ML20202J480
| ML20202J480 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/19/1997 |
| 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 9712110168 | |
| Download: ML20202J480 (8) | |
Text
o w 1 i NOV 191997 MEMORANDUM TO: Management Review Board Members:
Hugh Thompson, EDO '
Richard Bangart. AP Carl Paperiell:., M.'.iSS Karen Cyr, OGC '
Richard Barrett, AEOD FROM- Kathleen N. Schneider, Senior Project Manager N 'fI"1 Ut~ud by:
Office of State Programs *I't e2- E.
SUBJECT:
REVISED DRAFT MINUTESI NEW MEXICO OCTOBER 23, 1997 MRB MEETING Attached are the revised draft minutes of the Management Review Board (MRB) -
meeting held on October 23,1997,- These revised draft minutes have been issued due to revisions to the paragraph involving the commen performance indicatcr, Response to incidents and Allegations (the first paragraph on page 2). Please review and comment by December 8, 1997. If no comments are received by that time, the minutes will be finalized as is. If you have any questions, please contact me at 415-2320, or Lance Rakovan at 415-2589.
Attachment:
As stated cc: William Floyd, NM
'$ ga, Benito Garcia, NM t Geoffrey Sloan, NM g Ray Paris, OR N Distribution:
E% DlR RF DCD (SP01) .
Om SDroggitis PDR (YES/)
% bc PLohaus SWoods, EDO SMoore, NMSS JHornor, RIV/WC JLyr.ch, Riti GDeegan, NMSS I DCool, NMSS - CHackney, RIV I g Terry Frazee, WA CMaupin .-gg TMartin, AEOD FCombs, NMSS -
LHowell, RIV 4 , ,, , s e New Mexico File
- ~, .L DOCUMENT NAME
- G:\LJR\NMMRB.REV To recem a copy of this docurnent. mancate m the bor "C" = Cocy mmout attachrnent/enctosure "E" = Copy em attachment / enclosure 'W a No cc OFFICE OSP /, OSP l NAME LRakovan:kk % KNSchneiderTJ9 DATE __
11/0/97 " ., 11/9/97 i
gg gg SMh wrx gggggiql OSP FILE CODE: SP-AG-19
,e -_ _. ~ - - -
p2 #t3
% UNITED STATED
- )2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASH!MCYON, o.C. So66H001
%.....p November 19, 1997 l MEMORANDUM TO:- Management Review Board Members:
L Hugh Thompson, EDO Richard Bangart, OSP
! Carl Paperiello, NMSS Karen Cyr, OGC Richard Barrett, AEOD / 'd Cb, 5M 1
FROM: Kathleen N. Schneider, Senior Project Manager a Office of State Programs h
SUBJECT:
REVISED DRAFT MINUTES: NEW MEXICO OCTOBER 23, 1997 MRG MEETING Attre.hed are the revised draft minutes of the Management Review Board (MRB) meeting held on October 23,1997. These revised draft minutes have been issued due to
- revisions to the paragraph involving the common performance indicator, Response to incidents and Allegations (the first paragraph on page 2). Please review and comment by December 8, 1997. If no comments are received by that time, the minutes will be finalized as is. If you have any questions, please contact me at 415-2320, or Lance Rakovan at 415-2589.
Attachment:
As stated cc: William Floyd, NM Benito Gercia, NM Geoffrej Sloan, NM Rey Paris, OR O '
MINUTES: MANAGEMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING OF OCTOBER 23.1997 These minutes are presented in the same general order as the items were discussed in the meeting. The attendees were as follows:
Hugh Thompson, DEDR Richard Bangart, OSP Richard Barrett, AEOD Carl Paperiello, NMSS Karen Cyr, OGC Ray Paris, OR Geoffrey Sloan, NM William Floyd, NM -
James Lynch, Rill Terry Frazee, WA Jack Homor, RIV/WC Scott Moore, NMSS
. Don Cool, NMSS Fred Combs, NMSS Linda Howell, RIV. Susanne Woods, EDO Paul Lohaus, OSP Kathleen Schneider, OSP
- Lance Rakovan, OSP By telephone:
Benito Garcia, NM Margaret Lopez, NM
- 1. Convention Hugh Thompson, Cheir of the Management Review Eoard (MRB),
convened the mesting at 2:00 Fm. Introductions of the attendees were conducted.
- 2. New Business. New Mexico Review letroduction. Mr. James Lynch, Regional State Agreements Officer (RSAO), Region 111, led the Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Prngram (IMPEP) team for the New Mexico review.
Mr. Lynch discussed how the review was conducted. Pre!iminary work included a
_ review of New Mexico's response to the IMPEP questionnaire. The onsite review was conducted July 14-18,1997. The onsite review included an otrance interview, detailed audits of a representative sample of completed licensing actions and inspections, and (
fol!ow-up discussions with staff and management. Tim onsite portion of the review concluded with exit briefings with New Mexico management. Fol'owing the review, the -
. team issued a dreft report on August 8,1997; received New Mexico's comment letter dated October 10,1997; and submitted a proposed final report to the MRB on October 15l1997.
Due to the significance and number of deficiencies found during the twiew and stated in the New Mexico report, including an " unsatisfactory" for one indicator and " satisfactory _
t -
with recommendations for improvement' for three indicators, the review team recommended probation for the New Mexico program,- Mr. Lynch stated that_in their response to the draft report, New Mexico had no exceptions to the findings, yet commented that probation was not necessary.
Common Performance Indicators. Based on the number of recommendations and suggestions involving the common performance indicators, Response to incidents and Allegations and Technical Quality of Inspections, the review team presented results from these two performance indicators first.
_ __ __- _ ___ ___.-m____-_..____.___ .____ _ _ _ ___ __
2 The common performance indicator, Resoonse to inciderits and Allegations, was the first common performance indicator discussed. Mr. Hnmor led the discussion in this area. As discussed in Section 3.5 of tne report, the team found New Mexico's performance relative to this indicator to be " unsatisfactory" and made six recommendations and two suggestions. Mr. Homor discussed details invr>jving the specific incidents, allegations, and misadministrations reviewed that appeared worthy of an onsite response. The MRB discussed with Mr. Homor the root causes for New Mexico's handling of incidents and allegations. The State commented that the main problem was documentation, end that NRC had reviewed and approved the approach in previous rev'~vs. New Mexico stated that they are working on solving the problem, and referred the MRB to a new incident investigatio' form now in use. TM MRB and the State discussed the lack of documentation in the incident files. The State and the MRB discussed what steps the State was taking to properly handle incidents and allegations.
New Mexico pointed out that the proposed final report states that no specific examples of pubic health and safety degradation were identified by the review team. The State also commented that they are dedicated 'o 'ixing all the problems found by the IMPEP tet.m and do not believe that probation is warranted. The MRB agreed that New Mexico's performance met the standard for an " unsatisfactory" rating for this indicator at the time of the team's review. Tha MRB noted thct the new procedures appeared adequate to address the concems, and if these procedures are properly impleniented ,
New Mexico would receive a rating of " satisfactory with recommendations for improvement' for this indicator. Due to the fact that no incidents have been reported .
since the new procedures were put into place, the question of implementation remains.
3 The MRB decided t postpone a final position on whether the State's program should be placed on probativa until all of the indbators were discussed.
Mr. Moore discussed the find:ngs for the common performance indicator, Technical Quality of Inspections, which are summarized in Section 3.4 of the report. The team found that New Mexico's performance with respect to this indicator was "sa'Jsfactory with recommendations," and made seven recommendations and four suggestions. The MRB and the IMPEP team discussed the recommendations involving increasing the rigor and breadth of inspections and conducting exit interviews with upper management.
Mr. Moore stated that possible root causes for the problems included lack of training, management, and culture for detailed inspections. The MRB and the State discussed the steps New Mexico is taking and plans to take to fully train their staff. The MRB questioned the IMPEP team on their decision to not find the State " unsatisfactory" for this indicator. The IMPEP team commented that the criteria for this indicator were closely followed, and that the accompaniments completed by the team all received a minimum of a " passing grade." 1he MRB then discussed with the team the appropriateness of the steps New Mexico is taking to solve these problems. After this discussion, the MRB reached consensus that New Mexico's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory with recommendations" rating for this indicator.
Mr. Lynch discussed the findings for the common performance indicator, Status of the Materials Inspection Program. His presen'ation corresponded to Section 3.1 of the IMPEP report. The review team found New Mexico's performance w;th respect to this indicator " satisfactory with recommendations," and made four recommendations as
.a.
documented in the repcit. After a brief discussion on inspection priorities, the MRB agreed that New Mexico's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory with recommendations" rating for this indicator.
Mr. Lynch presented the findings regarding the common performance indicator, Technical Staffing and Training His presentation corresponded to Section 3.2 of the IMPEP report. Mr. Lynch reported that the IMPEP review team found that New Mcxico's performsnce with respect to the indicator to be " satisfactory with recommendations," and made three recommendations. The MRB and the State discussed New Mexico adopting a formal training program, and the status of their training budget. New Mexico assured the MRD that they could make the necessary improvements to their program, including the use of innovative approaches to address staff training needs. The MRB agreed that New Mexico's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory with recommendations" rating for this Indicator.
Mr. Frazee presented the findings regarding the common performance indicator, Technical Quality of Licensing Actions. He summarized the findings in Section 3.3 of the report, where the review team found New Mexico's licensing actions to be generally thorough, complete, consistent, and of acceptable quality with hea'in and safety issues properly addressed. The IMPEP team found New Mexico's performance to be " satisfactory" for this indicator, and made one suggestion, that documentation of license reviewers' actions be maintained in license files. The MRB agreed that New Mexico's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
Non-Common Performance Indicators. Mr. Homor led the discussion of the non-common performance indicator, Legislation and Regulations, which is summarized in Sr:ction 4.1 of the report. The team found New Mexico's performance relative to this indicator to be "satisfactoru" and made one recommendation and one suggestion as documented in the report. The State commented that all past due ru!es as well as a number of other rules would be adopted by May 30,1998. The MRB and the State discussed New Mexico's request to retum their SS&D program to the NRC. The MRB reached the consensus that New Mexico's performance met the standard for a
" satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
- 3. MRB Consultation / Comments on Issuance of Report. Mr. Lynch summanzed that New Mexico's program was rated " satisfactory" on one common performance indicator and the applicable non-common performance indicator, " satisfactory with recommendations" for three common performance indicators, and " unsatisfactory" for the final common performance indicator. Based on the findings of the review, the review team recommended that New Mexico's program be put on probation and believes that heightened oversight is warranted.
The MRB met for a short period of time in an executive session. Upon retuming, the MRB stated that there were three main issues New Mexico had to clearly address in terms of programmatic changes and procedure implementation: (1) level of program staff and amount of resource support, (2) technical quality of staff and training needs, and (3) level of management support, involvement, and ove sight of New Mexico
Agreement State program activities. The MRB found the New Mexico program to be adequate, but needs improvement, and compatible. The MRB stated that Mr.
Thompson and Mr. Bangart would meet with upper management of the New Mexico program before the MRB voted on the recommendation for probationary status for the New Mexice program. The final report will not be issued until a decision on probation has been reached by the MRB.
- 4. Comments from the State of New Mexico. Mr. Floyd and Mr. Sloan thanked the IMPEP team for their work in the review. Mr. Garcia emphasized the resource limitations of the New Mexico program and discussed with the MEd their expectations for the meeting with New Mexico upper management. Designated as contact for the meeting, Mr. Bangart committed to working with New Mexico staff to jointly developing
- an agenda.
- 5. Old Business. Maryland Good Practice lesue. At the completion of the New Business, the Maryland Good Practice issue was discussed. The MRB stated that the good practice in question should be removed from the Good Practice Report at this ;
time, and that the Good Practice Report should be completed.
Approval of the Texas MRB Minutes. The Texas final MRB minutes were offered for the MRB approval. The minutes were approved as written.
Texas LLRW Revisions. OGC concurred on the proposed revisions t > Section 4.3 of the Texas final report. Issuance of the final report is pending NMSS concurrence.
- 6. Status of Remaining Reviews. Mrs, Schneider briefly reported on the status of the remaining IMPEP reviews and reports.
- 7. Adjournment. The meeting was adjoumed at approximately 4:45 pm.
l M _ ______-_.._.__m_ --
- ~
PLEASE FORWARD IMMEDIATELY U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS FAX: (301) 415-3502 NUMBER OF PAGES: 6 including this page DATE: NOVEMBER 20,1997 TO: BENITO GARCIA NM WILUAM FLOYD, NM GEOFFREY SLOAN, NM RAY PARIS, OR i
FROM: /ATHLEEN N. SCHNEIDER OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS .
(301)415 3340 SUBJECT. NEW MEX!CO OCTOBER 23,1997 MRB MEETING REVISED DRAFT MINUTES (OOMMENTS DUE BY DECEMBER 8,1997)
VERIFICATION - (301) 415-3340 I
< TRANSACTION REPORT > 11 ,,1,,, , ,,, ,,,,1 C OROADCAST 3
.3 NO. DATE TIME DESTINATION STATIOfl PG. DURATION MODE RESUL.T 34888 7 408 . (){ 6 0 '
- Ck 12 O'07'47' s
s
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . - . _ _ _ _ - . _ - __ - . _ _ . . _ _