ML20198Q334
| ML20198Q334 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/09/1998 |
| From: | Bolling L NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP) |
| To: | Snellings D ARKANSAS, STATE OF |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9801220405 | |
| Download: ML20198Q334 (12) | |
Text
.
1
~0 E Mr. David Snellings, Director Division of Radation Control and Emergency Management Department of Health 4815 West Markham Street, Slot 30 Little Rock, AR 72205-3867
Dear Mr. Snellings:
As you are aware, NRC is using the integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) for i
the ovaluation of Agreement State Programs. Per our discussion, I will be the team leader for the IMPEP review of the Arkansas program scheduled for the week of March 23,1998. The team willinclude Lloyd Bolling, Health Physicist. Office of State Programs; David Collins, Health Physicist, NRC Region ll; Martha Dibblee, Manager, Oregon Radioactive Materials Program; and Thomas O'Brien. Health Physicist, Office of State Programs.
Enclosed is the document, *iritegrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program Questionnaire." The questionnaire is being ft.rnished to you on a computer disk as well as in printed form. I ask that you send your responses by internet to LAB @NRC. GOV or retum the disk to me by February 20,1998. I am sending the document and disk in advance of the IMPEP review in order to provide time for you to allocate the staff resources necessary to complete the document by the due date.
Pari A of the questionnaire contains questions on the common performance indicators. Part B contains cuestions on the non-common performance indicators for Agreement States.
Also included with the questionnaire is the document ' Materials Raquested to Be Available for the Onsite Portion of an Impep Review.' We encourage States to have the Jems listed prepared prior to the IMPEP team's arrival.
l request that you set up an appointment with the appropriate State Senior Management Official to discuss the results of the IMPEP review of the Arkansas program on March 27,1998, i
If you have questions, please call me at (301) 415-2327.
Sincerely, g.
9901220405 900109 L'-
PDR STPRO ESOAR Lloyd Bolling, Te'am Leader PDR Office of State Programs
Enclosures:
As stated l
cc:
Sandra B. Nichols, M.D., Director Arkansas Department of Health k1 C 94 7 I
Distnbution:
j DIR RF 1000 (SPCi)
SDroggitis DCollins, Ril KSchneider POB (YESj_!. NO
)
TO'Brien MDibblee, OR LRakovan IMPEP File JHornor, RIV LMcLean, RIV Arkansas File 9.) g g DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ LAB \\LTRBRLPT. ARK
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE.
To toco8ve e cep ' of this clocument. Inclicato in the bor "C" e Copy weout attachmenvencbsure T e Cop' we attachmenvenclosure "N" e No copy OFFICE OSP=
OSP.D l
l NAME LBolling nb PHLohaus RLBangart DATE 01/08/98
- 01/08/98
- 01/09/9d
- w PILE OGUiin: "A19,
{
h.
Mr. David Snellings, Director Division of Radiat#on Control and Emergency Management Department of Health 4815 West Markham Street, Slot 30
/
Little Rock, AR 72205 3867
Dear Mr. Snellings:
As you are aware, NRC is using the Integrated Materials Performance Evaluatio rogram (IMPEP) for the evaluation of Agreement State Programs. Per our discussion, I will be the am leader for the IMPEP review of the Arkansas program scheduled for the week of March 23,1998. The team willinclude Lloyd Boll;ng Health Physicist. Office of State Programs; David Collins Health P ysicist, NRC Region 11; Martha Dibblee, Manager, Oregon Radioactive Materials Program; and Thomas 'Brien, Health Physicist, Office of State Programs.
Enclosed is the document," Integrated Materials Performance Ev ation Program Questionnaire." The questionnaire is being furnished to you on a computer disk as w I as in printed form. I ask that you send your responses ty internet to LAB @NRC. GOV or retum thepIsk to me by February 20,1998. I am sending the document and disk in advance of the IMPEP review in order to provide time for you to allocate the staff resources necessary to complete the document the due date.
Part A of the questionnaire contains questions on the ommon performance indicators. Part B contains questions on the non-common performance indical s for Agreement States.
Also included with the questionnaire is the docu nt
- Materials Requested to Be Available for the Onsite Portion of an impep Review." We encourage tates to have the items listed prepared prior to the IMPEP e 'm's arrival.
i request that you set up un appointmen ith the appropriate State Senior Management Official to discuss the results of the IMPEP review of the rkansas program on March 27,1998.
If you have cuestions, please call at (301) 415-2327.
Sincerely, Lloyd Bolling, Team Leader Office of State Programs
Enclosures:
As stated cc:
Sand B. Nichols, M.D., Director Arkansas Department of Health
/
Rainbution-DIR RF DCD (SP01)
SDroggitis DCollins, Ril PDR (YESf._ NO
)
TQBrien MDibblee, OR IMPEP File -
JHomor, RIV Arkansas File i :-
DOCUMENT NAME: GALAB\\LTRBRLPT. ARK v.
- i e, m...,noi.ii.cs-m-meo,. r cor...in.,i.com.oi ncio.o,.
,<.. o copy OFFICE OSP,9a l (LQLD l
OSP.QJo, l
l NAME LBolling:nbM),
PHLMabla RLBangart' kid DATE 01/T'/98 01/ D 8 01/r498 OSP FILE CODE: SP AG-3 J
s.:
-.m
..ex-m,-
- o 4
[%k UNITED STATES p
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION wasumatow, e.c. aussem
%e....
January 9,-1998 Mr. David Snellings, Director Divleion of Radiation Control and Emergency Management Department of Health 4815 West Markham Street. Slot 30 Little Rock, AR 72205 3887
Dear Mr. Snellings:
j As you are aware, NRC is using the Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program j
(IMPEP) for the evaluation of Agreement State Programs. Per our discussion, I will be the team leader for the IMPEP review of the Arkansas program scheduled for the week of j
~ March 23,1998. The team willinclude Lloyd Bolling, Health Physicist, Office of State
< Programs; David Collins, Health Physicist, NRC Region ll; Martha Dibbles, Manager, Oregon.
Radioactive Materials Program; and Thomas O'Brien, Health Physicist, Office of State Programs.
I Enclosed is the document, " integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program
- Questionna!re " The questionnaire is being fumished to you on a computer disk as well as in printed form. I ask that you send your responses by intemet to LABONRC. GOV or retum the disk to me by February 20,1998. I am sending the document and disk in advance of the
- IMPEP review in order to provide time for 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 9 contains questions on the non-common performance indicators for Agreement States.
l i
Also included with the questionnaire is the document " Materials Requested to Be Available for the Onsite Portion of an Impep Review." We encourage States to have the items listed j
prepared prior to the IMPEP team's arrival.
i
. I request that you set up an appointment with the appropriate State Senior Management Official i
to discuss the results of the IMPEP review of the Arkansas program on March 27,1998.
- If you have questions, please call me at (301) 415-2327.
Sincerely,p 9 v
p e
L yd pthing, som r
Officiof State Progra s j
Enclosures:
E As stated
- cet Sandra B. Nichols,- M.D., Director 1 j
Arkansas Department of Health -
.k
~
L:
..,,w...
,.~1.- L. 6
.,__.~,,_i.,,
r Approved by OMB' No. 3150-0183 Expires 4/30/98
+
INTEGRATED MATERIALS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROGRAM QUESTIONNAIRE Name of State / Regional Program Review Period: May 26,1995 to March 27,1998 i
A.
COMMON PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 1.
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. The list should include initialinspections that are overdue.
Insp. Frequency Licensee Name (Yearsi Due Date Months Q/D 2.
Do you currently have an action plan for completing overdue inspections? If so, pleasc describe the plan or provide a written copy with your response to this questionnaire.
8 3.
Please identify individual licensee groups of licensees the State / Region is inspecting more or less frequently tnan called for in NRC Ir:spection Manual Chapter 2800 and state the reason for the change.
3 Estimated burden per response to comply with this voluntary collection request: 45 hour5.208333e-4 days <br />0.0125 hours <br />7.440476e-5 weeks <br />1.71225e-5 months <br />si 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 (3150-0183), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503, if an information collection does not display a currently valid OMB control number, NRC may not conduct or spunsor, and a person is not required to respond to, the information colbetion.
r
,-m.
i
-I 4.
Please complete the following table for licensees granted reciprocity during the reporting period.
l Number of Licensees Granted Reciprocity Number of Licensees i
Priority Permits Each Year inspected Each Year Service Licensees performing YR YR h
teletherapy and irradiator source YR YR j
instellatons or changes YR YR YR YR YR YR 1
YR YR YR YR YR YR YR YR t
2 YR YR YR YR YR YR YR YR 3
YR YR YR YR YR YR 4
All Other 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 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, ll.
Technical Quality of insoections 7,
What, if any, changes were made to your written inspection procedur6s during the reporting period?
8.
Prepare a table showing the number and types of supervisoty accompaniments made during the review period. Include:
Insoector Suoervisor ME,t:: Cat Qaig i
I 2
i i
9.
Describe intomal procedures for conducting supervisory accompaniments of inspectors in the field. If supervisory accompaniments were documented, please provide copies of the documentation for each accompaniment.
10.
Describe or provide an update on your instrumentation and methods of calibration. Are allinstrumes.cs properly calibrated at the present time?
- lil, Technical Staffino and Training 11.
Please provide a staffing plan, or complete a listing using the suggemd format below, of the professional (technical) person years of effort appliou te the agreement or radioactive material program by individual. Include the name, position, and, for Agreement States, the fraction of time spent in the *!ollowing areas: administration, materials licensing & compliance, emergency response, LLW, U mills, other if these regulatory responsibilities are divided between offices, the table should be consolidated to include all personnel contributing to the radioactive materials program, include all vacancies anc: identify all se *r personnel assigned to monitor. vet 9f junior personnel. If consultants were used to carry out the progrards radio 6ctive materials responsibilities, include their efforts.- The table heading should be:
NAME POSI'llON AREA OF EFFORT EIE%
12.
Please provide a listing of all new professional personnel hired since the last review, indicate the, degree (s) they received, if applicable, and additional training a 1 years of experience in health physics, or other disciplines, if appropriate, t
13.
Please list all professional staff who have not yet met the qualification requirements of license reviewer / materials inspection staff (for NRC, inspection Manuai Chap:ers 1246; for Agreement States, please hscribe 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.
14.
Please identify the technical staff who left the RCP/ Regional DNMS program during this period.
15.
List the vacant positions in each program, the length of time each position has been vacant, and a brief summary of efforts to fill the vacancy.
IV.
Technical On=lity of Licensina Actions 16.
Please identify any major, unusual, or complex licenses which were issued, received a major amendment, were terminated, decommissioned, submitted a 3
l:
r,
.4 1
I bankruptcy notification or renewed in this period. Also identify any new or amended licenses that now require emergency plans.
j 17.
Discuss any variances in licensing policies and procedures or exemptions from l
the regulations granted during the review period.
18.
What, if any, changes were made in your written licensing procedures (new l
procedures, updates, policy memoranda, etc.) during the reporting period?
i 19.
For NRC Regions, identify by licensee name, license number and tyr's, any renewal applications that have been pending for one year or more.
~
V.
Responses to lncidents and Allegations.
20.
Please provide a list of the reportable incidents (i.e., medice.. 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. See Handbook e Nuclear Material Event Reporting in Agreernent States for additional guidance.) that occurred in the Region / State during the review period. For Agreement States, information included in previous submittels to NP" need not be repeated (i.e., those submitted under OMB clearance numbo, 3150-0178, Nuclear Material Events Database). The list should be in the following format:
l LICENSEE NAME UCENSE #
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?- For States, was timely notification made to NRC7 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, s.
For Agreement States, please identify any allegations referred to your program
' by the NRC that have not been closed.
R 4
.~...--,m----_~,. _ _ - -,. -, -,,
.-,,.,..,._,m~-,,m--.,,,,.--..,.-
,-.....m
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 deacription 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.
B. NON-COMMON PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 1.
Leaislation and Procram Elements Reauired for Comoatibility
- 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 complete the enclosed table based on NRC chionology of amendments. Identify those that have not been adopted by the State, explain why they were not adopted, and discuss any actions being taken to adopt them. Identify the regulations that the State has adopted through legally binding requirements other than regulations.
- 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 normallength of time anticipated to complete each step, ll.
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 headit.g should be:
SS&D Manufacturer, Type of Registry Distnbutor or Device Date Number
-Custom User or Source lssued 32.
What guides, standards and procedures are used to evaluate registry applications?
33.
Please include information on the following quections in Section A, as they apply to the Sealed Source and Device Program:
Technical Staffing and Training - A.lll.11 15 Technical Quality of Licensing Actions - A.IV.16-18 Responses to incidents and Allegations A.V.20-23 5
e
5
=
Ill.
Lw-Level Waste Procram 34.
Please include information on the following questions in Section A, as they apply to the low-level Waste Progrem:
Status of Materials inspection Program A.I.13, A.I.6 Technical Quality of Inspections - A.ll.7-10 Technical Staffing and Training - A.Ill.11 15 Technical Qua!ity of Licensing Actions - A.IV.16-18 Responses to incidents and Allegations - A.V.20-23 IV.
Uranium Mill Proaram 35.
Pleasc include information on the following questions in Section A, as they apply to the Uranium Mill Program:
Status of Materials inspection Program - A.I.1-3, A.I.6 Technical Quality of Inspections - A.ll.7-10 Technical Staffing and Training - A.Ill.11-15 Technical Quality of Licensing Actions - A.IV.16-18 Responses to incidents and Allegations - A.V.20-23 h
3
TABLE FOR QUESTION 29.
OR DATE DATE 10 CFR RULE DUE ADOPTED CURRENT EXPECTED STATUS ADOPTICN
' Any ans.dirent due prior to 1991. Identify each regulation (refer to the Chronology of Amendments)
D=u,.....ssioning; 7/27/91 Parts 30,40. 70 Emergency Planning.
4/7/93 Parts 30,40. 70 Standards for Protechon Against fidiation; 1/1/94 Part 20 Safety Requirements 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 Requirements 7/1/96 for Irradiators; Part 36 Definition of Land Disposal 7/22/96 and Waste Site OA Program; Part 61 Decnmmitsioning Recordkeeping: Docu-10/25/96 mentation Additions; Parts 30. 40. 70 Seff-Guarantee as an Additional Financial 1/28/97 Mechanism; Parts 30,40,70 Uranium M;;I Tailings: Conforming to EPA 7/1/97 Standards; Part 40 Timeliness in Decommissioning 8/15/97 Parts 30,40. 70 Preparation. Transfer for Commercial Dis-1/1/98 tribution. and Use of Byproduct Material for l
Medical Use; Parts 30,32. 35 E
7
e 1.;
- 4 1
- r OR~
DATE' DATE 210'CFR RULE DUE' ADOPTED.
CURRENT; N
STATUS-ADOPTION
.. y-.
Fsequency of Modcol Exammasons for Use of 3/13m
_ _ e, Prahu*rwi Equipment Low.LevelWeste Shipment Mondest 3/1/98-g ?A vmenon and Reporting
- Performance Requeements for Raeography 6f30f98 v E= ;. /
R=d=s== Protecton Requeements Amended 8/1W98 c.
arid N ClonAceton of C+:_.__
_ -., Funding 11/2498 t
^
m.
10 CFR Part 71: Compettilhty wiWi the
- 1/99 incomotonal Atomic C.-,, Agency Mescal Admrustration of Radiation and 10/20M18
-Radioechve Motonets Temunshon or Transfer of Licensed Adnnhos.
6/16/99 d
Recordk
. " :, _ _.. _. /..
1 Resolubon of Duel Reguiston of Asrbome if E EfRuones of P=4aareve Malenals; Cloen Air '
o Fissile Meterial Shipments and Exemptons 2/1000 Recogrubon of Agreement State Licenses in 2/27/00 1
Areas Under Exctuesve Federal JunsJichon Wipun an.^
_ -./ State Criteria foc the Release of Indivsduals 5/2900 Admmsetored R=renareve Motonal Licenses for Industrial Radography and 6/27JOO Reenhan Safety R:6... ee for industrial R=e w-sphy Operamons: Final Rule R_W Cnterte for Liconee Terminsten 8120f00 8
..... ~ _ __ - -...... - _....--
y;,,
MATERIALS REQUESTED TO BE AVAILABLE FOR THE ONSITE PORTION OF AN IMPEP REVIEW ORGANIZATION CHARTS Clean, sized 8% X 11" including names and positions a One showing positions from Governor down to Radiation Control Program Director (RCPD) o Ore showing positions of current radiation control progrom with RCPD as Head a Equivalent charts for LLRW and mills programs, if applicable LICENSE LISTS a Pnntouts of current licenses, showing total, as follows:
Name License #
Location License Type Priority Last inspection Due Date Sort alphabetically Also, sort by due date and by priority (if possible)
THE FOLLOWING LISTS o List of open license cases, with date of onginal request, and dates of follow up actions a List of licenses terminated during review period.
O Copy _of current log or other document used to track licensing actions a Copy of curient log or other document used to track inspections a List of Inspection frequency by license type o Listing or log of allincidents and allegations occurring during the review period. Show whether incident is open or closed and whether it was reported to the NRC THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS o All State regulations a Records of results of supervisory a Statutes affecting the regulatory authority of accompaniments ofinspectors the state program o Emergency plan and communications list a Standard license conditions a Procedures for investigating allegations a Technical procedures for licensing, model a Enforcement procedures, including licenses, review guides procedures for escalated enforcement, o SS&D review procedures severity levels, civil penalties (as applicable) o Instrument calibration records a Copies of job descriptions a laspection procedures and guides o inspection report forms 9
.