ML20136E705
Text
'
w :
7 o UNITED STATES
-8 % NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
( $ WASHINGTON, D. C. 20566 k ..... p January 10, 1984 l MEMORANDUM FOR: Norman L. McElroy Material Licensing Branch, NMSS FROM: Harriet Karagiannis, Health Physicist Safeguards and Materials Programs Branch Division of Quality Assurance, Safeguards, and Inspection Programs, IE THRU: Leonard I. Cobb, Chief Safeguards and Materials Programs Branch Division of Quality Assurance, Safeguards, i and Inspection Programs, IE
SUBJECT:
REVISION OF 10 CFR PART 35 We have reviewed the proposed staff plan and have the following comments for your consideration.
It is apparent from item three of the revised 10 CFR Part 35 staff plan that there will be an increase in the NRC materials inspection effort. This is due to the flexibility in allowing licensees to modify safety methods and procedures without NRC review and approval. Therefore, more time will be required for the inspector to spend in medical facilities. For example, a licensee may decide to adapt an air exhaust system for the administration of radioactive aerosols or gases instead of using a collection and decay system. The inspector will have to review and decide on the safety of the procedures, make calculations of effluent releases, consider the number of patients the licensee is planning to diagnose, as well as inspect the imple-mentation of the procedures. With the current NRC licensing review system, such calculations are done prior to inspections during the review of the modifying procedures. We endorse this approach since we do not intend to increase ir.,pection resources. During our meeting on December 9,1983 you mentioned that no additional time should be required for medical inspectors that are experts in medical programs. We agree, but the reality is that the majority of the materials inspectors are.not medical experts.
You should also consider the revised 10 CFR Part 20. It refers to the revision of 10 CFR Part 35 for the current 920.303 exemption of patient excreta. We have not seen this exemption included in the revision.
A W Y& Aaa /Sh rn a d :?a / o/ hanf E8 & f ds N.n MY b u,,*
S /c ll 4,e/ ol $ /10Al,//C M f b bo)t.4 4 r
/c h am .uwenumez .d aw>wnad M w;// Ncme -
Jhv /6 utmy9 Ant w k- -
makLX 1
/daffev/lmcEd. .
Il9 M 8 5
o O 8
Norman L. McElroy 2 We will be glad to answer any questions you may have regarding our comments.
Har gian st Safeguards and Materials Programs Branch Division of Quality Assurance, Safeguards, and Inspection Programs, IE cc: J. Partlow, IE L. Cobb, IE f.< i&x .! /,;a b)/r jh b s77>fl kx<j - w $mJ.<//g &c c,nua L (W arae. d~d envfo du>, J AG A a juicL.-
catc:dUs a:Ja'sAs:s ~4/4r on.nes >4na shouk kvf myxch J)eefd /od af & .
psaa']e (a fsaci
/I m i /saa'sedamy=
s dymu)f;A at g'.mm r/> edual Do a- m;e.d da/ccela do<> ou esta
- msas amc/ e//Deam&
concemhaA*.<w: p/dai ivaa,a , lshe.r;TTfio wal
& & /dssa (2b:0, /sma2 c?auon s da% fod21c'/J2), /,/,.e ,awfa && .
20% af sac 4~ cdcula$ i % -
6Ad'ad psw eaice nGab 6.wh 5lYcu,)edaoyso
/Isuu (Scfm ps pason n a u.ny a /adcQ e y_Az.u au hs .styfannw f7m a Ur'4C >6d as a LXwp as4 -
' aoynuuf remb/a n.m Arcamanda' /%odfs/ cm b u,xd i1: .4(I'$afcala 6A ) <]I'>" c":Yad A / k ' da faA a'-
}/>oan us<np6, / bad /33 N u/ .c4&& sa waA, Jm , .9m e Sm ums = 3am'/n 04v /,A, SA/idL, a 60 daw dainC f(36 m'x 40 ) ~ & to%C/mle ct/ank (10,,a d hiopo")sJ (sodew Ad antaoancinwns do:J intn vex /N'a//sw). Jhw/a/e uAe. _
//> seeapi A m .v' b ;&..
.a e - nee. 4
'_ j 6MG AND TRANSMITTAL SUP / g. ,
1 01 edIIce symbed, room nu
' islON l Initials Date , i L f\' &
s.A w J &acL nw /f N"Sg
/ //7 4.
v kr . -1 g, -
.f9 Acelon Flie Note and Retum -
Approwel For Clearance PerCenwo m
- 11Cist As C ^1' For Correction Propero Reply ns Branch Cheulate For Your Information See Me .safeguards, Demment - lavestigate Signature -
t _^:. :^": -- Justify i
. s Branch E p . >f p & e g A 4 'ea" rd'-
M b)0N1h b W f(2/Y .-
' d
~
hkb .
e 'i e following comments for s .I 10 CFR Part 35 staff plan
_ . fials inspection effort. This
- ' . :<3$to 1
modify safety Therefore, methods more time will
~
'. ,u -
' cal facilities. For example,
. . . ;ystem for the administration
" " "" " *EQ"e"n, j,78,7%****""'"*" d3*P'. Ing a col 1ection and decay Fnose(Nam org. symbol. Agency / Post) s Room No.-Bldg.
'-decide o e fet ft
,/ / gjg -
as well as inspect the imple-fy, / /N %"g* ,NRC licensing review system, Iu7 . . ,
[- M 7 Y 43
- 7-78)
'** 5" CE 282-22 888 n we o no, n en o Ji ng on December 9, 1983 you
..._~..___........;a._.......: .,e ._auired for medical inspectors that are experts in medical programs. We dgree, but the reality is that the majority of the materials inspectors are. pot medical experts.
You should also consider the revised 10 CFR Part 20. It refers to the revision of 10 CFR Part 35 for the current $20.303 exemption of patient excreta. We have not seen this exemption included in the revision.
U llo Asa k n nu a J su / sf A / 2d c je d g T, g,; _ !! k a io tap M s.d ofis m a,& cau a f s p u sv to b a, a w e v m e z d: sw>umad h/// Ncav -
jN' a/ N1y /t #12 Etd. } lt W /de L.* 6 9) f Y W W m y mk Eb /c 11 .
- -