[The Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations]
[Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Plan]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]


NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (NRC)

Statement of Regulatory Priorities
Under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and 
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulates the processing and utilization of 
source, byproduct, and special nuclear material. The NRC's regulatory 
mission is to ensure that civilian uses of nuclear materials and 
facilities are carried out with proper regard for the protection of 
public health and safety, the environment, and national security. The 
NRC regulates the operation of nuclear power plants and fuel cycle 
plants; the safeguarding of nuclear materials from theft and sabotage; 
the safe transportation of nuclear materials; the decommissioning and 
return to safe use of licensed facilities that are no longer in 
operation; and the medical, industrial, and research applications of 
nuclear material.
The NRC's regulatory priorities for the next fiscal year are to ensure 
that:
1. Nuclear power plants and other licensed facilities are operated 
safely and that licensees are adequately prepared to respond to 
accidents;
2. The basic principles and criteria that would allow decommissioned 
lands and structures to be released for unrestricted use are codified; 
and
3. Evolutionary and advanced reactor designs may be reviewed and 
licensed effectively and efficiently.
The NRC is addressing its regulatory initiatives in a manner that is 
consistent with the President's regulatory philosophy. The NRC 
routinely conducts comprehensive regulatory analyses that examine the 
costs and benefits of contemplated regulations as part of its 
regulatory process. The NRC has been aggressive and innovative in 
expanding the scope of public and industry participation in its most 
significant rulemakings. For example, the NRC has conducted several 
public workshops and established an electronic bulletin board to 
facilitate participation in the rulemaking to establish radiological 
criteria for decommissioning. The NRC has also developed internal 
procedures and programs to ensure that only necessary requirements are 
imposed on its licensees and to review existing regulations to 
determine whether the requirements imposed are still necessary.
_______________________________________________________________________
NRC

                              -----------

                          PROPOSED RULE STAGE

                              -----------

161. STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INTEGRITY
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841


CFR Citation:


 10 CFR 50


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) plans to develop a rule 
pertaining to steam generator tube integrity. The objective of the rule 
would be to maintain adequate assurance of steam generator tube 
integrity while allowing a more appropriate approach to steam generator 
surveillance and maintenance activities at nuclear power plants. Steam 
generator degradation is a significant issue affecting current 
pressurized water reactors.


Statement of Need:


The NRC plans to develop a rule pertaining to steam generator tube 
integrity (i.e., maintaining an extremely low overall probability of 
steam generator tube leakage that could result in core damage or 
exceeding allowable offsite doses). The proposed rule would allow a 
more flexible approach to maintaining steam generator tube integrity 
through a balance of preventative, inspection and repair, and 
mitigative measures that reflect current industry-wide operating 
experience. The regulatory action is intended to:
1. Improve the scope and methods for inspecting steam generator tubing;
2. Provide incentives to continue to improve inspection methods;
3. Develop plugging/repair criteria based on the most appropriate 
nondestructive parameters, thereby improving enforceability of the 
criteria and eliminating unnecessary conservatism; and
4. Reflect appropriate considerations of related systems issues.
Operating experience indicates that the current regulatory requirements 
need to be more stringent in some areas while in other areas they are 
overly conservative. To date this situation has been dealt with on a 
plant specific basis, when necessary. However, a generic approach to 
dealing with steam generator issues is necessary to effectively update 
inspection and repair criteria.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The NRC is authorized to promulgate new rules. The new rule that will 
be developed on steam generator integrity will be in accordance with 
the provisions of 10 CFR Part 50.109 on backfitting.


Alternatives:


The primary alternative would be to continue with resource intensive 
plant-specific ad hoc licensing in the area of ensuring adequate steam 
generator tube integrity. Public comments provided in response to the 
advance notice of proposed rulemaking indicate agreement on the part of 
industry that rulemaking is the preferred regulatory means for 
addressing this issue.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


The regulatory action would result in a decrease in costs in some areas 
(e.g., steam generator tube repair costs, avoidance/delay of steam 
generator replacement costs), and an increase in cost in other areas 
(e.g., inspection costs). The regulatory action may also result in a 
decrease in personnel exposure. Since the proposed rule is intended to 
be performance based, a major benefit would be in providing a more 
flexible and cost-effective regulatory program pertaining to 
maintaining steam generator tube integrity.


Risks:



The regulatory action will result in increases in safety margins.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
ANPRM           59 FR 47817                                    09/19/94
ANPRM Comment Period End                                       12/05/94
NPRM                                                           12/00/95
Final Action                                                   06/00/96
Small Entities Affected:


None


Government Levels Affected:


None


Agency Contact:
Tim Reed
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Washington, DC 20555
Phone: 301 415-1462
RIN: 3150-AF04
_______________________________________________________________________
NRC
162.  REPORTING RELIABILITY AND AVAILABILITY INFORMATION FOR 
RISK-SIGNIFICANT SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT
Priority:


Other Significant


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841


CFR Citation:


 10 CFR 050


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


The proposed rule would amend the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's 
(NRCs) regulations to require that licensees for commercial nuclear 
power reactors report summary reliability and availability data for 
risk-significant systems and equipment to the NRC. The proposed rule 
would also require licensees to maintain onsite, and to make available 
for NRC inspection, records and documentation that provide the basis 
for the summary data reported to the NRC. This proposed rule is 
necessary to improve public health and safety, to reduce economic 
burden by focusing NRC and licensee attention on the most risk-
significant issues, and to support generic and plant-specific 
regulatory actions. The proposed rule would substantially improve 
licensee implementation of the evaluation and goal setting aspects 
required by the maintenance rule and NRC's oversight of licensee's 
implementation of the maintenance rule.


Statement of Need:


The NRC plans to amend its regulations to require that licensees for 
commercial nuclear power reactors report summary reliability and 
availability data for risk-significant systems and equipment to the 
NRC. The NRC also plans to require licensees to maintain onsite, and to 
make available for NRC inspection, records and documentation that 
provide the basis for the summary data reported to the NRC. This action 
is necessary to substantially improve: (1) licensees' implementation of 
the NRC's maintenance rule, (2) the NRC's oversight of maintenance rule 
implementation, and (3) the NRC's ability to make risk-effective 
regulatory decisions. The NRC is authorized to promulgate new rules. 
This action will enhance both efficiency and protection of public 
health and safety.


Alternatives:


One alternative would be to continue the status-quo. Other alternatives 
include: (1) direct collection of data by NRC inspectors and (2) 
voluntary submittal of data by licensees.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


The regulatory action would increase costs for collection, reporting, 
and processing of reliability and availability data. These increased 
costs would be outweighed by substantial savings as a result of 
improving implementation and oversight of the NRC's maintenance rule 
and moving towards risk-based regulation and attendant regulatory 
relief.


Risks:


The regulatory action is expected to help reduce overall risk by 
improving implementation and oversight of the NRC's maintenance rule 
and helping to focus NRC and industry attention on the most risk-
significant aspects of power plant operation.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM Comment Period End                                        10/00/95
Final Action                                                   06/00/96
Small Entities Affected:


None


Government Levels Affected:


None


Agency Contact:
Dennis Allison
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Office for Analysis and Evaluation of
Operational Data
Washington, DC 20555
Phone: 301 415-6835
RIN: 3150-AF33
_______________________________________________________________________
NRC
163.  REVISION OF FEE SCHEDULES; 100% FEE RECOVERY, FY 1996
Priority:


Economically Significant


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841


CFR Citation:


 10 CFR 170; 10 CFR 171


Legal Deadline:


 Final, Statutory, September 30, 1996.


Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990


Abstract:


This proposed rule would amend the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's 
(NRCs) regulations regarding the licensing, inspection, and annual fees 
charged to NRC licensees and applicants for an NRC license. The 
amendments are necessary to recover approximately 100 percent of the 
NRC budget authority for fiscal year 1996 less the amounts appropriated 
from the Nuclear Waste Fund. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 
1990 (OBRA-90) requires that the NRC accomplish the 100 percent 
recovery through the assessment of fees.


Statement of Need:


This rulemaking will amend the licensing, inspection, and annual fees 
charged to NRC licensees and applicants for an NRC license. The 
amendments are necessary to recover approximately 100 percent of the 
NRC budget authority for fiscal year 1996 less the amounts appropriated 
from the Nuclear Waste Fund. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 
1990 (OBRA-90) requires that the NRC accomplish the 100-percent 
recovery through the assessment of fees. The NRC assesses two types of 
fees to recover its budget authority. License and inspection fees are 
assessed under the authority of the Independent Offices Appropriation 
Act to recover the costs of providing individually identifiable 
services to specific applicants and licensees (10 CFR part 170). OBRA-
90 requires that the NRC recover the full cost to the NRC of all 
identifiable regulatory service that each applicant or licensee 
receives. The NRC recovers generic and other regulatory costs not 
recovered through 10 CFR Part 170 fees through the assessment of annual 
fees under the authority of OBRA-90 (10 CFR Part 171). Annual fee 
charges are consistent with the guidance in the Conference Committee 
Report on OBRA-90 that the NRC assess the annual charge under the 
principle that licensees who require the greatest expenditure of the 
agency's resources should pay the greatest annual fee.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act requires that the NRC recover 
approximately 100 percent of its budget authority, less the amount 
appropriated for the Nuclear Waste Fund, for fiscal years 1991 through 
1998. The Act requires that the fees for fiscal year 1996 must be 
collected by September 30, 1996. Therefore, the final rule is to become 
effective by August 1, 1996.


Alternatives:


Because this action is mandated by statute and the fees must be 
assessed through rulemaking, the NRC did not consider alternatives to 
this action.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


The cost to NRC licensees is the NRC fiscal year 1996 budget authority 
less the amount appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund. The dollar 
amount is not yet determined but is expected to be in a range close to 
$503.8 million.


Risks:


Not applicable.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM                                                           04/00/96
Final Action                                                   07/00/96
Small Entities Affected:


None


Government Levels Affected:


None


Agency Contact:
C. James Holloway, Jr.
Office of the Controller
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, DC 20555
Phone: 301 415-7724
RIN: 3150-AF39
_______________________________________________________________________
NRC

                              -----------

                            FINAL RULE STAGE

                              -----------

164. RADIOLOGICAL CRITERIA FOR DECOMMISSIONING OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES
Priority:


Other Significant


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841


CFR Citation:


 10 CFR 020; 10 CFR 030; 10 CFR 040; 10 CFR 050; 10 CFR 051; 10 CFR 
070; 10 CFR 072


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to codify 
the basic principles and radiological criteria that would allow 
decommissioned lands and structures to be released for unrestricted 
public use. In the final rule entitled, ``General Requirements for 
Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities'' (June 27, 1988; 53 FR 24018), the 
need and urgency for guidance with respect to residual contamination 
criteria were expressed. At that time, it was anticipated that an 
interagency working group organized by the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA) would develop necessary Federal guidance. However, in the 
absence of significant progress by the interagency working group, the 
Commission has directed that the NRC expedite rulemaking because the 
requirements, once final, will provide licensees with an incentive to 
complete site decommissioning.
The proposed rule would establish basic radiological criteria for 
release of lands and structures. Measurables, in the form of surface 
and volume radioactive concentrations and site radioactivity inventory 
values, would be provided in supporting regulatory guidance. These 
combined activities should benefit the public, industry, and the NRC, 
providing a risk-based framework upon which decommissioning activities 
and license terminations can be accomplished. The framework will ensure 
adequate protection of public health and safety and identify residual 
radioactivity criteria upon which licensees can confidently develop 
reasonable and responsible decommissioning plans.


Statement of Need:


The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend 10 CFR 20 
of its regulations to provide specific radiological criteria for the 
decommissioning of soils and structures. The proposed criteria would 
apply to the decommissioning of all facilities licensed under 10 CFR 
Parts 30, 40, 50, 60, 61, 70, and 72, as well as other facilities 
subject to the Commission's jurisdiction under the Atomic Energy Act 
and the Energy Reorganization Act. The NRC would apply these criteria 
in determining the adequacy of remediation of residual radioactivity 
resulting from the possession or use of source, byproduct, and special 
nuclear material. The proposed rule is intended to provide a clear and 
consistent regulatory basis for determining the extent to which lands 
and structures must be remediated before a site can be considered 
decommissioned.
The NRC has developed the basis for the residual contamination levels 
in light of changes in basic radiation protection standards, 
improvements in remediation and radiation detection technologies, 
decommissioning experience obtained during the past 15 years, and 
comments received from public workshops held as part of this rulemaking 
effort. This rulemaking has been closely coordinated with the EPA from 
both a policy standpoint and for the technical underpinnings. The EPA 
was a key participant in the rulemaking workshops conducted for the 
rulemaking. EPA is preparing a parallel rulemaking. In addition, under 
the framework of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between NRC and 
EPA, EPA will make a determination that the NRC rulemaking provides a 
sufficient level of protection for public health and safety and for the 
environment. This coordination will minimize the expenditure of Federal 
resources, provide a consistent regulatory approach for all facilities, 
and avoid a duplication of effort or overlapping regulations.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


This proposed rule is being developed under the authority of the Atomic 
Energy Act of 1954, as amended.


Alternatives:


The NRC presently allows decommissioning on a site-specific basis using 
existing guidance. The NRC could continue to allow decommissioning to 
proceed on a case-by-case basis. However, the NRC believes that 
codifying radiological criteria for decommissioning would provide a 
more effective method of and a broadly understood set of standards to 
be used in protecting public health and the environment at 
decommissioned sites.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


The proposed rule would establish a clear and consistent regulatory 
basis for determining the extent to which lands and structures must be 
remediated before a site can be decommissioned. The Commission believes 
that inclusion of criteria in the regulations will result in more 
efficient and consistent licensing actions related to the numerous and 
frequently complex site decontamination and decommissioning activities 
anticipated in the future. Therefore, the proposed rule would use NRC 
and licensee resources more efficiently, be applied consistently to all 
types of licenses, create a predictable basis for decommissioning 
planning, and eliminate the protracted delays in decommissioning 
because licensees wait for generic regulatory criteria before 
proceeding with decommissioning of their facilities. The proposed rule 
would, for the most part, codify existing regulatory practice. It is 
not expected to result in any significant additional cost to the 
industry, the government, or the public. In fact, efficiencies produced 
by codifying and stabilizing regulatory practice in this area should 
result in an overall reduction in costs associated with decommissioning 
nuclear facilities. It is not possible to quantify the extent of these 
cost reductions at this time.


Risks:


This rulemaking would ensure that decommissioning will be carried out 
without undue impact on public and occupational health and safety and 
the environment. The proposed rule ensures a stable framework to 
accomplish decommissioning and achieves a stable level of costs for 
risks averted. The proposed amendments enhance the existing regulatory 
framework by providing a clear and consistent regulatory basis for 
determining the extent to which lands and structures must be remediated 
before a site can be decommissioned. The Commission believes that 
inclusion of radiological criteria in the regulations will result in 
more efficient and consistent licensing actions related to the numerous 
and frequently complex site decontamination and decommissioning 
activities anticipated in the future and reduce the risk to public 
health and the environment.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM            59 FR 43200                                    08/22/94
NPRM Comment Period End                                        12/20/94
Final Action                                                   02/00/96
Small Entities Affected:


Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions, Organizations


Government Levels Affected:


State, Local, Federal


Agency Contact:
Charleen Raddatz
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
Washington, DC 20555
Phone: 301 415-6251
RIN: 3150-AD65
_______________________________________________________________________
NRC
165. DESIGN CERTIFICATION FOR ADVANCED BOILING WATER REACTOR (ABWR)
Priority:


Other Significant


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841


CFR Citation:


 10 CFR 052


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


The proposed rule would revise the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's 
(NRCs) regulations by certifying the U.S. Advanced Boiling Water 
Reactor (ABWR) standard design in accordance with the requirements of 
Part 52. If a standard design is certified, then an applicant for a 
combined license that references the certified design will be assured 
of receiving an approval for the portion of the plant that was approved 
in the certification rulemaking. This amendment references the design 
control document (DCD) and sets forth the process for changing 
information in the DCD. GE Nuclear Engineering is currently preparing 
the DCD for ABWR design, which will contain the design information that 
will be certified by the rule and approved by the rule (so-called Tier 
1 and 2 information). The NRC is reviewing two applications for 
standard design certifications for two evolutionary nuclear power plant 
designs pursuant to Part 52 (see ``Design Certification for System 80'' 
(RIN 3150-AF15).


Statement of Need:


The NRC has reviewed and approved two applications for design 
certification for evolutionary standard light-water reactor designs 
under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 52. The applicants for 
these design certifications are GE Nuclear Energy and Asea Brown 
Boveri-Combustion Engineering for the ABWR and System 80+ standard 
designs. The NRC has published two proposed rules which when published 
as final rules will provide design certification for these two designs 
by referencing the design information in separate appendices to Part 
52. The Commission's certification of approved standard designs is 
necessary to provide for the early resolution of licensing issues and a 
more predictable licensing process. Ideally, a future applicant will 
reference a certified design in an application for a combined license 
to construct and operate a nuclear power plant. Design certification by 
rulemaking is accomplished pursuant to Commission regulations set out 
in 10 CFR 52 under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended. The Energy Policy Act of 1992, signed into law on October 24, 
1992, largely codifies the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 52. The 
Commission believes that standardization of plant designs will enhance 
the safety and reliability of future nuclear power plants while 
requiring fewer resources in their safety reviews.


Alternatives:


The Commission's regulations in 10 CFR part 52, subpart B, provide for 
design certification of standard nuclear power plant designs through 
rulemaking. Design certification is a procedural mechanism to effect 
the early resolution of licensing issues and encourage the use of 
standardized designs. These regulations were promulgated, in part, to 
provide a stable and predictable process for the licensing of future 
nuclear power plants. There is no alternative to rulemaking for the 
certification of a particular design.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


It may not be possible to quantify the costs and benefits of these 
rulemakings. Much depends on the extent to which the industry pursues 
standardization. However, if the industry finds in its interest to 
proceed with the development of nuclear power, there is every reason to 
expect that the safety and economic benefits of standardization will 
far outweigh the up-front costs of design and Commission certification.


Risks:


The standards used in the review of design certification applications 
are, in general, the same standards in effect for current nuclear power 
plants. However, standardization of plant designs will enhance the 
safety and reliability of future nuclear power plants while requiring 
fewer resources in their safety reviews.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
ANPRM           58 FR 58664                                    11/03/93
ANPRM Comment Period End                                       01/03/94
NPRM            60 FR 17902                                    04/07/95
NPRM Comment Period End                                        08/07/95
Final Action                                                   03/00/96
Small Entities Affected:


None


Government Levels Affected:


None


Agency Contact:
Jerry N. Wilson
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Washington, DC 20555-0001
Phone: 301 415-3145
RIN: 3150-AE87
_______________________________________________________________________
NRC
166. DESIGN CERTIFICATION FOR SYSTEM 80+
Priority:


Other Significant


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841


CFR Citation:


 10 CFR 052


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


The proposed rule would revise the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's 
(NRCs) regulations by certifying the System 80+ standard design in 
accordance with the requirements of Part 52. If a standard design is 
certified, then an applicant for a combined license that references the 
certified design will be assured of receiving an approval for the 
portion of the plant that was approved in the certification rulemaking. 
This amendment references the design control document (DCD) and sets 
forth the process for changing information in the DCD. ABB-Combustion 
Engineering is currently preparing the DCD for the System 80+ design, 
which will contain the design information that will be certified by the 
rule and approved by the rule (so-called Tier 1 and 2 information). The 
NRC is reviewing two applications for standard design certifications 
for two evolutionary nuclear power plant designs pursuant to part 52 
(See ``Design Certification for Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR)'' 
(RIN 3150-AE87).


Statement of Need:


The NRC has reviewed and approved two applications for design 
certification for evolutionary standard light-water reactor designs 
under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR part 52. The applicants 
for these design certifications are GE Nuclear Energy and Asea Brown 
Boveri-Combustion Engineering for the ABWR and System 80+ standard 
designs. The NRC has published two proposed rules which when published 
as final rules will provide design certification for these two designs 
by referencing the design information in separate appendices to part 
52. The Commission's certification of approved standard designs is 
necessary to provide for the early resolution of licensing issues and a 
more predictable licensing process. Ideally, a future applicant will 
reference a certified design in an application for a combined license 
to construct and operate a nuclear power plant. Design certification by 
rulemaking is accomplished pursuant to Commission regulations set out 
in 10 CFR part 52. The Commission believes that standardization of 
plant designs will enhance the safety and reliability of future nuclear 
power plants while requiring fewer resources in their safety reviews.


Alternatives:


The Commission's regulations in 10 CFR Part 52, Subpart B, provide for 
design certification of standard nuclear power plant designs through 
rulemaking. Design certification is a procedural mechanism to effect 
the early resolution of licensing issues and encourage the use of 
standardized designs. These regulations were promulgated, in part, to 
provide a stable and predictable process for the licensing of future 
nuclear power plants. There is no alternative to rulemaking for the 
certification of a particular design.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


It may not be possible to quantify the costs and benefits of this 
rulemaking. Much depends on the extent to which the industry pursues 
standardization. However, if the industry finds in its interest to 
proceed with the development of nuclear power, there is every reason to 
expect that the safety and economic benefits of standardization will 
far outweigh the up-front costs of design and Commission certification.


Risks:


The standards used in the review of design certification applications 
are, in general, the same standards in effect for current nuclear power 
plants. However, standardization of plant designs will enhance the 
safety and reliability of future nuclear power plants while requiring 
fewer resources in their safety reviews.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
ANPRM           58 FR 58664                                    11/03/93
ANPRM Comment Period End                                       01/03/94
NPRM            60 FR 17924                                    04/07/95
NPRM Comment Period End                                        08/07/95
Final Action                                                   03/00/96
Small Entities Affected:


None


Government Levels Affected:


None


Agency Contact:
Jerry N. Wilson
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Washington, DC 20555
Phone: 301 415-3145
RIN: 3150-AF15
BILLING CODE 7590-01-F