ML20195J591
| ML20195J591 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/28/1999 |
| From: | Merrifield J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Vietticook A NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20195J506 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-64FR11508, RULE-PR-170, RULE-PR-171, RULE-PR-30, RULE-PR-31, RULE-PR-32 SECY-99-108-C, NUDOCS 9906210048 | |
| Download: ML20195J591 (2) | |
Text
p--
'99 04/27 22:40 036 1 466 6631 Il0TEL CELLERT tg ous NOTATION VOTE RESPONSE SHEET l
TO:
Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary FROM:
COMMISSIONER MERRIFIELD
SUBJECT:
SECY-99-108 - PROPOSED RULE: 10 CFR PARTS 30,31, 32,170, AND 1171
" REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN GENERALLY ~ LICENSED INDUSTRIAL DEVICES CONTAINING BYPRODUCT MATERIAL" Approved -- /
Disapproved Abstain Not Participating COMMENTS:
SEE A7rn oico c o m m cn7.5 l
)
l SI 5E
/M b'l d-<9 9 9 DATE Entered on"AS" Yes /
No l
9906210048 990615 RES DE E PDR 490/pldD(((
t
'o9 04/27 22:40 936 1 466 6631 IloTEL GELLERT fd OO 4 Commissioner Merrifield's Comments [
l i
t approve the staffs request to issue the proposed rule for public comments on a registration program for General License devices as described in SECY-99-108. I have'no specific changes that need to be made to the package before it is issued for public comment. There are multiple questions still to be addressed in the implementation of the proposed rule, and it is appropriate to obtain public comments as input to the resolution to these questions. For example, the staff discusses a fee per licensee but then the example provided in the fee analysis assumos a licensee with multiple sites will have a registration per site. The staff is having difficulty tracking down the location of some licensees, so perhaps additionalinformation, such as a taxpayer identification number, is needed on the registration form. Although I have no doubt that the registration program will improve the accountability and control over general license devices by periodically emphasizing the requirements to the licensees, I do question the ability of the resulting NRC database to efficiently and quickly identify the owner of an orphan source. As currently envisioned, there would be an NRC database and individual databases for each Agreement State. Looking for the owner of a lost source could require searching 30 or more databases. I understand the financial problems of creating a national database and am not advocating a particular solution. However. I want to encourage the staff to continue to seek an innovative solution to the problem. All of the above problems, as well as others, are identified in the proposed Federal Register notice and I believe will be approp'riately addressed through seeking public comments.
\\
p#%
UNITED STATES y
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5
j WASHINGTON. D.C. 20555 0001 U
i
.....f June 15, 1999 SECRETARY MEMORANDUM TO:
William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations i
Jesse L. Funches Chief Financial Officer William M. Beecher Director, Office of Public Affairs FROM:
Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary
SUBJECT:
STAFF REQUlFEMENTS - SECY-99-108 - PROPOSED RULE:
10 CFR PARTS 30,31,32,170, AND 171 " REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN GENERALLY LICENSED INDUSTRIAL DEVICES CONTAINING BYPRODUCT MATERIAL" The Commission has approved publication of the proposed rule in the Federal Reaister for a 75-day public comment period. The comments and changes noted below and in the attachment should be incorporated in the rulemaking package, the Congressionalletters, and the press release, as appropriate, prior to publication of the draft rule.
(EDO/OPA)
(SECY Suspense:
8/20/99)
The Commission has approved the plan to assess a flat fee to the registrants based on the
() (/
average cost of the program per licensee. However, the FR notice should be modified to highlight the fce structure. The FR notice should be revised to discuss the other two fee optiony considered by NRC.- a fee per device or sliding scale. Moreover, the FR notice would benefit from a fuller discussion of the basis for the staff's preferred approach as is provided in sections 4.1.J. and 6.0 of the draft Regulatory Analysis.
(EDO/CFO)
(SECY Suspense:
8/20/99)
The Commission has agreed with the staffs plan not to implement a national database at this time. However, the FR notice should be modified to discuss the pros and cons of implementing a national database and request specific comments on this issue. The staff should keep abreast of changes in Agreement State programs that might make them more amenable to a national database. The staff should not delay development of the automated registration system
' pending outcome of this issue. Instead, this should be handled as a modification to the system, if necessary, after a final decision.
l l
Consideration should be given to requiring taxpayer identification numbers for general licensees subject to registration. If it is not feasible to include this in the current development of the i
registration system, consideration should be given to adding it at some future time when other l
M o44.ioc y g.
p, system enhancements are needed, issues concerning design of generally licensed devices and limitations on the types and quantity of devices that may be used under the general license should continue.to be handled separate from this rulemaking since these issues are being reviewed as part of.the corrent Materials Risk Study.
Attachment:
As stated
)
cc:
Chairman Jackson i
Commissioner Dieus Commissioner Diaz Commissioner McGaffigan 1
Commissioner Merrifield OGC CIO CFO OCA OlG OPA Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ACNW, ASLBP (via E-Mail)
Attachment Changes to the Federal Reaister Notice 1.
The Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors representei:1 by Dr. Lipoti raised certain important issues that should be considered. Specifically,1) the need for a backup responsible individual,2) the need for additional guidance on the use of generally-licensed devices, including safety instructions and response to accidents, and
- 3) the need for a requirement for up-front disclosure by suppliers or vendors of the devices, including a signed acknowledgment by the purchaser. With regard to 1, the FR notice shguld be revised to solicit comment on whether general licensees should be required to identify a " backup responsible individual"in addition to the " primary" responsible individual. This approach may help ensure that institutional memory is not lost, particularly in cases where the primary responsible individual departs abruptly. With l
regard to 2, Draft NUREG-1556, Volume 16, should be modified to include additional guidance on safety instructions and precautions that need to be provided to general licensees. The instructions should include limitations on use ;f the device, instructions for testing the device, response to failures or accidents, anu mthods for disposal. With regard to 3, the rule should be revised to clearly indicate that full disclosure of the required laformation should occur prior to purchase rather than prior to transfer of the device and the FR notice should explicitly solicit comment on this issue.
2.
The staff should consider duplicating all the questions in the FR notice into a single, new section while retaining the questions in their current locations so as to leave them in context. This approach will facilitate the public review and comment process and is consistent with that used in the FR notices for the proposed rules on Parts 35 and 63.
The discussion on page 9 regarding re' istration of general licensees when the NRC fails 3.
g to contact needs to be revised.. lf NRC fails to contact a general licersee, it is unclear how NRC can expect to place the burden of not registering on an uninformed licensee who, even under the current rule, has had little or no contact with NRC. While the Commission supports a provision that would require general licensees to complete registration by a certain time frame, the Commission does not necessarily support NRC taking enforcement action against a general licensee who, once discovered, may have previously violated the registration provision unknowingly because NRC failed to contact i
them. It should be recognized that there willlikely be a subset of existing general licensees who will never be contacted by NRC or an Agreement State because their existence is not known. The staff should make appropriate changes to the enforcement procedures to address this concem.
4.
On page 7, paragraph 1 under ' Discussion', line 6, revise the sentence so it reads ' The j
NRC also needs to trackspecific individual generally licensed devices....'
5.
On page 9, lines 2 and 3 from the top, revise the sentence so it reads '... under the
. generallicense would bear the operational cost of the program instead of those who hold specific licenses.'
6.
On page 9, line 3 from the top, add a new sentence at the end of the paragraph which reads: "However, it should be noted that the initial program startup costs would be
F i_ '
recovered from the annual fee paid by current holders of specific licenses.
7.
' On page 16,2"d full paragraph, lines 1 and 2, change the sentence to read '... currently l
restricts applicability of the general license, in the case of devices from distributors in l'
' Agreement States, to those devices from~ Agreement States-wlie that authorize the devices to be used....'
l' l
8.'
On page 16,2"' full paragraph, lines 3 - 7, replace the two sentences which read 'To accommodate the... by { 31.5 general licensees.' with 'However, NRC practice is to allow a device to be used under the general license in S 31.5, that is distributed in I
accordance with a license issued under equivalent regulations to 9 32.51 by an Agreement State that does not authorize devices to be used under a general license within their State.'
9.
On page 27, line 1, insert 'to two years' after ' limit'so it reads ' Would limit to two years the amount of time....'
10.
On page 35, in the paragraph under ' Regulatory Flexibility Certification', line 5, insert -
.' Portions of' at the beginning of the new sentence so it reads ' Portions of t-The proposed l
rule would....'
6 11.
On page 45, in item (15), line 1, change the 2"d 'that' to 'than'so it reads 'May not hold devices that are not in use for longer thav n 2 years.'
o Changes to the Congressional Letters 12.
In paragraph 1, line 5, insert 'to certain categories of general licent eed after ' fee'so it l
reads '... use under a general license and (b) add a registration fee to certain categories of generallicensees.'
13.
In paragraph 1, line 5, replace 'this' with 'a'so it reads 'NRC plans to institute-this a registration system....'
Changes to the Press Releases 14.
On page 2," paragraph 2, line 4, add at the end 'and, in some cases, have ended up in the public domain'so it reads '... generally licensed devices have not been properly l
handled or properly disposed of and, in some cases, have ended up in the public domain causing radiation exposures or radioactive contamination.'
' '15.
On page 3,1" full paragraph, line 1, insert at the beginning of the sentence 'On March 9, 1999 (64 FR 11508)' and delete 'has'so it reads 'On March 9,1999 (64 FR 11508) t-The i
Commission hee established an interim....'
l i
j