[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Agreement State - NRC relationship



Bill, others,

I don't think its so much "preaching to the choir", as "speaking of the past". 
The current NRC framework, including fees, capability, training/support, etc,
including many larger issues of Federalism and returning power and
accountability to the states, does not seem likely to be able to support the
mission as previously defined. It is appropriate to pay attention to a more
substantial role for the CRCPD. And that may be appropriate, rather than
trying to maintain the past that reflects a more developmental era. 

Thanks.

Regards, Jim Muckerheide
jmuckerheide@delphi.com
jmuckerheide@state.ma.us
=============================
> As a former Agreement State Employee and seasoned veteran of State 
> Government, I have genuine reasons to believe that the relationship 
> between the NRC and Agreement States is a very important relationship
> to nurture and maintain.
> 
> Without NRC provided training most Agreement State programs would dry up 
> and blow away. (With a couple of notable exceptions.)
> 
> Without NRC adequacy and compatability issues some programs might find it 
> administratively impossible to conduct rule-makings and enforcement.
> 
> Without NRC involvement some issues are beyond the technical capabilities 
> of some Agreement State programs to efficiently and effectively handle.  
> The technical assistance provided would be difficult to obtain from 
> outside sources in a manner that would maintain objectivity.
> 
> Without the NRC the exchange of regulatory and safety information could 
> be impaired unless another entity (such as CRCPD) was utilized to 
> facilitate this sharing of data and experience.
> 
> I'll stop here... (In case I'm preaching to the Choir.)
> 
> Bill Pitchford
> Radiation Protection Facility
> Arizona State University
> Tempe, Arizona 85287-3501