ML20057A243
| ML20057A243 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/30/1993 |
| From: | Scarano R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | Bernero R NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20055C202 | List:
|
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9309130272 | |
| Download: ML20057A243 (3) | |
Text
s i
.# RfCuq
[o UNITED STATES
[) 3 w ( g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION p
{.p$'ff l REGION V o,
6 1450 MARIA LANE, SUITE 210 J
WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596
%.4
,o JUL.
1%8 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Robert M. Bernero, Deputy Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards FROM:
Ross A. Scarano, Director Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards
SUBJECT:
DRAFT REGION V 1988 NATIONAL PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT We have reviewed the subject draft report which you submitted to Region V with your memorandum dated June 20, 1988 and are providing the following comments as requested.
As a general comment, an effort should be initiated expeditiously to gain a mutual understanding of the data selection criteria used in these appraisals.
As can be seen from the following comments, we cannot reproduce much of th-data contained in the draft report.
[)
Page 2 Last Paragraph To our knowledge there have been very few insignificant and no significant technical errors. Therefore, we recommend that the phrase
" generally of high quality" be changed to " consistently of high quality".
2)
Page 3 Third Paragraph This paragraph seems to be combining elements of two major materials enforcement cases Region V has been working on during this appraisal period.
We are providing the following as possible replacement paragraphs:
Region V conducted an extensive 'nspection of the radiography firm, Finlay Testing Laboratories, in conjunction with the Office of Investigations.
The inspection was conducted from September, 1987 when the original license suspension was issued until early May, 1988 when a settlement was negotiated with the licensee.
The resulting inspection report and NOV, which was the basis for a show cause order, was so thorough in documenting the willful disregard of the regulations that the licensee agreed to license termination without a hearing.
Region V continues to coordinate the oversite of U. S. Testing Company with the other regions and several Agreement States.
U. S. Testing is still operating under an Order modifying the license which requires them to provide radiation safety controls on a site-by-site basis.
Region V is reviewing U. S. Testing's efforts to reestablish a nationally controlled program but has determined that the program is not yet at tb? stage to rescind the Order.
9309130272 930830 PDR STPRG ESGGEN
};
i f
R. Bernero Jil.
3)
Page 4 Third Paragraph We are not clear on the intent of this paragraph.
4)
Py e 4 Fifth Paragraph Our data indicates that the average number of days from the inspection to issuance of reports is 11.5 and 9.0 using RITS and the Inspection Report Tracking System respectively.
If fuel fabrication licensees are included the average is 10.6 days.
5)
Page 4 Sixth Paragraph Our data indicates that the average number of hours per materials inspection, excluding V. S. Testing, Finlay Laboratories and Fuel Fabrication facilities is 6.9 (RITS).
6)
Page 7 Third Paragraph Region V completed the three fuel facility physical security licensing reviews budgeted for the full fiscal year as of March 31, 1988.
The three completed cases were:
General Atomics Case No. 0700073430 Completed 01/26/88 General Atomics Case No. 0700073431 Completed 02/01/88 General Atomics Case No. 0700073432 Compl eted 03/30/88 7)
Page 11 Seconc' Paragraph We recommend you aad the following to the end of the paragraph:
The medical inspection form was revised at the time of the NMSS review and is currently in use by Region V inspectors.
8)
Page 11 Last Paragraph and Page 14 Fourth Paragraph We recommend deleting the sentences discussing materials inspection backlog. We can find no basis for the noted 20% backlog in 1987.
9)
Page 18 Table Our calculations for FTE utilization for the October-December period totals 94.3% as opposed to the 88% shown. Our data source is the 01/02/88 Regional RWAT.
80
\\
i R. Bernero py,
, l:
10)
Page 20 First Paragraph The last two sentences are not valid and should be deleted. As documented on pages 7 and 13, these program areas are ahead of schedule.
h E oss A. Scarano, Director b R
Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards cc:
R. Scarano, RV J. Montgomery, RV K. Hamill, RV M. Schuster, RV R. Thomas, RV Central Files, RV l
_..