The current Part 380 contributes to meeting the legislative goals of conserving, improving, and protecting the State's natural resources and environment and preventing, abating and controlling water, land, and air pollution. This is done through several provisions in the rule. Part 380 sets limits on the radiation dose to members of the public due to releases of radioactive material to the environment. It requires parties to obtain permits for most releases of radioactive material made directly to the environment. Radiation exposures in uncontrolled areas in the environment are required to be kept as low as reasonably achievable. The regulations also restrict the disposal of radioactive material to only those methods approved in the regulations or by DEC in a permit.

The proposed amendments would not change the general requirements for disposal of radioactive material or obtaining permits, or the requirement that exposures be kept as low as reasonably achievable. New provisions that would contribute to meeting the legislative goals include applying a constraint on emissions to the air, which is lower than the current limit.

The proposed amendments to Part 380 would update several provisions that are required for compatibility with federal regulations, simplify and update language, and add several needed provisions that have been absent from the regulations. The following outline highlights the proposed changes.

In subpart 380-1, several changes to the general provisions will be made for the purpose of improving clarity and to fill regulatory gaps. Reference to Article 37 of the ECL has been added, as it had been previously inadvertently omitted. Applicability has been expanded to include the use of licensed radioactive material in the environment (e.g., in environmental studies). Because the use of radioactive material in the environment is not currently specifically identified in regulation as being subject to Part 380, DEC cannot issue Radiation Control Permits for such uses until the proposed amendment is adopted. This subpart has also been expanded to clarify that certain types of radioactive materials are not subject to Part 380, such as intact smoke detectors, household waste containing excreted residues of radiopharmaceuticals, or naturally occurring radioactive material in natural isotopic abundance. This clarification should help avoid confusion about the disposal of radioactive materials that are not subject to regulatory control. In addition, a paragraph has been added to clarify that sites containing buried radioactive waste are subject to Part 380.

In subpart 380-2, several additions and changes in definitions will be made to maintain compatibility with federal regulations, improve clarity, and incorporate commonly used terms of art. The definition changes are highlighted below.

“Disposal” has been added, as it is not currently defined in Part 380. “Release” has been added, as it replaces the former use of the term “discharges” throughout the regulation. “Discharge” has been revised to apply only to the release of material to ground or surface water. The term currently applies to the release of radioactive material to both air and water. “Emission” has been added for the release of material to the air. “Effluent” has been added to mean material released to air or water, as this term appears in the Table of Concentrations in section 380-11.7. “Effluent treatment” has been added as it is referenced in section 380-3.4. “Incineration” is defined as a process, instead of the equipment used. “Incinerator” has been deleted. “Permit” has been expanded to apply to the use of radioactive material in the environment, and for the maintenance of a former radioactive waste land burial site. “Permittee” has been updated for consistency with language used in other DEC regulations. “Loss of control of radioactive material” has been revised because the previous definition was limited to licensed radioactive material. “Uncontrolled release” has been added for unplanned releases of radioactive material to the environment. This term is referenced in section 380-9.2 and is needed to differentiate from controlled releases of radioactive material to the environment as authorized under the Part 380 regulations. “TENORM” has been added to clarify that technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive material (TENORM) is the same as processed and concentrated naturally occurring radioactive material, which is regulated radioactive material.

Other definitions will be added or revised as required for compatibility with federal regulations issued by the NRC in 10 CFR 20. Definitions for “dose constraint” and “public dose” will be added. Likewise, the definitions for “total effective dose equivalent” and “member of the public” will be revised as required to maintain compatibility with federal rules.

In subpart 380-3, permit requirements will be clarified to identify each type of disposal or release of radioactive material that can only be undertaken as authorized by DEC in a permit. Also, the required content of permit applications has been expanded to establish in regulation the minimum information that must be included in a permit application. These criteria have already been used to evaluate the sufficiency of submitted permit applications for many years.

In subpart 380-4, language has been added so that all allowed waste disposal methods for radioactive material are now referenced in this subpart. The disposal of a specific category of wastes (the so-called biomedical exemption) has been expanded to include animal bedding meeting certain criteria, which supports the longstanding disposal exemption that exists for animal tissue containing small amounts of radioactive material.

In subpart 380-5, which pertains to radiation dose limits for individual members of the public, a 10 millirem (mrem) constraint on airborne emissions has been added to maintain compatibility with federal rules. This dose constraint has already been implemented by permit condition for several years. Also, the reference to 40 CFR 190 has been deleted because it was inappropriately included in Part 380.

In subpart 380-6, annual calibrations are now required for instruments used to measure effluent flow rates. This requirement has already been implemented by permit condition for several years.

No significant changes were made to subpart 380-7, Release Minimization Programs.

In subpart 380-8, which pertains to records, regulated persons are now authorized to record quantities of radioactivity in the International System of Units (also known as SI). Two new requirements will be added: (1) data maintained in electronic format must be made available to DEC via hardcopy upon request; and (2) records required by Part 380 must be transferred from the old permittee to the new permittee when a permit is transferred. These requirements would ensure that inspectors can obtain information and raw data that may only exist on a computer system, and would ensure that records relevant to Part 380 compliance are properly transferred when a permit is transferred.

In subpart 380-9, which pertains to reports, the requirement for a permittee to submit annual reports has been expanded to require reporting of environmental dosimeter results when the acquisition of such data is required by the permit. This requirement has already been implemented by permit condition for several years. Several requirements have changed regarding Notification of Incidents; some changes were required to maintain compatibility with federal regulations, and other changes were added to lower the reporting thresholds because the federal rules requiring notification of incidents only involve large exposures. Reports are now required for: (1) uncontrolled releases or events that could cause releases; (2) exceedance of any permit or regulatory limit (this requirement has already been implemented by permit condition for several years); or (3) exceedance of the dose constraint. The contents of reports and timeframes are specified.

In subpart 380-10, which includes the “General Regulatory Requirements,” several additions will be made. The new prohibition of engaging in deliberate misconduct is required for compatibility with federal rules. This prohibits the deliberate submission of inaccurate or incomplete information to DEC, and applies to permittees, applicants and contractors. Also, information submitted to DEC must be complete and accurate, and a prohibition has been added against uncontrolled releases, unauthorized transfers, or abandonment of radioactive material or failure to comply with any requirement in Part 380. These additions would strengthen DEC’s enforcement capabilities in the event that violations of Part 380 are identified.

In subpart 380-11, two new isotopes will be added to the Tables of Concentrations: N-13 and O-15. These additions are required to maintain compatibility with the federal rules issued by NRC in 10 CFR 20.

In summary, the proposed amendment to Part 380 would: (1) update several provisions that are required for compatibility with federal regulations; (2) simplify, clarify and update language; and (3) add several needed provisions that have been absent from the regulations when it was previously promulgated.

Full text of the Regulatory Impact Statement is available on the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s website at http://www.dec.ny.gov/regulations/106149.html

1. STATUTORY AUTHORITY

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) regulates the disposal and release of radioactive material to the environment pursuant to Articles 1, 3, 17, 19, 27, 29, and 37 of the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) and the State of New York's agreement with the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

New York State Agreement State Program:

The Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954 created the federal program for controlling the use of most radioactive materials and for limiting the public exposure to radiation resulting from that use. In 1960, the AEA was amended to allow states to enter into agreements with the NRC whereby the authority to license most uses of radioactive material is relinquished to the state. New York State became an Agreement State in 1962. The State’s agreement is implemented by the New York State Department of Health (DOH), the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (NYCDHMH), and DEC.

ECL Articles 1 and 3:

The ECL vests in DEC broad powers with respect to the discharge of pollutants into the environment. Those powers are set forth in ECL section 1-0101(1). DEC further implements this policy by ECL section 3-0301(1). There is not a separate ECL Article that comprehensively governs the regulation of radioactive materials. Rather, the source of legal authority is divided among the following ECL Articles: Article 17 (Water), Article 19 (Air), and Article 27 (Solid Waste), Article 29 (Low-Level Radioactive Waste Facilities), and Article 37 (Substances Hazardous or Acutely Hazardous to Public Health, Safety or the Environment).

2. LEGISLATIVE OBJECTIVES

The current Part 380 contributes to meeting the legislative goals of conserving, improving, and protecting the State's natural resources and environment and preventing, abating, and controlling water, land, and air pollution.

The proposed amendments would not change the current requirements governing the disposal of radioactive material, obtaining permits for releases of radioactive material to the environment, or the requirement that exposures be kept as low as reasonably achievable. New provisions that would contribute to meeting the legislative goals include applying a constraint on emissions to the air, which is lower than the current limit.

3. NEEDS AND BENEFITS

The purpose of Part 380 is to control the release of radioactive material to the environment in order to protect the public health and the environment. The regulations apply to all State-regulated parties that dispose of or release radioactive materials to the environment.

These amendments are needed because of New York State's agreement with the NRC: the State is required to have regulations that are compatible with the federal regulations. This amendment is needed to incorporate applicable federal changes to 10 CFR 20, the federal standards for protection against radiation, that were made from 1991 through 2008.

The proposed amendments would also simplify language, define commonly used terms of art, and clarify several regulatory provisions. These clarifications would benefit the regulated community whose operations are regulated by Part 380, and strengthen DEC’s enforcement capabilities regarding these regulatory provisions.

In subpart 380-1, several changes to the general provisions will be made for the purpose of improving clarity and to fill regulatory gaps.

In subpart 380-2, several additions and changes to the definitions will be made to maintain compatibility with federal regulations, improve clarity, and incorporate commonly used terms of art.

In subpart 380-3, permit requirements will be clarified to identify each type of disposal or release of radioactive material that can only be undertaken as authorized in a permit. Also, the required content of permit applications will be expanded to establish the minimum information that must be included in a permit application.

In subpart 380-4, language will be added so that all allowed waste disposal methods are referenced in this subpart.

In subpart 380-5, a 10 millirem (mrem) constraint on airborne emissions will be added, as required to maintain compatibility with federal regulations.

In subpart 380-6, annual calibrations will be required for instruments used to measure effluent flow rates.

No significant changes were made to subpart 380-7.

In subpart 380-8, regulated parties will be authorized to record quantities of radioactivity in SI units. Also, two new requirements will be added: data maintained in electronic format must be made available to DEC via hardcopy upon request, and records required by Part 380 must be transferred from the old permittee to the new permittee when a permit is transferred.

In subpart 380-9, the requirement for a permittee to submit annual reports will be expanded to require reporting of environmental dosimeter results when the acquisition of such data is required by the permit. Several requirements have changed regarding Notification of Incidents - - some changes were required to maintain compatibility with federal regulations; others were made to lower the reporting thresholds.

In subpart 380-10, several additions will be made to the General Regulatory Requirements. The new prohibition of engaging in deliberate misconduct is required for compatibility with federal regulations. Also, information submitted to DEC must be complete and accurate, and a prohibition will be added against uncontrolled releases, unauthorized transfers, or abandonment of radioactive material, or failure to comply with any requirement in Part 380.

In subpart 380-11, two new isotopes will be added to the Tables of Concentrations: N-13 and O-15. These additions are required to maintain compatibility with federal regulations.

4. COSTS

Costs to Regulated Parties:

Part 380 applies to all state-regulated parties that use or dispose of radioactive material in quantities and concentrations that are subject to regulation by the licensing agencies of New York State (i.e., DOH and NYCDOHMH).

In 2012, there were 28 persons holding one or more Part 380 permits. Those 28 permittees held a total of 30 permits: 1 for the incineration of radioactive material, 26 for releases to the air, 1 for discharges to surface water, and 2 for the maintenance of former radioactive waste burial sites.

There should be no additional costs to regulated persons due to the requirements to meet the 10 mrem dose constraint on airborne emissions or to report environmental dosimeter results in their annual reports, because permittees have already been subject to this requirement via permit condition for several years. There may be some additional costs to regulated persons due to the lower threshold for reporting of incidents, via expenditure of staff time to prepare and submit reports of incidents and follow up actions.

Costs to the Department, State, and Local Government:

DEC would expend resources and staff time preparing to implement the proposed revision. Guidelines and explanatory documents distributed to regulated persons must be written, and staff must be trained in the implementation of the new regulations. This would require several months of staff time. After the initial preparation and training period, the routine implementation of the amended regulations is not expected to cost more (on a cost per regulated person basis) than the implementation of the current Part 380 program.

In addition to the cost to DEC, the other State agency in the Agreement State program, DOH, would expend some staff time becoming familiar with DEC's amended regulation. This may require one or two days of staff time. At least two state agencies and one campus of the state university system have been issued Part 380 permits. Their costs as regulated persons are described above.

The proposed amendment does not place any requirements directly on local governments, except where local governments operate facilities that possess radioactive material. In that case, the cost to the local government would be the same as that to other regulated parties. Currently, none of the entities that have been issued Part 380 permits are owned by local governments.

NYCDHMH, as one of the three Agreement State agencies in New York State, would probably expend one or two staff days becoming familiar with the revised Part 380.

5. LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANDATES

The adoption of this proposed amendment would not place any mandates on local governments except for those local governments operating facilities that are regulated parties. In those cases, local governments must meet the requirements placed on all regulated parties. Because control of radioactive materials is preempted by the federal government and only relinquished to Agreement States, local governments, other than New York City, have no regulatory responsibilities over the release or disposal of radioactive materials.

6. PAPERWORK

Several provisions in the proposed amendment would require the preparation and submission of additional paperwork. The amendment clarifies the information that must be included in a permit application. The implementation of lower thresholds for notification of incidents would require reports to be submitted for uncontrolled releases or events that could cause releases, exceedance of any permit or regulatory limit, or exceedance of the dose constraint. The required submission of annual reports will be expanded to include reporting of environmental dosimeter results from permittees whose permit requires the aquisition of environmental dosimetry data.

7. DUPLICATION

The New York State Agreement State program is divided among three agencies. The two agencies other than DEC have the authority to license the possession and use of radioactive materials. It is only when that material is disposed of or released to the environment that it comes under the jurisdiction of DEC. Thus, there is no overlap between the regulatory programs of the licensing agencies and that of DEC.

Because the proposed amendments to Part 380 must be compatible with 10 CFR, many sections in Part 380 are identical, or very similar, to the federal rules. However, 10 CFR applies to federally-regulated facilities, while Part 380 applies to state-regulated facilities, and thus there is no duplication of regulation.

8. ALTERNATIVES

The alternatives available to DEC in developing the proposed amendments to Part 380 are limited by its role as an Agreement State agency. As explained above, an Agreement State's regulations must be compatible with 10 CFR, and be adopted essentially verbatim.

Because DEC’s regulations must be compatible with NRC’s regulations, DEC was precluded from considering alternatives to them. The affected provisions are definitions, dose limits, notification of incidents, the constraint rule, deliberate misconduct, and the addition of O-15 and N-13 to the Tables of Concentrations. Thus, DEC did not consider alternatives to those provisions of the proposed rule.

For those portions of the proposed amendments that are required by federal rule, taking the no-action alternative would not be consistent with New York State's agreement with the NRC. If Part 380 is not revised, not only would it be obsolete, but it would be inconsistent with the regulations of the radioactive materials licensing agencies in New York State. Thus, not revising Part 380 for compatibility with federal rules could jeopardize New York’s agreement with NRC.

For those changes that were not based on federal rules, taking the no-action alternative would result in not simplifying regulatory language, not clarifying regulatory provisions, and not filling regulatory gaps which had become apparent through years of implementing the existing Part 380 regulations.

9. FEDERAL STANDARDS

The proposed amendments are more stringent than federal regulations regarding several requirements for reporting of incidents. The amendment would require reporting of uncontrolled releases of radioactive material or events that could cause releases or the exceedance of any regulatory limit. These provisions are more restrictive than the federal rules, which require reporting only when dose limits are greatly exceeded. Lower severity events are more common, but are not currently required to be reported. The amendments require lower severity events to be reported; facility compliance with this new requirement would enable DEC to ensure that prompt and appropriate actions are taken to resolve such events.

10. COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE

Section 380-1.5 establishes the transition rules for these amendments. In general, all provisions in the proposed amendments would become effective on the effective date of the rulemaking. The new 10 mrem dose constraint on airborne emissions has already been in effect as a permit condition for several years. Permittees have also been required to report environmental dosimetry results in their annual reports and report the exceedance of any permit limit, in accordance with permit conditions, for several years.

1. EFFECT OF RULE

The proposed amendments to 6 NYCRR Part 380 would affect small businesses that release radioactive material to the environment. (Small businesses that possess radioactive material in a form that is not normally released to the environment are only subject to the disposal restrictions in the existing Part 380. These requirements will not be changed by the Part 380 amendments.) Affected parties may include such small businesses as medical practices, radioactive waste brokers, small research or diagnostic laboratories, radioisotope production facilities, and manufacturers that use radioactive material in their production or quality control processes.

Only one of the parties that currently have a Part 380 permit is a small business. It is a company that produces isotopes for use in medical imaging. Another type of small business that would be affected by this regulation is health physics consultants that may be hired by regulated parties to assist in implementing these amendments. These businesses may benefit from increased business due to these proposed amendments, although they would also need to invest time and resources in becoming familiar with the new rules.

2. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS

The current Part 380 sets limits on the radiation dose to members of the public that could be received from the release of radioactive material to the environment. Regulated parties must restrict their releases so that those dose limits are not exceeded. The proposed amendments to Part 380 add a new 10 millirem dose constraint for members of the public that could result from radioactive airborne emissions in one year. Regulated parties are not expected to have to change their operations to comply with this amendment because the doses from all currently regulated releases are already below the proposed new dose constraint. Part 380 Radiation Control Permitees have already been subject to the 10 millirem dose constraint by a permit condition for the past several years.

The proposed amendments lower the reporting threshold requiring regulated parties to notify the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) of any release of radioactive material to the environment. Reports would be required for uncontrolled releases or events that could cause releases, for exceedance of any permit or regulatory limit, or for exceedance of the dose constraint; the contents of reports and timeframes are specified in the proposed amendments.

The proposed amendments expand the requirement for permitees to submit annual reports to also require reporting of environmental dosimeter results when the acquisition of such data is required by the permit. Regulated parties are not expected to have to change their operations to comply with this amendment because this requirement has already been implemented by a permit condition for several years.

The proposed amendments expand the requirement for annual calibration of radiation detection instruments to include instruments used to measure effluent flow rates. Permittees are not expected to have to change their operations to comply with this amendment because this requirement has already been implemented by a permit condition for several years.

3. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

The proposed amendments to Part 380 do not set any requirements that require any professional services beyond those needed to comply with the current Part 380. To comply with the existing regulations, regulated parties should have on staff one or more professionals knowledgeable in the principles of health physics, radiation protection, and control and monitoring of releases to the environment. In the past, some small businesses have hired consultants to prepare part or all of their permit applications. This practice is expected to continue after the regulations have been amended.

4. COMPLIANCE COSTS

The proposed amendments to Part 380 include a 10 millirem dose constraint for members of the public that could result from radioactive emissions to the air. No regulated party will have to make any initial capital or non-capital investments to meet this requirement as they are already complying with the 10 millirem dose constraint.

The proposed amendments lower the reporting threshold requiring regulated parties to notify DEC of any uncontrolled release of radioactive material to the environment. This requirement will result in expenditure of staff time to prepare and submit reports of incidents and conduct follow up actions, should a reportable incident occur. Historically, such reports have usually been voluntarily submitted by permittees, as good practice. A reportable incident would require several hours to investigate, document, and institute corrective actions; such work would likely be conducted by the facility’s on-site radiation protection staff. Such incidents do not occur frequently.

The proposed amendments expand the requirement for permittees to submit annual reports to also require reporting of environmental dosimeter results when the acquisition of such data is required by the permit. There will be no increase in costs to regulated parties as they are already complying with this requirement.

The proposed amendments expand the requirement for annual calibration of radiation detection instruments to include instruments used to measure effluent flow rates. There will be no increase in costs to regulated parties as they are already complying with this requirement.

5. ECONOMIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL FEASIBILITY

Implementation of the proposed amendments would be economically and technologically feasible for small business and local governments. Regulated parties currently manage the possession, use and disposal of radioactive material in accordance with a host of existing regulatory requirements which address the sufficiency of facilities, equipment, and staff expertise necessary to conduct operations safely. Most of the changes proposed in the amendments to Part 380 are already being met by regulated parties by permit conditions, thus demonstrating that the proposed amendments are economically and technologically feasible.

6. MINIMIZING ADVERSE IMPACT

The provisions in the proposed amendments to Part 380 would not have an adverse impact on small businesses, as most provisions are already being met by regulated parties. DEC did not have the option of relaxing these requirements for small businesses. The alternatives available to DEC in writing the proposed amendments to Part 380 are limited by DEC's status as an Agreement State agency. Under New York State’s (State) agreement with the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), in which NRC has relinquished its authority to regulate the use and possession of most radioactive material to the State, DEC’s Part 380 regulations must be compatible with the federal regulations promulgated by the NRC.

7. SMALL BUSINESS AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATION

As a public outreach initiative in early 2010, information on this rulemaking was mailed to all Part 380 permittees and applicants, radioactive materials licensees, and environmental and public interest groups in the State. Also, a preliminary draft of the amendment was posted on DEC’s website and a notice was published in DEC’s Environmental Notice Bulletin.

8. CURE PERIOD OR OTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR AMELIORATIVE ACTION

DEC does not believe that there is a need for a cure period for the proposed Part 380. Significant proposed amendments (summarized below) are already implemented, as these requirements have been included as permit conditions for the past several years. Such amendments required by a permit condition are: (1) 10 millirem dose constraint for members of the public that could result from radioactive airborne emissions in one year; (2) notification of uncontrolled release, or incidents that are in exeedance of any permit or regulatory limit; (3) annual reporting of environmental dosimeter results when a permit requires acquisition of such data; and (4) annual calibration of instruments used to measure effluent flow rates. Since these requirements are already provided as permit conditions, they are not imposed to the regulated community without prior notice and a cure period is not needed. The regulated community would be required to comply with the proposed amendments upon the effective date, which is 30 days after DEC files the Notice of Adoption with the State Department of State. Furthermore, no new penalties are created by proposed Part 380 because enforcement is governed by statutory language which is set forth in Article 71 of the Environmental Conservation Law.

9. INITIAL REVIEW OF THE RULE

DEC will conduct an initial review of the rule within three years of the promulgation of the final rule.

1. TYPES AND ESTIMATED NUMBER OF RURAL AREAS

For purposes of this Rural Area Flexibility Analysis, “rural area” means those portions of the state so defined by Executive Law section 481(7). SAPA section 102(10). Under Executive Law section 481(7), rural areas are defined as “counties within the state having less than two hundred thousand population, and the municipalities, individuals, institutions, communities, programs and such other entities or resources as are found therein. In counties of two hundred thousand or greater population, ‘rural areas’ means towns with population densities of one hundred fifty persons or less per square mile, and the villages, individuals, institutions, communities, programs and such other entities or resources as are found therein.” There are 44 counties in New York State that have populations of less than 200,000 people and 71 towns in non-rural counties where the population densities are less than 150 people per square mile. This rule would apply statewide so it applies to all rural areas of the State.

2. REPORTING, RECORDKEEPING, OTHER COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS; AND NEED FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Several provisions in the proposed rule clarify and expand requirements for the preparation and submission of permit applications, notification of incidents, and annual reports, as well as the maintenance of specific records of disposals and releases. Such work is typically conducted by the facility’s on-site facility radiation protection staff, although a regulated facility may elect to hire a health physics contractor to assist in the preparation of required records and reports.

3. COSTS

Regulated parties subject to this proposed rule should experience little or no increase in costs. Many provisions have already been in effect for several years via permit condition. The new, lower threshold for reporting of incidents would require the expenditure of staff time to prepare and submit reports of incidents, should they occur.

4. MINIMIZING ADVERSE IMPACT

This rule is not expected to generate any adverse impact to regulated parties. As stated previously, there would be little or no increase in costs for regulated parties.

5. RURAL AREA PARTICIPATION

A public outreach effort was conducted in early 2010: regulated and interested parties were mailed an informational package regarding the preliminary draft of the proposed rule; this information was also posted on New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s (DEC) web site and DEC’s Environmental Notice Bulletin. In addition, DEC would hold special meetings or workshops if the proposed rule generates sufficient interest or questions.

In accordance with Section 201-a(2)(a) of the State Administrative Procedures Act (SAPA), a Job Impact Statement has not been prepared for this proposed rule as it is not expected to create a substantial adverse impact on jobs and employment opportunities in New York State.

Part 380 requirements control the release of radioactive material to the environment. This rulemaking would update several provisions that are required for compatibility with federal regulations, simplify and update language, and add several needed provisions that have been absent from the regulations. The parties affected by this amendment are facilities that possess regulated radioactive materials.

This proposed rule is not expected to cause the loss of jobs at facilities that possess regulated radioactive material. Many of the new requirements in this rule have already been in effect for several years through permit conditions. The new, lower threshold for reporting of incidents would require the expenditure of staff time to prepare and submit reports of incidents, should such incidents occur. Responsibility for ensuring compliance with this rulemaking would likely be designated to on-site facility radiation protection staff, although a regulated facility that has experienced a serious incident may elect to hire a health physics contractor to assist with the investigation, documentation, reporting, and correction of the root causes of such an incident. Regulated facilities are located throughout the State and compliance with this rulemaking would not have any adverse impact on jobs in any areas of the State.