ML20081A057
| ML20081A057 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/31/1984 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0072-R01, NUREG-72-R1, NUREG-BR-0072, NUREG-BR-72, NUDOCS 8403020460 | |
| Download: ML20081A057 (155) | |
Text
.
NUREGIBR-0072 Revision 1 l
f oaao uy%
e United States 8
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
\\..... [
EDO Procedures Manual l
1 l
\\2 l
l Office of the Executive Director for Operations Rev.1 to April 1981 Edition January 1984 8403020460 840131 PDR NUREG BR-OO72 R PDR
O ED0 PROCEDURES MANUAL JANUARY 1984 The EDO Procedures Manual dated April 1981 has been
. revised in its entirety.
Please replace the attached pages, tabs, and outer cover in your current binder.
A change sheet is.also provided to accomodate future revisions.
k O
i 01/01/84
0 l
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION An issmo:
SUPPLEMENT NUMBER l1 FILING INSTRUCTIONS PAGES TO RE REMOVED NEW PAGES TO BE INSERTED PART PAGE NUMBER DATE PART PAGE NUMBER DATE O6 O
01/01/84 ji l
1
PAGEa TO BE REMOVED NEW PAGES TO BE INSERTED PART PAGE NUMBER DATE PART PAGE NUMBER DATE h
r 01/01/84 111
O FOREWORD Contained in this manual are procedures for preparing correspondence, SECY papers, comunicating and coordinating with other offices, communicating with theEDO,theCommissionandtheirstaff,etc.,andothermiscellanedus information necessary for conducting NRC business.
This manual is intended to serve as guidance to the technical staff who write and coordinate the papers and correspondence. This manual may also be helpful to the administrative and program support staffs who may type, prepare, and track staff items.
The procedures will be revised as necessary by the EDO.
Suggestions and comments should be directed to the A0/EDO.
O iv 01/01/84 l
(:
INDEX I.
Office of the Executive Director for Operations II.
Correspondence III.-
Comission Papers and Memoranda IV.
Comission Meetings V.
Congressional Procedures VI.
Procedures for Responding to GA0 Requests and Reports and 0IA Audit Reports VII.
TrackingofTasks(WITS)
VIII.-
Miscellaneous O
e O
v I
01/01/84
I.
OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS A.
Functions of the ED0 B.
OED0 Organization C.
Working with 0ED0 D.
ED0 Rulemaking Authority 1.
General 2.
Preparation of Rulemaking Paper 3.
Notification of Commission for Rules
-to be Signed by the EDO E.
Daily Staff Notes 1.
Purpose O
.2.
Scope 3.
Details of Reporting F.
Weekly Information Report 1.
Purpose 2.
Scope 3.
Details of Reporting G.
Weekly Staff Meetings
-Exhibits
(
01/01/84 I-1
)
I.
OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS A.
Functions of EDO The Executive Director for Operations (ED0) is responsible for super-vising and coordinating policy development and operational activities of NRC program and staff offices. Specifically, the EDO:
1.
Develops and promulgates rules, except proposed or final rules involving significant questions of policy or involving 10 CFR Parts 0, 2, 7, 8, 9 Subpart C, and 110, 2.
Is responsible for administrative functions of the Commission including resolving EE0 and grievance matters and providing support services.
3.
Proposes any reorganization of the major offices which report to the EDO, consults with the Choirman prior to the Chairman's initiation of the appointmerts of the Directors of NRR, NMSS, RES, and IE, and appoints and removes, after consultation with the Chairman and without any further action by the Commission, all officers and employees of the offices reporting to the EDO except:
Directors of NRR, NMSS, RES, and IE.
4.
Ensures that the Commission, through the Chairman, is fully and currently informed about matters within its functions.
9 5.
Performs any other matter or function explicitly assigned by the Commission or the Chairman.
O 01/01/84 I-2
B.
OEDO Organization b
The Office of EDG consists of the Executive Director for Operations (EDO), the Deputy Executive Director for Operctions (D/ED0), the Assistant for Operations (A0/EDO), the Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operations and Generic Requirements (DEDROGR), and the AdministrativeandCorrespondenceBranch(0EDO:ACB). Their major job responsibilities are:
D/EDO - Specifically responsible for coordination of budget matters, emergency planning matters, and the Executive Resource Board - as well as such other areas he may address for the EDO.
Acts for the ED0 in ED0's absence.
A0/E00 - Monitors all correspondence and tasks assigned the staff by ED0 or the Comission and establishes procedures for handling such work. Specifically responsible for interface with GA0 and a
the DOE coordinating comittee. Available to staff for guidance in any o'T these areas and for ED0 guidance when required.
DEDR0GR - Supports the ED0's managerial and supervisory responsi-bility for the Regions. Also supports the E00's management, control and tracking of generic comunications with and requirements placed on licensees, permit holders and applicants.
Chairs the Comittee to Review Generic Requirements and is specifically responsible for overseeing the prioritization and reduction of the current backlog of regulatory actions.
Frequently represents the ED0 before the Comission, Congress, other agencies, industry and the public.
OEDO:ACB - reviews and processes all comunications addresscd or referred to the ED0; serves as liaison with SECY on the coordination of principal correspondence, etc.; functions as central control point with OED0 and all the offices under it.
v 01/01/84_
I-3
1 C.
Working with OED0 1.
The A0/ED0 or OEDO:ACB should be contacted to arrange for briefings of the Cor:missioriers, or regarding the status of a SECY paper, a piece of principal correspondence submitted, etc.
Occasionally, offices may get telephone inquiries from the Comissioners' Assistants or from the Comission offices such as Congressional Affairs (0CA), Public Affairs (0PA), Policy Evaluation (OPE),
ACP.S, etc.
Consult your supervisor if there is any doubt in coordinating a task or assignment. The appropriate office contact should always be advised of contacts from the Comission.
D.
EDO RULEMAKING AUTHORITY 1.
General a.
Subject to the general policy guidance from the Comission, the ED0 has the authority to issue all proposed or final rules except those:
involving significant questions of policy, or involving 10 CFR Parts 0 (Conduct of Employees);
2 (Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Pro-ceedings); 7 (Advisory Comittees); 8 (Interpre-tations); 9 Subpart C (Government in the Sunshine Act Regulations); and 110 (Export and Import of Nuclear Facilities and Materials).
NOTE: This covers any rulemaking notice affecting these parts, including corrections, minor changes, etc.
O 01/01/84 I-4
b.
For purposes of general guidance, a rule is considered to fs involve "significant questions of policy," and therefore must be submitted to the Comission if it:
' represents a major change in existing Comission
- policy, represents a major new issue, or if it will result in a major comitment of resources by a class of licensees.
Further guidance on a determination can be obtained from Division of Rules and Records, Office of Administration.
c.
For those rules which do not involve significant questions of policy, the EDO must still notify the Comission of his actions.
D' 2.
Preparation of Rulemaking Paper The staff office responsible for initiating a rule must make an initial determination of whether the rule falls within the scope of the ED0's rulemaking authority (see 1 D.1.).
a.
If the rule does not fall within the scope of the ED0's rulemaking authority, the rule should be prepared for forwarding to the Comission in the normal Comission paper format. Sea Chapter III.
b.
If the rule does fall within the scope of the ED0's rulemaking authority, the rule should be forvarded by meraorandum to the EDO. The memorandum should explain the basis and purpose of the rule.
In addition, the originating office shall:
)
s 01/01/84 I-5
l Include in the memorandum, after the Office Director's signature, a certification statement prepared for EDO signature (see Exhibit 1 for a sample certification statement). This statement should identify the rule and explain how it comes within the scope of the ED0's rulemaking authority.
If appropriate, it should also reference previous Comission policy decisions relating to the subject of the rule, and Prepare a notice as in Paragraph D.3., below.
3.
Notification of Comission for Rules to be Signed by ED0 a.
In the case of a notice of proposed rulemaking, notification will occur by inclusion of an entry in the Weekly Information Report (see Exhibit 2 for a sample entry describing a pro-posed rule). The Office originating a notice of proposed rulemaking shall prepare the appropriate entry and include it in the signature package which is sent to the Division of Rules and Records for review and transmission to the ED0 for action.
OED0 will place the entry in the Weekly Information Report when/if ED0 signs the rulemaking package, b.
In the case of a notice of final rulemaking, the office originating the rule will prepare an entry (see Exhibit 2) for inclusion in the Daily Staff Notes in order to give the Comission the required notice.
In this case, the ED0 will place the notice in the Daily Staff Notes and hold the rule-making notice for five working days after it is signed, to allow time to complete the Comission notification process, after which the rulemaking package will be forwarded to Rules and Records for final action.
O 01/01/84 I-6
c.
Staff who receive any connents on ED0 rulemaking from the V
Comissicn pursuant to notices in Weekly / Daily Reports must advise OEDO promptly in order that appropriate action on the rule can be taken.
E.
Daily Staff Notes 1.
Purpose:
To provide the Commission with a daily report of significant events. See Exhibit 3.
2.
Scope: Reported items should include issues of sufficient importance that the Commission would find it valuable to be advised promptly. Entries should be brief; if necessary, they can be followed up in detail in the Weekly Infonnation Report or by means of a separate paper.
3.
Details of Reporting a.
All offices will submit reports as required. Negative report is required from Program Offices only.
b.
Typed reports (original or good xerox copy) are submitted to A0/EDO by 9:00 a.m. daily. Brief reports may be phoned in.
Faxed reports must be received by 4:45 p.m.
c.
Reports should be concise -- a sentence (several at the maximum) -- for each item. Use "who, what, when, why, where" criteria to assure clarity. See Exhibit 4 for a sample.
\\.
d.
Examples of possible input:
CP/0L/FES i'suance or important related activities.
s Orders / Civil Penalties 01/01/84 I-7
Significant meetings / actions Important correspondence received / Congressional hearings requiring testimony / feedback on hearings Foreign incidents (major exposures or releases, degradation of systems, generic problems); expand in Weekly Information Report)
Exemptions, orders, events related to a hearing, releases, operating problems, failures (as appropriate to a daily report; otherwise oport in Weekly Information Report)
F.
Weekly Information Report 1.
Purpose:
To provide a single weekly document to include a general summary of the week's activities.
2.
Scope: Since this report serves to advise a broad range of readership (Commission, staff to Branch Chief level and above, general public via PDR and subscription), it should be a genuine summary covering ongoing as well as completed items.
It should particularly include items which the Commission should be aware of but which do not deserve the more formal treatment of an information paper.
3.
Details of Reporting:
a.
Offices submit typed reports (original or good xerox copy) to A0/ED0 by COB each Friday using format shown in Exhibit 5.
Faxed reports must be received by 4:45 p.m.,
Friday. Negative report is required from all offices.
b.
Individual issue reports should be limited to a paragraph or two.
a O
01/01/84 I-8
L c.
Input should includa:
Status of major issues and projects in which the office (c\\
is involved and with which staff or the Commission has an ongoing interest.
Reports of meetings / task groups which may be of interest outside the office involved.
Actions undertaken or projected which may be of interest outside the office involved.
Information which might normally be circulated as an Information Paper, unless it is either too difficult to reduce to one or two paragraphs or too timely to wait for issuance of the report.
Preliminary Notifications issued during the week, summarized /information closing out the action when complete (IE).
F0IA/ Privacy Act actions, summarized (ADM).
LWAs/ cps /0Ls.
Licensing Actions.'
Significant foreign incidents or information, y
Status of TMI activities.
Upcoming significant meetings (see 3.e.).
Items otherwise requested to be a part of this report.
d.
Items which are sensitive should be marked with an asterisk in the left column and the notation " Deleted trom PDR copy" added at bottom of page.
Items so marked will be extracted from copies made available to the public.
e.
. Procedures for Reporting Meetings 1.
Submit meeting notices s a separate pagc with the Weekly Information Report, using the format shown in Exhibit 6.
~O)
'N 01/01/84 I-9
i 2.
Include meetings with external groups and any really significant internal meetings.
3.
Report meetings to be held during the two-week period beginning 10 days after the reporting date (e.g., the December 10 report will include meetings scheduled for the 2-week period beginning December 20).
4.
Adjust the report each week to reflect schedule changes and additions.
For significant meetings, report last
~
minute changes and additions in the Daily Staff Notes.
G.
Weekly Staff Meetings E00 staff meetings are usually held on Thursday mornings and are attended by Program Office Directors (or their deputies or designees),
and such others as may be invited. These meetings provide offices with the opportunity to raise and discuss important issues that might eventually be brought to the EDO for resolution and discussion.
O 01/01/84 I-10
SAMPLE CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
[USE SINGLE SFACING]
Approved For Publication In a final rule published March 19,1982 (47 FR 11816), the Comission delegated to the E00 (10 CFR 1.40 (c) and (d)) the authority to develop and promulgate rules as defined in the APA (5 U.S.C. 551(4)) subject to the limitations in NRC Manual Chapter 0103, Organization and Functions, Office of the Execu'ttve Director for Operations, paragraphs 0213, 038, 039, and 0310.
- The enclosed final rule entitled " Administrative Claims Under Federal Tort Claims Act" amends 10 CFR Part 14 to make it current and censistent with the regulation of the Attorney General, 28 CFR Part 14, to change the office where claims are filed and the NRC officials who are authorized to act on claims, and to provide procedures when NRC employee drivers are sued in State courts.
In issuing this rule the ED0 is acting in accordance with the general policy guidance provided by the Comission in a final rule establishing the Comission's administrative procedures for implementing the Federal Tort Claims Act (32 FR 3731).*
This final rule does not constitute a significant question of policy, nor does it amend regulations contained in 10 CFR Parts 0, 2, 7, 8, 9 Subpart C
[m) or 110.
I therefore find that this rule is within the scope of my rulemaking
(/
authority and am proceeding to issue it.
Date LNamej Executive Director for Operations
- Between asterisks insert the necessary description for the particular rule in question. These words are taken from a particular rule to serve as an example.
(J 01/01/84 I-11 EXHIBIT 1
..... =..
i SAMPLE WEEKLY INFORMATION REPORT OR DAILY STAFF NOTES ENTRY
[USE SINGLE SPACING]
Proposed or Final Rule to be Signed by EDO On
.1982, the Executive Director for Operations approved a
[ proposed rulej [ final rule] which revises 10 CFR Part 14, Administrative Claims under Federal Tort Claims Act. This rule would add to Part 14 (a) procedures which NRC is to follow when claims are filed with NRC and one or more other agencies, (b) a requirement that NRC employee drivers who are sued in State Courts report such proceedings to the U.S. District Court if the employee was acting within the scope of his employment, (c) provisions for payment n# claims over $2,500.00 through the General Accounting Office, and (d) provis.ons limiting attorney fees as provided in the governing statute. The rule authorizes the Executive Legal Director to determine, compromise, and settle claims.
While about half of the 49 claims filed during the past 4 years have been filed by rental car agencies, the average amount allowed has been less than
$250.00. The Executive Director for Operations therefore certified under the Regulatory Flexibility Act that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This notice constitutes notice to the Commission that, in accordance with the rulemaking authority delegated to EDO, [the E00 has signed this proposed rule for publication in the FR.] [the ED0 has received this final rule and proposes to forward it on to the Office of the Secretary for FR publication, unless otherwise directed by the Comission.]
O 01/01/84 I-12 EXHIBIT 2
't_
SAMPLE DAILY STAFF NOTES g = g'o UNITED STATES 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
k WASHINGTON, D. C. 20$55 6,*****/
June 1, 1983 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Chairman Palladino Comissioner Gilinsky Commissi0ner Roberts Commissioner Asselstine Commissioner Bernthal FROM:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
DAILY STAFF NOTES - MAY 31, 1983 IE_
1.
IE Infnrmation Notice 83-35, Fuel Movement with Control Rods Withdrawn at BWRs was issued May 31, 1983, to all boiling water reactor facilities holding an operating license or construction permit.
Region I 1.
R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant
,q f
i V'
The Region I staff will be conducting an enforcement conference on June 1, 1983, with Rochester Gas and Electric Company management regarding their failure to perform the appropriate post maintenance testing on the containment personnel air lock in October 1982.
NRR 1.
Clinton Power Station Illinois Power Company announced on May 24, 1983 that the fuel load date for the Clinton Power Station, Unit I has been revised from January 1984 to January 1986.
/# 'N
\\
01/01/84 I-13 EXHIBIT 3
SAMPLE DAILY STAFF NOTES ENTRY
\\
x NRR DAILY HIGHLIGHT September 12, 1983 1.
Seabrook Station, Unit No. 2 The owners of Seabrook station, Unit No. 2 passed a resolution to reduce s
expenditures to a minimum level. Construction will be reduced to an activity level consistent with " maintaining" the construction permit.
This action places Unit 2 in hn extended construction delay.
PSNH will formally submit a letter by the end of this month providing details of its U, nit 2 plans along with a c'opy of the resolution that was passed.
2.
ArkansasNucleardne,UnitNo.1 AND-1 wa's manually shutdown from full power operation at 7:00 pm CDT September 7,1983 as a result of an unidentified lekage of greater than
'1.gpm (Tet.hnical Spicificat, ion limit) in the Reactor Coolant System.
g The lii:ensee identified the leak as being from a 3/4" "C" Reactor s
Coolant Pump Seal drain line at a pipe to flange weld. The licensee determined that this drain line can be shut and, therefore, has installed blind flanges on this line upstream of the leak and all like drain lines of the other.RCP seals.
7
(
Because this event was a shutdown for a limiting condition of operation, an3 unusual event was declared.
3 3.
Peach _Rottom Unit No. 3 On September 7, 1983w duringsstartup of Unit 3 after an extended refueling and pfpe crack repair outage, an increase in the unidentified leakage rate was recorded with the reactor at 15% power and 1000 psi.
Unidentified coolantcleakage.t measured at the floor sump pump c
increased from 0.75 gpm to 3.0 gpm in less than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
Reactor pressure was then decreased to 500 psi and a search for the source of leakage was made.
It was determined that the "B" recirculation discharge pcmp valve (M053B) was leaking at the body to bonnet flange.
,5
, An initial repair attempt by readjusting the torque around the bonnet
' failed to stop the leakage.
Reactor pressure has been further decreased i
to 50 psi and the Senior Resident, Inspector (SRI) now indicates that the licensee plans to seal-weld the bonnet to stop leakage. Seal-weldir;9 has been used previously by TVA to correct similar leakage problems and s
l, is an acceptable fix. This proposed repair technique was scheduled to
, commence on September 8, 1983 and be completed in two to three days.
,s fl 4
01/01/84 I-14 EXHIBIT 4
+
-L SAMPLE WEEKLY INFORMATION REPORT ENTRY
!9 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION l
ITEMS OF INTEREST i
Week Ending August 26, 1983 i
Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3 At Saturday midnight, unidentified drywell leakage rose again after about a month to 3gpm requiring licensee analysis to determine the source.
f Containment air sampling was dona..Ith no abnormal indications and v
surveillance intervals between sump pumping were shortened to two hours. A f
reading of over 4gpm was reached during one cf these two hour intervals but the subsequent four hour value was 3.66gpm which does not require a drywell r
entry. The licensee, based on his analysis to date, believes that the leak is either in a recirculation pump discharge valve or in a recirculation pump seal. Although a drywell entry is not required at this time, the licensee is 7
considering a shutdown later this week so that entry can be made. The reading at 12:00 noon on August 22 was 3.25gpm.
c j
Indian Point 2 - Striking Workers Return to IP-2 Members of Local #1-2 Utility Workers of America have begun to relieve
'~
management watchstanders at IP-2 following Thursday's vote to accept Con Edison's contract proposal.
Reorientation of the returning operators, i
which includes required reading, classroom training and parallel 4
watchstanding, will continue through all three normal Monday shifts.
Management watchstanders will retain control of operations until 11 p.m.
f Monday night when the Tuesday mid-shift reports for work. The IP-2 resident inspectors are providing 24-hour coverage of the turnover activities.
Beaver Valley Unit )
After core reload during the week of August 15, 1983 the licensee experienced trouble latching one rod cluster control assembly (RCCA). On August 20,
,=
L 1983, after removal of the upper core internals package, the entire K row of fuel assemblies was found shifted about 1/4 inch. The nozzle on assembly K-2 (new fuel assembly) was crushed down about 7/8 of an inch with its associated 5
RCCA displaced down approximately 2 inches. Underwater camera inspection of the bottom of the upper core plate was performed on August 22, 1983.
It was found that the control rod guide tube assembly has been aligned by guide pins that have been incorrectly placed on the upper core plate.
(Apparently, when m;-
these pins were installed during a recent repair effort, they were mistakenly placed in the bypass holes on the upper core plate.)
The licensee believes that there is no damage to the fuel elements. The damaged assembly will be withdrawn, inspected and be replaced or repaired.
)
01/01/84 I-15 EXHIB1T 5
4 S
RES MEETING NOTICES August 26, 1983 oC DOCXET ATTENDEES /
2 DATE/ TIME
- NUMBER LOCATION PURPOSE APPLICANT NRC CONTACT 8/27-28/83 Boston, MA 20/3D UPTF Measurement Tests Zuber Zuber 8/28-9/1 Cambridge, MA International Mtg on LWR CSRB, ORNL, Agrawal-INEL, LANL, SNL 8/29/83 P-il8 Semiscale Landry Landry y,
3E 8/30/83 Idaho Falls, ID INEL HIST Support Young Young g
8/29/83 1133-SS Meeting with Mr. Finzi of Cortez R
coordinatica g
g 8/29/83 Rm 78084 Meeting with DOE on waste RES, NMSS Minogue 5
3:00 PM Forrtestal management d
Bldg.
A 8/30/83 1140-55 Meeting with Mr. Cottrell Minogue h
of Oak Ridge to discuss the Nuclear Safety Journal 8/31/83 Hanover, NM 1/2 Scale Thermal Mixing Tests Reyes Reyes 9/1/83 Los Alamos, NM LANL MIST Support Young Young O
9/1/83 1717 H Street ACP.S Mtg - Severe Accident ACRS/SARP Larkins 5
AM Manag/BCL Wang 5
9/2/83 P-110 NRC/EPRI H Rvw. Mtg.
CSRB/CHEB Larkins 2
All Day Bethesda NRR Branches EPRI O
O O
II. CORRESPONDENCE A.
Principal Correspondence
=
1.
ED0 Control Ticket System 2.
Preparation of Reply 3.
Suspense Dates (due dates) 4.
Office Responsibilities 5.
Correspondence Tone and Style 6.
Assignment of Reply Signator and Information Routing 7.
Special Instructions for Preparing Letters for the Chairman's Signature 8.
Concurrence / Review 9.
Staff Inquiries l
10.
Format t-l B.
General Correspondence O
C.
Interoffice Memoranda D.
Proofreading E.
Classified Information Exhibits 0
01/01/84 11-1
II.
CORRESPONDENCE A.
Principal Correspondence Principal correspondence includes, but is not limited to, Congressional inquiries, all letters addressed to the Chaiman, Comissioners, and the Executive Director for Operations (ED0), the replies to the above, as well as me:::oranda from tha Comissioners.
1.
EDO Control Ticket System An NRC form 232, Principal Correspondence Control ticket, is used by the Administrative and Correspondence Branch of the OED0 (OEDO:ACB) for tracking the incoming principal correspondence that is assigned to the staff for reply.
This ticket contains information such as the writer and addressee of the incoming correspondence, a brief description of its content, the office that is assigned to prepare the reply, the reply due date, whose signature the reply should be prepared for (e.g., EDO, Chaiman, or other), etc. The Information Routing column shows the int'ividuals (offices) that tne OEDO:ACB has sent copies of incoming correspondence to. These individuals (offices) should also receive copies of the reply.
Often, the ED0 Control ticket item also contains a Secretariat Control ticket (form NRC 62) used by the Office of the Secretary (SECY) for tracking correspondence addressed to the Chairman and the Comissioners and Comission staff offices. The instructions on the ED0 Control ticket should be followed.
See Exhibit 1 A and B for a sample of the E00 Control ticket and the Secretariat Control ticket.
O 01/01/84 II-2
' 2. -
Preparation of Reply
. Replies to principal correspondence should be prepared on word processing equipment capable of communicating via data phone (e.g., IBM Displaywriter, IBM 5520, IBM System 6), whenever possible. A separate identification sheet containing the document name or disk number as applicable should accompany the correspondence.
3.
Suspense Dates (due dates) a.
Normally the staff is given 10 workdays (critical correspondence) and 15 workdays (routine corresponoence) to work on Principal correspondence and to forward the reply to the OEDO:ACB by the due date indicated on the control fora. Suspense times of less than 10 workdays may occur; e.g., for letters for the Chairman's signature, if specific due dates have been stated by the SECY.
O b.
When assigned an ED0 Control ticket item, the staff should first look at the suspense date.. If you think.it is unreasonable or cannot be met, inform youf supervisor and ask to have the
' suspense date extended through the OEDO:ACB.
Do not wait until the last minute or when the deadline is'actually missed.
Consider management review time in your calculations, c.
.If a complete reply to the principal correspondence cannot be made within the assigned suspense time, and an extension is not granted, or-is impractical to obtain, a brief interim reply shall be considered. An interim reply should explain the reason for the delay and give the expected date of final response. The interim reply may be signed by an office or division director, subject to coordination with the OEDO:ACB.
Ld..
Critical Items - critical items are those requiring top priority
[
handling'such as requests from Comissioners, letters from NRC's
-\\
Congressional Oversicht Comittees, other important congressional 01/01/84~
II-3
letters, and letters for the Chairman's signature. These items should be handled on a priority basis. The E00 Control form will be marked " Priority".
e.
A suspense date, be it for an E00 Control ticket item or a WITS item, applies to all offices involved. The rule of thumb should be for offices to use two-thirds of the time allotted for development (in concert with others as required) and one-third for coordination. This assumes prompt initiation of the task and use of parallel--not sequential-- dissemination f
of concurrence.
f.
Concurring in other offices' tasks is just as important as working on your own tasks.
4.
Office Responsibilities a.
SECY The SECY is responsible for assigning suspense dates (final due dates) to the principal correspondence addressed to the Chairman and the Comissioners. SECY also advises the OEDO:
ACB of procedural or format changes requested by the Commission or warranted by specific requirements.
(Contactsgenerally should not be made by staff to SECY; OEDO:ACB is the proper contact.)
b.
OED0 The OEDO:ACB is responsible for assigning internal ED0 suspense dates (i.e., the dates at which the replies are due at the OEDO:ACB), for interfacing with SECY and for keeping track of replies. ACB is the contact for staff in offices reporting to the E00.
O 01/01/84 II-4 1
The Assistant for Operations, EDO (A0/ED0) is responsible for assuring that the outgoing correspondence for the signature of the EDO, Chairman, or the Commissioners is responsive to the incoming, contains the right format, and properly addresses the NRC's policies and procedures, etc.
c.
ADM The Office of Administration is responsible for expediting mail delivery involving principal correspondence as defined
- earlier, d.
Originating Office The individual (office) assigned to prepare the reply is responsible for ensuring that the reply is properly coordinated (including correspondence chain) and prepared (containing Q
necessary background information, right fonnat, free of typographical errors, etc.); also, that the reply is complete in its final form and forwarded to the OEDO:ACB before the due date.
5.
Correspondence Tone and Style Be concise. Rely on enclosures to the basic letter or memorandum for the majority of detail. The letter or memorandum should be no longer than one page if possible.
Prepare all correspondence with a courteous tone. Begin with phrases such as "I am pleased to respond..." or "Thank you for your letter..."
and end with "Please let us know if we can provide any further assistance..." or "If you have any further questions, please let us know" or words to that effect, n
01/01/84 II-F
'h r
When responding to Congressional inquiries, do not include a staff person's name and telephone number as a contact.
6.
Assignment of Reply Signator and Information Routing a.
General The determination of who is to sign the reply to Principal Correspondence is made at the primary control point and entered on the control form. The control form also indicates the routing of the reply for information.
b.
Replies for Signature of the Chairman Responses to incoming communications shall be prepared for the signature of the Chairman when they:
1.
are addressed to the Chairman from Members of Congress.
ii.
originate from cabinet officers or the heads of government agencies or commissions.
iii. are received from high ranking officials of foreign govern-ment agencies or commissions.
iv.
originate from major officials of State governments or domestic organizations.
v.
solicit NRC's position on substantive matters, or request toe establishment of policy, legislative, or budgetary positions.
_ Replies for Signature of the Executive Director for Operations c.
Congressional mail assigned to the ED0 or members of the E00 staff will normally be signed by the Executive Director or the Deputy Executive Director for Operations, except when such responses establish policy, legislative position, o; budget requirements (see 6.b.v.: Replies for Signature of the Chairman).
01/01/84 II-6
Regional Administrators will sign con';tituent referral letters d
that are received directly by them from Congressional home offices.
7.
Special Instructions for Preparing Letters for the Chairman's Signature a.
Begin letters for the Chairman's signature with phrases such as "This is in response to your letter..." or "In response to your letter...."
Except when the Chairman has personally requested the writer to answer the letter for him, phrases such as "The Chairman has requested that I respond..." or "I have been asked by the Chairman to respond..." should not appear in responses to incoming letters addressed to the Chairman.
b.
Stationery Use NRC stationery with the NRC seal in the upper left corner with the legend " Chairman" or " Office of the Chairman" under the seal. Regular NRC stationery cannot be used.
c.
Signature Block The Chairman's signature block depends upon which stationery is used.
When using " Chairman" letterhead, the signature block should simply _ be the name without the title.
See Exhibit 2.
When using " Office of the Chairman" letterhead, the name and title (Chairman) must be typed.
See Exhibit 3.
rx
.01/01/84 II-7
l d.
Letters should generally be 1-2 pages in length. Details requiring lengthy discussion should be added as enclosures and referenced in the letter.
8.
Concurrence / Review a.
The office that is assigned the princial correspondence should decide what offices need to concur in the proposed reply.
The section of the EDO control form listing "information routinq" can serve as a guide.
If possible, obtain concurrence from different offices simultaneously. Sequential concurrence is too time consuming and should be avoided.,
Following are some general guidelines:
(1)
Office of the Executive Legal Director (ELD)
A copy of a reply that involves legal considerations should be sent to the ELD in draft form, along with a copy of the incoming correspondence, after the appropriate division director has approved it.
ELD will confirm its receipt of the above and should be allowed 16 working hours for the review. Any legal problems or objections will be resolved directly between the ELD and the division. Telephone con-currences may be made by the ELD if it has no legal objections on the draft reply.
(ii)
Office of Resource Management (RM)
Follow similar procedures for obtaining RM review and concurrence of correspondence related to budget, appropriations, or other financial matters.
O 01/01/84 II-8
(iii)
Office of the Inspector and Auditor (01A)
O Follow similar procedures for obtaining OIA review and concurrence on replies on matters related to General Accounting Office (GA0). See Chapter IV,
" Procedures for Responding to GA0 Requests and Reports and OIA Audit Reports."
(iv)
E00 and Others The final reply that went through the appropriate concurrence chain, i.e., the writer, Branch Chief, Division Director, Office Director, ELD and/or RM, and other coordinating offices as needed, should be forwarded to the OEDO:ACB, with necessary background information attached, p
E00 will review for concurrence all corresprn-V dence prepared for the signature of the ESO, Chairman, or the Commissioners.
OEDO:ACB will forward the above to SE(Y for Commission review and concurrence as appropriate.
OEDO:ACB will send replies to Congressional inquiries to the Office of Congressional Affairs (CA) for review and dispatch, b.
Editorial work and the tone are the responsibility of the office preparing the paper or correspondence.
Concurring offices should concentrate on substantive issues rather than editing smaller points.
OO 01/01/84 II-9
c.
Office Directors and Regional Administrators are expected to establish systems which either delegate authority to deal with an ' issue when it is assigned or to assure that an efficient method of providing guidance is established.
Staff should not be exercised in developing a paper which is overturned at the eleventh hour.
d.
When asking other offices to review and comment on a draft of a SECY paper or a letter, try to note changes between drafts (if more than one) by using lines in the margin beside major changes, underlining, or handwritten indications. This will help the reviewer focus on changes from previously reviewed material rather than having to do a line-by-lire comparison.
9.
Staff Inquiries a.
All questions related to correspondence, suspenses, etc.,
shall be directed to OEDO:ACB.
b.
Staff may, as necessary, contact initiators of correspondence to understand better the problem, request, etc. When Congressional staff is an initiator, contact should first be made with OCA.
- 10. Format a.
See Exhibits 4 and 5 b.
ature blocks
< and titles for signature blocks for use on principc.l correspondence can be found in the NRC telephone directory.
O 01/01/84 II-10
1 c.
Complimentary Close Use " Sincerely" as the complimentary close on all letters except for those to the President, which should use
" Respectfully yours."
d.
Distribution and concurrence block (see Exhibit 6).
e.
Copy requirements (see Exhibit 7).
B.
General Correspondence General correspondence refers to the correspondence that does not fit under the principal correspondence category, as described earlier.
This may include letters from, or to, other Government agenices, contractors, and general public. The~ proper format is similar to that required of the principal correspondence. These are usually signed at the branch, division, or office level depending on the individual office procedures. ELD concurrence is required if any legal consideration, e.g., interpretation of rules and regulations, is involved.
C.
Interofi;ce Memoranda i
Exhibit 8 ;iows the proper format for memoranda between NRC offices.
Rule of thumb:
In order that proper review ano approval are obtained, the signer of a memorandum should generally hold a position equivalent to that of the addressee.
For example: A division director signs a letter to the division director of another office. A memorandum addressed to a staff member of another office (division, branch) may be signed by the staff-writer, provided that the memorandum is on matters related to Ob 01/01/84 II-11
areas or tasks that have been specifically assigned to the staff-writer, and that it does not refer to any significant policy issues. The division director or branch chief's approval may not be necessary in this case, depending on each office's policy. ELD should be included for review and concurrence, when appropriate.
D.
Proofreading It is the responsibility of both the writer and the typist to proofread carefully the work before submitting to EDO, etc.
Refer to NRC Manual.
Appendix 0240 for detailed instructions.
E.
Classified Information Material involving classified information should be prepared and protected properly.
Refer to NRC Manual, Appendix 2101, Part III (dated 1/31/80) for detailed information on preparation of classified doctments, etc.
O 01/01/84 II-12
(~~%
SAMPLE EDO CONTROL TICKET FROM ACTION CONTROL DATES CONTROL 4.
COMPL DEADLINE 10-3-M -
1MO
' Rep. John Doe.
oATE oF oOCUMENT m aa = az'tv 9-16-83 Yo['
PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF:
FINA mEPLY Chairman b^~
rite LOCATION OsmacuTive anecTon OTHEa
[
l i DESCRIPTION. Q LETTtm O ucuo O neronT O oTsca sPECIAL INSTRUCT:ONS OR REMARKS
. Requests to be kept informed of all REF: EDO 10000 l-p
. significant developments relating to
' incidents AS$1GNED TO DATE INFORuATION = OUTING Williag11. ISP 9 83 Jones Brown Smith.
Johnson t
I SECY 83-1456 NRO FORM 232 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS
' 5 80)
PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL
(,
O'./01/84 11-13 EXHIBIT 1A
SAMPLE SECY CONTROL TICKET O
79-1485 10-18-80 N o.
togg,n, o,,,
NRC SECRETARIAT TO:
O commissioner oaie
$ Exec. oir./Oper.
O cen. counsei O cons. Lia; son O soiicitor O Pubhc Affairs O secretary O
Rep. John Doe incoming.
From:
Chairman 10-18-80 7,.
o,1,
Subject:
Development of Workable basis of comunications with the NRC due to incidents b Prepare reply for signature of:
G chairman DATE DUE COMMISSION:
10-29-80 O commissioner O soO. ac. ct. SOL. PA. sEcY O signature biock omitted O
O Returr original of incoming with response O For direct repiy-For appropriate action O For information For recommendation Copies to: Chairman, Comissioners, PE, GC, PA, Remam,:
OCA. OCA to acknowledge, For the Comm;ssion-
- se id three (3) copies of reply to sew Wil Facility NRC42 ACTION SLIP I
01/01/84 II-14 EXHIBIT 1B
SAMPLE CHAIRMAN LETTERHEAD g u,
/
O!
lo,,
UNITED 5TATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
g j
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20065
- g...../
CHAIRMAN O
Sincerely, Name O
01/01/84 II-15 EXHIBIT 2 l
SAMPLE OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN LETTERHEAD p e,g
/
o 4%
UNITED STATES i
E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5
E W ASHINGTON, D.C. 20555
~s.,
/
OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN i
Sincerely, Name Chairman O
01/01/84 II-16 EXHIBIT 3
SAMPLE LETTER FORMAT
,/* "%
m uw Tso :Tarus
)
g
\\
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISslON v
3 g
wasMinoton,n.c. asses
\\*****/
(minimum ofIspaces) i Mr. Richard Johnson National Business Corporation 123 Main Street Detroit, Michigan 48217 Dear Mr. Johnson This illustrates a business letter prepared for an addressee outside tha Nuclear Regulatory Comission.
The left margin is set t.t least 1 inch from the edge of the paper.
The right margin should be approximately equal to the left margin to give the letter a well-balanced appearance. The bottom margin should be at least 11/6 inches (7 typewriter spaces) or more to allow (ma.:
rstrum adequate clearance for the concurrence grid at the bottom of the (mm, imum 7 heh official record copy (NRC Fonn 318).
f inch
- N Single space letters of two or more paragraphs, and double space between paragraphs. Double space a short (10-lines or less) Ictter, and indent the first line 5 typewriter spaces.
pi A subject ifne may be included (except on Principal Correspondence).
t'd Type in all caps, two lines below the salutation.
The complimentary close is typed 2 spaces below the last line of the letter, beginning at page center; the signer's name and title 5 spaces below and flush witri the complimentary close, and organization on the next line. Enclosure and "cc" infonnation is provided below as an illustration.
Sincerely.
l (5 spaces) l William L. Smith, Director Division of Document Control Office of Administration (2 spaces)
Enclosures :
1.
NRC Manual App. 0240 2.
NRC Report cc w/ enc 1:
Mr. John Jones, Et0A (mhimum 1 1/1 bch marp&r er 7 typewriter aneces) pxj 01/01/84 II-17 EXHIBIT 4
SAMPLE SECOND PAGE OF LETTER II (Type heading i hch or 6 spaces from top edge)
Mr. Richard Johnson 2
i (4 spaces)
Use plain white bond paper for the second and succeeding pages of letters.
Ib not begin a paragraph near the end of a page unless there is room for at least 2 lines on that page. Do not continue a paragraph on the following page unless at least 2 lines can be carried over to that page.
Type the name of the addressee flush with the left margin, using the margins established for the first page.
Center the page number.
The body of the letter is continued 4 spaces below the heading.
Sincerely, William L. Smith, Director Division of Document Control Office of Mministration 0
01/01/84 II-18 EXHIBIT 5
O O
O
{
l s
D Sincerely,
.c l
William L. Smith, Director Division of Document Control Office of Administration l
Enclosures:
m 1.
HRC Hanual app. 0240 2.
NRC Report g
n cc w/ encl:
e Hr. John Jones ERDA (Abova Ens shows on origirosi and si copies) 8 b
b Distribut1on:
(Bekw Erre shows on Fi1e and krlernal n
CD6Tb1 copies on&}
g EDO Rearling File o"
EDO SECY (if referred by SECY)
CA (if Congressional ltr.)
D. Smith, NRR Docket No.00-000 PDR m
LPDR 5
ELD 5
NRM Off. Dir.
NRR NRR..
_ fl0 EDO
_0rjginator:
Div. Dir.
Off. Dir.
_BJanec name_
-7f6-7.6t piirliill date date date e.- 4sc.su in.,.s3, 4am en*
m S
COPY REQUIREMENTS o<
FOR PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE l'
1.
Official File Copy 2.
EDO Control Ticket No. or,ED0 Reading File r
l 3.
Executive Director for Operations (ED0)
Secretariat -- If Correspondence is referred by the Secretariat which means 4.
it will contain a Secretariat Control Ticket Congressional Affairs -- If it is a Congressional letter.
5.
Courtesy copy reproduced from the original with a copy of the incoming 6.
=
letter -- if it is a Conaressional letter directed to the Congressman's This courtesy copy is for the Congressman's Washington Office.
L home Office.
o Individuals that received a copy of the Incoming letter -- See Information 7.
routing block on the ED0 Control ticket.
8.
Any other copies the Originator determines is necessary.
R5 5-N 9
9 e
i OU Format for NRC Memoranda - (Single Addressee)
[
UNITSO STATM g=
OsWCLEAA Re0ULATOflY CCNea18810ld 1
START DATE AT PAGE CENTER.
- UMSs
- duly 20.19XX
'C" " * ""'""
5 u
g spe tit o ouT.
Docket 70.50-000 i.au.
uu. s, aces st? TAB 2 sPActs AFTER THE CotON.
OR 17 SPACES FRoM TH4 MARGIN.
MEMORANbUMFOR:. A. Smith. Director. Division of Document Control. ADM 30M:
Lena H. Henry Chief. Records Management Branch. DDC 5BJECT:
MEMDRANDA PREPARATION (YOUR MEMO 7/12/XX)
InPactsi This is an illustration of a single adJressee memorandum used for correspondence between NRC offices.
The date begins at page center. 2 spaces below the letterhead. When rg g
Docket Case Numbers are required, they are placed 2 tpaces below the
)
0 NRC seal, flush with the left edge of the saal.
(V) i
\\
e captions " MEMORANDUM FOR:."."FROM:." PATTN." or "THRU." when used)
~
and "
SUBJECT:
" are typed in all capital letters flush with the left margin. The' MEMORANDUM FOR:" caption begins a minimum of 4 spaces below _
the date when typed. When Docket Case Numbers are required. provide I"l eNCM additional space aCCordingly. Double space between the last line of the 11NCM
^"G'"
._'RG'N u
previous caption data and the next caption.
gin the body of the memo 3 spaces below the subject line. Single space memos of two or more paragraphs, and double space between paragraphs.
Double space a short (10 lines or less) memo and indent the first line 5 typewriter spaces.
5sn paragraphs are subdivided and numbered they fall in the sequence shown in Exhibit 9. Part IV.
Beginning at page center. type the signer's name and title. 5 spaces below the body of the Mmo and his organizaFon on the r. ext line. (See Part IV. M.) Enclosure inforination is illustrated in Exhibit 3 Part IV. ($ee Part IV. N.)
Tvrt THE ssGN4TURE Records Management Branch stocu aT PAGt CsNTs R*
s seacts et tow Twe Division of Document Control tasT tine Or Te xt Office of Administration CONTACT:
Jim G. Gree M
49 27000 Ares aRs on einst eact.
go,,,uuu e us i=cw uancis 1 REGARoLEssOF tENGTM OF uf uomaNCUw 7
[
\\
%/
01/01/84 II-21 EXHIBIT 8
i III. COMMISSION PAPERS AND MEMORANDA General A.
Types of SECY Papers 1.-
Comission Meeting 2.
Affimation 3.
Notation Vote 4.
Negative Consent 5.
Information B.
Release of SECY Papers.
C.
Format Requirements 1.
Resource Estimates a.
Category 1 Estimates b..
Category 2 Estimates O-2.
Regulatory Analysis Guidelines 3.
Sunshine Act
- 4..
Scheduling 5.
Federal Register Notices 6.
Paperwork Reduction Act 7.
Regulatory Flexibility Act D.
Miscellaneous 1.
_ Style 2.
Stationery 3.
Coordination. Routing and Dispatch 4.
Copy Requirements 5.
Distribution Sheet E.
Memoranda to the Commissioners Exhibits O
'01/01/84-III-1
II. COMMISSION PAPERS General Comission papers, also referred to as SECY papers, include responses to questions raised by the Chairman and the Comissioners, those initiated due to petitions for rulemaking, and those initiated by the staff when it identifies an issue or technical development which should be brought to the Commission's attention for information purposes or for action.
The SECY papers constitute the principal instrument by which the Commission receives information needed for making decisions. Certain decisional SECY papers are acted upon by formal Comission vote at a Comission meeting.
Other papers are acted upon by individual Commissioner notation vote and do not require a Comission meeting to complete the action. The "Comission meeting" is discussed in Chapter IV.
See Exhibit 1 for an illustration of a typical SECY paper and its standard entries.
Exhibit 1 is a flow chart tracking a SECY paper through various offices from the time it leaves the originating office to its final disposition.
A.
Types of SECY Papers Based on their purposes and contents, the SECY papers can be categorized into the following types:
O 01/01/84 III-2
i l
[
1.
Comission Meeting Papers Purpose - To present major policy issues for discussion and decision by the Comission at a scheduled meeting.
Format
-a alternatives b
pros and cons of each alternative c
recommendations Note
- a)
A Comission meeting paper should include an objective analysis of the reasonable alternatives presented in the paper, and should show why an alternative is preferred and therefore recommended.
b)
Do not simply present a staff's point of view and try to justify it in the paper.
c)
These papers address major issues and the Comission usually are formally briefed by staff.
d)
See Exhibit 3.
2.
Affirmation Papers s
im Purpose - To present relatively minor policy issues - usually on rules and regulations - as compared to Policy papers.
Included are those which:
a) do not appear to have far-reaching implications; b) represent only a small extension, modification, or elaboration of existing policy; or c) do not appear to set new precedent or to constitute a major departure from existing policy. Affirmation papers also are used to address the residual adminis-trative actions of policy paper issues, (e.g., approval of previously considered Federal Register Notices) and usually present specific items for Comission approval, such as an effective rule, denial or grant of a petition, or a statement of organization and functions of a newly created NRC office which includes a delegation of authority to the office director.
' (~h i
'd 01/01/84 III-3
Format - Alternatives are generally presented, although it is occasionally appropriate not to do so. A recomendation is presented.
Note
- a)
Affinnation papers are acted upon by individual Comissioners through Affirmation Vote Shcets and these votes are affirmed in a subsequent Comission meeting which usually has little in the way of discussion.
If unanimous approval is not attained and a meeting is required to resolve differences, it becomes a policy paper, for all intents and purposes, b)
See Exhibit 4.
3.
Notation Vote Papers Purpose - To address matters which do not require a Comission decision at a meeting, but which nevertheless require Comissioner concurrence and/or coment. A typical example is a proposed rule.
Format - Alternatives are generally not presented, although it is occasionally appropriate to do so. A recomendation is presented.
Note
- a)
The Discussion section should include sufficient information for the Comission to understand clearly and easily what is before them for coment and/or concurrence, b)
Notation Vote papers are acted upon by individual Comissioners through Notation Vote Sheets which are distributed with the paper.
Final decision does not involve affirmation, at an open meeting, so decisions are reached by the Comission more quickly.
c)
See Exhibit 5.
4.
Negative Consent Papers Purpose - To address issues which the Comission would like brought to its attention before action is taken, but which do not require t~ne formality of a Comission vote.
Comission assent is presumed from the lack of action to preclnde the recomendation from beir.g implemented, i.e., negative consent. A typical example is a review of a staff position on an Emergency Operations Facility at a nuclear power plant.
O 01/01/84 III-4
l
\\
No alternatives but a recommendation is present.
Format a)
The Discussion section should include sufficient Note information for the Comission to understand clearly and easily what is before them for comment.
b)
The Comission is granted a 10-day time frame in which to act. Subject to Comissioner contrary views and receipt of a subsequent Staff Requirements Memo from SECY, the staff recommendation is accepted.
c)
See Exhibit 6.
5.
Information Papers Purpose - To forward to the Comission information on significant
. matters.
No Comission action is requested or required.
No recommendation contained.
Format 3)
Information papers should only be used when the Note information is of greater length or of greater urgency than inserts in the Weekly Information Report satisfy.
b)
Condense the infonnation in " executive summary" fashion, and the introductory paragraph should show why the item should be of interest to the Comission.
c)
Information papers will not be used to obtain Comission approval or negative consent.
If Comission approval is requested, it must be obtained through 'an appropriate Notation Vote or Negative Consent paper.
d)
See Exhibit 7.
k O
01/01/84 III-5
B.
Release of SECY Papers to the PDR 1.
If it is anticipated prior to submission of a Comission paper to the EDO that release to the PDR is advisable, note in the Recommendation section of the paper that staff recomends the paper be placed in the PDR.
2.
If, after a paper is published, the staff desires to release the paper for some reason other than an F0IA request, the first contact should be to the ED0 who will advise whether SECY should be requested to survey the Comission and request release.
3.
If a paper is discussed in an open meeting, it is automatically placed in the PDR.
C.
Format Requirements 1.
Resource Estimates A Comission Paper which has resource impacts (funding and/or man-power) on the NRC must so indicate.
Resource estimates can be presented together with the pro / con discussion of each alternative (see Exhibit 8) or discussed in a separate paragraph. However, the estimates must be summarized separately as in Exhibit 8.
The sumary must include all NRC resources (not just those of the requesting office) and must specify possible sources of resources (such as reprograming) to impicment any new initiatives.
If no resource impact is expected, the last paragraph of the Discussion section should state that the action involves no new resource requirements.
(See Exhibit 1.)
The Commission Papers recomending program changes that have resource impacts generally fall into the following categories.
O 01/01/84 III-6
While' the requesting offices have the primary responsibility to determine which category a paper falls under, the ED0 may change the category based on his own review and OED0 staff recommendation.
a.-
Category 1 Estimates
.Those which have little resource impact and/or which seek 7
preliminary Comission guidance - most papers in this category require resources within the requesting office's availability.
The oriainating office will prepare a preliminary resource estimate for each alternative presented in the paper. After the Comission reviews the paper and has reached a decision on the
. alternative, the originating office may be required to prepare a detailed resource estimate for the selected (preferred) alterna-tive to allow the Comission to make a final decision.
b.
-Category 2 Estimates O
Those which have-significant resource implications and/or are being proposed.to the Comission for final decision - usually these papers propose courses of action that. require resources beyond the
-requesting office's availability. These papers are required to contain fully developed and detailed best estimates when they are submitted to the.EDO. There they will undergo OED0 staff review before being fornrded to the Comission.
Important resource considerations during such review would include overall NRC availability, Congressional reprograming thresholds, and the need to pursue budget supplementals or amendments.
2..
Regulatory Analysis Guidelines The Executive Director for Operations announced the adoption of
' new Regulatory Analysis Guidelines ~ in a memorandu;a to Office Directors and Regional Administrators, dated December 13, 1982.
{u
. 01/01/841
-- III-7 1
E '- '- '-
-m-___.__._-
- - - -------- - - - ^-- ' - -- - - - - -
The revised guidelines replace the Comission's guidelines for preparing value impact analyses (SECV-77-388A, December 19, 1977). A regulatory analysis must accompany each rulemaking action submitted for review t,y the Comittee to Review Generic Requirements and by the Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operations and Generic Requirements, or for decision by the Executive Director for Operations or the Comission.
For detailed information concerning the preparation and content of a regulatory analysis, refer to the Regulatory Analysis Guidelines presented as an attachment to the December 13, 1982 memorandum (NUREG-BR-0058).
3.,
Sunshine Act All papers which have a potential of appearing as an item on the Comission meeting agenda must, in order for " Sunshine Act" procedures to be met, include a statement in the Scheduling block:
"If scheduled on the Commission agenda, recomend this paper be considered at a [ closed] [open] meeting." [See also IV.E.]
4.
Scheduling This block should be filled out for every paper requiring Comission action.
a.
If there is a circumstance which requires or makes it advisable that Commission action be completed by a certain date, the date and an explanation shculd be stated, e.g.:
"Comission action is requested by January 31 in order to leave 60 days for coment, 60 days for revision and ACRS review, and 30 days for final Comission approval. This will allow the rule to be in place by July 1 to meet the conditions af the Comission Order of June 1980."
- or **
O 01/01/84 III-8
/
" Commission action is requested by June 15. The h
Department of State advises us they intend to act by June 16 with or without NRC input."
- or **
"While no specific circumstances require Comission action by a _particular date, the Comission should be aware that this action is on the critical path to any further direction to licensees on installation of water level indicators in B&W reactors."
b.
If there are no such circumstances, the entry should read:
"No specific cirr.mstance is known to staff which would require Comission action by any particular date in the near term."
5.
Federal Register Notices and Congressional letters A Federal Register Notice and letters to Congressional Committees are prepared as attachments to a SECY paper dealing with rule-making.- The Federal Register Notice is prepared for signature by the Secretary of.the Comission. The NRC' Regulations Handbook, L
.NUREG/BR-0053 and 0055_, August 1982, prepared by the Office of Administration, provides guidance in the drafting and preparation of various ; types of Federal Register Notices. The Handbook i
discusses content and format requirements applicable to the various
- types of Federal. Register Notices. The Handbook also sets out sample-documents that illustrate proper compliance with these requirements.
Sample documents include an Advance Notice of Proposed _.Rulemaking, a Proposed Rule, a Final Rule, and a response
-to a petition for rulemaking.
For copies of the Handbook and assistance in preparing a Federal Register Notice, contact the Chief, Rules and Procedures Branch, Division of Rules and Records, Office of Administration (492-7086).
. Compliance with the requirements applicable to a Federal Register Notice will reduce delay as documents are processed for publica-ation by the Office of the Fe& ral Register.
OD01/84 III-9
l Letters to Congressional Committees are prepared for the signature of the Office Director that originated the action. See Exhibit 9 for a sample letter to appropriate Congressional Committees from an Office Director informing them of a rulemcking action.
Note that requirements concerning the preparation of a Federal Register Notice and letters to Congressional Committees are applicable to rulemaking actions prepared for the ED0's signature under the March 19, 1982 delegation of authority to the ED0 (see Chapter I).
6.
Paperwork Reduction Act Each rulemaking paper which contains an application, recordkeeping or reporting requirement must contain a statement concerning paperwork reduction requirements.
For detailed requirements concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act, see the E' 0's April 24, 1981 Memo to Office Directors regarding J
Implementation of the Paperwork Reduction Act, NUREG/BR-0053 and 0055, August 1982.
Further information on procedures related to the Act will be published in NRC Manual Chapter 0230 " Federal Reports Management."
7.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Each rulemaking paper must contain a statement concerning the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act as follows:
Note that, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis has been prepared which is summarized in Appendix A to the notice and which will be made available to the public for comment.
Note that, a copy of analysis will be sent to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA.
OR 01/01/84 III-10 1
(q
. Certify that the rule will not, if promulgated, have a j
U significant economic impact on a substantial number of small enti'.es pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
[Present a succinct statement indicating the basis for this conclusion.]
~
Note that the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small liiisiness Administration will be informed of the certification and the reasons for it as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
For detailed instructions concerning the implementation of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, rafer to NUREG/BR-0053 and 0055, August 1982, NRC Regulations Handbook or the guidance document, prepared by the Division of Rules and Records, Office of Administration.
D.-
Miscellaneous A
f
)
1.
Style - Be concise and clear.
2.
Stationery o
See Exhibit 10.
3.
Coordination, Routing and Dispatch a).
iG1 Commission papers should be prepared for the signature of the Executive Director for Operations. The concurrence copy of tne paper. should have the initials of the Office Director responsible for the paper, or those of a person acting for the Office Director. These initials will indicate that the Office Director supports the paper. The concurrence blocks for other organizational entities should also be included.
Either the handwritten initials of the concurring official or the typed name and date of concurrence should be inc Dded.
m[v) 01/01/84' III-11
\\
i The A0/E00 determines if a SECY paper needs to be reviewed by the Office of General Counsel (0GC) or the Office of Policy Evaluation (OPE) on legal and policy issues. The A0/E00 will work with the originating offices to incorporate OGC and OPE coments on the oaper.
Significant staff disagreements should be sumarized in the Discussion section of the paper. ELD or 0GC may select "no objection" to indicate that the paper is acceptable with rega u to legal issues.
Offices preparing papers should set a time limit for allowing their subordinate managers to resnive concurrence difficulties with managers of other offices. This limit generally should not exceed one week.
If, after this time, a concurrence has not been received by subordinate staffs, Office Directors and Regional Administrators involved should a' tempt to resolve it.
If this does not succeed, the problem should be referred to the ED0 for a decision, promptly.
b)
Comission papers should be forwarded to the EDO with a covering memorandum which (1) emphasizes major issues which would be a value to the ED0 in review prior to si; nature, and (2) sumarizes concurrences /nonconc.urrences.
4.
C m Requirementi a)
Since all SECY pape s are signed by the EDO, the original and an official file copy of the SECY paper are fardarded to OE50:ACB for review and signature by the EDO. The original, one copy, and one official file copy are required for Information Papers.
b)
If enclosures to a SECY paper are bulky, suc5 as NUREG reports, eight (8) copies should be provided to ED0 for distribution only to the Conmissioners, SECY, OGC and OPE.
01/01/84 III-12
5.
Distribution Sheet a)
See Exhibit 11. This is prepared by the originating office to advise SECY as to how many copies of the paper they need to reproduce and to whom the copies should be sent. Tfe distribution numbers listed are for guidance only and can be changed.
b)
Once the paper is approved and signed by the EDO, the OEDO:ACB dates it and sends to SECY for reproduction.
E.
Memoranda to the Comissioners Purpose - To respond to a question raised by the Comission, or to address a matter whicn requires limited distribution to the Comissioners.
9 Format - Memoranda to the Comission responding to specific requests for information from individual Comissioners nonna11y are signed by the Executive Director for Operations.
Care should be taken, however, that memoranda are not used as a substitute for comission papers, Direct memoranda to the Chairman or Comissioners from an Office Director are appropriate if the offict is replying to a direct, verbal question. Such memoranda should have an EDO "thru" line and should be transmitted through him.
Note
- Unless the matter is private, without exception, memos to any Comissioner should be copied to all Commissioners, SECY, OPE and 0GC.
(See Exhibit 12.)
O 01/01/84 III-13
STAFF PAPER
SUMMARY
73d For:
The Comissioners From:
[name]
Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
PROVIDE FULL SUBJECT / TITLE
Purpose:
State the reason for presentation of this paper to the Comission (to inferm, request decision, etc.).
Category:*
This paper covers a major / minor policy question or routine matter requiring Comission consideration. State whether resource estimates are Category 1 or Category 2.**
Issue:***
Concise statement of the substantive issue. A sentence should suffice.
Decision List the criteria which niust be applied to each alternative Criteria:***
in order to select the best decision.
Alternatives:***
List the alternatives one after the other so that they are visible at a glance.
(No pros and cons or discussion.)
Discussion:
All papers should begin with enough background information to remind the reader of relevant past actions and explain why the paper is being presented.
Contact:
Name, Office
'i Telephone Number 1
l
- This block is not.necessary in an Information, Negative Consent, Notation Vote or an Affirmation Paper. However, it is required for the latter two where recomendations imply new NRC resource requirements (or reprograming of existing resources).
- Category 1 estimates are preliminary. Category 2 estimates are more detailed.
(See Page III-6.)
- This block is not necessary in an Information, Negative Consent, Notation Vote, or Affirmation pap:r, although it may be used on items (S
of importance.
N].
-01/01/84 III-14 EXHIB1T 1
. - V In policy papers, background decisions should be followed by each alternative, listing for each the resource estimates and pros and cons which result from applying e
criteria to the problem (if extensive, this may be included in an enclosure).- Following this section, summary remarks on why a particular alternative is chosen and other relevant information may be added.
In Notation Vote, Negative Consent, Information, and Affirmation Papers, this block should include a concise discussion /sumary/ explanation which stands by itself, i.e., does not simply refer to an enclosure. Again details in an enclosure.
In all papers any resource implications and value/impect summary coments inust be addressed, backed up by enclosures, if necessary.
If there is no resource impact state "This action involves no resource requirements."
Recommendaticn:*
State exactly what you recomend, i.e., do not make the reader refer to the text.
Include notes - to fill out what the Comission should know is also going to take place as a-~ result of recomendations; e.g., Note:
Congressional Comittees-and licensees will be notified.
p)
\\V Scheduling:
Note deadlines to be met, if any.
Indicate whether closed /open session is recomended.
(If none of above is appropriate, omit entire line.)
[name]
Executive Director for Operations Enclosure (s):
1.
2.
- This biock is not necessary in an Information Paper.
O, i
4-ky!
01/01/84 III-15 EXHIBIT 1
THACKING OF A SECY PAPER oC S>g Same Day ORIGINATING Before Suspense Date of Receipt Reviewed and Signed by m
EDO, AO/EDO and Staff r
OFFICE r
I i
l C
UE l
gr l
og a
uzmi 1
Z Comments Rwiew By incorporated Originating 2
OEDO OGC and/or OPE SECy OEDO Office 2
Commission Voting Results, 1 I Meeting Commission E
(paper, ballot, etc.)
Decisions, etc.
Originating m
5 COMMISSION y
SECY y
OEDO
?
Office and/or Staff p
~
l I Actions (if required)
O O
O
(Sample Con ting Paper)
V
- S, JW For:
The Comissioners From:
[name]
Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
US/IAEA SAFEGUARDS AGREEMENT
Purpose:
To obtain Comission action on the final draft US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement.
Category:
This paper covers a major policy matter. Resource estimates, Category 1, preliminary.
Issue:
Whether the final draft text of the US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement should be approved by the Comission.
O Decision 1.
Does the alternative provide for a solution Ny.
Eriteria:
compatible with US domestic and international interests.
2.
Will Comission actions in the future be unnecessarily constrained?
3.
Will relationships with IAEA be affected?
Alternatives:
a.
The Comission may approve the provisions of the draft US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement and direct the staff to proceed with working out the details of implementation on a routine or expedited basis, making such staff assignments as required to meet an assigned target date.
Contact:
[name],NMSS 492-7551~
- NOTE:
The original paper contains no resource estimates in the text.
Thus it was necessary to provide some fictitious estimates for illustrative purposes.
In addition, the text has been modified.
V 01/01/84 111-17 EXHIBIT 3
, b.
The Commission may defer approval of the provisions of the draft US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement and direct the staff to provide details of the impact of its implementation on the NRC and the industry.
c.
The Comission may defer approval of the provisions of the draft US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement as written until decisions are reached on industry classification and clearance programs.
Discussion:
Since 1972 the Department of State, with advice and assistance from AEC (NRC/ERDA) and ACDA, has engaged in formal r.egotiations with the IAEA to prepare an agreement for imp ~lementing the 1968 Presidential offer to place nuclear activities in the US under IACA safeguards.
Details of the progress of these negotiations, potential problem areas, and related NRC actions have been reported to the Comission in SECY-75-206 dated May 2, 1975; SECY-75-170 dated June 1?. 1975; and SECY-75-411, dated August 1, 1975.
Substant./e issues are therefore not addressed in this paper.
NRC now has a final draft text of the Agreement which the Department of State and. the US Mission in Vienna are eager to present to the IA2A Board cf Governors for consideration as soon as possible, preferably at their September 1976 meeting. Prior to doing so, however, it is necessary that the text of the draft Agreement be reviewed and concurred in by the other interested US Agencies (NRC, ERDA, and ACDA). A copy of the final text of the draft Agreement is enclosec for review at Enclosure 1.
Since the last submission of information on this subject to the Comission in August 1975, NRC actions in regard to the Agreement have proceeded but at a very low level of manpower assignment because of the imediacy of other programatic requirements. Actions have included:
a.
A meeting with the Safeguards Policy Comittee of the Atomic Industrial Forum to discuss the provisions of the Agreement and its expected effects on the US industry. Subsec.uently, a letter was received from the Chairman of the AIF's Safeguards Policy Comittee expressing appreciation for the meeting and stating the acceptability of the Agreement provisions to Comittee members. A copy of the letter is at Enclosure 2.
01/01/84 III-18 EXHIBIT 3
O,J b.
An NRC working group has been es" 511shed'to develop and document a clear exposition of the internal assignment of responsibilities for the many tasks required to assure smooth implementation of the Agreement. The group is made up of representatives of ELD, IP, SP, IE, NRR, and is chaired by NMSS (Powers). The group has identified a number of action items required to implement the Agreement. A tentative schedule for completing the required actions has also been prepared. Copies of these items are at Enclosure 3.
After approval of the Agreement by the IAEA Board, a great deal of NRC activity will be required, necessitating a higher management assignment of priority and a larger comitment to manpower resources. The Agreement will not come into effect until the United States informs the IAEA that it is ready for implemention. As pointed out by the schedule at Enclosure 3, some of the implementing
. actions may require over a year to accomplish
.n_
depending on the amount of resources applied to J
them.
The alternative approaches to this issue are evaluated as follows:
Alt. 1:
The Commission may approve the provisions of the draft US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement and direct the staff to proceed with working out the details of implementation on a routine or expedited basis, making such staff assignments as required to ineet an assigned-target date.
PR0:
a.
Permits the draft Agreement to go forward to the BoTrd of Governors at an early date when all required i;
US approvals have been given; and, b.
demonstrates Comission confidence that the details of implementino the Agreement can be resolved satisfactorily.
C0!!: This alternative would commit the Commission to the provisions of the Agreement:
s V
01/01/84 111-19 EXHIBIT 3
f O a.
In the absence of firm estimates of the impacts and costs of implementa-tion on the NRC and the industry;
- and, b.
without certainty concerning the possible effect that pending decisions on classification and material access clearance programs will have on the manner in which the Agreement is implemented.
RESOURCE ESTIMATE:
Current program -- Three NRC staff employed 4
full time and one representative from three other Federal agencies donate 1-2 days per month on Agreement-related activities.
Preparation of value-impact analysis for implementing the Agreement will require 6 staff months (2 staff members full time for 3 months). Costs to NRC and industry of implementing the Agreement cannot be calculated with confidence pending final determination of numbers and types of faciliti~es to be placed under IAEA safcguards control. However, our rough estimate is 6 NRC full time staff members (3 in addition to current program) will be required each year for the next 4 fiscal years.
Alt. 2:
The Commission may defer approval of the provisions of the draft US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement and direct the staff to provide details of the impact of its implementation on the NRC and the industry.
PR0: Removes the uncertainties associated with Alternative 1.
CON:
a.
Delays presentation of the draft Agreement to the IAEA Board of Governors.
O 01/01/84 III-20 EXHIBIT 3
- ___-_-_-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ pU b.
May not be practicable since implementation details in sub-sidiary agreements are nomally not determined until after the Agreement is approved by the IAEA Board of Governors.
RESOURCE ESTIMATE:
1 Same as for Alt. 1 for current program and value-impact analysis. However, implementa-tion costs could exceed those of Alt. 1 if a crash effort and reprograming is required.
A rough estimate is that 8 NRC full time staff would be required for the next two fiscal years and four the third fiscal I.
year.
Alt. 3 The Commission may defer approval of the provisions of the draft US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement as written until decisions are reached on industry classification and
(
clearance programs.
\\
PR0: Assures that Agreement comitments are not made until the impacts of possible industry classification and clearance programs are fully known.
CON a.
Brings US/IAEA Agreretrent considerations to a dead stc?.
b.
Will be viewed as an act of bad faith by other affected Agencies, the IAEA, and other IAEA Member States.
RESOURCE ESTIMATES:
Current p ogram continues (3 full time NRC staff.
Recomendation:
That the Comission:
1.
A) prove Alternative 1: Approve the pro-isions of tie draft US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement an. direct the staff to proceed with working out the dtails of implementation on a routine or expedited basis,
-(q making such staff assignments as required to meet j-v an assigned target date.
01/01/84 III-21 EXHIBIT 3 1
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. 2.
Note:
a.
that the appropriate Congressional Committees will be informed; and, b.
that an Environmental Impact Statement need not be prepared on subsequeat associated rulemaking action since the actions to be tken are essentially procedural in nature and will not have significant environmental impact.
Scheduling:
This paper should be scheduled at an Lo en session. No specific circumstance is known to staff which would require Commission action by any particular date in the near term.
[name]
Executive Director for Operations
Enclosures:
1.
Final Text of Draft Agreement 2.
AIF Letter 3.
Tentative Schedule s
i i
O 01/01/84 III-22 EXHIBIT 3
(Sample Affirmation Paper)
G For:
The Commissioners From:
[name]
Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
10 CFR PART 50--GENERAL REVISION OF APPENDICES G AND H, FRACTURE TOUGHNESS AND REACTOR VESSEL MATERIAL SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS
Purpose:
Obtain Commission approval of a notice of final rulemaking.
Issue:
Modification of NRC regulations involving the l.
requirements for fracture toughness of the reactor I'
coolant pressure boundary, including surveillance of neutron radiation embrittlement of the reactor vessel beltline materials.
Discussion:
Appendix G. " Fracture Toughness Requirements," and Appendix H, " Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Program Requirements," have undergone only limited revision in over nine years of use.
In this general revision, the requirements of Appendices G and H have been updated to be more consistent with current technology and pertinent National Standards.
Some of the amendments are intended to clarify the applicability of these requirements to older plants; that is, those built to ASME Codes earlier than the Summer 1972 Addenda to the 1971 Edition, which often requires consideration of proposed alterntives to specific requirements. The amendients specify when acceptance of a proposed alternatne must take the form of an exemption granted amendments Ndify requirc.nents that have proved to be unduly conservatiw. A number of other amendments
'by the Comission and when acceptance m3y be granted by the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation as being equivalent to the NRC requirements.
Contact:
~
[name],RES D)-
443-5903 1,v 01/01/84 111-23 EXHIBIT 4
l The notice of proposed rulemaking on this issue was published for public comment in the Federal Regi;ter on November 14, 1980. Thirteen replies were received from utilities and vendors concerned with the application of specific requirements. An analysis of the comments received and the staff response is given in Enclosure 4, and a summary is given in the Supplementary Information section of Enclosure 1.
Rrcommendation:
That the Commission:
1.
Approve publication of the amendments to Appendices G and H to 10 CFR Part 50 (Enclosure 1) as a final rule.
2.
Note the staff conclusions set forth in Enclosure 3, which provides the analysis called for by the Periodic and Systematic Review established by Task IV.G.2 of the TMI Action Plan.
3.
Certify that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities, in order to satisfy requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
4.
Note:
a.
That the amendments to 10 CFR Part 50 will be published in the Federal Register, and will become effective 60 days after publication.
b.
No environmental impact statement, negative declaration, or environmental impact appraisal need be prepared in connection with the amendments because the action taken by the amendments will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
c.
The reporting and recordkeeping requirements contained in this regulation have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget, OMB approval No. 3150-0011.
d.
The Office of Public Affairs concurs that a public announcement is not needed.
e.
The NRC staff will inform the Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment of the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, the 01/01/84 III-24 EXHIBIT 4
- __-___-_ __-________ Ob Subcommittee on Energy and Power of the House Comittee on Inte'.
'e and Foreign Commerce, the Subcommittee o.
.vironment, Energy and Natural Resources of the House Comittee on Government Operations, and the Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation of the Senate Comittee on Environment and Public Works of this action by letter such as Enclosure 5.
f.
The Federal Register notice of rulemaking will be distributed by ADM to power reactor licensees / permit holders, applicants for a l
construction permit for a power reactor, public interest groups, and nuclear steam system suppliers.
1 g.
The Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration will be informed by I
DRR of the certification regarding economic impact on small entities together with the reason for it.
Scheduling:
If scheduled on the Comission agenda, recomend this (O
b -)
paper be considered at an open meeting. No specific circumstance is known to staff which w,uld require Comission action by any particular date in the near term.
>1
[name]
Executive Director for Operations
Enclosures:
1.
Federal Register Notice 2.
Regulatory Analysis Statement 3.
Analysis with respect to the periodic and systematic review of regulations 4
Analysis of public coments and staff response 5.
Draft Congressional Letter r
v 01/01/84 III-25 EXHIBIT 4
(Sample Notation Vote Paper)
O For:
The Consissioners From:
[name]
Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
PROPOSED REVISION OF 10 CFR PART 35 " HUMAN USE OF BYPRODUCT MATERIAL"
Purpose:
To obtain Commission approval of a notice of proposed rulemaking.
Category:
This paper covers a significant policy on licensing of byproduct materials.
Issue:
Simplification of the regulations for licensing of human use of bypteduct material.
Discussion:
The staff is proposing a majo.' revision to 10 CFR Part 35, Human Use of Byproduct Material.
It includes procedures for streamlining the material licensing process and combines the general and specific medical licenses.
The NRC issues licenses to medical facilities and individual physicians for the use of radioactive materials in medical diagnosis and treatment of humans.
During the past three decades, nuclear medicine has grown annually at a rate of about 15 percent.
There are currently 2,631 NRC medical licensees.
In 1981, NRC staff received 73 applications for new licenses, 244 renewal applications, and 2,303 amendment applications for a total of 1,620 requested licensing actions.
Contact:
[name],NMSS 427-4052 0
01/01/84 III-26 EXHIBIT 5
'. t\\d By memorandum dated January 7, 1982, the Commission issued its FY 1983-87 Policy and Planning Guidance (PPG). The key guidance elements were the Commission's intent that (1) regulations reflect the reality of nuclear techrology, (2) the regulatory process, particularly the licensing program, be efficient and cost effective, and (3) regulatory decisions be reached without unwarranted delay.
Key features of the proposed rule change designed to meet these objectives include:
Consolidation of those requirements for nuclear medicine that are not dispersed throughout existing regulations, branch policy positions, standard conditions of licenses and guidance protocols into a concise and coherent set of regulations.
Reduction in the amount of information that must be submitted with a licerse application by focusing on information essential for safety and eliminating nonessential information.
I
)
Substantial' savings may be realized by NRC medical licensees as described in the Value/ Impact Statement (Enclosure 3). Total savings for licensees resulting from all of the proposed changes in licensing could be
$8,492,700 to as much as $11,906,500 per year.
The concepts embodied in the proposed rule have been reviewed at meetings with connittees of the Society of Nuclear Medicine, the Health Physics Society, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine and informally with other professional groups such as the American College of Radiology and American College of Nuclear Physicians. Based on the verbal reaction of these groups there appears to be a broad basis of support in the ;nedical community. The Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes endorses the proposed rule.
Recommendation:
Tnat the Commission:
1.
Approve a notice of proposed rulemaking (Enclosure
- 1) that would consolidate all human use requirements for the new medical standard license into 10 CFR Part 35.
4 A
(v) 01/01/84 III-?7 EXHIBIT 5 0
2.
Certify that this rule, if promulgated, will not have a negative economic impact on small entities since it is expected that the rule will result in substantial cost savings to licensees. This certification is necessary to satisfy the requirements for the new medical standard license into 10 CFR Part 35, 3.
Note:
a.
The rulemaking would be published in the Federal Register for a 60-day public comment period; b.
The staff conclusions, set forth in Enclosure 2, provide the analysis called for by the Feriodic and Systematic Review of Regulations; c.
Neither an environmental impact statement nor a negative declaration need be made in connection with this relamaking because it is nonsubstantive and insignificant from the standpoint of environ-mental impact. (Enclosure 3);
d.
The Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration will be informed of S
the certification regarding economic impact on small entities and the reasons for it ias required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act; e.
The proposed rule contains information collection requirements that ana subject to review by OMB. Upon Comission affirmation, formal request for 0MB review and clearance will be initiated; f.
The Agreement States have requested that a representative designated by them be allowed to present their views on this proposal to the Comissions when the Comission meets to consider the proposal; g.
A public announcement (Enclosure 4) will be issued when the proposed r'ile is filed with the Office of the Federal f.egister; h.
The appropriate Congressional Comittees will be informed (Enclosure 5); and 0
01/01/84 111-28 EXHIBIT 5
. \\
? ~J i.
Copies of the Federal Register notice of proposed rulemaking will be distributed to all Comission licensees. The notice will be sent to other interested parties upon request.
Scheduling:
If scheduled on the Comission agenda, recommend this paper be considered at an open meeting. No specific circumstance is known to staff which would require Commission action by any particular date in the near tenn.
[name]
Executive Director for Operations
Enclosures:
1.
Federal Register Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 2.
Periodic and Systematic Review 3.
Value/ Impact Analysis 4.
Oraft Public Announcement
(
5.
Draft Congressional Letter
(
6_
v 01/01/84 111-29 EXHIBIT 5
l (Sample Negative Consent Paper)
O For:
The Commissioners From:
[name]
Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
PRIMARY EMERGENCY OPERATIONS FACILITY FOR THE PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION
Purpose:
To request the Comission to review the staff disappproval of the primary Emergency Operations Facility (EOF) for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station.
Discussion:
A BECo April 15, 1983 submittal (Enclosure 1) states that the primary E0F for the PNPS consists of five mobile trailers permanently installed as integrated units. This E0F is located approximately one quarter of a mile from the reactor containment and har a protection factor of approximately 1.0.
As confirmed in the BECo letter of December 6,1982 (Enclosure 2), the ventilation system is not equipped with HEPA filters.
BECo further states that this primary EOF meets the requirements of General Design Criterion 19 for a design basis / loss of coolant accident. According to the BECo letter of June 1,1981 (Enclosure 3), the total 30 day doses to occupants of the E0F are approximately 3.1 rem whole-body and 5.6 rem to the thyroid. This analysis is based on the assumption that the release is from the PNPS 335 ft stack and that the radioactive plume will not reach ground level et the E0F.
In the event the primary EOF becomes uninhabitable, a backup E0F has been established in the Massachusetts Civil Defense Agency Area II Headquarters which is approximately 20 miles from the PNPS site in Bridgewater.
The trailers for the construction of the primary EOF were moved onsite in June 1980 and construction was completed in March of 1981.
Contact:
[namel,IE 492-4426 0
01/01/84 III-30 EXHIBIT 6
_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ It is the staff's position that the PNPS primary E0F is unacceptable from the standpoint of radiological habitability. The BECo assumptions used to determine that the EOF meets GDC-19 are dependent upon all releases being elevated by the plant stack and the assumption that this elevated radioactive plume will not reach ground. level at the E0F. The use of certain meteorological conditions cannot be depended upon as a protective device unless extensive plume trajectory and site analysis studies establish that the assumed conditions will:always be present.
In our view a more realistic evaluation of possible plant release pathways and plume trajectories under adverse meteorological conditions would show that the EOF would not meet GDC-19 and the E0F personnel could receive radiation doses in excess of the levels set forth therein.
Recomendations:
That the Comission:
1.
Disapprove the habitability of the primary E0F at PNPS and require tte licensee to change his E0F concept to meet the Comission's guidance.
2..
Note that the staff intends to inform BECo that it V
does not accept the primary EOF at PNPS because it does not meet the Comission's guidance on habitability and-to request pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) that BECo provide its plans for establishing an E0F which meets the Comission's uidance. A proposed draft of the letter to be g
sent to BECo is enclosed (Enclosure 4). The staff intends to send this letter.within 10 working days of the date of this paper unless otherwise instructed by the Comission.
[name]
Executive Director for operations
Enclosures:
1..
Ltr from'BECo dtd 4/15/83
- 2..
Ltr'from BECo dtd 12/6/83 3.;
Ltr from BECo dtd 6/1/83 4.
Draft 1tr to BECo O
~
01/01/84
.III-31 EXHIBIT 6
(Sample Information Paper)
O For:
The Comissioners From:
[name]
Execuive Director for Operations
Subject:
RESULTS OF OPERATOR LICENSING EXAMINATIONS
Purpose:
To inform the Commissioners of historical and current rates of license issuance and examination failures for Reat. tor Operators and Senior Reactor Operators.
Discussion:
The enclosed tables report licensing action results, such as license issuances, denials or withdrawals and pass / fail rates (percentages in parentheses) for each NRC licensing examination component. These results are reported for two periods:
fourth quarter FY 1982 (Table
- 1) and for all of FY 1982 (Table 2).
The total number of licensing actions processed in the fourth quarter was slightly less than for the third quarter FY 1982, (SECY 82-460). The pass / fail rate a
reinained consistent during the overall period. Written examinations continue to contribute most to the failure rate.
The basic features of the computerized administrative system are now operational. The tasks of testing and entering the backlog of data are underway.
[name]
Executive Director for Operationt
Enclosures:
1.
Table 1 2.
Table 2
Contact:
[name],NRR 49-29595 0
01/01/84 111-32 EXHIBIT 7
$ $/'
O 8 Yk+ %lk
////p
[,. /,4 g, IMAGE EVALUATION 4
k/77/Tf $>/
TEST TARGET (MT-3) p j
l.0
'd 2 4 E n yl[ EM i,i
[m Ne
]
1.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 4
150mm 4
6"
- ?
' //f
?k,?;.?
= =, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
...-.M
.A &
o Og,,
Jt>
g+
////
IMAGE EVALUATION 1.0
'!2 BE yll241 1,i
[m IMe 1.8 1.25 1.4 i.6 4
150mm 4
6"
+<[&>%i
/4
' ++ege
+ A
- w 7//
o i
k
-= -
4 O
SAMPLE SUMARY OF ESTIMATED'NRC-RESOURCE IMPACTS af n 75 TY 50 FY 61 Alternative 1 (Recommended) 5,000 5,000 10,000 People 3
4 6
Alternative 2 5,000 5,000 15,000 People 3
4 8
Alternative 3 (Current Program) 5,000 5,000 5,000 People
-3 3
3 Alternative 4 S (NMSS Decision Unit 52509/)
5,000 3
-O ASSUMES that implementation of final Agreement starts in FY 81. These are all NMSS resources, no other Office's resources will be required.
N Resources from other NMSS program areas which could be reprogrammed if additional resources weren t provided by the Commission. Note that reprogrammable resources (Alt. 4) plus current program (Alt. 3) add to totals estimated for Alt. 1, the recommended alternative.
Y Safeguards Regulatory Improvement.
l
(
01/01/84 III-33 EXHIBIT 8 4...
__,.._,.,.m--.,_..
(Sample letter to Congress forwarding Federal Register Notice)
The Honorable Morris K. Udall, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs United States House of Representatives Washington, DC ?0515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Enclosed for the information of the Subcommittee are copies of a public announcement and a proposed amendment to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations which is to be published in the Federal Register.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is proposing to amend its requirements for the Material Control and Accounting (MC&A) of Low Erriched Uranium (LEU) at fuel cycle facilities.
These amendments will better reflect the low strategic significance of LEU by eliminating unnecessarily burdensome l
requirements and allow greater license flexibility when implementing the regulations by replacing prescriptive requirements with performance capability statements. Through this action a greater distinction will be drawn between MC&A requirements for LEU and those for the more significant strategic special nuclear material.
The Commission is issuing the proposed amendment for a sixty-day public comment period.
Sincerely,
[name], Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
Enclosures:
1.
Public Announcement 2.
Federal Register Notice cc:
Rep. Manuel Lujan IDENTICAL LETTERS SENT TO THOSE ON ATTACHED LIST O
01/01/84 III-34 EXHIBIT 9
,t
(
l The Honorable Alan Simpson,-Chairman Subcomittee on Nuclear Regulation i "
Committee on Environment and Public Works
. United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 cc: Sen. Gary Hart The Honorable Richard L. Ottinger, Chairmn
- Subcomittee on Energy Conservation and Power Committee on Energy and Comerce.
United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 cc: Rep. Carlos Moorhead s
O ll,
t l
l l
01/01/84 III-35 EXHIBIT 9
T (Sample SECY Paper Lecterhead)
For all papers, begin typing 16 ff
'#'o, Papers should be typed on lines frm the top of the page.
y g
plain bond paper. They will Stop typing 12 lines frcm bottom 5
9y be reproduced by the of page.
Che inch lef t and right S
\\.....,#
Secretariat on preprinted margins or less if paper is lengthy.
staff paper stationery.
POLICY ISSUE (Commission Meeting) 7**c<,,
o I', mff :
$..m4./
RULEMAKING ISSUE (Affirmation)
,s>**'*%,
t,
/
POLICY ISSUE (Notation Vote)
.p** %,,
?
/
POLICY ISSUE (NEGATIVE CONSENT) s>* ** coa 3.g.iy,;
5(..v /
POLICY ISSUE (Information) h 01/01/84 III-36 EXHIBIT 10 i
Y %
[
}
\\
f V
Sample SECY paper Distribution Sheet NRC Form 6 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSK)N (10-82)
NRCMo2so RECOMMENDED DISTRIBUTION Office of the Secretary ORIGINATING OFFICE l CONTACT l EXTENSION Yk k (12t M E 7010 TITLE OF PROPOSEO PAPER
[
/
PAPER TYPE l MEETING l l AF FIRM ATION M l NOTATION l l NEGATIVE CONSENT l
llNFORMATION DISTRIBUTION (Check bos foreach serpienr1 C"y,[g O
RECIPIENT RECIPsE NT OP' 5 1
3 CHAIRMAN PALLADeNO
[
t ADMINs3TRATION
{
2 COMMessiONER GsuNsav 1
3 REMURCE MANAGEMENT 1
2 COMMeSS$0NER ASSELsTINE
{
2 EXEcuffvE LEGAL DaRECTOR.
[
2" COMul5$ LONER AME ARNE g2 COMuisseONER ROBERTS t
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNsTV 2
STATE PROGRAMS
{
t CONGRES$104AL AFPalRS 2
INTERNATIONAL PROGR AMS i
Pusuc APF AtR$
g 12 NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULAftON
[
t GE NER AL Coug8EL NUCLE AR MATERIAL SAFETV & SAFEGUARDS
{
2 fNFECTOR & AUDsTOR g
4
{
g to muCLE Am REGULATORY RESE ARCM 4
POuCy EvaLua750N g
10 SECRETARY I
ANALVIll & EVALUATION OF OPERATIONAL OATA
[N s
I COOER I
{
2 DOLUMENT MANAGEMENT BR SMALL & De$ADV ANTAGEO SUSINESS UTIU2ATION AND CIVIL RIGesTS 3
ggyggyggg g gqygggggggy k,/
REGIONAL OFFICES 3
EmECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERAftONS usNG OF PRusseA
[
1 OEPUTV DenFCTOR FOR OPERafsONs
[
t
[
t DEPufv OtRECTOR FOR REG 104AL OPERATIONS & GENEmeC REQ.
[
t ATLANTA d
ta AOVisORv COMMITTEE ON RE ACTOR $AFEGUARDS t
CHICAGO 2
ATOMec SAFETv & LaCEN5 SNG SOARD PANEL 1
9 OALLAS 2
ArOM*C SAFETY & uCENS4NG APPE AL PANEL l
t SAN FR ANCtSCO SUBTOTAL TOTAL h
NUM8ER OF COPIES NUMBER OF COPtES
((7 RE M ARK S
?
I l
l i
l l
i p^%
\\
/
Nnr/
he ld_R** CRIGINAL TO p
01/01/84 III 37 ETHIBIT 11 l
(Sample Memorandum to the Comission)
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Chairman Surname Comissioner Surname Comissioner Surname Comissioner Surname Comissioner Surname FROM:
[name]
Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
LICENSING SCHEDULE Start body here, 3 SPACES after " SUBJECT."
The signature block is at page center at the end of the text. The contact appears on the first page regardless of the length of the memorandum.
l The descriptive terms are in all Caps.
O l
1
- [name]
Executive Director for Operations Enclosures-1.
Schedule 2.
Data Analysis cc: SECY OPE OGC
Contact:
[name],NRR Telephone No.
- Signature block appears at end of memorandum.
- Contact goes on first page regardless of length of memorandum.
O 01/01/84 111-38 EXHIBIT 12
_~
IV.
COMISSION MEETINGS General A.
Types of Comission Meetings 1.
Briefings 2.
Decision Meetings 3.
Affirmation Sessions B.
Scheduling C.
Documents for Comission Meetings
.D.
Staff Attendance E.
Sunshine Act Voting Requirements F.
Comission Votes
. 1.
Definition of Votes l
2.
Basis for Determining Voting Results l
3.
Recording of Comission Decisions l
Exhibits l
l 3
01/01/84 IV-1
III. Commission Meetings O'
Only formal actions which have legal impact in relation to third parties, such as adoption of a rule, would legally require Comission votes.
Actions such as submission of a designated study, approval of a budget request, or appointment of certain officials still require the lesser formality of Comission votes submitted without meeting although they do not have such legal impacts.
Immediately before each open Comission meeting, the SECY will place copies of SECY papers or other documents identified on the Commission schedule as the central issue for discussion on a table in the rear of the Connission meeting room for people attending the meeting. Papers dealing with issues which require discussion of non-releasable material will be considered in closed Commission session.
(See " Sunshine Act Voting Requirements" under E of this section.)
If a paper requires reference to information which is exempt from public disclosure, the exempt information must be furnished in a cross-referenced supplemental paper to assure proper protection of the material.
Unofficial transcripts of all open Commission meetings are kept in the Phillips and Willste Libraries for a period of six months and are available to the NRC staff. These transcripts are unedited and unreviewed, and should not be quoted without verification from SECY.
O 01/01/84 IV-2
f3 -
A.-
Types of Comission Meetings 1.
Briefings - Information is presented by staff for Comission discussion or to obtain Commission guidance. A Comissioner vote is not anticipated. The briefings may or may not concern a pending staff paper.
2.
Decision Meetings - Discussion with staff of policy issues or license applications which have been presented to the Comission for decision.
3.
Affirmation Sessions - Short meetings required by law to ratify, in all Comissioners' presence, votes previously cast by paper ballot on Affirmation papers circulated.
(Staff is not required toattend.)
i B.
Scheduling A. ()
Schedules of Comission meetings are reviewed and approved by the Comission at a weekly Agenda Planning Session chaired by the Chairman. Comissioners or their. representatives and representatives from'EDO, 0GC, OPE, SECY, OCA and OPA normally attend and participate in the discussion of schedules for a six-week cycle - the current week and the five succeeding weeks. Comission meetings are generally scheduled to be held on Wednesdays and Thursdays, 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon, and 2:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
The next week's sche 0ule and agenda items are published and distributed on Friday by SECY.
Such l
.information is also provided to the public through an automatic Telephone Answering Service (Number (202) 634-1498) which operates 24 I
hours a day..
l o
l 01/01/84 IV __
C.
Documents for Comission Meetings 1.
Papers a.
For Comission meetings at which a Comission paper is required, that paper must be to the Comission five (5) working days before the meeting (e.g., received cob Monday by SECY for a meeting Tuesday the next week).
EDO should have at least three (3) working days for his review, b.
When a meeting is requested because of unusual circumstances or in order to allow a Comission meeting to proceed which otherwise might be cancelled because the 5-working-day deadline has not been met, ED0 may, on request, authorize an office to:
1)
Submit a draft for early review by EDO, or brief him, in order to save the 3 days set aside for ED0 review.
ii) Submit on the above schedule a document complete except for a minor portion to be submitted separately prior to the meeting.
2.
Briefing Outline and Viewgraphs a.
For Comission meetings at which a Comission paper is not required, a briefing outline must be submitted on the same schedule as outlined above. The detail should be sufficient to provide the Comission with the thrust and essential elements of what is to be discussed.
See Exhibit 1.
O 01/01/84 IV-4
[
b.
Viewgraphs, if utilized, must be provided to ED0 two (2) s
)
working days before a scheduled Comission meeting (e.g.,
received cob Thursday for a meeting Tuesday the next week).
For a Comission meeting open to the public, 50 copies should be provided; 25 copies for a closed meeting. Viewgraphs should have on each page a date, contact, Office and a telephone number. See Exhibit 2.
c.
All viewgraphs should be prepared by the originating office, using the IBM 10-pitch selectric typewriter or speechwriter.
The materials needed and instructions are available from copy centers at Phillips, Willste, Nicholson Lane, and H Street buildings.
D.
Staff Attendance The " lead" office for a Comission briefing / discussion should notify n
other offices whose attendance they desire as early as possible after a session is scheduled.
Each Director's office will advise ACB:0ED0 (x27585) of their office attendance by roon one working day before a scheduled Comission meeting. Attendance should be limited to those who may be expected to contribute to the discussion and their backup. If an office wishes to have someone present just to keep track of Comission discussion on an issue, such' attendance must be limited to one person.
l EDO will review attendance lists and will advise offices if attendance requires adjustment.
r l
O V
01/01/84 IV-5
,-,--,n n--_
Please see that staff is advised of this procedure as it implits that attendance by individual staff is appropriate only with Office-level approval.
E.
Sunshine Act Voting Requirements Comission meetings are publicly announced at least one week in advance. Meetings are open to public attendance unless it is determined, by vote of three members of the Comission, that the meeting should be closed.
If closed, the General Counsel is required to certify the justification for closing a meeting.
In such cases, the SECY papers must indicate " closed session" under the scheduling block of the paper and the paper appropriately marked. See Exhibit 3 for the types of materials that are normally exempt from public disclosures, and the way for marking SECY papers on such issues. A recommendation for closing the meeting must be prepared in memo format to the Office of the Secretary. See Exhibit 4.
A list of anticipated attendees, if known at the time, should be listed or included as an enclosure to the memo.
The Comission is also required to vote to hold meetings announced with less than seven (7) days public notice. Votes of three members are required. Briefings on Information Papers are generally scheduled for l
the individual Commissioner at his/her own request, with other Commissioners invited to attend.
If a majority of the Commission attends the briefing, it will constitute a Commission meeting and be i
o subject to Sunshine Act requirements, l
F.
Commission Votes On each Affirmation or Notation Vote paper, the Comissioners may
" Approve," " Disapprove," " Abstain," "Not Participate," or " Request Discussion." Comnission vote sheets are distributed to staff by ED0 for information.
If action is required on a particular vote sheet it will be controlled by an EDO Control ticket.
See Exhibit 5 for a sample vote sheet.
01/01/84 IV-6
A quorum consists of " Approve" votes, " Disapprove" votes and those a
" Abstain" votes needed to establish a quorum. Action is taken only O'
when a majority of Comissioners participating in the matter (the quorum) has approved, or disapproved the item. Abstaining Comissioners are recorded as "Not Participating."
1.
Definition of Votes a) Approved This constitutes agreement with the recommendations contained in the applicable Comission paper.
b) Disapproved This constitutes disagreement with the recommendations contained in the applicable Comission paper.
c) Request Discussion Sel f-explanatory.
I d) Abstain This is a statement of not partici-QJ pating in making the decision on the app'licable Comission paper. However, it indicates a willingness to partici-pate for the purpose of establishing i
"a quorum required for Comission l
action," if needed. As such it will l
j be counted for quorum purposes only.
l This vote is otherwise treated the same as a vote of not participating.
l l
e.
Not Participating This is a statement of not partici-pating in making the decision on the applicable Comission paper. As L
such, the vote will not be counted in l
either determining the action of the Comission or the presence of a quorum.
t 01/01/84 IV-7
2.
Basis for Determining Voting Results The following rules are applied in determining the Comission voting results:
a) a quorum is required to act.
b) a quorum consists of those Commissioners participating h votes plus no votes plus the number of those voting to abstain which may be required to constitute a quorum).
c) action is based on the majority of those participating h votes plus n_o votes plus the abstain votes used for quorum purposes).
When "No Action" results, the SECY paper will be returned to the originating office without action.
3.
Recording of Commission Decisions SECY records Comission decisions in the form of SECY memoranda or Commission Orders to staff which the staff receives two to three days after the meeting. These include a basic statement of Commission action on the recomendation(s) of a paper and an expression of individual Comissioners' views when appropriate.
Requirements for additional action by the staff are also included with appropriate action dates. Short term actions will be tracked by EDO:ACB by ED0 Control ticket and long-term actions in WITS.
(See Chapter VII for discussion of WITS.)
O 01/01/84 IV-8
(Sample Briefing Outline)
OO BRIEFING ON NRC INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT STUDY ACTIVITIES PURPOSE The purpose of this briefing is to provide the NRC Comissioners with information on those near-term and long-term IE study activities directed toward determining how much and what type of inspection and enforcement activity is enough to properly support the NRC mission.
SCOPE The briefing will present an overview of the coordinated study activities within IE, describing the current list of planned in-house and contractual activities, resource requirements, and related on-going efforts.
BRIEFING OUTLINE I.
Introduction l
II. Purpose, Methodology and Approach g
III. Dimensions of the Study IV. Study Subsystems and Modules
-A.
Policy Studies B.
Studies of IE Techniques C.
Resource Allocation Methodology bG 01/01/84 IV-9 EXHIBIT 1
COMPONENTS INSIDER RULEMAKING PACKAGE e
ACCESS AUTHORIZATION (SCREENING) e SEARCil REQUIREMENTS e
MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS (VITAL ISLANDS, ETc.)
y E
f E
3 x
b E
W b
Q N
(Name, Office)
(Tel e. No. )
(Date)
L o
o o
i~
O 5g 4
2 lilSTORY GENERAL f
- PROPOSED CLEARANCE RULE PUBLISilED :FOR COMMENT (1977) ~
- COMMISS10N ESTABliSiiED llEARING 80ARD (1978)
- BOARD RECOMMENDED (1979)/AND COMMISSION DIRECTED (1980)
- DEVELOP AN ACCESS AUTil0RIZATION RULE FOR POWER REACTORS - INDU5TRY RUN PROGRAM E-Z
?
j
- SAFETY / SAFEGUARDS REVIEW COMMITTEE (1982/1983) j
~
u5 j
- GA0 REPORT (1983) 1 l
- SEARCli AND VITAL AREA CONTROL ISSUES (1977-1983) i 5
i l
j (Name, Office) i (Tele No.)
l l
(Date)
GUIDELINES FOR MARKING AND WITHHOLDING MATERIAL FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE A.
Material considered appropriate for withholding from public disclosure includes:
1.
Information specifically authorized by Executive Order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and in fact classified pursuant to an Executive Order (exemption 1 of the Freedom of Information Act). Such information includes, for example:
a.
documents containing information concerning measures for the physical protection of significant quantities of strategic nuclear material; b.
documents containing information concerning measures for tile physical protection of nuclear facilities (i.e., production or utilization facilities or any other facilities or activities) involving such material provided that the dis-closure of such information may be reasonably expected to facilitate theft, diversion or sabotage; and c.
donments containing information concerning control and accounting procedures for significant quantities of strategic nuclear material, including but not limited to inventory dis-crepaney data generated under such procedures. This infor-matier shall remain classified for at least a period of six months after it is generated, or any longer period of active ongoing investigation. At the expiration of six months or the conclusion of a related investigation, whichever is later, such data may be declassified.
2.
Material specifically exempted from disclosure by a Federal statute other than the F0IA, such as Restricted Data (exemption 3 i
of the F0IA).
3.
Trade secrets and comercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential (exemption 4 of the F0IA). Such information includes, for example:
a.
documents furnished to the NRC and detennined to be
" proprietary" under 10 CFR 2.790(b);
b.
other documents furnished to the NRC containing " company proprietary" information; O
l 01/01/84 IV-12 EXHIBIT 3
r
,s c.
documents which identify a licensee's (or applicant's)
I
\\
procedures for safeguarding licensed special nuclear material V
(plutonium, uranium-233, or uranium-235 enriched above 20%; and d.
documents which identify a licensee's (or applicant's) detailed security measures for the physical protection of a licensed facility or plant in which licensed special nuclear material is possessed or used.
4.
Personnel and meaical files and similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy (exemption 6 of the F0IA).
5.
Investigatory records compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such records would (i) interfere with enforcement proceedings, (ii) deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication, (iii) constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, (iv) disclose the identity of a confidential source and, in the case of a record compiled by a criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation, or by an agency con-ducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, confidential information furnished only by the confidential source, (v) disclose investigative techniques and procedures, or (vi) endanger the life or physical safety of law enforcement personnel (exemption 7 of the F0IA).
B.
Markings of such information should be as follows:
(1) Security classification markings made in accordance with NRC Appendix 2101, Part III.
(2) Proprietary markings made in accordance with NRC Bulletin 2100-3 dated June 15, 1976.
(3) With other markings specifying the basis for withholding from public disclosure (for example, " Exempt from disclosure under. F0IA exemption because"), the name and position title of the person authorizing such marking, and the date on which the marking wa:
authorized.
i f
~
/..
O-01/01/84 IV-13 EXHIBIT 3
(Sample Sunshir-Act M mo Ricommending Closed Meeting)
/
'o,,
UNITED STATES 8
'i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
E WASPINGTON, D. C. 20555
- \\.....}
O MEMORANDUM FOR:
Samuel J. Chilk, Secretary of the Commission FROM:
William J. Dircks, Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
[ Title of Pape.]
It is recommended that the subject paper be scheduled for a closed meeting in accordance with the following Sunshine Act exemption (s):
[ List number of exemption (s).]
[ Statement describing how specific exemption (s) apply to the subject item.]
[ Statement as to why public interest would be furthered by a closed meeting.]
[ List attendees, both NRC and external, if known.]
O William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations 0
01/01/84 IV-14 EXHIBIT 4
M s
cc: Dircks k --
(Sample Commissioner Vote Sheet)
-Roe I
L N 0-T A T-I 0 N
-V 0 T E EISPONSESHEET JShea IP (copies FYI provided s '
TRehm.
by EDO).
-T0:
'SAMUELd.CHILK,SECRETARYOFTHECOMMISSION 1
h
- FROM:-
CH41RMAN PALLADINO
[
SUBJECT:
SEcY-83-388 - PROPOSED EXPORT OF REPROCESSING INFORMATION
.-UNDER PART 810.TO WEST GERMANY j'
v-I APPROVED V
. DISAPPROVED ABSTAIN E
NOT: PARTICIPATING REQUEST DISCUSSION i
n.
l COMMENTS:
1 I-a i:
i-Mbl %s V ' M6NAIURL ff;2 d l[]
DAl t.
1 SECRETARIAT NOTE: -PLEASE ALSO RESPOND-TO AND/OR COMMENT ON-0GC/0PE MEMORANDUM'IF'ONE HAS BEEN-ISSUED ON THIS PAPER.
i;
. 01/01/84 IV-15 EXHIBIT 5 L
NRC-SECY FORM DEC. E0 m,
v.
5.
,-,,-,---#-..-.....---.----.44.---w-
--~-+------E--
+.-
+---=~**~e-
---~~~U-**-
f
, Congressional Procedures I
V.
A.
Provision of Information to Congress B..
Procedures for Handling Congressional Questions from Authorization and Appropriations Committees During the Period of Hearings and Other Congressional Questions C.
Congressional Testimony D.
Congressional Hearing Transcripts and Inserts for the Record E.
Congressional Correspondence F.
Procedures for Handling Legislation and Executive Orders t
4 1.
New Legislation 2.
Legislation Before Congress f
3.
Enacted Legislation
.I 4.-
Executive Orders F
t Exhibits I
t-3 4
L
~
I 01/01/84 V-1
-,-...,,-g,
-,ee,.,-,.,,
,,.,,,,,,_nnn-m,
,,wwn,n,,_n,..enmeg,-,,,-,,,n,-,.
.._a.-,,,,,,n,,,m,m,.,n.,,,,,n-a,,-ew__,,e.
V.
CONGRESSIONAL PROCEDURES A.
Provision of Information to Congress The Senate Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation and tne House Subcommittees on Energy and the Environment, and Energy Conservation and Power constitute the NRC's principal oversight Subcommittees. The NRC is obliged to keep these three subcommittees " fully and currently informed" of its activities. Exhibit 1 is a list of information (though not inclusive) that should be sent to the Congress through the Office of Congressional Affairs.
Each office should take necessary steps to assure that these Congressional Subcommittees receive the information on a timely basis.
Exhibit 2 provides the membership and addresses of NRC Oversight Committees.
B.
Procedures for Handling Congressional Questions from Authorization and Appropriations Committees During the Period of Hearings and Other Congressional Questions In the spring, Authorization and Appropriations Comittees often fcrward letters with up to 100 questions requiring an answer. Such letters are handled as follows:
1.
Comittee sends questions to Commission (Chairman, SECY, or Congressional Affairs (CA).
2.
CA receives copies of all questions (serves as Commission contact) and forwards to EDO, indicating those questions which are essential to the suspense.
3.
E00 makes assignments to offices 1/ (indicating both prime and support responsibilities), sets deadlines, numbers questions, attaches format (pages V-4 and V-5) and ED0 controls with EDO Control ticket marked " Priority."
1/ Questions to be answered by 0PE/0GC/01A, etc., will be worked out by ED0 in coordination with CA. Those responses will not be forwarded to RM, but will be married up with package forwarded by ED0 when it arrives at CA.
Responses should, if at all possible, be forwarded via communicating word processor to preclude retyping when revisions are required.
01/01/84 V-2
4.
ED0 forwards Control ticket to Office of Resource Management (RM),
g
(
with copies to Offices assigned acticn.
5.
RM contacts offices separately with assignments if suspense requires speed and, whenever possible, provides reference to pertinent background information (related Q&A's from current or previous years, etc.).
6.
0ffices with primary responsibility for questions 1/ gather input from secondary Offices to transmit and provide coordinated responses to RM, one question per page (see enclosed instructions, pages V-4 and V-5).
7.
RM reviews responses for consistency with policy and with budget program and resolves problems with appropriate offices.
8.
RM provides package of responses reviewed by offices to EDO. 2/
9.
ED0 reviews and forwards approved package to CA.
- 10...CA coordinates responses with Comission and Comission staff (OPE,0GC,etc.).
11.
CA resolves Comissioner differences, forwards final approved responses to Committee, provides original of Comission approved responses to EDO and RM.
- 12. - RM makes final' distribution to all offices.
Congressional questions not related to Authorization and. Appropriations
' Hearings are also received for staff response (e.g., other hearings on various subjects). The procedures outlined above apply to those types of-questions as well as budget questions except that an Office other than RM (e.g., NRR) may be assigned the responsibility for coordinating the replies.
1/0n~ receipt of questions, offices must immediately' review entire list to assure assignments are correctly made. The minor problems of offering or requesting. input can be worked out directly with other offices.. Mal-assignments of questions can be resolved between offices and RM advised, or RM will resolve or refer to EDO as appropriate.
2/RM will forward to ED0 responses available to meet suspense date;
~~ inputs received-later will be forwarded in supplementary packages as
[
1 required.
(v) 01/01/84~
V-3
, -, ~,. - -.
(Question Instructions and Format)
QUESTION 6.
From time to time Congressional questions are received and routed to RM (or the apppropriate Office) to coordinate the responses.
Individual questions are assigned to various offices for actual preparation of the answers.
(a) What is the typing format for responding to Congressional questions?
ANSWER.
Q&As are to be typed on word processing equipment capable of communicating with RM (or the appropriate office) via data phone (i.e., IBM Displaywriter, IBM 5520, IBM System 6 or IBM Mag Card 2).
Type each Q&A on a separate page using 12 pitch, Gothic type style, and single spacing.
Side margins are 12 and 88; top and bottom margins are 1 inch.
Type each question as a separate job on the word processor. This will aid in later transmission of Q&As to the OCA Displaywriter.
If succeeding pages are required in answering the question, type the question number and page number at top of each page.
Type questions with multiple parts (a, b, c, etc.) on a separate page per part, as shown in samples.
Identify questions at bottcm right margin on each page, indicating Committee, originating Office, and current date. Subsequent revisions should reflect the revised date.
If enclosures are to be included with a response, indicate on Q&A (as shown below) and type question number on each enclosure.
Enclosures:
Sample Q&A Format Simpson/E00
[date]
O 01/01/84 V-4
(Question Instructions and Fennat)
' {Uf N}
QUESTION 6.
(b) What are the procedures for preparing and transmitting responses to RM or the appropriate Office?
ANSWER.
When a question is assigned to mc:e than one Office -- for instance, NRR/RES/NMSS -- the first Office listed is responsible for submitting a reply that has been coordinated with the other Offices. The secondary Offices should send their input to the answer to the primary Office.
The primary Office assigned will then transmit via data phone the final coordinated staff response to the appropriate RM or other Office word processing contact.
When the primary Office assigned does not have wordtprocessing equipment available to them, provide the original (even if it is cut-and-paste) and one copy (each with any attachments) to RM or the appropriate Office.
Where mag-cards have been prepared and data communications are not available, provide the original and one copy and the mag cards (appropriately indexed) to RM or the appropriate Office.
l l w) l l
r l
l-I Simpson/EDO
[date]
n
,v l
l 01/01/84 V-5
C.
Congressional Testimony Testimony for Congressional Hearings should be typed on word processing equipment in double space on bond paper using a speechwriter element (orator or rhetoric). One copy of the testimony is to be provided to ED0 for forwarding to 0CA. OCA will obtain any Commission comments and coordinate revisions with staff and EDO.
OCA will prepare final testimony or request staff to do so. See Exhibit 3 for sample E00 and Chairman testimony.
D.
Congressional Hearing Transcripts and Inserts for the Record Congressional transcripts for editing of staff's remarks are forwarded by OCA to ED0 or direct to staff appearing at the hearing.
Involved staff are to edit their remarks by marking up the transcript and forwarding direct to OCA.
If there are no comments or they are minor, a call to 0CA will be sufficient.
Inserts for the record which are required will usually be.noted, but staff should double check. When required, inserts should be sent to ED0 for review and forwarding to 0CA.
See Exhibit 4 for a sample " Insert for the Record."
E.
Congressional Correspondence Letters from Congress are Principal Correspondence and should be pre-i pared in accordance with the instructions in Chapter II, Correspondence.
Refer also to NRC Manual Chapter 0240, Correspondence Management.
F.
Procedures for Handling Legislation and Executive Orders 1.
New Legislation a.
Requests for new legislation will be dealt with in two categories:
1 (i) As required. When a specific need is identified that is important and urgent, staff will notify the Commission, justifying the need and outlining the requirements. On 01/01/84 V-6
Comission approval, 0GC will work out legislative wording and support and OCA will follow the issue through to sub-mittal to Congress.
(ii) Omnibus legislation. Yearly--usually in June-OGC wi'l request from staff a list of legislation or changes to existing legislation recomended for Congressional consideration beginning the next January.
ED0 t;ill develop a list categorizing requests as (1) immediate need, (2) more information required before request is firm, or (3)
Comission guidance required. 0GC will review, acquire a Comission decision, and follow through.
b.
Legislative Drafting and Process Once legislation is agreed to by the Comission, 0GC will develop language with staff assistance. As it now stands, 0GC will then submit to 0MB, but will not be constrained to leave before them, beyond a reasonable limit, legislation with a health and safety g
)
impact.
c.
Legislation of Other Agencies Legislative requests by other _ agencies are passed by OMB through l
OGC for comment. OGC will sort out those which affect NRC and will forward to ED0 (with a copy to ELD) for development of comments which OGC will pass back to 0MB, advising OCA of the l
content.
l 2.
Legislation Before Congress l
Review of Comittee/Subcomittee Reports and Bills OCA will provide ED0 (with a copy to ELD) copies of draft bills and comittee reports relevant to staff interests with a cover note indicating action necessary.
l 01/01/84 V-7
3.
Enacted Legislation O
When enacted bills become law, 0GC will identify and provide EDO (with a copy to ELD) the bill and supporting material promptly for analysis and appropriate directions to staff.
4.
Executive Orders OGC will review Executive Orders and Presidential Memos and forward promptly for action to ED0 those which are appropriate to staff responsibilities.
O O
01/01/84-V-8
PROVISION OF INFORMATION TO CONGRESS Simpson Committee (Senate Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation)
Ottinger Comittee (House Subcomittee on Energy Conservation
~ and Power)
Udall Comittee (House Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment)
ALL 0FFICES 1.
Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemaking ALL 0FFICES 2.
Notices of Proposed Rulemaking ALL OFFICES 3.
Notices of Final Rulemaking ALL OFFICES 4.
Notices of Filing of Petitions for Rulemaking ALL 0FFICES 5.
Notices of Denials of Petitions for Rulemaking ALL OFFICES 6.
Notices of NRC Meetings Regarding Rule;naking ALL 0FFICES 7.
Notices Regarding NRC Policy Statements ALL OFFICES 8.
Notices Regarding Memoranda of Understanding ADM 9.
Report of Proposal to Establish a New System of Records ADM
- 10. NRC's_ Annual Report on tne Administration of Freedom of Information Act RM
- 11. Budget Justification Books RM
- 12. Authorization Bill and Bill Analysis RM
- 13. Responses -to Authorization Comittee Questions RM
- 14. Markup of Authorization Testimony RM
- 15. Information-on Reprogramming Actions as they occur RES
- 16. Topical Reports announced in the Federal Register, all Regulatory Guides and Draft IAEA Safety with Federal Register Notice.
IE/NRR
- 17. Show Cause Orders Issued to Licensees NRR
- 18. Limited Work Authorizations i
[continuedonnextpage]
bv 01/01/84-V-9 EXHIBIT 1
. ~.
- 19. Notices of Availability of ER NRR
- 20. Notices of Issuances of DES and FES IE 21.
Preliminary Notification of Event or Unusual Occurrence IE/NMSS 22.
Preliminary Notification of Safeguards Event IE 23.
Notification of Significant Enforcement Action ADM
- 24. Notice of Rule Change on License Fees ALL OFFICES 25.
Formal Reports of Major Studies and Workshops SDBU/CR
- 26. Quarterly Report on Status of NRC EE0 Activities AE00
- 27. Quarterly Abnormal Occurrence Reports AE00 28.
Individual Abnormal Occurrence Reports ADM
- 29. Grant of Waiver to Nonnal Contract Procedures PA 30.
Press Releases ALL 0FFICES
- 31. NRC Comments on GA0 Reports SCCY
- 33. Summaries and Announcements of ACRS Meetings SECY
- 34. Weekly Agenda of Commission Meetings ED0
- 36. Daily Staff Notes ED0
- 37. Weekly Information Report AE00
- 38. Power Reactor Licensee Event Reports SECY 39.
Public Speeches delivered by any one of the Commissioners ADM
- 40. SES Announcements RM
- 41. Operating Units Status Report (NUREG-0200)
- 42. Construction Status Report - Nuclear Power Plants (NUREG-0300)
- 43. Standards Development Status Summary Report SP
- 44. State Legislation Activities Report SP 45.
Federal Register Notices, Section 274b Agreements 0
01/01/84 V-10 EXHIBIT 1
MEMBERSHIP AND ADDRESSES OF NRC OVERSIGHT COMMITTEES On matters related to NRC activities generally, all correspondence should be
(( ~'s) addressed to:
PRINCIPAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEES ATTENTION LINES:
(on envelope only)
The Honorable Alan Simpson, Chairman Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington, D. C.
20510 ATTN: James Curtiss cc:
Senator Gary Hart ATTN:
Keith Glaser The Honorable Morris K. Udall, Chairman Subecmmittee on Energy and the Environment Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs United States House of Representatives Washington, D. C.
20515 ATTN: Henry Myers cc:
Rep. Manuel Lujan ATTN:
R. Thomas Heimer The Honorable Richard L. Ottinger, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy Conservation and Power
.(sg
('- -)
Consittee on Energy and-Commerce United States House of Representatives Nashington, D. C.
20515 ATTN: Jeanine Hull cc:
Rep. Carlos Moorhead ATTN:
Chris Warner
- >******************+************************************
On matters related to budget, correspondence should also be addressed to:
The Honorable Tom Bevill, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Committee on Appropriations United States House of Reoresentatives Washington, D. C.
20515 cc:
Rep. John Myers The Honorable Mark Hatfield, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Committee on Appropriations United States Senate Washington, D. C.
20510 (A) cc: Senator J. Bennett Johnston J
01/01/84 V-11 EXHIBIT 2 y
ww
,+n.
--a w
_m
-,---e
-we
+,.
~w-,-p.
1 On matters related to international proliferation of nuclear exports, correspondence should also be addressed to:
The Honorable Clement Zablocki, Chairman Comittee on Foreign Affairs United States House of Representatives Washington, D. C.
20515 cc:
Rep. William S. Broomfield The Honorable Charles Percy, Chairman Comittee on Foreign Relations United States Senate Washington, D. C.
20510 cc:
Senator Claiborne Pell The Honorable Charles Percy, Chairman Subcomittee on Energy, Nuclear Proliferation and Government Processes Committee on Governmental Affairs United States Senate Washington, D. C.
20510 cc:
Senator John Glenn
- o****
The following Subcomittees have frequent interface with NRC and, depending on the subject matter, should be kept informed of significant NRC actions and activities:
The Honorable Edward Markey, Chairman Subcomittee on Oversight and Investications Comittee on Interior and Insular Affairs United States House of Representatives Washington, D. C.
20515 cc:
Rep. Ron Marlenee The Honorable John Dingell, Chairman Subcomittee on Oversight and Investigations Committee on Energy and Commerce United States House of Representatives Washington, D. C.
20515 cc:
Rep. James T. Broyhill 01/01/84 V-12 EXHIBIT 2
3-The Honorable Mike Synar, Chairman
.Subcomittee on Environment, Energy and Natural Resources Comittee on Government Operations United States House of Representatives Washington, D. C.
20515 cc:
Rep. Lyle Williams
'The Honorable Marilyn Lloyd, Chairman Subcomittee on Energy Research and Production Comittes on Science and Technology United States House of Representatives Washington, D. C.
20515 cc:
Rep. Manual Lujan
- +*********************************
All should be addressed as "
Dear Mr. Chairman:
" or "
Dear Madam Chairman:
" as appropriate.
l t
b l-
. 'd. -.
01/01/84 V-13 EXHIBIT 2 L
i
--n-~-
n,..,--,-.,.---,--,,,.,,,-n--..---
.n- -n--.
,nnn,,-=,-,-
Sample CCngr ssional Testimony Format O
PREPARED TESTIMONY SUBMITTED BY UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PRESENTED BY NUNZIO J. PALLADINO, CHAIRMAN TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY CONSERVATION AND POWER COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CONCERNING THE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT LICENSING REFORM ACT OF 1983 SUBMITTED:
SEPTEMBER 23, 1983 0
01/01/84 V-14 EXHIBIT 3
f-'S THANK-YOU MR. CHAIRMAN.
I AM PLEASED TO APPEAR BEFORE YOU AND V
YOUR SUBCOMMITTEE TODAY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING THE
" NUCLEAR POWER PLANT LICENSING REFORM ACT OF 1983."
SEVERAL OF-MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS AND SENIOR MEMBERS OF THE NRC STAFF ACCOMPANY ME TODAY, BEFORE BEGINNING OUR TESTIMONY, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE CHAIRMAN FOR EXPEDITIOUSLY HOLDING HEARINGS ON THIS SUBJECT.
THE CURRENT NRC LICENSING PROCESS HAS NOT CHANGED SUBSTANTIALLY 7-~
Q
-SINCE IT WAS ORIGINALLY ENACTED 29 YEARS AGO IN THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT.
THAT LICElSING PROCESS WAS A PRUDENT COURSE TO FOLLOW WHEN THE NUCLEAR POWER INDUSTRY WAS IN ITS EARLY CONCEPTUAL AND DEVELOPMENT YEARS.
IN THE EARLY YEARS THERE WERE MANY FIRST-TIME NUCLEAR PLANT APPLICANTS, DESIGNERS AND CONSTRUCTORS, AND MANY NOVEL DESIGN CONCEPTS.
ACCORDINGLY,'THE PROCESS WAS STRUCTURED TO ALLOW-LICENSING DECISIONS TO BE MADE WHILE DESIGN WORK WAS l-STILL IN PROGRESS AND TO FOCUS ON CASE-SPECIFIC REVIEWS OF l
Ns INDIVIDUAL PLANT-SITE CONSIDEPATIONS.
l 01/01/84 V 15 EXHIBIT 3
Sample Insert for ths Record INSERT FOR THE RECORD SUBCOMMITTEE HEARING ON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS JULY 8, 1983 Insert for page 56, line 1293 At the hez, ring before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held on July 8,1983 concerning emergency preparedness at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, a question was raised regarding evacuation time estimates.
In response, reference was made to portions of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's Initial Decision of May 1982, which reflects the determination of the maximum evacuation time estimate as ranging from approximately two and one-half hours under optimal conditions to approx-imately seven and one-quarter hours under adverse weather conditions.
A copy of relevant sections of that Decision is attached.
A review of documents after the submissicn of the Commission's testimony for the August 2nd hearing disclosed that an additional evacuation estimate was prepared by the licensee, Southern California Edison, in the context of addressing the complicating effects of earthquakes on emergency preparedness.
In light of the Commission's decision which foreclosed consideration of this issue by the Licensing Board, however, that time estimate was not addressed in the Licensing Board's Initial Decision.
Nevertheless, it had been considered by the Staff in its safety evaluation of the facility which was completed prior to the Commission's decision.
SCE's evaluation concludes that under severe evacuation route disruption, evacuation of the 10-mile north sector could require up to 15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br />.
A copy of the pertinent page of the Staff's evaluation, contained in Supplement No. 3 to the Safety Evaluation Report, NUREG-0712, is enclosed for your information and inclusion in the hearing record.
Attachments:
As stated 0
01/01/84 V-16 EXHIBIT 4
_ _ _.. _ ~
f i-2 l
t V
I. PROCEDURE
S FOR RESPONDING TO GA0 REQUESTS AND REPORTS AND OIA AUDIT REPORTS Introduction B.
GA0 Audits 1.
. Initial Contact
'2.
Preliminary Survey - Quick Data Gathering 4
3.
The Audit C.
Draft GA0 Report D.
Final GA0 Report 1
I 1.
Initial Contact 2.
. Suspense Dates 3.
60-Day Response Requirement 4.
Format and Content E.
Annual Compilation of NRC Actions Taken en Comptroller General Recommendations 1
-F.
Follow-up i
G.
OIA Audit Reports Exhibits.
i v
l i
t i
t oO 01/01/84
- VI-1 i
VI.
PROCEDURES FOR RESPONDING TO GA0 REQUESTS AND REPORTS AND OIA AUDIT REPORTS O A.
INTRODUCTION, One of the General Accounting Office's (GA0) principal functions is to audit program activities, financial transactions, and accounts of the Federal Government agencies, and to report to the Congress and the aedited agencies its audit results.
An audit may be initiated in response to Congressional inquiries, private citizen requests, or due to GAO-identified needs. A GA0 draft report on its audit findings is sent to the audited agency for comment. The final report usually contains recommendations that require actions to be taken by the agency.
The purpose of this procedure is to explain GA0's auditing procedures and to provide NRC staff guidance for interaction with GA0 during its activities within NRC.
B.
GA0 AUDITS 1.
Initial Contact The Office of Inspector and Aeditor (0IA) is responsible for coordinating GA0's activities within NRC. The NRC point of contact with GA0 is the Assistant Director for Audits, 01A.
Prior to initiating any planned work, GA0 will inform OIA of their intention, purpose, scope, etc. OIA, in turn, notifies the Commission, Commission offices, and the ED0 who will arrange for an entrance conference, if necessary, attended by GAO, 0IA, EDO, and offices affected by the audit (as determined and notified by the ED0). During this conference, GA0 will brief the NRC staff 9
01/01/84 VI-2
on its audit objectives, method of operation, schedule, etc.
NRC l
'l participants will provide GA0 with a brief overview of how their g
operations relate to GA0's identical interests and the current status of the area to be audited. The NRC points of contact for the audit are established by the ED0 in this meeting.
2.
Preliminary Survey - Quick Data Gathering Occassionally, GA0 may wish to gather certain background information in as short a time as possible for planning succeeding phases of the audit. An entrance conference may not be needed if it is clear as to which office can best provide the needed data.
OIA, after coordinating with ED0 may ask GA0 to contact directly designated persons in the Office in question.
3.
The Audit After the initial contact, GA0 will contact offices directly for i
needed records or information throughout the office process.
However, GA0 will notify OIA of any deviations from stated audit objectives, or any problems or policy issues that arise during the course of an audit. 01A/ED0 should be advised by offices in all instances in which information requested by GA0 includes classified or proprietary information. Classified infomation should be handled within established procedures; i.e., need to know determined and security clearance verified.
If classified material is related to the audit, that generally constitutes a "need to know." Questions should oe referred to 0IA.
4.
OIA issues a monthly report on the status of all ongoing GA0 activities concerning NRC operations to the Chairman, Commissioners, EDO and Office Directors.
/
01/01/84 VI-3
~
C.
GA0 DRAFT REPORT O
1.
Twenty-five (25) copies of the GA0 draft audit reports are sent to 0IA for NRC's review and comment.
OIA immediately distributes copies to the Commission, its staff offices (OPE, OCA, etc.), and the EDO.
2.
Depending on the subject of the draft report, appropriate offices are assigned by the EDO, through its ED0 Control ticket system, to review and comment on the report. A suspense date is indicated on the Control ticket.
3.
OED0 determines, after discussion with offices, whether a meeting with GA0 is desirable in order to clarify facts, contest conclusions, etc.
a.
If a meeting is scheduled, a lead office will be assigned to mark up a copy of the draft report.
NRC does not attend GA0 meetings without a coordinated view. Such mark-up will consolidate the comments of all offices concerned, and a cover sheet summarizing the major points of issue will be included. The package will be furnished to GA0 at the meeting.
b.
If no meeting is required (or upon receipt of a revised draft), a lead office will be designated to prepare a consolidated staff response to the GA0 Director for ED0 signature. The content of the letter should address any major facts, findings, or conclusions with which the staff finds difficulties, either factual or policy reasons, and should be in accord with the anticipated Commission response to the recommendations (see D.3.).
If the staff has no differences in the draft, the letter need merely so O
01/01/84 VI-4
state. This letter will normally be published in the final 3
GA0 report as an appendix.
(See Exhibit 1 for example.)
c.
The draft letter will be sent by OED0 to the Office of the Chairman for review. The final letter will be dispatched to GA0 through OIA.
4.
NRC is normally given 30 days to respond to a draft GA0 report.
If more than 30 days is required, Public Law 96-226 requires that the Chairman request exemptions from the Comptroller General and limits extensions to 30 additional days.
Staff is, therefore, expected to meet deadlines.
5.
On some occasions, GA0 may request NRC comments in less than 30 days.
In the',a instances, on a case-by-case basis, 01A will coordinate with ED0 to determine.the best method for handling the request.
If a meeting is set up for the NRC staff to offer oral comments to GAO, GA0 will forward a copy of the meeting minutes or g
a revised draft to 01A (who, in turn,. forwards to ED0) as soon as possible to ensure that the oral coraments have been accurately interpreted by GA0.
D.
GA0 FINAL REPORT 1.
Initial Lontact GA0 provides 0IA with twenty-five (25) copies of the final report.
OIA will make distribution to the Commissioners, EDO, and the l
appropriate NRC offices (e.g., those that reviewed and commented on the draft report).
l l
,av)
(
l l
01/01/84 VI-5 l
l
2.
Suspense Dates In its memorandum distributing the final GA0 report, 01A indicates the dates by which the draft response should be sent to the Commission and by which the response is due at the Congressional Committees.
E00 assigns to appropriate offices, by ED0 Control ticket, the task of preparing the draft statements.
EDO usually allows the offices about 30 days. Overdue responses are also monitored by OIA by means of the OIA monthly GA0 status report.
3.
60-Day Response Requirement If the final GA0 report contains recommendations to NRC or to Heads of Federal Agencies, the Chairman is required to submit to the Congress a written statement on the actions uken within 60 days of the date of the report.
ED0 is responsible for coordinating and finalizing the responses to GAO, OMB, and Congressional Committees.
Fonnat and Content a.
Response shculd be in the form of a Notation Vote paper with forwarding letters to Congressional Committees, GAO, and OMB from the Chairman, NRC. This response is a Comission (as opposed to a staff) response and should stand by itself separately from staff comments on the tiraft.
b.
Substance should include such introductory comments as the NRC should make to correct findings or to contest conclusions.
Each recommendation should be addressed, indicating NRC concurrence, non-concurrence, or that action is complete. A brief description of either why NRC does not O
01/01/84 VI-6
concur, or the action we propose to undertake /have V
undertaken, and a date for completion of action should be included if that is relevant.
c.
An example is attached as Exhibit 2.
Appropriate addresses are listed at Exhibit 3.
E.
ANNUAL COMeILATION OF NRC ACTIONS TAKEN ON COMPTROLLER GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS Secticn 236 of the Legislative Reorganization Act requires NRC to submit an annual statement to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees summarizing NRC actions taken during that calendar year on all GA0 report recomendations made no more than 60 days before NRC's first request for appropriations.
Significant actions taken on GA0 reports issued in prior years are also included in this statement. The statement is compiled by 01A, based on all 60-day response letters C'
prepared during the year. The ED0 then circulates this statement to the operating offices for updating.
The annual compilation is due to the Committees each year with NRC's first request for appropriations.
F.
FOLLOW-UP Each recommendation for which NRC has committed action will be entered in WITS and followed to completion.
G.
OIA Audit Reports The Office of Inspector and Auditor is responsible for conducting NRC internal audit activity at all levels of operation. Once OIA completes its audit, a draft report is forwarded to the ED0 soliciting comments on the recommendations in the report prior to finalizing and sending it O)
(m 01/01/84 VI-7
l to the Comission. Coments are required within 30 days of the date of the report.
EDO forwards the report to the appropriate Office by E00 control ticket to prepare a response to 0IA for ED0's signature. See Exhibit 4.
Each reconrnendation in the report must be addressed. All open items will be entered in WITS and followed to completion.
l O
01/01/84 VI-8
Sample Response to Draft GA0 Report f
A lq3 UNITED STATES 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
Y WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
{Q %,.....f
~n Mr. J.. Dexter Peach Director, Resources, Community, and Economic Development' Division U.S. General ~ Accounting Office.
441 G Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20548
Dear Mr. Peach:
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the draft GA0 report " Emergency Preparedness Around Nuclear Facilities Needs Improvement." Tb. report makes several points which are useful to the Nuclear Regulatory Cor; ssion and to other federal agencies involved in this area, and it highlights several areas in which we agree that further work by NRC may be desirable.
The. general tone of the report suggests that emergency preparedness by State and local governments around NRC licensed facilities is ir. disarray.
Although we agree that improvements can certainly be made in this area, we g'j believe that the impression left by the report on the capabilities and preparedness of State and local officials may be doing them a disservice.
While short of the results we ultimately desire, we believe the level of planning and preparedness is definitely improving due in large part to the support and voluntary cooperation of the State and local personnel.
Specific comments on the recommendation in the report are enclosed.
Sincerely, William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
Enclosure:
Comments on GA0 Reconinendations
[~'N
\\,
01/01/84 VI-9 EXHIBIT 1
~
ENCLOSURE O
Specific Comments on GA0 Report 1.
Recomendation 1 GA0 should distinguish its own conclusions from those of the Reactor Safety Study (WASH-1400) in the following statement:
"The study concluded that nuclear accidents may happen and would present a potential adverse health consequence that provides a sobering contrast to the estimated risk." The words "in our opinion" should be inserted after the words "... health consequences that, 3 our opinion, provides..."
because the " sobering contrast" statement is the GA0 conclusion and is not found in WASH-1400.
2.
Recommendation 2 The statement "that there will be evacuation of an area 25 miles downwind from the accident site" is misleading since the study assumed that 30% of the population remained in place.
3.
Recommendation 3 The report creates an impression that the offsite supportive services from State and local agencies are taken for granted. The NRC, however, does not take these services for granted.
Specific requirements are set forth in Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50.
As an example, licensees' emergency plans are required to provide " agreements reached with local, State, and Federal officials and agencies for the early warning of the public and for public evacuation or other protective measures should such warning, evacuation, or other protection measures become necessary or desirable."
O 01/01/84 VI-10 EXHIBIT 1
Sample Papir Fcrwarding Response to Final GA0 R? port C'N O
For:
The Comissioners From:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
FINAL GA0 REPORT ENTITLED "THE PROBLEM 0F DISPOSING 4
0F NUCLEAR LOW-LEVEL WASTE: WHERE 00 WE G0 FROM HERE?"
Purpose:
Approval of a response to Congress on actions taken on GA0 recommendations (pursuant to Section 236 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970).
Discussion:
The GA0 report includes two listings of recomenda-tions. One listing, with seven specific recomendations to the NRC Chairman, deals with " Addressing Several Basic Questions Will Alleviate the Present Disposal Problem" (Chapter 2, pp. 17-18 of the report). The h:
second listing, with one recommendation to the NRC
(,/
Chairman, deals with "Certain Issues Should be Resolved Before Developing New Shallow-Land Burial Sites" (Chapter 3, p. 29 of the report).
Of the seven specific recommendations of Chapter 2, the staff agrees with the substance of six of the recommendations. Ongoing staff activities already u'nderway at the time of the GA0 audit should be responsive to those recomendations.
Recomendation:
That the Commission approve the proposed response to Congress.
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations Enc 1osures:
3.
1.
Response to GA0 Recomendations 2.
Proposed letter to Congress CONTACT:
J. Surmeier, NMSS l
p 427-4423 l
01/01/84 VI-11 EXHIBIT 2
ENCLOSURE 1 Response to Recommendations Chapter 2 The GAO stated that addressing several basic questions will alleviate the present disposal problem.
1.
What is low-level radioactive waste? GA0 Recommendation:
"Give top priority to defining low-level waste by establishing categories based upon requirements for safe disposal."
NRC Response: The NRC has been aware of this need and will utilize a waste classification methodology in the development of its planned rulemaking (10 CFR Part 61) on licensing and regulation of the disposal of low-level radioactive wastes (LLW). The NRC earlier comissioned a study by Ford, Bacon, Davis Udah, Inc., to characterize and classify waste streams from a variety of sources and incorporate this work into the draft environmental impact statement (EIS) being prepared to accompany the proposed low-level waste regulation. This will allow different types of wastes to be examined against different types of disposal techniques, and permit interested members of the public to evaluate and recommend alternatives. The Comission anticipates that the proposed low-level waste regulation (10 CFR 61) and its accompanying draft EIS will be published for public coment early in 1981.
2.
Who are the generators of low-level waste and how much waste do they generate? GA0 Recomendation:
" Determine who the generators of low-level waste are in both the Agreement and non-Agreement States and i
how much waste each licensee is generating."
NRC Response:
The Comission does not believe that the benefit resulting from a license-by-license determination of waste generation by thousands of licensees would offset the cost to the Commission and to the licensees to accumulate this information. This GA0 recomendation will not result in meaningful additional data on LLW volumes and characteristics. As part of the staff's ongoing efforts to prepare nn environmental irpact statement (EIS) for the LLW disposal regulation (10 CFR Part 61), the staff is analyzing the volumes and characteristics of different waste streams from different types of l
licensees. There are approximately 8,000 NRC licensees and 12,000 Agreement State licensees ranging from individual physicians to fuel plants and reactors.
However, preliminary data indicates that the majority of the radioactivity (in excess of 90%) contained in LLW is generated by a relatively small number of NRC and Agreement State licensees (approximately 100 licensees).
O 01/01/84 VI-12 EXHIBIT 2
Sample Letter to Congrass Forwarding NRC Rasponse to Final GAO Rtport i
b[N 4
The Honorable William V. Roth,~Jr.
Chairman, Committee on Governmental Affairs United States Senate Washington, D.C.
20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
In accordance with the statutory obligation to respond to recommendations by the General Accounting Office (GA0) within 60 days of publication, we hereby submit our responses to the recommendations made by the GA0 in their report entitled, "The Problem of Disposing of Nuclear Low-Level Waste: Where Do We Go From Here?"-
The Commission in its responses to several GA0 recommendations (Item Nos. 3, 4
- 4 and 7 of the Enclosure) believes that the protection of the public health and' safety could be enhanced through legislation that would establish minimum technical and procedural standards for the development'and operation of low-level waste disposal sites. This legislation should assuce that
. /'_s uniform minimum national standards are followed in these areas for both
. (s Agreement and non-Agreement States. Over the past year the Commission has testified before several Congressional Committees in favor of such legislation.-
Specific comments on the GA0 recommendations are presented in the Enclosure.
Sincerely, (Name)
Chairman
Enclosure:
Responses to GA0 Recommendations
'cc:
Sen. Thomas F. Eagleton
- IDENTICAL LETTERS TO THOSE ON ENCLOSED IIST 01/01/84 VI-13 EXHIBIT 3 4
- <s-
-a n---.s, v
..-,,e,,,
y
O The Honorable Jcck Brooks, Chairman Committee on Government Operations United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
20515 cc:
Rep. Frank Horton The Honorable Alan Simpson, Chairman Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation Comittee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington, D.C.
20510 cc:
Sen. Gary Hart The Honorable Morris K. Udall, Chairman Subcomittee on Energy and the Environment Comittee on Interior and Insular Affairs United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
20515 cc:
Rep. Manuel Lujan The Honorable Richard L. Ottinger, Chairman Subcomittee on Energy Conservation and Power Comittee on Energy and Commerce United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
20515 cc:
Rep. Carlos Moorhead The Honorable Charles A. Bowsher Comptroller General of the United States General Accounting Office Washington, D.C.
20548 The Honorable David A. Stockman Director Office of Management and Budget Washington, D.C.
20503 0
01/01/84 VI-14 EXHIBIT 3
Sample Response to 0IA Audit Report j#
- UNIT D STATES s,f.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisslON 7
die WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 N...>.l./l SEP 1 1983 MEMORANDUM FOR: James J. Cummings, Director.
Office of Inspector and Auditor FR0!!:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
REVIEW 0F NRC'S YEAR-END SPENDING CONTROLS This responds to your August 9, 1983 memorandum transmitting the subject audit report.
I note your conclusion that NRC has adequate controls over year end spending. With respect to your specific recomendations, I submit the following:
Recomendation 1.
Deobligate unneeded funds by:
]
a.
Continuing to close out expired contracts, emphasizing contracts (V
with the greatest uncosted balances; and l
b.
Requiring justification of uncosted balances with limited activity prior to the end of the fiscal year.
l
Response
a.
We agree. We estimate that during FY 83 we will de-obligate
$600,000 in unneeded funds. We will revise our May 11, 1982 l
policy statement on this subject to emphasize uncosted balances as a factor in determining which contracts to close out first.
This will be accomplished by September 30, 1983.
b.
We disagree.
As contracts continue-to expire each month, a backlog naturally develops. These are then addressed in the priority established in our May 11,1982 policy statement. We would prefer to use our staff resources to actually close out the contracts rather than " justify" why uncosted balances i
remain at the.end of each fiscal year.
Recomendation 2.
Coordinate with institutions and other Government agencies to assure financial reports are submitted promptly and assets and uncosted
[,')T balances are more accurately reflected in agency financial reports, t.
EXHIBIT 4 l
01/01/84 y1_15
~-
James J. Cumings Response We agree. Although no specific contracts were r.entioned in the report as requiring correction, we agree with the principle stated and will continue to comply.
Recommendation 3.
Improve grant manageanent by:
a.
Developing a system to assure grantees submit requi md f.inancial reports within the time limits specified by the unifom administration requirements for grants. OMB Circular A-110; b.
Basing the method of payment for grants on the financial requirements of the grantee; and Requiring reim'ursement requests to be based'on actual expenses.
c.
a
Response
a.
We agree. A reminder letter will be forwarded to affected grantees by October 31, 1983.
Additional emphasis will be placed on obtaining timely submissions in the future.
l l
b.
We agree. This has been accomplished as advanced funding l
has been approved for grantees.
l c.
We agree. This has been accomplished.
l (Signed) Jack W. Roe William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations O
01/01/84 VI-16 EXHIBIT 4
?-
t
- i.
I.
~VII.-
-TRACKING 0F' TASKS (WITS)
- O A.
ED0 Work Item Tracking System (WITS) l 3..
i j
-B.
Office Responsibilities
(
C.
Additional Information
{
Exhibits i
c i
i f
i j..
i 1-
?O
[.
i i
l o
b i
e 01/01/84
- VII-1
VII. TRACKING 0F TASKS (WITS)
O The Work Item Tracking System (WITS) is an automated information system designed to provide every office within the NRC with the capability of monitoring items of work. The primary purpose of WITS is to assist management in the day-to-day allocation of staff for the timely completion of assignments.
This is accomplished by providing managers with computer-generated reports which track the status of work items.
Tracking begins with the original assignment of a work item to an organizational unit and ends when the work item is completed. At the conclusion of an assignment, work items are deleted and certain information is placed on microfiche for historical purposes.
A.
EDO Work Item Tracking System (WITS)
The E00 portion of WITS is designed to show the status of work items, assigned to the various offices either directly by the ED0 or indirectly by the Chairman or the Commissioners, which require more than approximately two weeks to complete. The Office of the ED0 enters in WITS, for each such Commission or ED0-ascigned project, its description, suspense date, and other supporting information.
B.
Office Responsibilities 1.
RM, in conjunction with EDO:ACB, reviews and enters incoming Commission requests for new tasks, accepts entries and changes from staff offices which do not operate their own portions of WITS, approves transfers of tasks to other offices, and publishes the weekly WITS reports.
2.
Offices which have received ass.jnments are required to update the status of their assignments every week. This process is performed by a designated WITS Coordinator within each office. The Coordinator contacts the individuals responsible for the various 0
01/01/84 VII-2
assignments and then marks any new status directly on one of two Q
printed reports. These reports arc distributed to the Coordinators every Monday morning.
The first report to be updated is Option 1 of the Assignee Status Report.
(See Exhibit 1.) This report contains a listing of all work items, other than EDO Control ticket items, and is broken down into three sections. The " Priority A" section lists those work items which are currently being worked on by the staff.
If a work item is completed by the staff and does not require Comission action, a completion date is entered for that item.
Con:pleted items continue to be printed on this report for a period of 30 days after a completion date has been entered.
The " Priority B" section lists those work items which have been sent to the Commission for action.
If the work item requires a Comission briefing or a Comission decision, the Office of the ED0 enters the item on the Comission's Tentative Agenda Items (p)
List.
If the Comission requests additional information on a work item, it will be returned to the " Priority A" section. The
" Priority C" section lists work items which have been delayed for a year or more.
i The seco,1d report to be updated is Option 5 of the Assignee Status j
Report.
(See Exhibit 2.) This report contains a listing of all l
ED0 Control Ticket Items and does not show completed items. Under i
the priority scheme mentioned above, this report lists only l
" Priority A" and " Priority B" items.
I~
All updates to the ED0 portion of WITS oust be submitted BEFORE l_
12:00 N00N, WEDNESDAYS, either by telephone or in writing, to the Office of Resource Management. All offices which operate their own portions of WITS should enter data for the ED0 portion of WITS no later than TilVRSDAY. or FRIDAY in order for the report which is p,
run on Friday night to be current.
01/01/84 VII-3
3.
RM distribut's weekly WITS reports to SECY, EDO, and all staff
. offices which do not operate their own portions of WITS.
C.
Additional Information Detailed informatice concerning WITS is available in the " WITS Coordinators-6peratorsGuide." Copies may be obtained from the Of'fice of Resource Management.
l l
O l
~
l l
O 01/01/84 yII_4
m
~4 e
1...
[V h
}
\\
v
~ R1234100' N U C L E A RR E G U L A T 0 R Y C'0 M M I 5 S I'0 N PAGE:- 57 DATA AS OFs 01/20/84
'W 0 R K.
ITEM TRACKING SYSTEM
[
'0FFICE 0F THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
'I OPTION 18 OPEN ITEMS AND ITEMS CLOSED < 30 DAYS (COMPLETED ITEMS PRINTED)0 3 %L n N NN\\
- BY. PRIORITY, ASSIGNEE, ITEM ASSIGNEE: ALL
========================================================================================================================
PRIORITY (A) 0FFICE: NRR
- - - _ - - - _. _ = _
.=__.
ITEM NO: 820432 CONTACT: MEYER..
SECY M03 N EDD-REF: TA3K BASIS: 820431 ORIG BY
' TYPE:
. ORIG DUE: 02/06/84 ' ORIG. DAYS *-
.+17 REV 14 N
CURR DUE: 02/06/84 - CURR DAYS
+17 REVS 14 CURR DUE8 02/06/84 -CURR DAYS '
+17
.GA0/0IA:
N' ORIG DUE: 02/06/84 ORIG DAYSt
. + 17 UPDTD*
01/12/84. REC,h s.
N COMPL START:
COMPL -
N Es0 ND:
SRM8 N
i DESC: MONTHLY 8 QUARTERLY REPORT ON STATUS OF LICENSING N BASISs'11-29-82 DEDO MEMO TO DENTON 8 DEYOUNG. DUE:
SCHEDULES (BEVILL) - DUE EDO MONTHLY; CONGRESS ^
N JAN (2-6-84): FEB (3-5-84)s.JAN-MAR (4-4-84); APR N
OCT (11-4-83)
MOV (12-5-83); OCT-DEC (1-4-84)s O
QUARTERLY.
o.
- W (5-4-84); MAY (6-4-84); APR-JUN (7-5-84).
s C. BASIS:
11-29-82 DEDO MEMO TO DENTON 8 DEYOUNG.-DUE: OCT ( 11-4-83) 3 - M0V ( 12-5-83); OCT-DEC (1-4-84):
2.
.JAN (2-6-84); FEB (3-5-84); JAM-MAR (4-4-84); APR (5-4-84)s-MAY (6-4-84); APR-JUN f7-5-84).
STATUS:
4 01/11/848 QUARTERLY REPORT TO SECY 1-9-84. MEXT NOMTHLY REPORT DUE 2-6-84.
4 12/16/83 MONTHLY REPORT TO EDO 12/15/83. MEXT QUARTERLY REPORT TO CONGRESS DUE 1/4/84 vi 12/09/83 PENDING ASLBP APPROVAL OF LICENSING TABLES.
11/23/83* MONTHLY REPT TO EDO 11-22-83. NEXT MONTHLY REPORT DUE 12-5-83.
3 10/13/83 QUARTERLY REPORT-TO CONGRESS 10/20/83.
MONTHLY REPORT TO FDO 9-9-83. DEXT QUAR'NEXT MONTHLY REPORT DUE 11/4/83.
I 09/14/83 TERLY.. REPORT TO CONGRESS DUE 10-4-83.'
C) 1 08/17/83: MONTHLY REPORT RECEIVED EDO 8-12-83. NEXT MONTHLY R!! PORT DUE 9-2-83.
A 07/13/83 QUARTERLY REPORT TO SECY 7/8/83.
g 07/07/83 QUARTERLY REPORT TO CONGRESS RECEIVED EDO 6/30/83.M4HTHLY REPORT DUE EDO 8/4/83.
s l
06/14/83: MONTHLY REPORT TO EDO RECEIVED 6-8-83. QUARTERLY. REPORT TO CONGRESS.DUE 7 1-83.
i i
x 1
k
' Y m
t m
i' o
I A
t t
i l
i ms i
~
.{.
i 1
u 1
R1234100 NUCLEAR REGULAT0RY C0MMISSION PAGE:
12 DATA AS OF 01/20/84 W0RK ITEM TRACKING SYSTEM OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OPTION 5: OPEN ITEMS AND ITEMS CLOSED < 30 DAYS (GRN/PRI TICKETS ONLY -COMPLETED ITEMS OMITTED) \\
- BY PRIORITY. ASSIGNEE, ITEM ASSIGNEE: ALL
========================================================================================================================
PRIORITY: (A) 0FFICE: NRR dTEM NO: 013467 CONTACT: DENTON SECY NO: 83-219 M EDD-REF: TASK BASIS: 013467 ORIG BY:
TYPE: GRN CURR DUE 01/31/S4 CURR DAYS:
+11 REV Of M
CURR DUE: 01/31/84 CURR DAYS:
+11 REV 01 ORIG DUE: 12/23/83 ORIG DAYS
-28 GAD /0IA:
M ORIG DUE: 12/23/83 ORIG DAYS
-28 UPDTDs 01/17/84 RECVD M
COMPL:
START:
COMPL M
EDO NO:
SRM:
M DESC: REQUEST REPORT DESCRIBING HRC PROGRESS IN N
BASIS: LETTER FROM LOUIS 0. GIUFFRIDA TO CHAIRMAN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE " FEDERAL GUIDELINES M
PALLADINO DATED 8/19/83 FOR DAM SAFETY" M
BASIS:
LETTER FROM LOUIS 0. GIUFFRIDA TO CHAIRMAN PALLADINO DATED 8/19/83 STATUS:
01/05/84: DENTON RETURNED TO VOLLMER TO SNCEDULE A MEETING 12/16/83: FINAL DRAFT IN CONCURRENCE 11/17/83: DRAFT IN PREPARATION
____.___..............___ ________=====- _______........--___._______ ______....._________.--___________________._....______ _____.
ITEM NO: 013539 CONTACT: DENTON SECY NO:
M EDO-REF: TASK BASIS: 013539 ORIG BY:
TYPE: PRI CURR DUE: 01/25/84 CURR DAYS:
+5 REVI 07 N
CURR DUE: 01/25/84 CURR DAYS:
+5 REV 07 ORIG DUE: 10/03/83 ORIG DAYS
-109 GA0/01A M
ORIG PUE: 10/03/83 ORIG DAYS:
-109 UPDTDs 01/19/84 RECVDs M
COMPL:
c3 START:
COMPL:
M EDO NO:
SRN:
>4 M
v, c3 DESC: REVIEW AND RESPONSE TO OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS M BASIS: MEMO FROM CHAIRMAN PALLADINO TO DIRCKS DATED
>[
REPORT ON TMI-2 CLEANUP ALLEGATIONS M
9/9/83 3
03# BASIS:
MEMO FROM CHAIRMAN PALLADINO TO DIRCKS DATED 9/S/83 o
STATUS:
S 01/05/84: RECEIVED EDO 12/22/83
-~
11/25/83: CASE AND STELLO REVIEWING REPORT 11/17/83: FINAL RESPONSE IN PREPARATIcN
.c El v5 0'
E
~8 7+
m "I
5 Z
~
O O
O
- VIII.
MISCELLANE0US A.
Resolution of Inter-and Intra-Office Differences B.
Keeping the Connission Inforned C.
Comunications Between Staff and Connissioners' Of fices D.
. Coordination of ACRS Full Comittee Meetings F.-
Policy on the Distribution of Draft Inspection Reports G.
Procedures in Dealing with FBI / Department of Justice H.
Public' Speaking Engagements I.
Policy and Procedures for Direct Distribution of Proposed and Effective Regulations to Licensees and Other Interested Persons J.
Procedures for Foreign Travel K.
Use of Blue Bag Service-t Exhibits.
1 I
A t
01/01/84 VIII-1 L
[:
F VIII. MISCELLANEOUS A.
Resolution of Inter-and Intra-Office Differences Office Directors and Regional Administrators are expected to have the necessary mechanisms' in place to assure that they are made aware of differences which are being worked out with other offices, as well as of conflicting opinions within their own offices. When advised that difficulties in resolution will/may affect a suspense date, either Office or Division Directors must become involved with their counterpart.
If this is not effective, the Office must make a prompt decision either to bring the issue to the attention of the ED0 or, if a Comission paper is involved, to outline the difference with a non-concurrence by one or more parties.
B.
Keeping the Comission Informed In " keeping the Comission advised," it is desirable to communicate in writing in order to eliminate possible misperceptions.
The "non crisis" method of notification is via the Daily Staff Notes.
The " crisis" method is to use datafax facilities.
The " Preliminary Notification" developed by IE is a good example and can be used in preference to or as supplementary to phone calls.
(See Exhibit 1.)
C.
Communications Between Staff and Comissioners' Offices Any member of the NRC staff should feel free to contact a Commissioner's office to provide factual information or notice of forthcoming events concerning items known or believed to be of interest to that Comissioner. Contacts initiated by Comissioners' offices requesting factual information should be answered directly without hesitation.
It O
01/01/84 VIII-2
is normally expected that, in either case, the staff member's imediate f.
supervisor will be informed promptly about contacts of substance; the supervisor should, in turn, advise upper management as appropriate.
Responses which involve significant staff efforts or that represent office views on policy should be made in accordance with established NRC procedures.
See Chapter III.
D.
Memorandum of Understanding Between the Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) and NRC Staff - Executive Director for Operations (ED0)
A Memorandum of Understanding between the ACRS and EDO was issued effective June 15, 1983 (modified August 15,1983), to establish proce.Jures for ACRS participation in major NRC policy and rulemaking activities of the NRC at a sufficiently early stage to permit constructive interaction during formulation of safety related rules or policy statements. See Exhibit 2 for a copy of the MOU.
E.
Coordination of ACRS Full Comittee Meetings The following procedures have been established to provide for centralization of the process of forwarding issues to ACRS for consideration at Full Comittee Meetings.
On the first business day after the 4th of each month, Offices should l
provide to A0/EDO a projection of items to be presented to the Full Comittee for the next 3 monthly meetings (e.g., on July 5 for meetings inAugust,SeptemberandOctober).
No report is required if no topics are to be submitted.
Provide infonnation for each month in format shown in Exhibit 3.
.ACPS has indicated that they will provide ED0 a list of items they I-propose for consideration by the 1st of each month. When that is received, it will be provided to those concerned.
t h
v 01/01/84 VIII-3
F.
Policy on the Distribution of Draft Inspection and Investigation Reports On October 7, 1983, the EDO issued a policy statement on distribution of draft inspection and investigative reports. This policy is contained in Exhibit 4.
G.
Procedures in Dealing with FBI / Department of Justice See procedures issued on October 24, 1983, at Exhibit 5.
H.
Public Speaking Engagements 1.
Speaking engagements are necessary to communicate to the public and industry NRC's regulatory role and positions. Managers should approach the Office of Public Affairs for advice when necessary.
2.
Management should make careful judgment to assure that speeches take on a regulatory stance which cannot be miscontrued as one of proponent / opponent of nuclear power. Meetings which suggest a
" debate" between " pro" and " anti" nuclear speakers should be approached cautiously, as identification with one side or another of the issue is difficult to avoid.
i 3.
It is management's responsibility to approve speaking engagements on the part of staff persoanel, a.
Office Directors / Regional Administrators may set up their own procedures for review.
b.
ED0 will approve the speeches of Office Directors and Regional Administrators which deal with significant issues, new policy or new policy implementation. They will be submitted to EDO, ATTN: A0/E00, 3-7 days before acoroval is needed. Those which deal with routine matters need not be submitted.
O 01/01/84 VIII-4
4.
Forthcoming public speaking engagements are listed in the ED0 Weekly
'(
)
Information Report.
'O I.
Policy and Procedures For Direct Distribution of Proposed and Effective Regulations to Licensees and Other Interested Persons 1.
Policy All substantive II proposed and effective regulations will be a.
mailed to affected licensees and other known interested persons.
" Interested persons" includes, for example, standards writing groups, trade associations, trade pub-lications likely to be read by affected licensees, public interest groups, persons who commented on a proposed rule, and other persons who have expressed an interest in the regulation.
b.
Commission papers recommending proposed or effective
(
)^
regulations will contain a statement that affected licensees
- w/
and other interested persons will receive a copy of the amendment by direct mail.
c.
The task leader responsible for the development of a regulation will be responsible for assuring that copies of the final rule are made available to persons who commented on the proposed rule.
l 1/ n those cases where the amendment is considered minor and does not l
I i
affect the public health or safety, or NRC's regulatory requirements, e.g.,
inconsequential _ grammar, address, or title changes, the task leader should seek his/her Division Director's approval to forego the direct mailing in j.
the interest of economy.
I
/
! (v%
)-
i.
01/01/84 VIII-5
d.
In the case of a regulation affecting Agreement State licensees, the Office of State Programs will inform the Agreement States of such.
2.
Procedures Effective immediately, as a service to the program offices, the Office of Administration will assume responsibility for distributing each proposed and final rule to affected licensees and other interested persons maintained on computer based mailing lists. As soon as a rule is published in the Federal Register, the Rules and Procedures Branch, DRR, ADM will forward a copy of the published notice to the Document Management Branch which will distribute it to the proper persons.
If a particular rulemaking proceeding has generated public coments, the program office will continue to be responsible for mailing copies of the notice to the commenters.
In the event of special distribution considerations, the contact person should contact the Chief, Document Management Branch, TIDC, on extension 49-28585.
The notation section of a Commission paper accompanying a rulemaking notice should contain this paragraph:
Copies of this notice will be distributed to affected licensees and other interested persons by the Office of Administration.
O 01/01/84 VIII-6
'J.
2 Procedures-for Foreign Travel
-Administrative approval of foreign travel via Form 445 should be requested during the early stages of planning for a trip and not during the last week before a trip begins. NRC Fom 445 should be forwarded totthe Office of International Programs / Travel /ED0 30 days before the begin date'of the travel.
Forms submitted later than 30 days prior should have an explanation for the delay accompany the form.
Foreign travel related to meetings, symposia or conferences external to OECD countries must be approved by EDO (thru IP) before the' traveler commits to the event. This approval should normally be requested by memo, to EDO thru IP, as soon as the event is known. When IP receives a general invitation directly, they will evaluate the importance of the
. event' ar.d recomend to the EDO before soliciting attendance.
All foreign trips of any nature will include a justification in the
[
remarks section if more than one person'is involved in all or part of i
the travel involved.
K.
- Use of Blue Bag Service 7
- NRC blue bag service is available for' delivery of urgent correspondence
- between NRC. Headquarters locations. The use of this service is limited to Division' Directors and above and requires the written authorization of an official-at the level.of Division Director or above on Form NRC-234, " Blue Bag Mail Service" card.
(SeeExhibit6.)
Note that the card is signed at both the sending and receiving offices.
Thus,' the card also serves as the proof of delivery. However, if you g
- simply need proof of delivery for non-urgent communications, use NRC Fom 253~, " Messenger / Courier Receipt" (Exhibit 6) instead of the Blue Bag Service.
Both of the forms can be obtained by submitting a requisition to the Warehouse.
- O
.01/01/84 VIII-7 5
n - * -,,
-w..m,-mr_w..c.ry-,.,vy,.-mem-y-%,,,m
.w-m,,,_,.,.,...,,,w.m
,-,.,,-,.--,..mm.w-.,4 m,,,-mw...
--._,,.,e
,.m,~~
Unclassified correspondence to be placed in a Blue Bag should be taken to the Mail Room servicing the sender's building or given to the mail person servicing the office, along with the completed Form 234. The correspondence will be placed in a blue bag and delivered to its destination on the next availatle mode of transportacion, i.e., Special Messenger, Mail Shuttle, Passenger Shuttle, or hand-carried Classified material must be transported by authorized messenger only and prepared in accordance with established security procedures. The Form NRC-234 must indicate the classification of the document, i.e.,
Secret or Confidential.
In addition, an NRC Form-253 must be completed and accompany the classified Blue Bag material.
Blue Bags should not be retained in individual offices; they should be returned to the Mail Room or the mail person delivering the material after the Form 234 has been signed by the recipient and the contents removed.
Any questions concerning the Blue Bag services should be directed to the Chief, Mail and Messenger Branch (X-27485).
i O
01/01/84 VIII-8
SAMPLE PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION O
PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION 4
PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION OF EVENT OR UNUSUAL OCCURRENCE PNO-V-81-07 February 5, 1981 This preliminary notification constitutes EARLY notice of events of POSSIBLE safety or public interest significance. The information presented is as initially received without verification or evaluation and is basically all that is known by IE staff on this date.
FACILITY:
University of Hawaii Honolulu,. Hawaii Licensee No. 53-00017-23 SU3 JECT:
NEWS MEDIA INTEREST IN OCEAN DISPOSAL Region V received a telephone inquiry from a staff member of the Hawaii State Senate Environment Committee. The staff member stated that a headline story appeared in a Honolulu newspaper yesterday evening (02/04/81) describing ocean disposal of radioactive waste by the University of Hawaii. The staff member was 2
anticipating that the news article will generate interest and he wanted to gather b
some background information for members of the Senate Environment Committee.
Region V provided information on the general subject of sea disposal, the rela-tive hazards that could be expected from the University of Hawaii's disposals, the responsibilities for military disposals versus commercial disposals and EPA's role in sea disposal. The University of Hawaii had made sea disposals during the (A) period of 1954 to 1970. The total activity was probably less than 100 mci of
%./
byproduct maGrials.
4 Region V was notified of this situation by a telephone call from a staff member
- of the Hawaii State Senate Environment Committee at 10:20 a.m. on February 5,
'1981.
l.
.-This Preliminary Notification is for information only. No further action is planned by Region V.
l CONTACT:
.F. Wenslawski, 463-3757 H. Book, 463-3755 -
Distribution:
Transmitted H. St. 2:25p.
Chairman Ahearne Commissioner Hendrie S. J. Chilk, SECY.
Commissioner Gilinsky Connissioner Bradford
- 4. C. Kammerer, CA Commissioner Kennedy
-ACRS-(ForDistribution)
Transmitted: 'MNBB P. Bldg.
IE:X005 (IE:HQ Dist)
W. J. Dircks, EDO H. R. Denton, HRR C. Michelson,- AE00 R. H. Vollmer, NRR Landow (6 min /page)
J.~J. Fouchard,.PA R. J. Mattson, NRR J. J. Cummings, OIA N. M. Haller, MPA' D. F. Ross, NRR H.-K. Shapar, ELD _
D. Eisenhut.NRR MAIL R. G. Ryan, SP g
S. H. Hanauer, NRR F Flinogue, SD XI:X005 i
Willste Bldg.
Document Mgt. Br. (For l O J. G. Davis, NM55 PDR/LPDR)
Regional Offices R. J. Budnitz, RES RV Form 211 PRELIMINAPY INFORMATION EXHIBIT 1 I.
01/01/84 VIII-9 i
t
O MEMORANDUM 0F UNDERSTANDING PARTIES:
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) - ACRS Chairman; NRC Staff - Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
ACRS PARTICIPATION IN NRC RULEMAKING AND POLICY MATTERS The purpose of this memorandum is to establish procedures for ACRS partici-pation in major NRC policy and rulemaking activities of the NRC at a suffi-ciently early stage to pern it constructive interaction during fcrmulation of safety related rules or policy statements.
The following has been agreed upon to facilitate ACRS participation in rulemaking and major policy issues involving nuclear safety matters within the purview of the ACRS.
1.
Areas of ACRS interest will be identified on behalf of the Committee by the ACRS Executive Director.
2.
The NRC Staff will be responsible for ensuring that ACRS comments regarding nuclear safety rules and major nuclear safety policy matters
- under development by-the NRC Staff are obtained and taken into account at appropriate stages in the development process of these items. This function will normally be the responsibility of the cognizant NRC Staff Office.
3.
The Project Engineer supporting the ACRS Regulatory Activities Subcom-mittee will serve as the ACRS contact for rulemaking and major policy matters. The ACRS Coordinator in the responsible office will be tha contact in the NRC Staff.
4.
When a proposed rule or a major policy matter involving nuclear safety is under consideration by the NRC Staff for eventual transmission to the Commission, the ACRS should be informed of the anticipated NRC Staff action when the basic requirements are being formulated, and an opportunity for ACRS discussion should be provided.
This may be achieved by the ACRS Coordinator / Project Engineer providing ACRS with copies of the pertinent task initiation form (after user office endorsement) or other relevant of fice documents. Any written reaction by the ACRS on the need for, scope and direction of the proposed task will be considered, and responded to by the EDO.
- A major policy issue is a safety-related matter that must be brought to the attention of.he Commissioners and/or requires their action before being implemented.
01/01/84 VIII-10 EXHIBIT 2
J 2.
~4.
The llRC Staff will provide the ACRS with a status report on proposed rules, on a quarterly basis that provides timely information on the status of proposed rules.
5.
Normally, ~ACRS comments on a rule or major policy matter will be provided to the EDO at the following two stages:
a..
Prior to submittal to the Commission for action regarding publication of a ' proposed rule or major policy matter for public comment, a hearing, or other action as appropriate.
This would normally occur.before CRGR review.
b.
~ Prior to. submittal to the Cnmmission for action regarding implementation of the final ie or major policy matter unless
'no substantive revisions are aiade by the staff in preparing the matter for final Commission action.
This would normally occur after the public comment period and/or after completion of a related hearing and before CRGR. review.
The cognizant NRC Staff of fice (ACRS Coordinator / Project Engineer) will ensure that schedules for the development of a specific rule or' a
' major ' policy matter include sufficient time (normally about two A
months) for ACRS ' review prior to submittal to CRGR/EDO, as feasible
'and as required, at both stages.
Twenty-five copies of a. rule' or major policy matter will be provided to the ACRS for review by the ACRS Coordinator / Project Engineer at the stages identified in paragraph Sa. and b. with a memorandum addressed to the ACRS Executive Director requesting ACRS review and also includ-
~ing a ' proposed schedule for review and publication, as appropriate.
The ACRS Executive Director will keep the ED0 informed of the schedule for ACRS' comments / recommendations to the EDO.
-When sending a rule or major policy matter to the ACRS for review, the Staff office involved (ACRS Coordinator / Project Engineer) will ensure that the ACRS is provided with a copy of other related documents such as differing judgments on technical issues'among the NRC Staff, public comments, NRC -Staff's resolution of public comments, etc.
6..
.In ' addition, ACRS will have the option of reviewing a specific document during its public comment period and at'such other times as considered
. appropriate by the ' cognizant ACRS' Subcomittee.
Under such circum-
. stances, the - NRC..Staf f (ACRS Coordinator / Project Engineer) will' be informed as early as possible of anticipated 'ACRS full Committee and Subcommittee activities and will provide the time, to the degree practicable,. required for the ACRS input.
O-
'01/01/84-VIII-11 EXHIBIT 2
3.
7.
Ten copies of a rule or major policy matter will also be provided to the ACRS for information by the ACRS Coordinator /Proj ect Engineer at the following stages with a memorandum addressed to the Exec-utive Di rector, ACRS, indicating that they are sent to ACRS for information:
a.
When a proposed rule or major policy matter is sufficiently developed for CRGR review and comment (e.g., when a proposed rule or a major policy matter is sent to other NRC offices by the originating office for final review and comment).
b.
After incorporation of CRGR comments on a proposed rule or a policy matter, when it is sent to the Commission for approval to be published as a Federal Register Notice for public comment.
c.
After approval by the Commission, when a proposed rule or policy matter is sent to be published as a Federal Register Notice for public comment.
d.
After CRGR review of a proposed final rule subsequent to the public comment period, when it is sent to the Commission for approval for implementation, e.
Final document, when it is sent to be published as an effective rul e.
8.
All ACRS comments will be forwarded to the ED0 with copies to the cognizant Staff office (ACRS Coordinator) and the Commission.
The ACRS Coordinator will ensure that copies are provided to appropriate NRC Staff Of fices and the ED0 will assure consideration of ACRS comments by the NRC Staff.
Commission papers will address ACRS comments including those not resolved by the Staff.
9.
In particular cases, procedures in this Memorandum of Understanding may be altered consistent with the needs of the Commission or as appropriate in those cases where the ACRS is participating directly in a related rulemaking hearing as outlined in 10 CFR 2.809.
The ACRS Chairman or Executive Director should be consulted on such changes.
O 01/01/84 VIII-12 EXHIBIT 2
l 4.
l
- 10.
-.This Memorandum of Understanding will take effect on June 15, 1983.
It supersedes-the previous Memorandum of Understanding on this subject
+
i
'between the ACRS and the NRC Staff.
l
}
$htlr3
^
7 j.
(Date)
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations AH /U
$ blW i
/, (Date) fSse C. Ebersole, Acting Chairman Mvisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards 1
l y
i 3
t l
l l.
9 I
4 9
g.
i.
I t
[.
- 01/01/84 VIII-13 EXHIBIT 2 l
~
1
-.., _ _,. _ -..., _,.. -. ~....... _ _ _.. _
1 ATTACHMENT 2 Areas of ACRS Interest Per Item 1 of Memorandum of Understanding dated June 15, 1983, ACRS Participation in hKC Rulemaking and Policy Matters For purposes of implementing the MOV noted above, the ACRS has identified the following areas of interest which consist of safety-related rules, pro-posed rule changes, or Appendices in the areas noted below. Policy matters which impact on safety considerations in these areas are also of interest.
Part 20 - Standards for Protection Against Radiation Part 21 - Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance Part 50 - Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities Part 55 - Operators' Licenses Part 60 - Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in Geologic Repositories Part 61 - Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste Part 70 - Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material
- . Part 71 - Packaging of Radioactive Material for Transport and Transportation of Radioactive Material Under Certain Conditions Part 72 - Licensing Requirements for the Storage of Spent Fuel in an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Part 73 - Physical Protection of Plants and Materials Part 100- Reactor Site Criteria With respect to new rules, proposed changes, or Appendices to Part 2 or 51 whicn impact on safety-related aspects of the regulatory process (e.g., limits on the scope or nature of the safety review process), the ACRS also has an interest to a degree that copies should be provided for information consistent with step 7 of the referenced MOU.
- Deleted by 8-9-83 ACRS memo and 8-15-83 DEDO memo.
8 f
Ald1AAA ACR$Executivepirector Vis/r.s (Date) 01/01/84 VIII-14 EXHIBIT 2
.,,S
\\
APRIL i
Title / Issue' Purpose ~
Priority Related Documents.
3 Meeting with a Regional Discuss matters of High (EDO)
None Director a general' interest i
R.G. 8'.8 Rev. 4. "Information' Request ACRS High'(RES)
R.G. 8.10. " Operation m
Philosophy for Maintaining l
Relevant to Ensuring that Comnents Occupational Radiation
=
Occupational Radiation Exposures l
at Nuclear Power Plants will be Exposures As Low As Reasonably
=
As Low As Reasonably Achievable" Achievable" y
Proposed-Revisions to 10 CFR Request ACRS High(RES)
Proposed rule and Regulatory I
30, 40, 70, and 72 on Emergency
= concurrence.in.
Analysis will be provided on Freparedness-for Fuel Cycle and staff. position 12/15/83 Other Radioactive Material 3
O Licensees y
O 3
R.G. 1.114. Rev. 2, " Guidance Request ACRS High(RES)
New staffing rule- -
t i
on Being Operator at the Comments 10 CFR 50.54, 1(m)(2)
=
Controls and A Senior Operator and (m)(3), " Conditions S,
in the Control Room of a Nuclear of Licenses." To be Power Plant" transmitted by 11/18/83.
E
?n River Bend OL Application Request ACRS Medium (NRR)
SER (02/84) t Connents i
n i
Trends and Patterns Status Report Medium (AE00) Briefing Package Program Plan (04/01/84)
,n l
Implementation of R.G. 1.97
. Status Report Low (NRR)
Briefing Package E
(04/11/84) jg:
1 rn5 S
w i
U
\\
4
'o UNITED STATES g
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
wasuiwarow, o. c.aosss
~s., * " * * /
O OCT 0 7 W MEMORANDUM FOR:
Richard C. DeYoung. Director, IE Thomas E. Murley, Regional Administrator, RI James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator, RII James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator, RIII John T. Collins, Regional Administrator, RIV John B. Martin, Regional Administrator, RV FROM:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
POLICY ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF DRAFT INSPECTION AND INVESTIGATION REPORTS I have reviewed your coments with regard to the policy on distribution of draft inspection reports stated in my memoranda of March 24 and July 30, 1982.
I have also discussed our policy on release of draft investigation reports with the Directors of 01 and OIA.
The primary motivation of this policy statement is to ensure that official NRC documents, and their inspection and investigative conclusions, are published without any taint, either real or perceived, of improper influence by those we regulate. Moreover, we will reinforce policies which strengthen the authority of the NRC field staff to coment freely on safety issues at the preliminary stages of fact collection and evaluation. The basic problem to be addressed by this policy is the fact that licensees shall not be afforded opportunities to modify NRC documents to their advantage outside the public arena.
In order to give suitable consideration to these issues, the policies stated j
in my memoranda of March 24 and July 30, 1982 are superseded by the following:
A.
Objectives The following statements reflect the basic objectives of this policy statement:
1.
To ensure that sufficient flexibility is provided to the Regional Administrators so that they and their staffs will not hesitate to disseminate safety-related information to licensees during the inspection / investigation process, prior to distribution of the final reports, and 2.
To ensure that inspection / investigation findings accurately represent the facts collected by, and the conclusions drawn by, the l
NRC staff, without improper influences by licensees or their agents 01/01/84 VIII-16 EXHIBIT 4
2 1.
on the content and/or conclusions of NRC reports of inspections or investigations.
B.
Safety and Security Issue Communications NitC policy recognizes that nuclear safety and security concerns must be addressed by prompt, positive actions.
Accordingly, safety or security information must be promptly and clearly identified to responsible licensee management to ob Min prompt licensee evaluation and, if appro-priate, safety-related corrective actions.
Such clear communications are necessary to maintaining required levels of safety and security at licensed facilities.
When such comunications are made as a result of concerns that ar,ise during the course of an inspection / investigation, the fact of the comunication should be noted in the inspection / investigation report, and a copy of any written comunication should be included in the report.
L Where approved by regional management, inspectors may, in preparation for exit interviews or enforcement meetings, provide to the licensee a listing of significant issues developed in the course of an inspection, in order to facilitate communication of inspection findings which require However, notes, draft reports, draft evaluations, O
corrective action.
draft notices of violations or non-compliance, or other material containing preliminary inspection conclusions, findings and recomendations are not to be provided to the licensee, except as required by safety or security concerns, as noted above.
Briefing materials prepared by the staff for use in meetings with licensees occasioned by inspection activities should be reviewed by,d to regional management prior ~ to distribution at a meeting, and appende the inspection report.
C.
Release of Draft Inspection Reports Under no circumstances should draft inspection reports, either in their entirety or excerpts from them, be released to licensees or their agents, or to any source external to the NRC without the express permission of the EDO.
For the purposes of this policy, a draft inspection report is the preliminary draft of the document which will provide the account and conclusions of an official NRC inspection.
It is to be considered a draft inspection report from its initial development, and throughout the period of supervisory and management review, until final publication t
and distribution in accordance with IE Manual Chapter 1025.
-In the event any draft inspection report is inadvertently or otherwise released contrary to this policy, the EDO should be promptly advised in writing.
The EDO will take or recomend action as appropriate.
l 01/01/84 VIII-17 EXHIBIT 4
3 D.
Release of Draft Investigation Reports For the purposes of this policy, a draft investigation report is the preliminary draft of the document which will provide the account and findings of an official NRC inquiry or investigation.
It is to be considered a draft investigation report from its initial development, and throughout the period of supervisory and management review, until final publication.
It is important to realize that OI is required by Comission directives to inform Regional Administrators of safety and security issues as they are developed in the course of an investigation.
Regional Administrators shall act on this information in accordance with the policies set forth above for the prompt comunication of safety and security issues, and in addition shall observe the following procedure.
The Regional Administrator shall infom the Director 01, in advance that information related to an open investigation is being considered for release to the licensee because safety or security concerns require initiation of corrective actions before publication of the investigation report.
The Director, 01, should review the information to be released and advise the Regional Administrator of the anticipated effect of its release on the course of the investigation.
The Regional Administrator will release the information only after determining that the safety or security concerns are significant enough to justify the risk of l
compromising the effectiveness of the investigation and, possibly, subsequent enforcement or prosecution options.
Any such release of information should be recorded in the investigation report.
l l
pursuant to Comission approved OI policy, draft OI reports of l
investigation will not be circulated outside the NRC without the specific approval of the Chairman.
(OIA draft reports of investigation will under no circumstances be reviewed with or given to licensees, their agents, or to any source external to NRC, without the express l
permission of the Director, 01A.)
Requests for such permission should l
be made through the EDO.
In the case of an emergency appearing to require immediate action NRC personnel shall provide the licensee with any information they judge the circumstances warrant.
If time permits, regional management should be I
consulted first.
O 01/01/84 VIII-18 EXHIBIT 4
4 O
The foregoing policies are effective immediately.
The EDO, following an appropriate evaluation period for this policy, will incorporate this policy into the NRC Manual.
Also, the EDO is reviewing existing procedures and practices related to other types of comunications under the cognizance of other NRC Offices and will issue policy guidance where deemed appropriate.
r Willi J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations cc:- H. Denton J. Davis R. Minogue G. Messenger B. Hayes O
V l
l l
i O
01/01/84 VIII-19 EXHIBIT 4
N[
?
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- h.,.. [
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%,(..v October 24, 1983 g
MEMORANDUM FOR: Office Directcrs and Regional Administrators FROM:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
PROCEDURES IN DEALING WITH FBI / DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE The following procedures apply effective this date:
A.
Special Functional Areas:
1.
Contacts with FBI in regard to security matters - including background investigations and internal security activities -
will be handled by the Division of Security direct with FBI.
NRC personnel, when contacted by FBI personnel on background investigations for security clearances, need not report such contacts; contacts made in regard to internal security matters should be reported to the Division of Security.
2.
Contacts with FBI in regard to threat assessment, contingency response planning and other matters covered in the NRC/ FBI
" Memorandum of Understanding for Cooperation Regarding Threat, Theft or Sabotage in the Nuclear Industry" will be handled by NMSS according to their standard procedures.
3.
Contacts by and with Regional Administrators in regard to general NRC matters of coordination, such as status reports, with FBI Regional offices and other law enforcement agencies j
need not be reported unless substantive matters are discussed.
If substantive matters are discussed, the provisions of 4
paragraph B will apply.
B.
Receipt of information - whether by telephone, visit or in writing -
from law enforcement agencies on all matters other than those listed in paragraph A will be handled as follows:
1.
Regions:
All contacts will be refecred to the 01 Regional Field Office which will in turn advise OI Headquarters of the nature of the contact as appropriate.
O 01/01/84 VIII-20 EXHIBIT 5
Q]
[
2.
Headquarters Offices:
Contacts will be referred to 0I (Contact: Division of Field Operations, Telephone: 27246).
OI will consult with ED0 as necessary(and advise the caller of the appropriate NRC contact s).
Contacts will the'n be advised to respond to queries.
3.
OI will be responsible to determine the nature of the FBI /D0J contact and, where appropriate, advise staff of investigations which relate to matters of health and safety and OIA of matters touching upon the conduct of NRC employees or contractors.
Due regard will be paid to the sensitivity of the information.
C.
Referral of information to 00J/ FBI will be handled as follows:
1.
OIA will be the single point of contact for referral to D0J/ FBI of information touching upon the conduct of NRC employees or contractors.
2.
01 will be the single point of contact for referral to D0J/ FBI of infonnation touching upon the conduct of licensees, applicants, vendors or their contractors.
Offices and Regions will assure thit this policy reaches and is understood by all employees of the agency.
-V l
(Signed) William J.Dirch l
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations I
1 p
01/01/84 VIII-21 EXHIBIT 5 L
O Sample Blue Bag and Mes:enger/ Courier Receipt 8
NRC eOnu 234 U.S. NUCLE AR RE GUL ATOR Y COMMISSION 3
BLUE BAG MAIL (6 76)
BLUs BAG MAIL SERVICs j
SENDER'S RECEIPT Complete this Portion and Give to Mail Person with Material Being Mailed.
SENT SENT TO:
DATE lj DATE TIME
,m 3
TIME BY:
ct i
RECEtVED u
To:
FROM:
CATE
<E
{
TIME e
W BY: (Signature) y O
a
""C' 00 NOT KEEP BLUE BAG - Return it to th. Mail Person g
NRC FORM 293 OATE SENT CONTRobho.
< *.. on U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION messenGsnicouaisa neceier 45896 ro.
O RG..e. S.
0,.
.e.
00
.e0.
FROMs OmeApe.Sym Bus @ese ROOM eeO.
UNCLASSIFIEO OESCRIPT60N MESSENGER'S# COURIER $1GN ATURE DATE WESS EN G ER/C OURIER MESS E N G ER/C OUR IER MMOEne
- 3. "
" DATE SENT.""TO,"" froes,"ene "UNCLASSsPIED OCSCRIFTtON" M ESS E N G E R /C OU R I E R
- 2. OMain geESSEPm3E84COURetR signatue, In Mest space gree.,ee.
S. Ressaa *SEMOE R4 SUSPENSE COPY."
MESSENGER e Denver to es mes
. oneewee to oestessee.
RECIMENTs
.Sagnene m en "
IMENT'S SIONATURE." ene "OATE" bseckL
- 3. Re.e
.a e=
N.e.
RECIPIENT - RETURN THIS COPY TO SENDER O
01/01/84 VIII-22 EXHIBIT 6
120555078877 1 1AN19A19819C1 US NRC 2
ADM-DIV OF TIOC POLICY W-501 C PUB MGT BR-POR NUREG WASHINGTON DC 20555 s
1 i
4 I
1 l
i i
l 1
O O
O
- -