ML16070A115

Efforts to Improve Rulemaking Tracking and Reporting

ML16070A115
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	03/11/2016
From:	Portzline S Three Mile Island Alert
To:	NRC/EDO
References
Download: ML16070A115 (16)

Text

Efforts to Improve Rulemaking Tracking and Reporting U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Public Meeting March 11, 2016 Comments of Scott D. Portzline Security Consultant to Three Mile Island Alert Harrisburg PA

• The NRC is to be commended for their effort to assist the public and stakeholders in rulemaking by taking advantage of modern tools to access the docketed records in a timely manner.

• The proposed improvements would be consistent with the Commissions objectives as stated by the NRC in Public Participation in NRCs Rulemaking Process.

June 12, 2008 2

in communication and decision making o Facilitates public understanding o Provides an opportunity for affected people to participate in the process o Increases credibility and cooperation NRCS slides: Public Participation in NRCs Rulemaking Process June 12, 2008 3

The NRC rulemaking process is a mature process and we welcome suggestions on how to improve it.

NRCS slides: Public Participation in NRCs Rulemaking Process June 12, 2008 4

This is what happened to our petition for rulemaking:

September 12, 2001 - - TMI Alert filed a petition for rulemaking which would require guards to be posted at the entrances of owner controlled areas at nuclear power plants. The timing of the filing was coincidental to the 9-11 attacks and had been planned for six weeks prior to our filing.

Petition for Rulemaking PRM-73-11 5

FAILED TO INACCURATE EXCESSIVE DELAYS CORRESPOND INFORMATION

• The NRC Repeatedly

• On 13 separate

• The NRC incorrectly rescheduled the occasions when the listed our petition as rulemaking. NRC rescheduled, completed for we heard nothing. several weeks on its

• Offered no web site until we explanation for the

• The NRC did not requested the NRC rescheduling. inform us of to correct it.

management

• Showed no changes as to who

• Meeting transcripts accountability when was handling our mistakenly stated challenged. petition. that we were dis-cussing entrance cards instead of entrance guards.

• FULL REPORT on how the NRC bungled an effort to create a new rule to require entrance guards. 10/31/2008 6 http://tinyurl.com/qj2mn3d

TRIED TO DENY US A SEAT AT THE VANISHING ACT MISLED CONGRESS RULEMAKING TABLE

• The NRC did not want to

• Our petition for *

• NRC letters to give me the opportunity rulemaking had congressional leaders to speak during the disappeared, not only stated that entrance guards meeting. from the meeting, but are already being

• Our petition and from the process. considered in the ongoing background data was Power Reactor Security not in the room or on

• There was no mention Requirements rulemaking.

the document handout of our petition in the table. Power Reactor Security

• NRC hid the fact that their

• When we complained, Requirements staff had decided that the NRC made no rulemaking, the entrance guards are not attempts to correct the rulemaking into which needed and that the absence of our petition our petition had been entrance guard petition or background supposedly merged. had been denied de facto.

information.

• July 29, 2008 see ADAMS ML081220609 7

SURPRISE ENDING NO DECISION BLATANT DISREGARD

• The NRC failed to

• The NRCs correspondence

• Actually, there were inform us when the only indicated that the more than 40 petition was closed. petition was considered occurrences when NRC staff claimed resolved and closed. the NRC failed to they could not find adhere to its my phone number

• As per guidelines, principles of or address. petitions are decided with openness and a letter clearly indicating: clarity, and to follow

• I learned that the its procedural acceptance, guidelines while petition was closed partial acceptance, handling the from the Union of Concerned or denial. rulemaking.

Scientists.

8

Public confidence in the NRC is eroded each time we fail to resolve issues in a timely, clear, and transparent manner.

NRC Commissioner Gregory Jaczko Regulatory Information Conference March 8, 2006 9

Unwanted consequences of commenting on proposed rules.

This main entrance gate at Three Mile Island is has been wide open and unguarded for more than a decade.

10

Three Mile Island The north bridge is the main entrance for emergency responders.

Approaches: Particular emphasis must be placed on main and alternate entry routes for law-enforcement or other offsite support agencies and the location of control points for marshalling and coordinating response activities.

Enhancements To Emergency Preparedness Rulemaking - 2011 11

• TMI Alert filed a comment on this rulemaking noting that without control of the two bridges at Three Mile Island, many aspects of the planned emergency responses could be severely compromised.

• Rather than address that issue, the NRC dropped that portion of the proposed Emergency Preparedness Rule. This retraction meant that the objectives of the rule can not be ensured at TMI.

• Our comment for improving emergency preparedness actually served to weaken the rule!

• Currently, the entrance is wide open and the bridges are not controlled by security forces.

12

NRC REPORT CARD PETITION FOR RULEMAKING 13

More Trouble

• NRC staffers wanted to use TMI Alerts petition as a quintessential example of NRC petition handling failures.

• The NRC then failed to invite us to the special public meeting on petition problems as promised.

14

What TMI Alert believes is needed:

• Clear rules.

• Follow the rules.

• One NRC staffer who will be held accountable for managing and executing a rulemaking, and for timely communications to all involved.

• A dedicated grievance handling officer if the rulemaking manager fails in his/her duties.

15

end notes FULL REPORT on how the NRC bungled an effort to create a new rule to require entrance guards. 10/31/2008. ADAMS #ML13140A166 or at http://tinyurl.com/qj2mn3d FINAL RULEMAKING - Power Reactor Security Requirements (RIN 3150-AG63) SECY-08-0099 July 9, 2008. ADAMS #ML081650474 FINAL RULE: Enhancements To Emergency Preparedness Regulations (10 CFR PART 50 AND 10 CFR PART 52) April 8, 2011.

ADAMS # ML102150180 16

Efforts to Improve Rulemaking Tracking and Reporting U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Public Meeting March 11, 2016 Comments of Scott D. Portzline Security Consultant to Three Mile Island Alert Harrisburg PA

• The NRC is to be commended for their effort to assist the public and stakeholders in rulemaking by taking advantage of modern tools to access the docketed records in a timely manner.

• The proposed improvements would be consistent with the Commissions objectives as stated by the NRC in Public Participation in NRCs Rulemaking Process.

June 12, 2008 2

in communication and decision making o Facilitates public understanding o Provides an opportunity for affected people to participate in the process o Increases credibility and cooperation NRCS slides: Public Participation in NRCs Rulemaking Process June 12, 2008 3

The NRC rulemaking process is a mature process and we welcome suggestions on how to improve it.

NRCS slides: Public Participation in NRCs Rulemaking Process June 12, 2008 4

This is what happened to our petition for rulemaking:

September 12, 2001 - - TMI Alert filed a petition for rulemaking which would require guards to be posted at the entrances of owner controlled areas at nuclear power plants. The timing of the filing was coincidental to the 9-11 attacks and had been planned for six weeks prior to our filing.

Petition for Rulemaking PRM-73-11 5

FAILED TO INACCURATE EXCESSIVE DELAYS CORRESPOND INFORMATION

• The NRC Repeatedly

• On 13 separate

• The NRC incorrectly rescheduled the occasions when the listed our petition as rulemaking. NRC rescheduled, completed for we heard nothing. several weeks on its

• Offered no web site until we explanation for the

• The NRC did not requested the NRC rescheduling. inform us of to correct it.

management

• Showed no changes as to who

• Meeting transcripts accountability when was handling our mistakenly stated challenged. petition. that we were dis-cussing entrance cards instead of entrance guards.

• FULL REPORT on how the NRC bungled an effort to create a new rule to require entrance guards. 10/31/2008 6 http://tinyurl.com/qj2mn3d

TRIED TO DENY US A SEAT AT THE VANISHING ACT MISLED CONGRESS RULEMAKING TABLE

• The NRC did not want to

• Our petition for *

• NRC letters to give me the opportunity rulemaking had congressional leaders to speak during the disappeared, not only stated that entrance guards meeting. from the meeting, but are already being

• Our petition and from the process. considered in the ongoing background data was Power Reactor Security not in the room or on

• There was no mention Requirements rulemaking.

the document handout of our petition in the table. Power Reactor Security

• NRC hid the fact that their

• When we complained, Requirements staff had decided that the NRC made no rulemaking, the entrance guards are not attempts to correct the rulemaking into which needed and that the absence of our petition our petition had been entrance guard petition or background supposedly merged. had been denied de facto.

information.

• July 29, 2008 see ADAMS ML081220609 7

SURPRISE ENDING NO DECISION BLATANT DISREGARD

• The NRC failed to

• The NRCs correspondence

• Actually, there were inform us when the only indicated that the more than 40 petition was closed. petition was considered occurrences when NRC staff claimed resolved and closed. the NRC failed to they could not find adhere to its my phone number

• As per guidelines, principles of or address. petitions are decided with openness and a letter clearly indicating: clarity, and to follow

• I learned that the its procedural acceptance, guidelines while petition was closed partial acceptance, handling the from the Union of Concerned or denial. rulemaking.

Scientists.

8

Public confidence in the NRC is eroded each time we fail to resolve issues in a timely, clear, and transparent manner.

NRC Commissioner Gregory Jaczko Regulatory Information Conference March 8, 2006 9

Unwanted consequences of commenting on proposed rules.

This main entrance gate at Three Mile Island is has been wide open and unguarded for more than a decade.

10

Three Mile Island The north bridge is the main entrance for emergency responders.

Approaches: Particular emphasis must be placed on main and alternate entry routes for law-enforcement or other offsite support agencies and the location of control points for marshalling and coordinating response activities.

Enhancements To Emergency Preparedness Rulemaking - 2011 11

• TMI Alert filed a comment on this rulemaking noting that without control of the two bridges at Three Mile Island, many aspects of the planned emergency responses could be severely compromised.

• Rather than address that issue, the NRC dropped that portion of the proposed Emergency Preparedness Rule. This retraction meant that the objectives of the rule can not be ensured at TMI.

• Our comment for improving emergency preparedness actually served to weaken the rule!

• Currently, the entrance is wide open and the bridges are not controlled by security forces.

12

NRC REPORT CARD PETITION FOR RULEMAKING 13

More Trouble

• NRC staffers wanted to use TMI Alerts petition as a quintessential example of NRC petition handling failures.

• The NRC then failed to invite us to the special public meeting on petition problems as promised.

14

What TMI Alert believes is needed:

• Clear rules.

• Follow the rules.

• One NRC staffer who will be held accountable for managing and executing a rulemaking, and for timely communications to all involved.

• A dedicated grievance handling officer if the rulemaking manager fails in his/her duties.

15

end notes FULL REPORT on how the NRC bungled an effort to create a new rule to require entrance guards. 10/31/2008. ADAMS #ML13140A166 or at http://tinyurl.com/qj2mn3d FINAL RULEMAKING - Power Reactor Security Requirements (RIN 3150-AG63) SECY-08-0099 July 9, 2008. ADAMS #ML081650474 FINAL RULE: Enhancements To Emergency Preparedness Regulations (10 CFR PART 50 AND 10 CFR PART 52) April 8, 2011.

ADAMS # ML102150180 16