ML20237E320
| ML20237E320 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/11/1998 |
| From: | Bangart R NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP) |
| To: | GENERAL, MINNESOTA, STATE OF, OHIO, STATE OF, OKLAHOMA, STATE OF, PENNSYLVANIA, COMMONWEALTH OF |
| References | |
| SECY-98-068-C, SECY-98-68-C, SP-98-043, SP-98-057, SP-98-070, SP-98-43, SP-98-57, SP-98-70, NUDOCS 9808310142 | |
| Download: ML20237E320 (14) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - - _ _ - - _
\\
UNITED STATES p
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 3066H001
^
August 11, 1998 ALL AGREEMENT STATES MINNESOTA, OHIO, OKLAHOMA, PENNSYLVANIA TRANSMITTAL OF STATE AGREEMENTS PROGRAM INFORMATION (SP-98-070) 1Your attention is invitad to the enclosed correspondence which contains.
INCIDENT AND EVENT INFORMATION..........
- PROGRAM MANAGEMENT INFORMATION...
TRAINING COURSE INFORMATION...............
TECHNICAL INFORMATION............................
~ OTH ER I N FOR MATION...................................
XX NRC AND AGREEMENT
~
STATE COORDINATION AND COMMUNICATION ON f
INSPECTION, INVESTIGATION AND
'i ENFORCEMENT i
INFORMATION 4
- Supplementary information: Enclosed for your review and comment is a summary of NRC
^
! conclusions and actions resulting from discussions held duririg the October 17,1997 All -
' Agreement States Meeting on NRC and Agreement States Sharing of Inspection, Investigation and Enforcement information. The summary was reviewed by Roland G. Fletcher, Chair, i Organization of Agreement States (OAS). We_would appreciate your comments on the enclosed summary within 30 days of your receipt of this letter. _ Your comments will be used to l assess the need for development of additional guidance on the exchange of information in this
= area.tYour comments will also be used to frame future discussions concerning these issues V
between the OAS and NRC staff. Chairman Jackson urged the OAS Executive Committee I#
! during the March 31,1998 Commission tiriefing on issues of concern to the Agreement States L to have direct discussions of those concerns with NRC's Offices of _ Investigations, Public 3
, _ Affairs, Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data, and NRC's Agency Allegations Advisor.
[
- (See SP-98-043 dated May 8,1998, which transmits NRC Staff Requirements Memorandum
\\
L
- (SRM) dated April 27,1998).' -T_he development of any additional guidance will be coordinated
(-
L~
J with you.'
1 j
Additionally, NRC's June 12,1998 SRM SECY-98-068 (SP-98-057, dated July 2,1998)
)
- recommends that NRC staff coordinate with Agreement States to determine whether L Agreement States can provide the NRC with information on State actions to prohibit individuals
- ,4 g, @ e.
~
W 9909310142 990811..
E ~,O,4 #
PDR STPRO E800EN 1
t 5M-y h
da
)
e g
H, j
. [.
l t
SP-98-070 AUG 111998
-- licensed or unlicensed -- from involvement in licensed activities for the purpose of sharing l
such information. ' It also recommends the NRC staff should consider the feasibility of adding relevant Agreement State information to the compilation of information on NRC actions currently available on the NRC Home Page. The SRM recommendations are included in the enclosed summary under Section 11, Communications involving Inspection and Enforcement.
l This information' request has been approved by OMB 3150-0029, expiration April 30,2001.
The estimated burden per response to comply with this collection request is 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />. Forward j
any comments regarding the 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 (3150-0029), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. If a document does not display a currently valid OMB control number, the NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information.
POINT OF CONTACT:
Rosetta Virgilio TELEPHONE:
(301) 415-2307 FAX:
(301) 415-3502 INTERNET:
ROV @NRC. GOV l
k[IfI
$11 M Richard L. Bangart, Director l
Office of State Programs
Enclosure:
As stated -
1 I
r i
E_____
f
[.
i i
L SP-98 070 -
2-AUG 11 1998 I
l-
-- licensed or unlicensed - from involvement in licensed activities for the purpose of sharing such information, it also recommends the NRC staff should consider the feasibility of adding l
relevant Agreement State information to the compilation of information on NRC actions currently available on the NRC Home Page. The SRM recommendations are included in the enclosed summary under Section ll, Communications involving Inspection and Enforcement.
This information request has been approved by OMB 3150-0029, expiration April 30,2001.
The estimated burden per response to comply with this collection request is 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />. Forward any comments regarding the 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 (3150-0029), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. If a document does not display a currently valid OMB control number, the NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information.
POINT OF CONTACT:
Rosetta Virgilio TELEPHONE:
(301) 415-2307 FAX:
(301) 415-3502 INTERNET:
ROV @NRC. GOV
@MW By R! CHARD L BANGART Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs
Enclosure:
As stated Distribution:
DIR RF DCD (SP03) J SDroggitis
' PDR (YES.4) (NO._)
.RSAOs A/S Filo E-MAILED TO STATES: 8 / 13 / 9 8 DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ ROV \\SP98070. ROV
- See previous concurrence.
Ty receive e copr of this document, Indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure "E" = Copy with attachment / enclosure "N* = No copy OFFICE.
'OSP:DD -
l OGC NMSS:D
~l Ol:D NAME RVirgilio:nb PLohaus FCameron CPaperiel!o GCaputo DATE 05/14/98*
05/14/98*
05/28/98*
05/21/98*
05/27/98*
OFFICE
- OE:D l
OSP:D f,d/
NAME JLieberman RLBangart l%id r
DATE 05/15/98*
08/// /98 OSP FILE CODE: SP-A-4 1
h SP Branch (T-6 F33), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washing on, DC 20555-0001, and to the Paperwork Reduction Project (3150-0029), Office of Manage ent and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. If a document does not display a currently valid OM control number, the NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond o, a collection of information.
POINT OF CONTACT:
Rosetta Virgilio TELEPHONE:
(301) 415-2307 FAX:
(301)415-3502 INTERNET:
ROV @NRC.GO l
Richa L. Bangart, Director Offic of State Programs
Enclosure:
As stated Distribution:
DIR RF DCD (SP03)
SDroggitis PDR (YESj_) (NO__)
DCool, NMSS OSP Staff RSAO's A/S File FAXED TO STATES:
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ ROV \\NRCAAS1.IIE T
- receive e cop r of this document, Indicate in the box: v e Co a wfhc ht atta rnent/endosure "E" = Cop r with attachment / enclosure *N" = No copy l
/
OAS:C NMSS:D OI:D l
NAME RVirgilio:nb N/
PLohaus: ITT /
RFletcher CPaperiello GCaputo DATE 05//#98 05@/98 /
05/
/98 05/
/98 05/
/98 I
l OFFICE OE:D l
,OGC
/l OSP:D l
l l NAME JLieberman F)Camero.n /
RBangart l DATE 05/ /98
/
057/498 05/ /98 OSP FILE CODE: SP-A-4 l
jg
4.
SP Branch (T-6 F33), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ashington, DC 20555-0001, and to the Paperwork Reduction Project (3150-0029), Office of anagement and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. If a document does not display a currently v id OMB control number, the NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information.
POINT OF CONTACT:'
Rosetta Vi gilio TELEPHONE:
(301)415;3502 307 FAX:
(301) 41 INTERNET:
ROV @N C. GOV i
Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs
Enclosure:
As stated Distnbution DIR RF.
DCD (SP03)
. SDroggitis PDR (YES L)(NOJ DCool, NMSS '
OSP Staff a
RSAO's l
A/S File FAXED TO STATES:
I
- DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ ROV \\NRCAAS1.llE Ta receive a com > of this document, Indicate in the box: "C" = Co w e h attachtnamure "E" s Cop t with ettschment/ enclosure "N" = No copy OFFICE OSP _/lg OSP@
l OAS:C NMSS:D l
OI:D /,
~NAME RVirgilio:nb N/
PLohaus: Ih RFletcher CPaperiello h.GCaputo J/Ri L
DATE-05// #98 05@/98 05/
/98 05/
/98 05/d/98 l
t OFFICE
. OE:D l-OGC/
l OSP:D l
l l
NAME-JLieberman FXCameron RBangart l
DATE 05/ /98 05/ /98 05/ /98 OSP FILE CODE: SP-A-4
l SP -2 Branch (T-6 F33), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washing on, DC 20555-0001, and to t
the Paperwork Reduction Project (3150-0029), Office of Manage ent and Budget, Washington, I
DC 20503. If a document does not display a currently valid OM control number, the NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond o, a collection of information.
POINT OF CONTACT:
Rosetta Virgilio TELEPHONE:
(301)415-2307 FAX:
(301) 415-3502 INTERNET:
ROV @NRC.GO Richar L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs
Enclosure:
As stated Distribution:
DIR RF DCD (SP03)
SDroggitis PDR (YES_f.) (NO_)
' A/S File FAXED TO STATES:
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ ROV \\NRCAAS1.IIE T7 receive a cop > of this document, Indicate in the box: "C" a Co y withdt attachr nt/endosure "E" = Cop r with attachment / encl 4sure "N" = No copy OFFICE OSP._ / L6 OSP@
l j OAS:C
.NMS$$
Ol:D NAME RVirgilio:nb K/
PLohaus: Ih
/ RFletcher CP4$driollo GCaputo DATE-05//g98 05/h/98
/
05/
/98
- 05/$ /98 05/
/98
/
OFFICE OE:D
[
[!
OSP:D NAME JLieberman FXCameron
/
RBangart DATE 05/ /98 05/ /98 /
/
/
?
f SP Branch (T-6 F33), U.S. Nuclear Regulate.y Commission, Washing on, DC 20555-0001, and to the Paperwork Reduction Project (3150-0029), Office of Manage lent and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. If a document does not display a currently valid OM control number, the NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond o, a collection of information.
POINT OF CONTACT:
Rosetta Wigilio TELEPHONE:
(301)415-2307 FAX:
(301) 415-3502 INTERNET:
ROV @NRC.GO Richar L. Bangart, Director Office f State Programs
Enclosure:
As stated l
1 Distribution:
DIR RF DCD (SP03)
SDroggitis PDR (YES.L) (NO_)
RSAO's A/S File FAXED TO STATES:
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ROMNRCAAS1.llE Tt receive a cop i of this document. Indicate in the box: "C" = Cow withd attach t/ enclosure "Eaa Cop f with attachment / enclosure "N" a No copy OFFICE OSP,_f jf OSP$
l
/
OAS:C NMSS:D OI:D
"'*ME RVirgilio:nb N/
PLohaus: ITT
'RFletcher CPaperiello GCaputo DATE 05//#98 05/h/98
/
05/
/98 05/
/98 05/
/98 I
OFFICE-Q O E:D
,,l OGC l/
OSP:D l
l NAME Jtlehbrman *'"#
FXCameron
/
RBangart DATE
" 05/1998 05/ /98
/
05/ /98 OSP FILE CODE: SP-A-4 l
__-____a
)
l SP !
Branch (T-6 F33), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washingfon, DC 20555-0001, and to the Paperwork Reduction Project (3150-0029), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. If a document does not display a currently valid OMBl control number, the NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information.
POINT OF CONTACT:
Rosetta Virgilio TELEPHONE:
(301) 415-2307 i
FAX:
(301) 415-3502 l
lNTERNET:
ROV @NRC. GOV I
Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of! State Programs
Enclosure:
1 As stated l
' Distribution:
DIR RF DCD (SP03)
SDroggitis PDR (YES_f.) (NO_)
'A/S File FAXED TO STATES:
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ ROV \\NRCAAS1.IIE Ta receive a cop i of this document, Indicate in the box: "C" = Co a withc0t attachrnent/encio ure "E" = Cigrr with attachment / enclosure "N" = No copy OFFICE OSP _/ g OSP:$
l QAS:C NMSS:D 01.. '
{
NAME RVirgilio:nb N/
PLohaus: h RFlefcher CPaperiello GCaput.
DATE 05////98 05/h/98
/05/
/98 05/
/98 05/
/98 I
OFFICE OE:D l
/OSP:D l
NAME JLieberman FXCameron RBhngart DATE 05/ /98 05/ /98
/ 05/ /38 OSP FILE CODE: SP-A-4 i
I i
7; 1
. NRC AND AGREEMENT STATES COORDINATION AND COMMUNICATION ON INSPECTION, INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION
=
BACKGROUND:
The subject topic was addressed during the.1997 Annual All Agreement States Meeting in part to discuss with the States NRC staff actions in response to commitments made in Chairman l
Jackson's June 3 and November 19,1996 correspondence to Commissioner Sweeney, State of New York Department of Labor (NY/ DOL), Attachments 1 and 2. Commissioner Sweeney's correspondence suggested the need for improved communication of investigation, inspection and enforcement information.1The Chairman's responses indicated staff would review its practices and develop additional guidance to further improve the exchange of information. In addition, Chairman Jackson urged the OAS Executive Committee during the March 31,1998
' Commission briefing on issues of concern to the Agreement States to have direct discussions of those concerns with NRC's Offices of Investigations, Public Affairs, Analysis and Evaluation l
of Operational Data, ar : "JRC's Agency Allegations' Advisor. (See SP-98-043, dated May 8, l
1998, which transmits I&.C Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) dated April 27,1998.)
' Any additional guidance would be developed in coordination with the Agreement States.
Additbnally, NRC's June 12,1998 SRM SECY-98-068 (SP-98-057, dated July 2,1998) l recommends that NRC staff coordinate with Agreement States to determine whether Agreement States can provide the NRC with Information on State actions to prohibit individuals
-- licensed or unlicensed -- from involvement in licensed activities for the purpose of sharing such information.. It also recommends the NRC staff should consider the feasibility of adding
)
relevant Agreement State information to the compilation of information on NRC actions -
l currently available on the NRC Home Page.
Based upon a review of existing NRC policy, procedures and guidarice, NRC staff concluded, with some exceptions, current procedures and practice in the routine exchange of information
' between NRC and Agreement State staff appear to adequately cover the exchange of NRC and Agreement State inspection, investigation and enforcement information. Some modification to NRC procedures have been or are scheduled to be made to improve communications in this i
- area.; For example, Agreement States will receive a copy of the synopsis of all NRC investigations involving NRC licensee activities and, upon request, a redacted version of the full report of investigation will be distributed to the appropriate Agreement State. Additionally, clari*ying statemen_ts will be added to NRC's Management Directive 8.8, Management of
- Allegations, and to NRC's Enforcement Manual to specify that States will be informed of immediate health and safety issues resulting from allegations. NRC Inspection Manual Chapter
. (IMC) 2800, Section 9.02, requires at least one week advance notification of radiation control
' program person.nel in both Agreement and Non-Agreement States for routine NRC inspections as well as, whenever possible, notification of Agreement State radiation contrcl program
' personnel before the start of a reactive inspection. In a February 20,1998 memorandum l.
l(Attachment 3),~ Donald Cool, Director, Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety, H
-. Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, requested NRC Regional counterparts to provide as much advance notice as possible for inspections in Agreement States. The question remains,
- however, whether additional guidance is necessary; thus, the need for this expanded discussion and request for comment.
1 ENCLOSlJRE c
. DISCUSSION:
l The primary issues concern the following: Prior notification to Agreement States of NRC investigations conducted in Agreement States; sharing investigative, inspection and enforcement information, when NRC licensees violate Agreement State requirements and when Agreement State licensees violate NRC requirements; and sharing information having immediate public health and safety significance.
- 1. Communications involvina Investigation Activities
- Under existing NRC procedures for sharing investigative information, NRC does not provide routine State notification prior to entry into a State, either Agreement or non-Agreement, to conduct investigations relating to NRC licensees (either specific or general).- This longstanding practice is based on the need to maintain the integrity of investigations, especially since NRC is required to refer all substantiated wrongdoing cases to the Department of Justice for prosecutorial consideration. Absent an immediate public health and safety threat, the Agreement States are not informed of potential NRC licensee violations of Agreement State
~
- requirements until after the investigation is completed. However, if a potential significant public health and safety concern is identified that must 3 addressed immediately, NRC will promptly
, notify an Agreement State of the safety concern. As noted in the Background section above, NRC will provide ' Agreement States with the synopsis of all NRC investigations involving NRC licensee activities in Agreement States and a redacted version of the full report of investigation will be available to Agreement States upon request.-
At present, there is no wrltten NRC guidance requesting Agreement State notification to NRC of
-Agreement State investigations that may be of interest to NRC. NRC staff is uncertain whether Agreement States may be able to share such information with NRC, given the sensitive nature of investigations and internal State procedures governing the release of such information.
Staff
Conclusions:
1.
Because of the need to maintain investigation integrity, the NRC's position with respect y
to sharing investigative information with the Agreement States remains unchanged.
2.
There is no written ' guidance requesting Agreement State notification to NRC of Agreement State investigations that may be of interest to NRC.
' Questions:
i it Do you agree with the above-stated first conclusion? If not, please provide
, recommendations for improvement in the area of NRC sharing investigative information with A eement States.
' 2.
. Given the general sensitive nature of investigations and specific internal State procedures governing the release of information regarding State investigations, are l
States in a position to share this kind of information with NRC?
l' p7 w-
i 3.
Should a reciprocal, Agreement State exchange 'of investigative information take place
.with NRC7 If so, through what mechanism?!
ll. Communications involvina inspection and Enforcement Activities Section 9 of NRC IMC 2800 addresses NRC communications with Agreement States relative to routine and reactive inspections. In the case of routine NRC irispections in both Agreement and
~
non-Agreement. States, State radiation control program personnel are notified of the inspection at least one week in advance, by telephone or facsimile. Whenever possible, for reactive
~. inspections of NRC licensees located in Agreement States, State radiation contrc,1 program personnel are notified before the start of the inspection ;so that they have an opportunity to accompany the NRC inspector and can refer any public inquiries that may come to the State '
. radiation control program to the appropriate NRC Regional Office. A reactive inspection is 1
identified as a special inspection in response to an incident, allegation, or special information j
7 obtained by NRC (e.g., misadministration reports, other Federal agency interests).
l
-, NRC IMC 1200 addresses communication of results of NRC inspections of Agreement State -
licensees conducting operations _under the reciprocity provisions in 10 CFR 150.20. One of the
. obb ctives of NRC lMC 1200 is to provide information to appropriate State radiation control
. agt ncies and to NRC regarding Agreement State licensees operating in non-Agreement States.
Apg endix ll of NRC IMC 1220 provides that copies of enforcement correspondence shall be sent to the Agreement State authority issuing the license under which the Agreement State licensee is operating.
Section 8.6.3 of NRC Enforcement Manual, NUREG/BR-0195, addresses enforcement actions against Agreement State licensees operating in areas of NRC jurisdiction and details guidance 1
for ensuring Agreement States receive copies of any enforcement correspondence resulting i
from either routine or reactive inspections, including meeting notices for predecisional L
enforcement conferences. In addition, guidance is provided for NRC and Agreement State communication relative to proposed escalated enforcement actions before the enforcement l
' action is issued.~ Although enforcement correspondence is routinely provided by mail to the
' Agreement State that issued the specific license, NRC does not routinely notify Agreement '
States by telephone of escalated notices of violations cnd civil penalty actions taken against
' Agreement State licensees or other non-escalated Notices of Violation.
. Staff
Conclusion:
1.~
. Current NRC guidance and practice with respect to NRC communications with -
Agreement States about NRC inspection and enforcement activities appear sufficient.
L' Questions:
1.
Do you agree with the above-stated conclusion? If not, please provide L
recommendations for improvement or additional guidance relative to NRC communications with Agreement States in the area of inspection and enforcement actions against Agreement State licensees.
i L
J LI 1
_ _. _. u. _._.:_ r.
__1_
7.-
~
2.
Do Agreement States want routine telephone or e-mail notification of:
Escalated notices of violation and civil penalties against Agreement State licensees operating under reciprocity in NRC jurisdiction?
i Non-escalated notices of violation?
p Predecisional enforcement conferences? Orders?.
p
- There currently is no guidance to' Agreement States delineating a process for Agreement State l
J notification to NRC of inspection and enforcement activities of potential regulatory interest to
. NRC. There is also no specific written guidance that requests an Agreement State to notify L
NRC of its ability to prohibit individuals from licensed activities, and share information about
~such prohibitions. ~
Staff
Conclusions:
1.
' NRC staff believes the general exchange of information that occurs between Agreement States and NRC has been and will continue to be sufficient to provide NRC with information about significant Agreement State inspection and enforcement activities.
2.
In order to address the recommendations in the June 12,1998 SRM, NRC is interested in the States' ability to prohibit individuals from involvement in licensed activities and, if I
. so, whether States can provide NRC with information on individuals prohibited from L
involvement in licensed activities.
- Questions:
t
~
1.
Do you agree with the above-stated conclusions? If not, please delineate some g
l acceptable approaches for Agreement States to provide information concerning
. enforcement actions taken against NRC licensees working in Agreement State jurisdictions that are of special concern.
J 2.
Should Agreement States routinely provide NRC information which includes the names of prohibited!ndividuals and significant actions taken against Agreement State licensees?
IIL Communications on Sianificent Public Health and Safety Issues l
l
- NRC utilizes several mechanisms to share information with Agreement States having significant i public health and safaty significance relative to NRC inspections, investigations and j
L enforcement actions. They include Preliminary Notices of Events or Unusual Occurrences, i
u
!Information Notices, and All Agreement States Letters.' Agreement States are notified of issues
.g that are the subject of escalated enforcement actions, including immediately effective orders.
E The NRC inspection Manual and Enforcement Manual contain statements that generally address the' identification and communication of imrnediate action relative to NRC inspections, 4
- investigations and enforcement actionsi Additional guidance will be added to NRC j
' Management Directive 8.8, Management of Allegations, and NRC'.s Enforcement Manual to
- more explicitly state the need for NRC staff to notify Agreement States of immediate health and r
l 4
t c
ht L
L L
l safety issues. Finally, through existing guidance to Agreement States and routine day-to-day l
contact and exchange of information, Agreement States share with NRC information having immediate public health and safety significance.
Staff
Conclusion:
l 1.
NRC and Agreeraent State existing guidance and practice appear sufficient to mutually l
inform Agreement States and NRC of information having significant or immediate public l
health and safety significance.
l Question:
l 1.
Do you agree with the ~above-stated conclusion? If not, please provide recommendations for improvement in the area of NRC and Agreement State sharing of inform.ation having significant or immediate public health and safety significance.
l Attachments:
I As stated i
i l
l l'
5
}
N UNITED STATES
~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.
wasswoTow. o.c.seess.aeos June 3. 1996 ommus Mr. John E. Sweeney-Commissioner of Labor State of New York i
Department of Labor-
' Governor N. Averell Harriman l
. 5 tate Office Buildin Campus i
' Building 12 Room 50 Albany,- New York 12240 q
Daar Commissioner Sweeney:
{
1 am responding to your letter of April 19,1996, in which you expressed-concern that recent Nuclear Regulatory Commission investigation activities appeared to' violate the spirit and letter of the 1962 Agreement between the NRC and the State of New York. As part of our routine exchange-of-information
-. program with Agreement States, the NRC strives to communicate to States expeditiously any-safety information which could affect the public health and safety and the regulation of licensed operations as it becomes available to i
us. However, under current practice and consistent with standard
' investigative procedures, the NRC does not provide routine State notification
- prior to entry into a State to investigate matters relating to NRC-licensed l
pperations. Nevertheless, we recognize that the Agreement State may also have a regulatory interest in the issue under investigation under certain circumstances. Therefore, NRC staff has been requested to review its current
)
- practice.
1 Nith respect to' the December 1995 NRC investi ation in New York State, the Commission believes that the record of zommun cations between NRC and New York j
State's Radiolo ical Health Unit ( U) 13 indicates a responsible and timely flow I
- pf information rom NRC. On Sept r
1995 the NRC Region I staff I
conductedaconferencecallwithNs.R.Aldrich, Director,RHU,todiscuss results of an NRC inspection of one of our licensees and the licensee's response. The call was to inform New York State of allegations of wrongdoing 4
by the NRC licensee which involved the use of licensed material at a temporary
' job site in New York. The staff indicated that the NRC was considering initiation of an investigation. Copies of the inspection report and the licensee response were faxed to RHU on the same day.
On September 20,' 1995,-.the NRC's Office of Investigation.(01), which is charged with the investigation of licensee wrongdoing, initiated an-investigation into the NRC licensee's activities. On November 8, 1995, an 01
.special agent was-informed that in September 19'5, NRC-licensed material was transferred by the NRC licensee to an unlicensed New York company (different from the location identified above), used by that company at its New York
[
__,_.__-___-_~
- r.. '.,
i
=
9,;
Mr. J. E. Sweeney 2
location without any authorization by the RHU, and then returned to the NRC licensee's storage facility. On November 14, 1995, Mr. C. Gordon, Region I State Agreements Officer, contacted Ms. Aldrich by telephone and provided her i
information about the transfer of material into New York State and about the ongoing 01 investigation into the matter. On December 6 and 7, 1995, 0! staff interviewed personnel at the New York facility where the material was allegedly used to corroborate information relating to the NRC licensee. The NRC staff again contacted Ms. Aldrich on December 13, 1995, to inform her that the investigation was continuing. The staff also provided her information which essentially substantiated the earlier allegations.
The Commission remains committed to timely and' responsible exchange of information with the State of New York so that NRC and the State may effectively fulfill our respective responsibilities to protect the public health and safety. We look forward to working with you in the future.
Sincerely, l
i l
l l
I l
l
/....
l l
4*
gun,orInw YORK DEFARTMENT OF LABOR o-Oowsmor W. Avertil Mantman state omce suilding campus Ameny newYork 12240 1
W JOMM E. SWEEMEY commissioner orlabor April 19,1996 1
l 1
Shirley Ann Jacksor., Ph.D.
Chairman
~ U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 1
l
Dear Chairman Jackson:
Under New York State's 1962 Agreen ent with the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRCI. the NRC " discontinued" regulation of certain radiation sources in New York State and New York State assumed regulatory authority. A recent incident involving your agency appears to violate both the spirit and the letter of this Agreement.
On December 7,1995, NRC entered New York State, without our knowledge or consent, to conduct an investigation at a New York State company which is not an NRC licensee conceming events which took place entirely within New York State. Additionally, having come into possession ofinformation during that investigation which indicated that violations had occurred,' NRC failed to transmit this infonnation to our regulatory agency.
The events leading up to this investigation began in September 1995 when the Radiological Health (RHU) was informed by NRC's Region I office that a company licensed by NRC had apparently used radioactive materials in New York State without the required authorization of reciprocity by our RHU. Ree!procity was denied based on this information and on a letter fmm the company acknowledging such inw. A copy offhis denini was pmvided to NRC's Region I office. RHU later obtained information that the company, whose use of radioactive sources had been suspended by NRC, had entered into an agreement with a New York State company to provide them with radioactive sources. This information was also passed on to i
NRC, along with documentation.
l information obtained from Craig Gordon, NRC regional liaison officer, on December 13,1995, indicated that there were two or three other dates when the NRC licensee might j
, have used radiation sources at the New Yod; company.ite without RHU authorization.
" When the inspector visited the site on Febmary 9.1996, to verify this information, he was l informed by the company that NRC investigators had conducted an investigation on December 7,1995. New Yoit State was never infbrmed of this investigation, nor given any infonnation resulting from the investigation.
.Y e
,s t.t., a...
t t.t., ass s ~m w
>=
7
)*
2 The failure of NRC to inform New York State of their actions is not consistent with the terms of our AEreement, nor does it foster a spirit of cooperation. I respectfully request that in the future, NRC notify RHU of any action involving a businen that is within our jurisdiction.
incerely
\\
fu m E. Sweeney /
gmmissioner of t.42r
\\
1 i
I
}
i l
l i
e I
1
/..,
1 *.
c' s
UNffE0 STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION wAsumotow o.c.sessssoot November 19, 1996 emmew l
Mr. John E. Sweeney Commissioner of Labor State of New York Department of Labor-State Office Buildin Campus Building 12, Room 50 Albany, New York 12240
Dear Commissioner Sweeney:
i
'I am responding to your letter of July 18, 1996, regarding the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's:(NRC's) conduct of investigations in New York State.
The NRC, as a Federal agency, has jurisdiction to conduct investigations of its licensees
- activities in all States, including Agreement States.
Nevertheless, I believe that the information you provided highlights the need to consider additional NRC procedures in this area.
The NRC conducts investigations and inspections in order to determine whether NRC licensees are in compliance with NRC requirements.
In the case that I referenced in my June 3,1996 letter, the issue involved a potential violation of NRC requirements by an NRC licensee. Our Office of Investigations (01 was investigating alleged false statements made by an NRC licensee that the N C-licensed material in question was located in Pennsylvania. Based on uns necessary, in 01'g that the sources actually were located in New York, it information suggestins judgment, to ascertain the actual location of the sources in order to complete its investigation.
This is in contrast to the case raised in your letter of July 18,1996, in which New York State had informed the NRC of numerous instances where an NRC licensee had entered New York State without filing the required notices or
' obtaining'the required approval of your Radiological Nealth Unit. As we both agree, NRC has no jurisdiction in this case because it concerns compliance with New York State requirements rather than those of the NRC. However, because an NRC licensee's failure to comply with an Anreement State's l
l requirements may be indicative of failure to comply wLth NRC regulations while conducting business in non-reement States, it is important that timely exchanges of information sho ld occur between the NRC and Agreement States.
l The Commission appreciates your Radiological Health Unit's efforts to keep us informed in this matter.
As a result of this case, the 4RC s$aff s developing guidance that can be
.used to improve communication iiboint, and{ coordination of, tespective NRC and
)
. Agreement State inspection investigation,_and enforcement actions when NRC licensees stolate Agreement State requirements and when Agreement State
~
& C.bl w P spy,
o John E. Sweeney licenseep violate NRC requirements. The staff also will be developing guidaned that documents the current practice of informing the Agreement State of any issue having immediate public health and safety significance within the State. flatters not of an tamediate public health and safety significance 1
ender the State's regulatory authority which are discovered in the course of NRC investt l
art lilunvever,'Jacicn or' inspection of an NRC licensee in an Agreement Statecontinbe'I the individual case circumstances and the need to maintain confidentiality of
)
an investigation, Agreement States will be notified as soon as practicable.
l The NRC staff will coordinate the development of the proposed procedures with the Agreement States.
NRC continues to be available to meet with you to discuss further the specific circumstances of the case to which your correspondence referred, including any enforcement action taken within NRC, jurisdiction.
Please contact Richard,L. Bangart, Director, Office of State Programs, at 301/415-3340,to arrange such a meeting or to discuss this letter.
Sincerely, A --. f / v Shirley Ann Jackson
[*
STA1T, OF MEW YORK INFARTME!W OF LABOR covemorW. AvemilHantman,
State Office Budding Campus t
Aabeny.newYork 1224o 1
m E. SWEIMEY July 18,1996 commissionererimber
' Shirley Ann Jackson, Ph.D.
~
Chairman
~ Lt.S; Nuclear Regulatory Commission
. Washington. D.C. 20555
Dear Chaimun Jackson:
4 I have received your letter of June 3.1996. responding to my April 19,1996 letter, conceming an investig'ation conducted by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission INRC) in New York State. without the knowledge or consent of this agency.
As I p'ointed out in my letter. the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) discontinued
'the exercise of regulatory authority over Atomic Energy Act (AEA) radioactive materials in New York State when it entered into the 1962 Agreenwnt with the state. Under the terms of this Agreement. authority over all use and users of such materials in New York State was transferred to the state. This authority also extends to licensees of the NRC who use AEA -
materials in New York State. Conversely. New York State licensees who use AEA materials cutside of the state. are subject to thejurisdiction of any Agreement State they enter, or NRC's jurisdiction in the case of a non-Agreement State.
I have been informed. for example, that an NRC licensed company was found to have entered New York State on over 30 occasions during 1995, without filing the required notices and obtaining the appmval of our Radiological llealth Unit (RHU). When our RHU informed NRC of their licensee's habitual unauthorized entries into New York State, as a routine exchange ofiniomtation. the RI-lU wa luk) that NRC Iml nojurialidion over the activities ofits licensees in Agreement States and would take no action. While our staff agreed with
. the jurisdictional position and were proceeding with enforcement action against the company, they had thought that NRC would want to take some disciplinary action against a licensee that no consistently misused radioactive sources obtained under an NRC license.
Your response does not address jurisdictional limits, but appears to assume that NRC
- has the authority to enter an Agreement State at will to investigate the conduct of an NRC licensee. Since this is contiary to longstanding precedent, as illustrated. above. and to our ~
understanding of New York State's Agreement with NRC. we would appreciate clarification
. cf the Commission's understanding ofits'junsdiction.
I k'M is,s isi.3 m.mi e m taia3 m. as
%% c s
8 l,,*, "
l l.*,:
i r*
2 As far as the exchange ofinformation on the case at issue is concemed, at no time has our Radiological Health Unit been informed by NRC, that NRC's licensee had transferred control of a radioactive source to an unlicensed New York State company, even though seven snonths have passed since NRC"a investigation in December,1995. The RHU finally obtained this information on its own.
I look forward to your response on this important federal-state jurisdictional issue.
3 l
ince :1y, f QL$wm in E. Sween commissioner of I
4
./
- gn cero y
t UNITE 3 STATES g
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
t WASHINGTON D.C. 2066M001 February 20, 1998 l
l MEMORANDUM TO: A. Randolph Blough, Director Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, RI Douglas M. Collins, Director Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Ril Cynthia D. Pederson, Director Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Rlli Ross A. Scarano, Director Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards, RIV FROM:
Donald A. Cool, Director Division of Industrial and
[/ O'
+
Medical Nuclear Safety, NMSS
SUBJECT:
ADVISEMENT OF AGREEMENT STATES IN ADVANCE OF PERFORMING INSPECTIONS At the February 11,1998, monthly teleconference with the Organization of Agreement States (OAS), concem was expressed that NRC does not provide sufficient advance notice of upcoming NRC inspections to Agreement State regulatory organizations. The Agreement States were said to have difficulty scheduling accompaniments (as observers) because of the often short lead-time available.
The conference call participants were informed that NRC inspection tchedules change quickly and frequently, but NRC would attempt to provide as much advance notice as possible for inspections in Agreement States. Regions should factor this commitment into the inspection scheduling process and provide as much lead time as is possible, consistent with the other factors involved in scheduling.
l l
As a reminder, inspection Manual Chapter 2800, " Materials inspection Program," Section 09.02 l
requires at least one week advance notification of radiation control program perr,onnel in both l
Agreement and non-Agreement States for routine NRC inspections as well as, whenever l
possible, notification of Agreement State radiation control program personnel before the start of a reactive inspection. We realize the difficulties involved in inspection scheduling and l
I CONTACT: Ronald E. Zelac, NMSS/IMNS l
(301) 415-6316 1
1 f
UN Y-
R. Blough, Rl, et. al 2-understand that lead-times of less than one week are sometimes necessary for routine inspections, due to late schedule changes and responses b events. However, please attempt to give Agreement States as much advance notice as possible. We, and the OAS representatives, appreciate your attention to this matter, cc: P. Lohaus, OSP
~ ~ - - - - -
h I