Yucca Mountain: Persistent Quality Assurance Problems Could Delay Repository Licensing and Operation : Report to Congressional Requesters
The Department of Energy (DOE) must obtain a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to construct a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. In licensing, a quality assurance program helps ensure that the information used to demonstrate the safety of the repository is defensible and well documented. DOE developed a corrective action plan in 2002 to fix recurring problems with the accuracy of such information. This report assesses the status of corrective actions and the adequacy of DOE's plan to measure the effectiveness of actions taken. DOE has reportedly implemented most of the actions in its 2002 corrective action plan, but recent audits and assessments have identified lingering quality problems with data, models, and software and continuing management weaknesses. Audits revealed that some data sets could not be traced back to their sources, model development and validation procedures were not followed, and some processes for software development and validation were inadequate or not followed. DOE believes these problems have not affected the technical basis of the project; however, they could adversely affect the licensing process. Recent assessments identified continuing management weaknesses in the areas of roles and responsibilities, quality assurance policies and procedures, and a work environment that did not foster employee confidence in raising concerns without fear of reprisal. NRC has acknowledged DOE's effectiveness in identifying quality problems, but recently concluded that quality problems could delay the licensing process. DOE cannot assess the effectiveness of its 2002 plan because the performance goals to assess management weaknesses lack objective measurements and time frames for determining success. The goals do not specify the amount of improvement expected, how quickly the improvement should be achieved, or how long the improvement should be sustained before the problems can be considered corrected. DOE recently developed a measurement tool that incorporates and revises some of the goals from the action plan, but most of the revised goals continue to lack the necessary time frames needed to determine whether the actions have corrected the recurring problems. A recently completed DOE review of the 2002 plan found that the corrective actions have been fully implemented. However, the review also noted the effectiveness of the actions could not be evaluated because many of the plan's goals lacked the level of objectivity and testing needed to measure effectiveness.
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
13 goals 2002 corrective action Accounting Office actions taken adequacy April Booz Allen Hamilton Civilian Radioactive Waste closed the corrective completed continuing problems corrective action plan corrective action report Decreasing trend Department of Energy documents DOE and Bechtel DOE and contractor DOE officials DOE reported draft report effectiveness of corrective effectiveness reviews employee concerns programs evaluate the effectiveness fear of reprisal frame to meet implemented Independent Review issues Las Vegas license application licensing process line management Management Assessment Management Improvement Initiatives meet and sustain models and software NRC officials NRC requirements Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Waste Office of Civilian Partial improvement performance goals performance indicators personnel problems with data quality assurance auditors quality assurance problems quality assurance program quantitative measure added Radioactive Waste Management recurring problems recurring quality problems repository revise roles and responsibilities scientific models significant quality problems specific sustain goal lacking Yucca Mountain project