81 FR 1116 - List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Holtec International, HI-STORM Flood/Wind Multipurpose Storage System, Certificate of Compliance No. 1032, Amendment No. 0, Revision 1
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 6 (January 11, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 6 (January 11, 2016)
| Page Range | 1116-1118 | |
| FR Document | 2016-00163 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 6 (Monday, January 11, 2016)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 1116-1118] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-00163] [[Page 1116]] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 72 [NRC-2015-0134] RIN 3150-AJ62 List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Holtec International, HI-STORM Flood/Wind Multipurpose Storage System, Certificate of Compliance No. 1032, Amendment No. 0, Revision 1 AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is confirming the effective date of April 25, 2016, for the direct final rule that was published in the Federal Register on September 28, 2015. This direct final rule amended the NRC's spent fuel storage regulations by revising the Holtec International (Holtec), HI-STORM (Holtec International Storage Module) Flood/Wind (FW) Multipurpose Canister Storage (MPC) Storage System listing within the ``List of approved spent fuel storage casks'' to add Amendment No. 0, Revision 1, to Certificate of Compliance (CoC) No. 1032. This revision corrects the CoC's expiration date (editorial change), clarifies heat load limits for helium backfill ranges, clarifies the wording for the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) on vent blockage, and revises the vacuum drying system heat load. DATES: Effective date: The effective date of April 25, 2016, for the direct final rule published September 28, 2015 (80 FR 58195), is confirmed. ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0134 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 Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0134. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415- 3463; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. 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]. NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O-1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Solomon Sahle, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3781; email: [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Discussion On September 28, 2015 (80 FR 58195), the NRC published a direct final rule amending its regulations in Sec. 72.214 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations by revising the Holtec HI-STORM FW MPC Storage System listing within the ``List of approved spent fuel storage casks'' to add Amendment No. 0, Revision 1, to CoC No. 1032. This revision corrects the CoC's expiration date (editorial change), clarifies heat load limits for helium backfill ranges, clarifies the wording for the LCO on vent blockage, and revises the vacuum drying system heat load. II. Public Comments on Companion Proposed Rule In the direct final rule, the NRC stated that if no significant adverse comments were received, the direct final rule would become effective on April 25, 2016. The NRC received public comments from private citizens on the companion proposed rule (80 FR 58222). Electronic copies of these comments can be obtained from the Federal Rulemaking Web site, http://www.regulations.gov, by searching for Docket ID NRC-2015-0134. The comments also are available in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML15296A243, ML15296A241, ML15296A242, ML15299A281, ML15307A612, ML15307A615, ML15307A608, ML15307A609, ML15307A610, and ML15307A611. For the reasons discussed in more detail in Section III, ``Public Comment Analysis,'' of this document, none of the comments received are considered significant adverse comments. III. Public Comment Analysis The NRC received comments on the proposed rule, many raising multiple and overlapping issues. As explained in the September 28, 2015, direct final rule, the NRC would withdraw the direct final rule only if it received a ``significant adverse comment.'' This is a comment where the commenter explains why the rule would be inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach, or would be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. In this instance, the NRC determined that none of the comments submitted on the proposed rule are significant adverse comments. The comments were either beyond the scope of this rulemaking or already addressed by the NRC staff's safety evaluation report (SER) (ADAMS Accession No. ML15124A644). The NRC has not made any changes to the direct final rule as a result of the public comments. However, the NRC is taking this opportunity to respond to the comments in an effort to clarify information about the 10 CFR part 72 CoC rulemaking process, and the limited nature of this revision. For rulemakings amending or revising a CoC, the scope of the rulemaking is limited to the specific changes requested by the applicant in the request for the amendment or revision. Therefore, comments about the system, or spent fuel storage in general that are not applicable to the changes requested by the applicant, are outside the scope of this rulemaking. Comments about details of the particular system that is the subject of the rulemaking, but that are not being addressed by the specific changes requested, have already been resolved in prior rulemakings. Persons who have questions or concerns about prior rulemakings and the resulting final rules may consider the NRC's petition for rulemaking process under 10 CFR 2.802. Additionally, safety concerns about any NRC-regulated activity may be reported to the NRC in accordance with the guidance posted on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/allegations/safety-concern.html. This Web site provides information on how to notify the NRC of emergency or non-emergency issues. The NRC identified the following issues raised in the comments, and the NRC's responses to these issues follow. Comment 1 Two comments received from one commenter requested the NRC deny this revision request, expressing concern with the thickness of the canisters. The commenter stated that European systems have a more robust design and that NRC should require the same. The commenter expressed concern that the [[Page 1117]] NRC's approval would not be protective of public health and safety. NRC Response The comment is out of scope for this revision. It is a general comment recommending that United States' manufacturers utilize some design features used in some European systems. The European systems cited are designed for a different application than dry cask storage systems authorized by 10 CFR 72 Subpart K, ``General License for Storage of Spent Fuel at Power Reactor Sites.'' The HI-STORM FW MPC Storage System was evaluated by the NRC staff to acceptably protect the public health and safety on July 14, 2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML111950103). The Revision 1 changes were evaluated by the NRC staff to ensure that the HI-STORM FW MPC Storage System will continue to protect the public health and safety. These evaluations were performed in accordance with the NRC's existing part 72 regulations. Requests to revise the underlying part 72 requirements are beyond the scope of this revision request. Comment 2 Two comments, which read ``good'', appeared to indicate support for the rule. NRC Response The NRC acknowledges the comments. Because the comments appear to support the rule, the comments are not considered significant adverse comments. Comment 3 Two commenters expressed concern regarding the vent size, stating that the vents are disproportionately small for such large casks, and poorly located. The commenters also stated that 50% blockage of the vents is unacceptable regardless of temperature, and that, instead, vents should be totally unblocked to be considered operable. The commenters also expressed concern with the protocols for vents that are not operable within 24 hours. The commenters also objected to a perceived inconsistent application of ASME code standards to the CoC. NRC Response The HI-STORM FW MPC Storage System design, including the vent size and location, were evaluated by the NRC staff in the initial approval (ADAMS Accession No. ML111950103). The system was ultimately determined to be acceptable because the applicant demonstrated that the system could maintain the spent nuclear fuel below regulatory limits with up to 50% blockage of the inlet and out vents for an indefinite time as long as the spent fuel storage cask heat removal system remains operable. Although this revision includes clarifying changes to the LCO vent blockage language, there are no changes in this revision that impact the underlying analysis evaluated in the initial approval. Additionally, there is no specific information in the comment that would cause the NRC to reevaluate this analysis. Therefore, this comment is not considered a significant adverse comment. Comment 4 One commenter requested withdrawal of the revision due to concerns that the environmental assessment (EA) that accompanied the rule was inadequate. The commenter expressed concern that, because the EA for this rule tiered off of an EA performed for the 1990 rulemaking that added the general license for storage of spent fuel at power reactor sites, the EA is outdated. The commenter noted that using an outdated EA raises the question of whether the EA is valid in light of the Fukushima disaster that occurred in Japan on March 11, 2011. In addition to withdrawal of the rule, the commenter also requested that a new environmental impact assessment be commissioned, and that all current projects meet at least the minimum standards employed at Fukushima. NRC Response This comment is not a significant adverse comment as it fails to present any specific challenge to the EA performed in support of this rule. As noted in the comment, the NRC performed an EA in support of this revision. That EA tiered off of an earlier EA completed to support changes to the part 72 rule that added the general license provisions, but considered environmental impacts specific to this revision. Both of these EAs concluded with a finding of no significant environmental impact. This comment does not provide any specific environmental information relating to the storage of spent fuel at Fukushima that would invalidate the finding of no significant impact in this EA or the earlier EA or that would cause the NRC to reevaluate the environmental impacts associated with this revision to this CoC. Moreover, the staff is unaware of any information that would challenge the findings made in these EAs. Comment 5 Comments were also received which neither supported nor opposed the rule, but instead, contained numerous questions about this CoC system and other similar CoC systems. Although these comments are not significant adverse comments, and in many instances fall outside the scope of this specific rulemaking, the NRC is taking this opportunity to attempt to address the questions received. One commenter asked about temperature values included in the Appendix A Technical Specifications (TS) page 3.1.2-2. The commenter noted that a previous CoC included one temperature value as 137 degrees F, while this CoC TS identifies it as 139 degrees F, but does not reflect it as a revision. The commenter asked which temperature value is correct and the implication of the temperature difference. The commenter also asked how relevant ambient air temperature is to underground systems such as the Holtec HI-STORM UMAX system. NRC Response The temperature addressed in the comment is correctly listed as 139 degrees F which is applicable to CoC 1032, Amendment No. 0. This temperature was changed to 137 degrees F in CoC 1032, Amendment No. 1. The HI-STORM UMAX is a different system from the HI-STORM FW MPC Storage System and as such has a different thermal design. Comment 6 Another commenter requested an explanation as to the vendor's statement in the application regarding additional flexibility associated with the limits to the use of vacuum drying to casks at lower heat loads. NRC Response In the application for this revision, the applicant contends that lowering this temperature limit provides additional conservatism (margin) that would allow the applicant the flexibility to implement some changes under the 10 CFR 72.48 process rather than through the amendment process. The NRC staff evaluated the lower temperature limit in its preliminary SER (ADAMS Accession No. ML15124A644), and found the lower limit acceptable. Comment 7 Finally, there were several questions asked about the relationship between this revision and the HI-STORM UMAX system and/or the implications of the changes proposed here to potential uses at the San Onofre Generating Station [[Page 1118]] (SONGS). Questions included whether this change addresses the impacts of using the HI-STORM FW system MPC-37 in the HI-STORM UMAX system, and whether it involves ``the proposed San Onofre configuration of only installing \1/2\ underground.'' The commenter questioned what CoC is approved for use in the HI-STORM UMAX system. Another question asked was whether this change allows ``MPC-37 canister thickness increases (such as a change from 0.5'' to 0.625'' proposed for San Onofre) without requiring a license amendment.'' NRC Response There is no relationship between this revision and the HI-STORM UMAX system. Each system is separately reviewed and certified in accordance with 10 CFR part 72. General licensees may use the certified systems identified in 10 CFR 72.214 subject to meeting certain requirements in 10 CFR part 72. Therefore, the changes in this revision are applicable only to the HI-STORM FW MPC system, CoC No. 1032, and are not applicable to the HI-STORM UMAX system that is intended to be used at SONGS. Nothing in this revision impacts anything associated with the HI-STORM UMAX system; therefore, this revision does not impact the thickness of the canisters in the HI-STORM UMAX system, or the placement of the UMAX system. Additionally, although this rule is a revision to the HI-STORM FW MPC system, nothing in this revision impacts the thickness of the canisters in the HI-STORM FW MPC system. For these reasons, the NRC staff has concluded that the comments received on the companion proposed rule for the Holtec HI-STORM FW MPC Storage System listing within the ``List of approved spent fuel storage casks'' to add Amendment No. 0, Revision 1, to CoC No. 1032, are not significant adverse comments as defined in NUREG/BR-0053, Revision 6, ``United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulations Handbook'' (ADAMS Accession No. ML052720461). Therefore, this rule will become effective as scheduled. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day of December 2015. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules, Announcements, and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration. [FR Doc. 2016-00163 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
![1116 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 6 / Monday, January 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
NUCLEAR REGULATORY adams.html. To begin the search, select and overlapping issues. As explained in
COMMISSION ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then the September 28, 2015, direct final
select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS rule, the NRC would withdraw the
10 CFR Part 72 Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, direct final rule only if it received a
[NRC–2015–0134] please contact the NRC’s Public ‘‘significant adverse comment.’’ This is
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at a comment where the commenter
RIN 3150–AJ62 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by explains why the rule would be
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. inappropriate, including challenges to
List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and the rule’s underlying premise or
Casks: Holtec International, HI–STORM purchase copies of public documents at approach, or would be ineffective or
Flood/Wind Multipurpose Storage the NRC’s PDR, Room O–1F21, One unacceptable without a change.
System, Certificate of Compliance No. White Flint North, 11555 Rockville In this instance, the NRC determined
1032, Amendment No. 0, Revision 1 Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. that none of the comments submitted on
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the proposed rule are significant adverse
Commission. Solomon Sahle, Office of Nuclear comments. The comments were either
ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. beyond the scope of this rulemaking or
effective date. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, already addressed by the NRC staff’s
Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone: safety evaluation report (SER) (ADAMS
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 301–415–3781; email: Accession No. ML15124A644). The NRC
Commission (NRC) is confirming the Solomon.Sahle@nrc.gov. has not made any changes to the direct
effective date of April 25, 2016, for the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: final rule as a result of the public
direct final rule that was published in comments. However, the NRC is taking
the Federal Register on September 28, I. Discussion this opportunity to respond to the
2015. This direct final rule amended the On September 28, 2015 (80 FR 58195), comments in an effort to clarify
NRC’s spent fuel storage regulations by the NRC published a direct final rule information about the 10 CFR part 72
revising the Holtec International amending its regulations in § 72.214 of CoC rulemaking process, and the
(Holtec), HI–STORM (Holtec Title 10 of the Code of Federal limited nature of this revision.
International Storage Module) Flood/ Regulations by revising the Holtec HI– For rulemakings amending or revising
Wind (FW) Multipurpose Canister STORM FW MPC Storage System listing a CoC, the scope of the rulemaking is
Storage (MPC) Storage System listing within the ‘‘List of approved spent fuel limited to the specific changes
within the ‘‘List of approved spent fuel storage casks’’ to add Amendment No. 0, requested by the applicant in the
storage casks’’ to add Amendment No. 0, Revision 1, to CoC No. 1032. This request for the amendment or revision.
Revision 1, to Certificate of Compliance revision corrects the CoC’s expiration Therefore, comments about the system,
(CoC) No. 1032. This revision corrects date (editorial change), clarifies heat or spent fuel storage in general that are
the CoC’s expiration date (editorial load limits for helium backfill ranges, not applicable to the changes requested
change), clarifies heat load limits for clarifies the wording for the LCO on by the applicant, are outside the scope
helium backfill ranges, clarifies the vent blockage, and revises the vacuum of this rulemaking. Comments about
wording for the Limiting Condition for drying system heat load. details of the particular system that is
Operation (LCO) on vent blockage, and II. Public Comments on Companion the subject of the rulemaking, but that
revises the vacuum drying system heat Proposed Rule are not being addressed by the specific
load. changes requested, have already been
In the direct final rule, the NRC stated
DATES: Effective date: The effective date resolved in prior rulemakings. Persons
that if no significant adverse comments
of April 25, 2016, for the direct final who have questions or concerns about
were received, the direct final rule
rule published September 28, 2015 (80 prior rulemakings and the resulting final
would become effective on April 25,
FR 58195), is confirmed. rules may consider the NRC’s petition
2016. The NRC received public
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID comments from private citizens on the for rulemaking process under 10 CFR
NRC–2015–0134 when contacting the companion proposed rule (80 FR 2.802. Additionally, safety concerns
NRC about the availability of 58222). Electronic copies of these about any NRC-regulated activity may
information for this action. You may comments can be obtained from the be reported to the NRC in accordance
obtain publicly-available information Federal Rulemaking Web site, http:// with the guidance posted on the NRC’s
related to this action by any of the www.regulations.gov, by searching for public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/
following methods: Docket ID NRC–2015–0134. The about-nrc/regulatory/allegations/safety-
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to comments also are available in ADAMS concern.html. This Web site provides
http://www.regulations.gov and search under Accession Nos. ML15296A243, information on how to notify the NRC
for Docket ID NRC–2015–0134. Address ML15296A241, ML15296A242, of emergency or non-emergency issues.
questions about NRC dockets to Carol ML15299A281, ML15307A612, The NRC identified the following
Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463; ML15307A615, ML15307A608, issues raised in the comments, and the
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For ML15307A609, ML15307A610, and NRC’s responses to these issues follow.
technical questions, contact the ML15307A611. For the reasons Comment 1
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER discussed in more detail in Section III,
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this ‘‘Public Comment Analysis,’’ of this Two comments received from one
ebenthall on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with RULES
document. document, none of the comments commenter requested the NRC deny this
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents received are considered significant revision request, expressing concern
Access and Management System adverse comments. with the thickness of the canisters. The
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- commenter stated that European
available documents online in the III. Public Comment Analysis systems have a more robust design and
ADAMS Public Documents collection at The NRC received comments on the that NRC should require the same. The
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ proposed rule, many raising multiple commenter expressed concern that the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:23 Jan 14, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\11JAR1.SGM 11JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_1122/page/1.svg)
![1118 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 6 / Monday, January 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(SONGS). Questions included whether DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE New Fee Schedule
this change addresses the impacts of In an October 22, 2015, final rule (80
using the HI–STORM FW system MPC– National Oceanic and Atmospheric
FR 63914), NESDIS established a new
37 in the HI–STORM UMAX system, Administration
schedule of fees for the sale of its data,
and whether it involves ‘‘the proposed information, and related products and
San Onofre configuration of only 15 CFR Part 950
services to users (‘‘October 2015 Fee
installing 1⁄2 underground.’’ The Schedule Rule’’). NESDIS revised the
[Docket No. 150202106–5999–03]
commenter questioned what CoC is fee schedule that has been in effect
approved for use in the HI–STORM RIN 0648–BE86 since 2013 to ensure that the fees
UMAX system. Another question asked accurately reflect the costs of providing
was whether this change allows ‘‘MPC– Schedule of Fees for Access to NOAA access to the environmental data,
37 canister thickness increases (such as Environmental Data, Information, and information, and related products and
a change from 0.5’’ to 0.625’’ proposed Related Products and Services; services. The new fee schedule lists
for San Onofre) without requiring a Correction both the current fee charged for each
license amendment.’’ item and the new fee to be charged to
AGENCY: National Environmental
NRC Response Satellite, Data and Information Service users that took effect beginning
(NESDIS), National Oceanic and November 23, 2015. The schedule
There is no relationship between this Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), applies to the listed services provided
revision and the HI–STORM UMAX Department of Commerce. by NESDIS on or after this date, except
system. Each system is separately for products and services covered by a
ACTION: Final rule; correcting
reviewed and certified in accordance subscription agreement in effect as of
amendment. this date that extends beyond this date.
with 10 CFR part 72. General licensees
may use the certified systems identified SUMMARY: This action corrects the In those cases, the increased fees will
in 10 CFR 72.214 subject to meeting NESDIS FY 2016 schedule of fees for the apply upon renewal of the subscription
certain requirements in 10 CFR part 72. sale of its data, information, and related agreement or at the earliest amendment
Therefore, the changes in this revision products and services to users. NESDIS date provided by the agreement.
are applicable only to the HI–STORM is authorized under the United States NESDIS will continue to review the
FW MPC system, CoC No. 1032, and are Code to assess fees, up to fair market user fees periodically, and will revise
not applicable to the HI–STORM UMAX value, for access to environmental data, such fees as necessary. Any future
system that is intended to be used at information, and products derived from, changes in the user fees and their
SONGS. Nothing in this revision collected, and/or archived by NOAA. effective date will be announced
impacts anything associated with the This action corrects one user fee, titled through notice in the Federal Register.
HI–STORM UMAX system; therefore, the Department of Commerce Need for Correction
this revision does not impact the Certification. In the October 22, 2015,
thickness of the canisters in the HI– final rule, the fee was incorrectly listed The October 2015 Fee Schedule Rule
STORM UMAX system, or the as $16.00. The correct user fee should be contains one fee—which appears in a
placement of the UMAX system. $116.00. table in Appendix A to Part 950—that
Additionally, although this rule is a was reported incorrectly. The
DATES: Effective January 11, 2016.
revision to the HI–STORM FW MPC Department of Commerce Certification
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fee was listed as $16.00. The last rule
system, nothing in this revision impacts James Lewis (301) 713–7073.
the thickness of the canisters in the HI– had the rate incorrectly listed. The
STORM FW MPC system. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: correct fee for this service is $116.00.
We now are setting out the entire table
For these reasons, the NRC staff has Background
with the corrected fee to provide clarity
concluded that the comments received NESDIS operates NOAA’s National for the public.
on the companion proposed rule for the Center for Environmental Information
Holtec HI–STORM FW MPC Storage (NCEI). Through NCEI, NESDIS Classification
System listing within the ‘‘List of provides and ensures timely access to The correction this action makes is
approved spent fuel storage casks’’ to global environmental data from minor and merely updates a
add Amendment No. 0, Revision 1, to satellites and other sources, provides typographical error within the original
CoC No. 1032, are not significant information services, and develops final rule. This rule has been
adverse comments as defined in science products. NESDIS maintains determined to be not significant for
NUREG/BR–0053, Revision 6, ‘‘United some 1,300 databases containing over purposes of E.O. 12866.
States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2,400 environmental variables at NCEI The provisions of the Administrative
Regulations Handbook’’ (ADAMS and seven World Data Centers. These Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) requiring
Accession No. ML052720461). centers respond to over 2,000,000 notice of proposed rulemaking and the
Therefore, this rule will become requests for these data and products opportunity for public comment are
effective as scheduled. annually from over 70 countries. This inapplicable because this rule falls
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day collection of environmental data and within the public property exception of
of December 2015. products is growing rapidly, both in size subparagraph (a)(2) of section 553, as it
and sophistication, and as a result the relates only to the assessment of fees, as
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ebenthall on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with RULES
associated costs have increased. authorized by 15 U.S.C. 1534, that
Cindy Bladey, Users have the ability to access the accurately reflect the costs of providing
Chief, Rules, Announcements, and Directives data offline, online and through the access to publicly available
Branch, Division of Administrative Services, NESDIS e-Commerce System (NeS) environmental data, information, and
Office of Administration. online store. Our ability to provide data, related products. Further, no other law
[FR Doc. 2016–00163 Filed 1–8–16; 8:45 am] information, products and services requires that a notice of proposed
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P depends on user fees. rulemaking and an opportunity for
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:23 Jan 14, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\11JAR1.SGM 11JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_1122/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2016-01-16 01:05:11
Document Modified: 2016-01-16 01:05:11
| 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 | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date. | |
| Contact | Solomon Sahle, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3781; email: [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 1116 | |
| RIN Number | 3150-AJ62 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR