ML083540269

Response to Public Comments for DG-5026 (Rg 5.73)

ML083540269
Person / Time
Issue date:	03/02/2009
From:	NRC/RES/DE
To:
Orr M P/RES/301-415-6373
Shared Package
ML083450025	List: ML083540269
References
DG-5026 RG-5.073
Download: ML083540269 (37)

Text

APPENDIX B Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026, Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published a notice in the Federal Register (73 FR 56618) on September 29, 2008, that Draft Regulatory Guide (DG)-5026 (proposed new Regulatory Guide 5.73) was available for public comment. The public comment period ended on October 31, 2008. Fourteen organizations submitted comments, which are available in the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The NRC has combined the comments, and the following table summarizes the NRC staffs disposition of them.

Comments were received from the following individuals and organizations:

Douglas J. Walters, Senior Director NEI comments also endorsed by: Donna Alexander, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Progress Energy 1776 I Street, N.W., Suite 400 Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. 411 Fayetteville Street Mall Washington, DC 20006-3708 ADAMS Accession No. ML083100592 P.O. Box 1551 ADAMS Accession No. ML083110161 and Raleigh, NC 27602 ADAMS Accession No. ML090080138 Public Service Electric & Gas Co. ADAMS Accession No. ML083100594 ADAMS Accession No. ML083100591 NEI comments endorsed by: C.L. Funderburk Florida Power & Light Dominion Resources Services, Inc.

Southern Nuclear Operating Co. ADAMS Accession No. ML083100589 500 Dominion Boulevard ADAMS Accession No. ML083050619 Glen Allen, VA 23060 Strategic Teaming and Resources Sharing ADAMS Accession No. ML083220199 Northern States Power Co. (Xcel Energy) (STARS) David Lochbaum, Director Nuclear Safety Project ADAMS Accession No. ML083050184 ADAMS Accession No. ML083190386 Union of Concerned Scientists 1825 K Street, N.W., Suite 800 Dominion Resources Services, Inc. Washington, DC 20006 ADAMS Accession No. ML083220199 ADAMS Accession No. ML090080163 Edwin D. Hill, International President Mark H. Ayers, President AFL-CIO comment letter cosigned by:

International Brotherhood of Electrical Building and Construction Trades Dept., Iz Cakrane, President Workers (IBEW) AFL-CIO Associated Maintenance Contractors 900 Seventh Street, N.W. 815 16th Street, N.W., Suite 600 510 Carnegie Center Washington, DC 20001 Washington, DC 20006 Princeton, NJ 08540 ADAMS Accession No. ML082960428 ADAMS Accession No. ML083100595 ADAMS Accession No. ML083100595 March 2, 2009

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Comments on DG-5026 1 NEI and Regulatory Position 1Definition of Predictive The NRC staff agrees that inconsistencies between technical supporters, Maintenance specifications at different sites could result in Progress Energy inconsistencies in the implementation of the requirements in The commenters stated, In DG-5026, the staff proposed Subpart I, Managing Fatigue, of Title 10 Part 26, Fitness revising NEI 06-11, Revision E, Section 6.2, to read as for Duty [FFD] Programs, of the Code of Federal follows, Predictive maintenance activities that are not Regulations (10 CFR Part 26). The NRC staff also required by technical specifications or do not result in a acknowledges that the wording of Regulatory Position 1 in change of condition or state of a structure, system, or DG-5026 could be interpreted to mean that all predictive component (SSC) are excluded from covered maintenance maintenance activities required by technical specifications activities. These predictive maintenance activities include would be covered maintenance activities. The staff agrees nondestructive analyses (NDE), thermography, vibration that predictive maintenance activities other than analysis, and data collection and analysis. nondestructive examination (NDE), thermography, vibration analysis, and data collection and analysis may not result in a Progress Energy expressed three concerns with the proposed change of condition or state of a covered SSC. The staff wording: further agrees that starting or stopping a covered SSC would

1. Adding the words, ... that are not required by be performing work under the operating category.

technical specifications ... is unnecessary and confusing. The source document requiring the However, the NRC staff believes that the definition, predictive maintenance activity does not change the proposed by NEI, of maintenance activities that may be risk. Including technical specifications requirements as performed by individuals who are not subject to the work-a qualifier increases the complexity of the hour controls required in 10 CFR 26.205, Work Hours, implementation guidance without benefit. This will lacks precision and would be difficult to implement.

introduce inconsistency in application. Technical Therefore, Regulatory Position 2 in the final regulatory specifications vary from plant to plant. It is possible guide clarifies the definition of excluded predictive one plant would have a maintenance task as covered maintenance activities as follows:

work while another plant with the same task would not include it as covered work simply due to the version of Predictive maintenance activities that do not result in a technical specification that the station has incorporated. change of condition or state of a structure, system, or These type of differences would lead to regulatory and component (SSC) that a risk-informed evaluation process inspection inconsistencies. has shown to be significant to public health and safety may Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-2

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition

2. Adding the words, ... that are not required by technical be excluded from covered maintenance activities. Examples specifications... also implies that all activities of activities that may be excluded if they do not change the performed per technical specifications should be state or condition of these SSCs include, but are not limited considered covered work. This could include such to, nondestructive examination (NDE), thermography, categories as performance of reactor engineering vibration analysis, and data collection and analysis.

calculations required by technical specifications, system engineering walkdowns that are performed using a preventive maintenance work order, or analyzing and trending predictive maintenance data such as pump vibration or thermography. These maintenance activities are data gathering or calculation activities ...

that are non-intrusive and do not pose significant risk to public health and safety from a worker fatigue error.

3. Predictive maintenance is not easily defined. The staffs proposed wording removed the words, such as, from the NEI 06-11, Revision E wording. Removal of these words implies that only the listed activities can be excluded and are not simply examples of work activities that can be excluded from covered work.

Other activities such as lube oil analysis could be considered predictive maintenance.

The NEI and its supporting commenters stated, Based on discussion at the October 16 public meeting on the fatigue management rule, the industry revised NEI 06-11 to clarify that activities that have not historically been defined as maintenance, that are non-intrusive, and pose low risk to the health and safety of the public are excluded from covered work.

Industry Position:

The industrys position is included in NEI 06-11, Managing Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-3

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition Personnel Fatigue at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites, Revision 1, Section 6.2 and is below.

Work hour controls do not apply to the following individuals and activities:

Maintenance, as defined per Part 26, does not include activities that have not historically been defined as maintenance, that are non-intrusive, and pose low risk to the health and safety of the public, such as calculations, non-destructive analysis (NDE), thermography, vibration analysis, data collection and analysis.

Note: At times an activity requires starting or stopping a piece of equipment. The worker starting or stopping the equipment would be performing covered work under the operating category; however, the data collection activity would not be considered a covered work activity.

2 NEI and Regulatory Position 2Periodic Overtime The NRC reviewed the guidance in NEI 06-11, Revision 1, supporters, Managing Personnel Fatigue at Nuclear Power Reactor Progress Energy The commenters stated, NEI revised its guidance on Sites, Section 7.1, Periodic Overtime. As described in Periodic Overtime in Section 7.1 of NEI 06-11 in response DG-5026, the implementation guidance in Section 7.1 of to feedback from the October 16 public meeting on the NEI 06-11 introduces the concept of periodic overtime.

fatigue management rule. The document now states that The rule does not include this concept, and it is not licensees will perform at minimum a quarterly review necessary to do so. Therefore, the final regulatory guide comparing actual work hours for covered workers to the 54- includes an exception to the concept of periodic overtime, hour per week average per shift cycle criterion. Each station as described in NEI 06-11, Revision 1.

will document any issues it discovers during these reviews in its Corrective Action Program. (NEI). The implementation guidance in Section 7.1 of NEI 06-11, Revision 1, would permit licensees to establish a schedule Progress Energy and other commenters endorsing NEIs for a shift duration (e.g., 8-hour shifts) that includes changes requested that NRC endorse NEI 06-11, Revision 1, sufficient days off to meet the minimum days off (MDO)

Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-4

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition Section 7.1, Periodic Overtime. requirements for that shift duration but would allow licensees to assign or permit unscheduled work hours that The commenters explained that the rule uses the shift could result in individuals working shift lengths (e.g., 10- or schedule of the worker to determine minimum days off 12-hour shifts) that would require a greater number of days (MDO) but does not provide a precise definition of shift off under 10 CFR 26.205(d)(3). Although the guidance in schedule. They stated, NRCs guidance in DG-0526 would Section 7.1 of NEI 06-11, Revision 1, describes a quarterly implement a running average of hours worked during a work review process to address this concern, the NRC staff does cycle to calculate minimum days off for that work cycle. not consider implementation of that process as meeting the This method could have unintended consequences on the requirements of the rule. Specifically, the process would continuity of supervision and emergent work activities. allow work hours for emergent work to be excluded from The commenters argued that the revisions to NEI 06-11, consideration in the determination of the applicable MDO Revision 1, will address NRCs concerns with the excessive requirements. In addition, by allowing deviations from the use of periodic overtime and will provide transparency to the MDO requirements to be controlled through quarterly regulator through the corrective action program. reviews, the process would circumvent the waiver requirements in 10 CFR 26.207, Waivers and Exceptions.

Industry Recommendation:

The NRC is requested to endorse the guidance provided in The MDO requirements in 10 CFR 26.205(d)(3) are NEI 06-11, Managing Personnel Fatigue at Nuclear Power designed to prevent cumulative fatigue while Reactor Sites, Revision 1, Section 7.1, Periodic Overtime. accommodating variations in workload that result from emergent work. For example, the MDO requirements for maintenance personnel on 8- and 10-hour shifts allow, on average, an extra day of work per week above a nominal 40-hour workweek. The MDO requirements for maintenance on 12-hour shifts allow, on average, an extra 1.5 days per week. In addition, the requirements allow licensees to meet the MDO requirements as an average over a period of up to 6 weeks. As a result, licensees have the flexibility to distribute these extra workdays as necessary to accommodate emergent work. As noted in the FR notice for the final rule (73 FR 16988; March 31, 2008),

10 CFR 26.205(d)(3) accommodates a wide range of scheduling practices and short-term fluctuations in workload. Because the requirement was intended to Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-5

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition accommodate fluctuations in workload within limits that prevent cumulative fatigue, the NRC staff does not endorse the guidance in Section 7.1 of NEI 06-11, Revision 1, which would permit these limits to be exceeded through the exclusion of work hours for emergent work.

As stated in 10 CFR 26.205(d)(3), Licensees shall ensure that individuals have, at a minimum, the number of days off specified in this paragraph. The staff considers the appropriate means of deviating from this requirement to be the waiver process described in 10 CFR 26.207. In this regard, the staff notes that the rule permits licensees to grant waivers of the work-hour controls in 10 CFR 26.205(d)(1) through 10 CFR 26.205(d)(5)(i), including the MDO requirements of 10 CFR 26.205(d)(3). The waiver requirements in 10 CFR 26.207 are intended to ensure that deviations from the work-hour controls, including the MDO requirements, are limited to circumstances necessary to prevent or mitigate conditions adverse to safety or security.

By allowing deviations from the MDO requirements to be controlled through quarterly reviews, and by using criteria unrelated to safety or security, the process described in NEI 06-11, Revision 1, will circumvent the rules waiver requirements.

In accordance with the staffs view that the guidance contained in NEI 06-11, Revision 1, does not provide an acceptable means to comply with the regulation, Regulatory Positions 4, 5 and 6 in the final regulatory guide revise the guidance that depends on the concept of periodic overtime. Regulatory Position 4 revises a paragraph in Section 7, Work Hours Scheduling, of NEI 03-11, Revision 1, which discusses periodic overtime. The staffs Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-6

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition guidance for determining the applicable MDO requirements when covered individuals or crews work unscheduled work hours is presented in Regulatory Position 5 in the final regulatory guide. Regulatory Position 6 in the final regulatory guide presents guidance the staff finds acceptable for managing work-hours transitions during a shift cycle.

3 NEI and Regulatory Position 3Shifts of More Than 11 Hours The NRC staff agrees that NEI 06-11, Revision 1, supporters incorporates the additional language recommended by the The commenters stated, This position is incorporated into staff to address average shift durations of more than NEI 06-11, Managing Personnel Fatigue at Nuclear Power 11 hours1.273148e-4 days <br />0.00306 hours <br />1.818783e-5 weeks <br />4.1855e-6 months <br /> per day. Therefore, the final regulatory guide Reactor Sites, Revision 1. retains the guidance NEI added in NEI 06-11, Revision 1, in Regulatory Position 5.

Industry Recommendation:

Revise DG-5026 to endorse NEI 06-11, Revision 1, and eliminate this position.

4 NEI and Regulatory Position 4Transitions The NRC staff considers Section 7.3, Transitioning onto a supporters Shift or Between Covered Groups or into a Covered The commenters stated, This position has been incorporated Group, of NEI 06-11, Revision 1, to be acceptable, except into NEI 06-11, Managing Personnel Fatigue at Nuclear for the last bullet that reads, A minimum of 2 days off in Power Reactor Sites, Revision 1. the preceding 7-day period is acceptable for operators who have been working outage hours on 10- or 12-hour shifts Industry Recommendation: before they transition to the non-outage unit as one of the Revise DG-5026 to endorse NEI 06-11, Revision 1, and two required operators working non-outage minimum days eliminate this position. off. This does not preclude short-term relief of the non-outage unit operators as described in Section 8.3. For the reasons discussed with respect to Comment 6 in this table, the staff does not agree that only two operators on an operating unit should remain on nonoutage work hours at a multiunit site with one or more units in an outage.

Therefore, Regulatory Position 7 in the final regulatory guide clarifies the last bullet before the examples in that section as follows:

Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-7

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition A minimum of 2 days off in the preceding 7-day period is acceptable for operators at a multiunit site with one or more units in an outage, if the operators have been working outage hours on 10- or 12-hour shifts before they transition to an operating unit as members of the minimum shift complement described in Section 8.3.

5 NEI and Regulatory Position 5Unplanned Outages, Increased Because NEI 06-11, Revision 1, incorporates the additional supporters Threats language recommended by the NRC staff to address The commenters stated, This position has been incorporated transitioning into and out of unplanned unit outages, into NEI 06-11, Managing Personnel Fatigue at Nuclear unplanned security system outages, and increased threat Power Reactor Sites, Revision 1. conditions, the final regulatory guide does not retain Regulatory Position 5 from DG-5026.

Industry Recommendation:

Revise DG-5026 to endorse NEI 06-11, Revision 1, and eliminate this position.

6 NEI and Regulatory Position 6Eligibility for Outage Minimum The NRC staff agrees that the 25-percent criterion for supporters, Days Off determining participation in outage activities should be Progress Energy deleted from the final regulatory guide. However, the The commenters stated, The industry requests that the staff staffs position remains that, at a minimum, those reconsiders their position on eligibility for outage minimum individuals who constitute the operator minimum shift days off and endorses a requirement that a minimum of one complement, including the operator at the controls and the reactor operator and one senior reactor operator for each senior operator in the control room, as specified in operating reactor at a multi-unit station will not be eligible 10 CFR 50.54, Conditions of Licenses, for the operating for outage minimum days off. Additionally, the industry will unit at a multiunit site should not work the longer work delete the 25% criteria for determining participation in hours that the rule permits for outages, because these outage activities from NEI 06-11. individuals primary duties are to ensure the safe operations of the operating unit. Regulatory Position 11 in the final This position is stated in NEI 06-11, Managing Personnel regulatory guide retains the staffs position, as described in Fatigue at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites, Revision 1, as DG-5026, with the following two additions.

follows:

In recognition of the flexibility that the relevant regulations, Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-8

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition Workers Eligible to Work Outage Hours standard technical specifications, and licensees

• Covered workers at single sites working on outage administrative procedures permit in addressing control room activities are eligible staffing, the final regulatory guide clarifies that operators

• Covered workers at multi-unit sites with one unit in an who are working on an operating unit and maintaining outage that are working on outage activities are eligible operating work hours may perform outage activities.

• Covered workers, due to Emergency Response Organization, Fire Brigade, or Security duties, at a multi- The final regulatory guide also permits operators who have unit sites with a unit in an outage are eligible been working outage hours to provide short-term relief (not

• Covered workers at multi-unit sites that work on both to exceed 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />) for the operator at the controls or the outage activities and operating unit activities are eligible, senior operator in the control room of an operating unit in with the exception described below: limited circumstances. Regulatory Position 11 in the final regulatory guide includes the following guidance:

Workers Not Eligible to Work Outage Hours One reactor operator assigned to the controls and one senior An operator who has been working outage work hours and reactor operator assigned to the controls for each operating has had 2 days off in the previous 7-day period may provide unit at a multi-unit station while any unit is in an outage. relief to the operator at the controls or the senior operator in This does not prevent short term relief of these licensed the control room, if an appropriately qualified operator who operators by licensed operators that are eligible for outage has been working nonoutage work hours is not immediately work hours. available to provide relief. If an operator who has been working outage work hours and has had 2 days off in the Eligibility should be established on an individual or defined previous 7-day period is not immediately available, an group basis. Eligibility should be evaluated each 15 days for operator who has been working outage hours may provide each individual or defined group during the outage. (1) short-term relief (up to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />) for the operator at the controls or the senior operator in the control room without a The industry also requests that the statement of waiver or (2) longer term relief (more than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />) under a considerations for 10 CFR Part 26 be revised to reflect the waiver of the MDO requirement that is applicable to the Commissions action to remove solely from the rule. shift schedule (i.e., 8-, 10-, or 12-hour shifts) for personnel assigned to the operating unit.

The final regulatory guide includes additional changes to the guidance in NEI 06-11, Revision 1, in Regulatory Position 3 (i.e., a clarification that the emergency response organizations minimum shift complement differs from the Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-9

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition minimum shift complement of operators) and Regulatory Position 11 (i.e., three of the examples) to ensure that the guidance conforms to the staffs position.

The staff disagrees that a revision to the Statement of Considerations (SOC) for the rule is necessary.

NUREG-1912, Summary and Analysis of Public Comments Received on Proposed Revision to 10 CFR Part 26, Fitness for Duty Programs, (in press) discusses the Commissions direction to remove solely from the rule.

7 NEI and Regulatory Position 7Reviews The NRC staff agrees that the review requirements in supporters, 10 CFR 26.205(e) specify minimum requirements for the Progress Energy NEI and other industry representatives endorsing the NEI review; therefore, this provision does not require the review submittal, including Progress Energy, commented that the of all job performance data at a station. The NRC staff also NRCs proposed paragraph on the review of job performance agrees that it is appropriate for the implementation guidance data unnecessarily increases the scope of the annual review to include these minimum requirements. However, the staff because it omits the rules minimum list of individuals who believes that the guidance in Section 15, Reviews, of must be subject to review. They stated, The rule requires NEI 06-11, Revision 1, numbered paragraphs 1 and 2, could job performance reviews for the following: be interpreted in such a way that the conduct and scope of

• Individuals whose actual work hours worked during the the review would be inconsistent with the intent of the review period exceeded an average of 54 hours6.25e-4 days <br />0.015 hours <br />8.928571e-5 weeks <br />2.0547e-5 months <br /> per requirement. As a result, the final regulatory guide includes week in any shift cycle while the individuals work a clarification to provide alternate guidance that adopts the hours are subject to the requirements of § 26.205(d)(3). minimum review requirements and also addresses the NRC

• Individuals that were granted more than one waiver staffs concerns regarding the conduct and scope of the during the review period. review. The following paragraphs address the staffs

• Individuals that were assessed for fatigue under specific concerns with the guidance in NEI 06-11,

§ 26.211 during the review period. Revision 1, Section 15.

Because it does not include a minimum list of qualifiers for NEI 06-11, Revision 1, emphasizes the review of worker the review, the proposed paragraph could be interpreted as performance by separating the guidance concerning review requiring annual review of all job performance data at the of worker job performance from the review of actual hours Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-10

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition station with respect to the effects of duration, frequency, and worked. As a result, the guidance could be interpreted to sequencing of work hours on performance. require two independent reviews. The intent of the requirement is for licensees to conduct a single review in NEI stated that it revised its implementation guidance, based which worker performance and actual hours worked are on the NRCs feedback, to include an emphasis on worker reviewed in an integrated assessment to identify potential performance in the review. NEI requested that the NRC correlations between actual hours worked and job endorse the review requirement that is included in performance. The objective of the review is to identify NEI 06-11, Revision 1, Managing Personnel Fatigue at relationships between the workers job performance and the Nuclear Power Reactor Sites: actual frequency, duration, or sequencing of successive shifts that might be meaningful to a licensees assessment of Licensees shall: its performance regarding the performance objectives of 10 CFR 26.205(c). Accordingly, the final regulatory guide Review the actual work hours of covered individuals for includes a clarification to NEI 06-11, Revision 1, consistency with work hours scheduling requirement Section 15, which replaces the guidance in numbered objective of preventing impairment from fatigue due to paragraphs 1 and 2 with a single paragraph that provides duration, frequency, and sequencing of hours worked. The guidance consistent with the intent for a single integrated review should be based on information associated with assessment.

fatigue, including but not limited to, the corrective action program. At a minimum, this review should address: Further, NEI 06-11, Revision 1, limits the scope of the

• Individuals whose actual hours worked during the review review of worker performance and actual work hours to period exceeded an average of 54 hours6.25e-4 days <br />0.015 hours <br />8.928571e-5 weeks <br />2.0547e-5 months <br /> per week in any information associated with fatigue. The NRC staff shift cycle while the individuals work hours are subject believes this guidance can be interpreted to mean that, in to the non-outage days off requirements. conducting an annual review in accordance with

• Individuals who were granted more than one waiver 10 CFR 26.205(e), a licensee need consider only during the review period. information that was previously identified as contributing to

• Individuals who were assessed for fatigue during the or associated with fatigue (e.g., work hours or worker review period. performance that was identified through a problem report or root cause analysis as associated with fatigue). Although Industry Recommendation: the staff agrees that inclusion of such information is Revise DG-5026 to endorse NEI 06-11, Revision 1, and appropriate, limiting the review to information that has been eliminate this position. predetermined to be associated with fatigue is inconsistent with the intent of the requirement as described in the preceding paragraph. However, the NRC is also mindful of Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-11

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition licensees need to be efficient and effective in the conduct of such reviews. In this regard, the NRC agrees with the commenters that the rule establishes a minimum scope for the review and has incorporated these minimum criteria in Regulatory Position 14 of the final regulatory guide.

8 NEI and Additional CommentsShift Turnovers The NRC staff accepts the portion of NEI 06-11, supporters Revision 1, which permits licensees to exclude the time that The commenters stated, The description of shift turnovers in individuals spend on shift turnover from the calculation of NEI 06-11, Managing Personnel Fatigue at Nuclear Power individuals work hours and one period of shift turnover Reactor Sites, Revision E provides a constraint that is not from the calculation of break times between successive required by the rule. The NEI guidance allowed the licensee work periods.

to only exclude one period of shift turnover time from work hour calculations. As the industry has begun preparing The staff agrees that the time required for security personnel schedules and procedures for implementing this rule, it has to arm and disarm may be considered shift turnover become apparent that some category of workers requires a activities for the calculation of work hours. Shift turnover shift turnover at the beginning and the end of the work period activities specified in 10 CFR 26.205(b)(1) include only to safely and effectively transfer job positions. This has those activities that are necessary to safely transfer made it necessary to revise the industry guidance on shift information and responsibilities between two or more turnovers to align with rule requirements. individuals between shifts. The NRCs requirements for nuclear power plant security plans effectively mandate that This section was changed to read: many security posts at nuclear power plants be staffed 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> a day, 7 days a week by armed security personnel.

Shift turnover To provide continuous staffing at these posts with armed Licensees may exclude shift turnover from the calculation of personnel, it is necessary for security personnel to arm an individuals work hours. Shift turnover includes only before the beginning of their shift and disarm following the those activities that are necessary to safely transfer end of their shift. Therefore, the NRC considers the arming information and responsibilities between two or more and disarming activity to be necessary to safely transfer individuals between shifts. Shift turnover activities may responsibilities between security officers. As a result, the include, but are not limited to, discussions of the status of time for arming and disarming may be considered turnover.

plant equipment, and the status of ongoing activities, such as extended tests of safety systems and components. Turnovers The staff does not agree that the activities of donning and for supervisors may be more extensive than for workers and doffing protective clothing for radiation workers fall within Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-12

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition will therefore may be longer. Turnover may include time the scope of shift turnover activities specified in necessary to prepare for specific job requirements for 10 CFR 26.205(b)(1). Although donning and doffing example arming and disarming times for security guards or protective clothing are activities necessary for individuals to donning or un-donning of protective clothing for radiation perform their job duties, they are typically not required to workers as necessary to support turn-over. safely transfer responsibility between shifts or to continuously staff positions that are required by NRC Licensees may exclude either the oncoming or off going shift regulations.

turnover, but not both, from the calculation of break times between successive work periods. Therefore, Regulatory Position 8 in the final regulatory guide clarifies the staffs position that arming and disarming Licensees may not exclude work hours worked during may be considered shift turnover but deletes reference to turnovers between individuals within a shift period due to donning and doffing protective clothing, as these activities rotations or relief within a shift. Activities that licensees may should be considered covered work and included in the not exclude from work hours calculations also include, but calculation of individuals work hours.

are not limited to, shift holdovers to cover for late arrivals of incoming shift members; early arrivals of individuals for meetings, training, or pre-shift briefings for special evolutions; and holdovers for interviews needed for event investigations.

Industry Recommendation:

It is requested that the NRC endorse the revised shift turnover guidance that is included in NEI 06-11, Managing Personnel Fatigue at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites, Revision 1.

9 NEI and Additional CommentTraining The NRC staff has not reviewed NEI 03-04 and, therefore, supporters has not determined that implementation of NEI 03-04 would The commenters stated, Changes have been made to adequately meet the training requirements of NEI 06-11, Managing Personnel Fatigue at Nuclear Power 10 CFR Part 26. Regulatory Position 1 in the final Reactor Sites, Revision 1 to provide reference to NEI 03-04, regulatory guide provides this clarification.

Guideline for Plant Access Training, for specific training objectives that are a requirement of the rule. These Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-13

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition references appear in Section 1 Introduction, Section 12 Fatigue Assessments, and Section 14 Training.

Industry Recommendation:

It is requested that the NRC endorse these changes in NEI 06-11, Managing Personnel Fatigue at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites, Revision 1.

10 NEI and Additional CommentConsideration for Enforcement The NRC staff will evaluate specific requests for supporters Discretion enforcement discretion that are supported by an adequate technical basis. The general request contained in this The commenterst stated, The industry has discussed with comment does not include sufficient information for the the NRC staff that the requirements of the fatigue rule and staff to complete an evaluation of the need for enforcement the implementation guidance will result in the need to discretion.

increase staff. In some cases, such as security the nominal staffing increases expected across the industry is 20%. The time required in hiring and training of the new staff may result in challenges as the rule is implemented and could lead to an increase in the use of waivers. The industry asks the NRC to consider a period of 6 months of enforcement discretion following the implementation date of October 1, 2009 in order to facilitate transition to the new rule.

Comments from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) on NEI 06-11, Revision E, dated October 2008.

11 IBEW Labor-Sharing Agreements Licensee employees who travel to work at another site, whether that site is operated by the individuals employer or Reference in NEI 06-11: another licensee, are not considered to be contractor/vendor Contractor/Vendor (C/V) means any company, or any (C/V) personnel under the definition of C/V in 10 CFR 26.5, individual not employed by a licensee who is providing work Definitions. As discussed in the SOC for 10 CFR 26.4, or services to a licensee, either by contract, purchase order, FFD Program Applicability to Categories of Individuals, oral agreement, or other arrangement. the applicability of the rules requirements depends on the types of access and job duties an individual performs for a IBEW Comment 1: licensee or other entity who is subject to Part 26, regardless Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-14

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition Are licensee employees from one company that travel to of the individuals employer. For clarification and to ensure work at another licensee company considered consistency with the rules intent, Regulatory Position 10 in Contractor/Vendors? i.e., USA/STARS labor sharing the final regulatory guide includes a revision of Section 8.3 program. of NEI 06-11, Revision 1, as follows:

Licensee employees and contractor/vendor personnel may go from an outage at one site to an outage at another site.

When a licensee employee or contractor/vendor performs covered work for a licensee during two or more unit outages or security system outages (or a combination thereof), and the interval(s) between successive outages is less than 9 days, the receiving licensee should determine that the individual has had a 34-hour break period within the 9 days that precede the day on which the individual begins working for the receiving licensee. In addition, when the individual begins work for the receiving licensee, the licensee should ensure that the individuals hours worked did not and will not exceed the following limits:

1. 16 work hours in any 24-hour period

2. 26 work hours in any 48-hour period

3. 72 work hours in any 7-day period For individuals (either employees of a licensee or a C/V) who transition between sites under other circumstances, the NRC staff expects that the appropriate implementation guidance contained in Section 7.3 of NEI 06-11, Revision 1, would apply.

12 IBEW Regulatory Position 1Definition of Predictive As discussed in the NRC staffs response to Comment 1 in Maintenance this table, the staff agrees that predictive maintenance should be considered covered work when the task changes The IBEW provided three comments related to the definition the state or condition of SSCs that a risk-informed Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-15

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition of predictive maintenance in NEI 06-11, as follows: evaluation process has shown to be significant to public health and safety. Therefore, Regulatory Position 2 in the Reference in NEI 06-11: final regulatory guide revises the guidance contained in Maintenance means, the following onsite maintenance Section 6.2, Work Hour Controls for Covered Individuals, activities: Modification, surveillance, post-maintenance of NEI 03-11, Revision 1, related to predictive maintenance.

testing, and corrective and preventive maintenance of SSCs that a risk-informed evaluation process has shown to be The staff also agrees with the commenter that significant to public health and safety. (1) individuals who are directing covered predictive IBEW Comment 2: maintenance activities must also be subject to the work-hour The term predictive should be included. This term should controls of Subpart I of 10 CFR Part 26, and (2) the reactor also include work events similar to recent 2008 reactor scram events cited by the commenter illustrate the potential scrams from a worker using a digital camera with a flash, for certain maintenance activities to affect safe operations.

inspecting electrical circuits (Indian Point) and a chemistry lab computer upgrade (Hatch). With respect to NDE radiography, the NRC staff agrees that, if the NDE radiography requires a change in the state Reference in NEI 06-11: or condition of an SSC that a risk-informed evaluation Work hour controls do not apply to the following individuals process has shown to be significant to public health and and activities: safety, then the work would be considered covered work.

• Predictive maintenance activities that do not result in a However, the presence of a controlled source in the work change of condition or state of a structure, system, or area in itself would not fall within the scope of predictive component (SSC) are excluded from covered maintenance activities that must be performed by maintenance activities such as, non-destructive analysis individuals who are subject to the work-hour controls in

[sic] (NDE), thermography, vibration analysis, data 10 CFR 26.205. Therefore, the staff has not added this collection and analysis. consideration to the final regulatory guide.

IBEW Comment 7:

The IBEW disagrees with this definition for exemption. If The staff also has not added the term, predictive, to the these activities are performed with work controls on risk definition of maintenance in NEI 06-11, Revision 1, because significant SSC the activity should be covered work. NDE changing the definition of maintenance in the final radiography should be covered work due the utilization of regulatory guide would create an inconsistency with the controlled sources in work areas within the power block. definition of maintenance in 10 CFR 26.5, Definitions.

Further, predictive maintenance is commonly understood Reference in NEI 06-11: within the nuclear power industry to fall within the scope of The following tasks are examples generally considered NOT preventive maintenance activities. For example, NUMARC Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-16

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition directing: 93-01, Industry Guideline for Monitoring the Effectiveness

• Any work that is not operations or maintenance on risk of Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants, includes significant SSCs predictive maintenance activities as one type of preventative IBEW Comment 9: maintenance. Therefore, the staff considers adding the term Predictive Maintenance methods should be included as risk in the final regulatory guide to be both inconsistent and significant SSC work. unnecessary.

13 IBEW Exclusion of Unpaid Union Business from Work Hours The NRC staff agrees that unpaid union business, like any other activity that may occur on site that is not performed Reference in NEI 06-11: for the licensee, may be considered personal time in which Personal time in which an individual is on-site but is off duty an individual is on site but is not performing covered work.

(i.e., before or after his/her normally scheduled work period The staff has not added the recommended phrase to the final in which work activities are performed for the licensee) may regulatory guide because of concerns that the examples in be excluded. The individual may be reading the paper, in the NEI 06-11, Revision 1, may not apply to all circumstances on-site fitness center, eating breakfast, etc. for all licensees or other entities subject to Subpart I of 10 CFR Part 26. Adding another example would be IBEW Comment 3: inconsistent with the staffs concerns as stated in Regulatory At union represented facilities, employees may be Position 15 in the final regulatory guide.

performing union business off-duty while at the facility.

Unpaid union business should be added prior to the etc.

14 IBEW Including Unpaid Work in Work-Hours Calculations As discussed in the SOC for 10 CFR 26.205(b),

compensation for work performed for a licensee is not a Reference in NEI 06-11: determining consideration in the calculation of an Verifying his/her working hours are correctly documented individuals work hours under Subpart I of 10 CFR Part 26.

regardless of whether he/she is paid for the hours worked. The NRC recognizes that some personnel perform work for a licensee that falls outside their normally scheduled shift.

IBEW Comment 4: The rule requires that these hours be included in the This needs explanation; IBEW does not condone working calculation of the individuals work hours for the purposes without pay for a public rule regulatory implementation of preventing and mitigating the effects of fatigue on job guide. performance. Because the implementation guidance referenced by the commenter is consistent with the rules Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-17

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition intent and requirements, the staff has not added an explanation in the final regulatory guide.

15 IBEW Reporting Fatigue-Related Concerns The correct method for reporting fatigue concerns depends on the type of concern and the reporting procedures the Reference in NEI 06-11: licensee has established. If an individual is concerned that Being aware of the total hours worked in the previous 14 he or she is not fit to safely and competently perform his or days and notifying management if work hour limits will be her duties for any part of a working tour as a result of exceeded if asked to work additional hours. fatigue, the individual should follow the self-declaration procedures that licensees are required to establish under IBEW Comment 5: 10 CFR 26.203(b)(1). If an individual is concerned that a Are fatigue concerns appropriate to document in a Behavior coworker may not be fit to safely and competently perform Observation Program (BOP)? Is it the correct vehicle? duties as a result of fatigue (or any other cause),

10 CFR 26.33, Behavioral Observation, requires the individual to report the concern to the personnel designated in the licensees FFD policy.

10 CFR 26.29(a)(10) requires licensees to train personnel on the procedures to follow to make a self-declaration of fatigue and to report a fitness concern about a coworker. 10 CFR 26.29(a)(10) also requires licensees to ensure that individuals have the ability to initiate the appropriate actions if an individual has a concern.

Concerns regarding licensee implementation of the fatigue management requirements of 10 CFR Part 26 should be reported and addressed through the licensees process(es) for the identification and resolution of safety concerns or may be reported directly to the NRC through its allegations process.

16 IBEW Work-Hours Tracking Tool for Individuals Although 10 CFR Part 26 does not impose a requirement on individuals to track their work hours and days off, the NRC Reference in NEI 06-11: staff has not taken an exception to the guidance in Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-18

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition Being aware of the total hours worked in the previous 14 NEI 06-11, Revision 1, that suggests individuals should days and notifying management if work hour limits will be maintain records of their work hours and days off.

exceeded if asked to work additional hours. However, the staff notes that responsibility for ensuring that covered workers work hours are controlled in accordance IBEW Comment 5: with the regulation rests with the licensee for whom the GENERAL NOTE: This guide should include a individual is performing covered duties. The NRC staff standardized tracking tool form (pocket size?) for covered expects that licensees and other entities who implement this and potential covered worker to assist in keeping adequate final regulatory guide will differ in the procedures and tools record for the awareness requirement. Being sure is much they develop to aid individuals in tracking the information better than being aware when individuals will be trained to that is required by the licensees or other entities fatigue consequences for failing the company fatigue policy. management programs. Therefore, the final regulatory guide does not include a standardized tracking tool.

17 IBEW Applicability of Work-Hour Controls to Quality The NRC staff agrees that any individual who is performing Control/Quality Assurance Activities the activities specified in 10 CFR 26.4(a) must be subject to work-hour controls, including individuals who are certified Reference in NEI 06-11: to perform quality control (QC) activities. However, Work hours controls do not apply to the following individuals 10 CFR Part 26 does not currently require that individuals and activities: who are solely performing QC activities, without also

• Quality control and quality assurance activities. performing the work activities described in 10 CFR 26.4(a),

must be covered by work-hour controls. In a staff IBEW Comment 6: requirements memorandum (SRM) dated April 17, 2007, Individuals who are certified to do QC activities and the Commission directed the staff to extend the rules work-perform rule covered work (multi-qualifications) who are a hour requirements to cover personnel who perform QC and part of a work crew doing covered work, should have their quality verification activities. The NRC staff is currently work counted as covered work. working to implement the SRM.

18 IBEW Escort Qualifications There is no requirement in 10 CFR Part 26 that an escort must be certified on or otherwise qualified to oversee the The IBEW provided two comments related to the technical activities being performed by an escorted C/V. The NRC is qualifications of individuals who are escorting C/Vs, as enhancing its requirements for the technical qualifications follows: of escorts in other rulemaking activities. Therefore, the NRC staff has not added guidance regarding the technical Reference in NEI 06-11: qualifications of escorts because it is beyond the scope of Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-19

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition Work-hour controls do not apply to the following individuals this final regulatory guide.

and activities:

• Contractor/Vendors, who are not granted unescorted Further, the activity of escorting a C/V is distinct from the access (i.e., the individual is escorted), conducting work activity of assessing an individual for a waiver of the work-on a risk-significant system, structure, or component hour controls under 10 CFR 26.207. Specifically, in the onsite case of an escorted C/V, there is no a priori reason to IBEW Comment 8: believe that the individual is impaired from fatigue or may Clarification requested. Is the person escorting the C/V become impaired. By contrast, an individual who is being required to be certified on the activity being performed if the considered for a waiver of the work-hour controls will be licensee has such qualified individuals on-staff? working longer hours than the rule would otherwise permit.

Therefore, there is a basis to anticipate that the individual Reference in NEI 06-11: could be subject to impairment from fatigue. Accordingly, In order to grant a waiver, the licensee shall meet the 10 CFR 26.207(a)(1)(ii) requires that the supervisor following requirements: determine that there is reasonable assurance that the

1. A supervisor assesses the individual face to face and individual will be able to safely and competently perform determines that there is reasonable assurance that the his or her duties during the additional work period. If the individual will be able to safely and competently perform supervisor determines that there is a potential for fatigue-his or her duties during the additional work period for related degradations in alertness and performance to affect which the waiver will be granted. The supervisor risk-significant functions, the rule requires the supervisor to performing the assessment shall be trained in establish controls and conditions under which the individual accordance with the requirements of §§ 26.29 and will be permitted to perform work, such as peer review and 26.203(c) and shall be qualified to oversee the work to approval of job tasks or provisions for additional rest be performed by the individual. breaks. As described in the SOC for 10 CFR 26.207(a)(1)(ii), assessing the risks associated with IBEW Comment 17: the tasks that the individual will be performing and This ties back to the Pg. 12 C/V qualification concern for establishing appropriate controls and conditions both require oversight of work performed by C/Vs. This presents a detailed knowledge of the tasks to be performed by the double standard in the rule if escorted C/Vs are not required individual working under a waiver. Because the activity of to have qualified individuals overseeing the work of the C/V escorting a C/V and conducting a supervisory assessment on risk significant SSCs. are fundamentally different, the NRC staff does not agree that the rule presents a double standard.

19 IBEW Role of Reactor Engineer in Fuel Movement The NRC staff agrees that directing nuclear fuel movement Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-20

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition operations is covered work under the work-hour Reference in NEI 06-11: requirements. In 10 CFR 26.5, the term directing is Example 3: defined as the exercise of control over a work activity by The Reactor Engineer is required by station procedures to be an individual who is directly involved in the execution of present during fuel movement. The Reactor Engineers the work activity, and either makes technical decisions for function is to observe the fuel movement activity and provide that activity without subsequent technical review, or is technical recommendations to the fuel handling SRO. Is the ultimately responsible for the correct performance of that Reactor Engineer a covered individual? work activity. However, 10 CFR 50.54(m)(2)(iv) reserves Answer: The Reactor Engineer is not directing, they are responsibility for directing fuel movement for a senior providing technical information and observing and therefore operator or a licensed fuel-handling senior operator.

not conducting covered work. The fuel handling SRO would Therefore, a reactor engineer is prohibited, by regulation, be directing and is a covered individual. from directing these activities. The NRC staff is not including this recommendation in the final regulatory guide IBEW Comment 10: because it would be inconsistent with the current If the Reactor Engineer would be directing where fuel rods regulations.

were to be located and tracking such results, the answer should be YES, the work should be subject to fatigue provisions. Observing and not interfacing with the SRO would not be directing, and therefore, not covered work.

20 IBEW Role of Reactor Engineer in Control Room The NRC staff considered the issue raised by the commenter when developing 10 CFR Part 26 and Reference in NEI 06-11: determined that performing criticality calculations, although Example 4: important to public health and safety, is not within the scope The Reactor Engineer is required by station procedures to be of work activities that must be performed by individuals present during reactor startup. The Reactor Engineers who are subject to the work-hour controls in function is to provide information to the control room 10 CFR 26.205. Therefore, the final regulatory guide does supervisor on the reactivity of the reactor during the not include an exception, addition, or clarification to address approach to criticality. Is the Reactor Engineer a covered this comment.

individual?

Answer: The Reactor Engineer is not directing, they are providing technical information and therefore not conducting Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-21

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition covered work. The control room supervisor would be directing and is a covered individual.

IBEW Comment 11:

Is it good for nuclear safety for criticality calculations to be made while in the control room as a non-covered individual for fatigue as an outage is transferring to power operations based from this individuals direct work via calculations to commence nuclear chain reactions?

21 IBEW Emergent Training The staff has not added examples of emergent training in the final regulatory guide because the staff does not agree Reference in NEI 06-11: with the concept of periodic overtime that is referenced in Staffing levels should be sufficient so that schedules (over this paragraph of NEI 06-11, Revision 1. The basis for the non-outage periods) for the covered individuals can be staffs exception to the concept of periodic overtime is maintained based on vacation and emergent training demand discussed in the response to Comment 2 in this table.

without relying on waivers. It is expected and allowed that Regulatory Position 4 of the final regulatory guide includes normal variation in the vacation demand and training a revision to this paragraph of NEI 06-11, Revision 1, which demand may occasionally require additional work hours to deletes the term emergent training from the guidance.

be used. Management is responsible for understanding the total vacation, training, and workloads, and for maintaining sufficient staff to get the work done. Normal variation in the vacation demand, training demand, and emergent or extraordinary work demands will require periodic overtime.

Section 15, Reviews, addresses an annual performance based assessment of the work schedule.

IBEW Comment 12:

Can examples of emergent training be explained?

22 IBEW Reference to Training Weeks The NRC staff agrees with this comment and clarifies this sentence in Regulatory Position 9 in the final regulatory Reference in NEI 06-11: guide. Specifically, the NRC staff is revising the first After hours study time during training weeks shall be sentence of the second paragraph under the heading, Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-22

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition excluded from work hour calculations. Incidental duties performed off site, in Section 8.1 of NEI 06-11, Revision 1, as follows:

IBEW Comment 13:

Craft training is often not on specific cyclic training weeks After-hours study time that is not required by the licensee as operations workers are accustomed to rotate through. may be excluded from work-hour calculations.

23 IBEW After-Hours Study Time The NRC staff agrees that NEI 06-11, Revision 1, does not define the term training. The staff is not adding a Reference in NEI 06-11: definition of training to the final regulatory guide because Appropriate after hours study time compliments the utility this term is defined in ANSI/ANS-3.1-1993, Selection, provided training to ensure the learning process occurs and Qualification, and Training of Personnel for Nuclear Power optimal information retention is achieved. Plants, which the staff has endorsed in Regulatory Guide 1.8, Qualification and Training of Personnel for Nuclear IBEW Comment 14: Power Plants. ANSI/ANS-3.1-1993 defines training as an Training is not defined in the definition table. Licensees instructional program designed to develop or improve may also have built-in study time on property for self study. performance on the job.

This sentence should be removed.

The staff also agrees with the portion of this comment that suggests that onsite study time required by the licensee should be considered work hours for the purposes of calculating the maximum work hours permissible and the MDO requirements for covered workers under 10 CFR 26.205. After-hours self-study required by the licensee should also be considered work hours for calculation purposes, as discussed in the SOC for 10 CFR 26.205(d)(2).

Neither training nor required study time is covered work, however. The hours spent in training or required study by a worker who otherwise performs covered duties should be included in the calculation of the individuals work hours only if the individual participates in training or required study during a shift cycle that also includes hours worked Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-23

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition performing covered activities (see 10 CFR 26.205(b)(3)).

If an individual voluntarily dedicates after-hours personal time to study that is not required by the licensee, those voluntary study hours should not be considered hours worked for the purposes of calculating work hours and the MDO requirements for covered workers under the rule. As defined in 10 CFR 26.205(b), work hours are the amount of time the individuals perform duties for the licensee.

Voluntary after-hours study time does not meet this criterion. Therefore, because the sentence referenced by the commenter discusses after-hours study time that is not required by the licensee and does not conflict with the requirements for calculating work hours in 10 CFR 26.205(b)(3), the staff is not clarifying this implementation guidance in the final regulatory guide.

24 IBEW Work Performed at Home for the Licensee 10 CFR 26.205(b) requires licensees to include, in the calculation of an individuals work hours, the amount of Reference in NEI 06-11: time the individual performs duties for the licensee.

Example 3: Therefore, the NRC staff agrees that, if a licensee were to What work-related activities may be done at home on a downgrade an individual if he or she does not perform an day off without violating the day off intent? For example, activity at home on a day off, then the activity should be may an individual read procedures, catch up on considered to be required by the licensee and therefore administrative tasks, or study for a license requalification included in the calculation of the individuals work hours.

exam for a number of hours and still count that day as a In this case, the work requirement would be implied by the day off? licensees employment action. However, if the licensee rewards an individual for self-initiated activities at home, Answer: Activities initiated by the individual (not required the self-initiated activities would generally not be by the licensee) may be performed at home on a day off and considered covered work because the licensee did not not be considered work, e.g., studying, reading work- require these activities. The NRC staff is not clarifying the related material, reading email. example referenced by the commenter in the final regulatory guide because it is consistent with the regulation.

Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-24

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition IBEW Comment 15:

At any such time the licensee would downgrade or reward an individual for home initiated activities on behalf of the licensee (i.e., employee evaluation) such licensee activity would be disallowed.

25 IBEW Individuals Work-Hours Records for a Supervisory The NRC staff agrees that Section 9, Waivers, of Assessment NEI 06-11, Revision 1, should include a reference to a licensees records of the individuals work hours over the Reference in NEI 06-11: past 14 days for individuals who are being considered for a

3. Supervisory assessment (Note: Shall be completed before waiver of the work-hour controls in 10 CFR 26.207(a).

start of waiver period.) However, the staff is aware that there may be circumstances

• Work history for past 14 days as reported by the in which the licensee does not have access to records of the individual for whom the waiver is requested. individuals work history because the individual has not worked for a licensee who is subject to Subpart I of IBEW Comment 16: 10 CFR Part 26 within the past 14 days. Therefore, A cross check should be made to the individual reported 14 Regulatory Position 12 in the final regulatory guide replaces day period to licensee records for the individual. the bullet referenced by the commenter with the following:

Work history for the past 14 days, as reported by the individual for whom the waiver is requested and, if the individual has worked for a licensee who is subject to Subpart I of 10 CFR Part 26 over the past 14 days, as documented by that licensee.

26 IBEW Supervisory Qualifications for Granting Waivers The commenter has identified an inconsistency between NEI 06-11, Revision 1, and the requirements in Reference in NEI 06-11: 10 CFR 26.207(a)(1)(ii). Item 2 under the heading, In order to grant a waiver, the licensee shall meet the Granting Waivers, in NEI 06-11, Revision 1, Section 9, following requirements: should refer to a supervisor who is qualified to direct the

1. A supervisor assesses the individual face to face and work to be performed rather than to oversee the work to determines that there is reasonable assurance that the be performed. The initial phrase in item 3 under the same individual will be able to safely and competently perform heading should also refer to a supervisor who is qualified to his or her duties during the additional work period for direct the work to be performed by the individual under the Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-25

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition which the waiver will be granted. The supervisor waiver. To address this inconsistency, the NRC staff is performing the assessment shall be trained in incorporating a clarification under Regulatory Position 13 of accordance with the requirements of§§ 26.29 and the final regulatory guide. Specifically, the final regulatory 26.203(c) and shall be qualified to oversee the work to guide states the following:

be performed by the individual.

In Section 9, under the heading Granting Waivers,

2. If there is no supervisor on site who is qualified to replace the phrase qualified to oversee the work with the oversee the work, the assessment may be performed by a phrase qualified to direct the work in the second sentence supervisor who is qualified to provide oversight of the of numbered item 2. Replace qualified to oversee with work to be performed by the individual. The Supervisor, qualified to direct in the first sentence of numbered if knowledgeable of the work activity, can be a second item 3.

level supervisor or a manager in the chain of command.

The SOC for 10 CFR 26.207(a)(1)(ii) explains this section IBEW Comment 18: of the guidance. To address situations in which no This is confusing for the supervisor oversight requirement in supervisor qualified to direct the work is available on site,

1. 3 after reading #2 requirements. Please provide an the final rule allows for a supervisor who is qualified to explanation on how #3 would be implemented if no provide oversight of the work to make the assessment if he supervisor was present as described in #2. or she is trained in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 26.29, Training, and 10 CFR 26.203(c).

Although this individual may be less familiar with the details of how the work is to be performed, this provision of the rule prevents the substantial burden of requiring a supervisor who is qualified to direct the work to report to the site to perform the assessment.

27 IBEW Bases for Disciplinary Actions The NRC staff disagrees with these comments.

10 CFR 26.27(a) requires licensees to establish a written The IBEW provided two comments related to policy and procedures to meet the general performance implementation guidance in NEI 06-11 regarding conditions objectives and applicable requirements of 10 CFR Part 26.

and considerations for taking disciplinary actions, as follows: 10 CFR 26.27(b)(8) requires the written policy to describe the consequences of violating the policy for individuals who Reference in NEI 06-11: are subject to the rule. As required by 10 CFR 26.203(b)(4),

Individuals that exhibit chronic self-declaration that they are licensee procedures must identify any disciplinary actions Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-26

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition not fit for duty as a result of fatigue, absent a sound medical that a licensee may impose following an individuals fatigue reason, may be subject to disciplinary action. assessment and the conditions and considerations for taking

• Personnel are required to be fit for duty and getting those disciplinary actions. The staff views both the third sufficient rest is required to ensure a person is not and fifth paragraphs of Section 10 of NEI 06-11, Revision 1, subject to fatigue. as consistent with the regulation and the NRCs intent. The

• Persons who make choices that result in less than the third paragraph in Section 10 appropriately conveys sleep necessary for that person to remain alert and avoid management expectations that may form the basis for fatigue are not meeting their obligation per this rule. disciplinary action in response to individuals who frequently IBEW Comment 19: or repeatedly self-declare that they are not fit for duty Both of these bullets need to be clear that the guidance is because of fatigue without an acceptable medical specific to chronic fatigue based on individuals self declaring explanation. The fifth paragraph in Section 10 recommends fatigue. considerations for assessing disciplinary actions following a fatigue assessment. Therefore, the final regulatory guide Reference in NEI 06-11: does not include the clarification and deletion requested in Facts to be considered in assessing disciplinary action shall the comments.

include the employees job assignment, past work record, and work schedule.

IBEW Comment 20:

Remove sentence.

28 IBEW Time Away from Work for Fatigue Recovery The NRC staff disagrees with this comment. As discussed in the response to the previous comment in this table, Reference in NEI 06-11: 10 CFR 26.203(b)(4) requires licensee procedures to Personnel subject to the fatigue assessments who refuse to be identify any disciplinary actions that a licensee may impose assessed will be considered fatigued and unable to perform related to fatigue assessments and the conditions and their duties. Time away from work for fatigue management considerations for taking those disciplinary actions. The recovery shall be classified as vacation, personal time (if staff views classifying time away from work as vacation, available), or non-paid time. personal time, or nonpaid time as a disciplinary action in response to a refusal to be assessed for fatigue. The staff IBEW Comment 21: believes that the guidance in the second sentence of the last Remove second sentence of paragraph. paragraph in Section 10 of NEI 06-11, Revision 1, appropriately communicates the specific nature of the Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-27

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition disciplinary actions licensees may take in response to an individuals refusal to be assessed. Therefore, the staff is not taking an exception to this implementation guidance in the final regulatory guide.

29 IBEW For-Cause Fatigue Assessments As required by 10 CFR 26.203(c)(2), individuals must receive training on and demonstrate, by passing a Reference to NEI 06-11: comprehensive examination, the ability to identify Licensees shall ensure that fatigue assessments are symptoms of worker fatigue. Further, 10 CFR 26.203(c) applicable for all individuals in the FFD Program under the requires that individuals who perform fatigue assessments following conditions: must also be trained and be capable of demonstrating this

1. For-Cause. In addition to any other test or ability. As stated in the SOC for 10 CFR 26.211(b),

determination of fitness that may be required, a fatigue indications of fatigue may include decreased facial tone, assessment must be conducted in response to an rubbing of eyes, and slowed speech. The SOC also states observed condition of impaired individual alertness that, at the extreme, workers who have acute fatigue show creating a reasonable suspicion that an individual is not symptoms that are similar to those of intoxication. For fit to safely and competently perform his or her duties, example, speech may be less precise, attention may be except if the condition is observed during an individuals lacking, and normal body movements and posture may be break period. If the observed condition is impaired absent. The NRC staff is not adding this information to the alertness with no other behaviors or physical conditions final regulatory guide because the staff believes that creating a reasonable suspicion of possible substance Section 14, Training and Examination, of NEI 06-11, abuse, then the licensee need only conduct a fatigue Revision 1, adequately addresses the requirement to provide assessment. If the licensee has reason to believe that the training on this topic. Specifically, the sixth bullet in the observed condition is not due to fatigue, the licensee second set of bullets in Section 14 indicates that the training need not conduct a fatigue assessment. required under 10 CFR 26.203(c)(2) must ensure that workers are able to demonstrate an understanding of the IBEW Comment 22: symptoms of worker fatigue.

What are examples of observed conditions to consider a for cause fatigue assessment?

30 IBEW Forms for Fatigue Assessments The NRC staff agrees that a form, checklist, or other means to aid individuals in providing complete and accurate The IBEW submitted two comments addressing information could facilitate performing a fatigue documentation requirements for fatigue assessments in assessment. However, the staff does not believe that use of Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-28

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition NEI 06-11, as follows: a standardized form is necessary to comply with the fatigue assessment provisions in 10 CFR 26.211, Fatigue Reference in NEI 06-11: Assessments. For this reason and the reasons discussed in A fatigue assessment must provide the information necessary response to Comment 16 in this table, the staff is not adding for management decisions and actions in response to the standardized forms to the final regulatory guide.

circumstance that initiated the assessment.

b. Individuals shall provide complete and accurate In addition, although the staff does not object to the information that may be required by the licensee to guidance in NEI 06-11, Revision 1, which suggests that address the required factors. Licensees shall limit any individuals should maintain documentation of their work inquiries to only the personal information from the histories over the past 14 days, the staff did not intend to subject individual that may be necessary to assess the impose a recordkeeping burden on individuals in the required factors. rulemaking. The guidance in Section 12.6, Assessment Process, of NEI 06-11, Revision 1, which asks individuals IBEW Comment 23: to report (without documenting) their work histories for the A standardized form should be part of this potential past 14 days is consistent with the applicable requirement in regulatory implementation guide. 10 CFR 26.211(c)(2). Further, the staff is aware that some individuals who have not been subject to Subpart I of Reference in NEI 06-11: 10 CFR Part 26 may not have complete documentation of

2. Assessment their work histories over the past 14 days because they are

• Work history for past 14 days as reported by the new to the industry or were not previously performing individual. covered work. These individuals may not have been trained or otherwise informed by a licensee that documentation of IBEW Comment 25: their work histories for the past 14 days might be required.

This should read as reported and documented by the As a result, they would be unable to comply with guidance individual. to both report and produce documentation of their work histories for the past 14 days. Therefore, the staff is not adding the suggested phrase, and documented by the individual, to the final regulatory guide.

31 IBEW Bases for For-Cause Fatigue Assessments The NRC staff disagrees with this comment. As required by 10 CFR 26.211(a)(1), a licensee must conduct a fatigue Reference in NEI 06-11: assessment for cause if an individual is observed to be in a

1. Identification of condition requiring a fatigue assessment: condition creating a reasonable suspicion of impaired Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-29

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition

• For Causedescription of observed behavior individual alertness. As stated in the SOC for 10 CFR 26.211(b), behaviors such as rubbing of eyes, IBEW Comment 24: slowed speech, speech that is less precise, and the absence Replace behavior with condition. (See pg. 43 For- of normal body movements and posture are indications of a Cause) condition of impaired alertness that may warrant a fatigue assessment. Therefore, the staff finds the wording in NEI 06-11, Revision 1, to be acceptable and has not included the recommended clarification in the final regulatory guide.

32 IBEW Training Outcomes The context of this bullet in Section 14, Training and Examination, of NEI 06-11, Revision 1, is a discussion of Reference in NEI 06-11: the knowledge and abilities that workers must have to Workers should be able to: ensure that they understand the consequences of failing to

• Discuss the consequences of not following the company comply with the licensees fatigue management policy.

fatigue management policy. Although the NRC staff does not disagree with the content of the commenters suggested modification, Subpart I of IBEW Comment 26: 10 CFR Part 26 does not require such a discussion.

This consequence discussion should be well rounded and Therefore, the final regulatory guide does not include this not one way. Include individual consequences from the recommendation.

licensee and licensee consequences from the regulator.

Comments from Building and Construction Division of AFL-CIO and Associated Maintenance Contractors 33 AFL-CIO Comment on 10 CFR Part 26, Subpart I: During the rulemaking process, the NRC considered the

& AMC The commenters stated, Reducing overtime (and therefore issues this comment raises and made a number of earning) opportunities at nuclear refueling outages will adjustments to the provisions in the final rule to allow dissuade construction workers from accepting employment longer work hours for covered maintenance personnel.

there if more lucrative construction opportunities within However, these individuals perform important functions that other industries are available. may directly affect public health and safety. As a consequence, the final rule retained fatigue management Therefore, we are concerned that the new regulations for requirements for this group of individuals. Because managing personnel fatigue at nuclear power plants, set forth 10 CFR Part 26 codifies these requirements, the final in Subpart I of 10 CFR Part 26, will discourage the most regulatory guide does not address this comment.

Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-30

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition highly qualified and skilled workers from accepting job offers with contractors at nuclear power plants because of reduced earnings opportunities. We predict that the regulations will have the unintended effect of producing chronic low nuclear-returnee rates, by experienced construction workers when employment in that industry becomes a third or fourth-choice option in light of other opportunities in a booming industrial construction marketplace. As a result, nuclear contractors will likely experience a lack of available skilled labor during outages at nuclear power plants, resulting in the potential for unintended consequences such as higher rates of work-related injuries, reduced work quality and longer outage durations.

34 AFL-CIO Comment on 10 CFR Part 26, Subpart I: The fatigue management provisions in 10 CFR Part 26

& AMC The commenters stated, We understand that Draft apply based on an individuals job duties and whether the Regulatory Guide DG-5026 is designed to provide guidance individual has unescorted access to nuclear power plant on the implementation of the fatigue management rules of protected areas. These provisions are not based on job Subpart I of 10 CFR Part 26, and that this is not the forum for titles. Consequently, Subpart I of 10 CFR Part 26 does not urging changes to the regulations. Nevertheless, we feel the call out construction workers by name, although the NRC Commission should be aware of our concerns with respect to staff expects some construction workers to be affected, as the impact of the regulations and urge the Commission to detailed below. In general, however, the potential for reconsider application of the regulations to construction construction workers to be affected by the fatigue workers hired on a temporary full-time basis to perform management requirements is more limited than suggested maintenance work at nuclear stations. In addition, for these by the comment.

same reasons we believe that the fatigue rules need to be reexamined to the extent they are deemed to apply to The majority of construction workers building new reactors construction workers during the construction phase of new will not be subject to the fatigue management requirements nuclear power facilities once the nuclear fuel is received on of Subpart I of 10 CFR Part 26, because this portion of the site. Alternatively, the Commission, for the above reasons, rule does not apply to individuals who are constructing new should issue an exemption from the fatigue management reactors, unless fuel assemblies have been received at the rules, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 26, Subpart A, Section 26.9, site (see 10 CFR 26.3(c) and definitions under 10 CFR 26.5, for such construction workers when they are performing as applicable). As reflected in the final rules SOC for 10 CFR 26.3(a), the 10 CFR Part 26 requirements that apply Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-31

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition maintenance and new construction work. to a licensee operating a nuclear power plant are not warranted during nuclear power plant construction until fuel Until there is a change in the regulations, we are requesting arrives on site when radiological risks will increase.

that the activities subject to the requirement of one day off in Moreover, even at sites where the fatigue management any seven-day period during the first 60 days of a unit outage provisions are applicable (i.e., at operating reactors and at include pre-outage activities performed by construction new reactor construction sites when fuel assemblies are workers not regularly employed at the site. We suggest, received), construction workers will be affected only in the therefore, that Regulatory Guide DG-5026 be modified to ways described in the following paragraphs.

make clear that the first 60-day period of a unit outage includes pre-outage work by construction workers hired Workers of any type who are granted unescorted access to temporarily by licensees or by contractors of licensees to the protected areas of a nuclear power reactor are covered perform maintenance work related to outage activities. If the by 10 CFR 26.203, General Provisions (e.g., the workers Commission believes such modification is not possible would have to be trained with respect to identifying without an exemption pursuant to 10 CFR Part 26, symptoms of worker fatigue and contributors to decreased Subpart A, Section 26.9, please treat this letter as a request alertness in the workplace). These general provisions apply for such exemption. With this clarification or exemption, to permanent licensee employees, temporary workers during such workers would be covered by the minimum days off outages, and new reactor construction workers when fuel requirements of Section 26.205(d)(4), as long as the total of assemblies are received, but only if the individuals have pre-outage and outage activities do not exceed 60 days. unescorted access to protected areas (see 10 CFR 26.5 for the definition of protected areas).

A smaller subset of workers who are granted unescorted access to the protected areas of a nuclear power reactor also are subject to the work-hour controls in 10 CFR 26.205 if they perform one of the covered duties specified in 10 CFR 26.4(a)(1) through 10 CFR 26.4(a)(5). One of these covered duties is maintenance or onsite direction of the maintenance of SSCs that a risk-informed evaluation process has shown to be significant to public health and safety. Construction workers who perform such duties and who have been granted unescorted access will be covered by the work-hour controls.

Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-32

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition However, with respect to any of the temporary full-time outage workers mentioned in the comment who may be affected (i.e., based on their duties and access status), it is worth noting that the NRC considered the issues raised by the comment when developing the final rule and included adjustments allowing longer work hours for individuals performing covered maintenance activities. The most notable adjustment (given the issues raised in this comment) is that 10 CFR 26.205(d)(4) relaxes the MDO requirements for individuals performing covered maintenance during the first 60 days of an outage, to a minimum of 1 day off in any 7-day period. As a result of these adjustments, the NRC staff believes that the concerns raised by the commenter have been greatly reduced.

Because the commenters exemption request seeks to exempt an entire class of individuals from the 10 CFR Part 26 fatigue management requirements, the commenter is essentially requesting that the NRC revise the 10 CFR Part 26 requirements as they apply to these individuals. Such a request is more appropriately submitted through a petition for rulemaking under 10 CFR 2.802, Petition for Rulemaking.

Comments from Dominion Resources Services on NEI 06-11 and DG-5026 35 Dominion Endorsement of Revision 1 to NEI 06-11 The NRC agrees with this comment and has made the requested changes throughout the final regulatory guide.

Comment:

Many times in the Draft Regulatory Guide the NRC either endorses or references Revision E of NEI 06-11, with the corresponding date and ADAMS number. Since the issue date of the Draft Regulatory Guide, the latest version of NEI 06-11 is now at revision 1.

Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-33

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition Recommendation:

It is suggested that the revision number and date for NEI 06-11 be changed in the text of the Draft Regulatory Guide to Revision 1 with the date of October 2008.

Comments from the Union of Concerned Scientists on DG-5026 and NEI 06-11 36 UCS Regulatory Position 6Eligibility for Outage Minimum The NRC staff agrees that, at a minimum, those individuals Days Off who constitute the operator minimum shift complement, including the operator at the controls and the senior operator The commenter objected to industry concerns that the work in the control room, as specified in 10 CFR 50.54, for the hour limits for control room operators at multiple unit sites operating unit at a multiunit site with one or more units in having at least one reactor operating and at least one reactor an outage should not work the longer work hours that the in an outage are too onerous. The commenter argued that rule permits for outages because these individuals primary safety should trump inconvenience and stated that the NRC duties are to ensure the safe operations of the operating unit.

staff had appropriately balanced safety and economics in the Regulatory Position11 in the final regulatory guide revises final rule. The commenter also included four enclosures the guidance in NEI 06-11, Revision 1, to reflect the staffs supporting the need for these work hour limits. The position.

commenter argued that these documents show the following:

• The Three Mile Island accident involved an operating reactor adjacent to a reactor in the latter stages of a refueling outage (NUREG/CR-1496).

• Workers on the operating reactor at the time of the accident admitted to being too fatigued to perform assigned tasks (NUREG-0600).

• Since the Three Mile Island accident, the NRC has been concerned about fatigue impairing workers performance and its detrimental effects on nuclear plant safety (NRC Circular No. 80-02).

Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-34

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition

• Recent NRC data illustrate that human error rates are highest in the latter stages of refueling outages (Attachment 1 to NRC Information Notice 2000).

Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-35

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition Additional Comments from NEI on DG-5026 to Further Support the Request for Enforcement Discretion (see Comment 10) 37 NEI NEI provided further discussion of its request (in The NRC staff is evaluating this request for enforcement December 24, Comment 10 in this table) for a 6-month period of discretion.

2008 letter enforcement discretion for the fatigue management provisions of 10 CFR Part 26. The points raised include the following:

• Additional time will be needed to finalize software packages for tracking the work-hour restrictions of the rule after publication of the final regulatory guide. NEI noted that publication of the final regulatory guide in May 2009 will allow only 4 months for making any necessary modifications before the fatigue management requirements must be implemented, there are limitations on the resources of vendors coordinating and scheduling software installation at many sites, and time will be required to test the software and train personnel to use it.

• Licensees need to recruit, evaluate, and train increased staff (e.g., a 20-percent increase in security staffing across the industry) to implement the rule.

There may be potential schedule impacts on fall 2009 outages from the need to ensure that there are sufficient reactor operators and senior operators to maintain some operators on nonoutage hours for operating units at multiunit sites; and

• Granting a 6-month period of enforcement discretion will not adversely affect public health and safety and will allow for a more consistent implementation of the rule.

38 NEI NEI also recommended that, during the 6-month period of The NRCs procedures include a process and criteria for December 24, enforcement discretion, the industry working group and the revising regulatory guides. The questions to be answered in Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-36

Response to Public Comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-5026 (RG 5.73),

Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel New Regulatory Guide 5.73 Comment from Comment NRC Staff Disposition 2008, letter NRC staff should collect lessons learned and revise determining whether to revise a guide include:

NEI 06-11, Managing Personnel Fatigue at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites, as appropriate, to ensure more consistent Does the current regulatory guide represent a method that is implementation of the rule requirements. no longer acceptable for meeting the regulations?

Would the revision improve efficiency, improve effectiveness, or reduce burden for the staff or licensees and applicants?

If the revision is not needed to meet a new regulation, rule, or order, or is not required to adequately protect public health and safety, would the benefits of the proposed revision outweigh the costs (both agency costs and industry costs) of making the revision?

Lessons learned from implementing the final regulatory guide would provide information to the NRC staff needed to answer these questions and determine whether a future revision is warranted.

Appendix B to RG 5.73, Page B-37