ML20036D671
| ML20036D671 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/04/1996 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL (OIG) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20036D670 | List: |
| References | |
| OIG-96E-18, NUDOCS 9610220185 | |
| Download: ML20036D671 (18) | |
Text
,
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATOR' COMMISSION
/
BETTER DEFINITION AND PLANNING NEEDED TO GUIDE NRC'S TRANSITION TO A RISK-INFORMED, PERFORMAJCE-BASED REGULATORY SYSTEM OIG/96E-18 October 4,1996 SPECIALEVALUATION REPORT gWREcy c
s, 4,
i s
b O
w O
H E
,1/
g Q
N Y4 0
4 ms 102 5 961004 O&.M-BREPTS GEN CF
[
cc:
H. Thompson, OEDO
(
J. Milhoan, OEDO J. Blaha, OEDO J. Hoyle, SECY K. Cyr, OGC D. Rathbun, OCA
{
R. Scroggins, OC P. Norry, ADM G. Cranford, IRM R. Bangart, OSP F. Miraglia, NRR E. Jordan, AEOD D. Monison, RES C. Paperiello, NMSS J. Funches, ICC W. Beecher, OPA H. Miller, RI f
S. Ebneter, RII A. Beach, RIII
(
L. Callan, RIV t
OPA-RI OPA-RII
{
OPA-RIII OPA-RIV OPA-RIV-FO f
f
NRC's Transition to a Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulatory System REPORT SYNOPSIS The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is shifting its regulations for nuclear power reactors to a more risk-informed and performance-based approach. The Chairman has noted this approach will allow the targeting of NRC and industry resources on those aspects of nuclear operations that have the greatest safety significance and will tend to relieve regulatory burden as a result. One of the agency's most significant efforts toward developing risk-informed, performance-based regulations is the recently implemented Maintenance Rule (10 CFR 50.65).
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) evaluated the agency's efforts to shift to risk-informed and performance-based regulations, using the recently implemented Maintenance Rule as the primary example of that effort.
Through implementation of the Maintenance Rule and other pilot projects being undenaken as pan of the PRA Implementation plan, NRC is developing an understanding of how a risk-informed, performance-based regulatory system will function. In order to facilitate the transition to this new regulatory system, we believe the agency needs e define performance-based regulation and describe how the agency plans to implement it. Although NRC is in the process of developing final enforcement guidance for the Maintenance Rule, the agency also needs to address the broader issue of how performance-based regulation will affect the ciing of violations and the use of enforcement. In addition, we believe the t
transition to a risk-informed, performance-based system would benefit from the development of a comprehensive strategy for implementing these regulatory changes including specific objectives and a means to measure progress toward meeting those objectives.
OlG,96r IN Pagei
NRC's Transition to a Risk-informed, Performance-Based Regulatory System TABLE OF CONTENTS REPORT SYNOPSIS i
IhTRODUCTION I
BACKGROUND l
EVALUATION RESULTS 3
DEFINING PERFORMANCE-BASED REGULATION AND ITS EFFECTS ON ENFORCEhENT 4
DEVELOPING A COMPRElIENSIVE STRATEGY FOR TIIE TRANSTTION TO PERFORMANCE-BASED REGULATION
.. 6 CONCLUSIONS 7
MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION 7
APPENDICES f
I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 11 U.S. NRC Functional Organization Chan III Major Contributors To This Repon IV Glossary: Of6ce of the Inspector General Products
NRC's Transition to a Risk-informed. Performance-Based Regulatory System INTRODUCTION The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is shifting its regulations for nuclear power reactors to a more risk-informed and performance-based approach. The Chairman has noted this approach will allow the targeting of NRC and industry resources on those aspects of nuclear operations that have the greatest safety significance and will tend to relieve regulatory burden as a result. One of the agency's most significant efforts toward developing risk-informed, performance-based regulations is the recently implemented Maintenance Rule (10 CFR 50.65).
Under the Maintenance Rule, licensees use insights from probabilistic risk assessments (PRA)' and other operational insights (risk-informed) in setting maintenance performance goals (performance-based), for the plant's systems, stmetures and components that are reviewed and then monitored by NRC to ensure that the plant operates reliably and safely.
f In the 1997 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, the Senate Committee on Energy and Water encouraged the NRC to continue its movement toward replacing unnecessary, prescriptive regulatory requirements and guidance with performance-based regulation. The Committee stated that a performance-
{
based regulatory approach can substantially improve the regulatory process and result in a mote effective use of both NRC and licensee resources. In addition, the Nuclear Enegy Institute (NEI), the industry's trade association, endorses the shift to more risk-informed and performance-based regulation.
The OfTice of the Inspector General (OlG) evaluated the agency's efforts to shift to risk-informed and performance-based regulations, using the recently implemented Maintenance Rule as the primary example of that effort. Appendix
{
I contains additional information regarding our objectives, scope, and methodology.
f BACKGROUND f
{
NRC has been working for many years to transition from deterministic, complian ce-orient ed regulation toward risk-inform ed, perform ance-bas e%dregulation
'PRA is an analytical process that estimates the potential risk to public health and safety of different plant operating conditions using the operational and maintenance practices of a plant.
OlG/96F IN Page I f
NRC's Transition to a Risk-info.med, Pertormance-Based Regulatory System while maintaining acceptable levels of safety in the nuclear power industry.
l Rewarding superior licensee operating practices is one result of the movement to performance-based requirements. During the 1980's, NRC initiated the Marginal-g to-Safety program to make regulatory requirements more efficient by eliminating 5
those with marginal impact on safety. As pan of this program, Appendix J to 10 CFR 50 was revised to provide a performance-based option for leakage-rate testing of containments of cenain nuclear power plants. The revision reduced prescriptive requirements contained in the existing regulation and allowed test intervals to be based on system and component performance. Industry representatives estimate that savings from the changes to Appendix J will exceed one billion dollars over the next 15 to 20 years with no reduction in plant safety.
In 1993, NRC formed the Regulatory Review Group (RRG) to review power reactor regulations and assess the feasibility of substituting performance-based requirements and guidance for prescriptive requirements and guidance. The RRG suggested using more performance-based and risk-based approaches in certain regulatory areas. After the RRG report was released, NRC issued a policy statement on the use of PRA on August 16,1995. The policy statement described NRC's intent to increase the use of PRA in all regulatory matters with the intent of reducing unnecessary conservatism and, where appropriate, to support proposed additional regulatory requirements.
I In 1994, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), along with other NRC program offices, established the "PRA Implementation Plan" which described various effons to apply PRA information to regulations and identified who was responsible for completing the objectives of the plan. The agency, in cooperation with members of the industry, established a number of pilot projects to assist in the use of PRA to modify regulatory requirements based on risk insights. These pilot programs include inservice testing and inspection, operability of motor-operated valves, graded quality assurance, and the Maintenance Rule. Work under the plan has also recently included efforts to develop performance-based methods for the pilot projects.
The Maintenance Rule, which was implemented on July 10,1996, represents a departure from the agency's customary, process-oriented way of regulating licensees. The rule allows licensees to set reliability and availability criteria for safety-related, and certain non-safety-related, plant structures, systems, and components. The licensee is then required to estabhsh and maintain a maintenance om e em2 I
l NRC's Transition to a Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulatory System program that will ensure those criteria are met. Through its inspection program, NRC then monitors the effectiveness of the licensees' maintenance programs. This allows NRC to focus on the performance of licensees' maintenance programs, rather than adherence to prescriptive regulatory requirements. However, the Maintenance Rule does not remove any requirements licensees had to meet prior to the rule's implementation.
The implementation of the Maintenance Rule was also somewhat different in that the industry participated actively in the development of the regulatory guidance that would be used by NRC in implementing the rule. Between September 1994 and March 1995, NRC performed a series of nine pilot site visits to provide early feedback to the industry and to verify the adequacy of NRC's Maintenance Rule inspection program. Over the next two years, the agency will be conducting baseline inspections at every plant to evaluate the maintenance programs licensees have put in place. During that time, NRC will modify the inspection and enforcement aspects of the program as necessary before publishing the enforcement policy in final form.
NRC's policy of enforcement and its consistency in application is key to the success of the Maintenance Rule. To ensure that consistency, NRC formed an enforcement panel of NRR and Office of Enforcement (OE) personnel who will review all proposed enforcement actions resulting from Maintenance Rule inspections. Current NRC enforcement guidance precludes a licensee from being cited for more than one violation for an infraction that may fall under both the Maintenance Rule and other NRC regulations, such as 10 CFR 50 Appendix B,2 EVALUATION RESULTS Through implementation of the Maintenance Rule and other pilot projects being undertaken as part of the PRA Implementation plan, NRC is developing an understanding of how a risk-informed, performance-based regulatory system will function. In order to facilitate the transition to this new regulatory system, we 2
Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 requires licensees to have in place a quality assurance program that provides adequate confidence that a structure, system, or component will perform satisfactorily in service.
OlG/%FA N Pat' 3
I NRC's Transition to a Risk-informed, Performance-Based Regulatory System believe the agency needs to define performance-based regulation and describe how the agency plans to implement it. Although NRC is in the process of developing final enforcement guidance for the Maintenance Rule, the agency also needs to E
address the broader issue of how performance-based regulation will affect the Ei citing of violations and the use of enforcement. In addition, we believe the transition to a risk-informed, performance-based system would benefit from the l
development of a comprehensive strategy for implementing these regulatory changes including speci6c objectives and a means to measure progress toward meeting those objectives.
DEFINING PERFORMANCE-BASED REGULATION AND ITS EFFECTS ON ENFORCEMENT While the agency has stated its objectives for the use of PRA in a risk-informed environment, NRC has not defined what it means by " performance-based regulation," and has not determined what its related goals are. This has resulted in differences in perceptions among NRC staff, and between NRC and the industry, regarding how performance-based regulation differs from the current, process-oriented system. For example, NRC managers we interviewed described the conflict that exists between the recent emphasis on strict compliance with l
regulatory requirements that may not be safety significant and the focus on safety significant systems emphasized in perf:.anance-based regulation.
In addition, we found that agency staff and industry representatives have different understandings of what performance-based regulation means in regard to violations and enfo. cement. Representatives of the industry told us that if, under the Maintenance Rule, they could still get Appendix B violations even though they were meeting their performance goals, then the rule was not truly performance-based. These licensees believe that without relief from less safety significant Appendix B violations, the Maintenance Rule will be just another layer of g>
requirements to be met that increases their costs. NEI representatives stated that 5
this " layering" of regulations could have a chilling effect on licensees' willingness to embrace the Maintenance Rule. One licensee we interviewed also noted there would be no incentive to take advantage of performance-based regulations if there was no relief from Appendix B violations. OIG previously reported' that some
' "Famrs Contributing to Inconsistency in the Operating Reactor Inspection Program" OIG/95A-04, December 27,1995.
oncm,raa Pare 4 I
NRC's Transition to a Risk-informed, Performance-Based Regulatory System inspectors use Appendix B as " catch-all" criteria to be used when there is nothing g
else to cite against. Licensees stated that they expect little overall benefit from the Maintenance Rule unless NRC provides some form of enforcement reliefin less safety-significant areas.
In contrast, NRC staff generally do not see the Maintenance Rule as a vehicle for regulatory relief. Many staff members pointed out the current enforcement guidance for the nile states that the mie does not supersede other requirements, specifically referring to Appendix B. We posed a hypothmical example to the staff in which a licensee, who was meeting overall performance criteria for maintaining and operating diesel generators under the rule, missed a step in a required maintenance procedure. In the example, the error was identified and corrective action taken. In response to this example, most NRC staff we spoke with would still cite the licensees for an Appendix B, quality assurance violation, despite the fact that the incident did not affect meeting the overall performance goal for diesel generator availability. Many stated that to cite a licensee in such a case would not be in accordance with the intent of performance-based regulation.
However, NRC managers we spoke with, who were responsible for developing the Maintenance Rule program, fe't that one of the rule's primary purposes was to allow NRC to regulate balance-ot-plant
- areas that had not been previously subject to NRC review; they did not view the rule as a " defense" against other requirements.
Recent events at the Millstone nuclear power station have caused NRC to refocus 4
its emphasis on ensuring licensees strictly comply with regulatory requirements, such as adhering to the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), for all nuclear power plants.
However, industry representatives we spoke with are concerned that this re-emphasis on compliance threatens the viability of the effort to develop risk-informed, performance-based regulation. NRC managers also saw the reaction to the events at Millstone as keeping the agency's emphasis on compliance. We believe this attitude may inhibit the implementation of such a fundamental change as the move to more performance-based regulation, particularly if there is not a clear understanding of the direction of that change.
- " Balance-of-plant" refers to all nuclear plant systems except the Reactor Protection System, Control Rod Drive and Reactor Coolant System. For example, the turbine, generator and primary feedwater systems are all considered part of the balance-of-plant.
OIG/96F IN Page 5
s Transition to a Risk-Informed Performance-Based Regulatory System It has been shown that for an organization to successfully make a fundamental change to how it operates, a shared understanding among those involved in implementation regarding the direction and appropriateness of that move is necessary. For example, we found that Transpon Canada Aviation (TCA), a regulatory organization with a public safety mandate similar to NRC's, went from a system known as Regulation by Directive to a performance-oriented system of regulation. TCA did not have a policy statement when it first began its transition to a performance-oriented system, but found it necessary to have top-down guidance, in the form of a policy statement, to make the process function as intended. TCA found that such a statement helped motivate staff to make the change, ensured suppon by managers, and eliminated disagreement and in-fighting ovei the direction the agency was taking. In contrast, while NRC has instmeted staff and management in Maintenance Rule implementation, the agency has not developed a shared un :rstanding among NRC staff regarding what performance-l based regulation meaim or how it affects overall enforcement policy.
DEVELOPING A COMPREllENSIVE STRATEGf FOR THE TRANSITION TO PERFORMANCE-BASED REGULATION 1
In order to ensure that NRC's move toward performance-based regulation is done in a consistent manner, the agency needs a comprehensive, integrated strategy for g;
achieving that goal and a means to measure its progress toward that goal. While 3'
the staff responsible for the PRA Implementation Plan have begun to develop i
l concepts of how selected regulatory requirements could be more performance-based, there are areas where performance-based methods are being used which do not fall under the plan. All regulatory areas should be captured under a broader strategy. For example, a mle for steam generator degradation and a revision to Appendix R, fire protection requirements may become performance-based, but these effons are not included in the PRA Implementation Plan. Several senior NRC managers told us that more clearly articulated objectives for performance-based regulation and an understanding of how NRC will meet those objectives would facilitate the move to performance-basco regulation.
In addition, a comprehensive strategy for making regulatory requirements more performance-based should include a means for measuring progress toward achieving the program goals the agency establishes. Recently, significant emphasis has been put on establishing performance measures for government programs by E
the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA). GPRA requires Federal 5 !
OlG/96F IN Page 6 I
NRC's Transition to a Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulatory System agencies to establish performance goals to be measured on an annual basis. The establishment of measurable performance goals is designed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Federal programs and : spur better performance.
Developing perfonnance measures will meet the objectives of GPRA and increase the chances for a successful transition to a risk-informed, performance-based regulatory system.
CONCLUSIONS NRC has capressed its intent to move to a more risk-informed, performance-based regulatory system and has a number of effons underway to incorporate risk insights and performance-based methods into its regulatory system. To that end, the ageiicy needs to define what a performance-based system is and how it will affect the citing of violations and the use of enforcement actions. We believe this is of particular concern due to the significantly different perceptions that the agency and the industry have of performance-based regulation and enforcement.
In addition, to ensure that regulatory changes are made in an effective and efficient manner, NRC should develop a comprehensive, integrated strategy for how its risk-informed and performance-based efforts will be accomplished. This strategy should include a means for measuring progress towards meeting the objectives of that strategy.
MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION To facilitate its movement toward a risk-informed, performance-based regulatory system in a consistent and comprehensive manner, NRC should consider:
1)
Developing a conceptual framework for what performance-based regulation is and how it affects enforcement, and communicate this information publicly, far instance, through a policy statement; OlG/96r,.IN Page 7 I
h consequence is that t:1e Air Force may dispose of the krypton-65 check sources in the scme wcy it disposes of electron tubes exempted under 10 CFR 30.15(a)(8), as normal trash.
Cognizant staff in ONMSS have been censulted on these questions and agree with i
the conclusions reached, i
Robert L. Fonner Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Rulemaking and fuel Cycle Enclesures:
As stated i
cc:
R. Cunningham. ONMSS V. Miller, ONMSS F. St Mary, ONMSS R. Goddard, 211 1
i l
i
\\
..e.E u.
I l
NRC's Transition to a Risk-Informad, Performance-Ba.ed t'egulatoq System 2)
Designing a strategy for implementing that cenceptual framework, which includes establishmg goals, and designating senior managers responsible for seeing that the goals are met; and 3)
Establishing performance measures to evaluate progress toward meeting taose goals.
I I
I I
I I
I OIG/960 IN Pate 8
,,'g.
f Appendix 1 NRC's Transition to a Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulatory System OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METIIODOLOGY The objective of this work was to e.21uate the agency's efforts to move toward a risk-informed, performance-based regulatory system using the Maintenance Rule as the primary example of that effort.
We interviewed senior NRC managers in the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), the Office of Enforcement (OE) and managers and inspectors ir Regions
'I and III. We also mterviewed representatives of the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), the nuclear enc *gy industry's Washington-based trade association. In addition, we spoke with representatives from the Federal Aviation Administration, Transport Canada Aviation, and licensees who operate three nuclear power plants.
We also reviewed documentation relating to risk-informed, performance-based regulation and the Afaintenance Rule obtained from both NRC and the industry.
We conducted our audit work from June through August 1990.
C I
OIG96E-18 Page I of I I
l
~ _
_ - ~ - - -. -_ ~
~- -
_ ~----
l RutES ANO wemALOM
- ** m 8 U ".ag**m"8 ' * * *; ' ** M -
meltarg steet a*.d ir48 I
1*42 p q rurDCV
...oved wiu2 s
nicat! base alloys. Therefore. the Ccm-i-
Chopise XIV Commodit) Credit Cor.
mlLiG IU rti v!Til J LRLaul in
.c Enugy masien cora:ders it un;:kely that carry-l perofien, DePortmen' of Aviculture Ch plH over of thortum durms melung of metal l
D t
Comm'55'on scrap. generated m W use of ruckel-I 568CMarTtt aMcANI. PVICHAIII= ANI PART 40 -LiCEN5fNG OF touRCE thcr!a alloys in jet aircraft engtne pa.ru.
orwta ortaanown wul contassa nuclear reacter con.
MATERIAL strucuan materina to a level which lecc ors n Pne, soport Asgs, tart cr@
I wouJd increase remeter plant racte.
suca supp amet Il ls*mP'ica *I C*rteen Airtreft Engine 1
acuvity levela ft is noted. however. chas GRAINS AND $thilLARLY Ports Containing Nickel Thorio Alley i
the dst.a on removal of norium.n the HANDLED COMMODiftES on Aurust 1.1963. the Atomic Enerry metal processing are direcur app:1cao:t to tnorium dispersed in nicke'.
Subport 1967 Crop Pr. e Loen and Commission cubitshed in the TrettaL thoria aIIcys in the form of Anely divide I 48 FR 8043 a proposed only ic 10 CFR Recrstra smenement of 4013'eu4i.
thoria ithertum dictJdet and W exemp-Purchase Program i
Pm 40. which moWd have exempted tion n a been !(rnstec stcord:nsucn that finished products or paru f abricated of.
A T j
Basic Strecat Ratts or containing any tacrium metal f.Iloy "!3 order to contann tert ne retWatsons issued by the Com-j in s htch W thodum content m W ahoy materiais by thorium or other sam:lar modity CreWt Corporauon. pub!!shed in does not exceed 4 percent by selght.The ;mparttles does not occur r buAld up l
33 F R. 58*9 and setths forth require-nouce of proposed rule making saa pub-over an extende2 period of 1:me. the ments with respect to price support forlished in response to a peution filed by Commission will arrange periodically to i
sample reactor construction materts'.
1967 crep r:ce, are amended as follows:E. I du Pont de Nemours and Co. Inc.
is amended to Wilmmtton Del. recuesting an exemp-for thorium and otder contamtr anu 2 l
Sectica 1421.2*g3f as frem licennns requiremenu for this persocac sampling shows an incress-add the variety Damn to Group II of the ricael-thorium alicys containing up to
>gwr um level in such materials. tr:e t:nn value f actors for head and broken r ce l
f 4 percent thotium by me:ght Interested retWauen set forth below may te amend-il and reads u follows :
persons sete invited to submst sritten e4 from time to time to eCect 1:censmg c:mments or sugestrens for considers-Po!s to prevent the thor: m cen-ton m connechen with the proposed tained m discarded nickel tnoria a:re-af t i ! 4:l%33 %ppart nio.
EM i
amencreent within 30 days after put!!ca-engme parts from contaminating mate.
i l
Bosic ro!es * *
- nen of the nonce of proposed rWe makmg rials used for construcuen of nue: ear
<ae m the Tc: cast RgetstrE na reactors app;y. If l
~
s m r.mu e... u na on n.ca n Sutsecuent to publication of *he pro-ne Comminacn will 430 pesed exemption for comme', tr e Com-determitted necessary, spectficauon uw twin mission considered whethe! tma ext-**
su on the amount of thcrtum and othe ne m w we are f
c oo, men 4tely resWt in contam1* simsfar materials allout t as trace con.
t:en could ulurr:
taminuta in materiais used for con.
l em e, e* *d nauon ny thorid of materisia tred in construction of nudear reactors. as a a;ru%:en of nuclear reactors.Thest hm-a s*
2" i
1.
ret ** neeri n*".
its would dLTar los dagarant contam -
resW1 of d3 carded nickel thorta partt M *,Ra va'"[,C,7 being incorporated se scrap in the trelt-nants and for varyir:t reactor uses I
n~m ing of a:loys containing nickel. If stgruft-
' N ',*1,"[f*"'
i fers from the proposed rWe oueushed 1
f cant the-lum impur1ues were to be pree.
H -
ens m matenals used in constructing in the Trttant Rectsin 48 T R 8*4D i
+4 % ur+
1 3y nuclear reactor plants such impunute
' M, i",*, Ul In the follot"ing respects:
d.
- 1. The exemption hu been restt:c:ed 3"-
coWd result m additional radioactive fis.
~
J
=a9 Fa"*
slon products in the reactor coolant and to thortum contained in any.*n;shed air W-
% D i.E,* M J
potentially in the atmosphere surround-ing the reacter craft engtne part contaming
]
me n=
ai The Pfortged nat:
7w'O ^,%
thorta alloy:
5 thortum is dispersed in the meael-thera wastes. Among th? inferrration consid-i alley in the form of finely dsvided thoria ered zu the expcrimerital evidence pro-i
)
[*gy;""*g vided by LLe pehuoner on the removal otsthertum dioxide); and tb' the thonum
{
. m m.n thoria in s4g durtng metal procasa!ng. content irt the nickel ther!* alley does m in aa *N' l
The petitionar has reported the resWta not exceed 4 percent by weight C.',, M +c.
J of a aboratory e1tytriment that foDowed
- 2. nc exemLtion is m the f o".n of a*
sn l
e.n. r -
140.13 tcu s) rather than sn commerc.141 me!L pracuoes for scrap and re s
( *A'** * ""
i fluxar.s egent additions These results amendment of f 4013rci841 as procese new
/
' " ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~
hatt shesn that essenually all of the No chan=e is beit:g made at t*us ume n l ss steel ar d turcsten-the exempuon for thorium ta to o u unensee; 1311 s c. thorta tmduced into stam etitt.g furnaces is separs}ed thonum and magnesium thertum anc>s (see 4 e2 stat 16s Interp es r,9pir we 5 s2 sut lots. Tncomen me'"rg:ss De pehuoner also has re-present'y provided in i 4013'c 4 *.
J the rasure of a full-scale melt of 3. ne cretapuon adopted permits the uce tot oct, s2 stat. sost. ne ametees.1o54.
sa Hutelley alley X to wn;ch a large quan-conduct of activiues such as reca;r cf sac 2c2. *2 sut. one; 1s c3 C.116c.1 US C.
port tity of nittei thoria scrap was acced f!ntshed circraf t ereme parta contamm Q'ene resuita aho have shown that mtre mcket thms al.c scrit serso by sem 1s21.t+4ti U!ective upon publication in the Trs*
thaTrvr percent of the thorta was rg-prxess ra ef nietcesaurs. An moved in (As slag anJ LFTt?%2tgm con-tent in tr.e Lt are tsat Rtctstra.
potent.tal health hazarda sh S!gned at Washington. D C.. on No-wta of haicw the was ~sCyeEncern witr ressetL~Trisctsg sn-workers carrying out s tember 13.196*l.
ll wt:1 te ex-i H. D. Goortsv.
sfnactiamIht s,ontaminauen.On the knet.nl currently avail Esecterat>e Vice President.
uons of radioactive material m esc 19st *daQ4Commiscon hu cone;uded thee--pose Commodtry credit Corporaries.
the tnoria (thorium dictidel covered by ly A Doe ET-12H9: rued. riot. 17 i
t es a m-1 it 18. toay tietsu stGisite. Vol. 32. NO. 224-4AtueD47. NOYtml 1
m i
mmummmmmm
Appendix 11 NRC's Transition to a Risk-informed, Performance-Based Regulatory System UeS. NRC FUNCTIONAL ORGANIZATION CHART hTC Commissioners Executive Director for Operations danistant for aWas l
l M ***
m Yd7o,,"
permsi.eeu w pireo s.
Depw3L cano p.rea s.
s%clasr kisserhins s4ee3, horiser keucear Reguhsteen, blaguert: & Operwoms hppart kegeunalOperweens & Research
&W l
l l
l l
P sennel Othe et the CamreEer Ofke er Omce d Orac omce er i,g,,
g,,,,,,,,
i.ee.e af
-,,og, k.
Ad.,_.r., _,
,,,n.,en,e.,
Orme c a e t N o a344. Am a t 39-512 '
)
emport to countries or destmations other s 40 90. Soutnern
.g. Thorium contained in any hnisheft P ART 39 A!RWORTHINE55 than those 15ted in Rhodesta and Cuca. of thor um com stressit ensme part con't ung sucerl.
OIRECTIVES tained an fintsted strerait engine parta
$ritish A,ircraft (N.o. Model B AC 1 11 containtr's nicket thona a!!cy. provided thona alloy, provided's' The thorium is o..crsed in the that;
- a t The thortum is dispersed in the nickel.thorta alley in the wrm of finety 203/ AE. 20^ -
- F, and 212/ AR Air.
nickel therta alloy in the form of finely anr8 divided thoria sthorium dioxiden:'Ib The thertum and divided thoria sthertum dioxide * :the thetium content in the nickel.
plan n g
thoria a!!cy does not exceed 4 percent thosta alloy does not exceed 4 pr cent J.o de
+c8 Federal Avtation Regulations to :
ey u risht an airworthiness directive recuarmd by metsht.
relocation of the fuel tire couplings at The foiecoms revisions refect further or.m:ssion cor.siderat;on of the pro.
3 Psi m auh
>di of 14021 of 10 1:sh Aircraf t Corp Sat;on 630 en Br:1-11 203 AE. 2f 4 AF s"d posed amendment. int!udmg additional CFR Part 40 ts reces!gnate1 paras 1Nh Model BAC 212 AR airplanes aas puo tsted.n 32 paiagraph in!vimauen and data received af ter the
.e. and the following new notice of prope<ed ru:e msnma nas pub.
4.s added to i 40 23 to read as follow' I
T R 12065 Interested petsons have oeen ahded f
hsted on August 7 1963 Geneeml tiren.c. in es port.
an epportunity to partuete m the mak.
ne Comm:ssion ha s found that the re. I 4043 I
No oo;tet;:ns possession use. transfer. and am*
d' A general hcense designated AEC-ng of the amendment re:pt port mto tre United States o; thorium GRO-SMD ts hereby issued authorizing were recened In cons 2deration of the foregomg and contamed m any $ntshed aircraf t engme the export from the United States to pursuant to the authority de:rg part container fuckel.tt.cria alloy pur. any foreign country or dest:nstion, ex.
suant to the exemptior. m ( 4013't < ge cept Southern Rhodesta. Cuta or coun.tries or dest.r.ations 8 3913 of the Federal Aviation Regu:a puelfshed below. involve unimpettant thortum contained in Snished aircraft tions is amended by adttin cuantities of source material withm the of section 62 of the Atomic as amerded. which e=gine parts containing nirkel.thorts al.
strworthiness directhe meaning N
A' mew Appnes to mee Energy Act of 1954 are not of s.gmacance to the comtnen
.cy. providea that.
8"*"$,f,**qYtrNo,na
- 1i ne thormm ts dispersed in the e
it co e[,,,
defense and security. and that such ac.
nickel.r.horta a!!cy te the form of Sne!y nnues see in service arter me e*eeme :ste tivities can be conducted sithout un.
httard to Lfe or preperty. divided thoria 4 thorium dioxide'; and or sina 40 un4ess aireact accempi:st+e To
.eam
- t n The thertum content an the nicket. e,ois tne possib:28tr of a fuel reasonabM ne Cortc.12ssion has also found that the er: ary i2:
expers of ther:um in anishec aircraf t thoria s!!or does net esteed 4 percent tete pressurises stes reioeste tne r:gns f uel une coupttr.es from station 630 J
ensme parts. pursuant to the general 11 a pmnt 3 inchu fears. In acco by t'eight.
cense m 4 40 23'd' published below, will 4
not be mimical to the interesta of the (Soc.181. se Stat Ha. 42 U S C 7201.933. 933; Inter.
letm No to-Phi 2:10 t
later AR81. approved taeue. or an eque e i
The Commission considers that Sn. pnt or arcir secs a2 M. es stat.
.ppre,eo ut t&e chier. Aircrsrt c United States.
j 1shed aircraft engine parta containinI 42 U S C.30e3.30e43 fuckel.thoria n!!oy are not products in.
Dsted at Germanuwn. Md. this four.
Ree son.
f by the general pubite teenth day of November 1967.
j g[g fgh' tended for usS of within the purview of I 15015'st '88 Y
p Auw ' u act. 403. Freest tinued Re A r7 A
.o t in Art W. B McCoot.
'S'88 30'ai SecreterF.
ment States Under Section 274". Accord.
IT. Issb Issued in Washington. D C. on Nostm-the transfer of possesaton or et.ti432; rues Now ir it poe
- teely, control of such Antahed streraft engine eesami ber 9.1961.
Jamts T Rrrotew parts in agteement Statee ' by the manu.
facturer. processor. or producer arould Director. Th#ti Standards Stet.cc ala 1 85 Bilf'f u r an Ent?
.g net be regulated by the Commisaton.
T'hlE l P Q U Ql M b M Ull
,p g 3,
g.g3g. m 3,
Pursuant to the Atomic Enerty Act of a.41 s m i I
1954. na amended. and the /,dministra.
tive Procedure Act of 1H8. as amended, h hhh
- "* * ****3' '
j the fol'owing amendrnents of 10 CFR Part 40 are Dubushed as a document sub.
Chapter 4 5 moll Business PART 39 AltWORTHINE55 Ject to codincation. to be effeettre thirtF Admini, retion DIR5CTIVE5 are after put!! cation in the Pro.
Hawker Siddeloy, de H ov.llan d 3
I Ames et Subparastaph 'si of I 4013 e> of PART 101-ADMINISTRATION Model W Den Senn AMono i
Part 40 ts redestrnsted subpara.
W amend Part 39 cf the C
List of Pub!k.Use 58A Forms A propoan) rederst Aviation Reg'ulations to include an alrworthiness direettve renu correctioni periodic inspection of the sing root jot states to ehtch the oommt.eion ha sran. In F R. Doc. 87-12530 appearing at regunstery authertly o,e, rectoscuve matertal by formst agtwement. prae 15806 in the 1put of Friday. No. Attings of Haster S i
f ertes certaan 20.1987" pursuant to section 214 of the Atomic Energy tgrnber 17, IggT, the date " Nee.
Act of tss4 as amended.
esF ftDisat etCitttt. VOL. St. 8*0. 336-.f arvega?. psovisaste 18. t
Appendix lil NRC's Transition to a Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulatory System MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO TIIIS REPORT William D. McDowell Team Leader Lindley R. Higgins Senior Management Analyst Robert W. Moody Auditor OlG/96F 18 Page I of I
~.
Mr. Aubrey V. Godwin
. i was raised in the early 1960s that steel supplies might becom contaminated i
with source material.
Extensive tests conducted by Dupont showed that i
essentially all of the thorium introduced into stainless steel or Inconel melting furnaces was separated with the slag. These types of issues (e.g.,
re-use of scrap metal) will be addressed in the planned recycle rulemaking effort which will be coordinated with the EPA.
1 In response to your fourth question, based on the information that you have provided, it appears that the nickel-thoria aircraft engine parts are being transferred to scrap dealers and recyclers as authorized by 10 CFR 40.13(c)(8). Therefore, we do not see the need for any enforcement action at this time.
Sincerely, Paul H. Loi:=s, Deputy Director Office of State Programs
Enclosures:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
l DIR RF (6S-199)
RBangart PLohaus SDroggitis LBolling FCameron, OGC BMorris, RES DCool,IMNS/NMSS DCD (SP03)
PDR YES_./ NO,_
- See previous concurrence.
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\TSK6S199. lab
- 1. m.
.em.m
.m w
wm c-cm.%
.n.ca nv.new.
c.cm.m..n.cs
,c.nce.
m
= mv 0FFICE OSP E
OSP:DD C
OGC C
IMNS:D C
NAME LBolling:gd PLohaus FCameron DCool DATE 10/02/96*
10/03/96*
/
/
/ /
mammmmmma mum sammmmmminum man meanmammmmmmmmmme em 1
0FFICE RES C
OSP:D l
NAMF BMorris RLBangart l
DATE
/
/
/
/
/
/
/ /
l
Appendix IV NRC's Transition to a Risk-Informed. Performance-Based Regulatory System GLOSSARY: OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL PRODUCTS INVESTIGATIVE 1.
INVESTIGA TIVE REPORT-WHITE COVER An Investigative Report documents pertinent facts of a case and describes available evidence relevant to allegations against individuals, including aspects of an allegation not substantiated. Investigative reports do not recommend disciplinary action against individual employees. Investigative reports are sensitive documents and contain information subject to the Privacy Act restrictions. Reports are p.ven to officials and managers who have a need to know in order to properly determine wnether administrative action is warranted. The agency is expected to advise the OlG within 90 days of receiving the investigative report as to what disciplinary or other action has been taken in response to investigative report findings.
2.
EVENTINQUIRY - GREEN COVER The Event inquiry is an investigative product that documents the examination of events or agency actions that do not focus specifically on individual misconduct. These reports identify institutional weaknesses that led to or allowed a problem to occur. The age..cy is requested to advise the OlG of managerial initiatives taken in response to issues identified in these reports but tracking its recommendations is not required.
3.
MANA GEMENT IMPL;CA TIONS REPORT (MIR) - MEMORANDUM MIRs provide a
- ROOT CAUSE" ana;ysis sufficient for manage s to facilitate correction of problems and to avoid similar issues in the future. Agency tracking of recommendations is not required.
AUDIT 4.
AUDIT REPORT-BLUE COVER An Audit Heport is the documentation of the review, recommendations, and findings resulting from an objeevive assessment of a program, function, or activity. Audits follow a defined procedure that allows for agency review and comment on draft audit reports. The audit results are also reported in the OlG's " Semiannual Report" to the Congress. Tracking of audit report recommendations and agency response is required.
5.
SPECIAL EVALUA TION REPORT-BURGUNDY COVER A Special Evaluation Report documents the results of short-term, limited assessments. It provides an initial, quick response to a question or issue, and data to determine whether an in-depth independent audit should be planned. Agency tracking of recommendations is not required.
REGULATORY 6.
REGULA TORY COMMENTARY - BROWN COVER Regulatory Commentary is the review of existing and proposed legislation, regulations, and policies so as to assist the agency in preventing and detecting fraud, waste, and abuse in programs and operations. Commeutaries cite the IG Act as authority for the review, state the specific law, regulation or policy examined, pertinent beagmund information considered and identifies OlG concerns, observations, and objections. Signficant observations regarding action or inaction by the agency are reported in the OlG Semiannual Report to Congress. Each report indicates whether a response is required.
OlG.96L18 Page l or!
I
__