Draft Safety Culture Policy Statement: Request for Public Comments, 57525-57529 [E9-26816]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 214 / Friday, November 6, 2009 / Notices
Closed—10:30 a.m.–12 p.m. Management
topics and status of data; analysis;
Open—1 p.m.–2:30 p.m. Tour and facilities
maintenance;
Closed—2:30 p.m.–6:30 p.m. Cybersecurity,
EPO, LSC status and Executive Session.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Closed—8:30 a.m.–12 p.m. Project overview
and Project Management status;
Closed—1:30 p.m.–6 p.m. Technical
Progress, Development, R&D support.
Executive Session
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Closed—8:30 a.m.–12 p.m. Executive
Session, report writing, Close Out report.
Reason for Closing: The proposal contains
proprietary or confidential material including
technical information; financial data, such as
salaries; and personal information
concerning individuals associated with the
proposals. These matters are exempt under 5
U.S.C. 552b(c) and (6) of the Government in
the Sunshine Act.
Dated: November 3, 2009.
Susanne Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E9–26784 Filed 11–5–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2009–0485]
Draft Safety Culture Policy Statement:
Request for Public Comments
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC).
ACTION: Issuance of draft safety culture
policy statement and notice of
opportunity for public comment.
DATES: Comments are requested 90 days
from the date of this Federal Register
Notice. Comments received after this
date will be considered if it is practical
to do so, but the NRC is able to assure
consideration only for comments
received on or before this date. Please
refer to the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section for additional information
including questions for which the NRC
is requesting comment.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any one of the following methods.
Please include Docket ID NRC–2009–
0485 in the subject line of your
comments. Comments submitted in
writing or in electronic form will be
posted on the NRC Web site and on the
Federal rulemaking website
Regulations.gov. Because your
comments will not be edited to remove
any identifying or contact information,
the NRC cautions you against including
any information in your submission that
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:23 Nov 05, 2009
Jkt 220001
you do not want to be publicly
disclosed.
The NRC requests that any party
soliciting or aggregating comments
received from other persons for
submission to the NRC inform those
persons that the NRC will not edit their
comments to remove any identifying or
contact information, and therefore, they
should not include any information in
their comments that they do not want
publicly disclosed.
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for documents filed under Docket ID
NRC–2009–0485. Address questions
about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher
301–492–3668; e-mail
Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
Mail comments to: Michael T. Lesar,
Chief, Rulemaking and Directives
Branch (RDB), Division of
Administrative Services, Office of
Administration, Mail Stop: TWB–05–
B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, or by fax to RDB at (301) 492–
3446.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alexander Sapountzis, Office of
Enforcement, Mail Stop O–4 A15A, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001, or by email to Alexander.Sapountzis@nrc.gov.
SUMMARY: The NRC is issuing a draft
policy statement that sets forth the
Commission’s expectation that all
licensees and certificate holders 1
establish and maintain a positive safety
culture that protects public health and
safety and the common defense and
security when carrying out licensed
activities. The Commission defines
safety culture as that assembly of
characteristics, attitudes, and behaviors
in organizations and individuals which
establishes that as an overriding
priority, nuclear safety and security
issues 2 receive the attention warranted
by their significance. The Commission
also considers nuclear safety and
security issues to be equally important
in a positive safety culture. The
importance of treating safety and
security in an equal manner within
1 Throughout this document, the phrase ‘‘licensee
and certificate holders’’ includes licensees,
certificate holders, permit holders, authorization
holders, holders of quality assurance program
approvals and applicants for a license, certificate,
permit, authorization, or quality assurance program
approval.
2 Throughout this document, the terms ‘‘safety’’
or ‘‘nuclear safety,’’ ‘‘security’’ or ‘‘nuclear
security,’’ and ‘‘safety culture’’ are used. These
terms refer to matters that are related to NRCregulated activities, including radiation protection,
safeguards, material control and accounting,
physical protection, and emergency preparedness.
.
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57525
NRC’s regulatory framework is clearly
evident in our mission and strategic
goals. Experience has shown that certain
organizational characteristics and
personnel attitudes and behaviors are
present in a positive safety culture.
These include, but are not limited to,
individuals demonstrating ownership
and personal responsibility for
maintaining safety and security in their
day-to-day work activities; the
implementation of processes for
planning and controlling work activities
such that safety and security are
maintained; a work environment in
which personnel feel free to raise safety
and security concerns without fear of
retaliation; prompt and thorough
identification, evaluation, and
resolution of nuclear safety and security
issues commensurate with their
significance; the availability of the
resources needed to ensure that safety
and security are maintained; decisionmaking processes that protect safety and
security; clearly defined roles and
responsibilities for maintaining safety
and security; and the seeking out and
implementation of opportunities to
improve safety and security. The NRC
expects its licensees and certificate
holders to foster these characteristics,
attitudes, and behaviors in their
organizations and among individuals
who are overseeing or performing
regulated activities commensurate with
the safety and security significance of
their activities and the nature and
complexity of their organization and
functions.
The NRC is requesting comments on
the draft safety culture policy statement
and associated questions.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
(1) Background
The Commission has long expressed
its expectations for safety culture in
previous policy statements. In 1989, the
Commission published its ‘‘Policy
Statement on the Conduct of Nuclear
Power Plant Operations’’ (54 FR 3424;
January 24, 1989) to make clear the
Commission’s expectations of utility
management and licensed operators
with respect to the conduct of
operations. The policy statement stated,
‘‘the phrase safety culture refers to a
very general matter, the personal
dedication and accountability of all
individuals engaged in any activity
which has a bearing on the safety of
nuclear power plants.’’ The policy
statement further stated that the
Commission issued the policy statement
to help foster the development and
maintenance of a safety culture at every
facility licensed by the NRC.
E:\FR\FM\06NON1.SGM
06NON1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6
57526
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 214 / Friday, November 6, 2009 / Notices
In 1996, the Commission published a
policy statement, ‘‘Freedom of
Employees in the Nuclear Industry to
Raise Safety Concerns Without Fear of
Retaliation’’ (61 FR 24336; May 14,
1996), to set forth its expectations that
licensees and other employers subject to
NRC authority will establish and
maintain safety-conscious environments
in which employees feel free to raise
safety concerns, both to their
management and to the NRC, without
fear of retaliation. This policy statement
applied to NRC-regulated activities of
all licensees and their contractors and
subcontractors. A safety conscious work
environment is an important attribute of
safety culture and is one of the safety
culture characteristics in the draft safety
culture policy statement.
The importance of a positive safety
culture for activities involving civilian
uses of radioactive materials and other
potential hazards has been
demonstrated by a number of
significant, high-visibility events worldwide that have occurred in the 20-year
period since the Commission published
its 1989 policy statement addressing
safety culture in nuclear power plants.
The events occurred across multiple
industries including at nuclear power
plants, fuel cycle facilities, and in other
industries such as chemical processing
plants and aerospace. Examples of
nuclear industry events include those
that occurred at the Davis-Besse Nuclear
Power Station and the Peach Bottom
Atomic Power Station. Workers at the
Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station
discovered a cavity in the reactor
pressure vessel head caused by boric
acid corrosion. The corrosion developed
over a period of several years but was
not discovered before the cavity
developed. The licensee’s analysis of
the event identified weaknesses in the
station’s safety culture as the root cause
of the event. It particularly noted that
management prioritized ‘‘production
over safety.’’ At the Peach Bottom
Atomic Power Station, personnel
behaviors adverse to the security of the
plant were identified, specifically,
inattentiveness by security officers.
Other licensees have had recurring
problems resulting in violations of NRC
regulations. Through a Commission
confirmatory order, a fuel cycle facility
licensee committed to having a thirdparty assessment of its safety culture to
determine the causes of its continuing
problems in order to establish
appropriate corrective actions. The
third-party assessment identified
weaknesses in areas important to safety
culture. In addition, weaknesses in the
safety culture of licensees and certificate
holders have contributed to
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:23 Nov 05, 2009
Jkt 220001
unscheduled events or incidents that
the Commission has determined to be
significant from the standpoint of public
health and safety. Examples linked to
characteristics and attitudes in
organizations and individuals
associated with weak safety cultures
include inadequate procedures;
procedures not being followed;
inadequate supervision; decisionmaking that does not ensure that safety
and security are maintained; and
ineffective problem identification,
evaluation, and resolution. They have
included medical misadministrations
(such as giving iodine-131 to lactating
females that resulted in the uptake by
their infants and multiple events
associated with prostate brachytherapy
treatment) and overexposures arising
from the loss of control of radiography
or well logging sources.
(2) Statement of Policy
It is the Commission’s policy that a
strong safety culture is an essential
element for individuals, both internal to
the NRC and external, performing or
overseeing regulated activities. As such,
the NRC will include appropriate means
to monitor safety culture in its oversight
programs and internal management
processes. The NRC defines safety
culture as that assembly of
characteristics, attitudes, and behaviors
in organizations and individuals, which
establishes that as an overriding
priority, nuclear safety and security
issues receive the attention warranted
by their significance. Further, it is
important for all organizations to
provide personnel in the safety and
security sectors with an appreciation for
the importance of each, emphasizing the
need for integration and balance to
achieve optimized protection. Safety
and security activities are closely
intertwined, and it is critical that
consideration of these activities be
integrated so as not to diminish or
adversely affect either safety or security.
A safety culture that accomplishes this
would include all nuclear safety and
security issues associated with NRCregulated activities including radiation
protection, safeguards, material control
and accounting, physical protection,
and emergency preparedness issues
among the issues that receive attention
as a matter of priority.
The Commission’s regulations are
designed to protect both the public and
workers against radiation hazards from
the use of radioactive materials. The
Commission’s scope of responsibility
includes regulation of commercial
nuclear power plants; research, test, and
training reactors; nuclear fuel cycle
facilities; medical, academic, and
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
industrial uses of radioactive materials;
and the transport, storage, and disposal
of radioactive materials and wastes. The
Commission carries out these
responsibilities in numerous ways
including through such regulatory
activities as inspecting licensed and
certified facilities and activities;
collecting, analyzing, and disseminating
information about operational safety
and security; investigating nuclear
incidents; and developing policy and
providing direction on safety and
security issues.
The Commission believes that,
because licensees and certificate holders
use or provide services related to the
use of radioactive material, they bear the
primary responsibility for safely
handling and securing these materials. It
is, therefore, each licensee’s and
certificate holder’s responsibility to
develop and maintain a positive safety
culture which establishes that nuclear
safety issues and nuclear security
issues, as an overriding priority, receive
the attention warranted by their
significance. Therefore, licensees and
certificate holders should foster a
positive safety culture in their
organizations and among individuals
who are overseeing or performing
regulated activities. However, as the
regulatory agency, the Commission has
an independent oversight role (through
inspection and assessment processes)
including addressing licensees’ and
certificate holders’ performance related
to areas important to safety culture.
(3) Safety Culture Concept
In 1991, as a result of the 1986
Chernobyl accident, the International
Nuclear Safety Group (INSAG)
emphasized the concept of safety
culture for the nuclear industry in its
report, INSAG–4, ‘‘Safety Culture.’’
INSAG is an advisory group to the
International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA). The INSAG–4 definition of
safety culture is, ‘‘that assembly of
characteristics and attitudes in
organizations and individuals which
establishes that, as an overriding
priority, nuclear plant safety issues
receive the attention warranted by their
significance.’’
Implied in the INSAG definition of
safety culture is the recognition that
every organization is continually faced
with resolving conflicts among its goals
for cost, schedule, and quality (or
safety). The organization’s members
(groups and individuals) also face
conflicts among different goals in
performing their jobs. Management
establishes the framework (management
systems, programs, processes) and
communicates its priorities for resolving
E:\FR\FM\06NON1.SGM
06NON1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 214 / Friday, November 6, 2009 / Notices
conflicts among different goals.
Members of the organization work
within that framework and are
influenced by management’s priorities,
but they have their own beliefs and
attitudes about what is important and
make individual choices on how to
proceed when faced with multiple
competing goals. The INSAG definition
emphasizes that in a positive safety
culture, the goal of maintaining nuclear
safety receives the highest priority in
the organization’s and individuals’
decision-making and actions when
faced with a conflict with other
organizational or individual goals.
The Commission modified the INSAG
definition of safety culture which refers
to ‘‘nuclear plant safety.’’ The
Commission is strongly committed to
promoting positive safety cultures
among its nuclear reactor licensees;
however, the Commission regulates
many other organizations and processes
involving civilian uses of radioactive
materials. These regulated activities
include industrial radiography services;
hospitals, clinics and individual
practitioners involved in medical uses
of radioactive materials; research and
test reactors; large-scale fuel fabrication
facilities; as well as nuclear power
plants. The Commission also regulates
the construction of new facilities where
operations will involve radioactive
materials with the potential to affect
public health and safety and the
common defense and security.
Therefore, by revising the INSAG
definition of safety culture to replace
‘‘nuclear plant safety’’ with ‘‘nuclear
safety,’’ the Commission is emphasizing
that it expects all of its licensees and
certificate holders to place the highest
priority on nuclear safety commensurate
with the risks inherent in the regulated
activities.
The Commission also modified the
INSAG definition to adequately capture
or communicate the equal importance of
nuclear security and nuclear safety in a
positive safety culture. Following the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,
the Commission increased its attention
to the important role of security in
regulated facilities whose operations
can have an impact on public health
and safety. The Commission issued
orders enhancing security at its NRCregulated facilities to further ensure
public health and safety and the
common defense and security. One of
the insights gained from the greater
emphasis on security is the importance
of incorporating security considerations
into a safety culture and effectively
managing the safety and security
interface. In general, the safety and
security interface refers to the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:23 Nov 05, 2009
Jkt 220001
organizational and individual awareness
that the functions and goals of safety
and security must be considered
together so that actions to achieve either
set of functions and goals do not
inadvertently compromise the other.
Therefore, to emphasize the equal
importance of nuclear security and
nuclear safety in a positive safety
culture, the Commission has added
‘‘nuclear security’’ to the safety culture
definition. The NRC’s modified INSAG
definition is provided in the Statement
of Policy section above.
(4) Stakeholder Outreach
The Commission’s February 28, 2009,
Staff Requirements Memorandum
(SRM)–COMGBJ–08–0001, ‘‘A
Commission Policy Statement on Safety
Culture,’’ (ML080560476) stated in part
that the staff should, as part of its public
stakeholder outreach, reach out to all
types of licensees and certificate
holders. In the development of the draft
policy statement, the NRC staff sought
insights and feedback from
stakeholders. This was accomplished by
providing information in a variety of
forums such as stakeholder organization
meetings, newsletters, and
teleconferences and by publishing
questions in Federal Register Notices
entitled ‘‘Safety Culture Policy
Statement: Public Meeting and Request
for Public Comments’’ (ML090260709)
that were related to the Commission’s
SRM. In addition, a significant
stakeholder outreach activity was
accomplished by a public workshop
held on February 3, 2009, at NRC
Headquarters in Rockville, Maryland.
The staff reviewed and considered the
stakeholder feedback derived from these
different forums and incorporated it into
the development of the draft policy
statement and recommendations.
(5) Safety and Security Culture
In SRM–COMGJB–08–0001, the
Commission also considered whether
publishing the NRC’s expectations for
safety and security culture is best
accomplished in one safety/security
culture statement or in two separate
statements, one each for safety and
security, while still considering the
safety and security interface.
Based on a variety of sources
including document reviews and
stakeholder feedback, the Commission
concluded there is no one definitive
view of this issue, but the results
weighed heavily toward a single policy
statement to be titled a ‘‘Safety Culture
Policy Statement.’’ Document reviews
and stakeholder feedback suggested that
a single policy statement (1) builds on
the fact that safety and security have the
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57527
same ultimate purpose of protecting
people and the environment from
unintended radiation exposure and (2)
encourages attention to the ways safety
and security interface. For these
reasons, the Commission determined
that the term ‘‘safety culture’’ should
include both safety and security.
Safety and security have been the
primary pillars of NRC’s regulatory
programs. However, in the current
heightened threat environment, there
has been a renewed focus on security,
and the staff has implemented a number
of efforts to enhance security and
strengthen the safety and security
interface. It is important to understand
that both safety and security share a
common purpose of protecting public
health and safety. In today’s
environment, safety and security
activities are closely intertwined, and it
is critical that consideration of these
activities be integrated so as to
complement each other and not
diminish or adversely impact either
safety or security. Further, it is
important for licensees and certificate
holders to provide personnel in the
safety and security sectors with an
appreciation for the importance of each,
emphasizing the need for integration
and balance to achieve optimized
protection. The importance of both
safety and security in an equal and
balanced manner within NRC’s
regulatory framework is clearly evident
in the Commission’s mission and
strategic goals.
While many safety and security
activities complement each other or are
synergistic, there remain areas where
potential conflicts may arise. It is then
imperative that mechanisms be
established to resolve these potential
conflicts to assure the adequate
protection of public health and safety
and promote the common defense and
security. Hence, safety and security
have implications for each other in
connection with all aspects of nuclear
activities.
One potential challenge is the way in
which individuals involved in safety
and security activities approach the goal
of risk mitigation and protection of
public health and safety. The safety staff
is typically focused on preventing errors
that would result in an inadvertent
accident while the security staff is
focused on preventing deliberate attacks
or diversion of certain materials that
could cause harm. Another challenge is
that the organization/facility must
ensure that the existence of motivated
and capable persons with ill intent is
recognized and that the importance of
nuclear security to prevent such persons
from unauthorized access is understood.
E:\FR\FM\06NON1.SGM
06NON1
57528
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 214 / Friday, November 6, 2009 / Notices
To manage these potential conflicts of
challenges, the Agency has recently
issued regulations on the safety/security
interface. An overarching safety culture
policy statement which encompasses
security supports and further enhances
those regulations.
Based on the above considerations,
the Commission concluded that a single
policy statement would accomplish its
goal that, as an overriding priority,
safety issues and security issues receive
the attention warranted by their
significance. Although, in some cases,
issues relating to security might be
handled differently than issues related
to safety. A single policy statement
recognizes there is one overarching
culture in an organization; however,
safety and security functions and goals
must be treated equally within that
overarching safety culture.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6
(6) Characteristics of a Positive Safety
Culture
Experience has shown that certain
organizational attributes and personnel
attitudes and behaviors are present in a
positive safety culture. Therefore, in
2006, when the NRC implemented an
enhanced reactor oversight process
(ROP) that more fully addressed safety
culture, it identified and incorporated
safety culture components that are
overarching characteristics of a positive
safety culture. The NRC based its
development of the safety culture
components on a review of a variety of
sources of information including the
Institute of Nuclear Power Operations;
the IAEA; the Nuclear Energy Agency;
the regulatory approaches of other
domestic and international
organizations; and the organizational
behavior, safety culture, and safety
climate research literature. The
Commission presented drafts of the
safety culture components and aspects
in frequent public meetings and
modified them in response to
stakeholder feedback.
For the purpose of this policy
statement, the NRC modified the ROP
safety culture components (termed
‘‘safety culture characteristics’’) to
explicitly address security in the safety
culture characteristics descriptions,
create a more generic description for
each safety culture characteristic that
would apply to the range of NRC
licensees and certificate holders, and
maintain all the safety culture concepts
in the safety culture components. The
staff presented the draft safety culture
characteristics for stakeholder comment
in a February 3, 2009, public workshop
and on the NRC’s public safety culture
Web site (https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:23 Nov 05, 2009
Jkt 220001
regulatory/enforcement/safetyculture.html).
Although the safety culture
characteristics themselves are
applicable to all licensees and certificate
holders, there may be other examples
that more specifically address the
unique characteristics of a licensee’s or
certificate holder’s environment (i.e.,
unique for medical and industrial
applications, operating reactors,
research and test reactors, fuel cycle
facilities, and new reactor construction
environments). Hence, the Commission
recognizes that these safety culture
characteristics are not all inclusive;
other characteristics and attitudes in
organizations and individuals may be
indicative of a positive safety culture.
However, the Commission expects its
licensees and certificate holders to
consider the extent to which these
characteristics and attitudes are present
in their organizations and among
individuals who are overseeing or
performing regulated activities and to
take steps, if necessary, to foster a
positive safety culture commensurate
with the safety and security significance
of activities and the nature and
complexity of the licensee’s or
certificate holder’s organization and
functions.
The following characteristics that are
indicative of a positive safety culture,
are relevant across the broad range of
activities carried out by the nuclear
industry, the Agreement States and the
NRC, and address the importance of
nuclear safety and security:
• Personnel demonstrate ownership
for nuclear safety and security in their
day-to-day work activities by, for
example, ensuring that their day-to-day
work activities and products meet
professional standards commensurate
with the potential impacts of their work
on safety and security. They proceed
with caution when making safety- or
security-related decisions and question
their assumptions, especially when
faced with uncertain or unexpected
conditions, to ensure that safety and
security are maintained.
• Processes for planning and
controlling work ensure that individual
contributors, supervisors, and work
groups communicate, coordinate, and
execute their work activities in a
manner that supports safety and
security. For example, individuals and
work groups communicate and
cooperate during work projects and
activities to ensure their actions do not
interact with those of others to
adversely affect safety or security. In
addition, managers and supervisors are
accessible to oversee work activities,
including those of contractors or
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
vendors, and they challenge work
activities and work products that do not
meet their standards.
• The organization maintains a safety
conscious work environment in which
personnel feel free to raise safety and
security concerns without fear of
retaliation. For example, claims of
harassment, intimidation, retaliation,
and discrimination are investigated
consistent with the regulations
regarding employee protection. If an
instance of harassment, intimidation,
retaliation, or discrimination for raising
a safety or security concern is identified,
corrective actions are taken in a timely
manner.
• The organization ensures that issues
potentially impacting safety or security
are promptly identified, fully evaluated,
and promptly addressed and corrected,
commensurate with their significance.
• The organization ensures that the
personnel, equipment, tools,
procedures, and other resources needed
to assure safety and security are
available. For example, training is
developed and implemented or accessed
to ensure personnel competence.
Procedures, work instructions, design
documentation, drawings, databases,
and other job aids and reference
materials are complete, accurate, and
up-to-date.
• The organization’s decisions ensure
that safety and security are maintained.
For example, production, cost, and
schedule goals are developed,
communicated, and implemented in a
manner which demonstrates that safety
and security are overriding priorities.
• Roles, responsibilities, and
authorities for safety and security are
clearly defined and reinforced. For
example, personnel understand their
roles and responsibilities in maintaining
safety and security. Programs, processes,
procedures, and organizational
interfaces are clearly defined and
implemented as designed. Leaders at all
levels of the organization consistently
demonstrate that safety and security are
overriding priorities.
• The organization maintains a
continuous learning environment in
which opportunities to improve safety
and security are sought out and
implemented. For example, individuals
are encouraged to develop and maintain
current their professional and technical
knowledge, skills, and abilities and to
remain knowledgeable of industry
standards and innovative practices.
Personnel seek out and implement
opportunities to improve safety and
security performance.
E:\FR\FM\06NON1.SGM
06NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 214 / Friday, November 6, 2009 / Notices
(7) Implementation of Policy
This policy statement describes areas
important to safety culture, but it does
not address how the nuclear industry,
the Agreement States, and the NRC
should establish and maintain a positive
safety culture in their organizations. The
nuclear industry, the Agreement States,
and the NRC differ in their size and
complexity, infrastructure, and
organizational frameworks. Therefore, a
single approach for establishing and
maintaining a positive safety culture is
not possible. Nevertheless, the
Commission expects that nuclear safety
and security issues receive the attention
warranted by their significance, and all
organizations consider and foster the
safety culture characteristics
(commensurate with the safety and
security significance of activities and
the nature and complexity of their
organization and functions) in carrying
out their day-to-day work activities and
decisions.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6
Questions for Which NRC Is Seeking
Input
(1) The draft policy statement
provides a description of areas
important to safety culture, (i.e., safety
culture characteristics). Are there any
characteristics relevant to a particular
type of licensee or certificate holder (if
so, please specify which type) that do
not appear to be addressed?
(2) Are there safety culture
characteristics as described in the draft
policy statement that you believe do not
contribute to safety culture and,
therefore, should not be included?
(3) Regarding the understanding of
what the Commission means by a
‘‘positive safety culture,’’ would it help
to include the safety culture
characteristics in the Statement of
Policy section in the policy statement?
(4) The draft policy statement
includes the following definition of
safety culture: ‘‘Safety culture is that
assembly of characteristics, attitudes,
and behaviors in organizations and
individuals which establishes that as an
overriding priority, nuclear safety and
security issues receive the attention
warranted by their significance.’’ Does
this definition need further clarification
to be useful?
(5) The draft policy statement states,
‘‘All licensees and certificate holders
should consider and foster the safety
culture characteristics (commensurate
with the safety and security significance
of activities and the nature and
complexity of their organization and
functions) in carrying out their day-today work activities and decisions.’’
Given the diversity among the licensees
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:23 Nov 05, 2009
Jkt 220001
and certificate holders regulated by the
NRC and the Agreement States, does
this statement need further clarification?
(6) How well does the draft safety
culture policy statement enhance
licensees’ and certificate holders’
understanding of the NRC’s
expectations that they maintain a safety
culture that includes issues related to
security?
(7) In addition to issuing a safety
culture policy statement, what might the
NRC consider doing, or doing
differently, to increase licensees’ and
certificate holders’ attention to safety
culture in the materials area?
(8) How can the NRC better involve
stakeholders to address safety culture,
including security, for all NRC and
Agreement State licensees and
certificate holders?
To ensure efficient consideration of
your comments, please identify the
specific question numbers with your
comments when applicable. When
commenting, please exercise caution
with regard to site-specific securityrelated information. Comments will be
made available to the public in their
entirety. Personal information such as
your name, address, telephone number,
and e-mail address will not be removed
from your submission.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day
of October 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Cynthia A. Carpenter,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E9–26816 Filed 11–5–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2009–0192; Docket No. 50–244;
Renewed License No. DPR–18]
In the Matter of EDF Development, Inc.;
Constellation Energy Nuclear Group,
LLC; R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant,
LLC (R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant);
Order Superseding Order of October 9,
2009, Approving Application
Regarding Proposed Corporate
Restructuring
I
R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC
(Ginna, LLC or the licensee) is the
holder of Renewed Facility Operating
License No. DPR–18 which authorizes
the possession, use, and operation of the
R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant (Ginna).
The facility is located at the licensee’s
site in Ontario, New York. The
operating license authorizes the licensee
to possess, use, and operate Ginna.
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57529
II
By letter dated January 22, 2009, as
supplemented on February 26, April 8,
June 25, July 27, October 15, October 19,
October 25 (two letters), October 26, and
October 28, 2009 (together, the
Application), Constellation Energy
Nuclear Group, LLC (CENG), on behalf
of the licensee and EDF Development,
Inc. (EDF Development) (together, the
applicants), requested that the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC, the
Commission), pursuant to Title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)
50.80, consent to the indirect license
transfers that would be effected by the
indirect transfer of control of CENG’s
ownership and operating interests in
Ginna. The actions being sought are a
result of certain proposed corporate
restructuring actions in connection with
a planned investment by EDF
Development whereby it would acquire
a 49.99% ownership interest in CENG
from Constellation Energy Group, Inc.
(CEG), the current 100% owner of
CENG. EDF Development is a U.S.
corporation organized under the laws of
the State of Delaware and a whollyowned subsidiary of E.D.F. International
S.A., a public limited company
organized under the laws of France,
which is in turn a wholly-owned
´
´
subsidiary of Electricite de France S.A.,
a French limited company.
Following the closing of the transfer
of ownership interests in CENG to EDF
Development, EDF Development will
hold a 49.99% ownership interest in
CENG; CEG will hold a 50.01%
ownership interest in CENG through
two new intermediate parent
companies, Constellation Nuclear, LLC
and CE Nuclear, LLC, formed for nonoperational purposes. In addition,
Constellation Nuclear Power Plants,
Inc., which is currently an intermediate
holding company between CENG and
Ginna, LLC and Nine Mile Point
Nuclear Station, LLC, will convert to a
Delaware limited liability company by
operation of law and become
Constellation Nuclear Power Plants,
LLC, and will exist as an intermediate
holding company between CENG and
Ginna, LLC, Nine Mile Point Nuclear
Station, LLC, and Calvert Cliffs Nuclear
Power Plant, LLC by merger. No
physical changes to the facilities or
operational changes are being proposed
in the application.
Approval of the transfer of the license
is requested by the applicants pursuant
to 10 CFR 50.80. Notice of the request
for approval and opportunity for a
hearing was published in the Federal
Register on May 6, 2009 (74 FR 21013).
No hearing requests or petitions to
E:\FR\FM\06NON1.SGM
06NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 214 (Friday, November 6, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57525-57529]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-26816]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2009-0485]
Draft Safety Culture Policy Statement: Request for Public
Comments
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
ACTION: Issuance of draft safety culture policy statement and notice of
opportunity for public comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Comments are requested 90 days from the date of this Federal
Register Notice. Comments received after this date will be considered
if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to assure
consideration only for comments received on or before this date. Please
refer to the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for additional
information including questions for which the NRC is requesting
comment.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following methods.
Please include Docket ID NRC-2009-0485 in the subject line of your
comments. Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be
posted on the NRC Web site and on the Federal rulemaking website
Regulations.gov. Because your comments will not be edited to remove any
identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against
including any information in your submission that you do not want to be
publicly disclosed.
The NRC requests that any party soliciting or aggregating comments
received from other persons for submission to the NRC inform those
persons that the NRC will not edit their comments to remove any
identifying or contact information, and therefore, they should not
include any information in their comments that they do not want
publicly disclosed.
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and
search for documents filed under Docket ID NRC-2009-0485. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher 301-492-3668; e-mail
Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
Mail comments to: Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rulemaking and
Directives Branch (RDB), Division of Administrative Services, Office of
Administration, Mail Stop: TWB-05-B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by fax to RDB at (301) 492-
3446.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alexander Sapountzis, Office of
Enforcement, Mail Stop O-4 A15A, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by e-mail to
Alexander.Sapountzis@nrc.gov.
SUMMARY: The NRC is issuing a draft policy statement that sets forth
the Commission's expectation that all licensees and certificate holders
\1\ establish and maintain a positive safety culture that protects
public health and safety and the common defense and security when
carrying out licensed activities. The Commission defines safety culture
as that assembly of characteristics, attitudes, and behaviors in
organizations and individuals which establishes that as an overriding
priority, nuclear safety and security issues \2\ receive the attention
warranted by their significance. The Commission also considers nuclear
safety and security issues to be equally important in a positive safety
culture. The importance of treating safety and security in an equal
manner within NRC's regulatory framework is clearly evident in our
mission and strategic goals. Experience has shown that certain
organizational characteristics and personnel attitudes and behaviors
are present in a positive safety culture. These include, but are not
limited to, individuals demonstrating ownership and personal
responsibility for maintaining safety and security in their day-to-day
work activities; the implementation of processes for planning and
controlling work activities such that safety and security are
maintained; a work environment in which personnel feel free to raise
safety and security concerns without fear of retaliation; prompt and
thorough identification, evaluation, and resolution of nuclear safety
and security issues commensurate with their significance; the
availability of the resources needed to ensure that safety and security
are maintained; decision-making processes that protect safety and
security; clearly defined roles and responsibilities for maintaining
safety and security; and the seeking out and implementation of
opportunities to improve safety and security. The NRC expects its
licensees and certificate holders to foster these characteristics,
attitudes, and behaviors in their organizations and among individuals
who are overseeing or performing regulated activities commensurate with
the safety and security significance of their activities and the nature
and complexity of their organization and functions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Throughout this document, the phrase ``licensee and
certificate holders'' includes licensees, certificate holders,
permit holders, authorization holders, holders of quality assurance
program approvals and applicants for a license, certificate, permit,
authorization, or quality assurance program approval.
\2\ Throughout this document, the terms ``safety'' or ``nuclear
safety,'' ``security'' or ``nuclear security,'' and ``safety
culture'' are used. These terms refer to matters that are related to
NRC-regulated activities, including radiation protection,
safeguards, material control and accounting, physical protection,
and emergency preparedness.
.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NRC is requesting comments on the draft safety culture policy
statement and associated questions.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
(1) Background
The Commission has long expressed its expectations for safety
culture in previous policy statements. In 1989, the Commission
published its ``Policy Statement on the Conduct of Nuclear Power Plant
Operations'' (54 FR 3424; January 24, 1989) to make clear the
Commission's expectations of utility management and licensed operators
with respect to the conduct of operations. The policy statement stated,
``the phrase safety culture refers to a very general matter, the
personal dedication and accountability of all individuals engaged in
any activity which has a bearing on the safety of nuclear power
plants.'' The policy statement further stated that the Commission
issued the policy statement to help foster the development and
maintenance of a safety culture at every facility licensed by the NRC.
[[Page 57526]]
In 1996, the Commission published a policy statement, ``Freedom of
Employees in the Nuclear Industry to Raise Safety Concerns Without Fear
of Retaliation'' (61 FR 24336; May 14, 1996), to set forth its
expectations that licensees and other employers subject to NRC
authority will establish and maintain safety-conscious environments in
which employees feel free to raise safety concerns, both to their
management and to the NRC, without fear of retaliation. This policy
statement applied to NRC-regulated activities of all licensees and
their contractors and subcontractors. A safety conscious work
environment is an important attribute of safety culture and is one of
the safety culture characteristics in the draft safety culture policy
statement.
The importance of a positive safety culture for activities
involving civilian uses of radioactive materials and other potential
hazards has been demonstrated by a number of significant, high-
visibility events world-wide that have occurred in the 20-year period
since the Commission published its 1989 policy statement addressing
safety culture in nuclear power plants. The events occurred across
multiple industries including at nuclear power plants, fuel cycle
facilities, and in other industries such as chemical processing plants
and aerospace. Examples of nuclear industry events include those that
occurred at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station and the Peach Bottom
Atomic Power Station. Workers at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station
discovered a cavity in the reactor pressure vessel head caused by boric
acid corrosion. The corrosion developed over a period of several years
but was not discovered before the cavity developed. The licensee's
analysis of the event identified weaknesses in the station's safety
culture as the root cause of the event. It particularly noted that
management prioritized ``production over safety.'' At the Peach Bottom
Atomic Power Station, personnel behaviors adverse to the security of
the plant were identified, specifically, inattentiveness by security
officers.
Other licensees have had recurring problems resulting in violations
of NRC regulations. Through a Commission confirmatory order, a fuel
cycle facility licensee committed to having a third-party assessment of
its safety culture to determine the causes of its continuing problems
in order to establish appropriate corrective actions. The third-party
assessment identified weaknesses in areas important to safety culture.
In addition, weaknesses in the safety culture of licensees and
certificate holders have contributed to unscheduled events or incidents
that the Commission has determined to be significant from the
standpoint of public health and safety. Examples linked to
characteristics and attitudes in organizations and individuals
associated with weak safety cultures include inadequate procedures;
procedures not being followed; inadequate supervision; decision-making
that does not ensure that safety and security are maintained; and
ineffective problem identification, evaluation, and resolution. They
have included medical misadministrations (such as giving iodine-131 to
lactating females that resulted in the uptake by their infants and
multiple events associated with prostate brachytherapy treatment) and
overexposures arising from the loss of control of radiography or well
logging sources.
(2) Statement of Policy
It is the Commission's policy that a strong safety culture is an
essential element for individuals, both internal to the NRC and
external, performing or overseeing regulated activities. As such, the
NRC will include appropriate means to monitor safety culture in its
oversight programs and internal management processes. The NRC defines
safety culture as that assembly of characteristics, attitudes, and
behaviors in organizations and individuals, which establishes that as
an overriding priority, nuclear safety and security issues receive the
attention warranted by their significance. Further, it is important for
all organizations to provide personnel in the safety and security
sectors with an appreciation for the importance of each, emphasizing
the need for integration and balance to achieve optimized protection.
Safety and security activities are closely intertwined, and it is
critical that consideration of these activities be integrated so as not
to diminish or adversely affect either safety or security. A safety
culture that accomplishes this would include all nuclear safety and
security issues associated with NRC-regulated activities including
radiation protection, safeguards, material control and accounting,
physical protection, and emergency preparedness issues among the issues
that receive attention as a matter of priority.
The Commission's regulations are designed to protect both the
public and workers against radiation hazards from the use of
radioactive materials. The Commission's scope of responsibility
includes regulation of commercial nuclear power plants; research, test,
and training reactors; nuclear fuel cycle facilities; medical,
academic, and industrial uses of radioactive materials; and the
transport, storage, and disposal of radioactive materials and wastes.
The Commission carries out these responsibilities in numerous ways
including through such regulatory activities as inspecting licensed and
certified facilities and activities; collecting, analyzing, and
disseminating information about operational safety and security;
investigating nuclear incidents; and developing policy and providing
direction on safety and security issues.
The Commission believes that, because licensees and certificate
holders use or provide services related to the use of radioactive
material, they bear the primary responsibility for safely handling and
securing these materials. It is, therefore, each licensee's and
certificate holder's responsibility to develop and maintain a positive
safety culture which establishes that nuclear safety issues and nuclear
security issues, as an overriding priority, receive the attention
warranted by their significance. Therefore, licensees and certificate
holders should foster a positive safety culture in their organizations
and among individuals who are overseeing or performing regulated
activities. However, as the regulatory agency, the Commission has an
independent oversight role (through inspection and assessment
processes) including addressing licensees' and certificate holders'
performance related to areas important to safety culture.
(3) Safety Culture Concept
In 1991, as a result of the 1986 Chernobyl accident, the
International Nuclear Safety Group (INSAG) emphasized the concept of
safety culture for the nuclear industry in its report, INSAG-4,
``Safety Culture.'' INSAG is an advisory group to the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The INSAG-4 definition of safety culture
is, ``that assembly of characteristics and attitudes in organizations
and individuals which establishes that, as an overriding priority,
nuclear plant safety issues receive the attention warranted by their
significance.''
Implied in the INSAG definition of safety culture is the
recognition that every organization is continually faced with resolving
conflicts among its goals for cost, schedule, and quality (or safety).
The organization's members (groups and individuals) also face conflicts
among different goals in performing their jobs. Management establishes
the framework (management systems, programs, processes) and
communicates its priorities for resolving
[[Page 57527]]
conflicts among different goals. Members of the organization work
within that framework and are influenced by management's priorities,
but they have their own beliefs and attitudes about what is important
and make individual choices on how to proceed when faced with multiple
competing goals. The INSAG definition emphasizes that in a positive
safety culture, the goal of maintaining nuclear safety receives the
highest priority in the organization's and individuals' decision-making
and actions when faced with a conflict with other organizational or
individual goals.
The Commission modified the INSAG definition of safety culture
which refers to ``nuclear plant safety.'' The Commission is strongly
committed to promoting positive safety cultures among its nuclear
reactor licensees; however, the Commission regulates many other
organizations and processes involving civilian uses of radioactive
materials. These regulated activities include industrial radiography
services; hospitals, clinics and individual practitioners involved in
medical uses of radioactive materials; research and test reactors;
large-scale fuel fabrication facilities; as well as nuclear power
plants. The Commission also regulates the construction of new
facilities where operations will involve radioactive materials with the
potential to affect public health and safety and the common defense and
security. Therefore, by revising the INSAG definition of safety culture
to replace ``nuclear plant safety'' with ``nuclear safety,'' the
Commission is emphasizing that it expects all of its licensees and
certificate holders to place the highest priority on nuclear safety
commensurate with the risks inherent in the regulated activities.
The Commission also modified the INSAG definition to adequately
capture or communicate the equal importance of nuclear security and
nuclear safety in a positive safety culture. Following the terrorist
attacks of September 11, 2001, the Commission increased its attention
to the important role of security in regulated facilities whose
operations can have an impact on public health and safety. The
Commission issued orders enhancing security at its NRC-regulated
facilities to further ensure public health and safety and the common
defense and security. One of the insights gained from the greater
emphasis on security is the importance of incorporating security
considerations into a safety culture and effectively managing the
safety and security interface. In general, the safety and security
interface refers to the organizational and individual awareness that
the functions and goals of safety and security must be considered
together so that actions to achieve either set of functions and goals
do not inadvertently compromise the other. Therefore, to emphasize the
equal importance of nuclear security and nuclear safety in a positive
safety culture, the Commission has added ``nuclear security'' to the
safety culture definition. The NRC's modified INSAG definition is
provided in the Statement of Policy section above.
(4) Stakeholder Outreach
The Commission's February 28, 2009, Staff Requirements Memorandum
(SRM)-COMGBJ-08-0001, ``A Commission Policy Statement on Safety
Culture,'' (ML080560476) stated in part that the staff should, as part
of its public stakeholder outreach, reach out to all types of licensees
and certificate holders. In the development of the draft policy
statement, the NRC staff sought insights and feedback from
stakeholders. This was accomplished by providing information in a
variety of forums such as stakeholder organization meetings,
newsletters, and teleconferences and by publishing questions in Federal
Register Notices entitled ``Safety Culture Policy Statement: Public
Meeting and Request for Public Comments'' (ML090260709) that were
related to the Commission's SRM. In addition, a significant stakeholder
outreach activity was accomplished by a public workshop held on
February 3, 2009, at NRC Headquarters in Rockville, Maryland. The staff
reviewed and considered the stakeholder feedback derived from these
different forums and incorporated it into the development of the draft
policy statement and recommendations.
(5) Safety and Security Culture
In SRM-COMGJB-08-0001, the Commission also considered whether
publishing the NRC's expectations for safety and security culture is
best accomplished in one safety/security culture statement or in two
separate statements, one each for safety and security, while still
considering the safety and security interface.
Based on a variety of sources including document reviews and
stakeholder feedback, the Commission concluded there is no one
definitive view of this issue, but the results weighed heavily toward a
single policy statement to be titled a ``Safety Culture Policy
Statement.'' Document reviews and stakeholder feedback suggested that a
single policy statement (1) builds on the fact that safety and security
have the same ultimate purpose of protecting people and the environment
from unintended radiation exposure and (2) encourages attention to the
ways safety and security interface. For these reasons, the Commission
determined that the term ``safety culture'' should include both safety
and security.
Safety and security have been the primary pillars of NRC's
regulatory programs. However, in the current heightened threat
environment, there has been a renewed focus on security, and the staff
has implemented a number of efforts to enhance security and strengthen
the safety and security interface. It is important to understand that
both safety and security share a common purpose of protecting public
health and safety. In today's environment, safety and security
activities are closely intertwined, and it is critical that
consideration of these activities be integrated so as to complement
each other and not diminish or adversely impact either safety or
security. Further, it is important for licensees and certificate
holders to provide personnel in the safety and security sectors with an
appreciation for the importance of each, emphasizing the need for
integration and balance to achieve optimized protection. The importance
of both safety and security in an equal and balanced manner within
NRC's regulatory framework is clearly evident in the Commission's
mission and strategic goals.
While many safety and security activities complement each other or
are synergistic, there remain areas where potential conflicts may
arise. It is then imperative that mechanisms be established to resolve
these potential conflicts to assure the adequate protection of public
health and safety and promote the common defense and security. Hence,
safety and security have implications for each other in connection with
all aspects of nuclear activities.
One potential challenge is the way in which individuals involved in
safety and security activities approach the goal of risk mitigation and
protection of public health and safety. The safety staff is typically
focused on preventing errors that would result in an inadvertent
accident while the security staff is focused on preventing deliberate
attacks or diversion of certain materials that could cause harm.
Another challenge is that the organization/facility must ensure that
the existence of motivated and capable persons with ill intent is
recognized and that the importance of nuclear security to prevent such
persons from unauthorized access is understood.
[[Page 57528]]
To manage these potential conflicts of challenges, the Agency has
recently issued regulations on the safety/security interface. An
overarching safety culture policy statement which encompasses security
supports and further enhances those regulations.
Based on the above considerations, the Commission concluded that a
single policy statement would accomplish its goal that, as an
overriding priority, safety issues and security issues receive the
attention warranted by their significance. Although, in some cases,
issues relating to security might be handled differently than issues
related to safety. A single policy statement recognizes there is one
overarching culture in an organization; however, safety and security
functions and goals must be treated equally within that overarching
safety culture.
(6) Characteristics of a Positive Safety Culture
Experience has shown that certain organizational attributes and
personnel attitudes and behaviors are present in a positive safety
culture. Therefore, in 2006, when the NRC implemented an enhanced
reactor oversight process (ROP) that more fully addressed safety
culture, it identified and incorporated safety culture components that
are overarching characteristics of a positive safety culture. The NRC
based its development of the safety culture components on a review of a
variety of sources of information including the Institute of Nuclear
Power Operations; the IAEA; the Nuclear Energy Agency; the regulatory
approaches of other domestic and international organizations; and the
organizational behavior, safety culture, and safety climate research
literature. The Commission presented drafts of the safety culture
components and aspects in frequent public meetings and modified them in
response to stakeholder feedback.
For the purpose of this policy statement, the NRC modified the ROP
safety culture components (termed ``safety culture characteristics'')
to explicitly address security in the safety culture characteristics
descriptions, create a more generic description for each safety culture
characteristic that would apply to the range of NRC licensees and
certificate holders, and maintain all the safety culture concepts in
the safety culture components. The staff presented the draft safety
culture characteristics for stakeholder comment in a February 3, 2009,
public workshop and on the NRC's public safety culture Web site (https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/enforcement/safety-culture.html).
Although the safety culture characteristics themselves are
applicable to all licensees and certificate holders, there may be other
examples that more specifically address the unique characteristics of a
licensee's or certificate holder's environment (i.e., unique for
medical and industrial applications, operating reactors, research and
test reactors, fuel cycle facilities, and new reactor construction
environments). Hence, the Commission recognizes that these safety
culture characteristics are not all inclusive; other characteristics
and attitudes in organizations and individuals may be indicative of a
positive safety culture. However, the Commission expects its licensees
and certificate holders to consider the extent to which these
characteristics and attitudes are present in their organizations and
among individuals who are overseeing or performing regulated activities
and to take steps, if necessary, to foster a positive safety culture
commensurate with the safety and security significance of activities
and the nature and complexity of the licensee's or certificate holder's
organization and functions.
The following characteristics that are indicative of a positive
safety culture, are relevant across the broad range of activities
carried out by the nuclear industry, the Agreement States and the NRC,
and address the importance of nuclear safety and security:
Personnel demonstrate ownership for nuclear safety and
security in their day-to-day work activities by, for example, ensuring
that their day-to-day work activities and products meet professional
standards commensurate with the potential impacts of their work on
safety and security. They proceed with caution when making safety- or
security-related decisions and question their assumptions, especially
when faced with uncertain or unexpected conditions, to ensure that
safety and security are maintained.
Processes for planning and controlling work ensure that
individual contributors, supervisors, and work groups communicate,
coordinate, and execute their work activities in a manner that supports
safety and security. For example, individuals and work groups
communicate and cooperate during work projects and activities to ensure
their actions do not interact with those of others to adversely affect
safety or security. In addition, managers and supervisors are
accessible to oversee work activities, including those of contractors
or vendors, and they challenge work activities and work products that
do not meet their standards.
The organization maintains a safety conscious work
environment in which personnel feel free to raise safety and security
concerns without fear of retaliation. For example, claims of
harassment, intimidation, retaliation, and discrimination are
investigated consistent with the regulations regarding employee
protection. If an instance of harassment, intimidation, retaliation, or
discrimination for raising a safety or security concern is identified,
corrective actions are taken in a timely manner.
The organization ensures that issues potentially impacting
safety or security are promptly identified, fully evaluated, and
promptly addressed and corrected, commensurate with their significance.
The organization ensures that the personnel, equipment,
tools, procedures, and other resources needed to assure safety and
security are available. For example, training is developed and
implemented or accessed to ensure personnel competence. Procedures,
work instructions, design documentation, drawings, databases, and other
job aids and reference materials are complete, accurate, and up-to-
date.
The organization's decisions ensure that safety and
security are maintained. For example, production, cost, and schedule
goals are developed, communicated, and implemented in a manner which
demonstrates that safety and security are overriding priorities.
Roles, responsibilities, and authorities for safety and
security are clearly defined and reinforced. For example, personnel
understand their roles and responsibilities in maintaining safety and
security. Programs, processes, procedures, and organizational
interfaces are clearly defined and implemented as designed. Leaders at
all levels of the organization consistently demonstrate that safety and
security are overriding priorities.
The organization maintains a continuous learning
environment in which opportunities to improve safety and security are
sought out and implemented. For example, individuals are encouraged to
develop and maintain current their professional and technical
knowledge, skills, and abilities and to remain knowledgeable of
industry standards and innovative practices. Personnel seek out and
implement opportunities to improve safety and security performance.
[[Page 57529]]
(7) Implementation of Policy
This policy statement describes areas important to safety culture,
but it does not address how the nuclear industry, the Agreement States,
and the NRC should establish and maintain a positive safety culture in
their organizations. The nuclear industry, the Agreement States, and
the NRC differ in their size and complexity, infrastructure, and
organizational frameworks. Therefore, a single approach for
establishing and maintaining a positive safety culture is not possible.
Nevertheless, the Commission expects that nuclear safety and security
issues receive the attention warranted by their significance, and all
organizations consider and foster the safety culture characteristics
(commensurate with the safety and security significance of activities
and the nature and complexity of their organization and functions) in
carrying out their day-to-day work activities and decisions.
Questions for Which NRC Is Seeking Input
(1) The draft policy statement provides a description of areas
important to safety culture, (i.e., safety culture characteristics).
Are there any characteristics relevant to a particular type of licensee
or certificate holder (if so, please specify which type) that do not
appear to be addressed?
(2) Are there safety culture characteristics as described in the
draft policy statement that you believe do not contribute to safety
culture and, therefore, should not be included?
(3) Regarding the understanding of what the Commission means by a
``positive safety culture,'' would it help to include the safety
culture characteristics in the Statement of Policy section in the
policy statement?
(4) The draft policy statement includes the following definition of
safety culture: ``Safety culture is that assembly of characteristics,
attitudes, and behaviors in organizations and individuals which
establishes that as an overriding priority, nuclear safety and security
issues receive the attention warranted by their significance.'' Does
this definition need further clarification to be useful?
(5) The draft policy statement states, ``All licensees and
certificate holders should consider and foster the safety culture
characteristics (commensurate with the safety and security significance
of activities and the nature and complexity of their organization and
functions) in carrying out their day-to-day work activities and
decisions.'' Given the diversity among the licensees and certificate
holders regulated by the NRC and the Agreement States, does this
statement need further clarification?
(6) How well does the draft safety culture policy statement enhance
licensees' and certificate holders' understanding of the NRC's
expectations that they maintain a safety culture that includes issues
related to security?
(7) In addition to issuing a safety culture policy statement, what
might the NRC consider doing, or doing differently, to increase
licensees' and certificate holders' attention to safety culture in the
materials area?
(8) How can the NRC better involve stakeholders to address safety
culture, including security, for all NRC and Agreement State licensees
and certificate holders?
To ensure efficient consideration of your comments, please identify
the specific question numbers with your comments when applicable. When
commenting, please exercise caution with regard to site-specific
security-related information. Comments will be made available to the
public in their entirety. Personal information such as your name,
address, telephone number, and e-mail address will not be removed from
your submission.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day of October 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Cynthia A. Carpenter,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E9-26816 Filed 11-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P