ML20136E879

Submits Comments on Proposed Rev to 10CFR35 & Reg Guide 10.8 Re Preparation of Applications for Medical Programs & Requests Addl Info for Review

ML20136E879
Person / Time
Issue date:	03/21/1984
From:	Grace J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To:	Cunningham R 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 ML20137Q644 ML20137Q655 ML20137Q660 ML20137Q671 ML20137Q682 ML20137Q688 ML20137Q690 ML20137Q692 ML20137Q695 ML20137Q697 ML20137Q705 ML20137Q710 ML20137Q715 ML20137Q719 ML20137Q721 ML20137Q724 ML20137Q726 ML20137Q734 ML20137Q742 ML20137Q747 ML20137Q760 ML20137Q766 ML20137Q777 ML20137Q783 ML20137Q791 ML20137Q796 ... further results
References
FRN-50FR30616, RTR-REGGD-10.008, RULE-PR-35 AA73-1, NUDOCS 8404050044
Download: ML20136E879 (2)

Text

~

(g UN11TD STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g.e Q ,.

N ; r[,,

y WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 ,

?, March 21, 1984 I

? . . . . .,/

s) j (('p Richard E. Cunningham, Director

.HEMORANDUM FOR:

Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety, NMSS

.FR0M: J. Nelson Grace, Director Division of Quality Assurance, Safeguards, and Inspection Programs,.IE

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR REVIEW 0F DRAFT 10 CFR PART 35 AND DRAFT REVISION OF REGULATORY GUIDE 10.8, GUIDE FOR THE PREPARATION OF APPLICATIONS FOR MEDICAL PROGRAMS

'We have reviewed the proposed revision for 10 CFR Part 35 and Regulatory

- Guide 10.8 and have the following comments for your consideration.

Draft Commission payer p.5, line 13 from top

... licensees will 3e free to modify their procedures without NRC review or approval ..." and Draft Commission Paper p.5, lines 21 and 28 from top.

" A licensee will be cited for... failure to follow technically valid procedures."

It- is apparent fram the above two statements that since modified procedures v~,

will.not be reviewed by license reviewers, they will have to be reviewed during

. inspections to show that they are technically valid and for the licensee to meet

/ compliance. This ans the inspectors would have to spend more time during

{ inspections. dan /co/} Q 'L/ ,xf p p gryfg,w

' Proposed Rule p.21, last sentence.

3 - Why more stringent license requirements? Are the regulations deficient?

Y ,nD tmq /1.f.,'mA w Atw .JCTpi-Enclosure 1, p.107-635.80, item (d)4cnf / gg, ,,gjagy/tw This statement is vague as to what type of trans assurance is required. emcg, Met ,,p.h'/ /r;M edd/equipment ported h drMgst and quality Proposed revision 2, Regulatory Guide 10.8, p.24.

N 7"#

What guidance is given to supervised inoividuals when authorized. individuals t

are on vacation, etc. on#M cadk wg f,6,w.

e Proposed revision 2, to Regulatory Guide 10.8, p.53.

Add item 8 to inventory on new sources to be.placed in the safe. ed'AD.

Proposed revision 2, to Regulatory Guide 10.8, p.75.

First paragraph, third sentence. tA

, fg g f 4 IE needs a justification for this requirement. I CONTACT: H. Karagiannis, IE 492-9655

R. E. Cunningham 2 We will be glad to answer any questions you may hav regarping our comments.

( W W J. Ne on Grace, Director Divi on of Quality Assurance, Safeguards, and Inspection Programs, IE 1

l