Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2007-06-08 · Office of Health, Safety and Security, Department of Energy · Presidential Documents

Presidential Documents. Final rule

57,030 words·~259 min read·/register/2007/06/08/07-2892

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

Billing code 4910-62-M 72 110 Friday, June 8, 2007 Rules and Regulations Part II Department of Energy 10 CFR Parts 820 and 835 Procedural Rules for DOE Nuclear Activities and Occupational Radiation Protection; Final Rule DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 10 CFR Parts 820 and 835 [Docket No. EH-RM-02-835] RIN 1901-AA95 Procedural Rules for DOE Nuclear Activities and Occupational Radiation Protection AGENCY: Office of Health, Safety and Security, Department of Energy. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Department of Energy
(DOE)today amends its Procedural Rules for DOE Nuclear Activities, and its Occupational Radiation Protection requirements. The amendments to 10 CFR part 820, the Procedural Rules for DOE Nuclear Activities, update its provisions to take into account the establishment of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). The amendments to 10 CFR part 835, the Occupational Radiation Protection requirements, update its provisions to account for lessons learned since the initial adoption of these regulations, comments from the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) and members of the public, new recommendations from the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), and the establishment of the NNSA. DATES: This rule is effective July 9, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Peter V. O'Connell, U. S. Department of Energy, Office of Worker Safety and Health Policy (HS-11), 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585;
(301)903-5641. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background of 10 CFR Part 820 II. Discussion of Changes to 10 CFR Part 820 III. Background of 10 CFR Part 835 IV. Discussion of Changes to 10 CFR Part 835 V. Regulatory Review A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 B. Review Under Executive Order 12988 C. Review Under Executive Order 13132 D. Review Under Regulatory Flexibility Act E. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 F. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act H. Review Under Executive Order 13211 I. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999 J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 K. Congressional Notification VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary I. Background of 10 CFR Part 820 Part 820 sets forth the procedural rules relating to DOE nuclear safety requirements. Among other matters, 10 CFR part 820 sets forth the process for granting exemptions from nuclear safety requirements and the process for issuing civil penalties for violations of nuclear safety requirements. DOE proposed 10 CFR part 820 on December 9, 1991 (56 FR 64290) and issued a clarification on May 15, 1992 (57 FR 20796). DOE published 10 CFR part 820 as a final rule on August 17, 1993 (58 FR 43680) and amended it on October 8, 1997 (62 FR 52479), on March 22, 2000 (65 FR 15218), and on November 28, 2006 (71 FR 68727). DOE proposed its latest amendments to 10 CFR part 820 on August 10, 2006 (71 FR 45996). Today's final rule modifies 10 CFR part 820 by:
(1)Formalizing the use of enforcement letters; and
(2)Making explicit the role of NNSA in giving direction to NNSA contractors pursuant to 10 CFR part 820. As discussed in this notice of final rulemaking, this final rule was developed after consideration of comments received during a public hearing and through written and electronic public comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR). II. Discussion of Changes to 10 CFR Part 820 The National Nuclear Safety Administration Act (NNSA Act) (Title XXXII of Pub. L. 106-65, 50 U.S.C. 2401 *et seq.* ) established the NNSA. The Act contains provisions that affect 10 CFR part 820. In particular, non-NNSA DOE personnel, other than the Secretary and Deputy Secretary, are prohibited from giving direction to NNSA contractors. On November 28, 2006, DOE published a final rule that amended the Code of Federal Regulations to address the fact that several Assistant Secretaries and the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Naval Reactors positions were converted into NNSA Deputy Administrator positions by the NNSA Act (71 FR 68727-38). A. Definition of “Secretarial Officer” The November 28, 2006 final rule revised the definition of “Secretarial Officer” in 10 CFR 820.2 to mean an individual who is appointed to a position in the Department of Energy by the President of the United States with the advice and consent of the Senate or the head of a departmental element who is primarily responsible for the conduct of an activity under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. The revised definition in the final rule also states that with regard to activities and facilities covered under E.O. 12344, 42 U.S.C. 7158 note, pertaining to Naval nuclear propulsion, Secretarial Officer means the Deputy Administrator for Naval Reactors. B. Investigations DOE adds two new subsections to § 820.21 to codify current practices. The final rule adds section 820.21(g), which recognizes the use of enforcement letters to communicate expectations during an investigation into a possible violation of a nuclear safety requirement. It also adds section 820.21(h), which provides that the Director may sign, issue and serve subpoenas during an investigation. These changes were in the proposal and DOE received no comments on them. C. Direction of NNSA Contractors The NNSA Act provides at 50 U.S.C 2410(b) that non-NNSA DOE personnel (other than the Secretary and Deputy Secretary) are prohibited from giving direction to NNSA contractors. Since the establishment of the NNSA, the NNSA and other elements of DOE, including the Office of Enforcement, have worked together to ensure 10 CFR part 820 operates in a manner consistent with section 2410(b). New § 820.13 codifies current practices and makes clear that NNSA is responsible for signing, issuing and serving actions that give direction to NNSA contractors. These changes were in the proposal and DOE received no comments on them. D. Appendix on Enforcement Policy DOE updates the Appendix on Enforcement Policy to reflect the changes this final rule makes to 10 CFR part 820. These changes were in the proposal and DOE received no comments on them. III. Background of 10 CFR Part 835 Part 835 of title 10 of the CFR sets forth the nuclear safety requirements that provide radiological protection for DOE workers and members of the public in a controlled area at a DOE facility. DOE proposed 10 CFR part 835 on December 9, 1991 (56 FR 64334) and published it as final on December 14, 1993 (58 FR 65458). DOE amended 10 CFR part 835 on November 4, 1998 (63 FR 59662) and on November 28, 2006 (71 FR 68727). DOE proposed its latest amendment to 10 CFR part 835 on August 10, 2006 (71 FR 45996). Today's final rule amends 10 CFR part 835 by:
(1)Clarifying those requirements in 10 CFR part 835 which apply to radioactive material transportation;
(2)Excluding from the scope of 10 CFR part 835 material, equipment, and real property approved for release in accordance with DOE approved authorized limits which have been approved by a Secretarial Officer in consultation with the Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer. (Note: At the time of DOE's proposed amendment, August 10, 2006, this function was to be accomplished by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health. After publication of the NOPR, DOE reorganized the Office of Environment, Safety and Health into the Office of Health, Safety and Security. Under this reorganization the Secretarial Officer responsible for environment, safety and health matters is the Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer);
(3)Updating the dosimetric models and dose terms to be consistent with newer recommendations from ICRP, including use of updated tissue and radiation weighting factors and updated derived air concentration
(DAC)values;
(4)Establishing DAC values for Special Tritium Compounds (STCs);
(5)Lowering the maximum amount of radioactive material which need not be labeled;
(6)Allowing use of thresholds for recording occupational exposures;
(7)Establishing DAC default values for radionuclides not listed in the rule; and
(8)Revising values in Appendix E to be consistent with newer dosimetric models and adding values for STCs. These final amendments were developed after consideration of input received during a public hearing and through written and electronic public comments on the NOPR. The schedule for achieving compliance with the amendments to 10 CFR part 835 is as follows. As provided at § 835.101(g)(3), updated radiation protection programs must be submitted to DOE within 180 days following the effective date of this final rule or January 4, 2008. Changes that do not decrease the effectiveness of the radiation protection program
(RPP)may be implemented prior to DOE approval. Changes that decrease the effectiveness of the RPP require DOE approval prior to implementation. As provided at § 835.101(i), an update of the RPP shall be considered approved 180 days after its initial submission unless rejected by DOE at an earlier date. Consistent with the proposal, today's final rule, at § 835.101(f), requires that RPPs include plans, schedules, and other measures for achieving compliance with regulations of this part such that full compliance with the regulatory changes is achieved within three years of the effective date of the final rule, which is July 9, 2007. IV. Discussion of Changes to 10 CFR Part 835 DOE is amending 10 CFR part 835 for a number of reasons. In some cases, an analysis of the operating experience with 10 CFR part 835 indicated that DOE's needs could be met more effectively if there was a change. In other cases, the DNFSB staff or members of the public have suggested changes. In addition, the ICRP has issued newer recommendations on areas covered by 10 CFR part 835. DOE received several comments proposing new changes, not related to proposed changes in the NOPR. DOE has decided there is no need to consider these proposed changes now and, if it were to do so, it would be required by section 553 of the Administrative Procedures Act (5 U.S.C. 553) to engage in further notice and comment proceedings. DOE is not making any new changes that are unrelated to the proposed changes in the NOPR. A. Scope of 10 CFR Part 835 1. *U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC)Regulated Activity Exclusion* . One comment noted that the exclusion in 10 CFR 835.1(b)(1) refers to activities regulated through a license by the NRC, or a State under an agreement with the NRC, including activities certified by the NRC under section 1701 of the Atomic Energy Act. The exclusion is limited by 10 CFR 835.1(c) which indicates that occupational doses received as a result of excluded activities shall be considered when determining compliance with DOE's occupational dose limits. The preamble to the proposed rule indicates that ICRP Publication 68, *Dose Coefficients for Intakes of Radionuclides by Workers* , will be the basis for the rule's terminology and methodology. Under certain circumstances, when a DOE worker conducts multiple activities involving both excluded and un-excluded activities under 10 CFR 835.1(b)(1), clarification is needed as to how the rule would be applied when using different dose coefficients and weighting factors to calculate the overall cumulative total effective dose for the worker. DOE agrees with this comment and will provide guidance (see discussion of 10 CFR part 835.2). 2. *Material, Equipment, and Real Property Exclusion* . DOE proposed to amend § 835.1 (Scope) by inserting a new paragraph (b)(6) which would exclude radioactive material on or within material, equipment, and real property that is approved for release when the radiological conditions of the material, equipment, and real property have been documented to comply with the criteria for release set forth in a DOE authorized limit that has been approved by a Secretarial Officer in consultation with the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health. The NOPR explained that under DOE O 5400.5, *Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment* , real property on a DOE site and material and equipment from a DOE site may be released for unrestricted or restricted use by members of the public in accordance with a process to determine the risk to an individual from the residual radioactive material remaining on or within the material, equipment, or property. Such material, equipment, or real property may sometimes contain contaminated surfaces which exceed the surface contamination levels in 10 CFR part 835 appendix D. The appendix D values trigger application of occupational radiological controls for contaminated areas. Accordingly, prior to today's final rule, even though DOE may have determined that this material, equipment, or property posed a minimal risk to individuals, if DOE activities were still associated with the material, equipment, or property, then certain radiological controls in 10 CFR part 835, such as those for access control, posting and training, would apply to portions of this material, equipment, or property. To eliminate this potential inconsistency, DOE proposed a new § 835.1(b)(6) that would exclude from the scope of 10 CFR part 835 radioactive material on or within material, equipment, and real property which has been approved by DOE for release. In this final rule, DOE modifies the language in the new § 835.1(b)(6) to exclude radioactive material on or within material, equipment, and real property which is approved for release when the radiological conditions of the material, equipment, and real property have been documented to comply with the criteria for release set forth in a DOE authorized limit which has been approved by a Secretarial Officer in consultation with the Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer. As previously noted, the functions of the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health have been transferred to the Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer and the final rule reflects that change. DOE recognizes that, depending on the potential exposure, requiring approval at the Secretarial Officer, level may be a higher level of approval than required by DOE O 5400.5. However, this level of approval is consistent with other provisions of 10 CFR part 835 for which there are alternative means of compliance, such as alternatives to the DOELAP, use of planned special exposures, and exemptions from specified provisions of 10 CFR part 835. The requirement for consultation with the Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer would be satisfied by providing copies of a Secretarial Officer's approved authorized limits and supporting documentation to the cognizant office within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (currently the Office of Nuclear Safety and Environment (HS-20)) for review and comment. The Office of Nuclear Safety and Environment will coordinate the review and comment with the Office of Worker Safety and Health Policy (HS-11). After comments have been resolved, the consultation process is complete. The intent for this change is to allow for the exclusion to apply for material, equipment, or real property regardless of whether the property has been released from DOE control. The Department also expects the material, equipment, or real property to which this exclusion is applied will be released from DOE control according to a specified time interval. DOE received several comments that the proposed change would be beneficial and may promote better harmony between DOE occupational radiation protection and environmental protection requirements. DOE also received a comment requesting clarification of the applicability of this exclusion to real property which has been remediated under the criteria and conditions specified in an approved Record of Decision under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). The process for determining CERCLA remediation criteria and conditions is analogous to the process for determining an authorized limit pursuant to the requirements of DOE O 5400.5. Accordingly, for the purpose of excluding real property from the scope of 10 CFR part 835, approved CERCLA remediation criteria may be considered equivalent to an authorized limit if the DOE site office has determined that the criteria meet DOE requirements for authorized limits and provided that the use of these criteria as DOE authorized limits is documented and approved as would be an authorized limit, i.e., by a Secretarial Officer or designee in consultation with the Chief Office of Health, Safety, and Security Officer. 3. *Radioactive Material Transportation* . DOE proposed revising § 835.1 to clarify which requirements in 10 CFR part 835 apply to the transportation of radioactive material by or on behalf of the DOE. Specifically, DOE proposed to delete existing § 835.1(b)(4) and replace it with a new § 835.1(d) that would state clearly that subparts F (Entry Control Program) and G (Posting and Labeling) do not apply to radioactive material transportation conducted by a DOE individual or DOE contractor, when the radioactive material is under the continuous observation and control of an individual who is knowledgeable of and implements required exposure control measures. This proposed change was not intended to affect the application of requirements to radioactive material transportation in the other subparts of 10 CFR part 835. The proposal stated that DOE did not intend 10 CFR part 835 to apply to transportation by the U. S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier, such as Fedex or UPS, which transport radioactive material as part of their normal operations. A company or subsidiary of a corporation that operates a DOE facility would not be considered a commercial carrier—even if such an organization transports radioactive material as part of its contractual agreement with DOE. This position is consistent with NRC practice. See, for example, 10 CFR 30.13, 40.12, and 70.12. DOE requested comments as to whether there should be an explicit exclusion of these carriers from the scope of 10 CFR part 835. DOE also proposed changes to the definition of “radioactive material transportation” in § 835.2(a) to improve the regulatory language. The NOPR stated that these proposed changes were not intended to affect the existing scope of this definition, which excludes activities related to transportation such as the preparation of material or packagings for transportation, storage of material awaiting transportation, or application of markings and labels required for transportation. DOE received comments requesting guidance on the new exclusion, particularly the proposed “continuous observation” provision. One commenter noted that, if the radioactive material ceases to be under “continuous observation” the requirements of subparts F and G should apply because to do otherwise, could result in potential exposure of workers or the public. DOE agrees with this comment. However, DOE recognizes that there are some cases when it may be impractical to maintain “continuous observation.” To address this situation and still provide adequate warning to workers and members of the public, DOE adds a provision to § 835.1(d) to allow exception from subparts F and G for transportation by DOE and DOE contactors for radioactive material transportation conducted in accordance with Department of Transportation
(DOT)regulations or DOE orders that govern such movements. For radioactive material transportation that is not subject to DOT regulations or DOE transportation orders (for situations where DOE and a contractor had not included such orders in the contract), the conditions for the exception from subparts F and G would be met by conducting the transportation activity per DOT regulations or DOE orders whether or not these are regulatory or contractually required for the transportation activity. DOE believes that the provisions at § 835.1(d) fulfill its intentions with regard to protection of workers and the public. Another commenter noted that material staged for some period on DOE property was still technically in transit and requested guidance for continuous observation for such material. DOE disagrees with this comment, and the definition of “radioactive material transportation” does not include preparation of material or packagings for transportation or storage of material awaiting transportation such as what might occur when material is staged on DOE property. In accordance with the definition of “radioactive material transportation,” the exclusion applies while the material is in the process of undergoing movement, including nominal stoppages such as for traffic considerations or refueling activities. Another commenter stated that this change should lead to cost savings for DOE laboratories. A commenter also requested a definition of “radioactive material” be added to the rule. DOE also received a comment that there should be a specific exclusion for a “company or subsidiary of a corporation that operates a DOE facility.” At most DOE facilities the prime contractor transports radioactive materials as part of routine facility operations. DOE disagrees with the comment that its contractors conducting radioactive material transportation should be excluded from all the provisions of 10 CFR part 835. While DOE agrees that, at most DOE facilities, the prime contractor commonly transports radioactive materials as part of routine facility operations, it is the Department's position that all DOE occupational exposures to ionizing radiation to DOE and DOE contractor employees should, to the extent practicable, be subject to the provisions of 10 CFR part 835. For example, provisions in 10 CFR part 835 that should apply to workers involved in radioactive material transportation, are qualification and training requirements, necessary radiation exposure monitoring, and As Low As is Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) requirements. The NOPR stated DOE's intention that 10 CFR part 835 not apply to transportation by the U.S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier, such as Fedex or UPS, which transport radioactive material as part of their normal operations. DOE adds a provision to § 835.1(b) explicitly excluding all radioactive material transportation from the scope of 10 CFR part 835 that is not performed by DOE or a DOE contractor. This change clarifies the applicability of the transportation exclusion by making it an explicit regulatory provision. There may be situations where DOE or DOE contractor personnel also perform radioactive material transportation activities for other than DOE related purposes (such as DOE or DOE contractor personnel performing work for a commercial transportation company after normal work hours). This situation is comparable to that where a DOE individual or a DOE contractor works part-time at an NRC regulated facility. Occupational exposure resulting from working at a NRC regulated facility ( *i.e.* , an excluded activity) is considered when evaluating compliance with the dose limits. Accordingly, DOE is including in 10 CFR 835.1(c) a provision that occupational doses received as a result of radioactive material transportation performed by other than the DOE or a DOE contractor, be considered to the extent practicable when determining compliance with the occupational dose limits. One commenter suggested imposing a time limit on the radioactive material transportation exclusion. The commenter noted that there is already a time-based exception for posting radiological areas when there is a knowledgeable person controlling access to the area, for up to eight hours (§ 835.604(a)). A comparable approach was suggested for radioactive material transportation. DOE believes this is an impractical approach for the radioactive material transportation exclusion due to the wide variation in shipment circumstances (including variable time periods) expected to be encountered across the DOE complex. This final rule includes the changes to the radioactive material transportation provisions in the NOPR with the following additional changes: Section 835.1(b)(7) is added excluding radioactive material transportation not performed by the DOE or a DOE contractor. Section 835.1(c) is modified such that occupational doses received as a result of radioactive material transportation performed by other than the DOE or a DOE contractor, must be considered to the extent practicable when determining compliance with the occupational dose limits. Section 835.1(4) is added excluding radioactive material transportation not performed by the DOE or a DOE contractor. Section 835.1(d) is modified to exclude DOE and DOE contractors performing radioactive material transportation from subpart G and F if such transportation is conducted under the continuous observation and control of an individual who is knowledgeable of and implements required exposure control measures or if the transportation is conducted in accordance with DOT regulations or DOE orders that govern such movements. B. Definitions in 10 CFR Part 835 DOE proposed to change most of the dosimetric terms used in 10 CFR part 835 to reflect the recommendations for assessing dose and associated terminology from ICRP Publication 60, *1990 Recommendations of the ICRP on Radiological Protection* , and ICRP Publication 68, *Dose Coefficients for Intakes of Radionuclides by Workers* . DOE proposed this change mainly because these recommendations are based on updated scientific models and more accurately reflect the occupational doses to workers than the models currently used by DOE. DOE currently uses models that were used in developing *Radiation Protection Guidance to Federal Agencies for Occupational Exposures* , published by the Environmental Protection Agency (52 FR 2822, January 27, 1987), which are based upon 1977 recommendations from the ICRP. In the NOPR, DOE noted that other federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), have already adopted parts of the current ICRP recommendations related to dosimetry in recent guidance documents and requirements. NIOSH uses the newer recommendations in performing DOE worker dose assessments under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000, which is contained in the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-398). EPA has adopted the recommendations in Federal Guidance Report Number 13, *Cancer Risk Coefficients for Environmental Exposure to Radionuclides* . In addition, recommendations published by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements for the past several years, as well as several standards issued by the American National Standards Institute, have used the newer dosimetric quantities and units endorsed by the ICRP. Internal doses would still be calculated based on a 50-year committed dose. The following “cross-walk” was provided in the NOPR to show the new terms DOE proposed and the terms that would be replaced: Current dosimetric terms Proposed dosimetric terms Committed effective dose equivalent Committed effective dose. Committed dose equivalent Committed equivalent dose. Cumulative total effective dose equivalent Cumulative total effective dose. Deep dose equivalent Deep equivalent dose. Dose equivalent Equivalent dose. Effective dose equivalent Effective dose. Lens of the eye dose equivalent Lens of the eye equivalent dose. Quality factor Radiation weighting factor. Shallow dose equivalent Shallow equivalent dose. Weighting factor Tissue weighting factor. Total effective dose equivalent Total effective dose. Note: Throughout the text of the NOPR, the above terms were proposed to be revised. In addition, DOE proposed revising the following definitions: Annual limit on intake, Derived air concentration, Radiation area, Radiological worker, Dose, External dose or exposure, and Internal dose or exposure. Also, consistent with ICRP Publication 60, the table of weighting factors for neutrons would no longer list a column for neutron flux density. DOE recognized that the proposed changes to most of the dosimetric terms used in 10 CFR part 835 to reflect the recommendations for assessing dose and associated terminology from ICRP Publications 60 and 68 would require revising many site documents and updating training materials. Although in June 2004 and again in June 2006, the ICRP released a draft of updated recommendations, which included some adjustment of Tissue Weighting Factors and Radiation Weighting Factors, DOE expressed its belief that this was still an opportune time to make these changes rather than waiting for the draft recommendations to be finalized. It may be several years before the ICRP finalizes and issues the revised recommendations and accompanying dose conversion factors. DOE evaluated the effect of the June 2004 proposed revisions to Tissue Weighting Factors on derivation of dose conversion factors used in ICRP Publication 68. The evaluation found, for radionuclides of most interest to DOE, that the ICRP proposed Tissue Weighting Factors revisions would have minimal impact on the ICRP Publication 68 derived secondary limits ( *i.e.* , the DACs and Sealed Radioactive Source Accountability values). The ICRP's June 2006 proposed revisions to Tissue Weighting Factors will also have minimal impact. Any future need by DOE to revise weighting factors should have minimal administrative impact for such activities as revising procedures and training materials. It is envisioned that, over time, updated recommendations to make revisions to dosimetry calculation models will periodically be made by national and international consensus groups. Given that fact, and the significant financial and resource impact, DOE recognizes that historical doses, recorded and reported to individuals prior to the effective implementation date of this proposed amendment, should still be considered to be the official doses of record. Barring some unforeseen reason or factor (e.g., discovery of a site or vendor specific miscalculation in assigned doses), DOE would not require the updating of historical doses to reflect these changes. DOE considered several options for amending part 835 including: • Allowing sites to choose either converting to the newer dosimetric terminology and Tissue and Radiation Weighting Factors or retaining the existing requirements; • Not specifying in part 835 a specific set of Tissue and Radiation Weighting Factors, but requiring sites to specify in their DOE approved Radiation Protection Program the weighting factors to be used and the technical basis for that determination; • Updating the Tissue and Radiation Weighting Factors to reflect the newer research without revising the dose terminology; • Updating the Tissue and Radiation Weighting Factors to reflect the newer research and revising the dose terminology; and • Converting to the newer dosimetric terminology and Tissue and Radiation Weighting Factors and not updating the DAC values (appendices A and C to part 835) and appendix E to part 835 values. DOE considered the best approach, which it proposed, was to convert all terminology and methodology, including the appendices A, C and E to part 835 values, to reflect ICRP Publications 60 and 68. DOE solicited comments on all of these different options. DOE recognized in the NOPR that the proposed dosimetric changes would result in the need to update numerous site documents and proposed a three-year implementation schedule to alleviate the burden of making the changes. Therefore, DOE considered that many of the changes can be made during the regularly scheduled document updating processing. An extended implementation date also was proposed because DOE recognized that the benefit of updating documents to reflect the dosimetric changes may not justify the cost at sites nearing closure. The NOPR stated that DOE would allow sites to use the exemption process in 10 CFR part 820 to request relief, if appropriate, for closure sites which are scheduled to continue operation beyond the implementation date for the proposed changes. In the proposal, DOE requested input on any other constructive ways to reduce the costs of implementing this proposed change. DOE received several comments supporting DOE's proposed changes to reflect the recommendations for assessing dose and associated terminology from ICRP Publications 60 and 68. Comments noted that there would be associated costs and appreciated DOE's three-year implementation schedule to meeting this change. The same comments applied to the updates to appendices A, C and E to part 835 to reflect ICRP Publications 60 and 68 methodologies. One commenter stated that DOE should be aware that some difficulties in communications with radiation workers and perhaps even members of the public will likely linger for many years, and there did not appear to be an identifiable benefit in terms of worker protection to be gained from this change. Comments were also received stating that DOE should not incorporate draft ICRP recommendations into this revision of 10 CFR part 835. DOE is not incorporating draft ICRP recommendations into this revision of 10 CFR part 835. DOE agrees that this action would be premature. DOE agrees that these changes will have some impact on site operations, particularly in updating site documents and training of workers on the new terminology. Accordingly, to lessen the impact, DOE proposed and is adopting in § 835.101 a three-year implementation schedule. DOE intends to provide revised guidance documents during this time period to facilitate site implementation of these changes. Comments were received that DOE should consult with the NRC and other federal agencies and not make these changes unless the NRC makes these changes. In preparing the NOPR, DOE did consult with the NRC and, as a member of the Interagency Scientific Committee on Radiation Standards, consulted with other federal agencies having radiation protection responsibilities. No significant objections were raised prior to publication of the proposed rule. Other federal agencies, including EPA, FDA, and NIOSH, have already adopted dosimetric aspects of the current ICRP recommendations in recent guidance documents and requirements. The NRC was the only federal agency who submitted public comments on the proposed rule. The NRC recommended postponing updating the dosimetric models and terms. A review of significant unplanned radiation exposures at DOE facilities over the past several years reflects that, at DOE facilities, significant unplanned radiation exposures have been from internal exposures, resulting from intakes of radioactive material. As the owner and regulator of these facilities, DOE believes it is prudent and warranted to assess these exposures using dose assessment methods more current than those in the current rule. DOE notes that the NRC has authorized selected fuel cycle facilities to use this approach. DOE continues to believe that, for DOE facilities, these changes are an improvement. DOE received a comment that, under certain circumstances, when an individual conducts multiple activities involving both activities under 10 CFR 835.1(b)(1) and excluded activities ( *e.g.* , activities involving NRC licensed activities) it is ambiguous as to how the rule would be applied when using different dose coefficients and weighting factors to calculate the total effective dose for the worker from both activities. DOE agrees that guidance is needed for this provision. For the purpose of compliance with 10 CFR 835.1(b)(1), DOE considers the following terms to be equivalent: Dosimetric term as defined by excluded activity cognizant regulator DOE amended dosimetric term Committed effective dose equivalent Committed effective dose. Committed dose equivalent Committed equivalent dose. Cumulative total effective dose equivalent Cumulative total effective dose. Deep dose equivalent Equivalent dose to the whole body. Dose equivalent Equivalent dose. Effective dose equivalent Effective dose. Lens of the eye dose equivalent Equivalent dose to the lens of the eye. Quality factor Radiation weighting factor. Shallow dose equivalent Equivalent dose to the skin or Equivalent dose to any extremity. Weighting factor Tissue weighting factor. Total effective dose equivalent Total effective dose. In response to another comment, DOE replaces the term “nonstochastic” with the term “deterministic.” One commenter stated that there did not appear to be significant benefit to changing the dosimetric methodologies. DOE disagrees with the comment and, to the contrary, believes that using more up-to-date models for assessing worker dose is beneficial. Under the 10 CFR part 820 exemption process, DOE already authorizes the Y-12 and Savannah River Site facility to use ICRP Publications 60 and 68 methodologies for assessing doses. The contractors requested the change and noted that the improved accuracy in determining worker doses would be beneficial. Similarly, as noted previously, the NRC authorized selected fuel cycle facilities to use this approach. DOE also received a comment that DOE should move the phrase “(1 rem = 0.01 sieverts)” to the end of the definition for “annual limit on intake,” rather than with the definition of “committed equivalent dose,” because this would be the first use of the term “Sievert.” DOE makes these editorial changes, with the exception that the phrase “(1 rem = 0.01 Sv)” is included in the definition of “annual limit on intake,” the first usage of the term “Sievert” in 10 CFR part 835. One commenter noted that the definition of “absorbed dose” should refer to energy imparted and not energy absorbed. DOE agrees with this comment and changes the definition. One commenter requested the addition of several additional dosimetric terms/operational quantities in the rule such as “ambient dose” and “personal dose equivalent.” DOE agrees that these quantities are important because they are the operational quantities that have been recommended by ICRP for use in assessing compliance with the numerical dose criteria for external exposure specified in this part. However, DOE does not believe it is necessary to define or revise additional dosimetric terms, such as “ambient dose,” and “personal dose equivalent.” Definitions of such terms are best left in supporting documents, such as implementation guides for 10 CFR part 835 and the technical standards for the DOELAP. For clarification, DOE provides a discussion of this topic in section U of this part. One commenter requested that DOE not use the terms “deep equivalent dose,” “lens of the eye equivalent dose” and “shallow equivalent dose” because these terms are not defined in the referenced ICRP publications. DOE agrees with this comment and replaces these terms with “equivalent dose to the whole body,” “equivalent dose to the lens of the eye,” “equivalent dose to the skin,” or “equivalent dose to the extremity,” as appropriate, in §§ 835.202, 835.205, 835.402, 835.502, and 835.702. DOE adds the following sentence to the definition of “equivalent dose” in § 835.2(b) “For external dose, the equivalent dose to the whole body is assessed at a depth of 1 cm in tissue; the equivalent dose to the lens of the eye is assessed at a depth of 0.3 cm in tissue, and the equivalent dose to the extremity and skin is assessed at a depth of 0.007 cm in tissue.” DOE received a comment that it should clarify the definition of “committed effective dose” to assure consistency with the equations of Section 6 of ICRP Publication 68 and the methodology for calculating the “remainder” dose. DOE agrees with these comments and revises the definition of “committed effective dose” and footnote number 1 under the table of Tissue Weighting Factors to be consistent with ICRP Publication 68. One commenter pointed out that footnote 2 to the table on radiation weighting factors in the definition of “radiation weighting factor” in § 835.2(b) did not provide information on the radiation weighting factor for Auger electrons emitted by radioactive atoms incorporated into DNA and requested either deletion of the exclusion or clarification on the appropriate radiation weighting factor. After reevaluation of this topic, DOE has determined that from a regulatory perspective, the benefits of this footnote to worker health and safety may be outweighed by difficulties in complying with the footnote. The reasons are:
(1)This footnote only applies to dose received by the DNA of a cell and, thus, is a very small fraction of the dose received by the entire tissue;
(2)assessment of doses and risks will require information on the distribution of radionuclides within tissues and cells which may not be readily available, and which will depend on the chemical form involved; and
(3)except for accidents, most exposures of this type are therapeutic and would not be covered by provisions of 10 CFR part 835. Accordingly, footnote 2 to the table on radiation weighting factors in § 835.2(b) from the proposed rule is not included in the final rule and DOE will develop guidance to address the infrequent situations and complex dosimetry resulting from incorporation of Auger electron emitters in DNA. DOE received a comment recommending DOE permit sites to choose to either convert to the newer tissue and radiation weighting factors or remain with the existing requirements. Another option suggested by the commenter was for DOE to not include tissue weighting factors, radiation weighting factors, and DACs in the rule. Rather, this information may be placed into a set of guidance documents and incorporated by reference in the rule. After considering all the comments DOE has received, DOE still considers the best approach to be to convert all terminology and methodology, including the appendices A, C and E values, to reflect ICRP Publications 60 and 68. DOE did not propose excluding tissue weighting factors, radiation weighting factors, and DACs from the rule and is not making this change. DOE received a comment that the dose methodology in the proposed 10 CFR part 835 is not consistent with DOE's requirements for the protection of the public. The commenter believed that the standards for the public and environment and the standard for DOE workers should be revised at the same time to avoid situations where some DOE standards are based on new ICRP recommendations and some standards are based on older ICRP recommendations. DOE does not agree with this comment. DOE has already initiated adoption of the more recent ICRP recommendations as demonstrated by its guidance on radiation risk estimation (endorsing Federal Guidance Report Number 13, which is consistent with ICRP Publication 60). DOE sees no conflict in making this change at this time and no benefit in waiting until all of its environmental policy and guidance is updated. As part of DOE's response to a comment regarding application of appendix D surface contamination values to areas of fixed contamination consisting of special tritium compounds (STCs), DOE is adding a definition of “special tritium compound.” The definition is from DOE technical standard, *Radiological Control Programs for Special Tritium Compounds* , DOE-HDBK-1184-2004. One commenter requested clarification of the term “personal property” which is used in the definition of “real property.” DOE revised the definition of “real property” to not include the term “personal property.” DOE received a comment that a definition of “activity median aerodynamic diameter”
(AMAD)should be included in the rule. DOE agrees with is comment and has added a definition, based on ICRP Publication 66, *Human Respiratory Tract Model for Radiological Protection* , for AMAD. DOE also clarifies, in the appendix A notes, that AMAD is the appropriate particle size value. DOE received a comment that, because of the uncertainties in the biological effect of high energy radiation and difficulties in measuring radiation at such levels, DOE should insert a binding statement in 10 CFR part 835 requiring DOE contractors to evaluate and justify the radiation weighting factors used for photon and particle energies above 10 MeV. DOE agrees that at high energies, such as those above 10 MeV, the biological impact of particles on human tissue may be more uncertain than at other energies and that monitoring of workplaces and individuals exposed to particles with these energies may be very challenging. However, other challenging radiological conditions exist in the DOE complex that are not explicitly addressed in 10 CFR part 835. Moreover, radiation fields consisting of particles greater than 10 MeV do not occur extensively within the DOE complex. When such conditions are identified, efforts should be focused on significantly limiting exposure to these types of radiation fields through the application of engineered and administrative controls. If doses to workers result from exposure to such radiation fields, provisions in subpart E of 10 CFR part 835 require that instruments and equipment used for monitoring individuals and workplaces be appropriate for the types, levels and energies of the radiations encountered, and that monitoring be performed to detect changes in radiological conditions. Finally, DOE notes that the purpose of radiation weighting factors is to establish dose limits, set up other dose dependent criteria for protection purposes, and plan radiological work. They are not for the purpose of measuring radiation fields and individual doses. Accordingly, DOE does not believe there is a need to include a specific provision in the final rule specifying evaluation and justification of the radiation weighting factors used for photon and particle energies above 10 MeV. DOE, however, will include in guidance a recommendation to evaluate and document the technical bases for the equivalent dose response of instruments and equipment used to monitor workplaces and individuals exposed to photon and particle energies above 10 MeV. A commenter proposed that neutron flux to dose conversion factors be added as conversion factors in 10 CFR part 835 and that DOE sites be permitted to use different values if they could defend their position. DOE believes that if the neutron energy spectrum is known in sufficient detail to permit the use of more radiation weighting factors than are currently provided in the proposed amendment to 10 CFR part 835, a more detailed set of radiation weighting factors would be appropriate. Such an approach was used in the previous versions of 10 CFR part 835 which included a table containing mean quality factors for 21 values of neutron energy. Accordingly, the formula recommended in ICRP Publication 60 relating to neutron energy and radiation weighting factors is added to footnote 3 of the radiation weighting factors table in the definition of “radiation weighing factor.” DOE will not provide neutron fluence to dose conversion factors, as proposed by the commenter, because they are a function of many more factors than the relationship between neutron energy and radiation weighting factors and would not be as widely applicable throughout the DOE complex. Regarding a comment to permit DOE sites to use different neutron fluence to dose conversion factors, DOE's decision to include the formula relating neutron energy and radiation weighting factors obviates the need for such a change to the final rule. As long as the neutron fluence to dose conversion factors incorporate the radiation weighting factors permitted by 10 CFR part 835, DOE sites may use conversion factors appropriate to local conditions to relate neutron fluence to equivalent dose and effective dose. Note that the radiation weighting factors are only for use in calculating equivalent dose, effective dose, committed effective dose, and total effective dose. The operational radiation dose quantities used in the measurement of radiation dose use other modifiers of absorbed dose, such as quality factors, to account for the biological impact of the radiation type. However, to ensure compliance with the dose quantities specified in 10 CFR part 835, the operational radiation dose quantities must provide a dose estimate equal to or greater than the dose quantities specified in 10 CFR part 835. In summary, DOE makes the proposed changes to the dosimetric terms used in 10 CFR part 835 to reflect the recommendations for assessing dose and associated terminology from ICRP Publications 60 and 68. DOE revises the definition “nonstochastic effects” to read “deterministic effects.” As previously discussed, DOE revises the definitions of “committed effective dose,” “committed equivalent dose,” and “absorbed dose.” DOE adds definitions for “activity median aerodynamic diameter” and “special tritium compound.” DOE deletes the proposed definitions of “deep equivalent dose,” “lens of the eye equivalent dose,” “shallow equivalent dose,” and footnote 2 to the table on radiation weighting factors in § 835.2(b) that addresses the radiation weighting factor for Auger electrons emitted by radioactive atoms incorporated into DNA. DOE adds the following formula to the definition of “radiation weighting factor (w <sup>R</sup> ):” ER08JN07.000 DOE revises 10 CFR 835.2(c) to state that terms defined in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 or in 10 CFR part 820 and not defined in this part are used consistent with the meanings given in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 or in 10 CFR part 820. Accordingly DOE removes the definitions of “Contractor” and “Secretarial Officer” from 10 CFR part 835 and uses the terms as defined in 10 CFR part 820. C. Radiological Units in 10 CFR Part 835 DOE proposed to revise the text of § 835.4 to allow use of additional units, such as dpm, mass units, μCi/cc, and dpm/100cm 2 in records required by this part. The original intent of this provision was to preclude the exclusive use of the SI units of becquerel, gray
(Gy)and sievert (Sv). As stated in the NOPR, the intent was not to preclude use of other conventional units, such as those previously listed. The proposed change was intended to achieve the original intent of this section. DOE received comments that the allowance for the additional units of measurement should prove to be beneficial and the continued preclusion of the exclusive use of the SI units is beneficial and appreciated. The final rule makes the changes as proposed in the NOPR. D. Radiation Protection Programs DOE proposed to add a new sentence at the end of § 835.101(f) that would provide that unless otherwise specified in part 835, compliance with the amendments made by this final rule shall be achieved no later than three years following the effective date of the final rule. The reasons DOE proposed an extended implementation date are the same as those discussed in connection with the changes to the dosimetric terms. DOE received several comments that given the extensive changes proposed, the proposed three-year implementation period would be beneficial. One commenter believed that the three-year implementation period was excessive and could cause confusion at sites with multiple contractors where each contractor may implement the amendments at different times. DOE will provide guidance for this situation. One commenter believed that the three-year implementation time period may not be adequate for all sites. DOE believes that the three-year period is reasonable. Contractors still have the option of requesting an extension of the implementation date through the 10 CFR part 820 exemption process, on a case by case basis. The final rule makes the changes as proposed in the NOPR. E. Occupational Dose Limits for General Employees DOE proposed amending § 835.202 by revising the dosimetric terms to be consistent with the revised definitions. One commenter noted that the phrase “for external exposures” was redundant because that phrase was already included in the definitions of “deep equivalent dose' and “shallow equivalent dose.” As discussed previously, DOE is not including in the final rule definitions for “deep equivalent dose” or “shallow equivalent dose.” The term “for external exposures” is no longer redundant in § 835.202(a)(2). DOE makes the following changes: § 835.202(a)(2) is rewritten as “The sum of the equivalent dose to the whole body for external exposures and the committed equivalent dose to any organ or tissue other than the skin or the lens of the eye”; § 835.202(a)(3) is rewritten as an “equivalent dose to the lens of the eye”; and § 835.202(a)(4) is rewritten as “The sum of the equivalent dose to the skin or to any extremity for external exposures and the committed equivalent dose to the skin or to any extremity.” F. Combining Internal and External Equivalent Doses DOE proposed amending § 835.203 by revising the dosimetric terms to be consistent with the revised definitions. DOE received a comment requesting clarification on the proposed change to § 835.203(b) by specifying that the radiation weighting factor values, in addition to the tissue weighting factor values, provided in § 835.2 shall be used in determining effective dose. Although the definition of “radiation weighting factor” already specifies the factors to be used, DOE agrees that the additional words in § 835.203(b) will clarify the requirement. DOE makes the changes as proposed in the NOPR with the exception that the phrase “radiation and” is added before the phrase “tissue weighting factor.” G. Occupational Dose Limits for Minors DOE proposed amending § 835.207 by revising the dosimetric terms to be consistent with the revised definitions. DOE received a comment that the term “equivalent” in the first line on the proposed change to section 835.207 was incorrect. As stated, the sentence contradicts the revised definitions in the NOPR. DOE agrees and makes the changes as proposed in the NOPR with the exception that the word “equivalent” is deleted from the first sentence. H. General Requirements for Monitoring Individuals and Areas in 10 CFR Part 835 DOE proposed amending § 835.401(a)(5) by revising the text “engineering and process controls” to read “engineering and administrative controls.” This change was proposed in order to make the use of the terms consistent with DOE Policy 450.4 “Safety Management System Policy.” DOE considered the terms to be equivalent. DOE received comments that the proposed change to § 835.401(a)(5) was a beneficial clarification. One commenter recommended that wherever the term “engineering control(s)” is used in the rule that it be changed to “engineered control(s).” This is primarily a matter of clarity in meaning. “Engineering control” can have several meanings. “Engineered control” is less ambiguous. DOE agrees with this editorial comment and makes this change throughout the rule. I. Monitoring of Packages Containing Radioactive Material in 10 CFR Part 835 DOE proposed amending § 835.405(c)(2) by changing “unless the package contains less than a Type A quantity” to “if the package contains a Type B quantity.” DOE received comments that the proposed change in the requirements pertaining to Type A quantities is a useful clarification and should have insignificant associated costs. DOE received a comment that its proposed change to the definition of “radioactive material transportation,” by removing the text “when such movement is subject to DOT regulations or DOE orders that govern such movements,” creates ambiguity as to when receipt surveys are required under § 835.405. The commenter provided an example: If material is transported on-site via a cart, receipt surveys would not be required; however, if the same package was transported in a truck ( *i.e.* , a “highway vehicle”), surveys would be required. While DOE agrees that there is ambiguity in the requirement, DOE does not agree that keeping the text “when such movement is subject to Department of Transportation regulations or DOE orders that govern such movements” in the rule addresses this ambiguity. Section 835.405(d) requires, in part, that packages received from radioactive material transportation, which meet the criteria of § 835.405(b), be monitored as soon as practicable following receipt of the package. The purpose of this monitoring is to verify the radiological condition of the package ( *e.g.* , contamination levels and/or radiation levels). The verification is needed because, other than the visual indications listed in § 835.405(b)(3), the recipient typically has no knowledge of the physical rigors the package was subject to while in transit. Monitoring is needed to ensure protective actions for subsequent package handlers as well as notifying the transporter if unexpected radiological conditions are identified. The exclusion in § 835.1(d) applies to radioactive material transportation conducted by a DOE employee or DOE contractor employee, when the radioactive material is under the continuous observation and control of an individual who is knowledgeable of and implements required exposure control measures. For situations meeting this exclusion, DOE sees no benefit in post-transit monitoring of the packages to verify the radiological condition of the package ( *e.g.* , contamination levels and/or radiation levels). The verification is not needed because a DOE employee or DOE contractor employee had the package under continuous observation and is knowledgeable of the physical rigors the package was subject to while in transit. Accordingly, DOE adds a new § 835.405(e) to reflect that receipt monitoring is not required for packages transported on a DOE site which have remained under the continuous observation and control of a DOE employee or DOE contractor employee who is knowledgeable of and implements required exposure control measures. The final rule makes the other changes as proposed in the NOPR. J. Exception for Labeling Requirements in 10 CFR Part 835 DOE proposed to establish an upper limit of 0.1 Ci for a quantity of radioactive material which would be excepted from the labeling requirement in § 835.606(a)(2). After the establishment of the radioactive material labeling requirements in the 1998 amendment to 10 CFR part 835, DOE noted that the exception to labeling requirements for radioactive materials appeared excessive for certain isotopes. DOE currently exempts from labeling items and containers if a quantity of radioactive material is less than one tenth of the values specified in appendix E of 10 CFR part 835. For some isotopes this quantity is significant. For example, a container of tritiated water need not be labeled “Caution, Radioactive Material” as long as there is less than 16 Ci of tritiated water in the container. While the basis for this exception, as discussed in the preamble to the 1998 amendment to 10 CFR part 835, is technically defensible, DOE believes that it is prudent to establish an upper limit for the labeling exception. The approach DOE proposed is similar to that taken by the NRC, except that the NRC upper limit is 0.001 Ci. DOE believes that the proposed 0.1 Ci upper limit in § 835.606 would provide an acceptable level of protection, based on the exposure scenario discussed in the preamble to the 1998 amendment (63 FR 59672-73, November 4, 1998), and still provides for sufficient operational flexibility in not being overly restrictive in the labeling requirements. DOE received comments that the proposed change to establish an upper limit of 0.1 Ci for a quantity of radioactive material which would be excepted from the labeling requirement provides an acceptable level of protection in harmony with operational flexibility. Anticipated costs for compliance would be negligible. The final rule makes the changes as proposed in the NOPR. K. Individual Monitoring Records Requirements in 10 CFR Part 835 DOE proposed to revise § 835.702(b) to give sites the option of not assessing and recording any internal dose monitoring result estimated to be less than 10 millirems committed equivalent dose. This change was proposed in response to concerns that, under the current requirements, there is no threshold for positive internal dose monitoring results which need not be assessed and a dose recorded. DOE stated in the NOPR that this flexibility would likely be of most benefit for routine bioassay results from tritium and uranium operations. For tritium, under the current rule, positive bioassay results could result in the need to determine and record doses that are less than one millirem. DOE proposed the revision to allow some relief from the need to perform a dose assessment and to record these very small doses. DOE envisioned that this would most easily be achieved through the development and use of default values, below which no further dose assessment or recording would be required. Establishing a dose threshold for any single bioassay and/or air monitoring result would make the DOE requirements consistent with nationally accepted standards as discussed in “American National Standard for Design of Internal Dosimetry Programs” (ANSI/HPS N13.39-2000). The proposed provision would still require the maintenance of bioassay and/or air monitoring results in case they are needed by DOE in the future. The NOPR also stated that DOE's policy has been that the current monitoring threshold of 100 millirems should not be interpreted as an objective for internal dose monitoring. DOE fully recognizes that routine internal dose monitoring is not capable of detecting doses at the monitoring threshold for some radionuclides. Consistent with that policy, DOE stated that the proposed threshold values for assessing internal dose should not be construed as the establishment of thresholds for internal dose monitoring. As stated in the NOPR, the proposed revision would provide flexibility for assessing and recording doses for any single bioassay and/or air monitoring result. It also included an annual limit for doses that need not be assessed or recorded based on 50 percent of the applicable monitoring threshold at § 835.402(c)(1) through (4). DOE recognized that sites wishing to invoke the flexibility offered by this proposed change would need to develop and implement a program to track bioassay results to ensure that dose constraints are not exceeded without recording the doses. DOE stated its intention to provide guidance on acceptable implementation methods. DOE received several comments supportive of the proposed change. DOE also received a comment recommending changing § 835.702(b) such that the annual threshold dose which must be assessed and recorded as a result of internal monitoring be increased from 50 percent to 100 percent of the applicable monitoring threshold. DOE agrees with this comment and adopts this recommendation. A few commenters were opposed to the proposed change to 10 CFR 835.702(b). Reasons stated included: A belief that any dose should be assessed when there is monitoring data available; the change would cause more trouble than relief; DOE might be accused of making the change in order to lower DOE's collective dose; not reporting dose when bioassay samples have been taken may lead to litigation and require dose reconstruction for former workers; and a more effective change might be to raise the monitoring threshold to 500 millirems instead of 100 millirems. One commenter suggested an alternative approach of assigning a minimum dose to all non-monitored workers. DOE believes that, consistent with ANSI/HPS N13.39-2000 recommendations, it is acceptable to only assess and record doses exceeding 10 millirems, provided that the monitoring data are maintained. DOE continues to believe that the change is beneficial, and the change is supported by several commenters. DOE anticipates a slight drop in the collective dose as a result of this change. According to DOE's 2004 REMS Report, approximately 31 rems collective dose was from individual exposures of less than 100 millirems. This is approximately 3 percent of the collective dose. As DOE has done in the past, DOE will ensure that the reason for this slight decrease is clearly explained in DOE's REMS report. DOE does not believe that this change will lead to extensive litigation because the individual monitoring results must still be maintained, and they will be available. DOE already conservatively maintains an internal exposure monitoring threshold of 100 millirems, which contrasts with the NRC's value of 500 millirems, and requires maintenance of the individual monitoring results. DOE believes this approach should suffice to avoid future expensive dose reconstruction efforts and supports DOE's continuance of the 100 millirems monitoring threshold. DOE sees no benefit in assigning a minimum dose to all workers, monitored or not. One comment stated that, in order to be consistent with ANSI/HPS N13.39-2000, one of the stated objectives for making the change discussed in the NOPR, the value for not requiring the assessing and recording of an internal dose monitoring result should be 10 millirems committed effective dose, rather than 10 millirems committed equivalent dose. DOE received another comment that this change may not provide significant relief because there are requirements to assess and record both whole body internal doses (committed effective doses) and organ or tissue internal doses (committed equivalent doses). The commenter suggested that a threshold for not requiring assessing and recording of an internal dose be applied to both whole body and organ or tissue internal doses. DOE agrees with these comments. The intent of the proposed change was to provide relief from having to assess and record all internal doses which are well below DOE's conservative internal dose monitoring threshold. To meet this intent, DOE revises the provision to not require recording of whole body internal doses (committed effective doses) and organ or tissue internal doses (committed equivalent doses) as long as the monitoring data are estimated to correspond to an individual receiving less than 10 millirems committed effective dose. For radionuclides of most concern to DOE, the 10 millirems committed effective dose threshold is suitable to ensure adequate evaluation of organ or tissue doses as well. In summary, DOE revises § 835.702(b) to not require recording of whole body internal doses (committed effective doses) and organ or tissue internal doses (committed equivalent doses) as long as the monitoring data are estimated to correspond to an individual receiving less than 10 millirems committed effective dose. DOE revises the value for unrecorded internal dose estimated for any individual in a year to be the applicable monitoring threshold at § 835.402(c). L. Radiation Safety Training DOE proposed amending § 835.901(b) by adding the text “applied training,” after “by successful completion of,” in the introductory language of that paragraph. The training and applied training is to be commensurate with the hazards in the area and the required controls. DOE already requires that each individual demonstrate knowledge of the radiation safety training topics listed in § 835.901(c) by successful completion of an examination and performance demonstrations. The current requirement for performance demonstration implies that the training will include practical factors or “applied training.” Accordingly, DOE considered the proposed change to be only editorial. DOE considered comments on options for adding a provision for retention testing in 10 CFR part 835. DOE specifically noted in the NOPR that DOE-HDBK-1131-98 includes an attachment “Evaluating the Effectiveness of Radiological Training.” This attachment discusses a recommended approach to implementing a retention testing program. DOE also solicited comments on adding a provision, in subpart J, for radiological control technician
(RCT)training. The NOPR noted that 10 CFR part 835 already requires individuals responsible for developing and implementing measures necessary for ensuring compliance with the requirements of 10 part CFR 835 (including RCTs) to have the appropriate education, training, and skills. The NOPR referenced DOE guidance which details DOE's expectations for the appropriate level of training, retraining, testing and qualifications of RCTs. DOE, however, solicited comments on whether DOE should specifically include requirements for RCT training, retraining, testing, and qualifications in 10 CFR part 835. DOE received a comment that several changes need to be made in the area of radiation safety training. Specifically, the commenter requested that DOE: • Add a requirement for applied training and performance demonstrations for the periodic requalification; • Add a requirement for retention testing; • Make changes to the testing process to ensure that computer-based training does not allow the trainee to pass the examination based on trial and error; • Reinstate the training requirements for RCTs. Regarding the comment to add a requirement for applied training and performance demonstrations for periodic requalification, 10 CFR 835.901(e) currently specifies the training requirements for requalification. DOE has had no indication that the lack of performance demonstration requirements for requalification has created a radiation protection concern. DOE searched its occurrence reporting data, and could not identify significant examples of radiological occurrences resulting from improper radiological work practices due to lack of performance demonstrations during requalification training. Although DOE is not amending 10 CFR part 835 as requested by the commenter, it may update its implementation guide to recommend that sites periodically evaluate individuals' abilities to perform acceptable radiological work practices (such as donning and doffing protective clothing) and include, as necessary, performance demonstrations during the requalification training. Regarding the comment that DOE should add a requirement for retention testing, as discussed in the NOPR, DOE provides, and maintains several guidance documents which address retention testing. Several other comments stated that there is no need for a retention testing requirement in 10 CFR part 835. DOE has searched its occurrence reporting data and found no significant examples of radiological occurrences resulting from lack of retaining information from radiological worker training or equivalent training. Consequently, at this time, DOE is not adding a requirement for retention testing for radiation safety training. DOE continues to support retention testing as a good practice and is willing to work with DOE sites to improve previously discussed guidance documents relating to retention testing. Regarding the comment to make changes to the testing process to ensure that computer-based training does not allow the trainee to pass the examination based on trial and error, DOE believes that permitting a trainee to pass by trial and error would be inconsistent with the requirement that individuals demonstrate an acceptable baseline knowledge level of radiation protection fundamentals and practices. DOE may update its implementation guide to clearly indicate that this practice is not consistent with the requirement. Regarding the comment to reinstate the training requirements for RCTs, DOE explained its basis for specifying the training and qualification requirements for individuals responsible for implementing 10 CFR part 835 requirements, which include RCTs, when DOE amended 10 CFR part 835 on November 4, 1998 (63 FR 59662). Under the original rule, published on December 14, 1993 (58 FR 65458), DOE specified training and retraining requirements for RCTs in § 835.903. To address a number of shortcomings in its provisions for training RCTs, DOE proposed, in its December 23, 1996, NOPR, to amend 10 CFR part 835 by codifying the definition of “radiological control technician” at § 835.2(a). DOE also solicited comments on four alternative approaches. Alternative Approach 4 included specifying the training and qualification requirements for individuals responsible for implementing 10 CFR part 835 requirements, including RCTs, under a new § 835.103. Public comments indicated that DOE's proposed definition of the term “radiological control technician” did not adequately describe the roles and responsibilities of individuals filling this position. DOE received comments endorsing each of the proposed alternative approaches, with the majority of the comments endorsing Alternative Approach 4. DOE subsequently chose this approach because it provided the flexibility necessary to cover the wide range of individuals involved in developing and implementing measures necessary for ensuring compliance with 10 CFR part 835, including cognizant managers, supervisors, auditors, engineers, clerks, and technicians. DOE has decided that the current approach in § 835.103 is the optimal approach for specifying training requirements for RCTs. DOE received several comments supporting this position. DOE has searched its occurrence reporting data, and could not identify significant examples of radiological occurrences resulting from inadequate training or qualifications of RCTs. Consequently, DOE is not making any revisions to the training requirements for RCTs at this time. DOE will, however, continue to assist sites in meeting § 835.103 by improving and maintaining those previously discussed guidance documents relating to the training, retraining, and qualifications of RCTs. DOE also received comments that the proposed change to § 835.901(b) was confusing. DOE proposed to specify that each individual shall demonstrate knowledge of the radiation safety training topics established in § 835.901(c), commensurate with the hazards in the area and required controls, by successful completion of applied training. There were questions concerning the new term “applied training” and requests for DOE to either delete this change or make revisions to clarify the intent. DOE provides the following clarification in response to these comments. DOE believes that radiation safety training should include appropriate theoretical training (such as radiological fundamentals, limits, and controls) as well as applied training (such as reading and understanding work permits and donning and doffing protective clothing). DOE recognizes that there are different training methods available to effectively provide this training, including classroom instruction, computer-based training, on-the-job mentoring, or combinations of these methods. Successful completion of such training is demonstrated by completion of an examination and performance demonstrations. As DOE stated in the NOPR, the current requirement for performance demonstration already implies that the training includes applied training. DOE has decided, after considering the comments, that the proposed addition of the term “applied training” to the training requirements does not clarify or improve the requirement. Consequently, DOE does not make the proposed change to § 835.901(c) in today's rule. In summary, DOE makes no revisions to subpart J as part of this final rule. M. Design and Control Requirements in 10 CFR Part 835 DOE proposed to amend § 835.1001(a) by replacing the text “physical design features and administrative control” with “engineering and administrative controls.” DOE also proposed to amend § 835.1001(b) by replacing the text “physical design features” with “engineering controls” and proposed to amend § 835.1003 by replacing the text “physical design features and administrative controls” with “engineering and administrative controls.” These changes were proposed in order to make the terms used in 10 CFR part 835 consistent with those in DOE Policy 450.4, “Safety Management System Policy.” DOE considered the terms to be equivalent. DOE received a comment that the proposed changes to § 835.1001(a) will clarify the text and will be beneficial. DOE makes the changes as proposed in the NOPR with exception that the term “engineering” will be replaced with the term “engineered.” See discussion in section IV. H. of this preamble. N. General Provisions to Emergency Exposure Situations in 10 CFR Part 835 DOE proposed to amend the general provisions to emergency exposure situations to clarify that the resumption of operations, pursuant to § 835.1301(d), only applies to operations which have been suspended as a result of a dose in excess of the limits specified in § 835.202. DOE considered the proposed change to be only editorial. DOE received a comment that § 835.1301(d) should also require operations which have resulted in a dose in excess of the limits specified in § 835.202, except those received in accordance with § 835.204, to be suspended. DOE does not agree with this comment. Implementing a requirement such as this would be problematic. Past DOE experience with exposures in excess of the limits have involved situations where the exposure was not determined for a considerable time period after the operation causing the exposure. Sometimes the operation causing the exposure had already ceased by the time the exposure was assessed. Other times the operation causing the exposure was never determined. The rule is not the appropriate vehicle for such management of DOE operations. DOE received another comment that the proposed clarification of § 835.1301(d) will be beneficial. The final rule makes the changes as proposed in the NOPR. O. DAC Values, Introductory Paragraph, and Footnotes in Appendix A in 10 CFR Part 835 There is discussion earlier in this preamble of DOE's adoption in this final rule of the system of dosimetry for intake of radioactive materials set forth in more recent ICRP Publications. DOE also proposed to modify the DAC values contained in appendix A to part 835 to reflect the previously mentioned ICRP publications. The salient changes proposed were: • The use of updated dose per unit intake conversion factors (dose coefficients) specified in ICRP Publication 68 instead of the dose per unit intake conversion factors in the EPA Federal Guidance Report Number 11, *Limiting Values of Radionuclide Intake and Air Concentration and Dose Conversion Factors for Inhalation, Submersion, and Ingestion* , which is the basis for the current appendix A values. ICRP Publication 68 lists committed effective dose coefficients which are used in deriving the DAC limit based on the stochastic limit of 5 rem. In order to determine if the non-stochastic (organ) limit of 50 rems to any organ or tissue is more limiting, DOE used the ICRP computer program, *The ICRP Database of Dose Coefficients: Workers and Members of the Public* , ISBN 0 08 043 8768. As in the current set of DAC values, the more limiting value (stochastic or non-stochastic) is used. • The use of the ICRP Publication 66, *Human Respiratory Tract Model for Radiological Protection* , classification of radioactive material by absorption type [F(fast), M(medium), and S(slow)] instead of by lung clearance classes [D(days), W(weeks), and Y(years)] as specified in ICRP Publication 30. Values were calculated in units of Bq/m 3 and converted to units of μCi/mL. The table presents both units, each truncated to one significant figure. • The use of default particle size distribution of 5 micrometers instead of a default particle size distribution of 1 micrometer, if the actual particle size distribution is not known. In addition to the changes in the dosimetric models used to calculate the DACs in appendix A, several other changes to this appendix were proposed. One proposed change was to establish DAC values for tritiated particulate aerosols and insoluble organically bound tritium and default values for radionuclides not listed in the appendix. Subsequent to the November 4, 1998 amendment to 10 CFR part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection (63 FR 59662), the Department developed guidance for controlling individual exposures to tritiated particulate aerosols and insoluble organically bound tritium. In 2001, the DOE Office of Worker Protection Policy and Programs (EH-52) issued Radiological Control Technical Position RCTP 2001-02, *Acceptable Approach for Developing Air Concentration Values for Controlling Exposures to Tritiated Particulate Aerosols and Organically Bound Tritium* , which provided guidance on the use of acceptable air concentration values. In 2004, EH-52 also published a technical standard, *Radiological Control Programs for Special Tritium Compounds* , DOE-HDBK-1184-2004, which provided additional guidance on use of acceptable air concentration values. DOE proposed including DAC values for tritiated particulate aerosols based on the methodology described in DOE-HDBK-1184-2004, adjusted to use the ICRP 60 dosimetric quantities and adjusted to use a default 5 micron particle size. This handbook is available for review at: *http://www.hss.energy.gov/HealthSafety/WSHP/radiation/ts.html.* Appendix A of 10 CFR part 835 does not include default values for radionuclides not listed in the appendices. Consistent with the NRC practice, DOE proposed to establish default values for radionuclides not listed in appendix A. One default value would apply to any isotope not already listed with a decay mode other than alpha emission or spontaneous fission and with a radioactive half-life greater than two hours. The default value would be the most restrictive applicable DAC value already listed in appendix A for that type of decay, *i.e.* , 4 E-11 μCi/mL (1 Bq/m 3 ). The second default value would apply to any isotope not already listed with a decay mode of alpha emission or spontaneous fission. The second default value would also apply to any mixture for which the identity or the concentration of any radionuclide in the mixture is not known. The default value would likewise be the most restrictive applicable DAC value already listed in appendix A, *i.e.* , 2 E-13 μCi/mL (8 E-03 Bq/m 3 ). DOE received a comment that the proposed note at the end of appendix A which states that a DAC value for “any mixture for which the identity or the concentration of any radionuclide in the mixture is not known” conflicted with the existing note at the beginning of appendix A which states that for “unknown radionuclides, the most restrictive DAC (lowest value) for those isotopes not known to be absent shall be used.” DOE agrees with this comment and, in the final rule, omits the text regarding “any mixture for which the identity or the concentration of any radionuclide in the mixture is not known.” DOE also moves the two notes at the end of appendix A, pertaining to default values for any single radionuclide not listed in the appendix, to the beginning of appendix A. DOE received a comment that, for amendment items pertaining to STCs, consideration be given to recent ICRP and published information regarding STCs, such as the October 2004 Health Physics Society Journal paper, *Application of the ICRP Clarification of the Tritium Metabolic Model.* DOE reviewed updated published information regarding STCs, including the Health Physics Society Journal paper referenced. DOE believes that the methodology and values in DOE-HDBK-1184-2004 continue to provide the best approaches to developing acceptable controls such as DAC values and the posting and labeling criteria for STCs, which are adjusted to use the ICRP Publication 60 dosimetric quantities and a default 5 micron particle size. Accordingly, in today's final rule, DOE makes the proposed changes to DAC values for tritiated particulate aerosols and organically bound tritium. For consistency with terminology in DOE-HDBK-1184-2004, the revised footnote to appendix D, and the definition of “special tritium compound” in § 835.2, DOE replaces the terms “tritiated particulate aerosol and organically bound H-3 (insoluble)” and “organically bound H-3 (soluble)” with “STCs (insoluble )” and “STCs (soluble).” DOE received a comment that a single set of DACs, based only on committed effective dose values ( *i.e.* no DAC values based on the non-stochastic limit to an organ or tissue), would provide a much simpler framework, which still would provide adequate protection to the worker. DOE does not believe that this change would significantly simplify the regulatory framework and does not make this change. DOE received a comment that the definition of “derived air concentration” should include reference to the ICRP computer program, *The ICRP Database of Dose Coefficients: Workers and Members of the Public* , ISBN 0 08 043 8768. This program was referenced in the NOPR preamble as being a source for calculation of appendix A values. DOE agrees with this comment and makes this change. DOE received two comments that DOE should allow sites to derive their own DAC values. The commenters stated that DOE should allow sites to derive default DAC values for nuclides not listed in appendix A, and that DOE should allow use of alternate self-absorption factors for determining DACs for STCs. DOE does not agree with these comments. DOE believes it is beneficial for DOE to use a consistent set of DACs across the complex, with variation permitted for particle size as specified in appendix A. The need for use of site-specific DACs may be addressed through the 10 CFR part 820 exemption process. P. DAC Values, Introductory Paragraph, and Footnotes in Appendix C in 10 CFR Part 835 DOE proposed to amend appendix C of 10 CFR part 835 by changing the term “contaminated atmospheric cloud” to “cloud of airborne radioactive material.” DOE considered this proposed change to be only editorial. Consistent with DOE's proposal to adopt the system of dosimetry for intake of radioactive materials set forth in more recent ICRP publications, DOE proposed to replace the air immersion DAC values in appendix C with new values which were determined using ICRP Publication 68 methodology. Specifically, the proposed values were derived from the dose conversion factors in Annex D of ICRP publication 68 and assumed 250 days (50 weeks times 5 days per week) exposure per year to get an effective dose of 5 rems in a year. Consistent with the NRC, DOE also proposed to establish a default value for any single radionuclide not listed in appendix C to part 835. The default value would apply to any isotope not already listed with a decay mode other than alpha emission or spontaneous fission and with a radioactive half-life less than two hours. The DAC would be the most restrictive value already listed, i.e., 6 E-06 μCi/mL (2 E+04 Bq/m 3 ). DOE received a comment that the change in terminology proposed for appendix C to part 835 would be welcomed, especially at accelerator facilities. The final rule makes the changes as proposed in the NOPR. Q. Text and Footnotes in Appendix D in 10 CFR Part 835 Several changes to appendix D were proposed in order to codify guidance issued by the Department in Radiological Control Technical Positions
(RCTP)and to enhance the clarity of this section. In *10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 835 Appendix D—Surface Radioactivity Values,* RCTP 96-02, DOE provided guidance on the application of footnote 5 to appendix D to part 835 that addresses surface contamination values for mixed fission products containing Sr-90. Based on this guidance, DOE proposed to revise appendix D to part 835 as follows: In the second group of nuclides (total surface radioactivity value−1000 dpm/100 cm 2 ; removable surface radioactivity value−200 dpm/100 cm 2 ), DOE proposed to insert the parenthetical phrase “including mixed fission products where the Sr-90 fraction is 90 percent or more of the total activity.” DOE proposed to add a new group to appendix D to part 835 (between the existing second and third groups) that would consist of mixed fission products where the Sr-90 fraction is more than 50 percent but less than 90 percent of the total activity. For this proposed group, the total surface radioactivity value would be 3000 dpm/100 cm 2 and the removable surface radioactivity value would be 600 dpm/100 cm 2 . In addition, DOE proposed to clarify footnote seven to appendix D by replacing the term “(alpha)” with the sentence “These limits apply only to the alpha emitters within the respective decay series.” DOE did not propose additional changes to the surface radioactivity values in appendix D to part 835. DOE is aware of newly developed surface radioactivity criteria (see American National Standard—Surface and Volume Radioactivity Standards for Clearance (ANSI/HPS N13.12-1999)), for the release of property and other items, which are more clearly based on potential risks than the surface contamination values in appendix D to part 835. However, to maintain a consistent application in the use of surface radioactivity values for the protection of workers; the public; and the environment, DOE has decided to continue evaluation of appendix D to part 835 surface contamination values as a coordinated project that addresses both occupational and environmental aspects of this topic. DOE-HDBK-1184-2004 recommends applying the 10 CFR part 835 subpart L provisions if the contamination levels from insoluble tritiated particles fixed to a surface exceed the removable tritium limit. DOE solicited comments on the need to revise the rule to reflect this recommendation. DOE received comments opposed to codifying the guidance issued by RCTP 96-02 into appendix D to part 835. Although the change was proposed with the intent of clarifying the requirements, some commenters stated that they believed that the revised text would increase costs and make compliance much more difficult. More specifically, they claimed that application of the more conservative contamination values for some Sr-90 mixtures could create a significant challenge because of the difficulty in detecting those values consistently in a field setting with current techniques and available instrumentation. Moreover, implementation of the proposed three-tiered Sr-90 contamination values would be complex due to the need to determine the relative abundance of Sr-90 in the specific mixture being dealt with, in order to determine which contamination value to apply. Commenters suggested that DOE adopt the ANSI N 13.12 groupings. DOE's intent with the proposed change to appendix D to part 835 was to provide clearer requirements. Under the current appendix D to part 835, footnote 5, the higher limit (total surface radioactivity value −5000 dpm/100 cm 2 ; removable surface radioactivity value−1000 dpm/100 cm 2 ) does not apply to Sr-90 which has been separated from the other fission products or mixtures where the Sr-90 has been enriched. This footnote applies to mixed fission products which, through the passage of time, have resulted in mixtures where the Sr-90 is enriched. There had been questions regarding the applicability of this footnote to specific site operations, especially where mixed fission products had been stored for extended time periods. The intent of the proposed change to appendix D to part 835 was to clarify requirements for application of the surface radioactivity values for these mixtures, so as to not always require the lower limit (total surface radioactivity value −1000 dpm/100 cm 2 ; removable surface radioactivity value−200 dpm/100 cm 2 ) that applied to pure or enriched Sr-90. In view of the negative comments on this proposed change, DOE questions whether the proposed change would simplify radiological operations or enhance radiological safety. Accordingly, DOE does not make the proposed changes that address surface contamination values for mixed fission products containing Sr-90. However, DOE will retain the guidance in this area. DOE also received a comment that Pu-241 should not be included within the “transuranic” category. This category should only apply to alpha emitters. As noted in the NOPR preamble, DOE agrees that eventually DOE should move toward a risk-based, consensus value for surface contamination values such as the ANSI/HPS N13.12 values. DOE will continue to evaluate application of surface radioactivity values for protection of workers, the public, and the environment as a coordinated project that addresses both occupational and environmental aspects of this topic. DOE received a comment that appendix D to part 835 should be updated to include recommendations regarding STCs as provided in DOE-HDBK-1184-2004, Section 3.2.1.1. Specifically, the commenter suggested that Section 3.2.1.1 implies that removable surface contamination values for STCs should be 1,000 dpm/100 cm 2 . The handbook explains that if surface contamination levels are less than one tenth of the 10 CFR part 835 appendix D value, (i.e., < 1,000 dpm/100 cm 2 ) it may be appropriate to assume that there are no significant levels of STC contamination and additional controls such as posting, access control, and personnel monitoring are not required. The commenter suggests that a value of 1,000 dpm/100 cm 2 for removable surface contamination from STCs be added to appendix D to part 835, and the reference to tritiated compounds be deleted from footnote 6. Based on both the intent of DOE HDBK 1184-2004 and consideration of the estimated dose consequence associated with surfaces contaminated by STCs, DOE has determined that it is unnecessary to decrease the surface radioactivity value for removable contamination in appendix D to part 835 that applies to tritiated compounds. However, DOE has added a footnote to appendix D to part 835 to address other situations involving surfaces contaminated by insoluble tritiated particles. With regard to DOE HDBK 1184-2004, DOE notes that the guidance to initiate some radiological controls for STCs at a level of one tenth of the appendix D to 10 CFR part 835 value is based on the relative uncertainty associated with the activity-to-dose conversion factor for these compounds, the difficulties performing surface contamination measurements of these compounds, and the possibility that STCs may be located in areas where surveys are difficult to conduct. The factor of one tenth was estimated by assuming a three-to four-fold uncertainty in the activity-to-dose conversion factor and a two-to three-fold uncertainty in the measurement of surface contamination. Because the potential dose from STCs is related to the activity-to-dose conversion factor and the surface contamination measurement, the uncertainty in the potential dose from STCs could range from four- to five-fold. That is, the estimated potential dose from STCs could be only up to one fifth (0.2) of the actual potential dose from STCs. Thus, DOE believes that a factor of one tenth should reasonably account for uncertainties associated with determining the potential dose from STCs. Establishing criteria for certain types of radiological controls at a factor of 0.1 of the normal surface radioactivity values for STCs is a way to account for uncertainties, reduce the chance of significant STC exposure to workers, and ensure compliance with the regulatory value for surface contamination. Because of the conservatism of this approach, the types of radiological controls recommended (performance of more surveys and evaluations to make sure that sources of STCs are comprehensively identified) are less stringent than those triggered by the appendix D to part 835 values (e.g. posting, personal monitoring and the use of personal protective equipment). With regard to the dose consequence associated with surfaces contaminated by STCs, calculations (performed using RESRAD BUILD Version 3.0) indicate that exposure to a surface contaminated by insoluble tritiated particles at levels of 10,000 dpm/100 cm 2 will result in a yearly dose of 1.18 x 10-4 millirems. This value is four orders of magnitude below the criterion of 1 millirem/year generally accepted as the criterion for unrestricted release of materials. Thus, DOE believes there is no significant health benefit to be gained by lowering the appendix D to part 835 value for removable surface contamination that applies to tritiated compounds. DOE also received a comment that appendix D to part 835 should be updated to include recommendations regarding STCs as provided in DOE-HDBK-1184-2004, Section 3.2.1.2. which addresses fixed surface contamination. This section of the handbook addresses the possibility that there may be cases where tritium binds tightly to the matrix into which it has diffused, and removable contamination levels are below the values in 10 CFR part 835 (i.e., 10,000 dpm/100 cm 2 ), and recommends that provisions of part 835, subpart L, Radioactive Contamination Control, pertaining to total surface contamination values be applied when total contamination exceeds 10,000 dpm/100 cm 2 . The commenter suggests that appendix D to part 835, Table and footnotes, be revised to address fixed surface contamination from STCs. Consideration of the properties of STCs suggests that there may be cases where tritium binds tightly to a material into which it has diffused, and the removable contamination level on the surface of this material is below the value in 10 CFR part 835. Such cases could occur when a class of STCs called insoluble tritiated particles
(ITPs)are fixed to a surface or from tritium exposure to bulk quantities of metals of the types from which ITPs are formed. Although this situation is not expected to occur often, DOE addresses it by modifying 10 CFR part 835 appendix D footnote 6, to indicate that there is a situation where tritium may exist in a form that can be considered to be fixed surface contamination. DOE also addresses it by specifying a total surface contamination value of 10,000 dpm/100 cm 2 as the value above which the appropriate requirements in 10 CFR part 835 are triggered. Because the definitions of insoluble metal tritides and insoluble tritiated particle are imprecise, it may be necessary to perform a technical evaluation of metals that have been exposed to tritium in order to determine if fixed surface contamination exists. DOE-HDBK-1184-2004 provides guidance to help in making such a determination. In summary, the final rule revised appendix D to 10 CFR part 835 as follows. In the last row of the first column, the entry is changed to “Tritium and STCs.” In the last row of column three of 10 CFR part 835 appendix D, “N/A” is replaced with “See Footnote 6.” The following text is added to footnote 6, “In certain cases, a ‘Total' value of 10,000 dpm/100 cm 2 may be applicable either to metals, of the types which form insoluble special tritium compounds, that have been exposed to tritium; or to bulk materials to which particles of insoluble special tritium compound are fixed to a surface.” Footnote 7 is revised to read “These limits only apply to the alpha emitters within the respective decay series.” R. Text and Footnote in Appendix E in 10 CFR Part 835 As discussed earlier, DOE proposed to adopt the system of dosimetry for intake of radioactive materials set forth in more recent ICRP publications. DOE proposed to revise the appendix E to part 835 values using the ICRP Publication 60 methodology and the same exposure scenarios discussed in the 1998 amendment to 10 CFR part 835. In summary, the values were based on the more limiting of the quantity of radioactive material which results in either an external or internal whole body dose, from either inhalation or ingestion, of 100 millirems. The external exposure scenario assumed a photon exposure for 12 hours a day for 365 days with the source distance being at 1 meter. The internal exposure scenario assumed an instantaneous intake of 0.001% of the material by an individual. Consistent with the other proposed changes, the values in appendix E to part 835 were recalculated to reflect the previously mentioned ICRP publications. DOE also proposed to reorder the entries in accordance with atomic weight rather than alphabetically. DOE also proposed to add a footnote to appendix E to part 835 specifying a value of 10 Ci for any type of STC. This proposed change would be made to keep appendix E to part 835 consistent with the proposed change to appendix A which includes the addition of STCs. The value of 10 Ci was derived using the same method as the other proposed values in appendix E to part 835, *i.e.* , they were based on the exposure scenario discussed in the preamble to the 1998 amendment. Specifically, the inhalation exposure scenario used to derive the 10 Ci value assumed a 100 millirems dose from a Type S hafnium tritide particle (the most restrictive STC) with a release fraction to be inhaled of 0.001%. A dose conversion value of 2.6 E-10 Sv/Bq, was determined by using the methodology from DOE-HDBK-1184-2004 and adjusted using the ICRP Publication 60 dosimetric quantities. In addition, DOE proposed revising the value for Californium-252 in appendix E to part 835 calculated for an external neutron exposure situation, which was more limiting than the photon exposure. More specifically, DOE calculated the proposed appendix E to part 835 value for Californium-252 by substituting a neutron exposure for the photon exposure in the external exposure scenario using values from *Reference Neutron Radiations—Part 1: Characteristics and Methods of Production,* ISO/CD, 8529-1. As mentioned in the appendix A to part 835 discussion, DOE received a comment that for amendment items pertaining to STCs, consideration should be given to recent ICRP publications and published information regarding STCs, such as the October 2004 Health Physics Society Journal paper, *Application of the ICRP Clarification of the Tritium Metabolic Model.* DOE reviewed updated published information regarding STCs, including the Health Physics Society Journal paper referenced. DOE believes that the methodology and values in DOE-HDBK-1184-2004 continue to provide the best approaches to developing acceptable controls such as DAC values and the posting and labeling criteria for STCs, adjusted to use the ICRP Publication 60 dosimetric quantities and a default 5 micron particle size. Accordingly, the final rule makes the changes to appendix E to part 835 values for tritiated particulates or organically-bound tritiated compounds as proposed. For consistency with the revised footnote to appendix D to part 835 and the added definition of STCs, DOE replaces the term “tritiated particulate or organically-bound tritiated compound” with “STC.” DOE also received a comment that the table appeared to be intended to be arranged in order of increasing atomic number, with all isotopes of the same element included together. The commenter thought this was a good approach that expedites finding the values for a given radionuclide. The commenter noted some ordering inconsistencies. DOE agrees with this comment and revises the table in appendix E to part 835 so that the order is by increasing atomic number with all isotopes of the same element included together. DOE also received a comment that the basis for the appendix E to part 835 values in the NOPR is well-stated and if DOE decides to make this transition, this rationale should be retained in a footnote to the appendix or some other readily traceable reference. The comment stated that in practical radiation protection work, it is often useful to track down the origin of the values found in such tables. To do that, one needs clear traceability to their original derivation. DOE agrees with this comment and intends to add a discussion of this issue in the updated implementation guide for 10 CFR part 835. DOE received a comment that the proposed change would likely result in many more sources exceeding the appendix E threshold. DOE does not agree with this comment. DOE compared proposed appendix E to part 835 values with the existing values for 22 representative radionuclides. The comparison showed that only six of the proposed values were more restrictive than the existing values and those values were only slightly more restrictive. In summary, the final rule makes the changes as proposed in the NOPR, with the exception that DOE replaces the term “tritiated particulate or organically-bound tritiated compound” with “STC.” DOE revises the order to be in increasing atomic number with all isotopes of the same element included together. S. Guidance Documents The primary implementation guide which defines DOE's expectations for the existing rule is DOE's implementation guide G 441.1-1B, *Radiation Protection Programs Guide for Use with Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection.* This guide is available through the DOE radiation protection Web page on *http://www.hss.energy.gov/HealthSafety/WSHP/radiation/regs.html.* DOE plans on updating this guide to reflect the amended requirements. DOE also plans to review and, as necessary, incorporate the DOE Radiological Control Technical Positions issued by the DOE Office of Worker Safety and Health Policy into the guide. DOE Technical Standards developed by the DOE Office of Worker Safety and Health Policy will also be updated. In particular, these Technical Standards include: DOE-STD-1098-99 *Radiological Control, DOE-STD-1121-98 Internal Dosimetry* and the series of handbooks relating to radiation protection training. DOE plans to have all guidance documents updated and available in sufficient time to be of use in meeting the amended 10 CFR part 835 implementation date. T. Submitting Documents for DOE Approval Part 835.101(g) requires contractors to update their Radiation Protection Program
(RPP)and submit it to DOE within 180 days of the effective date of any modifications to part 835. In accordance with 10 CFR 835.101(f), the RPP shall include plans, schedules, and other measures for achieving compliance no later than three years following the effective date of the amendment. DOE issued guidance on submittal of RPPs in DOE G 441.1-1B, *Radiation Protection Programs Guide for Use with Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection. * U. Protection and Operational Quantities The ICRP Publication 60 dosimetric quantities adopted in 10 CFR part 835 have been designated by ICRP as “protection quantities” that are intended for defining and calculating the numerical limits and action levels used in radiation protection standards such as 10 CFR part 835. Protection quantities provide a way to relate the magnitude of a radiation exposure to the risk of a health effect that is applicable to an individual and that is largely independent of the type and source (internal or external) of the radiation. In addition the protection quantities can be easily calculated for use in planning radiological work. These goals are achieved using a combination of theoretical and practical considerations. For example, absorbed dose is assumed to be averaged over a tissue or organ. Radiation weighting factors are used to account for the biological effectiveness of various types and energies of radiation and tissue weighting factors are used to account for the sensitivity of various tissues to radiation induced cancer. The tissue and radiation weighting factors are based on both biological and epidemiological studies and have been updated as new research becomes available. Nevertheless, the values of these weighting factors are approximations that account for both uncertainty in the underlying data and the need to ensure that the protection quantities do not underestimate the true dose and hence the risk. Protection quantities used in 10 CFR part 835 include: equivalent dose, effective dose, committed equivalent dose, committed effective dose, total effective dose, and cumulative total effective dose. Because protection quantities were developed to provide an index of the risk resulting from energy imparted to tissue by radiation, they are theoretical and not measurable. Fortunately, it is possible to use the measurable properties of radiation fields and radioactive materials associated with exposure to external radiation sources or intake of radioactive materials to estimate and demonstrate compliance with the protection quantities. These measurable quantities are called operational quantities. Although many types of operational quantities are possible, a well characterized set of operational quantities for assessing doses received from external exposure have been selected by the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements
(ICRU)in Report 51, *Quantities and Units in Radiation Protection Dosimetry.* These operational quantities have been adopted in recommendations of the ICRP and in the standards implementing the ICRP recommendations written by the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA)and the European Union (EU). In addition, the ICRP, in Publication 74, *Conversion Coefficients for Use in Radiological Protection Against External Radiation,* compared and contrasted doses determined using the ICRP system of protection quantities with doses determined using the ICRU based operational quantities. For almost all situations considered, doses determined with the operational quantities were greater or equal to the doses determined using protection quantities. These operational quantities and their relation to the protection quantities listed in the final version of 10 CFR part 835 are listed below. Relation Between Protection Quantities and Operational Quantities for Individual Monitoring of External Exposure Protection quantity Operational quantity (depth [d] in tissue [mm]) Equivalent dose to the whole body from external sources* H <sup>p</sup> (10). Equivalent dose to the lens of the eye from external sources H <sup>p</sup> (3). Equivalent dose to the extremity or skin from external sources H <sup>p</sup> (0.07). Where: H <sup>p</sup>
(d)is the personal dose equivalent at depth d in tissue See ICRU Report 51 for the definition of H <sup>p</sup>
(d)*Same as effective dose from external sources. For doses resulting from intakes of radioactive materials operational quantities have been published in ICRP, IAEA and EU documents. Relation between protection quantities and operational quantities for individual monitoring of doses from intakes of radioactive material ER08JN07.001 Where: h <sup>j,eff,50,inh</sup> is the committed effective dose per unit of radioactivity intake by inhalation
(inh)h <sup>j,eff,50,ing</sup> is the committed effective dose per unit of radioactivity intake by ingestion
(ing)h <sup>j,T,50,inh</sup> is the committed equivalent dose to a tissue
(T)per unit of radioactivity intake by inhalation h <sup>j,T,50,ing</sup> is the committed equivalent dose to a tissue
(T)per unit of radioactivity intake by ingestion I <sup>j,inh</sup> is an intake by inhalation I <sup>j,inh</sup> is an intake by ingestion j is a radionuclide For the total effective dose, the following operational quantity is suggested. ER08JN07.002 In addition to the operational quantities used for individual monitoring, the following table contains operational quantities that may be measured to characterize certain aspects of radiation fields in the workplace. Operational Quantities for Use in Characterizing Workplace Radiation Fields Workplace measurement Suggested operational quantity Control of effective dose H *(10). Control of dose to the skin, the extremities and the lens of the eye H '(0.07, Ω). Control of dose to the lens of the eye H '(3, Ω). Where: H*(10) is the ambient dose equivalent at a depth of 10 mm in tissue H'(0.007, Ω) is the directional dose equivalent at a depth of 0.07mm in the ICRU sphere H'(3, Ω) is the directional dose equivalent at a depth of 3 mm in the ICRU sphere Ω defines the direction of the radiation field See ICRU Report 51 for the definitions of ambient dose equivalent and directional dose equivalent. To summarize the above discussion, protection quantities have been developed for use in radiation protection standards to establish dose limits and action levels that reflect the risk associated with radiation exposure and are directly applicable to all members of the population being protected. Measurable operational quantities have been selected that permit measurements which show compliance with protection quantities specified in 10 CFR part 835. Additional guidance will be provided in the implementation guide for 10 CFR part 835. V. Regulatory Review A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 Today's final rule has been determined not to be a “significant regulatory action” within the scope of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993), as amended by Executive Order 13258, 67 FR 9385 (February 26, 2002) and Executive Order 13422 (January 18, 2007). Accordingly, this rule was not reviewed under the Executive Order by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA)in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). B. Review Under Executive Order 12988 With respect to the review of existing regulations and the promulgation of new regulations, section 3 of Executive Order 12988, “Civil Justice Reform,” 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on Executive agencies the general duty to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, write regulations to minimize litigation, provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard, and promote simplification and burden reduction. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in section 3(a) and section 3(b) to determine whether they are met. DOE has completed the required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law, this final rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order 12988. C. Review Under Executive Order 13132 Executive Order 13132, “Federalism,” 64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999), requires agencies to develop an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have “federalism implications.” Policies that have federalism implications are defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Today's regulatory action has been determined not to be a “policy that has federalism implications;” that is, it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, nor on the distribution of power and responsibilities among various levels of government under Executive Order 13132, 64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999). D. Reviews Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ) requires that a federal agency prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis for any regulation for which a general NOPR is required, unless the agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities (5 U.S.C. 605(b)). Today's regulation establishes DOE amended requirements for nuclear safety and occupational radiation protection at DOE sites. The contractors who manage and operate DOE facilities are principally responsible for implementing the rule requirements. DOE considered whether these contractors are ”small businesses,” as that term is defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601(3)). The Regulatory Flexibility Act's definition incorporates the definition of ”small business concern” in the Small Business Act, which the Small Business Administration
(SBA)has developed through size standards in 13 CFR part 121. The DOE contractors subject to this rule exceed the SBA's size standards for small businesses. In addition, DOE expects that any potential economic impact of this rule on small businesses would be minimal because DOE sites perform work under contracts to DOE or the prime contractor at the site. DOE contractors are reimbursed through their contracts with DOE for the costs of complying with DOE nuclear safety and radiation protection requirements. They would not, therefore, be adversely impacted by the requirements in this rule. For these reasons, DOE certifies that today's regulatory action does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and, therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis has been prepared. DOE's certification and supporting statement of factual basis will be provided to the Chief Counsel of Advocacy of the SBA pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b). E. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act The information collection provisions of this final rule are not substantially different from those contained in DOE contracts with DOE prime contractors covered by this rule. The information collection was previously approved by OMB and assigned OMB Control No. 1910-0300. Accordingly, no additional OMB clearance is required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). F. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act DOE has reviewed these amendments to 10 CFR parts 820 and 835 under the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 *et seq.* ), the Council on Environmental Quality's regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-08), and DOE's implementing regulations (10 CFR part 1021). Categorical Exclusion A5 in appendix A to Subpart D of 10 CFR part 1021 (rulemaking that amends an existing rule without changing the environmental effect of the amended rule) applies to this rulemaking. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared an environmental impact statement or an environmental assessment pursuant to NEPA. G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, (2 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ), requires each Federal agency, to the extent permitted by law to prepare a written assessment of the effects of any Federal mandate in an agency rule that may result in the expenditure by State, tribal, or local governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. The Act also requires a Federal agency to develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officials of State, tribal, or local governments on a proposed ”significant intergovernmental mandate,” and requires an agency plan for giving notice and opportunity to provide timely input to potentially affected small governments before establishing any requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. DOE has determined that today's final rule does not contain any Federal mandates affecting small governments, so these requirements do not apply. H. Review Under Executive Order 13211 Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,” 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001) requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to the OMB, a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy action. A “significant energy action” is defined as any action by an agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a final rule, and that:
(1)Is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and
(2)is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, or
(3)is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a significant energy action. For any proposed significant energy action, the agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented, and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use. Today's regulatory action would not have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy and is, therefore, not a significant energy action. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects. I. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999 Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a ”Family Policymaking Assessment” for any rule that may affect family well-being. Today's regulatory action has no impact on the autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Family Policymaking Assessment. J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516, note) provides for agencies to review most dissemination of information to the public under guidelines established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed today's regulatory action under the OMB and DOE guidelines, and has concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those guidelines. K. Congressional Notification As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will submit to Congress a report regarding the issuance of today's regulatory action rule prior to the effective date set forth at the outset of this notice. The report will state that it has been determined that the rule is not a ”major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this final rule. List of Subjects 10 CFR Part 820 Administrative practice and procedure, Federal buildings and facilities, Government contracts, Nuclear energy, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Nuclear safety, Penalties, Public health, and Radiation protection. 10 CFR Part 835 Federal buildings and facilities, Nuclear energy, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Nuclear safety, Occupational safety and health, Radiation protection, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Issued in Washington, DC on May 22, 2007. Glenn Podonsky, Chief, Office of Health, Safety and Security. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, Parts 820 and 835 of Chapter III, Title 10, of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended as set forth below. PART 820—PROCEDURAL RULES FOR DOE NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES 1. The authority citation for part 820 is revised to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2201; 2282(a); 7191; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note; 50 U.S.C. 2410. 2. In § 820.2 add a new definition for “NNSA” to read as follows: § 820.2 Definitions. *NNSA* means the National Nuclear Security Administration. 3. Section 820.13 is added to read as follows: § 820.13 Direction to NNSA contractors.
(a)Notwithstanding any other provision of this part, and pursuant to section 3213 of Pub. L. 106-65, as amended (codified at 50 U.S.C. 2403), the NNSA, rather than the Director, signs, issues and serves the following actions that direct NNSA contractors:
(1)Subpoenas;
(2)Orders to compel attendance;
(3)Disclosures of information or documents obtained during an investigation or inspection;
(4)Preliminary notices of violations; and
(5)Final notices of violations.
(b)The NNSA Administrator shall act after consideration of the Director's recommendation. 4. In § 820.21, paragraphs
(g)and
(h)are added to read as follows: § 820.21 Investigations.
(g)The Director may issue enforcement letters that communicate DOE's expectations with respect to any aspect of the requirements of DOE's Nuclear Safety Requirements, including identification and reporting of issues, corrective actions, and implementation of DOE's Nuclear Safety Requirements, provided that an enforcement letter may not create the basis for any legally enforceable requirement pursuant to this part.
(h)The Director may sign, issue and serve subpoenas. 5. In Appendix A to part 820, revise sections IV and VIII to read as follows: Appendix A to Part 820—General Statement of Enforcement Policy IV. Responsibilities
(a)The Director, as the principal enforcement officer of DOE, has been delegated the authority to:
(1)Conduct enforcement inspections, investigations, and conferences;
(2)Issue Notices of Violations and proposed civil penalties, Enforcement Letters, Consent Orders, and subpoenas; and
(3)Issue orders to compel attendance and disclosure of information or documents obtained during an investigation or inspection.
(b)The NNSA Administrator, pursuant to section 3212 (b)(9) of Public Law 106-65 (codified at 50 U.S.C. 2402 (b)(9)), as amended, has authority over and responsibility for environment, safety and health operations within NNSA and is authorized to sign, issue and serve the following actions that direct NNSA contractors:
(1)Subpoenas;
(2)Orders to compel attendance;
(3)Disclosure of information or documents obtained during an investigation or inspection;
(4)Preliminary Notices of Violations; and
(5)Final Notices of Violations. The NNSA Administrator acts after consideration of the Director's recommendation. VIII. Enforcement Letter
(a)In cases where DOE has decided not to conduct an investigation or inspection or issue a Preliminary Notice of Violation (PNOV), DOE may send an Enforcement Letter to the contractor, signed by the Director. Enforcement Letters issued to NNSA contractors will be coordinated with the Principal Deputy Administrator of the NNSA prior to issuance. The Enforcement Letter is intended to communicate the basis of the decision not to pursue enforcement action for a noncompliance. The Enforcement Letter is intended to inform contractors of the desired level of nuclear safety performance. It may be used when DOE concludes the specific noncompliance at issue is not of the level of significance warranted to conduct an investigation or inspection or for issuance of a PNOV. Even where a noncompliance may be significant, the Enforcement Letter recognizes that the contractor's actions may have attenuated the need for enforcement action. The Enforcement Letter will typically recognize how the contractor handled the circumstances surrounding the noncompliance, address additional areas requiring the contractor's attention, and address DOE's expectations for corrective action.
(b)In general, Enforcement Letters communicate DOE's expectations with respect to any aspect of the requirements contained in the Department's nuclear safety rules, including identification and reporting of issues, corrective actions, and implementation of the contractor's nuclear safety program. DOE might, for example, wish to recognize some action of the contractor that is of particular benefit to nuclear safety performance that is a candidate for emulation by other contractors. On the other hand, DOE may wish to bring a program shortcoming to the attention of the contractor that, but for the lack of nuclear safety significance of the immediate issue, might have resulted in the issuance of a PNOV. An Enforcement Letter is not an enforcement action.
(c)With respect to many noncompliances, DOE may decide not to send an Enforcement Letter. When DOE decides that a contractor has appropriately corrected a noncompliance or that the significance of the noncompliance is sufficiently low, it may close out its review simply through an annotation in the DOE Noncompliance Tracking System (NTS). A closeout of a noncompliance with or without an Enforcement Letter may only take place after DOE has confirmed that corrective actions have been completed. Closeout of any NNSA contractor noncompliance will be coordinated with NNSA prior to closeout. PART 835—OCCUPATIONAL RADIATION PROTECTION 6. The authority citation for part 835 is revised to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2201, 7191; 50 U.S.C. 2410. 7. Section 835.1 is amended: a. In the introductory text of paragraph (b), remove the word “discussed” and insert in its place “provided.” b. Paragraph (b)(2) is revised. c. Paragraph (b)(4) is removed. d. Paragraph (b)(5) is redesignated as paragraph (b)(4) and the word “or” at the end of the paragraph is removed. e. Paragraph (b)(6) is redesignated as paragraph (b)(5) and the punctuation at the end of the paragraph is replaced with the punctuation “;” and the word “or” is added at the end of the paragraph. f. A new paragraph (b)(6) is added. g. A new paragraph (b)(7) is added. h. Paragraph
(c)is revised. i. A new paragraph
(d)is added. The revisions and additions specified above read as follows: § 835.1 Scope.
(b)* * *
(2)Activities conducted under the authority of the Deputy Administrator for Naval Reactors, as described in Pub. L. 98-525 and 106-65;
(6)Radioactive material on or within material, equipment, and real property which is approved for release when the radiological conditions of the material, equipment, and real property have been documented to comply with the criteria for release set forth in a DOE authorized limit which has been approved by a Secretarial Officer in consultation with the Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer.
(7)Radioactive material transportation not performed by DOE or a DOE contractor.
(c)Occupational doses received as a result of excluded activities and radioactive material transportation listed in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) and (b)(7) of this section, shall be included to the extent practicable when determining compliance with the occupational dose limits at §§ 835.202 and 835.207, and with the limits for the embryo/fetus at § 835.206. Occupational doses resulting from authorized emergency exposures and planned special exposures shall not be considered when determining compliance with the dose limits at §§ 835.202 and 835.207.
(d)The requirements in subparts F and G of this part do not apply to radioactive material transportation by DOE or a DOE contractor conducted:
(1)Under the continuous observation and control of an individual who is knowledgeable of and implements required exposure control measures, or
(2)In accordance with Department of Transportation regulations or DOE orders that govern such movements. 8. Section 835.2 is revised to read as follows: § 835.2 Definitions.
(a)As used in this part: *Accountable sealed radioactive source* means a sealed radioactive source having a half-life equal to or greater than 30 days and an isotopic activity equal to or greater than the corresponding value provided in appendix E of this part. *Activity Median Aerodynamic Diameter (AMAD)* means a particle size in an aerosol where fifty percent of the activity in the aerosol is associated with particles of aerodynamic diameter greater than the AMAD. *Airborne radioactive material or airborne radioactivity* means radioactive material dispersed in the air in the form of dusts, fumes, particulates, mists, vapors, or gases. *Airborne radioactivity area* means any area, accessible to individuals, where:
(1)The concentration of airborne radioactivity, above natural background, exceeds or is likely to exceed the derived air concentration
(DAC)values listed in appendix A or appendix C of this part; or
(2)An individual present in the area without respiratory protection could receive an intake exceeding 12 DAC-hours in a week. *ALARA* means “As Low As is Reasonably Achievable,” which is the approach to radiation protection to manage and control exposures (both individual and collective) to the work force and to the general public to as low as is reasonable, taking into account social, technical, economic, practical, and public policy considerations. As used in this part, ALARA is not a dose limit but a process which has the objective of attaining doses as far below the applicable limits of this part as is reasonably achievable. *Annual limit on intake (ALI)* means the derived limit for the amount of radioactive material taken into the body of an adult worker by inhalation or ingestion in a year. ALI is the smaller value of intake of a given radionuclide in a year by the reference man (ICRP Publication 23) that would result in a committed effective dose of 5 rems (0.05 sieverts (Sv)) (1 rem = 0.01 Sv) or a committed equivalent dose of 50 rems (0.5 Sv) to any individual organ or tissue. ALI values for intake by ingestion and inhalation of selected radionuclides are based on International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication 68, *Dose Coefficients for Intakes of Radionuclides by Workers* , published July, 1994 (ISBN 0 08 042651 4). This document is available from Elsevier Science Inc., Tarrytown, NY. *Authorized limit* means a limit on the concentration of residual radioactive material on the surfaces or within the property that has been derived consistent with DOE directives including the as low as is reasonably achievable (ALARA) process requirements, given the anticipated use of the property and has been authorized by DOE to permit the release of the property from DOE radiological control. *Background* means radiation from:
(1)Naturally occurring radioactive materials which have not been technologically enhanced;
(2)Cosmic sources;
(3)Global fallout as it exists in the environment (such as from the testing of nuclear explosive devices);
(4)Radon and its progeny in concentrations or levels existing in buildings or the environment which have not been elevated as a result of current or prior activities; and
(5)Consumer products containing nominal amounts of radioactive material or producing nominal amounts of radiation. *Bioassay* means the determination of kinds, quantities, or concentrations, and, in some cases, locations of radioactive material in the human body, whether by direct measurement or by analysis and evaluation of radioactive materials excreted or removed from the human body. *Calibration* means to adjust and/or determine either:
(1)The response or reading of an instrument relative to a standard ( *e.g.* , primary, secondary, or tertiary) or to a series of conventionally true values; or
(2)The strength of a radiation source relative to a standard ( *e.g.* , primary, secondary, or tertiary) or conventionally true value. *Contamination area* means any area, accessible to individuals, where removable surface contamination levels exceed or are likely to exceed the removable surface contamination values specified in appendix D of this part, but do not exceed 100 times those values. *Controlled area* means any area to which access is managed by or for DOE to protect individuals from exposure to radiation and/or radioactive material. *Declared pregnant worker* means a woman who has voluntarily declared to her employer, in writing, her pregnancy for the purpose of being subject to the occupational dose limits to the embryo/fetus as provided in § 835.206. This declaration may be revoked, in writing, at any time by the declared pregnant worker. *Derived air concentration (DAC)* means, for the radionuclides listed in appendix A of this part, the airborne concentration that equals the ALI divided by the volume of air breathed by an average worker for a working year of 2000 hours (assuming a breathing volume of 2400 m 3 ). For the radionuclides listed in appendix C of this part, the air immersion DACs were calculated for a continuous, non-shielded exposure via immersion in a semi-infinite cloud of radioactive material. Except as noted in the footnotes to appendix A of this part, the values are based on dose coefficients from International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication 68, *Dose Coefficients for Intakes of Radionuclides by Workers* , published July, 1994 (ISBN 0 08 042651 4) and the associated ICRP computer program, *The ICRP Database of Dose Coefficients: Workers and Members of the Public* , (ISBN 0 08 043 8768). These materials are available from Elsevier Science Inc., Tarrytown, NY. *Derived air concentration-hour (DAC-hour)* means the product of the concentration of radioactive material in air (expressed as a fraction or multiple of the DAC for each radionuclide) and the time of exposure to that radionuclide, in hours. *Deterministic effects* means effects due to radiation exposure for which the severity varies with the dose and for which a threshold normally exists ( *e.g.* , radiation-induced opacities within the lens of the eye). *DOE* means the United States Department of Energy. *DOE activity* means an activity taken for or by DOE in a DOE operation or facility that has the potential to result in the occupational exposure of an individual to radiation or radioactive material. The activity may be, but is not limited to, design, construction, operation, or decommissioning. To the extent appropriate, the activity may involve a single DOE facility or operation or a combination of facilities and operations, possibly including an entire site or multiple DOE sites. *Entrance or access point* means any location through which an individual could gain access to areas controlled for the purpose of radiation protection. This includes entry or exit portals of sufficient size to permit human entry, irrespective of their intended use. *General employee* means an individual who is either a DOE or DOE contractor employee; an employee of a subcontractor to a DOE contractor; or an individual who performs work for or in conjunction with DOE or utilizes DOE facilities. *High contamination area* means any area, accessible to individuals, where removable surface contamination levels exceed or are likely to exceed 100 times the removable surface contamination values specified in appendix D of this part. *High radiation area* means any area, accessible to individuals, in which radiation levels could result in an individual receiving an equivalent dose to the whole body in excess of 0.1 rems (0.001 Sv) in 1 hour at 30 centimeters from the radiation source or from any surface that the radiation penetrates. *Individual* means any human being. *Member of the public* means an individual who is not a general employee. An individual is not a “member of the public” during any period in which the individual receives an occupational dose. *Minor* means an individual less than 18 years of age. *Monitoring* means the measurement of radiation levels, airborne radioactivity concentrations, radioactive contamination levels, quantities of radioactive material, or individual doses and the use of the results of these measurements to evaluate radiological hazards or potential and actual doses resulting from exposures to ionizing radiation. *Occupational dose* means an individual's ionizing radiation dose (external and internal) as a result of that individual's work assignment. Occupational dose does not include doses received as a medical patient or doses resulting from background radiation or participation as a subject in medical research programs. *Person* means any individual, corporation, partnership, firm, association, trust, estate, public or private institution, group, Government agency, any State or political subdivision of, or any political entity within a State, any foreign government or nation or other entity, and any legal successor, representative, agent or agency of the foregoing; provided that person does not include DOE or the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. *Radiation* means ionizing radiation: alpha particles, beta particles, gamma rays, X-rays, neutrons, high-speed electrons, high-speed protons, and other particles capable of producing ions. Radiation, as used in this part, does not include non-ionizing radiation, such as radio waves or microwaves, or visible, infrared, or ultraviolet light. *Radiation area* means any area, accessible to individuals, in which radiation levels could result in an individual receiving an equivalent dose to the whole body in excess of 0.005 rem (0.05 mSv) in 1 hour at 30 centimeters from the source or from any surface that the radiation penetrates. *Radioactive material area* means any area within a controlled area, accessible to individuals, in which items or containers of radioactive material exist and the total activity of radioactive material exceeds the applicable values provided in appendix E of this part. *Radioactive material transportation* means the movement of radioactive material by aircraft, rail, vessel, or highway vehicle. Radioactive material transportation does not include preparation of material or packagings for transportation, storage of material awaiting transportation, or application of markings and labels required for transportation. *Radiological area* means any area within a controlled area defined in this section as a “radiation area,” “high radiation area,” “very high radiation area,” “contamination area,” “high contamination area,” or “airborne radioactivity area.” *Radiological worker* means a general employee whose job assignment involves operation of radiation producing devices or working with radioactive materials, or who is likely to be routinely occupationally exposed above 0.1 rem (0.001 Sv) per year total effective dose. *Real property* means land and anything permanently affixed to the land such as buildings, fences and those things attached to the buildings, such as light fixtures, plumbing and heating fixtures. *Real-time air monitoring* means measurement of the concentrations or quantities of airborne radioactive materials on a continuous basis. *Respiratory protective device* means an apparatus, such as a respirator, worn by an individual for the purpose of reducing the individual's intake of airborne radioactive materials. *Sealed radioactive source* means a radioactive source manufactured, obtained, or retained for the purpose of utilizing the emitted radiation. The sealed radioactive source consists of a known or estimated quantity of radioactive material contained within a sealed capsule, sealed between layer(s) of non-radioactive material, or firmly fixed to a non-radioactive surface by electroplating or other means intended to prevent leakage or escape of the radioactive material. Sealed radioactive sources do not include reactor fuel elements, nuclear explosive devices, and radioisotope thermoelectric generators. *Source leak test* means a test to determine if a sealed radioactive source is leaking radioactive material. *Special tritium compound (STC)* means any compound, except for H <sup>2</sup> O, that contains tritium, either intentionally ( *e.g.* , by synthesis) or inadvertently ( *e.g.* , by contamination mechanisms). *Stochastic effects* means malignant and hereditary diseases for which the probability of an effect occurring, rather than its severity, is regarded as a function of dose without a threshold, for radiation protection purposes. *Very high radiation area* means any area, accessible to individuals, in which radiation levels could result in an individual receiving an absorbed dose in excess of 500 rads (5 grays) in one hour at 1 meter from a radiation source or from any surface that the radiation penetrates. *Week* means a period of seven consecutive days. *Year* means the period of time beginning on or near January 1 and ending on or near December 31 of that same year used to determine compliance with the provisions of this part. The starting and ending date of the year used to determine compliance may be changed, provided that the change is made at the beginning of the year and that no day is omitted or duplicated in consecutive years.
(b)As used in this part to describe various aspects of radiation dose: *Absorbed dose*
(D)means the average energy imparted by ionizing radiation to the matter in a volume element. The absorbed dose is expressed in units of rad (or gray) (1 rad = 0.01 grays). *Committed effective dose* (E <sup>50</sup> ) means the sum of the committed equivalent doses to various tissues or organs in the body (H <sup>T,50</sup> ), each multiplied by the appropriate tissue weighting factor (w <sup>T</sup> )—that is, E <sup>50</sup> = Σw <sup>T</sup> H <sup>T,50</sup> + w <sup>Remainder</sup> H <sup>Remainder,50</sup> . Where w <sup>Remainder</sup> is the tissue weighting factor assigned to the remainder organs and tissues and H <sup>Remainder,50</sup> is the committed equivalent dose to the remainder organs and tissues. Committed effective dose is expressed in units of rem (or Sv). *Committed equivalent dose* (H <sup>T,50</sup> ) means the equivalent dose calculated to be received by a tissue or organ over a 50-year period after the intake of a radionuclide into the body. It does not include contributions from radiation sources external to the body. Committed equivalent dose is expressed in units of rem (or Sv). *Cumulative total effective dose* means the sum of all total effective dose values recorded for an individual plus, for occupational exposures received before the implementation date of this amendment, the cumulative total effective dose equivalent (as defined in the November 4, 1998 amendment to this rule) values recorded for an individual, where available, for each year occupational dose was received, beginning January 1, 1989. *Dose* is a general term for absorbed dose, equivalent dose, effective dose, committed equivalent dose, committed effective dose, or total effective dose as defined in this part. *Effective dose*
(E)means the summation of the products of the equivalent dose received by specified tissues or organs of the body (H <sup>T</sup> ) and the appropriate tissue weighting factor (w <sup>T</sup> )—that is, E = Σw <sup>T</sup> H <sup>T</sup> . It includes the dose from radiation sources internal and/or external to the body. For purposes of compliance with this part, equivalent dose to the whole body may be used as effective dose for external exposures. The effective dose is expressed in units of rem (or Sv). *Equivalent dose* (H <sup>T</sup> ) means the product of average absorbed dose (D <sup>T,R</sup> ) in rad (or gray) in a tissue or organ
(T)and a radiation
(R)weighting factor (w <sup>R</sup> ). For external dose, the equivalent dose to the whole body is assessed at a depth of 1 cm in tissue; the equivalent dose to the lens of the eye is assessed at a depth of 0.3 cm in tissue, and the equivalent dose to the extremity and skin is assessed at a depth of 0.007 cm in tissue. Equivalent dose is expressed in units of rem (or Sv). *External dose or exposure* means that portion of the equivalent dose received from radiation sources outside the body ( *i.e.* , “external sources”). *Extremity* means hands and arms below the elbow or feet and legs below the knee. *Internal dose or exposure* means that portion of the equivalent dose received from radioactive material taken into the body ( *i.e.* , “internal sources”). *Radiation weighting factor* (w <sup>R</sup> ) means the modifying factor used to calculate the equivalent dose from the average tissue or organ absorbed dose; the absorbed dose (expressed in rad or gray) is multiplied by the appropriate radiation weighting factor. The radiation weighting factors to be used for determining equivalent dose in rem are as follows: Radiation Weighting Factors 1 , w <sup>R</sup> Type and energy range Radiation weighting factor Photons, electrons and muons, all energies 1 Neutrons, energy < 10 keV 2, 3 5 Neutrons, energy 10 keV to 100 keV 2, 3 10 Neutrons, energy > 100 keV to 2 MeV 2, 3 20 Neutrons, energy > 2 MeV to 20 MeV 2, 3 10 Neutrons, energy > 20 MeV 2, 3 5 Protons, other than recoil protons, energy > 2 MeV 5 Alpha particles, fission fragments, heavy nuclei 20 1 All values relate to the radiation incident on the body or, for internal sources, emitted from the source. 2 When spectral data are insufficient to identify the energy of the neutrons, a radiation weighting factor of 20 shall be used. 3 When spectral data are sufficient to identify the energy of the neutrons, the following equation may be used to determine a neutron radiation weighting factor value: ER08JN07.003 *Tissue weighting factor* (w <sup>T</sup> ) means the fraction of the overall health risk, resulting from uniform, whole body irradiation, attributable to specific tissue (T). The equivalent dose to tissue, (H <sup>T</sup> ), is multiplied by the appropriate tissue weighting factor to obtain the effective dose
(E)contribution from that tissue. The tissue weighting factors are as follows: Tissue Weighting Factors for Various Organs and Tissues Organs or tissues, T Tissue weighting factor, w <sup>T</sup> Gonads 0.20 Red bone marrow 0.12 Colon 0.12 Lungs 0.12 Stomach 0.12 Bladder 0.05 Breast 0.05 Liver 0.05 Esophagus 0.05 Thyroid 0.05 Skin 0.01 Bone surfaces 0.01 Remainder 1 0.05 Whole body 2 1.00 1 “Remainder” means the following additional tissues and organs and their masses, in grams, following parenthetically: adrenals (14), brain (1400), extrathoracic airways (15), small intestine (640), kidneys (310), muscle (28,000), pancreas (100), spleen (180), thymus (20), and uterus (80). The equivalent dose to the remainder tissues (H <sup>remainder</sup> ), is normally calculated as the mass-weighted mean dose to the preceeding ten organs and tissues. In those cases in which the most highly irradiated remainder tissue or organ receives the highest equivalent dose of all the organs, a weighting factor of 0.025 (half of remainder) is applied to that tissue or organ and 0.025 (half of remainder) to the mass-weighted equivalent dose in the rest of the remainder tissues and organs to give the remainder equivalent dose. 2 For the case of uniform external irradiation of the whole body, a tissue weighting factor (w <sup>T</sup> ) equal to 1 may be used in determination of the effective dose. *Total effective dose*
(TED)means the sum of the effective dose (for external exposures) and the committed effective dose. *Whole body* means, for the purposes of external exposure, head, trunk (including male gonads), arms above and including the elbow, or legs above and including the knee.
(c)Terms defined in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 or in 10 CFR part 820 and not defined in this part are used consistent with their meanings given in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 or in 10 CFR part 820. 9. Section 835.4 is revised to read as follows: § 835.4 Radiological units. Unless otherwise specified, the quantities used in the records required by this part shall be clearly indicated in special units of curie, rad, roentgen, or rem, including multiples and subdivisions of these units, or other conventional units, such as, dpm, dpm/100 cm 2 or mass units. The SI units, becquerel (Bq), gray (Gy), and sievert (Sv), may be provided parenthetically for reference with scientific standards. 10. Section 835.101(f) is revised to read as follows: § 835.101 Radiation protection programs.
(f)The RPP shall include plans, schedules, and other measures for achieving compliance with regulations of this part. Unless otherwise specified in this part, compliance with the amendments to this part published on June 8, 2007 shall be achieved no later than July 9, 2010. 11. Section 835.202 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) to read as follows: § 835.202 Occupational dose limits for general employees.
(a)* * *
(1)A total effective dose of 5 rems (0.05 Sv);
(2)The sum of the equivalent dose to the whole body for external exposures and the committed equivalent dose to any organ or tissue other than the skin or the lens of the eye of 50 rems (0.5 Sv);
(3)An equivalent dose to the lens of the eye of 15 rems (0.15 Sv); and
(4)The sum of the equivalent dose to the skin or to any extremity for external exposures and the committed equivalent dose to the skin or to any extremity of 50 rems (0.5 Sv). 12. Section 835.203 is revised to read as follows: § 835.203 Combining internal and external equivalent doses.
(a)The total effective dose during a year shall be determined by summing the effective dose from external exposures and the committed effective dose from intakes during the year.
(b)Determinations of the effective dose shall be made using the radiation and tissue weighting factor values provided in § 835.2. 13. In § 835.205 paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3) introductory text, and (b)(3)(ii) are revised to read as follows: § 835.205 Determination of compliance for non-uniform exposure of the skin.
(b)* * *
(1)Area of skin irradiated is 100 cm 2 *or more* . The non-uniform equivalent dose received during the year shall be averaged over the 100 cm 2 of the skin receiving the maximum dose, added to any uniform equivalent dose also received by the skin, and recorded as the equivalent dose to any extremity or skin for the year.
(2)*Area of skin irradiated is 10 cm* 2 *or more* , *but is less than 100 cm* 2 . The non-uniform equivalent dose
(H)to the irradiated area received during the year shall be added to any uniform equivalent dose also received by the skin and recorded as the equivalent dose to any extremity or skin for the year. H is the equivalent dose averaged over the 1 cm 2 of skin receiving the maximum absorbed dose, D, reduced by the fraction f, which is the irradiated area in cm 2 divided by 100 cm 2 ( *i.e.* , H = fD). In no case shall a value of f less than 0.1 be used.
(3)Area of skin irradiated is less than 10 cm 2 . The non-uniform equivalent dose shall be averaged over the 1 cm 2 of skin receiving the maximum dose. This equivalent dose shall:
(i)* * *
(ii)Not be added to any other equivalent dose to any extremity or skin for the year. 14. In § 835.206 paragraphs
(a)and
(c)are revised to read as follows: § 835.206 Limits for the embryo/fetus.
(a)The equivalent dose limit for the embryo/fetus from the period of conception to birth, as a result of occupational exposure of a declared pregnant worker, is 0.5 rem (0.005 Sv).
(c)If the equivalent dose to the embryo/fetus is determined to have already exceeded 0.5 rem (0.005 Sv) by the time a worker declares her pregnancy, the declared pregnant worker shall not be assigned to tasks where additional occupational exposure is likely during the remaining gestation period. 15. Section 835.207 is revised to read as follows: § 835.207 Occupational dose limits for minors. The dose limits for minors occupationally exposed to radiation and/or radioactive materials at a DOE activity are 0.1 rem (0.001 Sv) total effective dose in a year and 10 percent of the occupational dose limits specified at § 835.202(a)(3) and (a)(4). 16. Section 835.208 is revised to read as follows: § 835.208 Limits for members of the public entering a controlled area. The total effective dose limit for members of the public exposed to radiation and/or radioactive material during access to a controlled area is 0.1 rem (0.001 Sv) in a year. 17. In § 835.401, paragraph (a)(5) is revised to read as follows: § 835.401 General requirements.
(a)* * *
(5)Verify the effectiveness of engineered and administrative controls in containing radioactive material and reducing radiation exposure; and 18. Section 835.402 is amended: a. Paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (ii), and
(iii)are revised. b. Paragraph (a)(2) is revised. c. Paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) are revised. The revisions read as follows: § 835.402 Individual monitoring.
(a)* * *
(1)* * *
(i)An effective dose of 0.1 rem (0.001 Sv) or more in a year;
(ii)An equivalent dose to the skin or to any extremity of 5 rems (0.05 Sv) or more in a year;
(iii)An equivalent dose to the lens of the eye of 1.5 rems (0.015 Sv) or more in a year;
(2)Declared pregnant workers who are likely to receive from external sources an equivalent dose to the embryo/fetus in excess of 10 percent of the applicable limit at § 835.206(a);
(c)* * *
(1)Radiological workers who, under typical conditions, are likely to receive a committed effective dose of 0.1 rem (0.001 Sv) or more from all occupational radionuclide intakes in a year;
(2)Declared pregnant workers likely to receive an intake or intakes resulting in an equivalent dose to the embryo/fetus in excess of 10 percent of the limit stated at § 835.206(a); 19. Section 835.405 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(2) and adding paragraph
(e)to read as follows: § 835.405 Receipt of packages containing radioactive material.
(c)* * *
(1)* * *
(2)Measurements of the radiation levels, if the package contains a Type B quantity (as defined at 10 CFR 71.4) of radioactive material.
(d)* * *
(e)Monitoring pursuant to § 835.405(b) is not required for packages transported on a DOE site which have remained under the continuous observation and control of a DOE employee or DOE contractor employee who is knowledgeable of and implements required exposure control measures. § 835.502 [Amended] 20. Section 835.502 is amended in paragraph (a)(2) by removing the words “deep dose equivalent” and replacing it with “equivalent dose to the whole body” and in introductory paragraph
(b)by removing the words “a deep dose equivalent” and replacing it with “an equivalent dose.” § 835.602 [Amended] 21. Section 835.602 is amended in paragraph
(a)by removing the word“equivalent.” § 835.606 [Amended] 22. Section 835.606 is amended in paragraph (a)(2) by adding “and less than 0.1 Ci” after the word “part” and before the punctuation. 23. Section 835.702 is amended: a. Paragraph
(a)is revised. b. Paragraph
(b)is revised. c. Paragraph (c)(3) is revised. d. Paragraphs (c)(4)(i) and
(ii)are revised. e. Paragraph (c)(5)(i),
(ii)and
(iii)are revised. f. Paragraph (c)(6) is revised. The revisions read as follows: § 835.702 Individual monitoring records.
(a)Except as authorized by § 835.702(b), records shall be maintained to document doses received by all individuals for whom monitoring was conducted and to document doses received during planned special exposures, unplanned doses exceeding the monitoring thresholds of § 835.402, and authorized emergency exposures.
(b)Recording of the non-uniform equivalent dose to the skin is not required if the dose is less than 2 percent of the limit specified for the skin at § 835.202(a)(4). Recording of internal dose (committed effective dose or committed equivalent dose) is not required for any monitoring result estimated to correspond to an individual receiving less than 0.01 rem (0.1 mSv) committed effective dose. The bioassay or air monitoring result used to make the estimate shall be maintained in accordance with § 835.703(b) and the unrecorded internal dose estimated for any individual in a year shall not exceed the applicable monitoring threshold at § 835.402(c).
(c)* * *
(3)Include the results of monitoring used to assess the following quantities for external dose received during the year:
(i)The effective dose from external sources of radiation (equivalent dose to the whole body may be used as effective dose for external exposure);
(ii)The equivalent dose to the lens of the eye;
(iii)The equivalent dose to the skin; and
(iv)The equivalent dose to the extremities.
(4)* * *
(i)Committed effective dose;
(ii)Committed equivalent dose to any organ or tissue of concern; and
(5)* * *
(i)Total effective dose in a year;
(ii)For any organ or tissue assigned an internal dose during the year, the sum of the equivalent dose to the whole body from external exposures and the committed equivalent dose to that organ or tissue; and
(iii)Cumulative total effective dose.
(6)Include the equivalent dose to the embryo/fetus of a declared pregnant worker. § 835.1001 [Amended] 24. Section 835.1001 is amended: a. In paragraph (a), first sentence, remove “physical design features and administrative control” and add in its place “engineered and administrative controls.” b. In paragraph (b), remove “physical design features” and add in its place “engineered controls.” § 835.1002 [Amended] 25. In § 835.1002, in the first sentence of paragraph (b), remove “0.5 mrem (5 microsieverts)” and add in its place “0.5 millirem (5 μSv).” § 835.1003 [Amended] 26. Section 835.1003 is amended in the introductory text by removing “physical design features and administrative controls” and adding in its place “engineered and administrative controls.” § 835.1202 [Amended] 27. In § 835.1202, paragraph
(b)is amended by removing “microcurie” and adding in its place “μCi.” § 835.1301 [Amended] 28. In § 835.1301, paragraph
(d)is amended by removing “after a dose was received” and adding in its place “which have been suspended as a result of a dose.” 29. Appendix A of part 835 is revised to read as follows: Appendix A to Part 835—Derived Air Concentrations
(DAC)for Controlling Radiation Exposure to Workers at DOE Facilities The data presented in appendix A are to be used for controlling individual internal doses in accordance with § 835.209, identifying the need for air monitoring in accordance with § 835.403, and identifying and posting airborne radioactivity areas in accordance with § 835.603(d). The DAC values are given for individual radionuclides. For known mixtures of radionuclides, determine the sum of the ratio of the observed concentration of a particular radionuclide and its corresponding DAC for all radionuclides in the mixture. If this sum exceeds unity (1), then the DAC has been exceeded. For unknown radionuclides, the most restrictive DAC (lowest value) for those isotopes not known to be absent shall be used. For any single radionuclide not listed in appendix A with decay mode other than alpha emission or spontaneous fission and with radioactive half-life greater than two hours, the DAC value shall be 4 E-11 μCi/mL (1 Bq/m 3 ). For any single radionuclide not listed in appendix A that decays by alpha emission or spontaneous fission the DAC value shall be 2 E-13 μCi/mL (8 E-03 Bq/m 3 ). The DACs for limiting radiation exposures through inhalation of radionuclides by workers are listed in this appendix. The values are based on either a stochastic (committed effective dose) dose limit of 5 rems (0.05 Sv) or a deterministic (organ or tissue) dose limit of 50 rems (0.5 Sv) per year, whichever is more limiting. Note: the 15 rems (0.15 Sv) dose limit for the lens of the eye does not appear as a critical organ dose limit. The columns in this appendix contain the following information:
(1)Radionuclide;
(2)inhaled air DAC for type F (fast), type M (moderate), and type S
(slow)materials in units of μCi/mL;
(3)inhaled air DAC for type F (fast), type M (moderate), and type S
(slow)materials in units of Bq/m 3 ;
(4)an indication of whether or not the DAC for each class is controlled by the stochastic (effective dose) or deterministic (organ or tissue) dose. The absorption types (F, M, and S) have been established to describe the absorption type of the materials from the respiratory tract into the blood. The range of half-times for the absorption types correspond to: Type F, 100% at 10 minutes; Type M, 10% at 10 minutes and 90% at 140 days; and Type S 0.1% at 10 minutes and 99.9% at 7000 days. The DACs are listed by radionuclide, in order of increasing atomic mass, and are based on the assumption that the particle size distribution of 5 micrometers AMAD is used. For situations where the particle size distribution is known to differ significantly from 5 micrometers AMAD, appropriate corrections may be made to both the estimated dose to workers and the DACs. Radionuclide Absorption type 3 μCi/mL F M S Absorption type 3 Bq/m 3 F M S Stochastic or organ or tissue 1 (F/M/S) H-3 (Water) 2 2 E−05 2 E−05 2 E−05 7 E+05 7 E+05 7 E+05 St/St/St H-3 (Elemental) 2 2 E−01 2 E−01 2 E−01 9 E+09 9 E+09 9 E+09 St/St/St STCs (Insoluble) 4 1 E−05 6 E−06 2 E−06 3 E+05 2 E+05 8 E+04 St/St/St STCs (Soluble) 1 E−05 1 E−05 1 E−05 5 E+05 5 E+05 5 E+05 St/St/St Be-7 - 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 4 E+05 4 E+05 /St/St Be-10 - 8 E−08 2 E−08 - 3 E+03 1 E+03 /St/St C-11 (Vapor) 2 - 1 E−04 - - 6 E+06 - /St/ C-11
(CO)2 4 E−04 4 E−04 4 E−04 1 E+07 1 E+07 1 E+07 St/St/St C-11 (CO <sup>2</sup> ) 2 2 E−04 2 E−04 2 E−04 9 E+06 9 E+06 9 E+06 St/St/St C-14 (Vapor) 2 - 9 E−07 - - 3 E+04 - /St/ C-14
(CO)2 7 E−04 7 E−04 7 E−04 2 E+07 2 E+07 2 E+07 St/St/St C-14 (CO <sup>2</sup> ) 2 8 E−05 8 E−05 8 E−05 3 E+06 3 E+06 3 E+06 St/St/St F-18 4 E−06 3 E−06 3 E−06 1 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET Na-22 2 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - - E/ / Na-24 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - - ET/ / Mg-28 3 E−07 3 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 - ET/St/ Al-26 4 E−08 4 E−08 - 1 E+03 1 E+03 - St/St/ Si-31 9 E−06 5 E−06 5 E−06 3 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/St/St Si-32 1 E−07 5 E−08 1 E−08 5 E+03 2 E+03 3 E+02 St/St/St P-32 5 E−07 1 E−07 - 1 E+04 7 E+03 - St/St/ P-33 4 E−06 4 E−07 - 1 E+05 1 E+04 - St/St/ S-35 (Vapor) - 4 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /St/ S-35 7 E−06 5 E−07 - 2 E+05 1 E+04 - St/St/ Cl-36 1 E−06 1 E−07 - 4 E+04 4 E+03 - St/St/ Cl-38 7 E−06 5 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Cl-39 2 E−06 4 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ K-40 1 E−07 - - 6 E+03 - - St/ / K-42 2 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - E/ / K-43 9 E−07 - - 3 E+04 - - ET/ / K-44 8 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / K-45 9 E−06 - - 3 E+05 - - ET/ / Ca-41 - 2 E−06 - - 8 E+04 - /BS/ Ca-45 - 2 E−07 - - 9 E+03 - /St/ Ca-47 - 2 E−07 - - 9 E+03 - /St/ Sc-43 - - 2 E−06 - - 7 E+04 / /ET Sc-44m - - 2 E−07 - - 1 E+04 / /St Sc-44 - - 1 E−06 - - 4 E+04 / /ET Sc-46 - - 1 E−07 - - 4 E+03 / /St Sc-47 - - 7 E−07 - - 2 E+04 / /St Sc-48 - - 2 E−07 - - 1 E+04 / /ET Sc-49 - - 8 E−06 - - 3 E+05 / /ET Ti-44 7 E−09 2 E−08 9 E−09 2 E+02 7 E+02 3 E+02 St/St/St Ti-45 3 E−06 2 E−06 2 E−06 1 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET V-47 8 E−06 6 E−06 - 3 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ V-48 2 E−07 2 E−07 - 9 E+03 7 E+03 - ET/St/ V-49 1 E−05 2 E−05 - 7 E+05 9 E+05 - BS/St/ Cr-48 2 E−06 2 E−06 2 E−06 8 E+04 8 E+04 8 E+04 ET/ET/ET Cr-49 7 E−06 5 E−06 5 E−06 2 E+05 2 E+05 2 E+05 ET/ET/ET Cr-51 1 E−05 1 E−05 1 E−05 6 E+05 6 E+05 5 E+05 St/St/St Mn-51 7 E−06 5 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Mn-52m 7 E−06 5 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Mn-52 2 E−07 2 E−07 - 8 E+03 8 E+03 - ET/ET/ Mn-53 5 E−06 1 E−05 - 2 E+05 5 E+05 - BS/St/ Mn-54 5 E−07 4 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 - St/St/ Mn-56 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 9 E+04 8 E+04 - ET/ET/ Fe-52 6 E−07 5 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 - ET/E/ Fe-55 6 E−07 1 E−06 - 2 E+04 6 E+04 - St/St/ Fe-59 1 E−07 1 E−07 - 6 E+03 6 E+03 - St/St/ Fe-60 1 E−09 4 E−09 - 6 E+01 1 E+02 - St/St/ Co-55 - 5 E−07 5 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 /ET/ET Co-56 - 1 E−07 1 E−07 - 5 E+03 4 E+03 /St/St Co-57 - 1 E−06 9 E−07 - 5 E+04 3 E+04 /St/St Co-58m - 3 E−05 3 E−05 - 1 E+06 1 E+06 /St/St Co-58 - 4 E−07 3 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 /St/St Co-60m - 4 E−04 4 E−04 - 1 E+07 1 E+07 /St/St Co-60 - 7 E−08 3 E−08 - 2 E+03 1 E+03 /St/St Co-61 - 6 E−06 6 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 /ET/ET Co-62m - 7 E−06 6 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 /ET/ET Ni-56 (Inorg) 4 E−07 4 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 - ET/ET/ Ni-56 (Carbonyl) - 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /St/ Ni-57 (Inorg) 5 E−07 5 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 - ET/ET/ Ni-57 (Carbonyl) - 7 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - /ET/ Ni-59 (Inorg) 2 E−06 5 E−06 - 9 E+04 2 E+05 - St/St/ Ni-59 (Carbonyl) - 6 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - /St/ Ni-63 (Inorg) 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 4 E+04 6 E+04 - St/St/ Ni-63 (Carbonyl) - 2 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /St/ Ni-65 (Inorg) 5 E−06 4 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Ni-65 (Carbonyl) - 8 E−07 - - 3 E+04 - /ET/ Ni-66 (Inorg) 7 E−07 2 E−07 - 2 E+04 1 E+04 - St/St/ Ni-66 (Carbonyl) - 2 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /ET/ Cu-60 5 E−06 4 E−06 4 E−06 1 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET Cu-61 3 E−06 3 E−06 3 E−06 1 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET Cu-64 4 E−06 3 E−06 3 E−06 1 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/E/E Cu-67 2 E−06 1 E−06 9 E−07 8 E+04 3 E+04 3 E+04 ET/St/St Zn-62 - - 8 E−07 - - 3 E+04 / /St Zn-63 - - 5 E−06 - - 2 E+05 / /ET Zn-65 - - 2 E−07 - - 7 E+03 / /St Zn-69m - - 1 E−06 - - 6 E+04 / /St Zn-69 - - 7 E−06 - - 2 E+05 / /ET Zn-71m - - 1 E−06 - - 5 E+04 / /ET Zn-72 - - 3 E−07 - - 1 E+04 / /St Ga-65 1 E−05 9 E−06 - 4 E+05 3 E+05 - ET/ET/ Ga-66 8 E−07 7 E−07 - 3 E+04 2 E+04 - ET/St/ Ga-67 3 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 7 E+04 - ET/St/ Ga-68 6 E−06 4 E−06 - 2 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Ga-70 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 6 E+05 4 E+05 - ET/ET/ Ga-72 5 E−07 5 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 - ET/ET/ Ga-73 4 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/St/ Ge-66 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 9 E+04 9 E+04 - ET/ET/ Ge-67 1 E−05 7 E−06 - 3 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Ge-68 6 E−07 7 E−08 - 2 E+04 2 E+03 - ET/St/ Ge-69 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 3 E+04 3 E+04 - ET/ET/ Ge-71 5 E−05 5 E−05 - 2 E+06 1 E+06 - ET/E/ Ge-75 1 E−05 7 E−06 - 4 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Ge-77 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 4 E+04 4 E+04 - ET/ET/ Ge-78 3 E−06 3 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ As-69 - 9 E−06 - - 3 E+05 - /ET/ As-70 - 2 E−06 - - 8 E+04 - /ET/ As-71 - 1 E−06 - - 4 E+04 - /St/ As-72 - 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /St/ As-73 - 8 E−07 - - 3 E+04 - /St/ As-74 - 3 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /St/ As-76 - 6 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - /St/ As-77 - 1 E−06 - - 4 E+04 - /St/ As-78 - 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /ET/ Se-70 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 9 E+04 - ET/ET/ Se-73m 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 5 E+05 4 E+05 - ET/ET/ Se-73 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 6 E+04 5 E+04 - ET/ET/ Se-75 4 E−07 3 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 - St/St/ Se-79 3 E−07 1 E−07 - 1 E+04 6 E+03 - K/St/ Se-81m 1 E−05 6 E−06 - 3 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Se-81 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 6 E+05 4 E+05 - ET/ET/ Se-83 6 E−06 5 E−06 - 2 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Br-74m 3 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Br-74 4 E−06 4 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Br-75 4 E−06 3 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Br-76 5 E−07 5 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 - ET/ET/ Br-77 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 7 E+04 7 E+04 - ET/ET/ Br-80m 6 E−06 5 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/St/ Br-80 3 E−05 2 E−05 - 1 E+06 7 E+05 - ET/ET/ Br-82 3 E−07 3 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 - ET/ET/ Br-83 9 E−06 6 E−06 - 3 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Br-84 7 E−06 5 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Rb-79 8 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / Rb-81m 1 E−05 - - 6 E+05 - - ET/ / Rb-81 2 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - ET/ / Rb-82m 8 E−07 - - 3 E+04 - - ET/ / Rb-83 5 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - - St/ / Rb-84 3 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - - St/ / Rb-86 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - - St/ / Rb-87 7 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - - St/ / Rb-88 1 E−05 - - 5 E+05 - - ET/ / Rb-89 1 E−05 - - 3 E+05 - - ET/ / Sr-80 3 E−06 - 2 E−06 1 E+05 - 9 E+04 ET/ /St Sr-81 7 E−06 - 5 E−06 2 E+05 - 2 E+05 ET/ /ET Sr-82 1 E−07 - 7 E−08 6 E+03 - 2 E+03 St/ /St Sr-83 1 E−06 - 9 E−07 3 E+04 - 3 E+04 ET/ /ET Sr-85m 4 E−05 - 3 E−05 1 E+06 - 1 E+06 ET/ /ET Sr-85 1 E−06 - 8 E−07 3 E+04 - 3 E+04 St/ /St Sr-87m 1 E−05 - 9 E−06 4 E+05 - 3 E+05 ET/ /ET Sr-89 4 E−07 - 1 E−07 1 E+04 - 3 E+03 St/ /St Sr-90 1 E−08 - 7 E−09 4 E+02 - 2 E+02 BS/ /St Sr-91 1 E−06 - 9 E−07 5 E+04 - 3 E+04 ET/ /St Sr-92 2 E−06 - 1 E−06 8 E+04 - 6 E+04 ET/ /St Y-86m - 7 E−06 6 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 /ET/ET Y-86 - 4 E−07 4 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 /ET/ET Y-87 - 9 E−07 8 E−07 - 3 E+04 3 E+04 /ET/ET Y-88 - 1 E−07 1 E−07 - 6 E+03 6 E+03 /St/St Y-90m - 4 E−06 4 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /St/St Y-90 - 3 E−07 3 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 /St/St Y-91m - 2 E−05 2 E−05 - 7 E+05 7 E+05 /ET/ET Y-91 - 1 E−07 9 E−08 - 4 E+03 3 E+03 /St/St Y-92 - 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 7 E+04 7 E+04 /St/St Y-93 - 9 E−07 9 E−07 - 3 E+04 3 E+04 /St/St Y-94 - 8 E−06 8 E−06 - 3 E+05 3 E+05 /ET/ET Y-95 - 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 4 E+05 4 E+05 /ET/ET Zr-86 5 E−07 5 E−07 5 E−07 2 E+04 2 E+04 2 E+04 ET/ET/ET Zr-88 1 E−07 3 E−07 3 E−07 5 E+03 1 E+04 1 E+04 St/St/St Zr-89 6 E−07 6 E−07 6 E−07 2 E+04 2 E+04 2 E+04 ET/ET/ET Zr-93 3 E−09 1 E−08 1 E−07 1 E+02 6 E+02 5 E+03 BS/BS/BS Zr-95 9 E−08 1 E−07 1 E−07 3 E+03 5 E+03 4 E+03 BS/St/St Zr-97 7 E−07 4 E−07 4 E−07 2 E+04 1 E+04 1 E+04 ET/St/St Nb-88 - 5 E−06 5 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /ET/ET Nb-89 (66 min) - 3 E−06 3 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /ET/ET Nb-89 (122 min) - 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /ET/ET Nb-90 - 3 E−07 3 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 /ET/ET Nb-93m - 1 E−06 6 E−07 - 7 E+04 2 E+04 /St/St Nb-94 - 7 E−08 2 E−08 - 2 E+03 8 E+02 /St/St Nb-95m - 7 E−07 6 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 /St/St Nb-95 - 4 E−07 4 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 /St/St Nb-96 - 4 E−07 4 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 /ET/ET Nb-97 - 5 E−06 5 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /ET/ET Nb-98 - 3 E−06 3 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /ET/ET Mo-90 8 E−07 - 7 E−07 3 E+04 - 2 E+04 ET/ /ET Mo-93m 1 E−06 - 1 E−06 3 E+04 - 3 E+04 ET/ /ET Mo-93 2 E−07 - 4 E−07 7 E+03 - 1 E+04 BS/ /St Mo-99 1 E−06 - 5 E−07 5 E+04 - 1 E+04 E/ /St Mo-101 8 E−06 - 6 E−06 3 E+05 - 2 E+05 ET/ /ET Tc-93m 8 E−06 7 E−06 - 3 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Tc-93 3 E−06 3 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Tc-94m 5 E−06 4 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Tc-94 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 4 E+04 3 E+04 - ET/ET/ Tc-95m 8 E−07 6 E−07 - 3 E+04 2 E+04 - ET/St/ Tc-95 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 5 E+04 5 E+04 - ET/ET/ Tc-96m 2 E−05 2 E−05 - 1 E+06 1 E+06 - ET/ET/ Tc-96 3 E−07 3 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 - ET/ET/ Tc-97m 1 E−06 2 E−07 - 5 E+04 7 E+03 - St/St/ Tc-97 4 E−06 3 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/St/ Tc-98 3 E−07 9 E−08 - 1 E+04 3 E+03 - St/St/ Tc-99m 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 5 E+05 4 E+05 - ET/ET/ Tc-99 1 E−06 1 E−07 - 5 E+04 6 E+03 - St/St/ Tc-101 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 6 E+05 4 E+05 - ET/ET/ Tc-104 9 E−06 7 E−06 - 3 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Ru-94 5 E−06 5 E−06 5 E−06 2 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET Ru-97 2 E−06 2 E−06 2 E−06 8 E+04 8 E+04 8 E+04 ET/ET/ET Ru-103 8 E−07 2 E−07 2 E−07 3 E+04 1 E+04 9 E+03 St/St/St Ru-105 2 E−06 2 E−06 2 E−06 9 E+04 8 E+04 8 E+04 ET/ET/ET Ru-106 5 E−08 3 E−08 1 E−08 2 E+03 1 E+03 5 E+02 St/St/St Rh-99m 3 E−06 3 E−06 3 E−06 1 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET Rh-99 8 E−07 6 E−07 6 E−07 3 E+04 2 E+04 2 E+04 ET/St/St Rh-100 5 E−07 5 E−07 5 E−07 1 E+04 1 E+04 1 E+04 ET/ET/ET Rh-101m 1 E−06 1 E−06 1 E−06 6 E+04 6 E+04 6 E+04 ET/ET/ET Rh-101 3 E−07 3 E−07 1 E−07 1 E+04 1 E+04 6 E+03 St/St/St Rh-102m 2 E−07 2 E−07 1 E−07 1 E+04 7 E+03 4 E+03 St/St/St Rh-102 6 E−08 1 E−07 6 E−08 2 E+03 4 E+03 2 E+03 St/St/St Rh-103m 4 E−04 2 E−04 2 E−04 1 E+07 8 E+06 8 E+06 St/St/St Rh-105 3 E−06 1 E−06 1 E−06 1 E+05 5 E+04 4 E+04 ET/St/St Rh-106m 1 E−06 1 E−06 1 E−06 6 E+04 5 E+04 5 E+04 ET/ET/ET Rh-107 1 E−05 9 E−06 9 E−06 5 E+05 3 E+05 3 E+05 ET/ET/ET Pd-100 5 E−07 5 E−07 5 E−07 2 E+04 2 E+04 2 E+04 ET/ET/ET Pd-101 3 E−06 3 E−06 3 E−06 1 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET Pd-103 4 E−06 1 E−06 1 E−06 1 E+05 6 E+04 7 E+04 E/St/St Pd-107 1 E−05 1 E−05 1 E−06 5 E+05 4 E+05 7 E+04 K/St/St Pd-109 2 E−06 1 E−06 1 E−06 9 E+04 4 E+04 4 E+04 St/St/St Ag-102 9 E−06 7 E−06 7 E−06 3 E+05 2 E+05 2 E+05 ET/ET/ET Ag-103 8 E−06 7 E−06 7 E−06 3 E+05 2 E+05 2 E+05 ET/ET/ET Ag-104m 8 E−06 6 E−06 6 E−06 2 E+05 2 E+05 2 E+05 ET/ET/ET Ag-104 3 E−06 3 E−06 3 E−06 1 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET Ag-105 7 E−07 8 E−07 7 E−07 2 E+04 2 E+04 2 E+04 St/St/St Ag-106m 2 E−07 2 E−07 2 E−07 9 E+03 9 E+03 9 E+03 ET/ET/ET Ag-106 1 E−05 1 E−05 1 E−05 5 E+05 4 E+05 4 E+05 ET/ET/ET Ag-108m 7 E−08 1 E−07 2 E−08 2 E+03 4 E+03 1 E+03 St/St/St Ag-110m 8 E−08 9 E−08 7 E−08 3 E+03 3 E+03 2 E+03 St/St/St Ag-111 9 E−07 3 E−07 3 E−07 3 E+04 1 E+04 1 E+04 St/St/St Ag-112 4 E−06 2 E−06 2 E−06 1 E+05 8 E+04 8 E+04 E/St/St Ag-115 1 E−05 8 E−06 8 E−06 4 E+05 3 E+05 3 E+05 ET/ET/ET Cd-104 4 E−06 4 E−06 4 E−06 1 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET Cd-107 5 E−06 5 E−06 4 E−06 2 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET Cd-109 2 E−08 9 E−08 1 E−07 9 E+02 3 E+03 4 E+03 K/K/St Cd-113m 1 E−09 6 E−09 1 E−08 6 E+01 2 E+02 6 E+02 K/K/K Cd-113 1 E−09 5 E−09 1 E−08 5 E+01 2 E+02 5 E+02 K/K/K Cd-115m 3 E−08 1 E−07 1 E−07 1 E+03 3 E+03 3 E+03 K/St/St Cd-115 9 E−07 4 E−07 4 E−07 3 E+04 1 E+04 1 E+04 K/St/St Cd-117m 1 E−06 1 E−06 1 E−06 4 E+04 4 E+04 4 E+04 ET/ET/ET Cd-117 2 E−06 2 E−06 2 E−06 8 E+04 7 E+04 7 E+04 ET/ET/ET In-109 4 E−06 4 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ In-110 (69 min) 5 E−06 4 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ In-110 (5 h) 9 E−07 9 E−07 - 3 E+04 3 E+04 - ET/ET/ In-111 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 5 E+04 5 E+04 - ET/ET/ In-112 2 E−05 1 E−05 - 9 E+05 6 E+05 - ET/ET/ In-113m 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 4 E+05 3 E+05 - ET/ET/ In-114m 5 E−08 9 E−08 - 1 E+03 3 E+03 - St/St/ In-115m 6 E−06 5 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ In-115 1 E−09 5 E−09 - 4 E+01 1 E+02 - St/St/ In-116m 4 E−06 3 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ In-117m 5 E−06 4 E−06 - 2 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ In-117 7 E−06 5 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ In-119m 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 6 E+05 4 E+05 - ET/ET/ Sn-110 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 6 E+04 6 E+04 - ET/ET/ Sn-111 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 6 E+05 5 E+05 - ET/ET/ Sn-113 7 E−07 2 E−07 - 2 E+04 1 E+04 - St/St/ Sn-117m 8 E−07 2 E−07 - 3 E+04 9 E+03 - BS/St/ Sn-119m 1 E−06 3 E−07 - 5 E+04 1 E+04 - St/St/ Sn-121m 5 E−07 1 E−07 - 2 E+04 6 E+03 - St/St/ Sn-121 4 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 7 E+04 - ET/St/ Sn-123m 1 E−05 7 E−06 - 4 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Sn-123 3 E−07 1 E−07 - 1 E+04 3 E+03 - St/St/ Sn-125 4 E−07 2 E−07 - 1 E+04 7 E+03 - St/St/ Sn-126 4 E−08 3 E−08 - 1 E+03 1 E+03 - St/St/ Sn-127 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 9 E+04 7 E+04 - ET/ET/ Sn-128 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 8 E+04 - ET/ET/ Sb-115 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 5 E+05 4 E+05 - ET/ET/ Sb-116m 3 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Sb-116 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 4 E+05 3 E+05 - ET/ET/ Sb-117 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 4 E+05 3 E+05 - ET/ET/ Sb-118m 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 4 E+04 4 E+04 - ET/ET/ Sb-119 6 E−06 6 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Sb-120 (16 min) 2 E−05 2 E−05 - 1 E+06 7 E+05 - ET/ET/ Sb-120 (6 d) 3 E−07 3 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 - ET/ET/ Sb-122 8 E−07 4 E−07 - 3 E+04 1 E+04 - St/St/ Sb-124m 4 E−05 3 E−05 - 1 E+06 1 E+06 - ET/ET/ Sb-124 2 E−07 1 E−07 - 1 E+04 4 E+03 - St/St/ Sb-125 2 E−07 1 E−07 - 7 E+03 6 E+03 - BS/St/ Sb-126m 1 E−05 7 E−06 - 3 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Sb-126 2 E−07 1 E−07 - 9 E+03 6 E+03 - ET/St/ Sb-127 7 E−07 3 E−07 - 2 E+04 1 E+04 - E/St/ Sb-128 (9 h) 5 E−07 5 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 - ET/ET/ Sb-128 (10 min) 1 E−05 9 E−06 - 4 E+05 3 E+05 - ET/ET/ Sb-129 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 6 E+04 5 E+04 - ET/ET/ Sb-130 3 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Sb-131 6 E−06 4 E−06 - 2 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Te-116 (Vapor) - 6 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - /St / Te-116 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 8 E+04 7 E+04 - ET/ET/ Te-121m (Vapor) - 4 E−08 - - 1 E+03 - /BS/ Te-121m 1 E−07 1 E−07 - 4 E+03 5 E+03 - BS/St/ Te-121 (Vapor) - 1 E−06 - - 4 E+04 - /St / Te-121 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 3 E+04 3 E+04 - ET/ET/ Te-123m (Vapor) - 5 E−08 - - 2 E+03 - /BS/ Te-123m 1 E−07 1 E−07 - 4 E+03 6 E+03 - BS/St/ Te-123 (Vapor) - 1 E−08 - - 4 E+02 - /BS/ Te-123 2 E−08 5 E−08 - 1 E+03 1 E+03 - BS/BS/ Te-125m (Vapor) - 1 E−07 - - 3 E+03 - /BS/ Te-125m 2 E−07 1 E−07 - 9 E+03 7 E+03 - BS/St/ Te-127m (Vapor) - 6 E−08 - - 2 E+03 - /BS/ Te-127m 1 E−07 9 E−08 - 5 E+03 3 E+03 - BS/St/ Te-127 (Vapor) - 7 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - /St/ Te-127 5 E−06 3 E−06 - 2 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/St/ Te-129m (Vapor) - 1 E−07 - - 5 E+03 - /St/ Te-129m 3 E−07 1 E−07 - 1 E+04 3 E+03 - St/St/ Te-129 (Vapor) - 1 E−05 - - 5 E+05 - /St/ Te-129 1 E−05 7 E−06 - 4 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Te-131m (Vapor) - 1 E−07 - - 5 E+03 - /T/ Te-131m 3 E−07 3 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 - T/St/ Te-131 (Vapor) - 6 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - /T/ Te-131 1 E−05 7 E−06 - 4 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Te-132 (Vapor) - 7 E−08 - - 2 E+03 - /T/ Te-132 1 E−07 1 E−07 - 6 E+03 6 E+03 - T/St/ Te-133m (Vapor) - 1 E−06 - - 6 E+04 - /T/ Te-133m 3 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - T/ET/ Te-133 (Vapor) - 7 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - /T/ Te-133 1 E−05 9 E−06 - 4 E+05 3 E+05 - ET/ET/ Te-134 (Vapor) - 6 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - /St/ Te-134 3 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ I-120m (Methyl) 4 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - T/ / I-120m (Vapor) - 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /St / I-120m 2 E−06 - - 8 E+04 - - ET/ / I-120 (Methyl) 1 E−06 - - 6 E+04 - - T/ / I-120 (Vapor) - 1 E−06 - - 5 E+04 - /T/ I-120 2 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - E/ / I-121 (Methyl) 5 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - T/ / I-121 (Vapor) - 4 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /T/ I-121 8 E−06 - - 3 E+05 - - T/ / I-123 (Methyl) 1 E−06 - - 7 E+04 - - T/ / I-123 (Vapor) - 1 E−06 - - 5 E+04 - /T/ I-123 2 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - T/ / I-124 (Methyl) 3 E−08 - - 1 E+03 - - T/ / I-124 (Vapor) - 2 E−08 - - 9 E+02 - /T/ I-124 4 E−08 - - 1 E+03 - - T/ / I-125 (Methyl) 2 E−08 - - 9 E+02 - - T/ / I-125 (Vapor) - 2 E−08 - - 7 E+02 - /T/ I-125 3 E−08 - - 1 E+03 - - T/ / I-126 (Methyl) 1 E−08 - - 5 E+02 - - T/ / I-126 (Vapor) - 1 E−08 - - 4 E+02 - /T/ I-126 2 E−08 - - 7 E+02 - - T/ / I-128 (Methyl) 3 E−05 - - 1 E+06 - - T/ / I-128 (Vapor) - 8 E−06 - - 3 E+05 - /St/ I-128 1 E−05 - - 6 E+05 - - ET/ / I-129 (Methyl) 3 E−09 - - 1 E+02 - - T/ / I-129 (Vapor) - 2 E−09 - - 1 E+02 - /T/ I-129 5 E−09 - - 2 E+02 - - T/ / I-130 (Methyl) 2 E−07 - - 7 E+03 - - T/ / I-130 (Vapor) - 1 E−07 - - 6 E+03 - /T/ I-130 3 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - - T/ / I-131 (Methyl) 1 E−08 - - 6 E+02 - - T/ / I-131 (Vapor) - 1 E−08 - - 5 E+02 - /T/ I-131 2 E−08 - - 9 E+02 - - T/ / I-132m (Methyl) 1 E−06 - - 7 E+04 - - T/ / I-132m (Vapor) - 1 E−06 - - 6 E+04 - /T/ I-132m 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - T/ / I-132 (Methyl) 1 E−06 - - 6 E+04 - - T/ / I-132 (Vapor) - 1 E−06 - - 5 E+04 - /T/ I-132 2 E−06 - - 7 E+04 - - T/ / I-133 (Methyl) 9 E−08 - - 3 E+03 - - T/ / I-133 (Vapor) - 7 E−08 - - 2 E+03 - /T/ I-133 1 E−07 - - 5 E+03 - - T/ / I-134 (Methyl) 8 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - T/ / I-134 (Vapor) - 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /St/ I-134 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - ET/ / I-135 (Methyl) 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - - T/ / I-135 (Vapor) - 3 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /T/ I-135 6 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - - T/ / Cs-125 1 E−05 - - 4 E+05 - - ET/ / Cs-127 4 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - ET/ / Cs-129 2 E−06 - - 9 E+04 - - ET/ / Cs-130 1 E−05 - - 6 E+05 - - ET/ / Cs-131 7 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / Cs-132 9 E−07 - - 3 E+04 - - ET/ / Cs-134m 8 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / Cs-134 5 E−08 - - 2 E+03 - - St/ / Cs-135m 8 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / Cs-135 5 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - - St/ / Cs-136 2 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - - E/ / Cs-137 8 E−08 - - 3 E+03 - - St/ / Cs-138 5 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / Ba-126 4 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - ET/ / Ba-128 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - - St/ / Ba-131m 4 E−05 - - 1 E+06 - - ET/ / Ba-131 1 E−06 - - 4 E+04 - - ET/ / Ba-133m 2 E−06 - - 7 E+04 - - St/ / Ba-133 3 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - - St/ / Ba-135m 2 E−06 - - 9 E+04 - - St/ / Ba-139 1 E−05 - - 3 E+05 - - St/ / Ba-140 3 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - - St/ / Ba-141 1 E−05 - - 4 E+05 - - ET/ / Ba-142 9 E−06 - - 3 E+05 - - ET/ / La-131 1 E−05 8 E−06 - 4 E+05 3 E+05 - ET/ET/ La-132 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 5 E+04 5 E+04 - ET/ET/ La-135 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 4 E+05 4 E+05 - ET/ET/ La-137 4 E−08 2 E−07 - 1 E+03 8 E+03 - L/L/ La-138 3 E−09 1 E−08 - 1 E+02 4 E+02 - St/St/ La-140 4 E−07 3 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 - ET/St/ La-141 5 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 9 E+04 - St/St/ La-142 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 9 E+04 8 E+04 - ET/ET/ La-143 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 6 E+05 4 E+05 - ET/ET/ Ce-134 - 3 E−07 3 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 /St/St Ce-135 - 5 E−07 5 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 /ET/ET Ce-137m - 1 E−06 9 E−07 - 3 E+04 3 E+04 /St/St Ce-137 - 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 7 E+05 7 E+05 /ET/ET Ce-139 - 4 E−07 4 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 /St/St Ce-141 - 2 E−07 1 E−07 - 7 E+03 6 E+03 /St/St Ce-143 - 5 E−07 5 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 /St/St Ce-144 - 2 E−08 1 E−08 - 9 E+02 7 E+02 /St/St Pr-136 - 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 3 E+05 3 E+05 /ET/ET Pr-137 - 9 E−06 9 E−06 - 3 E+05 3 E+05 /ET/ET Pr-138m - 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 7 E+04 7 E+04 /ET/ET Pr-139 - 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 5 E+05 5 E+05 /ET/ET Pr-142m - 6 E−05 5 E−05 - 2 E+06 2 E+06 /St/St Pr-142 - 8 E−07 7 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 /St/St Pr-143 - 2 E−07 2 E−07 - 1 E+04 9 E+03 /St/St Pr-144 - 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 4 E+05 4 E+05 /ET/ET Pr-145 - 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 8 E+04 8 E+04 /St/St Pr-147 - 9 E−06 9 E−06 - 3 E+05 3 E+05 /ET/ET Nd-136 - 4 E−06 4 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /ET/ET Nd-138 - 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 5 E+04 5 E+04 /St/St Nd-139m - 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 5 E+04 5 E+04 /ET/ET Nd-139 - 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 6 E+05 6 E+05 /ET/ET Nd-141 - 3 E−05 3 E−05 - 1 E+06 1 E+06 /ET/ET Nd-147 - 2 E−07 2 E−07 - 1 E+04 9 E+03 /St/St Nd-149 - 4 E−06 4 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /ET/ET Nd-151 - 9 E−06 9 E−06 - 3 E+05 3 E+05 /ET/ET Pm-141 - 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 4 E+05 4 E+05 /ET/ET Pm-143 - 5 E−07 6 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 /St/St Pm-144 - 1 E−07 1 E−07 - 3 E+03 5 E+03 /St/St Pm-145 - 1 E−07 4 E−07 - 5 E+03 1 E+04 /BS/St Pm-146 - 4 E−08 6 E−08 - 1 E+03 2 E+03 /St/St Pm-147 - 1 E−07 1 E−07 - 4 E+03 6 E+03 /BS/St Pm-148m - 1 E−07 1 E−07 - 5 E+03 4 E+03 /St/St Pm-148 - 2 E−07 2 E−07 - 9 E+03 9 E+03 /St/St Pm-149 - 7 E−07 6 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 /St/St Pm-150 - 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 8 E+04 8 E+04 /ET/ET Pm-151 - 9 E−07 8 E−07 - 3 E+04 3 E+04 /St/St Sm-141m - 5 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - /ET/ Sm-141 - 1 E−05 - - 4 E+05 - /ET/ Sm-142 - 4 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /ET/ Sm-145 - 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /BS/ Sm-146 - 2 E−11 - - 1 E+00 - /BS/ Sm-147 - 2 E−11 - - 1 E+00 - /BS/ Sm-151 - 7 E−08 - - 2 E+03 - /BS/ Sm-153 - 8 E−07 - - 3 E+04 - /St/ Sm-155 - 1 E−05 - - 3 E+05 - /ET/ Sm-156 - 2 E−06 - - 7 E+04 - /St/ Eu-145 - 5 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - /ET/ Eu-146 - 3 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /ET/ Eu-147 - 5 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - /St/ Eu-148 - 2 E−07 - - 9 E+03 - /St/ Eu-149 - 2 E−06 - - 9 E+04 - /St/ Eu-150 (12 h) - 2 E−06 - - 7 E+04 - /St/ Eu-150 (34 yr) - 1 E−08 - - 6 E+02 - /St/ Eu-152m - 1 E−06 - - 6 E+04 - /St/ Eu-152 - 2 E−08 - - 7 E+02 - /St/ Eu-154 - 1 E−08 - - 5 E+02 - /St/ Eu-155 - 7 E−08 - - 2 E+03 - /BS/ Eu-156 - 1 E−07 - - 6 E+03 - /St/ Eu-157 - 1 E−06 - - 4 E+04 - /St/ Eu-158 - 5 E−6 - - 1 E+05 - /ET/ Gd-145 9 E−06 7 E−06 - 3 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Gd-146 1 E−07 1 E−07 - 4 E+03 4 E+03 - St/St/ Gd-147 7 E−07 6 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 - ET/ET/ Gd-148 5 E−12 2 E−11 - 2 E−01 9 E−01 - BS/BS/ Gd-149 1 E−06 7 E−07 - 4 E+04 2 E+04 - St/St/ Gd-151 2 E−07 8 E−07 - 9 E+03 3 E+04 - BS/St/ Gd-152 7 E−12 3 E−11 - 2 E−01 1 E+00 - BS/BS/ Gd-153 9 E−08 4 E−07 - 3 E+03 1 E+04 - BS/St/ Gd-159 3 E−06 1 E−06 - 1 E+05 5 E+04 - St/St/ Tb-147 - 2 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /ET/ Tb-149 - 1 E−07 - - 6 E+03 - /St/ Tb-150 - 2 E−06 - - 8 E+04 - /ET/ Tb-151 - 1 E−06 - - 4 E+04 - /ET/ Tb-153 - 2 E−06 - - 8 E+04 - /St/ Tb-154 - 5 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - /ET/ Tb-155 - 2 E−06 - - 8 E+04 - /St/ Tb-156m (24 h) - 2 E−06 - - 9 E+04 - /St/ Tb-156m (5 h) - 4 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /St/ Tb-156 - 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /E/ Tb-157 - 2 E−07 - - 8 E+03 - /BS/ Tb-158 - 1 E−08 - - 6 E+02 - /BS/ Tb-160 - 1 E−07 - - 3 E+03 - /St/ Tb-161 - 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /St/ Dy-155 - 2 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /ET/ Dy-157 - 5 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /ET/ Dy-159 - 2 E−06 - - 8 E+04 - /BS/ Dy-165 - 6 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - /ET/ Dy-166 - 3 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /St/ Ho-155 - 1 E−05 - - 4 E+05 - /ET/ Ho-157 - 2 E−05 - - 1 E+06 - /ET/ Ho-159 - 2 E−05 - - 9 E+05 - /ET/ Ho-161 - 3 E−05 - - 1 E+06 - /ET/ Ho-162m - 9 E−06 - - 3 E+05 - /ET/ Ho-162 - 5 E−05 - - 2 E+06 - /ET/ Ho-164m - 3 E−05 - - 1 E+06 - /St/ Ho-164 - 2 E−05 - - 8 E+05 - /ET/ Ho-166m - 7 E−09 - - 2 E+02 - /St/ Ho-166 - 6 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - /St/ Ho-167 - 4 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /ET/ Er-161 - 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /ET/ Er-165 - 2 E−05 - - 1 E+06 - /ET/ Er-169 - 6 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - /St/ Er-171 - 1 E−06 - - 6 E+04 - /St/ Er-172 - 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /St/ Tm-162 - 9 E−06 - - 3E+05 - /ET/ Tm-166 - 1 E−06 - - 4 E+04 - /ET/ Tm-167 - 5 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - /St/ Tm-170 - 1 E−07 - - 4 E+03 - /St/ Tm-171 - 2 E−07 - - 9 E+03 - /BS/ Tm-172 - 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /St/ Tm-173 - 2 E−06 - - 8 E+04 - /St/ Tm-175 - 8 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - /ET/ Yb-162 - 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 5 E+05 5 E+05 /ET/ET Yb-166 - 6 E−07 5 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 /St/St Yb-167 - 3 E−05 3 E−05 - 1 E+06 1 E+06 /ET/ET Yb-169 - 2 E−07 2 E−07 - 9 E+03 8 E+03 /St/St Yb-175 - 8 E−07 8 E−07 - 3 E+04 2 E+04 /St/St Yb-177 - 6 E−06 5 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 /ET/ET Yb-178 - 5 E−06 5 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /ET/E Lu-169 - 9 E−07 9 E−07 - 3 E+04 3 E+04 /ET/ET Lu-170 - 4 E−07 4 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 /ET/ET Lu-171 - 6 E−07 6 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 /St/St Lu-172 - 3 E−07 3 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 /St/St Lu-173 - 2 E−07 4 E−07 - 8 E+03 1 E+04 /BS/St Lu-174m - 2 E−07 2 E−07 - 7 E+03 8 E+03 /BS/St Lu-174 - 9 E−08 2 E−07 - 3 E+03 8 E+03 /BS/St Lu-176m - 3 E−06 3 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /St/St Lu-176 - 3 E−09 1 E−08 - 1 E+02 6 E+02 /BS/St Lu-177m - 5 E−08 4 E−08 - 2 E+03 1 E+03 /St/St Lu-177 - 5 E−07 5 E−07 - 2 E+04 1 E+04 /St/St Lu-178m - 4 E−06 4 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /ET/ET Lu-178 - 8 E−06 8 E−06 - 3 E+05 3 E+05 /ET/ET Lu-179 - 3 E−06 3 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /St/St Hf-170 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 4 E+04 4 E+04 - ET/ET/ Hf-172 6 E−09 3 E−08 - 2 E+02 1 E+03 - BS/BS/ Hf-173 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 9 E+04 8 E+04 - ET/ET/ Hf-175 5 E−07 6 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 - BS/St/ Hf-177m 2 E−06 1 E−06 - 9 E+04 6 E+04 - ET/ET/ Hf-178m 8 E−10 4 E−09 - 3 E+01 1 E+02 - BS/BS/ Hf-179m 2 E−07 1 E−07 - 8 E+03 6 E+03 - BS/St/ Hf-180m 2 E−06 1 E−06 - 7 E+04 6 E+04 - ET/ET/ Hf-181 1 E−07 1 E−07 - 4 E+03 5 E+03 - BS/St/ Hf-182m 5 E−06 4 E−06 - 2 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Hf-182 5 E−10 2 E−09 - 2 E+01 9 E+01 - BS/BS/ Hf-183 6 E−06 4 E−06 - 2 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Hf-184 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 5 E+04 4 E+04 - ET/St/ Ta-172 - 5 E−06 5 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /ET/ET Ta-173 - 3 E−06 3 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /E/E Ta-174 - 5 E−06 5 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 /ET/ET Ta-175 - 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 6 E+04 6 E+04 /ET/ET Ta-176 - 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 3 E+04 3 E+04 /ET/ET Ta-177 - 4 E−06 4 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /St/St Ta-178 - 3 E−06 3 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /ET/ET Ta-179 - 4 E−06 1 E−06 - 1 E+05 7 E+04 /St/St Ta-180m - 9 E−06 9 E−06 - 3 E+05 3 E+05 /St/St Ta-180 - 1 E−07 4 E−08 - 4 E+03 1 E+03 /St/St Ta-182m - 6 E−06 6 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 /ET/ET Ta-182 - 9 E−08 7 E−08 - 3 E+03 2 E+03 /St/St Ta-183 - 3 E−07 2 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 /St/St Ta-184 - 8 E−07 8 E−07 - 3 E+04 3 E+04 /ET/ET Ta-185 - 5 E−06 5 E−06 - 2 E+05 1 E+05 /ET/ET Ta-186 - 7 E−06 7 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 /ET/ET W-176 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - ET/ / W-177 5 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / W-178 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - ET/ / W-179 1 E−04 - - 5 E+06 - - ET/ / W-181 1 E−05 - - 4 E+05 - - ET/ / W-185 2 E−06 - - 9 E+04 - - St/ / W-187 1 E−06 - - 5 E+04 - - ET/ / W-188 6 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - - St/ / Re-177 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 6 E+05 4 E+05 - ET/ET/ Re-178 1 E−05 1 E−05 - 5 E+05 3 E+05 - ET/ET/ Re-181 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 5 E+04 4 E+04 - ET/ET/ Re-182 (64 h) 4 E−07 3 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 - ET/St/ Re-182 (12 h) 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 4 E+04 4 E+04 - ET/ET/ Re-184m 6 E−07 1 E−07 - 2 E+04 4 E+03 - St/St/ Re-184 7 E−07 3 E−07 - 2 E+04 1 E+04 - ET/St/ Re-186m 4 E−7 7 E−08 - 1 E+04 2 E+03 - St/St/ Re-186 7 E−07 4 E−07 - 2 E+04 1 E+04 - St/St/ Re-187 2 E−04 1 E−04 - 8 E+06 4 E+06 - St/St/ Re-188m 3 E−05 2 E−05 - 1 E+06 1 E+06 - St/St/ Re-188 8 E−07 7 E−07 - 3 E+04 2 E+04 - St/St/ Re-189 1 E−06 9 E−07 - 4 E+04 3 E+04 - St/St/ Os-180 1 E−05 1 E−05 1 E−05 5 E+05 3 E+05 3 E+05 ET/ET/ET Os-181 3 E−06 3 E−06 3 E−06 1 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET Os-182 1 E−06 9 E−07 9 E−07 3 E+04 3 E+04 3 E+04 ET/ET/ET Os-185 4 E−07 5 E−07 5 E−07 1 E+04 2 E+04 1 E+04 St/St/St Os-189m 1 E−04 7 E−05 7 E−05 4 E+06 2 E+06 2 E+06 St/St/St Os-191m 1 E−05 4 E−06 4 E−06 5 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 St/St/St Os-191 1 E−06 4 E−07 3 E−07 5 E+04 1 E+04 1 E+04 St/St/St Os-193 2 E−06 8 E−07 8 E−07 7 E+04 3 E+04 3 E+04 St/St/St Os-194 4 E−08 4 E−08 1 E−08 1 E+03 1 E+03 4 E+02 St/St/St Ir-182 9 E−06 7 E−06 7 E−06 3 E+05 2 E+05 2 E+05 ET/ET/ET Ir-184 1 E−06 1 E−06 1 E−06 7 E+04 6 E+04 7 E+04 ET/ET/ET Ir-185 2 E−06 1 E−06 1 E−06 7 E+04 7 E+04 7 E+04 ET/ET/ET Ir-186 (16 h) 8 E−07 7 E−07 7 E−07 2 E+04 2 E+04 2 E+04 ET/ET/ET Ir-186 (2 h) 5 E−06 4 E−06 4 E−06 1 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET Ir-187 4 E−06 3 E−06 3 E−06 1 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET Ir-188 6 E−07 6 E−07 6 E−07 2 E+04 2 E+04 2 E+04 ET/ET/ET Ir-189 3 E−06 1 E−06 1 E−06 1 E+05 5 E+04 4 E+04 St/St/St Ir-190m (3 h) 2 E−06 2 E−06 2 E−06 8 E+04 8 E+04 7 E+04 ET/ET/ET Ir-190m (1 h) 9 E−05 5 E−05 5 E−05 3 E+06 2 E+06 1 E+06 ET/St/St Ir-190 4 E−07 2 E−07 2 E−07 1 E+04 9 E+03 8 E+03 ET/St/St Ir-192m 1 E−07 1 E−07 2 E−08 3 E+03 6 E+03 1 E+03 St/St/St Ir-192 2 E−07 1 E−07 1 E−07 9 E+03 5 E+03 4 E+03 St/St/St Ir-194m 8 E−08 8 E−08 6 E−08 3 E+03 3 E+03 2 E+03 St/St/St Ir-194 1 E−06 7 E−07 7 E−07 5 E+04 2 E+04 2 E+04 St/St/St Ir-195m 2 E−06 2 E−06 2 E−06 9 E+04 7 E+04 7 E+04 ET/ET/ET Ir-195 7 E−06 5 E−06 4 E−06 2 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/ET/ET Pt-186 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - ET/ / Pt-188 8 E−07 - - 3 E+04 - - E/ / Pt-189 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - ET/ / Pt-191 1 E−06 - - 7 E+04 - - ET/ / Pt-193m 2 E−06 - - 8 E+04 - - ET/ / Pt-193 2 E−05 - - 7 E+05 - - ET/ / Pt-195m 1 E−06 - - 5 E+04 - - ET/ / Pt-197m 7 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / Pt-197 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - ET/ / Pt-199 1 E−05 - - 4 E+05 - - ET/ / Pt-200 1 E−06 - - 5 E+04 - - St/ / Au-193 4 E−06 3 E−06 3 E−06 1 E+05 1 E+05 1 E+05 ET/E/St Au-194 9 E−07 9 E−07 9 E−07 3 E+04 3 E+04 3 E+04 ET/ET/ET Au-195 3 E−06 7 E−07 4 E−07 1 E+05 2 E+04 1 E+04 ET/St/St Au-198m 6 E−07 2 E−07 2 E−07 2 E+04 1 E+04 1 E+04 ET/St/St Au-198 1 E−06 5 E−07 5 E−07 4 E+04 2 E+04 1 E+04 ET/St/St Au-199 2 E−06 8 E−07 7 E−07 7 E+04 3 E+04 2 E+04 ET/St/St Au-200m 5 E−07 4 E−07 4 E−07 1 E+04 1 E+04 1 E+04 ET/ET/ET Au-200 1 E−05 7 E−06 7 E−06 4 E+05 2 E+05 2 E+05 ET/ET/ET Au-201 1 E−05 1 E−05 9 E−06 5 E+05 3 E+05 3 E+05 ET/ET/ET Hg-193m
(Org)1 E−06 - - 4 E+04 - - ET/ / Hg-193m 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 4 E+04 4 E+04 - ET/ET/ Hg-193m (Vapor) - 1 E−07 - - 6 E+03 - /St/ Hg-193
(Org)5 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - ET/ / Hg-193 5 E−06 4 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Hg-193 (Vapor) - 5 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /St/ Hg-194
(Org)2 E−08 - - 1 E+03 - - St/ / Hg-194 3 E−08 1 E−07 - 1 E+03 3 E+03 - St/St/ Hg-194 (Vapor) - 1 E−08 - - 5 E+02 - /St/ Hg-195m
(Org)1 E−06 - - 5 E+04 - - ET/ / Hg-195m 1 E−06 8 E−07 - 5 E+04 3 E+04 - ET/St/ Hg-195m (Vapor) - 6 E−08 - - 2 E+03 - /St/ Hg-195
(Org)6 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / Hg-195 6 E−06 6 E−06 - 2 E+05 2 E+05 - ET/ET/ Hg-195 (Vapor) - 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /St/ Hg-197m
(Org)1 E−06 - - 5 E+04 - - ET/ / Hg-197m 1 E−06 8 E−07 - 5 E+04 3 E+04 - ET/St/ Hg-197m (Vapor) - 9 E−08 - - 3 E+03 - /St/ Hg-197
(Org)4 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - ET/ / Hg-197 4 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 7 E+04 - ET/St/ Hg-197 (Vapor) - 1 E−07 - - 4 E+03 - /St/ Hg-199m
(Org)8 E−06 - - 3 E+05 - - ET/ / Hg-199m 8 E−06 5 E−06 - 3 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Hg-199m (Vapor) - 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /St/ Hg-203
(Org)7 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - - St/ / Hg-203 9 E−07 2 E−07 - 3 E+04 1 E+04 - St/St/ Hg-203 (Vapor) - 8 E−08 - - 2 E+03 - /St/ Tl-194m 5 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / Tl-194 2 E−05 - - 8 E+05 - - ET/ / Tl-195 6 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / Tl-197 8 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / Tl-198m 2 E−06 - - 9 E+04 - - ET/ / Tl-198 1 E−06 - - 5 E+04 - - ET/ / Tl-199 5 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / Tl-200 8 E−07 - - 3 E+04 - - ET/ / Tl-201 4 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - ET/ / Tl-202 1 E−06 - - 5 E+04 - - ET/ / Tl-204 9 E−07 - - 3 E+04 - - St/ / Pb-195m 7 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - - ET/ / Pb-198 2 E−06 - - 9 E+04 - - ET/ / Pb-199 4 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - - ET/ / Pb-200 1 E−06 - - 4 E+04 - - ET/ / Pb-201 2 E−06 - - 7 E+04 - - ET/ / Pb-202m 1 E−06 - - 6 E+04 - - ET/ / Pb-202 4 E−08 - - 1 E+03 - - St/ / Pb-203 2 E−06 - - 7 E+04 - - ET/ / Pb-205 9 E−07 - - 3 E+04 - - BS/ / Pb-209 9 E−06 - - 3 E+05 - - ET/ / Pb-210 1 E−10 - - 5 E+00 - - BS/ / Pb-211 4 E−08 - - 1 E+03 - - ET/ / Pb-212 5 E−09 - - 2 E+02 - - ET/ / Pb-214 4 E−08 - - 1 E+03 - - ET/ / Bi-200 5 E−06 4 E−06 - 2 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Bi-201 3 E−06 2 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Bi-202 2 E−06 2 E−06 - 9 E+04 9 E+04 - ET/ET/ Bi-203 7 E−07 7 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 - ET/ET/ Bi-205 4 E−07 4 E−07 - 1 E+04 1 E+04 - ET/ET/ Bi-206 2 E−07 2 E−07 - 9 E+03 8 E+03 - ET/ET/ Bi-207 4 E−07 1 E−07 - 1 E+04 6 E+03 - ET/St/ Bi-210m 3 E−09 2 E−10 - 1 E+02 9 E+00 - K/St/ Bi-210 1 E−07 9 E−09 - 6 E+03 3 E+02 - K/St/ Bi-212 1 E−08 8 E−09 - 4 E+02 3 E+02 - ET/ET/ Bi-213 1 E−08 7 E−09 - 4 E+02 2 E+02 - ET/ET/ Bi-214 1 E−08 1 E−08 - 6 E+02 4 E+02 - ET/ET/ Po-203 5 E−06 4 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Po-205 4 E−06 3 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 - ET/ET/ Po-207 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 7 E+04 6 E+04 - ET/ET/ Po-210 7 E−10 2 E−10 - 2 E+01 9 E+00 - K/St/ At-207 1 E−06 2 E−07 - 4 E+04 1 E+04 - St/St/ At-211 7 E−09 5 E−09 - 2 E+02 1 E+02 - ET/St/ Rn-220 5 1 E−08 - - 6 E+02 - - - Rn-222 5 8 E−08 - - 3 E+03 - - - Fr-222 1 E−08 - - 3 E+02 - - ET/ / Fr-223 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - - St/ / Ra-223 - 9 E−11 - - 3 E+00 - /St/ Ra-224 - 2 E−10 - - 8 E+00 - /St/ Ra-225 - 1 E−10 - - 4 E+00 - /St/ Ra-226 - 2 E−10 - - 9 E+00 - /St/ Ra-227 - 8 E−07 - - 3 E+04 - /BS/ Ra-228 - 1 E−10 - - 5 E+00 - /BS/ Ac-224 1 E−08 6 E−09 5 E−09 6 E+02 2 E+02 2 E+02 BS/St/St Ac-225 2 E−10 9 E−11 8 E−11 7 E+00 3 E+00 3 E+00 BS/St/St Ac-226 1 E−09 6 E−10 5 E−10 4 E+01 2 E+01 2 E+01 ET/St/St Ac-227 2 E−13 1 E−12 1 E−11 1 E−02 5 E−02 4 E−01 BS/BS/St Ac-228 6 E−09 3 E−08 4 E−08 2 E+02 1 E+03 1 E+03 BS/BS/St Th-226 - 4 E−09 4 E−09 - 1 E+02 1 E+02 /ET/ET Th-227 - 9 E−11 7 E−11 - 3 E+00 2 E+00 /St/St Th-228 - 2 E−11 2 E−11 - 7 E−01 8 E−01 /BS/St Th-229 - 2 E−12 1 E−11 - 7 E−02 4 E−01 /BS/St Th-230 - 3 E−12 4 E−11 - 1 E−01 1 E+00 /BS/BS Th-231 - 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 5 E+04 5 E+04 /St/St Th-232 - 3 E−12 4 E−11 - 1 E−01 1 E+00 /BS/BS Th-234 - 1 E−07 9 E−08 - 3 E+03 3 E+03 /St/St Pa-227 - 4 E−09 4 E−09 - 1 E+02 1 E+02 /ET/ET Pa-228 - 1 E−08 1 E−08 - 3 E+02 4 E+02 /BS/St Pa-230 - 1 E−09 9 E−10 - 4 E+01 3 E+01 /St/St Pa-231 - 1 E−12 1 E−11 - 4 E−02 4 E−01 /BS/BS Pa-232 - 1 E−08 1 E−07 - 6 E+02 7 E+03 /BS/BS Pa-233 - 2 E−07 1 E−07 - 7 E+03 6 E+03 /St/St Pa-234 - 7 E−07 7 E−07 - 2 E+04 2 E+04 /ET/ET U-230 6 E−10 5 E−11 4 E−11 2 E+01 2 E+00 1 E+00 K/St/St U-231 2 E−06 1 E−06 1 E−06 8 E+04 4 E+04 4 E+04 ET/St/St U-232 5 E−11 1 E−10 2 E−11 2 E+00 4 E+00 7 E−01 BS/St/ET U-233 4 E−10 2 E−10 7 E−11 1 E+01 9 E+00 2 E+00 BS/St/ET U-234 5 E−10 2 E−10 7 E−11 1 E+01 9 E+00 2 E+00 BS/St/ET U-235 5 E−10 3 E−10 8 E−11 1 E+01 1 E+01 3 E+00 BS/St/ET U-236 5 E−10 2 E−10 7 E−11 1 E+01 1 E+01 2 E+00 BS/St/ET U-237 1 E−06 3 E−07 3 E−07 4 E+04 1 E+04 1 E+04 ET/St/St U-238 5 E−10 3 E−10 8 E−11 2 E+01 1 E+01 3 E+00 BS/St/ET U-239 1 E−05 9 E−06 9 E−06 5 E+05 3 E+05 3 E+05 ET/ET/ET U-240 1 E−06 7 E−07 6 E−07 5 E+04 2 E+04 2 E+04 ET/St/St Np-232 - 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /BS/ Np-233 - 7 E−05 - - 2 E+06 - /ET/ Np-234 - 5 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - /ET/ Np-235 - 1 E−06 - - 4 E+04 - /BS/ Np-236 (1 E+05 yr) - 4 E−11 - - 1 E+00 - /BS/ Np-236 (22 h) - 5 E−08 - - 1 E+03 - /BS/ Np-237 - 8 E−12 - - 3 E−01 - /BS/ Np-238 - 1 E−07 - - 4 E+03 - /BS/ Np-239 - 5 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /St/ Np-240 - 2 E−06 - - 8 E+04 - /ET/ Pu-234 - 3 E−08 3 E−08 - 1 E+03 1 E+03 /St/St Pu-235 - 9 E−05 8 E−05 - 3 E+06 3 E+06 /ET/ET Pu-236 - 1 E−11 7 E−11 - 6 E−01 2 E+00 /BS/St Pu-237 - 1 E−06 1 E−06 - 7 E+04 6 E+04 /St/St Pu-238 - 6 E−12 5 E−11 - 2 E−01 1 E+00 /BS/St Pu-239 - 5 E−12 6 E−11 - 2 E−01 2 E+00 /BS/BS Pu-240 - 5 E−12 6 E−11 - 2 E−01 2 E+00 /BS/BS Pu-241 - 2 E−10 2 E−09 - 1 E+01 1 E+02 /BS/BS Pu-242 - 5 E−12 6 E−11 - 2 E−01 2 E+00 /BS/BS Pu-243 - 5 E−06 5 E−06 - 1 E+05 1 E+05 /E/E Pu-244 - 5 E−12 6 E−11 - 2 E−01 2 E+00 /BS/BS Pu-245 - 9 E−07 8 E−07 - 3 E+04 3 E+04 /St/St Pu-246 - 8 E−08 8 E−08 - 3 E+03 2 E+03 /St/St Am-237 - 8 E−06 - - 3 E+05 - /ET/ Am-238 - 2 E−06 - - 9 E+04 - /BS/ Am-239 - 1 E−06 - - 6 E+04 - /ET/ Am-240 - 7 E−07 - - 2 E+04 - /ET/ Am-241 - 5 E−12 - - 1 E−01 - /BS/ Am-242m - 5 E−12 - - 1 E−01 - /BS/ Am-242 - 4 E−08 - - 1 E+03 - /St/ Am-243 - 5 E−12 - - 1 E−01 - /BS/ Am-244m - 3 E−06 - - 1 E+05 - /BS/ Am-244 - 1 E−07 - - 5 E+03 - /BS/ Am-245 - 5 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - /ET/ Am-246m - 6 E−06 - - 2 E+05 - /ET/ Am-246 - 2 E−06 - - 9 E+04 - /ET/ Cm-238 - 1 E−07 - - 4 E+03 - /St/ Cm-240 - 2 E−10 - - 7 E+00 - /St/ Cm-241 - 2 E−08 - - 8 E+02 - /St/ Cm-242 - 1 E−10 - - 5 E+00 - /St/ Cm-243 - 7 E−12 - - 2 E−01 - /BS/ Cm-244 - 9 E−12 - - 3 E−01 - /BS/ Cm-245 - 5 E−12 - - 1 E−01 - /BS/ Cm-246 - 5 E−12 - - 1 E−01 - /BS/ Cm-247 - 5 E−12 - - 2 E−01 - /BS/ Cm-248 - 1 E−12 - - 5 E−02 - /BS/ Cm-249 - 8 E−06 - - 3 E+05 - /ET/ Cm-250 - 2 E−13 - - 8 E−03 - /BS/ Bk-245 - 3 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /St/ Bk-246 - 8 E−07 - - 3 E+04 - /ET/ Bk-247 - 3 E−12 - - 1 E−01 - /BS/ Bk-249 - 1 E−09 - - 5 E+01 - /BS/ Bk-250 - 2 E−07 - - 9 E+03 - /BS/ Cf-244 - 1 E−08 - - 5 E+02 - /ET/ Cf-246 - 1 E−09 - - 5 E+01 - /St/ Cf-248 - 5 E−11 - - 2 E+00 - /BS/ Cf-249 - 3 E−12 - - 1 E−01 - /BS/ Cf-250 - 7 E−12 - - 2 E−01 - /BS/ Cf-251 - 3 E−12 - - 1 E−01 - /BS/ Cf-252 - 1 E−11 - - 6 E−01 - /BS/ Cf-253 - 5 E−10 - - 2 E+01 - /St/ Cf-254 - 2 E−11 - - 8 E−01 - /BS/ Es-250 - 4 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /BS/ Es-251 - 3 E−07 - - 1 E+04 - /St/ Es-253 - 2 E−10 - - 9 E+00 - /St/ Es-254m - 1 E−09 - - 5 E+01 - /St/ Es-254 - 6 E−11 - - 2 E+00 - /BS/ Fm-252 - 2 E−09 - - 8 E+01 - /St/ Fm-253 - 1 E−09 - - 6 E+01 - /St/ Fm-254 - 6 E−09 - - 2 E+02 - /ET/ Fm-255 - 2 E−09 - - 8 E+01 - /St/ Fm-257 - 1 E−10 - - 4 E+00 - /St/ Md-257 - 2 E−08 - - 1 E+03 - /St/ Md-258 - 1 E−10 - - 4 E+00 - /St/ Footnotes for Appendix A 1 A determination of whether the DACs are controlled by stochastic
(St)or deterministic (organ or tissue) dose, or if they both give the same result (E), for each absorption type, is given in this column. The key to the organ notation for deterministic dose is: BS = Bone surface, ET = Extrathoracic, K = Kidney, L = Liver, and T = Thyroid. A blank indicates that no calculations were performed for the absorption type shown. 2 The ICRP identifies these materials as soluble or reactive gases and vapors or highly soluble or reactive gases and vapors. For tritiated water, the inhalation DAC values allow for an additional 50% absorption through the skin, as described in ICRP Publication No. 68, Dose Coefficients for Intakes of Radionuclides by Workers. For elemental tritium, the DAC values include a factor that irradiation from gas within the lungs might increase the dose by 20%. 3 A dash indicates no values given for this data category. 4 DAC values derived using hafnium tritide particle and are based on “observed activity” (i.e, only radiation emitted from the particle is considered). DAC values derived using methodology found in Radiological Control Programs for Special Tritium Compounds, DOE-HDBK-1184-2004. 5 These values are appropriate for protection from radon combined with its short-lived decay products and are based on information given in ICRP Publication 65: Protection Against Radon-222 at Home and at Work and in DOE-STD-1121-98: Internal Dosimetry. The values given are for 100% equilibrium concentration conditions of the short-lived radon decay products with the parent. To allow for an actual measured equilibrium concentration or a demonstrated equilibrium concentration, the values given in this table should be multiplied by the ratio (100%/actual %) or (100%/demonstrated %), respectively. Alternatively, the DAC values for Rn-220 and Rn-222 may be replaced by 2.5 working level
(WL)and 0.83 WL, respectively, for appropriate limiting of decay product concentrations. A WL is any combination of short-lived radon decay products, in one liter of air without regard to the degree of equilibrium, that will result in the ultimate emission of 1.3 E+05 MeV of alpha energy. 30. Appendix C of part 835 is revised to read as follows: Appendix C to Part 835—Derived Air Concentration
(DAC)for Workers From External Exposure During Immersion in a Cloud of Airborne Radioactive Material a. The data presented in appendix C are to be used for controlling occupational exposures in accordance with § 835.209, identifying the need for air monitoring in accordance with § 835.403 and identifying the need for posting of airborne radioactivity areas in accordance with § 835.603(d). b. The air immersion DAC values shown in this appendix are based on a stochastic dose limit of 5 rems (0.05 Sv) per year. Four columns of information are presented:
(1)Radionuclide;
(2)half-life in units of seconds (s), minutes (min), hours (h), days (d), or years (yr);
(3)air immersion DAC in units of μCi/mL; and
(4)air immersion DAC in units of Bq/m3. The data are listed by radionuclide in order of increasing atomic mass. The air immersion DACs were calculated for a continuous, nonshielded exposure via immersion in a semi-infinite cloud of airborne radioactive material. The DACs listed in this appendix may be modified to allow for submersion in a cloud of finite dimensions. c. The DAC values are given for individual radionuclides. For known mixtures of radionuclides, determine the sum of the ratio of the observed concentration of a particular radionuclide and its corresponding DAC for all radionuclides in the mixture. If this sum exceeds unity (1), then the DAC has been exceeded. For unknown radionuclides, the most restrictive DAC (lowest value) for those isotopes not known to be absent shall be used. Air Immersion DAC Air immersion DAC Radionuclide Half-Life (μCi/mL) (Bq/m 3 ) Ar-37 35.02 d 1 E+00 4 E+10 Ar-39 269 yr 4 E-04 1 E+07 Ar-41 1.827 h 1 E-06 3 E+04 Kr-74 11.5 min 1 E-06 4 E+04 Kr-76 14.8 h 3 E-06 1 E+05 Kr-77 74.7 h 1 E-06 5 E+04 Kr-79 35.04 h 5 E-06 2 E+05 Kr-81 2.1E+05 yr 2 E-04 9 E+06 Kr-83m 1.83 h 2 E-02 9 E+08 Kr-85 10.72 yr 2 E-04 9 E+06 Kr-85m 4.48 h 9 E-06 3 E+05 Kr-87 76.3 min 1 E-06 5 E+04 Kr-88 2.84 h 6 E-07 2 E+04 Xe-120 40.0 min 3 E-06 1 E+05 Xe-121 40.1 min 7 E-07 2 E+04 Xe-122 20.1 h 2 E-05 1 E+06 Xe-123 2.14 h 2 E-06 8 E+04 Xe-125 16.8 h 5 E-06 2 E+05 Xe-127 36.406 d 5 E-06 2 E+05 Xe-129m 8.89 d 6 E-05 2 E+06 Xe-131m 11.84 d 1 E-04 6 E+06 Xe-133 5.245 d 4 E-05 1 E+06 Xe-133m 2.19 d 4 E-05 1 E+06 Xe-135 9.11 h 5 E-06 2 E+05 Xe-135m 15.36 min 3 E-06 1 E+05 Xe-138 14.13 min 1 E-06 4 E+04 For any single radionuclide not listed above with decay mode other than alpha emission or spontaneous fission and with radioactive half-life less than two hours, the DAC value shall be 6 E-06 μCi/mL (2 E+04 Bq/m 3 ). Appendix E to Part 835—[Amended] 31. Appendix D is amended in the last row of the first column by revising the words “Tritium and tritiated compounds 6 ” to read “Tritium and STCs 6 .” The last row of column three is revised by replacing the term “N/A” with the words “See Footnote 6.” Footnote 6 is revised by appending the following to the end of the footnote “In certain cases, a “Total” value of 10,000 dpm/100 cm 2 may be applicable either to metals, of the types which form insoluble special tritium compounds that have been exposed to tritium; or to bulk materials to which particles of insoluble special tritium compound are fixed to a surface.” Footnote 7 is revised to read “These limits only apply to the alpha emitters within the respective decay series.” 32. Appendix E of part 835 is revised to read as follows: Appendix E to Part 835—Values for Establishing Sealed Radioactive Source Accountability and Radioactive Material Posting and Labeling Requirements The data presented in appendix E are to be used for identifying accountable sealed radioactive sources and radioactive material areas as those terms are defined at § 835.2(a), establishing the need for radioactive material area posting in accordance with § 835.603(g), and establishing the need for radioactive material labeling in accordance with § 835.605. Nuclide Activity (μCi) H-3 1.5E+08 Be-7 3.1E+03 Be-10 1.4E+05 C-14 4.6E+06 Na-22 1.9E+01 Al-26 1.5E+01 Si-32 4.9E+04 S-35 2.4E+06 Cl-36 5.2E+05 K-40 2.7E+02 Ca-41 9.3E+06 Ca-45 1.1E+06 Sc-46 6.2E+01 Ti-44 1.5E+02 V-49 1.0E+08 Mn-53 7.5E+07 Mn-54 6.5E+01 Fe-55 2.9E+06 Fe-59 1.9E+02 Fe-60 8.1E+03 Co-56 3.9E+01 Co-57 2.3E+02 Co-58 1.3E+02 Co-60 1.7E+01 Ni-59 3.2E+06 Ni-63 1.3E+06 Zn-65 1.1E+02 Ge-68 5.6E+02 As-73 5.3E+02 Se-75 6.3E+01 Se-79 8.7E+05 Rb-83 9.1E+01 Rb-84 2.0E+02 Sr-85 1.2E+02 Sr-89 4.8E+05 Sr-90 3.5E+04 Y-88 3.3E+01 Y-91 5.0E+04 Zr-88 1.1E+02 Zr-93 9.3E+04 Zr-95 1.9E+02 Nb-91 6.9E+01 Nb-91m 3.6E+02 Nb-92 1.8E+01 Nb-93m 4.4E+02 Nb-94 2.3E+01 Nb-95 3.4E+02 Mo-93 7.7E+01 Tc-95m 1.3E+02 Tc-97 8.1E+01 Tc-97m 3.5E+02 Tc-98 2.5E+01 Tc-99 8.4E+05 Ru-103 4.4E+02 Ru-106 2.5E+02 Rh-101 8.7E+05 Rh-102 3.0E+05 Rh-102m 6.4E+05 Pd-107 9.3E+06 Ag-105 3.3E+06 Ag-108m 1.8E+01 Ag-110m 2.2E+01 Cd-109 1.6E+02 Cd-113m 2.0E+04 Cd-115m 1.0E+04 In-114m 7.7E+02 Sn-113 3.1E+02 Sn-119m 3.3E+02 Sn-121m 8.1E+05 Sn-123 1.3E+04 Sn-126 1.8E+02 Sb-124 9.1E+01 Sb-125 6.7E+01 Te-121m 1.8E+02 Te-123m 2.8E+02 Te-125m 4.4E+02 Te-127m 8.0E+02 Te-129m 2.3E+03 I-125 3.5E+02 I-129 1.8E+02 Cs-134 2.6E+01 Cs-135 1.3E+06 Cs-137 6.0E+01 Ba-133 5.1E+01 La-137 2.7E+05 Ce-139 2.4E+02 Ce-141 2.4E+03 Ce-144 1.4E+03 Pm-143 1.3E+02 Pm-144 2.9E+01 Pm-145 2.6E+02 Pm-146 4.4E+01 Pm-147 7.7E+05 Pm-148m 1.0E+02 Sm-145 2.4E+06 Sm-146 4.0E+02 Sm-151 2.5E+05 Eu-148 1.1E+06 Eu-149 1.1E+07 Eu-152 3.1E+01 Eu-154 3.1E+01 Eu-155 3.6E+02 Gd-146 5.1E+05 Gd-148 9.0E+01 Gd-151 2.9E+06 Gd-153 2.1E+02 Tb-157 2.5E+03 Tb-158 9.0E+04 Tb-160 1.2E+02 Dy-159 1.0E+07 Ho-166m 2.1E+01 Tm-170 8.4E+03 Tm-171 2.8E+04 Yb-169 5.5E+02 Lu-173 1.8E+06 Lu-174 9.3E+05 Lu-174m 1.0E+06 Lu-177m 5.8E+01 Hf-172 7.3E+04 Hf-175 3.0E+06 Hf-178m 8.7E+03 Hf-181 3.4E+02 Hf-182 7.5E+03 Ta-179 9.3E+06 Ta-182 7.3E+01 W-181 1.0E+03 W-185 3.9E+06 W-188 6.3E+04 Re-183 5.3E+02 Re-184 2.6E+02 Re-184m 1.5E+02 Re-186m 3.4E+05 Os-185 1.3E+02 Os-194 6.4E+04 Ir-192 1.3E+02 Ir-192m 1.4E+05 Ir-194m 2.7E+01 Pt-193 8.7E+07 Au-195 4.8E+02 Hg-194 5.2E+04 Hg-203 4.9E+02 Tl-204 2.2E+04 Pb-202 1.9E+05 Pb-205 9.0E+01 Pb-210 9.2E+01 Bi-207 1.7E+01 Bi-208 1.5E+01 Bi-210m 1.2E+03 Po-209 6.3E+03 Po-210 1.2E+03 Ra-226 2.2E+02 Ra-228 1.5E+03 Ac-227 4.2E+00 Th-228 8.4E+01 Th-229 3.1E+01 Th-230 5.4E+00 Th-232 9.3E+01 Pa-231 3.0E+01 U-232 1.0E+02 U-233 3.9E+02 U-234 2.9E+02 U-235 6.7E+01 U-236 3.1E+02 U-238 3.5E+02 Np-235 1.1E+02 Np-236 2.1E+01 Np-237 4.9E+01 Pu-236 2.0E+02 Pu-237 3.3E+02 Pu-238 9.0E+01 Pu-239 8.4E+01 Pu-240 8.4E+01 Pu-241 4.6E+03 Pu-242 8.7E+01 Pu-244 9.0E+01 Am-241 7.2E+01 Am-242m 1.1E+02 Am-243 7.3E+01 Cm-241 1.0E+05 Cm-242 6.2E+02 Cm-243 4.8E+01 Cm-244 1.5E+02 Cm-245 5.0E+01 Cm-246 1.0E+02 Cm-247 8.5E+01 Cm-248 2.8E+01 Cm-250 5.4E+00 Bk-247 6.0E+01 Bk-249 2.7E+04 Cf-248 4.4E+02 Cf-249 5.5E+01 Cf-250 1.2E+02 Cf-251 5.3E+01 Cf-252 5.2E+00 Cf-254 1.2E+02 Es-254 6.3E+01 Es-255 8.8E+03 Fm-257 5.1E+02 Md-258 6.1E+02 Any alpha emitting radionuclide not listed in appendix E and mixtures of alpha emitters of unknown composition have a value of 10 μCi. With the exception that any type of STC has a value of 10 Ci, any radionuclide other than alpha emitting radionuclides not listed in appendix E and mixtures of beta emitters of unknown composition have a value of 100 μCi. Note: Where there is involved a mixture of radionuclides in known amounts, derive the value for the mixture as follows: determine, for each radionuclide in the mixture, the ratio between the quantity present in the mixture and the value otherwise established for the specific radionuclide when not in the mixture. If the sum of such ratios for all radionuclides in the mixture exceeds unity (1), then the accountability criterion has been exceeded. [FR Doc. E7-10477 Filed 6-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P 72 110 Friday, June 8, 2007 Proposed Rules Part III Department of Housing and Urban Development 24 CFR Part 1000 Use of Indian Housing Block Grant Funds for Rental Assistance in Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Projects; Proposed Rule DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 24 CFR Part 1000 [Docket No. FR-4999-P-01] RIN 2577-AC61 Use of Indian Housing Block Grant Funds for Rental Assistance in Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Projects AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This proposed rule would amend the Indian Housing Block Grant
(IHBG)program regulations to specify the conditions under which IHBG funds may be used for project-based or tenant-based rental assistance. The proposed rule clarifies that such rental assistance may be provided in a manner consistent with assistance provided under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 on behalf of a tenant receiving assistance under the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA). DATES: *Comment Due Date:* August 7, 2007. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this rule to the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500. Interested persons also may submit comments electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at *www.regulations.gov* . HUD strongly encourages commenters to submit comments electronically so that HUD can make them immediately available to the public. Commenters should follow the instructions provided on that site to submit comments electronically. Facsimile
(FAX)comments are not acceptable. In all cases, communications must refer to the docket number and title. All comments and communications submitted to HUD will be available for public inspection and copying between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays at the above address. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters building, an advance appointment to review the public comments must be scheduled by calling the Regulations Division at
(202)708-3055 (this is not a toll-free number). Copies of all comments submitted are available for inspection and downloading at *www.regulations.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Lalancette, Director, Office of Grants Management, Office of Native American Programs, United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, 1670 Broadway, 23rd Floor, Denver, CO 80202-4801; telephone
(303)675-1625 (this is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at
(800)877-8339. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4101 *et seq.* ) (NAHASDA) changed the way that housing assistance is provided to Native Americans. NAHASDA eliminated several separate assistance programs and replaced them with a single block grant program, known as the Indian Housing Block Grant
(IHBG)program. NAHASDA and its implementing regulations recognize tribal self-determination and self-governance while establishing reasonable standards of accountability. The regulations governing the IHBG program are located in part 1000 of HUD's regulations in title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Under the IHBG program, HUD makes assistance available to eligible Indian tribes for affordable housing activities. The amount of assistance made available to each Indian tribe is determined using an allocation formula, developed with the active participation of Indian tribes and using negotiated rulemaking procedures. The IHBG allocation formula is based on factors that reflect the need of Indian tribes for affordable housing activities. Based on the amount of funding appropriated annually for the IHBG program, HUD calculates the annual grant for each Indian tribe and provides this information to the Indian tribes. An Indian Housing Plan
(IHP)for each Indian tribe is then submitted to HUD. If the IHP is found to be in compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements, the grant is made. An Indian tribe (or its tribally designated housing entity (TDHE)) may use its IHBG funds for a wide range of affordable housing activities, including the provision of project-based or tenant-based rental assistance for eligible families. II. Low-Income Housing Tax Credits In 1986, Congress amended the Internal Revenue Code to create the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) (see 26 U.S.C. 42), a tax incentive to promote the development of affordable rental housing. These tax credits encourage investment in affordable housing by providing developers a source of equity investment—an ownership interest in the housing project—in exchange for an agreement to limit rents to a level that would be affordable to low-income households. State housing agencies competitively allocate the credits to private developers who acquire, construct, or rehabilitate affordable rental housing. Eligible projects receive Federal income tax credits over a 10-year period using a formula that, in part, takes into account certain eligible costs called “eligible basis.” Generally, Federal grants used with respect to a building or for its operation thereof result in a dollar-for-dollar decrease in eligible basis. However, the Internal Revenue Service
(IRS)has recognized that certain types of Federal rental assistance payments are not Federal grants that require a reduction in a building's eligible basis. They include payments made pursuant to section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f) (Section 8) and comparable programs or methods of rental assistance designated by the Secretary of the Treasury by publication in the **Federal Register** or in the Internal Revenue Bulletin. (See the IRS regulations at 26 CFR 1.42-16(b).) Section 8 is the statutory authority for HUD's principal rental assistance programs—the tenant-based Housing Choice Voucher program (with implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 982) and the Project-Based Voucher program (with implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 983). HUD rental assistance programs (such as the project-based voucher program) address the requirements that apply when such program rental assistance is provided to tenants residing in LIHTC projects. However, the IHBG program regulations are silent with regard to the use of IHBG rental assistance in these projects. HUD has received requests from several Indian tribes and TDHEs that are IHBG recipients and wish to use their IHBG funds for LIHTC projects. Specifically, these requests came from eight IHBG recipients as well as one Native American housing association representing 32 Indian tribes, all requesting that HUD address the inability to use IHBG grants in LIHTC projects without penalty ( *i.e.* , without the amount of the grant coming out of a building's eligible basis). This proposed rule would address these tribal requests. III. This Proposed Rule The proposed rule would add a new § 1000.103 to specify the conditions under which IHBG funds may be used for tenant-based or project-based rental assistance. Proposed § 1000.103 would clarify that IHBG funds may be used for project-based or tenant-based rental assistance. Further, the proposed rule clarifies that IHBG funds may be used for project-based or tenant-based rental assistance that is administered in a manner consistent with Section 8. IHBG funds used for project-based or tenant-based rental assistance must comply with the requirements of NAHASDA and 24 CFR part 1000. Only the Secretary of the Treasury may make a determination that project-based or tenant-based rental assistance complies with IRS regulations at 26 CFR 1.42-16(b) and, therefore, will not reduce the building's eligible basis. This proposed rule is necessary in order to begin the process of requesting IRS approval for the combination of IHBG funds with LIHTCs. This proposed rule, when promulgated in final form, will allow for such determination to be made. This proposed rule would not limit the range of eligible activities that an Indian tribe or TDHE may undertake. It merely will clarify one permissible use of IHBG funds. IV. Findings and Certifications Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)reviewed this rule under Executive Order 12866 (entitled “Regulatory Planning and Review”). OMB determined that this rule is a “significant regulatory action,” as defined in section 3(f) of the Order (although not economically significant, as provided in section 3(f)(1) of the Order). Any changes made to the rule subsequent to its submission to OMB are identified in the docket file, which is available for public inspection in the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters building, please schedule an appointment to review the docket file by calling the Regulations Divisions at
(202)708-3055 (this is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at
(800)877-8339. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ) generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule would clarify that IHBG funds may be used for project-based or tenant-based rental assistance that is provided in a manner consistent with assistance provided under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 on behalf of a tenant receiving assistance under NAHASDA. This rule would not impose new requirements on IHBG program participants. Accordingly, the undersigned certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Notwithstanding HUD's determination that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, HUD specifically invites comments regarding less burdensome alternatives to this rule that will meet HUD's objectives as described in this preamble. Environmental Impact A Finding of No Significant Impact with respect to the environment has been made in accordance with HUD regulations at 24 CFR part 50, which implement section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). The Finding of No Significant Impact is available for public inspection between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays in the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters building, please schedule an appointment to review the rule docket file by calling the Regulations Division at
(202)708-3055 (this is not a toll-free number). Executive Order 13132, Federalism Executive Order 13132 (entitled “Federalism”) prohibits, to the extent practicable and permitted by law, an agency from promulgating a regulation that has federalism implications and either imposes substantial direct compliance costs on state and local governments and is not required by statute, or preempts state law, unless the relevant requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order are met. This rule does not have federalism implications and does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on state and local governments or preempt state law within the meaning of the Executive Order. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
(UMRA)establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, and tribal governments, and on the private sector. This rule would not impose any Federal mandate on any State, local, or tribal government, or on the private sector, within the meaning of UMRA. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number applicable to the program affected by this rule is 14.862. List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 1000 Aged, community development block grants, Grant programs—housing and community development, Grant programs—Indians, Indians, Individuals with disabilities, Public housing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. For the reasons described in the preamble, HUD proposes to amend 24 CFR part 1000 to read as follows: PART 1000—NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING ACTIVITIES 1. The authority citation for part 1000 continues to read as follows: Authority: 25 U.S.C. 1401 *et seq.* and 42 U.S.C. 3535(d). 2. Add § 1000.103 to read as follows: § 1000.103 How may IHBG funds be used for tenant-based or project-based rental assistance?
(a)IHBG funds may be used for project-based or tenant-based rental assistance.
(b)IHBG funds may be used for project-based or tenant-based rental assistance that is provided in a manner consistent with section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f).
(c)IHBG funds used for project-based or tenant-based rental assistance must comply with the requirements of NAHASDA and this part. Dated: May 3, 2007. Orlando J. Cabrera, Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing. [FR Doc. E7-11054 Filed 6-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P 72 110 Friday, June 8, 2007 Rules and Regulations Part IV Federal Communications Commission 47 CFR Part 64 Customer Proprietary Network Information; Final Rules FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 64 [CC Docket Nos. 96-115, 96-149; FCC 02-214] Customer Proprietary Network Information AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule; announcement of effective date. SUMMARY: The Commission adopted rules to implement section 222 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, which governs carriers' use and disclosure of customer proprietary network information. The rules in §§ 64.2007, 64.2008, and 64.2009 required Office of Management and Budget approval and the Commission stated previously in its **Federal Register** publication that it would announce the effective date of these rules when approved. This document announces the effective date of these rules. DATES: The revisions to 47 CFR 64.2007, addition of 47 CFR 64.2008, and revision and amendments to 47 CFR 64.2009, published at 67 FR 59205, became effective on February 24, 2003. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Dever,
(202)418-1578, Wireline Competition Bureau. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FCC published a document in the **Federal Register** , 67 FR 59205, September 20, 2002, that sets forth an effective date of October 21, 2002, except for amendments to § 64.2007, addition of § 64.2008, and amendments and revisions to § 64.2009, which contained information collection requirements that had not been approved by the Office of Management and Budget. The document stated that the Commission will publish a document in the **Federal Register** announcing the effective date of these rules. On February 24, 2003, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)approved the information collection requirements contained in 47 CFR 64.2007, 64.2008, and 64.2009 pursuant to OMB Control No. 3060-0715. Accordingly, the information collection requirement contained in these rules became effective on February 24, 2003. The expiration date for the information collection was February 28, 2006. The expiration date was extended to May 31, 2008 in 70 FR 30112. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-10722 Filed 6-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 64 [CC Docket No. 96-115, WC Docket No. 04-36; FCC 07-22] Customer Proprietary Network Information AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Commission adopted rules to implement section 222 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, which governs carriers' use and disclosure of customer proprietary network information. In this document, the Commission responds to the practice of “pretexting” by strengthening its rules to protect the privacy of customer proprietary network information
(CPNI)that is collected and held by providers of communications services. DATES: Revised paragraph
(o)of § 64.2003, new paragraphs (a), (b), (d), (m), (q), and
(r)of § 64.2003, revised paragraph (c)(3) of § 64.2005, revised paragraph
(b)of § 64.2007, revised paragraph
(e)of 64.2009, and new §§ 64.2010 and 64.2011 contain information collection requirements that have not been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The Commission will publish a document in the **Federal Register** announcing the effective date. Written comment by the public on the modified information collection requirements are due August 7, 2007. Paragraphs (c),
(e)through (l), (n), and
(p)of § 64.2003 do not contain information collection requirements that have not been approved by OMB and therefore are effective on June 8, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adam Kirschenbaum,
(202)418-7280, Wireline Competition Bureau. For additional information concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection requirements contained in this document, contact Judith B. Herman at
(202)418-0214, or via e-mail at *Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report and Order (Order) in CC Docket No. 96-115 and WC Docket No. 04-36, FCC 07-22, adopted March 13, 2007, and released April 2, 2007. The complete text of this document is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone
(800)378-3160 or
(202)863-2893, facsimile
(202)863-2898, or via e-mail at *http://www.bcpiweb.com.* It is also available on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.fcc.gov.* In addition to filing comments with the Office of the Secretary, a copy of any comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection requirements contained herein should be submitted to Judith B. Herman, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C804, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to *Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov.* Synopsis of the Report and Order 1. On August 30, 2005, the Electronic Privacy Information Center
(EPIC)filed a petition with the Commission asking the Commission to investigate telecommunications carriers' current security practices and to initiate a rulemaking proceeding to consider establishing more stringent security standards for telecommunications carriers to govern the disclosure of CPNI. In particular, EPIC proposed that the Commission consider requiring the use of consumer-set passwords, creating audit trails, employing encryption, limiting data retention, and improving notice procedures. On February 14, 2006, the Commission released the *EPIC CPNI Notice,* 71 FR 13317 (March 15, 2006), in which it sought comment on
(a)the nature and scope of the problem identified by EPIC, including pretexting, and
(b)what additional steps, if any, the Commission should take to protect further the privacy of CPNI. Specifically, the Commission sought comment on the five EPIC proposals listed above. In addition, the Commission tentatively concluded that it should amend its rules to require carriers annually to file their section 64.2009(e) certifications with the Commission. It also sought comment on whether it should require carriers to obtain a customer's opt-in consent before the carrier shares CPNI with its joint venture partners and independent contractors; whether to impose rules relating to how carriers verify customers' identities; whether to adopt a set of security requirements that could be used as the basis for liability if a carrier failed to implement such requirements, or adopt a set of security requirements that a carrier could implement to exempt itself from liability; whether VoIP service providers or other IP-enabled service providers should be covered by any new rules the Commission adopts in the present rulemaking; and other specific proposals that might increase the protection of CPNI. 2. In this Order, the Commission responds to the practice of “pretexting” by strengthening its rules to protect the privacy of customer proprietary network information
(CPNI)that is collected and held by providers of communications services (hereinafter, communications carriers or carriers). Section 222 of the Communications Act requires telecommunications carriers to take specific steps to ensure that CPNI is adequately protected from unauthorized disclosure. In the Order, the Commission strengthens its privacy rules by adopting additional safeguards to protect customers' CPNI against unauthorized access and disclosure. 3. The Order is directly responsive to the actions of data brokers, or pretexters, to obtain unauthorized access to CPNI. As EPIC pointed out in its petition that led to this rulemaking proceeding, numerous Web sites advertise the sale of personal telephone records for a price. These data brokers have been able to obtain private and personal information, including what calls were made to and/or from a particular telephone number and the duration of such calls. In many cases, the data brokers claim to be able to provide this information within fairly quick time frames, ranging from a few hours to a few days. The additional privacy safeguards the Commission adopts in the Order will sharply limit pretexters' ability to obtain unauthorized access to this type of personal customer information from carriers the Commission regulates. 4. The Commission finds that the release of call detail over the telephone presents an immediate risk to privacy and therefore it prohibits carriers from releasing call detail information based on customer-initiated telephone contact except under three circumstances. First, a carrier can release call detail information if the customer provides the carrier with a pre-established password. Second, a carrier may, at the customer's request, send call detail information to the customer's address of record. Third, a carrier may call the telephone number of record and disclose call detail information. A carrier may disclose non-call detail CPNI to a customer after the carrier authenticates the customer. 5. The Commission does not intend for the prohibition on the release of call detail over the telephone for customer-initiated telephone contact to hinder routine carrier-customer relations regarding service/billing disputes and questions. If a customer is able to provide to the carrier, during a customer-initiated telephone call, all of the call detail information necessary to address a customer service issue ( *i.e.* , the telephone number called, when it was called, and, if applicable, the amount charged for the call), then the carrier is permitted to proceed with its routine customer care procedures. The Commission believes that if a customer is able to provide this information to the carrier, without carrier assistance, then the carrier does not violate the Commission's rules if the carrier takes routine customer service actions related to such information. The Commission additionally clarifies that, under these circumstances, carriers may not disclose to the customer any call detail information about the customer account other than the call detail information that the customer provides without the customer first providing a password. The Commission's rule is intended to prevent pretexter phishing and other pretexter methods for gaining unauthorized access to customer account information. 6. The Commission also requires carriers to password protect online access to CPNI. Although section 222 of the Act imposes a duty on carriers to protect the privacy of CPNI, data brokers and others have been able to access CPNI online without the account holder's knowledge or consent. The Commission agrees with EPIC that the apparent ease with which data brokers have been able to access CPNI online demonstrates the insufficiency of carriers' customer authentication procedures. In particular, the record evidence demonstrates that some carriers permit customers to establish online accounts by providing readily available biographical information. Thus, a data broker may obtain online account access easily without the customer's knowledge. Therefore, the Commission agrees with EPIC and others that use of such identifiers is an insufficient mechanism for preventing data brokers from obtaining unauthorized online access to CPNI. 7. The Commission continues to allow carriers to provide customers with access to CPNI at a carrier's retail location if the customer presents a valid photo ID and the valid photo ID matches the name on the account. The Commission agrees with the Attorneys General and finds that this is a secure authentication practice because it enables the carrier to make a reasonable judgment about the customer's identity. 8. The Commission requires carriers to notify customers immediately of certain account changes, including whenever a password, customer response to a carrier-designed back-up means of authentication, online account, or address of record is created or changed. The Commission agrees with the New Jersey Ratepayer Advocate that this notification is an important tool for customers to monitor their account's security. This notification may be through a carrier-originated voicemail or text message to the telephone number of record, or by mail to the address of record, as to reasonably ensure that the customer receives this notification. The Commission believes this measure is appropriate to protect customers from data brokers that might otherwise manage to circumvent the authentication protections the Commission adopts in this Order, and to take appropriate action in the event of pretexter activity. Further, the Commission finds that this notification requirement will also empower customers to provide carriers with timely information about pretexting activity, which the carriers may not be able to identify easily. 9. The Commission does make an exception to the rules that it adopts for certain business customers. The Commission agrees with commenters who argue that privacy concerns of telecommunications consumers are greatest when using personal telecommunications services. Indeed, the fraudulent practices described by EPIC have mainly targeted individual consumers, and the record indicates that the proprietary information of wireline and wireless business account customers already is subject to stringent safeguards, which are privately negotiated by contract. Therefore, if the carrier's contract with a business customer is serviced by a dedicated account representative as the primary contact, and specifically addresses the carrier's protection of CPNI, the Commission does not extend its carrier authentication rules to cover these business customers, because businesses are typically able to negotiate the appropriate protection of CPNI in their service agreements. However, nothing in the Order exempts carriers serving wireline enterprise and wireless business account customers from section 222 or the remainder of the Commission's CPNI rules. 10. The Commission agrees with EPIC that carriers should be required to notify a customer whenever a security breach results in that customer's CPNI being disclosed to a third party without that customer's authorization. However, the Commission also appreciates law enforcement's concern about delaying customer notification in order to allow law enforcement to investigate crimes. Therefore, the Commission adopts a rule that it believes balances a customer's need to know with law enforcement's ability to undertake an investigation of suspected criminal activity, which itself might advance the goal of consumer protection. 11. The Commission declines to specify the precise content of the notice that must be provided to customers in the event of a security breach of CPNI. The notice requirement the Commission adopts in this proceeding is general, and the Commission recognizes that numerous types of circumstances—including situations other than pretexting—could result in the unauthorized disclosure of a customer's CPNI to a third party. Thus, the Commission leaves carriers the discretion to tailor the language and method of notification to the circumstances. Finally, the Commission expects carriers to cooperate fully in any law enforcement investigation of such unauthorized release of CPNI or attempted unauthorized access to an account consistent with statutory and Commission requirements. 12. The Commission agrees with commenters that techniques for fraud vary and tend to become more sophisticated over time, and that carriers need leeway to engage emerging threats. The Commission therefore clarifies that carriers are free to bolster their security measures through additional measures to meet their section 222 obligations to protect the privacy of CPNI. The Commission also codifies the existing statutory requirement contained in section 222 of the Act that carriers take reasonable measures to discover and protect against activity that is indicative of pretexting. Adoption of the rules in this Order does not relieve carriers of their fundamental duty to remain vigilant in their protection of CPNI, nor does it necessarily insulate them from enforcement action for unauthorized disclosure of CPNI. 13. The Commission modifies its rules to require telecommunications carriers to obtain opt-in consent from a customer before disclosing that customer's CPNI to a carrier's joint venture partner or independent contractor for the purpose of marketing communications-related services to that customer. While the Commission realizes that this is a change in Commission policy, it finds that new circumstances force it to reassess its existing regulations. As the Commission has found previously, the Commission has a substantial interest in protecting customer privacy. Based on this and in light of new privacy concerns, the Commission now finds that an opt-in framework for the sharing of CPNI with joint venture partners and independent contractors for the purposes of marketing communications-related services to a customer both directly advances its interest in protecting customer privacy and is narrowly tailored to achieve its goal of privacy protection. Specifically, an opt-in regime will more effectively limit the circulation of a customer's CPNI by maintaining it in a carrier's possession unless a customer provides informed consent for its release. Moreover, the Commission finds that an opt-in regime will provide necessary informed customer choice concerning these information sharing relationships with other companies. 14. To the extent that carriers voluntarily obtained opt-in approval from their customers for the disclosure of customers' CPNI to a joint venture partner or independent contractor for the purposes of marketing communications-related services to a customer prior to the adoption of this Order, those carriers can continue to use those approvals. 15. The Commission adopts the Commission's tentative conclusion and amends its rules to require carriers to file their annual CPNI certification with the Commission, including an explanation of any actions taken against data brokers and a summary of all customer complaints received in the past year concerning the unauthorized release of CPNI. The Commission finds that this amendment to the Commission's rules is an appropriate measure and will ensure that carriers regularly focus their attention on their duty to safeguard CPNI. Additionally, the Commission finds that this modification to its rules will remind carriers of the Commission's oversight and high priority regarding carrier performance in this area. Further, with this filing, the Commission will be better able to monitor the industry's response to CPNI privacy issues and to take any necessary steps to ensure that carriers are managing customer CPNI securely. 16. The Commission extends the application of the Commission's CPNI rules to providers of interconnected VoIP service. In the *IP-Enabled Services Notice* and the *EPIC CPNI Notice,* the Commission sought comment on whether to extend the CPNI requirements to VoIP service providers. Since the Commission has not decided whether interconnected VoIP services are telecommunications services or information services as those terms are defined in the Act, nor does it do so in this Order, the Commission analyzes the issues addressed in this Order under its Title I ancillary jurisdiction to encompass both types of service. If the Commission later classifies interconnected VoIP service as a telecommunications service, the providers of interconnected VoIP services would be subject to the requirements of section 222 and the Commission's CPNI rules as telecommunications carriers under Title II. 17. The Commission concludes that it has authority under Title I of the Act to impose CPNI requirements on providers of interconnected VoIP service. Ancillary jurisdiction may be employed, in the Commission's discretion, when Title I of the Act gives the Commission subject matter jurisdiction over the service to be regulated and the assertion of jurisdiction is “reasonably ancillary to the effective performance of [its] various responsibilities.” Both predicates for ancillary jurisdiction are satisfied here. First, as the Commission concluded in the *Interim USF Order* and *VoIP 911 Order,* interconnected VoIP services fall within the subject matter jurisdiction granted to it in the Act. Second, the Commission analysis requires it to evaluate whether imposing CPNI obligations is reasonably ancillary to the effective performance of the Commission's various responsibilities. Based on the record in this matter, the Commission finds that sections 222 and 1 of the Act provide the requisite nexus, with additional support from section 706. 18. The Commission takes seriously the protection of customers' private information and commit to remaining vigilant to ensure compliance with applicable privacy laws within its jurisdiction. One way in which the Commission will help protect consumer privacy is through strong enforcement measures. When investigating compliance with the rules and statutory obligations, the Commission will consider whether the carrier has taken reasonable precautions to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of a customer's CPNI. Specifically, the Commission hereby puts carriers on notice that the Commission henceforth will infer from evidence that a pretexter has obtained unauthorized access to a customer's CPNI that the carrier did not sufficiently protect that customer's CPNI. A carrier then must demonstrate that the steps it has taken to protect CPNI from unauthorized disclosure, including the carrier's policies and procedures, are reasonable in light of the threat posed by pretexting and the sensitivity of the customer information at issue. If the Commission finds at the conclusion of its investigation that the carrier indeed has not taken sufficient steps adequately to protect the privacy of CPNI, the Commission may sanction it for this oversight, including through forfeiture. 19. The Commission offers additional guidance regarding the Commission's expectations that will inform its investigations. The Commission fully expects carriers to take every reasonable precaution to protect the confidentiality of proprietary or personal customer information. Of course, the Commission requires carriers to implement the specific minimum requirements set forth in the Commission's rules. The Commission further expects carriers to take additional steps to protect the privacy of CPNI to the extent such additional measures are feasible for a particular carrier. For instance, although the Commission declines to impose audit trail obligations on carriers at this time, the Commission expects carriers through audits or other measures to take reasonable measures to discover and protect against activity that is indicative of pretexting. Similarly, although the Commission does not specifically require carriers to encrypt their customers' CPNI, the Commission expects a carrier to encrypt its CPNI databases if doing so would provide significant additional protection against the unauthorized access to CPNI at a cost that is reasonable given the technology a carrier already has implemented. Final Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis 20. This Order contains modified information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. It will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review under section 3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the general public, and other Federal agencies are invited to comment on the new information collection requirements contained in this proceeding. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the Commission previously sought specific comment on how it might “further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.” 21. In the Order, the Commission assessed the burdens placed on small businesses to notify customers of account changes, to notify law enforcement and customers of unauthorized CPNI disclosure; to obtain opt-in consent prior to sharing CPNI with joint venture partners and independent contractors; to file annually a CPNI certification with the Commission, including an explanation of any actions taken against data brokers and a summary of all consumer complaints received in the past year concerning the unauthorized release of CPNI, and to extend the CPNI rules to providers of interconnected VoIP services, and found that these requirements do not place a significant burden on small businesses. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 22. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA)was incorporated in the EPIC CPNI Notice in CC Docket No. 96-115 and the IP-Enabled Services Notice in WC Docket 04-36. The Commission sought written public comment on the proposals in both notices, including comment on the IRFA. The Commission received comments specifically directed toward the IRFA from three commenters in CC Docket No. 96-115 and from three commenters in WC Docket No. 04-36. These comments are discussed below. This Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(FRFA)conforms to the RFA. A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Rules 23. The Order strengthens the Commission's rules to protect the privacy of CPNI that is collected and held by providers of communications services. Section 222 of the Communications Act requires telecommunications carriers to take specific steps to ensure that CPNI is adequately protected from unauthorized disclosure. The Order adopts additional safeguards to protect customers' CPNI against unauthorized access and disclosure. B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to the IRFA 24. *Comments Received in Response to the EPIC CPNI Notice.* In this section, the Commission responds to comments filed in response to the IRFA. To the extent the Commission received comments raising general small business concerns during the proceeding, those comments are discussed throughout the Order. 25. The Commission disagrees with Alexicon that small carriers are less vulnerable to unauthorized attempts to access CPNI. In fact, Alexicon itself points out that one of its client companies actually experienced an unauthorized access attempt, and thus the Commission finds the steps it takes in the Order are applicable to all carriers. The Commission does, however, agree with commenters that argue the Commission should not adopt many of EPIC's suggested requirements. The Commission also agrees with commenters that argue for flexible rules to allow carriers to determine proper authentication methods for its customers. Therefore, the Commission does not adopt specific authentication methods, or back-up authentication methods for lost or forgotten passwords and instead adopts rules that provide limits on the types of authentication methods that meet section 222's mandate to protect CPNI. Further, the Commission agrees with commenters that small carriers should be provided additional time to implement the requirements that the Commission does adopt in the Order. Thus, the Commission provides small carriers with an additional six month implementation period for the online carrier authentication requirements adopted in the Order. 26. *Comments Received in Response to the IP-Enabled Services Notice.* In this section, the Commission responds to comments filed in response to the IRFA. To the extent the Commission received comments raising general small business concerns during the proceeding, those comments are discussed throughout the Order. 27. The Commission disagrees with the SBA and Francois D. Menard (Menard) that the Commission should postpone acting in this proceeding—thereby postponing extending the application of the CPNI rules to interconnected VoIP service providers—and instead should reevaluate the economic impact and the compliance burdens on small entities and issue a further notice of proposed rulemaking in conjunction with a supplemental IRFA identifying and analyzing the economic impacts on small entities and less burdensome alternatives. The Commission believes the additional steps suggested by SBA and Menard are unnecessary because small entities already have received sufficient notice of the issues addressed in the Order and because the Commission has considered the economic impact on small entities and what ways are feasible to minimize the burdens imposed on those entities, and, to the extent feasible, has implemented those less burdensome alternatives. C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which Rules Will Apply 28. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be affected by the rules adopted herein. The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act. A small business concern is one which:
(1)Is independently owned and operated;
(2)is not dominant in its field of operation; and
(3)satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA). 29. *Small Businesses.* Nationwide, there are a total of approximately 22.4 million small businesses, according to SBA data. 30. *Small Organizations.* Nationwide, there are approximately 1.6 million small organizations. 31. *Small Governmental Jurisdictions.* The term “small governmental jurisdiction” is defined generally as “governments of cities, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.” Census Bureau data for 2002 indicate that there were 87,525 local governmental jurisdictions in the United States. The Commission estimates that, of this total, 84,377 entities were “small governmental jurisdictions.” Thus, the Commission estimates that most governmental jurisdictions are small. 1. Telecommunications Service Entities a. Wireline Carriers and Service Providers 32. The Commission has included small incumbent local exchange carriers in the present RFA analysis. As noted above, a “small business” under the RFA is one that, inter alia, meets the pertinent small business size standard ( *e.g.* , a telephone communications business having 1,500 or fewer employees), and “is not dominant in its field of operation.” The SBA's Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA purposes, small incumbent local exchange carriers are not dominant in their field of operation because any such dominance is not “national” in scope. The Commission has therefore included small incumbent local exchange carriers in this RFA analysis, although the Commission emphasizes that this RFA action has no effect on Commission analyses and determinations in other, non-RFA contexts. 33. *Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (LECs)* . Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for incumbent local exchange services. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission data, 1,303 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of incumbent local exchange services. Of these 1,303 carriers, an estimated 1,020 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 283 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that most providers of incumbent local exchange service are small businesses that may be affected by its action. 34. *Competitive Local Exchange Carriers, Competitive Access Providers (CAPs), “Shared-Tenant Service Providers,” and “Other Local Service Providers.* ” Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for these service providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission data, 769 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of either competitive access provider services or competitive local exchange carrier services. Of these 769 carriers, an estimated 676 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 93 have more than 1,500 employees. In addition, 12 carriers have reported that they are “Shared-Tenant Service Providers,” and all 12 are estimated to have 1,500 or fewer employees. In addition, 39 carriers have reported that they are “Other Local Service Providers.” Of the 39, an estimated 38 have 1,500 or fewer employees and one has more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that most providers of competitive local exchange service, competitive access providers, “Shared-Tenant Service Providers,” and “Other Local Service Providers” are small entities that may be affected by its action. 35. *Local Resellers* . The SBA has developed a small business size standard for the category of Telecommunications Resellers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission data, 143 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of local resale services. Of these, an estimated 141 have 1,500 or fewer employees and two have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of local resellers are small entities that may be affected by its action. 36. *Toll Resellers* . The SBA has developed a small business size standard for the category of Telecommunications Resellers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission data, 770 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of toll resale services. Of these, an estimated 747 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 23 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of toll resellers are small entities that may be affected by its action. 37. *Payphone Service Providers (PSPs)* . Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for payphone services providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission data, 613 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of payphone services. Of these, an estimated 609 have 1,500 or fewer employees and four have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of payphone service providers are small entities that may be affected by its action. 38. *Interexchange Carriers (IXCs)* . Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for providers of interexchange services. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission data, 316 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of interexchange service. Of these, an estimated 292 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 24 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of IXCs are small entities that may be affected by its action. 39. *Operator Service Providers (OSPs)* . Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for operator service providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission data, 23 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of operator services. Of these, an estimated 20 have 1,500 or fewer employees and three have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of OSPs are small entities that may be affected by its action. 40. *Prepaid Calling Card Providers* . Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for prepaid calling card providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category Telecommunications Resellers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission data, 89 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision of prepaid calling cards. Of these, 88 are estimated to have 1,500 or fewer employees and one has more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that all or the majority of prepaid calling card providers are small entities that may be affected by its action. 41. *800 and 800-Like Service Subscribers* . Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for 800 and 800-like service (“toll free”) subscribers. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category Telecommunications Resellers. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. The most reliable source of information regarding the number of these service subscribers appears to be data the Commission collects on the 800, 888, and 877 numbers in use. According to the Commission's data, at the end of January, 1999, the number of 800 numbers assigned was 7,692,955; the number of 888 numbers assigned was 7,706,393; and the number of 877 numbers assigned was 1,946,538. The Commission does not have data specifying the number of these subscribers that are not independently owned and operated or have more than 1,500 employees, and thus is unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of toll free subscribers that would qualify as small businesses under the SBA size standard. Consequently, the Commission estimates that there are 7,692,955 or fewer small entity 800 subscribers; 7,706,393 or fewer small entity 888 subscribers; and 1,946,538 or fewer small entity 877 subscribers. b. International Service Providers 42. The Commission has not developed a small business size standard specifically for providers of international service. The appropriate size standards under SBA rules are for the two broad census categories of “Satellite Telecommunications” and “Other Telecommunications.” Under both categories, such a business is small if it has $12.5 million or less in average annual receipts. 43. The first category of Satellite Telecommunications “comprises establishments primarily engaged in providing point-to-point telecommunications services to other establishments in the telecommunications and broadcasting industries by forwarding and receiving communications signals via a system of satellites or reselling satellite telecommunications.” For this category, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were a total of 371 firms that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 307 firms had annual receipts of under $10 million, and 26 firms had receipts of $10 million to $24,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of Satellite Telecommunications firms are small entities that might be affected by its action. 44. The second category of Other Telecommunications “comprises establishments primarily engaged in
(1)providing specialized telecommunications applications, such as satellite tracking, communications telemetry, and radar station operations; or
(2)providing satellite terminal stations and associated facilities operationally connected with one or more terrestrial communications systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to or receiving telecommunications from satellite systems.” For this category, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were a total of 332 firms that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 259 firms had annual receipts of under $10 million and 15 firms had annual receipts of $10 million to $24,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of Other Telecommunications firms are small entities that might be affected by its action. c. Wireless Telecommunications Service Providers 45. Below, for those services subject to auctions, the Commission notes that, as a general matter, the number of winning bidders that qualify as small businesses at the close of an auction does not necessarily represent the number of small businesses currently in service. Also, the Commission does not generally track subsequent business size unless, in the context of assignments or transfers, unjust enrichment issues are implicated. 46. *Wireless Service Providers* . The SBA has developed a small business size standard for wireless firms within the two broad economic census categories of “Paging” and “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.” Under both SBA categories, a wireless business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the census category of Paging, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 807 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 804 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and three firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this category and associated small business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. For the census category of Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 1,397 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 19 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this second category and size standard, the majority of firms can, again, be considered small. 47. *Cellular Licensees* . The SBA has developed a small business size standard for wireless firms within the broad economic census category “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.” Under this SBA category, a wireless business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the census category of Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 1,397 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 19 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this category and size standard, the great majority of firms can be considered small. Also, according to Commission data, 437 carriers reported that they were engaged in the provision of cellular service, Personal Communications Service (PCS), or Specialized Mobile Radio
(SMR)Telephony services, which are placed together in the data. The Commission has estimated that 260 of these are small, under the SBA small business size standard. 48. *Common Carrier Paging* . The SBA has developed a small business size standard for wireless firms within the broad economic census category, “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.” Under this SBA category, a wireless business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the census category of Paging, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 807 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 804 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and three firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this category and associated small business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. In the Paging *Third Report and Order* , the Commission developed a small business size standard for “small businesses” and “very small businesses” for purposes of determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding credits and installment payments. A “small business” is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $15 million for the preceding three years. Additionally, a “very small business” is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues that are not more than $3 million for the preceding three years. The SBA has approved these small business size standards. An auction of Metropolitan Economic Area licenses commenced on February 24, 2000, and closed on March 2, 2000. Of the 985 licenses auctioned, 440 were sold. Fifty-seven companies claiming small business status won. Also, according to Commission data, 375 carriers reported that they were engaged in the provision of paging and messaging services. Of those, the Commission estimates that 370 are small, under the SBA-approved small business size standard. 49. *Wireless Communications Services* . This service can be used for fixed, mobile, radiolocation, and digital audio broadcasting satellite uses. The Commission established small business size standards for the wireless communications services
(WCS)auction. A “small business” is an entity with average gross revenues of $40 million for each of the three preceding years, and a “very small business” is an entity with average gross revenues of $15 million for each of the three preceding years. The SBA has approved these small business size standards. The Commission auctioned geographic area licenses in the WCS service. In the auction, there were seven winning bidders that qualified as “very small business” entities, and one that qualified as a “small business” entity. 50. *Wireless Telephony* . Wireless telephony includes cellular, personal communications services (PCS), and specialized mobile radio
(SMR)telephony carriers. As noted earlier, the SBA has developed a small business size standard for “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications” services. Under that SBA small business size standard, a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission data, 445 carriers reported that they were engaged in the provision of wireless telephony. The Commission has estimated that 245 of these are small under the SBA small business size standard. 51. *Broadband Personal Communications Service* . The broadband Personal Communications Service
(PCS)spectrum is divided into six frequency blocks designated A through F, and the Commission has held auctions for each block. The Commission defined “small entity” for Blocks C and F as an entity that has average gross revenues of $40 million or less in the three previous calendar years. For Block F, an additional classification for “very small business” was added and is defined as an entity that, together with its affiliates, has average gross revenues of not more than $15 million for the preceding three calendar years.” These standards defining “small entity” in the context of broadband PCS auctions have been approved by the SBA. No small businesses, within the SBA-approved small business size standards bid successfully for licenses in Blocks A and B. There were 90 winning bidders that qualified as small entities in the Block C auctions. A total of 93 small and very small business bidders won approximately 40 percent of the 1,479 licenses for Blocks D, E, and F. On March 23, 1999, the Commission re-auctioned 347 C, D, E, and F Block licenses. There were 48 small business winning bidders. On January 26, 2001, the Commission completed the auction of 422 C and F Broadband PCS licenses in Auction No. 35. Of the 35 winning bidders in this auction, 29 qualified as “small” or “very small” businesses. Subsequent events, concerning Auction 35, including judicial and agency determinations, resulted in a total of 163 C and F Block licenses being available for grant. 52. *Narrowband Personal Communications Services* . To date, two auctions of narrowband personal communications services
(PCS)licenses have been conducted. For purposes of the two auctions that have already been held, “small businesses” were entities with average gross revenues for the prior three calendar years of $40 million or less. Through these auctions, the Commission has awarded a total of 41 licenses, out of which 11 were obtained by small businesses. To ensure meaningful participation of small business entities in future auctions, the Commission has adopted a two-tiered small business size standard in the *Narrowband PCS Second Report and Order* . A “small business” is an entity that, together with affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than $40 million. A “very small business” is an entity that, together with affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than $15 million. The SBA has approved these small business size standards. In the future, the Commission will auction 459 licenses to serve Metropolitan Trading Areas
(MTAs)and 408 response channel licenses. There is also one megahertz of narrowband PCS spectrum that has been held in reserve and that the Commission has not yet decided to release for licensing. The Commission cannot predict accurately the number of licenses that will be awarded to small entities in future auctions. However, four of the 16 winning bidders in the two previous narrowband PCS auctions were small businesses, as that term was defined. The Commission assumes, for purposes of this analysis that a large portion of the remaining narrowband PCS licenses will be awarded to small entities. The Commission also assumes that at least some small businesses will acquire narrowband PCS licenses by means of the Commission's partitioning and disaggregation rules. 53. *220 MHz Radio Service—Phase I Licensees* . The 220 MHz service has both Phase I and Phase II licenses. Phase I licensing was conducted by lotteries in 1992 and 1993. There are approximately 1,515 such non-nationwide licensees and four nationwide licensees currently authorized to operate in the 220 MHz band. The Commission has not developed a small business size standard for small entities specifically applicable to such incumbent 220 MHz Phase I licensees. To estimate the number of such licensees that are small businesses, the Commission applies the small business size standard under the SBA rules applicable to “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications” companies. This category provides that a small business is a wireless company employing no more than 1,500 persons. For the census category Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications, Census Bureau data for 1997 show that there were 977 firms in this category, total, that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 965 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and an additional 12 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this second category and size standard, the majority of firms can, again, be considered small. Assuming this general ratio continues in the context of Phase I 220 MHz licensees, the Commission estimates that nearly all such licensees are small businesses under the SBA's small business size standard. In addition, limited preliminary census data for 2002 indicate that the total number of cellular and other wireless telecommunications carriers increased approximately 321 percent from 1997 to 2002. 54. *220 MHz Radio Service—Phase II Licensees* . The 220 MHz service has both Phase I and Phase II licenses. The Phase II 220 MHz service is a new service, and is subject to spectrum auctions. In the *220 MHz Third Report and Order* , the Commission adopted a small business size standard for “small” and “very small” businesses for purposes of determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding credits and installment payments. This small business size standard indicates that a “small business” is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $15 million for the preceding three years. A “very small business” is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues that do not exceed $3 million for the preceding three years. The SBA has approved these small business size standards. Auctions of Phase II licenses commenced on September 15, 1998, and closed on October 22, 1998. In the first auction, 908 licenses were auctioned in three different-sized geographic areas: three nationwide licenses, 30 Regional Economic Area Group
(EAG)Licenses, and 875 Economic Area
(EA)Licenses. Of the 908 licenses auctioned, 693 were sold. Thirty-nine small businesses won licenses in the first 220 MHz auction. The second auction included 225 licenses: 216 EA licenses and 9 EAG licenses. Fourteen companies claiming small business status won 158 licenses. 55. *800 MHz and 900 MHz Specialized Mobile Radio Licenses* . The Commission awards “small entity” and “very small entity” bidding credits in auctions for Specialized Mobile Radio
(SMR)geographic area licenses in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands to firms that had revenues of no more than $15 million in each of the three previous calendar years, or that had revenues of no more than $3 million in each of the previous calendar years, respectively. These bidding credits apply to SMR providers in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands that either hold geographic area licenses or have obtained extended implementation authorizations. The Commission does not know how many firms provide 800 MHz or 900 MHz geographic area SMR service pursuant to extended implementation authorizations, nor how many of these providers have annual revenues of no more than $15 million. One firm has over $15 million in revenues. The Commission assumes, for purposes here, that all of the remaining existing extended implementation authorizations are held by small entities, as that term is defined by the SBA. The Commission has held auctions for geographic area licenses in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz SMR bands. There were 60 winning bidders that qualified as small or very small entities in the 900 MHz SMR auctions. Of the 1,020 licenses won in the 900 MHz auction, bidders qualifying as small or very small entities won 263 licenses. In the 800 MHz auction, 38 of the 524 licenses won were won by small and very small entities. 56. *700 MHz Guard Band Licensees* . In the *700 MHz Guard Band Order* , the Commission adopted a small business size standard for “small businesses” and “very small businesses” for purposes of determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding credits and installment payments. A “small business” as an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $15 million for the preceding three years. Additionally, a “very small business” is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues that are not more than $3 million for the preceding three years. An auction of 52 Major Economic Area
(MEA)licenses commenced on September 6, 2000, and closed on September 21, 2000. Of the 104 licenses auctioned, 96 licenses were sold to nine bidders. Five of these bidders were small businesses that won a total of 26 licenses. A second auction of 700 MHz Guard Band licenses commenced on February 13, 2001 and closed on February 21, 2001. All eight of the licenses auctioned were sold to three bidders. One of these bidders was a small business that won a total of two licenses. 57. *Rural Radiotelephone Service* . The Commission has not adopted a size standard for small businesses specific to the Rural Radiotelephone Service. A significant subset of the Rural Radiotelephone Service is the Basic Exchange Telephone Radio System (BETRS). The Commission uses the SBA's small business size standard applicable to “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications,” *i.e.* , an entity employing no more than 1,500 persons. There are approximately 1,000 licensees in the Rural Radiotelephone Service, and the Commission estimates that there are 1,000 or fewer small entity licensees in the Rural Radiotelephone Service that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein. 58. *Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service* . The Commission has not adopted a small business size standard specific to the Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service. The Commission will use SBA's small business size standard applicable to “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications,” *i.e.* , an entity employing no more than 1,500 persons. There are approximately 100 licensees in the Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service, and the Commission estimates that almost all of them qualify as small under the SBA small business size standard. 59. *Aviation and Marine Radio Services* . Small businesses in the aviation and marine radio services use a very high frequency
(VHF)marine or aircraft radio and, as appropriate, an emergency position-indicating radio beacon (and/or radar) or an emergency locator transmitter. The Commission has not developed a small business size standard specifically applicable to these small businesses. For purposes of this analysis, the Commission uses the SBA small business size standard for the category “Cellular and Other Telecommunications,” which is 1,500 or fewer employees. Most applicants for recreational licenses are individuals. Approximately 581,000 ship station licensees and 131,000 aircraft station licensees operate domestically and are not subject to the radio carriage requirements of any statute or treaty. For purposes of the Commission's evaluations in this analysis, the Commission estimates that there are up to approximately 712,000 licensees that are small businesses (or individuals) under the SBA standard. In addition, between December 3, 1998 and December 14, 1998, the Commission held an auction of 42 VHF Public Coast licenses in the 157.1875-157.4500 MHz (ship transmit) and 161.775-162.0125 MHz (coast transmit) bands. For purposes of the auction, the Commission defined a “small” business as an entity that, together with controlling interests and affiliates, has average gross revenues for the preceding three years not to exceed $15 million dollars. In addition, a “very small” business is one that, together with controlling interests and affiliates, has average gross revenues for the preceding three years not to exceed $3 million dollars. There are approximately 10,672 licensees in the Marine Coast Service, and the Commission estimates that almost all of them qualify as “small” businesses under the above special small business size standards. 60. *Offshore Radiotelephone Service* . This service operates on several UHF television broadcast channels that are not used for television broadcasting in the coastal areas of states bordering the Gulf of Mexico. There are presently approximately 55 licensees in this service. The Commission is unable to estimate at this time the number of licensees that would qualify as small under the SBA's small business size standard for “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications” services. Under that SBA small business size standard, a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 61. *39 GHz Service* . The Commission created a special small business size standard for 39 GHz licenses—an entity that has average gross revenues of $40 million or less in the three previous calendar years. An additional size standard for “very small business” is: an entity that, together with affiliates, has average gross revenues of not more than $15 million for the preceding three calendar years. The SBA has approved these small business size standards. The auction of the 2,173 39 GHz licenses began on April 12, 2000 and closed on May 8, 2000. The 18 bidders who claimed small business status won 849 licenses. Consequently, the Commission estimates that 18 or fewer 39 GHz licensees are small entities that may be affected by the rules and polices adopted herein. 62. *Multipoint Distribution Service, Multichannel Multipoint Distribution Service, and ITFS* . Multichannel Multipoint Distribution Service
(MMDS)systems, often referred to as “wireless cable,” transmit video programming to subscribers using the microwave frequencies of the Multipoint Distribution Service
(MDS)and Instructional Television Fixed Service (ITFS). In connection with the 1996 MDS auction, the Commission established a small business size standard as an entity that had annual average gross revenues of less than $40 million in the previous three calendar years. The MDS auctions resulted in 67 successful bidders obtaining licensing opportunities for 493 Basic Trading Areas (BTAs). Of the 67 auction winners, 61 met the definition of a small business. MDS also includes licensees of stations authorized prior to the auction. In addition, the SBA has developed a small business size standard for Cable and Other Program Distribution, which includes all such companies generating $12.5 million or less in annual receipts. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were a total of 1,311 firms in this category, total, that had operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,180 firms had annual receipts of under $10 million and an additional 52 firms had receipts of $10 million or more but less than $25 million. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of providers in this service category are small businesses that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein. This SBA small business size standard also appears applicable to ITFS. There are presently 2,032 ITFS licensees. All but 100 of these licenses are held by educational institutions. Educational institutions are included in this analysis as small entities. Thus, the Commission tentatively conclude that at least 1,932 licensees are small businesses. 63. *Local Multipoint Distribution Service* . Local Multipoint Distribution Service
(LMDS)is a fixed broadband point-to-multipoint microwave service that provides for two-way video telecommunications. The auction of the 1,030 Local Multipoint Distribution Service
(LMDS)licenses began on February 18, 1998 and closed on March 25, 1998. The Commission established a small business size standard for LMDS licenses as an entity that has average gross revenues of less than $40 million in the three previous calendar years. An additional small business size standard for “very small business” was added as an entity that, together with its affiliates, has average gross revenues of not more than $15 million for the preceding three calendar years. The SBA has approved these small business size standards in the context of LMDS auctions. There were 93 winning bidders that qualified as small entities in the LMDS auctions. A total of 93 small and very small business bidders won approximately 277 A Block licenses and 387 B Block licenses. On March 27, 1999, the Commission re-auctioned 161 licenses; there were 40 winning bidders. Based on this information, the Commission concludes that the number of small LMDS licenses consists of the 93 winning bidders in the first auction and the 40 winning bidders in the re-auction, for a total of 133 small entity LMDS providers. 64. *218-219 MHz Service.* The first auction of 218-219 MHz spectrum resulted in 170 entities winning licenses for 594 Metropolitan Statistical Area
(MSA)licenses. Of the 594 licenses, 557 were won by entities qualifying as a small business. For that auction, the small business size standard was an entity that, together with its affiliates, has no more than a $6 million net worth and, after federal income taxes (excluding any carry over losses), has no more than $2 million in annual profits each year for the previous two years. In the *218-219 MHz Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order,* the Commission established a small business size standard for a “small business” as an entity that, together with its affiliates and persons or entities that hold interests in such an entity and their affiliates, has average annual gross revenues not to exceed $15 million for the preceding three years. A “very small business” is defined as an entity that, together with its affiliates and persons or entities that hold interests in such an entity and its affiliates, has average annual gross revenues not to exceed $3 million for the preceding three years. The Commission cannot estimate, however, the number of licenses that will be won by entities qualifying as small or very small businesses under its rules in future auctions of 218-219 MHz spectrum. 65. *24 GHz—Incumbent Licensees.* This analysis may affect incumbent licensees who were relocated to the 24 GHz band from the 18 GHz band, and applicants who wish to provide services in the 24 GHz band. The applicable SBA small business size standard is that of “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications” companies. This category provides that such a company is small if it employs no more than 1,500 persons. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 977 firms in this category, total, that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 965 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and an additional 12 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this size standard, the great majority of firms can be considered small. These broader census data notwithstanding, the Commission believes that there are only two licensees in the 24 GHz band that were relocated from the 18 GHz band, Teligent and TRW, Inc. It is the Commisson's understanding that Teligent and its related companies have less than 1,500 employees, though this may change in the future. TRW is not a small entity. Thus, only one incumbent licensee in the 24 GHz band is a small business entity. 66. *24 GHz—Future Licensees.* With respect to new applicants in the 24 GHz band, the small business size standard for “small business” is an entity that, together with controlling interests and affiliates, has average annual gross revenues for the three preceding years not in excess of $15 million. “Very small business” in the 24 GHz band is an entity that, together with controlling interests and affiliates, has average gross revenues not exceeding $3 million for the preceding three years. The SBA has approved these small business size standards. These size standards will apply to the future auction, if held. 2. Cable and OVS Operators 67. *Cable and Other Program Distribution.* This category includes cable systems operators, closed circuit television services, direct broadcast satellite services, multipoint distribution systems, satellite master antenna systems, and subscription television services. The SBA has developed small business size standard for this census category, which includes all such companies generating $12.5 million or less in revenue annually. According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were a total of 1,191 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,087 firms had annual receipts of under $10 million, and 43 firms had receipts of $10 million or more but less than $25 million. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of providers in this service category are small businesses that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein. 68. *Cable System Operators.* The Commission has developed its own small business size standards for cable system operators, for purposes of rate regulation. Under the Commission's rules, a “small cable company” is one serving fewer than 400,000 subscribers nationwide. In addition, a “small system” is a system serving 15,000 or fewer subscribers. 69. *Cable System Operators (Telecom Act Standard).* The Communications Act of 1934, as amended, also contains a size standard for small cable system operators, which is “a cable operator that, directly or through an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1 percent of all subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed $250,000,000.” The Commission has determined that there are approximately 67,700,000 subscribers in the United States. Therefore, an operator serving fewer than 677,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small operator, if its annual revenues, when combined with the total annual revenues of all its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the aggregate. Based on available data, the Commission estimates that the number of cable operators serving 677,000 subscribers or fewer, totals 1,450. The Commission neither requests nor collects information on whether cable system operators are affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues exceed $250 million, and therefore is unable, at this time, to estimate more accurately the number of cable system operators that would qualify as small cable operators under the size standard contained in the Communications Act of 1934. 70. *Open Video Services.* Open Video Service
(OVS)systems provide subscription services. The SBA has created a small business size standard for Cable and Other Program Distribution. This standard provides that a small entity is one with $12.5 million or less in annual receipts. The Commission has certified approximately 25 OVS operators to serve 75 areas, and some of these are currently providing service. Affiliates of Residential Communications Network, Inc.
(RCN)received approval to operate OVS systems in New York City, Boston, Washington, DC, and other areas. RCN has sufficient revenues to assure that they do not qualify as a small business entity. Little financial information is available for the other entities that are authorized to provide OVS and are not yet operational. Given that some entities authorized to provide OVS service have not yet begun to generate revenues, the Commission concludes that up to 24 OVS operators (those remaining) might qualify as small businesses that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein. 3. Internet Service Providers 71. *Internet Service Providers.* The SBA has developed a small business size standard for Internet Service Providers (ISPs). ISPs “provide clients access to the Internet and generally provide related services such as Web hosting, Web page designing, and hardware or software consulting related to Internet connectivity.” Under the SBA size standard, such a business is small if it has average annual receipts of $21 million or less. According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were 2,529 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 2,437 firms had annual receipts of under $10 million, and 47 firms had receipts of $10 million or more but less then $25 million. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of these firms are small entities that may be affected by its action. 4. Other Internet-Related Entities 72. *Web Search Portals.* The Commission's action pertains to interconnected VoIP services, which could be provided by entities that provide other services such as e-mail, online gaming, Web browsing, video conferencing, instant messaging, and other, similar IP-enabled services. The Commission has not adopted a size standard for entities that create or provide these types of services or applications. However, the census bureau has identified firms that “operate Web sites that use a search engine to generate and maintain extensive databases of Internet addresses and content in an easily searchable format. Web search portals often provide additional Internet services, such as e-mail, connections to other Web sites, auctions, news, and other limited content, and serve as a home base for Internet users.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category; that size standard is $6 million or less in average annual receipts. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 195 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 172 had annual receipts of under $5 million, and an additional nine firms had receipts of between $5 million and $9,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of these firms are small entities that may be affected by its action. 73. *Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services.* Entities in this category “primarily * * * provid[e] infrastructure for hosting or data processing services.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category; that size standard is $21 million or less in average annual receipts. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 3,700 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 3,477 had annual receipts of under $10 million, and an additional 108 firms had receipts of between $10 million and $24,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of these firms are small entities that may be affected by its action. 74. *All Other Information Services.* “This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in providing other information services (except new syndicates and libraries and archives).” The Commission's action pertains to interconnected VoIP services, which could be provided by entities that provide other services such as email, online gaming, web browsing, video conferencing, instant messaging, and other, similar IP-enabled services. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category; that size standard is $6 million or less in average annual receipts. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 195 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 172 had annual receipts of under $5 million, and an additional nine firms had receipts of between $5 million and $9,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of these firms are small entities that may be affected by its action. 75. *Internet Publishing and Broadcasting.* “This industry comprises establishments engaged in publishing and/or broadcasting content on the Internet exclusively. These establishments do not provide traditional (non-Internet) versions of the content that they publish or broadcast.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this new
(2002)census category; that size standard is 500 or fewer employees. To assess the prevalence of small entities in this category, the Commission will use 1997 Census Bureau data for a relevant, now-superseded census category, “All Other Information Services.” The SBA small business size standard for that prior category was $6 million or less in average annual receipts. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 195 firms in the prior category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 172 had annual receipts of under $5 million, and an additional nine firms had receipts of between $5 million and $9,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of the firms in this current category are small entities that may be affected by its action. 76. *Software Publishers.* These companies may design, develop or publish software and may provide other support services to software purchasers, such as providing documentation or assisting in installation. The companies may also design software to meet the needs of specific users. The SBA has developed a small business size standard of $21 million or less in average annual receipts for all of the following pertinent categories: Software Publishers, Custom Computer Programming Services, and Other Computer Related Services. For Software Publishers, Census Bureau data for 1997 indicate that there were 8,188 firms in the category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 7,633 had annual receipts under $10 million, and an additional 289 firms had receipts of between $10 million and $24, 999,999. For providers of Custom Computer Programming Services, the Census Bureau data indicate that there were 19,334 firms that operated for the entire year. Of these, 18,786 had annual receipts of under $10 million, and an additional 352 firms had receipts of between $10 million and $24,999,999. For providers of Other Computer Related Services, the Census Bureau data indicate that there were 5,524 firms that operated for the entire year. Of these, 5,484 had annual receipts of under $10 million, and an additional 28 firms had receipts of between $10 million and $24,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of the firms in each of these three categories are small entities that may be affected by its action. 5. Equipment Manufacturers 77. The equipment manufacturers described in this section are merely indirectly affected by the Commission's current action, and therefore are not formally a part of this RFA analysis. The Commission has included them, however, to broaden the record in this proceeding and to alert them to its decisions. 78. *Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturers.* The SBA has established a small business size standard for Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing. Examples of products in this category include “transmitting and receiving antennas, cable television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile communications equipment, and radio and television studio and broadcasting equipment” and may include other devices that transmit and receive IP-enabled services, such as personal digital assistants (PDAs). Under the SBA size standard, firms are considered small if they have 750 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 1,215 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of those, there were 1,150 that had employment of under 500, and an additional 37 that had employment of 500 to 999. The percentage of wireless equipment manufacturers in this category was approximately 61.35%, so the Commission estimates that the number of wireless equipment manufacturers with employment of under 500 was actually closer to 706, with an additional 23 establishments having employment of between 500 and 999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of wireless communications equipment manufacturers are small entities that may be affected by its action. 79. *Telephone Apparatus Manufacturing.* This category “comprises establishments primarily engaged primarily in manufacturing wire telephone and data communications equipment.” Examples of pertinent products are “central office switching equipment, cordless telephones (except cellular), PBX equipment, telephones, telephone answering machines, and data communications equipment, such as bridges, routers, and gateways.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 1,000 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 598 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 574 had employment of under 1,000, and an additional 17 establishments had employment of 1,000 to 2,499. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of these establishments are small entities that may be affected by its action. 80. *Electronic Computer Manufacturing.* This category “comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing and/or assembling electronic computers, such as mainframes, personal computers, workstations, laptops, and computer servers.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 1,000 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 563 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 544 had employment of under 1,000, and an additional 11 establishments had employment of 1,000 to 2,499. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of these establishments are small entities that may be affected by its action. 81. *Computer Terminal Manufacturing.* “Computer terminals are input/output devices that connect with a central computer for processing.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 1,000 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 142 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year, and all of the establishments had employment of under 1,000. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority or all of these establishments are small entities that may be affected by it action. 82. *Other Computer Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing.* Examples of peripheral equipment in this category include keyboards, mouse devices, monitors, and scanners. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 1,000 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 1061 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 1,046 had employment of under 1,000, and an additional six establishments had employment of 1,000 to 2,499. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of these establishments are small entities that may be affected by its action. 83. *Fiber Optic Cable Manufacturing.* These establishments manufacture “insulated fiber-optic cable from purchased fiber-optic strand.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 1,000 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 38 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 37 had employment of under 1,000, and one establishment had employment of 1,000 to 2,499. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of these establishments are small entities that may be affected by its action. 84. *Other Communication and Energy Wire Manufacturing.* These establishments manufacture “insulated wire and cable of nonferrous metals from purchased wire.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 1,000 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 275 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 271 had employment of under 1,000, and four establishments had employment of 1,000 to 2,499. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority or all of these establishments are small entities that may be affected by its action. 85. *Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing.* These establishments manufacture “electronic audio and video equipment for home entertainment, motor vehicle, public address and musical instrument amplifications.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 750 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 554 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 542 had employment of under 500, and nine establishments had employment of 500 to 999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of these establishments are small entities that may be affected by its action. 86. *Electron Tube Manufacturing.* These establishments are “primarily engaged in manufacturing electron tubes and parts (except glass blanks).” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 750 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 158 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 148 had employment of under 500, and three establishments had employment of 500 to 999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of these establishments are small entities that may be affected by its action. 87. *Bare Printed Circuit Board Manufacturing.* These establishments are “primarily engaged in manufacturing bare (i.e., rigid or flexible) printed circuit boards without mounted electronic components.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 500 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 1,389 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 1,369 had employment of under 500, and 16 establishments had employment of 500 to 999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of these establishments are small entities that may be affected by its action. 88. *Semiconductor and Related Device Manufacturing.* These establishments manufacture “computer storage devices that allow the storage and retrieval of data from a phase change, magnetic, optical, or magnetic/optical media.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 500 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 1,082 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 987 had employment of under 500, and 52 establishments had employment of 500 to 999. 89. *Electronic Capacitor Manufacturing.* These establishments manufacture “electronic fixed and variable capacitors and condensers.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 500 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 128 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 121 had employment of under 500, and four establishments had employment of 500 to 999. 90. *Electronic Resistor Manufacturing.* These establishments manufacture “electronic resistors, such as fixed and variable resistors, resistor networks, thermistors, and varistors.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 500 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 118 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 113 had employment of under 500, and 5 establishments had employment of 500 to 999. 91. *Electronic Coil, Transformer, and Other Inductor Manufacturing.* These establishments manufacture “electronic inductors, such as coils and transformers.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 500 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 448 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 446 had employment of under 500, and two establishments had employment of 500 to 999. 92. *Electronic Connector Manufacturing* . These establishments manufacture “electronic connectors, such as coaxial, cylindrical, rack and panel, pin and sleeve, printed circuit and fiber optic.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 500 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 347 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 332 had employment of under 500, and 12 establishments had employment of 500 to 999. 93. *Printed Circuit Assembly (Electronic Assembly) Manufacturing* . These are establishments “primarily engaged in loading components onto printed circuit boards or who manufacture and ship loaded printed circuit boards.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 500 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 714 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 673 had employment of under 500, and 24 establishments had employment of 500 to 999. 94. *Other Electronic Component Manufacturing* . These are establishments “primarily engaged in loading components onto printed circuit boards or who manufacture and ship loaded printed circuit boards.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 500 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 1,835 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 1,814 had employment of under 500, and 18 establishments had employment of 500 to 999. 95. *Computer Storage Device Manufacturing* . These establishments manufacture “computer storage devices that allow the storage and retrieval of data from a phase change, magnetic, optical, or magnetic/optical media.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 1,000 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 209 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 197 had employment of under 500, and eight establishments had employment of 500 to 999. D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Compliance Requirements 96. The Commission is requiring telecommunications carriers and providers of interconnected VoIP service to collect certain information and take other actions to comply with its rules regarding the use of CPNI. For example, carriers must have an officer, as an agent of the carrier, sign and file with the Commission a compliance certificate on an annual basis stating that the officer has personal knowledge that the carrier has established procedures that are adequate to ensure compliance with the CPNI rules. The carrier must also provide a statement accompanying the certificate explaining how its operating procedures ensure that it is or is not in compliance with the CPNI rules. Further, the carrier must include an explanation of any actions taken against data brokers and a summary of all consumer complaints received in the past year concerning the unauthorized release of CPNI. Additionally, carriers must obtain opt-in approval before sharing CPNI with their joint venture partners or independent contractors for the purposes of marketing communications-related services to customers. Also, carriers are required to maintain a record of any discovered breaches, notifications to the United States Secret Service
(USSS)and the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI)regarding those breaches, as well as the USSS and FBI response to those notifications for a period of at least two years. 97. The Commission also imposes other requirements on telecommunications carriers and providers of interconnected VoIP service. Specifically, the Order prohibits carriers from releasing call detail information over the phone during customer-initiated telephone calls except by those methods provided for in the Order. The Order also requires that a carrier not permit customers to gain access to an online account without first properly authenticating the customer and, for subsequent access, without a customer password or response to a back-up authentication method for lost or forgotten passwords, neither of which may be based on a carrier prompt for readily available biographical information, or account information. For the rules pertaining to online carrier authentication, the Commission provides carriers that satisfy the definition of a “small entity” or a “small business concern” under the RFA or SBA an additional six months to implement these rules. 98. The Order also requires that carriers notify customers through a carrier-originated voicemail or text message to the telephone number of record, or by mail or email to the address of record whenever a password, customer response to a back-up means of authentication for lost or forgotten passwords, online account, or address of record is created or changed. Further, the Order requires that carriers notify the USSS and the FBI no later than seven days after a reasonable determination of a CPNI breach. E. Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered 99. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may include (among others) the following four alternatives:
(1)The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities;
(2)the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities;
(3)the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and
(4)an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities. 100. The notices invited comment on a number of issues related to small entities. For example, the Commission sought comment on the effect the various proposals described in the *EPIC CPNI Notice* will have on small entities, and on what effect alternative rules would have on those entities. Additionally, the Commission invited comment on ways in which the Commission can achieve its goal of protecting consumers while at the same time imposing minimal burdens on small telecommunications service providers. With respect to any of the Commission consumer protection regulations already in place, the Commission sought comment on whether it has adopted any provisions for small entities that the Commission should similarly consider in this proceeding? The Commission also invited comment on whether the problems identified by EPIC were better or worse at smaller carriers. The Commission invited comment on whether small carriers should be exempt from password-related security procedures to protect CPNI. The Commission invited comment on the benefits and burdens of recording audit trails for the disclosure of CPNI on small carriers. The Commission invited comment on whether requiring a small carrier to encrypt its stored data would be unduly burdensome. The Commission solicited comment on the cost to a small carrier of notifying a customer upon release of CPNI. The Commission sought comment on whether the Commission should amend its rules to require carriers to file annual certifications concerning CPNI and whether this requirement should extend to only telecommunications carriers that are not small telephone companies as defined by the Small Business Administration, and whether small carriers should be subject to different CPNI-related obligations. 101. The Commission has considered each of the alternatives described above, and in this Order, imposes minimal regulation on small entities to the extent consistent with its goal of ensuring that carriers and providers of interconnected VoIP service protect against the unauthorized release of CPNI. Specifically, the Commission extended the implementation date for the rules pertaining to online authentication by six months so that small businesses will have additional time to come into compliance with the Order's rules. 102. As stated above, the Commission must assess the interests of small businesses in light of the overriding public interest of protecting against the unlawful release of CPNI. The Order discusses that CPNI is made up of very personal data. Therefore, the Commission concluded that it was important for all telecommunications carriers and providers of interconnected VoIP service, including small businesses, to comply with the rules the Commission adopts in this Order six months after the Order's effective date or on receipt of OMB approval, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act, whichever is later. For example, the Commission concluded that carriers and providers of interconnected VoIP service must stop releasing call detail information based on customer-initiated telephone calls except by those methods provided for in the Order. Additionally, the Commission concluded that it was important for all telecommunications carriers and providers of interconnected VoIP service to report breaches of CPNI data to law enforcement. The Commission therefore rejected solutions that would exempt small businesses. The record indicated that exempting small carriers from these regulations would compromise the Commission's goal of protecting all Americans from the unauthorized release of CPNI. 103. *Report to Congress:* The Commission will send a copy of the Order, including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act. In addition, the Commission will send a copy of the Order, including this FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. A copy of the Order and FRFA (or summaries thereof) will also be published in the **Federal Register** . Ordering Clauses 104. Accordingly, *It is ordered* that pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 222, and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i)-(j), 222, 303(r), this Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-115 and WC Docket No. 04-36 is adopted, and that Part 64 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR Part 64, is amended as set forth in Appendix B. The Order shall become effective upon publication in the **Federal Register** subject to OMB approval for new information collection requirements or six months after the Order's effective date, whichever is later. 105. *It Is Further Ordered* that the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64 Customer proprietary network information, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Telecommunications. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. Final Rules For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the FCC amends 47 CFR part 64 as follows: PART 64—MISCELLANEOUS RULES RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS 1. The authority citation for part 64 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 254(k); secs. 403(b)(2)(B),(c), Pub. L. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56. Interpret or apply 47 U.S.C. 201, 218, 222, 225, 226, 228, and 254(k) unless otherwise noted. 2. Revise § 64.2003 to read as follows: § 64.2003 Definitions.
(a)*Account information* . “Account information” is information that is specifically connected to the customer's service relationship with the carrier, including such things as an account number or any component thereof, the telephone number associated with the account, or the bill's amount.
(b)*Address of record* . An “address of record,” whether postal or electronic, is an address that the carrier has associated with the customer's account for at least 30 days.
(c)*Affiliate* . The term “affiliate” has the same meaning given such term in section 3(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 153(1).
(d)*Call detail information* . Any information that pertains to the transmission of specific telephone calls, including, for outbound calls, the number called, and the time, location, or duration of any call and, for inbound calls, the number from which the call was placed, and the time, location, or duration of any call.
(e)*Communications-related services* . The term “communications-related services” means telecommunications services, information services typically provided by telecommunications carriers, and services related to the provision or maintenance of customer premises equipment.
(f)*Customer* . A customer of a telecommunications carrier is a person or entity to which the telecommunications carrier is currently providing service.
(g)*Customer proprietary network information (CPNI)* . The term “customer proprietary network information (CPNI)” has the same meaning given to such term in section 222(h)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 222(h)(1).
(h)*Customer premises equipment (CPE)* . The term “customer premises equipment (CPE)” has the same meaning given to such term in section 3(14) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 153(14).
(i)*Information services typically provided by telecommunications carriers* . The phrase “information services typically provided by telecommunications carriers” means only those information services (as defined in section 3(20) of the Communication Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 153(20)) that are typically provided by telecommunications carriers, such as Internet access or voice mail services. Such phrase “information services typically provided by telecommunications carriers,” as used in this subpart, shall not include retail consumer services provided using Internet Web sites (such as travel reservation services or mortgage lending services), whether or not such services may otherwise be considered to be information services.
(j)*Local exchange carrier (LEC).* The term “local exchange carrier (LEC)” has the same meaning given to such term in section 3(26) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 153(26).
(k)*Opt-in approval.* The term “opt-in approval” refers to a method for obtaining customer consent to use, disclose, or permit access to the customer's CPNI. This approval method requires that the carrier obtain from the customer affirmative, express consent allowing the requested CPNI usage, disclosure, or access after the customer is provided appropriate notification of the carrier's request consistent with the requirements set forth in this subpart.
(l)*Opt-out approval.* The term “opt-out approval” refers to a method for obtaining customer consent to use, disclose, or permit access to the customer's CPNI. Under this approval method, a customer is deemed to have consented to the use, disclosure, or access to the customer's CPNI if the customer has failed to object thereto within the waiting period described in § 64.2008(d)(1) after the customer is provided appropriate notification of the carrier's request for consent consistent with the rules in this subpart.
(m)*Readily available biographical information.* “Readily available biographical information” is information drawn from the customer's life history and includes such things as the customer's social security number, or the last four digits of that number; mother's maiden name; home address; or date of birth.
(n)*Subscriber list information (SLI).* The term “subscriber list information (SLI)” has the same meaning given to such term in section 222(h)(3) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 222(h)(3).
(o)*Telecommunications carrier or carrier.* The terms “telecommunications carrier” or “carrier” shall have the same meaning as set forth in section 3(44) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 153(44). For the purposes of this subpart, the term “telecommunications carrier” or “carrier” shall include an entity that provides interconnected VoIP service, as that term is defined in section 9.3 of these rules.
(p)*Telecommunications service.* The term “telecommunications service” has the same meaning given to such term in section 3(46) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 153(46).
(q)*Telephone number of record.* The telephone number associated with the underlying service, not the telephone number supplied as a customer's “contact information.”
(r)*Valid photo ID.* A “valid photo ID” is a government-issued means of personal identification with a photograph such as a driver's license, passport, or comparable ID that is not expired. 3. Section 64.2005 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(3) to read as follows: § 64.2005 Use of customer proprietary network information without customer approval.
(c)* * *
(3)LECs, CMRS providers, and entities that provide interconnected VoIP service as that term is defined in § 9.3 of this chapter, may use CPNI, without customer approval, to market services formerly known as adjunct-to-basic services, such as, but not limited to, speed dialing, computer-provided directory assistance, call monitoring, call tracing, call blocking, call return, repeat dialing, call tracking, call waiting, caller I.D., call forwarding, and certain centrex features. 4. Section 64.2007 is amended by revising paragraph
(b)to read as follows: § 64.2007 Approval required for use of customer proprietary network information.
(b)*Use of Opt-Out and Opt-In Approval Processes.* A telecommunications carrier may, subject to opt-out approval or opt-in approval, use its customer's individually identifiable CPNI for the purpose of marketing communications-related services to that customer. A telecommunications carrier may, subject to opt-out approval or opt-in approval, disclose its customer's individually identifiable CPNI, for the purpose of marketing communications-related services to that customer, to its agents and its affiliates that provide communications-related services. A telecommunications carrier may also permit such persons or entities to obtain access to such CPNI for such purposes. Except for use and disclosure of CPNI that is permitted without customer approval under section § 64.2005, or that is described in this paragraph, or as otherwise provided in section 222 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, a telecommunications carrier may only use, disclose, or permit access to its customer's individually identifiable CPNI subject to opt-in approval. 5. Section 64.2009 is amended by revising paragraph
(e)to read as follows: § 64.2009 Safeguards required for use of customer proprietary network information.
(e)A telecommunications carrier must have an officer, as an agent of the carrier, sign and file with the Commission a compliance certificate on an annual basis. The officer must state in the certification that he or she has personal knowledge that the company has established operating procedures that are adequate to ensure compliance with the rules in this subpart. The carrier must provide a statement accompanying the certificate explaining how its operating procedures ensure that it is or is not in compliance with the rules in this subpart. In addition, the carrier must include an explanation of any actions taken against data brokers and a summary of all customer complaints received in the past year concerning the unauthorized release of CPNI. This filing must be made annually with the Enforcement Bureau on or before March 1 in EB Docket No. 06-36, for data pertaining to the previous calendar year. 6. Section 64.2010 is added to subpart U to read as follows: § 64.2010 Safeguards on the disclosure of customer proprietary network information.
(a)*Safeguarding CPNI.* Telecommunications carriers must take reasonable measures to discover and protect against attempts to gain unauthorized access to CPNI. Telecommunications carriers must properly authenticate a customer prior to disclosing CPNI based on customer-initiated telephone contact, online account access, or an in-store visit.
(b)*Telephone access to CPNI.* Telecommunications carriers may only disclose call detail information over the telephone, based on customer-initiated telephone contact, if the customer first provides the carrier with a password, as described in paragraph
(e)of this section, that is not prompted by the carrier asking for readily available biographical information, or account information. If the customer does not provide a password, the telecommunications carrier may only disclose call detail information by sending it to the customer's address of record, or by calling the customer at the telephone number of record. If the customer is able to provide call detail information to the telecommunications carrier during a customer-initiated call without the telecommunications carrier's assistance, then the telecommunications carrier is permitted to discuss the call detail information provided by the customer.
(c)*Online access to CPNI.* A telecommunications carrier must authenticate a customer without the use of readily available biographical information, or account information, prior to allowing the customer online access to CPNI related to a telecommunications service account. Once authenticated, the customer may only obtain online access to CPNI related to a telecommunications service account through a password, as described in paragraph
(e)of this section, that is not prompted by the carrier asking for readily available biographical information, or account information.
(d)*In-store access to CPNI.* A telecommunications carrier may disclose CPNI to a customer who, at a carrier's retail location, first presents to the telecommunications carrier or its agent a valid photo ID matching the customer's account information.
(e)*Establishment of a Password and Back-up Authentication Methods for Lost or Forgotten Passwords.* To establish a password, a telecommunications carrier must authenticate the customer without the use of readily available biographical information, or account information. Telecommunications carriers may create a back-up customer authentication method in the event of a lost or forgotten password, but such back-up customer authentication method may not prompt the customer for readily available biographical information, or account information. If a customer cannot provide the correct password or the correct response for the back-up customer authentication method, the customer must establish a new password as described in this paragraph.
(f)*Notification of account changes.* Telecommunications carriers must notify customers immediately whenever a password, customer response to a back-up means of authentication for lost or forgotten passwords, online account, or address of record is created or changed. This notification is not required when the customer initiates service, including the selection of a password at service initiation. This notification may be through a carrier-originated voicemail or text message to the telephone number of record, or by mail to the address of record, and must not reveal the changed information or be sent to the new account information.
(g)*Business customer exemption.* Telecommunications carriers may bind themselves contractually to authentication regimes other than those described in this section for services they provide to their business customers that have both a dedicated account representative and a contract that specifically addresses the carriers' protection of CPNI. 7. Section 64.2011 is added to subpart U to read as follows: § 64.2011 Notification of customer proprietary network information security breaches.
(a)A telecommunications carrier shall notify law enforcement of a breach of its customers' CPNI as provided in this section. The carrier shall not notify its customers or disclose the breach publicly, whether voluntarily or under state or local law or these rules, until it has completed the process of notifying law enforcement pursuant to paragraph
(b)of this section.
(b)As soon as practicable, and in no event later than seven
(7)business days, after reasonable determination of the breach, the telecommunications carrier shall electronically notify the United States Secret Service
(USSS)and the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI)through a central reporting facility. The Commission will maintain a link to the reporting facility at *http://www.fcc.gov/eb/cpni.*
(1)Notwithstanding any state law to the contrary, the carrier shall not notify customers or disclose the breach to the public until 7 full business days have passed after notification to the USSS and the FBI except as provided in paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) of this section.
(2)If the carrier believes that there is an extraordinarily urgent need to notify any class of affected customers sooner than otherwise allowed under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, in order to avoid immediate and irreparable harm, it shall so indicate in its notification and may proceed to immediately notify its affected customers only after consultation with the relevant investigating agency. The carrier shall cooperate with the relevant investigating agency's request to minimize any adverse effects of such customer notification.
(3)If the relevant investigating agency determines that public disclosure or notice to customers would impede or compromise an ongoing or potential criminal investigation or national security, such agency may direct the carrier not to so disclose or notify for an initial period of up to 30 days. Such period may be extended by the agency as reasonably necessary in the judgment of the agency. If such direction is given, the agency shall notify the carrier when it appears that public disclosure or notice to affected customers will no longer impede or compromise a criminal investigation or national security. The agency shall provide in writing its initial direction to the carrier, any subsequent extension, and any notification that notice will no longer impede or compromise a criminal investigation or national security and such writings shall be contemporaneously logged on the same reporting facility that contains records of notifications filed by carriers.
(c)*Customer notification.* After a telecommunications carrier has completed the process of notifying law enforcement pursuant to paragraph
(b)of this section, it shall notify its customers of a breach of those customers' CPNI.
(d)*Recordkeeping.* All carriers shall maintain a record, electronically or in some other manner, of any breaches discovered, notifications made to the USSS and the FBI pursuant to paragraph
(b)of this section, and notifications made to customers. The record must include, if available, dates of discovery and notification, a detailed description of the CPNI that was the subject of the breach, and the circumstances of the breach. Carriers shall retain the record for a minimum of 2 years.
(e)*Definitions.* As used in this section, a “breach” has occurred when a person, without authorization or exceeding authorization, has intentionally gained access to, used, or disclosed CPNI.
(f)This section does not supersede any statute, regulation, order, or interpretation in any State, except to the extent that such statute, regulation, order, or interpretation is inconsistent with the provisions of this section, and then only to the extent of the inconsistency. [FR Doc. E7-10732 Filed 6-7-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P 72 110 Friday, June 8, 2007 Presidential Documents Part V The President Proclamation 8155—Flag Day and National Flag Week, 2007 Title 3— The President Proclamation 8155 of June 5, 2007 Flag Day and National Flag Week, 2007 By the President of the United States of America A Proclamation The American Flag represents freedom and has been an enduring symbol of our Nation's ideals since the earliest days of our Nation. Wherever it flies, we are reminded of America's unity and in the great cause of liberty and justice for all. Two hundred and thirty years ago, the Second Continental Congress officially made the Stars and Stripes the symbol of America. The Founders declared that the 13 stars gracing the original flag represented “a new constellation,” just as America embodied new hope and new light for mankind. Today, our flag continues to convey the bold spirit of a proud and determined Nation. Americans have long flown our flag as a sign of patriotism and gratitude for the blessings of liberty. We also pledge allegiance to the flag as an expression of loyalty to our country and to the belief in the American creed of freedom and justice. By displaying and showing respect for the flag, we honor the ideals upon which our democracy rests and show appreciation for the freedoms we enjoy today. Flying the flag can also be an expression of thanks for the men and women who have served and sacrificed in defense of our freedoms—from the early patriots of the Continental Army to the courageous Americans in uniform who are defending those freedoms around the world today. During Flag Day and National Flag Week, we honor Old Glory and reflect on the foundations of our freedom. As citizens of this great Nation, we are proud of our heritage, grateful for our liberty, and confident in our future. To commemorate the adoption of our flag, the Congress, by joint resolution approved August 3, 1949, as amended (63 Stat. 492), designated June 14 of each year as “Flag Day” and requested that the President issue an annual proclamation calling for its observance and for the display of the flag of the United States on all Federal Government buildings. The Congress also requested, by joint resolution approved June 9, 1966, as amended (80 Stat. 194), that the President issue annually a proclamation designating the week in which June 14 occurs as “National Flag Week” and calling upon all citizens of the United States to display the flag during that week. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim June 14, 2007, as Flag Day and the week beginning June 10, 2007, as National Flag Week. I direct the appropriate officials to display the flag on all Federal Government buildings during that week, and I urge all Americans to observe Flag Day and National Flag Week by flying the Stars and Stripes from their homes and other suitable places. I also call upon the people of the United States to observe with pride and all due ceremony those days from Flag Day through Independence Day, also set aside by the Congress (89 Stat. 211), as a time to honor America, to celebrate our heritage in public gatherings and activities, and to publicly recite the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fifth day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand seven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-first. GWBOLD.EPS [FR Doc. 07-2892 Filed 6-7-07; 10:12 am]
Connectionstraces to 45
Traces to 45 documents
U.S. Code
22 references not yet in our index
  • 10 CFR 820
  • 10 CFR 835
  • Pub. L. 106-65
  • Pub. L. 106-398
  • 13 CFR 121
  • 10 CFR 1021
  • Pub. L. 105-277
  • Pub. L. 98-525
  • 24 CFR 1000
  • 24 CFR 982
  • 24 CFR 983
  • 24 CFR 50
  • 2 USC 1531-1538
  • 47 CFR 64
  • 47 CFR 64.2007
  • 47 CFR 64.2008
  • 47 CFR 64.2009
  • Pub. L. 104-13
  • Pub. L. 107-198
  • Pub. L. 104-104
  • 80 Stat. 194
  • 89 Stat. 211
Citation graph
cites case law
Presidential Documents
Final rule
Fed. Reg.Notices
Fed. Reg.Notices
Fed. Reg.Proposed Rules
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 2401
C.F.R.§ 820.2
U.S.C.§ 7158
U.S.C.§ 2410
U.S.C.§ 553
Cite10 CFR 820
Cite10 CFR 835
Pub. L.Pub. L. 106-65
Cites 67 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.