ML20235P094
| ML20235P094 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/19/1987 |
| From: | Zech L NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20235N989 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-87-300 NUDOCS 8707200338 | |
| Download: ML20235P094 (17) | |
Text
__ - _ _ . . - . . _ _
- 4. .#O l l
I
. PREPARED TESTIN0NY SUBMITTED By j
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
TO i i
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY-AND WATER DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS ;
UNITED HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES l
CONCERNIN.G THE FY 1988 BUDGET REQUEST PRESENTED BY LANDO W. ZECH, JR.
CHAIRMAN SUBMITTED: MARCH 19, 1987 8707200330 870715 PDR FOIA CNDASHB7--3OO PDR1 e ..
._--.___--___-----___.---_.__-_a
o l 1
i
\
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission l FY 1988 Budget Testimony
'l Mr. Chairmer and members of the Committee, the Comission appears before l i
you today tc discuss NRC's FY 1988-Budget Recuest. With me today are my j l
fellow Commissioners, the Executive Director for Operations, the General i
Counsel and the principal office directors. >
I Overview
]
{
1 i
The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and the Energy Reorganization Act of.1974 l
assign the Nuc' lear Regulatory Comission important responsibilities. These l responsibilities include assuring that the benefits of the peaceful.use of nuclear energy are provided to our fellow citizens in such a way that the public health and safety and the environment will be protected and that the !
}
l common defense and security are not compromised.
, The Comission believes that sound and credible federal safety regulation i
is an important component in assuring the continuing safe use of ccmercial j nuclear power. We at the NRC intend to continue to pursue a. policy of firm and fair regulation of the nuclear industry.
4 Public confidence in nuclear power was shaken by the TMI accident. The l
Chernobyl accident has exacerbated the situation. We believe there are serious challenges today in order for our fellow citiz~ ens to continue to l
)
.2 receive the benefits of nuclear power. We at the NRC are structuring our programs to meet these challenges.. Congressional support in providing us the needed resources is an essential factor in attaining success.
While there may be challenges, we believe it is important to recognize that )
l commercial nuclear energy, for more than twenty years, has been making an important contribution to our nation's electrical needs and, with continued emphasis on safety, will be able to contribute to our nation's future
]
energy needs. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is composed of many dedicated and competent professionals who can be counted on to perform with integrity, candor, technical competence and with the' very strongest l
commitment to safety in the service of the American people. With your continued support, Mr. Chairman, I believe the American people will centinue to be very well Mrved by the NRC, Tne NRC's FY 1988 budget request reflects our commitments towards ensuring the continued safe operation of the 107 licensed nuclear power plants'as well as the quality construction of those plants remaining to te brought en-line. Additionally, our comitments involve protecting the public from !
risks associated with the widespreid use of nuclear materials under .
approximately 9,000 nuclear mater f als licenses; ensuring the safe !
transportation, storage and disposal of nuclear waste; provi#ing appropriate safeguards for facilities and (naterials; establishing a more ,
. predictable' and stable regulatory environment; encouraging nuclear power plant standardization; providing resources for essential safety research; l
l l
-__ _.._ . . . _ . . ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _____________--_m- . -
managing agency resources more effectively and efficiently; and consolidating NRC headquarters' offices.
The NRC budget request for FY 1988 is for $427.8 million and 3250 full timet equivalent (FTE) staff. Our FY 1989 budget estimate is .$422.6 million and 3,180 FTE. This. budget shows' our plan to reduce FTE allocations by about 10 percent from the FY 1986 level. It also reflects essentially the.same funding level as we have in FY 1987 plus a small increase primarily needed for essentidl safety research, oversight for the increasing number. of operating reactors, and the materials inspection program. It also providas funds for consolidating the majority of. cur Washington, D.C., headquarters .i staff into one building located in Rockville, Maryland.
This is a straightforward, responsible budget -- ene that we believe l contains the resources needed to fulfill our responsibilities. The Commission recognizes and is supportive of the need for budget austerity, and we have initiated actions to become more productive and to reduce resources. My fellow Commissioners cnd I strongly urge that you provide us with the resources we need to meet our regulatory responsibilities.
l Two specific examples of our efforts to become more productive and efficient in use of the public's resources are building consolidation and reorganization.
We are finally able to begin consolidating our headquarters' offices after .
i l
more than 10 years of operations dispersed among ten different buildings l l
. i
4-around the Washington, DC area. The General Services Administration has purchased an 18-story office building and signed ar. agreement to lease space in an adjacent building, scheduled for construction within about three years. This will permit full headquarters consolidation in Rockville. We have worked diligently on this endeavor and are comitted to its success.
The Congress har repeatedly supported our efforts te r.onsolidate cur headquarters employees. We believe the benefits the agency will derive from consolidation, in terms of increased efficiency and effectiveness, will be pemanent and will have a positive effect on our ability to protect the public health and safety.
Additionally, I have initiated, with Commission support, a major agency reorganization. The reorganization will comply with current statutes. No legislation is necessary. The purpose of the proposed reorganization is to better accommodate the changed nature of the agency's responsibilities and ,
workload through a more effective and efficient organizational structure.
The responsibilities of the Nuclear Regulatory Consission have-shifted from evaluation of construction permit and operating license applications to the regulation of a maturing operational industry. For example, in 1975, when the NRC was formed, there were 52 plants licensed to operate, 69 plants under construction and 75 applications for construction permits under i l
review. Today, there are 107 plants licensed to operate,18 plants under construction and no applications for construction pemits. As the plants l presently being built are completed, the NRC will have progressively less i i
l l
regulatory involvement with large complex construction activities and considerably more involvement with plant operations, maintenance, life er. tension and similar issues. Op to this point, however, the structure of ;
the agency has not evolved to reflect this shift in responsibilities, and the need for both different and differently deployed resources. Our I current reorganization initiative is an attempt to more properly reflect our responsibilities as we see them today and into the 1990's.
The basic reorganization structure and many of the senior managers have been recently approved by the Commission. The reorganization is planned to become effective in April 1987. The Commission expects that some
)
l reprogramming may be necessary as a result of the reorganization for l
FY 1987, but this would be accomplished within the resource level authorized by the Congress. For fiscal year 1988, the Commission will be i submitting revised budget information which reflects the reorganization.
As is the case for FY 1987, the revisions will be accomplished within the resource levels in the current FY 1988 request.
In the new organization, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) will be responsible and accountable for licensing, inspection and safeguards programs for reactors. The Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards -(NMSS) will have a parallel responsibility and accountability for non-reactor safety programs, including nuclear waste management.
l l
l l
i I
This approach will provide the managers of our programs greater capabilities to address, analyze and resolve operational safety issues.
Previously, several offices might have been involved with a single operational safety issue. Under the new reorganization, responsibility, authority and accountability will be more focused.
We have also established a new Office of Special Projects, reporting directly to the Executive Director for Operations. The new office is responsible for managing all aspects of the NRC's licensing and inspection efforts for nuclear power plants owned by the Tennessee Valley Authority and for the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant. This special office will be 1
maintained until these projects can once again be handled within the normal
! organizational framework of our Nuclear Reactor Regulation and Regional offices.
Under the new organization, the Office of International Programs and the Office of State Programs will become Commission-level offices rather than ,
1 staff offices. This action reflects the importance that the Commission assigns to enhanced communications internationally and with states, local j consnunities and Indian tribes. They will report to the Commission through the new Office of Government and Public Affairs. Additionally, the new j office will include the functions of the present Office of Public Affairs i and the Office of Congressional Affairs.
Another feature of the reorganization is to increase the responsibilities of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. The Office of Nuclear l
________m_.____ _ _ _ __ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _
Regulatory Research will now'be' responsible for resolution of generic safety issues, including unresolved safety issues, and for the review of full-scope probabilistic risk assessments. These assignments are intended to bring about a closer tie between research and other' agency safety programs. The recommendations of the recent National Academy of Sciences' report are under review by the Commission. - We anticipate taking actions in response to the reconnendations in the near future.
l The NRC research program is needed to provide us with sound technical information that we must have to deal effectively with complex technical issues. Between fiscal years 1981 and 1987, research funds have been reduced by more than 50 percent. The completion of large research projects I and joint programs with other parties have helped mitigate the effect of these reductions. However, the Commission is concerned that our capability to deal with future nuclear power plant problems will be greatly impaired by continued erosion of our research program funding. Without the. safety information provided by our research program to support the resolution of complex technical issues, we could be forced to shut down some operating l facilities or delay licensing others. Either situation could impose significant costs on the public and the nudear industry.
The NRC will continue to rely on industry to conduct programs supportive of the agency's regulatory programs. Some significant examples of current l industry programs include: reassessment of Babcock and Wilcox designed reactors; accreditation of training for reactor personnel; industry degraded core rulemaking review; reactor construction and operations i
a l
-]
I j
- i assessments including events evaluations; readiness reviews; owner's group efforts on technical issues; plant specific probabilistic risk assessments; and centralized training of plant personnel for piping examination. l The Comission believes that it is important to increase the regulatory stability and predictability of our regulatory process. The Commission is l
currently reviewing a legislative proposal to improve the reactor licensing process.
Additionally, NRC is acting to effect improvements in nuclear regulation where it is within our existing authority to do so. The Comission believes that the future of the industry would be best served by adoption of standardized plant designs. Standardization can bring about improvements in design, construction, operation, maintenance and training, as well as in plant performance and management. Standardization should take into account the lessons the NRC has learned in almost three decades of development of comercial nuclear power. It could. improve both licensing schedules and plant operational safety. Although we believe that legislation would be highly desirable, the Comission is developing a .
policy statement which will emphasize the Comission's expectations that future reactor designs be standardized. ,j l
The appendix to our testimony sumarizes the ag.ency's budget request by major budget categories. I will briefly summarize each program.
l
-1
- j i
L__ ________ ________.__ ___________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. Program Summary Reactor Regulation l The overall resources for our reactor regulatory program will be about the l
same in FY 1988 as they are in FY 1987. However, the mix of in-house staff and technical assistance funding will change, and there will be some adjustments within the program as the nature of the workload shifts from license reviews to maintaining operating nuclear power plants.
We are providing for a higher level of review of some plants identified as needing increased regulatory attention and evaluations of unanticipated reactor events. These activities have required significant agency 1
resources and ranagement attention. For example, our efforts related to TVA plants and Comanche Peak, as well as evaluating operational events, will centinue to require application of our staff and contractor resources to review safety and licensee management issues.
We will centinue to conduct an active reactor operator license examination program, resolve safety issues, implement policies on severe accidents and 1
safety goals, and review advanced reactor concepts now being evaluated by l
the Department of Energy.
1 ,
1 l
l l
l l
l l
- l C.-- ____m__.-______-.-____________.____.m-_.-__. _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _.___.____.___-.m,_ - . -
_ 1_._. .m__ _ __ - _-__. _ _ __ ._._ _ ..__
. - 10'-
o Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards i
The Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards programs have been adjusted in respo.ise to the additional responsibilities assigned to the NRC by the Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980, as amended in 1985, and the f Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. Most importantly, NRC must: ensure that appropriate regulations exist for both NRC and state licensing of low-level waste disposal sites; be prepared to provide technical assistance to states in reaching decisions on such disposal sites; and be prepared to license both a monitored retrievable storage facility, if authorized by Congress, and the high level waste repository.
4 Other essential efforts in FY 1988 include the completion of licensing reviews for several thousand bypro Q ct, source and special nuclear material l licensees, and the conduct of a comprehensive safeguards program designed to protect against risks from theft, diversion or sabotage, at licensed facilities and during transport of nuclear materials.
! Funding for our Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards program will be 1
about the same in FY 1988 as it is in FY 1987. )
)
l 4
Inspection and Enforcement i
The Inspection and Enforcement Program will continue to emphasize on-site inspection of reactors. At least two resident inspectors are assigned to
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ = _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ . _ ---_-___a
. - 11 e almost all reactor sites. This means that about 160 NRC personnel are
~
stationed on-site to observe, evaluate and report on the adequacy of licensee nuclear safety activities on a day-to-day basis. Their efforts are augmented by region-based inspectors and technical contractors who conduct a variety of highly specialized inspections designed to achieve an I indepth perspective on licensee power plant safety.
Management has been concentrating on improving the effectiveness and .
1 efficiency of the reactor inspection effort. Programs are being developed to improve the methods and information used to focus inspection attention l
on particular plants and systems which are most prone to problems and on new inspection approaches. Event assessments, inspection appraisals, operational data, probability. risk assessments and performance indicators will be used to detennine where resources are most needed. Additional- !
l diagnostic team inspections will examine the functioning of components and systems. In addition, the safety impact of major plant modifications will be conducted to evaluate performance and require safety improvements where I needed.
Finally, the Comission has not neglected its inspection program for- the approximately 9,000 materials licensees. It is in the area in which the average citizen is most likely to come in contact with licensed nuclear materials. The proposed budget provides additional resources to irprove' the oversjght of NRC's materials licensees.
l l
l l
)
H
- e 12 -
All of the above functions and responsibilities will be carried over to the new organization. Inspection responsibilities will be assigned to NRR and NMSS. Enforcement responsibilities will be assigned to a new office i
reporting to a Deputy Executive Director for Operaticns.
! Research In FY 1988, the major emphasis of the NRC research program will continue to I be the early identification and resolution of operational safety issues.
l Examples of these operational safety issues are corrosion in piping vessels, radiation embrittlement of reactor vessels, defective valves and relays in safety systems, inadequate means for detecting and characterizing ,
flaws in critical components, steam generator degradation in pressurized water reactors, cracked piping in boiling water reactors, temporary loss of feedwater at the Davis-Besse plant, and power loss to the Integrated Control System at the Rancho Seco plant.
As a result of the accident at Three Mile Island, our research program now includes important efforts on severe accidents and on assessment of risks resulting from such accidents. The severe accident research is focused on:
assessing various accident sequences and the core damage which can result from inadequate core cooling; considering methods for restoring adequate core cooling; examining the response of reactor containment to loads from severe accidents; and analyzing the release and transport of radioactive material during serious reactor acciderts.
_._A_ ..
The risk assessment effort has centered on the study of six plants in the Reactor Risk Reference Document (NUREG-1150). The purpose of this effort is to provide a quantitative risk basis for NRC's evaluation of plant safety performance. The NUREG-1150 draf t document has been issued for comment, and a final version will be published in about a year. The i methods developed and results reported in NUREG-1150 will be used in the l
Independent Plant Evaluation (IPE) program to examine and identify accident sequences or events which could significantly affect the safety of U.S.
operating nuclear plants. We expect that the IPE effort should be completed in the next 2 years.
1 l
Dur research program is providing the technical information to resolve many other operational safety questions. This includes the evaluation of:
aging of reactor equipment such as piping, valves, relays and steam generators; degraded materials due to corrosion, radiation embrittlement and fatigue; inservice inspection methods to detect flaws and cracks in pipes; and carthquake hazards and their effects on operating plants.
The NRC research efforts planned for FY 1988 will also contribute to the technical basis the NRC needs to evaluate independently the adequacy of programs and information being developed by the Department of Energy necessary to license geologic repositories for' the disposal of high-level radioactive waste.
l The small funding increase for our research program will provide resources for: the construction, testing and initial operatiers of the thermal q
. - ' 14 -
1 hydraulic test facilities which will provide information on which to base future regulatory actions; selective experimentation and testing of various aspects of a high-level waste repository to validate performance assessment models to be used in the regulatory process and in licensing evaluation; 1 i l and evaluations of alternatives to the presently used shallow land burial I for disposal of low-level waste.
l l
l~ The Commission believes it mutually beneficial to expand, as practicable, the coodtrative efforts between the NRC and the various industry' organizations involved in nuclear safety research -- EPRI Owner's Groups, vendors and other government agencies performing related work. Where coopetution is appropriate, we believe our efforts will have a broader level of exposure, potentially better peer review and a greater level of a:4eptance. Alto by spreading costs, cooperative research'can be done in a more cost-efficient way.
The Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research also has numerous bilateral and multilateral agreements which include most of the free world foreign countries involved in nuclear safety research. In many cases, these agreements result in an influx of money from those countries to our l
l programs as well as a beneficial exchange of information on nuclear safety 1 .
- issues.
1 e
0 s
__._.-___________.__.______..._______._______...__________.____________________m_____-_~
, ,g , .--
y Conclusion i
i l
The details of our budget request are contained in our submission, which has already been provided to the Comittee.
4 i
a In closing, we want to reemphasize the Comission's belief that our FY 1988 1 l
4 l budget request it a straightforward and responsible budget. It contains {
the resources tnat we believe are necessary for us to meet our regulatory I
responsibilities for protection of public health and safety in the civflian .
use of nuclear materials. We urge.your strong support for the full amount of our request.
I i
1 1
(
., i l
l i
i 4
1 l
; .) '
'\
I
_ J
APPENDIX l
^
BUDGET RESOURCE
SUMMARY
1/
PROGRAMS FY 1987 FY_1988 FY 1989 FTE 1 _
_FTE_ $ FTE_ $ !
i Nuclear Reactor ;
Regulatten 686 80.8 655 83.5 635 81.0 Nuclear Mat'l Safety ;
and Safeguards 363 40.4 344 41.2 337 40.0 j 1 i inspection and l Enforcement 1.136 100.6 1.114 104.9 1.088 98.9- l I
.1 Nuclear Regulttory i Research 180 111.7 172 119.7 172 125.3 l l
Program Technical i Support 357 33.7 334 34.1 323 33.7 Pr5 gram Direction and Admin. 647 43.1 631 44.4 625 43.7
- 3.369 410.3 3.250 427.8 3.180 422.6 l II Dollars are expressed in millions.
9 l
1 1
1
- - - - - - - - - _ - . _ _ . _ . . _ _ . .