ML20136G028
| ML20136G028 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/15/1985 |
| From: | Roe J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Kerrigan M OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8511220237 | |
| Download: ML20136G028 (11) | |
Text
.g . -
, Mr. Mark Kerrigan 15 W Room 8002 New Executive Office Building Office of Management and Budget Washington, DC 20503
Dear Mr. Kerrigan:
This letter is in response to questions you recently posed in conversations with Peter Rabideau from the Office of the Executive Director for Operations and with Ray Priebe from the Office of Inspection and Enforcement.
Answers to your questions are provided in the enclosure. In addition, I would like to SystemERDS) (provide you additional project. information When activated on the during by a licensee Emergency Response an event, the data Data provided will allow NRC to have a better real time understanding of plant conditions. This method is an improvement over voice communicated data since it minimizes the likelihood for transmission of inaccurate information and reduces the burden on the licensee for providing the data to NRC during an event. Timely receipt and frequent updating of a limited set of plant data will facilitate verification of plant conditions during an accident with less verbal communication. Verbal communications, with ERDS implemented, are anticipated to emphasize information transfer rather than data collection. The combined improved data and information are expected to substantially improve the ability of the NRC to fulfill its mission.
If you have any additional questions regarding the ERDS project please contact us.
Sincerely, (Signed) Jack W. Roo Jack W. Roe Deputy Executive Director for Operations
Enclosure:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
DCS JMTaylor DEPER R/F RHVollmer IRB R/F ELJordan JHickman SASchwartz RPriebe JBlaha KPerkins JWRoe PDR KCyr ED0 ED0 r/f *PRabideau 11/13/85 Revised in EDO 11/14/85 DD:DEPER:IE 0:DEPER:IE E
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCES *SASchwartz *ELJordan ^JW e 10/24/85 11/5/85 11 /85 IRB:DEPR:IE IRB:DEPER:IE IRB:DEPER:IE D:PSAS:IE_ . ELD
- JBHickman:amw *RFPriebe *KEPerkins- -JLBlaha *KCyr 10/21/85 10/ /85 10/ /85 11/1/85
$$k# 0R R
- g . . - .
Question What are the capital costs associated with the implementation of ERDS?
Answer An estimate of the capital costs is included below. The estimate delineates the site and headquarters components of the costs. The cost figures are based on a review of the available information describing licensees' data systems and a determination of the propor-tion of licensees that represent a trivial interface problem to those that are more complex. Precise site costs will have to be determined on a case-by-case basis.
Site Costs: (Based on 114 units) Total Hardware @ $6.5 K/ unit $ 740 K Software @ $21.8 K/ unit $2,486 K Design @ $3.2 K/ unit $ 367 K Implementation @ $10.1 K/ unit $1,155 K Headquarters Costs:
Hardware $ 58 K Software $ 270 K Design and Implementation $ 395 K Total $5,471 K i
i l
r m *t ee- + - T - - - ,M =
. y.. .
4 Question What are the ERDS operating costs including regular maintenance costs and those associated with " deployment" of ERDS if necessary for an
- incident? >
4 Answer
- Regular testing and repair.
$ 200 K/ year
- Software modifications due to licensee computer changes.
$ 40 K/ year based on:
Assumption that each unit will upgrade computer hardware once over the operating life of the unit.
4 units / year '
$10 K/ software modification i
- Cost for system usage during exercises or actual events and part of i the maintenance costs will depend on transmission system chosen.
Based on the current transmission method of dialup commercial i telephone, annual service costs would be $20K. Usage cost would be long distance charges to the site. Other transmission possibilities have been considered and the method to be used is subject to revision based on agency telecommunications upgrades.
1 4
4
- - r,,- v-e-- .- w-, e -, g n v r-es - - - , - - e , en m ,m.,-,, ,np s ,: m--gw m-m m -- n n - -mm -w n--m mm- -,-w w~w. w -m e o e- -
Question What impact, if any, will ERDS have on the government liability issue?
Answer In our view, ERDS information availability in no way affects NRC liability. The agency has considered the actions it would be prepared to take in defining its role. */ The availability of ERDS would only mean that any actions taken wit 1 be based on a small set of timely reliable information. Having a more timely and reliable source of key plant data, such as ERDS, would make the staff less likely to err in its evaluation of licensee responses or in making specific recommendations for protective actions. Determination of NRC liability in general is discussed below.
Tne question of governmental liability for personal injury or property damage arising out of NRC's actions during an emergency would be governed by the provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act. **/ The Federal Tort Claims Act permits recovery against the United 3tates for negligent acts of federal employees, unless those acts involve the performance of or failure to perform a " discretionary function" within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. 62680(a). The NRC's determination whether or not to take certain actions during an emergency would most likely be viewed by the courts as involving the exercise of discretion in carrying out the Commission's regulatory functions. However, once the Commission had determined to undertake performance of certain actions or to take control of a facility, the possibility of liability would increase. If the actions of the NRC did not involve the exercise of governmental discretion at the planning, policy-making level but rather involved performance of functions at an operational level, the United States would be potentially liable for the negligent acts and omissions of NRC employees. Whether in undertaking certain 3/ The revised role of this agency during a nuclear emergency has been defined in NUREG-0728, revised, which was forwarded to the Congress in February 1983.
Briefly, the agency's role is fourfold. The NRC monitors the licensee to ensure that appropriate recommendations are being made with respect to offsite protective actions. The NRC informs other Federal agencies and entities and in coordination with other public affairs groups, informs the news media of the NRC's knowledge of the situation. The NRC provides advisory support to the licensee and State and local authorities, including confirming the licensee's recommendations to offsite authorities. Finally, in some rare and unusual situations, the NRC may find it necessary to intervene by providing limited direction to the licensee.
The Commission believes that this role can best be fulfilled by sending a team of experts to the site of an emergency, with the Headquarters Operations Center providing the initial response during the 2 to 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> that the Site Team is in transit and providing support and analysis to the Site Team once it arrives.
- / The Price-Anderson Act provisions (Atomic Energy Act $170, 42 U.S.C. S2210) regarding limitations on liability would not apply to claims against the NRC itself.
r- ,
_2_
\
l actions during an emergency, the NRC and hence the United States, would be liable for the consequences of its actions would depend on such circumstances as the nature and scope of NRC's actions, whether the actions were negligent, and whether the actions caused the alleged injury.
4 e
I l
i i
-.,,n,
, y Mr. Mark Kerrigan Room 8002 New Executive Office Building Office of Management and Budget Washington, DC 20503 7
Dear Mr. Kerrigan:
/
/
This letter.is in response to questions you recently posed'in conversations with Peter Rabideau from the Office of the Executive Director for Operations and with Ray Priebe fromsthe Office of Inspection and Enforcement.
\ /
Answers to your questions are provided in the, enclosure. In addition, I would like to convey the importance with which weM iew the Emergency Response Data System (ERDS) project. Whel1' activated by'a licensee during an event, the data provided will allow NRC to havb a better real time understanding of plant conditions. This method is an im'prqvement over voice communicated data since it minimizes the likelihood for transmission of inaccurate information and reduces the burden on the licens~ee for'prsoviding the data to NRC during an event. Timely receipt and frequent updatihg of a limited set of plant data will facilitate verificatjo'n of plant conditions during an accident with less verbal communication. Verbal communications, w'ith ERDS implemented, are antici-pated to emphasize infor'mation transfer rather tha'n data collection. The combined improved data and inf9tmation are expected to substant' ally improve the ability of the NRC to fulfill'its mission.
/
If you have any ad'ditional concerns or questions regarding the ERDS project please contactjds.
, /
/ Sincerely, Jack W. Roe Deputy Exectative Director- --
for Operations
Enclosure:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
DCS JMTaylor Ebo Rlc '
DEPER R/F RHVollmer IRB R/F ELJordan - ~
SASchwartz JHickman RPriebe JBlaha N[
KPerkins JWRoe PDR KCyr DD:DEPER:IE E ER:IE ED0
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE *SASchwartz Jordan JWRoe 10/24/85 /[/85 10/ /85 IRB:DEPR:IE IRB:DEPER:IE IRB:DEPER:IE R D:PSAS:IE EL
- JBHickman:amw *RFPriebe *KEPerkins JLBlaha KCy 10/21/85 10/ /85 10/ /85 1 85 10/ /85 $/l/85
- - - . - - , y -
r,- -
- -, .- , - - + , , . - -,i.-2 - - . , 4w---
Question What are the capital costs associated with the implementation of
'ERDS?
4 Answer An estimate of the capital costs is included below. The estimate delineates the site and headquarters components of the costs. The cost figures.are based on a review of the available information describing licensees' data systems .and a determination of the propor-tion of licensees that represent a trivial interface problem to those that are more complex. Precise site costs will have to be determined on a case-by-case basis.
Site Costs: (Based on 114 units) Total Hardware 0 $6.5 K/ unit $ 740 K Software 0 $21.8 K/ unit $2,486 K Design 0 $3.2 K/ unit $ 367 K Implementation 0 $10.1 K/ unit $1,155 K Headquarters Costs:
Hardware $ 58 K 4
Software $ 270 K Design and Implementation $ 395 K Total $5,471 K i
s T
b J
-. - . . . _ _ _ . . _ , , ,_.sm. _. - , . . . . . - . . ., . - _ . , _
' Question What are the ERDS operating costs including regular maintenance costs and those associated with " deployment" of ERDS f f necessary for an incident?
Answer Regular testing an'd repair. ,
$ 200 K/ year Software modifications due to licensee computer changes.
$ 40 K/ year based on:
Assumption that each unit will upgrade computer hardware once over the operating life of the unit. J 5
4 units / year
$10 K/ software modification
- Cost for system usage during exercises or actual events and part of the maintenance costs will depend on transmission system chosen, Based on the current transmission method of dialup commercial 4- telephone, annual service costs would be $20K. Usage cost would be long distance charges to the site. Other transmission possibilities have been considered and the method to be used is subject to revision based on agency telecommunications upgrades.
}
Question What impact, if any, will ERDS have on the government liability i issue?
Answer In our view, ERDS information availability in no way affects NRC liability. The agency has considered the actions it would be pre-pared to take in defining its role. */ The availability of ERDS would only mean that any actions taken will be based on a small set of timely reliable information. Having a more timely and reliable source of key plant datc, such as ERDS, would make the staff less likely to err in its evaluation of licensee responses or in making specific recommendations for protective actions. Determination of NRC liability in general is discussed below.
The question of governmental liability for personal injury or proper-
' ty damage arising out of NRC's actions during an emergency would be governed by the provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act. **/ The Federal Tort Claims Act permits recovery against the United 3tates for negligent acts of federal employees, unless those acts involve the performance of or failure to perform a " discretionary function" within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. 92680(a). The NRC's determination whether or not to take certain actions during an emergency would most likely be viewed by the courts as involving the exercise of discre-tion in carrying out the Commission's regulatory functions. However, once the Commission had determined to undertake performance of certain actions or to take control of a facility, the possibility of liability would increase. If the actions of the NRC did not involve the exercise of governmental discretion at the planning, policy-making level but rather involved performance of functions at an operational level, the United States would be potentially liable '
for the negligent acts and omissions of NRC employees. Whether in undertaking certain
- / The revised role of this agency during a nuclear emergency has been defined in NUREG-0728, revised, which was forwarded to the Congress in February 1983.
Briefly, the agency's role is fourfold. The NRC monitors the licensee to ensure that appropriate recommendations are being made with respect to offsite protective actions. The NRC informs other Federal agencies and entities and in coordination with other public affairs groups, informs the news media of the NRC's knowledge of the situation. The NRC provides advisory support to the licensee and State and local authorities, including confirming the licensee's recommendations to offsite authorities. Finally, in some rare and unusual situations, the NRC may find it necessary to intervene by providing limited direction to the licensee.
The Commission believes that this role can best be fulfilled by sending a team of experts to the site of an emergency, with the Headquarters Operations Center providing the initial response during the 2 to 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> that the Site Team is in transit and providing support and analysis to the Site Team once
it arrives.
- / The Price-Anderson Act provisions (Atomic Energy Act $170, 42 U.S.C. 62210) regarding limitations on liability would not apply to claims against the NRC itself.
2 actions during an emergency, the NRC and hence the United States, would be liable for the consequences of its actions would depend on such circumstances as the nature and scope of NRC's actions, whether the actions were negligent, and whether the actions caused the alleged injury.