ML20137Z221
| ML20137Z221 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/18/1997 |
| From: | Woodruff R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Ratliff R TEXAS, STATE OF |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9704240033 | |
| Download: ML20137Z221 (11) | |
Text
.,
4 April 18. 1997 Mr. Richard A. Ratliff. PE. Chief Bureau of Radiation Control Texas Department of Health 8704 Wall Street. Room N 127 Austin TX 78754
Dear Mr. Ratliff:
As you are aware. NRC is using the Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) for the evaluation of Agreement State Programs.
Per our discussion this date. I will be the team leader for the IMPEP review of the Texas Bureau of Radiation Control scheduled for the week of June 23-27. 1997.
The team will include tir. Craig Gordon. NRC. Region I: Mr. James Myers. Office of State Programs (OSP): Mr. Tom O'Brien. OSP: Mr. Tom Rich. Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards: and Ms. Elizabeth Drinnon. Georgia Radioactive Materials Program.
Enclosed is the document. " Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program Questionnaire." The questionnaire is being furnished to you on a com) uter disk as well as in printed form.
I ask that you send your responses
)y internet (RI.WONRC. GOV) or return the disk to me by May 22. 1997.
I am sending the documa.t a'd disk in advance of the June 23, 1997 IMPEP review in order to provide timo 'ior you to allocate the staff resources necessary to 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.
An identical questionnaire is being sent to Mr. Dan Pearson. Executive Director. Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission.
The review of their Low-level Radioactive Waste Program, and the Uranium Recovery Program will be conducted during the week of June 16-20. 1997.
Our preference would be to hold a joint exit meeting with both Agencies on Friday. June 27 1997, to discuss the results of the review. As discussed during our telephone call. I request that you coordinate and set u) an appointment with the a)propriate State Senior Management Officials in aoth Agencies. to discuss tie results of the IMPEP review on Friday. June 27, 1997.
If you have questions prior to April 28. 1997, please call me at 404-331-5545.
After April 28, 1997 I will have a new office location and the new phone number will be 404-562-4407.
2 Sincerely
' 3 0 05 <1 L LF 'l (Original signed by R. Woodruff) 9704240033 970418 3
Richard L. Woodruff PDR STPRQ ESor Regional Agreement States Officer ll CERTIFIED MAIL NO. Z 238 524 071 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Enclosures:
(See Page 2) ll
R. Ratliff 2
Enclosures:
1.
Questionnaire 2.
Diskette cc w/ encl 1:
David R. Smith, M.D.
Commissioner Texas Department of Health 1100 West 49th Street Austin. TX 78756 l
distribution:
DCD (SP01)
R. Woodruff i
I l
l l
l See previous concurrence i
0FFitt Pff paso pff Onus SIGNATURE NAME RWoodruff BMalleh j
DATE 04 /
/ 97 04 /
/ 97 04 /
/ 97 04 /
/ 97 04 /
/ 97 04 /
/ 97 COPY?
YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO OFFICIAL ktLORD COPf DOCUMthi NAMt: A:\\lX_QLIR.IDH es.g
R. Ratliff 2
Enclosures:
1.
Questionnaire 2.
Diskette cc w/encis:
1 David R. Smith. M.D.
l Commissioner Texas Department of Health 1100 West 49th Street i
Austin, TX 78756 distribution:
DCD (SP01)
R. Woodruff l
l CFFICF pff paso Off ONws SIGNATURE l
NAME RW ruff BMa ett 04/[I/97 DATE
.4/
/ 97 04 /
/ 97 04 /
/ 97 04 /
/ 97 04 /
/ 97 COPY?
YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO 0FilCIAL RECORD COP (
DOCUMENT NAMt; A:\\iX,0_LIR. LDH
]
=+
w e-
. _ - _. _ _ _ _.. _ _ _ ~
9 1
Approved by OMB No. 3150-0183 Expires 4/30/98 j
i INTEGRATED MATERIALS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROGRAM OVESTIONNAIRE Name of State:. Texas Reporting Period: March 12. 1994 to June 27, 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 scheduled frequency set 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 individuel licensees or grou3s 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 or other users with inspection frequencies of three years or less?
l Estimated burden per response to comply with this voluntary collection 2
I 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 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.
i 1
4en r
g.
m m
-ey
r b.
For those identified in 4a. how many reciprocity inspections were conducted?
i 5.
Other than recipr6 city 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 describe 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 Staffina 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 areas: administration, materials licensing & compliance, emergency response. LLW U-mills, othe
' these regulatory responsibilities are divided betwren offices, the table should be 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 l
8.
Please 3rovide a listing of all new professional personnel hired l
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 qualifications 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.
2 6
- 'e.
-.-.-y e-e
+--
III. Technical Ouality of Licensina Actions 11.
Please identify any major, unusual, or complex licenses which were issued, received a major amendment. ' terminated or renewed in this period.
12.
Please identify any new or amended licenses added or removed from the list of licensees requiring emergency plans?
13.
Discuss any variances in licensing policies and 3rocedures or exemptions from the regulations granted during t1e review period.
14.
What, if any, changes were made in your written licensing procedures (new procedures, updates, policy memoranda, etc.)
during the reporting period?
15.
For NRC Regions, identify by licensee name, license number and type, any renewal applications that have been pending for one year or more.
IV.
Technical Ouality of Insoections 16.
What, if any, changes were made to your written inspection procedures during the reporting period?
17.
Prepare a table showing the number and types of supervisory accompaniments made during the review period.
Include:
Suoervisor Insoector License Cat.
Date 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.
19.
Describe or provide an update on your instrumentation and methods of calibration. Are all instruments properly calibrated at the present time?
i 3
i
- ~-
V.
Resoonses to Incidents and Alleaations 20.
Please provide a list of the most sionificant incidents (i.e..
medical misadministration, overexpostres, 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 50. 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.
i 4
l oy
B. NDN COMMON PERFORMANCE INDICATORS I.
Reaulations and leaal Authority
- 27. Please list all currently effective legislation that affects the radiation control program (RCP).
- 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 com31ete the enclosed table based on NRC chronology of amendments.
Identify t1ose that have not been adopted by the State, explain why they were not adopted, and discuss any actions being taken to adopt them.
- 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 Proaram
- 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 l
l 32.
What guides, standards and procedures are used to evaluate registry applications?
l 33.
Please include information on the following questions in Section A. as i
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 l
Responses to Incidents and Allegations - A.V.20-23 III.
Low-Level Waste Proaram 34.
Please include information on the following questions in Section A. as they apply to the Low-level Waste Program:
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 Responses to Incidents and Allegations - A.V.20-23 i
5
.. ~ ~
i IV.
Uranium Mill Proaram l
35.
Please include information on the following questions in Section A. as l
they apply to the' Uranium Mill Program:
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 l
Technical Quality of Inspections - A.IV.16-19 l
Responses to Incidents and Allegations - A.V.20-23 l
l l
l l
I i
l l
l l
i t
6
i TABLE FOR QUESTION 29.
i 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 t
Safety Requirements for Radiographic 1/10/94 Equipment; Part 34 Notification of incidents:
10/15/94 Pads 20, 30, 31, 34, 39, 40, 70 Quahty Management Program and 1/27/95 Misadministrations; Part 35 Licensing and Radiation Safety 7/1/96 Requirements for Irradiators; Part 36 Definition of Land Disposal 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; Paris 30,40,70 1
Uranium Mill Tairrngs: Conforming to EPA 7/1/97 Standards; Part 40 Timeliness in Decommissioning 8/15/97 Parts 30,40,70 7
-m.
t OR DATE DATE 10 CFR RULE DUE ADOPTED CURRENT EXPECTED STATUS ADOPTION Preparation, Transfer for Commercial Dis-1/1/98 i
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 International Atomic Energy Agency Medical Administration of Radiation and 10/20/98 Radioactive Materials.
Termination or Transfer of Licensed 5/16/99 Activities: Recordkeeping Requirements.
Resolution of Dual Regulation of Airborne 1/9/00 Effluents of Radioactive Materials: Clean Air Act Recognition of Agreement State Licenses in 1/13/00 Areas Under Exclusive Federal Jurisdiction VAthin an Agreement State Criteria for the Release of Individuals 1/29/00 Administered Radioactive Material 8
. - -