ML20136E318

Proposes Changes to Draft Commission Paper, Proposed Rev of 10CFR35 of Human Use of Byproduct Matl

ML20136E318
Person / Time
Issue date:	08/30/1982
From:	Sullivan J NRC OFFICE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (ORM)
To:	Webb Patricia Walker NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
Shared Package
ML20136D915	List: ML20136D909 ML20136E266 ML20136E272 ML20136E278 ML20136E295 ML20136E318 ML20136E323 ML20136E492 ML20136E705 ML20136E879 ML20136F099 ML20136F109 ML20136F154 ML20137Q526 ML20137Q531 ML20137Q538 ML20137Q545 ML20137Q557 ML20137Q566 ML20137Q572 ML20137Q579 ML20137Q585 ML20137Q596 ML20137Q605 ML20137Q612 ML20137Q619 ML20137Q628 ML20137Q633 ML20137Q639 ML20137Q644 ML20137Q650 ML20137Q655 ML20137Q660 ML20137Q668 ML20137Q671 ML20137Q676 ML20137Q682 ML20137Q686 ML20137Q688 ML20137Q690 ML20137Q692 ML20137Q695 ML20137Q697 ML20137Q705 ML20137Q710 ML20137Q715 ML20137Q719 ML20137Q721 ML20137Q724 ML20137Q726 ... further results
References
FRN-50FR30616, RULE-PR-35 NUDOCS 8210210011
Download: ML20136E318 (2)

Text

.,

pii'stto 4'

UNITED STATES g

g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 5

't

%...../

7 ;>

AUG 3 0 1982

,,/

j(:, ~i >

d V

h UY F

,j p

,3 ll_ (b, MEMORANDUM FOR: William J. Walker, Jr.

i Material Licensing Branch h, "

Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards FROM:

John A. Sullivan, Program Analyst Division of Data Automation and Management Information Office of Resource Management

SUBJECT:

DRAFT COMMISSION PAPER " PROPOSED REVISION OF 10 CFR PART 35 ON HUMAN USE OF BYPRODUCT MATERIAL" I was asked to provide you with comments on this paper because I previously worked with Mike MacWilliams on the Licensing Management System (LMS) cost-benefit study. We do have some proposed changes to the paper and enclosures, specifically where they discuss current plans to modify the automated management information system (i.e., to develop the LMS).

The discussion of the LMS in the draft paper gives the impression that the

"/'

• O Commission is being asked to approve development of the LMS (see the first AM" sentence, third paragraph, page 5).

In addition, there is an ambiguous 1

(J ;/d statement that seems to imply that the decisions to improve the LMS require that the Commission first approve a revision of 10 CFR Part 35 (see the last sentence on page 6).

,a I suggest that all of the material starting with the words "If the

' m "' ' 7',, c Commission..." on page 5 and ending with the words "... review of f * /'

• b :

applications," on page 7 be deleted from the draft memo and replaced withi/# '

the first paragraph on page 8 of Enclosure 1 (draft Federal Register l/dA Notice).

~,; a l; w, I also suggest that the second paragraph on page 8 of Enclosure 1 be 3 sw We concluded in the cost-benefit study that reduction in licensing deleted.

application processing time was only one of five objectives that could be j,

j fg '

Although complementary, non-MIS improvements could be '[f

?,','

satisfied by the LMS.

f made and will be necessary, they will not provide the capability to meet

/

the other four objectives.

4

(.. J o S

$N

O Wil? tam J. Walker, Jr.

2-Section 35.18 requires that the licensee notify the Commission if an -

authorized user, Radiation Safety Officer (RS0) or qualified teletherapy calibration expert is no longer affiliated with the licensee's byproduct material program.

Is it anticipated that the names of these individuals

't.

be part of the data base of the LMS? If not, should consideration be given to making it so?

f

()

/

i b i vi N,%

pf1. t y

[ John A. Sullivan, Program Analyst

' Division of Data Automation and Management Information Office of Resource Management cc:

H. Bassett I. Kirk M. MacWilliams

-