[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 86 (Thursday, May 3, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22134-22137]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-11108]


 ========================================================================
 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. 66, No. 86 / Thursday, May 3, 2001 / Proposed 
Rules  

[[Page 22134]]



NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 50


Reducing Unnecessary Regulatory Burden While Maintaining Safety 
Workshop and Comments

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of public workshop and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: Consistent with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) 
Strategic Plan and the Energy and Water Appropriations Bill, 2000, the 
Commission has directed the staff to maintain plant safety and improve 
public confidence, but reduce unnecessary regulatory burden. Within 
this context, unnecessary regulatory burden is defined as regulatory 
requirements that do not aid the Commission in its mission to protect 
public health and safety. A workshop will be held to inform and solicit 
stakeholder input on activities associated with reducing unnecessary 
regulatory burden. Comments can be provided orally at the workshop, or 
in writing within 30 days following the workshop. The workshop will be 
a facilitated round table format with participants representing the 
broad spectrum of affected interests. There will also be opportunities 
for audience comments and questions. Although unnecessary burden 
reduction initiatives are ongoing agency-wide, this workshop will 
primarily focus on three areas: Risk informing portions of 10 CFR Part 
50, reforming outdated or paperwork oriented regulations, reviewing 
other regulatory requirements (e.g., technical specifications) for 
burden reduction opportunities. Depending on comments and discussions 
received during or following this workshop, other workshops may follow. 
This workshop will also entertain new technologies or techniques that 
could be used to reduce unnecessary regulatory burden and will provide 
the status of the licensing action information collection initiative. 
The NRC hopes to gain widespread participation from (but not limited 
to) representatives from non-governmental organizations, industry, 
Federal agencies, State governments, local governments, international 
organizations, and private citizens. Following the workshop, the NRC 
staff plans to prepare a staff paper to the Commission to articulate 
stakeholder's interest, comments, and recommendations regarding this 
initiative.

DATES: The workshop will be held on May 31, 2001--8:30 a.m. to 5:00 
p.m. The comment period expires July 2, 2001.

ADDRESSES: The workshop will be held at NRC Headquarter Offices, Two 
White Flint, Auditorium, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 
20555-0001. Written comments may be sent to: Chief, Rules and 
Directives Branch, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T-06 
D59, Washington, D.C., 20555-0001. Comments may be hand delivered to 
11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20555-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francis X. Cameron, the facilitator of 
this workshop, Mail Stop O-15 D21, telephone (301) 415-1642; Internet: 
[email protected]; or William S. Raughley regarding comments, telephone (301) 
415-7577; Internet: [email protected], U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001.
    For material related to the meeting, please contact U.S. NRC Public 
Affairs Office (301) 415-8200.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Consistent with the NRC Strategic Plan and the Energy and Water 
Appropriations Bill, 2000, NRC has several initiatives planned to 
reduce unnecessary regulatory burden on licensees. Although unnecessary 
burden reduction initiatives are agency-wide, this workshop will 
primarily focus on initiatives associated with the following three 
areas: (1) Risk informing portions of 10 CFR Part 50, (2) reforming 
outdated or paperwork oriented regulations, and (3) seeking unnecessary 
burden reduction in other regulatory requirements (e.g., technical 
specifications). The workshop will also entertain new technologies or 
techniques which could be used to reduce unnecessary regulatory burden 
and provide a status on the information collection initiative for 
licensing actions.
    To elaborate, the NRC Strategic Plan, Fiscal Year 2000-Fiscal Year 
2005 (Volume 2, Part I) and the companion document Strategic Plan 
Appendix (Volume 2, Part 2) explain NRC performance goals to: (1) 
Maintain safety, protection of the environment, and common defense and 
security; (2) increase public confidence; (3) make NRC activities and 
decisions more effective, efficient, and realistic; (4) reduce 
unnecessary regulatory burden on licensees. Stakeholders generally 
include the public, licensees, other Federal Agencies, States, local 
governments, industry, the international community, non-government 
organizations and others. (The referenced documents and ADAMS 
references are available through the NRC website ``www.nrc.gov/NRC/
PUBLIC/meet.html'' under ``Nuclear Regulatory Research'' or ``RES.'') 
The Energy and Water Appropriations Bill, 2000, states in part that:

    * * * The Committee directs the Commission to examine reforms to 
the scope of power reactor regulations that will promote a higher 
level of confidence that the revised regulations, when issued, are 
consistent with the fundamental accountability of the Commission and 
that regulations which do not contribute to adequate protection are 
eliminated. The Committee directs that these efforts be completed no 
later than December 31, 2000.
    In addition, the committee directs the Commission to review 
existing regulations to reform those that are outdated or paperwork 
oriented to a set of regulations that are performance based by 2004.

    The NRC Strategic Plan and the Energy and Water Appropriations 
Bill, 2000 provide the framework for NRC initiatives to reduce the 
unnecessary regulatory burden on licensees. The NRC Strategic Plan 
defines the unnecessary regulatory burden for NRC licensees as 
requirements that go beyond what is necessary and sufficient for 
providing reasonable assurance that public health and safety, the 
environment, and the common defense and security will be protected. 
Consistent with the NRC Strategic Plan, the NRC is seeking stakeholder 
input to identify and discuss opportunities for

[[Page 22135]]

reducing unnecessary regulatory burden while maintaining safety. By 
reducing unnecessary regulatory burden, both the NRC and licensee 
resources may be made available to more effectively focus on 
maintaining safety. During the past 30 years, an ever-increasing body 
of technical knowledge and operating experience has been accumulated 
that may allow for refinements and enhancement in NRC requirements that 
can reduce the unnecessary regulatory burden while assuring maintenance 
of safety. Not all the NRC requirements may have been updated to take 
into account these advances. The NRC believes that for some areas of 
NRC regulations and practices, the burden is not commensurate with the 
safety benefit.

Discussion

    From the NRC's perspective the initiatives described below for 
reducing the unnecessary regulatory burden have common attributes: (1) 
The NRC Strategic Plan and the Energy and Water Appropriations Bill, 
2000 provide the incentive and framework for these initiatives; (2) 
each initiative is planned to result in revisions to regulatory 
documents or plant technical specifications; (3) while each initiative 
is expected to result in the reduction of unnecessary regulatory 
burden, expected levels of safety will be maintained; and (4) the plans 
to reduce the unnecessary regulatory burden while maintaining safety 
need greater stakeholder involvement in, and understanding of, the 
goals of the overall initiative; the relative priorities of the 
initiatives including those initiatives that will result in the burden 
reductions with no safety impact; and the identification and 
prioritization of candidate changes within each initiative. Removal of 
unnecessary regulatory burden can only be to the extent it is feasible 
and cost effective. In addition, having involved the stakeholders, the 
overall plans, the milestones we intend to meet, and status should be 
communicated to the Commission periodically and made publicly 
available.
    The staff plans to (1) hold a workshop to communicate to and obtain 
feedback from stakeholders regarding NRC plans for reducing unnecessary 
regulatory burden while maintaining safety and (2) provide an 
opportunity for written feedback after the meeting.
    The enclosed workshop agenda is designed to provide the opportunity 
for meaningful stakeholder interaction and involvement and provide 
stakeholders with a foundation to provide written comments. The 
specific objectives are to: (1) Provide an NRC management perspective 
of efforts to reduce unnecessary burden including the relationship 
between the individual efforts and the input needed from the 
stakeholders; (2) explain the NRC plans in the areas of risk informing 
10 CFR Part 50, reforming outdated and paperwork requirements, and 
reviewing other regulatory requirements; (3) share inputs received to 
date from stakeholders; (4) obtain broader participation and 
stakeholder input regarding the scope and relative priorities of these 
initiatives including new technologies; (5) provide context for 
identifying unrecognized opportunities and exploring concerns 
associated with unnecessary regulatory burden reductions; and (6) 
provide a foundation for stakeholders to provide detailed written 
comments on the agency's unnecessary burden reduction initiatives and 
specific questions.
    The following summarizes unnecessary burden reduction initiatives 
that will be discussed at the workshop.

Risk Informing the Regulations

    The staff has under way two initiatives for risk-informing 10 CFR 
Part 50, first described, and options defined in SECY-98-300, ``Options 
for Risk-informed Revisions to 10 CFR Part 50, Domestic Licensing of 
Production and Utilization Facilities,'' dated December 23, 1998. In 
the first initiative (SECY-98-300, ``Option 2'') the staff is 
addressing risk-informed changes to the regulatory scope for 
structures, systems, and components in need of special treatment (e.g., 
quality assurance, environmental qualification). This initiative does 
not address changing the technical content of the special treatment 
requirements, the design of the plant or the design-basis accidents. In 
the second initiative (SECY-98-300, ``Option 3'') the staff is 
assessing the risk-significance of technical requirements associated 
with the special treatment requirements in 10 CFR Part 50. This work is 
closely linked and integrated with the effort under Option 2.
    In SECY-99-264, ``Proposed Staff Plan for Risk-Informing Technical 
Requirements in 10 CFR Part 50,'' dated November 8, 1999, the staff 
provided the original plan and schedule for its work to risk-inform the 
technical requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 (Option 3). In SECY-00-0086, 
``Status Report on Risk-Informing the Technical Requirements of 10 CFR 
Part 50 (Option 3),'' April 12, 2000, the staff provided a status 
report on Option 3 activities, including an initial version of the 
``framework'' document (a document the staff is using to guide Option 3 
activities). In SECY-00-0086, based on meetings with stakeholders and 
input from industry, 10 CFR 50.44 ``Standards For Combustible Gas 
Control System In Light-Water-Cooled Power Reactors,'' and 10 CFR 
50.46, ``Acceptance Criteria For Emergency Cooling Systems For Light-
Water Reactors,'' were listed as a high priority candidate regulations 
for evaluation under Option 3.
    In SECY-00-0198, ``Status Report on Study of Risk-Informed Changes 
to the Technical Requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 (Option 3) and 
Recommendations on Risk-Informed Changes to 10 CFR 50.44 (Combustible 
Gas Control),'' September 14, 2000, the staff provided a status report 
focusing on the results of its feasibility study and recommendations to 
risk-inform 10 CFR 50.44, an updated framework document, and a short 
status of other Option 3 work underway. In SECY-00-0198, the staff 
indicated that work had been initiated to develop risk-informed 
alternatives to the current 10 CFR 50.46. More recently, the status of 
this work has been described noting the need for more stakeholder 
involvement in a memorandum to the Commission dated February 5, 2001 
(Adams Accession Number ML010260032).
    Risk-informed changes to 10 CFR 50.61, ``Fracture Toughness 
Requirements for Protection Against PTS Events,'' are also under 
evaluation. The status and schedule for this work were reported in 
SECY-00-0140, ``Reevaluation of the Pressurized Thermal Shock Rule (10 
CFR 50.61) Screening Criterion,'' June 23, 2000.
    The staff requested public comment on SECY-00-213, ``Risk-Informed 
Regulation Implementation Plan,'' October 26, 2000, in a Federal 
Register Notice (65 FR 80473) on December 21, 2000. Input received from 
stakeholders and work done to date on Option 3 by the staff are being 
considered in determining which regulations from 10 CFR Part 50 are 
candidates to be risk-informed. The staff-identified candidates 
identified to date are listed in Table A-2 in Attachment 1 to SECY-00-
0198.

Unnecessary Burden Reduction While Maintaining Safety

    A trip report (Adams Accession Number ML003725832) summarizes a 
public meeting on June 14, 2000, between the NRC Office of Nuclear 
Regulatory Research (RES) and Commonwealth Edison (Com-Ed) to 
understand concerns with some regulations that it perceives to impose 
unnecessary regulatory burden. The trip report attachments include a 
list of

[[Page 22136]]

items they consider to be unnecessary regulatory burden. Com-Ed 
explained that the list was illustrative but not exhaustive.
    The NRC reviewed the list, and it appeared the items fell into four 
categories: (1) Items that seem to be simple revisions to outdated or 
paperwork requirements of apparently little or no safety benefit; these 
items could be further grouped into outdated, redundant, collection, 
reporting, or paperwork-oriented-type regulations and are candidates to 
satisfy the Congressional request; (2) complex technical changes 
needing NRC resources and prioritizing in the budget and planning 
process; some of these items can be integrated into ongoing or planned 
initiatives such as risk informing 10 CFR 50.46; (3) items that are 
unlikely to be considered as part of current staff initiatives; (4) 
items already being processed for rulemaking.
    Subsequently, the Industry Licensing Action Task Force provided a 
list of outdated or paperwork requirements it considered to be 
unnecessary regulatory burden that was similar to items in the Com-Ed 
list.
    Resources have been assigned to develop a plan to evaluate outdated 
or paperwork requirements. However, rather than evaluating individual 
lists, the NRC believes that it would be efficient to obtain an 
exhaustive list of candidate outdated or paperwork requirements 
considered to be unnecessary regulatory burden before evaluating 
changes to outdated or paperwork requirements. In addition, the NRC 
would like to hear from other stakeholders regarding the possible 
reduction of outdated and paperwork requirements.

Reviewing Other Regulatory Requirements

    In addition to reviewing NRC regulations, the NRC staff is involved 
in various activities to assess other regulatory requirements and 
administrative processes to identify possible improvements in 
efficiency or reductions in unnecessary regulatory burden. The staff is 
currently reviewing its internal procedures and processes, various 
reporting or administrative requirements imposed on power reactor 
licensees, and is continuing with initiatives related to the content of 
technical specifications. Specific types of activities underway are 
discussed in ``Summary of Meeting Held on February 7, 2001, Between the 
NRC Staff and Industry Licensing Action Task Force,'' dated March 29, 
2001 (Adams Accession Number ML010890109).

Proposed Information Collection Initiative

    A Federal Register Notice (Adams Accession Number ML003771785) 
soliciting public comments on the proposed information collection was 
published on December 7, 2000. The purpose of the information 
collection initiative is to gather information from licensees regarding 
the impact of the NRC activities. As discussed in the Federal Register 
notice (FRN), the information gathered from the proposal would assist 
the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) staff in allocating 
staff resources and measuring how the work the NRR staff completes 
contributes to the agency goals and meets the Government Performance 
and Results Act (GPRA). Five different groups commented on the proposed 
initiative (Tennessee Valley Authority, Illinois Department of Nuclear 
Safety, Winston and Strawn, Hopkins and Sutter, and the Nuclear Energy 
Institute). Comments received from the public were generally not in 
favor of the proposed initiative. Based on the public comments, the 
staff believes that to proceed with the initiative as it was originally 
proposed in the FRN is not feasible and is not an effective use of NRC 
resources. Thus, the staff has explored other means of achieving the 
objectives and identified the following two options that will be 
discussed at the workshop:
    Option 1--The NRR Project Manager would indicate whether the 
amendment reduces: radiation dose, risk, outage time, increases safety, 
or is administrative. Criteria/guidance would be developed to 
categorize the various amendments. At the end of the fiscal year, the 
staff would determine how many of the licensing actions fell into each 
category and make a rough estimate regarding cost savings.
    Option 2--Criteria would be developed to determine whether an 
amendment was a low, medium, or high savings to the licensee. The 
licensee would indicate which category the amendment falls into. The 
staff would need input from the industry to develop the criteria and 
would need individual licensees to categorize amendments upon submittal 
to the NRC.

New Technologies or Techniques

    Advances in computational capability and data permit more realistic 
modeling of reactor behavior and may provide opportunities for reducing 
unnecessary burden while maintaining safety. Recent examples include 
revised source terms and current efforts to risk inform 10 CFR 50.44, 
10 CFR 50.46, and 10 CFR 50.61. The NRC is interested in other 
opportunities.

Obtaining Broad Stakeholder Input

    We are interested in stakeholder feedback on the priority of the 
candidates, to recommend what additional work should be in the scope of 
unnecessary burden reduction initiatives and to obtain general 
concerns. The feedback should consider factors such as potential safety 
benefit and stakeholder interest, as well as the agency's four 
performance goals. The stakeholders are encouraged to participate in 
the workshop discussion sessions and provide written comment. The 
following questions will help to start each workshop discussion session 
as well as provide a format for comments:
    1. What aspects of these initiatives interfere with the NRC ability 
to maintain safety or increase public confidence?
    2. Will implementation of these initiatives improve regulatory 
efficiency, effectiveness, and realism?
    3. Beyond this meeting and the request for comments, how can 
stakeholder participation in these initiatives be enhanced?
    4. Which areas being pursued will not likely be fruitful to 
stakeholders, or otherwise have a negative impact on stakeholder needs?
    5. Are ongoing and future activities to reduce unnecessary burden 
appropriately prioritized? Which activities should receive the highest 
priority and why?
    6. Are there any other opportunities that have not been recognized 
or being pursued at this time. Identify: (a) The regulation or portion 
thereof that should be evaluated; (b) possible improvements to the 
regulations; (c) the basis for the proposed reduction including the 
potential impact on safety, public confidence, regulatory effectiveness 
and efficiency; and (d) the estimate dollar cost saving per year.
    7. What advancements in technology would help NRC better meet its 
performance goal of reducing unnecessary burden on stakeholders?
    8. What new areas of regulatory research may be warranted to 
advance technology that could better serve these initiatives?

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of April 2001.


[[Page 22137]]


    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Farouk Eltawila,
Acting Director, Division of Systems Analysis and Regulatory 
Effectiveness, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.

Tentative Agenda--Reducing Unnecessary Regulatory Burden While 
Maintaining Safety Workshop

8:30-8:45  Welcome and Introduction
8:45-9:00  Meeting Objectives, Structure and Groundrules
9:00-9:15  Overview of NRC Initiative to Reduce Unnecessary Regulatory 
Burden
9:15-10:30  Risk Informing 10 CFR Part 50 Participants Discussion
10:30-10:45  Break
10:45-11:45  Paperwork Reduction and Obsolete Regulations Participants 
Discussion
11:45-1:00  Lunch Break
1:00-1:45  Licensing Actions to Reduce Unnecessary Burden Participants 
Discussion
1:45-3:15  Other NRC Initiatives Related to Unnecessary Burden 
Reduction Participants Discussion
3:15-3:30  Break
3:30-4:30  Open discussion
4:30-4:45  Summary and Closure

[FR Doc. 01-11108 Filed 5-2-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P