Original Notice.

     Preproposal statement of inquiry was filed as WSR 03-10-016.

     Title of Rule: WAC 246-247-075, 246-247-110, 246-247-120, and 246-247-130, Radiation protection -- Air emissions.

     Purpose: The purpose of this rule is to implement an independent statewide program to monitor radioactive air emissions from sources within the state.

     Statutory Authority for Adoption: RCW 70.98.050.

     Statute Being Implemented: RCW 70.98.050.

     Summary: This proposed rule updates references to the national standards for sampling and monitoring releases of airborne radioactive substances from nuclear facilities consistent with EPA rules adopted in October 2002. This proposal also updates references to guidance documents regarding quality assurance plans for consistency with EPA practices. The EPA rule and guidance documents apply only to federal facilities. The proposed rule expands applicability of the rules to include nonfederal facilities.

     Reasons Supporting Proposal: This rule change is necessary for consistency between federal and state regulations and as a primacy condition between the state Department of Ecology and the EPA.

     Name of Agency Personnel Responsible for Drafting, Implementation and Enforcement: Roy Evans, Tumwater, (360) 236-3265.

     Name of Proponent: Washington State Department of Health, governmental.

     Rule is necessary because of federal law, 40 C.F.R. Part 61.

     Explanation of Rule, its Purpose, and Anticipated Effects: The intent of the underlying statute is to protect public health by implementing an independent statewide program to monitor ionizing radiation emissions to the air from radiation sources within the state. The proposed rule meets this intent by adopting the most current standards and guidance and applying them to both federal and nonfederal facilities within the state.

     Proposal Changes the Following Existing Rules: The proposed change updates the existing reference to the American National Standard Institute/Health Physics Society national standards for sampling and monitoring releases of airborne radioactive substances from the stacks and ducts of nuclear facilities (ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999) as well as references to EPA guidance pertaining to quality assurance program and project plans.

     No small business economic impact statement has been prepared under chapter 19.85 RCW. A small business economic impact statement has not been prepared because there are no small businesses within the regulated industry required to comply with the proposed rule and thus there is no disproportionate impact on small businesses.

     RCW 34.05.328 applies to this rule adoption. RCW 34.05.328 applies to this rule adoption because the proposal amends potential conditions of licensure for certain facilities regulated by the Department of Health.

     Hearing Location: Department of Health, Point Plaza East, Room 153, 310 S.E. Israel Road, Tumwater, WA 98504, on August 29, 2003, at 9:00 a.m.

     Assistance for Persons with Disabilities: Contact Joy Redman by August 22, 2003, TDD (800) 833-6388.

     Submit Written Comments to: Roy Evans, Radiation Protection, P.O. Box 47827, Olympia, WA 98504-7827, fax (360) 236-2256, by August 29, 2003.

     Date of Intended Adoption: September 12, 2003.

July 19, 2003

M. C. Selecky

Secretary

OTS-6166.1

AMENDATORY SECTION(Amending WSR 94-07-010, filed 3/4/94, effective 4/4/94)

WAC 246-247-075   Monitoring, testing and quality assurance.   (1) All radioactive air emissions monitoring, testing, and quality assurance requirements of 40 CFR 61, Subparts H and I published in the Federal Register on December 15, 1989, are adopted by reference, as applicable as specified by the referenced subparts.

     (2) Equipment and procedures used for the continuous monitoring of radioactive air emissions shall conform, as applicable, to the guidance contained in ANSI N13.1, ANSI N42.18, ANSI N323, ANSI N317, reference methods 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 4, 5, and 17 of 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A, 40 CFR Part 52, Appendix E, and any other methods approved by the department.

     (3) The operator of an emission unit with a potential-to-emit of less than 0.1 mrem/yr TEDE to the MEI may estimate those radionuclide emissions, in lieu of monitoring, in accordance with 40 CFR 61 Appendix D, or other procedure approved by the department. The department may require periodic confirmatory measurements (e.g., grab samples) during routine operations to verify the low emissions. Methods to implement periodic confirmatory monitoring shall be approved by the department.

     (4) The department may allow a facility to use alternative monitoring procedures or methods if continuous monitoring is not a feasible or reasonable requirement.

     (5) The following types of facilities shall determine radionuclide emissions in accordance with either a methodology referenced in subsections (1) through (4) of this section or the respective document referenced below:

     (a) Nuclear power reactors licensed by the NRC: Offsite Dose Calculation Manual;

     (b) Fuel fabrication plants licensed by the NRC: NRC's Regulatory Guide 4.16, dated December 1985;

     (c) Uranium mills that are processing material: NRC's Regulatory Guide 4.14, dated April 1980.

     (6) Licensed facilities shall conduct and document a quality assurance program. Except for those types of facilities specified in subsection (5) of this section, the quality assurance program shall be compatible with applicable national standards such as ANSI/ASME NQA-1-1988, ANSI/ASME NQA-2-1986, ((QAMS-004)) QA/R-2, and ((QAMS-005)) QA/R-5.

     (7) Those types of facilities specified in subsection (5) of this section shall conduct and document a quality assurance program compatible with either the applicable national standards referenced in subsection (6) of this section or the NRC's Regulatory Guide 4.15, dated February 1979.

     (8) Facilities shall monitor nonpoint and fugitive emissions of radioactive material.

     (9) The department may conduct an environmental surveillance program to ensure that radiation doses to the public from emission units are in compliance with applicable standards. The department may require the operator of any emission unit to conduct stack sampling, ambient air monitoring, or other testing as necessary to demonstrate compliance with the standards in WAC 246-247-040.

     (10) The department may require the owner or operator of an emission unit to make provision, at existing emission unit sampling stations, for the department to take split or collocated samples of the emissions.

     (11) The planning for any proposed new construction or significant modification of the emission unit must address accidental releases with a probability of occurrence during the expected life of the emission unit of greater than one percent.

     (12) All facilities must be able to demonstrate that appropriate supervisors and workers are adequately trained in the use and maintenance of emission control and monitoring systems, and in the performance of associated test and emergency response procedures.

     (13) All facilities must be able to demonstrate the reliability and accuracy of the radioactive air emissions monitoring data.

[Statutory Authority: Chapters 70.98 and 70.94 RCW and chapter 173-480 WAC. 94-07-010, § 246-247-075, filed 3/4/94, effective 4/4/94.]

OTS-5494.1

AMENDATORY SECTION(Amending WSR 94-07-010, filed 3/4/94, effective 4/4/94)

WAC 246-247-110   Appendix A -- Application information requirements.   (1) Name and address of the facility, and location (latitude and longitude) of the emission unit(s).

     (2) Name, title, address, and phone number of the responsible manager.

     (3) Identify the type of proposed action for which this application is submitted:

     (a) Construction of new emission unit(s);

     (b) Modification of existing emission unit(s); identify whether this is a significant modification;

     (c) Modification of existing unit(s), unregistered.

     (4) If this project is subject to the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) contained in chapter 197-11 WAC, provide the name of the lead agency, lead agency contact person, and their phone number.

     (5) Describe the chemical and physical processes upstream of the emission unit(s).

     (6) Describe the existing and proposed (as applicable) abatement technology. Describe the basis for the use of the proposed system. Include expected efficiency of each control device, and the annual average volumetric flow rate(s) in meters³/sec for the emission unit(s).

     (7) Provide conceptual drawings showing all applicable control technology components from the point of entry of radionuclides into the vapor space to release to the environment.

     (8) Identify each radionuclide that could contribute greater than ten percent of the potential-to-emit TEDE to the MEI, or greater than 0.1 mrem/yr potential-to-emit TEDE to the MEI.

     (9) Describe the effluent monitoring system for the proposed control system. Describe each piece of monitoring equipment and its monitoring capability, including detection limits, for each radionuclide that could contribute greater than ten percent of the potential-to-emit TEDE to the MEI, or greater than 0.1 mrem/yr potential-to-emit TEDE to the MEI, or greater than twenty-five percent of the TEDE to the MEI, after controls. Describe the method for monitoring or calculating those radionuclide emissions. Describe the method with detail sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the applicable requirements.

     (10) Indicate the annual possession quantity for each radionuclide.

     (11) Indicate the physical form of each radionuclide in inventory: Solid, particulate solids, liquid, or gas.

     (12) Indicate the release form of each radionuclide in inventory: Particulate solids, vapor, or gas. Give the chemical form and ICRP 30 solubility class, if known.

     (13) Release rates.

     (a) New emission unit(s): Give predicted release rates without any emissions control equipment (the potential-to-emit) and with the proposed control equipment using the efficiencies described in subsection (6) of this section.

     (b) Modified emission unit(s): Give predicted release rates without any emissions control equipment (the potential-to-emit) and with the existing and proposed control equipment using the efficiencies described in subsection (6) of this section. Provide the latest year's emissions data or emissions estimates.

     In all cases, indicate whether the emission unit is operating in a batch or continuous mode.

     (14) Identify the MEI by distance and direction from the emission unit(s). The MEI is determined by considering distance, windrose data, presence of vegetable gardens, and meat or milk producing animals at unrestricted areas surrounding the emission unit.

     (15) Calculate the TEDE to the MEI using an approved procedure (see WAC 246-247-085). For each radionuclide identified in subsection (8) of this section, determine the TEDE to the MEI for existing and proposed emission controls, and without any emission controls (the potential-to-emit) using the release rates from subsection (13) of this section. Provide all input data used in the calculations.

     (16) Provide cost factors for construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed control technology components and system, if a BARCT or ALARACT demonstration is not submitted with the NOC.

     (17) Provide an estimate of the lifetime for the facility process with the emission rates provided in this application.

     (18) Indicate which of the following control technology standards have been considered and will be complied with in the design and operation of the emission unit(s) described in this application:

     ASME/ANSI AG-1, Code on Nuclear Air and Gas Treatment (where there are conflicts in standards with the other listed references, this standard shall take precedence)

     ASME/ANSI N509, Nuclear Power Plant Air-Cleaning Units and Components

     ASME/ANSI N510, Testing of Nuclear Air Treatment Systems

     ANSI/ASME NQA-1, Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Facilities

     40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Methods 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 4, 5, and 17

     ((ANSI N13.1, Guide to Sampling Airborne Radioactive Materials in Nuclear Facilities)) ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999, Sampling and Monitoring Releases of Airborne Radioactive Substances From the Stacks and Ducts of Nuclear Facilities

     For each standard not so indicated, give reason(s) to support adequacy of the design and operation of the emission unit(s) as proposed.

[Statutory Authority: Chapters 70.98 and 70.94 RCW and chapter 173-480 WAC. 94-07-010, § 246-247-110, filed 3/4/94, effective 4/4/94.]

     Scope. The BARCT demonstration includes the abatement technology and indication devices that demonstrate the effectiveness of the abatement technology from entry of radionuclides into the ventilated vapor space to release to the environment. The applicant shall evaluate all available control technologies that can reduce the level of radionuclide emissions.

     Technology Standards. The BARCT demonstration and the emission unit design and construction must meet, as applicable, the technology standards shown below if the unit's potential-to-emit exceeds 0.1 mrem/yr TEDE to the MEI. If the potential-to-emit is below this value, the standards must be met only to the extent justified by a cost/benefit evaluation.

     ASME/ANSI AG-1, Code on Nuclear Air and Gas Treatment (where there are conflicts in standards with the other listed references, this standard shall take precedence)

     ASME/ANSI N509, Nuclear Power Plant Air-Cleaning Units and Components

     ASME/ANSI N510, Testing of Nuclear Air Treatment Systems

     ANSI/ASME NQA-1, Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Facilities

     40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Methods 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 4, 5, and 17

     ((ANSI N13.1, Guide to Sampling Airborne Radioactive Materials in Nuclear Facilities)) ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999, Sampling and Monitoring Releases of Airborne Radioactive Substances From the Stacks and Ducts of Nuclear Facilities

     The following standards and references are recommended as guidance only:

     ANSI/ASME NQA-2, Quality Assurance Requirements for Nuclear Facilities

     ANSI N42.18, Specification and Performance of On-Site Instrumentation for Continuously Monitoring Radioactivity in Effluents

     ERDA 76-21, Nuclear Air Cleaning Handbook

     ACGIH 1988, Industrial Ventilation, A Manual of Recommended Practice, 20th ed., American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists

     BARCT Demonstration Procedure.

     Step 1. Define facility process variables. Describe the physical and chemical process. Include the potential radionuclide release rates (by isotope, in units of curies/year), process variables (such as flow rate, temperature, humidity, chemical composition), and other technical considerations. Base the radionuclide release rate on the potential-to-emit.

     Radionuclides selected for consideration in the BARCT demonstration shall include those which contribute more than ten percent of the potential TEDE to the MEI or more than 0.1 mrem/yr, and any others which the department determines are necessary.

     Step 2. Gather information on all available control technologies. Search for all available technologies that can reduce the emissions levels for the radionuclides selected in Step 1. Sources of information shall include previous BARCT demonstrations, regulatory authorities, industry or regulatory agency data bases, literature searches, information from technology vendors, research and development reports, and any other means necessary to identify all available technologies. "Available technology" includes any technology that is commercially available. Recently completed searches may be used with department approval.

     Step 3. Determine technical feasibility. Determine technical feasibility by evaluating vendor specifications for available control technologies identified in Step 2 with respect to the process variables identified in Step 1. Evaluate combinations of abatement technology and control devices by component, and the system as a whole.

     If a control technology has poor safety, reliability, or control effectiveness as achieved in practice under the proposed process conditions, or the technology is not applicable to the emission unit under consideration, the technology may be eliminated with supporting documentation of the technical infeasibility.

     Step 4. List all feasible control technologies in order of effectiveness. Evaluate feasible control technologies for efficiency (effectiveness) in reducing the TEDE to the MEI. List them in order, with the most effective first. If the most effective feasible technology is proposed as BARCT, the demonstration is complete at this step.

     Step 5. Evaluate the environmental, energy, and economic impacts. Evaluate each control technology in succession, beginning with the most effective. Present an objective evaluation considering both beneficial and adverse impacts. Quantify the data where possible. Impact cost and effectiveness evaluations are incremental and include only that portion of the facility which comes under the authority of this chapter. Evaluate at least the following impacts:

     Environmental impact - Determine the incremental environmental impact, both beneficial and adverse. Evaluate the beneficial impact of reduction in the TEDE to the surrounding population or, at a minimum, to the MEI due to the abatement of radioactive air emissions. Consider the adverse impacts from waste generation (radioactive and nonradioactive, air and nonair), disposal and stabilization, construction of control equipment, and the health and safety to both radiation workers and the general public.

     Energy impact - Determine the incremental energy impact. Include the impact of any resulting need for new services such as energy distribution systems.

     Economic impact - Determine the incremental economic impact. Determine capital and expense costs including design, development, procurement, construction, operation, maintenance, taxes, waste disposal, and any other applicable financial components. Base all costs on the expected lifetime of the emission unit and reduce to an annualized cost for evaluation and comparison.

     The adverse economic impact compared to the beneficial impact, including reduction in TEDE to the surrounding population or the MEI, is a measure of the cost versus benefit for the control technology evaluated.

     The most effective technology may be eliminated from consideration if the applicant can demonstrate to the department's satisfaction that the technology has unacceptable impacts. State clearly the basis for this conclusion and proceed to the next most effective control technology. If the next most effective technology is proposed as BARCT, the demonstration is complete; otherwise, evaluate the control technology for impacts in accordance with this step.

     If the control technology cannot be eliminated on the basis of its impacts, it is proposed as BARCT.

     Reporting. Prepare a BARCT compliance demonstration report for department review. Provide sufficient information such that the department can validate essential results. If no control technology is feasible, and/or emissions are unacceptable, the department reserves the right to prohibit the construction and operation of the emission unit(s).

[Statutory Authority: Chapters 70.98 and 70.94 RCW and chapter 173-480 WAC. 94-07-010, § 246-247-120, filed 3/4/94, effective 4/4/94.]

     Scope. The ALARACT demonstration includes the abatement technology and indication devices, from entry of radionuclides into the ventilated vapor space to release to the environment. The facility shall evaluate the existing control system in relation to applicable technology standards, and other control technologies that have been successfully operated for similar applications.

     Technology Standards. The ALARACT demonstration and the emission unit design and construction must meet, as applicable, the technology standards shown below if the unit's potential-to-emit exceeds 0.1 mrem/yr TEDE to the MEI. If the potential-to-emit is below this value, the standards must be met only to the extent justified by a cost/benefit evaluation.

     ASME/ANSI AG-1, Code on Nuclear Air and Gas Treatment (where there are conflicts in standards with the other listed references, this standard shall take precedence)

     ASME/ANSI N509, Nuclear Power Plant Air-Cleaning Units and Components

     ASME/ANSI N510, Testing of Nuclear Air Treatment Systems

     ANSI/ASME NQA-1, Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Facilities

     40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Methods 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 4, 5, and 17

     ((ANSI N13.1, Guide to Sampling Airborne Radioactive Materials in Nuclear Facilities)) ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999, Sampling and Monitoring Releases of Airborne Radioactive Substances From the Stacks and Ducts of Nuclear Facilities

     The following standards and references are recommended as guidance only:

     ANSI/ASME NQA-2, Quality Assurance Requirements for Nuclear Facilities

     ANSI N42.18, Specification and Performance of On-Site Instrumentation for Continuously Monitoring Radioactivity in Effluents

     ERDA 76-21, Nuclear Air Cleaning Handbook

     ACGIH 1988, Industrial Ventilation, A Manual of Recommended Practice, 20th ed., American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists

     ALARA References. "Health Physics Manual of Good Practice for Reducing Radiation Exposure to Levels that are As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA)", PNL-6577, June, 1988; prepared for the USDOE by Pacific Northwest Laboratories (Battelle Memorial Institute).

     "A Guide to Reducing Radiation Exposure to As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA)", DOE/EV/1830-T5, April, 1980, R.L. Kathren and J.M. Selby; prepared for the USDOE by Pacific Northwest Laboratories (Battelle Memorial Institute).

     "A Practical Method of Performing Cost-Benefit Analysis of Occupational and Environmental Protective Measures", WHC-SA-0484-FP, March, 1989, G.F. Boothe and D.E. Webb; prepared for the USDOE by Westinghouse Hanford Company.

[Statutory Authority: Chapters 70.98 and 70.94 RCW and chapter 173-480 WAC. 94-07-010, § 246-247-130, filed 3/4/94, effective 4/4/94.]

© Washington State Code Reviser's Office