Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 53025 

consistent with the NRC rule regarding 

import and export of radioactive waste 

that has been in place since 1995, and, 

through its limitation to one-for-one 

exchanges, has a neutral effect on 

disposal capacity constraints within the 

U.S. The NRC staff also notes that the 

other nine Low-Level Waste Compacts 

and ten unaffiliated States have not 

expressed specific views on the waste 

management practices that apply to 

disused radioactive sources. 

By addressing this aspect of the 

Northwest Compact’s comment in this 

comment resolution document 

(published at the same time as the BTP), 

the NRC is reiterating to licensees the 

potential limits both to disposal options 

for disused sources and long-term 

storage capacity at the licensees’ 

respective sites. 

Comment: Three commenters 

(Northwest Compact, LLW Forum and 

UDEQ) would like additional language 

added to the BTP to acknowledge the 

lack of current disposal options for nonU.S. origin disused radioactive sources. 

UDEQ commented that ‘‘[t]he 

importation of sources/devices not 

directly attributable to U.S.-origin 

certainly raises a concern regarding 

disposal site access in Utah.’’ UDEQ 

suggested adding clarification to the 

BTP to state that where disposal of such 

sources is not an option, a licensee 

‘‘. . . would still be required to store these 

sources safely, to meet the financial 

assurance provisions as applicable in the 

regulations, and would have to dispose of the 

sources in an authorized facility at some 

time. The DEQ staff expects that licensees 

would consider the additional costs for 

potential storage and out-of-compact disposal 

in deciding whether to import sources . . .’’ 

UDEQ also suggested adding more 

explanatory text regarding potential 

storage and disposal considerations and 

requirements directly into the BTP as a 

clarifying footnote. The Northwest 

Compact and LLW Forum raised similar 

concerns about potential impacts on 

capacity for domestic long-term storage 

and ultimate disposal by NRC and 

Agreement State licensees. Specifically, 

the LLW Forum observed that 

‘‘. . . although NRC may allow certain 

radioactive sources to be imported into the 

country under the proposed BTP, the agency 

should be aware that there may not be a 

disposal option for the sources depending 

upon the policies of the particular Compact 

and/or sited state to which the sources are 

being returned.’’ 

Response: A specific license for the 

import of radioactive waste must ‘‘. . . 

name an appropriate facility that has 

agreed to accept and is authorized to 

possess the waste for management or 

disposal . . .’’ (10 CFR 110.43(d) 

(emphasis added)) where 

‘‘management’’ includes authorization 

for long-term storage under a company’s 

NRC or Agreement State issued 

possession license. A general license (10 

CFR 110.27) is contingent on ‘‘the U.S. 

consignee [being] authorized to receive 

and possess the material under a general 

or specific NRC or Agreement State 

license . . .’’ Among other things, the 

domestic authorization sets possession 

limits and provisions for long-term 

storage. The NRC staff is aware that 

there may not be disposal options for 

some sources due to current Compact 

policies on admittance of out-ofCompact waste. 

Agreement State and NRC possession 

license holders historically have not 

differentiated use or storage of 

radioactive sources based on origin. In 

terms of their possession limits and 

storage capacity, licensees handle the 

sources identically regardless of origin 

in order to protect public health and 

safety. With the ‘‘one-for-one’’ exchange 

required under the BTP, there should be 

no increase in the volume of disused 

sources for management or disposal as 

a result of the BTP. The application of 

this BTP is limited to those radioactive 

sources that have been exchanged on a 

‘‘one-for-one’’ basis and after a good 

faith effort has been made by the 

importer to determine the origin. 

Accordingly, it is the NRC’s expectation 

that the number of disused sources 

imported by the manufacturer or 

distributor into the United States must 

not be greater than the number of new 

or refurbished sources exported by that 

manufacturer or distributor. 

Comment: The Northwest Compact 

and the UDEQ suggested that the final 

BTP include language explicitly: 

‘‘. . . informing U.S. licensees to consider 

the ramifications and costs of the potential 

need for extended storage in the absence of 

a recycling or subsequent disposal option for 

imported sources and devices as well as the 

legal jurisdictions of low-level radioactive 

waste compacts in terms of the availability of 

or access to disposal activities.’’ 

Response: The NRC is aware that the 

costs of long term storage may be an 

issue for some licensees. For this reason, 

NRC has added language to the final 

BTP to reflect the Northwest Compact 

and State of Utah concerns regarding the 

availability and access to the limited 

disposal options currently available. 

Comment: The LLW Forum expressed 

that ‘‘the NRC should show greater 

deference to the LLW Compacts and 

host states through earlier and more 

active involvement in the import of 

potentially non-U.S. origin radioactive 

sources for disposal.’’ They suggest that: 

‘‘. . . when the NRC is in the process of 

developing policy positions on the disposal 

of disused sources, the NRC should evaluate 

whether the position is consistent with the 

policies of interstate compacts that host Part 

61 commercial low-level radioactive waste 

disposal facilities and should also include 

consultation and communication with 

affected compacts and sited states.’’ 

Response: The NRC staff works within 

the confines of the Atomic Energy Act 

of 1954, as amended, and recognizes the 

authorities granted to the States and 

Compacts in the Low Level Waste 

Policy Act of 1985. The LLW Compacts 

are provided multiple opportunities to 

comment on publications for 

rulemaking in Part 110, Part 110 specific 

license applications for import of 

radioactive waste, and guidance 

documents such as the BTP (see preemption response above). 

Comment: International Isotopes 

suggested that the final BTP should 

‘‘recognize the practice of a ‘‘one-forone’’ source exchange and acknowledge 

that there are complexities associated 

the radioactive source supply chain.’’ 

More specifically, International Isotopes 

points out that the timing of exports and 

imports over the course of a timeframe 

might not align specifically with the 

‘‘one-for-one’’ principle on which the 

BTP is based. 

Response: The NRC staff recognizes 

that importing/exporting trends and an 

importer’s intent are licensee and 

isotope-specific and will be considered 

on a case-by-case basis by NRC staff. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd 

day of August, 2013. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Charlotte Abrams, 

Acting Director, Office of International 

Program. 

[FR Doc. 2013–20975 Filed 8–27–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 141 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0100; Amdt. No. 

141–17A] 

RIN 2120–AJ67 

Pilot Certification and Qualification 

Requirements for Air Carrier 

Operations; Correction 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting a final 

rule published on July 15, 2013 (78 FR 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
53026 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

42324). In that final rule, which became 

effective on the date of publication, the 

FAA amended its regulations to create 

new certification and qualification 

requirements for pilots in air carrier 

operations. The FAA inadvertently 

listed an incorrect amendment number 

for that final rule. This document 

corrects that error. 

DATES: Effective: August 28, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this 

correction contact Barbara Adams, Air 

Transportation Division, AFS–200, 

Federal Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–8166; facsimile (202) 267–5299, 

email barbara.adams@faa.gov. 

For legal questions concerning this 

correction contact Anne Moore, Office 

of the Chief Counsel—International 

Law, Legislation, and Regulations 

Division, AGC–240, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–3123; facsimile 

(202) 267–7971, email anne.moore@

faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On July 15, 2013, the FAA published 

a final rule entitled, ‘‘Pilot Certification 

and Qualification Requirements for Air 

Carrier Operations’’ (78 FR 42324). In 

that final rule, which became effective 

July 15, 2013, the FAA amended part 

141. The FAA inadvertently listed the 

incorrect amendment number for part 

141 in the header information of the 

final rule as 141–1. The correct 

amendment number is 141–17. 

Correction 

In the final rule, FR Doc. 2013–16849, 

published on July 15, 2013, at 78 FR 

42324, make the following correction: 

1. On page 42324 in the heading of 

the final rule, revise ‘‘Amdt. No. 141–1’’ 

to read as ‘‘Amdt. No. 141–17’’. 

Issued in Washington, DC, under the 

authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 

44701(a) and Secs. 216–217, Public Law 111– 

216, 124 Stat. 2348 on August 23, 2013. 

Brenda D. Courtney, 

Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2013–20962 Filed 8–27–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[TD 9619] 

RIN 1545–BD84 

Regulations Enabling Elections for 

Certain Transaction Under Section 

336(e); Correction 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Correction to final regulations. 

SUMMARY: This document describes 

corrections to final regulations [TD 

9619] that provide guidance under 

section 336(e) of the Internal Revenue 

Code (CODE), which authorizes the 

issuance of regulations under which an 

election may be made to treat sale, 

exchange or distribution of at least 80 

percent of the voting power and value 

of the stock of a corporation (target) as 

a sale of all its underlying assets. These 

regulations were published in the 

Federal Register on Wednesday, May 

15, 2013. 

DATES: This correction is effective on 

August 28, 2013, and is applicable 

beginning May 15, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark J. Weiss, (202) 622–7930 (not a 

toll-free number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The final regulations (TD 9619) that 

are the subject of this correction are 

under section 336(e) of the Code. 

Need for Correction 

As published May 15, 2013 [78 FR 

28467] TD 9619 contains errors that may 

prove to be misleading and is in need 

of clarification. 

Correction of Publication 

Accordingly, the publication of the 

final regulations [TD 9619], which were 

the subject of FR Doc. 2013–11522, is 

corrected as follows: 

1. On page 28467, column 2, in the 

preamble under the caption ‘‘Paperwork 

Reduction Act’’, the fourth line from the 

top, the language, ‘‘in §§ 1.336–2(h) and 

1.336–4(c)(4). This’’ is corrected to read 

‘‘in §§ 1.336–2(h) and 1.336–4(c). This’’. 

2. On page 28467, column 2, in the 

preamble under the caption 

‘‘Background’’, second paragraph, fifth 

line, the language, ‘‘947 [73 FR 49965– 

02]) (the proposed’’ is corrected to read 

‘‘947 [73 FR 49965]) (the proposed’’. 

Martin V. Franks, 

Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, 

Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief 

Counsel (Procedure and Administration). 

[FR Doc. 2013–20495 Filed 8–27–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[TD 9619] 

RIN 1545–BD84 

Regulations Enabling Elections for 

Certain Transaction Under Section 

336(e); Correction 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Correcting amendment. 

SUMMARY: This document contains 

amendments to correct errors in final 

regulations [TD 9619] that provide 

guidance under section 336(e) of the 

Internal Revenue Code (CODE), which 

authorizes the issuance of regulations 

under which an election may be made 

to treat sale, exchange or distribution of 

at least 80 percent of the voting power 

and value of the stock of a corporation 

(target) as a sale of all its underlying 

assets. These regulations were 

published in the Federal Register on 

Wednesday, May 15, 2013. 

DATES: This correction is effective on 

August 28, 2013, and is applicable 

beginning May 15, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark J. Weiss, (202) 622–7930 (not a 

toll-free number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The final regulations (TD 9619) that 

are the subject of this correction are 

under section 336(e) of the Code. 

Need for Correction 

As published May 15, 2013 [78 FR 

28467] TD 9619 contains errors that may 

prove to be misleading and is in need 

of clarification. 

List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1 

Income taxes, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Correction of Publication 

Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is 

corrected by making the following 

correcting amendments: 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES