UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

REGION I 

2100 RENAISSANCE BLVD., SUITE 100 

KING OF PRUSSIA, PA 19406-2713 

March 24, 2015 

Keith Bentley, Branch Chief 

Air Protection Branch 

Georgia Environmental Protection Division 

4244 International Parkway, Suite 120 

Atlanta, GA 30354 

Dear Mr. Bentley: 

A periodic meeting with you and your staff was held on February 24, 2015. The purpose of this 

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

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was represented by Catherine Haney, Duncan 

White, and me. 

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

resulting from the discussions. A Management Review Board (MRB) meeting to discuss the 

outcome of the periodic meeting will be scheduled for a future date. Call in information for the 

MRB will be provided in a separate transmission. 

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 (610) 337-5214 or 

via e-mail at Monica.Ford@nrc.gov to discuss your concerns. 

 Sincerely, 

 /RA/ 

 Monica Lynn Ford 

 Regional State Agreements Officer 

 Division of Nuclear Materials Safety 

 U.S. NRC Region I 

Enclosure: 

Periodic Meeting Summary for Georgia 

cc w/encl.: Travis Cartoski, Manager 

 Radioactive Materials Program 

 

 
March 24, 2015 

Keith Bentley, Branch Chief 

Air Protection Branch 

Georgia Environmental Protection Division 

4244 International Parkway, Suite 120 

Atlanta, GA 30354 

Dear Mr. Bentley: 

A periodic meeting with you and your staff was held on February 24, 2015. The purpose of this 

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

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was represented by Catherine Haney, Duncan 

White, and me. 

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

resulting from the discussions. A Management Review Board (MRB) meeting to discuss the 

outcome of the periodic meeting will be scheduled for a future date. Call in information for the 

MRB will be provided in a separate transmission. 

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 (610) 337-5214 or 

via e-mail at Monica.Ford@nrc.gov to discuss your concerns. 

 Sincerely, 

 /RA/ 

 Monica Lynn Ford 

 Regional State Agreements Officer 

 Division of Nuclear Materials Safety 

 U.S. NRC Region I 

Enclosure: 

Periodic Meeting Summary for Georgia 

cc w/encl.: Travis Cartoski, Manager 

 Radioactive Materials Program 

 

Distribution: 

L. Dimmick, NMSS K. Meyer, NMSS D. White, NMSS C. Einberg, NMSS 

P. Henderson, NMSS L. Dudes, NMSS J. Nick, RI D. Collins, RI 

D. Janda, RI M. Ford, RI C. Haney, NMSS 

SUNSI Review Complete: MLF (Reviewer’s Initials) 

S:\State Agreement Files\Georgia\Heightened Oversight-Probation 2013\02-24-15 Periodic meeting summary with Letter.docx 

After declaring this document “An Official Agency Record” it will be released to the Public. ML05089A444 

To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment/enclosure "E" = Copy with 

attachment/enclosure "N" = No copy 

OFFICE DNMS/RI E 

NAME MFord/mlf 

DATE 03/24/15 

 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Enclosure 

AGREEMENT STATE PERIODIC MEETING SUMMARY FOR 

GEORGIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION’S 

RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS PROGRAM 

DATE OF MEETING: February 24, 2015 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

(NRC) Attendees 

Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) 

Attendees 

Monica Ford, State Agreements Officer, 

Region I 

Keith Bentley, Branch Chief, Air Protection Branch 

Catherine Haney, Director, Office of 

Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards 

Karen Hays, Policy Advisor, Air Protection Branch 

Duncan White, Senior Health Physicist, 

Agreement State Programs Branch 

Travis Cartoski, Manager, Radioactive Materials 

Section 

 Barty Simonton, Manager, Environmental Radiation 

Section 

DISCUSSION: 

During the 2008 Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) review of the 

Georgia Agreement State Program (Program), the review team found the State’s performance 

satisfactory, but needs improvement for the indicators Technical Staffing and Training, Status of 

Materials Inspection Program, Technical Quality of Licensing, and Technical Quality of 

Inspections and satisfactory for the indicators Technical Quality of Incidents and Allegations, 

Compatibility Requirements, and Sealed Source and Device Evaluation. Two recommendations 

were made by the IMPEP review team and two recommendations were carried over from the 

previous IMPEP review. On December 4, 2008, the Management Review Board (MRB) met to 

consider the proposed final IMPEP report on the Program. The MRB found the Program 

adequate to protect public health and safety, but needs improvement, and compatible with the 

NRC’s program. The MRB directed NRC staff to initiate a period of monitoring for the Program. 

During the 2012 IMPEP review the review team found the State’s performance unsatisfactory 

for the indicators Technical Quality of Inspections and Technical Quality of Incidents and 

Allegations; satisfactory but needs improvement for the indicators Technical Staffing and 

Training, Status of Materials Inspection Program, and Technical Quality of Licensing; and 

satisfactory for the indicators Compatibility Requirements and Sealed Source and Device 

Evaluation. Twelve recommendations were made by the IMPEP team, one of which was 

carried over from the 2004 and 2008 IMPEP reviews. On January 17, 2013, the MRB met to 

consider the proposed final IMPEP report on the Program. The MRB found the Program 

adequate to protect public health and safety but needs improvement and compatible with the 

NRC’s program. The MRB stated that it would recommend to the Commission that the Program 

be placed on probation and until such time as the Commission votes, the Program would be on 

Heightened Oversight. The MRB also directed that another full IMPEP review take place one 

year from the date of the MRB. SECY-13-0051, conveying the IMPEP findings and the MRB’s 

recommendation, was presented for Commission vote on May 9, 2013. On August 1, 2013, the 

Commission sent a letter to Georgia Governor Nathan Deal informing him of their decision to 

place the Program on probation (ML13193A193). A press release, letters to Congress, and a 

Federal Register Notice were also issued. 
 2 

In January 2014, another full IMPEP review of the Program took place. The review team found 

the State’s performance satisfactory for the indicators Technical Staffing and Training, Technical 

Quality of Licensing Actions, Technical Quality of Incidents and Allegations, and Compatibility 

Requirements; satisfactory but needs improvement for the indicator Technical Quality of 

Inspections; and unsatisfactory for the indicator Status of Materials Inspection Program. One 

new recommendation was made and two recommendations were kept open from the 2012 

IMPEP review. On April 17, 2014, the MRB met to consider the proposed final IMPEP report on 

the Program. The MRB found the Program adequate to protect public health and safety but 

needs improvement and compatible with the NRC’s program. The MRB stated that it would 

recommend to the Commission that the Program be removed from probation and placed on 

heightened oversight. The MRB also directed that a full IMPEP review take place approximately 

two years from the date of the MRB meeting, that a periodic meeting be held in a year, that bimonthly calls between the Program and the NRC continue, and that the Program revise its 

program improvement plan (Plan) accordingly. SECY 14-0074 was transmitted to the 

Commission on July 24, 2014 (ML14115A053) requesting discontinuance of the probation 

period for the Program. SRM-SECY-14-0074 was issued on August 25, 2014, removing the 

Program from probation and placing them on heightened oversight (ML14237A148). 

The Program submitted their original Plan to the NRC, addressing recommendations from the 

2012 IMPEP review, on March 7, 2013 (ML13070A161) and the Plan was approved by the NRC 

in a letter dated April 4, 2013 (ML13079A465). Revisions to this Plan were submitted on 

June 10, 2013 (ML13161A314) and August 21, 2013 (ML13240A136). Subsequent to the 

April 2014 MRB, on June 23, 2014, the Program submitted a new Plan reflecting the 

recommendations made during the 2014 IMPEP review (ML14174A733). Updated Plans were 

submitted on September 10, 2014 (ML14265A191) and November 7, 2014 (ML14337A383). 

As directed by the MRB a periodic meeting was held, approximately one year after the IMPEP 

review, on February 24, 2015. This summary is a reflection of that periodic meeting. 

TOPICS COVERED DURING THE MEETING INCLUDED:

Program Strengths

The Program has implemented weekly staff meetings which have helped to open the lines of 

communication between management and staff. These weekly meetings have also encouraged 

open discussions to ensure all questions on a particular item are addressed. The Program 

routinely conducts in-house training. Self-audits conducted by the Program allow management 

to identify and correct deficiencies on a proactive basis. A new database has been 

implemented which helps to ensure accurate tracking of licensing and inspection activities. 

Program Challenges

The Program feels that staff retention is the biggest challenge for the program. The Program 

currently has three staff vacancies, all of which have come about since the last IMPEP review in 

January 2014. At the time of the periodic meeting the Program was in the process of filling 

these three positions. Program management stated that the Program is looking at ways to 

retain staff. A discussion was held with the Program on strategies to retain staff. The Program 

currently offers work from home days to allow staff more flexibility in their work life balance and 

is going to consider some of the other ideas that were shared during the discussion. 
 3 

Feedback on the NRC’s Program

The Program is interested in using the NRC’s web based licensing system. The Program has 

been in contact with the project manager and relayed some questions on the information 

technology compatibility of the system. At the time of the periodic meeting, the Source 

Management and Protection Branch in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards 

was working on a response. 

Agreement State Program Staffing and Training (2014 IMPEP: Technical Staffing and Training –

Satisfactory)

The Program staffing plan calls for nine technical staff positions and one program manager. At 

the time of the January 2014 IMPEP review the Program had no vacancies. Following the 

IMPEP review two staff left the Program creating two vacancies within the Program. The 

Program was able to post these positions and both positions were filled. At the time of the 

periodic meeting the Program had an additional three vacant staff positions. Of these three 

vacancies, one staff member left the program to take a job outside of the Georgia EPD, one 

staff member is moving to another section within Georgia EPD, and one staff member was 

promoted to the section manager position when the previous section manager left the section in 

October 2014. At the time of the periodic meeting the Program was in the process of hiring to 

fill all three vacant positions. In total the Program has lost four technical staff and one program 

manager since the last IMPEP review. The employment times of those who left the program 

was two months, six months, two years, two years, and six years. 

The Program revised its training manual in June 2013 to incorporate changes that were made in 

NRC’s Inspection Manual Chapter 1248. This revised training manual is being used by new 

staff starting with the Program. Program staff is attending NRC training courses when available. 

Organization

The Georgia Agreement State Program is located in the Air Protection Branch which is part of 

the Georgia EPD. The Georgia EPD is located in the Georgia Department of Natural 

Resources. 

Program Budget/Funding

The Program is 100 percent fee funded. The funds are placed into an account for the 

Radioactive Materials Section. No carryover is allowed from fiscal year to fiscal year. Any 

excess money is used within the Georgia EPD. The Program recently increased the fees 

collected for reciprocity. Program management stated that the current budget allowed for 

sufficient funding of a fully staffed program. 

Inspection and Licensing Programs (2014 IMPEP: Status of Materials Inspection Program –

Unsatisfactory; Technical Quality of Inspections – Satisfactory but needs improvement; 

Technical Quality of Licensing Actions – Satisfactory)

The 2014 IMPEP review found the Program unsatisfactory for the indicator Status of Materials 

Inspection Program due to the Program completing 53 percent of its priority 1, 2, and 3 and 

initial inspections overdue during the review period. Since the last IMPEP review the Program 

has completed one inspection overdue (a priority 2 inspection) out of 55 priority 1, 2, and 3 

inspections completed. The Program has no priority 1, 2, and 3 inspections currently overdue. 
 4 

The Program completed 11 out of 24 initial inspections overdue (greater than 12 months past 

the date of the license issuance). These overdue initial inspections were identified when the 

Program implemented a new database in the fourth quarter of calendar year 2013. At the time 

of the periodic meeting all overdue initial inspections had been completed and no new initial 

inspections were found overdue. The Program’s inspection frequencies are the same as NRC’s 

inspection frequencies as listed in Inspection Manual Chapter 2800. All supervisory 

accompaniments were completed for calendar year 2014. The Program is attempting to 

complete reciprocity inspections as time allows. During the periodic meeting it was discovered 

that the program had a misunderstanding of how to determine if a licensee was a candidate for 

a reciprocity inspection. A discussion was held with the program manager after the periodic 

meeting and a copy of Inspection Manual 1220 Appendix III was provided to offer clarity on this 

topic. The Program originally calculated that eight percent of reciprocity candidates were 

inspected in calendar year 2014, however this number will likely decrease given the additional 

information provided to the program. 

The Program has approximately 460 licensees. Georgia licensees are subject to a five year 

license renewal term. The program has a decommissioning licensing action that has been in 

house since 2008. The Program stated that this action is expected to be completed in March 

2015. All other licensing actions have been in house for less than one year. 

 

The 2014 IMPEP review team generated three recommendations for these performance 

indicators. The recommendations are listed below along with their status. 

Recommendation 1: The review team recommends that the State: (1) implement its 

inspection procedures to ensure that inspectors document the reason for missing temporary job 

site inspections; document details and circumstances of violations in inspection reports and 

NOVs; consider a reduction in inspection frequency for serious violations; and conduct 

performance based inspections; and (2) complete its enforcement procedure for assigning 

severity levels of violations. 

Status: The Program is taking a multi-step approach to resolving this recommendation. In 

order to address item number one, the Program retrained staff on the appropriate 

documentation of an inspection. The training occurred on August 5, 2014. Additional training 

(both in house and NRC offered courses) has been utilized to give specialized refresher training 

on a number of inspection topics. The Program also plans to conduct managerial reviews of a 

selection of inspection reports beginning in March 2015. This review will allow program 

management to ensure that inspections are being conducted using a performance based 

approach (once the inspection procedure is fully updated) and will help to identify weaknesses 

in the program’s inspection abilities. In addition inspection forms are being updated to include 

more performance based characteristics. On September 23, 2014, the Program completed 

training offered by the NRC on performance based inspection techniques. The Program has 

reviewed its inspection procedures to determine what improvements need to be made to 

enhance an inspector’s comprehension of performance based inspections. These procedure 

improvements are in progress. The Program manager is also performing inspection 

accompaniments and will evaluate staff on their performance based and overall inspection 

technique and will provide feedback to each inspector on areas for improvement. 

In order to address item number two, the Program developed and implemented an enforcement 

procedure and provided training to the staff in January 2015. The Program plans to analyze the 

effectiveness of the procedure on an annual basis. 
 5 

Recommendation 2: The review team recommends that the State verify that all previously 

approved medical authorized users have proper documentation of their qualifications, since the 

new requirements were initiated in 2008. (Kept open from the 2012 IMPEP) 

Status: The Program has been working on addressing this recommendation since the 2012 

IMPEP review. As of the periodic meeting, 33 users still require additional documentation to be 

correctly placed on a license as an authorized user. All of the authorized users/ licensees have 

been contacted and the Program is waiting for additional information to complete these actions. 

The Program hopes to have this work completed before the next IMPEP review in fiscal year 

2016. 

Recommendation 3: The review team recommends that the State finalize its procedures for 

pre-licensing requirements and provide training to the staff on the revised procedure.

Status: The Program finalized, in May 2014, its new licensing procedure which included the 

pre-licensing requirements. The Program plans to conduct an annual review of the procedure 

and revise it as necessary. The Program held training on this procedure on July 8, 2014. The 

Program uses checklists based off of the NRC’s worksheets for its Basis of Confidence 

checklists. The program manager plans to perform reviews of pre-licensing activities to ensure 

that the procedure is being used correctly and is effective. The program manager completed a 

review of prelicensing actions for new licenses issued from July 2013 thru January 2015 and 

found three of 13 actions did not have any pre licensing documentation in the chart. Those 

three files were assigned to staff and prelicensing work was completed for each case. Staff was 

then assigned a list of renewals that were completed between July 2013 and January 2015 to 

ensure prelicensing documentation existed in each file. Deficiencies discovered as a result of 

this audit were corrected. Program management stated that audits will now be conducted 

quarterly to ensure this does not happen in the future. 

Regulations and Legislative Changes (2014 IMPEP: Satisfactory)

There have not been any legislative changes or proposals that have affected the Program. 

There are no regulations overdue for adoption. The Program has submitted a license condition 

for the equivalent adoption of the NRC’s Part 37. The NRC provided comments back to the 

Program in February 2015. The Program is working on revisions to their regulations to address 

changes made in regulation amendment tracking sheet 2011-1. The Program plans to submit 

these revisions for review before the end of calendar year 2015. 

Event Reporting (2014 IMPEP: Technical Quality of Incidents and Allegations – Satisfactory)

The Program has reported 20 events to the NRC since the 2014 IMPEP review. All reportable 

events have been reported to the NRC accordingly and appropriate follow-up through NMED 

has occurred. The Program stated that all staff is aware of event reporting criteria. 

Response to Incidents and Allegations

The Program continues to be sensitive to notifications of incidents and allegations. Incidents 

are quickly reviewed for their effect on public health and safety. Staff is dispatched to perform 

onsite investigations when necessary. The Program is aware of the need to maintain an 

effective response to incidents and allegations. The Program has received one allegation since 

the 2014 IMPEP review. This allegation was investigated by the program and a notice of 

violation was subsequently issued to the licensee. 
 6 

CONCLUSIONS: 

Georgia continues to improve upon their Agreement State Program. The Program continues to 

struggle with staff retention. At the time of the periodic meeting the Program had three 

vacancies. The Program has already performed interviews and hopes to fill the three positions 

in the near future. The Program completed no priority 1, one priority 2 and no priority 3 

inspections overdue since the last IMPEP. The Program completed 13 of 24 initial inspections 

in a timeframe greater than one year since the last IMPEP review. These were identified when 

the program transitioned to a new database in late 2013. The Program currently has no 

overdue initial inspections. The Program continues to stay current on its licensing actions and is 

responding to events appropriately. 

NRC staff recommends that the Program continue on Heightened Oversight and the next 

IMPEP review be conducted as scheduled in May 2016.