All licensing actions across NRC offices,  however, include the submission of an application. When the NRC review team has the  information needed to ensure a fully informed, technically correct, and  legally defensible decision, it will either approve or deny the license  application. Individual NRC Offices Have Their Own Guidance to Issue RAIs and Are Updating It in an Effort to Improve the RAI Process

Each NRC office that issues RAIs has its own guidance, and the Office of  Nuclear Reactor Regulation, the Office of New Reactors, and some  divisions in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards have  efforts underway to update guidance intended to improve oversight of  RAIs. Guidance for developing and issuing RAIs is generally the same  across individual offices that issue them but also reflects each office’s  own specific responsibilities and procedures. This updated guidance includes an increased  focus on ensuring staff compliance with the process through managerial  review. For example, the expectations  memorandum elevates the issuance of additional questions on the same  topic to divisional management to discuss the need for an additional  round of RAIs before submitting them to a licensee. NRC Offices Do Not Track the Number of RAIs They Issue, and Certain Activities Often Elicit RAIs

NRC offices do not track the number of RAIs and do not know how many  they have issued over the past 5 years, and there is no legal requirement  for NRC to track the number of RAIs it issues. Offices Do Not Track the Number of RAIs That NRC Issues, and There Is No Legal Requirement to Do So

NRC offices that issue RAIs do not specifically track the number of RAIs  that they issue, and there is no legal requirement for the agency to track  the number of RAIs. Some NRC offices have been working to update their internal tracking  systems for licensing actions. RAIs Are Not Unusual, and Certain Activities Often Elicit RAIs

NRC officials told us that receiving RAIs as part of a licensing action is  not unusual, and officials and licensees we interviewed said that RAIs are  often issued for the following activities and circumstances: complex  licensing actions, activities for which regulations are unclear, new  activities, and when the initial application does not contain adequate  information or detail. NRC  officials and licensees said that a request for an exception can occur, for  example, when a licensee asks NRC for a license to use a construction  material that is not referenced in regulatory guidance. Licensees We Interviewed Were Generally Satisfied with the RAI Process and Identified Certain Strengths

Many of the licensees we interviewed expressed satisfaction with NRC’s  current process to develop and issue RAIs and acknowledged the role of  RAIs in the licensing process. Some said that they viewed them as a  natural part of interacting with a regulator. Licensees we interviewed also identified NRC’s openness to  communication and engagement as a strength of the RAI process. Licensees Identified Two Common Weaknesses in the RAI Process, Which NRC Has Made Recent Efforts to Address

Licensees and NRC officials that we interviewed identified weaknesses in  the RAI process, including two commonly mentioned ones: (1) a gap  between NRC’s expectations and licensees’ understanding of what  should be included in a license application and (2) staff departure from  guidance that leads to RAI questions that appear to be redundant or  beyond the scope of the review. According to  NRC officials, such inconsistencies can lead to reviewers’ using RAIs to  gather the information needed to make a licensing decision. The Office of New Reactors, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation,  and the Division of Spent Fuel Management in the Office of Nuclear  Material Safety and Safeguards have made recent efforts to address  inconsistencies between NRC’s expectations and licensees’  understanding by emphasizing greater communication between review  staff and licensees.
Why GAO Did This Study

NRC issues RAIs to obtain information in licensing requests to ensure that officials can make a fully informed, technically correct, and legally defensible regulatory decision. RAIs are necessary when the information was not included in an applicant's initial submission, is not contained in any other docketed correspondence, or cannot reasonably be inferred from the information available to agency staff. NRC's use of RAIs has come under scrutiny in the past. For example, NRC's Inspector General, in a 2015 report, cited concerns about RAIs, including the amount of time it took to complete the RAI process and the resources required to do so.
GAO was asked to review how NRC uses RAIs. This report examines (1) NRC's guidance for developing and issuing RAIs and how it differs across offices; (2) how many RAIs NRC has issued over the past 5 years and the kinds of activities that elicit RAIs; and (3) strengths and weaknesses of NRC's processes to develop RAIs identified by NRC and licensees and the actions NRC is taking to address concerns. GAO examined agency guidance documents and selected licensing actions containing RAIs. GAO interviewed NRC officials and selected licensees. GAO randomly selected licensing actions and licensees from a sample of recent licensing actions that included cases from each of NRC's RAI-issuing offices.

What GAO Found

At the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), individual offices that issue requests for additional information (RAI) each have their own guidance that is generally the same across the offices. NRC offices have some efforts underway to update their guidance. These efforts are intended to improve oversight of RAIs and include an increased focus on oversight of RAIs and on staff compliance through managerial review. For example, one of the offices that issues RAIs calls for management to discuss the need to send a licensee additional questions on the same topic before doing so.
NRC offices that issue RAIs do not specifically track the number of RAIs that they have issued and do not have a comprehensive accounting for the last 5 years, although one office has a system capable of tracking the number of RAIs. Information from NRC officials and licensees GAO interviewed suggests that certain activities and circumstances often elicit RAIs. There is no legal requirement for the agency to track the number of RAIs; however, offices are updating their internal tracking systems in order to improve information on their licensing activities. Receiving RAIs is not unusual, particularly for certain activities such as complex licensing actions and activities for which regulations are unclear, according to officials. In such cases, increased coordination between NRC and the licensee may be required to resolve certain issues.
Licensees GAO interviewed were generally satisfied with the RAI process, identifying strengths and two common weaknesses, and NRC has made recent efforts intended to address these weaknesses. Some licensees noted that they see RAIs as a natural part of interacting with a regulator and identified NRC's openness to communication and engagement as a strength of the RAI process. Two common weaknesses that licensees cited are a gap between NRC's expectations and licensees' understanding of what to include in their applications, and staff departure from guidance. NRC offices have made recent efforts to address these issues. For example, to address inconsistencies between NRC's expectations and licensees' understanding, NRC offices are emphasizing greater communication between review staff and licensees.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is not making any recommendations. NRC generally agreed with GAO's findings.