NRC Enforcement Policy Revision; Processing Fitness-for-Duty Drug and Alcohol Cases
fitness-for-duty
2016-12-02 2016-12-02 2016-12-02 2016-12-02 2016-12-02 2016-12-02 2016-12-02 2016-12-02
NRC-2016-0185-0009 NRC-2016-0185-0004 NRC-2016-0185-0002 NRC-2016-0185-0012 NRC-2016-0185-0008 NRC-2016-0185-0006 NRC-2016-0185-0005 NRC-2016-0185-0011
05:00:00 05:00:00 05:00:00 05:00:00 05:00:00 05:00:00 05:00:00 05:00:00
https://api.regulations.gov/v4/comments/NRC-2016-0185-0009 https://api.regulations.gov/v4/comments/NRC-2016-0185-0004 https://api.regulations.gov/v4/comments/NRC-2016-0185-0002 https://api.regulations.gov/v4/comments/NRC-2016-0185-0012 https://api.regulations.gov/v4/comments/NRC-2016-0185-0008 https://api.regulations.gov/v4/comments/NRC-2016-0185-0006 https://api.regulations.gov/v4/comments/NRC-2016-0185-0005 https://api.regulations.gov/v4/comments/NRC-2016-0185-0011
Catherine corn Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous Audrey Marianne David Kathryn
Catherine corn Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous Birkby Holman Bankston
I support this.Catherine Corn Please Look at all of these nuclear worker/nuclear supervisor failures for fitness of duty at nuclear power stations--http://enformable.com/?s=fitnessTherefore, please keep monitoring nuclear workers /supervisors as stringently as is necessary for such an important job.Thank you. You must continue to do your job and supervise the nuclear workers and watch for their being drugged up or drunk.  You are supposed to be a regulator and monitor the nuclear power stations-utilities.  A drunk or drugged up worker or a marijuana stub found every few months is very serious.  The US NRC needs to stop having weird party luncheons and get to work.   ID: NRC-2016-0185-0001The Nuclear Regulatory Commission needs to not only continue regulating but to expand its job as a regulator of Fitness of Duty at nuclear sites rather than formally cease to regulate and throw it to the nuclear utilities-industry, as appears to be its current plan.  As is routinely the case, the NRC is also violating the clear writing rule, so it is impossible to be certain of what this proposal is about.  The Fitness for Duty rule should be zero tolerance and expanded to uranium mining and any other nuclear sites which you are supposed to supervising.  You must not only continue to regulate, oversee, and investigate drug and alcohol use at nuclear power stations and nuclear fuel sites, but should increase and improve oversight.  It is important that there is a public record of these events.  It would be a good idea to have a system where workers can only access the site after a breath test.  Furthermore, you need to have someone who has decent mastery of the English language write these documents, as required under the clear writing rule.    Im in favor of this revision. If  the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission believes that they need to make improvements towards the supervision of their licensees employees than I believe its a positive change. With this new rule change, I hope that the NRC will feel as if they can oversee drug and alcohol enforcement policies efficiently. It was noted in the docket that in March of 2008, the NRC found Instances of individuals violating FFD DA procedures at licensee sites. These types of cases result from a range of issues including failed drug tests, alleged attempts to subvert FFD testing, alleged possession or use of illegal drugs or alcohol, or alleged misuse or failure to report the use of prescription drugs. This explains that theres a need for the NRC to have more authority over this kind of safety, and I think the change will be a step in the right direction for better safety.  Dear NRC,RAdiation Free Lakeland are a voluntary nuclear safety group in Cumbria, UK.  We have thousands of supporters from all walks of life.  We strongly object to any weakening of the drugs testing regime for workers at nuclear installations. We strongly oppose drugs testing being carried out by the industry itself.  This self monitoring excludes any public scrutiny and increases the risk of nuclear accident, damage to public health and the environment.  Drugs Testing regimes should be carried out by autonomous  regulators and NOT by the nuclear operators or companies involved.  Our members who have worked in the nuclear industry tell us that nuclear workers are no different to the rest of society and that drugs are accessible.  To leave monitoring to the industry would be deliberately reckless.  NRC Must Ensure Scrutiny. Yours sincerely,MArianne BirkbyOn behalf of Radiation Free LakelandLA77DJUK I encourage you to keep  monitoring and investigating nuclear workers for drug and alcohol and not leave it to the utilities-fuel fabrication companies.This needs to be done By the NRC as an independent exercise.  And,  of course, the NRC should continue to monitor safety issues that have direct proportional effects to danger to the public. It should go without saying that a part of that would be insuring that plant operators be fit for duty.