Energy Compensation Sources for Well Logging and Other Regulatory Clarifications

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

ay 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

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.

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.

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

rocess 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

inal 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

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

aft 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

h 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

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

lides 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

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

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

nly

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

s 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

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

ay 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

tion.

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

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

ng, 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

ilable 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

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

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

uded 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

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

roposed 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

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

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

ted, 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

ion, 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.

. 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.

* * * * *

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.

(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.

made within the 6 months before the transfer, the sealed

source may not be used until tested.

(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.

ec. 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].

rce.

(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.

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

* * * * *

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