« PreviousContinue »
no fire actually occurs, the staff could impose nothing higher than a Severity Level IV violation.
For ell of these reasons, I cannot support the process and interpretations outlined by the staff in the SECY-85-306 series. There are unanswered questions about the need for the document, the workability of the propcsed process, and the technical adequacy of the new interpretations.
As a separate metter, I think the Commission should carefully consider the backfit analysis provided by the staff on the new interpretations document. The analysis is cursory at best. The discussions of the criteria in $50.109 are really nothing more than unsupported, conclusory statements. The level of detail in this analysis is far below that of the analysis provided for the Station. Blackout Rule. I propose that we require an * that is at least as complete as that for the Station Blackout Rule.
Further, I propose that we publish a more detailed analysis for public comment, as was the interpretations document. Any comments received should be addressed before the Commission acts.
RULENIAKING ISSUE seco-s3-222
William J. Dircks
FINAL RULEMAKING CONCERNING FITNESS FOR DuTY FOR PERSONNEL witH
To obtain Commission approval to publish a final rule in the
On August 5, 1982, the Commission published for comment (47 FR
Seventy-three responses containing 310 comments were received
Approximately one-third of the comments involve socioeconomic and
Twenty-seven respondents comment that the Commission should not
specify specific methods (e.g., breath testers, psychological
The Federal Register notice for the final fule (Enclosure "A")
The final rule does not include coverage of NRC personnel, since NRC personnel (e.g., inspectors) require unfettered access to nuclear power plants to perform their assigned duties, and since they do not perform functions that directly and immediately affect the safety of the plant.
The rule retains the word "protected" rather than using the term
Finally, the rule is broadly worded in keeping with the belief
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 Operations (INPO), Edison Electric Institute (EEI) and the utilities, is developing a set of standard guidelines for licensees to use in responding to this rule.
The NRC does not have regulations which specifically address use of alcohol and other drugs or the broader issue of fitness for duty of persons with unescorted access to protected areas at nuclear power stations. Since operation of a nuclear power station by personnel not fit for duty could degrade the licensee's abil to operate the facility in a safe manner, developaent of a requirement concerning the determination of fitness for duty with respect to the consumption of alcoholic beverages, use of other drugs, and mental or physical impairments which could affect a person's faculties in a way contrary to safety is neces" sary to protect the health and safety of the public.
The subject final amendment will require that licensees operating commercial power reactors licensed under 10 CFR 50.21Gb) or 50.22 establish and implement written procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance that the licensee's and its contractors' personnel with unescorted access to protected areas, while in those protected areas, are not under the influence of alcohol or other drugs or otherwise unfit for duty.
Personnel would be considered unfit for duty if their faculties were affected in a way contrary to safety by substances such as alcohol or other drugs. Additionally, the phrase "... or otherwise unfit for duty..." is intended to require the licensee to consider other factors when determining an individual's fitness for duty, such as the effects of fatigue, stress, illness, and physical impairments.
Consideration was given to incorporating this "Fitness for Duty"
the staff considered extending the rule to nuclear power plants under construction. It was determined by the staff that these plants need not be included in the rule since construction presents no immediate adverse effect on the public health and safety due to a radioactive release. Additionally, government and industry quality assurance programs at construction sites would be expected to minimize the potential latent effects of poor workmanship, due to non-fitness for duty, on operating
That the Commission:
Approve publication of the final rule as set forth in Enclosure "A", to amend 10 CFR 50.2 and 50.54 by requiring that licensees operating commercial power reactors licensed under 10 CFR 50.21(b) or 50.22 establish and implement adequate written procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance ######################## irrortnorotorio-root-of
at Coulon at Tec Gir faculties_in_any way contrary to safety, or otherwise un use of mental or p àBăssments which could affect their performance in any way contrary to safety:
In order to satisfy the requirements of the Regulatory Flexi-
a. That, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.5(d)(3) neither an environmental impact statement nor a negative declaration need be prepared in connection with this rulemaking action since the amendment is nonsubstantive and insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact.
b. That the Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and the Subcommittee on Energy and Power of the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce will be informed.
c. That ADM will send copies of the final rule to all affected licensees and other interested persons following Commission approval.