ML20203D286
| ML20203D286 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/02/1999 |
| From: | Lance Rakovan NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP) |
| To: | Lohaus P, Miraglia F, Paperiello C NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned), NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS), NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9902160152 | |
| Download: ML20203D286 (5) | |
Text
. -. . . - ,
t
. fEB 2 - ft99 MEMORANDUM TO: Management Review Board Members: +
Frank J. Miraglia, Jr., EDO .
Paul H. Lohaus, OSP Carl J. Paperiello, NMSS Karen D. Cyr, OGC Rosemary T. Hogan, IRO FROM: Lance Rakovan, Health Physicist Office of State Programs
SUBJECT:
DRAFT MINUTES: NEBRASKA DECEMBER 17,1998 MRB MEETING Attached for your review and concurrence are the draft minutes of the Management Review Board (MRB) meeting held on December 17,1998. If you have any questions, please contact me at 415 2589, or Kathleen Schneider at 415-2320.
Attachment:
As stated cc: Robert Leopold, NE Cheryl Rogers, NE Roland Fletcher, MD Distribution:
DIR RF DCD (SP01) i SDroggitis PDR (YES/)
RWoodruff, Ril LMcLean, RIV CSanders, GA FCongel, IRO JKennedy, NMSS FCameron, OGC l AKirkwood, NMSS KHsueh, OSP l 1 KSchneider i HNnwsome, OGC .
\ l DMartin, EDO (Maine Fileg DOCUMENT NAME: G:\lMPEP\NEMRB98. MIN Ta receive a copy of this documor,t. Indicate in the box: 'C' = Copy without attachment / enclosure 'E' = Copy with attachment / enclosure 'N' = No copy ,, _ ,
OFFICE OSP /#
NAME LRakovan:gd +
DATE 2/4 /99 OSP FILE CODE: SP-AG-16
, n oGO ~ ~"
7D 99021601i,52 990202 PDR STPRO ESGNE Y si MPY PDR
, )YW4q t UNITED STATES
(( j 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 4 001 p
Q. '
% ,,,+ o February 2,1999 MEMORANDUM TO: Management Review Board Members:
2 Frank J. Miraglia, Jr., EDO
Karen D. Cyr, OGC Rosemary T. Hogan, IRO FROM: Lance Rakovan, Health Physicist W Office of State Programs i
SUBJECT:
DRAFT MINUTES: NEBRASKA DECEMBER 17,1998 MRB MEETING Attached for your review and concurrence are the draft minutes of the Management Review Board (MRB) meeting held on December 17,1998. If you have any questions, please contact me at 415-2589, or Kathleen Schneider at 415-2320.
Attachment:
i As stated cc: Robert Leopold, NE Cheryl Rogers, NE Roland Fletcher, MD
MINUTES: MANAGEMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING OF DECEMBER 17.1998 These minutes are presented in the same general order as the items were discussed in the
- meeting. The attendees were as follows
Paul Lohaus, MRB Member, OSP Carl Paperiello, MRB Member, NMSS Rosemary Hogan, MRB Member, AEOD Karen Cyr, MRB Member, OGC Roland Fletcher, AOS Liaison, MD Dan Martin, EDO
, Robert Leopold, NE Cheryl Rogers, NE Lance Rakovan, OSP Kathleen Schneider, OSP Fred Combs, NMSS Kevin Hsueh, OSP By telephone:
Sue Semerena, NE Howard Shuman, NE Beverly Spang, NE Bryan Miller, NE Brent Freisen, NE Trudy Hill, NE
- 1. Convention. Carl Paperiello, Chair of the Management Review Board (MRB),
convened the meeting at 9:00 a.m. Introductions of the atterdees were conducted.
- 2. New Business. Nebraska Review introduction. Mr. Richard Woodruff, Rll, led the integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) team for the Nebraska review.
I Mr. Woodruff discussed how the review was conducted. Preliminary work included a review of Nebraska's response to the IMPEP questionnaire. The onsite review was conducted September 21-25,1998. 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 issued a draft report on October 28,1998; received Nebraska's comment letter dated November 23,1998; and submitted a proposed final report to the MRB on December 9,1998.
Previous Review Findings. Mr. Woodruff stated that the recommendations from the previous review were closed. However, a new recommendation involving the schedule for the development and implementation of previously identified procedures was made by the team. The State commented that they are using consultants to write the procedures, and that the procedures should be in place by the end of January.
Common Performance Indicators. Mr. Woodruff 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 Nebraska's performance with respect to this indicator " satisfactory,' and made no recommendations or suggestions. The MRB agreed that Nebraska's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory
- rating for this indicator.
Ms. Sanders discussed the findings for the common performance indicator, Technical Quality of Inspections, which are summarized in Section 3.2 of the report. The team found that Nebraska's performance on this indicator was " satisfactory," and made one recommendation as documented in the report. Mr. Woodruff stated that the information in Appendix C of the report about inspection accompaniments would be corrected. The MRB, the State, and Ms. Sanders discussed the confusion between " recommendations" and " items of non-compliance" issued by the State. The MRB directed that the recommendation be changed to a suggestion in the final report. The MRB agreed that Nebraska's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
Ms. McLean presented the findings regarding the common performance indicator, Technical Staffing and Training. Her presentation corresponded to Section 3.3 of the IMPEP report. The team found that Nebraska's performance with respect to this indicator was " satisfactory," and made one recommendation and one suggestion. The MRB and the State discussed the need for a computer database to track staff training and the impact of the upcoming LLRW site decision. Mr. Woodruff stated that a former staff member in the materials program is still employed by the State and could be utilized. After a brief discussion about training budgets, the MRB agreed that Nebraska's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
Mr. Kirkwood 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 Nebraska's performance to be " satisfactory" for this indicator and made one recommendation. Mr. Kirkwood noted that in their response to the draft report, Nebraska had opposed the use of the word " expeditiously"in the recommendation involving the inventory license condition. The State commented that they plan on revising applicable licenses, but resources may prevent immediate completion of the task. The State commented that 27 licensees do not have the inventory requirement and that a letter could be sent to these licensees addressing the inventory requirement. The MRB directed the team to revise the recommendation to declare thct the State should revise the applicable licenses within a year. The MRB agreed that Nebraska's performance met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
Ms. McLean presented the findings regarding the final common performance indicator, Response to incidents and Allegations. As discussed in Section 3.5 of the report, the team found Nebraska's performance relative to this indicator to be " satisfactory" and made one recommendation as documented in the report. The MRB and the State discussed the recommendation involving the clarity of allegat;on records and alleger contact. The MRB agreed that Nebraska's performance met the standard for a
" satisfactory" rating for this indicator.
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 Nebraska's performance relative to this indicator to be " satisfactory," and made one L- _- -____--_ _ - - _ -__- _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
4 e
t recommendation. The MRB and the State discussed the licensing termination regulation. The State declared that the four regulations identified in the report were promulgated on December 14,1998. The MRB agreed that Nebraska's performance for this indicator met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating.
Mr. Kennedy led the discussion for the non-common performance Niicator, Low Level Radioactive Waste Program, which is summarized in Section 4.3 of t report. The team found Nebraska's performance with respect to this indicator to be satisfactory,"
and made three recommendations. The MRB, the State, and Mr. Kennedy discussed the work that has been done by the State since the on-site review, and the wording of the recommendations in the report. The MRB directed the team to remove recommendations 7 and 8 in the final report, and to revise the report to reflect the current status of the LLRW program. Mr. Kennedy stated that he would work with the State to bring the report up to date. The MRB agreed that Nebraska's performance for this indicator met the standard for a " satisfactory" rating.
On December 21,1998, Mr. Woodruff, Mr. Kennedy, Ms. Schneider, Ms. Rogers, Mr. Gerry Allen, NE discussed the status of recommendations seven & eight. Additional documentation was obtained by the IMPEP team and used to revise the final report as well as to delete these two recommendations.
MRB Consultation / Comments on issuance of Report Mr. Woodruff concluded, based on the discussion and direction of the MRB, that Nebraska's program was rated
' satisfactory" for all performance indicators. The MRB found the Nebraska program to be adequate to protect public health and safety and compatible. The IMPEP team and MRB agreed that the next IMPEP review for Nebraska be conducted in four years, with the stipulation that Nebraska's quarterly communications with Region IV and their periodic meetings would be used to monitor the program's status.
Comments from the State of Nebraska. Mr. Leopold thanked the NRC for their assistance over the last few years. He stated his commitment to the program and declared his satisfaction in the quarterly conference calls with Region IV. He noted that staff turnover has been a problem and they are attempting to minimize this in the future.
Finally, he thanked the team for their actions.
Ms. Rogers commented that the program was already making vast improvements when she assumed the Program Manager position. She stated that getting an outside viewpoint was beneficial.
- 3. Status of Remaining Reviews. Mrs. Schneider briefly reported on the status of the current and upcoming IMPEP reviews and reports.
, 4. Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:20 a.m.
l
_ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _____ ___ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ ____ _____ _ _ ___J