Rubidium-82 Generators, Emerging Technologies, and Other Medical Use of Byproduct Material, 42654-42659 [2023-14018]
Download as PDF
42654
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 88, No. 126
Monday, July 3, 2023
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 35
[Docket No. NRC–2018–0297]
RIN 3150–AK80
Rubidium-82 Generators, Emerging
Technologies, and Other Medical Use
of Byproduct Material
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Regulatory basis; notice of
public meeting.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is conducting
rulemaking to add requirements for
calibration and dosage measurement for
certain generator systems and establish
performance-based requirements for
existing and future emerging medical
technologies. The NRC is also
considering additional changes to its
medical use regulations to accommodate
developments in the medical field
related to new radiopharmaceuticals
and emerging medical technologies. The
rulemaking will affect medical licensees
who use these technologies and evaluate
the current training and experience
requirements for emerging medical
technologies. The NRC is requesting
comments from the public on the
regulatory basis for this rulemaking. The
NRC plans to hold one or more public
meetings during the comment period to
promote full understanding of the
contemplated action and facilitate
public comment.
DATES: Submit comments by October 31,
2023. Comments received after this date
will be considered if it is practical to do
so, but the NRC is able to ensure
consideration only for comments
received before this date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods;
however, the NRC encourages electronic
comment submission through the
Federal rulemaking website:
• Federal Rulemaking website: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Jun 30, 2023
Jkt 259001
for Docket ID NRC–2018–0297. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Dawn
Forder; telephone: 301–415–3407;
email: Dawn.Forder@nrc.gov. For
technical questions contact the
individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• Email comments to:
Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov. If you
do not receive an automatic email reply
confirming receipt, then contact us at
301–415–1677.
• Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001, ATTN:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.
For additional direction on obtaining
information and submitting comments,
see ‘‘Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments’’ in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Celimar Valentin-Rodriguez, telephone:
301–415–7124, email: Celimar.ValentinRodriguez@nrc.gov; and Maryann
Ayoade, telephone: 301–415–0862,
email: Maryann.Ayoade@nrc.gov. Both
are staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2018–
0297 when contacting the NRC about
the availability of information for this
action. You may obtain publicly
available information related to this
action by any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking website: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2018–0297.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly
available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. To begin the search, select
‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For
problems with ADAMS, please contact
the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR)
reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–
415–4737, or by email to PDR.resource@
nrc.gov. For the convenience of the
reader, instructions about obtaining
materials referenced in this document
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
are provided in the ‘‘Availability of
Documents’’ section.
• NRC’s PDR: The PDR, where you
may examine and order copies of
publicly available documents, is open
by appointment. To make an
appointment to visit the PDR, please
send an email to PDR.Resource@nrc.gov
or call 1–80–397–4209 or 301–415–
4737, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern
time, Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
B. Submitting Comments
The NRC encourages electronic
comment submission through the
Federal rulemaking website (https://
www.regulations.gov). Please include
Docket ID NRC–2018–0297 in your
comment submission.
The NRC cautions you not to include
identifying or contact information that
you do not want to be publicly
disclosed in your comment submission.
The NRC will post all comment
submissions at https://
www.regulations.gov as well as enter the
comment submissions into ADAMS.
The NRC does not routinely edit
comment submissions to remove
identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating
comments from other persons for
submission to the NRC, you should
inform those persons not to include
identifying or contact information that
they do not want to be publicly
disclosed in their comment submission.
Your request should state that the NRC
does not routinely edit comment
submissions to remove such information
before making the comment
submissions available to the public or
entering the comment into ADAMS.
II. Discussion
The NRC is requesting comment on a
regulatory basis to support a rulemaking
that would amend part 35 of title 10 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR), ‘‘Medical use of byproduct
material,’’ to add requirements for
calibration and dosage measurement for
strontium-82/rubidium-82 generators
(hereafter referred to as Rb-82
generators) and establish performancebased requirements for existing and
future emerging medical technologies
(EMTs). The NRC is also considering
additional changes to its medical use
regulations to accommodate
developments in the medical field
related to new radiopharmaceuticals
E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM
03JYP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 126 / Monday, July 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
and EMTs. Additionally, the NRC is
evaluating the current training and
experience requirements required for
authorized users (AUs) of EMTs to
fulfill their radiation safety-related
duties and supervisory roles.
A regulatory basis is a precursor to a
proposed rule and describes the NRC’s
planned approach for revising the
regulations. This regulatory basis (1)
includes a discussion of the background
of the regulatory issues, (2) explains the
proposed areas of change to the
regulations and how those changes
could resolve the issues, (3) provides
the technical and policy information
used to support the regulatory basis, and
(4) identifies different alternatives to
address the regulatory issues and
evaluates the cost and benefits of
rulemaking and the alternatives. The
regulatory basis also explains the
limitations on the scope and quality of
the regulatory basis, such as known
uncertainties in the data or methods of
analysis, and the mitigation measures
that address these limitations.
Request for Comment Regarding
Averted Costs to Licensees
III. Specific Requests for Comment
Generator Systems (See Regulatory Basis
Section A.1)
The NRC considers a regulatory basis
to be a pre-rulemaking document. If the
NRC decides to pursue rulemaking, the
NRC will publish a proposed rule that
will seek public comment. Currently,
the NRC is seeking advice and
recommendations from the public on
the regulatory basis.
The regulatory basis, titled
‘‘Rubidium-82 Generators, Emerging
Technologies, and Other Medical Use of
Byproduct Material—Regulatory Basis,’’
can be obtained at ADAMS Accession
No. ML23122A356. The regulatory basis
evaluates the existing regulatory
framework for Rb-82 generators,
including the use of enforcement
discretion when licensees who use Rb82 generators cannot meet existing
requirements for calibration, and dosage
determination and what type of
regulatory changes would need to be
considered to permit such action. In
addition, the regulatory basis evaluates
what regulatory changes are needed to
establish risk-informed, performancebased requirements for existing and
future emerging medical technologies.
The NRC will consider any comments
received on the regulatory basis in the
development of the proposed rule and
will respond to the comments in the
proposed rule. The regulatory basis
describes all of the regulatory changes
being considered, and the NRC is
requesting comment regarding some of
these potential changes. Please indicate
the topic and item number with your
response or comment:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Jun 30, 2023
Jkt 259001
Section 8 of the regulatory basis
document discusses potential
rulemaking costs and other impacts to
the NRC (section 8.3), Agreement States
(section 8.4), and licensees (section 8.5).
The analyses are based on the NRC’s
preliminary assessment and estimates,
and the NRC will conduct a more
detailed cost and impact evaluation in
the draft regulatory analysis that will
accompany the proposed rule. To assist
the NRC in conducting this detailed
analysis, please provide comments on
whether licensees would realize averted
costs from a more streamlined licensing
of existing and future EMTs. Explain
why or why not.
Request for Comment on Topics in
Appendix A of the Regulatory Basis
The specific areas for comment that
follow are from appendix A of the
regulatory basis, and the numbering
scheme matches the numbering in
appendix A.
The NRC is considering regulatory
changes to address calibration and dose
determination requirements for
rubidium-82 generators. In addition, the
NRC is also considering regulatory
changes to address generators currently
licensed under 10 CFR part 35, subpart
K and novel generator systems.
Question A.1.1: Please provide
comments on the need for radiation
safety officers to have specific training
for all generator systems licensed under
10 CFR part 35, subpart D, ‘‘Unsealed
Byproduct Material—Written Directive
Not Required.’’ If general awareness on
radionuclide generators, including their
functions and risks, is sufficient,
explain why.
The NRC is considering amending the
requirement in § 35.63, ‘‘Determination
of dosages of unsealed byproduct
material for medical use,’’ to clarify that,
for the incremental administration of
rubidium-82, dose measurements do not
have to be complete before
administration when the dose is
measured continuously during the
infusion of Rb-82 from a generator to the
patient.
Question A.1.2: Please provide
comments on whether and how the NRC
should allow the completion of dosage
measurement after the beginning of an
incremental administration for
radionuclides other than Rb-82. How
would such an allowance be bounded?
What considerations should go into the
expansion of this flexibility?
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42655
Question A.1.3: The NRC has found
that AUs authorized under § 35.290,
‘‘Training for imaging and localization
studies,’’ have sufficient understanding
of radionuclide generators, and the NRC
is considering revising § 35.27,
Supervision,’’ to require device-specific
training requirements for supervised
individuals. Please provide comments
with a rationale on whether § 35.290
AUs should also be required to have
device-specific training for all
radionuclide generators for which they
supervise the use.
Intravascular Brachytherapy Systems
(See Regulatory Basis Section A.2)
The NRC is considering revisions to
10 CFR part 35, subpart F, ‘‘Manual
Brachytherapy,’’ to incorporate
regulatory requirements for
intravascular brachytherapy (IVB).
Question A.2.1: The NRC is
considering adding a new section under
subpart F to address the specific
training and experience (T&E)
requirements to be an AU for IVB and
other uses under § 35.401 (liquid
brachytherapy, diffusion brachytherapy,
and eye applicators). Please provide
comments on the sufficiency of the T&E
for AUs as outlined in the current EMT
licensing guidance documents for IVB,
liquid brachytherapy, and eye
applicators. Specifically, the NRC is
seeking comments on the knowledge
topics encompassing the safety-related
characteristics of these EMTs required
for AUs to fulfill their radiation safetyrelated duties and supervision roles; the
methods on how knowledge topics
should be acquired; and consideration
for continuing education, vendor
training for new medical uses, and
training on NRC regulatory
requirements.
Liquid Brachytherapy Sources and
Devices (See Regulatory Basis Section
A.3)
The NRC is considering changes to 10
CFR part 35, subpart F, ‘‘Manual
Brachytherapy’’ and other pertinent
sections to incorporate regulatory
requirements for liquid brachytherapy.
Question A.3.1: The NRC has found
that the hazards of liquid brachytherapy
are similar to those of microsources and
microspheres. Please provide comments
with a rationale on whether the current
definition of manual brachytherapy in
§ 35.2, ‘‘Definitions,’’ should be revised
to include liquid brachytherapy and
exclude microsources or if liquid
brachytherapy should be included in
the newly proposed subpart I for
microsources.
Question A.3.2: The NRC is proposing
to add a new § 35.71, ‘‘Contamination
E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM
03JYP1
42656
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 126 / Monday, July 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
control,’’ that would require licensees to
develop, implement, and maintain
procedures addressing contamination
control and spill response for the uses
authorized on the license. The NRC is
seeking input on whether this
requirement is needed or if the
requirements in 10 CFR part 20,
‘‘Standards for Protection against
Radiation,’’ are sufficient for
contamination control. Please provide
comments on this proposed requirement
and indicate if it should apply to all
medical licensees or to a certain subset
and why.
Question A.3.3: The NRC is
considering amending § 35.2 to define
the term ‘‘source leakage’’ as it relates to
liquid brachytherapy. For example, a
possible leakage rate could be any
leakage from a liquid brachytherapy
source that results in a dose exceeding
0.5 Sievert (50 rem) dose equivalent to
any individual organ other than the
treatment site. Please comment on
whether this limit is appropriate and
explain why or why not. What types of
limits for liquid brachytherapy device
leakage should the NRC consider (e.g.,
activity-based, dose-based, external to
the patient)?
Gamma Stereotactic Radiosurgery and
Photon Emitting Teletherapy Units (See
Regulatory Basis Section A.6)
Since the NRC established
requirements for gamma stereotactic
radiosurgery units in 2002, the design
and engineering elements have evolved
and the components and operation of
newer GSR units are significantly
different from the units that the NRC
currently regulates under 10 CFR part
35, subpart H, ‘‘Photon Emitting Remote
Afterloader Units, Teletherapy Units,
and Gamma Stereotactic Radiosurgery
Units.’’
Question A.6.1: Please provide
comments on the need for modelspecific training for radiation safety
officers for certain 10 CFR part 35,
subpart H devices. If model-specific
training is needed, how should the NRC
determine which devices would require
such training?
Question A.6.2: Current NRC
requirements in 10 CFR part 35, subpart
H, are focused on components critical to
patient and facility safety for the use of
these devices. The proposed changes to
subpart H focus on elements and
objectives rather than specific
components. Examples of elements
include source output, source
collimation, source position, source
attenuation, patient safety, and facility
safety. Please provide comments on
other elements that should be
considered.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Jun 30, 2023
Jkt 259001
Question A.6.3: Please provide
comments on what types of objective
tests the NRC should require for full
calibration measures for 10 CFR part 35,
subpart H devices. What functional
elements should be considered for
safety?
Question A.6.4: Please provide
comments on what types of objective
tests the NRC should require for
periodic spot-checks for 10 CFR part 35,
subpart H devices. Additionally, what
functional elements should be
considered critical to safety?
Microsource Manual Brachytherapy
(See Regulatory Basis Section A.7)
The use of microspheres for
permanent implant manual
brachytherapy has grown significantly
over the past 20 years, and the NRC has
accrued valuable operating experience.
To incorporate the use of new and
existing microspheres and
microparticles for manual
brachytherapy, the NRC is considering
creating a new subpart within 10 CFR
part 35 in the currently ‘‘reserved’’
subpart I of 10 CFR part 35.
Question A.7.1: The NRC is
considering defining a ‘‘microsource’’ in
§ 35.2 as microparticles and
microspheres. What types of radiation
(such as alpha, beta, gamma) should fit
into the definition of ‘‘microsource’’?
Please include comments and a
rationale for whether (1) microspheres
should be limited to specific types of
radiation or certain energies; (2)
microsources should be limited to
sealed sources with a Sealed Source and
Device (SS&D) registry; (3) unsealed
microsources should be required to have
a SS&D registry; and (4) any additional
changes are needed in the current
regulations for microsource
brachytherapy that would increase
flexibility for future microsource
brachytherapy.
Question A.7.2: The NRC is
considering defining ‘‘physiological
equilibrium’’ in § 35.2 to include stasis
or other states of equilibrium. Please
provide comments on what should be
included in a definition of physiological
equilibrium or identify other
considerations for physiological stop
points.
Question A.7.3: As the complexity of
the medical use of byproduct material
increases, use of teams in medical care
is becoming more common. Please
provide comments on the fundamental
elements of a successful team-approach
program.
Section 35.40, ‘‘Written directives,’’
would be amended to clarify that
requirements for manual brachytherapy
uses under 10 CFR part 35, subpart F,
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
are in § 35.40(b)(6). The NRC is
considering listing the subpart I
requirements for written directives for
microsource manual brachytherapy uses
under a new item in § 35.40(b).
Question A.7.4: For microsource
manual brachytherapy, please provide
comments and a rationale for whether
the before-implant written directive
should specify the dose or activity.
Question A.7.5: For microsource
manual brachytherapy, please provide
comments and a rationale for whether
the after-implant written directive
should specify the activity administered
or the dose delivered to the treatment
site.
Question A.7.6: As required by § 35.41
for determining whether a medical
event has occurred (as defined in
§ 35.3045), please comment on whether
and why the NRC should require
calculating and documenting the
activity administered or the activity or
dose specifically delivered to the
treatment site. By what deadline (e.g.,
number of hours or days) should this
determination be made?
Question A.7.7: For microsource
manual brachytherapy, please comment
on whether the NRC should require
post-treatment imaging to confirm that
the treatment was delivered in
accordance with the written directive.
Why or why not? What other
mechanisms are available to confirm
that the treatment was delivered in
accordance with the written directive?
Question A.7.8: Please identify any
tasks that would require an authorized
medical physicist for the use of
microsphere manual brachytherapy and
identify whether and how the NRC
should revise the training and
experience requirements for authorized
medical physicists in § 35.51, ‘‘Training
for an authorized medical physicist.’’
Question A.7.9: Please comment on
what types of use should be permitted
for microsource manual brachytherapy,
including whether the use should be
limited to that approved in the sealed
source and device registry. Please
comment on why unsealed
microsources without a unique delivery
system should or should not be allowed.
Question A.7.10: Please comment on
why any new requirements for
microsource manual brachytherapy
should or should not be limited to
permanent implants.
Question A.7.11: The NRC is
considering establishing minimum
safety procedures for microsources and
requiring instructions to assure
adequate protection of public health and
safety. These changes are based on
current EMT licensing guidance for
yttrium-90 (Y–90) microspheres and
E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM
03JYP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 126 / Monday, July 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
expected new uses of microsources.
Please identify and comment on other
items that should be included in a new
requirement for safety procedures and
instructions for microsource manual
brachytherapy.
Question A.7.12: The NRC is
considering establishing minimum
safety precautions (controls) to assure
adequate protection of public health and
safety. These considerations are based
on current EMT licensing guidance for
Y–90 microspheres and expected new
uses of microsources. Please identify
and comment on other items that should
be included in a new requirement for
safety precautions (controls) for
microsource manual brachytherapy.
Question A.7.13: The NRC is seeking
input on the need for continued
conditional approval for AUs of Y–90
microspheres. The current licensing
guidance for Y–90 microspheres states
that an AU should successfully
complete training in the operation of the
delivery system, safety procedures, and
clinical use for the specific type of Y–
90 microsphere for which authorization
is sought. The guidance specifies that
clinical use training to support
unsupervised use should include at
least three hands-on patient cases for
each type of Y–90 microsphere
requested, conducted in the physical
presence of an AU who is authorized for
the type of Y–90 microsphere for which
the individual is seeking authorization.
The guidance allows conditional
approval of an AU before completing
these three hands-on patient cases if a
proposed AU cannot complete patient
cases before authorization. This
conditional approval was originally
added to the guidance because there
were limited Y–90 microsphere
licensees and AUs to train future AUs.
As the use of Y–90 microspheres has
increased significantly, please comment
on the continued need for conditional
approval for Y–90 microsphere AUs.
Indicate why the NRC should or should
not continue to allow this pathway for
all microspheres and microsources AUs.
Question A.7.14: The NRC is seeking
input on the 80 hours of classroom and
laboratory training for interventional
radiologists pursuing AU status for Y–
90 microsphere and other microsource
uses. The NRC in the current EMT
licensing guidance for Y–90
microspheres includes a pathway for
interventional radiologists to become
AUs for Y–90 microspheres use. This
pathway requires the interventional
radiologist to demonstrate that they
have 80 hours of classroom and
laboratory training in specific topics and
specific work experience important to
radiation safety, in addition to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Jun 30, 2023
Jkt 259001
demonstrating they have sufficient
clinical interventional radiology and
diagnostic radiology experience. Please
comment on why 80 hours is or is not
an appropriate amount of time to ensure
these topics are adequately covered.
Who should supervise the work
experience to ensure the future AUs
have adequate radiation safety
knowledge and why?
Question A.7.15: The NRC is seeking
input on classroom and laboratory
training topics for physicians seeking
AU status for all microspheres or other
types of microsources. The NRC, in the
current EMT licensing guidance for Y–
90 microspheres, provides a pathway for
interventional radiologists and
physicians that meet the training and
experience requirements in §§ 35.390
and 35.490 to become AUs for Y–90
microspheres use. This pathway does
not require any classroom and
laboratory training or specific work
experience for these physicians besides
demonstration of successfully
completed training in the operation of
the delivery system, safety procedures,
and clinical use (including hands-on
patient cases) for the type of Y–90
microsphere for which authorization is
sought. Please identify and comment on
any additional classroom and laboratory
training topics or specific work
experience that should be required for
these physicians to become AUs for all
microspheres or other types of
microsources in subpart I. What
additional training and work experience
should be considered, if any, and why?
Question A.7.16: The NRC is seeking
input on the pathways for physicians to
become AUs for use of microspheres
and other types of microsources. The
NRC in the current EMT licensing
guidance for Y–90 microspheres
provides pathways for interventional
radiologists and physicians that meet
the training and experience
requirements in §§ 35.390 and 35.490 to
become AUs for Y–90 microsphere use.
Please comment on whether and why
the NRC should or should not provide
additional pathways for other types of
physicians to become AUs for use of
microspheres or other types of
microsources.
Question A.7.17: In most
circumstances, are AUs the individuals
administering Y–90 microspheres? Is it
appropriate for other individuals to
administer microsources under the
supervision of an AU? Why or why not?
Other Part 35 Changes: Novel
Radionuclide Generators (See
Regulatory Basis Section A.8)
Question A.8.1: Industry is evaluating
various novel radionuclide generators.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42657
Some novel radionuclide generators
may be utilized to compound
therapeutic dosages of unsealed
byproduct material. The NRC is
considering a requirement for licensees
to perform breakthrough testing on
novel radionuclide generators and
report instances when breakthrough
exceeds a defined limit. Since
breakthrough limits for some novel
radionuclide generators have not been
established by the United States
Pharmacopeia, please explain why it
would or would not be sufficient for
licensees to develop, implement, and
maintain procedures for breakthrough
testing and reporting for novel
radionuclide generators.
Other Part 35 Changes: Training and
Experience (See Regulatory Basis
Section A.8)
Question A.8.2: Please comment on
the type of T&E that should be required
for AUs utilizing novel radionuclide
generators and the type of T&E for
authorized nuclear pharmacists utilizing
novel radionuclide generators.
Question A.8.3: Please comment on
why the current structure for authorized
medical physicist involvement in 10
CFR part 35, subpart F, ‘‘Manual
Brachytherapy,’’ is or is not sufficient. If
not sufficient, what specific tasks or
skills should be performed by an
authorized medical physicist for manual
brachytherapy?
Question A.8.4: Due to the increased
number and complexity of EMTs, please
comment on why the NRC should or
should not require continuing education
for AUs. If continuing education should
be required, what should it entail, at
what frequency should it be acquired,
and how should knowledge topics be
acquired?
Question A.8.5: Please comment on
the need for AUs for § 35.200 to have
device-specific training on radionuclide
generators. If device-specific training is
needed, what topics should the training
include? Please explain why the
training should or should not be specific
to the radionuclide generators for which
the AUs are supervising the use.
Question A.8.6: Please comment and
provide a rationale for whether
physicians authorized for full use under
§ 35.300 need additional T&E to fulfill
their radiation safety-related duties and
supervision roles because of expected
emerging therapeutic
radiopharmaceuticals. Please comment
on why additional training is or is not
needed on regulatory requirements for
emerging therapeutic
radiopharmaceuticals. If needed, what
topics should the T&E include? What
specific training should these AUs be
E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM
03JYP1
42658
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 126 / Monday, July 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
required to have (e.g., vendor training
on clinical use and safety procedures)
prior to first-time use, if any? Why
should they be required or not required
to have continuing education?
Question A.8.7: Please comment on
why the current AU T&E requirements
for use of sealed sources and medical
devices for diagnosis in § 35.590 (i.e., 8
hours of classroom and laboratory
training in basic radionuclide handling
techniques specifically applicable to the
use of the device authorized under
§ 35.500, as well as device-specific
training in the use of the device) are or
are not appropriate for emerging sealed
sources and medical devices containing
sealed sources. If AUs for § 35.500 need
additional training and work experience
on emerging sealed sources and medical
devices containing sealed sources for
diagnosis, what topics should be
covered?
Other Part 35 Changes: Security and
Controls
Question A.8.8: Please comment on
any specific changes that are needed to
secure consoles, keys, and passwords
for remote afterloader units, teletherapy
units, and gamma stereotactic
radiosurgery units because of changes in
technology.
Question A.8.9: Please comment on
the types of doors or entry controls that
would be acceptable to maintain
security of licensed material while not
interfering with patient care. For
example, why should a physical door be
required, or why other entry controls
such as lasers acceptable?
4. What are the unintended
consequences, and how should they be
addressed?
5. Please comment on the NRC’s cost
and benefit estimates in the regulatory
basis.
IV. Cumulative Effects of Regulation
V. Public Meetings
The NRC is following its Cumulative
Effects of Regulation (CER) process by
engaging with external stakeholders
throughout this regulatory basis and
related regulatory activities.
Opportunity for public comment is
provided to the public at this regulatory
basis stage.
1. In light of any current or projected
CER challenges, how should NRC
provide sufficient time to implement the
new proposed requirements, including
changes to programs and procedures?
2. If CER challenges currently exist or
are expected, what should be done to
address them? For example, if more
time is required for implementation of
the new requirements, what period of
time is sufficient?
3. What other (NRC or other agency)
regulatory actions (e.g., orders, generic
communications, license amendment
requests inspection findings of a generic
nature) influence the implementation of
the proposed rule’s requirements?
During the public comment period,
the NRC will hold one or more public
meetings to facilitate discussion of the
proposed rulemaking described in the
regulatory basis document, including
the questions in Appendix A of the
document and provided in Section III of
this document.
The NRC will publish a notice of the
location, time, and agenda of the
meetings in the docket on
Regulations.gov, and on the NRC’s
public meeting website at least 10
calendar days before the meeting.
Stakeholders should monitor the NRC’s
public meeting website for information
about the public meeting at: https://
www.nrc.gov/public-involve/publicmeetings/index.cfm.
VI. Availability of Documents
The documents identified in the
following table are available to
interested persons through one or more
of the following methods, as indicated.
ADAMS
accession No.
or Federal
Register
citation
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Document
Final Rule—‘‘Criteria for the Release of Individuals Administered Radioactive Material,’’ January 29, 1997 ................................
Final Rule—‘‘Requirements for Expanded Definition of Byproduct Material,’’ October 1, 2007 .....................................................
Licensing Guidance for the Intraocular Use of NeoVista, Inc.Epi-Rad90TM (Strontium-90) Ophthalmic System, April 2009 ..........
Enforcement Guidance Memorandum (EGM) 13–003, ‘‘Enforcement Guidance Memorandum—Interim Guidance for
Dispositioning Violations Involving 10 CFR 35.60 and 10 CFR 35.63 for the Calibration of Instrumentation to Measure the
Activity of Rubidium-82 and the Determination of Rubidium-82 Patient Dosages,’’ April 18, 2013.
ViewRayTM System for Radiation Therapy Licensing Guidance, July 24, 2013 .............................................................................
Low Activity Radioactive Seeds Used for Localization of Non-Palpable Lesions and Lymph Nodes Licensing Guidance, Revision 1, October 07, 2016.
Memorandum from M. Dapas to D. Dorman, C. Pederson, K. Kennedy; ‘‘Revision of Technical Basis for Granting Specific Exemption from Decommissioning Funding Plan Requirement for Germanium-68/Gallium-68 Generators,’’ July 13, 2017.
SECY–18–0015, ‘‘Staff Evaluation of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Program for Regulating Patient Release After
Radioisotope Therapy,’’ January 29, 2018.
Management Directive 5.9, ‘‘Adequacy and Compatibility of Program Elements for Agreement State Programs,’’ April 26, 2018
Leksell Gamma Knife® PerfexionTM and Leksell Gamma Knife® IconTM Licensing Guidance, Revision 1, January 10, 2019 .....
Germanium-68/Gallium-68 Pharmaceutical Grade Generators Licensing Guidance, July 2019 ....................................................
NUREG-1556, Volume 9, Revision 3, ‘‘Consolidated Guidance About Materials Licenses: Program-Specific Guidance About
Medical Use Licenses, Final Report,’’ September 2019.
SECY–00–0118, Final Rules—10 CFR part 35, ‘‘Medical Use of Byproduct Material’’ and 10 CFR part 20, ‘‘Standards for Protection Against Radiation,’’ May 31, 2000.
Xcision® GammaPodTM Licensing Guidance, January 22, 2020 ....................................................................................................
NRC Enforcement Policy, January 15, 2020 ...................................................................................................................................
State and Tribal Communication STC–20–049, ‘‘Responses to the Organization of Agreement States (OAS) Requests Regarding Clarification of Compatibility Categories for Medical Licensing Guidance Documents; and Use of Safety Evaluation
Reports (SERs) as a Legally Binding Requirement,’’ June 30, 2020.
SECY–21–0013, ‘‘Rulemaking Plan to Establish Requirements for Rubidium-82 Generators and Emerging Medical Technologies,’’ February 9, 2021.
Yttrium-90 Microsphere Brachytherapy Sources and Devices TheraSphere® and SIR-Spheres® Licensing Guidance, Revision
10.2, April 20, 2021.
NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC, RadioGenix® Molybdenum-99/Technetium-99m Generator System; Licensing Guidance for Medical Use Licensees, Medical Use Permittees, and Commercial Nuclear Pharmacies, December 17, 2021.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Jun 30, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM
03JYP1
62 FR 4120.
72 FR 55864.
ML091140370.
ML13101A318.
ML13179A287.
ML16197A568.
ML17075A487.
ML17279B139
(package).
ML18081A070.
ML18333A365.
ML19106A367.
ML19256C219.
ML003698513.
ML19304B370.
ML19352E921.
ML20178A610.
ML20261H562.
ML21089A364.
ML21350A064.
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 126 / Monday, July 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
ADAMS
accession No.
or Federal
Register
citation
Document
Staff Requirements Memorandum, SRM–SECY–21–0013, ‘‘Rulemaking Plan to Establish Requirements for rubidium-82 Generators and Emerging Medical Technologies,’’ January 13, 2022.
Staff Requirements Memorandum, SRM–SECY–20–0005, ‘‘Rulemaking Plan for Training and Experience Requirements for
Unsealed Byproduct Material (10 CFR part 35),’’ January 27, 2022.
Alpha Tau Alpha DaRTTM Manual Brachytherapy Licensing Guidance, March 10, 2022 ..............................................................
Appendix, Consolidated Technical Analysis (chart with list of 10 CFR part 35 regulations and conditions applicable to use of
Alpha DaRTTM).
Letter to All Agreement States, Connecticut, and Indiana; ‘‘Results of Annual Count of Radioactive Material Licenses in the
National Materials Program’’ (STC–22–034), May 19, 2022.
NRC Strategic Plan, NUREG–1614, Vol. 8, ‘‘Strategic Plan, Fiscal Years 2022–2026’’ ................................................................
Regulatory Basis, ‘‘Rubidium-82 Generators, Emerging Technologies, and Other Medical Use of Byproduct Material,’’ June
2023.
The NRC may post materials related
to this document, including public
comments, on the Federal rulemaking
website at https://www.regulations.gov
under Docket ID NRC–2018–0297. In
addition, the Federal rulemaking
website allows members of the public to
receive alerts when changes or additions
occur in a docket folder. To subscribe:
(1) navigate to the docket folder (NRC–
2018–0297); (2) click the ‘‘Subscribe’’
link; and (3) enter an email address and
click on the ‘‘Subscribe’’ link.
The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub.
L. 111–274) requires Federal agencies to
write documents in a clear, concise, and
well-organized manner. The NRC has
written this document to be consistent
with the Plain Writing Act as well as the
Presidential Memorandum, ‘‘Plain
Language in Government Writing,’’
published June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31883).
The NRC requests comment on this
document with respect to the clarity and
effectiveness of the language used.
Dated: June 27, 2023.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John M. Moses,
Deputy Director, Division of Rulemaking,
Environmental, and Financial Support, Office
of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2023–14018 Filed 6–30–23; 8:45 am]
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Jun 30, 2023
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. FAA–2023–1441 Airspace
Docket No. 22–AAL–25]
RIN 2120–AA66
Revocation of Colored Federal Airway
Blue 12 (B–12) in the Vicinity of Kodiak
Island, AK
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
VI. Plain Writing
Jkt 259001
This action proposes to
revoke Colored Federal airway Blue 12
(B–12) in the vicinity of Kodiak Island,
AK due to the previous establishment of
Area Navigation (RNAV) route T–385 in
support of a large and comprehensive Troute modernization project for the state
of Alaska.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 17, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Send comments identified
by FAA Docket No. FAA–2023–1441
and Airspace Docket No. 22–AAL–25
using any of the following methods:
* Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
www.regulations.gov and follow the
online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
* Mail: Send comments to Docket
Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Room W12–140, West
Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC
20590–0001.
* Hand Delivery or Courier: Take
comments to Docket Operations in
Room W12–140 of the West Building
Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
42659
Sfmt 4702
ML22013A266.
ML22027A519.
ML22018A225.
ML22018A223.
ML22139A026.
ML22067A170.
ML23122A356.
* Fax: Fax comments to Docket
Operations at (202) 493–2251.
Docket: Background documents or
comments received may be read at
www.regulations.gov at any time.
Follow the online instructions for
accessing the docket or go to the Docket
Operations in Room W12–140 of the
West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed
online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/
publications/. You may also contact the
Rules and Regulations Group, Office of
Policy, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone: (202) 267–8783.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steven Roff, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267–8783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for This Rulemaking
The FAA’s authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code.
Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator.
Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the
agency’s authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part A,
Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that
section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use
of the airspace necessary to ensure the
safety of aircraft and the efficient use of
airspace. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority as it would
modify the route structure as necessary
to preserve the safe and efficient flow of
E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM
03JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 126 (Monday, July 3, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42654-42659]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-14018]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 126 / Monday, July 3, 2023 / Proposed
Rules
[[Page 42654]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 35
[Docket No. NRC-2018-0297]
RIN 3150-AK80
Rubidium-82 Generators, Emerging Technologies, and Other Medical
Use of Byproduct Material
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Regulatory basis; notice of public meeting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is conducting
rulemaking to add requirements for calibration and dosage measurement
for certain generator systems and establish performance-based
requirements for existing and future emerging medical technologies. The
NRC is also considering additional changes to its medical use
regulations to accommodate developments in the medical field related to
new radiopharmaceuticals and emerging medical technologies. The
rulemaking will affect medical licensees who use these technologies and
evaluate the current training and experience requirements for emerging
medical technologies. The NRC is requesting comments from the public on
the regulatory basis for this rulemaking. The NRC plans to hold one or
more public meetings during the comment period to promote full
understanding of the contemplated action and facilitate public comment.
DATES: Submit comments by October 31, 2023. Comments received after
this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC
is able to ensure consideration only for comments received before this
date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods;
however, the NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the
Federal rulemaking website:
Federal Rulemaking website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0297. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Dawn Forder; telephone: 301-415-3407;
email: [email protected]. For technical questions contact the
individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
Email comments to: [email protected]. If you do
not receive an automatic email reply confirming receipt, then contact
us at 301-415-1677.
Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff. For additional direction on obtaining information
and submitting comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting
Comments'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Celimar Valentin-Rodriguez, telephone:
301-415-7124, email: [email protected]; and Maryann
Ayoade, telephone: 301-415-0862, email: [email protected]. Both
are staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0297 when contacting the NRC
about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain
publicly available information related to this action by any of the
following methods:
Federal Rulemaking website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0297.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or
by email to [email protected]. For the convenience of the reader,
instructions about obtaining materials referenced in this document are
provided in the ``Availability of Documents'' section.
NRC's PDR: The PDR, where you may examine and order copies
of publicly available documents, is open by appointment. To make an
appointment to visit the PDR, please send an email to
[email protected] or call 1-80-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, between 8
a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern time, Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
B. Submitting Comments
The NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the
Federal rulemaking website (https://www.regulations.gov). Please
include Docket ID NRC-2018-0297 in your comment submission.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at
https://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions
into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons
for submission to the NRC, you should inform those persons not to
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove such information before making the comment submissions available
to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.
II. Discussion
The NRC is requesting comment on a regulatory basis to support a
rulemaking that would amend part 35 of title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), ``Medical use of byproduct material,'' to add
requirements for calibration and dosage measurement for strontium-82/
rubidium-82 generators (hereafter referred to as Rb-82 generators) and
establish performance-based requirements for existing and future
emerging medical technologies (EMTs). The NRC is also considering
additional changes to its medical use regulations to accommodate
developments in the medical field related to new radiopharmaceuticals
[[Page 42655]]
and EMTs. Additionally, the NRC is evaluating the current training and
experience requirements required for authorized users (AUs) of EMTs to
fulfill their radiation safety-related duties and supervisory roles.
A regulatory basis is a precursor to a proposed rule and describes
the NRC's planned approach for revising the regulations. This
regulatory basis (1) includes a discussion of the background of the
regulatory issues, (2) explains the proposed areas of change to the
regulations and how those changes could resolve the issues, (3)
provides the technical and policy information used to support the
regulatory basis, and (4) identifies different alternatives to address
the regulatory issues and evaluates the cost and benefits of rulemaking
and the alternatives. The regulatory basis also explains the
limitations on the scope and quality of the regulatory basis, such as
known uncertainties in the data or methods of analysis, and the
mitigation measures that address these limitations.
III. Specific Requests for Comment
The NRC considers a regulatory basis to be a pre-rulemaking
document. If the NRC decides to pursue rulemaking, the NRC will publish
a proposed rule that will seek public comment. Currently, the NRC is
seeking advice and recommendations from the public on the regulatory
basis.
The regulatory basis, titled ``Rubidium-82 Generators, Emerging
Technologies, and Other Medical Use of Byproduct Material--Regulatory
Basis,'' can be obtained at ADAMS Accession No. ML23122A356. The
regulatory basis evaluates the existing regulatory framework for Rb-82
generators, including the use of enforcement discretion when licensees
who use Rb-82 generators cannot meet existing requirements for
calibration, and dosage determination and what type of regulatory
changes would need to be considered to permit such action. In addition,
the regulatory basis evaluates what regulatory changes are needed to
establish risk-informed, performance-based requirements for existing
and future emerging medical technologies.
The NRC will consider any comments received on the regulatory basis
in the development of the proposed rule and will respond to the
comments in the proposed rule. The regulatory basis describes all of
the regulatory changes being considered, and the NRC is requesting
comment regarding some of these potential changes. Please indicate the
topic and item number with your response or comment:
Request for Comment Regarding Averted Costs to Licensees
Section 8 of the regulatory basis document discusses potential
rulemaking costs and other impacts to the NRC (section 8.3), Agreement
States (section 8.4), and licensees (section 8.5). The analyses are
based on the NRC's preliminary assessment and estimates, and the NRC
will conduct a more detailed cost and impact evaluation in the draft
regulatory analysis that will accompany the proposed rule. To assist
the NRC in conducting this detailed analysis, please provide comments
on whether licensees would realize averted costs from a more
streamlined licensing of existing and future EMTs. Explain why or why
not.
Request for Comment on Topics in Appendix A of the Regulatory Basis
The specific areas for comment that follow are from appendix A of
the regulatory basis, and the numbering scheme matches the numbering in
appendix A.
Generator Systems (See Regulatory Basis Section A.1)
The NRC is considering regulatory changes to address calibration
and dose determination requirements for rubidium-82 generators. In
addition, the NRC is also considering regulatory changes to address
generators currently licensed under 10 CFR part 35, subpart K and novel
generator systems.
Question A.1.1: Please provide comments on the need for radiation
safety officers to have specific training for all generator systems
licensed under 10 CFR part 35, subpart D, ``Unsealed Byproduct
Material--Written Directive Not Required.'' If general awareness on
radionuclide generators, including their functions and risks, is
sufficient, explain why.
The NRC is considering amending the requirement in Sec. 35.63,
``Determination of dosages of unsealed byproduct material for medical
use,'' to clarify that, for the incremental administration of rubidium-
82, dose measurements do not have to be complete before administration
when the dose is measured continuously during the infusion of Rb-82
from a generator to the patient.
Question A.1.2: Please provide comments on whether and how the NRC
should allow the completion of dosage measurement after the beginning
of an incremental administration for radionuclides other than Rb-82.
How would such an allowance be bounded? What considerations should go
into the expansion of this flexibility?
Question A.1.3: The NRC has found that AUs authorized under Sec.
35.290, ``Training for imaging and localization studies,'' have
sufficient understanding of radionuclide generators, and the NRC is
considering revising Sec. 35.27, Supervision,'' to require device-
specific training requirements for supervised individuals. Please
provide comments with a rationale on whether Sec. 35.290 AUs should
also be required to have device-specific training for all radionuclide
generators for which they supervise the use.
Intravascular Brachytherapy Systems (See Regulatory Basis Section A.2)
The NRC is considering revisions to 10 CFR part 35, subpart F,
``Manual Brachytherapy,'' to incorporate regulatory requirements for
intravascular brachytherapy (IVB).
Question A.2.1: The NRC is considering adding a new section under
subpart F to address the specific training and experience (T&E)
requirements to be an AU for IVB and other uses under Sec. 35.401
(liquid brachytherapy, diffusion brachytherapy, and eye applicators).
Please provide comments on the sufficiency of the T&E for AUs as
outlined in the current EMT licensing guidance documents for IVB,
liquid brachytherapy, and eye applicators. Specifically, the NRC is
seeking comments on the knowledge topics encompassing the safety-
related characteristics of these EMTs required for AUs to fulfill their
radiation safety-related duties and supervision roles; the methods on
how knowledge topics should be acquired; and consideration for
continuing education, vendor training for new medical uses, and
training on NRC regulatory requirements.
Liquid Brachytherapy Sources and Devices (See Regulatory Basis Section
A.3)
The NRC is considering changes to 10 CFR part 35, subpart F,
``Manual Brachytherapy'' and other pertinent sections to incorporate
regulatory requirements for liquid brachytherapy.
Question A.3.1: The NRC has found that the hazards of liquid
brachytherapy are similar to those of microsources and microspheres.
Please provide comments with a rationale on whether the current
definition of manual brachytherapy in Sec. 35.2, ``Definitions,''
should be revised to include liquid brachytherapy and exclude
microsources or if liquid brachytherapy should be included in the newly
proposed subpart I for microsources.
Question A.3.2: The NRC is proposing to add a new Sec. 35.71,
``Contamination
[[Page 42656]]
control,'' that would require licensees to develop, implement, and
maintain procedures addressing contamination control and spill response
for the uses authorized on the license. The NRC is seeking input on
whether this requirement is needed or if the requirements in 10 CFR
part 20, ``Standards for Protection against Radiation,'' are sufficient
for contamination control. Please provide comments on this proposed
requirement and indicate if it should apply to all medical licensees or
to a certain subset and why.
Question A.3.3: The NRC is considering amending Sec. 35.2 to
define the term ``source leakage'' as it relates to liquid
brachytherapy. For example, a possible leakage rate could be any
leakage from a liquid brachytherapy source that results in a dose
exceeding 0.5 Sievert (50 rem) dose equivalent to any individual organ
other than the treatment site. Please comment on whether this limit is
appropriate and explain why or why not. What types of limits for liquid
brachytherapy device leakage should the NRC consider (e.g., activity-
based, dose-based, external to the patient)?
Gamma Stereotactic Radiosurgery and Photon Emitting Teletherapy Units
(See Regulatory Basis Section A.6)
Since the NRC established requirements for gamma stereotactic
radiosurgery units in 2002, the design and engineering elements have
evolved and the components and operation of newer GSR units are
significantly different from the units that the NRC currently regulates
under 10 CFR part 35, subpart H, ``Photon Emitting Remote Afterloader
Units, Teletherapy Units, and Gamma Stereotactic Radiosurgery Units.''
Question A.6.1: Please provide comments on the need for model-
specific training for radiation safety officers for certain 10 CFR part
35, subpart H devices. If model-specific training is needed, how should
the NRC determine which devices would require such training?
Question A.6.2: Current NRC requirements in 10 CFR part 35, subpart
H, are focused on components critical to patient and facility safety
for the use of these devices. The proposed changes to subpart H focus
on elements and objectives rather than specific components. Examples of
elements include source output, source collimation, source position,
source attenuation, patient safety, and facility safety. Please provide
comments on other elements that should be considered.
Question A.6.3: Please provide comments on what types of objective
tests the NRC should require for full calibration measures for 10 CFR
part 35, subpart H devices. What functional elements should be
considered for safety?
Question A.6.4: Please provide comments on what types of objective
tests the NRC should require for periodic spot-checks for 10 CFR part
35, subpart H devices. Additionally, what functional elements should be
considered critical to safety?
Microsource Manual Brachytherapy (See Regulatory Basis Section A.7)
The use of microspheres for permanent implant manual brachytherapy
has grown significantly over the past 20 years, and the NRC has accrued
valuable operating experience. To incorporate the use of new and
existing microspheres and microparticles for manual brachytherapy, the
NRC is considering creating a new subpart within 10 CFR part 35 in the
currently ``reserved'' subpart I of 10 CFR part 35.
Question A.7.1: The NRC is considering defining a ``microsource''
in Sec. 35.2 as microparticles and microspheres. What types of
radiation (such as alpha, beta, gamma) should fit into the definition
of ``microsource''? Please include comments and a rationale for whether
(1) microspheres should be limited to specific types of radiation or
certain energies; (2) microsources should be limited to sealed sources
with a Sealed Source and Device (SS&D) registry; (3) unsealed
microsources should be required to have a SS&D registry; and (4) any
additional changes are needed in the current regulations for
microsource brachytherapy that would increase flexibility for future
microsource brachytherapy.
Question A.7.2: The NRC is considering defining ``physiological
equilibrium'' in Sec. 35.2 to include stasis or other states of
equilibrium. Please provide comments on what should be included in a
definition of physiological equilibrium or identify other
considerations for physiological stop points.
Question A.7.3: As the complexity of the medical use of byproduct
material increases, use of teams in medical care is becoming more
common. Please provide comments on the fundamental elements of a
successful team-approach program.
Section 35.40, ``Written directives,'' would be amended to clarify
that requirements for manual brachytherapy uses under 10 CFR part 35,
subpart F, are in Sec. 35.40(b)(6). The NRC is considering listing the
subpart I requirements for written directives for microsource manual
brachytherapy uses under a new item in Sec. 35.40(b).
Question A.7.4: For microsource manual brachytherapy, please
provide comments and a rationale for whether the before-implant written
directive should specify the dose or activity.
Question A.7.5: For microsource manual brachytherapy, please
provide comments and a rationale for whether the after-implant written
directive should specify the activity administered or the dose
delivered to the treatment site.
Question A.7.6: As required by Sec. 35.41 for determining whether
a medical event has occurred (as defined in Sec. 35.3045), please
comment on whether and why the NRC should require calculating and
documenting the activity administered or the activity or dose
specifically delivered to the treatment site. By what deadline (e.g.,
number of hours or days) should this determination be made?
Question A.7.7: For microsource manual brachytherapy, please
comment on whether the NRC should require post-treatment imaging to
confirm that the treatment was delivered in accordance with the written
directive. Why or why not? What other mechanisms are available to
confirm that the treatment was delivered in accordance with the written
directive?
Question A.7.8: Please identify any tasks that would require an
authorized medical physicist for the use of microsphere manual
brachytherapy and identify whether and how the NRC should revise the
training and experience requirements for authorized medical physicists
in Sec. 35.51, ``Training for an authorized medical physicist.''
Question A.7.9: Please comment on what types of use should be
permitted for microsource manual brachytherapy, including whether the
use should be limited to that approved in the sealed source and device
registry. Please comment on why unsealed microsources without a unique
delivery system should or should not be allowed.
Question A.7.10: Please comment on why any new requirements for
microsource manual brachytherapy should or should not be limited to
permanent implants.
Question A.7.11: The NRC is considering establishing minimum safety
procedures for microsources and requiring instructions to assure
adequate protection of public health and safety. These changes are
based on current EMT licensing guidance for yttrium-90 (Y-90)
microspheres and
[[Page 42657]]
expected new uses of microsources. Please identify and comment on other
items that should be included in a new requirement for safety
procedures and instructions for microsource manual brachytherapy.
Question A.7.12: The NRC is considering establishing minimum safety
precautions (controls) to assure adequate protection of public health
and safety. These considerations are based on current EMT licensing
guidance for Y-90 microspheres and expected new uses of microsources.
Please identify and comment on other items that should be included in a
new requirement for safety precautions (controls) for microsource
manual brachytherapy.
Question A.7.13: The NRC is seeking input on the need for continued
conditional approval for AUs of Y-90 microspheres. The current
licensing guidance for Y-90 microspheres states that an AU should
successfully complete training in the operation of the delivery system,
safety procedures, and clinical use for the specific type of Y-90
microsphere for which authorization is sought. The guidance specifies
that clinical use training to support unsupervised use should include
at least three hands-on patient cases for each type of Y-90 microsphere
requested, conducted in the physical presence of an AU who is
authorized for the type of Y-90 microsphere for which the individual is
seeking authorization. The guidance allows conditional approval of an
AU before completing these three hands-on patient cases if a proposed
AU cannot complete patient cases before authorization. This conditional
approval was originally added to the guidance because there were
limited Y-90 microsphere licensees and AUs to train future AUs. As the
use of Y-90 microspheres has increased significantly, please comment on
the continued need for conditional approval for Y-90 microsphere AUs.
Indicate why the NRC should or should not continue to allow this
pathway for all microspheres and microsources AUs.
Question A.7.14: The NRC is seeking input on the 80 hours of
classroom and laboratory training for interventional radiologists
pursuing AU status for Y-90 microsphere and other microsource uses. The
NRC in the current EMT licensing guidance for Y-90 microspheres
includes a pathway for interventional radiologists to become AUs for Y-
90 microspheres use. This pathway requires the interventional
radiologist to demonstrate that they have 80 hours of classroom and
laboratory training in specific topics and specific work experience
important to radiation safety, in addition to demonstrating they have
sufficient clinical interventional radiology and diagnostic radiology
experience. Please comment on why 80 hours is or is not an appropriate
amount of time to ensure these topics are adequately covered. Who
should supervise the work experience to ensure the future AUs have
adequate radiation safety knowledge and why?
Question A.7.15: The NRC is seeking input on classroom and
laboratory training topics for physicians seeking AU status for all
microspheres or other types of microsources. The NRC, in the current
EMT licensing guidance for Y-90 microspheres, provides a pathway for
interventional radiologists and physicians that meet the training and
experience requirements in Sec. Sec. 35.390 and 35.490 to become AUs
for Y-90 microspheres use. This pathway does not require any classroom
and laboratory training or specific work experience for these
physicians besides demonstration of successfully completed training in
the operation of the delivery system, safety procedures, and clinical
use (including hands-on patient cases) for the type of Y-90 microsphere
for which authorization is sought. Please identify and comment on any
additional classroom and laboratory training topics or specific work
experience that should be required for these physicians to become AUs
for all microspheres or other types of microsources in subpart I. What
additional training and work experience should be considered, if any,
and why?
Question A.7.16: The NRC is seeking input on the pathways for
physicians to become AUs for use of microspheres and other types of
microsources. The NRC in the current EMT licensing guidance for Y-90
microspheres provides pathways for interventional radiologists and
physicians that meet the training and experience requirements in
Sec. Sec. 35.390 and 35.490 to become AUs for Y-90 microsphere use.
Please comment on whether and why the NRC should or should not provide
additional pathways for other types of physicians to become AUs for use
of microspheres or other types of microsources.
Question A.7.17: In most circumstances, are AUs the individuals
administering Y-90 microspheres? Is it appropriate for other
individuals to administer microsources under the supervision of an AU?
Why or why not?
Other Part 35 Changes: Novel Radionuclide Generators (See Regulatory
Basis Section A.8)
Question A.8.1: Industry is evaluating various novel radionuclide
generators. Some novel radionuclide generators may be utilized to
compound therapeutic dosages of unsealed byproduct material. The NRC is
considering a requirement for licensees to perform breakthrough testing
on novel radionuclide generators and report instances when breakthrough
exceeds a defined limit. Since breakthrough limits for some novel
radionuclide generators have not been established by the United States
Pharmacopeia, please explain why it would or would not be sufficient
for licensees to develop, implement, and maintain procedures for
breakthrough testing and reporting for novel radionuclide generators.
Other Part 35 Changes: Training and Experience (See Regulatory Basis
Section A.8)
Question A.8.2: Please comment on the type of T&E that should be
required for AUs utilizing novel radionuclide generators and the type
of T&E for authorized nuclear pharmacists utilizing novel radionuclide
generators.
Question A.8.3: Please comment on why the current structure for
authorized medical physicist involvement in 10 CFR part 35, subpart F,
``Manual Brachytherapy,'' is or is not sufficient. If not sufficient,
what specific tasks or skills should be performed by an authorized
medical physicist for manual brachytherapy?
Question A.8.4: Due to the increased number and complexity of EMTs,
please comment on why the NRC should or should not require continuing
education for AUs. If continuing education should be required, what
should it entail, at what frequency should it be acquired, and how
should knowledge topics be acquired?
Question A.8.5: Please comment on the need for AUs for Sec. 35.200
to have device-specific training on radionuclide generators. If device-
specific training is needed, what topics should the training include?
Please explain why the training should or should not be specific to the
radionuclide generators for which the AUs are supervising the use.
Question A.8.6: Please comment and provide a rationale for whether
physicians authorized for full use under Sec. 35.300 need additional
T&E to fulfill their radiation safety-related duties and supervision
roles because of expected emerging therapeutic radiopharmaceuticals.
Please comment on why additional training is or is not needed on
regulatory requirements for emerging therapeutic radiopharmaceuticals.
If needed, what topics should the T&E include? What specific training
should these AUs be
[[Page 42658]]
required to have (e.g., vendor training on clinical use and safety
procedures) prior to first-time use, if any? Why should they be
required or not required to have continuing education?
Question A.8.7: Please comment on why the current AU T&E
requirements for use of sealed sources and medical devices for
diagnosis in Sec. 35.590 (i.e., 8 hours of classroom and laboratory
training in basic radionuclide handling techniques specifically
applicable to the use of the device authorized under Sec. 35.500, as
well as device-specific training in the use of the device) are or are
not appropriate for emerging sealed sources and medical devices
containing sealed sources. If AUs for Sec. 35.500 need additional
training and work experience on emerging sealed sources and medical
devices containing sealed sources for diagnosis, what topics should be
covered?
Other Part 35 Changes: Security and Controls
Question A.8.8: Please comment on any specific changes that are
needed to secure consoles, keys, and passwords for remote afterloader
units, teletherapy units, and gamma stereotactic radiosurgery units
because of changes in technology.
Question A.8.9: Please comment on the types of doors or entry
controls that would be acceptable to maintain security of licensed
material while not interfering with patient care. For example, why
should a physical door be required, or why other entry controls such as
lasers acceptable?
IV. Cumulative Effects of Regulation
The NRC is following its Cumulative Effects of Regulation (CER)
process by engaging with external stakeholders throughout this
regulatory basis and related regulatory activities. Opportunity for
public comment is provided to the public at this regulatory basis
stage.
1. In light of any current or projected CER challenges, how should
NRC provide sufficient time to implement the new proposed requirements,
including changes to programs and procedures?
2. If CER challenges currently exist or are expected, what should
be done to address them? For example, if more time is required for
implementation of the new requirements, what period of time is
sufficient?
3. What other (NRC or other agency) regulatory actions (e.g.,
orders, generic communications, license amendment requests inspection
findings of a generic nature) influence the implementation of the
proposed rule's requirements?
4. What are the unintended consequences, and how should they be
addressed?
5. Please comment on the NRC's cost and benefit estimates in the
regulatory basis.
V. Public Meetings
During the public comment period, the NRC will hold one or more
public meetings to facilitate discussion of the proposed rulemaking
described in the regulatory basis document, including the questions in
Appendix A of the document and provided in Section III of this
document.
The NRC will publish a notice of the location, time, and agenda of
the meetings in the docket on Regulations.gov, and on the NRC's public
meeting website at least 10 calendar days before the meeting.
Stakeholders should monitor the NRC's public meeting website for
information about the public meeting at: https://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/index.cfm.
VI. Availability of Documents
The documents identified in the following table are available to
interested persons through one or more of the following methods, as
indicated.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADAMS accession No. or
Document Federal Register
citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Rule--``Criteria for the Release of 62 FR 4120.
Individuals Administered Radioactive
Material,'' January 29, 1997.
Final Rule--``Requirements for Expanded 72 FR 55864.
Definition of Byproduct Material,'' October
1, 2007.
Licensing Guidance for the Intraocular Use of ML091140370.
NeoVista, Inc.Epi-Rad90\TM\ (Strontium-90)
Ophthalmic System, April 2009.
Enforcement Guidance Memorandum (EGM) 13-003, ML13101A318.
``Enforcement Guidance Memorandum--Interim
Guidance for Dispositioning Violations
Involving 10 CFR 35.60 and 10 CFR 35.63 for
the Calibration of Instrumentation to
Measure the Activity of Rubidium-82 and the
Determination of Rubidium-82 Patient
Dosages,'' April 18, 2013.
ViewRay\TM\ System for Radiation Therapy ML13179A287.
Licensing Guidance, July 24, 2013.
Low Activity Radioactive Seeds Used for ML16197A568.
Localization of Non-Palpable Lesions and
Lymph Nodes Licensing Guidance, Revision 1,
October 07, 2016.
Memorandum from M. Dapas to D. Dorman, C. ML17075A487.
Pederson, K. Kennedy; ``Revision of
Technical Basis for Granting Specific
Exemption from Decommissioning Funding Plan
Requirement for Germanium-68/Gallium-68
Generators,'' July 13, 2017.
SECY-18-0015, ``Staff Evaluation of the U.S. ML17279B139 (package).
Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Program for
Regulating Patient Release After
Radioisotope Therapy,'' January 29, 2018.
Management Directive 5.9, ``Adequacy and ML18081A070.
Compatibility of Program Elements for
Agreement State Programs,'' April 26, 2018.
Leksell Gamma Knife[supreg] PerfexionTM and ML18333A365.
Leksell Gamma Knife[supreg] IconTM Licensing
Guidance, Revision 1, January 10, 2019.
Germanium-68/Gallium-68 Pharmaceutical Grade ML19106A367.
Generators Licensing Guidance, July 2019.
NUREG[dash]1556, Volume 9, Revision 3, ML19256C219.
``Consolidated Guidance About Materials
Licenses: Program-Specific Guidance About
Medical Use Licenses, Final Report,''
September 2019.
SECY-00-0118, Final Rules--10 CFR part 35, ML003698513.
``Medical Use of Byproduct Material'' and 10
CFR part 20, ``Standards for Protection
Against Radiation,'' May 31, 2000.
Xcision[supreg] GammaPodTM Licensing ML19304B370.
Guidance, January 22, 2020.
NRC Enforcement Policy, January 15, 2020..... ML19352E921.
State and Tribal Communication STC-20-049, ML20178A610.
``Responses to the Organization of Agreement
States (OAS) Requests Regarding
Clarification of Compatibility Categories
for Medical Licensing Guidance Documents;
and Use of Safety Evaluation Reports (SERs)
as a Legally Binding Requirement,'' June 30,
2020.
SECY-21-0013, ``Rulemaking Plan to Establish ML20261H562.
Requirements for Rubidium-82 Generators and
Emerging Medical Technologies,'' February 9,
2021.
Yttrium-90 Microsphere Brachytherapy Sources ML21089A364.
and Devices TheraSphere[supreg] and SIR-
Spheres[supreg] Licensing Guidance, Revision
10.2, April 20, 2021.
NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC, ML21350A064.
RadioGenix[supreg] Molybdenum-99/Technetium-
99m Generator System; Licensing Guidance for
Medical Use Licensees, Medical Use
Permittees, and Commercial Nuclear
Pharmacies, December 17, 2021.
[[Page 42659]]
Staff Requirements Memorandum, SRM-SECY-21- ML22013A266.
0013, ``Rulemaking Plan to Establish
Requirements for rubidium-82 Generators and
Emerging Medical Technologies,'' January 13,
2022.
Staff Requirements Memorandum, SRM-SECY-20- ML22027A519.
0005, ``Rulemaking Plan for Training and
Experience Requirements for Unsealed
Byproduct Material (10 CFR part 35),''
January 27, 2022.
Alpha Tau Alpha DaRT\TM\ Manual Brachytherapy ML22018A225.
Licensing Guidance, March 10, 2022.
Appendix, Consolidated Technical Analysis ML22018A223.
(chart with list of 10 CFR part 35
regulations and conditions applicable to use
of Alpha DaRT\TM\).
Letter to All Agreement States, Connecticut, ML22139A026.
and Indiana; ``Results of Annual Count of
Radioactive Material Licenses in the
National Materials Program'' (STC-22-034),
May 19, 2022.
NRC Strategic Plan, NUREG-1614, Vol. 8, ML22067A170.
``Strategic Plan, Fiscal Years 2022-2026''.
Regulatory Basis, ``Rubidium-82 Generators, ML23122A356.
Emerging Technologies, and Other Medical Use
of Byproduct Material,'' June 2023.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NRC may post materials related to this document, including
public comments, on the Federal rulemaking website at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2018-0297. In addition, the
Federal rulemaking website allows members of the public to receive
alerts when changes or additions occur in a docket folder. To
subscribe: (1) navigate to the docket folder (NRC-2018-0297); (2) click
the ``Subscribe'' link; and (3) enter an email address and click on the
``Subscribe'' link.
VI. Plain Writing
The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-274) requires Federal
agencies to write documents in a clear, concise, and well-organized
manner. The NRC has written this document to be consistent with the
Plain Writing Act as well as the Presidential Memorandum, ``Plain
Language in Government Writing,'' published June 10, 1998 (63 FR
31883). The NRC requests comment on this document with respect to the
clarity and effectiveness of the language used.
Dated: June 27, 2023.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John M. Moses,
Deputy Director, Division of Rulemaking, Environmental, and Financial
Support, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2023-14018 Filed 6-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P