[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 53 (Thursday, March 19, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13372-13374]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-7114]


 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 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.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 53 / Thursday, March 19, 1998 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 13372]]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 72

RIN 3150-AF84


Minor Revision of Design Basis Accident Dose Limits for 
Independent Spent Fuel Storage and Monitored Retrievable Storage 
Installations

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) proposes to amend its 
regulations governing the dose limits and the dose calculational 
methodology used in design basis accident analyses for Independent 
Spent Fuel Storage Installations (ISFSI) and Monitored Retrievable 
Storage Installations (MRS). This proposed rule would amend ISFSI and 
MRS design basis accident dose limits to conform to the dose 
calculational methodology currently used in the regulations that 
specify standards for protection against radiation and make a minor 
change to match the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 
regulations. This action is needed to make limits for design basis 
accidents at ISFSI and MRS installations consistent with dose 
methodology specified in the regulations, and to afford licensees the 
flexibility provided by dose methodology when performing design basis 
accident analyses.

DATES: The comment period expires May 4, 1998. Comments received after 
this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the 
Commission is able to assure consideration only for comments received 
on or before this date.

ADDRESSES: Mail written comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Attention: Rulemakings and 
Adjudications Staff. Comments may be delivered to One White Flint 
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, between 7:30 am and 
4:15 pm on Federal workdays.
    You may also provide comments via the NRC's interactive rulemaking 
web site through the NRC home page (http://www.nrc.gov). This site 
provides the availability to upload comments as files (any format) if 
your web browser supports that function. For information about the 
interactive rulemaking site, contact Ms. Carol Gallagher, (301) 415-
6215; e-mail [email protected].
    Certain documents related to this rulemaking, including comments 
received, may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L 
Street NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC. These same documents also may 
be viewed and downloaded electronically via the interactive rulemaking 
website established by NRC for this rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Naiem S. Tanious, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6103; e-mail: 
INTERNET:[email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Paragraph (b) of section 72.106 establishes the dose limit for a 
design basis accident at an independent spent fuel storage installation 
(ISFSI) or a monitored retrieval storage installation (MRS). The dose 
limit in Sec. 72.106(b) is based on the dose calculational methodology 
contained in International Commission on Radiological Protection 
Publication Number 2 (ICRP-2, 1959). The ICRP-2 methodology was 
subsequently revised in ICRP Publication Number 26 (ICRP-26, 1977), and 
was incorporated into 10 CFR Part 20 when Part 20 was revised in 1991.
    The calculational methodology in the revised Part 20 no longer 
quantifies dose in terms of whole body dose and individual organ dose. 
Instead, the dose is quantified as a risk equivalent dose. In this 
manner, the doses absorbed by the whole body and the individual organs 
can be summed to a single quantity relating to risk.
    Under the Part 20 calculational methodology, deep-dose equivalent 
(Hd), which applies to the external whole-body exposure, is 
defined at 10 CFR 20.1003 as the dose equivalent at a tissue depth of 1 
cm (1000 mg/cm2). The committed dose equivalent (CDE) 
(HT,50) is defined at Sec. 20.1003 to mean the dose 
equivalent to organs or tissues of reference (T) that will be received 
from an intake of radioactive material by an individual during the 50-
year period following the intake. The committed effective dose 
equivalent (CEDE) (HE,50) is defined at Sec. 20.1003 as the 
sum of the products of the weighting factors applicable to each of the 
body organs or tissues that are irradiated and the committed dose 
equivalent to these organs or tissues (HE,50 = 
wTHT,50). The total effective dose 
equivalent (TEDE) is the sum of the deep-dose equivalent (for external 
exposure) and the committed effective dose equivalent (for internal 
exposures).
    The ICRP-26 methodology was not incorporated into Part 72 at the 
time Part 20 was revised. Part 72 contains two regulations that specify 
dose limits: Sec. 72.104, which sets dose limits during normal 
operations and anticipated occurrences; and Sec. 72.106, which sets 
dose limits for design basis accidents.
    The main objective of this proposed rule is to revise 
Sec. 72.106(b) to incorporate the methodology in 10 CFR Part 20. A 
second objective of the rule is to make a minor word change to 
Sec. 72.104(a) to match the language used by EPA in 40 CFR 191.03(a).

Discussion

    At present, Sec. 72.106(b), Controlled area of an ISFSI or MRS 
provides:

    (b) Any individual located on or beyond the nearest boundary of 
the controlled area shall not receive a dose greater than 5 rem to 
the whole body or any organ from any design basis accident. The 
minimum distance from the spent fuel or high-level radioactive waste 
handling and storage facilities to the nearest boundary of the 
controlled area shall be at least 100 meters.

    This 0.05 Sv (5 rem) limit to the whole body or any organ would be 
amended in the proposed rule to conform with the Part 20 dose 
calculational methodology. The amended limit would become the more 
limiting of the TEDE of 0.05 Sv (5 rem), or the sum of the deep dose 
equivalent and the committed dose equivalent to any individual organ or 
tissue (other than the lens of the eye) of 0.5 Sv (50 rem). The 
amendment would also include a separate dose limit for the lens of the 
eye of 0.15 Sv (15 rem); and for the skin or any extremity, a shallow 
dose equivalent of 0.5 Sv (50 rem). The use of separate dose limits for 
the eye,

[[Page 13373]]

skin, and extremities would conform with the dose calculational 
methodology used in Part 20 and would ensure that no observable effects 
(e.g., induction of cataracts in the lens of the eye) would occur as a 
result of any accidental radiation exposure.
    This action would make Sec. 72.106 consistent with Part 20 dose 
calculational methodology. This action would also provide Part 72 
licensees flexibility when performing design basis accident analyses 
because they would be able to use organ weighting factors to calculate 
the dose to the maximally exposed organ. In addition, Part 72 licensees 
would no longer need to comply with one calculational methodology for 
their radiation protection programs (i.e., the revised Part 20 
methodology) and another methodology for their design basis accident 
analyses.
    This proposed rule does not revise Sec. 72.104(a) to incorporate 
ICRP-26 methodology because doing so would render this regulation 
incompatible with the Environmental Protection Agency's regulation at 
40 CFR 191.03(a) which is applicable to ISFSI and MRS licensees. 
However, 40 CFR 191.03(a) phrases the standard in terms of dose limits 
to the whole body and any critical organ; whereas, Sec. 72.104(a) 
phrases the standard in terms of dose limits to the whole body and any 
organ. The NRC staff proposes to make Sec. 72.104(a) more consistent 
with 40 CFR 191.03(a) by inserting the word critical before the word 
organ. The critical organ (listed in Table 1 of ICRP-2) associated with 
an intake of radioactive material is considered to be that organ of the 
body whose damage by the radiation results in the greatest damage to 
the body.

Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion

    The NRC has determined that this proposed regulation is the type of 
action described in categorical exclusion 10 CFR 51.22(c)(2). Therefore 
neither an environmental impact statement nor an environmental 
assessment have been prepared for this proposed regulation.

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

    This proposed rule does not contain a new or amended information 
collection requirement, and therefore is not subject to requirements of 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing 
information collection requirements were approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget, approval numbers 3150-0002, 3150-0127, and 3150-
0132.

Public Protection Notification

    If an information collection does not display a currently valid OMB 
control number, the NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to, the information collection.

Regulatory Analysis

    To determine whether the amendments to 10 CFR Part 72 are 
appropriate, the NRC staff considered the following two alternatives:

1. The No-Action Alternative

    This alternative is not acceptable to the NRC for the following 
reasons. Section 72.106(b) would continue to be inconsistent with Part 
20. Part 72 licensees would demonstrate compliance with the dose limits 
in Part 20 using the 1977 dose calculational methodology of ICRP-26 for 
their radiation protection programs as required by Secs. 72.24(e) and 
72.44(d). However, Part 72 licensees would continue to use the 1959 
dose calculational methodology of ICRP-2 in addressing radiation dose 
from a design basis accident as required in Sec. 72.106(b). Thus, 
licensees would not be able to take advantage of the flexibility 
provided by the dose calculational methodology used in Part 20 when 
performing design basis accident analyses. Therefore, this alternative 
was not pursued.

2. Amendments of 10 CFR Part 72

    In this option, the NRC staff considered preparing a proposed rule 
to amend the dose limiting design objective in Sec. 72.106(b) to 5 rem 
TEDE. This is consistent with the intent of the existing Sec. 72.106(b) 
and updates the dose calculational methodology to that used for 
demonstration of compliance with Part 20. Updating the dose 
calculational methodology also would increase the organ dose limit, 
CDE, from 5 rem to 50 rem; allow for the use of risk-based weighting 
factors for each organ or tissue to determine the 50 year CEDE; and 
provide licensees with additional flexibility in conducting and 
submitting design basis accident analyses to demonstrate compliance 
with the requirements in Sec. 72.106(b).
    In addition to the increased flexibility provided, licensees would 
no longer need to comply with one calculational methodology for 
radiation protection programs (i.e., the revised Part 20 methodology) 
and another methodology for design basis accident analyses.
    Moreover, design basis accident analyses for ISFSIs and MRS 
installations would use the same dose calculational methodology as 
design basis accident analyses for a geologic repository operations 
area (10 CFR 60.136(b)). This alternative was chosen by the NRC.
    This constitutes the regulatory analysis for this proposed rule. As 
discussed above, this rule does not impose any new requirements. 
Therefore, there will be no additional cost burden to Part 72 licensees 
or the Federal Government.

Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 
605(b), the Commission certifies that this rule, if adopted, will not 
have a significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small 
entities. The proposed rule would provide licensees with additional 
flexibility in conducting and submitting design basis accident analyses 
to demonstrate compliance with the requirements in Sec. 72.106(b). In 
addition, the licensees would no longer need to comply with one 
calculational methodology for their radiation protection programs 
(i.e., the revised Part 20 methodology) and another methodology for 
their design basis accident analyses.
    The proposed rule, if adopted, would not impose any additional 
obligations on entities that may fall within the definition of ``small 
entities'' as set forth in Section 601(3) of the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act; or within the definition of ``small business'' as found in Section 
3 of the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632; or within the size 
standards adopted by the NRC on April 11, 1995 (60 FR 18344).

Backfit Analysis

    The NRC has determined that the backfit rule, 10 CFR 72.62, does 
not apply to this proposed rule, and a backfit analysis is not 
required, because these amendments do not involve any provisions that 
would impose backfits as defined in 10 CFR 72.62(a). The rule does not 
constitute a backfit under 10 CFR 72.62, because it does not require a 
change to existing structures, systems, components, procedures, or 
organization. Further, the rule would not result in a more stringent 
outcome than the existing rule, and therefore current licensees who are 
in compliance with the existing rule would not be required to make any 
changes or take any action. New applicants and license renewal 
applications would be able to take advantage of some additional 
flexibility in the dose calculations that is afforded by the rule.

Agreement State Implementation Issues

    Under the ``Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility of

[[Page 13374]]

Agreement State Programs'' approved by the Commission on June 30, 1997 
(62 FR 46517), this rule is classified as compatibility Category 
``NRC.'' This regulation addresses areas of exclusive NRC authority. 
However, a State may adopt these provisions for the purposes of clarity 
and communication, as long as the State does not adopt regulations or 
program elements that would cause the State to regulate this area.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 72

    Criminal penalties, Manpower training programs, Nuclear materials, 
Occupational safety and health, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Security measures, Spent fuel.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of 
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization 
Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 553; the Commission is proposing 
to adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR Part 72.

PART 72--LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF 
SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE

    1. The authority citation for Part 72 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 51, 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 161, 182, 183, 
184, 186, 187, 189, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 934, 935, 948, 953, 
954, 955, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 
2071, 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233, 
2234, 2236, 2237, 2238, 2282); sec. 274, Pub. L. 86-373, 73 Stat. 
688, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2021); sec. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 
Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); 
Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 as amended by Pub. L. 102-
486, sec. 7902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec. 102, Pub. L. 
91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332); secs. 131, 132, 133, 135, 
137, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2229, 2230, 2232, 2241, sec. 148, 
Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10151, 10152, 10153, 
10155, 10157, 10161, 10168).
    Section 72.44(g) also issued under secs. 142(b) and 148(c), (d), 
Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-232, 1330-236 (42 U.S.C. 10162(b), 
10168(c), (d)). Section 72.46 also issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 
955 (42 U.S.C. 2239); sec. 134, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2230 (42 
U.S.C. 10154). Section 72.96(d) also issued under sec. 145(g), Pub. 
L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10165(g)). Subpart J also 
issued under secs. 2(2), 2(15), 2(19), 117(a), 141(h), Pub. L. 97-
425, 96 Stat. 2202, 2203, 2204, 2222, 2224 (42 U.S.C. 10101, 
10137(a), 10161(h)). Subparts K and L are also issued under sec. 
133, 98 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10153) and sec. 218(a), 96 Stat. 2252 
(42 U.S.C. 10198).


Sec. 72.104  [Amended]

    2. In Sec. 72.104, the introductory text of paragraph (a) is 
revised to read as follows:


Sec. 72.104  Criteria for radioactive materials in effluents and direct 
radiation from an ISFSI or MRS.

    (a) During normal operations and anticipated occurrences, the 
annual dose equivalent to any real individual who is located beyond the 
controlled area must not exceed 25 mrem to the whole body, 75 mrem to 
the thyroid and 25 mrem to any other critical organ as a result of 
exposure to:
* * * * *
    3. In Sec. 72.106, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 72.106  Controlled area of an ISFSI or MRS.

* * * * *
    (b) Any individual located on or beyond the nearest boundary of the 
controlled area may not receive from any design basis accident the more 
limiting of a total effective dose equivalent of 0.05 Sv (5 rem), or 
the sum of the deep-dose equivalent and the committed dose equivalent 
to any individual organ or tissue (other than the lens of the eye) of 
0.5 Sv (50 rem). The eye dose equivalent shall not exceed 0.15 Sv (15 
rem) and the shallow dose equivalent to skin or to any extremity shall 
not exceed 0.5 Sv (50 rem). The minimum distance from the spent fuel or 
high-level radioactive waste handling and storage facilities to the 
nearest boundary of the controlled area must be at least 100 meters.
* * * * *
    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of March 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
L. Joseph Callan,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 98-7114 Filed 3-18-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P