ML19254D742
| ML19254D742 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/15/1979 |
| From: | Bradford P, Hendrie J, Kennedy J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 7910300040 | |
| Download: ML19254D742 (50) | |
Text
TEG f
s N U CLE A R R E G U L ATO R'( COMMISSION l
I IN THE MATTER OF:
I l
i PUBLIC HEARING l
DISCUSSION OF IMPROVING COMMISSIONER PROCEDURES
& " FULL ACCESS" PROVISION Place -
Washington, D.C.
Date -
Monday, October 15, 1979 Pages 1 - 44
- ^'8 233 Teiechone:
(202)347 3700 ACE -FEDERAL REPORTERS,INC.
OffichlReponers y
444 North Capitol Street Washington, D.C 20001 ( 7 9103 00C f d, NATICNWIDE COVERAGE. DAILY e
1 C17702 DISCLAIMER This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on Manday, October 15, 19 79 in the c',mmissions 's of fices m.1717 H Street, N.W.,
Washington, D. C.
The taeeting was open to public attendance and observation.
This transcript has not been reviewed, carrected, or edited, and it may contain
' inaccuracies.
The transcript is intended solely for general informational purposes.
As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the matters discussed.
Expressions of opinion in this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determinations or beliefs.
No pleading or other paper may be filed with the Commission in any proceeding as the result of or addressed to any statement or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may authorize.
- "8 234
i CR 7702 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AR:ar i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
l 1
3 PUBLIC HEARING l
1 4
DISCUSSION OF IMPROVING COMMISSION PROCEDURES l
5
& " FULL ACCESS" PROVISION l
6 l
7 Room 1130 g
1717 H Street Northwest We ':hingto n,
D.C.
9, i
10 Monday, October 15, 1979 11 The Commission met, pursuant te notice, at 3:40 i
12 p.m.
13 BEFORE:
l 14
- DR. JOSEPH M. HENDRIE, Chairman.
15 RICHARD T.
KENNEDY, Commissioner.
16 PETER A. BRADFORD, Commissioner.
17 JOHN AHEARNE, Comr'isioner.
18 ALSO PRESENT:
i 19 l Messrs. Bickwit, Malsch, Ostrach, Rothschild and 20 Rathbun.
i l
21 '
"8 235 g
23 24
,...aerei Reporters, inc.
25 l
I
i 2
1 EEEEEEELEEE 2
[ Commissioner Kennedy not present.]
i-3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay, let's come to order.
I 4
The Commission will get on with its discussion I
5 for improving its own procedures, if tnc+'s possible.
i I
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
The discussion or the improve-1 7
ment?
g CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Also there is some aspects of l
9 the full access provision that I dimly recall from an OGC 10 memorandum that I asked somebody to look into, and I guess j
11 we'll have a report on those.
I 12 Let's talk a minute about the procedures that have 13 come up in this paper, and I detected from certain comments i
14 and voting' sheets that they were not viewed with the uniform 15 enthusiasm in all quarters.
16
[ Commissioner Kennedy entered the room at 17 3:41 p.m.]
l i
18 Why don't we talk a little bit about those.
l 19 Tell me what your sort of thrust on these things would be.
t i
20 Clearly these things for the most part sort of 21 follow down that track that we adoptid in the export area 22 where some time goes by and then once a majority of 23 Commissioners have acted, there is then pressure put more i
24 formally on those who have not yet acted to do so, and so on.
> sral Reporters, Inc.
25 And, I don' t know, do you see other ways of trying to move "8
236
i 3
1 things along or --
2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
No, it's the conclusiveness 3
at which things are moved along on this particular track.
l l
4 That is obviously it makes sense when you have three or 5
four positions for the train to begin to move in that direction, I
6 if it in fact it does.
But there will be a lot of situations, I think, 7
in which reasons of particular interest or other priorities 8
9 or what-have-you, the fourth or fif th Commissioner on the list '
will come in with items that turn out to be worth considering,'
10 11 and a set of procedures that tends indiscriminately, that is 12 whether or not there's any high degree of urgency in getting l
13 the item underway, to cut that process short seems to me --
l 14 is that me' that's buzzing?
l l
15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE :
No, somewhere we've got a mike 16 that's set a little too high and we've got a couple of them i
17 feeding each other.
Let us go down the line and turn off all i
18 unased or -- mikes that aren't needed.
I 19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I have no difficulty with 20 this system that sets at least target deadlines, but I would 21 make it longer than these, and I would provide that they not i
22 begin to run until we had all Staff and Commission office l
23 comments in front of us in one sper, or at least in one --
24 where it could be put together and brought to bear on the
..vesi Ruorun. ls 25 subject in our office.
I should think it would make sense
- "8 237 f
i 4
1 for the Commission time, for example, to run while the paper 2
is still -- or OGC is still --
3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, in a sense all papers I,
4 are before OGC and OPE, sort of indefinitely.
In another sense 1
5 they aren't.
I have long since asked the Staff wherever 6
possible to get draft papers to OPE and OPE in turn to get at least draf t comments that they think they want to make on 7
it back to the Staff so that where things work as one would 8
R 9
hope they would most of the time, things like OPE comments l
10 are included in the paper.
That is there's
.n OPE memo there 11 and a response and a Staff final paper or recommendations 12 may accommodate to them or reject them; but at least it got I
13 into the process.
14
' Paper comes and lies before the Commission, I i
15 suppose in principle there could be further OPE ccmments or 16 OGC comments, but it's kind of hard to detect when and how l
17 there are to be such specifically on a given paper.
i 18 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Excuse me.
As a general rule, 19 doesn't the Secretary, when he passes an action paper to the 20 Commissioners, note on the bottom the dcte on which OGC and j
21 OPE comments, if any, are supposed to be provided to the i
i 22 Commissioners?
i i
So there is a date that's already been established. '
23 i
24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Generally.
e arel Reporters. Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Isn't that the procedure?
I "8
238 i
5 I note the Secretary isn't here.
I wonder if it's 3
because he has a 1cck of interest or is bored or tired or out 2
f -- which?
That he's bored, cired?
j 3
[ Laughter. ]
4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I wonder, Joe, we've got a 5
few vacant seats.
Maybe we ought to let OGC in on the act.
6 MR. ROTHSCHILD:
The procedures we've recommended 7
here --
8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yeah, you want to come forward?
9 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Come en up and join us.
10 It doesn't look crowded.
11 MR. ROTHSCHILD:
The procedures we are providing 12 here would start with Commissioner comments and would begin 13 after that' deadline for OGC and OPE comments.
14 l
Now if OGC and OPE are late with their comments, j
15 l
16 which sometimes we are, then it would extend the Commission 17 time accordingly.
j l
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
So that takes care of that 18 i
19 concern of yours, Peter, which I certainly would share.
There's no point in running -- start running against the 20 Commissioners' time when comments they might have desired 21 l i
to review hadn't even been received.
So that the time in these 22 1
papers runs after that set time for receipt of the ofrice 23 24 comments.
e, aeral Reprms, lm.
25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE :
Let's see, the proposition here i
- "8 239 I
f 6
would be -- ah, somebody remind me.
What does it amount to?
I 2
Eight days?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Eight days.
3 4
Five on export matters.
5 CHAIUMAN HENDRIE:
Five working days --
f i
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That's what it is now.
l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Eight wc _ king days on other 7
g matters.
9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE-The Staff and Commission's 10 cwn offices have four days.
11 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
So that makes a total of 12 l
12 days.
12 work days.
13 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
From what time?
'a
' COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
When it comes into SECY.
15 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Well, from when it's i
16 distributed by SECY to the Iommissioners.
From the date 17 that's up on the corner of this paper that we get, which is l
18 the same date daat we get it.
It's 12 days from that time it 19 would be expected -- four days Staff. ffices would provide 1
20 us comments, eight days, working days, for us to comment, 21 which is a total of 12 working days, or two and a half weeks.
22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
And the -- now let's see, who is.
23 responsible for the procedures?
24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
One and a half weeks.
No,
..dral Reporten, Inc.
25 I'm sorry, two and a half weeks.
Okay.
"8 240 i
l t
f 7
1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yeah, two and a half weeks.
2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Let me put it another way.
3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yes.
4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Especially, as Victor 5
would say, since he's not here, to what question is that 6
the answer?
I 7
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
It's the --
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
What kind of hammering at 8
9 the gates do we actually have in terms of people who feel that l 10 major items are languishing here longer than they should?
I i
11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE :
Thereperiodicallyareoccasions(
12 when it does happen, and when thers. have been a majority of j
l 13 votes to go one way or another, and when action is then l
14 prevented"over a long, sometimes a long period of time, s 15 few times it has been a long period of time, simply by f ailure j 16 of any expression of opinion f rom the remaining offices, j
17 neither for nor against.
And the only resolution then is 18 to, without having ever any word from the offices who haven't l 19 responded, just schedule it for a discussion and vote session, 20 which means another week or two down the line, because you l
21 hardly feel at that stage able to justify short noticing, t
22 and it just seems to me that we ought to be better able to 23 mov things than that.
l 24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But without having a sense j cal Recomrs. W.
25 of the particular papers that are causing this concern, it's l
\\'
- " 8 241
8 1
sort of hard to respond.
There's a sense, reading this, that's what happening is that either Commissioners aren' t reading 2
3 their mail or they're not coming to work, or they're 4
losing things in their drawers.
5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Or all of the above.
l COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
All of the above.
And 6
I I wonder when one looks at the real problem papers of the 7
cases that have apparently caused difficulty, I wonder if 8
9 that's really what's holding them up.
10 CHAIRMNR HENDRIE:
I think in a few cases, they've l
11
-- well, I can't say.
l l
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I thought another part, though,
i 13 of the point that was given an organization such as ours that i
I i
14 operates with large volumes of papers flowing through, that t
15 at some point it makes sense to try to lay out a set of l
16 procedures by which these papers will be handled.
In the 17 absence of any specific set of problems, that in order to i
l i
la have the people involved, the offices understand, what are 19 the ground rules under which they're operating.
i 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
And to provide scmewhat l
21 propelling decisions forward.
22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Is there some way to propel i
23 this meeting forward.
24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
We could ask for analysis of the
..rai n worm s.ine.
25 records and so on, but I'm afraid it will show a number of "8
242 l
l t
9 occasions when there has been an extended period after three 1
Commissioners have acted before views could be extracted from 2
3!
the other offices.
i I
I Now sometimes those views, you know, go with the 4
5 majority, and sometimes not; but it does seem to me that if a l
l Commissioner -- if we get to the point where three have acted 6
and the eight day -- eight working days af ter receipt of OGC.
7 and OPE comments has run out, two and a half weeks, and three 8
I 9
Commissioners have acted, then it appears to me that unless 10 there are some fairly pressi.g concerns on the part of one 11 of the remaining Commissioners who hasn't indicated a yea or l
12 nay or abstention, it appears to me that the collegial body i
13 ought to be able to move its business forward.
14
'If one of the Commissioners who hasn't indicated i
i 15 a view by that time says, "Look, I want to discuss this," or, f
16 "I needmoretimetoasksomequestions,ormoreinformation,"l 17 or something, why, then it seems to me that as we do on the l
18 export side, that's appropriate.
19 But it just seems to me that silence on the paper, on a paper, by the time you've gotten that f ar down the track, l 20 is not a reasonable thing to prevent the collegial Commission 21 i
22 from working its will.
I So that's why I've encouraged these propositions.
l 23 24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, in what areas can
<,si Ruomrs, Inc.
25 silence actually have that effect?
.,,8 2,43 I
10 1
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
At the present -time in any case 2
except the export area, where we have an explicit policy.
3 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Not the adjudicatory cases 4
because eventually the time for review wi13 un.
5 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
But that' the rules to that, 6
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD :
Right, but that's a good 7
way to do it.
That certainly does do it.
I g
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That's sort of what this 9l would do, it would codify procedures which are followed in 10 other aspects of our business, extend them to our general 1
11 business, rather than just the adjudicatory items and just I
i 12 the export items, all the others uncovered.
j i
i 13 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD :
There are categories of i
14 papers othbr than export licenses and other than adjudicatory i
15 matters on which you from time to time circulate notices l
l 15 saying three Commissioners have concurred, and if we don't j
17 hear from you by thus and such, I will take the following 1
l 18 action.
l 19 SECRETARY CHILK':
We'll do that in any case if 20 we have three votes, and we'll give you some 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> to answer, 21 or 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br />, if we've got four votes, and close the issue if 22 we don't.
i i
23 Now there are times when you others ask for l
24 information from the Staff which kind of sets up a different Leni neoonm inc.
25 situation, and then the question is do your colleagues i
,"^8 244 j
I
11 want to stay with you or whoever requested the information?
1 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Are you saying that that's 2
3 the way we do it now?
l 1
1 SECRETARY CHILK:
I am certainly saying that, j
4 5
That's the way it's been done, yes.
6, MR. RATHBUN:
Even before the eight days are up? !
l SECRETARY CHILK:
Af ter the eight days are up.
f 7
I We don't close it out before the target date, but if we have 8
three votes af ter that time, we ' re going to attempt to close 9
10 it out, we're going to give them 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.
11 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Wait.
12 SECRETARY CHILK:
If they come back with another 13 question --
14
' COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Are you doing that?
Is 15 that what the Commission has agreed to do now?
16 SECRETARY CHILK:
That'r what the Commission's 17 been doing for -- ever since its existence.
i 18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
You're not being aware of f
19 that does you credit, of course, Dick.
What it says is that 20.
you always respond in time.
I 21
[ Laughter.]
22 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
And that is not accurate, so 23 something is not accurate here.
24 SECRETARY CHILK:
You've had your share of requests 9
,eral Reporters, Inc.
25 to either vote or be closed out.
ono
-)
0 L D
i l
l t
12 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
On export matters and others, 2
but I -- you know --
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
We're not doing this on all 3
4 papers, are we?
l SECRETARY CHILK:
We certainly are.
5 l
i COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Isn't it fascinating that j
6 i
I 7
nobody knows about it but you'
[ Laughter.]
8 t
9 I mean, you know, it's extraordinary, at least.
10 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
The delinquents among you l
11 have a much greater sense of it than the rest of --
12
[ Laughter.]
I 13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I have to conclude that you ja must be a little surprised because you didn't like the similar,
15 proposal in this paper.
16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD :
No.
l 17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Which appears to be the samel t
I 18 thing as --
l think general counsel l 19 SECRETARY CHILK': -
No, I 20 is suggesting in essence that you get three votes and you go with it.
When somebody's asking a question of the Staf f, 21 22 that sets up an entirely -- dien for the most part the l
23 Commissioners are willing to wait and get the answe.
24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
That's right, and Sam's
,rel Rmorurs, inc.
i 25 current notational system has one other dimension that I didn't
'"8 246 i
I
13 see here, and that is one can indicate on the flip side 1
2 how much longer he needs to deal with the case, and as f ar as
,3 I know, once you indicate that, you get it.
l 4
SECRETARY CHILK:
None of you -- none of the 5
colleagues and none of the Commissioners are objecting to that 6
at this time.
When they do, you don't get it.
I 7
MR. BICKWIT:
Have you ever had occasion when a i
8 Commissioner --
i 9
SECRETARY CHILK:
Very seldom, if ever.
10 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I don't remember ever i
11 encountering that.
12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
How about things like letter 3?
13 SECRETARY CHILK:
Letters are entirely different, i
l 14 Mr. Chairm'an, because there we keep going around with another I
15 set of words each and every time.
j i
16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Some of them so long, indeed, 17 that the letter gets overtaken by several others and you l
18 incorporate them all into a single reply, which of course i
19 saves postage.
I 20 SECRETARY CHILK:
I think the answer on letters I
i 21 is that the Commission ought to agree to either collegially 22 a nswer those that involve policy or collegially agree to I
23 answer those that are replies to your principal committees 24 in Congress and delegate the authori.ty, ask the Chairman to eral Reporters, Inc.
25 sign all the others.
You will see them in the reading files.
i
- 8 247 I
14 1
And that will keep them out of your office.
2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Let me just ask about 3
letters.
I'm not sure -- I either misunderstood the paper I
4 or misunderstand the practice.
The paper recommends -- the 5
paper states the practice to be that letters go to OPE and i
6 OCA before they come to the Commission and that they are then I
7 in some way edited and commented on and finalized in separate 8
Commissioner comments.
9 That makes sense, and I would vote for that, but I 10 think the actual practice is that they go to OPE and OCA l
l i
11 simultaneously with going to the Commission of fices, and then 12 the Commissioners work them over for everything from grammar i
13 to content, and OPE and OCA go to some effort to reconcile five 14 different sets of comments.
15 I think it would be good if they were edited once 16 for plain English and whatever other corrections that either 17 OPE or OCA could work on before they came into the Commission i
18 office, and that probably would mean that we'd have fewer 19 instances in which five sets of Commissioners corrected the same awkward grammatical construction five dif ferent ways. !
20 21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Could I --
i 22 CHAl.RMAN HENDRIE:
We would throw into the process --
l 23 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD :
I hope it would shorten it, !
24 if I'm right, that it would save five different Commissioners :
i _,ral Reporters, Inc.
25 making five different corrections to one awkward sentence.
"8 248
15 I would think it would save time.
1 2
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Sam, is the time consumption 3
in the letter ~ answering because of grammatical construction 4
problems, or is it a. substantive. problem?
l 5l SECRETARY CHILK:
Both.
It's a matter of opinion.
l 1
1 6
What is grammatical to me is substantive to you.
l 7
[ Laughter.]
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
It is to be noted that I g
l almost know of no way to make a substantive correction in a i
9 10 letter without semehow affecting its grammer.
l 11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
That is true.
The reverse {
l 12 m ay not be, but that is correct.
{
l 13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Sam applies it in the reverse, 14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE :
Sam, I gather from your 15 comment that you probably are not in agreement that this is 16 a necessary action, some of these steps; is that correct?
17 SECRETARY CHILK:
Le t me --
i 18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
You seem to be doing some of I
19 this, Sam.
Why don't we check off the ones you are doing and 20 and worry about --
21 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
And approve the ones you're 22 doing and make them a matter of record.
That at least will l
23 let all the Commissioners know that in f act you are doing it, i
24 which none of us did.
?... eral Reporters, Inc.
25 SECRETARY CHILK:
I guess the question that was
^"3 249 i
l
16 asked me is whether I -- what I think of these, and I'm saying 1
2 let me start from the other end -- I think the procedures 3
are perf ectly enforceable, and I have no objections to the i
4 procedures the way they're written or in any other way.
l i
I 5
But if the intent of the Commission is to expedite l
6 the Commission decision process, then these procedures won 't 7
do it any more than the export procedures did last year as l
i 8
far as' expediting uhe decision-making process.
l 9
It seems tc me that what you really want to do is 10 determine what you want to delegate.
Why look at all of the 11 letters?
Only look at a limited number of letters and let I
12 the Chairman answer the --
l l
13 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That's one of the procedures.
i l
14 It says here --
15 SECRETARY CHILK:
And that's a very good one.
16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
It says here --
7 SECRRETARY CHILK:
And that's a very good one, j
l 18 you've got a recommendation --
l 19 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Page 9 --
20 SECRETARY CHILK:
-- from Devine on exports to 21 try to delegate some of the exports.
You need to get rid 22 of those things you can get rid of and then look at what you l
23 want to do to the rest.
24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Let me get down to that for l
.ral Reporters, Inc.
25 the moment, but let me understand, as I did not understand
, " 8 250 I
17 i
before, that on papers other than adjudicatory or export 2
license papers, you are in fact, as soon as you get three votes and the eight working days have gone by af ter appropriate-3 4
date, you are in fact dunning Commissioners with a sheet j
5 that says three have voted and you've got 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> to vote or --
SECRETARY CHILK:
Or tell me what else you want to 6
7 00-CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Are you getting votes back in 8
I g
that case, yea, nay, or some kind?
i 10 SECRETARY CHILK:
Yes, you're getting something 11 back.
I get either a yea or nay or I need seven more days I
i 12 to answer this, or I've got seven questions of the Staff.
13 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I can't remember even seeingl 14 one of the'se things.
I 15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I guess you've never been l
t i
16 dunned, Richard, which says a number of things.
j i
t 17 MR. BICKWIT:
You're talking about the second paper?
18 SECRETARY CHILK:
We generally do not follow OGC j
19 memos unless you've asked us to follow them, or somebody, 20 you know, wants them geared into the system, because we don' t i
i f
21 get the reply, 22 MR. BICKWIT:
On OGC memos, we have not been l
i I
23 adopting that policy.
t 24 MR. ROTHSCHILD:
Let me make a couple of comme!'ts :
- 81 Regmners, inc.
25 One, I don't think all adjudicatory items are "8
251 i
I
18 1
covered by comments now.
For example, in writing adjudicatory 2
opinions after the Commission has taken review, there is 3
no time limit for the Commission comments.
In that case i
4 we've had three votes, to let an adjudicatory order go, and i
5 a substantial time period elapsed before we've been able to 6'
get views from the fourth and fifth Commissioners.
We would like them covered by some procedure.
l 7
8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Again, which ones do you l
l 9
have in mind?
I 10 !
MR. ROTHSCHILD:
Which adjudicatory things?
11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Ye ah.
{
12 MR. ROTHSCHILD:
I think there were same -- I'm i
13 not the best one to speak to that.
I know in the past rew 14 years ther'e have been problems.
Maybe Offshore Power was i
i li a recent problem, where I know the opinion language was very 16 long time before it was issued.
I don' t know why.
I was not 17 involved in that case at all.
But I know there wae long i
18 period, and I understand there were votes fairli..
- kly.
1 19 SECRETARY CHILK:
Was it an OGC memo?
20 MR. ROTHSCHILD:
Oh, yes --
21 SECRETARY CHILK:
I do not control those unless 22 you ask me to do that.
i 23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Sounds like you ought to let i
24 the Secretary control --
4781 Reporters, Inc.
as 25 SECRETARY CHILK:
I'm not looking for the business.
~'8 2S2 i
i i
19 1
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I think the SECY should contro 2
all of our actions so there would be one --
3i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yeah, I agree, John, and 4
furthermore, where Commissioners would occasionally look to 5
dun an answer out on scme questbn that they have asked, why, I
6, if you put it through Sam's machine, it provides a rechanism I
7 to do that.
l 8
Otherwise, you may get the -- you know, the lost 9,
paper treatment and never hear.
\\
l 10 MR. ROTHSCHILD:
Sam, when we have a SECY paper l
i 11 which is a request for answer and we get three ccmments, do l
12 you send out 72-hour notices on items that require formal 13 Commission votes like that?
~
14 SECRETARY CHILK:
If it's a SECY paper --
i 15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
If it's an OGC memo -- on 16 the other hand, if OGC comes to you and says do it that way, i
17 I recommend you do it that way.
l 18 SECRETARY CHILK:
No question about it.
We've l
19 just hesitated to try to run their business and get involved.
20 MR. ROTHSCHILD:
We do see the language sometimes 21 on rules that we get a couple of votes very quickly, and i
1 22 then all of a sudden, weeks and months later we are still I
I 23 waiting for votes on the final rules.
24 SECRETARY CHILK:
I think for the most part when
_ eras Reporters. Inc.
25 OGC has been in that -- some of that trouble, they've come
~
7h no
~
I
20 to us and we've gone to your office and said, hey, we need i
2 some help to get something done.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Peter, what -- you had 3
alluded to these as greasing the skids.
l 4
l COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
- Yes, Well, that -- as I 5;
said before, I found myself reluctant or uncomfortable 6
with the concurrent sheet with which I have not concurred 7
i with the document entitled " Including Commission Procedures."
8 I
When I thought about why not, I realized that I had changed 9
10 the title a little.
I 11 My concern with -- and what compelled me in the l
12 direction of retitling is was this:
Papers come in from 1
13 the Staff.
They get us an analysis.
Then they come to the l
14 Commission.
To the extent that one is relatively comfortable 15 l
16 with what the Staff has done, it's relatively easy to get 17 the paper out quickly, you know.
But I think that a set l
l of tight deadlines reinforced by the automatic taking effect 18 i
19 or by majority denials of extensions is basically to increase the momentum on the side of the Staff proposal, which I'm 20 s ure isn't always a bad thing, but in some cases it will be.
21 So what I was concerned about in the dea-22 i
to the extent they went beyond the practice that Sam is 23 24 already following, was that it seemed to me that they had a
.....r.i n ecomri. i ne.
momentum to Staf f proposals in a way that I thought probably 25
8 254 i
21 1
was not altogether healthy.
2 On top of that, I thought.ih'e deadlinis w~e're too-~
~
-~~
36 tight, and that there were problems like this business of I
I 4lI having OGC and OPE comment times possibly chewing into the i
I Commission time.
l 5
I But the basic concern was that tight deadlines l
6 t
tend to work against critical Commission office scrutiny of j
7 8
the Staff papers, and absent some compelling showing that 9
we've got a problem in important areas of our work now, I 10 just felt that this went a lot further than I was prepared to ;
i 11 go.
l' I
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Was it primarily the i
13 tightness of the deadlines or the imposition of deadlines?
l 14
' In other words, could your problems be solved by 15 having a longer time, or was it the basic idea of --
i 16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
In many cases, longer i
17 times would do it.
18 I am troubled by -- though I recognize there's a l
19 time in which it becomes necessary -- but essentially tr'oubled 20 by the framework in which three Commissioners can in all cases ;
21 on a f a,i.rly routine basis take action while two other 22 Commissioners are still somewhere or another trying to come l
i 23 tu grips withwwhatever the problem is.
l 24 The present system allows that, but doesn' t compel
-. sf al AfDorters, IrtC.
25 it, or doesn'tcompel the question to be f aced periodically.
,o 7
q a
s l
22 And it seems to me that there are a lot of cases i
that ccme before us in which for one reason or another time 2
3 is really not of the essence.
It may be that this particular activity is ongoing and the :: reccmmendation is that it 4
i 5
continue, but for some reason or another on e or two i
Commissioners have some doubts about it and want to go back i
6 7
and dig into the Staff papers.
I i
I Now no real harm in that case comes from the 8
9, decisions staying with the Commission for a while.
10 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Sam, could I just read off i
I 11 a few things?
i i
12 SECRETARY CHILK:
Sure.
I know what you're going l
13 to read, but go ahead, be my guest.
I la
' COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Status of ' consent calendar 15 before the Commission.
I'm just going to read a few.
I i
16 Item 1, SECY 78-674, suggested time periods for 17 issuance of initial decisions.
Due date was 1/3/79.
That's i
18 January 3rd, 1979.
That's nine months ago, I believe.
I i
19 All comments were received, and then Mr. Hendrie 20.
asked that one be held with a target date of 11/15.
That's I
i 21 not too bad.
22 SECRETARY CHILK:
That target date keeps being 23 '
changed.
24 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
SECY 79-283, export of
, srel Reponers. Inc.
25 certain minor quantities of nuclear material.
The due date
'"8 256 i
i
I 23 1
was May 3rd, 1979.
Mr. Hendrie approved on July 18th, Mr.
2 Gilinsky commented on August 8th, Mr. Kennedy approved on 3
7/25, Mr. Ahearne approved on 6/5, and Mr. Bradford hasn't I
4 had time to act on that one yet.
5 CRAIRMAN HENDRIE:
That's an export matter.
6 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
It's a --
7 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
It's not an individual --
l 8
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
It's a policy question.
l 9
COMMISSIONE? BRADFORD:
But at the same time, a 10 minor quantity --
11 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
The Fielka FOIA appeal.
12 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: It's not as though we've 13 stopped exporting all minor cuantities.
14
- COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
The Fielka appeal -- I'm 15 just pointing out the f acts, you know, I'm just suggesting 16 that here's a paper, the generic issue of financial 17 qualifications.
The due date was May lith.
All comments l
18 were finally received on 8/1, and a revised meno was circulated; I
19 to the Commissioners on October 3rd, which ought to say same-20 thing.
It took three months to make some sense out of the i
21 Commissioners' comments, I guess.
22 At any rate, I suppose we will now anticipate --
23 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
August and September, two l
24 months.
j sral Remmrs, lec.
25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Two months, excuse me.
I
'"3 25/
I
24 i
Well, I would now anticipate we will have two more 2
months while the Commissioners consider it, and then two further months. while the comments on this revised draft are reviewed.
3 4
All I'm saying is this is not a system.
This is a 5
chaotic exhibition of energy.
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
It takes a long time --
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I'm only pointing out 7
the sheet goes on and on in the same way, pages and pages, 8
that have been here for God knows how long, and is sitting 9
i 10 there waiting for one or possibly two, but usually one 11 Commissioner to act.
Three of them already having voted
{
12 months before, expressing a view, and I have some difficulty 13 in understanding what is the law contemplated.
14
'I'm suggesting Commissioners -- that's right.
15 Many, many of them.
Over and over.
Page after page.
l i
16 Now, whatever your system is, Sam, it doesn't j
17 happen.
l l
18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
No, but Sam's system does i'
19 give us a chance in fact to have sprung any of those items.
20 If we objected to Joe's putting the initial decisions on --
21 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I don't ever recall having
{
l 22 been asked whether I would desire that any of these matters j
l 23 go f orward.
l 24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But that one comes around
,eral Reporurs, Inc. ;
25 i on Sam's list of items pending every two weeks.
You know,
3 258 1
I 25 I
it says JH placed a hold beside it, and it seems to me 2
for months that if I objected very much to Joe's having placed 3
that one on hold, I could have raised it with a memo to the 4~
other Commissioners or by asking Sam -- I don't knot.- wnat l
t I
5 Sam could do, but at least send a memo to the Commissioners.
i 6
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Look, S am, are you telling f
I I
7 me now that on every one of these matters, you have gone out l
8 with a memo that says unless you put a hold on this, we're 9,
going to put it out in 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />?
i 10 SECRETARY CHILK:
I would guess yes, that there is 11 a memo that has said that and there is some reason why the l
12 matter is being held.
I 13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
What about the ones that say i
14 no response?
I understand the one that says JH recuests hold, !
Ib l that's fairly obvious. pending action by CIA, I understand l
16 that, tentatively scheduled for Commission meeting, that's 17 clear.
But no response, it doesn't seem to fit --
18 SECRETARY CHILK:
I'm sure there either is a notice 19 that's gone out on it, or notice is about to go out on it, 20 or it's been closed out ever since the document was published, 21 one of the three.
Or we blew it.
You know, I guess that's 22 possible, too.
23 COMMISSIONER KEMNEDY:
I can only suggest that 24 all three of those must be at play here in substantial numbers.
-t eral Recorters, Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
As I interpret it, Steve, "3
259 i
26 as I interpret it, what you are proposing is a system by which 1
2 once a majority had reached a position, the things would now 3,
go forward with the sort of two kinds of exceptions:
One of the other Commissions who was not in the 4
5 majority had requested a meeting, then a meeting would go l
f orward.
6 l
Or if the minority could convince a member of the 7
8 majority to continue the delay.
9 MR. ROTHSCHILD:
Yeah.
We ' re shifting the burden.
10 Right now the burden seems to be on the majority to grasp 11 the issue and to act on the paper, and now we're going to 12 shif t the burden and those who want to delay will have to i
i 13 convince the majority of the Commission to delay.
14
-MR.
BICKWIT:
Delay is sort of a pejorEtive word.
15 MR. OSTRACH:
That's only after an initial period 16 of time in which any Commissioner by himself can request the j
17 matter be set up for Commission discussion, provide input 18 to the Commission decision.
19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, the setting it up 20 for Commission discussion, of course, is that survives under i
21 1 any system, and certainly it should.
It would be a mistake 22 ever to make that the only way to get an extension.
It's l
23 silly to have to request that a meeting be scheduled 10 days 24 from now in order to get an action.
.eral Reporters, Inc.
25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
But at the moment we don' t
'"3 260 I
27 1
come around as we do on exports and say --
2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, Sam does come around, I
3 at least he does a pretty good percentage of the time.
4 What may not happen with any deal of regularity is that 5
the Commissioners in the majority are then asked to approve 6;
the extended period of time requested by whoever received the I
I 7
dunning notice.
8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
You think that every place on i
9, here that a paper is. older than -- I don ' t know, three weeks --
i 10 l SECRETARY CHILK:
I think there's a reasonabl.:
I i
11 '
explanation for it, in almost every case.
l 12 I think we could sit down with you and say here is i
13 the reason and make some reasonable sense out of it.
14 But it does not move papers as f ast as what they're supposed
't 1
15 to do.
16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But what I hear you saying, j
17 '
Sam -- correct me if I'r wrong -- is that if some of the time i
i 18 periods in the OGC 's memo were adjusted, there would be the i
19 same system you have.
20 If that is the case, then I don' t think there 21 should be~any problem with affirming the OGC's proposal.
22 SECRETARY CHILK:
I'm not arguing for the OGC 23 proposal.
I'm merely saying that if -- depending on what i
24 you.- intent is, if your intent -- if you think it's going
,eral Reporten. Inc.
25 to uove papers out of the Commission f aster, as a general rule, '
"3 261 l
L
2C 1
then I'd say that it seems to me that is a better approach to expedite the Commission decision.
3 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Tell me how it would work i
i 4
with any -- you know, let's -- could we get some specifics, 5
Sam, and take a look at this page which is Commission Action 6
Items Before the Commissioners?
How would this be helped?
l 7
I don't understand your proposition.
8 Are you suggesting that the Commissioners should 9
not' be dealing with those issues?
And if so, wh.ch ones?
10 SECRETARY CHILK:
No, I'm suggesting that, A, that 11 Commissioners only address correspondence of certain types.
i 12 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
How is that going to help i
13 anything on that page?
l 14
" SECRETARY CHILK:
I previously suggested a method l
15 of negative consent, which the General Counsel have picked up. ;
4 16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Oh, so you favor that i
17 proposition?
i 18 SECRETARY CHILK:
I have favored it initially.
I I
19 recommended it several months ago, if I'm not mistaken.
20 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
So you do favor it?
l 21 That 's what I'm trying to get at.
Okay.
22 As to correspondence, that's a different question.
2J I'm talking only about Commission papers at the moment.
l 24 SECRETARY CHILK:
I do think that in the final I
not Reporurs, Inc.
l 25 analysis there is a reason that almost every paper on here
."8 262
29 1
that'4 held is being held --
2 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
iell, I'm --
3 SECRETARY CHILK:
Anf. that --
l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I've no doubt about that, I
4 l
I 5
SECRETARY CHILK:
You will, on any other system, i
6 1 t'..a delay will be approximately the same or the length of I
time getting through the Commission will be approximately l
7 g
the same.
9 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
We should have asked Mr.
10 Rogovin
.o be here.
I think that's an important fact for 11 him to understand.
And indeed I submit right now, I suggest 12 we provide him with a copy of the transcript of this meeting.
13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I would think his chores --
14 I suggest the --
15 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I suggest that may be one I
16 of the problems.
l 17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I think his job is burdenseme 18 enough without it.
i 1
19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Well, what troubles me is 1
20 ;
not that the results under this sytem would be the same.
21 Obviously if I were sure they would, I would, as John 2;
indicated, have no basis for objecting to it, but that they 23 might be different, and it seems to me that the way in which 24 they might be different would be in terms of decisions
-.,eral Reporters. Inc.
25 actually being made by three Commissioners while two others
"3 263 I
30 still saw an aspect of the problem which merited looking into.
1 They might have questions outstanding to the Staff 2
3:
that the other three thought didn't matter very much.
I presum'e i
4 we want some paper moved, and if those questions ought to drop to a rel~atively low priority in the Staff since they're now 5-f acclemic, it it were a process in which the extensions were 6
I easily granted, that I'm sure I'd have much less trouble 7
with.
81 i
I i
4 9l But the fact is I think that there'll be a number
~
10 of cases in which for one reason or another the three or l
6 four commissions who have voted will vote to keep it moving, 11 12 and the questions of ae remaining Commissioner will get l
l I
13 pretty short shrift or just won't get asked at all.
j 14
'Now maybe as an alternative there is a way to 15 designate certain papers as priority items and to give them 16 something approximating this treatment.
Obviously I don't 17 think any reasonable person could object to a system in which matters which had a real urgency in the outside world 18 11 were treated expeditiously by the Commission.
But I would think that that's something different 20 21 from giving this approach, making this approach standard 22 for every proposal.
i Now I can go through it with an eye to specific l
23 24 sets of deadlines and specific sets of procedures and maybe e.r. derat Rmorters, inc.
25 critique it back.
Maybe that would be a usef ul starting
"8 264 i
31 1
point, but --
2 MR. RATHBUN:
It seems to me you're saying 3
scmsthing else, though, too, and I think that is the questions 4
that you might pose --
5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Could you use one of those j
l mikes?
6; l
7 MR. RATHBUN:
-- the questions that you might pose ;
i would' carry answers which if received could change -- well, 8
could influence your position in a given matter, but perhaps 9
10 the others as well.
Is that correct?
j 11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
That's certainly the i
12 point, I'm asking the question, that there 's something l
13 troublesome in this proposal.
i i
i 14
- MR. RATHBUN:
Which we'11d influence more than l
15 your decision.
l 16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
At least the answer to 17 the question might, yeah.
i 18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But I think the Staff 19 ;
proposal, though, has a dimension, the concept that if they l
20 have those kinds of questions, are able to be explained to I
21 the extent that they co: ~ 1 convince one of the majority to 22 also wait, then I see Peter's concern.
The concern really is 23 th.. a minority still has an outstanding prcblem, but cannot i
s 24 convince the majority, that that problem is sufficient to r.....res aeoorters, inc.
warrant the continuing --
8 265 25 l i
32 MR. BICKWIT:
I think that's a central issue here.
j COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
The fundamental question is 2
really what is a minority and majority.
3 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
And for that I would suggest 4
there are a hierarchy in cases, certainly cases which have same.
5 I'
urgency outside of the Commission and the Commission's own 6
procedures ought not to be able to be held up by any individual 7
i Commissioner indefinitely, if three or four of his colleagues 8
feel that nothing will change their position.
9 So that added to that category of cases, some 10 11 sort of procedures may make sense, although as I say, I don't i
know cases in which items of major oublic immortance are 12 13 being withheld or even withheld by three Commissioners who l
are bound and determined to go on it.
14 i
SECRETARY CHILK:
There are papers, we have 15 16 Papers being held for others, this one on the page which Mr.
Kennedy just gave me which shows the Staff communications 17 to the Commission of being held in conjunction with the 18 19 delegation of authority study.
The caper has been up here for same considerable i
20 i
l 1
period of time, and there has been views of people that want 21 to tie the two together, and, you know -- so there are --
22 you look at it and it says, well, gee, four people have 23 24 voted on it.
j
,,eral Reporters, Inc.
25 But, on the other hand, it has a diff erent kind of a "8
266 i
33 I
context.
2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Is that for 79-84?
3!
SECRETARY CHILK:
That's 82, 79-82.
i 4
There's 276, which deals with placement of documents i
5' in the task force.
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, the status is listed 7
as Vic and John, no response.
8 SECRETARY CHILK:
79-82?
I think Mr. Ahearne i
9 has commented on it.
Victor has not.
But I do know the 10 reason that paper --
~
II COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That was SECY's tabulation.
12
[ Laughter.]
13 SECRETARY CHILK:
I know the reason the paper is 14 being held, I think that's the case, is that there has been 15 a suggestion which has been discussed before, that the thing f
16 be -- that we wait until we delegation of authority study i
17l to consider how thau one is going to fit in with the other.
f 18 And so I'm not trying to defend the system, I'm merely trying f
19 to say that, you know, whatever it is, there are reasons for 20 them.
21 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I guess this sheet isn' t as much 22 help as I thought it was.
I 23 SECRETARY CHILK :
Not if it's not right.
Certainly' i
24 not if it's not right.
I don't --
i ersi Reporters, inc.
25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Maybe supplying me the large
'"3 267 i
l i
34 i
sheets.
SECRETARY CHILK:
I think -- no, let me try to 2
revise tdat one tc, get you what I think --well, it tells you 3
l I
the status of the votes, but it doesn't always tell you that 4
some of the other underlying reasons why nothing is happening.
5 What about trying to separate outl:
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
6 i
some of the -- to establish some sort of hierarchy and separate!
7 l
out some of the more routine ones?
8 9
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That's one of the suggestions l l
10 here.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
One of the few suggestions l
11 12 here with which I disagree with, i
13 SECRETARY CHILK:
That's why it didn' t fly the last ;
i 14 time.
15 '
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
It's II No.
2, right?
16 SECRETARY CHILK:
Right.
./
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I'm not sure whether I'm for it 18 or agin it, but I think I'm probably -- what was your objec-i 19 tion?
20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
My objection was that you il may recall last f all, they brought it up, and at that time 22 they also gave a list of the ones that they classed as 23 controversial and then the ones that were noncontroversial.
24 And I found a couple of their so-called noncontroversial eral Reporters, Inc.
25 ones to be contreversial, or at least in my mind quite
'"8 268 I
35 controversial.
j COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
The controversial-2 3,
noncontroversial break is the wrong one, for just that reason.
I COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
The idea of a class that j
4 would have in some sense a Commission approval if a period 5
of time has gone by and nobody had acted on it, if it was 6
l l
significant enough to bring to us, we had to act on it, therefor 7
1 we ou",nt to a':t on it.
8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
What I had in mind was a 9
different classification, sort of an urgent and a normal set l
10 i
11 of tracks, and anything on the urgent track at the very least l t
it seems to me Commissioners would make every effort to l
12 I
13 expedite what they did on them, and at most maybe there l
l 14 should be a set of procedures that are invokable to force it l
t 15 out.
I i
16 But I do have misgivings about setting up a 17 procedure until somebody can show me an urgent item that we're i
18 incapable of getting out now.
19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I didn't really view these 20 as addressing so-called, for example, should an emergency crew be sent, that type of question.
I thought it was more than 21 22 the daily business or the weekly business, monthly business l
of the Commission.
j 23 24 SECRETARY CHILK:
You've got to remember, you
, aeral Roorters inc.
25 would still see them if you objected to the category, you
8 269 i
t
1 36 could request a change in the category at any time.
That 1
may not invalidate the theory or a system that would allow 2
I 3i papers to go through without requiring any votes, because you could change if you said, hey, I want to vote on that.
4 S
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I guess on the bottom on that which shif ts back to the other point, Sam, is that 7 6
{
think that if it is required for us to act, it's. tot delegated,!
7 8
it's required for us to act --
SECRETARY CHILK:
That's why it didn't fly the last' 9,
10 time.
I understand that.
But I still think it's a theory 11 to look at.
I 12 Somehow you get 'o get tne Commission out of some I
13 of these things, I guess is my thought.
14
- COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Well, I think the approach i
i 15 that Devine attempted to take is the right word.
Some i
16 categories of items ought t) be reviewed for delegat on.
17 I certainly agree that many of the Congressional letters or l
18 the letters that get signed ought to be delegated, whether l
19 that's to OCA or directly for EDO to sign out.
And there 20 are sets of lette*s in that direction.
i Most of the things, as Mr. Kennedy points out, on 21 22 this list, these are different types.
i CEATRMAN HENDRIE:
How about sorting out things like 23 24 Congressional correspondence?
t-
, erst Amorters, inc.
25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I think it's long needed.
l
8 270 l
i i
37 1
80 percent of it doesn't need to come to us at all.
2 SECRETARY CHILK:
You can reduce your work load by 3
66 percent if you come up with any reasonable limitation,
,f 4
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
What is the criterion now?
5 Joe signs all letters to Congress?
I 6
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Almost all.
l 7
SECRETARY CHILK:
Well, I'd say, you know, 75 8
Fercent of them.
9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
A number of them -- there are a 10 fraction that are just flat out ex parte sorts of things.
11 The executive director, response that you don't normally see 12 at all, and there -- yeah, and same of the constituent 13 referrals, OCA or Lee responds to.
l l
14
'But I sign an awful lot of Congressional correspon-l 15 dence, I must say.
16 MR. ROTHSCHILD:
It's my undarstanding from l
17 Congressional affairs that anything that is directed directly {
18 to Chairman Hendrie, where he is the addressee, is generally l
l 19 signed by the Chairman, except with the constituents and the 20 ex parte problems, and that's --
21 VOICE:
I think generally the correspondence 22 that's addressed to the Chairman has gone for your signature, 23 response for your signature, with the exception of obviously 24 bucked-over correspondence which usually has a little slip on i
F..ral Recorurs, Inc, 25 it and is addressed to the Commission, or Congressional Affairs, "8
271 1
1
38 i
or ex parte correspondence, that's usually addressed by EDO.
There is a lot of correspondence that comes to the 2
Commission that's addressed to Congressional Affairs or 3
Staf f or just the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's correspondence 4
1 and that's dealt with at the Staff level.
There is a lot of i
5 i
correspondence that's addressed to the Chairman, #requently i
6 I
with the assumption that if they address it to the Chairman, j
7 it will get a speedier response.
But that right now is being 8
9 prepared for your signature, and when it's prepared for your 10 signature, I think almost always it's circulated around ay l
11 the Secretary with a yellow sheet on top of it.
I 12 VOICE:
It seems to me that we're probably the 13 only. agency in the government that automatically would have 14 you sign out letters that are addressed to you, leaving aside 15 those referrals.
In any other agency they have a standard 16 procedure, you know, the Secretary has asked me to respond, 17 and send of f, by the Congressional guy or by the substantive 18 guy, and, you know, if there's something of a substantive l
19 nature that warrants going to the top, then you have to rely Il 20 il on the judgment of the guy that gets it.
This is true in l
21 Defense and State.
i 22 SECRETARY CHILK:
Otherwise it gets delegated then l l
23 and generally that's based on the individual that signed 24 the correspondence.
For exanple, you might say I want to eweral Reporters, Inc.
25 personally sign letters to all of the chairmen of the Oversight
'^'8 2/2
39 I
Committees, that sort of thing, the Prasident, the Vice 2
President, the Cabinet members and so forth, and then the 3
distinction between policy and nonpolicy.
4 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: My recollection is that in 5
.the very early days after the Commission was established,
{
l I
6 most of this correspondence was sent up here for the reason i
7 that the Staff was looking for what is the policy thrust, 8
what approaches are we taking, and moreover is it the desire i
9 to get the new Commission before the Committees even then, i
10 even with the Joint Committee.
Be sure that the recognization '
11 that you have a new ball game in town was clear.
i it seems to me we just remained in that framewo$k, 12 But I3 as the correspondence has increased, the number of committees !
l Id trebled, and it's become an all but intolerable sort of l
i 15 burden.
0 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
The volume is way up, and it 17 isn't the most fun in the world going through those blasted IO letters. It sure does slow it down.
19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
This is not an area that 20 I have the same types of concerns about.
If we can agree 21 on a criterion for delegating, and as long as I'm sure that somebody will read those letters and ask questions about them, [
22 one, are they written in language that is reasonably easy l
23 i
24 to understand; and two, do they give a reasonably thorough L.r.i neponm. inc.
25 answer to all -- each and every one of the questions raised
'"8 273 i
40 in the incoming letter, I would be content not to see a fair 1
2 part of the correspondence.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I'd suggest that we adopt, untilf 3
we find reason to adjust it again, the policy about like that 4
5 reconnended here, that is that inquiries not involving major f
6 policy questions, the Secretary would either assign them to the Staff or direct response.
They wouldn't come up to the 7
Commission.
8 I
The ones that would come to the Commission would be 9
10 responses to letters from the Oversight chairmen or, you know,i, i
11 ranking members of the Oversight committees, where they're l
12 clearly dealing on a piece of business between the agency j
i i
13 and the Oversight Committee, and letters that carry in them 14 elements o'f policy decisions the Commission will want to keep i
15 track of.
16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
The one suggestion that I 17 would make in the change is I guess I would feel more comfortable with OCA doing the screening on the direction.
18 19 They are likely to be a little more sensitive to the political 20 implications.
21 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Let me add also that in 22 doing this, we are not in any sense proposing that we're i,
23 downgrading our response.
It is only a recognition that --
l 24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
We're speeding it.
4 s
t-hderst Reporun, Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Yes, we're trying to improve;
'"8 274 i
l
41 the way in which a response can be made, both in time and in 1
2 substance.
3i To that end,, it seems to me that even though the correspondence is goi.,.g to be responded to by the Staff, a 4
l copy of that respor.se ought to go to OCA, which should look it l 5
i 6
over, to be sure.
I'm not suggesting they even have to do it l
1 7
ahead of time.
All that correspondence ought to be reviewed j
by OCA to be sure that everything is consistent and not by 8
mistake or inadvertence begin to veer off on a track that 9
10 the Commiscion is not going.
11 VOICE:
Right now all the correspondence is l
12 dispatched from --
13 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Fine, so long as OCA i
14 has read it before they dispatch it, my problem is taken care 15 of.
16 CHAIKKMi HENDRIE:
Sam, on Congressional stuff, 17 you should consult with OCA.
18 SECRETARY CHILK:
I always do.
19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But I still have my two 20 problems which are Chat we do get Congressional correspondence, 21 which seems to me to be virtually impenetrable, and we also --
22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE :
You mean the incoming or the i
23 outgoing?
24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I'll pass the incoming I
i r ~ cal Reporms, ine, 25 for diplomatic reasons.
The outgoing, which I have -- the nne or
[
l
42 1
outgoing has that problem, and there are a7so times when the 2
outgoing response seems somehow to have passed the complaining 3
caestions in the night, and somewhere in that rechanism we 're l
4 going to take the Commission out of it, there ought to be something else introduced.
l 5l 6 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Well, I guess my own view l
is I think I would rely on OCA to do that, because at least 7
in the sense that I have of one of OCA's functions, which are 8
1 9
the link to the Congress, they are the ones who ought to 10 expect to receive the heat. If the answer is both impenetrable j 11 and incomplete, in their view, I think it would serve them well i
12 to make sure that'.both of those problems are solved.
13 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But it needs to be clear i
14 then that in giving OCA this function, we're also giving them i
15 the power to send the letter back to whatever branch of the j
16 Staff and say --
17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes, right.
18 Joe, I'm sorry, I do have to leave.
I have my 19 sort of vote on all of the paper and additional comments I
20 which I'll have typed up and distributed to you people as 21 well as the originators and to SECY.
22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Thank you.
I 23
[ Commissioner Ahearne lef t the room at I
24 4:45 p.m.]
r ausi neconm. ine.
25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY :
You hadn't planned to vote
'"8 276 i
l l
43
)
afternoon, had you?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
No, I'd like to do two things:
2 3
First of all, to invite you to take a cut at l
I some of these, because I think some further grinding on the 4
5 procedure would be helpful.
- hat I propose, I'd say al 6
And secondly, to warn you i
week or two down the line, and get some preparation in hand, l
7 to have an administrative meeting, and I'll try to provide 8;
9 you some useful summary materials on it, Sam's files beforehand.
10 But at that meeting one thing I propose to do 11 would be to march down this list of things that I get every l
l 12 week and affirm that's it paper by paper, issue by issue, 13 that wherever it's stuck in the process, that it is in fact 14 properly stuck; that tilere is a Commissioner who has a 15 problem; and tha+ we want to defer to it.
16 Inevitably part of that would be to point out 17 some areas where we want to outvote each others, perhaps,
l 18 on those holds.
I don't know, but I would think that's i
i 19 certainly one of the reasons for having the meeting, or 20 possible reasons.
21 And with that, it seems to me I guess we've gone 22 as far as we can go.
23 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
We've only had half of this 24 meeting, the important question, the possible ques tionable
.F eral Reporters, Inc.
25 legality of our procedures or the way they are applied, and "8
277
t 44 I
I'm very anxious to see that discussed at some point, but I
~
2 think all Commissioners should be present when we do.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I'm not sure khether to include l
3l 4
that in our administrative whatever, the administrative l
0 meeting --
6 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
It should be a public I
7 meeting.
O CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yes, certainly.
All the 1
9 administrative meeting -- maybe we could schedule one
,i I
10 l right after the other.
11 In preparation f or the administrative one, Sam, j
12 we need some decipherable version of your tables, of what is l
l 13 holding these papers up to distribute to Commissioners so that l I#
we can sit there and see whether we agree that that's a f air I
15 tabulation and summary, and what the reasons fer.
t 6
We might even end up shaking a few loose, you 17 can't tell.
Some of them I've forgotten, long since forgotten 18 what..ny view was, and I'd be interested to learn it.
19 Okay.
Thank you.
20 'l
[Whereupon, at 4:47 p.m.,
the hearing was i
21 l adjourned.]
22
'"3 278 l
23 24 hceral Reporters, Inc.
25
!