ML093440038
| ML093440038 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/16/2010 |
| From: | Tschiltz M NRC/NMSS/FCSS |
| To: | Schleuter J Nuclear Energy Institute |
| Merritt N. Baker, FMB, 301-492-3128 | |
| References | |
| Download: ML093440038 (4) | |
Text
August 16, 2010 Ms. Janet Schleuter, Senior Director Fuel Supply/Material Licenses Nuclear Generation Division Nuclear Energy Institute 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006-3708
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE TO ACTIONS REQUESTED AT THE PUBLIC MEETING ON DERMAL EXPOSURES AT FACILITIES LICENSED BY THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REFERENCES:
LETTER, NEI TO NRC SEPTEMBER 8, 2008; ADAMS ACCESSION NUMBER ML083360632 LETTER, NRC, TO NEI, NOVEMBER 10, 2008; ADAMS ACCESSION NUMBER ML082900889 LETTER, NEI TO NRC, FEBRUARY 24, 2009; ADAMS ACCESSION NUMBER ML090690732 LETTER, NRC TO NEI, JUNE 12, 2009; ADAMS ACCESSION NUMBER ML090920296 MEETING
SUMMARY
OF NOVEMBER 12, 2009 MEETING WITH INDUSTRY TO DISCUSS DERMAL EXPOSURE ISSUES; ADAMS ACCESSION NUMBER ML093200082
Dear Ms. Schleuter:
This letter is in response to areas of concern which were identified at a public meeting on November 12, 2009, between industry representatives and members of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) headquarters staff from the Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards and Office of General Counsel and to Mr. Killars February 24, 2009 letter.
Prior to the close of that meeting, the NRC committed to respond to three items listed below:
NRC position regarding the need for worker quantitative standards:
By its terms, 10 CFR 70.65(b)(7) requires that an Integrated Safety Analysis (ISA) Summary describe the quantitative standards used to assess an accidents consequences to an individual regarding acute chemical exposure to licensed material or chemicals produced from licensed materials which are onsite. In this regard, 10 CFR 70.65(b)(7) refers to 10 CFR 70.61(b)(4) and 10 CFR 70.61(c)(4). Provisions in 10 CFR 70.61(b)(4) and 10 CFR 70.61(c)(4) similarly use the word individual" (high consequence and intermediate consequence events include an "acute chemical exposure to an individual"). The word individual is not defined, but 10 CFR 70.4 defines person as including any individual. The word worker is defined in 10 CFR 70.4 as meaning an individual who receives an occupational dose. The NRC affirms its position - stated in its June 12, 2009 letter -- that because 10 CFR 70.65(b)(7) makes no distinction between workers and members of the public, it applies equally to both.
In your February 24, 2009 letter you note that to date these regulations have been interpreted by NEI to require that licensees propose quantitative standards only for individuals outside of
controlled areas as specified in 10 CFR 70.61(b)(4)(ii) abd (c)(4)(ii), and not for workers. The NRC does not agree with this NEI interpretation, as discussed further below.
The provisions you cite - 10 CFR 70.61(b)(4) and 10 CFR 70.61(c)(4) - apply to high consequence and intermediate consequence events, respectively. 10 CFR 70.61(b)(4) states in relevant parts follows:
(b) The risk of each credible high-consequence event must be limitedHigh consequence events are those internally or externally initiated events that result in:
...(4) An acute chemical exposure to an individualthat:
(i)
Could endanger the life of a worker, or (ii)
Could lead to irreversible or other serious long-lasting health effects to any individual located outside the controlled areaIf an applicant possesses or plans to possess quantities of material capable of such chemical exposures, then the applicant shall propose appropriate quantitative standards for these health effects As written, the risk of a chemical exposure to an individual that must be limited includes both one that could endanger the life of a worker, and one that could lead to irreversible or other serious long-lasting health effects to any individual located outside the controlled area.
Similarly, 10 CFR 70.61(c)(4) states in relevant part as follows:
(c) The risk of each credible intermediate-consequence event must be limitedintermediate consequence events are those internally or externally initiated events that are not high consequence events, that result in:
...(4) An acute chemical exposure to an individualthat:
(i)
Could lead to irreversible or other serious health effects to a worker, or (ii)
Could cause mild transient health effects to any individual located outside the controlled areaIf an applicant possesses or plans to possess quantities of material capable of such chemical exposures, then the applicant shall propose appropriate quantitative standards for these health effects As written, the risk of a chemical exposure to an individual that must be limited includes both one that could lead to long-lasting health effects to a worker, and one that could cause mild transient long-lasting health effects to any individual located outside the controlled area.
Thus, these 10 CFR70.61(b) and (c) requirements that a licensee propose for NRC approval appropriate standards regarding chemical exposures by their terms apply to both workers at the licensees facility and to individuals located outside of the controlled area.
NRC position regarding mitigation:
The NRC agrees that mitigation of the effects of an accident scenario meets the performance requirements in 10 CFR 70.61. However, in situations involving exposure to hazardous chemical, the preferred approach is prevention based on the logic that once an event occurs no
chances for prevention remain, only mitigation. The NRC recognizes that mitigation may include limiting time in the area as well as limiting the source term from the event. The NRC recognizes the role of other industrial safety programs, but using the same logic, in situations where exposures have occurred, first aid or medical treatment becomes the last possible mitigation technique. In this regard, offsite medical treatment - in most situations - is not suitable for use as an item relied on for safety.
Offsite medical treatment would more appropriately be utilized as a defense in depth measure.
In situations where licensees rely upon offsite medical treatment, it is difficult to ensure that the availability and reliability of the treatment would adequately avoid endangering the life of a worker, or prevent irreversible or other serious long-lasting health effects to any individual located outside of the controlled area. Further, in situations where offsite medical care is relied upon it is difficult to establish and maintain proper management measures - as the offsite medical organization would be external and thus could not be controlled by the licensee.
Request for definitions of serious long lasting versus mild transient health effects:
In general, the regulatory language in Subpart H has stood on its own. The undefined phrases serious long-lasting health effects and mild transient health effects are part of the performance requirements in 10 CFR 70.61, and must necessarily cover a broad range of licensed activities. These provisions are not intended to be absolute, like a dose limit. The NRC recognizes that licensees use different chemicals in varying concentrations, which would result in different exposure paths and health hazards of concern. Because of tese factors, establishing regulatory definitions of these phrases is not practical.
In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 2.390 of NRCs Rules of Practice, a copy of this letter will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room and the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Mr. Nick Baker of my staff at 301-492-3128 or via email at merritt.baker@nrc.gov.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Michael D. Tschiltz, Acting Director Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards
chances for prevention remain, only mitigation. The NRC recognizes that mitigation may include limiting time in the area as well as limiting the source term from the event. The NRC recognizes the role of other industrial safety programs, but using the same logic, in situations where exposures have occurred, first aid or medical treatment becomes the last possible mitigation technique. In this regard, offsite medical treatment - in most situations - is not suitable for use as an item relied on for safety.
Offsite medical treatment would more appropriately be utilized as a defense in depth measure.
In situations where licensees rely upon offsite medical treatment, it is difficult to ensure that the availability and reliability of the treatment would adequately avoid endangering the life of a worker, or prevent irreversible or other serious long-lasting health effects to any individual located outside of the controlled area. Further, in situations where offsite medical care is relied upon it is difficult to establish and maintain proper management measures - as the offsite medical organization would be external and thus could not be controlled by the licensee.
Request for definitions of serious long lasting versus mild transient health effects:
In general, the regulatory language in Subpart H has stood on its own. The undefined phrases serious long-lasting health effects and mild transient health effects are part of the performance requirements in 10 CFR 70.61, and must necessarily cover a broad range of licensed activities. These provisions are not intended to be absolute, like a dose limit. The NRC recognizes that licensees use different chemicals in varying concentrations, which would result in different exposure paths and health hazards of concern. Because of tese factors, establishing regulatory definitions of these phrases is not practical.
In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 2.390 of NRCs Rules of Practice, a copy of this letter will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room and the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Mr. Nick Baker of my staff at 301-492-3128 or via email at merritt.baker@nrc.gov.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Michael D. Tschiltz, Acting Director Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards DISTRIBUTION:
FMB r/f ML093440038 OFFICE FMB FMB OGC FMB FFLD NAME MBaker THristopoulos JHull PHabighorst MTschiltz DATE 12/10/09 12/10/09 12/14/09 12/17/09 8/11/10 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY