[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 69 (Monday, April 12, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17506-17510]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-9035]
[[Page 17506]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 40
RIN 3150-AD65
Radiological Criteria for License Termination of Uranium Recovery
Facilities
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its
regulations regarding decommissioning of licensed thorium mills and
uranium recovery facilities to provide specific radiological criteria
for the decommissioning of lands and structures. This final rule uses
the existing soil radium standard to derive a dose criterion (benchmark
approach) for the cleanup of byproduct material other than radium in
soil and for the cleanup of surface activity on structures to be
released for unrestricted use. This final rule is intended to provide a
clear and consistent regulatory basis for determining the extent to
which lands and structures can be considered to be decommissioned.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation becomes effective on June 11, 1999.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Cardile, telephone: (301) 415-
6185; e-mail: fpc@nrc.gov; or Elaine Brummett, telephone: (301) 415-
6606, e-mail: esb@nrc.gov, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Summary of Public Comments and Responses to Comments
IV. Agreement State Compatibility
V. Final Environmental Assessment: Availability
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
VII. Regulatory Analysis
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
IX. Backfit Analysis
X. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
XI. Criminal Penalties
I. Introduction
The NRC is amending its regulations regarding decommissioning of
licensed thorium mills and uranium recovery (UR) facilities
(conventional uranium mills and uranium extraction processes such as in
situ leach (ISL) facilities) to provide radiological criteria for the
decommissioning of lands and structures. These criteria apply to the
decommissioning of licensed UR facilities subject to the NRC's
jurisdiction and will also apply to thorium mills if any become
licensed in the future. The criteria apply to decommissioning of UR
facilities that operate through their normal lifetime and to those that
may be shut down prematurely. The NRC will apply these criteria in
determining the adequacy of remediation of residual radionuclides
resulting from the possession or use of byproduct material.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As defined in 10 CFR Part 40, byproduct material is the
tailings or wastes produced by the extraction of uranium or thorium
from any ore processed primarily for its source material content,
including discrete surface wastes resulting from uranium solution
extraction processes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The intent of this rulemaking is to provide a clear and consistent
regulatory basis for determining the extent to which lands and
structures at UR facilities must be remediated before decommissioning
of a site can be considered complete and the license terminated. The
NRC has previously applied site release criteria for decommissioning on
a site-specific basis using existing guidance for surface activity and
radionuclides other than radium in soil. The NRC believes that
inclusion of criteria in the regulations will result in more efficient
and consistent licensing actions related to site remediation
activities.
II. Background
On August 22, 1994 (59 FR 43200), the NRC published a proposed rule
to amend 10 CFR Part 20 of its regulations ``Standards for Protection
Against Radiation'' to include radiological criteria for license
termination as subpart E. The proposed rule applied to uranium mills
and other NRC-licensed facilities, but did not apply to mill tailings
or to soil radium cleanup at mills because they are regulated under 10
CFR Part 40, Appendix A.
On July 21, 1997 (62 FR 39058), the NRC published a final rule that
codified radiological criteria for license termination for NRC
licensees, but excluded UR facilities. The NRC excluded UR facilities
from the scope of the final cleanup rule to allow further consideration
of the issues unique to the decommissioning of these facilities. These
unique issues include the existing regulatory framework for UR
facilities and the nature of contamination at UR facilities, both of
which are discussed below.
Under the existing regulatory framework for UR facilities, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the authority to set cleanup
standards for uranium and thorium mills and, based on that authority,
issued regulations in 40 CFR Part 192 that contain some decommissioning
criteria for these facilities. NRC's regulations in 10 CFR Part 40,
Appendix A, Criterion 6(6), conform to EPA's standards for radium in
soil. Appendix A also provides ground-water protection criteria.
Therefore, this rulemaking addresses only the radiological criteria
for decommissioning of lands and structures. The rule only applies to
those UR facilities that do not have an approved decommissioning plan
for buildings and soil when the rule becomes effective. The sites with
approved decommissioning plans may request an amendment to their
license to adopt the criteria of this rule after the revision to
Criterion 6(6) is promulgated.
The applicable cleanup standards for soil radium in 10 CFR Part 40,
Appendix A, Criterion 6(6), address the main contaminant at uranium
mills in the large areas where windblown contamination from the
tailings pile has occurred, and to a lesser extent, at ISLs in holding/
settling ponds and process or bleed solution spills. These standards
require that the concentration of radium (Ra-226 at UR facilities, Ra-
228 at thorium mills) not exceed the background level by more than 5
pCi/g (0.19 Bq/g) in the first 15 cm (6 inches) of soil and 15 pCi/g
(0.56 Bq/g) for every subsequent 15 cm (6 inch) layer. However, in
other mill and ISL site areas proximate to locations where radium
contamination exists (e.g., under/around the mill/process building, in
a yellow cake storage area, and under/around an ore crusher), uranium
(U-nat) is the radionuclide of concern. At least one mill site must
also address soil cleanup of thorium (Th-230, the parent of Ra-226, is
usually in approximate equilibrium (same activity concentration) with
Ra-226) because thorium is more mobile in the acidic milling solutions
and leaches farther into the ground than the radium under raffinate
ponds and heap leach pads. Because 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A, does not
have cleanup standards for surface activity or for soil contamination
from radionuclides other than radium, NRC guidance documents have been
the source of cleanup criteria for residual uranium, thorium, and
building surface activity.
An additional difficulty for remediation of UR facilities is that
the residual radionuclides to be addressed in the site decommissioning
are also present in the surrounding background soil in elevated and
widely variable concentrations. Some mill sites even have uranium mine
pits and/or piles of
[[Page 17507]]
overburden soil containing low-grade ore on or adjacent to the areas to
be remediated. This complicates the determination of background values
and limits the ability of the licensee to distinguish residual
radioactivity from naturally occurring (in-situ) radioactivity.
To allow for consideration of these issues, the NRC also published,
on July 21, 1997 (62 FR 39093), a request for additional comments on
regulatory options for decommissioning of UR facilities. Included as
part of the request was a discussion of an option to codify a dose
objective for radionuclides other than radium (uranium and thorium) at
UR facilities consistent with the radium cleanup standard. Under this
approach, UR facilities would use the dose, excluding radon, from
radium at the cleanup standard in existing 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A,
Criterion 6(6), as a benchmark for the cleanup of building surface
activity and radionuclides other than radium in soil. Commenters were
requested to provide input on options for decommissioning and,
specifically, on the benchmark approach.
Use of the benchmark approach would provide for a common dose
criterion across a UR site for those areas contaminated with radium and
for those areas contaminated with other radionuclides.
The radium dose benchmark approach would require UR licensees
subject to the rule to calculate the potential total effective dose
equivalent to the average member of the critical group for the site
that would result from the radium standard within 1000 years, based
upon site-specific parameters. These licensees would be required to
provide justification for the models and parameters selected in the
dose calculations. The dose from the 5 pCi/g (0.19 Bq/g) radium
standard would be applicable for most of the site contamination.
Licensees would then remediate the site such that the residual
radionuclides (byproduct material) remaining on the site that are
distinguishable from background would not result in a dose that is
greater than that which would result from the radium soil standard. The
radionuclides of concern are uranium and thorium, because it is assumed
that the progeny of Ra-226 are at acceptable levels when the radium
standard is achieved. Licensees would also be required to demonstrate
that doses were ``as low as is reasonably achievable'' (ALARA). In the
unlikely event that a site benchmark dose (before application of ALARA)
exceeds 100 mrem/yr (1 mSv/yr), the NRC staff would consult with the
Commission before approving such a benchmark dose.
III. Summary of Public Comments and Responses to Comments
Comments received on the 1994 proposed rule for 10 CFR Part 20
subpart E were summarized in NUREG/CR-6353 and in the final rule notice
(62 FR 39058, July 21, 1997). The eleven responses (nine commenters) to
the July 21, 1997, request for additional comments on radiological
criteria for UR facilities are addressed here.
A. Comments on Approach to the Criteria
One commenter indicated that the standards should be technically-
based, protective of human health, and based on a substantial fraction
of the 100 mrem/yr (1 mSv/yr) public dose limit. The use of dose-
objective standards was encouraged. Evaluation of radon and thoron
exposure was considered essential. This commenter also pointed out that
the benchmark approach would codify a different dose limit for each
facility.
The EPA commented that the soil radium standard of 5 pCi/g (0.19
Bq/g) is consistent with the minimally acceptable dose limit of 15
mrem/yr (0.15 mSv/yr) for the residential scenario, and that for other
land use scenarios, the cleanup standards are more stringent for Ra-
226, Ra-228, Th-232, and Th-230. The EPA also cautioned that a dose
limit for uranium cleanup should not exceed 15 mrem/yr (0.15 mSv/yr).
A third commenter stated that the proposed rule is not acceptable
because doses resulting from the benchmark approach could exceed 100
mrem/yr; NRC's existing guidance on cleanup of uranium, thorium, and
surface activity should be used to set the minimum requirements; the
expected dose from the radium standard should be clarified; the radon
dose should be included in demonstrating compliance; and the time frame
for dose modeling should be 10,000 years. The commenter also indicated
that the proposed approach seems to allow a total dose of twice the
radium dose; and that if more types of areas are to be included than
those indicated in the proposal, then the enlargement of scope would
require additional notice and review.
Six other commenters supported the Ra-226 benchmark dose approach
for cleanup of other radionuclides such as U-nat, Th-230, and Th-232.
These commenters indicated that the existing regulatory framework is
appropriate and provides for flexibility to allow optimum tailings
disposal on a site-specific basis. One of these commenters also pointed
out that uranium mill sites will be turned over to the custodial care
of the Department of Energy (DOE) or the State for long-term care,
effectively eliminating substantial portions of these sites from the
public exposure pathways. In addition, some of the vicinity properties
remediated with neighboring abandoned mills (under the DOE's's Uranium
Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project) have deposits of contamination
(Ra-226, Th-230, or U-nat) above the limits remaining under the
supplemental standards provisions of 40 CFR 192.21.
A. Response: The NRC agrees with the need to develop regulations
that are protective of public health and safety with regard to
decommissioning of UR facilities. NRC has previously addressed
considerations related to radioactivity and dose to the public, public
health aspects, fraction of the 100 mrem/yr (1 mSv/yr) dose, and the
rationale for excluding the radon dose in Sections A.2.2.1, A.2.2.2,
and F.6 of the July 21,1997, Federal Register notice (62 FR at 39060-64
and 39082) for the final rule for 10 CFR Part 20, subpart E; those
discussions remain applicable to this final rulemaking.
As discussed above, the UR facilities have large areas contaminated
with radium in soils where the existing radium standard is applied. The
NRC believes that it is important to promulgate cleanup standards for
other residual radionuclides that are consistent with the radium
cleanup standards. Use of such an approach would result in a common
dose criterion across an entire UR site, both for those areas
contaminated with radium and for those areas contaminated with uranium
and thorium. As noted above, the 5 pCi/g radium standard was
promulgated by EPA for UR sites. The 5 pCi/g radium value has also been
recommended as an exemption level by the Board of Directors of the
Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors (October 1998) for
the Suggested State Regulations on technologically enhanced naturally
occurring radioactive materials.
The NRC staff's preliminary dose modeling, using realistic
parameter values and the RESRAD code, indicates that at typical UR
facilities, where the background radiation results in doses of over 200
mrem/yr (2.0 mSv/yr), the Ra-226 standard of 5 pCi/g (0.19 Bq/g) could
typically result in a potential peak annual dose on the order of 20 to
35 mrem/yr (0.2 to 0.35 mSv/yr) to the average member of the critical
group. Although it is possible that some site-
[[Page 17508]]
specific parameter values and subsurface contamination could result in
a higher benchmark dose than that estimated by the staff for the
various scenarios, the staff has high confidence that a site-specific
dose using the benchmark approach will typically be a small fraction of
100 mrem/yr (1 mSv/yr), and in all cases will not exceed 100 mrem/yr (1
mSv/yr). The rule also requires licensee's to demonstrate that doses
are ALARA which should result in a potential dose of less than 25 mrem/
yr (0.2 mSv/yr) from the residual Ra-226 on the remediated site for
most sites. Therefore, the potential health risk should be similar to
the NRC dose limit established for other facilities in Part 20, subpart
E, and approximate the level suggested in the EPA comment.
The radium benchmark dose modeling results are greater than the 5
pCi/g (0.19 Bq/g) radium modeling results reported by the EPA. The main
reason for the difference in results is that the EPA modeled a much
smaller area of contamination than that used by NRC staff (100 m\2\
versus 404,687 m\2\). Also, EPA modeled a much smaller fraction of time
an individual would spend outdoors (0.02 versus 0.25) and used a less
conservative root depth value (0.9 versus 0.25 meters) which generally
decreases the calculated potential dose. What is not factored into the
dose modeling is the low probability of anyone constructing a house or
growing a large garden on the areas of residual contamination at these
facilities. The UR facilities are in semi-arid (7-15 inches (18-39 cm)
annual precipitation), sparsely populated areas (1-13 persons/mile\2\
(0.4-5 persons/km\2\)) where mining and grazing (3 cows/acre (1 cow/
1348 m\2\)) are the main land uses.
The existing regulatory framework does not provide criteria for the
cleanup of radionuclides other than radium in soil. Also, the existing
guidance does not provide dose criteria, so additional criteria are
warranted. In areas where there is more than one residual radionuclide,
the benchmark dose would apply to the sum of all radionuclides present
in that area (i.e., radium, uranium, thorium, etc.). This is indicated
in the rule text, and in draft guidance for implementation of the
benchmark approach, where it is stated that, for each 100 m2
area, the unity rule will apply such that the sum of the ratios for
each radionuclide of the concentration present to the concentration
limit may not exceed ``1'' (i.e., unity). The rule text and guidance
also stipulate that the total effective dose equivalent limit is based
on the peak annual dose within a 1000 year period to the average member
of the critical group. This time frame is in keeping with the EPA
regulatory time frame for these facilities (40 CFR Part 192).
Only portions of uranium mill sites and no portion of ISL
facilities are anticipated to be turned over to the custodial care of
Government entities. The radium standard applies to all areas of a site
except the disposal cell, regardless of future use. The NRC staff plans
a similar approach for the criteria for other radionuclides. The
restricted use of areas that will be in perpetual custodial care could
be considered under the ALARA provision, if cleanup is difficult or
expensive in these areas.
B. Radionuclides at UR Sites are Naturally Occurring and of Variable
Concentration in Nature
Several commenters indicated that the residual radionuclides at UR
sites (uranium, thorium, radium) are naturally occurring in the local
environment and that there is significant variability in soil
background concentrations of these radionuclides, in particular at UR
facilities where uranium pit mines or mineral outcrops exist. This
leads to variability in potential dose such that the 25 mrem/yr (0.25
mSv/yr) dose in Part 20 subpart E would be indiscernible in the natural
variability of background at a UR site. Any concentration standard must
account for the significant variability in background and state that
the limits are for ``concentrations above background'' at the different
areas of the site. Also, two commenters indicated that a statistical
approach, not just an average value, should be used to determine the
background values for a site.
It was also mentioned that measurement of U-238 and Th-230 at
levels above background, which result in an annual dose to residents of
25 mrem (0.25 mSv), would not be possible using reasonably available
field techniques and that the additional cost of laboratory analyses to
demonstrate compliance could be $100,000 per acre.
Several commenters stated that there is no reliable way to
distinguish natural (in situ) ore material from processed (licensed)
ore. A related concern was that decommissioning standards for UR
facilities must not regulate mining activities and the associated ore
material that may be present at UR sites.
B. Response: As noted above in Section II, and as described in the
rule implementation guidance, the radionuclide dose limit is applied to
the level of licensed (byproduct) material distinguishable from
background. Site cleanup guidance indicates that background values
should be based on areas with characteristics similar to the
contaminated area(s) and that distinct areas of the site could have
different background values. Statistical approaches, such as those
discussed in the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation
Manual (NUREG-1575, 1997), will be considered.
Field measurements for soil U-nat and Th-230 in general are
difficult and not just in the concentration equivalent of 25 mrem/yr
(0.25 mSv/yr). Laboratory measurements are practical because site-
specific dose modeling provides derived concentration limits for U-nat
and Th-230 that can exceed current guideline values. For most sites,
cleanup of soil U-nat and Th-230 would involve less than an acre (4,047
m2). Therefore, the costs of sampling and of laboratory
analysis for these radionuclides would be a minor part of the
decommissioning costs.
Distinguishing in situ ore from processed ore material can be a
problem on some sites and is addressed in the guidance. The NRC will
regulate only NRC-licensed materials remaining at UR facilities, not in
situ ore or mine waste. In determining compliance with the new
regulation, the NRC staff will consider 10 CFR 40.42 (j) and (k) that
state, in part, that as a final step in decommissioning, the licensee
shall demonstrate that the site is suitable for release and that
reasonable effort has been made to eliminate residual radioactive
contamination.
C. Considerations of Risks, Costs, and Benefits of Cleanup
Several commenters pointed out that the actual risk of excavating
and moving dirt (construction and transport accident risks that are
actuarial) must be compared against health risks of radiation exposure
which have not been demonstrated below 10 rem/yr (0.1 Sv/yr). The risk
of cleaning up areas to below regional background levels would likely
result in net human health and environmental detriment. Lowering of the
current radium standard for uranium and thorium could cause undue
economic burden to industry and the Government based on the need for
cleanup of large soil areas and would not result in significant (if
any) risk reduction.
At ISL facilities, lowering dose criteria could result in large
areas retroactively becoming disposal areas requiring substantial and
costly cleanup, and could inhibit efficiency of mining if irrigation
practices with restoration fluids were effectively prohibited.
[[Page 17509]]
C. Response: The NRC considered the risk of the cleanup work in the
regulatory analysis. The radium standard is not lowered by the
rulemaking; therefore, there is no undue economic burden for licensees.
Providing a radium benchmark dose standard for U-nat and Th-230 should
not result in significant decrease in the soil concentration allowed to
remain, compared to current guidance.
D. Regulatory Guidance
Several commenters offered suggestions for regulatory guidance and
requested that the regulatory guidance implementing the standard
include determination of background and dose modeling flexibility.
D. Response: The NRC recognizes that there may be difficulties in
the determination of background concentrations of radionuclides at some
UR facility sites. The NRC staff has prepared guidance (in the form of
evaluation criteria) on mill site cleanup in the draft Standard Review
Plan (SRP) for reclamation plans. This draft SRP will soon be published
for public comment. The NRC staff is preparing another chapter of this
SRP to address the implementation of the radium benchmark dose approach
and dose modeling flexibility for this unique set of licensees. This
chapter will also be published as a draft for public comment before
finalization and incorporation into the SRP.
IV. Agreement State Compatibility
This rule will be a matter of compatibility between the NRC and the
Agreement States, thereby providing consistency among State and Federal
safety requirements. The final rule on radiological criteria for
license termination for nuclear facilities issued July 21, 1997 (62 FR
39058), was determined to be a Division 2 matter of compatibility under
the previous Commission policy for Agreement State compatibility. As
noted for that final rule (at 62 FR 39079), Division 2 rules address
basic principles of radiation safety and regulatory functions. Although
Agreement States must address these principles in their regulations,
the use of language identical to that in NRC rules is not necessary if
the underlying principles are the same. Also, the Agreement States may
adopt requirements more stringent than NRC rules. Under the current NRC
policy, Category C compatibility would be consistent with that
indicated in 62 FR 39079, and, hence, the NRC has determined that this
rule will be a Category C matter of compatibility.
V. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability
The NRC has determined under the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969, as amended, and the regulations in Subpart A of 10 CFR Part
51, that this rule will not be a major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human environment and, therefore, an
environmental impact statement is not required. The final rule amends
the NRC's regulations in 10 CFR Part 40 to include radiological dose
criteria for decommissioning of lands and structures at UR facilities.
The rule will affect 11 current NRC licensees. The environmental impact
of this rule will be insignificant compared to current practice and to
the decommissioning process in general because the areas requiring
cleanup for residual radionuclides other than radium are small.
The final environmental assessment and finding of no significant
impact on which this determination is based are available for
inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW (Lower
Level), Washington, DC. Single copies of the environmental assessment
and the finding of no significant environmental impact are available
from Elaine Brummett, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mailstop T7-J9, Washington, DC
20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6066.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
This final rule does not contain a new or amended information
collection requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing requirements were approved by the
Office of Management and Budget, approval number 3150-0014.
Public Protection Notification
If an information collection does not display a currently valid OMB
control number, the NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, the information collection.
VII. Regulatory Analysis
The NRC has prepared a regulatory analysis on this final
regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the
alternatives considered by the NRC. The analysis is available for
inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW (Lower
Level), Washington, DC. Single copies of the analysis may be obtained
from Frank Cardile, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mailstop T-C24, Washington, DC
20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6185.
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C.
605(b), the NRC certifies that this rule, if adopted, does not have a
significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small
entities. The rule will affect 11 current NRC licensees and any future
licensees who will be conducting uranium milling operations. These
licensees are not small entities as defined in 10 CFR 2.810.
IX. Backfit Analysis
The NRC has determined that the backfit rule, 10 CFR 50.109, does
not apply to this final rule and therefore, a backfit analysis is not
required for this final rule because these amendments do not involve
reactor operations and do not involve any provisions that would impose
backfits as defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1).
X. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
In accordance with the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, the NRC has determined that this action is not a
``major'' rule and has verified this determination with the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget.
XI. Criminal Penalties
For the purposes of Section 223 of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA), the
NRC is issuing the final rule under one or more of sections 161b, 161i,
or 161o of the AEA. Willful violations of the rule will be subject to
criminal enforcement.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 40
Criminal penalties, Government contracts, Hazardous materials
transportation, Nuclear materials, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Source material, Uranium.
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization
Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553; the NRC is adopting
the following amendments to 10 CFR Part 40.
PART 40--DOMESTIC LICENSING OF SOURCE MATERIAL
1. The authority citation for Part 40 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 62, 63, 64, 65, 81, 161, 182, 183, 186, 68
Stat. 932, 933, 935, 948,
[[Page 17510]]
953, 954, 955, as amended, secs. 11e(2), 83, 84, Pub. L. 95-604, 92
Stat. 3033, as amended, 3039, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42
U.S.C. 2014(e)(2), 2092, 2093, 2094, 2095, 2111, 2113, 2114, 2201,
2232, 2233, 2236, 2282); sec. 274, Pub. L. 86-373, 73 Stat. 688 (42
U.S.C. 2021); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as
amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); sec. 275, 92 Stat.
3021, as amended by Pub. L. 97-415, 96 Stat. 2067 (42 U.S.C. 2022);
193, 104 Stat. 2835 as amended by Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321,
1321-349 (42 U.S.C. 2243).
Section 40.7 also issued under Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat.
2951 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Section 40.31(g) also issued under sec. 122,
68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152). Section 40.46 also issued under sec.
184, 68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Section 40.71 also
issued under sec. 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2237).
2. In 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A, Criterion 6(6), a second
paragraph is added to read as follows:
Appendix A to Part 40
* * * * *
I. Technical Criteria
* * * * *
Criterior 6 * * *
(6) * * *
Byproduct material containing concentrations of radionuclides other
than radium in soil, and surface activity on remaining structures, must
not result in a total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) exceeding the
dose from cleanup of radium contaminated soil to the above standard
(benchmark dose), and must be at levels which are as low as is
reasonably achievable. If more than one residual radionuclide is
present in the same 100-square-meter area, the sum of the ratios for
each radionuclide of concentration present to the concentration limit
will not exceed ``1'' (unity). A calculation of the potential peak
annual TEDE within 1000 years to the average member of the critical
group that would result from applying the radium standard (not
including radon) on the site must be submitted for approval. The use of
decommissioning plans with benchmark doses which exceed 100 mrem/yr,
before application of ALARA, requires the approval of the Commission
after consideration of the recommendation of the NRC staff. This
requirement for dose criteria does not apply to sites that have
decommissioning plans for soil and structures approved before June 11,
1999.
* * * * *
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of April 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 99-9035 Filed 4-9-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
