April 30, 2013

Rusty Lundberg, Director 

Division of Radiation Control 

Utah Department of Environmental Quality 

195 North 1950 West 

P.O. Box 144850 

Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4850

Dear Mr. Lundberg: 

A periodic meeting with you, your staff, and counsel from the Utah Attorney General’s office was 

held on March 21, 2013. The purpose of this meeting was to review and discuss the status of 

the Utah Agreement State Program. The NRC was represented by Stephen Poy from the Office 

of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs (FSME); Anton 

Vegel, Director, Binesh Tharakan, and Marti Poston-Brown from the Division of Nuclear 

Materials Safety (DNMS) in NRC Region IV, and me. I have completed and enclosed a general 

meeting summary, including any specific actions resulting from the discussions. 

In addition to a discussion of general topics associated with your program, additional 

discussions to ascertain the status of regulatory changes associated with your Low Level 

Radioactive Waste and Uranium Recovery programs were also held. 

If you feel that our conclusions do not accurately summarize the meeting discussion, or have 

any additional remarks about the meeting in general, please contact me at 817-200-1143 or 

email me at Randy.Erickson@nrc.gov to discuss your concerns. 

 Sincerely,

 

 Randy Erickson

 Regional State Agreements Officer

Enclosure:

Periodic Meeting Summary for Utah

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I V

1600 EAST LAMAR BLVD

ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76011-4511
ENCLOSURE

AGREEMENT STATE PERIODIC MEETING SUMMARY FOR THE 

UTAH DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

DATE OF MEETING: MARCH 21, 2013

NRC Attendees Utah Attendees

Randy Erickson, RSAO Rusty Lundberg, Director

Anton Vegel, Director, DNMS Craig Jones, Program Manager

Binesh Tharakan, SAO Loren Morton, Program Manager

Marti Poston-Brown, SAO John Hultquist, Program Manager

Stephen Poy, FSME Tom Rushing, Staff Scientist

Laura Lockhart, Attorney

DISCUSSION:

The Utah Agreement State Program is administered by the Division of Radiation Control (the 

Division). The Division is located within the Department of Environmental Quality (the 

Department).

The previous IMPEP review was conducted the week of July 11-14, 2011. At the conclusion of 

the review the review team found Utah’s performance to be found satisfactory, but needs 

improvement for the performance indicators, LLRW Disposal Program and Uranium Recovery 

Program and satisfactory for the other indicators reviewed. The review team made three 

recommendations regarding the performance of the State. 

The review team also recommended and the MRB agreed, that the Utah Agreement State 

Program be found adequate to protect public health and safety, and compatible with NRC's 

program. 

The current status of the recommendations identified during the 2011 Utah final IMPEP report 

are summarized below.

• The review team recommends that the Division institute appropriate training in all 

aspects of the allegation response program to ensure that LLRW and the Uranium Mills 

program staff have the same competency and consistency in handling allegations as 

demonstrated by the Radioactive Materials program staff. (Section 4.3.1) 

Current Status: The Division reported that allegation training for all staff, including the 

LLRW and Uranium Mills program staff, was conducted on September 11, 2011. The 

same staff also received allegation refresher training in March 2013. The Division also 

generated a new allegation intake form that is designed to direct staff taking allegations 

to treat both oral and written allegations the same. Under the previous system, oral 

allegations were treated as additional information and not processed as allegations. The 

training has also made it clear there are no “off the record” conversations between 

licensee staff and Division staff. 
Utah Periodic Meeting Summary

-2- 

ENCLOSURE

• The review team recommends that independent and confirmatory radiation 

measurements are consistently performed with the appropriate calibrated instruments for 

inspections conducted by the LLRW and the Uranium Mills program staff. (Sections 

4.3.3 and 4.4.3) 

Current Status: The Division reported that the training completed in September 2011 

and March 2013 also included the selection; use and maintenance of survey 

instrumentation that is available to all of the inspection staff. The Division updated their

inspection forms to include spaces to prompt the inspector to add information associated 

with the instrument used during inspections such as the serial number, the calibration 

date, and results of a response check for each survey instrument used. The Division 

believes these changes will improve consistency between inspectors who perform 

confirmatory measurements. 

• The review team recommends that the Division ensures sufficient numbers and types of 

calibrated instruments, appropriate to the activities conducted by the licensee, are 

available to the LLRW and the Uranium Mills program staff and that the staff is trained in 

the proper use of the instrumentation. (Sections 4.3.3 and 4.4.3) 

Current Status: The Division reported that this was also addressed during the training 

completed in September 2011 and March 2013. In the past, Division inspectors would 

sometimes rely on the licensees measurements when documenting confirmatory 

measurements rather than carry several different types of survey instruments. To 

address this recommendation, the Division now uses their own survey instrumentation 

for all confirmatory measurements. 

Other topics covered at the meeting included.

Program Strengths: The Utah Program is a busy program with a highly motivated staff

that is responsible for the licensing and inspection of approximately 200 specific 

materials licensees. Management support to the Program is good and access to senior 

management is unencumbered. The Program noted that with the exception of the two 

newest staff members, most of the staff has been with the Program between 15 and 20 

years. They have a high degree of experience and professional maturity which allows 

them to effectively mentor junior staff members. Staff members work well together 

providing a high level of customer service to their licensees, and Program management 

has worked diligently to ensure that a proper balance is achieved within the Program. 

The Program noted that another strength is their initiative for increased openness with 

the public. They are working to become more transparent, have asked for public input

before major decisions are made rather than just comments afterward, and transmit 

information to the public through various forms of social media, particularly for facilities 

with significant public interest. They currently have Facebook and Twitter accounts, a 

list server for both the materials and the low level radioactive waste programs, and are 

currently developing a blog for the Department. 
Utah Periodic Meeting Summary

-3- 

ENCLOSURE

Program Weaknesses: The Program noted that their main weakness is their ability to 

easily become inundated and overwhelmed with work, in large part due to requests for 

comments or data requests from NRC. While they appreciate the ability to comment on 

draft documents, the number and frequency of these requests, often coming from 

different organizations within NRC can sometimes overwhelm their already lean and 

busy staff. Often requests for comments involve subject matter that is of importance to 

the Division, requires time to research and develop a proper response, but only allows 

for a 30 day response period. When these various requests overlap or arrive back-toback, is generally when the Division becomes overloaded. 

Feedback on NRC’s Program: 

 The Division feels that they receive too much information, too quickly and with too 

little time given for the State to provide a meaningful response. Because these 

requests come from different areas within the NRC, they are distributed as they are 

developed with what appears to be little consideration given to the effect they have 

on a State program. Many of the requests for comment are of importance to the 

Division and the Division wants to provide meaningful feedback. The Division 

believes it would be helpful if requests for comments could be sent at a more 

controlled rate and allow more than 30 days for a response.

 The Division is frustrated by the current depleted uranium regulation development 

process and the future changes scheduled to begin development in FY2015. These 

changes are requiring Utah to make decisions that are putting them ahead of what 

the NRC is doing in this area. However, the Division expressed appreciation for 

NRC’s commitment to and level of stakeholder involvement, particularly for 

Agreement States and host states, in this important rule development process. 

 The Division noted that Part 61 guidance and proposed rule changes have the 

potential to place an added burden on the Division and other states with a disposal 

facility as performance evaluations for waste generators shift toward an option based 

waste acceptance criteria at these facilities. The movement towards increased 

flexibility for waste generators and their packaging will likely result in a significant 

resource commitment for waste disposal facilities and the Agreement States that 

regulate these facilities. The State believes the regulatory burden for ensuring waste 

acceptable criteria are met should be shared by regulatory agencies in which the 

waste generators conduct business (i.e.; generate and package waste)

 The Division expressed their appreciation for the support they receive in the form of 

training from NRC. They noted that training is going well, getting into classes for the 

new health physics staff has not been difficult and they have thoroughly enjoyed 

working with Brenda Usilton. 
Utah Periodic Meeting Summary

-4- 

ENCLOSURE

Staffing and training: 

The Utah Program is a busy program which is divided into several program sections 

(RAM, X-ray, Administrative, Environmental, LLRW/UMills Licensing and LLRW/UMills 

Compliance). The majority of the staff has been with the program between 15 and 20 

years. A Reduction in Force (RIF) occurred in 2009, which was backfilled with a senior 

staff member, who later retired. As a result, just over a year ago, two new individuals 

joined the Utah Program in the RAM Program. Both individuals are currently qualified to 

conduct licensing actions (Phase 1) but are not qualified for the peer review of licensing 

actions (Phase 2). These individuals are qualified to conduct some types of inspections 

independently (portable gauges, fixed gauges and medical 100, 200 and 300 material) 

but are not fully qualified on all the inspection types (such as medical 600 material) 

performed by the RAM Section.

Program reorganizations: 

While there were no Division reorganizations since the previous IMPEP review, at the 

time of the previous IMPEP review, the Division was in the process of an internal 

reorganization utilizing the Lean Six Sigma process improvement plan. As a result, the

Division reorganized the LLRW and Uranium Mill responsibilities. The Division split the 

licensing and compliance sections into two separate sections. As a result, a new 

Compliance Section Manager was named. The current Low Level Waste/Uranium Mills 

and Radon Section Manager are managing the new licensing section. The Division 

reported that the internal reorganization within the Division is functioning well.

Changes in Program budget/funding: 

The Division’s funding for the Radioactive Materials and X-ray Sections comes from the 

general fund and is comprised of revenue from RAM license fees, X-ray registration fees 

and X-ray inspection fees. The last fee increase was in 2006. The Division 

recommended a fee increase this year, but that request did not make it into the 

Governor’s budget. 

The Division’s funding for the LLRW program comes from a flat licensing fee (rather than 

a fee based on the waste volumes of the facility) of $2.06M per year, paid in monthly 

installments by the LLRW facility. There are separate licensing fees for the three 

uranium mill sites and the commercial disposal facility. 

The State recently passed HB124 which requires the fees collected by the Division 

associated with low level radioactive waste and that are already placed into a dedicated 

fund are to be used exclusively for administering radiation control programs. The 

legislation also doubles the maximum civil penalty that can be assessed per violation 

and requires waste generators who obtain a permit from the Division to grant the 

Division reasonable access to their facilities for purposes of evaluating and verifying, 

with respect to applicable Utah laws and requirements, waste characterization, 
Utah Periodic Meeting Summary

-5- 

ENCLOSURE

classification, and packaging of waste sent to the facility. At the current time there are 

approximately 140 permit holders who have access to send waste to the LLRW site.

Materials Inspection Program: 

The Division stated that they perform inspections at a frequency greater than the 

frequencies identified in IMC 2800. They also noted that there is a small backlog of 

overdue inspections based on their program frequencies. They added that there is no 

backlog on Priority 1-3 inspections based on IMC 2800 criteria. 

Licensing Program: 

The Division reported that they currently perform license renewals on a five year 

frequency. The Division also reported that licenses currently under timely renewal have 

increased significantly, primarily due to the recent turnover in staff in addition to the current 

policy of renewing licenses every five years. The Division is considering moving to a 

renewal frequency closer to NRC’s renewal frequency of 10 years. 

The Division reported they perform pre-licensing visits in accordance with the revised 

procedures. They noted that a pre-licensing inspection is performed on all new IC 

licenses, and the license is not issued unless all of the requirements are in place. 

Sealed Source and Device Evaluation Program (SS&D): 

The Division does not have an active SS&D Program. 

Uranium Recovery Program: 

At the time of the periodic review, Utah’s uranium recovery program had regulatory 

oversight of four facilities. Since receiving Agreement State status in 2004, the Division 

has issued a license for the EnergySolutions facility for the receipt, storage, and disposal 

of 11e.(2) byproduct material and is now in the process of reviewing the renewal 

application submitted in 2012. Also, the Division is currently in the process of renewing 

the license for the White Mesa Uranium Mill – the ownership of the facility was recently

transferred to Energy Fuels Resources, Inc. The Uranium One Shootaring Canyon Mill is 

on standby – the potential for the mill to restart is, and has been for several years, 

uncertain due to uranium market fluctuations. The Rio Algom Mining Lisbon Valley 

Uranium Mill is currently undergoing decommissioning/reclamation. The licenses for the 

EnergySolutions and White Mesa Uranium Mill facilities were discussed because of the 

recent communications between the Division and NRC regarding issues raised by a 

concerned individual and the 11e.(2) byproduct material license review process under 

applicable provisions of the Atomic Energy Act. 
Utah Periodic Meeting Summary

-6- 

ENCLOSURE

Low Level Radioactive Waste Program: 

At the time of the review, the Division regulated one LLRW disposal facility. 

EnergySolutions is a commercial LLRW disposal facility located 80 miles west of Salt Lake 

City in Tooele County.

There were various discussions during the Periodic Meeting with respect to the facility 

relating to outdated (around 1990) performance concerns provided by a concerned 

individual, to issues by the State regarding potential impacts of guidance and proposed 

rule changes to Part 61 with respect to waste classification of low level waste being 

disposed at the facility coming from outside of the State, and relating to recent changes in 

statues regarding site access of out-of-state waste generators. 

Regulations and Legislative changes: 

The Division reported that three legislative packages were finalized following the 2011 

IMPEP review that affected the Program. These included: 

 HB124 (2013 General Session) requires that fees collected by the Division 

associated with low level radioactive waste and that are already placed into a 

dedicated fund are to be used exclusively for administering radiation control 

programs. The legislation also doubles the maximum civil penalty that can be 

assessed per violation and requires waste generators who obtain a permit from the 

Division to grant the Division reasonable access to their facilities for purposes of 

evaluating and verifying, with respect to applicable Utah laws and requirements,

waste characterization, classification, and packaging of waste sent to the facility.

 SB21 (2012 General Session) adjusted the make-up of the Radiation Control 

Board and shifted some of the responsibilities of the Board and Executive 

Secretary of the Board to the Director of the Division. 

 

 SB11 (2012 General Session) changed administrative procedures to a record 

based process for appeals of agency actions and decisions. Appeals are no longer 

subject to the trial process but instead go to an administrative law judge who 

issues a recommendation for consideration of the Executive Director of the Utah 

Department of Environmental Quality who then renders a decision.

The Division does not have any overdue regulations.

The following are regulation changes and adoptions that will be needed in the future: 

• “Decommissioning Planning,” 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, and 70 amendments (76 FR

35512), that is due for Agreement State adoption by December 17, 2015.
Utah Periodic Meeting Summary

-7- 

ENCLOSURE

• “Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Materials Licensees,” 10 CFR Parts 30, 36,

39, 40, 70, and 150 amendments (76 FR 56591), that is due for Agreement State 

adoption by November 14, 2014. 

• “Change of Compatibility of 10 CFR 31.5 and 31.6 (See RATS ID: 2001-1 for Rule 

Text),” 10 CFR Part 31 amendment (77 FR 3640), that is due for Agreement State 

adoption by January 25, 2015. 

• “Advance Notification to Native American Tribes of Transportation of Certain Types of 

Nuclear Waste,” 10 CFR Part 71 amendment (77 FR 34194), that is due for Agreement 

State adoption by August 10, 2015.

• “Technical Corrections,” 10 CFR Parts 30, 34, 40, and 70 amendments (77 FR 39899), 

that is due for Agreement State adoption by August 6, 2015.

• “Requirements for Distribution of Byproduct Material,” 10 CFR Parts 30, 31, 32, 40, and 

70 amendments (77 FR 43666), that is due for Agreement State adoption by 

October 23, 2015.

Event reporting, including follow-up and closure information in NMED.

Since the 2011 IMPEP review, the Division had reported eight events to NMED, with 2 

remaining open. The Program will close the open events when they are able to obtain the 

necessary information. 

Response to incidents and allegations.

The Division continues to be sensitive to notifications of incidents and allegations. 

Incidents are quickly reviewed for their affect on public health and safety. Incidents are 

evaluated for safety significance and staff is dispatched to perform onsite investigations 

whenever possible. 

Status of allegations and concerns referred by the NRC for action. 

The Division reported that since the 2011 IMPEP review, two allegations were referred 

from the NRC to the Division and that no allegations were received directly by the Division 

during this period. 

A concerned individual from the State of Utah had provided the NRC with a number of 

concerns relating to compatibility of Utah regulations with Section 274o. of the Atomic 

Energy Act (AEA). The concerned individual claimed that none of the provisions for 

administrative proceedings allow for “an opportunity for cross examination” in proceedings 

associated with licensing actions for the regulation of 11e.(2) byproduct material. During 

the periodic meeting the Division stated that they are working to develop, in consultation 

with NRC staff, a process that allows for pre-decisional opportunities of public involvement 

per the provisions of the AEA. A draft of this would be provided by the Division for NRC 
Utah Periodic Meeting Summary

-8- 

ENCLOSURE

review after the periodic meeting. A pre-decisional copy of this was provided to the NRC 

staff on March 22, 2013. It is currently being reviewed by the NRC staff and the staff will 

respond with comments within 30 days of the date they were provided. After the Division 

has provided an acceptable set of procedures that complies with the Atomic Energy Act, 

the NRC will close out these concerns with the concerned individual.

The Program continues to be sensitive to issues of identity protection regarding allegers 

and is able to protect allegers identities. 

Significant events and generic implications. 

The Division indicated during the period reviewed they did not have any significant events or 

any events with generic implications.

Current State Initiatives. 

• The Division has developed and is implementing a program to capture the knowledge 

retained by their qualified long term staff to ensure the program is not negatively 

impacted as individuals approach retirement.

• The Department has developed and implemented a leadership development program in 

which candidates are identified by management, and mentored. Candidates must 

complete assigned class work and work on a team project.

Emerging Technologies. 

The Division reported that new emerging technologies they are actively working with 

include:

 The use of Radium Di-chloride. 

Large, complicated, or unusual authorizations for use of radioactive materials.

The Division reported the following as examples of large and complicated authorizations:

 Waste disposal License (Cavanaugh Services) terminated in 2012, per the request 

of the licensee. This licensee was a waste transportation broker working with 

EnergySolutions. They received a license to market their company but did not use

it, so the Division terminated the license. The Division reviewed the conveyance 

staging areas, performed surveys, processed financial assurance instruments and 

allowed for a public comment period.

 
Utah Periodic Meeting Summary

-9- 

ENCLOSURE

State’s mechanisms to evaluate performance. 

The Division reported the following as examples of how they evaluate program 

performance:

 Inspector accompaniments are performed to ensure they are performing at the 

expected level. 

 Peer reviews are being performed.

 The Legislative Auditor General conducted a performance audit of the Division with 

respect to its regulation and oversight of the EnergySolutions Clive facility. The 

majority of the audit recommendations focused on pre-disposal activities. The 

audit report’s eight recommendations are being acted upon by the Division.

Current NRC initiatives: 

The following NRC initiatives were discussed with the Division: 

 NRC management changes 

 Status of Part 37

 Updates on the NUREG 1556 series revisions 

 FSME letters recently released

 RCPD letters recently released

 Updates on training class status

 Wyoming’s interest in potentially becoming an Agreement State 

 Discussion of Borehole Mining – Is this mining or milling?

 Phosphate Mining

Schedule for the next IMPEP review:

 It is recommended that the next IMPEP review to be held on schedule in July 2015.