ML20059A805
| ML20059A805 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/17/1993 |
| From: | Rogers K NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Bowsher C, Byrd R, Conyers J, Glenn J, Lehman R, Lieberman J, Natcher W, Sharp P GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE, HOUSE OF REP., HOUSE OF REP., APPROPRIATIONS, HOUSE OF REP., ENERGY & COMMERCE, HOUSE OF REP., GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, SENATE, APPROPRIATIONS, SENATE, ENVIRONMENT & PUBLIC WORKS, SENATE, GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9401030133 | |
| Download: ML20059A805 (14) | |
Text
-
.\\%6L
. f "*%'
-J NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION UNITED STATES I'
' 'I U -)
h W ASHINGTON. D. C. 205S5
- l l#$
N December 17. 1993 CHAlHMAN The Honorable Robert C.
Byrd, Chairman Committee on Appropriations United States Senate Washington, D.C.
20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am enclosing a summary of actions taken by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in response to recommendations concerning the NRC which were in reports issued by the General Accounting Office.
It includes progress made on resolving and completing the recommendations since our last summary report submitted on December 31, 1992.
This summary is required by Section 236 of Public Law 91-510, the " Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970."
Sincerely,
'[
+
Kenneth C.
Rogers Acting Chairman
Enclosure:
Summary of NRC Actions cc:
Senator Mark O.
Hatfield r
O 2001)3 pf
~
'\\
9401030133 931217 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR,
1
, ja a'og'o
/
UNITED STATES 8 M*
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{J W ASHINGT ON. D. C. 205SS
/
December 17, 1993 CHAIRMAN The Honorable William H.
Natcher, Chairman Committee on Appropriations United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am enclosing a summary of actions taken by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in response to recommendations concerning the NRC which were in reports issued by the General Accounting Office.
It includes progress made on resolving and completing the recommendations since our last summary report submitted on December 31, 1992.
This' summary is required by Section 236 of Public Law 91-510, the " Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970."
Sinceir'y,
(\\
4-OR h
Kenneth C.
Rogers Acting Chairman
Enclosure:
Summary of NRC Actions cc:
Representative Joseph M. McDade i
i l
f* *'%g Ua51TED SVATES S y
-c,
{-
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.
,t WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555
%, Nl/'
o, c j
o, December 17. 1993 CH AIRM A N The Honorable John Glenn, Chairman Committee on Governmental Affairs United States Senate Washington, D.C.
20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am enclosing a summary of actions taken~by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in response to recommendations concerning the NRC which were in reports issued by the General Accounting Office.
It includes progress made on resolving and completing the recommendations since our last summary report submitted on l
December 31, 1992.
This summary is required by Section 236 of Public Law 91-510, the " Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970."
Sincerely, l
r W
h Kenneth C.
Rogers Acting Chairman
Enclosure:
Summary of NRC Actions cc:
Senator William V.
Roth, Jr.
4 1
)
4 i
1 i
- psnc, u
[ [j ',,, ),j UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
+'*
.f WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
^
'%, ~ %*....f December 17. 1993 CHAIRMAN The Honorable John Conyers, Jr.
Committee on Government Operations United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
20515 8
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am enclosing a summary of actions taken by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in response to recommendations concerning the NRC which were in reports issued by the General Accounting office.
It includes progress made on resolving and completing the recommendations since our last summary report submitted on December 31, 1992.
This summary is required by Section 236 of Public Law 91 '310, the " Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970."
Sincerely, 0[4 M
Kenneth C.
Rogers Acting Chairman
Enclosure:
Summary of NRC Actions cc:
Representative William F. Clinger, Jr.
1 4
I i
l
l 4 "'4,%
4 1
9
- /
UNITED STATES
[
-[} -
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
W ASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 1'
n r!
+
'%..~# a /
December 17, 1993
..+
CHAlHMAN The Honorable Joseph I.
Lieberman, Chairman Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Regulation Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington, D.C.
20510 f
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am enclosing a summary of actions taken by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in response to recommendations concerning the NRC which were in reports issued by the General Accounting Office.
It includes progress made on resolving and completing the recommendations since our last sammary report submitted on December 31, 1992.
This summary is required by Section 236 of Public Law 91-510, the " Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970."
Sincerely, I
\\
Kenneth C.
Rogers 1
Acting Chairman
Enclosure:
Summary of NRC Actions cc:
Senator Alan Simpson i
s 4
'.[re ar%,*)g UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORV COMMISSION
'e ')
e I-i W ASHINGTON, 0. C. 20555
~
Y#'%....f;
..F December 17, 1993 CHAIRMAN 4
The Honorable Richard Lehman, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources Committee on Natural Resources United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
. i I am enclosing a summary of actions taken by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in response to recommendations concerning the NRC which were in reports issued'by the General Accounting office.
It includes progress made on resolving and completing the recommendations since our last summary report submitted on December 31, 1992.
This summary is required by Section 236 of Public Law 91-510, the " Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970."
Sincerely, W
\\
Kenneth C.
Rogers Acting Chairman
Enclosure:
Summary of NRC Actions cc:
Representative Barbara Vucanovich 9
1 t * * " %,
.?p UWITED STATES o
~
[ ',
y,7 g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.C WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 t
-N
]
/
December 17, 1993
- s, CHAIRMAN The Honorable Philip Sharp, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Power Committee on Energy and Commerce United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
i I am enclosing a summary of actions taken by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in responte to recommende.tions concerning the NRC which were in reports issued by the General Accounting Office.
It includes progress made on resolving and completing the recommendations since our last summary report submitted on December 31, 1992.
This summary is required by Section 236 of Public Law 91-510, the " Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970."
Sincerely, t
1 i
s Kenneth C.
Rogers Acting Chairman
Enclosure:
Summary of NRC Actions cc:
Representative Michael Bilirakis O
t
t**%
p f..
UMITED STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
-y,.,,,,.
.s W ASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 1
/!
%, N*...f December 17, 1993 CHAlRMAN The Honorable Charles A.
Bowsher Comptroller General of the United States General Accounting Office Washington, D.C.
20548
Dear Mr. Bowsher:
I am enclosing a summary of actions taken by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in response to recommendations concerning the NRC which were in reports issued by the General Accounting office.
It includes progress made on resolving and completing the recommendations since our last summary report submitted on December 31, 1992.
This summary is required by Section 236 of Public Law 91-510, the " Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970."
1 Sincerely, g
Kenneth C.
Rogers Acting Chairman i
Enclosure:
Summary of NRC Actions F
r
l
SUMMARY
OF NRC ACTIONS RESPONSE TO GAO REPORTS Page i
i 1.
Stricter Controls Needed for Radioactive Byproduct A-2 Material Licenses 2.
License Renewal Questions for Nuclear Plants Need A-3 to be Resolved 3.
NRC's Decommissioning Procedures and Criteria Need A-4 to be Strengthened 4.
Better Criteria and Data would Help Ensure Safety of A-6 l
Nuclear Materials
'j l
l t
I i
i A-1 i
I
t GAO Report - Stricter Controls Needed for Radioactive Byproduct Material Licenses October 1988 (GA0/RCED-89-15)
Recommendation No. 2 (Chapter 3)
The GA0 report recommended that the NRC finalize regulations that would provide at least a minimum level of financial assurance that licensees can pay for the cleanup of accidental spills and releases.
NRC Response of January 12. 1989 and Current Vodate The NRC agreed that it would be desirable to complete this rulemaking but noted that the licensees were already responsible for cleanup following accidents and that the government would take protective action if there was an immediate threat to public health and safety.
In order to assess the need for the rulemaking, the NRC funded studies at the Sandia National Laboratories to assess the risks of accidents at materials facilities. Two study reports were produced:
(1) "A Preliminary Evaluation of the Economic Risk for Cleanup of Nuclear Material Licensee Contamination Incidents," NUREG/CR-4825 (March 1989); and (2) " Economic Risk of Contamina-tion Cleanup Costs Resulting from large Nonreactor Nuclear Material Licensee Operations," NUREG/CR-5381 (March 1990).
These studies show that most accidents having large cleanup costs are low probability events.
These studies and the comments received on the 1985 Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking have been reanalyzed. The reanalysis revealed no known incidents of accidental contamination that were not cleaned up by the licensee.
Further, this reanalysis confirmed that significant contamination events are of a low likelihood, and those relatively few licensees whose facilities or operations pose a potential for significant (costly) accidental contamination have sufficient insurance expressly for covering the cost of cleanup.
Based upon the reanalysis, which suggests there may be no health and safety basis for a rulemaking, the staff proposed no rulemaking to the Commission. A formal recommendation was submitted to the Commission on May 11, 1993.
The Commission responded that the staff's justification of their recommenda-tion did not provide sufficient information to support a decision and request-ed additional information before making a decision on the rulemaking (memo, Chilk to Taylor, June 28,1903).
The requested information will be sent to the Commission in the spring of 1994.
This GAO recommendation remains open.
A-2
i
-i i
GA0 Report - License Renewal Questions
[
far Nuclear Plants Need to be Resolved April 1989 (GA0/RCED-89-90)
Recommendation (Chaoter 71 GA0 recommended that the NRC (1) accelerate the schedule for developing license renewal regulations and stipulate the basis that will be used to evaluate renewal applications and the types of information needed to support a i
request, and (2) resolve the outstanding technical, environmental, and procedural uncertainties.
I NRC Response of June 30, 1989 and Current Vodate The Commission agreed that NRC should accelerate its efforts to resolve issues associated with license renewal and to resolve outstanding uncertainties.
The final rule for license renewal,10 CFR Part 54, was published in the Federal Reoister on December 13, 1991 (56 FR 64943).
A draft regulatory guide (DC-1009) and a draft standard review plan (NUREG-1299), based on the proposed rule, were issued for public comment in December 1990.
Based on concerns expressed by industry and others about difficulties in implementing the final rule, the staff is recommending to the Commission that license renewal l
rulemaking be reopened. A revised final rule is expected to be completed by late 1994/early 1995. A final regulatory guide and a final standard review plan will-be issued about six months after the final rule.
A draft generic environmental impact statement (GEIS) and proposed revisions to 10 CFR Part 51 (NRC's environmental protection regulations) were issued for public comment on September 17, 1991. The comment period closed on March 16, 1992, and over 130 comments were received. Comments from both CEQ and EPA questioned the basic concept of the rule to codify the GEIS conclusions, and, as a result, extensive time has been necessary to ensure appropriate coordina-tion and agreement.
Furthermore, many of the comments address substantive technical issues that are taking considerable additional effort to resolve..
This effort was not anticipated at the time the proposed rule was issued.
It is now expected that these comments will be resolved and a final rule issued in early 1995.
This GA0 recommendation remains open.
i t
E A-3
GA0 Report - NRC's Decommissioning Procedures and Criteria Need to be Strengthened May 1989 (GA0/RCED-89-119)
Recommendation No. 1 (Chapter 5)
The GA0 report recommended that NRC require licensees to specifically list in one document all land, buildings, and equipment involved with their licensed operations.
NRC Response of September 26. 1989 and Current Update The NRC agreed with this recommendation. Our final decommissioning rule, approved by the Commission in May 1988, specifically requires licensees to keep in an identified location all records important to decommissioning.
Such records include drawings of structures and equipment where radioactive materials are used or stored, documentation identifying the locations of inaccessible residual contamination, and detailed descriptions of spilled radioactive material.
In addition, such records include identification and characterization of wastes that have been disposed of on site.
Further, in response to the GA0 recommendation, NRC conducted a rulemaking to require licensees to specifically list in one document all land, buildings, and equipment involved with their licensed operations.
The staff has revised existing rules to implement the GA0 recommendation. The proposed rulemaking was published for comment in the Federal Reaister in October 1991 (56 FR 50524).
The final rule was approved by the Commission and published in the Federal Reaister on July 26,1993 (58 FR 39628).
We consider this GA0 recommendation closed.
Recommendation No. 2 (Chapter 5)
The GA0 report recommended that NRC ensure that licensees decontaminate their facilities in accordance with NRC's guidance before fully or partially releasing a site for unrestricted use.
NRC Response of September 26. 1989 and Current Vodate The NRC agreed. Our response reported that licensees are required to decon-taminate their facilities in a safe manner prior to release for unrestricted use. We expanded the scope of our confirmatory surveys to verify that licensees adequately decontaminate their facilities in accordance with NRC's guidance and criteria.
Our inspectors and agency contractors have been specifically trained and equipped to perform such verification surveys during closecut inspections to confirm the accuracy of the licensees' surveys.
In A-4
{
addition, the NRC committed to revise existing guidance to clarify the scope and rigor of verification surveys conducted to ensure that licensees decontam-inate their facilities in accordance with our guidance before the NRC fully or partially releases a site for unrestricted use. This guidance was published for interim use and comment as NUREG/CR-5849 in July 1992 and a notice of 1
availability published in the Federal Reaister (57 FR 33374).
f The t/RC staff is involved in a cooperative effort with DOE and EPA to develop a single site survey manual that could be used by all three agencies and patterned after the NUREG. This task will continue as NRC and EPA pursue parallel rulemakings on radiological criteria for decommissioning.
Present l
NRC schedule calls for a proposed rule for Commission review in May 1994 and i
for a final rule in June 1995.
The survey guidance is anticipated to be made i
final with the final rule.
This GAO recommendation remains open.
t 4
i I
)
i A-5 i
i i
)
GAO Report - Better Criteria and Data 1
Would Help Ensure Safety of Nuclear Materials June 1993 GA0/RCED-93-90 Recommendation 1 (Chapter 2)
GA0 recommendation: The Chairman, NRC, should establish " common performance indicators in order to obtain comparable information to evaluate the effectiveness of both the Agreement State and NRC regulated state programs in l
meeting NRC's goal."
NRC Resoonse of July 28. 1993 and Current Uodate We agree, and the Cemmission intends to implement a new program evaluation approach beginning next year. Although differences exist in the roles and regulatory responsibilities of the 29 Agreement States versus the five NRC Regional Offices, core performance indicators for NRC and Agreement State program evaluation will be helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of the national nuclear materials program. We are currently considering core performance indicators that include both the traditional programmatic indicators, as well as output indicators such as medical misadministrations, lost or abandoned radioactive sources, radiation overexposures, and contaminated sites. We are also considering graded evaluations of these core performance indicators which will be used in the development of an annual integrated materials safety evaluation.
After completing the first year of the program in 1994, we will use these indicators as a basis for an annual discussion with the Organization of Agreement States, present the results at the NRC Senior Management Meeting in June of each year, and brief the Commission annually at a public meeting.
This GA0 recommendation remains open.
A-6 f
i l
ILocomendation 2 (Chapter 2)
GAO recommendation:
The Chairman, NRC, should establish " specific criteria and procedures for suspending or revoking an agreement-state program. Once i
NRC ensures the effectiveness of the NRC-regulated state program using the new performance indicators, it should take aggressive action to suspend or revoke any agreement-state program that is incompatible or inadequate with the performance indicators."
NRC Resoonsg_gL July 28. 1993 and Current Update We agree with GAO with regard to the need to have specific procedures for termination of an agreement and we intend to complete such written procedures in 1994. Currently, we are in the process of developing these procedures i
which will incl'.de early Commission involvement when an Agreement State program begins te have trouble. We too are concerned about the delay which may occur b? wae.1 the time we are first concerned about an Agreement State program and tha time that the concern is corrected.
We will address that issue in our rrocedures.
Our General ' statement of Policy states that if no significant Category I coments aru provided, the program is adequate to protect the public health and safety The converse, however, is not necessarily true.
If comments on Category
- indicators are provided, this means we believe that the program 1
deficienc es might eventually, if allowed to continue unremedied, seriously affect the state's ability to protect the public health and safety, but it does not necessarily mean that there is an immediate threat to public health and safety.
For example, the status of the state's inspecticn program is a Category I indicator under our guidelines. The fact that a. license is overdue for inspection does not necessarily mean that the public health and safety are compromised. The licensee may be continuing to run an effective radiation i
safety program protecting health and safety. Overdue inspections are, however, a regulatory deficiency that could compro.ase the state's ability to protect public health and safety in the long run.
Hence, we would withhold a finding of adequacy until the state addressed this programmatic deficiency.
l The Atomic Energy Act makes clear that Agreement State status is a long term comitment for the state; neither we nor the states take lightly the l
termination of an agreement. We do not take an inflexible " regulatory" approach that requires a state to do everything our way. We believe that the states are committed to protecting public health and safety adequately and maintaining regulatory programs consistent with their commitments.
I f, however, we became aware of a specific situation in a state where the health and safety of the public was in serious jeopardy and in our judgement the state was unwilling or unable to take decisive action, we would not hesitate to take unilateral action to reassert authority over that situation.
This GA0 recommendation remains open.
r A-7
-e
~
p Recommendation 3 (Chapter 2)
GA0 recommendation:
The Chairman, NRC, should " require agreement states to report abnormal occurrences so that NRC.can include the occurrences in its i
quarterly report to Congress."
and Recommendation 4 (Chapter 2)
GA0 recommendation:
The Chairman, NRC, should "take appropriate action to ensure that the information on radiation events in agreement states is reported completely and accurately."
NRC Response of July 28. 1993 and Current Vodate We agree that abnormal occurrences should be reported to the NRC for inclusion i
in the quarterly report to Congress required by Section 208 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974. Although Section 208 does not address abnormal occurrences involving Agreement State licensees NRC requested agreement state cooperation in providing such information to Congress through an exchange-of-information program.
The NRC established an Agreement State abnormal occurrence reporting system on July 1, 1977.
While the Agreement States participate in the abnormal occurrence reporting program based on the commitment, discussed above, to exchange information with the NRC, the GA0 points out that some Agreement States have not submitted abnormal occurrence reports.
The GA0 report also observes that the data available on the Agreement State programs are not identical to those that are available for the NRC materials program. These observations are correct and we are in the process of rectifying this situation.
Currently, we continue working to increase the level of uniformity between _the-NRC and the Agreement States on reporting.
In August 1993 the NRC hosted a management workshop for the Agreement States to discuss' event reporting, along with enforcement, allegation, and investigation issues.
On November 17 and 18, 1993, the Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data hosted a workshop to ciscuss proposed revisions in event / incident data collection and analyses with NRC and Agreement State participation. The goal of the workshop was to provide the Agreement States an( 1RC participants with a better understanding of the program issues, and foster cooperation through participation, with the goal cf increasing convergence among all the programs.
i We are also considering the type of appropriate action necessary, to ensure that information on radiation events in Agreement States is reported completely and accurately.
4 This GA0 recommendation remains open.
I A-8
,