ML19208C669
| ML19208C669 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/14/1979 |
| From: | Hendrie J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Mcintyre J OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19208C650 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7909270211 | |
| Download: ML19208C669 (3) | |
Text
"Eco I,.
..k UNITED STATES
' f '$ ?: #f S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
<; agg, !
W ASH IN GTON. D.C. 20555 g-
. j.
August 14, 1979 OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN The Honorable James T. McInty e, Director Office of Management and Budget Washington, D. C.
20503
Dear Mr. McIntyre:
In accordance with Section 236 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is hereby submitting a statement on the Commission actions being taken with regard to the recommendations made by the Comptroller General of the United States in a report entitled, " Higher Penalties Could Deter Violations of Nuclear Regulations." The Commission's response to the GA0 report is enclosed.
As you are aware, the response to this report is past due.
This delay was necessitated by the unexpected and heavy demands on the NRC staff in the af*.ermath of the accident at Three Mile Island.
(
Sincerely, WLt pb-Q
- DJoseph M. Hendrie Chairman
Enclosure:
Response to gat Report 7 9 0 9 o '7 0 -S 2
1
'D o t
,$,smnh V_ u 6
a k[ g' g U d#da p 9
l (s
s On February 16, 1979, the Comptroller General issued a report to the Congress of the United States an the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's use of civil cenalties to enforce its regulations.
This report, entitled " Higher Penalties Could Deter Violations of Nuclear Regulations," made six recommenuations to the Cnairman of the NRC.
Actions taken concerning these i ecommendations are as follows:
1.
- Recommendation - Treat each occurrence of a violation of the same recuirement as a separate violation.
NRC Action - Generally, NRC's current policy concerning this subject is to treat more than one situation, event or occurrence as a single item of noncompliance when:
-- All involve the same basic requirement;
-- Only a single functional organization is involved; and
-- All occur in the same inspection period.
NRC believes it is unnecessary to cite the licensee for each and every example of a violation of a regulatory requirement to achieve the desired level of compliance.
How 'ver, in appropriate :ircumstances continuing items of noncompliance and each example are cited as separate items of ncncompliance.
We believe that this policy focuses the licensee's atten-tion on the matters of concern and has proven generally s ound and ef fec-tive in producing the desi"ed deterre *. effect.
We shall, however, monitor closely its implementation to ensure that it continues to be applied uniformly and fairly.
2.
Recommendation - Treat each occurrence of a continuing violattun as a separate violation for the purpose of computing a ci vil penalty.
NRC Action - Chapter 18, Section 234 of the Atomic E:nergy Act of 1954 as amenced, provides for treating a continuing violation as separate violations each day the viol u. ion runs.
Section 234 goes on te give the Commission discretiorary authority in compromising, mitigating, or remitting such penalties.
The imposition of civil penalties requires the exercise of sound judgment based on the facts of each case and consideration of the purpose of the enforcement action rather than the mechanical application of sanctions.
3.
Recommendation - Establish procedures to ensure that. NRC promptly clarifies regulatory requirements wnich are being m-i.sinterpreted by licensees.
NRC-Action - NRC agrees that timely clarification c1 misinterpreted regulatcry requirements, is necessary and that procedures to assure such timely clarifications are appropriate.
All affectet Jffice Directors will be directed to establish appropriate procedures.
~.
Recommendation - Notify appropriate state utility commissions when NRC imooses c;vil penalties on utilities operating nucl ear coaer plants.
D f(
D b lY F
g S C9 L
P [E' M D j T, oar i
-n
+/fI' f iU; I
h'/'
'fi_
_ NRC Action - Currently NRC has a contact in each state, a State Liaison Officer cesignated by the Governor.
In all cases of elevated enforcement action or other NRC actions of importance to the state, NRC routinely notifies the Liaison Offi ar.
Even prior to the GA0 recommendation, the staff had begun examining the usefulness of notifying regulatory commis-sions directly.
This examination will be completed by August 1979 after which appropriate recommendations will be forwarded to the Commission and a decision reached on the matter.
5.
Recommendation - Assign a higher priority to ~ processing proposed civil penalties, includir.s eliminating the present 5-day advance notice to Commissioners.
NRC Action - Civil penalties are given a high priority within the Commission.
The staff has renewed its emphasis on seeking ways of stream-lining the processing of civil penalties.
Both the regions' timeliness in initially proposing actions and the Headquarters review and coordination of cases have been examined for methods of improving timeliness.
A report has been prepared by the IE staff making specific recommendations for streamlining the process.
Implementation of revised methods is expected by September 1979.
It should be noted that the advance notice to the Commission is now 3-cays.
Elevated enforcement cases have, on occasion, caused interest by the media or the affected parties.
This prior notification is for the purpose of informing the Commissioners of elevated actios.
in the event these act'.uns cause concern or comment.
6.
Recommendation - Establish enforcement criteria, policies and procedures by rulemaking.
NRC Action - NRC is giving serious confideration to the desirability and feasioiiity of placing the enforcement policies in formal. Ges.
Recom-mendations concerning this matter are scheduled to be made t o the Commissioners before December 1979.
p m TU.2 hL
&u C:720