ML20217Q377
| ML20217Q377 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/25/1997 |
| From: | Bangart R NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP) |
| To: | Cool D NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20217Q380 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9709030041 | |
| Download: ML20217Q377 (3) | |
Text
. _
MEMORANDUM TO:
D:nald A. C:ol, Director AUG 2 51897 Division of Industrial cnd Medical Nuclear Safety, NMSS OrigitalSigned By FROM:
Richard L. Bangart, Director PAULH.LOHAUS Office of State Programs g[v
)
SUBJECT:
EVENT INVOLVING UNAUTHORIZED REPAIR OF HIGH DOSE RATE (HDR) REMOTE AFTERLOADER AT PIEDMONT HOSPITAL, ATLANTA, GEORGlA in sesponse to your memorandum of July 25,1997, we have received additional information from Mr. Thomas Hill, Georgia, regarding the above incident and have had further discussions with your staff concerning the potential safety consequences and regulatory significance of this incident, it is our understanding that your concern was primarily with the lack of enforcement action taken by the State against the licensee fo' unauthorized repair of the HDR afterloader and not the State's actions with regard to
' incident follow up and the evaluation of generic implications.
Agreement States are required tu have statutory authority to enforce legally binding requirements and enforcement proedures are required to satisfy tha compatibility criteria designation under implementing procedures for the new adequacy and compatibility policy.
Agreement State use of enforcement cuthority is assessed, together with inspection program effectiveness, by evaluating whether Agreement State licensee compliance is f
equivalent to compliance achieved by NRC licensees subject to NRC's enforcement policy.
An Agreement State has the flexibility to adopt specific enforcement procedures and methods of implementation that differ from those of the NRC. Thus, during integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) reviews of Agreement States, NRC conducts detailed evaluations of enforcement procedures only when concerns are identified related to licensee performance or management of the State's enforcement policy. We will include this case for evaluation in the next Georgia IMPEP review when evaluating the
" technical quality of inspection" indicator. We welcome any further discussion on this matter, as needed.
9709030041 970825 l
Distribution:
DIR RF DCD (SP06)
SDroggitis PDR (YESf_ NO,__)
THill, GA C n yn g ll l l ll l llll RWoodruff, Rll Events File
~v"'
Georgia File-DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\KXS\\GAEVENT.RB2 :
. 'See Previ.
Cbncurrence n
.w...,. thi. aoeum.ot. insc.i. in in. 6..:
c - copy witnoui eti.chmente.,Tc W t - copy wiin ett. chm nt/.ncio.u,.
w - No copy OFFICE OSP E
OSP:DD OS PQfs NAME-KSchneider:nb PHLobaus RLBangart l' C DATE 08/22/97
- 08/22/97.'
08/2 y97 eg ggg HLE E,S, g glLE CODE:St-AG-7
. SP-EM b
n
MEMORANDUM TO:
D:nald A. Cool, Dircctor Division of industri:1 cnd Medical Nuclear Safety, NMSS j
FROM:
Richard L. Bangart, Director
/
Office of State Programs
SUBJECT:
EVENT INVOLVING UNAUTHORIZED REPAIR OF HIGH DOSE RATE (HDR) REMOTE AFTERLOADER AT PIEDMONT j
HOSPITAL, ATLANTA, GEORGIA,/
In response to your memorandum of July 25,1997, we haGe received additional information from Mr. Thomas Hill, Georgia, regarding th 'above incident and have had 9
further discussions with your staff concerning the potehtlal safety consequences and regulatory significance of this incident. It is our undpr' standing that your concern was primarily with the lack of enforcement action takenby the State against the licensee for unauthorized repair of the HDR afterloader and not the State's actions with regard to incident fobw up and the evaluation of generlo' implications.
/
Agreement States are required to have stat.utory authority to enforce legally binding requirements. Agreement Stato use of eryforcement authority is assessed, together with inspection program effectiveness, by eva'luating whether Agreement State licensee compliance is equivalent to compliance' achieved by NRC licensees subject to NRC's enforcement policy. An Agreement, State has the flexibility to adopt specific enforcement procedures and methods of implementation that differ from those of the NRC. Thus, during Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) reviews of Agreement States, NRC conducts detailed,ekaluations of enforcement procedures when concerns are identified related to licensee performance or management of the State's entorcement evaluating the " technical 90,dase for evaluation in the next Georgia IMPEP review policy. We willinclude this ality of Inspection" indicator. We welcome any further discussion on this matter lar. needed.
/
/
/
/
/
Distribut[on:
DIR RF DCD (SP06)
SDrosgitis PDR (YES v' NO
)
THill, GA i
RWoodruff, Ril j, Events File
/
DOCUMENT NAME:n G:\\KXS\\GAEVENT.RB2 n
..w.. e.py. 4.y%,4ntance.i. m in. i o, cry 4,py wanout.n. chin.nv.ncio.u,. : e. copy wan.n.chrn.ne.ncio.u,.
r = No copy OFFICE P pPv&, l QS 9QP
- l OSP:D '
NAME KSchneider:nb PHLbhaus RLBangart DATE 08/d (/97 08/44/97 08/. /97 OSP FILE CODE: SP E-M
om atoo g
p" 4
UNITEE) STATES s
}
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
WASHINGTON. D.C. 30846-0301 August 25, 1997 l
MEMORANDUM TO:
Donald A. Cool, Director Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety, N Sy FROM:
Richard L. Bangart, Director ) d [h' bF Office of State Programs
SUBJECT:
EVENT INVOLVING UNAUTHORIZED REPAIR OF HIGH DOSE RATE (HDR) REMOTE AFTERLOADER AT PIEDMONT HOSPITAL, ATLANTA, GEORGIA in response to your memorandum of July 25,1997, we have received additional information from Mr. Thomas Hill, Georgia, regarding the above incident and have had further discussions with your staff concerning the potential safety consequences and regulatory significance of this incident, it is our understanding that your concern was primarily with the lack of enforcement action taken by the State against the licensee for unauthorized repair of the HDR afterloader and not the State's actions with regard to incident follow up and the evaluation of generic implications.
Agreement States are required to have statutory authority to enforce legally binding requirements and enforcement procedures are required to satisfy the compatibility criteria designation under implementing procedures for the new adequacy and compatibility policy.
Agreement State use of enforcement authority is assessed, together with inspection program effectiveness, by evaluating whether Agreement State licensee compliance is equivalent to compliance achieved by NRC licensees subject to NRC's enforcement policy.
An Agreement, State has the flexibility to adopt specific enforcement procedures and methods of implementation that differ from those of the NRC. Thus, during Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) reviews of Agreement States. NRC conducts detailed evaluations of enforcement procedures only when concerns are identified related to licensee performance or management of the State's enforcement policy. We will include this case for evaluation in the next Georgia IMPEP review when evaluating the
- technical quality of inspection" indicator. We welcome any further discussion on this matter, as needed.
a