ML20129C914
| ML20129C914 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/05/1996 |
| From: | Federline M NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Cool D, Martin T, Ten Eyck E NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned), NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20129C917 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-WM-3 NUDOCS 9610240146 | |
| Download: ML20129C914 (3) | |
Text
.
P KfCg i
f1 k
UNITED STATES g
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
E WASHINGTON, D.C. 20565 4001
- q&
October 5, 1996 I
MEMORANDUM TO:
Those on Attached List FROM:
Margaret'V. Federline. Acting Director ' ' 5 i
Division of Waste Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
SUBJECT:
REVIEW 0F DRAFT STANDARDS FOR THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCREDITATION CONFERENCE i
The National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC) is a voluntary association of State and Federal Officials whose mission is l
l to foster the generation of laboratory data of known and l
documented quality through the development of national performance standards for environmental laboratories. to be implemented by i
State and Federal accrediting authorities in a consistent l
fashion."
l
)
The purpose of this memorandum is to request your assistance in reviewing the attached standards that were developed by NELAC.
The NELAC standards are currently organized into six sections: Constitution and Bylaws. Proficiency Testing. On-site Assessment. Accreditation Process.
Quality Systems and Accrediting Authority.
The annual meeting of NELAC was held on July 22-24, 1996.
During this meeting, a majority of the standards were accepted by the conference during the voting session. The conference 1
decided to delay voting on the radioanalysis sub-section of the Quality 1
Systems section pending further review and revision.
AlthoJgh comments are 4
being requested in regards to the entire NELAC standards document particular i
focus is requested in reviewing the radioanalysis sub-sectio;1 of the Quality l
Systems section (pages D-15 through D-18 of the Quality Systems section.
l Appendix D).
The radioanalysis sub-section should be reviewed within the context of the Quality Systems section.
j In addition to technical comments regarding the radioanalysis sub-section, please provide input that will serve to answer the following questions:
1)
How would NELAC standards potentially affect the NRC?
2)
Do the NELAC standards contradict current or planned NRC regulationc.
guidance, or generally accepted practices?
l CONTACT:
Donna Moser. NMSS/DWM
/
/4/ M ii l
(301) 415-6753 p%T LM h 9610240146 961005 PDR WASTE WM-3 PDR:
i e
Multipla Addressees 3)
Should the NRC endorse NELAC? If so, should NELAC be endorsed through regulatory guidance (i.e., revise Regulatory Guide 4.15 to include NELAC accreditation)?
All comments regarding this document are appreciated and are requested by October 25, 1996.
Attachments:
As stated i
TICKET: N/A i
DISTRIBUTION: [PLEASE NOTATE W/ OR W/0 ENCL OR ATT]
l CCtral File MFederline-w/o MBell MWeber c 77,%
f * '"~"A JHolonich JA_upup NMSS r/f DWM t/f
- N_
~J% v g
PUBLIC (ikiSIch r/f)
(Ay roa.s A-Ihr-y)conad
. Ew4
%Dw gusu w LW nys glc, DOCUMENT NAME:S:\\DWM\\LLDP\\DSM2\\NELACMEM.N01
- See previous concurrence OFC LLDP LLDP LLDP, )
LLDP M DWM NAME
- DMoser
- RAbu-Eid TJo r
MWeber-MFeEeNine DATE 9/30/96 9/30/96
/0/ E /96 id / 3/96 to/ T/96 UFFICIA_ RLCURD COPY 9
i i
i
Multiple Addressees 3)
Should the NRC endorse NELAC?
.i t so, should NELAC be endorsed through regulatory guidance (i.e.. revise Regulatory Guide 4.15 to include NELAC accreditation)?
All comments regarding this document are appreciated and are requested by October 25. 1996.
l Attachments:
As stated I
I l
j'
.s s.
i
/
i et. al. i In additica to technical comments regarding the radicanalypical sub-section, -please provide input that will serve to en swpr the
]
following questions:
/
/
1)
How.would NELAC standards potential affect the NRC?
Does NELAC standards contradict current or p'lanned.W.C l
2) j regulations, guidance, or generally accept practices?
I l
All. comments regarding this document are appr,[ciated and are j
requested by October 18, 1996.
If have que tions, please contact Donna Moser on (301) 415-6753.
+
Attachments:
As stated I
1 TICKET: N/A
/
DISTRIBUTION: [PLEASE NOTATE W/ OR W/0 ENCL 0R AU]
f i
Central File MFederline-w/o MBell MWeber JHolonich JAustin-NMSdr/f DWM t/f PUBLIC (Branch r/f) i DOCUMENT NAME: S:\\DWM\\LLDP\\DSM2\\NELACREV.IEW l
0FC LLDP LLDP
/
/ )LLDP LLDP NAME DMosert94 RAbu-E[dA.-/// TJohnson MWeber DATE
& Mo/96
'l/d/96
/ /96
/ /96
/ /96 i
OFFICIALf8C0itDCOPY
./
ACNW:
YES NO IG:
YES NO
/
LSS:
YES NO
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
l t
1 Addressees - Memorandum dated 10/5/96
SUBJECT:
REVIEW OF DRAFT STANDARDS FOR THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCREDITATION CONFERENCE Donald A. Cool. Director Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety Office of Nuclear Mater 31 Safety and Safeguards Elizabeth 0. Ten Lyck. Director Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards Office of Nuclear Material Safety l
and Safeguards Tim Mart n. Acting 0;recter Division of Reactor Program Management Office cf Nuclear Reactor Regulation Frank J. Congel. D1iacter Incident Response Division
- Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operation Data 4
(narles W. Hehl. Director Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Region I Bruce Mallet. Director Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Region II j
Cynthia Pederson. Director Division of Nuclear Materials Safety i
Region III Ross A. Scarano. Director Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Region IV i
Richard P,699 art. Director Office of State Programs Bill M. Morris. Director Division of Regalatory Applications Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 4
s l
Multip15 Addressees 3)
Should the NRC endorse NELAC?
If so, should NELAC be endorsed through regulatory guidarice (i.e., revise Regulatory Guide 4.15 to include NELAC accreditation)?
All comments regarding this document are appreciated and are requested by October 25. 1996.
Attachments:
As stated TICKET: N/A DISTRIBUTION: [PLEASE NOTATE W/ OR W/0 ENCL OR ATT]
Central File MFederline-w/o MBell MWeber C 7?**
- # #"~"*
i JHolonich JAuOiD NMSS r/f i E -L/1
.r m _
Ji&a v y
'PUBLIC (MEEh r/f)
(fw r o*
e eJ h r-W Eh4 tcw ptu m LR Duah DOCUMENT NAME:S:\\DWM\\LLDP\\DSM2\\NELACMEM.N01
- See previous concurrence 0FC LLDP LLDP LLDP 9
LLDP M DWM f
NAME
- DMoser
- RAbu-Eid TJo M r MWeber MFe'deMine I
DATE 9/30/96 9/30/96
/o/E/96
'O/ J/96 u/ r/96 0FFICIA RLLORD COPY
)
l
ls PM Gu
[.
4 UNITED STATES
.j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
f WASHINGTON. D.C. 20555 4001 I
- g
,/
- ..+
October 5, 1996 i
MEMORANDUM T0:
Those on Attached List A
FROM:
Margaret V. Federline. Acting Director '
Division of Waste Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety j
and Safeguards l
SUBJECT:
REVIEW 0F DRAFT STANDARDS FOR THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
)
LABORATORY ACCREDITATION CONFERENCE l
l The National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC) is a voluntary association of State and Federal Officials whose mission is to foster the generation of laboratory data of known and documented quality through the development of national performance standards for environmental laboratories. to be implemented by State and Federal accrediting authorities in a consistent j
fashion."
i Tne purpose of this memorandum is to request your assistance in reviewing the attached standards that were developed by NELAC.
The NELAC standards are currently organized into six sections: Constitution f
and Bylaws. Proficiency Testing. On-site Assessment. Accreditation Process.
i Quality Systems, and Accrediting Authority.
The annual meeting of NELAC was held on July 22-24. 1996.
During this meeting, a majority of the standards were accepted by the conference during the voting session.
The conference decided to delay voting on the radioanalysis sub-section of the Quality Systems section pending further review and revision.
Although comments are being requested in regards to the entire NELAC standards document particular focus is requested in reviewing the radioanalysis sub-section of the Quality Systems section (pages D-15 through D-18 of the Quality Systems section.
Appendix D). The radioanalysis sub-section should be reviewed within the context of the Quality Systems section.
In addition to technical comments regarding the radioanalysis sub-section, please provide input that will serve to answer the following questions:
1)
How would NELAC standards potentially affect the NRC?
2)
Do the NELAC standards contradict current or planned NRC regulations.
guidance, or generally accepted practices?
l CONTACT:
Donna Moser. NMSS/DWM (301) 415-6753 l
Addressees - Memorandum dated 10/5/96
SUBJECT:
REVIEW 0F DRAFT STANDARDS FOR THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCREDITATION CONFERENCE Donald A. Cool Director Division of Industrial and Medical V
'ar Safety Of f Nuclear Material Safety ifeguards
- a..
Elizabeth 0. Ten Eyck. Director Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Tim Martin. Acting Director Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Frank J. Congel. Director Incident Response Division Of fice for Analysis and Evaltration of Operation Data Charles W. Hehl. Director Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Region I Bruce Mallet. Director Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Region II Cynthia Pederson. Director Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Region III Ross A. Scarano. Director Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Region IV Richard Bangart. Director Office of State Programs Bill M. Morris. Directo-Division of Regulatory Applications Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research h