NRC-99-0093, Comment on Prs 10CFR30,31,32,170 & 171 Re Requirements for Certain Generally Licensed Industrial Devices Containing Byproduct Matl. Licensee Unclear Whether Requirements Apply to Holder of Operating License

Comment on Prs 10CFR30,31,32,170 & 171 Re Requirements for Certain Generally Licensed Industrial Devices Containing Byproduct Matl. Licensee Unclear Whether Requirements Apply to Holder of Operating License

ML20217G464
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	10/12/1999
From:	Peterson N DETROIT EDISON CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
References
CON-NRC-99-0093, FRN-64FR40295, RULE-PR-170, RULE-PR-171, RULE-PR-30, RULE-PR-31, RULE-PR-32 64FR40295-00035, NUDOCS 9910210296
Download: ML20217G464 (2)

Text

-*i Fermi 2 6400 North Dixie Hwn Newpo@ M

~

Detroit Edison 0mTED M.

99 OCT 18 P3 :23 e %ber 12,1999 1 M.' '-99-0093 f, Secretary DOCKET NUMBER U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission PROPOSED RULE.PR3o.3,. so ivuive l Washington, DC 20555-0001 ~((,qriNon95)

Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff {

l

Reference:

Fermi 2 {

NRC Docket No. 50-341 NRC License No. NPF-43

Subject:

Detroit Edison Comments on Proposed Rule Regarding Requirements for Certain Generally Licensed Industrial Devices Containing Bvoroduct Material L Detroit Edison, Operator of the Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant, offers the following comments regarding proposed rulemaking, " Requirements for Certa'm Generally  ;

Licensed Industrial Devices Containing Byproduct Material," published in the Federal l Register on July 26,1999.

1 As the holder of a power reactor operating license, under 10 CFR 50, Detroit Edison is I

- I allowed to receive and possess, at the Fermi 2 site, whatever types, forms, and quantities of source, byproduct, and special nuclear material that are needed to operate Fermi 2.

This includes devices that may be possessed under a general license of 10 CFR 31. As a power reactor licensee, however, these devices are included in our radiation protection

- program, which provides for the proper receipt, use, accountability, and transfer of these  !

devices, as well as leak testing, if the quantity of radioactive material exceeds a threshold )

quantity. These controls assure that these devices do not create a radiological hazard while in our possession, and that their transfer is limited to authorized recipients.

The proposed rulemaking imposes a registration fee and administrative requirements on i those who possess these devices under a general license. It is unclear, however, whether these requirements apply to the holder of an operating license. While appro# e for a person who is not subject to the strict controls of an operating license, thest .equirements would be an unnecessary burden to a power reactor licensee. For example:

)

e Fermi 2 i!, required to leak test sources exceeding a specified threshold, with a \

contamination limit of 0.005 microcurie. Sources found to have contamination j O

~

9910210291'951012 l 3 64 40295 PDR .

l0

j; Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff NRC-99-0093 Page 2 exceeding this limit must be reported to the Commission on an annual basis. Power reactor licensees should not have to also meet the 30-day reporting requirement of 10 CFR 31.5. In addition, the proposed rulemaking would require that the report include "a plan for ensuring that the premises and environs are acceptable for unrestricted use..." This has the potential to impose an unnecessary burden on a power reactor licensee who is using this device within its restricted area.

e The proposed rulemaking will not allow a licensee to hold a device that is not in use for more than 2 years. Although this is a reasonable requirement for a general

. licensee without a radiation protection program, it is an unnecessary burden on a

- power reactor licensee who has adequate storage facilities, e The requirement for annual registration, with payment of a fee, would impose an unnecessary burden on a person who already maintains an operating license.

Although the additional requirements of 10 CFR 31 do not seem designed for persons who would be allowed to possess these devices under their operating licenses, the applicability of 10 CFR 31 is not clear. This should be corrected through an explicit statement in the regulations that these requirements are limited to those who cannot possess this device under the provisions of a specific or operating license.

, Sincerely, f '

N. K. Peterson Director, Nuclear Licensing cc: A. J. Kugler A. Vegel NRC Resident Office Regional Administrator, Region III -

1 1

_