ML20207F099

Requests Comments & Approval to Publish Annual Rept, FY98 NRC Annual Rept

ML20207F099
Person / Time
Issue date:	03/19/1999
From:	Galante A NRC OFFICE OF THE CONTROLLER
To:
References
SECY-99-083, SECY-99-083-R, SECY-99-83, SECY-99-83-R, NUDOCS 9906080058
Download: ML20207F099 (64)

Text

"

. f e ~'*gi, ........................*

RELEASED TO THE PDR .

\, *- / l

6/vh9 Wini9s  :

• ..* dat'e ~

POLICY ISSUE '"""'"""""""'

(Notation Vote)

March 19, 1999 SECY-99-083 FOR: The Commissioners ,

FROM: A. J. Galante __

Chief Informati ficer

SUBJECT:

FISCAL YEAR 1998 NRC ANNUAL REPORT PURPOSE: To request comments and approval to publish the annual report.

DISCUSSION:

Staff requirements memorandum COMSECY-98-033 directed that my office supply the Commission a draft of the NRC Annual Report for Fiscal Year 1998 within six months of the end of the fiscal year.

The draft annual report is attached for the Commission's comments and approval to publish after resolution of their comments.

SCHEDULING:

Receiving comments by April 21,1999, should allow the staff to distribute printed copies in early May.

Attachment:

Draft NRC Annual Report r

Contact:

l Juanita F. Beeson, OClO 415-7174 'j ' I DC ',r.,y / a e

9906090058 990319

' ~

e.

2

')

Commissioners' completed vote sheets / comments should be provided directly to the Office of the Secretary by c.o.b. Monday. April 5.1999.

~

- Commission staff office comments, if any, should be submitted to the Commissioners NLT-March 29.1999. with an information copy to SECY. If the paper is of such a nature that it requires additional review and comment, the Commissioners and the Secretariat should be apprised of when comments may be expected.

DISTRIBUTION:

-Commissioners' OGC' OCAA OlG OPA OIP OCA ACRS-ACNW ASLBP CIO CFO EDO'

. REGIONS

^SECY 4

i L

L9,98 ca;_sga w au avg &ar 9tegatatony %nikam f"" ""%,

($...$.. ),,

1

iv. . \

s

• I Increasing the Effectiveness and F.fficiency of Key Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12 NRC/ Industry Ucensing Process Improvement Working Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Ucense Re newal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 .......

Certification of Next-Generation Reactor Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... 13 Independe n t Program Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Analysis of Opera tional Da ta for Reactors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Performance Indicator Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Accident Sequence Precursor Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. ............ 15 Regulatory Effectiveness Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Common.Cause Failure Database and Studies . . . . . . . . 15 System Reliability Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16 Abnormal Occurrences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 Radiation Exposures and Overexposures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...........................

........................ 16 Adj udica tory Prochedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Atomic Safety and Ucensing Boards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Greater Efficiency in Adjudicatory Proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 New Procedures for Ucense Transfer A

. . . . . . pplications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 Decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..................... .......

21 Pending u tiga tion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................................

22 Enforcement and Investigative Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Enforce m e n t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22 ........

Investigati ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 CHAPTER 2: NUCLEAR MATERIALS SAFETY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 Generic Materials Licensing and Inspection Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Medical Use of Byproduct Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 28 Agreeme nt States Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...................

................. 28 Cooperation With Stat es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Technical Assistance to States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 ...

Training Offered State Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Review of State Regulatory Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Operational Events in Agreement States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 The Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Fuel Cycl e Fa ciliti es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

~

y

. 4 111 I

l CONTENTS HI GHLI G HTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ix Changes in the Commission and Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Program Highligh ts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Nuclear Re actor Safe ty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Nuclear Materials Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi Nuclear Wast e Safe ty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi Communicating With Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xii Adjudicatory Procee dings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xii S:pport Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii Personnel Training, and Employee Assistance Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii M anaging Dive rsity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii.

Information Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii Administrative Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii CHAPTER 1: NUCLEAR REACTOR SAFETY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 M i n ta in in g S a fe ty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Revisions to the Assessment and Oversight Process . . . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Ye r 2000 Problem in Nuclear Power Plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Making 10 CFR Part 50 Risk Informed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 All :ga ti ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Indemnity, Financial Protection, and Property Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Incident Response Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Reducing Unnecessary Licensee Burden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Issuance of Risk. Informed License Amendments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Rul: making on 10 CFR 50.59 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Guidance for Updating Final Safety Analysis Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Increasing Public Confidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

g Analysis of Materials Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Nuclear Material Licensees and Agreement States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Radiation Exposures and Overex 32 Abnormal Occurrences . . . . .. . . .posures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :

......................................................... 36 Rulemaldag Supporting Nuclear Materials Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,. . . . . 37 ..

L.icensee Burden Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 ........

Improvements in the Regulatory Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Enforcement and Investigative Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Enfo rce me nt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Escalated Enforcement Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 CHAITER 3: NUCLEAR WASTE SAFETY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 .

S pe n t Fuel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Pilot Program For Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 High -Level Wa s te . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Low- Level Wa s te . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 .........

Reactor and Site Decommissioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Research Supporting Nuclear Waste Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Advisory Committee On Nuclear Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 CHAPTER 4: INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR SAFETY SUPPORT . . , . . . . . . . . . . 53 Generic International Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Export Control and Non-Proliferation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 International Nuclear Safety Activitie.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ 56 Implementation of U.S. Policy on Nuclear Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Bilateral Cooperative and Assistance Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Cooperation with Multilateral Organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Development of International Legal Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 International Nuclear Regulators Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . 60 Year 2000 Activiti es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 l

1 i

vi CHAPTER 5: COMMUNICATING WITH NRC STAKEHOLDERS . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Public Informa tion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 ...

Media Workshop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Published Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 News Confe rences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......................... ....................... 62 School Volunteer Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Communication With The Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

63

~ State and Local Governments and American Indian 'IYibes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Commission Meetings and Related Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Commission Decisionmaking Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Commission History Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Proceedings and Litigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ ....... 70 Advisory Commi ttees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 CHAPTER 6: SUPPORT SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Omce of the Chief Financial Omcer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 The Chief Financial Officers Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73 .

Government Performance and Results Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Improving Financial Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Omce of the Chief Informa tion Omcer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Year 2000 at the NRC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75 .

Worl d Wi de Web Si te . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 .

NUREG-Series Publications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Agencywide Documents Access and Management System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Capital Planning and Investment Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Omce of Human Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 ..

NRC Staff.Ycars Expended . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Re crui tm e n t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Awards an d Recognition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ ...... 79 Benefits.............................................................................. 79 Labor Rel a ti ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79 ..

Training and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Employee Assistance, Health, and Fitness Programs . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

l

. vii Office of Small Business and Civil Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Equal Employment Opportunity Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Affirmative Action Pro Civil Rights Program...............................

. gram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81. .........

82 Small Business Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...........................

82 Historically Black Colleges and Universities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ ....... 83 Office of Administra tion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 ..........

Facilities Program . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

83 Securi ty Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............

83 Property Management Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -. . . . . . 84 Re cycling Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . r . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 84 Rulemaking and Directives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....................

......................... 84 Contract M an agem ent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .........

....... 84 APPENDICES N RC Orga n iza t ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 FIGURES 1.1 Performance Indicators-Annual Industry Averages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . .

l 3

1.2 Distribution of ASP Conditional Core Damage Probabilities by Calendar Year . . . . . . . . . 4 1.3 ,

Had dam Neck Pl an t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 ..

2.1 U.S. Map. Location of NRC Offices and Agreement States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 ,

3.1 Operating Spent Fuel Storage Sites (ISFSI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 3.2 Potential Near-Term, New ISFSI Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 5.1 Region II Administrator Luis Reyes Briefs NRC Chairman Shirley Ann Jackson During a November 1997 Visit to St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant Near Ft. Pierce, Florida.

Florida Power and Light Company Was Changin Unit 1 Containment Building. . . . . . . . . ..................................

. . . . . . .g Steam Generators in .

Its 65 5.2 NRC Official John Austin (left) and a DOE Facilitator Respond to Questions From the Audience During a Public Meeting at Oak Ridge (Tennessee) Associated Universities To Discuss a Pilot NRC Plan To Simulate Regulation of DOE Activities at a DOE Radiochemistry Laboratory at Oak Ridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 l 5.3 Senator Joseph Lieberman (Democrat from Connecticut) Tours the Millstone Plant  !

With NRC Executive Director For Operations Joseph Callan in February 1998 . . . . . . . . . 66 5.4 Special Projects Office Director Wilham Travers, a Unit 3 Operator, and Chairman Shirley Ann Jackson in the Control Room at Millstone Nuclear Power Plan t in February 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 5.5 Commissioner Nils Diaz in the Control Room at Millstone Nuclear Power Plant in April 199 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 5.6 The NRC's Public Affairs Office Arranged for News Reporters To Interview the l Helicopter Pilot and Crew Who Would Perform Aerial Surveys Over Greensboro, 1 North Carolina, in March 1998, To Search for Missing Cesium 137 Sources that Disappeared From Greensboro's Moses Cone Hospital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 5.7 Region II Official Charles Hosey Points to Map Locations Durin Over Greensboro, North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...................... . . . . . . . .g the Aerial Surveys 6!!

)

TABLES L1 Agency Responses to Event Notifications during Fiscal Year 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.2 Agency Responses to Non. Reportable Events during Fiscal Year 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.3 - Events Reported to the NRC Operations Center during Fiscal Year 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1.4 Classification of Events Under Licensee Emergency Plans from Calendar Year 1990 to Fiscal Year 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c 9 1.5 Civil Penalty Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... ....... 23 2.1 Distribution of NRC Nuclear Materials Licenses (as of October 1,1998) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.2 Annual Occupational Exposure Data for Commercial Reactors 1973 and 1992 to 1997 . . . 33 2.3 Occupational Exposure Data for NRC Licensees in 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 2.4 Annual Occupational Overexposures for NRC Licensees CY 1992 to CY 1997 . . . . . . . . . . 34 2.5 Annual Occupational Overexposure Rate at NRC Reactor and Radiography 2.6 Licensees 1992 to 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34. . . .

Nuclear Materials Reportable Events Submitted to the NRC and to Agreement States in 1998 by Event Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 2.7 Annual Exposure Data for NRC Industrial Radiography Licensees 1992 and 1997 . . . . . . . 35 2.8 Annual Exposure Data for NRC Manufacturing and Distribution Licensees 1992 to 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36 ..

2.9 Annual Exposure Data for NRC Fuel Fabrication and Processing Licensees 1992 to 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 2.10 Civil Penalty Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................ ~ 35 3.1 Annual Exposure Data for NRC Independent Spent Fuel Storage Licensees 1992 to 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45 ...

3.2 Annual Exposure Data for NRC Low. Level Waste Disposal Licensees 1992 to 1997 . . . . . 47 5.1 '

Congressional Hearings at Which NRC Witnesses Testified or Submitted Testimony During FY 9 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 l

l l

o , 1 o 7.;

,g a l

HIGHLIGHTS This 24th annual report of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission '

(NRC) for Fiscal Year Stptember 30,1998scusses -<h(FY) 1998-October 1,1997, through regulatory activities that support NRC's perforraance goals and moveraent toward risk informed, performance-

' based regulation of nuclear materials and facilities. Additionally, the .

re met includes organizational changes and major support services for

' ac nevmg NRC's overall regulatory mission. NRC regulates the Nation's civilian use of byproduct, source, and special nuclear materials to ensure adequate rotection of the public health and safety, to promote the common c efense and secunty, and to protect the environment.

Its mission and purposes are defined by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, and the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,

. which provide the foundation for regulating the Nation's civilian uses of nuclear materials. In accordance with the 1974 Act, the President rppoints five Commissioners, by and with the advice of the Senate, and -

designates the Chairman of the Commission from among these Commissioners.

The NRC carries out its mission through a licensing and regulatory -

system comprising the following activities:

o . licensing the design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of nuclear reactors and other nuclear facilities (such as nuclear fuel -

cycle facilities, uranium enrichment facilities, and test and research reactors);

o licensing the possession, use, processing, handling, and exporting of nuclear materials; o licensing the siting, design, construction, operation, and closure of low level radioactive waste disposal sites under NRC jurisdiction and the construction, operation, and closure of geologic repositories for high-level radioactive waste; o - licensing the operators of civilian nuclear reactors; o inspecting licensed facilities and activities;

'o: conducting the principal U.S. Government research program on light-water reactor safety; of ' conducting research to gain independent expertise and information for making timely regulatory judgments and for anticipating problems of potential safety signi6cance; o developing and implementing rules and regulations that govern licensed nuclear activities;

l

• \ investigating nuclearincidents and allegations Several key executives were reassigned in FY 1998 concerning any matter regulated by the NRC; or shortly thereafter. In the Commission Staff 1

\

enfor ing NRC regulations and the conditions offices, Annette L Vietti-Cook became Secretary of the Commission; Janice Dunn Lee becjyne the I

I of NR licenses; Acting Director of the Office ofInterna ronal Programs; and G. Paul Bollwerk III e the e conductingyublic hearings on matters of Acting Chief Administrative Judge the Atomic nuclear and ladiological safety, environ- Safety and Licensing Board Pane ilham D.

common defense and Travers became the Executive rector for mental concerh>i security, and ant st matters; Operations, Frank J. Miragl came the Deputy Executive Director for Re tory Programs, and

• developing effective Malcolm R. Knapp be the Deputy Executive rking relationships Direct r f r Regulato ctiveness. In the staff with the States regardirig reactor operations and the regulation of nu' ear material'- offices, Michael L Sp , ger became the Director of the Office of mstration, Paul H. Lohaus e ameth Nre r oMe Mce omate maintaimn8 the NRC Incid Qt Resp nse Programs, and J mes E. Dyer became the Program, m. eluding the NRC perations Regional Ad istrator in Region III.

Center; The NRC ganization as of September 30,1998, e collecting, analyzing, and dissemi ting is shown ' the Appendix to diis report, and the information about the operational fety of commercial nuclear power reactors a d NRC of anization as of February 19,1999,is show m an addendum to this appendix.

certain nonreactor activities; PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS CHANGES IN THE COMMISSION AND ORGANIZATION uclear Reactor Safety As of September 30,1998, Dr. Shirley In FY 98, the NRC continued to monitor Jackson was Chairman of the Commissi n (her significa t safety and regulatory issues at 103 term expires June 30,1999), and the m- commerci nuclear power reactors that are missioners were Nils J. Diaz (his te expires licensed to caerate and at another 18 that are June 30,2001), and Edward McGa gan (his term undergoing decommissioning.

expires June 30,2000). The two y ant \

Commissioner positions were fil d shortly after Allegations. In P)' 1998, the NRC received 1,026 the end of the fiscal year: Greta J. Dieus returned allegations, compitsing 2,222 individual concerns.

to the Commission on Octobyf 27,1998 (her term Of the 1,026 allegat'igns,693 involved reactor expires June 30,2003) andjeffrey Merrifield was issues,244 involved materials issues,69 involved appointed to the Commission on October 23,1998 Agreement State issue' and 20 involved other (his term expires June 30,2002). non-NRC issues.

/

On December 10,1998, the Commission approved Indemnity. Regarding insu the staff's plan to stre'amline the Office for plants, the 16th annual prop,nce for nuclear Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data and submitted by power reactor licensees indicated consolidate its funitions in other program offices, that of the 68 sites insured,53 are covered for at primarily the Offi' ces of Nuclear Reactor least the 51.06 billion as required under our Regulation andeuclear Regulatory Research. regulations. The remaining 15 sites have sought or w /

MM-12-1999 15:is g ::33 3 ..g 3 m c _. 0 2 %, ,

l .

e investigating nuclear incidents and allegations Several key executives were reassigned in FY 1998 concerning any matter regulated by the NRC; or shortly thereafter. In the Commission Staff offices, Annette L. Vietti-Cook became Secretary of the Commission; Janice Dunn Lee became the

. enforcing NRC regulations and the conditions of NRClicenses; Acting Director of the Office of International Programs; and O. Paul Bollwerk, III, became the Acting Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic e conducting public hearings on matters of S fety and Licensing Board Panel. William D.

nuclear and radiological safety, environ.

mental concern, common defense and Travers became the Executive Director for Operations, Frank J. Miraglia became the Deputy security, and antitrust matters'. Executive Director for Regulatory Programs, and Malcolm R. Knapp became the Deputy Executive

• developing effecti e working relationships irector for Regulatory Effectiveness. In the staff with the States regarding reactor operations othces, Michael L. Spnnger became the Director and the regulation of nuclear material-* of the Office of Adnurustration, Paul H. Lohau:,

ecame e ect r e ate e maintainin8 the NRC Incident Response Programs, and James E. Dyer became the Program, m. eluding the NRC Operations Regional Administrator in Region III.

Center; The NRC organization as of September 30,1998,

• co!!ecting, analyzing, and disseminating is shown in the Appendix to this report, and the information about the operational safety of NRC organization as of February 19,1999, is commercial nuclear power reactors and shown m an addendum to this appendix.

certain nonreactor activities; 1

l l

l CHANGES IN THE l FEES 1

COMMISSION AND .

ORGANIZATION The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-508), as amended, requires that As of September 30,1998, Dr. Shirley Ann in FY 1998, the NRC collect fees (under 10 CFR Jackson was Chairman of the Commission (her Part 170) and annual fees (under 10 CFR Part term expires June 30,1999), and the Com- 171) that approximate 100 percent of the agency's I missioners were Nils J. Diaz (his term expires budget authority,less the amount appropriated to i l

June 30,2001) and Edward McGaffigan (his term the NRC from the Nuclear Waste Fund. Public expires June 30,2000). The two vacant Law 105-62 appropriated $472.8 million to the l Commissioner positions were filled shonly after NRC for FY 1998. Of the funds appropriated to the end of the fiscal year: Greta J. Dicas retumed the NRC, S15 million was derived from the to the Commission on October 27,1998 (her term Nuclear Waste Fund and S3 million was appro- I expires June 30,2003), and Jeffrey Merrifield was priated for regulatory reviews and other assistance  ;

appointed to the Commission on October 23,1998 provided to the Department of Energy and other (his term expires June 30,2002). Federal agencies; both of which are excluded from license fee revenues. In FY 1998, the total amount On December 10,1998, the Commission approved collected through fees and other charges was l the staff's plan to streamline the Office for $458.9 million. Of this total, S454.8 million offsets ,

Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data and the appropriation, bringing the net appropriation l consolidate its functions in other program offices, for FY 1998 to S18 million. The remaining S4.1  ;

primanly the Offices of Nuclear Reactor million will be used to reduce the total fees Regulation and Nuclear Regulatory Research, assessed in FY 1999.

( 1 1

t

l 1- xi have been granted exemptions from the full e 10 reviews and 1 follow-up review of amount of required coverage. Agreement State programs and 2 regional integrated program reviews; Stakeholder Invoviement. In FY 1998, there was a substantial increase in public meetings and a 101 licensing and certification actions (e.g.,

stakeholderinvolvementin NRCinitiatives. For new, amended, and renewed licenses or cxample, the Commission held specific meetings certificates) for enrichment, fuel fabrication, with stakeholders: more than 14 meetings were conversion, and other fuel cycle. facilities; and h:Id with stakeholders on improvements to the e 191 fuel cycle facility licensee and certificate 4 regulatoly oversight program; five meetings were j held in the second half of FY 1998 on licensing holderinspections.

process improvements, and numerous public Assistance to Agreement States. To assist the l meetmgs and workshops were held m all program areas. States in administration of materials licensees, the NRC sponsored 34 training courses and workshops attended by 357 State radiation control Reducing Licensee Eurden. One initiative to personnel during the fiscal year.

reduce licensee burden in FY 1998 was the continuation of the Improved Standard Technical Strategic and Special Nuclear Material Specifications (ISTS) program. Applications to (S&SNM). In carrying out its mandate to regulate convert to ISTS have been received for 57 units, of S&SNM in FY 1998, the NRC completed 60 which 43 have been approved. The staff has seen a safety-related source and S&SNM license or 32 percent reduction in the number oflicense certificate amendments,37 S&SNM technicsl i amendments per unit for plants that have reviews, and 4 S&SNM license renewals. The  !

converted to ISTS. NRC staff performed 134 inspections et eight fuel cycle facilities and 57 inspections at the two i Licensing Action Inventory. For FY 1998, the gaseous diffusion plants. The NRC renewed three licensing action inventory decreased about 11 SNM licenses that included specific review of the percent and the median age of the inventory is criticality safety function and 10 nuclear criticality 4 down from 7.6 months to 7.1 months. Continued safety related license or certificate amendments.

efGeiency gains are expected as the NRC works Using a risk informed and performance based with an outside consultant and stakeholders on approach, NRC inspection staff confirmed that licensing action process improvements. :riticality safety was adequate at each fuel licensee -

and gaseous diffusion plant.

Nuclear Materials Safety Nuclear Waste Safety Nuclear materials safety activities included licensing, certification, inspection, and other Licensing and Inspection Activities. The NRC.

regulatory actions concerned with production and received 36 applications for spent fuel storage and us*, of reactor produced radioisotopes (byproduct transponation package designs ar.d facilities and material). Nuclear materials regulation during FY completed 35 of these applications m FY 1998, 1998 comprised- meludmg an m, dependent spent fuel storage installation license for North Anna. Separately, the staff completed in technical review for the o 3,437 licensing actions. Of this total,277 were Holtec HI-STAR storage cask and approved the for new bcenses,2,940 were for amendments, MP-187 transportation package. The NRC also 67 were for license renewals, and 153 were received 103 applications for transportation sealed source and device reviews; package designs for other radioactive materials and completed the review and approval of 96 o 1,884 materials licensee inspections; applications in FY 1998. The NRC has approved

xil '

13 designs for spent fuel storage under the use of interested persons to NRC information is the either a general license or as part of a site-specific " Citizen's Guide to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory license, and it has certified two cask designs for Commission Information" (NUREG/BR-0010, the transport of spent nuclear fuel. Finally, the Rev. 3), published in December 1998. It describes inspection staff completed 18 inspections and 60 various types of NRC information and how to reviews related to quality assurance, a number of obtain it.

which resulted in significant inspection findings.

Communicating With the Media. To reach the Pilot Program Regarding U.S. Department of media, the NRC held a two-day workshop for Energy (DOE) Nuclear Facilities. In FY 1998, the reporters that covered current issues facing NRC and the DOEjointly conducted a pilot program to provide DOE and NRC information nuclear utilities across the nation in April 1998 in addition to electronically providing press releases for determining the desirability of NRC's and speeches of senior officials to about 1,000 regulatory oversight of DOE nuclear facilities and to support a decision on whether to seek worldwide subscribers free of charge.

legislation to authorize NRC regulation of DOE nuclear facilities; Each of the NRC's four Regional Administrators conducted periodic news briefings during the year.

The NRC conducted three pilot projects in FY Sessions were held at the Salem plant in New 1998 for the following facilities: Jersey, the D.C. Cook plant in Michigan, and the Quad Cities plant in Illinois. Other sessions were

1. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; held in Stuart and Miami, Florida; Atlanta, Georgia; and Erwin, Tennessee.

2. Radiochemical Engineering Development Center at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory; and

3. Receiving Basin for Offsite Fuel at the Adjudicatory Proceedings Savannah River Site.

In general, NRC found that under the existing As part ofits broad initiative to increase effective-regulatory framework, NRC could resolve most of ness of the NRC's programs and processes, the the technical, policy, and regulatory issues that the Commission on July 28,1998, issued a policy NRC staff encountered and that precedent for statement entitled " Policy on Conduct of resolving many of these issues was in existing NRC Adjudicatory Proceedings." 63 FR 41872 policy and practice. (August 31,1998). This statement critically reassessed the NRC's practices and procedures for conducting adjudicatory proceedings under the existing Rules of Practice in 10 CFR Part 2, primarily subpart G, and set out certain measures Communicating With hearing boards and presiding officers should Stakeholders emPl oy to ensure efficient conduct of proceedings.

The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board. The Improving Communication With the Public. In Panel's FY 1998 caseload followed a trend, begun the spring of 1998, the staff presented the in the late 1980s, of a docket primarily consisting Commission with an extensive report containing of enforcement cases, materials licensing cases, more than 40 recommendations aimed at and reactor license amendment cases. It was improving the quality, clarity, and credibility of reflective of the regulation of a maturingindustry, the agency's communications with all those and differed significantly from Panel caseload in interested in the safety oversight of nuclear power, previous decades, which consisted mainly of and particularly with members of the general construction permit and operating license cases public. One recent publication that points for licensing new reactors.

e ,

1 i

xill SUPPORT SERVICES held for Headquarters managers and supervisors and one session m each of the agency's four regional offices. To enhance information sharing with the small business community, the office initiated a series of small business forums that are Personnel,'lYaining, and conducted quarterly and installed a toil-free,

. 24-hour voice mail system that has fax-on-demand Employee Assistance capability.

Programs During FY 1998, the NRC expended a total ot- Information Management 2,949 staff-years in canying out its mission. Total stoff years included permanent full-time staff, NRC's World Wide Web Site. Posting material to permanent part-time staff, temporary employees, NRC's World Wide Web site resulted in savings.

and consultants. The NRC hired 116 permanent For example, incorporating the information full-time employees and lost 176 permanent previously available at the Fedworld Web site, full-time employees, the latter figure representing which had been maintained for NRC by the en attrition rate of 6.11 percent. National Technical Information System, saved an annual cost of $176,000. The agency alsc, improved As part of the training program, the NRC developed a new acquisition curriculum to teach access to the information by restructuring the indices by topic. In addition, posting agency Acquisition for Project Managers and for announcements to NRC's internal Web site for Supervisors of Project Managers. Comprising staff use saved 3400 reams of paper and $103,500 11 workshops, this curriculum focuses on pro- annually, curement reforms resulting from the Federal i Acquisition Streamlining Act and the Federal Publications. In FY 1998, the OCIO issued 283 Acquisition Reform Act. NUREG-series publications, many of which are cited in this report. Sixty percent of these were During FY 1998, the Employee Assistance written by the staff. Some of them are posted to Program (EAP) continued to give individual l the NRC's WWW site, counseling and referral assistance to NRC personnel with such problems as chemical dependency, job stress, chronic illness, sexual . . .

harassment, and family issues. Employee visits to Administrative Services the health center average 30 per day. The NRC continued offering a variety of health and fitness Property Management Program. Executive Order programs in its fitness center located in Two 12999," Improving Mathematics and Science White Flint North. About 500 NRC employees Education in Support of National Education participated in these programs offered by Goals," directs Federal agencies to the maximum professionally trained exercise physiologists and extent possible to identify and transfer excess health professionals.

education-related equipment to elementary and secondary schools. Under these guidelines, the NRC established a program for donating used and 7 obsolescent computer equipment to school Managing Diversity systems nationwide. In FY 1998, the NRC donated more than 1,241 pieces of computer equipment, The managing diversity process is a long-term including color monitors, system units, and imtiative designed to create and mamtam an printers.

environment in which every employee is valued and works cooperatively to do his or her best work. During FY 1998, three sessions of the , ,

Contract Management. Effective implementation

. Managing Diversity Leadership Seminars were of procurement refonns resulted in timely

xiv '

)

l contract awards for obligations totaling $73 procurement data to staff and managers and has million. The agency also processed 5,093 improved the accuracy of the data. NRC purchase-card transactions totaling $2.7 million  ;

continued to conduct reviews of DOE laboratory for an estimated savings of $255,000 during FY agreements to ensure effective oversight for 1998. Implementation of a new contract placement and monitoring of the agency's work information system has facilitated availability of performed under such agreements.

p.,,, ,

e <

CHAPTER 1 NUCLEAR REACTOR SAFETY The strategic goal for nuclear reactor safety is to prevent radiation- .

related deaths and illnesses and protect the environment in the use of civilian nuclear reactors. In Fiscal Year (FY) 1998, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRC) met the associated performance goals and had (1) no civilian nu(clear reactor accidents; (2) no deaths resulting from radiation or radioactivity releases from civilian nuclear reactors; (3) no substantiated breakdown of physical protection that significantly weakens protection against radiological sabotage or theft or diversion of special nuclear materials; and (4) no offsite releases of radioactive material from civilian nuclear reactors that have the potential to cause a serious adverse impact on the environment. Data for the fifth goal, environmental impacts, are considered through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process before regulatory action is taken and will be available for FY 1999.

The primary mission of the NRC as it pertains to the Nuclear Reactor Safety Atena is to ensure that its licensees safely design, construct, and operate civilian nuclear reactor facilities, as well as nonpower reactors.

The NRC mission is accomplished through reactor licensing, inspection, performance assessment, identification and resolution of safety issues, reactor regulatory research, regulation development, independent assessment of reactor operational events and experience, investigations of alleged wrongdoing by licensees, applicants, contractors or vendors, and imposition of enforcement sanctions for violations of NRC r quirements.

Activities of the NRC staff during FY 1998 focused on four outcomes:

1. maintaining safety;

2. reducing unnecessary licensee burden;

3. increasing public confidence; and

4. increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of key processes.

Specific activities contributing to attainment of these outcomes in FY 1998 are discussed in this section.

MAINTAINING SAFETY The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) is responsible for i- ensuring the public health and safety through licensing and inspection activities at all nuclear power reactor facilities in the United States. It is responsible for the oversigin of all aspects oflicensing and inspection of

. - - - - - =

2 -

manufacturing, production, and utilization facilities (except for facilities reprocessing fuel Revisions to the Assessinent and performing isotropic fuel enrichment), and and Oversight Process receipt, possession, and ownership of source, byproduct, and special nuclear material used or produced at facilities licensed under 10 CFR The NRC initiated efforts to develop a new assessment and oversight process that focuses on Part 50," Domestic Licensing of Production and regulated activities that pose the greatest risk to Utilization Facilities." In addition, the NRR staff the public. This process is based on probabilistic develops policy and inspection guidance for risk assessment (PRA) concepts and other programs assigned to the reponal offices and approaches to monitor and assess the per-assesses the effectiveness and uniformity of the formance of nuclear power plants. The NRC staff region's implementation of those programs. The staff also identifies, and in coordination with the worked closely with the ACRS to develop guidance documents and pilot applications on the regional offices, takes action regarding conditions and licensee performance at such facilities that use of PRA in the regulatory process. The continued development of a new risk-informed may adversely affect public health and safety, the oversight process will continue into FY 1999.

environment, or the safeguarding of nuclear Activities that occurred during FY 1998 were-facilities. It assesses and recommends or takes action in response to incidents or accidents.

• Using a team of regional and headquarters experts, the NRC staff proposed a new assessment framework that builds upon the The NRC is responsible for licensing issues and cornerstones oflicensee performance that regulatory policy concerning reactor operators, must be monitored to ensure that nuclear including the initial 1icensing examination and power reactor operations do not pose requalification exarmnations; emergency unacceptable risks to the public. As part of preparedness, including participation in the assessment framework, the NRC staff has emergency drills with Federal, State, and local identified performance indicators, agencies; radiation protretion; security and performance indicator thresholds, and safeguards at such f acilities, including fitness for risk-informed inspections that would duty; and the inspec ion of nuclear component supplement and verify the validity of the supplier facilities. Raulatory responsibilities for performance indicator data.

reactors include the technical review, certification, and licenting of advanced nuclear

• Using a risk-informed approach, the NRC reactor facilities and the renewal of current power staff developed a proposed baseline reactor operating licenses. The staff also inspection program that includes a exchanges safety and regulatory information with comprehensive list ofinspectable areas within other nations having major nuclear power each cornerstone of the assessment programs. framework. A recent report,"New NRC Reactor Inspection and Oversight Program" In FY 1998, the NRC continued to monitor '

significant safety and regulatory issues at 103

• A public comment period on the new commercial nuclear power reactors that are oversight process was used to seek comment

' licensed to operate and at another 18 that are on improvements to the assessment, undergoing decommissioning. Improving trends inspection, and enforcement processes.

continued in NRC tracked performance indicators (Figure 1.1) and accident sequence precursors

• A workshop was held with the industry and (Figure 1.2). For additional information about the public to obtam and evaluate input on these figures, see " Analysis of Operationa! Data recommendations for improving the for Reactors"in this chapter. regulatory oversight process. Consensus was reached on the overall philosophy of the proposed process. The results of the Other noteworthy topics relating to the outcome workshop will be used as the foundation of 3 of maintaining safety include the following areas. the new oversight process during FY 1999.

I

', 3 Annualindustry Averages 1985 -1998 I

lhmn.... lIlkhhi...

SB as W GB 80 GB M N GB N $$ 90 W 98 i

SS N SF as as te M N SB to M 90 W Os

!k......_!Illlllkdn 88 N W 88 as et M N SB M 95 95 W SS W 80 et et M St K GS M 88 W SS is .

1000 Commercial C#ticalHoews t

I l i l i l %.as N as W 00 se SS M 93 ta M N 98 W 98 l i k ...... Ill M 88 W 80 Se 98 M BB SS M OS 95 W OS Cenective Radiation Exposure

$llIlllemn as at W as at to M 98 98 M 98 08 K 98 Figure 1.1 Performance Indicators-Annual Industry Averages

o . .

4 -

CONDIT!ONAL CORE DAMAGE PROBABILITY RESULTS FROM ASP PROGRAM 20 E ise mis 4 is4 misa E esa mis 4 E is4 m is4 E ene,s iaa y 15 -

o . _

E 8 . -

10 -

a.

u. - -

O, O

Z ,

o 1984 1986 1986 1987 1988 1900 1960 1991 1982 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 YEAR

= = . we n,. .ou . . - ,um.. ..

Figure 1.2 Distribution of ASP Conditional Core Damage Probabilities By Calendar Year e The NRC suspended the Systematic the ACRS to formulate the new inspection Assessment of Ucensee Performance (ShLP) and assessment process.

process so that resources could be focused on developing assessment process The NRC staff conducted a self assessment of the improvements.

way it reviews and evaluates events agencywide and developed recommendations from the anitysis of this self-assessment. The results were

• The Senior Management Meeting (SMM), documented in a report that was completed in which is a review and integration of the December 1998 and transmitted to the agency's observations and findings for nuclear Commission in a paper identified as SECY reactors, was changed from a semiannual to 99-005 (see Chapter 5," Communicating With an annual meeting. As a result of this NRC Stakeholders," in this report for information meeting, the NRC staff worked closely with about Commission Papers with these designators).

w - e-:s=s :s::s w ::ss 5;.5 s w ,c-  : . cn

, s 5

Year 2000 Problem in Nuclear regulations and including provisions for risk-mformed alternatives to present requirements).

Power Plants This is a natural continuation of recently completed worr on the development of risk- i

" I" '*W" ## *( ^ #

In FY 1998, the NRC continued its oversight of standard review plan (SRP) chapters (see nuclear power plant licensee efforts to address the < http://nrr10.nrc. gov /adt/dssa/spsb/rira.h tm > ).

Year 2000 (Y2K) problem. As a result ofinter- Together, these documents will serve to establish a actions between the NRC staff and the Nuclear risk-informed regulatory infrastructure by Energy Institute (NEI) on the Y2K problem, NEI providing criteria for NRC to use in evaluating issued , Nuclear Utility lear 2000 Readmess applications referencing risk insights. They will be (NEI/NUSMG 97--07), dated October 1997, a key ingredient in attaining the goal of the NRC's which provided guidance to nuclear power plant strategic plan for nuclear reactor safety.

licensees on irnplementation of a program to address the Y2K problem at their facilities. In i May 1998, the NRC issued Generic Letter 98-01,  !

" Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants," which requested licensees Allegations i to confirm implementation of a Y2K readiness l program consistent with the NRC accepted In FY 1998, the NRC received 1,026 allegations, industry guidance document (NEI/NUSMG comprising 2,222 individual concerns. Of the 1,026 allegations,693 involved reactor issues,244 97-07) and to confirm Y2K readiness of their ,

facilities by July 1,1999, or to provide a status and involved materials is State issues, and 20 m, sues,69 volved involved Agreemenli other non-NRC schedule of work remaining to achieve readiness.

In August 1998, all licensees confirmed implemen- issues. Of the 1,026 allegations received,201 were ,

tation of a Y2K readiness program consistent with Purported to involve wrongdom, g and 118 stated i the NEI/NUSMG 97-07 guidance. In September that someone had been discriminated against for ,

1998, the NRC began to conduct 12 sample audits raising a safety or regulatory concem. In the same l oflicensee Y2K readiness programs in order to time frame, the NRC completed action on 1,264 '

verify the effectiveness of licensee efforts. The allegations, comprising 3,087 individual concerns.

audits will continue into the early part of FY 1999. In 35 percent of the allegations on which action was completed, the NRC was able to substantiate the validity of at least part of the concerns raised.

The average time to complete the review of

, allegations was 117 days for allegations that did Making 10 CFR Part 50 not invoive wrongdoing and 354 days for Heations imrolving w=gdoing. T3is avuage is Risk-Informed an improvement over the average tune to complete reviews in FY 1997,119 days and 371 The staff began work on a proposed plan for the days, respectively.

Commission that discusses approaches to modifying the regulations in 10 CFR Part 50 to make them risk informed. This initiative is . .

intended to contribute to maintaining safety by Indemm.ty, Financial focusing NRC and licensee resources on those Protection, and Property areas of greatest risk significance. The plan will identify related policy issues for Commission Insurance consideration. Among other things,it will propose the development of risk-informed definitions for As part ofits responsibilities under the Price-safety-related and safety-important structures, Andenon Act, the NRC provides a summary to systems, and components and the evaluation of Congress ofits key activities concerning potential changes to the body of Part 50 indemnity, financial protection, and property regulations that would incorporate risk informed insurance. On September 17,1998, the attributes (e.g., deleting unnecessary or ineffective Cm nmission forwarded to Congress, NUREG/

5 Year 2000 Problem in Nuclear attributes (e.g., deleting unnecessary or ineffective regulations and includmg provisions for nsk-)

Power Pih ts informed alternatives to present requireme is).

This is a natural continuation of recently In FY 1998, the NR continued its oversight of completed work on the development of 'sk-nuclear power plant i ensee efforts to address the informed regulatory guides (RGs) an e Year 2000(Y2K) probl n. As a result of standard review plan (SRP) chapter see mteractions between the RC staff and the <http://nrr10.nrc. gov /adt/dssa/sps rira.htm>).

Nuclear Energy Institute Together, changes to these docu ents will serve to I) on the Y2K problem, NEIissued "Nucl r Utility Year 2000 establish a risk-informed regul oryinfrastructure Readmess"(NEI/NUSMG 9 07), dated October that is a key ingredient in att ning the goal of the 1997, which provided guidance nuclear power NRC's strategic plan for n ear reactor safety.

plint licensees on implementati q of a program to address the Y2K problem at their heilities. In May 1998, the NRC issued Generic etter 98-01, i

" Year 2000 Readiness of Computer S tems at llegatlOnS Nuclear Power Plants," which requeste icensees to confirm implementation of a Y2K rea 4

ess In FY 1998, th NRC received 1,026 allegations, program consistert with the NRC accepte comprising 22 individual concerns. Of the 1,026 industry guidance document (NEI/NUSMG allegations 93 involved reactor issues,244 97-07) and to confirm Y2K readiness of their involved aterialsissues,69 involved Agreement facilities by July 1,1999, or to provide a status d State is es, and 20 involved other non NRC ,

schedule of work remaining to achieve readiness. issues Of the 1,026 allegations received,201 were In August 1998, all licensees confirmed \

rted to involve wrongdoing and 118 stated implementation of a Y2K readiness program someone had been discriminated against for f consistent with the NEI/NUSMG 97-07 guidance. ' sing a safety or regulatory concern. In the same In September 1998, the NRC began to conduct 12 frame, the NRC completed action on 1,264 sample audits oflicensee Y2K readiness programs all ations, comprising 3,087 individual concerns.

in order to verify the effectiveness oflicensee In 3 reent of the allegations on which action efforts. The audits will continue into the early pa 'was e pleted, the NRC was able to substantiate of FY 1999.

the vah ity of at least part of the concerns raised.

The ave ge time to complete the review of allegation was 117 days for allegations that did not involve ongdoing and 354 days for MakinE 1 0 CFR Part 50 alleg ti nsi vdvingwrongddng.ms amageis an improvem t over the average time to Risk-Informed mmplete revie s in FY 1997,119 days and 371 days, respectivel The staff began work on a propos d plan for the Commission that discusses appr aches to modifying the regulations in 1 CFR Part 50 to make them nsk-informed. s mitiative is Inge.mnity, Fi , ncial intended to contribute to intaining safety by focusing NRC and license resources on those Protection, an froperty areas of greatest risk si ficance. The plan will Insurance identify related policy ' sues for Commission .'

consideration. Amon other things,it will propose As part ofits responsibilities un er the Price-the development of sk-informed definitions for Anderson Act, the NRC provides\a summary to stfety-related and afety-important structures, Congress ofits key activities concerning systems, and co onents and the evaluation of indemnity, financial protection, and property potential chan s to the body of Part 50 insurance. On September 17,1998, the regulations t t would incorporate risk-informed Commission forwarded to Congress, NUREG/ i I

l

6 CR-6617, a Congressionally mandated report on e participating in bilateral exchanges of safety the status of the Price-Anderson system and and regulatory information with nations conclusions and recommendations that should be having major nuclear power programs, which considered if Congress decides to extend included France, Japan, the United Kingdom, Price-Anderson beyond the current August 1, Spain, Korea, Taiwan, and Canada. (See also 2002, expiration date. Chapter 4," International Nuclear Safety Support,"in this report.) The main technical In addition, the 16th annual property insurance topics included in these exchanges were safety )

reports submitted by power reactor licensees Performance of high burnup fuels, risk-indicated that of the 68 sites insured,53 are informed regulation, advanced digital covered for at least the $1.06 billion as required instrumentation and control (I&C) systems, under our regulations. The remaining 15 sites and recent events of regulatory significance. ,

have sought or have been granted exemptions The NRC continued participation in a four-  !

from the full amount of required coverage. party working group (regulatory authorities of France, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Finally, the private nuclear energy liability the United States) to exchange information insurance pool, American Nuclear Insurers, paid on digital I&C systems and was also mvolved policyholders a 32nd annual refund of premium in compilation of material from NRC j reserves under their Industry Credit Rating Plan. Publications for the U.S. national report for j Under the plan, a portion of the annual premiums the International Convention on Nuclear j is set aside as a reserve available for refund to Safety; and policyholders. The amount of the reserve available e representing the United States on the for refund is determined on the basis of the loss experienced by all policyholders over the Nuclear Energy Agency Committee on preceding 10-year penod. Refunds paid in 1998 Nuclear Regulatory Activities (CNRA). The (for the period from 1988 through 1998); totaled CNRA focused, during this year, on Review

$32,057,988, which is approximately 43.6 percent Procedures and Criteria for different of all premiums paid on the nuclear liability Regulatory Applications of PSA; Inspection msurance pohcies issued in 1988. The refunds Practices; Fuel Safety Margins, and, Future represent about 75.1 percent of the premiums Regulatory Challenges. The NRC was also placed m reserve m 1988. active in support of selected IAEA nuclear safety programs.

Other key ongoing activities with respect to ,

maintaining safety include- Incident Response Operations e continuing to implement revised inspection The NRC conducts incident response activities to  ;

procedures to ensure design basis is ensure that (1) it is prepared to carry out its role '

appropriately captured at licensed reactor in a radiological emergency at NRC-licensed facilities; nuclear reactor and materials facilities, 1 (2) licensee responses are consistent with hcensee e publishing a draft rule to require licensees to responsibilities, and (3) NRC responses are 1 complete safety assessments before coordinated with other Federal response activities  !

performing on-line maintenance, including and State and local government activities. To l during shutdown conditions; ensure that a reliable and high-quality incident response program is maintained, the NRC- i e overseeing industry initiatives on several e maintains and implements the NRC incident safety issues, including high pressure injection response program in preparation for actual line cracking; guidelines for surveillance and operational events within the industry; mamtenance of steam generators; and inspection and repair of BWR reactor vessel

• operates the NRC Operations Center 24 internals, and part length control rod drive hours a day with engineers and scientists j mechanisms; capable of receiving event reports and I

7 recognizing and communicating problems and by a tornado. The Monitoring Phase of Normal emergencies to managers; Mode was also entered for one Alert, four Unusual Events, and one non-emergency event as o coordinates efforts to maintain the well as in anticipation of the potential onset of two functionality of the Federal Radiological hurricanes. Tables 1.1 and 1.2 summarize the Emergency Response Plan, the Federal NRC's responses to both event notifications and Response Plan, and agreements between the other non-reportable events during FY 1998.

NRC and other State, Federal, and international organizations and countries on In addition to emergency event notifications, the responses to nuclear events; NRC Operations Center receives notifications of o conducts a State ' outreach program to events that do not meet the threshold for mugency classMcation undu heensee improve the States' understanding of how the NRC, as the Lead Federal Agency' will emergency rcSPonse plans. The Operations coordinate the Federal response to a severe Center received reports of 1,836 events during FY -

1998, including 24 Unusual Events and 8 Alerts. I accident at a nuclear facihty; and (This data exclu. des emergency event report o maintains the NRC Operations Center and retractions. One Alert and four Unusual Event regional functional procedures, response n tifications were retracted by licensees following tools, and training. event evaluation and response.) The events reported to the NRC Operations Center during The NRC is prepared t'o respond to an event at all FY 1998 are summarized in Tables 1.3 and 1.4.

times by continually staffing the NRC Operations Ccnter with highly qualified Operations Officers, by having an adequately staffed and trained Augmented Inspection Team Response. On June 17, )

1998, owing to various equipment deficiencies and incident response organization, and by having an maintenance errors a rupture occurred in the NRC Operations Center and an emergency firemain system at Washing Nuclear Power Plant, telecommunications system that are available Unit 2. The unit was in cold shutdown and under all circumstances. Upon notification of an preparations were underway for a plant startup.

emergency, the NRC promptly determines the The rupture of the firemain system caused tppropriate response, rapidly staffs the NRC flooding that entered safety-related equipment Operations Center with an appropriate rooms and completely submerged one equipment complement of responders, and conducts an room and rose to excessive levels in an adjacent independent assessment of plant conditions and room via a failed drain sump cross-connect valve.

protective action recom nendations for both To isolate the flooding, plant operators secured licensee personnel and the public. the fire pumps, which impaired the normal fire suppression capability of the station. On the basis In the event of an emergency at an NRC-licensed of these events, the plant operators declared a facility (or associated with an NRC-licensed notification of unusual event and activated the activity), the licensee places an emergency Pl ant emergency response organization.

telephone c'all to the NRC Operations Center immediately after notifying appropriate State and An NRC augmented inspection team (AIT) was local agencies. The NRC's response to an event dispatched from the Region and was on site from may range from routine followup to a complete June 17 to 23,1998. The results of the AIT were cctivation of both the regional incident Response presented at a public exit meeting on site on Center and the NRC Operations Center located in July 8,1998, and were documented in NRC headquarters. The NRC utilizes the following Inspection Report 50-397/98-16, which was formal modes for responding to events at its issued on July 17,1998. A Preliminary licensed facilities: Normal, Standby, Initial Notification of Occurrence PNO-IV-98-026, Activation, and Expanded Activation. which described this event, was issued on June 18, 1998, updated on June 19,1998, and updated During FY 1998, the NRC entered the Standby again on June 23,1998. Finally, NRC Information Mode and Monitoring Phase of Normal Mode for Notice 98-31 was issued on August 18,1998,and the Davis Besse loss of offsite power Alert caused provided further details related to the event.

8 < -

• Table 1.1 Agency Responses to Event Notifications during Fiscal Year 1998 Emergency. Classification, Event Date, and Facility  : Description of Event NRC Response Mode Moses Cone Health NON-EMERGENCY - 03/04/98 - North Monitoring Phase of Systems Carolina Division of Radiation Protection Normal report regarding 19 Cesium-137 brachyther-apy sources ranging from 12 to 60 millicuries '

missing from a hospital located in the Greensboro area Limerick 1 ALERT - 04/17/98 - Strong odor of either Monitoring Phase of (GE/BWR-4) propane or acetylene in the Unit I turbine Normal condenser area Washington Nuclear 2 UNUSUAL EVENT - 06/17/98 - Flooding Monitoring Phase of (GE/BWR-5) of two emergency core cooling system pump Normal rooms due to a broren fire headerline Davis Besse 1 ALERT / UNUSUAL EVENT - 06/24/98 - Standby and Monitor- ,

(B&W-R-LP/PWR) Tornado damage in the electrical switchyard, ing Phase of Normal cooling tower, and turbine building and re-sulting in a turbine trip / reactor trip from 99%

3 power due to aloss of offsite power l Brunswick 1,2 UNUSUAL EVENT - 08/25/98 - Issuance Monitoring Phase of (GE/BWR-4) of a IIurricane Warning due to the potential Normal onset of Hurricane Bonnie Turkey Point 3,4 UNUSUAL EVENT - 09/24/98 - Issuance Monitoring Phase of (W/PWR-3) of a Hurricane Warning due to the potential Normal onset of Hurricane Georges Waterford 3. UNUSUAL EVENT - 09/26/98 - Issuance Monitoring Phase of (CE/PWR) of a Hurricane Warning due to the potential Normal onset of Hurricane Georges Table 1.2 Agency Responses to Non-Reportable Events during Fiscal Year 1998 NRC Response Event Dates Description of Event Facilities Involved Mode 08/25 - 27/98 Anticipation of the potential General Electric Monitoring Phase of onset of Hurricane Bonnie Nuclear Energy Normal i Harris 1 i

• Brtmswick 1,2 l Surry 1,2 09/25/98 Anticipation of the potential

• Turkey Point 1,2 Monitoring Phase of 09/27 - 28/98 onset of Hurricane Georges *Waterford 3 Normal River Bend 1 Grand Gulf 1 Farley 1,2

• Brunswick, Turkey Point, and Waterford made event notifications on these issues. (Refer to Table 1)

r 9

Table 1.3 Events Reported to the NRC Operations Center during Fiscal Year 1998 Non- Well Logging /

Emergency Power Fuel Power 'Iiransport/

Class Reactor Facility Reactor Hospital Materials Other Total Non-Emergency 1,213 295 1 57 120 118 1,804 Unusual Ev nt 24" 0 0 0 0 0 24*

Alert 4 4* 0 0 0 0 8' Site Area Emergency 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 General Emergency 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T;tal 1,241* 299* 1 57 120 118 1,836*

• D:ta excludes emergency event report retractions (One Alert and four Unusual Event notifications were retracted by licensees following event evaluation and response.)

Table 1.4 Classification of Events Under Licensee Emergency Plans from Calendar Year 1990 to Fiscal Year 1998 Emergency Class CY90 CY91 CY92 CY93 CY94 CY95 FY% FY97 FY98 Unusual Event 151 170 135 103 97 66* 67* 49* 24' Alert 10 9 20 8 4 8 10 4 8' Site Area Emergency 1 2 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 General Emergency 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total' 162 181 156 112 74* 53' 101 78* 32' i

• Data excludes emergency event report retractions (During fiscal year 1998, one Alert and four Unusual Event notifications were retracted by licensees following event evaluation and response.)  !

NOTE: Calendar year values are shown for 1990 through 1995, and fiscal year values are used from 1996 on. Data for October 1,1995, through December 31,1996, is included in both calendar year 1995 l

l and fiscal year 1996.

f REDUCING UNNECESSARY maintaining safety while reducing unnecessary burden on its licensees. Initial feedback from LICENSEE BURDEN reactor licensees indicated that NRC initiatives are starting to be effective in reducing unnecessary The NRC staff continued to pursue initiatives in burden at reactor sites. Some of these activities FY 1998 that focused on the dual outcomes of are summarized in the following sections.

10 related requirements, concerning processes for Issuance of Risk-Informed control of changes made by heensees to their License Amendments facilities without prior NRC approval. The purpose of the proposed rule is to provide clarity During FY 1998, the staff performed numerous through definitions, and also flexibility through risk-informed licensing reviews (using the RGs revised criteria for when prior approval is needed.

and SRP chapters shown at <http://nrr10.nrc. gov / The staff paper was forwarded to the Commission adt/dssa/spsb/rira.htm>) that resulted in the n July 10,1998 (SECY-98-171), and the issuance of numerous license amendments. Many Commission approved pubhcation of a proposed of these amendments modified technical rule f r a 60-day comment period m, a Staff speci5 cations. The following are some examples Requirements Memorandum dated September 25, of the results oflicensing reviews: 1998. The proposed rule was published on October 21,1998 (63 FR 56098).

• Amendments were issued extending the allowed outage times (AOTs) for (a) a single inoperable safety injection tank at San . . .

Onofre-2 and -3, Arkansas Nuclear One-2, Guidance for Updating Final and Millstone-2, and (b) a single inoperable emergency diesel generator at Fermi-2 Safety Analysis Reports Pilgrim, North Anna-1 and -2, and San Onofre-2 and -3. As a result of the lessons-learned from the Millstone Nuclear Power Plant experience and the

• Approval of a Westinghouse proposal was discovery that updates to final safety analysis given that could be used by licensees of reports (FSARs) at a number of plants did not Westinghouse plants of various vintage to contam the types ofinformation expected, the allow their extension of the AOTs for a single NRC detennined that additional guidance was inoperable accumulator. necessary. The staff developed a proposed generic Icter, but its issuance was deferred pending

• A confirmatory order was issued modifying resolution of differences between staff positions post-TMI containment hydrogen monitor and those in a guidance document proposed by requirements for Arkansas Nuclear One-2. industry. During the summer of 1998, the staff and industry met several times to resolve the

• A pilot application of a risk-informed remaining issues. As of September 30,1998, the inservice testing program at Comanche Peak staff was waiting for industry to submit its was completed. guidance document for formal endorsement in a regulatory guide. FSAR guidance can be found at

• Pilot applications of risk-informed Inservice < http://www.nrc. gov /OPA/gmo/tip/tip41.htm > .

inspection programs were initiated at Vermont Yankee, Surry, and Arkansas Other burden reduction initiatives pursued in FY Nuclear One 2. 1998 include-e c ntinuation of the Improved Standard These activities contributed to meeting the NRC's strategic plan nuclear reactor safety goal by Techmcal Specifications (ISTS) program.

helping to ensure safe plant operation during the Applications to convert to ISTS have been received for 57 units, of which 43 have been transition associated with the economic deregulation of the electric utility industry. approved. The staff has seen a 32 percent reduction m the number of hcense amendments per unit for plants that have converted to ISTS.

Rulernaking on 10 CFR 50.59 - improvements to guidance in a range of areas such as enforcement where guidance was During FY 1998, the NRC prepared proposed issued to clarify existing policy in handling of rulemaking for revisions to 10 CFR 50.59 and non-risk significant violations and Severity

gg Level IV violations (see " Enforcement.and reevaluation of the bases for NRC's Pressurized Investigative Actions"in this chapter). In Thermal Shock (PTS) screening criteria in 10 addition, concerns regarding compliance CFR 50.61.

backfits as it relates to generic communications were addressed as well as Seismic Design of Piping. Several technical issues actions to clarify guidance on the threshold were raised about the seismic design codes for for issuing a Confirmatory Action Letter nuclear plant piping proposed in the Addenda of (CAL) tolicensees. the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. The o

proposed codes,if endorsed in the NRC rulemaking improvements, such as changes to regulations, could significantly reduce the safety regulations tc eliminate requirements for margins for some piping designs,if used for plant licensees to periodically update to the latest modifications as well as new designs. Because of endorsed edition and addenda of the these concerns, the NRC initiated a research American Society of Mechanical Engineers program to assess the technical basis for the (ASME) code, response to an industry proposed new codes.

rulemaking petition concerning changes to licensee Quality Assurance Plans, and a The research project confirmed that some rulemaking plan to allow credit for more Provisions of the 1994 Addenda have inadequate accurate flow measurements in analyses for technical basis and may not provide an adequate emergency core cooling system performance. margin of safety. Specifically, both fatigue and collapse failure modes need to be considered in Reactor Pressure Vessels. During FY 1998 the piping design, whereas the 1994 Addenda' NRC completed three major activities that have considered only the fatigue failure mode. More contributed to the relaxation of overly imponant, the work provided the NRC staff with conservative criteria and that are contributing to the technical basis to define an adequate level of the technical basis for a broad reassessment of the safety margins, based on risk-informed requirements for assuring reactor pressure vessel considerations, to calculate the design margin.

(RPV) safety.

First, working with the ASME Working Group, the NRC undertook a reevaluation of the fracture toughness bases for nuclear plant pressure INCREASING PUBLIC temperature (P-T) limits. This work established the techmcal bases for changm, g the basic fracture CONFIDENCE toughness curves used in determining P-T curves and c.lso provided a significant burden reduction The final key outcome that was the NRC's staff for the majority of operating nuclear plants. focus in FY 1998 was increasing public confidence.

Often, the specific activities affecting this outcome Second, the NRC published " improved are intertwined in programs and initiatives Embrittlement Correlations for Reactor Vessel reported in the other outcome areas. A sampling Steels" (draft NUREG/CR-6551), which of some of the FY 1998 activities not previously provides much of the technical basis for revising mentioned are summarized below.

Regulatory Guide 1.99, Rev. 2, on Radiation Embrittlement. The industry is currently using the

• In FY 1998, there was a substantial increase work described in the report as the basis for a in public meetings and stakeholder revision to ASTM Standard E-900 on Radiation involvement in NRC initiatives. For example, Embrittlement. the Commission held specific meetings with stakeholders; over 14 meetings were held with Third, the NRC completed detailed ultrasonic test stakeholders on improvements to the (UT) examinations of welds removed from an regulatory oversight program; five meetings RPV that had not seen service. The results of were held in the second half of FY 1998 on these examinations are being used to develop an licensing process improvements as well as recurate assessment of the flaw density and

' numerous public meetings and workshops distribution for RPV welds that will be used in being held in all program areas (see

12 '

t Chapter 5," Communicating With NRC following areas: outage plans, modification plans, Stakeholders,"in this report). significant on-line maintenance activities, risk-informed Initiatives, and updated plant risk

• NRC sponsored its 10th annual Regulatory profile information. Additionally, the visits are Information Conference (RIC). The RIC expected to provide valuable long-term benefits in provides a communication forum for that new, formal lines of communication have managers and staff of NRC and utilities to been established with each licensee. These lines of meet and enhance and promote a better communication are expected to enhance safety by understanding of industry and regulatory exploiting a new resource of information that trends, processes, and initiatives for should provide a valuable risk perspective for improving nuclear safety. The 1998 RIC was important activities. As a follow on to these visits, held April 14 and 15,1998, at the Capital a counterpart workshop is scheduled in the Hilton Hotel in Washington, D.C., and was Regional office for July 20-21,1999, to continue attended by over 750 people from industry; to develop the lines of communication that were other Federal, State, and local government established during the site visits and to provide a agencies; and the general public, forum for discussion of current issues ofinterest.

• The priority of the review of petitions to modify, suspend, or revoke a license (2.206 petitions) was raised and the timeliness goal for completion of these reviews were . INCREASING THE emphasized. EFFECTIVENESS AND

• The increased use of the NRC web site as a EFFICIENCY OF KEY means for dissemination ofinformation was encouraged (see Chapter 6, " Support PROCESSES Services,"in this report).

A continuing improvement outcome for the NRC Regional Reactor Site Visits. In late 1997 through staffis to increase the effectiveness and efficiency early 1998, the Senior Reactor Analysts (SRAs) fits key processes. Several areas and activities of conducted site interface visits with each facility in f cus dun,ng FY 1998 are desenbed in the next Region IV for the purpose of establishing f ur sections, technical contact with the licensee's risk organizations. These visits usually lasted two days, and the first day was devoted to technical discussions related to the status of the licensee,s NRC/ Indust Licensin risk analysis. Discussions centered around the plant-specific risk profile as well as how the Process Improvement Working I current profile may have changed from that Group submitted in the integrated plant evaluation (IPE) studies. During the second day, the SRAs, in In July 1998, the staff conducted an NRC/NEI conjunction with the plant staff, toured the plants licensing interface meeting to discuss areas of for the purpose of gaining familiarity with the stakeholder concern regarding the licensing major risk significant equipment and operator process. Subsequently, the staff established an actions at site. Whenever possible, the assigned NRC working group to interface with an industry resident staff participated in the visits. The visits working group for the purpose of facilitating included discussions with various plant licensing process improvements. The staff also organizations to gain an appreciation of how risk issued and conducted training on revised guidance insights are being integrated into plant operations. (NRR Office Letter No. 803, Revision 2," License Amendment Review Procedures") to address The visits yielded immediate short term benefits. stakeholder concerns regarding requests for The SRAs were able to collect information that additionalinformation and handling of regulatory l allowed the region to gain valuable insights in the commitments and performance goals. For FY

13 1998, the licensing action inventory decreased level of design approval ever issued by the NRC about 11 percent and the median age of the and it is the key process for early resolution of inventory is down from 7.6 months to 7.1 months.

licensing issues. The design certification process Continued efficiency gains are expected as NRR prepares the NRC for future licensing of nuclear works with an outside consultant and stakeholders power plants in an effective and efficient manner.

on licensing action process improvements. The ACRS provided valuable insights and helped resolve key technical issues associated with the FDA of the AP600 passive plant. .

License Renewal- Advanced neactors. Underlying most aspects of reactor safety is control of the nuclear reaction The Atomic Energy Act and NRC regulations rate and the flow of coolant. Quantitative analysis limit commercial power reactor hcenses to 40 of these parameters (referred to as ye:rs, but also permit the renewal of such licenses. thermal-hydraulic codes) is necessary to design A nuclear power heensee may app 1y to the NRC and operate a reactor safely. These codes are as early as 20 years before expiration ofits current carefully fitted to each reactor design to produce a h,eense to renew its bcense for up to 20 years. The mathematical model that is validated with experimental data. The NRC maintains its own application would be subject to public hearmgs and the formal adjudicatory process. Durmg independent thermal-hydraulic codes to analyze FY1998, the NRC staff received applications for unanticipated events in operating reactors and to check licensee analyses that are submitted for renewal from the licensees for the Calvert Cliffs action.

and the Oconee facilities. Through ongoing efforts to streamline the license renewal process, the staff During FY 1998, NRC completed all model cstimates that without a hearing, the review of development, validation, and analysis that th se two applications can be completed in tpproximately 26 months, down from initial supported the final design approval for the Westinghouse AP600 nuclear plant design, which estimates that were as long as 5 years. The reviews is published in a NUREG-series report.

for the Calvert Cliffs and Oconee faciF. ties are proceeding on schedule. To ensure the efficiency After completing this work, NRC initiated work to and effectiveness of these initiallicense renewal modernize the agency's thermal-hydraulic codes.

reviews, a 1 icense Renewal Steering Group, The capabilities of the four old codes are being consisting of senior NRC managers, was consolidated into two modernized codes, called established.

TRAC-M and PARC-3D. They will be modular, easy to use with graphical user interfaces, fast running, and robust. Many of these codes are post to NRC's WWW site <www.nrc. gov /RES/

Certification of Next- rescodes.html>.

Generation Reactor Designs NRC achieved the goals of standardization and a more stable and predictable licensing process Independent Program through certification of two next-generation g gggg g reactor designs (Advanced Boiling Water Reactor end System 80+) and issuance of a final design In July 1998, the NRC retained a consulting firm approval for the AP600 design. For the AP600, the (Arthur Anderson) to provide an independent NRC issued a final design approval (FDA) and programmatic assessment of NRR and provide final safety evaluation report (FSER), assistance in the area of Planning, Budgeting, and NUREG-1512, on September 3,1998. GE Performance Management. Arthur Anderson is to Nuclear Energy requested that the NRC terminate perform an efficiency and effectiveness its review of the Simplified Boiling Water Reactor assessment of NRR. This assessment is intended design, the NRC staff completed its closcout to aid NRR in its transition from being output action in 1998. Design certitation is the highest based to being outcome based through an

l 14 -

i

{

Operating Plan forimplementation. Arthur The NRC has developed a set of simplified, plant Anderson is also reviewing and making analysis risk (SPAR) models for use in accident recommendations for improvement in the areas of sequence precursor analyses and prompt the licensing action review process and work assessments of the risk significance of operational control process. events which occur at U. S. commercial nuclear power plants. These plant-specific, train level Other activities that increased process efficiency models were designed for use with the SAPHIRE and effectiveness include- suite of PRA codes developed for the NRC. NRC staff analysts use these Level 1 SPAR models with e streamlining the hearing process associated a user-friendly interface (the SAPHIRE/ GEM with license transfers through rulemaking code) to estimate the resulting conditional core (see " Adjudicatory Proceedings" in this damage probability (CCDP) given the occurrence chapter) as well as completing Standard of a specific initiating event or the existence of a Review Plans for review of license transfer specific condition at a plant.

applications; Generic Safety Issues. A reactor generic issue is a e implementing an automated system for matter that may affect the design, construction, inspection planning, scheduling, and tracking Operation, or decommissioning of all, several, or a of findings; specific class of commercial nuclear power reactors. During FY 1998, the NRC began to e establishing a PRA Steering Group and reassess its Reactor Generic Issues, Program to Risk-informed Licensing Panel to ensure improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the appropriate management oversight on risk Pmgram. The study will be completed in FY 1999 initiatives; and and revised as needed to correct any deficiencies.

e increasing training of NRC managers and During the ast 15 years,639 GSIs have been staff in key areas such as PRA, budgetmg, and reviewed, o USIs were identified during this mantgmg change. period. Of the 639 GSIs raised,624 of them have been resolved (or closed) and 15 issues remain Probabilistic Risk Assessment. The NRC staff has Pen. During p M8,one GSI was resolnd without imposmg new reqmrements on licensees.

activelYand extensivel Ybeen suPPortin8 the The issue that was resolved was GSI-171, ASME m. the development of a "StandaH for

" Engineered Safety Features Failure From the Probabilistic Risk Assessment for NpAf Power Loss-of-Offsite Power Subsequent to a Loss of Plant Applications." This standarc W m forth the criteria and methods for develop..,g and Coolant Accident".

applying PRA methodology to commercial nuclear power plants, and applies to PRAs used to support design, procurement, construction, operation and i maintenance.

ANEYSIS OF l In the Individual Plant Examination of Extemal Events (IPEEE) Program the staff completed OPERATIONAL DATA FOR preliminary reviews of all 70 licensee's IPEEE REACTORS submittals. The staff also completed final reviews of seven submittals. The staff concluded in the Staff Evaluation Reports for each of these seven .

plants, that these submittals met the intent of Performance Indicator Supplement 4 to Generic Letter 88-20 (i.e., the IPEEE program). In January 1998, the staff issued proEram a draft report that provided preliminary perspectives on the IPEEE program based on Most of the analysis reports and data is reported approximately one third of the reviews which were by fiscal year. In some cases, where noted, the underway at that time. information is by calender year.

15 The Performance Indicator (PI) Program has Program are peer-reviewed by outside consultants, cnalyzed data and information in a consistent other NRC offices, and the affected licensees.

manner over a number of years. As measured by They are used in NRC initiatives such as the these indicators (see Figure 1.1), the U.S. industry Senior Management Meeting process. Figure 1.2 average safety performance has improved steadily. shows that there were five ASP events or Five of the seven performance indicators-- conditions in calender year (CY) 1997, none of automatic scrams, safety system actuations, which resulted in a CCDP equal to or greater than significant events, equipment forced outages per 104 1000 critical hours, and collective radiation exposure-show statistically significant improvement smce 1985. The number ofinitiating events resulting iri scrams has declined Regulatory Eff'ectiveness significantly, and this is reflected in fewer and less complicated plant transients. However, equipment STIED I problems persist, as evidenced by the percentage '

cf scrams caused by equipment failure (the In 1995, the NRC initiated a Strategic Assessment le: ding cause of all scrams), the relatively and Rebaselining Project that reassessed NRC constant values for safety system failures and activities. Enhancing regulatory excellence was a forced outage rate since 1985, and the lack of key output of the project. In FY 1998, the NRC improvement in equipment-forced outages per staff developed Strategy 5, one of thirteen .

1000 critical hours since 1994. Industry average strategies to enhance NRC effectiveness and unit availability and capacity factors also improved efficiency. Strategy 5, now called Regulatory considerably between 1985 and 1995. However, Effectiveness Strategy, is a systematic process to I

this was due, not to fewer forced outage hours, but identify candidate issues for improving the to greatly reduced scheduled outage hours. This is effectiveness and efficiency of rules, standards, a consequence oflongcr fuel cycles, which result regulatory guidance, and their application.

in greater intervals between refueling outages, and of shorter refueling outages. Industry average After developing the strategy, the staff began to cvailability and capacity factors increased in 1998 implement the plan by a pilot effort to review over the previous years of 1996 and 1997. Operating experience and obtain stakeholder j input. Consistent with the strategy,in September '

1998, the NRC staff participated in a public meeting to solicit from external stakeholders 1 comments on the developed process and the Accident Sequence Precursor identification of candidate issues for input into the Program Process and to ensure that all the meeting comments were addressed. In November 1998, the staff identified three issues and completed its The Accident Sequence Precursor (ASP) Program analyses for improving regulatory effectiveness.

is a formal program in which nuclear power plant The identification ofissues is the first phase of the events are analyzed, using PRA techniques. The overall strategy to be followed by the analysis and ASP Program evaluates operational experience proposal phases.

using a rigorous method that integrates actual initiating events, plant conditions, and the reli;bility of standby safety equipment into an overall quantitative assessment, which is Common-Cause Failure i

expressed as a conditional core damag probability (CCDP). An ASP is an operational D8t3Dase and Studies event or plant condition that is an important element of a postulated core-damaging (severe The NRC and the Idaho National Engineering and accident) sequence. Sequences considered in the Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) developed l ASP Program are those associated with i and maintain a common-cause failure (CCF) inadequate core cooling, which would be expected database for the U.S. commercial nuclear to result in core damage. Results of the ASP industry. The latest CCF efforts provided a

16 > -

compact disk (CD) containing the CCF database, 4. "Special Study: Operating Experience CCF analysis software, and associated technical Feedback From Service Water System reports that were made available in CY 1998 to Failures and Degradations (1986-1995)"

the nuclear power reactor licensees. The technical (AEOD/S98-01); and reports on the CD were published as-

5. "High-Pressure Core Spray System

• " Common-Cause Failure Database and Reliability,1987- 1993" (AEOD/S98-02)

Analysis System: Overview" -

(NUREG/CR-6268, Vol.1);

• " Common-Cause Failure Database and DD0rnlal Occurrences Analysis System: Event De5nition and

' Classification" (NUREG/CR-6268, Vol. 2); AEOD administers the Commission's program for reporting abnormal occurrences (AOs) to

• " Common-Cause Failure Database and Congress. AOs are incidents or events that the Analysis System: Data Collection and Event Commission determines are significant from the Coding" (NUREG/CR-6268, Vol. 3); and standpoint of public health and safety. There were no AOs at the nuclear power plants in FY 1998.

• " Common-Cause Failure Database and The number of AOs at nuclear power plants since 6 Analysis System: Software Reference 1988 has remained low, averagm, g two per year.

Manual" (NUREG/ CR-6268, Vol. 4). For m, formation on the material AOs see Chapter 2," Nuclear Materials Safety"in this report. A In additior , the CCF database, two detailed description of AOs may be found in th.e common-ci. ise related reports wen completed in " Report to Congress on Abnormal Occurrences, CY 1998," Guidelines on Modelig Fiscal Year 1998" (NUREG-0090, Vol. 21).

Common-Cause Failures in Probabilistic Risk Assessment" (NUREG/CR-5485) and the m -C lure Parameter Estimations" Radiation Exposures and Overexpcsures All NRC licensees are required to monitor Systern Reliability Studies employee exposure to radiation and radioactive materials at levels sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the occupational dose limits The NRC uses operational data to determine the specified in 10 CFR Part 20. Licensees of power reliability of risk.5ignificant systems in U.S. reactors are required by 10 CFR 20.2206 to commercial reactors. The data are obtained from provide to the NRC annual reports of exposure licensee event repons, special reports, and data for individuals for whom personnel monthly operating experience reports. In CY monitoring is required. These data for 1973 and 1998, the following five reports were completed: for 1992 through 1997 (the latest year for which data are available) are summarized in Table 2.1 by

1. " Evaluation of Loss of Offsite Power Events CY, and in Table 2.2 the data for CY 1997 are at Nuclear Power Plants: 1980-1996" compared to the classes of nuclear materials (NUREG/CR-5496); licensees that are required to submit annual exposure reports (see the tables in Chapter 2,

2. " Rates of Initiating Events at U.S. Nuclear " Nuclear Material Safety," in this report).

Power Plants: 1987-1995"(NUREG/

CR-5750); Almost all radiation doses from nuclear power plants are occupational doses, that is, doses to

3. " Reliability Study: Auxiliary / Emergency nuclear power plant employees and contractors l Feedwater System,1987-1995" who work at the plant. The economics of (NUREG/CR-5500 Vol.1); operating a plant creates a strong impetus to

17 reduce exposures and achieve ALARA (as low as by radiography licensees, the nuclear materials reasonably achievable) objectives. As a result, licensee category of most concern because of the utility violations of NRC limits on personnel high rate and magnitude of overexposures. For exposure are rare, and the vast majority of nuclear more information on nuclear materials see power plant personnel have annual exposures far Chapter 2.

below NRC regulatory limits specified in 10 CFR Part 20. This is believed to result primarily from Understanding Radiological Characterization of the licensees' extensive dose-reduction efforts. Sites. From October 1997 through January 1998, Some measures that reduce collective exposure the Region I staffled a special review of activities tre an effective maintenance program, conducted at the Haddam Neck Station in East experienced and well-trained personnel, a good Haddam, Connecticut (Figure 1.3). The 1825 Mwt water chemistry control program, effective pressurized water reactor was permanently shut d: contamination and cleanup practices, good fuel down by its operator, Connecticut Yankee Atomic cl:dding integrity, effective radiation exposure Power Company,in December 1996.

control programs, good housekeeping, and an alert health physics staff. The objectives of this review were to gain a better understanding and appreciation of the scope and extent of previous radiological occurrences in Although commercial reactor occupational order for the NRC to better assess the exposures have been maintained at a low level, a acceptability of the licensee's future site few overexposures continue to occur. The radiological characterization efforts and numbers of occupational overexposures in NRC- subsequent remediation of affected areas, both on licensed reactor and nuclear materials facilities the site and in the environment, and to identify f:r 1992 through CY 1997 are given in Table 2.3. whether licensee activities that resulted in Although the data for FY 1998 have not yet been contamination of the site, uncontrolled or compiled, there have been no reports of deaths or unmonitored effluent releases, or insufficient significant radiation exposures owing to civilian control of licensed materials were considered for nuclear reactors in 1998. Table 2.4 in Chapter 2 of or subject to action in accordance with existing this report shows occupational overexposures NRC regulatory requirements, including reported by reactor licensees and those reported enforcement.

Figure IJ Haddam Neck Plant

18  ;

• On the basis of available information and dose resignation, or retirement of I full-time and 7 assessments to date, the team concluded that- part-time judges, leaving the Panel with 11 full-time and 11 part-time judges. Five of these o the conduct oflicensed activities at the remaining judges were lawyers,8 were Haddam Neck Plant over the last 30 years environmental scientists,6 were engineers or apparently did not result in any exposure to physicists, and 3 were medical doctors. This the public or environment that exceeded the 25-percent decrease in judges during the year limits in 10 CFR Part 20; could prove significant if estimated future  ;

increases in the Panel's caseload occurs.

• the licensee's review of any past radiological occurrences were appropriate and sufficiently Panel Caseload. The FY 1998 Panel caseload comprehensive, and comprised a total of 30 proceedings. Twelve involved nuclear power plants or related facilities

• NRC's inspection activities and application of and eighteen involved other Commission enforcement at Haddam Neck was generally licensees. Types of cases on the FY 1998 docket consistent with the agency's existing policy included the following:

and practices that evolved over time.

Number Case Type. of Cases Reactor Ucense Amendment 8 ADJUDICATORY Reactor ucense Extension . 2 PROCEEDINGS Reactor operator ucensing i Enforcement 9-Materials Ucenses 7 Atomic Safety and Licensing Remand 2 Boards Other 1 Adjudicatory hearings at the NRC are conducted These cases represent a 15-percent increase over by three-member licensing boards or a smgle the total number of cases in FY 1997. In addition, presidmg officer drawn from the Atomic Safety 21 new cases were docketed in FY 1998, a and Licensing Board Panel. These heanngs 30-percent increase over the previous year when pnmanly deal with nuclear reactor heensmg, nuclear matenal hcensmg, and enforcement 15 new cases were docketed. A significant portion of the FY 1998 increase was attributable to matters when heensees and other affected entities reactor licensing cases, which increased 100 contest penalties or orders brought against them by the NRC staff for alleged infractions of NRC percent over FY 1997*

regulations. Additional hearings are sometinies The Panel's FY 1998 caseload followed a trend, held dealing with antitrust licensing, personnel begun in the late 1980s, of a docket primarily matters, and special Commission-ordered consisting of enforcement cases, materials proceedings. licensing cases, and reactor license amendment cases. It was reflective of the regulation of a Panet Judges. Panel hearings are conducted by maturint, industry, and differed significantly from three member licensing boards or a single Panel caseload in previous decades, which presiding officer who are assigned from the consisted mainly of construction permit and Panel's pool of administrative judges. Panel judges operating license cases for licensing new reactors.

are lawyers or technical members with expertise in a wide variety of disciplines. At the beginning of The materials licensing, reactor license FY 1998, the Panel consisted of 30 judges (12 amendment, and enforcement cases of the 1990s full time and 18 part time). By year's end, this are expected to continue in the future.

number was reduced 25 percent by the death, Nevertheless, beginning in FY 1998 and gradually

- ______-___-__ __ A

19 increasing over the next several years, new types Valley Band of Goshute Indians to build an cf cases are expected that could be especially interim high-level waste storage facility on their large-scale. These willinclude a series of reactor Utah reservation located about 40 miles southwest license extension cases as utilities attempt to , of Salt Lake City. Opposition to the application extend the operating lives of their reactors. They was substantial, and intervention was granted by a also will include an assortment of highly licensing board to the State of Utah, two Native contested, high-level waste storage cases dealing American tribes and a Native American with the licensing of privately operated offsite organization, and several local ranching interim spent fuel storage facilities and the companies. The board also accepted a number of projected Yucca Mountain permanent high-level the intervenors' safety, environmental, and waste storage facility. Also on the horizon are physical security contentions. Private fuel Storage, potential highly contested cases involving the L.L.C. (Independent Spent Fuel Storage licensing of novel nuclear fuel and production Installation), LBP-98-7,47 NRC 142 (1998);

facilities, such as a proposed new AVLIS LBP-98-10,47 NRC 288 (1998); LBP-98-13, enrichment faciSty, a MOX fuel plant for burning 46 NRC 360 (1998); LBP-98-17,48 NRC 69 plutonium, ard a tritium production facility, and (1998). The first planned series of hearings on the the proposed regulation of U.S. Department of contentions are scheduled to begin in November Energy (DOE) facilities. 2000.

Significant FY 1998 Proceedings. FY 1998 marked Cases Closed During FY 1998. Cases closed by the advent of utilities seeking 20-year operatmg licensing boards and presiding officers during FY 1998 included the following:

license extensions for reactors licensed by the NRC. During the year, these extensions were Enforcement Cases requested by Baltimore Gas and Electric

• Bamert IndustrialX-Ray, Inc. (Stillwater, Company for its Calvert Cliffs Units 1 and 2 and by Duke Power Corporation for its Oconee Units Oklahoma), LBP-97-19,46 NRC 237 (1997) 1,2, and 3. These applications were opposed by

• 21st Century Technologies, Inc. (Fort Worth, local public interest groups and individuals Texas), LBP-98-1,47 NRC1 (1998) residing near these facilities. Among other things, petitioners in both proceedings contended that the o PowerInspection, Inc., LBP-98-6,47 NRC extension requests should be rejected because a 140 (1998) final NRC staff determination on some relevant

• techmcalissues had not been reached. At fiscal NDT Services, Inc., Slip Opinion (July 6,1998) year's end, licensing board decisions in both

• John Boschuk, Jr., LBP-98-15,48 NRC 57 proceedings were pending with respect to the (1998) petitioners' standing to intervene and the admissibihty of contentions. e Lourdes I Boschuk, LBP-98-16,48 NRC 63 (1998)

Another especially significant case during the year Materials Licensing Cases was the Private Fuel Storage proceeding. This case e Quivera Mining Company (Ambrosia Lake involved the first attempt by private utilities to jointly build an interim waste facility for offsite Facility), LBP-97-20,46 NRC 257 (1997) storage of spent fuel until the Yucca Mountain e Intemational Uranium (USA) Corp. (White permanent facility is ready. This application was Mesa Uranium Mill), LBP-97-21,46 NRC filed by a consortium of 11 utilities that had 273 (1997) contracted with the Skull Valley Band of Goshute .

Indians to build an interim high-level waste e Atlas Corporation (Moab, Utah), LBP storage facility on their Utah reservation located 18,48 NRC 78 (1998)

r. bout 40 miles southwest of Salt Lake City.

Remanded Case Opposition to the application storage of spent fuel until the Yucca Mountain permanent facility is

• Louisiana Energy Services, L.R (Claiborne I ready. This application was filed by a consortium Enrichment Center), LBP-97-22,46 NRC of 11 utilities that had contracted with the Skull [

275 (1997); CLI-98-5,47 NRC 113 (1998)

20

• License Amendment Case Commission reminded parties that the burden remains on the proponent, not on the licensing e Yankee Atomic Electric Company (Yankee board, to formulate the contention and provide Nuclear Power Station), LBP-98-12' 47 necessadnformadon to enapsh admissM, board may raise a matter on its own'only motion ,5 NRC 343 (1998) ,

m extraordinary circumstances , and may not proceed further with sua sponte issues without the Commission's approval. -

Greater Efficiency in Adjudicatory Proceedings To reduce time spent in the pre-hearing stage, the policy statement directs the staff to establish a case file after the board completes its rulings on As part ofits broad initiative to increase effective- contentions. This file, periodically updated, shall ness of the NRC's programs and processes, the include the application at issue and relevant NRC Commission on July 28,1998, issued a policy reports and correspondence and will be made statement entitled " Policy on Conduct of available to the parties. No other discovery against Adjudicatory Proceedings." 63 FR 41872 the staff will be allowed until the staff has issued (August 31,1998). This statement critically review documents regarding the application. The reassessed the NRC's practices and procedures for boards should set reasonable bounds on discovery, conducting adjudicatory proceedings under the for example bylimiting the rounds of existing Rules of Practice in 10 CFR Part 2, interrogatories and depositions and the time for primarily subpart G, and set out certair. measures their completion The Commission concluded the that the hearing boards and presiding officers Policy statement by noting its intention to monitor should employ to ensure efficient conduct of proceedings to ensure their fairness and proceedings. As one of these measures, the timeliness, to provide guidance to boards and Commission directed boards "to shorten the filing Parties in individual proceedings, and to decide and response times set forth in the regulations to issues "in the interest of a prompt and effective the extent practical in a specific proceeding," resolution of the matters set for adjudication."

noting that 10 CFR 2.718 gives presiding officers authority to alter the schedules established in Part 2 for various filings. The Commission also Pursuant to the policy set out in this statement, directed heensmg boards to establish procedures the Commission issued case-specific orders in two for electronic filing and to consider use of new proceedings on nuclear power plant operating technologies to expedite proceedings. The pohey

, license renewal applications. Baltimore Gas &

statement further noted that the Commission Electric Company (Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power itself may set milestones for the completion of

, , , Plant Units 1 and 2), CLI-98-14,48 NRC 39 proceedm, gs. If a licensmg board deternunes that a (1998); Duke Energy Corporation (Oconee Nuclear Commission-set milestone may be missed by more Station, Units 1,2, and 3) CLI-98-17,48 NRC than 30 days, the board must notify the Commission promptly, explam, mg the delay and 123 (1998). In each order the Commission established as a goal the issuance of a Commission describm, g measures the board will take, where possible, to restore the overall schedule. decision on the pending application in about 21/2 years from the date the application was received.

The Commission set out several milestones that The Commission emphasized that by itself action the licensing board should adopt for conclusion of by the boards will not achieve the objectives of the significant steps in the hearing. No extensions of policy statement. The parties to a proceeding must time are to be granted " absent unavoidable or satisfy their obligations and must adhere to the extreme circumstances." The Commission stated specified time frames. Extensions of time may be in each order "We do not e'xpect the Licensing granted, the Commission said, but "only when Board to sacrifice fairness and sound decision- j warranted by unavoidable and extreme making to expedite any hearing granted on this j circumstances." With regard to contentions, the application."

l t

21 9

New Procedures for License The informai Subpart M procedures are similar to those used by the Commission m cases mvolvmg TERDSfer Applications export licensing hearings under 10 CFR Part 110.

Proceedings will be oral unless all parties agree to a written proceeding. The Commission itself will conduct the hearing or w11 appoint a Presiding On December 3,1998, the Commission issued a Officer to be responsible for collecting evidence final rule amending its regulations to provide and developing a record which will then be unif:rm procedures and rules of practice for submitted to the Comnassion for a final decision.

handling requests for hearings associated with '

Parties may present recunmended question to the license transfer applications. These procedures Presiding Officer, but only the Presiding Officer are set out in a new Subpart M to 10 CFR Part 2, may question witnesses. To improve efficiency the the "NRC's Rules of Practice for Domestic rule imposes schedular milestones for the filing of Licensing Proceedings and Issuance of Orders." testimony and responses and for the commence-The new procedures are informal and apply to ment of the oral hearings, subject to adjustment by transfers of material and reactor licenses and also the Presiding Officer. In routine cases these licenses issued under the regulations governing procedures are expected to result in the issuance the independent storage of spent nuclear fuel and of a final Commission decision on the license high level radioactive waste. The rule became transfer within 6 to 8 months of the notice of effective immediately upon publication in the receipt of the application.

Fedeml Register. 63 FR 66721 (December 3,1998).

In promulgating the new Subpart M, the Com. Decisions mission noted its expectation that the ongoing restructuring of the electric power industry will City ofBenton v. NRC, No. 95-1402 (D.C. Cir.,

cause a continuing high rate of requests for decided Feb. 27,1998) cpproval of license transfers. Under Section 184 of the Atomic Energy Act no license may be This long-running lawsuit challenged (on antitrust transferred, assigned, or disposed of by transfer of grounds) two NRC license amendments issued in control unless the Commission finds the transfer 1995: one to transfer control of the River Bend in accord with the provisions of this act and gives Nuclear Power Reactor from Gulf States Utilities its consent. " Typical staff review of such to Entergy Corporation, and one to transfer applications," the Commission observed," consists Operating responsibility of River Bend to Entergy largely of assuring that the ultimately licensed Operations, Inc. Ongmally, Cajun Electric Power entity has the capability to meet financial Cooperative jomed a group known as Arkansas qualification and decommissioning funding Cities and Cooperative (ACC) as petitioners, but espects of NRC regulations." In an increasingly Cajun ultimately dropped out of the suit as a competitive environment, license transfer result of a settlement agreement in bankruptcy applications require expeditious decisionmaking. Proceedm, gs.

Moreover, these transfers generally do not involve

, The parties initially filed full briefs in the case in the kind of technical issues with immediate 1995. On the eve of oral argument, however, the impact on facility operation safety that may court of appeals decided to hold the case in bensfit from review under the complex and often abeyance to await the outcome of the time-consuming formal heanng procedures of 10 then-pending Cajun bankruptcy proceeding. In CFR Part 2, Subpart G. The Commission noted its 1997, after Cajun withdrew its petition for review, conclusion that the Atomic Energy Act does not the court reinstated the case to its active docket.

require formal, trial-type heanngs but rather gives The parties then filed fresh briefs. On the Commission flexibility to fashion its February 27,1998, the court (Williams, Sentelle &

procedures to meet the needs of the particular

, Henderson, JJ.) dismissed the case in its entirety type of decisionmakmgin question. Accordingly, for lack of jurisdiction.

the Commission concluded that for hearings on license transfers uniform informal procedures The court held, as we had argued in our brief, that should be adopted. ACC's petition for review was fatally defective for

22 failure to challenge a final agency order. ACC's public and the environment. Consistent with that petition had designated for review the NRC staff's purpose, enforcement action is used as a deterrent interlocutory finding of no signi5 cant antitrust to emphasize the importance of compliance with changes rather than the Commission's ultimate regulatory requirements, and to encourage order actually granting the license amendments, prompt identification and prompt, comprehensive The court stated that "[i]n a licensing proceeding, correction of violations. The Office of it is the order granting or denying the license that Enforcement (OE) is responsible for managing ordinarily is the final order," and concluded that the Commission's enforcement program. The

"[w]hatever order ACC intended to ask the court NRC's enforcement program is addressed in the to review, it named the wrong order in its petition." agency's Enforcement Policy, NUREG-1600, Rev.1 " General Statement of Policy and ACC did not seek certiorari in the Supreme Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions."

Court.

Escalated Enforcement Activities. All violations (except minor violations) identified through Pending LitigatiOH inspections and investigations are subject to civil enforcement action and may also be subject to criminal prosecution. After an apparent violation ThermalScience, Inc. v. NRC, No. 98-3147 (8th is identified, the severity is evaluated in order to Cir, stay denied September 10.1998) determine the appropriate enforcement sanction.

Severity levels range from Level I for the most This is the continuation of the effort by Thermal significant violations, to Level IV for those of Science to challenge NRC consideration of a more than minor concern. Minor violations are proposed $900,000 civil penalty for alleged false not subject to formal enforcement action. The ,

statements to the agency about the testing of NRC considers violations categorized at Severity 1 Thermal Science's Thermo-Lag product. After a. Level I and II to be very significant, as well as lengthy delay, the district court dismissed the suit enforcement actions consisting of multiple outright as premature and also refused to stay Severity Level III violations. During FY 1998, the administrative proceedings pending appeal. agency issued five Severity Level II violations, and Thermal Science then appealed and sought a stay six multiple Severity Level III violation actions to from the court of appeals. The NRC opposed the reactor licensees. No Severity Level I violations stay. In a one sentence order, the court of appeals were issued during this period.

denied the stay motion. The court also set a briefing schedule on the merits of the appeal. The NRC uses three primary enforcement Thennal Science continues to argue that NRC sanctions: Notices of Violation (NOV), civil consideration of a civil penalty violates the penalties, and orders. The NRC considers civil Constitution's Double Jeopardy Clause and is penalties, orders, and NOVs, including Severity beyond the agency's statutory authority. The court Level I, II, and III violations, as escalated of appeals will likely hear the case in early 1999. enforcement actions.

An NOV sets forth one or more violations of a legally binding requirement and normally requires a response from the licensee describing the ENFO'RCEMENT AND reasons for the violation, the corrective steps INVESTIGATIVE ACTIONS taken or P lanned, and the date when actions will be complete. Dunng FY 1998, the agency issued 33 escalated NOVs to reactor licensees.

Enforcement ^ 'i"i Seven. Penalty ty Level is a monetary III violations fine considered for and normally assessed for Severity Level I and II violations and The Commission has developed an enforcement knowing and conscious violations of reporting program and Enforcement Policy to support the requirements of Section 206 of the Energy NRC's overall safety mission in protecting the Reorganization Act. Section 234 of the Atomic

1

<- . e -:c-1999 15: 19 W : 55 EL5 5: <--  : cuu

. j 23 enforcement action and may also be subject to Table 1.5 Civil Penalty Infomation criminal prosecution. After an apparent violation FY 98 is identified, the severity is evaluated in order to determine the appropriate enforcement sanction. Number of Proposed Civil-Severity levels range from Level I, for the most Penalties 47 significant violations, to Level IV, for those of Amount of Proposed Civil more than minor concern. Mmor violations are Penalties $4'936,000 not subject to formal enforcement action. The NRC considers violations categorized at Severity Amount of Paid Civil Level I and II to be very significant, as well as Penalties $5,008,000 enforcement actions consisting of multiple Number of Imposed Civil Severity Level III violations. Durmg FY 1998, the Penalties 1 agency issued five Severity Level II violations, and ,

six multiple Severity Level III violation actions to Amount of Imposed Civil l Penalties $100,000 reactor licensees. No Severity Level I violations were issued during this period.

1 In addition to NOVs and civil penalties, orders The NRC uses three primary enforcement may be used to modify, suspend, or revoke 1 sanctions: Notices of Violation (NOV), civil licenses. Orders may require additional corrective penalties, and orders. The NRC considers civil actions, such as removing specified individuals penalties, orders, and NOVs, including Severity from licensed activities or requiring additional Level I, II, and III violations, as escalated controls or outside audits. Persons adversely enforcement actions. affected by orders that modify, suspend, or revoke a license, or that take other actions may request a hearing. During FY 1998, the agency issued one order to a reactor licensee. In addition, one civil An NOV sets forth one or more violations of a legally binding requirement and normally requires Penalty imposition order was issued.

a response from the licensee describing the reasons for the violation, the corrective steps A predecisional enforcement conference is taken or planned, and the date when actions will normally condtieted with a licensee or individual be complete. During FY 1998, the agency issued before making an enforcement decision if 33 escalated NOVs to reactor licensees. escalated enforcement action appears to be warranted and if the NRC concludes that it is necessary or the licensee or individual requests it.

A civil penalty is a monetaty fine considered for During FY 1998, the agency conducted a total of Sevetity Level 111 violations and normally 122 conferences for reactor and material assessed for Severity Level I and 11 violations and licensees.

knowing and conscious violations of reporting requirements of Section 206 of the Eney The NRC issues a Press release with a proposed Reorganization Act. Section 234 of the Atomic civil penalty or order. All orders are published .m Energy Act (AEA) provides for penalties of up to the FederalRegister.

5100,000 per violation per day; but that amount was adjusted by the Debt Collection Improvement Act ofl99J to $110,000. During FY 1998, the Additional information on the NRC's agency proposed 47 individual civil penalties to enforcement program and enforcement activities reactor licensees. Most licensees pay the civil is available in the OE's FY1998 Annual Report.

penalty when it is proposed. However, in some This document is available in the Public cases, the agency imposes the civil penalty through Document Room and on NRC's WWW site at the issuance of an order. Table 1.5 includes <www.nre. gov /OE/>. This Web site also includes additional civil penalty information. Note that a copies of significant enforcement actions that the civil penalty may be proposed in one fiscal year agency has issued arranged by reactor, materials, and paid or imposed in another fiscal year.

l and individual actions.

r 23 Ene Act (AEA) provides for penalties of up to <www.nrc. gov /OE/>. This Web site also inclu s

$100, per violation per day; but that amount copies of significant enforcement actions that e was adj ted by the Debt Collection Improvement agency has issued arranged by reactor, mate 1s, Act of 19 to be $110,000. During FY 1998, the and individual actions.

agency pro osed 47 individual civil penalties to reactor licen es. Table 1.5 includes additional civil penaltyi ormation. .

Investigations .

Table 1.5 Civilpnalty Information The information in this FY 19 NRC Annual g Report is taken from the Off' ofInvestigations

\ (OI) annual report to the mnussion ofits Number of Proposed Civil activities and actions. A py of the FY 1998 OI Penalties 47

\ Annual Report (37 pag , including graphs and Amount of Proposed Civil \ attachments)is avail e for yourinformation Penalties s $4,936,000 UPon request to e- il address: <BSB@nrc. gov >.

Number ofImposed Civil \ OI conducts inv tigations of alleged wrongdoing Penalties by individuals

\1 organizations who Amount ofImposed Civil \ e Penalties are lice sed by the NRC

$100,000

• are plicants for licenses, or In addition to NOVs and civil penalties,\o e lers may be used to modify, suspend, or revoke e licensee contractors or vendors.1 licenses. Orders may require additional corr tive re were 1,026 allegations regarding potential rctions, such as removing specified individuals

'olations ofits rules, regulations, or requirements from licensed activities or requiring additional eceived by the NRC during FY 1998. Of these controls or outside audits. Persons adversely allegations, approximately 19 percent involved affected by orders that modify, suspend, or revoke

, potential wrongdoing. The total OI inventory of a h,eense, or that take other actions may request a cases under investigation in FY 1998 was 292. Of hearing. During FY 1998, the agency issued one ese Of closed 194 cases, or 66 percent of the order to a reactor licensee. In addition, one ci i entory. Approximately 5 percent of these cases penalty imposition order was issued.

cor ained multiple suspected wrongdoing viola Jons.

A predecisional enforcement conference i normally conducted with a licensee or individual OI surp sed its performance goal to complete before making an enforcement decisio if cases wit an average of 12 months. The FY escalated enforcement action appear to be 1998 avera for completing a case was 6.3 warranted and if the NRC conclud that it is months. OI w s also successful in reducing the necessary or the licensee orindi ual requests it. percentage of es in the inventory open longer During FY 1998, the agency co ucted a total of than 12 months t 8 percent. OI established an 122 conferences for reactor a material additional goalin .1998 of 75 percent, or more, licensees. of cases within the i entory which would be brought to a full conci ion based on the merits of The NRC issues a press r ease with a proposed the case. OI surpassed 1 is goal in FY 1998 by civil penalty or order. orders are published in achieving a percentage v ubstantive cases of 93 the FedemiRegister. percent.

Additionalinform ion on the NRC's. Of the194 investigations closed in FY 1998,53 enforcement pro am and enforcement activities cases were referred to DOJ for prosecutorial is r.vailable in e OE's FY1998 Annual Report. INote that allegations invoMng NRC croployees or contractors to the '

This docume is available in the Public NRC corne under the purwcw of the NRC's office of the inspector Document om and on NRC's WWW site at encra .and n t under the purnew of 01.

l

p 24 '

review. During FY 1998, OI supported two with the charter of the ACRS and FACA Federal grand juries. In addition, OI investiga- requirements, unclassified ACRS reports are tions resulted in four guilty pleas in Federal court.

made part of the public record. The ACRS Web address is <http://www.nrc. gov /ACRSACNW/>.

There were 182 escalated enforcement actions taken by the NRC in FY 1998, which included civil The ACRS membership is drawn from various penalties, orders, and NOVs at or above Severity scientific and engineering disciplines. Its current Level III. In 39, or 21 percent, of these actions, membership includes those experienced in the the OI investigative findings were factored into areas of nuclear power plant operations; the decision to take escalated enforcement action. probabilistic risk analysis; analysis of severe l reactor accident phenon ena; design of plant structures, systems, and components; material sciences; mechanical, civil, and electrical i Advisory Committee on *"8 i"**ri"g; and digita I&C systems.

Reactor Safeguards During FY 1998, the ACRS and ACNW com-pleted a Report to Congress on Nuclear Safety Research, dated February 24,1998, and a detailed The ACRS, established by statute in 1957 by report to the Commission on the NRC Safety

• revision of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, provides advice to the NRC on potential hazards Research Program: " Review and Evaluation of the l Nuclear Regulatory Commission Safety Research )

of proposed or existing reactor facilities and the Program" (NUREG 1635, Vol.1). l adequacy of proposed safety standards. The Atomic Energy Act also requires that the ACRS The following reports were among the most advise the Commission with respect to the safety significant ACRS contributions during FY 1998:

of operating reactors and perform such other 2 duties as the Commission may request. Consistent 12/11/97 - Proposed Final Regulatory Guide ,

with the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, the 1.174 and Standard Review Plan Chapter 19 for I committee will review any matter related to the Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulation i safety of nuclear facilit ies and activities of the '

DOE that DOE requests. Upon request, the 12/16/97-Treatment of Uncertainties Versus ACRS also provides advice to the Defense Point Values in the PRA-Related Decisionmaking Nuclear Facilities Safety Board and the U.S. Navy. Process In addition, the ACRS, on its own initiative, reviews specific generic matters on nuclear facility 03/12/98 - Proposed Final Standard Review Plan safety-related items. Sections and Regulatory Guides for Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulation for The ACRS reviews requests for preapplication Inservice Testing, Graded Ouality Assurance, and site and standard plant design approvals, as well Technical Specifications as applications for construction permits, operating licenses for power reactors,10 CFR Part 52 03/16/98 - SECY-98-001, Mechanism for i licenses, and certain test reactor facility licenses Addressing Generic Safety Issues I for construction and operation. With respect to reactors that are already licensed to operate, the 05/11/98 - Elevation of CDF to a Fundamental ACRS is involved in the review and evaluation of Safety Goal and Possible Revision of the any substantive licensing changes, corrective Commission's Safety Goal Policy Statement actions resulting from operating events and incidents, and the resoltdou of generic safety 07/16/98 - Proposed Revisions to 10 CFR 50.59 issues. (Changes, Tests and Experiments)

Activities of the ACRS are conducted in 07/24/98 - General Electric Nuclear Energy accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Extended Power Uprate Program and Monticello Act (FACA), which provides for public attendance Nuclear Generating Plant Power Level Increase at cod participation in ACRS meetings. Consistent Request

25 09/15/98 - Application for Power Level Increase 09/30/98 -Impact of Probabilistic Risk for Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 Assessment Results and Insights on the end 2 Regulatory System k

~

g 4 CHAPTER 2 NUCLEAR MATERIALS SAFETY The strategic goal for nuclear materials safety is to prevent radiation-related deaths and illnesses, protect the emironment, and saf: guard special nuclear material and facilities in the civilian use of source, byproduct, and special nuclear materials. In Fiscal Year (FY) 1998, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) met the associated performance goals and had (1) no radiation-related deaths.

resulting from civilian use of source, byproduct, or special nuclear materials; (2) no increase in the number of significant radiation exposures resulting from loss or use of source, byproduct, or special nuclear materials; (3) no offsite releases of radioactive material from '

operating facilities that have the potential to cause an adverse impact on the environment; (4) no significant accidental releases of radioactive material from the storage or transportation of nuclear material or nuclear waste; and (5) no loss, thcft, or diversion of formula quantities of str:tegic special nuclear materials or unauthorized enrichment of special nuclear material regulated by the NRC. Data for the sixth goal, environmental impacts, are considered through the National Enviromental Pohey Act (NEPA) process before regulatory action is taken and will be available for FY 1999.

The NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS)  ;

and the NRC's four regional offices regulate the safe use of nuclear  !

materials under several broad programs. NRC regulates approximately i 7,000 licensees, and the 30 Agreements States have formal agreements I with the NRC under which they have assumed regulatory authority over cpproximately 15,000 radioactive materials licensees. Material safety, i

fuel facility safety and safeguards, and storage and transport of nuclear fuel are discussed in this chapter, and waste management activities are discussed in Chapter 3.

Activities covered in this chapter include licensing, certi5 cation, inspection, and other regulatory actions concerned with the production cnd use of reactor-produced radioisotopes (byproduct material). Nuclear materials regulation during FY 1998 comprised-o 3,437 licensing actions. Of this total,277 were for new licenses, 2,940 were for amendmeats,67 were for license renewals, and 153 were scaled source and device reviews; o 1,884 materials licensee inspections; -

o 10 reviews and 1 followup review of Agreement State programs and 2 regional integrated program reviews;

1

. l 28 -

101 licensing and certification actions (e.g., license renewals, and 153 were sealed source and new, amended, and renewed licenses or device reviews.

certificates) for enrichment, fuel fabrication, conversion, and other fuel cycle facilities; and In FY 1998, the staffissued six draft and three final reports (various volumes of NUREG-1556)

• 191 fuel cycle facility licensee and certificate of revised program-specific guidance for licensees holder inspections. and reviewers that were developed using business process redesign techniques. These reports consolidate guidance from a number of different sources and will help to streamline the licensing process. When is' sued in final form, they are GENERIC MATERIALS li i"t"ded f r use by APP cants, licensees, NRC heense reviewers, and other NRC personnel. They LICENSING AND take a risk-informed, performance-based approach to regulatim.

INSPECTION ACTIVITIES The materials program is designed to ensure that Medical Use of Byproduct activities involving uses of radionuclides do not endanger public health and safety. As of Material September 30,1998, the NRC administered approximately 5,830 licenses for the possession NRC has published a proposed rule to revise its and use of nuclear materials in medical and regulations governing the medical use of industrial applications. This administration byproduct material. The overall goal of the represents a reduction of about 70 licenses in the proposed rule is to focus NRC's regalations on past year. Table 2.1 shows the distribution of those medical procedures that pose the highest licenses by region. The 30 Agreement States risk and to structure NRC's regulations to be risk administer about another 15,000 licenses, informed and performance based.Three public workshops were held (San Francisco, California; Kansas City, Missouri; and Rockville, Maryland)

Table 2.1 Distribution of NRC Nuclear to solicit comments from stakeholders and other Materials IJeenses (as of October 1,1998) members of the public. The NRC anticipates Region I 1,765 Publishing the final rule in the summer of 1999.

Region II 834 Region III 2,171 Egia IV 842 Headquarters 218 AGREEMENT STATES Total: 5,830 A total of 30 States have formal agreements with The NRC regional staff completed 1,884 the NRC, by which those States have assumed inspections of materials facilities in FY 1998. The regulatory responsibility over byproduct, source, regions oversee almost all materials licensees, and small quantities of special nuclear material, with the exception of those holding exempt Approximately 15,000 radioactive materials distribation licenses and sealed source and device licenses are regulated by the Agreement States, design licenses. representing about 70 percent of all radioactive material licenses issued in the ' United States. The The NRC completed 3,437 licensing actions during States of Minnesota, Ohio, Oklahoma, the fiscal year. Of this total,277 were for new Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin continue to actively licenses,2,940 were for ame.ndments,67 were for work toward becoming Agreement States.

r --

29

\

l I

l I

i l

l I

( l Figure 2.1 U.S. Map. Location of NRC OEces and Agreement States.

Cooperation With States Joint NRC-Agreement State Working Groups have also contmued to be effectively used to address common issues and to evaluate i NRC continued activities to ensure early and improvements in the regulation of radioactive  !

substantive involvement of Agreement States in material. NRC's participation in the Annual All i NRC rulemaking and other regulatory issues. Agreement States Meeting also affords an Th:se activities included early opportunity to opportunity for further information exchange and comment on draft rulemaking plans and the use of cooperation.  ;

el:ctronic communication, via e-mail and bulletin '

boards, to facilitate the transfer ofinformation.

A current list of Agreement States (including nimes, addresses, and telephone numbers of Technical Assistance to States responsible officials) may be obtained upon request from NRC's regional offices. Or visit the The NRC continued to provide technical NRC Office of State Programs'(OSP's) Home assistance to Agreement States by responding to Page <http://www.hstd.ornl. gov /ntc> and choose requests for licensing and inspection information,

" Directories" and then " State Prc$ .im reviewing and commenting on proposed changes Directors." to State regulations, and by dealing with specific

-l

4 y "

or unusual radiation applications requiring panel review of the IMPEP team's recommen-specialized expertise and knowledge, dations and issues the official NRC findings to the region or the Agteement State. An Agreement State management liaison representative serves on this board. 'he IMPEP has proved to be effective Daining Offered State both in terms of evaluating the adequacy and compatibility of the materials programs and in Personnel improving technical and programmatic exchange ofinformation between NRC and the Agreement The NRC sponsors training courses and States. Followup or special reviews are also workshops for Agreement State and NRC staff to conducted, as needed.

assist State radiation control personnel meet their goal of maintaining high-quality regulatory During FY 1998, NRC continued implementation programs. Course subjects are diverse, covering of the IMPEP to evaluate Agreement State and health physics, industrial radiography safety, NRC regional materials programs. NRC well-logging, environmental monitoring, irradiator performed 10 IMPEP reviews and 1 followup technology, transportation of radioactive nuclear review of Agreement State programs. Ten of the materials, site decommissioning characterization, Agreement State IMPEP reviews,10 programs, nuclear medicine, inspection procedures, and were found adequate and compatible with NRC's materials licensing. In addition, special workshops oversight programs, and 1 Agreement State's on specific topics are held, as needed. The NRC program was found adequate but needs sponsored 34 training courses and workshops improvement and to be made compatible with the attended by 357 State radiation control personnel others. NRC also performed two regional IMPEP during FY 1998. The sessions were also attended reviews and found those programs adequate.

by NRC staff and by military personnel, in addition to officials from foreign countries.

Review of State Regulatory Operational Events in Programs Agreement States The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, Information on events that have occurred in  ;

requires that NRC ensure that public health and Agreement States involving the use of radioactive safety are being adequately protected and that - byproduct material is routinely exchanged with the Agreement State programs are compatible with NRC and incorporated into the Nuclear Materials NRC's program. NRC uses the Integrated Events Database. Safety-significant Agreement Ma:erials Performance Evaluation Program State and NRC operational events are discussed at (IMPEP) to periodically evaluate NRC's regional periodic NRC staff meetings, and they emphasize office and Agreement State materials licensing identifying the cause of each event. During the and inspection programs. The IMPEP uses five past year, Agreement State personnelinvestigated common performance indicators: status of material events involving overexposures, materials inspection program; technical staffing unplanned contamination, leaking sources, and training; technical quality of licensing; industrial radiography, lost or stolen equipment, technical quality of inspection; and response to and equipment failure, as well as incidents incidents and allegations. Program areas unique to involving the administration of radioactive NRC regions and Agreement States are reviewed byproduct material to individuals for medical as noncommon performance indicators. These diagnosis and therapy. When short- and long-term reviews were conducted using interdisciplinary analysis of operational events lead to effective teams with members drawn from NMSS, OSP, the generic remedies that reduce the likelihood of l NRC regions, and the Agreement States. A event recurrence, the information is disseminated Management Review Board provides a senior to the appropriate regulatory agencies and users. ,

i i

U

1 l

31 i

The Conference of Radiation amendments. Using a risk-informed and

. performance-based approach, the NRC inspection Centrol Program Directors, staff confirmed that criticality safety was adequate

{gg, at each fuellicensee and GPD. ,

In FY 1998, NRC inspections and United States Th NRC, through the OSP, continues to be a Enrichment Corporation (USEC) self-assessments Fed:ral liaison to the Board of Directors of the identified sigmficant shortconungs m the Ccnference of Radiation Control Program implementation of the NCS program,at the Directors, Inc. (CRCPD), to help ensure that Portsmouth GDR Of the 183 event reports made St:te and Commission programs for protection t the NRC for the Portsmouth GDP,155 dealt rgainst the hazards of radiation are coordinated. with NCS. NRC used a Special Inspection Team to The CRCPD was formed in 1968 to provide a nspect nuclear enticah,ty safety issues. As a result f: rum in which Federal, State, and local radiation f this mvestigation, a comprehensive NCS control program officials could address corrective action program was imtiated and a gov;rnmental radiation protection issues, mainly corrective action plan was implemented that through working groups and committees. As many required ongomg quarterly updates of progress on as 15 NRC resource persons are represented on the completion of plan milestones. A sigmficant approximately 18 committees and working groups, yeduction in the number of NCS-related events which meet throughout the year. The NRC andicates that Portsmouth GDP is improving its contributed $110,000 in FY 1998 to the CRCPD. C mPhance with NCS requirements.

During FY 1998, all inventory differences between book and measured inventories of SNM reported by licensees to the NRC were either within Fu21 Cycle Facilities regulatory limits or within expected ranges. No investigations or anomalous conditions were In FY 1998, the NRC completed 60 safety-related reported during the report period. l source and special nuclear material (S&SNM) license / certificate amendments,37 S&SNM The NRC maintained two full-time resident inspectors at each GDP and one resident l technical reviews, and 4 S&SNM license renewals.

inspector at each of the two highly enriched Environmental assessments were completed for uranium fuel fabrication facilities. The regional the following licensing actions: Shieldalloy staffs have continued to be active in improving the Metallurgical Corporation (New Jersey) source i materiallicense renewal, General Atomics inspection focus on identification of criticality I safety issues in fuel facilities. The regions have (C:lifornia) Site Decommissioning Plan, and worked with NMSS to ensure that the inspection Fansteel (Oklahoma) authorization to process planning process is based on licensee performance pond materials. All other fuel cycle licensing and that all inspections are integrated and actions, including research and development coordinated. As examples of this progress, the ficility license renewals and fuel cycle license staff significantly improved the safety margin by amendments, were determmed to meet the (1) holding an Operational Readiness Review at environmental criteria in 10 CFR Part 51, Siemens for a new process begun in FY 1998 and

" Environmental Protection Regulations for by (2) conducting preoperational and start-up Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory inspections at Nuclear Fuel Se vices for new Functions," and did not require an environmental processes and for the restart of processes that had review. Dming FY 1998, NRC performed 134 been idle for an extended time.

inspections at eight fuel cycle facilities and 57 inspections at the two gaseous diffusion plants During FY 1998, the NRC continued its support of (GDPs). the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Tank Waste Remediation System Privatization During FY 1998, NRC renewed three SNM (TWRS-P) Project under a DOE-NRC licenses that included specific review of the Memorandum of Understanding, dated criticality safety function and 10 nuclear criticality January 29,1997. The purpose of the cooperative safety (NCS) related license or certificate agreement between the two agencies is to

l 32 '

i l

l establish the basis for the development and Territories. The remaining 30 States, known as execution of a comprehensive regulatory program Agreement States, have entered into agreements by DOE that is consistent with NRC's regulatory with the NRC under Section 274 of the Atomic approach for protecting workers, the general Energy Act, as amended, whereby the NRC public, and the environment. During this year, the relinquishes and the States assume regulatory NRC has been providing technical assistance and authority over the use of byproduct materials, regulatory perspective to the DOE Regulatory source materials, and other special nuclear Unit at the Hanford Site that is responsible for the material in quantities not capable of sustaining a TWRS-P project by assistingin the review of chain reaction.

DOE and DOE contractor documents involving . 1 the establishment of design criteria and design The NRC collects and reviews nuclear materials standards. NRC has an assigned site event information reported by NRC licensees and representative at Richland, Washington, and the Agreement States. NRC h,censees submit reports NRC staff at headquarters is also supporting this directly to the NRC regional or headquarters activity. offices. Agreement State beensees submit reports to the States, which, in turn, voluntarily transmit On April 22,1998, Louisiana Energy Services, LP. summary reports to the NRC under an informal (LES), formally withdrew its application for a information-sharing agreement. NRC maintains t license to construct and operate a gas centrifuge this information in the Nuclear Material Events I uranium enrichment plant near Homer, Database (NMED). In FY 1998, NRC received I Louisiana, after a 7-year effort and $34 million in 770 reports of events involving nuclear materials costs to LES. This withdrawal was made after the licensees that were required to be reported, as Commission affirmed in part, reversed in part, shown in Table 2.2. None of these events resulted and remanded for further proceedings, the Atomic in radiation-related deaths.

Safety Licensing Board's decision of May 1,1997, against LES on several environmental justice issues. See also " Adjudicatory Proceedings" in Chaper 1 of this report. Radiation Exposures and  !

Overexposures 1 i

On June 29,1998, USEC announced its decision j

to privatize through an initial public offering of All NRC licensees are required to monitor i securities. The U.S. Treasury Department employee exposure to radiation and radioactive approved the decision, and USEC was formally materials at levels sufficient to demonstrate privatized on July 28,1998. compliance with the occupational dose limits specified in 10 CFR Part 20. Licensees of power j reactors and licensees involved in industrial l radiography, the manufacture and distribution of l radioactive materials, fuel fabrication and '

ANALYSIS OF MATERIALS processing, low-level radioactive waste disposal, OPERATIONS ^"d '" dependent spent fuel storage, are required by 10 CFR 20.2206 to provide to the NRC annual reports of exposure data for individuals for whom personnel monitoring is required. These data for Nuclear Material Licensees 992 6yough 1997 (me latpst year for which data are available) are summarized in Tables 2.3 and Agreement States through 2.9.

The number of indhiduals overexposed in nuclear The NRC licenses the use of reactor-produced materials applications typically exceeds the isotopes, the milling of uranium, and the number overexposed at reactor sites. The l subsequent processing of both natural and nonreactor licensees of most concern for enriched uranium, as well as other special nuclear overexposures are radiographers. The special ,

material. The NRC directly regulates licensees in radiological problems of industrial radiography 20 States, the District of Columbia, and the U.S.

(

have been known for some time, and the NRC has l l

33 Table 2.2 Annual Occupational Exposure Data for Commercial Reactors 1973 and 1992 to 1997 Collective TEDE No. of Workers . Average Measurable (person-cSv with Measurable TEDE per Worker Year No. of Reactors [ rem]) TEDE (cSv [ rem])

1973 24 13, % 2 14,780 0.94 1992 114 29,298 94,317 0.31 1993 114 26,365 86,187 .0.31 1994 109 21,695 73,780 0.29 1995 109 21,674 70,986 0.31 1996 109 18,874 68,182 0.28

~

1997 109 17,136 68,188 0.25 Source: Radiation Exposure Information Reporting System, funded by the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. All reactor data are adjusted to account for multiple counting of transient re:ctor workers.

Note: TEDE means total effective dose equivalent.

Table 2.3 Occupational Exposure Data for NRC Ucensees in 1997 Average Collective Measurable No. of TEDE No. of Workers TEDE per Licensees (person- with Measurable Worker Category Reporting cSv [ rem]) TEDE (cSv [ rem])

Reactors 109 17,136 68,188 0.25 Industrial Radiography 143 1291 2,454 0.53 Menufacture &

Distribution 31 397 665 0.60 Fuel Fabrication

& Processing 8 076 3,319 0.29 Low-Level Waste Disposal 2 5 50 0.11 Independent Spent Fu:1 Storage 1 6 24 0.24 Source: Radiation Exposure Information Reporting System Note: TEDE means total effective dose equivalent.

34 .

o

. Table 2.4 Annual Occupational Overexposures for NRC Licensees CY 1992 to CY 1997 CY 1992 CY 1993 CY 1994 CY 1995 CY 1996 CY 1997 Reactors 5 0 1 0 1 1 Industrial

• Radiography 1 1 2 1 1 0 Medical Facilities 5 3 0 0 0 0 Manufacture &

Distribution 0 5 1 2 0 1 Other 3 3 0 0 0 0 Source: Radiation Exposure Information Reporting System Note: Occupational overexposures exclude exposures to the general public and to patients in excess of those prescribed for medical procedures.

Table 2.5 Annual Occupational Overexposure Rate at NRC Reactor and Radiography Ucensees 1992 to 1997 Reactors Radiography No. of No. of Workers Over. Workers Over- ,

with No. of exposures with .No. of exposures  !

Measurable Workers per 1,000 Measurable Workers per 1,000  ;

Year TEDE Overexposed Workers TEDE Overexposed Workers 1992 94,317 5 0.05 4,265 1 0.23 1993 86,187 0 0.00 3,007 1 0.33 1994 73,780 1 0.01 2,351 2 0.85 1995 70,986 0 0.00 2,465 1 0.41 1996 68,182 1 0.02 2,537 1 0.39 1997 68,188 1 0.02 2,454 0 0.00 Source: Radiation Exposure Information Reporting System Notei TEDE means total effective dose equivalent.

i

. 35 Table 2.6 Nuclear Materials Reportable Events Submitted to the NRC and to Agreement States in 1998 by Event 'Iype

'Iype of Event Number Misadministrations 36 Radiation overexposures 11 Loss of control oflicensed material 213 Leaking sources 18 Release of material 28 Transportation 37 Equipment problems 170 '

Fuel cycle facility problems 255 Test, research, and training reactors 2 Total 770 Note: Not all Agreement State reports had been received at the time this table was prepared.

Table 2.7 Annual Exposure Data for NRC Industrial Radiography Licensees 1992 to 1997 No. of Average Workers Collective Average Measurable No. of With TEDE Individual TEDE per No. of Monitored Measurable Person. TEDE-Year Worker- j Licensees Individuals TEDE cSv (rem) cSv (rem) cSv (rem) 1 1992 246 6703 4265 1864 0.28 0.44 1993 176 4721 3007 1596 0.34 0.53 I 1994 139 3230 2351 1415 0.44 0.60 j

1995 139 3530 2465 1338 0.38 0.54 l 1996 l 144 3631 2537 1385 0.38 0.55 I 1997 143 3436 2454 1291 0.38 0.53 Note: TEDE means total effective dose equivalent,

~ f

\

36 *

• Table 2.8 Annual Exposure Data for NRC Manufacturing and Distribution Licensees 1992 to 1997 No. of Average Workers Collective Average Measurable No. of With TEDE Individual TEDE per No. of Monitored Measurable Person. TEDE. Worker-Year Licensees Individuals TEDE cSv (rem) cSv (rem) cSv (rem) 1992 67 5210 2250 784 0.15 0.35 1993 58 4913 2254 680 0.14 0.30 1994 44 2941 1251 580 0.20 0.46 1995 36 2666 1222 595 0.22 0.49 1996 36 2628 1239 556 0.21 0.45 1997 31 1151 665 397 0.34 0.60 Note: TEDE means total effective dose equivalent.

Table 2.9 Annual Exposure Data for NRC Fuel Fabrication and Processing Licensees 1992 to 1997 No. of Average Workers Collective Average Measurable No. of With TEDE Individual TEDE per No. of Monitored Measurable Person. TEDE- Worker-Year Licensees Individuals TEDE cSv (rem) cSv (rem) cSv (rem) 1992 11 8439 5061 545 0.06 0.11 1993 8 9649 2611 339 0.04 0.13 1994 8 3596 2847 1147 0.32 0.40 1995 8 4106 2959 1217 0.30 0.41 l

1996 8 4369 3061 878 0.20 0.29 1997 10 11,214 3910 1006 0.09 0.26 Note: TEDE means total effective dose equivalent.

1 provided guidance, a training document, and a videotape to address those problems. Although Abnormal Occurrences the data for FY 1998 have not yet been compiled, In the " Report to Congress on Abnormal there have been no reports of deaths. Occurrences, Fiscal Year 1998" (NUREG-0090,

. 37 Vol. 21), NRC described five proposed abnormal amendment processes and to make these occurrences (AOs) that were reported by NRC processes more effective and efficient; nuclear materials licensees. One event involved a seismic risk at a GDP. Two events involved

• A final rule to provide criteria that allow multiple brachytherapy misadministrations, one qualifying nonprofit entities and involved a radiopharmaceutical nonbond-issuing business corporations to use misadministration, and one involved an exposure self-guarantee as an additional mechanism to a minor. The report also addresses one for financial assurance; .

proposed AO, a brachytherapy misadministration, at a facility licensed by an Agreement State.

• A final rule to exempt canisters holding vitrified waste containing plutonium from the packaging requirement for double containment (10 CFR Part 71);

RULEMAKING

• A final rule to eliminate the 5-year term for medical use Heensees and t senhe z w SUPPORTING NUCLEAR terms of up to 10 years, which are the same as MATERIALS SAFETY the license terms set for other material licensees; however, some licenses may be issued for shorter terms if warranted by the In early FY 1998, the NRC took steps to further circumstances oflicense applicants (10 CFR improve the effectiveness and efficiency ofits Part 35); and rulemaking activities by transferring the rulemaking activities related to materials from the * . A final rule to establish the same regulations Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research to the for distributing timepieces containing gaseous Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. tritium light source timepieces contamm,s g tntiumas is and paint nowtoused for the Rulemakings promulgated by the NRC in FY 1998 remove from the regulations the specific contributed in a significant way to NRC's success requirements for prototype testing (10 CFR in achieving its performance goals. These Part 32).

rul: makings provided burden relief to licensees and led to improvements in the regulatory framework.

Improvements in the Regulatory Framework Licensee Burden Reduction A draft proposed rule and associated draft Stand-ard Review Plan for 10 CFR Part 70," Domestic The following rulemakings were promulgated to Licensing of Special Nuclear Material," which reduce burden on licensees, which, in turn, addressed changes requested in petition allowed licensees to redirect their limited PRM-70-7 and the public comments received on resources to activities that have greater safety the petition, were developed by the staff and significance.

provided to the Commissioners. In preparing the o

draft proposed rule and the associated Standard A proposed rule to shorten or eliminate the Review Plan, the staff held several public meetings 30-day delay for the loading of spent reactor to solicit public comments on the subject.

fuel into an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Subsequently, the staff briefed the Commission Installation (ISFSI) following completion of and held a public meeting to discuss the proposed preoperational testing; rule changes. NRC worked on the following o initiatives to improve the regulatory framework:

A proposed rule (10 CFR Part 76) that applies to such items as certificate renewals

• A proposed mle to expand applicability of and appeals for GDPs to streamline the requirements dealing with completeness and

W l

38

• i accuracy ofinformation submitted to NRC to Rev.1," General Statement of Policy and include additional parties, such as holders of Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions."

an' applicants for cenificates of compliance j and eir contractors, subcontractors, and c ns ants () cPR Pan 72).

Escalated Enforce nt

• A propo d rule to correct a number of inconsiste 'es, clarify the applicability of Activities -

several secuqns, and modify the data for submittal of cask storage effluent reports All violations (except min violations) identified (10 CFR Part ). through inspections and ' vestigations are subject to civil enforcement a on and may also be f '

e ' A final rule to ext d the requirements of the subject to criminal pr ecution. After an apparent deliberate miscond rule to apply to the vi lation is identifie , the severity is evaluated m applicants for NRC heenses, cenificates of rder to determin the appropnate enforcement compliance, and recipr' 'ty (10 CFR Pan 30' S*""II "~ S***" evels range from LevelI for the 40,50,60,61,70, and 72). " SI S'8"*0C"" . lations, to Lent or those of more than nor concern. vMmor @iolation e A final rule to provide minor clarifications n t subject t formal enforcement action. The and to revise the monitoring 'teria (1) for NRC consi ers violations categorized at Severity LmlI H to be very sigmficant, as a,t does minors from 0.5mSv (0.05 rem) 1 mSv (0.1 rem)in a year and (2) for declare pregnant enf rce ent acn,ons mnsisung of muldple Smn hvel IU vi lations. Dun,ng FY 1998, the women from 0.5 mSv (0.05 rem) to mSv (0.1 ,

issued two Seventy Level I violations, five rem) during their pregnancies (10 C - Part 20)*

agen Sev ,ty Level II violations, and three multiple Se crity Level III actions to materials licensees.

e NRC uses three primary enforcement sanctions: notices of violation (NOVs), civil Penalties, and orden. h NR ENFORCEMENT AND penalties, orders, and NOVs, eludingm,C mnsiden civ Seventy INVESTIGATIVE ACTIONS vei I, II, and III violations, as escaiated eqforcement actions.

See also "New Procedures for License Transfp An NOV sets fortn one or more violations of a Applications"in Chapter 1. legallhinding requirement and normally requires i a resporise from the licensee describing the  ;

reasons fo the violation, the corrective steps taken or pl . ed, and the date when actions will Enforcement be compl ete. During FY 1998, the agency issued 57 escalated N s to materials licensees.

The Commission has developed an enforcement A civil penalty is a onetary fine considered for program and an Enforcement Pflicy to support Severity Level III vioktions and normally the NRC's overall safety mission m protectmg the assessed for Severity elI and II violations and public and the environment.ponsistent with that knowing and conscious vi ations of reporting purpose, enforcement action is used as a deterrent requirements of Section 2 of the Energy

. to emphasize the importance of compliance with Reorganization Act.Section 4 of the Atomic regulatory requirements /and to encourage Energy Act (AEA) provides fo nalties of up to prompt identification azid prompt, comprehensive $100,000 per violation per day; b that amount correction of violatio s. The Office of ' was adjusted by the Debt Collectio Improvement Enforcement (OE) ' responsible for managing Act of 1996 to $110,000. During FY 98,the the Commission'y nforcement program. The agency proposed 29 individual civil pc lties be NRC's enforceptent program is addressed in the imposed on materials licensees. Table 2. ()

agency's En arcement Policy, NUREG-1600, includes additional civil penalty informatig

. r:Y-:c-1999 15:19 W EEE 54.,3 3: N - .cs a 1 =

3g A final rule to provide minor clarifications violation is identified, the severity is evaluated in O

and to revise the monitoring criteria (1) for order to determine the appropriate enforcement sanction. Severity levels range from Level 1, for minors from 0.5mSv (0.05 rem) to 1 mSv (0.1 i

rem) in a year and (2) for declared pregnant the most significant violations, to Level IV, for

, I women from 0.5 mSv (0.05 rem) to 1 mSv (0.1 those of more than minor concern. Minor rem) during their pregnancies (10 CFR Part violations are not subject to formal enforcement l action. The NRC considers violations categorized l 20).

at Severity Level I and II to be very signi5 cant, as l it does enforcement actions consisting of multiple Severity Level III violations. During FY 1998, the agency issued two Severity Level I violations, five Severity Level II violations, and three multiple ENFORCEMENT AND Severity Levei ni actions to materials ticensees.

INVESTIGATIVE ACTIONS l

The NRC uses three primary enforcement See also "New Procedures for I,icense Transfer sanctions: notices of violation (NOVs), civil i Applications" in Chapter 1. penalties, and orders. The NRC considers civil )

penalties, orders, and NOVs, including Severity Level I, II, and III violations, as escalated enforcement actions.

Enforcement An NOV sets forth one or more violations of a legally binding requirement and normally requires The Commission has developed an enforcement a response from the licensee describing the program and an Enforcement Policy to support reasons for the violation, the corrective steps the NRC's overall safety mission in protecting the taken or planned, and the date when actions will public and the environment. Consistent with that be complete. During FY 1998, the agency issued

. purpose, enforcement action is used as a deterrent 57 escalated NOVs to materials licensees.

to emphasize the importance of compliance with

• regulatory requirements, and to encourage prompt identification and prompt, comprehensive correction of violations. The Office of .

A civ 1 penalty is a monetary fine considered for Enforcement (OE) is responsible for managing Severity Level III violations and nonnally the Commission s enforcement program. The assessed for Severity Level I and II violations and NRC s enforcement program is addressed in the knowing and conscious violations of reporting g agency s Enforcement Pohey, NUREG-1600, requirements of Section 206 of the Energy Rev.1, General Statement of Pohcy and Recrganization Act. Section 234 of the Atomic Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions.,, Energy Act (AEA) provides for penalties of up to

$100,000 per violation per day; but that amount was adjusted by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of1996 to S110,000. During FY 1998, the

• 8*"CY PmPosed 29 individual civil penalties be Escalated Enforcement imposed on materials beensees. Most licensees pay the civil penalty when it is proposed.

Activities However,in some cases, the agency imposes the civil penalty through the issuance of an order.

Table 2.10 includes additional civil penalty All violations (except minor violations) identified information. Note that a civil penalty may be through inspections and investigations are subject to civil enforcement action and may also be proposed in one fiscal year and paid or imposed in subject to criminal prosecution. After =_n nparent another fiscal year.

, m -;c-:999 15:Ic a: ::35 5% 5 E m :-  :. ce:c 39 Table 2.10 Civil Penalty Information orders to materials licensees. In addition, five civil penalty imposition orders were issued.

g 93 Number of Proposed 29 A predecisional enforcement conference is normally conducted with a licensee or an Civil Penalties individual before making an enforcement decision Amount of Proposed S270,600 if escalated enforcement action appears to be Civil Penalties warranted, and if the NRC concludes that it is Amount of Paid Civil 5330,350 necessary or the licensee or the individual Penalties requests it. During FY 1998, the agency conducted a total of 122 conferences for reactor and material Number of Imposed 5 licensees.

Civil Penalties Amount of Imposed $65,650 The NRC issues a press release with a proposed Civil Penalties civil penalty or order. All orders are published in the FederalRegister.

Additionalinformation on the NRC's In addition to NOVs and civil penalties, orders enforcement program and enforcement activities may be used to modify, suspend, or revoke is available in the OE's Fiscal Year 1998 Annual licenses. Orders may require additional corrective Report. This document is available in the public ections, such as removing specified individuals document room and on NRC's World Wide Web from licensed activities or requiring additional (WWW) site. The address for OE's Home Page is controls or outside audits. Persons adversely <http://www.nrc. gov /OE/>. This WWW site also affected by orders that modify, suspend, or revoke contains copies of significant enforcement actions a license, or that take other actions, may request a that the agency has issued arranged by reactor, hearing. During FY 1998, the agency issued seven materials, and individual actions.

l 1

O i

I

CHAPTER 3 NUCLEAR WASTE SAFETY The strategic goal for nuclear waste safety is to prevent adverse impacts ta the current and future public health and safety and the environment as a result of uranium recovery, facilities decommissioning, cleanup of contaminated sites, and disposal of radioactive wastes. In Fiscal Year (FY) 1998, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRC met the associated performance goal and had no radiation exp(osures) or releases cf radioactive material that are likely to occur now or in the future that will have significant adverse impacts on the health and safety of the public and the environment resulting from uranium recovery, facilities decommissioning, cleanup of contaminated sites, and disposal of r:dioactive wastes. The NRC's target for the FY 1999 performance goal to establish the regulatory framework for high-level waste (HLW)

' disposal, consistent with current national policy, is to issue a final rule after promulgation of the standard by the end of FY 1999 or early FY 2000.

SPENT FUEL The Spent Fuel Project Office (SFPO) in the NRC's Office of Nuclear M:terial Safety and Safeguards was created in April 1995, primarily to review the Department of Energy (DOE) design for a multipurpose canister (MPC) for the transportation, storage, and disposal of spent nuclear fuel. After the creation of SFPO, the MPC program was canceled. and DOE replaced its MPC program with a policy to rely on private-sector development of canisters for transportation and storage.

Thus,instead of the review of the technology for a single MPC, the NRC staff is now reviewing technologies for several canisters used for transportation and storage (dual-purpose canisters). Staff reviews of rpplications for dry cask storage licenses are increasing because prcctically all of the Nation's nuclear power plants are now seeking (or will seek) licenses for dry cask storage. As nuclear plant spent fuel pools reach capacity, the licensee's capability to offload a full core of fuel rods is r:duced.

In addition to reviewing technologies for dual purpose canisters, the staff is responsible for-o the licensing and certi5 cation of facilities and technologies associated with the safe storage and transportation of spent fuel from the Nation's nuclear utilities; o the certification of transportation packages for other nuclear materials;

42 *

• safety inspections of dry storage and transport The NRC is involved with DOE in various package licensees, certificate holders, licensing, certification, and inspection related applicants, designers, and fabricators; and activities. For example, the NRC's DOE-related licensing, certification, or inspection-related e the reviewof quality assurance (OA) projects include-programs for the fabrication and use of transportation packages.

• Fon St. Vrain ISFSI license transfer review; Thus far, the NRC has approved 13 designs for e Three Mile Island Unit 2 '(TMI-2) fuel debris spent fuel storage under the use of either a ISFSI heensmg review; general license or as part of a site-specific license, e and it has certified two cask designs for the Non-site-specific central interim storage transport of spent nuclear fuel. Figure 3.1 shows facility topical safety analysis report review *-

the locations of the currently operating ""d independent spent fuel storage installations e Dry Transfer System topical safety analysis (ISFSIs) and the spent fuel storage technologies report review.

associated with each facility, while Figure 3.2 shows the locations of the potential near-term During this fiscal year, the staff continued its ISFSI sites. In general, the SFPO staff maintains involvement with DOE in the return of foreign oversight ofits licensed and certified entities research reactor spent nuclear fuel, including through licensing reviews and safety inspections. transportation package certification, route approvals, and inspection of shipments.

The NRC received 36 applications for spent fuel storage and transportation package designs and To complement the licensing and certification facilities and completed 35 of these applications in reviews, NRC developed and implemented an FY 1998, including an ISFSI license for North inspection program to monitor the performance of j Anna. Separately, the staff completed its technical storage and transportation certificate holders and i review for the Holtec HI-STAR storage cask and licensees. During FY 1998, the staff monitored the  !

approved the MP-187 transportation package. industry's progress on resolving the problems of l The NRC also received 103 applications for cracks in the closure welds for the VSC-24 cask 1 transportation package designs for other design. Inspectors observed the demonstration hf I radioactive materials and completed the review a new nondestructive examination technique used and approval of 96 applications in FY 1998. The for assessing the condition of the VSC-24 cask staff also accomplished the following activities closure weld. Inspectors also observed the initial -

during FY 1998: implementation of an improved weld process on I the VSC-24 cask closure welds at the Arkansas e Issued dual purpose dry cask review Nuclear One, Point Beach, and Palisades power ,

schedules to all vendor applicants. These Pl ants. These observations, coupled with a review  !

technical reviews are either on schedule or of the capabilities of the new nondestructive j are being changed at the applicant's request. technique, ultir ately led to the lifting of the '

confirmatory action letters previously issued to e Continued to review the Trojan reactor vessel Sierra Nuclear (now BNFL Solutions) and the shipment application and issued the approval three power plants using the VSC-24 cask system package in October 1998 for the to allow resumption of fuel loading in the Commission's consideration, using risk-based VSC-24 casks. The NRC also continued to assess j information to support the package approval. industry responses to NRC Bulletin 97-02, '

" Puncture Testing of Shipping Packages Under

• Issued the scoping report for the 10 CFR Part 71." Inspectors noted that several environmental impact statement associated certificate holders experienced the same problems with the Private Fuel Storage, Limited as those discussed in the bulletin and that Liability Corporation, application for an appropriate corrective actions were being taken.

ISFSI located on the Skull Valley Band of During FY 1998, the staff developed guidance Goshute Indian Reservation in Tooele resulting in the issuance, in January 1999, of a County, Utah, on September 16,1998. generic communication to existing certificate

R N -

f

)

~

) ) ) ) ) ) ~) 9 -

8 51 1 (26( ( 9 ._

. 3(

P 1

( _2(

(' )

8

(

0 4

(

9 1

a P n P 7,

)3 e 24 s 24 y o P s 4 y r

1 s - a f f -

r r

1 3 7- 2- ) a s S 23 in s ( n i u u S S s 5(

l e e n C S VX

//

8 b S n d 4 2 B M A t M 2 o M M a 4 J a

a s O r r01 O s r

s ht 2 e O oo1 -- 2 R O n 2- f o

i C-i v H r 3- v H t t ss C3 - .

H H a C s a U l

a S o N l

a U aaC AN B. U U kr S a P V D N N T CCMNT H C N N N A V n o

i t

a n

n fo I

n

_l a n

h ) )

c 2( I a r S e 4 F B 2- S

=p I

t (

i n C s e

o S t P V i S

~

e N ' o g

a r

t _

S

\

h l e

e

- F -

t

' n e

p 4 S s

i r

r N g n

o i

t

~ a M

E r

- q- ~"

O r

e p

G 1 3

e r

u g

i F

t n

l a

P r r s e g . a e k

a k plu w s

a r s od r o o a -

e S C Co i

s C t r

n d eM e cla a

e e y r gnt le ic ed c k

L ns a o D a anmu r

lt r o r o eN e

g iceL c u at u zt a ficL if o aleSsisn s r o

r el r VcdA r u e oyo HStg t s

pa e aNtaahe r n t s eb r lusli e c egiah e e-it eu nm dntnct l oar e uu oa r s w s

d n)4 SGN e n

a ia = = =

MTVNNSW t

s u

) r 4 -

ls (7 V(2 AO#

) SNCCS P i s

I

. ( DTSAM N n ier 4 0

t S S V VNOH W M M o

ia - t r

D U E r N P T oV N G FM "

1 t .

e e a - p s -

e n k m t n

k w o n e o e k n a e t t m s

c Y

a R r o s i

t r

e h

e C B er e

s s

a e e u r h i

u h a Pz in k q e c c e a n s t

s a G c t

e s

i t

M ya u y e a n e

F S O P M H c s

s c

n u

n a

d e

s a

e c

jg-t k

c ,

1. it s

e o 4, - " S R -

, , I S

i B

g 5 - h ,

F S

I w

. e

- N, m _

1 r _

e l

T -

r-

~ a e

N l

a ne

& + )

i t

n e

d _ t o

s P

e r -

2 D

3

- e z_ r

__ u g

, i F

o t n

a l

P r r e e _

s g .a _

O k a k plr u w

s o a r o s a od Pr e

C Co

_ C s

n d t

S M e a e e y r e cla gnt le c

( iced s a D a anmu r e g

LceL n o ft atr o ur zt u eSsis rn o eN a r

L iic f

cL o if WlcdA s o yog t o

E el r r u e r H St s E

N pae S eb r laNtaahe usl le cegiah n tew e nm i

I o i eu t dntnct oar euu roa s s c SGN MTVNNSW t e

@ e e e s

u k = = = - - - - - -

fr l

e e t d S o dr ) SNCCS P s e

r f

u l o o n e 6O(# DTSAM N i

r r

C 2 P a n 2- b h c F O V- V M VNOHW M o

l N j o

I m n S n l o- U E w r M u a F a a-- N G O W T T H R P S P " _

r

, summmmmmmmmmmmmmmmer 45 holders. Finally, the inspection staff completed 18 The NRC conducted three pilot projects in FY inspections and 60 QA reviews of dry storage and 1998 for the following facilities:

transport licensees, applicants, designers, and vendors, a number of which resulted in significant 1.

inspection findings. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Annual exposure data for NRC's ISFSIlicensees 2. Radiochemical Engineering Development is shown in Table 3.1. See Chapter 2 of this report Center at.the Oak Ridge National Laboratory; and .

for additionalinformation about radiation exposure.

3. Receiving Basin for Offsite Fuel at the Savannah River Site.

PILOT PROGRAM FOR In general, NRC found that under the existing regulatory framework, NRC could resolve most of DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY the technical, policy, and regulatory issues that the NUCLEAR FACILITIES NRC sta# encountered and that precedent for resolving many of these issues was m existing NRC policy and practice. Each of the first three sites In FY 1998, the NRC and the DOEjointly could be licensed by NRC and continue to operate conducted a pilot program to provide DOE and with very few changes. Two of the three facilities NRC information for determining the desirability evaluated during the pilot project were cf NRC's regulatory oversight of DOE nuclear stand-alone facilities at a complex site, and NRC facilities and to support a decision on whether to determined that it would be impractical to license se:k legislation to authorize NRC's regulation of these individually without licensing the whole site DOE nuclear facilities. The pilot program was because of their dependence on the shared-site established to test regulatory concepts for at least infrastructure for many of the key elements of safe six DOE facilities over 2 years by evaluating the Operation. Additionally, safeguards was an issue at pilot facilities and their standards, requirements, these two facilities. The interfaces, relatedness, procedures, practices, and activities against the and associated risks among the safety, safeguards, standards that NRC believes would be appropriate and security programs should continue to be f:r each of these types of facilities. reviewed as part of the Pilot Program.

Tzbie 3.1 Annual Exposure Data for NRC Independent Spent Fuel Storage Licensees 1992 to 1997 No. of Average Workers Collective Average Measurable No. of With TEDE Individual TEDE per No. of Monitored Measurable Person. TEDE. Worker-Year Licensees Individuals TEDE cSv (rem) cSv (rem) cSv (rem) 1992 2 290 85 11 0.04 0.13 1993 2 135 52 14 0.10 0.26 1994 1 158 89 42 0.27 0.47 1995 1 104 49 51 0.49 1.04 1996 1 97 53 54 0.56 1.02 1997 1 55 24 6 0.11 0.24 Nots: TEDE means total effective dose equivalent.

l l

g .

HIGH-LEVEL WASTE staff during the development of the issue resolution process. In FY 1998, the staff l

f completed initial development of IRSRs for eight j The NRC's HLW regulatory activities are issues:

mandated by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA), the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments

1. Unsaturated and Saturated Flow under Act of 1987, and the Liergy Policy Act of 1992 Isothermal Conditions' (EnPA). The NWPA s xcifies a detailed approach 2. Thermal Effects on Flow,'

for the long-range undertaking of HLW disposal, giving the DOE operational responsibility and the 3. Evolution of the Near Field Environment, NRC regulatory responsibility for HLW disposal.

The Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act 4.' Structural Deformation and Seismicity of the directs DOE to characterize only one candidate Yucca Mountain Site, site, the Yucca Mountain site in the State of Nevada. Accordingly, NRC's activities are focused 5. Re sitory Design and Thermo-mechanical on Yucca Mountain. In the EnPA, Congress ects, directed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to issue final environmental 6. Container Life and Source Term' standards that are " based on and consistent" with 7. Igneous ~ Activity, and the 1995 findings and recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences. Once Snal EPA 8. Total System Performance Assessment standards are established, NRC must modify its (TSPA) and Integration.

technical requirements and criteria under Section 121(b) of the NWPA (i.e.,10 CFR Part 60) to be In addition to preparing the IRSRs in FY 1998, consistent with the new EPA standards. To issue the NRC staff's technical exchanges with DOE f5nal regulations within the short time allotted by contributed toissue resolution by-EnPA, NRC completed a strategy for a site-specific rulemaking (SECY-97-300) in

• Presenting the staff's preliminary analysis of

?arallel with the ongoing development of the DOE's TSPA VA methodologies and results IPA's new standards for Yucca Mountain. This to DOE and the Nuclear Waste Technical rulemaking will ensure that DOE will have the Review Board; necessary regulation for preparing its license

• Completing development of and preparing application for an HLW repository. Finally, a proposed rule,10 CFR Part 63, was prepared for user's manuals for NRC's Total Performance I' the Commission s approval (SECY-98-225). Assessment Codes 3.1 and 3.2. These codes The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste are used to P'rform KTI-level and system leve) performance sensitivity studies (ACNW) worked closely with the NRC staff to formulate this risk-informed site-specific rule for and will be used to support review of the VA the Yucca Mountain HLW repository. and evaluation of the b,eense application; and In FY 1998, the NRC continued its refocused

• Increased NRC monitoring of DOE's implementation ofits OA Program with four HLW program (1) to resolve, at the staff level, the performance-based observation audits and Key Technical Issues (KTIs) most important to director-level NRC/ DOE meetings. These repository performance and (2) to give DOE audits and meetings led to identification of a feedback before the publication ofits vi, ability major concern with implementation of DOE's assessment (VA) for the Yucca Mountam site. OA program. Subsequently, NRC agreed with Eventually, the KTIs will be used to develop the DOE on a corrective action plan.

Yucca Mountain Review Plan. Issue Resolution Status Reports ( IRSRs) are the primary Finally, for performance assessment, the NRC mechanism for documenting issue resolution and completed KTI-level and system-level sensitivity they include acceptance criteria that are the bases studies to assess the relative importance of for determining resolution at the stafflevel. The technical issues to performance. The results of ACNW provided technical insights to the NRC these studies will allow the staff to have a

~

. 47 quantitative, risk-informed basis with which to respectively. Consistent with its goals, the NRC prioritize issues, allocate resources, and improve continues to provide support to the Agreement the technical basis for review. States. During FY 1998, NRC activities in the LLW program werc limited to consultation with States, review of an Envirocare license application, and technical assistance to State LOW-LEVEL WASTE "8"'** 'Y'8'"d*5-Annual exposure data for NRC's i.LW licensees is Nuclear waste is a byproduct of the use of shownin Table 3.2.

r:dioactive materials. Low-level radioactive waste results from reactor operations and from medical, academic, industrial, and cher commercial uses, and this waste generally contains relatively limited concentrations of radioactivity. The Low Level REACTOR AND SITE Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980, amended in 1985, made States responsible for providing for DECOMMISSIONING the disposal of commercial low level waste (LLW) generated within their borders. The act The Decommissioning Program encompasses the encouraged States to enter into compacts that regulation of decontamination and the would allow several States to dispose of waste at a decommissioning of power reactor, fuel cycle entered into compacts, and several States are facility, and materials licensees. This program proceeding with plans to construct and operate includes the-regional disposal facility. Most of the States have new disposal facilities. Although some compact e development of associated regulation and disposal facilities have been planned, none has guidance; been opened with the exception of the Envirocare f:cility in Clive, Utah, which accepts only certain

• review of site characte:ization plans for categories of LLW. Regulatory responsibility for complex cases; special nuclear materials at the Barnwell and Hanford disposal sites was transferred to the o review and approval of decontamination and States of South Carolina and Washington, decommissioning plans; Table 3.2 Annual Exposure Data for NRC Low level Waste Disposal Licensees 1992 to 1997 No. of Average Workers Collective Average Measurable No. of With TEDE Indhidual TEDE per No. of Monitored Measurable Person. TEDE.

Year Worker-Licensees IndMduals TEDE cSv (rem) cSv (rem) cSv (rem) 1992 2 467 82 37 0.08 0.45 1993 2 432 76 21

^

0.05 0.27 I 1994 2 202 83 22 0.11 0.27 l 1995 2 212 56 8 0.04 0.15 1996 2 165 67 8 0.05 0.12 1997 2 185 50 5 0.03 0.11 Note: TEDE means total effective dose equivalent.

1 l

i e development of environmental assessments NRC also began a pilot study to facilitate  ;

and environmental impact statements decommissioning of materials sites by reducmg j associated with these reviews; the submittal and review processes. In March i 1998, NRC conducted a public workshop to e regulatory oversight of decommissioning explain this streamlining initiative. The purpose of actions; streamlining, in addition to accomplishing health  !

and safety review objectives, is to complete a e review of final survey reports; licensing decision in a time period that meets the licensee's needs. This process is intended to e conduct of selected confirmatory surveys; facilitate reviews and licensing decisions in accordance with schedules defined and agreed

• termination oflicenses; and upon by both the licensee and NRC. The March 1998 workshop was attended by NRC licensees

• development of policy to ensure efficient and and representatives of industry, the media, and consistent licensing actions. the NRC. Followmg this workshop, five stakeholders agreed to participate in the pilot In 1998, the NRC implemente.d a transition from study.

the Site Decommissioning Management Plan (SDMP) to a comprehensive decommissioning During FY 1998, NRC participated in a Citizen program. The major components of the Task Force (CTF). The CTF was formed by the comprehensive decommissioning program are New York State Energy Research and to- Development Administration with the participation of DOE to assist in developinga o maintain the SDMP site list to track progress preferred alternative for the completion of the at complex decommissioning sites; West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) and closure of the site. The CTF met two evenings per

• shift decommissioning issue resolution from month from January 1997 to June 1998 to learn the SDMP to the Agency Operating Plan; about the site and to discuss the various alternatives for completion of the WVDP and e develop a standard review plan and a closure of the site. NRC, as a cooperating agency regulatory guide to implement the license in the West Valley Environmental Impact termination rule; and Statement, participated in these meetings by making penodic presentations and by a video e phase out or revise existing SDMP guidance teleconference to discuss NRC's activities and documents to be consistent with the license responsibilities under the WVDP Act.

termination rule.

During FY 1998, NRC participated in public For material decommissioning, in FY 1998, meetings concerning decommissioning of nuclear consistent with the goal to remove three sites from power plant facilities and sites listed in the Site the SDMP each year, NRC succeeded in removing Decommissioning Management Plan (SDMP).

three sites from the SDMP: Cabot Corporation, These meetings included decommissioning of the Boyertown, Pennsylvania; Clevite, Cleveland, Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 1, Ohio; and Schott Glass Technologies, Duryea, Monroe, Michigan; the Peach Bottom Atomic Pennsylvania. For reactor decommissioning, the Power Station, Unit 1, Delta, Pennsylvania; and NRC issued draft guides for comment entitled the Babcock and Wilcox site, Parks Township,

" Regulatory Guide on the Format and Content of Pennsylvania. NRC attended a seminar by Nucicar Nuclear Reactor License Termination Plans" and Risk Management for Native Communities to a " Standard Review Plan (SRP) for Evaluating inform Native Americans of the current state of Nuclear Power Reactor License Termination decommissioning the Sequoyah Fuels Corporation Plans." These documents are being developed to (SFC) Fuel Cycle Facility in' Gore, Oklahoma.

ensure the quality and uniformity oflicensee NRC observed a public meeting at the SFC submittals and NRC reviews. The final regulatory. Facility in conjunction with site visits to the guide will be issued in 1999. Fansteel, Inc., plant in Muskogee, Oklahoma, and

} 49 the Kaiser Aluminum Specialty Products site in Tulsa, Oklahoma. are conservative in order to adequately protect public health and safety. Research is focused on improving supporting data, reducing uncertainties, In March 1998, NRC conducted a public workshop and providing more realistic models of natural '

t2 explain a streamlining initiative to facilitate processes that control the movement of decommissioning of materials sites by reducing radionuclices in the environment. This work is the submittal and review processes.The workshop applicable most effectively at complex sites with was attended by NRC licensees and repre- large radionuclide inventories where the simple I sentatives of industry, the media, and NRC.

apprcaches dictate extraordinary actions to Fallowing this workshop, five stakeholders agreed achieve compliance with regulatory standards. In to panicipate in the pilot study. 1998, the most significant accomplishments of the program included the activities listed below.

In support of developing guidance for i implementing the final rule on " Radiological j In FY 1998, the research was completed on the Criteria for License Termination," NRC organized analysis of single- and cross-hole pneumatic tests a 2-day public workshop on review of dose in unsaturated fractured rock at the Apache Leap modeling methods. The workshop presenters Research Site (reported in NUREG/CR-5559).

discussed dose modeling seeds for licensing This work, conducted by the University of rzviews, development of guidance related to dose Arizona, provided significant insights into the modeling and parameter selection, and the EPA Processes that will be important to assessing dose assessment model. Computer Performance of an HLW repository at Yucca demonstrations of the dose codes were also Mountain, Nevada. Field activities related to provided to the attendees, who included testing and evaluating ground water monitoring rzpresentatives of Agreement States, industry, strategies at the University of Arizona's Maricopa consultants, national laboratory and Federal site were also completed. Information, including cgencies, and interested members of the public. A the technical bases, was provided to the NRC report of the workshop proceedings (NUREG/ licensing staff, Agreement State regulators and CP-0163) was published, which outlines the their consultants, the U.S. Geological Survey, and presentations made during the workshop and U.S. Department of Energy scientists through two cddresses questions raised during the panel workshops. One workshop was a " hands-on" discussions. The workshop and the NUREG series technology transfer workshop, which was held at report are useful to participants because they were the Maricopa site, and the second workshop was a d: signed to provide technical bases and " lessons-learned" workshop held at NRC discussions to support development of the headquarters.

decommissioning guidance.

Work was completed on the interagency cooperative agreements with the Agricultural '

Research Service (U. S. Department of Agriculture), the U.S. Geological Survey, and the RESEARCH SUPPORTING "^ti "aiInstnute f Standards and wmoiogy (NIST). An mtergovernmental agreement with the NUCLEAR WASTE SAFETY Johns Hopkins University was also completed to combm, e and share resources and improve the efficiency of NRC research in speciSc areas.

Research in the area of nuclear waste safety is These activities have resulted in a significant focused on improving the regulatory framework increase in staff research activities as direct cnd reducing unnecessary burden on licensees in contract funds have decreased. The cooperative the area of assessing the performance of waste work with the Agricultural Research Service deals disposal and storage, contaminated site cleanup, with field testing of infiltration instrumentation uranium recovery operations, and methods and analyses for ground water movement decommissioning activities. Some current in the unsaturated zone. The cooperative research assessment techniques use overly simplistic or with the U.S. Geological Survey involves the conservative assumptions to account for application of mechanistic models of sorption uncertainties and to ensure that dose estimates processes to radionuclide transport in the 1

1 1

50 -

{

environment. In 1998, a uranium-contaminated See also " Licensee Burden Reduction"in Chapter field site with complex chemistry (Naturita, 2 for two rules related to waste.

Colorado) was selected by the NRC and the Survey for a demonstration project on the application of mechanistic models to performance assessment. The cooperative research with NIST ADVISORY COMMnTEE deals with the verification and testing of 4 SIGHT, a computer code developed by NIST. This code is ON NUCLEAR WASTE I intended to predict degradation of concrete l barriers over time. In 1998, staff from the NRC The NRC established the Advisory Committee on )

and NIST collected weathered samples of Nuclear Waste (ACNW) in 1988. The ACNW concrete, and laboratory analyses will be reports to and advises the NRC on nuclear waste performed to quantify degradation rates of disposal facilities as directed by the Commission; concrete under environmental conditions. The by " Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in intergovernmental agreement with the Johns Geologic Repositories" (10 CFR Part 60),

Hopkins University is to characterize and quantify " Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of the degradation rates for contaminated slags. The Radioactive Waste" (10 CFR Part 61), a proposed contemporary slags were collected from three pan, " Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes

. sites in Pennsylvania and ancient slags (200 to in a Proposed Geological Repository at Yucca ,

1500 years old) were collected from archeological Mountain, Nevada" (10 CFR Part 63), published sites in mining districts in the Czech Republic and in the FedemlRegister on February 22,1999 (64 the United Kingdom. FR 8639-8679), and other applicable regulations; and by legislative mandates such as the NWPA, The ,in house,, research on remediation of m. situ ~

. the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act, and the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act, leach uranium mines to determine " pore

, as amended. In performing its work, the volumes necessary to achieve cleanup standards committee will examine and report on those areas -

continued. of concern referred to it by the Commission and may undertake studies and activities on its own The investigation continued on (a) the initiative, as appropriate, radionuclide source terms and scaling factors from activated metals and ion-exchange resins obtained ACNW reports, other than those that may contain from nuclear power stations, (b) determining classified matenal, are made part of the pubh,c solubilities and leaching properties of record.The ACNW Web address is radionuclides in slags and soils as a function of <http://www.nrc. gov /acrsacnw>. Activities of the committee are conducted m, accordance with the chemical parameters (e.g., pH), (c) radionuclide-chelating complex behavior from decontaminated Federal Advisory Committee Act, which provides reactor component leachates. The staff completed for the public to attend and participate m field lysimeter studies involving field testing of committee meetmgs. The ACNW membership is cement and vinyl-ester waste form behavior and drawn from scientific and engmeenng disciphnes radionuclide releases to soils under actual and includes mdividuals expenenced in ,

ge sciences, risk assessment, radioactive waste environmental conditions and presented their finoings at the Waste Management '98 treatment, environmental engineering, and nuclear engineering.

Symposium. These findings from the research were published in a report (NUREG/CR-6569). The following repons were among the most important ACNW contributions during FY 1998:

The NRC developed a technology transfer an i 03/06/98 NRC High-Level Waste Issue-trairung course on a newly developed dose Resolution Process and Issue-Resolution assessment code, "MEPAS within FRAMES." The Status Reports course was held at the NRC headquarters computer training facility for EPA, DOE and 03/26/98 Risk-Informed, Performance-Based DOE's national laboratories, and .NRC licensing Regulation in Nuclear Waste l staff working on decommissioning reviews. Management

1 A

CHAPTER L INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR SAFETY SUPPORT The strategic goal for international nuclear safety support is to support U.S. nationalinterests in the safe and secure use of nuclear materials and in nuclear non-proliferation. In Fiscal Year (FY) 1998, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC met the associated performance goal to strengthen international nuclea)r safety and safeguards through leadership and participation in international nuclear policy formulation and exchange activities by providing assistance through international cgreements and to support nuclear non-proliferation interests through cxport and import licensing and other activities.

.s l

GENERIC INTERNATIONAL PARTICIPATION .

The NRC participates in a broad program ofinternational activities, based on statutory requirements, U.S. Government obligations and ,

commitments, international treaties and agreements, Executive Orders I and Presidential Decision Directives, and Commission policy and I j

guidance. These activities contribute to improving the safety and security cf NRC licensed facilities in the United States, enhancing U.S. national {

j security, supporting U.S. foreign policy objectives, and demonstrating U.S. reliability as a supplier of goods and services. In support of these )

effarts, NRC- j t

o licenses imports and exports of nuclear facilities, equipment, material, and related commodities, and provides technical support for U.S. nuclear nonproliferation activities; o maintains some 34 arrangements and letters of agreement signed

\

with counterpart foreign national regulatory organizations which ensure prompt notification of safety problems warranting action or '

I investigation, and provide for limited bilateral cooperation and information and personnel exchanges on nuclear safety, safeguards, waste management and radiological protection, as well as more than 60 joint international safety research agreements; {

j o contributes to the implementation of national nuclear policy by supporting Presidential summits, Vice Presidential commissions, and interagency nuclear safety and nonproliferation activities that are directed by the Executive Branch; o improves understanding by informing foreign and international organizations of NRC's most recent regulatory policies and practices through visits, information exchanges, and assignments of

1 54 o foreign regulatory personnel to the NRC and included export authorizations for a 10 MWt by obtaininginformation on foreign TRIGA Research Reactor to Thailand and reactor regulatory approaches and operational components to China via Canada. The NRC experience that helps to improve NRC's reviewed nine Department of Energy (DOE) domestic nuclear regulation; subsequent arrangement proposals, including a j request from Argentina to recover and use 1 e participates and takes a leadership role in U.S.-supplied unirradiated highly enriched I standing committees and senior advisory uranium for medical isotope production. Finally, groupsof theInternational AtomicEnergy NRC also reviewed 17 nuclear technology transfer Agency (IAEA) and the Organization for cases that DOE is considering for approval. A Economic Cooperation and Development's number of these requests concerned the transfer Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD/NEA of nuclear power reactor technologies and services issues such as safeguards application, ) toonChina to assist the civilian nuclear power I standards development, training, technical program in the wake of the implementation of the assistance, physical protection of nuclear U.S.-China Agreement for Cooperation in the materials, reactor safety research and Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy and the lifting of regulatory matters, radiation protection, risk sanctions on nuclear-related commerce.

assessment, waste management, and transportation; NRC participated in the March 1998 Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) Plenary in Scotland, e facilitates the imple~ mentation ofIAEA where working groups were established to initiate Safeguards Agreement with respect to those open-ended consultations on legal and technical licensee facilities selected by the IAEA for issues relating to intangible tecimology transfer, the implementation of safeguards measures and on implementation and policy issues. Latvia and provides support to the strengthening of was welcomed as a new NSG member. The group international safeguards and nonproliferation decided to hold a second Seminar on the Role of efforts; Export Controls in Nuclear Non-Proliferation in New York in the spring of 1999, before the e assists in the development ofintemational Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) legal instruments establishing the basis for a Preparatory Committee meeting.

global nuclear safety culture; In FY 1998, the Commission was consulted and e plays a leading role in the activities of the gave its formal views to the President and the International Nuclear Regulators Association Department of State (DOS) on proposed nuclear (INRA); and trade and cooperation agreements with Kazakhstan, Romania, and Ukraine.

e supports U.S. and international activities t concerning the Year 2000 computer problems. The NRC participates in a range of U.S. inter-agency and international nuclear non-proliferation activities. Perhaps most important are the contributions NRC makes toward aiding the l United States to meet its export control and EXPORT CONTROL AND technology transfer obligations under Article IV NON-PROLIFERATION f the Nudear Non Pmhferation Treaty,induding support for bilateral and IAEA- sponsored exchanges of equipment, materials, and scientific In FY 1998, the NRC completed 90 export license and technological information on the peaceful cases. Most of the new casework involved exports uses of nuclear energy. NRC staff also provided of low-enriched uranium to Japan, South Korea, technical assistance to U.S. policy makers in Taiwan, and Western Europe for use as fuel in connection with the U.S.-Russia agreement to nuclear power reactors. In addition, there were make permanent the cessation of plutonium two export authorizations to supply high-enriched production for nuclear weapons; the uranium target material to Canada for medical U.S.-Russia-1AEA Tnlateral Verification Initiative isotope production. Other notable actions on excess weapons material; the process of making

- 51 06/19/98 ACNW Comments on NRC's Review of High-Level Radioactive Waste the DOE Viability Assessment Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada 09/09/98 Issues and Recommendations Concerning the Near-Field Environment 07/29/98 Comments on NRC's Total System and the Performance of Engineered Sensitivity Studies for the Proposed Barriers at Yucca Mountain 1

i 1

4 l

55 i decisions of how to dispese of plutonium excess to e the Subgroup on IAEA Safeguards in the U.S. weapons program needs (e.g., safe storage, U.S., which is responsible for addressing long-term disposal or use as mixed oxide fuel in issues related to IAEA safeguards imple-commercial power plants); and the Fissile 3 Material Cutoff I'reaty. NRC is also represented mentation in the U.S. (this committee is I chaired by the NRC); and on the Nonproliferation Steering Committee, which coordinates and shapes U.S. e the Subgroup on Safeguards Technical Government-wide activities. Support, which is responsible for providing technical assistance to the IAEA through The NRC is also responsible for meeting obliga- providing personnel with needed technical tions under 53ilateral Agreements for Peaceful {

expertise and development of new safeguards 1 Nuclear CcLperation. In meeting these obliga- technologies.

tions, the NRC must respond to requests for 1

information on the imported or obligated nuclear The dominant issue currently before the inter-

{

materials submitted by the bilateral agreement agency safeguards committees is the development i partner. of systems and procedures for implementing the new Additional Protocol to the U.S.-IAEA Over two hundred facilities licensed by the NRC Safeguards Agreement. This protocol was signed have been placed on the list of U.S. Facilities in May 1998 and is being prepared for submittal to Eligible for IAEA Safeguards. From this list the the Senate for Advice and Consent. The protocol IAEA currently has selected six facilities: one for Will Provide additionallegal authority to the inspection and reporting of accounting data (BWX IAEA for implementing the safeguards Technologies downblending facility) and five for strengthening measures to assure the accuracy and 1

the reporting of accounting data (the five LEU c mpleteness or State declarations. The U.S.

fuel fabricators). During IAEA inspections of Provides the largest share of voluntary technical j licensee facilities the NRC accompanies the support and financial assistance to the IAEA of inspectors to assure that the inspector's requests any IAEA Member State.

are within the scope of the Safeguards Agreement and to facilitate the accesses and transfers of In support ofits program to assure that effective mformation necessaiy for the inspector t physical protection arrangements are provided for cccomplish the inspection. The NRC also ensures U.S.-supplied special nuclear materials in other i that the licensee mformation is properly countries, the U.S. Participates with other U.S.

l, submitted for electronic transfer to the IAEA's govela ent agencies m physical protection j Headquarters in Vienna, Austria. NRC staff inf rmawu exchange trips for the purpose of ,

discussmg and observing other physical protection {

routinely meet with representative from the IAEA ,

j to resolve problems associated with IAEA Programs. During FY 1998, bilateral physical ,

safeguards implementation. Protection visits were made to Denmark, Austria, Germany, Sxth Africa and the Netherlands. In The NRC Partici atesP on the following U.S. addition, representatives from Japan and government interagency committees for the Germany accompanied NRC staff w observe implementation and strengthening ofIAEA Physical Protection Performance Evaluation stfeguards: Reviews at U.S. facilities.

o To further support strengthening ofinternational the IAEA Steering C.nnmittee, which is a physica! orotection practices, NRC co-chaired senior management-level committee that IAEA's working group responsible for revising the establishes U.S. government policy on IAEA IAEA's physical protection guidat.cc document, issues; which serves as the international criteria for acceptable physical protection programs. An NRC o the Subcommittee on International staff member participated in IAEA's Safeguards and Monitoring,which is " International Physical Protection Advisory responsible for addressing and recommending Service" (IPPAS) mission to Poland, along with policy solutions to international safeguards representatives from the United Kingdom, issues; France, and Germany.

i International Nuclear Safety Reconstruction and Development EBRD/NSA).

In each of these groups, NRC prov(ides impo Activities technical advice and policy guidance in framing U.S. nuclear safety proposals and evaluating those NRC currently participates in 34 arrangements f ther governments, especially activities with foreign national regulatory authorities, which inv Ivmg reguh. tory assistance.

provide the framework for most of NRC's In FY 1998, the NSWG continued to work to bilateral cooperation and assistance activities.

Durmg FY 1998, NRC entered into a new effectively implement the Memorandum of classi5ed information exchange arrangement with Understanding (MOU) with Ukraine, which Canada, and renewed standmg general provides for closure by the year 2000 of the mformation exchange and cooperation four-unit Chornobyl nuclear power plant. A key arrangements with China, Greece, Indonesia, element in the MOU has been stabilization of the Israel, Japan and The Netherlands. NRC also deteriorating sarcophagus entombing Unit 4, with implements an on-the job traimng program for a goal to transform the sarcophagus to a safer and

. more environmentally stable condition. At a cost assignees from other countries, usually from their of $750 million and covering 22 integrated tasks, regulatory organizations, oper,atmg under the work under the Shelter Implementation Plan aegis of the bilateral information exchange (SIP) began in the fall of 199"' and is scheduled to arrangements. During FY 1998, eight people from be completed in 2005. A dedicated fund was China, France, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Spam and Switzerland participa:ed in the established at the EBRD to finance sarcophagus improvement activities. This fund, which is Program.

separate from the Nuclear Safety Account, solicits The NRC conducts confirmatory regulatory contributions from both public and private donors.

research in partnership with nuclear safety The Ukramian Nuclear Regulatory Authority agencies and institutes in more than 25 countries. (NRA) will play a key role m the realization of the Much of this activity is concentrated in four major SIP, most notably in the creation of critena to unPl ement shelterimprovements.

thermal /hydrauh)c code maintenance andsubject areas: (1 severe accident research; (

Since 1992, the G-24 NUSAC has coordinated assessment; (3) probabilistic risk assessment; and safety assistance programs worldwide for the (4) steam generator tube integrity. These mternational research agreements provide for countries of the former Soviet Union (FSU) and Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). In March shared use of facilities, joint funding 1998, NRC attended the G-24 NUSAC Plenary arrangements, prompt exchange of experimental Committee meeting. NRC has also been actively results, coordinated analyses, and other forms of involved in efforts to restructure the G-24 cooperation to yield confirmatory safety data of NUSAC coordination process, reflecting the mutual benefit m a timely and cost-effective manner. maturity and experience that has been gained since 1992.

The EBRD/NSA is a supplementary multilateral mechanism to address immediate operational Impleinentation of U.S. Policy safety and technical safety improvement measures at the east safe Soviet-design reactors not on Nuclear Assistance covered by bilateral programs. Admmistered by a steering body of representatives from the 15 donor NRC continued its active involvement in support countries, the NSA is coordinated with and of the three nuclear safety institutions that have assisted by the G-24 NUSAC, and is managed by emerged from the annual Group of Seven (G-7) the EBRD. In FY 1998, the NSA and the economic summits: the G-7 Nuclear Safety Government of Ukraine began implementation of Working Group (NSWG), the Group of the grant agreement signed in 1997 for Twenty four Nuclear Safety Coordination approximately $125 million in assistance to l r%chanism (G-24 NUSAC), arid the Nuclear support the Chornobyl plant closure initiative.

Lfety Account at the European Bank for Other NSA projects include $30 million for safety I

. 57 upgrades and improvements at the Bulgarian slowed in the latter part of the reporting period Kozloduy nuclear power plant; approximately $50 because of financial restrictions related to U.S.

million for safety upgrades and improvements and foreign policy concerns, NRC requirements, and to conduct a safety assessment at the Lithuanian fiscal limitations. In addition, serious economic Ignalina plant; and approximately 570 million for influences in these countries impede the ability of safety upgrades and improvements at the Russian the regulators to regulate-because of small Kola and Novovoronezh plants and to support budgets-and of the operators to comply-licensing of these activities by Gosatomnadzov because oflow revenues.

(GAN). Key to most of these projects is the strengthening of the national nuclear regulatory i cuthonties, m, which NRC has had a substantial NRC actively participates in the biannual role. NRC has also provided technical assistance meetings of the U.S./ Russian Joint Commission on Economic and Technological Cooperation, {

in other tilateral and multilateral EBRD/NSA I projects. which has established a policy framework for implementing nuclear nonproliferation and safety ,

activities. During the reporting period, NRC )

worked closely with its counterpart Russian regulatory authority, GAN, in such areas as Bilateral Cooperative and development of a regulatory training center and Assistance Activities an emergency response capability, and review of regulatory standards and criteria. of particular nuclear safety and nonproliferation significance is A maior focus of U.S. and G-7 international the continuing bilateral effort to convert Russia's nuclear policy is to enhance the safety of the three operating plutonium production reactors to nuclear prot, rams in the countries of the FSU and district electricity and heat uses, developing a CEE. The NRC safety assistance program is design that would not produce weapons-grade designed to aid the nuclear regulators in the FSU Plutonium. In support of formal U.S.-Russian and CEE to develop regulatory techniques Government agreements to begin implementation c::mmon in the West, and to establish regulatory Pf this amtiative, NRC and GAN announced the process independent of the user of nuclear i tialing of an implementing arrangement to technology. Of these countries, those with the enhance regulatory oversight of core conversion largest nuclear programs are Russia and Ukraine. activities. with the intent of ensunng that safety Under Presidential Decision Directive-41, the remain at the heart of the project. NRC and GAN NRC supports the nuclear regulators in Ukraine, will focus on such areas as the venfication of t Kazakhstan, and Russia in their efforts to design and accident analysis codes, quahty strengthen their national programs for nuclear assurance, design requirements for enticality, materials protection, control, and accounting. c ntrol systems, and probabilistic nsk analysis.

By the end of FY98, most of NRC's activities In FY 1998, NRC completed its Ath year of originally planned for these countries had been providing bilateral assidance in nuclear safety and completed. Virtually all of the equipment,in the safeguards to Russia and Ukraine, and its third form of computers, simulators, and year of providing nuclear safety and safeguards communications equipment, had been delivered.

assistance to Armenia and Kazakhstan. NRC has This more advanced infrastructure is facilitating focused its assistance on helping its regulatory the implementation of technology transfers and counterparts in such areas as developing their the management of growing regulatory basic nuclear legislation, enhancing analytical responsibilities. Measurable accomplishments analysis capabilities, enhancing emergency have been achieved in both countries for response and emergency preparedness implementing nuclear legislation, preparing capabilities, and developing inspection documents on which to base licensing decisions, procedures. Further, NRC has continued to constructing state-of the art training and provide technical assistance on developing systems emergency response facilities, and developing fire of nuclear materials protection to the regulatory safety standards and learning to perform complex bodies of countries of the former Soviet Union risk assessments. However, the program was possessing these materials.

58 -

l Supporting Commissioner Dieus's participation in In the fall of 1997 the Commission approved the the Joint Coordinating Committee for Radiation implementation of three nuclear safety projects Effects Research (JCCRER), including her visit to with the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board Russia in May 1998 for a JCCRER meeting, NRC (AERB) of India. In support of this decision, NRC conducts joint research in health effects of hosted a visit by AERB Chairman P. Rama Rao in radiation on the population affected by the March 1998, and Chairman Jackson in turn visited Chornobyl disaster; health effects of exposure on India in April 1998. These projects-in fire safety, workers in radiation zones; and information emergency response and preparedness, and design technologies in radiation effects. modifications-were to have commenced in May 1998, but were suspended as a result of the Indian The NRC has continued its extensive assistance Government's miclear detonations on May 11 and program to the countries of CEE, drawing on 13,1998, and the imposition of U.S. sanctions funds provided by the Agency for International legislation.

Development (AID). The NRC program is aimed Although the scheduled U.S.-South Africa at transferring to local regulators western safety Binational Commission meetings were canceled, pnneiples and NRC safety review and licensing methodology. The combined efforts of western owing to U.S. military actions taken against Iraq, ,

donor countries has brought about a noticeable NRC continued to implement its nuclear safety I merease in safety culture and awareness in the initiatives with the South African Department of Minerals and Energy and with the Council for CEE countries, to the point that many of them are Nuclear Safety. Other Commissioner travel now capable of nuclear safety assistance to other included Commissioner Diaz' visit to Mexico to CEE countries. The NRC also continued its close l

(

cooperation with the IAEA on a range of CEE address the Conference of Mexican Nuclear Society, and Chairman Jackson's visit to the Czech activities, including participation in IAEA- Republic to address a conference on Plant Life initiated Technical Cooperation Program review Management Extension, both of which included meetmgs to help monitor ongomg assistance activities and to assist in defining future discussions with national nuclear authorities and site visits.

)

assistance.

1 The NRC has traditionally maintained strong ties - -

with the countries of Western Europe and C00perat10H WIth Multilateral Canada, many with active and mature nuclear programs. NRC Chairman, Commissioner, and OrganjZatiOHS staff visits to Canada, France, Germany, Spr.in, and the United Kmgdom advanced knowledge of NRC works closelyin the area of nuclear safety i important new techmcal developments, both f f with the IAEA and the OECD/NEA. Through its operating facilities and new designs, and aided in participation in technical committee meetings, harmonization of regulatory approaches. advisory group meetings, the Advisory Commission on Safety Standards (ACSS), in which the NRC provides the sole U.S. l The Commission continues to place a high priority representative, and its attendant Advisory on safety cooperation with Pacific Rim countries. Committees, NRC participates in, and provides NRC conducts an active bilateral safety program active technical support for, a wide range of IAEA l with China, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea, nuclear safety-related activities. NRC also attends which was underscored by Commissioner and staff meetings of the IAEA's policy making bodies-the visits to Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan during Board of Governors, the Technical Assistance and the reporting period. Under the NRC-Korear. Cooperation Committee (TACC), the General Ministry of Science and Technology arrangement, Conference-serving as a principal lead on one Korean technical expert completed a matters related to nuclear safety. In this way, year-long on-the-job training assignment at NRC, NRC helps to determine the direction of future and one NRC staff member (supported by one technical assistance programs as well as provide NRC contractor) participated in an advisory input to IAEA budgetary matters. In FY 1998, mission to Korea on human factors engineering. NRC staff participated in nearly 50 adviserv

4 59 group, technical committee, and consultants General's Standing Advisory Group on Safeguards meetings in the areas of reactor safety, waste Implementation and the Chair to the international disposal, and radiation safety. NRC staff also Technical Coordinating Committee for the attended several planning meetings to help plan Program on Safeguards for the Final Disposal of nuclear safety-related Technical Cooperation (TC) Spent Fuel in Geologic Repositories. The standing projects for the IAEA 2000-2001 TC program. advisory group reviews critical technical and policy Because ofits ongoing relationship with the issues of current importance and makes l IAEA, NRC is also able to provide urgent, recommendations to the Director General and near-term support for unplanned nuclear safety through him to the Board of Governors. NRC staff issues that may arise. For example, NRC also further participated in the strengthening of IAEA provided key support to help the IAEA address safeguards through participation in IAEA advisory intergranular stress corrosion cracking in group, consultants and experts meetings and Soviet-designed RBMK reactors, a matter that safeguards technical seminais. l could impact closure schedules for plants such as Chornobylin Ukraine.

The NRC is actively involved in the OECD/NEA NRC also funds a nuclear safety attach 6 position budget formulation, and development ofits at the U.S. Mission to International Organizations Program of Work, and contributions to the OECD in Vienna, Austria. As the sole member of the Policies on sustamable development, by serving on U.S. Mission to focus on nuclear safety, the the U.S. delegation to the Steenng Commn, tee,  ;

member represents U.S. policy and technical participation m its Standing Technical Committees views on nuclear, radiation, and waste and Workmg Groups, and the Group of )

management issues to the IAEA Secretariat, and Government Experts on Third Party Liability. The programmatic and policy oversight to the U.S. NRC's research program is expanded through Government on the IAEA's nuclear safety cooperative mternational research in projects such Program. as the Halden Reactor Project, the Information System on Occupational Exposure (ISOE), the International Cooperative Program on the The NRC provides support for IAEA-sponsored Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities, and the int:rnational safeguards activities for deterring RASPLAV Project on reactor pressure vessel nuclear proliferation and for strengthening and accidents. Much of the NEA's technical implementing IAEA safeguards. Through cooperation exchange work is directly related to Cooperative Threat Reduction and Lisbon the NRC domestic nuclear safety priorities, Initiative program funding, NRC assists the Particularly operational safety, radiation regulatory authorities of Russia, Ukraine, and Protection, and radioactive waste. During the Kazakhstan to establish national regulatory reporting period Chairman Jackson was the guest l systems for materials control and accounting and speaker at the official dinner for the 40th l

physical protection. NRC staff contribute to the Anniversary Celebration of the OECD/NEA.

U.S. Program of Technical Assistance to IAEA Commissioner Rogers completed his appointment Safeguards, which provides the largest share of as a member of the High Level Advisory Group voluntary technical support of any IAEA member on the Future Role of the OECD's Nuclear energy stat:. In support of its review of physical Agency. The Group presented its report, " Nuclear protection arrangements for U.S.-controlled Energy in the OECD: Towards an Integrated i materials in other countries, the NRC participates Approach" to the OECD Council in January 1998.

jointly with other U S Government agencies in information exchange trips for the purpose of discussing national physical protection programs. A large share of the NEA's technical work is  !

During FY 1998, visits were made to Denmark, related to NRC domestic nuclear safety priorities, Austria, Germany, South Africa and The particularly operational safety. Cooperative Netherlands. The NRC also works closely with the international research on high priority safety areas IAEA to strengthen safeguards implementation. under the auspices of the NEA complement and In support of these activities, the NRC supplies expand NRC's research program in a cost the U.S. representative to the IAEA Director effective manner.

g .

{

Development ofInternational nuclear 5^fety regulation. These key elements were commumcated to INRA member national IsegalInstruments governments for reference in nuclear safety assistance and cooperation efforts. Further, a In FY 1998, NRC continued to support U.S. Paper on " Ensuring Nuclear Safety in an Government efforts to develop an international Increasmgly Competitive Electricity Sector,",

legal basis for a global nuclear safety culture, as along with the key elements list, were transmitted represented in the Convention on Nuclear Safety to the March 1998 Energy Ministerial in Moscow, (CNS); the Joint Convention on the Safety of and to the May 1998 Bumm, gham G-7 Summit.

Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Dun,ng this reporting period, INRA also Radioactive Waste Management (the Joint exchanged letters with the IAEA to provide for Convention); and the Convention on enhanced communication and possible future Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear e Peration.

Damage. NRC worked closely with DOS and DOE to seek Senate ratification of the CNS, and to complete the interagency review of both the Joint Convention and the Supplementary Compensation Convention so they can be sent to Year 2000 Activities the President to be forwarded to the Senate for its advice and consent to ratification. When the NRC has developed a Year 2000 Y2K)

United States becomes a CNS Contracting Party, contingency plan in coordination (with the U.S.

NRC will be the lead Federal agency in nuclear power industry; other Federal agencies, implementation activities related to U.S. such as the Federal Emergency Management obligations under the Convention, including the Agency; State governments, and international development of the U.S. National Report. When nuclear regulatory organizations. The draft plan the U.S. becomes a Contracting Party to the Joint includes provisions to collect and disseminate Convention, NRC will provide technical advice to information on Y2K-related events that occur in the DOE, which will be the lead Federal agency in countries in time zones ahead of the United States the Joint Convention's implementation activities, and to conduct an international Y2K contingency When the supplemental funding convention and plan exercise in October 1999, which will be the associated protocol to amend the Vienna closely coordinated with Canada and Mexico.

Convention on Liability are ratified, the U.S. will be able to participate in an international liability NRC is also actively promoting international regime in the event of a nuclear accident. awareness of the possible impact of Y2K computer problems on the safety of nuclear installations. During the 42nd General Conference, IAEA Member States adopted an International Nuclear NRC-drafted resolution on Y2K as it applies to I the safety of nuclear power plants, fuel cycle Re0ulators Association ,

facilities, and other enterprises using radioactive )

materials. The resolution urged Member States to In FY 1998, Chairman Jackson and the heads of submit information to the IAEA on activities the national regulatory bodies of Canada, France, underway to inventory and remediate Y2K Germany, Japan, Spain, Sweden, and the United problems at the nuclear facilities, and designated Kingdom met in January and July 1998 to the IAEA as the coordinator for disseminating exchange views on a broad range of regulatory information about Member State Y2K retivities.

policy issues. The Association continued their In addition, NRC identified a U.S. Cost-Free discussions of salient differences and common Expert to help the IAEA implement a Y2K features in national regulatory approaches and program related to the safety of nuclear power identified a set of fundamental elements in plants.

CHAPTER 5 COMMUNICATING WITH NRC STAKEHOLDERS -

1 Building and maintaining public trust is critical to carrying out the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Comtnission's (NRC's) mission. To be an effective steward for nuclear safety, the public, those we regulate, and other i stakeholders in the national and international community must have '

rzspect for and confidence in NRC's regulatory actions. NRC assigns a high priority to earning public trust and confidence through early identification of public concerns and through facilitating interaction with the public and participation by the public in regulatory decisions of substantial interest to NRC stakeholders. The " Citizen's Guide to U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Information" (NUREG/BR-0010, Rev.

3), published in December 1998, describes various types of NRC information and how to obtain it. This information may be ofinterest to all stakeholders.

PUBLIC INFORMATION The NRC continued its mission to protect public health and safety while providing full and fair access to our decisionmaking process to all who are interested. To foster greater understanding of and confidence in the agency's regulatory oversight of the nuclear power industry and the licensed users of radioactive material, the NRC is committed to providing complete, clear, and accurate information about our programs, policy d:cisions, and activities. This goal is accomplished primarily through news releases, pamphlets, fact sheets, and other published materials.

Much of this information is available electronically on the NRC World Wide Web (WWW) site <http://www.nrc. gov >. Additionally, NRC closely follows news coverage of the agency and responds to press and public inquiries in a timely, courteous, and professional manner. The ag:ncy also administers a cooperative program with schools to educate students and teachers about the agency's responsibilities.

In the spring of 1998, the staff presented the Commission with an ext:nsive report containing more than 40 recommendations aimed at improving the quality, clarity, and credibility of the agency's communications with all those interested in the safety oversight of nuclear power, and particularly with members of the general public. The Commission approved most of the recommendations, and the staffis currently implementing them. These initiatives include the-

62 .

e development of an audio /visuallibrary for understand and report on events at nuclear photographs to be used in briefings and facilities in their communities. )

publications; e review of training programs to incorporate .

communications techniques: Published Inforination e updating of the glossary on NRC's www page; and During FY 1998, NRC published a fact sheet on the accident at Three Mile Island and updated e development of a pubh. .c mvolvement and published reports and brochures targeted at handbook as a staff reference and traimng specific technical issues. These reports and tool. brochures included the " User's Guide to Physical Protection Documents Published by the NRC"

.The communications plan will assist the agency by (NUREG/BR-0250) in addition to the following, identifymg public concerns earh,er, providing which were published for comment:

clearer oral and written communications, allowing

.* Staff Re:ponses to Frequently Asked '

earher public mvolvement in NRC activities, responding more effectively to public concerns' Questions Concerning Decommissioning of and improvmg pubhc access to mformation. Nuclear Power Reactors (NUREG-1628) e Proposed Standard Technical Specifications In July, the Commission met with severalinvited stakeholders to discuss concerns about the NRC's f r Permanently Defueled Westinghouse regulatory program and to invite their comments Plants (NUREG-1625) on nuclear reactor and spent fuel programs, e specifically concermng m, spection and Draft Standard Review Plan for the Review of enforcement, use of performance mdicators and a Reclamation Plan for Mill Tailings Sites performance assessment, risk-informed Under Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailing:; ,

regulations, regulatory pohcies, and the timeliness Radiation Control Act (NUREG-1620)  !

of NRC processes. The stakeholder meeting was The NRC also continued to expand its information l positively received and the Commission will on the WWW site by providing plant status and l periodically continue these types of dialogues. event reports that NRC licensees submit. This I collection of reports is updated daily. A new section called "NRC's Changing Regulatory Environment" contains information on major Media Workshop external and internal events that have been shaping the agency in recent times. The NRC also In April, the NRC held a 2-day workshop for continues to offer current information on our reporters that covered current issues facing regulatory program, meluding press releases and nuclear utilities across tl'e Nation. At the speeches, reports of high pubh,c mterest on workshop, senior managers and staff specialists regulatory oversight of specific licensees, and spoke to more than a dozen reporters from all UPd ates on current information affecting the over the muntry about allegations pertaining to nuclear mdustry. The agency contmues to provide safety concerns, reactor and materials Press releases and speeches of senior officials decommissioning, regulation of medical facilities, electronically to about 1,000 subscribers the integrated nuclear power plant assessment w ridwide free of charge.

program, spent fuel storage, nuclear plant license

' renewal, and other current issues reporters may write about. Reporters took the opportunity t interview the NRC staff on particular issues of News Conferences interest and toured the NRC Operations Center.

The reporters expressed enthusiasm about the Chairman Jackson held a number of news workshop and said it should help them better conferences both at headquarters and at nuclear

. 63 plant sites around the country after visits to those facilities. She held a press conference and pubne School Volunteer ProEram me: ting to discuss Millstone (Connecticut) in F;bruary 1998 and held a press briefing at Three NRC employees continued their commitment to h:ld press co(nferences after her trips theirto YuccaMile IslandinPennsylvania)in Au commumties by volunteering area schools Mountain (Nevada) and Lawrence Livermore through the School Volunteer Program. This year, approximately 100 employees visited area schools She also held press co(nferences a)t St. nearLucieNational headquarters and theLaboratory regional officesCalifornia to in Jan (Florida) during her review of a major steam judge science fairs, tutor students, and participate generator outage (Figure 5.1). Press conferences in career days.

were held to discuss the pilot program for simulating NRC oversight of Department of NRC provided judges for the Montgomery Area Energy (DOE activities at Oak Ridge Science Fair in Gaithersburg, Maryland, and (Tennessee) in) March 1998 (Figure 5.2), invitedand ataward winners to explain their special Savannah River (South Carolina) in June 1998. winning projects before the Commission and other .

employees at headquarters.  !

Commissioner Diaz briefed the press at Catawba f NRC also hosted Montgomery County teachers (South Carolina) in February 1998 and at for a 1-day workshop at headquarters, focusing on  ;

Millstone in April 1998 (Figures 5.3,5.4, and 5.5). agency employees' careers and skills, '

fundamentals of radioactivity, and basic reactor operations.

Each of the NRC's four Regional Administrators conducted periodic news briefings during the year.

Sessions were held at the Salem plant in New Jersey, the D.C. Cook plant in Michigan, and the Quad Cities plant in Illinois. Other sessions were held in Stuart and Miami, Florida; Atlanta, Ge:rgia; and Erwin, Tennessee. A press COMMUNICATION WITH conference to discuss NRC assistance with DOE ,1,11E CONGRESS overflights searching for missing cesium-137 applicators was held in Greensboro, North Carolina (Figures 5.6 and 5.7), in March of 1998. The Office of Congressional Affairs is responsible Press conferences were held at Lynchburg, for developing, managing, and coordinating Virginia,in August 1998, following a special relations with the Congress, and this staffis the inspection of a new food and materialsirradiator Principal point of contact between the agency and complex, and following presentations of Congress. The office coordinates the appearances Systematic Assessments of Licensee Performance and testimony of all NRC officials at hearings, (SALPs) at Oconee and Summer (South monitors and tracks bills relevant to the NRC, Carolina), Watts Bar and Sequoyah (Tennessee), coordinates briefings for Members of Congress Browns Ferry (Georgia), Farley (Alabama), and and their staffs, keeps the Congress informed of Turkey Point (Florida). See also " Revisions to the current agency activities, and keeps the NRC Assessment and Oversight Process"in Chapter 1. apprised of congressional concems and interests.

During Fiscal Year (FY) 1998, NRC witnesses Decommissioning meetings were held regarding testified or submitted testimony at eight hearings the Big Rock Point and Fermi plants (Michigan), before congressional committees and Lacrosse (Wisconsin), and the Zion and Dresden subcommittees, as shown in Table 5.1. The plants (Illinois). A public meeting was held in Congressional Affairs staff attended and prepared Cleveland, Ohio, to discuss inspection findings summaries and reports for approximately 50 related to concerns about radioactive hearings and legislative markups (i.e., legislation contamination at Advanced Medical Systems,Inc. marked for revision) during the fiscal year.

64 u Table 5.1 Congressional Hearings at Which NRC Witnesses Testified or Submitted Testimony During FY 98 Date Committee Subject 03/20/98 Committee on Appropriations FY 99 NRC Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy & Water Development (House) Testimony Supplied for the Record 03/25/98 Committee on Commerce FY99 NRC Authorization Subcommittee on Energy & Power (House) 05/14/98 Committee on Science Millennium Short Circuit:

Subcommittee on Technology The Y2K Effect on Energy (House) Utilities 05/20/98 Committee on Commerce External Regulation of DOE Subcommittee on Energy & Power Facilities (House) 05/21/98 Committee on Science External Regulation of DOE Subcommittee on Energy.& Environment Facilities and Subcommittee on Basic Research (House) 06/12/98 Special Committee on the Y2K and the Power Grid .

Year 2000 Technology Problem (Senate) 07/30/98 Committee on Environment and Public Works NRC Oversight Hearing Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property, and Nuclear Safety (Senate) 09/03/98 Committee on Armed Services DOE's Low Level Waste i Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Disposal Practices (Senate)

STATE AND LOCAL The NRC continued to pursue cooperative activities with the States and their national GOVERNMENTS AND organizations in 1998. In addition to routine interaction with State and local government and AMERICAN INDIAN TRIBES Indian Tribe officials, NRC representatives participated in a number of State related events, including the activities of the National Association One of NRC's priorities is to maintain open lines of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, as they of communication and close liaison with L./e and relate to nuclear issues and spent fuel disposal local government officials and their organizational and storage. The NRC staff met with State and representatives, as well as with Native Americans local officials throughout the year to discuss the and organizations representing American Indian results of the SALPs of nuclear power plants and Tribes. These relationships are developed in an outreach activities related to emergency response effort to foster public confidence by fully planning. The NRC also maintained cognizance of addressing concerns and to promote increased the activities of other State-related organizations, understanding of issues related to NRC such as the National Governors' Association, the regulation, inspection, and oversight activities to Western Governors' Association, and the National protect public health and safety. Conference of State Legislatures.

. 65 1

Figure 5.1 Region II Adanimistrator Luis Reyes Briefs NRC Chainnaa Shirley Aan Jackrom During a Novem-ber 1997 Visit to SL Lucie Nuclear Power Plant Near Ft. Pierce, Florida. Florida Power and Light Company Was Changing Steam Generators is its Unit 1 Containment Buildag.

i l

I I

Figure 5.2 NRC OmcialJohn Austin (left) and a DOE Facilitator Respond to Questions From the Audience l

During a Public Meetlag at Oak Ridge (Tennessee) Associated Universities To Discuss a Pilot h1C l

Plan To Simuiste Regulation of DOE Activities at a DOE Radiochemistry Laboratory at Oak Ridge i i

l l

1 1

(p(, * ,

Figure 5.3 Senator Joseph LJeberman (Dessocrat from Comaecticut) Tears the Millstone Plaat With NRC Executive Director for Operations Joseph Callas in February 1998 l

l l

Figure SA Special Projects Omce Director William " Revers, a Unit 3 Om

• tor, and Chairman Shiriry Ana Jackson la the Control Room at Millstone Nuclear Power Plar an February 1998.

. 67 i

Figure 53 Commissioner Nils Diaz la the Control Room at Millstone Nuclear Power Plant la April 1998.

i k

Figure 5.6 ne NRC's Public Affairs Of5ce Arranged for News Reporters To laterview the Helicopter Pilot and Crew Who Would Perform Aerial Surveys Over Greensboro, North Carolina, in March 1998, To Search for Missing Cesium 137 Soerces that Disappeared From Greensboro's Moses Come l>

Hospital

]

c C *

• I l

l i

Figure 5.7 Region II Of5cial Charles Honey Points to Map Locations During the Aerial Surveys Over Greensboro, North Carolina.

The NRC also implements a policy allcwing State Minnesota, the Skull Valley Band of Goshute officials to observe or participate in NRC Indians and the Confederated Tribes of the inspections at reactors, in accordance with the Goshute Reservation in Utah, and the Cherokee statement on " Cooperation With States at Nation in Oklahoma, has provided for a number policy'ar Nucle Power Plants and Other Nuclear of government-to-government exchanges of Production or Utilization Facilities" (57 FR 6462). information related to NRC's regulatory authority In some cases, States may observe special in the areas of high- and low-level radioactive i inspections as well. The NRC policy statement on waste storage, disposal, emergency response, l Cooperation With States identifies the transportation, and reclamation.

governor-appointed State Liaison Officer (SLO) as the primary State contact for all requests involving observation of NRC inspections of plants I or facilities. The SLOs are also the NRC's primary point of contact with the States about all relevant COMMISSION MEETINGS  !

NRC decisions and actions. The NRC hosts a AND RELATED ACTIVITIES national SLO meeting every 3 years and regional SLO meetings are held on an as needed basis in The NRC Commissioners meet to discuss agency I the off years.

business in the Conference Room of the NRC Headquarters building located at One White Flint The NRC maintains communications with those Nonh,11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.

American Indian Tribes and their national Members of the public are welcome to attend and organizations potentially affected by or otherwise observe most Commission meetings. However, a interested in NRC regulatory activities. Tribal Commission meeting may be closed to members interest in nuclear-related activities, including of the public if it is convened to deal with one or those of the Navajo Nation in New Mexico, the more of certain subjects specified m the Prairie Island Dakota Indian Community in Government in the Sunshine Act. Specifically, the

. 69 Sunshine Act allows the closing of meetings distributed via e mail over the Internet system.

involving classified documents,information The schedule includes the time, place, and subject deemed confidential by statute, trade secrets, matter of the meeting; states whether it is an open investigations, adjudicatory matters, internal or closed meeting; and gives the name and personnel matters, matters involving personal telephone number of an official designated to privacy, or similar information. Members of the respond to requests for information about the public attend open Commission sessions as meeting.

observers, but they may not actively participate .

unless specifically requested to do so by the Commission. During FY 1998, the Commission held 72 meetings that were open to pubhc Commission DeciSionmaking observance. Of particular note, the Commission Documents h21d an open public meeting on July 17,1998, to m:et with a selected group of stakeholders rzpresentmg the nuclear m, dustry, public interest The primary decisionmaking tool of the collegial groups, and informed individuals, as well as the Commission is the written issue paper submitted NRC staff, to conduct a dialogue on the NRC's by the staff, commonly called a "SECY paper."

nuclear reactor and spent fuel regulatory Policy, rulemaking, and adjudicatory matters, as programs. The Commission discussed stakeholder well as general information, are provided to the c:ncerns about the NRC and its regulatory Commission for consideration in SECY papers.

programs and potential short- and long term As a general policy, all SECY papers will be actions to address those concerns. A copy of the released to the public unless they contain specific, transcript of tlus meeting may be found in the limited types ofinformation (adjudicatory, PDR or on the NRC WWW site <http://www. enforcement or investigatory, lawyer-client or nrc. gov /NRC/ COMMISSION / TRANSCRIPTS / legal work product, classified or pro,prietary, or mdex.html>. personal privacy) that the Commission has specifically agreed should be withheld. Along with the SECY paper, the Commission also releases Copies of viewgraphs and the principal staff the " staff requirements memorandum" (SRM) papers to be considered at open meetings are and the " Commission voting record" (CVR) normally made available at the entrance to the associated with the paper. The SRM includes a Conference Room before the meeting begins. At concise statement of the Commission's decision the conclusion of each open meeting, a transcript on the recommendation of the SECY paper and a of the meetingis placed in the public document clear statement of any additional requirements or room (PDR) for inspection and copying, along tasks to be performed by the staff. The CVR with any papers made available to the public at contains a clear indication of the individual votes the meeting. A copy of the transcript is also made of the Commissioners, a copy of each available in electronic form on the WWW site. In Commissioner's vote sheet, and a comment addition, the Commission makes available msolution section indicating the extent to which videotapes of open Commission meetings for differing views,if any, were expressed, and how reviewing and copying in the PDR. they were accommodated, resolved, and reflected in the final decision. SECY papers, SRMs, and In all cases, the Commission attempts to provide CVRs are available through the NRC's PDR or advance notice of each meeting at least I week may be downloaded from the NRC WWW site before it is held. To provide its stakeholders with < http://www.nrc. gov /NRC/COM MISSION /

additional advance information about its meeting SECYS/index.html>. Dunng FY 1998, the dates and topics, the Commission publishes a Commission released 254 papers to the pubh,c.

weekly schedule in the FedemlRegister and posts the schedule to the NRC Web site <http://

www.nrc. gov /SECY/smj/ schedule.htm >. The schedule for Commission meetings and votmg sessions are regularly announced on a recorded Commission HiStoU ProEram telephone message (301-415-1292). Copies of Through the Commission History Program, the advance schedules are posted in the PDR and also origins and evolution of NRC regulatory policies I

70 .

, j l

are explored and set forth in their historical which licensees' plants or facilities are located.

context. Research on the evolution of these The Commission also publishes Commission and policies is drawn from- ASLBP orders in the " Nuclear Regulatory Commission Issuances" (NUREG-07S0), a case e the archives of a number of Government law publication available to the public through agencies; Federal and State and local law libraries and some general public libraries. Certain decisions of the e personalinterviews; and Commission are posted on the NRC WWW site.

During FY 1998, parties to adjudicatory the personal papers of former Government proceedirgs were allowed by the Commission to officials and others involved in regulatory utilize e-mail as a method of filing pleadings and issues.

other documents with the Commission. The Office of the Secretary established an e-mail address for The History Office is currently conducting this purpose: <hearingdocket@nrc. gov >.

research for the third volume of a detailed, However, when required by rule or order, signed scholarly history of nuclear regulation. The agency paper copies must also be sent to the Secretary. In historian, J. Samuel Walker, recently published an the future, all cam file documents will be available essay on the NRC in A Historical Guide to the U.S.

to the public through the Commission's document Govemment, ed. George T. Kurian (New York:

management system or by posting on NRC's Oxford University Press,1998). "A Short History WWW site. See "Agencywide Documents Access of Nuclear Regulation,1946-1990" (NUREG/ and Management System"in Chapter 6 of this BR-0175 ,is available by contacting the Governme)nt Printing Office (GPO), or byreport.

sending an e-mail request to <jsw@nrc. gov > or by ,

' 2 "MW'J'2". ADVISORY COMMrrfEES The NRC engages the expertise and experience of Proceedings and Litigation * *ide 5e8 ment of the Public through the service of certam members of the pubhc on the Commission's standing advisory committees and The Secretary of the Commission manages the on its ad hoc committees. Members of NRC -

official NRC adjudicatory dockets for the committees are drawn from a broad cross-section Commission. The adjudicatory dockets contain the of the scientific and technical communities, as well filings of all parties to the Commission's licensing as from State and local governmental and enforcement proceedings that are initiated by organizations, the National Congress of American a party's request for a hearing or petition to Indians, and private citizens. The committees intervene. The hearing docket also contains arovide advice and recommendations to NRC on a transcripts of the hearings held in each case, the arge range ofissues affecting NRC policies and exhibits, and all orders and decisions issued in l programs.  !

such proceedings by the Commission or its Atomic Safety and Licensing Boards (ASLBs). The During FY 1998, the NRC had four Chartered Secretary also serves orders of the Commission Advisory Committees: the Advisory Committee on and the ASLBs on the parties to proceedings and Reactor Safeguards (ACRS), the Advisory certifies docket indexes to the United States Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW), the Courts in agency litigation. See " Adjudicatory Advisory Committee on the Uses of Isotopes, and Proceedings"in Chapter 1. the Licensing Support Network Advisory Review Panel. In FY 1998, the committees held a total of Currently, filings in Commission adjudications are 68 meetings and issued 48 reports to the available to the public by ordering them on-line or Commission on a variety of subjects. The reports by telephone or by visiting the Commission's proved to be very helpful to the Commission in PDR. Case documents are also available in local formulating its decisions on issues involving public document rooms usually established in reactor safety and regulatory processes, nuclear community or university libraries in the areas in isotope usage, nuclear waste disposal, and revision l

J

l

. l

[ 71 l of the Commission's regulations for the conduct of committees meet in public sessions at future hearings on a high-level radioactive waste headquarters locations and in venues throughout facility. A complete summary of the activities of the United States. Notices of advisory committee the NRC's Committees for 1998 can be found in meetings are published in the FedemlRegister and the NRC's Annual Report on Advisory in NRC press announcements. Notices of meeting Committees filed with the General Services dates and topics are also posted on NRC's WWW Administration (GSA) at <http://policyworks. gov / site <http://www.nre. gov /NRC/PUBLIC/

crg/ main /mc/index-r.htm>. Detailed meeting meet.html> and at the PDR. Transcripts or schedules, transcripts, and copies of reports for minutes of meetings are also available for th; ACRS and the ACNW (the two committees inspection and copying at the PDR. Persons that meet on a regularly scheduled basis) can be interested in committee meetings or the activities I

' found on the NRC's WWW site <http:// of a particular committee may write to the NRC www.nre. gov /ACRSACNW/>. Advisory Committee Management Officer, Office of the Secretary, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001, In accordance with the requirements of the call 301-415-1968, or send an e-mail to F;deral Advisory Committee Act, NRC advisory <alb@nrc. gov >.

i I

Pg h CHAPTER 6 SUPPORT SERVICES Several U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRC) organizations

- provide support services to the program area s(taffs who are executing their regulatory mission activities. The senior manager for two of these offices serves on NRC's Executive Council wim the Executive Director for Operations: the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) and the Chief Information Officer (CIO). This chapter describes major support 1998 in the areas of personnel and activities achieved training, security in and and facilities, Fiscal in t Year (FY) he management and dissemination cfinformation.

i OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO)is responsible for the NRC's overall planning and financial management.

The Chief Financial Officers Act The ChiefFinancial Officen Acr requires that an agency CFO oversee all financial management activities relating to the programs and operations cf the agency, which includes establishing financial management policies and requirements; monitoring operation of agency financial management systems; monitoring financial execution of the agency's budget; and developing an annual financial statement that is auditable.

The NRC has produced an annual financial statement each year since FY 1992 and has received an unquahfied audit opinion on every statement beginning with FY 1994. FY 1998 was the fifth year that the NRC achieved an unqualified opinion. Of the 24 agencies that have CFOs, the NRC was one of ten agencies to achieve an unquahfied opinion on its FY 1997 Financial Statements.

The NRC's goals and strategies for improving financial management are consistent with the goals and strategies for implementing Government-wide financial management and the priority initiatives discussed in the 1998 Federal Financial Management Status Report issued jointly by the United States CFOs Council and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). To ensure the integrity of the financial information reported to NRC stakeholders, the NRC has adopted the accounting standards r: commended by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board and cpproved by OMB.

74 .

l Government Performance and audited snancial statement, program performance results, and the Chairman s statement on Results Act management controis, agency snanciai management systems, and final actions on Of5cc f the Inspector General audit recommendations.

The Government Performance and Results Act requires Federal agencies to develop and submit strategic and performance plans that focus agency planning and activities around the achievement of goals and desired outcomes. Agency performance Improving Financial is measured toward the achievement of these Management goals in terms of performance outcomes. This act requires each Federal agency to develop a The OCFO has continued a process ofiterative triennial strategic plan, an annual performance improvements to financial management, including plan, and an annual accountability report. financial systems, processes, reporting, and training.

The OCFO coordinated preparation of the NRC's first Strategic Plan, which covered FY 1997 Financial Systems. The OCFO,in collaboration through FY 2002. This plan describes the agency's with the OCIO,is implementing an agency-wide long-term program goals and strateg:es and is integrated resource management system based on a strategic assessment and the (STARFIRE), which provides for the automation re-baselining of NR.C's programs that the NRC and integration of systems critical to the support initiated in September 1995. The NRC developed of financial management, which in turn supports direction-setting issue papers and provided them the programs of the agency. The overarching goal to NRC's stakeholders for comment. Fir.1 is to eliminate multiple, ancillary financial i Commission policy decisions were made after tracking systems within the agency by establishing consideration of stakeholder comments. The NRC a single source of financial management data that sought the advice and consultation of OMB and its are commonly available to all managers. The Congressional oversight committees on the draft benefits inherent in the implementation of NRC FY 1997-2002 Strategic Plan. The Snal STARFIRE are more than financial. The system Plan was submitted to Congress in September Will Provide NRC with the tools required to meet 1997. NRC's first performance plan was for FY growing demands for faster and inexpensive 1999; it was submitted to Congress in February management information.

1998. The Performance Plan sets annual goals hat are STARFIRE will comprise the following financial e ot e ge cy a egic P n systems: general ledger, budget formulation, funds performance indicators are used to measure or control, travel, cost accounting, and fee billing.

assess the relevant output, service levels, and core Snanaal system will include accounts outcomes related to the agency's performance Payable and accounts receivable / collection goals. Of the 24 agencies who have CFOs, the APPli cations. Mixed systems will include Congressional staff ranked NRC sixth in the Procurernent, payroll / personnel, labor cost quality and completeness of its " Strategic Plan" distribution, performance measurement, and and ranked its " Performance Plan" fourth. The Property reportmg.

NRC is working to improve its next strategic plan. Managing Receivables. Since FY 1991, the NRC The OCFO incorporated the NRC's second has been required by the Omnibus Budget annual Performance Plan with its FY 2000 Budget Reconciliation Act to collect 100 percent ofits that was recently submitted to the Congress. budget less funds appropriated from the Nuclear

.. Waste Fund through fees charged to its licensees.

For the past 4 years, the NRC has participated in a The NRC has met this requirement by annually pilot project, along with other Federal agencies, to collecting an average of 98 percent of the budget streamline financial management reporting by in fees.

consolidating performance-based reporting into a single accountability report. The NRC's FY 1998 Delinquent Debt. The OCFO has steadily Accountability Report contains the agency's improved the collection of receivables and

75 reduced the amount of delinquent debt owed to financial management systems. For FY 1998, the NRC. As of September 30,1994, the delinquent agency's assessment disclosed no material debt owed to NRC was $16.5 million. As of weaknesses in the NRC's programs or September 30,1998, delinquent debt owed to administrative activities. Management did identify NRC has been reduced approximately 90 percent managerial cost accounting as a significant to $2.1 million. weakness pursuant to the Federal Manager's Financial Integrity Act and as a substantial Prompt Payment. On-time payments subject to noncompliance with the Federal Fimmcial the Prompt Payment Act have increased steadily Management Improvement Act. A corrective from 82 percent in FY 1994 to 96 percent in FY action plan is being developed to resolve this 1998. Indicative of this performance, the amount deficiency.

cfinterest penalties incurred have decreased from

$15,000 in FY 1994 to $6,100 in FY 1998.

Electronic Payments. The percentage of employees paid via electrome funds transfer OFFICE OF THE CHIEF (EFT) has mereased from 96 percent in FY 1994 to 99 percent in FY 1998. The percentage of INFORMATION OFFICER vendor payments made via EFT has increased from approximately 32 percent in FY 1994 to 85 The Chief Information Officer manages, in percent in FY 1998. More emphasis will continue accordance with Federallaws and regulations, the on electronic pannents to vendors with the technology to create information and to passage of the Debt Collection improvement Act, disseminate NRC's information to appropriate

,ag;,gge,'

and the President's Electronic Commerce initi:tive.

Financial Performance Reporting. Financial performance reporting is accomplished via the Year 2000 at the NRC 4 monthly " Budget Execution Report," which will The NRC has an active Year 2000 (Y2K) program contmue to be issued to the agency's Executive Council and agency financial managers. The to address software, hardware, embedded chip, report, designed to allow agency financial and regulatory issues associated with the Y2K managers to routmely consider financial computer problem. The OMB developed a implications m agency discussions and decisions, strategy and established guidelines and milestones measures the agency and program office financial to be followed by all Federal agencies. The major performance against established goals and targets. milestones comprise five distinct program phases:

Financial Training. The OCFO, in conjunction l with the Office of Human Resources, developed a 2. Assessment; l four-part seminar on financial management and  !

administrative control of funds for all NRC 3. Renovation; manrgers and supervisors, allowance financial

4. Validation; and managers, and funds certifying offi::ials.

Approximately 250 staff received this training in 5. Implementation.

1998. I Internal Program. During FY 1998, NRC was Management Control Program. A management deeply involved in remediating its computer  !

control program is organized within the context of systems and embedded-chip systems that have the National Performance Review and the most Y2K problems, accomplishing tasks associated recent revision to OMB Circular No. A-123, with the previously mentioned phases. As of the

" Management Accountability and Control." Each end of FY 1998, NRC has renovated, validated, ye:r, an annual statement to the President and and implemented 50 percent ofits mission-critical Congress is prepared that reports the agency's systems,75 percent of it business-essential evaluation of its management control and systems, and 39 percent ofits non-critical systems.

76

• t Additionally, the staff has assessed all areas of the determine their progress in addressing the Y2K agency that have the potential to exchange data problem as it relates to their products. All of the with other Federal, State and local governments, vendors have responded, been contacted by and with the international and commercial telephone, or had their Internet site accessed to entities. Three systems were identified that determine status. Responses and research indicate exchange data with NRC. Two of these systems that 94 percent of our telecommunications exchange data with one source. One system inventory is Y2K-compliant or is not affected by exchanges data with six sources. Y2K issues. A small number of these vendors t (6%) have been identi6ed as non-compliant and Discussions with NRC data erchange partners will be retired or replaced. We have also l l

reveal that two exchanges are already contacted our telecommunications service '

Y2K-compliant and that five exchanges do not providers to determine their plans to achieve Y2K require NRC to make any changes. The final data compliance. All of our service providers have exchange is contained in one of NRC's responded that they are compliant or will be mission-critical systems. This system is on compliant by mid-1999.

schedule for implementation in March 1998.

Finally,in the area of business continuity and We have analyzed and identined where embedded contingency planning, NRC has an established chip systems exist at the NRC. Forward date Program that develops, maintains, and updates the testing of some embedded chip systems is agency's business continuity plans, in accordance problematic since access is limited to embedded with Federal Guidance, including with OMB chip system control programs. As a result, both Circular A-130, Appendix III,"Secruity of industry and NRC rely on manufacturers' Federal Automated Information Resources." The certification to establish compliance and, where objective of this program is to ensure that possible and appropriate, in-house testing to appropriate business continuity plans are put in confirm compliance. Pl ace for all its general purpose systems and major applications, which include the mission-critical In the area of microcomputers and laser printers, applications identified under the Y2K program.

we have successfully tested our hardware with The process of developing the plans has several available testing software to determine steps:

compliance. NRC has a program underway to replace all microcomputers that have Conduct Business Impact Analysis and Risk non-compliant chips by December 1998. Assessment In the area oflocal- and wide-area network

• Develop Security Plan computer components, one of our mission-critical . Test Security Plan '

systems bemg replaced covers all of the infrastructure for these components. This

• Certify and Accredit the System mission-critical system is now 76 percent complete.

• Develop Disaster / Business Continuity Plan All agency building systems were assessed. We

• Train personnel and test the Disaster /

determined that there are four building system Busmess Continmty Plan.

categories that could have Y2K issues:

environmental, fire protection, security access control and alarms, and elevator. Building system OCIO uses contractor resources, obtained vendors for these systems were contacted, and we through GS#s multiple award contract for received written responses from them. We have Computer Security Services, to assist with our determined that continued safe operation of work in this area, including the conduct of systems in these four categories will not be facilitated risk assessments and development of affected by the Y2K date rollover. plans.

NRC sent letters to its various telecommuni- NRC's business contiriuity plans cover a wide cations quipment vendors nation-wide in order to range of possible events from routine software and

a 77 hardware problems to major natural disasters. .

adding new areas to the toolbar at the bottom One such event would be a software failure of the page: Commission Information, What's st:mming from an undetected Y2K problem. NRC New, Doing Business with NRC, Contacting has tried to ensure that contingency plans for its NRC, Site Disclaimer, and Viewers and mission-critical systems contain elements that Plugins; specifically address failures arising from the Y2K problem.

• responding to all e mail inquiries from the public and the NRC staff each day, updating Compared to large, complex applications dealing the telephone directory monthly, updating with millions of records and complex real-time ~ NRC meetings open to the public weekly, processes, NRC mission-critical systems are posting NRC's Weekly Information Reports relatively simple and deal with a volume of regularly, posting notices of Commission information that is small enough to manage by meetings, and revising NRC organizational manual means, if necessary, should automation be charts as needed; temporarily unavailable. Our contingency plans are commensurate with the nature of our

• Posting and maintaining the following mission-critical systems. We are confident that collections (over 9,300 files total):

NRC's plans are sufficient to address Y2Kissues. .

1. i mformation on Commission activities: over j NRC's seven mission-critical systems suppon 510 Commissica meeting transcripts (for all Pubhc meetings since 1991),340 Commission

, j three core functions. One system supports the interchange ofinformation agency-wide and is Papers and staff requirements memoranda, integral to all agen:y operations. Three and related documents, with both interrelated systems support our response chronological and topic hyperlinked indices. I capability in the event of a nuclear emergency.

The remam, mg three systems support the tracking

2. all generic communications to NRC licensees and mspection of nuclear materials. These three issued since 1971: over 2,700 files with annual l groups of systems are mdependent of each other hyperlinked indices for administrative letters, l cnd have no complex mterrelationships with any bulletins, circulars, generic letters, and l other systems except for dependencies on the U.S. information notices.

telecommunications infrastructure. 3. all final NRC Regulatory Guides approved by .

the NRC's Office of Nuclear Regulatory l Research for online display, which initially (

included 42 guides, a main index containing l World Wide Web Site background information on the guides; and links to indexes of the 10 divisions into which Durin8 Y F 1998, the agency continued to expand the guides are categorized; and 10 division the m. formation and improve its useability for both mdexes, each contaimng the number, title, the pubhc and the staff on its Web site <http:// and release dr.te of every draft or final guide www.nrc. gov > by- in that division. i 1

4. the complete text of Title 10 of the Code of redesigning the NRC Home Page to add Fedeml Regulations (over 3,100 HTML files, information titled Radiation Protection, 50 graphic images, and dozens of hyperlinked Public Participation & School Programs, and indices), which includes all changes to the Reference Library; regulations announced in the FedemlRegister ,

+ (FR) to date. This collection is updated as incorporating the information previously final rules are noticed in the FR and is available at the Fedworld Web site, which had been maintained for NRC by the National therefore the triost current version of NRC's regulations in an easy-to-access location.

Technical Information Service for an anmtal cost of $176,000. The agency also improved 5. the complete text of NRC Inspection Manual access to this information by restructuring the (IM) (over 1,800 files and hyperlinked indices by topic; indices), which contains guidance to NRC

78 -

inspectors about their activities at commercial whether prepared by the staff or contractors for nuclear power plants licensed by the NRC. the staff; and for ensuring that they are printed in The online collection includes all changes to accordance with the regulations of the Joint the IM announced by change notice. This Committee en Printing. In FY 1998, the OCIO collection is therefore the most current issued 283 publications (60 % of these were version of the IM in an easy-to-access written by the staff), many of which are cited in location. t . Some of them are posted to the NRC's

6. the complete text of NRC Part 21 Reports (over 800 files and four hyperlinked indices),

which NRCreceives fromitslicenseeswhen a licensed facility, activity, or basic Agencywide Documents Access component fails to comply with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or other and Management System NRC regulations, as described in Part 21 of Title 10 of the Code ofFedemlRegulations. Effective management ofinformation is critical to The online collection includes all reports NRC's performing its mission. Much of this received by NRC and is therefore the most information is in the form of documents. The current version of the Part 21 reports in an Commission's policies, decisions, and bases for easy-to-access location. regulatory action depends on these documents.

Today, the NRC operates in a predominamly

7. Numerous technical reports about nuclear paper-based environment with an aging, power reactors and other licensed activities, microfiche-based, legacy document-indexing including NUREG-series publications about system of limited functionality to support its such diverse topics as standards for operator ' needs. To take advantage of current technology licensing exammations, in-service testing, and better accommodate the information needs of guidance to matrials licensees, and the the licensees, the public, and the staff, the NRC is comprehensive "1997 Information Digest." developing and implementing a modern, fully functional document management capability Other information concerning reactors includes an called ADAMS (Agencywide Documents Access infonnation notice about Strontium-90 eye and Management System). The system will be applicators, individual plant examination data, composed of off-the-shelf software.

geospatial site locations, a video about a spent fuel cask gas burn at Point Beach, and an Office of ADAMS will be an enterprise system in which the Inspector General's report titled "NRC Needs NRC documents will be captured in electronic Comprehensive Plan To Resolve Regulatory form and stored electronically in a central Issues." repository, thus ensuring the integrity and completeness of the agency's document collection.

On the Agency's internal Web site, the staff began It will provide functionality to support electronic posting Yellow and Weekly Announcements, concurrence and signatures, version control, and which will save the Agency 3400 reams of paper electronic distribution. ADAMS will allow the and $103,500 annually. staff to complete full-text searches and view electronic images of documents at their workstations. It will allow the public to access publicly available documents through the Internet NUREG-Series Publications at the NRC's Web site, using a standard Web browser.

The NRC has a formal report series that Agencywide deployment of ADAMS is scheduled I comprises brochures; conference proceedings; for FY 1999. The Cost-Benefit Risk Analysis books; and reports, including those prepared for conducted for the project in FY 1997 indicates international agreements. The OCIO staff edits that ADAMS has the potential for significant many of these reports prepared by the NRC staff; improvements in staff productivity and efficiency is responsible for the review of all manuscripts, and will thus support its mission-related functions.

i, T

79 Through implementation of ADAMS, the NRC should achieve a substantial increase in the level Recruitment cf NRC staff, licensee, and public satisfaction with the accuracy and availability of a key category of During this report period, the NRC continued to agency information the information in agency provide recruitment services and oversight for a documents. variety of professional, technical, and administrative positions. The NRC recniits new employees by conducting recruitment trips to educational institutions, participatirig in job fairs, and advertising in various news media (e.g.,

, newspapers, trade journals, the Internet).

Capital Planning and Ap >1ications received by the agency are managed anc controlled through an automated applicant InVeSimen& Control tracking system. During FY 1998, the NRC hired 116 permanent full-time employees and lost 176 permanent full-time employees, the latter figure The Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 requires each representing an attrition rate of 6.11 percent.

F deral agency head to design and implement a C pital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC)

Process for evaluating information technology (IT) projects. During FY 1998, NRC used lessons Awards and Recognition Irrned in working with a preliminary CPIC process during FY 1997 to finalize its CPIC process. The new process streamlmes During FY 1998, the NRC continued to recognize employees for their performance. At the Annual documentation requirements but ensures rigorous Awards Ceremony, the NRC honored numerous m nagerial review. Only those proj,ects that {

employees through the presentation of awards cler,rly demonstrate support for NRC s mission, such as the Distinguished Service Award, the positive return on m, vestment, and compatibility Meritorious Service Award, Performance Awards, with NRC s information technology architecture Special Act Awards, High Quality Increases, are approved for submission to the NRC's budget formulation process. The CPIC process r

Distinguished and Me'itorious Rank Awards for Senior Executive Se: > ice members, and awards for additionally provides for morutoring the progress ,

Senior Level System employees, i of ongomg projects and for evaluating the success of completed projects.

Benefits The NRC provided advice and guidance to OFFICE OF HUMAN numerous employees in many areas, including retirement, life and health insurance, the Thrift RESOURCES Savings Pian, leave programs, and voluntary early retirement. Appropriate open seasons were conducted, retirement training was offered, and I individual counseling was provided to ensure that employees understood the various benefits NRC Staff-Years Expended afforded Federal employees.

During FY 1998, the NRC expended a total of 2,949 staff-years m, carrym, g out its mission. Total Labor Relations sttff-years included permanent full-time staff, permanent part time staff, temporary employees, On October 1,1993, the President signed and consultants. Exe.cutive Order 12871 dealing with

)

E

80

• Labor-Management Partnerships in the Federal training facility using televideo training Government. The order calls for a more equipment.

cooperative and less confrontational relationship between labor and management. In accordance The Individualized Learning Center provided with this order, the agency, together with the employees with the latest audio / video, j union, established an agency partnership computer-based, and multimedia training in I committee as well as office and regional project management, communication, partnership committees to foster a cooperative management ano supervision, computer skills, relationship and to identify problems, and propose secretarial skills, and employee assistance.

solutions. The agency has also provided training in interest-based bargaining, helping parties work The agency also sponsored a number of programs I together to achieve partnership objectives. to help employees develop the skills necessary to meet the NRC's future clerical, administrative, technical, and management needs. Developmental programs sponsored by the agency included-Training and Development

• the Certified Professional Secretaries Program;

)

During FY 1998, the Of6ce of Human Resources the Administrative Skills Enhancement provided about 1,000 onsite instructor-led training Pmgram; sessions and about 400 self-study sessions in information technology, management and the Computer Science Development j supervision, equal employment opportunity, Program;

}

regulatory skills, communication skills, acquisition, financial management, and special the Women's Executive Leadership Program; disciplines. The NRC also sponsored a wide variety of traimng and developmental programs

• the Graduate Fellowship Program; conducted at colleges and universities, at other Government agencies, and in the private sector.

• the Intern Program; and The agency continued to offer Program and the Congressional Fellowship Program.

Resource Management training to managers and supeivisors to provide them with tools and techniques for improving their managerial and ,

supervisory skills and to communicate concepts of Employee Assistance, Health, performance measurement and results that can be applied to their day-to-day work activities. The ggd pjggggg proETHInS NRC developed a new acquisition curriculum to teach Acquisition for Project Managers and for During FY 1998, the Employee Assistance Supervisors of Project Managers. Comprising 11 Program (EAP) continued to give individual workshops, this curriculum focuses on counseling and referral assistance to NRC procurement reforms resulting from the Federal personnel with such problems as chemical Acquisition Streamlining Act and the Federal dependency, job stress, chronic illness, sexual Acquisition Reform Act. The curriculum for harassment, and family issues, as well as guidance computer applications continued to be a and training to supervisors. The agency continued significant part of the NRC's training program. to make EAP services readily accessible to Instruction sessions in ACCESS database software regional and field personnel through contractors.

and Wordperfect 6.1 were heavily attended. The EAP provided advice and guidance to Hands-on training was provided to prepare supervisors on dealing with troubled employees.

employees for the new Wm' dows NT upgrade with Education and awareness programs on a variety of Corel 8 software. Hands-on computer training was topics, including stress and smoking cessation, provided to remote sites from the Headquarters were presented.

. 81 1

Hummer Associates continued to operate the respective organizations. Implementation of a health center. The staff, consisting of a full time managmg diversity process continued.

physician, two full time nurses, and a medical receptionist, provided a variety of services to The managing diversity process is a long-term cmp oyees. Services included limited treatment initiative designed to create and maintain an for on-the-job illness and injury and referral to environment in which every employee is valued communit and works cooperatively to do his or her best glaucoma,y resources; screening for diabetes,high work. During blood pressure, FY 1998, and breast three sessions of the and prostate cancer; immunizations; and health Managing Diversity Leadership Seminars were awareness programs on topics such'as coronary held for Headquarters managers and supervisors artery disease, breast cancer, prostate cancer, and one session in each of the agency's four Lyme disease, and skin cancer. Employee visits to regional offices. To enhance information sharing the health center average 30 per day. The EAP, with the small business community, the office th2 health center, and the fitness centerjointly initiated a series of small business forums that are sponsored a health fair and continued publishing a conducted quarterly and installed a toll-free, quarterly newsletter to provide information on 24-hour voice mail system with fax-on-demand health, fitness, substance abuse, and mental health capability.

issues. -

During FY 1998, the NRC continued offering a . .

variety of health and 6tness programs in its fitness Affirmative Action Program {

center located in Two White Flint North. About 500 NRC employees participated in these The Affirmative Action Program,whichincludes programs offered by professionally trained activities of the Federal Women's Program, exercise physiologists and health professionals. develops and provides oversight of the Agency's affirmative action employment initiatives related to the utilization of women, minorities, and persons with disabilities. It also includes review and assessment of program and regional offices' OFFICE OF SMALL EEO accomplishments. Oversight is provided to the Agency's seven Equal Employment BUSINESS AND CIVIL Opportunity (EEO) Advisory Comnuttees, whose IIIGII'I'S cooperative goal is to identify and provide recommendations on EEO related issues that impact equal opportunities for all employees.

During FY 1998, the office staff developed the agency's Affirmative Employment Plan and issued Equal Employment it to all employees. This plan provides a strategic Opportunity Program framework for identifying and pursuing EEO goals and supports the agency's managmg diversity initiative. It also includes four guiding principles The Office of Small Business and Civil Rights for achieving a standard of EEO excellence. These administers the agency's Affirmative Action, Civil guiding principles have been included in the Rights, and Small Business Programs, and the agency's operating plan and, thus, will be used as Historically Black Colleges and Universities the bases for the reporting of offices' EEO (HBCU) initiative. During FY 1998, major accomplishments. Establishing and implementing ectivities included biannual briefings to the an Affirmative Employment Plan meets the Commission that presented status reports on the guidelines set forth by the Equal Employment Agency'.s Equal Employment Opportumty (EEO) Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Program. Each briefing included a presentation by two Office Directors or Regional Administrators The NRC completed a review of the EEO who provided information on the implementation Advisory Committees' recommendations that of EEO programs and policies within each of their focused on three areas of primary concern: (1) i

s2 - .

4 perception of preselection; (2) monitoring filed and two settlement agreements were programs that are in place to facilitate equal executed.

employment opportunity; and (3) suppon for implementing a managing diversity process. In During this fiscal year, the staff developed a new response to these recommendations, the Agency EEO Counseling Administrative Procedures implemented several initiatives as follows: (1) Manual, which includes standard operating adopted a merit staffing checklist to assist procedures and resource material to assist the managers in thinking through the merit selection counselors in better performing their duties and process in the early stages so that selection criteria ensure greater consistency in their handling of are not unduly restrictive and candidates are able EEO activities. A summary of complaint activity to compete fairly and equitably; (2) reinstituted during this period is as follows:

the Agency's Intern Program to facilitate diversity in the Agency's workforce; (3) and implemented a managing diversity process. STATUS OF COMPIAINTS HSCAL YEAR 1998 The agency's Facilitated Mentoring Program TOTAL COMPLAINTS PENDING 7 AT BEGINNING OF FISCALYEAR continued to provide opportunities for employees to improve their skills, productivity, and potential Filed during fiscal year 12 for advancement. Through this program, a more Remands 2 i experienced employee is paired with an employee Closed during fiscalyear 9 who requests career development guidance. Three . .

Mentoring Program Orientation sessions were Disnussals 3 conducted for new panicipants to provide Settlements 3 guidance on their roles, responsibilities, and Final agency decision of no j

parameters in the mentoring process. The number discrimination 3 -

of participants remains at 40 mentors and 60 TOTAL COMPLAINTS PENDING AT 12 mentees.

END OF FISCALYEAR Civil Rights Program Small Business Program The Civil Rights Program provides for the The agency continued its commitment to small prompt, ' air and impanial processing of businesses, Section 8(a) businesses, small discri.dation complaints filed against the Agency disadvantaged businesses, and small women-under applicable Federal statutues. Collectively, wned businesses. At the beginning of FY 1998, these statutes prohibit discrimination on the basis the " Forecast of Procurement, Opportunities" was of race, color, national origin, gender, reprisal for Published that identified anticipated procurement panicipation in or opposition to activity protected actions for that fiscal year. This mformation was by civil rights statutes, age (individuals age 40 and made available on the NRC's World Wide Web over), mental or physical disabilities. In addition, (WWW) site at <http://www.ntc. gov >. During FY 1 by Executive Order, sexual orientation was added 1998, the staff initiated Quarterly Small Busmess j as a basis for discrimination. Fonims to provide opportunities for representatives of small busmess concerns to discuss their capabilities and skills with agency During FY 1998, the agency's EEO Counseling project managers. A toll-free,24-hour voice mail Program continued to serve as an effective means system that has fax-on-demand capability was of addressing employee concerns. Our cadre of 29 installed that provides recorded information on EEO Counselors (18 at headquaners and 11 in doing business with the NRC and a schedule of the agency's four regional offices) handled 18 Small Business Forums. The system can be informal inquiries. Twelve formal complaints were accessed by calling 1-800-903-SBCR.

I 83 Historically Black Colleges ocCUPi ed the building. It also provides work space enhancements, such as supplemental air cnd Universities conditioning in iarse conference rooms. revised office configurations, and new traffic patterns to The principal goals of the Historically Black facilitate movement of employees and visitors.

Colleges and Umversities (HBCUs) Research Improvements of physical security include Panicipation Program are to enhance academic .

additional alarms, card readers, and guard patrol studies m scence, mathematics, and engmeering, verification stations. During FY 1998, work was and to increase the number of scientists, completed on floors 5,11,12, and 16. This project engmeers, and related professionals. The program will be completed in FY 2000.

introduces HBCU faculty, graduate, and undergraduate students to the research and The NRC successfully coordinated installation of a development activities of the NRC. The program major upgrade of the air condittomng system m provides participants a mechanism by which to 1) the One White Flint North building to replace become familiar with research areas and the ne(eds deterioratmg pipes and install new air exchange cf the NRC;(2 participate in scientific, equipment to improve air quality.

cngineering, an)d other research and development activities related to NRC's mission; and (3) gain experience that enhances participants' academic and scientific credentials. The agency's HBCU Program is conducted through a cooperative cgreement with the Oak Ridge Institute for Security Program Science and Education.

During FY 1998, the agency awarded $227,862 in As a part of the Depanment of Justice's (DOJ's) research grants to 16 faculty members and 8 facilities security upgrades following the students at 15 HBCUs, thus exceeding its goal of Oklahoma City bombing, NRC replaced the existing black and white closed-circuit television

$200,000 by 14 percent. Participants were assigned to NRC technical assistance projects at 10 cameras with a new generation of higher different DOE laboratories where a majority of resolution color cameras and installed additional this work is performed. Assignments were made cameras throughout the White Flint North l

on the basis of the participants' major fields of complex. The Headquarters Central Alarm l study and interests. Six participants were assigned Station underwent extensive upgrades, including to on-campus research projects, and three of these the installation of equipment for monitoring the projects are scheduled for completion in FY 1999. new cameras. This installation was completed in June 1998.

In support of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, the staff participated in OFFICE OF actions leading to the privatization of the U. S.

Enrichment Corporation (USEC). Specifically, it MMMISMTION developed requirements that would restrict foreign control or ownership of the USEC, thus avoiding the possibility of compromising classified information penaining to the corporation's Fccilities Program Perations.

The staff also conducted a reactive security During FY 1998, the Office of Administration inspection of USEC's Paducah Gaseous Diffusion (ADM) continued the interior renovation of die Plant in February 1998, and an initial inspection of One White Flint North building. The project the USEC Headquarters in June 1998 to effect the consists of replacing all the interior Snishes that transfer of security oversight from the U.S.

have deteriorated during the 10 years NRC has Deparnment of Energy (DOE) to NRC.

t g4 . . ,

U Property Management gments in the Federal Register during FY Program The NRC submitted 100 percent ofits general notices in electronic form to the Office of the The NRC conducted an FY 1998 Headquarters Federal Register for publication, resulting in a inventory of sensitive items and equipment valued savings of $56,274 during FY 1998, at more than $300. More than 20,000 equipment items were inventoried. Regional offices Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness conducted self-inventories and submitted fully reconciled reports to the headquarters staff. A Act. On March 29,1996, President Clinton signed supply module was added to the NRC's automated the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. The act ensures that Congress is Property and Accounting System to improve notified of " major actions" (as defined by the act) control and accountability for furniture and supply by Federal agencies. In FY 1998, NRC submitted stock assets.

57 final actions to the Office of Management and Budget for review. One action, NRC's 100-percent Executive Order 12999, " Improving Mathematics fee recovery rule, was determined to be a " major" and Science Education in Support of National rule under the act.

Education Goals," directs Federal agencies to the maximum extent possible to identify and transfer excess education-related equipment to elementary and secondary schools. Under these guidelines, the NRC established a program for donating used Contract Management and obsolescent computer equipment to school systems nationwide. In FY 1998, the NRC donated more than 1,241 pieces of computer equipment, During FY 1998, the NRC contm.ued toimprove including color monitors, system units, and the efficiency of the procurement process through printers. a variety of electrom,e commerce activities and through streamlining measures under its procurement reinvention laboratory. ADM's homepage on NRC's WWW internal site provides direct links to electronic catalogs, such as GSA Recycling Program Advantage!, the Air Force Country Store, and the UNICOR catalog, enabhng staff to procure goods and services efficiently. In another initiative, the In FY 1998, the NRC Headquarters Recycling OMB sent NRC's electronic streamlining Program generated more than $42,000 in revenue Procurement innovation, " Focused Source through an area-wide contract administered by the Selection," to Congress for review. This General Services Administration. The revenue innovation represents a streamlined approach to generated by the program is available for agency competitive acquisitions, using the Internet and use on a discretionary basis and will be used for negotiating with the best rated proposer. NRC employee programs, including tuition assistance Pl ans to implement this innovation after the for employees whose children would otherwise be required 270-day Congressional review period has unable to attend the onsite child care center. elapsed. Use of oral presentations in lieu of lengthy written proposals continues to improve efficiency in the procurement process at NRC. In recognition ofits pioneering efforts in the use of oral presentations, NRC's Acquisition Reform Rulemaking and Directives Team was nominated to receive a National Performance Review " hammer" award in FY 1998. The WWW also was used for an extensive The staff provided rulemaking review support for market survey, using the Commerce Business Daily 220 rulemaking actions, docketed four petitions (CBD) Internet (CBDNet) and ADM's Web sites, l for rulemaking, and published 45 rulemaking to determine the availability of contractors and l l

l l

)

85 i

educational institutions to assist the NRC in areas Performance, Performance-Based Service in which sources could be limited for Contracting, and Streamlined Source Selection.

conDict-of-interest reasons if NRC's regulation of DOE's facilities is expanded. Effective implementation of procurement reforms resulted in timely contract awards for obligations totaling $73 million. The agency also processed The NRC continues to provide extensive training 5,093 purchase-card transactions totaling $2.7 million for an estimated savings of $255,000 in the use of streamlining measures to help NRC during FY 1998. Implementation of a new program offices and procurement personnel contract information system has facilitated improve processing times for simplified availability of procurement data to staff and ccquisitions, competitive contract awards, and managers and has improved the accuracy of the contract closcout activities. During FY 1998, NRC data. NRC continued to conduct reviews of DOE cffered three satellite broadcasts and three laboratory agreements to ensure effective in house training opportunities for procmement oversight for placement and monitoring of the and technical staff, including courses on Past agency's work performed under such agreements.

l 1

l l

I

e

- 2 1,e3 :s.a =:=:ss s%s s m . .c,

. 1 J

4 . l g7 Appendix NRC Organization (Current as of September 30,1998) ,

COMMISSIONERS l Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman Nils J. Diaz Edward McGaffigan Inspector General Hubert T. Bell Chief Financial Officer Jesse L. Funches i

ChiefInformation Officer Anthony J. Galante )

The Commission Staff Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication-John E Cordes, Jr., Acting Director Office of Congressional Affairs-Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of the General Counsel-Karen D. Cyr, General Counsel Office of International Programs-Carlton R. Stoiber, Director Office of Public Affairs-William M. Beecher, Director Secretary of the Commission-John C. Hoyle, Secretary Executive Director for Operations Executive Director for' Operations-L. Joseph Callan Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory Effectiveness-William D. Travers Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory Programs-Hugh L. Thompson, Jr.

Deputy Executive Director for Management Services-Patricia G. Norry Assistant for Operations-James L. Blaha Program Ofnces Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards--Carl J. Paperiello, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation-Samuel J. Collins, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research-Ashok C. Thadani, Director

", m -:e-:ses : sue s=: =:ss st..s s m :- =. m :c as' NRC Organization (continued)

EDO Staff Omces Office of Administration-Edward L. Halman, Director Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data-Thomas T. Martin, Director Office of Enforcement-James Lieberman, Director Office of Investigations-Guy P. Caputo, Director Office of Human Resources-Paul E. Bird, Director Office of Small Business and Civil Rights-Irene P. Little, Director OfEce of State Programs-Richard L. Bangart, Director Regional Offices Region I, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania-Hubert J. Miller, Regional Administrator Region II, Atlanta, Georgia-Luis A. Reyes, Regional Administrator Region III, Chicago, Illinois-James L. Caldwell, Acting Regional Administrator Region IV, Dallas, Texas-Ellis W. Merschoff. Regional Administrator Other Omces Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste-B. John Garrick, Chairman Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards-Robert L. Seale, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel-B. Paul Cotter, Jr., Chief Administrative Judge RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE Responsibilities of the OFFICES, THE REGIONS, Executive Council AND THE ADVISORY The Chief Financial Officer (CFO) oversees the COMMITTEES AND nnancial management of NRC's programs and Perations and provides advice to the Chairman LICENSING PANELS on financial management matters. The CFO establishes financial management policy for the agency and provides policy guidance to senior managers on the budget and all other financial management activities,includisc systems, Office of the InsNctor General personnel, structure and functions, performed by component financial management organizations; The Office of the Inspector General is an oversees the development and maintenance of independent and objective unit that conducts and financial management and accounting systems to supervises audits and investigations relating to provide reliable information for internal and NRC programs and operations, identifying ways to external f'mancial management repolting; improve agency activities resulting from the establishes agency-wide financial data and detection and prevention ofinstances of fraud, reponing format requirements, and provides an waste, and abuse; and, keeps the head of the agency-wide management control program for agency and the Congress fully and currently financial and program managers that provides for informed of serious issues and concerns relating to timely corrective actions regarding material the administration of prog; rams. weaknesses disclosed through audit findings and

y

, w 1995 15:20 N:: ::555%55 A-  :.29 c g9 reports provided under the FederalManagers' the Commission's guidance, after presentation of Financiallntegrity Act. options; and for consulting with the Office of the General Counsel in identifying options to be The ChiefInformation Omcer (CIO) plans, presented to the Commission and in drafting the directs, and oversees the NRC's information final decision to be presented to the Commission.

resources, including information technology infrastructure and delivery of information The Omce of Congressional Affairs provides management services, to meet the mission and advice and assistance to the Chairman, the goals of the agency. The CIO provides principal Commission, and the NRC staff on all NRC advice to the Chairman to ensure that Information relations with Congress and views of Congress Technology (IT) is acquired and information toward NRC policies, plans, and activities; resources across the agency are managed in a maintains hanson with congressional committees manner consistent with Federal Information and members of Congress on matters ofinterest Resources Management (IRM) laws and to the NRC; serves as primary contact for all NRC regulations; assists senior management in communications with Congress, reviewing and recognizing where information technology can add concurrmg m all outgcing correspondence to value while improving NRC operations and members of Congress coordinates NRC internal services delivery; directs the implementation of a activities with Congie ss; plans and develops sound and integrated IT architecture to achieve NRC's legislative prognm; and monitors NRC's strategic and IRM goals; monitors and legislative proposals, bish, and hearings.

evaluates the performance ofinformation The Omce of the General Counsel directs matters technology and information management of law and legal policy, p< oviding opinions, advice, programs based on applicable performance and assistance to the Ccmmission and staff with measures and assesses the adequacy of IRM skills respect to all activities of the agency, i of the agency; and provides guidance and i oversight for the selection, control, and evaluation The Omce ofInternstional Programs provides ofinformation technology investments. advice and assistarse to the Chainnan, the Commission, and the NRC staff on international The Executive Director for Operations (EDO) is issues. The office formulates and recommends the chief operational and administrative officer of policies conceming nuclear exports and imports, the Commission and is authorized and directed to international safeguards, international physical discharge licensing, regulatory, and administrative security, non proliferation matters, and functions of the NRC and to take actions international cooperation and assistance in necessary for day-to-day operations of the agency. nuclear safety and radiation protection. The office The EDO supervises and coordinates policy plans, develops, anU implements programs to development and operational activities of EDO carry out policies established in these areas; plans, staff and program offices and implements develops, and manages international nuclear Commission policy directives pertaining to these safety information exchange programs; and offices. coordinates international research agreements.

The office obtains, evaluates, and uses pertinent information from other NRC and U.S.

Government offices in processing nuclear export The Commission Staff and import license applications; establishes and maintains working relationships with individual countries and international nuclear organizations, The Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication as well as other U.S. Government agencies; and is responsible for monitoring cases pending before ensures that all international activities carried out presidmg officers; for providing the Commission by the Commission and the staff are properly with an analysis of any adjudicatory matter , coordinated internally and Government-wide and requiring a Commission decision (e.g., petitions are consistent with NRC and U.S. policies.

for review of Initial Licensing Board decisions, certified questions, interlocutory referrals, staff The Office of Public AfTairs develops policies, requests), including available options; for the programs, and procedures for informing the pubh,c drafting of any necessary decisions, pursuant to of NRC activities; prepares, clears, and

, m -:2-1995 5:n W : 35 5%5 E:%  :.: n 90 disseminates information to the public and the with other NRC offices in coordinating safety and news media concerning NRC policies, programs, safeguards programs and in recommending and activities; keeps NRC management informed research, standards, and policy options necessary of media coverage of activities ofinterest to the for their successful operations.

agency; plans, directs, and coordinates the activities of public information staffs located at The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ensures the Regional Offices; conducts a cooperative program with the schools; and carries out assigned the public health and safety through licensing and i I

cetivities in the area of consumer affairs. inspection activities at all nuclear power reactor facilities in the United States. The office oversees 1 The Omce of the Secretary of the Commission all aspects of licensing and inspection of l provides executive management services to manufacturing, production, and utilization  !

support the Commission and to implement facilities (except for facilities reprocessing fuel Commission decisions; advises and assists the and performing isotopic fuel enrichment), and Commission and staff on planning, scheduling, receipt, possession, and ownership of source, 1 and conducting Commission business; prepares byproduct, and special nuclear material used or the Commission's meeting agenda; codifies produced at facilities licensed under 10 CFR Part Commission decisions in memoranda directing 50. The office develops policy and inspection staff action, monitors staff compliance of pending guidance for programs assigned to the regional retions, and tracks commitments through the offices and assesses the effectiveness and automated Commission tracking system; manages uniformity of the Regions

• implementation of the staff paper and COMSECY systems; initiates those programs. The office identifies and takes action in coordination with the regional offices cnd monitors the status of office automation initiatives into the Commission's administrative regarding conditions and licensee performance at such facilities that may adversely affect public system; processes and controls Commission correspondence; maintains the Commission's health and safety, the environment, or the efficial records and acts as Freedom of safeguarding of nuclear facilities and assesses and Information coordinator for Commission records; recommends or takes action in response to incidents or accidents. The office is responsible maintains the official adjudicatory and rulemaking dockets of the Commission and serves for licensing issues and regulatory policy Commission and Atomic Safety and Licensing conceming reactor operators, including the initial Board issuances in all adjudicatory matters and licensing examination and requalineation public proceedings; directs and administers the examinations, emergency preparedness, including NRC Historical Program; and functions as the participation in emergency drills with Federal, Federal Advisory Committee Management State, and local agencies; radiation protection, Officer. security and safeguard at such facilities, including fitness for duty; and the inspection of nuclear supplier facilities. The office also conducts technical review, certification, and licensing of

• dv""c'd ""cle^r re^ct I f'ciliti'5 ^"d '*"**S Responsibilities of the current power reactor operatmg licenses.

Program Offices The OITice of Nuclear Regulatory Research plans, The Omce of Nuclear Material Safety and recommends, and implements programs of Safeguards licenses, inspects, and regulates nuclear regulatory research, standards facilities and materials associated with processing, development, and resolution of safety issues for transporting, and handling nuclear materials, as nuclear power plants and other facilities regulated well as disposing of nuclear waste and regulating by the NRC. It develops and promulgates all uranium recovery facilities. The office also technical regulations; coordinates research regulates related facility decommissioning. The activities within and outside the NRC, including s;feguard staff of the office reviews and assesses appointment of staff to committees and protection against potential threats, thefts, and conferences; and coordinates national volunteer sabotage for licensed facilities, working closely standards efforts.

r 1

. * -;0-;939 15:2; M ::E5 5%s 3w,c- 2, ; w j

, ,a 91 i

ne Regional Omces are under the supervision accordance with the SmallBusiness Act, as and direction of the Executive Director for amended, ensuring that appropriate consideration Operations and cary out NRC regulatory is given to small business firms, including programs originating in the various Headquarters women-owned and minority businesses. The office offices. develops and recommends NRC policy providing for equal employment opportunity, and develops, monitors, and evaluates the affinnative action program to ensure compliance with the policy.

Responsibilities of the Support The ffice25o5erveSa5contSct*ithi c^1*"d national pubhc and private organizations with StatiOfficeS

• related interests and administers the Historically Black Colleges and Universities Program.

The Omce of Administration directs the agency's The Omce of State Programs is responsible for programs for contracting and procurement; establishing and maintaining good community transportation services; security of persormel and relations between the NRC, the States, local facilities; rulemaking suppon; management of governments, other Federal agencies, and Indian space and equipment; and other administrative Tribe organizations; serves as primary contact for services, policy matters between the NRC and these groups; keeps the agency apprised of activities of The Omce for Analysis and Evaluation of these groups as they may affect NRC, and conveys Operational Data provides agency coordination to NRC management the groups' views on NRC for the collection, storage, and retrieval of policies, plans, and activities; coordinates liaison ,

operational data associated with licensed with other Federal agencies through the Federal l activities, analyzes and evaluates such operational Uaison Program; administers the State experience and feeds back the lessons of that Agreements Program; provides training and experience to NRC licensing, standards, and technical assistance to Agreement States; inspections activities staff. The office is also integrates Federal regulatory activities with the responsible for the NRC incident response States; and maintains cooperative and liaison ~

program and he Technical Training Center, as well activities with the States.

cs the tracking oflicensee performance indicators.

~

The Omce of Enforcement develops policies and programs for the enforcement of NRC Other Offices requirements, manages major enforcement actions, and assesses the effectiveness and The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste was uniformity of regional enforcement actions. established by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 1988 to advise the Commission on The Office of Human Resources plans and . nuclear waste disposal facilities, as directed by the implements NRC poh,cies, programs, and services Commission.

to provide for the effective orgaruzation, reenritment, placement, utilization, and The Advisoty Committee on Reactor Safeguards is development of the agency's human resources- a statutory committee established to advise the Commission on safety aspects of proposed and The Omce of Investigations conducts, supervises, existing nuclear facilities and on the adequacy of end arsures quality control of investigations of proposed reactor safety standards and to perform licensees, applicants, contractors, or venders, such other duties as the Commission may request.

including the investigation of all allegations of The committee conducts a continuing study of wrongdoing by other than NRC employees and reactor safety research and submits an annual contractors. The office develops policy, repon to the Congress. The committee also procedures, and standards for these activities. administers a fellowship program.

The Omce of Small Business and Civil Rights The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panelis a develops and implements the NRC's program in p mel of lawyers and others with expertise in I

1 I

F

. * -:2-1999 15:22 m: =:35 52. 3 3:x - _ ., .s_ ., ~,

92 various technical fields from which three-member it by the NRC staff and gives expert opinions on Licensing Boards are drawn to conduct public the medical uses of radioisotopes. The comrrdttee hearings and make such intermediate or final also advises the NRC staff, as required, on matters decisions as the Commission may authorize in of policy.

proceedings to grant, amend, suspend, or revoke NRC licenses.

The Licensing Support System Advisory Review The Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Panel, established in 1989, advises the NRC's Isotopes, established in 1958, is composed of Licensing Support System Administrator and the qualified physicians and scientists, employed Department of Energy on selected aspects of the under yearly personnel services contracts. The design, development, and operation of the suppon committee considers medical questions referred to system.  !

i e

. . m -t m :s:22 #: = ss se..s s m :_ =. m n

1 Addendum to the Appendix NRC Organization )

(Current as of February 19,1999) i COMMISSIONERS Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman i Greta J. Dieus Nils J. Diaz Edward McGaffigan Jeffrey Merrifield l Inspector General Hubert T. Bell Chief Financial Officer Jesse L. Funches ChiefInformation Officer Anthony J. Galante The Commission Staff Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication-John E Cordes, Jr., Acting Director Office of Congressional Affairs-Dennis K. Rathbun, Director ,

Office of the General Counsel-Karen D. Cyr, General Counsel j Office ofInternational Programs-Janice Dunn Lee, Acting Director Office of Public Affairs-William M. Beecher, Director Secretary of the Commission-Annette L Vietti-Cook, Secretary l

Executive Director for Operations j Executive Director for Operations-William D. Travers l Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory Effectiveness-Malcolm R.,Knapp l Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory Programs-Frank J. Miraglia Deputy Executive Director for Management Services-Patricia G. Norry Assistant for Operations-James L. Blaha Program Offices Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards-Carl J. Paperiello, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation-Samuel J. Collins, Director  ;

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research-Ashok C. Thadani, Duector l I

i

o %v-:c-:999 5:22 sa : ::s3 se a 3;:.s - ,, ,

j 1

4 7

• C.

94 ,

EDO Staff Offices Offee of Administration-Michael L. Springer, Director Of5cc of Enforcement-James Lieberman, Director Office of Investigations-Guy P. Caputo, Director Office of Human Resources-Paul E. Bird, Director Office of Small Business and Civil Rights-Irene P. Little, Director Office of State Programs-Paul H. Lohaus, Director Regional Offices Region I, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania-Hubert J. Miller, Regional Administrator Region II, Atlanta, Georgia-Luis A. Reyes, Regional Administrator Region III, Chicago, Illinois-James E. Dyer, Regional Administrator Region IV, Dallas, Texas-Ellis W. Merschoff, Regional Administrator Other OfTices Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste-B. John Garrick, Chairman Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards-Dana A. Powers, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel-0. Paul Bollwerk III, Acting Chief Administrative Judge i

TOTA P.::

L .

_ _ _ _ _ _