ML20147A839: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter: | {{#Wiki_filter:8 UNITED ST ATES 3 | ||
[V.. | [V.. | ||
t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3,'I.h)Qf)/ h 9 | |||
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 Way/ | |||
g% | g% | ||
DEC 0 51973 m | DEC 0 51973 m | ||
r-Ms. Dorothy B. Jones | r-Ms. Dorothy B. Jones First Vice-President Another Mother Fund for Peace 407 North Maple Drive Suite 240 Beverly Hills, California 90210 | ||
First Vice-President Another Mother Fund for Peace 407 North Maple Drive Suite 240 Beverly Hills, California 90210 | |||
==Dear Ms. Jones:== | ==Dear Ms. Jones:== | ||
In response to your letter of November 6,1978, we are providing the following infonnation. | In response to your letter of November 6,1978, we are providing the following infonnation. | ||
Regulatory Guide 1.42 was withdrawn in March,1976. The reason for the withdrawal was the issuance of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50. | Regulatory Guide 1.42 was withdrawn in March,1976. | ||
The reason for the withdrawal was the issuance of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50. | |||
realistic calculational models and methods to evaluate existing and future nuclear facilities. These updated calculational models and methods are presented in Regulatory Guides 1.109, 1.110, 1.111, 1.112, and 1,113. Reguitory Guide 4.8, which was issued for comment in December,1975, describes methods, procedures, and reporting fonnats for the preparation of environmental radiological and non-radiological surveillance technical specifications. Although Regulatory Guide 4.8 has never been withdrawn, continuing staff discussion concerning the non-radiological portions of the guide have resulted in the guide being placed in an " indefinite hold" status. However, the staff completed a review of the comments received regarding the radiological portion of R.G. 4.8 and had | In implementing Appendix I to 10 CFR 50, the staff developed more realistic calculational models and methods to evaluate existing and future nuclear facilities. | ||
incorporated these comments where appropriate, into an updated version of the recommended environmental radiological technical speci fic ations. Therefore, in April,1978, guidance regarding envirorrnental radiological surveillance was issued to licensees as a branch technical position. | These updated calculational models and methods are presented in Regulatory Guides 1.109, 1.110, 1.111, 1.112, and 1,113. | ||
Reguitory Guide 4.8, which was issued for comment in December,1975, describes methods, procedures, and reporting fonnats for the preparation of environmental radiological and non-radiological surveillance technical specifications. Although Regulatory Guide 4.8 has never been withdrawn, continuing staff discussion concerning the non-radiological portions of the guide have resulted in the guide being placed in an " indefinite hold" status. | |||
However, the staff completed a review of the comments received regarding the radiological portion of R.G. 4.8 and had incorporated these comments where appropriate, into an updated version of the recommended environmental radiological technical speci fic ations. | |||
Therefore, in April,1978, guidance regarding envirorrnental radiological surveillance was issued to licensees as a branch technical position. | |||
Regulatory Guides are issued by the staff for the purpose of communicating technical infonnation and positions to licensees. | Regulatory Guides are issued by the staff for the purpose of communicating technical infonnation and positions to licensees. | ||
These guides impose no legal obligations onto licensees and therefore positions contained within them can be modified or | These guides impose no legal obligations onto licensees and therefore positions contained within them can be modified or | ||
...r changed depending upon the individual licensee circumstances. | |||
A branch technical position is interpreted in the same manner. | A branch technical position is interpreted in the same manner. | ||
v81214D347 BB | v81214D347 BB | ||
L 1 | L 1 | ||
i | i DEC 0 51978 fis. Dorothy B. Jones 2 | ||
DEC 0 51978 fis. Dorothy B. Jones | ~ | ||
+ | |||
i The new guidance concerning sampling and analysis frequency for iodine-131 in milk has changed from weekly to every other week when animals are on pasture and monthly at other times. | |||
i The new guidance concerning sampling and analysis frequency for iodine-131 in milk has changed from weekly to every other week | Ba sed on the results obtained from the weekly sampling and analysis procedures, the staff detemined that sufficient information to protect the public health and safety could be obtained by semi-weekly sampling while the animals were on pasturp. | ||
when animals are on pasture and monthly at other times. Ba sed on the results obtained from the weekly sampling and analysis procedures, the staff detemined that sufficient information to protect the public health and safety could be obtained by semi-weekly sampling while the animals were on pasturp. This deter-mination resulted from observing very small amoghts of or no | This deter-mination resulted from observing very small amoghts of or no iodine in milk in spite of very rigorous sampling and analysis techniques. | ||
iodine in milk in spite of very rigorous sampling and analysis techniques. Monthly sampling for iodine when the animals are not | Monthly sampling for iodine when the animals are not on pasture is to determine if mechanisms other than grazing could result in nuclear facility produced iodine reaching the animal's mil k. | ||
on pasture is to determine if mechanisms other than grazing could result in nuclear facility produced iodine reaching the animal's mil k. | Since this pathway is not of primary importance, the sampling frequency is reduced. | ||
Since this pathway is not of primary importance, the sampling frequency is reduced. | s Milk is sampled quarterly under NRC/ State contracts in' Wi sconsin and California as part of a program to verify the sampling and analysis procedures of licensees. | ||
s Milk is sampled quarterly under NRC/ State contracts in' Wi sconsin and California as part of a program to verify the sampling and analysis procedures of licensees. Since these programs are for back-up or verification of primary programs of the licensees, quarterly sampling is appropria,te. | Since these programs are for back-up or verification of primary programs of the licensees, quarterly sampling is appropria,te. | ||
Sincerely, | Sincerely, | ||
/ | |||
Richard | Richard DeYou Di rector Division of Site Safety and s | ||
Environmental Analysis Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l | |||
l l}} | l l}} | ||
Latest revision as of 13:49, 11 December 2024
| ML20147A839 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/05/1978 |
| From: | Deyoung R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | David Jones AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20147A844 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-REGGD-04.008, RTR-REGGD-4.008 NUDOCS 7812140329 | |
| Download: ML20147A839 (2) | |
Text
8 UNITED ST ATES 3
[V..
t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3,'I.h)Qf)/ h 9
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 Way/
g%
DEC 0 51973 m
r-Ms. Dorothy B. Jones First Vice-President Another Mother Fund for Peace 407 North Maple Drive Suite 240 Beverly Hills, California 90210
Dear Ms. Jones:
In response to your letter of November 6,1978, we are providing the following infonnation.
Regulatory Guide 1.42 was withdrawn in March,1976.
The reason for the withdrawal was the issuance of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50.
In implementing Appendix I to 10 CFR 50, the staff developed more realistic calculational models and methods to evaluate existing and future nuclear facilities.
These updated calculational models and methods are presented in Regulatory Guides 1.109, 1.110, 1.111, 1.112, and 1,113.
Reguitory Guide 4.8, which was issued for comment in December,1975, describes methods, procedures, and reporting fonnats for the preparation of environmental radiological and non-radiological surveillance technical specifications. Although Regulatory Guide 4.8 has never been withdrawn, continuing staff discussion concerning the non-radiological portions of the guide have resulted in the guide being placed in an " indefinite hold" status.
However, the staff completed a review of the comments received regarding the radiological portion of R.G. 4.8 and had incorporated these comments where appropriate, into an updated version of the recommended environmental radiological technical speci fic ations.
Therefore, in April,1978, guidance regarding envirorrnental radiological surveillance was issued to licensees as a branch technical position.
Regulatory Guides are issued by the staff for the purpose of communicating technical infonnation and positions to licensees.
These guides impose no legal obligations onto licensees and therefore positions contained within them can be modified or
...r changed depending upon the individual licensee circumstances.
A branch technical position is interpreted in the same manner.
v81214D347 BB
L 1
i DEC 0 51978 fis. Dorothy B. Jones 2
~
+
i The new guidance concerning sampling and analysis frequency for iodine-131 in milk has changed from weekly to every other week when animals are on pasture and monthly at other times.
Ba sed on the results obtained from the weekly sampling and analysis procedures, the staff detemined that sufficient information to protect the public health and safety could be obtained by semi-weekly sampling while the animals were on pasturp.
This deter-mination resulted from observing very small amoghts of or no iodine in milk in spite of very rigorous sampling and analysis techniques.
Monthly sampling for iodine when the animals are not on pasture is to determine if mechanisms other than grazing could result in nuclear facility produced iodine reaching the animal's mil k.
Since this pathway is not of primary importance, the sampling frequency is reduced.
s Milk is sampled quarterly under NRC/ State contracts in' Wi sconsin and California as part of a program to verify the sampling and analysis procedures of licensees.
Since these programs are for back-up or verification of primary programs of the licensees, quarterly sampling is appropria,te.
Sincerely,
/
Richard DeYou Di rector Division of Site Safety and s
Environmental Analysis Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l
l l