ML15147A405
| ML15147A405 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/30/1997 |
| From: | NRC/OCM |
| To: | |
| References | |
| Tran-M971030 | |
| Download: ML15147A405 (51) | |
Text
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
ALL EMPLOYEES MEETING (PUBLIC MEETING)
Location: Rockville, Maryland Date: Thursday, October 30, 1997 Pages: 1 - 48 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
1250 I St., N.W.,Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
DISCLAIMER This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on October 30, 1997 on "The Green" Plaza area at One White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland. The meeting was open to public attendance and observation. This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected or edited, and it may contain inaccuracies.
The transcript is intended solely for general informational purposes. As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the matters discussed. Expressions of opinion in this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determination or beliefs. No pleading or other paper may be filed with the Commission in any proceeding as the result of, or addressed to, any statement or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may authorize.
1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
4 ALL EMPLOYEES MEETING 5
6 PUBLIC MEETING 7
8 9 Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10 "The Green" Plaza Area 11 11555 Rockville Pike 12 Rockville, Maryland 13 14 Thursday, October 30, 1997 15 16 The Commission met in open session, pursuant to 17 notice, at 10:30 a.m., the Honorable SHIRLEY A. JACKSON, 18 Chairman of the Commission, presiding.
19 20 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
21 SHIRLEY A. JACKSON, Chairman of the Commission 22 GRETA J. DICUS, Member of the Commission 23 EDWARD McGAFFIGAN, JR., Member of the Commission 24 NILS J. DIAZ, Member of the Commission 25 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
2 1 P RO C E ED I NG S 2 [10:30 a.m.]
3 MRS. NORRY: I would like to welcome all of you to 4 the Seventh Annual All Employees Meeting on the Green.
5 Following the Chairman's remarks there will be an 6 opportunity for questions which the Chairman and the 7 Commissioners can address.
8 For the purpose of those questions coming from 9 here, there are microphones scattered throughout the tent.
10 For those coming from the regions, they will be relayed and 11 will be read this morning by Amy Siller and James Heck.
12 I would like to point out that this meeting is an 13 opportunity for the Commissioners to discuss the strategic 14 direction the Commission is taking. It is not intended to 15 address questions related to personnel policies, practices 16 or general working conditions.
17 Because of that, the agency Labor Management 18 Partnership Committee will be scheduling a meeting hopefully 19 before the end of the year where we will have an opportunity 20 to have such questions brought to the committee. That will 21 be well advertised and will be open to all employees. So 22 please save your questions for that occasion.
23 Chairman Jackson.
24 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Thank you very much, 25 Mrs. Norry.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
3 1 Good morning. With me today are Commissioners 2 Greta Joy Dicus, Nils J. Diaz, and Edward McGaffigan, Jr.
3 On behalf of my Commission colleagues, I would like to 4 welcome all of you to this special meeting of the Commission 5 with the NRC staff. I extend that welcome both to those of 6 you assembled here in the tent at headquarters and also to 7 the groups of employees connected by telephone from the 8 regions.
9 These all employees meetings have become an annual 10 tradition, as Mrs. Norry has said, since 1991. They are 11 intended to stimulate and to facilitate direct communication 12 between the Commission and individual members of the staff, 13 to clarify the Commission's agenda, to engender a shared 14 vision, and to motivate all of you in pursuit of that 15 vision.
16 I should mention that in keeping with these same 17 purposes I also have been holding a series of small group 18 sessions with the staff which have been referred to as 19 Chairman-Staff dialogues. Those sessions which I began in 20 August of this year are proving to be extremely beneficial 21 and positive for all involved, and I eventually hope and 22 indeed plan to meet with each of you within that context.
23 After my introductory presentation, our agenda 24 today will be determined by you, by your questions. I 25 increasingly have become aware of how important it is that ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
4 1 the Commission understand the perspectives and concerns of 2 the staff if we are to be effective in setting and directing 3 agency policy.
4 Conversely, it is equally important that the staff 5 understands the perspective of the Commission, the 6 priorities and concerns that undergird Commission policy, 7 its decisions and directives.
8 So we will respond to your questions today based 9 on our understanding of your concerns as well as our 10 collective and individual perspectives on these concerns.
11 Our format today will be similar to that used for 12 previous sessions, namely, following this introduction, the 13 Commission will entertain questions from any of the 14 employees present here on the green as well as from any of 15 the regional and field offices connected by telephone.
16 As in previous years, we will hold a second 17 session this afternoon at 1:30 since we have insufficient 18 space to accommodate all employees in a single session.
19 Before we address questions, let me take a few 20 moments to review with you what we have accomplished as an 21 agency since our last all employees meeting in October of 22 1996 as well as to discuss a few of the internal and 23 external forces of change that will continue to shape our 24 regulatory environment.
25 First of all, on behalf of the entire Commission, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
5 1 let me extend my hearty congratulations to all of you for 2 reaffirming in an era of rapid and challenging change that 3 the NRC is indeed a highly competent technical agency that 4 employs extraordinarily gifted and dedicated individuals.
5 Let me give you a few examples of some of the more 6 significant NRC accomplishments of the past 12 months.
7 On March 3rd of this year we officially assumed 8 regulatory jurisdiction over the U.S. Enrichment Corporation 9 gaseous diffusion plants in Piketon, Ohio, and Paducah, 10 Kentucky.
11 In May we witnessed the culmination of nearly a 12 decade of effort when the Commission issued the final rules 13 certifying the advanced boiling reactor design by GE Nuclear 14 and the System 80+ design by ABB Combustion Engineering.
15 On July 21st the Commission issued the final 16 license termination rule establishing radiological criteria 17 for decommissioning and release of a facility for 18 unrestricted use and conditions and requirements for 19 restricted release.
20 The NRC also has made significant progress on 21 other fronts in areas that continue to receive Commission 22 focus. Allow me to mention just a few of these areas both 23 in terms of the progress we have made and in terms of what 24 our agenda should be for the near future.
25 The first such area is a grouping we often refer ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
6 1 to as design basis issues. Over the past year we have made 2 significant progress in this area, but our efforts also have 3 made it clear that we need a big picture solution rather 4 than one more strip in a series of band-aids. Currently we 5 have multiple methods of dealing with inoperable and/or 6 degraded conditions, each in a reactor site and each with 7 its own formula for classifying equipment, structures, 8 systems and components.
9 We have 10 CFR 50.59, Generic Letter 91-18, 10 Appendix B, Criterion 16, the technical specifications, the 11 FSARs and other guidance, each created at a different point 12 in the evolution of this agency, each with a specific scope 13 and purpose.
14 The resultant ambiguity and overlap of these 15 methods, guidance documents and requirements have created 16 inconsistent application or gaps in their application that 17 can create confusion and inefficiency both for us and for 18 our various stakeholders, especially those we regulate. The 19 agenda for the near future, then, is to find a unified, 20 consistent approach that also is understandable, is fair, 21 and is risk informed.
22 Another area in which we are seeking a big picture 23 solution concerns the various NRC processes for assessing 24 power reactor licensees, such as the use of the plant issues 25 matrix, the plant performance review, the systematic ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
7 1 assessment of licensee performance, and the senior 2 management meeting.
3 NRR currently is working to devise an overall 4 integrated approach to plant assessment that will clarify 5 the objectives of each assessment method, eliminate 6 redundancies, define roles and responsibilities, ensure 7 consistency, reduce the administrative burden, and match the 8 processes to staff resources.
9 A third area that has received a great deal of 10 attention both from the NRC staff and from outside observers 11 is the potential external regulation by the NRC of 12 Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. Both the NRC 13 and the DOE have created high level task forces to identify 14 the policy and regulatory issues needing analysis and 15 resolution.
16 In a June 1997 meeting Secretary of Energy Pena 17 and I on behalf of the Commission agreed on a pilot program 18 to explore NRC regulation of DOE facilities. This pilot 19 program would simulate NRC regulation of a selected set of 20 DOE nuclear facilities over a two-year period in order to 21 help both agencies gain experience in this area.
22 Simulated regulation, as defined for the purposes 23 of this pilot program, means that the NRC will test 24 regulatory concepts and evaluate a facility and its 25 standards, requirements, procedures, practices and ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
8 1 activities against standards that the NRC believes would be 2 appropriate to ensure safety in view of the nature of the 3 work and the hazards at that pilot facility.
4 Simulated regulation will involve NRC interactions 5 with both DOE and DOE contractors as well as other 6 stakeholders and will involve inspections of each pilot 7 facility to identify implementation issues but will not 8 result in enforcement actions to compel compliance with 9 particular NRC standards or requirements. Any significant 10 inspection findings with a health and safety impact will be 11 transmitted promptly to the appropriate DOE organization for 12 review and corrective actions as appropriate by the pilot 13 facility.
14 In the recently approved NRC budget for fiscal 15 year 1998 the Congress designated $1 million for this pilot 16 program. The NRC and DOE have worked together to prepare a 17 memorandum of understanding (MOU) to establish the pilot 18 program framework. This MOU already has been signed by 19 Secretary Pena. I expect to sign the MOU on behalf of the 20 NRC in the near future once the Commission has completed its 21 formal action on it.
22 Two pilot facilities have been chosen to date, the 23 Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory in California and the Radio 24 Chemistry Facility at the Argonne National Laboratory. We 25 currently are finalizing the NRC teams for the pilot ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
9 1 activities at each of these facilities. In fact, just 2 yesterday an NRC group conducted a site visit to the 3 Lawrence Berkeley facility.
4 The third facility for this initial phase of the 5 pilot in this fiscal year has not been chosen but we are 6 considering the possibility of a fuel storage facility.
7 As we proceed in this area we must ensure that our 8 commitments do not overcome our resources, that is, that any 9 new responsibilities we take on do not compromise our 10 ability to regulate effectively within the scope of our 11 current mission.
12 In an area that is somewhat related we have 13 continued to make progress in our activities with respect to 14 potential regulatory oversight of the Hanford Tank Waste 15 Remediation project. In January of this year we signed an 16 MOU with DOE regarding this project, and in May we 17 established a full-time, permanent, onsite NRC 18 representative to handle our issues. At present we are 19 continuing to establish review criteria relative to 20 regulatory and licensing issues and to review submittals of 21 the DOE contractors.
22 A lot of our work seems tied up with DOE.
23 Certainly in budgetary terms that is not true, but in terms 24 of new initiatives it is true.
25 In January of this year DOE also issued its record ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
10 1 of decision for the storage and disposition of weapons 2 usable fissile materials. The dual track approach that DOE 3 announced involves, first, immobilizing surplus plutonium 4 with high level radioactive waste in a glass or ceramic 5 material for direct geologic disposal, and second, burning 6 some of the surplus plutonium as mixed oxide fuel in 7 existing commercial nuclear reactors.
8 The NRC interest in this approach stems from three 9 areas of potential impact: high level waste, fuel cycle 10 facilities, and commercial nuclear power reactors.
11 The Commission received a briefing from DOE 12 shortly after the record of decision was issued and in 13 February and March the NRC sponsored two technical seminars, 14 both open to the public, in which nuclear industry 15 representatives made presentations on the fabrication of MOX 16 fuel and its use in commercial reactors. More recently the 17 Commission received a second DOE briefing and update in 18 which the DOE acquisition strategy for MOX fuel fabrication 19 and irradiation services was described.
20 As this area continues to unfold we must ensure 21 again that the NRC is prepared to perform its emerging 22 regulatory role in a manner that ensures protection of 23 public health and safety and that avoids unnecessary delays 24 or costs.
25 Another area in which we have made considerable ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
11 1 strides relates to information technology and information 2 management. To ensure that the proper focus and emphasis is 3 given to this area, the chief information officer has 4 reorganized both processes and structure to fully integrate 5 information management into program activities.
6 A significant accomplishment in this area is the 7 establishment and the beginning implementation of a 8 requirement that all budget requests related to information 9 technology must be evaluated under the capital planning and 10 information control (CPIC) process before an information 11 technology system is included in the budget.
12 The CIO also has developed a comprehensive plan to 13 repair or to replace systems that require change to be ready 14 for the year 2000.
15 This set of topics is only a snapshot based on my 16 promise to be reasonably brief, but other issues that could 17 be covered include the potential for tritium production in 18 commercial light water reactors, the business process 19 reengineering and guidance consolidation ongoing within 20 NMSS, and various initiatives that come under the heading of 21 regulatory excellence or regulatory effectiveness.
22 In addition, this focus on change and transition 23 should not minimize the tremendous accomplishment 24 represented by your day-to-day efforts on tasks that fall 25 within the more traditional scope of NRC efforts. What is ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
12 1 significant to note is that as an agency that is seeing 2 changes on a variety of internal and external fronts we have 3 continued to be successful in adapting to and positioning 4 ourselves for those changes.
5 A significant factor in this success, which in 6 itself has been both a challenge and an accomplishment, is 7 that we have operated for much of this year with a new 8 organizational alignment and in many cases with a new 9 management team.
10 Rarely, if ever, has the NRC gone through a year 11 with so many individuals taking on new positions of 12 significant leadership and management responsibility 13 concomitant with our organizational realignment at the 14 beginning of 1997. In almost every case these individuals 15 have experienced challenges considerably greater or 16 different in character from anything they had faced before, 17 and I believe it is to their credit that the present 18 management team, both in the regions and in headquarters, 19 has made the transition so smoothly.
20 Now let me get to my last topic and real area of 21 focus today. In making my rounds through various groups of 22 working level NRC staff I have become increasingly aware of 23 how important it is that each employee understands his or 24 her roles and responsibilities, that is, what we do and why 25 we do it.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
13 1 I also have noticed that the eyes sometimes glaze 2 over when people hear the term "strategic assessment and 3 rebaselining." I should tell you that Commissioner 4 McGaffigan has brought his DSI book with him this morning.
5 The eyes glaze over primarily because it has been viewed by 6 some as a theoretical exercise with little or no practical 7 value. Today I intend to mention strategic assessment and 8 rebaselining repeatedly, and I am going to ask each of you 9 to pay close attention because I intend to personalize the 10 message as much as I can to emphasize how planning, budget 11 and strategic assessment have directly impacted and will 12 continue to impact you and your daily tasks.
13 The foundation of strategic assessment and 14 rebaselining rests on change, the new elements being added 15 to our mission, the changing world of those we regulate, 16 that is, new business environments, which dictate that we 17 must change; new opportunities to use new tools to become 18 more effective in our regulation; and changing expectations 19 of our various stakeholders, including the public, the 20 Executive Branch, as evidenced by Vice President Gore's 21 national performance review, and the Congress.
22 Perhaps more than in any recent time the U.S.
23 Congress has taken a direct and intrusive interest in 24 holding federal agencies accountable and demanding that they 25 justify their resource needs, their expenditures, and even ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
14 1 their existence.
2 None of you are unfamiliar with terms like 3 reinventing government or with concepts like do more with 4 less or with the actual impact of budget cuts. What is 5 important to realize, however, is that the stakes are 6 continuing to rise. Let me give you an example.
7 Most of you probably are aware of the information 8 management issue known as the "year 2000 problem," referring 9 to the fact that most computer systems that manage dates and 10 schedules are based on only the last two digits of the 11 calendar year in question and therefore cannot differentiate 12 between, for example, the year 2000 and the year 1900.
13 What you may not know is that the member of the 14 Congress who oversees information technology issues in the 15 House of Representatives recently issued a report card in 16 which federal agencies were graded on their progress in 17 addressing this problem. This represents the high attention 18 being given to this area by the Congress.
19 But now consider the impact at a practical level.
20 Four agencies were put on notice by the Office of Management 21 and Budget (OMB) that they will not receive any funding for 22 buying new computer and other information technology systems 23 in fiscal year 1999 until they have plans in place to 24 address the year 2000 problem in mission critical computer 25 systems.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
15 1 The point of this example is to illustrate the 2 degree of detail and the level of interest that the Congress 3 has in how well agencies can justify what they do, why they 4 do it, and the resources required.
5 Looking backward from this perspective, the reason 6 becomes obvious for the level of effort and attention the 7 Commission has focused on strategic assessment, the 8 strategic plan, and the linked performance plan. Over two 9 years ago we undertook the strategic assessment and 10 rebaselining.
11 Phase 1 of that initiative was painstaking but 12 simple in nature. We attempted to answer two basic 13 questions across the agency and in exhaustive detail:
14 First, what do we do, and second, why do we do it?
15 This phase, which was completed in April of 1996, 16 identified a series of topics on which the Commission needed 17 to deliberate and to make decisions. We call these topics 18 direction setting issues.
19 Phase 2 involved the development of options to 20 address each of these issues. The Commission shared its 21 preliminary views with stakeholders through the Internet and 22 public meetings. The staff reviewed and summarized the 23 comments from stakeholders on each issue paper associated 24 with the DSIs and the Commission made its final decisions on 25 the DSIs. This phase was essentially completed in August ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
16 1 1996 except for a few issues.
2 In phase 3 we developed a new strategic plan based 3 on the results of the previous two phases undergirded by the 4 DSI decisions in which we set forth the long-term directions 5 and goals of the NRC.
6 In accordance with the Government Performance and 7 Results Act, what is referred to as GPRA, the strategic plan 8 will be reviewed annually and updated every three years.
9 When last month we submitted to the Congress and the OMB the 10 NRC fiscal year 1997 to fiscal year 2002 strategic plan, 11 phase 3 of the strategic assessment and rebaselining had 12 officially come to an end.
13 I also should note that a copy of the strategic 14 plan was distributed to all NRC employees this week, and I 15 would encourage each of you to review it and to provide your 16 feedback.
17 This brings us to the current and final phase of 18 strategic assessment and rebaselining: implementation, or 19 what has been referred to as the rollout of the strategic 20 plan. Regardless of what your involvement has been to date, 21 at this point in the process every employee should sit up 22 and take notice.
23 With the issuance of the strategic plan and the 24 more dynamic performance plan that flows from it we are 25 putting into place a new agency planning process. This is ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
17 1 not, I repeat, not, although it may look like it initially, 2 an additional task to be added to your workload, because it 3 is the way to accomplish your work. In this phase we are no 4 longer talking about a special one-time effort but rather a 5 way of doing business.
6 Each manager, and to a lesser extent each 7 employee, must understand, first, how to develop an 8 operating plan for your area of NRC functionality.
9 Second, how that plan fits into or is linked to 10 the overall strategic plan.
11 Third, how to integrate that plan with the budget 12 process.
13 Fourth, how to conduct performance monitoring of 14 the plan as it is executed.
15 In fact, I would go so far as to pledge to the 16 working level staff that your managers in the not too 17 distant future will be sitting down, if they have not 18 already done so, to explain to you the linkages of the 19 strategic plan with your specific area of work. They have 20 been asked to do that. And I will be meeting with the SES 21 managers next month to emphasize precisely this need and 22 expectation.
23 The new agency planning process will provide an 24 effective approach for planning, budgeting and assessing our 25 performance against the goals of the strategic plan, which ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
18 1 is what the Congress is specifically looking for.
2 The chief financial officer (CFO) in conjunction 3 with the other members of the Executive Council has 4 developed a new planning and performance management system 5 that will involve all employees in the planning process down 6 to the branch and section levels. The four main components 7 of the system are as follows:
8 First, setting the strategic direction and 9 performance expectations for the specific organization.
10 Second, determining the resources and the planned 11 accomplishments necessary to meet those expectations.
12 Third, measuring and monitoring performance 13 against the established expectations.
14 Fourth, assessing performance, developing lessons 15 learned, and applying the results.
16 This planning and performance system integrates 17 many of the ongoing efforts associated with the operating 18 plan, with program reviews and program evaluations. In many 19 ways this planning process represents a paradigm shift that 20 relates not only to planning and resource management but in 21 the way that the NRC conducts its business in general.
22 Again I encourage all of you to become familiar 23 with the goals of the strategic plan and to provide feedback 24 on ways that we can more seamlessly integrate planning into 25 our day-to-day efforts.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
19 1 So let me attempt to link all of this together.
2 The more information and planning involvement that 3 the staff has at the first line level the more success we 4 will have in meeting and adhering to the strategic plan.
5 The more success we have at adhering to the strategic plan 6 the more outcomes as opposed to outputs orientated we will 7 be, and the more likely we will be to have consistency and 8 acceptable performance in our programs and in our budget 9 process in a way clearly linked to agency goals as laid out 10 by the Commission. Given the current level of congressional 11 and stakeholder scrutiny, without success and consistency in 12 these areas, and in particular in our budget process, we 13 cannot expect to succeed in accomplishing our mission as we 14 understand it today.
15 In summary, I hope that I have reemphasized the 16 significant progress that we have made in a number of areas, 17 the issues on which we must continue to remain focused, and 18 in particular the need for additional effort in planning and 19 financial management. Most importantly, I hope I also have 20 exhibited my pride in serving with you in this truly 21 remarkable agency.
22 Now I would like to turn this meeting over to you.
23 I would ask each of you who wishes to ask a question to use 24 one of the microphones so that everyone can hear your 25 question. Please feel free to direct your question to any ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
20 1 one of us. If your question is intended for all of us, I 2 will refer it to each of my Commission colleagues in turn so 3 that we can move it along in an efficient manner.
4 We are ready for the first question. May we have 5 the first question, please.
6 I understand that Mr. James Heck and Ms. Amy 7 Siller will be the regional question readers.
8 QUESTION: In 1974 the NRC was given a threefold 9 mission, to protect public health and safety, common defense 10 and security, and the environment. That mission remains 11 unchanged, but the context in which that mission is 12 practiced has changed and continues to change.
13 We have the increased use of radioisotopes in 14 medicine and industry, increased attention to the hazard 15 posed by poorly designed storage and disposal facilities, 16 the decision by several reactor operators to decommission 17 their reactors early, the need to decommission materials on 18 licensees' properties now that the licensees have moved on 19 to other things, the approaching end of reactor design life, 20 and the consequent need for more decommissioning and the 21 lack of interest in design life extension and siting new 22 reactors.
23 I have a two-part question.
24 Part 1, how does the agency intend to change the 25 use of resources in response to these changes?
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
21 1 Part 2, how does the agency intend to help 2 employees learn new skills to adapt to these changes?
3 Thank you very much.
4 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Thank you.
5 I can answer that for you. First of all, there 6 are specific initiatives under way in each of the areas and 7 any number of other areas, both the ones that you have 8 mentioned and others. More broadly, the issue of the use of 9 resources is precisely what the new agency planning process 10 and framework is meant to help us address. It is also why 11 it was squarely rooted in the initial phase of strategic 12 assessment and rebaselining.
13 It is very important that we understand all of the 14 things down to the activity level that we are doing, what 15 the history has been, how external forces are affecting 16 either our ability to continue doing them or even the need, 17 necessity or motivation to continue to do them.
18 In order for us to in fact on the financial side 19 justify to the Congress, at a time where we are still 20 essentially 100 percent fee based and our licensees are 21 undergoing economic stress of their own, the budget that we 22 think we need, we have to be very careful that we understand 23 all the things we need to do, why we need to do them, what 24 should be on the fee base, perhaps what not, and that we can 25 demonstrate results, that is, outcomes, and not just that we ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
22 1 are carrying out a series of activities. That's why the 2 long discussion I gave you a moment ago about strategic 3 assessment and rebaselining, the strategic plan which the 4 Congress is deadly serious about, and about the new planning 5 framework linked to it.
6 Concomitant with developing this process we are 7 also developing and putting into place new resource 8 management systems. These are things that I know are new to 9 people who fundamentally are engineers and scientists, the 10 technically oriented. As you know, I as well as my 11 colleagues also have scientific backgrounds.
12 Nonetheless, the changes that we face and our 13 ability to respond to those changes in real time really 14 require different, better, more integrated planning than we 15 have ever done before, predicated on the best set of 16 assumptions that we can make, based on the best data we have 17 about what things are coming down the pike, but that's also 18 why the plan and the planning process is evergreen, because 19 our long-term goals and vision will not change overnight, 20 but we do have to be able to evolve how we carry out our 21 business.
22 As far as new skills are concerned, there is an 23 effort under way looking at in fact having skills 24 assessments done both in terms of our existing set of skills 25 in our population as well as new skills that may be needed ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
23 1 for new initiatives such as our PRA implementation plan and 2 its various aspects, or new ways of doing our fundamental 3 jobs as well as new tasks we may take on.
4 These things then will be married, and it's being 5 carried out under the umbrella of the Office of Human 6 Resources and in Mrs. Norry's line organization to ensure 7 that we have a strategy that relates to how people should be 8 trained, what jobs they can do, and how that folds into any 9 other planning we need to do, including recruitment. So 10 that, in a nutshell, is kind of the net-net answer to your 11 question.
12 Is there another question?
13 MS. FRATTALI: Yes. I'm Dr. Sandra Frattali from 14 the Office of Research. In your original remarks you 15 mentioned meetings directly with working staff. You 16 mentioned that you would like to continue these meetings and 17 to do them with each one of us. I have a question about 18 these meetings.
19 Are they formal? Are they informal? How are they 20 arranged?
21 How is the staff prepped?
22 Is management present? Is your staff present?
23 Is the exchange of information open?
24 How do you choose who to speak with?
25 In other words, is this truly an exchange of ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
24 1 information with the working staff, or is it filtered 2 through the existing system so that you hear what you always 3 have heard in the past?
4 Thank you.
5 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Thank you for the question.
6 [Applause.]
7 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: As they say, the proof will be 8 in the pudding. I've carried out a number of meetings in 9 the regions and a few here in headquarters.
10 The answer to your question is, no, management is 11 not present. I talk directly with the staff.
12 For instance, in the regions I meet with 13 everybody, but I meet with groupings that relate to the 14 work. So I meet with the Division of Reactor Projects, all 15 of the people; the Division of Reactor System, all of the 16 people; DURMA; the Division of Nuclear Materials Safety and 17 Safeguards.
18 Unfettered discussion. There is no preparation 19 necessary. I'm not prepared; I'm not looking for formal 20 statements from people; they're not being queried on their 21 jobs or job performance; I'm just there to listen, to 22 address their questions, to lay out a vision not unlike what 23 I have discussed already this morning, and to get feedback 24 and to try to address people's questions.
25 What I don't do, which is the same as here today, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
25 1 is address specific personnel issues, specific work 2 condition issues, but to try to understand in the large 3 people's concerns and to try to engender a shared vision.
4 But it is a very informal, unstructured process. Since I 5 was just in Region I, I would invite you to speak with any 6 of your friends in the region and have them tell you how the 7 discussions went.
8 I thank you for your question.
9 Is there another question?
10 QUESTION: Good morning, Chairman Jackson, good 11 morning Commissioners.
12 My first question from the region. As you may 13 know, there has been a significant loss of senior resident 14 and resident inspector personnel from program over the past 15 year both to industry and to other NRC jobs. What is the 16 Commission doing to enhance retention and recruitment of 17 high quality resident inspectors?
18 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Thank you for the question.
19 We're aware of the fact that we need to be very concerned 20 about stabilization of the ranks of the resident inspectors.
21 So in addition to looking specifically at having done a job 22 task analysis of the resident inspector program, we are also 23 looking at issues and possible mechanisms for how to bring 24 people into the agency as well as the generalized terms and 25 conditions of the work of those people, which I am not going ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
26 1 to discuss.
2 As I visited the various regions I have been made 3 very aware of the administrative burden that a number of the 4 resident inspectors feel they have. Part of some of what we 5 are doing in the large, such as the integrated assessment of 6 the reactor assessment programs that we have as well as a 7 number of information management initiatives that are under 8 way, is meant to address work conditions.
9 I would invite you afterwards to in fact talk with 10 Mrs. Norry or Mr. Callan, the EDO, because there are a 11 number of specific initiatives under way having to do with 12 recruitment and retention of resident inspection personnel.
13 Thank you.
14 Is there another question?
15 QUESTION: I have another question from the 16 region. Can the Commission provide an overview or summary 17 of its vision of risk assessment for materials programs? We 18 understand that a project is currently under way to evaluate 19 risk assessment in this area, but does the Commission 20 envision use of standard PRA techniques or a different 21 approach?
22 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Thank you. I'll speak and then 23 I would invite any of my Commission colleagues who wish to 24 comment.
25 You are correct that there is an effort under way ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
27 1 that Mrs. Federline from the Office of Nuclear Materials 2 Safety and Safeguards spoke to at a recent Commission 3 meeting on the PRA implementation plan. It is an effort 4 meant to look not only at PRA as such and its use in nuclear 5 materials activities, but at the use of other risk or hazard 6 assessment methodologies.
7 The nuclear materials area, as you know, is very 8 diverse. Depending upon whether one is talking about 9 decommissioning a site, making an assessment for a possible 10 high level waste geologic repository, looking at issues 11 related to fuel cycle facilities, or the use of 12 radioisotopes in medicine, then the particular risk 13 assessment methodology that may be relevant could be 14 different.
15 For instance, when one is talking about a geologic 16 repository, there is a whole methodology and set of 17 activities associated with it in the performance assessment 18 area, and while it bears a number of things in common with 19 PRA techniques, they aren't exactly the same.
20 When one is talking about fuel cycle facilities, 21 there is what is known as an integrated safety assessment 22 that takes account of the fact that the fuel cycle 23 facilities not only are handling special nuclear material, 24 but they essentially are chemical plants. There is a 25 rulemaking under way for revision to Part 70 that has that ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
28 1 aspect folded in.
2 Similarly, if one is talking about the use of 3 radioisotopes in medicine, one wants to have as risk 4 informed an approach as possible, but again the techniques 5 may be different.
6 So risk assessment may have a slightly different 7 life form, depending upon the exact application, but what 8 the Commission is encouraging is as much cross fertilization 9 and feed in from one area to the other of techniques as they 10 are developed and as they mature in order to have as robust 11 a risk assessment framework as we can have but in addition 12 to potentiate all the activities to move them along at a 13 faster pace.
14 Let me ask Commissioner Dicus if she has any 15 comments.
16 COMMISSIONER DICUS: I think the issue that the 17 Chairman brought up regarding the wide range of uses with 18 radioactive materials is a great deal of the problem in 19 being able to get into risk assessments and risk informed 20 type regulations and activities, because one size will not 21 fit all, and that's the problem that they are trying to 22 wrestle with at this time, and having to use the various 23 techniques and perhaps devise some new techniques to address 24 it.
25 Nevertheless, I think it's critically important ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
29 that we do this because it's in this area, in the use of 1
2 radioactive materials in this area that we have the public 3 being exposed to radiation; it's not in the reactor side of 4 the house; it's in the materials side of the house that the 5 public is being exposed unnecessarily in some cases when we 6 lose control of that material, or in the case of medicine, 7 where it's intentional. I think that underscores the need 8 to approach our regulatory structure in a risk informed 9 manner, but it's not easy to do given the diversity of the 10 uses.
11 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Thank you.
12 Is there another question?
13 MR. RANDALL: I'm John Randall from the Research 14 Office. In September an SRM came out on separating 15 rulemaking from research and also consolidating research 16 from other offices into Research. In that memo I could not 17 detect a long-term vision by the Commission about what the 18 research function should be at the NRC. Could you address 19 that, please?
20 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: The rulemaking for a time has 21 been obviously only a part of the activity of the Office of 22 Research. The Commission's decision to have the rulemaking 23 moved into the program offices related to having that 24 rulemaking closer to where the regulatory activity was 25 occurring.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
30 1 In terms of a long-term vision for the Office of 2 Research, I would ask you to in fact review DSI 22 where the 3 Commission lays out its position in that regard. But let me 4 try to give you a few key elements.
5 The Commission envisions Research being the 6 repository of certain high level core competencies that 7 undergird the technical work that is the heart of how we 8 make our regulatory judgments. To that end, in fact the 9 Office of Research has been asked to develop an assessment 10 and a working vision for itself of what those core 11 competencies need to be.
12 In addition, the Commission has said that it 13 expects the Office of Research not only to do confirmatory 14 research or to be responsive to user needs, but in fact to 15 do anticipatory research, namely, looking ahead and trying 16 to understand where there are key issues that need to be 17 addressed that relate to safety questions that arise, or 18 potential safety questions. So it has both a real time need 19 to undergird the technical work that relates to the 20 day-to-day regulatory program as well as a going forward, 21 looking ahead perspective in terms of what it does.
22 Finally, the Office of Research has been asked to 23 look at how it prioritizes its activities to ensure that 24 what it does is focused and is as risk informed as the 25 activities that go on in the day-to-day research programs ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
31 1 and to use that as the basis not only of deciding what new 2 work to do, but to decide what work not to do, or work to 3 sunset.
4 Being the fundamental repository of the technical 5 expertise in the areas necessary for us to carry out our 6 research program, to have a vision that is risk informed in 7 terms of how it chooses to do the work it does, and how it 8 prioritizes that work and to have a focus that is both 9 confirmatory or user need oriented but anticipatory are 10 critical elements.
11 I don't know if any of my fellow Commissioners 12 would like to add anything, but if you want to when we have 13 a break, Commissioner McGaffigan has DSI 22 here.
14 I think Commissioner Diaz would like to make a 15 comment.
16 COMMISSIONER DIAZ: I can see some of the 17 background of the question. It is well known that when 18 resources get scare research is first to be cut. This is 19 true universally.
20 I think the long-term vision of the Commission was 21 that we need to ensure that we have a strong research 22 organization that is very plugged into the issues, that is 23 accountable, and that everybody can recognize its expertise.
24 I believe the change that has been made has been to 25 stabilize it and actually make it into a long-term component ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
32 1 of the NRC not threatened by additional cuts but a vital 2 part of what we do. Thank you.
3 MR. RANDALL: I think Commissioner Diaz answered 4 the question I was going to ask. I agree with the 5 Commission's preliminary view on DSI 22. I read that pretty 6 carefully, and what you have just said, Chairman Jackson, 7 but none of that can happen without the resources. I think 8 that's a very difficult problem for the Research Office 9 right now.
10 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I think today you have a 11 Commission that is committed to and understands the clear 12 importance of a research organization within an agency like 13 the NRC. In fact, I spoke to that at the recent water 14 reactor safety meeting. At the same time, the Office of 15 Research itself has an opportunity to develop an operational 16 vision consistent with what you heard from Commission Diaz 17 and myself.
18 I am well aware of the kind of, let us call it, 19 savage budget cuts over the years well before this 20 Commission was in place that the Office of Research has 21 faced, but at the same time we are in budget reality space.
22 As I have said and tried to say in terms of my 23 overall remarks, the secret to ensuring that we have the 24 kind of stabilized, respected research organization that 25 undergirds our regulatory program but is forward looking is ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
33 1 that in fact that organization itself is able to clearly lay 2 out and prioritize what it needs to do and that it is hooked 3 into where the action is and is not necessarily holding on 4 to where the action is not. So I think that, in an 5 overarching way, should give you a vision, and I think you 6 have a new leadership that is oriented to ensuring that in 7 fact that occurs.
8 Is there another question?
9 QUESTION: Madam Chairman, the past year or year 10 and a half there have been a high number of retirements 11 among high ranked officials in the agency, particularly in 12 the program offices. In the memory of some this has been a 13 rather unusual exodus with a substantial loss of experience.
14 In light of the unique responsibilities of the agency in 15 protection of the nation's safety and health, does this 16 drain of experience pose any concern to the members of the 17 Commission?
18 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: At any given time there are 19 obviously turnovers in the ranks both of staff and 20 management. If there is expertise that exits when those 21 individuals exit, that is always an issue of concern. But I 22 think in fact the Commission and I certainly are comforted 23 by the fact that we have an extremely able group of managers 24 who have come up and taken the place of those who have gone, 25 who themselves have come up through and under the tutelage ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
34 1 of many of the people who have left, but they also are 2 managers who have a vision that is oriented to positioning 3 the agency for change, who know what they have to do to try 4 not only to stabilize and enhance the staff we currently 5 have, but to build it up as necessary through recruitment 6 and/or training of individuals.
7 I think it is true that a number of people with 8 many years of experience have left, but it is a kind of 9 transition that many organizations undergoing change have 10 experienced, and I have every confidence in the new 11 management team and that we are going to come through this 12 and are coming through it with flying colors.
13 I don't know if any of my fellow Commissioners 14 have any comments they wish to make.
15 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN: I'd just echo the 16 Chairman's remarks. I have total confidence in the team 17 that we have in place. I think one of the things that we 18 are going to do better in the future is succession planning.
19 Mr. Callan is already trying to think through the future and 20 put in place ideas for how this generation of managers will 21 itself be succeeded. So I echo the Chairman's remarks.
22 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: That's an excellent point.
23 Commissioner Diaz.
24 COMMISSIONER DIAZ: I think Commissioner 25 McGaffigan last year said that he had met ten wise men in ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
35 1 the Commission staff. I would like to say that I have met a 2 lot more and that we feel very comfortable with the wisdom 3 that we get from you, and we thank you for it.
4 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I would just repeat that except 5 to say men and women.
6 [Laughter.]
7 COMMISSIONER DIAZ: It was a generic issue.
8 [Laughter.]
9 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Yes. It's like humankind or 10 mankind. Thank you.
11 Another question, please?
12 MS. KOTRA: Good morning, Madam Chairman.
13 Dr. Janet Kotra from the Division of Waste Management. I 14 have observed that periodically various commissions take aim 15 at the length of the concurrence process in generating 16 issues for the Commission. I've also observed that every 17 time that happens a shadow concurrence process emerged that 18 may be just as onerous before the actual concurrence process 19 is initiated. Setting aside the somewhat demoralizing 20 impact that that has on those of us at the bottom of the 21 food chain, I gather that is more appropriately addressed by 22 Mrs. Norry's initiative.
23 I was wondering if the Commission had given 24 thought from a resource and efficiency point of view whether 25 this is truly resulting (a) in superior products that arrive ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
36 1 for the Commission's consideration, and secondly, whether 2 this is the most efficient and effective way to do business.
3 Thank you.
4 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Thank you. I think there are 5 two things that can be said in response to your question.
6 One is that the Commission, this Commission in 7 particular, is very focused on the efficiency with which the 8 work gets done, and in some sense you could argue almost 9 creates forcing functions in terms of the kinds of deadlines 10 that we set for the work. That obviously does not get down 11 to the detailed level of how the actual concurrence process 12 occurs. It's very important, though -- and that's the role 13 of the management -- that work does get the appropriate 14 review before it comes to the Commission.
15 Nonetheless, I know that the concurrence process 16 is something that Mr. Callan has as something that he is 17 looking at and he knows of the Commission interest in it, 18 and there in fact is an experiment, I believe, that is just 19 beginning in the Office of Research looking at ways to 20 shorten that process. I think, depending upon how we are 21 informed by what comes out of that, there are opportunities 22 for improvement in that regard.
23 I don't think it is the Commission's role to get 24 down into the details to say who should sign off on what, 25 but rather to indicate to Mr. Callan its interest in seeing ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
37 1 that we have an efficient but an effective process that 2 results in reasonable time frames in products coming to the 3 Commission but with the right quality, and I think the kind 4 of initiative that is under way under Dr. Knapp's tutelage 5 in the Office of Research is very important in this regard.
6 Thank you.
7 Are there other questions.
8 MR. MARKLEY: Good morning, Chairman and 9 Commissioners. My name is Anthony Markley. I'm in the 10 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. From my time of 11 working with the Commission I have gained some appreciation 12 of the outside influences and concerns that the Commission 13 deals with.
14 Having returned to the staff and gone through the 15 experiences of generating operating plans and things of that 16 nature and becoming acquainted with the challenge of 17 resources, and what have you, I have come away very troubled 18 in one regard. In terms of dealing with supervisor ratios, 19 I think the agency will probably be able to handle that 20 situation, although it will present diminished opportunities 21 for members of the staff.
22 But the area that is even more troubling than that 23 is the outside influences that deal with the percentage of 24 the agency grade 14's and above. Historically the NRC and 25 NASA have been highly graded technical agencies that ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
38 1 required a great level of technical expertise to accomplish 2 their health and safety mission. With this outside pressure 3 to reduce grades and to bring in people of lower grades to 4 essentially do the equivalent work, I am concerned that this 5 is going to cause us a great deal of challenge.
6 To use an educational field metaphor, if we 7 continue in the reduction of grade levels and reduction of 8 opportunities to the people, are we going to essentially 9 deal with a dumbed-down version of the NRC for the future to 10 deal with these changing fields and challenges that we are 11 going through? Will the Commission at some time realize or 12 come to understand that there is a point where it may be 13 necessary to draw a line in the sand and say that if we 14 continue declines in our resources, the grade levels, the 15 decline of expertise, that we will no longer be able to 16 accomplish our safety mission?
17 I'd like to get your views on that subject.
18 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Let me state, first of all, 19 unequivocally that the Commission obviously is not 20 interested in having a "dumbed-down staff." That does not 21 help us accomplish our mission.
22 Secondly, we clearly understand the need for 23 technically, highly competent staff.
24 However, at the same time we have to balance 25 various realities. As I said earlier, and it's a very ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
39 1 important point, in order for us to draw the line in the 2 sand, we have to know where the line ought to be. That's 3 number one. In order to stabilize ourselves relative to 4 whether it's grade levels or overall head count, we again 5 have to be very clear on what it is we must do and what we 6 need in the way of resources, including human resources and 7 the talents associated with that, to accomplish those tasks.
8 You heard this morning mention made of various 9 initiatives, including succession planning, skills 10 assessment, et cetera, and all of that is being done to 11 address the kind of issue that you are talking about, 12 namely, to come away with a clear understanding of what it 13 is we now must do, what kind of people and skills do we need 14 to do it, what do we have, and what does that imply about 15 the skills mix, and then all of that works its way through 16 the human resource system in terms of grades and so forth.
17 Before the Commission can step out and make a 18 statement it needs to know exactly where that line in the 19 sand is, and that has to be developed by the various 20 initiatives and by the managers who have responsibility to 21 do that. The worst thing in the world is to cry wolf and to 22 go out and say, you know, you're killing us, because it has 23 happened in budget land. The Congress looks at your 24 credibility; the Office of Personnel Management looks at 25 your credibility; the OMB looks at your credibility. So ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
40 1 we're very concerned about these sorts of issues, but we 2 want to be sure that when we step out we have credible 3 statements to make.
4 Is there another question.
5 QUESTION: This question is directed to the 6 Commission. President Clinton signed an executive order 7 requesting federal agencies to involve historically black 8 colleges and universities in their activities. What has the 9 NRC or what does the NRC plan to do to involve faculty, 10 staff and students from historically black colleges and 11 universities?
12 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I can't give you a detailed 13 response. What I am going to do is to refer you to 14 Mrs. Irene Little to give you the specific statistics and 15 set of activities that we carry out.
16 I would just say to you that in the general sense, 17 just as when we had our recent EEO briefing of the 18 Commission, the Commission is committed to having the 19 appropriate involvement, both in terms of employees as well 20 as our outreach activities, with all historically 21 underrepresented groups, and we had a particularly focused 22 discussion on Hispanic Americans at the previous EEO 23 briefing of the Commission.
24 So let me take that question under advisement. We 25 will get you specific information, and if there is a problem ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
41 1 relative to the executive order vis-a-vis the resources we 2 have available, then we can address it at that point. Thank 3 you.
4 Is there another question?
5 QUESTION: I have another question from the 6 region. Given the recent troubles experienced by vendors 7 that manufacture approved spent fuel storage casks through 8 ongoing bankruptcy and regulatory issues, how concerned is 9 the Commission that some reactors may have to shut down in 10 the not too distant future because of the lack of viable 11 options for removing spent fuel from the spent fuel pools?
12 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Obviously the issue of spent 13 fuel storage capacity at operating reactors is a very 14 relevant issue and an issue that affects the continued 15 operation. While I think it is an issue that is of concern, 16 it is not at this point a crisis. I am well aware of the 17 bankruptcy of one of the cask vendors, but I don't believe 18 that they are the only vendors whose casks we have approved 19 for use for dry cask storage at reactor sites.
20 In the end, yes, we have a concern, but that 21 concern cannot overshadow the public health and safety 22 responsibility that we have. Again, I guess my statement to 23 you is, yes, we are well aware of the bankruptcy at least in 24 one case; yes, we generally know there is an issue with 25 respect to spent fuel storage capacity, particularly in the ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
42 1 spent fuel pools at reactor sites; yes, that makes licensees 2 more dependent upon the use of dry casks; but, yes, there is 3 more than one dry cask vendor whose designs we have 4 certified or licensed. Thank you.
5 Commissioner.
6 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN: If I could just try to 7 add to that. Many of the licensees are giving increased 8 attention to their suppliers and taking more ownership 9 responsibility for their suppliers. I think this crisis is 10 partly in the hands of the licensees and working with their 11 suppliers.
12 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Thank you. That's an excellent 13 point, because it's in their interest.
14 Further questions.
15 QUESTION: Another regional question. This is for 16 the Commission and it's a two-part question regarding 17 safety.
18 What is the Commission doing to ensure that the 19 safety impact of the economic deregulation of the electric 20 utility industry is minimized, and has the Commission 21 considered the potential impact of economic competition 22 between nuclear power producers on the willingness of the 23 licensees to freely share important safety information?
24 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I will make an initial comment 25 and call on my Commission colleagues.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
43 1 You heard me discuss in my opening remarks the 2 integrated review the Commission has asked the staff to make 3 of our plant assessment processes and try to look at what 4 role they are meant to serve, eliminate duplication or 5 redundancy, but to ensure that, roughly speaking, the 6 waterfront is covered. That's number one.
7 Let me just make an overarching statement. The 8 overarching statement is that all of the initiatives that 9 the Commission has asked the staff to undertake are oriented 10 exactly to this end, to ensure through the use, for 11 instance, of PRA and risk informed regulation that we and 12 our licensees stay focused on the things that have the 13 greatest risk significance, that having done that, that we 14 lay out our expectations and enforce them.
15 Second, the staff is taking a look at our various 16 plant assessment processes up to and including the senior 17 management meeting.
18 As part of review of the senior management meeting 19 process the Commission has asked the staff to work to 20 develop objective performance indicators, including ones as 21 they are available that are risk informed but ones that in 22 fact are oriented to being able to detect early on signs of 23 economic stress that may be affecting the safety performance 24 of our licensees.
25 The issue of how freely information is shared is ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
44 1 in fact something that the industry itself is looking at, 2 both at the level of INPO as well as with NEI, because there 3 is a clear understanding that information sharing and peer 4 review and those linked processes are very important.
5 I think it's something that from our point of view 6 we have to watch. I don't know that we have any plans at 7 this particular time to force inter-utility sharing of 8 information, but we look at the results.
9 We do have certain information requirements in 10 terms of the use of reliability data that we have been 11 working with the industry on, but that has to do with that 12 information coming to us. That does link to how the 13 information is gathered in the industry.
14 I know it's something that Commissioner Diaz has 15 also thought about. So I'm going to ask him to speak to 16 this.
17 COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Thank you. This issue of 18 deregulation is like preparing for a storm but you don't 19 know whether it's a tornado or just a mild thunderstorm 20 coming. I think what we have done is try to maintain the 21 stability of the processes and the accountability of the 22 processes from both the safety viewpoint, the ownership, the 23 decommissioning. Every one of those issues that we can put 24 our hands on we have directed the staff to be aware, to 25 track them, and to maintain for the record what are the ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
45 1 different interactions.
2 I think at the present time, like the Chairman 3 said, there is little we can do until we get a better 4 definition of the storm, but it is an issue that is upon us, 5 and I think we are very concerned about it and I think we 6 have taken the necessary steps to address it.
7 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Commissioner Dicus.
8 COMMISSIONER DICUS: I agree with what has been 9 said so far. To add another point to it, particularly on 10 the deregulation and the impacts that this may have, we are 11 also working with the rate-setting bodies, making them very 12 much aware of our concerns with the safety culture as plants 13 become stressed perhaps economically or as they move 14 economically to better be competitive in the market. We are 15 dealing with NARUC, even with the FERC, and making them 16 aware of the issues, together with some rulemaking that is 17 going on.
18 With regard to sharing information, clearly, as 19 you have heard, that's not necessarily an area that we can 20 get into other than to be aware of it and to continue to 21 encourage the sharing of information. As a positive note, 22 I've even had a few of either the utilities or industry reps 23 suggest that the sharing may increase in order to survive 24 the nuclear part of power generation. So there could be a 25 very positive impact.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
46 1 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Commissioner McGaffigan.
2 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN: Let me add a couple 3 points. First of all, safety doesn't have to be an economic 4 problem. There is a virtuous quadrant of low SALP scores, 5 l's and 1.25's, and low cost. We'd like the entire industry 6 to be in that area if it could get there. So safety doesn't 7 have to cost.
8 One aspect of economic deregulation that we are 9 going to have to grapple with that could be a safety benefit 10 is there may be significant consolidation as a result of 11 economic deregulation with the quality of the licensees 12 perhaps going up on average as a result of economic 13 deregulation. That's the hope. That is going to be the 14 result of economic decisions that people make, not our 15 decisions, but it's a possible outcome that you will get on 16 average better operators in the end.
17 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Thank you. I would just have 18 two additional comments to add. One is that I've always 19 made the point that good economic performance and safety go 20 hand in hand in the sense that if you have a plant that is 21 well run and it's reliable, the kinds of safety systems and 22 issues that we are concerned about are ones that are at the 23 heart of having a reliable and well run operation.
24 Money comes into play many times when licensees 25 have dug themselves into a hole in terms of their safety ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
47 1 performance and in terms of not having taken care of their 2 plants all the way along.
3 It's as if you have a car, always my favorite 4 analogy, and you don't take care of it. If you just let it 5 fall apart on you and now you have to try to rebuild the 6 body, replace the brakes, put in a new steering column, et 7 cetera, et cetera, you're going to have a much more 8 expensive process; if you haven't tuned the engine, you 9 don't put oil in it, and you now have to rebuild or replace 10 that engine, then you have a very expensive proposition.
11 That's very different than operating at a certain 12 baseline where you have a certain baseline performance and 13 you try to stay there, and then I think you propagate 14 directly into what the Commissioner has said.
15 Having said that, we have made the point, as 16 Commissioner Dicus has said, with various state regulatory 17 entities, and certainly in my discussions with the members 18 of Congress on the Hill I have made the point, that in terms 19 of any kind of a transition to a deregulated regime, then 20 one wants to not necessarily have unlevel playing fields but 21 there are concerns relative to the financial wherewithal of 22 these companies.
23 Again, we may have big players, bigger players who 24 are better players who emerge out of all of this. So other 25 than our being sure that we are looking at the right things ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
48 1 and that we take the actions that we need to take and 2 speaking out as appropriate, I think we are doing all that 3 can reasonably be done at this point.
4 As Commissioner McGaffigan said, good economic 5 performance and deregulation and competition are not 6 necessarily bad. It's bad for those that have dug 7 themselves into a hole that they have to get out of.
8 Another question? This is your big chance. It's 9 our big chance.
10 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN: I think the region has 11 had more questions than headquarters so far.
12 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Are there other questions here 13 in headquarters?
14 If not, let me thank you very much. We have 15 enjoyed it. It's good to see you.
16 [Applause.]
17 [Whereupon, at 11:48 a.m., the public meeting was 18 concluded.]
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the attached description of a meeting of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission entitled:
TITLE OF MEETING: ALL EMPLOYEES MEETING -- PUBLIC MEETING PLACE OF MEETING: Rockville, Maryland DATE OF MEETING: Thursday, October 30, 1997 was held as herein appears, is a true and accurate record of the meeting, and that this is the original transcript thereof taken stenographically by me, thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under the direction of the court reporting company Transcriber:____________
Reporter: Mike Paulus