|
|---|
Category:Regulatory Guide
MONTHYEARML23333A4462024-01-24024 January 2024
Basis for Withdrawal of Regulatory Guides
ML23226A0362023-11-0909 November 2023
Rulemaking - Final Rule - Regulatory Guide - 1.242, Revision 0 - Emergency Preparedness for Small Modular Reactors and Other New Technologies
ML22272A0452022-09-29029 September 2022
10/18-19/2022 ACRS Public Meeting - Predecisional - Documents to Support Part 53 - DG-1414 Alternative Evaluation for Risk Insights (Aeri) Methodology
ML22272A0422022-09-29029 September 2022
10/18-19/2022 ACRS Public Meeting - Predecisional - Documents to Support Part 53 - DG-1413 Technology-Inclusive Identification of Licensing Events for Commercial Nuclear Plants
ML22041A3102022-02-0909 February 2022
Document to Support ACRS Subcommittee Meeting Redline RG 5.66, Rev 3, Access Authorization Program for Nuclear Power Plants
ML22042A1042022-02-0909 February 2022
Document to Support ACRS Subcommittee Meeting Redline RG 1.149, Rev 5, Nuclear Power Plant Simulation Facilities for Use in Operator Training, License Examinations, and Applicant Experience Requirements
ML22041A3352022-02-0909 February 2022
Document to Support ACRS Subcommittee Meeting Redline RG 5.84, Rev 1, Fitness-For -Duty Programs at New Reactor Construction Sites
ML22041A2832022-02-0909 February 2022
Document to Support the ACRS Subcommittee Meeting Redline RG 4.7, Rev 4, General Site Suitability Criteria for Nuclear Power Stations
ML22041A2712022-02-0909 February 2022
Document to Support ACRS Subcommittee Meeting Redline RG 1.206, Rev 2, Applications for Nuclear Power Plants
ML22041A2342022-02-0909 February 2022
Document to Support ACRS Subcommittee Meeting Redline RG 1.200, Rev 4, Acceptability of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Results for Risk-Informed Activities
ML22041A2292022-02-0909 February 2022
Document to Support ACRS Subcommittee Meeting Redline RG 1.187, Rev 4, Guidance for Implementation of 10 CFR 50.59, Changes, Tests, and Experiments
ML22041A2252022-02-0909 February 2022
Document to Support ACRS Subcommittee Meeting Redline RG 1.174, Rev 4, an Approach for Using Probablistic Risk Assessment in Risk-Informed Decisions on Plant-Specific Changes to the Licensing Basis
ML21208A1202021-12-14014 December 2021
Draft Regulatory Guide DG-4032,(RG 4.2 Rev 4), Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations
ML21274A1522021-12-14014 December 2021
Rulemaking: Proposed Rule: Redline Strikeout Regulatory Guide 4.2 (DG-4032) Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations (Publishing to Support Proposed Rule: Advanced Nuclear Reactor Generic Environmental Impact Statemen
ML20205L5632020-08-31031 August 2020
DG 1373 RG 1.240 Regulatory Analysis - Fresh and Spent Fuel Pool Criticality Analyses
ML19059A4032019-06-27027 June 2019
Draft Regulatory Basis GTCC Rulemaking
ML19157A1112019-06-0606 June 2019
Preliminary Draft Proposed Regulatory Guide 8.39, Release of Patients Administered Radioactive Materials, Revision 1 (Phase 1) for ACMUI Review with Note
ML19141A0912019-05-30030 May 2019
Regulatory Guide Number 8.30
ML19141A0892019-05-30030 May 2019
Regulatory Guide Number 3.61
ML19141A0902019-05-30030 May 2019
Regulatory Guide Number 4.14, Revision 1
ML19141A0922019-05-30030 May 2019
Regulatory Guide Number 3.48
ML19141A0932019-05-30030 May 2019
Regulatory Guide Number 3.56, Revision 0
ML19008A0952019-01-11011 January 2019
01/23/2019 - Predecisional - Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Sub-Committee Public Meeting Regulatory Guide 2.7 for Non-Power Production or Utilization Facility License Renewal (Rin 3150-AI96, NRC-2011-0087)
ML17145A3402017-05-0101 May 2017
Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5062 for Fuel Cycle Cyber Security Documents for June 8, 2017, ACRS Full Committee Meeting
ML16225A4442017-03-31031 March 2017
Rev. 0, Basis for Withdrawal Questions
ML16293A1122016-10-19019 October 2016
Redline Strikeout Version Comparing September 15, 2016 Draft Final Part 61 to Current Part 61 Rule Language
ML16273A1592016-10-0606 October 2016
Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5062: Cyber Security Programs for Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities (Proposed New Reg Guide)
ML16221A0842016-08-10010 August 2016
Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5062 - Cyber Security Programs for Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities
ML14310A3392015-09-0303 September 2015
Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5049, Independent Assessment of Nuclear Material Control and Accounting Systems
ML15198A0212015-08-27027 August 2015
Draft Regulatory Basis - Cyber Security at Fuel Cycle Facilities
ML13219B2042014-02-0606 February 2014
Draft Regulatory Guide (DG) - 3044, Corrective Action Programs for Fuel Cycle Facilities
ML12087A0352013-11-18018 November 2013
Draft Regulatory Guide DG-3042, (Proposed Revision 2 of Regulatory Guide 3.50, Dated September 1989), Standard Format and Content for a License Application for an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation or a Monitored Retrievable Storag
ML23292A0812013-09-30030 September 2013
Rev 0 Periodic Review
ML1033705652011-04-30030 April 2011
Staff'S Responses to Public Comment on DG-3039, Standard Format and Content for Emergency Plans for Fuel Cycle and Material Facilities.
ML0506102582005-03-25025 March 2005
Sher Bahadur Memo Request to Waive CRGR Review of Proposed Revision to Regulatory Guide 3.71 Nuclear Criticality Safety Standards for Fuels and Materials Facilities
ML0506103222005-03-25025 March 2005
John T. Larkin Memo Request to Waive Acrs/Acnw Review of Proposed Revision to Regulatory Guide 3.71, Nuclear Criticality Safety Standards for Fuels and Materials Facilities
ML0313506112003-06-11011 June 2003
SECY-03-0118Attachment 3-SITE Evaluations and Design Earthquake Ground Motion for Dry Cask Independent Spent Fuel Storage and Monitored Retrievable Storage Installations
ML0321801641990-11-13013 November 1990
Draft Regulatory Guide, Format and Content for the License Application for the High-level Waste Repository.
ML0319200771990-07-13013 July 1990
Topical Guidelines for the Licensing Support System
2024-01-24
[Table view]Some use of "" in your query was not closed by a matching "". |
Text
Regulatory Guide Periodic Review Regulatory Guide Number: 8.30 Revision number: 1
Title:
Health Physics Surveys in Uranium Recovery Facilities Office/division/branch: NMSS/DUWP/URLB Technical Lead: Ronald A. Burrows Staff Action Decided: Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration
- 1. What are the known technical or regulatory issues with the current version of the Regulatory Guide (RG)?
RG 8.30, Revision 1 (Rev. 1), Health Physics Surveys in Uranium Recovery Facilities, issued in May 2002, describes health physics surveys that are acceptable to the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff for protecting workers at uranium recovery facilities (e.g., uranium mills, in-situ recovery (ISR) facilities, ion exchange recovery facilities, heap leach facilities) from radiation and the chemical toxicity of uranium while on the job. RG 8.30, Rev.1, did not fully incorporate the changes to 10 CFR Part 20 when those regulations were revised in 1991, as was intended. For example, the discussion in Regulatory Position 2.2, Surveys for Airborne Yellowcake, still refer to the undefined terms soluble and insoluble instead of the inhalation classes D, W, and Y.
Furthermore, Regulatory Position 2.2 does not address yellowcake processed at uranium ISR facilities. Specifically, RG 8.30, Rev.1, does not address how to evaluate a uranium compound (uranyl peroxide) that is not listed in Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 20.
Other deficiencies have been identified in Regulatory Positions 2.5, 2.6, and 2.7, all of which involve contamination surveys. For example, the recommendations in Regulatory Position 2.5 are based on older dosimetry models (prior to the current 10 CFR Part 20
[i.e., ICRP-2]) and terminology that is not consistent with what is used by NRC licensees (e.g., inactive area and active area vs. restricted area and unrestricted area).
Another example is that Regulatory Positions 2.6 and 2.7 do not address beta-gamma-emitting radionuclides found in contamination at uranium recovery facilities. These radionuclides have a separate limit from alpha-emitting radionuclides. In addition, although not currently part of RG 8.30, Rev.1, guidance on how to assess the lower limit of detection (Table 3) for contamination surveys should be added using NUREG-1575, Multi-Agency Survey and Site Investigation Manual, and other relevant guidance documents.
Lastly, Regulatory Position 3 should include an expanded discussion of 10 CFR 20.1204(g). What is currently in Regulatory Position 3 is technically correct. However, through discussions with the uranium recovery industry, there is confusion on how to apply the regulatory requirement correctly at uranium ISR facilities.
- 2. What is the impact on internal and external stakeholders of not updating the RG for the known issues, in terms of anticipated numbers of licensing and inspection activities over the next several years The NRC staff does not anticipate any new or renewal applications in the next several years. However, there will be approximately 3 - 4 inspection activities per year over the next several years (and more in Agreement states). The NRC staff expects minimal impact on the inspection activities as the issues discussed in Section 1 above have been addressed in individual licenses (e.g., specific license conditions). In addition, other available NRC guidance documents address the issues discussed in Section 1 above.
For example, RG 8.22, Bioassay at Uranium Mills, discusses unlisted uranium materials, NUREG-1736, Consolidated Guidance: 10 CFR Part 20 - Standards for Radiation Protection Against Radiation, provides examples on how to comply with 10 CFR 20.1204(g), and consistent with Supplemental Information on the Implementation of the Final Rule on Radiological Criteria for License Termination, (63 FR 64133),
individual license conditions require licensees to monitor for beta-gamma-emitting radionuclides found in contamination at uranium recovery facilities.
- 3. What is an estimate of the level of effort needed to address identified issues in terms of full-time equivalent (FTE) and contractor resources?
The NRC staff requires approximately 1-2 FTE to complete documentation of the various technical issues identified in Section 1 above. No contractor support is anticipated.
- 4. Based on the answers to the questions above, what is the NRC staff action for this guide (Reviewed with no issues identified, Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration, Revise, or Withdraw)?
Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration.
- 5. Provide a conceptual plan and timeframe to address the issues identified during the review.
The NRC staff will consider the identified issues as part of the next periodic review.
NOTE:This review was conducted in April 2019 and reflects the NRC staff plans as of that date. These plans are tentative and are subject to change. (ML19141A091)