ML18003A819
| ML18003A819 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/23/2018 |
| From: | Lance Rakovan NRC/NMSS/DMSTR/ASPB |
| To: | |
| Rakovan L | |
| References | |
| Download: ML18003A819 (4) | |
Text
MINUTES: MANAGEMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING OF SOUTH CAROLINA SEPTEMBER 14, 2017 The attendees were as follows:
In person at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Headquarters in Rockville, Maryland:
Fred Brown, MRB Chair, OEDO Lance Rakovan, NMSS Scott Moore, MRB Member, NMSS Paul Michalak, NMSS Tison Campbell, MRB Member, OGC Karen Meyer, NMSS Darrell Roberts, MRB Member, NSIR Dan Collins, NMSS Aaron Gantt, SC James Peterson, SC Binesh Tharakan, Team Leader, Region IV Maria Arribas-Colon, Team Member, NMSS By videoconference:
Michelle Simmons, Team Member, RegionIV Monica Ford, Team Member, Region I Dennis ODowd, Team Member, Region III By telephone:
Mike Snee, MRB Member, OH, OAS Joe OHara, NMSS Phil Goble, Team Member, UT Kathy Modes, NMSS Lizette Roldan-Otera, NMSS
- 1. Convention. Mr. Lance Rakovan convened the meeting at approximately 2:30 p.m. (ET).
He noted that this Management Review Board (MRB) meeting was open to the public.
Introductions of the attendees were conducted.
- 2. South Carolina IMPEP Review. Mr. Binesh Tharakan, Team Leader, led the presentation of the South Carolina Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) review results to the MRB. He summarized the review and the teams findings for the eight indicators reviewed. The on-site review was conducted by a team composed of technical staff members from the NRC and the State of Utah during the period of June 19-23, 2017. A draft report was issued to South Carolina for factual comment on July 20, 2017. South Carolina responded to the teams findings by e-mail dated August 16, 2017. Mr. Tharakan reported that the team found the South Carolina Agreement State Program satisfactory for all eight performance indicators reviewed.
- 3. Common Performance Indicators.
a) Ms. Monica Ford reviewed and presented the common performance indicator, Technical Staffing and Training. Her presentation corresponded to Section 3.1 of the proposed final IMPEP report. The MRB, the team, and State representatives discussed the one-page sheet the Bureau of Radiological Health (the Bureau) uses for planning and tracking training. The MRB supported the teams recommendation that the Bureau update its training and qualification manual to incorporate the essential elements of NRC Inspection Manual Chapter
South Carolina MRB Meeting Minutes Page 2 1248 and implement it for all staff to ensure continued effective and consistent training and development of its staff.
The team found South Carolinas performance with respect to this indicator to be satisfactory and the MRB agreed.
b) Mr. Dennis ODowd reviewed and presented the common performance indicator, Status of Materials Inspection Program. His presentation corresponded to Section 3.2 of the proposed final IMPEP report. The MRB, team members, and Bureau representatives discussed challenges involving reciprocity inspections.
The team found South Carolinas performance with respect to this indicator to be satisfactory and the MRB agreed.
c) Mr. ODowd reviewed and presented the common performance indicator, Technical Quality of Inspections. His presentation corresponded to Section 3.3 of the proposed final IMPEP report.
The team found South Carolinas performance with respect to this indicator to be satisfactory and the MRB agreed.
d) Ms. Michelle Simmons reviewed and presented the common performance indicator, Technical Quality of Licensing Actions. Her presentation corresponded to Section 3.4 of the proposed final IMPEP report.
The team found South Carolinas performance with respect to this indicator to be satisfactory and the MRB agreed.
e) Mr. Tharakan reviewed and presented the findings regarding the common performance indicator, Technical Quality of Incident and Allegation Activities. His presentation corresponded to Section 3.5 of the proposed final IMPEP report. The MRB, the team, and Bureau representatives discussed whether incident response procedures accurately described current protocols for information exchange between NRC and Agreement States. The team indicated that written incident response procedures are Compatibility Category C and discussed the latest NRC guidance for incident response. The MRB noted that Agreement State Programs are not required to adopt NRCs incident response procedures. The MRB further noted that the States procedures have been adequate for implementing their response program for several years as determined by previous IMPEP teams and the assessment of the current team as discussed in the report. The team made a formal recommendation for the State to update their incident response procedures using the latest guidance to ensure responses to incidents are suitable, timely, and effectively documented.
The MRB members agreed to a modified version of the teams recommendation; however, the MRB Chairman disagreed with leaving a formal recommendation in the final report. Nevertheless, following substantial discussion with the team and the MRB, the State indicated that they planned to update their incident response
South Carolina MRB Meeting Minutes Page 3 procedures. The MRB directed that the recommendation made by the team in the proposed final report be removed and replaced with a statement indicating the State would update their procedures.
The team found South Carolinas performance with respect to this indicator to be satisfactory and the MRB agreed.
- 4. Non-Common Performance Indicators.
a) Ms. Ford reviewed and presented the non-common performance indicator, Compatibility Requirements. Her presentation corresponded to Section 4.1 of the proposed final IMPEP report.
The team found South Carolinas performance with respect to this indicator to be satisfactory and the MRB agreed.
b) Ms. Maria Arribas-Colon reviewed and presented the non-common performance indicator, Sealed Source and Device (SS&D) Evaluation Program. Her presentation corresponded to Section 4.2 of the proposed final IMPEP report.
The team found South Carolinas performance with respect to this indicator to be satisfactory and the MRB agreed.
c) Mr. Phil Goble reviewed and presented the non-common performance indicator, Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Program. His presentation corresponded to Section 4.3 of the proposed final IMPEP report. The MRB asked for additional details about the 10 additional licenses discussed in the report. The team and the Division provided information about what those licenses authorized.
The team found South Carolinas performance with respect to this indicator to be satisfactory and the MRB agreed.
- 5. MRB Consultation/Comments on Issuance of Report. The team recommended, and the MRB agreed, that the South Carolina Agreement State Program be found adequate to protect public health and safety and compatible with the NRC's program. The team recommended, and the MRB agreed, the next IMPEP review take place in approximately 5 years. The MRB directed that a periodic meeting be held in approximately 2.5 years.
The final report may be found in the ADAMS using the Accession Number ML17271A272.
- 6. Precedents/Lessons Learned. None applicable to this review
- 7. Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 3:20 p.m. (ET)
SUBJECT:
Summary of September 14, 2017 South Carolina MRB Meeting ML18003A819 OFFICE MSTR/ASPB MSTR/ASPB NAME KMeyer LRakovan DATE 01/08/18 01/23/18 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY