ANS 3.4 Re-Write Committee

Status Update

Barb Stevens, RN, BSN, MHA Exelon

Director, Occupational Health Regulatory Medical Services

Our Mission

Update the ANS 3.4 to reflect the current medical clinical knowledge

that may impact the ability for licensed nuclear plant operators to safely operate the nuclear power

plants.

Our Committee

Company Representatives

Exelon Barbara Stevens (Chair); RN, BSN, MHA William (Bob) Pilkey; PA-C

FP & L Laurie Kubec; RN, Point Beach NP

NPPD Michael Zaruba; MD, Cooper Nuclear Station

Scientech George Rombold (Vice-Chair); BS – ENGR., Project Director

SCE Jennifer Shaver; RN, San Onofre

USNRC Samuel Hansell; Operations Branch Chief, Region I Hironori Peterson; Operations Branch Chief, Region III Carole Revelle; Operator Licensing Assistant, Headquarters

Xcel Thomas Jetzer; MD MPH; Monticello & Prairie Island Julianne Peterson; RN, BSN, Prairie Island

US DOE Michael Ardaiz; MD, MDH, CPH; Chief Medical Officer

Our Committee

• Utility members represent from 22 sites • NRC support from two regions and

headquarters • Hundreds of years of experience

– 3 Physicians – 1 Physician Assistant – 4 Degreed Nurses – 3 Engineers

Philosophy

Why not implement the 1996 Standard?

Only 10% of Industry implemented 1996 Standard • Major Reason - Stamina Testing

• Expensive

• Poor indicator of Cardiac Risk

What is wrong with the 1983 Standard

• Does not reflect current medical practices • Significant medical advances in past 30 years • Medical issues addressed via NRC feedback document

as they arise • Significant Confusion regarding requirements

• 48 violations since 2005

How the new Standard Solves these issues

1. Provide clarification and more comprehensive medical guidance. For each area we define;

– Minimum Requirements – Disqualifying Conditions – Exam Methods – Monitoring Methods

How the new Standard Solves these issues

2. Provide additional definitions to eliminate confusion including:

• Administrative Controls, • Administrative Hold, • Administrative Conditional

Restriction, • Conditional license, • Examining Physician, • Facility licensee, • Licensed Duties,

• Marker Gas, • No Solo Operations, • Operator, • Licensed Reactor operator, • Licensed Senior Operator, • Permanent Medical Condition, • Sudden Incapacitation, and • Temporary Medical Condition.

How the new Standard Solves these issues

3. Reduce unnecessary reporting of medical conditions For example,

The 1983 and 1996 standards cancer requirements are too broad and require licensees to report all cancers to the NRC.

The revised standard includes an ANNEX to provide the examining physician guidance when determining operator fitness and when to notify the NRC.

How the new Standard Solves these issues

4. Incorporation of Operating Experience, DOT, FAA and medical progression to improve clarity

For example, Tactile testing was unclear and testing was administered with considerable variability among facilities. In the new standard, tactile deficit testing is addressed by standard neurological or orthopedic testing.

How the new Standard Solves these issues

5. Incorporation of example standard forms

• Facility Operator’s Report

• Health History Questionnaire

• Licensed Operator Medical Examination

• Licensed Operator Checklist

• OHS final certification of medical examination

Industry Implementation Support

Stakeholder Analysis Developed Major Stakeholders:

• Station Leadership • LOFG • Nursing and Medical

Staffs • Operator Training Org. • Licensed Operators

• Utility Licensing • NRC • NEI • INPO • PROS

Industry Implementation Support

Support Documents Scheduled for Development

• Transition guide which outlines the win-win of going to the new standard

• Medical program transition guide which provides the procedures & training for the new standard

• Operator training module to explain the new standard

• Provide communication talking points to communicate to public

New Standard Schedule

• Draft submitted to ANS 21 Subcommittee • Comments due back 6/1/2012 • No significant comments to date

• After Subcommittee comment resolved – standard is submitted for concurrent review by: • Nuclear Facility Standards Committee • ANSI • Public Comment

Feedback for the Committee

Are there other areas that are not currently addressed that we should consider?

What are the barriers to you adopting a revised standard?

What else do we need to consider?

Thank You for your Feedback