ML20212M131
| ML20212M131 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/19/1999 |
| From: | Dicus G, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Vietticook A NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212M127 | List: |
| References | |
| SECY-99-219-C, NUDOCS 9910080175 | |
| Download: ML20212M131 (6) | |
Text
'
l NOTATION VOTE RESPONSE SHEET 1
TO: Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary 1
i I
FROM: CHAIRMAN DICUS
SUBJECT:
SECY-99-219 - PROPOSED REVISION OF THE ENFORCEMENT POLICY TO ADDRESS THE PROCESS FOR ASSESSING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF VIOLATION w/ comments -.
Approved X Disapproved Abstain Not Participating COMMENTS:
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS I du, M.m su ATUR$_/C lw be 19 19T9 l DATE f '
Entered on "AS" Yes x No i 9910000175'991007 ORRESP DE E PDR
% ont
(;. .
t ',
l .
1 CHAIRMAN DICUS' COMMENTS ON SECY-99-219, " PROPOSED REVISION TO THE EWFORCEMENT POLICY TO ADDRESS THE PROCE.c5 FOR ASSESSING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF VIOLATIONS"
. I approve the publication of the revised NRC Enforcement Policy in the Federa/ Register.
The NRC Enforcer.w..t .clicy will continue to evolve, and although additional changes to the enforcement polic, are anticipated (after more fully considering the implementation of the revised reactor oversight process and use of risk in our material's oversight orocesses), this y timely revision to the Enforcement Policy will provide consolidated guidarce and capture those important changes that we have already made to our enforcement proc.ssses. The staff should ensure mat the next revision to the Enforcement Policy is fully integra'.ed with the revised reactor oversight process and completed on a schedule that supports the implementation of a revised reactor oversight process at all operating reactors.
The staff should review the discussion related to announcing public meetings containe'd in the FRN. While this information is currently accurate, some ongoing initiatives may soon cause this information to be outdated (e.g., electronic bulletin board may be eliminated). It appears appropriate for the staff to consider this in the FRN and provide the public with guidance (e.g.,
webpage) for where additionalinformation on revisions to process for noticing public meetings, if
- approved, could be found.
In the Enforcement Policy, under Section VI. Enforcement Actions, the staff should delete the sentence that states "For the vast majority of violations, a Notice of Violation or a Notice of Nonconfortnance is the normal action."
Other, minor, editorial comments are noted on the attached pages.
l 1
4 i
I issues such as, but not limited to, programmatic breakdowns
. ., (i e aggrega o a ons ),2 repetitive violations, willful violations and reponing violations. The NR of this term in the context of assessing the significance of violations. T l warranted given the nature of stakeholder concerns, which included the te defmition, its subjective nature, and its lack of a clear nexus to safety. T that use ofregulatory significance (under the practice of aggregation) essment that is a for should be performed outside the enforcement process. Under the revi concerns about a licensee's performance as a result of a large number ofless sig violations, or repetitive violations based on ineffective corrective actions, assessment processes provide the regulatory tools necessary to address these perf concems.
Although the NRC believes it is appropriate to eliminate the term regula from this policy statement, some ofits underlying concepts are appropriate .
Gd j NRC continue to consider violations that impact or have the potential to impa' c ability to carry out its statutory mission. Examples of cases in this category wou violations of 10 CFR 30.9, 50.9, etc. (completeness and accuracy ofinfo ,
50.54(a), 50.59, 76.68, etc. (need for NRC approval of changes), and Subpart ,
30.50,50.72-73, etc. (reponing requirements). Even inadvertent reportin because many of the surveillance, quality control, and auditing systems on w
'The previous policy stated that a group of Severity Level IV violations could be eva uated in the aggregate had the same underlying cause or programmatic deficiencies.and ass ,
en 964=
_ gh- - - - - -IO*E
and its licensees rely in order to monitor compliance with safety standards are based primarily on complete, accurate and timely recordkeepingunland reporting. The NR 16DtT' consider willful violations involving licensees and their employees, including the ability to i j I maintain a safety conscious work environment. Examples of cases in this category would 1
include violations of 10 CFR 30.10, 50.5, etc. (deliberate misconduct), and willful violations of
]
)
I requirements including 30.7, 50.7, etc. (discrimination), 30.9, 50.9, etc. (completeness and i 1
accuracy ofinfonnation), and reporting requirements. Willful violations are by definition of particular concern to the Commission because its regulatory program is based on licensees and
- - l their contractors, employees, and agents acting with integrity and communicating with candor. l This section also elaborates on the concept of potential consequences as a consideration in the significance assessment process. It emphasizes that the NRC will consider the realistic likelihood of affecting safety, i.e., the existence of credible scenarios with potentially significant consequences. It also states that risk information will be used wherever possible and clarifies that use of risk information may increase or decrease the severity level of a violation.
This overall approach to assessing significance preserves the ability to evaluate violations based on those concepts the NRC believes important, while minimizing the controversy that surrounds the use of the term regulatory significance.
VI.B.2.d Exercise of Discretion The guidance in this section has been rewritten to state that the NRC may exercise
. 1 required to protect the public health, safety, or interest, or if the violation is willful. Section 2.204 sets out the procedures for issuing a Demand for Information (Demand) to a licensee or other l person subject to the Commission'sjurisdiction for the purpose of determining whether an order or other enforcement action should be issued. The Demand does not provide hearing rights, as only information is being sought. A licensee must answer a Demand. An unlicensed person may answer a Demand by either providing the requested information or explaining why the Demand should not have been issued.
III. RESPONSIBILITIES The Executive Director for Operations (EDO) and the principal enforcement officers of the NRC, the Deputy Executive Director for Reactor Programs (DEDR)and the Deputy Executive Director for Materials, Research and State Programs Rghrj Effesem GlT l (DEDMRS) have been delegated the authority to approve or issue all escalated enforcement actions.3 The DEDR is responsible to the EDO for NRC enforcement programs. The Office of Enforcement (OE) exercises oversight of and implements the NRC enforcement program. The Director, OE, acts for the Deputy Executive Director in enforcement matters in his absence or as I d 'egated.
Subjsct to the oversight and direction of OE, and with the approval of the Deputy Executive Director, where necessary, the regional offices normally issue Notices of Violation and proposed civil penalties. However, subject to the same oversight as the regional offices, the !
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) and the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and i Safeguards (NMSS) may also issue Notices of Violation and proposed civil penalties for certain activities. Enforcement orders are nonnally issued by the Deputy Executive Director or the Director, OE. However, orders may also be issued by the EDO, especially those involving the more significant matters. The Directors of NRR and NMSS have also been delegated authority to issue orders, but it is expected that normal use of this authority by NRR and NMSS will be confined to actions not associated with compliance issues. The Chief Financial Officer has been delegated the authority to issue orders where licensees violate Commission regulations by nonpayment oflicense and inspection fees. ,,
In recognition that the regulation of nuclear activities in many cases does not lend itself to a mechanistic treatment, judgment and discretion must be exercised in determining the severity levels of the violations and the appropriate enforcement sanctions, including the decision to issue a Notice of Violation, or to propose or impose a civil penalty and the amount of this penalty, after considering the general principles of this statement of policy and the significance of the violations and the surrounding circumstances.
I 'The term " escalated enforcement action" as used in this policy means a Notice of Violation or civil penalty for
- any Severity Level I,11, or 111 violation (or problem) or any order based upon a violation.
i l!
s
- r 1
\
1
' which the NRC chooses to exercise discretion and refrain from issuing a formal Notice of l eif# ,
Violation. It makes it clear that this discretion is not meant to eliminate 3the NRC's emphasis on IDfr l
l compliance for the importance ofmaintaining safety.Section VII.B.I.a includes the essence of l
the ' guidance on dispositioning power reactor Severity Level IV violations that was previously i
included in Appendix C. Sections VII.B.I.b - g are reserved for future applications. l I
Section VII.B.I.h includes guidance for dispositioning all other types oflicensees. This f
I subsection captures the guidance that was previously included under VII.B.1.
I VII.B.3 Violations Involving Old Design Issues I l
l I
Paragreph (a) of this section has been modified to include the correct schedule the NRC !
I will use when it considers whether it should exercise mitigating enforcement discretion for I I
violations associated with departures from the FSAR. The previous schedule stated,"within two )
years after October 18,1996." The correct schedule identifies March 30,2000, for risk-significant items as defined by the licensee's maintenance rule program and March 30,2001, for !
all other issues. Like the schedule in Section VII.A.I.h, this Commission-approved sche _dule inadvenently failed to be reflected in a revision to the policy statement.
Vll.C Notice of Enforcement Discretion for Power Reactors and Gaseous Diffusion Plants l
This section has been renamed to more clearly reflect that this type of discretion applies to both power reactors and gaseous diffusion plants.