ML20133M605

Forwards, Integrated Matls Performance Evaluation Program Questionnaire (Impep). Responses Requested to Be Sent by Internet or Return of Encl Disk by 970224.W/o Disk

ML20133M605
Person / Time
Issue date:	01/10/1997
From:	Woodruff R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Eastvold P ILLINOIS, STATE OF
References
NUDOCS 9701220452
Download: ML20133M605 (10)

Text

- .. = .. . . _ - -

4 i

January 10, 1997 1

Mr. Paul Eastvold, Manager Office of Radiation Safety Department of Nuclear Safety 1035 Outer Park Drive Springfield, IL 62704

Dear Mr. Eastvold:

As you are aware, NRC is using the Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) for the evaluation of Agreement State Programs. Per our discussion, I will be the team leader for the IMPEP review of the Illinois program scheduled for the week of March 24-28, 1997. The team will include Dr. Dennis M. Sollenberger, NRC Office of State Programs; Mr. James L. Lynch, NRC Region III Agreement State Officer; Mr. John W. Lubinski, NRC Office of Nuclear Materials and Safety and Safeguards; and Mr. James Johnson, Kansas Department of Health and Environment.

Enclosed is the document, " Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program Questionnaire." The questionnaire is being furnished to you on a computer disk as well as in printed fcrm. I ask that you send your responses by internet (RLW@NRC. GOV) or return the disk to me by February 24, 1997. I am sending the document and disk in advance of the March 24-28, 1997 IMPEP review ,

in order to provide time for you to allocate the staff resources necessary to i complete the document by the due date.

Part A of the questionnaire contains questions on the common performance indicators. Part B contains questions on the non-common performance indicators for Agreement States.

I request that you set up an appointment with the appropriate State Senior Management Official to discuss the results of the IMPEP review of the Illinois program on Friday, March 28, 1997.

If you have questions, please call me at 404-331-5545.

Sincerely l (original signed by  !

R. L. Woodruff) i Richard L. Woodruff I

. Agreement State Program Officer l

Enclosures:

1. Questionnaire

2. Diskette cc w/ encl 1: (See Page 2) \

l I

9701220452 9p0510 PDR STPRO ESCIL PDR (0 W

i I

P. Eastvold 2  !

cc w/ enc 1 1: l Mr. Thomas Ortciger, Director Department of Nuclear Safety  ;

1035 Outer Park Drive 4 Springfield, IL 62704

]

Mr. Steve Collins, Chief Division of Radioactive Materials Office of Radiation Safety Department of Nuclear Safety 1 1035 Outer Park-Drive. i Springfield, IL 62704 i Distribution w/ encl 1:

MdN fM l

)

nrrrr nMMM RARn nMMMn SIGNATURE NAME RWoodruff BManett DATE 01/ [h/ 97 01'h /97 01/ /97 01 / /97 01 / /97 01 / /97 COPY? YES X NO kES/ NO YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DOCUMLNT NAML: 5:\DRSS\LTRBRLPT.lL

4 l

i t

Approved by OMB No. 3150-0183 )

Expires 4/30/98 l

INTEGRATED MATERIALS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROGRAM OVESTIONNAIRE Name of State: ILLIN0IS Reporting Period: July 23, 1994 to March 24, 1997 A. COMMON PERFORMANCE INDICATORS I. Status of Materials Insoection Proaram

1. Please prepare a table identifying the licenses with inspections that are overdue by more than 25% of the schedeled frequency set i

out in NRC Inspection Manual Chapter 2800 (issued 4/17/95). The

, list should include initial inspections that are overdue.

Insp. Frequency Licensee Name (Years) Due Date Months 0/0

2. Do you currently have an action plan for completing overdue

, inspections? If so, please describe the plan or provide a written copy with your response to this questionnaire.

3. Please identify individual licensees or grou)s of licensees the State / Region is ins)ecting less frequently tlan called for in NRC Inspection Manual Clapter 2800 (issued 4/17/95) and state the reason for the change.

4. How many licensees filed reciprocity notices in the reporting period?

a. Of these, how many were industrial radiography, well-logging l or other users with inspection frequencies of three years or )

less?

2 Estimated burden per response to comply with this voluntary collection request: 60 hours6.944444e-4 days <br />0.0167 hours <br />9.920635e-5 weeks <br />2.283e-5 months <br />. Forward comments regarding burden estimate to the Information and Records Management Branch (T-6 F33). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory i Commission, Washington. DC 20555-0001. and to the Paperwork Reduction Project ,

(3150-0052). Office of Management and Budget. Washington, DC 20503. NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

-. ~ -. - _- - - - . - . - - - - _ = . - . _ _ - . - . . .

4  ;

c e

b. For those identified in 4a how many reciprocity inspections were conducted?

5. Other than reciprocity licensees, how many field inspections of radiographers were performed?

6. For NRC Regions, did you establish numerical goals for the number of inspections to be performed during this review period? If so.

please descriDe your goals, the number of inspections actually performed, and the reasons for any differences between the goals and the actual number of inspections performed.

II. Technical Staffino and Trainina

7. Please provide a staffing plan, or complete a listing using the suggested format below. of the professional (technical) person-years of effort applied to the agreement or radioactive material program by individual. Include the name, position, and, for Agreement States, the fraction of time spent in the following i areas: administration. materials licensing & compliance, emergency  ?

response LLW, U-mills, other. If these regulatory l responsibilities are divided between offices, the table should be i

consolidated to include all personnel contributing to the-radioactive materials program. Include all vacancies and identify all senior personnel assigned to monitor work of junior personnel.

If consultants were used to carry out the program's radioactive materials responsibilities, include their efforts. The table  :

heading should be:

NAME POSITION AREA 0F EFFORT

8. Please 3rovide a listing of all new professional personnel hired since tie last review, indicate the degree (s) they received, if applicable, and additional training and years of experience in health physics, or other disciplines, if appropriate.

9. Please list all professional staff who have not yet met the qualification requirements of license reviewer / materials inspection staff (for NRC. Inspection Manual Chapters 1245 and 1246: for Agreement States, please describe your gualifications requirements for materials license reviewers and inspectors). For each, list the courses or equivalent training / experience they need to attend and a tentative schedule for completion of these requirements.

10. Please identify the technical staff who left the RCP/ Regional DNMS program during this period.

IMPEP QUESTIONNAIRE FILE NAME:IMPEPOVE.KNs November 29, 1996 2

i i I

4.

2 III. Technical Quality of Licensina Actions l

l 11. Please identify any major, unusual, or complex licenses which were i -.

issued. received a major amendment, terminated or renewed in this f i period.

i

12. Please identify any new or amended licenses added or removed from l the list of licensees requiring emergency plans? ,

13. Discuss any variances in licensing policies and )rocedures or exemptions from the regulations granted during tie review period. i

)

i 14. What, if any changes were made in your written licensing L procedures (new procedures, u

, during the reporting period? pdates, policy memoranda, etc.)

l 15. For NRC Regions, identify by licensee name, license number and l

type, any renewal applications that have been pending for.one year  !

or more.

IV. Technical Quality of Insoections  !

1 l 16. What. -if any, changes were made to your written inspection

! procedures during the reporting period? '

l

17. Prepare a table showing the number and types of supervisory i accompaniments made during the review period. Include

1 4 Suoervisor Insoector License Cat. Data i

18. Describe internal procedures for conducting supervisory accompaniments of inspectors in the field. If supervisory accompaniments were documented, please provide copies of the  ;

documentation for each accompaniment. i i

19. Describe or provide an update on your instrumentation and methods 4 of calibration. Are all instruments properly calibrated at the present time?

J' .l

^ IMPEP QUESTIONNAIRE FILE NAME:IMPEP0UE.KNs November 29. 1996 3

V. Resoonses to Incidents and Alleaations

20. Please provide a list of the most sianificant incidents (i.e..

medical misadministration, overexposures, lost and abandoned sources. incidents requiring 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or less notification, etc.)

that occurred in the Region / State during the review period. For Agreement States, information included in previous submittals to NRC need not be repeated. The list should be in the following format:

LICENSEE NAME LICENSE # DATE OF INCIDENT / REPORT TYPE OF INCIDENT

21. During this review period, did any incidents occur that involved equipment or source failure or approved operating procedures that were deficient? If so, how and when were other State /NRC licensees who might be affected notified?

a. For States, was timely _ notification made to the Office of State Programs? For Regions, was an appropriate and timely PN generated?

22. For incidents involving failure of equipment or sources, was information on the incident provided to the agency responsible for evaluation of the .

device for an assessment of possible generic design deficiency? Please provide details for each case.

23. In the period covered by this review, were there any cases involving possible wrongdoing that were reviewed or are presently undergoing review? If so, please describe the circumstances for each case.

24. Identify any changes to your procedures for handling allegations that occurred during the period of this review.

a. For Agreement States please identify any allegations referred to your program by the NRC that have not been closed.

VI. General

25. Please prepare a summary of the status of the State's or Region's actions taken in response to the comments and recommendations following the _last review.

26. Provide a brief description of your program's strengths and weaknesses.

These strengths and weaknesses should be supported by examples of successes, problems or difficulties which occurred during this review period.

IMPEP QUESTIONNAIRE FILE NAME:IMPEPQUE.KNS November 29, 1996 4

i i

}

B. NON COMMON PERFORMANCE INDICATORS l l- I. Lecislation and Reculations

27. Please list all currently effective legislation that affects the radiation i control program (RCP). l 1

28. Are your regulations subject to a " Sunset" or equivalent law? If so.

explain and include the next expiration date for your regulations.

29. Please comalete the enclosed table based on NRC chronology of amendments.

Identify tiose that have not been adopted by the State, explain why they were not adopted, and discuss any actions being taken to adopt them.

1

30. If you have not adopted all amendments within three years from the date of NRC rule promulgation, briefly describe your State's procedures for amending regulations in order to maintain compatibility with the NRC, showing the normal length of time anticipated to complete each step.

II. Sealed Source and Device Evaluation Procram

31. Prepare a table listing new and revised SS&D registrations of sealed sources and devices issued during the review period. The table heading should be:

SS&D Manufacturer. Type of Registry Distributor or Device  !

Number Custom User or Source  !

32. What guides, standards and procedures are used to evaluate registry applications?

33. Please include information on the following questions in Section A, as they apply to the Sealed Source and Device Program:

l Technical Staffing and Training - A.II.7-10 Technical Quality of Licensing Actions - A.III.11. A.III.13-14 Responses to Incidents and Allegations - A.V.20-23  ;

III. Low-level Radiactive Waste Disoosal Procram  !

34. Please include information on the following questions in Section A, as they apply to the Low-level Radioactive Waste Disposal Program:

Status of Materials Inspection Program - A.I.1-3 A.I.6 Technical Staffing and Training - A.II.7-10 i Technical Quality of Licensing Actions - A.III.11 A.III.13-14  :

Technical Quality of Inspections - A.IV.16-19 IMPEP QUESTIONNAIRE FILE NAME:IMPEPOUE.KNs November 29. 1996 I 5

l

l' Responses to Incidents and Allegations - A.V.20-23 IV. Uranium Recovery Proaram

35. Please include information on the following questions in Section A, as

, they apply to the Uranium Recovery Program:

l l

Status of Materials Inspection Program - A.I.1-3. A.I.6 Technical Staffing and Training - A.II.7-10 Technical Quality of Licensing Actions - A.III.11. A.III.13-14 Technical Quality of Inspections - A.IV.16-19 l Responses to Incidents and Allegations - A.V.20-23 i

IMPEP QUESTIONNAIRE FILE NAME:IMPEPQUE.KNs November 29, 1996 6

TABLE FOR QUESTION 29.

OR DATE DATE 10 CFR RULE DUE ADOPTED CURRENT EXPECTED STATUS ADOPTION Any amendment due prior to 1991. Identify each regulation (refer to the Chronology of Amendments)

Decommissioning; 7/27/91 Parts 30,40,70 Emergency Planning: 4/7/93 Parts 30,40,70 Standards for Protection Against Radiation; 1/1/94 Part 20 Safety Regtarements for Radiographic 1/10/94 Equipment; Part 34 Notification of Incidents; 10/15/94 Parts 20, 30, 31, 34, 39, 40, 70 Quality Management Program and 1/27/95 Misadministrations; Part 35 Licensing and Radiation Safety 7/1/96 Requirements for Irradiators; Part 36 Definition of Land Disposa! 7/22/96 and Waste Site QA Program; Part 61 Decommissioning Recordkeeping: Docu- 10/25/96 mentation Additions; Parts 30,40,70 Self-Guarantee as an Additional Financial 1/28/97 Mechanism; Parts 30,40,70 Uranium Mit! Tailings: Conforming to EPA 7/1/97 Standards; Part 40 Timeliness in Decommissioning 8/15/97 Parts 30,40,70 IMPEP QUESTIONNAIRE FILE NAME:IMPEPOUE.KNS November 29. 1996 7

O OR DATE DATE 10 CFR RULE DUE ADOPTED CURRENT EXPECTED STATUS ADOPTION Preparation. Transfer for Commercial Dis- 1/1/98 -

tribution, and Use of Byproduct Material for Medical Use Parts 30,32. 35 Frequency of Medical Examinations for Use 3/13/98 of Respiratory Protection Equipment Low-Level Waste Shipment Manifest 3/1/98 Information and Reporting .

Performance Requirements for Radiography 6/30/98 Equipment Radiation Protection Requirements: 8/14/98 Amended Definitions and Criteria Clarification of Decommissioning Funding 11/24/98 Requirements 10 CFR Part 71: Compatibility with the 4/1/99 Intemational Atomic Energy Agency Medical Administration of Radiation and 10/20/98 Radioactive Materials.

Termination or Transfer of Licensed 5/16/99 Activities: Recordkeeping Requirements.

IMPEP OUESTIONNAIRE FILE NAME:IMPEPQUE.KNS November 29, 1996 8

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - _ _ - . _ _ - - - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _