ML19276H498
| ML19276H498 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/31/1979 |
| From: | Hendrie J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Ribicoff A SENATE, GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7911290027 | |
| Download: ML19276H498 (4) | |
Text
I%..,*
October 31, 1979 coyg CHAIRMAN g(tk The Honorable Acraham Ribicoff Chairman, Connittee on Goverr. mental Affair!,
United States Senate Washington, DC 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
This is in response to your letter of September 6 asking for this agency's connents on S. 1411.
The purpose, method of coordination, and procedures for obtaining clearance in the proposed S.1411, "The Paperwork and Redtape Reduction Act of 1979," is basically a restatement of the present Title 44, Chapter 35, Section 101, commonly referred to as the " Federal Reports Act," and GA0's imple-menting regulation, 4 CFR Part 10. Therefore, it represents no new, significant work impact on NRC.
Notable differences and other specific comments are suar,a-rized in Attachment A on a section-by-section basis.
There is, however, an important difference in the thrust of the proposed legis-lation compared to present requirements.
Whereas GA0 presently " advises" independent regulatory agencies as to the necessity of any proposed reporting requirement, the proposed Ai.inistrator would be the final " authority" for approval if a proposed reporting requirement is challenged under Section 3507.
This woula seem to represent a direct contradiction to NRC's substantive inde-pendent authority under tne Atonic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Energy Reorganization A:t of 1974. We do not believe the Administrator for Federal Infonnation Kanagement Policy should be in a position to direct NRC not to impose a reporting requirement that NRC has determined is vital to nuclear safety.
NRC recognizes the importan:e cf centro 111ng the impact of paperwork burden.
An analysis of reporting burden is rr.ade a part of each value-impact statement that is considered with every proposed rule or regulation, and subsequently reviewed by the Commission.
The substantive technical analysis is reviewed by the Paper-work Reduction Subgrcup and prc:essed through GA0 by the Division of Rules and Records.
Administrative overhead costs and considerations are reviewed by the staff of NRC's Paperwork Managenent Service Section of the Division of Technical Information and Document Control. Of course, NRC also complies with the pro-visions of the present Federal Reports Act. We believe, however, that the final decision about the " necessity" or value of any. reporting requirement vis-a-vis safety must reside with NRC and not with some separate organization not specifi-cally charged with protecting the public health and safety.
Further, giving an Executive Branch agency this review responsibility for independent regulatory agencies appears contrary to the intent of Congress when it added a rider to the Alaskan Pipeline Bill removing independent regulatory agencies from the control of OMB and, instead having them report to GA0 (Section 409(b) of Pub.L.93-153, 87 Stat. 593) for the purposes of coordinating Federal information collection.
1424 280 o29 CC)m m s N R.CC CORgg3panoerce 7911290
d
2 We als: asst =n that Se: tion 3504(e) of the proposed legislation refers only to
'prceearal" advice and guidance for reporting of information.
Si:iilar cuida.:s is nx proviced through OMB Circular A-71, TM-1, Federal Infomation Processir.; Star.dards, Publication 31 " Guidelines for Automtic Data Processing Physi:a Security and Risk Management," and OMB Circular A-108.
k's presume there is no in_ent to involve the Administrator in the detemination of the level d prote: tion or classification that agencies may assign to particular inform:fon cor.sistent with existing laws, Executive Orders and regulations.
- incerely,
]
s V
Joseph M. Hendrie Enci osure: Section by Se: tion
- cnents P00R BRISM 1424
?81
NOTABLE DIFFERENCES AND SPECIFIC COW.ENTS Title
, Section 101(a)
Section 3502(7):
4 CFR 10.10(c)(7) of GAO's regulations and Standard Form 83 new speak in ran-hours of burden; " financial resources" is not included in the definition. Wnat financial resources means or how it should be calculated is not clear.
Section :.M(a):
It would clarify the " authority" issue if it were made a clear statement that the Administrator's Government-wide responsibility is for
" pro:edural" rratters and that no interference with substantive agency authori-ties is intended.
Section 3504(c)(2): NRC would be required to expend more effort to carry out this provision.
Section 3504(g):
The authority to promulgate standards for records retention could impact health and safety standards.
It should be made clear that the Administrator's standards are advisory and not mandatory.
Sectior. 3504(e):
We assume that this refers to " procedural" considerations
- nd would not affect NRC's substantive responsibilities under existing laws--
Atomic Energy Act, Energy Reorganization Act, or Privacy Act, i.e., the Admin-istratcr would not be in a position to second-guess or overrule the NRC on what NF.C deems a matter of health and safety.
Sectior. 3507:
This gives the Administrator the absolute authority to override substar.tive decisior.s by the Comission that may significantly affect public health and safety.
In performing its du'.ies, the NRC staff must continuously make judgments of what information is needed in making complex regulatory decisiens.
If hampered by placing the final decision in another Agency with-out the same technical and regulatory expertise, the NRC's mandate to protect the public health and safety at nuclear energy facilities would be impaired.
In addition, it is inconsistent with Section 3509(a)(3) which allows the Cc nission to override the Administrator by a two-thirds vote.
Sectior 3509'a)(3):
If an agency can override the Administrator's decision, then section 3507 (providing for an appeal and a hearing on an agency initial decisicn) be:ones a time-consuming procedural exercise with the identical pers ns being required to reaffirm a prior decision.
Sectior.3509(b):
"cr the General Accounting Office" should be added after 0M3.
Sectior. 3513'2':
Should be expanded to include "or Executive Order" after
" law' :o pro:e:t information classified under Executive Order. This section requires some general codification; it is too encompassing and vague.
P00R BRGE 1424
?82 r
J 2
i
/
Section 3515: This section, in effect, places financial considerations on equal footing with health and safety, in contradiction of NRC's statutory mandate.
Section 3516: The regulations issued by OMB and GA0 are not identical.
This section should be changed to provide that agencies currently reporting to OM3 will continue to follow OMB regulations and agencies reporting to GA0 will continue to follow GA0 regulations until modified.
Title I, Secton 102(b): On page 22, "Sec. 6 of the" should be inserted before " Privacy Act."
As it now reads, the Director of OMB would also be delegating to the Administrator the Director's authority to run his own agency rather than the authority to develop guidelines and provide assistance to other agencies.
Title II, Section 201(a)
Section 3601(10): The definition of "public-use report" would be useful in section 3502, since this type of report is referred to in Chapter 35.
1424
?B3