Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 189 / Thursday, September 30, 2010 / Notices 60485 

employer/affiliation information (name 

of institution, address, country, 

telephone); title/position of attendee. To 

expedite admittance, attendees with 

U.S. citizenship can provide identifying 

information 3 working days in advance 

by contacting Peter Meister via e-mail at 

peter.g.meister@nasa.gov or by 

telephone at (202) 358–1557. 

Dated: September 24, 2010. 

P. Diane Rausch, 

Advisory Committee Management Officer, 

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24485 Filed 9–29–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7510–13–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2008–0497] 

NRC Enforcement Policy Revision 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Policy statement. 

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC or Commission) is 

publishing a major revision to its 

Enforcement Policy (Enforcement Policy 

or Policy) to clarify the use of terms and 

update the Policy, removing outdated 

information and adding information 

addressing enforcement issues in areas 

that are not currently directly addressed 

in the Policy. 

DATES: This revision is effective on 

September 30, 2010. The NRC intends to 

solicit comments on this revised Policy 

approximately 18 months after the 

effective date. 

ADDRESSES: 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 NRC’s 

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

301–415–4737, or by e-mail to 

pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

The NRC maintains the Enforcement 

Policy on its Web site at http:// 

www.nrc.gov; select Public Meetings 

and Involvement, then Enforcement, 

and then Enforcement Policy. The 

Enforcement Policy is also accessible 

via ADAMS accession number 

ML093480037. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Doug Starkey, Office of Enforcement, 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555; 

Doug.Starkey@nrc.gov, 301–415–3456. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On January 25, 2007 (72 FR 3429), the 

NRC published a notice announcing that 

the NRC was undertaking a major 

revision of its Enforcement Policy. On 

September 15, 2008 (73 FR 53286), the 

NRC published a notice of availability of 

draft and request for comments on its 

proposed revised Policy. A corrected 

proposed revised Policy was published 

(73 FR 61442) on October 16, 2008. The 

public comment period for the revised 

Policy ended on November 14, 2008. On 

June 8, 2009 (74 FR 27191), the NRC 

published a notice of availability and 

request for comments on additional 

proposed revisions to Section 6.0, 

Supplements—Violation Examples, of 

the proposed revised Policy. The June 8, 

2009, Notice of Availability and request 

for comments applied only to additional 

proposed revisions to Section 6.0 of the 

proposed revised Policy. The public 

comment period for the proposed 

revised Supplements ended on July 8, 

2009. 

As discussed in the Supplementary 

Information of the September 15, 2008 

(73 FR 53286) document, the NRC, in 

developing the revised Policy, in many 

instances proposed to reword, delete, or 

move (i.e., move to the NRC 

Enforcement Manual, an NRC staff 

guidance document) some of the 

information in the current Policy. In 

addition, the NRC had also planned to 

add detailed violation examples to the 

Enforcement Manual to serve as further 

guidance to NRC inspectors. However, 

based on public comments received in 

response to the September and October 

2008 publications of the proposed 

revised Enforcement Policy, the NRC 

reconsidered its original plan to have 

abbreviated violation examples in the 

revised Policy and detailed violation 

examples in the Enforcement Manual. 

The NRC will continue its past practice 

of providing violation examples in the 

Enforcement Policy. These revised 

violation examples cover a broad range 

of circumstances in each of the four 

severity levels in each of 14 activity 

areas. Also, much of the material that 

the NRC had originally planned to 

remove from the revised Policy was 

subsequently retained based in part on 

comments received during the 2008 and 

2009 public comment periods. 

A summary of the comments and the 

NRC’s responses associated with the 

2008 and 2009 Notices are available at 

the NRC’s Electronic Reading Room at 

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 

adams.html (ADAMS Accession 

Numbers ML091830260 and 

ML092650309, respectively). 

Summary of Major Revisions to the 

Enforcement Policy 

1. Revisions to Table of Base Civil 

Penalties 

Regulatory requirements have varying 

degrees of safety, security, or 

environmental significance. For that 

reason, the NRC imposes various base 

civil penalties depending on the specific 

circumstances. Section 8.0, Tables A 

and B, of the revised Enforcement 

Policy set forth the base civil penalties 

for various reactor, fuel cycle, material, 

and vendor programs. The NRC uses a 

graded approach in assessing civil 

penalties based on the severity level of 

the violation and on the class of 

licensee, vendor, or other person. Base 

civil penalties generally take into 

account the significance of a violation as 

the primary consideration, whereas the 

licensee’s ability to pay is a secondary 

consideration. The NRC reviews each 

proposed civil penalty on its own merits 

and, after considering all relevant 

circumstances, may adjust the base civil 

penalties in Table A for Severity Level 

I, II, and III violations as reflected in 

Table B of the Enforcement Policy (i.e., 

100 percent for Severity Level I 

violations, 80 percent for Severity Level 

II violations, and 50 percent for Severity 

Level III violations). However, in no 

instance would a civil penalty for any 

one violation exceed the current 

statutory limit, which is presently 

capped at $140,000 per day per 

violation. In consideration of the above, 

the following revisions have been made 

to the Table of Base Civil Penalties: 

a. Geologic Repository for Spent Fuel 

and/or High-Level Waste Repository 

The Table of Base Civil Penalties in 

the current Enforcement Policy has no 

provisions that address a geologic 

repository. Therefore, the NRC is 

revising the civil penalty table in the 

revised Policy to include geologic 

repositories to ensure that, if the need 

arises, the NRC has the appropriate tools 

to take enforcement actions. 

Based on the potential nuclear 

material inventory involved at a 

geologic repository and the 

corresponding safety consequences that 

could arise at the site (specifically to 

employees), the NRC determined that 

the statutorily allowed maximum base 

civil penalty for a Severity Level I 

violation is appropriate. In determining 

the base civil penalty that should be 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6

60486 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 189 / Thursday, September 30, 2010 / Notices 

applied to a geologic repository, the 

NRC also considered that the licensing 

criteria used in developing 10 CFR Part 

60, ‘‘Disposal of High-Level Radioactive 

Wastes in Geologic Repositories,’’ and 

10 CFR Part 63, ‘‘Disposal of High-Level 

Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic 

Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada,’’ 

were comparable to the criteria applied 

to reactors and spent fuel facilities. The 

NRC has included this information in 

Table A of the revised Policy under the 

generic heading ‘‘High-Level Waste 

Repository’’ to address the possibility of 

any future engineered underground 

disposal facilities used for the storage of 

HLW. 

b. Uranium Enrichment Facilities 

The current Enforcement Policy only 

provides a base civil penalty for gaseous 

diffusion plants (GDPs) and does not 

address other enrichment facilities such 

as gas centrifuge or laser enrichment 

facilities. The NRC has issued licenses 

for two gas centrifuge uranium 

enrichment facilities with enrichment 

levels of up to 5 weight percent 

uranium-235 (U–235) and 10 weight 

percent U–235 and licensed a pilot laser 

enrichment facility. Currently, NRC is 

performing the licensing review for a 

third uranium enrichment facility with 

an enrichment level of 5 weight percent 

uranium-235. Therefore, the NRC 

believes that it is appropriate to provide 

a base civil penalty for these types of 

facilities at this time. 

In developing a base civil penalty for 

uranium enrichment facilities, the staff 

compared the radiological, chemical 

hazards of licensed materials, criticality 

and security hazards of these facilities 

with both gaseous diffusion plants 

(GDPs) and Category III fuel fabricators 

and, through an overall comparison, 

provided an appropriate base civil 

penalty. Both enrichment facilities and 

Category III fuel fabricators have 

Category III special nuclear material 

(i.e., these facilities are limited to 

enrichments of less than 20 percent of 

U–235 (special nuclear material of low 

strategic significance)). In addition, the 

radiological and chemical risks of gas 

centrifuge uranium enrichment facilities 

are considered very similar to Category 

III fuel fabricators. Therefore, the 

necessary physical protection and 

material control and accounting 

requirement (based on the category of 

facility) for uranium enrichment 

facilities are similar to those required 

for Category III fuel fabricators. For 

these reasons, the staff believes that the 

base civil penalty for Severity Level I 

violations at uranium enrichment 

facilities in Table A should be 

established at $35,000, the same as the 

amount already established for Category 

III fuel fabricators. For these reasons, the 

staff believes that the base civil penalty 

for Severity Level I violations at 

uranium enrichment facilities in Table 

A should be established at $35,000, the 

same as the amount already established 

for Category III fuel fabricators. 

c. Uranium Conversion Facilities 

The staff proposes to increase the base 

civil penalty for enforcement activities 

associated with uranium conversion 

facilities to $70,000 from the current 

amount of $14,000. Presently, the only 

operating uranium conversion plant in 

the United States is the Honeywell 

facility located in Metropolis, IL. 

Currently, uranium conversion 

facilities are in the same base civil 

penalty category as test reactors and 

industrial radiographers with a base 

civil penalty amount of $14,000. The 

staff compared the radiological, 

chemical hazards of licensed materials, 

criticality hazards of a conversion 

facility to similar hazards at GDPs and 

Category III fuel fabricators and 

concluded that the radiological and 

chemical hazards at uranium conversion 

facilities are similar in comparison to 

those of GDPs. However, the criticality 

risk present at a GDP and Category III 

fuel fabricators is not a major risk factor 

at a uranium conversion facility. 

The staff also considered the security 

implications associated with the 

operation of uranium conversion 

facilities as compared to the operation 

of GDPs and to Category III fuel 

fabricators. That comparison indicates 

that the security and safeguards 

measures necessary at a uranium 

conversion facility are similar to or less 

than those of Category III fuel fabricators 

and GDPs. However, because of the 

large number of potential chemical 

hazards associated with licensed 

materials and certain radiological 

hazards, protection against potential 

criminal activities is required to protect 

worker and public health and safety. 

In comparison, the overall 

radiological hazards and chemical 

hazards associated with licensed 

materials for uranium conversion 

facilities are much more significant than 

those of test reactors and industrial 

radiographers and Category III fuel 

fabricators but less than those of GDPs. 

For these reasons, the staff believes that 

the base civil penalty for violations at 

uranium conversion facilities in Table A 

should be established at $70,000, which 

is the same amount established for fuel 

fabricators authorized to possess 

Category I or II quantities of special 

nuclear material. 

2. Other Major Revisions to the 

Enforcement Policy 

a. Interim Enforcement Policy Regarding 

the Use of Alternative Dispute 

Resolution 

The Interim Enforcement Policy on 

the Use of Alternative Dispute 

Resolution (ADR) was established to set 

forth an interim Policy that the NRC 

would follow while undertaking a pilot 

program to test the use of ADR. Because 

the ADR pilot program has been 

successfully completed and the ADR 

program has since been fully 

implemented, the staff has revised the 

Policy statement on ADR to reflect this 

change. 

b. Violation Examples 

The violation examples have been 

reorganized and expanded from the 8 

activity areas contained in the current 

Enforcement Policy to 14 activity areas 

in the revised Policy. These changes 

were made for clarification and ease of 

use; in other cases, the activity areas 

reflect changes made to NRC 

regulations. For example, the NRC 

rewrote the facility construction 

violation examples to include licensees 

under 10 CFR Part 52, ‘‘Licenses, 

Certifications, and Approvals for 

Nuclear Power Plants,’’ and fuel cycle 

facilities. Fuel cycle and materials 

operations were reorganized into 

separate activity areas. New activity 

areas were added for reactor and fuel 

facility security, materials security, 

information security, and fitness for 

duty. 

c. Addition of a Glossary 

A Glossary, containing many of the 

terms commonly used throughout the 

NRC enforcement process, has been 

added to the revised Policy. 

d. Terminology Change 

The revised Enforcement Policy 

includes a change to previous Policy 

Statement terminology that was 

published in the Federal Register on 

December 18, 2000 (65 FR 79139). 

Specifically, the NRC has replaced the 

term ‘‘sealed source or device’’ with the 

term ‘‘regulated material’’ both in the 

body of the revised Policy, Section 

2.3.4, and in the Table of Base Civil 

Penalties, Table A, category f. The term 

‘‘sealed’’ was deleted from this section 

since the same enforcement approach is 

used for both sealed and unsealed 

sources. The term ‘‘regulated material’’ 

captures all present and future NRC 

regulated material. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 189 / Thursday, September 30, 2010 / Notices 60487 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

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. 

Congressional Review Act 

In accordance with the Congressional 

Review 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. 

Dated at Rockville, MD, this 24th day of 

September 2010. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Annette L. Vietti-Cook, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24561 Filed 9–29–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–62981; File No. SR–CBOE– 

2010–086] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

Chicago Board Options Exchange, 

Incorporated; Notice of Filing and 

Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed 

Rule Change To Modify the Fees 

Schedule for the CBOE Stock 

Exchange 

September 23, 2010. 

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 

‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2

notice is hereby given that on 

September 14, 2010, the Chicago Board 

Options Exchange, Incorporated (the 

‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘CBOE’’) filed with the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(the ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 

change as described in Items I, II, and 

III below, which Items have been 

prepared by the Exchange. The 

Commission is publishing this notice to 

solicit comments on the proposed rule 

change from interested persons. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to modify the 

Fees Schedule for its CBOE Stock 

Exchange (‘‘CBSX’’). The text of the 

proposed rule change is available on the 

Exchange’s Web site (http:// 

www.cboe.org/legal), at the Exchange’s 

principal office, and at the 

Commission’s Public Reference Room. 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

In its filing with the Commission, the 

self-regulatory organization included 

statements concerning the purpose of 

and basis for the proposed rule change 

and discussed any comments it received 

on the proposed rule change. The text 

of those statements may be examined at 

the places specified in Item IV below. 

The Exchange has prepared summaries, 

set forth in sections A, B, and C below, 

of the most significant parts of such 

statements. 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and the 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

CBSX proposes to adopt the Trading 

Permit Holder Application Fees that 

apply to CBOE. The purpose of the 

proposed rule change is to offset some 

of the expenses incurred by the 

Exchange in connection with CBSX 

Trading Permit Holder applicants and 

existing CBSX Trading Permit Holders. 

A description of the application fees is 

provided below. 

The Individual Applicant Fee 

(Trading Permit Holder) is payable by a 

new individual applicant for Trading 

Permit Holder status on the Exchange. 

The applicant’s Fingerprint Processing 

Fee is included as part of this fee. The 

New Trading Permit Holder Orientation 

& Exam Fee is payable by each applicant 

seeking Trading Permit Holder status, 

which requires a trading function. 

The TPH Organization Application 

Fee (Corporation/Partnership/LLC) is 

payable by an applicant that desires to 

be a TPH organization on the Exchange. 

This fee encompasses the TPH 

Organization Application and related 

documentation, one Responsible 

Person’s Orientation & Exam Fee and 

Fingerprint Fee associated with the TPH 

Organization Application, and 

Associated Person(s) Fees that are part 

of this TPH Organization Application. 

The TPH Organization Renewal Fee 

(Corporation/Partnership/LLC) is 

payable by a former trading firm 

member or TPH organization that 

reapplies for Trading Permit Holder 

status within nine months of its Trading 

Permit Status termination date and 

becomes an effective TPH organization 

within one year of its Trading Permit 

Status termination date. This fee 

encompasses the TPH Organization 

Application and related documentation 

and one Responsible Person who is a 

former Responsible Person who 

reapplies within nine months of his 

termination date and becomes an 

effective Responsible Person within one 

year of his termination date. 

The Associated Person Fee is payable 

for the addition of certain individuals 

on a TPH organization’s Form BD. This 

fee includes the related Fingerprint 

Processing Fee. This fee is payable by 

each executive officer, general partner, 

or LLC Manager. Additionally, this fee 

is payable by each principal shareholder 

that has 5% or more direct ownership 

of a class of a voting security of a TPH 

organization corporation, limited 

partner who has the right to receive 

upon dissolution, or has contributed, 

5% or more of the partnership’s capital, 

and LLC member who has the right to 

receive upon dissolution, or has 

contributed, 5% or more of the LLC’s 

capital. This fee is also payable by any 

person classified as a ‘‘Control Person’’ 

of the TPH organization. 

The Fingerprint Processing Fee will 

be assessed for employees of Trading 

Permit Holders and any other individual 

requesting the Exchange to process a 

fingerprint, electronically or otherwise, 

excluding fingerprint requirements for 

Individual Applicants, individuals 

applying for Renewal/Change of Status, 

and Associated Persons. 

The Renewal/Change of Status Fee is 

payable by a former individual Trading 

Permit Holder who reapplies for 

Trading Permit Holder status within 

nine months of his Trading Permit 

Holder status termination date and 

becomes an effective Trading Permit 

Holder within one year of his Trading 

Permit Holder status termination date. A 

former individual Trading Permit 

Holder or former individual member 

who reapplies for Trading Permit 

Holder status within nine months of 

termination from Trading Permit Holder 

status will be assessed the Renewal/ 

Change of Status fee at the time of 

submission of the application. If that 

person becomes an effective Trading 

Permit Holder more than one year after 

his Trading Permit Holder status 

termination date, the person will then 

be charged an additional fee equal to the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6