ML24253A098

FOIA-2024-000126 - Released Set

ML24253A098
Person / Time
Issue date:	06/14/2023
From:	NRC/OCIO
To:
References
FOIA-2024-000126
Download: ML24253A098 (1)

Text

House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Hearing Entitled, "Oversight,~f NRC: Ensuring Efficient and Predictable Nuclear Safety Regulation for a Prosperous America" June 14, 2023 Questions for the Record for Commissioner Annie Caputo The Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers

1. Would you each provide for the record, your recommendations for ensuring and enabling staff leadership to work in service to policies Congress establishes?

RESPONSE

I believe the path to improving the agency's execution of Congressional direction lies in restoring leadership focus on priorities, measuring perfonnance to improve efficiency, and improving accountability for effective decision-making.

The Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 established the NRC for the purpose of "licensing and related regulatmy functions," effectively designating licensing as our principal, enumerated function. 1 Of course, this is complemented by oversight to verify compliance.

\\vould like to associate myselhvith Commissioner Crowell's emphasis on the role each individual commissioner and the Commission as a whole play in fostering and maintaining a high level of staff leadership.

The NRC is required to "assess and collect fees from any person \\Vho receives a service or thing of value from the Commission to cover the costs to the Commission of providing the service or thing of value. " 2 The agency does this in part by assessing fees for licensing and inspection services under 10 CFR Part 170, charged by the hour and for contract support costs. 3 In FY 2023, this workload totaled $195 million, approximately 21 percent of the agency's total budget authority of$927 million. Thus, roughly 79 percent of the agency's budget is for other activities.

I 42 lJ.S.C. ~ 580](c).

! Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act (NEl\\1A) § 102(b)(2), 42 U.S.C. § 2215(b)(2).

3 There arc enumerated exemption~ under Part 170 to these fee~. which include certain facilities licensed under section 104c. of the /\\.tom1c Energy Act and certain contested hearings. See 10 C.F.R. § 170.l l(a). In addition. the NRC can grant fee waiver~. See 10 C.F.R. § 170.1 l(b).

Since 2016, the Part 170 licensing and oversight workload has fallen roughly 46% from 1.2 million staff hours to 650,000 in FY 2023. 4 Using the agency's productivity estimate of 1551 hours0.018 days <br />0.431 hours <br />0.00256 weeks <br />5.901555e-4 months <br /> per FTE, the work billed under Part 170 required roughly 419 FTE of the agency's 2,860 FTE budgeted in FY 2023. And yet there have been delays in some licensing activities, such as Subsequent License Renewal reviews, due in part to a "lack of staff resources." 5 Such results are difficult to justify considering the agency's continuing trend of increasing carryover funds, $108 million at the end of FY 2023, resulting from budgeting for resources beyond what is needed to execute the mission.

The NRC's Principles of Good Regulation call for "the best possible management and administration of regulatory activities" and say that "Regulatory decisions should be made

\\Vithout undue delay." 6 Yet, among the 32 strategies in the NRC's Strategic Plan, only one specifically addresses timely decision-making. 7 These facts begin to paint a picture that shows licensing must compete for leadership attention. The Commission must restore leadership focus that prioritizes effective and efficient licensing reviews.

Tracking the agency's performance is key to improving efficiency. Meaningful, objective performance metrics for licensing activities would allow the agency to benchmark best practices, discover opportunities for process improvements, and refine budget estimates.

This is especially relevant as the agency conducts first-of-a-kind reactor licensing reviews that will likely bear higher costs than later reviews due to a learning curve. Improved perfonnance management will help verify whether the agency's learning curve is leading to more efficient, consistent, and predictable reviews.

For these reasons, Commissioner Wright and I provided a proposal to our colleagues to establish meaningful metrics to track agency performance. 8 Such information would guide perfomiance improvement through better allocation of staff and resources, setting expectations and goals for improved execution of licensing \\Vork and holding staff leadership accountable for results.

a. Would you include in your recommendations how the Commission should measure or monitor the effectiveness of staff leadership?

RESPONSE

4 See FY 2016 Final Fee Rule; FY 2023 Final Fee Rule.

5 See Letter from Christopher Regan (NRC) to Dianne Strand (Florida Power & Light Co.), "Revised Schedule for the Environmental Review of the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station, Units 3 and 4, Subsequent License Renewal Application'" (June 5. 2023) (ADA\\1S Accession No. \\11 "3 1--1-:S-\\ '6(J) (communicating a schedule change due to several factors including "staff resource challenges related to high priority work'").

b See Principle~ of Good Regulation, http-;:,1*,1*,1*.mc.go, about -1uc Yalu~*,.html'--'princi pk*, (last reviewed/updated Jan. 31, 2024).

7 NUREG-1614, Vol. 8, Strategic Plan Fiscal Years 2022-2026"' (Apr. 2022) (\\11 "'0h7 \\ 170).

° COM DA W-23-0001/CO\\1AXC-23-0002, "Measuring NRC Succc~~,, (Aug.29.2023) 1 r.JL::'..<2--1-1 BO l J ).

2

There is a growing pattern of applicants viewing agency processes as unpredictable and financially risky. Many policymakers and stakeholders have expressed concern that the NRC needs to improve the execution and timely completion of its licensing activities if nuclear energy is to make a significant contribution to meeting national and global needs for clean energy and energy security. 9 The NRC must recognize

\\Vithin its important mission the need for effective, efficient decision making. Given the agency's reputation as a world leader in nuclear safety regulation and experience in using risk to guide decision making, the NRC should be implementing best practices for reducing regulatory risk and improving the predictability and timeliness of licensing revie\\vs.

It has been rightly stated: '*If you can't measure it, you can't manage it." Without meaningful metrics, it is impossible to discern whether the agency's performance is improving or declining. The longstanding metrics published in the agency's Congressional Budget Justification have become anachronistic; ineffective at either depicting performance or driving improvement. Hence, Commissioner Wright and I proposed to our colleagues that the agency establish transparent, meaningful metrics collected in near-real-time. 10

2. Recent NRC experience with advanced reactor licensing and development of new regulatory frame\\vorks for advanced reactors has highlighted the importance of effective communication. Discussions with NRC applicants and licensees indicate that effective communication bet\\veen applicants and NRC staff and management is critical to successful resolution of licensing questions. Ineffective communication between NRC and stakeholders has contributed to challenges encountered during the development of the 10 CFR Part 53 regulatory frame\\vork.

a. What steps is the NRC taking to promote effective communication bet\\veen the NRC and stakeholders including applicants, licensees, members of the public, and other stakeholders?

RESPONSE

Infomiation about the staffs efforts in this area are summarized and contextualized in Chair Hanson's response.

In the instance of the development of the Part 53 regulatory framework, the staff endeavored to conduct a first-of-a-kind rulemaking process for the agency with significant engagement prior to the comment period. This type of public engagement may have additional value once the staff gains experience with the appropriate level

'! See. e.g., Ranking Member Capito Opening Statement at Nuclear Regulatory Commission Budget Hearing (Apr. 19. 2023) http~:

11 11 11.<ep11.~cnc1tc. i!l'\\ puhl 1,* rndc,.c li11 w,'~~-1 cl c<1~<e,-1*,'publ I(' c1n'.'lfl- :' 1411116 "7-" fl.\\ 1-

--1 BI '-<JF4,_,,\\ 7761.\\ I :<FOL F; Idaho National Laboratory, "RcL*pn1111,'11d,ilH>11~ tu ln1wp1,' the '\\Juclca1* R,'i!uLl(Pn

( l't1H111~~1\\>ll R,'<1cw1* 1 1L*,'11~1lli! and \\ppt"P\\ al Pwn:~~" (Apr. 2023); I..:tk'1 110111 l'1*;11i! l l. P1..:rc1* (American Nuclear Society) to Hon. Cathy Mc\\1orris Rodgers, (U.S. Senate) el al., (May 5. 2023).

io Id.

3

of response to input from stakeholders prior to the formal comment period. This approach warrants continued attention to ensure that the agency responds appropriately to communication from internal and external stakeholders.

b. What is the value of allowing infonnal, non-public meetings between applicants and staff to facilitate more efficient, effective communication and licensing processes?

RESPONSE

The Chair's response details the NRC's public meeting policy 11 and the processes in place that allO\\v for non-public interactions with applicants or licensees consistent

\\Vith this policy and the NRC's Principles of Good Regulation. As the Chair notes in his response, these processes include publicly noticed, closed meetings and regulatory audits. The staff benefits from these non-public interactions with applicants because proprietary material and other sensitive information (e.g., security-related infomiation) can be discussed, \\Vhich facilitates familiarity with supporting non-public information for an application and can be used for the staff to verify its understanding of design information. These meetings do not and should not supplant public meetings. While there is a need to balance the benefits of non-public interactions against the NRC's Principle of Good Regulation of Openness, it is important to note that any information on which the staff relies to support a regulatory decision is submitted to the agency on the docket.

c. What should be done to increase informal communication?

RESPONSE

Audits can be a beneficial means to seek clarification or verify the staffs understanding of information pertinent to a review. The need for and benefit of these audits will vary depending on the complexity of a review or the staffs familiarity with the matter at hand. As such, I think the staff should be encouraged to utilize this tool to improve understanding and efficiency, but the discretion to do so should remain with the staff. This should be done in addition to public meetings and other modes of communication customarily utilized during reviews.

3. In the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act (NEIMA), Congress directed the agency to develop a new risk-informed, performance-based rulemaking to enable the timely and predictable licensing of advanced reactors. NRC staff provided a draft proposed rule to the Commission that the Nuclear Energy Institute and the U.S. Nuclear Infrastructure Council consider not viable.

a. What was the staffs justification for providing an unusable rule to the Commission?

11 Enhancing Participation in NRC Public Meetings, S(, I -.:d. R-.:,:. l--1.%- (\\far. 19, 2021 ).

4

RESPONSE

Chair Hanson's response summarizes the staff's justification. In my view, imperfect communications, gaps in external awareness, and a lack of receptiveness to the infonnation provided by stakeholders likely contributed to the outcome. In any event, these issues should have been brought to light and addressed in the staff's lengthy concurrence process prior to submission to the Commission. In the future, I hope to see senior leadership recognize and address potentially similar situations much earlier in the process.

b. How much was spent to develop the proposed rule, both in dollars and FTE?

RESPONSE

As noted in Chair Hanson's response, the NRC has spent 36.9 FTE ($7,283.?K) on NRC staff and S2,077K in contractor support, respectively, to develop the Part 53 draft proposed rule.

c.

How will the Commission remedy this situation and produce a useful rule in accordance with Congress' direction in NEIMA?

RESPONSE

As detailed in my response to the July 14, 2023, letter from 64 Senators and Representatives, 12 and in keeping with my commitment to provide specific direction to staff to resolve outstanding issues, my vote on Part 53 includes line-by-line edits of the draft rule text. 13 While this approach required significant effort, I believe it results in clear, specific direction to support timely completion of the rulemaking and to be responsive to Congress, potential applicants, and other stakeholders. I will continue to collaborate with my colleagues to provide a flexible regulatory frarne\\vork supported by guidance that \\Vill enable innovation by advanced reactor technology developers. I will also seek to enable regulatory innovation, to reduce potential subjectivity where possible, and to retain consistency with current regulatory practices where it makes sense.

4. NRC applicants and licensees have reported that the quality of the NRC Project Manager responsible for a license application review or other regulatory review can have an outsized impact on the outcomes of the revie\\v. A high-quality project manager can facilitate an effective and efficient review while a poor-quality project manager may allow unnecessary 12 I..:lk'1 lwrn Tlwrn,1~ R. C1q1..:r. Chair, Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, el at..

to Christopher T. Hanson, Chair, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (July 14, 2023); l cttn ti*l,rll -\\11111..: ( <1Jlt1ll\\

Commissioner, Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Thomas R. Carper, Chair. Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, el al. (Aug. 18, 2023).

13 Commissioner Caputo Voting Record. *'SECY-23-0021-Proposcd Rule: Risk-Jnfonncd. *1*cchnology-lnclusivc Regulatory Framework for Advanced Reactors'" (July 18, 2023) (r-lL2.> I '!0.,\\::'.Sll).

5

delays or unproductive and distracting reviews by unfocused NRC staff. Some stakeholders have expressed concern that NRC project managers are not empowered to effectively manage technical staff and focus reviews on issues more important to safety.

a. What steps is NRC taking to improve project management, empower project managers to do their jobs and do them well, and ensure that all projects are assigned high quality project managers?

RESPONSE

I appreciate the Chair's responses and the efforts undertaken by the staff to update existing processes, procedures, and training for project management. However, I share the concern that our project managers are not empowered to manage resources or direct \\Vorkload taskings, thus limiting their ability to effectively manage a project.

The agency must ensure it retains our existing skilled and dedicated project managers and enhances their skills with access to sufficient training. We currently face a

\\Vorkforce transition and a potentially increasing workload that will require significant effort to hire, train, and integrate a sizable cadre ofne\\v staft~ including project managers. 14 While this presents a challenge, it also provides an opportunity for the agency to establish improved training and standardized processes to enable project managers to perform high-quality licensing \\Vork more efficiently.

I believe the agency would greatly benefit from an external review of our project management capabilities and practices from the National Academy of Public Administration, or an organization \\Vith similar expertise, that can compare our capabilities to state-of-the-art project management practices and offer insights regarding our program's effectiveness and opportunities to improve.

b. How are you incorporating industry accepted project management best practices and expertise?

RESPONSE

As noted in the Chair's reply, \\Ve offer project managers industry-recognized training and additional external project management training. This training helps establish foundational competencies for entry-level project managers and leverages current industry standard aptitudes for seasoned project managers. In addition, the NRC also has staff who have attained or are pursuing government or industry-recognized project management certifications.

However, external training may not be required as part of the project managers qualification process, \\Vhich is thereby inconsistently applied throughout the agency.

There could be considerable value in pursuing a standardized set of required external training for project manager competencies from an organization like the Project 14 NUREG-2251, Vol. 2. Capacity /\\sscs~mcnt for Statistics, Research, Evaluation, and Other Analysis Fi~cal Year 2023,at I0(.\\*JL2.'.:'7lA21U).

6

Management Institute (PMI) to ensure a broad range of best practices and fresh thinking are incorporated in a project manager's training program.

The Honorable Jeff Duncan

1. The Committee is updating a bill to direct the NRC to evaluate the current environmental review process for reactors and identify areas where there are reasonable options for less burdensome assessments under NEPA.

d. What opportunity, beyond recent changes to NEPA, do you see to reduce duplicative or unnecessary environmental reviews to license reactors more efficiently?

RESPONSE

I appreciate the Chair's response, \\Vhich discusses several opportunities the NRC has identified to increase efficiency in its environmental revie\\VS. I \\Vill not repeat all of them here but would like to highlight a few items mentioned in his response.

As the Chair notes, the NRC is working on several generic environmental impact statements (GEISs) to improve efficiency in environmental reviews. I see the use of codified GEISs as an area where the NRC can make progress. As detailed in the Chair's response, the Commission currently has before it a GEIS for advanced reactors. The purpose of the advanced reactor GEIS, as described by the staff, "is to present analyses of potential environmental impacts that are common to many or most advanced nuclear reactors that can be addressed generically, thereby eliminating the need to repeatedly reproduce the same analyses each time a licensing application is submitted and allowing applicants and NRC staff to focus future environmental review efforts on issues that can be resolved only once a site is identified." 15 I recently weighed in on this matter.

In addition, and as noted in the Chair's response, the staff is once again revising the license renewal GEIS and our regulations for initial and subsequent license renewals.

I echo Commissioner Wright's statements regarding the importance of codifying GEIS findings in our pertinent regulations. The use of a codified GEIS has been helpful in the license renewal process because it focuses staff and stakeholder attention on areas where environmental impacts may be site-specific or differ from project to project.

The Chair also highlights a draft proposed rule currently before the Commission for its consideration. This draft proposed rule \\vould revise certain categorical exclusions in 10 CFR Part 51, which the staff expects '\\vould reduce inefficiencies and inconsistencies in the implementation of the NRC's regulatmy program" and '*ensure 1' SECY 0098. Lnch1,urc.::', "Draft /\\.<lvance<l Nuclear Reactor Generic Environmental Impact Statement" (Nov. 29, 2021) (.\\*1 L2 l.::'22. \\U-1-1 ).

7

resources are directed to activities that have the potential to significantly affect the environment." 16 I am actively reviewing this matter.

Finally, and as further described in the Chair's response, the staff has taken measures to streamline the environmental review process for applications currently under review, while also continuing to meet the agency's NEPA responsibilities. For example, in a recent construction permit application review, the staff produced a more concise and focused environmental impact statement (EIS): a total of258 pages including appendices and table of contents. 17 Indeed, in response to a public comment regarding the need for efficient reviews, the staff stated that "the draft EIS represents a substantial reduction in page count and schedule length compared to past NRC new reactor EISs" while "still ensur[ing] that all NRC's obligations under NEPA and related laws, regulations, and processes were fully met." 18 In this instance, stakeholders have stated that they are '*pleased with the quality, timeliness, and efficiency" of the NRC's draft EIS and noted that '*a high-quality application and

\\Vorking with the NRC staff to meet its related infomiation needs" are both "essential to timely and efficient NRC reviews." 19 While that is true, there are additional steps the agency must take to ensure timely and efficient reviews are the norm, not the exception, and demonstrate a learning curve that benefits future applicants. Agency leadership must improve their external awareness to recognize and respond to changes in the operating environment.

Environmental reviews for subsequent license renewals are a cautionary example.

The agency must do a better job of projecting workload and contingency planning to ensure an agile response to fact-of-life schedule changes. This includes more accurate allocation of staff resources, cross-training and reassigning staff from 10\\ver priority \\Vork as needed, and supplementing \\Vith contractor resources as appropriate.

2. What authorities can Congress provide to improve the efficiency ofNRC's decision-making on advanced reactors?

RESPONSE

The authorities given in NEICA, NEIMA, and introduced in the ADVANCE Act of2023 provide the agency \\Vith the authority to review ne\\V reactor technologies efficiently and effectively. HO\\vever, there may be additional opportunities to provide the Commission with I(, SU \\ 22 U l (I(), "Proposed Rule Categorical Exclusions from Environmental Review" (Nov. 18, 2022).

17 As the Chair notes, the body of the final EIS is under 150 pages, which i~ almo~t a 75%:, decrease in the number of page~ from the last new reactor US publi~hcd by the NRC and within the US page limit established by the Fi~cal Respon~ibility Act of 2023.

1' NUREG-2263, "Environmental Impact Statement for the Construction Pennit for the Kairos Hennes Test Reactor:* Final Report, Appendix G, G-29 (Aug. 2023) (1\\11 ':<' 1--L\\ "lfi'J).

1'1 Id. at G-43.

8

discretion for certain activities that would increase overall efficiencies while continuing to meet the NRC's safety and security mission.

Section 189a of the Atomic Energy Act requires the Commission to conduct hearings (sometimes referred to as mandatory hearings) for certain applications regardless of whether the application references a standard design or is a license application for an additional, identical facility at the same site. It would be helpful if Congress either eliminated this obsolete requirement or provided discretion to the Commission to determine on a case-by-case basis whether such hearings are warranted. 20 Also, section 182b of the Atomic Energy Act requires the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) to revie\\v certain applications, again regardless ohvhether the application references a standard design or is for an identical facility at the same site. The ACRS provides valuable input to the Commission. In my view, hO\\vever, its focus should be on novel or unique issues rather than license applications for identical facilities. Thus, it would be helpful if Congress provided discretion to the Commission to determine whether it needed ACRS input on a particular review. With such discretion, the Commission could help ensure the considerable expertise of the ACRS and its limited time are focused on new or novel issues and less likely to be overburdened with repetitive reviews such as the addition of identical modular reactors at a given site.

In addition, I understand that applicants seeking manufacturing licenses may wish to test the reactors at the manufacturing site prior to shipping them to the sites \\Vhere they would be licensed to operate. Microreactor developers have communicated they may pursue this licensing approach, given the potential that a manufacturing license holder could rapidly scale reactor deployment by fabricating several reactors at a manufacturing facility. It is not clear whether section 192 of the Atomic Energy Act provides the Commission \\Vith the authority to issue temporary operating licenses to holders of manufacturing licenses to allow such testing at the manufacturer's site. Clarifying the NRC's authority might enable more efficient development of manufactured microreactors.

Lastly, as I indicated in a response to Chair Rodgers, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 established the NRC for '*licensing and related regulatory activities," thereby appearing to enumerate licensing as the agency's principal function. 21 While the agency remains diligent in verifying compliance \\Vith existing licenses through its inspection and oversight \\Vork, licensing reviews remain a relatively small portion of the agency's activities, competing for management attention. I believe this is a situation where the agency should reassert the importance of licensing reviews as principal to our mission, use data to track efficiency,

!II See Bowen, M., Ponangi, R.T., and Burns. S.G., '"Improving the Efficiency ofNRC Power Reactor Licensing:

The 1957 Mandatory Hearing Reconsidered,"" at 37 (Nov. 2023), http~.

\\1 \\1 \\1.,'11Cn!1 pl1l1c\\*.rl,lu111b1a...:du 11 p-L'\\\\lltcnt uplui1d~ '0':< 11 '\\'RL I 1,*s:1hlllc'.-( C,FP R,'pu1( 11 'I "3.pdl'(stating *'[t]he potential value of mandatory hearings is even harder to discern in cases where subsequent deployments of the same reactor design are being considered'").

n 42 U.S.C. § 580l(c).

9

reevaluate and adjust staff priorities as appropriate, use data to drive performance improvement, and hold leadership accountable for results.

Congress could support such an effort by authorizing a review of our operating processes by outside experts such as the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) or similar organization. Such a revie\\v would provide insights and best practices on hO\\v best to improve the agency's operational effectiveness in the following areas:

Strategic planning should be revie\\ved and revised to appropriately prioritize licensing work and the timely execution of licensing reviews; Budget development should be revie\\ved and revised to incorporate best practices and improve accuracy and fairness; Enterprise Risk Management processes should be reviewed and revised to improve workload projections, workflow management, and contingency planning; Performance management should be reviewed and revised to clearly align with agency goals and ensure timely execution of the agency's mission; Leadership development should be revie\\ved and revised to ensure agency leaders are prepared to fully implement operational processes and achieve results; and Strategic Workforce Planning and Knowledge Management should be reviewed and revised to implement best practices and prioritize adequate numbers of properly trained licensing staff.

An external review that benchmarks the NRC against best-in-class agencies would provide insights regarding \\Vhere the agency is performing \\Veil and where there are opportunities for improvement. Enhancing the understanding and implementation of these processes should produce better outcomes, verifiable through metrics.

As I noted in response to a question from Chair Rodgers, the agency's project management processes, practices, and training could also benefit from an external revie\\v to gather insights regarding where our program is effective and how to achieve best-in-class performance.

There have been concerns raised about the need for increased hiring authority for the agency and Congress is considering language to address this. HO\\vever, I don't believe any additional authority is \\Varranted at this time. The agency has hired about 600 personnel during the last two years. This hiring effort has been necessary to address a staffing composition \\Vhere the agency had a large portion of its \\Vorkforce that was retirement-eligible. Progress has been made in addressing this workforce transition \\Vith the retirement-eligible group no\\V around a third. 22 I have not seen employee attrition data that would suggest a need for additional hiring authority at this time. I share Commissioner Wright's views that the agency could more effectively use its current hiring authorities. I also have some foundational concerns about the adequacy of our Strategic Workforce Planning and

~c "I !earing on the Nuclear Regulatory Comm1~~ion's Proposed Fi~cal Year 2024 Budget'"; Committee on Environment and Public \\Vorks, U.S. Senate, April 19, 2023.

10

knowledge management efforts being integrated into our workload forecasting and budget development.

Regarding fee recoveiy, it has been a longstanding legal requirement, reaffirmed in NEIMA, that: "the Commission shall assess and collect fees from any person who receives a service or thing of value from the Commission to cover the costs to the Commission of providing the service or thing ofvalue." 23 This includes licensing reviews, inspections, and related oversight work attributable to a particular licensee or applicant. NEIMA describes licensing reviews as '*requested activities" and requires that the NRC '*shall expressly identify anticipated expenditures necessary for completion of the requested activities" and funds authorized for requested activities "shall be used, to the maximum extent practicable, solely for conducting requested activities." 24 In FY 2023, the agency requested S144M, about 14 percent of the agency's total budget authority. The Administration, Congressional and industiy stakeholders, and some NGOs continue the stress the importance of efficient licensing reviews. As I noted in response to a question from Chair Rodgers:

"The NRC's Principles of Good Regulation call for '*the best possible management and administration ofregulatoiy activities" and say that "Regulatory decisions should be made \\Vithout undue delay." Yet, among the 32 strategies in the NRC's Strategic Plan, only one specifically addresses timely decision-making.

These facts begin to paint a picture that shO\\vs licensing must compete for leadership attention. The Commission must restore leadership focus that prioritizes effective and efficient licensing reviews.

Providing and preserving adequate funding specifically for Requested Activities should ensure adequate funds for licensing revie\\VS rather than facilitating overall growth in the NRC budget, of which licensing revie\\vs remain a small fraction. However, there is a need for diligent oversight of these funds since excessive budgeting unfairly increases licensee annual fees if the licensing \\Vorkload falls short of projections.

3. The NRC has yet to meet the cap NEIMA set for corporate support. For three years in a row, the NRC's fee-billable licensing and oversight work is below S200M while the agency's budget requests continue to grow. The agency had S92M in carryover in FY 2022 and asked for significant budget increases in FY 2023 and FY 2024.

a. Whenever the agency overestimates its \\Vorkload or total budget, the annual fee for operating reactors increases. How does the agency justify this as fair?

RESPONSE

I have been an advocate for the agency to improve its financial ste\\vardship since my first term as an NRC Commissioner. Our Principles of Good Regulation state that,

!J NEIMA § 102(b)(2), 42 U.S.C. § 2215(b)(2).

N NEIMA. §Sec. 102(a) (I )-(,2). 42 U.S.C. § 221 S(a)(l )-(2).

11

'*The American taxpayer, the rate-paying consumer, and licensees are all entitled to the best possible management and administration of regulatory activities."25 While the agency must have the resources necessary to successfully execute its mission, the trend of ending a fiscal year with significant carryover funds is indefensible. As noted, the agency ended FY 2023 with roughly S 108 million in carryover funds that weren't necessary to support its operations. There will always be some fact-of-life adjustments \\Vith regard to projected licensing work that will be difficult for the agency to anticipate. However, carryover funds amounting to over 11 % of the agency's full budget authority for FY 2023 is excessive and inappropriate.

As noted in a response to Chair Rodgers, the NRC is required to "assess and collect fees from any person who receives a service or thing of value from the Commission to cover the costs to the Commission of providing the service or thing ofvalue." 26 The agency does this in part by assessing fees for licensing and inspection services under 10 CFR Part 170, charged by the hour and for contract support costs. 27 In FY 2023, this \\Vorkload totaled $195 million, approximately 21 percent of the agency's total budget authority ofS927 million. Thus, roughly 79 percent of the agency's budget is for other activities. If spending on other indirect work grows, so will the operating reactor annual fee assessed under Part 171, due to the legal requirement for the agency to recover operating costs.

Since 2016, the Part 170 licensing and oversight workload has fallen roughly 46%

from approximately 1.2 million staff hours to about 650,000 in FY 2023. 28 Using the agency's productivity estimate of 1551 hours0.018 days <br />0.431 hours <br />0.00256 weeks <br />5.901555e-4 months <br /> per FTE, the work billed under Part 170 required roughly 419 FTE of the agency's 2,860 FTE budgeted in FY 2023. And yet there have been delays in some licensing activities, such as Subsequent License Rene\\val reviews, due in part to a "lack of staff resources." 29 Such results are difficult to justify especially in light of continuing trend of increasing carryover funds.

The first step to ensuring a fair operating reactor annual fee is to budget accurately.

Ending the fiscal year with excessive carryover results in increased annual fees. The second step, in recognition of fiscal responsibility to taxpayers, licensees, and 2' See Principles of Good Regulation, http~: \\l'\\\\'\\\\'.lll"e.0.m :1hrn11-me \\':1l11e,.h1ml"pri11ciplc, (last reviev.'ed/updated Jan. 31, 2024).

21' Nuclear Energy Innovation and \\1odemization Act (NEIM/\\.) ~ 102(b)(2), 42 U.S.C. ~ 22 l 5(b)(2).

27 There are enumerated exemptions under Part 170 to these fees. which include certain facilities licensed under section 104c. of the Atomic Lncrgy Act and certain contested hearing~. See 10 C.F.R. ~ 170.1 l(a). In addition, the NRC can grant fee waivers. See 10 C.F.R. ~ 170.1 l(b).

2' See FY 2016 Final Fee Rule; FY 2023 Final Fee Rule.

29 See Letter from Christopher Regan (NRC) to Dianne Strand (Florida Power & Light Co.), '"Revised Schedule for the Environmental Review of the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station, Units 3 and 4. Subsequent Liccn~c Renewal Application" (June 5. 2023) (ADA\\1S Accession No..\\JL.::'J l--1:5.\\2(,()) (communicating a schedule change due to several factor~ including "staff resource challenges related to high priority work").

12

applicants, is to seek efficiencies in mission-indirect spending. Such an effort should restore a more appropriate ratio of mission-direct and mission-indirect work.

One reason Congress enacted NEIMA was to spur fiscal responsibility. The agency can and should be more responsive to the direction provided in the Act.

The agency's budget should be data-driven, performance-based, and focused on our mission needs. Actual expenditures should inform budget development with a measure of detail commensurate to truly inform decisions. This requires the agency to scrutinize and prioritize activities and services that support the core licensing and oversight workload.

b. Did the funding from licensing fees of the University Nuclear Leadership Program violate NEIMA restrictions? What is the justification for funding with licensing fees?

RESPONSE

The University Nuclear Leadership Program, formerly the Integrated University Program, provides grants to academic institutions to support education in nuclear science and engineering and related fields. The NRC has provided funding for university research and development, as well as for scholarships, fellowships, and faculty development. The agency funded the University Nuclear Leadership Program in FY 2023 with canyover funds that were collected from fee-recoverable sources. I am apprised that the agency has followed Congressional direction and is technically in compliance with section 102(b) ofNEIMA. I believe the program is beneficial but do not agree \\Vith the use of fee-recoverable funding to support the University Nuclear Leadership Program.

c. Of the S92M in carryover from 2022, how much was collected from taxpayers and how much from licensees?

RESPONSE

I concur \\Vith the Chair's response, \\Vhich indicates that the $92M in carryover did not come exclusively from FY 2022. It is a cumulative total of all prior years, with approximately S60M from fee-recoverable funds and approximately S32M from non-fee-recoverable funds.

d. How much would the annual fee for operating reactors have decreased if the NRC had budgeted accurately \\Vithout resulting in S92M in carryover?

RESPONSE

I have reviewed the information provided by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer and contextualized in Chair Hanson's response. The final carryover amount for 2023

\\Vas $108 million. It remains unclear to me how much the annual fee \\vould have decreased under an accurate budget without the carryover amount.

13

How did the NRC spend the S92M in carryover from 2022?

RESPONSE

The agency recently provided additional infomiation regarding this question. *10 While that information detailed how the funds were allocated, it is not clear how much of those funds have actually been spent at this time.

e. How much carryover does the NRC estimate for FY 2023?

RESPONSE

Since the date of this response is past the end of FY 2023, the actual carryover amount for FY 2023 is known to be approximately S 108 million. Of this amount, roughly $69 million was fee-recoverable and $39 million \\Vas non-fee-recoverable.

f.

What actions is the agency taking to improve its fiscal discipline and comply with NEIMA?

RESPONSE

While I appreciate the responses provided by the Chair, I must respectfully disagree with the sentiments expressed. In my view, the agency can and should be a better steward of taxpayer and licensee resources. The continuing trend of increasing canyover is indefensible. Further actions are needed to strengthen our fiscal discipline and comply with NEIMA. Specifically, I support the following actions:

The budget should be data-driven, performance-based, and focused on mission needs.

Actual expenditures should inform budget development \\Vith a measure of detail commensurate to truly inform decisions.

The agency should focus resources on licensing and oversight \\Vork, prioritize activities and services that support this core workload, enhance efficiencies in agency operations and processes, and reduce overly burdensome, 10\\v-priority tasks.

Providing and preserving adequate funding specifically for licensing reviews, in accordance with the Requested Activities provision in NEIMA, should ensure adequate funds for licensing reviews rather than facilitating overall growth in the NRC budget, ohvhich licensing reviews remain a small fraction.

In the event of significant projected carryover funds, NRC staff should engage appropriators to enable allocation of carryover funds to offset appropriations.

30 Letter to Representative Duncan (Chainnan Energy. Climate, and Grid Security Subcommittee) from \\1r. Eugene Dacus (NRC) (Jan. 24, 2024).

14

4. The NRC has had an ongoing transformation effort for the last five years.

a. How much has NRC spent on transformation and innovation over the last five years?

RESPONSE

I am not mvare that resources executed for transformation and innovation are being captured or tracked at a level of detail to inform this response.

b. Please provide a list of the transfonnation and innovation goals and objectives.

RESPONSE

The standing goal has been to "Become a modem, risk-informed regulator." 31 While that is a laudable vision that I support, I have been disappointed by the lack of clearly defined goals or objectives designed to achieve that outcome or metrics to track the agency's progress.

The transformation-related Objectives and Key Results (OKRs) for 2023 were:

Objective: Foster a healthy organizational culture in which the workforce is engaged, adaptable, and receptive to change and makes data-driven and evidence-based decisions.

o Key Result: Eighty percent or more of agency employees would say, "I recommend my organization as a good place to work."

Objective: Attract, develop, and maintain a high-performing, diverse, engaged, and flexible workforce with the skills needed to carry out the NRC's mission now and in the future.

o Key Result: The agency leverages technology and resources across the agency to onboard within 1 percent of the agency's FY 2024 allocation.

o Key Result: The agency achieves less than 2 percent nonretirement attrition."32

c. What metrics does the NRC have in place to track progress toward the transformation goals and objectives?

RESPONSE

While many activities have been undertaken that have likely yielded varying levels of benefit, it is unclear what measurable results have been achieved. 33 I am not aware of data that would support a conclusion that the agency is ultimately more effective or efficient as a result of these efforts. This further demonstrates that the agency would

• 11 NRC's Transformation Journey, htlp\\* \\\\ \\\\ \\\\ tire g()\\" alwut-mc plan~-)1L'ri'urn1a11cc: 111odc:rn-ri-;k-inforn1L*d-1*c:g lrnn~-_l()Urnc:y html (last reviewed/updated Dec. 26, 2023).

12 ~F( Y ')-(HHll<. "Agency-Level Objectives and Key Results for Calendar Year 2023,'" at 3 (Jan.30.2023).

>J Transfomrntion at the NRC Sustaining Progress as a \\1odem, Risk-Infonned Regulator (June 1. 2022)

(\\ 1 L22 l--1-(,,\\()71').

15

benefit from more effective use ofperfonnance metrics. As I testified in the hearing, I joined Commissioner Wright on a proposal to establish detailed, transparent, near-real-time performance metrics challenging enough to drive improvement and specific enough to identify challenges or inefficiencies. 34 Such metrics would provide transparency to Congress, licensees and applicants, the public, and other stakeholders on the agency's progress.

d. Please provide a list of the innovations, efficiencies, and cost savings resulting from the transformation effort.

RESPONSE

Chair Hanson provided a list of innovations to \\Vhich I have nothing further to add.

As stated above, I am not aware that resources executed for transformation and innovation are being captured or tracked at an adequate level of detail to infonn this response. While many activities have been undertaken that have likely yielded varying levels of benefit, it is unclear \\Vhat measurable results have been achieved. 35 A cursory review looking forward from 2020 shows spending on the Part 170 licensing and oversight \\Vorkload declined from $206 million to $195 million in 2023 while the budget increased from $840 million to $927 million. This suggests a trend of spending more money to do less mission-direct work. In addition, the agency continues to have growing amounts of carryover funding. While there may be some cases of efficiencies or cost savings, the benefit is not observable in the agency's overall finances.

5. For the last three years, the NRC has billed less than S200M for all of its oversight and licensing work, a small fraction of the NRC's budget.

a. What actions does NRC take to ensure its safety mission is balanced with the need for timely decision-making?

RESPONSE

As stated in my response to Chair Rodgers, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 established the NRC for the purpose of "licensing and related regulatory functions" effectively designating licensing as our principal, enumerated function. 36 Of course, this is complemented by oversight to verify compliance. While the agency remains diligent in verifying compliance with existing licenses through its inspection and oversight work, licensing reviews remain a relatively small portion of the agency's activities, competing for management attention. I believe this is a situation where the agency should reassert the importance of licensing reviews as principal to our

-14 COM DA \\A./-23-0001/COMAXC-23-0002, '"Measuring NRC Succc~~" (Aug.29.2023) ( \\ll.2.'2--l l !Hl 1.1).

1

' Transfonnation at the NRC - Sustaining Progress as a \\.1odem, Risk-Infonned Regulator (1\\11 r, 1--lh -\\071<).

31'42 U.S.C. § 580l(c).

16

mission, use data to track efficiency and drive performance improvement, reevaluate and adjust staff priorities as appropriate, and hold leadership accountable for results.

As noted earlier, these are some of the reasons Commissioner Wright and I provided a proposal to our colleagues to establish meaningful metrics to track agency perfonnance. 37 Such information would guide performance improvement through better allocation of staff and resources, setting expectations and goals for improved execution of licensing work and holding staff leadership accountable for results.

The NRC's sPrinciples of Good Regulation call for "the best possible management and administration of regulatory activities" 38 and say that "Regulatory decisions should be made without undue delay." 39 Yet, among the 32 strategies in the NRC's Strategic Plan, only one specifically addresses timely decision-making. 48 As I noted above, there are additional steps the agency must take to ensure timely and efficient revie\\VS are the norm, not the exception, and demonstrate a learning curve that benefits future applicants. Agency leadership must improve their external mvareness to recognize and respond to changes in the operating environment.

Environmental reviews for subsequent license rene\\vals are a cautionary example.

The agency must do a better job of projecting workload and contingency planning to ensure an agile response to fact-of-life schedule changes. This includes more accurate allocation of staff resources, cross-training and reassigning staff from lower priority work as needed and supplementing with contractor resources as appropriate.

Subsequent License Renewal revie\\VS are an opportunity to embody the principle that

'*Regulatory activities should be consistent with the degree of risk reduction they achieve." 41 Subsequent License Rene\\val reviews should exhibit improved efficiency and expend fewer resources than \\Vas necessary for initial license rene\\vals.

The experience gained should produce a learning curve for subsequent reviews to be more efficient based on lessons learned in previous ones. Furthermore, the majority of the aging management programs that are in place with regulatory approval and oversight for the first period of extended operations should largely remain valid for continued operation. Applicants should be credited for these and other existing regulatory programs, like maintenance requirements, so that the scope of the review should focus on issues unique to the 60-80-year timeframe. This should yield revie\\vs that are more efficient than the initial license rene\\val revie\\vs and consistent with the risk reduction achieved.

'7 COM DA W-23-000 I /COMAXC-23-0002, "Measuring NRC Success" (Aug.29.2023) 1 \\11 "-'"-1-1 HO I-,).

1' See Principles of Good Regulation, littp~:

11 11 11.11rL*.c'.u1 <1buut-111*,* 1,ii uc,.11\\ nil,::p11 nc1p k, (last reviewed/updated Jan. 31, 2024).

• 19 Id.

-1o NUREG-1614, Vol. 8. "Strategic Plan Fiscal Years 2022-2026'. (Apr. 2022) (\\11 '"l"()h/ *\\ I 7())_

41 See Principles of Good Regulation, hltp~: 111111.nff.c'.(1\\ alwut-mc I aluc,.html::prrnL*1pk, (last rcvicwcdiupdatcd Jan. 31, 2024).n COM DA W-23-0001/CO\\1AXC-23-0002 (Aug. 29. 2023) 1 \\1L2_1.2 I BO l J).

17

The Commission must restore leadership focus and prioritize effective and efficient licensing reviews. Congress could support such an effort by authorizing an independent revie\\v of the agency's operations as described in my response to Question 2.

b. What actions does the NRC take to ensure adequate resources are prioritized for licensing reviews to ensure those reviews are completed timely and on schedule?

RESPONSE

The agency has processes for budget development, strategic planning, strategic workforce planning, and enterprise risk management. However, the current results suggest the agency's implementation of these processes has not been fully successful.

My response to several of the questions belO\\v describes my support and issuance of a Commission Action Memorandum \\Vith Commissioner Wright to establish metrics and real-time data analysis.

c. What metrics are in place to track the timeliness of licensing reviews?

RESPONSE

The NRC's current practices for tracking the timeliness oflicensing revie\\vs include publicly available metrics in its Congressional Budget Justification. These metrics are an anachronism that only provide a once-a-year snapshot of the agency's performance compared to simplistic goals. They do not provide a transparent, current indication of how well the agency is performing on licensing actions. As noted above, Commissioner Wright and I issued a joint Commission Action Memorandum (COM) titled "Measuring NRC Success." 42 If approved by a majority of the Commission, our COM \\Vill establish metrics in key areas that \\Ve believe \\Vill help the NRC to accomplish its vital safety mission in a more efficient and transparent manner. Real-time data can be used by the NRC staff leadership to provide greater predictability to licensees and to identify potential issues earlier in the process.

Quality, publicly facing data will also help increase the NRC's transparency to external stakeholders and accountability to Congress. In addition, real-time updated data should help inform the conversations Commissioners have with NRC staff leadership and provide opportunities for the NRC to measure and celebrate its successes.

d. How does NRC leadership indicate a sense of urgency to completing:

application reviews for advanced reactors?

subsequent license extension reviews?

pO\\ver uprate reviews?

other license amendment revie\\vs for operating reactors?

fuel facility licensing reviews?

4c COMO!\\ W-23-0001/COM/\\.XC-23-0002 (Aug. 29, 2023) I.\\JL.::':C--11 BO I _1.).

18

RESPONSE

As noted previously, many processes exist and resources are available to enable timely execution of reviews, including reviews for advanced reactors. In addition, the staff conducts lessons learned reviews to document best practices and insights gained. 43 While the staff are well intentioned, licensing reviews are competing for leadership attention. As I noted in response to a question from Chair Rodgers, the Commission must restore leadership focus and prioritize effective and efficient licensing reviews.

We need to set clear and aggressive, but achievable goals in \\Vorkload execution and use meaningful metrics to drive perfomiance improvement. I believe this is crucial for the agency to enable the safe and timely development of small and advanced reactors in line with Congressional expectations. I believe demonstrating that we can achieve timely reviews and celebrating those successes is vital to improving staff morale. Demonstrating efficient, predictable reviews is also important to maintain stakeholder confidence in the agency's effectiveness.

With regard to Subsequent License Renewals in particular, the Commission has directed the staff to provide monthly updates on the progress of the Subsequent License Rene\\val reviews. These status reports \\Vill provide the Commission additional infomiation and may elevate attention to potential future challenges in the execution of these revie\\VS. The Commission has also directed the staff to provide a roadmap to restore the program to a path of timely and predictable reviews and achieve the goal of 18-month revie\\vs. 44 The roadmap should include action items and deadlines to risk-inform renewal revie\\VS, leverage operating programs, leverage previous reviews, and leverage the agency's and industry's operating experience in aging management. 45 The NRC doesn't currently have any power uprate applications under review, but as a result of Congressional action resulting in the incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act, such applications may be economically feasible and pursued by licensees. I \\Vill be follO\\ving the staff's performance in this area routinely.

The Chair's response describes the agency's processes for fuel facility licensing reviews. The agency is currently revie\\ving the TRISO-X fuel fabrication facility 41 See, e.g. Lessons Learned from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staffs Review of the NuScale Design Certification Application ( \\far. 2022) ( \\11 ""OS~-\\ I ii I ). 1 Staff Requirements - Strategic Programmatic Overview of the Operating Reactors and New Reactors Business Lines, December 11, 2023 (1\\1! ':<J.-1-).,\\' 1.-1-).

45 See id. The ~taff i~ also conducting public meetings related to increasing efficiencies in subsequent license renewal. See e.g. Public Meeting Announcement "Public meeting to discu~~ possible efficiencies on the Sub~cquent License Renewal review) (Aug. 18, 2023) ( \\ll.2322l).\\~_;o): Public Meeting Announcement. "Periodic public meeting to discuss possible efficiencies for the Subsequent License Renewal Review," (Oct. 31, 2023)

(\\1L2J_,()J,\\.::'l l).

19

application. This review will provide an indication ofNRC's readiness to review the anticipated future workload. I will be closely following the staff performance in this area.

e. The NRC issued a decision on the Kairos Hennes non-power reactor in 18 months.

How long will it take to reach a decision on an advanced power reactor?

RESPONSE

The NRC staff issued its final safety evaluation report for the Kairos Hermes construction pem1it in 18 months, ahead of its nominal schedule. This was one key element of the construction permit revie\\v. The decision to issue the construction permit for this project also required the completion of an environmental impact statement, consultation \\Vith Federally-recognized Tribes in the area under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and a mandatory Commission hearing. The mandatory hearing process for the Kairos Hem1es construction permit

\\Vas completed when the Commission issued its decision in December 2023, at a cost of over S400,000 to the licensee for NRC direct labor.

The staff has developed generic milestone schedules for its licensing reviews46 and the schedule varies based on the type oflicense requested. For example, the staffs schedule milestone for an advanced reactor applicant seeking a construction permit is 36 months, whereas an advanced reactor applicant seeking a combined license that references a certified design is 30 months.

For each application, the staff determines whether its review can be conducted more efficiently than the generic milestone schedule. It makes this determination based on a variety of factors, including the quality of the submitted application. For instance,

\\Vhile the generic milestone schedule for the staffs revie\\v of a construction pem1it application is 36 months, the staff estimated a 24-month revie\\v schedule for its review of the Kairos Hermes construction permit application. 47 While the particular schedule for an advanced reactor application is based on a variety of factors, there are items that would provide for more predictable, efficient licensing reviews. In the environmental review area, the Commission currently has under review a generic environmental impact statement for advanced reactors. 48 4f, Generic Milestone Schedules of Requested Activities of the Commission, http,: 11 11 11. me. 0.m ah,1111-11rc 0.c11c1*ic-

~c11cd11b l1tml (last reviev,red/updated Sept. 10. 2021 ).

-P Letter from Benjamin Beasley (NRC) to Peter Hastings (Kairos Power, LLC). "Acceptance for Docketing of the Hermes Non-Power Test Reactor Construction Permit Application Submitted by Kairos Power LLC'.

(Nov. 29, 2021) (\\1! 'I> I <J -\\35--1-) (stating Kairos submitted its application in September 2021, and the staff anticipated completing its final safety evaluation report and final environmental impact statement in September 2023.)

4" SECY-21-0098, "Draft Advanced Nuclear Reactor Genenc Environmental Impact Statement" (Nov. 29, 2021)

(\\ 1 L2 12.::'2,\\0-I-I ).

20

Once this is codified, it would generically present environmental impacts that are common to many or most advanced nuclear reactors, eliminating the need to repeatedly reproduce the same analyses for each application and focus the staffs environmental review for submitted applications on items that can only be resolved once a site is identified, thereby yielding time and effort savings for all stakeholders, without undercutting the NRC's responsibilities under NEPA.

f.

How long does it generally take for the Commission to develop and finalize a policy statement?

RESPONSE

The Chair's response describes the process for developing a policy statement. As he notes, the schedule for developing and issuing policy statements can vary based on the subject matter, complexity of the issues involved, and the extent of public engagement and competition for rulemaking resources. It is not unusual for a policy statement to require several years to develop.

6. What steps will the Commission take in lieu of Commissioner Baran's proposed policy statement on timely decision-making?

RESPONSE

I agree in principle with setting Commission expectations for the timely review of advanced reactor applications in a policy statement. However, I believe such expectations should be set for all licensing reviews, not just advanced reactors. Additionally, I believe it may be premature to set such expectations without a robust baseline of agency perfonnance data.

For such a policy statement to be effective, it must have a foundation rooted in appropriate analysis to establish expectations. Any near-tenn effort to improve timeliness must focus on implementing performance metrics and accountability. Congress, stakeholders, and the Commission have repeatedly indicated the desire for the agency to improve its performance in licensing reviews in additional areas like subsequent license renewals. I believe significant direction must be provided to the staff, with regard to performance metrics. Therefore, as noted in my responses to Questions 4 and 5, I joined Commissioner Wright on a proposal to establish performance metrics, which I view as a necessary complement to any efforts to draft a policy statement.

7. Surveys of NRC staff over the past 10 years have shown a relatively steady decline in NRC staff satisfaction with the workplace and management. What do you believe are the root causes for declining employee satisfaction at the NRC, and what steps are you taking to improve NRC staff morale and culture?

RESPONSE

Workforce surveys are an important tool for leaders to gain feedback from employees and focus on continuous improvement. Employee feedback is important but is not a substitute 21

for leadership and direction. I am concerned that agency FEVS scores have declined, indicating a decline in employee perceptions related to leadership, communication, and motivation of the workforce.

Scores are likely suffering in part due to a lack of clear goals and objectives and lack of effective and consistent communication by senior leadership. Without clear goals and objectives, it's difficult for staff to see how their day-to-day efforts align with and support higher-level mission objectives. This can erode engagement and job satisfaction.

Appropriate goal setting and clearly articulating those goals can increase employee engagement and reduce attrition.

I would like to see the agency return in its scores to be one of the best places to work in the federal government and demonstrate that we have capable leaders. In 2008 and 2009, when NRC was rated "the best place to work in the federal government," it was the start of the

'*nuclear renaissance," when the agency was executing an extremely heavy workload with challenging schedules and a sense of urgency. The agency continues to have brilliant and capable staff today. I'm confident they will strive to meet or exceed the goals set for them.

Achieving and celebrating such success is an essential element to job satisfaction, staff engagement, and pride in the agency.

8. Please provide a copy of your proposal for metrics when available.

RESPONSE

The Commission Action Memorandum is available at:

https: \\\\\\\\*w.nrc.i!O\\idnc-; \\t1L.2>24 l'vll.2.l241TI01.l.pdf.

I welcome any feedback or questions from your office for further discussion.

9. You raised a concern with the budget for the Commission itself. Please provide a detailed explanation of your concerns.

RESPONSE

From 2014 to 2023, the Commission remained within the S9.5 million in total for its requested resources. During this time no increases to this amount were requested to account for the cost of salaries and benefits increases, or inflationary costs for travel and training.

While prior Commissions were able to exist \\Vithin this budget, it has become increasingly difficult for Commissioners to staff their offices in keeping with past capabilities without significant constraints. It is becoming increasingly necessary to utilize strategies such as staff rotations rather than permanent hires or forgo travel to stay within the existing budget.

This dynamic could impair the Commission's ability to function collegially and the ability of commissioners to act independently. Commission offices should not be constrained by insufficient resources and unable to hire expert staff, to travel, or to provide training. The budget should be formulated to ensure each Commission office has the resources necessary 22

to function appropriately when the Commission is at its full complement of five commissioners. The FY 2024 Congressional Budget Justification requests a modest increase of funding to total S 10.3 million. While this is an important first step, such a funding level would be inadequate in future fiscal years with a Commission operating at its full complement.

Given the challenges facing the agency and the need to meet the expectations of Congress and external stakeholders, it is crucial for each commissioner to maintain their independence and attract the skilled staff necessaiy to support the execution of their responsibilities. I appreciate my colleagues for their support in rectifying this situation and I am confident we will work together to address this as a collegial body. I urge Congress' reevaluation of its current approach to funding the Commission.

The Honorable Troy Balderson

1. You've mentioned the need for enhanced performance indicators so the Commission and the public can track the duration and status for licensing reviews.

a. Can you expand on how this could help improve the efficiency and consistency of revie\\vs? And hO\\v could real-time measures or updates on licensing reviews benefit stakeholders that are looking to be licensed by the NRC?

RESPONSE

It has been rightly stated: '*If you can't measure it, you can't manage it." Without meaningful metrics, it is impossible to discern whether the agency's performance is improving or declining. The longstanding metrics published in the agency's Congressional Budget Justification are anachronistic and have significant limitations in depicting performance or driving improvement. Hence, Commissioner Wright and I proposed to our colleagues that the agency establish meaningful metrics collected in near-real-time and made publicly available. 49 Establishing performance metrics would set the agency's expectations for effectiveness, efficiency, and timeliness. The NRC should make these performance metrics publicly available on its website in near-real-time, should address the perfomiance metrics in its strategic plan, and should use the performance metrics to inform future Congressional Budget Justifications. Meaningful, measurable, and actionable perfomiance metrics are essential to identifying \\Vhat the agency is doing

\\Veil and what it needs to work on.

As I noted in response to Chair Rodgers, there is a growing pattern of applicants viewing our processes as unpredictable and financially risky. Many policymakers and stakeholders have expressed concern that the NRC needs to improve the execution and timely completion of its licensing activities if nuclear energy is to 4'1 COMO!\\. W-23-000I/COM/\\.XC-23-0002, "Mca~uring NRC Success" (Aug. 29, 2023) (.\\*JL2.>2 l UU 1 J).

23

make a significant contribution to meeting national and global needs for clean energy and energy security. 50 The agency does not routinely exhibit a "learning curve" in its review where subsequent reviews become more efficient and predictable over time. While there may be various reasons for this, meaningful, measurable, and actionable performance metrics are essential to identifying what the agency is doing well and \\Vhat it needs to

\\Vork on. Such insights are key to guiding the agency to address factors that are

\\Vi thin its control and improve the efficiency and predictability of its reviews. This

\\Vill be crucial to the agency's ability to meet a potential grO\\ving \\Vorkload.

Additional staff and resources will not be enough to meet this future challenge without first improving the underlying processes and practices.

The NRC must recognize the need for effective, efficient decision making \\Vithin its safety mission. Given the agency's reputation as a world leader in nuclear safety regulation and experience in pioneering the use of risk to guide decision-making, the NRC should also be the recognized leader in establishing best practices for reducing regulatory risk and improving the predictability and timeliness of license reviews.

The Honorable Rick W. Allen I. How can we use the lessons learned at Vogtle 3&4, and apply these to the operating fleet?

a. Can the NRC approach licensing requests \\Vith the regulatory agility and flexibility NRC demonstrated on Vogtle 3&4 to improve efficiency and timeliness?

RESPONSE

Our staff repeatedly demonstrated initiative, efficiency, and a safety focus in handling hundreds oflicense amendments during its oversight of the construction ofVogtle Units 3 and 4. It is a success story that should be cultivated broadly in licensing revie\\VS.

In general, several factors may impact the review time for a license amendment request, including the complexity of the request and the timeliness of the applicant's response to requests for additional information from the staff. NRC staff generally schedule and prioritize licensing requests commensurate with the licensee's communicated schedule needs. However, there are likely best practices from the Vogtle 3 and 4 effort that could be captured to spur agility, flexibility, and efficiency in other licensing reviews.

Replicating the successes demonstrated with Vogtle 3 and 4 could improve our timeliness.

50 See, e.g., Ranking Member Capito Opening Statement at Nuclear Regulatory Commission Budget Hearing (Apr. 19, 2023) http,* \\\\ \\\\ \\\\ <.:)11\\ ~c:natc: g()Y puhl ic i 1Hk,.ctl11 p1*~*'-'--ITIL*a~c:-;-1*~*puhl irn11 II) :'i 1--11 l(d<:'7-::' I),\\ 1-

--1 ll I ::'-91 -I::'-.\\ 77(, I.\\ I _;1 _()( *1*; Idaho National Laboratory, *'Rc:comm~*ndation~ w lmpnl\\ ~- the: '\\Jucka1* R~*gulahH)

(,Jlllllll '-'-Wll R-.:al*t,Jr L1c-.:n~lll!! ~rnd,\\pproq] l'r,Ju:~~,, (Apr. 2023 ); Lctt-.:r from ( *ra1!! 11. l'1c1T\\' (American Nuclear Society) to lion. Cathy Mc\\1orm Rodgers, (U.S. Senate) et al., (May 5. 2023).

24

b. I hear of some licensing amendments taking one to two years. What may the NRC do to use the licensing processes applied during Vogtle construction to the existing fleet?

RESPONSE

I believe the best practices that the staff developed to manage, prioritize, and timely review license amendment requests for Vogtle 3 and 4 during construction should be captured and expanded to all licensing actions \\Vhere possible. For the Vogtle plants under construction, the NRC staff applied lessons learned from the Watts Bar construction.-' 1 The staff also completed a similar lessons-learned effort for the Vogtle Units 3&4 construction.-'2 Those lessons learned and best practices should be applied across the agency's licensing review process wherever possible, rather than limited to plants under construction.

License amendment revie\\VS is an area that I believe would benefit substantially from the establishment of metrics as Commissioner Wright and I proposed. 53 During Project AIM, the agency noted that 85 percent of the total licensing action inventory were routine licensing actions, requiring 300 hours0.00347 days <br />0.0833 hours <br />4.960317e-4 weeks <br />1.1415e-4 months <br /> or less, yet the metrics listed in the Congressional Budget Justification are one year and t\\vo years for complicated items, as you noted. 54 This is one example that illustrates \\vhy the establishment of meaningful metrics is essential for transparency and performance improvement. Meaningful, objective performance metrics would enable the agency to monitor its performance on its licensing reviews, highlighting effective practices and identifying challenges or inefficiencies. 5-'

c. Does NRC track the data to measure improvements learned at Vogtle?

RESPONSE

I am not mvare of the NRC tracking data to measure specific improvements learned at Vogtle 3&4. However, the NRC staff completed a fomial review of lessons learned related to Vogtle Units 3&4. 56 The staffs revie\\v of lessons learned related to the 51 See 10 Cf<R Part 52 Construction Lessons-Learned Report (Jan. 16, 2024) (\\11.2.l32Si\\202); see also Revi~cd Charter for the Vogtle Readiness Group to Oversee the Tran~ition to Operations for Vogtle Unit~ 3 and 4, at 1 (Jan.

3, 2023) (r-lL22J:5S.\\0.1.2) (stating the NRC instituted a readiness group cons1~tent with lessons learned from Watts Bar construction).

02 See Id :11 2, 10 CFR Part 52 Lessons-Learned \\Vith Construction at Vogtle 3 & 4 and V.C. Summer 2 & 3 (July 12,2021)(\\11 "11(,(J.\\0"ll).

sJ COMO!\\. W-23-000I/COM/\\.XC-23-0002, "Mea~uring NRC Success" (Aug. 29, 2023) (.\\*JL2.>2"-t l Utl l J).

54 COMSECY-17-0004, '"Proposed Closure of Project Aim Integrated Implementation Plan Ta~k No. 19 - Liccn~ing Husincss Process Improvement (Jan. 24, 2017) (\\11.1 (13--I0AI 15}.

"' COMDA W-23-000 l/COMAXC-23-0002, Measuring NRC Success" (Aug. 29, 2023) I \\1! ':< '41 BO I 3 ).

56 See 10 Cf<R Part 52 Construction Lessons-Learned Report (Jan. 16, 2024) (\\11.2.l32Si\\202); see also Revi~cd Charter for the Vogtlc Readiness Group to Oversee the Transition to Operations for Vogtlc Units 3 and 4, at 2 (Jan.

3, 2023) (r-lL22J:5S.\\0.1.2); 10 CFR Part 52 Le~~on~-Learned with Construction at Vogtle 3 & 4 and V.C. Summer 2

& 3 (July 12, 2021) (.\\1L2 I 1 (,U.\\0J 1 ).

25

Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (IT AAC) hearing process is also complete and publicly available. 57 The Honorable Randy \\Veber

1. We will need a lot of new nuclear energy to keep our grid reliable and affordable. There are many types of exciting new reactors that could provide that reliability and affordability at home and for our allies abroad. However, the timelines for our current licensing process are not aligned with the necessary pace of deployment.

a. Why does licensing take so long? What parts could be improved?

RESPONSE

Licensing under the current deterministic regulations takes a long time because of the need for staff to independently verify compliance with the many prescriptive requirements. Establishing a modern, risk-infonned, performance-based regulatory framework, as directed in NEIMA, should reduce many of the prescriptive requirements that may not be necessary to ensure the safe operation of an advanced reactor technology. Additionally, the enhanced safety benefits and lower environmental impacts of advanced designs could allow the agency to satisfy environmental review requirements under NEPA through simpler processes such as streamlined environmental impact statements or environmental assessments.

In addition, I believe the staff should more fully explore the use of its existing authorities for licensing essentially identical reactors at multiple sites under the current regulatory framework. While the provisions for standardization of nuclear power plants have been in place in appendix N to 10 CFR Part 50, for example, since the 1970s, they have never been fully used. If the agency is to deliver on licensing the construction and operation of multiple modules of a small modular reactor or groupings of identical reactors, \\Ve should strive to fully implement this authority.

b. What is necessary to make these timelines meaningful?

RESPONSE

The best way for the NRC to lead internationally on new and advanced reactors is to demonstrate its ability to effectively and efficiently reach licensing decisions domestically. The Commission is considering the NRC staffs proposal on a new risk-informed, performance-based, and technology-inclusive framework for licensing the next generation of commercial nuclear plants, called Part 53. I \\Vill continue to work 57 Report Summarizing Lessons Learned from the JTAAC Hearing Process for Vogtlc Electric Generating Plant.

Units 3 and 4 (Dec. 18, 2023) (1\\1I.2.l3:'i2A 12-1); see also Summaty of October 24, 2023, Comment Gathering Public Meeting on Lessons Learned from the ITAAC Ilearing Process for Vogtle Units 3 and 4 (Nov. 9, 2023)

(\\ 1 LL\\ _,()-1,\\025 ).

26

with my colleagues to ensure Part 53 results in a simpler, more efficient, and predictable review for new reactors.

As I noted in response to Chair Rodgers, there is a growing pattern of applicants viewing our processes as unpredictable and financially risky. Many policymakers and stakeholders have expressed concern that the NRC needs to improve the execution and timely completion of its licensing activities if nuclear energy is to make a significant contribution to meeting national and global needs for clean energy and energy security. 58 The agency does not routinely exhibit a "learning curve" in its review where subsequent reviews become more efficient and predictable over time. While there may be various reasons for this, meaningful, measurable, and actionable performance metrics are essential to identifying \\Vhat the agency is doing well and \\Vhat it needs to \\Vork on.

Such insights are key to guiding the agency to address factors that are \\Vithin its control and improve the efficiency and predictability of its reviews. This will be crucial to the agency's ability to meet a potential growing workload. Additional staff and resources will not be enough to meet this future challenge without first improving the underlying processes and practices.

c. Which of those activities can the Commission undertake themselves today, and which of them require new authorization from Congress?

RESPONSE

The Commission's conclusion on the staffs proposed Part 53 rule will be a significant factor to make licensing more efficient for advanced reactors in the future.

The Commission also has responsibility to ensure the staff has the necessary resources and tools to operate in a timely, predictable, and efficient manner. In order to understand in greater detail whether agency decisions are timely, predictable, and efficient, Commissioner Wright and I have proposed that the agency establish meaningful, objective, and transparent performance metrics which would identify areas for improvement and enable predictable and timely review schedules. 59 Regarding activities that may require Congressional action, there may be additional opportunities to provide the Commission \\Vith discretion for certain activities that would increase overall efficiencies \\Vhile continuing to meet the NRC's safety and security mission. Section 189a of the Atomic Energy Act requires the Commission to conduct hearings (sometimes referred to as mandatory hearings) for certain applications regardless of whether the application references a standard design or is a license

"' See, e.g., Ranking Member Capito Opening Statement at Nuclear Regulatory Commission Budget Hearing (Apr. 19. 2023) http~: 11 11 11.cp11.~cnc1tc. i!l'\\ puhl 1,* rndc-....c li11 w,'~~-1 cl c<1~c,-1*,'publ I(' c1n'.'lfl-:' 1411116 "7-" fl.\\ 1-

--1 BI '-<JF4,_,,\\ 7761.\\ I :<FOL F; Idaho National Laboratory, '"RcL*pn1111,'11,liilH>11~ tu ln1wp1,' the '\\Juclca1* R,'i!uLl(Pn

( l't1H111~~1\\>ll R,'<1cw1* 1 1L*,'11~1lli! and \\ppt"P\\ al Pwn:~~" (Apr. 2023); I..:tk'1 110111 l'1*;11i! l l. P1..:rc1* (American Nuclear Society) to Hon. Cathy Mc\\1orris Rodgers, (U.S. Senate) el al., (May 5. 2023).

5'1 COMO!\\ W-23-000I/COM/\\.XC-23-0002, **Mca~uring NRC Success" (Aug. 29, 2023) (.\\*JL2.>2-l UU 1 J).

27

application for an additional, identical facility at the same site. It would be helpful if Congress either eliminated this obsolete requirement or provided discretion to the Commission to determine on a case-by-case basis whether such hearings are warranted. 60 In addition, section 182b of the Atomic Energy Act requires the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) to review certain applications, again regardless of whether the application references a standard design or is for an identical facility at the same site.

The ACRS provides valuable input to the Commission. In my view, however, its focus should be on novel or unique issues rather than license applications for identical facilities. Thus, it would be helpful if Congress provided discretion to the Commission to determine whether it needed ACRS input on a particular review. With such discretion, the Commission could help ensure the considerable expertise of the ACRS and its limited time are focused and less likely to be overburdened with repetitive reviews such as the addition of identical modular reactors at a given site.

As I noted in a response to Chairman Duncan, Congress could authorize a review of our operating processes by outside experts such as the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) or similar organization. Such a revie\\v could provide insights into what agency processes work well and could also highlight best practices on ways to improve the agency's operational effectiveness. As I noted in response to a question from Chair Rodgers, I also believe the agency's project management processes, practices, and training could also benefit from an external review to gather insights regarding where our program is effective and opportunities where it could improve.

Last, I understand that applicants seeking manufacturing licenses may wish to test the reactors at the manufacturing site prior to shipping them to the sites \\Vhere they would be licensed to operate. Microreactor developers have communicated they may pursue this licensing approach, given the potential that a manufacturing license holder could rapidly scale reactor deployment by fabricating several reactors at a manufacturing facility.

Section 192 of the Atomic Energy Act could be clarified to provide the Commission

\\Vith the authority to issue temporary operating licenses to holders of manufacturing licenses to allow such testing at the manufacturer's site. Clarifying the NRC's authority might enable more efficient development of manufactured microreactors.

Ml See Howen, M., Ponangi, R.T., and Hurns, S.Ci., *'Improving the Efficiency of NR(' Power Reactor Licensing:

The 1957 Mandatoiy Hearing Reconsidered" ( Nov. 2023) hllp\\ * \\\\ \\\\ \\\\ ~*nc:1*g1 p()] icy.c(1 lumh1a ~-du wp-rnntc:111 uph,ad~ 2()2_; 11 '<R("l icrn-;i11g-( (,I I' R~*1wrt 1121::'3.pdr(stating 'ltlhc potential valucofmandatoty hearing~ 1~ even harder to di~ecrn in ca~cs where subsequent deployments of the same reactor de~ign arc being considered").

28

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/202411:23:17 AM Accession Number ML23275A005 Document Date 10130123 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count 2

Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Document Title 10130/23 - Letter to the Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers, et al, from Chair Hanson, submits the September 2023 monthly status report on the NRC actIvItIes and use of unobligated carryover funds appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Fleischmann C Granger K Markey E Rodqers CM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Subcomrn on Energy US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US HR, Subcomm on Environment and Climate Change US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN. Subcomm on Clean Air & Nuclear Safety US SEN. Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN. Subcomm on Enerqy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23279A030 Document Date 1119/23 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Status Report Page 1 of 13 Document Title Enclosure - Status Report on the Licensing Activities and Regulatory Duties of the US NRC for the Reporting Period Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Markey E Rodgers CM Addressee Affiliation US SEN (Senate)

US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works AvaIlabIlIty Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23279A031 Document Date 1119/23 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Letter Document Title 11/09/23 Letter to the Honorable Thomas Carper. et al., from Chair Hanson re: submits the report for the fourth quarter in Fiscal Year 2023 on the licensing activities and regulatory duties of the NRC for the reporting period of July 1 - Sept 30, 2023 Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Markey E Rodgers CM Addressee Affiliation US SEN (Senate)

US SEN. Comm on Environment & Public Works Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23284A434 Document Date 1119/23 6:00 AM

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/202411:23:17 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence FInancIal Assurance Document Letter Report, Administrative Page 2 of 13 Document Title 11-09 Letter to the President and Congress, from Chair Hanson re: submits the NRCs Fiscal Year 2023 Agency FInancIal Report Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Arrington J Biden JR Carper TR Comer J Duncan J Fleischmann C Granger K Green ME Harris K D Johnson B Johnson M Manchin J Markey E Murray P Peters G C Rodgers CM Whitehouse S Addressee Affiliation US Executive Office of the President US HR (House of Representatives)

US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Comm on Homeland Security US HR, Comm on Oversight and Accountability US HR, Comm on the Budget US HR, Speaker of the House US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US HR, Subcomm on Energy, Climate and Grid Security US HR, Subcomm on Environment, Manufacturing and Cr1t1cal Materials US SEN (Senate)

US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Comm on Energy & Natural Resources US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN. Comm on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs US SEN. Comm on the Budget US SEN. President US SEN, President Pro Tempore US SEN, Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23289A026 Document Date 10/26123 6 00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Document Title 10-26-23 Letter to the Honorable Rand Paul from Chair Hanson, responds to letter requesting information about the NRC's operations in the event of a lapse in federal appropriations Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Paul R Addressee Affiliation US Congress US SEN (Senate)

Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23289A027 Document Date 10/26123 6 00 AM

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/202411:23:17 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Response to Request for Additional Information (RAI)

Document Title Response to Request for lnformat1on, Letter dated September 29, 2023 - Enclosure Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Paul R Addressee Affiliation US Congress US SEN (Senate)

Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23289A146 Document Date 1119/23 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count 25 Document Type Report, Miscellaneous Status Report Document Title Semiannual Report April-Oct 2023 Enclosure Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Duncan J Fleischmann C Johnson B Markey E J Murray P Rodgers CM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Subcomm on Energy, Climate and Grid Security US HR, Subcomm on Environment, Manufacturing and Cr1t1cal Materials US SEN (Senate)

US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN, Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN. Subcomm on Energy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23289A147 Document Date 1119/23 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count 9

Document Type Routine Status Report (Recurring Weekly/Monthly)

Document Title Semiannual Report April-Oct 2023 Rulemaking Enclosure Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Duncan J Fleischmann C Johnson B Markey E J Murray P Rodgers CM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Subcomm on Energy, Climate and Grid Security US HR, Subcomm on Environment, Manufacturing and Critical Materials US SEN (Senate)

US SEN. Comm on Appropriations US SEN. Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN, Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN, Subcomm on Enerqy & Water Development AvaIlabIlIty Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Page 3 of 13

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/202411:23:17 AM Accession Number ML23290A251 Document Date 11/9/23 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Page 4 of 13 Document Title Letter to the Honorable Edward J. Markey, et al., submits the NRC's Semiannual Status Report on the Licensing Activities and Regulatory Duties from the reporting period of April 1, 2023 - September 30, 2023, and includes a list of rulemaking activities Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Duncan J Fleischmann C Johnson B Markey E J Murray P Rodgers CM Addressee Affiliation US HR (House of Representatives)

US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Subcomm on Energy, Climate and Grid Security US HR, Subcomm on Environment, Manufacturing and Critical Materials US SEN (Senate)

US SEN. Comm on Appropriations US SEN. Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN. Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN, Subcomm on Enerqy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23293A061 Document Date 11/1/23 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Document Title 11/01/23 Letter to the Honorable Marcy Kaptur, from Chair Hanson responds to letter regarding follow up on concerns raised by union representatives during the June visit to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Kaptur M Addressee Affiliation US Congress US HR (House of Representatives)

Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23303A013 Document Date 12/1/23 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count 2

Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Document Title 12/01/23 - Letter to the Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers, et al., from Chair Hanson, submits the October 2023 monthly status report on the NRC activities and use of unobligated carryover funds appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Fleischmann C Granger K Markey E Murray P Rodgers CM Addressee Affiliation US Congress US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Subcomm on Energy US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/202411:23:17 AM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Subcomrn on Environment and Climate Change US SEN. Comm on AppropnatIons US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN, Subcomm on Clean Air & Nuclear Safety US SEN, Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23303A014 Document Date 1211/23 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Graphics incl Charts and Tables Page 5 of 13 Document Title Enclosure - US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Waste Fund Expenditures for October 2023 Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Fleischmann C Granger K Markey E RodQers CM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Subcomm on Energy US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US HR, Subcomm on Environment and Climate Change US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN, Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN. Subcomm on Energy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23318A256 Document Date 11127123 6 00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Document Title 1112712023 Letter to the Honorable Patty Murray and Chuck Fleischmann from Chair Hanson submits the NRC's October 2023 Congressional Status Report Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Fleischmann C Murray P Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23321A1gg Document Date 12121123 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Document Title 12-21-23 Letter to the Honorable Shelley Moore Capito and Pete Ricketts from Chair Hanson re: responds to request that NRC improve the management and oversight of Subsequent License Renewal and approval process Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Capito SM Ricketts P Addressee Affiliation US Congress

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/202411:23:17 AM Addressee Affiliation US SEN (Senate)

US SEN. Comm on Environment & Public Works Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23321A200 Document Date 12121123 6 00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Page 6 of 13 Document Title Enclosure to the Honorable Shelley Moore Capito and Pete Ricketts, responds to request that NRC improve the management and oversight of Subsequent License Renewal and approval process Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Capito SM Ricketts P Addressee Affiliation US Congress US SEN (Senate)

US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23326A012 Document Date 12121123 6 00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Document Title 12-21-23 Letter to the Honorable Byron Donalds from Chair Hanson re: responds to letter regarding 2.206 petition to close Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Donalds B Addressee Affiliation US Congress US HR (House of Representatives)

Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23333A158 Document Date 12111123 6 00 AM Estimated Page Count 3

Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Document Title 12-11-23 Letter to the Honorable Gerald E. Connolly, et al., from Chair Hanson, responds to letter regarding request for update on NRC's implementation of the Modernizing Government Technology Act for the Fl TARA Scorecard Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Connolly GE Addressee Affiliation US Congress US HR, Comm on Oversight and Accountability AvaIlabIlIty Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23333A452 Document Date 12119123 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count 2

Document Type Congressional Correspondence Document Title 12/1912023 - Letter to the Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers, et al., from Chair Hanson, submits the November 2023 monthly status report on the NRG activities and use of unobligated carryover funds appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund Author Name Hanson CT

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/202411:23:17 AM Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Fleischmann C Granger K Markey E Murray P Rodgers CM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Subcomm on Energy US HR, Subcomrn on Energy & Water Development US HR, Subcomm on Environment and Climate Change US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN, Subcomm on Clean Air & Nuclear Safely US SEN, Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN. Subcomm on Enerqv & Water Development AvaIlabIlIty Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23333A456 Document Date 12119123 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Graphics incl Charts and Tables Page 7 of 13 Document Title Enclosure - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Waste Fund Expenditures for November 2023 Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Fleischmann C Granger K Markey E Murray P Rodgers CM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Subcomm on Energy US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US HR, Subcomm on Environment and Climate Change US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN. Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN. Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN. Subcomm on Enerqy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23338A193 Document Date 1118124 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Routine Status Report (Recurring Weekly/Monthly)

Document Title 01-18-24 Letter to the Honorable Jeanne Shaheen from Chair Christopher Hanson - Reporting of the Status of the Agency's Provision of Compliance Guides to Small Entities Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Rodgers CM Shaheen J Williams R Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Committee on Small Business US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN, Comm on Small Business & Entrepreneurship AvaIlabIlIty Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/202411:23:17 AM Accession Number ML23346A081 Document Date 12/14/23 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Letter Page 8 of 13 Document Title 12-14-23 Letter to the Honorable Patty Murray and Chuck Fleischmann from Chair Hanson submits the NRC's November 2023 Congressional Status Report Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Murray P Addressee Affiliation US HR (House of Representatives)

US SEN (Senate)

AvaIlabIlIty Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23348A152 Document Date 1/24/24 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count 2

Document Type Congressional Correspondence Document Title 01124124 - Letter to the Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers, et al., from Chair Hanson, submits the December 2023 monthly status report on the NRG activities and use of unobligated carryover funds appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Fleischmann C Granger K Markey E Rodi;iers CM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Subcomm on Energy US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US HR, Subcomm on Environment and Climate Change US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN, Subcomm on Clean Air & Nuclear Safety US SEN, Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN, Subcomm on Enerqy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23348A156 Document Date 1124124 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Graphics incl Charts and Tables Document Title Enclosure - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Waste Fund Expenditures for December 2023 Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Fleischmann C Granger K Markey E Rodqers CM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Subcomm on Energy US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US HR, Subcomm on Environment and Climate Change US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN, Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN, Subcomm on Enerqy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/202411:23:17 AM Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23349A059 Document Date 2/12/24 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Letter Page 9 of 13 Document Title 02112124 - Letter to Frank Rusco, Director, Natural Resources and Environment, GAO, et al., responds to GAO report GAO-23-105997, entitled "Nuclear Power: NRC Needs to Take Additional Actions to Prepare to License Advanced Reactors" Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Rusco F Addressee Affiliation US Government Accountability Office (GAO)

US HR (House of Representatives)

US SEN (Senate)

Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23349A062 Document Date 2/12/24 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Report. Miscellaneous Document Title Enclosure - Letter to Frank Rusco. GAO, et al., responds to GAO report GAO-23-105997. entitled "Nuclear Power: NRG Needs to Take Additional Actions to Prepare to License Advanced Reactors" Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Rusco F Addressee Affiliation US Government Accountability Office (GAO)

US HR (House of Representatives)

US SEN (Senate)

Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23354A237 Document Date 1111124 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Response to Request for Additional Information (RAil Document Title 0111112024

Enclosure:

Response to Request for Information; Letter dated December 5, 2023 Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Kuster AM Pappas C Shaheen J Addressee Affiliation US Congress US HR (House of Representatives)

US SEN (Senate)

Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23354A238 Document Date 1/11/24 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Letter Document Title 01/11/2024 Letter to the Honorable Jeanne Shaheen. et al., from Chair Hanson responds to letter regarding proposed NextEra Common Emergency Plan for Seabrook Station and other nuclear power plants Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Kuster AM Pappas C Shaheen J Addressee Affiliation US Congress US HR (House of Representatives)

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/202411:23:17 AM Addressee Affiliation US SEN (Senate)

AvaIlabIlIty Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML24008A004 Document Date 2/5124 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Page 10 of 13 Document Title 02/05/2024 Letter to the Honorable Bill Huizenga, et al., from Chair Hanson, responds to letter regarding federal loan funding application submitted by Hallee to repowerthe Palisades Nuclear Power Plant Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Bergman J Huizenga B Moolenaar J R Norcross D Scholten HJ Slotkin E Stevens HM Van Drew J WalberQ T Addressee Affiliation US Congress US HR (House of Representatives)

US SEN (Senate)

Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML24009A270 Document Date 1/17/24 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Document Title 01/17/2024 Letter to the Honorable Patty Murray and Chuck Fleischmann from Chair Hanson submits the NRC's December 2023 Congressional Status Report Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Fleischmann C Murray P Addressee Affiliation US HR (House of Representatives)

US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US SEN (Senate)

US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN. Subcomm on Energy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML24009A272 Document Date 12/31/23 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Routine Status Report (Recurring Weekly/Monthly)

Document Title December 2023 NRC Congressional Status Report Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Fleischmann C Murray P Addressee Affiliation US HR (House of Representatives)

US SEN (Senate)

Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/202411:23:17 AM Accession Number ML24012A052 Document Date 2/5124 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Page 11 of 13 Document Title 02-05-24 Letter to the Honorable Edward Markey and Elizabeth Warren from Chair Hanson re: responds to concerns regarding the proposed Common Fleet Emergency Plan in NextEra Energy's License Amendment Request Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Markey E J Addressee Affiliation US Congress US SEN (Senate)

Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML24017A227 Document Date 2/13/24 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Status Report Document Title Enclosures - Status Report on the Licensing Activities and Regulatory Duties of the US NRC for the reporting period of October 1 - December 31, 2023 Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRC/Cha1rman Addressee Name Carper TR Addressee Affiliation US SEN (Senate)

US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML24017A228 Document Date 2/13/24 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Letter Document Title 02-13-24 Letter to the Honorable Thomas R. Carper, et al., from Chair Hanson submits the report for the first quarter In FY 2024 on the lIcensIng actIvIties and regulatory duties of the NRG for the reporting period of October 1, 2023 - December 31, 2023 Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRC/Cha1rman Addressee Name Carper TR Addressee Affiliation US SEN (Senate)

US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML24030A814 Document Date 3/6124 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count 2

Document Type Congressional Correspondence Document Title 03/06/24 - Letter to the Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers, et al., from Chair Hanson, submits the January 2024 monthly status report on the NRC activities and use of unoblIgated carryover funds appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Fleischmann C Granger K Markey E Murray P Rodgers CM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/202411:23:17 AM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Subcomrn on Energy US HR, Subcomrn on Energy & Water Development US HR, Subcomm on Environment and Climate Change US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN, Subcomm on Clean Air & Nuclear Safely US SEN. Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN. Subcomm on Energy & Water Development AvaIlabIlIty Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML24030A837 Document Date 1/31/24 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Financial Assurance Document Page 12 of 13 Document Title Enclosure - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Waste Fund Expenditures for January 2024 Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Fleischmann C Granger K Markey E Murray P Rodgers CM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Subcomm on Energy US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US HR, Subcomm on Environment and Climate Change US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN. Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN. Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN. Subcomm on Enerqy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML24038A312 Document Date 2/20/24 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Document Title 02-20 Letter to the Honorable Patty Murray and Chuck Fleischmann from Chair Hanson re: submits the NRC's January 2024 Congressional Status Report Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Fleischmann C Murray P Addressee Affiliation US HR (House of Representatives)

US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US SEN (Senate)

US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML24038A314 Document Date 2/20/24 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Routine Status Report (Recurring Weekly/Monthly)

Document Title January 2024 NRC Congressional Status Report Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/202411:23:17 AM Addressee Name Fleischmann C Murray P Addressee Affiliation US HR (House of Representatives)

US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US SEN (Senate)

US SEN. Comm on AppropnatIons US SEN, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development AvaIlabIlIty Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML24068A039 Document Date 3/18/24 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count 2

Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Page 13 of 13 Document Title 03/18/2024 Letter to the Honorable Patty Murray and Chuck Fleischmann from Chair Hanson re submits the NRC's February 2024 Congressional Status Report Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Fleischmann C Murray P Addressee Affiliation US HR (House of Representatives)

US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US SEN (Senate)

US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML24068A044 Document Date 2/29/24 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Congressional Correspondence Status Report Document Title February 2024 NRG Congressional Status Report Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Fleischmann C Murray P Addressee Affiliation US HR (House of Representatives)

US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US SEN (Senate)

US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23333A157 Document Date 11/20/23 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count 3

Document Type Response to Request for Additional Information (RAI)

Document Title 12-11-23 Enclosure to Letter to the Honorable Gerald E. Connolly, et al., Responds to Letter Regarding Request for update on NRCs Implementation of the ModernIzIng Government Technology Act for the FIT ARA Scorecard Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Oversight and Accountability AvaIlabIlIty Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/2024 11 :57:56 AM Accession Number ML23243A003 Document Date 1014/23 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count 2

Document Type Congressional Correspondence Letter Page 1 of 3 Document Title 10/04/2023 - Letter to the Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers, et al., from Chair Hanson, submits the August 2023 monthly status report on the NRC activities and use of unoblIgated carryover funds appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Feinstein D Fleischmann C Granger K Markey E Rodgers CM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Subcomrn on Energy US HR, Subcomrn on Energy & Water Development US HR, Subcomm on Environment and Climate Change US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN, Subcomm on Clean Air & Nuclear Safety US SEN. Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN. Subcomm on Energy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23243A007 Document Date 1014123 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Graphics incl Charts and Tables Document Title Enclosure - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Waste Fund Expenditures for August 2023 Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Carper TR Feinstein D Fleischmann C Granger K Markey E Rodgers CM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Subcomm on Energy US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US HR, Subcomm on Environment and Climate Change US SEN. Comm on Appropriations US SEN. Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN. Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN, Subcomm on Enerqy & Water Development AvaIlabIlIty Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23285A052 Document Date 10119123 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Letter Document Title 10119123 Letter to the Honorable Patty Murray and Chuck Fleischmann from Chair Hanson submits the NRC's September 2023 Congressional Status Report Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Fleischmann C Murray P Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/2024 11 :57:56 AM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Subcomrn on Energy & Water Development US SEN. Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML23285A055 Document Date 10119123 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Status Report Document Title September 2023 NRC Congressional Status Report Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Fleischmann C Murray P Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Subcomm on Energy & Water Development US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Subcomm on Enerqy & Water Development AvaIlabIlIty Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML24061A093 Document Date 3/1124 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count 227 Document Type NUREG Document Title NUREG-1100, Vol. 40, "U.S. NRG Congressional Budget Justification Fiscal Year 2025" Author Name Madden E Author Affiliation NRC/OCFO Addressee Name Addressee Affiliation Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Accession Number ML24078A138 Document Date 3/11/24 6:00 AM Estimated Page Count Document Type Letter Page 2 of 3 Document Title 03-11-24 Letter to the Honorable Shalanda Young, et al., from Chair Hanson, submits the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Fiscal Year 2025 Congressional Budget Justification Author Name Hanson CT Author Affiliation NRG/Chairman Addressee Name Arrington JC Cardin B CarperT R Carter B Comer J Fleischmann C Granger K Green ME Harris K Johnson M Manchin J Markey E Mccaul MT McMorris C McMorris Rodgers C Murray P Peters G C Whitehouse S Youn,:i S Addressee Affiliation US Executive Office of the President, Office of Mgmt & Budget (0MB)

US HR (House of Representatives)

ADAMS Documents as of 04/08/2024 11 :57:56 AM Addressee Affiliation US HR, Comm on Appropriations US HR, Comm on Energy & Commerce US HR, Comm on Foreign Affairs US HR, Comm on Homeland Security US HR, Comm on Oversight and Accountability US HR, Speaker of the House US HR, Subcornm on Energy & Water Development US HR, Subcornm on Energy, Climate and Gnd Security US HR, Subcomm on Environment, Manufacturing and Critical Materials US SEN (Senate)

US SEN, Comm on Appropriations US SEN, Comm on Energy & Natural Resources US SEN. Comm on Environment & Public Works US SEN. Comm on Foreign Relations US SEN, Comm on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs US SEN, Comm on the Budget US SEN, President US SEN, President Pro Tempore US SEN. Subcomm on Clean Air, Climate Change & Nuclear Safety US SEN. Subcomm on Energy & Water Development Availability Publicly Available Official Record?

Yes Replicated Yes Page 3 of 3

SUMMARY

OF NRC ACTIONS - RESPONSE TO GAO REPORTS Nuclear Regulatory Commission: NRG Needs to Improve Its Cost Estimates by Incorporating More Best Practices (GAO-15-98)

....... 2 Nuclear Security: NRG Has Enhanced the Controls of Dangerous Radioactive Materials, but Vulnerabilities Remain (GAO-16-330).

..4 Combating Nuclear Terrorism: NRG Needs to Take Additional Actions to Ensure the Security of High-Risk Radioactive Material (GAO-19-468).

....... 7 Information Technology: Agencies Need to Fully Implement Key Workforce Planning Activities (GAO-20-129)

.. 9 Preventing a Dirty Bomb: Vulnerabilities Persist in NRC's Controls for Purchases of High-Risk Radioactive Materials (GAO-22-103441)

....... 1 0 Nuclear Regulatory Commission: NRC Needs to Take Additional Actions to Prepare to License Advanced Reactors (GAO23-105997).

12 High-Risk Radioactive Material: Opportunities Exist to Improve the Security of Sources No Longer in Use (GAO-24-105998)

... 16 Cybersecurity: Federal Agencies Made Progress, but Need to Fully Implement Incident Response Requirements (GAO-24-105658)

... 17

The U.S. Government Accountability Office Report Nuclear Regulatory Commission: NRC Needs to Improve Its Cost Estimate by Incorporating More Best Practices December 2014 (GAO-15-98)

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), in its report, "Nuc!ear Regulatory Commission:

NRG Needs to Improve lts Cost Estimates by Incorporating More Best Practices," recommended that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) align its procedures with relevant cost-estimating best practices identified in GAO-089-3SP, "GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Developing and Managing Capital Program Costs" (March 2009). The status of the actions taken by the NRC in response to the GAO recommendation is provided below.

Recommendation:

To improve the reliability of its cost estimates, as the NRC revises its cost estimating procedures, the NRC Chairman should ensure that the agency aligns the procedures with relevant cost estimating best practices identified in the GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide and ensure that future cost estimates are prepared in accordance with relevant cost estimating best practices.

Status:

The NRC is updating its cost-benefit guidance to incorporate cost estimating best practices and the treatment of uncertainty to support the development of more realistic estimates of the costs to implement proposed requirements. This guidance update addresses relevant best practices provided by GAO and feedback provided by licensees, the Nuclear Energy Institute, and other stakeholders. This update will also consolidate guidance documents, incorporate recommendations from the GAO report on the NRC's cost-estimating practices and cost-estimating best practices from the GAO guide, and capture best practices for the consideration of qualitative factors in accordance with Commission direction in the Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) for SECY-14-0087, "Qualitative Consideration of Factors in the Development of Regulatory Analyses and Backfit Analyses."

The cost-benefit guidance update was released on April 14, 2017, for a 60-day public comment period Comments received were reviewed and addressed, and in March 2018, the staff submitted a draft of the final guidance (NUREG/BR-0058) to the Commission for approval. In July 2019, the Commission directed the staff to update NUREG/BR-0058 to a!ign with the update to Management Directive 8.4, "Management of Backfitting, Forward Fitting, Issue Finality, and Information Requests," that the Commission approved in May 2019. The staff made conforming changes to NUREG/BR-0058 and submitted a revised draft of NUREG/BR-0058 to the Commission on January 28, 2020 (SECY-20-0008, "Draft Final NUREG/BR-0058, Revision 5, 'Regulatory Analysis Guidelines of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission"').

2

The staff also developed additional draft guidance that will be in appendices to NUREG/BR-0058.

The staff developed Appendices F-I, which address emergent policy issues and provide references that update pertinent information contained in NUREG/BR-0184, "Regulatory Analysis Technical Evaluation Handbook," dated January 1997. The new appendices contain data sources, regulatory analysis methods, data for nuclear facilities other than power reactors, severe accident risk analysis, and guidance used when conducting cost-benefit analyses for the NRC's regulatory, backfit, forward fit, issue finality, and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) environmental review analyses across NRC program offices. The NRC issued the draft appendices for public comment on April 16, 2021, and held a public meeting on May 19, 2021, to answer stakeholder questions and facilitate public comment. The final draft appendices were provided to the Commission for its consideration on April 1, 2022 (SECY-22-0028, "Appendices to NUREG/BR-0058, Revision 5, 'Regulatory Analysis Guidelines of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission'")

In addition, the staff developed Appendices K-L, which provide guidance on the monetary valuation of nonfatal cancer risk used in cost-benefit analysis and replacement energy costs. The NRC issued the draft appendices for public comment on July 6, 2022, and held a public meeting on August 17, 2022, to answer stakeholder questions and facilitate public comment. The final draft appendices were provided to the Commission for its consideration on February 24, 2023.

After receiving Commission direction, the staff will issue the resulting final NUREG/BR-0058 and the associated appendices and reference it on the NRC public website.

On November 9, 2023, the Office of Management and Budget (0MB) issued a revised version of 0MB Circular No. A-4 on "Regulatory Analysis." The NRC staff is currently assessing the revised Circular to determine what actions, if any, the agency should take in response.

This GAO recommendation remains open.

3

The U.S. Government Accountability Office Report Nuclear Security:

NRC Has Enhanced the Controls of Dangerous Radioactive Materials, but Vulnerabilities Remain July 2016 (GAO-16-330)

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), in its report, "Nuclear Security: NRC Has Enhanced the Controls of Dangerous Radioactive Materials, but Vulnerabilities Remain," made three recommendations to the NRC to address vulnerabilities associated with licensing and accountability strategies for category 3 sources and quantities of radioactive material. The status of the actions taken by the NRC in response to the GAO recommendations is provided below.

Recommendation 1:

Because some quantities of radioactive materials are potentially dangerous to human health if not properly handled, the NRC should take action to better track and secure these materials and verify the legitimacy of the licenses for those who seek to possess them. Specifically, the NRC should take the steps needed to include category 3 sources in the National Source Tracking System and add agreement state category 3 licenses to the Web-based Licensing (WBL) System as quickly as reasonably possible.

Status:

On December 21, 2021, in SRM-SECY-17-0083, "Staff Requirements Memorandum SECY-17-0083 - Re-Evaluation of Category 3 Source Security and Accountability in Response to SRM-COMJMB-16-0001," the Commission directed the staff to pursue rulemaking to amend the regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (1 O CFR) Parts 30, 40, and 70 to:

1. require safety and security equipment to be in place before granting a license for an unknown entity in order to address the concern related to obtaining a valid license using a fictitious company or by providing false information;

2. clarify license verification methods for transfers involving quantities of radioactive material that are below category 2 thresholds in order to: (a) update the oral certification method to require that the certification be followed up with confirmation by the use of one of the other acceptable verification methods in those parts, and (b) remove the obsolete method of obtaining other sources of information compiled by a reporting service from official records; and, 3

require licensees transferring category 3 quantities of radioactive material to verify licenses through the Licensee Verification System (LVS) or the regulatory authority. For this activity Agreement States that do not use the WBL System as their license tracking system would need to either voluntarily provide their licenses authorizing category 3 quantities of radioactive material to the NRC to facilitate verification through LVS or perform manual license verification.

The Commission did not direct the staff to include category 3 sources in the National Source Tracking System.

4

On December 19, 2022, the staff submitted the draft proposed rule to the Commission for its consideration, addressing the Commission's SRM. The draft proposed rule and supporting content can be found in SECY-22-0112, "Proposed Rule: Radioactive Source Security and Accountability (3150-AK83; NRC-2022-0103)." The Commission is currently considering the draft proposed rule.

This GAO recommendation remains open.

Recommendation 2:

Because some quantities of radioactive materials are potentially dangerous to human health if not properly handled, the NRC should take action to better track and secure these materials and verify the legitimacy of the licenses for those who seek to possess them. Specifically, the NRC should, at least until such time that category 3 licenses can be verified using the License Verification System, require that transferors of category 3 quantities of radioactive materials confirm the validity of a would-be purchaser's radioactive materials license with the appropriate regulatory authority before transferring any category 3 quantities of licensed materials.

Status:

In addition to the response provided to Recommendation 1, the NRC staff continues to engage licensees and Agreement States on the issues identified by this GAO investigation. In July 2022, the NRC staff issued a communication to its manufacturer and distributor licensees and Agreement State regulators to ensure that they are aware of the issues identified by GAO and remind them of ways to identify fraudulent licenses. The NRC staff also reminded licensees that under current requirements they can contact the regulator (either the NRC or Agreement State, as appropriate) to verify that a license holder can receive radioactive material under the terms of its license. In addition, the NRC staff contacted industry trade associations for source producers to discuss the GAO recommendations and encouraged the trade associations to proactively engage their member companies. The NRC staff will continue to engage with all relevant stakeholders on their responses to NRC communications and the findings of this GAO audit.

This GAO recommendation remains open.

Recommendation 3:

Because some quantities of radioactive materials are potentially dangerous to human health if not properly handled, the NRC should take action to better track and secure these materials and verify the legitimacy of the licenses for those who seek to possess them. Specifically, the NRC should, as part of the ongoing efforts of the NRC working groups meeting to develop enhancements to the pre-licensing requirements for category 3 licenses, consider requiring that an on-site security review be conducted for all unknown applicants of category 3 licenses to verify that each applicant is prepared to implement the required security measures before taking possession of licensed radioactive materials.

Status:

In addition to the Commission direction and NRC staff activities described in response to Recommendations 1 and 2, the NRC issued a revision to the pre-licensing guidance. The revised guidance emphasizes that licenses should not be hand-delivered during a pre-licensing site visit and outlines processes to conduct additional screening of applicants and evaluate any 5

potential security risks identified during the application review, as appropriate. The NRC has also updated its licensing and inspection courses and offered multiple targeted training sessions to ensure that license reviewers understand the revisions to the pre-licensing guidance and to reinforce expectations regarding adherence to licensing processes.

This GAO recommendation remains open.

6

The U.S. Government Accountability Office Report Combating Nuclear Terrorism: NRC Needs to Take Additional Actions to Ensure the Security of High-Risk Radioactive Material April 2019 (GAO-19-468)

The U.S Government Accountability Office (GAO), in its report. "Combating Nuclear Terrorism.

The NRG Needs to Take Additional Actions to Ensure the Security of High-Risk Radioactive Material, made three recommendations to the US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRG) related to the security of radioactive material. Two of these recommendations have been previously reported as recommendations that would not be implemented. The status of the actions taken by the NRG in response to the remaining GAO recommendation is provided below.

Recommendation 2:

The Chairman of the NRG should require additional security measures for high-risk quantities of certain category 3 radioactive material and assess whether other category 3 materials should also be safeguarded with additional security measures Status:

On December 21, 2021, in SRM-SECY-17-0083, "Staff Requirements Memorandum SECY-17-0083 - Re-Evaluation of Category 3 Source Security and Accountability in Response to SRM-COMJMB-16-0001,,. the Commission directed the staff to pursue rulemaking to amend the regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Parts 30, "Rules of General Applicability to Domestic Licensing of Byproduct Material," 40, "Domestic Licensing of Source Material," and 70, "Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material," to:

1. require safety and security equipment to be in place before granting a license for an unknown entity in order to address the concern related to obtaining a valid license using a fictitious company or by providing false information;

2. clarify license verification methods for transfers involving quantities of radioactive material that are below category 2 thresholds in order to: (a) update the oral certification method to require that the certification be followed up with confirmation by the use of one of the other acceptable verification methods in those parts, and (b) remove the obsolete method of obtaining other sources of information compiled by a reporting service from official records, and,

3.

require licensees transferring category 3 quantities of radioactive material to verify licenses through the License Verification System (LVS) or the regulatory authority. For this activity Agreement States that do not use the Web-based Licensing (WBL) System as their license tracking system would need to either voluntarily provide their licenses authorizing category 3 quantities of radioactive material to the NRG to facilitate verification through LVS or perform manual license verification.

The Commission did not direct the staff to include category 3 sources in the National Source Tracking System.

7

On December 19, 2022, the staff submitted the draft proposed rule to the Commission for its consideration, addressing the Commission's SRM The draft proposed rule and supporting content can be found in SECY-22-0112, "Proposed Rule: Radioactive Source Security and Accountability (3150-AK83; NRC-2022-0103)." The Commission is currently considering the draft proposed rule.

This GAO recommendation remains open.

8

The U.S. Government Accountability Office Report Information Technology: Agencies Need to Fully Implement Key Workforce Planning Activities March 2020 (GAO-20-129)

The Federal Government spends over $90 billion on information technology (IT). Despite this large investment, projects too frequently fail or incur cost overruns and schedule slippages while contributing little to mission-related outcomes. Effectively implementing workforce planning activities can facilitate the success of major acquisitions. GAO was asked to conduct a government-wide review of IT workforce planning. The objective was to determine the extent to which Federal agencies effectively implemented IT workforce planning practices. GAO made one recommendation to the NRC in this report.

Recommendation 14:

The Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission should ensure that the agency fully implements each of the seven key IT workforce planning activities it did not fully implement.

Status:

The following summary describes the actions taken by the NRC to fully implement seven key IT workforce planning activities identified by GAO.

The NRC has enhanced the Strategic Workforce Planning (SWP) process. This process was informed by the GAO report titled "Strategic Human Capital Management: NRC Could Better Manage the Size and Composition of Its Workforce by Further Incorporating Leading Practices" (GAO-17-233). This enhanced SWP process has been fully implemented resulting in the identification of strategies and action plans to address potential IT skill gaps.

In a previous report, the NRC described its efforts to identify competencies at the agency and to further strengthen that activity by joining other Federal agencies that are part of the Chief Information Officers Council to build career paths/competency models for 64 IT security roles across the Federal Government. After further review, the NRC identified 34 core positions for IT security roles instead of the initial 64 roles identified within the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) in order to build competency models. OCIO has completed 11 competency models to date.

The NRC also provided comments on the current state of our IT workforce planning activities, including our efforts to identify competencies at the agency, and to further strengthen that activity by joining other Federal agencies that are part of the Office of the Chief Information Officer Council to build career paths/competency models for 64 IT Security roles across the Federal Government.

The NRC has identified certain competency gaps and has developed and implemented strategies, taken steps to address issues, monitored actions, and reported on progress in addressing these competency gaps. As a result of its actions, NRC has improved its capability to anticipate and respond to changing staffing needs and to control human capital risks when developing, implementing, and operating critical IT systems.

The NRC considers this GAO recommendation to be closed.

9

The U.S. Government Accountability Office Report Preventing a Dirty Bomb:

Vulnerabilities Persist in NRC's Controls for Purchases of High-Risk Radioactive Materials July 2022 (GAO-22-103441)

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), in its report, "Preventing a Dirty Bomb:

Vulnerabilities Persist in NRC's Controls for Purchases of High-Risk Radioactive Materials,"

made two recommendations to the NRC related to the security of radioactive material. The status of the actions taken by the NRC in response to the GAO recommendations is provided below.

Recommendation 1:

The Chairman of the NRC should immediately require that vendors verify category 3 licenses with the appropriate regulatory authority.

Status:

On December 21, 2021, in SRM-SECY-17-0083, "Staff Requirements Memorandum SECY-17-0083 - Re-Evaluation of Category 3 Source Security and Accountability in Response to SRM-COMJMB-16-0001," the Commission directed the staff to pursue rulemaking to amend the regulations in 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, and 70 to:

1. require safety and security equipment to be in place before granting a license for an unknown entity in order to address the concern related to obtaining a valid license using a fictitious company or by providing false information;

2. clarify license verification methods for transfers involving quantities of radioactive material that are below category 2 thresholds in order to: (a) update the oral certification method to require that the certification be followed up with confirmation by the use of one of the other acceptable verification methods in those parts, and {b) remove the obsolete method of obtaining other sources of information compiled by a reporting service from official records; and,

3. require licensees transferring category 3 quantities of radioactive material to verify licenses through the LVS or the regulatory authority. For this activity Agreement States that do not use the WBL System as their license tracking system would need to either voluntarily provide their licenses authorizing category 3 quantities of radioactive material to the NRC to facilitate verification through LVS or perform manual license verification.

On December 19, 2022, the staff submitted the draft proposed rule to the Commission for its consideration, addressing the Commission's SRM. The draft proposed rule and supporting content can be found in SECY-22-0112, "Proposed Rule: Radioactive Source Security and Accountability (3150-AK83; NRC-2022-0103)." The Commission is currently considering the draft proposed rule.

The NRC staff continue to engage licensees and Agreement States on the issues identified by this GAO investigation. In July 2022, the NRC staff issued a communication to its manufacturer and distributor licensees and Agreement State regulators to ensure that they are aware of the 10

issues identified by GAO and remind them of ways to identify fraudulent licenses. The NRC staff also reminded licensees that under current requirements they can contact the regulator (either the NRC or Agreement State, as appropriate) to verify that a license holder can receive radioactive material under the terms of its license. In addition, the NRC staff contacted industry trade associations for source producers to discuss the GAO recommendations and encouraged the trade associations to proactively engage their member companies. The NRC staff will continue to engage with all relevant stakeholders on these issues, their responses to NRC communications, and the findings of this GAO audit.

This GAO recommendation remains open.

Recommendation 2:

The Chairman of the NRC should add security features to its licensing process to improve its integrity and make it less vulnerable to altering or forging licenses. These security features could include multifactor authentication or moving away from paper licenses to electronic-based licensing.

Status:

The draft proposed Radioactive Source Security and Accountability rule currently being considered by the Commission offers direct verification of licenses for category 3 quantities of radioactive materials through LVS or by contact with the regulator. The draft proposed rule also contemplates that the NRC would develop additional guidance for regulators and licensees to reduce the potential for use of altered or counterfeited licenses to purchase category 3 radioactive sources.

The NRC staff also explored the security features suggested by GAO as an interim step for licenses for category 3 quantities of material, as well as a potential enhancement for smaller quantities of materials. The NRC evaluated the advantages and disadvantages of features such as two factor authentication, non-fungible tokens, data tokens, and QR codes. Tokenization and QR codes demonstrated the most promise of security improvement within reasonable implementation cost. A path towards adoption of this security feature has been developed, and integration into WBL will begin in 2024.

This GAO recommendation remains open.

11

The U.S. Government Accountability Office Report Nuclear Regulatory Commission: NRC Needs to Take Additional Actions to Prepare to License Advanced Reactors July 2023 (GAO-23-105997)

The U.S Government Accountability Office (GAO), in its report, "Nuclear Regulatory Commission: NRC Needs to Take Additional Actions to Prepare to License Advanced Reactors," made four recommendations to further enhance the NRC's ability to review advanced reactors. The status of the actions taken by the NRC in response to the GAO recommendations is provided below.

Recommendation 1:

The Chairman of the NRC should direct the staff to develop procedures for establishing and managing a review schedule for an incomplete application, including applications for first-of-a-kind designs.

Status:

The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) reviews license applications for completeness and acceptability for docketing, consistent with the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations {10 CFR). NRR established procedures for conducting acceptance reviews in NRR Office Instruction LIC-117, "Acceptance Review Process for New Nuclear Facility Licensing Applications," dated January 28, 2021 {Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML20283A188). NRR considers a license application to be acceptable for docketing and review upon the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff's conclusion that the application reasonably appears to contain sufficient technical information, both in scope and depth, for the agency to complete the technical review in a predictable timeframe. In certain rare circumstances, the NRC may docket for review an incomplete application, for example, a first-of-a-kind design, that the staff would not normally find to be sufficiently complete for docketing. Under these circumstances, the application would not contain sufficient information to establish a predictable review schedule. In such a case, the NRC staff could establish interim schedule milestones for portions of the application that contain sufficient information for review but would not be able to provide a comprehensive review schedule until such time as the applicant has supplemented the application with sufficient information to enable the staff to review the entire application in a predictable timeframe.

Based on its experience with docketing for review incomplete applications for novel and first-of-a-kind designs were ultimately denied, the NRC expects that it would be very rare to invoke this exception in the future If an application has technical sufficiency issues but contains sufficient information to begin the majority of the review, the NRC may begin portions of the review without making a determination that the staff will accept the application for docketing.

The NRC recently took this approach for the NuScale US460 standard design approval application, which was tendered but not docketed as indicated in a letter dated March 17, 2023

{ML23058A160). This is consistent with the guidance in LIC-117, Enclosure 1, "Guide to Performing Acceptance Reviews for New Reactor Licensing Applications," Section 4.0 B, "Application Not Initially Acceptable for Docketing-Acceptance Contingent on Receipt of Specific Supplemental Information" 12

Further, as the NRC workload increases with expected initial license application submissions, the NRC will prioritize its resources to review high-quality applications. Low-quality or incomplete applications typically consume significant resources and could divert attention and resources away from high-quality applications, resulting in potentially unnecessary schedule delays for them The NRC has held public discussions with stakeholders including the industry, most recently on December 7, 2023, to emphasize the importance of applicants' submitting high-quality applications, as outlined in the published acceptance criteria, and the importance of the NRC's not accepting incomplete applications for docketing.

Based on the foregoing, the NRC staff is confident that its current procedures are adequate to manage incomplete applications and that it would be inconsistent with the NRC's Principles of Good Regulation, specifically efficiency, to expend resources to develop new procedures to govern what is now considered a highly unlikely scenario.

The NRC considers this GAO recommendation closed.

Recommendation 2:

The Chairman of the NRC should direct the staff to finalize draft preapphcation guidance to clarify the extent to which advanced reactor developers should participate in preapplication activities.

Status:

Communicating expectations on preapplication engagement with prospective applicants continues to be a priority for the agency. The NRC published draft preapplication guidance in the Federal Register (FR) for comment on May 25, 2023 (88 FR 33924 ), as Appendix A to Draft Interim Staff Guidance (DANU) ISG 2022 01, "Review of Risk Informed, Technology Inclusive Advanced Reactor Applications-Roadmap," issued May 2023 (ML22048B546). This draft preapplication guidance covers the optimization of preapplication engagement and was discussed in several public meetings to seek stakeholder feedback before it was formally issued for public comment. The NRC staff will finalize this guidance in early 2024 after consideration of public comments.

This GAO recommendation remains open.

Recommendation 3:

The Chairman of the NRC should direct the staff to establish benchmarks and measures to assess the effectiveness of its recruitment, relocation, and retention strategies and incentives to assess their effectiveness to help NRC retain and hire the staff necessary to license advanced reactors.

Status:

The NRC has established several processes (including formal strategic workforce planning) and formulated fiscal year budget requests to ensure sufficient staff with the appropriate skill sets will be available to accomplish the anticipated workload. If the strategic workforce planning process highlights potential gaps in staffing, steps are taken to address them. The agency is currently engaged in an aggressive human capital campaign to recruit and retain the necessary staff to fulfill its mission. Building on work done in response to GAO-20-129, Recommendation 14 (discussed on page 9), the NRC continues to evaluate its Strategic Workforce Planning process.

This evaluation is expected to result in recommendations for enhancing the program's 13

effectiveness as well as refining the benchmarks and measures that will be used to continuously assess the effectiveness of the program going forward. These benchmarks and measures will consider indicators for measuring and monitoring organizational health and performance that were provided as examples in guidance from the Office of Management and Budget in memorandum M 23 15, "Measuring, Monitoring, and Improving Organizational Health and Organizational Performance in the Context of Evolving Agency Work Environments," dated April 13, 2023. Furthermore, the NRC staff is exploring additional options to address future potential peaks in advanced reactor licensing work, including repositioning other qualified, appropriately skilled NRC staff throughout the agency to further augment advanced reactor staffing and using contractors.

To date, staffing challenges have not impacted the NRC's schedule for reviewing advanced reactor lfcensing actions. However, NRR has experienced some challenges to fully encumber all budgeted positions that will support future reviews for advanced reactor applications. This has required NRR to employ creative near-term solutions to manage the current workload, including exercising telework flexibilities, employing rehired annuitants, engaging available contractor support, and leveraging staff in other offices for select short term assignments. The volume of advanced reactor licensing work is expected to increase based on industry plans, therefore the Agency's ability to achieve a commensurate increase in dedicated staffing resources with the requisite knowledge, critical skill sets, and experience to perform the essential work will be critical to continue to support time!y reviews.

The NRC staff routinely monitors and refines benchmarks and measures to assess the effectiveness of its recruitment, relocation, and retention strategies to ensure alignment with agency hiring goals. Furthermore, NRR continues to work with the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer to maximize opportunities to fill mission critical, priority vacancies in a strategic, efficient, and informed manner to best ensure there are no adverse impacts to the agency's ability to fulfill its regulatory mission.

This GAO recommendation remains open.

Recommendation 4:

The Chairman of the NRC should direct the staff to clarify in information provided to advanced reactor developers how and when they should engage with the ACRS during the licensing process.

Status:

The review schedules published by the NRC staff include interactions with the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS). The NRC licensing project managers are responsible for coordinating with the ACRS staff to schedule timely ACRS meetings to support the overall schedule for advanced reactor reviews The NRC project managers also coordinate the ACRS meeting schedule with the applicant. The NRC staff and the Chair of the ACRS communicated this process to stakeholders during an advanced reactor stakeholder meeting held on July 20, 2023, to ensure that prospective applicants are aware of the process. The NRC staff also communicates this information to individual applicants and potential applicants through routine interactions, including public meetings and status calls.

As noted in GAO-23-105997, the NRC staff encourages design developers to seek early engagement with the ACRS. Decisions regarding how and when to engage the ACRS depend on multiple factors, including the number of unique and novel features affecting the safety of the proposed facility and the developer's desired schedule for gaining NRC approval. To assist 14

developers in making informed decisions about Committee engagement, the ACRS has increased communication and the transparency of its review processes. Best practices guidance for ACRS members is now posted on the ACRS public website (h!tQS:i/wvvw nrc gov/docs/r"i,-1L2322/ML23227A042 Qdf), specifically in the section titled

• 'Member Guidance - Ill Design-Centered Subcommittee Reviews," beginning on page 1 O This guidance emphasizes several aspects of the ACRS review process, such as the following:

topical report subjects that typically warrant ACRS review the importance of communicating with cognizant NRG staff practices that make reviews more efficient An applicant may use this information to optimize its schedule for ACRS review. ACRS members will continue to identify and make available new lessons learned as more reviews are conducted.

ACRS members and staff participate in outreach efforts regarding Committee review processes.

During the last several years. members presented in public forums, such as advanced reactor stakeholder meetings, American Nuclear Society meetings, Nuclear Energy Institute conferences, and Commission briefings. During these meetings, members discuss ACRS processes related to reviewing applications for first-of-a-kind reactors with little operating experience and recent changes to improve ACRS effectiveness. In addition, the ACRS staff has issued publications regarding ACRS review processes and contributions.

The NRC considers this GAO recommendation closed 15

The U.S. Government Accountability Office Report High-Risk Radioactive Material: Opportunities Exist to Improve the Security of Sources No Longer in Use November 2023 (GAO-24-105998)

The U.S. Government Accountability Office {GAO), in its report, "High-Risk Radioactive Material: Opportunities Exist to Improve the Security of Sources No Longer in Use," made two recommendations to the NRC related to the storage of foreign-origin americium-241 and minimizing the time that disused sources are in licensees' possession. GAO also made a separate recommendation to the U.S. Department of Energy regarding foreign-origin americium-241. The status of the NRC actions is provided below.

Recommendation 2:

The Chairman of the NRC, in coordination with DOE and in consultation with other relevant stakeholders, should conduct an analysis to evaluate options and take action to facilitate long-term storage, within agency authorities, to better secure foreign-origin americium-241 until a permanent disposal or viable recycling option is available.

Status:

The GAO report was issued on November 30, 2023. The NRC is evaluating the report, assessing necessary actions, and will respond to GAO and Congress within 180 days of the report date.

This GAO recommendation remains open.

Recommendation 3:

The Chairman of the NRC should comprehensively assess leading practices that, if implemented, would minimize the time that disused sources are in a licensee's possession.

These practices include financial assurances for all category 1, 2, and 3 sources; tracking of category 3 sources; possession time limits or fees for disused sources and orphan source funds Status:

The GAO report was issued on November 30, 2023. The NRC is evaluating the report, assessing necessary actions, and will respond to GAO and Congress within 180 days of the report date.

This GAO recommendation remains open.

16

The U.S. Government Accountability Office Report Cybersecurity: Federal Agencies Made Progress, But Need to Fully Implement Incident Response Requirements December 2023 (GAO-24-105658)

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), in its report, "Cybersecurity: Federal Agencies Made Progress, but Need to Fully Implement Incident Response Requirements,"

recommended that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission should ensure that the agency fully implements all event logging requirements as directed by 0MB guidance. The Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA) requires agencies to develop, document, and implement agency-wide programs to provide security for the information and information systems that support their operations and assets. FISMA requires that agency information security programs include procedures for detecting, reporting, and responding to security incidents and that agencies report annually on the total number of information security incidents to 0MB and Congress. The status of the actions taken by the NRC in response to the GAO recommendation is provided below.

Recommendation:

The Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission should ensure that the agency fully implements all event logging requirements as directed by 0MB guidance.

Status:

The NRC has increased the Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) tool licensing level and acquired funding to adequately support procurement and onboarding. The NRC plans to implement all requirements across event logging (EL) maturity tiers EL 1, EL2 and EL3 to ensure events are logged and tracked in accordance with Office of Management and Budget (0MB) M-21-31, "Improving the Federal Government's Investigative and Remediation Capabilities Related to Cybersecurity Incidents," dated August 27, 2021, by the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2025.

This GAO recommendation remains open.

17

OFFIGIAL USE ONLY SECURITY RliibAlED-INFORMAllON February 22, 2024 The Honorable Gene L. Dodaro Comptroller General of the United States U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street, NW Washington, DC 20548

Dear Mr. Dodaro:

On behalf of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), I am pleased to provide the enclosed summary of actions taken by the NRG in response to recommendations contained in various U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that address NRC activities.

The summary describes the progress made in addressing recommendations remaining open as of, or not included in, our last summary report of March 2, 2023. The G_AO recommendations that were addressed in previous annual reports and were indicated as closed by the NRC are not addressed in this report.

I am also providing a non-public summary of actions taken by the NRC in response to non-public GAO reports. We respectfully request that you treat the enclosed non-public summary in kind, honoring the markings.

If you have any questions, please contact me or have your staff contact John Jolicoeur, Office of the Executive Director for Operations, at (301) 415-1642.

Enclosures:

1. Summary of NRC Actions

2. Summary of NRC Actions for Non-public Reports cc: Frank Rusco Sincerely, Christopher T. Hanson r transmitted herewith contains Official Use Only-Security Related Information. When separated from I, this transmittal letter is decontrolled.

OFFlelAL USE ONL'f,m5ECURIT¥-RELA-TED INFORMATION I

I j

OFFICIAL USE 6NL','--SE61lRITY REbATED IN~ORMIITION Identical letter sent to the following recipients, with the exception of the replacement of the point of contact with the Chair and the Director of the Office of Congressional Affairs:

The Honorable Gene L. Dodaro Comptroller General of the United States U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street, NW Washington, DC 20548 cc: Frank Rusco The Honorable Thomas R. Carper Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 cc: Senator Shelley Moore Capito The Honorable Edward J. Markey Chairman, Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate, and Nuclear Safety Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 cc: Senator Pete Ricketts The Honorable Jeff Duncan Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Committee on Energy and Commerce United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 cc: Representative Diana DeGette The Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers Chair, Committee on Energy and Commerce United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 cc: Representative Frank Pallone, Jr.

The Honorable Buddy Carter Chairman, Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing and Critical Materials Committee on Energy and Commerce United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 cc: Representative Paul Tonko The Honorable Chuck Fleischmann Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Committee on Appropriations United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 cc: Representative Marcy Kaptur The Honorable Patty Murray Chair, Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Committee on Appropriations United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 cc: Senator John Kennedy The Honorable Gary C. Peters Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 cc: Senator Rand Paul The Honorable Mark E. Green Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security United States House of Representative Washington, DC 20515 cc: Representative Bennie Thompson The Honorable Sheldon Whitehouse Chairman, Committee on the Budget United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 cc: Senator Chuck Grassley The Honorable Jodey C. Arrington Chairman, Committee on the Budget United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 cc: Representative Brendan F. Boyle OFFIGIAL USE ONLY SECURITY RliLATISD INFORMATION

OFFICIAL USE ONLY SECURITY RELATE9 INFORMA-2 The Honorable Patty Murray Chair, Committee on Appropriations United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 cc: Senator Susan Collins The Honorable Kay Granger Chairwoman, Committee on Appropriations United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 cc: Representative Rosa Delaura The Honorable Joe Manchin Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 cc: Senator John A. Barrasso The Honorable James Comer Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Accountability United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 cc: Representative Jamie Raskin The Honorable Mike Johnson Speaker of the House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 The Honorable Kamala Harris President of the Senate Washington, DC 20510 Ms. Shalanda Young Director, Office of Management and Budget 725 17th Street, NW Washington, DC 20503 cc: Christine A. McDonald Erin Alejandre The Honorable Ben Cardin Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relations United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 cc: Senator James E. Risch The Honorable Michael Mccaul Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 cc: Representative Gregory Meeks OFFICIAL YSE ONLY 51iCURITY R-EiLA:rED-INJOORMA:i:10111

OFFICIAL us~ 01;ty - SECUftll'( ftELATEB lljFQftMATIOt~

(U)

SUMMARY

OF NRC ACTIONS - RESPONSE TO NON-PUBLIC GAO REPORTS (U) Preventing a Dirty Bomb: Vulnerabilities Persist in NRC's Controls for Purchases of High-Risk Radioactive Materials (GAO-22-106076SU).

........... 2 OFFISIAL l:JSE o~*LY SEOURITV RELATEB H~FORMJicTION

~oFFICl>\\L USE ONLY SECUftl'fY ftEL>\\'fEB INFOftM>\\'flON (U) The U.S. Government Accountability Office Report Preventing a Dirty Bomb:

Vulnerabilities Persist in NRC's Controls for Purchases of High-Risk Radioactive Materials August 2022 (GAO-22-106076SU)

(U) The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), in its restricted non-public report, "Preventing a Dirty Bomb: Vulnerabilities Persist in NRC's Controls for Purchases of High-Risk Radioactive Materials." made three recommendations to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) related to the security of radioactive material. The status of the actions taken by the NRG in response to the GAO recommendations is provided below.

Recommendation 1:

(U) The Chairman of the NRC should immediately require that vendors verify category 3 licenses with the appropriate regulatory authority.

Status:

(U) On December 21, 2021, in SRM-SECY-17-0083, "Staff Requirements Memorandum SECY-17-0083 - Re-Evaluation of Category 3 Source Security and Accountability in Response to SRM-COMJMB-16-0001," the Commission directed the staff to pursue rulemaking to amend the regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Parts 30, 40, and 70 to:

1. require safety and security equipment to be in place before granting a license for an unknown entity in order to address the concern related to obtaining a valid license using a fictitious company or by providing false information;

2. clarify license verification methods for transfers involving quantities of radioactive material that are below category 2 thresholds in order to: (a) update the oral certification method to require that the certification be followed up with confirmation by the use of one of the other acceptable verification methods in those parts, and (b) remove the obsolete method of obtaining other sources of information compiled by a reporting service from official records; and

3. require licensees transferring category 3 quantities of radioactive material to verify licenses through the Licensee Verification System (LVS) or the regulatory authority. For this activity Agreement States that do not use the WBL System as their license tracking system would need to either voluntarily provide their licenses authorizing category 3 quantities of radioactive material to the NRC to facilitate verification through LVS or perform manual license verification.

(U) On December 19, 2022, the staff submitted the draft proposed rule to the Commission for its consideration, addressing the Commission's SRM. The draft proposed rule and supporting content can be found in SECY-22-0112, "Proposed Rule Radioactive Source Security and Accountability (3150-AK83; NRC-2022-0103)." The Commission is currently considering the draft proposed rule.

OFFICl"'L USE ONLY SECURITY REL,..TEB INFORM,..TION 2

(U) The NRC staff continue to engage licensees and Agreement States on the issues identified by this GAO investigation. In July 2022, the NRC staff issued a communication to its manufacturer and distributor licensees and Agreement State regulators to ensure that they are aware of the issues identified by GAO and remind them of ways to identify fraudulent licenses.

The NRC staff also reminded licensees that under current requirements they can contact the regulator (either the NRC or Agreement State, as appropriate) to verify that a license holder can receive radioactive material under the terms of its license. In addition, the NRC staff contacted industry trade associations for source producers to discuss the GAO recommendations and encouraged the trade associations to proactively engage their member companies. The NRC staff will continue to engage with all relevant stakeholders on these issues, their responses to NRC communications, and the findings of this GAO audit.

(U) This GAO recommendation remains open.

Recommendation 2:

(U) The Chairman of the NRC should add security features to its licensing process to improve its integrity and make it less vulnerable to altering or forging licenses. These security features could include multifactor authentication or moving away from paper licenses to electronic-based licensing.

Status:

(U) The draft proposed rule currently being considered by the Commission offers direct verification of licenses for category 3 quantities of radioactive materials through LVS or by contact with the regulator. As part of this process, if approved by the Commission, the NRC would develop additional guidance for regulators and licensees to reduce the potential for use of altered or counterfeited licenses to purchase category 3 radioactive sources.

(U) The NRC staff also explored the specific methods suggested by GAO as an interim step for licenses for category 3 quantities of material, as well as a potential enhancement for smaller quantities of materials. The NRC evaluated the advantages and disadvantages of features such as two factor authentication, non-fungible tokens, data tokens, and QR codes. Tokenization and QR codes demonstrated the most promise of security improvement within reasonable implementation cost. A path towards adoption of this security feature has been developed, and integration into WBL will begin in 2024.

(U) This GAO recommendation remains open.

Recommendation 3:

(b)(7)(F)

(U) The NRC issued guidance to its nuclear materials and export/import stakeholders to ensure information is not unnecessarily disseminated that terrorists could use to plan or execute an attack against facilities or citizens in the United States. This guidance is found in Regulatory 8fifil81i11L U8E 8PJLY 8E8UAI"' flELillTE8 IPJfi8flMillTl8PJ 3

OFFICIAL USE ONLY - SECURITY RELATED INFORMATION Issue Summary (RIS) 2005-31, "Control of Security-Related Sensitive Unclassified Non Safeguards Information Handled by Individuals, Firms, and Entities Subject to NRC Regulation of the Use of Source, Byproduct, and Special Nuclear Material." Additional information is provided on the NRC's website at https //www_nrc gu_v/iead1ng-r1n/sen1t1ve-11 ifo/nrnter1als html.

b)(7)(F)

(U) The NRC considers this GAO recommendation to be closed.

OFFICIAL USE ONLY - SECURITY RELATED INFORMATION 4