ML19316B207
| ML19316B207 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/14/1980 |
| From: | Ahearne J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Brooks J HOUSE OF REP., GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19316B203 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8006120071 | |
| Download: ML19316B207 (4) | |
Text
.-,
UNITED STATES "h7 3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 8
O
'e N A & N, *h W
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 pcg/
May 14, 1980 CHAIRMAN
'The Honorable Jack Brooks, Chairman Committee on Government Operations United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Chairman Brooks:
The Commission has completed its review of the amendments to Reorganization Plan No.1 of 1980, submitted by the President to the Congress on May 5, 1980.
In sum, the Commission recommends that the Congress not disapprove the amended Plan.
While varying reasons underlie each Commissioner's acceptance of the amended
~
Plan, we all believe that the organizational structure it provides is workable and should not hinder the agency's performance of its statutory responsibilities.
However, the Commission believes certain clarifications in the legislative record could offer additional protection against the Plan becoming a source of conflict for the agency.
The clarifications the Commission has in mind follow.
I agree with (2) and (5),
but disagree with the others.
(1) The ultimate agency authority to interpret and apply the Plan resides in the Commission, as exerrplified in its authority to
' resolve doubt about its functions under subsection 1(a).
~
(2) Subsections 1(b),1(c), '2(a) and 2(b)(4) which provide for authority to remove NRC officers and employees pertain only to the subject of who has authority to remove, and are not intended to affect other laws, such as those which relate to substantive and proced-ural rights for such officers and employees; (3) No provision of the Plan authorizes the Chairman or the Executive Director for Operations (or any other employee of the Commission) to withhold information from the Commission and individual Com-missioners; (4) The provision in subsection 2(c) requiring the ED0 to keep the Commission fully and currently informed "through the Chairman" is no't intended to cuthorize the Chairman to prevent, hinder or control the substantive content or timing of the ED0's communica-tions to the Commission under this subsection; M
80061200N(
=
The Honorable Jack Brooks 2
(5) The provisions in subsection 4(a) which autnorize direct communi-cations to the Commission or a Commissioner i,y an NRC officer or employee are not intended to prevent the Cormission from estab-lishing other policies relating to direct communications such as its "open door" policy.
These communications ara to be encouraged, when necessary, and the Plan is not intended to erect barriers to them.
(6) Although the Plan does not explicitly so provide, its intent is that the Staff of the Commission (other than the officer and Staff referred to in sections 1(b)(4), 1(c) and 2(a) of the Plan) shall report to the EDO.
My comments are attached.
The Commission appreciates the careful scrutiny which the Congress has given to the NRC Reorganization Plan.
If we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call on us.
Sincerely, b/
^
I l
J n F. AhearYe
Attachment:
Separate comments of Chairman Ahearne cc:
The. Honorable Frank Horton 1
O e
Chairman Ahearne's Separate Comments I personally agree that the Plan will assist the agency in the performance of its duties.
I also agree that some legislative clari-fication may be helpful in guiding the NRC in its implementation.
However, I do not believe that the Plan itself has any great inherent danger of becoming a stumbling ' lock or source of conflict.
The re-sponsibility for the effective implementation of this Plan rests with the five members of this Commission.
The intent of the President's Reorganization Plan is very clear: the Commission must devote its energies to the development of pelicy, handle rulemakings, and address adjudications. These policies and rules, and then interpretations through the adjudicatory process, provide guidance to the staff.
It is equally clear that it is the intent of the Plan that the details of the
~
management of the NRC staff in the implementation of Commission policy shall be the responsibility of the Chairman acting through the Executive Director.
Any clarification in the legislative racord should be con-sistent with these goals of the Plan.
My specific comments on the suggested clheifications follow:
1.
While there is no argument that the Commission has the final authority to interpret the Plan within the iOr. the Plan places well defined limits on the scope of that authority in Section 1(a).
2.
I agree with the Commission comment.
3.
I do not believe there is any ambiguity in Section 1(d).
The Commissioners shall have equal votes, authority and access to information pertaining to those areas for which they are responsible as described in Section 1(a) and 1(b).
Commissioners should not as a matter of course be receiving information outside of these areas, and the Chairman would be justified in insisting that a Commissioner i
show why such a request related to his other Commission duties.
Furthermore, the inclusion of the EDO or any other employee of the Commission in this paragraph implies that the Commission would make l
requests without going through the Chairman.
This would be a clear violation of the intent and letter (Section 2(c)) of the Plan.
l 4.
As principal executive officer of the Commission, the Chairman is ultimately responsible for the performance of the staff, including the EDO.
There is adequate pro.tection already in the Plan against the arbitrary suppression of safety related information (see next suggestion).
j 5.
I agree with the Commission comment.
i l
1 1
L
i 2
6.
The intent of the Plan is that the staff will report to the EDO, subject to the direction and supervision of the Chairman (Section 2(b)).
9 4
e i
O t
i l
2