[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 91 (Wednesday, May 10, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30018-30019]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11662]


 ========================================================================
 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. 65, No. 91 / Wednesday, May 10, 2000 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 30018]]



NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 76

[Docket No. PRM-76-1]


United Plant Guard Workers of America; Receipt of Petition for 
Rulemaking

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; Notice of receipt.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has received and 
requests public comment on a petition for rulemaking filed by John M. 
Driskill on behalf of Local 111 of the United Plant Guard Workers of 
America. The petition has been docketed by the Commission and has been 
assigned Docket No. PRM-76-1. The petitioner requests that the NRC 
amend its regulations concerning security at gaseous diffusion plants 
to address sites that have both special nuclear material security 
concerns and protection of classified matter concerns; to require that 
these facilities be able to detect, respond to, and mitigate threats of 
a sabotage event; and to require that the security force be armed and 
empowered to make arrests in limited situations. The petitioner 
believes that these amendments are necessary to address the protection 
of classified information, equipment and materials, and special nuclear 
material at the gaseous diffusion plants.

DATES: Submit comments by July 24, 2000. Comments received after this 
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of 
consideration cannot be given except as to comments received on or 
before this date.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Attention: Rulemakings and 
Adjudications staff.
    Deliver comments to 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 
between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm on Federal workdays.
    For a copy of the petition, write to David L. Meyer, Chief, Rules 
and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of 
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001.
    You may also provide comments via the NRC's interactive rulemaking 
website at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. This site provides the capability 
to upload comments as files (any format), if your web browser supports 
that function. For information about the interactive rulemaking 
website, contact Ms. Carol Gallagher, (301) 415-5905 (e-mail: 
[email protected]).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David L. Meyer, Office of 
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555. Telephone: 301-415-7162 or Toll-free: 1-800-368-5642 or E-mail: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 30, 2000, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) docketed 
a March 13, 2000, letter from John M. Driskill, President of Local 111 
of the United Plant Guard Workers of America, to William Travers, the 
NRC's Executive Director for Operations, as a petition for rulemaking 
under 10 CFR 2.802. In this letter, Mr. Driskill requested that the 
NRC's regulations applicable to safeguards and security at gaseous 
diffusion plants be amended under 10 CFR 2.206. The Sec. 2.206 process 
is applicable to actions that would suspend, modify, or revoke a 
license. Requests to add, amend, or remove a regulation are processed 
under 10 CFR 2.802. Therefore, Mr. Driskill's request was docketed 
under the procedures applicable to petitions for rulemaking contained 
in Sec. 2.802.

The Regulations

    The gaseous diffusion plants located in Piketon, Ohio and Paducah, 
Kentucky have obtained a certificate of compliance issued under the 
provisions of 10 CFR part 76. This ensures that these plants operate in 
compliance with those requirements considered necessary to protect the 
public health and safety from radiological hazards and to provide for 
the common defense and security. The regulations in Subpart E of Part 
76 address safeguards and security requirements for the gaseous 
diffusion plants.
    The gaseous diffusion plants process Category III levels of special 
nuclear material as described in 10 CFR 73.2. The petitioner notes that 
these types of quantities require a minimum level of security, as 
specified in 10 CFR 73.67, to minimize the possibility for the 
unauthorized removal of special nuclear material. The specified level 
of security is intended to be consistent with the potential 
consequences of such an action. The petitioner also notes that the 
regulations in 10 CFR part 95 establish security requirements for the 
protection of classified matter at the levels of confidential 
restricted data and secret restricted data. The petitioner further 
notes that these two security protocols are not similar.

The Requested Actions

    The petitioner requests that the NRC amend its regulations 
applicable to safeguards and security at the Portsmouth and Paducah 
gaseous diffusion plants. The requested amendments would--
    1. Require more stringent security programs to protect both the 
special nuclear material and classified matter;
    2. Require that these facilities be able to detect, respond to, and 
mitigate threats of a sabotage event; and
    3. Require the security force to be armed and empowered to make 
arrests in limited situations, such as for violations of the Atomic 
Energy Act.

Material Security and Classified Matter

    The petitioner asserts that the regulations do not adequately 
address sites that have both nuclear material security concerns and 
classified matter concerns. The petitioner believes that the applicable 
regulations were not appropriately merged in the regulations governing 
gaseous diffusion plants to address a site that covers the protection 
of classified information, equipment and materials, and special nuclear 
material.
    The petitioner provides an example of this situation in the 
Controlled Area Fence Line. The petitioner explains that the fence line 
serves as a minimum level of protection against the unauthorized 
removal of special nuclear material contained in 10 and 20 ton 
cylinders.

[[Page 30019]]

The petitioner explains that the portals and gates are in place to 
ensure that personnel who gain access to the controlled access area 
have the proper clearance or are under escort and ensuring that 
prohibited articles are not allowed into the controlled area. The 
petitioner believes that the missing element of security is whether the 
fence line, which the petitioner believes does minimize the 
unauthorized removal of special nuclear material of 10 and 20 ton 
cylinders, adequately protects against the unauthorized removal of 
restricted information, equipment, and other materials or the 
unauthorized access to these types of materials.
    The petitioner asserts that other facilities that possess Category 
III quantities of special nuclear material regulated by the NRC do not 
share the level of concern for classified matter, equipment, and 
technology that exists at the gaseous diffusion plants. The petitioner 
suggests that the regulations concerning security programs at the 
gaseous diffusion plants, such as escort requirements and physical 
security measures, should be amended to be made more stringent to 
protect this technology.

Sabotage Events

    According to the petitioner, the NRC typically relies on local law 
enforcement agencies to respond to incidents of workplace violence or 
sabotage at material licensee facilities. The petitioner states that 
the scope and complexity of a gaseous diffusion plant makes it far 
different from other types of NRC licensed materials facilities. 
Furthermore, the petitioner believes that these differences result in 
unique problems in relying on local law enforcement agencies to protect 
such a facility from violent incidents. The petitioner indicates that 
local law enforcement agencies in the vicinity of the Paducah plant 
have stated, for the record, that they should not be viewed as a 
replacement for on-site security because of their lack of knowledge of 
the plant site, the types of hazards contained in the plant, and their 
limited resources. The petitioner presents two letters, attached to the 
petition, from law enforcement agencies in the vicinity of the Paducah 
plant that support this contention.
    Because of the unique nature of gaseous diffusion plants and the 
importance of their operation, the petitioner believes that a violent 
incident or an act of sabotage would affect national security. The 
petitioner also asserts that, because of the many radiological and 
toxicological hazards associated with these plants, an act of sabotage 
could adversely affect the safety of plant workers and the public.
    The petitioner believes that these dangers were not addressed as 
part of the certification process. According to the petitioner, current 
NRC standards do not require a security force that is capable of 
preventing a sabotage event. The petitioner requests that the 
regulations be amended to require that security forces at the gaseous 
diffusion plants be able to detect, respond to, and mitigate violent 
incidents or acts of sabotage.
    The petitioner also notes that current regulations do not require 
that the security force be armed or empowered to enforce the Atomic 
Energy Act. The petitioner requests that security officers at the 
gaseous diffusion plants be armed and empowered to make arrests in 
limited situations, such as for violations of the Atomic Energy Act.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of May, 2000.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 00-11662 Filed 5-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P