April 21, 2010 

Mr. B. J. Smith, Director 

Mississippi State Department of Health 

Division of Radiological Health 

3150 Lawson Street 

PO Box 1700 

Jackson, MS 39215-1700 

Dear Mr. Smith: 

A periodic meeting with you and your staff was held on March 30, 2010. The purpose of this 

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

NRC was represented by Aaron McCraw from NRC’s Office of Federal and State Materials and 

Environmental Management Programs and Rachel Browder and me from Region IV. 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 Rachel Browder at 817-

276-6552 or by e-mail at Rachel.Browder@nrc.gov to discuss your concerns. 

 Sincerely, 

 /RA/ 

 Linda McLean 

 Regional State Agreements Officer 

Enclosure: 

Mississippi Periodic Meeting Summary 

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION IV

612 EAST LAMAR BLVD, SUITE 400

ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76011-4125
Mississippi State Department of Health 

 

- 2 -

Internal distribution via E-mail: 

K. Kennedy, D:DNMS 

C. Cain, DD:DNMS 

R. Erickson, SAO 

R. Browder, SAO 

L. McLean, SAO 

D. White, FSME 

A. McCraw, FSME 

 ML101110482 

S:\DNMS\!SAO\PeriodicMeetings\2010\MS Periodic Mtg Summary 3-30-10.doc 

ADAMS: 
 No ⌧ Yes ⌧SUNSI Review Complete Reviewer Initials: mlm 

⌧ Publicly Available ⌧ Non-Sensitive 


 Non-publicly Available 
 Sensitive 

RIV:RSAO:DNMS RSAO:DNMS 

LMMcLean;dlf RSBrowder 

 /RA/ /RA/ 

4/14/10 4/21/10 

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

MISSISSIPPI PERIODIC MEETING SUMMARY 

Date of Meeting: March 30, 2010 

Attendees 

NRC MISSISSIPPI 

Linda McLean, RSAO B. J. Smith, Division Director 

Rachel Browder, RSAO Jayson Moak, Branch Director 

Aaron McCraw, FSME Danny Brantley, Health Physicist 

 Brandy Fraiser, Health Physicist 

 Ali Shafqat, Health Physicist 

 Jim Craig, Director* 

Office of Health Protection 

*Attended exit briefing 

DISCUSSION: 

The last IMPEP Review was conducted April 20-24, 2009. During the IMPEP review period, 

four technical staff members left the program. One staff member transferred to another branch 

within the division, and the other three left the branch for other career opportunities. Of the 

three that left the division, two were Health Physicist Seniors that took a considerable number of 

years of experience with them and the other was a Health Physicist Trainee that left the Branch 

after just 4 months of employment. 

Also during the review period, the former Division Director retired. In addition to maintaining his 

own duties and responsibilities, the former Branch Director assumed the responsibilities of the 

Division Director position until the position was filled. The Division Director position remained 

vacant for approximately one year before the former Branch Director was officially promoted to 

the Division Director position in 2008. In turn, the Division Director continued to execute the 

responsibilities of his former position until that position was filled almost a year later. In 

February 2009, a Health Physicist Senior was promoted to the Branch Director position. 

The staff departures during this review period constituted a high degree of staff turnover relative 

to the size of the program. The Division Director and the Branch Director were the only 

individuals in the program that were with the program at the time of the 2005 review. Previous 

review teams also noted a high degree of staff turnover in the program. The high level of 

turnover limited the availability of resources to address the Branch’s workload. For the past 

year, the Division Director and the Branch Director were the only qualified inspectors and 

license reviewers in the program and were performing all of the technical work in the Branch. 

Mississippi’s performance was found satisfactory, but needing improvement, for the 

performance indicator Technical Staffing and Training and satisfactory for all other performance 

indicators reviewed. Overall, the Mississippi Agreement State Program was found adequate to 

protect public health and safety and compatible with NRC's program. 

Based on the results of the 2009 IMPEP Review, the Management Review Board (MRB) 

concurred that the next full review of the Mississippi Agreement State Program is to take place 

in approximately 4 years from this review, and a periodic meeting will be scheduled 
approximately one year from this review. Typically, periodic meetings take place approximately 

2 years after an IMPEP review but, because of the importance of addressing the staff turnover 

issue, the MRB directed that a meeting be held sooner. 

The purpose of the periodic meeting was to evaluate the effectiveness of the State’s response 

to the review team’s recommendations, as well as the overall implementation of the Agreement 

State program. 

The status of the State=s actions to address the open recommendations from the 2009 IMPEP 

Review follows: 

1. The review team recommended that the State take additional actions, such as 

increasing salary and benefits, to stabilize staffing and ensure continued successful 

program implementation. 

 

 Status: Shortly after the last IMPEP review, two staff members were hired. With these 

 additions, the Branch is fully staffed; however, one of the new staff members is expected 

 to leave this summer to attend medical school. 

A legislative bill was passed prohibiting pay increases to State employees during 

Mississippi’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2010. The bill does not affect step increases or 

promotions. The Branch has requested that two staff be promoted from trainee to the 

Health Physicist position. 

The State had a one-time salary increase for existing employees during the last review 

period. The increase did not affect the State’s starting salary structure; therefore, the 

State’s starting salaries remain comparatively low to neighboring Agreement State 

programs and private industry. 

This recommendation remains open and should be evaluated at the next IMPEP review. 

2. The review team recommended that the State update its existing procedures and 

develop new procedures, if necessary, to memorialize the policies and practices of the 

Agreement State program and to serve as a knowledge management tool. 

Status: All procedures have been updated, and the following procedures have been 

implemented: licensing, inspections, and increased controls. 

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

3. The review team recommended that the State implement a reliable and comprehensive 

licensing and inspection database that serves as an effective planning, tracking, and 

data management tool. 

 

Status: An Access database is now in use and is password protected. All licenses are 

in the database and inspection tracking has improved. The database also includes 

tracking candidates for reciprocity. 

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

4. The review team recommended that the State implement a process to ensure that 

violations are adequately documented, licensee corrective actions are reviewed for 

adequacy and documented, and sufficient followup of violations is performed and 

documented consistent with the safety or security significance. 

Status: All inspection reports and letters are reviewed by the Division Director and the 

Branch Director before issuance. In addition, all incoming inspection correspondence is 

also reviewed by both managers. The Branch regularly meets to discuss potential 

violations found during inspections to improve staff consistency. 

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

5. The review team recommended that the State develop and implement a procedure for 

the control of sensitive or security-related information that provides guidance to identify, 

mark, handle, and protect such information. 

Status: A procedure for the control of sensitive and security-related information has 

been developed and implemented. 

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

Other Topics Covered at the Meeting Included

Program Strengths: The Branch is small; therefore, the staff does both inspections and 

licensing actions. This improves communications between staff and provides increased 

awareness of licensees’ activities. 

Program Weaknesses: Turnover has been a problem for several years. 

Feedback on NRC’s Program

The Division indicated that they appreciated the good support they receive from NRC 

Region IV and enjoy the good relationship and communication that they have with NRC 

in general. 

Staffing and Training 

The Branch is currently fully staffed with a total of four staff positions; although, three 

have one year or less experience. The new staff members are aggressively taking the 

NRC training courses to become qualified in all types of inspections. 

A Region III license reviewer provided training on licensing to the new staff recently. 

The Director and staff commented that it was very good training and thanked NRC for 

the assistance. 

- 3 - ENCLOSURE 
Program Reorganizations 

The State has appointed a new State Health Officer. No other reorganizations have 

taken place since the last review. 

Changes in Program Budget/Funding 

The Division, although fully fee funded, had $135,000 removed from their $1.3 million 

2010 budget. The Division Director does not believe this cut will significantly impact the 

radioactive materials program. 

Materials Inspection Program 

At the time of this periodic meeting, no Priority 1, 2, or 3 or initial inspections were 

overdue. Since becoming fully-staffed, the Division has been able to reduce its backlog 

of lower priority inspections. At the time of this periodic meeting, no inspections were 

overdue. 

Materials Licensing Program

New applications and amendments are completed promptly. However, license renewals 

have a significant backlog. The delay in completing renewals is due to the staff 

shortage. The Branch’s top priority is new applications and amendments. All licensing 

actions are peer reviewed and then reviewed and signed by the Division Director. 

Regulations and Legislative Changes

One legislative change is a bill prohibiting salary increases which affects the branch. 

The State is up to date on all regulation amendments currently required for compatibility. 

The Branch needs to respond to comments on a final regulation (RATS ID 2004-1) 

reviewed by NRC. 

The following amendments will need to be addressed by the Branch in future 

rulemakings or by adopting alternate generic legally binding requirements: 

“Medical Use of Byproduct Material – Minor Corrections and Clarifications,” 10 CFR 

Parts 32 and 35 amendment (72 FR 45147, 54207) that is due for Agreement State 

adoption by October 29, 2010 

“Requirements for Expanded Definition of Byproduct Material,” 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 31, 

32, 33, 35, 61, and 150 amendment (72 FR 55864) that is due for Agreement State 

adoption by November 30, 2010 

- 4 - ENCLOSURE 
“Exemptions from Licensing, General Licenses, and Distribution of Byproduct Material: 

Licensing and Reporting Requirements,” 10 CFR Parts 30, 31, 32, and 150 amendment 

(72 FR 58473) that is due for Agreement State adoption by December 17, 2010 

“Occupational Dose Records, Labeling Containers, and Total Effective Dose Equivalent,” 

10 CFR Parts 19 and 20 amendment (72 FR 68043) that is due for Agreement State 

adoption by February 15, 2011 

Event Reporting, Including Follow-up and Closure Information in NMED

The Branch reported three events to NMED since the 2009 IMPEP review. All of the 

events were appropriately reported to the NRC and were properly entered into, and 

updated within, NMED. 

Response to Incidents and Allegations

The Branch continues to be responsive to notifications of incidents and allegations. 

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

Status of Allegations and Concerns Referred by the NRC for Action

The NRC did not refer any allegations to Mississippi since the last IMPEP review. 

Significant events and generic implications

Staff members were aware of the recent Information Notice issued by the NRC 

regarding industrial gauge shutter issues. The Branch has been keeping up with the 

recent fixed gauge events and is looking at this issue during routine inspections. 

Emerging Technologies

None noted 

Large, Complicated, or Unusual Authorizations for use of Radioactive Materials

None noted 

Current State initiatives

For many years, the Division has been monitoring the Salmon site where two 

underground detonations took place on October 22, 1964, and December 3, 1966. The 

Salmon Site is a 1,470-acre tract of land located about 21 miles southwest of 

Hattiesburg, Mississippi. The tract is located over a geological formation known as the 

Tatum Salt Dome and is the location of the only nuclear weapons test detonations 

known to have been performed in the Eastern United States. 

- 5 - ENCLOSURE 
The Division recently was told that DOE wants to turn over the site to the State. The 

State is anxious to take it and use it for recreational activities. The land is selfsupporting because of its timber resources. The State’s plan is to cut down many of the 

trees and sell them to provide the resources for making the land into a State park. 

The Division’s concern is that the trees have never been analyzed for radioactive 

material deposition, such as tritium. Therefore, the Division plans to start analyzing the 

trees for both radioactive materials and chemical deposition. Although the radioactive 

materials Branch will not be impacted by these activities, the Division’s laboratory will be 

heavily involved in these activities. 

State’s Mechanisms to Evaluate Performance

The Branch uses peer reviews of licensing actions and inspection reports to ensure the 

quality of regulatory products. Inspectors are accompanied annually by the Branch 

Director or Division Director. Also, the Branch Director reviews the monthly inspection 

status reports and maintains a training file for all of the inspectors. 

Current NRC Initiatives

NRC staff discussed ongoing initiatives with the Mississippi representatives. This 

included web-based licensing, maximum possession limits, sharing enforcement 

information, and NSTS activities. 

CONCLUSIONS: 

The branch has spent a noteworthy amount of time and effort on the five recommendations from 

the last IMPEP review. Even with having only two qualified inspectors, the branch has 

continued to maintain public health and safety and continue an effective safety program. 

Mr. Jim Craig, Director, Office of Health Protection, was available for the exit brief. Issues 

discussed were the staff turnover rate, staff retention, and other areas of concern such as the 

licensing backlog. 

Schedule for the Next IMPEP Review 

NRC staff recommends that the next IMPEP review be held, as currently scheduled, in 

FY2013. 

- 6 - ENCLOSURE