[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 77 (Monday, April 22, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23684-23685]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09375]
========================================================================
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. 78, No. 77 / Monday, April 22, 2013 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 23684]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 73
[Docket No. PRM-73-16; NRC-2013-0024]
Personnel Access Authorization Requirements for Nuclear Power
Plants
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; notice of receipt and request for
comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is publishing for
comment a notice of receipt of a petition for rulemaking (PRM) filed
with the Commission by Ellen C. Ginsberg on behalf of the Nuclear
Energy Institute (NEI or the petitioner) on January 25, 2013. The
petition was docketed by the NRC on February 4, 2013, and has been
assigned Docket No. PRM-73-16. The petitioner requests that the NRC
amend its regulations to limit the scope of third-party review of
licensee decisions denying or revoking an employee's unescorted access
at their facility. The petitioner seeks to ensure that such decisions
cannot be overturned by any third party. The petitioner also requests
an expedited review of this petition based on pending arbitration cases
that will be affected by NRC action on this petition. The NRC has
reviewed the petitioner's request for an expedited review of this
petition and has determined that the petition should be expedited due
to the aforementioned pending arbitration cases. Therefore, the NRC is
limiting the public comment period to 45 days. While 75 days is the
normal duration for NRC technical rules, the NRC believes that 45 days
provides sufficient time for stakeholders to comment.
DATES: Submit comments by June 6, 2013. Comments received after this
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is
able to assure consideration only for comments received on or before
this date. Because the NRC has determined that the petition should be
expedited due to the aforementioned pending arbitration cases, requests
for extension of the comment period will not be granted.
ADDRESSES: You may access information and comment submissions related
to this petition for rulemaking which the NRC possesses and is publicly
available, by searching on http://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
NRC-2013-0024. You may submit comments by any of the following methods
(unless this document describes a different method for submitting
comments on a specific subject):
Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0024. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-492-
3668; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
Email comments to: [email protected]. If you do
not receive an automatic email reply confirming receipt, then contact
us at 301-415-1677.
Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission at 301-415-1101.
Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff.
Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (Eastern Time) Federal
workdays; telephone: 301-415-1677.
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: Scott Sloan, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001; telephone: 301-415-1619, email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Accessing Information and Submitting Comments
A. Accessing Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2013-0024 when contacting the NRC
about the availability of information for this petition for rulemaking.
You may access information related to this petition for rulemaking,
which the NRC possesses and is publicly available, by any of the
following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0024.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC
Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the
search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and then select ``Begin Web-
based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-
4737, or by email to [email protected]. The ADAMS accession number
for each document referenced in this document (if that document is
available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is
referenced.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
B. Submitting Comments
Please include Docket ID NRC-2013-0024 in the subject line of your
comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make
your comment submission available to the public in this docket.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in you
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into
ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove
identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be
publicly
[[Page 23685]]
disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that
the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such
information before making the comment submissions available to the
public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.
The Petition
Ellen C. Ginsburg, vice president, general counsel, and secretary,
NEI, submitted a PRM dated January 25, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML13035A186), requesting that the NRC amend its personnel access
authorization regulations to ensure that denials cannot be overturned
by a third party. The NRC has determined that the petition meets the
threshold sufficiency requirements for a petition for rulemaking under
Sec. 2.802 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
``Petition for rulemaking,'' and the petition has been docketed as PRM-
73-16. The NRC is requesting public comment on the petition for
rulemaking.
The Petitioner
The petition states that NEI ``is the organization responsible for
establishing unified industry policy on matters affecting the nuclear
energy industry, including the regulatory aspects of generic
operational and technical issues.'' The petition further states that
NEI ``endeavors to bring matters to the NRC's attention that might
frustrate the agency's statutory and regulatory objectives.'' The NEI
believes that the issue raised in this petition is a generic matter and
``has the potential to affect the ability of NRC reactor licensees to
control access to the protected and vital areas of their sites.''
Discussion of the Petition
The NRC's regulations at 10 CFR part 73, ``Physical protection of
plants and materials,'' require a nuclear power plant to have access
authorization programs in place to evaluate an employee's suitability
for unescorted access to the plant. Specifically, 10 CFR 73.56(c)
contains the requirement that all licensees have access authorization
programs in place that provide a high degree of assurance that all
employees granted unescorted access to nuclear power plants ``are
trustworthy and reliable, such that they do not constitute an
unreasonable risk to public health and safety or the common defense and
security, including the potential to commit radiological sabotage.''
Regulations at 10 CFR 73.56(d) require licensees to perform background
investigations of those employees seeking unescorted access, and
regulations at 10 CFR 73.56(l) requires licensees to implement a
notification and review process for those employees who are denied
unescorted access. For the employee whose denial may provide an adverse
impact on employment, the review ``must provide for an impartial and
independent internal management review.''
The petitioner states that the United States Court of Appeals for
the 7th Circuit decided, in Exelon Generation Company, LLC v. Local 15,
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, 676 F.3d 566 (7th Cir.
Ill. 2012), that the NRC's access authorization regulations do not
prohibit the use of third-party arbitrators in cases where employees
have been denied access. The petitioner states that one effect of the
court's decision is that a person who has been determined not to be
trustworthy and reliable by a licensee and denied unescorted access to
a nuclear power plant could have that determination overturned by a
third party. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the 7th Circuit
court's decision ``undermines the NRC's ability to demonstrate that
adequate protection is assured if licensees are impeded in their
ability to comply with NRC regulations to maintain `high assurance'.''
Furthermore, the petitioner believes that the 7th Circuit court's
conclusion that NRC regulations do not explicitly prohibit third-party
arbitration of denials of unescorted access could have been prevented
had the regulations contained more ``clarity regarding the proper scope
of the review process and the ultimate responsibility of the licensee
for plant safety and security.'' The petitioner states that in order to
provide the necessary clarity, the NRC regulations should be modified
to ``expressly prohibit the restoration or grant of unescorted access
by third parties (including arbitrators), to remove all doubt that the
licensee is solely responsible for making final unescorted access
decisions, and to prescribe a clearly-articulated scope of review for
third-party reviewers.'' The petitioner provided proposed modifications
to the regulations at 10 CFR 73.56(a)(4), 10 CFR 73.56(a)(5), and 10
CFR 73.56(l), that the petitioner believes would clarify the process
and limit the scope on third-party reviews of access denials, and
strengthen the authority of licensees to approve or deny unescorted
access to nuclear power plants.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of April 2013.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013-09375 Filed 4-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P