ML20197C816
| ML20197C816 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/15/1997 |
| From: | Lohaus P NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP) |
| To: | Marshall S NEVADA, STATE OF |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9712240279 | |
| Download: ML20197C816 (14) | |
Text
e .
Mr. Stanley R. Marshall, Supervisor Radiological Health Section DEC 151337 Health Division
. Department of Human Resources 1179 Fairview Drive, Suite 102 Carson City, NV 89701 5405 Daar Mr. Marshall:
Given the significance of the revised 10 CFR Part 20 rule to both NRC and Agreement State programs, NRC undertook a review of all Agreement State final Part 20 equivalent rules for compatibility with 10 CFR Part 20. The review was conducted as a two step process. The first step involved a review by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), under contract with NRC, to identify any differences or inconsistencies between 10 CFR Part 20 and each Agreement Stato equivalent rule. A copy of the two volume ORNL report, dated June 2,1995, documenting its staff review of the Nevada final 10 CFR Part 20 equivalent rule, is enclosed for your information and use (Enclosure 1). NRC staff first evaluated the ORNL report to determine if any potentially significant health and safety issues were identified that required immediate attention, if there were none, NRC staff then conducted, as resources permitted, a detailed review of the differences and inconsistencies identified by ORNL for comp 9tibility and adequacy issues that should be brought to your attention for routine action.
The NRC review focused on those provisions of the Nevada rule that are required for compatibility or for health and safety under the new adequacy and compatibility policy statement approved by the Commission by Staff Requirements Memorandum dated June 30, 1997 (Enclosure 2 describes the new compatibility categories). The NRC review concluded that the Nevada 10 CFR Part 20 equivalent rule meets the compatibility and health and safety categories of the new policy, if you have any questions regarding the compatibility criteria, the NRC regulations used in the review, or the Oak Ridge report, please contact me at (301) 415-2326 or Mr. Richard Blanton of my staff at (301) 415 2322, or INTERNET: RLB@NRC. GOV.
- " Sincerely, -
' Ny Paul H. RLA RT Lohaus, Deputy Director
} Office of State Programs i
Enclosures:
As stated i Distribution:
' DCD (SP08])-Copies of Enclosure 1 to be DIR RF (7S225) ,
C SDroggitis R- filed in Central Files and PDR only j- JHornor, RIV '
PDR (YES) 0 'KSchneider l Nevada File 240077 j [' p L.]' ,y! . '
Part 20 File (w/o Enclosure 1) - , , , .
DOCUMENT NAME: G;\RLB\NVPT20DF.WPD *See Previous Concurrence.
w e.c.w. . ew w in o.eum.nunsc.i. sa in tior e . cm .w .n.cu ne.ncun r . cm e .mne.ncan v . no eo w OFFICE OSP l USP OSP.DD l OGC l OSPJDb _
NAME RLBlanton nb CHMaupin PHLohaus FCameron RLBarigairt' '
DATE 10/20/97
- 11/2/97
- 12/8/97' 12/15/97 12/\6/97-9712240279 971215 attached OSP FILE CODE: SP-AG-17 , SP-P-1 PDR STPRO ESGNV PDR
Mr. Stanley R. Marshall, Superviscr Radiological Health Section
~
Health Division Department of Human Resources
, 1179 Fairview Dnve, Suite 102 Carson City, NV 89701 5405
Dear Mr. Marshall:
Given the significance of the revised 10 CFR Part 20 e to both NRC and Agreement State programs, NRC undertook a review of all Agreement State final Part 20 equivalent rules for compatibihty with 10 CFR Part 20. The review was conducted as a two step process. The first step involved a review by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), under contract with NRC, to identify any differences or inconsistencies between JO CFR Part 20 and each Agreement State equivalent rule. A copy of the two volume ORNL report, dated June 2,1995, documenting its staff review of the Nevada final 10 CFR Part 20 equivalent rule, is enclosed fer your information and use (Enclosure 1). NRC staff first evaluated the ORNL report to determine if any potentially significant health and safety issues were identified that required irnmediate attention.
If there were none, NRC staff then conducted, as resources permitted, a detailed review of the differences and inconsistencies identified by ORNL for compatibility and adequacy issues that should be brought to your attention for routine action.
/
The NRC review focused on those provisions,0f the Nevada rule that are required for compatibility or for health and safety under the new adequacy and compatibility policy statement approved by the Commission by Siaff Requirements Memorandum dated June 30, 1997 (Enclosure 2 describes the new compa'tibility categories). The NRC review concluded that the Nevcda 10 CFR Part 20 equivalent rule / meets the compatibility and health and safety categories of the new policy.
If you have any questions regarding the mpatibility criteria, the NRC regulations used in the review, or the Oak Ridge report, please o'o ntact me at (301) 415 2326 or Mr. Richard Blanton of my staff at (301) 415 2322, or INTERNEET: RLB@NRC. GOV.
Sincerely, Paul H. Lohaus, Deputy Director Office of State Programs
Enclosures:
As stated Distribution:
DlR RF (7S225) DCD (SP08)) Copies of Enclosure 1 to be SDroggitis filed in Central Files and PDR only JHornor, RIV PDR (YES)
KSchneider Nevada File I Part 20 File (w/o Enclosure 1) f I
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\RLB\NVPT20DF WPD *See Previous Concurrence.
To r.e.w. . e a n. am,-.noaac.i. in m.or c Icm w .umniwim. fr em we .umne.nciow. v A en3 OFFICE OSP l OSP/ l OSP.DD l OGC OSP44 l NAME RLBlanton:nb CHMaupin PHLohaus FCameron RLBangdh P l DATE 10/20/97
- 11/2/97
I ROUTING AND TRAN5NITTAL SLIP DATE: DECEN8ER 8, 1997 -
CONCURRENCE REQUESTED INITIALS DAI{
I 12/(/97 F. CAMERON, 00C J LETTER T0: STANLEY R. MARSHALL, SUPERVISOR RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH SECTION FRON: PAllL H. LOHAUS. DEPUTY DIRECTOR 2'!CE OF STATE PROGRANS l SudJECT: NEVADA - 10 CFR PART 20 EQUIVALENT RULE REVIEW i
i T.00ESTED BY C.O.B. DECEMER 15. 1997. l 050 CONTACT: RICHARD BUNTON (415-2322)
PLEASECALLKATHALEENKERR(415-3340) FOR PICK UP.
00C.97- 004973 ;
Mr. Stanley R. Marshall, Supervisor Rndiological Health Setion Nevada State Health Division Department of Human Resources
, 400 W. King Street, Room 101 Carson City, NV 89710
Dear Mr. Marshall:
/
/
Given the significance of the revised 10 CFR Part 20 rule to both NRC and' Agreement State i programs, NRC undertook a review of all Agreement State final Part 20 equivalent rules for compatibility with 10 CFR Part 20. The review was conducted as a two step process. The first step involved a review by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), under contract with NRC, to idcntify any differences or inconsistencies between 10 CFR Part 20 arWI each Agreement State squivalent rule. A copy of the two volume ORNL report, dated June 2,1995, documenting its staff review of the Nevada final 10 CFR Part 20 equivalent rule, is 9hclosed for your information and use (Enclosure 1) NRC staff first evaluated the ORNL report to determine if any potentially significant health and safety issues were identified that required immediate attention, if there were none, NRC staff then conducteo, as resources permitted, a detailed review of the atibility and adequacy issues that differences should be broughtand to yourinconsistencies attention for routine action. identified by ORNL for comp /
/
The NRC review focused on those provisions of the Nevada rule that are required for compatibility or for health and safety under the new adequacy and compatibility policy statement approved by the Commission by Staff Requirements Memorandum dated June 30, 1997 (Enclosure 2 describes the new compatibility categories). The NRC review concluded that ;
the Nevada 10 CFR Part 20 equivalent rule meets the' compatibility and health and safety categories of the new policy.
If you have any questions regarding the compatib/ity criteria, the NRC regulations used in the review, or the Oak Ridge report, please contact pie at (301) 415 2326 or Mr. Richard Blanton of my staff at (301) 415 2322. or INTERNET: RLB@NRC. GOV,
/
l' Sincerely,
/
Paul H. Lohaus, Deputy Director Office of State Programs
Enclosures:
/
As stated /
Distribution /
DIR RF (7S225) / DCD (SP08 )-Copies of Enclosure 1 to be SDroggitis '
filed in Central Files and PDR only JHornor, RIV j PDR (YES) ,
KSchneider /-
- Nevada File Part 20 File (w/o Enclosure 1) l DOCUMENT NAME: G:\RLB\NVPT20DF.WPD / *See Previous Concurrence.
- t. . , nw e. om m w e . cm .nw .n.Aldnau. r . em .m .ne nv.am v no w y OFFICE OSP [ OSP O$QQ ! OGC l OSP:D l NAME RLBlanton:nb 4 CHMaupin PHL'oilaus FCameron RLBangart ,
DATE 10/20/97 *' 11/2/97
.i - - - - -- ..
=. . _ . . . . - . - . . . . .-
Mr. Stanley R. Marshall -2 j Finally, implementation procedures for the new policy statement prcvide guidan hat indicates l Agreement State rules that are not currently consistent with the new compatibi ~ category de'ignations should conform with the new policy not later than 3 years after policy's effective date.
. If you have any questions regarding these comments, the compatibilit riteria, the NRC regulations used in the review, or the Oak Ridge report, please cont me at (301) 415 2326 or Mr. Richard Blanton of my staff at (301) 415 2322, or INTERNET: LB@NRC. GOV.
Sincerely, Pa H. Lohaus 00puty Director ice of State Programs
Enclosures:
As stated Distr @uttory DIR RF (7S225) DCD (SP08)-Copies of Enclosure 1 to be Sp,oggitis r filed in Central Files and PDR only
$AO PDR (YES)
XSchneider f
/ Nevada File-Part 20 File (wlo Enclosure 1)
DOCbMENT NAME: G:\RLB\NVPT20DF.WPD T) receive a eon oC thee document indicate in the boa: 'C' = Cow wrthout etischment'endosure T e Cory we ottachment'endosure V e No cow OFFICE OSP JA OM OSP.DD ] OGC- l OSP.D l l NAME RLBlanton@ CHMM$irf PHLohaus FXCameron RLBangart DATE 10/fo/9%'V M/9497 10/ /97 10/ /97 --- 10/ /97 OSP FILE CODE: SP-AG 17, SP-P 1
,,A..-.y.~. , . . ~
d
o aseg ;
p 4 UNITED STATES l 3 NUCLEAR 'QULATORY COMMISSION i
, n.ww.407oN, D.C. Dettwoot >
"% , , , g December 15, 1997 t
Mr. Stanley R. Marshall, Supervisor Radiological Health Section Health Division Department of H9 man Resources 1179 Fairview Drive Suite 102 Carson City, NV 89701 5405 Des? Mr. Marshall:
Given the significance of the revised 10 CFR Part 20 rule to both NRC and Agreement State ,
programm, NRC undertook a review of all Agreement State final Part 20 equivalent rules for ,
compatibiny with 10 CFR Part 20. The review was conducted as a two step process. The first step involved a revi?w by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), under contract with NRC, to identify any dfferences or inconsistencies between 10 CFR Part 20 and each Agreement State equivalent rule. A copy of the two volume ORNL report, dated June 2,1995, documenting its staff review of the Nevada final 10 CFR Part 20 equivalent rule, is enclosed for your information and use (Enclosure 1), NRC staff first evaluated the ORNL report to determine if any potentially significant health and safety issues were identified that required immediate attention.
If there were none, NRC staff then conducted, as resources permitted, a dotalled review of the differences and inconsistencies identified by ORNL for compatibility and adequacy issues that should be brought to your attention for routine action.
The NRC review focused on those provisions of the Nevada rule that are required for compatibility or for health and safety under the new adequacy and compatibility policy statement approved by the Commission by Staff Requirements Memorandum dated June 30, 1997 (Enclosure 2 describes the new compatibi'ity categories). The NRC review concluded that the Nevada 10 CFR Part 20 equivalent rule meets the compatibility and health and safety categories of the new policy.
If you have any questions regarding the compatibility criteria, the NRC regulations used in the review, or the Oak Ridge report, please contact me at (301) 415 2326 or Mr. Richard Blanton of my staff at (301) 415 2322, or INTERNET: RLB@NRC. GOV.
y Sinepr ly, (g t ( t/A ,p Paul H. Lohaus, Deputy Director /
Office of State Programs V
Enclosures:
As stated l
Compatibihty Category and H&S Identification ;
for NRC Regulations !
{
Key to categories: A= Basic radiation protection standard or related '
definitions, signs, labels or terms necessary for a '
common understanding of redistion protection principles. The State program element should be [
essentially identical to that of NRC. ;
B= Program element with significant direct i transboundary implications. The State program element should be essentially identical to that of ;
NRC.
C= Program element, the essential objectives of which h should be adopted by the State to avoid conflicts, '
duplications or gaps. The manner in which the essential objectives are addressed need not be the ,
same as NRC provided the essential objectives are met.
D= Not required for purposes of compatibility. ,
i NRC = Not required for purposes of compatibility. These are NRC program element areas of regulation that cannot be relinquished to Agreement States pursuant to the AEA or provisions of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The State should not .
< adopt these program elements.
H&S = Program elements identified as H&S are not required for purposes of compatibility; however, they do have particular health and safety significance. The State should adopt the essential objectives of such program elements in order to maintain an adequate program.
b I
L ENCLOSURE 2 v- a ,r,., - - --- -s , , ,,,-se- , - - - - - - , e , ,
ww ,,-c.------ -v,,--e-- wo-,,wna e v , v-~w.---r,--w ~
w
BACKGROUND MATERIAL FOR OSF FILES REVIEW OF NEVADA PART 20 EQUIVALENT REGULATIONS October 2.1997 EXPLANATION OF ENTRIES UNDER "Comoatible"
[Y] means the definition or rule meets the criterie associated with the detsnatica for the equivalent 10 CFR Fert 20 definition or rule IN] means the criteria is NOT met Deicriation Definition _NRC Se@ State Section Comoatible A Absorbed dose 20.1003 459.012 [Y]
A Activity 20.1003 459.0145 [Y]
A Adult 20.1003 459.015 [Y]
A Airborne rad.oactive material 20.1003 459.018 [Y]
A Airborne radioactivity . rea 20.1003 459.020 [Y]
A ALARA 20.1003 459.0205 [Y]
A Annual limit on intake (All) 20.1003 459.0185 [Y]
A Background radiation 20.1003 459.021 [Y]
A Bioassay 20.1003 459.0214 [Y]
[A1 Byproduct material 20.1003 [150.3(c)] 459.022 [Y]
A Class (lung class or inhalation class) 20.1003 459.0245 [Y]
A Collective dose 20.1003 459.025 [Y]
A Committed dose equivalent 20.1003 459.0254 [Y]
A Committed effective dose equivalent 20.1003 459.0256 [Y]
A Declared pregnant woman 20.100,3 459.1156 [Y]
A Deep dose equivalent 20.1003 459.0275 [Y]
A Derived air concentration (DAC) 20.1003 459.029 [Y]
A De.tzed air concentration-hour (DAC-hour) 20.1003 459.0292 !Y]
A Dose equivalent 20.1003 459.034 [Y]
A Dose limits { limits} 20.1003 459.0504 [Y]
Rule Review: Nevada Part 20 equivalent rules Desionation Defrnition NRC Section State Section Comcatibi!e .
A Effective dose equivaient 20.1003 459.035 [Y]
A Embryo / fetus 20.1003 459.0354 [Y]'
2 C Entrance or access point 20.1003 459.0356- [Y1 A Exposure 20.1003 459.036 [Y]
A Extamal dose 20.1003 459.0382 [Y]
A Extremity 20.1003 459.0384 [Y]
A Eye dose equivalent 20.1003 459.0386 [Y1' A/D' G+.ne.Niy app!icable environmental 11 radiation st 7dards 20.1003 - NONE - [Y]
A Gray 20.1004 -NONE- [Y]*
A High radiation area 20.1003 459.042 [Y]
A Individual 20.1003 -NONE- [Y]'
A Individual monitoring (~ Personnel monitoring *) 20.1003 459.053 [Y]
C Individual monitoring devices (" Personnel ...~) 20.1003 459.060 [Y]
A Intemal dose 20.1003 459.047 [Y]
B Lost or missing licensed [or registered] 1 I source of radiation { material} 20.1003 459.0506 [Y]
A Member of the public 20.1003 459.051 [Y)
A Minor 20.1003 459.0512 [Y]
A Monitoring 20.1003 459.0516 [Y]
A Nonstochastic effect 20.1003 459.053 [Y]
A Occupational dose 20.1003 459.054 [Y]
[C] Person 20.1003 [150.3(g)] 459.058 [Y]
D Planned special exposure 20.1003 459.0645 [Y]
A Public dose 20.1003 459.065 [Y]
A Quality factor 20.1003 459.0655 [Y]
A Rad 20.1004 459.066 [Y]
A Radiation 20.1003 459.068 [Y]
A Radiation area 20.1003 459.070 [Y]
A Reference Man 20.1003 459.079 [Y]
A Rem 20.1004 459.086 [Yi C Respiratory protective equipment { device} 20.1003 459.089 IY)
' "A" for states with authority to regulate uranium mill activity, "D~ for states without that suthority
Rute Review:' Nevada Part 20 equivalent rules Designanon Defntion feC Section State Section Comnanhiin .
A P.e.bicted area 20.1003 459.090 [Y]
A Sanitary rewerage 20.1003. 459.093 [YI
'A Shallow dose equivalent 20.1003 459.095 [Y]
A Sievert 20.1004 - NONE - [Y]-
- [Al Source material 20.1003 [150.3(l)] 459.096 [Y]
[A] Special nuclear material 20.1003 [150.3G)] - NONE - [Y]*_.
A Stochastic effect 20.1003 459.103 [Y]
A Survey 20.1003 459.104- [YI' A Total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) 20.1003 459.1095 lY]
A Unrestricted area 20.1003 459.114 [Y]
A Very high radiation area 20.1003 459.1145 [Y]
A . Weighting factor wr 20.1003 459.115,.323 [Y]
A Whole body _ 20.1003 459.1152 [Y]
!_. A- ' Working level (WL) 20.1003- - NONE - [Y]'
j: A : Working level month (WLM) 20.1003 - NONE - [Y]
1 'A _ Year 20.1003 -NONE- (Y]*
i
?
)
a
- l ,
l I'
er_.,u
Rule Review: Nevada Part 20 equivalent rules Desianation NRC rule Rule subiect State Rule Comoatible .
A 20.1004 Units of radiation dose -NONE- [Yl' A 20.1005 Units of radioactivity -NONE- [Y]
H&S 20.1101 Radiation protection programs 459.321 [Y]
A 20.1201 Occupational dose limits for adults 459.325 [Y]
A 20.1202 Requirements for summation of external and internal doses 459.3255 [Y]
A 20.1203 Determination of extemal dose from airbome radioactive 459.327 [Y]
material A 20.1204 Determination of 'nternal exposure 459.3275 [Y1 H&S 20.1206 Planned special exposures 459.329 [Y]
A 20.1207 Occupational dose limits for minors 459.331 [Y]
A 20.1208 Dose to an embryo /'etus 459.333 [Y]
A 20.1301(a, b, c, e) Dose limits for individual members of the public 459.335 [Y]
H&S 20.1302(a, b) Compliance with dose limits for individual members of 459.3355 [Y1 the public H&S 20.1501 Sur eys and monitoring - general 459.337 [Y]
HQS 20.1502 Conditions requiring individual monitoring of extemal 459.339 [YI and internal occupational dose H&S 20.1601 Control of access to hig% radiation areas 459.341 [Y]
H&S 20.1602 Control of access to very high radiation areas 459.343 [Y]
j
Rule Review: Nevada Part 20 equivalent rules Designation NRC rule Rule suosect State Huie Camontihim .
lH&S'. 20.1701' Use of process or other engeneenng controls 459.347(1) [Y]
H&S- 20.1702 Use of other controls 459.347(2) [Y]
H&S- .20.1703' Use of individual respiratory protection eqimpment 459.349- [Y]
'H&S '20.1801 Security of stored sources of radiation 459.353 [Y]
H&S' '20.1802 Control of material not in storage 459.3525 [Y]* ;
A 20.1901' Caution signs 459.355 [Y]
A 20.1902 Posting requirements 459.3555 [Y]
'A- 20.1904 Labeling cootainers 409.357 [Y]
A 20.1905 Exceptions to labeling requirements 459.3575 [Y] '
HChS 20.1906 Procedures for receiving and opening packages 459.3585 [Y]" i
~C. 20.2001 Waste disposa! - general requirements 459.359 [Y] }
A' 20.2OO3(a)(2), (a)(3) Disposal by release into sanitary sewerage 459.3605 [Y]
C. 20.2OO3(a)(4) [Y] l
.B. 20.2006 Transfer for disposal and manifests 459.823 -826 [Y] f C 20.2101 Records -- general provisions 459.3625 (Y]
i C' 20.2104(except f) Determination of prior occupational dose 459.365 (Y] l C 20.2106(a, e) Records of individual monitonng results 459.3665 [YI t
i
a
'I Rule Review: Nevada Part 20 equivalent rules Designatson NRC rule Rule subies:1 State Rule Comentable .
cC- 20.2201(except c) Reports of Stolen, Lost, or Missing lxensed or Registered 459.369 [Y]
Sources of Radiation C ' 20.2202(except e) Notification of incidents 459.3695 [Y]'2 C - 20.2203(a, b) Reports of Exoonures, Radiation Levels, and Concentrations 459.371 [Y]
of Radioactive Material Exceeding the t.imits
~
H&S 20.2204 Reports of P;anned Special Exposures 459.3715 [Y]
C 20.2205 Reports to individuals of exceeding the dose limit- 459.368 [Y1 C 20 Appendix A Protection Factors for Respirators by reference [Y]
A 20 Appendix B ALI's and DAC's: effluent concentrations; concentrations by reference [Y]
for release to sewerage A 20 Appendix C Quantities of licensed material requiring labeling by reference [Y]
D - 20 Appendix F LLW transfer for disposal and marufests 459.823 .826 !Y]
Notes:
4
- 1. Definition " embryo / fetus" - Nevada does not define or use the term " fetus." i
- 2. Definition " Entrance or access point"- Nevada does not define or use the term " access point." ,
- 4. Definition " Gray" - Nevada does not define or use SI units.
- 5. Definition " Individual" - Nevada uses the term person instead.
- 6. Definition "Special Nuclear Material"- Nevada ac; opted this definition by statute.
i i
s
,-+v <-y, ~..,s m.---, y. ,, , ,4.- %
,_ m,. -- , ,, . ,,, c , e - -- , , . - . -- , ,.,,,voor.. - - ,,c.- , - . - - - .. r y ,-o,-.-,--w -yy---,,--,y,y,-4,m , , .- ., ,,
t o
I i.
j' . 7. Definitions " Working levet" and ~ working level month" - dunng the ev%ation it was noted that these terms are never used in Part 20. The terms are therefore category "A" for 11e.(2) States only.
j 8. Definition ~ Year"- after re-evaluation, the term was determined to be category "D."
i 9.10 CFR 20.1004 and 20.1005 - Nevada adopts these provisions as definitions.
U 10.10 CFR 20.1802 " Control of material not in storage"- Nevada uses the ph.ase "related to the cars of a r atient" rather ,
- than "in a patient." Nevada interprets the phrase in the limited sense that only actions immediately d ,ected t s care of a i q patient are "related." Thus, the term addresses the essential obgective of the NRC rule.
i 11.10 CFR 20.1906 ~ Procedures for receiving and opening packages" - The Nevada rule doer not spe :sfy COT labeled 4
packages, and addresses " potential contamination" rather than degraded package integrity. Based on conter t of the rule, '
.however, the Nevada rule addresses the essential objective of the NRC rule. :
i 12.10 CFR 20.22O2 " Notification of Incidents"- the numericallimit in 459.3695(2)(b) is five AU, but should be one AU. It j is noted that this is the same limit as in 459.3695(1)(bl. On discussion with Nevada staff, it has been identified as an editorial '
- error. 3 f
- i. ..
- i i
3 I
i l
+
i i
I i
i
. . _ _ , _ . _ . . .. _ __ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ _ . _ ~. _ . _ _ ~ . . . . _ _ _ . _ - _ _ _ _
EX.ECUTIVE TASK MANAGEMENT
. ....... ~~ . .......... ...... SYSTEM . .
<<< PRINT SCREEN UPDATE FORM >>>
TASK,# - 7S225 M DATE- 09/05/97 ,.
MAIL CTRL. - 1997
?^S5.8?ARJgg - 09/05/97 {AS{,gg{ - 10/30/97 {AS{,CgMPgE((g / /
TASK JESCRIPTION - PART 20 EQUIVALENT REVIEW - STATE OF NEVADA WITS - 0 FYP - N REQUESTING
........ .. ... O.FF. - OSP REQUESTE.R
.-~~ . .. . PHL ~~~~ ...
PROG.-
RLB PERSON -
STAFF LEAD - RLB PROG.
.....-~~~~
AREA -
PROJECT STATUS - OSP DUE DATE: 10/30/97 PLANNED ACC. -N LEVEL CODE - 1 9
-- ,