10786 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 47 / Thursday, March 12, 2009 / Notices 

Environmental Impacts of the 

Alternatives to the Proposed Action 

Due to the largely administrative 

nature of the proposed action, its 

environmental impacts are small. 

Therefore, the only alternative the staff 

considered is the no-action alternative, 

under which the staff would leave 

things as they are by simply denying the 

amendment request. This no-action 

alternative is not feasible because it 

conflicts with 10 CFR 30.36(d), 

requiring that decommissioning of 

byproduct material facilities be 

completed and approved by the NRC 

after licensed activities cease. The 

NRC’s analysis of the Licensee’s final 

status survey data confirmed that the 

Facility meets the requirements of 10 

CFR 20.1402 for unrestricted release. 

Additionally, denying the amendment 

request would result in no change in 

current environmental impacts. The 

environmental impacts of the proposed 

action and the no-action alternative are 

therefore similar, and the no-action 

alternative is accordingly not further 

considered. 

Conclusion 

The NRC staff has concluded that the 

proposed action is consistent with the 

NRC’s unrestricted release criteria 

specified in 10 CFR 20.1402. Because 

the proposed action will not 

significantly impact the quality of the 

human environment, the NRC staff 

concludes that the proposed action is 

the preferred alternative. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

NRC provided a draft of this 

Environmental Assessment to the 

Missouri Department of Health and 

Senior Services for review on February 

18, 2009. By response dated February 

20, 2009, the State agreed with the 

conclusions of the EA, and otherwise 

provided no comments. 

The NRC staff has determined that the 

proposed action is of a procedural 

nature, and will not affect listed species 

or critical habitat. Therefore, no further 

consultation is required under Section 7 

of the Endangered Species Act. The 

NRC staff has also determined that the 

proposed action is not the type of 

activity that has the potential to cause 

effects on historic properties. Therefore, 

no further consultation is required 

under Section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act. 

III. Finding of No Significant Impact 

The NRC staff has prepared this EA in 

support of the proposed action. On the 

basis of this EA, the NRC finds that 

there are no significant environmental 

impacts from the proposed action, and 

that preparation of an environmental 

impact statement is not warranted. 

Accordingly, the NRC has determined 

that a Finding of No Significant Impact 

is appropriate. 

IV. Further Information 

Documents related to this action, 

including the application for license 

amendment and supporting 

documentation, are available 

electronically at the NRC’s Electronic 

Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/ 

reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, 

you can access the NRC’s Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System (ADAMS), which provides text 

and image files of NRC’s public 

documents. The documents related to 

this action are listed below, along with 

their ADAMS accession numbers. 

1. Kevin J. Sharkey, Pharmacia 

Corporation, letter dated January 15, 

2009, (ADAMS Accession No. 

ML090200063); 

2. Title 10 Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E, 

‘‘Radiological Criteria for License 

Termination;’’ 

3. Title 10 Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 51, ‘‘Environmental 

Protection Regulations for Domestic 

Licensing and Related Regulatory 

Functions;’’ 

4. NUREG–1496, ‘‘Generic 

Environmental Impact Statement in 

Support of Rulemaking on Radiological 

Criteria for License Termination of NRCLicensed Nuclear Facilities;’’ 

5. NUREG–1757, ‘‘Consolidated 

Decommissioning Guidance’’. 

If you do not have access to ADAMS, 

or if there are problems in accessing the 

documents located in ADAMS, contact 

the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) 

Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– 

415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. 

These documents may also be viewed 

electronically on the public computers 

located at the NRC’s PDR, O 1 F21, One 

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR 

reproduction contractor will copy 

documents for a fee. 

Dated at Lisle, Illinois, this 2nd day of 

March, 2009. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Christine Lipa, 

Chief Materials Control, ISFSI, and 

Decommissioning Branch, Division of Nuclear 

Materials Safety, Region III. 

[FR Doc. E9–5356 Filed 3–11–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2009–0106] 

Proposed Generic Communications; 

Protection of Safeguards Information 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of opportunity for public 

comment. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is proposing to issue 

a regulatory issue summary (RIS) to 

remind all stakeholders of the 

significant changes to Title 10 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations 10 CFR 

73.21, 73.22 and 73.23. Previously, 

many licensees, applicants, certificate 

holders, or other persons were issued 

Orders in the aftermath of the terrorist 

attacks of September 11, 2001, that 

required them to protect certain detailed 

information designated as SGI or SGI– 

M. Further Orders were issued by the 

NRC after the enactment of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), which 

expanded the NRC’s fingerprinting 

authority with respect to access to SGI. 

This RIS provides clarifying information 

of the impact of the new rule (effective 

date February 23, 2009). 

This Federal Register notice is 

available through the NRC’s 

Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System (ADAMS) under 

accession number ML090630662. 

DATES: Comment period expires April 

13, 2009. Comments submitted after this 

date will be considered if it is practical 

to do so, but assurance of consideration 

cannot be given except for comments 

received on or before this date. 

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments 

to the Chief, Rulemaking, Directives and 

Editing Branch, Division of 

Administrative Services, Office of 

Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Mail Stop TWB 5B01M, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001, and cite 

the publication date and page number of 

this Federal Register notice. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert Norman, at 301–415–2278 or by 

e-mail at robert.norman@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2009– 

XX 

Implementation of New Final Rule, 

Protection of Safeguards Information 

Addressees 

Each NRC licensee, certificate holder, 

applicant, or other person who 

produces, receives, or acquires 

Safeguards Information. 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 47 / Thursday, March 12, 2009 / Notices 10787 

Intent 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is issuing this 

regulatory issue summary (RIS) to 

remind all stakeholders of the 

significant changes to Title 10 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations 10 CFR 

73.21, 73.22 and 73.23. This RIS 

provides clarifying information of the 

impact of the new rule (effective date 

February 23, 2009). This RIS requires no 

action or written response on the part of 

an addressee. 

Background 

Previously, many licensees, 

applicants, certificate holders, or other 

persons were issued Orders in the 

aftermath of the terrorist attacks of 

September 11, 2001, that required them 

to protect certain detailed information 

designated as SGI or SGI–M. Further 

Orders were issued by the NRC after the 

enactment of the Energy Policy Act of 

2005 (EPAct), which expanded the 

NRC’s fingerprinting authority with 

respect to access to SGI. 

SGI, which includes both SGI and 

SGI–M, is a special category of sensitive 

unclassified information that licensees 

must protect from unauthorized 

disclosure under Section 147 of the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA), as 

amended. Section 147 of the AEA gives 

the Commission authority to designate, 

by regulation or order, other types of 

information as SGI. For example, 

Section 147.a.(2) of the AEA allows the 

Commission to designate as SGI a 

licensee’s or applicant’s detailed 

security measures (including security 

plans, procedures, and equipment) for 

the physical protection of source 

material or byproduct material in 

quantities that the Commission 

determines to be significant to the 

public health and safety or the common 

defense and security. Prior to the events 

of September 11, the Commission 

implemented its Section 147 authority 

through regulations in 10 CFR sections 

73.21 and 73.57. These requirements 

generally applied to security 

information associated with nuclear 

power plants, formula quantities of 

strategic special nuclear materials, and 

the transportation of irradiated fuel. 

However, changes in the threat 

environment after September 11, have 

resulted in the need to protect, as SGI, 

additional types of security related 

information held by a broader group of 

persons, including licensees, applicants, 

vendors, and certificate holders. 

Subsequently, orders were issued that 

increased the number of licensees 

whose security measures would be 

protected as SGI and added types of 

security related information that would 

be considered SGI. For example, EA– 

04–190, issued to certain NRC 

byproduct materials licensees on 

November 4, 2004 (69 Federal Register 

(FR) 65470, November 12, 2004). The 

Commission determined the 

unauthorized release of this information 

could harm the public health and safety 

and the Nation’s common defense and 

security and damage the Nation’s 

critical infrastructure, including nuclear 

power plants and other facilities and 

materials licensed and regulated by the 

NRC or Agreement States. 

Subsequently, Congress enacted the 

EPAct (Pub. L. 109–58, 119 Stat. 594). 

Section 652 of the EPAct amended 

Section 149 of the AEA to require the 

fingerprinting of a broader class of 

persons for the purpose of checking 

criminal history records. Before the 

EPAct, the NRC’s fingerprinting 

authority was limited to requiring 

licensees and applicants for a license to 

operate a nuclear power reactor under 

10 CFR part 50, ‘‘Domestic Licensing of 

Production and Utilization Facilities,’’ 

to fingerprint individuals before 

granting them access to SGI. The EPAct 

expanded the NRC’s authority to require 

fingerprinting of individuals associated 

with other types of activities before 

granting them access to SGI. The EPAct 

preserved the Commission’s authority in 

Section 149 of the AEA to relieve, by 

rule, certain persons from the 

fingerprinting, identification, and 

criminal history records checks required 

for access to SGI. The Commission 

exercised that authority to relieve, by 

rule, certain categories of persons from 

the fingerprint identification and 

criminal history records check along 

with other elements of the background 

check requirement. Categories of 

individuals relieved from the 

background check are described in 10 

CFR 73.59. 

In addition to the orders mentioned 

above, the NRC issued a second round 

of orders to licensees to impose the 

fingerprinting requirements mandated 

by the EPAct. Those orders were issued 

to the same persons who had previously 

received SGI protection orders, and 

required fingerprinting for an FBI 

identification and criminal history 

record check for any person with access 

to SGI. One significant aspect of the SGI 

fingerprinting orders was the 

requirement that the recipients 

designate a ‘‘reviewing official’’ who 

needed access to SGI, and who would 

be required to be approved by the NRC 

as ‘‘trustworthy and reliable’’ based on 

the NRC’s review of his or her 

fingerprint-based criminal history 

records (e.g., Order EA–06–155; 71 FR 

51861, 51862, August 31, 2006, 

Paragraph C.2). The orders specified 

that only the NRC-approved reviewing 

official could make determinations of 

access to SGI for the licensee. In 

addition, the SGI fingerprinting orders 

also did not require the fingerprinting of 

a licensee employee who ‘‘has a 

favorably-decided U.S. Government 

criminal history records check within 

the last five (5) years, or has an active 

federal security clearance’’ id. 

(Paragraph A.3). 

All of the orders issued by the NRC 

contained a relaxation clause that 

generally permitted the order issuing 

official (NRC Office Director) to ‘‘in 

writing, relax or rescind any of the 

above conditions upon demonstration of 

good cause by the licensee.’’ The 

cumulative efforts of the staff to increase 

the protection requirements associated 

with SGI and SGI–M, culminated in a 

final rulemaking. The final rule, 

Protection of Safeguards Information, 

was published in the Federal Register 

on October 24, 2008, (73 FR 63546). As 

stated in the final rule, the purpose of 

the rulemaking was, in part, to 

‘‘implement generally applicable 

requirements for SGI that are similar to 

requirements imposed by the orders.’’ 

Discussion 

Since publication of the final rule in 

October 2008, licensees and other 

stakeholders who routinely use SGI 

have raised a number of questions with 

the NRC staff regarding implementation 

of the final SGI rule, which was 

effective February 23, 2009. All persons 

subject to the rule’s requirements 

(meaning any person, including 

licensees, vendors, industry groups, etc. 

who are currently in possession of SGI) 

were required to be in compliance with 

the rule by that date. Based upon 

stakeholder questions and comments 

with implementation of the rule, the 

NRC is issuing this RIS to review rule 

requirements and articulate the staff’s 

position on several implementation 

issues. Stakeholders are advised to 

closely examine the final rule itself to 

ensure that they are in compliance with 

all requirements. 

• Continuing Effect of the Orders 

A common question from 

stakeholders has been whether the final 

rule supersedes the existing SGI Orders. 

It is the Commission’s intent for all SGI 

order requirements to be codified in 

regulations. However, the final rule does 

not automatically supersede the SGI 

orders. Those orders will remain in 

effect until further notice and 

administrative action is taken. As the 

Commission noted in the revised 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
10788 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 47 / Thursday, March 12, 2009 / Notices 

1The NRC staff notes that the Commission has 

also expressed its concern with the continuing 

effectiveness of the reviewing official provision in 

that only last year, the Commission asked Congress 

for an amendment to Section 149 that would permit 

the NRC to collect fingerprints from persons 

responsible for making decisions regarding a 

person’s trustworthiness and reliability. See Letter 

to the Honorable Nancy Pelosi from Chairman Dale 

E. Klein, dated June 9, 2008 (Legislative Proposal 

Package, ADAMS Accession Number 

ML0815505691). 

proposed rule, ‘‘the final rule would, on 

its effective date, supersede all SGI 

orders and advisory letters issued prior 

to that effective date. The Commission 

will, however, take administrative 

action to withdraw all previously issued 

[sic] orders where appropriate’’ (71 FR 

64004, 64009 (October 31, 2006)). The 

Commission will ultimately have to 

decide when and by what means it will 

relax the SGI orders. The NRC staff is 

currently examining this issue as well as 

the need for additional SGI rulemaking. 

As noted earlier, the orders contain 

several provisions, such as the 

requirement for a ‘‘reviewing official,’’ 

that were not included in the final rule 

that the NRC staff continues to view as 

an essential part of the NRC’s SGI 

protection requirements.1

The NRC staff also notes that to the 

extent there may be a conflict between 

the orders and the rule, the more 

stringent of the requirements would 

apply. For example, the background 

check requirements of the rule would be 

imposed as a prerequisite for access to 

SGI. Additionally, order recipients 

would still be obligated to maintain an 

NRC-approved reviewing official as 

required by the order. 

• Grandfathering of Persons With 

Current Access to SGI 

Some licensees have asked if the 

access requirements set forth in the final 

SGI rule are applicable to all current 

and future persons subject to the rule’s 

requirements. Persons who have not 

been subjected to the rule’s background 

check requirement (i.e., the employment 

history, education history and personal 

references check), must complete such 

checks and be found to be trustworthy 

and reliable by the responsible party 

before they are permitted access to any 

SGI. This does not mean that 

individuals who have recently been 

subject to an equivalent background 

check (such as for unescorted access or 

for access to national security 

information), will have to re-accomplish 

a background check simply for access to 

SGI. The final rule requirements are 

intended to apply to those individuals 

to whom these requirements have not 

been applied or have not otherwise been 

applied in a reasonably recent time 

period. 

• Expanded Applicability of the Rule 

An important change to SGI 

requirements reflected in the final rule 

is the expansion of applicability of the 

rule to all persons who use SGI. Under 

the previous version of the rule, section 

73.21(a), the only person subject to the 

SGI protection requirements by 

regulations were licensees who 

possessed formula quantities of strategic 

special nuclear material, who were 

authorized to operate a nuclear power 

reactor, who transported a formula 

quantity of strategic special nuclear 

material or more than 100 grams of 

irradiated reactor fuel, or to persons 

who dealt with SGI through a 

relationship with any of these categories 

of licensees. Under the new rule, 10 

CFR 73.21(a)(1), that limitation has been 

eliminated, so that the rule applies 

broadly to ‘‘Each licensee, certificate 

holder, applicant or other person who 

produces, receives, or acquires 

Safeguards Information (including 

Safeguards Information with the 

designation or marking: Safeguards 

Information-Modified Handling) shall 

ensure that it is protected against 

unauthorized disclosure.’’ 

• Elimination of Categories of Persons 

Permitted Access to SGI 

Under the previous SGI rule, only 

categories of persons specifically 

identified in paragraphs 73.21(c)(1)(i) 

through (iv), or specifically approved by 

the Commission on a case by case basis, 

were permitted access to Safeguards 

Information. This often resulted in a 

lengthy approval process when certain 

persons sought access to SGI who were 

not included within one of the listed 

categories. The rule no longer contains 

this restriction. In essence, any person 

who has a need to know and who has 

been determined by the possessor of the 

SGI to be trustworthy and reliable based 

on meeting all elements of a background 

check, may have access to SGI. 

• Validity of Active Federal Security 

Clearances 

Several licensees have asked the NRC 

whether personnel with active Federal 

security clearances (e.g., ‘‘Q’’ or ‘‘L’’ 

clearances) would be required to have 

additional fingerprinting and 

background checks for purposes of 

access to SGI. These stakeholders noted 

that, although the orders essentially 

relieved these individuals from being 

fingerprinted for access to SGI (e.g., 

Order EA–06–155; 71 FR 51861, 51862, 

August 31, 2006, Paragraph A.3), the 

new SGI rule did not contain provisions 

for continuing this practice. 

It is the NRC Staff’s view that the SGI 

rule does not require additional 

fingerprinting and background checks 

for persons with active Federal security 

clearances, provided that sufficient 

documentation of the active security 

clearance can be obtained by the 

adjudicating official. Rather than being 

‘‘relieved’’ from the fingerprinting and 

background check requirement, such 

individuals are considered to have 

satisfied the requirements through other 

means, namely, the completion of their 

national security clearance 

investigations. This reflects a longstanding practice of the Commission as 

reflected in the hundreds of SGI 

fingerprinting orders that it has issued. 

• Relief From Fingerprinting 

In response to licensee questions of 

‘‘relief from fingerprinting’’ 

requirements, the staff provides the 

following clarification. As noted in the 

previous section, persons with active 

Federal security clearances are not 

‘‘relieved’’ from being fingerprinted, but 

rather may continue to have access to 

SGI based on the fingerprinting for their 

national security clearance investigation 

and their meeting all other access 

requirements. However, 10 CFR 73.59 

does identify categories of person 

assigned or occupying certain positions 

that are categorically relieved from 

fingerprinting by virtue of their 

occupational status. These categories of 

personnel were originally published in 

an Immediately Effective Final 

Rulemaking that created 10 CFR 73.59 

(71 FR 33989, June 13, 2006). The final 

SGI rule maintained the majority of 

those relief provisions, with several 

modifications and additions. Most 

notably, 10 CFR 73.59 relieves from 

fingerprinting ‘‘any agent, contractor, or 

consultant of the aforementioned 

persons who has undergone equivalent 

criminal history records checks to those 

required by 10 CFR 73.22(b) or 10 CFR 

73.23(b).’’ 

It is important to note that personnel 

relieved from the fingerprinting and 

other elements of the background check 

requirement by 10 CFR 73.59 are still 

required to possess a valid need to know 

prior to obtaining access to SGI or SGIM. 

• Storage of SGI or SGI–M 

Some licensees raised questions 

concerning the storage of Safeguards 

Information. The section that addresses 

the protection of SGI while in use and 

storage was modified by the final rule, 

sections 73.22(c)(1) and 73.23(c)(1), to 

recognize that SGI can be considered 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 47 / Thursday, March 12, 2009 / Notices 10789 

‘‘under the control of an individual 

authorized access to SGI’’ when it is 

attended by such a person though not 

constantly being used. Safeguards 

Information within alarm stations, or 

rooms continuously occupied by 

authorized individuals need not be 

stored in a locked security container. As 

has always been the case, SGI must be 

stored in a locked security storage 

container when unattended. In contrast, 

SGI controlled as SGI–M need only be 

stored in a locked file drawer or cabinet. 

In either case, the rule requires that the 

container where SGI or SGI–M is stored 

not bare markings that identify the 

contents. 

• Marking, Reproduction, and 

Transmittal of SGI or SGI–M 

In response to questions concerning 

the marking, reproduction and 

transmittal of Safeguards Information, 

the staff provided responses, as 

summarized here. The SGI document 

marking requirements were changed to 

assist the reader with the identification 

of the document’s designator and the 

date that the document or material was 

designated as SGI. The first page of SGI 

documents or other matter must now 

contain the name, title, and organization 

of the individual authorized to make a 

SGI determination and who has 

determined that the document or other 

matter contains SGI. The document or 

other matter must also indicate the date 

that the determination was made, and 

indicate that unauthorized disclosure 

will be subject to civil and criminal 

sanctions. Additional instructions were 

provided to aid those tasked with 

creating transmittal letters or 

memorandum to the NRC that do not in 

themselves contain SGI, but is 

associated with an attachment or 

enclosure that does. 

When transmittal letters or 

memorandum to the NRC include 

enclosures that contain SGI but do not 

themselves contain SGI or any other 

form of sensitive unclassified 

information, the transmittal letter or 

memorandum shall be conspicuously 

marked, on the top and bottom, with the 

words Safeguards Information. In 

addition to the SGI marking at the top 

and bottom of the transmittal letter or 

memorandum, the bottom of the 

transmittal letter or memorandum shall 

be marked with text to inform the reader 

that the document is decontrolled when 

separated from SGI enclosure(s). 

Correspondence to the NRC containing 

SGI and non-SGI must be portion 

marked (i.e., cover letters, but not the 

attachments) to allow the recipient to 

identify and distinguish those sections 

of the correspondence or transmittal 

document containing SGI from those 

that do not. The portion marking 

requirement is no longer applicable to 

guard qualification and training plans. 

The new rule has also removed the 

guidance that allowed documents and 

other matter containing SGI in the 

hands of contractors and agents of 

licensees that were produced more than 

one year prior to the effective date of the 

old rule to go unmarked as SGI 

documents as long as they remained in 

storage containers and were not 

removed for use. Those documents and 

other matter, whether or not removed 

from storage containers for use, must 

now be properly marked as SGI 

documents. 

It is important to note however, that 

the rule does not require current 

possessors of SGI to retroactively mark 

SGI documents that were produced 

prior to the effective date of the rule. As 

noted by the Commission in the final 

rule, ‘‘the Commission does not expect 

that licensees or applicants must go 

back and mark documents for which a 

cover sheet was used for the required 

information instead of the first page of 

the document, as set forth in 10 CFR 

73.22(d)(1)’’ (73 FR 63557). 

Safeguards Information may continue 

to be reproduced to the minimum extent 

necessary consistent with need without 

permission of the originator. Equipment 

used to reproduce SGI however, must be 

evaluated to ensure that unauthorized 

individuals cannot obtain SGI by 

gaining access to retained memory or 

through network connectivity. 

The new rule no longer speaks in 

generalities to the packaging 

requirement for SGI that is transmitted 

outside an authorized place of use or 

storage. The rule, sections 73.22(f) and 

73.23(f), now states that SGI or SGI–M, 

when transmitted outside an authorized 

place of use or storage, must be 

packaged in two sealed envelopes or 

wrappers to preclude disclosure of the 

presence of protected information. The 

inner envelope or wrapper must contain 

the name and address of the intended 

recipient and be marked on both sides, 

top and bottom, with the words 

‘‘Safeguards Information’’ or 

‘‘Safeguards Information-Modified 

Handling,’’ as applicable. The outer 

envelope or wrapper must be opaque, 

addressed to the intended recipient, 

must contain the address of the sender, 

and may not bare any markings or 

indication that the document or other 

matter contains SGI or SGI–M. The new 

rule no longer makes reference to the 

use of ‘‘messenger-couriers’’ for the 

transportation of SGI. It now states that 

SGI or SGI–M may be transported by 

any commercial delivery company that 

provides service with computer tracking 

features. It also authorizes the continued 

use of U.S. first class, registered, 

express, or certified mail for the 

transportation of SGI. Individuals 

authorized access to SGI or SGI–M may 

also transport SGI or SGI–M outside of 

an authorized place of use or storage. 

The NRC continues to allow for 

exceptions when SGI is transmitted 

under emergency or extraordinary 

conditions. Additionally, a requirement 

was added to change what was stated as 

‘‘protected telecommunications circuits 

approved by the NRC’’ to ‘‘NRC 

approved secure electronic devices, 

such as facsimiles or telephone 

devices.’’ The authorized use of those 

NRC-approved devices is conditional 

and based upon the transmitter and 

receivers compliance with information 

security prerequisites. To meet the 

requirements, the transmitter and 

receiver must implement processes that 

will provide high assurance that SGI is 

protected before and after the 

transmission. Electronic mail, through 

the internet, is permitted provided that 

the information is encrypted by a 

method (Federal Information Processing 

Standard [FIPS] 140–2 or later) 

approved by the appropriate NRC office. 

The information must be produced by a 

self contained secure automatic data 

process system; and transmitters and 

receivers implement the information 

handling processes that will provide 

high assurance that SGI is protected 

before and after transmission. 

• Electronic Processing of SGI or SGI–M 

The requirements for processing SGI 

on automatic data processing systems 

have not been significantly revised by 

the new SGI rule. However, there are 

noticeable differences between the 

requirements for processing SGI and 

SGI–M on computers. For SGI, 

automatic data processing systems used 

to process or produce SGI must 

continue to be isolated in that they can 

not be connected to a network 

accessible by users who are not 

authorized access to SGI. The 

requirement that an entry code be used 

to access the stored information has 

been deleted. Each computer however, 

used to process SGI that is not located 

within an approved and lockable 

security storage container, must have a 

removable storage medium with a 

bootable operating system. The bootable 

operating system must be used to load 

and initialize the computer. The 

removable storage medium must also 

contain the software application 

programs, and be secured in a locked 

security storage container when not in 

use. 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
10790 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 47 / Thursday, March 12, 2009 / Notices 

A mobile device, such as a laptop, 

may be used for processing SGI 

provided the device is secured in a 

locked security storage container when 

not in use. Where previously not 

addressed in the old rule, the new rule 

makes allowance for electronic systems 

that have been used for storage, 

processing or production of SGI to 

migrate to non-SGI exclusive use. Any 

electronic system that has been used for 

storage, processing or production of SGI 

must be free of recoverable SGI prior to 

being returned to nonexclusive use. 

However, SGI–M need not be processed 

on a stand-alone computer. The rule 

permits SGI–M to be stored, processed 

or produced on a computer or computer 

system, provided that the system is 

assigned to the licensee’s or contractor’s 

facility. SGI–M files must be protected, 

either by a password or encryption. 

Word processors such as typewriters are 

not subject to these requirements as long 

as they do not transmit information 

offsite. 

• Removal From SGI or SGI–M Category 

When documents or other matter are 

removed from the SGI category, because 

the information no longer meets the 

criteria, care must be exercised to 

ensure that any document or other 

matter decontrolled not disclose SGI in 

some other form or be combined with 

other unprotected information to 

disclose SGI. The authority to determine 

that a document or other matter may be 

decontrolled will only be exercised by 

the NRC, with the NRC approval, or in 

consultation with the individual or 

organization that made the original SGI 

determination. 

• Destruction of Matter Containing SGI 

or SGI–M 

The final rule now states that SGI and 

SGI–M shall be destroyed when no 

longer needed. The information can be 

destroyed by burning, shredding or any 

other method that precludes 

reconstruction by means available to the 

public at large. Of particular note in the 

new rule it is stated one-quarter inch 

dimension size for pieces that are 

considered destroyed when thoroughly 

mixed with several pages or documents. 

The NRC will continue to evaluate its 

requirements, policies and guidance 

concerning the protection and 

unauthorized disclosure of SGI. 

Licensees, certificate holders, applicants 

and other persons who produce, receive, 

or acquire SGI will be informed of 

proposed revisions or clarifications. 

Backfit Discussion 

This RIS does not represent a new or 

different staff position regarding the 

implementation of 10 CFR 73.21, 10 

CFR 73.22 or 10 CFR 73.23. It requires 

no action or written response. Any 

action by addressees to implement 

changes to their safeguards information 

protection system, or procedures in 

accordance with the information in this 

RIS ensures compliance with 10 CFR 

part 73 and existing orders, is strictly 

voluntary and therefore, is not a backfit 

under 10 CFR 50.109, ‘‘Backfitting.’’ 

Consequently, the NRC staff did not 

perform a backfit analysis. 

Federal Register Notification 

To be done after the public comments 

periods. 

Congressional Review Act 

This RIS is not a rule as designated by 

the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 

801–886) and therefore, is not subject to 

the Act. 

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement 

This RIS does not contain any 

information collections and, therefore, 

is not subject to the requirements of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 

Contact 

Please direct any questions about this 

matter to Robert Norman, at 301–415– 

2278 or by e-mail at 

robert.norman@nrc.gov. 

End of Draft Regulatory Issue Summary 

Documents may be examined, and/or 

copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public 

Document Room at One White Flint 

North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 

Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available 

records will be accessible electronically 

from the Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading 

Room on the Internet at the NRC Web 

site, http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/ 

index.html. If you do not have access to 

ADAMS or if you have problems in 

accessing the documents in ADAMS, 

contact the NRC Public Document Room 

(PDR) reference staff at 1–800–397–4209 

or 301–415–4737 or by e-mail to 

pdr@nrc.gov. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day 

of March 2009. 

For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Martin C. Murphy, 

Chief, Generic Communications Branch, 

Division of Policy and Rulemaking, Office 

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

[FR Doc. E9–5296 Filed 3–11–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

Proposed Collection; Comment 

Request 

Upon Written Request, Copies Available 

From: Securities and Exchange 

Commission, Office of Investor 

Education and Advocacy, 

Washington, DC 20549. 

Extension: 

Rule 489 and Form F–N, SEC File No. 270– 

361, OMB Control No. 3235–0411. 

Notice is hereby given that, pursuant 

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities 

and Exchange Commission (the 

‘‘Commission’’) is soliciting comments 

on the collection of information 

summarized below. The Commission 

plans to submit this existing collection 

of information to the Office of 

Management and Budget for extension 

and approval: 

Rule 489 (17 CFR 230.489) under the 

Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et 

seq.) requires foreign banks and foreign 

insurance companies and holding 

companies and finance subsidiaries of 

foreign banks and foreign insurance 

companies that are exempted from the 

definition of ‘‘investment company’’ by 

virtue of Rules 3a–1 (17 CFR 170.3a–1), 

3a–5 (17 CFR 270.3a–5), and 3a–6 (17 

CFR 270.3a–6) under the Investment 

Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a–1 

et seq.) to file Form F–N (17 CFR 

239.43), under the Securities Act of 

1933 to appoint an agent for service of 

process when making a public offering 

of securities in the United States. 

Approximately 19 entities are required 

by Rule 489 to file Form F–N, which is 

estimated to require an average of one 

hour to complete. The estimated annual 

burden of complying with the rule’s 

filing requirement is approximately 24 

hours, as some of the entities submitted 

multiple filings. 

The estimates of average burden hours 

are made solely for the purposes of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and are not derived 

from a comprehensive or even 

representative survey or study of the 

cost of Commission rules and forms. 

Written comments are invited on: (a) 

Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 

of the burden of the collection of 

information; (c) ways to enhance the 

quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information collected; and (d) ways to 

minimize the burden of the collection of 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with NOTICES