ML20236L576

From kanterella
Revision as of 08:07, 21 February 2021 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses COMSECY-96-006, Early Commission Consultation on Rev to Part 34,Radiography. Inclined to Favor Option a Provided Staff Can Support cost-benefit Analysis Indicating Implementation of Option B
ML20236L576
Person / Time
Issue date: 04/08/1996
From: Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To: Hoyle J
NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
Shared Package
ML20236J269 List:
References
FRN-62FR28948, RULE-PR-150, RULE-PR-30, RULE-PR-34, RULE-PR-71 AE07-2-015, AE7-2-15, NUDOCS 9807130079
Download: ML20236L576 (1)


Text

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

ffh #b

{ UNITED STATES g

o  ! /em'e$ .E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 l

{

April 8, 1996

%, /

CHAIRMAN Speis l Murphy John C. Hoyle, Secretary Morris MEMORANDUM TO: Costanzi 7 MkW -

Shirley Ann Jackson # Martin FROM: / Glenn COMSECY-96-006, EARLY COMMISSION CONSULTATION ON

SUBJECT:

REVISION TO PART 34, RADIOGRAPHY .Trottier Nellis

~

Based on the information presented in Mr. Taylor's memorandum of March 18, 1996 to the Commissioners, I am inclined to favor Option A (not to adopt the two-person rule) provided that the staff can support the cost-benefit analysis in the memo that indicates that implementation of Option B (two-person rule) would cost $720,000 to $4.3 million per year while the eff,ective benefit, based on the $2,000 per person-rem guideline, would be less than $80,u00 per year. However, such a conclusion would depend to a large degree on the confidence Therefore, one I would has in prefer thethe that cost-benefit analysis itself.

staff make its own independent recommendation on this issue when the final rulemaking package is submitted to the Commission for its approval. .

l l 9807130079 980611 1 PDR PR 30-62FR28948 PDR f)l$

L___$ ?[ M " Q