This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

18303 

Vol. 74, No. 76 

Wednesday, April 22, 2009 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

10 CFR Part 50 

[PRM–50–89; NRC–2007–0018] 

Raymond A. West; Consideration of 

Petition in Rulemaking Process 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Closure of petition for 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) has received a 

petition for rulemaking dated December 

14, 2007, and revised on December 19, 

2007, filed by Raymond A. West 

(petitioner). The petition was docketed 

by the NRC and has been assigned 

Docket No. PRM–50–89. The petitioner 

is requesting that the NRC amend the 

regulations that govern domestic 

licensing of production and utilization 

facilities at nuclear power plants. 

Specifically, the petitioner is requesting 

that the regulations that govern codes 

and standards at nuclear power plants 

be amended to provide applicants and 

licensees a process for requesting NRC 

approval of changes or modifications to 

American Society of Mechanical 

Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel 

Code (ASME Code) cases that are listed 

in the relevant NRC-approved regulatory 

guides cited in the current regulations. 

The petitioner believes that the current 

requirements do not allow changes or 

modifications to be proposed as 

alternatives to NRC-approved ASME 

Code cases. This action provides notice 

that the NRC will consider the 

petitioner’s request in the NRC’s 

rulemaking process. 

DATES: The petition for rulemaking 

docketed as PRM–50–89 is closed on 

April 22, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: The NRC is not soliciting 

comments at this time. Further NRC 

action on the issues raised by this 

petition will be accessible at the federal 

rulemaking portal, http:// 

www.regulations.gov, by searching on 

rulemaking docket ID: [NRC–2007– 

0018]. 

You can access publicly available 

documents related to this petition for 

rulemaking using the following 

methods: 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and search 

for documents filed under the following 

rulemaking docket ID: [NRC–2007– 

0018]. 

NRC’s Public Document Room: The 

public may examine, and have copied 

for a fee, publicly available documents 

at the NRC’s Public Document Room 

(PDR), Public File Area, Room O1F21, 

One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, Maryland. 

NRC’s Agencywide Document Access 

and Management System (ADAMS): 

Publicly available documents created or 

received at the NRC are available 

electronically at the NRC’s Electronic 

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

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

the public can gain entry into ADAMS, 

which provides text and image files of 

NRC’s public documents. If you do not 

have access to ADAMS or if there are 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS, contact the PDR 

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

415–4737, or by e-mail to 

pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: L. 

Mark Padovan, Office of Nuclear 

Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555. Telephone: 301–415–1423 or 

Toll-Free: 1–800–368–5642 or by e-mail: 

Mark.Padovan@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The NRC has received a petition for 

rulemaking dated December 14, 2007, as 

revised on December 19, 2007, 

submitted by Raymond A. West 

(petitioner). The petitioner requests that 

the NRC amend 10 CFR Part 50, 

‘‘Domestic Licensing of Production and 

Utilization Facilities.’’ Specifically, the 

petitioner requests that 10 CFR 50.55a, 

‘‘Codes and Standards,’’ be amended to 

permit licensees and applicants to 

directly request approval of an 

alternative for changes to NRC-approved 

ASME Code cases. 

The NRC determined that the petition 

met the threshold sufficiency 

requirements for a petition for 

rulemaking under 10 CFR 2.802. The 

petition was docketed by the NRC as 

PRM–50–89 on December 26, 2007. 

II. Discussion of the Petition 

The petitioner states that 10 CFR 

50.55a currently provides no defined 

provisions to allow applicants or 

licensees to request changes or 

modifications to ASME Code cases 

listed in NRC Regulatory Guides 1.84, 

1.147, or 1.192 that NRC has approved 

for use under §§ 50.55a(b)(4), (b)(5), and 

(b)(6). 

The petitioner states that 

requirements in § 50.55a(a)(3) for 

proposing alternatives to the 

requirements in § 50.55a(a) are limited 

to the requirements in paragraphs (c), 

(d), (e), (f), and (g) of that section. The 

petitioner further states that alternatives 

to requirements in § 50.55a(b) are not 

permitted. The petitioner believes that 

although these requirements were 

appropriate for many years, when 

§§ 50.55a(b)(4), (b)(5), and (b)(6) were 

added, § 50.55a(a)(3) could no longer be 

used for ‘‘direct approval’’ of changes or 

modifications to NRC-approved ASME 

Code cases. 

The petitioner notes that ASME Code 

cases are written by ASME to provide 

alternatives to existing requirements or 

to introduce new technologies or 

methodologies. The petitioner states 

that it typically takes 4 years for a 

particular ASME Code case to be 

accepted for generic use by applicants 

or licensees in regulatory guides. Most 

applicants or licensees are willing to 

wait for generic approval because of the 

estimated minimum $12,000 cost to 

request approval of a particular ASME 

Code case before it is accepted for use 

in a regulatory guide. The petitioner 

states that, in many instances when an 

attempt is made to use a newlyapproved ASME Code case, there are 

one or two requirements in the code 

case that cannot be met because: 

(1) The need for the ASME Code case 

has broadened beyond the scope of the 

approved case, 

(2) The committee that developed the 

ASME Code case did not foresee all 

possible uses of a particular case, or 

(3) Limitations at a particular site may 

preclude using an ASME Code case 

without modification. 

The petitioner is concerned that 

problems occur when there is an 

immediate need to use an ASME Code 

case that contains most of the 

requirements needed to resolve an issue 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
18304 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 22, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

1 Section 811 is part of Subtitle B of Title VIII 

of EISA, which has been codified at 42 U.S.C. 

17301-17305. 2 15 U.S.C. 41-58. 

but cannot be used without a 

modification. The petitioner cites an 

effort to mitigate primary water stress 

corrosion cracking (PWSCC) in Alloy 

82/182 welds after an ASME Code case 

was approved by the NRC for use in the 

appropriate regulatory guide for weld 

overlay of stainless steel material but 

not for austenitic nickel-based material 

that was subject to potential PWSCC. 

The petitioner states that this issue 

resulted in licensees having to perform 

a ‘‘work-a-round’’ by requesting usage of 

some ASME Code cases with 

modifications. The petitioner has 

concluded that use of ASME Code cases 

with modifications cannot be performed 

under § 50.55a(a)(3). 

The petitioner describes the ‘‘work-around’’ that is accepted by the NRC is 

for an applicant or licensee to propose 

an alternative to the governing ASME 

Code requirements, such as using ASME 

Code Section XI requirements, instead 

of requesting usage of an ASME Code 

case with a change or modification. The 

petitioner states that the NRC allows 

this type of alternative under 

§ 50.55a(a)(3) because the provisions of 

§ 50.55a(g) govern use of ASME Code 

Section XI. The petitioner states that, if 

the need for an alternative is urgent, the 

only choice an applicant or licensee has 

is to perform the ‘‘work-a-round’’ 

described above that the petitioner 

states has been done routinely. The 

petitioner has concluded that the NRC 

has determined that no mechanism for 

evaluating a licensee’s proposal to an 

existing NRC approved voluntary 

alternative is allowed by § 50.55a(a)(3) 

because it would be ‘‘providing an 

alternative to an alternative.’’ 

The petitioner has proposed draft 

rulemaking text to address these issues. 

The petitioner states that his proposed 

amendments to § 50.55a will clarify this 

regulation to correct administrative 

issues associated with alternatives to 

ASME Code cases when an urgent issue 

arises that cannot be solved under the 

current regulatory provisions. 

III. NRC Review of the Petition 

The NRC reviewed the issues raised 

by the petitioner and determined the 

following: 

• Code cases often provide 

alternatives that have technical merit 

and, in many instances, are 

incorporated into future ASME Code 

editions. 

• The ASME Code case process itself 

constitutes a method of how a licensee 

can seek to obtain ASME approval for a 

variation of a previously-approved code 

case. § 50.55a(a)(3) currently provides 

specific approaches for obtaining NRC 

approval of alternatives to ASME Code 

provisions. Inasmuch as ASME Code 

cases are analogous to ASME Code 

provisions, it is not unreasonable to 

provide an analogous regulatory 

approach for obtaining NRC approval of 

alternatives to ASME Code cases. 

For these reasons, the NRC has 

determined that the issues raised in this 

petition should be considered in the 

NRC’s Common Prioritization of 

Rulemaking process. The NRC uses this 

process to determine which rulemaking 

actions to pursue based on available 

resources and how the actions maintain 

safety, ensure security of nuclear 

facilities and materials, increase 

effectiveness, and maintain openness 

with stakeholders. Members of the 

public can track the progress of the 

issues raised in the petition as they go 

through the rulemaking process via the 

‘‘NRC Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual 

Report (NUREG–0936),’’ or online at 

http://www.regulations.gov; search on 

rulemaking docket ID NRC–2007–0018. 

The changes requested in the petition 

may or may not be incorporated into 10 

CFR 50.55a exactly as requested. With 

this action, PRM–50–89 is considered 

resolved and administratively closed. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day 

of April 2009. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

R.W. Borchardt, 

Executive Director for Operations. 

[FR Doc. E9–9197 Filed 4–21–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 317 

[Project No. P082900] 

RIN 3084-AB12 

Prohibitions on Market Manipulation in 

Subtitle B of Title VIII of The Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Revised notice of proposed 

rulemaking; request for public 

comment. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 811 of 

Subtitle B of Title VIII of The Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007 

(‘‘EISA’’),1 the Federal Trade 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘FTC’’) 

is issuing a Revised Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (‘‘RNPRM’’). The revised 

proposed Rule in this RNPRM would 

prohibit any person, directly or 

indirectly, in connection with the 

purchase or sale of crude oil, gasoline, 

or petroleum distillates at wholesale, 

from knowingly engaging in any act, 

practice, or course of business— 

including the making of any untrue 

statement of material fact—that operates 

or would operate as a fraud or deceit 

upon any person, or intentionally failing 

to state a material fact that under the 

circumstances renders a statement made 

by such person misleading, provided 

that such omission distorts or tends to 

distort market conditions for any such 

product. Violations of the revised 

proposed Rule, if such Rule is adopted, 

would require proof by a preponderance 

of the evidence. Anyone violating an 

FTC rule promulgated under Section 

811 of EISA, such as this revised 

proposed Rule would be if adopted, may 

face civil penalties of up to $1 million 

per violation per day, in addition to any 

relief available to the Commission under 

the Federal Trade Commission Act 

(‘‘FTC Act’’).2 The Commission invites 

written comments on issues raised by 

the revised proposed Rule and seeks 

answers to the specific questions set 

forth in Section IV.I. of this RNPRM. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received by May 20, 2009. The 

Commission does not contemplate any 

extensions of this comment period. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 

invited to submit written comments 

electronically or in paper form. 

Comments should refer to ‘‘Market 

Manipulation Rulemaking, P082900’’ to 

facilitate the organization of comments. 

Please note that your comment— 

including your name and your state— 

will be placed on the public record of 

this proceeding, including on the 

publicly accessible FTC website, at 

(http://www.ftc.gov/os/ 

publiccomments.shtm). 

Because comments will be made 

public, they should not include any 

sensitive personal information, such as 

an individual’s Social Security Number; 

date of birth; driver’s license number or 

other state identification number or 

foreign country equivalent; passport 

number; financial account number; or 

credit or debit card number. Comments 

also should not include any sensitive 

health information, such as medical 

records or other individually 

identifiable health information. In 

addition, comments should not include 

any ‘‘[t]rade secret or any commercial or 

financial information which is obtained 

from any person and which is privileged 

or confidential,’’ as provided in Section 

6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and 

FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2). 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS