ML20236V676
| ML20236V676 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/25/1987 |
| From: | Zech L NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Bowsher C, Brooks J, Glenn J, John Miller GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE, HOUSE OF REP., GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET, SENATE, GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8712040471 | |
| Download: ML20236V676 (7) | |
Text
-
v--
a
-y pD
[ 'o UNITED STATES -
, j [,,g a
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION w ASHINGTON, D. C. 20065 y ;
November 25, 1987 CHAIRMAN The Honorable John Glenn, Chairman Comittee on Governmental Affairs United States Senate
-Washington, DC 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am enclosing a sumary of actions taken by the United States Nuclear-Regulatory'Comission (NRC) in response to the. General Accounting Office (GAO) report entitled." Nuclear Regulation: Efforts to Ensure Nuclear-Safety can Be Strengthened." This sumary is required by Section 236 of Public Law 91-510, the_" Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970," as amended.
Sincerely.
(N . ,
Lando W. Zech Jr.
Enclosure:
Responses to GA0 Recoramendations cc: w/ enclosure:
Senator William V. Roth,.Jr.
h 4
I E __ ______
j
SR REGO
.- 'o, UNITED STATES
! n. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l2 'I WASHINGTON, D. C. 20565
- %9 . ,,, p November 25, 1987 CHAIRMAN i'
.The Honorable Charles A. Bowsher Comptroller General of the United States
' General Accounting Office Washington,'DC 20548
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am enclosing a sumary of actions taken by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission-(NRC) in response to,the General Accounting Office (GAO) report entitlea "huclear Regulation: Efforts to Ensure Nuclear Safety Can Be Strengthened." This sumary is required by Section '236 of Public Law 91-510,.
the " Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970," as amended.
Sincerely, W- .
Lando W. Zech, Jr. ..
Enclosure:
Responses to GA0 Recommendations a
l I
- ) .-
- g arou i
/ 'o,, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
! n W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20666 N' -
\ ,,,,, November 25, 1987 CHAIRMAN The Honorable Jack Brooks, Chairmen Comittee on Government Operations United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am enclosing a sumary of actions taken by the United States Nuclear
- Regulatory Comission-(NRC) in response to the General Accounting Office (GAO).
report entitled " Nuclear Regulation: Efforts to Ensure Nuclear Safety Can Be-
-Strengthened." This sumary is required by Section 236 of Public Law 91-510, the " Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970," as amended.
Sincerely, (N . k ~
Lando W. Zec Jr.
Enclosure:
Responst.s to GA0 Recommendations cc: w/ enclosure:
Rep. Frank Horton
Q - -
t g
AR Rf Op #' '
/ o- UNITED STATES
'8 '7, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20666 I
, oi,,,.j November 25,.1987 CHAIRMAN The Honorable. James C. Miller, III Director-Office of Management and Budget Washington, DC 20503
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am enclosing a summary of actions taken by the United States. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in response to the General Accounting Office (GAO)
. report entitled " Nuclear Regulation: Efforts.to Ensure Nuclear Safety Can Be Strengthened." This summary is' required by Section 236 of Public Law 91-510, the " Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970," as amended.
Sincerely, k- .
Lando W. Zech, Jr.
Enclosure:
Responses to GAO Recorrendations
i RESPONSE TO GA0 REPORT (GA0/RCED-87-141) RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation No. 1 (Chapter 3 of Report)
The GAO stated.that, although'it agreed with the NRC that the ultimate decision to shut a plant down should be made on a case-by-case basis, there should be a mechanism to alert the industry that plants would be shut down when safety or management problems approach a specific threshold.
The GA0 report recomended that "the Chairman, NRC, develop guidelines.to use as a framework in deciding the types and/or degree of safety problems that constitute undue risk such that NRC would consider shutting a plant down."
NRC Response:
Prior to issuing an operating license for a nuclear power plant, the NRC reviews.the design features of'the plant and makes an assessment of the credible design basis accident scenarios and the systems and conditions necessary to prevent or mitigate those accidents such that regulated exposure limits will not be exceeded. The results of this review are documented in formal reports issued by the NRC prior to licensing and are reflected in the plant's technical specifications issued as a part of the operating license.-
The plant's technical specifications clearly identify' operating conditions requiring the plant to be shut down and time limits for achieving shutdown conditions. Compliance with these technical specifications by the licensee is mandatory; failure to do so can result in civil penalties and suspension or revocation of the operating license. As noted in the GA0 report, NRC has a number of enforcement. options, ranging from violation notices to binding orders, that can be employed when operation of a plant is found to be in violation of the license, regulations, or licensee commitments.
The NRC staff recognizes.the. continuing need to evaluate the safety performance of its licensees and has developed a number of formal procedures to this end.
Since 1980, the NRC has conducted a formal, periodic assessment of each utility holding a construction permit or operating license. These assessments, called Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) reviews, perform a very important function in the NRC's determination of the adequacy of a licensee's performance ano the allocation of the NRC's inspection resources. Each plant is reviewed every 12 to 18 months in 10 to 12 management and operation areas, including the number and severity level of violations. .Although not specifically mentioned in the GA0 report, the NRC had identified management problems at the five plants discussed in the report through the SALP process and had taken specif_ic actions to improve management performance at those facilities. (It should be noted, however, that a SALP rating involves 3 categories of acceptable licensee performance; they are not passing or failing grades on which a shutdown decision would be made.) More recently, the NRC has L also initiated a formal system for tracking various plant performance l-indicators to supplement the information yielded by the SALP process. On a
" semiannual basis, senior NRC headquarters managers (Office Directors) and the five NRC Regional Administrators meet to discuss plant performance and f corrective actions using all available sources of information including the l
I SALP process, recent inspection results, and performance indicators. A decision to shut a plant down because licensee performance had deteriorated to an unacceptable safety level would logically result from one of these meetings.
ENCLOSURE 1 o _ _
s .
.- In summary, the Commission considers that an adequate framework presently exists to render a decision to shut a plant down should it constitute an undue risk to the public health and safety. The conditions requiring shutdown in most cases has been made in advance as reflected in the technical specifications and. license conditions unique to each plant. In those cases, the licensee is expected to recognize a situation requiring plant shutdown and is obligated by NRC regulations to shut down the plant and notify the NRC.
In addition, the NRC has resident inspectors at each plant site to monitor the safety of operations and compliance with the regulations and operating license.
In the more subtle cases involving cumulative minor violations or other indicators of declining licensee management performance,, the NRC has a formal and deliberative process for making a decision that a plant shutdown is the appropriate corrective action as discussed above. In the extremely rare situation where a major safety violation has occurred and the licensee has not recognized that a plant shutdown is appropriate, the Commission feels confident that adequate measures presently exist to enable the NRC to recognize the situation and rapidly order the plant shut down.
Recommendation No. 2 (Chapter 4 of Report)
The GA0 report stated that each year the NRC finds thousands of violations of safety standards. It also notad that a system exists whereby the NRC relies on its regional offices and resident inspectors to track the violations to ensure that utilities take corrective action, but NRC headquarters does not routinely consolidate this information.
The GA0 report recommended that the " Chairman, NRL, annually develop consolidated information for all operating plants showing the status of corrective actions planned or taken by the utilities."
NRC Response:
In response to this recommendation, the Commission has reexamined the information management systems currently in place, procedures r esently being used by the staff to assess the adequacy and status of corr %ive at,tions, and the need for an annual consolidation of this information. The results of this l reexamination are discussed below. l There are three information wanagement systems used by the NRC staff to track )
I enforcement-related issues on a plant-by-plant basis.
- 1. An Open Item Tracking System (0ITS) is maintained by each Regional Administrator to track the status of corrective actions and licensee commitments at each plant in that region resulting from various inspection activities, including violations and deviations. Reports from this system are also used by the NRC Project Managers for each plant at i.
NRC headquarters to maintain an awareness of plant-related issues. l
- 2. The Enforcement Action Tracking System (EATS) is maintained by NRC l headquarters (specifically, by the Of fice of Enforcement) to track enforcement actions at all plants. In the past, this system has tracked ENCLOSURE 1 L ___
i 4 only Level I, II, and III violations, but it is being expanded to also track cases involving the less severe Levels IV and V violations. As recomended in a 1985 report by the Advisory Committee for Review of the Enforcement Policy, the NRC is also expanding this system to improve its ability to monitor enforcement actions at the national level. This enhancement should allow review of violation trends (number, regional distribution, facility distribution :.nd functional areas) and repetitive violations of a generic nature. The EATS does not, however, track corrective actions resulting from violations because this would duplicate the OITS discussed above.
- 3. The "766" system is maintained by NRC headquarters to tabulate status of inspection activities including individual violations found by inspection.
Reports from this system are used in developing inspection strategies.
The "766" system is currently being revamped to increase its usefulness in managing the NRC's overall inspection program.
The GA0 report recommended an annual consolidated report showing the status of corrective actions taken or planned by utilities. As discussed above, tracking of enforcement actions is presently performed by the EATS, but tracking of corrective actions is the responsibility of each regional office i using OITS with the information available M headquarters personnel, including the Project Managers. It is important to Nalize that not all violations result in corrective actions of an ongoing nature. In a large number of cases i the corrective action is taken at the time of the inspections, or shortly I thereafter, and needs only to be documented in NRC inspection reports. In general, corrective action associated with violations is verified by NRC inspectors and documented in NRC inspection reports.
There are a number of occasions when the NRC reviews a plant's history regarding violations and corrective actions. For example, the periodic SALP review includes the number and severity of violations during the assessment period. The SALP process also assesses management involvement and responsiveness in resolving technical safety issues. A second example is that each time an NRC inspection is performed, a review of the current status of corrective actions in the area of concern is performed by the inspector. In addition, significant outstanding corrective actions are discussed with licensee executives during periodic meetings with NRC management.
In light of the NRC activities already in place, the NRC does not consider that initiating an annual consolidation of corrective action information would serve to enhance the NRC's ability to ensure the continued protection of public health and safety.
ENCLOSURE 1
_ - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _