July 10, 2008 

Mr. Mike Broderick 

Dept. of Environmental Quality 

707 North Robinson, 5thFlr 

Oklahoma City, OK 73102 

Dear Mr. Broderick, 

A periodic meeting with your State was held on June 26, 2008. The purpose of this meeting 

was to review and discuss the status of the Oklahoma Agreement State Program. The NRC 

was represented by Mr. Dennis Sollenberger from NRC’s Office of Federal and State Materials 

and Environmental Management Programs (FSME), and me. Topics and issues of importance 

discussed at the meeting included a detailed discussion of recommendations from the 2006 

IMPEP review. 

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 

e-mail me at Linda.McLean@nrc.gov to discuss your concerns. 

 Sincerely, 

 /RA/ 

 Linda McLean 

 Regional State Agreements Officer 

Enclosure: 

Periodic Meeting Summary for Oklahoma 

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION IV

612 EAST LAMAR BLVD, SUITE 400

ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76011-4005
M. Broderick -2- 

bcc: 

A. Howell 

C. Cain 

L. McLean 

R. Erickson 

R. Lewis, FSME 

Duncan White, FSME 

A .McCraw, FSME 

K. Lukes, FSME 

D. Sollenberger, FSME 

W. Rautzen, FSME 

J. Luehman, FSME 

ML

SUNSI Review Completed: MLM ADAMS: X Yes No Initials: MLM 

 X Publicly Available Non-Publicly Available Sensitive X Non-Sensitive 

S:\dnms\!SAO\Periodic Meetings\2008\Oklahoma\Summary Periodic Meeting 

RIV: SAO 

MLMcLean 

/RA/ 

07/10/08 

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

 - 1 - Enclosure 

AGREEMENT STATE PERIODIC MEETING SUMMARY FOR OKLAHOMA 

DATE OF MEETING: June 26, 2008 

NRC Attendees Oklahoma Attendees 

Linda McLean, RSAO Mike Broderick, Program Manager 

Dennis Sollenberger, FSME Kevin Sampson, Environmental Specialist 

 Jon Roberts, Environmental Programs 

Manager 

 

DISCUSSION: 

The Oklahoma Agreement State Program (the Program) is administered by the 

Radiation Management Section (the Section), located within the Land Protection Division 

of the Department of Environmental Quality. At the time of last the IMPEP Review, the 

Program regulated 246 specific licenses authorizing Agreement materials. 

The previous IMPEP review was conducted the week of June 5-8, 2006. The review 

team found Oklahoma’s performance to be satisfactory, but needs improvement, for the 

indicator, Technical Quality of Incident and Allegation Activities, and satisfactory for all 

remaining performance indicators reviewed. The review team made three 

recommendations regarding the performance of the Oklahoma Agreement State 

Program and recommended that one recommendation from the 2002 IMPEP review 

remain open. The status of each of the recommendations is discussed below. 

The review team recommended and the MRB agreed that the Oklahoma Agreement 

State Program is adequate to protect public health and safety and compatible with 

NRC's program. Based on the results of the 2006 IMPEP review, the review team 

recommended and the MRB agreed that the next full IMPEP review should take place in 

approximately four years. 

Status of open IMPEP review recommendations

1. The review team recommended that all inspections be fully documented, and that 

license files be complete and accurate. (From the 2002 IMPEP report) (Section 3.3 

of 2006 IMPEP Report) 

Report Finding: During the 2006 IMPEP Review, the team found that in several of 

the cases reviewed, inspections were not fully documented, and license files were 

not complete and accurate. Therefore, the recommendation regarding inspection 

report documentation remained open from the 2002 IMPEP report. 

Status: The Section has better clerical assistance for file maintenance. This has 

help ensure that license files are complete and accurate. The recordkeeping and file 

maintenance in the Section is now much more efficient. In addition, the Program 
 

 - 2 - Enclosure 

Manager reviews all of the inspection results and is finding improvement in the 

inspection documentation. This recommendation should be verified and closed at 

the next IMPEP review. 

2. The review team recommended that the State document corrective actions for cited 

violations issued on DEQ Form 410-591. (Section 3.3 of 2006 IMPEP Report) 

Report Finding: Violations issued on DEQ Form 410-591 are violations of minor 

safety consequences. If cited violations are issued on the DEQ Form, the Section 

requests only that the licensee sign a copy of the Form and return it to the Section. 

The review team found that for cited violations issued on DEQ Form 410-591, there 

was no documentation of any corrective actions on the form issued or in the 

inspection report or in the inspection files. 

Status: The Program Manager reviews all of the inspection results and is finding 

improvement in the inspection documentation and the documentation of corrective 

actions. This recommendation should be verified and closed at the next IMPEP 

review. 

3. The review team recommended that the State take measures to ensure proper 

documentation and appropriate response, review, enforcement, and follow up of all 

radioactive materials incidents. (Section 3.5 of 2006 IMPEP Report) 

Report Findings: The review team found the Section’s documentation in response to 

incidents was often incomplete, and in some cases, the investigation results were 

missing from the licensee files and had to be found in other locations. 

Status: The Program Manager reviews all inspection reports to ensure proper 

documentation. In addition, a staff member has been assigned to review all NMED 

reports to ensure they are complete and are closed. This recommendation should 

be verified and closed at the next IMPEP review. 

4. The review team recommended that the State take measures to ensure proper 

documentation and appropriate tracking and closure of all allegations involving 

radioactive material. (Section 3.5 of 2006 IMPEP Report) 

Report Findings: The team found that the initial contact information and the 

investigation documentation was maintained in several locations, and in some cases 

the follow up lacked proper documentation. 

Status: The Section has better clerical assistance for file maintenance. This has 

help ensure that license files are complete and accurate. In addition, the Program 

Manager reviews all reports to ensure proper documentation and appropriate 

tracking and closure of allegations. This recommendation should be verified and 

closed at the next IMPEP review. 
 

 - 3 - Enclosure 

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

NRC including identification of actions that could diminish weaknesses

• Strengths: Although during this review period, one experienced staff person retired 

and the Program Manager anticipates that a second experienced person will retire 

this year, the Section has been able to fill the vacancies promptly and with 

individuals with good backgrounds. One new hire has a master's degree in medical 

physics and has been a very valuable asset for the Program. 

• Weakness: Low salaries continue to be a concern. However, the situation has 

improved to some extent in recent months with an increase in pay for three staff 

members. 

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

action that should be considered by NRC

• The Section said that they appreciate that NRC re established the funding for 

Agreement State staff training. The Section suggested that NRC consider 

reinstituting the five week Health Physics course.* 

Status of State Program including: 

• Staffing and training: Currently, the Section is fully staffed. The Section has one 

manager, 9 technical staff, one part time technical staff, and one clerical staff. 

Vacancies have been filled promptly. Turnover has slowed down and staffing 

appears adequate. 

• Materials Inspection Program: Currently, two inspections are over the +25% 

requirement; however, both inspections have been scheduled. Due to a database 

problem, 20 inspections were conducted overdue in 2007. The database problem 

has been corrected. The Program Manager stated that the Section has noticed an 

increase in enforcement activities, perhaps due to the increased control 

requirements. All accompaniments were completed in 2007 and are scheduled to be 

completed in 2008. 

• Large, complicated, or unusual authorization for use of radioactive materials: The 

Section is licensing a Linac for proton therapy in Oklahoma City. Also, an electron 

beam accelerator is being installed for sterilization of bottles. The Program Manager 

noted that there has been an increase in requests for the use of Californium-252 as a 

replacement for Amercium-241. (Apparently Am-241 has been in short supply.) 

Since the Periodic Meeting, the Section has learned that the Department of Energy is 

ceasing production of Californium due to budget constraints, which may be the end 

of this trend. 

• Current State initiatives: The Section offers industrial radiography examinations for 

radiographers to obtain an Oklahoma identification card. It was noted that number of 

exams requested and the exam failure rate has increased. The EPA has installed an 

air monitoring system (RAD-Net) in Oklahoma City that the Section will maintain. 

Another RAD-Net system will soon be installed in Tulsa. 
 

 - 4 - Enclosure 

• Regulations and Legislative changes: All regulations and/or legally binding 

requirements are up to date. The fingerprinting order was implemented by use of 

license conditions. The Section will be updating their regulations by “incorporation 

by reference” this fall which should include all of NRC’s amendments as of January 

2008. There has been no substantive change to LLW Compact Law, and no 

changes to Radiation Management Act are contemplated. 

• Program reorganizations: The Division added one additional level of management 

with the addition of the position Environmental Program Manager III. The Program 

Manager reports to this position; nevertheless, the Section has full access to other 

senior management. 

• Changes in Program budget/funding: The Section is primarily fee funded, with some 

additional EPA grants. Fees are stable, and the EPA grants are increasing slightly. 

The Section’s funding situation is stable. The State’s finance situation is fair, but 

since the Section does not have appropriated funding, this should have little direct 

impact on the RAM program. 

Event Reporting, including follow-up and closure information in NMED: Reports in 

NMED have been completed and closed where applicable. 

Response to Incidents: Response to incidents has been prompt, as appropriate. The 

Section had two significant events during this period. One involved an X-Ray 

overexposure, and the second involved a lost well logging source which resulted in an 

overexposure to a member of the public. Both events resulted in enforcement actions 

with financial penalties. 

Allegations: One allegation was referred to the Section by the NRC. The Section 

followed up appropriately. 

Information exchange and discussion: The Section discussed the security requirements; 

such as, using rulemaking in place of orders and bringing to an end or reducing the 

amount of security actions placed on the States. Other topics discussed: action items 

that were due to the NRC and FSME letters. The Program Manager applauded the 

Federal government for reinstituting cytogenetic testing capability in the U.S. 

Other topics: The Program Manager mentioned that one of his staff had problems 

receiving travel reimbursements for two trips causing the employee to incur interest 

charges and to pay the charges with her own money.* 

Schedule for the next IMPEP Review: FY2010 

The Section requested that their next IMPEP Review be performed after the month of 

July.* 

* Action items