80 FR 76676 - Emergency Preparedness and Response at the Pantex Plant

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 237 (December 10, 2015)

Page Range		76676-76677
FR Document		2015-31093

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board) published a notice of a recommendation to the Secretary of Energy in the Federal Register of December 3, 2015, (80 FR 75665), concerning emergency preparedness at the Pantex Plant. The Board corrects that notice by providing the additional information as set forth below.

Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 237 (Thursday, December 10, 2015)

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 237 (Thursday, December 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76676-76677]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31093]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

[Recommendation 2015-1]


Emergency Preparedness and Response at the Pantex Plant

AGENCY: Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.

ACTION: Notice, recommendation; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board) published 
a notice of a recommendation to the Secretary of Energy in the Federal 
Register of December 3, 2015, (80 FR 75665), concerning emergency 
preparedness at the Pantex Plant. The Board corrects that notice by 
providing the additional information as set forth below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Welch, General Manager, Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue NW., Suite 700, 
Washington, DC 20004-2901, or telephone number (202) 694-7000.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of December 3, 2015, in FR Doc. 2015-30562, 
on page 75673, in the first column, after line 37, add the following 
information:

CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE SECRETARY

Department of Energy
Under Secretary for Nuclear Security
Administrator, National Nuclear Security Administration
Washington, DC 20585

November 4, 2015

The Honorable Joyce L. Connery
Chairman
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
65 Indiana Avenue NW., Suite 700
Washington, DC 20004

Dear Madam Chairman:

    On behalf of the Secretary, thank you for the opportunity to review 
the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Draft 
Recommendation 2015-1, Emergency Preparedness and Response at the 
Pantex Plant. The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has 
established specific performance goals for the Pantex Emergency 
Management Program, to include improvements in the three areas 
highlighted by the Draft Recommendation 2015-1. These goals are 
consistent with the mutually agreed-upon benefits of implementing the 
DNFSB Recommendation 2014-1.
    The draft Recommendation's risk assessment states: ``it is not 
possible to do a quantitative assessment of the risk of these [the 
Pantex Emergency Management Program] elements to provide adequate 
protection of the workers and the public.'' As a point of 
clarification, the Department of Energy (DOE) demonstrates adequate 
protection of workers, the public and the environment as an integral 
part of operating a nuclear facility like that situated at the Pantex 
Plant. To this end, the Department has put in place a system of 
requirements, standards, policies and guidance that, when effectively 
implemented, not only provide reasonable assurance of adequate 
protection, but takes a very conservative approach to ensure such 
protection. Functions such as emergency management provide that 
additional conservatism and margin of protection. We are confident 
that, even with deficiencies identified by the DNFSB, the Pantex 
Emergency Management Program can perform its role to ensure this 
protection. Accordingly, DOE recommends removing the phrase: ``in order 
to provide an adequate protection to the public and the workers'' in 
justifying the need for the draft recommendation.
    To increase protection assurances and drive improvement in an 
effective and efficient manner, I suggest that the best approach to 
address the concerns identified in your Draft Recommendation is to 
incorporate ongoing NNSA performance improvement initiatives and 
enhancements into the existing implementation plans for Recommendation 
2014-1. This approach would enable the Department to take a holistic, 
integrated approach to making the needed improvements at Pantex.
    We appreciate the DNFSB's perspective and look forward to continued 
positive interactions with you and your staff to include Pantex-
specific actions and milestones in the existing Implementation Plan for 
Recommendation 2014-1.
    If you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. Geoffrey 
Beausoleil, Manager, NNSA Production Office, at 865-576-0752.

Sincerely,
Frank G. Klotz

[[Page 76677]]



       Disposition of DOE Comments on Draft Recommendation 2015-1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           DOE comment              Board response      Revised wording
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The draft Recommendation's risk   Upon review of      Original wording
 assessment states: ``it is not    Draft               of last sentence
 possible to do a quantitative     Recommendation      in first
 assessment of the risk of these   2015-1, in the      paragraph of the
 [the Pantex Emergency             noted phrase the    text of the
 Management Program] elements to   word ``provide''    Recommendation:
 provide adequate protection of    was used,          ``We believe that
 the workers and the public.''     whereas, in         DOE and National
 As a point of clarification,      similar             Nuclear Security
 the Department of Energy (DOE)    references to       Administration
 demonstrates adequate             adequate            (NNSA) must
 protection of workers, the        protection in       address these
 public and the environment as     other parts of      concerns in order
 an integral part of operating a   Draft               to provide an
 nuclear facility like that        Recommendation      adequate
 situated at the Pantex Plant.     2015-1, the word    protection to the
 To this end, the Department has   ``ensure'' was      public and the
 put in place a system of          used. The Board     workers at the
 requirements, standards,          voted to amend      Pantex Plant.''
 policies and guidance that,       the language to    Revised wording:
 when effectively implemented,     reflect that the   ``We believe that
 not only provide reasonable       Recommendation is   DOE and the
 assurance of adequate             intended to         National Nuclear
 protection, but takes a very      ensure adequate     Security
 conservative approach to ensure   protection.         Administration
 such protection. Functions such                       (NNSA) must
 as emergency management provide                       address these
 that additional conservatism                          concerns in order
 and margin of protection. We                          to ensure the
 are confident that, even with                         adequate
 deficiencies identified by the                        protection of the
 DNFSB, the Pantex Emergency                           public and the
 Management Program can perform                        workers at the
 its role to ensure this                               Pantex Plant.''
 protection. Accordingly, DOE
 recommends removing the phrase:
 ``in order to provide an
 adequate protection to the
 public and the workers'' in
 justifying the need for the
 draft recommendation.
To increase protection            As noted in the     No change.
 assurances and drive              ``Findings,
 improvement in an effective and   Supporting Data,
 efficient manner, I suggest       and Analysis''
 that the best approach to         document of Draft
 address the concerns identified   Recommendation
 in your Draft Recommendation is   2015-1, the
 to incorporate ongoing NNSA       problems
 performance improvement           identified in
 initiatives and enhancements      Draft
 into the existing                 Recommendation
 implementation plans for          2015-1 will not
 Recommendation 2014-1. This       be adequately
 approach would enable the         addressed by the
 Department to take a holistic,    Board's
 integrated approach to making     Recommendation
 the needed improvements at        2014-1, Emergency
 Pantex.                           Preparedness and
                                   Response.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Dated: December 4, 2015.
Joyce L. Connery,
Chairman.
[FR Doc. 2015-31093 Filed 12-9-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3670-01-P

76676 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 237 / Thursday, December 10, 2015 / Notices

with the regulations and terms of an ACTION: Notice, recommendation; workers and the public.’’ As a point of
APO is a sanctionable violation. correction. clarification, the Department of Energy
We are issuing and publishing these (DOE) demonstrates adequate protection
results in accordance with sections SUMMARY: The Defense Nuclear of workers, the public and the
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Facilities Safety Board (Board) environment as an integral part of
published a notice of a recommendation
Dated: December 2, 2015. operating a nuclear facility like that
to the Secretary of Energy in the Federal
Christian Marsh, situated at the Pantex Plant. To this end,
Register of December 3, 2015, (80 FR
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 75665), concerning emergency the Department has put in place a
and Countervailing Duty Operations. system of requirements, standards,
preparedness at the Pantex Plant. The
Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in Board corrects that notice by providing policies and guidance that, when
the Issues and Decision Memorandum the additional information as set forth effectively implemented, not only
below. provide reasonable assurance of
Summary
adequate protection, but takes a very
Background FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Scope of the Order conservative approach to ensure such
Mark Welch, General Manager, Defense
Discussion of the Issues protection. Functions such as
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625
emergency management provide that
General Comments Indiana Avenue NW., Suite 700,
Washington, DC 20004–2901, or additional conservatism and margin of
1. Duty Drawback
telephone number (202) 694–7000. protection. We are confident that, even
2. Duty Drawback and Treatment of the
Resource Utilization Support Fund with deficiencies identified by the
3. Deducting Certain Expenses from the Duty Correction DNFSB, the Pantex Emergency
Drawback Calculation In the Federal Register of December 3, Management Program can perform its
4. Making a Duty Drawback Adjustment to 2015, in FR Doc. 2015–30562, on page role to ensure this protection.
Normal Value and/or Capping the U.S. Accordingly, DOE recommends
75673, in the first column, after line 37,
Duty Drawback Adjustment
5. Treatment of Duty Drawback in the Cash add the following information: removing the phrase: ‘‘in order to
Deposit Rate and Assessment Rate provide an adequate protection to the
CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE
6. Other Arguments Related to Duty public and the workers’’ in justifying
SECRETARY
Drawback the need for the draft recommendation.
7. Differential Pricing Analysis Should Not Department of Energy
Be Used Because the Cohen’s d Test To increase protection assurances and
Under Secretary for Nuclear Security
Does Not Measure Targeted or Masked Administrator, National Nuclear drive improvement in an effective and
Dumping Security Administration efficient manner, I suggest that the best
8. Differential Pricing Analysis Reasoning for approach to address the concerns
Use of Average-to-Transaction
Washington, DC 20585
November 4, 2015 identified in your Draft
Comparison Methodology is Arbitrary
and Unlawful
Recommendation is to incorporate
The Honorable Joyce L. Connery
ongoing NNSA performance
Company-Specific Comments Chairman
improvement initiatives and
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
Borusan 65 Indiana Avenue NW., Suite 700 enhancements into the existing
9. Duty Drawback and Treatment of the Yield Washington, DC 20004 implementation plans for
Loss Factor Recommendation 2014–1. This
10. Home Market Sales of Overruns and the Dear Madam Chairman:
approach would enable the Department
Ordinary Course of Trade On behalf of the Secretary, thank you to take a holistic, integrated approach to
11. Domestic Inland Freight Expenses for the opportunity to review the making the needed improvements at
12. International Freight Expenses Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Pantex.
Toscelik (DNFSB) Draft Recommendation 2015–
1, Emergency Preparedness and We appreciate the DNFSB’s
13. Billing Adjustments
Response at the Pantex Plant. The perspective and look forward to
14. Duty Drawback
15. Duty Drawback Adjustment to Cost National Nuclear Security continued positive interactions with
16. Toscelik’s Net Financial Expense Administration (NNSA) has established you and your staff to include Pantex-
Recommendation specific performance goals for the specific actions and milestones in the
[FR Doc. 2015–31188 Filed 12–9–15; 8:45 am] Pantex Emergency Management existing Implementation Plan for
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Program, to include improvements in Recommendation 2014–1.
the three areas highlighted by the Draft If you have any questions, please
Recommendation 2015–1. These goals contact me or Mr. Geoffrey Beausoleil,
DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES are consistent with the mutually agreed- Manager, NNSA Production Office, at
SAFETY BOARD upon benefits of implementing the 865–576–0752.
DNFSB Recommendation 2014–1.
[Recommendation 2015–1] The draft Recommendation’s risk Sincerely,
assessment states: ‘‘it is not possible to Frank G. Klotz
Emergency Preparedness and
do a quantitative assessment of the risk
Response at the Pantex Plant
of these [the Pantex Emergency
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

AGENCY: Defense Nuclear Facilities Management Program] elements to
Safety Board. provide adequate protection of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:33 Dec 09, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\10DEN1.SGM 10DEN1

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 237 / Thursday, December 10, 2015 / Notices 76677

DISPOSITION OF DOE COMMENTS ON DRAFT RECOMMENDATION 2015–1
DOE comment Board response Revised wording

The draft Recommendation’s risk assessment states: ‘‘it is not Upon review of Draft Rec- Original wording of last sentence in first para-
possible to do a quantitative assessment of the risk of these ommendation 2015–1, in the graph of the text of the Recommendation:
[the Pantex Emergency Management Program] elements to noted phrase the word ‘‘pro- ‘‘We believe that DOE and National Nuclear
provide adequate protection of the workers and the public.’’ vide’’ was used, whereas, in Security Administration (NNSA) must ad-
As a point of clarification, the Department of Energy (DOE) similar references to ade- dress these concerns in order to provide an
demonstrates adequate protection of workers, the public and quate protection in other adequate protection to the public and the
the environment as an integral part of operating a nuclear parts of Draft Recommenda- workers at the Pantex Plant.’’
facility like that situated at the Pantex Plant. To this end, the tion 2015–1, the word ‘‘en- Revised wording:
Department has put in place a system of requirements, sure’’ was used. The Board ‘‘We believe that DOE and the National Nu-
standards, policies and guidance that, when effectively im- voted to amend the lan- clear Security Administration (NNSA) must
plemented, not only provide reasonable assurance of ade- guage to reflect that the address these concerns in order to ensure
quate protection, but takes a very conservative approach to Recommendation is in- the adequate protection of the public and
ensure such protection. Functions such as emergency man- tended to ensure adequate the workers at the Pantex Plant.’’
agement provide that additional conservatism and margin of protection.
protection. We are confident that, even with deficiencies
identified by the DNFSB, the Pantex Emergency Manage-
ment Program can perform its role to ensure this protection.
Accordingly, DOE recommends removing the phrase: ‘‘in
order to provide an adequate protection to the public and
the workers’’ in justifying the need for the draft rec-
ommendation.
To increase protection assurances and drive improvement in As noted in the ‘‘Findings, No change.
an effective and efficient manner, I suggest that the best ap- Supporting Data, and Anal-
proach to address the concerns identified in your Draft Rec- ysis’’ document of Draft
ommendation is to incorporate ongoing NNSA performance Recommendation 2015–1,
improvement initiatives and enhancements into the existing the problems identified in
implementation plans for Recommendation 2014–1. This ap- Draft Recommendation
proach would enable the Department to take a holistic, inte- 2015–1 will not be ade-
grated approach to making the needed improvements at quately addressed by the
Pantex. Board’s Recommendation
2014–1, Emergency Pre-
paredness and Response.

Dated: December 4, 2015. 2015–ICCD–0137. Comments submitted the public’s reporting burden. It also
Joyce L. Connery, in response to this notice should be helps the public understand the
Chairman. submitted electronically through the Department’s information collection
[FR Doc. 2015–31093 Filed 12–9–15; 8:45 am] Federal eRulemaking Portal at http:// requirements and provide the requested
BILLING CODE 3670–01–P
www.regulations.gov by selecting the data in the desired format. ED is
Docket ID number or via postal mail, soliciting comments on the proposed
commercial delivery, or hand delivery. information collection request (ICR) that
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Please note that comments submitted by is described below. The Department of
fax or email and those submitted after Education is especially interested in
[Docket No.: ED–2015–ICCD–0137] the comment period will not be public comment addressing the
accepted. Written requests for following issues: (1) Is this collection
Agency Information Collection information or comments submitted by necessary to the proper functions of the
Activities; Comment Request; postal mail or delivery should be Department; (2) will this information be
Evaluation of Effectiveness of the addressed to the Director of the processed and used in a timely manner;
Scholarships for Opportunity and Information Collection Clearance (3) is the estimate of burden accurate;
Results (SOAR) Program Division, U.S. Department of Education, (4) how might the Department enhance
AGENCY: Institute of Education Sciences 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room the quality, utility, and clarity of the
(IES), Department of Education (ED). 2E115, Washington, DC 20202–4537. information to be collected; and (5) how
ACTION: Notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For might the Department minimize the
specific questions related to collection burden of this collection on the
SUMMARY: In accordance with the activities, please contact Meredith respondents, including through the use
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Bachman, 202–219–2014. of information technology. Please note
U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The that written comments received in
proposing an extension of an existing Department of Education (ED), in response to this notice will be
information collection. accordance with the Paperwork considered public records.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. Title of Collection: Evaluation of
submit comments on or before February 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general Effectiveness of the Scholarships for
8, 2016. public and Federal agencies with an Opportunity and Results (SOAR)
ADDRESSES: To access and review all the opportunity to comment on proposed, Program.
documents related to the information revised, and continuing collections of
collection listed in this notice, please information. This helps the Department OMB Control Number: 1850–0800.
use http://www.regulations.gov by assess the impact of its information Type of Review: An extension of an
searching the Docket ID number ED– collection requirements and minimize existing information collection.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:33 Dec 09, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\10DEN1.SGM 10DEN1

Document Created: 2015-12-14 13:28:36
Document Modified: 2015-12-14 13:28:36

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
Action		Notice, recommendation; correction.
Contact		Mark Welch, General Manager, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004-2901, or telephone number (202) 694-7000.
FR Citation		80 FR 76676