged, and (2) the petition for rulemaking process could be 
    improved to make it more responsive to petitioners.
    
    Description
    
        The NRC has prepared a proposed rule that would modify 10 CFR 
    2.802, Petition for Rulemaking, to expand the use and improve the 
    responsiveness of the petition for rulemaking process. The proposed 
    rule would also delineate factors that affect priorities for review of 
    petitions. This would improve the openness of the rulemaking process.
        The NRC staff currently expends resources in developing responses 
    to petitions for rulemaking that may or may not result in changes to 
    NRC regulations. The reasons for the granting or denial of petitions 
    sometimes only become evident after completion of considerable NRC 
    staff effort that may include the development of a regulatory analysis 
    and a backfit analysis. As a consequence, processing and disposition of 
    petitions sometimes is unduly prolonged. On the other hand, the NRC 
    recognizes that licensees are in the best position to provide 
    information to assist the NRC to assess the effect of regulatory 
    actions and are also the primary beneficiaries of efforts to reduce 
    regulatory requirements that are unduly burdensome but have no 
    commensurable safety benefits.
        In order to allow petitions to be treated more expeditiously, to 
    facilitate the submission of petitions with strong technical merit, and 
    to improve the likelihood of acceptance of petitions, the NRC proposes 
    to modify Sec. 2.802 to encourage industry and the public to submit 
    more detailed supporting information in the petition for rulemaking 
    than currently required. The NRC concluded that this modification would 
    be an effective means to help processing the petitions in a more 
    expeditious manner, because this information would enable the NRC staff 
    to conclude, with a minimal expenditure of staff resources, whether to 
    grant or deny the petition. The incentive for any petitioner to take 
    this action would be that more expeditious review and processing of the 
    petition will result. It is expected that this alternative process will 
    be more efficient in the use of NRC staff and industry resources and be 
    more responsive to petitioners. This proposed rule would not change any 
    existing provision regarding petitions for rulemaking, rather it offers 
    an alternative within the petition process which would be available to 
    all petitioners regardless of the nature of the petitions.
        The industry is therefore encouraged to identify and propose 
    improvements to regulations that seek to reduce the regulatory burden 
    while providing sufficient supporting information in the petition to 
    demonstrate that the proposed changes will result in significant 
    reduced burden and minimal impact to overall safety (safety 
    neutrality). Similarly, members of the public who seek safety 
    enhancement through the rulemaking process are encouraged to make use 
    of the sizable publicly available safety information to support and 
    expedite their petitions.
        It is to be noted that the prioritization and scheduling for review 
    and disposition by NRC are based on consideration of the merit of each 
    petition. The merit of a petition is judged on its safety significance 
    and the level of detail of supporting information. Petitions containing 
    supporting information additional to those currently required would 
    improve their priority for review and receive more expeditious 
    disposition. Consideration of safety significance is the first 
    criterion for prioritizing the [[Page 15879]] review and disposition of 
    petitions. It is the primary concern of the NRC to ensure that design 
    and operation of NRC licensed facilities are carried out in a manner 
    which assures adequate protection of public health and safety, of the 
    environment, and of national security. Therefore, petitions found by 
    the NRC to raise a concern in this regard would receive immediate NRC 
    attention. In assessing the safety significance of petitions 
    consideration would be given to the technical information submitted and 
    other information available to the NRC, and to whether the proposal is 
    likely to meet the criteria of the backfit rule. Petitions that are 
    safety neutral, i.e., implementation of which would result in an 
    insignificant change to the level of protection to public health and 
    safety, would be resolved in such a way as to minimize the cost to the 
    NRC and maximize the benefit to the petitioner.
        The more detailed supporting information in addition to that 
    required in the current Sec. 2.802(c) should include the suggested 
    regulatory text, regulatory analysis, backfit analysis (if required), 
    information required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 
    and a guidance document similar in nature to a Regulatory Guide, if 
    needed, in support of a proposed rule, as described in paragraph (d)(2) 
    of the proposed rule. The regulatory analysis is important for 
    petitions seeking either to enhance safety or to reduce regulatory 
    burden, because it would provide information on the changes to risk 
    levels as well as costs associated with proposed alternatives.
        The proposed changes would afford any petitioner two options: 
    submit the minimal threshold information in the petition that is 
    required by the current rule and be subject to the regular processing 
    procedures, or submit more detailed supporting information and analyses 
    in the petition in return for a more expeditious processing procedure 
    by the NRC. The proposed revisions would not change any existing 
    provision regarding petitions for rulemaking if they meet the minimum 
    threshold requirement of the current Sec. 2.802(c).
        Subsequent to the establishment of review priority the NRC would 
    develop a schedule for all petitions that are docketed. This schedule 
    would reflect the priority of each petition based on consideration of 
    the combination of safety significance and level of detail of 
    supporting information. A summary of petitions for rulemaking, 
    including the status of each petition, would be prepared semiannually 
    by the NRC staff, as described in paragraph (h) of the proposed rule. A 
    copy of this report would be available for public review in the NRC 
    Public Document Room.
        Further, the NRC has decided to provide administrative procedures 
    to make it easier for concerned parties to submit petitions for changes 
    to regulatory guidance documents, such as regulatory guides, bulletins, 
    generic letters and sections of the Standard Review Plan (SRP). These 
    documents do not have the force and effect of a regulation, but they 
    are used by the NRC staff to identify methods that would comply with 
    the regulation. A formal procedure which enables interested parties to 
    propose changes to such regulatory guidance documents does not now 
    exist. The guidance for preparation of more detailed petitions for 
    rulemaking as well as petitions requesting the revision of regulatory 
    guidance documents will be provided in proposed Regulatory Guides 10.XX 
    and 10.XY to be developed in the near future.
    
    Specific Considerations
    
        Advice and recommendations on the proposed revision to 10 CFR 2.802 
    and on any other points considered pertinent are invited from all 
    interested persons. Comments and supporting reasons are particularly 
    requested on the following questions:
        1. Is the concept of the proposal sound, namely that all 
    petitioners have the option to submit more detailed supporting 
    information which, if found adequate, would lead to faster NRC 
    disposition?
        2. Is the description of information required for detailed 
    supporting information in paragraph (d)(2) sufficiently complete to 
    avoid unnecessary correspondence after the petition has been docketed?
        3. Under what circumstances should a guidance document in the form 
    of a Regulatory Guide be required to support a petition? What criteria 
    are appropriate for not requiring it?
        4. Should there be an NRC electronic bulletin board dealing 
    exclusively with petitions?
        5. As the NRC attempts to shift rulemaking approaches to be more 
    performance-based and risk-based, what changes would be appropriate for 
    the information requirements under the proposed revision of 10 CFR 
    2.802?
        6. Should administrative procedures be established to allow 
    petitions for changes to regulatory guidance documents, such as 
    regulatory guides, bulletins, generic letters, and sections of the 
    Standard Review Plan? Should these procedures be incorporated in a 
    rule?
    
    Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion
    
        The proposed regulations involve an amendment to 10 CFR 2.802, and 
    qualify as actions eligible for the categorical exclusion from 
    environmental review in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(1). Therefore, neither an 
    environmental impact statement nor an environmental assessment has been 
    prepared for these proposed regulations.
    
    Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
    
        The proposed rule amends information collection requirements that 
    are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
    seq). This rule has been submitted to the Office of Management and 
    Budget for review and approval of the information collection 
    requirements.
        The public reporting burden for this collection of information is 
    estimated to average an additional 500 hours for each PRM that contains 
    additional supporting information and analyses. Send comments regarding 
    this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of 
    information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the 
    Information and Records Management Branch (T-6 F33), U.S. Nuclear 
    Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; and to the Desk 
    Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, NEOB-10202, 
    (3150-0136), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503.
    
    Regulatory Analysis
    
        The Administrative Procedure Act requires each Federal agency to 
    give interested persons the right to petition for the issuance, 
    amendment, or repeal of a rule. The proposed changes would facilitate 
    more expeditious disposition by the NRC of petitions with sufficient 
    supporting information, and would also improve the openness of the 
    rulemaking process by delineating petition review priorities. This 
    expended right, however, is available to any interested petitioner. The 
    proposed rule does not affect any existing rights and gives expanded 
    rights to licensees and interested persons. This proposed rule 
    constitutes the preferred course of action and the cost involved in its 
    promulgation and action is necessary and appropriate. The foregoing 
    discussion constitutes the regulatory analysis for the proposed rule.
    
    Regulatory Flexibility Certification
    
        In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 
    605(b)), the Commission certifies that this rule will not, if 
    promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a 
    [[Page 15880]] substantial number of small entities. Any interested 
    person has the right to submit a petition for rulemaking under the 
    existing guidelines. If an interested person voluntarily chooses to 
    develop additional information and perform additional analysis to 
    support a proposed petition, the proposed rule would further encourage 
    petitioners to do so. If the interested person is unable or unwilling 
    to incur the costs associated with developing additional information 
    and performing these analyses, a petition may be submitted under the 
    existing rule. The NRC staff will continue to perform the analyses that 
    may be required to resolve the petition. The proposed rule does not 
    impose any obligations on regulated entities that may fall within the 
    definition of ``small entities'' as set forth in section 601(3) of the 
    Regulatory Flexibility Act, or within the definition of ``small 
    business'' as found in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
    632), or within the small business standards contained in 13 CFR Part 
    121.
    
    Backfit Analysis
    
        This proposed rule does not involve any new provisions which would 
    impose backfits as defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1). Accordingly, no 
    backfit analysis pursuant to 10 CFR 50.109(c) is required for this 
    proposed rule.
    
    List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 2
    
        Administrative practice and procedure, Antitrust, Byproduct 
    material, Classified information, Environmental protection, Nuclear 
    materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Penalties, Sex 
    discrimination, Source material, Special nuclear material, Waste 
    treatment and disposal.
    
        For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of 
    the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization 
    Act of 1974, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC is proposing to 
    adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR part 2.
    
    PART 2--RULES OF PRACTICE FOR DOMESTIC LICENSING PROCEEDINGS
    
        1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:
    
        Authority: Secs. 161, 181, 68 Stat. 948, 953, as amended (42 
    U.S.C. 2201, 2231); sec. 191, as amended, Pub. L. 87-615, 76 Stat. 
    409 (42 U.S.C. 2241); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 
    5841); 5 U.S.C. 552.
        Section 2.101 also issued under secs. 53, 62, 63, 81, 103, 104, 
    105, 68 Stat. 930, 932, 933, 935, 936, 937, 938, as amended (42 
    U.S.C. 2073, 2092, 2093, 2111, 2133, 2134, 2135); sec. 114(f), Pub. 
    L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2213, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10134(f)); sec. 102, 
    Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332); sec. 301, 
    88 Stat. 1248 (42 U.S.C. 5871). Sections 2.102, 2.103, 2.104, 2.105, 
    2.721, also issued under secs. 102, 103, 104, 105, 183, 189, 68 
    Stat. 936, 937, 938, 954, 955 as amended (42 U.S.C. 2132, 2133, 
    2134, 2135, 2233, 2239). Section 2.105 also issued under Pub. L. 97-
    415, 96 Stat. 2073 (42 U.S.C. 2239). Sections 2.200-2.206 also 
    issued under secs. 161b,i, o, 182, 186, 234, 68 Stat. 948-951, 955, 
    83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2236, 2282); sec. 206, 88 Stat. 
    1246 (42 U.S.C. 5846). Sections 2.600-2.606 also issued under sec. 
    102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332). 
    Sections 2.700a, 2.719 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 554. Sections 
    2.754, 2.760, 2.770, 2.780 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 557. Section 
    2.764 and Table 1A of Appendix C also issued under secs. 135, 141, 
    Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161). 
    Section 2.790 also issued under sec. 103, 68 Stat. 936, as amended 
    (42 U.S.C. 2133) and 5 U.S.C. 552. Sections 2.800 and 2.808 also 
    issued under 5 U.S.C. 553. Section 2.809 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 
    553 and sec. 29, Pub. L. 85-256, 71 Stat. 579, as amended (42 U.S.C. 
    2039). Subpart K also issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 
    2239); sec. 134, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10154). 
    Subpart L also issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239). 
    Appendix A also issued under sec. 6, Pub. L. 91-560, 84 Stat. 1473 
    (42 U.S.C. 2135). Appendix B also issued under sec. 10, Pub. L. 99-
    240, 99 Stat. 1842 (42 U.S.C. 2021b et seq.).
    
    
    Sec. 2.8  [Amended]
    
        2. Section 2.8 paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
    * * * * *
        (b) The approved information collection requirements contained in 
    this part appear in Sec. 2.802 and appendix C.
        3. Section 2.802 is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 2.802  Petition for rulemaking.
    
        (a) Any interested person may petition the Commission to issue, 
    amend, or rescind any regulation. The petition should be addressed to 
    the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
    20555-0001, Attention: Chief, Docketing and Service Branch.
        (b) A prospective petitioner may consult with the NRC before filing 
    a petition for rulemaking by writing the Director, Freedom of 
    Information and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. 
    Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: 
    Chief, Rules Review and Directives Branch. A prospective petitioner may 
    also telephone the Rules Review and Directives Branch on (301) 415-7158 
    or toll free on (800) 368-5642.
        (1) In any consultation before the filing of a petition for 
    rulemaking, the assistance that may be provided by the NRC staff is 
    limited to:
        (i) Describing the procedure and process for filing and responding 
    to a petition for rulemaking;
        (ii) Clarifying an existing NRC regulation and the basis for 
    regulation; and
        (iii) Assisting the prospective petitioner to clarify a potential 
    petition so that the Commission is able to understand the nature of the 
    issues of concern to the petitioner.
        (2) In providing the assistance permitted in paragraph (b)(1) of 
    this section, the NRC staff will not draft or develop text or 
    alternative approaches to address matters in the prospective petition 
    for rulemaking.
        (c) Each petition filed under this section shall:
        (1) Set forth a general solution to the problem or the substance or 
    text of any proposed regulation or amendment, or specify the regulation 
    which is to be revoked or amended;
        (2) State clearly and concisely the petitioner's grounds for and 
    interest in the action requested;
        (3) Include a statement in support of the petition which shall set 
    forth the specific issues involved, the petitioner's views or arguments 
    with respect to those issues, relevant technical, scientific or other 
    data involved which is reasonably available to the petitioner, and such 
    other pertinent information as the petitioner deems necessary to 
    support the action sought. In support of its petition, petitioner 
    should note any specific cases of which petitioner is aware where the 
    current rule is unduly burdensome, deficient, or needs to be 
    strengthened.
        (d) Petitions for rulemaking will be prioritized and scheduled for 
    review and disposition by NRC on the basis of the following 
    considerations:
        (1) Safety significance of the issues identified or alternatives 
    proposed in petitions will be the dominant consideration for the 
    prioritization of petitions.
        (2) Petitions containing supporting information additional to that 
    described in paragraph (c) of this section, will improve the priority 
    for review and more expeditious disposition. Sufficient supporting 
    information for higher priority should include:
        (i) The text of a proposed, revised, or amended regulation (``the 
    proposed rule'');
        (ii) Supplementary information constituting the proposed statement 
    of considerations for the regulation;
        (iii) Supporting material to show conformance with legal 
    requirements such as the National Environmental Policy Act, the 
    Paperwork Reduction [[Page 15881]] Act, and the Regulatory Flexibility 
    Act, as appropriate;
        (iv) A regulatory analysis. For information on the form and content 
    of a regulatory analysis see NUREG/BR-0058\1\ and NUREG/CR-3568;\2\
    
        \1\NUREG/BR-0058, ``Regulatory Analysis Guidelines of the U.S. 
    Nuclear Regulatory Commission,'' Rev. 1, May 1984. A draft Rev. 2 of 
    this report was issued for comment in August 1993, and should be 
    published as final report in the near future.
        \2\NUREG/CR-3568, ``A Handbook for Value-Impact Assessment,'' 
    December 1983. The document is currently undergoing revision and 
    will tentatively be titled the ``Regulatory Analysis Technical 
    Evaluation Handbook.''
    
        Note: Copies of NUREG/BR-0058 and NUREG/CR-3568 may be purchased 
    from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing 
    Office, Mail Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328. Copies are also 
    available from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port 
    Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. A copy is also available for 
    inspection and copying for a fee in the NRC Public Document Room, 
    2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC 20555-0001.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        (v) Supporting information that responds to 10 CFR 50.109(c), the 
    Backfit rule where applicable; and
        (vi) A guidance document in the form of a Regulatory Guide when 
    necessary (Note that a Regulatory Guide is usually provided for a 
    performance based regulation).
        (e) The petitioner may request the Commission to suspend all or 
    part of any licensing proceeding to which the petitioner is a party 
    pending disposition of the petition for rulemaking.
        (f) If it is determined that the petition includes the information 
    required by paragraphs (c) and, if petitioner elects, (d)(2) of this 
    section and is complete, the Director, Division of Freedom of 
    Information and Publications Services, or designee, will assign a 
    docket number to the petition, will cause the petition to be formally 
    docketed, and will deposit a copy of the docketed petition in the 
    Commission's Public Document Room. Public comment may be requested by 
    publication of a notice of the docketing of the petition in the Federal 
    Register, or, in appropriate cases, may be invited for the first time 
    upon publication in the Federal Register of a proposed rule developed 
    in response to the petition. Publication will be limited by the 
    requirements of section 181 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
    amended, and may be limited by order of the Commission.
        (g) If it is determined by the Executive Director for Operations 
    that the petition does not include the information required by 
    paragraphs (c) and, if applicable, (d)(2) of this section and is 
    incomplete, the petitioner will be notified of that determination and 
    the respects in which the petition is deficient and will be accorded an 
    opportunity to submit additional data. Ordinarily this determination 
    will be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of the petition by 
    the Office of the Secretary of the Commission. If the petitioner does 
    not submit additional data to correct the deficiency within 90 days 
    from the date of notification to the petitioner that the petition is 
    incomplete, the petition may be returned to the petitioner without 
    prejudice to the right of the petitioner to file a new petition.
        (h) The Director, Division of Freedom of Information and 
    Publications Services, Office of Administration, will prepare on a 
    semiannual basis a summary of petitions for rulemaking before the 
    Commission, including the status of each petition. A copy of the report 
    will be available for public inspection and copying for a fee in the 
    Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level), 
    Washington, DC.
    
        Dated at Rockville, MD, this 22nd day of March 1995.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    Andrew L. Bates,
    Acting Secretary of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 95-7563 Filed 3-27-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    
    

Document Information

Published:
03/28/1995
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Proposed rule.
Document Number:
95-7563
Dates:
Comment period expires June 12, 1995. 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 this date.
Pages:
15878-15881 (4 pages)
RINs:
3150-AF23: Procedures for Submission of Petitions for Rulemaking
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/3150-AF23/procedures-for-submission-of-petitions-for-rulemaking
PDF File:
95-7563.pdf
CFR: (2)
10 CFR 2.8
10 CFR 2.802