Get the best hourly candidates. Learn more.

Find Testing and Abatement Contractors

Home Contractor? Click Here

See Sold-Out Shows! Tickets Available on StubHub.com

March 14, 2008

Bill to stop quarry uses nearby n-plant as reason enough

One of the bills introduced in state Senate to stop a proposed quarry in southern Limestone County would ban quarries within 10 miles of a nuclear power plant. At issue is the Nashville-based Rogers Group's plan to extract limestone on a 209-acre site off U.S. 31 near Tanner. The bills have been in the Senate Local Legislation Committee No. 1, chaired by Sen. Zeb Little (D-Cullman), since the first week of the session. Little opposes the bills, and has delayed calling a public hearing. Some of those favoring the bills used stalling tactics Tuesday and Thursday as a protest. After it became clear Thursday that the filibuster would continue, the Senate adjourned until March 25.

[Source: Bob Lowry (Times staff writer), "Is quarry a Limestone or state issue?", The Huntsville Times (Alabama), March 14, 2008]

February 17, 2007

Alabama - Natural gas field, 45 miles northeast of Birmingham, excites landowners

Dominion Resources has amassed drilling rights for tens of thousands of acres in St. Clair County in the past two years. "Some people are going around saying this is going to be their retirement", Jackie Biddle said of fellow landowners who have sold their mineral rights to Dominion. "To me, that seems a little pie in the sky." The front page sory in Birmingham News today called it "gas fever", and noted that more than 250 people packed the Old Courthouse in Ashville to hear Dominion's proposal to expand drilling in the Big Canoe Creek Field.

[Ref: Russell Hubbard, "State gas board sets new drilling rules | Some in Ashville have dreams of mineral wealth", Birmingham News, February 17, 2007, pp. 1A, 7A]

June 14, 2006

Alabama's radiation control program - IMPEP update

Alabama is a Nuclear Regulatory Commission "Agreement State". Instead of letting federal government license and regulate users of radioactive material, the state does this job. Here's excerpts from hot-off-the-press report of NRC-sponsored review of the state's program:

Source: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, proposed final report, "Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program Review of Alabama Agreement State Program, April 3-7, 2006", June 14, 2006

The Alabama Agreement State program is administered by the Department of Public Health (the Department), Office of Radiation Control (the Office). The Director of the Office reports to the State Health Officer, who serves as the Director of the Department. Organization charts for the Department and the Office are included as Appendix B. At the time of the review, the Alabama Agreement State program regulated 438 specific licenses authorizing Agreement materials. ...

Technical Staffing and Training

The Office has a Director, an Assistant Director, and four technical Branches: the Inspection Branch; the Licensing Branch; the Healing Arts and X-Ray Branch; and the Emergency Planning and Environmental Monitoring Branch. The Inspection and Licensing Branches make up the Agreement State program. The Office Director spends approximately twenty percent of his time on Agreement State program activities. Among other duties, the Assistant Director, who is a Certified Health Physicist, provides technical assistance to the staff and handles allegations.

There are two technical staff positions and one Branch Director position in both the Inspection Branch and Licensing Branch. One staff member is new to the Alabama materials program and one staff member has returned to the Office after 20 years of service with another Agreement State program. The Office currently has no vacancies in the Agreement State program.

The Office Director is very supportive of staff training opportunities, as well as staff participation in working groups. All but two staff members have attended the five-week Health Physics course conducted by the Oak Ridge Institute of Science and Education. The remaining two staff members were attending the course during the week of the review. The Inspection Branch Director and primary inspector both attended the NRC Security Systems and Principles Course in Autumn 2005.

The review team noted that the Office experienced stable funding during the review period due to the Alabama law that established radioactive materials licensing fees at 75 percent of the fees that the NRC charges its materials licenses. The Office is fully funded from fees.

The Office has a documented training plan that is consistent with the guidance in the NRC/Organization of Agreement States Training Working Group Report and NRCās Inspection Manual Chapter (MC) 1246. They also have on-the-job training to supplement the course work so that individuals may broaden their work areas. New staff members are assigned increasingly complex licensing duties and accompany more experienced inspectors during increasingly complicated inspections under the direction of their Branch Director. Inspectors are assigned independent inspections after demonstrating competence during accompaniment evaluations by the Branch Director. The team confirmed that the new staff are in the process of gaining qualifications at an appropriate pace.

The Radiation Advisory Board (the Board) is an advisory board to the State Health Officer. The Board serves in an advisory capacity when requested by the State Health Officer. Several members of the Board are either licensed themselves or work for licensees. Members of the Board are required to file annual Ethics Commission Statements regarding their service and possible conflicts of interests. ...

Status of Materials Inspection Program

... A Department memorandum dated May 12, 2004, entitled "License and Registration Inspections Priority," established that inspections be conducted in accordance with the priority schedule provided in MC 2800, with more frequent inspections in some categories. For example, all NRC Priority T (telephone) programs are considered Priority 5 by the Office. The memorandum also established a policy for more frequent inspections of licensees whose previous inspection identified violations, based on severity and repetition.

The Office maintains an "Inspections Due" database, sorted by priority, to identify the inspection due dates of all licensees. The database contains sufficient information for proper management of the inspection program. The Inspection Branch conducts an average of 106 inspections per year. Only one inspection was conducted overdue during the review period. This inspection was incorrectly coded as an out-of-State licensee, which resulted in a delay in conducting the initial inspection. The percentage of overdue inspections was below one percent of the inspections conducted by the Office during the review period.

The review team noted that the Office routinely performed inspections of materials licensees on an unannounced basis, except for initial inspections. Initial inspections of new licensees are scheduled for nine months after the date the license is issued. An inspection is performed before the end of the first year of license issuance independent of whether materials have been acquired or not. Fifty-five initial inspections were performed during the review period. All initial inspections were conducted within the scheduled interval, except for the one overdue inspection mentioned above.

NRC allows Agreement State licensees 180 days of use of radioactive materials in NRC jurisdiction under reciprocity. Alabama regulations only allow 30 days of use of radioactive materials in the State under reciprocity. After 30 days, an out-of-State Alabama license must be obtained. Holders of these out-of-State licenses are required to give a notification in advance of any use of radioactive material in Alabama.

Because of the short reciprocity interval, the review team could not directly apply the reciprocity inspection goal of 20 percent, as prescribed by MC 1220, to this program. Many companies have out-of-State Alabama licenses and are inspected annually by the program. The review team found that many of the reciprocity licensees entered the State for one to two days throughout the year for jobs lasting only a few hours each trip, and thus attempted inspections were not able to be completed. Office management indicated that performing reciprocity inspections remains a goal of the Office. The review team concluded that the Officeās performance of reciprocity inspections over the review period was acceptable.

The timeliness of the issuance of inspection findings was evaluated by the teamās review of inspection casework. Fifty-four inspection reports from 25 inspection files were reviewed for timeliness. All inspection reports are signed by the Inspection Branch Director. The inspection results were transmitted to licensees within 30 days, with four exceptions. All four overdue letters involved enforcement actions. ...

Technical Quality of Inspections

... Based on ... casework reviews, the review team found that routine inspections covered all aspects of a licenseeās radiation protection program. Inspection reports were thorough, complete, consistent, and of high quality, with sufficient documentation to ensure acceptable performance with respect to health and safety by the licensee. Previous violations and other findings are reviewed during each subsequent inspection. Draft reports were reviewed and approved by supervisors in a timely manner. Inspection findings led to appropriate and prompt regulatory action. Team inspections were performed when appropriate and for training purposes.

Documentation in the inspection files adequately supported any cited violations, recommendations made to licensees, unresolved safety issues, and discussions held with the licensee during exit meetings. The review team noted that the inspector checklists do not specifically mention public dose assessments and the effluent Constraint Rule requirements, and therefore there was no documentation of inspection reviews in these areas. The review team discussed the benefits of including these items in the inspector checklists for completeness.

During the review period, the Inspection Branch Director performed annual accompaniments of the fully-qualified inspector and performed additional accompaniments of the new inspector going through the qualification process. The review team noted that the Inspection Branch Director conducted materials inspections on a routine basis (about once per month); however, since the Officeās internal procedures do not require accompaniments for a Director, he was not accompanied annually. The review team found this practice acceptable because of the extensive experience of the Inspection Branch Director.

The review team noted that all technical staff members are equipped with a combination cell phone/two-way radio for communication. Inspectors can contact the Office immediately if there is a problem in the field. The inspectors can also be reached anywhere in the State of Alabama if the need arises.

The Office maintains a sufficient number and variety of survey instruments to perform radiological surveys of materials licensees. The review team examined the Stateās instrumentation and observed that the survey instruments were calibrated and operable.

The review team accompanied one materials inspector during the period of March 7-8, 2006. The inspector was accompanied on inspections of a medical licensee and an industrial radiography licensee. These accompaniments are identified in Appendix C. During the accompaniments, the inspector demonstrated appropriate performance-based inspection techniques and knowledge of regulations. The inspector was prepared and was thorough in the reviews of the licensees' radiation safety programs. Overall, the technical performance of the inspector was excellent and adequately assessed radiological health and safety. ...

Technical Quality of Licensing Actions

The review team examined completed licensing casework and interviewed license reviewers for 17 specific licenses. Licensing actions were reviewed for completeness, consistency, proper radioisotopes and quantities, qualifications of authorized users, adequate facilities and equipment, adherence to good health physics practices, financial assurance, operating and emergency procedures, appropriateness of the license conditions, and overall technical quality. The casework was also reviewed for timeliness, use of appropriate deficiency letters and cover letters, reference to appropriate regulations, product certifications, supporting documentation, consideration of enforcement history, pre-licensing visits, supervisory review as indicated, and proper signatures. The casework was checked for retention of necessary documents and supporting data.

The licensing casework was selected to provide a representative sample of licensing actions that were completed during the review period. Licensing actions selected for evaluation included three new licenses, five renewals, nine amendments, and two terminations. The sampling included the following types of licenses: medical (institution, private practice, and broad scope), nuclear laundry, industrial radiography, well logging, portable and fixed gauges, radioisotope and sealed source radiotherapy, decontamination services, and a nuclear pharmacy. A listing of the licensing casework evaluated can be found in Appendix D.

The review team found that the licensing actions were thorough, complete, consistent, and of acceptable quality with health and safety issues properly addressed. Licenses are issued for a five year period under a timely renewal system. License tie-down conditions were stated clearly, backed by information contained in the file, and inspectible. Standard license conditions are used. The licenseeās compliance history was taken into account when reviewing all renewal applications and major amendments. Terminated licensing actions are well documented, showing appropriate transfer and survey records. The exemptions noted in the questionnaire response relative to this indicator were determined to be appropriate and well documented by license conditions.

In addition to review by the license reviewer, the Licensing Branch Director performs a technical review on all licensing actions. All licenses are signed by the Office Director and the State Health Officer.

The review team examined the licensees that the Office had determined met the criteria for the increased controls per COMSECY-05-0028. The review team determined that the Office had correctly identified the licensees that require increased controls based on this criteria, and will continue to issue increased controls to any additional licensees, as appropriate. Each licensee was issued a license amendment requiring increased controls in accordance with the time lines established by the Commission in the Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) for COMSECY- 05-0028. The Office has started to plan for the initial set of inspections of these licensees in accordance with the increased control requirements. ...

Technical Quality of Incident and Allegation Activities

In evaluating the effectiveness of the Officeās actions in responding to incidents, the review team examined the Officeās response to the questionnaire relative to this indicator, evaluated selected incidents reported for Alabama in the Nuclear Material Events Database (NMED) against those contained in the Office files, and evaluated the casework and supporting documentation for radioactive materials incidents. A list of the incident casework examined, with case-specific comments, is included in Appendix E. The team also reviewed the Officeās response to allegations involving radioactive materials including those referred to the State by the NRC during the review period. The review team also discussed the Officeās incident and allegation policies, procedures, files, and tracking system with the staff.

The review team identified 174 incidents in NMED for the State of Alabama during the review period and selected 17 incidents for review. The incidents included: damaged equipment, equipment failures, a fire, medical events, an abnormal occurrence, lost and stolen radioactive material, leaking sources, and an overexposure. The review team found that the Officeās response to incidents was complete and comprehensive. Initial responses were prompt and well-coordinated, and the level of effort was commensurate with the health and safety significance. The Office dispatched inspectors for on-site investigations when appropriate, and took suitable enforcement and follow-up actions.

The responsibility for initial response and follow-up actions to materials incidents may be assigned to any member of the materials program. Upon receipt, Office staff reviews the incident, decides on the appropriate response, and logs the incident into the Officeās log book. Documentation related to an incident is placed both in an incident file and in the appropriate license docket file.

The Officeās incident procedure indicates that events requiring immediate notification be provided to the NRC within 24 hours, and 30-60 day reportable events are provided to the NRC in monthly reports. The review team noted that the Office usually meets the 24 hour notification of significant events. All the incidents requiring 30-60 day notification were reported to the NRC within the required time frame. The Office uses the latest NMED software to track all radioactive material incidents. Three staff members are trained in the use of the computer system and one staff member manages the Stateās submissions. The Office promptly responded to requests for information from the NMED contractor by e-mails with attachments.

In evaluating the effectiveness of Alabama's actions responding to allegations, the review team examined the Officeās questionnaire response relative to this indicator, casework for the three allegations referred to the State by the NRC as well as the casework for four additional allegations reported directly to the State. The team noted that the State receives a relatively small number of allegations. The Office evaluates each allegation and determines the proper level of response. The review of the casework indicated that the Office took prompt and appropriate action in response to the concerns raised. All of the allegations reviewed were appropriately closed and the review team noted that allegations were treated and documented internally in the same manner as incidents. The State makes every effort to protect an allegerās identity, and it is only released for a good cause. There were no performance issues identified from the review of the casework documentation. ...

Compatibility Requirements

Legislative authority to create the program and enter into an Agreement with the NRC was granted in 1963 (Acts of 1963, No. 582). The State Board of Health is designated as the State's radiation control agency. ...

The State regulations for control of radiation are located in Chapter 420-3-26 of the Alabama regulations for Control of Radiation and apply to ionizing and non-ionizing radiation, whether emitted from radionuclides or devices. Alabama requires a license for possession and use of radioactive materials, including naturally-occurring and accelerator-produced radioactive material.

The review team examined the procedures used in the Stateās rulemaking process and found that the public and other interested parties are offered an opportunity to comment on proposed regulation changes. Rulemaking responsibility is assigned to the Office Director. Draft regulations are sent to the NRC for review. The package of proposed regulations prepared by the Office requires review by the Alabama Office of General Counsel and approval from the State Committee of Public Health (SCPH). The State has Emergency Rule capability, if public health and safety is at risk. Although the Stateās rules and regulations are not subject to "sunset" laws, the entire program is subject to a sunset review every four years. The most recent review in 2005 recommended for continuance of the program.

The review team evaluated Alabamaās response to the questionnaire relative to this indicator, reviewed the status of regulations required to be adopted by the State under the Commissionās adequacy and compatibility policy, and verified the adoption of regulations with data obtained from the Office of State and Tribal Programās State Regulation Status Data Sheet. Since the previous IMPEP review, the Department adopted two regulation amendments. These regulations were:

* "Respiratory Protection and Controls to Restrict Internal Exposures," 10 CFR Part 20 amendment (64 FR 54543; 64 FR 55524).

* "Revision of the Skin Dose Limit," 10 CFR Part 20 amendment (67 FR 16298).

Currently, the Office has six regulations in one rule package that is out for public comment. The package was expected to be adopted by SCPH by May 17, 2006, and should have become effective 35 days after publication. The entire rule package was delayed within STP, due to the resolution of issues associated with the regulation "Requirements for Certain Generally Licensed Industrial Devices Containing Byproduct Material." These regulations are:

* "Energy Compensation Sources for Well Logging and Other Regulatory Clarifications," 10 CFR Part 39 amendment (65 FR 20337) that became effective May 17, 2000 and was to be implemented by May 17, 2003.

* "New Dosimetry Technology," 10 CFR Parts 34, 36, and 39 amendments (65 FR 63749) that became effective January 8, 2001 and was to be implemented by January 8, 2004.

* "Requirements for Certain Generally Licensed Industrial Devices Containing Byproduct Material," 10 CFR Parts 30, 31, and 32 amendments (65 FR 79162) that became effective February 16, 2001 and was to be implemented by February 16, 2004.

* "Medical Use of Byproduct Material," 10 CFR 20, 32, and 35 amendments (67 FR 20249) that became effective October 24, 2002 and was to be implemented by October 24, 2005.

* "Financial Assurance for Materials Licensees," 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, and 70 amendment (67 FR 57327) that became effective December 3, 2003.

* "Medical Use of Byproduct Material - Recognition of Specialty Boards," 10 CFR Part 35 amendments (70 FR 16336) that became effective April 29, 2005.

The Office will need to address the following three regulations in upcoming rulemakings or by adopting alternate legally-binding requirements:

* "Compatibility with IAEA Transportation Safety Standards and Other Transportation Safety Amendments," 10 CFR Part 71 amendment (69 FR 3697) that became effective October 1, 2004.

* "Security Requirements for Portable Gauges Containing Byproduct Material," 10 CFR Part 30 amendment (70 FR 2001) that became effective July 11, 2005.

* "Medical Use of Byproduct Material - Recognition of Specialty Boards; Correction," 10 CFR Part 35 amendment (71 FR 1926) that became effective January 12, 2006.

In order to inform portable gauge licensees of the new requirements for security of portable gauges in a timely manner, on January 15, 2004, the Office issued a letter describing acceptable means of the use of two independent physical controls. ...

The full report, and internal NRC cover memo, are available via ADAMS as ACN ML061660477, released to public on June 24, 2006.

August 5, 2005

* Nuke plant plans aired; State to offer tax breaks if Bellefonte site is chosen
David Brewer, Huntsville Times (AL)

A committee from NuStart executives has been looking at Bellefonte this week and will continue touring the site next week before visiting five others the group is studying. Garry Miller of NuStart said the consortium will select two sites in late September and immediately start the process of applying to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a construction and operating license for them. The target date for getting a license is 2010. One site, he said, will be chosen for a General Electric-designed reactor and the other for one designed by Westinghouse. Jack Bailey, vice president of TVA's nuclear asset recovery division and a member of the NuStart group studying the six sites, said Bellefonte has several advantages, including several structures that could be used at a new plant - cooling towers, office buildings, a water intake line from the Tennessee River and its switchyard and transmission lines. Bailey said the proposal calls for building a plant in four to five years for about $4.5 billion. 2,000 to 3,000 workers would be needed to build the new plant and 800 to 1,000 permanent employees to operate both units.

Alabama officials plan to offer tax breaks as an incentive: "We'll put together an aggressive response", Neal Wade, director of Alabama Development Office, told about 50 local, state and federal officials at Scottsboro High School. State Sen. Lowell Barron, D-Fyffe, said he will do everything he can to lure a NuStart partner to Bellefonte, including getting legislation enacted to provide tax incentives to the utility. Tax incentive packages in Alabama are not authorized for utilities. "We understand about incentives," Barron told NuStart Wednesday. "We've used them to lure Mercedes, Toyota" and other companies. "We'll step up to the plate big time," he said. "I'll personally introduce legislation to make it happen. I can assure you the incentives and the support (are) in place." U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Mobile, who also attended Wednesday's meeting, said the recently passed federal energy bill will make it easier for utilities to build nuclear plants.

March 19, 2004

* Farley - City of Ashford, Alabama supports license renewal

December 19, 2003

* Fed Ex can't find 2.1 Ci Xe-133 source which supposedly left Oakland CA Friday; shipment was from GE Vallecitos, bound for University of Alabama

October 30, 2003

Alabama's performance as agreement state praised by NRC

NRC periodicaly evaluates the performance of each agreement state. The review of Alabama's program is summarized in a letter available here. The state has 429 specific licensees. The program is funded by fees, which are legislatively set at 75% of the applicable fee as charged by federal NRC.

June 3, 2002

Alabama was one of four states that joined in a lawsuit with the Southeast Compact Commission in suing North Carolina for failing to meet its obligation. A press release about the suit is available here.

March 1, 2002

The owner of a pawn shop in Pritchard Alabama called police yesterday and told tem about a radiography camera that someone left on his front step about a month ago. The device had been stolen several months earlier from a Houston-based company. Officials from Alabama Department of Public Health determined that the Ir-192 source was secure in the camera. The AP report called it an "industrial x-ray machine" and noted that the 37-pound device, called a SPEC150, looks like a heavy duty lunch box.