ML20148G115
| ML20148G115 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/08/1997 |
| From: | Schneider K NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP) |
| To: | Bangart R, Paperiello C, Thompson H NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS), NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP), NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9706050176 | |
| Download: ML20148G115 (8) | |
Text
. _. _,
SEN-8 E MEMORANDUM TO:
Management Review Board Members:
Hugh Thompson, EDO Richard Bangart, OSP Carl Paperiello, NMSS Karen Cyr, OGC Denwood Ross, AEOD G41: n.-imen7, FROM:
Kathleen N. Schneider, Senior PrEjebt kanager I
r Oifice of State Programs
SUBJECT:
DRAFT MINUTES: MARCH 6,1997 MEETING Attached are the draft minutes of the Management Review Board (MRB) meeting held on March 6,1997. These minutes are submitted for your approval at the April 10, 1997 MRB meeting. If you have any questions, please contact me at 301-415-2320.
Attachment:
As stated 1
cc:
Roland Fletcher, MD Ed Bailey, CA j
Distribution:
DlR RF DCD (SPO1)
PDR (Yes g_ No __)
RLBangart PLohaus SDroggitis DCool DCollins, Ril SMoore PLarkins CGordon, RI FCameron HNewsome TFrazee, WA MD File '
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\KXS\\MDMRBMIN.97 OFFICE OSPgj@
E l
NAME KSchneider:gd/nb OSP CODE: SP-AG-14 --
I{
wtemqd M
()50042
_, e q p& ~5 %
~6 n.
v.
. r4 ~
9706050176 970408 PDR STPRG ESGMD PDR
4 pa raro g
UNITED STATES g
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
WASHINGTON, D.C. 2tMMi6-0001 April 8,1997 MEMORANDUM TO:
Management Review Board Members:
Hugh Thompson, EDO Richard Bangart, OSP Carl Paperiello, NMSS Karen Cyr, OGC Denwood Ross, AEOD
/
.Sg'A FROM:
Kathleen N. Schneider, Senior Project Manager Office of State Programs
SUBJECT:
DRAFT MINUTES: MARCH 6,1997 MEETING
' Attached are the draft minutes of the Management Review Board (MRB) meeting held on March 6,1997. These minutes are submitted for your approval at the April 10, 1997 MRB meeting. If you have any questions, please contact me at 301-415-2320.
Attachment:
As stated cc:
Roland Fletcher, MD Ed Bailey, CA
MINUTES: MANAGEMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING OF MARCH 6,1997 These minutes are presented in the same general order as the items were discussed in the meeting. The attendees were as follows:
Hugh Thompson, EDO Denwood Ross, AEOD Carl Paperiello, NMSS Karen Cyr, OGC Richard Bangart, OSP Ed Bailey, CA Ann Marie DeBiase, MD Roland Fletcher, MD Paul Lohaus, OSP Carl Trump, Jr, MD Patricia Larkins, OSP Terry Frazee, WA Kathleen Schneider, OSP Glenn Tracy, OEDO Richard Blanton, OSP Charles Rossi, AEOD Don Cool, NMSS Cardelia Maupin, OSP Lance Rakovan, OSP Thomas O'Brien, OSP By phone:
Craig Gordon, Rl/NRC 1.
Convention. Hugh Thompson, Deputy EDO, Chair of the Management Review Board (MRB), convened the meeting at 10:20 a.m. Introductions of the attendees were conducted.
2.
New Business. Maryland Review introduction. Mrs. Patricia Larkins, OSP, led the Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) team for the Maryland review. Mr. Gordon presented his findings first for the non-common performance i
indicator on Legislation and Regulations, and the common performance indicator on Technical Quality of Inspections.
Mrs. Larkins discussed how the review was conducted. Preliminary work included review of Maryland's response to the IMPEP questionnaire. The onsite review was conducted September 23-27,1996. The onsite review included an entrance interview, detailed audits of a representative sample of licensing and inspection files, and follow-up discussions with staff and management. The onsite portion of the review concluded with exit briefings with Maryland management. Following the review, the team issued a draft report on December 16,1996; received Maryland's comment dated February 3,1997; and submitted a proposed final report to the MRB on February 28,1997.
Status of items identified in Previous Reviews. Mr. Gordon discussed the previous comments on regulations that correspond to Section 2.2(1) and (2). The team recommended that these two iten:a remain open as documented in the report.
Mr. Frazee reviewed the State's actions in connection with previous comments on Neutron Products, Inc. (NPI). The MRB discussed with both the State 1
representatives and Mr. Frazee the external and internal pressures on the State to issue the license. The need for a performance based versus prescriptive license that Maryland issued for NPI was discussed.
Mrs. Larkins discussed the current status of the joint NRC and State review of misadministrations that occurred at Sacred Heart Hospital (SHH). In the draft report, the review team had recommended that the State take action to ensure patient notification by the hospital had occurred and the item was left as an open recommendation. Mr. Fletcher indicated that the State had sent a letter to SHH and SHH committed to follow through on the patient notifications. The MRB discussed the need to track the recommendations of the joint NRC and State review in the IMPEP report and directed the review team to revise the report to indicate that this recommendation is closed. The MRB did request that the State inform NRC when the patient notifications had been completed and revised the IMPEP report to reflect that recommendation.
Common Performance Indicators. Mr. Gordon discussed the finding for the common performance indicator - Technical Quality of Inspections, which summarized Section 3.4 of the report. The team found that Maryland's performance on this indicator was " satisfactory with recommendations for improvement," and made two recommendations, as documented in the report. The MRB discussed the basis of this finding with both the review team and the State. Mr. Gordon discussed in detail results of the accompaniments. The less than satisfactory performance of one inspector during two high priority inspections was the basis for the team's finding for this indicator. This individual's performance had not been evaluated annually by State management during the review period. Note, Mr. Trump stated that the draft report was incorrect on page 16 and should be revised to indicate that i
this inspector had been accompanied in March,1994. Mr. Fletcher and Mr. Trump indicated that this inspector has resigned from the program since the review. The need for annual field accompaniment was noted by both the State and MRB as a lesson learned. The remaining State inspectors performance was considered satisfactory by the review team. Based on the overall satisfactory performance of j
the other three inspectors and the resignation of the inspector with the i
unsatisfactory performance, the MRB directed the team to revise the finding for this I
indicator to " satisfactory."
Mr. Frazee discussed the finding for the common performance indicator - Status of i
the Materials inspection Program. His presentation corresponded to Section 3.1 of the IMPEP report. The review team found Maryland's performance with respect to this indicator "satisf actory." The team made one recommendation, as documented j
in the report. in examination of the State's initial inspections conducted, the review l
team identified a good practice. The State conducts a pre-licensing inspection to help assure that licensees are equipped and knowledgeable before receiving radioactive materials thus helping licensees to achieve early success in complying with the requirements of the license. Following this discussion, the MRB reached I
consensus that Maryland's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
4 2
1 l
Mrs. Larkins presented the finding regarding Technical Staffing and Training. Her presentation corresponded to Section 3.2 of the IMPEP report. Mrs. Larkins reported that the IMPEP review team found that Maryland's performance with respect to the indicator to be " satisfactory with recommendations for improvement." The team made four recommendation, as documented in the report.
Based on discussions the MRB held with the review team, the MRB directed the team to revise the recommendation that the State assess the adequacy of the program staff to maintain a program to complete pending regulation revisions to exclude the phrase "to protecting public health and safety." The MRB discussed with the team and the State representatives the criteria for a " satisfactory" versus a
" satisfactory with recommendations for improvement" finding. Following this discussion, the MRB concluded that Maryland's performance met the standard for
" satisfactory with recommendations for improvement" rating for this indicator.
Mrs. Schneider presented the finding regarding the indicator - Technical Quality of Licensing Actions. She summarized the finding in Section 3.3 of the report, where the review team found Maryland's licensing actions to be generally thorough, complete, consistent, and of acceptable quality with health and safety issues properly addressed. The IMPEP team found Maryland's performance to be
" satisfactory" for this indicator and made one recommendation, as documented in the report. The MRB discussed and directed the review team to include in the report that NRC would continue to monitor the status of NPl's timely license renewal action. Following this discussion, the MRB reached consensus that Maryland's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
The final common performance indicator assessed Maryland's response to incidents and allegations. Mrs. Larkins led the discussion in this area. As discussed in Section 3.5 of the report, the team found Maryland's performance relative to this indicator to be " satisfactory" and made three recommendations, as documented in the proposed final report. The review team identified a good practice by Maryland staff in that all complex events, allegations or events with the potential for impacting public safety are evaluated by staff and management, including the program director, to determine the appropriate responses and actions. The MRB discussed with the State and team the need to track allegations. The MRB directed the team to revise the report to suggest that the State consider implementing a tracking system for allegations. Following this discussion, the MRB reached consensus that Maryland's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
Non-common Performance Indicators. Mr. Gordon led the discussion of the non-common indicator on Legislation and Regulations, which summarized Section 4.1 of the report. Mr. Gordon noted that the State's regulations were not compatible with those of the NRC at the time of the review due to recently identified additional comments on Maryland rules that had been previously reviewed and resolution of the term " person" in the LLRW regulations. The team found Maryland's 3
performance relative to this indicator to be " unsatisfactory" and made three recommendations, as documented in the report. The MRB and State representative discussed the timeliness of NRC reviews of Maryland's regulations.
Mrs. Schneider led the discussion of the indicator, Sealed Source and Device Evaluation Program (SSD) which was based on Section 4.2 of the report. The team found Maryland's performance relative to this indicator to be " satisfactory" and made three recommendations, as found in the report.
Mrs. Schneider stated that the non-common indicator, Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW') Disposal Program, was not reviewed. Although Maryland has low-level radioactive waste disposal authority, NRC has not required the State to have a program for licensing a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility until such time as the State has been designated as a host State for a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility.
4.
MRB Consultation / Comments on issuance of Report. Mrs. Larkins concluded, based on the discussion and direction of the MRB, that Maryland's program was rated
" satisfactory" on four of the five common performance indicators and the SSD non-common performance indicator. On the Technical Staffing and Training indicator, the review team found the State's performance to be " satisfactory with recommendations for improvement." The review team found the State's performance on Legislation and Regulations non-common performance indicator to be " unsatisfactory." The team recommended, and the MRB concurred to find the Maryland program to be adequate to patect public health and safety but needs improvement and not compatible.
5.
Comments from the State of Maryland. Ms. DeBiase and Mr. Fletcher stated that they believed the experience with IMPEP was positive. Maryland found the team competent.
6.
Old Business. Approval of the Nebraska MRB Minutes. At the completion of the New Business, the Nebraska draft MRB minutes were offered for the MRB approval.
The Nebraska draft minutes, as written, were approved as circulated with one minor editorial change. Mr. Bangart commented that the MRB minutes as written, which repeat the list of suggestions and recommendations from the IMPEP report, could be shortened by using a reference to information in the report. Mr. Thompson directed Mrs. Schneider to revise the MRB minutes to highlight significant discussion items and that the Maryland MRB minutes would ref!9ct this revision to the format.
7.
Status of Remaining Reviews. Mrs. Schneider reported on the status of the remaining IMPEP reviews and reports. Status charts were distributed to the MRB.
8.
Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 12:00 noon.
4
< TRANSACTION REPORT >
04-08-1997(TUE) 03:30 j
0 l
C BROADCAST 3
4 NO.
DATE TIME DESTINATION STATION PO.
DURATION F10DE RESULT 31590 4-08 09:10 410 631 3198 5
O*03'08" NORMAL OK 31591 09:30 919163243610 0
UOOO a
5 O'03'08" 1$
i 4
k 4
< TRANSACTION REPORT >
04_ce_1997<Tue> 10:45 E
TRANSMIT 3
NO.
DATE TIME DESTINATION STATION PG.
OURATION t100E RESULT 31593 4-08 10:42 0111916 3243610 5
O*02'59" NORM.E OK 5
O*02'59" 4
i a
a e
?
i