[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 36 (Tuesday, February 24, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8350-8352]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-3890]


 ========================================================================
 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. 69, No. 36 / Tuesday, February 24, 2004 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 8350]]



NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Parts 19, 20, and 50


Collection, Reporting, or Posting of Information; Availability of 
Draft Rule Language

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Availability of draft rule language.

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

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is making available 
the draft wording of possible changes to its regulations. The changes 
under consideration would clarify or revise the regulations to reduce 
unnecessary regulatory burden associated with the collecting, 
reporting, and posting of information. The NRC staff is making the 
draft rule language available to inform stakeholders of the NRC staff's 
consideration of possible changes to its regulations, and to solicit 
comments on the staff's direction and draft language. The draft wording 
and several specific requests for feedback are available on the NRC's 
public Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.

DATES: Submit comments by April 9, 2004. Comments received after this 
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission 
is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before 
this date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods. 
Personal information will not be removed from your comments:
    Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications 
Staff.
    E-mail comments to: [email protected]. If you do not receive a reply e-
mail confirming that we have received your comments, contact us 
directly at (301) 415-1966. You may also submit comments via the NRC's 
rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. Address questions 
about our rulemaking Web site to Carol Gallagher at (301) 415-5905; e-
mail: [email protected]. Comments can also be submitted via the Federal 
eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov.
    Hand deliver comments to 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 
20852, between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm on Federal workdays (Telephone: 
(301) 415-1966).
    Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
(301) 415-1101.
    Publicly available documents related to this rulemaking may be 
viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's 
Public Document Room (PDR), O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The PDR reproduction contractor 
will copy documents for a fee. Selected documents, including comments, 
may be viewed and downloaded electronically via the NRC rulemaking Web 
site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.
    Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after 
November 1, 1999, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic 
Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this 
site, the public can gain entry into the NRC's Agencywide Documents 
Access and Management System (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 Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at (800) 
397-4209, (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William D. Reckley, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; 
telephone: (301) 415-1323; e-mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In SECY-02-0081, ``Staff Activities Related to the NRC Goal of 
Reducing Unnecessary Regulatory Burden on Power Reactor Licensees,'' 
dated May 13, 2002 (ADAMS Accession No. ML020420137), the NRC staff 
described various interactions with stakeholders regarding ways to 
reduce unnecessary regulatory burden. By memorandum dated June 25, 2002 
(ADAMS Accession No. ML021760768), the Commission directed the staff to 
proceed with its evaluation of possible rule changes. In developing the 
initiative described in SECY-02-0081, the NRC staff solicited 
observations and suggestions by placing a notice in the Federal 
Register (66 FR 22134; May 3, 2001) and sponsoring a workshop on May 
31, 2001. In a letter dated July 2, 2001 (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML011870432), the Nuclear Energy Institute provided a list of 
suggestions from its members for possible changes to several 
regulations that could reduce unnecessary regulatory burden, including 
certain reporting and labeling requirements in 10 CFR parts 19 and 20. 
The NRC staff has evaluated the suggestions from industry and other 
stakeholders and selected 10 CFR 19.13, ``Notifications and reports to 
individuals,'' 10 CFR 20.2104, ``Determination of prior occupational 
dose,'' and container labeling requirements as being candidates for 
further consideration. The NRC staff is also considering changes to 10 
CFR 20.1003 to clarify the use of the effective dose equivalent in 
place of the deep dose equivalent in dose assessments (see Regulatory 
Issue Summary 2003-04, ``Use of the Effective Dose Equivalent in Place 
of the Deep Dose Equivalent in Dose Assessments,'' dated February 13, 
2003; ADAMS Accession No. ML030370122). The NRC staff's preliminary 
assessment is that these regulations result in regulatory burdens on 
licensees beyond what is needed to protect workers and the public 
against radiation.

Discussion

    The rulemaking under consideration would revise several 
administrative requirements associated with the collection, reporting, 
and posting of information. The draft wording for the changes being 
considered by the NRC staff may be viewed on the NRC's public Web site 
at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.
    The first change being considered would affect 10 CFR 19.13 and 
related regulations in 10 CFR Part 20. Prior to 1992, 10 CFR 19.13(b) 
required licensees to provide each worker annually the worker's 
occupational dose ``[a]t the request of any worker.'' Thereafter, the 
Commission amended its regulations (58 FR 23360; May 21, 1991) to 
conform to 1987 Presidential guidance for Federal agencies on

[[Page 8351]]

occupational radiation protection (52 FR 2822; January 27, 1987). NRC 
licensees are currently required to advise each worker annually of the 
worker's received dose as shown in records maintained by the licensee 
pursuant to 10 CFR 20.2106, ``Records of individual monitoring 
results.'' Licensees are required by 10 CFR 20.2106 to maintain records 
of doses received by all individuals for whom monitoring was required 
pursuant to 10 CFR 20.1502, ``Conditions requiring individual 
monitoring of external and internal occupational dose.'' Under 10 CFR 
20.1502, licensees are required to monitor occupational radiation 
exposure for workers likely to receive a dose in excess of 10 percent 
of the limits specified in 10 CFR 20.1201, ``Occupational dose limits 
for adults,'' or for workers who enter a high or very high radiation 
area. Licensees make this determination prospectively with a measure of 
conservatism, so that many of the workers monitored by licensees 
actually receive no measurable exposure or only a small fraction of the 
doses specified in 10 CFR 20.1502. As a result, the recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements have applied to a large number of workers, 
thereby increasing administrative costs to licensees. The NRC staff is 
considering a change to the reporting requirement so that licensees 
would continue the current reporting for workers who receive more than 
2 percent of the limits specified in 10 CFR 20.1201 (this would 
generally translate to exceeding a total effective dose equivalent 
(TEDE) of 100 millirem in one year), but would not be required to 
provide annual dose reports to workers who receive less than 2 percent 
of those limits. Licensees would continue to provide all workers access 
to information from their dose records and would provide any worker 
with a copy of their annual dose report upon request. The staff's 
initial criteria of 100 millirem was selected because it corresponds to 
the annual dose limit in 10 CFR 20.1301, ``Dose limits for individual 
members of the public,'' and is also the threshold for requiring 
employee training pursuant to 10 CFR 19.12, ``Instruction to workers.''
    In addition to other comments or suggestions regarding this 
possible change to NRC regulations, the NRC staff requests that 
stakeholders responding to this solicitation address the following 
questions:
    (1) Does the language being considered appropriately balance the 
intent of the Federal government's guidance and regulations related to 
occupational exposure in terms of avoiding burdensome requirements for 
doses that are insignificant while adequately providing individuals 
with information about their occupational exposures?
    (2) Has the staff suggested appropriate criteria for when licensees 
are required to provide a report to workers (i.e., is ``exceeds 2 
percent of the dose limits in 10 CFR 20.1201(a) or the worker makes a 
request for a report of their dose'' a reasonable threshold)?
    (3) Would the change, if made based on the language being 
considered, result in cost savings to licensees? If so, please provide 
an estimate of the savings.
    (4) Should licensees be required to notify workers periodically of 
their right to request their dose report (e.g., when the worker is 
issued a personal dosimeter or annually)?
    (5) Does the possible consolidation of required reports to 
individuals into 10 CFR 20.2205 and the deletion of 10 CFR 19.13(d) 
clarify the regulations and would there be a significant cost 
associated with implementing this possible change?
    The second change under consideration would revise 10 CFR 20.1905, 
``Exemptions to labeling requirements,'' or alternatively add a new 
regulation to 10 CFR part 50 which would define an exemption from 10 
CFR 20.1904 for certain containers within facilities with licenses 
issued under parts 50 or 52. The exempted containers would need to 
satisfy conditions such as being located within an area posted in 
accordance with 10 CFR 20.1902, being conspicuously marked, and being 
accessible only to trained individuals.
    In addition to other comments or suggestions regarding this 
possible change to NRC regulations, the NRC staff requests that 
stakeholders responding to this solicitation address the following 
questions:
    (1) Does the language being considered provide adequate controls 
for radioactive materials stored within facilities licensed under 10 
CFR part 50?
    (2) Would the change, if made based on the language being 
considered, result in cost savings to part 50 licensees? If so, please 
provide an estimate of the savings.
    (3) Are there categories of materials licensees to which this 
exemption might be applied, where adequate controls for radioactive 
materials stored within these facilities could be provided by the 
conditions being considered for the exemption? If so, what would be the 
cost savings to these licensees?
    The third change under consideration involves 10 CFR 20.2104. This 
possible change would revise the requirement in 10 CFR 20.2104(a)(2) 
for licensees to attempt to obtain the records of cumulative 
occupational radiation dose for each worker requiring monitoring 
pursuant to 10 CFR 20.1502. The information on occupational doses in 
years other than the current year is not used except in performing 
evaluations required by 10 CFR 20.1206, ``Planned special exposures.'' 
Requirements related to obtaining information, performing evaluations, 
maintaining records, and making reports to individuals and the NRC 
about planned special exposures are codified in 10 CFR 20.1206 and 
20.2104(b). The NRC staff is considering changing 10 CFR 20.2104 to 
require that licensees obtain the records of cumulative occupational 
radiation dose only for those individuals being authorized to receive a 
planned special exposure.
    In addition to other comments or suggestions regarding this 
possible change to NRC regulations, the NRC staff requests that 
stakeholders responding to this solicitation address the following 
questions:
    (1) Would the change, if made based on the language being 
considered, ensure adequate protection of radiation workers?
    (2) Would the change, if made based on the language being 
considered, result in cost savings to licensees? If so, please provide 
an estimate of the savings.
    The fourth change under consideration by the NRC staff is to revise 
the definition of TEDE in 10 CFR 20.1003 to be more consistent with the 
technical basis for the requirements in Part 20 (e.g., the 
recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological 
Protection in its Publication 30, a copy of which may be purchased 
through Elsevier at http://www.elsevier.nl/locate/series/icrp). The 
change under consideration resolves a source of possible confusion in 
the current regulation by clarifying that the TEDE is the sum of the 
effective dose equivalent (for external exposures) and the committed 
effective dose equivalent (for internal exposures). If a licensee is 
not using a method approved by the NRC for determining effective dose 
equivalent with radiation measuring devices, the deep dose equivalent, 
determined for the highest exposed part of the whole body, will be 
substituted for the effective dose equivalent (for external exposures). 
Regulatory Issue Summary 2003-04 provides the regulatory basis, and 
approved methods, for using the effective dose equivalent from external 
exposures in complying with the regulatory requirements, and limits, on 
TEDE.
    In addition to other comments or suggestions regarding this 
possible

[[Page 8352]]

change to NRC regulations, the NRC staff requests that stakeholders 
responding to this solicitation address the following questions:
    (1) Is the proposed definition of TEDE consistent with the 
technical basis of the current regulations in 10 CFR part 20 (e.g., 
recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological 
Protections in its Publications 26 and 30)?
    (2) Does the language clarify the existing requirements as 
explained in Regulatory Issue Summary 2003-04?
    (3) Should the rule address approvals by Agreement States of 
dosimetry methods for using effective dose equivalent when external 
exposure is determined by measurement? If so, how should approval by 
one jurisdiction be considered by other jurisdictions to ensure 
consistent results and to minimize state-by-state variations in 
approach for licensees operating in multiple jurisdictions?
    The draft rule language is preliminary and may be incomplete in one 
or more respects. The NRC staff is releasing the draft rule language to 
inform stakeholders of the NRC staff's consideration of possible 
changes to 10 CFR parts 19, 20, and 50, and to invite stakeholders to 
comment on the draft revisions. As appropriate, the Statements of 
Consideration for the proposed rule will briefly discuss substantive 
changes made to the rule language as a result of comments received. 
Comments may be provided as indicated under the ADDRESSES heading. The 
NRC may post updates periodically on the rulemaking web site that may 
be of interest to stakeholders.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of February, 2004.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William H. Ruland,
Director, Project Directorate IV, Division of Licensing Project 
Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 04-3890 Filed 2-23-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P