ML20217A770

Forwards Copies of Public Announcement & Fr Notice Withdrawing Proposed Amend to 10CFR20

ML20217A770
Person / Time
Issue date:	08/04/1997
From:	Rathbun D NRC OFFICE OF CONGRESSIONAL AFFAIRS (OCA)
To:	Inhofe J, Schaefer D HOUSE OF REP., SENATE, ENVIRONMENT & PUBLIC WORKS
References
CCS, NUDOCS 9709220121
Download: ML20217A770 (2)

Text

/

p.,.~,

y[

UNITED STATES

.g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 0,

WASHINGTON. o.C. 30MH001

1. '49*****

August 4, 1997 i

The Honorable Dan Schaefer, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Power i

i Committee on Commerce United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

l Enclosed int the information of the Subcommittee are copies of a public announcement and a Federal Register notice withdrawing e proposed amendment to 10 CFR Part 20. The proposed rule would have required reporting of any unauthorized use of radioactive material. In reviewing public comments the Commission concluded that the potential burden associated with this rule was not justified and is withdrawing the rule.

Sincerely, NE.

~

Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs

Enclosures:

1. Public Announcement

2. Federal Register Notice cc: Representative Ralph Hall Cc56 BT"!8MiM888*

CORRESPONDENCE PDR jn910

p er4,9

• S t

umTED STATES y-B NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMM;8SION y*

'f WASHINGTON, D,c, stMM001 6

e..,+

August 4, 1997 The Honorable James M. Inhofe, crialrman Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property and Nuclear Safety Committee on Environment end o blic Works u

United States Senate Washlegton, DC 20MO

Dear Mr. Chairman:

Enclosed for the information of the Subcommittee are copies of a public announcement and a Federal Register notice withdrawing a proposed amendment to 10 CFR Part 20. The proposed rule would have required reporting of any unauthorized use of mdioactive material, in reviewing public comments the Commission concluded that the potential burden associated with this rule was not justified and is withdrawing the rule, Sincerely, MMd4 Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs

Enclosures:

1. Public Announcement

2. Federal Register Notice ec: Senator Bob Graham

-)

\\

s 3

[759001-P)

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIE 10-CFP Part 20 RIN: 3150 AF44

{

i Reporting Requirements for Unauthor13ed Use of Licensed Radioactive Material AGENCY: Nuclear Re,alatory Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule: Withdrawal.

StWiARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Consnission (NRC) is withdrawing a notice of L

proposed rulemaking that was published in the federal Register on January 31, 1996, regarding the intentional unauthorized use of licenseo radioactive material by individuals. The majority of conynenters stated that the costs of implementing the proposed rule would outweigh the benefits.that might result from the rule. - After reviewing these commants, the Commission has reconsidered the need for the proposed rule and is withdrawing.t FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary L. Thomas, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. U.S Nuclear Regulatory Ca nission, Washington.-D.C. 20555 0001, telephone (301) 415-0?30 E-mail MLTilaNRC.G0V.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On January 31. 1996, the NRC published a proposed amendment to 10 CFR' Part 20, in the Federal Register (61 FR 3334), that would have required licensees _ to report events involving intentional unauthorized use of licensed O

?O 3'8

radioactive material to the NkC Operations Center within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of discovery.

i.

Eighty-six ceranent letters were receh'ed on tM proposed rule: 12 from power reactor licensees. 11 from industry representative groups. 8 from Agreement States 14 from Agreement State licensees. 30 from NRC material i

licensees, 10 from private citizenu, and one from a public inte-est group.

Eighty two of the comenters opposed the proposed rule: Yrye were in favor of the proposed rule.

In addition, ceraents wero received from the Advisory l

Comittee on Medicai Uses of Isotopes (ACHUI) at a m(eting held on Februaiy

22. 19G5.

The commenters addressed the regulatory analysis, the severity level that would be assigned to violations for failure to report and the backfit analysis as well as the proposed rule itself.

Because the proposed rule is being withdrawn, only the comments received on the proposed rule itself are discussed here. All of the comments received on the rule are available for review in the NRC's Public Document Room.

Capect:

Forty commenters stated that the concept presented in this rule was not t

consistent with the ALARA principle.

They also stated that the rule would require every event of contamination and exposure to be reported regardless of the level of contamination or exposure. Several commenters atgued that using a reporting threshold that included any " allegedly intentional" unauthorized use was too broad and would result in licensees spending more time and money than the 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> to evaluate an incident estimated in the proposed regulatory analysis for the proposed rule, and would detract from their ability to 2

perform their other duties.

They stated that this would place an unduc burden on small licensees whose resources are already limited.

Thirty-two comenters suggested that the requirement to report events where unauthorized use could not be ruled out within 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> be deleted.

They stated that it was too vague, burdensome, and restrictive, and they would be forced to report every contamination to avoid a Severity level !!! violation.

Forty nine comenters suggested that the NRC be more specific with respect to the type of events to be reported.

Thirty-six commenters suggested that the proposed rule be withdrawn.

They stated uat basing a rubaaking on only two incidents wod not justified. Of this group. 26 comenters stated that regulations already exist to cover such incidents, such as 10 CFP,30.10, Deliberate misconduct. 10 CFR 20.2201. Reports of theft or loss of licensed material. 10 CFR 20.2202.

Notification of incidents, and 10 CFR 30.50(a). Reporting requirements.

Of the eight Agreement States that provided comments, all stated that the proposed rule should be withdrawn. One Agreement State commented that this rule may violate the intent of that State's Regulatory Reform Act of 1995 that requires the State's regulatory system not impose excessive, unreasonable, or unnecessary obligations.

Four comments were received in favor of the proposed rule.

One comenter supported the proposed rule without changes: the other three supported the intent of the proposed rule but suggested changes to further clarify the intent and to make the rule less burdensome. As discussed below, the Comission recognizes that regulations already exist requiring reporting of events when certain established dose thresholds have been reached.

The Comission believes that a requirement to report events below these 3

o established thresholds would not provide any additional protection and the

. cost would not be justified.

Response

The Commission examined the comments received on the proposed rule, and concluded that a sufficient basis does not exist to promulgate a rule at this time.

The Comission recognizes that regulations already exist requiring reporting of events when certain dose thresholds have been reached.

The established threshola3 in these existing requirements capture any event where the occupational dose limits have been exceeded.

Therefore, any additional protection achieved from reporting events below the established thresholds would be low and the costs of both the reporting by licensees and the subsequent follow-up actions by the NRC staff would not be justified.

For the above reasons, the Comission is withdrawing the proposed rule.

Dated at Rockville. Maryland, this f L day of August. 1997.

4 For the Nuclear Regulatory Comission.

Johng' Hoyle. '

Secrttary of the Comission.

4

~

CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENCE SYSTEM DOCUMENT PREPARATION CUSCRLIST Das check list :s to be submitted with each document (or group of Qs/As) sentfor processing into the CCS.

0ie CfWf24

1. i'RIEFD85CRIPTION OFDOCUMENT(S)

A

5. TYPE OFDOCUMENT X CORRESPONDENCE HE4 RINGS (Qs/As)

3. DOCUMENT C0hTROL SENSITIVE (NRC ONLF)

X NON-SENSITIVE

4. CddGRE5510NAL COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEE ({f applicable)

Congressional Committee Subcommittee S. SURIECT CODES (A)

(B) _

(C)

6. SOURG OFDOCUMENTS l

(A) 5520 (DOCUMENT NAME

)

(B)

SC4N (C)

ATTAWMENTS (D)

OTHER

7. SYS i 40G DATES (A) l' 'll'i7 DATA OC4 SENTDOCUMENT TO CCS (B)

DATE CCS RECEIVED DOCUMENT (C)

DATE RETURNED TO OC4 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (D)

DATE RESUBM!TTED BY OC4 TO CCS (E)

DATE ENTERED INTO CCS BY (F)

DATE OC4 NOTIFIED THATDOCUMENT IS IN CCS COMMENTS:

~

RELEASE TO PDR

,, s

-