ML20136G718
| ML20136G718 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/14/1997 |
| From: | Lieberman J NRC OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT (OE) |
| To: | Beach A, Miller H, Reyes L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| References | |
| EGM-97-006, EGM-97-6, NUDOCS 9703180162 | |
| Download: ML20136G718 (5) | |
Text
'
f f urg', '
h&
g j UNITED STATES NUCLEAR RECULATORY CCMMISSIGN g
3 g g WASHINGTON. D.C. 20066-0001
%, *
- s *
- f March 14, 1997 EGM 97-006 MEMORANDUM T0: Hubert J. Miller, Regional Administrator Region I Luis A. Reyes, Regional Administrator ,
Region II '
A. Bill Beach, Regional Administrator Region III James E. Dyer, Acting Regional Administrator Region IV Roy Zimmerman, Associate Director for Projects, NRR Ashok C. Thadani, Associate Director for Inspection and Technical Assessment, NRR Donald A. Cool, Director, Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety, NMSS John T. Greeves, Director, Division of Waste Management, NMSS Elizabeth Q. Ten Eyck, Director, Division of fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, NMSS FROM: James Lieberman, Director b Office of Enforcement j
SUBJECT:
ENFORCEMENT GUIDANCE MEMORANDUM - ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS INVOLVING VIOLATIONS OF RECIPROCITY REQUIREMENTS IN AREAS OF EXCLUSIVE FEDERAL JURISDICTION The purpose of this memorandum is to provide guidance for processing enforcement actions involving Agreement State licensees that perform work under reciprocity in areas under exclusive Federal jurisdiction. This memorandum supplements the guidance in Section 8.6.3.1 of the Enforcement Manual.
By EGM 97-002 dated February 5, 1997, I informed you that the Commission published a final rulemaking to 10 CFR 150.20 to allow Agreement State licensees to qualify for an NRC general license when operating in areas under exclusive Federal jurisdiction within Agreement States. Such general license is granted provided, in part, that the Agreement State licensee file for reciprocity (i.e., NRC Form-241). Note that the burden is on the Agreement State licensee to determine whether the Federal area is one of exclusive jurisdiction.
- Under Supplement VI of the Enforcement Policy, a failure to file for reciprocity is normally characterized at Severity Level III. The failure is considered a significant regulatory concern because the NRC is denied an opportunity to inspect the safely and in accordance withactivity to determine that it is being conducted .?{f NRC requirements.
9703180162 970314 PDR STPRG EEGCEN i PDR qll,]%l{El$Ef$,M,I I
1 su f Multiple Addressees ,
While the staff believes that the rulemaking will clarify NRC requirements and reduce confusion among Agreement State licensees, OE anticipates that failures to file for reciprocity will continue in the near future, given the lack of knowledge of the recently published rulemaking by both Agreement State :
licensees and Federal agencies. Therefore, to ensure consistency in processing enforcement actions, the staff has prepared guidance for different scenarios, as described below, to assist the regions in processing such enforcement actions. This guidance applies only to cases involving violations of reciprocity in areas of exclusive Federal jurisdiction and is applicable after it is determined that a violation has occurred.
Case 1. The licensee has evidence that it received a written determination from a Federal agency, before beginning work, that the area is not under exclusive Federal jurisdiction. However, it is later determined that the Federal agency nade a mistake in its determination.
Discretion should be exercised under Section VII.B.6 of the Enforcement Policy by not issuing a Notice of Violation. In addition, the attached letter should be sent to the Federal agency. While no enforcement panel with OE is needed, coordination with OE staff is warranted given the exercise of discretion. In addition, the region needs to obtain an enforcement action number for tracking purposes.
Case 2. An isolated failure to file for reciprocity, with no evidence of '
wi11 fulness, by a cauae licensee.
A Severity Level IV violation may be issued by the region without an enforcement panel with OE. An enforcement action r. umber is not warranted in this case.
Case 3. An isolated failure to file for reciprocity, with no evidence of wi11 fulness, by a radioaraohv licensee.
A Severity Level III violation may be issued by the region without l an enforcement panel with OE. A civil penalty may be included if l determined to be warranted by the normal civil penalty assessment process. An enforcement action number is warranted for this case.
Case 4. Multiple dures by either radiography or gauge licensees, cases involvi willfulness, or all others cases including those involvin a second Severity Level III violation in two years /two instsn ions, whichever is longer. .
The case should be paneled with OE, and the severity of the violation will depend on the merits of the case. An enforcement action number is warranted for these case.
Case 5. Cases involving violations that occurred prior to the effective date of the final rulemaking to 10 CFR 150.20.
\
4
, Multiple Addressees These cases should be processed consistent with the guidance 1 currently in the Enforcement Manual with similar issued cases.
Section 8.6.3.1 of the Enforcement Manual points out that if the region )
determines that an Agreement State licensee was not aware it was operating I within NRC jurisdiction, enforcement discretion in accordance with '
Section VII.B.6 may be appropriate. This particular guidance was placed in the Enforcement Manual because 10 CFR 150.20 was unclear as to whether an Agreement State licensee that operates in areas of exclusive Federal j jurisdiction was required to file for reciprocity. In light of the new i rulemaking, this statement is no longer valid and will, therefore, apply only to cases involving violations that occurred before the effective date of the revised rule.
The attached standard format will be added to the Enforcement Manual in the upcoming revision in May 1997. l If you have any questions, please contact me or Nader Hamish of my staff.
Attachment:
As stated cc: E. Jordan, DED0 J. Goldberg, 0GC l R. Bangart, OSP 1
l l
l
of Attachment Fors X-X: Letter to Federal facility regarding 10 CFR 150.20, Reciprocity 4
(Name of Facility)
ATTN:
(Mailina Address) i i On (date) (name of comoany)
, conducted (describe the activity. e.a..
{
"radioaraohv") in an area of exclusive Federal jurisdiction at your facility, At the time, this company did not have a specific NRC license to conduct this activity and had not filed Form-241 with the NRC pursuant to 10 CFR 150.20, " Recognition of Agreement State Licenses." Therefore, the
- activity was conducted in violation of NRC requirements.
I The filing of Form-241 informs the NRC of the location and dates of work being performed by Agreement State licensees (ASLs) in areas under NRC jurisdiction, 2
including areas of exclusive Federal jurisdiction, and allows the NRC to perform safety inspections to assure that the work is being performed in accordance with NRC requirements and that the public health and safety is protected. Failure to submit the required Form-241 may subject your contractors to civil and criminal sanctions under the Atomic energy Act of 1954, as amended.
Please ensure that your contracting office is aware of areas at your facility that are under exclusive Federal jurisdiction so that contractors, who use radioactive material in these areas, will be informed of the need to meet NRC requirements. You should inform your ASL contractors during pre-construction briefings, or otherwise, that they may not perform work in areas of exclusive Federal jurisdiction at your facility unless they first obtain an NRC license or file Form-241 with the NRC pursuant to 10 CFR 150.20. You may contact (name) of the NRC Region _ Office at (telephone number) to determine whether a particular ASL has filed Form-241 prior to conducting work at your facility. We would also appreciate your forwarding this information to the Radiation Protection Officer (RPO) or Safety Coordinator for your facility.
[If aoorooriate state the followina: Recent NRC inspection findings have indicated that your RPO was not aware that licensed activities were being conducted at your facility, or that the area was under exclusive Federal jurisdiction.] The NRC believes that by notifying the installation RP0 of the issues surrounding this requirement, both safety and regulatory oversight of activities involving the use of radioactive material at your facility would be improved.
Thank you for your cooperation with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Please contact me at (ohone number) if you have any questions concerning this letter.
Sincerely, Name , Director Division of Nuclear Material Safety
l 1
4 Multiple Addressees DISTRIBUTION:
JLieberman, OE OE Staff Enforcement Coordinators RI, RII, RIII, RIV EGM File Day File l
DES)
E /ffS) NMamish JLkdberman v
NO N0 3/fr/97 3//h/97 Doc Name: G:\EGM97006.NM l