February 27, 2004

Mr. Mike Broderick

Environmental Program Manager

Radiation Management Section

Department of Environmental Quality

P.O. Box 1677

Oklahoma City, OK 73101-1677

Dear Mr. Broderick :

A periodic meeting with Oklahoma was held on February 10, 2004. The purpose of this

meeting was to review and discuss the status of Oklahoma’s Agreement State Program. I have

completed and enclosed a general meeting summary, including 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 discussion, or have

any additional remarks about the meeting in general, please contact me at (817) 860-8116 or

e-mail mlm1@nrc.gov to discuss your concerns.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Linda McLean

Regional State Agreements Officer

Region IV

Enclosure:

Agreement State Periodic Meeting

 Summary for Oklahoma

cc w/enclosure:

Paul Lohaus, Director, 

Office of State and Tribal Programs
AGREEMENT STATE PERIODIC MEETING SUMMARY FOR Oklahoma

DATE OF MEETING: February 10, 2004

ATTENDEES:

State of Oklahoma

Mike Broderick, Environmental Program Manager

Pamela Bishop, Environmental Program Specialist IV

NRC

Elmo Collins, Director, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region IV

Linda McLean, Regional State Agreements Officer, Region IV

Richard Blanton, Agreement State Project Officer, Office of State and Tribal Programs

 

DISCUSSION:

The Oklahoma Agreement State program is administered by the Radiation Management

Section (the Section), Land Protection Division, in the Oklahoma Department of Environmental

Quality (DEQ). The Section regulates approximately 244 specific licenses authorizing

Agreement materials. Oklahoma’s first IMPEP Review was conducted the week of July 15,

2002

The following is a summary of the meeting held in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, on February 10, 

2004, between representatives of the NRC and the State of Oklahoma. During the meeting, the

topics suggested in a letter dated January 21, 2004, from Mrs. McLean to Mr. Broderick were

discussed. The discussion pertaining to each topic is summarized below.

Current Status on IMPEP Review Findings

1. The review team recommended that the Section take appropriate measures to conduct

core inspections, including initial inspections in accordance with the NRC’s inspection

priority system. 

Current Status: The Section provided updated information regarding the number of

inspections completed and overdue since the IMPEP Review (attached). The Section

appears to be making progress in completing timely inspections. 

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

2. The review team recommended that the Section take appropriate measures to assure

timely dispatch of inspection findings to licensees. 

Current Status: The Section is trying to assure timely dispatch of inspection findings to

licensees. Although there has been some improvement, they acknowledge that there is

still a need to improve in this area. 

It is recommended that this item remain open.
3. The review team recommended that all inspections be fully documented, and that

license files be complete and accurate. 

Current Status: Since the review, staff stated that all inspections have been fully

documented, and the license files are complete and accurate. 

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

4. The review team recommended that the Section conduct annual accompaniments of

both new and experienced inspectors to ensure continued technical quality of

inspections and to assist in the training and qualifications of new staff. 

Current Status: The program manager has been successful in conducting annual

accompaniments of inspectors with one exception. A valid reason for the exception was

discussed. 

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

5. The review team recommended that all license terminations be terminated by a license

amendment. 

Current Status: The staff confirmed that all license terminations are terminated by a

license amendment. 

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

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Program

Strengths

The Section has capable and competent staff despite some turn-over. The program manager

and the supervisor each have greater than 10 years experience at DEQ. The new hires have

good credentials (e.g., one has a masters degree in chemical engineering). Currently, the

Section is fully staffed, is able to fill vacancies, and is able to fund staff training, including the 5-

week course. Another strength is that the Section can and does respond to events/incidents

quickly. 

The Program is 100% fee funded. A 25% fee increase has been proposed and will be

presented to the Radiation Advisory Council on February 25. No opposition is expected. 

Another strength is that the Council members have good credentials and experience. 

Weaknesses

The backlog of license actions is improving, but there is still a significant backlog. 

Another stated weakness is the State’s salary structure. The concern is in the Section’s ability

to retain qualified staff. The program manager is concerned that it will continue to be an issue

until the pay structure can be improved. Although the State Legislature agreed to pay-forperformance increases to help with this problem, in 2003 there were no bonuses awarded. 
State Feedback on NRC’s Program/NRC Program or Policy Changes That Could Impact

Agreement States

The following topics were discussed: 

• Security inspections and the 274(i) Agreement: The program manager confirmed that

Oklahoma is potentially interested in signing a 274(i) agreement and performing the

security inspections, but the Section wants to observe how these work in other states

before committing Oklahoma to it. In addition, the program manager expressed 

concern that NRC may use security issues as a justification to impose a "national

security fee" on agreement state licenses. He indicated that the State would oppose

such a move. 

• Manual Chapter 2800 changes: The change in the inspection frequencies were

discussed and how they may affect the State’s inspection program. 

• Transportation regulations: The Section requested that the NRC consider providing 

workshops on the new transportation regulations. 

Recent or Pending State Program Changes

Changes in Program Staff: There were two technical staff hires since the IMPEP Review which

replaced the two staff vacancies. In addition, one staff member was promoted to

Environmental Program Specialist IV, giving her increased authority to do technical supervision. 

Program reorganizations: No reorganizations are planned. 

Legislative changes: A 25% fee increase has been proposed and will be presented to the

Radiation Advisory Council on February 25. No opposition is expected. 

Changes in program budget/funding: The Section is financially sound. No changes are

anticipated. 

Results of any internal program audits/self-assessments conducted by the State or NRC. 

In preparation of this meeting the Section reviewed the status of the program, and provided the

NRC with statistics on the program activities (attached). 

Status of Allegations Referred by NRC to the State

No allegations have been referred by NRC to the Section during this review period.

Compatibility of Oklahoma Rules and Regulations

Oklahoma adopts regulations for AEA materials by reference. Adopting regulations by

reference allows the State to implement regulations quickly and avoid potential compatibility

conflicts. Also, it reduces confusion for reciprocity licensees and multi-State licensees.
Nuclear Material Events Database (NMED)

No problems were noted with the NMED database program. 

Schedule for the next IMPEP Review The next IMPEP Review will be in FY 2006. 

Note: The program manager stated that the periodic meetings between the IMPEP Reviews

are beneficial and effective tools. He is not in favor on reducing the number of periodic

meetings. 
cc: (via ADAMS e-mail distribution):

ECollins

CCain

VCampbell

LRakovan, STP

AMcCraw, STP

RBlanton, STP

MIS System

ADAMS: Yes No Initials: _mlm_____ 

Publicly Available Non-Publicly Available Sensitive Non-Sensitive

DOCUMENT NAME: draft: C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML040620181.wpd final r:\_dnms

RIV:RSAO

MLMcLean

/RA/

2/26/04

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