ML20195H041
| ML20195H041 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/03/1999 |
| From: | Lance Rakovan NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP) |
| To: | Lohaus P, Miraglia F, Virgilio M 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 9906160255 | |
| Download: ML20195H041 (9) | |
Text
. . .
1 295- 3 CB I-l-
MEMORANDUM TO: Management Review Board Members:
1 Frank J. Miraglia, Jr., EDO Paul H. Lohaus, OSP
, Martin J. Virgilio, NMSS Karen D. Cyr, OGC FROM: Lance Rakovan, Health Physicist - [
Office of State Programs
SUBJECT:
DRAFT MINUTES: FLORIDA MAY 20,1999 MRB MEETING Attached for your review and concurrence are the draft minutes of the Management Review Board (MRB) meeting held on May 20,1999. We would like to finalize these minutes at the Maryland MRB meeting on June 22,1999, if you have any questions, please contact me at 415-2589.
Attachment:
As stated cc: William Passetti, FL Edgar Bailey, CA Distribution:
DIR RF DCool, NMSS - DCD (SP01)
SDroggitis GDeegan, NMSS PDR (YES/)
DWhite, RI RWoodruff, Ril TO'Brien, OSP JDeCicco, NMSS l
SG vitt, NY - SMoore, NMSS I CPcperiello, NMSS DMartin, EDO STr:by, OGC GKim, OCG Florida File DSollenberger, ASPO j C D D ',e, DOCUMENT NAME: G:\lMPEP\FLMRB98. MIN Ts receive a cop i of this documant. Indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure "E" = Copy with attachment / enclosure "N" = No copy OFFICE OSP /,t, l l l l l NAME LRakovan:gd W DATE 06 ".3/99 j OSP FILE CODE:SP-AG-6 l
.: [. l
@ Utu g i UNITED STATES g j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
$ WASHINGTON, D.C. 20066-0001
...../ June 3, 1999 MEMORANDUM TO: Management Review Board Members:
Frank J. Miraglia, Jr., EDO Paul H. Lohaus, OSP Martin J. Virgilio, NMSS Karen D. Cyr, OGC FROM: Lance Rakovan, Health Physici % ,
Office of State Programs
SUBJECT:
DRAFT MINUTES: FLORIDA MAY 20,1999 MRB MEETING Attached for your review and concurrence are the draft minutes of the Management Review Board (MRB) meeting held on May 20,1999. We would like to finalize these minutes at the Maryland MRB meeting on June 22,1999. If you have any questions, please contact me at i l
415-2589.
Attachment:
As stated cc: William Passetti, FL Edgar Bailey, CA I
i
7
[3 ,
. 'f ;
MINLTTES: MANAGEMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING OF MAY 20.1999 I
These minutes are presented in the same general order as the items were discussed in the i meeting. The attendees were as follows:
^
]
L ! Frank Miraglia, MRB Chair, EDO Paul Lohaus, MRB Member, OSP Karen Cyr, MRB Member, OGC . ' Martin Virgilio, MRB Member, NMSS Duncan White, Team Leader, RI Joseph DeCicco, Team Member,- NMSS . J Tom O'Brien, Team Member, OSP Dan Martin, EDO .
Frederick Sturz, NMSS Scott Moore, NMSS Lance Rakovan, OSP Kathleen Schneider, OSP Brenda Usilton, OSP.
By videoconference: a Richard Woodruff, Ril By' telephone:
J 1 Edgar Bailey, OAS Liaison, CA Steven Gavitt, Team Member, NYCH )
1.- Convention.' Frank Miraglia, Chair of the Management Review Board (MRB), convened the meeting at 10:00 p.m. Introductions of the attendees were conducted.
2.- ! New Busineas. Florida Review I'ntroduction. Mr. Duncan White, Rl, led the integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) team for the Florida review.
Mr. White discussed how the review was conducted. Preliminary work included a review of Florida's response to the IMPEP questionnaire. The onsite review was conducted February 22-26,1999. The onsite review included an entrance interview, detailed audits of a representative sample of completed licensing actions and inspections, and follow-up discussions with staff and management. Following the review, the team lasued a draft report on March 19,1999; received Florida's comment letter dated April 6,1999; and s'ubmitted a proposed final report to the MRB on May 12,1999. ;
Common Performance Indicators. Mr. DeCicco discussed the findings for the common performance indicator, Status of the Materials inspection Program. His presentation corresponded to Section 3.1 of the IMPEP report. The review team found Florida's pedormance with respect to this indicator " satisfactory," and made one recommendation involving reciprocity inspection frequencies. The MRB, the State, and the team discussed the reciprocity inspection frequencies established in NRC Inspection Manual Chapter 1220. Mr. Passetti commented that the State is putting more resources into completing reciprocity inspections. The MRB discussed the need to re-evaluate the IMPEP criteria for reciprocity inspections. The MRB suggested and the IMPEP team agreed to remove the recommendation invoMng reciprocity inspections from the report.
After this discussion, the MRB agreed that Florida's performance met the standard for a
" satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
V
, . ., -....b.. .. ~ .
. . . . . . . . _ .m . . . . .
)
Mr. White discussed the findings for the common performance indicator, Technical Quality of Inspections, which are summarized in Section 3.2 of the report. The team i found that Florida's performance on this indicator was " satisfactory," and made two recommendations. The MRB commented that the report did not reflect that safety issues were fully addressed by the State in the Technical Quality of Inspections section as it is discussed in the Technical Quality of Licensing Actions section. Mr. Woodruff indicated that State inspectors concentrated on performance and addressed health and safety issues during inspection accompaniments. Ms. Schneider agreed to update the language used in IMPEP reports to properly describe the level of health and safety issues addressed by State and Regional inspectors. The MRB, the team, and the State discussed the recommendation involving transmitting field notes to the Tallahassee office. Due to the few instances of field notes not being properly transmitted, the MRB !
directed the team to remove this recommendation from the report. After a brief discussion on the State's irradiator field notes, the MRB found Florida's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
Mr. DeCicco presented the findings regarding the common performance indicator, Technical Staffing and Training. His presentation corresponded to Section 3.3 of the j IMPEP report. The team found that Florida's performance with respect to this indicator was " satisfactory," and made no recommendations or suggestions. The team did identify one good practice involving a basic health physics training module used by the State. The MRB agreed that Florida's health physics module be found a good practice.
The MRB also agreed that Florida's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
Mr. Gavitt presented the findings regarding the common performance indicator, Technical Quality of Licensing Actions. He summarized the findings in Section 3.4 of the report. The IMPEP team found Florida's parformance to be " satisfactory" for this indicator and made no recommendations or suggestions. The MRB agreed that j Florida's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating for this' indicator.
Mr. O'Brien presented the findings regarding the final common performance indicator, ,
Response to incidents and Allegations. As discussed in Section 3.5 of the report, the i team found Florida's performance relative to this indicator to be " satisfactory" and made one recommendation involving the State's incident and allegation procedures.
Mr. Passetti commented that the State does report incidents to NMED and that no performance issue exists. Mr. O'Brien stressed that the IMPEP criteria for this indicator specifically mentions incident and allegation procedures. The issue of complete documentation was discussed with the team and the State. The MRB directed that this recommendation be revised to reflect the need for complete documentation in the State's procedures. The MRB agreed that Florida's performance met the standard for a
" satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
l 7,, y . . . 4 i
l Non-Common Performance Indicators. Mr. Woodruff led the discussion of the non-common performance indicator, Legislation and Program Elements Required for Compatibility, which is summarized in Section 4.1 of the report. The team found Florida's performance relative to this indicator to be " satisfactory," and made no recommendations or suggestions. The MRB agreed that Florida's performance for this indicator met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating.
Mr. Woodruff presented the findings regarding the non-common performance indicator, Sealed Source and Device (SS&D) Evaluation Program. As discussed in Section 4.2 of the report, the team found Florida's performance relative to this indicator to be
" satisfactory" and made no recommendations or suggestions. The MRB agreed that Florida's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
MRB Consultation / Comments on issuance of Report. Mr. White concluded, based on the discussion and direction of the MRB, that Florida's program was rated -
" satisfactory" for all common and applicable non-common performance indicators. The MRB found the Florida program to be adequate to protect public health and safety and compatible. The IMPEP team and MRB agreed that the next IMPEP review for Florida be conducted in four years.
Comments from the State of Florida. Mr. Passetti commented that the IMPEP process is a step in the right direction in focusing on performance. He thanked the team and MRB for their support.
- 3. Status of Remaining Reviews. Ms. Schneider briefly reported on the status of the current and upcoming IMPEP reviews and reports. Ms. Schneider and Mr. White discussed the timing of the Massachusetts SS&D IMPEP review with the MRB. The MRB directed that the review be placed on the FY 2000 IMPEP schedule as long as the q State completes a sufficient number of SS&D evaluations prior to the IMPEP review. 1 4
- 4. . Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 11:25 a.m. )
j