[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 6, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66660-66661]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-26582]
========================================================================
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. 215 / Wednesday, November 6, 2013 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 66660]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 2
[NRC-2013-0050]
RIN 3150-AJ24
Potential Changes to Interlocutory Appeals Process for
Adjudicatory Decisions
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; withdrawal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is withdrawing an
advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) that presented possible
changes to its interlocutory appeals process for certain adjudicatory
decisions. The NRC published the ANPR on April 5, 2013, and solicited
public comments. Based upon the limited public comments received, the
NRC does not believe that amendments to the current regulations are
warranted at this time.
DATES: The ANPR to make changes to the NRC's interlocutory appeals
process for certain adjudicatory decisions that was published on April
5, 2013 (78 FR 20498), is withdrawn on November 6, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2013-0050 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information for this final rule. You may
access publicly-available information related to this final rule by any
of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0050. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact
the individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
of this final rule.
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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tison Campbell, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001;
telephone: 301-415-8579; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On April 5, 2013 (78 FR 20498), the NRC published an ANPR
soliciting public comment on proposed changes to its process for
interlocutory review of rulings on requests for hearings or petitions
to intervene under Sec. 2.311 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR). The NRC presented four options for amending the
10 CFR 2.311 interlocutory review provision:
(1) Retaining the current rule without any change (status quo),
which permits interlocutory appeals, without any threshold
requirements, of rulings on requests for hearings or petitions to
intervene regarding only whether the hearing or intervention should be
granted or denied in its entirety.
(2) Increasing the scope of 10 CFR 2.311 beyond just whether the
hearing or intervention should be granted or denied in its entirety to
encompass the interlocutory review of each individual contention
admissibility determination. All appeals would have to be made
immediately following the issuance of the ruling by the presiding
officer.
(3) Increasing the scope of 10 CFR 2.311 to encompass the
interlocutory review of each individual contention admissibility
determination, except for the admission or denial of contentions
grounded in the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended
(NEPA). For decisions on environmental contentions partially admitting
or partially denying a request or petition, the appeal of which would
only be entertained either a) after the issuance of a final
Environmental Impact Statement (or other NEPA document) or,
alternatively, b) after a final decision in the proceeding
(noninterlocutory).
(4) Reducing the scope of 10 CFR 2.311 to include only
interlocutory review of whether a request for hearing or petition to
intervene was properly denied in its entirety. Orders granting a
hearing, but only admitting some contentions would not be immediately
appealable by any party.
In addition to presenting these options, the NRC sought comment on
clarifying the interlocutory review process.
II. Public Comment on the Potential Changes to 10 CFR 2.311
The NRC received a single response during the public comment
period, from the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). NEI suggested that the
rulemaking be deferred, suspended, or withdrawn because it will not
clearly improve safety or efficiency, and therefore should not be an
agency priority. In its comments, NEI indicated that there is little
information available to help predict the advantages and disadvantages
of each potential option described in the ANPR. Because of this, NEI
supported Option 1--to not take any action at this time. NEI noted that
if the NRC were to proceed with a rulemaking, Option 2 may result in
some increased efficiency. NEI did not support Options 3 or 4, and
stated that Option 4 would be an inequitable standard.
III. Reasons for Withdrawing the ANPR
The sole public response to the ANPR argued that the NRC should
preserve its existing interlocutory appeals standards. No public
comments were received in favor of modifying the rule. Accordingly, the
NRC believes that there is not significant public interest in a rule
change at this time. The NRC also received no public comments
suggesting that the current interlocutory appeals process is
inefficient, prejudicial, or otherwise deficient. For these reasons,
the NRC is withdrawing the ANPR.
[[Page 66661]]
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day of October 2013
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Margaret M. Doane,
General Counsel, Office of the General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2013-26582 Filed 11-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P