Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 179 / Monday, September 15, 2008 / Notices 53291 

Interim Enforcement Policy for 

Generally Licensed Devices Containing 

Byproduct Material (10 CFR 31.5) 

This interim policy addressed 

violations that persons licensed 

pursuant to 10 CFR 31.5 discovered and 

reported before, as well as during, the 

initial cycle of a notice and response 

program related to the revision of 10 

CFR 31.5. This interim policy was 

expected to remain in effect through 

completion of one cycle of the licensee 

notice and response program. Since one 

cycle is complete, this interim policy is 

no longer in effect. 

Interim Enforcement Policy Regarding 

Enforcement Discretion for Certain 

Fitness-for-Duty Issues (10 CFR Part 26) 

10 CFR Part 26, Fitness for Duty 

Programs, has been amended. The final 

rule became effective on April 30, 2008 

(73 FR 16966). The amended rule 

addressed the issues covered by the 

interim enforcement discretion policy. 

Therefore, this interim policy has been 

deleted from the revised Enforcement 

Policy. 

Interim Enforcement Policy Regarding 

the Use of Alternative Dispute 

Resolution 

This interim policy addressed the use 

of a pilot program for testing the use of 

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in 

the enforcement program. On May 5, 

2006, in SECY–06–0102, ‘‘Evaluation of 

the Pilot Program on the Use of 

Alternative Dispute Resolution in the 

Allegation and Enforcement Program’’, 

the staff provided the Commission with 

the results of the evaluation of the ADR 

pilot program. The Office of 

Enforcement concluded that the 

program was successful and the staff 

intends to continue using the ADR 

program for discrimination and other 

wrongdoing cases. The ADR program 

has been incorporated into the revised 

Enforcement Policy. 

Interim Enforcement Policy Regarding 

Enforcement Discretion for Certain Fire 

Protection Issues (10 CFR 50.48) 

This interim policy was moved in its 

entirety into section 3.9 of the revised 

Enforcement Policy. 

V. Procedural Requirements 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This policy statement does not 

contain new or amended information 

collection requirements subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) Existing 

requirements were approved by the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB), approval number 3150–0136. 

Public Protection Notification 

The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, 

and a person is not required to respond 

to, a request for information or an 

information collection requirement 

unless the requesting document 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

In accordance with the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, the NRC has 

determined that this action is not a 

’’major’’ rule and has verified this 

determination with the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget. 

Dated at Rockville, MD, this 9th day of 

September 2008. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Cynthia A. Carpenter, 

Director, Office of Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. E8–21433 Filed 9–12–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[IA–08–014] 

In the Matter of Joseph S. Shepherd; 

Order Prohibiting Involvement in 10 

CFR Part 71 Activities and 

Conditioning Other NRC Licensed 

Activities (Effective Immediately) 

I 

Joseph S. Shepherd was a contractor 

to Source Production and Equipment 

Company, Inc. (SPEC), of St. Rose, 

Louisiana. SPEC was a registered user of 

a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

(NRC or Commission) Model No. 5979 

Shipping Package (Certificate of 

Compliance (CoC) No. 5979, Revision 

10), and an NRC-approved Quality 

Assurance (QA) Program Approval 

holder (NRC Docket Number 71–0102) 

pursuant to Part 71 of Title 10 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR). 

The CoC authorized use of the Model 

No. 5979 package under the general 

license provisions of 10 CFR 71.12 

[currently 10 CFR 71.17]. The QA 

Program Approval satisfied the 

requirements of 10 CFR 71.12(b) 

[currently 10 CFR 71.17(b)], and 10 CFR 

71.101(c) [currently 10 CFR 

71.101(c)(1)] by authorizing activities to 

be conducted under criteria of Subpart 

H of 10 CFR Part 71, ‘‘Quality 

Assurance.’’ SPEC also was an NRC 

export licensee pursuant to 10 CFR Part 

110. SPEC hired Mr. Shepherd to 

perform certain maintenance 

inspections required by the NRC CoC for 

the Model No. 5979 shipping cask prior 

to making shipments of NRC licensed 

radioactive material to Mexico. 

II 

During an NRC inspection conducted 

on November 18, 2004, at Alpha-Omega 

Services, Inc. (AOS), an NRC certificate 

holder and Quality Assurance (QA) 

program holder, certain 

nonconformances regarding a shipping 

package, serial number 1B, CoC No. 

5979, Model No. 5979, were brought to 

the NRC’s attention. The end-caps of the 

shipping package did not conform to the 

physical (weight and materials) and 

dimensional (end cap thickness and 

length of the bolts) configuration 

specified by the CoC. In addition, holes 

had been drilled in the turret of the 

shipping package. Foss Therapy 

Services (FTS) had purchased the 

shipping package from AOS in 2001. 

FTS holds a State of California 

radioactive materials license and 

coordinates source exchanges and 

recycling for radiation therapy systems 

at various hospitals. FTS, however, is 

not an NRC licensee, authorized user, or 

certificate or QA program holder. AOS 

happened to be performing its annual 

inspection of the Model No. 5979 

package when NRC conducted its 

November 18, 2004, inspection at AOS. 

The NRC also became aware during 

its November 18, 2004, inspection at 

AOS that FTS had been using SPEC, to 

ship byproduct material for FTS to 

Mexico. The NRC obtained shipping 

documents which confirmed that SPEC 

had used the nonconforming container 

between June 25, 2001, and May 20, 

2004, to make export shipments to 

Mexico. SPEC hired Mr. Shepherd, an 

officer and co-owner of FTS, to perform 

inspections of the Model No. 5979 

shipping package prior to three export 

shipments by SPEC on July 15, 2003, 

December 4, 2003, and May 20, 2004. 

As a result of the NRC’s November 18, 

2004, inspection, the NRC’s Office of 

Investigations (OI) initiated an 

investigation to determine whether 

SPEC had willfully violated NRC 

regulations relating to its export 

shipments to Mexico. 

Based on the OI investigation, the 

NRC has concluded that Mr. Shepherd 

engaged in three examples of deliberate 

misconduct in violation of 10 CFR 

110.7b, ‘‘Deliberate Misconduct.’’ 

First, on or about July 15, 2003, and 

December 4, 2003, and in violation of 10 

CFR 110.7b(a)(2), Mr. Shepherd 

deliberately provided materially 

inaccurate information to SPEC in two 

checklists and in shipping papers 

concerning inspections of the Model No. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

53292 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 179 / Monday, September 15, 2008 / Notices 

5979 shipping package. Specifically, Mr. 

Shepherd signed ‘‘OK’’ on all applicable 

steps of the FTS inspection checklists, 

and certified on the bills of lading that 

the package conformed to all national 

governmental regulations, signifying 

that Mr. Shepherd had performed all 

steps of the inspection and that the 

package conformed to the NRC CoC 

requirements. In fact, Mr. Shepherd did 

not perform step 2.4.A, which required 

that he remove and visually check six 

cask screws. The inaccurate information 

was material because it concealed that 

SPEC failed to conform to the CoC 

requirement that before shipment of the 

package, an inspection must be 

performed, including step 2.4.A. 

By deliberately providing materially 

inaccurate checklists and bills of lading 

to SPEC on or about July 15, 2003 and 

December 4, 2003, Mr. Shepherd 

violated 10 CFR 110.7b(a)(1) because he 

deliberately caused SPEC to violate 10 

CFR 71.3, ‘‘Requirement for License.’’10 

CFR 71.3 requires that all persons who 

deliver for transport, or who transport, 

NRC licensed material must have an 

NRC license to do so. 10 CFR 71.17, 

‘‘General license; NRC-approved 

package’’, provides that a general 

license to deliver or transport licensed 

material in a package with an NRC CoC 

is granted only to licensees who comply 

with the terms and conditions of the 

CoC. SPEC relied upon Mr. Shepherd’s 

representations that he had completed 

all steps of the package inspection 

required by the CoC. As a result of Mr. 

Shepherd’s deliberate provision of 

materially inaccurate information, SPEC 

did not comply with the COC, and thus 

SPEC delivered for transport and 

transported licensed material without 

the license required by 10 CFR 71.3. 

Second, on or about May 20, 2004, 

and in violation of 10 CFR 110.7b(a)(2), 

Mr. Shepherd deliberately provided 

materially inaccurate information to 

SPEC in a checklist and in a bill of 

lading concerning an inspection of the 

Model No. 5979 package. Specifically, 

Mr. Shepherd signed ‘‘OK’’ on all 

applicable steps of the FTS inspection 

checklist and certified on the bill of 

lading that the package met all national 

governmental regulations, signifying 

that Mr. Shepherd had performed all 

steps of the inspection and that the 

package met all CoC requirements. In 

fact, Mr. Shepherd was not present and 

did not conduct any inspection of the 

CoC No. 5979 package. The inaccuracies 

were material because they concealed 

that Mr. Shepherd’s associate who did 

the inspection was not authorized or 

qualified to perform the inspection on 

SPEC’s behalf, and concealed that steps 

2.4 through 2.8, required by the 

maintenance inspection procedures, 

were not performed. 

By deliberately providing a materially 

inaccurate checklist and bill of lading to 

SPEC on or about May 20, 2004, Mr. 

Shepherd violated 10 CFR 110.7b(a)(1) 

because he deliberately caused SPEC to 

violate 10 CFR 71.3, ‘‘Requirement for 

License.’’ 10 CFR 71.3 requires that all 

persons who deliver for transport, or 

who transport, NRC licensed material 

must have an NRC license to do so. 10 

CFR 71.17, ‘‘General license; NRCapproved package’’, provides that a 

general license to deliver or transport 

licensed material in a package with an 

NRC CoC is granted only to licensees 

who comply with the terms and 

conditions of the CoC. SPEC relied upon 

Mr. Shepherd’s representations that he 

had completed all steps of the package 

inspection required by the CoC. As a 

result of Mr. Shepherd’s deliberate 

provision of materially inaccurate 

information, SPEC did not comply with 

the CoC, and thus SPEC delivered for 

transport and transported licensed 

material without the license required by 

10 CFR 71.3. 

Third, Mr. Shepherd violated 10 CFR 

110.7b(a)(2) by deliberately providing 

materially inaccurate information to 

SPEC in a conversation around May 

2004, in a fax dated January 12, 2005, 

and again in an e-mail of April 12, 2005, 

when Mr. Shepherd told SPEC that he 

had not authorized any modifications to 

the Model No. 5979 package. Mr. 

Shepherd told SPEC personnel that the 

only modifications to the package were 

holes drilled in the turret by someone 

else in Mexico. In June 2005, shortly 

after an OI interview in which Mr. 

Shepherd admitted to having authorized 

modifications to the package, Mr. 

Shepherd told SPEC that he did in fact 

authorize modifying the end caps by 

drilling larger holes. The inaccurate 

information was material because it 

concealed that the shipping package 

was rendered nonconforming by the 

modification Mr. Shepherd had 

authorized, and concealed that SPEC 

had delivered for transport or 

transported licensed material in a 

certified container without the license 

required by10 CFR 71.3. 

III 

Joseph S. Shepherd entered into a 

plea agreement with the United States 

Department of Justice on August 22, 

2008. Under the terms of that plea 

agreement, Mr. Shepherd agreed not to 

contest an NRC order that requires him 

to comply with the following, or 

substantially similar, provisions related 

to his involvement in NRC activities: 

1. Not package any Type B shipments, 

nor prepare any paperwork, for a Type 

B shipment in any NRC jurisdiction. 

2. Prepare and submit the following 

information to the NRC by the end of 

September 2008: A list of lessons 

learned and measures taken to avoid 

recurrence and a statement describing 

the reasons that the NRC should have 

confidence that Mr. Shepherd will 

perform licensed activities in 

compliance with NRC regulations. 

3. Prior to his conducting licensed 

activities in NRC jurisdiction, Mr. 

Shepherd will notify the NRC in writing 

no later than 5 business days of the 

planned work in order to facilitate 

inspections of his activities. 

4. For a period of five years from the 

date of an Order, prior to his conducting 

licensed activities in NRC jurisdictions, 

Mr. Shepherd will notify customers that 

the NRC has issued an Order to him and 

will also make that Order available to 

customers. 

5. Prepare a presentation and offer to 

give that presentation at an industry 

conference to include, at a minimum, a 

description of the violations, as well as 

the circumstances that led to the 

violations, lessons learned, and the 

corrective actions taken and planned to 

prevent recurrence. The presentation 

will also address the following: (1) 

Acknowledgment that a condition 

occurred that resulted in violations of 

NRC requirements; (2) the need to 

establish an environment and culture 

that promotes regulatory compliance 

through the implementation of controls 

and processes; (3) the need to ensure 

that all employees are trained and 

oriented in NRC requirements; and (4) 

the importance of continued selfassessment of programs and processes to 

ensure that these programs and 

processes are delivering the desired 

outcomes. Mr. Shepherd agrees to 

advise the NRC of his compliance with 

this provision no later than one year 

from the date of an Order. 

6. Take a Radiation Safety Officer 

course with emphasis on the regulatory 

interface within one year of the date of 

an Order in order to enhance his 

understanding of the importance of 

completeness and accuracy of 

information regarding activities subject 

to NRC and DOT regulation. Mr. 

Shepherd agrees to advise the NRC of 

his compliance with this provision no 

later than one year from the date of an 

Order. 

7. If Mr. Shepherd should seek other 

employment involving NRC-regulated 

activities within five years from the date 

of an Order, Mr. Shepherd will provide 

that employer with a copy of any Order 

addressing the violations. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 179 / Monday, September 15, 2008 / Notices 53293 

IV 

Based on the above, it appears that 

Joseph S. Shepherd has engaged in 

deliberate misconduct in violation of 10 

CFR 110.7b, ‘‘Deliberate misconduct.’’ 

The NRC must be able to rely on its 

licensees and their employees and 

contractors to comply with NRC 

requirements, including the requirement 

to provide information that is complete 

and accurate in all material respects. 

Mr. Shepherd’s actions in causing SPEC, 

an NRC Licensee, to violate 10 CFR 

71.3, and his misrepresentations to 

SPEC, have raised serious doubt as to 

whether he can be relied upon to 

comply with NRC requirements and 

whether the public health and safety 

can be assured if he is involved in NRClicensed activities. 

While the NRC is not aware of actual 

safety consequences associated with the 

shipments, the potential safety 

consequences were significant, 

considering the potential adverse 

impact of shipping radioactive materials 

in an unapproved package design that 

had not been demonstrated to meet the 

transportation package approval 

standards for both normal and 

hypothetical accident conditions as 

required by 10 CFR part 71. Of the many 

controls that are in place to assure 

public health and safety during the 

transport of radioactive materials, one of 

the most important is that the 

configuration of the package conforms 

to that analyzed and approved by the 

NRC staff, through the package CoC 

process, so as to assure integrity of the 

package during transportation for both 

normal and hypothetical accident 

conditions. In this case, the package 

integrity is of particular safety concern 

given the quantities of licensed 

radioactive material that were 

transported on July 15, 2003, December 

4, 2003, and May 20, 2004. 

Consequently, I lack the requisite 

reasonable assurance that Mr. Shepherd 

can be relied upon to comply with NRC 

requirements with honesty and 

integrity. Therefore, the public health, 

safety, and interest require that Mr. 

Shepherd be prohibited from any 

involvement in 10 CFR part 71 

activities, including the package 

certificate and quality assurance 

program requirements of 10 CFR part 

71, and that Mr. Shepherd’s 

involvement in other NRC licensed 

activities be conditioned. Furthermore, 

pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, ‘‘Orders,’’ I 

find that the significance of Mr. 

Shepherd’s conduct described above is 

such that the public health, safety, and 

interest require that this Order be 

immediately effective. 

V 

Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 81, 

161b, 161i, 161o, 182, and 186 of the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 

and the Commission’s regulations in 10 

CFR 2.202, 10 CFR Part 71, 10 CFR 

110.7b, and 10 CFR 150.20, it is hereby 

ordered, effective immediately, that: 

1. Mr. Shepherd is prohibited from 

packaging any Type B shipments and 

from preparing any paperwork for a 

Type B shipment in any NRC 

jurisdiction. 

2. Mr. Shepherd shall prepare a list of 

lessons learned and identify measures 

taken to avoid recurrence of his 

violations. Mr. Shepherd shall also 

include a statement describing the 

reasons that the NRC should have 

confidence that Mr. Shepherd will 

perform licensed activities in 

compliance with NRC regulations. This 

information shall be submitted to the 

NRC by the end of September 2008. 

3. Prior to his conducting licensed 

activities in any NRC jurisdiction, Mr. 

Shepherd shall notify the NRC in 

writing no less than 5 business days in 

advance of the planned work in order to 

facilitate inspections of his activities. 

The notifications shall be made for a 

period of five years from the date of this 

Order. 

4. Prior to his conducting licensed 

activities in any NRC jurisdiction, Mr. 

Shepherd shall notify customers that the 

NRC has issued this Order to him and 

shall also make this Order available to 

customers. The notifications shall be 

made for a period of five years from the 

date of this Order. 

5. Mr. Shepherd shall prepare a 

presentation and offer to give that 

presentation at an industry conference. 

The presentation must include, at a 

minimum, a description of the 

violations, as well as the circumstances 

that led to the violations, lessons 

learned, and the corrective actions taken 

and planned to prevent recurrence. The 

presentation must also address the 

following: (1) Acknowledgment that a 

condition occurred that resulted in 

violations of NRC requirements; (2) the 

need to establish an environment and 

culture that promotes regulatory 

compliance through the implementation 

of controls and processes; (3) the need 

to ensure that all employees are trained 

and oriented in NRC requirements; and 

(4) the importance of continued selfassessment of programs and processes to 

ensure that these programs and 

processes are delivering the desired 

outcomes. Mr. Shepherd must advise 

the NRC upon completion of these 

items, which shall be no later than one 

year from the date of this Order. 

6. Mr. Shepherd shall take a Radiation 

Safety Officer course with emphasis on 

the regulatory interface within one year 

of the date of the Order in order to 

enhance his understanding of the 

importance of completeness and 

accuracy of information regarding 

activities subject to NRC and DOT 

regulation. Mr. Shepherd must advise 

the NRC upon completion of this item, 

which shall be no later than one year 

from the date of the Order. 

7. Should Mr. Shepherd leave Foss 

Therapy Services and seek other 

employment involving NRC-regulated 

activities within five years from the date 

of this Order, Mr. Shepherd shall 

provide that employer a copy of this 

Order. 

The Director, Office of Enforcement, 

may, in writing, relax or rescind any of 

the above conditions upon 

demonstration by Joseph S. Shepherd of 

good cause. 

VI 

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, 

Joseph S. Shepherd must, and any other 

person adversely affected by this Order 

may, submit an answer to this Order 

within 20 days of its issuance. In 

addition, Joseph S. Shepherd, and any 

other persons adversely affected by this 

Order may request a hearing on this 

Order within 20 days of its issuance. 

Where good cause is shown, 

consideration will be given to extending 

the time to request a hearing. A request 

for extension of time must be made in 

writing to the Director, Office of 

Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, and include a statement of 

good cause for the extension. 

The answer shall be in writing and 

under oath or affirmation, and shall 

specifically admit or deny each 

allegation or charge made in this Order. 

The answer shall set forth the matters of 

fact and law on which Joseph S. 

Shepherd or other persons adversely 

affected relies and the reasons as to why 

this Order should not have been issued. 

The answer may consent to the Order. 

Any answer shall be submitted to the 

Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, ATTN: Chief, Rulemakings 

and Adjudications Staff, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001. Copies shall also be 

sent to: the Director, Office of 

Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001; the Assistant General Counsel for 

Materials Litigation and Enforcement at 

the same address; and to Joseph S. 

Shepherd if the answer is by a person 

other than Joseph S. Shepherd. 

If a person other than Joseph S. 

Shepherd requests a hearing, that 

person shall set forth with particularity 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

53294 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 179 / Monday, September 15, 2008 / Notices 

the manner in which his or her interest 

is adversely affected by this Order and 

shall address the criteria set forth in 10 

CFR 2.309(d) and (f). 

If Joseph S. Shepherd or a person 

whose interest is adversely affected 

requests a hearing, the Commission will 

issue an Order designating the time and 

place of any hearing. If a hearing is held, 

the issue to be considered at such 

hearing shall be whether this Order 

should be sustained. 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), 

Joseph S. Shepherd, or any other person 

adversely affected by this Order may, in 

addition to demanding a hearing, at the 

time the answer is filed or sooner, move 

the presiding officer to set aside the 

immediate effectiveness of the Order on 

the ground that the Order, including the 

need for immediate effectiveness, is not 

based on adequate evidence but on mere 

suspicion, unfounded allegations, or 

error. The motion must state with 

particularity the reasons why the Order 

is not based on adequate evidence and 

must be accompanied by affidavits or 

other evidence relied on. 

A request for a hearing or to set aside 

the immediate effectiveness of this order 

must be filed in accordance with the 

NRC E-Filing rule, which became 

effective on October 15, 2007. The NRC 

E-filing Final Rule was issued on 

August, 28 2007, (72 FR 49,139) and 

codified in pertinent part at 10 CFR Part 

2, Subpart B. The E-Filing process 

requires participants to submit and 

serve documents over the internet or, in 

some cases, to mail copies on electronic 

optical storage media. Participants may 

not submit paper copies of their filings 

unless they seek a waiver in accordance 

with the procedures described below. 

To comply with the procedural 

requirements associated with E-Filing, 

at least five (5) days prior to the filing 

deadline the requestor must contact the 

Office of the Secretary by e-mail at 

HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV, or by 

calling (301) 415–1677, to request (1) a 

digital ID certificate, which allows the 

participant (or its counsel or 

representative) to digitally sign 

documents and access the E-Submittal 

server for any NRC proceeding in which 

it is participating; and/or (2) creation of 

an electronic docket for the proceeding 

(even in instances when the requestor 

(or its counsel or representative) already 

holds an NRC-issued digital ID 

certificate). Each requestor will need to 

download the Workplace Forms 

ViewerTM to access the Electronic 

Information Exchange (EIE), a 

component of the E-Filing system. The 

Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and 

is available at http://www.nrc.gov/sitehelp/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. 

Information about applying for a digital 

ID certificate also is available on NRC’s 

public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/ 

site-help/e-submittals/applycertificates.html. 

Once a requestor has obtained a 

digital ID certificate, had a docket 

created, and downloaded the EIE 

viewer, it can then submit a request for 

a hearing through EIE. Submissions 

should be in Portable Document Format 

(PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance 

available on the NRC public Web site at 

http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. A filing is considered 

complete at the time the filer submits its 

document through EIE. To be timely, 

electronic filings must be submitted to 

the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. 

Eastern Time on the due date. Upon 

receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing 

system time-stamps the document and 

sends the submitter an e-mail notice 

confirming receipt of the document. The 

EIE system also distributes an e-mail 

notice that provides access to the 

document to the NRC Office of the 

General Counsel and any others who 

have advised the Office of the Secretary 

that they wish to participate in the 

proceeding, so that the filer need not 

serve the document on those 

participants separately. Therefore, any 

others who wish to participate in the 

proceeding (or their counsel or 

representative) must apply for and 

receive a digital ID certificate before a 

hearing request is filed so that they may 

obtain access to the document via the EFiling system. 

A person filing electronically may 

seek assistance through the ‘‘Contact 

Us’’ link located on the NRC Web site 

at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html or by calling the NRC 

technical help line, which is available 

between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., 

Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. 

The help line number is (800) 397–4209 

or locally, (301) 415–4737. 

Participants who believe that they 

have good cause for not submitting 

documents electronically must file a 

motion, in accordance with 10 CFR 

2.302(g), with their initial paper filing 

requesting authorization to continue to 

submit documents in paper format. 

Such filings must be submitted by (1) 

first class mail addressed to the Office 

of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: 

Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or 

(2) courier, express mail, or expedited 

delivery service to the Office of the 

Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White 

Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, 

Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: 

Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. 

Participants filing a document in this 

manner are responsible for serving the 

document on all other participants. 

Filing is considered complete by firstclass mail as of the time of deposit in 

the mail, or by courier, express mail, or 

expedited delivery service upon 

depositing the document with the 

provider of the service. 

Documents submitted in adjudicatory 

proceedings will appear in NRC’s 

electronic hearing docket which is 

available to the public at http://ehd.nrc.

gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, unless 

excluded pursuant to an order of the 

Commission, an Atomic Safety and 

Licensing Board, or a Presiding Officer. 

Participants are requested not to include 

personal privacy information, such as 

social security numbers, home 

addresses, or home phone numbers in 

their filings. With respect to copyrighted 

works, except for limited excerpts that 

serve the purpose of the adjudicatory 

filings and would constitute a Fair Use 

application, Participants are requested 

not to include copyrighted materials in 

their works. 

In the absence of any request for 

hearing, or written approval of an 

extension of time in which to request a 

hearing, this Order shall be final 20 days 

from the date of this Order without 

further order or proceedings. If an 

extension of time for requesting a 

hearing has been approved, the 

provisions specified in Section IV shall 

be final when the extension expires if a 

hearing request has not been received. 

An answer or request for hearing shall 

not stay the immediate effectiveness of 

this order. 

Dated this 8th day of September 2008. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Cynthia A. Carpenter, 

Director, Office of Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. E8–21432 Filed 9–12–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC 

POWER AND CONSERVATION 

PLANNING COUNCIL 

Proposed Amendments to Columbia 

River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program 

AGENCY: Pacific Northwest Electric 

Power and Conservation Planning 

Council (Northwest Power and 

Conservation Council, Council). 

ACTION: Proposed amendments to the 

Council’s Columbia River Basin Fish 

and Wildlife Program. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Pacific 

Northwest Electric Power Planning and 

Conservation Act of 1980 (16 U.S.C. 839 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES