ML20236Q529
| ML20236Q529 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/10/1987 |
| From: | Kerr W Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Zech L NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| ACRS-R-1279, NUDOCS 8711200108 | |
| Download: ML20236Q529 (2) | |
Text
!
WWJMV I
f[)h
- pn accoq[o UNITED STATES
. /,i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5~.37 ! E ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS
~
o,
[
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 gv...../
November 10, 1987 2
The Honorable Lando W. Zech, Jr.
Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission-Washington, D.C. 20555
Dear Chairman Zech:
SUBJECT:
ACRS COMMENTS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF RAPIATION PROTECTION STANDARDS During the 331st meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor - Sefe-guards, November. 5.7, 1987,. we met. with Floyd - L.
Galpin, Office ' of-Radiation. Programs, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Robert E. Alexander, Office of Nuclear Regulatory.Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC),-to discuss current developments related to radiation protection standards.
These discussions included reports on the efforts of (1) EPA to establish individual dose rates for members of' the public that would be considered to be "below regulatory concern" (BRC), and (2) an interagency committee, coordinated by EPA with NPC support, that is engaged in developing guidance for federal agencies on radiation protection of the public.
These topics were also' subjects of-discussion by our Waste Management Subcommittee during its. meeting on October 15-16, 1987.
Current EPA efforts are being directed prinarily~to' developing limits on dose rates from low-level radioactive wastes, including the development-of dose rates that are BRC, for members of the ~public.
Several proposals on this topic from outside organi7ations have' been reviewed and endorsed by the EPA's Science Advisory Board..As such, this work' holds promise for alleviating some of the problems being encountered in the management and disposal of such wastes.
Although these efforts have revealed inconsistencies in existing radi-ation protection standards (which will require considerable efforts to resolve), and although problems remain (such as clarifying distinctions in dose rates considered to be BRC and those considered to be de mini-mis), we are very encouraged by these activities.
They ~ hold liromise, not only of providing a coherent system o_f radiation protection stand-ards, but also of placing the risks from low radiation dose rates in better perspective.
N
)7//200/0TK4
e The Honorable Lando W. Zech, Jr. November 10, 1987 For these reasons, we recommend that the NRC continue its support of and lend encouragement to the work of the interagency committee and the related efforts of the EPA.
Sincerely, William Kerr Chairman l
l l
1 l