ML20101L415
| ML20101L415 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Neely Research Reactor |
| Issue date: | 06/06/1974 |
| From: | Ziemann D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20101L254 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9604040024 | |
| Download: ML20101L415 (7) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
1 UNITED STATES A'IDMIC ENERGY C0fMISSION DOCKET NO. 50-160 GEORGIA INSTITUIE OF 'IECHNOIDGY NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF APENDMENT 'IO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE No request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene having been filed following publication of the notice of proposed action in the Federal Register on December 22, 1972 (37 F.R. 28312), the United States Atomic Energy Comission (the Comission) has issued Amendment No.1 to Facility Operating License No. R-97 to the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgis Tech), as proposed in that notice, except that the license wording has been modified to confom with the current Regulatory license format.
'Ibe license amendment authorizes Georgia Tech to operate its modified research reactor located on its campus in Atlanta, Georgia, at power levels up to 5 megawatts (themal) for research and development activities. The amendment also authorizes an increase (from 11 kilograms to 33 kilograms) in the quantity of uranium 235 that Georgia Tech may receive, possess and use in connection with operation of the reactor.
The reactor facility has been inspected by a repmsentative of the Comission and found to have been modified substantially in accordance with the provisions of Construction Pemit No. CPRR-116.
9604040024 960322 PDR ADOCK 05000160 H
PDR 6 u o n o n o v c ~-1
_. 'Ihe application for the amendnent conplies with the standards and mquimnents of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Comission's rules and mgulations. '1he Comission has made appropriate findings as mquimd by the Act and the Comission's rules and regulations in 10'CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment, and has concluded that the issuance of the license amen &ent will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
A copy of Aiwr4ient No. I to License No. B-97 with Technical Specifications and the Safety Evaluation dated December 19, 1972, are available for inspection at the Comission's Pubuc Document Room,1717 H Stmet, N. W., Washington, D. C., or may be obtained upon request sent to the U. S. Atomic Energy Comission, Washington, D. C.
20545, Attention:
Deputy Director for Reactor Projects, Directorate of Licensing - Regulation. 'Ihe proposed Technical Specifications wem made available for inspection at the above location on April 12, 1974.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 6th day of June 1974.
POR 'IfE A'IOMIC ENERGY 03fEISSION n
Qivvywr Dennis L. Zie
, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #2 Dimetorate of Licensing f
i 4
a
2 The npplication for tha aaendnent complies with the standards and requirenants of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as anended (the Act), and the Comission's rules and regulations. The Comission has made appropriate findings as requimd by the Act and the Comission's rules and mgulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license anendment, and has
{
i concluded that the issuance of the license anendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
A copy of Amendment No.1 to License No. R-97 with Technical Specifications and the Safety Evaluation dated Decenber 19, 1972, am available for inspection at the Cocmission's Public Document Room, 1717 H Stmet, N.
H., Washington, D.
C., or may be obtained upon request sent to the U. S. Atomic Energy Comission, Washington, D. C.
20545, Attention:
Deputy Director for Reacter Projects, Directorate of Licensing - Regulation. The proposed Technical Specifica,tions were made available for inspection at the above location on April 12,1974.
Dated at Dethesda, Maryland, this 6th day of June 1974 FOR TIE AIOMIC ENERGY CO.'?IISSION v1vw' g,w Ibnnis L. Zi::'n, Chief j
Operating Reactors Branch #2 Dimetorate of Licensing t
l I
j i
i i
ENCLOSURE 10
PART 140 o FINANCIAL PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS AND INDEMNITY-Io benefits thersfor are eithsr pay 313 cr r, f Address quired to be provided under any workmen's ;
- 9. Bankruptcy or insolvency of any person Item 2-1Joense number er numbers --
compensauon or occupauonal disease law: g indemnified or of the estate of any person Item 8-Idostion z indemnified shall not relieve the Comnis a alon of any of its obligations hereunder, Provsded, hotoever, That with respect to an a extraordinary nuclear occurrence occurring "L, at the facility, a claimant who is employed at the facility in connection with the con-An**# III Itses 4-The indausnity asmoment designat-ed above, of which this Attachtaent is a struction of a nuclear reactor with respect
- 1. When the Comunission determines that part. is effective as of E on the to which no operating licew has been the United States will probably be required 6 day of
.19.
q sion not be e o
in gegoas o g
N,/,0F nited States Muelear Regulatory L connection with the activity where the es*
nuclear occumnoe takes place ahaH how th right W couabwak wim th a
8E licensee and other persons indemnified in
' -(1) The claimant is employed esclusively the settlement and defense of any claisa m gw 2 in connection with the construcuan of a nu-(provided that no government indemnity 3
clear reactor, including all related equip.
By ment and installauons at the feeGity, and Dublic ty is these pur.
I)ated at Betheses, E the --- day of (2) No operating flamama has been issued l! poses) and shah han h right (a) to m-
,3p.,
by the NRC with respect to the nuclear m. g gulm W prior appeal of me heimaan actor, and a for the settaement or payment of any claim "il40.96 Appendis 5-Ferm of indemnity (3) The claimant is not employed in con. g or action mortad against me ha====* or agmmet wh & eduseMonal necuan with the possession, storage, use or, other persons indesanified for puhuc liabG-lastihsMons.
_ transfer of nuclear matertal at the facGity; w sty or demange to property of persons legaHF entered into by and betwe This indemanity agreement No. 5 -- - is liable for the nuclear incident which einha
~~
(d) Shall not apply to any claim for puni-w acuon W 1h or h hmi-ton 3 meninaftw NMed W as W 'teenm7 tive or esemplary damages, provided, with may be moutmd to indemnify under this a and the United States Nuclear Regulatory asmoment and 2) te appear through th respect to any claim for wrongful death under any 8 tate law which provides for Auerney General of me United States on [ hat-taa (heminaner miemd to as the
"'=aaa7 pumunat to submuon N damages only punitive in nature, this exclu, behalf of W licensee or ohn' pomon in a W W Am Ewsy Act W 1,M M p-slon does not apply to the extent that the desanified, take charge of such action and M (NF Mid # M W M h claimant has sustained actual damages, setQe or defend any such action. If the set-measured by the pecuniary injuries result.
Siement or defense of any such acuen or g g,g
-ins from such death but not to exceed the claim is underman by the 'a=missaan the
_ As used in this agreement.
r E mazianum amount otherwise recoverable licensee shah furnish aH raamaaahia assist.
b derauchlaw; ance tra effecting a settlement or asserting a f 1. Nuclear reactor." "b uct matenal."
un
?! Shan be effeettve only with respect to defense.
b " person."" source mate " "special nuclear those obugauons set forth in this agree-
~
ment; G material." and " precautionary evacuation" (f) Shall not apply to, or prejudlee the
- 2. Neither this agreement nor any snureeg shall have the meanings 5iven them in the therein nor claim thereunder may be as.
Atomic Energy Act of t9M. as amended, and signed or transferred without the approval he regualtions issued by the Commission.
to cla h ch no wt e to tion afforded under (1) the limit of liabGity of Cmamlasion.
provisions under subsecuan 179e. of the
- 3. (a) " Nuclear incident" means any occur-Atomic Energy Act of 1964, as amended, and Amtscia IV rence including an estraordinary nuclear oc.
,2) the terms of this agreement.
The parties agree that they will enter into currence or serles of occurrences at the locs.
(
appropriate amendments of this agreement uon or in tk course of transportauen caus-O With respect to a common occurrence.
[to extent that such amadmnts am M*
ing bodily injury, ataha*== disease, or death.
the obligations of the Commission under this
- Quimd pumant to W Atanic Ewry Act or loss of use of property, arising out of or l
Article shall apply only with respect to such N of 1964, as amended, or boenses, regulauons " resulting from the radiomative, totic, espb i
sive, or other hasardous properues of the public habihty and such damage to property M Mdm M 1 e 6 mdioacun material.
j of persons legal 4 hable for the nuclear Aaracts V g"'('bl Any :
including an estraordi incident (other than such property desenbed The licensee agrees to pay to the Commis.
g n the proviso to paragraph 2 of this Article) alon such fees as are established by the i
reness injury die
. as in the aCgregate exceed whichever of the Commission pursuant to regulauona or ease or death, or loss of or damage to prop-Z following is lower-(1) The sum of the amount
, orders of the Comunission, erty, or los of use W property, arts ng out g ofImancial protection estabbshed under all of or resulung from tM radioacun, wxic, AaTacts VI apphcable agreements; or (2) en amount explosive or other hasardous properties of E equaI to the sum oi$200.000.000 and tha The term of this agnemnt shau om.
I amount avsilable as secondary financial mence as of the date and time specified in
- 1. The radioacuve material discharged or protection. As used m this Article "spplicable item 4 of the attachment and shan tered.
dispersed from the location ont a period of agreements" means each agreement entered nate at the tanne of espirauon of that 11 days, weeks months or h4er and also arts-into by the Comminion pursuant to conse specified in item 3 of the Attachment, las out of such properties of other tasterial which is the last to explM; provided that, defined as "the radioactiW InitCla!"in any subsection 170c. or k. of the Act in which y escept as may otherwise be provided in ap-other agreement or agreementa entered into agreement the nuclear incident is defined as
?; placable regulations or orders of the Com.
by the h='=taa under subsection d0 e
- common occurrence.
adesion, the term of this agreement shan v or k of the Act and so discharged or dis-
! not terminata until au the radioacuve mate g persed freen "the locatton" as defined in any rnal has been removed froen the locauon and such other agreennent; or 1
bli
$ er this greeme'nt d
hell sp ly ny th transportation of W radioactin matertal f H. The radioactin anaterial in the course from the locauon has ended as defined in C 7,,,,g
- ,,3,,, 3,,ge paragraph 4(bl. Article I of this secuen. g of transportation and also arising out of
' 8 88' 8
,r this agressmeat such properties of other smaterial defined in 8'
- 8. The obbgatsons 'T the Commission un.
Termination of the terni of this agreement any other agreement entered into by the
~ der this and all other s 'eme tia and con.
shau not affect any obligatice of the lleens-haiaataa pursuant to subsection 170 e or E trasts to whash tas / r elselse is a parsy se or any obligation of the Co==imiaa k of the Act as "the radioneuve snatertal" Lahatt not under this agreestent with respect to any and which is in the course of transportation nuclear incident occurring during the toren shall be deoened to he a common occurrence.
r-of this agreement.
g with respect to any nuclear incident, in A common occurrence shall be deemed to W agensate exceed whichem of the F constitute a kingle nuclear incident.
.O.following is the lower: (a) $600.000,000 UprTen SnTes Noct 3Am RsGMatomT
=. " Extraordinary nuclear occurrence" g or (b) with respect to a cossman occur
- Conastestow 3
S rence, 4640.000,000 less the sunt of the e Indemnity Agreement No. h.-
means an event which the Comm1==taa has R asnounts of Anancial protection estab.
e determlaed to be an extraordinary nuclear S
Lisshed under all applienbie agressments. g anacammt ec occurrence as defined in the Ateenic Energy
- 4 Act of Is64.a amended.
Item 1-1Jconsee ep,,
140-35 September 29,1995
PART 140 o FINANCIAL PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS AND INDEMNITY-
~ 4. "In the course e,f transportation" means AarscLE II (d) Khall not apply to any claim for puni-
~
in the course of transport &uon w thin the tive or exemplary damages, provided, with g.
a nsM undu 4 United States, or la the course of transpor.
respect to any claim for wrongful death
! tation outalde the United States and any under any State law which provides for U
L d he ton a other nation, and moving from one person damages only punitive in nature. this exclu-
~ licensed by the Commlaston to another h* U" F*
D D
88 M 8" ston does not apply to the extent that the E person !!cerised by the Commlasion. includ-
- I I*
1c nt' claimant has sustained actual damages.
en ins handling or temporsry storage inciden.
F**D*CI IO *DF 'ItF**F D"FF DU' ins from such death but not to exceed the measured by the pecuniary injuries result-
" tal thereto, of the radioactive maternal to location or from the location provided therwtae recoverable
,"h hunt pMos omm o and th m t-
, on behalf of staett and other persons indem* E te) Shall be effective only with respect to (a) With respect to transportation of the *,; each agree to waive:e nLited, insofar as meir lateresta appear. ' those obligations set forth in this agre g ment' radioactive saatarial to the locauon. such - (a) Any IWe or defense as to the conduct trarwportation is not by predeterminaucn [ of the claimant or fault of persons indemni-(f) Shall not apply to, or prejudice the to be interrupted by the removal of the ma, fled, including. but not limited to prosecution or defense of. any claim or por-terial from the transporting conveyance for a tt) Negligence-tion of claim which is not within the protec-ar y purpose other than the continuation of (3) Contributory eegligenes, tion afforded under (1) the nietit of !! ability provlalons under subasetton 170e of the such transportation to the location or tem-(3) Assumpuen of the risk Atomic Energy Act of IM4. as amended, and porary storage lacidental themto; (4) Unforeseeable intervening causes-(b) the terms of this agreement.
(b) The transportation of the radioactive whether involving the conduct of a third material from the locauen shall be deemed Amtsets III person or an act of God.
=
e e a
as (c) *'In the course of transport 490n" as
.or sourmnental im'aunity, used tr' this agreement shau not include clear incident to property of any person le-transt rW,lon of th
- dioactive maternal to (c) Any issue or defense based on any sally liable for the nuclear incident, the the location if tla % rlal is also "in the s'atute of hmitations if suit is lastituted Commienton agrees to pay to such person course of transporta n" from any other within 3 years from the date on which the those sum.s which such person would have been richssted to pay if such property had
" location" as defined an any other agree-claimant first knew. or teenably could have belor. sed to anohr; provided, that the oblt-ment entered into by the Commission pur. A known of his injury ora.4le and the cause E gra;ph 3 does not apply with respect to: gar on of the C suant to subsection 170 c or b of the Act.
O thereof.
E The waiver of any such issue or defense (a) Property which is located at the loca-
- 5. " Person indemnified" means the licens- [ isha!! be effective regardless of whether such g 'lon and used in connection with the licens-S
- te and any other person who may be liable I ssue or defense may otherwise be deemed l Wa coassulon, use or transfer of the redle-
,"; for public habthty.
junedictional or reletmg to an element la the
- U" **I*""I; t
cause of action The waivere shall be (b) Property damage due to 6ne neglect of c_
judicially enforceable in accordance with the person indemnified to use all reasonable means to save and preserve the property their terms by the claimant against the person after knowledge of a nuclear incident; e ',Pubhc limbihty" means are legel hebihty indemnified.
ensms out of or resultmg from a nuclear (c) !! the nuclear incident occurs in the course of transportation of the radioactive mcident or precautionary evacuation
- 3. The waivere set forth in paragraph 3 of Insterial, the transporting vehicle and con-I.ncludmg all reasonable additional costs this article:
talnars used in such transportauon; meurred by a State. or a pohtical subdivision (a) shan not preclude a defense based (d)The radioactive material.
ei a State. m the course of respondmg to a upon a fanure to take reasonable steps to nuclest meident or precautionary mtugate damages; f3.(Reserved) evecuetion), except (1) claims under State or all n,ot app (b
,g p g.
a hle e 4(a) The obugauons of the C==*=am
, Federal Worlunen's Compensation Act of is intenuonauy sustained by the clasmant or 1 under this agmment shall apply only with s employees of persons indemnified who are
- employed (a) et the location or. if the nuclear a which resulta from a nuclear incident inten. ; respect to such public liabuity and such E
meident occurs in the course of
' tionally and wrongfully caused by the claim a damage to property of persons legally liable N
ant.
a for the nuclear inciJent (other than such f transpcrtation c,f the radioactive materal or E (c)Shall not apply toinjury to a claimant $ property described in the pmiso to pars-i the transporting vehicle, and (b)in nection with the actfylty where the extraor. Jl graph 3 ef this Article) as in the aggregate who is employed at the site of and in con-
" connection with the hcensee's possession, aosed WOO.
use, or tronaler of the radioactive matenah dinary nuclear www....
takes place !!
(2) claims arisms out of an act of war; and (3) benefits therefor are either payable or r,.
(b) With respect to e common occurrence.
claims for loes of. ot damage to, or loss of use outred to be provided under any workmen's the obligations of the Commission under this of(s) property which is located at the
_ compensation or occuparsonal eticease law-agreement shall apply only with respect to location and used in coanection with such pubhc !! ability and such damage to licerisee s possession. use, or transfer of the dd. hm Tht wlm respoet to an p
ofp m p p p rsdioactive matonal. and (b)if the nuclear estraordinary nuclear===-. _ _ _ occurring nuc ear incident (other than such property mcident ot. curs in the couree of at the faculty, a c144mant who is eenployed described in the provico to paragraph 3 of transportattore of the radioactive material, the at the faculty in aaaaartion with the een $ this Article)asin the agrepete esosed struction of a nuclear reactor with respect Ewhicheverof thefollowingtolower:(1)'!he transportq ver cle, containere used in such to which no opersung naan=* has been lasued by the Nuclear Regulatory e===6m si.m of the amounts og gnciag rotection transport.w and the radioactive matanal.
p ston shall nc. Se considered as employed in [E or (2) en amount equ estabhshed under a.) apphcable agreemente:
- 1. "The location" means the location de-connection with the activity where the es.
scribed in Item 3 of the Attachment hereto. g traordinary nuclear mv.....a takes place 8300.000.000 a.sd the amount available sa g.The radioactive amaterial" aneans g if:
escondary nnancial tecnon. As used in a
E sou'rce. special nuclear, and byproduct mate. m (1) The claimant is employed esclusively this Article"apphce ayooments" means O rtal which (1) is used or to be used in. or is g in connection with the construction of a nu-each agreement entered into by the a trradiated or to be irradiated by, the nuclear a clear reactor. Including all related egulp-Comrnission pursuant to subsection 170 c. or
- rtactor of reactcra subject to the lieense or ment and instansuons at the facility, and
- k. of the Act in which agreement the nucleer 2 licenses designated in the Attachment (3) W onerstans ucense has been tesued incident is defined as e *rmmmon which la produced as the by the 7tRC with respect to the nuclear re' Lhereto, or (3) occurrence."
result of operation of said reactor (s).
f'ge latmant is not employed in con-N t. m estagnucas of the comratasson un.
c&
- 9.,UDII'd 018t88 When used in a ge&
nection whrs the possession, storage. use, or der this agressment shall apply only with 7 graphical sense includes Puerto Rico and all transfer of nuclear maternal at t w facility; respect to nuclear tacidents occurring durtng
% territories and possessions of the United a the teres of this agreement.
a
- e. m estagstions of the commnaston un.
h States.
L g der taus and au other agreements and coa.
3 erects to wmseh the commaeston is a parts ygg
%0-36 U**" **'
~
140.95 140.10' PART 140 o FINANCIAL PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS AND INDEMNITY-with respect to any nuclear incident. in nit trrmintte unul all the radioactive mate-
" Commission") pursuant to subsection lioc the aggresite esosed thichever cf the l rtal has been remsved from th3 locattin and l cf th? Atcmic Energy Act of 1954, as amend-3 following la the lower: (a) 8600.000.000 transportauon of the radioact!ve material g ed thereinafter referred to as "the Act"L i
g or tb) with respect to a counmon occur, from the location has ended as defined in g and Section 201 of the Energy Reoganiza.
1 E tence. 4500.000.000 less the sum of the subparagraph 4(bh Article 1. Termination of 6 tion Act of 1974, as amended.
j<
$ amounts of Saancial protocuon estab.
- the term of this agreement shall not affect g L1,1ahed under all appEemble agresehents.
any obilgation of the lloensee or any oblica.
Astsetz !
I g tion of the Commimion under this agm*
As used in this agreement:
J L If the licensee is tw. ane from public 11 ment with respect to any nuclear incident j
X ability because it is a state agency, the Com-occurring during the term of this agree-f 1. "By product material." " person."" source
"'U' g mission shall make paymenta under the g material""special nuclear material."
g agreement in the same manner and to the Uerfm Sfa Wcuaa Ramtomy
, " precautionary evacuation." and g ease tutent as the Commission would be re-
- satraordinary nuclear occurrence" shall Indemnity Agreement No. E--
b have the meaning givan them in the Atomic m tsstoe a outrod to do !! the 11censee were not such a l s. tate agency.
M Enerfy Act of 1964. se amended, and the
,,,mgulahone ised h h Commasion.
{ 8. The obligations of the Cammimion ATTacmsprr 9
I*
["
Iteen 1-1Joensee
~ 2. Except where otherwise specifically pro-1 knot be affected by any failure on the part of Address v6ded. " amount of financial pmtecuon the lleonese to fulful als aw'f=Ha== under Item 3-14 cense number or numbers means the amount specified in Item 2a and f this agreement. Bankruptcy or lasolvency of 3 Item 3-1mesuon b, of the Attachment annexed hereto as the Iteensee or any other person ladent g modified by paragraph 6. Article !!. with re-
}
m fled or of the estate of the 8'aaaaa* or any E apect to comsnon occurunces.
other person indemnified shall not rolleve m
- 3. (a) " Nuclear incident" means any occur.
the Comrnieston of any of les obligauons g rence includmg an extraordmary nuclear cc j
Item 4-The indemnity agreement dentsnag.
currence, or series of occurrences. the lo-i hereunder.
ed above, of which this Attachment is a cauon or in the course of transportation t
Amtscts Iy part. is effecuve as of
- m. on the causing bodily injury, sickness disease. or 4
day of
.19.
death. or loss of or damage to property, or
- 1. When the Commission deterames that For the United States Nuclear Regulatory loss of use of property, arising out of or re-the United States will probably be esquimd to Cammianian sulting from the radioactive, toxic. explo-make indesmity paymente under the By sive, or other hasardous properties of the pro isions of this agreement, the Commission Forthe rad one 1n ma rial a a have the right to collaborate with the By dhy nh occumt M e M e bcensee and other persons indemnified in the (Name of Iloonsu) settlement and defense of any claim incidng Dated at Bethesda, Md.. the - day of I currences causing bodily injury. sickness.
disease or death, or loss of or damage to such legal costs of the hcensee as are I'~'
f prope:ty, or loss of use of property, arisms approved by the Commission and shall have 8
Appendia NIndemnity leen. % out of or resulting from the radioactive.
}
the nght (a) to require the pnor approval of tonic, explosive, or other hazardous proper.
, the Comnussion for the settlement or 8A*a8-ties of:
p payment of any claim or action asserted ta) Geoarephical boundaries ofindemnify
- 1. The radioscuve material discharged or g against the beensee or other person locations. t D in every indemnity agreement dispersed from the location over a period of e indemidfied for pubhc habihty or dammae to between the Commission and a lloonsee days, weeks. months or longer and also arts-
$ property of persons legauy hable fc Ov.
which affords Indemnity protecuta for the ing out of such properties of other material
- nuclear incident wluch cleam f* scoor the preoperational storage of fuel at the sue of defined as "the radioactive maternar m any hcensee or the Commission me* be required a nuclear power reactor under construction.
Other agreement or agreements entered into i
to indomrufy under tius agreem' nt, and (b) to the geographical boundarles of the indemni by the Commission under subsection 170c or i
e ty locauon will include the enure construc-k of the Act and so discharged or dispersed Ppear through the Attokney General of the tion area of the nuclear power reactor, as from "the location" as defined in any such nited States on behelt of the hcensee or del 4.rinined by the t'ammissina Such area other agreement, or j
cther person mdemnified. take charge of such wn! not necessarily be onestensive with the
- 11. The radioactive materlat in the course action or defend any such action. If the indemnity locauen which wul be estabHahed of transportauon and also arising out of settlement or def"se of any suh action or
" at the time an operaung namaan is issued for such properues of other matertal defmed in e
claim is undertak en by the Commission. the g such addiuonal nuclear power reactors.
any other agreement entered into by the hcensee shall furnish all reasonable g (3) In every indemnity agreement between Commission pursuant to subsecuon 170e or assistance in effecting a settlement or a the Cor==t-taa and a lleensee which af, k of the Act as "the radio 6ctive material asserting a defense.
g fords truammatty protocuen for an amanHay and which is in the course of transportauon nuclear power reactor, the geographloal shall be deemed to be a common occurrence.
" 3. Nelther this agreement nor any interest boundarles of the indemnity laaanaa shall A common occurrence sha!! be deemed to therein nor claim thereunder may be as.
include the entire construetten area of anP
.consutute a sinsk nuclear incident.
addl
- "I ""*I**# 8o'n," built as part of
- 4. *In the course of transportation" means
)
- '*f 88 88**
i signed or transferred without the approval mined by the Commisi the same power etauen by the same lleens-in the oeures of treasportetton wittun the i
of the Cammt=%.
Aancu V se. Such area will not ama==utly be esea-UaHed Stems, or in he ocurse of i
tensive with the indsennity locauen which 2 ronoporte6en c',ateide the Unsted States and t
[ appropriate amendments of this agreement The parues agree that they will enter ;nto will be e.huaha's at the time en operating g any other metica and moving from one l
g license la assued for such addluonal nuclear
- persoslicensed by the Commission to to the extent that such amendments are re-power reactors.
E another perses beensed by the Commission.
i gm quired pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act (3) This section is effecuve May 1,1973, as en incledtag handhas er temporary storage g of 1964. as amended, or licenses, regulations to construction permits issued prior to
- tac 6st==nal hereto, of the radioactave matenal or orders of the Commisalon.
March 3.19?3, and, as to construcuan per-to Ine k anaa er from the location provided mits imuod on or after March 3.1973, the Anncu v1 promions of tha meuen win pir no m= #*
i
,,g,,,8,y, rap',et,ygan,s*[,tatj;n of gy,
'"* se* W a A L*labfa'hcd $ " " $ hu,h,,,, ",
I awn
~
5
- s s
Commission pursuant to regulauons or transportauon is not by predetermination j
_ orders of the Cammission.
to be interrupted by the removal of the me-
)
8 IWe'f Appendix Mwm ofladmy Anneu VII agreenient with licensen preseennes I ha[t ntYn
]
pu n
P *8**I** I*r #8' la platen 6em pree. s l
The term of this agreement shat! com-
- seeing and feel fabrice 6en plants and
- such transportation to the location or tem.
l e mence as of the date and time specified in a porary storage incidentaJ thereto:
j
{ ltem 4 of the Attachment and shat! terms.
- fornishing ineenrance pel6cies as proof I thi The transportation of the radionethe
- nate at the ume of emptration of that 11 I of financ6al proteden.
meternal from the locauon shall be deemed E tense spectfled in item 3 of the Attachment, to *md when the radiometne maternal is re-i j
- whleh is the last to expire; provided that.
This Indemnity Adreement No.
is movs1 from the transporting conveyance 9
R except as may otherwise be provided in ap.
'"t'r'd 8"88 br *ad h*a for any purpo e other than tne contmu.
plicable regulations or orders of the Com, (hereinafter referred to as the "16eensee")
l maaston. the term of this agreement shall 1
stion of transportation or tempon /t) stor.
and the United States Nuclear Itegulatory I
age incidental thereto.
Commission theretnafter referred to as the f
140 37 April 30,1992 i
c p
w
-mw-n ym=-
yew-
m-ew--
-p-,--
p,-
~y
,n,-
---,m
General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions Enforcement Policy Manuscript Completed: June 1995 Date Published: July 1995 l
Omce of Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 f
~%,,
f I
I M
J
l l
l Abstract This document includes the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's or Commission's) revised General Statement of Policy and i
l Procedure for Enforcement Actions (Enforcement Policy) as it was l
published in the federal Register on June 30, 1995 (60 FR 34381).
l This document also includes the notice announcing the removal of the l
Enforcement Policy from the Code of Federal Regulations (60 FR 34380; June 30, 1995). The Enforcement Policy is a general i
statement of policy explaining the NRC's policies and procedures in initiating enforcement actions, and of the presiding officers and the Commission in reviewing these actions. This policy statement is applicable to enforcement in matters involving the radiological health and safety of the public, including employees' health and safety, the common defense and security, and the environment. This statement of general policy and procedure is published as NUREG-1600 I
to provide widespread dissemination of the Commission's Enforcement Policy. However, this is a policy statement and rot a regulation.
l The Commission may deviate from this statement of policy and procedure as appropriate under the circumstances of a particular case.
Questions concerning the Enforcement Policy should be directed to the NRC's Office of Enforcement at 301-415-2741.
i i
e i
i lii NUREG 1600 4
Contents iii Abstract................................
Notice Announcing Removal of the Enforcement Policy From the Code of Federal Regulations..................... 2 Statements of Consideration for Revised Enforcement Policy 3
5 Revised Enforcement Policy Table of Contents............................ 5 Preface................................. 5 5
I.
Introduction and Purpose 5
II. Statutory Authority A.
Statutory Authority....................... 5 6
B.
Procedural Framework......................
6 III. Responsibilities IV. Severity of Violations....................... 7 A. Aggregation of Violations.................... 7 B.
Repetitive Violations...................... 7 7
C.
Willful Violations D.
Violations of Reporting Requirements 8
Y.
Predecisional Enforcement Conferences 8
VI. Enforcement Actions........................ 9 A.
Notice of Violation....................... 9 B.
C i v i l Pen al ty.......................... 9 1.
Base Civil Penalty
....................9 2.
Civil Penalty Assessment 9
a.
Initial Escalated Action 12 b.
Credit for Actions Related to Identification 12 c.
Credit for Prompt and Comprehensive Corrective Action..................
13 d.
Exercise of Discretion 14 C.
Orders 14 l
D.
Related Administrative Actions 14 VII. Exercise of Discretion.....................
15 A.
Escalation of Enforcement Sanctions..............
15 1.
Civil Penal ties......................
15 2.
Orders..........................
15 3.
Daily Civil Penalties...................
15 B.
Mitigation of Enforcement Sanctions..............
15 1.
Licensee-Identified Severity Level IV Violations 15 2.
Violations Identified During Extended Shutdowns or Work Stoppages....................
15 3.
Violations involving Old Design Issues 16 4.
Violations Identified Due to Previous Escalated Enforcement Action 16 5.
Violations Involving Discrimination............
16 6.
Violations Involving Special Circumstances 16 C.
Exercise of Discretion for an Operating Facility 16 VIII. Enforcement Actions Involving Individuals...........
17 IX.
Inaccurate and Incomplete Information..............
19 X.
Enforcement Action Against Non-Licensees.............
19 XI. Referrals to the Department of Justice 20 XII. Public Disclosure of Enforcement Actions............
20 XIII. Reopening Closed Enforcement Actions 20 NUREG.1600 v
Supplements l
Supplement 1 - Reactor Operations....................
20 Supplement 11 - Part 50 Facility Construction..............
20 Supplement 111 - Safeguards.......................
21 Supplement IV - Health Physics (10 CFR Part 20).............
22 Supplement V - Transportation......................
22 Supplement VI - Fuel Cycle and Materials Operation
. 23
)
Supplement Vil - Miscellaneous Matters
. 24 Supplement Vill - Emergency Preparedness
. 25 t
Mgure Civil Penalty Assessment Flowchart...................
11 Tables lA Base Civil Penalties........................
14 IB Base Civil Penalties
........................14 l
l l
l l
1 l
i l
1 l
NUREG-M00 vi A
i b
~
=
Friday i
June 30,1995 l
i G
Part 111 Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10 CFR Part 2 Enforcement Actions Policy and Procedure: Final Rule and Notice l
34380 FedIr:1 RegistIr / Vol. 60, No.126 / Friday, Juns 30, 1995 / Rults and Regulations NUCLEAR REOULATCRY NRC Enforcem:nt Program," was eff1ct."(Brock v. Cathsdral Bluffs Shala COSARNSSON published in April 1993. The team Oil Co.,796 F.2d 533,539 (D.C. Cit.
report, in Rect"nmendation.l. G-3, 1986) citing 44 U.S.C.1510 (1982)).
I 10 CFR Part 2 recommended that the Enforcement Therefore, because the Enforcement l
Policy be removed from the Code of Policy is not a regulation, the l
Policy and Procedure for Enforcement Federal Regulations (CFR) because the Commission is removing it from the Act6ons; Removal Enforcement Policy is not a regulation.
Code of Federal Regulations. Revisions I
l The NRC Enforcement Policy has of the Enforcement Policy will continue AcaNcy: Nuclear Regulatory been codified at 10 CFR Part 2, to be published in the Federal Register.
Commission.
Appendix C to provide widespread To ensure widespread dissemination.
l ACTION: Policy statement.
diesemination c,f the Commission's the Enforcement Policy will be provided Enforcement Policy. However, after the to licensees, made available on an suensARY:The Nuclear Regulatory Commission first published the electronic bulletin board, and published Commission (NRC)is removing its Enforcement Policy on October 7.1980 as NUREG-1600 " General Statement of General Statement of Policy and (45 FR 66754), the Commission has Policy and Procedure for NRC Procedure for Enforcement Actions maintained that the NRC Enforcement.
Enforcement Actions."
i (Enforcement Policy) from the Code of Policy is a policy statement and not a Federal Regulations because the regulation. The Commission's reason for Paperwork Reduction Act Statement l
Enforcement Policy is not a regulation.
having a policy statement rather than a This policy statement contains no DATas:This action is effective on June rule was explained in the Statement of information collection requirements i
30,1995.
Considerations that accompanied the and, thwefore,is not subject to the Submit comments on or before August publication of the 1982 Enforcement Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 14,1995. Comments received after this Policy,The Commission stated then:
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
i date will be considered if it is practical An underlyi basis of this policy that is to do so but the Commission is able to reflected throuhout it is that the List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 2 assure consideration only for comments determination of h appropriate sanction Administrative practice and received on or before this date.
tres the exercise of discretloc such that M
procedure, Ant' trust, Byproduct ADDREests: Send written comments to:
y
'8y I'j,d fgs material, Classified information, 3
i,,
The Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
discretion ymvided, the enforcernent policy Environmental protection, Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commisalon, la being adopted as e statement of general materials Nuclear power plants and l
Washington, DC 20555. A*T1'N:
policy rather than as a regulation.
reactors, Penalties, Sex discrimination, Docketing and Service Branch. Hand notwithstanding that b staternent has ban Source material, Special nuclear deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville prornulgated with notice and cmannent material. Weste treatment and disposal.
Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:45 Procedura. A genere! statement of policy rmit the Commission maximum PART 2 -RULES OF PRACTICE FOR am and 4:15 pm, Federal workdays.
will f11[( revis he p Copies of comtrents received may be DOldESTIC LICENSING PROCEEDINGS t
t, examined at the NRC Public Document wpecially the supplement, will be revised as AND ISSUANCN MM Room,2120 L Street, NW,(Lower necessary to reflect changes in policy and Level), Washington, DC.
direction of the Commission (47 FR 9989:
1.The authority citation for rt 2
[
Fon FunTNER seFonesATION CONTACT:
March 9,1992).
continuet, to road,in part, as lo ows:
l James Lieberman, Director Officamf For the same reasons,the Commission AuIberky: Secs.161,181,68 Stat. 948, Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory continues to hold the view that the 953, as amended (42 U.S.C 2201,2231); sec. 191, as amended Pub. L 87-615,76 Stat. 400 Commission, Washington,DC 205:5 Enforcement Policy is a policy (42 U.S.C 2241): we. 201, s8 Stat.1242, as l
(301)415-2741.
statement. However, at least one court.
amended (42 U.S.C 54411* *
- I suPPLEGAENTARY INFoAlsATION:On May in considering whethw an enforcement 13,1994, the NRC's Executive Director policy was a policy statement or a Appendix C to Port 2(flemoved/
for Operations established a review regulation, noted that if the policy were
- 2. Appendix C to Part 2 is removed.
tasm to assess the NRC enforcement published in the CFR,it would be program. The review team report, properly treated as a regulation because Deted et Rockville. MD this 23rd day of NUREG-1525,8 " Assessment of the the CFRis reserved for documents Im,19es.
"having general applicability and legal
- For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
8 Copies cl NUREC-1525 may be purchased from John C Hoyle, the Superintendent of Documents. U.S. Government Royal mand. Spriegnend.Yks, ale 221M. A espy in Secretaryof the Conurussion' Printing Office. P.O. Boa 270a2, Weenissten. DC also ess11eblo ler inspect 6on arid empo ar a Iso IFR Doc. 95-15951 Filed 6-29-95: 8:45 aml 2oo1>7052. Copas are also evellable from the in the NItC Public Docunnat #6ma. hJo 1. Sweet.
Netionel Technical Information Service. 52as Part Nw [ lower levell Washlagon, DC 20684-e001.
maAsse goesrea u w I
)
1, i
j NUREG-1600 2
4
NUCLEAR REEULATCRY As refheted in the severity levels, salty (2) To encouragi prompt significance includes actual setzty idsntification and prompt, C2MMISS80N consequtnce, potential saf;ty consequence' comprehensiva correction of violations.
and regulatory significance. The un of Revision of the NRC Enforcement graduated sanctions from Notices of IV. Severity of Violations Policy Violation to orders further reflects the AQaNCv: Nuclear Regulatory varying seriousness of noncompliances.
Severity Level V violations have been e The enforcement conference is en eliminated.The examples at that level Commission.
imPortant step in achieving a mutual have been withdrawn from the ACTION: Policy statement-understanding of facts and issues before supplements. Formal enforcement for suten4ARY:As a result of an assessment h
fe e uk i
actions will now only be taken,ty Level of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's effort for both the NRC and licensees, they violations categorized at Severi I to IV to better focus the inspection and (NRC) enforcement program,the NRC generally contribute to better decision.
has reviud its General Statement of making.
enforcement process on safety. To the Policy and Procedure for Enforcement
+ Enforcement activ.s deliver regulatory extent that minor violations am Actions (Enforument Policy or Policy). messages properly focused on safety.These described in an inspection report, they MnPhasise the need for liconeses to will be labeled as Non-Cited violations Mylh*[d Cy,
,nd (NCVs).When a licensee does not take By a separate action published today in i
s di m the the Federal Register, the Commission is s
corrective action or repeatedly or removing the Enforcement Policy from oCportunttles to identify and prevent willfully commits a minor violation the Code of Federal Regulations.
, lotions.
Dates:This action is effective on June
. The use of discretion and judgment such that a formal response would be 30,1995, while comments are being throughout the deliberative process needed,the violation should be recognimos that enforcement of NRC categorized at least at a Severity lAvel received. Submit comments on or befo,, requirements does not lend itself to gy, August 14,1995. Additionally, the mchannetic tutment.
The NRC staff willbe reviewing the Commission intends to provide an However, the Review Team found that severity level exam les in the opportunity for public comments after this revised Enforcement Policy has the existing enforcement program at supplements over t e next 6 months.
been in effect for about 18 months, times provided mixed regulatory The purpose of this review is to ensure messages to licensees. and room for the examples are appropriately focused AcoRassss: Send written comments to:
im ement exiswd in the un safety significance, including The Secretary of the Commission,U.S.
En ment Policy.The review Wde dM W Nuclear B9gulatory Commission, suggested that th program s focus consequence, potential ufety 1
Wuhington, DC 20555. A'ITN:
should be clarili to.
Docketing and Service Branch. Hand deliver comments to:11555 Rockville
+ Emphasise the importance ofidentifying significance.
Pike, Rockville, Marylund, between 7:45 Problems before events occur, and of taking am and 4:15 pm, Federal workdays.
Prompt, comprehensive corrective action V.Fredecisional Enforcement when problems are identified:
Conferences cop es of comments received may be
. Direct acy attention at licensees with l
i nt a ti ns in a relatively Enforcement conferences are being "Mi#'*"d:aYn renamed ' predecisional enforcement m 2120 St N
e perio level), Washington, DC.
- Focus on current priormance of conferences." These conferences should FOR FuRTHER INFORGAATION C30ffACT:
licensees, b Md b b ohi@
James Lieberman. Director, Office of in addition, the review team found information to assist NRC in making Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory that the process for assessing civil enforcement decisions when the agency Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
penalties could be simplified to improve reasonably expects that escalated (301) 415-2741.
the predictability of decision-making enforcement actions will result. They suppLansawrART seFORhtAttoss:On May and obtain better consistency beten should also normally be held if 13,1994. the NRC's Executive Director regions.
requested by a licensee. In addition they for Operations established a review As a result ofits review,the review should normally be held before issuing team to assess the NRC enforcement team made several recommendations to an order or a civil penalty to en program, in its report (NUREG-1525,i revise the NRC Enforcement Policy to unlicensed individual.
" Assessment of the NRC Enforcement produce an enforcement program with in light a,the changes to the,,
Program." April 5,1995), the review clearer regulatory focus and more Enforcement Policy, the Commission team concluded that the existing NRC predictability.The Commission is has decided to continue a trial program enforcement program, as implemented, tasuing this policy statement after of conducting approximately 25 percent is appropriately directed toward considering those recommendations and of eligible conferences open to public supporting the agency's overall safety the bases for them in NUREG-1525.
observation pending further evaluation.
mission. This conclusion is reflected in The more significant changes to the (See 57 FR 30762; July 10,1992, and 59 several aspects of the program:
current Enforcement Policy are FR 36796; July 19,1994). The intent of described below.*
open conferences is not to maximize
. The Policy recognians that violations have difloring degrees of esfoty significence.
- 1. latrodwei== and Purpose public attendance,but is rather for This section has been modified to determining whether providing the emP asize that the purpose and public with an opportunity to observe MM d,Y, "M'
"",wm"s' ce'"er h
ennring omes, been seep ssor binsten. Dc objectives of the enforcement program the regulatory process is compatible zoeon-e as copies ese enen evenebne srom the are focused on using enforcement with the NRC's ability to exercies its NotkaelTechnua:Informouon seMce.s28s Pen actions; regulatory and safety responsibilities.
NU ehD 4
'k^se',7ss
(1) As a dowrrm.to emphasize the The provisions of the trial program have m ihe NRC Pubisc Document seem. 2120 L suost.
Importar.ce of compliance with been incorporated into the Enforcement ww. u.awer LeveII. washington, DC sosss e001.
requirements; and Policy.
3 NUREG-M00
f 34382 Federal Register / Vcl. 60, No.126 / Friday, June 30. 1995 / N:tices l
l VI. Enforcement Actions warrant a more financially meaningful each cf these decisional points may Penalty. A $500 civil penalty for a have several amanciated considerations A. Notice of Violation Severity invol m violation (at 50% of for any given case. However, the 1
This section was modified to clarify the Severity 1Avel I base amount) does outcome of a (nee, absent the exefcies of that the NRC may waive all or portions not reflect the seriousness of this type discretion. is limited to three results: no 1
of a licensee's written response to a of violation for this category ofliconees. civil penalty, a base civil penalty, or a i
Notice of Violation to the extent Itis noted'that withthe revised base civilpenalty esmlated by 100%.
j relevant information has already been assessment approach, these licensees D. flelated Administrative Actions provided to the NRC in writing or will not normally receive a civil penalty documented in an NRC inspection if prompt and comprehensive corrective h mfomace to related report and is on the applicable docket action is taken for isolated non-willful administrative inachanisms have been in the NRC Public Document Room.
Severity IAvelM violations.
mplaced with mleted administrative actions to clarify the documents as 4
j
- 8. CivilPenalty 2.CivilPenalty Assessment acdons.
j
- 1. Base CivilPenalty This section has been renamed to VII.Esercise ofINameden tha process for j
Tables 1A and 1B have been revised.
he ability to exercise discretion is in Table 1B the percentage for Severity Pena
_ substan y
with the revised policy.
h mvised process is involIV violations has been deleted g
la provida!to deviate fran e
since such violations will not be subject
. Continue to emphasise compliance the nennel approach to either incmase to civil penalties. If a violation that in a m h kdum or decrease sanctions where necessary 4
to ensure that the sanction reDects the j
would otherwise be categorised at a yjoggjen,.
signitence of the cir===taa== and Severity I4 vel IV violation merits a civil ficanca,the e Encourage prombt identification nsive correction conveys the opp regulatory Penalty because ofits si
?
violation would normal y be categorimod and prompt, com re of violations and their root causes; message.his on has been modi 8ed j
et a Severity levelIII.
. Apply the recognition of good past to Provide examples where it is i
Table 1A has been simplified to performance to give credit to a licensee appropriate to consider civil penshies j
combine categories of licensees with the committing a non-willful St. m or escalate civil penalties same base penalty amounts.The bene violation who has had no previous notwithstanding the normal==-'
Penalty amounts have generally significant violations during the past 2 Erecess in Soccan VI of the mmained unchanged.h mvised rs or 2 inspections (whicheveris r.nforcement Policy. One significant j
policy notes that the base penalties may example to note involves the loss of a j
be adjusted on a case-by-case basis to
, pi,'ce greater attention on situations source.his example is being edded to reflect the ability to pay and the gravity of greater concem (i.e., where a licensee emphaal== the importanos ot licensees of the violation.10 CFR Part 35 has had more than one significant being aware of the location of their licensees (doctors. nuclear pharmacies, violation in a 2 year or two-inspection sources and to recognise that there 1
and other medical related licensees) are period, where corrective action is less should not be an economic advantage j
combined into an overall medical than prompt and comprehensive, or for inappropriate disposal or transfer.
j category, based on the similarity of where egregious cirr.umstances, such as As to mitigation of sanctions for hasards. Because transportation where it is clear that repetitiveness or violations involving special i
i violations for alllicensees are primarily willfulness, are involved);
circumstances. mitigation can be j
concemed with the potential for e StreamlinetheNPCdecisional considered if the licenses has personnel exposure to radiation, the process in a mannar that will preserve demonstreted overall sustained y
violations in this arms will be treated the judgment and discretion.but will Performance which has been same as those in the health physics ama. provide a clest normative standard and particularly good.The levels of ap al The $100.000 base civil penalty produce relatively predictable results for exercising discretion are g
amount for safeguards violations, which for routine cases;and in this section. Finally. Table 2.
applies *o only two categories of e Provide clear guidance on applying " Examples ~of Progressions of Escalated j
j licensees, fuel fabricators and fewer adjustment factors in various Enfortement Actions for Similar t
independent fuel and monitored types of caans,in order to increase Violations in the Same Activity Ares j
retrievable storaae installations, has consistency and predictability.
Under the Same 1.icense." has been been deleted.Tne penalty amount for Once a violation has been categorised withdrawn from the Enforcement safeguards should be the same as for at a Severity I4velIII or above.the Policy.De guidance in that table is not other violations at these facilities. NRC assessment process considers four besic needed because the policy is clear that has not had significant safeguards decisional ints:
each case should be judged on its own violations at these facilities. If the (1) the licensee has had a merits, especially those repetitive penalty that would normally be assessed previous secalated enforcement action violation cases to which the table for operational violations is not during the past 2 years or past 2 applied.
adequate to address the circumstances ins ions,whichever is longer; VIII. Enfortement Actions Involving of the violation, then discretion would
( Whether the licensee should be ladividuale be used to determine the appropriate given credit for actions related to penalty amount.
identification:
The Enforcement Policy has been The base civil penalty for "other" (3) Whether the licensee's corrective clarified to provide that some action is materials licensees, currently set at actions may reasonably be considered normally to be taken against a licensee 31000. has been increased to $5000. The prompt and comprehensive; and for violations caused by significant acts primary concerns for these licensed (4) Whether. in view of all the of wrongdoing by its employees.
activities are individual radiation circumstances, the case in question conasctors. or contractors employoos.
exposure and loss of control of material warrants the exercise of discretion. As The Policy has also been modified to to the environment. both of which described in the Enforcement Policy, state that the nine lectors in Section VID NUREG-1600 d
.-..-.--,..,m
,--.m m.
,.,,_,-_m-.c
.p,.m.
FCderal Register / Vel. 60, No.126 / Friday, Juno 30, 1995 / Notices 34383 should be used to amist in the decision
- 3. Violeuans involving Old Design leeues of compliance which the NRC expects.8 1
on whether enforcement action should
- 4. Violettone ident18ed Due to Previous Each enforcement action is dependent Bouland Enhecement Acuan on the circumstances of the cue and be taken Yainst an unlicensed individua as well as the licensee.&
- s. Vionsuces Involving Discriminetton requires the exercise of discretion after
)
6.
volving SW Policy currently uses these factors to consideration of these policies and determine whether to take enforcement c Emercin of Discredon for an Operating Procedures. In no case, however, will action against an unlicensed person Facility limasses who cannot achieve and j
rather than the licensee. 'Ihese changes VHl. Enforcement Actions involving maintain adequate levels of protection are consistent with the intent of the Individuele be permitted to conduct licensed Conuniasion in prom the rule on IX. Innocurses and Incomplete Information activities.
l deliberatemisconduct 56
- 40664, X. Raforcement Action Against Non.
II. Statutory Authority and Procedural 40666, August 15,1991). IAss XI.Refene to the "-
t ofJustice Framework bEaa X1L Public DisclosureWBabem===e B
of A. SioistoryAuthorffy Re is not a sanction and is now XHI. Roopentes Closed Enforcement Actione b NRC's enforcement jurisdiction is to as an adal nistrative action suppnemeses drawn from the Atomic Energy Act of i
le consistent with Section VI.D of the Policy.
y,,g,
1954, as===adad, and the Energy Reorgeriimmian Act (ERA) of1974, as N cmn= lesion expects that the h following statement ofgeneral
==madad'181 of the Atomic Energy Act changes to the Enforcement Policy-policy and procedure explains the Section abould result in an increase in the enforcement cy and procedures of authorises the NRC to conduct protection of the public haalth and the U.S. N Regulatory inspections and investigations and to salety by better emphasizing the Commission (NRC or Commission) and fesue orders as may be necoseary or prevention, detection, and correction of the NRC staN(staN)in initiating desirable to promote the common violations before events occur with enforconnent actions, and of the defenes and security or to protect health impact on the public. In about 2 years presiding ofRoers and the mn=taalari or to minimise danger to life or e
the Commission intends to review the in myiewing these actions.This pro
.Se: tion 186 authorians the Enforcement Policy. In that regard,it is statement is applicable to enforcement to revoke licenses under certain expected that in about is months an in matters involving the radiological circumetences (e.g., for material falso opportunity will be provided to receive health and salsty of the public, statements,in response to conditions public comments on the including employees' health and safety, that would have warranted refusal of a implementation of this Policy, the common defense and security,and license on en original application, for a General Statement ofPolicy and the environment.8 'this statement of heenese's failure to build or operate a Procedure for NRC Enforcement general policy and procedure willbe facility in accordance with the terms of Actions Published as NUREG-1600 to provide the permit or license, and for violation widespread dianaminatian of the of an NRC regulation). Section 234 Table of Centent*
Comunission's Enfore===at Policy.
authorians the NRC to impoes civil Preface However, this is a policy statement and Penalties not to exmed 3100,000 per violation por certain specin, day for the violation of L latroduction and Purpose not a lation, b Comunission may ec rovisions of
- 11. Statutory Authority deviate this statement of policy the Act, rules, orders,an (icones terms A. Statutory Authtirity and procedure as appropriate under the B. Procedural Fromework circii=*==e== of a particular case.
Implesnenting these provisions, and for lu. Responsibilities violations for which licenses can be IV. Severity of Violatione I.Intnaducties and Purpose revoked.in addition to the enumerated g'g,ssrytagiguane
& purpose of the NRC enforceanent Provisions in section 234, sections 84 A
C Wikul violatione Prestern is to support the NRC's omall and 147 authorise the imposition of civil enalties for violations of D. Violations of Reporting mW
- to unhty mission in the public P
V. Predecletonal Enforcomart Conferemoes and the environment.
ent with regulations implementing those VI. Enforcement Acuona that purpose, enlerrument action should Provisions. Section 232 authorises the i
A. Notice of Violation be usad.
NRC to seek injunctive or other B.Ovil Penalty e As a deterunt to eenphesise the equitable relief for violation of importance ofcompliance with I
t a.InitialEsaleted Action requirennents,and M
M RC
- b. Credit for Actione Reisted to e To encourage prompt identiflation as for knowing Ident16 cation and prompt, compmhansive correction toimPoes civil
- c. Credit for Prompt and Comprohoosive ofviolations.
and conscious uros to provide i
certain es information to the NRC.
Corrective Action ranal.eaat with the purpose of this Cha 1 of the AtomicEnergy Act
- d. Exercise of Discretion and vi us D.Releted Admlatetrothe Actions enforcesnan action will taken whern provi or varying levels of criminal C Orders VII.Esercise of Discretica deshag with llama % vendors,
,7bts peuey poteertly addseness the activiths of A. Escalation of Entornement Sanctions contractors, and their eenployees, who leC hamme and hemu tar leC akensa.
1.Ov11 Preelties do not achieve the ascessary metianlous needuse, the terut "I is mand thsaushout
- 2. Ordere attention to detail and the high standard *" pelley. lasusser. la mee emu whose he MC j
- 3. Dolly Civil Penalties d",",",,h",*j
M
)
B. Mitigation of Enforcement Saectione
. Anerusi essaremment manere wal be denit ladivumet.ee suusass la eh poHey wul be used.
- t. Liconeso.identlN Severity Level IV with es e asso a gase hesis.
as pan==Ma spastac idense ressedlag r
Violetions The isnm" vender"es used la tble amanne amassessment astian t ladividuals and men.
- 2. Violatione identified During Estended a
her of er servises se he la en hemmesma is la socitons vm and X.
Shutdowns or Work Stoppages Isainty er actiny.
supmertwy.
5 NUREG-1600 4
_ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ ~ _ __ _.. _ _ _ _ _. _.. _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ ~ _ _ _.-
k j
84384 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / NoticGs i
i penalties (i.e., monetary fines and provide hearing rights, as only including the decision to issue a Notice j
unprisonment) for willful violations of information is being sought. A licensee of Violation, or to propose or impose s the Act and regulations or orders issued must answer a Demand. An unlicensed civil penalty and the amount of this under sections 65,161(b),161(1), or person may answer a Demand by either penalty, after considering the general j
161(o) of the Act. Section 223 provides providing the requested information or principles of this statement of policy that criminal penalties may be imposed explaining why the Demand should not and the technical significance of the 1
on certain individuals employed by have been issued.
violations and the surrounding firms constructing or supplyi basic circumstances.
4 j
components of any utilisation lity if III.Respoeshilities Unless Commission consultation or the individual knowingly and willfully The Executive Director for Operations notification is required by this policy, j
a l
violates NRC requisements such that a (EDO) and the principal enforcement the staff may depart, where warranted in basic component could be si ficantly officers of the NRC,the Deputy the public's interest, from this policy as i
impaired. Section 235 provi that Executive Director for Nuclear Material provided in Section VII," Exercise of 5
criminal penshies may be imposed on Safety. F ' i and rations Enforcement Discretion."The who laterfere with inspectors.
Support (DfDS) and the - puty Commission will be provided written a
on 236 provides that alminal Executive Director for Nuclear Reactor notification of pil enforament actions penahles may be imposed on persons Regulation, Regional rations, and involving civil penalties or orders. The i
who attempt to or cause sabotage at a Research (DEDR), have delegated Commission will also be provided nuclear facility or to nuclear fuel.
the authority to approve or issue all notice in those cases where discretion is
~
Alleged or suspected criminal violations escalated enforcement actions.* T!,e exercised as discussed in Section of the Atomic Energy Act are refened to DEDS is responsible to the EDO for the VII.B.6. In addition, the Commission the Department of Justice for NRC enforcement programa. The Office will be consuked prior to taking action i
appwpriate action.
of Enforcement (OE) exercises oversight in the followiq; C dons (unless the of and implements the NRC urgency of the situation dictates j
B.ProceduralFramework enforcement programs. The Director, immediate action):
Subpart B of to CFR part 2 of NRC's OE, acts for the Deputy Executiv*
(1) An action affecting a licensee's lations sets forth the procedures the Directors in enforcement matters in operation that requires balancing the j
uses in exercising its enforcement their absence or as deleanted.
public hashh and safety or common authority.10 CFR 2.201 sets forth the Subject to the oversight and direction defense and escurity implications of not procedures for issuing notices of of OE, and with the approval of the operating with the potential radiological violation.
appropriate Deputy Executive Director, or other hasards associated with The procedure to be used in assessing where necessary, the regional offices continued operation:
civil penalties is set forth in to CFR normally issue Notices of Violation and (2) Proposals to impose civil penalties 2.205.This regulation provides that the proposed civil penalties. However, in r. mounts greater than 3 times the civil penalty process is initiated by subject to the same oversight as the Severity level I values shown in Table issuing a Nodes of Violation and regional offices, the Office of Nuclear 1A:
Proposed Imposition of a Civil Penalty.
Reactor Regulation (NRR) and the Office (3) Any proposed enforcement action The licensee or other person is provided of Nuclear Material Safety and that involves a Severity levelI an opportunity to contest in writing the Safeguards (NMSS) may also issue violation:
proposed imposition of a civil penalty.
Notias of Violation and proposed civil (4) Any enformment action that After evaluation of the response, the penshies for certain activities.
involves a finding of a material falso civil penalty may be mitigated, remitted, Enforcement orders are normally issued statement:
or imposed. An opportunity is provided by a Deputy Executive Director or the (5) Exercising discretion for matters for a hearing if a civil penalty is Director, OE. However, orders may also meeting the criteria of Section Vll.A.1 imposed. If a civil penalty.is not paid be issued by the EDO, especially those for Commission consultation; following a hearing or if a hearing is not involving the more signincant matters.
(6) Refraining from taking requested, the matter may be referred to The Directors of NRR and NMSS have enforcement action for matters meeting the U.S. Department of Justice to also been delegated authority to issue the criteria of Section VII.B.2:
institute a civil action in District Court.
orders. but it is expected that normal (7) A"Y Proposed enforcement action that involves the issuanc.a oft civil The procedure for issuing an order to use of this authority by NRR and NMSS institute a proceeding to modify, will be confined to actions not penahy or order to an unbased suspend, or revoke a license or to take maandated with compliance issues.The mdividust or a civil penahy to a other action against a licensee or other Director, Offim of the Controller, has limnaed reactor ooerstor, person subject to the jurisdiction of the been delegated the authority to issue (8) Any action the EDO believes warrants Commission involvement:
Commission is set forth in to C5'R orders where lica-violate 2.202. The licensee or any oth er person Commission regulations by nonpsyment j,f,I D yy an o vest tion O!)
adversely affected by the ordet may oflicense and ins ion fees.
request a hearing.The NRC is in recognition t the regulation of report th %
th O!
staff) does not arrive at the same authorised to make orders imm&tel nuclear activities in many cases does effective if required to protect the p c not lend itself to a mechanistic conclusions as those in the 01 report lasues of in if the health, safety, or interest, or if the treatment, judgment and discretion concem ofOf conclu Director et violation is willful. Section 2.204 sets must be exercised in determining the mission casuhatin is warranted; out the procedures for irsuing a Demand severity levels of the violations and the for Information (Demandi to a licensee
- PProPriate enforcement sanctions, (10) Any proposed enforcement action
'" OI Cornm se on s ed ion or the
- N **= ~=al**d 'alama".m.amn m
- t j$, s.,,Q,, w,.,*C*Ma.Nm* "
Purpose of determining whether an order or other enformment action w.ici
.y h e op., e should be issued. The Demand does not w imi.n.
NUREG-H00 6
.,_,.-.w,,
.. -n
. - - ~. - - - -
- -. - ~. ~. _ _.. -
Federal Regist:r / Vol. So, No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / N:tices 34385
. IV, Severity of Violations SupplementsI through VH1 provide a repetitive violation will depend on tne Regulatory requirements have examples and serve as guidance in circumstances, such as, but not limited s
varying degrees of safety, saf uords, or detwmining the appropriate severity to, the number of times the violation has environmental significance, brefore,level for violations in each of the eight occurred, the similarity of the violations the relative importance of each activity areas. However, the examples and their root causes, the adequacy of 2
are neither exhaustive nor controlling.
previous corrective actions, the pen,od violation, including both the technial significance and the regulatory in addition, these examples do not of time between the violations, and the significance is evaluated as the first step create sww requimments.Each is significance of the violations.
In the enforcement process.
designed to illustrate the signiScance C. Willful Violations Consequently, for p of formal that the NRC places on a particular Willful violations am by definition of
. enforcement action, vi e are of violation of NRC requirements.
cular concern to the Commission categorised in terms of four of the examples in the supplements is normall[ severity to show their relative predicated on a violation of a regulatory useits agulatory program is based levels o on 11=- and their antractors, importance within each of the following requirement.
eight activity areas:
The NRC reviews each case being employees,and agents acting with I. Reactor considered for enforcement action on its in ty and comanunicating with own merits to ensure that the severity of or, Willfulviolations annot be a violation is characterised at the lowl tolerated by either the Commission or a
- 11. Facilit#
ion *.
IV. Health Plheles:
best suited to the significance of the licenseeM-==== are expected to take nt. salsauerds W.Trans tion particular violation. In some cases, signi8 mat remedial action in VI. Fuel and Meterials spedal circumstances may warrant an responding to willful violatiwns i
commensurate with the circumstances VH.Mi laneous Mauen; e adjustment to the severity level such that it demonstrates the VHl. Emerpacy Preparedness.
categorisation.
serion=== of the violation thereby Licensed activities will be placed in A. Aggregation of Violoh.ons creating a deterrent e5ect within the the particular violation involved A group of Severity LevelIV licensee's organisation. Although the activity area most suitable fri light of including activition r.ot directly covered violations may be evaluated in the removal of the person is not necosearily by one of the above listed areas, e.g.,
aggregate sad assigned a single, required, substantial disciplinary action export license activities. Within each increased severity level,thereby is expected, activity area, Severity Invel I has been resulting in a Severity Imvel HI problem, Therefore,the severity level of a assigned to violations that are the most if the violations have the same violation may be increened if the significant and Severity involIV underlying cause or programmatic circumstances surrounding the matter violations am the least significant.
deficiencies, or the violations.
Involve careless disregard of J
Severity involI and H violations am of contributed to or were unavoidable requirements, deception, or other very significant regulatory concom. In conesquences of the underlying inascations of willfulness. The term general, violations that are included in problem.Normally, Severity Invol D "wil!Julness"as used in this policy these severity categories involve actual and IH violations are not aggregated into embrams a spectrum of violations or high potential impact on the public.
a higher severity level.
ranging from deliberate intent to violate Severity Invel HI violations are cause The purpose of aggregating violations or falsify to and including careless for significant regulatory concern.
is to focus the licensee's attention on the disregard for requirements. Willfulness severity invol IV violations are less fundamental underlying causes for does not include acts which do not rise serious but are of more than miAnt which enforcement action appears to the level of careless disregard, e.g.,
concern; i.e., if left uncorrected, they warranted and to reflect the fact that inadvertent clerical errors in a could lead to a more serious concom.
eeveral violations with a common cause document submitted to the NRC. In The Commission recognises that there may be more significant collectively determining the specific esverity level are other violations of minor safety or than individually and may therefore, of a violation involvicg willfulness, environmental concern which are below warrant a more substantial enforcement mnsideration will be given to such the level of significance of Severity action.
factors as the position and InvolIV violations.These minor respanalbilities of the person involved violations are not the subject of formal B. Repetitive Violations in the violation (e.g., licensee officiala enforcement action and am not usually The severity level of a Severity invol or non-supervisory employes),the described in inspection reports. To the IV violation may be increened to significance of any underlying violation, extent such violations are described.
Severity invol HI, if the violation can be the intent of the violator (14., careless 4
I they are noted as Non Cited Violations.* considered a repetitive violation.'h dierogard or deliberateness), and the umparisons of signi8cance hetween purpose of esalating the severity level economic or other advantage,if any, activity areas are inappropriate. For of arepetitiveviolationisto gained as a result of the violation. The example,the immediacy of any hasard acknowledge the added significance of relative weight given to each of these to the publicw=*ad with Severity the situation based on the liconees's invol I violations in Reactor Opeutions failure to implement effective cornetive
The isem "twenese eenciel" as mal in e Polic7 *ema.mi ames e nat. tine supnviser
is not directly comparable to that action for the previous violation.W ehem a 16mmed indmduel. e adhuen essey
== mar 4=ted with Severity invol1 decision to escalate the severity level of wner.or a suihmme ser w las.e4 m.wral violations in Facility Construction.
whether et het listed on a thanee. Norwithetendtn6 i
1
'The term "repetkive violetten" er "shaller en indiv6duare job title. esvertty level s The term "segstrument" as used in this policy v6eletten" as used la this policy -s seens messerlooseen for willful acts involvtag Individuals means a legelly bending seguisement sech as e a v6eleton that somosnably could have been who can he meno6dued ikonese elRc6ew will enetute. regulatien laense candialen. ""
psevented by a lheen se's corsective acues for e some& der sevesel Escessa, inciv og the positten of spectAcetion.er esder.
psevnees violetten menselly escusrieg (1) within the indMdual seleuve to the inconese's
- A Non41eed Vietnalen (NCV)is a violettee that the poet a yeese of the inspectlen et leeue, or (r) the ergenteettenal structum and the individual's has est been ferraeliend lose e to CFR Lael Notics parted wkhna the Imot two "
trhichever
- ' Nos seisuse to the ovossight of tw of Violation.
le losM achehose end to the use of fleenood meteriel.
i 7
MJREG-pee
- ~--
34388 Federd Register / Vol. 60, No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / Notices factrrs in arriving at the appropriat2 is not bild, th3 lictnase will normally is a matter cf public record, such as an severity level will be dependent on the be requested to provide a written adjudicatory decision by the circumstances of h violation.
response to an inspection report. If Department of labor. in addition, with However,if a licensee afuses to correct issued, as to the licensee's views on the h approval of the Executive Director a minor violation within a reasonable apparent violations and hir root for Operations, conferences will not be time such that it willfully continues, the causes and a description of planned or open to the public where good cause has violation should be categorized at least implemented corrective action.
been shown after balancing the benefit at a Severity 14velIV.
During the predecisional enforcement of the public observation against the D. Violations of Jieporting fleguirements conference, the limnsee, vendor, or potentialimpact on the agency's other persons will be given an enforcement action in a particular mee.
The NRC expects licensees to provide opportunity to provide information As soon as it is determined that a complete, accurate, and timely consistent with the purpose of the conference will be o to public information and reporta. Accordingly, conference, including an explanation to observation, the willnotify the unless otherwise categorised in the b NRC of the immediate corrective licensee that the conference will be Supplementa, the severity level of a actions (if any) that were taken open to public observation as part of the violation involving the failure to make following identincation of the potential agency's trial program. Consistent with a requimd report to the NRC will be violation or nonconformanca and the the agency's policy on open meetings, based upon the significance of and the long-term comprehensive actions that "Stan Meetings Open to Public."
circumstances surrounding the man" were taken or willbe taken to prevent Published September 20,1994 (59 FR that should have been reported recurrence. l.icensees, vendors, or other 48340), the NRC intends to announce However,the severitylevelof an persons will be told when a meeting is OPen conferences normally at least to untimely report, in contrast to no soport, a predecisional enforcement confomace. working days in advana of conferences may be reduced depending on the A predecisional enforcernent through (1) notices posted in the Public circumstances surround the matter.
conferona is a meeting between &
Document Room,(2) a toll-free A limnses w. inot a y be cited for NRC and the licensee. Conferences are tel* phone recordina at 800-952-4674, a failure to report a condition or event normally held in the regional omces and (3) a toll-free electronic bulletin.
unless the licer.see was actually aware and are not normally open to public board at 800 ')S2-e676. In addition, the of the condition or event that it failed observation. However, a trial program is NRC will also issue a press release and to report. A licensee will, on the other being conducted to open approximately notify appropriate State liaison omcors hand, normally be cited for a failure to 25 percent of all eligible conferences for that a predecisional enforcement report a condition or event if the pt.blic observation,i.e overy fourth maiorence has been scheduled and that licensee knew of the information to be eligible conference involving one of it is open to public observation.
reported, but did not recognise that it three categories of licensees (reactor, The public attending open was mluired to make a repet.
hospital, and other materials hconsees) conferences under the trial program may V, Fredecisional Enforcement will be open to the public. Conferences observe but not participate in the Conferences will not normally be open to the public confwence. it is noted that the purpose Whenever the NRC has leamed of the if th enforcement action being an "8 bnot t n ad trial C*" ""
existence of a potential violation for g3) W ulb takai against an public attendance, but rather to which escalated enforcernent action appears to be warranted, or recurring individual, or if the action, though not determine whether providing the public nonconformance on the part of a taken against an individual, turns on with opportunities to be informed of whether en individual has committed NRC activities is compatible with the vendor, the NRC may provide an agag.
NRC's ability to exercise its regulatory opportunity for a predecisional (2) volves significant personnel and safety responsibilities. Therefore, enforcomant conference with the failures where the NRC has requested members of the public will be allowed licensee, vendor, or other person before that the individual (s) involved be access to the NRC regional omcas to taking enforcement action. The purpose present at the conference:
attend open enforcement confwenas in of the conference is to obtain (3)is based on the findings of an NRC accordance with the " Standard information that will assist the NRC in Omca ofInvestigations report, er Opwating Procedures For Providing detamining the appropriate (4) Involves safeguards Information, Security Support For NRC Hearings And enforcement action, such as:(1) A Privacy Act information, or information Meetings," published November 1,1991 common understanding of facts, root which could be considered proprietary; (56 FR 56251).These procedures causes and missed opportunities in addition, conferences will not provide that visitors may be sub to j
===aciated with the apparent violations, normally be to the public if:
Personnel screening, that signs, naers, (2)e common understanding of (5)The con involves medical posters, etc.. not larger than 18" be corrective actisn taken or planned, and misadministrations or overexposures permitted, and that disrupuve persons (3) a common understanding of the and the conference cannot be conducted may be removed.
signincance ofissues and the need for without disclosing the exposed Members of the public attending open lasting comprehensive corrective action. Individual's name; or conferences will be reminded that (1)
If the NRC concludes that it has (6)The conference will be conducted the apparent violations discussed at suscient information to make an by telephone or the conference will be predecisional enforcement conferences informed enforcement decision, a conducted at a relatively small are subject to further soview and sney be conference will not normally be held licensee's facilit.
subject to change prior to any resulting unless the licensee requests it. However, Notwithstandog meeting any of these enforcement action and (2) the an opportunity for a conference will critaria, a conference may still be open statements of views or expressions of if th conference involves issues related opinion made by NRC employees at normally be provided before issuing an
+
order based on a violation of the rule on to an ongoing adjudlestory proceeding predecisional enforcanent contwences.
Deliberate Misconduct or a civil Ity with one or more intervonors or where or the lack thereof, are not intended to to an unlicensed person. lf a nce the evidentiary basis for the conference represent final determinations or beliefs.
l i
4
- -, - - ~ -... - -, - -,
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / Noticzs 34387 Persons attending open conferences will to be under oath. Norm 611y, responses management involvement in licensed be provided an opportunity to submit under oath willbe mquired only in activities and a decrease in protection of written comments concerning the trial connection with Severity level 1, II, or the public health and safety.
program anonymously to the regional HI violations or orders.
office.These comments will be The NRC uses the Notice of Violation 1 Base CivilPenaltI subsequently forwarded to the Director as the usual method for formalizing the The NRCimposes different levels of of the Office of Enforcement for review existena of a violation. Issuance of a penalties for different severity level and consideration.
Notice of Violation is normally the only violations and different classes of When needed to protect the public enforcement action taken, except in licensees, vendors, and other persons.
health and safety or common defense mass where the criteriefor issuance of Tables 1A and 1B show the base civil and security, secolated enforcement civil penalties and orders, as set forth in penalties for various reactor, fuel cycle, action, such as the issuance of an Sections VI.B and VI.C, respectively, are materials, and vendor programs. (Civil iramediately e5ective order, will be met. However, special circumstanas penalties issued to individuals are taken before the conference. In these regard the violation findings may determined on a case.by-cam basis.) The cases, a conference may be held aAer the warrant on being exercised such structure of these tables generally takes escalated enforcernent action is taken, that the NRCrefrains from issuing a into account the gravity of h violation VI. Enforamenuctions Notice of Violation. (See Section VII.B.,,
as a primary consideration and the on,fi riiy dery This section describes the in a o
d y pperations enforcement sanctions available to the cited for violations rueulting from involvi nuclear'rr storial NRC and specifies the conditions under matters not within bir control, such as inventor d
ter tial which each may be used.The basic equipment fallums that were not consequenas to pu nd licensee enforcement sanctions are Notices of avoidable by reasonable licensee quality emPl mm-high i il Violation, civil penalties, and orders of assurance measures or management various types. As discussed furtherin controls. Generally, however, licensees ["l "I g,8,,the T I a n d
Section VI.D. related administrative are held responsible for the acts of their [' ' g g
g he ci es"it I actions such as Noticos of emplo
. Accordingly, this policy no7th N C71n ention the he of Pena f a Act I.ette no erro.
t sa1 ot f ormation are used to su l B. CivilPenalty business (orders, rather than civil enforcement program. In obement the ting the A civil penalty is a monetary penalty Penalties, are used when the intent is to enforcement sanctions or administrative that may be imposed for violation of (1) suspend or terminate limnsed activities) actions, the NRC will consider attain specified licensing provisions of or adversely affects a liconess's ability enforcement actions taken by other the Atomic Energy Act or to anfoly conduct licensed activities.
Federal or State regulatory bodies supplementary NRC rules or orders: (2)
The deterrent effect of civil penalties is having concurrent jurisdiction, such as any requirement for which a license best served when the amounts of the in transportation matters. Usually, may be revoked: or (3) reporting Penalties take into account a licensee's whenever a violation of NRC requirements under section 206 of the ability to pay. In determining the requirements of more than a minor Energy Reorganisation Act. Civil amount of civil penalties for licensees concem is identified, enforcement penalties are dosi ned to deter future for whom the tables do not reflect the action is taken. The nature and extent of violations both b the involved licensee ability to pay or the gravity of the
- he enforcement action is intended to as well as by r licensees conducting violation,the NRC will consider as reflect the seriousness of the violation hasize the necessary an increase or decrease on a similar activities and to emh violations case.by-case basis. Normally, if a involved. For the vast majority of need for licensees to identi violations, a Notice of Violation or a and take prompt comprehensive lianses can demonstrate financial Notice of Nonconformance is the normal corrective action.
hardship, the NRC will consider action.
Civil penalties are considered for Payments over time, including interest, A. Notice of Violation Severity Level III violations. In addition, rather than reducing the amount of the dvil penalties will normally be assessed dvil penalty. However, where a licensee A Notice of Violation is a written for Severity invol I and II violations and claims Anancial hardship, the licensee notice setting forth one or more knowing and conscious violations of the will normally be required to address violations of a legally binding reporting requirements of section 206 of why it has su?lcient resources to safely requirement. The Notice of Violation the Energy Reorganisation Act.
conduct licensed activities and pay normally requires the recipient to Civil penaltfes are useo to encourage license and inspection fees.
provide a written statement describing prompt identification and prompt and 2.CivilPenalty Assessment (1) the reasons for the violation or, if comprehensive correction of violations, contested, the basis for disputing the to emphasise compliance in a manner in an effort to (1) emphasise the violation: (2) corrective steps that have that deters future violations, and to importance of adherena to been taken and the results achieved: (3) serve to focus licensees' attention on requirements and (2) reinform prompt corrective steps that will be taken to violations of sigrificant regulatory self-identification of problems and root prevent recurrence: and (4) the date concern.
auses and prompt and comprehensive when full compliance will be achievisd.
Although management involvement, correction of violations, the NRC The NRC may waive all or portions of direct or indirect,in a violation may reviews each proposed civil penalty on a written response to the extent relevant lead to an increase in the civil penalty, its own merits and, after considering all information has already been provided the lack of managernent involvement relevant circumstanas, may adjust the to the NRCin writing or documented in may not be used to mitigste a civil base civil penalties shown in Table 1A an NRC inspection report.The NRC may penalty. Allowing mitigation in the and 1B for Severity level I, !!, and III require responses to Notias of Violation latter case could encourage the lack of violations as described below, 9
34388 Federal Register / Vcl. 60. N).126 / Friday. June 30, 1995 / Nitices
'Ibe dvil penalty assessment process whether the licensee's corroedve actions each violation or problem. absent the masiders four decisional points: (a) are prompt end comprehensive: and (d) exordes of discretion,is limited to one Whether the licensee has had any whether.in view of all the of the fo!!owing three msults: no cfvil previous escalated enforament action d cumstances, the matterin question penalty, a base civil penalty, or a base (regardless of the activity area) during rpquires the exerdes of discretion, dvil penalty =armlated by 100%.The the past 2 years or past 2 inspections, Although each of these decisional Bow chart presented below is a graphic l
whicheveris longer;(b) whether the points may have several namar4ated mpresentation of the dril penalty j
licensee should be given credit for considerations for any given cess, th, assessment process ections related to identification: (c) outcome of the essessment process for numa cons w 4
)
I i
l 4
2 1
i NUREG-1600 10
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / Noticos 34389 i
O=
YES I
S CP YES CA l
CREDW
?
l 1st NON.
WILLFUL i
SL lit NO IN VES Ist SAGE i-ID CP CREDIT
- NO 9
J YES I
i NO CA J
CREDIT 7
D SASE NO OP
+100%
- aneu6d the seenmee ne geven essen ser semene reisted to beentneetton?
..~
dm enasse caos feen.e w 11 NUltEG-1640
- au
..uonu use,. u..
vv. av...,... uy, nu..
.,v,. ~.,,
..w -
- o. Initial escolatId action. Wh:n th)
(1) Whethir the problem requiring lic:nsee credit for actions related to NRC dittrminIs that a non willful ccrrective action was NRC ihntifitd, identific:. tion normally should considir Severity Level !!! violation or problem limnsee-identified, or revealed through the ease of discovery, whether the event has occurred, and the licensee has not an event;'
occurred as the result of a licensee self-had any previous escalated actions (ii) Whether prior opportunities monitoring effort (i.e., whether the (regardless of the activity area) during existed to identify the problem requiring licensee was "looking for the problem"),
the past 2 years or 2 inspections, corrective action, and if so, the age and the d ree of licensee initiative in whichever is longer, the NRC will number of those opportunities; identi ing the problem or problems consider whether the licensee's (iii) Whether the problem was requiring corrective action, and wl. ether corrective action for the present revealed as the result of a licensee self-prior opportunities existed to identify violation or problem is reasonably monitoring effort, such as conducting an the problem.
prompt and comprehensive (see the audit, a test, a surveillance, a design Any of these considerations may be review, or troubleshooting; d through overriding if particularly noteworthy or discussion under Section VI.B.2.c, (iv) For a problem reveale particularly egregious. For example,if below). Using 2 years as the basis for assessment is expected to cover most an event, the ease of discovery, and the the event occurred as the result of situations, but considering a slightly degree oflicensee initiative in conducting a surveillance or similar longer or shorter period might be identifying the root cause of the self-monitoring effort (i.e., the licensee warranted based on the circumstances problem and any associated violations; was looking for the problem), the of a particular case. The starting point (v) For NRC-identified issues, whether licensee should normally be given credit of this period should be considered the the licensee would likely have for identification. As a second instance, date when the licensee was put on identified the issue in the same time-even if the problem was easily notice of the need to take corrective riod if the NRC had not been discovered (e.g., revealed by a large spill action. For e licensee-idec ified nvolved; of liquid), the NRC may choose to give violation or an event, this would be (vi) For NRC-identified issues, credit because noteworthy licensee i
when the licensee is aware that a whether the licensee should have effort was exerted in terreting out the problem or violation exists requiring identified the issue (and taken action) root cause and associated violations, or corrective action. For an NRC-identified earlier; and simply because no prior opportunities violation. the startin int would be (vii) For cases in which t))e NRC (e.g., procedural cautions, post-when the NRC puts t licensee on identifies the overall problem requirin8 maintenance testing, quality control corrective action (e.g.
notice, which could be during the issue), the degree of h,. a programmatic failures, readily observable rameter unsee initiative inspection, at the inspection exit trends, or repeated or lock in meeting, or as part of post-inspection r lack of initiative in identifying the annunciator warnings) existed to communication.
problem or problems requiring identi the roblem.
If the corrective action is judged to be corrective action.
(iii) RC-entified. When a problem prompt and com rehensive, a Notice of (2) Although some cases may consider requirin corrective action is NRC-Violation norma 1 should be issued all of the above factors, the importance identifi, the decision on whether to with no associate civil nalt. If the of each factor will very based on the give the licensee credit for actions corrective action is judg d to less tYP' of C*$e as discussed in the related to Identification should than prompt and comprehensive, the foll wing general utdance:
normally be based on an additional (i) Licensee-Ide ified. When a question: should the licensee have Notice of Violation normally should be issued with a base civil nalty.
roblem requiring corrective action is reasonably identified the problem (and
- b. Cradit for actions te oted to icensee-identified (i.e., identified taken action) earlier?
identification. (1)If a Severity Levell or befm the problem has resulted in an in most cases, this reasoning may be 11 violation or a willful Severit Levelill event), the NRC should normall give based simply on the ease of the NRC violation has occurred-or if, uring the the licensee credit for actions re sted to inspector's discovery (e.g., conducting a -
past 2 years or 2 inspections, whichever identification, regardless of whether welkdown, observing in the control is longer, the liumsee has been issued prior o ortunities existed to identify room, performing a confirmatory NRC at least one other escalated action-the the to m.
radiation survey, hearing a cavitating civil penalty assessment should (1 identified Through an Event.
pump, or finding a valve obviously out normally consider the factor of When a problem requiring corrective of position). In some cases, the identification in addition to corrective action is identified through an event-licensee's missed opportunities to action (see the discussion under Section the decision on whether to give the identify the problem might include a VLB.2.c below). As to identification, similar previous violation, NRC or the NRC should consider whether the g'",",'(","j,bagas industry notices, internal audits, or an ""'
licensee should be iven credit for
,q,ip oi o, p.,,onnel, r day obvious t y human readily observable trends.
actions related to i entification, aburunon or inerrume istion. or (2) e redelostcal If the NRC identifies the violation but in each case, the decision should be impact on personnet or the environment in acus concludes that, under the focused on identification of the problem "I"sul*'ary limits. such n an onruposure. a circumstances, the licensee's actions requiring corrective action. In other
,"$",g"$dj,',",",M**b"',7p nmas."
related to Identification were not c
n words, although giving credit for equipmeni t.iiu,e dicove,,d through e spill of unreasonable, the matter would be Identification and Corrective Action liquid. a loud noise. the failure io han a sysiem treated as licensee-identified Ior should be separate decisions, the
= Pond Propely,or a annunchior alarm would purposes of assessing the civil penalty.
concept of Identification presumes that
['*"*y$'",'h e dA'[$**r v'w* "~ud rm In such cases, the question of be the identifier recognizes the existence of similarty. it a lumn e. d:ecover d. through Identification credit shifts to whether a problem. and understands that querierly dosimetry reedmsn. that employees had the licensee should be penahzed for corrective action is needed. The hun inadepmty monaered for radianon. the NRC's identification of the problem.
decision on Identification requires
"'"',Q how er Ov) Mixed identification. For
- mixed" da ry adms*
considering all the circumstances of di. cia d en overexposure. the issue would be identifiCalion situations (i e-, Where identification including:
considad an ennt.
multiple violations exist. some NRC-NUREG 1600 12 m
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No.126 / Friday, }une 30, 1995 / Noticis 34391 I
identified some licensee identified or The evsluation of missed Regardless of other circumstances where the NRC prompted the licensee to opportunities snould normally depend (e.g., past enforcement history.
take action that resulted in the on whether the information available to identification), the licensee's corrective identification of the violation),the the licensee should reasonably have actions should always be evaluated as NRC's evaluation should normally caused action that would have part of the civil penalty assessment determine whether the licensee could prevented the violation. Missed process. As a reflection of the reasonably have been expected to opportunities is normally not applied importance given to this factor, an NRC identify the violation in the NRC's where the licensee appropriately judgment that the licensee's conective absence. This determination should reviewed the opportunity for action has not been prompt and consider, among other things, the timing application to its activities and comprehensive will always result in I
of the NRC's discovery, the information reasonable action was either taken or issuing at least a base civil penalty.
available to the licensee that caused the planned to be taken within a reasonable in assessing this factor, consideration NRC concern, the specificity of the
- time, will be given to the timeliness of the NRC's concern, the scope of the in some situations the missed corrective action (including the J
licensee's efiorts, the level of licensee Opportunity is a violation in itself. In promptness in developing the schedule resources given to the investigation, and these cases, unless the missed for long term corrective action), the l
whether the NRC's path of analysis had opportunity is a Severity LevelIII adequacy of the licensee's root cause been dismissed or was being pursued in violation in itself, the missed analysis for the violation, and, given the parallel by the licensee.
Opportunity violation may be grouped significance and complexity of the with the other violations into a single issue, the comprehensiveness of the in some cases, the licensee may have addressed the isolated symptoms of Severity level Ill " problem." However, corrective action (i.e., whether the if the missed opportunity is the only action is focused narrowly to the each violation (and may have identified violation, then it should not normally be specific violation or broadly to the i
the violations), but failed to recognize counted twice (i.e., both as the violation general area of concem). Even in cases the common root cause and taken the and as a missed opportunity " double when the NRC, at the time of the j
necessary comprehensive action. Where counting") unless the number of enforcement conference, identifies this is true, the decision on whether to give licensee credit for actions related to 0.PPortunities missed was particularlyadditional peripheral or minor corrective action still to be taken, the i
s knificant.
(dentification should focus on portunity licensee may be given credit in this area, he timin of the missedghile a ngid identification of the problem requiring should also considered.
as long as the licensee's actions conective action (e.. the programmatic time-frame is unnecessary, a 2 year addressed the underlying root cause and breakdownl. As suc, depending on the eri d should generall be considered are considered sufficient to prevent chronology of the various violations, the [or consistency in imp ementation, as recurrence of the violation and similar earliest of the individual violations the penod reflecting relctively cunent violations.
mi ht be considered missed 8
performance.
Normally, the judgment of the o portunities for the licensee to have (3) When the NRC determines that the adequacy of conective actions will i entified the larger problem.
licensee should receive credit for hinge on whether the NRC had to take (v) Missed Oppo tunities to Identify-actions related to identification, the action to focus the licensee's evaluative Missed opportunities include prior civil penalty assessment should and corrective process in order to obtain notifications or missed opportunities to normally result in either no civil comprehensive conective action. This identify or prevent violations such as (t) penalty or a base civil penalty, based on will normally be judged at the time of.
through normal surveillances, audits, or whether Conective Action is judged to*
the enforcement conference (e.g., by quality assurance (QA) activities;(2) be reasonably prompt and outlining substantive additional amas through prior notice i.e., specific NRC or comprehensive. When the licensee is where corrective action is needed).
industry notification; or (3) through not given credit for actions related to Earlier informal discussions between other reasonable indication of a identification, the civil penalty the licensee and NRC inspectors or potential problem or violation, such as assessment should normally result in a management may result in improved observations of employees and Notice of Violation with either a base corrective action, but should not contractors, and failure to take effective civil penalty or a base civil penalty normally be a basis to deny credit for conective steps, it may include findings escalatrd by 100%. depending on the Corrective Action. For cases in which of the NRC, the licensee, or industry quality of Corrective Action, because the the licensee does not get credit for made at other facilities operated by the licensee's performance is clearly not actions related to identification because licensee where it is reasonsble to expect acceptable.
the NRC identified the problem, the the licensee to take action to identify or
- c. Creditfor prompt and assessment of the licensee's corrective prevent similar problems at the facility comprehensive corrective oction. The action should begin from the time when subject to the enforcement action at purpose of the Corrective Action factor the NRC put the hcensee on notice of issue. In assessing this factor, is to encourage licensees to (t) take the the problem. Notwithstanding eventual consideration will be given to, among immediate actions necessary upon good comprehensive corrective action. if other things. the opportunities available discovery of a violation that will restore immediate corrective action was not to discover the violation the ease of safety and compliance with the license, tsken to restore safety and compliance discovery, the similarity between the regulation (s), or other requimment(sh once the violation was identified, violation and the notification, the and (2) develop and implement (in a corrective action would not be peno'd of time between when the timely manner) the lasting actions that considered prompt and comprehensive.
violstion occurred and when the will not only prevent recunence of the Corrective action for violations notification was issued, the action taken violation at issue, but will be involving discrimination should (or planned) by the licensee in response appropriately comprehensive. given the normally only be considered to the notification, and the level of significance and complexity of the comprehensive if the licensee takes management review that the notification violation, to prevent occurrence of prompt, comprehensive corrective received (or should have received).
violations with similar root causes, action that (t) addresses the broader 13 NUREG-1600
i 34392 Federal Eagister / Vol. 60, No.126 / Friday, Juns 30, 1995 / Noticss i
environment for raising safety concerns correction of an improperly constructed willfulnees. Otherwise, a prior l
in the workplace, and (2) provides a safety-related system or component: or opportunity for a hearing on the order remedy for the particular discrimination (ii) The licensee's quality assurance is afforded. For cases in which the NRC l
st issue.
program implementation is not adequate believes a basis could reasonably exist
- d. Eiereise of discretion. As provided to provide confidence that construction for not taking the action as proposed.
+
l~
in Section Vil," Exercise of Discretion," activities are being properly carried out: the licensee will ordinarily be afforded disdetion may be exercised by either (c) When the licensee has not an opportunity to show why the order escalating or mitigating the amount of responded adequately to other should not be issued in the proposed the civil penalty determined after enforcement action; manner by way of a Demand for applying the civil penalty adjustment (d) When the licensee interferes with Information. (See 10 CFR 2.204) factors to ensure that the proposed civil the conduct of an inspection or D. Related administrative actions. In 1
penalty reflects the NRC's concem investigation; or addition to the formal enforcement regarding the violation at issue and that (e) For any reason not mentioned actions, Notices of Violation. civil it convoys the appropriate meenage to above for which license revocation is penalties, and orders, the NRC also uses the licensee. However, in no instance legally authorised.
administrative actions, such as Notices will a civil penalty for any one violation Sr.spensions may apply to all or part of Deviation, Notices of exceed 3100,000 per day.
of the limnaed activity. Ordinarily, a Nonconformance, Confirmatory Action limnand activity is not suspended (nor latters,14tters of Reprimand, and TABLE 1 A.--Base Civil Penalties is a suspension prolonged) for failure to Demands for Information to supplement comply with requirements where such its enforcement program. The NRC
- a. Power seactors -
3100,000 failure is not willful and adequate expects licensees and vendors to adhere
- b. Fuel tat.ncelors, indusinal corrective action has been taken.
to any obligations and commitments processors, and independent
- 3. Revocation Orders may be used:
resulting from these actions and will not spent lust and monnored re-(a) When a licensee is unable or hesitate to issue appropriate orders to inevetse storage tr*=== mans 25.000 unwilling to comply with NRC ensure that these obligations and
- c. Test reactors, mas and ura-requirements:
commitments are met.
ruum conversson inceses.
(b) When a limnese refuses to correct
- 1. Notices of Deviation are written comractors, vendors, wese*
a violation:
notices describing a licensee's failure to
' ear===t beense e, and in-(c) When !!consee does not respond to satisfy a commitment where the s Notice of Violation where a response commitment involved has not been d.
eac aca.
was required; made a legally binding requirement. A domic, medical, or ottier me, teriallicenseei 5.000 (d) When a licensee refuses to pay an Notice of Deviation requests a licensee applicable fee under the Commission's to provide a written explanation or
- Trus apples to nonproht messumons not regulations; or statement describing corrective steps 7,,,g7,jj"
'gg (e) For any other reason for which taken (or planned), the results achieved, revocation is authonsed under section and the date when corrective action will cian oteces.
186 of the Atomic Energy Act (e.g., any be completed.
TABLE 18.--BASE civil PENAL. TIES condition which would warrant refusal
- 2. Notices of Nonconformance are of a license on an original application).
written notices describing vendor's asse crve pen.
- 4. Cease and Desist Orders may be failures to meet commitments which any amount (Per-used to stop an unauthorimod activity have not been raade legally binding S*v**y level
- gag that has continued after notification by requirements by NRC. An example is a 3g) the NRC that the activity is commitment made in a 1,rocurement i
unauthorised.
contract with a licenue as required by i
100
- 5. Orders to unlicensed persons, to CFR Part 50, Appendix B. Notices of it so including vendors and contractors, and Nonconformances request non licensees ill _
50 employees of any of them, are used to provide written explanations or when the NRC has identified deliberate sratements describing corrective steps C. Orders. An order is a written NRC misconduct that may cause a licenses to (taken or planned), the results achieved, directive to modify, suspend, or revoke be in violation of an NRC requirement the dates when corrective actions will a license: to cease and desist from a or where incomplete or inaccurate be completed, and measures taken to given practice or activity; or to take such information is deliberately submitted or preclude recurrence.
other action as may be proper (see 10 where the NRC loses its reasonable
- 3. Confirmatory Action latters are CFR 2.202). Orders may also be issued assurance that the licensee will meet letters confirming a licensee's or in lieu of, or in addition to, civil NRC requirements with that person vendor's agreement to take certain penalties, as appropriate for Severity involved in licensed activities.
actions to remove significant concerns level I II, or 111 violations. Orders may Unless a separate response is about health and safety, safeguards, or be issued as follows:
warranted pursuant to 10 CPR 2.201, a the environment.
4 1.1.icense Modification orders are Notia of Violation need not be lesued 4.14tters of Reprimand are letters issued when some change in licensee wke an order is based on violations addressed to individuals subject to equipment, procedures, personnel, or described in the order. The violations Commission jurisdiction identifying a management controls is neccesary.
described in an order need not be significant deficiency in their
- 2. Suspension Orders may be used:
categorized by severity levd performance of licensed activities.
(a) To remove a threat to the public Orders are made effective
- 5. Demands for Information are health and safety, common defense and immediately, without prior opportunity demands for information from licensees security, or the environment; for hearing, whenever it is determined or other persons for the purpose of (b) To stop facility construction when. that the public beelth, interest, or safety enabling the NRC to determine whether (1) Further work could preclude or so regt. ires, or when the order is an order or other enforcement action significantly hinder the identification or responding to a vloietion involving should be lesued.
NUREG-1600 14
~.
Fed:r::.1 Register / Vol to, No.126 / Friday, June 30 1995 / Noticss 34393 i
VII. Exercise of Discretion (e) Situations when the exceulve when discretion should be considered duration of a problem has roulted in a for departing from the normal approach Notwithstanding the normal guidance substantialincrossa in riak; in Section VI.B include but are not contained in this policy, as provided in (f) Situations when the licensee made limited to the following:
Section III," Responsibilities," the NRC a conscious decision to be in 1.1.imosee-Identified Severity 14 vel may choom to exercise discretion and noncompliance in order to obtain an IV Violations.The NRC,with the either escalate or mitigate enforcement economic benefit; or approval of the Regional Adrainistrator sanctions within the Commission's (g) Cases involvingthe loss of a or his designee, may refrain from statutory authority to ensure that the source, la addition, unless the limnsee issuing a Notice of Violation for a resulting enforcement action self-id8ntifi88 and reports the !ces to th* SeveritylevelIV violation that is appropriately reflects b level of NRC E,&ne mes shmid normally result documented in an inspection report (or concern regarding the violation at issue in a civil penalty in an amount at least official field notes for some material and conveys the appropriate message to in the order of the cost of an authorised cases) and described therein as a Non-g g;m' disposal of the material or of the transfer Cited Violation (NCV) provided that the A Escalation ofEnforcement Sanctions of the materialto an authorised inspection reportlocludes a brief no NRC considers violations recipient.
description of the corrective action and
)
- 2. Orders.%e NRC may, whom that the violation meets all of the categorised at Severity invol I, II, or III
--y a desirable, issues orders in following criteria:
to be of signlAcant regulatory concern conjunction with orin lieu of civil (a) It was identifled by the licensee, If the application of the normal Penaldes 2 ochiem or formalis*
including identification through an
)
guidance in this policy does not result conectin actions and to deter further event; in an apfof the appropriate Deputyropriate sanction,with the recurrence of serious violations.
(b)It was not a violation that could approva
- 3. Daily civil penalties.In order to reasonably be expected to have been Executive Director and consultation recognise the added technical safety prevented by the licensee's corrective witn me a.DO and Commission, as signinmace or latory significance action for a previous violation or a warranted,the NRC may apply its full la &me casm w re a my strong previous licersee finding that occurred enforcement authority where the action manage is warranted for a significant within the past 2 years of the inspection is warranted. NRC action may include violation that continues for more than at issue, or the period within the last (1) escalating civil penalties. (2) issuing one day,the NRC may overcise two inspections, whichever is longer; appropriate orders, and (3) assessing discretion and assess a separate (c)It was or willbe corrected within civil penalties for continuing violations violation and attendant civil penalty uP a reasonable time, by specific corrective on a per day basis, up to the statut to the statutory limit of $100.000 for action committed to by the licensee by limit of $100,000 per violation, per y.
mch day the violation conunues.The the end of the inspection, including
- 1. Civil penalties. Notwithstanding NRC may exercise this discretion if a immediate corrective action and the outcome of the normal civil penalty licenses was aware or clearly abould comprehensive conective action to assessment process addressed in Section have been sware of a violation, or if the prevent recurrence; VI.B. the NRC may exercise discretion licensee had an opportunity to identify (d) It was not a willful violation or if by either proposing a civil penalty and correct the violation but failed to do it was a willful violation:
whom application of the factors would (1)ne information concerning the so.
otherwise result in aero penalty or by violatim,ifnot m;uimd 2 be spawd.
escalating h amount of the resulting B. Mitigorion of Enforcement Sanctions was promptly provided to appropriate
. civil penalty (i.e.. base or twice the base h NRC may streise discredon and NRC personnel, such as a resident civil penalty) to ensure that the acivii ty d/ ins or or regional section or branch Proposed civil Ity reflects b
",I'*IN g
of ed snstanca and
- 8,hn of the normal promes described in (11) The violation involved the acts of y
py
,,g g
Section VI.B does not result in a e low.levelindividual(and not a m
o to the consee. Consultation saaction consistent with an appropriate licensee official as defined in Section wi e Commission is required if the regulatory message. In addition, even if IV.C);
deviation in the amount of the civil the NRC exercises this discretion, when (Hi) b violation appears to be the bnalt[e amount of the civil penaltyproposed under this discretion the lima = failed to make a required isolated action of the employee without
'ePort to the NRC, a separete management involvement and the t
amessed under the normal proose is enforcement acuan will normally be violation was not caused by lack of more than two times the base civil Issued fw es H=a='s fanum to vaaka management oversight as evidenced by hy shown in Tables 1A and 1B.
Spies when this discretion should a mguimd mpet.The approval of the either a history ofisolated willful Diredor,OfBa of Enforcement,with violations or a lack of adequate audits be maaidored include,but am not consuhation with the appropriate or supervision of emplo
- and limited to the followi.
D*Puty Executive Director as warranted.
(iv) Significant al action (a) Problems cate sed at Severity is raguired for sxarcising discretion of commensurate with the circumstances (b) Ovmexposures, or releases of the type described in Section VII.B.1.b was taken by thelicensee such that it i
14velIorIr.
where a willful violation is involved, demonstrated the seriousness of the radiological material in excess of NRC and of the types described in Sections violation to other employees and requirements:
(c) Situations involving particularly VILB.2 through VILB.5. Commission contractors, thereby creating a deterrent poor licensee performana, or involving consuhation is required for exercising effect within the licensee's organisation.
discretion of the type described in Although removal of the employee from winfulness:
(d) Situations when the limnase's Section VILB.2 and the approval of the limneed activities is not necessarily previous enforament history has been appropriate Deputy Executive Director required, substantial disciplinary action j
particularly
, or when the current and Cornmission nodScotion is required is expected.
violation is ly repetitive of an for exercising the discretion of the type
- 2. Violations identified During earlier violation; described in Section VR.B.6. Examples Extended Shutdowns or Work f
15 NUREG.1600 l
i 1
x
34394 Federal Register / Vol. 60. No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / Notices Stoppages. The NRC may refrain from violation was caused by maduct that is action when b licensee has addressed issuing a Nodce of Violation or a not reasonably linked to present the ovnau work environment for raising proposed civil penalty for a violation performance (normally, violations that safety concerns and has publicised that that is identined aRer (i) the NRC has are at least 3 years old or violations a com laint of discrimination for taken significant enforcement action ocx:urring during plant construction) in protected activity was made based upon a major safety event and bro had not bean prior notice so to L, that the matter was settled contributing to an extended shutdown that the licensee should have reasonably to b satisfaction of the employes (the of an operating reactor or a material identified the violation earlier. This terms of the specinc settlement licensee (or a work stop)page at a exercise of discretion is to plam a agreement need not be
), and that, construction site), or (11 the licensee premium on licanases initiatina efforts if the DOL Area D5co enters an extended shutdown or work to identify and correct subtle violations discrimination, the licenses has taken stoppage related to generally poor that are not likely to be identined by action to positively reemphasias that performance over a long period of time, routine efforts before degraded safety discrimination will not be toleratsd.
provided that the violation is systems are called upon to work.
Simildy,the NRC may retrain froan documented in an inspection report (or 4.Violationsidenfined Due to teldag enfoscament action if a licensee official Aold notes for some material Previous Escalated Enforcement Action. aettles a matter ptly aRar a peeson cases) and that it meets all of the The NRC raay refrain from issuing s comes to the without going to the following criteria:
Notice of Violation or a proposed civil DOL.Such discretion would normally (a) It was either licensee-identined as Penalty for a violation that is identified not be exercised in cases in which the a result of a comprehensive program for aRer the NRC has taken escalated liconese does not appropriately address problem identification and correction enforcement action for a Severity level the overall work environment (e,g., by that was developed in response to the H orIE violation, provided that the using training, postings, revised policies shutdown or identified as a result of en violation is documnted in an or procedures,any neccesary employee allegation to the licensee; (If inspection report (or omcial Aeld notes disciplinary action, etc., to the NRC identifies the violation and all for some material cases) that includes a communicate its policy against of the other criteria are met, the NRC description of the corrective action and discrimination) or in cases that involve:
should determine whether enforcement that it meets all of b following criteria: allegations of discrimination as a result action is necessary to achieve remedial (a) It was licensee. identified as part of of providing information directly to the action, orif discation may still be the corrective action for b previous NRC, allegations of discrimination escalated enforcement action; caused by a manager above Arst line ap(propriate.)
b)It is based upon activities of the (b)It has the same or similar root supervisor (consistent with current limnsee prior to the events leading to cause as the violation for which Enforcement Policy classification of b shutdown:
escalated enforcement action was Severity Level I or D violations),
(c)It would not be cowgorized at a issued; allegations (.. discrimination where a severity level higher than Severity Lawl (c)It dess not substantially change the history of Andings of discrimination (by II; safety significana or the character of the puL or the NRC) or settlements (d)It was not willful; and the mgulatory concern arising out of the (e) The licensee's decision to restart initial violation; and suggests a programmatic rather than an the plant requires NRC concurrence.
(d)It was or will be corrected
- isolated discrimination problem. or
- 3. Violations involving Old Design including immediate corrective action allegations of discrimination which a
particularly blatant or egregious.
Issues.The NRC may refrain from and long term comprehensive corrective
. Violations involving Special proposing a civil penalty for a Severity action to prevent recurrence, within a Circumstances. Notwithstanding the level 11 or IU violation involving a past reasonable time following identification. outcome of h normal civil penalty problem, such as in engineering, design,
- 5. Violations Involving Certain orinstallation, provided that b Discrimination lasues. Enforcemnt assessment process addressed in Section VLB, as provided in Section 111, violation is documented in an discretion may be exercised for inspection report (or official field notes discrimination cases when a licensee
" Responsibilities," the NRC may reduce for some material cases) that includes a who, without the need for government or retrain from issuing a civil penalty or description of b corrective action and intervention identifies an issue of a Notice of Violation for a Severity Level H or DI violation based on the merits of that it meets all of the following criteria: discrimination and takes prompt, h case aner considering the guidance (a)It was licensee-identified as a comprehensive, and effective corrective in this statement of policy and such result ofits voluntary initiative:
action to address both the particular factors as the age of the violation, the (b)It was or will be corrected, situadon and the overall work safety signl8cance of the violation. the including immediate cx>rrective action environment for raising safety concems. overall sustained ps.'....u.s of the and long term comprehensive corrective Similarly, enforcement may not be licensee has been particularly good, and action to prevent recurrence, within a warranted where a complaint is filed other relevant circumstances, including reasonable time following identi5 cation with the Department oflabor (DOL) any ht may have changed since the (this acuan should involve expending under Section 211 of the Energy violation. This discredon is expected to the initiative, as necessary, to identify Reorganisation Act of1974,as be exercised only where application of other failures caused by similar root amended, but the licensee settles the the normal guidance in the policy is causes); and matter before the DOL makes an initial tmwarranted.
(c)It was not likely to le identified find;ng of discrimination and addresses (aher the violation occurroQ by routine the overall we te:vironment.
C Exercise ofDiscretionfor on licensee efforts such as normal Alternative!y,if e Anding of Operating facihty surveillance or quality assurence (QA) discriminathn is made,the licensee On ocxasion, circumstances may arise activities, may choose to settle the case before the where a licensee's compliance with a in addition, the NRC may nfrain from evidentiary hearing begins. In such Technical Specification (TS) Limiting issuing a Notice of Violation for cases cases, the NRC may exercise its Condition for Operation or with other that meet the above criteria provided the discretion not to take enforcement licones conditions wou'd involve en NUREG-1600 16
--m----
~ - - ~ - "
= = ~ '
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / Notices 34395 unnecessary plant transient or exercised with respect to equipment or knowinaly, or with careless disregard performance of testing, inspection,or systems only when it has at least (i.e., wit'h more than more negligence) system realignment that is lnappropriate concluded that, notwithstanding the failed to take required actions which with the specific plant conditions, or conditions of the license:(1) m have actual or potential safety unnecessary delays in plant startup equipment or system does not perform signincance. Most transgressions of without a corresponding health and a safety function in the mode in which individuals at the level of Severity level safety benefit. In these circum aar=a, operation is to occur:(2) the safety E orIV violations willbe handled by e
the NRC staff may choose not to enforce function performed by the equipment or citing only the facility liconess.
the applicable TS or other license system is of only marginal safety More serious violations, including condition. ' Itis enforcement discretion, beneSt. provided remaining in the those involving the integrity of an designated as a Notim of Enforcement current mode increases the likelihood of individual (e.g., lying to the NRC)
Discretion (NOED), will only be an unnar==aary plant transient; or (3) concerning matters within the scope of exercised if the NRC staffis clearly the TS or other license condition the individual's u - -- lities, will be with protecting the public health and p'ya test, inspection or system considered for enforcement action satisned that the action is consistent nt that is inappropriate for the against the individual as well as against eafety, A licensee eseking the issuance particular plant conditions,in that it the facility liconese. Action against the l
of a NOED must provide a written does not provide a safety beneSt.or individual, however, will not be taken justincation, or in circumstances where may, in fact, be detrimental to safety in if the Japroper action by the individual good cause is shown, oral justlAcation the particular plant condition.
was caused try snanagement failures.
followed as soon as possible by written h decision to exercise enfortmanent h following examples of situations justincation, which documents the discretion does not change the fact that illustrate this concept.
safety basis for the request and provides a violation will occur nor does it imply
. Inadvertentindividualmistakes whatever other information the NRC that enfortament diametion is being resulting from inadequate training or staff deems necessary in making a exercised for any violation that may guidance provided by the facility decision on whethw or not to issue a have led to the violation at issue.In Isr= aman NOED.
each case where the NRC staff has e Inadvertently missing an The appropriate Regional chosen to issue a NOED, enforceenent insign1Rcant procedural x
-t Administrator, or his or her designes, action will normally be taken for the when the action is mutine,' fairly may issue a NOED where the root causes, to the extent violations uncomplicated, and them is no unusual noncompliance is temporary and were involved, that led to the cire-amanca indicating that the nonrecurring when an amendment is noncompliance for which enforcement procedures should be referred to and not practical. The Director, Office of discretion was used. The enforcement followed step-by-step.
Nuclear Reactor Regulation, or his or action is intended to emphasias that
. Compliance witn an express her designes, may issue a NOED if the licensees should not rely on the NRC's direction of management, such as the expected noncompliance will occur authority to exercise enforcement Shift Supervisor or Plant Manager, during the brief iod of time it discretion as a routine substitute for resulted in a violation unless the requires the staff to process an compliance or for requesting a licones individual did not express his or her emergency or exigent license amendment.
concern or objection to the dhoction.
amendment under the provisions of to Finally,it is expected that the NRC e Individual error dhocaly resulting CFR 50.91(a)(5) or (6). The person staff will exercleo enforcement from following the technical advice of exercising enforcement discretion will discretion in this area infrequently.
en expert unless the advice was clearly document the decision.
Although a plant must shut down, unr===aaakta sul the lir=aaarl For an operating plant, this exercise of refueling activities may be sus individual abound have recognised it as enforcement discretion is intended to or plant startup may be dela
, absent such.
minimise the potential safety the exercise of enforcement scretion, e Violations resuhing from consequences of unnecessary plant the NRC staff is under no obligation to inadequate procedures unless the transients with the accompanying take such a step merely because it has individualueed a faulty procedure operational risks and impacts or to been requested. The decision to forego knowing it was faulty and had not eliminate testing, inspection, or system enforcement is discretionary.When attempted to get the procedure realignment which is inappropriate for enforcement discretion is to be corrected.
the particular plant conditlons. For exercised, it is to be exercised only if IJseed below are examples of plants in a shutdown condition, the NRC suff is clearly satisfied that situations which could result in exercising enforcement discretion is such action is warranted from a health enforcement actions involving i
intended to reduce shutdown risk by, and safety perspective, individuals, licensed or unlicensed. If t'ne actions described in these examples again, avoiding testink,ich isinspection or VIII.Enforcument Actionsleveldag are taken a licensed operstor or taken system realignment w I*dIdd**I8 deliberatel en unlicensed i
inappropriate for the particular plant conditions,in that,it does not provide Enforcement actions involving individual eat edion may be a safety benefit or may,in fact be individuals includinglicensed taken dhocaly against the individual.
detrimental to safety in the particular operators, are signl8 cant personnel However, violations involving willful plant condition. Exercising enforcement actions, which will be closely controlled conduct not amounting to deliberste discretion for plants attempting to and judiciously applied. An action by an unlicensed individualin startup is less likely than exercising it enforcement action involving an these situations may result in for an operating plant,as simp individual will normally be taken only enforcernent action against a licensee delaying startup does not usua leave when the NRC is satisfied that the that may impact an individual.The the plant in a condition in whi it individual fully understood, or should situations include, but are not hmited could experience undesirable transients. have understood, his or her to, violations that involve:
In such cases, the Commission would responsibility; know, or should have e Willfully cousing a licensee to be in expect that discretion would be known,the required actions;and violation of NRC requimments.
17 NUREG liet
~ -. - - -
34396 Federal RegistIt / Vcl. 60, No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / Notic:s e Willfully taking actirn that wruld limnsee, th) NRC recognises th:1 until certtin conditions are satisfied, have caused a licensee to be is. violation judgments will have to be made on a e.g., completing specified training or of NRC requirements but the a:: tion did case by case basis. In making these meeting certain qualifications.
not do so because it was detected and decisions, the NRC will consider factors
- Require notification to the NRC corrective action was taken.
such as the following:
before resuming work in licensed e Recognir.ing a vloistion of 1.The level of the individual within activities.
procedural mquirements and willfully the organisation.
- Require the person to tell a not taking corrective action.
- 2. The individual's training and Prospective employer or customer
- Willfully defeating alarms which experiena as well as knowledge of the engaged in licensed activities that the have safet si ificance.
potential consequences of the Pwson has been subject to an NRC
- Unau sed abandoning of reactor wrongdoing order.
controls.
3,.The safety consequences of the in the case of a licensed operator's
- Dereliction of duty.
misconduct.
failure to meet applimble fitness.for-e Falsifying records required by NRC
- 4. The benefit to the wrongdoer, e.g.,
duty requirements (to CFR 55.53(j)) the regulations or by the facility license.
personal or corporate gain.
NRC may issue a Notice of Violation or
- Willfully providing, or causing a
- 5. The degresiof supervision of b a civil penalty to the Part 55 licensee, licensee to provide, an NRC laspector or individual,i.e..how closely is the or an order to suspend, modify, or investigator with inaccurate or individual monitored or audited, and revoke b Part 55 license. These actions incomplete information on a matter the likelihood of detection (such as a may be taken the first time a licensed radiographer werking independently in OPentor fails a drug or. alcohol test, that material to the NRC.
. Willfully withholding safety the field as contrasted with a team is, receives a confirmed positive test significent information rather than activitye a poww lant) that exceeds the cutoff levels of to CFR making such information known to
- 6. The employer s response e.g.,
Part 26 or b facility licensee's cutoff appropriate supervisory or technical disciplinary action taken.
levels, if lower. However, normally only a Notice of Violation will be issued for personnel in the licensee's organisation.
- 7. The attitude of the wrongdoer, e.g.,
. Submitting falso information au.. admission of wrongdoing, acceptance of the first confirmed positive test in the a result gaining unescorted wr=a to a mponsibility.
absence of aggravatlng circumstances nuclear power plant.
8 The d of ma ent such as wrors in the performance of e Willfully providing fates data to a mponsibil or cu pa licensed duties or evidence of prolonged licensee by a contractor or other person
- 9. Who identified the misconduct.
use. In addition, the NRC intends to who provides test or other services.
Any proposed enforcement action inue an ordu to suspend the Part 55 when the data affects the licensee s involving individuals must be issued license for up to 3 years the second time compliance with to CFR part 50, with the concurrence of the appropriate a licensed operstm exceeds those cutoff appendix B, or othw regulatory Deputy Executive Directrr The j
levels. In the event there are less than requirement.
particular sanction to be u 4 should be 3 years mmaining irt the term of me e Willfully providing false certification that components meet the dawmbd n a um.by buisjo individual s license, the NRC may Notices of Violation and Orders are consider not renewing the individual,s j
requirements of their intended use, such hcense w nm issuin a new heena ahn as ASME Code.
examples of enforcement actions that j
may be a propriate against individuals. the three year peri is completed. The 1
The adm(nistrative action of a lAtter of
. Willfully supplying.by vendors of NRC intends to issue an order to revoke
)
equipment for transportation of the Part 55 license the third time a radioactive material casks that do not Reprimand may also be considered.In licensed opwator exceeds those cutoff comply with their certificates of y,drInfor at$on g ther nfo on o levels. A licensed operator or applicant compliance.
enable it to determine whether an order who refuses to participate in the drug
. Willfull performing unauthorized and alcohol testing programs bypassing o[ required reactor or other or other enforcement action should be established by the facility licensee or
- Issued, facilit saisty systems.
who is involved in the sale, use, or e dillfully taking actions that violate Orders to NRC-licensed reactor possession of an illegal drug is also Technical Specification Limiting CPentes may inalw suspension fw a subject to license sus myocation,'or denial pension.
Conditions for Operation or other specified pelod, modification, w license conditions (enforcement action mucation of,their individual licenses.
In addition, the NRC may take for a willful violation will not be taken Orders to unhanaed individuals might enforcement action against a licensee if that violation is the result of action include provisions that would:
that may impact an individual, where e Prohibit involvement in NRC taken following the NRC's decision to the conduct of the individual places in
!orego enforcement of the Technial licensed activities for a specified period question the NRC's resonable
'III"'I""*II[d not exceed 5 yeam) or the period of auurance that licensed activities will be Specification or other license condition suspension wou properly conducted. The NRC may take or if the operator meets the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54 (x), (i.e.,
enforcement action for reasons that unless the operutor acted unreasonably
, "4,",,$,'n"d7/d** ' *" M a"*I'n d would warrant refusal to issue a license 8
th considering all the relevant of ten msmonded.NaC I not numeHy hnpees on an original Spplication. ACCordingly, circumstances surrounding the a civil penalty assinst en ladMdual. Howow, appropriate enforcement actions may be "cH** * *' * ^'8"d* E""sf Act tAE^l s'*
k d
h
. "$."3,%'M"*g["
ta en regar ing matters t at raise inues emergency.)
Normally, some enforcement action is "
of integrity, competence, fitness for-taken against a licensee for violations secthn its of the ARA to include individuals s duty, or other matters that may not caused by significant acts of wrongdoing verimy of menaissuens. and any represenw6,ee a maarily be a violation of specific by its employees, contreetors, or essait we ss= the canuniman autherny a Commission recuirements.
contractors
- employees. In deciding
",,P,sm Chu In the case of an unlicensed person, n
,py e
hen oe whether to issue an enforcement action, qw,em,n,43, cdy imped on mm is whether a firm or an individual, an to an unlicensed person as well as to the c = mined order modifying the facility license may NUREG 1600 18 1
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / Noticts 34397 be issued to requim (1) The removal of action may be taken for an failure to provide significant the person from alllicensed activities unintentionally incomplete or information. In any event,in serious for a specified period of time or inaccurate oral statement provided to cases where the licensee's actions in not indefinitely, (2) prior notice to the NRC the NRC by a licensee official or others correcting or providing information before utilizing the person in licensed on behalf of a licensee,if a record was raise questions about its commitment to activities, or (3) the licensee to provide madeof theoralinformationand safety or its fundamental notice of the issuance of such an order provided te the licensee thereby trustworthiness, the Commission may to other persons involved in licensed permitting an opportunity to correct the exercise its authority to issue orders activities making reference inquiries. In oral information, such as if a transcript modifying, suspending, or revoking the addition, orders to employers might of the communication or raseting license.The Commission recognizes require retraining, additional oversight, summary containing the error was made that enforcement detenninetions must or andependsat verification of activities available to the licensee and was not be made on a mee-by-case basis, taking postmed by tlw person,if the person subsequently corncted in a timely into consideration the inues described is to be involved in licensed activities.
manner.
In this section.
d i,x, pga n --P-ira".. :'m ie !"rm.uon.
y,,--ita-ei-in-x i
the decision to tesue a Notice of A violation of the regulations Violation for the initial inaccurate or The Commission's enforcement policy involving submittal ofincomplete e incomplete information normally will is also applicable to non-licensees, or inaccurate information, whether t be dependent on the circumstances, including employees of licensees, to not considered a material false including the sese of detection of the contractors and sulr.ontractors, and to rtatement, can result in the full range of enor, the timeliness of the correction, employees of contractors and enforcement sanctions.The labeling of a whether the NRC or the limnses subcontractors, who knowingly provide ccmmunication failure as a material identified the problem with the components, equipment, or other goods false statement will be made on a case, communication,and whether the NRC or services that relate to a licensee's by-case basis and will be reserved for relied on the information prior to the activities subject to NRC regulation. The egregious violations. Violations conection. Generally,if the matter was prohibitions and sanctions for any of involving inaccurate or incomplete promptly identified and corrected by these persons who engage in deliberate information or the failure to provide the licensee prior to reliance by the misconduct or submission of significant information identified by a NRC, or before the NRC raised a incomplete or inaccurate information limnase normally will be categorized question about the infonnation,no are provided in the rule on deliberate based on the guidance herein,in Section enforcement action will be taken for the misconduct, e.g.,10 CFR 30.10 and 50.5.
IV," Severity of Violations," and in initialinaccurate or incomplete Vendors of products or services Su2plement VII.
information. On the other hand, if the Provided for use in nuclear activities are Tne Commission recognizes that oral misinformation is identified after the subject to artain requirements designed information may in some situations be NRC relies on it, or after some question to ensure that the products or services inhemntly less reliable than written is reised regarding the accuracy of the supplied that could affect safety are of submittela because of the absence of an information, then some enforcement high quality.'Ihrough procurement opportunity for reflection and action normally will be taken even if it contracts with reactor licensees, vendors management review. However, the is in fact corrected. However,if the may be required to have quality Commission must be able to rely on oral initial submittal was accurate when assurance programs that meet applicable communications from licensee officials made but later turns out to be erroneous requirements includina to CFR Part 50, concerning significant information.
because of newly discovered Appendix B, and to CFR Part 71 Therefore, in determining whether to information or advance in technology, a Subpart H. Vendors supplying products take enforcement action for an oral citation normally would not be orservicestoreactor materials,and to statement, consideration may be given appropriate if, when the new CFR Part 71 licensees are sub}ect to the to factors such as (1)The degree of information became available or the requirements of to CFR Part 21 knowledge that the communicator advancement in technology was made, maarding reporting of defects in basic should have had, regarding the matter, the initial submittal was conected.
components.
In view of his or her position, training.
The failure to correct inaccurate or When inspections determine that and experience;(2) the opportunity and incomplete information which the violations of NRC requirements have time available prior to the limnese does not identify as significant occurred, or that vendors have failed to communication to assure the accuracy normally will not constitute a separate fulfill contractual commitments (e.g., to or completenesa of the information:(3) violation. However, the circumstances CFR Part 50, Appendix B) that could the dogme ofintem or negligence,if surrounding the failure to correct may adversely affect the quality of a safety any, involved;(4) the formality of the be conaldered relevant to the significant product or service, communication; (5) the rossonableness determination of erhrmment action for enforcement action will be taken.
of NRC reliance on the information:(6) the initialinaccurra or incomplete Notices of Violation and civil penalties the importance of the information statement. For example, an will be used, as appropriate, for licensee which was wrong or not provided; and unintentionally inaccurate or failures to ensure that their vendors (7) the reasonableness of the incomplete submission may be treated have programs that meet applicable l
explanation for not providing complete as a more severe matter if the licensee requirements. Notices of Violation will I
and accurate information, later determines that the initial be issued for vendors that violate 10 Absent at least mreless disregard, an submittal was in error and does not CFR Part 21. Civil penalties willbe incomplete or inaccurate unswom oral correct it or if there were clear imposed against individual directors or statement normally will not be subject opportunities to identify the error. lf responsible officers of a vendor to enforcement action unless it involves information not corrected was organization who knowinB y and l
significant information providd by a recognized by a licensee as significant, consciously fall to provide the notice licanese official. However, enforcecent a seperste citation may be made for the required by 10 CFR 21.21(b)(1). Notices i
19 NUREG 1600 l
34398 Feder-1 Register / Vol. 60, No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / Notic;s cf Nonconf rmanc) will be used f:r abl3 to perform its int:nded safity
- 3. Insttintiv: ness to duty cn th> part vendors which fail to meet functiona when actually called upon to oflicensed personnel:
commitments related to NRC activities.
work:
- 4. Changes in rector parameters that XI. Referrals to the Department of
- 3. An accidental criticallt : or cause unanticipated reductions in y,,g,
- 4. A limnsed operator at e centrols margins of safety; of a nuclear reactor, or a senior operator
- 5. A significant failure to meet the Alleged or suspected criminal directing licensed activitin, involved in requirements of 10 CFR 50.59, including violations of the Atomic Energy Act procedural errors which result in, or a failure such that a required license (and of other relevant Federal laws) are exparbete the consequences of, an alert amendment was not sought; mferred to the Department of Justice or higher level emergoney and who, as
- 6. A licenses failure to conduct (DOJ) for invatigation. Referral to the a rault of subsequent testing, receives adequate oversight of vendors resulting DOJ does not preclude the NRC from a confirmed positive test result for drugs in the use of products or services that taking other enforcement action under or alcohol.
this policy. However, enforament B. Severity Level U-Violations are of defective or indeterminate quality actions will be coordinated with the involving for example:
and that have safety signiacance:
- 7. A breakdown in the control of DOJ in accordance with the
- 1. A system desi ned to prevent or licensed activities involvin 6
Memorandum of Understanding mitigate serious safety events not being of violations that are'related (a numbe or if between the NRC and the DOJ,53 FR able to perform its intended safety 50317 (December 14,1988).
function:
isolated, that are mcurring violations)
- 2. A licensed o retor involved in the that collectively represent a potentially XII. Fehlic Disclosure of Enforcesneat use, sale, or poe ion ofill 1 drugs signincent lack of attendon or or the consumption of alcohoYc carelessness toward licensed
^*II'"'
Enforament actions and licensees beverages, within the protected area: or f*8Ponsibilities: or responses,in accordance with to CFR
- 3. A ucensed operator at the control
- 8. A licensed operator's confirmed 2.790, are publicly available for of a nuclear reactor, or a senior operator Positive test for drugs or alcohol that inspection. In addition, press aleams diacting licennd activities, involved in does not issult in a Severity Lavol I or are generally issued for orders and civil proadural errors and who, as a result U violation, penalties and are issued at the same of subsequent testing, receives a
- 9. Equipment failures caused by time the order or proposed imposition confirmed positive test result for drugs inadequate or improper maintenance of the civil penalty is issued. In or alcohol.
that substantially complicates recovery addition, press releases are usually C. Severity LevelIU-Violations from a plant transient.
issued when a propomd civil penalty is involving for example:
D. Severity LevelIV-Violations withdrawn or substantially mitigated by
- 1. A significant failure to comply with involving for example:
some amount. Press releases am not the Action Statement for a Technical
- 1. A less significant failure to comply S ecification Limiting Condition for with the Action Statement for a normally issued for Notices of Violation P
that are not accompanied by orders or Operation where the a propriate action Technical Specification Limitin proposed civil penalties was not taken within e required time, Condition for Operation where t e such as:
appropriate action was not taken within XIIL Reopening Closed Enforcement (e)1n a pressurized water reactor,in the required time, such as:
Actions the applicable moda, having one high-(a)In a pressurized water reactor, a If significant new information is pressure safety injection pump 5% deficiency in the required volume of received or obtained by NRC which inoperable for a period in excess of that the condensate storage tank: or indicate that an enformment sanction allowed by the action statement; or
- (b)ln a boiling water reactor, one was incorrectly applied, consideration (b)ln a boiling water reactor, one subsystem of the two independent MSIV may be given, dependent on the Primary containment isolation valve leakage control subsystems inoperable:
circumstances, to reopening a closed in0Perable for a period in excess of that
- 2. A failure to meet the requirements enforcement action to increase or allowed by the action statement.
of 10 CFR 50.59 that does not result in decrease the severity of a sanction or to
- 2. A system dwigned to prevent or a Severity Level I, H, or HI violation; correct the record. Reopening decisions mitigate a serious safety event:
- 3. A failure to meet regulatory will be made on a case-by case basis, ar, (a)Not being able to perform its recuirements that have more than minor expected to occur rarely, and require the intended function under certain safety or environmental significance; or specific approval of the appropriate conditions (e.g., safety system not
- 4. A fsilure to make a required Deputy Executive Director.
Operable unless offsite power is Licensee Event Report evallable; materials or components not Sepplement I-Reactor Operations environmentally valified);or SupplementII-Part 50 Facility
' Itis supplement provides examples (b) Being d ed to the extent that Construction of violations in each of the four severity a detailed eva tion would be required This supplement provides examples levels as guidance ha determining the to detennine its operability (e.g.,
appropriate severity level for violations component parameters outside of violations in each of the four severity levels as guidance in determining the in the area of reactor operations.
approved limitt such as pump flow appropriate severity level for violations A. Severity level I-Violations ratw, beat exchan r transfer involving for example:
characteristics, sa sty valve lift in the area of Part 50 facility construction.
- 1. A Safety Limit, as defined in to setpoints, or valve stroke times);
A. Severity 1Avel1-Violations CFR 50.36 and the Technical involving structures or systems that are Specifications being exceeded; manaserial centrol symmus well a physical completed nin such a manner that they
- 2. A system H designed to prevent or 87','Q g,,,
g mitigate a serious safety event not being sessey function. end is not directed toward a nose "The term completed" as used in this of radundancy. A loss of one outsystem does not supplement means compwtlon'of construction H The term
- system" as used in these delmet the intended selety function as long as the including review and acceptance by the supplemente, includes administrative and other subsystem is operable.
construction QA organisation.
NUREG-1600 20
_m _ _
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No.126 / Friday June 30, 1995 / Notices 34399 would not have satisfied their intended able to perform its intended safety considered to be significant while the safety related purpose.
function when actually called upon to mformation is outside the protected area B. Severity LevelII-Violations work: or and accessible to those not authorised involving for example:
(c) An accidental criticality occurred; access to the protected trea:
- 1. A breakdown in the Quality
- 2. The theft, loss, or diversion of a
- 6. A significant failure to respond to Assurance (QA) program as exemplified formula quantity H of special nuclear an event either in sufficient time to by defi;iencies in construction QA material (SNM): or provide protection to vital equipment or related to more than one work activity
- 3. Actual unauthorised production of strategic SNM. or with an adequate (eg., structural, piping, electrical, a formula quantity of SNM.
response force:
foundations). These deficiencies B. Severity levelII-Violations
- 7. A failure to perform an appropriate normally involve the limnase's failure involving for example:
evaluation or background investigation to conduct adequate audits or to take 1.The entry of an unauthorised so that information mlevant to the pmmpt corrective action on the basis of individualiswho represents a threat access determination was not obtained such audits and normally involve into a vital area ** from outside the or considered and as a result a person, multiple examples of deficient protected area; who would likely not have been granted construction or catruction of 2.The theft, loss or diversion of SNM acass by the licenses,if the required unknown quality due to inadequate of moderate strategic significanceo in investigation or evaluation had been program implementation; or.
which the security system did not performed, was granted access; or
- 2. A structure or system that is function as requised; or
- 8. A breakdown in tha security completed in such a manner that it
- 3. Actual unauthorised production of program involving a nuraber of could have an adverse effect on the SNM.
violations that are related (or, if isolated, safety of operations.
C. SeveritylevelIII-Violations that are recurring violation' hat C. Severity 14vellil-Violations involvina for smample:
collectively reflect a potent ly involving for example:
- 1. A fallure or inability to control significant lack of attention or
- 1. A deficiency in a licensee QA access through established systems or carelessness toward licensed program for construction related to a PMw= such that an unauthorised responsibilities, single work activity (e.g.. structural, individual (i.e. not authorised D. Severity 14 vel IV-Violations piping, electrical or foundations). This unescorted access to protected area) involving for example:
algnificant deficiency normally involves could easily gain undetected meraas '8
- 1. A failure orinability to control the licensee's failure to conduct into a vital area imm outside the access such that an unauthorized adequate audits or to take prompt protected area; individual (i.e.. authorised to protected corrective action on the basis of such
- 2. A failure to conduct any nearch at area but not to vital area) could easily audits and normally involves multiple the access control point or conducting gain undetected access into a vital ares examples of deficient construction or an inadequate search that resulted in the from inside the protected area or into a construction of unknown quality due to introduction to the protected area of controlled access area; inadequate program implementation:
firearms, explosives, or incendiary
- 2. A failure to respond to a suspected
- 2. A failure to confirm the design devims and reasonable facsimiles event in either a timely manner or with safety requirements of a structure or thereof that could significantly assist an adequate response force:
system as a result of inadequate radiological sabotage or theft of strategic
- 3. A failure to implement to CFR preoperational test program SNM; Parts 25 and 95 with respect to the implementation: or
- 3. A failure, degradation.or other information addressed under Section
- 3. A failure to make a required 10 CFR deficienc'y of the protected area 142 of the Act, and the NRC approved intrusion detection or alarm assoasment security plan relevant to those parts; 50.55fe) report.
D. Seventy 1.evelIV-Violations systems such that an unauthorised
- 4. A lallure to make, maintain or involving failure to meet regulatory individual who represents a threat provide log entries in accordance with requirements including one or more could predictably circumvent the to CFR 73.71 (c) and (d), where the Quality Assurance Criterion not system or deleet a specific zone with a omitted information (1) is not otherwise amounting to Severity level 1.11. or 111 high degree of confidence without available in easily retrievable records, violations that have more than minor insider knowledge, or other significant and (ii) significantly contributes to the safety or environmental significance.
degradation of overall system capability; ability of either the NRC or the licensee 4.Asi ificant failure of the to identify a programmatic breakdown; l
systems designed or used to
- 5. A failure to conduct a proper search m
S8PP ament til as This supplement provides examples prevent or detect the theft. Ices or at the access controlpoint; of violations in each of the four severity diversion of stretsgic SNM;
- 6. A failure to properly secure or levels as guidance in determining the 5..A failure to protect or control protect classified or safeguards appropriate severity level for violations classified or safeguards information information inside the protected aron which could assist an individual in an in the area of safeguards.
A. Severity 14 vel 1-Violations a see is cm ra.: for th defininen et lennate act of radiological sabotage or theft of involving for example:
quenney."
strategic SNM where the information a misnn uneumerimdindMoul"m and was not removed from the protected
- 1. An act of radiological sabotage in which the security system did not
$ $ $ $.,in meinonne,en,ed."'"w",",,* $[,,, area:
- 7. A failure to mntrol access such that function as required and, as a result of ne eumeriandaen the failure, there was a significant event.
= m pwese vuot eree a med in tw an opportunity exists that could allow such as:
supplanent taciudes vuei esees and insieriet names unauthorized and undetected access into the protected area but which was (a) A Safety Limit, as defined in 10 CFR 50.36 and the Technical jMC"'fM$"$""["g., neither easily or likely to be exploitable; i
- 6. A failure to conduct an adequate Sp(ecifications, was exceeded:
3,,,,,,,,,,,,,,w,w,,,,,, w,,,ay search at the exit from a material acmas b) A system designed to prevent or sained. inmere such a produnstsluy. idenunehmey.
mitigate a serious safety event was not and een of peessee should he conendered.
area:
21 NUREG-1600 j
s
34400 Federal Register / Vcl. 60, No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / Notices
- 9. A thin or loss cf SNM cf1:w skin af the wh:le body, er to tha feet, cpplicabb limits in to CFR Pvt 20 strategic significance that was not ankles, hands or forearms, or to any Sections 20.1001-20.2401 whOer or detected within the time period other organ or tissue; not an exposure or relewe occurs:
8Pecified in the security plan, other
- 4. An annual exposure of a member of
- 9. Disposal of licensed material not relevant document, or regulation: or the public in excess of 0.5 rem total covered in severity Levels I or !!:
- 10. Other violations that have more effective does equivalent:
- 10. A release for unrestricted use of than minor safeguards signincena.
- 5. A release of radioactive material to contaminated or radioactive material or Supplesment IV-Heahh Physica(to an unrestricted ares at concentrations in equipment that poses a realistic CFR Pat m) exmss of10 times the limits for tial for exposure of the public to members of the public as described in is or doses exceeding the annual
'!his supplement provides examples 10 CFR 20.1302(bX2XI)(except when does limits for members of the public, of violations in each of the four severity operation up to 0.5 rum a year has been or that reDects a programmatic (rather levels as guldmann in determi b
approved by the Comuniesion under than anisolated) weakness in the appropriate severity level for vio Section 20.1301(c));
radiation control program; in the area of health physics,10 O'R 6.Disposaloflicensed materialin
- 11. Conduct oflicensee activities by a Part top guantities or camcentrations in excess of technically unqualified person, A.SeverityI.svelI Violations nye times the limits of to CFR 20.2003:
- 12. A signifkiant failure to control involving for example:
or licensed snatorial: or
- 1. A radiation exposure during any
- 7. A failure to make an immediate
- 13. A breakdown in the radiation year of a workerin exoses of 25 rusos notincetion as required by 10 CFR safety program involving a number of total e5ective does equivalent,75 rems 20.2202 (aX1) or (aM2).
violations that are related (or, if isolated, so the lens of the eye, or 250 reds to h C. Severity involIll-Violations that are recurring) that collectively skin of the whole body, or to the feet, involving for,emarnple:
represent a potentially signincant lack ankles, hands or forearms, or to any
- 1. A radiation exposum during any of attention or carol===== toward other organ or tissue:
year of a worker in excess of 5 rems total licensed responsibilities.
- 2. A radiation exposum over b oflective dose equivalent,15 nuns to the D. Severity 14velIV-Violations gestation period of the embryo /fotus of lens of the eye, or 50 rems to the skin involving for example:
a declared pregnant woman in=== of of the whole body or to the feet, ankles,
- 1. Exposures in exones of the limits of 2.5 reme total effective does equivalent: hands or forearms, or to any other organ 10 CFR 20.1201,20.1207, or 20.1208 not
- 3. A radiation exposure during any or tissue:
constituting Severity Imvel I, II, or III year of a minorin excess of 2.5 soms
- 2. A radiation exposure over the violations:
total effective dose equivalent,7.5 roms gestaden od of the ernbryo/fotus of
- 2. A misase of radioscun snaurial to to the lens of the eye, or 25 roms to the a
. ant woman in excess of an unrestricud area at concentrations in skin of b whole body, or to the feet
- 0.5 rum total e we does equivalent excess of the limits for members of the ankles, hands or forearms, or to any (except when doses are in accordance public as mierenad in to CFR other organ or tissue; with the p)rovisions of mar +1=i 20.1302(b)(2)(1)(except when operation
- 4. An annual exposure of a member of 20.120s(d );
up to 0.5 som a year has been approved the public in excess of1.0 som total
- 3. A radiation exposure during any by the Commission under Section year of a sninorin excess of 0.5 rem total 20.1301(c));
effective does huivalent',
- 5. A release radioactive material to effectiw does equivalent; 2.5 rarns to
- 3. A radiation dose rate in an an unrestricted area at concentradons in the lens of the eye, or 5 paras to the skin unrestricted or controlled ares in excess excess of 50 times the limits for of the whole body, or to the feet, ankles, of 0.002 roen in any 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> (2 millirem /
members of the hublic as described in hands or forearms, or to any other organ hour) or 50 millisems in a year:
10 CFR 20.1302 X2)(i); or or Hasue;
- 4. FaHun to maintain and implement
- 6. Disposal oflicensed materialin 4A eXPoem abow radiation s to keep radiation quantitles or concentrations in excess of tory limits when such exposure ex as as is reasonably 10 times the limits of 10 CPR 20.2003.
(ucm g,
u 5.
to a member of the publicin B.
ver ty involII-Violations nvo ng orexamp.
control program, exoses of any EPA generally applicable
- 1. A radiation exposure during any
- 5. An annual exposure of a member of environmental radiation standards, such year of a workerin excess of to rosas the public in excess of 0.1 roen total as 40 CPR Part 190; total effective does equivalent. 30 resna eRectiw does equivalent (except when
- 6. A failure to ranke b 30-day to the lens of the eye, or 100 soms to the operation up to 0.5 rem a year nas been notincetion required by to CPR skin of the whole body, or to the feet.
approved by the th==taatan unda.
20.2201(aX1)(ii) or 20.2203(s);
Secuan 20.1301(c));
- 7. A failure to make a timely written ankles, hands or forearms, or to any
- 6. A release of radioactive material to report as required by to CF1t 20.2201(b),
other organ or tissue:
an unrestricted ares at concentrations in 20.2204, or 20.2206: or
- 2. A radiation orposure over the exoses of two times the efDuent
- 8. Any other matter that has more gestation period of the embryo / fetus of concentration limits referenad in to than a minor safety, health, or a declared pregnant woman in excess of 1.0 rem total effective dose equivalent; CFR 20.1302(bX2XI)(except when environmental significance.
- 3. A radiation exposure during any operation up to 0.5 rem a year has been y_y,,,,,,,,,g;,
year of a minorin excese of1 som total approved by the Comuniasion under
~"
Section 20.1301(c)).
Es supplement provides examples effective does equivalent: 3.0 roms to
- 7. A failure to ma'ka a 24. hour of violations in each of the four severity the lens of the eye, or to roms to the notiScotion required by to CFR lewis as guidance in determining the 20.2202(b) or en immediate notification appropriate severity level for violations g g,Q"*jfll"%'Q%
required by 10 CFR 20.2201(aX1)(1);
enwesency ruponee erfon wm he treated on a cas,.
- 8. A substantial potential for by-cue ima exposures or releases in excess of the NUREG-1600 22 6
_ ____...~_ _ __ _
Federal Regist:r / Vcl. 60, No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / Notic:s 34401 in the area of NRC transportation collectively mflect a potentially C. Severity 1.evel[U-Violations requirements W.
significant lack of attention or involving for example:
A. Severity Level 1-Violations camlesaness toward licensed
- 1. A failure to control access to involving for example:
msponsibilities.
Licensed materials for radiation
- 1. Failure to meet transportation D. Severity 1AvelIV-Violations purposes as specified by NRC i
requirements that resulted in loss of involving for example:
requirements; control of radioactive material with a
- 1. A breach of package integrity
- 2. Possession or use of unauthorised breach in package integrity such that the without extemal radiation levels equipment or materials in the conduct material caused a radiation exposure to exceeding tlw NRC limit or without oflicensee activities which degrades a member of the public and there was contamination levels exceeding five safety; clear potential for the public to receive times the NRC limits; 3.Use of radmctive material on more than.1 rom to the whole body;
- 2. Surface contamination in excess of humans where such use is not
- 2. Surface contamination in excess of but not more than five times the NRC suthorised:
- 4. Conduct of licensed activities by a 50 times the NRC limit; or limit:
- 3. Extemal radiation levels in excess
- 3. A failure to register as an technically valified person; of to times the NRC limit.
authorimod user of an NRC Certified
- 5. Radiation is, contamination levels, or releases that exceed the limits B. Severity invol D-Violations Transport packap; l
involving for example:
- 4. A noncomp3ance with ehlpping sPecified in the licones:
- 1. Failure to meet transportation pepts, marking, labeling, placarding.
- 6. Substantial failum to implement
)
requirements that resulted in loss of packagmg ur loading not amounting to the quality management program as control of radioactive meterial with a a Severity level I. E, or El violation:
required by Section 35.32 that does not breech in package integrity such that
- 5. A failure to demonstrate that result in a misedm8nistration: failure to there was a clear potential for the packages for special form radioactive r* Port a miandministration;or member of the public to receive more material meets applicable regulatory Programmatic weakness in the than.1 rem to the whole body:
mquirements implementationof thequality i
- 2. Surface contamination in excess of
- 6. A failure to demonstrate that at program that results in a i
10,but not more than 50 times the NRC packages meet DOT Specifications for mi ministration.
- 7. A breakdown in the controlof limit:
7A Type A packages; or licensed activities involvina a number
- 3. Extemal radiation levels in excess 7.Other violations that have mor, of five, but not more than 10 times the than minor safety or environmental of violations that are related (or, if laolated, that are recurring violations)
NRC limit; or significance, that collectively represent a potentially
- 4. A failure to make required initial SuPP ement VI-Fuel Cycle and significant lack of attention or i
l notifications associated with Severity Is Operations camlessness toward licensed lave!I or H violations.
Thi8 8uPP ement provides examples responsibilities; l
C. Severity IAvelIll-Violations involving for example:
of violations in each of the four severity
- 8. A failure,during radiographic
- 1. Surface contamination in excess of levels as guidana in determining the OP88stions, to have present or to use five but not more than 10 times the NRC appropriate severity level for violations radiographic equipment, radiation l
limit:
in the eres of fuel cycle and materials survey instruments, and/or personnel l
2.Extemal radiation in exmes of one operations.
monitoring devices as required by 10 but not more than five times the NRC A. Severity 14 veli-Violations CFR Part 34:
- 9. A failure to submit an NRC Form limit:
involving for example:
- 3. Any noncompliance with labeling,
- 1. Radiation levels, contamination 241 in accordance with the placarding, shipping paper, packaging, levels, or releases that exceed to times requirements in Section 150.2 ) d to loading, or other requirements that the limits speci8ed in the license:
CFRPart 150:
could reasonably result in the following:
- 2. A system designed to prevent or
- 10. A failure to receive required NRC (a) A significant failure to identify the mitigate a serious safety event not being ap val prior to the implementation of a
in licensed activities that has type, quantity, or form of material; operable when actually required to I
(b) A failure of the carrier or recipient Perform its design function; radiological or programmatic j
to exercise adequate controls; or
- 3. A nucleescriticality accident: or significance, such as, a change in (c) A substantial potential for either
- 4. A failure to follow the procedures ownership: lack of an RSO or personnel exposure or contamination of the quality management program, replacement of an RSO with an above regulatory limits orimproper utred by Section 35.32 that results in unqualified individual; a change in the l
tronaler of material:
a th or serious injury (e.g.,
location where licensed activities are l
- 4. A failure to make required initial substantial orgna impairment)to a being conducted,or where licensed notification asacciated with Severity Patient.
materialis being stored where the new levelIH violations;or B. Severity 1Avel U-Violations IScilities do not meet safety guidelines;
- 5. A breakdown in the licensee's involving for example:
or a change in the quantity or type of
- 1. Radiation levels, contamination radioactive meterial being processed or l
program for the transportation of levels, or releases that exceed five times used that has radiological significance; i
licensed memrial involving a number'of violations that are related (or,if isolated, the limits specified in the license; or
- 2. A system designed to prevent or
- 11. A significant failure to meet that are recurring violations) that mitigate a serious safety event being decommissioning requirements asen=imneparutionenq irennais epplied inoperable; or including a failure to notify the NRC as a more then one tieessen inwohed in the eman
- 3. A substantial programmatic failure required by regulation or limnee activity such se a shipper and a cartner, when a in the implementation of the quality condition, substantial failure to meet tiUre* cad the ree '
management program required by to decommissioning standards, failure to CFR 35.32 that results in a conduct and/or complete 16canese which. under the circumenences or the emen. nmy be one or more of the licenesse involved mierdministration, decommissioning activities in M
NUREG-M00
kedoral Register / Vol. 60, No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / Notices
.lati:n er license er the common d fonse and security EAP's staffis aware that an ladividual's o meet required
("signiBeant information identJfled by a condition may adversely' affect safety equate limnase") and is deliberately withheld ' related activities: or from the Commission:
- 9. '!he failum of licensee management
/-Violations
- 4. Action by senior corporate to take effective action in correcting a o
managementin violation of to CFR 50.7 hostile work environment.
trin patients or similar regulations against an C. Severity level HI-Violations e cobah-60, employee; involving for example:
- n-192 implants or
- 5. A knowing and intentional failure 1,1==nplete orinaccurate ankage or to-de the notice required by to information that is provided to the NRC n u use properly Part 21:or (a) because of actions on the
- 6. A failum to substantially part of Hraa===
but not that have more implement the required 8tness for-duty amounting to a Set Mty levelI or H mviraa==atal programar violation, or (b)if tb information, had B. Severity Isvol B-Violations it been complete and accurate at the the quality involving for esasaple:
time provided,likely would have i, including 1.Inaccurote or incomplete resulted in a reconsideration of a or not a information that is to the NRC regulatory position or substantial further curs, provided the (a) by a licenses bomuse of inquiry such as an additional inspection lo not demonstrate careless disregard for the completeness or a formalrequest for information; ness in the or accuracy of the information, or (b) if
- 2. Incomplois orinaccurote e QM program, and the information, had it been complete information that the NRC re ences if a and accurate at the time provided,likely kept by a licenses that is (a) quires be incomplete invalved: failure to would have resulted in regulatory action orinaccurate because ofinadequate Program review: or such as a show cause order or a alfferent actions on the part of licensee ofBcials ivs actions as regulatory poaltion; but not amounting to a Severity invol !
5.32: or
- 2. Incomplete or inaccurate or H violation, or (b) if the information, the records information that the NRC requins be had it been complete and acx:urete when 33.32 or 35.33.
kept by a licenses which is (a) reviewed by the NRC, likely would have iceHaneses incomplete orinaccurate bomune of resulted in a reconalderation of a careless disregard for the accuracy of the regulatory position or substantial further inforrnation on the part of a lin=====
inquiry such as an additional inspection cvides examples ofBcial, or (b) if the information, had it or a fonnal request forinformation:
>f the four severity been complete and accurate when 3=A failure to provide "signifiant det:rm the reviewed by the NRC,likely would have information identified by a licensee" to evst for vio tions resulted in regulatory action such as a the Corn =l== ion and not amounting to
'us matters.
show cause order ora different a SeveritylevelIor H violation:
-Violations regulatory position:
- 4. An action by first-line supervision
- 3. "Signthant information identi6ed in violation of to CFR 50.7 or similar amplow by a licensee"and not provided to the regulations not en employee:
stovided to the Commission bemuse of careless
- 5. An las uste review or failure to vith the knowledge disregard on the part of a licensee review such
,1f an appropriate ut the information official review had been made as required, a 10 airste,or(b)if the
- 4. An action by plant management CFR Part 21 report would have been en complete and above first line supervision in violation made:
ovided,likely of10 CFR 50.7 or similar regulations
- 6. A failure to complete a suitable n regulatory action against an employee:
inquiry on the basis of to CFR Part 26, cada required by
- 5. A failure to ide the notice keep records concoming the denial of 8afety-required by to Part 21:
access,or mopond toinquiries ccurate
- 6. A failure to remove an individual concerning denials of access so that, as
'RCrequires be from unescorted access who has been a result of the failure, a person is (a)1.scomplete involved in the sale, use, or possession P8eviously denied acmas for Atness for-of falsification by of illegal drugs within the prasar+=d area duty reasons was improperly granted
> cf a licenses or take action for on duty misues of
- amese, formation, had it
- alcohol, ption drugs, or over-the.
- 7. A failure to take the required action
- urets when counwr fora conArawd to have been likely would ha e 7 A failure to take r===an=hle action test Positive for illegal drug use or acti:n such as an when observed behavior within the take action for onsite alcohol use: not md by public protected area or credible information amounting to a Severity 14 vel U iderations; concerning activities within the violation; he licensee has protected area indicates possible
- 8. A failure to assury, as required, that gnificant unfitness for duty based on drug or mntractors or vendors have an effective
- health and safety alcohol use.
fitnese-for-duty progrem;
- 8. A delit erste failure of the licensee's
- 9. A breakdown in the fitness-for-duty on chie suppleme"'
Emffy licensee's management whenloyee Assistance Program (EAP) to Program involving a number of apw insonneuenand not violations of the basic elements of the
- la nad'
- th*
fitness-for-duty program that a !
8'The esemple for violations for atsees.lar. duty collectively reflect a significant lack of i IV.C, relate to violetHms of 10 CPR part 38.
attention or camlessness towards 24 s
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No.126 / Friday, June 30, 1995 / Notices 34403 meeting the objectivu of to CFR 26.10: in the area of emerBency preparedness.
standard involving assessment or it should be noted that citations are not notification.
or
- 10. Threats of discrimination or normally made for violations involving C. Severity levelIll-Violations restrictive agreements which are emergency preparedness occurring involving for example:
violations under NRC regulations such during emergency exercism. However,
- 1. In an alert, licensee failure to as 10 CFR 50.7(f).
where exercises reveal (i) training, promptly (1) correctly classify the event.
D. Severity LevelIV-Violations procedural, or repetitive failures for (2) make required notifications to involving for example:
which corrective actions have not been responsible Federal. State, and local
- 1. Incomplete or inacx: urate taken. (ii) an overall concem regarding agencies, or(3) respond to the event information of more than minor the liansee's ability to implement its (e.g., assess actual or potential offsite significance that is provided to the NRC plan in a manner that adequately canaequences, activate emergency but not amounting to a Severity Isvol 1, protects public health sad safety, or (iii) response facilities, and augment shift H, or H! violation:
poor selferitiques of the licensee's staff):
2.Information that the NRC requires exercises, enforcement action may be
- 2. A licensee failure to meet or be kept by a licensee and that is appropriate.
Implement more than one emergency incomplete orinaccurate and of more A. Severity 14 vel 1-Violations planning standard involving assessment i
than minor significance but not involving for example:
or notification;or amounting to a Severity level 1. H, or HI ln a general emergency, licensee
- 3. A breakdown in the control of failure to promptly (1) correctly classi8r li,=nand activities involving (a number violation:
the event,(2) make required of violations that are related or,if
- 3. An inadequate review or failure to review under 10 CFR Part 21 or other notifications to responsible Federal isolated, that are recurring violations) procedural violations associated with 10 State, and local agencies, or (3) respond that collectively represent a potentially CFR Part 21 with more than minor to the event (e.g., assess actual or significant lack of attention or safety significance; potential offsite consegunces, activata carelessness toward licensed
- 4. Violations of the requirements of emergery response facw N, and responsibilities.
Part 26 of more than minor significana; augment shift staff)-
D. Severity !avelIV-Violations
- 5. A failure to report acts of licensed B. Severity invol H-Violations involving for example:
operators or supervisors pursuant to 10 involving for example:
A licenses failure to meet or CFR 26.73 or
- 1. In a site r
.r licenses failure implement any emergency planning
- 6. Discrimination cases which,in to promptly (1) correct classify the standard or requirement not directly themselves, do not warrant a Severity event,(2) make requi notifications to related to assessment and notification level HI categorization.
responsible Federal State, and local land.this 2%
i g,,,
ygg_,_
agencies,or(3) respond to the event
,, g g
"'I*I 'II*I'*
For tbs Nuclear itsgulatory Commision.
Preparedness g
This supplement provides examples response facilities, and e ahlft Jeha C Hoyle, seemeoryof the Commh of violations in each of the four severity staff): or levels as guidance in determining the
- 2. A licenses failure to meet or (7R Doc. 95-1ses2 Filed 6-29-95: a:45 aml appropriate severity level for violations implement one emergency planning sume sees resww
\\
25 NUREG-1600 e
f
&... y. A R h y lW Q & }.& &e f g iG & y W '. A{ :.~
E: more he=n se==mes'meTanaglbbneine f
j.
wwmir.o.sawre.ss ryWarpmeddWeeM K
asene.sv s ia.%%WS"ar%%9ab. y$engin asandedurWEcink;tiii6e&mignesd6thefra m
F "Announcemma'dgs al.M.YEsaisaf1lElGQ*Q l
' swi
@ amen. m tet h efa b e,= w disrm = W
%.rh* M*' *an iney=.dee'impacidsymimmee+a e
~
a
=: se adope m 6mbi A ally bp Ram (samme" ?% f annex wtaE 'assighis(k, abqsheey dB sindy 4km(% ".,
i showed am m djimisriwys.ke7pohm46r i -
scream'ste--
vos es weedn emidis n' c, E contrans'entoehhnar.gkW.essaidydea
. ~,e61msawam(p1bisunrassa miteisy.ine=oneweeri.
=r sue iisisqpe me esmsEl4f,4seie ' Sums.hllW puenoekkr he adatN.M6M"N%
l.,(NW,22 Puh 1fQu Mag-eama $&_
1EMMeleuld,46 sting 9sim(c'stlyY5e'gNk'*MeM#"'E M h
agg ew S ti+ :am,a.rgnykselpi4Mtef pehsis 10 seclear easioners,est as12 womahes APind '
W '
Wer *%p=W w%decawagmeiewN.w~,ue.mo) ugssyneceowana*.mynmur
.p. ~
s e
E.
--h s ggggg-isserghosupusomicwe.emuy=== 1 -
L; N R'RGEL -
Manenftombs.*m y-4.-nysy
.sy.*. y
,,,n as erutcGAte 8mithMajsepWaWBCPai-d.'
p a nso d
-,,e.sh hnhen
& W wenita.
anashenomessen.q '
I or=*s-se a-- mMospin whetimessagenwaseed 47 wemserinsdeur'endinhan-emaseensmesmA.+
. f*8tydelisming varmeprenneypeesatusser L fBR). Aaadedshead tipisbehewedtoheriolettisk..s,hommassenewasadbdious13hseghead$naRf
" MesdimAgesgmibressardensIsabstaudy M.
h
[ enemminaDee.mbers.-ReSi #wGouf AP-" Meanwhik, the prototype's baiseguered ouru
__~ -"wanesee ressovhem = % =
- %anspea $r w a w =mimeneer,enet.sodhennemmesdaemmei.s
!( o agues by on--pa-enhave ins.
esipi
- t. -
.ha a ' : e;,... 1 r. E,.,.
. J3tf "Univesshy,esspect)Ess439esseemisutd4estisk a h The therinoccuple web at the estrance of he C teersf' occanted, mnesman said. % tv.Hs&cdAt=5sh vs.,mm the mannadery heat tansport sysuun (SR13) was famad40 r Beneds is an astrepirysedst who wsges sandnes furee '
g
[.; have sustanned what appear like cracis"es te smhos, aw r.-i-Seeid Demmessac Pussyb eine 8900s 8 m
Power Reactor & Nuclear Fuel Devdarmant Corp. $98C) -
so sus g;alkar breeds smanenrc5s wRl be a symaker at am
/
r official reported March 12..The h lsek occused et, assi-Moep Edhanes hiTseregn, as aise e(Memps, and M
'y r
the opposne posityn-ee exit.
"'%ree cracks were And March 11 $/dsra,., 5c[,
.wiDimve "a essaion to enttmage apiusons" uth PRICimuusq soe tagsaurs sher histear af te piset,TIECedErmal= subt.9 e & $
f means, n.d we believed to be===H r than t =m - - 'in,
- cte nsewestedin ase,6ysiasare.Menee -* w
.;.y^
depth and 5 mm in width, PNC Power Reacsor Develop-y.
Insmenee,e
, = said.-Nasati(1sul. Telpe meet Division Director Nmaid Nakaban sold a psees -
V
- c. wsst.e#W;.h P.vasma.
~
conference. %ere were no signs of so6am leak inshielhe.
-N
- 'k.
%df '.:,."..
- t ;> c '
o"m
~
......T p'f',g-
.o,-
?.A.;..r -
900RTH M,AGEf4CES SM, y.,,
d-nomeier -impec dso.dA a2m.m.h NNNbM-bgh14 Each of the three SS15 loops has 16 shenpocospies.
9' i===Had in the paping.%. A and B) oops howalisedy. J, e
, WIEA 3
nasumaomanen waramanusenwese.m. ;
. couple wells have showed a sia.n elcan$s,Mehqilms %:._.u,.
G/ W).Managsmas _M A and ansee sagdanors are
., s.
m i ar e s ids m e +sian a - -
s
, howev
.re ern a4an.a to'ery to read a ' eisemmes o,n a Easem
~ne darnaged Cloop wee med the
'siiusj cy,c j
o l
closest so the loop' entrance are ao he '
. M 6e
~~
ILWesposal,Wh WakeCommty..,,7.
i Y
~-
i N,
j EU nvu.
O.
P at 1
l gap ' c.,
a a, -
NihdditYo 1
,A.
W p
a
, 'Ag*
98 1
n Q[g/ REGULATORY GUIDE U.S. NUCLEAR RECULATORY COMMISSION My inst f
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH
.,,o REOULATORY OUlDE 8,29 (Tesk OH 0024 l
INSTRUCTION CONCERNING RISKS FROM OCCUPATIONAL RADIATION EXPOSURE A. INTRODUCTION Concerns about these inological effects have resulted in controle on doess to individual workers and in efforts to Section 19.12 of 10 CFR Part 19," Notices, Instructions control the coDoctive does (person roms) to the worker and Reports to Workers; "n:I-39." requires that aD population.
persons workingin or frequenting any portion of a restricted area be instructed in the health protection problems asso.
NRC-licensed activities result in a significant fraction of cisted with exposure to radioactive materials or radiation, the total occupational radiation exposure in the United This guide describes the instruction that should be provided States, Regulatory action has recently focussd asore atten-to the worker concerning biological risks from occupational tion on snaintaining occupational radiation exposure at radiation exposure. Additional guides are being or will be levela that are as low as is reasonably achievable (ALARA).
developed to address other aspects of radiation protection Radiation proter; tion training for all workers who may be training.
exposed to ionizmg radiation is an essential component of any program designed to maintain exposure levels ALARA.
B. DISCUS $10N A clear understanding of what is presently known about the biological risks associated with exposure to radiation will It is generaDy accepted by the scientific community that result in more effective radiation protection training and exposure to ionizing radiation can cause biological effects should generate more interest on the part of the workerin that are harmful to the exposed organism. These effects are minirrizing both individual and couective doses. In addition, g
classified into three categories:
radiation workers have the right to whatever information on radiation risk is available to enable them to nake informed Sometic Effects:
Effects occurring in the exposed decisions regarding the acceptance d these tisks. It is intended person that, in turn, may be divided into two classes:
that workers who receive this instruction develop a healthy respect for the risks involved rather than excessive fear or frompt effects that are observable soon after a large indifference.
or acute dose (e.g.,100 rems' or more to the whole body in a few hours), and At the relatively low levels of occupational radiation exposure in the United States,it is difficult to demonstrate Deleyed effects such as cancer that may occur years a relationship between exposure and effect. There is con-after exposure to radiation.
siderable uncertainty and controversy regarding estimates of radiation risk. In the appendix to this guide, a range of 2
Generie Effects:
Abnormahties that may occur in the risk estimates is provided (see Table 1). Information on future children of exposed individuals and in subsequent radiation risk has been included from such sources as the generations.
1980 National Academy of Sciences'lteport of the Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR-80),
Terstorenic Effects: Effects that may be observed in the International Commission on Radiological Protection children who were exposed during the fetal and embryonic (ICRP) Publication 27 entitled " Problems in Developing an stages of development.
Index of Harm," the 1979 report of the science work group of the interagency Task Force on the Health Effects of 8 1n the intern.tlon.1 System of Uni.: (st) the um is r.pl.c.d Ionizing Radiation, the 1977 report of the United Nations by the swnet. Ioo r.ms is.qu.i to a suv.rt (svh Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR report), and numerous published articles (see s
.iae erf.et. ene ding norm.: incide.c. have not been o
obe.tved 6n.ny of the studess of espc.ed hum.ns.
the bibliography to the appendix).
USNRC REGULATORY oulDES Co
- t. mo unt to r.
- r..
fm?' ",,LM*".t"# 2 i: *;,"ac"'im",1J"J'l"o",'"":
/'t"a",,#i
^ " * " " * " * * " " " " " " " * ' " " " ' ' '
ft."J 's".!'. '.".J,i'7,"t"J'.".b"'."40'Pa' '
,,6.".="2 U_
P':" *0 '"'A ::Jr =?:,'ra 2'itat.*fa".t""
1: ??.":'.",f:."v'
.. 1: *,;% ',ouo.
o 2,.";u,,.'.,.",*.' ; f"!.'"gg,*J.,"". '4. "!3:',r,".,i."J.OJr.".' f. :.'"Ji.o" "!,
!: M..J/,"..',,."*!.?'.M. iifA'f** :: 2*.i.t.ii,.:!;*."4 i'in'.".., n a
g,, g,,
o,,,
. o o
on o
- s...
oi-no ic.
2!!o'lkeit"I'o're'.*T"f74JO"."*J","Ji="'4f."To o.'
n.',,'g',*a.g!!J' "'.PJ.:,*g=o,,:?,i,'o g. g Cg gi g v.
.n
..uo.,...
,s
- 'Lc;"'"'.*."
, :.,:",3gigo.a..
.t".i.:.".l.*.: '*,'.XJ,.' n f":"." a. '.".*:.'.
g oo
.. i
- i....
g on p
,7 i ; c t i v u ki isfy
l C. REGULATORY POSITION sessions. Each individual should be given an cpportunity to ask questions and should be asked to acknowledgein writing Strong management support is considered essential to an that the instruction has been received and understood.
adequate radiation protection training program. Instruction to w rkers performed in compliance with { 19.12 of 10 CFR D. IMPLEMENTATION l
Part 19 should be given prior to assignment to work in a restricted area and periodically thereafter. In providing The purpose of this section is to provide information to instruction concerning health protection problems associated applicants regarding the NRC staff's plans for using this with cxposure to radiation, all workers, including those in regulatory guide.
supervisory roles, should be given specific instruction on the risk of biological effects resulting from exposure to Except in those cases in which an applicant or licensee redttion.
proposes an acceptable alternative method for complying with specified portions of the Commission's regulations, the The instruction should be presented both orally and in methods described in this guide will be used in the evalua-
. printed form to all affected workers and supervisors. It ahould tion of the training program for all individuals working in include the information provided in the appendix to this or frequenting any portion of a restricted area and for all guide.3 The information should be discussed during training supervisory personnel after December 15,1981.
I 8
I an applicant or licensee wishes to use the material pro-copses of the e in to are avesable at the cuma Governense Primeias Nsney te obianned by wrtain vided in this guide on or before December !$,1981, the
$sN, EnsembNi$edMT.Y.d7,$$'s.D'on pertinent portions of the application or the licensee's perfor-
- pretekted, and cosandse6cm approva11e not required so r produce it.
mance will be evaluated on the basis of this guide.
e l
1 l
l e
8.29-2
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION APPENDIX 70 REGULATORY OUIDE 8.30 INSTRUCTION CONCERNING RISKS FROM OCCUPATIONAL RADI ATION EXPOSURE This instructional material is intended to provide the The biological effects that are known to occur after 8
user with the best available information concerning what is exposure to high doess(hundreds of roms ) of radiation are currently known about the health risks from exposure to discussed early in the document; discussions of the estk lonizing radiation.8 A question and answer format has been mated risks from the low occupational does (<5 reme per used. The questions were developed by the NRC staff is year) follow. It is intended that this information will help consultation with workers, union representatives, and develop an attitude of healthy respect for the risks asso-licensee representatives experienced in radiation protection sisted with radiation, rather than unnecessary fear or lack training. Risk estimates have been compiled from numerous of ooneera. Additional guidanos is being or will be devel-sources generally recognised as reliable. A bibliography is opod ocacerning other topics in redistion protection included for the user interested in further study.
training.
e e
assume that some health effects do occur at the lower expo-1.
Wher k meant 6p riskt sure levels.
Risk can be defined in general as the psobability (chance)
J.
West h asseet 6p prompt effeess, dehyed e#ress, med cf injury, illness, or death resulting from some activity.
g 7
However, the perception of risk is affected by how the individual views its probability and its severity. The intent
- a. prompt effects are observable shortly after receiving of this document is to provide estimates of and explain the a very large dose in a short period of time. For example, a j
basis for possible risk of injury, illnes, or death resulting whole-body" does of 450 repis (90 times the annual does i
from occupational radiation exposure. (See Questions 9 and limit for routine occupational exposure) in an hour to an 10 for estimates of radiation risk and comparisons with averap adult will cause vosaiting and daarrhea within a few kther types of risk.)
hours; loss of hair, fever, and weight loss within a few weeks; and about a 50 percent chance of death within 2.
What are she possiede heefth effeess of esposm so 60 days without medical treatment.
omhetient
- b. Delayed effects nach as cancer may occur years Some of the health effects that exposure to radiation after exposure to radiation.
the future children of exposed parents, and cataracts $,
may cause are cancer (including leukemia), birth defects
- c. Genetic effects can occur when there is radiation damage to the genetic material. These effects may show up These effects (with the exception of pnetic effects) have u M hi m
M h h Mm M been observed in studies of medical radiologists, uranium the exposed ladividual and succeeding ynerations, as miners, radium workers, and radiotherapy patients wh demonstrated in animal experiments. However, exces have received large doses of radiation. Studies of people pnetic effects clearly caused by radiation have not been exposed to radiation from atomic weapons have als observed in human populations exposed to radiation. It has provided data on radiation effects. In addition, radiation been observed, however, that radiation can chany the effects studies with laboratory animis have provided a pnes in cells of the human body. Thus, the possibility 1:rge body of data on radiation-induced health effects, exists that genetic effects can be caused in humans by low including genetic effects.
doses even though no direct evidence exists as yet.
"Ihe observrtions and studies mentioned above,however, 4.
In worker proteesion, whden effers are of most cesseern involve levels of radiation exposure that are much higher to she NAC7 (hundreds of rems) than those permitted occupationally The main concern to the NRCis the delayed incidence today (<5 rems peryear). Althoughstudieshave notshown a cause-effect relationship between health effects and current of cancer. The chance of delayed canceris believed to depend levels of occupational radiation exposure, it is prudent to 3 Cataracts differ from other redist6an effects in that a certain level of dose to the lens of the eye (=200 roms) is required before Ilonizins radiation consists of enersy or small particles such as they are observed.
samma, beta, or alpha radiation emitted from red 60 active materials which. when shoorbed by hvins tenue, can cause ce,emical and P I' *
- 8
It is important to distinsuish between whole body and partial-body esposure. loo tems to the whole body wat have more effect 2The tem is the unit of measure for radiation doet and relates to than 100 to a hand. For saamste.espesure or a hand would arrect a small fraction of the bone marrow and a limited partion of the skin.
the b6ological effect of the absorbed rad 6stion.
8.29-3
l I
i on hw much radiation exposure a person gets; therefore, One theory is that radiation can damage chromosomes in a every reasonable effort should be made to keep exposures cell, and the cell is then directed along abnormal growth low.
pattems. Another is that radiation reduces the body's normal resistance to existing viruses which can then multiply Immediate or prompt effects an very unlikely since and damage cells. A third is that radiation activates an large exposures would normally occur only if there were a existing virus in the body which then attacks normal serious radiation accident. Accident rates in the radiation cells causing them to grow rapidly.
industry have been low, and only a few accidents have analted in ex posuns exceedmg the lesallimits. ne probabil-What is known is that, in groups of highly exposed ity of serious genetic effects in the future children of people, a higher than normalincidence of cancer is observed.
workers is estimated in the BEIRs report, based on animal Higher than normal rates of cancer can also be produced in studies, at less than one third that of delayed can:er (5-65 laboratory animals by high levels of radiation. An increased genetic effects per mhn rems compared to 160-450 incidence of cancer has not been demonstrated at radiation cancer cases). A clearer understanding of the causecffect levels below the NRC limits.
relationship between radiation and human genetic effects will not be possible until additional research studies are 7.
if I receh'e e redistion dear, does shat mean I am l
completed.
cerssin to ser cancert J.
What is the d#ference herween scree ased chronic Not at all. Everyone gets a radiation dose every day (see l
exposuret ~
Question 25), but most people do not get cancer.Even with doses of radiation far above legal limits, most individuals Acute radiation exposure, which causes prompt effects will experience no delayed consequences. There is evidence and may also cause delayed effects, usually refers to a large that some radiation damage can be repaind. The danger dose of radiation received in a short period of time; for from radiation is muchlike the danger from cigarette smoke.
example,450 rems received within a few hours or less. The Only a fraction of the people who breathe cigantte smoke l
effects of acute exposures are well known from studies of get lung cancer, but there is good evidence that smoking l
radiotherapy patients, some of whom received whole-body increases a person's chances of setting lung cancer. Similarly, doses; atomic bomb victims; and the few accidents that there is evidence that the larger the radiation dose, the have occurred in the early days of atomic weapons and larger the increase in a person's chances of getting cancer.
reactor development, industrial radiography, and nuclear fuel pror*==nr Then have been few occupationalincidents Radiation is like most substances that cause cancer in that have resulted in large exposures. NRC data indicate that the effects can be seen clearly only at high doses.
that, on the average, I accidental overexposure in which Estimates of the risks of cancer at low levels of exposure any acute symptoms are observed occurs each year. Most are derived from data available for exposures at high dose e f these occur in industrial radiography and involve exposures levels and high dose rates. Generally, for radiation protection cf the hands rather than the whole body.
purposes these estamates are made using the linear model (Curve I in Figun 1). We have data on health effects at high Chronic exposure, which may cause delayed effects but doses as shown by the solid tir.e in Figure 1. Below about not prompt effecta, refers to small doses received repeatedly 100 rems, studies have not been able to accurately measure cyrcr long time periods; for example,20-100 mrem (a the risk, primarily because of the small numbers of exposed mrem is one thousandth of a rem) per week every week for people and because the effect is small campared to differences several years. Concern with occupational radiation risk is in the normal incidence from year to year and place to place, primarily focused on chronic exposure to low levels of Most scientists believe that there is some degree of risk no radiation over long time periods.
matter how small the dose (Curves 1 and 2). Some scientists believe that the risk drops off to zero at some low dose 6.
Now does redistion esuae esseert (Curve 3), the threshold effect. A few believe that risklevels off so that even very small doses imply a significant risk How radiation causes cancer is not well understood.
(Curve 4). The majority of scientists today endorse either It is impossible to tell whether a given cancer was caused by the linear model (Curve 1) or the linear-quadratic model radiation or by some other of the many apparent causes.
(Curve 2). The NRC endorses the linear model (Curve 1),
However, most diseases are caused by the interaction of which shows the number of effects decreasing as the dose several factors. General physical condition, inherited traits, decreases, for radiation protection purposes.
age, sex, and exposure to other cancer-causing agents such as cigarette smoke are a few possible contributing factors.
It is prudent to assume th'at smaller doses have some i
chance of causing cancer. This is as true for natural cancer-causers such as sunlight and natural radiation as it is for those that are man made such as cigantte smoke, smog, and man-made radiation. As even very small doses may entail th oee l93 some small risk, it follows that no dose should be taken the Baol ce ffects o lonia Radiats riport on the effects on puistions of esposure to low levels of without a reason. Thus, a principle of radiation protection son s radaation provi es much of the backsround for this 8.29-4
i
't,ig%.
E l
@u E
//
u.
/
/
4
/
/
2 o
/
/
)
s'/
]
g o
100 DOSE (REMS)
Figure 1. Some proposed models for how the effects of radiation very with doses at low levels.
limits; doses should be kept as low as is reasonably achievable 1000 draws. We can any that if you receive a radiation dose.
(ALARA).
you will have increased your chances of eventually developing cancer. It is assumed that the more radiation exposure you We don't know exactly what the chances are of getting get, the more you increase your chances of cancer.
cancer from a low-level radiation dose, but we can make estimates based on extensive scientific knowledge. The estimates of radiation risks are at least as reliable as estimates Not all workersincur the same level of risk. The radia-for the effects from any chemical hazard. Being exposed tion risk incurred by a worker depends on the amount of to typical occupational radiation doses is taking a chance, does received. Under the linear model explained above, a but that chance is reasonably well understood.
worker who receives 5 rems in a year incurs 10 times as much risk as another worker (the same age) who receives it is important to understand the probability factors only 0.5 rem. The risk depends not only on the amount of here. A similar question would be: If you select one card dose, but also on the age of the worker at the time the dose is from a full deck, will you get the see of spades? This received. This age difference is due,in part, to the fact that question cannot be answered with a simple yes or no. The a young worker has more time to live than an older worker, best answer is that your chances are 1in 52. However,if and the risk is believed to depend on the number of years 1000 people each select one card from full decks, we can of life following the dose. The more years left, the larger predict that about 20 of them will get an ace of spades.
the risk. It should be clear that, even within the regulatory Each person will have I chance in 52 of drawing the see of dose limits, the risk may vary a great deal from one worker spades, but there is no way that we can predict which persons to another. Fortunately, only a very few workers receive will get the right card.The issue is further complicated by the doses near 5 rems per year; as pointed out in the answer to fact that in I drawing by 1000 people, we might get only Question 19, the average annual dose for all radiation
(
15 successes and in another perhaps 25 correct cards in workers is less than 0.5 rem.
8.29 5
A reasonable comparison involves exposure to the sun's TABLEI rays. Frequent short exposures provide time for the skin to repair. An acute exposure to the sun can result in painful Estimat:s cf Excess Canc2r Incidrnce frem Exp:sure burning, and excessive exposure has been shown to cause to Low. Level Rediation skin cancer. However, whether exposure to the sun's rays is short term or spread over time, some of the injury is not Number of Additional
- Cancers Estimated repaired and may eventually result in skin cancer.
Source to Occur in i Million People After I
Exposure of Each to 1 Rem of Radiation The effect upon a group of workers occupationally exposed to radiation may be an increased incidence of b
cancer over and above the number of cancers that would BEIR,1980 160 450 normally be expected in that group. Each exposed individual has an increased probability ofincurring subsequent cancer.
ICRP,1977 200 We can say that if 10,000 workers each receive an additional I rem in a year, that group is more likely to have a larger UNSCEAR,1977 150 350 incidence of cancer than 10,000 people who do not receive the additional radiation. An estimate of the increased probability of cancer from low radiation doses delivered to e
, g,,
large groups is one measure of occupational risk and is bAs three sroups estimated mature deaths from red 6auon-discussed in Question 9.
enduced cancers. The American cer Society has recently stated that only about one half of all cancer cases are fatal. Thus, to estimate incidence of cancer, the pubiashed numbers were multipued 8.
What greatps of expert scientists have studied the risk by 2. Note that the three groupe are in close agreement on the risk
- f****b*4***********
from espearre to redierioni in 1956, the National Academy of Sciencesestablished I rem, we could estimate that three would develop cancer advisory committees to consider radiation risks. The first of because of that exposure, although the actual number could these was the Advisory Committee on the Biological Effects be more or less than three.
of Atomic Radiations (BEAR) and more recently it was renamed the Advisory Committee on the Biological Effects The American Cancer Society has reported that approxi-of lonizing Radiation (BEIR). These comrnittees have mately 25 percent of all adults in the 20. to 65-year age periodically reviewed the extensrve research being done on bracket will develop cancer at some time from all possible the health effects of ionizing radiction and have published causes such as smoking, food, alcohol, drugs, air pollutants, estimates of the risk of cancer from exposure to radiation and natural background radiation. Thus in any group of (1972 and 1980 BEIR reports). The InternationalCommission 10,000 workers not exposed to radiation on the job, we can on Radiological Protection (ICRP)and the National Council expect about 2,500 to develop cancer. If this entire group on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP)are two of 10,000 workers were to receive an occupational radiation other groups of scientists who have studied radiation effects dose of I rem each, we could estimate that thme additional and published risk estimates (ICRP Publication 26,1977).
cases might occur which would give a total of about 2,503.
These two groups have no government affiliation. In nia means that a 1-rem dose to each of 10,000 workers addition, the United Nations established an independent might inenase the cancer rate from 25 percent to 25.03 study group that published an extensive report in 1977, percent, an increase of about 3 hundredths of one percent.
j including estimates of cancer risk from ionizing radiation l
(UNSCE AR,1977).
As an individual,if your cumulative occupational radia-tion dose is I rem, your chances of eventually developing Several individual research groups or scientists such as cancer during your entire lifetime may have increased from Alice Stewart, E.S. Gilbert, T.F. Mancuso, T.W. Anderson, 25 percent to 25.03 percent. If your lifetime occupational to name a few, have published studies concerninglow-level dose is 10 rema, we could estimate a 25.3 percent chance of radiation effects. The bibliography to this appendix includes developing cancer. Using a simple linear model, a lifetime several articles for the reader who wishes to do further dose of 100 rems may have increased your chances of study. The BEIR-80 report includes analysis of the work of cancer from 25 to 28 percent.
many independent researchers.
The normal chance of developing cancer if you receive P.
What are the estimates of the risk ofcancerfrom podie-no occupational radiation dose is about equal to your chance tion expomaret of getting any spade on a single draw from a full deck of playing cards, which is one chance out of four. The addi-The cancer risk estimates (developed by the organiza-tional chance of developing cancer from an occupational tions identified in Question 8) are presented in Table 1.
exposure of I rem is less than your chances of drawing an ace from a full deck of cards three times in a row.
In an effort to explain the significance of these estimates, we will use an approximate average of 300 excess cancer Since cancer resulting fram exposure to radiation usually cases per million people, each exposed to I rem ofionizing occurs 5 to 25 years after the exposure and since not all radiation. If in a group of 10.000 workers each receives cancers are fatal, another useful measure of risk is years of 8.29-6
life expectancy lost on the average from a radiati:n induesd TABLE 2 cancer. It has been estimated in cveral studies that the 8
average toes cf life expectancy ft:m exposure to radiation is Estimated less af Life Espectancy from Health Risks sbaut I day per rem of exposure. In other words, a person O-exposed to I rem of radiation may, on the average, lose 1 day of life. The words "on the average" are important, Esthastes of Days of hswever, because the person who gets cancer fro.n radiation Life Espectancy last.
l may lose several years of tlfe expectancy while his coworkers Health Risk Average l
suffer no loss. The ICRP estimated that the average number cf years of life lost from fatal industrial accidents is 30 Smoking 20 cigarettes / day 2370(6.5 years) while the average number of years of his lost from a fatal Overweight (by 205) 985 (2.7 years) radiation-induced cancer is 10. The shorter loss of life All accidents combined 435 (1.2 years) expectancy is due to the delayed onset of cancer.
Auto accidents 200 l
Alcohol consumption (U.S. average) 130 It is important to realize that these risk numbers are Home accidents 95 only estimates. Many difficulties are involved in designing Drowning di research studies that can accurately measure the small Natural background radiation, 8
increases in cancer cases due to low exposures to radiation calculated l
as compared to the normal rate of cancer. There is still Medical diagnostic x-rays (U.S.
6 uncertainty and a great deal of controversy with regard to average), calculated l
estimates of radiation risk. The numbers used here result All catastrophes (earthquake, etc.)
3.5 l
fr:m studies involvict high doses and high dose rates, and I rem occupational radiation dose, I
j they may not apply to osses at the lower occupational calculated (industry everage for levels of exposure. The l'RC and other agencies both in the the higher-dose job categories is l
United States and abroad as continuing extensive long-range 0.65 rem /yr) research programs on rahation risk.
I rem /yr for 30 years, calculated 30 Some members of he National Academy of Sciences BEIR Advisory Committee end others feel that risk estimates e
noyades, Dd from Cohen and tae, "A cesalosue or Rieks,"Neerm Aan in Table 1 are higher than would actually occur and represent
.se, June 979.
an upper limit on the risk. Other scier.tists believe that g
the estimates are low and that the risk could be higher.
A second useful comparison is to look' at estimates of g
However, these estimates are considered by the NRC staff the average number of days of life expectancy lost from to be the best available that the worker can use t 2 make an exposure to radiation and from commonindustr al accidents infcrmed decision concerning acceptance of the risks asso-at radiation-related facilities and to compare this number ciated with exposure to radiation. A worker who decides to with days lost from other occupational accidents. Table 3 l
accept this risk should make every effort to keep exposure shows average days of life expectancy lost as a result of to radiation ALAR A to avoid unnecessary risk. The worker, fatal work-related accidents. Note that the data for occupa-after all, has the first hne responsibility for protecting himself tions other than radiation related do not include death risks from radiation hazards.
from other possible hazards such as exposure to toxic chem-icals, dusts, or unusual temperatures. Note also that the
- 10. Now een we compere redderion risk to other kinds of unlikely occupational exposure at 5 rems per year for 50 j
heelrh risks?
years, the maximum allowable risk level, may result in a I
risk comparable to the average risks in mhing and heavy Perhaps the most useful unit for comparison among construction.
health risks is the average number of days of life expectancy lost per unit of exposure to each particular health risk.
Industrial accident rates in the nuclear industry and I
Estimates are calculated by looking at a large number of per-related occupational areas have been relatively low during sons, recording the age when death occurs from apparent the entire history of the industry (see Table 4). This is causes, and estimating the number of days of life lost as a believed to be due to the early and continuing emphasis on result of these early deaths. The total number of days of tight safety controls. The relative safety of various occupa-life lost is then averaged over the total group observed.
tional areas can be seen by comparing the probability of death by accident per 10,000 workers over a 40 year Several studies have compared the projected loss oflife working lifetime. These figures do not include death expectancy resulting from exposure to radiation with other from possible causes such as exposure to toxic chemicals or health risks. Some representative numbers are presented in radiation.
Table 2.
(
l1.
Can a worker become srerGe orimperentfhem occupe.
These estimatesindicate that the health risks from oxu-rienst radierion exposure?
' bpational radiation exposure are smaller than the risks asso-h ciated with many othereventsoractivities we encounterand Observation of radiation therapy patients who receive j
accept in normal day-to-day activities.
localized exposures, usually spread over a few weeks, has
}
8.29-7
TABLE 3 shown that a dose cf 500 800 rems to the g*.nads can produce permanent sterility in males or females (an acute Eationated Lees of Life Expectancy from ladustrial Hazards
- whole body dose of this magnitude would probably result in death within 60 days). An acute dose of 20 rems to the testes can result in a measurable but temporary reduction in Estimates of Days of sp:rm count. Such high exposures on the job could result Life Expectancy test, only from serious and unlikely radiation accidents. Although Industry Type Average high doses of radiation can affect fertility, they have no effect on the ability to function sexually. Likewise, exposure Allindustry 74 to permitted occupationallevels of radiation has no observed Trade 30 effect on fertility and also has no effect on the ability to Manufacturing 43 function sexually.
Service 47 Government 55 12.
Whet are the NR C external radiation dose itmits?
Transportation and utilities 164 Agriculture 277 Federal regulaticms currently limit occupational external Construction 302 whols-body radiation dose to 1% rems in any calendar Mining and quarrying 328 quarter or specified 3-month period. However, when there Radiation accidents, death from
<l is dacumented evidence that a worker's previous occupa-cxposure tional dose is low enough, a licensee may permit a dose of Radiation dose of 0.65 rem /yr 20 up to 3 rems per quarter or 12 rems per year. The accumulated (industry average) for 30 years, dose may not exceed 5(N 18) rems' where Nis the person's calculated age in years, Le., the lifetime occupational dose may not Radiation dose of 5 rems /yr for 250 exceed an average of 5 rems for each year above the age 50 years of 18.
Industrial accidents at nuclear 58 facilities (nonradiation)
An additional whole-body dose of approximately 5 rems per year is permitted from internal exposure. (See
)
Question 28.)
8 Phydes, hted from Cohee and tae, "A Catalosue of lus4L " Neelsh 11 Met is meant by MjgA 7 Ada ot. 36, June 1979; and Westd Health Organiast6on, Neelsh Impuesadoser of Nuceeer Power Producafour, Decomeer 197s.
In addition to providing an upper limit on a person's permissible radiation exposure, the NRC also requires that its licensees maintain occupational exposures as far below the limit as is reasonably achievable (ALARA).This means TABLE 4 that every activity at a nuclear facility involving exposure to radiation should be planned so as to minimize unnecessary ProbabRity of Accidental Death by Type of Occupation *
- Posure to individual workers and also to the worker population. A job that involves exposure to radiation should be scheduled only when it is clear that the benefit Nussbar of Accidental justifies the risks assumed. All design, construction, and Deaths for 10,000 operating procedures should be reviewed with the objective Occupation Workers for 40 Years of reducing unnecessary exposures.
Mining 252
- 14. Has she ALARA concept been applied (f, insteed of Construction 228 reaching dont limits during the first week of a quarter, Agriculture 216 the workerir dose is spread out over the whole quarter?
Transportation and public 116 No. For radiation protection purposes, the risk of utilities Allindustries 56 cancer from low doses is assumed to be proportional to the Government 44 amount of exposure, not the rate at which it is received.
Nuclear industry (1975 data 40 Thus it is assumed that spreading the dose out over time or sxcluding construction) over larger numbers of people does not reduce the overall Manufacturing 36 risk.The ALARA concept has been followed only when the Services 28 individual and collective doses are reduced by reducing the Wholesale and trade 24 time of exposure or decreasing radiation levels in the
'The NRC has published a proposed rule chanse for public i
comment that would eliminate the s(N 1s) formula. This proposalis currently under consideration by a task force revnewins all of 10 CFR j
Adapted from National Safety Council. Accident Facar,1979 Part 20. Recent EPA suidance recommends eliminating the s(N Is) s and Atom 6e Emergy Counmiss6an. OpereWomar Accidense and Jtadie-formula. If adopted,the maximum allowed annual dose wiD be s tosas adon Exposure Expertrace, WASH 1192,197s.
rather than I2.
8.29-8 i
indkidual and couective doses are reduced by reducing the cancer far the werker p:pulati:n. At best, the tttal risk time cf exposure or decreasing radiati:n levels in the remains the same, and it may even be increased. The enly working environment.
way to reduce the risk is to reduce the collective dose;that can be done only by reducing the radiation levels, the f5. h%st is meant by co# serin dear and why abounf it working times, or both, i
te mehensined Al. ARA ?
I 7, lethy doesn 't the NRCimpose comectin done Nminsi Nuclear industry actkities ex pose an increasing number cf people to occupational radiation in addition to the radia-Compliance with individual does limits can be achieved tion doses they recebe from natural background radiation simply by using extra workers. However, compliance with a and medical radiation exposures. The couective occupational collective dose limit (such as 100 person rems per year for a does (person-roms) is the sum of an occupational radiation licensee) would require reduction of radiation levels, exposure rooshed by all the workers in an entire worker working times, or both. But there are many problems population. For example, if 100 workers each reesive 2 rome, associated with setting appropriate collective does limita.
the ladividual does is 2 rems and the collective does is 200 person roms. The total additional risk of cancer and genetic For example, we might consider applying a single cffects in an exposed population is assumed to depend on couective does limit to au licensees. The selection of such a the conective dose.
couective does limit would be almost impossible because of the wide variatioas in couective doses among licensees.
It should be noted that, from the viewpoint of risk to A power reactor could reasonably be expected to have an a total population,it is the couective dose that must be con-average annual couective dose of several hundred person-trolled. For a given couective dose, the number of health rems. However, a small industrial radiography licensee affects is assumed to be the same even if a larger nun aer of could very well hase a collective dose of only a few person-people share the dose. Therefore, apreading the dose out rems in a year.
nay reduce the individual risk, but not that of the population.
Even choosing a collective dose limit for a group of Efforts should be made to maintain the collective done similar licensees would be almost as difficult. Radiography AIARA so as not to unnecessarily increase the averall popula-licensees as a group had an average couective dose in 1977 tion incidence of cancer and genetic effects.
of 9 person-rems. However, the smauest coDective dose far a radiography licensee was less than I person-rem, and the
- 16. Is #Ae use of essm workers a good wey se reduce risAr?
largest was 401 person-rems.
There is a "yes" answer to this question and a "no" Setting a reasonable couective dose limit for each indi-answer. For a given job involving exposure to radiation, vidual licensee would also be very difficult. It would the more people who share the work, the lower the average require a record of aH past couective doses on which to base dose to an individual. The lower the dose, the lower the such limits. Setting an annual collective dose limit would risk. So, for you as an individual, the answer is "yes."
then amount to an attempt to predict a reasonable collective dose for each future year. In order to do this,it would be But how about the risk to the entire group of workers?
necessary to be able to predict changes in each licensed Under assumptions used by the NRC for purposes of protec-activity that would increase or decrease the collective does.
tion, the risk of cancer depends on the total amount of in addition, annual couective doses vary significantly from radiation energy absorbed by human tissue, not on the year to year according to the kind and amount of mainte-number of people to whom this tissue belongs. Therefore,if nance required, which cannot generauy be predicted in 30 workers are used to do a job instead of 10, and if both advance. Following all such changes and revising limita up groups set the esme collective dose (person-rems), the total and down would be very difficult if not impossible. However, cancer risk is the same, and nothing was gained for the these efforts would be necessary if a couective dose limit group by using 30 workers. From this viewpoint the answer were to be reasonable and help minimize doses and risks.
is "no."
The risk was not reduced but simply spread around among a larger number of persons.
- 18. ffow are redsonien dose Wmits esas44shed?
Unfortunately, spreading the risk around often results The NRC establishes occupational radiation dose in a larger collective dose for the job. Workers are exposed limits based on guidance to Federal agencies from the as they approach a job, while they are setting oriented to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and,in addition, do the job, and as they withdraw from the job. The dose considers NCRP and ICRP recommendations. Scientific received during these actions is caDed nonproductive. If reviews of research data on biological effects such as the several crew changes are required, the nonproductive dose BEIR report are also considered.
can become very large. Thus it can be seen that the use of extra workers may actually increase the total occupational For example, recent EPA guidance recommended 4
dose and the resulting collective risks.
that the annual whole body dose limit be established at 5 rems per year and indicated that exposure, year after year, The use of extra workers to comply with NRC dose to 5 rems would involve a risk to a worker comparable to limits is not the way to reduce the risk of radiation-induced the average risks incurred by workers in the higher risk jobs 8.29 9
1 such as mining. In fact, few workers ever reach such a limit, there is danger. Exceeding a limit does not imply that you much less year after year, and the risks associated with have suffered an injury. A good comparison is with the actual exposures are considered by the EPA to be comparable highway speed limit, which is selected to limit accident risk to the safer job categones. A 5-rem per year hmit would and still allow you to get somewhere. If you drive at 75 allow occasional high dosejobs to be done without excessive mph, you increase your risk of an auto accident to levels risk.
that are not considered acceptable by the people who set speed limits, even though you may not actually have an 19.
What are the typicalrumfistieri dms received by worhrrst accident. If a worker's radiation dose repeatedly exceeds 3 rems in a quarter, the risk of health effects could eventually The NRC requires that certain categories oflicensees increase to a level that is not considered acceptable to the report data on annual worker doses and doses for all workers NRC. Exceeding an' NRC protection limit does not mean who leave employment with licensees. Data were received that any adverse health effects are going to occur. It does on the occupational dosesin 1977 of approximately 100,000 ;
mean that a licensee's safety program has failed in some wrrkers in power reactors, industrial radiopaphy, fuel.
respect and that the NRC and the licensee should investigate I
processing and fabrication facilities, and manufacturing to make sure the problems are corrected.
and distribution facilities. Of this total poup, 85 percent received an annual dose of less than I rem; 95 pe,rcent if an overexposure occurs,the regulations prohibit any received less than 2 rems; fewer than 1 percent exceeded additional occupational exposure to that person during the 5 rems in I year. The average annual dose of those workers remainder of the calendar quarterin which the overexposure who were monitored and had measurable exposures was occurred. The licensee is required to file an overexposure about 0.65 rem. A study completed by the EPA, using report to the NRC and may possibly be subject to a fine, 1975 exposure data for 1,260,000 workers, indicated that just as you are subject to a traffic fine for exceeding the the average annual dose for all workers who received a speed limit. In both cases, the fines and,in some serious or measurable dose was 0.34 rem.
repetitive cases, suspension of license are intended to encourage efforts to operate within the limits. The safest Table 5 lista sverage occupational exposures for workers limits would be 0 mph and 0 rem per quarter. But then we (persons who had measurable exposure above background wouldn't get anywhere.
levels) in various occupations, based on the 1975 data.
21.
Why do some fisc0ities esssMish administutive limits TABLE 5 that are below she NRClimitsi U.S. Occupational Exposure Estimates' There are two reasons. First, the NRC regulations state that licensees should keep exposures to radiation ALARA.
Average Whole-By requiring specific approval for worker doses in excess of Occupational Body Dose CoBective Does set levels, more careful risk benefit analysis can be made as Subgroup (mulirema)
' (person reens) each additional increment of dose is approved for a worker.
Secondly, a facility administrative limit that is set lower MIdicine 320 51,400 than the quarterly NRC limit provides a safety margin Industrial Radiography 580 5,700 designed to help the licensee avoid overexposures.
Source Manufacturing 630 2,500 P:wer Reactors 760 21,400 Fuel Fabrication and 560 3,100
- 22. Sevenst scientiss have suggested that NACIfmits are soo high endshoestd belowered. Whstare the arguments Reprocessing Uranium Enrichment 70 400 forlowering the limitar Nuclear Waste Disposal 920 100 j
Uranium Mills 380 760 in general, those critical of present doselimits say that Department of Energy 300 11,800 the individual risk is higher than is estimated by the BEIR Committee, the ICRP, and UNSCEAR. Based on studies of Facilities Department of Defense 180 10,l00 low-level exposures to large groups, some researchers have concluded that a given dose of radiation may be more likely Facilities Educational Institutions 206 1,500 to cause biological effects than previously thought. Some of Transportation 200 2,300 these studies are listed in the bibliography (Mancuso, Archer) and the BEIR 80 report includes a section analysing the findings of these and other studies. Scientific opinion ionsaawbted from Cook and Neeson, Occupesonal Esponsees to differs on the validity of the research methods used and the aAda aseson in she unssar sssers: A comperhemare summary for A p fJ, Drsrt, Environmental Protection Asency.
methods of statistical analysis. 'Ihe problem is that the expected additional incidence of radiation-caused effects 20.
What happens (f s worker exceeds the quarterfy expo-such as cancer is difficult to detect in comparison with the much larger normal incidence. It cannot be shown without sure limitt question that these effects were more frequent in the Radiation protection limits, such as 3 rems in 3 months, exposed study group than in the unexposed group used for are not absolute limits below which it is safe and above which comparison, or that the observed effects were caused 8.29-10
_.___m.
l f
by radiation. The BEIR ccmmittee concluded that claims level radiation acctrding to the linear model explained in cf higher risk had "no substance."
Questian 7. Based on this approach, the regulations in 10 CF R j
Part 20, " Standards for Protection Against Radiation," also l
The NRC staff continually reviews the results d research state that licensees should maintain all radiation exposures, j
en radiation risks. With respect to large-scale studies of and releases of radioactive materials in effluents, as low as is i
radiation-induced health effects in human populations reasonably achievable. More recent scientific reviews of the i
exposed to low-levelionizing radiation, the NRC and EPA large body of experimental data, such as the BEIR 80 and have recently concluded that there is no one population the recent EPA guidance, continue to support the view that j
group available for which such a study could be expected to use of a 5 rem-per-year limit is acceptable in practice.
j provide a more meaningful estimate of the low-level radia-Experience has shown that, under this limit, the average
)
4 tion risk. This is due, in large part, to the observed and dose to workers is near 0.5 rem /yr with very few workers i
estimated low incidence of radiation health effects from consistently approaching the limit.
low doses. However, the results of ongoing studin, auch as j
that on nuclear shipyard workers, will be carefully reviewed
- c. There is little to gain.
and the development of a radiation-worker registry is being considered as a possible data base for future studies.
Reducing the dose limita, for example, to 0.5 rem /yr i
has been analysed by the NRC staff. An estunated 2.6 milhon 23.
h'hst av the aussens for met lowerdas de NAC dose person-rems could be esved from 1980 through the year j
Nmd8s?
2000 by nuclear power plant licensees if compliance with the new limit were achieved by lowering the radiation i
j Assuming that the 5-rem-per-year limit is adopted, levels, working times, or both, rather than by using extra 4
there are three reasons:
workers. It is estimated that something like 523 bdhon would j
be spent toward this purpose. Spending $23 billion to save j
- a. Health risks are already low.
2.6 milhon person-rems would amount to spending $30 to
$90 milhon to prevent each potential radiationinduced The estimated health risks associated with current premature cancer death. Society considers this cost ussecept-average occupational radiation doses (e.g., 0.5 tem /yr for ably high for individual protection.
50 years) are comparable to or less than risk levels in other occupational areas considered to be among the safest. If a
- 24. Are mere any arums of concem steert nudisalen risks
}
person were exposed to the maximum of 5 rems per year shot might result he cAmisdag abe NAC dost #m%7 i
for 50 years, which virtually never occurs, he or she might incur a risk comparable to the average risks in mining and Yes.Three areas of concern to the NRCstaff are specifi-t i
heavy construction. An occasional 5 rem annual dose might cally identified below:
i be necessary to allow some jobs to be done without a significant increase in the collective dose. If the dose limits
- a. An independent study by Rossiend Mays and other were lowered significantly, the number of people required biological research have indicated that a given dose of 8
to complete many jobs would increase. The collective dose neutron radiation may be more likely to cause biological
?
would then increase since more individuals would be effects than was previously thought. Other recent studies j
receiving nonproductive exposure whDe entering and cast doubt on the issue. The NCRP is currently studying the leaving the work area and preparing for the job. The total data related to the neutron radiation question and is a
number of health effects might go up as the collective dose expected to make recommendations as to whether neutron j
increased.
dose limits should be changed. Although the scientific community has not yet come to agreement on this question,
- b. The current regulations are considered sound.
workers should be advised of the possibility of ldgher risk j
when entering areas where exposure to neutrons will occur.
The regulatory standards for dose limits are based en the recommendations of,the Federal Radisticn Council.
- b. It has been known for some time that rapidly j
At the time these standards were developed, about 1960,it growing living tissue is more sensitive to i Qury from radiation was considered unlikely that exposure to these levels during than tissue in which the cells are not reproducing rapidly.
a working lifetime would result in clinical evidence of Thus the embryo or fetus is more sensitive to radiation injury or disease different from that occurring in the injury than an adult. The NCRP recommended in Report i
unexposed population. The scientific data base for the No. 39 that special precautions be taken when an occupa-standards consisted primarily of human experience (x-ray tionally exposed woman could be pregnant in order to exposures to medical practitioners and patients, ingestion protect the embryo or fetus. In 1975, the NRC issued I
of radium by watch dial painters, early effects observed in Regulatory Guide 8.13. " Instruction Concerning Prenatal Japanese atomic bomb survivors, radon exposures of Radiation Exposure," in which it is recommended that i
uranium miners, occupational radiation accidents) involving licensees instruct all workers concerning this special risk.
j very large doses delivered at high dose rates. The data base The guide recommends that all workers be advised that the also included the results of a large number of animal NCRP recommended that the maximum permissible dose to experiments involving high doses and dose rates. The animal the embryo or fetus from occupational exposure of the experiments were particularly useful in the evaluation of mother should not exceed 0.5 rem for the full 9 month l
genetic effects. The observed effects were related to low-pregnancy period. In addition,.he guide suggests options n
B.29-11
available 13 the female empiryse who chooses nit 13 Thus, the average individualin the general population expose her embryo or fetus to this additional risk.
receives about 0.2 rem of radiation exposure each year from sources that are a part of our natural and man made The United States Department of Health and Human environment. By the age of 20 years, an individual has Services is similarly concerned about prenatal exposure accumulated about 4 rems. The most likely target for from-medical x-rays. In 1979 they published proposed reduction of population exposure is medical uses.
guidelines for physicians conceming abdomina! x rays for possibly pregnant women. The guidelinesin effect encourage 26.
Why sun't medical exposures conddered as part of a the x rsy staff to make efforts to determine whether a workerir allowed dose?
female patient is pregnant and to defer x-rays if possible l
until after the child is born.
Equal doses of medicaland occupational:3distion have equal riaka.' Medical exposure to radiatica should be justified
- c. Also of specialinterest is the indication that female for reasons quite different, however, from those applicable workers are subject to more risk of cancerincidence than to occupational exposure. A physician prescribing an x-ray male workers. In terms of all types of cancer except leukemia,'
should be convinced that the benefit to the patient of the the BEIR 80 analysis indicates that female workers have resulting medical information justifies the risk associated a risk of developing radiation-induced cancer that la approxi-with the radiation. Each worker must decide on the accept-mately one and one half times that for males. This increased ance of occupational radiation risk just as each worker must risk is primarily due to the incidence of breast and thyroid decide on the acceptability of any other occupational cancer in women. These types of cancer, however, have a hazard.
high cure rate. Thus the difference between men and women in cancer mortality is not great. Incidence of For another point ciview, consider a worker who receives radiation-induced leukemia is about the asme for both a dose of 2 rems from a series of x-rays or a radioactive sexes. Female workers should be aware of this difference in medicine in connection with an injury or illness. This dose l
the risks of radiation-induced cancer in deciding whether and the implied risk should be justified on medical grounds.
or not to seek work involving exposure to radiation.
If the worker had also received a dose of 2 rems on the job, the combined dose of 4 rems would not incapacitate the
- 25. How much rediation does the average person who worker. A dose of 4 rems is not especially dangerous and is does nor work in the nuclearindustry receive?
not large compared to the cumulative lifetime dose. Restrict-ing the worker from additional job exposure during the We are all exposed from the moment of conception remainder of the quarter would have no effect one way or to ionizing radiation from several sources. Our environment, the other on the risk from the 2 rems already received from and even the human body, contains naturally occurring medical exposure. If the individual worker accepts the risks radioactive materials that contribute some of the background associated with the x-rays on the basis of the medical radiation we receive. Cosmic radiation originating in space benefits and the risks associated with job related exposure and in the sun contributes additional exposure. The use of on the basis of employment benefits, it would be unfair to x rays and radioactive materials in medicine and dentistrv restrict the individual from employment in radiation areas adds considerably to our population exposure, for the remainder of the quarter.
Table 6 shows estimated average individual exposure Some therapeutic medical doses such as those received in millirems from natural background and other sources.
from cobalt-60 treatment can range as high as 6000 rems to a small part of the body, spread over a period of several TABLE 6 weeks or months.
U.S. General Population Exposure Estimates (1978)*
27 What is meent by internalcrposure?
Average Individual The total radiation dose to the worker is the external Source Dose dose (measured by the film badge and reported as "whole-(mrem /yr) body dose") plus the dose from internal emitters. The monitoring of the additional internal dose is difficult.
Natural background (average in U.S.)
100 Because there is the possibility of internal doses occurring, a RIlease of radioactive materialin 5
good air monitoring program should be established when natural gas, mining, milling, etc.
warranted.
MIdical(whole-body equivalent)'
90 Nuclear weapons (primarily fallout) 5-8 The uptake of radioactive materials by workers is gener-Nuclear energy 0.28 ally due to breathing contaminated air. Radioactive materials Consumer products 0.03 may be present as fine dust or gases in the workplace atmosphere. The surfaces of equipment and workberches Total
%200 mrem /yr sA d from a report by the tnterapene Task Force on the It is likely that a significant portion of reported medical a<sy Health ffects of lonizing Radiation pubishe by the Departmerit exp oute is to parts of the body only. An exposure of too mrem to af Health, E.ducation.and welfare.
the whole body is more signiricant than a loo-mrem chest a.rsy.
8.29-12
d may be contaminated. Radioactive materials may enter the limit. ICRP recommends that the internal and external doses body by being breathed in, taken in with food or drink, or should be appropnately added. This recommendation is I
being absorbed through the skins particularly if the skin is currently under study by the staffs of the NRC, the EPA, broken.
and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration l
(OSHA).
After entering the body, the radioactive material will migrate to particular organs or particular parts of the body J0. New de a worteris expernsindission dear desermmedt depending on the biochemistry of the material. For example, uranium will tend to deposit in the bones where it will A worker may wear three types of radiation-measuring remain for a long time. It is slowly elinunated from the devices. A self-reading pockst dosimeter records the exposure body, mostly by way of the kidneys. Radium will also tend to incident radiation and can be read out immediately upon to deposit in the bones. Radioactive iodine will seek out the finishing a job involving external exposure to radiation. A thyroid glands (located in the neck) and deposit there.
fum badge or TLD badge records radiation dose, either by the amount of darkening of the fum or by stonas energy in The dose from these internal emitters cosmot be nies-the TLD crystal. Both these devices require processang to sured either by the fum badge or by other ordmary dosim-determme the dose but are conssdered more reliable than sters carried by the worker. his means that the inte nal the pocket donimeter. A worker's offidal report of dose radiation dose must'be separately monitored using other received is normally based on fam or TLD badge readings, detection snethods.
which provide a cumulative total and are more accurate.
Internal exposure can be estimated by measuring the 11.
W4st er my epsdens (I deedde met se secept she ris&s radiation emitted from the body or by measuring the asseedssed wist oecesperdensi sedisados espesunt radioactive materials contained in biological samples such as urine or feces. Does estimates can also be made if one If t'.e risks from expoenre to radiation that may be knows how much radioactive material is in the air and the expected to occur during your work are unacceptable to i
length of time during which the air was breathed.
you, you could request a transfer to a job that does not involve exposure to radiation. However, the risks associated
- 28. Now are she Ainsferforinsensaf espesuse art?
with exposure to radiation that workers, on the sverage, actually receive are considered acceptable, compared to Standards have been established for the maximum other occupational risks, by virtually all the scientific permissible amount of each radionuclide that may be groups that have studied them. Your employer is probably accumulated in the critical organs' of the worker's body.
not obligated to guarantee you a transfer if you decide not to accept an assignment requiring exposure to radiation.
Calculations are made to determine the quantity of radioactive material that has been taken into the body and the total dose that would result. Then, based on limits You.also have the option of seeking other employment established for particular body organs sunilar to 1% rems in a nonradiation occupation. However, the studies that in a calendar quarter for whole-body exposure, the regula-have compared occupational risks in the nuclear industry to tions specify maximum permissible concentrations of radio-those in other job areas indicate that nuclear work is tetive material in the air to which a worker can be exposed relatively safe. Thus, you wiu not necessarGy find signif-for 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br /> per week over 13 weeks or I calendar quarter.
icantly lower risks in another job, he regulations also require that efforts be made to keep internalexposure ALARA.
A third option would ic 3 practice the most effective work procedures so as to keep your exposure ALARA. Be internal exposure is controlled by hmiting the release of aware that reducing time of emposure, nuintaining distance radioactive material into the air and by carefully monitoring from radiation sources, and using shiettir.3 can all lower the work area for airborne radioactivity and surface con-your exposure. Plan radiation jobs co.sfully to increase tamination. Protective clothing and respiratory (breathing) efficiency while in the radiation area. Learn the most protection should be used whenever the possibility of effective snethods of using protective clothing to avoid contact with loose radioactive materialcannot be prevented.
contamination. Discuss your job with the radiation protec-tion personnel who can suggest additional ways to reduce
- 29. Es she dose a persen received f>ess tesensaf espesure your exposure.
added to shot receivedf>em essenant espeenrei J2.
Where es Isetaddisdenaf 6(orusssion en noddarder ris&F Exposure to radiation that results from radioactive materials taken into the body is measured, recorded, and The following list suggests sources of usefulinforma-reported to the worker separately from external dose. De tion on radiation risk:
p internal dose to the whole body or a specific organs does not at this time count against the 3-rem-per calendar-quarter
- a. YearEmployer E "es'* bone.""**Trr iI*e*nYE sg $
The radiation protection or health physics office eerseen Eove meter 6stsY consenw,ow 6t nonen into the body.
in the facility where you are employed.
son I
8.29 13
- ~.
s hueteerhegutesery Comneden60n
- e. Depertme:t of Heelk and Human Services Regional 0111000 Offlee ef the Director Bureau of Radiological Health (HFX 1)
King of Prueda, PA 19406 215 137 5000 Department of Health and Human Services Atlanta,OA 30303 404 221 4503 5600 Fishers Lans Glen Ellyn,IL 60137 312 932 2500 Rockville, MD 20857 1
Arlington,TX 76012 817 334 2841 Walnut Creek,CA 94596 415 943 3700 Telephone: 301 443 4690 Headquarters
- d. Enrhonmenselhetection Aseney Oecupational Radiation Protection Branch Offlos of Radiation Programs Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commlasion 401 M Street, SW Weekington, D.C. 20555 Washinston, D.C. 20460 Telephone: 301 443-5970 Tolophone: 703-557 9710 9
l 9
8.2914
~. -
BISLIOGRAPHY i
I American Cancer Society,1979 Cancer Facts sad Figures, In ternational Commisson on Radiological Protection, Radis-
{
1978.
l tion Ntection, Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection, ICRP Publication 26, 1
Anderson, T.W, " Radiation Exposure of Hanford Workers:
Pergamon Press, January 1977.
A Critique of the Mancuso, Stewart, and Kneale Report,"
- estth Physics, Vol 35, December 1978.
Reissy, C.A.," Comparison of Relative Risk from Radiation j
Exposure and Other Common Hazards," #esith Physics, j
Archer, V.E., " Effects of Low level Radiation: A Critical Vol 35, August 1978.
Review,"Nuclasr Safety, Vol. 21, No.1, January-February i
1978.
(
lapp, R.E., me Redistion Controversy, Reddy Communice-tions, Inc., Greenwich, Connecticut,1979.
)
Atomic Energy Commission, Openstional Accidents and
)
Radistion Exposure Experiener, WASH-1192, Fall !975.
Lapp, R.E., A hbeker's Cadde to Asdistion, Atomicladustrial i
Forum, August 1979.
Rarnett, M.H., ne Biologios! Elfacts ofionising Redistion:
An Orsrriew, Department of Health, Eduation, and Welfare Linos, A., et al, "I.aw Dose Radiation and Leukemia, Mayo Pubhcation (FDA) 77-8004, October 1976.
Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, Winn.," New England
)
Journst of Medicine 1980; Vol. 302, pp. I101 1105.
Cohen, B.L., and Ime, l.S., "A Catalog of Risks," #eslth Physics, Vol 36, June 1979.
Mancuso.T.F., Stewart, A., and Kneale, G.,* Radiation Expo-sures of Hanford Workers Dying from Cancer and Other Cook, J., and Nelson, D.,0ccupstions! Exposures to lontsing Causes," Hestth Physics, Vol 33, November I977.
R:distion in the finited States: A Comprehensive Summary for 197.5, EPA 520/4-80401, Environmental Protection Wilei, R.,"Natwal Radiation lisca* ground n. bdiaticnfrom Agency.
Nuclear Power Plants," Journal of EnydronmentalSciences.
August 1972.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Aiologic Effects oflenising Radistion, Report of the Science Work Nasarian, T., and Colton, T., " Mortality from leukemia and Group of the lateragency Task Force on Radiation, June 1979.
Cancer in Shipyard Nuclear Workers," Lancet,1: May 1978.
Dreyer, N.A., et at, ne Fassi6thry of Epidemiologic lares-National Academy of Scionas, ne Effects on Pbpuistions Itgetions of the Nestth Effects of Low LevellonisingRadis-of Exposure to Low Levels oflonising Redistion, Report tion, NUREG/CR-1728, Nudear Regulatory Commission, of the Committee on the Biological Effects of ionizing November 1980.
Radiation (BEIR),1980.
GDbert, E.S., " Assessment of Risks from Occupational Rossi and Mays, " leukemia Risk from Neutrons," #ealth Exposure to lonizing Radiation," in Energy sad #asith Physics, Vol. 34, pp. 353 360,1978.
Proceedings of the Conferener on Energy and Hesith, June 26-30,1978, SIAM Publication, PhBadelphia,1979.
Schottenfeld, D., and Haas, J., " Carcinogens in the Work-place," CA A Cancer /ournal for Cfiniciens, Vol. 29, No. 3, G:fman, J.W., "The Question of Radiation Caumtion of May June 1979.
Cancer in Hanford Workers," #esith Physics, Vol 37, November 1979.
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation,1977, Sources and Effects oflonising Gitchy, R.L, " Estimation of life $bortening Resulting Asdistion, Report to the General Assembly, UN Publica-from Radiosenic Cancer per Rem of Absorbed Dose,"
tion No. E.77.lX.1,1977.
Nasith physics, Vol. 35. October 1978.
i U ton, Arthur C., " Radiation from Nuclear Power Exagger-P Hall, EJ., Radistion and L(fe, Pergamon Pres,1976.
sted," New Engisad /oepast o/ Mea. cine, VoL 302. pp.1205-l 1206, May 22,1980.
International Commission on Radiological Protection, Mblems inrotred in Developing an index of Herm, Annais World Health Organization, Health implications of Nucteer cf theICAP,1CRP Publication 27, Pergamon Press, May 1977.
1bwerProdartion, Report of a Dbrking Group, December 1975.
I 8.29-15 l
1 VALUE/ IMPACT STATEMENT
- l. PROPOSED ACTION from the availabiuty of an NRC guide rn radiation risk suitable for inclusion in those training pregrams. The guide 1.1 Description was reviewed and distributed to agreement states by the Office of State Programs. Comments hase been received All NRC licensees are required to provide appropriate radia-from the EPA and the Bureau of Rad.ologica! Health, tion proteetim training for all permanent and transient person-nel who work in restricted areas ()19.12 of 10 CFR Part 19).
l.J.J Industry A clear and reasonable assessment of the biologicat riaks asso-ciated with occupational radiation exposure is essential to Providing a reasonable and understandable sat: rent on effective rediatian protection training. The propoesd action is worker risk should facilitate industry efforts to provide to provide instructional materialin a suitable form describing effective safety training and to better achieve as low as is and estimating the risks from exposure to radiation. The reasonably achievable ( ALARA) objectives. Minimalimpact instructional material will be suitable for use in licensee is expected in the form of additional cost of training trainmg programs and will represent an acceptable method of programs since trainmg repirements already exist. Comments complying with part of the existing training requirements.
from unions and industry in the development ofinstructional materialon risk were encouraged. Numerous public comment 1.2 Need for Proposed Action lette~ were received from industry and three meetings were held with worker groups to review the draft guide.
One common element of those occupationalareasencom-passed by NRC licensing activity is worker exposure to iorning 1.J.4 Workers radiation And the biological risks from exposure. Union repre-sentatives have expressed a dissatisfaction with the way in The proposed action should improve worker protection which these risks have been explained to the worker by the in that reasonable understanding of radiation riskis essential licensee. In addition, they feel the NRC hasa responsibility to the development of safe working practices. The staff to make its position on the controversial issuc of radiation believes that an objective discussion of radiation risk may in risk clear to the worker and the public. A meeting of NRC fact reduce "over concern" and also climinate "under staff and union representatives was held on November 28, concern" on the part of some workers. If improved training 1978, during which this matter was discussed. A transcript results in a wider recognition and respect for radiation as of the meeting is availsble from the Public Document Room.
an industrial hazard, more attention will be given to protective procedures and a. reduction in individual and collective dose "Ihe Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has should result.
published recommendations concerning radiation protection for public comment and, in cordunction with other govern-1.J.5 PuWie ment agencies, will be holding public hearings on radiation risk and doselimits.This guide reflects current and proposed Nuclear workers are also members of the public and are EPA guidance and will be helpful to workers and worker generally residents of the area where facilities are located.
groups interested in understanding current discussion on Having a better-informed public should result in a wider range of participation in local decisionmaking concerning the issues of risk and dose limits.
nuclear development. Improved training implies the added benefit of increased plant safety, thereby decreasing the 1.3 Value/ Impact of Proposed Action probability of accidents that could involve the public.
1.J.1 NRCOperations 1.J.6 Decision on Proposed Action Instructional material on radiation risk written at a level The NRC should develop and provide instructional and scope understandable to the worker should contribute to increased confidence, on the part of the worker,in the material concerning risk from occupational radiation NRC in general. A better understanding of the risk should
- exposure, elicit more worker cooperation with NRCenforced safety
- 2. TECHNICAL APPROACH programs. Impacts of the development of instructional material on risk include task completion manpower cost, estimated to be 0.2 person-year, and printing costs of The technical approach proposed is to develop instruc-tional material concerning risks to the worker from occupa-approximately 5400.00.
tional radiation exposure and to publish the materialin a form that will receive the widest dissemination among 1.1.3 Other Government Agencies NRC-licensed facilities. An alternative is to publish the Agreemrnt States whose licensing regulations include findings of the proposed hearing on dose limits and assume the relevant information will filter down to the worker. It is radiation protection training requirements may benefit 8.29-16 w
~.. - - --
~... - - _.-..
4
'the feiling of the staff that a direct approach is required 3.2 Decision an Procedtral Approach here.
The staff concludes that a regulatory riide similar to j
- 3. PROCEDURAL APPROACH Regulatory Guide 8.13 on the subject of worker instruction concerning risks from occupational radiation exposure The proposed action, to publish training material concern-should be published at this time.
ing risks from occupational radiation exposure, the use of which would be recommended to all licensees, could be
- d. STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONS j
accomplished by several alternative methods. These include j
an NRC regulation requiring that specific training materials 4.1 NRC Regulatory Authority l
be used, a regulatory guide based on the existing $19.12 that would provide an acceptable method for tramma on Section 19.12 of 10 CPR Part 19 establishes a legal risks, an ANSI standard on training that could be adopted requirement that all NRC ha=====
provide radiation by a regulatory guide, and a NUREG report or a branch protection traanans to pernammal and that the training be position paper.
commennarate with 'the potential risks from radiation exposure encountered by those personnel. The NRCis thus 3.1 Valse /Isapact of Procedural Alternatives authorised to provide criteria for acceptable levels of training and to inspect for complaance with traaning requir -
An NAC regulation establishes generallegat roquirements, ments.
is costly and tinne connaming to prepare, and is not an appropriate vehicle for the specific and narrow objective d.2 Need for NEPA Statement proposed here. A regulation would be difficult to modify L
as new information on radiation risk is. developed. Ona The action proposed here is to publish an instructional advantage is that a regulation legaDy requires compliance.
document on risks. This will occur after, and be in addition in general, this approach is not considered cost effective in to, any major NRC action on retaining or modifying view of the objectives of the proposed action.
existing dose limits, based on planned public hearmes.
Since at that time it would not constitute a major addition ANSI ssendards are generally intended as highly technical -
or change and would enta0 no effect on the environment, and advanced treatments of specialized areas of concern to an environmental impact statement is not conseered industry. A comprehensive technical review of risks from necessary.
radiation would be of value but would not be suitable as instructional material at an introductory level for worker
- 5. RELATIONSIEP10 011EER EXISTDIG OR PROF 0 SED radiation protection traming. Completion of an ANSI REGULATIONS OR POLICIES standard and an endorsing regulatory guide would require several years and would be too costly. This approach is not Regulatory Guide 1,70, " Standard Format and Content considered cost effective in view of the proposed objectives.
of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants,"
requires a commitment to appropriate radiation protection A NUAEG document would be an appropriate vehicle trainans. When next revised, it should include refersace to for a comprehensive discussion of radiation risk beyond the this proposed action as an acceptable element of a licensee's scope of what is proposed here. A regulatory position, training program.
however,is not established through publication of a NUREG report. Since this proposal includes establishing an accept-This proposed guide is consistent with Regulatory able method for compliance with elements of required Guide 8.8,"Information Relevant to Ensuring That Occupa-training programs, a NUREG report is not suitable.
tional Exposures at Nuclear Power Stations Will Be As Low As is >==aaably Achievable." When next revised, llegulatory bench position statements are intended as interim Guide 8.8 should include cross reference to this proposed measures to be used when an immediate response is required.
action.
They are usually superseded when a more permanent mode of guidance is developed.
This propeesd action directly supplements Regulatory Guide 8.27 and will supplement and be referenced in other A regulatory guide can be prepared at reasonable cost planned guides on training at other types of licensed facil-within a reasonable time period. The staff does not consider ities, e.g., uranium fuel fabrication plants, uranium mills, that revison of any existing regulatory guides could provide medicalinstitutions.
the instructimial material intended here. Regulatory guides on training requirements are being developed but are specific to
- 6.
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS types of licensees such as Regulatory Guide 8.27," Radiation Protection Training for Personnel at light-Water-Cooled in summary, it is proposed that this regulatory guide be Nuclear Power Plants." The action proposed here has broad prepared and issued for the purpose of providing mstruc-application to all licensees, as does Regulatory Guide 8.13, tional material concerning assessment of nsk from occupa-
" Instruction Concerning Prenatal Radiation Exposure."
tional radiation exposure.
8.29-I7
_