UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

R EGI ON IV

612 E. LAMAR BLVD., SUITE 400

ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76011-4125

July 2, 2008 

Richard A. Ratliff, P.E., LMP 

Radiation Control Program Director 

Division for Regulatory Services 

Department of State Health Services 

1100 West 49th Street, MC 2828 

Austin, Texas 78756-3189 

Dear Mr. Ratliff: 

A periodic meeting with you and your staff was held on June 9, 2008. The purpose of this 

meeting was to review and discuss the status of the Texas Agreement State Program. The 

NRC was represented by Mr. Charles Miller and 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 meeting summary for the June 9, 2008 meeting, including any 

specific actions resulting from the discussions. A separate meeting summary was prepared and 

sent to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality for the meeting held on June 10, 2008. 

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) 860-8143 or 

e-mail Randy.Erickson@nrc.gov to discuss your concerns. 

 Sincerely, 

 /RA/ 

 Randy Erickson 

 Regional State Agreements Officer 

Enclosure: 

Periodic Meeting Summary for TDSHS 

(cc listing on next page) 
Texas Department of State Health Services 

-2- 

cc w/enclosure: 

Susan M. Jablonski, P.E. 

Director, Radioactive Materials Division 

Office of Permitting, Remediation and 

 Registration 

Texas Commission on Environmental 

 Quality 

P.O. Box 13087 

Austin, Texas 78711-3087 
Texas Department of State Health Services 

-3- 

bcc (via ADAMS e-mail distribution): 

Arthur Howell 

Chuck Cain 

Robert Lewis, FSME 

Terry Reis, FSME 

JLuehman, FSME 

Duncan White, FSME 

Linda McLean 

Randy Erickson 

Aaron McCraw, FSME 

Kim Lukes, FSME 

Dennis Sollenberger, FSME 

William Rautzen, FSME 

MLXXXXXXXXX 

SUNSI Review Completed: Yes ADAMS: X Yes □ No Initials: RRE 

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

S:\dnms\!SAO\PeriodicMeetings\2008\Texas\TexasPeriodicMtg.Summary.doc 

Final: s:\dnms\ltrs-memos\ 

RIV: RSAO FSME 

RRErickson DSollenberger 

/RA/ /RA R Erickson for/ 

7/2/08 7/2/08 

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

AGREEMENT STATE PERIODIC MEETING SUMMARY FOR THE TEXAS 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES 

DATE OF MEETING: JUNE 9, 2008 

NRC Attendees 

Randy Erickson, RSAO Dennis Sollenberger, FSME 

Charles Miller, Director, FSME 

Texas Attendees 

Kathryn Perkins, RN, Asst. Commissioner Darice Bailey, Manager, RAM Insp. Group 

Susan Tennyson, Director, Env. Section Robert Free, Manager, Env. Mon. Group 

Debbie Peterson, Unit Manager Barbara Taylor, HP II 

Richard Ratliff, Director, Rad. Control David Fogle, HP II 

Alice Rogers, P.E., Manager, Insp. Unit Ruben Cortez, HP II 

Cindy Cardwell, Manager, Policy Group Art Tucker, HP I 

Thomas Cardwell, Manager, Insp. Branch Eric Skotak, HP I 

DISCUSSION: 

The Texas Agreement State Program is administered by two State agencies, the Department of 

State Health Services (the Department) and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

(TCEQ). At the time of the 2006 IMPEP review, the Department regulated approximately 1,650 

specific materials licenses. The responsibility for the uranium recovery and byproduct disposal 

facilities, and radioactive waste processing and storage facilities were transferred to TCEQ in 

June of 2007. 

The previous follow-up IMPEP review was conducted the week of November 13-17, 2006. At 

the conclusion of the review the team found Texas= performance to be satisfactory for the 

performance indicators, Technical Staffing and Training, Status of Materials Inspection 

Program, and Technical Quality of Inspections. Texas’ performance for the performance 

indicator, Technical Quality of Incident and Allegation Activities, was found to be satisfactory, 

but needs improvement. The review team made one recommendation regarding Program 

performance. Additionally, the review team recommended, and on February 2, 2007, the 

Management Review Board (MRB) agreed, that the Texas Agreement State Program be found 

adequate, but needs improvement, and compatible with the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission’s (NRC) program. The MRB also concluded that the period of Heightened 

Oversight should end and a period of Monitoring should be implemented. 
Texas Periodic Meeting Summary 

-2- 

ENCLOSURE 

The proposed status for the recommendation from the 2006 Texas final IMPEP report is 

summarized below. 

• The review team recommends that the Department report all significant and routine 

events, as well as follow-up event information, to the NRC in accordance with STP 

Procedure SA-300, “Reporting Material Events.” (Section 2.4) (Open recommendation 

from the 2001 IMPEP Report). 

Previous Status: During the 2001 and 2005 IMPEP reviews, timeliness of event reporting 

was identified as a weakness. The review team also noted that the Department had not 

updated NMED records with follow-up or closure information even though they had 

closed out NMED records. During the 2006 IMPEP review, the team noted 

improvements in the area of event reporting, but the improvements had not been in 

place long enough for the review team to fully evaluate their effectiveness or if those 

improvements could be sustained. 

Current Status: The Department continues to make improvements to the Incident and 

Allegations Program. Additional staff members have received NMED training in June of 

2005 and again in May of 2008. The staff has remained stable until recently when one 

staff member left the Department. Following the 2006 review, a comprehensive 

database was developed to ensure the timely reporting of incidents. The system flags 

each incident investigator each morning with all open investigations which must be 

manually closed to proceed with other activities. This feature allows management the 

opportunity to see what events are open and follow-up appropriately. All facets of the 

event are linked to the database and it can be comprehensively searched for any event 

the Department has reviewed. The Department reported that since development of this 

database, they have not experienced any late reporting of events. The Department also 

expressed concern about the length of time between submittal of an incident report, and 

when the NMED contractor actually enters the data into the national database. The 

Department noted that this lag time can be up to three weeks which can give the 

appearance that the Department was late in reporting the incident. 

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

Other topics covered at the meeting included. 

Program Strengths: The Texas Program is a very busy program with a highly motivated 

and dedicated staff. While the Department has experienced staff losses since the last 

IMPEP review, they have successfully filled vacated positions with talented individuals 

bolstering the Program’s already broad knowledge base. Several staff members have 

been, and others currently are involved in NRC working groups. Many staff members 

are also active participants on IMPEP teams. The Department has integrated the 

workload associated with Increased Controls and Fingerprinting requirements without 

falling behind in other Program areas. Increased Controls requirements are already in 

rule, and Fingerprinting requirements are currently in the rulemaking process. Staff 

members work well together providing a high level of customer service to their licensees, 
Texas Periodic Meeting Summary 

-3- 

ENCLOSURE 

and Department management has worked diligently to ensure that a proper balance is 

achieved within the program. 

Program Weaknesses: The Department identified areas where weaknesses have 

existed and many involve funding. To date, the Department has been able to conduct 

the increased control inspections, issue fingerprinting license conditions, and implement 

new pre-licensing guidance while still meeting its inspection and licensing obligations. 

However, Department management noted that additional unfunded security-related 

requirements are expected to severely strain the Department’s resources. The 

Department has placed restrictions on capital expenditures which has prevented the 

Program from expanding the use of laptop computers with internet access for their home 

based employees. The Department has also been restricted in the starting salaries they 

can offer new employees which limits the experience level of new hires, and while NRC 

is now funding staff training, the number of available training classes and the seats 

available in each has limited their opportunities. 

Staffing and training: 

The Texas Program is a large program which is divided into several program areas. The 

Radioactive Materials Inspection Group currently has 16 technical staff with one vacancy, 

the Radioactive Materials Licensing Group currently has 11 technical staff and one 

vacancy, the Policy, Standards and Quality Assurance Group has six technical staff and 

one vacancy, the Environmental Monitoring Group has three technical staff and one 

vacancy. Of the noted vacancies, two are posted and one position has recently become 

vacant. 

The Department continues to have difficulty obtaining out of state travel funding. While out 

of state travel is not a complete impossibility, it has placed a constraint on the ability of 

multiple staff to participate together in out of State training. 

Program reorganizations: 

 The Department has not experienced any overall program reorganizations since the 

previous IMPEP review and none are expected; however, responsibility for the uranium 

recovery and byproduct disposal facilities, and radioactive waste processing and storage 

facilities were transferred to TCEQ in June of 2007. 

Changes in Program budget/funding: 

 The Department has not experienced significant problems with budgeting or funding. The 

Department is fee funded. The most recent change to the Department’s funding came in 

2007 when the uranium and waste programs were transferred to TCEQ. 
Texas Periodic Meeting Summary 

-4- 

ENCLOSURE 

Materials Inspection Program: 

The Department reported that they currently have no overdue inspections. Routine 

inspections are generally performed by the due date, but because of intermittent staff 

losses, occasionally inspections are performed within the +25 percent window. Initial 

inspections are performed within 12 months of issuance. They continue to inspect 

reciprocity licensees and have not had difficulty performing inspections on at least 20 

percent of candidate reciprocity licensees. The Department initially identified 224 

licensees who were required to implement Increased Controls. The Department reported 

that all Increased Controls inspections were performed timely and that the requirement to 

perform these inspections within the three year window did not cause any routine 

inspections to be performed late. 

Regulations and Legislative changes: 

The Department reported that they are up to date on all regulations except for issues 

involving medical training and experience compatibility. The Increased Controls 

requirements are currently in rule and the Fingerprinting requirements are in the 

rulemaking process. No other legislative changes are anticipated. It was noted that not all 

of the final regulations had been submitted to NRC for review. These regulations (Texas 

Sections 289.251, 289.252, and 289.258) were adopted by the state in May 2008. The 

submittal package for NRC is being prepared. 

Event reporting, including follow-up and closure information in NMED.

The Department reported that all NMED information with the exception of seven open 

items is currently up to date. 

Response to incidents and allegations.

The Department continues to be sensitive to notifications of incidents and allegations. 

Incidents are quickly reviewed for their affect on public health and safety. Staff is 

dispatched to perform onsite investigations when necessary. The Program Manager has 

placed a high emphasis on maintaining an effective response to incidents and allegations. 

Status of allegations and concerns referred by the NRC for action. 

Six allegations were referred by NRC to the Department since the 2006 review. None of 

the allegations referred by NRC required the Department to respond back. 

Significant events and generic implications. 

The Department reported two significant enforcement actions since the 2006 review. One 

involved an overexposure and one was a medical event. None involved generic 

implications. 
Texas Periodic Meeting Summary 

-5- 

ENCLOSURE 

Current State Initiatives. 

The Department plans to investigate a flat fee structure for emergency response activities 

at nuclear power plants instead of the actual cost reimbursement they currently have in 

place. These funds would be paid directly to the Department and not to general revenue. 

The Department is developing an exceptional item for the next legislative session. It is an 

appropriations request to address staff shortages caused by security related mandates. 

The item should address staffing, but also includes amounts needed for laptops for home 

based employees, out of state travel funds, and salaries for recruitment, retention and 

training of employees. 

Emerging Technologies. 

None noted. 

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

 None noted. 

State’s mechanisms to evaluate performance. 

Department managers review performance reports involving licensing actions, inspections 

performed, incidents reported, and reports reviewed. 

Inspector accompaniments are also performed to ensure they are performing at the 

expected level. 

Current NRC initiatives: 

NRC staff discussed ongoing initiatives with the Department. These included pre-licensing 

guidance, fingerprint orders, national source tracking, web based licensing, generally 

licensed devices, and the issues associated with tritium exit signs. 

Summary:

 The Department appears to have spent a significant amount of time and effort to correct 

the issues facing the Program. The final recommendation involving Incidents and 

Allegations had been vastly improved at the time of the 2006 review. However, at that 

time, the Department had not been able to demonstrate a period of sustained performance 

in this Program area; therefore, the review team recommended it remain open. During the 

2008 Periodic Meeting, the Department was able to demonstrate a new tracking database 

developed in direct response to the recommendation. The Department also sufficiently 

demonstrated a period of sustained performance indicating that since inception of the 

database, they have not experienced any late reporting of events. 
Texas Periodic Meeting Summary 

-6- 

ENCLOSURE 

 For that reason, it is recommended that the Management Review Board consider 

removing the Texas Department of State Health Services from Monitoring. 

 

Schedule for the next IMPEP review:

 It is recommended that the next IMPEP review to be held in two years.