ML20236H820
| ML20236H820 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/12/1998 |
| From: | Callan L NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| FRN-64FR19089 AG14-1-008, AG14-1-8, SECY-98-105, SECY-98-105-01, SECY-98-105-1, SECY-98-105-R, NUDOCS 9807070370 | |
| Download: ML20236H820 (19) | |
Text
_.
. ...........e .<. ,
,,,% RELEASEDTC x
! [
') v ( S k ss 'ai : we i
f,6 .... .........'....>...;
dse RULEMAKING ISSUE (NEGATIVE CONSENT)
May 12, 1998 SECY-98-105 EQB: The Commissioners FROM L. Joseph Callan Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
RULEMAKING PLAN: ENERGY COMPENSATION SOURCES FOR WELL LOGGING AND CLARIFICATIONS - CHANGES TO 10 CFR PART 39 PURPOSE:
To inform the Commission of the staffs Rulemaking Plan to modify well-logging requirements to accommodate the use of new well-logging technology which should reduce the need for licensee exemption requests. The Rulemaking Plan has been revised to reflect Agreement State comments received on the May 28,1997, draft Rulemaking Plan. Other changes are also being proposed to improve, clarify, and update 10 CFR Part 39 which may also reduce the need for licensee exemptions.
BACKGROUND:
In SECY-97-111 (May 28,1997), the staff provided the Commission with a draft Rulemaking Plan to update Part 39 regulations. This update would incorporate newer technology used by well-logging licensees. This technology employs a low activity radioactive source referred to as an energy compensation source, or ECS. Well-logging licensees have identif;ed concerns with the current well-logging requirements, which were written for high activity sources (i.e., in the curie range) and do not seem appropriate for an ECS.
The draft Rulemaking Plan was sent to the Agreement States for comment on May 28,1997 (SP-97-036). Comments were received from the States of Utah, Illinois, and Washington. In general, the three Agreement State commenters agree that the current regulations described in Part 39 need to be revised to reflect the use of ECSs. They provided specific information and comments that are discussed in the attached Rulemaking Plan. <
W y
CONTACT: Mark Haisfield, NMSS/IMNS NOTE: TO BE MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE (301) 415-6196 WHEN THE FINAL SRM IS MADE AVAILABLE 9807070370 980512 L-tc I P1 9f l PDR SECY X o 4 t1- b c,c H r1 ;e p,/
98-105 R PDR SSSSb
2 AGREEMENT STATE IMPLEMENTATION ISSUE:
Agreement State licensees should benefit from these changes in a manner similar to U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensees, in the course of this rulemaking, the NRC will evaluate each revision to determine its compatibility category or health and safety category in accordance with the new adequacy and compatibility policy approved in the Commission Staff Requirements Memorandum dated June 30,1997.
COORDINATION:
The Office of the General Counsel has no legal objection to the Rulemaking Plan. The Office of the Chief Financial Officer has reviewed the Rulemaking Plan for resource implications and has no objection. The Office of the Chief Information Officer has reviewed the rulemaking plan for information technology and information management implications and concurs in it. However, the plan suggests changes in information collection requirements that must be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget at the same time the rule is forwarded to the Federal Register for publication.
RESOL'RCES:
Resources required to complete the rulemaking and implement the final rule are included in the current budget.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the staff proceed with implementation of the attached Rulemaking Plan within 10 days from the date of this paper, L. seph Calla k
E cutive Direc r for Operations Attachments: SECY NOTE: In the absence of instructions to the
- 1. Rulemaking Plan contrary, SECY will notify the staff on Wednesday,
- 2. Agreement State Comments May 27, 1998 that the Comission, by negative consent, assents to the action proposed in this paper.
DISTRIBUTION:
Commissioners OCA OGC CIO OCAA CFO OIG EDO OPA REGIONS SECY
q.
6 0
ATTACHMENT 1 RULEMAKING PLAN I
1 s
l.
RULEMAKING PLAN ENERGY COMPENSATION I,0VRCES FOR WELL LOGGING AND CLARIFICATIONS - CHANGES TO 10 CFR PART 39 Lead Office: Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards l Staff
Contact:
Mark Haisfield. NMSS/IMNS Concurrences:
C. Paperiello, NMSS Date f- J7:nO' a/re/r7 l R. Bangart. OSP 'Date l
N'
/J-)b/97 J. Funches. OCF0 ' D' ate
/%W6 /7/2/t,~
l B. Shelton. OCIO Date l f- /7? ///2flff
- J. Lieberman, OE ' Date 1
l $'/7?tt5 3 /s /73 S. Treby. OGC ' Date i s
1
-Approval:
L
[ ,
/
.A DdteNMf[
osephCa[an L !
1 l
i l
t.
i o
Rulemaking Plan ENERGY COMPENSATION SOURCES FOR WELL LOGGING AND CLARIFICATIONS - CHANGES TO 10 CFR PART 39 Reoulatorv Problem i
The licensing and radiation safety requirements for well logging are provided in 10 CFR L Ptst 39 (Part 39). The basic regulation was promulgated about 10 years ago. Since then -
newer technology has been developed that was not envisioned when the rule was written. The NRC staff is proposing to modify the existing regulations, as described below, to account for the newer technology. The change would reduce regulatory burden with minimal impact to public health and safety. In addition, there are other sections that should be changed to improve, darify, and update Part 39.
The dra't Rulemaking Plan was sent to the Agreement States for their comment on May 28,1997 (SP-97-036). Comments were received from the States of Utah, Illinois, and Washington. These States generally supported the proposal and provided specific information
[ and comments (see the section on Agreement State Implementation issues).
Current Requirements and Prooosed Chanaes t
The principal objective of the proposed rulemaking is to revise Part 39 to accommodate the low activity radioactive sources (i.e., microct rie range) that are now used in some well logging' applications. When Part 39 was promulgated, welllogging technology required drilling L to stop, while parts of the drilling pieces were removed, before lowering a logging tool down a
!=. well. More recent technology, referred to as "!ogging whifa drilling," allows well logging to be
! accomplished during drilling. This technology employs a lu.? adivity radioactive source, known a6 an energy compensation source, or ECS. A second innovation separates the ECS and the logging tool from the larger well logging source to allow easier retrieval of the well legging source if the drill stem becomes unretrievable. 1 i !
l The ECS is a low activity source (less than 100 microcunes) corapared to the normal i I ' 3-to-20 curie sources used in well logging. Because this has been an emergir g technology, l Part 39, originally promulgated in 1987, has no specific previsions for these low activity
, sources. Many of the requirements in Part 39, when applied to an ECS, are not necessary to protect public health and safety and the environment and may not be appropriate for an ECS.
Because the existing regulations do not allow for variations based on the activity of the source, licensees who use an ECS must meet all the requirements of Part 39. Examples of unnecessary requirements deal with well abandonment (Sections 39.15 and 39.77), leak testing (Section 39.35), design and performance criteria for sealed sources (Section 39.41), and y . monitoring of sources lodged in a well (Section 39.69). The NRC staff is proposing that only ,
l sections dealing with physical inventory (Section 39.37) and records of material use (Section !
39.39) should apply for the use of an ECS. Requirements established in other parts of NRC l regulation *, (e.g., Parts 20 and 30) are still applicable to possession of byproduct material and l are adequate to protect public hevth and safety and the environment.
l.
l Therefore, the NRC staff is proposing to modify the regulations in Part 39 to define an ECS and provide appropriate regulations for using ECSs in well logging. The most significant change would exempt an ECS from the costly procedures for well abandonment. Well abandonment, in addition to specific reporting and approval requirements, requires that the source be immobilized and sealed in place with a cement plug, that the cement plug be !
protected from inadvertent intrusion, and that a permanent plaque be mounted at the surface of i the well. The NRC staff is proposing to implement less stringent standards for ECSs that are less than 3.7 MBq (100 microcuries). Current ECSs typically use up to 50 microcuries of Am-241. A preliminary assessment has indicated that no significant impact to public health and 1 safety would result from this change. An Environmental Assessment will be prepared for this rulemaking, The NRC staff is proposing several other changes to improve, clarify, and update Part 39 requirements. l
- 1. Revise requirements for tritium neutron generator target sources containing less than '
1,110 GBq [30 curies] of tritium. Tritium neutron generator sources typically contain less than 20 curies of tritium which is less hazardous than the typical cesium or americium sources currently being used in well logging applications. The tritium neutron generator target sources only produce a significant neutron stream when a voltage is applied.
For well logging applications, the NRC staff is proposing that the tritium neutron generator targets be subject to the requirements of Part 39 except (1) for the sealed source design and performance criteria (Section 39.41) and (2) the well abandonment procedures (Sections 39.15 and 39.77) when a surface casing is used (which is standard for oil and gas wells). As discussed below, the potential hazard of these sources does not warrant the existing requirements for well abandonment in the event that the source becomes lost. In addition, the requirements associated with sealed sources for well logging were not intended for tritium neutron generator target sources, but Part 39 does not make clear thir intent or distinction.
Based on NRC staffs' preliminary assessment, the 30-curie limit would allow licensees flexibility in designing new sources of this kind while maintaining the tritium within an environmentally safe level. This should be confirmed in the staffs Environmental Assessment.
These sources are used for logging oil and gas wells, which use surface casings to protect ,
fresh water aquifers. Hence, the only potential exposure hazard these sources would present is I to the workers and such exposure could only occur if the source were ruptured and the tritium were ingested in significant quantities. If a tritium source were lost, it would be contained within thousands of cubic feet of drilling mud. This drilling mud contains hazardous chemicals and is cbntrolled and moniiored as part of the drilling operations. Therefore, the NRC staff believes that eliminating costly requirements for these sources will not impact public health and safety.
- 2. Section 39.77 provides the requirements for notification and procedures for abandoning irretrievable well logging sources. This section specifies that NRC approval must be obtained prior to implementing abandonment procedures. In some circumstances, such as i high well pressures that could lead to fires or explosions, the delay required to notify NRC may cause an immediate threat. This section should be modified to allow immediate abandonment 2
l
v d
without prior NRC approval if a delay could cause an immediate threat to public health and safety. The NRC would be notified after the fact.
- 3. Section 39.15 provides requirements for abandoning irretrievable sealed sources.
This section would be modified to provide performance-based criteria for inadvertent intrusion
. on the source. This would allow licensees greater procedural latitude while continuing to ensure source integrity. The current requirements may be more restrictive than is necessary for licensees to protect an abandoned source, depending upon the individual well abandonment. For example, if a significant amount of drilling equipment is abandoned with the well, this equipment may be effective in preventing inadvertent intrusion on the source but might not meet the requirements of Section 39.15.
Paragraph (a)(5)(ii) of Section 39.15 has prescriptive requirements for irretrievable well logging sources, specifying the use of a mechanical device to prevent inadvertent intrusion on the source, at a spscific location within the abandoned well. The NRC staff is proposing that licensees " prevent inadvertent intrusion on the source," which would require that the source be
- protected but allow licensees the flexibility to determine the best method. This proposed change would not affect the requirement in (a)(5)(i) for a well logging source to be immobilized with a cement plug or the requirement in (a)(5)(iii) fcr a permanent plaque.
- 4. The NRC issued a generic exemption from the current design and performance criteria for sealed sources in 1989. This exemption allows the use of older sealed sources, that have not demonstrated that they meet current criteria, to be used for well logging. This exemption is currently in use, but is not included in Part 39. The regulations would be modified to make this existing procedure an NRC regulation.
Sealed sources that were manufactured before July 14,1989, may use design and
- performance criteria from the United States of America Standards institute (USASI) N5.10-1968 or the criteria in Section 39.41. -The use of the USASI standard is based on an NRC Notice of Generic Exemption issued on July 25,1989 (54 FR 30883). Sealed sources manufactured
. after July 14,1989 had to continue to meet the requirements of Section 39.41. NRC regulations have not incorporated the USASI N5.10-1968 requirements for older sealed sources. The primary difference between the two standards is that the new standard includes a
- vibration test that was included for consistency with international standards. The USASI standard considered a vibration test and concluded that, to pass the other requirements, the source would be so rugged there was no reason to include a vibration test.
The exemption to allow the use of the USASI standard was to avoid a situason in which well logging licensees might be unnecessarily forced out of business and have to dispose of their sources because the original source manufacturers fGJ f:) damor strate that these sources meet criteria that became effective ia 1989. The NRC determined that mMd source models subject to the USASI standard would not adversely affect public health and safety.
Because many of these older =ec!cd sources contain radioactive material with half-lives that allow their continued use (i.e., cesium-137 and americium-241 have half-lives of 30 and 458 years respectively), th:s modification to the regulations is appropriate.
3
- 5. Section 39.35 specifies leak testing requirements for sealed sources, and paragraph (e) specifies exemptions from the testing requirements. The existing leak testing requirements would be amended to clarify that they apply to the radiation that is capable of escaping an intact source capsule, rather than the radioactive element or material itself contained within that capsule. For example, although Am-241 emits both alpha and gamma radiation, when encapsulated in stainless steel (e.g. an ECS source) only the gamma radiation can pass through the capsule and therefore such sources would be exempt from leak testing if it contains less than 3.7 MBq (100 microcuries).
- 6. Sections of Part 39, that contain dates that have passed, would be updated to reduce confusion. Sections 39.33 and 39.49 contain requirements that were dependent upon dates that have passed and are no longer appropriate. For clarity and to avoid confusion, these sections should be updated to remove requirements that are no longer appropriate.
- 7. Sections 39.15,39.33,39.35, and 39.41 of Part 39 will be updated to conform with the agency's metric policy by stating parameter values in dual units w;th metric units first and with English units in brackets.
Assessment of Imoacts on Licen; ::; and Cost Effectiveness This rulemaking would provide relief to NRC and Agreement State licensees who use an ECS or a tritium neutron generator target for well logging without a significant impact on health -
and safety, as NRC staff should confirm in the development of the Regulatory Analysis and Environmental Assessment. Other revisions to Part 39 would reduce confusion regarding generic exemptions, leak testing, and unnecessary dates, and may reduce costs, for NRC and Agreement State licensees.
A review of some typical well abandonments has shown that wells have been abandoned with only the ECS present at costs that range from hundreds of thousands of dollars to over a million dollars. Since NRC resources to amend 10 CFR Part 39 are estimated to be about one staff year, this is a cost effective one-time use of resources.
I OGC Analysis !
The principal objective of the proposed rule is to chcnge the current regulations to reflect the use of new technology that allows logging operations to be done concurrently with drilling. This rule would more appropriately regulate low activity energy compensation sources.
The ruie would modify the abandonment procedures for inadvertent intrusion on the source ,
using performance-based criteria, modify the abandonment procedures for tritium neutron !
generator target sources to avoid costly abandonments since this hazard does not warrant the use of the existing procedures, and modify well abandonment procedures when an immediate threat to puolic health and safety is involved. The proposed rule wou!d also update sections of 4 _
l I
[
i,.
l 10 CFR Part 39 that contain dates which have passed and conform Part 39 with the Commission's metric policy. OGC does not believe this action constitutes a " major rule" pursuant to the Small Business Regulatory Faimess Enforcement Act of 1996. OGC believes l that the rule does not constitute a backfit pursuant to 10 CFR 50.103, 'herefore, a backfit l analysis is not necessary. However, OGC believes that the NRC staff must develop an environmental assessment pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21 and an OMB Clearance Package. In all other respects, OGC has not identified any potential legal complications or known bases for a legal objection to the rulemaking.
Aareement State implementation Issues l Agreement State licensees should benefit from these changes in a manner similar to l NRC licensees. In the course of this rulemaking, the NRC will evaluate each revision to i
determine its compatibility category or health and safety category in accordance with the new adequacy and compatibility policy approved in the Commission SRM dated June 30,1997.
In general, the three Agreement State commenters agree that the current regulations described in Part 39 need to be revised to reflect the use of ECSs. Following are the more significant comments and responses.
l i
! - Comment: The State of Illinois argued that ECSs with activities exceeding 100 i L microcuries for beta / gamma emitters or 10 microcuries for alpha emitters should be leak tested and therefore ECSs should not be given a categorical exemption. The State of Washington commented that tritium sources have been known to leak and that proper monitoring of these sources should be required. !
l Response The NRC staff intends to define an ECS as having 100 microcuries or less of radioactive material and therefore an ECS will be exempt from the existing leak testing requirements of section 39.35 (see 39.35(e)). If a source has more than 100 microcuries it will l l not meet the definition of an ECS or the exemption criteria in section 39.35(e). Based on -
l design requirements, ECSs will not include alpha emitters.
1 The NRC does not, and has not, required leak testing of any tritium sealed sources.
Section 39.35(e) specifically exempts all tritium sealed sources used in well logging. At this !
time, the NRC staff has no additional information that would require NRC to reexamine the existing regulation.
Comment The State of Illinois believes that some degree of protection is necessary for i ECSs lost near the surface.
Response The NRC staff intends to build into the regulations separate provisions for ECSs based on whether a surface casing is used or not. Surface casings are used to protect fresh water aquifers from contamination and are extensively used in oil and gas exploration.
When surface casings are not used, more rigorous recovery operations will be required (see Section 39.51.)
5 l E_ _ = _ _ _ . . _ - - _ _ _ _ .
i4-At this time the staff believes that a surface casing will provide adequate near surface
- protection. The Environmental Assessment to be prepared will determine if there is a risk that
!. warrants additional measures.
Comment: The State of Illinois does not believe that ECSs should be categorically ,
excluded from design and performance criteria for sealed sources. The State of Utah, on the other hand, suggests that ECSs should be exempt from Part 32 (Section 32.210 discusses registration of sealed sources).
Response Although the NRC staffs intends to exclude ECSs from the rigorous design and performance criteria in Part 39, the ECSs will still need to meet the licensing requirements of Section 30.32(g) (which references Section 32.210) which require more general design and performance requirements.' The NRC staff believes this is a reasonable requirement for these sources.
4 i Comment: Both the States of Illinois and Washington believe that the example that was used in the draft Rulemaking Plan comparing the radioactive sources in ECSs and gas and aerosol detectors as a basis for exempting ECSs is inappropriate.
, Response The NRC staff was not trying to justify the exemption based on this comparison, and will remove it from the Rulemaking Plan. The Environmental Assessment, to be prepare as part of this rulemaking, will assess whether ECSs can be safely exempted from l
the requirements of Part 39.
Comment: The State of Illinois commented that neutron generator devices containing tritium targets also require above-ground testing for operability and calibrwion and can produce l radiation levels constituting "High Radiation Areas." The State argues that the revised regulations should allow testing and operation of such devices provided procedures are in place to monitor radiation levels and ensure that adequate safety procedures are in place and implemented.
Response The NRC staff agrees with this concept. Tritium sources will remain subject !
to Section 39.63 - Operating and emergency procedures.
Comment: The State of lilinois raised some concems about some sources meeting the
- USASI standards. They noted an event where a source experienced damage due to vibration
! within a source holder. Specifically, vibration of a sealed source within a source holder may L have led to a loss of containment. Therefore, the assumption that sources built under the USASI standard would be so rugged so as to preclude a public health and safety problem has ,
been called into question. The State also suggested that how sealed sources may be loaded _
i into source holders has not been thoroughly evaluated and suggested that the NRC may wish to consider the source and source holder comt:ination.
Response The NRC staff understands that the problem identified was not related to the USASI standard, but an improperly assembled source holder. There was r.o loss of ,
containment. The vibration test is not designed to acco'.mt for an improperly loaded source.
Historically, the NRC has not regulated source holders or the well logging devices in which the 6
L___ __ __________ - _ __ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ - _ ___ ___ - - _ __ _ _ l
source holders or sources are placed. The staff also notes that there has been no history or problems with the source and source holder comb tations. The staff has concluded that no rule change is necessary, and in any event, the comment is beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
Supoortino Documents This rulemaking would require a Regulatory Analysis that would identify and estimate the relevant values and impacts likely to result from this action. The Regulatory Analysis would estimate the cost savings to licensees for each of the proposed changes and compare this to the potentialimpacts to public health and safety. The staff has used a risk informed approach to the burden reductions proposed in this rulemaking. The information provided in the Regulatory Analysis for each change conceming the impact on small entities would be sufficient to support a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis or a certification that the proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
No backfit analysis will be needed because the rulemaking would not affect Part 50 licensees. An OMB Clearance Package will be needed because the rulemaking is expected to reduce reporting or recordkeeping requirements.
An Environmental Assessment would be needed to show, as NRC staff currently believe, that there is no significant impact to public health and safety in treating an ECS or a tritium neutron generator target with less stringent regulatory requirements than the larger well logging sources and the other changes discussed. This information would be needed in the development of the Regulatory Analysis.
The consolidated regulatory guidance project will incorporate all necessary guidance for well logging licensees into NUREG-1556, " Consolidated Guidance About Materials Licenses, Program Specific Guidance About Well-Logging Licenses." The staff will coordinate the publication dates for the draft and final NUREGs with the publication dates for the draft and final rule. However, the changes proposed in this rulemaking should have a minimal impact to this NUREG.
The change proposed for Section 39.77 allowing flexibility during an emergency for abandoning irretrievable well logging sources may impact the procedures of the NRC Emergency Operations Center. If necessary, appropriate changes will be made during the rulemaking. Other changes that might impact int.pection and enforcement procedures will be updated during the rulemaking.
7
Resources The estimated resources to complete this rulemaking would be about one staff year divided among RES, NMSS, Region IV, and OGC.
Contractor support will be expended to assist in preparing the Environmental Assessment and the Regulatory Analysis. NRC staff estimates this effort at about $50,000.
These resources are included in the current budget.
Staffing Project Manaoement Concurrina Official NMSS - Mark Haisfield Carl Paperiello Technical Gucoort NMSS - Bruce Carrico Carl Paperiello Region IV- Anthony Gaines Ross Scarano OGC - Maria Schwartz Stuart Treby Steerina Grouo No steering group will be used on this rulemaking. The working group is identified above.
Enhanced Public Participation This rulemaking will use the NRC electronic bulletin board on the NRC's web page on the Internet. This bulletin board will be used as a mechanism to enhance public dialogue. This bulletin board allows users to submit comments electronically as well as review comments and questions submitted by others, and provides a mechanism for NRC to respond electronically, where appropriate.
EDO or Commission issuance it is recommended that the EDO issue the proposed and final rule. This act on does not constitute a significant question of policy, and falls within the EDO's authority. If significant policy issues are raised during the public comment period, a SECY Paper will be prepared for the final rule.
8
Schedules Draft Rulemaking Plan for Office concurrence March 1997 Draft Rulemaking Plan to the Agreement States and CRCPD for comment, and SECY Paper to the Commission for information June 1997 SECY Paper, including Rulemaking Plan, with disposition of Agreement State comments for Ofhce concurrence November 1997
.SECY Paper, for approval of Rulemaking Plan, to EDO May 1998-Proposed Rulemaking package to the EDO . 9 months following
. (And OMB clearance package for submittal to OMB) EDO approval of the I Rulemaking plan Final Rule to the EDO 6 months following expiration of the 75-day comment period
)
I 9
u______.______.________.___________________...___ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ._ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . . . . . _ _ . . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ __ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _
( l 4
e i 1
1 O
i i
l l
1 I
t I
l l
ATTACHMENT 2 :
i l AGREEMENT STATE COMMENTS i
i l
I
l 1'..
From: Craig Jones <cjones@deg. state.ut.us>
To:- WND1.WNP9(jhm)
Date: 6/12/97 12:40pm
Subject:
. Response to 10 CFR Part 39-Oraft Rulemaking Plan Hi Jim: l Our licensing and inspection staff have reviewed the Draft Rulemaking Plan for 10 CFR Part 39 sent'as Agreement State transmittal SP-97-036. We support the proposed changes .for small energy compensation sources (ECS).
It is not clear that NRC is also proposing that an ECS containing up to 100 microcuries will be exempt;under Section 32. If not, maybe they should be exempt.
The other proposed changes are reasonable and necessary. The move from
, prescriptive requirements to performance-based requirements is a welcome change.
.. Thanks for logging in these comments, Craig i
i t
e I 1
_ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ . - . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.____-..m_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ .
, i
~
sJIdishsgs DEPARTME .OKNU. ,
AR SAFETY 1035 OUTERTARK. E SPRINfMd"' Nilh[ .a x x 2704 Jim Edgar Governor D@ 3. / Thomas W. Ortciger 21 ~
Director n ,
July 9,1997
"~
Jim Meyers Office of State Programs US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Re: Draft Rulemaking Plan to Revise Well Logging Regulations (10 CFR 39).
Gentlemen: i The Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety (Department) hereby submits its comments on the referenced notice. The proposal represents changes to 10 CFR 39 that would make minor regulatory changes and accommodations for updated technologies associated with well logging. Our specific comments are as follows:
- 1. Regarding the regulation of Energy Compensation Sources (ECS), the Department agrees that Part 39 should be revised to reflect their use. However, we disagree on the ,
lack of need for leak testing these sources. Although most sources may be of small activities, should their activity exceed 100 uCi for beta / gamma emitters or 10 uCi for alpha emitters, they should be leak tested according to the current regulation for similar activity sources. As such, ECS should not be categorically exempted.
- 2. If a logging string with an ECS is lost near the surface and is under consideration for abandonment, projections must be incorporated into the regulations such that it is unlikely that the borehole may be rebored or excavated. Although we agree rigorous recovery operations and costly abandonment procedures are unnecessary, some degree of protection of the abandoned string should be in place.
rdyct t*
\
.:\
US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2
!. July 9,1997
- 3. Policy and Guidance Directive 84-22; Rev. I should be used to determine when ECS '
should be subjected to design and performance criteria. ECS should not be categorically excluded from evaluation.' We suggest that ECS be viewed as calibration and referene.e_ sources when interpreting the policy. Absent any technically rigorous environmental impact assessment to suggest other values, the value of 100 uCi for beta / gamma emitters and 10 uCi for alpha emitters should continue to be used. In addition we ask that the NRC keep in mind when developing these regulations that although the NRC does not regulate Ra-226, this nuclide may be used as an ECS. ' Also, we suggest that the NRC refrain from use of the illustrative example of gas and aerosol detectors with regard to exempt sources authorized for distribution. These materials represent a different form and authorized use than those under consideration in this proposal. ,
- 4. Neutron generator devices containing tritium targets also require above-ground testing for operability and calibration. When energized, these devices can produce radiation levels which may constitute "High Radiation Areas". Therefore, to acknowledge this use, language should be incorporated in the regulations to allow such testing and operation provided arrangements are made via facility design or engineered safety equipment to reduce the radiation levels and ensure adequate written safety procedures have been developed and are in use by trained personnel. ,
- 5. We agree that in some emergencies, prior notification of source abandonment to a regulatory agency is not in the best interest of public health and safety. Allowances l
should be made for immediate abandonment notwithstanding the radiological threat if a determination ofimmediate threat to public health and safety is made by responsible on-site personnel. Such decisions should be made given due consideration to the possibility of fire, explosion, or unstable working environments such as high winds, tornadoes or lightning. To the extent possible, these circumstances should be defined in emergency procedures.
- 6. We support the allowance of alternate means to prevent inadvertent intrusion into an abandoned well, provided immobilization and protection is still accomplished and the regulatory agency approves of the alternate measures.
- 7. We recommend that the past exemption and list of sources allowed under the generic exemption be directly referenced in the proposed rulemaking to clarify those older sealed sources which may still be used, with some reservation (see next comment).
l)S Nuclear IUgulatory Conunission Page 3 July 9,1997 S.
In addition to those items in the Draft Rulemaking Pl consider for inclusion in the regulation, the need for evaluatian, the NRC may how sealed sources may be loaded into on or specification source holdersof Rece t Department, an Illinois licensee and nan NRC licensee suggest th i events involving the e nteraction of the thoroughly evaluated. Comments asfrom not be the SSS Sectisou Therefore, the assumption that sources. built unde a nment.
rugged so as'to preclude a pubhc heai5and s andardsafetyproblem would be so has be i question. It may be necessary under these circumstances er calfedinto to determin well logging licensees would be unnecessarily ess e forced again if out of busin of disposal valid of these sources or replacement orgenericin nature. costs) should these conc ms prove to be these cooperative efforts that both a ng.the Agreement StatTha Itis through regarding (217) 785-9947. these comments,er ordo not hesitate to call m e any questions Daren Perrero at Sincerely, faA.dd&+
Steven C. Collins, Chief Division ofRadioactive Materials SCC:dmp cc:
Jim Lynch, State Agreements Officer
g____ _ _ _-.___ _ _ _ _ _ __ _. _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
j 4
l i
le .
)
l i l From: Frazee, Terry <tef0303@ hub.doh.wa. gov >
To: ' WND1.WNP9 (jhm)
Dates 7/11/97.12:15pm subject: SP-97-036
( We have several comments regarding the Draft Rulemaking Plan for 10 CFR 39:
.]
Overall we agree with the intention of.the Draft Rulemaking Plan to improve the Well Logging regulations; however, some statements are made that need to !
be examined. 1
- 1) NRC justifies the 100 microcurie limit.for Am-241 energy compensation l sources by stating that it already authorizes distribution of gas and aerosol 1 detectors under section 32.26 containing more than 100 microcuries to persons exempt from an NRC license. This may be true but the sources are not subjected to similar environments! Generally, gas and aerosol detectors are NOT shoved down a hot, wet hole with a whirling drill bit. A stronger safety statement needs to be provided.
2).Likewise, the tritium. neutron generator target sources are characterized as a trivial hazard. Again, this may be true but the public may not see it that way.when by inference the NRC is proposing to let licensees drill right through a stuck source rather than abandon a well. A stronger safety statement needs to be provided.
- 3) Our experience with tritium sources indicates a strong propensity to l leakage. Proper monitoring for tritium should be a clear part of the regulations. This could be a significant. burden for well logging licensees j who are not equipped for liquid scintillation counting.
-This message from: Terry Frazee
. Quick ways to reach me:
Voice = 360-753-3461 FAX = 360-753-1496 Also, visit our Home Page at
--> http://www.doh.wa. gov /ehp/rp l
k___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _m_ __