ML20297A470

National Organization for Test, Research and Training Reactors 2020 Annual Conference Presentations Made by NRC Staff, Fretz

ML20297A470
Person / Time
Issue date:	09/29/2020
From:	Robert Fretz NRC/OE
To:
Montgomery C
Shared Package
ML20297A599	List: ML20297A453 ML20297A470 ML20297A486 ML20297A531 ML20297A595
References
Download: ML20297A470 (22)

Text

Overview of the Nuclear Regulatory Commissions Enforcement Program Robert Fretz, Senior Enforcement Specialist Office of Enforcement September 29, 2020

Statutory Authority and Regulatory Framework

• Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended

• Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended

• Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996

• Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 2, Subpart B 2

NRC Enforcement Policy

• Sets forth general principles and Commission expectations regarding the process to assess and disposition violations of NRC requirements

• A policy statement - not a regulation 3

NRC Enforcement Policy

• Emphasizes the importance of compliance with regulatory requirements

• Encourages prompt identification, and prompt, comprehensive correction of violations.

• Enforcement should be risk informed when appropriate and when possible

• Enforcement process provides appropriate transparency with stakeholders 4

Enforcement Process Overview What How should our Is this a Identify Assess significant Disposition regulatory violation? is it? response be?

5

Identifying Violations

• Violations are typically identified through:

- Inspections

- Investigations

- Allegations

- Licensee self-identifies 6

Assessing Significance After a violation is identified, the NRC assesses the significance of a violation by considering:

• Actual safety consequences

• Potential safety consequences

• Potential for impacting the NRC's ability to perform its regulatory function

• Any willful aspects of the violation (e.g., 10 CFR 50.5, Deliberate Misconduct) 7

Assessing Significance (continued)

Violations are either:

• Assigned a severity level, ranging from Severity Level IV for those of more than minor concern to Severity Level I for the most significant, or

• Power reactor licensees are normally assessed and assigned a significance through the Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) Significance Determination Process.

8

Assessing Significance (continued)

Escalated Cases

• Cited Violations Non-Escalated Cases

• Traditional: SL III, II and I

• Generally Non-Cited

• ROP: White, Yellow and Red Violations

• Possible civil penalties

• Traditional: SL IV

• Willfulness may escalate a

• ROP: Green violation Minor Violations

• No civil penalty

• Enforcement panel

• Typically not recommends action

• Usually handled within documented (HQ/Regions) regional offices

• Must be corrected 9

Enforcement Actions

• Notices of Violation (NOV)

• Orders

• Demands for Information

• Civil Penalties 10

Dispositioning Apparent Violations Non- Documented Escalated in Inspection Enforcement Report Choice or Escalated Enforcement Written NRC Final Conference Enforcement Panel Response Action Letter Predecisional or Enforcement Conference Alternative or possibly Dispute Resolution 11

Licensee Input

• Licensees and individuals subject to an NRC enforcement action have multiple opportunities to provide input before, or respond after, an enforcement action is taken.

- In writing to an apparent violation before NRC takes action

- Request a Pre-decisional Enforcement Conference (PEC)

- Dispute an enforcement action

- Request hearing before Atomic Safety and Licensing Board to appeal an Order or Civil Penalty 12

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

• Pre-Investigation (Early) ADR

- Goal: Encourage early and open discussion between the employer and the individual at the earliest stages of litigation

- Intended Benefits: Minimize adverse impact to the facilitys safety conscious work environment

• Enforcement ADR

- Goal: Provide a less adversarial process for the NRC and its regulated entities to resolve certain enforcement matters

- Intended Benefit: Broader and more comprehensive corrective actions than through the traditional enforcement process 13

Civil Penalties D Notice of Credit for Violation Corrective Yes &

Actions? No Civil Yes Penalty Yes Severity Level I, II

& III Violations, No D 1st Notice of and Violations Non-willful Violation related to Red, Credit for SL III in 2 years or No &

Yellow and White 2 Inspections Identification?

Base Civil SDP Findings Yes Penalty with Actual Consequences No D Notice of Credit for Violation Corrective No &

Actions? 2x Base Civil Penalty 14

Actions Against Individuals

• The NRC considers enforcement actions against individuals to be significant actions that will be closely evaluated and judiciously applied.

- Will normally take enforcement actions against non-licensed individuals only in cases involving deliberate misconduct by the non-licensed individual, and in cases involving a lack of reasonable assurance.

- May take enforcement action against NRC-licensed reactor operators even if the violation does not involve deliberate misconduct.

15

Orders to Individuals

• Typically, prohibition orders are fixed at one, three, or five years (unless the ban remains in place until certain conditions are satisfied)

• The NRC considers

- position of the individual in the organization;

- significance (or potential significance) of the underlying violation 16

No. of Escalated Enforcement Actions Enforcement Trends 17

Enforcement Trends 18

No. of Non-Escalated Enforcement Actions Enforcement Trends 19

Operating Reactors/RTR Comparison Since 2010

• Operating Reactors

- 300 Escalated Enforcement Actions (30/year)

- $1,990,942 in civil penalties ($200,000/year)

• Research and Test Reactors

- 6 Escalated Enforcement Actions (about 1 every 2 years)

- $10,750 in civil penalties (2 cases) 20

Recent Significant Cases Involving RTRs

• Texas A&M University (10/22/2015)

- NOV/CP $3,500

• U.S. Geological Survey (12/31/2018)

- NOV/CP $7,250

• Reed College (3/16/2020)

- Confirmatory Order (ADR) 21

22