ML20236S090: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| number = ML20236S090 | | number = ML20236S090 | ||
| issue date = 07/14/1998 | | issue date = 07/14/1998 | ||
| title = Responds to | | title = Responds to CRCPD Ltr,Informing of No Problem W/Ltr If First Sentence of 3rd Paragraph Agreeable.Make Sure Matl Could Still Be Classified as 11e.(2) Matl.Reading of 40.20(b) Is That It Applies Only to Title 1 Sites | ||
| author name = Holonich J | | author name = Holonich J | ||
| author affiliation = NRC | | author affiliation = NRC |
Latest revision as of 07:50, 19 April 2023
ML20236S090 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Issue date: | 07/14/1998 |
From: | Joseph Holonich NRC |
To: | Odell P, Oliver D NRC |
Shared Package | |
ML20236S043 | List: |
References | |
NUDOCS 9807240119 | |
Download: ML20236S090 (1) | |
Text
- - - --
.g ,
- From: Joseph Holonich [' tap 7 To: e' 1WFN_DO.twf1_po.DMS4 Date: ETue,%I14l199811:29 AM
Subject:
CRCPD Letter Dennis, No problem with the CRCPD letter if you agree with the following. In the 1st sentence of the 3rd paragraph, you say that we have no jurisdiction because the residuals were generated long before passage of UMTRCA, and were never produced from source material extraction under NRC license. I want to make sure that the material could still be classified as 11e.(2) material, but the sentence just was intended to make sure that people understand that we have no jurisdiction. Having it defined as 11e.(2) makes future reviews for processing or disposal at mills fairly easy, so I dorrt want to loose that option.
My reading of 40.20(b) is that it applies only to Title I sites.
Joe
- CC: DMG2, WND1 WNP2.MES I
i 9907240119 900715 PDR [
STPRC ESGGEN 4 L
PDR E
+
- m. ___.___ m_.__ . _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - ~~ ' ' - - - ' ' -