ML20197D768
| ML20197D768 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/11/1997 |
| From: | Lohaus P NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP) |
| To: | Rimawi K NEW YORK, STATE OF |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197D773 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9712290126 | |
| Download: ML20197D768 (5) | |
Text
. -- . . . - - . -
a s Karim Rimawl, Ph.D., Director DEC 11 1997 Bureau of Environmental Radiation Protection New York State Department of Health Two University Place, Room 375 Albany, NY 12203 t .
Dear Dr. Rimawi:
Given the significanca 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 State equivalent rule. A copy of the two volume ORNL report, dated November 16,1905, documenting its staff review of the New York State Department of Health final 10 CFR Part 20 equivalent rule, is encloted for your information and use (Enclosure 1). NRC staff first evaluated the ORNL report to determine if any pctentially 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 compatibility and adequacy issues tMt should be brought to your attention far routine action.
The NRC review focused on those provisions of the New York State Department of Health 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 datad June 30,1997 (Enclosure 2 describes the new compatibility categories).
The NRC review wncluded that the New York State Department of Health 10 CFR Part 20 equivalent rule meets the compatibility and health end safety categories of the new policy, if you have any questions regarding the compatibility criteria, tha NRC regulations used in the review, or the Oak Ridge report, please contact me at (301) 415-2326 or Tom O'Brien of my staff at (301) 415-2308, or INTERNET: TJO@NRC. GOV.
p% Sincerely, Original Signed By:
p 6i PAUL H. LOHAUS Paul H. Lohaus, Deputy Director p;
Li Office of State Programs
Enclosures:
[1, As stated [ g7 "~.y \
y/ Distnbution-
-[ DlR RF (7S227) '
DCD (SP05)-Copies.of Enclosure 1 to be filed in. Central Files and PDR only g SDroggitis 7
DWhite, RI 2N3Q PDR (YES) i
' ' KSchneider SSalomon 1
,M- %
New York File Part 20 File (w/o Enclosure 1)
BUsilton -
lh*
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\TJO\ REVIEWS \NYDOH20.LTR *See previous concurrence.
To seestvo a een ' of this document, Indicate in the host "C a Copy ethout attachment'endosure *E's Copy wth att4v=..;/.i %sure "N" a No co y OFFICE OSP ] dSP OSP:DD OGC OSP:pf ,
NAME TJO'Brien:nb CHMaupin- PHLohaus FCameron RLBandhkO DATE 11/17/97 * .. 10/17/97
- 10/17/97
- 11/04/97
r f 4 Lawrence Freidman, Ph.D. Finally, implementation procedures for the dew policy _ statement provide guidance that dicates Agreement State rules tnat are not Ourrently consistent with the new compatibility cat ory designations should conform with the new policy not later than 3 years after the po!' y's effeuiive date.
If you have any questions regarding these comments, the compatibility criteri , the NRC regulations used in the review, or the Oak Ridge report, please contact me 1(301) 415-2326 or Tom O'Brien of my staff at 301415-2308, or INTERNET: TJO@NRC.GO .
Sincerely, Paul H. L iaus, Deputy Director Office o tate Programs
Enclosures:
As stated
/
/
/
Distributiont
/
DIR RF (TS227) DCD (SP05)-Copies of Enclosure 1 to be SDroggpfs filed in Cuntral Files and PDR only DWhite', RI PDR (YES)
KSch/ielder New' York File Pa'rt 20 File (w/o Enclosure 1)
-! p
. DOCUMENT NAME: G:\TJO\REVIE\%NYDOH20.LTR *See previous concurrence.
- T receive a copy of this cocement. Indicate In the box: "C" = Copy weout ettachmenvendosure T
- CoOY W@ SttSCfw9envenclosure *N" = No copy OFFICE OSP ,fl M l Oggjj - O"GC l OSP:D l NAME TJO'BrisrVVi6 CHh4Upin PHLbHsusd FCameron RLBangart DATE- -10/17/97 10/(\ /97 10/f 19 7 - 11/04/97* 11/ /97 OSP FILE CODE: SP-AG , SP-P-1
+
^
Lowrende Freldm:n. Ph. ,
\
Finally, implementation procedures for the new policy statement provide guidance that indicates Agreement State rules that are' ot currently consistent with the new compatibility category designations should conform wit the new policy not later than 3 years after the policy's effective date.
If you have any questions regardingsthese comments, the compatibility criteria, the NRC regulations used in the review, or the Oak Ridge report, please contact me at (301) 415-2326 or Tom O'Brien of rny staff at 301-415-2300, or INTERNET: TJO@NRC. GOV.
\
Sincerely, N
\ Paul H. Lohaus. Deputy Director Office of State Pqrams
Enclosures:
s As stated \
\
\
\
Distribution: x DlR RF (7S227) DCD (SP05)-Copies of Enclosure 1 to be SDroggitis filed in Central Files and PDR only DWhite, RI PDR (YES) \
KSchneider- \
New York File \
Part 20 File (w/o Enclosure 1)- \
-DOCUMENT NAME: G:\TJO\REVIEVWNYDOH20.LTR n e a em oe is. soc.n.nt. inee in in. nov c copy .cout .n.cnm numso.w. T = copy wnn enennu.nce.ur. v . No em OFFICE-- OSPal M l O!SOfl OGC l OSP:D l l NAME TJO'Bn6tVli6 CHlkdUpin PHLMlius d FCameron RLBangart DATE 10/lf/97 10/(\ /97 - 10/[ /97 ,
iW@97 10/ /97 OSP FILE CODE: SP-AG , SP-P-1 m (q Q4 g
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ _. _ . _. _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . ~ . , _ _ ~ _ _
1
/*gue - - - $_ 7.7 .
.(
%g ,
- UNITED STATES:
' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIONL -
--. WAsHlWOToN, D.c. SOOOHOM '
p }$5
' % ,,, ,7 December 11,-1997/
{
i
' I Karim Rimawi,- Ph.D., Director .
. Bureau of Environmental Radiation Protection >
, . New Ycik State Department of Her.ith ,
L Two University Place, Room 375 Albany, NYg12203. l
Dear Dr. Rimawl:
? 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 - 1 3-
' step involved a ! aview by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), under contract with NRC, to P identify any differences or inconsistencies between 10 CFR Part 20 and each Agreement State
- equivalent rule. ' A copy of the two volume ORNL report, dated November 16,1995, documenting its staff review of the New York State Department of Health final 10 CFR Part 20 L _ equivalent rule, is enclosed for your information and use (Enclosure 1). NRC staff first .
4 evaluated the ORNL report to determine if any potentially significant health and safety issues .
j were identified that required immediate attention. If there were norie, NRC staff then 1 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 of the New York State Department of Health rule the are required for compatibility or for health and safety under_ the new adequacy and L cc patibility 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 New York State Department of Health 10 CFR Part 20 equivalent rule meets the compatibility and health and safety categories of the new policy.
l L ' 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 Tom O'Brien of my
- staff at(301)415-2308iorINTERNET
- TJOONRC. GOV.
o ,
Sincerely,
/)
y lCkt1 Sn d,1f A
Paul H. Lohaus, Deputy Di or k' Office of State Programs -
C
~
Enclosures:
- As stated
- r p
"s
, - - ,- r m .a -,v. wn,> + - , - , ,-n - , - . - - . . - , . , . . . - , .- .- , --- - -
H a
- +
Comnatibility CatMIOrv and H&S Idenuarmhr, for NRC Regulations Key to categories: A' = Basic radiation protection standard or related definitions, signs, labels or terms necessary for a common understanding of radiation protection
. principles. The State program element should be i .
essentially identical to that of NRC.
B= Prograni element with significant direct . .
transboundary implications. The State program -
element should be essentially identical to that of .
- NRC.
C= Program element, the essential objectives of which -
should be adooted by the State to avoid conflicts, -
duplications or gaps. The manner in which the L ..
essential objectives are addressed need not be the .
same as NRC provided the essential objectives are L" met.
D= Not required for purposes of compatibility. . .
~
1 NRC = Not required for purposes of compatibility. These are NRC program element areas of regulation that '
a.
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,-
4 they do have particular health and safety significance. The State should adopt the essential objectives of such program elements in order to i -. maintain an adequate program.
p i s' 9 ? ' .^ * (. h l ,
.-_ , : .__...~.~.L.2-._._._ -