ML20141J246
Text
- _ . . - - -
i j = asc
. .. UNITED STATES
+
3i y NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION p
~
f WASHINGTON, D.C. 206Woool
%g=.... / May 3, 1995 MEMORANDUN-T0: Bill M. Morris, Director Division of Regulatory Applications .RES FRON: Richard L. Bangart, Director
Office of State Programs [( h g f b - ( L t. ).7
SUBJECT:
TECHNICAL REVIEW: DRAFT FINAL RULE - CRITERIA FOR THE RELEASE OF PATIENTS ADMINISTERED RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS This is in response to your April 12, 1995 memorandum on the subject document.
We have reviewed the draft final rule as it applies to the Agreement States-through compatibility requirements. Attached are several suggested changes relating to staff's interaction with the Agreemeni. States. -
We nave no objection to proceeding with this rulemaking effort.
If you have any questions, please contact me or Lloyd Bolling of my staff.
Attachment:
As stated
- l gb411 -
9708150198 970807 PDR PR 20.62FR4120 PDR ._
e i
Suggested Changes - Final Rule On Patient Release Criteria
.l. Page 24,. Miscellaneous comments on the Rule
~
We suggest the response.to the first statement be.rev1 sed as follows:
Response: The NRC does not agree. .NRC ::r. ducts an assessment of each proposed requirement or rule to determine what level of compatibility will be assigned to the rule. These case-by-case -
-assessments are based, for the most part, on protecting public health and safety, i 2. Page,-34, IV. Coordination with NRC Agreement States l
We suggest the paragraph be revised as follows:
The staff. discussed the status of- this rulemaking effort- at two public meetings; the Agreement State Hanagers Workshop held on July 12-14, 1994 and at the All Agreement States Heeting held on October 24-25, 1994. The Agreement States expressed no objections to the approach in this rule.
- 3. Page 39, Vill Issues of Compatibility for Agreement States 10 CFR_20.1002 Scope.
Of fice of State Programs Internal Procedure B 7 entitled,
" Criteria for Compatibility Determinations", states that
" Scope" in 10 CFR Part 20 is a Division 111 item of compatibility. Therefore, the wording regarding 20.1002
" scope" should be-designated as a Division 111 matter of compatibility rather than Division 11. Division 111 rules would be appropriate for Agreement States to adopt, but do not-require any degree of uniformity between NRC and. State rules.
,ti' * "N. ,
1~ ,i UNITED STATES
- 9; &-
j N .n[i j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION' %O'J l f d w AsniwotON. O C. M5vooot
'o M f' .s Sciuet t-A,' .4;/
file
.**** June 9, 1995 W
MEMORANDUM-T0: David L. Morrison, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research .
FRON: James lle'berman, Diiect'or 4 Q k ___
Office of Enforcement .
SUBJECT:
0FFICE REVIEW AND CONCURRENCE ON A FINAL RULE - CRITERIA FOR !
THE RELF.ASE OF INDIVIDUALS ADMINISTEREO RADIDACTIVE MATERIALS The Office of Enforcement has no objection to the subject draft final ;
rule. Attached are three pages with miscellaneous edits that you may-wish-to consider.
Enclosure:
As stated s \(*
.