ML20199L632
| ML20199L632 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/30/1986 |
| From: | Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Hawkins P SENATE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20199L638 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8607090501 | |
| Download: ML20199L632 (16) | |
Text
's k
8
~%
UNITED STATES k
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
{
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
% *....,e June 30, 1986 CHAIRMAN The Honorabio Paula Hawkins United States Senate Washington, D. C.
20510'
Dear Senator Hawkins:
The Commission appreciates receiving your views on the need for a fitness for duty rule for the nuclear industry that were expressed in your letter of May 8, 1986.
We share your concern about the consequences of human error in the nuclear industry, and therefore require a number of programs, such as training and qualification, to minimize the occurrence of errors.
Mental and physical impairments from the effects of drugs are certainly included in our concerns about human error.
As an alternative to promulgation of regulations in this area, in August 1984, the nuclear industry offered to develop comprehensive guidance for licensee programs for providing assurance that personnel are fit to perform their duties.
NRC endorsement of the industry proposal with access to vital areas is consistent with the Commission's regulatory philosophy of encouraging initiatives by the nuclear industry where such self-improvements can rapidly satisfy NRC's concerns.
This policy is, of course, contingent upon NRC's determination through periodic inspections, audits, and other assessment means that industry is satisfactorily implementing programs which address these issues without the need for further regulations.
Notwithstanding the absence of a specific rule, our a.Lnority in all matters which potentially affect nuclear safety provides a sufficient basis for NRC action in any case where drug or alcohol use could impact the public health and safety.
There have been several recent industry efforts to implement fitness for duty programs.
These included publication in August 1985 of industry guidelines entitled "EEI Guide to Effective Drug and Alcohol / Fitness for Duty Policy Development," and a number of conferences on development and implementation of effective fitness for duty programs.
In February 1986, the Nuclear Utility Manpower and Resources Committee (NUMARC) reported to the Commission that all nuclear utilities had voluntarily implemented fitness for duty programs.
The Institute for Nuclear Power Operations (INP0), an industry organization formed to promote excellence in nuclear power operations, has revised its performance objectives to include specific criteria to evaluate licensee fitness for duty programs during INP0's normal evaluation process.
In addition, all nuclear power reactor licensees have committed to review and 8607090501 860630 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR
i.
upgrade, as necessary, their programs using the EEI guidelines.
The Commission's proposed Fitness for Duty Policy Statement, which endorses industry efforts and states Commission objectives was approved June 25, 1986 and is attached.
INP0 has agreed to conduct an industry survey to identify the various program elements in place at each utility.
During the House Select Committee hearing on May 7, 1986, Mr. Taylor's source of information on, current use of chemical testing by the nuclear industry was an. informal and incomplete tabulation of data gathered by INP0 during the past number of months.
When the generic results of the INP0 survey are received, we will be happy to provide them to you.
Commissioner Asselstine adds:
I believe that the Commission should promulgate a rule on fitness for duty rather than allowing the industry to regulate itself on this issue.
Human error is a dominant factor in the risk associated with nuclear power plants, and the Commission should do everything it can reasonably do to reduce that element of the risk.
A rule that would require all utilities to have an adequate program to ensure that their employees do not perform safety related work in a drug or alcohol impaired state would help reduce one possible cause for human error.
Unfortunately, the Commission has chosen only to issue a policy statement urging utilities to adopt such a program.
That policy statement is not enforceable by the Commission as a rule would be.
Therefore, the Commission's ability to ensure that utilities have an adequate program is limited.
Further, because there will be no rule and because the elements of the EEI guidelines are optional, there will more than likely be extensive variations among the programs of licensees.
For example, the utilities will probably adopt widely differing approaches on issues such as chemical testing and offsite drug use.
A rule, coupled with specific guidance on the elements of an adequate program, would ensure that all utilities had at least the basics of an effective program, or if they did not, the Commission would have the ability to take specific enforcement action to do something about it.
Chairman Palladino adds:
I, too, favor a rule; nonetheless, the policy statement will promptly focus industry's attention on the problem.
If the policy statement does not produce desired results in 18 months, I believe NP.C will have to establish a rule.
i.
Commissioners Roberts, Bernthal and Zech add:
The Commission majority does not share the Chairman's and Commissioner Asselstine's great concern about the legally non-binding character of the policy statement per se.
The Commission's hands are not tied if it finds inadequate compliance with straightforward and explicit policy guidelines.
The Atomic Energy Act confers broad authority on the Commission to take prompt action should any licensee facility, in the Commission's judgment,.n'ot be operated in a manner that adequately protects the public health and safety.
A policy statement, at this juncture, offers the quickest means to achieve the end we all desire.
Sincerely, lihbCfd <
-LL
-[
Nunzio J.
alladino
Attachment:
As stated
t 4/18/85 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSICN f
COMMISSION POLICY STATEMENT ON FITNESS FOR DUTY OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT PERSONNEL AGENCY:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ACTION:
Final Commission Policy Statement on Fitness for Duty of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel
SUMMARY
This statement presents the policy of the Nuclear Regu.latory Commission (NRC) with respect to-f'itness for duty and describes the activities that the NRC will use to execute its responsibilities to ensure the health and safety of the public.
To provide reasonable assurance that all nuclear power plant personnel with access to vital areas at operating plants are fit for duty, licensees and applicants are developing and implementing fitness for duty programs using guidance in the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) "EEI Guide to Effective i
Drug and Alcohol / Fitness for Duty Policy Development."
It remains the continuing responsibility of the NRC to independently evaluate applicant development and licensee implementation of fitness for duty programs to ensure that desired results are achieved.
Nothing in this Policy Statement limits NRC's authority or responsibility to follow up en operational events or its enforcement authority when regulatory requirements are not met.
However, while evaluating the effectiveness
of this guidance, the NRC intends to exercise discretion in enforcement matters related to fitness for duty programs for nuclear power plant personnel and ref, rain from new rulemaking in this area for a period of at least eighteen months from the effective date of this Policy Statement.
EFFECTIVE DATE:
(Upon publication in the Federal Register)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Loren Bush, Operating Reactor Programs Branch, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555, telephone (301) 492-8080.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
l BACKGROUND The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) recognizes drug and alcohol abuse problems to be a social, medical, and safety problem affecting every segment of our society.
Given the pervasiveness of the problem it must be recognized that it exists to some extent in the nuclear industry.
- Prudence, therefore, requires that the Commission consider additional appropriate measures to provide reasonable assurance that a person who is under the influence of alcohol or any substance legal or illegal which affects his ability to perform his
6.
duties safely, is not allowed access to a vital area at a nuclear power plant.
The nuclear power industry, with assistance from programs developed and coordinated by EEI and the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO)", has made and is continuing to make substantial progress in this area.
A Task Force on Drug Abuse Problems, Policies, and Programs established in 1982 by EEI's Industrial Relations Division Executive Advisory Committee, published guidelines in 1983 to help the industry address the issue of how to establish, comprehensive fitness for duty programs.
They were subsequently revised in 1985 as the "EEI Guide to Effective Drug and Alcohol /
Fitness for Duty Policy Development" and were provided to all nuclear utilities.
A series of EEI sponsored regional conferences in the fitness for duty area in 1982 and 1983 provided a forum for discussion of industry concerns related to development and implementation of fitness for duty programs.
Topics addressed at the conferences included union participation, legal aspects, training, and methods for handling controlled substances.
An industrywide conference sponsored by EEI in October 1985 provided the basis for additional discussions on fitness for duty based on the current EEI guidelines which had been expanded to include information on chemical testing.
As a result of
_4 increased awareness in this area, the nuclear industry has worked to develop and implement improved fitness for duty programs.
These programs concentrate on the training of managers, supervisors, and others in methods for identifying and dealing with personnel potentially unfit for duty.
i On August 5, 1982, the Commission published in the Federal Register a proposed rule on fitness for. duty (47 FR 33980).
The proposed rule would have required licensees to establish and implement written procedures for ensuring that personnel in a nuclear power plant are fit for duty.
Due to the initiatives taken by the nuclear in,dustry, the Commission has decided to defer implementation of the rule subject to successful implementation of fitness for duty programs by the industry as described in this Policy Statement.
NRC is publishing a separate notice in the Federal Register analyzing the comments on the proposed rule, and explaining its intent to reassess the possible nead for rulemaking after an 18-month period, if circumstances warrant.
The following statement sets forth the Commission's policy on fitness for duty and describes how it will execute its responsibilities in this area to ensure the health and safety of the public.
POLICY STATEMENT The Commission recognizes that the industry, through the initiatives of the Nuclear Utility Management and Resources
-. - = _ _ _ -
i s
l Committee (NUMARC), EEI, and INPO, has made progress in developing and implementing nuclear utility employee fitness for duty programs.
The Ccmmission stresses the importance of infustry's initiative and wishes to encourage further such self-improvement.
Subject to the continued success of industry's programs and NRC's ability to monitor the effectiveness of those programs, t
the Commission will refrain from new rulemaking on fitness for duty for a minimum of 18 months from the effective date of this' Policy Statement.
The Commission's decision to defer implementation of rulemaking in this area is in recognition of industry efforts to date and the intent of the industry to utilize the EEI Guidelines in developing fitness for duty programs.
The Commission will exercise this deference as long as the industry programs produce the desired results.
However, the Commission continues to be responsible for evaluating licensees' efforts in the fitness for duty area to verify effectiveness of the industry programs.
The Commission will reassess the possible need for further NRC action based on the success of those programs during the 18-month period.
At the Commission's request, the industry agreed to undertake a review of the program elements and acceptance criteria for a fitness for duty program.
EEI modified and issued the revised "EEI Guide to Effective Drug and Alcohol / Fitness for Duty Policy Development."
Further, INPO enhanced its performance objectives and criteria for its periodic
i i
I evaluations to include appropriate criteria for fitness for duty.
Copies of the documents describing the program elements and criteria for fitness for duty programs dereloped by the industry are provided to NRC for review and comment.
The NRC will evaluate the effectiveness of utility fitness for duty programs by its normal review of industry activities, through reviews of INPO program status and evaluation reports, periodic NRC observation of INPO evaluations, and direct inspecti~ons conducted by the NRC's Performance Appraisal Teams, Regional Office, and Resident Inspectors.
NRC will also monitor the progress of individual licensee programs.
By way of further guidance to licensees, Commission expectations of licensee programs for fitness for duty of nuclear power i
plant personnel may be summarized as follows:
o It is Commission policy that the sale, use, or possession of illegal drugs or alcohol within protected areas at nuclear plant sites is unacceptable.
o It is Commission policy that persons within protected areas at nuclear power plant sites shall not be under the influence of any substance, legal or illegal, which adversely affects their ability to perform their duties in any way related to safety.
_m_
r...
,m.
._ _ _ _ _.. ~-,.. -. -._-
_7_
o An acceptable fitness for duty program should at a minimum include the following essential elements:
1)
A provision that the sale, use, or possession of illegal drugs within the protected are'a will result in immediate revocation of access to vital areas and discharge from nuclear power plant activities.
The use of alcohol or abuse of legal drugs within the protected area will result in immediate revocation of access to vital areas and possible discharge from nuclear power plant activities.
2)
A provision that any other sale, possession, or use of illegal drugs will result in immediate revocation of access to vital areas, mandatory rehabilitation prior to reinstatement of access, and possible discharge from nuclear power plant activities.
3)
Effective monitoring and testing procedures to provide reasonable assurance that nuclear power plant personnel with access to vital areas are fit for duty.
,-r---
The industry, by periodic briefings or other appr9priate methods, is expected to keep the Commission informed on program status.
The NRC =ay also from time to time ask individual licensees to provide such information as the Cor. mission may need to assess program adequacy.
ENFORCEMENT violations of any applicable reporting requirement or instances of a person being unfit for duty such that plant safety is potentially affected will be subject to the enforcement process.
Any NRC staff enforcement action pertaining to fitness for duty during this grace period will be undertaken only with Commission concurrence.
In addition to required reports and inspections, information requests under'10 CFR 50.54(f) may be made and enforcement meetings held to ensure understanding of corrective actions.
Orders may be issued where necessary to achieve corrective actions on matters affecting plant safety.
In brief, the NRC's decision to use discretion in enforcement in order to recognize industry initiatives in no way changes the NRC's ability to issue orders, call enforcement meetings, 1
or suspend licensees should a significant safety problem be found.
n--.. - - - -, - - -. -.
-- ~.--,,- -.
g-Nothing in this Policy Statement shall limit the authority of the NRC to conduct inspections as deemed necessary to take appropriate enforcement action when regulatory requirements are not met.
O a
O l
1
'l l
l l
I l
i l
l
---_,-,na, v,-
,,,-,.w,,,,
--.,,-,--e
-,w,-n,n g,
Commissioner Asselstine's Separate Views on Fitness for Duty Policy Statement This policy statement is a step in the right direction. Human error is a dominant factor in the risk associated with the operation of nuclear power plants. An adequate fitness for duty program is essential to reduce the chance that human error will be caused by utility personnel performing safety-related work in a drug or alcohol impaired state. This policy statement puts the Commission on record as endorsing the concept of a drug and alcohol free workplace at plant sites, and that is useful. The statement also gives some guidance on what the Commission expects of licensee fitness for duty programs. However, I believe that the Commission should have gone further.
Instead of merely issuing a policy statement, the Commission should have promulgated a rule. The rule should be a relatively simple, nonprescrip-tive rule which would do two things.
First, it would prohibit anyone who is unfit for duty from being permitted access to vital areas of plants.
Second, it would require licensees to have a program and procedures to ensure that no one who is unfit for duty gains access to vital areas. The
~
Commission shou 1d then work with the industry to develop guidance on what are the essential elements of an adequate fitness for duty program. There are several reasons why I believe that this would be a better approach.
The most important reason for my preference for a rule and specific guidelines is that a rule is enforceable while a policy statement is not.
2-With a rule the Comission would have a clear basis for enforcement action in all cases in which a utility fails to establish and maintain an effective fitness for duty program. The NRC has broad authority under the Atomic Energy Act to take enforcement action by issuing an order should there be an immediate threat to public health and safety. The Commission would also be able to take enforcement action if it could tie a specific safety problem to a lapse in the licensee's fitness for duty program.
However, the Commission is unlikely to be able to do so.
For example, if a maintenance worker makes a mistake in assemb1.
safety equipment because he is under the influence of drugs or alcohol and equipment later malfunc-tions, it is unlikely that the true cause of the mistake would be j
discovered.
In fact, the problem would most likely be attributed to some defect in the worker's training.
Further, waiting until a specific safety problem surfaces or an immediate threat occurs and then trying to correct the fitness for duty program after the fact is not the best way to ensure that licensees have effective fitness for duty programs. Thus, our general enforcement authority does not provide us with enough flexibility to deal with all potential fitness for duty problems in a timely manner. Absent a specific event, it would not allow us to do much of anything if a licensee simply has not developed or implemented an adequate progi This policy statement represents a continuation of the reactive approach to regulation which has so often failed in the past.
A second reason for my preference for a rule with minimum guidelines is that the policy statement is too amorphous.
Even the " specific" guidance the Commission does provide is fairly vague. The policy statement provides i
~.
9,
little insight into what the Commission considers to be an adequate fitness for duty program or what standard the staff is supposed to use as it monitors the progress of the industry over the next eighteen months.
The Commission should work.together with the industry to identify the essential elements of an adequate fitness for duty program. While the policy statement comments favorably upon the EEI guidelines developed by the industry, those guidelines are optional, not mandatory. The utilities can, therefore, pick and choose among the various elements and decide whether to include them in their programs. Moreover, the EEI guidelines themselves are quite general in nature, and are subject to varying interpretations. Absent further guidance on what is an acceptable fitness for duty program, the utilities can and probably will adopt widely differing approaches on such elements as chemical testing and offsite drug use. Not all approaches are likely to be acceptable. The Commission should not wait until 18 months from now, when all the utilities are supposed to have their programs in place, to let the industry know whether the Commission agrees with what they have done.
The Commission and the the industry ought to decide now which elements are absolutely essential tn an adequate program, and then everyone will be working from a common base of understanding.
The Commission and the industry should also establish the specific criteria against which individual licensee programs will be evaluated so that the ground rules for evaluating programs and for monitoring progress will be in place before the 18 month monitoring period begins. Absent such
.- t guidelines, it is difficult to see how INP0 and NRC staff reviews of these programs will provide any meaningful insights as to their adequacy.
Thus, to ensure enforceability, to set the ground rules in advance and to ensure that all utilities me.et at least a minimum set of standards, I believe the Commission should issue a rule and should establish guidance, in cooperation with the industry, on just exactly what are the essential elements of a fitness for duty program.
i
.