ML20206R716: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 14: Line 14:
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| page count = 8
| page count = 8
| project =
| stage = Meeting
}}
}}


Line 38: Line 40:
Roger L. Suppes                                                        DEC S 01998 NRC staff comments in the decommissioning program area focused on the need to complete final decommissioning procedures and to understand the workload impact of a reference in the formal application to preparing Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) in support of decommissioning actions. Based on the discussions, we understand that Ohio, on a case-by-case basis, will prepare supporting environmental analyses for decommissioning actions. We understand that your assessm.ent of the level of effort required to carry out these analyses is minimal and will not require additional Ohio staff resources beyond those previously identified for decommissioning work. We consider this comment to be closed.
Roger L. Suppes                                                        DEC S 01998 NRC staff comments in the decommissioning program area focused on the need to complete final decommissioning procedures and to understand the workload impact of a reference in the formal application to preparing Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) in support of decommissioning actions. Based on the discussions, we understand that Ohio, on a case-by-case basis, will prepare supporting environmental analyses for decommissioning actions. We understand that your assessm.ent of the level of effort required to carry out these analyses is minimal and will not require additional Ohio staff resources beyond those previously identified for decommissioning work. We consider this comment to be closed.
NRC staff indicated that they had completed the review of selected Ohio licensing and inspection procedures, and closed out NRC staff comments on the procedures through discussion with Ohio staff, except for procedures in the decommissioning program area. As noted above, all procedures for the decommissioning program have not yet been completed.
NRC staff indicated that they had completed the review of selected Ohio licensing and inspection procedures, and closed out NRC staff comments on the procedures through discussion with Ohio staff, except for procedures in the decommissioning program area. As noted above, all procedures for the decommissioning program have not yet been completed.
You agreed to provide to NRC staff, for review during December, copies of the two key programmatic decommissioning procedures and the revised decommissioning policy guidance, and to identify those sections of the NRC decommissioning handbook which Ohio plans to apply in its program. When the NRC staff review of these procedures is complete. NRC staff will have completed its formal review of Ohio program procedures and guidance. In a letter dated November 30,1998, you supplied the necessary information and staff has completed its review of the procedures. We consider this comment to be closed.
You agreed to provide to NRC staff, for review during December, copies of the two key programmatic decommissioning procedures and the revised decommissioning policy guidance, and to identify those sections of the NRC decommissioning handbook which Ohio plans to apply in its program. When the NRC staff review of these procedures is complete. NRC staff will have completed its formal review of Ohio program procedures and guidance. In a {{letter dated|date=November 30, 1998|text=letter dated November 30,1998}}, you supplied the necessary information and staff has completed its review of the procedures. We consider this comment to be closed.
With respect to scheduling, NRC staff had previously indicated that staff would propose to the Commission publication of the Agreement in the Federal Reaister for public review and comment based on your commitment to completing staffing of the agreement materials program, and assuming that all other significant issues were resolved. Remaining significant issues included differences between the NRC and Ohio approaches to license termination under restricted release conditions and comments C.1 and C.2 identified in enclosure 3. The Commission has accepted Ohio's approach to license termination under restricted release conditions (See enclosure 4) and you agreed during the meeting to provide responses to comments C.1 and C.2 of the attachment by the end of December 1998. When the remaining significant issues are closed, NRC staff will forward a proposal to the Commission to publish the Agreement in the Federal Reaister based on the Ohio commitment to complete the staffing of the program.
With respect to scheduling, NRC staff had previously indicated that staff would propose to the Commission publication of the Agreement in the Federal Reaister for public review and comment based on your commitment to completing staffing of the agreement materials program, and assuming that all other significant issues were resolved. Remaining significant issues included differences between the NRC and Ohio approaches to license termination under restricted release conditions and comments C.1 and C.2 identified in enclosure 3. The Commission has accepted Ohio's approach to license termination under restricted release conditions (See enclosure 4) and you agreed during the meeting to provide responses to comments C.1 and C.2 of the attachment by the end of December 1998. When the remaining significant issues are closed, NRC staff will forward a proposal to the Commission to publish the Agreement in the Federal Reaister based on the Ohio commitment to complete the staffing of the program.
In our letter of October 18,1998, we enclosed an Elapsed-day Milestone Schedule that provided an estimate of the time to complete the Agreement, sign it, and have it become effective. We requested your views on this approach to completing the Agreement. During the November 19 meeting, you expressed concern on the length of the schedule and asked if additional actions could be taken to reduce the remaining time required to complete the agreement. You noted the current schedule had potential resource impacts for Ohio licensees.
In our letter of October 18,1998, we enclosed an Elapsed-day Milestone Schedule that provided an estimate of the time to complete the Agreement, sign it, and have it become effective. We requested your views on this approach to completing the Agreement. During the November 19 meeting, you expressed concern on the length of the schedule and asked if additional actions could be taken to reduce the remaining time required to complete the agreement. You noted the current schedule had potential resource impacts for Ohio licensees.

Latest revision as of 04:37, 6 December 2021

Informs That Ltr Documents Areas of Discussion & Commitments Made During 981119 Meeting Between NRC & Ohio Staff.During Meeting NRC Staff Comments on Formal Application for Agreement Submitted by Governor Voinovich Discussed
ML20206R716
Person / Time
Issue date: 12/30/1998
From: Bangart R
NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP)
To: Suppes R
OHIO, STATE OF
Shared Package
ML20206R720 List:
References
NUDOCS 9901200129
Download: ML20206R716 (8)


Text

.- .-- .- ._. . .-

% f regg

[ k UNITED STATES g g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

$ WASHINGTON, D.C. 20666-0001

% p!g December 30, 1998 Mr. Roger L. Suppes, Chief Bureau of Radiation Protection Ohio Department of Health 35 East Chestnut Street Columbus, OH 43266-0118

Dear Mr. Suppes:

This letter documents the areas of discussion and comrnitments made during the November 19, 1998 meeting between the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and Ohio staff. During that meeting, NRC staff comments on the formal application for an Agreement submitted by Governor Voinovich were discussed. The discussions focused on the proposed Ohio program element for the evaluation of safety information on sealed sources and devices (SS&D), Ohio guidance for decommissioning of licensed facilities, and the projected schedule for completing the Agreement. Copies of the meeting agenda and the NRC staff comments are enclosed.

The discussion of the SS&D program element focused on the technical training and experience requirements for SS&D reviewers, the demonstration of proficiency required to meet the criteria listed in NRC Management Directive (MD) 5.6, and inconsistencies in text in the SS&D program guidance documentation submitted with the formal application. NRC staff agreed to providing a list of educational subjects and specialized training courses in the SS&D area. NRC staff further agreed to provide on-the-job training (OJT) for two Ohio staff members, and to work with the Ohio staff to complete the development of, and to eliminate the inconsistencies in, the Ohio SS&D guidance documentation. NRC staff also agreed to document the performance of each Ohio staff member during the OJT in the areas covered.

As a part of discussions in this area, you agreed to further develop your training and qualification program for SS&D reviewers to include the criteria in MD 5.6. You also confirmed acceptance of NRC's offer to provide OJT in the conduct of SS&D reviews for two members of your staff in December 1998. You also agreed that Ohio staff would work with NRC staff during December to resolve documentation inconsistencies. Subsequently, two Ohio staff members did complete OJT at NRC during the weeks of November 30 and December 7,1998, and another Ohio staff member worked with NRC staff on the program documentation during the week of December 7.

During the discussion, you inquired about the process Ohio should follow to ' quality" an initial individual in the SS&D area (i.e. certify the first SS&D reviewer as having independent signatory

, authority). We believe that determination should be based on the individual having fulfilled l requirements of Ohio's training and qualification plan as determined by you, as Chief of the l Bureau of Radiation Protection. However, please note that we do not believe it would be l appropriate, unless specifically provided for in your plan, to designate another staff member I

with authority to grant certification, unless that individual is a qualified reviewer with independent signatory authority. j g1200129981230 l STPRO ESGOH PDR ,

C44~

NRC HLE CMTB M se_fM

.. f

(

Roger L. Suppes DEC S 01998 NRC staff comments in the decommissioning program area focused on the need to complete final decommissioning procedures and to understand the workload impact of a reference in the formal application to preparing Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) in support of decommissioning actions. Based on the discussions, we understand that Ohio, on a case-by-case basis, will prepare supporting environmental analyses for decommissioning actions. We understand that your assessm.ent of the level of effort required to carry out these analyses is minimal and will not require additional Ohio staff resources beyond those previously identified for decommissioning work. We consider this comment to be closed.

NRC staff indicated that they had completed the review of selected Ohio licensing and inspection procedures, and closed out NRC staff comments on the procedures through discussion with Ohio staff, except for procedures in the decommissioning program area. As noted above, all procedures for the decommissioning program have not yet been completed.

You agreed to provide to NRC staff, for review during December, copies of the two key programmatic decommissioning procedures and the revised decommissioning policy guidance, and to identify those sections of the NRC decommissioning handbook which Ohio plans to apply in its program. When the NRC staff review of these procedures is complete. NRC staff will have completed its formal review of Ohio program procedures and guidance. In a letter dated November 30,1998, you supplied the necessary information and staff has completed its review of the procedures. We consider this comment to be closed.

With respect to scheduling, NRC staff had previously indicated that staff would propose to the Commission publication of the Agreement in the Federal Reaister for public review and comment based on your commitment to completing staffing of the agreement materials program, and assuming that all other significant issues were resolved. Remaining significant issues included differences between the NRC and Ohio approaches to license termination under restricted release conditions and comments C.1 and C.2 identified in enclosure 3. The Commission has accepted Ohio's approach to license termination under restricted release conditions (See enclosure 4) and you agreed during the meeting to provide responses to comments C.1 and C.2 of the attachment by the end of December 1998. When the remaining significant issues are closed, NRC staff will forward a proposal to the Commission to publish the Agreement in the Federal Reaister based on the Ohio commitment to complete the staffing of the program.

In our letter of October 18,1998, we enclosed an Elapsed-day Milestone Schedule that provided an estimate of the time to complete the Agreement, sign it, and have it become effective. We requested your views on this approach to completing the Agreement. During the November 19 meeting, you expressed concern on the length of the schedule and asked if additional actions could be taken to reduce the remaining time required to complete the agreement. You noted the current schedule had potential resource impacts for Ohio licensees.

NRC staff committed to examine our ability to reduce the current schedule and to completing the Agreement as early as is practical.

We have examined the schedule and believe the remaining time required to complete the agreement can be reduced through: (1) further efforts to complete the final processing steps in

- parallel (i.e., publish the federal register notice announcing the proposed agreement for public review and comment shortly after informing the Commission of the staff's intent to publish), and

Roger L. Suppes  !DEC 8 01998 (2) by requesting expeditious NRC Office review and concurrence on necessary internal processing documents (e.g. staff assessment of the Ohio program, commission information l paper and proposed federal register notice). The extent of the reduction will depend on the l timely completion of commitments as outlined in this letter, our ability to complete additional steps in parallel and finally, as previously indicated, we will defer signing of the agreement, and I thus its effective date, until the Ohio program completes staffing in accordance with the  !

application.

l If you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. Richard Blanton of my staff at (301) 415-2322 or by E-mail at RLBONRC. GOV.

Sincerely, i 1( t'41 Ric ard Bangart, Director i Office of State Programs

Enclosures:

As stated l

l I

i l

l l

l i

Roger L. Suppes DEC 3 01998 (2) by requesting expeditious NRC Office review and concurrence on necessary internal processing documents (e.g. staff assessment of the Ohio program, commission information paper and proposed federal register notice). The extent of the reduction will depend on the timely completion of commitments as outlined in this letter, our ability to complete additionet steps in parallel and finally, as previously indicated, we will defer signing of the agreement, and thus its effective date, until the Ohio program completes staffing in accordance with the application.

If you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. Richard Blanton of my staff at (301) 415-2322 or by E-mail at RLB@NRC. GOV.

Sincerely, Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs

Enclosures:

As stated Distribution:

DIR RF DCD (SP07)

SDroggitis PDR (YES()

HN:wsome, OGC EWcinstein, AEOD JLynch, Rlli Ohio File ,

DOCUMENT NAME: G:\RLB\NOV19MT5.WPD f/ *See previous concurrenca.

T 4 receive a co my of thle document, Indicate in the box: "C' = Co yy withcHg att nt/ enclosure "E* = Cc4n with attachment /enrjosure *N* = No copy OFFICE OSP l OSP:DDl OGC U P NMSS Rlli OSP:Dfj. /

NAME RLBlanton:gd:kk PHLohaus FCameron CJPaperiello CPederson RLBangfift/b DATE 12/18/98* 12/18/98* 12/{0/98 12/23/98* 12/28/98* 12/45/98 OSP FILE CODE: SP-NA-15 )

I

. l

/

i Roger L. Suppes /

2) by requesting expeditious NRC Office review and concurrence on necessary internal processing documents (e.g. staff assessment of the Ohio program, commission information

( paper and proposed federal register notice). The extent of the reduction will depend on the i timely completion of commitments as outlined in this letter /our ability to complete additional steps in parallel and finally, as previously indicated, we will defer signing of the agreement, and thus its effective date, until the Ohio program completes staffing in accordance with the application.

/

/

I If you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. Richard Blanton of my staff at (301) 415-2322 or by E-mail at RLB@NRC. GOV. l Sincerelyj/

l l

Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs l

l

Enclosures:

As stated j l

l l

, Distribution:

l DIR RF DCD (SP07) l SDroggitis PDR (YES/)

l HNewsome, OGC l EW;instein, AEOD l JLynch, Rlli /

Ohio File DOCUMENT NAME: G:\RLB\NOV19MTS.WPD l rw. . .. w oe w. ooeum.ni, inee.i. in tw. % n v . co >v m .n.enm nvencio.u v . copo -e .n.ern nl newum r. No copy OFFICE nOJIP C- OSP: $ d iOGC l NMSS 8 ll W I (1 OSP:D l 1

NAME MLT4nt)n:gd PHLoh w f I FCamaron CJPaperiello C%!derson RLBangart DATE Y12/9/98 12//d/98 12/ /98 12/ /98 12/M/98 12/ /98

) OSP Fl& CODE: SP-NA-15

+ -

3 l ..

1 .

Roger L. Suppes ,

?

' i I

2) by requesting expeditious NRC Office review and concurrence on necessary intemal processing documents (e.g. staff assessment of the Ohio' program, commission information paper and proposed federal register notice). The extent of the reduction will depend on the

! timely completion of commitments as outlined in this letter, our ability to complete additional l steps in parallel and finally, as previously indicated, we pill defer signing of the agreement, and thus its effective date, until the Ohio program completes staffing in accordance with the application.

1 if you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. R chard Blanton of my staff at '

(301) 415-2322 or by E-mail at RLB@NRC. GOV.

Sincerely, Richard L. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs

Enclosures:

l As stated I

l

/ l I

/

Distribution:

DIR RF / DCD (SP07)

SDroggitis PDR (YES/)

HN;wsome, OGC l EW;instein, AEOD  !

JLynch, Rlli Ohio File /

l DOCUMENT NAME: G:\RLB\NOV19MTS.WPD Tn w. . co sy anni. ooeum.nundie.i. in in. iim v . co >y wnnout en.cnm.nv.nemum r - cop, wan .n.cnm nu.ncio um w . No copy OFFICE nOR lC- OSP:$$1 OGC l NMSS Rlli OSP:D l NAME R LVidnthn:gd PHLoh wh" ) FCameron CJPaperiello mi CPederson RLBangart DATE T12/@/98 12//f/98 12/ /98 12/M/98 12/ /98 12/ /98 OSP FILE CODE: SP-N A-15 I

i

i i

Roger L. Suppes L

2) by requesting expeditious NRC Officerence review and concur on necessary internal /

processing documents (e.g. staff assessment of the Ohio program, commission information paper and proposed federal register notice). The extent of the reduction will depend on the timely completion of commitments as outlined in this lette/, our ability to complete additional steps in parallel and finally, as previously indicated, we will defer signing of the agreement, and thus its effective date, until the Ohio program completes staffing in accordance with the application.

if you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. Richard Blanton of my staff at (301) 415-2322 or by E-mail at RLB@NRC. GOV.

Sincerely,

/

/

RichardfL. Bangart, Director Office of State Programs l

Enclosures:

/

As stated I

/

/

l

/

/

l

  • i l

/

/

I i

l Distribution: /

DIR RF DCD (SP07)

SDroggitis / PDR (YES()

HN wsome, OGC EW:instein, AEOD JLynch, Rlli Ohio File DOCUMENT NAME: G:\RLB\NOV19MT5.WPD <

TT receive a co >y of this document, Indicate in the bgq *Q" = Co >y without attachment / enclosure "E* = Cop" with attachmerit/ enclosure *N" = No copy OFFICE AJIf_ C- OSP: $ d OGC NMSS Rlli l OSP:D WAME MLWnt)n:gd PHLoh19f )

FCameron CJPaperiello CPederson RLBangart DATE G2/G/98 12//f/98 12/ /98 12/ /98 12/ /98 12/ /98 OSP FILE CODE: SP-NA-15

. . -- - .. . . . - ._ - .. - ... - - .- - =- _.- - - -

Nstica of Meeting Date: Thursday, November 19,1998 j Time: 10:00 a.m. - 2:00 (approximately)

Location: 0 - 3D22 Participants-Ohio Bureau of Radiation Control Roger Suppes, Chief ,

Bob Owen, Manager, Technical Services Section I Marcia Howard, Administrator, Nuclear Materials Ruth Vandegrift, Supervisor, Decommissioning Group Mark Light, Supervisor, Medical Licensing and Inspection Group NRC Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards i Division of industrial Nuclear Material Safetv Frederick Combs, Deputy Director Larry Camper, Chief, Medical, Academic and Commercial Use Safety Branch Michelle Burgess, Engineer, Sealed Sources and Devices Division of Waste Manaaement l John Hickey, Chief, LLW and Decommissioning Branch l James Kennedy, Health Physicist l Office of General Counsel Hampton Newsome, Staff Attomey Office of State Programs  !

Richard Bangart, Director l' l Paul Lohaus, Deputy Director Richard Blanton, Health Physicist Region ill James Lynch, Regional State Agreements Officer Kevin Null, Senior Radiation Specialist Agenda:

10:00 Introduction / Purpose of Meeting P.Lohaus 10:15 Discussion of NRC Comments on the NRC and Ohio staff Ohio Application for Agreernent

- SS&D F. Combs

- Decommissioning J. Hickey ,

- Staffing R. Blanton I

- Other R. Blanton Questions / Clarification R.Suppes 5

1:00 Summary of Commitments P.Lohaus I 1:15 Adjoum

, ENCUOSURE 1 i

i