ML20212F426
| ML20212F426 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/30/1997 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 9711040281 | |
| Download: ML20212F426 (46) | |
Text
.-]
' ~ ~ ~
I
~
~
~
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
ALL EMPLOYEES MEETING (PUBLIC MEETING)
Location:
Rockville, Maryland Date:
Thursday, October 30,1997 Pages:
1 - 43
/
Qij'y ANN RII EY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
1250 I St., N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C.20005 (202)842-0034 llllfff!lf0fllffl l!flf,l ffll]lf fllf
'd I
g 971030 97 10 PT9.7 PDR
t DISCLAIMER This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on i
October 30, 1997 on "The Green" Plaza area at One White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland.
The meeting was open to public-attendance and observation.
This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected or edited, and it may contain
~
inaccuracies.
The_ transcript is intended solely for general informational purposes.
As provide:1 by 10 CFR 9.103,-it-is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the-I matters discussed.
Expressions of opinion in this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determination or i:
beliefs.
No pleading or other paper may be filed with-the Commission in any proceeding as-the result of, or addressed to, any statement or argument contained herein, except as
- the Commission may. authorize.
1 a
-1.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
4 ALL EMPLOYEES MEETING 5-6 PUBLIC MEETING 7
8 9
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10 "The Green" Plaza Area 11-11555 Rockville Pike 12 -.
Rockv'lle, Maryland 13
-14 Thursday, October 30, 1997 15 16 The Commission. met in open session, pursuant to 17 notice, at 1:33 p.m.,
the Honorable SHIRLEY A. JACKSON, 18-Chairman of the Commission, presiding.
19
'20 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
21 SHIRLEY A. JACKSON, Chairman of the Commission.
22 GRETA J. DICUS, Member of the Commission 23 EDWARD McGAFFIGAN, JR., Member of the Commission 24 NILS J. DIAZ, Member-of the Commission 25 i
ANN RILEY'& ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters.
1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202)'842-0034
1 o
1-PROCEEDINGS 2
(1:33 p.m.]
3 MRS. NORRY:
I'would like to welcome all of you-to
.4 the Seventh Annual All Employees Meeting on the Green.
You l
5 will be hearing from the Chairman and the Commissioners.
I 6
would like to let you know that we will be offering ~an 7
opportunity, as we always do, to have questions from the 8
audience after the Chairman is finished with her remarks.
9 There are microphones scattered throughout the tent.
10 In addition, we will have' questions relayed from 11
.the regions.
They will lun read to you by Sue Smith and 12
'Keith Everly.
13 I would like to point out that this is a meeting 14 which affords.the Chairman and the Commissioners an 15 opportunity to discuss the strategic direction of the 16 agency, and that will be the appropriate subject for 17-questions.
We_will not be covering questions today which 18 relate to personnel, staffing,.or working conditions.
Those 19 types of questions will be covered in a meeting which we 20 will have within a couple of months with the agency 21 partnership, and it will-be a meeting that will be open to 22_
all: employees.
We will let you know before the meeting is 23 scheduled.
That will be the nppropriate time to address 24 those kinds of questions.
-25 Without further ado, Chairman Jackson.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
3 1
CHAIRMAN JACKSON:
Thank you, Mrs. Norry.
2 Good afternoon.
Let me introduce my Commission 3
colleagues, Commissioner Greta Joy Dicus, Commissioner Nils 4
J. Diaz, and Commissioner Edward McGaffigan, Jr.
5 On behalf of '.ny Commission colleagues, I would 6.
like to welcome all of you to this special meeting of the 7
Commission with the NRC staff.
I extend that welcome both 8
to those of you assembled here in the tent at headquarters 9
and also to the groups of employees connected by telephone 10 from the regions.
11 These all employees or all hands meetings have
[
12 become an annual tradition at'NRC since 1991.
They are 4
13 intended to stimulate and to facilitate direct communication 14 between the Commission and individual members of the staff, 15 to clarify the Commission's agenda, to engender a shared 1
16 vision, and to motivate the staff in pursuit of that vision.
17 I should mention that in keeping with these same 18 purposes I also have begun holding a series of small group 19 sessions with the staff which are referred.to er 20 Chairman-Staff dialogues.
These sessions, which I began in 21 August of this year, are proving to be extremely beneficial 22 and positive for all involved, and I eventually hope to meet 23 each of you in this context.
24 After my introductory presentation, our agenda 25 today will be determined by you, by your questions.
I 1
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 t
(202) 842-0034
e 4
1 increasingly have become aware of how-important 4.t is that 2-the Commission understand the perspectives and concerns of 3
the staff if we:are to be effective in setting and directing 4
agency policy.-
5 Conversely, it'is equally important that the staff 6
understands the perspective of the Commission, the 7
priorities and concerns.that undergird Commission policy, 8
decisions and directives.
9 We will respond to your questions today based on 10 our understanding of your concerns and our individual 11 perspectives on those concerns.
3 12-Our format today will be similar to that used for 13 previous sessions.
Following this introduction, the 14 Commission will entertain questions from any of the i
15 employees present here on the green as well as from any of 16 the regional and field offices connected by telephone.
17 As in previous years, this is the-second session 18 since we have insufficient space to accommodate all 19 employees in a single session.
20f Before we address questions, let me take a few 21 minutes to review with you what we have accomplished as an 22 agency since our last all employees meeting in October of 23 1996 as well as to discuss a few of the internal and 24 external forces of change that continue to shape our 25 regulatory environment.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
5-1 First of all, on behalf of the ent' ire Commission,_
2' let-me extend my_hearty congratulations to all of you for 3-reaffirming in an-era of rapid and challenging change that 4
-the NRC is a-highly competent technical agency that employs 5
extraordinarily gifted and dedicated. individuals.
6~
Let'me give you a_few examples of some of the more 7
significant NRC accomplishments of the past 12 months.
8
'On March-3rd of this year we officially assumed 9
' regulatory jurisdiction over the U.S. Enrichment Corporation 10 gaseous diffusion plants in Piketon, Ohio, and Paducah, 11
- Kentucky, 12 ~
In May we witnessed the ;ulmination of nearly a 13-decade of effort whenEthe Commission issued the final rules 14-certifying'the advanced boiling reactor design by GE Nuclear 15 and.the System 80+ design.by ABB Combustion Engineering.
16 On July 21st the Commission issued the final 17 license termination rule establishing radiological criteria 18 for decommissioning and release of a facility for 19 unrestricted _use and conditions and requirements,for 20 restricted release.
21 The NRC also has made significant-progress on
'22 other fronts in areas that continue to receive Commission 23_
focus.
Allow me to mention just a few of these areas both 24
-in terms of the progress we have made.and in terms of our 25-agenda and what it should be-for the near future.
2 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters s1 1250 I Street, N W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
6 1-The first such area is a grouping we often refer 2
to as design basis issues.
Over the past year we have made 3
significant progress in this area, but-our efforts also have 4
made it clear that we need a big picture solution rather 5
than one more strip in a series of band-aids.
Currently we 6
_have multiple methods of dealing with inoperable and/or 7
degraded conditions, each with its own formula for 8
classifying equipment, that is, systems, structures, and 9
components.
10 We have 10 CFR 50.59, Generic Letter 91-18, 11 Appendix B, Criterion 16, technical specifications, the 12 FSARs and other guidance, each created at a different point 13 in the evolution of this agency and of our regulatory 14 framework, each with a specific purpose and scope.
15 The resultant ambiguity and overlap of these 16 methods, guidance documents and requirements have created 17 inconsistent application or gaps in their application that 18 can create confusion and inefficiency both for us and for 19-our various stakeholders.
The agenda for the near future, 20 therefore, is to find a unified, consistent approach that 21 also is understandable, fair, and risk informed.
22 Another area in which we are seeking a big picture 23 solution-concerns the various NRC processes for assessing 24 power reactor licensees, such as the use of the plant issues 25 matrix, the plant performance review, the systematic ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters l
1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 L
(202) 842-0034 l
4 1
assessment of licensee performance, and the cenior 4
2 management meeting.
3 NRR currently ~is working to devise an overall 4
integrated approach to plant assessment that will clarify-5 the objectives of each assessment method, eliminate 6
redundancies, define _ roles and responsibilities,. ensure 7
consistency, reduce administrative burden, and match the i.
'8 processes to staff resources.
9 A third area that has received a great deal of 10 attention both from the NRC staff and from outside observers 11 is the potential external regulation by the NRC of the 12 Department of Energy nuclear facilities.
Both the NRC and
- 13 the DOE have created high level task forces to identify the I
14 policy and regulatory issues needing analysis and 15 resolution.
16 In a June 1997 meeting Secretary of Energy. Pena
- 17 and I on behalf of the Commission agreed on a pilot program 18 to explore NRC regulation of DOE facilities..This pilot 19 program would simulate-NRC regulation of a selected-set of 20 DOE nuclear. facilities over a two-year period in order to
- 21 help both agencies gain experience in this area.
22 Simulated regulation, as defined for the purposes 23 of this pilot program, means chat the NRC will test 24 regulatoty concepts and evaluate a facility and its 25 standards, requirements, procedures, practices and 4
ANN RILEY &' ASSOCIATES, LTD.
_ Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0334
8 1
activities against standards that the NRC believes would be 2
appropriate to ensure public health and safety in view of 3
the nature of the work and the hazards that the pilot 4
facility represents.
5 Simulated regulation will involve NRC interactions 6
with both DOE and DOE contractors and other stakeholders and
't will involve inspections of each pilot facility to identify 8
implementation issues but will not result in enforcement 9
actions to compel compliance with particular NRC standards 10 or requirements.
Any significant inspection findings with a 11 health and safety impact will be transmitted promptly to the 12 appropriate DOE organization for review and corrective 13 actions as appropriate by the pilot facility.
14 In the recently approved NRC budget for fiscal 15 year 1998 the Congress designated $1 million for this pilot 16 program.
The NRC and the DOE have worked together to 17 prepare a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to establich the 18 pilot program framework.
This MOU already has been signed
- 19 by Energy Secretary Pena.
I expect to sign the MOU on 20 behalf of the NRC in the near future once the Commission has 21 completed its formal action on it.
22 Two pilot facilities for this fiscal year have 23 been chosen to date, the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory in 24 Berkeley California and the Radio Chemistry Facility at the 25 Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
We currently are finalizing.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.. Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
9 l'
the NRC teams for the pilot activities at each of these 2
facilities.
In fact, just yesterday an NRC group conducted 3
a site visit to the Lawrence Berkeley facility.
4 The third facility has not yet been chosen but we 5
are considering the possibility of a fuel storage facility.
6-As we proceed in this area we must ensure that our 7
commitments do not overcome our resources, that is, that any 8
new responsibilities we take on do not compromise our 9
ability to regulate effectively within the scope of our 10 current mission.
11 In an area that is somewhat related we have 12 continued to make progress in our activities with respect to 13 our potential regulatory oversight of the Hanford Tank Waste 14 Remediation project.
In January of this year we signed an 15 MOU with DOE regarding this project, and in May we 16 established a full-time, permanent, onsite NRC 17 representative to handle our issues.
At present we are 18 continuing to establish review criteria relative to 19 regulatory and licensing issues and to review submittals of 20 DOE contractors.
21 In January of this year DOE also issued its record 22 of decision for the storage and disposition of weapons 1
.- 2 3 usable fissile materials.
The dual track approach relative 24 to plutonium-that DOE announced involves immobilizing 25 surplus plutonium with high level radioactive waste in a ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
10 1
glass or ceramic material for direct geologic disposal, and 2
burning, secondly, some of the surplus plutonium as mixed 3
oxide (MOX) fuel in existing commercial nuclear reactors.
4 The NRC interest in this approach stems from three 5
areas of potential impact:
high level waste, fuel cycle 6
facilities, and commercial nuclear power reactors.
7 The Commission received a briefing from DOE 8
shortly after the record of decision was issued and in 9
February and March the NRC sponsored two technical seminars, 10 both open to the public, in which nuclear industry representatives made presentations on the fabrication of MOX 12 fuel and its use in commercial reactors.
More recently, the 13 Commission received a second DOE briefing and update in 14 which DOE acquisition strategy for MOX fuel fabrication and 15 irradiation services was described.
16 As this area continues to unfold we must ensure 17 that the NRC is prepared to perform its emerging regulatory 18 role in a manner that ensures the protection of public 19 health and safety and that avoids unnecessary delays or 20 costs.
21 Another area in which we have made considerable 22 strides relates to information technology and information 23 management.
To ensure that the proper focus and emphasis is 24 given to this area, the chief information officer (CIO) has 25 reorganized both processes and structure to fully integrate ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
l 11 1
'information management into program activities.
2 A significant accomplishment in this area is the 1
l 3
establishment and the beginning implementation of a 4
requirement that all budget requests related to information j
5 technology must be evaluated under the capital planning and 6
information control (CPIC) process before an information 7
technology system is included in the budget.
8 The CIO also has developed a comprehensive plan to 9
repair or to replace systems that need change to be ready 10 for the year 2000.
More about this later.
11 This set of topics is only a snapshot based on a 12 promise to be reasonably brief, but other issues that could 13 be covered include the potential for tritium production in 14 commercial light water reactors, the business process 15 reengineering and guidance consolidation ongoing within i
16 NMSS, and various initiatives that come under the heading of i
- 17 regulatory excellence or regulatory effectiveness, 18-In addition, this focus on change and transition 19 should not minimize the tremendous accomplishment 20 represented by your day-to-day efforts on tasks that fall f
21 within the more traditional scope of NRC efforts, What is 22 significant to note is that as an agency that is seeing 23 changes on a variety of internal and external fronts we have F
24 continued to be successful in adapting to and positioning 25 ourselves for those changes.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
12 1
A significant factor in this success, which in 2
itself has been both a challenge and an accomplishment, is 3
that we have operated for much of this year with a new 4
organizational alignment and in many cases with a new 5
management team.
6 Rarely, if ever, has the NRC gone through a year 7
with so many individuals taking on new positions of 8
significant leadership and management responsibility 9
concomitant with our organizational realignment at the 10 beginning of 1997.
In almost every case these individuals 11 have experienced challenges considerably greater or 12 different in character from anything they had faced before, 13 and I believe it is to their credit that the present 14 management team, both in the regions and in headquarters, 15 has made the transition so smoothly.
16 Now let me get to a particular area of focus that 17 I want to spend some time on.
In making my rounde through 18 the various groups of working level NRC staff I have become 19 increasingly aware of kaw important it is that each employee 20 understands his or her roles and responsibilities, that is, 21 what we do and why ve do it.
22 I also ? ave noticed that the eyes of people 23 sometimes glaze over when people hear the term " strategic 24 assessment and rebaselining" even though you have been 25 hearing it for a long time, primarily because it has been ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporter.-
1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
13 1
viewed by some as a theoretical exercise with little or no 2
practical value.
Today I intend to mention strategic 3
assessment e.nd rebaselining repeatedly, and I am going to 4
ask each of you to pay close attention because I intend to 5
personalize the message to emphasize how planning, budget 6
and strategic assessment have directly impacted and will 7
continue to impact you and your daily tasks.
8 The foundation of strategic assessment and 9
rebaselining rests on change, the new elements being added 10 to our mission, the changing world of those we regulate, 11 that is, new business environments, which dictate that we
.2 must change; new opportunities to use new tools to become 13 more effective in our regulation; and changing expectations 14 of our various stakeholders, including the public, the 15 Executive Branch, as evidenced by Vice President Gore's 16 national performance review, and the Congress.
17 Perhaps more than in any recent time the U.S.
18 Congress has taken a direct and an intrusive interest in 19 503 ^
.z &E era) r, ge nc i v-
'ecountable and demanding that they
?
jostd+y their 2e w;Ne nesto.,, their expenditures, and even n
1---
- m.n.
2" nne of you are unfamiliar with terms like a3 re:ir.1 c.rP ing centur9" or with concepts like do more with
' " '.4 th3 actual impact of budget cuts.
What is 24 25 important to realize, however, is that the stakes are ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
L Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
14 1-continuing to rise.
Let me give you an example.
2 As I. started talking about earlier, most of you-3 probably are aware of the information management issue known 4
as the-" year-2000 problem," referring to the fact that most 5
computer systems that_ manage dates and schedulos.are based 6-only on the last two digits of the year and therefore cannot
'7
_ differentiate between, for example, the year 2000 and the 8
year 1900, 9.
What-you may not know is that the member of the 10 Congress who oversees information technology issues in the 11 House of Representatives recently issued a report card in 12 which federal agencies were graded on their progress in' 13 addressing this problem.
This represents the high attention 14
-being given to this area by the Congress.
15 But now consider the potential impact on a 16 practical level.
Four agencies, as a result of these 17 grades, were put on notice by the Office of Management and 18 Budget that they will not receive any funding for buying new
-19 computer and other information technology systems in fiscal-20 year 1999 until they have plans and actions in place to 21 address the year 2000 problem in mission critical computer 22_
systems.
23 The point of this example is to illustrate the 24 degree of detail and the level of interest that the Congress 25 has in how well agencies can identify what they do, why they ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
15 1-do it, and the resources required.
That is, how well 2:
. agencies 'can justify what they do, why they do it, and the 3
level of resources' required.
4 Looking backward from-this perspective, the reason 5
becomes obvious for the level of effort and attention the 6
Commission has focused on strategic assessment,-the 7
strategic plan, and the performance plan.
Over two years 8
ago we undertook the strategic assessment and rebaselining.
9 Phase 1 was painstaking but simple in nature.
We 10 attempted to answer two basic questions across the agency 11 and in exhaustive detail:
First, what do we do, and second, 12 why do we do it, considering the various internal and 13 external factors that bear on that?
.14 This phase, which was completed in April of 1996, 15 identified a series of topics and issues on which the 16 Commission needed to deliberate and to make decisions.
We 17 call these topics dir3ction setting issues, or DSIs, and I 18 am glad to see that Commissioner McGaffigan brought the book of DSIs.
He had it this morning and it was very useful, 20 Phase 2 involved the development of options to 21-address each of these issues.
The Commissicn shared its 22 preliminary views with stakeholders through the Internet and 23 public meetings.
The staff reviewed and summarized the 24_
comments from stakeholders on each issue paper associated 25 with the DSIs and the Commission made its final decisions on ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
. - ~..... -
. _ ~
16 1
the DSIs.-
2
.In phase 3 'e developed a new strategic plan based o
'3
.on the results of the previous two phases undergirded by the 1
4 DSI decisions in which we set forth the long-term directions 5
and_ goals of-the NRC.
{
6 In accordance with:the Government Performance and 7
Results Act,. or GPRA at it is called, the strategic plan l
8 will be reviewed annually and updated every three years.
9 When last month we submitted to the Congress and the OMB~the a
^
10 NRC fiscal year 1997 to fiscal year 2002 strategic plan, 11' phase 3 of the strategic assessment and rebaselining nad 12 officially come to an end.
13 1 also shculd note that a copy of the strategic 14 plan was distributed-to all employees this week.
We have 15 vur-copy up here, again thanks to Commissioner McGaffigan, 16 And I would encourage each of you to review it and to 17 provide feedback.
18 This brings us to the current and final phase of 19 strategic assessment and rebaselining:
implementation, or 20 what has-been referred to as the rollout of the-strategic 21.
plan.
Regardless of what your involvement has been to date, 22 at this point in the process every employee should sit up 23 and take notice.
24 With the issuance of the strategic plan and the R2 5 -
more dynamic performance plan that flows from it we are ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300
-Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
17 1
_ putting into place a new agency planning process.
This is 2-
-not an additional task to be added to your workload.
In 3
fact, it is the way to accomplish your work.
In this phase 4
of strategic assessment and rebaselining we no longer are 5
talking about a special one-time effort but rather a way of
~
6 doing business.
t 7
Each manager, and to a lesser extent each 8
employee, must understand, first, how to develop an 9
operating plan for your area of NRC functionality.
10 Second, how that plan fics into the overall i
11 strategic plan.
12 Third, how to integrate that plan with the budget i -
13 process.
14 Fourth,- how to conduct performance monitoring for 15 that plan.
I 16 In fact, I would go so far as to pledge to the 17-working level staff that your managers in the not too 18 distant future will be sitting down to explain to you the 19_
linkages of the strategic plan with your specific area of 20 work.
I will be meeting with SES managers next Monday to 21 emphasize precisely this need and expectation.
22 The new agency planning process will provide an 23 effective approach for planning, budgeting and assessing our 24 performance against the goals of the strategic plan.
-25 The chief financial officer, Mr. Funches, in 4
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court 1 Reporters
,f 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Soite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
18 1
conjunction with the other members of the Executive Council, 2
Mr. Callan and Mr. Galante, has developed a new planning and 13 performance management system ~that will involve all 4
employees in the planning process down to the branch and 5
section levels.
The four main components of the system are 6
as follows:
7 (1)
Setting the strategic direction and 8
performance expectations for the specific organization.
9 (2)
Determining the rusoorces and the planned 10 accomplishments-necessary to meet those expectations.
11 (3)
Measuring and monitoring performance against 12 the established expectations.
13 (4)
Assessing performance, developing lessons 14 learned, and applying the results.
15 This planning and performance system integrates 16 many of the ongoing efforts associated with the operating 17 plans, program reviews and program evaluations.
In many
-18 ways this planning process represents a paradigm shift that 19 relates not only to planning and~ resource management but in 20 the very way that the NRC conducts business in general.
H21 So I ence. rage all of you to become familiar with 22 the goals of the strategic plan and to provide feedback on 23 ways that we more seamlessly can integrate planning into our 24 day-to-day efforts.
25 So let me now attempt to link all of this ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters l-1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
19.
1
- together, i
-2
-The.more information and planning involvement that 3
the_ staff has at the first line level the more success we 4
will have-in meeting and adhering to the strategic plan.
y 5
The more success we have at adhering to the strategic plan 6
the more outcomes oriented as opposed to outputs orientated 7
we will be, and the more likely we will be to have 8
consistency and acceptable performance in our programs and 9
in our budget process in a way clearly linked to agency 10 goals.
Given the current level of congress'.c L.1 and 11 stakeholder scrutiny, without success and consistency in our 12 programs and in our budget process, we cannot expect to 13' succeed in accomplishing our mission as we understand it i
14 today.
15 In summary, I hope that I have reemphasized _the 16 significant progress that we have made in a number of areas,
[
17 the issues on which we must continue to remain focused, and 18 in particular the need for additional effort in planning and 19 financial management.
Most importantly, I hope that I also 20 have exhibited my pride in serving with you in this truly 21 remarkable agency.
22 Now I would like to turn this meeting over to you, t
23 I would ask each of you who wishes to ask a question to use I
24-one of the microphones available so that everyone can hear 25 your question.
Please feel free to direct your question to 4
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
20 1
any one of us.
If your question is intended for all of us, 2
I-will refer it to each of my fellow colleagues in turn in 3
order to facilitate ntoving the meeting along.
4 May we have the first question, please.
5 QUESTION:
Madam Chairman, in the fuel cycle area 6
we are being committed to using a risk informed approach to 7
our inspections of fuel cycle facilities.
My question is, 8
is there an effort to provide resources to develop a body of 9
risk assessment technologies or methods that we can point to 10 and show an impartial observer that we have done that 11 correctly?
12 CHAIRMAN JACKSON:
It is interesting.
Are you 13 sure that question wasn't passed along to you from this 14 morning?
15 Let me say the following.
There is a multipart 16 answer.
First of all, I'm a big believer that you have to 17 plan the work, resource load it, and then work the plan.
18 There are efforts ander way within NMSS to move to 19 and adopt a more risk informed approach to regulation in the 20 general area of materials.
NMSS encompasses a broad scope, 21 and in fact Commissioner Dicus spoke very eloquently to that 22 this morning.
Therefore the kind of risk assessment 23 methodology that may work in one area may not be entirely 24 appropriate for another, but there is great opportunity to 25 have synergy and to have a cross feed from efforts
- t. hat are ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
0 21 1
even going on in the reactor area using PRA techniques and 2
looking at how that comports or can potentiate what may be
)
going on with performance assessment if you are talking 4
repository performance, integrated safety assessments for 5
fuel cycle facilities, or some other methodology if there is 6
another activity.
7 There is a rulemaking going on relative to 8
revision of Part 70 for fuel cycle facilities that is 9
looking to try to fold Anto how we regulate in that area 10 systematic safety assessments using ISAs.
s 11 There is a rulemaking also going on with respect 12 to our regulation of the medical use of radioisotopes which 4
15 also is intended to be as risk informed as it can be.
We 14 will develop, coupled with efforts that Margaret Federline 15 is undertaking more broadly and within NMSS, to have a risk 16 informed approach.
He will have a better sense of what our 17 resource needs are and those things will then work their way 18 through the budget process as appropriate.
19 QUESTION:
Thank you.
20 CRAIRMAN JACKSON:
Thank you.
21 Is there another question?
22 QUESTION:
As kind of a carry-on to that, risk 23 informed, performance based are very elegant words, but at 24 my worker bee level I don't hear a dialogue going on that 25 helps to explain to us what enose elegant words mean in a ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
22 1-practical manner.
Could there be an effort in training or l
2 in other means to open that dialogue so that we are not
}
3 perceived as being against the concept if we even ask what 4
it is?
5
-CRAIRMAN JACKSON:
Thank you for asking that 6
question.
In fact, we have just begun an effort in my 7
office working with the other Commissic:lers to in fact 8
develop a statement as to what we ell agree and can agree on i
9 what risk informed, performance basnd regulation-is.
It's a 10 document that we hope to have developed within the next few 11 weeks to a month that we can all sign off on, fine tune, 12 that can then be used as the basis for the kind of 13 discussion at all levels cf the' agency.
14 I believe you are absolutely right.
There is a 15 need now to pin this down, to have a common vocabulary, and 16 to have it form the basis and to undergird the various 17 efforts-that are under way.
18 It has become clear, particularly in the last 19 several months, that there is a need to dn that.
I think we 20 may all start thinking we knew what it meant in reactor 21-space with PRA, and so forth, but as your question and the 22 previous question have made abundantly clear, we need to 23-have some commonality of approach, and that is what the 24 Commission is setting out to do.
25 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN:
As still a newcomer to i
ANN RILEY-& ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300
?
Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
23 1
this agency, someone who has been here only 15 months, I can 2
tell you I had the same reaction when I first heard the i
3 words risk informed, performance-based.
I think 4
Commissioner Diaz at a recent Commission meeting talked 5
about the need for a picture in your head, and Commissioner 6
Dieus and I on the side admitted that we didn't have that a
7 picture of just the risk informed piece.
We have discovered 8
in recent weeks we are now making a very careful distinction P
9 between risk informed and risk based.
10 CHAIRMAN JACKSON:
That's right.
l 11 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN:
There in a continuum 12 that goes from risk based to deterministic regulation, and 13 risk informed is somewhere on that continuum.
I think it's i
14 an exercise that the Chairman has under way.
It's a useful 15 exercise, but I think it's going to be a.long time as we try l
16 to define where on that spectrum we are.
17 The strategic plan says we are going to try to do 18 risk informed and, as appropriate, performance based 19 regulation.
Performance based is really a synonym for 20 flexible as opposed to prescriptive.
21 Th
~irman in a speech she made last week at the 22 Reactor Safety Conference took a crack at defining what "as 23 appropriate performance based" might mean, and she said --
24 I'm sure she will correct me if I'm wrong -
that one way to 25 try to define when it's appropriate is if the place where we i
ANN.RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I. Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
34 1
are granting tha flexibility does not result in an 2
intolerable state for the system, then we can consider I
3 fl(>,1ble or performance based approaches, and conversely, I 4
think she said if the flexibility could result in an 5
intolerable situation, then we have to stay relatively 6
prescriptive or totally prescriptive.
?
.We are trying; we are grappling.
I think it's a 8
wonderful question, and I don't know that we are going to 9
come to simple answers any time soon.
10 CRAIRMAN JACKSON:
What the Cut..missi'aer has just 11 described to you in terms of looking at this issue of 12 deciding whether change will result in something tolerable 13 versus intolerable in fact came out of a discussion that he 14 and I had.
That's why we realize that there is a need to at 15 least begin a dialogue here at the Commission level and try 16 to take some initial stabs at what we think, at least today, 17 we mean, and we are undoubtedly sure that it will evolve
~ ith time and will take a slightly different meaning, i
18 w
19 depending.upon the particular context.
20 Commissioner Dicus, do you have a comment?
21 COMMISSIONER DICUS:
We all agree at this table 22 that we have a lot of work yet to do to successfully 23-implement a march into risk informed, performance based 24 activities.
I believe in it and I think it's the direction
-25 that we definitely should go.
I think there is a commitment ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I-Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) '842-0034
35 1
to do that, but making this commitment where we are today 2
and successfully concluding that there is a gap in here.
3 I think the two questions we had certainly have 4
addressed the problem, the definition.
Do we all understand 5
what it is?
Do we know how to do it?
Are we providing the 6
kind of training and guidance that we should so that we can 7
successfully implement it?
8 He have, I think, the nuclear power industry with 9
us to do this.
When we get over into the material side of 10 the house, I think they will as well, but at the same time II we have got to show some successes in our first attempts to 12 do this.
I am concerned that we are going to get everything i
13 together in the right sequence and in a proper time frame to 14 do this.
We have a commitment to do that, but we have a lot 15 of work yet to do.
16 CHAIRMAN JACKSON:
Commissioner Dias.
17 COMMISSIONER DIAZ:
I think the problem goes 18 beyond the issue of definition.
I think the agency needs to 19 clearly spell out what is our commitment to risk informed or 20 risk based or risk informed, performance based, and do that 21 in a sequence so that everyone in the agency is clear on it.
22 I think we are all concerned with that.
23 I don't see anybody at the microphones, and that 24 concerns me.
Let me make a comment on that.
I don't know 25 whether it is appropriate or not, but I'm one of those guys ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
f l
26 1
that never worries whether what I am saying is appropriate U
2 or not.
3 (Laughter.)
l 4
COMMISSIONER DIAZ:
Somehow I always pay for it 4
5 whether I was right Tr not.
6 We as an agency always have been but lately have 7
been more.and more concerned with the right that every f
i 8
employee of every licensee has to raise safety issues.
In 9
fact we have put out a new vocabulary, whether it is a 10 chilled environment, as I like to call it, or whether we l
11 want to develop-a warm-environment.
Actually, tropical 12 sounds good.
l 2
13-
[ Laughter.)
14
- COMMISSIONER DIAZ:
I think the same-issue is very l
35 important to us.
We need to be committed to have every
' t 16-employee of this agency to raise any issue that is of 17-importance to our mission or our goals not only without the 18-fear of retaliation, but actually knowing that it will be
- 19 welcomed, knowing that it will be appreciated, knowing that 20 it will be considered.
1 21 Although we don't agree all the time on many. issues at the ('ommission level, and in fact sometimes it is l
23 fun to disagree, I believe that on-this issue we are in 24:
total. agreement, that you need to know that your comments 25 and your-points of view are very welcome.
4 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
i Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034 a
av w-s e--
m.e p.
g w-
e>e-iteyogy 9----g.-y-&wg, w.-e m yg y,------g---,,--v-.s
.q-977'wmiu7-,e
=
aeep yvrw-%>g y
9r'-9 gyryw-iy.,,
iw w e pn - gy -. wire qc-ey erg, qpar-wwn-
27 1
CRAIRMAN. JACKSON:
Thank you.
In fact that is 2
precisely why we are here.
So I'm looking for hundreds of 3
people to come to the microphone, j
4 QUESTION:
While I was sitting next to my branch 5
chief he poked me and he said it's okay to ask a second 15 question.
7
[ Laughter.)
8 QUESTION:
I'm concerned for safety now, but 9
actually for a different reason.
We might do some very fine i
10 work within the Commission, but when we start in with our 11 risk informed inspections, the outsider-who doesn't maybe 12 understand what we are doing may look at our efforts and say 13 all of a sudden we are inspecting one pa rticular facility 14 twice or three times as much as another._'We say it's 15 because that other facility is more risky.
How do we defend
-16.
that?
t 17 CHAIRMAN JACKSON:
I think the defense is the l
3 18 following.
19 First of all, our job is protection of public
-20 health and safety.
The ultimate and fundamental objective 21_
of a risk informed approach is to give in fact more meaning 22 and assurance tnat what we are focused on cre those things 23 that have the greatest safety significance.
24 Then there are various. tools, some of which we-25
-have spoken about,-that one can develop and apply to making N
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D,C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
28 1
risk assessments, and out of that there is going to be a 2-
-fallout, that one finds that the water flows both ways.
3 There are going to be some instances or some facilities 4
where we may have been giving more attention than needs to 5
be given relative to where the real risks are, but there 6
could be other facilities or parts of facilities where we 7
need to give more attention.
8 That's in fact what a risk informed approach does 9
for you.
It means that you are focused on where the risk is 10 and cherefore there can be fallout both ways.
It's a 11 message in fact that-I've clearly made_with the industry, 12 particularly the nuclear power industry, namely, that if one 13 moves down a risk informed path that the water flows both 14 ways.
15 On the one hand there are going to be places and j
16 cases where we clearly can relieve regulatory burden, and we 17 should, based on less risk significance.
On the other hand 18 there could be-cases where greater vulnerabilities are in 19 fact realized and recognized and may heretofore have been 20 known about, in which case there could be more that is 21 required or more scrutiny that is needed.
22 I think we just have to be consistent in that 23 message and I think it helps us, but that is why the kinds 24 of discussions we have already begun here at the Commission 25 level and the need to try to settle on definition, develop ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
39 i
1 tools to train people, et cetera, and then to have all of I
2 our people deliver this message.
I think that helps us in j
3 the long run.
So it's different and a change in our i
4 vocabulary and our approach, but it is something that I 5
think we have to keep working at.
6 I appreciate the question because 't's an j
7-important one.
8 Is there another question?
j 9'
QUESTION: -This is a question from the regions.
10 It was asked this morning but we decided to ask it again-l 11 1 with a little more background.
?
12 As you may know, there hah been a significant loss i
13 of senior resident and resident inspector personnel from the 14 program over the past year both to industry and to other NRC 15 jobs.
Thare appear to be several factors influencing the i
16-individual decisions but some common themes relate to the 1
17 loss of effectiveness of the resident inspector pay scale 18 due to the implementation of locality pay and the impact of 19-the resident inspector rotation policy on families and 20 family finances.
21 What is the Commission doing to enhance retention 22 and recruitment of high quality resident inspectors?
23 CHAIRMAN JACKSON:
I will give the answer that I 24 gave this morning, which is that in fact retention of high 25 quality staff at all levels, but particularly in the ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300
. Washington, D.C. 20005.
(202)-842-0034 L-
_---.- -- -~-
30 1
resident inspector ranks, is obviously of concern to the 2'
Commission at all times.
3 With respect tc the impact of locality pay and l
4 rotation policy, that has to do with a specific term and 5
condition of work, and that is not something that we are 6
prepared to discuss, but I would in fact invite you to have 7
those discussions with Mr. Bird and other representatives 8
from the Office of Human Resources in terms of the specific 9
issues.
10 In the general sense, in terms of our-interest in 11-recruitment and retention of qualified and capable staff in 12 the inspector ranks, it's an area that we are giving 13 attention to.
We are looking at the overall situation, but 14 there is always an issue in terms of the competition, in
- s terms of what people'can do in the private sector vice what 16 they can do in a government position.
17 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN:
There is a paper due to 18 the Commission as a result of DSI-11.
The demographic 19 question that came up this morning, I actually hadn't been 20 aware of the loss, but there is a requirement on the staff 21 to let us know by November 30th about the past and present 22 demographics and give us any recommendations that they need 23 to give us to ensure a stable or improving resident program, j
24 That is something that we'are expecting a paper on very 25 soon, and the demographic data will be in there.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250-I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
31 I
1 I think we all believe that the residents are sort i
2 of the forefront, the pilots of this institution in some i
+
3 sense, and we need to make sure that they are the best that
{
4 they can be.
I 5
CHAIRMAN JACKSON:
Thank you.
l 6
Is there another question?
7 QUESTION:
You indicated that our strategic plan 8
is the first step in managing for results.
Could you 9
outline how you envision succeeding steps being implemented
- 10 to have employees be accountable for the results as they I
11 perform their duties as well as the time line for this?
12 CHAIRMAN JACKSON: 'The hNecutive Council has 13 undertaken the implementation of a new program and budget i
14 planning process for the agency that is getting under way 15 this fall.
A key part of that involves developing operating 16 plans, as I had indicated earlier, for the various units of 17 NRC down to the section level.
18 Those operating plans are not just activity 19 focused; they.are focused on what we need to do to 20 accomplish the overall goals of the agency translated 21 appropriately to goals down to these functional levels.
22 The activities that would be done as part of those
. 23 operating plans are linked to the agency goals.
In iact 24 that is going to be rolled out and is-being rolled out in 25 the next several weeks.
As I-indicated earlier, I would ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
i 32 f
1 expect your managers to sit down with you and have 2
- discussions with you about your work and how that links to l
3 the ctrategic plan and-how the various unit operating plans 4
fit into that.
5 QUESTION:
live got a question about the strategic
[
t 6.
plan and implementing operating plans.- One of the things j
7 that I have noticed in looking at some of the goals and 8
things that have filtered down to the working level in my 9
area is it seems that we are focusing too hard on 10 establishing goals that are easy to measure rather than i
11 goals that-really speak to the quality of the work that we 12 are doing.
13 As an example, we will do so many inspections a 14 year versus the quality of the inspections that we do, or 15 we'll have so many licensing actions a year versus the 16 quality of the licensing actions themselves.
17 I am a little bit concerned that we are going to 18 get misdirected from the real focus and the real goal, which 19 la to do'high quality work, by trying to achieve soms other 20 goals that may be somewhat important but just happen to be 21 the easiest things to measure and therefore the goals that 22 are going in the operating plans, 23 CRAIRMAN JACKSON:
What you have talked about,
. 24:
whether you are talking number of inspection-hours or number 25 of licensing actions,. fall into the column of what I call ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
-w-,
=~
v,w-em
, --*ii,,,,-
2,-2,--er,
==rw.ww--
,----e,-
ww-
- - -, - -.. --w,
-m.,-w,,,,-y, w
--%-,--g-,
rr,
-,4,r v w = e,-m v +r-wr-v--r- - -
i 33 1
outputs.
What I think you are concerned about or what we 2
all should be concerned about is outcomes.
Outputs simply 3
have to be designed to be measures or metrics of the things 4
we do to achieve certain ends.
5 As part of the new planning process the Executive 6
Council is charged with seeing to it that in fact what gets 7
translated down to the various functional unit levels is 8
clearly outcome focused.
9 I think Mr. Callan is sitting here and he's not 10 wiggling in his seat.
So I believe that he clearly 11 understands that all of these issues are meant to be 12 addressed in this new planning process.
l 13 Thank you.
14 QUESTION:
Thank you.
15 COMMISSIONER DIAZ:
I think we all see this 16 tremendous amount of work in different fashions, but I think 17 it's important to realize that the strategic plan is 18 supposed to be a living document; it's not supposed to be a 19 line in the sand we are going to do this.
That is a plan.
20 As it is implemented these kind of issues will come and will 2L enrich the plan and will make it then implementable.
22 That is essentially what Mr. Callan and you are 23 charged to do.
The plan is only as good as it will be 24 implemented, but it's not a point or a line; it is a living 25 plan of the Commission and it needs to be adjusted year by
(
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1200 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
34 1
year, and that in why it is a plan and not simply an action 2
item.
3 CHAIRMAN JACKSON:
In fact the new planning and 4
budget process has built into it continual review and 5
foedback, assembling of lessons learned, and that goes back 6
into the loop to refresh and update the strategic plan.
So 7
that is in fact a part of the structure of what is being 8
rolled out today.
9 QUESTION:
Good afternoon.
Several minutes ago I 10 believe Commissioner McGaffigan used the word 11 "tolerability."
Some rations, our colleagues oversees, have 12 defined tolerability in'a rink informed manner, you might 13 say.
I was wondering if the Commission has any plans to 14 address that same issue as we move forward with this risk i
15 informed, performance based program in terms of perhaps
{
16 revisiting how we have used the words " adequate protection" 17 under the Atomic Energy Act.
18 CRAIRMAN JACKSON:
I think as we move forward we 19 have to move forward in a way that is consistent with the 20 legislative and legal foundation on which we do our work and i
21 that we don't in fact pull that. foundation away.
22 Having said that, that does not preclude our 23 revisiting these issues, and in fact as we move along we 24 have the Office of the General Counsel involved with having
-25 the various legal analyses vis-a-vis our undergirding ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
35 1
foundation done and considered by the Commission as we move 2
along in the technical and definitional arena.
I think that 3
is responsive to your question.
Thank you.
4 COMMISSIONER DIAZ:
We can also say yes.
1 5
CRAIRMAN JACKSON:
We could say yes within the 6
law.
7 Is there another question?
8 QUESTION:
I've got acother question from the 9
regions that was also asked this morning.
Given the recent
)
10 troubles experienced by vendors that manufacture approved 11 spent fuel storage casks through ongoing bankruptcy and 12 regulatory issues, how concerned is the Commission that some 13 reactors will have to shut down in the not too distant 14 future because of the lack of viable options for removing 15 spent fuel from the spent fuel pools.
16 CHAIRMAN JACKSON:
You're right.
The question did 17 come up earlier today.
Of course the Commission is 18 concerned at all times about the issue cf Icel offload and 19 the impact that the lack of spent fuel storage space would 20 have on the continued operations of the plant.
21 Having said that, as I indicated this morning, the 22 issue of adequacy of spent fuel storage capability, whether 23 it's in a pool or in a dry cask on site, is obviously 24 something that we monitor very closely.
25 As far as I know, there has been one particular ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
.. ~. _ _
36 1
bankruptcy of one particular cask vendor, and there are a 2
number of dry cask designs that NRC has certified and/or 3
licensed and-are being used.
So while it is an. issue that 4
we continue to monitor and keep track of, it is not that 5
there is a crisis because one particular vendor has 6
experienced difficulty.
7 Maybe I'll let him speak to it, because I think 8
Commissioner McGaffigan spoke very eloquently this morning 9
to licensee responsibility and concern in this area.
10 COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN:
I'll just add what I did 11 this morning, and I got a thumbs up from Carl Paperiello for 12 doing this.
So it must be okay.
13 The point I made is that as a result of these 14 problems that are being encountered licensees are taking I
15 more ownership for the vendors now, for their suppliers, and 16 developing relationships.
They realize there is a quality 17.
control problem and that they have to do something about it.
18 I think that is happening and will continue to happen.
19 CHAIRMAN JACKSON:
In the end it is in fact the 20 licensees' or the reactor operators' ox that will be gored 21 and they are now taking a more active interest in the whole 22 quality assurance issue with the cask vendors.
As far as 23 our being in an immediate. crisis situation, there are other
-24 cask vendors.whose casks continue to be used at licensee i
25 sites.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
O 37 1
Is there another question?
2 QUESTION:
What are the top three priorities for 3-the Commission in FY-987 4
CHAIRMAN JACKSON:
I think I have already outlined 5
them.
It has to do with some big picture solutions in areas 6
related to reactor parformance and assessment.
It is making 7
sure that the initiatives that I outlined that are already 8
under way in terms of certain critical rulemakings and NMSS 9
are successfully implemented, and it is to get our planning 10 and budget framework fully in place and under way.-
t 11 Having said that, there-are a whole lot of things 12 that I could just list for you that are varying degrees of 13 interest to varying members of the Commission, but in fact 14 it basically covers the waterfront.
15 Thank you.
16 QUESTION:
This is a question from the regions as 17 well as a similar question from a headquarters employee.
18 The President announced an agreement with China where U.S.
19 companies could apply for licenses to sell equipment to the l
20 Chinese for their nuclear power plants subject to U.S.
21 monitoring.
What do you believe NRC's role will be l
22 regarding the China-U.S. agreement on the transfer of 23 nuclear technology and equipment?
l 24 CHAIRMAN-JACKSON:
The-NKC was contacted and asked 25 for its position on so-called supplemental implementing i
e -
t ANN RILEY'&-ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street,- N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 l-(202) 842-0034
r f
38 l
i agreements and we issued our-assent to that earlier-this -
2 week.
l 3
More substantively, NRC is the export licensing t
4 agency for the' export of nuclear technology for the U.S.
5 Government, but that occurs under the umbrella of what is 6
Lealled the' Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy Agreements which 7
we already have with China, but it is_one that has not been i
8
-fully implemented heretofore because of a number of concerns t
9 in areas _related to nuclear export controls and China's 10-activities with countries with which we had some difficulty, 11 such as-Iran.
12 In fact China has put into place a'new export 13 control regime both from the point of view of their laws as 14 well as joining a nuclear suppliers group known as the 15 Zangger Committee and giving assurances that it will not
{
l 16 export nuclear technology to countries whose facilities are 17 not safeguarded, and then more recently in writing some 18 specific commitments to the President vis-a-vis its 19
, cessation or non-engagement of activities'with Iran.
P 20 If the President certifies China with respect to 21 these. requirements and the Congress accepts lthat,- then the-i 22 Peaceful Uses ofLNuclear Energy Agreement can be fully 23
= implemented, but even once that occurs the-NRC has a 24_
specific responsibility on a case by case basis each time t
25' there is an export license application to make certain 1
JUC2 RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
f Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington,-D.C. 20005 i
(202) 842-0034-
39 1
determinations vis-a vis the safeguarding of nuclear 2
facilities in the country to which the export would be made 3
and with respect to inimicality questions with respect to 4
national defense and security.
So there are specified 5
requirements and determinations that we have to make on a 6
case by case basis as we consider whether to issue an export 7
license in each instance.
8 If in fact the activity picks up, and I think U.S 9
vendors certainly expect the activities to pick up, then our 10 activities in those areas will also pick up.
The Commission 11 reviews those license applications on a case by case basis 12 because of the national security and safeguards issues 13 involved.
14 Are there Cther quections?
15 QUESTION:
We've got one last one from this 10 morning that was also from the regions.
What is the 17 Commission doing to ensure that the safety impact of the 18 economic deregulation of the electric utility industry is 19 minimized?
Has the Commission considered the potential 20 impact of economic competition between nuclear producers on 21 the willingness of licensees to freely share important 22 safecy information?
23 CHAIRMAN JACKSON:
I think the answer has to be a 24 variant on what we gave this morning.
First of all, if 25 Commissioner McGaffigan will let me draw on a comment he ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
40 1
made this morning, which-is true, while we have certainly 2
spoken and I have certainly spoken in speeches about the 3
need for us to monitor the potential of economic pressure in 4
terms of eroding a focus on safety, economic operation and 5
safe operation is not an oxymoron; they aren't mutually 6
exclusive.
7 I said this morning, and I'll let Commissioner 8
McGaffigan speak to what he spoke to, that the real issue in i
l 9
terms of how economics affects safe operation probably has
.)
j-10 more to do with licensees who may be predisposed to cut 11 corners in the first place and who may have gotten 12 themselves into a hole, and once they have gotten themselves.
13 into a hole, that's where the expense occurs; it is very 4
14 expensive to dig out of the hole.
15 Nonetheless, we monitor it, and a particular area
+
16 to which we have given focus and in fact have a rulemaking 17 relates to the adequacy of decommissioning funding and some 18' specific changes to our regulations in-that area that need 19 to be made to ensure the adequacy of decommissioning funds j
20 for licensees that may no longer come under an economic 21 regulation umbrella at the state level and/or licensees that 22
~ may prematurely shut down their plants.
23 The final statement, which is also what I 24 mentioned'this morning, is that I've already outlined to you
'25 some fundam : cal changes in how we go about or at least look l
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
41 1
at some fundamental change in our plant assessment 2
processes, taking an integrated look and review in addition 1
3 to dealing with what you might call some of the design basis 4
issues.
These are all oriented to making sure, coupled with 5
risk informed regulntion, that we are all looking at the i
1 6
same thing.
I 7
How let 100 turn the microphone over to i
8 Commissioner McGaffigan.
i 9
COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN:
The only thing I'll add 10 is echoing the point about safety does not have to cost.
We 11 have lots of data now that shows that there are a lot of 12 plants in the virtuous quadrant of the graph where you have 13 SALP 1 or hign-SALP scores and very low cost.
14 There could be a safety benefit to economic 15 deregulation was the point I made this morning in that there 16 is clearly going to be some consolidation in the industry.
17 That consolidation could lead to people who have 18 traditionally done better operating their facilities, who 19 haven't gotten in the trouble that the Chairman referred to, 20 operating more facilities.
So on average a few years from 21 now we may have a significant safety upgrade if the 22 economics allows it.
23 It's licentec choices that are going to lead to 24 the consolidation, not choices that we make, although I 25 think our job is going to be to watch and do the right thing ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005 (202) 842-0034
42 1-in terms of facilitating and protecting safety as that 2
consolidation goes-forward.
3 CHAIRMAN JACKSON:
In addition, with respect to 4
the issue of information sharing, we have no regulatory 5
authority to tell one company that it should share 6
information with another.
It is certainly discu sion that 7
is going on.within the industry itself, with INPO, with NEI, 8
because the industry recognizes that it is an issue.
9 To the extent that it affects the extent to which 10 our licensees take advantage of and make use of operating 11 experience, then that is something-of concern to us.
)
12 Also, when we find there may be a safety issue 13 that has generic implications, then we.put out a generic 14 communication and we expect the licensees'to respond to 15 that.
16 So those are some of the ways in fact that we are 17-padressing it, but I again would like to reiterate 18=
Commissioner McGaffigan's comment.- The issue has to do with 19 licensees who may be predisposed to cut corners or not pay 20 attention'in the.first place.
Those that are good 21 performers may turn out to be the big players in the end.
.22 It's not for us to predict, but those who sre the good 23 performers certainly are the ones that need not fear that 24 competition necessarily means thst they are going to have 25 trouble maintaining safety, and I would not expect that to ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street,-N.W., Suite 300 Washington,-D.C. 20005 (202) 842-0034
- ~..
~.
e 43 lL, 1
be the case.
l l
2 Is there another question?
i 3
Again I thank you for-coming out.
It's a very i
4 beautiful day, so it gave us all an opportunity to walk in 5
the sun.
Thank you very much.
6
[ Applause.)
7 (Whereupon, at 2:40 p.m., the public meeting was 8
concluded.)
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 j
21 22 23 24 25 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1250 I Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20005
.(202) 842-0034
CERTIFICATE Thirqis to certify that the attached. description of a meeting of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission entitled:
TITLE OF MEETING:
ALL EMPLOYEES MEETING -- PUBLIC MEETING PLACE OF MEETING:
Rockville, Maryland' i
DATE OF MEETING:
Thursday, October 30, 1997 was held as herein appears, is.a true and-accurate record of the meeting, and that this is the original transcript thereof taken stenographically by ra, thereafter reduced to typewriting'by me or under the direction of the court reporting company Transcriber:
tiz/I91/
kid'A -.
1 Reporter Mike Paulus
,-..en L,+,.v,.v,~...-n,..
v
.m n.
na.,c.
--c-n.,,