98-27366. Occupational Radiation Protection  

  • [Federal Register Volume 63, Number 213 (Wednesday, November 4, 1998)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 59662-59689]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 98-27366]
    
    
    
    [[Page 59661]]
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    Part III
    
    
    
    
    
    Department of Energy
    
    
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    
    
    10 CFR Part 835
    
    
    
    Occupational Radiation Protection; Final Rule
    
    Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 213 / Wednesday, November 4, 1998 / 
    Rules and Regulations
    
    [[Page 59662]]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
    
    10 CFR Part 835
    
    [Docket No.: EH-RM-96-835]
    RIN 1901-AA59
    
    
    Occupational Radiation Protection
    
    AGENCY: Department of Energy.
    
    ACTION: Final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) is amending its primary 
    standards for occupational radiation protection. This final rule is the 
    culmination of a systematic analysis to identify the elements of a 
    comprehensive radiation protection program and determine those elements 
    of such a program that should be codified as DOE continues its 
    transition from a system of contractually-based nuclear safety 
    standards to regulatory-based requirements. The final rule codifies 
    requirements previously established in DOE's contractually-based 
    standards, clarifies certain issues identified during implementation of 
    programs to ensure compliance with the original rule, and corrects 
    minor errors.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: The amendments to this regulation become effective on 
    December 4, 1998.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Joel Rabovsky, U.S. Department of 
    Energy, Office of Worker Protection Programs and Hazards Management, 
    EH-52, 19901 Germantown Road, Germantown, MD 20874, (301) 903-2135.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    I. Background
    II. Discussion of Significant Changes
    III. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act
    IV. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
    V. Review Under Executive Order 12866
    VI. Review Under Executive Order 12612
    VII. Review Under Executive Order 12988
    VIII. Review Under Paperwork Reduction Act
    IX. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    X. Review Under Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
    of 1996
    
    I. Background
    
        On December 14, 1993, DOE published a final rule, 10 CFR part 835, 
    ``Occupational Radiation Protection'' (58 FR 65458), which established 
    regulatory requirements consistent with the ``Radiation Protection 
    Guidance to Federal Agencies for Occupational Exposure'' (52 FR 2822) 
    (Guidance to Federal Agencies), as well as guidance issued by 
    authoritative organizations, including the National Council on 
    Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) and the International 
    Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). Many of the codified 
    requirements were previously established in DOE Order 5480.11, 
    ``Radiation Protection for Occupational Workers.'' In addition, DOE 
    codified in 10 CFR part 835 the ``as low as is reasonably achievable'' 
    (ALARA) process as the primary means of maintaining occupational 
    radiation doses below regulatory limits.
        As a result of an initiative to eliminate redundant and 
    unnecessarily stringent requirements, DOE conducted a systematic 
    analysis to identify the elements of a comprehensive radiation 
    protection program and determine those elements of such a program that 
    should be codified as DOE continues its transition from a system of 
    contractually-based nuclear safety standards to regulatory-based 
    requirements. The systematic analysis included an evaluation of DOE's 
    objectives for occupational radiation protection programs, including 
    structured analyses of existing standards for similar programs, 
    operational occurrences within the DOE complex, and provisions in the 
    original rule. The analysis also included reviews of the requirements 
    in DOE Notice 441.1, ``Radiological Protection for DOE Activities,'' 
    (extended by DOE N 441.2 and 441.3) and the provisions of the ``DOE 
    Radiological Control Manual'' (Manual). DOE proposed to codify 
    requirements in use within the DOE complex to ensure that worker health 
    and safety programs would continue to be maintained at a level 
    commensurate with workplace hazards. DOE also considered approaches 
    used by national and international radiation protection organizations 
    and experience throughout the DOE complex in achieving compliance with 
    10 CFR part 835. The systematic analysis is documented in a report 
    entitled, ``Development of the 1996 Proposed Amendment to 10 CFR part 
    835, Occupational Radiation Protection,'' (regulatory development 
    document, November 1996) which may be viewed in the DOE Freedom of 
    Information Reading Room at Room 1E-190, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, 
    Washington, DC, 20585, (202) 586-6020.
        On December 23, 1996, DOE published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
    that would amend 10 CFR part 835 by:
        1. Modifying the scope to explicitly exclude radioactive material 
    transportation and certain activities conducted on foreign soil;
        2. Adding requirements for area posting and sealed radioactive 
    source control;
        3. Adding a removable surface contamination value for tritium, to 
    be used to identify the need for area posting and imposition of certain 
    radioactive material controls;
        4. Expanding and clarifying provisions of the rule to address 
    emergent radiation protection issues;
        5. Deleting certain provisions, as appropriate, to eliminate 
    redundant and excessively stringent regulatory requirements; and
        6. Clarifying and correcting minor errors.
        As discussed in this Notice of Final Rulemaking, the final rule was 
    developed in consideration of the extensive input received during two 
    public hearings and through written and electronic public comments.
        The schedule for achieving compliance with the amendments to 10 CFR 
    part 835 is as follows. The final rule will become effective 30 days 
    following publication in the Federal Register. As provided at 
    Sec. 835.101(g)(3), updated radiation protection programs (RPPs) must 
    be submitted to DOE within 180 days following the effective date of the 
    final rule. Changes that do not decrease the effectiveness of the RPP 
    may be implemented prior to DOE approval. Changes that decrease the 
    effectiveness of the RPP require DOE approval prior to implementation. 
    As provided at Sec. 835.101(i), an update of the RPP shall be 
    considered approved 180 days after its initial submission unless 
    rejected by DOE at an earlier date. The final rule, at Sec. 835.101(f), 
    requires full compliance with the regulatory changes within 180 days of 
    RPP approval except for radiobioassay program accreditation required 
    under Sec. 835.402(d). Because of the breadth of the joint DOE/DOE-
    contractor effort needed to accomplish radiobioassay program 
    accreditation, at Sec. 835.101(f) DOE has established January 1, 2002 
    as the compliance date for the radiobioassay program accreditation 
    requirements.
    
    II. Discussion of Significant Changes
    
        The discussion of the significant changes to 10 CFR part 835 and 
    the response to public comments is organized according to subpart. When 
    there was more than one significant change in a subpart the significant 
    changes are generally listed in order of section. The topic addressed 
    by each significant change is listed. In many cases, inclusion of a 
    change to the provisions in one subpart or section required changes to 
    other subparts or
    
    [[Page 59663]]
    
    sections of the regulation either for internal consistency or to 
    resolve a public comment. For example a number of changes to the 
    provisions of the rule required concomitant changes to the definitions 
    or recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, the discussion of a change 
    may reference other subparts in addition to the one in which the 
    primary change was made. This organization of the discussion of the 
    significant changes to 10 CFR part 835 and the response to public 
    comments was chosen to more clearly explain the changes and how DOE 
    responded to the public comments.
    
    A. General Provisions, Subpart A
    
    1. Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed to revise the Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety 
    Program exclusion at Sec. 835.1(b)(3) to clearly indicate that the 
    exclusion applies only to the extent that compliance with 10 CFR part 
    835 would compromise the effectiveness of activities essential to 
    prevention of an accidental or unauthorized detonation. This action was 
    initiated to ensure that radiation protection programs are implemented 
    that do not compromise the overriding goal of preventing such 
    incidents.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        DOE received comments indicating that this exclusion should also be 
    extended to address the provisions of CG-TSS-S2, ``Transportation 
    Safeguards System Classification and Unclassified Controlled 
    Information Guide (Supplement),'' which states that ``The fact that a 
    specific SST (Safe Secure Trailer)/SSR (Safe Secure Railcar) is loaded 
    or empty is CNSI (controlled nuclear safeguards information).'' The 
    commenters believe that certain posting and labeling provisions of 10 
    CFR part 835 would provide indication of the loaded or empty status of 
    affected vehicles, contrary to the referenced guidance. DOE believes 
    that the existing exclusion already provides the flexibility needed for 
    implementation of programs consistent with CG-TSS-S2. Indeed, the 
    situation presented by the commenters is exactly the type of condition 
    for which the exclusion is intended.
    Final Rule
        After further consideration, DOE has determined that the proposed 
    clarification is not needed. Ruling 1995-1 makes it clear that the 
    existing language recognizes ``the paramount importance of preventing 
    accidental or unauthorized nuclear detonations and ensuring that the 
    requirements in (part 835) do not come into conflict with any 
    activities necessary to prevent such detonation. However, [the language 
    is] not intended to relieve the person responsible for a DOE nuclear 
    facility or a DOE activity from complying with the requirements in 
    (part 835) to the extent they do not interfere with the conduct of 
    activities undertaken to prevent an accidental or unauthorized 
    detonation.'' (61 FR 4212, February 5, 1996.)
    2. Radioactive Material Transportation
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE standards for packaging and transporting radioactive material 
    are addressed in DOE Orders. DOE Orders 460.1A, ``Packaging and 
    Transportation Safety,'' and 460.2, ``Departmental Materials 
    Transportation and Packaging Management,'' provide DOE requirements for 
    packaging and transportation of radioactive material. Requirements for 
    radioactive material transported under DOE's national security mission 
    are provided in DOE Order 5610.12, ``Packaging and Off-site 
    Transportation of Nuclear Components and Special Assemblies Associated 
    with the Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Safety Program,'' and DOE Order 
    5610.14, ``Transportation Safeguards System Program Operations.'' The 
    requirements of these Orders are consistent with Department of 
    Transportation (DOT) regulatory requirements and provide the framework 
    for ensuring transportation safety. Certain provisions of 10 CFR part 
    835 complement these transportation safety directives by ensuring that 
    individuals are afforded an adequate level of radiation protection 
    while preparing radioactive materials for transportation and taking 
    possession of radioactive material from transportation.
        Although the absence of provisions pertaining to radioactive 
    material transportation was addressed in the preamble for the original 
    Rulemaking (58 FR 65465), DOE did not explicitly exclude radioactive 
    material transportation from the scope of 10 CFR part 835. Consistent 
    with its original intent as expressed in the preamble of the final 
    rule, DOE proposed an exclusion at Sec. 835.1(b)(4) for radioactive 
    material transportation conducted in accordance with applicable DOE 
    Orders. DOE also proposed a definition of ``radioactive material 
    transportation'' at Sec. 835.2(a) to clarify the distinction between 
    the process of transporting radioactive materials, which would be 
    excluded from 10 CFR part 835, and those activities leading to or 
    resulting from radioactive material transportation, which would be 
    subject to 10 CFR part 835. The proposed definition included a 
    specified threshold (specific activity) consistent with DOT 
    requirements at 49 CFR 171-179.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Public comments supported DOE's intent to exclude radioactive 
    material transportation, but indicated that the proposed approach did 
    not clearly establish the interface between 10 CFR part 835 and 
    applicable transportation requirements. Other comments indicated that 
    the term ``specific activity'' in the proposed Sec. 835.2(a) definition 
    of the term ``radioactive material transportation'' could be 
    misconstrued, potentially resulting in non-compliant conditions.
    Final Rule
        The final rule clearly establishes the interface between the 
    occupational radiation protection and transportation requirements. This 
    approach makes it clear that 10 CFR part 835 does not apply to the 
    radioactive material transportation, which is defined to be movement of 
    radioactive material that is subject to DOE Orders or DOT regulations. 
    The definition of radioactive material transportation is independent of 
    the geographical location of the material being transported (i.e., 
    inside or outside of the area controlled by DOE) and also independent 
    of the radiological characteristics (e.g., specific activity) of the 
    material in question. As a result of this revised approach, DOE has not 
    included the term ``specific activity'' in the Sec. 835.2(a) definition 
    of the term ``radioactive material transportation.''
    3. DOE Activities Conducted on Foreign Soil
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed to add an exclusion at Sec. 835.1(b)(5) for DOE 
    activities conducted on foreign soil and under requirements agreed to 
    between the foreign government and the United States. DOE proposed this 
    exclusion in recognition of the primacy of foreign governments' 
    occupational radiation protection requirements.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Several commenters indicated that the development and approval of 
    agreements with foreign governments may require action by the State 
    Department and that DOE contractors could not take independent actions 
    to
    
    [[Page 59664]]
    
    ensure that appropriate agreements have been reached. However, DOE 
    activities, including those performed on foreign soil, are conducted 
    under the cognizance of the responsible DOE Program Office and these 
    offices are responsible for ensuring that such agreements are in effect 
    before authorizing the conduct of the activities. The only action 
    required of the DOE contractor will be to ensure that the DOE Program 
    Office has established, or verified the establishment of, the 
    appropriate agreements. Also, the activity is not excluded unless there 
    are occupational radiation protection requirements agreed upon.
    Final Rule
        The final rule includes the exclusion for DOE activities conducted 
    on foreign soil at Sec. 835.1(b)(5).
    4. Applicability of Occupational Dose Received From Excluded Activities
    Proposed Amendment
        At Secs. 835.1(c), 835.202(a), and 835.202(b), DOE proposed changes 
    to clarify the requirements for accounting for occupational doses 
    received from non-DOE activities. The proposed amendment indicated 
    that, even though certain activities are excluded from the scope of the 
    rule at Sec. 835.1(b), an individual's occupational dose resulting from 
    excluded activities would be applied toward determination of compliance 
    with the occupational dose limits established in subpart C of 10 CFR 
    part 835. This is necessary to ensure that an individual's annual 
    aggregate occupational dose is maintained below the limits specified in 
    the Federal Guidance. This would include occupational doses received 
    from activities licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and 
    its agreement states, activities conducted under the authority of the 
    Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, activities conducted under 
    the Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program, radioactive material 
    transportation activities, and activities conducted under the auspices 
    of foreign governments. However, radiation doses received from 
    background radiation, as a patient for the purposes of medical 
    diagnosis or therapy, and from participation as a subject in medical 
    research programs are not considered occupational doses and would not 
    be considered in determining compliance with the occupational dose 
    limits. Furthermore, occupational dose received as a result of 
    authorized emergency exposures and planned special exposures, although 
    occupational in nature, would not be considered in determining 
    compliance with the dose limits established at Sec. 835.202(a).
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Commenters generally supported this clarification of DOE policy.
    Final Rule
        The final rule adopts the proposed clarification that all 
    occupational doses, other than doses resulting from authorized 
    emergency exposures and planned special exposures, shall be considered 
    in determining compliance with the limits set forth in Secs. 835.202, 
    and 835.207. Section Sec. 835.206, Limits for the embryo/fetus, was 
    included in this provision for consistency and completeness. Because 
    Sec. 835.1302 establishes the appropriate criteria for authorizing 
    exposures under emergency conditions, DOE has instituted an editorial 
    change to reference this section. Procedures for handling doses 
    resulting from authorized emergency exposures and planned special 
    exposures are discussed in Section II.C of this Notice of Final 
    Rulemaking, ``Limitation of Individual Doses.''
    5. Definitions
        DOE proposed to add, revise, or remove the definitions of a number 
    of terms that appear at Sec. 835.2(a) and (b) as follows:
        a. Adding definitions of the terms ``accountable sealed radioactive 
    source,'' ``derived air concentration-hour,'' ``occupational dose,'' 
    ``radioactive material area,'' ``radioactive material transportation,'' 
    ``radiological control technician,'' ``real time air monitoring,'' 
    ``respiratory protective device,'' ``sealed radioactive source,'' 
    ``source leak test,'' and ``week.''
        b. Revising the definitions of the terms ``airborne radioactive 
    material or airborne radioactivity,'' ``airborne radioactivity area,'' 
    ``contamination area,'' ``controlled area,'' ``DOE activity,'' ``high 
    contamination area,'' ``member of the public,'' ``monitoring,'' 
    ``radiological area,'' ``year,'' ``committed dose equivalent,'' 
    ``cumulative total effective dose equivalent,'' ``effective dose 
    equivalent,'' ``external dose or exposure,'' ``internal dose or 
    exposure,'' ``quality factor,'' ``total effective dose equivalent,'' 
    and ``weighting factor.''
        c. Removing the definitions of the terms ``ambient air,'' 
    ``continuous air monitor,'' ``collective dose,'' and ``occupational 
    exposure.''
        The effects of these proposed changes, significant public comments 
    on these proposed changes, and any resulting changes are discussed in 
    this Notice of Final Rulemaking as these terms appear in the final 
    rule.
    6. Intervals Between Required Activities
    Proposed Rule
        DOE proposed to revise the required intervals for internal audits, 
    instrument and equipment calibration and maintenance, and radiation 
    safety retraining from the specified number of years to the equivalent 
    number of months. This change was proposed to eliminate any confusion 
    resulting from the Sec. 835.2(a) definition of the term ``year,'' which 
    specifically defined the year in terms necessary to ensure compliance 
    with the subpart C dose limits.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        DOE received a number of comments indicating that the required 
    intervals appeared to be somewhat arbitrary and should therefore 
    include some degree of flexibility to accommodate operational and 
    scheduling needs. DOE agrees with these observations.
    Final Rule
        DOE has included a provision at Sec. 835.3(e) that will allow a 30 
    day automatic extension in the required time interval to accommodate 
    operational and scheduling constraints. The extension is considered to 
    be automatic in that there is no requirement to obtain DOE or other 
    approval for the extension. This provision addresses the requirements 
    of Secs. 835.102, 835.901, and 835.1202 for internal audits, radiation 
    safety training, and sealed radioactive source inventories and leak 
    tests, respectively. Because of the varying lengths of the calendar 
    months, DOE has not provided a definition of the term ``month.'' DOE 
    expects that those entities responsible for ensuring compliance with 10 
    CFR part 835 will undertake those measures necessary to perform the 
    required activities within the prescribed time frame (i.e., if a sealed 
    radioactive source is leak tested on January 15, DOE would expect the 
    subsequent leak test to be performed on or before July 15 of the same 
    year). When operational or scheduling considerations preclude adherence 
    to that schedule, then one may consider utilization of the 30 day 
    extension (i.e., the leak test could be performed no later than August 
    14 of the same year).
    
    [[Page 59665]]
    
    7. Radiological Units
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed to delete the Sec. 835.4 prohibition on use of the 
    international (SI) radiological units. The international system of 
    radiological units is commonly used for calculational and reference 
    purposes. As proposed, Sec. 835.4 would continue to require the use of 
    the special radiological units in required records. Consistent with its 
    historical endorsement of the special units and in recognition of the 
    capabilities of many commercially-available instruments in use 
    throughout the DOE complex, DOE also proposed to specifically allow for 
    use of subunits and multiples of the unit ``roentgen.''
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Although some comments indicated that DOE should proceed toward use 
    of the SI units for required records, DOE believes that considerations 
    of consistency with records required by the NRC and its agreement 
    states override the impetus toward use of SI units.
    Final Rule
        As proposed, Sec. 835.4 of the final rule allows the use of the 
    international system of units for calculations or reference purposes. 
    Records required by 10 CFR part 835 will continue to be maintained 
    using the special radiological units of curie, rad, roentgen, and rem.
    
    B. Management and Administrative Requirements, Subpart B
    
    1. Documented Radiation Protection Programs
    Proposed Rule
        Paragraph 835.101(g) of the original rule requires that those 
    entities subject to the requirements of 10 CFR part 835 submit an 
    update of the documented radiation protection program (RPP) within 180 
    days of the effective date of any regulatory modifications. DOE 
    proposed to establish provisions at Sec. 835.101(f) requiring 
    compliance with amendments to 10 CFR part 835 no later than 180 days 
    following approval of the updated RPP, except for the provisions of 
    Sec. 835.402(d) for radiobioassay program accreditation. Because of the 
    extent of the joint DOE/DOE contractor effort necessary to complete the 
    radiobioassay program accreditations, DOE proposed a compliance date of 
    January 1, 2000 for this provision. DOE also proposed to delete 
    outdated provisions codified at Sec. 835.101 (f) and (g).
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Several commenters indicated that DOE's proposed compliance date of 
    January 1, 2000 for radiobioassay program accreditation may be 
    inappropriate due to the lack of experience in implementing the 
    accreditation program. Other comments indicated that DOE delays in 
    implementing the program might result in a state of non-compliance for 
    DOE-contractors. DOE agrees that more time may be necessary to complete 
    the required program accreditations.
    Final Rule
        DOE has codified the proposed 180 day period for achieving 
    compliance with the amendments to 10 CFR part 835, except for the 
    radiobioassay program accreditation requirements of Sec. 835.402(d). 
    DOE has extended the date for compliance with the radiobioassay program 
    accreditation requirements until January 1, 2002 to accommodate the 
    planned schedule to complete program accreditations throughout the DOE 
    complex. DOE expects this extension to provide ample time for 
    completion of the program accreditations. Should significant delays 
    occur in performing the program accreditations, DOE could exercise 
    appropriate enforcement discretion. These changes will not affect the 
    compliance status of personnel dosimetry programs currently accredited, 
    or excepted from accreditation, under the existing Department of Energy 
    Laboratory Accreditation Program (DOELAP) standards.
        DOE has deleted the outdated provisions of Sec. 835.101 (f) and (g) 
    as proposed.
    2. Education and Training of Cognizant Individuals
    Proposed Amendment
        To address a number of shortcomings in its provisions for training 
    radiological control technicians identified during its systematic 
    analysis, DOE proposed to codify a definition of ``radiological control 
    technician'' at Sec. 835.2(a). DOE also solicited comments on four 
    alternative approaches that were discussed in the preamble of the 
    Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Public comments indicated that DOE's proposed definition of the 
    term ``radiological control technician'' did not adequately describe 
    the roles and responsibilities of individuals filling this position. 
    DOE received comments endorsing each of the proposed alternative 
    approaches, with the majority of the comments endorsing Alternative 
    Approach 4 as discussed in the preamble of DOE's Notice of Proposed 
    Rulemaking.
    Final Rule
        To satisfy its programmatic objectives for occupational radiation 
    protection programs, DOE has codified an approach consistent with that 
    discussed as Alternative Approach 4 in its Notice of Proposed 
    Rulemaking. Under this approach, DOE has eliminated the specific 
    requirements for radiological control technician training from subpart 
    J of 10 CFR part 835 and added at Sec. 835.103 a requirement for all 
    individuals responsible for ensuring compliance with the rule to have 
    the appropriate education, training, and skills. This approach provides 
    the flexibility necessary to address the wide range of individuals 
    involved in developing and implementing measures necessary for ensuring 
    compliance with 10 CFR part 835, including cognizant managers, 
    supervisors, auditors, engineers, clerks, and technicians.
    3. Written Procedures
    Proposed Rule
        In its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, DOE noted that the existing 
    rule did not establish requirements for written procedures that 
    consistently addressed the hazards associated with the specified 
    activity. DOE believes that, due to the wide variation of radiological 
    activities and their associated hazards conducted at DOE facilities, 
    requiring written procedures for specific types of activities may 
    divert resources from active management of higher-hazard activities to 
    administrative control of lower-hazard activities. DOE discussed two 
    alternative approaches in its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 
    Alternative Approach 1 would eliminate most or all of the requirements 
    for written procedures and leave the determination of the need for 
    written procedures to the cognizant DOE Program Office. Alternative 
    Approach 2 would eliminate most or all of the existing requirements for 
    written procedures in favor of a general requirement that written 
    procedures be developed and implemented commensurate with the 
    radiological hazards created by the activity and consistent with the 
    education, training, and skills of the affected individuals.
    
    [[Page 59666]]
    
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Public comments overwhelmingly favored Alternative Approach 2. 
    Commenters indicated that this approach would provide for an 
    appropriate level of radiological safety while providing the 
    flexibility needed to address the wide range of DOE activities. DOE 
    agrees with the public comments.
    Final Rule
        DOE has established a requirement at Sec. 835.104 consistent with 
    that described as Alternative Approach 2 in its Notice of Proposed 
    Rulemaking. As a result of this change, DOE has deleted specific 
    requirements for written procedures from Secs. 835.501(d), 835.1001(a), 
    835.1001(b), 835.1003(a), 835.1101(c), and 835.1102(c)(3) (formerly 
    835.404(d)). In addition, proposed requirements for written procedures 
    at Secs. 835.405(f) and 835.1201(a) were omitted from the final rule.
        DOE's adoption of this approach is not intended to imply a global 
    requirement that written procedures be developed and implemented to 
    address all of the requirements of 10 CFR part 835. In evaluating the 
    need for written procedures addressing any particular provision of 10 
    CFR part 835, consideration must be given to the nature and extent of 
    the radiological hazards, the complexity of the measures necessary to 
    achieve compliance, and the education, training and skills of the 
    individuals who must implement those measures. Under such a regimen, a 
    low hazard activity employing a stable staff of highly educated and 
    skilled workers having an advanced knowledge of radiation protection 
    principles and practices could have fewer and less detailed procedures 
    than a higher hazard activity employing a transient force of workers 
    with less knowledge of radiation protection principles and practices. 
    The adequacy of the written procedures is ultimately determined by the 
    appropriate implementation of the necessary compliance measures by the 
    affected individuals.
        Because the scope of subpart B of 10 CFR part 835 has been 
    expanded, DOE has changed the title of this subpart to ``Management and 
    Administrative Requirements.''
    
    C. Limitation of Individual Doses, Subpart C
    
    1. Summing of Internal and External Doses
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed to revise Sec. 835.203(a) to provide flexibility in 
    requirements for summing of individual internal and external dose 
    equivalents to determine the total effective dose equivalent. As 
    proposed, Sec. 835.203(a) would require summing only when the 
    individual was monitored in accordance with Sec. 835.402 (that is, when 
    the individual's dose was likely to exceed the mandatory individual 
    monitoring thresholds) or when the individual's dose exceeded the 
    mandatory monitoring thresholds, regardless of a priori expectations.
        DOE also proposed to delete Sec. 835.203(c) because this provision 
    is redundant with provisions included in the Sec. 835.2(b) definition 
    of the term ``weighting factor.''
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        DOE received comments indicating that all monitored individual 
    internal and external doses should be summed to determine the total 
    effective dose equivalent. Commenters noted that these data were 
    available and could be important in future dose reconstruction or 
    litigation efforts. DOE agrees with these comments. Although DOE is 
    concerned about the administrative burden associated with the need to 
    sum trivial internal and external doses, DOE has provided ample 
    flexibility for ameliorating such burdens through codification of the 
    individual monitoring thresholds provided at Sec. 835.402.
    Final Rule
        DOE has omitted the proposed change from Sec. 835.203(a), but 
    deleted the second sentence of Sec. 835.203(a) because this sentence is 
    redundant with provisions included in the definition of the term 
    ``effective dose equivalent'' at Sec. 835.2(b). DOE has deleted 
    Sec. 835.203(c), as proposed.
    2. Planned Special Exposures
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed changes to the 10 CFR part 835 requirements for 
    conducting planned special exposures in excess of the dose limits 
    established at Sec. 835.202. The proposed changes included:
        a. Changing the Sec. 835.204(a)(1) reference from 
    Sec. 835.202(a)(1) to Sec. 835.202(a) to indicate that all of the 
    Sec. 835.202 dose limits apply.
        b. Revising Sec. 835.204(c) to indicate that doses resulting from 
    planned special exposures may exceed the numerical values established 
    at Sec. 835.202(a) without actually exceeding the occupational dose 
    limits.
        c. Clarifying documentation requirements for planned special 
    exposures at Sec. 835.204(d).
    
        DOE also solicited comments on the possibility of deleting the 
    provisions for planned special exposures because these provisions have 
    not been used to date.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Commenters generally supported the proposed changes to the 
    provisions for planned special exposures. Many commenters indicated 
    that the provisions for planned special exposures should be retained to 
    provide the maximum practical degree of flexibility.
    Final Rule
        Consistent with the comments received, DOE has retained the 
    provisions for planned special exposures, with the proposed revisions, 
    in the final rule.
    3. Radiation Dose Limits
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed editorial changes to Sec. 835.207 and the heading of 
    that section to clarify that the dose limits for minors apply to doses 
    resulting from occupational exposure only. DOE also proposed to add 
    deterministic dose limits for minors consistent with the Federal 
    Guidance. Non-occupational exposure of minors is subject to the dose 
    limits established at Sec. 835.208 for members of the public entering a 
    controlled area. DOE also proposed changes to Sec. 835.208 to clarify 
    that the member of the public dose limit applies to members of the 
    public in the controlled area only. DOE proposed to revise the 
    definition of ``member of the public'' at Sec. 835.2(a) to clearly 
    distinguish members of the public from temporary or transient workers 
    or visiting scientists who could receive occupational doses.
        DOE proposed to revise the definition of ``cumulative total 
    effective dose equivalent'' (CTEDE) at Sec. 835.2(b) to include all 
    total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) values, where available, from 
    January 1, 1989, whether or not the dose was received at that DOE site 
    or facility.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Several commenters questioned DOE's proposed approach to 
    controlling doses to minors, pointing out that a minor could possibly 
    receive 0.1 rem in a year occupational dose and 0.1 rem in a year as a 
    member of the public. Although this scenario is possible, the resulting 
    maximum dose is well below the most recent recommendations of 
    scientific bodies for exposures that do not occur repeatedly.
    
    [[Page 59667]]
    
        DOE did not receive any substantive comments on the proposed change 
    to the definition of the term ``cumulative total effective dose 
    equivalent.''
    Final Rule
        DOE has adopted the changes, essentially as proposed. DOE has also 
    made editorial changes to Secs. 835.207 and 835.208 for clarity. These 
    changes include omitting, in Sec. 835.207, the proposed occupational 
    dose limit for minors of 10% of the Sec. 835.202(a)(2) limit. This 
    limit is redundant because the 0.1 rem total effective dose equivalent 
    limit for minors is always more restrictive.
    4. Exposures to Airborne Radionuclides
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed to delete Sec. 835.209(b) because of redundancy with 
    other rule requirements for inhalation exposures and external exposures 
    from airborne radionuclides.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        DOE did not receive any substantive comments on the proposed 
    deletion.
    Final Rule
        DOE has deleted Sec. 835.209(b) and redesignated Sec. 835.209(c) as 
    Sec. 835.209(b). In addition, DOE has initiated an editorial change by 
    deleting the word ``representative'' from Sec. 835.209(c)(3) 
    (redesignated as Sec. 835.209(b)(3)). This word was redundant with the 
    remaining requirement that the internal dose estimate based upon air 
    concentration values must be as or more accurate than that based upon 
    bioassay results.
    
    D. Monitoring of Individuals and Areas, Subpart E
    
    1. General Requirements for Area and Individual Monitoring
    Proposed Amendment
        In reviewing the requirements of 10 CFR part 835, DOE noted that 
    the terms ``monitoring'' and ``survey'' were not used consistent with 
    the definitions provided at Sec. 835.2(a). DOE proposed changes to the 
    definition of the term ``monitoring'' at Sec. 835.2(a) to clearly 
    establish that ``monitoring'' involves measurement of radiological 
    conditions and the subsequent use of the results of these measurements 
    to evaluate potential and actual exposures to ionizing radiation. As 
    proposed, the term ``survey,'' would be more directly related to the 
    assessment of workplace or material radiological conditions through 
    direct measurement, assessment, or calculation for the purposes of 
    hazards assessment. DOE proposed changes throughout the rule to ensure 
    consistent application of these terms.
        DOE proposed to clarify the requirements of Secs. 835.401(c) and 
    835.703(d) by making the calibration requirements apply to both 
    ``instruments'' and ``equipment.'' This clarification is consistent 
    with current field practice with regard to equipment, such as an air 
    sampler, that, although incorporated into or associated with 
    instrumentation systems, does not have any instrumentation.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        DOE received a number of comments supporting its attempt to clarify 
    the ``monitoring'' and ``surveying'' terminology. However, comments 
    indicated that the usage of these terms remained inconsistent.
        With regard to the proposed Sec. 835.401(c) requirements for 
    calibration and maintenance of instruments and equipment, DOE received 
    a number of comments indicating that the required one year calibration 
    frequency was overly stringent given the reliability of many modern 
    instruments, particularly certain fixed monitors. Other commenters 
    indicated that the term ``equipment'' could conceivably be extended to 
    include vehicles, calculators, and other equipment routinely used in 
    the course of area monitoring.
        Commenters indicated that the use of the undefined term 
    ``workplace'' in this subpart could result in confusion regarding the 
    scope of the requirements. Commenters also indicated that the use of 
    the term ``area monitoring'' at Sec. 835.401(b) seemed to imply that 
    stationary area monitors were required under certain conditions.
    Final Rule
        DOE has determined that, for regulatory purposes as established in 
    10 CFR part 835, there is no substantive difference between the uses of 
    the terms ``monitoring'' and ``survey.'' Therefore, in the final rule 
    DOE has revised the definition of the term ``monitoring'' and deleted 
    the term ``survey,'' replacing this term with ``monitoring'' (as 
    modified) throughout the rule. DOE has also deleted the undefined terms 
    ``sampling'' and ``measurements'' in favor of the defined term 
    ``monitoring.''
        DOE has deleted the term ``workplace'' from subpart E of 10 CFR 
    part 835, instead adopting a performance-oriented approach of 
    ``monitoring of individuals and areas.'' In a related editorial change, 
    DOE has deleted the term ``area monitoring'' from proposed 
    Sec. 835.401(b) and redesignated the remaining text as 
    Sec. 835.401(a)(6) to eliminate any connotation regarding requirements 
    for stationary radiation monitors. DOE has also substituted the defined 
    term ``individual'' for the undefined term ``personnel'' in this 
    provision.
        In response to comments on DOE's requirements for calibration and 
    maintenance of instruments and equipment, DOE has revised these 
    requirements (at redesignated Sec. 835.401(b)(1)) such that calibration 
    and maintenance will be required ``periodically'' on an ``established 
    frequency.'' This change is consistent with NRC requirements at 10 CFR 
    20.1501 and provides flexibility for acceptance of recommendations 
    provided in various consensus standards accepted by the instrument 
    calibration community and used within the DOE complex. DOE will provide 
    guidance regarding measures for establishing appropriate maintenance 
    and calibration frequencies and proper application of these 
    requirements to ``equipment'' used for monitoring.
        As used in 10 CFR part 835, instruments and equipment used for 
    monitoring includes devices used for both area monitoring (e.g., 
    portable and installed radiation, contamination, and airborne 
    radioactivity sampling and monitoring devices) and individual 
    monitoring devices (e.g., thermoluminescent dosimeters, pocket ion 
    chambers, track etch dosimeters, and electronic dosimeters). Note that 
    the calibration of personnel dosimeters that are required under 
    Sec. 835.402 is addressed by the DOELAP for personnel dosimetry.
    2. Individual Monitoring and Dose Determination
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed several changes to the existing requirements for 
    monitoring individual radiation doses. The proposed changes included:
        a. Clarifying the requirements for external and internal dose 
    monitoring programs at Sec. 835.402(b) and (d) by providing that such 
    programs must be capable of demonstrating compliance with all of the 
    individual dose equivalent limits in subpart C. This approach is 
    consistent with DOE's previously established requirements for records 
    required under Sec. 835.701(a).
        b. Revising the monitoring requirements for minors at 
    Sec. 835.402(a)(3) and (c)(3) to expressly state that these 
    requirements apply to occupationally exposed minors only.
    
    [[Page 59668]]
    
    Minors who are not occupationally exposed are subject to the member of 
    the public monitoring requirements found at Sec. 835.402(a)(4) and 
    (c)(4).
        c. Deleting from Sec. 835.402(c)(1) the monitoring threshold based 
    on organ and tissue committed dose equivalent. The monitoring threshold 
    based upon committed effective dose equivalent obviates the need for 
    this threshold because, through application of the weighting factors 
    defined at Sec. 835.2(b), the committed effective dose equivalent 
    always provides a more restrictive basis for individual monitoring.
        d. Changing Sec. 835.402(a)(1)(i) to require individual monitoring 
    on the basis of deep dose equivalent rather than effective dose 
    equivalent because deep dose equivalent is the parameter actually 
    monitored by existing dosimetry programs.
        e. Removing provisions at Sec. 835.402(a)(1)(iv) for measuring deep 
    dose equivalent from external sources to any organ or tissue other than 
    the lens of the eye because any doses meeting this condition are 
    adequately addressed by Sec. 835.402(a)(1)(i).
        f. Clarifying Sec. 835.402(a)(4) and (c)(4) to indicate that these 
    provisions apply to members of the public inside the controlled area 
    only.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Commenters indicated that the proposed Sec. 835.402(a)(1)(i) 
    requirement for monitoring of deep dose equivalent, as worded, would 
    challenge the capabilities of modern dosimetry systems. While the 
    technical basis for the comments was not clear, reflection on these 
    comments revealed that the wording in the proposed rule could suggest 
    the basis for initiating monitoring was the highest dose received by 
    any portion of the whole body. Furthermore, although deep dose 
    equivalent is the quantity most commonly measured, effective dose 
    equivalent is the appropriate criterion upon which the mandatory 
    individual monitoring threshold should be based because the 
    corresponding occupational dose limits are stated in terms of effective 
    dose equivalent.
    Final Rule
        DOE agrees with the public comments regarding the proposed change 
    to Sec. 835.402(a)(1)(i). The language in the original version of 10 
    CFR part 835 has been retained. DOE has included the other proposed 
    changes in the final rule.
    3. Program Accreditation
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed a number of enhancements and additions to the existing 
    requirements for the DOELAP. These proposed changes included:
        a. Amending Sec. 835.402(b) to indicate that, except as discussed 
    below, personnel dosimetry programs must be either accredited under the 
    DOELAP or excepted from accreditation under that program.
        b. Amending Sec. 835.402(d) to require radiobioassay program 
    accreditation or exception through the recently developed DOELAP for 
    Radiobioassay. This proposed change was intended to ensure the 
    integrity of radiobioassay programs and prevent recurrence of recent 
    adverse events.
        c. Revising Sec. 835.402(b) and (d) to limit the scope of the 
    DOELAP requirements to personnel dosimetry and radiobioassay programs 
    implemented to ensure compliance with Sec. 835.402 (i.e., monitoring 
    when individual doses are likely to exceed the stated thresholds). In a 
    related change, because Sec. 835.401(b) addresses calibration of 
    instruments and equipment used for monitoring and DOELAP for Personnel 
    Dosimetry provides appropriate dosimetry system performance criteria, 
    DOE proposed to delete the dosimeter calibration requirement from 
    Sec. 835.402(b).
        d. Adding Sec. 835.402(e) to require that external dosimetry and 
    bioassay programs conform to the most recent revisions of the DOELAP 
    technical standards or be subject to review and approval of the 
    Secretarial Officer responsible for environment, safety, and health 
    matters (currently the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and 
    Health). For those programs that are not accredited or excepted from 
    the accreditation program, this provision would also allow this same 
    officer to provide approval if the programs demonstrate performance 
    equivalent to those accredited under the DOELAP. This provision would 
    ensure that, to the extent practical, DOE radiation protection programs 
    will reflect the latest advances in the sciences of external and 
    internal dosimetry. To prevent the automatic loss of accreditation 
    status as a result of changes to the DOELAP technical standards, the 
    DOELAP technical standards provide that changes in the standards become 
    effective only during the ensuing accreditation cycle.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Several commenters suggested that all individual dose measurements 
    be performed under an accredited dosimetry program in order to maintain 
    credibility of all monitoring data. However, DOE does not believe that 
    is appropriate to impose regulatory accreditation requirements on 
    monitoring programs that are not required by regulation. Existing 
    regulatory provisions at Sec. 835.402(a) and (c) require individual 
    monitoring for all individuals likely to receive a dose equivalent 
    exceeding the specified thresholds. As part of a comprehensive 
    radiation protection program, measures used to identify these 
    individuals should include comprehensive, documented area monitoring 
    and could include, if management so chooses, individual monitoring. 
    Section 835.401 establishes minimum requirements for performing such 
    monitoring, including requirements for calibration and maintenance of 
    instruments and equipment used to perform the monitoring. As required 
    by Secs. 835.701(a) and 835.703, the monitoring results must be 
    documented.
        Several commenters recommended that DOE revise the rule to permit 
    DOE facilities to procure the services of dosimetry processors who are 
    accredited by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program 
    (NVLAP) administered through the National Institute of Standards and 
    Technology, as an alternative to accreditation under the DOELAP for 
    personnel dosimetry. These comments noted the NRC's regulations require 
    licensees to use dosimetry processors with NVLAP accreditation. They 
    argued that permitting NVLAP accreditation in lieu of DOELAP 
    accreditation, would maximize private sector competition for DOE 
    contracts. DOE has not accepted the commenters' recommendations because 
    NVLAP accreditation does not meet DOE's requirement for an external 
    dose monitoring program. DOELAP accreditation covers both the 
    facility's and the processor's quality assurance program, whereas NVLAP 
    only deals with the dosimetry processor. The commenter's reference to 
    the NRC's use of NVLAP accreditation for dosimetry processors ignores 
    the fact that NRC has the resources to perform frequent on-site 
    inspections of a facility's dosimetry program. In the absence of such 
    resources at DOE facilities, DOE relies upon the DOELAP accreditation 
    to ensure that a facility's personnel dosimetry program provides 
    accurate results.
    
    [[Page 59669]]
    
        DOE received comments on its proposal to require DOELAP 
    accreditation, exception from accreditation under DOELAP, or DOELAP 
    equivalency, for radiobioassay programs that would satisfy the internal 
    dose monitoring program requirement in the rule. The commenters argued 
    that it would be premature to impose this requirement because DOE has 
    not completed the process for developing accreditation standards for 
    radiobioassay programs. As discussed in connection with Sec. 835.101, 
    concerning the effective date of the rule, DOE has responded to these 
    concerns by extending the deadline for complying with this provision to 
    January 1, 2002. In any event, Sec. 835.402(d) provides for Secretarial 
    Officer approval of radiobioassay programs that are not accredited 
    under DOELAP.
        Several commenters objected to proposed Sec. 835.402(e), which 
    would have required Secretarial Officer approval of personnel dosimetry 
    and radiobioassay programs that do not comply with the latest edition 
    of DOE's technical standards governing program accreditation. They 
    argued that incorporation by reference of the technical standards was 
    inappropriate because the requirements in the technical standards had 
    not been proposed for public comment in a rulemaking. In light of these 
    comments, DOE has deleted the reference to DOE's technical standards 
    for accreditation in the regulatory text of the final rule. DOE does 
    not intend to codify the accreditation standards through this 
    rulemaking. DOE technical standards are guidance documents to assist 
    contractors in implementing regulatory requirements. As a matter of 
    policy (DOE P 450.2A, May 15, 1996), DOE routinely seeks public 
    comments on guidance documents issued to implement environment, safety 
    and health requirements at DOE sites. On April 24, 1997, DOE published 
    a notice of availability of draft guides and technical standards for 
    the Occupational Radiation Protection Program (62 FR 19940). At that 
    time, DOE invited public comment on draft technical standard, 
    ``Department of Energy Laboratory Accreditation Program 
    Administration,'' which includes requirements for personnel dosimetry 
    and radiobioassay program accreditation. The revised regulatory 
    provisions will accomplish DOE's purpose of providing that programs 
    which DOE accredits, or excepts from accreditation, under DOELAP will 
    satisfy the requirements in this rule for programs that are implemented 
    to demonstrate compliance with Sec. 835.402(a) and (c). Accreditation 
    under DOELAP will obviate the need for contractors to secure approval 
    of the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health.
    Final Rule
        In the final rule DOE has revised Sec. 835.402(b) and (d) to 
    provide that contractors may demonstrate the adequacy of external and 
    internal dose monitoring programs, respectively, by submitting their 
    programs to the Secretarial Officer responsible for environment, safety 
    and health for approval in lieu of accreditation or exception from 
    accreditation under the DOELAP. Alternative programs will be approved 
    if their performance is demonstrated to be substantially equivalent to 
    that of accredited programs. This change makes unnecessary, and DOE has 
    deleted, proposed Sec. 835.402(e), which would have required 
    Secretarial Officer approval of programs not complying with the latest 
    edition of the technical standards for DOELAP accreditation.
        DOE has adopted the other changes as proposed, with minor editorial 
    corrections.
    4. Air Monitoring
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed to revise the Sec. 835.403(a)(1) air sampling 
    requirement to be based on potential individual exposures in derived 
    air concentration (DAC)-hours in a year rather than a percentage of the 
    annual limit on intake (ALI) because the values provided in appendices 
    A and C of 10 CFR part 835 are listed as DACs. DOE proposed to add 
    Sec. 835.403(a)(2) to require that air sampling be performed when 
    respiratory protective devices are prescribed to protect individuals 
    from exposure to airborne radionuclides. DOE also proposed an editorial 
    change to delete Sec. 835.403(b), eliminating redundancy with 
    Sec. 835.401(b).
        To enhance air monitoring programs, DOE proposed to provide more 
    practical and technically accurate criteria at Sec. 835.403 for the use 
    of real-time air monitors based on potential releases that would exceed 
    a defined threshold exposure levels of 40 DAC-hours in a week. In a 
    related change, DOE proposed to replace the term ``continuous air 
    monitor'' with the term ``real-time air monitor'' with supporting 
    changes to the definitions provided at Sec. 835.2(a). DOE also proposed 
    to add a definition of the term ``week'' at Sec. 835.2(a).
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        DOE received a number of comments indicating that the proposed 
    revision of the requirements for real-time air monitoring was unclear 
    and did not acknowledge the actual capabilities of available monitors. 
    Other commenters indicated that the proposed definition of the term 
    ``week,'' based upon a period beginning on Monday, might cause 
    unnecessary changes in existing schedules for real-time air monitor 
    filter changes. Several commenters indicated that the proposed 
    provisions for air sampling when respiratory protective devices are 
    prescribed could be construed to mean that an air sample must be taken 
    each time an individual enters an area wearing a respiratory protective 
    device.
        DOE received comments indicating that the existing criterion based 
    upon the percentage of an ALI was more appropriate for prospective 
    establishment of air monitoring programs. DAC-hours are related to the 
    fraction of an ALI in a consistent and fixed manner; therefore, 
    potential exposures in units of DAC-hours are an appropriate basis for 
    prospectively determining the need for air sampling.
    Final Rule
        As suggested through public comments, DOE clarified the mandatory 
    airborne radioactivity monitoring criteria in the final rule. Section 
    835.403(a) of the final rule requires the implementation of air 
    sampling programs in areas in which an individual is expected to be 
    exposed in excess of 40 DAC-hours in a year. The final rule clarifies 
    that airborne radioactivity monitoring during use of respiratory 
    protective equipment is required ``as necessary'' to characterize the 
    hazard. This provision is consistent with requirements imposed by both 
    the NRC and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 
    (see 10 CFR 20.1703(a)(3), ``Use of individual respiratory protection 
    equipment,'' and 29 CFR part 1910, ``Occupational Safety and Health 
    Standards,'' Sec. 1910.134(d)(1)(iii), respectively).
        The Sec. 835.403(b) criterion for real-time air monitoring is based 
    upon the need to alert potentially exposed individuals of the need for 
    action to reduce or terminate exposures to airborne radioactive 
    material. This approach provides more flexibility for implementation on 
    a site-and facility-specific basis, taking into account realistic event 
    scenarios, source terms, and instrument capabilities. This requirement 
    acknowledges the wide
    
    [[Page 59670]]
    
    variety of configurations and hazards associated with DOE activities 
    and the limitations of currently available real-time air monitoring 
    equipment. DOE's implementing guidance provides an acceptable approach 
    for achieving compliance with this provision. The restructuring of the 
    requirements for real-time air monitoring rendered proposed 
    Sec. 835.403(c) redundant; DOE has therefore deleted this provision.
        In support of the revised provisions, Sec. 835.2(a) provides 
    definitions for the terms ``derived air concentration-hour (DAC-
    hour),'' ``real-time air monitoring,'' ``respiratory protective 
    device,'' and ``week'' which are used at Sec. 835.403. In consideration 
    of public comments, DOE has revised the proposed definition of the term 
    ``week'' to omit a mandatory starting day. In addition, DOE has deleted 
    the definitions of ``ambient air'' and ``continuous air monitor'' 
    because these terms are no longer used in 10 CFR part 835.
    5. Contamination Monitoring
        In consideration of public comments received, DOE has revised the 
    Sec. 835.404 requirements for contamination monitoring and control and 
    moved these requirements to Sec. 835.1102. The proposed changes, public 
    comments, and final rule provisions are discussed in full in Section 
    II.J of this Notice of Final Rulemaking.
    6. Receipt of Packages of Radioactive Material
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed to add requirements at Sec. 835.405 for surveys of 
    packages of radioactive material received from radioactive material 
    transportation to ensure adequate protection is provided to 
    individuals, including warehouse and office workers, who may be exposed 
    to these materials. The proposed provisions included requirements for 
    taking possession of radioactive material packages from transport and 
    performing surveys of these packages. At 835.405(d), DOE proposed to 
    establish requirements for completion of the necessary surveys within 
    three hours of receipt of the package (if received during working 
    hours) or within three hours of the beginning of the following working 
    day (if received after working hours). The proposed requirements are 
    similar to NRC requirements at 10 CFR 20.1906.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Several commenters suggested that the time provision included in 
    the proposed amendment was unnecessarily stringent. During evaluation 
    and resolution of these comments, DOE determined that the nature of 
    many of its sites and facilities and the stringency of the requirements 
    for radioactive material transportation indicate that this observation 
    is accurate.
    Final Rule
        In deference to the comments received and in recognition of the 
    variety of sites and facilities subject to 10 CFR part 835, DOE has 
    extended the time required for monitoring packages received from 
    radioactive material transportation to 8 hours after the beginning of 
    the working day following the receipt of the package. In practice, the 
    actual interval may also be constrained by the requirements for 
    individual monitoring and radiation safety training at Secs. 835.402 
    and 835.901 respectively, and by the ALARA requirements at 
    Sec. 835.101.
        As used in Sec. 835.405, a ``working day'' is considered to be the 
    interval of time within each 24 hour period during which the building 
    or area in which the received package is stored is routinely occupied 
    or available for operations other than emergency activities. For 
    example, if the received package is stored in a warehouse awaiting the 
    required monitoring and that warehouse is occupied or accessible to 
    shipping and receiving personnel, then the working day is that period 
    of time within each 24 hour period during which the shipping and 
    receiving personnel are scheduled to be working or to have ready access 
    to the warehouse. The working day does not include periods during which 
    shipping and receiving personnel would have to return to work on a non-
    scheduled basis to address emergent issues requiring their attendance.
    
    E. Entry Control Program, Subpart F
    
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed more detailed provisions for written work 
    authorizations at Sec. 835.501(e) to address operational occurrences 
    throughout the DOE complex. DOE also proposed to revise Sec. 835.502 to 
    add measures for control of access to high radiation areas. The 
    proposed control measures were consistent with those previously 
    established in the Manual and included requirements for use of a 
    supplemental dosimetry device and appropriate area surveys.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Commenters expressed concern that the proposed Sec. 835.501(e) 
    entry control requirements were inappropriate for relatively minor 
    hazards present in areas such as radiation areas. With regard to the 
    proposed high radiation area access control requirements, commenters 
    also indicated that devices capable of rendering an immediate 
    indication of an individual's integrated dose resulting from neutron 
    radiation are not commercially available. Several commenters also 
    indicated that the proposed Sec. 835.502(c) requirements for control of 
    access to very high radiation areas could be taken to mean that the 
    required controls must be impenetrable. DOE agrees that these issues 
    require clarification.
    Final Rule
        Regarding low-hazard radiological areas, the final rule provides 
    significant flexibility for implementation of access controls on a 
    facility-and hazard-specific basis. The written authorizations required 
    by 835.501(d) must specify radiation protection measures consistent 
    with existing and potential hazards. DOE does not intend for this 
    provision to establish a global requirement for the development and 
    implementation of radiological work permits to address all entries into 
    radiological areas. The written authorization may take the form of 
    generally applicable procedures, as appropriate. Guidance on the use of 
    written authorizations will be published in DOE's Radiological Control 
    Standard. As a result of the deletion of specific requirements for 
    written procedures (discussed in Section II.B.3 of this Notice of Final 
    Rulemaking), DOE has redesignated proposed Sec. 835.501(e) as 
    Sec. 835.501(d) in the final rule.
        To address the unavailability of devices capable of providing an 
    immediate indication of an individual's dose resulting from exposure to 
    neutron radiation in a high radiation area, Sec. 835.502(a)(2) allows 
    for supplemental dosimeters or other means of immediately estimating or 
    measuring the individuals' integrated doses during the area entry. The 
    other means may include knowledge of the area exposure rates combined 
    with tracking of individual access times. Consistent with the existing 
    definition of the terms ``high radiation area'' and ``very high 
    radiation area,'' DOE has revised the proposed requirements to indicate 
    that the required devices and measures must be capable of estimating 
    the affected individual's deep dose equivalent, rather than the dose 
    equivalent. DOE also provided an editorial correction at 
    Sec. 835.502(b)(2), substituting the defined term ``individuals'' for 
    the undefined term ``personnel.''
    
    [[Page 59671]]
    
        In response to public comments, DOE has clarified Sec. 835.502(c) 
    to indicate that the additional controls required for very high 
    radiation areas need to be sufficient to prevent ``unauthorized or 
    inadvertent'' entries rather than to prohibit entry into the area.
    
    F. Posting and Labeling, Subpart G
    
    1. Controlled Area and Radiological Area Posting Requirements
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed several changes to clarify and simplify requirements 
    for area hazard posting and to provide additional flexibility in 
    implementing these requirements. In acknowledgment of the differing 
    hazards and controls associated with removable and fixed radioactive 
    contamination, DOE proposed to revise the Sec. 835.2(a) definitions of 
    ``contamination area'' and ``high contamination area'' to be based upon 
    removable surface contamination levels only and to clearly establish 
    these areas based on accessibility rather than the general reference to 
    ``working areas'' which appeared at Sec. 835.601(a). DOE proposed a 
    similar change to the Sec. 835.2(a) definition of the term ``airborne 
    radioactivity area.'' DOE also proposed to move the controlled area 
    maximum dose expectation from the Sec. 835.2(a) ``controlled area'' 
    definition to the Sec. 835.602(a) controlled area posting provision.
        Because radiological area terms are defined at Sec. 835.2(a), DOE 
    proposed to remove redundant definitions imbedded in the posting 
    provisions at Sec. 835.603. DOE also proposed to delete the requirement 
    for DOE approval of warning signs from Sec. 835.601(b) because 
    acceptable signs are described in DOE's implementing guidance and DOE 
    did not intend to establish a formal process for approval of 
    radiological postings and labels. In addition, DOE proposed to expand 
    its provision at Sec. 835.601(e) (redesignated as Sec. 835.601(d) in 
    the proposed amendment) allowing modification of postings and labels to 
    accommodate special considerations of DOE activities involving private 
    residences to also include private businesses.
        Consistent with NRC requirements published at 10 CFR 20.1902, DOE 
    proposed to amend Sec. 835.603(b), (d), and (f) to allow use of the 
    words ``Caution'' or ``Danger'' on postings for high radiation, high 
    contamination, and airborne radioactivity areas, respectively. This 
    proposed change would accommodate the wide range of radiological 
    conditions that may be present in these areas to provide some degree of 
    flexibility in their posting.
        Proposed Sec. 835.604(a) would create an exception from posting 
    requirements for periods of less than 8 continuous hours as long as the 
    radiological area is placed under continuous observation and control of 
    a person able to implement the required access and exposure control 
    measures. This exception would cover temporary conditions or activities 
    such as maintenance, repair or cleanup activities so long as the 
    absence of posting is kept to within the prescribed time and the 
    prescribed control measures are implemented.
        DOE also proposed to add Sec. 835.604(b) and (c) delineating 
    specific exceptions from the radiological area posting requirements of 
    Sec. 835.603, recognizing that compensatory measures may be implemented 
    that would obviate the need for area posting. The proposed exceptions 
    are similar to those established by the NRC at 10 CFR 20.1903.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        DOE received several comments indicating that the proposed 
    definition of the term ``airborne radioactivity area'' should include 
    an exposure-based criterion (i.e., based upon potential individual 
    exposures in term of dose, percentage of an ALI, or DAC-hours) instead 
    of, or in addition to, the existing criterion based upon the absolute 
    airborne radioactivity concentration. DOE agrees that this issue 
    requires clarification.
        Some commenters expressed support for the current 10 CFR part 835 
    posting provisions based upon the identification of ``working areas.'' 
    However, the term ``working areas'' is not defined and DOE does not 
    believe that posting of only ``working areas'' provides adequate 
    protection of individuals approaching or entering radiological areas in 
    which there is no work in progress. The commenters did not provide any 
    evidence that such a practice would provide for adequate protection.
        DOE received a number of comments on the proposed allowance for the 
    use of ``Caution'' or ``Danger'' on certain radiological hazard warning 
    signs. Commenters indicated that the terms ``Caution'' and ``Danger'' 
    are not interchangeable and that the term ``Danger'' generally carries 
    a connotation of greater hazard than ``Caution.'' While DOE agrees with 
    these observations, DOE believes that, in the continuum of possible 
    radiological conditions associated with DOE activities, the threshold 
    at which ``Danger'' becomes more appropriate than ``Caution'' most 
    likely lies somewhere within those conditions described in the 
    Sec. 835.2(a) definitions of ``airborne radioactivity area,'' ``high 
    radiation area,'' and ``high contamination area.'' Furthermore, 
    individual protective actions required for entry into these areas are 
    dependent upon the radiological area title, not the ``Caution'' or 
    ``Danger'' heading. DOE believes that the demarcation between those 
    conditions requiring ``Caution'' and ``Danger'' headings is best left 
    to the discretion of those responsible for individual DOE activities to 
    ensure that activity-specific conditions are addressed. Therefore, DOE 
    believes that it is appropriate to allow flexibility in the use of the 
    ``Caution'' and ``Danger'' headings for posting of high radiation, high 
    contamination, and airborne radioactivity areas.
        Some commenters indicated that provisions for alternative measures 
    for DOE activities conducted at private residences and businesses 
    should be extended to DOE activities conducted on state- and Federally-
    owned lands. However, DOE does not believe that considerations of 
    individual property rights and property value impacts extend to DOE 
    activities conducted on state and Federal lands. Furthermore, the great 
    majority of DOE activities are conducted at state-and Federally-owned 
    sites. Such an exception would negate the specific posting requirements 
    for essentially all DOE activities.
        Commenters generally supported DOE's proposed exceptions to the 
    radiological posting requirements. However, comments indicated that the 
    proposed Sec. 835.604(c) exception for packages received from 
    radioactive material transportation should not apply to damaged 
    packages. DOE agrees that this issue requires specific attention.
    Final Rule
        DOE has revised the Sec. 835.2(a) definition of the term ``airborne 
    radioactivity area'' such that posting and control of these areas will 
    be required when the airborne radioactivity concentration exceeds the 
    DAC values provided in appendix A or C of 10 CFR part 835 or when an 
    individual present in the area without a respiratory protective device 
    could be exposed to airborne radioactive material in excess of 12 DAC-
    hours in a week. This definition is similar to that provided by the NRC 
    at 10 CFR 20.1003.
        DOE has codified the changes to the radiological hazard posting 
    requirements as proposed. In the final rule, DOE has deleted 
    Sec. 835.601(a) to eliminate redundancy. As a result, Sec. 835.601(b)--
    (d) have been redesignated as Sec. 835.601(a)--(c), respectively. The 
    Sec. 835.604 radiological
    
    [[Page 59672]]
    
    area posting exceptions do not apply to the radiological area entry 
    control requirements established at Secs. 835.501 and 835.502 or to the 
    radiation safety training requirements at Sec. 835.901. In response to 
    public comments, DOE has restricted the scope of the posting exception 
    for packages received from radioactive material transportation to those 
    packages received in a non-degraded condition.
    2. Radioactive Material Area Posting
    Proposed Amendment
        To ensure that individuals entering controlled areas but not 
    entering radiological areas are adequately protected, DOE proposed 
    requirements for posting of radioactive material areas similar to the 
    existing requirements of DOE N 441.1 (extended by DOE N 441.2 and DOE N 
    441.3). The proposed posting requirements were based on quantities of 
    radioactive materials that exceeded 10 times the threshold values 
    proposed in appendix E of 10 CFR part 835 and were similar to NRC 
    requirements at 10 CFR 20.1902. DOE proposed to define ``radioactive 
    material area'' and include this term in the definition of 
    ``radiological area'' at Sec. 835.2(a) and establish requirements for 
    posting radioactive material areas at Sec. 835.603(g). DOE also 
    proposed exceptions to the radioactive material area posting 
    requirements at Sec. 835.604(b).
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        DOE received numerous comments on these proposed requirements. The 
    major issues included: (1) The threshold values (based on ten times the 
    activity levels provided in proposed appendix E of 10 CFR part 835) 
    which would require posting of radioactive material areas were overly 
    restrictive; (2) the hazards present in a radioactive material area, as 
    defined, did not warrant the imposition of specific entry controls and 
    radiation safety training programs required for radiological areas; (3) 
    posting of radioactive material areas should not be required when the 
    radioactive material consists solely of activated structures or 
    installed components; and (4) there is no apparent difference between 
    the hazards in a controlled area and a radioactive material area, as 
    defined at Sec. 835.2(a).
        DOE agrees that: (1) The proposed appendix E values, as a basis for 
    defining a radioactive materials area, were somewhat restrictive; (2) 
    posting of radioactive material areas should not be required when the 
    material solely consists of structures or installed components which 
    have been activated; and (3) the hazards present in a radioactive 
    material area, as defined, are not always significantly different than 
    the hazards in a controlled area and would not always warrant 
    imposition of the entry controls required for the defined radiological 
    areas.
    Final Rule
        DOE recognizes the fact that the radiological conditions expected 
    in radioactive material areas, as proposed, are less hazardous than 
    those present in radiological areas as defined in the original rule. 
    Accordingly, a less restrictive approach to radiological protection is 
    warranted. In the final rule, DOE has omitted the term ``radioactive 
    material area'' from the Sec. 835.2(a) definition of ``radiological 
    area.'' Therefore, radioactive material areas will not be subject to 
    the specific entry control provisions of Sec. 835.501. As a result of 
    the codification of hazard-based radiation safety training requirements 
    at Sec. 835.901 (discussed in Section II.H. of this Notice of Final 
    Rulemaking), applicability of the radiation safety training 
    requirements for entry into radioactive material areas will be subject 
    to an evaluation of the activities to be performed in the area and the 
    degree of actual or potential exposure to radiological hazards.
        Section 835.603(g) of the final rule requires posting of 
    radioactive material areas at the entry points to accessible areas 
    where there exist items or containers of radioactive material in excess 
    of the revised appendix E values as published, rather than ten times 
    the appendix E values, as proposed. The basis for the revised appendix 
    E values is discussed in detail in Section II.K of this Notice of Final 
    Rulemaking. Because of the minimal hazards present in radioactive 
    material areas, DOE has omitted the allowance for the use of the 
    ``Danger'' heading from the Sec. 835.603(g) requirement for posting of 
    radioactive material areas.
        DOE has included proposed exceptions to the radioactive material 
    area posting requirement at Sec. 835.604. In response to the comments 
    received, DOE has included another posting exception for areas in which 
    the radioactive material consists solely of structures or installed 
    components which have been activated, such as activation by exposure to 
    neutron radiation or radiation incident to operation of a particle 
    accelerator. DOE expects that this exception will most commonly be 
    applied to building and shielding structures associated with nuclear 
    reactors and particle accelerators. Note that these structures and 
    components are not excepted from the radiological area posting 
    requirements.
        Because the term ``radioactive material area'' has been deleted 
    from the Sec. 835.2(a) definition of the term ``radiological area,'' 
    DOE has revised the heading of Sec. 835.603 and the provisions of 
    Sec. 835.602(a) to reflect the inclusion of the radioactive material 
    area posting requirements in subpart G of 10 CFR part 835.
    3. Radioactive Material Labeling
    Proposed Amendment
        To augment and clarify existing requirements, DOE proposed to add 
    requirements for labeling items and containers of radioactive materials 
    at Sec. 835.605, with appropriate exceptions being proposed at 
    Sec. 835.606. These proposed provisions are similar to those in the 
    Manual and consistent with requirements imposed by the NRC at 10 CFR 
    20.1904 and 20.1905.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        DOE received comments indicating that, because the proposed 
    labeling provisions were based upon the proposed appendix E total 
    activity values, they were not adequate to ensure proper labeling of 
    items having removable contamination exceeding the 10 CFR part 835 
    appendix D surface radioactivity values. However, even though labeling 
    of contaminated items is not explicitly required by the rule, adequate 
    controls are established under Secs. 835.1101 and 835.1102 which will 
    require that either labeling or equivalent measures be implemented to 
    inform individuals of the contamination hazard.
        DOE also received comments on the proposed exceptions from the 
    labeling requirements. Commenters indicated that exceptions should also 
    be provided for nuclear weapons and their components, for inaccessible 
    radioactive material, and for activated building components. DOE agrees 
    with these comments.
    Final Rule
        DOE has codified the proposed requirements for labeling with minor 
    editorial changes. Section 835.605 requires labeling of radioactive 
    items and containers of radioactive materials. Section 835.606 provides 
    an exception from the labeling requirements for items and containers 
    having a total activity of less than \1/10\ of the appendix E values 
    rather than at the proposed appendix E values because DOE has 
    reevaluated the appendix E values to address concerns regarding the 
    stringency of the proposed
    
    [[Page 59673]]
    
    requirements for accountable sealed radioactive sources (see discussion 
    in Section II.K. of this Notice of Final Rulemaking). Because 
    Secs. 835.1101 and 835.1102 establish appropriate requirements for 
    control of contaminated material and equipment, DOE has not included 
    specific requirements for labeling of contaminated items in this 
    subpart.
        In response to the comments received, DOE has revised the 
    radioactive material labeling exceptions proposed at Sec. 835.606 to 
    include nuclear weapons and their components and inaccessible 
    radioactive material. In addition, the exception from the Sec. 835.601 
    design and color specifications for labels applied to sealed 
    radioactive sources, proposed at Sec. 835.1201(b), has been codified at 
    Sec. 835.606(b).
    
    G. Records and Reports, Subparts H and I
    
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed a number of changes to its requirements for records 
    demonstrating compliance with 10 CFR part 835. The proposed changes 
    included:
        1. Revising Secs. 835.203(a) and 835.702(b) to provide that, when 
    monitoring is performed, but not required by Sec. 835.402, internal and 
    external doses must be summed and records must be maintained only if 
    the doses determined by the non-mandatory monitoring exceed the 
    thresholds of Sec. 835.402. This proposed change was intended to reduce 
    the burden of recordkeeping consistent with the recommendations in the 
    Guidance to Federal Agencies.
        2. Deleting the words ``caused by contamination on the skin'' from 
    Sec. 835.702(b) to ensure consistency with the referenced requirements 
    at Sec. 835.205.
        3. Revising Sec. 835.702(c)(1) to provide that records must be 
    sufficient to demonstrate compliance with all of the subpart C dose 
    limits. This provision is consistent with Sec. 835.701(a).
        4. Deleting the requirement at Sec. 835.702(c)(4)(iii) to record 
    the estimated intake associated with internal dose assessments. This 
    change was necessary because determination of the individual dose 
    equivalent resulting from intakes of certain radionuclides, such as 
    tritium, does not require determination of the estimated intake.
        5. Revising Sec. 835.702(d) and (e) such that acceptance of written 
    estimates of an individual's prior occupational dose is based upon an 
    inability to obtain formal records, rather than the absence of those 
    records. DOE also proposed to revise Sec. 835.702(d) consistent with 
    the previously discussed clarification of the components of 
    occupational dose and to reference DOE Orders for authorizing emergency 
    exposures. DOE further proposed to revise Sec. 835.702(e) to indicate 
    that efforts to obtain records of prior years doses were necessary only 
    for those individuals monitored in accordance with Sec. 835.402.
        6. Technical and editorial changes to clarify the recordkeeping 
    provisions and to ensure consistency with other changes included in 
    subparts J and M. DOE also proposed to revise Sec. 835.704(d) to 
    require documentation of revocations of declarations of pregnancy.
        7. Because some individuals may not have social security numbers, 
    DOE proposed to revise Sec. 835.801(a) to allow for use of another 
    unique identification number in reports associated with such 
    individuals.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        DOE received a number of comments indicating that the results of 
    all individual monitoring that is performed should be recorded. DOE 
    agrees that this approach has merit. Furthermore, DOE has provided 
    adequate flexibility under the individual monitoring requirements of 
    Sec. 835.402 to eliminate any onerous administrative burdens resulting 
    from records of trivial doses.
        DOE received comments indicating that the term ``accident'' was not 
    clearly defined, resulting in uncertainty about the proper application 
    of the individual monitoring records requirement of Sec. 835.702(a).
        DOE received comments suggesting that the proposed change to 
    Sec. 835.702(e) was not needed because, in the absence of a cumulative 
    dose limit, written estimates would not serve any substantive purpose. 
    DOE agrees with this observation.
    Final Rule
        DOE has revised Sec. 835.702(a) to delete reference to accidents 
    and to specify that records be maintained to document unplanned doses 
    exceeding the monitoring thresholds of Sec. 835.402.
        In consideration of the comments received, DOE has not included the 
    proposed changes to Sec. 835.702(b) in the final rule.
        Consistent with the changes to Sec. 835.1302 discussed in Section 
    II.L of this Notice of Final Rulemaking, DOE has revised 
    Sec. 835.702(d) to reference the emergency exposure authorization 
    measures included in that section.
        DOE has also not included in the final rule the proposed change to 
    Sec. 835.702(e) allowing written estimates of prior years doses. DOE 
    has included the remaining changes with minor editorial corrections to 
    enhance clarity.
        DOE's review of 10 CFR part 835 revealed the fact that 
    Sec. 835.702(c)(2) inappropriately invoked the requirements of certain 
    DOE Orders. The applicability of these Orders is established through 
    DOE contractual processes. DOE has revised the text to delete this 
    invocation of DOE Orders.
        Consistent with changes discussed elsewhere in this Notice of Final 
    Rulemaking, DOE has revised the heading of Sec. 835.703 and language at 
    Sec. 835.703(a) and (e) to eliminate the use of the term ``workplace'' 
    and to reference those subparts of the rule (subparts E and L) that 
    establish monitoring requirements.
        Because individuals generally do not record the results of 
    contamination monitoring upon exiting contamination and high 
    contamination areas and there is little perceived value in maintaining 
    such records, DOE has clarified Sec. 835.703(a) to permit such a 
    practice. In consideration of comments on the specificity of the 
    proposed Sec. 835.703(c) recordkeeping provisions, DOE has not included 
    the second portion of proposed Sec. 835.703(c) regarding informational 
    content of these records in the final rule. DOE has revised the 
    recordkeeping requirements of Sec. 835.703(d) consistent with the 
    changes made to Sec. 835.401.
        In recognition of the need to record the estimated date of 
    conception for a declared pregnant worker (in order to determine 
    compliance with the applicable dose limit for the embryo/fetus), DOE 
    has clearly stated this as a requirement at Sec. 835.704(d). Also, 
    consistent with the changes made at Sec. 835.401, DOE has deleted the 
    term ``workplace'' from Sec. 835.704(e).
    
    H. Radiation Safety Training, Subpart J
    
    1. Training Course Content and Administration
    Proposed Amendment
        When 10 CFR part 835 was originally developed, the detailed 
    radiation safety training requirements provided in the Manual obviated 
    the need to specify minimum training course content in the rule. 
    Because the Manual is no longer mandatory, DOE proposed to specify 
    minimum training course content at Sec. 835.901(b). Also at 
    Sec. 835.901(b), DOE proposed requirements that would allow more 
    liberal acceptance of an individual's previous radiation safety 
    training.
        DOE proposed to further consolidate and simplify its requirements 
    for
    
    [[Page 59674]]
    
    radiation safety training. Under the proposed amendment, the level of 
    training required would be based upon the areas entered by the 
    individual unescorted, the activities performed, and the likely doses, 
    rather than the individual's classification as a member of the public, 
    general employee, or radiological worker. Implementation of this 
    hierarchical approach to training would result in the appropriate level 
    of radiation safety training for general employees, with a higher level 
    of training required for radiological workers. This approach is 
    consistent with field experience and feedback from DOE operating 
    contractors and is similar to the approach previously taken by DOE in 
    DOE Order 5480.11 and currently taken by the NRC in 10 CFR part 19, 
    ``Notices, Instructions and Reports to Workers: Inspection and 
    Investigations.'' DOE proposed to eliminate the examination requirement 
    for individuals who are not permitted unescorted access to radiological 
    areas and who do not perform unescorted assignments as a radiological 
    worker. DOE also proposed to provide specific requirements at 
    Sec. 835.901(f) for individuals who may act as escorts of individuals 
    who have not completed required training.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Public comments generally endorsed DOE's proposed hierarchical 
    approach to radiation safety training. However, some commenters were 
    concerned that the proposed approach, which would require an individual 
    to complete radiation safety training prior to being occupationally 
    exposed to radiation, would needlessly penalize those facilities that 
    conduct training inside the controlled area or in other areas in which 
    trivial occupational exposures may occur. However, as proposed, 
    Sec. 835.901(c) (Sec. 835.901(b) in the proposed rule) requires 
    training to the extent appropriate to the individual's degree of 
    exposure to potential radiological hazards. Under the circumstances 
    described, the ``extent appropriate'' may be minimal (perhaps a 
    briefing on appropriate alarm responses).
        Comments indicated that the proposed Sec. 835.901(b)(3) requirement 
    to provide training on ``measures implemented at the facility to 
    minimize exposures'' was inappropriate, as there is no requirement to 
    ``minimize exposures.'' Other comments indicated that it was 
    unnecessary for the required training to be appropriate to 
    ``anticipated and actual'' work assignments; training appropriate to 
    the individual's work assignments should be sufficient. DOE agrees with 
    these observations.
        DOE received comments indicating that the existing Sec. 835.2(a) 
    definition of the term ``radiological worker'' was overly restrictive 
    and unclear due to its inclusion of individuals who operate radiation 
    producing devices. Commenters indicated that this inclusion could 
    require extensive training and testing of individuals who operate 
    devices emitting nominal amounts of radiation or those who operate 
    devices such as televisions and computer monitors. However, consumer 
    devices that emit nominal amounts of radiation are clearly excluded 
    from the scope of 10 CFR part 835 under the provisions of 835.1(b)(6) 
    and the related Sec. 835.2(a) definition of ``background.'' Although 
    the proposed provisions of Sec. 835.901(d) (see Sec. 835.901(b) in the 
    final rule) would require training and testing of individuals who 
    operate other radiation producing devices, the provisions of 
    Sec. 835.901(c) (see Sec. 835.901(b) in the proposed rule) would only 
    require that such training be appropriate to the extent of the 
    individual's potential exposure to radiological hazards.
        Although many commenters favored DOE's proposed relaxation of the 
    examination requirements, other commenters indicated that an 
    examination should be required for all forms of training to ensure that 
    the student has an understanding of the material presented. DOE agrees 
    that examinations are useful tools for assessing the retention of 
    information by the student. However, as stated in DOE's Notice of 
    Proposed Rulemaking, the radiological hazards present in those portions 
    of controlled areas which are outside of radiological areas are so 
    minimal that the information needed prior to entry does not warrant a 
    regulatory requirement for an examination. However, the absence of this 
    regulatory requirement does not preclude DOE's operating entities from 
    administering an examination.
        Several commenters indicated that DOE's proposed requirements for 
    use of escorts in lieu of training were unclear because of the use of 
    the phrase ``where an escort is required.'' These commenters correctly 
    pointed out that the proposed Sec. 835.901(c) and (d) would permit, but 
    would not explicitly require, the use of escorts.
        Other commenters were concerned that the retraining requirements of 
    proposed Sec. 835.901(g) might require individuals to complete the full 
    introductory radiation safety training course every 24 months. DOE 
    agrees that this issue requires clarification.
    Final Rule
        As proposed, DOE has reformatted subpart J into one section in the 
    final rule, codifying an approach similar to that previously published 
    in the Manual and eliminating redundancy. DOE has omitted proposed 
    Sec. 835.901(a) from the final rule because that paragraph would not 
    establish any substantive requirements. DOE has also eliminated the 
    examination requirement for individuals who are not permitted 
    unescorted access to radiological areas and who do not perform 
    unescorted assignments as a radiological worker, as proposed. Although 
    not a regulatory requirement, DOE contractors may still choose to 
    administer examinations or to undertake other means of assessing 
    individual understanding, such as interactive classroom discussions.
        DOE has included at Sec. 835.901(c) (Sec. 835.901(b) in the 
    proposed amendment) a requirement for training to be provided to the 
    extent appropriate to the individual's work assignment. DOE has also 
    included at Sec. 835.901(c)(3) (proposed Sec. 835.901(b)(3)) a 
    requirement that the training address measures used to ``manage doses 
    and maintain doses ALARA,'' rather than ``minimize'' doses. This 
    modification makes clear the distinction between maintaining doses well 
    below the dose limits using the ALARA process and maintaining doses 
    well below the dose limits by minimizing doses regardless of other 
    considerations.
        DOE has established requirements applicable to instances in which 
    escorts are used, rather than required, in lieu of training at revised 
    Sec. 835.901(d) (Sec. 835.901(f) in the proposed amendment).
        With regard to the requirements for biennial retraining, DOE has 
    eliminated the use of the undefined term ``retraining.'' Section 
    835.901(e) of the final rule requires affected individuals to complete 
    the required training at least every 24 months. Like the initial 
    training, this follow-on training is for individuals subject to the 
    requirements of Sec. 835.901(a) and (b), and is subject to the 
    provisions of Sec. 835.901(c). Thus, the content and scheduling (prior 
    to the end of the two year time interval) of such training needs to 
    incorporate considerations of the individual's prior training, work 
    assignments, and degree of exposure to radiological hazards, as well as 
    significant changes to radiation protection policies and procedures 
    that affect the individual.
    
    [[Page 59675]]
    
    2. Radiological Control Technician Training [Sec. 835.903]
        DOE also proposed changes to the 10 CFR part 835 requirements for 
    training of radiological control technicians. These changes are 
    discussed in detail in Section II.B.3. of this Notice of Final 
    Rulemaking.
    
    I. Design and Control, Subpart K
    
    Proposed Amendment
        Experience in implementing programs to ensure compliance with 10 
    CFR part 835 revealed that the design objectives currently included at 
    Sec. 835.1002(b) and (c) may not be practical in developing certain 
    modifications to existing facilities. Therefore, DOE proposed to delete 
    Sec. 835.1002(b) and (c). DOE also proposed to move the remaining 
    requirements in paragraphs (a) and (d) of Sec. 835.1002 to 
    Sec. 835.1001.
        The design criteria established at Sec. 835.1003(a) did not include 
    all of the occupational dose limits of Sec. 835.202, e.g. the lens of 
    the eye dose limit established at Sec. 835.202(a)(3). This omission 
    implied that the design of new facilities or modification of existing 
    facilities could include design features that would result in doses 
    exceeding the lens of the eye dose equivalent limit of 15 rem 
    established at Sec. 835.202. DOE proposed to correct this omission by 
    including all applicable occupational dose limits established at 
    Sec. 835.202 in this section.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Comments indicated that the phrase ``as low as is reasonably 
    achievable'' at Sec. 835.1001(a) could be construed to have a meaning 
    that differed from ``ALARA'' as defined at Sec. 835.2(a).
        Many commenters stated that DOE should retain the numerical design 
    objectives provided at Sec. 835.1002. Although achievement of the 
    numerical design objectives may not be practical in some cases 
    (particularly for minor modifications of existing facilities), the 
    design objectives are important components of the ALARA process. Public 
    comments suggested that elimination of the numerical design objectives 
    could result in confusion over when to apply quantitative design 
    objectives and the appropriate magnitude of those objectives. Comments 
    also indicated that Sec. 835.1003(b) did not establish any substantive 
    requirements beyond those established in subpart E of 10 CFR part 835.
        DOE agrees with these observations.
    Final Rule
        At Sec. 835.1001(a), DOE has substituted ``ALARA'' for ``as low as 
    is reasonably achievable.''
        Because procedural requirements are a type of administrative 
    control, DOE has deleted the term ``procedural requirements'' from 
    Sec. 835.1001 and deleted the term ``procedures'' from Sec. 835.1003 to 
    eliminate redundancy. For consistency, DOE has revised the heading of 
    Sec. 835.1003 to read ``Workplace Controls.''
        Because the use of quantitative design objectives plays a 
    significant role in the ALARA process as it applies to facility design, 
    DOE has chosen to defer this critical change until more experience is 
    gained through implementation of these regulatory provisions. DOE has 
    accepted the public comments and has retained the numerical design 
    objectives of Sec. 835.1002; however, DOE has retained the proposed 
    editorial change at Sec. 835.1002 (proposed Sec. 835.1001(c)) 
    substituting the term ``existing facilities'' for the term ``old 
    facilities.'' DOE will address its concerns with the application of 
    these requirements through enhanced guidance for achieving compliance. 
    DOE has included in the final rule the proposed change related to the 
    lens of the eye dose limit. In consideration of public comments, DOE 
    has also deleted Sec. 835.1003(b) from the final rule.
    
    J. Radioactive Contamination Control, Subpart L
    
    Proposed Amendment
        Consistent with the changes to the Sec. 835.2(a) definitions of the 
    terms ``contamination area'' and ``high contamination area,'' DOE 
    proposed changes to the Sec. 835.404 requirements for areas having only 
    fixed contamination exceeding the appendix D total surface 
    radioactivity values.
        DOE proposed several changes to appendix D of 10 CFR part 835, 
    which provides mandatory surface radioactivity values for contamination 
    control. DOE proposed to add the word ``alpha'' after the values for 
    uranium isotopes in appendix D to clarify the applicability of these 
    values. DOE also proposed to add to appendix D of 10 CFR part 835 a 
    contamination control value of 10,000 disintegrations per minute per 
    100 square centimeters for surfaces contaminated with tritium and 
    Footnote 6 to explain the use of this value. The surface contamination 
    value would be used to determine the applicability of the Sec. 835.603 
    contamination hazard posting provisions and the Secs. 835.404 and 
    835.1101 contamination control provisions. DOE has prepared an 
    Environmental Assessment, available at DOE's Freedom of Information 
    Reading Room at the address provided above, that addresses this change 
    in detail.
        DOE also proposed to move the existing requirements of 
    Sec. 835.1101(d) to Sec. 835.703(c) to consolidate recordkeeping 
    requirements and to add a new requirement for removal of radioactive 
    material labels from released materials and equipment at 
    Sec. 835.1101(d).
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Public comments were generally supportive of DOE's proposed changes 
    to the requirements for control of radioactive contamination. Public 
    comments also indicated that the recordkeeping requirements of proposed 
    Sec. 835.703(c) were overly prescriptive in comparison to related 
    requirements of the rule. Public comments also indicated that a literal 
    reading of Sec. 835.404(f) would indicate that the performance of 
    individual contamination monitoring by someone other than the 
    individual exiting a contamination or high contamination area (i.e., 
    individual frisking by radiological control technicians) would be 
    contrary to 10 CFR part 835. DOE agrees with these observations.
        Comments indicated that the related requirements of Secs. 835.404 
    and 835.1101 were confusing and possibly contradicting. The existing 
    provisions of Sec. 835.404 establish requirements for control of areas 
    contaminated by radioactive material; the provisions of Sec. 835.1101 
    establish similar requirements for materials and equipment contaminated 
    by radioactive materials. Upon reexamination of these requirements in 
    light of the comments received, DOE believes that there is opportunity 
    for simplification and clarification of the rule.
    Final Rule
        DOE has combined and simplified the requirements of Secs. 835.404 
    and 835.1101 in the final rule as follows:
        a. Although the provisions of Sec. 835.404 were specifically 
    related to controlling the spread of contamination, they were located 
    in subpart E, which was entitled ``Monitoring in the Workplace.'' 
    Therefore, DOE has moved these requirements, with revisions discussed 
    below, to subpart L.
        b. Although the title of subpart L indicates that the subject 
    matter is related to ``Releases of Materials and Equipment from 
    Radiological Areas,'' the requirements are more specifically related to 
    retention and control of
    
    [[Page 59676]]
    
    contaminated materials in radiological areas. Therefore, DOE has 
    retitled subpart L, ``Radioactive Contamination Control.''
        c. DOE has clarified and simplified the structure of 
    Sec. 835.1101(a).
        d. DOE has retained paragraphs 835.1101(b) and (c) with minor 
    editorial clarifications. Consistent with the discussion in Section 
    II.B.3 of this Notice of Final Rulemaking regarding written procedures, 
    DOE has omitted the requirement for written procedures (formerly 
    Sec. 835.1101(c)(3)).
        e. Because the existing requirements of Sec. 835.404(a) established 
    no substantive requirements, DOE has omitted this paragraph from the 
    final rule.
        f. DOE has redesignated paragraph 835.404(b) as Sec. 835.1102(a) in 
    the final rule.
        g. DOE has edited paragraph 835.404(c) and redesignated it as 
    Sec. 835.1102(b) in the final rule. DOE has omitted the provision 
    related to posting of contamination hazards (formerly 
    Sec. 835.404(c)(1)) because this provision is redundant with 
    Sec. 835.603(e) and (f).
        h. DOE has edited paragraph 835.404(d) and redesignated it as 
    Sec. 835.1102(c) in the final rule. Consistent with the discussion in 
    Section II.B.3 of this Notice of Final Rulemaking regarding written 
    procedures, DOE has omitted the requirement for written procedures 
    (formerly Sec. 835.404(d)(5)).
        i. Because of the changes to the Sec. 835.2(a) definitions of 
    ``contamination area'' and ``high contamination area'' discussed above, 
    the areas discussed at Sec. 835.404(d) (i.e., those having fixed 
    contamination at levels exceeding the appendix D total contamination 
    values, but removable contamination levels below the appendix D 
    removable contamination values) would no longer be considered 
    radiological areas. This renders the provisions of Sec. 835.404(e) 
    redundant; therefore, DOE has omitted these requirements from the final 
    rule.
        j. DOE has clarified Sec. 835.404(f) and redesignated it as 
    Sec. 835.1102(d).
        k. DOE has revised the language at Sec. 835.404(g) for clarity and 
    redesignated it as Sec. 835.1102(e).
        DOE has reconsidered its proposal to add Sec. 835.1101(d) 
    establishing requirements for removal of radioactive material labels 
    from released materials and equipment. Although DOE considers materials 
    and equipment meeting the requirements of Sec. 835.1101(a) to be 
    appropriate for release from radiological areas, such materials and 
    equipment are not necessarily ``non-radioactive'' and conditions may 
    arise under which retention of the radioactive material labels is 
    appropriate. DOE has therefore omitted this provision from the final 
    rule.
        As before, the requirements of Sec. 835.1101 address release of 
    materials and equipment from radiological areas to controlled areas. 
    DOE requirements for release of materials and equipment from its 
    control are addressed in DOE environmental protection standards.
    
    K. Control of Sealed Radioactive Sources, Subpart M
    
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed to add subpart M to 10 CFR part 835 to establish 
    requirements for control of sealed radioactive sources. These 
    requirements would supersede similar requirements established in DOE 
    Notice 5400.9, ``Sealed Radioactive Source Accountability'' (extended 
    through DOE Notice 5400.13 and superseded by DOE N 441.1 through DOE N 
    441.3). DOE proposed to add the terms ``accountable sealed radioactive 
    source,'' ``sealed radioactive source,'' and ``source leak test'' at 
    Sec. 835.2(a) and to add recordkeeping requirements at Sec. 835.704(f). 
    DOE also proposed to add appendix E to 10 CFR part 835 to establish 
    threshold values for sealed radioactive source accountability, 
    radioactive material labeling, and radioactive material area posting.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Although many commenters supported DOE's efforts to codify 
    requirements for sealed radioactive source control, several commenters 
    indicated that the accountability threshold values proposed for 
    inclusion in appendix E of 10 CFR part 835 were overly restrictive. 
    Commenters also indicated that the definition of ``sealed radioactive 
    source'' was too broad to allow for exclusion of certain items, such as 
    reactor fuel elements, that are not commonly produced or used as sealed 
    radioactive sources. In addition, several commenters indicated that 
    DOE's proposed minimum activity requiring performance of periodic leak 
    tests (0.005 microcuries) was overly restrictive.
        Commenters indicated that inaccessible sources should be excepted 
    from the requirements for leak testing and inventory. Such a measure 
    would obviate the need to disassemble facility components and 
    instruments for the purpose of performing the inventories and leak 
    tests. Commenters also indicated that common contamination control 
    measures are capable of minimizing, but perhaps not preventing, the 
    spread of contamination as would be required by proposed 
    Sec. 835.1202(e).
        DOE agrees with these observations.
    Final Rule
        In response to public comments, DOE has revised the Sec. 835.2(a) 
    definition of the term ``sealed radioactive source'' to exclude reactor 
    fuel elements, nuclear explosive devices, and radioisotope 
    thermoelectric generators. DOE has included the definitions of 
    ``accountable sealed radioactive source'' and ``source leak test'' at 
    Sec. 835.2(a) as proposed. DOE has revised Sec. 835.1202(d) to provide 
    an exception from leak testing and inventory for sealed radioactive 
    sources that are inaccessible. DOE has also revised Sec. 835.1202(e) to 
    indicate that the required contamination control measures must 
    ``minimize'' the spread of contamination.
        DOE has revised the proposed appendix E values. DOE determined the 
    appendix E values in the final rule as follows: For each radionuclide, 
    DOE considered two scenarios: (1) the activity quantity resulting in a 
    deep dose equivalent from external radiation of 0.1 rem (0.001 sievert) 
    assuming an individual was irradiated for a period of 12 hours per day 
    at a distance of 1 meter from the source for 365 days; and (2) the 
    activity quantity resulting in a committed effective dose equivalent of 
    0.1 rem (0.001 sievert) assuming an instantaneous intake of 0.001% of 
    the material by an individual. DOE compared the activity quantities for 
    the deep dose equivalent and the committed effective dose equivalent 
    and selected the more restrictive value as the basis for the 
    accountability threshold value. DOE selected the value of 0.1 rem as 
    the basis for the revised appendix E values for consistency with DOE's 
    mandatory threshold for monitoring of general employee dose (see 
    Sec. 835.402) and dose limit for members of the public in controlled 
    areas (see Sec. 835.208). DOE also assumed more realistic values for 
    the exposure time and intake factor and eliminated the arbitrary 300 
    microcurie activity cap. The basis for the appendix E values is 
    discussed in more detail in a technical basis document available in 
    DOE's Freedom of Information Reading Room at the address provided 
    above.
        Because all of the revised appendix E values are greater than 0.005 
    microcuries, DOE has deleted this threshold from the requirements for 
    sealed radioactive source leak tests (proposed Sec. 835.1202(b)). DOE 
    has also omitted the proposed requirement for written procedures from 
    the final rule. For details on this omission, see Section II.B.3 of 
    this Notice of Final Rulemaking. Finally, because DOE's
    
    [[Page 59677]]
    
    reevaluation of the appendix E values resulted in significant increases 
    in all of the accountability threshold values, DOE has codified a 
    general requirement at Sec. 835.1201 for all radioactive sources (both 
    accountable and non-accountable) to be used, handled, and stored in a 
    manner commensurate with the radiological hazards created by the 
    operation involving the sources. DOE will provide implementing guidance 
    to discuss acceptable methods for achieving compliance with this 
    provision.
        The basis for the control of sealed radioactive sources is a 
    hierarchy of increasing radiological controls based upon the maximum 
    credible dose consequence resulting from the loss of a source. The 
    maximum credible dose consequence should not be considered to be a 
    release criterion. Under the requirements of 10 CFR part 835, some 
    degree of radiological control is required for all sealed radioactive 
    sources, regardless of their activity. This hierarchy of controls 
    reduces the likelihood of losing a sealed radioactive source. Thus the 
    approach to sealed radioactive source control is analogous to that 
    taken in nuclear safety. As the potential consequences of a credible 
    incident increase, additional controls are imposed to reduce the 
    probability that the incident will occur and mitigate the consequences 
    of that incident.
        For the lowest activity sealed radioactive sources, a minimal level 
    of radiological control is required based upon the hazards associated 
    with the operations involving the sources. More specific actions are 
    not considered necessary and are therefore not specified.
        For sealed radioactive sources whose loss could result in a maximum 
    credible dose consequence of 0.1 rem or more in a year, additional 
    controls are imposed. The requirement for semi-annual inventories 
    reduces the possibility of losing the source and, by triggering 
    investigative action, mitigates the consequences of a lost source. The 
    requirement for semi-annual leak testing provides a means of monitoring 
    the integrity of the source and likewise triggers action to mitigate 
    the consequences of a leaking source.
    
    L. Accident and Emergency Exposures, Subpart N
    
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed to correct Sec. 835.1301(a), (b), and (d) by deleting 
    references to Sec. 835.205, which provides no dose limits. Consistent 
    with changes to Sec. 835.204, DOE proposed to revise Sec. 835.1301(a) 
    to indicate that doses resulting from accident and emergency exposures 
    may exceed the numerical values established at Sec. 835.202(a) without 
    violating the occupational dose limits. Both accident and emergency 
    doses are considered occupational doses and are included in a general 
    employee's occupational dose record, but emergency doses are explicitly 
    excluded from consideration in determining compliance with the 
    occupational dose limits at Sec. 835.202(a).
        DOE proposed to delete Sec. 835.1302(d) because these provisions 
    are adequately addressed in related DOE Orders and emergency management 
    guides.
        DOE clarified Sec. 835.1304 by substituting the defined term 
    ``individual'' for the term ``personnel'' which eliminates any 
    confusion regarding the coverage of the personal nuclear accident 
    dosimetry provisions. DOE also proposed to remove the reference to 
    ``all personnel'' to provide flexibility in implementing the personal 
    nuclear accident dosimetry provisions.
    
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
    
        Regarding accident and emergency exposures, public comments 
    indicated that DOE had failed to clearly define the terms ``accident'' 
    and ``emergency,'' resulting in uncertainty about the proper 
    application of these provisions.
        Comments regarding the proposed approach basing personal nuclear 
    accident dosimetry requirements on the need for nuclear criticality 
    alarms indicated that this approach would be impractical due to the 
    vagueness of the referenced requirements for these alarms.
        DOE agrees with these observations.
    Final Rule
        DOE has included the proposed changes into the final rule.
        Consistent with the clarification of the requirements for 
    accounting for occupational doses, including doses resulting from 
    authorized planned special exposures and emergency exposures, DOE has 
    deleted the term ``accident'' from Sec. 835.1301(a). This deletion 
    results from DOE's recognition that, except for doses resulting from 
    planned special exposures and authorized emergency exposures, all doses 
    in excess of the regulatory limits may be considered to be 
    ``accidents.'' Under such circumstances, DOE believes that provisions 
    allowing affected individuals to return to work without further 
    detailed review subverts the intent of the Sec. 835.202 occupational 
    dose limits. DOE believes that it is most appropriate for this section 
    to address doses resulting from authorized emergency exposures. Despite 
    this change, DOE recognizes the fact that issues of individual work 
    rights and DOE liability may arise as a result of ``accidental'' 
    exposures exceeding the regulatory dose limits. Mechanisms for 
    addressing doses resulting from accidents, and authorizations to return 
    affected individuals to work, exist within the exemption process 
    established in 10 CFR part 820.
        In response to public comments, DOE revised the text in 
    Sec. 835.1301(c) and (d) to eliminate the terms ``emergency'' and 
    ``accident'' and specify that the notification and resumption 
    provisions apply when doses were received in excess of the limits of 
    Sec. 835.202, except those doses received in accordance with 
    Sec. 835.204.
        As discussed above with regard to Sec. 835.702(c)(2), DOE found 
    that Sec. 835.1301(e) inappropriately invoked the requirements of DOE 
    Orders. The applicability of these Orders is established through DOE 
    contractual processes. Therefore, DOE has deleted this provision.
        To resolve issues related to requirements for personal nuclear 
    accident dosimetry, DOE has revised the requirement to simply indicate 
    that the nuclear accident dosimetry system must include personal 
    nuclear accident dosimeters. This approach will allow for flexible 
    implementation on a site-and facility-specific basis.
    
    M. Use of Appendices
    
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed to clarify the application of the data presented in 
    the appendices of 10 CFR part 835 by adding introductory text to each 
    appendix referencing those sections of the rule requiring use of the 
    appendix. DOE also proposed to delete the absorption factor (f1) values 
    and the related footnote (footnote 5) from appendix A of 10 CFR part 
    835 because absorption factors and alternative absorption factors are 
    neither used nor referenced in the rule. DOE determined that 10 CFR 
    part 835 established no substantive requirements for use of the data 
    presented in appendix B, and therefore proposed to delete appendix B.
        DOE's review of exemption requests concerning occupational exposure 
    to 220Rn and 222Rn and their daughter products revealed that DAC values 
    for these radioisotopes are inappropriately referenced in both 
    appendices A and C. Exposure to these radionuclides results in a lung 
    dose and therefore, the air immersion DACs in appendix C are 
    inappropriate. Accordingly, DOE
    
    [[Page 59678]]
    
    proposed to delete the air immersion DAC values for 220Rn and 222Rn 
    from appendix C.
        Experience in implementing programs that ensure compliance with 10 
    CFR part 835 has proven that the exposure conditions used to determine 
    the appendix C DAC values (immersion in a semi-infinite cloud) often 
    differ from those at DOE facilities (i.e., exposure in relatively small 
    enclosures). Use of the appendix C DAC values under these conditions 
    can result in the overestimation of individual doses. Therefore, DOE 
    proposed to revise appendix C, note b., to allow modification of the 
    DAC values to compensate for immersion in a cloud of finite dimensions 
    and to provide instructions for determining the DAC of a mixture of 
    radionuclides.
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        Although several commenters suggested that the data in appendix B 
    were useful and should be retained, the correlation of chemical form to 
    lung retention class is available directly from Table 3 of Federal 
    Guidance Report Number 11, ``Limiting Values of Radionuclide Intake and 
    Air Concentration and Dose Conversion Factors for Inhalation, 
    Submersion, and Ingestion.''
        Commenters favored DOE's proposal to allow for modification of the 
    appendix C values. However, contrary to the information provided in 
    appendix C, note b., these values were calculated based upon an 
    exposure of 2000 hours per year, and not based upon a continuous 
    exposure.
    Final Rule
        DOE has included the proposed changes in the final rule with minor 
    editorial corrections. For consistency with the existing provisions 
    associated with appendix C of 10 CFR part 835, DOE has included a note 
    with appendix A of 10 CFR part 835 that will allow use of the sum of 
    the fractions rule when there exists a mixture of radionuclides in the 
    area of interest. DOE has also revised appendix C, note b., to reflect 
    the 2000 hour per year exposure basis of the values.
        Consistent with terminology used throughout the rule and in DOE's 
    guidance documents, DOE has also retitled the table in appendix D of 10 
    CFR part 835 ``Surface Contamination Values.''
    
    N. Corrections and Clarifications
    
    Proposed Amendment
        DOE proposed numerous editorial corrections and technical 
    clarifications that do not change the requirements of the rule or the 
    measures necessary to ensure regulatory compliance. The proposed 
    changes included:
        1. Correction of the definitions of ``airborne radioactive 
    material'', and ``year'' (Sec. 835.2(a)) and ``external dose or 
    exposure,'' and ``quality factor'' (Sec. 835.2(b));
        2. Clarification of the application of the mean quality factors for 
    neutrons provided at Sec. 835.2(b);
        3. Deletion of Sec. 835.2(d) because the convention stated in that 
    paragraph for the use of singular, plural, masculine, and feminine 
    terms is not used in part 835;
        4. Revision of the requirements of Sec. 835.102 for clarity;
        5. Change of the heading of Sec. 835.202 to ``Occupational dose 
    limits for general employees'' to accurately reflect the content of 
    that section;
        6. Deletion from Sec. 835.203(a) and the Sec. 835.2(b) definition 
    of ``total effective dose equivalent'' the provision related to 
    substitution of deep dose equivalent for effective dose equivalent from 
    external exposure. This provision is redundant with the revised 
    definition of ``effective dose equivalent'' proposed at Sec. 835.2(b).
    Summary of Public Comments and Disposition
        DOE received no substantive comments on these changes.
    Final Rule
        DOE has included the proposed changes in the final rule.
    
    III. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act
    
        DOE has reviewed the promulgation of this amendment to 10 CFR part 
    835 under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 
    U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the Council on Environmental Quality 
    regulations for implementing NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508). DOE has 
    completed an Environmental Assessment and on the basis of that 
    information has issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for 
    this amendment. The FONSI and the Environmental Assessment update the 
    FONSI and Environmental Assessment issued when the proposed amendment 
    was published for public comment and reflect changes in the final rule 
    made in response to public comments. The Environmental Assessment and 
    FONSI are available for inspection at the DOE Freedom of Information 
    Reading Room, 1E-190, 1000 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20585, 
    between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
    Federal holidays.
    
    IV. Review Under Regulatory Flexibility Act
    
        The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, requires that an 
    agency prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis and publish 
    it at the time of publication of general notice of rulemaking for the 
    rule. This requirement does not apply if the agency certifies that the 
    rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a 
    substantial number of small entities. 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
        Today's action amends DOE's regulations governing programs 
    established at DOE facilities to protect individuals from ionizing 
    radiation resulting from DOE activities. The contractors who manage and 
    operate DOE facilities are responsible for implementing the 
    occupational radiation protection program. DOE has considered whether 
    management and operating (M&O) contractors are ``small businesses,'' as 
    that term is defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 
    601(3)). The Regulatory Flexibility Act's definition incorporates the 
    definition of ``small business concern'' in the Small Business Act, 
    which the Small Business Administration (SBA) has developed through 
    size standards in 13 CFR part 121. Small businesses are business 
    concerns which, together with their affiliates, have no more than 500 
    to 1500 employees, varying by SIC category, and annual receipts of 
    between $0.5 million to $25 million, again varying by SIC category--
    Title 13 CFR part 121. DOE's M&O contractors exceed the SBA's size 
    standards for small businesses. In addition, it is noted that M&O 
    contractors are reimbursed through their contracts with DOE for the 
    costs of complying with DOE occupational radiation protection 
    requirements. They will not, therefore, be adversely impacted by the 
    requirements in the rule. For these reasons, DOE certifies that the 
    final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
    number of small entities.
    
    V. Review Under Executive Order 12866
    
        Today's regulatory action has been determined not to be a 
    ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, 
    ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). 
    Accordingly, today's action was not subject to review under the 
    Executive Order by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
    
    [[Page 59679]]
    
    within the Office of Management and Budget.
    
    VI. Review Under Executive Order 12612
    
        Executive Order 12612, 52 FR 41685 (October 30, 1987) requires that 
    regulations, rules, legislation, and any other policy actions be 
    reviewed for any substantial direct effects on States, on the 
    relationship between the National Government and the States, or in the 
    distribution of power and responsibilities among various levels of 
    government. If there are sufficient substantial direct effects, then 
    the Executive Order requires preparation of a federalism assessment to 
    be used in all decisions involved in promulgating and implementing a 
    policy action.
        This final rule would not have a substantial direct effect on the 
    institutional interests or traditional functions of States.
    
    VII. Review Under Executive Order 12988
    
        With respect to the review of existing regulations and the 
    promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, 
    ``Civil Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on 
    Executive agencies the general duty to adhere to the following 
    requirements:
        (1) Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations 
    to minimize litigation; and (3) provide a clear legal standard for 
    affected conduct rather than a general standard and promote 
    simplification and burden reduction. With regard to the review required 
    by section 3(a), section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988 specifically 
    requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure 
    that the regulation: (1) clearly specifies the preemptive effect, if 
    any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing Federal law or 
    regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct 
    while promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies the 
    retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines key terms; and (6) 
    addresses other important issues affecting clarity and general 
    draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General. 
    Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive agencies to 
    review regulations in light of applicable standards in section 3(a) and 
    section 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is unreasonable to 
    meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the required review and 
    determined that the amendments to 10 CFR part 835 meet the relevant 
    standards of Executive Order 12988.
    
    VIII. Review Under Paperwork Reduction Act
    
        DOE submitted the proposed collections of information in this rule 
    to the Office of Management and Budget for review under section 3507(d) 
    of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (42 U.S.C. 3507(d)), and, by 
    separate notice on May 26, 1998, invited public comment on DOE's 
    statement of need and estimates of the burden of the collection of 
    information in 10 CFR part 835 (63 FR 28495). The information that DOE 
    management and operating contractors are required to produce, maintain 
    and report is necessary to permit the Department and its contractors to 
    manage and oversee health and safety programs that control worker 
    exposure to radiation. DOE estimates that the total annual burden of 
    the collection of information requirements to be 50,000 hours for the 
    approximately 50 contractors subject to the rule.
        The Office of Management and Budget has approved the collections of 
    information in 10 CFR part 835 and assigned to the part OMB Number 
    1910-5105. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
    required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
    currently valid OMB control number (5 CFR 1320.5(b)).
    
    IX. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    
        Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), 
    Pub.L. 104-4 on March 22, 1995, codified at 2 U.S.C. 1501-1571, 
    requires each Federal agency, to the extent permitted by law, to 
    prepare a written assessment of the effects of any Federal mandate in a 
    proposed or final agency rule that may result in the expenditure by 
    State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate or by the 
    private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for 
    inflation) in any one year. Section 204(a) of the Act, codified at 2 
    U.S.C. 1534(a), requires the Federal agency to develop an effective 
    process to permit timely input by elected officers (or their designees) 
    of State, local, and tribal governments on proposals containing 
    ``significant Federal intergovernmental mandates.'' Section 203(a) of 
    the Act, codified at 2 U.S.C. 1533(a), provides that before 
    establishing any regulatory requirements that might significantly or 
    uniquely affect small governments, the agency shall have developed a 
    plan that, among other things, provides for notice to potentially 
    affected small governments, if any, and enables officials of affected 
    small governments to provide meaningful and timely input in the 
    development of regulatory proposals containing significant 
    intergovernmental Federal mandates.
        The final rule published today does not contain any Federal mandate 
    that would result in any expenditure by State, local or tribal 
    government. The provisions of 10 CFR part 835 apply only to activities 
    conducted by or for DOE. Therefore, the requirements of Title II of the 
    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do not apply.
    
    X. Review Under Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
    of 1996
    
        As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will report to Congress 
    promulgation of this rule prior to its effective date. The report will 
    state that it has been determined that the rule is not a ``major rule'' 
    as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    
    List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 835
    
        Emergency radiation exposures, Nuclear material, Occupational 
    safety and health, Radiation exposures, Radiation protection, 
    Radioactive material, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety 
    during emergencies, Training.
    
        Issued in Washington, DC, on October 29, 1998.
    Peter N. Brush,
    Acting Assistant Secretary, Environment, Safety and Health.
    
        For the reasons set forth in the preamble, Title 10, Code of 
    Federal Regulations, part 835 is amended as set forth below:
    
    PART 835--OCCUPATIONAL RADIATION PROTECTION
    
        1. The authority citation for part 835 continues to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2201; 7191.
    
    Subpart A--General Provisions
    
        2. Section 835.1 is amended by revising the introductory text of 
    paragraph (b) and paragraph (b)(3), redesignating paragraph (b)(4) as 
    (b)(6), and by adding paragraphs (b)(4), (b)(5), and (c) as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.1  Scope.
    
    * * * * *
        (b) Exclusion. Except as discussed in paragraph (c) of this 
    section, the requirements in this part do not apply to:
    * * * * *
        (3) Activities conducted under the Nuclear Explosives and Weapons 
    Surety Program relating to the prevention of accidental or unauthorized 
    nuclear detonations;
    
    [[Page 59680]]
    
        (4) Radioactive material transportation as defined in this part;
        (5) DOE activities conducted outside the United States on territory 
    under the jurisdiction of a foreign government to the extent governed 
    by occupational radiation protection requirements agreed to between the 
    United States and the cognizant government; or
        (6) Background radiation, radiation doses received as a patient for 
    the purposes of medical diagnosis or therapy, or radiation doses 
    received from participation as a subject in medical research programs.
        (c) Occupational doses received as a result of excluded activities 
    and radioactive material transportation, as listed in paragraphs (b)(1) 
    through (b)(5) of this section, shall be considered when determining 
    compliance with the occupational dose limits at Secs. 835.202 and 
    835.207, and with the limits for the embryo/fetus at Sec. 835.206. 
    Occupational doses resulting from authorized emergency exposures and 
    planned special exposures shall not be considered when determining 
    compliance with the dose limits at Secs. 835.202 and 835.207.
        3. At Sec. 835.2, paragraph (a) is amended by removing definitions 
    of the terms ``ambient air'', ``continuous air monitor'', ``DOE 
    activities'', ``occupational exposure'', ``representative'', and 
    ``survey''; by adding in alphabetical order, definitions for the terms 
    ``accountable sealed radioactive source'', ``derived air concentration-
    hour'', ``DOE activity'', ``occupational dose'', ``radioactive material 
    area'', ``radioactive material transportation'', ``real-time air 
    monitoring'', ``respiratory protective device'', ``sealed radioactive 
    source'', ``source leak test'', and ``week''; and revising the 
    definitions of the terms ``airborne radioactive material or airborne 
    radioactivity'', ``airborne radioactivity area'', ``contamination 
    area'', ``controlled area'', ``declared pregnant worker'', ``general 
    employee'', ``high contamination area'', ``member of the public'', 
    ``monitoring'', ``radiological area'', and ``year'' to read as follows. 
    At Sec. 835.2, paragraph (b), the definition of ``collective dose'' is 
    removed, the definition of ``dose'' is added, and the definitions of 
    the terms ``cumulative total effective dose equivalent'', ``effective 
    dose equivalent'', ``external dose or exposure'', ``quality factor'', 
    ``total effective dose equivalent'', and ``weighting factor'' are 
    revised as follows. Paragraph (d) of Sec. 835.2 is removed.
    
    
    Sec. 835.2  Definitions.
    
        (a) As used in this part:
        Accountable sealed radioactive source means a sealed radioactive 
    source having a half-life equal to or greater than 30 days and an 
    isotopic activity equal to or greater than the corresponding value 
    provided in appendix E of this part.
        Airborne radioactive material or airborne radioactivity means 
    radioactive material dispersed in the air in the form of dusts, fumes, 
    particulates, mists, vapors, or gases.
        Airborne radioactivity area means any area, accessible to 
    individuals, where:
        (1) The concentration of airborne radioactivity, above natural 
    background, exceeds or is likely to exceed the derived air 
    concentration (DAC) values listed in appendix A or appendix C of this 
    part; or
        (2) An individual present in the area without respiratory 
    protection could receive an intake exceeding 12 DAC-hours in a week.
    * * * * *
        Contamination area means any area, accessible to individuals, where 
    removable surface contamination levels exceed or are likely to exceed 
    the removable surface contamination values specified in appendix D of 
    this part, but do not exceed 100 times those values.
    * * * * *
        Controlled area means any area to which access is managed by or for 
    DOE to protect individuals from exposure to radiation and/or 
    radioactive material.
        Declared pregnant worker means a woman who has voluntarily declared 
    to her employer, in writing, her pregnancy for the purpose of being 
    subject to the occupational dose limits to the embryo/fetus as provided 
    at Sec. 835.206. This declaration may be revoked, in writing, at any 
    time by the declared pregnant worker.
    * * * * *
        Derived air concentration-hour (DAC-hour) means the product of the 
    concentration of radioactive material in air (expressed as a fraction 
    or multiple of the DAC for each radionuclide) and the time of exposure 
    to that radionuclide, in hours.
        DOE activity means an activity taken for or by DOE in a DOE 
    operation or facility that has the potential to result in the 
    occupational exposure of an individual to radiation or radioactive 
    material. The activity may be, but is not limited to, design, 
    construction, operation, or decommissioning. To the extent appropriate, 
    the activity may involve a single DOE facility or operation or a 
    combination of facilities and operations, possibly including an entire 
    site or multiple DOE sites.
    * * * * *
        General employee means an individual who is either a DOE or DOE 
    contractor employee; an employee of a subcontractor to a DOE 
    contractor; or an individual who performs work for or in conjunction 
    with DOE or utilizes DOE facilities.
        High contamination area means any area, accessible to individuals, 
    where removable surface contamination levels exceed or are likely to 
    exceed 100 times the removable surface contamination values specified 
    in appendix D of this part.
     * * * * *
        Member of the public means an individual who is not a general 
    employee. An individual is not a ``member of the public'' during any 
    period in which the individual receives an occupational dose.
    * * * * *
        Monitoring means the measurement of radiation levels, airborne 
    radioactivity concentrations, radioactive contamination levels, 
    quantities of radioactive material, or individual doses and the use of 
    the results of these measurements to evaluate radiological hazards or 
    potential and actual doses resulting from exposures to ionizing 
    radiation.
    * * * * *
        Occupational dose means an individual's ionizing radiation dose 
    (external and internal) as a result of that individual's work 
    assignment. Occupational dose does not include doses received as a 
    medical patient or doses resulting from background radiation or 
    participation as a subject in medical research programs.
    * * * * *
        Radioactive material area means any area within a controlled area, 
    accessible to individuals, in which items or containers of radioactive 
    material exist and the total activity of radioactive material exceeds 
    the applicable values provided in appendix E of this part.
        Radioactive material transportation means the movement of 
    radioactive material by aircraft, rail, vessel, or highway vehicle when 
    such movement is subject to Department of Transportation regulations or 
    DOE Orders that govern such movements. Radioactive material 
    transportation does not include preparation of material or packagings 
    for transportation, monitoring required by this part, storage of 
    material awaiting transportation, or application of markings and labels 
    required for transportation.
        Radiological area means any area within a controlled area defined 
    in this section as a ``radiation area,'' ``high radiation area,'' 
    ``very high radiation
    
    [[Page 59681]]
    
    area,'' ``contamination area,'' ``high contamination area,'' or 
    ``airborne radioactivity area.''
    * * * * *
        Real-time air monitoring means measurement of the concentrations or 
    quantities of airborne radioactive materials on a continuous basis.
    * * * * *
        Respiratory protective device means an apparatus, such as a 
    respirator, worn by an individual for the purpose of reducing the 
    individual's intake of airborne radioactive materials.
        Sealed radioactive source means a radioactive source manufactured, 
    obtained, or retained for the purpose of utilizing the emitted 
    radiation. The sealed radioactive source consists of a known or 
    estimated quantity of radioactive material contained within a sealed 
    capsule, sealed between layer(s) of non-radioactive material, or firmly 
    fixed to a non-radioactive surface by electroplating or other means 
    intended to prevent leakage or escape of the radioactive material. 
    Sealed radioactive sources do not include reactor fuel elements, 
    nuclear explosive devices, and radioisotope thermoelectric generators.
        Source leak test means a test to determine if a sealed radioactive 
    source is leaking radioactive material.
    * * * * *
        Week means a period of seven consecutive days.
        Year means the period of time beginning on or near January 1 and 
    ending on or near December 31 of that same year used to determine 
    compliance with the provisions of this part. The starting and ending 
    date of the year used to determine compliance may be changed provided 
    that the change is made at the beginning of the year and that no day is 
    omitted or duplicated in consecutive years.
        (b) * * *
        Cumulative total effective dose equivalent means the sum of all 
    total effective dose equivalent values recorded for an individual, 
    where available, for each year occupational dose was received, 
    beginning January 1, 1989.
    * * * * *
        Dose is a general term for absorbed dose, dose equivalent, 
    effective dose equivalent, committed dose equivalent, committed 
    effective dose equivalent, or total effective dose equivalent as 
    defined in this part.
    * * * * *
        Effective dose equivalent (H) means the summation of the 
    products of the dose equivalent received by specified tissues of the 
    body (H) and the appropriate weighting factor (w)--
    that is, H = wH. It includes the 
    dose from radiation sources internal and/or external to the body. For 
    purposes of compliance with this part, deep dose equivalent to the 
    whole body may be used as effective dose equivalent for external 
    exposures. The effective dose equivalent is expressed in units of rem 
    (or sievert).
        External dose or exposure means that portion of the dose equivalent 
    received from radiation sources outside the body (i.e., ``external 
    sources'').
    * * * * *
        Quality factor (Q) means the modifying factor used to calculate the 
    dose equivalent from the absorbed dose; the absorbed dose (expressed in 
    rad or gray) is multiplied by the appropriate quality factor.
        (i) The quality factors to be used for determining dose equivalent 
    in rem are as follow:
    
                                 Quality Factors
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Quality
                           Radiation type                           factor
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    X-rays, gamma rays, positrons, electrons (including tritium
     beta particles)............................................           1
    Neutrons, 10 keV.................................           3
    Neutrons, >10 keV...........................................          10
    Protons and singly-charged particles of unknown energy with
     rest mass greater than one atomic mass unit................          10
    Alpha particles and multiple-charged particles (and
     particles of unknown charge) of unknown energy.............          20
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        When spectral data are insufficient to identify the energy of the 
    neutrons, a quality factor of 10 shall be used.
        (ii) When spectral data are sufficient to identify the energy of 
    the neutrons, the following mean quality factor values may be used:
    
                          Quality Factors for Neutrons
     [Mean quality factors, Q (maximum value in a 30-cm dosimetry phantom),
     and values of neutron flux density that deliver in 40 hours, a maximum
     dose equivalent of 0.1 rem (0.001 sievert). Where neutron energy falls
    between listed values, the more restrictive mean quality factor shall be
                                     used.]
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Neutron
                                                          Mean        flux
                  Neutron energy  (MeV)                  quality    density
                                                         factor    (cm-2s-1)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    2.5 x 10-8 thermal...............................         2          680
    1 x 10-7.........................................         2          680
    1 x 10-6.........................................         2          560
    1 x 10-5.........................................         2          560
    1 x 10-4.........................................         2          580
    1 x 10-3.........................................         2          680
    1 x 10-2.........................................         2.5        700
    1 x 10-1.........................................         7.5        115
    5 x 10-1.........................................        11           27
    1................................................        11           19
    2.5..............................................         9           20
    5................................................         8           16
    7................................................         7           17
    10...............................................         6.5         17
    14...............................................         7.5         12
    20...............................................         8           11
    40...............................................         7           10
    60...............................................         5.5         11
    1 x 10 2.........................................         4           14
    2 x 10 2.........................................         3.5         13
    3 x 10 2.........................................         3.5         11
    4 x 10 2.........................................         3.5         10
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    * * * * *
        Total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) means the sum of the 
    effective dose equivalent (for external exposures) and the committed 
    effective dose equivalent (for internal exposures).
        Weighting factor (wT) means the fraction of the overall 
    health risk, resulting from uniform, whole body irradiation, 
    attributable to specific tissue (T). The dose equivalent to tissue 
    (HT) is multiplied by the appropriate weighting factor to 
    obtain the effective dose equivalent contribution from that tissue. The 
    weighting factors are as follows:
    
                Weighting Factors For Various Organs and Tissues
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Weighting
                        Organs or tissues, T                      factor, wT
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Gonads.....................................................         0.25
    Breasts....................................................         0.15
    Red bone marrow............................................         0.12
    Lungs......................................................         0.12
    Thyroid....................................................         0.03
    Bone surfaces..............................................         0.03
    Remainder 1................................................         0.30
    Whole body 2...............................................        1.00
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    1 ``Remainder'' means the five other organs or tissues, excluding the
      skin and lens of the eye, with the highest dose (e.g., liver, kidney,
      spleen, thymus, adrenal, pancreas, stomach, small intestine, and upper
      large intestine). The weighting factor for each remaining organ or
      tissue is 0.06.
    2 For the case of uniform external irradiation of the whole body, a
      weighting factor (wT) equal to 1 may be used in determination of the
      effective dose equivalent.
    
        (c) * * *
    
    [[Page 59682]]
    
        4. Section 835.3 is amended by adding paragraph (e) as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.3  General Rule
    
    * * * * *
        (e) For those activities that are required by Secs. 835.102, 
    835.901(e), 835.1202 (a), and 835.1202(b), the time interval to conduct 
    these activities may be extended by a period not to exceed 30 days to 
    accommodate scheduling needs.
    
    
    Sec. 835.4  [Amended]
    
        5. Section 835.4 is amended by adding ``roentgen,'' after ``rad,'' 
    in the first sentence and removing the last sentence.
    
    Subpart B--Management and Administrative Requirements
    
        6. The heading of subpart B is revised to read as set forth above.
        6a. Section 835.101 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as 
    follows, removing paragraph (g), and redesignating paragraphs (h), (i), 
    and (j) as (g), (h), and (i) respectively; in paragraph (d), the 
    reference to ``Sec. 835.101(i)'' is changed to ``Sec. 835.101(h)''.
    
    
    Sec. 835.101  Radiation protection programs.
    
    * * * * *
        (f) The RPP shall include plans, schedules, and other measures for 
    achieving compliance with regulations of this part. Unless otherwise 
    specified in this part, compliance with amendments to this part shall 
    be achieved no later than 180 days following approval of the revised 
    RPP by DOE. Compliance with the requirements of Sec. 835.402(d) for 
    radiobioassay program accreditation shall be achieved no later than 
    January 1, 2002.
    * * * * *
        7. Section 835.102 is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.102  Internal audits.
    
        Internal audits of the radiation protection program, including 
    examination of program content and implementation, shall be conducted 
    through a process that ensures that all functional elements are 
    reviewed no less frequently than every 36 months.
        8. Section 835.103 is added as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.103  Education, training and skills.
    
        Individuals responsible for developing and implementing measures 
    necessary for ensuring compliance with the requirements of this part 
    shall have the appropriate education, training, and skills to discharge 
    these responsibilities.
        9. Section 835.104 is added as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.104  Written procedures.
    
        Written procedures shall be developed and implemented as necessary 
    to ensure compliance with this part, commensurate with the radiological 
    hazards created by the activity and consistent with the education, 
    training, and skills of the individuals exposed to those hazards.
        10. Section 835.202 is amended by revising the section heading, 
    revising the introductory text of paragraph (a), and revising 
    paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.202  Occupational dose limits for general employees.
    
        (a) Except for planned special exposures conducted consistent with 
    Sec. 835.204 and emergency exposures authorized in accordance with 
    Sec. 835.1302, the occupational dose received by general employees 
    shall be controlled such that the following limits are not exceeded in 
    a year:
    * * * * *
        (b) All occupational doses received during the current year, except 
    doses resulting from planned special exposures conducted in compliance 
    with Sec. 835.204 and emergency exposures authorized in accordance with 
    Sec. 835.1302, shall be included when demonstrating compliance with 
    Secs. 835.202(a) and 835.207.
        (c) Doses from background, therapeutic and diagnostic medical 
    radiation, and participation as a subject in medical research programs 
    shall not be included in dose records or in the assessment of 
    compliance with the occupational dose limits.
        11. Section 835.203 is amended by revising the section heading and 
    paragraph (a) to read as follows and by removing paragraph (c):
    
    
    Sec. 835.203  Combining internal and external dose equivalents.
    
        (a) The total effective dose equivalent during a year shall be 
    determined by summing the effective dose equivalent from external 
    exposures and the committed effective dose equivalent from intakes 
    during the year.
    * * * * *
        12. Section 835.204 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1), 
    (a)(3), (c)(1), (c)(2) and (d) to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.204  Planned special exposures.
    
        (a) * * *
        (1) The planned special exposure is considered only in an 
    exceptional situation when alternatives that might prevent a 
    radiological worker from exceeding the limits in Sec. 835.202(a) are 
    unavailable or impractical;
    * * * * *
        (3) Joint written approval is received from the appropriate DOE 
    Headquarters program office and the Secretarial Officer responsible for 
    environment, safety and health matters.
    * * * * *
        (c) * * *
        (1) In a year, the numerical values of the dose limits established 
    at Sec. 835.202(a); and
        (2) Over the individual's lifetime, five times the numerical values 
    of the dose limits established at Sec. 835.202(a).
        (d) Prior to a planned special exposure, written consent shall be 
    obtained from each individual involved. Each such written consent shall 
    include:
        (1) The purpose of the planned operations and procedures to be 
    used;
        (2) The estimated doses and associated potential risks and specific 
    radiological conditions and other hazards which might be involved in 
    performing the task; and
        (3) Instructions on the measures to be taken to keep the dose ALARA 
    considering other risks that may be present.
    * * * * *
        13. Section 835.207 is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.207  Occupational dose limits for minors.
    
        The dose equivalent limits for minors occupationally exposed to 
    radiation and/or radioactive materials at a DOE activity are 0.1 rem 
    (0.001 sievert) total effective dose equivalent in a year and 10% of 
    the occupational dose limits specified at Sec. 835.202(a)(3) and 
    (a)(4).
        14. Section 835.208 is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.208  Limits for members of the public entering a controlled 
    area.
    
        The total effective dose equivalent limit for members of the public 
    exposed to radiation and/or radioactive material during access to a 
    controlled area is 0.1 rem (0.001 sievert) in a year.
    
    
    Sec. 835.209  [Amended]
    
        15. Section 835.209 is amended by changing the first ``to'' to 
    ``of'' in paragraph (a), removing paragraph (b), redesignating 
    paragraph (c) as (b), and removing the word ``representative'' from 
    (b)(3).
    
    Subpart E--Monitoring of Individuals and Areas
    
        16. The heading of Subpart E is revised to read as set forth above.
        16a. Section 835.401 is amended by removing paragraph (b), 
    redesignating
    
    [[Page 59683]]
    
    paragraph (c) as (b), revising paragraphs (a), introductory text, 
    (a)(2), (a)(4), (a)(5), (a)(6), and revising in newly redesignated 
    paragraph (b), the introductory text, and (b)(1) to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.401  General requirements.
    
        (a) Monitoring of individuals and areas shall be performed to:
        (1) * * *
        (2) Document radiological conditions;
        (3) * * *
        (4) Detect the gradual buildup of radioactive material;
        (5) Verify the effectiveness of engineering and process controls in 
    containing radioactive material and reducing radiation exposure; and
        (6) Identify and control potential sources of individual exposure 
    to radiation and/or radioactive material.
        (b) Instruments and equipment used for monitoring shall be:
        (1) Periodically maintained and calibrated on an established 
    frequency;
    * * * * *
        17. Section 835.402 is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.402  Individual monitoring.
    
        (a) For the purpose of monitoring individual exposures to external 
    radiation, personnel dosimeters shall be provided to and used by:
        (1) Radiological workers who, under typical conditions, are likely 
    to receive one or more of the following:
        (i) An effective dose equivalent to the whole body of 0.1 rem 
    (0.001 sievert) or more in a year;
        (ii) A shallow dose equivalent to the skin or to any extremity of 5 
    rems (0.05 sievert) or more in a year;
        (iii) A lens of the eye dose equivalent of 1.5 rems (0.015 sievert) 
    or more in a year;
        (2) Declared pregnant workers who are likely to receive from 
    external sources a dose equivalent to the embryo/fetus in excess of 10 
    percent of the limit at Sec. 835.206(a);
        (3) Occupationally exposed minors likely to receive a dose in 
    excess of 50 percent of the applicable limits at Sec. 835.207 in a year 
    from external sources;
        (4) Members of the public entering a controlled area likely to 
    receive a dose in excess of 50 percent of the limit at Sec. 835.208 in 
    a year from external sources; and
        (5) Individuals entering a high or very high radiation area.
        (b) External dose monitoring programs implemented to demonstrate 
    compliance with Sec. 835.402(a) shall be adequate to demonstrate 
    compliance with the dose limits established in subpart C of this part 
    and shall be:
        (1) Accredited, or excepted from accreditation, in accordance with 
    the DOE Laboratory Accreditation Program for Personnel Dosimetry; or
        (2) Determined by the Secretarial Officer responsible for 
    environment, safety and health matters to have performance 
    substantially equivalent to that of programs accredited under the DOE 
    Laboratory Accreditation Program for Personnel Dosimetry.
        (c) For the purpose of monitoring individual exposures to internal 
    radiation, internal dosimetry programs (including routine bioassay 
    programs) shall be conducted for:
        (1) Radiological workers who, under typical conditions, are likely 
    to receive a committed effective dose equivalent of 0.1 rem (0.001 
    sievert) or more from all occupational radionuclide intakes in a year;
        (2) Declared pregnant workers likely to receive an intake or 
    intakes resulting in a dose equivalent to the embryo/fetus in excess of 
    10 percent of the limit stated at Sec. 835.206(a);
        (3) Occupationally exposed minors who are likely to receive a dose 
    in excess of 50 percent of the applicable limit stated at Sec. 835.207 
    from all radionuclide intakes in a year; or
        (4) Members of the public entering a controlled area likely to 
    receive a dose in excess of 50 percent of the limit stated at 
    Sec. 835.208 from all radionuclide intakes in a year.
        (d) Internal dose monitoring programs implemented to demonstrate 
    compliance with Sec. 835.402(c) shall be adequate to demonstrate 
    compliance with the dose limits established in subpart C of this part 
    and shall be:
        (1) Accredited, or excepted from accreditation, in accordance with 
    the DOE Laboratory Accreditation Program for Radiobioassay; or,
        (2) Determined by the Secretarial Officer responsible for 
    environment, safety and health matters to have performance 
    substantially equivalent to that of programs accredited under the DOE 
    Laboratory Accreditation Program for Radiobioassy.
        18. Section 835.403 is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.403  Air monitoring.
    
        (a) Monitoring of airborne radioactivity shall be performed:
        (1) Where an individual is likely to receive an exposure of 40 or 
    more DAC-hours in a year; or
        (2) As necessary to characterize the airborne radioactivity hazard 
    where respiratory protective devices for protection against airborne 
    radionuclides have been prescribed.
        (b) Real-time air monitoring shall be performed as necessary to 
    detect and provide warning of airborne radioactivity concentrations 
    that warrant immediate action to terminate inhalation of airborne 
    radioactive material.
    
    
    Sec. 835.404  [Reserved]
    
        19. Section 835.404 is removed and reserved.
        20. Section 835.405 is added to subpart E to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.405  Receipt of packages containing radioactive material.
    
        (a) If packages containing quantities of radioactive material in 
    excess of a Type A quantity (as defined at 10 CFR 71.4) are expected to 
    be received from radioactive material transportation, arrangements 
    shall be made to either:
        (1) Take possession of the package when the carrier offers it for 
    delivery; or
        (2) Receive notification as soon as practicable after arrival of 
    the package at the carrier's terminal and to take possession of the 
    package expeditiously after receiving such notification.
        (b) Upon receipt from radioactive material transportation, external 
    surfaces of packages known to contain radioactive material shall be 
    monitored if the package:
        (1) Is labeled with a Radioactive White I, Yellow II, or Yellow III 
    label (as specified at 49 CFR 172.403 and 172.436-440); or
        (2) Has been transported as low specific activity material (as 
    defined at 10 CFR 71.4) on an exclusive use vehicle (as defined at 10 
    CFR 71.4); or
        (3) Has evidence of degradation, such as packages that are crushed, 
    wet, or damaged.
        (c) The monitoring required by paragraph (b) of this section shall 
    include:
        (1) Measurements of removable contamination levels, unless the 
    package contains only special form (as defined at 10 CFR 71.4) or 
    gaseous radioactive material; and
        (2) Measurements of the radiation levels, unless the package 
    contains less than a Type A quantity (as defined at 10 CFR 71.4) of 
    radioactive material.
        (d) The monitoring required by paragraph (b) of this section shall 
    be completed as soon as practicable following receipt of the package, 
    but not later than 8 hours after the beginning of the working day 
    following receipt of the package.
    
    Subpart F--Entry Control Program
    
        21. Section 835.501 is amended by revising paragraph (d) as 
    follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.501  Radiological areas.
    
    * * * * *
    
    [[Page 59684]]
    
        (d) Written authorizations shall be required to control entry into 
    and perform work within radiological areas. These authorizations shall 
    specify radiation protection measures commensurate with the existing 
    and potential hazards.
        22. At Sec. 835.502, paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) are redesignated 
    as paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) respectively; the paragraph heading of 
    redesignated paragraph (b) is revised; a new paragraph (a) is added and 
    redesignated paragraphs (b)(2) and (c) are revised as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.502  High and very high radiation areas.
    
        (a) The following measures shall be implemented for each entry into 
    a high radiation area:
        (1) The area shall be monitored as necessary during access to 
    determine the exposure rates to which the individuals are exposed; and
        (2) Each individual shall be monitored by a supplemental dosimetry 
    device or other means capable of providing an immediate estimate of the 
    individual's integrated deep dose equivalent during the entry.
        (b) Physical controls. * * *
        (1) * * *
        (2) A device that functions automatically to prevent use or 
    operation of the radiation source or field while individuals are in the 
    area;
    * * * * *
        (c) Very high radiation areas. In addition to the above 
    requirements, additional measures shall be implemented to ensure 
    individuals are not able to gain unauthorized or inadvertent access to 
    very high radiation areas.
    
    Subpart G--Posting and Labeling
    
        23. Section 835.601 is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.601  General requirements.
    
        (a) Except as otherwise provided in this subpart, postings and 
    labels required by this subpart shall include the standard radiation 
    warning trefoil in black or magenta imposed upon a yellow background.
        (b) Signs required by this subpart shall be clearly and 
    conspicuously posted and may include radiological protection 
    instructions.
        (c) The posting and labeling requirements in this subpart may be 
    modified to reflect the special considerations of DOE activities 
    conducted at private residences or businesses. Such modifications shall 
    provide the same level of protection to individuals as the existing 
    provisions in this subpart.
        24. Section 835.602 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
    follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.602  Controlled areas.
    
        (a) Each access point to a controlled area (as defined at 
    Sec. 835.2) shall be posted whenever radiological areas or radioactive 
    material areas exist in the area. Individuals who enter only controlled 
    areas without entering radiological areas or radioactive material areas 
    are not expected to receive a total effective dose equivalent of more 
    than 0.1 rem (0.001 sievert) in a year.
    * * * * *
        25. Section 835.603 is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.603  Radiological areas and radioactive material areas.
    
        Each access point to radiological areas and radioactive material 
    areas (as defined at Sec. 835.2) shall be posted with conspicuous signs 
    bearing the wording provided in this section.
        (a) Radiation area. The words ``Caution, Radiation Area'' shall be 
    posted at each radiation area.
        (b) High radiation area. The words ``Caution, High Radiation Area'' 
    or ``Danger, High Radiation Area'' shall be posted at each high 
    radiation area.
        (c) Very high radiation area. The words ``Grave Danger, Very High 
    Radiation Area'' shall be posted at each very high radiation area.
        (d) Airborne radioactivity area. The words ``Caution, Airborne 
    Radioactivity Area'' or ``Danger, Airborne Radioactivity Area'' shall 
    be posted at each airborne radioactivity area.
        (e) Contamination area. The words ``Caution, Contamination Area'' 
    shall be posted at each contamination area.
        (f) High contamination area. The words ``Caution, High 
    Contamination Area'' or ``Danger, High Contamination Area'' shall be 
    posted at each high contamination area.
        (g) Radioactive material area. The words ``Caution, Radioactive 
    Material(s)'' shall be posted at each radioactive material area.
        26. Section 835.604 is added to subpart G to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.604  Exceptions to posting requirements.
    
        (a) Areas may be excepted from the posting requirements of 
    Sec. 835.603 for periods of less than 8 continuous hours when placed 
    under continuous observation and control of an individual knowledgeable 
    of, and empowered to implement, required access and exposure control 
    measures.
        (b) Areas may be excepted from the radioactive material area 
    posting requirements of Sec. 835.603(g) when:
        (1) Posted in accordance with Secs. 835.603(a) through (f); or
        (2) Each item or container of radioactive material is labeled in 
    accordance with this subpart such that individuals entering the area 
    are made aware of the hazard; or
        (3) The radioactive material of concern consists solely of 
    structures or installed components which have been activated (i.e., 
    such as by being exposed to neutron radiation or particles produced by 
    an accelerator).
        (c) Areas containing only packages received from radioactive 
    material transportation labeled and in non-degraded condition need not 
    be posted in accordance with Sec. 835.603 until the packages are 
    monitored in accordance with Sec. 835.405.
        27. Section 835.605 is added to subpart G to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.605  Labeling items and containers.
    
        Except as provided at Sec. 835.606, each item or container of 
    radioactive material shall bear a durable, clearly visible label 
    bearing the standard radiation warning trefoil and the words ``Caution, 
    Radioactive Material'' or ``Danger, Radioactive Material.'' The label 
    shall also provide sufficient information to permit individuals 
    handling, using, or working in the vicinity of the items or containers 
    to take precautions to avoid or control exposures.
        28. Section 835.606 is added to subpart G to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.606  Exceptions to labeling requirements.
    
        (a) Items and containers may be excepted from the radioactive 
    material labeling requirements of Sec. 835.605 when:
        (1) Used, handled, or stored in areas posted and controlled in 
    accordance with this subpart and sufficient information is provided to 
    permit individuals to take precautions to avoid or control exposures; 
    or
        (2) The quantity of radioactive material is less than one tenth of 
    the values specified in appendix E of this part; or
        (3) Packaged, labeled, and marked in accordance with the 
    regulations of the Department of Transportation or DOE Orders governing 
    radioactive material transportation; or
        (4) Inaccessible, or accessible only to individuals authorized to 
    handle or use them, or to work in the vicinity; or
        (5) Installed in manufacturing, process, or other equipment, such 
    as reactor components, piping, and tanks; or
    
    [[Page 59685]]
    
        (6) The radioactive material consists solely of nuclear weapons or 
    their components.
        (b) Radioactive material labels applied to sealed radioactive 
    sources may be excepted from the color specifications of 
    Sec. 835.601(a).
    
    Subpart H--Records
    
        29. In Sec. 835.702, paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e) are 
    revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.702  Individual monitoring records.
    
        (a) Records shall be maintained to document doses received by all 
    individuals for whom monitoring was required pursuant to Sec. 835.402 
    and to document doses received during planned special exposures, 
    unplanned doses exceeding the monitoring thresholds of Sec. 835.402, 
    and authorized emergency exposures.
        (b) The results of individual external and internal dose monitoring 
    that is performed, but not required by Sec. 835.402, shall be recorded. 
    Recording of non-uniform shallow dose equivalent to the skin is not 
    required if the dose is less than 2 percent of the limit specified for 
    the skin at Sec. 835.202(a)(4).
        (c) The records required by this section shall:
        (1) Be sufficient to evaluate compliance with subpart C of this 
    part;
        (2) Be sufficient to provide dose information necessary to complete 
    reports required by subpart I of this part;
        (3) Include the following quantities for external dose received 
    during the year:
        (i) The effective dose equivalent from external sources of 
    radiation (deep dose equivalent may be used as effective dose 
    equivalent for external exposure);
        (ii) The lens of the eye dose equivalent;
        (iii) The shallow dose equivalent to the skin; and
        (iv) The shallow dose equivalent to the extremities.
        (4) Include the following information for internal dose resulting 
    from intakes received during the year:
        (i) Committed effective dose equivalent;
        (ii) Committed dose equivalent to any organ or tissue of concern; 
    and
        (iii) Identity of radionuclides.
        (5) Include the following quantities for the summation of the 
    external and internal dose:
        (i) Total effective dose equivalent in a year;
        (ii) For any organ or tissue assigned an internal dose during the 
    year, the sum of the deep dose equivalent from external exposures and 
    the committed dose equivalent to that organ or tissue; and
        (iii) Cumulative total effective dose equivalent.
        (6) Include the dose equivalent to the embryo/fetus of a declared 
    pregnant worker.
        (d) Documentation of all occupational doses received during the 
    current year, except for doses resulting from planned special exposures 
    conducted in compliance with Sec. 835.204 and emergency exposures 
    authorized in accordance with Sec. 835.1302(d), shall be obtained to 
    demonstrate compliance with Sec. 835.202(a). If complete records 
    documenting previous occupational dose during the year cannot be 
    obtained, a written estimate signed by the individual may be accepted 
    to demonstrate compliance.
        (e) For radiological workers whose occupational dose is monitored 
    in accordance with Sec. 835.402, reasonable efforts shall be made to 
    obtain complete records of prior years occupational internal and 
    external doses.
    * * * * *
        30. In Sec. 835.703, paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) are revised 
    to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.703  Other monitoring records.
    
    * * * * *
        (a) Results of monitoring for radiation and radioactive material as 
    required by subparts E and L of this part, except for monitoring 
    required by Sec. 835.1102(d);
        (b) Results of monitoring used to determine individual occupational 
    dose from external and internal sources;
        (c) Results of monitoring for the release and control of material 
    and equipment as required by Sec. 835.1101; and
        (d) Results of maintenance and calibration performed on instruments 
    and equipment as required by Sec. 835.401(b).
        31. Section 835.704, paragraph (a) is amended by removing the 
    reference to '', 835.902, and 835.903''; paragraphs (d) and (e) are 
    revised and a new paragraph (f) is added as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.704  Administrative records.
    
    * * * * *
        (d) Written declarations of pregnancy, including the estimated date 
    of conception, and revocations of declarations of pregnancy shall be 
    maintained.
        (e) Changes in equipment, techniques, and procedures used for 
    monitoring shall be documented.
        (f) Records shall be maintained as necessary to demonstrate 
    compliance with the requirements of Secs. 835.1201 and 835.1202 for 
    sealed radioactive source control, inventory, and source leak tests.
    
    Subpart I--Reports to Individuals
    
        32. Section 835.801, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.801  Reports to individuals.
    
        (a) Radiation exposure data for individuals monitored in accordance 
    with Sec. 835.402 shall be reported as specified in this section. The 
    information shall include the data required under Sec. 835.702(c). Each 
    notification and report shall be in writing and include: the DOE site 
    or facility name, the name of the individual, and the individual's 
    social security number, employee number, or other unique identification 
    number.
    * * * * *
    
    Subpart J--Radiation Safety Training
    
        33. In subpart J, Sec. 835.901 is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.901  Radiation safety training.
    
        (a) Each individual shall complete radiation safety training on the 
    topics established at Sec. 835.901(c) commensurate with the hazards in 
    the area and the required controls:
        (1) Before being permitted unescorted access to controlled areas; 
    and
        (2) Before receiving occupational dose during access to controlled 
    areas at a DOE site or facility.
        (b) Each individual shall demonstrate knowledge of the radiation 
    safety training topics established at Sec. 835.901(c), commensurate 
    with the hazards in the area and required controls, by successful 
    completion of an examination and performance demonstrations:
        (1) Before being permitted unescorted access to radiological areas; 
    and
        (2) Before performing unescorted assignments as a radiological 
    worker.
        (c) Radiation safety training shall include the following topics, 
    to the extent appropriate to each individual's prior training, work 
    assignments, and degree of exposure to potential radiological hazards:
        (1) Risks of exposure to radiation and radioactive materials, 
    including prenatal radiation exposure;
        (2) Basic radiological fundamentals and radiation protection 
    concepts;
        (3) Physical design features, administrative controls, limits, 
    policies, procedures, alarms, and other measures implemented at the 
    facility to manage doses and maintain doses ALARA, including both 
    routine and emergency actions;
        (4) Individual rights and responsibilities as related to
    
    [[Page 59686]]
    
    implementation of the facility radiation protection program;
        (5) Individual responsibilities for implementing ALARA measures 
    required by Sec. 835.101; and
        (6) Individual exposure reports that may be requested in accordance 
    with Sec. 835.801.
        (d) When an escort is used in lieu of training in accordance with 
    paragraph (a) or (b) of this section, the escort shall:
        (1) Have completed radiation safety training, examinations, and 
    performance demonstrations required for entry to the area and 
    performance of the work; and
        (2) Ensure that all escorted individuals comply with the documented 
    radiation protection program.
        (e) Radiation safety training shall be provided to individuals when 
    there is a significant change to radiation protection policies and 
    procedures that may affect the individual and at intervals not to 
    exceed 24 months. Such training provided for individuals subject to the 
    requirements of Sec. 835.901(b)(1) and (b)(2) shall include successful 
    completion of an examination.
    
    
    Secs. 835.902 and 835.903  [Removed and Reserved]
    
        34. Sections 835.902 and 835.903 of subpart J are removed and 
    reserved.
    
    Subpart K--Design and Control
    
        35. In Subpart K, section 835.1002 is amended by changing the word 
    ``old'' to ``existing'', and section 835.1001 is revised to read as 
    follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.1001  Design and control.
    
        (a) Measures shall be taken to maintain radiation exposure in 
    controlled areas ALARA through physical design features and 
    administrative control. The primary methods used shall be physical 
    design features (e.g., confinement, ventilation, remote handling, and 
    shielding). Administrative controls shall be employed only as 
    supplemental methods to control radiation exposure.
        (b) For specific activities where use of physical design features 
    is demonstrated to be impractical, administrative controls shall be 
    used to maintain radiation exposures ALARA.
        36. Section 835.1003 is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.1003  Workplace controls.
    
        During routine operations, the combination of physical design 
    features and administrative controls shall provide that:
        (a) The anticipated occupational dose to general employees shall 
    not exceed the limits established at Sec. 835.202; and
        (b) The ALARA process is utilized for personnel exposures to 
    ionizing radiation.
    
    Subpart L--Radioactive Contamination Control
    
        37. The heading of subpart L is revised to read as set forth above.
        37a. Section 835.1101 is revised and Sec. 835.1102 is added to read 
    as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.1101  Control of material and equipment.
    
        (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, 
    material and equipment in contamination areas, high contamination 
    areas, and airborne radioactivity areas shall not be released to a 
    controlled area if:
        (1) Removable surface contamination levels on accessible surfaces 
    exceed the removable surface contamination values specified in appendix 
    D of this part; or
        (2) Prior use suggests that the removable surface contamination 
    levels on inaccessible surfaces are likely to exceed the removable 
    surface contamination values specified in appendix D of this part.
        (b) Material and equipment exceeding the removable surface 
    contamination values specified in appendix D of this part may be 
    conditionally released for movement on-site from one radiological area 
    for immediate placement in another radiological area only if 
    appropriate monitoring is performed and appropriate controls for the 
    movement are established and exercised.
        (c) Material and equipment with fixed contamination levels that 
    exceed the total contamination values specified in appendix D of this 
    part may be released for use in controlled areas outside of 
    radiological areas only under the following conditions:
        (1) Removable surface contamination levels are below the removable 
    surface contamination values specified in appendix D of this part; and
        (2) The material or equipment is routinely monitored and clearly 
    marked or labeled to alert personnel of the contaminated status.
    
    
    Sec. 835.1102  Control of areas.
    
        (a) Appropriate controls shall be maintained and verified which 
    prevent the inadvertent transfer of removable contamination to 
    locations outside of radiological areas under normal operating 
    conditions.
        (b) Any area in which contamination levels exceed the values 
    specified in appendix D of this part shall be controlled in a manner 
    commensurate with the physical and chemical characteristics of the 
    contaminant, the radionuclides present, and the fixed and removable 
    surface contamination levels.
        (c) Areas accessible to individuals where the measured total 
    surface contamination levels exceed, but the removable surface 
    contamination levels are less than, corresponding surface contamination 
    values specified in appendix D of this part, shall be controlled as 
    follows when located outside of radiological areas:
        (1) The area shall be routinely monitored to ensure the removable 
    surface contamination level remains below the removable surface 
    contamination values specified in appendix D of this part; and
        (2) The area shall be conspicuously marked to warn individuals of 
    the contaminated status.
        (d) Individuals exiting contamination, high contamination, or 
    airborne radioactivity areas shall be monitored, as appropriate, for 
    the presence of surface contamination.
        (e) Protective clothing shall be required for entry to areas in 
    which removable contamination exists at levels exceeding the removable 
    surface contamination values specified in appendix D of this part.
        38. Subpart M is added, consisting of Secs. 835.1201 and 835.1202, 
    to read as follows:
    
    Subpart M--Sealed Radioactive Source Control
    
    
    Sec. 835.1201  Sealed radioactive source control.
    
        Sealed radioactive sources shall be used, handled, and stored in a 
    manner commensurate with the hazards associated with operations 
    involving the sources.
    
    
    Sec. 835.1202  Accountable sealed radioactive sources.
    
        (a) Each accountable sealed radioactive source shall be inventoried 
    at intervals not to exceed six months. This inventory shall:
        (1) Establish the physical location of each accountable sealed 
    radioactive source;
        (2) Verify the presence and adequacy of associated postings and 
    labels; and
        (3) Establish the adequacy of storage locations, containers, and 
    devices.
        (b) Except for sealed radioactive sources consisting solely of 
    gaseous radioactive material or tritium, each accountable sealed 
    radioactive source shall be subject to a source leak test upon receipt, 
    when damage is suspected, and at intervals not to exceed six months. 
    Source leak tests shall be capable of detecting radioactive material 
    leakage equal to or exceeding 0.005 microcurie.
    
    [[Page 59687]]
    
        (c) Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraph (b) of this 
    section, an accountable sealed radioactive source is not subject to 
    periodic source leak testing if that source has been removed from 
    service. Such sources shall be stored in a controlled location, subject 
    to periodic inventory as required by paragraph (a) of this section, and 
    subject to source leak testing prior to being returned to service.
        (d) Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of 
    this section, an accountable sealed radioactive source is not subject 
    to periodic inventory and source leak testing if that source is located 
    in an area that is unsafe for human entry or otherwise inaccessible.
        (e) An accountable sealed radioactive source found to be leaking 
    radioactive material shall be controlled in a manner that minimizes the 
    spread of radioactive contamination.
    
    Subpart N--Emergency Exposure Situations
    
        39. In Sec. 835.1301, paragraphs (a), introductory text, (b), (c), 
    and (d) are revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.1301  General provisions.
    
        (a) A general employee whose occupational dose has exceeded the 
    numerical value of any of the limits specified in Sec. 835.202 as a 
    result of an authorized emergency exposure may be permitted to return 
    to work in radiological areas during the current year providing that 
    all of the following conditions are met:
    * * * * *
        (b) All doses exceeding the limits specified in Sec. 835.202 shall 
    be recorded in the affected individual's occupational dose record.
        (c) When the conditions under which a dose was received in excess 
    of the limits specified in Sec. 835.202, except those received in 
    accordance with Sec. 835.204, have been eliminated, operating 
    management shall notify the Head of the responsible DOE field 
    organization.
        (d) Operations after a dose was received in excess of the limits 
    specified in Sec. 835.202, except those received in accordance with 
    Sec. 835.204, may be resumed only with the approval of DOE.
        40. Section 835.1302 is revised in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) as 
    follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.1302  Emergency exposure situations.
    
    * * * * *
        (b) Operating management shall weigh actual and potential risks 
    against the benefits to be gained.
        (c) No individual shall be required to perform a rescue action that 
    might involve substantial personal risk.
        (d) Each individual authorized to perform emergency actions likely 
    to result in occupational doses exceeding the values of the limits 
    provided at Sec. 835.202(a) shall be trained in accordance with 
    Sec. 835.901(b) and briefed beforehand on the known or anticipated 
    hazards to which the individual will be subjected.
    * * * * *
        41. At Sec. 835.1304, paragraphs (a) and (b)(1), the word 
    ``personnel'' is revised to read ``individuals'' and paragraph (b)(4) 
    is revised as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 835.1304  Nuclear accident dosimetry.
    
    * * * * *
        (b) * * *
        (4) Personal nuclear accident dosimeters.
        42. Appendix A of Part 835 is amended by removing footnote 5 from 
    the Footnotes for Appendix A and, adding the following two paragraphs 
    at the beginning of the introductory text:
    
    Appendix A to Part 835--Derived Air Concentrations (DAC) for 
    Controlling Radiation Exposure to Workers at DOE Facilities
    
        The data presented in appendix A are to be used for controlling 
    individual internal doses in accordance with Sec. 835.209, 
    identifying the need for air monitoring in accordance with 
    Sec. 835.403, and identifying the need for posting of airborne 
    radioactivity areas in accordance with Sec. 835.603(d).
        The DAC values are given for individual radionuclides. For known 
    mixtures of radionuclides, determine the sum of the ratio of the 
    observed concentration of a particular radionuclide and its 
    corresponding DAC for all radionuclides in the mixture. If this sum 
    exceeds unity (1), then the DAC has been exceeded. For unknown 
    radionuclides, the most restrictive DAC (lowest value) for those 
    isotopes not known to be absent shall be used.
    * * * * *
    
    Appendix B--[Removed and Reserved]
    
        43. Appendix B to Part 835 is removed and reserved.
        44. Appendix C to Part 835 is amended by removing the entries 
    for the radionuclides Rn-220 and Rn-222 and their corresponding 
    half-lives and air immersion DACs from the table and revising the 
    introductory text preceding the table as follows:
    
    Appendix C to Part 835--Derived Air Concentration (DAC) for Workers 
    From External Exposure During Immersion in a Contaminated 
    Atmospheric Cloud
    
    * * * * *
        a. The data presented in appendix C are to be used for 
    controlling occupational exposures in accordance with Sec. 835.209, 
    identifying the need for air monitoring in accordance with 
    Sec. 835.403, and identifying the need for posting of airborne 
    radioactivity areas in accordance with Sec. 835.603(d).
        b. The air immersion DAC values shown in this appendix are based 
    on a stochastic dose limit of 5 rems (0.05 Sv) per year or a 
    nonstochastic (organ) dose limit of 50 rems (0.5 Sv) per year. Four 
    columns of information are presented: (1) Radionuclide; (2) half-
    life in units of seconds (s), minutes (min), hours (h), days (d), or 
    years (yr); (3) air immersion DAC in units of Ci/ml; and 
    (4) air immersion DAC in units of Bq/m3. The data are 
    listed by radionuclide in order of increasing atomic mass. The air 
    immersion DACs were calculated for a continuous, nonshielded 
    exposure via immersion in a semi-infinite atmospheric cloud. The 
    DACs listed in this appendix may be modified to allow for submersion 
    in a cloud of finite dimensions.
        c. The DAC value for air immersion listed for a given 
    radionuclide is determined either by a yearly limit on effective 
    dose equivalent, which provides a limit on stochastic radiation 
    effects, or by a limit on yearly dose equivalent to any organ, which 
    provides a limit on nonstochastic radiation effects. For most of the 
    radionuclides listed, the DAC value is determined by the yearly 
    limit on effective dose equivalent. Thus, the few cases where the 
    DAC value is determined by the yearly limit on shallow dose 
    equivalent to the skin are indicated in the table by an appropriate 
    footnote. Again, the DACs listed in this appendix account only for 
    immersion in a semi-infinite cloud and do not account for inhalation 
    or ingestion exposures.
        d. Three classes of radionuclides are included in the air 
    immersion DACs as described below.
        (1) Class 1. The first class of radionuclides includes selected 
    noble gases and short-lived activation products that occur in 
    gaseous form. For these radionuclides, inhalation doses are 
    negligible compared to the external dose from immersion in an 
    atmospheric cloud.
        (2) Class 2. The second class of radionuclides includes those 
    for which a DAC value for inhalation has been calculated, but for 
    which the DAC value for external exposure to a contaminated 
    atmospheric cloud is more restrictive (i.e., results in a lower DAC 
    value). These radionuclides generally have half-lives of a few hours 
    or less, or are eliminated from the body following inhalation 
    sufficiently rapidly to limit the inhalation dose.
        (3) Class 3. The third class of radionuclides includes selected 
    isotopes with relatively short half-lives. These radionuclides 
    typically have half-lives that are less than 10 minutes, they do not 
    occur as a decay product of a longer lived radionuclide, or they 
    lack sufficient decay data to permit internal dose calculations. 
    These radionuclides are also typified by a radioactive emission of 
    highly intense, high-energy photons and rapid removal from the body 
    following inhalation.
        e. The DAC values are given for individual radionuclides. For 
    known mixtures of radionuclides, determine the sum of the ratio of 
    the observed concentration of a particular
    
    [[Page 59688]]
    
    radionuclide and its corresponding DAC for all radionuclides in the 
    mixture. If this sum exceeds unity (1), then the DAC has been 
    exceeded. For unknown radionuclides, the most restrictive DAC 
    (lowest value) for those isotopes not known to be absent shall be 
    used.
    * * * * *
        45. Appendix D to part 835 is revised as follows:
    
    Appendix D to Part 835--Surface Contamination Values
    
        The data presented in appendix D are to be used in identifying 
    the need for posting of contamination and high contamination areas 
    in accordance with Sec. 835.603(e) and (f) and identifying the need 
    for surface contamination monitoring and control in accordance with 
    Secs. 835.1101 and 835.1102.
    
                                   Surface Contamination Values \1\ in dpm/100 cm \2\
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     Total (Fixed +
                                    Radionuclide                                    Removable \2\    Removable) \2\,
                                                                                         \4\               \3\
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    U-nat, U-235, U-238, and associated decay products..........................         \7\ 1,000         \7\ 5,000
    Transuranics, Ra-226, Ra-228, Th-230, Th-228, Pa-231, Ac-227, I-125, I-129..                20               500
    Th-nat, Th-232, Sr-90, Ra-223, Ra-224, U-232, I-126, I-131, I-133...........               200             1,000
    Beta-gamma emitters (nuclides with decay modes other than alpha emission or
     spontaneous fission) except Sr-90 and others noted above \5\...............             1,000             5,000
    Tritium and tritiated compounds \6\.........................................            10,000              N/A
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The values in this appendix, with the exception noted in footnote 5, apply to radioactive contamination
      deposited on, but not incorporated into the interior or matrix of, the contaminated item. Where surface
      contamination by both alpha-and beta-gamma-emitting nuclides exists, the limits established for alpha-and beta-
      gamma-emitting nuclides apply independently.
    \2\ As used in this table, dpm (disintegrations per minute) means the rate of emission by radioactive material
      as determined by correcting the counts per minute observed by an appropriate detector for background,
      efficiency, and geometric factors associated with the instrumentation.
    \3\ The levels may be averaged over one square meter provided the maximum surface activity in any area of 100 cm
      \2\ is less than three times the value specified. For purposes of averaging, any square meter of surface shall
      be considered to be above the surface contamination value if: (1) From measurements of a representative number
      of sections it is determined that the average contamination level exceeds the applicable value; or (2) it is
      determined that the sum of the activity of all isolated spots or particles in any 100 cm \2\ area exceeds
      three times the applicable value.
    \4\ The amount of removable radioactive material per 100 cm \2\ of surface area should be determined by swiping
      the area with dry filter or soft absorbent paper, applying moderate pressure, and then assessing the amount of
      radioactive material on the swipe with an appropriate instrument of known efficiency. (Note--The use of dry
      material may not be appropriate for tritium.) When removable contamination on objects of surface area less
      than 100 cm \2\ is determined, the activity per unit area shall be based on the actual area and the entire
      surface shall be wiped. It is not necessary to use swiping techniques to measure removable contamination
      levels if direct scan surveys indicate that the total residual surface contamination levels are within the
      limits for removable contamination.
    \5\ This category of radionuclides includes mixed fission products, including the Sr-90 which is present in
      them. It does not apply to Sr-90 which has been separated from the other fission products or mixtures where
      the Sr-90 has been enriched.
    \6\ Tritium contamination may diffuse into the volume or matrix of materials. Evaluation of surface
      contamination shall consider the extent to which such contamination may migrate to the surface in order to
      ensure the surface contamination value provided in this appendix is not exceeded. Once this contamination
      migrates to the surface, it may be removable, not fixed; therefore, a ``Total'' value does not apply.
    \7\ (alpha)
    
        46. Appendix E to Part 835 is added as follows:
    
    Appendix E to Part 835--Values for Establishing Sealed Radioactive 
    Source Accountability and Radioactive Material Posting and Labeling 
    Requirements
    
        The data presented in this appendix E are to be used for 
    identifying accountable sealed radioactive sources as defined at 
    Sec. 835.2(a), establishing the need for radioactive material area 
    posting in accordance with Sec. 835.603(g), and establishing the 
    need for radioactive material labeling in accordance with 
    Sec. 835.605.
    
        Note: The data are listed in alphabetical order by nuclide.
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Activity                          Activity                         Activity
                Nuclide             (Ci)       Nuclide       (Ci)       Nuclide      (Ci)
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ac-227........................      1.5E+00    H-3..............      1.6E+08    Re-184m.........       1.5E+02
    Ag-105........................      2.1E+06    Hf-172...........      3.1E+04    Re-186m.........       2.8E+05
    Ag-108m.......................      1.8E+01    Hf-175...........      1.8E+06    Rh-101..........       2.5E+05
    Ag-110m.......................      2.2E+01    Hf-178m..........      4.1E+03    Rh-102..........       8.3E+04
    Al-26.........................      1.6E+01    Hf-181...........      3.5E+02    Rh-102m.........       2.1E+05
    Am-241........................      2.3E+01    Hf-182...........      3.0E+03    Ru-103..........       4.4E+02
    Am-242m.......................      2.4E+01    Hg-194...........      3.5E+04    Ru-106..........       2.1E+04
    Am-243........................      2.3E+01    Hg-203...........      4.9E+02    S-35............       4.0E+06
    As-73.........................      5.4E+02    Ho-166m..........      2.2E+01    Sb-124..........       9.1E+01
    Au-195........................      4.8E+02    I-125............      3.5E+02    Sb-125..........       6.8E+01
    Ba-133........................      5.2E+01    I-129............      1.8E+02    Sc-46...........       6.2E+01
    Be-10.........................      2.8E+04    In-114m..........      7.8E+02    Se-75...........       6.4E+01
    Be-7..........................      3.2E+03    Ir-192...........      1.4E+02    Se-79...........       1.0E+06
    Bi-207........................      1.7E+01    Ir-192m..........      2.6E+04    Si-32...........       9.9E+03
    Bi-208........................      1.5E+01    Ir-194m..........      2.7E+01    Sm-145..........       9.1E+05
    Bi-210m.......................      1.3E+03    K-40.............      2.8E+02    Sm-146..........       1.2E+02
    Bk-247........................      1.7E+01    La-137...........      1.1E+05    Sm-151..........       2.5E+05
    Bk-249........................      7.2E+03    Lu-173...........      4.4E+05    Sn-113..........       3.1E+02
    C-14..........................      4.8E+06    Lu-174...........      2.5E+05    Sn-119m.........       3.3E+02
    Ca-41.........................      7.4E+06    Lu-174m..........      3.9E+05    Sn-121m.........       8.7E+05
    Ca-45.........................      1.5E+06    Lu-177m..........      5.8E+01    Sn-123..........       1.3E+04
    Cd-109........................      1.6E+02    Md-258...........      6.0E+02    Sn-126..........       1.8E+02
    Cd-113m.......................      6.5E+03    Mn-53............      2.0E+07    Sr-85...........       1.2E+02
    
    [[Page 59689]]
    
    Cd-115m.......................      1.0E+04    Mn-54............      6.5E+01    Sr-89...........       2.4E+05
    Ce-139........................      2.4E+02    Mo-93............      7.7E+01    Sr-90...........       7.7E+03
    Ce-141........................      2.4E+03    Na-22............      1.9E+01    Ta-179..........       1.5E+06
    Ce-144........................      1.5E+03    Nb-91............      7.0E+01    Ta-182..........       7.3E+01
    Cf-248........................      2.0E+02    Nb-91m...........      3.6E+02    Tb-157..........       2.5E+03
    Cf-249........................      1.7E+01    Nb-92............      1.8E+01    Tb-158..........       3.9E+04
    Cf-250........................      3.8E+01    Nb-93m...........      4.4E+02    Tb-160..........       1.2E+02
    Cf-251........................      1.7E+01    Nb-94............      2.3E+01    Tc-95m..........       1.3E+02
    Cf-252........................      6.4E+01    Nb-95............      3.4E+02    Tc-97...........       8.1E+01
    Cf-254........................      3.4E+01    Ni-59............      7.5E+06    Tc-97m..........       3.6E+02
    Cl-36.........................      4.6E+05    Ni-63............      3.2E+06    Tc-98...........       2.5E+01
    Cm-241........................      6.8E+04    Np-235...........      1.2E+02    Tc-99...........       6.8E+06
    Cm-242........................      5.8E+02    Np-236...........      2.2E+01    Te-121m.........       1.9E+02
    Cm-243........................      3.3E+01    Np-237...........      1.9E+01    Te-123m.........       2.8E+02
    Cm-244........................      4.0E+01    Os-185...........      1.4E+02    Te-125m.........       4.4E+02
    Cm-245........................      2.2E+01    Os-194...........      1.5E+04    Te-127m.........       8.0E+02
    Cm-246........................      2.2E+01    Pa-231...........      7.8E+00    Te-129m.........       2.3E+03
    Cm-247........................      2.4E+01    Pb-202...........      1.0E+05    Th-228..........       2.9E+01
    Cm-248........................      6.0E+00    Pb-205...........      9.1E+01    Th-229..........       4.7E+00
    Cm-250........................      1.1E+00    Pb-210...........      9.2E+01    Th-230..........       3.1E+01
    Co-56.........................      4.0E+01    Pd-107...........      7.8E+05    Th-232..........       6.1E+00
    Co-57.........................      2.3E+02    Pm-143...........      1.3E+02    Ti-44...........       1.6E+02
    Co-58.........................      1.4E+02    Pm-144...........      2.9E+01    Tl-204..........       2.2E+04
    Co-60.........................      1.8E+01    Pm-145...........      2.6E+02    Tm-170..........       8.4E+03
    Cs-134........................      2.7E+01    Pm-146...........      4.5E+01    Tm-171..........       2.8E+04
    Cs-135........................      2.2E+06    Pm-147...........      2.5E+05    U-232...........       1.5E+01
    Cs-137........................      6.0E+01    Pm-148m..........      1.1E+02    U-233...........       7.4E+01
    Dy-159........................      4.1E+06    Po-209...........      6.3E+03    U-234...........       7.5E+01
    Es-254........................      6.3E+01    Po-210...........      1.1E+03    U-235...........       6.7E+01
    Es-255........................      4.6E+04    Pt-193...........      4.4E+07    U-236...........       8.0E+01
    Eu-148........................      7.0E+05    Pu-236...........      6.9E+01    U-238...........       8.4E+01
    Eu-149........................      5.3E+06    Pu-237...........      3.3E+02    V-49............       2.9E+07
    Eu-152........................      3.1E+01    Pu-238...........      2.5E+01    W-181...........       1.1E+03
    Eu-154........................      3.1E+01    Pu-239...........      2.3E+01    W-185...........       3.9E+06
    Eu-155........................      3.7E+02    Pu-240...........      2.3E+01    W-188...........       6.4E+04
    Fe-55.........................      3.7E+06    Pu-241...........      1.2E+03    Y-88............       3.4E+01
    Fe-59.........................      2.0E+02    Pu-242...........      2.4E+01    Y-91............       5.0E+04
    Fe-60.........................      1.3E+04    Pu-244...........      2.5E+01    Yb-169..........       5.5E+02
    Fm-257........................      4.3E+02    Ra-226...........      1.2E+03    Zn-65...........       1.1E+02
    Gd-146........................      2.6E+05    Ra-228...........      2.1E+03    Zr-88...........       1.2E+02
    Gd-148........................      3.0E+01    Rb-83............      9.2E+01    Zr-93...........       3.1E+04
    Gd-151........................      1.1E+06    Rb-84............      2.0E+02    Zr-95...........       2.0E+02
    Gd-153........................      2.1E+02    Re-183...........      5.4E+02
    Ge-68.........................      5.7E+02    Re-184...........      2.6E+02
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Any alpha emitting radionuclide not listed above and mixtures of 
    alpha emitters of unknown composition have a value of 10 
    microcuries.
        Any radionuclide other than alpha emitting radionuclides not 
    listed above and mixtures of beta emitters of unknown composition 
    have a value of 100 microcuries.
    
        Note: Where there is involved a combination of radionuclides in 
    known amounts, derive the value for the combination as follows: 
    determine, for each radionuclide in the combination, the ratio 
    between the quantity present in the combination and the value 
    otherwise established for the specific radionuclide when not in 
    combination. If the sum of such ratios for all radionuclides in the 
    combination exceeds unity (1), then the accountability criterion has 
    been exceeded.
    
    [FR Doc. 98-27366 Filed 11-3-98; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
12/4/1998
Published:
11/04/1998
Department:
Energy Department
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
98-27366
Dates:
The amendments to this regulation become effective on December 4, 1998.
Pages:
59662-59689 (28 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No.: EH-RM-96-835
RINs:
1901-AA59: Occupational Radiation Protection--Amendment
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/1901-AA59/occupational-radiation-protection-amendment
PDF File:
98-27366.pdf
CFR: (82)
10 CFR 835.2)
10 CFR 835.402)
10 CFR 835.1101(a)
10 CFR 835.202(a)(1)
10 CFR 835.401(a)(6)
More ...