[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 74 (Monday, April 17, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20337-20345]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9468]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 39

RIN 3150-AG14


Energy Compensation Sources for Well Logging and Other Regulatory 
Clarifications

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its 
regulations governing licenses and radiation safety requirements for 
well logging. The final rule modifies NRC regulations dealing with: low 
activity energy compensation sources; tritium neutron generator target 
sources;specific abandonment procedures in the event of an immediate 
threat; changes to requirements for inadvertent intrusion on an 
abandoned source; the codification of an existing generic exemption; 
the removal of an obsolete date; and updating regulations to be 
consistent with the Commission's metrication policy. The amendments to 
NRC's regulations are necessary to improve, clarify, update, and 
reflect current practices in the well logging industry.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 17, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Haisfield, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6196, e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#eda0aba5ad839f8ec38a829b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3c717a747c524e5f125b534a">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is 
amending its regulations to acknowledge and accommodate the use of well 
logging technology that was not incorporated when the NRC issued the 
existing well logging regulations (March 17, 1987; 52 FR 8225). This 
technology allows licensees to lower a logging tool down a well at the 
same time that the hole for the well is being drilled instead of 
requiring drilling to stop, removing drilling pieces, and lowering a 
logging tool down the well. This technology is commonly referred to as 
``logging while drilling.'' This process uses a relatively small 
radioactive source within the logging tool in addition to the larger 
radioactive sources currently used in logging a well. The 1987 
regulations were based on the use of the larger radioactive sources and 
include provisions that are unnecessary and potentially burdensome for 
the additional small sources. These changes will have no significant 
impact on public health and safety and the environment while reducing 
potential burdens to licensees. Licensees will no longer need to comply 
with unnecessary regulatory requirements for these small sources or to 
request licensing exemptions from the NRC for actions dealing with 
these small sources. Other changes are also being implemented to 
improve, clarify, and update NRC's well logging regulations to reduce 
confusion. These changes may also reduce the need for licensees to 
request exemptions from unnecessary requirements.

Introduction

    Oil and gas come from accumulations in the pore spaces of reservoir 
rocks (usually sandstone, limestone, or dolomites) and are removed via 
a well. Because the amount of oil and gas in these pore spaces is 
dependent upon the rock's characteristics, the oil and gas industry 
often needs to determine the characteristics of underground formations 
to predict the commercial viability of a new or existing well. Licensed 
radioactive materials are used to obtain information on certain 
properties of an underground formation, such as type of rock, porosity, 
hydrocarbon content, and density.

[[Page 20338]]

These properties are important in the evaluation of oil and gas 
reservoirs.
    One method to obtain information about oil and gas reservoirs is by 
using well logging tools. Licensed radioactive materials (sealed 
radioactive sources with associated radiation detectors) are contained 
in well logging tools. Americium-241 and cesium-137 are the radioactive 
materials most frequently used for this purpose. Traditionally, these 
tools are lowered into a well on a wireline. The depth of the well 
could range from several hundred feet to greater than 30,000 feet. 
Information collected by the detectors is sent to the surface through 
the wireline and plotted on a chart as the logging tool is slowly 
raised from the bottom of the well. Licensed radioactive materials are 
also used for similar purposes in coal and mineral exploration.
    The licensing and radiation safety requirements for well logging 
are provided in 10 CFR Part 39. When the existing regulations for well 
logging were promulgated in 1987, the well logging process required 
drilling to stop while parts of the drilling pieces were removed before 
lowering a logging tool down a well. More recent technology, referred 
to as logging-while-drilling (LWD), allows well logging to be 
accomplished during drilling. This technology employs an additional 
low-activity radioactive source within the well logging tool known as 
an energy compensation source, or ECS. The ECS is used to calibrate the 
well logging tool while the well is being drilled.
    LWD provides real time data during drilling operations and improves 
the evaluation of geologic formations while reducing drilling costs. 
The real-time information can aid in decision making because evaluating 
a formation can be planned as soon as the drill bit reaches a 
formation.

Background

    Based on the changing technology in the well logging industry, the 
NRC developed a Rulemaking Plan to consider the need to update 10 CFR 
Part 39. On May 28, 1997, the NRC provided Agreement States a draft 
Rulemaking Plan for comment entitled, ``Energy Compensation Sources for 
Well Logging and Clarifications--Changes to 10 CFR Part 39.'' The draft 
Rulemaking Plan was contained in SECY-97-111, also dated May 28, 1997. 
Comments were received from the States of Utah, Illinois, and 
Washington. These States generally supported the proposal and provided 
specific information and comments. Where appropriate, these comments 
were incorporated into the final Rulemaking Plan contained in SECY-98-
105, dated May 12, 1998, and approved by the Commission in a Staff 
Requirements Memorandum dated June 25, 1998.
    In the final Rulemaking Plan, the NRC proposed to modify the 
existing regulations in 10 CFR Part 39 to account for the use of ECSs. 
The changes would reduce regulatory burden on NRC and Agreement State 
licensees with no significant impact to public health and safety. In 
addition, there are other sections within 10 CFR Part 39 that should be 
changed to improve, clarify, and update the existing regulations. The 
final Rulemaking Plan provides the rationale used in the development of 
this proposed rule. The NRC published the proposed rule in the Federal 
Register on April 19, 1999 (64 FR 19089). The NRC received five 
comments on the proposed rule. These comments and responses are 
discussed in the ``Comments on the Proposed Rule'' section.

Regulatory Action

    The NRC is making seven specific changes to improve, clarify, and 
update the requirements in 10 CFR Part 39.
    1. The principal objective of this rulemaking is amending 10 CFR 
Part 39 to accommodate the radioactive ECSs that are used in some well 
logging applications. The ECS is a low activity source, typically less 
than 1.85 MBq (50 microcuries), compared to the normal 110 GBq to 740 
GBq (3 to 20 curies) sources used in well logging. 10 CFR Part 39, 
originally promulgated in 1987, does not provide any specific 
provisions for these low activity sources. Many of the requirements in 
10 CFR Part 39, when applied to an ECS, are not appropriate or 
necessary to protect public health and safety and the environment. 
Therefore, the NRC is changing the existing regulations.
    Because the existing regulations do not allow for variations based 
on the activity of the source, licensees who use an ECS would need to 
meet all the requirements for larger sources. Examples of requirements 
which are overly burdensome for licensees using ECSs include those 
addressing well abandonment (Secs. 39.15 and 39.77), leak testing 
(Sec. 39.35), design and performance criteria for sealed sources 
(Sec. 39.41), and monitoring of sources lodged in a well (Sec. 39.69). 
The NRC is requiring that only those sections dealing with leak testing 
(a revised Sec. 39.35 specifically addresses ECSs), physical inventory 
(Sec. 39.37), and records of material use (Sec. 39.39) will apply to 
the use of an ECS.
    Oil and gas wells use a surface casing to protect fresh water 
aquifers. However, if a surface casing is not used, the NRC would 
retain the well abandonment requirements. Requirements established in 
other parts of NRC regulations (e.g., 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, and 70) 
still apply to the possession and use of licensed material and are 
adequate to protect public health and safety and the environment.
    Therefore, the NRC is amending 10 CFR Part 39 to recognize the use 
of an ECS in well logging and to provide requirements governing its 
use. These provisions include radioactivity limits on the ECS and leak 
testing requirements. The most significant change will exclude an ECS 
from the costly procedures for well abandonment in the event only an 
ECS is lost within the well. The requirements for well abandonment, in 
addition to specific reporting and approval requirements, require the 
source to be immobilized and sealed in place with a cement plug which 
must be protected from inadvertent intrusion, and the mounting of a 
permanent plaque at the surface of the well. In the Regulatory Analysis 
(RA) conducted for this rulemaking, a limited survey of ECS users 
indicated that about eight ECSs are abandoned per year. Although 
estimated abandonment costs varied significantly by survey respondent, 
the estimated savings to the industry to avoid eight abandonments per 
year is $5 million.
    The NRC is establishing 3.7 MBq (100 microcuries) as the limit for 
an ECS. Existing ECSs typically use up to 1.85 MBq (50 microcuries) of 
americium-241 (cesium-137 sources are smaller). One licensee noted that 
they have calibration sources that use more than 100 microcuries. The 
3.7 MBq (100 microcuries) limit will allow licensees flexibility in 
designing new sources of this kind while maintaining their 
radioactivity within an environmentally safe level. These ECS sources 
will not be required to meet the requirements in Sec. 39.41. However, 
the ECS sources for use in well logging applications will be required 
to be registered pursuant to 10 CFR 32.210. 10 CFR 32.210 requires an 
evaluation using radiation safety criteria from accepted industry 
standards. Applicable standards for calibration sources may be found in 
American National Standard Institute (ANSI) standards (e.g., ANSI/HPS 
N43.6-1997).
    ECSs are used for logging oil and gas wells, which use casings to 
protect fresh water aquifers. Hence, the only potential exposure hazard 
these sources would present is to workers, and worker exposure could 
only occur if an ECS were ruptured. If ruptured, workers could be 
exposed to the radionuclide through ingestion or by absorption

[[Page 20339]]

through the skin. However, if the source were ruptured, it would be 
contained within hundreds to thousands of cubic feet of drilling mud 
which also contains hazardous chemicals and is controlled and monitored 
to protect workers as part of drilling operations.
    The Environmental Assessment (EA) conducted for this rulemaking 
demonstrates that there would be no significant impact to public health 
and safety or the environment resulting from this amendment. The EA 
evaluated a worst case scenario of a 3.7 MBq (100 microcuries) source 
ruptured by a drill bit and brought to the surface in the drilling mud. 
The most significant exposure from this scenario would be from 
ingestion of the drilling mud. The most dangerous radionuclide 
considered for this worst case scenario was curium-250. This 
radionuclide was used because the rule does not restrict the 
radionuclide used for ECS sources. Also, the scenario involved a source 
twice as large as most typical ECSs in use. For this worst case 
scenario, the estimated dose would be about 56 millirem, which is below 
the Federal annual dose limit to an individual member of the public of 
0.1 rem (100 millirem) or 1 millisievert (see 10 CFR 20.1301). For a 
3.7 MBq (100 microcuries) source of americium or cesium (the actual 
radionuclides used) the estimated dose would be less than 3 millirem 
and 1 millirem respectively. Therefore, the NRC believes that 
eliminating potential costly requirements for these sources, in the 
event that such sources become unretrievable, will not significantly 
impact public health and safety or the environment.
    Section 39.35 specifies leak testing requirements for sealed 
sources. Because of the small amount of radioactive material in an ECS 
(by definition less than 3.7 MBq (100 microcuries)) less stringent leak 
testing requirements are being established for ECSs. Also, the ECS is 
contained within a logging tool that is designed to withstand 
significant stress and pressure. The ECS is mounted inside a steel 
pressure housing in the interior of the logging tool, thereby providing 
additional encapsulation to protect the ECS from operational impacts. 
The NRC believes that it is unnecessary and overly burdensome to 
require that drilling operations stop because an ECS has exceeded the 
existing 6-month time interval requirement to be leak tested. The 
Regulatory Analysis conducted for this rulemaking surveyed a sample of 
the drilling industry to determine a normal maintenance period at which 
time a licensee would take a logging tool out of service for routine 
maintenance or other servicing. The NRC believes this maintenance 
period would be an appropriate time to conduct any necessary leak 
testing on an ECS. Although the survey results varied, these tools 
generally receive some type of out-of-field servicing every 18 months.
    Based on this information, and the NRC's belief that ECSs should 
normally only be leak tested during normal maintenance or when a 
logging tool is out of service for other repairs, the NRC is requiring 
that a leak test be performed at a minimum of every three years. This 
requirement should not be a burden for licensees if the logging tool is 
being properly maintained and, in fact, should provide licensees some 
flexibility. This is also consistent with an extended leak test 
frequency that has been established by license conditions for certain 
other sealed sources and devices.
    Many ECSs are already exempt from all leak testing requirements. 
Section 39.35 exempts all beta or gamma emitting radioactive material 
with an activity of 3.7 MBq (100 microcuries) or less. Because cesium-
137 is a beta/gamma emitter, all of these types of ECSs are already 
exempt from the existing leak testing requirements in Sec. 39.35.
    2. The NRC is revising existing 10 CFR Part 39 requirements for 
tritium neutron generator target sources. Tritium neutron generators 
help determine the porosity of the reservoir rock formation, which 
indicates the amount of liquid in the reservoir and the reservoir's 
permeability. Tritium neutron generator target sources are not used in 
logging while drilling tools. These sources are used in the more 
traditional well logging procedure where drilling is stopped and the 
tool is lowered downhole. Because tritium neutron generator target 
sources produce a significant neutron stream only when a voltage is 
applied, tritium neutron generator target sources are less hazardous 
than the typical americium or cesium sources currently being used in 
well logging applications.
    For well logging applications, the NRC is requiring that tritium 
neutron generator target sources be subject to the requirements of 10 
CFR Part 39 except for the sealed source design and performance 
criteria (Sec. 39.41), and the well abandonment procedures (Secs. 39.15 
and 39.77) when a surface casing is used to protect fresh water 
aquifers, a practice that is standard for oil and gas wells. The 
potential hazard of these sources when a surface casing is used does 
not warrant the existing requirements for well abandonment in the event 
that the source becomes lost. The design and performance criteria 
associated with sealed sources for well logging were not intended for 
tritium neutron generator target sources and the revised regulations 
will provide clarity.
    The NRC is establishing 1,110 GBq (30 curies) of tritium as the 
limit for a tritium neutron generator target source. Existing tritium 
neutron generator target sources typically contain less than 740 GBq 
(20 curies) of tritium. The 1,110 GBq (30 curie) limit would allow 
licensees flexibility in designing new sources of this type while 
maintaining their radioactivity within an environmentally safe level.
    When these sources are used for logging oil and gas wells, a 
surface casing is used to protect fresh water aquifers. The only 
exposure hazard these sources present are to workers if these sources 
were ruptured and the tritium was ingested. If a tritium source was 
ruptured, it would be contained within hundreds to thousands of cubic 
feet of drilling mud. As mentioned, this drilling mud contains 
hazardous chemicals and is controlled and monitored as part of drilling 
operations.
    The EA conducted for this rulemaking demonstrates that there would 
be no significant impact to public health and safety or the environment 
resulting from this change. The EA evaluated the worst case scenario of 
a 1,110 GBq (30 curie) tritium source ruptured by a drill bit and 
brought to the surface in the drilling mud. The most significant 
exposure would be through ingestion of this drilling mud. For this 
worst case scenario, the estimated dose would be 14 millirem, which is 
well below the Federal annual dose limit to an individual member of the 
public of 100 millirem or 1 millisievert (see 10 CFR 20.1301). 
Therefore, the NRC believes that eliminating potential costly 
requirements for these sources, in the event that such sources become 
unretrievable, will not impact public health and safety or the 
environment.
    3. Section 39.77 provides the requirements for notification and 
procedures for abandoning irretrievable well logging sources. This 
section specifies that the NRC must approve implementation of 
abandonment procedures before abandonment. In some circumstances, such 
as high well pressures that could lead to fires or explosions, the 
delay required to notify NRC could cause an immediate threat to public 
health and safety. The NRC is revising this section to allow licensees 
to use their judgement to abandon a well immediately, without prior NRC 
approval, if the licensee believes a delay could cause such a non-
radiological

[[Page 20340]]

threat. This modification will allow licensees greater procedural 
latitude. In the rule, the language has been modified to require 
licensees, in the event of immediate abandonment, to notify the NRC and 
justify the need for an immediate abandonment after the fact.
    4. Section 39.15 provides requirements for abandoning irretrievable 
sealed sources. The NRC is revising this section to provide 
performance-based criteria for inadvertent intrusion on the source. 
This modification will allow licensees greater procedural latitude 
while continuing to ensure source integrity. The existing requirements 
may be more restrictive than is necessary to protect an abandoned 
source, depending upon the individual well abandonment. For example, if 
a significant amount of drilling equipment is abandoned with the well, 
the equipment itself may be effective in preventing inadvertent 
intrusion on the source. However, the abandoned equipment would not 
meet the existing requirements of Sec. 39.15. The existing paragraph 
(a)(5)(ii) of Sec. 39.15 had prescriptive requirements for 
irretrievable well logging sources, specifying the use of a mechanical 
device to prevent inadvertent intrusion on the source, at a specific 
location within the abandoned well.
    The NRC is requiring that licensees ``prevent inadvertent intrusion 
on the source.'' This will require that the source be protected but 
allow licensees the flexibility to determine the best method. The 
revision will not affect the requirement in Sec. 39.15(a)(5)(i) that a 
well logging source be immobilized with a cement plug, the requirement 
in Sec. 39.15(a)(5)(iii) that a permanent identification plaque be 
mounted at the surface of the well, or the requirement in Sec. 39.77 
that the licensee must obtain NRC approval prior to implementing 
abandonment procedures (except as provided by the change in Sec. 39.77 
for immediate abandonment, as discussed in item 3).
    5. Two revisions are being made to Sec. 39.41, ``Design and 
performance criteria for sealed sources.'' The first will incorporate 
within NRC regulations an existing generic exemption for sealed sources 
that were manufactured before 1989 and met older standards. The second 
will add an optional acceptable standard by referencing oil-well 
logging requirements in ANSI/HPS N43.6-1997. The existing requirements 
will also remain as an option within this section.
    The NRC issued a generic exemption from the existing design and 
performance criteria for sealed sources in 1989. This exemption allows 
the use of older sealed sources which were not tested against the 
existing criteria, but which were tested in accordance with an earlier 
standard used for well logging sources. This exemption is currently in 
practice, but was not included in the existing 10 CFR Part 39. The NRC 
is modifying the regulations to include this existing generic exemption 
within 10 CFR Part 39.
    Sealed sources that were manufactured before July 14, 1989, may use 
design and performance criteria from the United States of America 
Standards Institute (USASI) N5.10-1968, ``Classification of Sealed 
Radioactive Sources'' or the criteria in Sec. 39.41. The use of the 
USASI standard is based on an NRC Notice of Generic Exemption published 
on July 25, 1989 (54 FR 30883). Existing NRC regulations had not 
incorporated the USASI N5.10-1968 requirements for older sealed 
sources. The primary difference between the USASI standard and the 
existing requirements is that the existing requirements includes a 
vibration test that is consistent with current national standards. The 
USASI standard considered a vibration test and concluded that, to pass 
the other requirements, the source would be so rugged there was no 
reason to include a vibration test.
    The exemption allowing the use of the USASI standard was intended 
to avoid a situation in which well logging licensees might be 
unnecessarily forced out of business and have to dispose of their 
sources. This situation could arise because the original source 
manufacturers tested against the USASI standard, but did not retest 
these sources against the standards that became effective in 1989. The 
NRC determined that those sealed source models meeting the USASI 
standard would not adversely affect public health and safety. These 
sources had been used for years in operational situations and had 
demonstrated through actual use that vibration from drilling operations 
had not caused failure. The survey of licensees conducted for the RA 
and EA for this rulemaking confirmed that these older sources have not 
presented a problem during actual use. Therefore, the NRC is codifying 
within this section the existing practice to use, as an option, the 
USASI standards for sealed sources that were manufactured before July 
14, 1989. Because many of these older sealed sources contain 
radioactive material with half-lives that allow their continued use 
(i.e., americium-241 and cesium-137 have half-lives of 458 and 30 years 
respectively), this modification to the existing regulations is 
appropriate.
    However, a vibration test has been included in ANSI standards since 
1977, and by NRC regulations which were promulgated in 1987. Based on 
survey information done for this rulemaking, it is estimated that the 
cost to test a source to see if it meets the vibration requirement in 
Sec. 39.41 is $2,400. Only the prototype for each design requires 
testing. The number of prototype designs each year is small. The only 
survey respondent on this topic indicated that they produce, at most, 
one new prototype per year and they did not indicate that vibration 
testing is burdensome. The NRC believes that the cost for vibration 
testing is not overly burdensome and is consistent with (1) ANSI N542-
1977, ``Sealed Radioactive Sources, Classification,'' published by the 
National Bureau of Standards [(NBS) currently the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology] in the 1978 NBS Handbook 126 and (2) ANSI/HPS 
N43.6-1997, ``Sealed Radioactive Sources--Classification'' approved in 
November 1997. ANSI/HPS N43.6-1997 is the revised update to ANSI N542-
1977. The NRC has decided to retain the requirements for vibration 
testing.
    The second revision to this section is to meet Public Law 104-113, 
``National Technology and Transfer Act of 1995'' and Office of 
Management and Budget Circular A-119, ``Federal Participation in the 
Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity 
Assessment Activities.'' This law encourages agencies to use 
``voluntary consensus standards'' (i.e., standards developed by a 
voluntary consensus body and made available to all interested parties). 
The existing NRC requirements are based on the older ANSI N542-1977 
standard, and allow licensees flexibility in determining how to conduct 
testing and ensuring integrity of the source. The NRC is adding an 
optional method of meeting the design requirements by referencing the 
newer, current ANSI standard (ANSI/HPS N43.6-1997) within 10 CFR Part 
39. Although the existing NRC requirements and ANSI/HPS N43.6-1997 are 
quite similar, the NRC does not want to eliminate the ability to meet 
the existing NRC regulatory requirements--that could result in a 
problem similar to that experienced in 1989. That is, existing approved 
sealed sources might not have been tested or evaluated exactly as 
specified in ANSI/HPS N43.6-1997, which could result in well logging 
licensees having to dispose of acceptable sealed sources. This action 
does not constitute the establishment of a standard that contains 
generally applicable requirements. There were no

[[Page 20341]]

public comments regarding NRC's approach in the use of these standards.
    6. For clarity and to avoid confusion, the NRC is updating 
Sec. 39.49 because it contains a date that has passed and is no longer 
appropriate. This section is being amended to remove the obsolete date.
    7. The NRC is updating Secs. 39.15, 39.35, and 39.41 to conform 
with the agency's metrication policy published on June 19, 1996 (61 FR 
31169), by stating parameter values in dual units with International 
System of Units (SI) first and with English units in brackets.

Comments on the Proposed Rule

    This section presents a summary of the principal comments received 
on the proposed rule, the NRC's response to the comments, and changes 
made to the final rule as a result of these comments. It includes a 
section-by-section description of the proposed changes, comments 
received, NRC's response, and any changes to the final rule. General 
comments are included after the specific section comments.
    The NRC received five comment letters. Two were from Agreement 
States and three were from industry. All five commenters supported this 
rule and four provided specific comments to clarify or improve the 
proposed rule. Copies of these letters are available for public 
inspection and copying for a fee at the Commission's Public Document 
Room, located at 2120 L Street, NW (Lower Level), Washington, DC.
    Section 39.2, Definitions, would be amended by adding definitions 
for an energy compensation source (ECS) and a tritium neutron generator 
target source.
    Comment: No comments.
    Paragraph 39.15(a)(5)(ii) would be amended to allow a more 
performance-based approach to prevent inadvertent intrusion on an 
abandoned source.
    Comment: One commenter indicated that State regulatory agencies 
having jurisdiction over drilling and well operations may have well 
abandonment procedures that are more restrictive than those proposed by 
the NRC.
    Response: The commenter indicates that because the State agencies 
that control drilling and well operations may require more restrictive 
abandonment procedures, the State radiation control agency may have no 
choice but to also impose similar procedures. The NRC's intent is to 
make the rule more performance-based and would hope that States would 
do likewise, if allowed; however, the requirements in Sec. 39.77(c) are 
Compatibility Category C which allows States to impose more restrictive 
requirements as long as NRC's essential objectives are met.
    Paragraphs 39.35(b), (d), (e)(4), (e)(5), and 39.41(d)(1)(v) 
(previously 39.41(a)(3)(v)) would be amended to meet the NRC's 
metrification policy.
    Comment: No comments.
    Paragraph 39.35(c)(1) and (c)(2) would allow a 3 year leak testing 
interval for ECSs.
    Comment: No comments.
    Section 39.41 would be amended to describe the applicable 
requirements for a sealed source.
    Comments: Three commenters provided comments regarding requirements 
for sealed sources. One commenter requested that an NRC memorandum 
dated November 1, 1991, be specifically referenced in our regulations 
because our changes to Sec. 39.41 do not cover all the sources listed 
in this memorandum. This memorandum lists sources that have been given 
a generic exemption from the requirements in Sec. 39.41.
    Two commenters requested that the new Sec. 39.41(f) be clarified 
because this section implies that all ECS's are to be registered 
pursuant to Sec. 32.210. They believe that this is incorrect because 
this would imply that isotopes considered exempt quantities under 
Sec. 30.18(a) would be required to be registered pursuant to 
Sec. 32.210. Also, one commenter believes that based on an NRC position 
statement, registration is not required in all cases.
    Response: The NRC memorandum dated November 1, 1991, does not need 
to be specifically referenced in the regulations because the changes to 
Sec. 39.41 supersede the memorandum, and cover all the sources listed 
in this memorandum. However, NUREG-1556, Vol. 3, ``Consolidated 
Guidance About Materials Licenses--Applications for Sealed Source and 
Device Evaluation and Registration'' and Vol. 14, ``Consolidated 
Guidance About Materials Licenses--Program-Specific Guidance About Well 
Logging, Tracer, and Field Flood Study License'' each include an 
appendix which provides a list of the sources that fall within the 
generic exemption.
    The NRC staff does intend to require that all ECS's be registered 
pursuant to Sec. 32.210 or applicable Agreement State regulations. It 
is expected that ECS's will at least meet appropriate ANSI criteria for 
calibration sources that can only be assured if the sources are 
registered by the NRC or an Agreement State. This criteria will be 
applied regardless of source activity. Although it is true that there 
is NRC guidance (NUREG-1556, Vol. 3, ``Consolidated Guidance About 
Materials Licenses--Applications for Sealed Source and Device 
Evaluation and Registration'') which indicates that sources with 
activities below certain limits do not need to be registered, that 
guidance will not be applied to ECS's. The NRC staff notes that the 
guidance also indicates that it is applied on a case-by-case basis in 
individual licensing situations and that the licensee may be expected 
to have authorization to possess and use unsealed material in similar 
quantities. This situation would not apply in this setting.
    Section 39.41(f) does not need to be clarified concerning sources 
obtained per Sec. 30.18(a). The NRC staff believes the commenter may 
have misinterpreted the regulations regarding exempt quantities. 
Pursuant to Sec. 30.18, a person possessing very small quantities of 
radioactive material may be exempt from licensing under limited 
circumstances. The NRC staff believes, in general, that these limited 
circumstances would not apply to ECS sources used in a well logging 
tool, and therefore they would not be exempt. However, if a company 
does receive a source that NRC has authorized for distribution to 
persons exempt from licensing, the company could use that source, 
without modification, in a well logging tool. In this situation, the 
sources would not need to meet Sec. 39.41 criteria. Note that 
Sec. 30.18(c) does not allow the incorporation of exempt sources into 
devices for commercial distribution. Therefore, companies who 
incorporate these sources into their logging tools, would not be 
allowed to commercially distribute such tools.
    Section 39.49 would be amended to remove an obsolete date.
    Comment: No comments.
    Section 39.53 would be added to provide requirements for ECSs.
    Comments: Two commenters had comments on this section. One believes 
that there are additional requirements within 10 CFR Part 39 that 
should apply to ECSs. Specifically, Sec. 39.43 (Inspection, 
maintenance, and opening of a source or source holder), Sec. 39.61 
(Training), Sec. 39.63 (Operating and emergency procedures), and 
Sec. 39.71 (Security).
    The other commenter noted that this section limits ECSs to 100 
microcuries based on the belief that there are no ECSs exceeding 50 
microcuries. They have specifically licensed ECSs meeting the 
requirements of 10 CFR Part 39 which contain 200 microcuries of Am-241. 
Therefore, they request a reassessment of the environmental impact 
based on 200 microcuries of Am-241 to allow 200 microcuries to be the 
maximum activity within an ECS.

[[Page 20342]]

    Response: The NRC staff does not agree that there is a need to 
impose additional 10 CFR Part 39 requirements for possession of these 
small sources, due to the low risk, and discussed these concerns with 
the commenter who, after further consideration, agreed. However, when 
authorizing ECS's, the NRC does intend to provide guidance for license 
conditions that would prohibit opening the source. This will be done in 
NUREG-1556, Vol. 14, ``Consolidated Guidance About Materials Licenses--
Program-Specific Guidance About Well Logging, Tracer, and Field Flood 
Study License.''
    The NRC staff does not agree with the commenter suggestion to 
increase the ECS limit to 200 microcuries. The Environmental Assessment 
did not support a 200 microcurie limit for all isotopes. Although the 
risk varies with individual isotopes, the NRC staff believes that a 
single limit should be applied to allow efficient implementation. The 
100 microcurie limit is consistent with the long standing maximum limit 
NRC has established for exempting beta/gamma sources from leak testing 
requirements, which reflects the lower risk associated with lower 
activity sources of 100 microcuries or less.
    Section 39.55 would be added to provide requirements for tritium 
neutron generator target sources.
    Comments: Two commenters had comments on this section. One 
commenter noted that neutron generator target sources require above-
ground testing for operability and calibration. When energized, these 
devices can produce radiation levels that may constitute ``High 
Radiation Areas.'' The commenter believes that the revised regulations 
should allow testing and operation provided arrangements are made via 
facility design or engineered safety equipment to reduce the radiation 
levels and ensure adequate written safety procedures have been 
developed and are in use by trained personnel.
    The other commenter noted that these devices typically contain less 
radioactive material (tritium) than is used in commercially available 
``glow in the dark'' emergency exit signs. The commenter noted that 
based on the construction of neutron generators, any exposure from a 
damaged neutron generator would be small compared to an exit sign, and 
therefore, believes that the proposed rule is appropriate for these 
devices.
    Response: The NRC agrees with the first commenter's concept. 
Tritium sources are and will remain subject to Sec. 39.63--Operating 
and emergency procedures. The NRC also agrees with the points made by 
this commenter.
    Section 39.77(c)(1)(i), (ii), and (d)(9) would be amended to allow 
an option to immediately abandon a well without prior NRC approval when 
the licensee believes there is an immediate threat to public health and 
safety. For this type of immediate abandonment, the licensee is 
required to justify to NRC in writing why it was necessary.
    Comment: One commenter requests clarification how a licensed party 
will make the decision to abandon these sources (i.e., RSO or 
authorized user) and what criteria will be used to determine if there 
is an immediate public health concern from explosions of other hazards. 
The commenter requests that if these items are not included in the 
regulations, the NRC identify how they are to be resolved.
    Response: The purpose of this proposed change was to allow 
licensees flexibility in the use of their best judgement when there is 
the possibility of an immediate threat to public health and safety. To 
add specific requirements as to who makes the on-the-spot decision and 
what specific criteria they are to use would negate some of the 
flexibility that the NRC was seeking to add. For example, what should 
the licensee do if the specified person was not on-site or the 
situation was not foreseen in established criteria? The NRC expects 
that this provision will be rarely used. However, if used, the licensee 
is required to justify why the immediate abandonment was necessary. If, 
after implementation, the NRC believes that this provision is being 
misused or used inappropriately, the NRC will consider modifying this 
section at a later time.

General Comments

    Comment: A State commenter noted that not all of their comments on 
the draft Rulemaking Plan were addressed in the proposed rule.
    Response: The NRC responded to the comments that the States made on 
the draft Rulemaking Plan in the final Rulemaking Plan. Although these 
comments and responses were not repeated in the Federal Register 
notice, they were incorporated, where appropriate, in the proposed 
rule.
    Comment: A commenter would like the rule to include requirements 
for tool design and loading of all sources. The commenter noted that 
during a recent investigation of loading procedures, they found that a 
few States and at least one NRC region are not consistently evaluating 
the design of tools or their loading procedures during the licensing 
process. If this is the case, the commenter does not believe that NRC 
can assume that the well logging tool will afford significant 
protection for any source much less the ECS sources. The commenter 
noted that the proposed regulation states that part of the reason for 
many of the exemptions for the ECS sources is the additional protection 
provided by the logging tool.
    Response: Historically, the NRC has not regulated source holders or 
the well logging devices in which the source holders or sources are 
placed. The sealed sources themselves must meet 10 CFR Part 39 
requirements that are essentially equivalent to ANSI criteria for use 
in well logging and does not take into account any protection provided 
by the tool or source holder. NRC also notes that there has been no 
history of problems with the source-tool combinations.
    Comment: A commenter noted that it was approached in 1993 by a well 
logging licensee to implement rule changes regarding ECSs used in 
logging while drilling (LWD) operations. The commenter noted that this 
was the only licensee in the State using ECSs and that they preferred 
to handle this technology through license conditions. As of June 1999, 
only one of Texas's licensees has requested changes to allow for LWD 
technology. The commenter asks whether the NRC has assessed how many 
well logging licensees are currently using LWD technology.
    Response: The NRC conducted a limited survey of nine licensees (the 
NRC staff did not feel it was necessary to conduct a larger survey that 
would have required OMB approval) in the preparation of the proposed 
rule. Of these nine, six use ECSs and one is planning to use an ECS in 
the future. Based on this response, plus the fact that four of these 
licensees use neutron generator target sources, the NRC believes that 
proposing generic requirements is appropriate.
    Comment: A commenter supports the proposed changes and noted that 
these changes offer the well logging industry simplified rules without 
decreasing public safety. The commenter also noted the significant 
differences in design between the stand-alone sources used in logging 
tools, and the permanent aspect of ECSs and neutron generator target 
sources that are built into logging tools. The commenter noted that 
because the ECSs and neutron generator target sources are protected 
from the well conditions and have much smaller inherent risks, the 
current requirements in 10 CFR Part 39 are too restrictive.
    Response: The NRC agrees with the points made by this commenter.

[[Page 20343]]

    Comment: A commenter noted that the Supplementary Information and 
Introduction sections of the proposed rule implied that only LWD tools 
utilize ECSs. The commenter noted that this is not the case and that 
ECSs have been in use for many years within many standard wireline 
logging tools.
    Response: The NRC will clarify this information in the preamble by 
changing the implication that ECS's are only used in logging while 
drilling tools. This will not impact the regulatory text to the final 
rule.
    Final rule: As noted above, the preamble will be clarified. There 
are no changes being made to the regulatory text of the final rule.

Specific Changes in Regulatory Text

    The following section is provided to assist the reader in 
understanding the specific changes made to each section or paragraph in 
10 CFR Part 39. For clarity of content in reading a section, much of 
that particular section may be repeated, although only a minor change 
would be made. Using this section should allow the reader to 
effectively review the specific changes without reviewing existing 
material that has been included for content, but has not been 
significantly changed.
    Section 39.2: This is being revised to add two new definitions for 
ECS and tritium neutron generator target source.
    Paragraph 39.15(a)(5)(ii): This is being revised to allow a more 
performance-based approach to prevent inadvertent intrusion on an 
abandoned source.
    Paragraph 39.15(a)(5)(iii): This is being revised to meet the NRC's 
metrification policy.
    Paragraph 39.35(b): This is being revised to meet the NRC's 
metrification policy.
    Paragraph 39.35(c)(1): This essentially repeats the existing 
paragraph on leak testing frequency, but notes that ECSs are not 
included in this paragraph.
    Paragraph 39.35(c)(2): This is a new paragraph allowing a 3 year 
leak testing interval for ECSs.
    Paragraph 39.35(d): This is being revised to meet the NRC's 
metrification policy.
    Paragraph 39.35(e)(1): This is an editorial change to indicate that 
hydrogen-3 and tritium are the same.
    Paragraphs 39.35(e)(4) and (5): This is being revised to meet the 
NRC's metrification policy.
    Section 39.41 has been significantly revised as described below:
    Paragraph 39.41(a): This is a new paragraph describing the 
applicable requirements for a sealed source which includes requirements 
from the existing Sec. 39.41(a)(1) and (2).
    Paragraph 39.41(b): This is a new paragraph to allow pre-1989 
sources to meet USASI standards.
    Paragraph 39.41(c): This is a new paragraph providing for the use 
of current ANSI standards.
    Paragraph 39.41(d): This replaces the existing Sec. 39.41(a)(3).
    Paragraph 39.41(d)(1)(v): This is being revised to meet the NRC's 
metrification policy (the existing Sec. 39.41(a)(3)(v)).
    Paragraph 39.41(e): This replaces the existing Sec. 39.41(b) and is 
edited to be consistent with the above changes.
    Paragraph 39.41(f): This is a new paragraph clarifying that this 
section does not apply to ECSs.
    Section 39.49: This is being revised to eliminate an obsolete date.
    Section 39.53: This is a new section providing requirements for 
ECSs.
    Section 39.55: This is a new section providing requirements for 
tritium neutron generator target sources.
    Paragraphs 39.77(c)(1)(i) and (ii): This is being revised to allow 
an option to immediately abandoning a well without receiving prior NRC 
approval when the licensee believes there is an immediate threat to 
public health and safety.
    Paragraph 39.77(d)(9): This is a new paragraph requiring the 
licensee to justify in writing why it was necessary to immediately 
abandon a well without prior NRC approval.

Criminal Penalties

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

Compatibility of Agreement State Regulations

    The compatibility of the provisions in 10 CFR Part 39 have been 
determined in accordance with the NRC's ``Policy Statement on Adequacy 
and Compatibility of Agreement State Programs'' approved by the 
Commission on June 30, 1997, and published in the Federal Register on 
September 3, 1997 (62 FR 46517).'' The definitions for an ``Energy 
compensation source'' and a ``Tritium neutron generator target source'' 
are assigned Compatibility Category B. Agreement States will need to 
adopt essentially identical definitions. Since the sources are 
routinely transported across jurisdictional boundaries for use, this 
level of compatibility is needed to assure uniform regulation. The new 
Sec. 39.53, Energy compensation source, and Sec. 39.55, Tritium neutron 
generator target source, are assigned Compatibility Category C. 
Agreement States are not required to adopt identical rules, however, 
they must adopt rules that address the essential safety objectives of, 
and are no less stringent than, the NRC sections. The NRC is not 
changing the compatibility of those sections of 10 CFR Part 39 that are 
being modified. The existing Compatibility Categories for the modified 
sections are: Section 39.41, Compatibility Category B; and Secs. 39.15, 
39.35, 39.49, 39.77(c) and (d), Compatibility Category C.
    Specific information about the NRC's Compatibility Policy and the 
levels of compatibility assigned to the existing rule may be found at 
the OSP Procedures area of the Office of State Program's Web site, 
http://www.hsrd.ornl.gov/nrc/home.html. [View Procedures SA-200 and SA-
201]

Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability

    The Commission has determined under the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 
Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51, that this rule will not be a major Federal 
action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, 
and therefore, an environmental impact statement is not required. The 
rule will modify NRC regulations dealing with: (1) Low activity energy 
compensation sources; (2) tritium neutron generator target sources; (3) 
specific abandonment procedures in the event of an immediate threat; 
(4) changes to requirements for inadvertent intrusion on an abandoned 
source; (5) the codification of an existing generic exemption; (6) the 
removal of an obsolete date; and (7) updating 10 CFR Part 39 to be 
consistent with the Commission's metrication policy. The environmental 
assessment evaluated the maximum annual public health risk to members 
of the public as a result of these changes and determined that there is 
no significant environmental impact as a result of the changes.
    The environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact 
on which this determination is based are available for inspection at 
the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level), 
Washington, DC. Single copies of the environmental assessment and the 
finding of no significant impact are available from Mark Haisfield, 
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-
6196.

[[Page 20344]]

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

    This final rule increases the burden on licensees to justify in 
writing the immediate threat to public health and safety that resulted 
in the implementation of abandonment procedures prior to NRC approval. 
The burden to include the justification in the existing report required 
in 10 CFR 39.77(d) is estimated to increase from 4 hours to 4.25 hours 
per impacted report. Because the burden for this information collection 
requirement is insignificant, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
clearance is not required. Existing requirements were approved by the 
OMB, approval number 3150-0130.

Public Protection Notification

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

Regulatory Analysis

    The Commission has prepared a final regulatory analysis on this 
final regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the 
alternatives considered by the Commission. The analysis is available 
for inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW. 
(Lower Level), Washington, DC. Single copies of the analysis may be 
obtained from Mark Haisfield, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and 
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, telephone (301) 415-6196.

Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 
605(b)), the Commission certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small 
entities. All of the amendments are to 10 CFR Part 39 and are intended 
to either reduce regulatory burdens from unnecessary requirements or to 
clarify and update regulations to reduce confusion. Therefore, any 
economic impact to a small entity using 10 CFR Part 39 should be either 
neutral or positive.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

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

Backfit Analysis

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

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 39

    Byproduct material, Criminal penalties, Nuclear material, Oil and 
gas exploration--well logging, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Scientific equipment, Security measures, Source material, 
Special nuclear material.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of 
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization 
Act of 1974, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC is adopting the 
following amendments to 10 CFR Part 39.

PART 39--LICENSES AND RADIATION SAFETY REQUIREMENTS FOR WELL 
LOGGING

    1. The authority citation for Part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 82, 161, 182, 183, 
186, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 934, 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as 
amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2077, 
2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2112, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2236, 2282); 
secs. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 
1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846).


    2. Section 39.2 is amended by adding definitions, in their proper 
alphabetic order, of the terms energy compensation source and tritium 
neutron generator target source to read as follows:


Sec. 39.2  Definitions.

    Energy compensation source (ECS) means a small sealed source, with 
an activity not exceeding 3.7 MBq [100 microcuries], used within a 
logging tool, or other tool components, to provide a reference standard 
to maintain the tool's calibration when in use.
* * * * *
    Tritium neutron generator target source means a tritium source used 
within a neutron generator tube to produce neutrons for use in well 
logging applications.
* * * * *

    3. Section 39.15 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(5)(ii) and 
the introductory text of paragraph (a)(5)(iii) to read as follows:


Sec. 39.15  Agreement with well owner or operator.

    (a) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (ii) A means to prevent inadvertent intrusion on the source, unless 
the source is not accessible to any subsequent drilling operations; and
    (iii) A permanent identification plaque, constructed of long 
lasting material such as stainless steel, brass, bronze, or monel, must 
be mounted at the surface of the well, unless the mounting of the 
plaque is not practical. The size of the plaque must be at least 17 cm 
[7 inches] square and 3 mm [\1/8\-inch] thick. The plaque must 
contain--
* * * * *

    4. Section 39.35 is amended by revising paragraphs (b), (c), 
(d)(1), (e)(1), (e)(4) and (e)(5) to read as follows:


Sec. 39.35  Leak testing of sealed sources.

* * * * *
    (b) Method of testing. The wipe of a sealed source must be 
performed using a leak test kit or method approved by the Commission or 
an Agreement State. The wipe sample must be taken from the nearest 
accessible point to the sealed source where contamination might 
accumulate. The wipe sample must be analyzed for radioactive 
contamination. The analysis must be capable of detecting the presence 
of 185 Bq [0.005 microcuries] of radioactive material on the test 
sample and must be performed by a person approved by the Commission or 
an Agreement State to perform the analysis.
    (c) Test frequency. (1) Each sealed source (except an energy 
compensation source (ECS)) must be tested at intervals not to exceed 6 
months. In the absence of a certificate from a transferor that a test 
has been made within the 6 months before the transfer, the sealed 
source may not be used until tested.
    (2) Each ECS that is not exempt from testing in accordance with 
paragraph (e) of this section must be tested at intervals not to exceed 
3 years. In the absence of a certificate from a transferor that a test 
has been made within the 3 years before the transfer, the ECS may not 
be used until tested.
    (d) Removal of leaking source from service. (1) If the test 
conducted pursuant to paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section reveals 
the presence of 185 Bq [0.005 microcuries] or more of removable 
radioactive material, the licensee shall remove the sealed source from 
service immediately and have it decontaminated, repaired, or disposed 
of by an NRC or Agreement State licensee that is authorized to perform 
these functions. The licensee shall check the equipment associated with 
the leaking source for radioactive contamination and, if contaminated,

[[Page 20345]]

have it decontaminated or disposed of by an NRC or Agreement State 
licensee that is authorized to perform these functions.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) Hydrogen-3 (tritium) sources;
* * * * *
    (4) Sources of beta- or gamma-emitting radioactive material with an 
activity of 3.7 MBq [100 microcuries] or less; and
    (5) Sources of alpha- or neutron-emitting radioactive material with 
an activity of 0.37 MBq [10 microcuries] or less.

    5. Section 39.41 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 39.41  Design and performance criteria for sources.

    (a) A licensee may use a sealed source for use in well logging 
applications if --
    (1) The sealed source is doubly encapsulated;
    (2) The sealed source contains licensed material whose chemical and 
physical forms are as insoluble and nondispersible as practical; and
    (3) Meets the requirements of paragraph (b), (c), or (d) of this 
section.
    (b) For a sealed source manufactured on or before July 14, 1989, a 
licensee may use the sealed source, for use in well logging 
applications if it meets the requirements of USASI N5.10-1968, 
``Classification of Sealed Radioactive Sources,'' or the requirements 
in paragraph (c) or (d) of this section.
    (c) For a sealed source manufactured after July 14, 1989, a 
licensee may use the sealed source, for use in well logging 
applications if it meets the oil-well logging requirements of ANSI/HPS 
N43.6-1997, ``Sealed Radioactive Sources--Classification.''
    (d) For a sealed source manufactured after July 14, 1989, a 
licensee may use the sealed source, for use in well logging 
applications, if--
    (1) The sealed source's prototype has been tested and found to 
maintain its integrity after each of the following tests:
    (i) Temperature. The test source must be held at -40 deg. C for 20 
minutes, 600 deg. C for 1 hour, and then be subject to a thermal shock 
test with a temperature drop from 600 deg. C to 20 deg. C within 15 
seconds.
    (ii) Impact test. A 5 kg steel hammer, 2.5 cm in diameter, must be 
dropped from a height of 1 m onto the test source.
    (iii) Vibration test. The test source must be subject to a 
vibration from 25 Hz to 500 Hz at 5 g amplitude for 30 minutes.
    (iv) Puncture test. A 1 gram hammer and pin, 0.3 cm pin diameter, 
must be dropped from a height of 1 m onto the test source.
    (v) Pressure test. The test source must be subject to an external 
pressure of 1.695  x  10\7\ pascals [24,600 pounds per square inch 
absolute].
    (e) The requirements in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) of this 
section do not apply to sealed sources that contain licensed material 
in gaseous form.
    (f) The requirements in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) of this 
section do not apply to energy compensation sources (ECS). ECSs must be 
registered with the Commission under Sec. 32.210 of this chapter or 
with an Agreement State.

    6. Section 39.49 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 39.49  Uranium sinker bars.

    The licensee may use a uranium sinker bar in well logging 
applications only if it is legibly impressed with the words ``CAUTION--
RADIOACTIVE-DEPLETED URANIUM'' and ``NOTIFY CIVIL AUTHORITIES (or 
COMPANY NAME) IF FOUND.''

    7. Section 39.53 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 39.53  Energy compensation source.

    The licensee may use an energy compensation source (ECS) which is 
contained within a logging tool, or other tool components, only if the 
ECS contains quantities of licensed material not exceeding 3.7 MBq [100 
microcuries].
    (a) For well logging applications with a surface casing for 
protecting fresh water aquifers, use of the ECS is only subject to the 
requirements of Secs. 39.35, 39.37 and 39.39.
    (b) For well logging applications without a surface casing for 
protecting fresh water aquifers, use of the ECS is only subject to the 
requirements of Secs. 39.15, 39.35, 39.37, 39.39, 39.51, and 39.77.

    8. Section 39.55 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 39.55  Tritium neutron generator target source.

    (a) Use of a tritium neutron generator target source, containing 
quantities not exceeding 1,110 MBq [30 curies] and in a well with a 
surface casing to protect fresh water aquifers, is subject to the 
requirements of this part except Secs. 39.15, 39.41, and 39.77.
    (b) Use of a tritium neutron generator target source, containing 
quantities exceeding 1,110 MBq [30 curies] or in a well without a 
surface casing to protect fresh water aquifers, is subject to the 
requirements of this part except Sec. 39.41.

    9. Section 39.77 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(1), 
redesignating paragraphs (d)(9) and (d)(10) as paragraphs (d)(10) and 
(d)(11), and adding a new paragraph (d)(9) to read as follows:


Sec. 39.77  Notification of incidents and lost sources; abandonment 
procedures for irretrievable sources.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) Notify the appropriate NRC Regional Office by telephone of the 
circumstances that resulted in the inability to retrieve the source 
and--
    (i) Obtain NRC approval to implement abandonment procedures; or
    (ii) That the licensee implemented abandonment before receiving NRC 
approval because the licensee believed there was an immediate threat to 
public health and safety; and
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (9) The immediate threat to public health and safety justification 
for implementing abandonment if prior NRC approval was not obtained in 
accordance with paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section;
* * * * *

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of April, 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William D. Travers,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 00-9468 Filed 4-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>