[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 69 (Monday, April 12, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17506-17510]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-9035]



[[Page 17506]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 40

RIN 3150-AD65


Radiological Criteria for License Termination of Uranium Recovery 
Facilities

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its 
regulations regarding decommissioning of licensed thorium mills and 
uranium recovery facilities to provide specific radiological criteria 
for the decommissioning of lands and structures. This final rule uses 
the existing soil radium standard to derive a dose criterion (benchmark 
approach) for the cleanup of byproduct material other than radium in 
soil and for the cleanup of surface activity on structures to be 
released for unrestricted use. This final rule is intended to provide a 
clear and consistent regulatory basis for determining the extent to 
which lands and structures can be considered to be decommissioned.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation becomes effective on June 11, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Cardile, telephone: (301) 415-
6185; e-mail: [email protected]; or Elaine Brummett, telephone: (301) 415-
6606, e-mail: [email protected], Office of Nuclear Material Safety and 
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Introduction
    II. Background
    III. Summary of Public Comments and Responses to Comments
    IV. Agreement State Compatibility
    V. Final Environmental Assessment: Availability
    VI. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
    VII. Regulatory Analysis
    VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
    IX. Backfit Analysis
    X. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
    XI. Criminal Penalties

I. Introduction

    The NRC is amending its regulations regarding decommissioning of 
licensed thorium mills and uranium recovery (UR) facilities 
(conventional uranium mills and uranium extraction processes such as in 
situ leach (ISL) facilities) to provide radiological criteria for the 
decommissioning of lands and structures. These criteria apply to the 
decommissioning of licensed UR facilities subject to the NRC's 
jurisdiction and will also apply to thorium mills if any become 
licensed in the future. The criteria apply to decommissioning of UR 
facilities that operate through their normal lifetime and to those that 
may be shut down prematurely. The NRC will apply these criteria in 
determining the adequacy of remediation of residual radionuclides 
resulting from the possession or use of byproduct material.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As defined in 10 CFR Part 40, byproduct material is the 
tailings or wastes produced by the extraction of uranium or thorium 
from any ore processed primarily for its source material content, 
including discrete surface wastes resulting from uranium solution 
extraction processes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The intent of this rulemaking is to provide a clear and consistent 
regulatory basis for determining the extent to which lands and 
structures at UR facilities must be remediated before decommissioning 
of a site can be considered complete and the license terminated. The 
NRC has previously applied site release criteria for decommissioning on 
a site-specific basis using existing guidance for surface activity and 
radionuclides other than radium in soil. The NRC believes that 
inclusion of criteria in the regulations will result in more efficient 
and consistent licensing actions related to site remediation 
activities.

II. Background

    On August 22, 1994 (59 FR 43200), the NRC published a proposed rule 
to amend 10 CFR Part 20 of its regulations ``Standards for Protection 
Against Radiation'' to include radiological criteria for license 
termination as subpart E. The proposed rule applied to uranium mills 
and other NRC-licensed facilities, but did not apply to mill tailings 
or to soil radium cleanup at mills because they are regulated under 10 
CFR Part 40, Appendix A.
    On July 21, 1997 (62 FR 39058), the NRC published a final rule that 
codified radiological criteria for license termination for NRC 
licensees, but excluded UR facilities. The NRC excluded UR facilities 
from the scope of the final cleanup rule to allow further consideration 
of the issues unique to the decommissioning of these facilities. These 
unique issues include the existing regulatory framework for UR 
facilities and the nature of contamination at UR facilities, both of 
which are discussed below.
    Under the existing regulatory framework for UR facilities, the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the authority to set cleanup 
standards for uranium and thorium mills and, based on that authority, 
issued regulations in 40 CFR Part 192 that contain some decommissioning 
criteria for these facilities. NRC's regulations in 10 CFR Part 40, 
Appendix A, Criterion 6(6), conform to EPA's standards for radium in 
soil. Appendix A also provides ground-water protection criteria.
    Therefore, this rulemaking addresses only the radiological criteria 
for decommissioning of lands and structures. The rule only applies to 
those UR facilities that do not have an approved decommissioning plan 
for buildings and soil when the rule becomes effective. The sites with 
approved decommissioning plans may request an amendment to their 
license to adopt the criteria of this rule after the revision to 
Criterion 6(6) is promulgated.
    The applicable cleanup standards for soil radium in 10 CFR Part 40, 
Appendix A, Criterion 6(6), address the main contaminant at uranium 
mills in the large areas where windblown contamination from the 
tailings pile has occurred, and to a lesser extent, at ISLs in holding/
settling ponds and process or bleed solution spills. These standards 
require that the concentration of radium (Ra-226 at UR facilities, Ra-
228 at thorium mills) not exceed the background level by more than 5 
pCi/g (0.19 Bq/g) in the first 15 cm (6 inches) of soil and 15 pCi/g 
(0.56 Bq/g) for every subsequent 15 cm (6 inch) layer. However, in 
other mill and ISL site areas proximate to locations where radium 
contamination exists (e.g., under/around the mill/process building, in 
a yellow cake storage area, and under/around an ore crusher), uranium 
(U-nat) is the radionuclide of concern. At least one mill site must 
also address soil cleanup of thorium (Th-230, the parent of Ra-226, is 
usually in approximate equilibrium (same activity concentration) with 
Ra-226) because thorium is more mobile in the acidic milling solutions 
and leaches farther into the ground than the radium under raffinate 
ponds and heap leach pads. Because 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A, does not 
have cleanup standards for surface activity or for soil contamination 
from radionuclides other than radium, NRC guidance documents have been 
the source of cleanup criteria for residual uranium, thorium, and 
building surface activity.
    An additional difficulty for remediation of UR facilities is that 
the residual radionuclides to be addressed in the site decommissioning 
are also present in the surrounding background soil in elevated and 
widely variable concentrations. Some mill sites even have uranium mine 
pits and/or piles of

[[Page 17507]]

overburden soil containing low-grade ore on or adjacent to the areas to 
be remediated. This complicates the determination of background values 
and limits the ability of the licensee to distinguish residual 
radioactivity from naturally occurring (in-situ) radioactivity.
    To allow for consideration of these issues, the NRC also published, 
on July 21, 1997 (62 FR 39093), a request for additional comments on 
regulatory options for decommissioning of UR facilities. Included as 
part of the request was a discussion of an option to codify a dose 
objective for radionuclides other than radium (uranium and thorium) at 
UR facilities consistent with the radium cleanup standard. Under this 
approach, UR facilities would use the dose, excluding radon, from 
radium at the cleanup standard in existing 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A, 
Criterion 6(6), as a benchmark for the cleanup of building surface 
activity and radionuclides other than radium in soil. Commenters were 
requested to provide input on options for decommissioning and, 
specifically, on the benchmark approach.
    Use of the benchmark approach would provide for a common dose 
criterion across a UR site for those areas contaminated with radium and 
for those areas contaminated with other radionuclides.
    The radium dose benchmark approach would require UR licensees 
subject to the rule to calculate the potential total effective dose 
equivalent to the average member of the critical group for the site 
that would result from the radium standard within 1000 years, based 
upon site-specific parameters. These licensees would be required to 
provide justification for the models and parameters selected in the 
dose calculations. The dose from the 5 pCi/g (0.19 Bq/g) radium 
standard would be applicable for most of the site contamination. 
Licensees would then remediate the site such that the residual 
radionuclides (byproduct material) remaining on the site that are 
distinguishable from background would not result in a dose that is 
greater than that which would result from the radium soil standard. The 
radionuclides of concern are uranium and thorium, because it is assumed 
that the progeny of Ra-226 are at acceptable levels when the radium 
standard is achieved. Licensees would also be required to demonstrate 
that doses were ``as low as is reasonably achievable'' (ALARA). In the 
unlikely event that a site benchmark dose (before application of ALARA) 
exceeds 100 mrem/yr (1 mSv/yr), the NRC staff would consult with the 
Commission before approving such a benchmark dose.

III. Summary of Public Comments and Responses to Comments

    Comments received on the 1994 proposed rule for 10 CFR Part 20 
subpart E were summarized in NUREG/CR-6353 and in the final rule notice 
(62 FR 39058, July 21, 1997). The eleven responses (nine commenters) to 
the July 21, 1997, request for additional comments on radiological 
criteria for UR facilities are addressed here.

A. Comments on Approach to the Criteria

    One commenter indicated that the standards should be technically-
based, protective of human health, and based on a substantial fraction 
of the 100 mrem/yr (1 mSv/yr) public dose limit. The use of dose-
objective standards was encouraged. Evaluation of radon and thoron 
exposure was considered essential. This commenter also pointed out that 
the benchmark approach would codify a different dose limit for each 
facility.
    The EPA commented that the soil radium standard of 5 pCi/g (0.19 
Bq/g) is consistent with the minimally acceptable dose limit of 15 
mrem/yr (0.15 mSv/yr) for the residential scenario, and that for other 
land use scenarios, the cleanup standards are more stringent for Ra-
226, Ra-228, Th-232, and Th-230. The EPA also cautioned that a dose 
limit for uranium cleanup should not exceed 15 mrem/yr (0.15 mSv/yr).
    A third commenter stated that the proposed rule is not acceptable 
because doses resulting from the benchmark approach could exceed 100 
mrem/yr; NRC's existing guidance on cleanup of uranium, thorium, and 
surface activity should be used to set the minimum requirements; the 
expected dose from the radium standard should be clarified; the radon 
dose should be included in demonstrating compliance; and the time frame 
for dose modeling should be 10,000 years. The commenter also indicated 
that the proposed approach seems to allow a total dose of twice the 
radium dose; and that if more types of areas are to be included than 
those indicated in the proposal, then the enlargement of scope would 
require additional notice and review.
    Six other commenters supported the Ra-226 benchmark dose approach 
for cleanup of other radionuclides such as U-nat, Th-230, and Th-232. 
These commenters indicated that the existing regulatory framework is 
appropriate and provides for flexibility to allow optimum tailings 
disposal on a site-specific basis. One of these commenters also pointed 
out that uranium mill sites will be turned over to the custodial care 
of the Department of Energy (DOE) or the State for long-term care, 
effectively eliminating substantial portions of these sites from the 
public exposure pathways. In addition, some of the vicinity properties 
remediated with neighboring abandoned mills (under the DOE's's Uranium 
Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project) have deposits of contamination 
(Ra-226, Th-230, or U-nat) above the limits remaining under the 
supplemental standards provisions of 40 CFR 192.21.
    A. Response: The NRC agrees with the need to develop regulations 
that are protective of public health and safety with regard to 
decommissioning of UR facilities. NRC has previously addressed 
considerations related to radioactivity and dose to the public, public 
health aspects, fraction of the 100 mrem/yr (1 mSv/yr) dose, and the 
rationale for excluding the radon dose in Sections A.2.2.1, A.2.2.2, 
and F.6 of the July 21,1997, Federal Register notice (62 FR at 39060-64 
and 39082) for the final rule for 10 CFR Part 20, subpart E; those 
discussions remain applicable to this final rulemaking.
    As discussed above, the UR facilities have large areas contaminated 
with radium in soils where the existing radium standard is applied. The 
NRC believes that it is important to promulgate cleanup standards for 
other residual radionuclides that are consistent with the radium 
cleanup standards. Use of such an approach would result in a common 
dose criterion across an entire UR site, both for those areas 
contaminated with radium and for those areas contaminated with uranium 
and thorium. As noted above, the 5 pCi/g radium standard was 
promulgated by EPA for UR sites. The 5 pCi/g radium value has also been 
recommended as an exemption level by the Board of Directors of the 
Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors (October 1998) for 
the Suggested State Regulations on technologically enhanced naturally 
occurring radioactive materials.
    The NRC staff's preliminary dose modeling, using realistic 
parameter values and the RESRAD code, indicates that at typical UR 
facilities, where the background radiation results in doses of over 200 
mrem/yr (2.0 mSv/yr), the Ra-226 standard of 5 pCi/g (0.19 Bq/g) could 
typically result in a potential peak annual dose on the order of 20 to 
35 mrem/yr (0.2 to 0.35 mSv/yr) to the average member of the critical 
group. Although it is possible that some site-

[[Page 17508]]

specific parameter values and subsurface contamination could result in 
a higher benchmark dose than that estimated by the staff for the 
various scenarios, the staff has high confidence that a site-specific 
dose using the benchmark approach will typically be a small fraction of 
100 mrem/yr (1 mSv/yr), and in all cases will not exceed 100 mrem/yr (1 
mSv/yr). The rule also requires licensee's to demonstrate that doses 
are ALARA which should result in a potential dose of less than 25 mrem/
yr (0.2 mSv/yr) from the residual Ra-226 on the remediated site for 
most sites. Therefore, the potential health risk should be similar to 
the NRC dose limit established for other facilities in Part 20, subpart 
E, and approximate the level suggested in the EPA comment.
    The radium benchmark dose modeling results are greater than the 5 
pCi/g (0.19 Bq/g) radium modeling results reported by the EPA. The main 
reason for the difference in results is that the EPA modeled a much 
smaller area of contamination than that used by NRC staff (100 m\2\ 
versus 404,687 m\2\). Also, EPA modeled a much smaller fraction of time 
an individual would spend outdoors (0.02 versus 0.25) and used a less 
conservative root depth value (0.9 versus 0.25 meters) which generally 
decreases the calculated potential dose. What is not factored into the 
dose modeling is the low probability of anyone constructing a house or 
growing a large garden on the areas of residual contamination at these 
facilities. The UR facilities are in semi-arid (7-15 inches (18-39 cm) 
annual precipitation), sparsely populated areas (1-13 persons/mile\2\ 
(0.4-5 persons/km\2\)) where mining and grazing (3 cows/acre (1 cow/
1348 m\2\)) are the main land uses.
    The existing regulatory framework does not provide criteria for the 
cleanup of radionuclides other than radium in soil. Also, the existing 
guidance does not provide dose criteria, so additional criteria are 
warranted. In areas where there is more than one residual radionuclide, 
the benchmark dose would apply to the sum of all radionuclides present 
in that area (i.e., radium, uranium, thorium, etc.). This is indicated 
in the rule text, and in draft guidance for implementation of the 
benchmark approach, where it is stated that, for each 100 m2 
area, the unity rule will apply such that the sum of the ratios for 
each radionuclide of the concentration present to the concentration 
limit may not exceed ``1'' (i.e., unity). The rule text and guidance 
also stipulate that the total effective dose equivalent limit is based 
on the peak annual dose within a 1000 year period to the average member 
of the critical group. This time frame is in keeping with the EPA 
regulatory time frame for these facilities (40 CFR Part 192).
    Only portions of uranium mill sites and no portion of ISL 
facilities are anticipated to be turned over to the custodial care of 
Government entities. The radium standard applies to all areas of a site 
except the disposal cell, regardless of future use. The NRC staff plans 
a similar approach for the criteria for other radionuclides. The 
restricted use of areas that will be in perpetual custodial care could 
be considered under the ALARA provision, if cleanup is difficult or 
expensive in these areas.

B. Radionuclides at UR Sites are Naturally Occurring and of Variable 
Concentration in Nature

    Several commenters indicated that the residual radionuclides at UR 
sites (uranium, thorium, radium) are naturally occurring in the local 
environment and that there is significant variability in soil 
background concentrations of these radionuclides, in particular at UR 
facilities where uranium pit mines or mineral outcrops exist. This 
leads to variability in potential dose such that the 25 mrem/yr (0.25 
mSv/yr) dose in Part 20 subpart E would be indiscernible in the natural 
variability of background at a UR site. Any concentration standard must 
account for the significant variability in background and state that 
the limits are for ``concentrations above background'' at the different 
areas of the site. Also, two commenters indicated that a statistical 
approach, not just an average value, should be used to determine the 
background values for a site.
    It was also mentioned that measurement of U-238 and Th-230 at 
levels above background, which result in an annual dose to residents of 
25 mrem (0.25 mSv), would not be possible using reasonably available 
field techniques and that the additional cost of laboratory analyses to 
demonstrate compliance could be $100,000 per acre.
    Several commenters stated that there is no reliable way to 
distinguish natural (in situ) ore material from processed (licensed) 
ore. A related concern was that decommissioning standards for UR 
facilities must not regulate mining activities and the associated ore 
material that may be present at UR sites.
    B. Response: As noted above in Section II, and as described in the 
rule implementation guidance, the radionuclide dose limit is applied to 
the level of licensed (byproduct) material distinguishable from 
background. Site cleanup guidance indicates that background values 
should be based on areas with characteristics similar to the 
contaminated area(s) and that distinct areas of the site could have 
different background values. Statistical approaches, such as those 
discussed in the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation 
Manual (NUREG-1575, 1997), will be considered.
    Field measurements for soil U-nat and Th-230 in general are 
difficult and not just in the concentration equivalent of 25 mrem/yr 
(0.25 mSv/yr). Laboratory measurements are practical because site-
specific dose modeling provides derived concentration limits for U-nat 
and Th-230 that can exceed current guideline values. For most sites, 
cleanup of soil U-nat and Th-230 would involve less than an acre (4,047 
m2). Therefore, the costs of sampling and of laboratory 
analysis for these radionuclides would be a minor part of the 
decommissioning costs.
    Distinguishing in situ ore from processed ore material can be a 
problem on some sites and is addressed in the guidance. The NRC will 
regulate only NRC-licensed materials remaining at UR facilities, not in 
situ ore or mine waste. In determining compliance with the new 
regulation, the NRC staff will consider 10 CFR 40.42 (j) and (k) that 
state, in part, that as a final step in decommissioning, the licensee 
shall demonstrate that the site is suitable for release and that 
reasonable effort has been made to eliminate residual radioactive 
contamination.

C. Considerations of Risks, Costs, and Benefits of Cleanup

    Several commenters pointed out that the actual risk of excavating 
and moving dirt (construction and transport accident risks that are 
actuarial) must be compared against health risks of radiation exposure 
which have not been demonstrated below 10 rem/yr (0.1 Sv/yr). The risk 
of cleaning up areas to below regional background levels would likely 
result in net human health and environmental detriment. Lowering of the 
current radium standard for uranium and thorium could cause undue 
economic burden to industry and the Government based on the need for 
cleanup of large soil areas and would not result in significant (if 
any) risk reduction.
    At ISL facilities, lowering dose criteria could result in large 
areas retroactively becoming disposal areas requiring substantial and 
costly cleanup, and could inhibit efficiency of mining if irrigation 
practices with restoration fluids were effectively prohibited.

[[Page 17509]]

    C. Response: The NRC considered the risk of the cleanup work in the 
regulatory analysis. The radium standard is not lowered by the 
rulemaking; therefore, there is no undue economic burden for licensees. 
Providing a radium benchmark dose standard for U-nat and Th-230 should 
not result in significant decrease in the soil concentration allowed to 
remain, compared to current guidance.

D. Regulatory Guidance

    Several commenters offered suggestions for regulatory guidance and 
requested that the regulatory guidance implementing the standard 
include determination of background and dose modeling flexibility.
    D. Response: The NRC recognizes that there may be difficulties in 
the determination of background concentrations of radionuclides at some 
UR facility sites. The NRC staff has prepared guidance (in the form of 
evaluation criteria) on mill site cleanup in the draft Standard Review 
Plan (SRP) for reclamation plans. This draft SRP will soon be published 
for public comment. The NRC staff is preparing another chapter of this 
SRP to address the implementation of the radium benchmark dose approach 
and dose modeling flexibility for this unique set of licensees. This 
chapter will also be published as a draft for public comment before 
finalization and incorporation into the SRP.

IV. Agreement State Compatibility

    This rule will be a matter of compatibility between the NRC and the 
Agreement States, thereby providing consistency among State and Federal 
safety requirements. The final rule on radiological criteria for 
license termination for nuclear facilities issued July 21, 1997 (62 FR 
39058), was determined to be a Division 2 matter of compatibility under 
the previous Commission policy for Agreement State compatibility. As 
noted for that final rule (at 62 FR 39079), Division 2 rules address 
basic principles of radiation safety and regulatory functions. Although 
Agreement States must address these principles in their regulations, 
the use of language identical to that in NRC rules is not necessary if 
the underlying principles are the same. Also, the Agreement States may 
adopt requirements more stringent than NRC rules. Under the current NRC 
policy, Category C compatibility would be consistent with that 
indicated in 62 FR 39079, and, hence, the NRC has determined that this 
rule will be a Category C matter of compatibility.

V. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability

    The NRC has determined under the National Environmental Policy Act 
of 1969, as amended, and the regulations in Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 
51, that this rule will not be a major Federal action significantly 
affecting the quality of the human environment and, therefore, an 
environmental impact statement is not required. The final rule amends 
the NRC's regulations in 10 CFR Part 40 to include radiological dose 
criteria for decommissioning of lands and structures at UR facilities. 
The rule will affect 11 current NRC licensees. The environmental impact 
of this rule will be insignificant compared to current practice and to 
the decommissioning process in general because the areas requiring 
cleanup for residual radionuclides other than radium are small.
    The final environmental assessment and finding of no significant 
impact on which this determination is based are available for 
inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW (Lower 
Level), Washington, DC. Single copies of the environmental assessment 
and the finding of no significant environmental impact are available 
from Elaine Brummett, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mailstop T7-J9, Washington, DC 
20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6066.

VI. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

    This final rule does not contain a new or amended information 
collection requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing requirements were approved by the 
Office of Management and Budget, approval number 3150-0014.

Public Protection Notification

    If an information collection does not display a currently valid OMB 
control number, the NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to, the information collection.

VII. Regulatory Analysis

    The NRC has prepared a regulatory analysis on this final 
regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the 
alternatives considered by the NRC. The analysis is available for 
inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW (Lower 
Level), Washington, DC. Single copies of the analysis may be obtained 
from Frank Cardile, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mailstop T-C24, Washington, DC 
20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6185.

VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 
605(b), the NRC certifies that this rule, if adopted, does not have a 
significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small 
entities. The rule will affect 11 current NRC licensees and any future 
licensees who will be conducting uranium milling operations. These 
licensees are not small entities as defined in 10 CFR 2.810.

IX. Backfit Analysis

    The NRC has determined that the backfit rule, 10 CFR 50.109, does 
not apply to this final rule and therefore, a backfit analysis is not 
required for this final rule because these amendments do not involve 
reactor operations and do not involve any provisions that would impose 
backfits as defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1).

X. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    In accordance with the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996, the NRC has determined that this action is not a 
``major'' rule and has verified this determination with the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget.

XI. Criminal Penalties

    For the purposes of Section 223 of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA), the 
NRC is issuing the final rule under one or more of sections 161b, 161i, 
or 161o of the AEA. Willful violations of the rule will be subject to 
criminal enforcement.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 40

    Criminal penalties, Government contracts, Hazardous materials 
transportation, Nuclear materials, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Source material, Uranium.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of 
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization 
Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553; the NRC is adopting 
the following amendments to 10 CFR Part 40.

PART 40--DOMESTIC LICENSING OF SOURCE MATERIAL

    1. The authority citation for Part 40 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 62, 63, 64, 65, 81, 161, 182, 183, 186, 68 
Stat. 932, 933, 935, 948,

[[Page 17510]]

953, 954, 955, as amended, secs. 11e(2), 83, 84, Pub. L. 95-604, 92 
Stat. 3033, as amended, 3039, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 
U.S.C. 2014(e)(2), 2092, 2093, 2094, 2095, 2111, 2113, 2114, 2201, 
2232, 2233, 2236, 2282); sec. 274, Pub. L. 86-373, 73 Stat. 688 (42 
U.S.C. 2021); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as 
amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); sec. 275, 92 Stat. 
3021, as amended by Pub. L. 97-415, 96 Stat. 2067 (42 U.S.C. 2022); 
193, 104 Stat. 2835 as amended by Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, 
1321-349 (42 U.S.C. 2243).
    Section 40.7 also issued under Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 
2951 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Section 40.31(g) also issued under sec. 122, 
68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152). Section 40.46 also issued under sec. 
184, 68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Section 40.71 also 
issued under sec. 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2237).

    2. In 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A, Criterion 6(6), a second 
paragraph is added to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 40

* * * * *

I. Technical Criteria

* * * * *
    Criterior 6 * * *
    (6) * * *
    Byproduct material containing concentrations of radionuclides other 
than radium in soil, and surface activity on remaining structures, must 
not result in a total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) exceeding the 
dose from cleanup of radium contaminated soil to the above standard 
(benchmark dose), and must be at levels which are as low as is 
reasonably achievable. If more than one residual radionuclide is 
present in the same 100-square-meter area, the sum of the ratios for 
each radionuclide of concentration present to the concentration limit 
will not exceed ``1'' (unity). A calculation of the potential peak 
annual TEDE within 1000 years to the average member of the critical 
group that would result from applying the radium standard (not 
including radon) on the site must be submitted for approval. The use of 
decommissioning plans with benchmark doses which exceed 100 mrem/yr, 
before application of ALARA, requires the approval of the Commission 
after consideration of the recommendation of the NRC staff. This 
requirement for dose criteria does not apply to sites that have 
decommissioning plans for soil and structures approved before June 11, 
1999.
* * * * *
    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of April 1999.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 99-9035 Filed 4-9-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P