ML20206M828
| ML20206M828 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/19/1986 |
| From: | Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Riley R SOUTH CAROLINA, STATE OF |
| References | |
| FRN-50FR51992, RULE-PR-19, RULE-PR-20, RULE-PR-30, RULE-PR-31, RULE-PR-32, RULE-PR-34, RULE-PR-40, RULE-PR-50, RULE-PR-61, RULE-PR-70 NUDOCS 8607010297 | |
| Download: ML20206M828 (3) | |
Text
._
t'Dy.
4,p....r'o,,
f/
UNITED STATES 5"
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
I WASHINGTON, D. C. 20565 4,..... s/
June 19, 1986 C&lAIRMAN The Honorable Richard W. Riley Governor of South Carolina Columbia, SC 29211
Dear Governor Riley:
Thank you for your letter of May 15, 1986, and for your suggestions for improving public understanding of the proposed revision to 10 CFR Part 20.
While it is probably too late to prepare and issue a separate explanctory document within the September 12, 1986 closing date for the comment period, your suggestion for an expanded explanation of the health physics calculations will definitely be considered in our preparation of a final rule.
You also commented that the proposed changes appeared to be
" insensitive to legitimate questions of radiation exposure, particularly to the fetus and to vulnerable humans."
One of the principal proposed additions to 10 CFR Part 20 is a limit on fetal doses which is not present in the current 10 CFR Part 20.
Other areas where increased protection would be provided include the institution of lower " reference levels" for both workers and members of the general public and the requirement for an "ALARA" (as low as is reasonably achievable) program for radiation exposure reductions.
Such provisions should provide the necessary protection for everyone concerned.
Thank you again for your personal comments.
We appreciate your interest in ensuring that our regulations provide adequate protection of the public and radiation workers.
Sincerely, 7-zc')
'W f ' clN
+-
t
/
Nunzio J. Palladino l
4 8607010297 860619 PDR PR 19 50FR51992 PDR
'l
}
State of Soutfr (!Inralinn RsCHARD W. RsLcv post Orrier som ll450 oovsamon COLUM BIA 29281 May 15, 1986 Mr. Nunzio J.
Palladino Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, NW Room 1130 Washington, D.C.
20555
SUBJECT:
Proposed Rule Part II, Title 10, Parts 19 et al; Standards for Protection Against Radiation
Dear Mr. Palladino:
During my terms as Governor of South Carolina, I have worked hard to resolve some of the political problems which have impeded federal nuclear waste policy.
Much of our work has been unnecessarily difficult because previous policies of the federal government have been insensitive to the need for public participation and acceptance.
The public is now understandably skeptical of vague federal assurances of safety, which make it particularly important to document the health and safety information which supports any major discussion affecting nuclear waste policy.
Therefore, I was pleased to hear from my staff that the NRC has extended the comment period on the proposed rule for standards for protection against radiation until a more complete record can be made available and reviewed.
I would like to take this opportunity to urge that NRC staff also develop an explanation of the health physics calculations upon which the proposed rule will be based so that the public may more readily understand this complicated issue.
i l
C// / / 1 / & [_?s f
- 4 w 4 wy~y () ;
I
While some of the NRC proposed rule changes appear meritorious, other proposals appear to be insensitive to legitimate questions of radiation exposure, particularly to the fetus and to vulnerable humans.
Making additional information available to the public prior to closing the comment period on the proposed rule may help to clarify the NRC position and alleviate concern.
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours sincerely, Richard W. Riley RWR/mhl cc:
Docketing Branch i
i l
i
, -., _ _. _ -.,,.