ML20149H399

Responds to 941013 Ltr Requesting Assistance in Determining How State Could Implement EPA Requirements Under CAA & Maintain Compatible Regulations W/Nrc Regulations for Protection of Public

ML20149H399
Person / Time
Issue date:	11/17/1994
From:	Bangart R NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP)
To:	Flater D IOWA, STATE OF
Shared Package
ML20149H402	List: ML20149H399
References
NUDOCS 9411220165
Download: ML20149H399 (2)

Text

. I Mr. Donald A. Flater, Chief g;7g Bureau of Radiological Health Department of Public Health Lucas Office Building Des Moines, IA 50319-0075

Dear Mr. Flater:

This letter is in response to your letter dated October 13, 1994 in which you requested assistance in determining how a State could implement the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and maintain compatible regulations with Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations for protection of the public.

Depending on the situation at a specific facility, demonstration of compliance with the CAA requirements could be made and still be in non-compliance with the Appendix B, concentrations at the unrestricted area boundary. Therefore, the CAA requirements do not necessarily demonstrate compliance with NRC requirements. For this reason, the NRC requirements should be maintained while adding the EPA requirements.

In the past, NRC adopted EPA standards by adding the specific requirement as an additional requirement not a replacement for the NRC's original requirement. An example of this type of regulatory structure is in NRC regulations at s20.1301(d). Such a regulatory structure could be used for the adoption of CAA requirements while retaining the AEA requirements needed for compatibility.

Conclusion:

We do not see any compatibility problems if the State adds additional regulatory requirements required under another F ederal program.

These new or additional requirements should not replace NRC regulations required for compatibility but should be added to those regulations.

If you have any questions on this issue, please call me or Dennis Sollenberger at 301-504-2819.

Sincerely, Orkjha! Signed &/

RICHARD L. BANGART Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs Distribution:

DIR RF S-290 RBangart PLohaus DSollenberger FCameron CPaperiello OSP Staff DCD (SP01)

PDR YES.E_ NO a m/ ,,

__0,F_C__ ,0S,[,: S,A, ( ,$,L ,NMS_S_

__,$ , 0_S,[

_h_ _05 _ _ _ _

_0, , ,___ ,__,

..N,M_E,j D, Sol,1 e,n p,rgg_j,P,(,h ,),,_j,F_ Cam,eyo,9,,,__j_C,[ap,e___ ej,1,g,j RB__gh DTE l.1/17/94 l 11 /94 l11/r1/94 !11/1/949  ! 11//k94 l  !  !

g:\lAFLATER.DMS i j 9411220165 941117 PDR STPRG ESGIA PDR I)I

. I ,

p s@M0 0 y lt UNITED STATES l j

j

't NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 0001 i

% # November 17, 1994-Mr. Donald A. Flater, Chief .

Bureau of Radiological Health i Department of Public Health Lucas Office Building Des Moines, IA 50319-0075

Dear Mr. Flater:

This letter is in response to your letter dated October 13, 1994 in which you requested assistance in determining how a State could implement the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and maintain compatible regulations with Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations for protection of the public.

I Depending on the situation at a specific facility, demonstration of compliance with the CAA requirements could be made and still be in non-compliance with the Appendix B, concentrations at the unrestricted area boundary. Therefore, the CAA requirements do not necessarily demonstrate compliance with NRC requirements. For this reason, the NRC requirements should be maintained while adding the EPA requirements.

In the past, NRC adopted EPA standards by adding the specific requirement as an additional requirement not a replacement for the NRC's original '

requirement. An example of this type of regulatory structure is in NRC regulations at 520.1301(d). Such a regulatory structure could be used for the

• adoption of CAA requirements while retaining the AEA requirements needed for compatibility.

Conclusion:

We do not see any compatibility problems if the State adds '

additional regulatory requirements required under another Federal program.

These new or additional requirements should not replace NRC regulations required for compatibility but should be added to those regulations.

If you have any questions on this issue, please call me or-Dennis Sollenberger at 301-504-2819.

Sincerely, d ga Richard L. Bangart, Diregtor Office of State Programs' i

1 l

-. . - ._ _ - _ -- _. - _ _ _