May 31, 2006

Mr. Kenneth Wangler

Division of Air Quality

Radiation and Air Program

North Dakota Department of Health

918 East Divide Avenue

Bismarck, ND 58501-1947

Dear Mr. Wangler:

A periodic meeting with North Dakota was held on May 2, 2006. The purpose of this meeting

was to review and discuss the status of North Dakota’s Agreement State Program. The NRC

was represented by me and William Maier from the Region IV office and Cardelia Maupin from

the Office of State and Tribal Programs. 

I have completed and enclosed a general meeting summary, including any specific actions

resulting from the discussions.

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) 860-8116 or

email mlm1@nrc.gov to discuss your concerns.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Linda McLean

Regional State Agreements Officer

Enclosure:

As stated

cc w/enclosure:

Janet Schlueter, Director, STP
North Dakota Department of Health

bcc: (via ADAMS e-mail distribution):

LWert

CCain

VCampbell

WMaier

CMaupin, STP

KSchneider, STP

AMcCraw, STP

MBurgess, NMSS

SUNSI Review Completed: ADAMS: / No Initials: _mlm_____ 

ADAMS: :Yes 9No Initials: ___mlm___ 

:Publicly Available 9Non-Publicly Available 9Sensitive :Non-Sensitive

DOCUMENT NAME: draft: E:\Filenet\ML061520048.wpd 

RIV:RSAO

LMcLean

/RA/

 5/ 31 /2006

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY T=Telephone E=E-mail F=Fax
ENCLOSURE

North Dakota Periodic Meeting 

Date of Meeting: May 2, 2006

ATTENDEES:

STATE

Ken Wangler, Manager, Radiation and Indoor Air 

Terry O’Clair, Director, Division of Air Quality

James Killingbeck, Environmental Scientist, RAM Licensing and Control

Chris Schmaltz, Environmental Scientist, RAM Licensing and Control

NRC

Linda McLean, Regional State Agreements Officer, Region IV

Cardelia Maupin, Agreement State Project Officer, Office of State and Tribal Programs

William Maier, Regional State Liaison Officer, RIV

DISCUSSION: 

The last IMPEP Review was the week of April 22 - 25, 2003. The review team found North

Dakota’s performance to be satisfactory for all performance indicators. The review team

recommended that the State program be found adequate and compatible with NRC's program,

and that the next full review should be in approximately four years.

The North Dakota Agreement State program is administered by the Radiation Program (the

Program), Division of Air Quality, North Dakota Department of Health (the Department). The

Department is the designated radiation control agency. The North Dakota Agreement State

program regulates 70 specific licenses authorizing Agreement materials. 

Program items discussed: 

1. Status of State’s actions to address all open previous IMPEP review findings and/or

open recommendations. The review found North Dakota’s performance to be

satisfactory for all performance indicators. No recommendations were made. 

2. Strengths and/or weaknesses of the State program as identified by the State or NRC

including identification of actions that could diminish weaknesses.

Strengths: The program has an excellent working relationship with the staff; good

senior management support for the program; stable management; and good rapport

with licensees. The recent relocation of the Department of Health has improved

communications since all departments are now co-located. 

Weaknesses: One staff member (50% of staff) resigned in the of Summer 2005; the

position was filled in December 2005. Consequently, the program is under stress to

keep the program from getting behind in inspections and licensing actions. Another

significant weakness is the State’s salary structure which impacts the ability to retain

qualified staff. 
-2-

3. Feedback on NRC’s program as identified by the State and including identification of

any action that should be considered by NRC. 

The State suggested again (RE: 2004 Periodic Meeting summary) that the NRC use

more distance education (i.e. video training) similar to the FDA and EPA programs. The

State commented on the additional work load due to the increased controls inspection

activities, and the large volume of e-mail messages received from STP. Also discussed

was the new definition of byproduct material which may cause problems in the future. 

4. Status of State Program including:

a. Staffing and training:

I) Number of staff in the program and status of their training and qualifications

Three of eight department staff members resigned in 2005 or were transferred to

another department. One staff was in the radioactive materials program. The

program is providing the necessary training to the new staff member so that he

can be qualified as soon as possible. 

ii) Program vacancies: Two vacancies in another program area.

iii) Staff turnover: Discussed above. 

iv) Adequacy of FTEs for the materials program: When fully staffed and trained

the program appears to be adequately staffed. However, losing one staff

member can cause program problems. It was suggested that the program

manager review STP Procedure SA-700 to evaluate the adequacy of the FTEs

for the materials program. The evaluation should include the increased controls

activities. 

b. Materials Inspection Program:

Discuss the status of the inspection program including if an inspection backlog

exists and the steps being taken to work off backlog: Currently, the program is

overdue on one inspection; however, they expect to have more overdue

inspections this year because of the staffing shortage. This is the first time in

four years that an inspection is overdue. 

c. Regulations and Legislative changes: All regulations are up-to-date. 

d. Program reorganizations: None pending

e. Changes in Program budget/funding: A draft rule has been issued requesting

increased license fees. License fees fund 75% of the program and 25% comes

from general funds. 

Another proposed bill in the legislature requests an increase in the department’s

salary structure. A 2% increase in salaries occurred on April 1, 2006, and a

second increase of 4% should occur in July 2006; however, the base level is

lower than other State departments. The State said that a letter of support from

the NRC could be of value in their pursuit of an increase in pay for the staff. 
-3-

5. Event Reporting, including follow-up and closure information in NMED: There were no

reportable events during this review period.

6. Response to Incidents and Allegations:

a. Status of allegations and concerns referred by the NRC for action: There were no

allegations referred to the State during this review period.

b. Significant events and generic implications: None

7. Information exchange and discussion:

a. Current State initiatives: None at this time

b. Emerging technologies: None to report

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

including, (e.g., major decommissioning and license termination actions):

A major decommissioning activity is being discussed. An old Union Carbide site

contaminated with uranium coal ash is adjacent to railroad owned property. The site

was characterized many years ago. The Department of Energy (DOE) and the State

committed to decontaminate the property with DOE funding 90% of the cost and the

State 10%. Because fiscal problems, the State pulled out of the transaction. The DOE

then took the site off their list. The railroad is wanting to sell their property and is

concerned about the contamination. The property is not fenced off and nothing has

been done to the land. There is also an old Kerr McGee site in a similar condition. 

d. State’s mechanisms to evaluate performance (as applicable):

i) Computer tracking: The program has a tracking system for licensing actions and

inspections. The manager reviews the inspection and licensing data frequently. 

ii) Inspector accompaniments: All accompaniments have been completed.

8. Other topics:

qThe State said that a letter of support from the NRC could be of value in their

pursuit of an increase in pay for the staff. 

The State indicated they had received calls from the U.S. Customs regarding radioactive

materials detected at the border of North Dakota and Canada. 

NRC discussed the proper handling of Safeguard Information (SGI), including the

importance of maintaining a log of the receipt and the final disposition of the material.

The State requested NMED training either in RIV or a nearby State. 

9. Schedule for the next IMPEP review: FY2007.