May 7, 2002

Mr. John M. Leonard

Assistant Commissioner for Environment

Department of Environment and Conservation

L & C Tower, 21st Floor

401 Church Street

Nashville, TN 37243-1530

Dear Mr. Leonard:

Thank you for your March 15, 2002, letter responding to the recommendations in the final

follow-up Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) report sent to you by

letter dated February 5, 2002. We appreciate the positive actions that you and your staff have

taken and are continuing to implement with regard to our recommendations. We are also

pleased to see that you have been successful in hiring two experienced inspectors. 

Your letter identified several issues that we have addressed below. 

On page 3 of your letter, you comment on the accuracy of the text in the second paragraph on

page 7 of the final report. The staff has reviewed your comments and the text and agrees that

further clarification is needed to better reflect changes that were made to the individual file

review comments in Appendix E of the follow-up report. The IMPEP team has modified the

paragraph to close Recommendation 3 and to more accurately reflect Appendix E and the

issues discussed with the Division management and staff (see Enclosure 1). The final report is 

being reissued with the revised paragraphs (see Enclosure 2). 

On page 4 of your letter, you describe the Division actions to ensure that Tennessee staff are

trained in various inspection and enforcement activities. You also state that the Division is

evaluating the applicability of NRC and other State regulatory processes that may be useful. 

NRC staff is prepared to provide you with any information that you may need for this process. 

NRC enforcement information is available on the NRC web site at

http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/regulatory/enforcement/ and the NRC Inspection Manual is 

available at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/insp-manual/ (click on reactors and

then either manual or procedures). Inspection Manual Chapter 2800 and Inspection

Procedures 87100-87654 as listed on the NRC web site are applicable to the materials

program. Other inspection procedures may also be useful to your program and can also be

found at this site. If you need additional information, please contact Richard Woodruff at (404)

562-4704 or e-mail RLW@NRC.GOV). 

On page 5 of your letter, you commented that the “Radiological Criteria for License

Termination” was submitted as part of the previous rule package. NRC staff agrees that the

Category A and B sections of the rule were addressed. However, the Category C sections

have not been addressed. We apologize that this was not identified during the initial regulation

review process. We ask that you please address the Category C sections in the Division’s

current rulemaking activities. 
John M. Leonard 2

Mr. Woodruff will be contacting Mr. Nanney to set up a time for the first quarterly conference

call to review the Division’s progress on the timeliness of inspections and the status of the

rulemaking effort, as well as your continuing progress on the other recommendations. 

I appreciate your continuing support of the Division of Radiological Health and look forward to

our agencies continuing to work cooperatively in the future. 

Sincerely,

/RA/

Carl J. Paperiello 

Deputy Executive Director

 for Materials, Research 

 and State Programs

Enclosures:

As stated

cc: Milton H. Hamilton, Jr.

Commissioner, Environment & Conservation

Lawrence E. Nanney

Director, Division of Radiological Health
John M. Leonard 2

Mr. Woodruff will be contacting Mr. Nanney to set up a time for the first quarterly conference

call to review the Division’s progress on the timeliness of inspections and the status of the

rulemaking effort, as well as your continuing progress on the other recommendations. 

I appreciate your continuing support of the Division of Radiological Health and look forward to

our agencies continuing to work cooperatively in the future. 

Sincerely,

/RA/

Carl J. Paperiello 

Deputy Executive Director

 for Materials, Research 

 and State Programs

Enclosures:

As stated

cc: Milton H. Hamilton, Jr.

Commissioner, Environment & Conservation

Lawrence E. Nanney

Director, Division of Radiological Health

bcc: Chairman Meserve

Commissioner Dicus

Commissioner Diaz

Commissioner McGaffigan

Commissioner Merrifield

Distribution:

DIR RF DCD (SP01) PDR (YES)

EDO RF 

SDroggitis, STP RWoodruff, RII

KSchneider, STP JPelchat, RII

LBolling, STP/ASPO BHamrick, CA

LRakovan, STP MVirgilio, NMSS

KCyr, OGC DCool, NMSS/IMNS

FCameron, OGC GDeegan, NMSS/IMNS

STreby, OGC TCombs, OCA

JLieberman, OGC Tennessee File Response to Incoming

Document: ML020850377

DOCUMENT NAME: G:\IMPEP\ML021080186.wpd; 

G:\IMPEP\2002 TN Revised Final IMPEP Rpt.wpd

OFFICE STP STP:DD STP:D DEDMRS

NAME DSollenberger:kk JMPiccone

(By PHLohaus)

PHLohaus CJPaperiello

DATE 4/17/02* 4/17/02* 4/17/02* 05/07/02

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Changes to the Tennessee Follow-Up Final Report

The IMPEP review team has revised the paragraph beginning with “An NON issued for

several...” and the following paragraph on page 7 of the Tennessee final follow-up report. The

replacement paragraphs are as follows:

The review team held several discussions with management and staff on the need for

 clear documentation supporting the issuance of NONs. The review team also reviewed

comments provided in John Leonard’s March 15, 2002 letter and agrees that

clarification is needed to better reflect changes made to the individual file review

comments in Appendix E. Based on this review, Recommendation 3 from the 2000

IMPEP review is closed. The inspection reports did not contain consistent

documentation which caused confusion for the IMPEP team in identifying the supporting

information. The review team discussed with Division management and staff the

usefulness of providing additional guidance to the inspection staff on consistently

documenting the supporting bases for each violation which should be included in the

section of the inspection report documenting the inspector’s observations. The review

team also discussed with the Division management and staff the importance of ensuring

senior licensee management attend close-out meetings at the conclusion of inspections

that either document a large number of violations, repeat violations, or violations that

would represent a serious radiation safety concern. 

During the January 22, 2002 MRB meeting, the MRB directed the review team to

expand Recommendation 3 to indicate that the review team’s concerns are not limited to

documentation of inspections. In response, given that Recommendation 3 has been

closed, the review team has developed the following recommendation to address the

MRB direction, “The review team recommends that the Division establish and implement

additional guidance for report documentation and ensuring consistent, appropriate , and

prompt regulatory actions, such as enforcement and inspection actions, incorporating

root cause identification and health and safety significance (severity levels) for repeat

violations.”

The SUMMARY section of the Tennessee Follow-Up Final Report is revised as follows to reflect

the above changes to the report:

Below is a summary list of the open recommendation from the 2000 report and the new

recommendations from this follow-up review. 

Open Recommendation from the 2000 IMPEP report:

Recommendation 1

The review team recommends that the Division take actions to ensure that: (1)

inspections are conducted in accordance with their assigned inspection

frequencies; and (2) inspection reports are issued in a timely manner. (Section

3.1 of 2000 report; Section 2.1 of follow-up report) 
New recommendations from the follow-up review:

Follow-up Recommendation 1

The review team recommends that the Division establish and implement

additional guidance for report documentation and ensuring consistent,

appropriate, and prompt regulatory actions, such as enforcement and inspection

actions, incorporating root cause identification and health and safety significance

(severity levels) for repeat violations. (Section 2.2 of follow-up report)

Follow-up Recommendation 2

The review team recommends that the Division establish a management plan for

the development, tracking, and adoption of regulations in a timely manner, and

to adopt the current regulations needed for adequacy and compatibility in

accordance with the STP Procedure SA-201, “Review of State Regulations or

Other Generic Legally Binding Requirements.” (Section 3.1.2 or follow-up

report)