ML20129C376
| ML20129C376 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/17/1996 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 9610240010 | |
| Download: ML20129C376 (64) | |
Text
-
0mGNA'-
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA l i
. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .
Title:
ALL EMPLOYEES MEETING ON "THE GREEN" PLAZA AREA BETWEEN BUILDINGS AT WHITE FLINT - PUBLIC MEETING .
Location: Rockville, Maryland Date: Thursday, October 17,1996 Pages: 1 - 61 0I o (Db I
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
.?4000G 1250 i st., u.w.,soit 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
- eA '!8#8
- 27 PT9.7 PDR
DISCLAIMER This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear. Regulatory Commission held on October 17, 1996 in the Commission's office at One White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland. The meeting was open to public attendance and observation. This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected or edited, and it may contain inaccuracies.
The transcript is intended solely for general informational purposes. As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the matters discussed. Expressions of opinion in this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determination or beliefs. No pleading or other paper may be filed with the commission in any proceeding as the result of, or addressed to, any statement or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may authorize.
\.
1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 ***
4 ALL EMPLOYEES MEETING ON "THE GREEN" PLAZA
. 5 AREA BETWEEN BUILDINGS AT WHITE FLINT 6 ***
7 PUBLIC MEETING 8 ***
9 Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10 11555 Rockville Pike 11 Rockville, Maryland 12 13 Thursday, October 17, 1996 14 15 The Commission met in open session, pursuant to 16 notice, at 10:40 a.m., the Honorable SHIRLEY A. JACKSON, 17 Chairman of the Commission, presiding.
18 19 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
20 SHIRLEY A. JACKSON, Chairman of the Commission 21 KENNETH C. ROGERS, Member of the Commission 22 GRETA J. DICUS, Member of the Commission 23 NILS J. DIAZ, Member of the Commission 24 EDWARD McGAFFIGAN, JR., Member of the Commission 25 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
1 2
1 PROCEEDINGS
,- 2 (10:40 a.m.]
3 MRS. NORRY: Good morning.
1 4 Welcome to the sixth annual All Employees Meeting
. 5 at the NRC. Back in the early days of this gathering, some 6 of you may recall we had to have it at downtown hotels and 7 now we are lucky to have a beautiful campus and a beautiful 8 location and beautiful weather, which was arranged for you 9 by the Office of Administration.
10 [ Laughter and applause.]
11 MRS. NORRY: After the chairman speaks, we will 12 have questions from the audience. You will notice that 13 there are microphones spread around. The regions and the 14 resident sites are plugged in and those questions will be IS relayed by our reliable Sue Smith and James Heck, stars of 16 former years.
17 We may have come press here and we welcome them l
l 18 but we ask that the questions be limited to those from NRC 19 employees; this is an employee meeting.
20 Now I would like to introduce Chairman Jackson, 21 who will introduce her fellow commissioners.
22 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Good morning everyone. Can 23 everyone hear me?
24 VOICES: Yes.
25 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Thank you.
l I
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. l I
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034 I
3 1 Now, on behalf of my Commission colleagues, I want 2 to welcome you to this special meeting of the Commission 3 with the NRC staff. These All Employee Meetings have been 4 held annually since 1991 and are intended to facilitate
. . 5 communication between the Commiss.on and individual c. embers 6 of the staff and to enable employees to become better 7 acquainted with newly appointed commissioners. Today's 8 meeting serves both of these purposes.
9 Before I launch into the more formal parts of my 10 remarks, I want to thank very much Mrs. Norry and the Office 11 of Administration, particularly for the weather.
12 Because this is the first All Employees Meeting in 13 some time in which we have had a full five-member Commission 14 and since many of you may not have had the opportunity to 15 meet all the members of the Commission, I would like to 16 introduce my colleagues to you.
17 on my immediate right is someone all of you know 18 and you know him well, Commissioner Kenneth C. Rogers, who 19 is serving his second five-year term as commissioner and as 20 dean of the corps.
21 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: Didn't know that.
22 [ Laughter.)
23 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: He previously served as 24 president of the Stevens Institute of Technology.
25 On my immediate left is Commissioner Greta Joy ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
4 1 Dicus, who previously served the state of Arkansas as a 2 commissioner and as Chairman of the Central Interstate Low-3 level Radioactive Waste Commission among other activities 4 and, in fact, was a member of the board of directors of the
. 5 U.S. Enrichment Corporation.
6 On my far right is Commissioner Nils J. Diaz.
7 Dr. Diaz came to the NRC from the University of Florida, 8 where he was a professor of nuclear engineering sciences and 9 director of the innovative Nuclear Space Power and 10 Propulsion Institute.
11 And, last but not least, on my far left is 12 Commissioner Edward McGaffigan, Jr., formally a senior 13 advisor to U.S. Senator Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico and a 14 member of the U.S. Foreign Service for seven years.
15 All of us have been looking forward to this 16 meeting with you and the opportunity to have an interchange.
17 Our format today will be the same as that used for our 18 session last year. .
19 Following my opening remarks, the Commission will 20 entertain questions from NRC employees here on the Green as 21 well as from our regional and field offices, which are 22 connected to us by open telephone lines. And, again this 23 year, we will be holding the second session of this meeting 24 this afternoon at 1:30 p.m., since we have insufficient 25 space to accommodate all of our employees here in a single ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
5 1 session.
2 I want to remind all of you that this is your 3 meeting. The agenda will be determined by your questions.
. \
4 This is your opportunity to ask us the questions you would j
, 5 like to have answered.
j 6 I strongly encourage each of you to participate 7 actively and to be candid in expressing your concerns. The 8 Commission needs to know what your concerns are if we are to 9 be effective in directing agency policy and you need to hear 10 our responses so that you can be effective in carrying out 11 your responsibilities as members of the NRC staff.
12 My Commission colleagues and I will respond to 13 your questions to the best of our abilities based on our 14 understanding of your concerns as well as our individual 15 perspectives on those concerns. This informal exchange of 16 views is our sole reason for being here this morning.
17 Before I turn the microphones over to questions, 18 however, I would like to take a few minutes to outline for J 19 you my assessment of ;;hr.t we have accomplished in the year 20 since our last All Employees Meeting and where I think we, 21 as an agency, need to be moving in the future.
22 As you will recall, shortly after becoming 23 Chairman, I described my early impression of the NRC as an 24 excellent technical organization that was finding itself 25 subject to an internal and external environment undergoing ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
6 1 rapid change. In light of the strong impact of this 2 changing environment, I suggested that it seemed inevitable 3 that the NRC would have to change as well if we were to ,
4 carry out our regulatory responsibilities successfully.
. 5 In retrospect, I think the picture I drew last ;
6 year was reasonably accurate. The agents of change were 7 very busy in the past year. Competitive pressures and 8 economic deregulation did have a strong impact on the 9 nuclear industry and that industry has begun to react, 10 somewhat tentatively to be sure, by consolidating its 11 activities and merging to form new, larger operating 12 entities. And I am primarily talking about the electric 13 utility industry.
14 Interestingly, one of the first such mergers took 15 place right here in our own backy'rd, so to speak, when 16 Baltimore Gas and Electric and PEPCO announced their plans 17 to merge. In the meantime, several state public utility 18 commissions, some of the most active agents for change, have .
19 begun to define rather precisely the responsibilities that 20 existing utilities and new entities in the business of ;
21 producing and distributing electric power will have in a new ,
i 22 competitive local area marketplace. '
I 23 The U.S. Congress, always a source of new I l
24 concepts, ideas and plans affecting the regulatory agencies, l l
25 including the NRC, has had a fairly broad agenda of energy- )
I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034 1
7 1 related legislative proposals to consider this year and can 2 be expected to maintain its strong interests in such matters 3 next year, no matter what the outcome of the November 4 elections.
. 5 At the NRC, we have been busy reacting to change 6 and to challenge over the past year and I think we can be 7 proud of what we have accomplished. We have continued to 8 carry out our regulatory mission of protecting public health 9 and safety and to maintain our, fundamental regulatory 10 activities despite continuing budget restrictions and the 11 national effort to reduce the size of government.
12 Sometimes, when we look at ourselves and our 13 budget, which has been shrinking, we think of ourselves as a 14 small, not-so-important agency. However, if we look at the 15 importance of our mandate, namely adequate protection of 16 public health and safety and the environment and the common 17 defense and security in the use of nuclear materials in the 18 United States, and if we look at the scope of that l
19 responsibility, together with the net capital investment in i 20 the range of activities that we regulate, our importance is l 21 very great indeed.
22 Potential new activities will give even greater 23 weight to what we do at a time when significant changes are 24 occurring for those we regulate. I believe that we have 25 taken significant steps to position ourselves for future l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
I 8
l' change.
2 Last onth, we issued a draft policy statement on g l 3 economic deregulation of nuclear power plants outlining our 1 4 concerns about the adequacy of decommissioning funds and the !
. 5 potential impact on reactor operational safety. Our 6 relationship with the Department of Energy is rapidly being 7 redefined. As you know, the Department has requested NRC 8 involvement in its pilot project to develop a high-level 9 radjoactive waste solidification system at Hanford, 10 Washington, in order to facilitate possible NRC licensing of 11 a privatized Hanford facility soon after the year 2000.
12 During fiscal year 1997, NRC will begin the 13 development of an overall review strategy to be made '
14 available as guidance for potential DOE contractors at the 15 site. Also in FY 1997, the NRC will begin assisting DOE 16 through a memorandum of understanding in evaluating 17 alternative approaches to tritium production. One 18 alternative under consideration by DOE for evaluation is the .
19 production of tritium in commercial light water reactors.
20 The NRC will be evaluating potential policy issues and 21 licensing requirements to implement this approach.
22 Possibly even more farreaching, we are being 23 considered for a major role in the oversight of DOE's 24 nuclear activities more broadly. Such an increase in our 25 regulatory responsibilities to encompass DOE facilities if ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034 l
2
- . - _ . =__ . __ = .. - -- - - - _ . . . - -
9 1 adopted by the Congress would require adequate resources and 2 sufficient time to develop a sound regulatory program.
3 Finally, we intend to assume regulatory oversight 4 of the operations of the U.S. Enrichment Corporation by
, 5 March 3, 1997, as well.
6 On the international scene, the Convention on 7 Nuclear Safety negotiated over a three-year period by 8 representatives from over 65 nations will enter into force 9 on October 24, thereby helping to ensure a safer global 10 environment. In the United States, ratification of the 11 treaty which the U.S. and the NRC in particular had major 12 roles in developing, is currently before the Senate and we 13 hope to obtain early Senate approval in the new Congress. ,
14 We are also finding international support for my 15 proposal to establish an international nuclear regulators' 16 forum in which nuclear regulatory officials from all over '
17 the world can exchange views, coordinate approaches and 18 harmonize arrangements for the safe and secure use of 19 nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
20 Fina71y, within the agency, we have made 21 significant progress in our strategic assessment and 22 rebaselining initiative. Although I will have more to say 23 about this in a few minutes, I want to note here that the 24 issue papers are out for public and NRC staff comments and 25 we intend to be in a position to reach final decisions on I
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
_ =_ _ . . .. . . . . . _ _ - - -
10 1 them in the December / January time frame.
2 While we have been busy preparing ourselves for 3 future changes, we have also continued to improve our 4 existing major safety programs. In the reactor area, we are
. 5 expanding our use of probabilistic risk assessment to ensure 6 that the Agency's resources and activities are focused on 7 the issues that are most important to safety. We have 8 modified our processes for evaluating nuclear plant 9 performance and we are taking steps to improve our program 10 for protecting allegers against retaliation.
11 In the nuclear materials and nuclear waste areas, 12 we have improved our cooperation with the states on 13 regulation of radioactive material. We have streamlined our 14 materials licensing and inspection processes. We have 15 adopted a new, performance-based licensing approach with i
16 respect to uranium recovery facilities and we have started a 17 process, initially with respect to our medical program, to 18 evaluate whether our materials program standards and ..
19 regulations are appropriately focused on the health and 20 safety issues of significance for these licensees.
21 In research, we are focusing our efforts on PRA, 22 on understanding the reactor component aging process and on 23 consolidating our efforts on thermal hydraulics into a 24 comprehensive long-range plan.
25 Now, I have covered a lot and, taken together, all
, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Fashington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
11 l' of these efforts represent a significant attempt to improve 2 our performance and to adjust to changing circumstances and 3 we, as an agency, have much to be proud of in our record 1 -
4 over the past year. I certainly am proud of our
. 5 accomplishments and our efforts to be ready to address the 6 new responsibilities we may take on during the next twelve 7 months and beyond. And I think each of you should take 8 pride in the individual roles that you have played in the 9 overall effort.
10 Now, unfortunately, much of what we have 11 accomplished has been seriously overshadowed by events in 12 New England. The Millstone and Connecticut Yankee plants 13 are likely to leave in many people's minds a more permanent 14 stamp on the record of the last twelve months and to 15 characterize the performance of the NRC far more than any of 16 the numerous accomplishments I have described over the same 17 period of time.
18 In part, this result is only to be expected. The 19 role of the regulator is a difficult role to play. Those of 20 you who are sports fans or have participated in a formal 21 debate know how much more difficult it is to maintain a 22 defensive posture than it is to mount an effective offense, 23 since the latter requires only a plan for a single course of 24 action and some ability to actually carry it out while the 25 former, the defensive posture, must have effective plans ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters j 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D.C. 20005 l
! (202) 842-0034
, m ._. . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . __ _ . _. _ . _ __ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ - _ _ __ . __ - . _ _ _ _ . ,
e i
12 !
1 against all possible contingencies. Regrettable as it may l 2 seem, it only takes one event to call into question the 3 ability or willingness of a regulator, an umpire, a referee l 4 or a traffic cop to accomplish his or her mission.
5 Yet it would be a serious mistake on our part to ;
6 dismiss the events at Millstone in particular as presenting !
7 merely an interesting set of technical problems that will !
8 ultimately be addressed and resolved with time and a certain i i
9 amount of increased attention on the part of the NRC As I j 10 noted last March when I addressed all of you about the Time l 1
e 11 Magazine article about the Millstone situation, if we 12 honestly assess the performance of the utilities in question ,
l 13 and our own performance, we would agree that not all aspects '
14 of nuclear operations and nuclear regulation are as they ,
i 15 should be, despite all of our efforts to the contrary. And 16 although we have much to learn yet about the situation at l l
17 Millstone and it would be premature to state totally full ;
i 18 conciusions, we do know enough about the conditions at the 19 plants to begin to ask ourselves some thought-provoking 20 questions about whether we have succeeded in establishing 21 the safety culture we have been trying to establish 22 throughout the industry, whether we are succeeding as well 23 as we should in anticipating problems in advance, whether we
. 24 are asking ourselves the right questions about the way we 25 have done things in the past or are doing them now and
. I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034 i"
- _ _ _ , , ,_m_ _ , - ~ _ _ _ _ , _ - _ , , . , , , - , _ , . , - _
13 1 whether NRC personnel both in headquarters and on site, in 2 evaluating licensee activities are sufficiently familiar 3 with regulations and requirements that apply to the specific a
4 activity being carried out.
. 5 When I look at the recent events at Millstone, I 6 see two broad decisions that, if we could go back and 7 change, we could. We should have put more NRC resources on 8 discovering the problems at Millstone at an earlier stage 9 and possibly turned the facility around prior to its 10 reaching its current state. The other is that perhaps we 11 stopped doing design-basis inspections too early and we 12 relied on industry to address the problem without 13 maintaining an appropriate regulatory focus to assess 14 whether, in fact, they were dealing with the issue in a 15 timely manner.
16 Now, this is not to say -- this is very 17 important -- this is not to say that we cannot rely on 18 industry. We have to, because they are responsible for the ..
19 safe operation of their facilities. However, it is our 20 responsibility to regulate them, to set appropriate safety 21 requirements and to insist upon compliance with existing 22 requirements. We cannot delegate regulatory responsibility 23 to the industry.
24 Now, I want to address a few remarks toward our 25 expectations of licensee performance and the emphasis of our l l
, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (209 842-0034
14 1 own regulatory oversight. I see real danger in our becoming 2 ensnared by false distinctions between safety and compliance 3 in our regulatory program. In fact, the concepts are bound 4 tightly to each other.
. 5 A licensee's compliance with our regulations and 6 license conditions is fundamental to our confidence in the 7 safety of licensed activities. As I have said any number of 8 times, if there are requirements on the books that do not 9 have to do with safety, we should remove them through the 10 well-established processes to make such changes. That is 11 important because it is untenable, as a regulatory agency, l 12 to imply that regulatory requirements can be ignored.
l 13 I recognize that, as an agency with limited l
14 resources and staff, we must make informed choices in i 15 applying our resources to the most safety-significant 16 activities or challenges requiring our oversight. This l
17 drives the importance of a risk-informed approach to 18 regulation. By focusing our resources on those significant l 19 issues and maintaining high expectations for licensees' 20 adherence to existing requirements until and unless they 21 change, we will strengthen the quality of our oversight and 22 public confidence in it and we will enhance consistency and j 23 objectivity in our evaluation and enforcement and thereby l 24 help to ensure fairness to all.
25 Of course, an event like Millstone quite obviously ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034 i
15 1 suggests the need for change, change in the industry as well 2 as change at the NRC, and we should welcome the opportunity 3 that Millstone affords to correct and improve our 4 performance as a regulatory body responsible for protecting
, 5 public health and safety. I have concern, however, that 6 some of you may view any suggestion for change as a 7 criticism of both your personal performance and the agency's 8 overall performance.
9 I personally believe that such a view is mistaken, 10 for any organization must change over time and in response !
11 to the challenges of the moment. We are, in fact, in l 12 effect, learning as we go and Millstone provides a timely 13 lesson for us. In fact, change and learning are built on 14 the foundation of the past. That is what we have been doing l t
15 all the time. j 16 I especially want to make it clear to you that I l l
17 recognize, and I have said it on many occasions, that NRC is
)
18 a highly competent technical agency that employs many 19 extraordinarily gifted and dedicated people. What we need 20 to do is to work together to continue to have a strong, l
21 respected organization and an important part of working l 22 together is communicating clearly with others and listening 23 carefully and attentively to what is being communicated to 24 us.
25 Communications and improvements in how we do ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
.. . - - ~ -. . - - -
16 1 business are also the key features of our strategic 2 assessment and rebaselining initiative at this stage of its 3 evolution. As you know, issue papers have been published 4 for comment and we will soon be holding a series of meetings
. 5 across the country to obtain comments from the general 6 public and other stakeholders. We are also especially 7 looking forward to hearing from each of you in that process.
8 I know many of you are concerned about the impact 9 of strategic assessment and rebaselining on your own 30 careers, on your own jobs but I want to assure you that, to 11 date, we have only made preliminary decisions on the issue 12 papers. We are counting, in fact, on your input to help 13 guide us in making final decisions and we want you to 14 identify any and all concerns that you may have. Be candid,
- 15. be straightforward, be thoughtful but, by all means, provide 16 us with your comments.
17 In that regard, I want to draw your particular 18 attention not just to those issue papers that may directly ,
19 impact your job but to Issue Paper Number 23 as well. It is 20 one entitled Enhancing Regulatory Excellence, which is l
21 directly applicable to the issues I have discussed today and 22 to the general direction of the Agency. We welcome your 23 comments on what you see as the major problems affecting the 24 agency and any solutions you may care to offer.
25 Now, I would like to turn the meeting over to you l
I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. 1 Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
1 17 l 1 and I would ask each of you who wishes to speak, to ask a 2 question, to use one of the microphones available so that 1
3 everyone can hear your question. ,
1.
! 4 Please feel free to direct your question to me or i
I
. 5 to any one of us and if your question is intended for all of ;
6 us, I will refer it to each of my colleagues in turn.
j 7 So, may we have the first question, please?
8 Is the meeting over?
9 VOICE: Good morning.
10 CHAIRMAN JACKdON: Good morning.
11 QUESTION FROM AUDIENCE: Who had a " good morning" 12 before I had a " good morning"?
i 13 [ Laughter.]
14 QUESTION FROM AUDIENCE: I would like to direct 15 there two questions to the two new commissioners and welcome 16 you, obviously, to the Commission.
17 Also, do you have any particular areas of 18 expectations or areas of particular interest that you would 19 like to pass on to the staff here as ccming new .o this job?
20 And also, particularly, Commissioner McGaffigan, 21 coming up from the Senate, what was your view of how the 22 Agency was viewed by the Senate, which obviously is an 23 important body in giving oversight to the Agency? I would 24 be interested in those two.
25 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Commissioner Diaz?
l l
i f ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
l Court Reporters
! 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 l (202) 842-0034 i
I
18 1 COMMISSIONER DIAZ: I believe that my greatest 2 expectation is on me rather than on the staff. I would like 1 3 to be able to learn more about all the things that we do so I
4 I can work effectively with you and that is what I am trying l
5 to do right now. I am in a learning curve. All learning l l
6 curves are "S" and I am definitely away from curving over; I 7 am still curving at the very bottom of it. l 8 But I would like to say that the -- my expectation 9 on the staff are to be able to communicate with you 10 frequently and openly and to know which directions you see 11 things going so I might be able to do my job better.
12 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN: I come to you from the 13 defense world and that means that, perhaps initially, I am 14 going to pay some attention of these issues of tritium 15 production in commercial reactors. I have a strong 16 background in nonproliferation and I spent 20 years in 17 government and I am going to try to help my colleagues 18 understand how government institutions work. I think, g 19 having been in government for 21 years, like many of you, I 20 think that will be a strength that I can bring to the 21 Commission in terms of processes, acquisition processes.
22 I was there when a lot of this legislature was 23 passed to make acquisitions systems more flexible for Pat 24 Norry and her people, make information systems work better. l 25 I am in a learning mode as well. I have learned a ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
19 i 1 lot in the last month from havinj 40 people come in and talk 2 to me about being TAs and it gave me a sense of just how 3 excellent this agency is and I think I could have thrown a 4 dart and ended up with good staff, but that is for all of
. 5 those of you who weren't chosen. But you are all -- they 6 were full of ideas and full of enthusiasm and full of ways 7 to make this a better institution. So I see that in the 8 staff.
9 In terms of how the Senate viewc the Agency, in I 10 all honesty, it is like many institutions. I oversaw the 11 Defense Department and there are many parts of the Defense 12 Department that are relatively unknown except to the 13 specialists and the staff and the NRC is in that category.
14 I think you have a general reputation, as the
- 15. Chairman said, as an excellent technical agency with top-16 notch people but you have not had an authorization bill l 17 passed in 11 or 12 years. That is -- if you get focus in i
18 the Congress, it is when members, all hundred of them, have ,.
I 29 to vote on issues and that hasn't happened in a long time. j 20 And the appropriations bill is handled relatively 21 straightforwardly with you buried in the energy and water 22 bill.
23 I think there are some very important issues for 24 the Agency in the Congress and our profile may well go up in ,
l 25 the coming years because of the nature of the issues that i
1 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 l (202) 842-0034 j 1
1
20 1 are going to come before us. But I think, in general, you 2 are thought of as a very competent technical agency that 3 they don't have to think about very much, which is good.
4 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Next question.
5 QUESTION FROM AUDIENCE: Good morning.
6 Some statements were made regarding shrinking 7 budgets and streamlining of the inspection and licensing 8 program. In light of this, what does the Commission see in 9 terms of the future of the usage of regions in terms of the 10 administration of the overall purpose of the NRC?
11 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I think there are two answers 12 to that question. One is that the Commission has made no 13 speci.ic decision one way or the other with respect to the 14 regions. Having said that, I think that the Commission 15 recognizes the strength of the regional system and the 16 importance of our inspection program, in terms of giving us 17 comfort that we, in fact, are carrying out our health and 18 safety mission effectively and that our licensees are living -
19 within the regulatory framework. So there is no specific 20 plan, at this particular time, to do anything one way or the 21 other with the regions.
22 But our overall regulatory program including 23 reactor oversight is under discussion both as an outcome of 24 lessons learned from a number of issues we have been 25 grappling with lately as well as being specifically part of ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
.a _ _ 4 _ . - .
- ._a 21 1 strategic assessment and rebaselining and you have, because 2 the papers are out, any and all preliminary views of the 3 Commission. But, as I have said, we also are going to be 4 looking for stakeholder input and some of our biggest
. 5 stakeholders are our own employees, obviously.
6 QUESTION FROM AUDIENCE: Thank you.
7 QUESTION FROM AUDIENCE: This is primarily for 8 Commissioner Rogers but others may comment.
9 I would like to know the commissioner's impression 10 of the completeness of the documentation of the safety 11 adequacy of the existing nuclear power plants.
12 [ Laughter.]
13 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: I detect my fellow 14 commissioners departing.
15 [ Laughter.]
16 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: It's called the' head-for-the-17 hills effect.
18 [ Laughter.] ,
19 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: Well, you know, the question 20 I think could be viewed in a couple of ways. One is, if you 21 really want to focus on documentation as such, that is one 22 aspect. And the other is, safety as it relates to 23 documentation.
24 I think that we certainly have felt that more 25 attention has to be paid to make sure that plants indeed ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
22 l' understand what their own documentation is and I have to say 2- that I think we have learned, through some studies recently 3 by the staff, that everybody's documentation has not been in 4
4 very good shape.
- 5 I can remember some years ago when I was at Public l 6 Service Electric and Gas as a director and we ran into 7 trouble with the NRC and an oversight committee was created 8 and I was on that committee. One of the first things that 9 committee did was to ask that company to go and look back at every commitment that it had made to NRC of any kind and to 10 11 see whether those commitments had been fulfilled or not and 12 to review all of the relevant documentation.
13 So I think that was a very healthy thing to do.
7 14 And I must say that I think plants have to understand what 15 their licensing basis is, they have to understand whether 16 they are in conformity with their alleged design which, 17 sometimes, what is on paper is not exactly what is in the 18 . plant. And I think these loose ends just should be tied up. ,:
19 It is a very important fundamental basis on which 20 to start to look at the futur.e: Do you understand and have 21 good documentation for what exists in the plant right now?
22 It would seem to me it is just very fundamental, it is l
23 elementary. The protests and objections to doing that from 24 licensees are understandable in some ways but I think it is 25 just a fundamental problem that has to be put to rest that 1
l 1
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
- ~ . _ , _. __
23 1 the documentation is in place and that the people who run 2 the plants understand what is in that documentation.
3 So I think that that is the beginning of continued 6
4 safe operation, to know what you have and what its technical o 5 basis is. To me, there is really no argument that makes 6 much sense that you shouldn't do that.
7 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I think that, in addition, a 8 number of our other initiatives such as PRA, and this came
't 9 out in the Commission briefing yesterday, rests on just that 10 knowledge and that ability to retrieve the licensing basis 11 and even, as Commissioner Rogers has stated in the past, it 12 is not just that you have it but that it is being ;
13 appropriately used as the plants are operating and in 1
14 operations and procedures and, particularly, as changes are !
15 made to the plants.
16 Next question?
17 COMMISSIONER DIAZ: I might add a comment on that.
l 18 I don't know whether it is -- you know, it is a very short ?
19 time that I have been here. But I am trying to connect the ,
20 issues regarding the safety culture and what I have come up j 21 with lately, and I am probably wrong, is that no safety l 22- culture in this business can survive without a tracking 23 infrastructure and the tracking infrastructure is what 24 actually supports the activities that we do, whether it is I 25 documentation or anything else. And that tracking Q
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
-. =
24 1 infrastructure has to connect every single point in the 2 Agency and now I am going t o throw out a word f rom my early 3 years in school, and there should not be any impedance 4 mismatch in between those points.
4 5 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Is there another question?
6 QUESTION FROM AUDIENCE: I was wondering how our 7 efforts have improved the safety in nuclear power plants in 8 the former Soviet Union.
9 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: It depends on your definition 10 of the former Soviet Union. I think if one looks at the 11 facilities in c ntral and eastern Europe and countries that 12 were formerly part of the Soviet Union, I think the case can 13 be made that the safety has been improved in a number of 14 senses. I think that a number of plants have made changes 15 in operations that show improvements in those operations.
16 There are more robust safety assessments that are done in 17 those plants, including the use of PRA and those assessments 18 have been used to make both physical and operational ,
19 improvements at the plants.
20 We have been involved in international efforts j 21 through both the G-7 and the G-24, specifically in making 22 safety upgrades at a number of plants of Soviet design.
23 Within the Russian Federation itself, we have made 24 some progress but the work continues. A big thrust of our 25 efforts as an agency has been in strengthening or bringing
, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
25 l' into existence where they didn't exist and strengthening the 2 regulatory bodies, particularly with respect to having those :
3 bodies and their statutory authority firmly rooted in basic i l
4 nuclear legislation and having regulatory bodies that have l
. 5 independence and the resources that they need.
6 We could say that there has been a lot of good 7 progress in that regard. If one wanted to be fair or
- 8 realistic, I would say there is no regulatory body that 9 looks like us anywhere in the world. Those bodies, then, in 10 those countries are a long way from where we are today.
11 However, in the sense that in certain instances there was no
- 12. regulatory structure and'there now is, that there was no 13 independence and there now is more, that there have been 14 specific both physical and operational safety upgrades made 15 in those plants and that there have been a number of efforts 16 and successful ones in improving safety culture, I would say 17 that the record is a positive one.
18 I don't know if Commissioner Rogers, who has also -
19 been here for a while, might wish to make a comment?
20 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: Yes. I think one thought 21 that occurs to me that might be of interest to you in this 22 regard is that NRC has been a training ground for regulators 23 from other countries over the years very effectively and 24 today we see people heading nuclear safety organizations in 25 countries that were part of the former Soviet Union who e
l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. l Court Reporters '
1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
26 1 spent a year at NRC some time ago and were profoundly 2 influenced by that and the ability to stay in touch with us 3 and to be assisted by us through informal as well as formal 4
4 contacts, I think, has been very valuable.
. 5 So I would say that part of the success that has 6 come about has been through the sharing of expertise by NRC 7 staff members with staff members from other countries and 8 that has produced, I think, some very important 9 possibilities for the future, because they have been 10 oriented toward how we do things, how we think about safety 11 and they could sort of hit the ground running when they were 12 given opportunity to become a regulator in their own 13 countries.
14 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I also think that one other 15 thing that is very important in this, in fact equally 16 critical, is that our government has been very focused on 17 the issue of safeguarding excess fissile materials and so 18 the NRC, together with other government agencies, has been .
19 very involved in issues of material protection, control and 20 accounting, implementing such systems as well as the actual 21 physical protection in countries of the fermer Soviet Union 22 both through the Gore /Chernomyrdin Commission process, of 23 which I am a member, and my predecessor before me but also 24 at the staff level.
25 So on the nonproliferation side and the ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034 I
27 1 safeguarding of materials side, we also have had a very 2 large impact and I don't know if Commissioner McGaffigan 3 wanted to make any comments since I know that the 4
4 nonproliferation issues are a focus of his.
, 5 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN: I don't want to get off 6 track, since the question is originally about reactors. But 7 I think that is something that our government has done I 8 extremely well and the Congress continues to provide very 9 adequate resources to pursue that and I think will continue 10 to do so even after Senator Nunn leaves the Senate in 11 January.
12 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Is there another question?
13 Yes.
14 QUESTION FROM AUDIENCE: I am asking this 15 question -- I am an administrative judge, by the way, and I 16 am asking this question. Does the Commission, either as a 17 whole or individually, commissioners, realize that in the 18 past few years one of the major efforts of the Commission .
19 seems to have been to cut down the opportunities for 20 meaningful -- and I would like to emphasize the word 21 " meaningful" -- public participation in various nuclear 22 regulation and the opportunity of members of the public to l
)
23 participate.
24 There seems to be an effort to cut dovn the 25 opportunities for meaningful public participation such as in
, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
28 1 hearings where I have participated. The Commission seems to 2 have attempted to cut down the opportunities for meaningful 3 public participation and I would like to get the current 4 Commissioners' views on the general subject.
. 5 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Well, I think, and I will speak 6 first here, that the Commission is continually reviewing and 7 currently reviewing how it interfaces with the public, the 8 opportunities.for the public to participate in our 9 regulatory processes at all levels, not just from the point i
10 of view of hearings but in rulemakings and other fora, i
11 I would take some degree of issue with that 12 perspective that we, in fact, are going the other way. I 13 think my understanding, and Commissioner Rogers, who has 14 been here longer, can speak to this more explicitly, but my 15 understanding is if you look at the question of how many 16 hearings we have versus not and use that as a metric of 17 public participation, I would argue first that is not the I
18 only metric of public participation for the Commission and j 19 there are any number of other ways that we involve the 20 public in our decisionmaking and continue to evaluate how we 21 can do a more effective job in that regard.
22 We are not as much of a licensing agency in terms 23 of major licensing activities as we were in the past when i
24 there were a number of large nuclear facilities under l 25 construction and being licensed and I think that there is a !
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
29 1 natural trend in terms of that kind of a process that then 2 tracks with the case load, as it were.
3 Secondly, there are opportunities for hearing.
4 There are hearing rights afforded to any number of groups
. 5 with standing in many of our processes ranging from 6 licensing to decommissioning. So that is something that we 7 should take a look at.
8 But in the absence of taking a more detailed look, 9 I would say to vou that our public participation has taken 10 different forms than just hearings but, in fact, my 11 perception is that the Agency is more open than it used to 12 be.
13 Commissioner Rogers, maybe you would like to make I i
14 a comment?
15 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: Yes. I think that that is a 16 very, very important point. I think, perhaps, from your 17 point of view of numbers of hearings and the number of times 18 the Commission has agreed to a hearing may be the basis for 19 your observation but I think that it does not reflect the i i
20 point of view of the Commission, should not be interpreted !
21 as the view of the Commission as disinterested or interested 22 in reducing public participation.
23 I would say that meaningful public participation i 24 can take place in many forms and certainly our efforts at
'25 enhanced participatory rulemaking, for example, which ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 -
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
30 1 occupied a great deal of attention of the Commission and has 2 only been tested a little bit but seems to show some real 3 promise, I think that is a meaningful process. It may not 4 be exactly the same kind of participation as you might
. 5 observe in connection with hearings but I believe it to be 6 very meaningful in influencing how the Commission has come 7 to write its rules and I hope we will see much more of that.
8 I think this Commission is very committed to 9 openness and public participation in every way that we see 10 opportunities for meaningful participation to be exercised.
11 So I would hope your observation would not be that we do not 12 feel that way. I believe very strongly that this Commission 13 has gone on record a number of times of really being 14 interested in involving the public in new ways that go 15 beyond the ways of the past. I don't think that the 16 measures that you may be applying tell the whole story.
17 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Commissioner Dicus?
18 COMMISSIONER DICUS: I can't address specifically -
19 what you are talking about with the hearing process; I have 20 not participated in that. But through the years that I 21 worked with this Agency in the various capacities that I 22 worked with the Agency prior to the time that I joined the 23 Commission, viewing it over that course of time, my 24 impression is that the Agency has become more open and has 25 attempted and honestly and sincerely attempted to involve ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
31 1 the public and other stakeholders in its decisionmaking 2 process far more than my view was some years ago.
3 So I see it trending to a better position of 4 communication between our agency, the people we serve, the
. 5 public, the licensees and the other stakeholders. If there 6 is room for improvement, and you are suggesting there is, 7 certainly, we should take a look at that. But my view is we 8 are doing a better job and we will continue in that trend.
9 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Commissioner Diaz?
10 COMMISSIONER DIAZ: We are committed to public 11 participation, period. There is no need to elaborate; it is 12 a fact.
13 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Commissioner McGaffigan?
14 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN: I can't quite be as 15 short as that.
16 [ Laughter.)
17 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN: But I agree. I come 18 here from an open institution, the Senate, and I have been 19 impressed in my first month-and-a-half here with just how 20 open this institution is, how open we are to public comment, 21 how public comment is taken seriously in every SECY paper 22 chat comes to us, how open the staff is when they go out and 23 do inspections and have public meetings at the end of 24 inspections and convey to the public what it is that is our ;
25 view of the current plants and how we deal openly with the
]
I i
l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
32 1 events that occur.
2 So I think you have a remarkably open institution.
3 If there are -- I don't know the history of the hearings 4 process, but if there are improvements to be made, we can 5 look at it. But I think you are one of the most open 4
i 6 institutions, most open to public comment and public 7 participation that we have in the government.
8 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I would also like to point out 9 that in laying out our strategic direction for the fu*.ure, l 10 as part of the strategic assessment, that is precisely why
[
i 11 we have rolled out all of these issue papers on what we feel 12 are the key issues for us, in terms of making decisions that 13 are going to affect our regulatory programs going forward 14 before the Commission even comes to a final decision and, in 15 fact, meeting with various stakeholders around the country j 16 to solicit their input and, very importantly, getting input 17 from our own people.
18 Let me go on to the next question, please.
19 Yes.
20 QUESTION FROM AUDIENCE: Dr. Jackson and l
21 Commissioner Rogers, I would like to indicate for myself a 22 personal concern that I have about the Commission's ability l
23 to actually create a risk-informed basis for doing many 24 things in the Agency. There are approximately somewhere 25 between 70 and 80 systematic evaluations, mostly
\
l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
l i
l 33 1 probabilistic risk assessments that have been performed for 2 nuclear power plants primarily under Generic Letter 8820.
3 However, because of the costs and the resources 1
4 required to review these risk assessments, they have been l
. 5 reviewed to a level that does not allow the staff to make 1 i
l 6 regulatory decisions based on these, it does not allow l 1
7 people to make licensing decisions based on the PRAs and 1 1
I 8 every time an issue comes up, it has to be addressed i l
9 indiv. ,
i i
10 Tue staff is at a tremendous disadvantage because 11 it does not have the ability to effectively argue back j l
12 against the licensee who has put in a million, two million
)
13 dollars to do the review and performance of the PRA and we 14 have not, on our part, done a review that allows us to use 15 it.
16 Therefore, it seems to me that throughout the l
17 agency, if we have all this information that is provided now l 18 by licensees, and I know now that I am a project manager I e 19 see that we can't effectively use it because the PRA l
20 branches are overwhelmed and overburdened with the {
l 21 possibility of reviewing every risk assessment issue that 22 comes up. Therefore, we can't really go forward, I believe, 23 until we do a much better job of reviewing these PRAs to 24 determine if they do do a good job of modeling the plant.
~
25 So I am interested in how the Commission sees this ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
. - - - _ - - - - - .__ _- -..- - =- - .-
34 1 and whether they have any plans to kind of break this box 2 that we have put ourselves in?
3 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I think that is an excellent l
4 question. I think there are several pieces to the answer.
. 5 One thing that the staff has been urged to do on i
6 an expedited basis is to develop certain key tools, among 7 them regulatory guidance as well as standard review plans.
8 One motivation of the Commission in asking that 1
9 these activities be undertaken on an expedited basis is for l 10 us as an agency to lay out, both for the licensees as well 11 as for our own staff, what are appropriate minimal 12 requirements for the use of the kinds of risk assessments 13 that you described in regulatory decisionmaking and, in so 14 doing, then to be able to give guidance to the staff 15 including people in critical positions, such as yours, for 16 what a minimal submission should be and what level of review 17 is required for what regulatory action.
18 I would say to you that, having had a recent 19 Commission briefing on the PRA implementation plan, I would 20 say that we are not there yet. There are, I know, draft 21 documents under development and under review but, in the 22 end, those documents have to, in fact, address the points 23 that you raice in terms of how are we going to review these 24 submittals, how are we going to make regulatory decisions 25 without certain levels of review of the PRA submissions but, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C, 20005 (202) 842-0034
35 1 more importantly, what are the base line requirements in 2 terms of what has to be in those.
3 Just as with everything else, everything is linked 4 to everything else. There was an earlier question about the
- 5 licensing basis of the plants. I think a big issue has to 6 deal with the fact of what is the base on which PRAs are
, 7 built and if we don't understand, if licensees don't 8 understand how their plants are built versus design, that 9 they haven't kept up with the licensing basis as the plants 10 have changed, it is not clear how, in fact, what the PRAs t
11 mean relative to that.
12 That is part of what the Commission is trying to 13 get at with the 5054 (f) letters that went out recently but 14 it is also part of what the commission has asked the staff 15 to do and I have been pushing very hard on the staff to 16 accomplish with developing these guidance documents. Are 17 they end all and be all? Of course not. But I think we 18 have to come up to a certain threshold level in terms of -
19 what minimally is required both of ourselves in terms of our 20 review of PRA submittals and of licensees in terms of what 1
21 has to be in them before we can move forward.
1 22 The concern that I have and I had when I got here l 23 is that the train has left the station in the sense of our 24 licensees very actively using these techniques in making 25 their own decisions and, in a certain sense, we have to l
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. l Court Reporters '
1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 ;
Washington, D.C. 20005 l (202) 842-0034 1
1 I
36 l' catch the train and stabilize the situation.
2 So I thank you for your comment and if you have 3 any specific recommendations that you think we could do --
4 of things you think we can do to move this along in a more
. 5 focused way or at a better pace, the Commission, I think, 6 would appreciate hearing from you.
7 Commissioner Rogers?
8 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: Yes, I would just like to 9 remind you that we did not require all plants to do a PRA.
I 10 We required all plants to do an individual plant examination 11 that might involve a PRA but did not necessarily require a 12 PRA and, in the early days of that process, the Commission I
13 was not either prepared or totally comfortable with using i 14 PRA to make regulatory decisions, although it felt that PRA I l
15 was a useful tool for licensees to employ in examining their '
16 own plants. I think what we have seen here is that that 1
17 tool has been taken up and used more extensively than we had 1
18 thought it would be five or six years ago. .l 19 We were never prepared to review every individual 20 plant PRA. I have been somewhat dismayed by that myself 21 because I think there is a great deal to be learned on our 22 part from examining PRAs. However, the Commission l 23 recognized that it would not have the resources to review i 24 every single plant PRA, nevertheless saw the value to the 25 licensaes in understanding their own plants better by doing ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. I Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 i (202) 842-0034 '
37 1 a PRA. That certainly has proven to be the case.
1 2 Many licensees have found vulnerabilities that i i
3 they did not really fully appreciate in doing the PRA and we 4 have observed that. But, as the Chairman has said, I think
. 5 we are starting now to get to the point where we realized 6 that this is a very powerful regulatory tool and we have to 7 be able to use it effectively, more extensively.
8 We have committed enormous resources to our PRA 9 implementation program. But we are still not quite in a 10 position to be able to supply enough person power to review 11 every single plant PRA.
12 I think it would be a very good thing if we could 13 do that, so I appreciate your concerns and sense of 14 frustration here. But I would call to your attention the 15 history that has gotten us to this point. We didn't really 16 expect that every plant would necessarily do a full level 17 two PRA or even a level one PRA when we started the l
18 individual plant examination program. That has sort of .
19 caught fire and now we are trying to learn how to deal with 20 it.
21 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: The question is where we go 22 from here. Commissioner Dicus?
23 COMMISSIONER DICUS: I leaned over and said 24 something to the Chairman so I get called on. That's okay.
25 [ Laughter.]
I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034 1
l
i 38 >
1 COMMISSIONER DICUS: No, I was concerned about the 2 question and agree with the Chairman it is a very valid 3 question and it is a question the Commission needs to be 8
4 concerned about.
. 5 I have raised similar issues and approached them
. 6 in another direction in Commission meetings to the extent of 7 asking when we are developing these documents, when we are -
8 going out with things, are they really being effective and
- 9 then, conversely, when these items come back in to us, are l
10 we really able to handle them, what are we going to do with l 1
i 11 them and how does this track? I am referring, in another i
l j 12 way, to what Commissioner Diaz said a little while about j 13 about infrastructure and tracking.
14 So I appreciate your question. I think, as a 15 Commission, we are concerned about this and we need to 16 ensure, as the Chairman said, that we do get the key tools ,
i 17 in place to address this sort of thing and ensure that what )
18 we are doing is the right course to take. .:
19 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Commissioner Diaz?
20 COMMISSIONER DICUS: Ditto.
21 [ Laughter.)
22 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Commissioner McGaffigan?
23 Okay, I didn't know who was there first. Maybe we 24 will take one from -- okay.
25 MS. SMITH: We have a number of different
, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
39
' l- questions from the regions but I will start with this one.
2 This is from Region IV.
3 The Information Technology wagement Reform Act 4 requires agencies to appoint a chief information officer.
. 5 When do you anticipate a selection will be made and what do 6 you see is the most significant impact which the agency will 7 experience from the formation of a new CIO organization?
8 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Thank you.
9 I would say that we are tracking probably to the 10 end of the year to have a choice, a person, a choice made 11 and that come into effect.
12 I think the significant impact has to do with 13 creating an agencywide architecture for information 14 management that is both responsive to the user needs but 15 allows us more effectiveness and efficiency in carrying out 16 our program.
17 There are any number of issues related to how 18 information flows, how information is managed, how databases 19 are created, how they communicate, if they communicate, do 20 they streamline the administrative burden that our various 21 staff have to grapple with so that the focus can be on an 22 effective regulatory program. So acquisition of information 23 technology is linked to that but the role of the individual 24 in that position working with the EDO and CFO is to ensure 25 that the systems that are developed, that before technology ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
_ -- _ _ _ . _ - . . - .-- _ . - . _ . - - -=. -
40 i
l 1 purchases are made, that we understand what they are to 2 accomplish and that we can do things appropriately on an
, 3 agencywide basis. It has some other things in terms of
- 4 acquisition, but that is a fundamental role.
- f. 5 So I personally am excited about the prospect and 6 I think we have a great opportunity and we just have to be
- 7 sure that it is implemented the right way.
i 8 MR. HECK: Okay, we have a question from Region
! 9 IV. The Agency has been --
t 10 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Can you speak up? I can't hear 11 you too well.
12 MR. HECK: Okay. A question from Region IV. The 13 Agency has recently been using special team investigations 14 to review problem plants such as Dresden and Maine Yankee.
15 Would you anticipate this process would become a more 16 frequently used supplement to the inspection program for 17 problematic plants?
18 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I think there are two answers 19 to that. One is that there is always a responsiveness 20 aspect to what we decide is needed relative to an issue that 21 may arise with one of our licensees; in this case a power 22 reactor site. So I would say that as needed and as 23 appropriate, we would do that.
24 There is a larger issue relating back to the 25 design basis and licensing basis issues as to whether -- and 4
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
41 1 I spoke to that in my remarks, that in fact we have stepped 2 away from doing design basis based inspections and that is 3 something that we are looking at again.
4 Let me take a question here. Yes.
. 5 QUESTION FROM AUDIENCE: Chairman Jackson, in your 6 opening remarks you referred to your support for an 7 international regulators forum.
8 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Correct.
9 QUESTION FROM AUDIENCE: You are, of course, aware 10 that the Nuclear Energy Agency of the OECD has a committee 11 called the Committee on Nuclear Regulatory Activities which 12 is an informal forum for reactor regulators, usually at the 13 level of the head of the Office of Regulation, nuclear 14 reactor regulation. This group does meet from time to time 15 with regulators from the eastern European countries. In 16 addition, from time to time, there are senior regulators, 17 heads of regulatory committees, regulatory agencies, that 18 meet in Paris and I am wondering to what sense do you see 19 the proposed international regulatory forum differ from what 20 exists already.
21 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Well, thank you for asking the 22 question. In fact, I introduced the idea of the 23 International Nuclear Regulators Forum at the Senior 24 Regulators Meeting at the NEA OECD in Paris just this fall 25 and it was very warmly and strongly endorsed.
, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
42 1 The CNRA, the committee that you spoke of, is a 2 committee within the NEA that has had primarily a technical 3 focus and, as you point out, it is one that has had a focus 4 primarily on reactors and it has involved senior managers or
. 5 officials primarily at the level of someone that would be, 6 in our context, the director of NRR.
7 The forum that I am talking about is one that 8 would involve -- would be at a very high policy level and 9 involves a range of issues primarily focused on nuclear 10 safety and security and would involve the senior most, 11 politically accountable policy officials of those agencies.
12 It is meant to be complementary to but it is meant to 13 address a larger range of issues.
14 It is not going to be a forum where people sit and 15 present papers on PRA and how it is applied to nuclear power 16 plants. It really is looking at some of these issues about 17 regulatory regimes worldwide ,me of the issues related to 18 creating regulatory bodies, legislative undergirding, any 19 number of issues. So it is meant to exist independently of 20 these existing structures but in harmony with them and to 21 latch onto them as appropriate.
22 In addition, the NEA membership is a very 23 restricted membership and a lot of the action in terms of 24 where there is need for regulatory discussion on the one 25 hand is in central and eastern Europe but, as far as where ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
43 1 there is major growth in nuclear programs, it's in Asia and 2 other than the membership of Japan and Korea, we don't have 3 certain major players in that forum.
4 Yes.
. 5 QUESTION FROM AUDIENCE: Chairman Jackson, you 6 mentioned that NRC will undergo some changes to survive.
7 Obviously, last year you discussed that extensively. At the 8 National Performance Review, where the government 9 performance was being reviewed actually on not the actual 10 mission but the way we perform, NRC was often cited as a 11 mature agency that had applied, relatively speaking, to 12 other regulatory agencies, common sense and judgment in 13 regulations.
14 Do you see that, more of that in the future or 15 less of that, given the problems that we have seen with !
16 exemptions being given out -- I l
17 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Do I see more of what? I l
18 QUEFTION FROM AUDIENCE: Of judgements used in I 19 regulatory application, common sense approaches that --
20 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Well, let me just say the 21 following. Judgment is always the basis of any decision 22 that is made. The question becomes what is the base on 23 which the judgment is made and do we have an infrastructure, 24 standards that we all understand and consistent tools that 25 we all use and understand and do we start from the same base l
l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
44 1 line of fundamental questions or ways of looking at whatever 2 the issue is or how we evaluate the performance of a 3 particular licensee.
9 4 I think what we are talking about here is ensuring
. 5 consistency, as much as possible, objectivity and the right 6 tools and common tools are used throughout our regulatory 7 programs and so that when our inspectors are in the field or 8 when we have region-based staff or headquarters staff that 9 everyone is reading from the same page.
10 You have heard me say, I have had it in a number 11 of speeches, that the way to regulate is not by exemption.
12 That if, in fact, one finds that there are circumstances 13 where there is somehow a need to issue blanket exemptions or 14 exemptions across some large base of licensees, that then 15 says that perhaps we need to take a look at why that 16 situation exists so that if, in fact, the regulation needs 17 to,be eliminated or if it needs to be modified in a way so 18 that what I call the safety case is clearly there, then we i 19 need to do that and that is why, in my opening remarks, I 20 said that it is very important that if we feel, if you feel, 21 if you know that our -- some regulation or regulatory 22 requirement does not have that safety case, then we need to 23 change it. But the solution for the regulator is not to say 24 that it is okay that we have these regulations, that it is 25 okay if they are ignored, because that is how we get ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
45 1 ourselves into the Millstone situation.
2 Over here?
3 MS. SMITH: This question comes from Region III H
4 and it is for the new commissioners.
- l. 5 What are your opinions on the National Academy of 6 Sciences recommendations regarding NRC oversight of medical l
7 facilities?
8 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I am sure that Commissioner 9 Dicus would want to be considered a new commissioner in 10 this.
11 [ Laughter.]
12 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Therefore, I am going to put 13 her on the spot and put her in the group. So, Commissioner l 14 Dicus? .
j 15 COMMISSIONER DICUS: I am trying to figure out l 16 what I have done here. !
17 The -- of course, as you know, one of the DSIs 18 addresses this specific issue and, as we have said and the l 19 Chairman has said, we are trying to back away and are 20 backing away.
j 21 Even in this case, as you will notice, from a 22 preliminary view of the Commission on this, we have heard l
l 23 from the stakeholders and have that broader look at the
! 24 overall recommendation. I would go cn and venture a little 25 bit of a comment toward this, however.
-4 l<
l 1
1 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. l
- Court Reporters i 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
46 1
If the ultimate determination is that the NRC does 2 stay in the medical use of radioactive materials, that we do 4
3 need to take a look at the program and see if there are ways 4 that the program would need to be modified to make it a more
. 5 effective program and to raise some of the concerns that 6 were raised in the IOM report. We clearly did not even 7 reach a preliminary view on it because it is important to 8 hear from stakeholders.
9 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Commissioner Diaz?
10 COMMISSIONER DIAZ: I, as some of you might know, 11 actually was trained in nuclear medical physics and actually 12 practiced about six years in the field. I decided to go and 13 work with nuclear rockets because it was safer.
14 [ Laughter.]
1 15 COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Having said that, I do believe i I
16 that there are some issues that were raised that are l l
17 important but I do believe that the medical area needs to be l I
18 carefully regulated. And I think I would like to take 19 another look at it.
20 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Commissioner McGaffigan? l 21 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN: I agree with Dr. Diaz 22 that I am -- the bias that I come to this institution with 23 is that medical regulation will probably continue here at 24 the NRC, that it is appropriate. I think we do, based on my 25 conversations with those 40 people, we do a pretty darn good ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
I 47 1 job. There are some things we can change. The staff has 2 ' coked at that.
3 I think that the fundamental problem the medical 4 community has with us is that we actually do a responsible
. 5 job and some of their other self-regulation, as you can tell 6 by watching 60 Minutes, doesn't particularly work very well.
7 So the bias that I come to is that we are likely to stay in 8 this business for a while.
9 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Well, you heard it here first.
10 [ Laughter.)
11 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Yes.
12 QUESTION FROM AUDIENCE: Good morning.
13 We have seen some regulatory issues involving our 14 interactions with the Environmental Protection Agency over 15 the past five to six years as sometimes very frustrating and 16 time consuming, both for the staff and for the Commission.
17 The most recent issue of which was finally resolved by the 18 full Commission, which was the constraint rule which will .
19 impose a 10 millirem constraint in Part 24 air emissions for 20 materials and fuel cycle facilities.
l 21 With the next large hurdle still ahead of us, 22 namely that of decommissioning or the cleanup rule, would 23 you please comment as to how the Commission or the Congress 24 can assist us and the EPA in resolving our differences in a 25 more timely manner, especially with respect to groundwater l
l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 l (202) 842-0034
48 1 protection and move ahead in this extremely important area.
2 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Let me just say the following.
3 We have some decisions before us that, as decisions, you 4 know, the Commission has to formally take up. So I am not
. 5 going to specifically speak to those in the absence of our 6 having reached a formal decision on that.
7 I think what I would rather do is, in particular, j 8 call on the left side, my left side, and see, and ask 9 Commissioner Dicus and Commissioner McGaffigan.
10 We will start with Commissioner McGaffigan.
11 [ Laughter . ]
12 COMMISSIONER DICUS: Thank you.
13 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: To speak to that issue because 14 it is an issue before us. But to try to stay away from the 15 decisions.
16 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN: I think it is, again 17 from those 40 wise people who talked to me, the 14s and 15s 18 of the Agency, it is a very fundamental issue that you raise 19 and it is one that we are intending to tackle. I think the 20 Congress can play a role and probably will play a role. You 21 know, coming from the Congress, I can say this. When you 22 get the Congress playing a role, it is a roll of the dice as 23 to how it turns out.
24 There is inconsistency. It is a matter of great 25 frustration. This Agency prides itself on making rules ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
49 1 based on the scientific evidence and that is not always the 2 case with our -- with some other agencies, perhaps, 3 So I think it is a fundamental issue, it is one f
4 that we intend to tackle in the context of the decisions
. 5 that the Chairman has referred to. Several of us, maybe all 6 of us, you know, the vote on the constraint rule I think is 7 public now and I think there was great frustration that we 8 had to do what we did and it was only based on the notion 9 that we really weren't adversely affecting our licensees.
10 But everything is a precedent for the next 11 decision and there was reluctance in that case that was 12 uniform. And I think the Chairman now wants to speak so I 13 will get out of the way.
14 [ Laughter.]
15 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I think a fair statement to you l 16 is that you will probably see more activism in this regard l l
17 in the next year, very direct activism. I 18 Having said that, let me defer to Commissioner .
19 Dicus.
20 COMMISSIONER DICUS: I still can't get off the 21 hook.
22 Having dealt with at least, well, two state i
23 legislatures, one in Arkansas and one in Nebraska when I was 24 chair of the commission there, the last place I like to try i 25 to get something resolved is at the political level. So if ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
.-. . - . . . . . . . . - . - .. -. . - - . ~ . . - - - - . - . . . _ . . - - . . - -
1 50
- 1- we can resolve it before we get there, it is probably much, 2 much better. As Commissioner McGaffigan said, it is a roll i
L 3 of the dice.
d 4 Here recently, we asked that something get on the l
- . 5 agenda for a briefing and it really had to do with dual l
} 6 regulation. But rather than spelling " dual" d-u-a-1, we 7 spelled it d-u-e-1 and I said, never mind, leave it; it's l
( l
! 8 closer to the truth.
I 9 [ Laughter.) i 10 COMMISSIONER DICUS: It really had to do with 11 the -- and it has to do with competing standards and j
12 standards with some of our sister agencies. l 13 I am very concerned that we have such a wide range 1
14 of standards and what those standards are based on and we ]
15 need to definitely try to find a core idea and stick with 16 it. I think it is going to be easier for our licensees, 17 easier for the public to understand and accept. So the 18 issue with what we have just passed, in part we were trying h 19 to get away from dual regulation and it was a way to 20 accomplish that, but we need to study this a little bit 21 more. I am very concerned about the number of standards and 22 how we decide that is the standard we should have.
23 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Remember, you heard it here 24 first that not only are we going to study it more, we are i
25 apt to take a more activist role.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. l Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 l (202) 842-0034 l
1 1
51 1 Commissioner Diaz?
2 COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Yes, I would like to have the l
3 40 wise people that talked to Commissioner McGaffigan to '
4 come and talk to me.
. 5 [ Laughter.)
6 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Commissioner Rogers. ;
7 COMMISSIONER ROGERS: I think everything has been 8 said that is going to be said.
9 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Let's hear if there is a 10 question from the regions. !
11 MR. HECK: Region IV. Current inspection is to 12 reduce the inspection effort at plants with good self-13 ratings. In light of the lessons learned from Millstone and 14 others, can the Agency continue to pursue this initiative 15 where, for superior performers, greater emphasis is placed l 16 on licensee self-regulation as opposed to NRC oversight.
17 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: That is a good question.
18 I think we are looking at that. There is a review 19 underway of the whole resident inspection program, how 20 people spend their time and how that squares with what we 21 were assuming about what our licensees were doing versus 22 what we feel we have learned in terms of lessons from some 23 of our recent experiences. So my general answer to you is 24 that there will be some -- a relook and possible 25 renormalization.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
52 1 A question here?
2 QUESTION FROM AUDIENCE: Good morning. I have two
, 3 personnel type questions.
9 4 I heard a lot of issues being addressed, PRA, 4
. 5 Millstone. Does the Commission believe the NRC has the 6 appropriate level of human resources to deal with all the 7 issues we have heard this morning and, if not, are there any
! 8 thoughts about going to Congress to increase our level of 9 human resources?
10 My second question is, what is the opinion of the 11 Commission as to the current level of morale at the NRC and 12 are there any thoughts about conducting a survey to address 13 the issue?
14 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Well, I will take your second 15 question as a suggestion which I think we will look at.
16 In terms of going to the Congress to request an 17 increase in our FTE, I think there are two answers to that 18 question. The chances of that, in the absence of r.ajor -
19 growth in our regulatory program, I mean, are somethf.ng that 20 is a slim opportunity.
21 However, having said that, I think the more 22 important and intelligent way that we have to do it, and it 23 is actually going to be an outcome, a follow-on of the 24 strategic assessment and rebaselining is that we have to 25 decide ourselves wherb we think that the regulatory program
, ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
53 l' is going and it hinges on decisions like some of what we 2 have been asked about today in the medical area, what we are 3 going to do in the inspection program, more broadly what we 9
4 are going to do in terms of our regulatory oversight.
- 5 We have to ask ourselves then what core 6 competencies does that imply for the agency and at what 7 level and then we have to look at the people we have, look 8 at fungibility of people, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera 9 and until and unless we address those questions, then to 10 talk about going to Congress for an increase or decrease or 11 the status quo is premature.
12 So that is my answer to you.
13 Yes.
14 MS. SMITH: Question from Region IV.
15 NRC recently shifted the agency lead in standby 16 mode for incident response from the. region to headquarters.
17 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Could you repeat the question?
18 She was disturbing me. -
19 COMMISSIONER DICUS: That means I am going to have 20 to answer another question.
21 [ Laughter.]
22 MS. SMITH: Okay. This is from Region IV.
23 NRC recently shifted the agency lead in the 1
24 standby mode for incident response from the region to '
25 headquarters. What additional changes do you foresee l
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
54 1 regarding the NRC Emergency Response Program?
2 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I don't think there is an 3 answer I can give you. That is being evaluated as part of a l 4 number of relooks at a number of things so there is no l
- 5 specific answer.
l 6 Any other questions? l 7 Is this Region IV again?
I 8 MR. HECK: No, this is Region III this time. l 9 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: I think Mr. Callum made these 10 plants; he wanted us to know he was here.
l 11 [ Laughter.)
12 MR. HECK: Is site experience as a resident 13 inspector a prerequisite for promotion for all reactor 14 program positions, particularly resident inspector 15 positions? Recently, it appears that site experience has 16 become a nonwritten prerequisite for promotions and, 17 unfortunately, highly qualified applicants with ir. depth 18 technical knowledge can be passed over for specialized 19 positions in favor of someone with site experience but 20 without the in-depth knowledge required for the position. ;
21 Was this what the Commission intended?
22 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Well, first of all, it is not 23 my understanding that there is either an actual or de facto '
\
24 requirement in that regard for promotion, unless these 25 gentlemen sitting here apprise me of something different.
l l
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034 l
I I
l l
55 i I
1 So that is something I will take a look at and we l
, 2 will take a look at but it is not my understanding that that 3 linkage is there at all. ;
4 Yes?
, 5 MS. SMITH: Three questions from Region III. '
1 6 First question, do you think we need dedicated design basis l 7 inspections?
8 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Probably, yes.
9 MS. SMITH: Question two. Based on the concerns
(
10 identified at Millstone, what areas of inspection need 11 increased attention? 1 12 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Well, in order -- rather than 13 just to give an off-the-top-of-our-head answer, let me just 14 say the following. The design basis area is one, design 15 basis, licensing basis. We will never take our focus off of. !
16 operational safety.
17 But I think the larger answer to the question is 18 going to come out of the review of the resident inspection 19 program coupled with the lessons learned rolling out of the l
20 Millstone and the other reviews that we have underway.
21 MS. SMITH: Finally, our-guidance regarding i i
22 inspections of 10 CFR 5059 safety evaluations is in much l l
23 need of improvement. Do you share the same view and what is i l
1 24 being done about this?
25 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Yes, and it is being worked as ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters
-1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034 1
, _ -. _ _ _ _ _ i
56 1 we speak in terms of changing that guidance.
2 Yes?
3 MR. HECK: Okay, this is from Region IV.
9 4 (Laughter.]
. 5 MR. HECK: This is a long question, so bear with 6 me.
7 There appears to be a change in attitude as far as 8 how we will deal with the inspection mission post Millstone.
9 Inspectors have been cautioned numerous times that we are 10 expected to be regulators versus inspectors. Many 11 inspectors have expressed concern that aggressive inspection 12 activities will cause complaints from licensees. Regulators 13 are supposed to be able to accomplish this inspection 14 mission and have the licensee thank them for it.
15 No one to date has explained or trained inspectors 16 how to do this. After the Towers-Perrin report, licensees 17 have been more aggressive in complaining to NRC management.
18 This has caused inspectors to be very cautious, less 19 aggressive and less intrusive, thereby increasing the chance 20 of another Millstone.
21 The question is, what should the Agency do to 22 counter this growing apprehensive posture in the inspection 23 program?
24 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Okay, thank you.
25 Well, I think we have to be very careful about ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
57 1
what I call the "versus" scenarios because I heard in there 2 an inspection versus regulation and, first of all, l
3 inspection is a critical part of our regulation and our )
4 regulatory oversight of our licensees. So that is the first 5 part.
6 The second one is there is this issue of having 7 the inspectors do their jobs and having licensees thank us 8 for it. That is an interesting statement in the following 9 sense in that I guess most of us don't necessarily want 10 people looking over our shoulders and telling us or finding 11 things that we are presumably doing in less than an optimal 12 fashion or doing wrong. So I don't know that we will ever 13 track to a point where one will have the profuse gratitude 14 expressed based on a licensing outcome -- I mean, an 15 inspection outcome.
16 But having said that, I think it is important and 17 I think this is the lesson that we have tried to promulgate 18 coming out of Towers-Perrin, it has to do with the -
19 professionalism with which our licensees are treated and I 20 think that is the value that our various managers have been l 21 trying to inculcate in our inspection staff. l 22 Having said that, we still have our jobs to do and l l
23 we are going to do those jobs. That then may cause 24 discomfort at some level on the part of those who are being 25 regulated / inspected. I think the way we deal with that is ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034 l
1
58 1 that we try to ensure that our inspectors have the right 2 training, the right tools, the right guidance, both in terms 1 1
3 of written guidance but guidance from their management l 1
4 because that is why the managers are there, to ensure they
. 5 are looking at the right things, that they, you know, 6 understand our regulations and regulatory requirements, that 7 that is what they apply in doing their inspections, that 8 they are as objective as possible and when the results are 9 pulled together, that the assessments that are made all the 10 way up the line are objective and build on all of the bases 11 that flow into those judgments.
12 I think what happens is, and this is a big focus 13 of mine, that is someone asked earlier the issue of judgment ;
14 in regulation and, as I say, there was always an element of
'5 judgment. But the important point is, and this is what 16 makes the regulator's job so hard, and that is one of the 17 principles of good regulation is independence and there is 18 kind of an arm's length relationship. It is a hard one to -
19 maintain in the right way but it is something that we have 20 to continually strive for.
21 Otherwise, one can track into one of the following 22 two situations. One, where if one leans over too far one 23 way licensees can be very comfortable but we may miss 24 something or we let something go by or the public feels that 25 we are too close to those we regulate. If we lean too far ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
59 1 the other way, we run the danger of telling licensees how to 2 run their plants and that is not our job either.
3 So we have to be clear on what the requirements 8
4 are and what our role is as regulators and it is not just 5 our individual decision that licensee X can ignore a 6 regulation because he is a good guy. You know, we don't do 7 good guy regulation. Or that licensee Y we are going to 8 screw to the wall on a regulation because he's a bad guy.
9 We don't do bad guy regulation.
10 What we do is regulation based on what our 11 regulatory requirements are and we do not tell our people 12 not to expect people to live within those requirements.
13 There are judgments that may get made in terms of the safety 14 or risk significance of what has occurred and that will be 15 handled both in enforcement space and in terms of how the 16 overall nuclear operations are judged through our various 17 evaluation processes, whether it is the plant performance 18 reviews all the way up to the senior management meeting 19 process. But that is the important point.
20 So, again, let us not be confused by "versus".
21 There is no regulation "versus" inspection. The one is 22 inextricably part of the other.
23 One more region and then if there are some more 24 here.
25 MS. SMITH: Actually, we have asked all the ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
_ _ _ . _ _ _ _l 60 l 1 questions from the. regions but this is from a headquarters i
{ 2 employee.
- 3 CHAIRMAN JACKSON
- Okay.
!t 4 MS. SMITH: My husband and I commute from
- . 5 Charlestown, West Virginia. The cost of commuting is not 6 getting any cheaper. Does the Agency have any plans to 7 subsidize employees for commuting costs?
! 8 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Not at this time. I commute i i.
9 also.
l 10 [ Laughter.]
11 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: Well, yes, Mrs. Norry?
12 MRS. NORRY: I don't have a microphone anymore but a
l 13 in spite of my facetious comments earlier about the weather, ;
i
- , 14_ I want to acknowledge the Office of Resources Management .
1 2
l l
15 without whose help on communications we couldn't do this. !
a 16 [ Applause.)
- 17 MRS. NORRY
- My general policy on these things, j
18 you should know is when I come to them I ask Ben if he's .
19 happy and if he's happy then I'm happy. And also Dennis 20 Tarner in the back there, on my staff.
21 [ Applause.)
22 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: And let us give another round 23 of applause to Mrs. Norry and all who helped to put this 24 together.
25 [ Applause.)
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters ,
1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 l Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
61 ,
1 (Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the meeting was concluded.]
2 3
4
. 5 6 .
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ,
16 17 18 ..
19 20 21 l i
22 l 23 24 j l
a 25 l
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. j Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034 J
. _ ~ . . .. _ - - . . - .. - . - .- .. - ..
CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the attached description of a meeting i
, , of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission entitled:
TITLE OF MEETING: ALL EMPLOYEES MEETING ON "THE GREEN" PLAZA AREA BETWEEN BUILDINGS AT WHITE j FLINT - PUBLIC MEETING N
PLACE OF MEETING: Rockville, Maryland DATE OF MEETING: Thursday, October 17, 1996 was held as herein appears, is a true and accurate record of l the meeting, and that this is the original transcript thereof
. l taken stenographically by me, thereafter reduced to l l
- typewriting by me or under the direction of the court .I 1
reporting company Transcriber: huny u 3 (# iTc it n i (
Reporter: Christopher Cutchall l
_ _ _