ML20202J565

Informs That NRC Using Integrated Matl Performance Evaluation Program for Evaluation of Agreement State Programs.Integrated Matls Performance Evaluation Program Questionnaire Encl

ML20202J565
Person / Time
Issue date:	11/21/1997
From:	Sollenberger D NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP)
To:	Friedman L NEW YORK, STATE OF
References
NUDOCS 9712110173
Download: ML20202J565 (11)

Text

-. - _ _ _

. Lcurence Friedm:n, Ph.D., Direct:r ,

Bure:u of Rafological H:alth . NOV 2119R New York City Department of He:lth Two Lafayette Street,11th Floor New York cry, NY 10007

Dear Dr. Friedman:

As you are aware, NRO is using the Integrated Materials Performance tivaluation Program (IMPEP) for the evaluation of Agreement State Programs. Per our discussion, I will be the team leader for the IMPEP review of all four New York programs that make up the Agreement State program for the State of New York. The New York City, Bureau of Radiological Health

s. program review is scheduled for January 26-30,1998. T'e team includes Duncan White, Regional State Agreements Officer, NRC Region 1; James Cameron, Sr., Materials inspector, NRC Reg'on 3; and Michael Stephens, Acting Environmental Administrator, State of Florida.

Enclosed is the document, " Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program Questionnaire." The questionnaire is being fumished to you on a computer disk in Wordperfect 6.1 format as wall as in printed form. I ask that yot, send your responses by Intemet (DMS4@NRCLJ)V) or return the disk to me by January 2,1998. 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 and submit the document by the due date.

Part A of the questionnaire contains questions on the common performance indicators. Part B contains questions on the non-common performance ir,dicators for Agreement States. 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 prepared prior to the IMPEP team's arrival I request that you set up an appointment with the appropriate management official to discuss the results of the IMPEP review of the New York City program on January 30,1998. A separate meeting with senior managers from all four New York programs to discuss the findings for the State will be scheduled approximately two weeks following the last program review.

According to the current schedule, this meeting would be in mid April 1998.

If you have questions, please call me at 3G !-415-2819.

Sincerely Dd@Bdby:

i

' 9712110173 971121 PDR O' *i' O M I h 50f STPRO ESON Dennis M. Sollenberger, Team Leader Office of State Programs

Enclosures:

As stated cc w/o Enis.: Benjamin Mojica, M.D., M.P.H.

Acting Commissioner, New York City Department of Health r'

[ Jack P. Spath, NYSERDA Distribution: , DCD (SP01) PDR (YES) LRakovan iI DIR RF '1G KSchndider JCameron, Rlli l SDroggitis ' ^ ~ C ' 3MStephens, FL TO'Brien New York City File DWhite, RI DOCUMENT NAME: G:tDMStNYlMPEPtNYC .TR.DMS m.c.ev. . cop or mm oocum.nunscae. m m. bor c pd.poue encnmenvenemw. r Acom we auenmenvenemw. v = no ew OFFlCE OSP % l OS M OSP:DifR NAME DSollenbercjer:kk PHLoheds RLBangart' W 0 DATE 11/21/97 m 11/2 i97 11pV97

< 6 OSP FILE CODE: SP-AG-20L.1 Wggg h-g s'., @A Illl.l l.lill.!!!I.lil.ll!!i ll

e na .

p k '

UNITED STATES s j NUCLEAR RE2ULATORY COMMISSION k j WASHINGTON, D.C. 30606-0001

\g/ November 21, 1997 Laurence Friedman, Ph.D., Director Bureau of Radiological Health New York City Department of Health Two Lafayet'e Street,11th Floor New York City, NY 10007

Dear Dr. Friedman:

As you ere aware, NRC is using the Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) for the evaluatidn of Agreement State Programs. Per our discussion, I will be the team leader for the IMPEP review of all four New York programs that make up the Agreement State pregram for the State of New York. The New York City, Bureau of Radiological Health program review is scheduled for January 26-30,1998. The team includes Duncan White, Regional State Agreements Officer, NRC Region 1; James Cameron, Sr., Materials inspector, NRC Region 3; and Michael Stephens, Acting Environmental Administrator. State of Florida.

Enclosed is the document, " Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program Questionnaire." The questionnaire is being fumished to you on a computer disk in Wordperfect 6.1 format as well as in prit,ted form. I ask that you send your responses by Intemet (DMS4@NRC. GOV) or retum the disk to me by Jr.nuary 2,1998. I am sending the document and diu in advance of the IMPEP review in order to provide time for you to allocate the staff resources necessary to complete and submit the document by the due date.

Part A of the questionnaire contains questions on the common performance indicators. Part B contains questions on the non-common performance indiators for Agreement States. 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 prepared prior to the IMPEP team's arrival.

I request that you set up a'n appointment with the appropriate management official to discuss the results of the IMPEP review of the New York City program on January 30,1998. c.

separate meeting with senior managers from all four New York programs to discuss the fir. dings for the State will be scheduled approximately two weeks following the last pregram review.

According to the current schedule, th,a meeting would be in mid April 1998.

If you have questions, please call me at 301415-2819.

Sincerely wN '

Dennis M. Solen rger, Tea eader Office of State Programs

Enclosures:

1 As stated cc w/o Encts.: Benjamin Mojica, M.D., M.P.H.

Acting Commissioner, New York City Department of Health Jack P. Spath, NYSERDA

e

+

Approved by OMB' No. 3150-0183 Expires 4/30/98 f'

i INTEGRATED MATERIALS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROGRAM QUESTIONNAIRE ,

Name of State / Regional Program _ _

Reporting Period: Month XX, [ YEAR], to Month XX, [ YEAR)

- A. COMMON PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ,

l. Status of Materials inspection Program -

1, Please prepare a table identifying the licenses with inskctions that are overdue by more than 25% of the scheduled frequor.cy set out in NRC Inspection Manual Chapter 2800. The list should include initial inspections that are overdue.

L Insp. Frequency.

Licensee Name (Years) Due Date Months O/D

'2. Do you currently have an action plan for completing overdue inspections? ' If so, l please describe the plan or provide a written copy with your response to this F - questionr., ire.

3. Please identify individual licensees or groups of licensees the State / Region is-

, inspecting more or less frequently than called for in NRC Inspection Manual Chapter 2800 and state the reason for the change. ,

I i

i l

V l l Estimated burden per response to comply with this voluntary collection request: 60 nours. Forward comments regarding burden estimate to the Infonnation and Records

+-

Management Branch (T-6 F33), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-L 0001, and to the Paperwork Reduction Project (3150-0052), Office of Management and Budget,

! Washington, DC 20503. NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to

! respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

i -

___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . . . _ . . . _ _ . - ~ . , . .-. - _. -

. _ . . _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ ._ .. _. . ~ . . . ___ _

1 i  : 4.- . Please comploie the foibwing table for licensees granted reciprocity during the reporting period.

Number of Licensees Granted Reciprocity - Number of Licensees Priority Permits Each Year - inspectsJ Each Year Service Ueensees performin(, YR YR teletherapy and irrediator source YR YR installations or changes YR ' YR YR YR YR YR 1 YR YR YR YR YR YR YR YR 2 YR YR YR YR YR YR

YM YR 3 YR YR YR YR YR YR

4 All Other 1

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 yade to your written inspection procedures during the reporting period?

8. Prepare a table showing the number and types of supervisory accompaniments

- made during the review period. Include:

2

4 j

inspector Supervisor License Cat. Dait t

9. Describe intemal procedures for conducting supervisory accompaniments of l inspectors in the field, if supervisory accompaniments were documented, please j provide copies of the documentation for each accompaniment.

}~ 10. Describe or provide an update on your instrumentation and methods of j calibration. Are all instruments property calibrated at the prasent time?

lll. Technical Staffino and Trainina

- 11. Please provide a staffing plan, or comple.te a listing using the suggested format below, of the professional (technical) person-years of effort applied to the 3

agreement or radioactive material program by individual. Include the name, g position, and, for Agreement Sttles, the fraction of time spent in the following

! areas: administration, materials licensirig & compliance, emergency response, i LLW, U-mills, other. If these regulator) responsibilities are divided between

offices, the table should be consolidate d to include all personnel contributing to j the radioactive materials program.^ 1nt.lude all vacancies and identify all senior i- personnel assigned to monitor werk eljunior personnel, if consultants were

. used to carry out the program's radioactive materials responsibilities, include j' their efforts.- The table heading should be; i

l NAME POSITION AREA OF EFFORT EIES i

12. Please provide a 1isting of all new professional personnel hired since the last review, ind% ate the degree (s) they received, if applicable, and additional training and years oi e perience in health physics, or other disciplines, if appropriate.

l 13. Please list all professional staff who have not yet met the qualification requirements of license r6 viewer / materials inspection staff (for NRC, inspection Manual Chapters 1246; for Agreement States, please describe your

, qualifications requirements for materials hcense reviewers and inspectors). For l each, list the courses or equivalent training / experience they need to attend and a j tentative schedule for completion of these requirements.

i 14. Please identify the technical staff who left the RCP/ Regional DNMS program

!' during this period.

L 15. List the vacant positions in each program, the length of time each position has l been vacant, and a brief summary of efforts to fill the vacancy.

i 1

2 l- 3 I

i

IV. Technical Quality of Licensino Actions

16. Please identify any major, unusual, or complex licenses which were issued, received a major amendment, terminated, decommissioned, bankruptcy notification or renewed in this period. Also identify any new or amended licenses that now require emergency plans.

17. Discuss any variances in licensing policies and procedures or exemptions from the regulations granted during the review period.

18. What, if any, changes were made in your written licensing procedures (new procedures, updates, policy memoranda, etc.) during the reporting period?

19. For NRC Regions, identify by licensee name, license number ar.d type, any renewal applications that have beer pending for one year or more.

V. Resoonses to incidents and Allecations

20. Please provide a list of the reportable incidents (i.e., medical 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 on Nuclear Material Event Reporting in Agreement States for additional guidance.) that occurred in the Region / State during the review period. For Agreement States, information included in previous submittals to NRC need not be repeated (i.e., those submitted under OMB 3150-0178). The list should be in the following format:

LICENSEE NAME LICENSE # DATE OF INCIDENT /REPQBI TYPE OF INCIDENT 21, During this review period, did any incidents oct,ur that involved equipment or source failure or approvod 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 NRC? For Regions, was an appropriate and timely PN generated?

22. For laddents involving failure of equ:pment or sources, was information on the incident provided to the agency responsible for evaluation of the device for an essessment of possible generic design deficiency? Please provide details for each case.

23. In the period covered by this review, were there any cases involving ponible 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.

4 i

4 t

a. For Agreement States, please identify any allegations referred to your program 4

by the NRC that have not been closed, t

!- VI. General

25. Please prepare a aummary of the status of the State's or Region's ac* ions taken in

[ response to the comments and recommendations following the last review.

i

26. Provide a brief description of your program's strengths and weaknesses. 'ihese strengths

and weaknessas shculd be supported by examples of successes, problems or difficulties

which occurred dunng this review period, i

j B. NON-COMMON PERFORMANCE INDICATORS i

1. Lealslation and Proaram Elements Raouired for Coir.netaility

27. Please list all currently effective legislation that affects the radiation control program

, (RCP).

i

[ '28. Are your regulations subject to a " Sunset" or equivalent law? If so, explain and include the next expiration date for your regulations, j

i f

29. Please complete the enclosed table based on NRC chronology of amendments. Identify -

those that have not been adopted by the State, explain why they were not adopted, and 3 discuss any actions being taken to adopt them. Identify the regulations that the State has l 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 normal length of time anticipated to j complete each step.

l - II. Sealed Source and Device Progtam i

31. Prepare e table listing new and reviced SS&D registrations of sealed sources and devices

!_ issued durii,i, the review period. The tab!e heading should be:

i.

SS&D Manufacturer, Type of

}- Registry Distributor or Device Date

__ Number Custom User or Source imaggd e

32. What guides, standards and procedures are used to evaluate registry applications?

i

33. Please include information on the following questions in Section A, as they apply to the Sealed Source and Device Program

l I

5 1

i l

i

y*

N Technical Stamng and Training - A.lli.11-15 l Technical Quality of Licensing Actions - A.IV.16-18

Responses to incidents and Allegations - A.V.20 23 j lll. Low-Level Waste Prooram

34. Please include information on the following questions in Section A, as they apply to the Low-level Waste Program:

Status of Materials Inspection Program - A.I.1-3, A.I.6 Technical Quality of Inspections - A.ll.7-10 Technical Stamng and Training - A.lll.11-15

Technical Quality of Licensing Actions - A.IV.16-18 j Responses to incidents and Allegations - A.V.20-20

, !V. ' ('ranium Mill Prooram i

F

35. Please include information on the following questions in Section A, as they apply to the

Uranium Mill Program

I Status of Materials inspection Program - A.I.1-3, A.I.6 2

Technical Quali+y of Inspections - A.ll.7-10 Technical Staffing and Training - A.lll.11-15 j Technical Quality of Licensing Actions - A.IV.16-18 i

Responses to Incidents and Allegations - A.V.20-23 6

rI l- ' TABLE FOR QUESTION 29. .

OR -t

, DATE DATE 10 CTR RULE DUE ADOPTED ' CURRENT EXP' CTED :

STATUS ADOPTION Any amendmerd due prior to 1991. Idenhiy each reguishon (refer to the Chronology of ..

Amendments) l Decommessoning; 7/2751 Parts 30,40. 70 l

! Emergency Planning. 4/743 i i Parts 30,40. 70 -  !

l '!

Standards for Protection Agair'st Radehon, 1/154  :!

Part 20

~

Safety Requremords for Radiographec 1/10/94 "

Equipnsnt; Part 34  ;

, 1 Nohficahon of Inodents. 10f15/94 -l Parts 20,30,31,34,39,40,70 i Quahty Management Program and 1/27/95 .i 1 Misadenistrations; Part 35 i

. i Licensing and Radetion Safety Requwements 7/1/96  !

for Irradetors: Part 36 I

, Definshon of Land Disposal 7/22/96 [

and Waste Site OA Program; Part 61

}

r Decommisssoning Recordkeepi.sg: Docu- 10/25/96 .

i mentation Additions; Parts 30,40. 70 i  ;

--- t

, . i Self-Guarantee as an Addebonal Financial 1128/97 i Mechanism; Parts 30. 40,70 /. -

[

Uranium Mill Tailirp: Conformmg to EPA 7/1/97 l Standards; Part 40 i

^ i

Timenness in Dommmissioneg 8/15/97 f  ;

Parts 30,40,70 / i Prefueration. Transfer far Commercial Dis- 1/1/98: 1

m. and Use of Byproduct Material for l i Lacal Use, Parts 30. 32,35

~

r 7 <

i t

t

_ _ _ - - - _ . - - - - _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ - . - . _ _-- . - - -_-... _ - . _ _ ~ _ _ _-.. - . - - .. -- - .- . . . . _

m .__._.._-..m-

.i . ,

OR-DATE- DATE '-

[

10 CFR RULE DUE ADOPTED CURRENT EXPECTED  :

STATUS ADOPTION _  :!

' .i Frequency of Medical Exammahons for Use of 3/13/06 i Respiratory Protection Equepment {

Low-LevelWeste Shipment Mansfest 3/1/98 I informahon and Repo%

-f k Performance Requiremer's for Radiography - 6/30/98 '

, Equipment Radiabon Protection Requwements. Amended 8/14/98 i Definitions and Criteria

, Clanlicahon of Decommissioning Funding 11/24/98 Requwements l 10 CFR Part 71: CompetitWilly with the 4/1/99 Intemahonal Atomic Energy Agency .l Medical Admmestration of Radiabon and 10f20f98

~

l Radioactwe Malenals  !

i Termmabon or Transfer of Lscensed ActMties. 8/16#99 l Recordkeeping Requerements  ;

! Resolubon of D sol Regulation of Arbome 1AWOO_

Efiluents of Radioactwe Malenals; C'sean Air Act 4 Fissile Material 04 . e. and Exemptions 2/10!00 l:

Recogmtion of Agreement State Licenses in 2/27/00 Areas Under Exclussve Federal Junedicbon Withm an A,n.. a State

. 6 Criteria for the Release of IndMduals 5/29f00 '

Admwwstered Radsoactrve Malenal Licenses for Industrial Radiography and 6/27/00 :I Radiabon Safety Requwements for industnal i Radography Opershons: Final Rule  !

-Radiologscal Criteria for License Terminabon 8/2000 i .;

l

?

I a 3

~

MATERIALS REQUESTED TO BE AVAILABLE FOR

THE ON9lTE PORTION OF AN IMPEP REVIEW i

. ORGANIZATION CHARTS Clean, sized 8% X 11" including names and positions o One showing positions from Governor down to Radiation Control Program Director (RCPD) o One showing positior's of current radiation control program with RCFD as Head ,

o Equivalent charts for LLRW and mills programs, if applicable l

LICENSE OSTS i o Printouts of current licenses, showing total, as follows:

Name License # Location License Type Priority Last Inspection Due Date -

Sort dphabetically Also, sort by due date and by priority (if possible)

THE FOLLOWING LISTS o - List of open license cases, with date of original request, and dates of follow up actions '

o List of licenses terminated during review period.

O Copy of current log or other document used to track licensing actions a Copy of current log or other document used to track inspcetions -

o List of Inspection frequency by license type y a Listing or log of all incidents 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 -

'o ~ Technical procedures for licensing, model a Enforcement procedures, including licenses, review guides . procedures for escalated enforcement, a SS&D review procedures severity levels, civil penalties (as applicable) o Instrument calibration records a Ccpies of job descriptions

• Jo inspection procedures and guides o inspection report forms 9