UNITED STATES

 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 REGION I

475 ALLENDALE ROAD

KING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406-1415 

June 5, 2006

Lawrence E. Nanney. Director

Division of Radiological Health

L & C Annex, Third Floor 

401 Church Street

Nashville, TN 37243-1532

Dear Mr. Nanney:

A periodic meeting with the Tennessee Division of Radiological Health was held on April 27,

2006. The purpose of the meeting was to review and discuss the status of the Tennessee 

Agreement State program. The NRC was represented by Andrew Mauer from the NRC’s Office

of State and Tribal Programs and me. Specific topics and issues of importance discussed at

the meeting included the Division’s turnover in staff, implementation of increased controls and

actions taken in response to the recommendations from the last Integrated Materials

Performance Evaluation Program review.

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

will be taken as a result of the meeting.

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

any additional remarks about the meeting in general, please contact me at (610) 337-5042 or

by e-mail at adw@nrc.gov to discuss your concerns.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

Original signed by Duncan White

Duncan White, CHP

Regional State Agreements Officer

Division of Nuclear Materials Safety

Enclosure: As stated

cc: 

A. Mauer, STP
L. Nanney 2

Tennessee Division of Radiological Health

DISTRIBUTION

RIDS SPO1

G. Pangburn, RI

F. Costello, RI

R. Trojanowski, RII

D. Rathbun, STP

A. McCraw, STP

O. Siurano, STP

DOCUMENT NAME: E:\Filenet\ML061580070.wpd

SISP Review Complete: DWhite

After declaring this document “An Official Agency Record” it will be released to the Public.

To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: “C” = Copy w/o attach/encl “E” = Copy w/ attach/encl “N” = No copy

OFFICE DNMS/RI N DNMS/RI DNMS/RI

NAME DWhite/ADW

DATE 06/05/06

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
AGREEMENT STATE PERIODIC MEETING SUMMARY FOR 

TENNESSEE DIVISION OF RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH

DATE OF MEETING: April 27, 2006

ATTENDEES:

Duncan White, RSAO

Andrew Mauer, ASPO

Tracy Carter, Senior Director, Air Resources Group

Eddie Nanney, Director, Division of Radiological Health (DRH)

Debra Shults, Deputy Director, DRH

Johnny Graves, Manager, Licensing, Registration and Planning

Roger Fenner, Health Physics Consultant

Ruben Crosslin, Manager, Technical Services

Mary Helen Short, Administrative Assistant Director

Beth Murphy, Regulations

DISCUSSION:

A. IMPEP Recommendations

There were three recommendations from the last Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation

Program (IMPEP) review of the Tennessee program that occurred February 23-25, 2004.

1. The review team recommends that the Division promptly adopt the current version of

10 CFR 20.2003. (Section 4.1.2)

Current Status: The State regulations will be effective July 2, 2006, with the current

version of 10 CFR 20.2003. DRH will provide a copy of the final version to the NRC for

review. It is recommended that this item be verified at the next IMPEP review.

2. The review team recommends that the Division acquire or provide a mechanism for staff

to have access to expertise commensurate with the complexity of SS&D casework. 

(Section 4.2.2)

Current Status: SS&D reviewers have been instructed to bring technical issues requiring

outside expertise to the Section Manager. A few issues have been raised since the last

IMPEP review and all have been successfully addressed. In one case, the DRH asked

the NRC to review the State’s evaluation of a vibrational issue involving a fixed gauge. 

It is recommended that this item be verified at the next IMPEP review.

3. The review team recommends that the Division prepare registration certificates

consistent with the current version of NUREG-1556, Volume 3. (Section 4.2.2)

Current Status: The correct format and content for SS&D sheets were discussed with

the reviewers. The sheets maintained by the program have been reviewed and

corrected for format and content as needed. It is recommended that this item be

verified at the next IMPEP review.
Tennessee Periodic Meeting Summary page 2

April 27, 2006

B. Program Status

One of the ongoing challenges faced by DRH has been the retention of inspection staff. Since

the last IMPEP review, 10 individuals have left the program (eight were involved with

Agreement State activities). Despite a Statewide hiring freeze, DRH has been able to routinely

get releases for the positions and hire replacements. Of the 10 vacated positions, seven

replacements have been hired and DRH is proceeding to fill the other three. An important

change over the last two years has been the ability of DRH to get training approved, particularly

out-of-state training. The Program is using a combination of in-house training and NRC

courses for the new inspectors. Most inspectors first gain experience with x-ray inspections

before they perform materials inspections. It takes DRH approximately two years to make the

inspector productive for materials inspections. DRH management noted that the Department’s

senior management has been very supportive of the program and their need to get positions

filled and individuals trained. Related to staff retention has been the low pay scales for State

employees. The State legislature considered providing some increase in pay for long-term

employees, but it did not pass this legislative session.

Another challenge currently facing the program is the high level of effort and participation

required of DRH for emergency response activities. In addition to the two commercial nuclear

power plants in the State, the Department of Energy’s (DOE) annual exercises at three major

facilities in the State (ORNL, K-25 and Y-12) have put a strain on DRH resources. Although

DRH did note that they have a good working relationship with the DOE’s Radiological

Assistance Program and are kept informed of DOE’s activities in this area, the Division is not

funded for these activities. DRH is also supporting emergency response activities being

conducted by DOE related to emergency response and antiterrorism efforts. Again, DRH is not

funded for these activities.

One of the program’s strengths is the number of long-term employees that provide stability to

the program, particularly in the area of licensing, DRH management does recognize the need

for transition planning to replace those long-term individuals in technical and management

positions within the Division in the coming years.

DRH noted a number of items regarding the State’s interaction with the NRC. DRH is

concerned that the implementation of some recent requests appear not to be well thought out

and with little time provided to get the request done. Recognizing that some of these requests

were the results of Congressional commitments and inquiries, DRH suggested that NRC should

not be rushed and do things the right way, even if that means to push back at Congress. DRH

indicated that if NRC chose to push back, the States would support NRC’s position. The State

also discussed their concerns with the proposed definition of byproduct material and 

compatibility level under the NARM rulemaking. Finally, DRH management expressed their

appreciation of how the STP Director’s handled a number of recent conference calls with the

States.

Despite the turnover in the inspection staff, the Division indicated that routine inspections are

being performed in accordance with Inspection Manual Chapter 2800. There is currently one

overdue inspection of a priority two licensee. This inspection has been scheduled for

completion. DRH management noted that the Division has a new computer tracking system for

all inspection activities which is available to all field offices. This system has been helpful in
Tennessee Periodic Meeting Summary page 3

April 27, 2006

ensuring the timely completion of inspections since it provides real-time feedback on the status

of any inspection. DRH management indicated that annual inspector accompaniments are

being completed in a timely manner.

With regard to the implementation of increased controls, the State has five inspectors who

received the security training. The Division recently performed its first increased controls

inspection. DRH plans to sent additional individuals for security training and increase the

number of inspections during the second half of the year. DRH management indicated that the

need to perform a significant number of increase controls inspections may have an impact on

the routine inspections.

The Region I office has referred six allegations to the State for follow up, including two for a

particular facility that required a significant amount of effort on the part of DRH inspection staff. 

NRC staff determined that the State has taken appropriate action with the referrals. The most

recently referred matter is currently being investigated. With regard to events, DRH indicated

that there has been no significant events or events with generic implications. 

Based on a review of the Nuclear Materials Event Database (NMED), NRC staff noted that

there were 60 events in Tennessee since the last IMPEP review. A total of 37 events required

reporting to the NRC. It was noted that nearly all of those events were closed in NMED.

DRH reported that the number of pending licensing actions has not changed substantially since

the last IMPEP. There are a number of large waste processors located in Tennessee. DRH

noted that this industry is currently undergoing consolidation and restructuring which has

resulted in a number of licensing amendments and restructuring of financial assurance

packages. The Division also noted that they are currently involved with a significant

decommissioning action involving ATG. Regarding the SS&D program, there are eight

manufacturers in the State, no change since the last IMPEP review. Over the last two years,

DRH has issued one new registration sheet, inactivated one sheet, removed one sheet and

issued 27 amendments to existing sheets.

There has been no legislative changes since the last review. A legislation proposal to provide

notification of local governments of new license applications or new locations of use is not likely

to pass. Even if this legislative proposal became law, DRH has already implemented a similar

notification policy since last June. Effective July 1, 2006, the State’s radon program will be

transferred to DRH. Currently, 92.5% of the Division’s budget comes from fees that are

maintained in a dedicated fund with the balance of the budget coming from general

appropriations. Fees were last adjusted in 2001. There has been no significant change in the

program’s budget the last two years. DRH management briefly discussed the reporting of

routine program information to upper management in the Department and the State legislature. 

NRC staff described the current status of NRC’s security initiatives involving material licensees,

status of the Commission regarding the Chairman’s term ending and the two Commissioner

serving under recess appointments, management changes at the Region and headquarters,

and the current status of NRC’s activities with regard to the Energy Policy Act. 
Tennessee Periodic Meeting Summary page 4

April 27, 2006

NRC staff reviewed the most recent State Regulation Status (SRS) Sheet dated April 5, 2005,

with DRH staff. In the table below, the current status and the State’s next action of RATS ID

that were listed as either not done or partially completed are presented.

RATS ID Status on SRS Sheet Current Status State’s Next Actions 

1994-3 NRC reviewed draft regulation

in 2004

Under Department review - to

be completed in 2006

Provide final version to NRC

for review when rule becomes

final

1995-6 No activity indicated DRH currently working on

draft regulations

Provide draft version to NRC

for review

1996-3 No activity indicated DRH currently working on

draft regulations

Provide draft version to NRC

for review

1998-5 NRC reviewed draft regulation

in 2003

Adopted as final rule effective

1/31/06

Provide final version to NRC

for review

1998-6 NRC reviewed draft regulation

in 2003

Adopted as final rule effective

1/31/06

Provide final version to NRC

for review

1999-3 NRC reviewed draft regulation

in 2003

Adopted as final rule effective

1/31/06

Provide final version to NRC

for review

2000-1 NRC reviewed draft regulation

in 2003

Adopted as final rule effective

1/31/06

Provide final version to NRC

for review

2000-2 NRC reviewed draft regulation

in 2003

Adopted as final rule effective

1/31/06

Provide final version to NRC

for review

2001-1 NRC reviewed draft regulation

in 2004

Submitted for Department

legal review - to be completed

in 2006

Provide final version to NRC

for review

2001-2 NRC reviewed draft regulation

in 2004

Submitted for Department

legal review - to be completed

in 2006

Provide final version to NRC

for review

2002-2 No activity indicated DRH currently working on

draft regulations

Provide draft version to NRC

for review

2003-1 No activity indicated DRH will start work on drafting

regulations at a later date

Plan to adopt as regulations

2004-1 No activity indicated DRH will start work on drafting

regulations at a later date

Plan to adopt as regulations

2005-1 No activity indicated DRH will start work on drafting

regulations at a later date

Plan to adopt as regulations

2005-2 No activity indicated DRH currently working on

draft regulations

Provide draft version to NRC

for review
Tennessee Periodic Meeting Summary page 5

April 27, 2006

C. Conclusions

NRC staff concluded that the next IMPEP review should be conducted as scheduled in

FY 2008. DRH management was invited to participate when NRC staff presents the results of

this periodic meeting to the Management Review Board. No specific actions were identified as

a result of this meeting.