« PreviousContinue »
rate of $80, the cost per licensee to develop written procedures specified in this rule will be approximately $96,000 (1200 hours x $80). Since the rule is broadly stated giving the licensee considerable latitude in developing and managing his procedures, only a general annual cost statement can be given here. If the licensee appoints/contracts a full-time program manager, his annual cost will be approximately $50-60 thousand. Included in this estimate are manager salary, office space, procedures reviews, recordkeeping and processing of clients. Costs associated with such things as rehabilitation are normally the responsibility of the employee. This is the practice among nonmilitary government agencies and private industry. The above cost estimates were derived from contacts with fitness for duty program personnel from private industry and non-military government agencies. Included among these is the NRC Alcohol and Drug Dependency Program which serves headquarters and regional offices. However, the NRC staff is also aware that several of the utilities currently have some manner of program in place (reference NUREG-0903), therefore, mirfimizing their costs in shaping current programs to meet "Fitness for Duty" rule requirements. Secondly, employee observation/assistance programs in other industries claim, almost unanimously, to save dollar costs in the longterm. While utilities such as TWA which claims that alcohol abuse alone costs it approximately $18.5 million annually -- fitness for duty programs of the type envisioned by the "Fitness for Duty" rule are expected to save dollar costs through quicker identification of employees not fit for duty, and through assisting these individuals, in whom considerable resources have been invested, so that they might return to high levels of productivity. Absenteeism due to alcohol-drugs costs U.S. industry an average of $300 annually for every worker nationwide. Alcohol-drug abusers lose an additional 25% cf. their productive time when on the job at an average annual cost to U.S. industry of approximately $2,900 per alcohol-drug abuser. The total cost to U.S. industry annually is between $12 and 15 billion. With regard to fitness for duty programs, Wrich 1980, 1 reports that U.S. industry benefits 10 dollars in decreased absenteeism and accidents, and increased productivity for every dollar it spends on fitness for duty.
IWFTENTJTThe Employee Assistance Program; updated for the 1980's. City Center, Minnesota: Hazelden Publishing Co., 1980.
One respondent (#45) comments that a specific blood alcohol level limit should be established but does not suggest a level.
RESOLUTION: The rule is broadly worded in keeping with the belief that each licensee should establish specific procedures and techniques for determining fitness for duty (e.g., breath testers, psychological tests) taking into consideration circumstances unique to its facility. Written procedures developed by licensees would probably include the following: (1) a statement of responsibilities of the program coordinator, managers, supervisors, and employees who come into contact with persons with unescorted access to protected areas; (2) an observation procedure; (3) a procedure (diagnosis, referral, return to duty) for assisting individuals who meet the criteria for alcohol/drug abuse or emotional instability; (4) an administrative procedure for processing individuals who refuse assistance and/or who wish to exercise their appeal rights; and (5) training provisions for all personnel and management to acquaint them with the licensee's fitness for duty procedures. Additionally, an industry task force, staffed by representatives from the Institute of Nuclear Power Cperations (INP0), Edison Electric Institute (EEI) and the utilities, is developing a set of standard guidelines for licensees to use in responding to this rule.
4. Recommended Changes in "Fitness for Duty" Rule Content
The "Fitness for Duty" rule published in the Federal Register for public comment on August 5, 1982 states: "Each licensee with an operating license issued under 10 CFR 50.21(b) or 50.22 shall establish, document and implement adequate written procedures designed to ensure that, while on duty, its and its contractor's personnel with unescorted access to protected areas are not (1) under the influence of alcohol, (2) using any drugs that affect their faculties in any way contrary to safety, or (3) otherwise unfit for duty because of mental or temporary physical impairments that could affect their performance in any way contrary to safety. Each licensee shall maintain the written records of these procedures for the life of the plant."
One respondent (#64) comments that the rule should be more specific concerning conditions of fitness and processing of persons determined to be unfit for duty.
RESOLUTION: The NRC staff concurs in comments a and e involving "reasonable assurance" and "broadly stated" rule, respectively. These changes have been incorporated into the final rule. The word "ensure" was changed to the term "provide reasonable assurance" since no written procedure can be expected to be 100% effective ail the time. The rule is broadly worded in keeping with the Commission's belief that each licensee should establish criteria for fitness for duty and implementation methods (e.g., breath testers, psychological tests) taking into consideration circumstances unique to its facility.
The NRC staff takes exception to Comment b which involves application of the rule to NRC personnel. NRC personnel (e.g., inspectors) need unfettered access to nuclear power plants to perform their assigned duties, and they do not perform functions that directly and immediately affect plant safety.
The NRC staff takes exception to Comment c which involves application of the rule to vital areas of the plant rather than the broader protected areas. The NRC staff maintains, as do five of the respondents, that the "Fitness for Duty" rule shou'd apply to unescorted access to protected areas. Selective application of the rule to only persons with unescorted access to vital areas would be impractical, since implementation of the rule will occur at the entrance to and in the protected areas of the plant. Additionally, there is no way of guaranteeing that persons with unescorted access to protected areas will not penetrate vital areas through assistance or coercion of persons with unescorted access to vital areas, especially if under the influence of alcohol or other mind altering and mood changing drugs. Therefore, the word protected is retained in the final rule.
Comment d involves saintenance for the life of the plant of records of written procedures developed to respond to the "Fitness for Duty" rule. The requirement that records of the written procedures be kept for the life of the plant has been eliminated since paragraph (l) of the rule already requires that the licensee's procedures be in written form.
f. Presented below is the proposed rule submitted for public comment on August 5, 1982. Superimposed on the proposed rule are changes resulting from resolution of public comments. Changes were also made in the proposed rule, from NRC staff deliberations, as follows. The words "nuclear power unit" were inserted between the words "licensee" and "issued" in paragraph (x)(1) to limit the rule to licensed nuclear power plants. The word "document" in paragraph (x)(1) was deleted as being redurdant with the word "written." The word "other" in oaragraph (x)(1)(ii) was added to recognize the fact that alcohol is also a drug. The word "could" in paragraph (x)(1)(ii) was added to recognize the fact that a wide variety of substances (i.e., controlled, noncontrolled, illegal) may or may not render particular individuals fit or not fit for duty. Additionally, the word "temporary" in paragraph (x)(1)(iii) was eliminated as not being meaningful. Mental and physical impairments, whether temporary or permanent, say or may not preclude a person from being fit for duty. A second paragraph (2) was added to the rule to specify a time requirement (nine months) for licensees to respond to the rule; also to provide a means through which individual licensees can negotiate an extension to the time requirement.
(x)(1) Each licensee with an operating license for a nuclear power unit issued under 10 CFR Part 50.21(b) or 50.22 shall establish, (doctoment) and implement written procedures designed to (ensure) provide reasonable assurance that the licensee's and its contractors' personnel with unescorted access to protected areas, while in those protected areas, are not: (i) Under the influence of alcohol; (ii) (Using) Under the influence of any other drugs that could affect their faculties in any way contrary to safety, or (iii) Otherwise unfit for duty because of sental or (temporary) physical impairments that could affect their performance in any way contrary to safety.
(2) (fhe-written-record-of-these-procedures-wiłł-be-maintained-for-the *ife-of-the-plant: ) Licensees shall establish and implement the procedures described in p. (x)(1) by a date nine months after the effective date of the rule, or date of issuance of an operating license, whichever is later. Licensees who cannot meet the 9-month deadline must submit, not less than 90 days prior to that deadline, a request for an extension to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation and demonstrate good cause for the request.
5. Specific Responses to Commissioners' Questions
The following questions were posed specifically by the Commissioners in soliciting public comment on the "Fitness for Duty" rule. Although each of these questions have been dealt with earlier in this Enclosure, they are restated here for Commissioner review.
a. Should the Commission establish specific fitness criteria? Nineteen respondents comment that the Commission should establish specific fitness criter ria. Three respondents comment that such criteria should be established by each licensee as part of its written procedures. The NRC staff concurs in this latter position since it believes that a broadly worded rule is in the best interests of government and industry.
b. Should specific methods be established by the NRC for implementation of the "Fitness for Duty" rule, including the use of breath tests, background investigations, psychological tests, behavioral observation programs, employee awareness programs, employee assistance programs, and other possible implementa" tion measures? Twenty-seven respondents comment specifically that breath tests should not be used. Regarding observation and assistance programs, almost all 36 utilities responding to the rule notice claim to have some form of observation and/or assistance progras in operation. Other measures (e.g., psycho" logical tests, other implementation measures) are not commented on specifically within the context of the "Fitness for Duty" rule.