[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 86 (Thursday, May 3, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19464-19466]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09359]


 ========================================================================
 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. 83, No. 86 / Thursday, May 3, 2018 / Proposed 
Rules  

[[Page 19464]]



NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Chapter I

[NRC-2017-0214]


Review of Administrative Rules

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is initiating a 
retrospective review of administrative requirements to identify 
outdated or duplicative administrative requirements that may be 
eliminated without an adverse effect on public health or safety, common 
defense and security, protection of the environment, or regulatory 
efficiency and effectiveness. The NRC is providing an outline of its 
strategy and is seeking public comment on the criteria that the NRC 
proposes to use to identify administrative regulations for possible 
elimination. This retrospective review of administrative regulations 
will complement the NRC's existing strategy for retrospective analysis 
of existing regulations.

DATES: Submit comments by July 2, 2018. Comments received after this 
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission 
is able to ensure consideration only for comments received before this 
date. The NRC will not prepare written responses to each individual 
comment, due to the NRC's schedule for completing the retrospective 
review of administrative regulations.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0214. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Ms. Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: [email protected]. For technical questions contact 
the individuals 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 obtaining information and submitting 
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Margaret S. Ellenson, Office of 
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards; telephone: 301-415-0894; email: 
[email protected]; or Mr. Andrew Carrera, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards; telephone: 301-415-1078; email: 
[email protected]; both are staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0214 when contacting the NRC 
about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain 
publicly-available information related to this action by any of the 
following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0214.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection 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 (if it is available 
in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this 
document.
     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-2017-0214 in your comment submission.
    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact 
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your 
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 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 into ADAMS.

II. Background

    On August 11, 2017, the NRC announced that the agency is 
initiating, beginning in the fall of the calendar year 2017, a 
retrospective review of its administrative regulations to identify 
those rules that are outdated or duplicative. Once identified, the 
regulations will be evaluated to determine whether they can be 
eliminated without impacting the agency's mission. The retrospective 
review supports the NRC's ongoing regulatory planning and retrospective 
analysis of existing regulations (ADAMS Accession No. ML14002A441).

The Retrospective Review of Administrative Regulations Strategy

    On November 22, 2017, the NRC staff issued SECY-17-0119, 
``Retrospective

[[Page 19465]]

Review of Administrative Regulations'' (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML17286A069), which provided for Commission approval the NRC staff's 
proposed strategy for the retrospective review of regulations. The 
staff requirements memorandum associated with SECY-17-0119 approved the 
NRC staff's proposal and directed staff to implement the strategy. 
Overall, the goal of the retrospective review is to enhance the 
management and administration of regulatory activities and to ensure 
that the agency's regulations remain current and effective. The review 
is intended to identify regulatory changes that are administrative in 
nature that will make the information submittal, record keeping, and 
reporting processes more efficient for the staff, applicants, and 
licensees. The strategy takes into consideration the agency's overall 
statutory responsibilities, including mandates to issue new 
regulations, the number of regulations in chapter I of title 10 of the 
Code of Federal Regulations, and available resources. This effort will 
not impact the NRC's mission, as it will be limited to identifying 
outdated or duplicative, non-substantive administrative regulations.

III. Discussion

    This notice provides an outline of the NRC's approved strategy for 
the retrospective review (see Table 1) and requests public comment on 
the criteria the NRC proposes to use to evaluate potential changes to 
the requirements. In summary, the retrospective review strategy 
involves seven steps--(1) developing criteria to evaluate potential 
regulatory changes to administrative requirements; (2) gathering NRC 
staff input on administrative regulations that might fit the proposed 
criteria; (3) reviewing historical correspondence documents submitted 
to the NRC related to eliminating duplicative or outdated 
administrative regulations; (4) including opportunities for public 
comment; (5) interacting with the public throughout the review process 
by conducting public meetings; (6) reviewing stakeholder input; and (7) 
developing rules or rulemaking plans to eliminate or modify 
administrative requirements, as appropriate.

                         Table 1--Retrospective Review Activity Description and Timeline
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                        Approximate completion
               Action                                  Description                             timeframe
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1: Develop Evaluation Criteria  Develop criteria to ensure administrative        Finalize criteria after
                                      regulations are evaluated in a consistent        close of public comment
                                      manner. The criteria will be used as guides to   period for this notice
                                      determine whether the administrative             and after final review
                                      requirement is duplicative or outdated and if    and approval by the
                                      the requirement(s) should be considered for      Commission.
                                      potential elimination or modification. The
                                      criteria are being disseminated to external
                                      stakeholders for comment via this notice and
                                      will be discussed in a public meeting.
Step 2: Gather NRC Staff Input.....  Provide an email address or other mechanism for  Concurrently with request
                                      NRC staff to provide input on administrative     for public input as
                                      requirements that may be outdated or             outlined in Steps 1 and
                                      duplicative and that the Commission should       4.
                                      consider for elimination or modification.
Step 3: Historical Correspondence    Review relevant historical letters received      Beginning concurrent with
 Review.                              from members of the public, other Federal        Step 4.
                                      agencies, State and local governments,
                                      Federally-recognized Tribes, non-governmental
                                      organizations, and representative industry
                                      groups related to eliminating duplicative or
                                      outdated administrative regulations.
Step 4: Request for Public Input on  Request public input to identify administrative  Within 4 months after the
 Outdated or Duplicative              requirements that may be outdated or             public comment period
 Administrative Requirements.         duplicative and that the Commission should       closes for this notice.
                                      consider for elimination or modification. The
                                      comment period will be open for a period of
                                      approximately 60 days.
Step 5: Conduct Public Meetings....  Schedule public meetings (in-person, webinar,    Meetings will be held
                                      and teleconference-capable) during the comment   during the public comment
                                      periods to provide awareness and answer          period for this notice
                                      questions to clarify the purpose and scope of    and during the public
                                      the activity. Although verbal comments will      comment period for the
                                      not be accepted during the meetings, staff       second notice (Step 4).
                                      will provide instruction on how attendees can
                                      submit written comments.
Step 6: Review Input...............  Compile and analyze the input and assign to the  Initial review and
                                      regulation ``owner'' for the assigned office     assignment of the input
                                      to review each proposal to determine if it has   will be targeted for
                                      merit.                                           after completion of the
                                                                                       public meetings (Step 5).
                                                                                       Recommendations (i.e., no
                                                                                       action or accept for
                                                                                       regulatory change) should
                                                                                       be submitted to the
                                                                                       Commission for its review
                                                                                       and approval within 18
                                                                                       months after initiation
                                                                                       of the activities.
Step 7: Develop Rulemaking           For any administrative requirements that have    The schedule for any
 Activities to Eliminate or Modify    been identified for elimination or               rulemaking activities
 Requirements.                        modification, the potential outcomes could       will be determined using
                                      include:                                         the budget and rulemaking
                                      A consolidated administrative            prioritization
                                      rulemaking;.                                     methodologies. Rulemaking
                                      Inclusion into an existing planned       plans will be submitted
                                      rulemaking; or.                                  to the Commission for its
                                      A stand-alone specific rulemaking.....   review and approval.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Public input will be critical to identifying potential changes to 
administrative requirements as well as to provide data on the benefits 
and costs of existing NRC administrative regulations. The NRC will 
conduct two public meetings to discuss the retrospective review process 
and recommendations. In addition, the NRC will seek input from the 
NRC's existing committees (the Committee to Review Generic 
Requirements, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, and the 
Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes), other Federal 
agencies, State and local governments, Federally-recognized Tribes, and 
non-governmental organizations. All input that the NRC receives will be 
used to inform the retrospective review recommendations.

[[Page 19466]]

    For the purpose of this review, administrative regulations are 
those that impose recordkeeping or reporting requirements or address 
areas of agency organization, procedure, or practice. Consistent with 
Step 1 of the strategy, the NRC developed the draft criteria and goals 
listed below to evaluate potential regulatory changes of this nature. 
The evaluation criteria would serve as factors of consideration to 
guide the staff's decisionmaking. The staff is not proposing to use the 
criteria to make stand-alone determinations. Instead, the criteria will 
be weighed against other activities outlined in the strategy, such as 
staff programmatic experience and, comments received, and the 
correspondence review. Draft criteria 1-3 are intended to ``screen-in'' 
regulations for inquiry for potential elimination or modification, as 
they address whether a regulation is outdated or duplicative. These 
screening-in criteria are not intended to be mutually exclusive. A 
given regulation may satisfy one or more of the criteria. Draft 
criterion 4 is intended to ``screen-out'' regulations from further 
inquiry or for potential elimination or modification so as to avoid 
unintended consequences. Specific points about which the NRC seeks 
public comment are described in the Section IV, ``Specific Questions,'' 
of this document.

Draft Criteria for Selecting Changes to Administrative Requirements

    1. Routine and periodic recordkeeping and reporting requirements, 
such as directives to submit recurring reports, which the NRC has not 
consulted or referenced in programmatic operations or policy 
development in the last 3 years.
    The goal of this criterion is to identify outdated requirements for 
information collection.
    2. Reports or records that contain information reasonably 
accessible to the agency from alternative resources or routine 
reporting requirements where less frequent reporting would meet 
programmatic needs.
    The goal of this criterion is to identify duplicative information 
or overused collection requirements.
    3. Recordkeeping and reporting requirements that result in 
significant burden. For example, more than $100,000 overall per 
potential regulatory change; or over 1,000 reporting hours for each 
affected individual or entity over a 3-year period; or 10 hours for 
each affected individual or entity each calendar year or per 
application.
    The goal of this criterion is to ensure that elimination or 
modification of outdated or duplicative recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements could result in appreciable reductions in burden for the 
NRC, licensees, or both. The criterion is not intended to be used as a 
stand-alone consideration, but rather as a tool to ensure that the 
retrospective review is focused on efforts that will in fact result in 
a reduction in burden.
    4. Reports or records that contain information used by other 
Federal agencies, State and local governments, or Federally-recognized 
Tribes will be eliminated from the review.
    The goal of this criterion is to decrease the potential for 
unintended consequences. For example, the NRC collects certain 
information on behalf of other government agencies. It is not the 
intent of this effort to change that practice.

IV. Specific Questions

    The NRC is providing an opportunity for the public to submit 
information and comments on the criteria that the NRC proposes to use 
to identify administrative requirements for potential modification or 
elimination. You may suggest other criteria; please provide supporting 
rationale for any alternative criteria you recommend that the NRC use 
in conducting its review. The NRC is particularly interested in 
gathering input in the following areas:
    1. Do the proposed evaluation criteria serve the purposes described 
in this notice? Why or why not?
    2. The NRC is considering whether the burden reduction minimum is 
appropriate. Is ``significant burden'' the appropriate measure? Are the 
examples given for Criterion 3 appropriate or useful? Should the NRC 
use different bases for measuring ``significant burden,'' and if so, 
what are these measures and how would they result in a more accurate or 
complete measurement of burden?
    3. The NRC is considering multiple thresholds for different classes 
of regulated entities, as a single threshold might not be useful to 
identify burden reductions for all licensee types. What is the 
appropriate threshold for your entity class (e.g., operating reactor, 
industrial radiographer, fuel cycle facility)?
    4. Are there other evaluation criteria the NRC should consider 
using in its retrospective review of administrative regulations? What 
are those criteria and why?

V. Public Meetings

    Public input will be critical to identifying potential regulatory 
changes as well as to provide data on the benefits and costs of 
existing NRC regulations. The NRC will conduct two public meetings to 
discuss the Retrospective Review process and recommendations.
    The NRC will publish a notice of the location, time, and agenda of 
any meetings in the Federal Register, on www.Regulations.gov, and on 
the NRC's public meeting website at least 10 calendar days before the 
meeting. Stakeholders should monitor the NRC's public meeting website 
for information about the public meeting at: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/index.cfm.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of April, 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2018-09359 Filed 5-2-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P