ML19281B076
| ML19281B076 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/29/1979 |
| From: | Ryan R NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP) |
| To: | Carn J NEVADA, STATE OF |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7904200441 | |
| Download: ML19281B076 (2) | |
Text
}
l '
f[.
4, UNITED ST ATES
?%
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisS:0N h'
S WASHING TON, D. C. 20555 c5 o,,
5 MAR 9 GT3 Ref: SA/JOL John H. Carr, M.D., State Health Officer Health Division State Department of Human Resources 505 East King Street Carson City, fievada 89710
Dear Dr. Carr:
This is to confirm the comments made to you by Mr. Joel Lubenau following the annual review of the Nevada radiation control program February 26 to March 2, 1979. The review included an accompaniment of a State inspector, examination of the program's staffing and personnel resources, licensing and compliance activ. ties, and the status of the State radiation control regulations.
As a result of the review of the State's program and the routine exchange of information between the fluclear Regulatory Commission and the State, the staff believes that the State's program for regulation of agreement materials is adequate to protect the public health and safety.
Nevada has not completed action to adopt regulations concerning notices, instructions and reports to workers, and inspections which are equivalent to those contained in 10 CFR Part 19. The addition of these provisions to Nevada's regulations is needed to maintain compatibility. Also, portions of the existing regulations are outdated and do not reflect current regulatory definitions and practices. Revisions to the regulations have been drafted by Nevada staff and have been reviewed for compatibility by NRC. We believe that adoption of these revisions will, in addition to making the regulations compatible, promote efficiency in the regulatory program, particularly in licensing, because of streamlined license requirements.
We have previously commented on the need for inspectors to make independent measurements for radioactive contamination (wipes) at places where unsealed radioactive sources are used, for example, at hospital nuclear medicine laboratories. We again found a need for improvement in this area. We believe the inspectors' reluctance to take wipe samples is influenced by the lack of in-house capability for performing simple laboratory analyses of these samples for alpha and beta-gamma activity.
In Las Vegas, samples must be taken to the EPA laboratory, however, the availability of EPA sources. may be contingent upon continuation of adequate funding of the radiatio.n program at the laboratory.
In Carson City, samples must be taken to a licensee's facility in Reno where they are analyzed gratis. We recommend the State consider establishment of in-house capability for performing such analyses.
790'420oyS/
John H. Carr, M.D..
We again recommend the State obtain equipment for conducting independent evaluations of airborne radioactivity, in particular, high and low volume air samples, a velometer, smoke tubes and a lapel air sampler.
I would appreciate your response to these comments.
I have enclosed a copy of our letter to Mr. Edmundson which convey aur comments on the technical aspects of the program. An extra copy of this letter is enclosed to be placed in your Public Document Room or be otherwise made available for public review.
We appreciate the courtesy and cooperation extended by your staff to Mr. Lubenau during the review.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly. We stand ready to assist you in achieving our common objective of protecting the public health and safety.
Sincerely, Y @L
_f l
i f
(
YJ Robert G. Ryan, Directo Office of State Programs
Enclosure:
As stated cc:
J. Edmundson w/o encl.
NRC Public Document Room r
State Public Document Room t
9 y
)
=6
/
,