ML20055D255
Text
_
--z-
- I
. !)c kt } { - {
-9 o
/,,~*
- g u,N-pgg Rosztoczy
-f o
UNITED STATES La hs/Di Palo/At f.'
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Hichar g.
-3
,g W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 Riani I*
i JAll 13199%
'#2
%.. + + #o#
4C File y
pg
' MEMORANDUM FOR::
Bill H. Morris, Director Division of Regulatory Applications, RES FROM:
Richard E. Cunningham, Director Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety, HMSS
SUBJECT:
COMMENTS ON PROPOSED RULEMAKING - NOTIFICATION OF INCIDENTS As requested by your memorandum dated December 16, 1988, we have reviewed the proposed rulemaking. 0ur comments are enclosed.
If you have questions about ou, comments, please ccntact Kevin Ramsey of-rqy staff at 492-0S34.
f Richard E. Cunningham, Director j
Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety, NMSS
Enclosure:
As stated D 3 3,. g 9007060053 900626
$$"ShR19090 PDR t
'O-i
\\
IMNS COMMENTS ON PROPOSED RULEMAK!tlG NOTIFICATION OF INCIDENTS v' 1.
Some Division Directors shown on the list of addresscees are incorrect.
The current Directors of the Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards in Regions I, II, and III are:
Region I
- Stewart D. Ebneter, Director Region II
- Douglas M. Collins, Acting Director Region III - Charles E. Norelius, Director ahu.
2.
Suggest rewording the sumary paragraph ohead:
"... Nan-Reactor IncTdenti~ relating to radiation safety, his action is needed to ensure-significant occurrences are promptly reported to NRC, so that NRC can 3
evalute whether to take imediate action to protect the public health and safety. This proposed rule..."
/ 3.
Delete Kevin Ramsey as a contact.
All input should be coordinated by the same person.
/4.
The background and discussion sections must be carefully worded, because there is pending enforcement action against licensees who claim the regulations are unclear.
Suggest rewording the first sentence of the background paragraph to read, "...that NRC licensees report certain events involving...", and change the second sentence to read, "The events are to be reported..." Delete the last sentence and insert, "It is important that such events be reported promptly so that NRC can evaluate whether prompt action is required to protect the public health and safety.
NRC has become concerned that certain provisions of 620.403 need to be redefined because licensees have not reported certain significant events."
5.
There needs to be a paragraph in the supplementary information about the need to track precursor events, and receive reports of items that may require commission action to prevent future problems or generic issues.
1 I
{
c 1
.i The paragraph should include specific examples of events that were not reported to NRC. The memo attached to the rulemaking package cited a licensee that failed to report a fire that damaged a gauge.
A reference should also be made to section 7 of NUREG 1198, " Release of UF from a 6
Ruptured Model 48Y Cylinder at Sequoyah Fuels Corporation Facility:
Lessons-Learned Report," which recommended that requirements for reporting events should be reviewed to ensure all potentially significant events are reported to NRC.
_6.
Suggest rewording the discussion paragraph to read, "The NRC staff has.
examined the provisions of $20.403 and decided that amendments are appropriate to : (1) better describe reportable events having significant implications for public health and safety, and (2) define "immediate notification." The requirements dealing with loss of operatirn and notification damage to property are being moved to Parts 30, 40 and 70 to improve clarity for material licensee's. Appropriate reporting requirements for reactors are already contained elsewhere in 10 CFR Parts 20 and 50.
In final form, this revision will amend the major revision to Part 20 that will be effective January 1,1991." The discussion section should also be expanded to discuss the intent of each notification requirement and the reasons why it was specified.
7.
The statement in the impact section that no new requirements are being added is questionable. 0GC should give an opinion on whether these changes can be issued as a clarification of what NRC considers to be information having a significant implication for public health and safety reportable under existing regulations including $30.9(b), 940.9(b), and 570.9(b). A clear explanation of the rationale behind the "no new requirements" statement should be provided in the discussion section.
8.
In the regulatory analysis section, the first sentence of the last paragraph is incorrect.
New sections are being added to existing parts.
Also, the cost analysis must address telephonic and written notifications 1
in addition to written reports for the analysis to be complete and accurate.
Please note the word "proposea" is misspelled in the last 9
sentence.
I
^
2 7
p I
t/ 9.
Delete the word " nuclear" in 920.403(a).
The term " licensed material" is specifically defined in 520.3(a)(8).
V10.
Delete 520.403(e).
It is a redundant cross reference which is inconsistent with other sections of Part 20.
3 t/11. Suggestrewordingtheendof930.50(a)and(b),540.60(a)and(b),and 670.50(a) and (b) to read, "... the following events involving licensed material:"
Y The quantity of material specified in 530.50(a)(1) and (b)(1) is too 12 low.
It would require NRC notification if a single vial of many radio-pharmaceuticals used in hospitals were broken. To avoid numerous reports of insignificant events, the quantity of material should be changed to ten thousand times 10 CFR 20 Appendix C.
13.
The Discussion of the damage costs in the supplementary information
'~
should clarify that the total costs include direct labor costs and.
- ~ ~
service charges for waste shipments and burial.
!. Reporting threats to the safety of licensed material is not necessary 14 because reports of excessive damage and radioactive releases are already required.
Suggest rewording 530.50(a)(3), 540.60(a)(3), and $70.50(a)(3) to read, "Any event or condition that poses an actual threat to the health and safety of personnel using licensed material or that prevents the performance of duties or safety systems necessary to...."
t/ 15. NRC notification is not necessary for trivial spills.
Suggest rewording
$30.50(b)(3) to read, "Any accidental contamination event which results in restriction of access to the contaminated area by workers or the public for more than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />."
Y 16. Delete $30.50(b)(4), and (b)(6), 540.60(b)(4), and (b)(6), and
$70.50(b)(4), and (b)(6). These events are too numerous to be handled as incident reports.
3
6
= *,.
/'
t 17. The phone number of the Operations Center should be provided in
$30.50(c)(1),540.60(c)(1),and570.50(c)(1).
t/'18. Suggestchangingthefirstsentenceof$30.50(c)(2),640.60(c)(2),and 670.50(c)(2) to read; "... requiring NRC notification immediately or within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />..." Also, replace the word "should" with the word "shall" in the second and third sentences.
V V
y
/
v y/19.
In54).60(a)(1),(a)(2)(1),(a)(2)(ii),(b)(1),(b)(2)(1),and (b)(2)(ii),deletetheword" enriched"proceedingU-238andchangethe material quantity to read "... or 90 kilograms of natural thorium or Th-232..."
- 20. The "100 X Appendix C" quantities specified in 670.50(a)(1), (a)(2),
(b)(1), and (b)(2) are too low and would generate numerous reports of insignificant events.
Licensees handling highly enriched uranium would have to notify NRC of any event involving only 15 milligrams of material....
The radioactivity thresholds should be based on the amount SNM posing a health and safety hazard warranting the attention of the agency. The physical state of the material and the enrichment should also be considered.
4 i
imm m_______._
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _