Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 8047 

of organic handling. This flexibility is 

intended to minimize the impact on 

small entities. This proposed rule would 

also remove the allowance for one 

nonorganic agricultural substance, 

annatto extract, in organic handling. 

The NOSB has determined that annatto 

extract is commercially available in 

organic form in sufficient quantities for 

organic handling. AMS concludes that 

the economic impact of this amendment 

to the National List, if any, would be 

minimal to small agricultural service 

firms and may spur further development 

of organic annatto production. 

Accordingly, AMS certifies that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

D. Paperwork Reduction Act 

No additional collection or 

recordkeeping requirements are 

imposed on the public by this proposed 

rule. Accordingly, OMB clearance is not 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501, and 

Chapter 35. 

E. Executive Order 13175 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

in accordance with the requirements of 

Executive Order 13175, Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments. The review reveals that 

this regulation will not have substantial 

and direct effects on Tribal governments 

and will not have significant Tribal 

implications. 

F. General Notice of Public Rulemaking 

This proposed rule addresses 

recommendations submitted to the 

Secretary by the NOSB for substances 

on the National List of Allowed and 

Prohibited Substances. A 30-day period 

for interested persons to comment on 

this rule is provided. Thirty days is 

deemed appropriate because potential 

changes to these listings were widely 

publicized through two NOSB meetings. 

Further, certain proposed amendments, 

one for potassium hydroxide in organic 

handling, and those for peracetic acid in 

organic crop production, are considered 

time sensitive and critical to organic 

production. The proposed amendment 

to the listing for potassium hydroxide 

would provide more tools for organic 

peach processors by allowing use of this 

substance to peel peaches for canning, 

in addition to its current allowance to 

peel peaches for frozen products. The 

proposed amendments to the listings for 

peracetic acid would ensure consistency 

with EPA labeling requirements for 

hydrogen peroxide products containing 

peracetic acid. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 205 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Agriculture, Animals, 

Archives and records, Imports, Labeling, 

Organically produced products, Plants, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Seals and insignia, Soil 

conservation. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 205, Subpart G is 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

PART 205—NATIONAL ORGANIC 

PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 205 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 6501–6522. 

■ 2. Section 205.601 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (a)(6) and (i)(8) to 

read as follows: 

§ 205.601 Synthetic substances allowed 

for use in organic crop production. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(6) Peracetic acid—for use in 

disinfecting equipment, seed, and 

asexually propagated planting material. 

Permitted in hydrogen peroxide 

formulations at concentration of no 

more than 5% as indicated on the 

pesticide product label. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(8) Peracetic acid—for use to control 

fire blight bacteria. Permitted in 

hydrogen peroxide formulations at 

concentration of no more than 5% as 

indicated on the pesticide product label. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 205.605 paragraph (b), revise 

the entry for ‘‘Potassium hydroxide’’ 

and ‘‘Silicon dioxide’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 205.605 Nonagricultural (nonorganic) 

substances allowed as ingredients in or on 

processed products labeled as ‘‘organic’’ or 

‘‘made with organic (specified ingredients 

or food group(s)).’’ 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

Potassium hydroxide—prohibited for 

use in lye peeling of fruits and 

vegetables except when used for peeling 

peaches. 

* * * * * 

Silicon dioxide—Permitted as a 

defoamer. Allowed for other uses when 

organic rice hulls are not commercially 

available. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Section 205.606 is amended by: 

■ A. Removing paragraph (d)(1); 

■ B. Redesignating (d)(2) through (d)(19) 

as (d)(1) through (d)(18); and 

■ C. Revising paragraph (d)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 205.606 Nonorganically produced 

agricultural products allowed as ingredients 

in or on processed products labeled as 

‘‘organic.’’ 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(2) Beta-carotene extract color— 

derived from carrots or algae (pigment 

CAS# 7235–40–7). 

* * * * * 

Dated: January 30, 2013. 

Rex A. Barnes, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–02398 Filed 2–4–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 959 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–12–0039; FV12–959–1 

PR] 

Onions Grown in South Texas; 

Increased Assessment Rate 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule would increase the 

assessment rate established for the 

South Texas Onion Committee 

(Committee) for the 2012–13 and 

subsequent fiscal periods from $0.025 to 

$0.03 per 50-pound equivalent of onions 

handled. The Committee locally 

administers the marketing order which 

regulates the handling of onions grown 

in South Texas. Assessments upon 

onion handlers are used by the 

Committee to fund reasonable and 

necessary expenses of the program. The 

fiscal period begins August 1 and ends 

July 31. The assessment rate would 

remain in effect indefinitely unless 

modified, suspended, or terminated. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

February 15, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments 

concerning this rule. Comments must be 

sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing 

Order and Agreement Division, Fruit 

and Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA, 

1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 

0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237; Fax: 

(202) 720–8938; or Internet: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Comments should 

reference the document number and the 

date and page number of this issue of 

the Federal Register and will be 

available for public inspection in the 

Office of the Docket Clerk during regular 

business hours, or can be viewed at: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

8048 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

http://www.regulations.gov. All 

comments submitted in response to this 

rule will be included in the record and 

will be made available to the public. 

Please be advised that the identity of the 

individuals or entities submitting the 

comments will be made public on the 

Internet at the address provided above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Doris Jamieson, Marketing Specialist or 

Christian D. Nissen, Regional Director, 

Southeast Marketing Field Office, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA; Telephone: (863) 324– 

3375, Fax: (863) 325–8793, or Email: 

Doris.Jamieson@ams.usda.gov or 

Christian.Nissen@ams.usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Laurel May, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– 

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email: 

Laurel.May@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

is issued under Marketing Order No. 

959, as amended (7 CFR part 959), 

regulating the handling of onions grown 

in South Texas, hereinafter referred to 

as the ‘‘order.’’ The order is effective 

under the Agricultural Marketing 

Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 

U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter referred to 

as the ‘‘Act.’’ 

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Order 

12866. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. Under the marketing order now 

in effect, South Texas onion handlers 

are subject to assessments. Funds to 

administer the order are derived from 

such assessments. It is intended that the 

assessment rate as proposed herein 

would be applicable to all assessable 

onions beginning on August 1, 2012, 

and continue until amended, 

suspended, or terminated. 

The Act provides that administrative 

proceedings must be exhausted before 

parties may file suit in court. Under 

section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any 

handler subject to an order may file 

with USDA a petition stating that the 

order, any provision of the order, or any 

obligation imposed in connection with 

the order is not in accordance with law 

and request a modification of the order 

or to be exempted therefrom. Such 

handler is afforded the opportunity for 

a hearing on the petition. After the 

hearing, USDA would rule on the 

petition. The Act provides that the 

district court of the United States in any 

district in which the handler is an 

inhabitant, or has his or her principal 

place of business, has jurisdiction to 

review USDA’s ruling on the petition, 

provided an action is filed not later than 

20 days after the date of the entry of the 

ruling. 

This rule would increase the 

assessment rate established for the 

Committee for the 2012–13 and 

subsequent fiscal periods from $0.025 to 

$0.03 per 50-pound equivalent of 

onions. 

The South Texas onion marketing 

order provides authority for the 

Committee, with the approval of USDA, 

to formulate an annual budget of 

expenses and collect assessments from 

handlers to administer the program. The 

members of the Committee are 

producers and handlers of South Texas 

onions. They are familiar with the 

Committee’s needs and with the costs 

for goods and services in their local area 

and are thus in a position to formulate 

an appropriate budget and assessment 

rate. The assessment rate is formulated 

and discussed in a public meeting. 

Thus, all directly affected persons have 

an opportunity to participate and 

provide input. 

For the 2009–10 and subsequent fiscal 

periods, the Committee recommended, 

and USDA approved, an assessment rate 

that would continue in effect from fiscal 

period to fiscal period unless modified, 

suspended, or terminated by USDA 

upon recommendation and information 

submitted by the Committee or other 

information available to USDA. 

The Committee met on June 26, 2012, 

and unanimously recommended 2012– 

13 expenditures of $145,467 and an 

assessment rate of $0.03 per 50-pound 

equivalent of onions. In comparison, 

last year’s budgeted expenditures were 

$190,467. The assessment rate of $0.03 

is $0.005 higher than the rate currently 

in effect. The Committee’s 2012–13 crop 

estimate of five million 50-pound 

equivalents is lower than the six million 

estimated for last year, and would not 

generate adequate assessment income to 

cover budgeted expenses at the $0.025 

rate. With the recommended $0.005 

increase, assessment income should 

approximate $150,000. The increased 

assessment rate should provide 

sufficient funds to cover anticipated 

2012–13 expenses. 

The major expenditures 

recommended by the Committee for the 

2012–13 fiscal period include $46,610 

for compliance, $37,050 for 

administrative, and $32,942 for 

management. Budgeted expenses for 

these items were the same in 2011–12. 

The reduction in overall budgeted 

expenses from $190,467 to $145,467 is 

due to the elimination of market 

development programs. 

The assessment rate recommended by 

the Committee was derived by dividing 

anticipated expenses by expected 

shipments of South Texas onions. 

Onion shipments for the year are 

estimated at five million 50-pound 

equivalents which should provide 

$150,000 in assessment income. Income 

derived from handler assessments, along 

with interest income, would be 

adequate to cover budgeted expenses. 

Funds in the reserve (currently 

$107,162) would be kept within the 

maximum permitted by the order 

(approximately two fiscal periods’ 

expenses as authorized in § 959.43). 

The proposed assessment rate would 

continue in effect indefinitely unless 

modified, suspended, or terminated by 

USDA upon recommendation and 

information submitted by the 

Committee or other available 

information. 

Although this assessment rate would 

be in effect for an indefinite period, the 

Committee would continue to meet 

prior to or during each fiscal period to 

recommend a budget of expenses and 

consider recommendations for 

modification of the assessment rate. The 

dates and times of Committee meetings 

are available from the Committee or 

USDA. Committee meetings are open to 

the public and interested persons may 

express their views at these meetings. 

USDA would evaluate Committee 

recommendations and other available 

information to determine whether 

modification of the assessment rate is 

needed. Further rulemaking would be 

undertaken as necessary. The 

Committee’s 2012–13 budget and those 

for subsequent fiscal periods would be 

reviewed and, as appropriate, approved 

by USDA. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS) has 

considered the economic impact of this 

rule on small entities. Accordingly, 

AMS has prepared this initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis. 

The purpose of the RFA is to fit 

regulatory actions to the scale of 

business subject to such actions in order 

that small businesses will not be unduly 

or disproportionately burdened. 

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the 

Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are 

unique in that they are brought about 

through group action of essentially 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 8049 

small entities acting on their own 

behalf. 

There are approximately 85 producers 

of onions in the production area and 

approximately 30 handlers subject to 

regulation under the marketing order. 

Small agricultural producers are defined 

by the Small Business Administration 

(SBA) as those having annual receipts 

less than $750,000, and small 

agricultural service firms are defined as 

those whose annual receipts are less 

than $7,000,000 (13 CFR 121.201). 

According to Committee data and 

information from the National 

Agricultural Statistical Service (NASS), 

the average price for South Texas onions 

during the 2010–11 season was around 

$7.35 per 50-pound equivalents and 

total shipments were approximately 5.4 

million 50-pound equivalents. Using the 

average price and shipment information 

and assuming a normal distribution, the 

majority of South Texas onion 

producers would have annual receipts 

of less than $750,000. In addition, based 

on available information, approximately 

80 percent South Texas onion handlers 

could be considered small businesses 

under SBA’s definition. Thus, the 

majority of South Texas onion 

producers and handlers may be 

classified as small entities. 

This rule would increase the 

assessment rate established for the 

Committee and collected from handlers 

for the 2012–13 and subsequent fiscal 

periods from $0.025 to $0.03 per 50- 

pound equivalent of onions. The 

Committee unanimously recommended 

2012–13 expenditures of $145,467 and 

an assessment rate of $0.03 per 50- 

pound equivalent. The proposed 

assessment rate of $0.03 is $0.005 higher 

than the 2011–12 rate. The quantity of 

assessable onions for the 2012–13 fiscal 

year is estimated at five million 50- 

pound equivalents, compared to an 

estimated six million 50-pound 

equivalents last year. The current 

assessment rate of $0.025 would not 

generate sufficient revenue to meet 

expenses, however the $0.03 rate should 

provide $150,000 in assessment income 

and be adequate to meet this year’s 

expenses. 

The major expenditures 

recommended by the Committee for the 

2012–13 fiscal period include $46,610 

for compliance, $37,050 for 

administrative, and $32,942 for 

management. Budgeted expenses for 

these items were the same in 2011–12. 

The reduction in overall budgeted 

expenses from $190,467 to $145,467 is 

due to the elimination of market 

development programs. 

Prior to arriving at this budget, the 

Committee considered information from 

various sources, such as the 

Committee’s Budget and Personnel 

Committee and the Marketing 

Committee. Alternative expenditure 

levels were discussed by these groups, 

based upon the relative value of various 

promotional projects to the South Texas 

onion industry. The assessment rate of 

$0.03 per 50-pound equivalent of 

assessable onions was then determined 

by dividing the total recommended 

budget by the quantity of assessable 

onions, estimated at five million 50- 

pound equivalents for the 2012–13 

fiscal period. Assessment income 

should approximate $150,000, $5,333 

above anticipated expenses, which the 

Committee determined to be acceptable. 

A review of historical information and 

preliminary information pertaining to 

the upcoming fiscal period indicates 

that the grower price for the 2012–13 

fiscal period could range between $6.60 

and $9.80 per 50-pound equivalent of 

onions. Therefore, the estimated 

assessment revenue for the 2012–13 

fiscal period as a percentage of total 

grower revenue could range between .3 

and .45 percent. 

This action would increase the 

assessment obligation imposed on 

handlers. While assessments impose 

some additional costs on handlers, the 

costs are minimal and uniform on all 

handlers. Some of the additional costs 

may be passed on to producers. 

However, these costs would be offset by 

the benefits derived by the operation of 

the marketing order. In addition, the 

Committee’s meeting was widely 

publicized throughout the South Texas 

onion industry and all interested 

persons were invited to attend the 

meeting and participate in Committee 

deliberations on all issues. Like all 

Committee meetings, the June 26, 2012, 

meeting was a public meeting and all 

entities, both large and small, were able 

to express views on this issue. Finally, 

interested persons are invited to submit 

comments on this proposed rule, 

including the regulatory and 

informational impacts of this action on 

small businesses. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35), the order’s information 

collection requirements have been 

previously approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0178 

(Vegetable and Specialty Crops). No 

changes in those requirements as a 

result of this action are necessary. 

Should any changes become necessary, 

they would be submitted to OMB for 

approval. 

This proposed rule would impose no 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

South Texas onion handlers. As with all 

Federal marketing order programs, 

reports and forms are periodically 

reviewed to reduce information 

requirements and duplication by 

industry and public sector agencies. 

AMS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the Internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

USDA has not identified any relevant 

Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with this rule. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

be viewed at: www.ams.usda.gov/ 

MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. 

Any questions about the compliance 

guide should be sent to Laurel May at 

the previously-mentioned address in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

A 10-day comment period is provided 

to allow interested persons to respond 

to this proposed rule. Ten days is 

deemed appropriate because: (1) The 

2012–13 fiscal period began on August 

1, 2012, and the marketing order 

requires that the rate of assessment for 

each fiscal period apply to all assessable 

onions handled during such fiscal 

period; (2) the Committee needs to have 

sufficient funds to pay its expenses 

which are incurred on a continuous 

basis; and (3) handlers are aware of this 

action which was unanimously 

recommended by the Committee at a 

public meeting and is similar to other 

assessment rate actions issued in past 

years. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 959 

Marketing agreements, Onions, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 959 is proposed to 

be amended as follows: 

PART 959—ONIONS GROWN IN 

SOUTH TEXAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 959 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. Section 959.237 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 959.237 Assessment rate. 

On and after August 1, 2012, an 

assessment rate of $0.03 per 50-pound 

equivalent is established for South 

Texas onions. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

8050 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

Dated: January 30, 2013. 

David R. Shipman, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–02400 Filed 2–4–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

10 CFR Part 72 

[Docket No. PRM–72–7; NRC–2012–0266] 

Spent Fuel Cask Certificate of 

Compliance Format and Content 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; receipt 

and request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is publishing for 

public comment a notice of receipt for 

a petition for rulemaking (PRM), dated 

October 3, 2012, which was filed with 

the NRC by Anthony R. Pietrangelo on 

behalf of the Nuclear Energy Institute 

(NEI or the petitioner). The petition was 

docketed by the NRC on October 18, 

2012, and assigned Docket No. PRM– 

72–7. The petitioner requests that the 

NRC add a new rule that governs the 

format and content of spent fuel storage 

cask Certificates of Compliance (CoCs), 

extend the backfit rule to CoCs, and 

make other improvements that result in 

‘‘more efficient and effective NRC 

oversight of dry cask storage activities as 

well as improved implementation of dry 

cask storage requirements by industry.’’ 

DATES: Submit comments by April 22, 

2013. Comments received after this date 

will be considered if it is practical to do 

so, but the NRC is able to assure 

consideration only for comments 

received on or before this date. 

ADDRESSES: You may access information 

and comment submissions related to 

this petition for rulemaking, which the 

NRC possesses and are publicly 

available, by searching on http:// 

www.regulations.gov under Docket ID 

NRC–2012–0266. You may submit 

comments by any of the following 

methods (unless this document 

describes a different method for 

submitting comments on a specific 

subject): 

• Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2012–0266. Address 

questions about NRC dockets to Carol 

Gallagher; telephone: 301–492–3668; 

email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. 

• Email comments to: 

Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov. If you 

do not receive an automatic email reply 

confirming receipt, then contact us at 

301–415–1677. 

• Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 301– 

415–1101. 

• Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001, ATTN: 

Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. 

• Hand deliver comments to: 11555 

Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 

20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. 

(Eastern Time) Federal workdays; 

telephone: 301–415–1677. 

For additional direction on accessing 

information and submitting comments, 

see ‘‘Accessing Information and 

Submitting Comments’’ in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules, 

Announcements, and Directives Branch, 

Division of Administrative Services, 

Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–492– 

3667, email: Cindy.Bladey@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Accessing Information and 

Submitting Comments 

A. Accessing Information 

Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2012– 

0266 when contacting the NRC about 

the availability of information for this 

petition for rulemaking. You may access 

information related to this petition for 

rulemaking, which the NRC possesses 

and is publicly available, by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2012–0266. 

• NRC’s Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS): You may access publicly 

available documents online in the NRC 

Library at http://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/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 pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The 

incoming petition is in ADAMS under 

Accession No. ML12299A380. 

• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and 

purchase copies of public documents at 

the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One 

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. 

B. Submitting Comments 

Please include Docket ID NRC–2012– 

0266 in the subject line of your 

comment submission, in order to ensure 

that the NRC is able to make your 

comment submission available to the 

public in this docket. 

The NRC cautions you not to include 

identifying or contact information that 

you do not want to be publicly 

disclosed in you comment submission. 

The NRC will post all comment 

submissions at http:// 

www.regulations.gov as well as enter the 

comment submissions into ADAMS. 

The NRC does not routinely edit 

comment submissions to remove 

identifying or contact information. 

If you are requesting or aggregating 

comments from other persons for 

submission to the NRC, then you should 

inform those persons not to include 

identifying or contact information that 

they do not want to be publicly 

disclosed in their comment submission. 

Your request should state that the NRC 

does not routinely edit comment 

submissions to remove such information 

before making the comment 

submissions available to the public or 

entering the comment submissions into 

ADAMS. 

II. The Petitioner 

The NEI is the policy organization for 

the nuclear energy and technologies 

industry. The NEI’s petition states that 

its ‘‘members include entities licensed 

to operate commercial nuclear power 

plants in the United States, nuclear 

plant designers, major architect/ 

engineering firms, and other 

organizations and entities involved in 

the nuclear energy industry.’’ These 

include CoC ‘‘holders, and licensees— 

under both the specific and general 

license provisions—regulated by the 

NRC through 10 CFR part 72 [part 72 of 

Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR)].’’ The petitioner 

states that its primary interest in 

submitting this petition is that it ‘‘is 

responsible for coordinating the 

combined efforts of licensees and CoC 

holders on matters involving generic 

NRC regulatory policy issues, and 

generic operations and technical 

regulatory issues affecting the activities 

of NRC-licensed independent spent fuel 

storage installations (ISFSIs) and NRCcertified dry storage cask designs.’’ 

III. The Petition 

In its petition (ADAMS Accession No. 

ML12299A380), the petitioner requests 

that the NRC initiate a rulemaking to 

amend 10 CFR part 72. The petitioner 

requests that the NRC regulations be 

amended as follows: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS