ML20129C599

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Ack to Chairman Jackson,Expressing Concern About Country Current Position Re Unintended Importation of Radioactive Matl in Scrap &/Or Products & Request by State Radiation Control Agency for Assistance
ML20129C599
Person / Time
Issue date: 10/16/1996
From: Taylor J
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To: Mobley M
TENNESSEE, STATE OF
References
NUDOCS 9610240067
Download: ML20129C599 (2)


Text

--- - . - - ... - _ _ . .. - _ . - - . .- - - - - . . -. -- . ..

d

([ *f*' 4- UNITED STATES g [ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20066-0001 October 16, 1996

' Mr. Michael H. Mobley, Director Division of Radiological Health Department of Environment  ;

and Conservation i State of Tennessee 3rd Floor, L&C Annex l 401 Church Street I Nashville, TN 37243-1532

Dear Mr. Mobley:

In your July 9,1996, letter to Chairman Jackson, you expressed concern about i this Country's current ~ position regarding unintended importation of radioactive material in scrap and/or products. I can appreciate the burdens which are imposed on a State when a local company finds that it has inadvertently received radioactive material in scrap or other products which '

it has-imported from a foreign _ country, whether or not a radiological emergency has been created. In such cases, we can agree that it is usually best if the shipment can be returned to the foreign supplier. To this end,  ;

companies which import scrap and other susceptible products may need to ,

require take-back provisions in their purchase contracts. This approach is '

considered more appropriate than to request governmental assistance for non-emergency situations, especially in an era of declining budgets. However,  !

because the NRC does not have a primary role in this. area, I have forwarded

.your letter to the U. S. Customs Service and the Environmental Protection Agency for their consideration. Both of these agencies have been working to resolve the unintended importation of radioactive materials issue you raise.

You also raise a second concern regarding the adequacy of Federal response to I a request by a State radiation control agency for assistance. As you know, the Federal Radiological Emergency Response Plan (FRERP) provides a foundation for Federal response for those incidents that pose an actual, potential, or perceived threat of radiological consequences. However, the definition of those incidents is purposefully broad, as discussed in the response to Comment 73 regarding the, draft FRERP. The May 8,1996 Federal Reaister contains the responses to all the comments on the draft. This broad and general definition allows flexibility for the State and Federal governments to jointly develop the appropriate level of response for the specific incident being addressed.  ;

In the Arkansas incident to which you refer, the Arkansas State radiation control and emergency management office and EPA Region VI . agreed that the incident did not constitute a radiological emergency. Nevertheless, EPA and

.D0E provided the State of Arkansas non-emergency assistance in the form of '

the names of companies that could assist NUCOR Steel in disposing of the contaminated steel. Mg tf We believe that the Federal response to the NUCOR event in Arkansas was '

appropriate and that the State correctly called the EPA. Likewise, any i Federal agency contacted-for assistance should be able to refer the caller to 9610240067 961016 PDR- STPRG ESGTN b b PDR g

@dEM)

A

M. H. Mobley the correct agency. Should similar future requests for assistance be made to the NRC Operations Center, we will refer the caller to the appropriate Federal agency for assistance and information.

We felt that the topic of defining appropriate levels of Federal and State response to a radiological incident was important and added it to the agenda of the recent Agreement State meeting on September 17-19, 1996. This discussion forum, which included representatives from FEMA and the EPA, provided an opportunity to exchange views on the issue of Federal / State response. We plan to broach this topic with the Federal Radiological Preparedness Coordinating Committee to determine if further guidance is required to more clearly define Federal and State responsibilities, particularly in situations that do not represent radiological emergencies.

Sincerely, Qs(tytr* k Jgqge RLTev%

James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations Distribution:

File Center JBlaha Public SEbneter EDO R/F (96634) EJordan AEOD R/F (96-88) Dross IRD R/F JRaines ERB R/F (96-26) MGCrutchley JTaylor RBangart JMilhoan CPaperiello HThompson RWilson, EPA JCallan CGJones RTrotter, Customs Service

  • See previous Concurrence:

DISK / DOCUMENT NAME: a:\galloway\mobley To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" - Copy w/o attachment. T - Copy w/ attachment. 'N' - No copy 0FC ER3:AEOD ERB:AE00 D:IRD:AE0D D:AE0D D:SP NAME MGalloway RTHogan FJCongel ELJordan RLBangart l DATE 10/04/96* 10/04/96* 10/04/96* 10/04/96* 10/04/96*

I 0FC OIP D:NMSS ED0 t [ OCM OCA NAME CStoiber CPaperiello JMTaidr GDicus SJackson DATE 10/04/96* 10t07/96* 10/h/96 10/ /96 10/16/96 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY

,