Comment (1) of Scott Cargill on FR Doc # 2011-29986

Document ID: NRC-2011-0265-0003
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Received Date: November 26 2011, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Date Posted: January 30 2012, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: November 21 2011, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: January 13 2012, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 80f73e3e
View Document:  View as format xml

View Comment

A brief review of the NUREG-1556 Vol 2 Rev 1 I noted two items that may require review. 1) The first is cosmetic and minor, the map of agreement states on page 3 needs a much higher contrast between the nrc jurisdictional states and agreement states, it is very difficult to seperate the two shades. 2) The second and more substaive in appendix E the requirements for radiographers and assistants list passing a written or oral exam on O&E with an 80% cut score. This cut score is not addressed in requlation .43(c). Though this is a guidence document it should reflect current regulation and not the authors preference. 70% is a standard cut score for most exams given.

Related Comments

   
Total: 4
Comment (1) of Scott Cargill on FR Doc # 2011-29986
Public Submission    Posted: 01/30/2012     ID: NRC-2011-0265-0003

Jan 13,2012 11:59 PM ET
Comment (2) of George Marshall on Behalf of American Portable Nuclear Gauge Association on NUREG-1556, Volume 2, Revision 1
Public Submission    Posted: 01/30/2012     ID: NRC-2011-0265-0004

Jan 13,2012 11:59 PM ET
Comment (3) of Stephen P. Matthews on NUREG-1556, Volume 2, Revision 1
Public Submission    Posted: 01/31/2012     ID: NRC-2011-0265-0005

Jan 13,2012 11:59 PM ET
Comment (4) of Michael Welling on Behalf of the Virginia Department of Health on NUREG-1556, Volume 2, Revision 1
Public Submission    Posted: 02/28/2012     ID: NRC-2011-0265-0006

Jan 13,2012 11:59 PM ET