ML20046B999
| ML20046B999 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/15/1993 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Synar M HOUSE OF REP., GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS |
| References | |
| CCS, NUDOCS 9308090104 | |
| Download: ML20046B999 (14) | |
Text
--
/-
gav"FCu
~ f.
?t UNITED STATES
.[.,$*j'fIj NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t
WASHINGTON, D C. 20E0001 D
July 15, 1993 The Honorable Mike Synar, Chairman Subcommittee on Environment, Energy, and Natural Resources Committee on Government Operations United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am pleased to provide responses to the questions pased in your staff's letter of June 8,1993, regarding the activities of the NRC in the regulation of Agreement States and materials licensees.
Enclosed is a copy of the June 8,1993 letter with the questions renumbered sequentially.
Sincerely, ecutive rector for Operations
Enclosures:
As stated cc:
Rep. J. Dennis Hastert (w/ enclosures)
Y l
w
-s 9308090104 930715 III PDR STPRG ESGGEN Mj -
.h
[3f
- .UAM P EksIA,A A.Staus%Dasa.
- ggggggg, ONS MUweMED TMme C0setRE85
= =. -
4 tem asse di'.3,,g Ongttss of the Enftri $tates yEey,gr~
x
=.
e=r= =--
m :. = = _
m,ucorRepariirecs E m E," men we
'e"u"fcTas*e*s'.**" ec.
h" *' h ***
.J MITTEE ON 00VERNMENT OPERATIONS "g""EE -
s cow
'J* 74****
d""
2187 Ravsvan Howes omse sunsene
, y, d = )=.
so.am massens,viess e
.ns.. "a O
Wassessetos. DC 2e51s 4143 June 8, 1993 g,s*g
$*@Lbe.
-w To:
Tom Combs NRC Congressional From:
Dave Berick Additional Fo1 Low-Up Items on Agreement States Re:
h)
In a March 8,1990 letter from C. Kamerer to H. Borchert, Div.
of Radiological Health, Nebraska a reference is made to a memo to Treby, dated February 7;.1990 on underlying V. Miller from Stuart policy of Section 274 and states that this memo is enclosed.
.The February '/, 1990 memo was not included.
Please provide a copy o,f this memo.
to C. Kamerer A July 2,1990 memo from Region IV (R. Martin) q{ ransmitting a revis6d draf t of Nebraska review letter had the wrong document attached.
Please provide the revised draft referred' to in the memo.
i In a July 30, 1990 letter from C.
Kamerer to the State ' of l
JY)braska transmitting ( the findings of the NRC review a reference is Is 7 Ne 1etter form Chairman Carr to Governor Orr.
made to a "recent*
1 this letter tho'same es the July 30, 1990 letter from Chairman Carr previded to the ' Subcomittee or. is there. an j
to Governor Orr additional letter?' If so, please provide the additional letter.
p /)
No staf f evaluat' ion and report for June, 1990 review of the State'of Nebraska disev.ssed.in the. July 30, 1990 letter from C.
Xamerer was provided.
Please provide this documentation.
A copy of these documents wes.apparently transmitted from Region'IV to V.
1 1990 according to a memo from'R. Doda.to V.
Miller on August 3, No documentation was-attached to the memo.
Miller.on that date.
in the es are made.to.regu1*ations in offeet h)
Several referent State of Nebraska-allowing for disposal of 1 short half-life materials'in landfilas.
No resolution of this issue seems to have been reached as noted in Item C on page 4 of the detailed coments:
How appended to the September-17, 1992 letter from C.. Kanunerer.
^
has this issue been resolved.
letter from C, Kammerer to the State of Mf')braska has an extrdmely confusing statement regarding the State's The September 17, 1992 compatibility.
On page. 2 of the detailed coments, the letter -
Ne 1
i I
discusses the fact thWt the State's regulations are apparently not compatible with NRC rdgulations up to the 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, and 70 amendments on decodmissioning that became effective on July 27, The letter states that a finding of compatibility will not
-1988.
be withheld if the am&ndment is 'on track for adoption by 1993.=
When was the decommistioning rule actually required to be adopted by the State of - Nebkaska and when did the State of Nebraska-actually adopt the rule?
No staff evaluttion,
- report, or etate questionnaire was
?
[f)provided for the review conducted of the State of Nebraska in June, 1992.
Please provide this documentation.
j
$I))
The State of Nebraska responded to the NRC's September 17, 1992 i
in correspondence dated November 25, 1992.
In thst letter correspondence the Sthte committed to a number of actions, but.no further documentation was provided to the _ Subcommittee on the State's action to complete such actions although Region IV's September 23, 1992 memo to V. Miller states that Region IV will monitor these actions on a weekly basis. What is the status of the Nebraska's program add its commitments made in the November 25,
}
1992 letter.
j
.i E
P i
i I
i i
o I
8
)
j t
4 l
1
b 4
" OUESTION 25.
Identify and describe all investigations conducted by the Office of Investigations of Agreement State Licensees as a result of activities described in Items la and Ib.
ANSWER.
In response to your May 4,1993 letter, we are forwarding the following Office of Investigations (01) reports regarding licensees of Agreement States working in an NRC jurisdiction and NRC licensees working in Agreement States. There were no 0I investigations conducted relating to Agreement States licensees working at a Federal facility. One report involves an NRC licensee working on a U.S. Government project to construct an incinerator on Johnson Atoll, a U.S.
Protectorate.
i List of Reports l
Case No.
Lice s Date Closed 3-92-024R American Testing and Inspection, Inc. '
04/23/93 4-92-031R Tulsa Gamma Ray' 03/31/93 3-92-039R Ponce I&M Engineering' 03/23/93 l
4-92-038R Gray Wireline Services, Inc.'
03/08/93 4-92-004
-Panhandle N.D.T. & Inspection, Inc.'
09/01/92 04/91-020 Midwest Industrial X-Ray' 04/10/92
' full Scale Investigation SYNAR/01 07/07/93 i
I
s-3-91-011 Piping Specialist, Inc. '*
02/21/92 I
5-87-00lS U.S. Testing Company, Inc.'
05/15/90 4-86-015 H&G Inspection Company' 08/22/88 5-87-008 Finlay Testing Laboratories, Inc.'
05/11/88 5-88-010 Finlay Testing Laboratories, Inc.'
04/30/91 Q2-86-004 QC Laboratories, Inc.'
03/31/86 4-85-010 Northwest X-Ray, Inc.'
10/08/85 1-84-023 Pittsburgh Testing Laboratories' 07/10/85 2
3-92-049 State of Iowa 12/23/92 4-92-029 Robco Production Logging, Inc.2 11/16/92 2
4-92-037 Western Technologies 11/13/92 5-92-010 Westex, Inc.2 08/27/92 3-92-031 Nucletron, Inc.2 07/31/92 2
4-92-006 RDL X-Ray 07/20/92 3
4-93-027 Anvil Inspections Pending 3
4-93-025 Well Site Inspection Pending 3
1-92-013 Cordi Corporation Pending 3
[
Enclosures:
-t 01 Reports of Investigation
' Full Scale Investigation.
- Case pending before the Department of Justice, distribution of which.
should be limited to Congressional staff.
2Case Evaluations Closed e
30ngoing Investigation I
SYNAR/0I 07/07/93 1
- I
QUESTION 44.
In a March 8, 1990 letter from C. Kammerer to H.
Borchert, Div. of Radiological Health, Nebraska, a reference is made to a memo to V. Miller from Stuart Treby, I
dated February 7,1990, on underlying policy of Section 274 and states that this memo is enclosed.
The February 7, 1990 memo was not included.
Please provide a copy of this memo.
ANSWER.
The February 7, 1990 memorandum to Vandy L. Miller, Assistant Director for l
State Agreements Program, Office of State Programs, from Stuart A. Treby, Assistant General Counsel for Rulemaking and Fuel Cycle, Office of the General 1
Counsel, is enclosed. We are also enclosing the September 29, 1989 letter referenced in the February 7, 1990 memorandum.
6
'h i
Enclosures:
}
As stated i
l l
i P
Synar/0SP l
07/07/93 a
~
OUESTION 45.
A July 2, 1990 memo from Region IV (R. Martin) to C.
Kammerer transmitting a revised draft of Nebraska review letter had the wrong document attached.
Please provide the revised draft referred to in the memo.
ANSWER.
I The revised draft review transmitted on July 2, 1990 was a draft and was not kept after the final version of the review letter was completed.
The final review letter dated July 30, 1990, to Gregg F. Wright, Director, Department of Health, and Dennis Grams, Director, Department of Environmental Control, from P
Carlton Kammerer, Director, Office of State Programs, is enclosed.
For tie Subcommittee's information, the document attached to the July 2, 1990 memorandum was a letter dated June 29, 1990, to Robert Doda from Governor Kay t
Orr addressing the issues and responses that were discussed at the exit meeting with Nebraska.
This letter was generated before the NRC staff sent t
its evaluation to the State of Nebraska on July 30, 1990.
Enclosure:
As stated Synar/OSP 07/07/93
1 l
]
i OUESTION 46.
In a July 30, 1990 letter from C. Kammerer to the State of Nebraska transmitting the findings of the NRC review a reference is made to a "recent" letter from Chairman Carr to Governor Orr.
Is this letter the same as the July 30, 1990 letter from Chairman Carr to Governor Orr provided to the Subcommittee or is there an additional letter?
If so, please provide the additional letter.
ANSWER.
The letter referred in the C. Kammerer correspondence dated July 30, 1990, is the same July 30, 1990 letter from Chairman Carr to Governor Orr already provided to the Subcommittee.
e 1
i e
i Synar/OSP 07/07/93
i i
OVESTION 47.
No staff evaluation and report for June,1990 review of the State of Nebraska discussed in the July 30, 1990 letter from C. Kammerer was provided.
Please provide this documentation.
A copy of these documents was apparently transmitted from Region IV to V. Miller on August 3, 1990 according to a memo from R. Doda to V. Miller on that date.
No documentation was attached to the memo.
ANSWER.
The memorandum dated August 3, 1990, for Vandy L. Miller, Assistant Director i
for State Agreements Program, SP, from Robert J. Doda, State-Agreements Officer, Region IV, transmits the staff evaluation dated July 30, 1990. The report is attached to the staff evaluation.
For the Subcommittee's information, the report is not sent to the State because all the information in the report is provided by the State.
The only documentation the State receives is the staff evaluation.
Enclosure:
As stated i
k k
Synar/OSP 07/07/93
9 4
4 OVESTION 48.
Several references are made to regulations in effect in the State of Nebraska allowing for disposal of short half-life materials in landfills.
No resolution of this issue seems to have been reached as noted in Item C on page 4 of the detailed comments appended to the September 17, 1992 letter i
from C. Kammerer.
How has this issue been resolved.
ANSWER.
The State of Nebraska has placed a license condition on a medical license issued to Good Samaritan Hospital that specifies that "... radioactive materials with half lives of 300 days or less may be held for decay for 10 I
half lives and then disposed of without regard to radioactivity." The State has indicated that this license condition was used to cover cobalt 57 sources used in hospitals.
This license condition is similar to a rule adopted by the State of Texas, and subsequently reviewed and accepted by the NRC.
NRC staff plans to review the supporting documentation for this license condition during the next routine review to resolve this issue.
l i
-i i
i l
Synar/0SP 07/07/93 ll m--f
4 t
OVESTION 49.
The September 17, 1992 letter from C. Kammerer to the. State of Nebraska has an extremely confusing statement regarding the State's compatibility. On page 2 of the detailed comments, the letter discusses the fact that the State's regulations are apparently not compatible with NRC regulations up to 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, and 70 amendments on decommissioning that became effective on July 27, 1988.
The letter states that a finding of compatibility will not be withheld if the amendment is "on track for adoption by 1993." When was the decommissioning rule actually required to be adopted by the State of Nebraska and when did the State of Nebraska actually adopt the rule?
1 ANSWER.
The decommissioning rule was required to be adopted by Agreement States by July 27, 1991; however, when the Agreement States were initially informed of the requirement, by letter dated July 12, 1988 (Enclosure 1), the NRC inadvertently cited the date as July 27, 1993.
The NRC staff informed the States of this error in a letter dated September 14,1990 (Enclosure 2). The l
September 14, 1990 letter states that if the State initiated rulemaking in a timely manner, and the rulemaking was on track as determined in the next Agreement State review, the NRC would not withhold the finding of compatibility if the July 27, 1991 date was not met.
l Synar/0SP 07/13/93 i
..; :g (TVESTION 49.
(Continued)
At the time of the 1992 Nebraska routine review, the State had drafted rules compatible with the NRC decommissioning rule.
Nebraska expects to adopt the final decommissioning rule by the end of 1993.
I' Enclosures-l
}
As stated
)l
]
i I
l I
i j
1 i
l 1
]
Synar/0SP.
07/07/93_
~
j
_ _ _ _ = _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
,u i
-1,
+
t
+
00ESTION 50.
No staff evaluation, report, or state questionnaire was provided for the review conducted of the State of Nebraska in June, 1992.
Please provide this documentation.
i i
ANSWER.
The staff evaluation dated September 17, 1992, to Mark B. Horton, Director, Department of Health, and Randy Wood, Director, Department of Environmental Control, is enclosed.
Attached to the staff evaluation is the report and State questionnaire.
For the Subcommittee's information, the report is not sent to the State because all the information in the report is provided by the State.
The only documentation the State receives is the staff evaluation.
i
Enclosure:
As stated t
i
.i
+
~!
i Synar/OSP
)
07/07/93-t r
r
=,
t 0VESTION 51.
The State of Nebraska responded to the NRC's September 17, 1992 letter in correspondence dated November 25, 1992.
In i
t that correspondence the State committed to a number of actions, but no further documentation was provided to the l
Subcommittee on the State's action to complete such actions although Region IV's September 23, 1992 memo to V. Miller states that. Region IV will monitor these actions on a weekly basis. What is the status of the Nebraska's program and its commitments made in the November 25, 1992 letter.
ANSWER.
As a result of the 1992 routine review of the Nebraska program, the State was asked to make improvements in two areas.
These areas included increasing i
staff level and reducing the inspection backlog. A verbal report from Region IV indicates that Nebraska has completed the suggested staffing requirements by hiring two additional health physicists and has been reducing the inspection backlog as described in the referenced November 25, 1992. letter from Dr. Mark B. Horton.
i i
.i i
Synar/0SP 07/07/93-
i CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENCE SYSTEX DOCUMENT PRZPARATION CHECKLIST I
This checklist is be submitted with each document (or g cup of Q3/As) sent for.
ing into the CCS.,
a
-f J
1.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DOCCXZNT(5)
.I be l'
5/
d/2A'I
\\
M' 2.
TYPE OF-DO N
/
Correspondenset Nearingse(Qs/Aab 3.
DOCUXENT CONTROL Bensitive (NRC Only) X Non-sensitive 4.
CONGRZ8SIONAL COMMITTEE and SUBCOMMITTEZS (if applicable)
Congressional Committee Subcommittae 4
5.
SUBJECT CODES (a)
(b)
(c) i 6.
SOURCE OF DOCUMINTS (a) 5520 (document name (b)
Y scan-(c)
Atlachments (d)
Rakey (e)
Other 7.
SYSTEM LOG DATES (a) 9 Date oCA sent document-to CCS (b)
Data CCS reesivens document (c)
Data returned to OCA for additional information (d)
Date resubmitted by-CCA to CCS
~
i (a)
Data entered into CCS by if)
Date OCA notified that document is in CCS l
i 8.
COMMENTS 0500 @
u
.!