[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 74 (Monday, April 19, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19089-19095]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-9746]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 39
RIN 3150-AG14
Energy Compensation Sources for Well Logging and Other Regulatory
Clarifications
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend
its regulations governing licenses and radiation safety requirements
for well logging. The proposed rule would modify NRC regulations
dealing with: low activity energy compensation sources; tritium neutron
generator target sources; specific abandonment procedures in the event
of an immediate threat; changes to requirements for inadvertent
intrusion on an abandoned source; the codification of an existing
generic exemption; the removal of an obsolete date; and updating
regulations to be consistent with the Commission's metrication policy.
The proposed amendments are necessary to reflect developments that have
occurred in well logging technology since the existing regulations were
adopted.
DATES: The comment period expires July 5, 1999. Comments received after
this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the
Commission is able to assure consideration only for comments received
on or before this date.
ADDRESSES: Send comments by mail or addressed to the Secretary, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Attention:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.
Hand-deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland, between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm on Federal workdays.
You may also provide comments via the NRC's interactive rulemaking
web site through the NRC home page (http://www.nrc.gov). From the NRC
home page, select ``Rulemaking'' from the tool bar. The interactive
rulemaking website can then be accessed by selecting ``Rulemaking
Forum.'' This site provides the availability to upload comments as
files (any format), if your web browser supports that function. For
information about the interactive rulemaking site, contact Ms. Carol
Gallagher, (301) 415-5905; e-mail [email protected]
Certain documents related to this rulemaking, including comments
received and the environmental assessment and finding of no significant
impact, may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street
NW., (Lower Level), Washington, DC. These same documents also may be
viewed and downloaded electronically via the interactive rulemaking
website established by NRC for this rulemaking.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Haisfield, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6196, e-mail
[email protected]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is
proposing to amend its regulations to acknowledge and accommodate the
use of well logging technology that has been developed since the NRC
issued the current well logging regulations (March 17, 1987; 52 FR
8234). This new technology allows licensees to lower a logging tool
down a well at the same time that the hole for the well is being
drilled instead of requiring drilling to stop, removing drilling
pieces, and lowering a logging tool down the well. This technology is
commonly referred to as ``logging while drilling.'' This process uses a
relatively small radioactive source within the logging tool in addition
to the larger radioactive sources currently used in logging a well. The
existing regulations were based on the use of larger radioactive
sources. These regulations include provisions which are unnecessary and
potentially burdensome for the additional small sources. The proposed
changes would have no significant impact on public health and safety
and the environment while reducing potential burdens to licensees.
Licensees would no longer need to comply with unnecessary regulatory
requirements for these small sources or to request licensing exemptions
from the NRC for actions dealing with these small sources. Other
changes are also being proposed to improve, clarify, and update well
logging regulations to reduce confusion. These changes may also reduce
the need for licensees to request exemptions from unnecessary
requirements.
Introduction
Oil and gas come from accumulations in the pore spaces of reservoir
rocks (usually sandstone, limestone, or dolomites) and are removed via
a well. Because the amount of oil and gas in these pore spaces is
dependent upon the rock's characteristics, the oil and gas industry
often needs to determine the characteristics of underground formations
to predict the commercial viability of a new or existing well.
[[Page 19090]]
Licensed radioactive materials are used to obtain information on
certain properties of an underground formation, such as type of rock,
porosity, hydrocarbon content, and density. These properties are
important in the evaluation of oil and gas reservoirs.
One method to obtain information about oil and gas reservoirs is by
using well logging tools. Licensed radioactive materials (sealed
radioactive sources with associated radiation detectors) are contained
in well logging tools. Americium-241 and cesium-137 are the radioactive
materials most frequently used for this purpose. Traditionally, these
tools are lowered into a well on a wireline. The depth of the well
could range from several hundred feet to greater than 30,000 feet.
Information collected by the detectors is sent to the surface through
the wireline and plotted on a chart as the logging tool is slowly
raised from the bottom of the well. Licensed radioactive materials are
also used for similar purposes in coal and mineral exploration.
The licensing and radiation safety requirements for well logging
are provided in 10 CFR part 39. When the regulations for well logging
were promulgated in 1987 (52 FR 8225, March 17, 1987), the well logging
process required drilling to stop while parts of the drilling pieces
were removed before lowering a logging tool down a well. More recent
technology, referred to as logging while drilling (LWD), allows well
logging to be accomplished during drilling. This technology employs an
additional low activity radioactive source within the well logging tool
known as an energy compensation source, or ECS. The ECS is used to
calibrate the well logging tool while the well is being drilled.
LWD provides real time data during drilling operations. It has also
provided the ability for improved evaluation of geologic formations and
can reduce drilling costs. The real-time information can aid in
decision making because formation evaluation can be planned as soon as
the drill bit reaches a formation.
Background
Based on the changing technology in the well logging industry, the
NRC developed a Rulemaking Plan to consider the need to update 10 CFR
part 39. On May 28, 1997, the NRC provided a draft Rulemaking Plan
entitled, ``Energy Compensation Sources for Well Logging and
Clarifications--Changes to 10 CFR part 39'' to the Agreement States for
their comment. The draft Rulemaking Plan was contained in SECY-97-111,
also dated May 28, 1997. Comments were received from the States of
Utah, Illinois, and Washington. These States generally supported the
proposal and provided specific information and comments. Where
appropriate, these comments were incorporated into the final Rulemaking
Plan which was contained in SECY-98-105, dated May 12, 1998.
In the final Rulemaking Plan, the NRC proposed to modify the
existing regulations in 10 CFR part 39 to account for the newer
technology. The changes would reduce regulatory burden on NRC and
Agreement State licensees with no significant impact to public health
and safety. In addition, there are other sections within 10 CFR part 39
that should be changed to improve, clarify, and update the regulations.
The final Rulemaking Plan provides the rationale used in the
development of this proposed rule.
Proposed Regulatory Action
The NRC is proposing seven specific changes to improve, clarify,
and update the requirements in 10 CFR part 39.
1. The principal objective of the proposed rulemaking is to amend
10 CFR part 39 to accommodate the radioactive ECSs that are now used in
some well logging applications. The ECS is a low activity source,
typically less than 1.85 MBq (50 microcuries), compared to the normal
110 GBq to 740 GBq (3 to 20 curies) sources used in well logging.
Because this is an emerging technology, 10 CFR part 39, originally
promulgated in 1987, does not provide any specific provisions for these
low activity sources. Many of the requirements in 10 CFR part 39, when
applied to an ECS, are not appropriate or necessary to protect public
health and safety and the environment. Therefore, the NRC believes the
regulations should be changed.
Because the existing regulations do not allow for variations based
on the activity of the source, licensees who use an ECS must meet all
the requirements for larger sources found in 10 CFR part 39. Examples
of requirements which are overly burdensome for licensees using ECSs
include those addressing well abandonment (Secs. 39.15 and 39.77), leak
testing (Sec. 39.35), design and performance criteria for sealed
sources (Sec. 39.41), and monitoring of sources lodged in a well
(Sec. 39.69). The NRC is proposing that only those sections dealing
with leak testing (a proposed revised Sec. 39.35 specifically addresses
ECSs), physical inventory (Sec. 39.37), and records of material use
(Sec. 39.39) should apply to the use of an ECS.
Oil and gas wells use a surface casing to protect fresh water
aquifers. However, if a surface casing is not used, the NRC would
retain the well abandonment requirements. Requirements established in
other parts of NRC regulations (e.g., 10 CFR parts 20, 30, 40, and 70)
would still apply to the possession and use of licensed material and
are adequate to protect public health and safety and the environment.
Therefore, the NRC is proposing to amend 10 CFR part 39 to
accommodate the use of an ECS in well logging and to provide
requirements governing its use. These provisions would include
radioactivity limits on the ECS and leak testing requirements. The most
significant change would exclude an ECS from the costly procedures for
well abandonment in the event an ECS is lost within the well. Current
requirements for well abandonment, in addition to specific reporting
and approval requirements, require the source to be immobilized and
sealed in place with a cement plug which must be protected from
inadvertent intrusion, and the mounting of a permanent plaque at the
surface of the well. In the draft Regulatory Analysis (RA) conducted
for this proposed rule, a survey of ECS users indicated that about
eight ECSs are abandoned per year. Although estimated abandonment costs
varied significantly by survey respondent, the estimated savings to the
industry to avoid eight abandonments per year is $5 million.
The NRC is proposing to establish 3.7 MBq (100 microcuries) as the
limit for an ECS. Current ECSs typically use up to 1.85 MBq (50
microcuries) of americium-241 (cesium-137 sources are smaller). The 3.7
MBq (100 microcuries) limit would allow licensees flexibility in
designing new sources of this kind while maintaining their
radioactivity within an environmentally safe level. In addition, the
sources would be required to be registered pursuant to 10 CFR 32.210 as
ECSs for use in well logging applications. These sources would not be
required to meet the requirements in Sec. 39.41. However, they would be
expected to meet the general requirements for calibration sources as
established in American National Standard Institute (ANSI) standards.
Because ECSs are used for logging oil and gas wells, they use
surface casings to protect fresh water aquifers. Hence, the only
potential exposure hazard these sources would present is to workers,
and worker exposure could only occur if an ECS were ruptured. If
ruptured, workers could be exposed to the radionuclide through
ingestion or by absorption through the skin. However, if the source
were ruptured, it would be contained within hundreds to thousands of
cubic feet of drilling mud
[[Page 19091]]
which also contains hazardous chemicals and is controlled and monitored
to protect workers as part of drilling operations.
The draft Environmental Assessment (EA) conducted for this proposed
rulemaking demonstrates that there would be no significant impact to
public health and safety or the environment resulting from this
amendment. The EA evaluated a worst case scenario of a 3.7 MBq (100
microcuries) source ruptured by a drill bit and brought to the surface
in the drilling mud. The most significant exposure from this scenario
would be from ingestion of the drilling mud. The most dangerous
radionuclide considered for this worst case scenario was curium-250.
This radionuclide was used because the rule, as proposed, does not
restrict the radionuclide used for ECS sources. Also, the scenario
involved a source twice as large as any in current use. For this worst
case scenario, the estimated dose would be about 56 millirem, which is
below the Federal annual dose limit to an individual member of the
public of 0.1 rem (100 millirem) or 1 millisievert (see 10 CFR
20.1301). For a 3.7 MBq (100 microcuries) source of americium or cesium
(the actual radionuclides used, but with larger activity) the estimated
dose would be less than 3 millirem and 1 millirem respectively.
Therefore, the NRC believes that eliminating potential costly
requirements for these sources, in the event that such sources become
unretrievable, would not impact public health and safety or the
environment.
Section 39.35 specifies leak testing requirements for sealed
sources. Because of the small amount of radioactive material in an ECS
(by definition less than 3.7 MBq (100 microcuries)) less specific leak
testing requirements are being proposed for ECSs. Also, the ECS is
contained within a logging tool that is designed to withstand
significant stress and pressure. The ECS is mounted inside a steel
pressure housing in the interior of the logging tool, thereby providing
additional encapsulation to protect the ECS from operational impacts.
The NRC believes that it is unnecessary and overly burdensome to
require that drilling operations stop because an ECS has exceeded the
current 6-month time interval requirement to be leak tested. The draft
Regulatory Analysis conducted for this proposed rulemaking surveyed a
sample of the drilling industry to determine a normal maintenance
period at which time a licensee would take a logging tool out of
service for routine maintenance or other servicing. The NRC believes
this maintenance period would be an appropriate time to conduct any
necessary leak testing on an ECS. Although the survey results varied,
these tools generally receive some type of out-of-field servicing every
18 months.
Based on this information and the NRC's belief that ECSs should
normally only be leak tested during normal maintenance or when a
logging tool is out of service for other repairs, the NRC is requiring
that a leak test be performed at a minimum of every three years. This
requirement should not be a burden for licensees if the logging tool is
being properly maintained and, in fact, should provide licensees some
flexibility. This is also consistent with an extended leak test
frequency that has been established by license conditions for certain
other sealed sources and devices.
Many ECSs are already exempt from all leak testing requirements.
Section 39.35 exempts all beta or gamma emitting radioactive material
with an activity of 3.7 MBq (100 microcuries) or less. Because cesium-
137 is a beta/gamma emitter, all of these types of ECSs are already
exempt from the existing leak testing requirements in Sec. 39.35.
2. The NRC is proposing to revise 10 CFR part 39 requirements for
tritium neutron generator target sources. Tritium neutron generators
help determine the porosity of the reservoir rock formation, which
indicates the amount of liquid in the reservoir and the reservoir's
permeability. Tritium neutron generator target sources are not used in
logging while drilling tools. These sources are used in the more
traditional well logging procedure where drilling is stopped and the
tool is lowered downhole. Because tritium neutron generator target
sources produce a significant neutron stream only when a voltage is
applied, tritium neutron generator target sources are less hazardous
than the typical americium or cesium sources currently being used in
well logging applications.
For well logging applications, the NRC is proposing that tritium
neutron generator target sources be subject to the requirements of 10
CFR part 39 except for the sealed source design and performance
criteria (Sec. 39.41), and the well abandonment procedures (Secs. 39.15
and 39.77) when a surface casing is used to protect fresh water
aquifers, a practice that is standard for oil and gas wells. The
potential hazard of these sources when a surface casing is used does
not warrant the existing requirements for well abandonment in the event
that the source becomes lost. The design and performance criteria
associated with sealed sources for well logging were not intended for
tritium neutron generator target sources. However, 10 CFR part 39 does
not make this intent or distinction clear.
The NRC is proposing to establish 1,110 GBq (30 curies) of tritium
as the limit for a tritium neutron generator target source. Current
tritium neutron generator target sources typically contain less than
740 GBq (20 curies) of tritium. The 1,110 GBq (30 curies) limit would
allow licensees flexibility in designing new sources of this type while
maintaining their radioactivity within an environmentally safe level.
When these sources are used for logging oil and gas wells, a
surface casing is used to protect fresh water aquifers. The only
exposure hazard these sources present are to workers and worker
exposure could only occur if such sources were ruptured and the tritium
was ingested. If a tritium source were ruptured, it would be contained
within hundreds to thousands of cubic feet of drilling mud. As
mentioned, this drilling mud contains hazardous chemicals and is
controlled and monitored as part of drilling operations.
The draft EA conducted for this proposed rulemaking demonstrates
that there would be no significant impact to public health and safety
or the environment resulting from this change. The draft EA evaluated
the worst case scenario of a 1,110 GBq (30 curies) tritium source
ruptured by a drill bit and brought to the surface in the drilling mud.
The most significant exposure would be through ingestion of this
drilling mud. For this worst case scenario, the estimated dose would be
14 millirem, which is well below the Federal annual dose limit to an
individual member of the public of 100 millirem or 1 millisievert (see
10 CFR 20.1301). Therefore, the NRC believes that eliminating potential
costly requirements for these sources, in the event that such sources
become unretrievable, would not impact public health and safety or the
environment.
3. Section 39.77 provides the requirements for notification and
procedures for abandoning irretrievable well logging sources. This
section specifies that the NRC must approve implementation of
abandonment procedures before abandonment. In some circumstances, such
as high well pressures that could lead to fires or explosions, the
delay required to notify NRC could cause an immediate threat to public
health and safety. The NRC believes that this section should be
modified to allow licensees to use their judgement to abandon a well
immediately, without prior NRC approval, if the licensee believes a
delay
[[Page 19092]]
could cause such a non-radiological threat. This modification would
allow licensees greater procedural latitude. In the proposed rule, the
language has been modified to allow licensees to notify the NRC and
justify the need for an immediate abandonment after the fact.
4. Section 39.15 provides requirements for abandoning irretrievable
sealed sources. The NRC believes that this section should be modified
to provide performance-based criteria for inadvertent intrusion on the
source. This modification would allow licensees greater procedural
latitude while continuing to ensure source integrity. The current
requirements may be more restrictive than is necessary to protect an
abandoned source, depending upon the individual well abandonment. For
example, if a significant amount of drilling equipment is abandoned
with the well, the equipment itself may be effective in preventing
inadvertent intrusion on the source. However, the abandoned equipment
would not meet the current requirements of Sec. 39.15. Paragraph
(a)(5)(ii) of Sec. 39.15 has prescriptive requirements for
irretrievable well logging sources, specifying the use of a mechanical
device to prevent inadvertent intrusion on the source, at a specific
location within the abandoned well.
The NRC is proposing that licensees ``prevent inadvertent intrusion
on the source.'' This would require that the source be protected but
allow licensees the flexibility to determine the best method. The
proposed change would not affect the requirement in Sec. 39.15(a)(5)(i)
that a well logging source be immobilized with a cement plug or the
requirement in Sec. 39.15(a)(5)(iii) that a permanent identification
plaque be mounted at the surface of the well.
5. Two changes are being proposed for Sec. 39.41, ``Design and
performance criteria for sealed sources.'' The first would incorporate
within NRC regulations an existing generic exemption for sealed sources
that were manufactured before 1989 and met older standards. The second
would add an optional acceptable standard by referencing oil-well
logging requirements in ANSI/HPS N43.6-1997. The existing requirements
would also remain as an option within this section.
The NRC issued a generic exemption from the current design and
performance criteria for sealed sources in 1989. This exemption allows
the use of older sealed sources which were not tested against the
current criteria, but which were tested in accordance with an earlier
standard used for well logging sources. This exemption is currently in
practice, but is not included in 10 CFR part 39. The NRC is proposing
to modify the regulations to include this existing generic exemption
within 10 CFR part 39.
Sealed sources that were manufactured before July 14, 1989, may use
design and performance criteria from the United States of America
Standards Institute (USASI) N5.10-1968, ``Classification of Sealed
Radioactive Sources'' or the criteria in Sec. 39.41. The use of the
USASI standard is based on an NRC Notice of Generic Exemption published
on July 25, 1989 (54 FR 30883). NRC regulations have not incorporated
the USASI N5.10-1968 requirements for older sealed sources. The primary
difference between the USASI standard and the existing requirements is
that the existing requirements includes a vibration test that is
consistent with current national standards. The USASI standard
considered a vibration test and concluded that, to pass the other
requirements, the source would be so rugged there was no reason to
include a vibration test.
The exemption allowing the use of the USASI standard was intended
to avoid a situation in which well logging licensees might be
unnecessarily forced out of business and have to dispose of their
sources. This situation could arise because the original source
manufacturers tested against the USASI standard, but did not retest
these sources against the standards that became effective in 1989. The
NRC determined that those sealed source models meeting the USASI
standard would not adversely affect public health and safety. These
sources had been used for years in operational situations and had
demonstrated through actual use that vibration from drilling operations
had not caused failure. The survey of licensees conducted for the RA
and EA for this proposed rulemaking confirmed that these older sources
have not presented a problem during actual use. Therefore, the NRC is
proposing to codify within this section the existing practice to use,
as an option, the USASI standards for sealed sources that were
manufactured before July 14, 1989. Because many of these older sealed
sources contain radioactive material with half-lives that allow their
continued use (i.e., americium-241 and cesium-137 have half-lives of
458 and 30 years respectively), this modification to the regulations is
appropriate.
However, a vibration test has been included in ANSI standards since
1977, and by existing NRC regulations which were promulgated in 1987.
Based on survey information done for this rulemaking, it is estimated
that the cost to test a source to see if it meets the vibration
requirement in Sec. 39.41 is $2,400. Only the prototype for each design
requires testing. The number of prototype designs each year is small.
The only survey respondent on this topic indicated that they produce,
at most, one new prototype per year and they did not indicate that
vibration testing is burdensome. The NRC believes that the cost for
vibration testing is not overly burdensome and is consistent with (1)
ANSI N542-1977, ``Sealed Radioactive Sources, Classification,''
published by the National Bureau of Standards [(NBS) currently the
National Institute of Standards and Technology] in the 1978 NBS
Handbook 126 and (2) ANSI/HPS N43.6-1997, ``Sealed Radioactive
Sources--Classification'' approved in November 1997. ANSI/HPS N43.6-
1997 is the revised update to ANSI N542-1977. However, the oil-well
logging requirements have not changed between the two ANSI standards
and the NRC has decided to retain the current requirements for
vibration testing.
The second proposed change to this section is to meet Public Law
104-113, ``National Technology and Transfer Act of 1995'' and Office of
Management and Budget Circular A-119, ``Federal Participation in the
Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity
Assessment Activities.'' This law encourages agencies to use
``voluntary consensus standards'' (i.e., standards developed by a
voluntary consensus body and made available to all interested parties).
The existing NRC requirements are based on the older ANSI N542-1977
standard, and allow licensees flexibility in determining how to conduct
testing and ensuring integrity of the source. The NRC is proposing to
add an optional method of meeting the design requirements by
referencing the newer, current ANSI standard (ANSI/HPS N43.6-1997)
within 10 CFR part 39. Although the current NRC requirements and ANSI/
HPS N43.6-1997 are quite similar, the NRC does not want to eliminate
the ability to meet the existing NRC regulatory requirements; that
could result in a problem similar to that experienced in 1989. That is,
existing approved sealed sources might not have been tested or
evaluated exactly as specified in ANSI/HPS N43.6-1997, which could
result in well logging licensees having to dispose of acceptable sealed
sources.
The NRC is inviting public comment on whether adding this voluntary
consensus standard (ANSI/HPS N43.6-1997) to 10 CFR part 39 is
appropriate
[[Page 19093]]
for use by manufacturers of sealed sources for use in well logging.
6. For clarity and to avoid confusion, the NRC is proposing to
update Sec. 39.49 because it contains a date that has passed and is no
longer appropriate. This section would be amended to remove the
obsolete date.
7. The NRC is proposing to update Secs. 39.15, 39.35, and 39.41 to
conform with the agency's metrification policy published on June 19,
1996 (61 FR 31169) by stating parameter values in dual units with
International System of Units (SI) first and with English units in
brackets.
Specific Changes in Regulatory Text
The following section is provided to assist the reader regarding
the specific changes made to each section or paragraph in 10 CFR part
39. For clarity and content, a substantial portion of a particular
section or paragraph may be repeated, while only a minor change is
being made. This approach will allow the reader to effectively review
the specific changes without cross-reference to existing material that
has been included for content, but has not been significantly changed.
Section 39.2: Two new definitions are being added for ECS and
tritium neutron generator target source.
Section 39.15(a)(5)(ii): This is being revised to allow a more
performance-based approach to prevent inadvertent intrusion on an
abandoned source.
Section 39.15(a)(5)(iii): This is being revised to meet the NRC's
metrification policy.
Section 39.35(b): This is being revised to meet the NRC's
metrification policy.
Section 39.35(c)(1): This essentially repeats the existing
paragraph on leak testing frequency, but notes that ECSs are not
included in this paragraph.
Section 39.35(c)(2): This is a new paragraph allowing a 3 year leak
testing interval for ECSs.
Section 39.35(d): This is being revised to meet the NRC's
metrification policy.
Section 39.35(e)(1): This is an editorial change to indicate that
hydrogen-3 and tritium are the same.
Sections 39.35(e)(4) and (5): This is being revised to meet the
NRC's metrification policy.
Section 39.41 has been significantly revised as described below:
Section 39.41(a): This is a new paragraph describing the applicable
requirements for a sealed source which includes requirements from the
existing Sec. 39.41(a)(1) and (2).
Section 39.41(b): This is a new paragraph to allow pre-1989 sources
to meet USASI standards.
Section 39.41(c): This is a new paragraph providing for the use of
current ANSI standards.
Section 39.41(d): This is the existing Sec. 39.41(a)(3).
Section 39.41(d)(1)(v): This is being revised to meet the NRC's
metrification policy (the old Sec. 39.41(a)(3)(v)).
Section 39.41(e): This is the old Sec. 39.41(b) and is edited to be
consistent with the above changes.
Section 39.41(f): This is a new paragraph clarifying that this
section does not apply to ECSs.
Section 39.49: This is being revised to eliminate an obsolete date.
Section 39.53: This is a new section providing requirements for
ECSs.
Section 39.55: This is a new section providing requirements for
tritium neutron generator target sources.
Sections 39.77(c)(1)(i) and (ii): This is being revised to allow an
option to immediately abandoning a well without receiving prior NRC
approval when the licensee believes there is an immediate threat to
public health and safety.
Section 39.77(d)(9): This is a new paragraph requiring the licensee
to justify in writing why it was necessary to immediately abandon a
well without prior NRC approval.
Compatibility of Agreement State Regulations
The compatibility of the provisions in 10 CFR part 39 have been
determined in accordance with the NRC's ``Statement of Principle and
Policy for the Agreement State Program; Policy Statement on Adequacy
and Compatibility of Agreement State Programs'' that was published on
September 3, 1997 (62 FR 46517). The NRC is adding definitions for an
``Energy compensation source'' and a ``Tritium neutron generator target
source'' to Sec. 39.2 and adding two new sections to 10 CFR part 39.
The definitions for an ECS and a tritium neutron generator target
source are assigned Compatibility Category B. The new Sec. 39.53,
Energy compensation source, and Sec. 39.55, Tritium neutron generator
target source, are assigned Compatibility Category C. The NRC is not
proposing compatibility changes for those sections of 10 CFR Part 39
that are being modified. The present Compatibility Categories for the
modified sections are: Section 39.41, Compatibility Category B;
Secs. 39.15, 39.35, 39.49, 39.77(c) and (d), Compatibility Category C.
Specific information about the NRC's Compatibility Policy and the
levels of compatibility assigned to the present rule may be found at
the Special Documents area of the Office of State Program's Web site,
http://www.hsrd.ornl.gov/nrc/home.html.
Plain Language
The Presidential Memorandum dated June 1, 1998, entitled, ``Plain
Language in Government Writing,'' directed that the Federal
government's writing be in plain language. The NRC requests comments on
the proposed rule specifically with respect to the clarity and
effectiveness of the language used. Comments should be sent to the
address listed above.
Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability
The Commission has determined under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in
subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, that this rule, if adopted, would not be a
major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment, and therefore, an environmental impact statement is not
required. The proposed rule would modify NRC regulations dealing with:
(1) Low activity energy compensation sources; (2) tritium neutron
generator target sources; (3) specific abandonment procedures in the
event of an immediate threat; (4) changes to requirements for
inadvertent intrusion on an abandoned source; (5) the codification of
an existing generic exemption; (6) the removal of an obsolete date; and
(7) updating 10 CFR Part 39 to be consistent with the Commission's
metrification policy. The draft environmental assessment evaluated the
maximum annual public health risk to members of the public as a result
of these proposed changes and determined that there is no significant
environmental impact as a result of the proposed changes.
The NRC has sent a copy of the environmental assessment and this
proposed rule to every State Liaison Officer and requested their
comments. The environmental assessment and finding of no significant
impact on which this determination is based are available for
inspection at the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW. (Lower
Level), Washington, DC. Single copies of the environmental assessment
and the finding of no significant impact are available from Mark
Haisfield, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone
(301) 415-6196.
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
This proposed rule increases the burden on licensees to justify in
writing
[[Page 19094]]
the immediate threat to public health and safety that resulted in the
implementation of abandonment procedures prior to NRC approval. The
burden to include the justification in the existing report required in
10 CFR 39.77(d) will increase from 4 hours to 4.25 hours per impacted
report. Because the burden for this information collection requirement
is insignificant, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) clearance is
not required. Existing requirements were approved by the OMB, approval
number 3150-0130.
Public Protection Notification
If a means used to impose an information collection does not
display a currently valid OMB control number, the NRC may not conduct
or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, the information
collection.
Regulatory Analysis
The Commission has prepared a draft regulatory analysis on this
proposed regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of
the alternatives considered by the Commission. The draft analysis is
available for inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street
NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC. Single copies of the draft analysis
may be obtained from Mark Haisfield, Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6196.
The Commission requests public comment on the draft regulatory
analysis. Comments on the draft analysis may be submitted to the NRC as
indicated under the ADDRESSES heading.
Regulatory Flexibility Certification
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C.
605(b)), the Commission certifies that this rule, if adopted, will not
have a significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small
entities. All of the proposed amendments are to 10 CFR part 39 and are
intended to either reduce regulatory burdens from unnecessary
requirements or to clarify and update regulations to reduce confusion.
Therefore, any economic impact to a small entity using 10 CFR part 39
should be either neutral or positive.
Any small entity subject to this regulation which determines that,
because of its size, it is likely to bear a disproportionate adverse
economic impact should notify the Commission of this in a comment that
indicates the following:
(a) The licensee's size and how the proposed regulation would
result in a significant economic burden upon the licensee as compared
to the economic burden on a larger licensee.
(b) How the proposed regulations could be modified to take into
account the licensee's differing needs or capabilities.
(c) The benefits that would accrue, or the detriments that would be
avoided, if the proposed regulations were modified as suggested by the
licensee.
(d) How the proposed regulation, as modified, would more closely
equalize the impact of regulations or create more equal access to the
benefits of Federal programs as opposed to providing special advantages
to any individual or group.
(e) How the proposed regulation, as modified, would still
adequately protect public health and safety.
Backfit Analysis
The NRC has determined that the backfit rule, 10 CFR 50.109, does
not apply to this proposed rule, and therefore, a backfit analysis is
not required because these amendments do not involve any provisions
that would impose backfits as defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1).
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 39
Byproduct material, Criminal penalties, Nuclear material, Oil and
gas exploration--well logging, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Scientific equipment, Security measures, Source material,
Special nuclear material.
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization
Act of 1974, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC is proposing to
adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR part 39.
PART 39--LICENSES AND RADIATION SAFETY REQUIREMENTS FOR WELL
LOGGING
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 82, 161, 182, 183,
186, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 934, 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as
amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2077,
2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2112, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2236, 2282);
secs. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244,
1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846).
2. Section 39.2 is amended by adding definitions, in their proper
alphabetic order, of the terms energy compensation source and tritium
neutron generator target source to read as follows:
Sec. 39.2 Definitions.
Energy compensation source (ECS) means a small sealed source, with
an activity not exceeding 3.7 MBq [100 microcuries], used within a
logging tool, or other tool components, to provide a reference standard
to maintain the tool's calibration when in use.
* * * * *
Tritium neutron generator target source means a tritium source used
within a neutron generator tube to produce neutrons for use in well
logging applications.
* * * * *
3. Section 39.15 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(5)(ii) and
the introductory text of paragraph (a)(5)(iii) to read as follows:
Sec. 39.15 Agreement with well owner or operator.
(a) * * *
(5) * * *
(ii) A means to prevent inadvertent intrusion on the source, unless
the source is not accessible to any subsequent drilling operations; and
(iii) A permanent identification plaque, constructed of long
lasting material such as stainless steel, brass, bronze, or monel, must
be mounted at the surface of the well, unless the mounting of the
plaque is not practical. The size of the plaque must be at least 17 cm
[7 inches] square and 3 mm
[\1/8\-inch] thick. The plaque must contain--
* * * * *
4. Section 39.35 is amended by revising paragraphs (b), (c),
(d)(1), (e)(1), (e)(4) and (e)(5) to read as follows:
Sec. 39.35 Leak testing of sealed sources.
* * * * *
(b) Method of testing. The wipe of a sealed source must be
performed using a leak test kit or method approved by the Commission or
an Agreement State. The wipe sample must be taken from the nearest
accessible point to the sealed source where contamination might
accumulate. The wipe sample must be analyzed for radioactive
contamination. The analysis must be capable of detecting the presence
of 185 Bq [0.005 microcuries] of radioactive material on the test
sample and must be performed by a person approved by the Commission or
an Agreement State to perform the analysis.
(c) Test frequency. (1) Each sealed source (except an energy
compensation source (ECS)) must be tested at intervals not to exceed 6
months. In the absence of a certificate from a transferor that a test
has been made within the 6 months before the transfer, the sealed
source may not be used until tested.
[[Page 19095]]
(2) Each ECS that is not exempt from testing in accordance with
paragraph (e) of this section must be tested at intervals not to exceed
3 years. In the absence of a certificate from a transferor that a test
has been made within the 3 years before the transfer, the ECS may not
be used until tested.
(d) Removal of leaking source from service. (1) If the test
conducted pursuant to paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section reveals
the presence of 185 Bq [0.005 microcuries] or more of removable
radioactive material, the licensee shall remove the sealed source from
service immediately and have it decontaminated, repaired, or disposed
of by an NRC or Agreement State licensee that is authorized to perform
these functions. The licensee shall check the equipment associated with
the leaking source for radioactive contamination and, if contaminated,
have it decontaminated or disposed of by an NRC or Agreement State
licensee that is authorized to perform these functions.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) Hydrogen-3 (tritium) sources;
* * * * *
(4) Sources of beta- or gamma-emitting radioactive material with an
activity of 3.7 MBq [100 microcuries] or less; and
(5) Sources of alpha- or neutron-emitting radioactive material with
an activity of 0.37 MBq [10 microcuries] or less.
5. Section 39.41 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 39.41 Design and performance criteria for sources.
(a) A licensee may use a sealed source for use in well logging
applications if--
(1) The sealed source is doubly encapsulated;
(2) The sealed source contains licensed material whose chemical and
physical forms are as insoluble and nondispersible as practical; and
(3) Meets the requirements of paragraph (b), (c), or (d) of this
section.
(b) For a sealed source manufactured on or before July 14, 1989, a
licensee may use the sealed source, for use in well logging
applications if it meets the requirements of USASI N5.10-1968,
``Classification of Sealed Radioactive Sources,'' or the requirements
in paragraph (c) or (d) of this section.
(c) For a sealed source manufactured after July 14, 1989, a
licensee may use the sealed source, for use in well logging
applications if it meets the oil-well logging requirements of ANSI/HPS
N43.6-1997, ``Sealed Radioactive Sources--Classification.''
(d) For a sealed source manufactured after July 14, 1989, a
licensee may use the sealed source, for use in well logging
applications, if--
(1) The sealed source's prototype has been tested and found to
maintain its integrity after each of the following tests:
(i) Temperature. The test source must be held at -40 deg. C for 20
minutes, 600 deg. C for 1 hour, and then be subject to a thermal shock
test with a temperature drop from 600 deg. C to 20 deg. C within 15
seconds.
(ii) Impact test. A 5 kg steel hammer, 2.5 cm in diameter, must be
dropped from a height of 1 m onto the test source.
(iii) Vibration test. The test source must be subject to a
vibration from 25 Hz to 500 Hz at 5 g amplitude for 30 minutes.
(iv) Puncture test. A 1 gram hammer and pin, 0.3 cm pin diameter,
must be dropped from a height of 1 m onto the test source.
(v) Pressure test. The test source must be subject to an external
pressure of 1.695 x 10 7 pascals [24,600 pounds per square
inch absolute].
(e) The requirements in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) of this
section do not apply to sealed sources that contain licensed material
in gaseous form.
(f) The requirements in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) of this
section do not apply to energy compensation sources (ECS). ECSs must be
registered with the Commission under Sec. 32.210 of this chapter or
with an Agreement State.
6. Section 39.49 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 39.49 Uranium sinker bars.
The licensee may use a uranium sinker bar in well logging
applications only if it is legibly impressed with the words ``CAUTION--
RADIOACTIVE-DEPLETED URANIUM'' and ``NOTIFY CIVIL AUTHORITIES (or
COMPANY NAME) IF FOUND.''
7. Section 39.53 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 39.53 Energy compensation source.
The licensee may use an energy compensation source (ECS) which is
contained within a logging tool, or other tool components, only if the
ECS contains quantities of licensed material not exceeding 3.7 MBq (100
microcuries).
(a) For well logging applications with a surface casing for
protecting fresh water aquifers, use of the ECS is only subject to the
requirements of Secs. 39.35, 39.37 and 39.39.
(b) For well logging applications without a surface casing for
protecting fresh water aquifers, use of the ECS is only subject to the
requirements of Secs. 39.15, 39.35, 39.37, 39.39, 39.51, and 39.77.
8. Section 39.55 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 39.55 Tritium neutron generator target source.
(a) Use of a tritium neutron generator target source, containing
quantities not exceeding 1,110 MBq [30 curies] and in a well with a
surface casing to protect fresh water aquifers, is subject to the
requirements of this part except Secs. 39.15, 39.41, and 39.77.
(b) Use of a tritium neutron generator target source, containing
quantities exceeding 1,110 MBq [30 curies] or in a well without a
surface casing to protect fresh water aquifers, is subject to the
requirements of this Part except Sec. 39.41.
9. Section 39.77 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(1),
redesignating paragraphs (d)(9) and (d)(10) as paragraphs (d)(10) and
(d)(11), and adding a new paragraph (d)(9) to read as follows:
Sec. 39.77 Notification of incidents and lost sources; abandonment
procedures for irretrievable sources.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) Notify the appropriate NRC Regional Office by telephone of the
circumstances that resulted in the inability to retrieve the source
and--
(i) Obtain NRC approval to implement abandonment procedures; or
(ii) That the licensee implemented abandonment before receiving NRC
approval because the licensee believed there was an immediate threat to
public health and safety; and
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(9) The immediate threat to public health and safety justification
for implementing abandonment if prior NRC approval was not obtained in
accordance with paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section;
* * * * *
Dated at Rockville, MD., this 31st day of March, 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Frank J. Miraglia, Jr.,
Acting Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 99-9746 Filed 4-16-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
