P.1 

PICK-UPDATE: 3/8/2007 

BOX 10 OF 10 

Step 2: FOR ASRC INTERNAL USE 

ONLY 

(PART A of B) 

EPA DOCKET ID: 102RQ-RN 

1) INDEX 

3) 102RQ-RN-1-2 

5) 102RQ-RN-1-4 

7) 102RQ-RN-1-6 

9) 102RQ-RN-3-1 

11) 102RQ-RN-3-3 

13) 102RQ-RN-2-1-2 

15) 102RQ-RN-2-1-4 

17) 102RQ-RN-2-2-1 

19) 102RQ-RN-2-3-1 

21) 102RQ-RN-2-4-2 

23) 102RQ-RN-2-4-4 

25) 102RQ-RN-2-4-6 

27) 102RQ-RN-2-4-8 

29) 102RQ-RN-2-4-10 

31) 102RQ-RN-4-2 

33) 102RQ-RN-4-4 

35) 102RQ-RN-4-6 

37) 102RQ-RN-4-8 

39) 102RQ-RN-5-1 

Step 3: FOR ASRC INTERNAL USE 

ONLV 

CD: 

OA: / 

2) 102RQ-RN-1-1 

4) 102RQ-RN-1-3 

6) 102RQ-RN-1-5 

8) ^K)2RQ-RN-l-7> 

10) 102RQ-RN-3-2 

12) 102RQ-RN-2-1-1 

14) 102RQ-RN-2-1-3 

16) 102RQ-RN-2-1-5 

18) 102RQ-RN-2-2-2 

20) 102RQ-RN-2-4-1 

22) 102RQ-RN-2-4-3 

24) 102RQ-RN-2-4-5 

26) 102RQ-RN-2-4-7 

28) 102RQ-RN-2-4-9 

30) 102RQ-RN-4-1 

32) 102RQ-RN-4-3 

34) 102RQ-RN-4-5 

36) 102RQ-RN-4-7 

38) 102RQ-RN-4-9 

40) 102RQ-RN-5-2 

/YES// 

Step 1: FOR ASRC INTERNAL USE ONLY 

Are there more documents for this Docket in another box? 

*FNI out Continuation Sheet and go to Step 2 \_X 

Internal SFUND Box Number 35 OF 283 

Initials/Date: LDS /_3-8-2007 

NO 
P.2 

/W0.-tfA/-/- ^ 

Wednesday 

May 24, 1989 

Part II 

Environmental 

Protection Agency 

40 CFR Parts 302 and 355 

Reportable Quantity Adjustment— 

Radionuclides; Final Rules 
P.3 

22524 Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 302 

[FHL-3352—6] 

Reportable Quantity Adjustment— 

Radionuclides 

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

flCTiOM: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Sections 103(a) and 103(b) of 

the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended, 

require that persons in charge of vessels 

or facilities from which a hazardous 

substance has been released within a 

24-hour period in a quantity equal to or 

greater than its reportable quantity (RQ) 

immediately notify the National 

Response Center of the release. Section 

102(b) of CERCLA establishes RQs at 

one pound for releases of designated 

hazardous substances, except those 

substances for which RQs have been 

established pursuant to section 311(b)(4) 

of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The RQ 

for radionuclides established by 

CERCLA is one pound. 

Section 102(a) authorizes the 

Administrator of the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) to adjust RQs 

for hazardous substances and to 

designate as hazardous substances 

those substances that, when released 

into the environment, may present 

substantial danger to the public health 

or welfare or the environment. EPA 

recognizes that an RQ of one pound for 

radionuclides may not be appropriate 

because releases of much less than one 

pound of radionuclides may present a 

substantial threat to public health or 

welfare or the environment. This final 

rule adjusts the RQ for radionuclides 

established under section 102(b) and 

administratively exempts from reporting 

certain radionuclide releases for which 

reporting would serve no useful purpose. 

This RQ adjustment is intended to allow 

EPA to focus its resources on the most 

serious releases and to protect public 

health and welfare and the environment 

more effectively. 

EFFECTIVE OATE: July 24,1989. 

ADDRESSES: The toll-free telephone 

number of the National Response Center 

is 1-800/424-8802; in the Washington, 

DC metropolitan area 1-202/267-2675. 

The record supporting this rulemaking 

is available for public inspection at the 

Superfund Docket in Room 2427, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (OS240), 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 

20460 (Docket Number.l02RQ-RN). The 

docket may be inspected between 9 a.m. 

and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday. To 

review docket materials, you may make 

an appointment by calling 1-202/382-

3046. The public may copy a maximum 

of 50 pages from any regulatory docket 

al no cost. Additional copies cost $9.20 

per page. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ms. Pamela Harris, Project Officer, 

Response Standards and Criteria 

Branch, Emergency Response Division 

(WH-548B), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20460, or the RCRA/ 

Superfund Hotline, 1-800/424-9346; in 

the Washington, DC metropolitan area, 

1-202/382-3000. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

contents of today's preamble are listed 

in the following outline: 

I. Introduction. 

A. Statutory Authority. 

B. Background of this Rulemaking. 

C. Organization of the Final Rule. 

II. Coverage. 

A. Hazardous Substances Subject to this 

Final Rule. 

B. Releases Subject to this Final Rule. 

C. Regulatory Reporting Exemptions. 

D. Duplicate Reporting/Regulatory 

Consistency. 

III. Discussion of NPRM Methodology. 

A. General. 

B. Inhalation Pathway. 

C. Ingestion Pathway. 

D. Direct Exposure Pathway. 

E. Establishing the RQ. 

F. Alternative Approaches. 

G. Reporting Requirements for Mixtures of 

Radionuclides Only. 

H. Reporting Requirements for Compounds 

and Mixtures of Radionuclides and Other 

Hazardous Substances. 

IV. Summary of Supporting Analyses. 

A. Executive Order No. 12291. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act. 

I. Introduction 

A. Statutory Authority 

The Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA or Superfund) of 1980 

(Pub. L. 96-510), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq., 

as amended by the Superfund 

Amendments and Reauthorization Act 

(SARA) of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-499), 

establishes broad federal authority to 

respond to releases or threats of 

releases of hazardous substances from 

vessels and facilities. Section 101(14) of 

CERCLA defines the term "hazardous 

substances" by reference to other 

environmental statutes. Section 102 of 

CERCLA gives the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) authority to 

designate additional hazardous 

substances. Currently there are 719 

CERCLA hazardous substances. 

Section 103 of CERCLA requires the 

person in charge of a vessel or facility ' 

to notify the National Response Cei\ter 

immediately when there is a release b? 

hazardous substance in an amount 

equal to or greater than the reportable 

quantity (RQ) for that substance. As 

established by EPA in'an earlier RQ 

rulemaking (50 FR 13463, April 4,1985), a 

24-hour period is used for measuring 

whether the RQ of a substance has been 

released (i.e., only releases of an RQ or 

more within 24 hours need to be 

reported). Section 102(b) of CERCLA 

establishes RQs at one pound for 

releases of hazardous substances, 

except for those substances for which 

RQs were established pursuant to 

section 311 of the Clean Water Act 

(CWA). Section 102(a) of CERCLA 

authorizes EPA to adjust all of these 

RQs by regulation. 

A major purpose of the section 103 (a) 

and (b) notification requirements is to 

alert the appropriate government 

officials to releases of hazardous 

substances that may require a response 

to protect public health or welfare or the 

environment. EPA emphasizes that a 

hazardous substance RQ is merely a 

trigger for informing the government of a 

release so that the appropriate 

government personnel can evaluate the 

need for a response action and can 

undertake any necessary action in a 

timely fashion. Federal personnel will 

evaluate all reported releases, but will 

not necessarily initiate a response 

because the release of an RQ will not 

necessarily pose a hazard in all 

circumstances. Government personnel 

will assess each reported release on a 

case-by-case basis to determine the 

appropriate response action, if any. In 

certain limited situations.'-when direct 

reporting to the National Response 

Center is impracticable, the person in 

1

 For this final rule on radionuclides, it is 

important to consider the CERCLA definition of 

"facility" in section 101(9). A number of consumer 

products may contain (and at some point release) 

radionuclides. Because the CERCLA definition of 

"facility" specifically excludes any consumer 

product in consumer use, any releases of 

radionuclides from such products when in consumei 

use are not subject to the notification requirements 

discussed in this final rule. Examples of such 

consumer products are smoke detectors, radon 

mitigation systems (for reducing indoor radon levels 

in homes), and home water purification systems 

used to reduce radon levels irrdrinking water. Any 

smoke detector, radon mitigation system, or home 

water purification system commercially purchased 

and used by a consumer would be excluded from 

the CERCLA definition of "facility,"and thus 

radionuclide releases from such, systems would not 

be subject to this rule's notification-requirements. 
P.4 

Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 22525 

charge may report to the nearest Coast 

Guard- or EPA-predesignated On-Scene 

Coordinator (OSC). If it is not possible 

to notify the National Response Center 

or predesignated OSC immediately, 

reports may be made immediately to the 

nearest Coast Guard unit, provided that 

^the person in charge of the facility 

jtifies the National Response Center as 

soon as possible (40 CFR 300.63(b) and 

33 CFR 153.203). 

Section 103(b) of CERCLA authorizes 

EPA to seek criminal penalties from 

persons in charge of vessels or facilities 

who knowingly fail to report releases of 

hazardous substances that equal or 

exceed RQs. SARA amended section 

103(b) of CERCLA by increasing the 

maximum penalties and years of 

imprisonment for failure to report. Any 

person who, as soon as he or she knows 

of a reportable release, fails to report 

the release immediately pursuant to 

section 103(b) or who submits in such a 

notification any information that she or 

he knows to be false or misleading, 

shall, upon conviction, be fined in 

accordance with the applicable 

provisions of Title 18, United States 

Code, or imprisoned for not more than 

three years (or not more than five years 

for second and subsequent convictions), 

or both. Notifications received under 

section 103(b), or information obtained 

by exploitation of such notifications, 

cannot be used against any reporting 

person in any criminal case, except a 

prosecution for perjury or for giving a 

false statement. Section 109 of CERCLA 

authorizes EPA to assess civil penalties 

for violations of CERCLA section 103(b), 

enforced through administrative or 

judicial civil proceedings. In addition, 

section 310 of CERCLA authorizes 

citizen suits against persons who violate 

the notification requirements of section 

103(b). 

In addition to the reporting 

requirements established by CERCLA, 

section 304 of the Emergency Planning 

and Community Right-To-Know Act of 

1986 (SARA Title III) requires the owner 

or operator of certain facilities to report 

releases of CERCLA hazardous 

substances to state and local entities. 

SARA section 304 notification must be 

given as soon as the owner or operator 

of a facility has knowledge of a release 

of an RQ or more (one pound or more if 

a reporting trigger is not established by 

regulation). The notification is to be 

given to the community emergency 

coordinator for each local emergency 

planning committee for any area likely 

to be affected by the release and to the 

state commission of any state likely to 

be affected by the release. Through this 

notification, state or local officials can 

assess whether a response to the release 

is appropriate, regardless of whether the 

federal government intends to respond. 

SARA section 304 notification 

requirements apply only to releases that 

have the potential for off-site exposure 

and that are from facilities that produce, 

use, or store a "hazardous chemical," as 

defined by regulations promulgated 

under the Occupational Safety and 

Health Act of 1970 (29 CFR 1910.1200(c)) 

and by section 311 of SARA. 

' Section 325 of SARA authorizes EPA 

to seek penalties, including criminal 

penalties for willful and knowing 

violations, against facility owners and 

operators who fail to report releases of 

hazardous substances pursuant to 

section 304. In addition, SARA section 

326 authorizes citizen suits against 

facility owners and operators for failure 

to submit a follow-up emergency notice 

of the release pursuant to SARA section 

304(c). 

B. Background of this Rulemaking 

On May 25,1983, EPA proposed a rule 

(48 FR 23552) to clarify procedures for 

reporting releases and to adjust RQs for 

387 of the then 696 CERCLA hazardous 

substances. That Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM) also listed, for the 

first time, the "hazardous substances" 

designated by section 101(14) of 

CERCLA. The NPRM discussed in detail 

the CERCLA notification provisions, 

including the persons required to notify 

the National Response Center of a 

release, the substances for which 

notification is required, the types of 

releases subject to the notification 

requirements, the exemptions from these 

notification requirements, the 

methodology and criteria used to adjust 

the RQ levels, and the adjustments 

proposed under section 102 of CERCLA 

" and under section 311 of CWA. .These 

issues were discussed further in the 

preamble to a rulemaking finalizing 340 

of the 387 proposed RQs, published on 

April 4,1985 (50 FR 13456). They will be 

discussed again in this preamble only to 

the extent that EPA needs to provide 

additional explanation of these issues in 

the specific context of adjusting RQs for 

releases of radionuclides. 

On March 16,1987, EPA published an 

NPRM concerning the adjustment of 

RQs for radionuclide releases (52 FR 

8172), with the comment period ending 

on May 15,1987. A total of 28 comment 

letters were received, five of which were 

after the comment deadline, totaling 

about 150 pages. The comments 

received, together with the Agency's 

responses, are contained in the 

Responses to Comments on the Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking on the 

Adjustment of Reportable Quantities for 

Radionuclides (Responses to 

Comments), which is available for 

inspection in the Superfund Docket in 

Room 2427, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (OS-240), 401 M 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460 

(Docket Number 102RQ-RN). 

Today, the Agency is promulgating 

this final rule to adjust the RQs for all 

(approximately 1,500) radionuclides. In 

preparing the final rule, EPA has 

considered carefully all of the public 

comments submitted on the proposals 

made in the March 16,1987 NPRM. 

Section II of this preamble describes the 

radionuclides and the releases subject 

to this final rule, while Section III 

describes the NPRM methodology and 

how that methodology has been altered 

in response to comments. Section IV 

provides a summary of the analyses 

supporting the rule. 

It should be noted that other 

provisions of CERCLA may apply even 

where the statute does not require 

notification. Therefore, nothing in this 

rulemaking should be interpreted as 

reflecting Agency policy or the 

applicable law with respect toother 

provisions of CERCLA. For example, 

unless specifically exempted under 

CERCLA, a party responsible for a 

release is liable for the costs of cleaning 

up the release and for any natural 

resource damages caused by the release, 

even if the release is not subject to the 

notification requirements of sections 103 

(a) and (b). Similarly, proper reporting of 

a release in accordance with sections 

103 (a) and (b) does not preclude 

liability for cleanup costs. The fact that 

a release of a hazardous substance is 

reported properly or that it is not subject 

to the notification requirements of 

sections 103 (a) and (b) will not prevent 

EPA or other government agencies from 

taking response actions under section 

104, seeking reimbursement from 

responsible parties under section 107, or 

pursuing an enforcement action against 

responsible parties under section 106. 

Note also that this final rule does not 

affect hazardous substance reporting 

requirements imposed by other 

regulations and statutes. 

C. Organization of the Final Rule 

Today's final rule amends 40 CFR by 

revising the footnote at the end of Table 

302.4 referencing radionuclides. This 

Table 302.4 footnote now will indicate 

that the adjusted RQs for radionuclides 

are listed in Appendix B to the table, 

which has been added by this final rule. 

Section 302.5 is being amended to 

explain which RQ to use when two RQs 

are applicable to a single hazardous 

substance, one based on chemical 
22526 Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 

P.5 

toxicity and the other based on potential 

radiation hazards. In addition, § 302.6 is 

being amended to revise the method for 

determining RQs for mixtures of 

hazardous substances and to 

incorporate the notification exemptions 

established in today's rulemaking. 

Finally, § 302.6 also is being amended to 

clarify that releases of radionuclides in 

quantities that equal or exceed the 

applicable RQ are reportable regardless 

of the particle size of the released 

radionuclide. 

II. Coverage 

A. Hazardous Substances Subject, to this 

Final Rule 

Congress incorporated, in the 

definition of hazardous substances 

under section 101(14) of CERCLA, six 

lists of substances identified primarily 

under other environmental statutes. 

Radionuclides, the subject of this final 

rule, are considered a hazardous 

substance under CERCLA because EPA 

designated them generically as a 

hazardous air pollutant pursuant to 

section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

Even though the source of their listing is 

the CAA, releases of radionuclides to all 

media are covered under section 103 of 

CERCLA and the provisions of this rule. 

There are approximately 1,500 different 

radionuclides and, because the Agency 

has listed radionuclides generically as a 

hazardous air pollutant under the CAA, 

all 1,500 are considered a CERCLA 

hazardous substance. 

The final RQs being adjusted in this 

rulemaking are for radionuclides, which 

are species of atoms defined by their 

atomic number and mass. These RQs 

are applicable to all chemical and 

physical forms in which the 

radionuclides may exist. The 

radionuclide RQs also are applicable to 

all particle sizes that may be released to 

the air. The particle size of a released 

substance is a critical factor in 

determining the potential for that 

substance to cause adverse health 

effects through the inhalation pathway. 

Based in part on this fact, 40 CFR 302.6 

had specified that releases of an RQ or 

more of solid particles of antimony, 

arsenic, cadmium, and other elements 

were not reportable if the mean 

diameter of the particles released is 

larger than 100 micrometers. However, 

because radionuclides in a particle size 

greater than 100 micrometers can cause 

adverse health effects through other 

exposure pathways (e.g., direct exposure 

and ingestion), § 302.6 is being amended 

today to clarify that the radionuclide 

RQs are applicable to aU particle sizes. 

B. Releases Subject to This Final Rule 

Congress defined the term "release" 

to include within its scope virtually all 

ways that substances may enter the 

environment: 

"release" means any spilling, leaking, 

pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, 

discharging, injecting, escaping, leaching, 

dumping, or disposing into the environment 

(including the abandonment or discarding of 

barrels, containers, and other closed 

receptacles containing any hazardous 

substance or pollutant or contaminant) 

[section 101(22) as amended by section 101(c) 

of SARA).2 

Several commenters addressed the 

issue of when, under the above 

definition, radionuclides are released 

into the environment. One commenter 

asked that the Agency clarify whether 

the radiation emitted by radionuclides is 

considered a "release" per se. The 

emission of radiation from 

radionuclides, apart from the release of 

the radionuclides themselves, does not 

constitute a release under CERCLA. 

Some radionuclides may be emitted in a 

gaseous form, however, and this would 

constitute a release. The emission of a 

radionuclide in a gaseous form is 

distinct from the emission of radiation 

from a radionuclide; the latter is not 

considered a release under section 103. 

On a related issue, this commenter, as 

well as several others, stated they were 

unclear whether the stockpiling, outside 

a building, of materials containing 

radionuclides constitutes a release of 

radionuclides under CERCLA, and thus 

might be subject to the notification 

requirements. The Agency considers the 

stockpiling of an RQ of a hazardous 

substance to be a release because any 

activity that involves the placement of a 

hazardous substance into any 

unenclosed containment structure 

wherein the hazardous substance is 

exposed to the environment is 

considered a release.3 An unenclosed 

s

 A release of a radionuclide must be reported 

immediately to the National Response Center if that 

radionuclide can decay into another substance (i.e., 

a daughter product) in such a time and amount that 

an RQ or more of the daughter would be released 

within a 24-hour period after the time of release of 

the parent. 

3

 The Agency wishes to clarify that, for the 

purpose of this discussion, an unenclosed 

containment structure means any surface 

impoundment, lagoon, tank, or other holding device 

that has an open side with the contained materials 

directly exposed to the ambient environment. An 

unenclosed containment structure does not include 

industrial tanks that have vents or piping systems to 

prevent over-pressurization or to provide for 

material transfer or treatment. 

containment structure may allow the 

hazardous substance to emit, escape, or 

leach into the air, water, or soil. Thus, 

the placement of an RQ of a hazardous 

substance in an unenclosed structure 

would constitute a "release" regardless 

of whether an RQ of the substance 

actually volatilizes into the air or ". 

migrates into surrounding water or soil. ' 

This same rule applies to the placement 

of material containing radionuclides in 

tanks or other containment structures 

outside a building. If the tank or 

containment structure is not totally 

sealed off from the environment, the 

placement into the containment 

structure of an amount of a hazardous 

substance that equals or exceeds an RQ 

constitutes a reportable release. 

This same commenter argued that the 

temporary placement of raw materials 

or products containing radionuclides in 

tanks or piles at a manufacturing facility 

is not spilling, leaking, dumping, or 

disposing them into the environment 

because it is an intentional method of 

managing the substances and because 

the substances will be used. Whether 

the material stockpiled or placed in a 

tank or other containment structure is 

intended for use in an industrial process 

is irrelevant to whether that placement 

constitutes a reportable release. Under 

CERCLA, whether the hazardous 

substances are used after a release is 

not relevant for reporting purposes, 

though it might be highly relevant to the 

government's evaluation of whether it 

will respond to the release. The purpose 

of the CERCLA reporting requirements 

under section 103 is to inform 

government agencies of the release so 

that they may evaluate whether 

governmental response is appropriate 

and to assess the response measures 

taken by others (50 FR 13459, April 4, 

1985). 

One commenter argued that 

radionuclides are a hazardous 

substance under CERCLA only to the 

extent that radionuclides are a 

hazardous air pollutant under the CAA. 

Thus, this commenter argued that only 

radionuclide releases to the air, and not 

to other media, would be subject to 

CERCLA requirements. EPA disagrees 

with this logic. There is no support in 

CERCLA for the notion that anything 

designated as a CERCLA hazardous 

substance due to its listing by one or 

more of the environmental statutes 

referenced in CERCLA section 101(14) is 

.so designated only for releases 

occurring in the same medium 

addressed in the referenced statute., In 

fact, several CERCLA provisions 

indicate that the statutory authority 

extends to all media to which a 
P.6 

Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 22527 

hazardous substance can be released. 

For example, the CERCLA release 

reporting requirement in section 102(a), 

as well as the definition of "release" in 

section 101(22), both concern hazardous 

substances released into the 

"environment," which is defined in 

ection 101(8) to constitute all media. 

Furthermore, CERCLA section 102(a) 

states that the EPA Administrator "may 

determine that one single quantity shall 

be the reportable quantity for any 

hazardous substance, regardless of the 

medium into which the substance is . 

released." This authority was referenced 

in the first RQ rulemaking (48 FR 23562, 

May 25,1983) and all subsequent RQ 

rulemakings. 

Several types of releases specifically 

are excluded from the definition of 

release in CERCLA section 101(22) and 

thus do not need to be reported under 

section 103. One exclusion is for 

releases of source, byproduct, or special 

nuclear material

 4 from a nuclear 

incident

 6 subject to requirements of the 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission for 

financial protection under section 170 of 

the Atomic Energy Act (AEA). Nuclear 

reactors are the primary type of facility 

subject to AEA section 170. 

In addition, CERCLA contains 

exemptions from the notification and 

liability requirements for certain 

releases of hazardous substances. The 

exemption most likely to be of greatest 

importance for radionuclides is that for 

federally permitted releases as defined 

in section 101(10). In particular, section 

101(10)(K) exempts from reporting "any 

release of source, special nuclear, or 

byproduct material * * * in compliance 

with a legally enforceable license, 

permit, regulation, or order issued 

pursuant to the * * * [AEA]. " 

Under the AEA, the Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission is responsible 

for issuing licenses for the possession 

and use of source, byproduct, and 

special nuclear material. States who 

4

 Source material is defined as (1) natural 

uranium, thorium, or any combination thereof or (2) 

ores which contain 0.05 percent or more (by weight) 

of uranium or thorium (section ll(z) of the Atomic 

Energy Act (AEA), and Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission regulations in 10 CFR Part 40). 

Byproduct material is (1) any material made 

radioactive by exposure to radiation in the process 

of producing or using special nuclear material or (2) 

the wastes produced by the extraction or 

concentration of uranium or thorium from ore 

(section 11(e) of the AEA). Special nuclear material 

is defined as plutonium, or uranium enriched in the 

U-235 or U-233 isotope (AEA section ll(aa)). All of 

these materials are licensed by the Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission and its Agreement States. 

6

 A nuclear incident means any occurrence of 

bodily injury, sickness, disease, death, loss of or 

damage to property, or loss of use of property 

resulting from the radioactive, toxic, explosive, or 

other hazardous properties of source, special 

nuclear, or byproduct material. 

have entered into an agreement with the 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (i.e., 

Agreement States) are also authorized 

under the AEA to issue licenses for the 

possession and use of source, 

byproduct, or special nuclear material. 

Releases of source, byproduct, or special 

nuclear material in compliance with 

licenses issued by the Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission or Agreement 

States are federally permitted releases 

under CERCLA section 101(10)(K). 

Regulations issued by the Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission specifically 

exempt certain facilities from the 

Commission's licensing and regulatory 

requirements. Because of these specific 

regulatory exemptions, the Agency does 

not consider releases of source, 

byproduct, or special nuclear material 

from these exempted facilities to be 

"federally permitted" under section . 

101(10)(K), unless the exemptions apply 

to operations conducted by the 

Department of Defense or Department of 

Energy (DOE) as explained below. 

To the extent releases of source, 

byproduct, and special nuclear material 

are in accordance with licenses, permits, 

orders, or regulations issued under the 

AEA through provisions not 

administered by the Commission or its 

Agreement States, they also would be 

considered federally permitted releases. 

For example, DOE governs its radiation 

protection activities under the AEA by a 

series of internal orders. When such 

orders are issued under DOE's AEA 

authority and releases of source, 

byproduct, or special nuclear material 

are in compliance with the applicable 

order(s), these releases are federally 

permitted under section 101(10)(K). The 

Department of Defense issues 

regulations under the AEA governing 

weapons and reactors within its 

jurisdiction and EPA has issued 

regulations under the AEA for certain 

operations involving radioactive 

material (e.g., 40 CFR Parts 190,191, and 

192); releases of source, byproduct, or 

special nuclear material in compliance 

with these regulations are also federally 

permitted under section 101(10)(K). Any 

release that is an RQ or more above any 

of these federally permitted levels, 

however, would be subject to the 

CERCLA notification requirements. 

CERCLA section 101(10)(H) defines 

federally permitted releases to include 

"any emission into the air subject to a 

permit or control regulation under * * * 

section 112 * * * of the Clean Air Act." 

Pursuant to section 112 of the CAA, EPA 

has issued final standards for 

radionuclide emissions to the air as part 

of the National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs); 

These standards currently apply to the 

following source categories: (1) DOE 

facilities; (2) Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission-licensed facilities and nonDOE federal facilities (including 

facilities licensed by Agreement States); 

(3) elemental phosphorus plants; (4) 

underground uranium mines; and (5) 

licensed uranium mill tailings. Any 

release of a radionuclide to the air from 

these sources, if the release is in 

compliance with NESHAPs, is "federally 

permitted" under section 101(10){H) and 

thus exempt from CERCLA reporting. It 

is important to clarify that NESHAPs 

apply only to the emission of certain 

(not all) radionuclides. Specifically, the 

NESHAPs currently do not apply to 

emissions of radon-220, radon-222, and 

their respective decay products from the 

first two source categories noted above; 

and apply only to emissions of 

polonium-210 from elemental 

phosphorus plants.8 An airborne release 

of radionuclides not covered under 

NESHAPs is not considered federally 

permitted under section 101(10)(H). 

Furthermore, several source categories 

presently are exempted from regulation 

under NESHAPs (e.g., low energy 

accelerators not operated by DOE, coalfired boilers, and mineral extraction 

industries). Radionuclide emissions from 

these facilities exempted under 

NESHAPs also are not considered 

federally permitted under section 

101(10)(H). This issue may be relevant to 

an NPRM on federally permitted 

releases (53 FR 27268, July 19,1988). 

The Agency is currently revising the 

radionuclide NESHAPs. Until these new 

standards are finalized, the existing 

radionuclide NESHAPs as described 

above should be used in determining 

whether airborne emissions are 

federally permitted under CERCLA 

section 101(10)(H). 

The NESHAPs limits for radionuclides 

are health-based annual limits, whereas 

radionuclide RQs are reporting triggers 

based on 24-hour releases. The Agency 

will require a report if an RQ above any 

annual NESHAPs limit is released in a 

24-hour period. Some of the NESHAPs 

limits, such as those for DOE facilities 

and Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

licensees, are annual dose-equivalent 

limits (e.g., 25 millirem/year to the 

whole body). In these cases, after it is 

known that an individual near the 

facility has received more than 25 

millirem within a one-year period, any 

• The NESHAPs for underground uranium mines 

and licensed uranium mill tailings do not specify 

emission limits, but rather establish work practices 

to limit the emission of radon-222 from those types 

of facilities. 
P.7 

22528 Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 

radionuclide release that equals or 

exceeds an RQ within 24 hours must be 

reported to the National Response 

Center. This issue may also be relevant 

to an NPRM on federally permitted 

releases (53 FR 27268, July 19,1988). 

Further clarification is needed for 

releases of naturally occurring and . 

accelerator-produced radioactive 

material (NARM) and the definition of 

federally permitted releases under 

sections 101(10)(H) and 101(10)(K). Only 

air releases of NARM that are in 

compliance with NESHAPs are 

considered federally permitted. The 

AEA gives DOE broad authority to 

control its radiation-related activities 

and to protect public health and safety 

and the environment. This authority 

applies to activities involving NARM, as 

well as activities involving source, 

byproduct, and special nuclear material. 

However, because section 101(l0)(K) 

refers only to releases of source, 

byproduct, and special nuclear material, 

the only basis for exempting DOE's 

NARM releases from CERCLA's 

reporting and liability provisions is 

section 101(10)(H), which is limited only 

to airborne emissions in compliance 

with the regulations issued pursuant to 

the CAA. Furthermore, although 

Agreement States may regulate NARM, 

their authority to regulate NARM is not 

federally derived (under the AEA, the 

only authority that can be relinquished 

to states by the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission is the authority to license 

source, byproduct, and special nuclear 

material). As a result, the only NARM 

releases from Agreement State licensees 

that are considered federally permitted 

are those that comply with the 

NESHAPs applicable to that source 

category. EPA published an NPRM on 

federally permitted releases (53 FR 

27268, July 19,1988); these issues, and 

any comments received related to these 

issues, will be addressed in that 

rulemaking. 

Although the preamble to the 

proposed rule noted that EPA was 

planning to clarify the provisions of 

CERCLA sections 101(10) in a separate 

rulemaking, several commenters sought 

clarification or reassurance concerning 

the applicability to some radionuclide 

releases of the federally permitted 

release exemptions. Two commenters 

desired reassurance that releases from 

commercial nuclear reactors and power 

plants, respectively, are federally 

permitted releases and thus are exempt 

from the CERCLA notification 

requirements. EPA agrees that releases 

of source, special nuclear, or byproduct 

material that are in compliance with 

applicable federal licenses, permits, 

regulations, or orders issued pursuant to 

the AEA do not need to be reported to 

the National Responses Center. 

Additionally, releases that are not in 

compliance, and thus are not federally 

permitted, do not need to be reported 

unless they exceed the federally 

permitted level by an RQ or more. 

In addition to the statutory 

. exemptions from the RQ notification 

requirements for releases of hazardous 

substances, section 103(f)(2) of CERCLA 

provides a reduced reporting 

requirement for releases that are 

"continuous" and "stable in quantity 

and rate." Such releases need only be 

reported annually and when there is a 

statistically significant increase in the 

quantity of the hazardous substance 

released. Releases of radionuclides that 

are "continuous" and "stable in quantity 

and rate" may qualify for this reduced 

reporting provision. EPA has published 

an NPRM (53 FR 12868, April 19,1988) 

regarding continuous releases. That 

proposed regulation, rather than today's 

rule, resolve all remaining issues 

pertaining to this provision. 

One commenter stated that the 

definition of "release" did not appear to 

encompass a lost sealed source, even 

though its radioactivity may be 

hazardous. Another commenter 

suggested that radionuclides in certain 

forms or shipping containers that are 

unlikely to result in releases should be 

exempted from the RQ notification 

requirements. EPA wishes to clarify that 

a lost sealed source containing 

radionuclides ih an amount equal to or 

above an RQ constitutes a release that 

must be reported to the National 

Response Center. The reporting 

requirements triggered by the release of 

an RQ are relevant if a hazardous 

substance is released into the 

environment. Under, the CERCLA 

definition, radionuclides are released 

when they are exposed to the 

environment or when they are enclosed 

in barrels, containers, or other closed 

receptacles that are discarded, lost, or ' 

abandoned. Thus, if only the containers 

are exposed to the environment, but not 

the radionuclides that they contain, no 

report under CERCLA is necessary, 

unless those containers have been lost, 

discarded, or abandoned. Moreover, as 

discussed previously in Section II.A. of 

this preamble, the radionuclide RQs are 

applicable to all chemical and physical 

forms in which the radionuclides may 

exist. Therefore, the same RQ fbr a 

given radionuclide will apply regardless 

of whether the radionuclide exists in a 

so-called "special form" (i.e., the 

radionuclide is a single solid piece or is 

contained in a sealed capsule with at 

least one dimension greater than five 

millimeters) or a "normal form" (i.e., any 

form that has not been demonstrated to 

qualify as a special form). 

Finally, as part of the proposed rule, 

EPA sought comments on whether a 

concentration cutoff (expressed in curia 

per gram), below which the RQs for 

radionuclides would not apply, would 

be appropriate to eliminate unnecessary 

and excessive reporting. Such a cutoff 

would be similar in concept to one used 

by the Department of Transportation, 

which defines radioactive material as 

material containing greater than 0.002 

microcuries per gram. All commenters 

who addressed this issue (i.e., slightly 

over half of all commenters) favored a 

concentration cutoff. The commenters 

stated that such a cutoff would 

eliminate the need for many CERCLA 

reports involving releases that do not 

truly pose a danger to the public or the 

environment, particularly releases of 

radon from naturally occurring materials 

in large mining operations, land 

holdings, irrigation systems, and mineral 

stockpiles. 

EPA considered a cutoff because there 

may be no benefit in requiring reports of 

releases of radioactive materials in such 

low concentrations. After evaluating 

this issue and reviewing the public's 

comments, however, EPA has decided 

not to pursue a concentration cutoff 

through this rule. Although the Agency 

realizes that there is some concentration 

of radionuclides below which the 

hazards are so low that a government 

response is unnecessary, determination 

of that precise level is a complex task. 

EPA does not have a sufficient basis at 

this time for determining the appropriate 

concentration cutoff level and, 

furthermore, does not believe that an 

RQ adjustment regulation is an 

appropriate forum in which to make 

such a determination. The Agency 

believes that a rulemaking designed to 

limit public health risks caused by 

radiation exposure, rather than release 

reporting requirements, is a more 

appropriate forum. The Agency is 

currently developing two rules related to 

de fl.mm.is/exemption/below regulatory 

concern levels and residual 

radioactivity criteria that may have a 

bearing on this issue. If sufficient 

information is provided in the future to 

enable the Agency to make a finding 

that a certain radionuclide 

concentration would pose a hazard only 

rarely and under circumstances that 

would not likely result in any action 

being taken to respond to the hazard, 

then the Agency will consider a 

concentration cutoff at that time. 
P.8 

C. Regulatory Reporting Exemptions 

In response to numerous comments 

received on the proposed rule, the 

Agency has decided to exempt from the 

CERCLA notification requirements for 

radionuclide releases three release 

sources. First, the Agency is exempting 

releases of naturally occurring 

radionuclides from^arge, generally 

undisturbed land holdings, such as golf 

courses and parks, along with those 

activities that involve the disturbance of 

large areas of land, such as farming or 

building construction. Second, the 

Agency is exempting the dumping of 

coal and coal ash, as well as 

radionuclide releases to all media from 

coal and coal ash piles, at utility and 

industrial facilities with coal-fired 

boilers. 

In granting these exemptions, the 

Agency considered the risks posed by 

the sources and activity within the 

context of the purposes of the CERCLA 

section 103 reporting requirements. This 

purpose, as the Agency has previously 

stated on numerous occasions, is to 

require "notification of releases so that 

the appropriate federal personnel can 

evaluate the need for a federal response 

action and undertake any necessary 

response (removal or remedial action) in 

a timely fashion." (50 FR 13456,13457, 

April 4,1985). Thus if the Agency 

determines that the federal government 

would never, or would only rarely, take 

a response action as a consequence of 

the harm posed by the release or 

because of the infeasibility of a federal 

response, a basis for an exemption from 

the section 103 reporting requirements 

-may exist. 

With respect to large undisturbed land 

holdings, as well as the disturbance of 

large areas of land, some commenters 

noted that these sites and this activity 

would result in the release of an RQ or 

more of some naturally occurring 

radionuclides (radon in particular). The 

Agency concluded that releases from 

such land holdings and land disturbance 

activities rarely would pose a hazard to 

public health or welfare or the 

environment because releases would be 

dispersed widely in the environment at 

levels not much (if at all) above natural 

background. Furthermore, the Agency 

does not believe that any action 

realistically could be taken to respond 

to such releases. Thus reports of 

radionuclide releases from generally 

undisturbed land holdings and land 

disturbance activities could divert 

National Response Center resources 

unnecessarily, preventing timely 

responses to those releases that truly 

warrant a response. Releases of 

radionuclides from land holdings and 

activities involving the disturbance of 

land for purposes other than mining, 

therefore, are exempted from complying 

with the RQ notification requirements. 

Facility owners and operators still are 

subject to all other provisions under 

CERCLA, including all liability 

provisions. 

The Agency is also exempting 

radionuclide releases resulting from the 

dumping of coal and coal ash, and 

radionuclide releases to all media from 

coal and coal ash piles, at utility and 

industrial facilities with coal-fired 

boilers. Like the exemption for large 

undisturbed land holdings and land 

disturbing activities, this exemption is 

based both upon the risks posed by such 

releases and the appropriateness of a 

federal response to such releases under 

CERCLA. 

Based upon information supplied by 

commenters and upon other readily 

available information, the EPA Office of 

Radiation Programs (ORP) performed a 

risk assessment of utility and industrial 

facilities with coal-fired boilers to 

determine if a technical basis exists to 

exempt these facilities from reporting 

under CERCLA for radionuclide releases 

from coal and coal ash piles. The ORP 

risk assessment used reasonably 

conservative models to estimate the 

radiation doses and resulting health 

risks to residents and workers living or 

working near or on coal and coal ash 

piles. In particular, for nearby residents, 

ORP estimated doses and risks via the 

following potential exposure pathways: 

(1) Direct radiation; (2) various 

pathways of exposure to particulates 

released to the air, including inhalation, 

immersion in an airborne plume, direct 

radiation from particulates deposited on 

the ground, and ingestion of crops 

contaminated by airborne deposition; (3) 

inhalation of radon; (4) ingestion of 

contaminated ground water, as well as 

ingestion of crops and livestock 

assumed to be contaminated by the 

ground water; and (5) ingestion of 

contaminated surface water, as well as 

ingestion of crops and livestock 

assumed to be contaminated by the 

surface water. The critical exposure 

pathway for nearby residents (i.e., the 

one yielding the highest dose and risk 

estimates) was found to be the 

inhalation of radon from the coal and 

coal ash piles. 

For workers, ORP estimated radiation 

doses and resulting health risks via four 

potential exposure pathways: (1) Direct 

radiation when standing next to (i.e., 10 

meters from) a coal or ash pile; (2) direct 

radiation when standing on a coal or 

ash pile; (3) various pathways of 

exposure to airborne particulates. 

including inhalation, immersion in an 

airborne plume, and direct radiation 

from particulates deposited on the 

ground; and (4) inhalation of radon. The 

critical exposure pathway for workers 

was found to be direct radiation, 

especially when standing on a coal or 

coal ash pile. (See Technical 

Background Supplement in Support of 

Rulemaking Adjustment Activities for 

Reportable Quantities of Radionuclides, 

available in the Superfund Docket, for 

more detail on the modeling 

assumptions used in this analysis.) 

According to the analysis completed 

by ORP, the estimated health risks 

posed by the radiation releases from 

coal and coal ash piles are within the 

range generally acceptable under the 

Superfund program. The estimated 

health risk posed to nearby residents 

and to workers are all within the general 

range of 10-4 to IO-7 individual lifetime 

excess cancer risk. 

In addition, the Agency believes that 

the submission of individual reports 

from each industrial and utility facility 

with coal and coal ash piles may not be 

consistent with the purposes of the 

section 103 reporting requirement. In the 

case of radiation releases from coal and 

coal ash piles, the amount and rate of 

radiation released is extremely similar 

across all industrial and utility facilities 

with coal-fired boilers. For example, all 

coal and coal ash piles will contain the 

same radionuclides in low 

concentrations. The radiation emitted 

from these piles, therefore, will always 

be emitted continuously at low levels • 

spread over large areas—it never will be 

emitted at a high rate or in an unusually 

large amount as the result of a sudden, 

episodic release. EPA is already aware 

of the amount and concentration of 

these radiation releases. Because of 

these two factors, submission of 

individual notifications of these releases 

is not necessary for the government to 

assess whether a response action is 

needed under CERCLA. 

Perhaps more importantly, however, a 

response action (i.e., removal or 

remedial action) under CERCLA does 

not appear to be the most appropriate 

federal regulatory response to radiation 

releases that are (1) similar in amount 

and concentration across an entire 

sector of industry; (2) pose acceptable 

exposure risks; and (3) disperse quickly 

in the environment such that a response 

is not necessary to cleanup the 

accumulation of what has already been 

released. Whereas CERCLA is designed 

to enable the government to respond on 

a case-by-case basis where each site or 

release poses different hazards and 

requires a different type of response 
22530 Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 

P.9 

other federal regulatory programs and 

mechanisms are more appropriately 

designed to address the hazards of 

releases that uniformly occur across an 

entire industry. In summary, because the 

health risks from radiation releases from 

coal and coal ash piles from industrial 

and utility facilities with coal-fired 

boilers are generally acceptable and 

because it is extremely unlikely that the 

Agency would take a response action to 

such releases, the Agency is exempting 

these releases from the CERCLA Section 

103 reporting requirements. 

D. Duplicate Reporting/Regulatory 

Consistency 

Several federal agencies, including the 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the 

Departments of Transportation and , : 

Energy, have existing requirements to 

report radionuclide releases under 

certain conditions. EPA also may 

require reporting under the Toxic, 

Substances Control Act. ..,. . , 

Nearly half of all commenters stated, 

that the CERCLA notification 

requirements for radionuclide releases 

were .an unnecessary duplication or 

contradiction pf existing reporting 

requirements. EPA points out, however, 

that the statutory language of CERCLA. 

(section 103(a)) requires that a facility's 

owner or operator immediately report to 

the National Response Center releases 

from the facility that equal or exceed an 

RQ. One exemption to this reporting 

requirement, however, is for releases 

that constitute a nuclear incident as 

defined by section .170 of the J^tbrhic., 

Energy Act (see CERCLA'section 

101(22)). For the ihbst hazardous 

releases, therefore, notification of the 

National Response.Centierisnot '. 

required. The statute provides no other 

exceptions' for situations in which other 

government agencies also must be 

informed of radionuclide releases 

pursuant to the directives of other 

statutes or regulations.7 CERCLA 

notification requirements, however, are 

not intended to supercede or supplant 

notification to state and local authorities 

in the event of a release. These 

notifications may occur as they have in 

the past; the requirement to report 

immediately to the National Response 

Center may be interpreted on a case-bycase basis, depending on the exigencies 

of the situation. 

1

 While the authority to.respond to radiological 

releases outside a building within a federal facility 

has been delegated by Executive Order No. 12580, 

sections 2 (d) and (e)(1), to the federal agency with 

custody of or jurisdiction or control over that 

facility, such releases still must be reported to the 

National Response Center if the release is one RQ 

- pr more greaterthan the permitted release.• •••• 

While EPA understands that Some 

additional burden would be imposed 

upon facility owners and operators who 

would need to file reports with more 

than one government agency, one 

purpose of alerting the National 

Response Center is to ensure a 

coordinated federal, state, and local 

response to the release, if a response is 

needed. Additionally, as noted in the 

Economic Impact Analysis 

accompanying this rule, EPA expects 

that only about 59 additional 

notifications of episodic releases 

annually will result from the RQ 

adjustments. Thus, the incidence of 

duplicative reporting due to this rule is 

relatively small. 

Two commenters also questioned how 

the CERCLA reporting requirement 

could be reconciled with the reporting 

provisions of the Federal Radiological' 

Emergency Response Plan (FRERP). The 

Agency notes that the FRERP itself/ 

states that it is a framework for 

coordinating federal actions within • 

statutory or other authorities, rather 

than creating any new: authorities itself. 

One such controlling statutory.-authority 

is GERCLA, with its requirement for the 

reporting of releases to the National 

Response Center.- Furthermore* the 

FRERP expressly allows facility owners 

or operators to contact directly an 

appropriate federal agency for 

assistance, which in this case is the 

National Response Center. Therefore, 

this rule has no bearing on the FRERP. 

The framework for coordinating federal 

actions established by the FRERP 

remains completely in place; the reports 

required by this rule simply will provide 

added information. 

III. Discussion pf NPRM Methodology 

A. General. 

Although radionuclides are potential 

carcinogens, there are several reasons 

why EPA could not adjust the 

radionuclide RQs using the existing 

methodology for adjusting RQs of 

potential chemical carcinogens (see 52 

FR 8140, March 16,1987 for a detailed 

description of the potential carcinogen 

RQ adjustment methodology). First, 

direct application of the potential 

carcinogen RQ adjustment methodology 

would result in adjusted RQs for 

radionuclides of either one or ten 

pounds. Each radionuclide has a 

different "specific activity" (i.e., a 

certain number of curies per gram of the 

element) and one or ten pounds equates 

to a different number of curies of each 

nuclide; Neither one nor ten pounds is 

appropriate for radionuclide RQs 

because theyequate to alarge number 

of curies for most isotopes and, •'•' -

therefore, could present an undue " 

hazard if released. In fact, as little as 

one-billionth of a pound of certain 

radionuclides could pose a threat to 

public health or welfare or the 

environment. Second, the RQs that 

would be calculated for radionuclides 

using the potential carcinogen RQ 

adjustment methodology (one or ten 

pounds) would differ by only one order 

of magnitude. EPA believes that this 

variation would not be appropriate for 

radionuclides, which present levels of 

hazard that differ by many orders of 

magnitude. Finally, establishing RQs in 

mass units such as pounds is entirely 

inappropriate because most radiation 

measurements and standards in the U.S. 

are established in terms of curies or 

dose-equivalent limits (in units of rem). 

The approach that EPA selected and 

presented in the March 16,1987 NPRM 

began with a decision to establish an 

RQ in terms of activity (measured in 

units of curies) for individual 

radionuclides. To develop individual 

RQs in units of curies, the Agency relied 

heavily on the health data and human.... 

intake limits published by the . * 

International Commission on 

Radiological Protection (ICRP), 

particularly as reflected in its 

Publication 30 (Pergamon 1982). Data 

were available for 757 radionuclides, 

and so analysis of individual 

radionuclides was limited to this 

universe. Although this list is not 

comprehensive (there are more than 

1,500 known radionuclides),.^ does . . 

represent all radionuclides for which 

data needed by EPA to develop <•-.•• 

individual.radionuclide RQs are 

.-available. Furthermore, the remaining 

radionuclides are generally rare and 

short-lived, and most are of little 

practical significance. Thus, EPA today 

is establishing individual RQs for 757 

radionuclides. Because of the 

inadequacy of available data for all 

other radionuclides, they are treated as 

a generic class with a single RQ for the 

entire class. 

The individual RQs were calculated 

using the Annual Limits of Intake (ALIs) 

developed by the ICRP. The ALIs: 

are the annual intakes of given radionuclides 

by 'Reference Man' which would result in 

either (1) a committed effective doBeequivalent * of 5 rem tc the whole body 

8

 An effective dose-equivalent is a weighted 

average of committed dose-equivalents for specific 

organs, with the weights determined from risk 

factors -associated with the respective organs. It 

provides a measure of the overall (i.e.. total body] 

. carcinogenic and genetic risk resulting from a 

radionuclide exposure. The term "committed doseequivalent" means thai this is the dose that will* 
P.10 

Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 22531 

(stochastic AU), or (2) a committed doseequivalent of 50 rem to any organ or tissue 

(non-stochastic AU).9 

ICRP has presented ALIs for both oral 

ingestion and inhalation. The ALIs, 

which are in units of becquerels, are 

considered to produce harm comparable 

to that of receiving a uniform whole 

body dose-equivalent of five rem. It is 

important to note that ALIs represent 

quantities of radionuclides taken into 

the body, not quantities released to the 

environment. These curie levels were 

adjusted by EPA to reflect (1) the 

difference between intake levels and -

release levels, and (2) a lower whole 

body dose-equivalent of 500 millirem 

(0.5 rem), a more protective limitation. 

For purposes of this rulemaking, the 

Agency used conservative assumptions 

regarding different releases to air and 

water, and analyzed exposure through 

inhalation, ingestion, and direct 

exposure. The Agency then estimated 

the smallest number of curies of a 

radionuclide-that, if released into the 

environment over a 24-hour period, 

could result in a person located 30 

meters from the release point receiving 

an effective dose-equivalent of 500 

millirem. 

Only two commenters expressed a 

preference for an alternative approach 

for adjusting the radionuclide RQs; Both 

indicated that establishing a doseequivalent level as the radionuclide RQ 

would be desirable under certain 

circumstances. One commenter 

explained that nuclear power plants 

could use site-specific data to calculate 

potential exposures for a release, 

thereby enabling appropriate 

adjustments in RQs for site-specific 

application. EPA believes, however, that 

few other individuals and organizations 

that handle radionuclides have this 

capability. Additionally, the Agency 

believes that it is the government's 

proper role, and not that of a private 

party, to evaluate the release to 

determine whether government 

intervention is required. The Agency 

also believes that development of a 

special rule to cover releases from 

nuclear power plants would serve no 

useful purpose and would be more. 

confusing and difficult to implement. 

This is particularly true because most 

releases from nuclear power plants 

would be exempted from the CERCLA 

notification requirements because these 

releases are federally permitted under 

accrue from one year of intake of radionuclides 

during the remaining lifetime (60 years) of the 

individual. 

8

 The total dose-equivalent averaged throughout a 

single organ or tissue (rather than the whole body) 

in the 50 years after Intake of a radionuclide into the 

body. 

CERCLA section 101(10)(K) or are 

excluded from the definition of CERCLA 

releases under section 101(22)(C). 

The other commenter noted that 

radionuclide transport in some media, 

such as ground water, is so slow that 

there would be time for facility owners 

or operators to estimate the doseequivalent released before public 

exposure occurred. The Agency notes, 

though, that it is the intention of 

CERCLA that the government be 

informed immediately of releases that 

may pose a hazard to public health or 

welfare or the environment. Further, the 

Agency has determined that it would be 

impractical from an implementation 

standpoint to provide different RQs for 

releases to different media, and, in some 

media (e.g., air], transport of the release 

to a point of exposure could occur 

quickly, allowing minimal time for an 

evaluation. The Agency is convinced 

that activity-level RQs will result in the 

most timely reporting. 

Two commenters argued that one of 

EPA's objections to a dose-equivalent 

RQ, the degree of variability in 

estimating whole body dose-equivalents, 

also was applicable to EPA's selected 

approach. EPA disagrees, however, 

because the curie is a clearly defined 

number for any given radionuclide; 

Unlike a dose-equivalent RQ, where 

determination of whether an RQ has':, -

been released would be based at least 

partially on the exposure scenario 

associated with the release, a release in 

curies could be measured or estimated 

irrespective of the exposure conditions. 

By establishing the adjusted RQs in 

units of curies, the Agency has made 

assumptions about the circumstances 

surrounding a release, and thereby has 

reduced the number of assumptions that 

would be required to be made by 

releasers to determine if the release 

equals or exceeds an RQ. EPA believes 

that it will be assured of more timely 

reporting if the method for determining 

whether an RQ has been released is 

unambiguous and not open to judgment; 

measuring or estimating the number of 

curies released is generally simpler and 

less open to judgment than estimating a 

resulting dose-equivalent. The Agency 

believes that by making conservative 

assumptions about release 

circumstances to derive activity level 

RQs, the Agency will be assured that the 

appropriate government authorities will 

have an opportunity to evaluate the 

need for a response. 

In developing the proposed RQs, the 

Agency did not account for radioactive 

decay explicitly in its models. After 

considering this issue further and after 

reviewing the public's comments, 

radioactive decay has been 

incorporated into some of the models 

used to determine the final RQ 

adjustments. For the inhalation pathway 

model and the model used to evaluate 

direct exposure due to submersion in an 

airborne cloud, the Agency has decided 

to continue to ignore the effects of 

radioactive decay. Both of these 

pathway models consider exposures to 

an airborne plume of radionuclides; 

however, the period of release and 

exposure, and thus the extent of 

radioactive decay over these periods, 

cannot be defined. For example, a shortlived radionuclide could undergo 

significant decay if the release and 

exposure periods were one day, but 

decay would be much less if a time 

period of one hour was considered. 

Because the models do not stipulate the 

release periods (except to assume that 

they do not exceed 24 hours), the 

Agency assumed conservatively that no 

decay occurs over these periods. EPA 

also ignored decay over the period of j 

radionuclide transport to the point of -| 

inhalation or submersion in a cloud. 1 

This approach was adopted because j 

transport to a location 30 meters from 

the point of release may occur in a 

matter of seconds, and decay would be 

negligible for a large majority of 

radionuclides. 

In the model used to evaluate 

exposure by the ingestion of ground 

water, the release conservatively is 

assumed to be instantaneous to the 

saturated zone, and it is assumed that 

no decay occurs over the period of the 

release. Decay over the period of 

transport and period of ingestion, 

however, has been incorporated into the 

model. For the period of transport, the 

time that it would take for a released 

radionuclide to travel to a drinking 

water well is first determined assuming 

conservative transport characteristics 

that take into account ground-water 

flow and sorption in an aquifer. In order 

to consider decay over the period of 

ingestion, it is recognized that an 

individual would ingest progressively 

smaller quantities of radionuclides as 

the radionuclides decay over the period 

of ingestion. For a detailed explanation 

of the mathematical calculations used to 

incorporate radioactive decay into the 

ground-water ingestion model, see the j 

Technical Background Document to i 

Support the Final Rulemaking Pursuant 

to Section 102 of CERCLA: i 

Radionuclides (Technical Background ' 

Document), Chapter 4 and Appendix B 

of that report, available in the Superfund 

Docket. 

In the NPRM, ingestion of vegetables 

contaminated by the airborne deposition 
P.11 

22532 Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 

of radionuclides was considered as 

another exposure pathway, but it was 

determined that it was not a critical 

pathway, largely because radioactive 

decay was ignored. With the 

incorporation of radioactive decay into 

the exposure models, the results of the 

vegetable ingestion pathway model 

serve as the basis for the RQs for some 

radionuclides. In the model used to 

evaluate the ingestion of vegetables 

contaminated by airborne deposition, it 

is not possible to define the period of 

release and deposition. Following the 

same approach used in the inhalation 

and cloud submersion models, therefore, 

decay during release and deposition is 

ignored. Similarly, decay during 

airborne transport to vegetation located 

30 meters from the point of release is not 

considered because the transport occurs 

over a 30-second period in the model 

and decay over this period would not be 

significant for the large majority of 

radionuclides. Once the initial quantity 

of radionuclides is deposited upon the 

.vegetation, however, a significant 

amount of decay may occur before the 

radionuclides actually are consumed. 

Decay over the period of ingestion, 

therefore, is taken into account in the 

vegetable ingestion model. 

Finally, for direct exposure to a point 

source of radionuclide, the Agency has 

decided to ignore decay during the 

period of release and transport and to 

assume instead that the release occurs 

instantaneously and that a person is 

exposed to radiation immediately after 

the radionuclide is released. Radioactive 

decay during.the period of exposure, 

however, is fully accounted for in the 

model. See Chapter 4 and Appendix D of 

the Technical Background Document for 

a detailed discussion on the methods for 

incorporating radioactive decay into the 

direct exposure pathway model. 

In summary, the methodology to 

adjust the final radionuclide RQs uses 

five separate equations to derive release 

values, in curies, that could result in an 

individual 30 meters from the release 

point receiving an effective doseequivalent of 500 millirem. The five 

equations represent the following routes 

of exposure: inhalation, ground-water 

ingestion, vegetable ingestion, direct 

exposure to a point source, and direct 

exposure by submersion in a cloud of 

radioactive noble gas. A sixth pathway 

equation, which is described later in this 

preamble, is for the ingestion of surface 

water. Although EPA calculated release 

values for this exposure pathway, they 

were never lower than those calculated 

for the other pathways and, thus, never 

served as the basis for RQs. 

Slightly over half of all commenters 

raised concerns about the 

appropriateness of certain general 

assumptions used in the models. Four 

commenters argued that the 500 millirem 

whole body dose-equivalent was too 

conservative. EPA disagrees, and points 

out that Federal Radiation Protection 

Guidance recommends 500 millirem as 

an upper bound on exposure to 

individual members of the general 

public. RQs do not have to be set at 

such levels that reports would be 

received only when there is a 

substantial danger to the public health 

or welfare or the environment. RQs are 

simply reporting triggers that allow 

government authorities to evaluate a 

release to determine if, based on the 

circumstances of the release, there is a 

need for federal, state, or local action. In 

addition, alternative and even more 

conservative dose-equivalents of 25 and 

100 millirem per year were noted in the 

NPRM as being considered by EPA for 

calculating radionuclide RQs. However, 

after further examination and after 

reviewing the public's comments, EPA 

has concluded that, for the time being, 

the 500 millirem assumption is 

sufficiently protective of the general 

public and the environment. 

Furthermore, EPA emphasizes that, due 

to the conservatism of the exposure 

pathway models noted above, it is likely 

that the release of an RQ will result in 

doses that are less than 500 millirem. 

However, if the Federal Radiation 

Protection Guidance recommendation 

for exposure limits for the general public 

changes from 500 millirem to 100 

millirem, or any other level, the Agency 

will consider adjusting the radionuclide 

RQs accordingly in a future technical 

update. 

Another commenter stated that ALIs 

were developed to protect workers from 

radiological hazards, and that RQs 

should be protective of critically 

exposed individuals, such as children, 

rather than workers. The Agency agrees 

that RQs are reporting triggers to protect 

the public health and welfare and the 

environment from the hazards 

associated with releases of hazardous 

substances. The ALIs used in the 

exposure models, therefore, are divided 

by a factor of 10 to reflect a whole body 

dose-equivalent of 500 millirem (0.5 

rem), as opposed to the occupational 

exposure limit of 5 rem. The Agency 

does not agree, however, that the most 

critical member of the general public 

should be used in determining RQs. EPA 

believes that the final RQs adjusted 

today are low enough to assure timely 

reporting for most release situations, but 

not so low as to result in numerous 

release reports to which the government 

would be unlikely to respond. If the 

Agency determines, however, that RQs 

for particular radionuclides are 

inappropriate, those RQs will be 

adjusted in a future technical update. 

Six commenters argued that the 

selection of an exposure point 30 meters 

from the release was too conservative. 

The Agency, however, does not agree. 

The Agency developed release scenarios 

that it believes are conservative but 

reasonable representations of potential 

release events. Because the models 

derive RQs applicable to releases from a 

wide variety of facilities, it is likely that 

the models do not represent accurately 

all potential release events. However, 

due to the administrative complexity 

involved in developing different RQs for 

different types of facilities, the Agency 

relies first on conservative models and 

then on the appropriate government 

official to evaluate the risks and the 

need for a response once notification 

occurs. 

Although 30 meters was selected as 

the assumed distance between the point 

of release and the point of exposure, a 

longer or shorter distance, in reality, 

could be relevant. Most nuclear power 

plants have restricted areas around a 

facility much greater than 30 meters; 

many facilities, such as hospitals, have 

no restricted area and 30 meters 

arguably could be too far. The 

Department of Transportation's (DOT) 

Emergency Response Guidebook 

recommends a range of isolation 

distances for releases of hazardous 

chemicals (not radionuclides), and 30 

meters is within the range of 

recommended distances. For small leaks 

of hazardous chemicals, the DOTrecommended initial isolation distances 

range from 9 meters to 180 meters, and 

for large spills the recommended initial 

isolation distances range from 20 meters 

to 380 meters. Approximately 44 percent 

of the initial isolation distances 

recommended for releases of hazardous 

chemicals is in the zero to 30-meter 

range. The 30-meter distance assumed in 

the exposure models, therefore, does not 

conflict \vith the DOT Guidebook and is 

not unrealistic. 

Two commenters claimed that the 24-

hour period of exposure for some 

models is too conservative and that 

releases are unlikely to last that long. 

•EPA agrees that it may be unlikely for 

exposure to last 24 hours for some 

pathways; however, no shorter period 

could be determined that was shown to 

be sufficiently protective. The release 

scenarios were developed to ensure that 

timely reporting occurs; without such 

reports, a release may continue 
P.12 

Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules an d Regulations 

m-W.mKm-U "^l-^ r yr* , M °

B a fM *^"' m

» * , , « " l

!

" ll II i IM liiMr*^*1*''*^*'^'*-^-''^-"'''-''TM 

22533 

unabated for at least 24 hours, and a 

proper response may not occur. EPA 

points out that all releases must be 

measured over a 24-hour period to 

determine if the RQ has been exceeded. 

Releases can occur over a shorter period 

of time; howev-er, a s soon as an RQ is 

released (within a 24-hour period), the 

release needs to be reported to the 

National Response Center. 

B. Inhalation Pathway 

The inhalation equation derives a 

release value for each radionuclide. 

Inhalation release values are in units of 

curies and represent the activity level of 

each radionuclide that, if released under 

the assumed set of modeling conditions, 

could result in an exposed individual 

receiving a whole body dose-equivalent 

of 500 millirem (0.5 rem). Critical 

assumptions that are built into the 

equation are that the release occurs 

from a point source at ground level and 

that the hypothetically exposed 

individual is 30 meters downwind from 

the point of release. The release values 

are derived by dividing the ALI for 

inhalation presented in ICRP Publication 

30 by the product of several factors that 

account for the dispersion in air, the 

fraction of each radionuclide that could 

become airborne, the breathing rate of 

man, and other factors described in 

detail in the Technical Background 

Document, Chapter 4. Where more than 

one inhalation ALI is given by ICRP for 

a particular radionuclide, the lowest one 

was used. This approach assures that 

the possible release of the most 

hazardous chemical form is taken into 

consideration. 

The inhalation model was not used for 

noble gases other than radon (e.g., 

argon, krypton, and xenon). According 

to ICRP Publication 30, the effects -of 

inhaling a noble gas are negligible 

compared to the effects of external 

irradiation from a person being 

submerged in a gas cloud of these 

radionuclides. Thus, a separate model, 

described later, wa s used to determine 

the direct exposure release values for 

noble gas radionuclides. Inhalation of 

radon was considered because the 

critical health effect associated with 

exposure to Tadon is caused -by 

inhalation of radon's short-lived decay 

products. 

Five commenters expressed concerns 

that certain aspects of the inhalation 

pathway model were unreasonable. One 

commenter argued that, for 

radionuclides with multiple ALIs, the 

ALI of the specific chemical form should 

be used, Tather than the lowest ALI 

value for that radionuclide. EPA does 

not agree with this commenter. Using 

multiple ALIs would result in multiple 

RQs for each radionuclide; EPA believes 

that a single reporting trigger is less" 

confusing and more likely to assure 

timely reporting. 

Four commenters argued that the 

assumption of a point source release for 

uniform emissions over large areas was 

inapplicable, and two other commenters 

claimed that the assumption of a 

ground-level release was inapplicable 

for emissions from piled materials or 

raised stacks. EPA realizes that any 

single atmospheric dispersion model 

will not be applicable to all possible 

release scenarios. The Agency believes, 

however, that multiple RQs for different 

release configurations would add 

significant complications to the rule and 

is unnecessary given the purpose of 

RQs. Even if the Agency used many 

different models to develop RQs for 

numerous different release scenarios, 

there would still be countless other 

scenarios for which the models would 

not be fully applicable. For these 

reasons, the Agency developed 

exposure models to simulate release 

events at facilities that could release 

radionuclides and to calculate RQs that 

are applicable broadly*. 

Another commenter cited several" 

aspects of the inhalation model a s 

overly conservative. This commenter 

claimed that the release fractions used 

in the model were of questionable 

applicability because they were 

developed for uranium fuel cycle 

facilities; the dispersion coefficients 

were suspect because they were 

extrapolated to a distance shorter than 

the range of standard references; and 

the model failed to account for vertical 

dispersion, radioactive decay, plume 

washout, ground deposition, or ground 

effects on dispersion. First, the Agency 

notes that the release fractions were not 

developed strictly for uranium fuel cycle 

facilities, but also for a variety of other 

radioactive material operations, and 

they are the only known attempt to 

quantify in a consistent manner airborne 

release fractions for numerous 

radionuclides. Second, while the 

dispersion coefficients have been 

extrapolated to a distance shorter than 

published ranges, the results appear 

reasonable compared to -documented 

values for distances of 100 meters or 

more. Finally, dispersion in vertical and 

horizontal directions was talcen into 

account but dispersion in the direction 

of flow was ignored because, relative to 

the chosen wind velocity of one meter 

per second, it is insignificant; 

radioactive decay was not considered 

for reasons explained earlier in this 

preamble; plume washout was ignored 

because it is unpredictable and because 

most days are rain-free; and ground 

deposition was not considered because 

radionuclides of respirable diameter are 

unlikely to plate out on the ground 

significantly before reaching a receptor 

located only 30 meters away. 

It also has come to EPA's attention 

that the release fraction used for 

bromine and chlorine isotopes in the 

inhalation model may be too low. The 

Agency is examining whether a release 

fraction of 0.5, rather than 0.01, may be 

more appropriate for these isotopes. 

Such a change in Ihe release fraction 

would result in a lower RQ for four 

isotopes: Chlorine-36—new RQ would 

be 0.1 Ci; Bromine-77—new RQ would 

be 10 Ci; Bromine-80m—new RQ would 

be 100 Ci; and Bromine-83—new RQ 

would be 100 Ci. The Agency will be 

considering readjusting these four RQs 

in a future rulemalung. 

C. Ingestion Pathway 

1. Ground-Water Ingestion 

One ingestion equation used for RQ 

development is based on a release of a 

radionuclide to ground water. The 

maximum concentration in a plume 30 

meters downgradient from a point 

source release is calculated using 

ground-water advection-dispersion 

modeling equations that take into 

account sorption of the radionuclides in 

the aquifer, ground-water flow velocities 

and other hydrogeological parameters, 

and radioactive decay during transport 

and during the exposure period. The 

details of this model are discussed in the 

Technical Background Document, 

Chapter 4. 

Only two commenters referenced the 

ground-water ingestion model. One . 

commenter claimed that the model's 

ground-water velocity was 

unrealisticaliy slow and that the model 

assumed that radionuclides would 

migrate upgradient. EPA obtained the 

velocity, however, from published 

studies that substantiate its 

appropriateness. Also, EPA emphasizes 

that only possible exposures at a 

downgradient location were considered. 

The other commenter argued that by 

assuming that a person would ingest 

contaminated ground water foT a 

maximum period of only one year, the 

model results in release values that are 

too low for certain radionuclides. 

Additionally, this commenter stated 

that the use of a point source release is 

inappropriate when approximating the 

release of a radionuclide from a large 

area into an aquifer. First, contrary to 

what the commenter states, the one year 

exposure time results in higher RQs, not 

lower RQs. This is because the model 
22534 Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 

P.13 

assumes a maximum period of exposure 

of one year, even though it may take. 

several years for a radionuclide, plume ' 

to pass a drinking water well located 30 

meters away (a longer exposure, period 

would result in a greater intake of 

radionuclides for a given release 

amount). By limiting the exposure period 

to one year, a greater number of curies 

would need to be released before an 

exposed person receives 500 millirem. 

Additionally, the one year maximum 

time period is appropriate because ALIs. 

are annual intake limits. Second, EPA 

agrees that the model's use of a point 

source release yields a lower release 

value than if an area source was 

assumed, as in the commenter's 

scenario. However, EPA prefers to use a 

single ground-water dispersion model to 

calculate RQs and believes that the 

complications added by having multiple 

RQs for different release configurations 

would outweigh the benefits to be 

gained by such an approach. 

2. Vegetable Ingestion 

In its analyses for the proposed rule, 

the Agency evaluated each of the 757 

radionuclides for which ICRP developed 

ALIs and calculated release values for 

two ingestion routes: ingestion of 

vegetables contaminated by airborne 

deposition and ingestion of 

contaminated ground water. For the 

majority of radionuclides, the groundwater exposure route resulted in lower 

release values (i.e., was a more critical 

route of exposure). Further, for the 

radionuclides for which the vegetable 

ingestion pathway produced lower 

release values, the Agency determined 

that in the vast majority of cases either 

inhalation or direct exposure was even 

more critical than vegetable ingestion. 

Therefore, in determining proposed RQs, 

the Agency chose to proceed with 

development of a release value for 

ingestion based only on the 

consumption of contaminated ground 

water. 

Decisions to include the effects of 

radioactive decay in models of other 

pathways and to use a different, more 

conservative model for estimating the 

transfer of radionuclides from air to 

vegetation tend to exaggerate the 

importance of the vegetable ingestion 

pathway relative to other pathways. 

Appendix C of the Technical 

Background Document supporting the 

NPRM describes the two models 

considered for, estimating airborne 

deposition of radionuclides, one 

presented by the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission and the other presented by 

the National Council on Radiation 

Protection and Measurements (NCRP). 

The analysis of the. vegetable ingestion 

route considered in support of the NPRM 

was based on the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission model, which was 

determined subsequently tobe 

inappropriate for the release 

configurations and distances considered 

for the development of RQs. The NCRP 

model, which is very conservative when 

coupled with the atmospheric dispersion 

factor considered for the inhalation 

pathway, was determined to be the most 

straightforward method for determining 

RQs for the vegetable ingestion 

pathway. Appendix C of the Technical 

Background Document supporting this 

final rule describes in detail the NCRP 

model. 

The equation that EPA has adopted 

for the calculation of release values 

based on consumption of contaminated 

vegetables divides the lowest ALI for 

ingestion by factors accounting for 

dilution from the point of release to the 

point of vegetable ingestion, the food 

consumption rate of man, the exposure 

period, and the airborne release 

fraction. The dilution factor represents 

the fraction of an airborne release of 

radionuclides that would be deposited 

in and on vegetables located 30 meters 

downwind. This factor was calculated 

using the same atmospheric dispersion 

factor used in the inhalation pathway 

equation, and the NCRP model which 

takes into account radionuclide 

deposition from the air, radionuclide 

loss due to weathering and radioactive 

decay, and radionuclide buildup in and 

uptake from soil. The Agency assumed 

that an individual ingests contaminated 

vegetables over the entire length of the 

, growing season, 60 days. For more 

details, see the Technical Background 

Document, Chapter 4 and Appendix C of 

that report. 

3. Surface Water Ingestion 

V In support of the NPRM, EPA 

analyzed qualitatively the relative 

hazards of radionuclide releases to 

ground water and surface water. It was 

concluded that the mixing in surface 

water is more complete than in ground 

water because of the higher flow rate 

and turbulence of surface water. Both of 

these factors suggested that, in general, 

there will be greater dilution in surface 

water than in ground water. Based on 

this analysis, the Agency concluded that 

exposures via the consumption of 

ground water (under the modeling 

conditions assumed) would likely be 

more critical than those through the 

consumption of surface water and, 

therefore, that the calculation of surface 

water ingestion release values for each 

radionuclide was unnecessary. 

The previous analysis in the NPRM 

was valid as long as radioactive decay , 

was not incorporated into the various 

exposure pathway equations; 

Incorporating the effects of decay (as 

explained in the Technical Background 

Document, Chapter 4), however, 

increased the relative importance of the 

surface water ingestion pathway. In the 

adjustment of final RQs, therefore, EPA 

calculated release values for the 

ingestion of surface water based on the 

lowest ingestion ALI for each 

radionuclide, a generally conservative 

stream flow rate, and the water 

consumption rate for standard man. 

Although some of the surface water 

release values calculated in this way 

were lower than those calculated for 

ground-water ingestion, the surface 

water release values were never the 

lowest when compared to those 

calculated for the other exposure 

pathways. Therefore, surface water 

ingestion release values were not used 

to derive any of the final RQ 

adjustments. 

D. Direct Exposure Pathway 

An equation with the same 

parameters—the quantity of radiation 

intercepted by "Reference Man" (ICRP 

Publication 23, Pergamon, 1975) at a 

distance of 30 meters from a release, 

with the exposure limited to 500 

millirem—also was developed to 

calculate a value for a third route of 

exposure, direct exposure to a point 

source of radiation. A separate direct 

exposure equation was developed for 

submersion in a radioactive cloud of 

noble gas because submersion in a 

radioactive cloud results in an 

integrated dose from all directions at 

varying distances from the body, unlike 

direct exposure to a point source.10 

These equations are discussed in more 

detail in the Technical Background 

Document, Chapter 4 and Appendix D of 

that report. 

Four commenters referred to the direct 

exposure models. Two of them stressed 

the desirability of using gamma ray 

constants for all gamma emitting 

nuclides. EPA notes that the direct 

exposure pathway equation 

incorporates an accepted equation for 

calculating gamma ray constants. 

Another commenter argued that it was 

implausible, in the model for submersion 

in a cloud of noble gas, for the gas 

concentration at a point 30 meters from 

the source to remain constant for 24 

10

 EPA recognizes that a cloud of non-noble gases 

can contribute to a dose through the submersion-ina-cloud pathway, in the same manner as noble 

gases. However, it is generally recognized that, in 

this situation, the inhalation pathway is controlling. 

Therefore, direct exposure by submersion in a cloud 

was analyzed only for noble gases. 
P.14 

Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 22535 

hours and for an exposed individual to 

remain in that position for 24 hours. EPA 

agrees that these assumptions are 

unlikely, but RQs are based on releases 

occurring over no more than a day, so 

the maximum period of exposure in this 

instance also is one day. The Agency 

could not determine a shorter exposure 

period that it was certain would be 

sufficiently protective. The final 

commenter stated that the point source 

release model is unrepresentative of 

area sources and that release values 

based on a point source model may be 

too low. EPA agrees that the release 

models are not perfect representations 

of all potential release situations, but 

the Agency prefers not to develop 

multiple RQs (or correction factors) to 

take into account many different release 

configurations because this would add 

more complications than benefits to the 

rule. Instead, EPA has adopted a single 

model to calculate direct exposure 

release values that is applicable 

broadly. 

E. Establishing the RQ 

For each of the 757 radionuclides 

listed in ICRP Publication 30, therefore, 

four release values were derived. The 

Agency selected the lowest of the four 

values for each specific radionuclide, 

with the intent of choosing an RQ that is 

the most protective of human health and 

welfare and the environment. A detailed 

explanation of the methodology used to 

derive radionuclide RQs is in Chapter 4 

of the Technical Background Document, 

available in the Superfund Docket. 

To simplify administration and 

implementation of RQ reporting for the 

757 separate radionuclides, EPA decided 

to place each radionuclide in one of 

seven groups, with each group assigned 

a single specific RQ. While the RQs for 

other CERCLA hazardous substances 

are divided into only five groups, the 

Agency decided to use seven groups for 

radionuclides so that the assigned RQ 

groups would not differ in magnitude by 

more than a factor of ten, as is the case 

for other hazardous substance RQ 

groups. The lowest release value for 

each radionuclide was used to 

determine the group to which the 

radionuclide was assigned. The RQs for 

. the seven radionuclide groups are as 

follows: 

Adjusted 

RQ(in 

curies) 

10 

100 

1000 

Lowest release value 

range (in curies) 

10-99.99 

100-999.99 

1000 and greater 

Number 

(and 

percent) of 

radionuclides 

220 (29%) 

235(31%) 

205 (27%) 

Adjusted 

RQ(in 

curies) 

0.001 

0.01 

0.I 

1 

Lowest release value 

range (in curies) 

0.001 -6.0099 

0.01-0.099 

0.1-0.99 

1-9.99 

Number 

(and 

percent) of 

radionuclides 

7(1%) 

29 (4%) 

29 ( 4%) 

32 ( 4%) 

All radionuclides not listed by ICRP 

Publication 30 have been assigned a 

final RQ of one Ci. Available 

information on these radionuclides is 

insufficient to develop a specific RQ for 

individual radionuclides in this group. 

An RQ of one Ci was selected because it 

is the middle RQ category, and the 

majority of radionuclides (91 percent) 

examined individually have RQs at least 

at this level. The Agency believes, for 

two main reasons, that an RQ of one Ci 

for these "remaining radionuclides" is 

sufficiently low to assure timely 

reporting for most release situations. 

First, most of the radionuclides that fall 

into this category are rare, both in terms 

of frequency of use and quantities used. 

Many of the.se radionuclides have been 

produced in only a few isolated research 

projects and many do not exist in the 

world in quantities that equal or exceed 

one Ci. Therefore, releases of the 

radionuclides not listed by ICRP 

Publication 30 are expected to be 

infrequent and, if they occur, are 

expected to be released within any 24-

hour period in quantities smaller than 

one Ci. Second, many of the remaining 

radionuclides have short half-lives and 

do not decay into other radioactive 

isotopes. Under most realistic release 

situations, these radionuclides would be 

expected to decay and virtually 

disappear before they could reach 

receptor locations. 

EPA has set a group RQ for these 

remaining radionuclides at a level that it 

believes is sufficiently protective of 

public health and welfare and the 

environment, without posing an 

unreasonable burden on the regulated 

community. Nevertheless, EPA 

recognizes that an RQ of one Ci may not 

necessarily assure timely reporting for a 

small number of remaining 

radionuclides. Also, an RQ of one Ci 

may result in unnecessary reporting of 

releases of some short-lived 

radionuclides. For example, more than 

one Ci of nitrogen-13 and oxygen-15 can 

be released to the air within 24 hours 

from low energy accelerators. Such a 

release, however, may not present a 

level of hazard worthy of a report 

because nitrogen-13 and oxygen-15 have 

short half-lives (10 minutes and 2 

minutes, respectively) and likely would 

undergo significant decay before 

reaching an exposure point. For these 

reasons, EPA is investigating alternate 

methodologies for developing RQs for 

the radionuclides not listed by ICRP 

Publication 30. Any necessary revision 

to the one Ci RQ promulgated today for 

these radionuclides will be made in a 

future technical update. 

Assignment of the individually 

calculated lowest release values to one 

of seven groups and placement of other 

radionuclides in the generic RQ group 

should not be interpreted to mean that 

all radionuclides in any given group 

represent the same threat or danger to 

public health and welfare and the 

environment. Two or more radionuclides 

with the same RQ do not reflect a 

determination that a release of one will 

be as hazardous as the release of 

another, or even that the release of one 

will be hazardous at or above the RQ 

level and not hazardous below that 

level. The actual hazard will vary with 

the unique circumstances of the release 

and the characteristics ofthe 

radionuclides, and extensive scientific 

data and analysis would be necessary to 

determine the hazard presented by each 

substance under a number of possible 

circumstances. The RQs are designed to 

be a trigger for notification and they 

reflect the Agency's judgment that the 

appropriate government agencies should 

be notified of certain releases to which a 

response might be necessary. The RQs 

represent a determination only of 

possible or potential harm, not that 

releases of a particular amount of a 

hazardous substance necessarily will be 

harmful to public health or welfare or 

the environment. 

One commenter suggested that the 

RQs should not be rounded off into the 

seven groups, as this is no simpler than 

being set at their specific calculated 

release values. EPA disagrees, and 

believes that seven different RQs for 757 

radionuclides is certainly simpler than 

757 RQs for 757 radionuclides. Also, the 

model calculations are only 

approximate, and setting individual RQs 

at specific release values implies an 

unjustified precision. 

Another commenter argued for 

adherence to the one-pound RQ for 

radionuclides not listed in ICRP 

Publication 30 until EPA obtains 

meaningful data on them. However, EPA 

has rejected measuring radionuclide 

RQs in terms of pounds. Using one 

pound as the RQ might ensure reporting 

of very large releases, but many releases 

much smaller than this may represent a 

serious health and environmental 

hazard. Additionally, a one-pound RQ 

does not conform to commonly accepted 

units of measurement for radionuclides. 
22536 " " .F-Btratsi-ai &agister'' f Voi.' 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 

F. Alternative Approaches 

In addition to describing in the NPRM 

the method and assumptions used to 

develop the proposed RQs, EPA 

solicited comments on other 

methodologies for developing RQs for 

radionuclides. Two commenters offered 

alternative approaches to the 

methodology described in the NPRM. 

One commenter suggested using EPA's 

Protective Action Guides (PAGs), or a 

multiple thereof, as the basis for RQs. 

PAGs are projected doses to individuals 

(ranging from one to five rem) that might 

warrant taking protective action. EPA 

notes that the final RQs were calculated 

based cn 500 millirem, which is 0.5 times 

the lowest PAG. 

There are several reasons why EPA 

chose net to use the PAGs directly, for. 

adjustment of the radionuclide RQs.. . 

First,, Ike PAGs are projected dose 

levels; they do not specify (or provide 

guidance for calculating) quantities of 

-specific radionuclides that, if released, 

could cause doses that exceed the 

PAGs. As discussed in the NPRM, EPA 

rejected the option of using a doseequivalent level as the RQ for 

radionuclides, mainly because it is , 

significantly more complicated to 

estimate a dose than a quantity 

released, and because different 

releasers could estimate doses dn 

different ways. This could result in 

untimely and inconsistent reporting. 

Second, the PAGs and RQs differ in 

their basic purpose. The PAGs are 

projected dose levels that might warrant 

protective action, while the RQs are 

simply reporting triggers designed to 

give the governmentthe opportunity to 

evaluate the release and mount a 

response if necessary. Given these 

different purposes, EPA sees no reason 

why the. PAGs and RQs should be based 

on the same dose level. Finally, the 

"protective actions", that appear, to be 

contemplated by the PAGs are generally 

large-scale actions, such as emergency 

response planning and evacuation on a 

community-wide level. The government, 

however, may wish to take smaller^scale 

actions, such as cleaning up a release or 

making ielephone calls to gather more 

information or to alert other government 

officials. "The SCO millirem level used to 

calculate the RQs is considered low 

enough to give the government the 

opportunity to carry out these smallscale responses, as well as any largescale responses that might be necessary. 

The other commenter recommended 

using as RQs the EOT A2 values, which 

define the content limits of "normal 

form"' radioactive material for Type A 

packages. fiPA believes, however, that 

the assumptions'and methodology used 

in calculating such values are not 

applicable to the calculation of RQs 

because they assume situations and 

conditions incompatible with 

determining the size of releases that 

should trigger a notification to the 

National Response Center. For example, 

the A2 values were calculated based on 

the following assumptions: a person in 

the vicinity of a failed transportation 

package receiving the annual dose limit 

for radiation workers (five rem); the 

distance from the point of release to 

point of exposure is one meter; the 

period of exposure is 30 minutes; and 

subjective assumptions regarding the 

extent of package damage and releases 

of tiie package's contents. RQs, on the 

other hand, are: Applicable for all types 

of release situations (not just those 

involving a damaged package]; based on 

500 millirem, the Federal Radiation 

Protection Guidance for members of the 

geheralpublic; based, in general, on a 

longer exposure.period; and based oh a 

longer distance to point of exposure (30 

meters) because they are designed to 

assure timely reporting in the event of 

public exposures, nol occupational 

exposures that might occur'iat a distance 

of one meter. Furthermore, A2 values are 

only available for about "250 

radionuclides.

 ; 

G. Reporting Requirements for Mixtures 

of Radionuclides Only 

1. Mixtures of Known Composition 

Reporting requirements for releases 

involving mixtures of known 

composition can be obtained directly 

" from the RQs for individual constituents 

of the mixture! If the identity and 

quantity (in curies) of each.'radionuclide 

involved in a release event is known, 

the decision whether to report a release 

must be made in the following manner; 

for each radionuclide in the mixture, 

determine the ratio between.the 

quantity (released in curies and the RQ 

for the radionuclide. If the sum of the 

ratios for all radionuclides is less than 

one, the release need not be reported. If 

the sum is equal to or greater than one, 

the release must be reported to the 

National Response Center. 

2. Mixtures of Unknown Composition 

Reporting requirementa for mixtures, 

where either the amount or identity ofthe individual radionuclides in the 

mixture is unknown, cannot be based on 

the determination of quantities released. 

There are three possibilities: (1) The 

identities of the radionuclides involved 

are -known, but the amount1 released of 

each is'ra&nown; (2) the identities of the 

' radionuclides (or one of the " 

'"•radionuclidesj in the mixture are 

•unknown, but the amount released is 

lujown in.total curies per unit volume or 

weight; or (3) the identities of the 

radionuclides involved are unknown 

and the amount of some pf the -

radionuclides released in the mixture is 

unknown (but the totel quantity is 

known). For these cases, the decision to 

report a release shall be made as 

follows: 

a. Identity known, but amount 

unknown . . 

. If the identity of each radionuclides 

the mixture is known but the amount of 

one or more of the radionuclides is 

unknown, the RQ for the mixture shall 

be the lowest RQ of any radionuclide in 

the mixture. 

One commenter suggested that when 

comparing the RQ of the unquantified 

isotope to the total release, the latter 

should be reduced by the known 

(isotope and quantity) releases, with the 

remainder of the release then assumed 

to be the isotope with the most 

restrictive RQ. EPA agrees that, in • ' 

theory, it would be sensible to separate 

the released quantity into the known • 

and unknown isotopes and quantities. 

However, EPA believes that this Would 

add considerable complication to 

. determining RQs and, hence, could ' '". 

prevent timely reporting of releases to 

the government. This commenter also 

urged that some de minimis level be 

applied to the determination that an 

isotope is known to be present, to 

prevent trace quantities from being 

considered. However, EPA disagrees 

that trace quantities of radionuclides, if 

known to the person-in-charge, should 

be ignored'fti assessing mixtures. ' 

b. Identity of rddionuclidefs) in ihe 

release is vnkncnvn 

If the identity of a radionuclide in a 

release is uriknown or if the identity of 

one or more radionuclides in the release 

of a mixture of radionuclides is 

unknown, the release must be reported 

to tiie National Response Center if the 

total release is equal td or greater than 

one Ci, or if the total release is equal to 

or greater than the lowest RQ of any 

known radionuclide in the mixture,, 

whichever is lower. 

3. Common Radionuclide Mixtures 

in response to comments on the 

NPRM, the Agency today has calculated 

RQs for four common radionuclide 

mixtures: radium-226 in secular 

equilibrium with its daughters (an RQ of 

0.053 Ci), natural uranium (an RQ of O.l 

Ci], natural, uranium in secular 

equilibrium with its daughters (an RQ of 

0.052 Ci), and thorium in secular 

equilibrium with its daughters (an RQ of 

0.011 Ci). The Agency has calculated 
P.16 

Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 /Rule s and Regulations 22537 

these RQs for the convenience of 

persons frequently handling these 

hazardous substances and these RQs 

are listed in a footnote in Appendix B to 

Table 302.4. The RQs are developed 

directly from the mixture rule discussed 

above. 

One commenter endorsed an RQ of 0.1 

Ci for natural uranium so long as it was 

not meant to apply to natural uranium in 

secular equilibrium with its daughters. 

The Agency today has clarified that the 

0.1 Ci RQ is applicable to natural 

uranium not in secular equilibrium with 

its daughters; natural uranium in secular 

equilibrium with its daughters has an 

RQ of 0.052 Ci. 

H. Reporting Requirements for 

Compounds and Mixtures of 

Radionuclides and Other Hazardous 

Substances 

One commenter noted that the RQs of 

several radionuclides (e.g., Cd-113, Be10, Cl-36, In-115, and Pb-205) should be 

based upon chemical toxicity rather 

than radiological hazard. EPA agrees 

that for some relatively long-lived and 

naturally occurring radioactive 

materials, the chemical toxicity may 

exceed the radiotoxicity. Two RQs may 

apply to the release of a substance 

containing radionuclides—one RQ being 

based on chemical toxicity and the other 

being based on radiotqxicity. In such 

situations, the lowest applicable RQ for; 

a substance governs when the owner, or 

operator must report the release to die , 

National Response Center. In this way, 

the RQs reflect the relative chemical 

toxicity and radiation hazard of a 

substance. 

For example, naturally occurring 

cadmium consists of roughly 12 percent 

cadmium-113, a radioactive isotope, and 

several other isotopes of cadmium that 

are not radioactive. The RQ for 

cadmium based on potential 

carcinogenicity will be finalized in a 

future rulemaking; the RQ for cadmium113, just one component of naturally 

occurring cadmium, is finalized in 

today's rulemaking at 0.1 Ci. A releaser 

of cadmium metal is required to report if 

either the RQ of the metal (if the 

diameters of the particles of the released 

metal are less than or equal to 100 

micrometers) or 0.1 Ci of cadmium-113 

(regardless of the particle size of the 

cadmium-113) is released. The RQ for 

cadmium based on chemical toxicity 

may be more limiting than the RQ based 

on radiotoxicity, however, for other 

materials, the RQ based on radiotoxicity 

may be more limiting than the RQ based 

on chemical toxicity. In both situations, 

the lowest RQ applicable to the 

substance released would be the 

reporting trigger. 

Uranyl acetate and uranyl nitrate are 

additional examples of substances with 

two applicable RQs, one based on 

chemical toxicity and the other based on 

radiation hazard. Both substances are 

specifically listed as CERCLA 

hazardous substances because they are 

included under section 311 of the CWA; 

however, they both consist of about 60 

percent uranium-238, a radionuclide. 

Based on their chemical toxicity, uranyl 

acetate and uranyl nitrate have a final 

adjusted RQ of 100 pounds (51 FR 34534, 

September 29,1986). The final RQ for 

uranium-238, based upon radiological 

hazard, is 0.1 Ci, which is equivalent to 

roughly 660 pounds of uranium-238. Both 

the 0.1 Ci RQ for uranium-238 and the 

100 pound RQ are applicable to releases 

of uranyl acetate and uranyl nitrate, but 

the 100-pound RQ will always trigger 

reporting first because it is the lower, 

more protective level. The RQ of 100 

pounds will assure timely reporting of 

releases of uranyl acetate and uranyl 

nitrate from both a radiological hazard 

and chemical toxicity standpoint. 

IV. Summary of Supporting Analyses 

A. Executive Order No. 12291 

Rulemaking protocol under Executive 

Order (E.O.) No. 12291 requires that 

regulations be classified as major or 

non-major fo,r purposes of review by the 

Office of Management and Budget . . 

(OMB). According to E.O. No. 12291, 

major rules and regulations that are 

' likely tO'xesult.in:... 

(1) An annual effect pn the economy 

of $100 million or more; or 

(2) A major increase in costs or prices 

for consumers, individual industries, 

federal, state, or local government 

agencies, or geographic regions; or 

(3) Significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or on the 

ability of United States-based 

enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises in domestic or export 

markets. 

The Economic Impact Analysis for the 

Final Reportable Quantity Adjustments 

for Radionuclides under section 102 of 

CERCLA (Economic Impact Analysis) is 

available for inspection in the Superfund 

Docket in Room 2427, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (OS240), 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20460. The Economic Impact Analysis 

shows that today's final regulation is 

non-major, because adoption of the rule 

will result in an estimated total annual 

cost of $1.6 million to the government 

and the regulated community, with the 

latter's share being about $1.2 million 

annually. Of these costs, $256,000 would 

be due to 59 additional episodic releases 

expected to be reported annually to the 

government. The remaining $1.4 million 

would result from about 1,000 facilities, 

largely in the mining and extraction 

industries, that would file reports 

pursuant to the reduced reporting 

requirements for continuous releases 

allowed under CERCLA section 

103(f)(2). None of the other 

characteristics of major rules are 

satisfied by today's rule. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

requires that a Regulatory Flexibility. 

Analysis be performed for all rules that 

are likely to have a "significant impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities." EPA certifies that this 

regulation will not have a significant 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. See Chapter 6 of the Economic 

Impact Analysis for more information 

concerning this finding. -

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The information collection .-• ". 

requirements contained in this rule have, 

been approved by OMB under the * 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and have • 

been assigned OMB control number ' 

2050-0046. 

Public.reporting burden for this 

-collection of information is estimated to 

average two hours per response, 

including time for reviewing 

instructions, searching existing data 

sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and 

reviewing the collection of information. 

Send comments regarding the burden 

estimate or any other aspect of this 

collection of information, including 

suggestions for reducing this burden, to 

Chief, Infonnation Policy Branch, PM223, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 401. M Street, SW., Washington, 

DC 20460; and to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget, 

Washington, DC 20503, marked 

"Attention: Desk Officer for EPA." 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 302 

Air pollution control, Chemicals, 

Hazardous materials, Hazardous 

materials transportation, Hazardous 

substances, Hazardous wastes, 

Intergovernmental relations, Mineral 

mining, Natural resources, Radioactive 

materials, Radionuclide, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Source, 

byproduct and special nuclear materials, 

Superfund, Waste treatment and 

disposal, Water pollution-Control. 
P.17 

22538 Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 

Dated: March 3a 1989. 

William K. Reilly, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, Title 40 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations is amended as follows: 

PART 302—DESIGNATION, 

REPORTABLE QUANTITIES, AND 

NOTIFICATION 

1. The authority citation for Part 302 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Sec. 102 ofthe Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation, and 

Liability Act of 1980.42 U.S.C. 9602; sees. 311 

and 501(a) of the Federal Water Pollution 

Control Act, 33 U.S.C. 1321 and 1361. 

2. Section 302.5 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a) to read as 

follows: 

§ 302.5 Determination of reportable 

quantities. 

(a) Listed hazardous substances. The 

quantity listed in the column "Final RQ"-

for each substance in Table 302.4, or in 

Appendix B to Table 302.4, is the 

reportable quantity (RQ} for that 

substance. The RQs in Table 302.4 are in 

units of pounds based on chemical 

toxicity, while the RQs in Appendix B to 

Table 302.4 are in units of curies based 

on radiation hazard. Whenever the RQs 

in Table 302.4 and Appendix B to the 

table are in conflict, the lowest RQ shall 

apply. 

**** * 

3. Section 302.6 is amended by 

redesignating paragraph (c) as (d) and 

by revising paragraph (b) and the newly 

designated (d) and by adding a new 

paragraph (cj to read as follows: 

§ 302.6 Notification requirements. 

**-** * 

(b) Releases of mixtures or solutions 

of 

(1) Hazardous substances, except for 

radionuclides, are subject to this 

section's notification requirements only 

where a component hazardous 

substance of the mixture or solution is 

released in a quantity equal to or greater 

than its RQ. 

(2) Radionuclides are subject to this 

section's notification requirements only 

in the following circumstances: 

(i) If the identity and quantity (in 

curies) of each radionuclide in a 

released mixture or solution is known, 

the ratio between the quantity released 

(in curies) and the RQ for the 

radionuclide must be determined for 

each radionuclide. The only such 

releases subject to this section's 

notification requirements are those in 

which the sum of the ratios for the 

radionuclides in the mixture or solution 

released is equal to or greater than one. 

(ii) If the identity of each radionuclide 

in a released mixture or solution is 

known but the quantity released (in 

curies) of one or more of the 

radionuclides is unknown, the only such 

releases subject to this section's 

notification requirements are those in 

which the total quantity (in curies) of the 

mixture or solution released is equal to 

or greater than the lowest RQ of any 

individual radionuclide in the mixture or 

solution. 

(iii) If the identity of one or more 

radionuclides in a released mixture or 

solution is unknown (or if the identity of 

a radionuclide released by itself is 

unknown), the only such releases 

subject to this section's notification 

requirements are those in which the 

total quantity (in curies) released is 

equal to OT greater than either one curie* 

or the lowest RQ of any known 

individual radionuclide in the mixture or 

solution, whichever is lower. 

(c) The Following categories of 

releases are exempt from the 

notification requirements of this section: 

(1) Releases of those radionuclides that 

occur naturally in the soil from land 

holdings such as parks, golf courses, or 

other large tracts of land; (2) releases of 

radionuclides occurring naturally from 

the disturbance of land for purposes 

other than mining, such as for 

agricultural or construction activities; (3) 

releases of radionuclides from the 

dumping of coal and coal ash at utility 

and industrial facilities with coal-fired 

boilers; and (4) releases of radionuclides 

from coal and coal ash piles at utility 

and industrial facilities with coal-fired 

boilers. 

' (d) Except for releases of 

radionuclides, notification of the release 

of an RQ of solid particles of antimony, 

arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, 

copper, lead, nickel, selenium, silver, 

thallium, or zinc is not required if the 

mean diameter of the particles released 

is larger than 100 micrometers (0.004 

inches). 

§302.4 [Amended] 

4. In Section 302.4, Table 302.4 is 

amended by revising the entry for 

"Radionuclides" under the "Final RQ" 

column for "Pounds (kg)" to read: "§." 

5. In Section 302.4, Table 302.4 is 

amended by revising the footnote at the 

end of the table explaining "§" to read: 

"§—the adjusted RQs for 

radionuclides may be found in 

Appendix B to this table." 

6. In Section 302.4, Table 302.4 is 

amended by adding the following table 

as Appendix B: 

APPENDIX B—RADIONUCLIDES 

Radionuclide 

Radionuclides* _ 

Actinium-225 . 

Actinhim-227 

Alumimim-26 -

Americium-237 . 

Americium-240 

Americium-241 J 

Americium-244 

Ameridum-245 „ _..; 

Arrtimony-116.._ i 

Antimony-117 

Antimony-118m -,\ 

Arrtimony-120 

(16 <riin) 

Antimony-120 i 

(5.76 day).- ..; 

Antimony-122— .... 

Antimony-125*. . 

Antimony-126 _. 

AnBmony-128 

Antimony-128 

(9.01 tu) 

Argon-41 _ _ 

Areenic-72 

Arsenic-73 _ 

Arsenic-74 

Arsenic-76 — _ 

Arsenic-78 

Astatine-207 

AstaSne-211 

Barium-128 

Barium-131 „ 

Barium-133. 

Barium-135m , 

Barium-140 _. „...., 

Barium-142 

8erkelium-248 

Berkelium-247 _ 

Berkelium-249 _.. 

Bismuth-200 

Bismuth-201 

Bismuth-202 

Bismuth-203 

Atomic 

Number 

89 

89. 

89 

89 

89 

13 

95 

95 

35 

95 

95 

95 

95 

95 

95 

95 

95 

95 

95 

51 

51 

51 

51 

51 

51 

5 1 ' 

51 

51 

51 

51 

51 

51 

51 

51 

51 

51 

51 

51 

51 

18 

18 

33 

33 

33' 

33 

33 

33 

33 

33 

33 

85 

85 

56 

56 

56 

56 

56 

56 

56 

56 

56 

56 

56 

97 

97 

97 

97 

97 

4 

4 

83 

83 

83 

83 

Final flQ Ci (Bq) 

14(3.7E10) 

100(3.7E 12) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

10(3.7E 11) 

0.001 {3.7E 7) 

10{3.7E11) 

10(3.76 11) 

1000(3.7E13) 

100(3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10<3.7E11) 

0.01 <3.7E 8) 

0.01 r(3.7E 8) 

100(3.7E 12) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100(3.7E 12) 

1000<3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10<3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E11) 

1O00 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E11) 

10(3.7E11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100<3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E-13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100(3.7E 12) 

10<3.7E 11) 

100<3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100(3.7E 12) 

100(3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10<3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100(3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10<3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100(3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100(3.7E12) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

1O0(3.7E12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 
P.18 

Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 22539 

maiNr.xe.3X--

APPENDIX B—RADIONUCLIDES— 

Continued ., 

Radionuclide 

Bismuth-205 

Bismuth-206 

Bismuth-207 

Bismuth-210m.... 

Bismuth-210 

Bismuth-212 

Bismuth-213 

Bismuth-214 

Bromine-74m 

Bromine-74 

Bromine-75 

Bromine-76 

Bromine-77 

Bromine-80m 

Bromine-80 

Bromine-82 _ 

Bromine-83 

Bromine-84 

Cadmium-104 

Cadmium-107 

Cadmium-109 

Cadmium-113m.. 

Cadmium-113 

Cadmium-115m.. 

Cadmium-115 

Cadmium-117m.. 

Cadmium-117 

Calcium-41 

Calcium-45 

Calcium-47 

Californium-244.. 

Californium-246.. 

Californium-248.. 

Californium-249.. 

Califomium-250.. 

Californium-251.. 

Califomium-252.. 

Californium-253.. 

Californium-254.. 

Carbon-11 

Carbon-14 

Cerium-134 

Cerium-135 

Cerium-137m...... 

Cerium-137 

Cerium-139 

Cerium-141 

Cerium-143 

Cerium-144 

Cesium-125.. 

Cesium-127 

Cesium-129 

Cesium-130 

Cesium-131 

Cesium-132 

Cesium-134m 

Cesium-134 

Cesium-135m 

Cesium-135 

Cesium-136 

Cesium-137 

Cesium-138 

Chlorine-36 

Chlorine-38 

Chlorine-39 

Chromium-48 

Chrominm-49 

Chromium-51 

Cobalt-55 

Cobalt-56 

Cobalt-57 

Cobalt-58m 

Cobalt-58 

Cobalt-60m 

Cobalt-60 

Atomic 

Number 

83 

83 

83 

83 

83 

83 

83 

83 

35 

35 

35 

35 

35 

35 

35 

35 

35 

35 

48 

48 

48 

48 

48 

48 

48 

48 

48 

20 

20 

20 

98 

98 

98 

98 

98 

98 

98 

98 

98 

6 

6 

58 

58 

58 

58 

58 

58 

58 

58 

55 

55 

55 

55 

55 

55 

55 

55 

55 

55 

55 

55 

55 

17 

17 

17 

24 

24 

24 

27 

27 

27 

27 

27 

27 

27 

Final RQ Ci (Bq) 

10 (3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E11) 

10(3.7E11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

10(3.7E11) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E11) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

'1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10 (3.7E 11) 

APPENDIX B—RADIONUCLIDESContinued 

Radionuclide 

Cobalt-61 

'/ Cobalt-62m 

Copper-60 

Copper-61 

Copper-64 

Copper-67 

Curkim-238 .... 

Curium-240 

Curium-241 

Curium-242 

Curium-243 

Curium-244 

Curium-245 

Curium-246 

Curium-247 

Curium-248 

Curium-249 

Dysprosium-155.... 

Dysprosium-157.... 

Dysprosium-159.... 

Dysprosium-165 

DysprosKim-166 

Einsteinkim-250 

Einsteinium-251 

Einsteinium-253 

Einsteinium-254m.. 

Einsteinium-254 

Erbium-161 

Erblum-165 

Erbium-169 

Erbium-171 

Erbium-172 

Europium-145 

Europium-146 

Europium-147 

Europium-148 

Europium-149 

Europium-150 

(12.6 hr) 

Europium-150 

(34.2 yr) 

Europium-152m 

Europium-152 

Europium-154 

Europium-155 

Europium-156 

Europium-157 

Europium-158 

Fermium-252 

Fermium-253 

Fermium-254 

Fermium-255 

Fermium-257 

Fluorine-18 

Francium-222 

Franctum-223 

Gadolinium-145 

Gadolinium-146 

Gadolinium-147 

Gadolinium-148 

Gadolinium-149 

Gadolinium-151 

Gadolinium-152 

Gadollnium-153 

Gadolinium-159 

Gallium-65 

Gallium-66 

Gallium-67 

Gallium-68 

Gallium-70 

Gallium-72 

Gallium-73 

Gemianium-66 

Germanium-67 

Atomic 

number Final RQ Ci (Bq) 

27 

27 

29 

29 

29 

29 

96 

96 

96 

96 

96 

96 

96 

96 

96 

96 

96 

66 

66 

66 

66 

66 

99 

99 

99 

99 

99 

68 

68 

68 

68 

68 

63 

6E 

63 

63 

63 

63 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

10(3.7E11) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

0.001 (3.7E 7) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100(3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

10O(3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100(3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

'10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

63 

63 

63 

63 

63 

63 

63 

63 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

9 

87 

87 

64 

64 

64 

64 

64 

64 

6« 

64 

64 

31 

31 

31 

31 

31 

31 

31 

32 

32 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E11) 

10(3.7E11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1O0(3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

0.001 (3.7E 7) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

0.001 (3.7E) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100(3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

APPENDIX B—RADIONUCLIDESContinued 

Radionuclide Atomic 

number 

Germanium-68 

Germanium-69 

Germanium-71 

Germanium-75 

Germanium-77 

Germanium-78 

Gold-193 

Gold-194 

Gold-195 

Gold-198m 

Gold-198 

Gold-199 

Gold-200m 

Gold-200 

Gold-201 

Hafnium-170 

Hafnium-172 

Hafnium-173 

Hatnium-175 

Hafnium-177m 

Hafnium-178m 

Hafnium-179m 

Hafnium-180m 

Hafnium-181 

Hamium-182m 

Hafnium-182 

Hafnium-183 

Hafnium-184 

Holmium-155 

Holmium-157 

Holmium-159 

Holmium-161 

Holmium-162m 

Holmium-162 

Holmium-164m 

Holmium-164 

Holmium-166m 

Holmium-166 

Holmium-167 ".. 

Hydrogen-3 

lndiiim-109 

lndium-110 (69.1 min) 

lndium-110(4.9hr) 

lndium-111 

lndium-112 

Indium-113m 

Indium-114m 

Indium-115m 

lndium-115 

Indium-116m 

Indium-117m ,.. 

lndium-117 

Indium-119m 

Iodine-120m 

lodine-120 

lodine-121 

lodine-123 

lodine-124 

lodine-125 

lodine-126 

lodine-128 

lodine-129 

lodtne-130 

lodine-131 

lodine-132m 

lodine-132 

lodine-133 

lodine-134 

lodine-135 

lridium-182 

lridium-184 

32 

32 

32 

32 

32 

32 

79 

79 

79 

79 

79 

79 

79 

79 

79 

72 

72 

72 

72 

72 

72 

72 

72 

72 

72 

72 

72 

72 

67 

67 

67 

67 

67 

67 

67 

67 

67 

67 

67 

1 

49 

49 

49 

49 

49 

49 

49 

49 

49 

49 

49 

49 

49 

53 

53 

53 

53 

53 

53 

53 

53 

53 

53 

53 

53 

53 

53 

53 

53 

77 

77 

Final RQ Cl (Bq) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100(3.7E12) 

10(3.7E11) 

100(3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E11) 

100(3.7E12) 

100(3.7E12) 

10(3.7E11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000(3.7E13) 

100(3.7E 12) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

100(3.7E 12) 

100(3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000(3.7E13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100(3.7E'12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E11) 

100(3.7E12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

0.001 (3.7E 7) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 
P.19 

22540 Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 

APPENDIX B—RADIONUCLIDES 

Radionuclide Atomic 

number 

lridium-185 

lridium-186 

lridium-187 

lridium-188 

lridium-189 

Iridium-190m 

lridium-190 

Iridium-192m 

lridium-192 

Iridium-194m 

lridiurtl-194 

Iridium-195m 

lridiiim-195 ... 

lron-52 

lron-55 

lron-59 

lron-60 .'. 

Krypton-74 

Krypton-76 .-. 

Krypton-77 .... 

Krypton-79 ..... 

Krypton-81 

Krypton-83m......... 

Krypton-85m......... 

Krypton-85 

Krypton-8l7 — 

Krypton-88 

Lanthanum-131.... 

Lanthanum-132.... 

Lanthanum-135.... 

Lanthanum-137.... 

Lanthanum-138.... 

Lanthanum-140.... 

Lanthanum-141.... 

Lanthanum-142.... 

. Lanthanum-143.... 

Lead-I95m 

Lead-198.'. 

Lead-199..— 

Lead-200 

Lead-201., 

Lead-202m ... 

Lead-202_ :... 

Lead-203 .'... 

Lead-205 

Lead-209 

Lead-210 

Lead-211 

Lead-212 

Lead-214 

Lutetium-169 

Lutetium-170 

Lutetium-171 

Lutetium-172 

Lutetium-173 

Lutetium-174m 

Lutetium-174 

Lutetium-176m 

Lutetium-176........ 

Lutetium-177m 

Lutetium-177 

Lutetium-178m 

Lutetium-178 

Lutetium-179 

Magnesium-28 

Manganese-51 

Manganese-52m.. 

Manganese-52 

Manganese-53 

Manganese-54 

77 

77 

77 

77 

77 

77 

77 

77 

77 

77 

77 

77 

77 

26 

26 

26 

26 

36 

36 

36 

36 

36 

36 

36 

36 

36 

36 

57 

57 

57 

57 

57 

57 

57 

57 

57 

. 62 

82 

82 

82 

82 

82 

82 

82 

82 

82 

82 

82 

82 

62 

71 

71 

71 

71 

71 

71 

71 

71 

71 

71 

71 

71 

71 

71 

12 

25 

25 

25 

25 

25 

Final RQ Ci (Bq) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E11) 

100(3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100(3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

. 10(3.7E11) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

10(3.7E11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100(3.7E12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E11) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E11) 

10(3.7E11) 

10(3.7E11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E11) 

10(3.7E11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

10(3.7E11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

- 10(3.7E11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E-11) 

APPENDIX B-RADIONUCLIDES— 

Continued 

Radionuclide 

Manganese-56 

Mendelevium-257 

Mercury-193 

Mercury-195 

Mercury-203 

Molybdenum-90 

Neodymium-136 

Neodymium-138 

Neodymium-139m 

Neodymium-139 

Neptunium-233 

Neptunium-234 

Neptunium-235 

Neptunium-236 (1.2 E 

5yr) 

Neptunium-236 

(22.5 hr) 

Neptuntum-237.... ... 

Neptunium-238 ; ... 

Neptunium-239 : 

Neptunium-240 

Nickel-56.„ 

Nicke(-57 

Nickel-59 „ 

Nickel-63 

Nickel-65 _... 

Nickel-66 

Niobium-88 

Niobium-89 (66 min)~... 

Niobium-89 (122 min).. 

Niobium-90 

Niobium-93m 

Niobium-94 

Nk)bium-95m 

Mfobium-95 

Niobium-96 

Niobium-97 

Niobium-98 

Osmium-181 

Osmium-182 

Osmium-189m „.. 

Osmium-191 

Osmium-193 

Palladium-100 

Palladium-101.... 

F'alladkim-lOS 

Palladium-107 ..„ 

Palladium-109 

Atomic 

number 

25 

101 

101 

80 

80 

80 

80 

60 

80 

80 

80 

80 

42 

42 

42 

42 

42 

60 

60 

60 

60 

60 

60 

60 

60 

93 

93 

93 

93 

93 

93 

, 93 

i 93 

93 

93 

28 

28 

28 

28 

28 

28 

41 

41 

41 

41 

41 

41 

41 

41 

41 

41 

41 

76 

76 

76 

76 

76 

76 

76 

76 

76 

46 

46 

. 46 

46 

46 

15 

Final RQ Ci (Bq) 

100(3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

10J3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

100(3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10 (3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100(3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12} 

10(3.7E 11) 

10 (3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

400 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10J3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10J3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10 (3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

APPENDIX B—RADIONUCLIDES— 

Continued 

Radionuclide 

Phosphorus-33 

Platinum-186 

Platinum-188 

Platinum-189 

Platinum-191 

Platinum-193m 

Platinum-193 

Platinum-195m 

Platinum-197 

Platinum-199 

Platinum-200 

Plutonium-234 

Plutonium-235 

Plutonium-236 

Plutonium-237 

Plutonium-238 

Pk)tonium-239 

Plutonium-240 

Plutonium-241 

Plutonium-242 

Plutonium-243 

Plutonium-244 

Polonium-203 

Polonium-205 

Polonium-210 

Potassium-40 „ 

Potassium-44 

Potasstum-45 

Praseodymium-136 

Praseodymium-137 

Prasepdymtum-J38frt.... 

Praseodymium-139.: 

Praseodymium-142m.... 

Praseodymium-142....... 

Praseodymium-143 

Praseodymium-144. 

Praseodymkim-145 

Promethium-141 

Protactinium-227 

Protactinium-228 

Protactinium-230 

Protactinium-231 

Protactinium-232 

Protactinium-233 _.. 

Protactinium-234 

Radium-223 _ 

Radium-224 

Radium-225..... 

Radium-226<1> 

Radium-227 

Radium-228 

Radbn-220 

Radon-222 . 

Atomic 

number 

15 

78 

78 

78 

78 

78 

78 

78 

. 78 

78 

78 

78 

94 

94 

94 

94 

94 

94 

94 

94 

94 

94 

94 

94 

84 

84 

84 

84 

19 

19 

19 

19 

19 

59 

59 

59 

•59 

59 

59 

59 

•59 

59 

59 

61 

61 

61 

61 

61 

61 

61 

61 

61 

61 

61 

91 

91 

91 

91 

91 

. 91 

91 

88 

88 

88 

88 

• 88 

88 

86 

86 

Final RQ Ci (Bq) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E11) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3:7E 11) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

10(3.7E 11) 

0.01 (3.7E 8) 

10(3.7E 11) 

- ' 100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E11) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

10(3.7E11) 

1 (3.7E10) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

0:1 (3.7E 9) 

0.1 (3.7E 9) 

0.H3.7E9) 
i n 

3 

0 

00 

d) 

K 

C 

CO 

a 

r—t 

3 

05 

05 

CO 

05 

•* 

N 

co 

Pr, 

CO 

- O 

03 

OJ 

c 

t 3 

cu 

OJ 

00 

I 

6 

Z 

lO 

o 

> 

00 

V 

Us 

bl 

QJ 

• c 

fa 

CO 

UJ 

Q 

_ l 

o 

C_) CU 

I o 

rit " 

m 

Q 

2 

UJ 

D. 

CL 

< 

O 

o 

cr. 

o E 

< § 

-CMT-^-CVICMCOCMCMC M cvj *- co • T-cviocoi^mcvjr^CMCOi--cvjT-cMCv)CMcocMCO ' 

LU UJU J * ^ UJ ' 

_ _ f^h-h-L U r- L _ _ 

-OCOCOO)CJa>0)CM01COCOCO ' 

^"UIUJUJUJUJ ,"Ui 1 

uiujujujujujujujuiujujujuiujujujujujujf^r^f^u j £ UJ wwujwuJLUiutuujujuJUJWUJLUUJUJUJUjwuJwuJUJUJ ^ 

eo co coco co co co co co co co co eo co co co eo co co T^-" - CO "-^CO CO CO CO c^c^e^c^co^c^c^c^c^c^c^c^eo^c^c^r^^ ^ 

ooooo o 

OV-OT-'-O----; -

OOOOOOOOOOO*-OQOOOOOOOOQOOOOOOOOOOOOO ^ 

— - i5 c iO0OO'-0^OOOOOO'-Oi-^-OO- ^ — © £ 

OO"-©©©©©©©©© ' 

O O 000000*-0< -

T - O O O T - i - O <rOT-000000 0 — _;OOO»-00« -

° O O O O ru^iou^i^ioti^^^T-^r-T--i-Y-^^^ooooooooc»e»a>c»aiOTa>o)ooooooooooooocye\ ] 

<G mQ -Q & (O to CO CO OS CO CO CO as CO CQ co to cb cn 0> <fi Gl Ol o> 

£ „ B E E E 

. 2 4 ' •- — • - • - • 

w — w 5 Q) 35 

H FhK H 

E 

. **r -*r cn 

i O) O. O) 

i.2.2. 2 

! "(5 "3 "3 

E 

N . CO CO 

OJ OJ OJ 

.2 .2 .2 

0)00 0 

* - eg CM cvj 

5 to rs co OJ o 

P CM CM CM CM CO 

CM CM CM CVJ CVJ CVJ 

*-- CM 

CO CO 

CM CM 

EEEEiEEE E 3 3 3 3 

ajrtajrtcortrtrt o 

2 3 

S -c -c -c -c •_ 

" ~ £ ;C £ ,-

C> * ^ Cxi CO 

OJ-r-^-^-T-T^T-T-t -

EEEEiE&EE o 

3 . 3 3 3 »~ * - •" 

E E 

T - CO f - OJ 

0333333 3 

:eei£i££i5 c c e c 

PFF F 

cor*-ooa*,-.nr*-co „ ^, _ 

. ..IT c i'c ^ t c c c222 2 

^^n n into r- *b £ | S H S S 2 £ BS EEE E 

»-- *7 •-- c c g>d>*3*ri.o*a.g>d?<| £ c 

i-H H t-;ir h- Kt - h-.l-t- HI—t- H hhh-333 3 

ccc! : 

(0 to eo rt cd rt 

3 3 3 

CO 

UJ 

a 

_i 

o 

2 

o 

< 

I 

CO 

X 

o 

z 

UJ 

a 

a 

< 

o 

o 

tr 

co»- 'T- co ' T- *y~ 'r- CM CO ' T- V- CM CO CM CO •»- CVJ i - Os 

UJUJ ujuiUJUJUJUJUtujujujuiujiJJUJUJUJr v 

r^r^r^r^sr^r^t^r^i^f^t^r^.^.^f^r^r^p- ; 

COCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO *-"* 

T-CMOCMCMCMCMT-COCOCOCOCMCO^CM^COC3«CMCM^COT-CMCM^CM^COCOCO^^r-^^T-cO^ W 

UUJUJIUUJLUUJUJLLIUJLUllJUJUJUJLULULiJUJLUliJLU 

copicocococico'cocoojcococococococococ o 

O O OOOOOOOOOO iOOOQOOOOOfiOO*-OOOQOOOOOOOOQOOOOOOO * O ©-Q OOOOOOQOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O O 

O^-^-O'-'-'-OOI-T-OCJOOT-O'-T- O OOOO^QQOOOOt-O^OOOOOT-Oi-00*^O^OOO^T--^T---^-i~Oi-Q'--0*-000000*-0*- 0 o 

— — — — - — , - t - r- y- t - OOOOT- O * - O O O ••— -r- * O ' f* »- • * * OO O O O O OOO'-'-T - * - i - o 

o E 

E E '• E : E • : E 

c*-)Lor*-r*-*3.0)r-T-cyc*-)CO'*t -

CM-OJ CM.CM OJCNJCOCOCOCOCOCO 

EEttf t 

© <B CD 

-"•'JS .2 

5o5coo5c/5o3tSco 

^EEEEE E 

3 3 3 3 3 3 " 

.—. ._ .— .,— .— .--. '2.3 3..Zm:

*£:J3.Jml'3 553532 5 ^ P 

r^ OJ o »-

*t **t io m 

-EEE E £ .2 .2 ,2 5 

o "ai QJ 0) 

E 

co ^ m <o to LO LO in 

iiii* 

.2 =..2 .2 o 

-ei-ef s. 

CD *D CD 5 

l-l-l-h -

co 

UJ 

g 

o 

o."8 

CO 

X 

Q 

z 

UJ 

a 

a. 

< 

o 

a 

cr 

ncoc j ' ^ ^*-*-*-«nnnn«rr-WT-^--c-jN^pnncvT*r^^-on^nWT-cyp^nco«-offl--c*innic*)-- w 

*-^» - m- ^-*---^^^^^^r---*---*--^^^*---^r-----.r-.:^^^^T*-^*-T----*--^T-.*----T-^T-^^*--^-----^^ ^ 

UIUiL U UJ UJUJUJUJUIUJUJUJUJUJUJUJUJUJUJLUUJLUlULUUJUJUJ'LU'UJUJlUUJUJLUmUJUJUJUJUJUJUJUJI***r ^ 

•""•. -^ ^-. -^

 fs

-. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^

 r ^r

* : r s .*^ f s ;

 fs :, s ;N

;

 ,s ;r

^'^ r^

r

^

r

^

f

^ ; r^

r

^ ' s: ' s; ^'^'^^^cori^'^r-;'^^^^-;^ r^c^^'^^^^' s;r-. r % ; ' s*;f s-:^' s: f s*;Cv: 

C3c*3c5 P5 nooorjocoonnnnnnnwcjnoonocont.oownnncoconnn*.*.*' ) ^—' —' co co co COCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOC-OCO'CTCOCO 

O O Q O OOOO'QOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOQO O ^- o OOOOOOOOOOOOO O 0000000Q000--00 0 

o o o -- ^-r-^-^SooQpo-^^o*-^*-oo ^ o o oo--.^----oo^oo-- o •oooo,-:.-;--oooo*-o*-o--ooo,-----ooo o oo o 

oo-» - ^oooo*-,-- - -o*-..ooo- - o o o> - *- o o o -- ^ ° --0-- 0 -- *- oo ^ ooo o ^o o 

« 5 

o E 

< § 

rs.r^^-^^^*^-^-^-r^Tr^^^xtT^^^^^^coCTcocococococococo'«•Tt^J'^• • 

t^ CO »- CVI h- Is

- CO CO _; 

iiii^ 

3 3 3 3 -N; 

' C C C ' C CM 

CO QJ Q) -QJ -rJZ mZ XL JZ — 

tx cc cc cr 

( D S OO) CM in'cpr^'-coific D

 : E E : '• • E oonmo)- - t - CO 

CO CO 

E E , 

• ••J.»».J«a«J8«-«J8???SSScccccccc58i i S£££e£.EEEEEEEEESgS-iiSi«»aS»«Ji8S| S 3=iz3--)-3fl]*Q*ococaa*acdcdcduuooouuoa}CDCDCDCDa}CD- = .-=.-=.-= cco:cccEOCc/}wc/>cnwcncScn<flc/)OT<oc/)-c/)c/5coc>)coc/3cow io io co w iS 
P.21 

22542 Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 

APPENDIX B—RADIONUCLIDES— 

Continued 

Radionuclide 

Xenon-122 

Xenon-123 

Xenon-125 

Xenon-127 

Xenon-129m 

Xenon-131m 

Xenon-133m 

Xenon-133 

Xenon-135m 

Xenon-135._ 

Xenon-138 

Ytterbium-162 

Ytterbium-166 

Ytterbium-167 

Ytterbium-169 

Ytterblum-175 

Ytterbium-177 

Ytterblum-178 

Yttrium-86m 

Yttrium-86 

Yttnum-87 

Yttrium-88 

Yttrium-90m 

Yttrium-90 

Yttrium-91m 

Yttrium-91 

Atomic 

Number 

54 

54 

54 

64 

54 

54 

54 

54 

54 

54 

54 

70 

70 

70 

70 

70 

70 

70 

39 

39 

39 

39 

39 

39 

39 

39 

Final R Q Ci (Bq) 

100 

10 

100 

100 

1000 

1000 

1000 

1000 

10 

100 

10 

1000 

10 

1000 

10 

100 

1000 

1000 

1000 

10 

10 

10 

100 

10 

1000 

10 

(3.7E 121 

(3.7E 11 

(3.7E 12] 

(3.7E 12] 

(3.7E 13; 

(3.7E 13; 

(3.7E 13; 

(3.7E 13] 

(3.7E 11 

(3.7E 12; 

(3.7E 11 

(3.7E 13; 

(3.7E11 

(3.7E 13; 

(37E 11 

(3.7E 12; 

(3.7E 13; 

(3.7E 13; 

(3.7E 13; 

(3.7E 11 

(3.7E 11 

(3.7E 11 

(3,7E 12; 

(3.7E11 

(3.7E 13) 

(3.7E 11 

APPENDIX B—RADIONUCLIDESContinued 

Radionuclide 

Yttrium-92 

Yttrium-93 

Yttrium-94 

Yttrium-95 

Zinc-62 

Zinc-63 

Zinc-65 

Zinc-69 

Zinc-72 

Zirconhtm-86 _ 

Zirconium-89 

Zirconium-93 

Zirccnium-95 

Atomic 

Number 

39 

39 

39 

39 

30 

30 

30 

30 

30 

30 

30 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

40 

Final RQ Ci (Bq) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

10(3.7E11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1000 (3.7E 13) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

10(3.7E 11) 

100 (3.7E 12) 

1 (3.7E 10) 

10(3.7E11) 

10(3.7E11) 

Ci—Curie. The curie represents a rate ot radioactive decay. One curie is the quantity ot any radioactive nuclide which undergoes 3.7E 10 disintegrations 

per second. 

Bq—Becquerel. The becquerel represents a rate 

of radioactive decay. One becquerel ia the quantity 

ol any radioactive nuclide which undergoes one 

disintegration per second. One curie is equal to 3.7E 

10 becquerel. 

«-— Final RQs lor all radionuclides apply to chemical compounds containing the radionuclides and elemental forms regardless ol the diameter ol pieces ol 

solid material. 

A—The adjusted RQ of one curie applies to all 

radionuclides not otherwise listed. Whenever the 

RQs in Table 302.4 and this appendix to the table 

are in conflict the lowest RQ shall apply. For example, uranyl acetate and uranyl nitrate have adjusted 

RQs shown in Table 302.4 of 100 pounds, equivalent to about one-tenth the RQ level lor uranium-238 

listed in this appendix. 

E—Exponent to the base 10. For example, 1.3E 2 

is equal to 130 while 1.3E 3 is equal to 1300. 

m—Signifies a nuclear isomer which is a radionuclide in a higher energy metastable state relative to 

the parent isotope. 

<•*—Notification requirements lor releases ol mixtures or solutions ol radionuclides can be found in 

Section 302.6(b) ol this rule. Final RQs lor the 

following lour common radionuclide mixtures are 

provided: radium-226 in secular equilibrium with its 

daughters (0.053 curie); natural uranium (0.1 curie); 

natural uranium in secular equilibrium with its daughters (0.052 curie); and natural thorium in secular 

equilibrium with its daughters (0.011 curie). 

[FR Doc. 89-8416 Filed 5-23-89; 8 15 ami 

BILUNQ CODE 6560-50 
Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 1989 / Rules and Regulations 

P.22 

22543 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 355 

[FRL-3574-2] 

Reportable Quantity Adjustment— 

Radionuclides 

AGENCY: U.S Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Technical amendment. 

SUMMARY: Sections 103(a) and 103(b) of 

the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended, 

require that persons in charge of vessels 

or facilities from which a hazardous 

substance has been released within a 

24-hour period in a quantity equal to or 

greater than its reportable quantity 

immediately notify the National 

Response Center of the release. As 

discussed elsewhere in today's Federal 

Register, the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) has decided to 

exempt from CERCLA notification 

requirements the following four 

categories of releases of radionuclides: 

(1) Releases of radionuclides that occur 

naturally in soil from land holdings such 

as parks, golf courses, or other large 

tracts of land; (2) releases of 

radionuclides occurring naturally from . 

the disturbance of land for purposes 

other than mining, such as for 

agricultural or construction activities; (3) 

releases of radionuclides from the 

dumping of coal and coal ash at utility 

and industrial facilities with coal-fired 

boilers; and (4) releases of radionuclides 

from coal and coal ash piles at utility 

and industrial facilities with coal-fired 

boilers. These releases also are exempt 

from the reporting requirements of 

section 304 of the Emergency Planning 

and Community Right to Know Act 

(EPCRA), also known as Title III of the 

Superfund Amendments and 

Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA). 

Under SARA Section 304(a)(3), releases 

of radionuclides must be reported to the 

community emergency coordinator for 

the Local Emergency Planning '•• 

Committee (LEPC) and to the State 

Emergency Response Commission 

(SERC) of any State that is likely to be 

affected by the release, if the release 

occurs at a facility at which a hazardous 

chemical is produced, used, or stored, 

arid if notification of the release is 

required under section 103(a) of 

CERCLA. Because of today's 

exemptions of certain radionuclide 

releases from CERCLA notification 

requirements, as described above, such 

exempted releases also are exempt from 

the reporting requirements of section 304 

of SARA. 

This Technical Amendment also adds 

language to 40 CFR 355.40(a)(2) that was 

inadvertently deleted in publishing the 

final rule adjusting Threshold Planning 

Quantities for Extremely Hazardous 

Substances (52 FR 13396; April 22,1987). 

This amendment adds paragraph 

355.40(a) (2) (iv) that provides that 

releases exempted from CERCLA 

section 103(a) reporting by CERCLA 

section 103(e) (which applies to the 

application, handling, or storage of a 

pesticide registered under the Federal 

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide 

Act) also are exempt from reporting 

under SARA section 304. In addition, 

this Technical Amendment clarifies the 

language in paragraph (a)(2)(v). Section 

355.40(a) (2) (v) exempts from section 304 

reporting any occurrence not meeting 

the definition of release under section 

101(22) of CERCLA. Such occurrences 

are also exempt from reporting under 

CERCLA Section 103(a). 

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 24,1989. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ms. Pamela Harris, Project Officer, 

Response Standards and Criteria 

Branch, Emergency Response Division 

(WH-548B), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, 

Washington, DC 20460, or the RCRA/ 

Superfund Hotline, 1-800/424-9346; in 

Washington DC metropolitan area, 1-

202/382-3000. 

Dated; May 11,1989. 

Jonathan Z. Cannon, 

Acting Assistant Administrator. 

For the reasons set forth above, Title 

40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 

amended as follows: 

PART 355—EMERGENCY PLANNING 

AND NOTIFICATION 

1. The authority citation for Part 355 is 

revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 11002 and 11048. 

2. Section 355.40 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (a)(2)(v) and 

(a)(2)(vi), and by revising paragraph 

(a)(2)(iv) to read as follows ((a)(2) 

introductory text is republished): 

§ 355.40 Emergency release notification. 

(a) Applicability. 

(1)* * * 

(2) This section does not apply to: 

* * * 

(iv) Any release of a pesticide product 

exempt from CERCLA section 103(a) 

reporting under section 103(e) of 

CERCLA; 

(v) Any release not meeting the 

definition of release under Section 

101(22) of CERCLA, and therefore 

exempt from Section 103(a) reporting; 

and 

(vi) Any radionuclide release which 

occurs (A) naturally in soil from land 

holdings such as parks, golf courses, or 

other large tracts of land; (B) naturally 

from the disturbance of land for 

purposes other than mining, such as, for 

agricultural or construction activities; 

(C) from the dumping of coal and coal 

ash at utility and industrial facilities 

with coal-fired boilers; and (D) from coal 

and coal ash piles at utility and 

industrial facilities with coal-fired 

boilers. 

**** * 

[FR Doc. 89-12180 Filed 5-23-89; 8:45 am) 

BILLING CODE 6560-SO-M 
P.23 

Monday /?/J ~ >'' 7 

November 30, 1992 ' 

Part IV 

Environmental 

Protection Agency 

40 CFR Parts 302 and 355 

Administrative Reporting Exemptions for 

Certain Radionuclide Releases; Proposed 

Rule 
P.24 

56726 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 230 / Monday, Novembe r 30, 1992 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 302 and 355 

[FRL-4153-7] 

Administrative Reporting Exemptions 

for Certain Radionuclide Releases 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This notice of proposed 

rulemaking provides notice of, and 

requests comments on, certain 

administrative exemptions from the 

notification requirements under section 

103 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 

(CERCLA), as amended, and section 304 

of the Emergency Planning and 

Community Right-to-Know Act 

(EPCRA), also known as title III of the 

Superfund Amendments and 

Reauthorization Act (SARA title III). 

The administrative reporting exemptions 

are proposed to be granted for: Releases 

of naturally occurring radionuclides 

from large generally undisturbed land 

holdings, such as golf courses and parks; 

releases of radionuclides naturally 

occurring from the disturbance of large 

areas of land for purposes other than 

mining, such as farming or building 

construction; releases of radionuclides 

from the dumping of coal and coal ash at 

utility and industrial facilities with coalfired boilers; and radionuclide releases 

to all media from coal and coal ash piles 

at utility and industrial facilities with 

coal-fired boilers. 

The Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) had originally granted these 

administrative reporting exemptions in a 

final rule on May 24,1989 (54 FR 22524) 

because EPA believed that reporting of 

radionuclide releases from these four 

source categories would serve no useful 

purpose. Subsequent to promulgation of 

that final rule, the United States Court of 

Appeals for the-District of Columbia 

held in The Fertilizer Institute v. United 

States Environmental Protection Agency 

(935 F.2d 1303 (DC Cir. 1991)) that the 

administrative reporting exemptions 

were not properly promulgated because 

they were issued without sufficient 

notice and opportunity for public 

comment. The Court, however, allowed 

the exemptions to remain in place while 

EPA provides the public with notice of, 

and the opportunity to comment on, the 

exemptions. This notice of proposed 

rulemaking provides such notice of, and 

requests comments on, the four abovementioned reporting exemptions. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before January 29,1993. 

ADDRESSES: Comments: Comments 

should be submitted in triplicate to: 

Emergency Response Division, 

Attention: Superfund Docket Clerk, 

Docket Number 102RQ-RN-1, Superfund 

Docket Room M2427, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Mail 

Code OS-245, 401 M Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20460. 

Docket: Copies of materials relevant 

to this rulemaking are contained in room 

M2427 at the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20460 (Docket Number 

102RQ-RN-1). The docket is available 

for inspection between the hours of 9 

a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding Federal holidays. 

Appointments to review the docket can 

be made by calling (202) 260-3046. The 

public may copy up to 267 pages from 

any regulatory docket at no cost. For 268 

pages or more, the first 100 copies are 

free and additional copies cost $.15 per 

page. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ms. Gerain Perry, Acting Chief of the 

Response Regulations Development 

Section, Emergency Response Division 

(5202G), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, 

DC 20460; or the RCRA/Superfund 

Hotline at (800) 424-9346 (in the 

Washington, DC metropolitan area, 

contact (703) 920-9810). The 

Telecommunications Device for the Deaf 

(TDD) Hotline number is (800) 553-7672 

(in the Washington, DC metropolitan 

area, contact (703) 486-3323). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

contents of today's document are listed 

in the following outline: 

I. Introduction 

A. Statutory Authority 

B. Background of this Rulemaking 

II. Regulatory Reporting Exemptions 

III. Regulatory Analyses 

A. Executive Order 12291 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

I. Introduction 

A. Statutory Authority 

The Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act of 1980 (CERCLA) (Pub. L. 96-510), 

42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq., as amended by 

the Superfund Amendments and 

Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) 

(Pub. L. 99-499), establishes broad 

Federal authority to respond to releases 

or threats of releases of hazardous 

substances from vessels and facilities. 

Section 101(14) of CERCLA defines the 

term "hazardous substance" primarily 

by reference to other environmental 

statutes. Section 102 of CERCLA gives 

the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) authority to designate 

additional hazardous substances. 

Currently there are 783 CERCLA 

hazardous substances. 

Section 103 of CERCLA requires the 

person in charge of a vessel or facility to 

notify the National Response Center 

immediately when he has knowledge 

that there is a release of a hazardous 

substance in an amount equal to or 

greater than the reportable quantity 

(RQ) for that substance. As established 

by EPA in an earlier RQ adjustment 

rulemaking (50 FR 13463, April 4,1985), a 

24-hour period is used for measuring 

whether an RQ or more of a hazardous 

substance has been released (i.e., only 

releases of an RQ or more within 24 

hours need to be reported). Section 

102(b) of CERCLA establishes RQs at 

one pound for releases of hazardous 

substances, except for those substances 

for which RQs were established 

pursuant to section 311(b)(4) of the 

Clean Water Act (CWA). Section 102(a) 

of CERCLA authorizes EPA to adjust the 

RQs for all hazardous substances by 

regulation. 

CERCLA sections 102(a), 103, and 115 

(the general rulemaking authority under 

CERCLA) together provide EPA with 

authority to grant administrative 

reporting exemptions. Such exemptions 

may be granted for releases of 

hazardous substances which pose little 

or no risk or to which a Federal 

response is infeasible or inappropriate. 

EPA has determined that requiring 

reports of such releases serves little or 

no useful purpose and could, instead, 

impose a significant burden on the 

Federal response system and on the 

persons responsible for notifying the 

Federal government of the release. 

Through such reporting exemptions, the 

Federal response system is able to more 

effectively focus on release reports that 

are more likely to pose a significant 

hazard to human health and the 

environment. In order to more 

effectively protect human health, 

welfare, and the environment and to 

implement CERCLA more efficiently, 

therefore, EPA may grant administrative 

exemptions from the release notification 

requirements of CERCLA for certain 

releases of hazardous substances. 

In addition to the reporting 

requirements established pursuant to 

CERCLA, section 304 of the Emergency 

Planning and Community Right-ToKnow Act of 1986 (EPCRA or SARA title 

III) requires the owner or operator of 

certain facilities to immediately report 

releases of CERCLA hazardous 

substances at or above their RQ to State 
P.25 

Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 230 / Monday, Novembe r 30, 1992 / Proposed Rules 56727 

and local entities. The notification is to 

be given to the community emergency 

coordinator for each local emergency 

planning committee (LEPC) for any area 

likely to be affected by the release and 

to the State emergency response 

commission (SERC) of any State likely 

to be affected by the release. Through 

this notification, State and local officials 

can assess whether a response to the 

release is appropriate, regardless of 

whether the Federal government intends 

to respond. EPCRA section 304 

notification requirements apply only to 

releases that have the potential for offsite exposure and that are from facilities 

that produce, use, or store a "hazardous 

chemical," as defined by regulations 

promulgated under the Occupational 

Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 CFR 

1910.1200(c)) and by section 311 of 

EPCRA. 

B. Background of this Rulemaking 

A major purpose of the section 103(a) 

notification requirements is to alert the 

appropriate government officials to 

releases of hazardous substances that 

may require a response to protect public 

health or welfare or the environment. 

EPA emphasizes that an RQ is merely a 

trigger for informing the government of a 

release so that the appropriate 

government personnel can evaluate the 

need for a response action and can 

undertake any necessary response 

action in a timely fashion. Federal 

personnel evaluate all reported releases, 

but in some cases will not initiate a 

response because the release of an RQ 

does not pose a hazard in all 

circumstances. Government personnel 

assess each reported release on a caseby-case basis to determine the 

appropriate response action, if any. 

Radionuclides are CERCLA hazardous 

substances because they are hazardous 

air pollutants pursuant to section 112 of 

the Clean Air Act. Radionuclides 

initially had a statutory one-pound RQ 

pursuant to CERCLA section 102(b). 

EPA recognized that an RQ of one 

pound for radionuclides was not 

appropriate because radionuclides are 

not generally measured in units of 

pounds, and releases of much less than 

one pound of radionuclides may present 

a substantial threat to public health or 

welfare or the environment. On March 

16,1987, EPA published a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 

concerning the adjustment of RQs for 

radionuclide releases (52 FR 8172). The 

comment period ended on May 15,1987. 

A total of 28 comment letters, totaling 

about 150 pages, were received, five of 

which were received after the comment 

deadline. The comments received, 

together with the Agency's responses, 

are contained in "Responses to 

Comments on the Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking on the Adjustment of 

Reportable Quantities for 

Radionuclides" (Responses to 

Comments), which is available for 

inspection in the Superfund Docket in 

room M2427, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (OS-240), 401 M 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460 

(Docket Number 102RQ-RN). 

The Agency promulgated a final rule 

(54 FR 22524; May 24,1989) to adjust the 

RQs for all (approximately 1,500) 

radionuclides. In preparing the final rule, 

EPA considered carefully all of the 

public comments submitted on the 

proposals made in the March 16,1987 

NPRM. At the time of the final rule, EPA 

granted four administrative exemptions 

from CERCLA section 103 and EPCRA 

section 304 reporting requirements 

based on those comments. The Agency 

exempted: (1) Releases of naturally 

occurring radionuclides from large 

generally undisturbed land holdings, 

such as golf courses and parks; (2) 

releases of radionuclides naturally 

occurring from the disturbance of large 

areas of land for purposes other than 

mining, such as farming or building 

construction; (3) releases of 

radionuclides from the dumping of coal 

and coal ash at utility and industrial 

facilities with coal-fired boilers; and (4) 

radionuclide releases to all media from 

coal and coal ash piles at utility and 

industrial facilities with coal-fired 

boilers. 

Subsequently, the United States Court 

of Appeals for the District of Columbia 

rendered a decision in The Fertilizer 

Institute v. United States Environmental 

Protection Agency (935 F2d 1303). In that 

case, the Court reviewed the 

promulgation of the radionuclide RQ 

adjustment final rule and found that 

administrative reporting exemptions 

contained therein were improperly 

promulgated because EPA failed to 

provide adequate notice of, and 

opportunity for public comment on, 

those exemptions. However, the Court 

left the four exemptions in place while 

the Agency undertakes a new round of 

notice and comment rulemaking. 

II. Regulatory Reporting Exemptions 

In response to numerous comments 

received on the proposed rule adjusting 

the RQs for radionuclides (52 FR 8172), 

EPA decided in the final rule (54 FR 

22524) to exempt from the CERCLA 

section 103 and EPCRA section 304 

notification requirements the four 

above-mentioned release sources for 

which reporting would serve no useful 

purpose. In granting these exemptions, 

the Agency considered the risks posed 

by the sources and activity in light of the 

purposes of the CERCLA section 103 

reporting requirements. A primary 

purpose of the reporting requirements 

under CERCLA is to provide 

"notification of releases so that the 

appropriate Federal personnel can 

evaluate the need for a Federal response 

action and undertake any necessary 

response." (50 FR 13456,13457, April 4, 

1985). Therefore, if the Agency 

determines that the Federal government 

would never, or only rarely, undertake 

removal or remedial action because of 

the risk posed, or the infeasibility or 

inappropriateness of a Federal response, 

a basis for an exemption from the 

section 103 reporting requirements may 

exist. 

In the final rule adjusting the RQs for 

radionuclides (54 FR 22524), the Agency 

found that there was indeed such a 

basis for exemption for the four abovementioned release sources. These 

administrative reporting exemptions are 

intended to allow EPA to focus its 

resources on the most serious releases 

and to protect public health and welfare 

and the environment more effectively. 

With respect to large undisturbed land 

sources, as well as disturbances of large 

areas of land, the release of an RQ or 

more of naturally occurring 

radionuclides (radon in particular) may 

occur, but such a release would in all 

likelihood not pose a hazard to public 

health, welfare, or the environment 

because the radionuclides would be 

dispersed widely in the environment at 

levels not much (if at all) above natural 

background. As a result, even if these 

releases were reported, in all likelihood 

the Agency would not take any response 

action. Thus, such reporting would only 

divert Federal and State response 

resources unnecessarily, preventing 

timely responses to those releases that 

truly warrant a response. 

The Agency also believes that 

reporting releases resulting from the 

dumping of coal and coal ash, as well as 

radionuclide releases to all media from 

coal and coal ash piles, at utility and 

industrial facilities with coal-fired 

boilers should be exempted, based on a 

risk assessment performed by EPA using 

conservative fate and transport models 

and site-specific exposure data. The 

EPA risk assessment used reasonably 

conservative models to estimate the 

radiation doses and resulting health 

risks to residents and workers living or 

working near or on coal and coal ash 

piles at utility or industrial facilities. 

EPA estimated doses and risks to 

nearby residents via the following 

potential exposure pathways: (1) Direct 

radiation; (2) various pathways of 
P.26 

56728 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 1992 / Proposed Rules 

exposure to particulates released to the 

air, including inhalation, immersion in 

an airborne plume, direct radiation from 

particulates deposited on the ground, 

and ingestion of crops contaminated by 

airborne deposition; (3) inhalation of 

radon; (4) ingestion of contaminated 

ground water, as well as ingestion of 

crops and livestock assumed to be 

contaminated by the ground water; and 

(5) ingestion of contaminated surface 

water, as well as ingestion of crops and 

livestock assumed to be contaminated 

by the surface water. The critical 

exposure pathway for nearby residents 

(i.e., the one yielding the highest dose 

and risk estimates) was found to be the 

inhalation of radon from the coal and 

coal ash piles. 

For workers, EPA estimated radiation 

doses and resulting health risks via four 

potential exposure pathways: (1) Direct 

radiation when standing next to (i.e., 10 

meters from) a coal or ash pile; (2) direct 

radiation when standing on a coal or 

ash pile; (3) various pathways of 

exposure to airborne particulates, 

including inhalation, immersion in an 

airborne plume, and direct radiation 

from particulates deposited on the 

ground; and (4) inhalation of radon. The 

critical exposure pathway for workers 

was found to be direct radiation, 

especially when standing on a coal or 

coal ash pile. (See "Technical 

Background Supplement in Support of 

Rulemaking Adjustment Activities for 

Reportable Quantities of 

Radionuclides," in the Superfund Docket 

No. 102RQ-RN-1). 

The EPA risk assessment showed that 

the estimated health risks to nearby 

residents and to workers attributable to 

radiation releases from coal and coal 

ash piles are all within the general range 

of 10"4 and 10"7 individual lifetime 

excess cancer risk. Such a risk range 

generally represents the goal of a 

Superfund response action, as opposed 

to an action level under Superfund. 

Although the Agency could take a 

response action for risks within this 

range, in all likelihood it would not do 

so in situations involving air emissions 

at the assessed levels which disburse 

widely. 

In addition, the Agency believes that 

the submission of individual reports 

from each industrial and utility facility 

with coal and coal ash piles may not be 

consistent with the purposes of the 

section 103 reporting requirements. In 

the case of radiation releases from coal 

and coal ash piles, the amount and rate 

of radiation released is extremely 

similar across all industrial and utility 

facilities with coal-fired boilers. For 

example, all coal and coal ash piles will 

contain the same radionuclides in low 

concentrations. The radiation emitted 

from these piles, therefore, will always 

be emitted continuously at low levels 

spread over large areas—it never will be 

emitted at a high rate or in an unusually 

large amount as the result of a sudden, 

episodic release. EPA is already aware 

of the amount and concentration of 

these radiation releases. Because of 

these two factors, submission of 

individual notifications of these releases 

is not necessary for the government to 

assess whether a response action is 

needed under CERCLA. 

Perhaps more importantly, however, a 

response action (i.e., removal or 

remedial action) under CERCLA does 

not appear to be the most appropriate 

Federal regulatory response to radiation 

releases that simultaneously (1) are 

similar in amount and concentration 

across an entire sector of industry; (2) 

pose individual lifetime excess cancer 

risks within the general range of IO"4 

and 10"7; and (3) disperse quickly in the 

environment such that a response is not 

likely to clean up the accumulation of 

what has already been released. 

Whereas CERCLA is designed to enable 

the government to respond on a case-bycase basis where each site or release 

poses different hazards and requires a 

different type of response, other Federal 

regulatory programs, such as the 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) or 

the Effluent Guidelines and Standards 

for discharges of water, are more 

appropriately designed to address the 

hazards of releases that uniformly occur 

across an entire industry. In sum, 

because the health risks from radiation 

releases from coal and coal ash piles 

from industrial and utility facilities with 

coal-fired boilers are such that it is 

extremely unlikely that the Agency 

would take a response action to these 

releases, the Agency is proposing to 

exempt these releases from the CERCLA 

section 103 and EPCRA section 304 

notification requirements. 

Based on these considerations, in the 

final rule adjusting RQs for 

radionuclides, EPA granted these four 

administrative reporting exemptions. 

Subsequent to the rule's publication in 

the Federal Register, the United States 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia was asked to review the rule 

on the ground that the Agency had not 

provided adequate notice of, and 

requested comment on, the reporting 

exemptions. The Court agreed and 

directed EPA to provide opportunity for 

notice and comment on the four 

administrative reporting exemptions. To 

minimize the burden on the Federal and 

State response system and, in particular, 

to prevent overwhelming the National 

Response Center with unnecessary 

reports of radionuclide releases from 

these four sources, the Court allowed 

the administrative reporting exemptions 

to remain in place, pending completion 

of the new round of notice and comment 

rulemaking. 

Today's notice of proposed 

rulemaking provides notice of, and 

requests comment on, these four 

exemptions from the CERCLA section 

103 and EPCRA section 304 notification 

requirements: (1) Releases of naturally 

occurring radionuclides from large, 

generally undisturbed land holdings, 

such as golf courses and parks; (2) 

releases of radionuclides naturally 

occurring from the disturbance of large 

areas of land for purposes other than 

mining, such as farming or building 

construction; (3) releases of 

radionuclides from the dumping of coal 

and coal ash at utility and industrial 

facilities with coal-fired boilers; and (4) 

radionuclide releases to all media from 

coal and coal ash piles at utility and 

industrial facilities with coal-fired 

boilers. EPA believes that these are four 

release sources for which reporting 

would serve no useful purpose and so 

requests comments on their exemption 

from the reporting requirements for 

releases of radionuclides under 

CERCLA section 103 and EPCRA section 

304. Exemptions are from CERCLA 

section 103 and EPCRA section 304 

reporting requirements only, not from 

CERCLA liability provisions nor from 

any other applicable reporting 

requirements. 

III. Regulatory Analyses 

A. Executive Order 12291 

Executive Order (E.O.) No. 12291 

requires that regulations be classified as 

major or nonmajor for purposes of 

review by the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB). According to E.O. 

No. 12291, major rules are regulations 

that are likely to result in: 

(1) An annual effect on the economy 

of $100 million or more; or 

(2) A major increase in costs or prices 

for consumers, individual industries, 

Federal, State, or local government 

agencies, or geographic regions; or 

(3) Significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or on the 

ability of United States-based 

enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises in domestic or export 

markets. 

The Agency has determined that this 

proposed rule is nonmajor because the 
P.27 

Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 1992 / Proposed Rules 56729 

rule would maintain previously granted 

administrative reporting exemptions for 

certain radionuclide releases. Thus, the 

rule would not impose any costs on 

society. Moreover, the rule would not 

cause a major increase in costs or prices 

mentioned in (2) above or cause any of 

the significant adverse effects 

mentioned in (3) above. 

This proposed rule has been 

submitted to OMB for review, as 

required by E.O. No. 12291. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

requires that a Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis be performed for all rules that 

are likely to have a "significant impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities." Because this proposed rule 

would grant reporting relief to certain 

sources of radionuclide releases, the 

rule would not result in a significant 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. EPA certifies that this proposed 

rule is not likely to have a significant 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities and, therefore, that a Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis is not required. 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

Because this rule provides an 

exemption from CERCLA 103(a) 

reporting requirements for certain 

radionuclide releases, there are no 

unique reporting or recordkeeping 

provisions that require approval from 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) under section 3504(h) of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 

U.S.C. 3501 et. seq. 

Approval has previously been granted 

by OMB for other release reporting 

requirements referenced in this rule: 

CERCLA section 103(a) releases of a 

hazardous substance equal to or greater 

than the RQ (OMB control No. 2050-

0046). 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 302 

Air pollution control, Chemicals, 

Hazardous substances, Hazardous 

waste, Intergovernmental relations, 

Natural resources, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, 

Water pollution control, Water supply. 

40 CFR Part 355 

Air pollution control, Chemicals, 

Disaster assistance, Hazardous 

substances, Hazardous Waste, 

Intergovernmental relations, Natural 

resources, Penalties, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, 

Water pollution control, Water supply. 

Dated: November 4,1992. 

William K. Reilly, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, it is proposed that chapter I of 

title 40 pf the Code of Federal 

Regulations be amended as follows: 

PART 302—DESIGNATION, 

REPORTABLE QUANTITIES, AND 

NOTIFICATION 

1. The authority citation for part 302 is 

revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9602, 9603, 9604, and 

9615; 33 U.S.C. 1321 and 1361. 

2. In § 302.6 Paragraph (c) continues to 

read as follows: 

§ 302.6 Notification requirements. 

**** * 

(c) The following categories of 

releases are exempt from the 

notification requirements of this section: 

(1) Releases of those radionuclides that 

occur naturally in the soil from land 

holdings such as parks, golf courses, or 

other large tracks of land; (2) releases of 

radionuclides occurring naturally from 

the disturbance of land for purposes 

other than mining, such as for 

agricultural or construction activities; (3) 

releases of radionuclides from the 

dumping of coal and coal ash at utility 

and industrial facilities with coal-fired 

boilers; and (4) releases of radionuclides 

from coal and coal ash piles at utility 

and industrial facilities with coal-fired 

boilers. 

PART 355—EMERGENCY PLANNING 

AND NOTIFICATION 

1. The authority citation for part 355 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42. U.S.C. 11002,11004, and 

11048. 

2. In § 355.40, paragraph (a)(2)(vi) 

continues to read as follows: 

§ 355.40 Emergency release notification. 

(a) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(vi) Any radionuclide release which 

occurs (A) naturally in soil from land 

holdings such as parks, golf courses, or 

other large tracts of land; (B) naturally 

from the disturbance of land for 

purposes other than mining, such as for 

agricultural or construction activities; 

(C) from the dumping of coal and coal 

ash at utility and industrial facilities 

with coal-fired boilers; and (D) from coal 

and coal ash piles at utility and 

industrial facilities with coal-fired 

boilers. 

**** * 

[FR Doc. 92-28513 Filed 11-27-92; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560-50-H