Radiation Protection Requirements; Amended Definitions and Criteria

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Parts 19 and 20

RIN 3150-AE80-1

Radiation Protection Requirements; Amended Definitions and

Criteria

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) proposes to amend its

regulations concerning radiation protection requirements. The proposed

rule would: Delete the definition of ``Controlled area'' to make it

clear that any area to which access is restricted for the purpose of

radiological protection is a restricted area as defined in the

regulation, revise the definition of ``Occupational dose'' to delete

reference to the ``Restricted area,'' revise the definition of

unrestricted area to be consistent with the deletion of controlled

area, revise the provision entitled ``Instruction to Workers,'' so that

radiation protection training will be provided to all persons with the

potential to be occupationally exposed and restore a provision to

provide that whenever licensees are required to report exposures of

individual members of the public to the NRC, then those individuals are

to receive copies of the report.

DATES: Comment period expires April 4, 1994. 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: Mail written comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention: Docketing and Service

Branch.

Deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland

between 7:45 am and 4:15 pm Federal workdays.

Copies of the regulatory analysis, the environmental assessment and

finding of no significant impact, the supporting statement submitted to

OMB, and comments received may be examined at: The NRC Public Document

Room, 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan K. Roecklein, Office of Nuclear

Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC

20555, telephone (301) 492-3740.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On May 21, 1991, (56 FR 23360) the NRC amended 10 CFR part 20 to

add its revised ``Standards for Protection Against Radiation (10 CFR

20.1001-20.2402). Compliance became mandatory for all licensees on

January 1, 1994. Extensive discussion regarding interpretation and

implementation of the new rules has ensued both within the NRC and

Agreement State staffs and with licensees and other interested parties.

The revised standards include a definition for the term

``Controlled area.'' The term is defined to be an area outside of a

restricted area, but inside the site boundary access to which can be

limited for any reason (10 CFR 20.1003). The term ``Restricted area''

was retained in the revised standards from the original regulation, 10

CFR part 20, and is defined as an area, ``access to which is limited by

the licensees for the purpose of protecting individuals against undue

risks from exposure to radiation or radioactive materials * * * (10 CFR

20.1003).'' Neither the revised standards themselves, nor the

supplemental information provide a basis for deciding whether to

designate a given area as a ``Restricted area'' or a ``Controlled

area.'' In discussions with licensees and Agreement States, the absence

of such a clear delineation appears to be the cause of considerable

uncertainty among a number of licensees regarding how to implement the

revised standards in this regard. The NRC believes that this situation

can be alleviated by eliminating the term ``Controlled area'' from the

regulations. This change has the effect of returning the regulation to

the former situation in which areas are either restricted or

unrestricted for purposes of radiation protection. As has always been

the case, licensees continue to have the option of controlling access

to areas for reasons other than radiation protection.

The definition of ``Unrestricted area'' in the revised standard

acknowledges the existence of controlled areas and currently is defined

as an area ``access to which is neither limited nor controlled by the

licensee'' (10 CFR 20.1003). Deletion of the term ``Controlled area''

permits return to the former situation in which areas are either

restricted or unrestricted for radiation protection purposes, and the

Commission now proposes to revise the definition of ``Unrestricted

area'' to make this clear.

Under this proposal, licensees would continue to have the option to

control access for reasons other than radiation protection. As before,

the definitions of ``restricted area'' and of ``unrestricted area'' do

not preclude the existence of areas in which access is limited for

purposes other than protecting individuals against undue risks from

exposure to radiation and/or radioactive materials.

``Occupational dose'' is defined currently in the revised standards

``as the dose received by an individual in a restricted area or in the

course of employment in which the individual's assigned duties involve

exposure to radiation and/or to radioactive materials * * *.'' (10 CFR

20.1003) Through meetings with licensees to discuss the revised

standards, the Commission has become aware that this definition can be

interpreted to allow individuals who are members of the public to

receive an ``occupational dose'' and exceed public dose limits if they

enter restricted areas. This was not the intention of the Commission in

promulgating the revised standards. A fundamental principle present in

the regulations is that a member of the public is subject to the limits

for a member of the public (Sec. 20.1301 (a)(1)), irrespective of that

individual's location. The Commission is separately considering

revisions to parts 20 and 35, whereby licensees who have been

administered radioactive materials to patients and released them in

accordance with Sec. 35.75 would be exempt from the provisions of

Sec. 20.1301 (a)(1) with regard to the radioactive material in the

released patient. Licensees must be able to ensure that a member of the

public, if present in a restricted area, as well as any other area,

will not exceed an exposure of 100 mrem/year. The suggestion that

permission to expose a member of the public to a dose in excess of 100

mrem in a year, is created by that individual's location in a

restricted area, can be removed by a simple modification to the

definition of occupational dose, specifically by eliminating reference

to dose received in a restricted area. In addition, ``radiation and/or

radioactive material'' should replace ``radiation and radioactive

material'' to correct a technical error in the text of the rule. With

these changes, it would become clear that occupational dose is dose

received as a result of an individual's employment in which assigned

duties involve exposure to radiation and/or radioactive material. These

changes would also make it clear that the dose received by a member of

the public cannot be permitted to exceed the public dose limit even if

the individual is receiving a portion of that dose while in a

restricted area. The remainder of the definition of occupational dose

would not be modified by this action, and maintains the description of

both what is included and what is excluded in occupational dose for

purposes of clarity.

The regulation entitled ``Instruction to Workers,'' 10 CFR 19.12,

currently requires that all individuals working in or frequenting any

portion of a restricted area be instructed in the health protection

problems associated with exposure to radiation and in radiation

protection procedures needed to minimize exposure. Under this

provision, if a worker never enters a restricted area, he or she would

require no radiation protection training. On the other hand, members of

the public, such as delivery persons who might occasionally enter a

restricted area, would be required to be trained even though the nature

of their activities would perhaps not warrant such instruction. The

proposed change to Sec. 19.12 would make it clear that anyone in the

course of their employment in which the individual's assigned duties

involve the potential for exposure to radiation and/or radioactive

material would have to be provided appropriate radiation protection

training.

Concern about training requirements has been expressed for certain

categories of workers and members of the public illustrated by the

following cases: Case (1) involves a member of the public who is

potentially exposed to some radiation while visiting a facility or

making deliveries, and, Case (2), a maintenance worker or contractor

who is exposed to radiation while performing repairs or cleaning. In

order to decide if training is required, and what type of training is

appropriate, certain provisions of the rules must be considered.

First, after January 1, 1994, a member of the public cannot be

permitted to receive more than 100 mrem in a year unless specifically

approved by the Commission (10 CFR 20.1301).1 Second, training

commensurate with the potential radiological health protection problems

present would be required by the proposed 10 CFR 19.12 only for

individuals whose assigned duties involve a potential for exposure to

radiation and/or radioactive materials. In the first case above, the

individual's activities, i.e., visiting a facility or making

deliveries, were not assigned by the licensee or a licensee contractor.

Under these conditions, the individual is a member of the public, and

the licensee must ensure that exposures are less than 100 mrem in a

year, and further must be as low as is reasonably achievable (ALARA).

Doses to these individuals should be controlled by other measures that

would be included in an ALARA program, such as shielding, escorting,

removing radioactive sources during visits, and controlling stay-times.

Therefore, the Commission believes training is not required. However,

nothing in the rules prevents providing training to any individuals.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\As discussed above, the Commission is separately considering

revisions to parts 20 and 35 to address cases whereby licensees have

treated patients with radioactive material and released them under

the provisions of Sec. 35.75, and thus would not fall under the

provision of Sec. 20.1301(a)(1) with regard to the radioactive

material in the released patient.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the second case, the individual's activities, i.e., performing

repairs or cleaning, are performed during the course of employment with

the licensee or a contractor to the licensee and the individuals'

assigned duties do involve the potential for exposure to radiation.

Although the individual may not enter a restricted area and, whether

this worker's dose exceeds 100 mrem in a year or not, if the worker has

the potential to receive some occupational exposure, training

``commensurate with potential radiological health protection problems

present in the workplace'' is required to ensure informed consent and

control of exposure. This training does not have to be extensive. The

Commission believes that doses received by individual workers at a rate

greater than the 1mSv (100 mrem) in a year public dose limit constitute

a level of risk which requires training at least to a level which

provides information on the risks of exposure and methods for reducing

exposure in keeping with the ALARA principle.

Prior to the promulgation of the revised standards, paragraph

20.409(b) of part 20 provided that whenever a licensee is required to

report to the Commission any exposure of an identified individual

worker or member of the public to radiation and/or radioactive

material, the licensee must also notify that individual.2 Although

it was the intent of the Commission that this provision remain in 10

CFR part 20, the requirement was inadvertently omitted from the revised

standards. Accordingly, Sec. 20.2205 is added to clearly restore to 10

CFR part 20 the intention that individual workers and individual

members of the public are to be notified of exposures in excess of the

dose limits that would require notifying the NRC. Under Sec. 20.2205,

the licensees' obligation to notify an individual will be triggered if

(and only if) the licensee's required report to NRC identifies that

individual by name as having received an exposure to radiation and/or

to radioactive material. The licensee's obligation to identify

individuals in a required report to the NRC is as provided for in 10

CFR 20.2203.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\See also 10 CFR 19.13(d) (When a licensee is required to

report to the Commission any exposure of an individual to radiation

or radioactive material, the licensee must also provide the

individual a report on their exposure data.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agreement States

The proposed amendments would apply to all NRC licensees and

Agreement States (Definitions in 10 CFR part 20 are Division I matters

and are thus matters of compatibility). The proposed changes, with the

exception of the addition of Sec. 20.2205 and the revision of the

definition of unrestricted area, were discussed in June 1993 with

Agreement State representatives and the changes discussed were strongly

supported. Agreement States have the opportunity to comment further on

all of the proposed changes during the public comment period. The

Agreement States cannot be expected to modify their regulations before

the January 1, 1994, date. Some States will need as much as 3 years to

conform to the changes. In the interim, States may wish to consider

alternative methods to address the issues presented in this rulemaking.

A draft of the proposed amendments, with the exception of the

addition of Sec. 20.2205 and the revision of the definition of

unrestricted area, was provided to the Agreement States prior to

submitting the amendments for publication in the Federal Register.

Several States submitted comments. One State suggested limiting public

doses to ``licensed'' sources of radiation while another observed that

keeping this provision general permitted the States to control exposure

from Naturally Occurring and Accelerator Produced Radioactive Material

(NARM) as well as byproduct material. The proposed rule is general and

does not specify licensed sources. This approach is consistent with the

rule, as expressed in Sec. 20.1001 to control doses from all sources of

radiation that are under the control of the licensee.

Another State provided a revised definition of ``Member of the

Public'' which would not rely on the definition of ``Occupational

dose'' and would make clear that workers exposed to NARM are not

members of the public. The intent here was to minimize the change to

the definitions and still accomplish the needed clarifications of these

issues. For that reason and because ``Occupational dose'' is defined as

from ``licensed or unlicensed'' sources, this change is not made in the

proposed rule.

Two States argued that the draft language restricting the training

requirements in 10 CFR 19.12 to individuals involved ``in licensed

activities'' and ``in the licensee's facility'' was too restrictive,

and might prevent workers such as housekeeping staff and security staff

from receiving minimal, but needed training. The language of the

training requirement is more inclusive in this proposed rule.

One State proposed retaining in Sec. 20.2104(a) a requirement to

determine prior occupational dose if an individual enters the

restricted area. The NRC staff believes that retaining only the words

``is likely to receive, in a year, an occupational dose requiring

monitoring,'' is sufficient to trigger a determination of prior dose.

The State also suggested wording which would make licensees responsible

for accounting for occupational exposure from nonlicensed activities.

This is consistent with the Commission's position and the draft is

revised accordingly.

Description

The provision in 10 CFR Part 20 for a ``Controlled area,'' its

definition and its use in several other sections of Part 20 would be

deleted. Licensees would continue to have the option to control access

to areas for reasons other than radiation protection.

The proposed rulemaking would revise the definition of

``Occupational dose'' to delete reference to the ``Restricted area'' so

that the occupational dose limit and its associated radiation

protection provisions, such as training and individual monitoring

requirements, would apply to an individual who in the course of

employment has assigned duties involving exposure to radiation and/or

to radioactive material. This change would also indicate that public

dose limits cannot be exceeded for members of the public even if they

enter a restricted area.

The definition of ``Unrestricted area'' would be revised to make it

clear that for the purposes of radiation protection areas, are either

restricted or unrestricted and that access to unrestricted areas can be

controlled for reasons other than radiation protection.

``Instructions to Workers,'' 10 CFR 19.12, would be revised to make

clear that training commensurate with the hazards present must be

provided to all individuals who have the potential to be occupationally

exposed rather than just to individuals working in or frequenting any

portion of a restricted area.

``Reports to individuals of exceeding dose limits,'' 10 CFR

20.2205, is added to restore to part 20 the Commission's intent that

any identified individual, including members of the public, who

receives an exposure in excess of the dose limits for which a report to

the NRC is required, will receive notification of that exposure from

the licensee.

Impact

The Commission believes that these proposed changes will have some,

albeit relatively minor, impacts on licensees. The impacts associated

with each of the changes are outlined below.

For the deletion of the definition of controlled area, the

Commission believes that there will be little impact on most power

reactor licensees. Although some confusion has surfaced associated with

the intent of the terms ``controlled area'' and ``occupational dose,''

these definitions have been discussed extensively with and by industry

representatives, and the Commission believes that the proposed rule

generally reflects current and planned practices of many reactor

licensees. Licensees can continue to designate areas as controlled

areas for purposes other than radiological protection, irrespective of

whether the term appears in the rule or not.

Some licensees have already implemented the revised standards, and

procedures have been written which would require changes as a result of

this proposed rulemaking if these procedures have employed the concept

of controlling areas for radiological protection.

For those reactor licensees who have already formally implemented

the revised standards or who have a need for the additional flexibility

afforded by the use of the concept of controlled area for purposes of

radiological protection, the provisions for exemptions from the NRC's

regulations provides an avenue of relief. The NRC currently believes

that the elimination of the concept of ``Controlled area'' will have

such a small impact on most power reactor licensees that it does not

constitute a backfit as envisioned by 10 CFR 50.109. The action removes

flexibility but does not directly impose new procedures. However, the

NRC welcomes comments on whether this action does in fact constitute a

backfit, the degree of burden imposed by the action, particularly for

licensees who have already implemented the revised standards, and on

whether in the limited matter of ``Controlled area,'' provisions for

grandfathering should be provided in the final rule to avoid such

burdens.

Revising the definition of ``Unrestricted area'' further makes

clear the NRC's intent that for purposes of radiation protection, areas

are either restricted or unrestricted. Some minor modifications to

procedures and training may be necessitated by this change.

For the change involving the term occupational exposure, the

Commission believes that some minor editorial modifications of

procedures and training will be necessary. Occupational exposure was

previously defined to include both presence in a restricted area and

activities involving exposure to radiation and/or radioactive

materials. Elimination of the reference to restricted areas will not

change the scope of applicability of the term occupational dose for

most licensees' employees. Furthermore, this change as it relates to

doses to members of the public, makes it clear that doses to members of

the public must remain within the limits for members of the public,

even if they are present within a restricted area. This distinction may

result in some minor corrections to procedures and administrative

control levels. However, it should be noted that licensees have

controlled and continue to control the exposure of these individuals to

small fractions of the public dose limit. Thus, there should be no

significant change necessary in licensee activities.

The conforming change to 10 CFR part 19 is minor and will affect

only a small number of licensees and will have a negligible impact. For

the modification of the training requirements to match the definition

of occupational exposure, the Commission believes that licensees will

need to make relatively minor modifications to training procedures to

reflect the new definition. Training remains ``commensurate with

potential radiological health protection problems'' and, thus, the

scope of the training activities is not anticipated to require

modification. The Commission also believes that any small incremental

increase in burden of additional occupationally exposed individuals

requiring training will be offset by the reduction in burden inherent

in the fact that members of the public entering a restricted area will

no longer be required to be trained in accordance with the provisions

of 10 CFR part 19.

The addition to 10 CFR part 20 of a requirement to notify

individual workers and individual members of the public of exposures in

excess of the dose limits is not considered to impose any additional

burden on licensees.3 The addition would make clear in 10 CFR part

20, where such a requirement would normally be expected, that when

existing reporting requirements would result in reporting exposure

information on an identified individual member of the public to NRC,

then the identified individual would receive a report on his or her

exposure.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\See also 10 CFR 19.13(d) (When a licensee is required to

report to the Commission any exposure of an individual to radiation

or radioactive material, the licensee must also provide the

individual a report on their exposure data.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The impact of these proposed rule changes on materials licensees is

considered to be minimal. The NRC believes that these changes will

provide additional clarity when implementing the revised 10 CFR part 20

and will not have an adverse impact on the health and safety of workers

or the public. Removing the implied option to establish controlled

areas for radiation protection purposes, and simplifying the definition

and administration of occupational dose will require minimal changes in

procedures and in some cases may even involve a net reduction in

burden. Licensees continue to have the option to control access to

areas for reasons other than radiological protection. Licensees who

have already written procedures including provisions for controlled

areas for radiation protection purposes would have the option to

request exemptions. Materials licensees, particularly those who have

already implemented the new regulations, are invited to comment on

whether or not the proposed changes impose significant burden.

Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability

The NRC 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 option of establishing access control over an area owned by a

licensee for reasons of security, for example, exists whether or not

the term ``Controlled area'' is specifically defined in 10 CFR part 20.

The provision for controlled areas in the rule is not a requirement.

Deleting the term ``Controlled area'' from the rule is not expected to

result in a significant change in the number of areas to be controlled

or in an increase in exposure to any member of the public. Public

access to licensee owned facilities and land is expected to remain

unchanged as a result of this amendment. No other environmental impact

or benefit is associated with the ``Controlled area'' provision.

Changing the definition of ``Occupational dose'' to make it clear

that individuals whose assigned duties involve exposure to radiation

and radioactivity are subject to radiation protection procedures

associated with occupational exposure and that members of the public

cannot be permitted to receive doses that exceed public dose limits

just by entering a restricted area is considered a benefit with no

environmental impact. This change would have no effect on the type or

quantity of material released into the environment and, if anything,

would make it less likely for members of the public to be exposed to

more than public dose limits.

Revising the definition of ``Unrestricted area'' to make it clear

that for purposes of radiation protection, areas are either restricted

or unrestricted, has no perceived environmental impact.

Amending the radiation protection training requirements to clarify

that they apply to individuals who in the course of employment are

potentially exposed to radiation and/or to radioactive material,

regardless of whether they may or may not be within a restricted area,

will result in no impact on the environment.

Adding Sec. 20.2205 to part 20, which would clearly restore the

Commission's policy that individual workers and individual members of

the public are notified, whenever NRC is notified, that they have been

exposed to radiation or radioactive material in excess of the dose

limits, will have no impact on the environment.

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

finding of no significant impact are available from Alan K. Roecklein,

U.S. NRC, 5650 Nicholson Lane, Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 492-3740.

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

This proposed rule does not contain a new or amended information

collection requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing requirements were approved by the

Office of Management and Budget, approval numbers 3150-0044, 3150-0014,

3150-0005, and 3150-0006.

Regulatory Analysis

The NRC has prepared a draft regulatory analysis on this proposed

regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the

alternatives considered by the NRC. 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 Alan K. Roecklein, U.S. NRC, 5640 Nicholson Lane,

Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 492-3740.

The NRC 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

Based upon the information available at this stage of the

rulemaking proceeding and in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility

Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the NRC certifies that, if promulgated, this rule

will not have a significant economic impact upon a substantial number

of small entities. The proposed amendments would apply to all NRC and

Agreement State licensees. Because these amendments only clarify,

restore, and conform existing requirements to the 1991 version of part

20, they are considered to have no significant economic impact on any

large or small entities.

However, the NRC is seeking comments and suggested modifications

because of the widely differing conditions under which small licensees

operate. Any small entity subject to this proposed regulation which

determines that, because of its size, it is likely to bear a

disproportionate adverse economic impact should notify the NRC of this

in a comment that indicates--

(a) The licensee's size in terms of annual income or revenue,

number of employees and, if the licensee is a treatment center, the

number of beds and patients treated annually;

(b) How the proposed regulation would result in a significant

economic burden upon the licensee as compared to that on a larger

licensee;

(c) How the proposed regulations could be modified to take into

account the licensee's differing needs or capabilities;

(d) The benefits that would be gained or the detriments that would

be avoided by the licensee if the proposed regulation was modified as

suggested by the commenter; and

(e) How the regulation, as modified, would still adequately protect

the public health and safety.

Backfit Analysis

Because 10 CFR parts 19 and 20 apply to all NRC licensees, any

proposed changes to these parts must be evaluated to determine if these

changes constitute backfitting for reactor licensees such that the

provisions of 10 CFR 50.109, ``Backfitting,'' apply. The following

discussion addresses that evaluation.

The proposed rule consists of five changes: (1) Deletion of the

definition and use of the term ``Controlled area,'' (2) deletion of the

phrase ``in a restricted area or'' contained in the definition of

occupational dose, (3) revising the definition of ``Unrestricted

area,'' (4) modification of the training requirement contained in 10

CFR 19.12, and (5) restoring a requirement that individuals members of

the public be notified when they are identified in reports to NRC on

exposures in excess of the limits.

The deletion of the definition of controlled area is a corrective

change. The term was originally added with the 1991 revision of part 20

to acknowledge the need for licensees to control access to areas for

purposes other than radiation protection. The use of the term was not

intended to be mandatory. Numerous questions from licensees regarding

implementing Controlled areas have arisen. Since the staff believes

that the use of a controlled area has no radiation protection function

other than potential use in estimating the occupancy time for

demonstrating compliance with the 100 mrem/year limit, it is being

proposed that the term be deleted from part 20.

For those reactor licensees who have already formally implemented

the revised standards or who have a need for the additional flexibility

afforded by the use of the concept of controlled area for purposes of

radiological protection, the provisions for exemptions from the NRC's

regulations provide an avenue of relief. The NRC currently believes

that the elimination of the concept of ``Controlled area'' will have

such a small impact on most power reactor licensees that it does not

constitute a backfit as envisioned by 10 CFR 50.109. The action removes

flexibility but does not directly impose new procedures. However, the

NRC welcomes comments on whether this action does in fact constitute a

backfit, the degree of burden imposed by the action, particularly for

licensees who have already implemented the revised 10 CFR part 20, and

on whether in the limited matter of ``Controlled area'' provisions for

grandfathering should be provided in the final rule to avoid such

burdens.

The deletion of the phrase ``in a restricted area or,'' contained

in the definition of occupational dose is to ensure that the

Commission's intent to apply the dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1301 to

members of the public regardless of their physical location, is

properly implemented. Currently, only workers are subject to the higher

occupational dose limits and just because a member of the public is

permitted entry into a restricted area does not mean that he or she

should be allowed to receive an occupational dose and exceed the public

dose limit. For this reason, the reference to a restricted area is

being removed from the definition of occupational dose.

Revising the definition of ``Unrestricted area,'' would make the

current staff position clear that for purposes of radiation protection,

areas are either restricted or unrestricted. This change is consistent

with the former 10 CFR part 20 and conforms to removing ``Controlled

area'' from the rule.

The change to 10 CFR 19.12 will be consistent with the proposed

revised definition of occupational exposure. Since occupational dose is

to be based upon the individual's activities involving radiation and/or

radioactive materials, rather than the location of the work (e.g.,

restricted area), a conforming change in part 19 is needed to ensure

that workers who receive an occupational dose are appropriately trained

regardless of the physical location where the work is performed. This

is also needed so that members of the public, such as delivery persons,

who occasionally enter a restricted area will not be required to

receive occupational training merely because they entered a restricted

area when their potential exposures do not exceed the 1 Msv (100 mrem)

public dose limit and their activities, therefore, would not subject

them to any significant risk.

The NRC staff believes that the impact of the change to 10 CFR

19.12 is negligible for 10 CFR part 50 licensees, given that the

expected numbers of additional occupationally exposed individuals

requiring training is small relative to the number of workers already

receiving training at these facilities. The NRC staff also believes

that these licensees have been providing training to these individuals,

even though not specifically required by the regulations.

The addition of 10 CFR 20.2205, ``Reports to individuals of

exceeding dose limits'' is considered to be the restoration of a

previous requirement. Section 20.409(b) of part 20 requires licensees

to notify an individual worker or member of the public whenever a

report to the NRC is required regarding an exposure of the identified

individual. This requirement was inadvertently omitted from the revised

standards. Although few incidents occur that involved exposure of a

member of the public in excess of dose limits, restoring this provision

to part 20 will ensure that licensees are aware of their obligation to

notify the individual if, and when, they are required to submit a

report to NRC of an occurrence that identifies that individual as

having received an exposure.

The Commission believes that these proposed changes to 10 CFR part

20 will have some, albeit minor, impacts on reactor licensees.

Licensees who have already implemented the revised standards, or who

have written procedures to do so, will need to revise those procedures

to reflect the proposed changes if promulgated. Benefits such as

simplifying the use of restricted and unrestricted area designation,

making it clear that only workers can receive occupational dose, tying

training requirements to the potential to receive occupational exposure

and ensuring that overexposed individuals are notified, are considered

by the Commission to far outweigh the impacts. However, these benefits

are qualitative in nature, and are expressed in terms of reduced

uncertainty in regulatory requirements, clarity of regulatory intent,

and consistency of regulatory approach. Thus the NRC believes that the

modifications proposed are not backfits. However, the NRC invites

comments from affected licensees on whether these proposed changes

impose significant burdens and whether or not the actions constitute a

backfit.

List of Subjects

10 CFR Part 19

Criminal penalties, Environmental protection, Nuclear materials,

Nuclear power plants and reactors, Occupational safety and health,

Packaging and containers, Radiation protection, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Sex discrimination.

10 CFR Part 20

Byproduct material, Licensed material, Nuclear materials, Nuclear

power plants and reactors, Occupational safety and health, Packaging

and containers, Penalty, Radiation protection, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Source material, Special nuclear material,

Waste treatment and disposal.

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 amendment to 10 CFR parts 19 and 20.

PART 19--NOTICES, INSTRUCTIONS AND REPORTS TO WORKERS: INSPECTION

AND INVESTIGATION

1. The authority citation for part 19 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 53, 63, 81, 103, 104, 161, 186, 68 Stat. 930,

933, 935, 936, 937, 948, 955, as amended, secs. 234, 88 Stat. 444,

as amended (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2093, 2111, 2133, 2134, 2201, 2236,

2282); secs. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841). Public

Law 95-601, secs. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 (41 U.S.C. 5851).

2. Section 19.12 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 19.12 Instructions to workers.

(a) All individuals who in the course of employment in which the

individuals' assigned duties involve the potential for exposure to

radiation and/or radioactive material shall be--

(1) Kept informed of the storage, transfer, or use of radiation

and/or radioactive material;

(2) Instructed in the health protection problems associated with

exposure to radiation and/or radioactive material, in precautions or

procedures to minimize exposure, and in the purposes and functions of

protective devices employed;

(3) Instructed in, and required to observe, to the extent within

the workers control, the applicable provisions of Commission

regulations and licenses for the protection of personnel from exposures

to radiation and/or radioactive material;

(4) Instructed of their responsibility to report promptly to the

licensee any condition which may lead to or cause a violation of

Commission regulations and licenses or unnecessary exposure to

radiation and/or radioactive material;

(5) Instructed in the appropriate response to warnings made in the

event of any unusual occurrence or malfunction that may involve

exposure to radiation and/or radioactive material; and

(6) Advised as to the radiation exposure reports which workers may

request pursuant to Sec. 19.13.

(b) The extent of these instructions must be commensurate with

potential radiological health protection problems present in the

workplace.

PART 20--STANDARDS FOR PROTECTION AGAINST RADIATION

3. The authority citation for part 20 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 53, 63, 65, 81, 103, 104, 161, 182, 186, 68

Stat. 930, 933, 935, 936, 937, 948, 953, 955, as amended (42 U.S.C.

2073, 2093, 2095, 2111, 2133, 2134, 2201, 2232, 2236, 2282); sec.

201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42

U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846).

Sec. 20.408 also issued under secs. 135, 141, Public Law 97-425,

96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161).

4. In Sec. 20.1003, remove the definition ``Controlled area.''

5. In Sec. 20.1003, the definitions of ``Member of the public,''

``Occupational dose,'' ``Public dose,'' and ``Unrestricted area'' are

revised to read as follows:

Sec. 20.1003 Definitions.

* * * * *

Member of the public means any individual except when that

individual is receiving an occupational dose.

* * * * *

Occupational dose means the dose received by an individual in the

course of employment in which the individual's assigned duties involve

exposure to radiation and/or to radioactive material from licensed and

unlicensed sources of radiation, whether in the possession of the

licensee or other person. Occupational dose does not include dose

received from background radiation, as a patient from medical

practices, from voluntary participation in medical research programs,

or as a member of the public.

* * * * *

Public dose means the dose received by a member of the public from

exposure to radiation and/or radioactive material released by a

licensee, or to any other source of radiation under the control of a

licensee. It does not include occupational dose or doses received from

background radiation, as a patient from medical practices, or from

voluntary participation in medical research programs.

* * * * *

Unrestricted area means any area that is not a restricted area.

* * * * *

6. In Sec. 20.1301 paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 20.1301 Dose limits for individual members of the public.

* * * * *

(b) If the licensee permits members of the public to have access to

restricted areas, the limits for members of the public continue to

apply to those individuals.

* * * * *

7. In Sec. 20.1302 paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 20.1302 Compliance with dose limits for individual members of the

public.

(a) The licensee shall make or cause to be made, as appropriate,

surveys of radiation levels in unrestricted areas and radioactive

materials in effluents released to unrestricted areas to demonstrate

compliance with the dose limits for individual members of the public in

Sec. 20.1301.

* * * * *

8. Section 20.1801 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 20.1801 Security of stored material.

The licensee shall secure from unauthorized removal or access

licensed materials that are stored in unrestricted areas.

9. Section 20.1802 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 20.1802 Control of material not in storage.

The licensee shall control and maintain constant surveillance of

licensed material that is in an unrestricted area and that is not in

storage.

10. In Sec. 20.2104 the introductory text of paragraph (a) is

revised to read as follows:

Sec. 20.2104 Determination of prior occupational dose.

(a) For each individual who is likely to receive, in a year, an

occupational dose requiring monitoring pursuant to Sec. 20.1502 the

licensee shall--

* * * * *

11. Section Sec. 20.2205 is added as follows:

Sec. 20.2205 Reports to individuals of exceeding dose limits.

When a licensee is required, pursuant to the provisions of

Secs. 20.2203, 20.2204, or 20.2206, to report to the Commission any

exposure of an identified individual worker or member of the public to

radiation or radioactive material, the licensee shall also provide to

the individual, a written report on his or her exposure data included

therein. This report must be transmitted at a time no later than the

transmittal to the Commission.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of January, 1994.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

James M. Taylor,

Executive Director for Operations.

[FR Doc. 94-2394 Filed 2-2-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P