What This Bill Does
This bill requires the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's inspector general to create and distribute a survey to NRC employees within 60 days of the bill becoming law. The survey asks employees for their ideas on how to make the NRC's work more efficient and how to speed up the process of approving new nuclear reactor designs. The inspector general must then report the survey results to Congress within 60 days of distributing the survey.
##
Who It Affects
- NRC employees who receive the survey
- The NRC inspector general who creates and distributes the survey
- Congress (who receives the results)
- Nuclear industry stakeholders (if they request to participate in a separate survey)
- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission as an agency
##
Key Provisions
- The inspector general must draft and distribute an optional and anonymous employee survey no later than 60 days after the bill becomes law (Sec. 2(c)(1))
- The survey must ask about ways to improve NRC licensing procedures, including questions about unnecessary regulations, outdated terms and definitions, staffing and hiring, use of artificial intelligence, and lessons from other countries (Sec. 2(c)(3))
- The inspector general must submit a report to Congress no later than 60 days after distributing the survey that includes a summary of responses and a document containing each individual response to every survey question (Sec. 2(c)(2))
- The survey must include a statement at the top assuring employees there will be no consequences for answering the survey (Sec. 2(c)(4))
- The inspector general may distribute a similar survey to nuclear industry stakeholders if it is feasible, only upon their request, and with the option to respond anonymously (Sec. 2(d))
##
What Changes
If this bill becomes law, the NRC must conduct a structured survey of its employees asking specific questions about improving efficiency and licensing procedures. Congress will receive detailed results of this survey. Additionally, the costs of creating and distributing these surveys are excluded from normal cost-recovery fees that the NRC charges.
##
Important Definitions
- **Commission**: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Sec. 2(f)(2))
- **Covered employee**: Any applicable employee of the Commission (Sec. 2(f)(3))
- **Inspector general**: The inspector general of the Commission (Sec. 2(f)(4))
- **Appropriate congressional committees**: The House Committee on Energy and Commerce, House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (Sec. 2(f)(1))
##
Effective Date
Not specified in bill text
I
118TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION H. R. 1006
To require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to distribute an optional
and anonymous survey to certain Commission employees to ultimately
find solutions to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Commis-
sion, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
FEBRUARY 14, 2023
Mr. DONALDS (for himself, Mr. FLEISCHMANN, Ms. MACE, and Mr. NEHLS)
introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on En-
ergy and Commerce
A BILL
To require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to distribute
an optional and anonymous survey to certain Commission
employees to ultimately find solutions to improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of the Commission, and for
other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
1
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
3
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Nuclear Regulatory
4
Commission Survey Act’’ or the ‘‘NRC Survey Act’’.
5
SEC. 2. NRC SURVEY.
6
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following:
7
VerDate Sep 11 2014
05:58 Mar 07, 2023
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1006.IH
H1006
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2
•HR 1006 IH
(1) The Commission is an independent agency
1
created by Congress in 1974 to ensure the safe use
2
of radioactive materials and nuclear power for bene-
3
ficial civilian purposes while protecting people and
4
the environment.
5
(2) The mission of the Commission is to regu-
6
late the national civilian use of nuclear byproducts,
7
nuclear sources, and special nuclear materials to en-
8
sure adequate protection of public health and safety,
9
to promote the common defense and security, and to
10
protect the environment.
11
(3) Before commercial nuclear technology can
12
be deployed in the United States, it must be ap-
13
proved by the Commission.
14
(4) Historically, the Commission has been a
15
thorough, methodical, and conservative agency and
16
is considered to be the gold standard in the world
17
with respect to regulating nuclear power.
18
(5) The Commission is a technically competent
19
agency that seeks strategies to successfully mod-
20
ernize its approach to license the next generation of
21
nuclear reactors.
22
(6) Current licensing procedures through the
23
Commission are very prescriptive and based pri-
24
marily on conventional pressurized water reactor de-
25
VerDate Sep 11 2014
05:58 Mar 07, 2023
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1006.IH
H1006
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3
•HR 1006 IH
signs that have the potential to restrict nuclear inno-
1
vation.
2
(7) The existing design, licensing, and delivery
3
processes for new reactor projects are extremely ex-
4
pensive and have lengthy timelines compared to such
5
design, licensing, and delivery processes in other
6
countries.
7
(8) The Commission reports directly to Con-
8
gress each year and is an independent agency that
9
is not a part of the executive branch.
10
(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con-
11
gress that Congress—
12
(1) recognizes the need for the Commission to
13
maintain public trust by keeping the nuclear indus-
14
try safe while also recognizing the need for increased
15
efficiency to license nuclear reactors in the United
16
States;
17
(2) understands that asking for continued
18
transparency from the Commission relating to the
19
development and licensing of nuclear reactors is im-
20
portant for Congress and the American public;
21
(3) stresses the need for the Commission to
22
modernize its regulatory regime to facilitate efficient
23
licensing of innovative next-generation nuclear tech-
24
nology; and
25
VerDate Sep 11 2014
05:58 Mar 07, 2023
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1006.IH
H1006
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
4
•HR 1006 IH
(4) believes that unnecessarily long licensing re-
1
views raise significant barriers to investment, reduce
2
customer interest in advanced reactors, and threaten
3
the long-term deployment potential of nuclear reac-
4
tors for the next generation.
5
(c) NRC EMPLOYEE SURVEY.—
6
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 60 days after
7
the date of enactment of this Act, the inspector gen-
8
eral shall draft and distribute an optional and anon-
9
ymous survey, in accordance with paragraphs (3)
10
and (4), to covered employees.
11
(2) REPORT.—Not later than 60 days after the
12
date of distributing the survey to covered employees
13
pursuant to paragraph (1), the inspector general
14
shall submit to the appropriate congressional com-
15
mittees a report containing—
16
(A) an unbiased cumulative summary of
17
the responses to each question of such survey;
18
(B) a document that contains every indi-
19
vidual response to each question of such survey;
20
and
21
(C) any other information the inspector
22
general determines necessary or appropriate.
23
VerDate Sep 11 2014
05:58 Mar 07, 2023
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1006.IH
H1006
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
5
•HR 1006 IH
(3) CONTENTS OF SURVEY.—The survey draft-
1
ed and distributed under paragraph (1) shall inquire
2
about the following:
3
(A) Any enhancements that can be made
4
to existing licensing frameworks utilized by the
5
Commission to increase the efficiency, timeli-
6
ness, and predictability of engagements between
7
the Commission and licensees.
8
(B) How the Commission could improve
9
the process of preparing for and learning about
10
the technical details of each proposed nuclear
11
reactor in a licensing application.
12
(C) How the Commission could improve
13
outreach to stakeholders, including any rec-
14
ommendations with respect to changing the ex-
15
isting policies of the Commission relating to
16
public engagement.
17
(D) Whether the Commission implemented
18
a risk-informed and performance-based ap-
19
proach to reviewing licensing applications and,
20
if implemented, how the Commission has imple-
21
mented such approach to reviewing licensing
22
applications.
23
(E) Examples of laws or regulations relat-
24
ing to nuclear energy that—
25
VerDate Sep 11 2014
05:58 Mar 07, 2023
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1006.IH
H1006
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
6
•HR 1006 IH
(i) may be unnecessary, irrelevant, or
1
duplicative;
2
(ii) need to be revised for modern ad-
3
vanced reactors; and
4
(iii) negatively affects the effectiveness
5
and efficiency of the Commission.
6
(F) How the Commission could maximize
7
the efficiency of licensing reactors that are
8
similar to reactors that are already licensed by
9
the Commission.
10
(G) How efficient the Commission would
11
be in reviewing licensing applications if the
12
Commission reviewed licensing applications
13
through a holistic approach instead of a chap-
14
ter-by-chapter approach.
15
(H) How providing clear expectations and
16
targets for achievable review milestones for po-
17
tential applicants would affect the process of re-
18
viewing and approving licensing applications.
19
(I) Suggestions for Congress to revise or
20
clarify any terms and definitions relating to nu-
21
clear energy that—
22
(i) are used within the scope of em-
23
ployment for covered employees;
24
(ii) may be outdated;
25
VerDate Sep 11 2014
05:58 Mar 07, 2023
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1006.IH
H1006
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
7
•HR 1006 IH
(iii) have inconsistencies in term
1
usage or definitions across different laws
2
and regulations; or
3
(iv) with respect to terms and defini-
4
tions relating to nuclear energy in laws
5
and regulations, used within the scope of
6
employment for covered employees.
7
(J) Any term, and the corresponding defi-
8
nition, relating to nuclear energy and nuclear
9
waste matters in laws and regulations, that are
10
used within the scope of employment for cov-
11
ered employees, that—
12
(i) may be outdated and in need of re-
13
vision;
14
(ii) have—
15
(I) inconsistencies in the defini-
16
tion of such term across different laws
17
and regulations; or
18
(II) inconsistencies in the defini-
19
tion of such term across different
20
agencies; and
21
(iii) may affect potential innovation in
22
the nuclear industry due to the inconsist-
23
encies described in clause (ii) in the defini-
24
tion of such term.
25
VerDate Sep 11 2014
05:58 Mar 07, 2023
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1006.IH
H1006
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
8
•HR 1006 IH
(K) Suggestions to Congress to clarify any
1
inconsistencies
described
in
paragraph
2
(3)(J)(ii).
3
(L) Whether covered employees feel a
4
sense of urgency when reviewing a licensing ap-
5
plication.
6
(M) Whether covered employees believe
7
that the lack of efficient licensing is hampering
8
nuclear innovation and dissuading American
9
companies from getting involved in the nuclear
10
industry.
11
(N) Whether covered employees believe
12
that the Commission is capable of approving
13
potentially hundreds of new licensing applica-
14
tions, including licensing applications for fission
15
reactors and fusion reactors, in a timely man-
16
ner over the course of the upcoming decades.
17
(O) Suggestions to redefine the overall
18
mission statement and mandate of the Commis-
19
sion so that such mission statement and man-
20
date reflects the goals of maintaining safety
21
and promoting nuclear innovation.
22
(P) Challenges a covered employee faces on
23
a daily basis within the scope of employment of
24
VerDate Sep 11 2014
05:58 Mar 07, 2023
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1006.IH
H1006
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
9
•HR 1006 IH
such covered employee and how Congress could
1
alleviate such challenges.
2
(Q) How the current funding structure of
3
the Commission affects the ability of the Com-
4
mission to—
5
(i) engage in rulemaking or licensing
6
review;
7
(ii) educate covered employees; and
8
(iii) conduct research to support risk-
9
informed and performance-based regula-
10
tions.
11
(R) How the current funding structure of
12
the Commission may inhibit private companies
13
from—
14
(i) rapidly acquiring licenses for new
15
nuclear reactors; and
16
(ii) suggesting improvements to the
17
Commission, if any, to such funding struc-
18
ture.
19
(S) Any obstacles imposed by the Commis-
20
sion that—
21
(i) negatively affect American nuclear
22
competitiveness; and
23
(ii) should be removed.
24
VerDate Sep 11 2014
05:58 Mar 07, 2023
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1006.IH
H1006
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
10
•HR 1006 IH
(T) How the Commission could improve
1
the resolution of disagreements between appli-
2
cants and covered employees.
3
(U) Recommendations on improving com-
4
munication between the Commission and appli-
5
cants with respect to providing an early and
6
predictable timeline and estimated costs of the
7
licensing
application
process,
including
8
preapplication review and application review.
9
(V) Whether the Advisory Committee on
10
Reactor Safeguards (established under section
11
29 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42
12
U.S.C. 2039)) is effectively and efficiently re-
13
viewing safety studies and licensing applica-
14
tions, or whether the role of the Advisory Com-
15
mittee on Reactor Safeguards—
16
(i) is unnecessary and redundant with
17
the existing review process by the Commis-
18
sion; and
19
(ii) ultimately impedes nuclear innova-
20
tion.
21
(W) How the Commission is using artifi-
22
cial intelligence, whether the functions of the
23
Commission could be improved if the Commis-
24
sion adopted an AI-friendly culture, and what
25
VerDate Sep 11 2014
05:58 Mar 07, 2023
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1006.IH
H1006
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
11
•HR 1006 IH
organizational challenges the Commission would
1
face in adopting and using a broader range of
2
artificial intelligence.
3
(X) How digitizing old data and informa-
4
tion may improve the overall efficiency of the
5
Commission, the steps taken to digitize such
6
data and information, and any challenges the
7
Commission is facing or will face in digitizing
8
such data and information.
9
(Y) Challenges the Commission faces with
10
relying on data from safety and performance
11
data simulations of proposed nuclear reactors
12
during the application review.
13
(Z) How effective the Commission is at
14
communicating to applicants, potential appli-
15
cants, and nuclear stakeholders about changes
16
made to the regulatory process.
17
(AA) Whether any new requirements or
18
processes implemented following the nuclear ac-
19
cident in Fukushima may have inadvertently
20
changed the culture and safety precautions of
21
the Commission in a negative manner, including
22
any unnecessary and burdensome regulations
23
that were promulgated due to such nuclear acci-
24
dent.
25
VerDate Sep 11 2014
05:58 Mar 07, 2023
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1006.IH
H1006
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
12
•HR 1006 IH
(BB) How to make the budget and fee
1
processes of the Commission more transparent.
2
(CC) Whether the Commission is taking
3
appropriate actions to hire highly skilled, tech-
4
nical individuals to prepare for the future influx
5
of licensing new nuclear reactors.
6
(DD) Whether the Federal Government
7
should standardize the definition of nuclear
8
waste.
9
(EE) The effectiveness of topical reports in
10
the licensing process, how topical reports im-
11
prove the efficiency of the licensing process, any
12
challenges that are involved with topical re-
13
ports, and suggestions on how to improve the
14
timeliness of reviewing and approving topical
15
reports.
16
(FF) In the event the use of a topic report
17
is not applicable, the effectiveness of other
18
forms of preapplication engagement, including
19
how the Commission and potential applicants
20
may reach a resolution or binding conclusions
21
on key issues in a timely manner.
22
(GG) How the Commission could navigate
23
environmental impact statements in an efficient
24
and effective manner, and any challenges that
25
VerDate Sep 11 2014
05:58 Mar 07, 2023
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1006.IH
H1006
kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
13
•HR 1006 IH
arise while performing and reviewing environ-
1
mental impact statements.
2
(HH) Any lessons the Commission can
3
learn from foreign governmental agencies that
4
govern nuclear energy.
5
(II) Any other question that the inspector
6
general, in consultation with the Commissioners
7
of the Commission, determines appropriate.
8
(4)
ADDITIONAL
LANGUAGE.—The
survey
9
dra
[Text truncated for display. Full text available on Congress.gov.]