ML20212C270: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 2: Line 2:
| number = ML20212C270
| number = ML20212C270
| issue date = 10/20/1997
| issue date = 10/20/1997
| title = Responds to 970929 Ltr Requesting Review & Comment on Troxler Electronics Consent Agreement.Commitments Contained in Ltr & Approach of Consent Decree Believed to Be Appropriate for Issues Involved
| title = Responds to Requesting Review & Comment on Troxler Electronics Consent Agreement.Commitments Contained in Ltr & Approach of Consent Decree Believed to Be Appropriate for Issues Involved
| author name = Bangart R
| author name = Bangart R
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP)
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP)
Line 11: Line 11:
| contact person =  
| contact person =  
| document report number = NUDOCS 9710290144
| document report number = NUDOCS 9710290144
| title reference date = 09-29-1997
| package number = ML20212C275
| package number = ML20212C275
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
Line 23: Line 24:
==Dear Mr. Fry:==
==Dear Mr. Fry:==


This is in response to your letter dated September 29,1997, requesting our review and comment on the Troxter Electronics consent agreement.
This is in response to your {{letter dated|date=September 29, 1997|text=letter dated September 29,1997}}, requesting our review and comment on the Troxter Electronics consent agreement.
We have reviewed the agreement and believe the commitments contained in the letter and the approach of a consent decree are appropriate for the issue involved. We offer the following comment for your consideration:
We have reviewed the agreement and believe the commitments contained in the letter and the approach of a consent decree are appropriate for the issue involved. We offer the following comment for your consideration:
We recommend item E of the Consent Decree be modified to require the subject report                                            .
We recommend item E of the Consent Decree be modified to require the subject report                                            .
Line 77: Line 78:
i i
i i
r Mr. Fry:
r Mr. Fry:
h            -This is response to your letter dated September 29,1997, requesting our review and 1              comment the Troxler Electronics consent agreement.
h            -This is response to your {{letter dated|date=September 29, 1997|text=letter dated September 29,1997}}, requesting our review and 1              comment the Troxler Electronics consent agreement.
;-              We have rev                  the agreement and believe the commitments contained in the lettet and the
;-              We have rev                  the agreement and believe the commitments contained in the lettet and the
;              approach of a              sent decree are appropriate for the issue involved. We offer the following j              comment for your nsideration:                                                                                                                  ,
;              approach of a              sent decree are appropriate for the issue involved. We offer the following j              comment for your nsideration:                                                                                                                  ,
Line 115: Line 116:
==Dear Mr. Fry:==
==Dear Mr. Fry:==


i This is in response to your letter dated September 29,1997,' requesting our review and comment on the Troxler Electronics consent agreer.3nt.
i This is in response to your {{letter dated|date=September 29, 1997|text=letter dated September 29,1997}},' requesting our review and comment on the Troxler Electronics consent agreer.3nt.
)              We have reviewed the agreement and believe the commitments contained in the letter and the
)              We have reviewed the agreement and believe the commitments contained in the letter and the
,              approach of a consent decree are appropriate for the issue !nvolved. We o#er the following
,              approach of a consent decree are appropriate for the issue !nvolved. We o#er the following

Latest revision as of 17:28, 5 May 2021

Responds to Requesting Review & Comment on Troxler Electronics Consent Agreement.Commitments Contained in Ltr & Approach of Consent Decree Believed to Be Appropriate for Issues Involved
ML20212C270
Person / Time
Issue date: 10/20/1997
From: Bangart R
NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP)
To: Fry R
NORTH CAROLINA, STATE OF
Shared Package
ML20212C275 List:
References
NUDOCS 9710290144
Download: ML20212C270 (4)


Text

.. .

Mr. R. M. Fry, Director Division of Radiation Protection DCTsX. 01997 Department of Environment and Natural Resources -

3825 Barrett Drive Raleigh, NC - 27609 7221

Dear Mr. Fry:

This is in response to your letter dated September 29,1997, requesting our review and comment on the Troxter Electronics consent agreement.

We have reviewed the agreement and believe the commitments contained in the letter and the approach of a consent decree are appropriate for the issue involved. We offer the following comment for your consideration:

We recommend item E of the Consent Decree be modified to require the subject report .

be provided following the 180 day cut-off date rather than at the close of the second quarter. The information that is to be included in the report is timely and it is important that the State and NRC be provided the information as soor a possible. If the second quarter ends prior to the 180 day cut-off date (which is likely w be the case), complete 4 data would not be obtained until the end of third quarter (another 90 days). Therefore, a special report after the end of the 180 day cut-off would seem to be a better alternative.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you require assistance on compiling information, such as publicly availabM user names and addresses that could be obtained from our licensing database. If you have additional questions on this matter, you may contact Mr, Douglas A.

Broaddus at (301) 415-5847 or Internet: DAB @NRC. GOV.

We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on this agreement.

Sincerely, 11R1 L RT Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs Distribution: \

DIR RF (7S263) DCD (SP06)

SDroggitis PDR (YES/)

PLarkins North Carolina File DABroaddus, NMSS/IMNS w/ incoming

  • See previous concurernce.

DOCUMENT NAME: G:\ LAB \TROX. LAB 77 receive a cop e of th6s document. Indicate in the box: "C" a Copy without attachment /encsosure "E" e Coon with attachmenvenclosurg "N" a No copy OFFICE OSP l OSP:DD l IMNS:NMSS OSP:y;o, NAME LBolling:nb/gd PHLohaus LCamper RLBangariW/h DATE 10/15/97* 10/15/97* 10/16/97* 10/4 /97

~.,-nOP91j OSP FILE CODE: SP-AG-21 gg p r"' "' ~

U Qi! UU 9710d9Oi44 971020 PDR llll l llll ll. .ll STPRO ESONC ...< , 2 PDR

.-w s ..

J

Mr. R. M Fry, Direct Divtlon of Radiation otection Department of Environ ent and Natural Resources 3825 Barrett Drive

. Raleigh, NC 27609-7221

Dear Mr. Fry:

This is in response to your lette sdated September 29,1997, requesting our review and comment on the Troxler Electronics consent agreement.

We have reviewed the agreement and believe the commitments contained in the letter and the approach of a concent decree are a repriate for the issue involved. We offer the following comment for your consideration:

We recommend item E of the Cogsent Decree be modified to require the subject report be provided following the 180 daycut-off date rather than at the close of the second quarter. The information that is to be included in the report is timely and it is important j that the State and NRC be provided' he information as soon as possible. If the second quarter ends prior to the 180 day cut- ff date (which is likely to be the case), complete data would not be obtained, until the end of third quarter (another 90 days). Therefore, a

special report after the ead of the 180 da cut-off would seem to be a better alternative.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you requ;.*'psistance on compiling information, such as

! publicly available user names and addresses that c9uld be obtained from our licensing database if you have additional questions on this matter, you may contact Mr. Douglas A.

Broaddus at (301) 415-5847 or Intemet
DAB @NRC. OV.

We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment this agreement.

Since ly, Paul H. Lohaus, Deputy Director Office of Sf te Programs 4

DistributiQD:

DIR RF (7S263) DCD (SP06)

SDroggitis PDR (YES f NO )

North Carolina File DABroaddus, N S/IMNS w/ incoming DOCUMENT NAME: G:\ LAB \TROX.LA ) PLarkins n r.c.ev. . e . .m. accum meem. m m. noc c- 4moui .nevn.nvM cop r om .awim.nv omur. v . wo c.

OFFICE OSP f 2l OM $p l IMMSf OSP:D \

LBolling:ntV 'd'

! NAME PHLoha d \ LCan W ' RLBangart \

i DATE 10/l5/97 10/lfl97 10/)k /97 10/ /97 \

OSP FILE CODE: SP-AG-21

~ ~ .

=f

- _-..~ - - - - . - - . . . . . _ - - - . - . . - . . . - - -

. s ,

' Mr, R. M. Fry, Director : _

L Div'2 ion of Radiation Prttoction .

Department of Environment-

_ and Natural Resources - -

L '3825 Barrett Drive l

' Raleigh, NC' 27609-7221 :

i i

r Mr. Fry:

h -This is response to your letter dated September 29,1997, requesting our review and 1 comment the Troxler Electronics consent agreement.

- We have rev the agreement and believe the commitments contained in the lettet and the
approach of a sent decree are appropriate for the issue involved. We offer the following j comment for your nsideration
,

We recomme em E of the Consent Decree be modified to require the subject report be provided folio the 180 day cut-off date rather than at the close of the second ';

quarter. The inform on that is to be included in the report is timely and it is important g '

that the State and NR provided the information as soon as possible. If the second '

quarter ends prior to the O day cut-off date (which is likely to be the case), complete i

data would not be cbtal ntil the end of third quarter (another 90 days). Therefore, a special report after the end o 180 day , ut-off would seem to be a better altemative, i-l Please do not hesitate to contact us if yo require assistance on compiling information, such as l publicly available user names and address that could be obtained from our licensing  :

database. :If you have additional questions o this matter, you may contact Mr. Douglas A.
Broaddus at (301) 415-5847 or internet
DAB RC, GOV.

We appreciate the opportunity to review and com nt on this agreement.

Sin rely, r

4 Paul H. L haus, Deputy Director

- Office of S e Programs k

I Distnbution- __

.DIR RF (7S263)_ - DCD (SP06) '

i SDroggitis- _

- PDR (YES_f._ N )

North Carolina File. DABroaddus, NMSS/I S w/ incoming

~

DOCUMENT NAME: G:\ LAB \TROX.LA

,-. . - - . , kee Prev.. Conc.~ L _-,.PLarkins- . _ . .

OFFICE OSP f 2 l- 'OM M l- IMNS:NMSS OSP:D l \ ] I j

NAME: LBolling:ntM V' PHLola # \ . LCamper-- RLBangart \

DATE 10/15/07 10/lf/97 110/16/97 * - 10/ /97 \

OSP FILE CODE: -AG-21 4

4

p p~r\ UNITE) STATES

.g-

]-

NUCLEAR RE2ULATCRY CCMMISSION WAsMINeToN, D.C. 30006 4 001

%....., October 20.-1997 i

Mr. R. M. Fry, Director Division of Radiation Protection -

Department of Environment and Natural Resources 3825 Barrett Drive Raleigh, NC 27609-7221 L

Dear Mr. Fry:

i This is in response to your letter dated September 29,1997,' requesting our review and comment on the Troxler Electronics consent agreer.3nt.

) We have reviewed the agreement and believe the commitments contained in the letter and the

, approach of a consent decree are appropriate for the issue !nvolved. We o#er the following

comment for your consideration:  ;

We recommend item E of the Consent Decree be modified to require the subject report be provided following the 180 day cut-off date rather than at the close of the second quarter. The information that is to be included in the report is timely and it is important

that the State and NRC be provided the information as soon as possible. If the second
. qi'arter ends prior to the 180 day cut-off date (which is likely to be the case), complete 4- data would not be obtained until the end of third quarter (another 90 days). Therefore, a >

1 special report after the end of the 180 day cut-off would seem to be a better altamative.

! Please do not hesitate to contact us if you require assistance on compiling information, such as

! publicly available user names and addresses that could be obtained from our licensing

[ database. if you have additional questions on this matter, you may contact Mr. Douglas A.

Broaddus at (301) 415 5847 or internet: DAB @NRC. GOV.

l We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on this agreement.

l

{; Sincerely, C fl s t stf Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs i'

l l

3

. . . . _ , - .-- . -~ .