ML19326B096
| ML19326B096 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 10/14/1977 |
| From: | Engelhardt T NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Allotta J GALLON, KALNIZ & IORIO |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19326B095 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8003060902 | |
| Download: ML19326B096 (2) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
OO D
9
[. mag %
UNITED STATES U QQ e
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMM!SSION
['4.
j;4 '
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20S55 g 'Q~
4
,l I
. A
_L a
a T.ft%/
g i_4 G77 i
%e Jcseph J. Allotta, Esq.
Gallon, Kalniz & Iorio, Co., L.P. A.
Gallon Building 3161 North Republic Boulevard Toledo, Ohio 43615 i
Dear Mr. A11otta:
23, 1977, to the Energy Research and Development Your letter of Septemocr Administration relating to employment of members of the International Brotherhood of Electrien1 Workers (IBEW), Local 8, at the Davis-Besse It nuclear power facility has been referred to this agency for response.
is my understanding that recently you have discussed the potential problem described in your letter with Mr. Jakel of this office and that Mr. Husted, the General Manager of Local 8, has had some recent discussion with Messrs. Phillip and Greger, of NRC's Region III Inspection and Enforcement Office, regarding permissible occupational doses and the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements imposed upon NRC licensees relative to exposure (and overexposure -suspected or actual) of workers to radiation.
Although your letter does not so indicate, we understand that your major l
concern--namely, forced unemployment of IBEW members working at a nuclear facility because of exposure to doses of radiation at (or possibly exceeding) the maximum permissible occupational level allowed by the NRC--is at present only an anticipated problem rather than an existing one. There is no provision in the NRC's basic statutory authority--the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 USCA S 2011 et seq.) and the i
Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, (42 USCA $ 5801 et s,eq.) -under which the NRC could require the facility licensee to reta a worker in some other capacity where he or she would not be exposed Nor' are there any statutory provisions in either ofd to any radiation.
these Acts which in your hypothesi::ed situation would afford the expose
' worker a specific basis for a cause action against the licensee-employer.
i 8008060 g
,~r r-7..
Joseph J. Allotta, Esq..
During a recent telephone conversation with you, Mr. Jakel indicated that
.he would send you a copy of the NRC's regulations specifying the per-missible radiation ievels for occupational exposures.
Enclosed is-an up-to-date copy of these regulations which are contained in 10 CFR Part 20, entitled " Standards for Protection Against Radiation."
Sincerely, a
u l Lc:m, Thomas F. Engelhardt Acting Executive Legal Director
Enclosure:
10 CFR Part 20 cc: (w/o Enclosure)
E. Jakel, HQ
- G. Phillip, ILE Region III Offi D
0 uo g I' D ~9F3 A
uS b 3
. e i8 n
e s
m-
-