10 C.F.R. § 2.802

Petition for rulemaking—requirements for filing

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Filing a petition for rulemaking. Any person may petition the Commission to issue, amend, or rescind any regulation in 10 CFR chapter I. The petition for rulemaking should be addressed to the Secretary, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, and sent by mail addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by email to Rulemaking. [email protected]; or by hand delivery to 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (Eastern time) on Federal workdays.

(b) Consultation with the NRC. A petitioner may consult with the NRC staff before and after filing a petition for rulemaking by contacting the Chief, Regulatory Analysis and Rulemaking Support Branch, Division of Rulemaking, Environmental, and Financial Support, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 1-800-368-5642.

(1) In any consultation regarding the drafting or amendment of a petition for rulemaking, the assistance that the NRC staff may provide is limited to the following:

(i) Describing the process for filing, docketing, tracking, closing, amending, withdrawing, and resolving a petition for rulemaking;

(ii) Clarifying an existing NRC regulation and the basis for the regulation; and

(iii) Assisting the petitioner to clarify a petition for rulemaking so that the Commission is able to understand the issues of concern to the petitioner.

(2) In any consultation regarding the drafting or amendment of a petition for rulemaking, in providing the assistance permitted in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the NRC staff will not draft or develop text or alternative approaches to address matters in the petition for rulemaking.

(3) In any consultation regarding a petition for rulemaking, the NRC staff will not advise a petitioner on whether a petition should be amended or withdrawn.

(i) Specify the name of the petitioner, a telephone number, a mailing address, and an email address (if available) that the NRC may use to communicate with the petitioner;

(ii) If the petitioner is an organization, provide additional identifying information (as applicable) including the petitioner's organizational or corporate status, the petitioner's State of incorporation, the petitioner's registered agent, and the name and authority of the individual who signed the petition on behalf of the organizational or corporate petitioner.

(iii) Present the specific problems or issues that the petitioner believes should be addressed through rulemaking, including any specific circumstances in which the NRC's codified requirements are incorrect, incomplete, inadequate, or unnecessarily burdensome;

(iv) Cite, enclose, or reference publicly-available technical, scientific, or other data or information supporting the petitioner's assertion of the problems or issues;

(v) Present the petitioner's proposed solution to the problems or issues raised in the petition for rulemaking (e.g., a proposed solution may include specific regulations or regulatory language to add to, amend in, or delete from 10 CFR chapter I);

(vi) Provide an analysis, discussion, or argument that explains how the petitioner's proposed solution solves the problems or issues identified by the petitioner; and

(vii) Cite, enclose, or reference any other publicly-available data or information supporting the petitioner's proposed solution; and

(viii) If required by 10 CFR 51.68 of this chapter, submit a separate document entitled “Petitioner's Environmental Report,” which contains the information specified in 10 CFR 51.45.

(2) To assist the NRC in its evaluation of the petition for rulemaking, the petitioner should clearly and concisely:

(i) Explain why the proposed rulemaking solution is within the authority of the NRC to adopt; and

(ii) Explain why rulemaking is the most favorable approach to address the problem or issue, as opposed to other NRC actions such as licensing, issuance of an order, or referral to another Federal or State agency.

(3) If the petition is signed by multiple petitioners, the petition must designate a lead petitioner who is responsible for disseminating communications received from the NRC to co-petitioners.

(d) [Reserved]

(e) Request for suspension of an adjudication involving licensing. The petitioner may request the Commission to suspend all or any part of any licensing proceeding to which the petitioner is a participant pending disposition of the petition for rulemaking.

(f) Amendment; withdrawal. If the petitioner wants to amend or withdraw a docketed petition for rulemaking, then the petitioner should include the docket number and the date that the original petition for rulemaking was submitted in a filing addressed to the Secretary, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, and sent by mail addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; or by email to Rulemaking. [email protected].

[80 FR 60526, Oct. 7, 2015, as amended at 83 FR 30287, June 28, 2018; 84 FR 65644, Nov. 29, 2019]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 15 cases, 1973–2016 · leading case: Massachusetts v. United States, 522 F.3d 115 (1st Cir. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Massachusetts v. United States, 522 F.3d 115 (1st Cir. 2008). · cites it 4× “” 10 C.F.R. § 2.802 (d). An interested governmental entity participating under 10 C.”

Honicker v. Hendrie, 465 F. Supp. 414 (M.D. Tenn. 1979). · cites it 3× “802 (1978), allow “any person” to request the institution of a proceeding to revoke the licenses of nuclear fuel cycle, licensees or to issue, amend, or rescind any regulations. Plaintiff has in fact availed herself of these administrative remedies by filing the petition for…”

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. Union v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 834 F.2d 191 (D.C. Cir. 1987). “Cir 1973), this court first noted that “petitioners retain the right to initiate rulemaking before the AEC by formally proposing the promulgation of the expanded rules they desire,” and then said in a footnote: Petitioners do have the right to petition the Commission for…”

Nat. Resources Def. Council v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n & United States of Am., 666 F.2d 595 (D.C. Cir. 1981). “10 C.F.R. § 2.802 (a) (1980) (“Any interested person may petition the Commission to issue, amend, or rescind any regulation.”

Nat. Resources Def. Council v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 823 F.3d 641 (D.C. Cir. 2016). “” 10 C.F.R. § 2.802 (e) (emphasis added). “Participant” is defined by the Commission as “an individual or organization .”

Laurence Gage v. United States Atomic Energy Comm'n & United States of Am. Commonwealth Edison Co., Intervenor, 479 F.2d 1214 (D.C. Cir. 1973). “10 C.F.R. §§ 2.802 and 2.803. 23 . It is arguable that if no adequate alternative remedies appeared and if their failure to join as “parties” to the rule-making was justifiable, petitioners could bring an action for “direct” review of the regulations.”

Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, Local 1245 v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n & United States of Am., 966 F.2d 521 (9th Cir. 1992). “See 10 C.F.R. § 2.802 . The claim regarding categories of workers was similarly general.”

Nader v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 513 F.2d 1045 (D.C. Cir. 1975). “10 C.F.R. § 2.802 (1974). . 10 C.F.R. § 2.”

Citizens for Safe Power, Inc., & Audubon Naturalist Council v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co., Intervenor, 524 F.2d 1291 (D.C. Cir. 1975). “758 or 10 CFR § 2.802 .” In connection with a discussion of NEPA issues, the Licensing Board did balance risks against benefits and specifically discussed and rejected alternates.”

New Jersey, Dep't of Env't Prot. & Energy v. Long Island Power Auth., 30 F.3d 403 (3rd Cir. 1994). · cites it 2× “15 NJDEPE could have petitioned the NRC for a new rulemaking process under 10 C.F.R. § 2.802 (a), which provides that “[a]ny interested person may petition the Commission to issue, amend or rescind any regulation.”

Consol. Rail Corp. v. Interstate Com. Comm'n, 646 F.2d 642 (D.C. Cir. 1981). “31 (1979) (DOT); 10 C.F.R. § 2.802 (1980) (NRC). See also 18 U.”

Spano v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 293 F. App'x 91 (2d Cir. 2008). · cites it 3× “Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.802 (f), if a petition is considered “incomplete, the petitioner will be notified of that determination and the respects in which the petition is deficient and will be accorded an opportunity to submit additional data.”

Show all 15 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.