Text

Commission Determination Releasing Transcript of Commission 790806 Meeting in Washington,Dc.Pp 1-86
	ML19338G495
Person / Time
Issue date:	10/14/1980
From:	; NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:	;
Shared Package
ML19338G494	List: ML19338G493; ML19338G495;
References
	REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8010300528
	Download: ML19338G495 (87)
	v • d • e

os O

fm,,%, Transcript of Proceedings

~

i' x

,/ NUCLEAR REGULATORY GOMMISSION BUDGET MARKUP SESSION (C_1.ased to Public Attendance)

Monday, August 6, 1979 1

1 j

l l

Pages 1 - 86 Prepared by:

C. H. Brown Office of the Secretary 8010300

$E$

t

?,

l t

1 l

1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA I

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2

l" 3

j BUDGET MARKUP SESSION I

(Closed to Public Attendance) 4

[

5' 1

6 Commissioner's Conference Room 1717 H Street, N.W.

7 washington, D.

C.

8 Monday, August 6, 1979 9

10 The Commission ~ met, pursuant to notice, at 9:50 a.m.,

11 Joseph Hendrie,. Chairman of the Commission, presiding.

12 4

13 PRESENT:

14 Chairman Hendrie Commissioner Gilinsky 15 j commissioner Kennedy i

Commissioner Bradford 16 Commissioner Ahearne ALSO PRESENT:

18 L. Gossick L.

Barry 19 T.

Engelhardt B. Cooper 20 N. Monaco N.

Haller 21 D.

Donoghue R.

Smith 22 23 1

t 24 25 i I! F F .. h*

3 -e e 1; i:- i l l 2 i t 1 PROCEEDINGS 2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Why don't we get started. i 3 i! . Walt, if you could do anything about the atmosphere, Y it would progably be good to do it. 4 I 5 MR. MAGEE: I'm afraid we are having air conditioning 6 problems again. 7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. ~ MR. GOSSICK: Don't cool it down too much, I can't g w rk in ariything less than 90, that's what I'm used to in my 9 7 building. 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: There seems to be a little dig yy there. 2 ~ MR. GOSSICK: That was for Donoghue's benefit. 3 Mr. Chairman, there are a couple of pieces of paper that over the weekend got reproduced down here. It is answers to questions, I believe, primarily Commissioner Ahearne asked. i One, the." planning wedge" and two, the-State-Programs --- CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, let me start out and fill a 18 procedural requirement. 19 l-This is the first of the Commission's Markup 20 Sessions. We have heard the office presentations on the 21 l'budgetandthebudgetdiscussionsthusfarhavebeeninpublic 22 I i session. We now come to a series of meetings when, consistent 1 23 i j with past practice, I would propose that-we close the meetings 24 rI with the understanding that the transcripts would be reviewed j 25 l and released when the appropriations actions, that we are hoping l, h I !

i b:
\\

lI

.t J i 3 i 1 ^ to' lead toward here are finally censummated. 2 i For today's session, these initial ones, the intent 3 1 ji was to limit attendance to Commissioners, their assistants, 4 Commission offices, the EDO and Controller and the Budget 5-ll Review Group people. As we work on in to the markup sessions, 6 I think we will come to times when we' will have some of the 7 individual office people here to have some exchange on particulae 8 points in their program, But at the moment, we will start out 9 without them. 10 With that background of a procedural note, I would 11 ask you to join me in voting to close under Exemption 9, of 12 this Budget Markup Session, and similar meetings on the 13 same subject for the next 30 days, then we won't have to vote 14 to close everytime we have one of those. We will have a 15 certificate by the General Counsel and so on. ,li 16 h Those in favor? li li ~ COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Aye.. 17 I COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Aye. 18 j CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Aye. 19 d S ordered. Good. 20 Nga we can go ahead and have said closed meeting. 21 h r Lee, you said you were circulating more pape~rs? 1 22 i i MR. GOSSICK: There have been a number of questions 23 g D asked, and these are just answers to questions. One in the it area of State Programs, and secondly, with regard to NRR, the 25 l: t. l' I. -I i i I'

A j! ll l 4 } / 'i cost of the people bei.ng loaned, hopefully, from other agencies as the so-called " planning wedge" question, which 3.[ was brought up one day last week. 4 Also, alternative inspection routines for I&E 5~ - on the unit inspection question, N-minus one and so forth. 6 There were about-five alternatives and Mr. Stello has provided 7 the numbers for it. 4 8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I'll tell you what.we might 9 contemplate, I don't know, how well traveled the corridors are 10 by the general public, but we could do ourselves a hell of a 11 lot of good from the air standpoint in breathing by just opening 12 the doors. 13 I must say, for myself I would be glad to, trade the 14 breathing room for whatever residual loss of total security 15 one would suffer thereby. 16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: How is the air conditioning. 17 in y ur room? CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Probably -- it was running in my 18 office, so I assume it is all right in that small room. .A9 4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: How about the small room 20 across the hall? CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: It's probably running over there. I I have a notion that there is a selective breaidown 23 . mechanism which cbserves spotted meetings of the Commission 24

l

! and switches some bad fuses. Would you like to trade? l 25 i i 4 I !8 1 l i! 1 r

g hl P S l U 1 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: This would be a fairly big "l 2 i group for your little room, I would think, but if the room 3 Np across the hall is -- I guess it isn't wired properly, though, is it. S'! COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: It isn't wired at all. 6 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well --- 7 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I'm happy either way. It is 8 not insufferable in here yet. 9 i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I'll tell you, the doors have been l 10 shut and it seemed very stuffy when I came in. With the doors

11. i open, it may turn out not to be -- simply grim but not 12 unbearable.

13 l ,Now, where were we. Stuck will all these new papers. 14 That's it, my faithful mechanical pencil has just run out of i 15 - l lead. I take this a symbol here at the very first, I'm about { to mark the budget up and my pencil is broken. I think I'll 16 i 17 just go hbme. 18 Why don't -- Let me know one overall thing, and then 19 I think we ought to just start at the beginning. The l numbers come out large and not surprisingly, particularly on 20 l lthepeople'sside. I think that's a place where we will have 21 l to be looking with some care, and it seems to me -- as I have 22 g ne through it, it seems to me there are places for it to 23 come down a bit and there will still be substantial requests. I 24 M I would mark it up, at any rate, not as high as indicated here. i 25 t I k l 1 ? 8 4

i d i n li i a 6 1 i i 1 Ii The dollars are --- 2 'l ji MR. BARRY: About $123 million over, if we are gc,1ng 3 l j to get into '80, excluding the supplemental. 4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, heaven only knows how the 5 supplemental will come through, but if it is, for instance, 6 of the order of $45, we are on a $363 million base now, if 7 $45 gets us close to $410 as a total in '80 and some number 8 .between the EDO's $434 and the $486 for the set. asides, strikes 9 me as not unreasonable. 10 However, I prop.ose to get there as a first crack 11 off, by starting to move through the offices.to see if people 12 have a feeling as to the overall number in an office and we 13 will see then, how far down into the decision unit structure 14 we want to go with this first crack. Then we can stand back 15 and see what that looks like and see where people want to go. 16 If that would be acceptable to you, what I propose 17 to do is to start out with Standards. I think these additional 18 materials which have been passed around, I see we have one 19 n Ryan, and one on resident inspection and one from NRR. 20 - COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: One from NRR? MR. GOSSICK: It is being copies right now, 21 Commissioner. It was not handed out before, unfortunately, but g Y' 23 I Is that a signal or ah --- 24

j

,1 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Yes, I -- given that all of 25 e ? Ii N

( 3 e 7 e L 1 the requests have at least some merit, it would help me a 2 'i e little in deciding what my feelings about people per office, 3 Y t if we knew what we wanted to use as a justification from what i i 4 we have sent forward. That is, if it is to be a budget to take i 5' into account Three Mile Island, that it should continue 6 licensing, the best possible clip, then that is one target. 7 If we are using something anywhere close to the OMB 8 goals set for us, that's another, then it would make a big 9 i difference in the number of people I felt would be justified 10 per office if we had come to some kind of an agreement on what, 11 in effect, what the justification we were going to put in the 12 letter that went on top of this would actually say, i 13 , COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: You drawed a distinction 14 between the first and the second. Are you saying that OMB 15 is different than --- 16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, as I understand it -- 17 What is the exact OMB? MR. BARRY: OMB planning signal in terms of dollars 18 19 is $403 million, plus --- COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Plus whatever we think for gg TMI? 21 i i MR. BARRY: Plus TMI, and then if you recall reading 22 there --- 4 23

a COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: What does that mean?

24 il MR. BARRY: That means within the $403 million they 25 h U I h i:

d .~ e it b 8 i I 3 ,J i ^ recognize that there would also be a TMI impact on your 2 l" budget that would probably exceed $403. Then they also --- 3 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: They didn't indicate any 4 estimate of what that might be? S' MR. BARRY: No. 6 In other wor s, they recognize S403 million probably 7 a normal program increase. 8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What was the date of that? 9 MR. BARRY: Of their policy guidance letter? It 10 was in late June, July, I can' t remember the exact date. 11 MR. ENGELHARDT: It was July 9th. 12 MR. BARRY: We got it just about the time we were 13 finishing our review in the BRG. ~ 14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: So $403 corresponds to $363, 15 in effect? 16 MR. BARRY: Yes. 17 CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY: That is the follow-on budget fr the --- 18 MR. BARRY: I'm sorry, no. It really would have 19 20 corresponded to probably $373 the way they do their business, but they also recognize that -- they -know that -we received 21 a reduction and they didn' t adjust it for that, so we have -- 22 i in effect, we have licenses to go up to $403 million, plus

l TMI and be within their ceiling.

l 24

j i

COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: As long as what we say 25 i i I I e v

t i 9 t i i 1 relates to TMI is compable with what they feel --- 2 MR..BARRY:. Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: They haven't given us a 3 4 j blank check for TMI. 5' MR. BARRY: No, but -- Well, they have given us an 8 ~6 i oPen check. ~ R 7 t, COMMISSIONER BRnDFORD: The amount is to bc agreed b g ] upon later.

i 9

j MR..BARRY: If your budget totaled $403 d 10 million and you had no TMI impact in there, they would say i 11 we met the planning target. COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Of course, you realize, 12 i Peter, it i; not absolutely mandatory that we meet on this yg total. 4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: No, I understand that. 12 I was just setting that as_a --- 6 MR. BARRY: It could be less. 17 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: And it could be more. 18 1 MR. BARRY: Or more. 19

)

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: We have never been down to it 2D l before, have we? 21 MR. COOPER: That's right, we have not. 22 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: No, I was just trying to 3,

l

~~ I' lay out a different approach. 24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, but it doesn' t seem to me - 25 t

1 10 1 that those are different. The first one you mentioned was: ^ Is it the intent of the agency to continue to license 3 construction permits and OLs, right? i 4 { COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, no, not that. But to l 5~ continue, in effect, the more or less at the pace that we f 6 would have, TMI or no TMI for budget planning purposes, along 7 with all of the TMI related work, in effect, the guns and 8 butter. l 9 ?- CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes, okay, but I don't --- 1 10 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Yes, but when one comes to 11 [ write this, the statement of justification, are we saying,in 12 effect, this is our normal budget plus all TMI related work 13 that we feel needs doing, t! ~ [ COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Aren't we going to end up 14 I; -15 j'! saying that we will have two things. We will have the l 16 [ supplemental which is primarily focused upon either waste i 17 management or TMI, and it will say that as best we can telle at the present time, here are the actions that we believe should 18 19 be taken and here is the monies and the people we will need to do it.' Then, in addition when we go to OMB, at least, we will 20 be saying, here is the 1981 budget which, again, to the best 1 21 f ur ability attempts to take into account those changes 22 e we se that are going to have to be made as the result of TMI, 3 g ~ !! recognizing that particularly on the '81 that there will be a l 24 number of other studies whose results will impact, perhaps l 'i -lo i l' l .m

a ll Il ji 11 b 1 I h heavily, upon the direction the agency is going, but at the ' l-2 present time and until time to go to the OM3 in the fall, this f is our best estimate. At least, as far as I can tell, many 3 4 of the program offices, when they made.their proposals, they I t 5' were saying that here are adjustments that are going to be 6 needed as the result of TMI. 7 At least I'm having difficulty in seeing any of 8 the offices saying that it is the normal, and we have the 9 TMI on top. Most of them are trying to say, here is our 10 best estimate and the change that is going to have to be made. 11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Even to do the normal. 12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well. I don't think anybody 13 was coming in ~and saying it is going to be -- we are going to 14 be doing the normal and then we will be doing some additional. 15 I think they were all saying, there are going to have to be 16 changes made and here's our best estimate and how the changes 17 are g ing'to end up. 18 I w uld say the alternative budget would have been, let us assume that there will be a six-month, one-year, two-year 19 moratorium. That would be a different characteristic. That's O not what we have at the minute. l ~ i COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, what do you see, then, 22 I as the threshold for knocking something out, that is, Joe, i 23 when you say you come out somewhere between the EDO figure f 24 j i { and --- 25 b!

1 -

l 1. h i' it J

5 i l! i. il h'! 12 i i i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Just, Peter, that here will come 1 an oftice or segment of an office saying, now, we perceive 2 ur responsibilities this way and we believe the workload in 3 this area is progressing this way and we need these ' resources 4 . l in order to deal with.it and it has got these sub-programs in it, and so on, and what is built in there then is an estimate of how the workload will shape going out a couple years in the future and what they think they will need to deal with it, and I may -- if I may dif fer with them in saying, well, 9 I probably if I was in your shoes making -- you know -- making 10 a request which I knew was going to be whittled, probably by 11' the Commission, OMB and two sets of actions in the Congress, 12 that I might lean a little into the wind and being one of 13 those steps up the line, why I'm trying to unlean out of the 14 wind a little bit and take a few degrees in the course of 15 that --- 16 i COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Peter, of course, is asking should we be doing that at all. 18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Do you mean trimming back? 19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: No, no. Is the activity 20 one that you want 'to continue or at that rate. But let me 21 ask --- 22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, that's a perfectly legitimate i 23 j question, b'ut I think the root answer, Peter, is not that there M 24 li is some clear-cut philosophical principle that says, Ah, you 4 i '25 i ask for $42 million, I can perceive you only need $32, based on i' Ej t c

y b h 13 F t 1 i the following differotce in view of the whole thing. For me, ^ 2 ' d it will. be differences of view about how one 'ought to estimate 3 0 p the resource needs and so forth. 4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What was the basis on which 5~ the Budget Review Group produced this budget. I mean, what 6 was the guidance you believed yourself to be on for generating? 7 MR. ENGELHARDT: Well, the basis upon which we under-8 took' the mission assigned was to determine whether there was 9 adequate justification or the requested element in the 10 budget, that is, either an increase or a new program. Whether 11 the particular office had developed a sound basis upon which 12' to build that program. 13 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: What would adequate 14 justification mean? 15 MR. ENGELHARDT: More than a level of effort or 16 more than, well, we think something would be about this much. 17 They woul'd have to come up with a solid justification in terms 18 of the projected scope of the program, the personnel effort --- 19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: For what, the Commission indication wanted done or --- 20 MR. ENGELHARDT: In some instances it was clear that 21 they were operating under Commission directive, in which case, 22 i i f urse, we. looked at it only from the point of view in f 23 staffing level in terms of whether the staff, that they l 24 F 4 pr p sed or the program support money that they proposed was i 25 i b 0 t I I i e

g i M p 14 9 i 1 within what we considered to be reasonable for the scope and, i 2 !i a nature of the program. 3 l There were others aspects that were looked at in 4 l terms of the nature of the program itself, and in some 5' l instances --- 6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Did you detail what justifi-l 7 cation you found compelling or convincing? 8 MR. ENGELHARDT : Much of that is spelled out in 9 summary fashion in the EDO's proposed budget. The BRG 10 recommendations to the EDO spelled it out a bit more in detail 11 with respect to elements within the decision unit that we looked 12 at, and essentially that -- and our working papers, of 13 . course, spelled out exactly what it is that was lacking in 14 justification or the BRG felt was not -- we could find no 15 specific' Commission direction that mandated that a particular 16 program be expanded or even undertaken. 17 This all comes, this whole. process begins with essent-18 ially a five-person task -force probing into the details of 19 the decision packages that each one of the offices developed. 20 With that information and with substantial numbers of briefings, 21 and question and answer periods, by that five member task force each one of the groups, headed by a task chairman,. developed 22 a pr p sal which was brought to the BRG. So the scrub 23 y started at the group level, moved up to the BRG level where 24

3..

25 "i reclamas and discussions with the offices continued and then, 5i ti E ?*

r il [ 15 i: l 1 8-l.of course, to the EDO where the same process was duplicated. 2 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Did you work from some basic 3 guidance document? 4 MR. ENGELHARDT: From the material that the 5' controller's Office sent out in the Budget Call. In other 6 words, that's all laid out in the Budget Call that went out. 7 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Do you have that one? 8 MR. GOSSICK: We sent out the PPPG at the same 9 time we sent it down to the Commission back in March, and I 10 l that was the basic guidance and we got a few comments back 11 from the Commission, but we didn't get any general approval 12 or disapproval of the guidance document that we put out. But 13 that was what we followed. ~ 14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Do you have a copy of that? 4 15 MR. GOSSICK: Yes, sir. Do we have one with us? 16 MR. HALLER: I have. 17 ~ MR. GOSSICK: Norm, do you.have one. 18 (Copy of document given to Comniissioner Gilinsky.) MR. BARRY: You. find yourself in basically two 19 I ingredients to a budget that you have to deal with. 20 The first one is not all that difficult. The first 3 ingredient is more akin to licensing where you make an assumption that you have to continue issuing licenses, et i 23 j i i cetera, et cetera, and you take a look at the manloading 1: 24 j ' involved and the supporting role involved, the contractural 25 j' 1 i.

i

.p r i ' f' .-I

It ll . h, ll s, 6 i r 16 l. 1 technical assistance involved, and if you satisfy yourself j 2 jj that the manloading and the contractural support is 3 reasonable, you make a decision. That's not all that tough. 4 I But there is a great portion of. the budget where 5' you have to make a cost-benefit decision, and it varies from 6 little dinky things such as your three people for " plain 7 English," if you want to do " plain.English" as we vi walize it, 8 we have indicated that it takes three people. Is the 9 benefit worth the three people? Well, five people around 10 the table, depending on how tough things are, some will say 11 absolutely and some will say it is not. I can give you examples 12 of.much bigger ones, but it is tough. It is cost benefit. 13 It is a judgment call. 14 MR. COOPER: I think one of the most important things 15 to observe was Commissioner Ahearne's question earlier in.the 16 hearing where he asked if we had an envelope, and the answer. -17 was, "no". We did not have.a boggie number we were trying 18 to hit, Commissioner Gilinsky. That was'not part of the 19 Controller guidance, to come up with a number, ner did we have the OMB figure through the BRG process. We didn't get it 20 until we had completed that. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Other on the point of general 1' scope? 23 I think it is clear that these budget estimates 24 y comtemplate a continuation, perhaps I should say an on going 25 i i I;8 1 p i f'

+j if h 17 0 1

wi u an appropriate modifications, the general process of 2

licensing and review; processing of amendments, discussion of i b plants and so on. 3 4 Shall we start at the beginning and plod forward. 5 l Let me put it on the bas s that our aim, the first 6 cut aim would be'to see if we can cover this morning, the 7 major office dollar and people chunks and see where we would 8 want to go back and look, where there may be agreement or 9 close to agreement or where we will have to look. 10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Get sort of a first 11 approximation. 12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I'd like to get a first 13 l approximation'if that's possible. In some ways, that's a little 14 harder to do than just whacking away a decision unit at a 15 time. I'd like to try it and just see where we are. Let 16 me start,, and if it all collapses, why we wi,ll go back and pick 17 l up that decision unit at another time and consult on the matter. COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I'm sorry to derail you 18 again f r a second, Joe, but just one other question about 19-l this relationship between TMI and the OMB numbers and our 20 continuation. 3 i Lee, the $430', 4 or 5 million, plus $52 million i 22 set aside, if we go back then to OMB and say the difference o 23 g h'betweenwhatyoutargeted, the $403 million, what we have 24

approved and let's say it is $450, does that mean we are saying,l 25 k

i' e, t'

f I 18 l l ~ in effect, that we have $47 million in TMI? ) 2 [ MR. GOSSICK: No. There are some items in the 3 !! 6 S434 and the set asides beyond the $403 that is not necessarily l TMI related. S' COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Okay, that gets a little close c 6 to what I was after. Now, what kind of a reception then does l 7 one expect from OMB on the non-TMI portion of the amount of 8 $403? 9 MR. GOSSICK: I think it depends entirely on 10 the subject. If it is waste management, that's one thing, but 11 if it is a coversion of temporaries, that's another, if it is 12 " plain English" that's something else. It will depend on the, 13 merit of the argument. l 14 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: But these would be sorts 15 of things that OMB would of at least had generally in mind 16 even when they set the $4037 17 MR. GOSSICK: Some they would, the waste they would 18 enter into their number, but not necessarily some of the 19 other things. COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I think what they had in 20 ] mind, Peter, when they sent their, number is that they go 21 through the Federal Budget about April or May, have a 22 Dire tors' meeting and they estimate what the overall Federal 1 23 I Budget is going to look like, how much income they are going l 24 to be getting and what the economic situation is, and they e i' E

O f 19 a I: 1 !! make a rough estimate, they give a mark to each of the 2 agencies. The guidance here that they expect tnsa to come 3 in at doesn' t say that they aren' t going to scurb everything 4 that comes in anyway, but they are sayine that if you are 5' substantially over this, then you ough'. to expect large chunks 6 taken out. It is the guidance so that the whole Federal 7 Budget will fit in with what they estimate to be. 8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Yes, so that the $403 million, 9 that isn't really so much related to our program except as our 10 program has been a pretty convenient size of the budget in the I it past. It is a piece of a number that is the overall target. 12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That's right, that's right. 13 And they make ' rough estimates of program growth, such as Bob's. COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: But it does have some relationship to our program. .5 MR. BARRY: Yes. 6 l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: It zeflects their best 7 judgment as to where that -- at that point in time, and given g ~ the totality of the Federal Budget where that program ought to go. COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Or can. 21 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Or can. 22 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: But is there any reason i 23 l to think that it is a percentage of which or a ratio of 24

i

(; which one case is the relationship between the total size of the i 25 i I 4 i-

20 1 budget this year to last, and the other piece is the size of, 2 our budget this year to last? MR. BARRY: Yes, there is. They approve $373 million 4 j for us in '80, and thought that was a good program. .i 5' Now, they recognize that there is going to be 6 i inflation, up 8 or 9 percent now,' going into '81'for that ? 7 same program. So there is a big dollar amount, $13, 14, 15 N 8 million. 9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Right. 10 } MR. BARRY: They have also recognized that waste 11 management --- J 12

l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE

Eight or 9 percent of $373 --- 13 i COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: It is more than that. 14 j COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: It is more than that. I 5 mean, that's more like the whole difference between $373 and 15 16 S403. 17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: As a matter of fact, it is. MR. BARRY: But it is program support inflation. yg 19 .) It is not the total budget inflation. It is an inflation on y ur contract dollars, and its support, to some degree. 20 Then they recognize that waste management is going 3 to increase in this agency and we recognize. So you know, g even those two right there gets you pretty close up there g to over $400 million. COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I think what Peter is asking, I-l- 7 I

e 21 i l 1 is it likely that there is a very carefully developed 2 philosophical --- .i 3 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Program rationale. 4 MR. BARRY: No, not to them. I 5~ They gross it just as I have explained. That is the 6 way they gross it over there. I 7 j COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Sorry, Joe. 8 l MR. BARRY: That is the art of budgetary. 9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Okay, let's take a fast trot ]!' through the general budget. 10 11 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Are we going to do '80 and 12 '81? 1 13 E CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

think we ought to talk about i

14 the ' 80 supplement and ' 81 for each of these things. I'm i Ii 15 l; not going to worry about the out years. If we can get ti 11 16 ll anchored reasonably well on the '80 supplement and the '81 5l; requests,thenmostoftheoutyears.canbereasonably 17 .I adjusted from the office's estimates to renormalize on the 18 yg j '81 set point. y n we start and work through the major 20 i!h offices, taking them in the order on that summary sheet. 21 y k Standards. The proposition would be for an '80 22 supplement at, I think, 7 people and $1,268 and for another two people and 250 kilo-dollars. They would have some 24

i. more capability in emergency planning.

25 l-il 2 9

22 1 In Fiscal '81, they would then come up to a total 2 of 171 which is people, and program support is $7,850,000, 3 For myself, I had a tentative check on that and concluded the 4 set aside, which would give an '80 supplement of plus-9 people 5 and program support of $1,518,000. Why don't I look up and down 6 the table and see --- 7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: No problem with the '80 8 supplement. 9 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Okay, with the set aside. 10, COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. 11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: As I look -- I'll tell you what, as 12 I look up and down the table, why we will stop as people say, 13 " Hey, wait a-minute," either up of down, otherwise I'll plan 14 to take it as a tentative, but I will regard it as tentative 15 if people want to go back and think, that is, in not objecting i 16 to someone at this point, why I'm not going to say, well, you 17 have voted or you have had your vote for all time on this budget, j r 18 okay? 19 Now, on '81, I was willing to go ahead with another 20 five people, and then the estimate in here, the $7,850,000. l 21 Comments? John? 22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. On the dollars, I would 23 delete the $700,000 for the ;;dS program. I think Bob had pointed li i 24 l out that possibly something had to go, have to give and that's l what he would give. So I would delete that $700,000. 25 l e

'I 23 1 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: That was the NBS prog:rt 2 for what? 3 MR. BARRY: That's the safeguards program that we have 4 been running with. NBS for --- 0 5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: And Bob had pointed out that it 6 is questionable whether that should be something that industry f i 7 should begin funding, l 8 Then, as far as the people goes, I --- 9 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Is it a program that needs to 10 be done? 11 MR. BARRY: We have been spending about a million I 12 l de,llars a year on it. L '81 we were supposed to reduce it i 13 25 percent, pnd in '82, about complete it. Finish it in '82. I 8 i 14 ! CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes, are you sure it doesn't result I l-in whacking down one of those --- l l 16 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, I'm basing my proposed I s 17 ' reduction on when Bob was briefing it, he said that that was a candidate for reduction and reduction eught to be taken. 18 19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: This'is the 1.'easurement quality g i 20 assurance program? COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. I'm surprised. I 21 MR.-GOSSICK: I believe there is good support by 33 23 ! Burnett and company on that, isn't there Ray? li 3 i MR. SMITH: Yes. a 4 i lt MR. GOSSICK: I just wanted to point out that while it is 5 il .?

a. l si

e

I 24 1 in Bob's package that it has been supported in the past by 2 NMSS. 3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I understand that. That's my 4 proposal. 5 Then, as far as manpower goea, rather than peaking 6 at '81, I would push it off to '82, so I would drop the people 7 and instead of going to 174 or 171, I would go to 168. 8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Okay, so you would take -- plus 2. 9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes, because EDO had taken it 10 to 166, 171, 165,161. Andtheprogramsupportwouldamount-h CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: 11 CCMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That would be $7150 --- 12 13 CH, AIRMAN HENDRIE: Would be a straight $700K. COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I think it was $700K in '81. 14 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes, so it would be $7150. 15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That's what I would do. 16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I could certainly agree to that. ] 7 It seems to me well'within my range. g 19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: $7150, Joe or $7,150? 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: $7,150,000. I'm writing these j 21 in kilo dollars, so $7 million comes out in that. 22 I 1(R. BARRY: Let me ask quickly: Are we suggesting that 23 l'l! li 24 we terminate that program in '81 or reduce the level? I 25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: It may have to be a termination fi e

l J 25 L i I 1 because I think that's what Bob would propose. 2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: But I'll tell you what I'd do. 3 Rather than mandate that program, I would reduce the program 4 l support number by the $700K and let Minogue and company decide i 5 where he would like to take it. 6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I guess I'd rather reduce it 7 to $700, and then if he wanted to reclama back in to say, well, 8 he would rather take it elsewhere, but he did propose in going 9 through his presentation that there was an area in this, I think, 10 it is always better to make the decision. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well --- 12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: If he thinks that in retrospect 13 that he shouldn't have proposed that cut there then he could f 14 say that he prefers to do it elsewhere. 15 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Is this the safeguards standards 16 program? 1' 1 17 MR. BARRY: Yes. I i 18 MR. GOSSICK: It started.out in Research, you remember, 19 and we moved it over two years ago because of --- l l 20-COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Yes. t 21 MR. BARRY: Now, Bob did propose that he could 22 reduce that program, but the reason I asked the question is that i i 23 il.it still leaves a bit of money in the program to bring it on 24 0 down to its conclusion. i l 25 ; COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, I was just thinking of the O p i!i!

26 1 reduction view. 2 MR. BARRY: Sure. 3 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I agree that if Bob suggested 4 this is the area to take the cut then it makes sense to let 5 him reclama back if he has changed his mi.Td. 6 Would we be saying, in effect though -- are we really 7 saying that we don' t feel the program is necessary or are we 8 saying we have a dollar target of which this is the first in a 9 lot of steps -- in effect, do we take the bottom two or three 10 programs in each office? 11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: What I would be doing is, at least 12 in this particular case, is recognize that we do have total dollar 13 constraints because -- and I'm not looking so much at the OMB 14 target, it is just the total magnitude of the increases and 15 recognizing that Minogue ended up saying that there was a weak 16 spot, that that was the place that I would go with 'his judgment. g i 17 It doesn't automatically mean that in every office I would a7 cept-- 18 propose to accept an office structure, but I guess Minogue, I 19 have enough confidence, that I would do it. 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes, that one I'm confident in. 21 Let's mark it 168, $7150. I 22, COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I don't agree with that. I \\ 23 j ' would not cut the program. U tl t 34 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: How about the people? I 25 l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I don't know where the people'are il - lY 'N

.[ 27 1 going to come from, the three people. 2 COMMISSIONER'GILINSKY: I would give Minogue 171. 3 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I would give him a figure that 4 EDO had recommended. I don' t see where the three people are 5 going to come from. If I knew that, I could look at it 6 differently. l 7 MR. COOPER: I would maybe make one observation there. 8 When you take the conference mark for 1980 and add the supplemental 9 you are proposing, you are around a $7 million level in program 10 supprt in 1980. His request would essentially give him a cost-11 of-living growth at $7850. 12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: S7850 wouldn't be much more than ( 13 inflation on,the total in '80. On the other hand, in a number of 14 these programs, why I think '80 will be kind of a peak year. I t 15 I don't think you necessarily have to go on from strength to 13l strength in every line year by. year. Let's see, how are you on $7850, Vick? 17 ^ 18 tentatively go along with it, or either way. I don't -- if we g 4 Cut back, I guess I Would give him discretion on that. I would distribute the money. COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: For now at least, I would agree p with John on the $700,000 but stay at the 171 for people. !I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Okay, it looks like the 171 will 24 ; i; wash, John. I think it would be useful if there could be some 25 ? ) -n a

t 28 I' I 1 discussion with. Bob about the $700,000. Maybe a phone call 2 would do it to confirm that and the nature of his feeling about 3 that. 4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Yes, I would like to have a 5 little more information on that, too. 6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: And what we could do is to lay 7 that question open for a discussion at a session where we would 8 have some of the office directors up to talk about some of g diese things, okay? So put that one as item number one for 10 discussion on your list. 11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD. Joe, where were you on that "*? 12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I was willing to go with the 171 and 13 l ~ S7,850,000. My feeling is that the office has been held down 14 l f r several years, they have been at 157 for one, two, three 15 r years -- two years I guess. 16 Right now we have got'a fair chunk of them working in f, 7 MRR or for NRR pretty directly, so it is clear that as resources g in this office are added in that they don't disappear into some g unobtainable occupation that doesn't have relevance for other O things. Minogue runs a pretty --- 21 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: It's a pretty tight ship. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: -- tight ship in there. I have a 23 j .I h feeling that his people get ef fectively used. 24 Okay, why don't we plunge on to NRR. i o h a y

I l' 2 29 l i, l l i MR. COOPER: Mr. Chairman, can I just make a clarificatiob 1 2 that the mark is $7850 fcr temporarily, and 171 on people, not 3 168? Is.that correct? { 4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes, because I think a majority of { I .3 the Commission stand there, but one will want to discuss with 6 Bob that $700K in safeguards, the NBS work, to see indeed if ) 7 he wants to trim on that. There also will be a question if he 8 was at 168'-- to come out at 168 in FY '81, how would he l 9 arrange that, where would he propose to take that, and what would i i 10 that mean. 11 NRR: They have picked up the 100 people in the t 12 appropriation bill, they, therefore, do not have a supplemental { g l 13 [ personnel request. I 14l:l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: That puts them at what number? o 15 [ CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: It will bring them up to 730, which i e i 16 is their -- that, in fact, I guess is their authorized strength P. 17 ;! right now, to all practical purposes. i 18 b MR. BARRY: Yes, it is. n 19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: And they are recruiting against it, i 20 It is my fesling that recruiting 100 people in Fiscal '80 will 21-keep them_well occupied, and further personnel additions in '80 are; I 22 q not. likely to result in additional people actually working 23 % effectively in the_ office. ?: 24 q _They have asked for $4,540,000 in the supplement -- no, o they have asked for about. twice that, but the EDO mark is 25

30 1 $4,540,000. That was without --- I MR. BARRY: That was 'tithout the loaner program. 3 whatever might be needed to CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: 4 pay for the lab help. COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Now, they gave this the last 6 couple of days --- I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes, we've got a thing from Nick 0 Monaco, right. 9 MR. BARRY: The best estimate we have right now, Nick, 10 is about what, $3.5 million? 11 MR. MONACO: Yes. 4 12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Oh, that's Nick. 13 COMMISF.ONER AHEARNE: That's the $3.8 million? I 1 14 MR. BARRY: Yes. 15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Wait, say it again? 16 MR. BARRY: The best estimate we have to date on what 17 it is going'to take to pay for the man years involved, about j t 18 $3.8, I guess it is. $3.8 million. And I believe that's what, 19 64 man years of lab, plus some people from the Corps of Engineers 20 and a cocple other places. This still rema;.ns to be pr' iced out. 21' C'iAIRMAN HENDRIE: How many man years so far? 22 CO.WhISSIONER KENNEDY: Seventh three people? 23 ! COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Seventh six man years. )l li

l 24 %,

MR. GOSSICK: Thirty six total, g 25j CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Good. Now, to what extent is coveragei' II Oo e C i 0 i: iI

31 1 for some of that included in the -- either the $19,119,000, that's sort of an informal estimate of their present dollars 3 in the appropriations bill, and how much of it -- that is, if 4 we have to add to $4,540,000 how much of the 38 do we add? MR. BARRY: All of it. 6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: All of it? 7 MR. BARRY: In the $19 million that they are probably 8 going to get in their base program, that was all in the original '80 budget, in their technical assistance program to sustain their 0 normal licensing process. 11 MR. COOPER: The only amcunt that has been budgeted 12 through the years is, in our reprog ramming letter we included 13 S400,000 for '79. Other than that, there is no funding for this 14 lab support in the out years. 15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Now, I notice also that they 16 are reclaming the difference between the 19 and the 21. 1 17 MR. BARRY: All I can say on that is, that's life, i 18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Lots of luck to them. 19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, no. Harold is saying that 20 therefore you ought to increase their supplemental request by that. 4 21 MR. GOSSICK: They can do that in reclama, f t' 22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I guess I'd chuck the $3.8 million [ 23 h on top of the'S4.5 million. h 24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Is that the right budget q 25 category? I il Nw 3

32 1 MR. BARRY: Yes, sir. 2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: The $4.5 million, $540 of'it was 3 a technical project and $4 million was in operating reactor -- 4 What was the S4 million breakout now? 5 MR. BARRY: Well, it was that shopping list that -- 6 it was the " lessons learned." Really, what it was, it was 7 Roger Mattson's area or the results of his " lessons learned." 8 That is being applied to the operating reactor. I'm not sure 9 I have the detail of that. 10 CHAIRMA.N HENDRIE: Okay. 11 FR. BARRY: I can dig it out in their briefing. 12 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: That's a number larger than the 13 original off.'ce request? 14 MR. BA?RY: Yes, you mean with this amount. 15 MR. GOSSiCK: Mr. Chairman, could I just remind us 16 that we do have, at some point, we"need to go back and_ talk about t 17 some minor readjustments here to take care of the previous loans 18 that we made, like out of the security program, the operational 19 data evaluation office and so forth. O CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let's see, with regard to the loans 21 and so on --- t 22 MR. GOSSICX: I don't know if you want to do it now, but l 23! I just wanted to mention that because before too long we probably 24 do need to address that. 25 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: What we find is the security program t !!o i! g

i il 33 1 is going forward and Donoghue needs the five people to process 2 that stuff. 3 MR. GOSSICK: Right, it has not really gone forward 4 until we get some man power on it. 5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: NRR now has a hiring -- an open 6 license for 100 people. I think they turn over 5 slots to 7 Donoghue so he can get himself the security clerks and do.it. 8 Presumably, NRR, there are five people now in NRR 9 who have Donoghue's shoulder patch on them, in principle, at least and Harold will want to keep those people, presumably, good. 11 So he gets those five and he gets 95 slots and that's his 100 and 12 Donoghue gets his five slots. I think that's right. I think that's 13 clear cut and that frees that up. It doesn't change the overall 14 manpower numbers, the 730 and so on. 15 I guess I don't see much help then except to make the 16 NRR '80 supplement for $8,340,000. 17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, I would like to add a little f 18 to that if I could. 19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Okay. What --- 0 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARHE: Well, in the same paper Monaco sent us, there is Harold's resources for study of control and l 21 22 design improvements. He has got $200,000 for FY '80, some [ t o 23 sponsor requesting ' that. It's the last page. _24 l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: So_you w'ould add the $8.8 million 25 j and S2.200- thousand making a total of $4 million to the EDO's i 1 -

34 1 $4.5 million? 2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: My concern is that I'm not 3 even sure that this study that he has proposed still needs put 4 out liko that done, because I notice where he's got described 5 as it would incorporate improved practices in existing control 6 rooms ;ad guidence to engineers for the future. I suspect that 7 at some point there is going to have to be guidance for redesign 8 of current control rooms, so that is still not there, but at least 9 it is the money to study how to think of improvements in control 10 rooms. So I think that certainly is one of the things we ought 11 to be proposing for FY '81. 12 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Again, unless you want to change 13 the 200 --- j 14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: No, I would just go for the 200 instead. 15 16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Yes. And there is the other l' $3.8 which is reimbursable and that makes a total of $4 million 17 18 to be added to the EDO's mark of $4.5 million, comes to $8.5 milli n which is $400,000 more than the original NRR request. 19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: 'les, but the NRR original 20 request did not have any of the $3.8. 21 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Right. f 32 i 23l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I don't know whether NRR is the j right place and the $200K the right level for this. ,~4 g COMMISSIONER GIL7.NSKY: As opposed to Research or what? i I ? .i 0 i

i r

.= 1 35 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. 2 On the other hand, if you move it out to Research, why 3 you would do so because you wanted a larger and more sophisticated 4 effort, probably. That inevitably means it is going to take 5 loncer. Run out of the -- as technical assistance out of the 6 licensing office, it would tend to be a shorter reach look at 7 things, and $200K, why, isn' t that much of a --- 8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: There have been several extensive 9 studies, some funded by us, the aerospace study, for example. 10 The study that Stanford or Lockheed, rather, did for EPRI was 11 a very extensive study. So it is not there is a lack of 12 information. It would just be the translation of it. 13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, clearly, figuring out I h 14 how we can relate to that stuf f and what role is there in the { 15 l NRC rather than for them to do a layout of the control room, b 16 seems to me that that is the right thing to do. There have been 17 studies in control room designs. If we are going to design a '{t. 18 control room, NRR is not the group to design a control. So it [ I 19 is really looking at an area where we haven't been regularly, t 20 to anything more than a superficial degree, you know. I think i 21 we should try-to figure out what we ought to be doing. f' 22 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: That's a completely different 23 h thing that John's talking about. COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Because, if you are really o 3 4 g ing to do all the study to develop a modern control room, I i 25 L o 4 5

0..

I i 36 1 guess NRR is not the place to do that and you are not going to 2 do that for $200,000 anyway. 3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: And it may be that --- 4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I think what you probably 5 need is control. 6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: But at any rate, I don't object 7 to $200K in here with the kind of licensing and regulation 8 oriented look at the things. 9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: But we ought to make clear 10 that dat's what it is intended for. They are tying it very much 11 to TMI and I'm not sure that that's really what one wants to 12 do. You know, it is not a matter of moving the thing from the 13 back-board o,n to the front of the panel that caused particular 14 problems at TMI, it is just that people are deciding that control 15 ro ms are too primitive. [ COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, it is not so much deciding h 16 i' that they are too primitive, it is recognizing people have e 17, i I been de iding that for a number of years. It is just that TMI 18 indicates that it is time that something be done. ,9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Right, but it ought to be 20 a reas n f r a tion, and urgency of the issue, rather than 21 making changes in the control rcom that would have affected i 2 i the course of that particular accident. 23 ll f COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Do you mean solely? a [b COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Solely, yes. Which is a little 20 21 C,

8 1

37 1 bit the way I read this. 2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I thought it was stronger than 3 that, but I can see how you can read it that way. That is 4 perhaps narrowly focused. 5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, they refer to selected 6 tasks at TMI, error events which occurred and some of those. 7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: And it ends up with a product which 8 is guidelines for incorporating improved practices in existing 9 plants which leads to the sort of question of how do you establish 10 in a regulatory framework, then, some of those things. You don't i 11 want to order specific designs, but be a little more gentle. 12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, at some stage people may t 13 ' conclude that someone is going to have to direct, that operator l 1 14 ? control rooms have certain capabilities in them to mesh with the 15 l operator and-the machines, and if we don' t do it, the Congress f t 16 l will or the plants won't operate. j i i 17 ' CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, it is mandated functions, but l 18 I expect we will never get to the point where we specify --- 19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Particular equipment? I 4 20 t. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: -- Particular equipment and you l 21 j will always have to have latitude for reasonable competent i 22 j vendors.to try and deal with. 23 Ah, S8.5 million in change? li 24 !! COMMISSIONER'AHEARNE: Yes. 25 h COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: (Nods in the affirmative.) li n, if .t.

38 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: There seems to be --- 2 MR. BARRY: On the improved instrumentation there 3 is $400,000 in '80 and another $400,000 in '81 in Research's 4 budget for improved instrumentation. 5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: How much? 6 MR. BARRY: $400,000 in both years. Supplemental, and 7 $400,000 in '81 in the improved safety portion of Research's 8 budget. So --- 9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I'm not sure that that's control 10 rooms. 11 MR. BARRY: No, no. That's not --- b COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I thought that was instrumentatioj 12 MR. BARRY: All I'm saying is that someone mentioned 13 - that we also need te look at the instrumentation aspects from the 14 1 nger range standpoint. 15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What was the number you came 16 up with? 17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: $8540. Now, let's see. yg That would put the Fiscal totals for NRR at 730 at yg 20 MR. BARRY: Right. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Now, the '81 proposition from the office is.plus 80 people, and a program support at $22,700,000 q 24 l and change. $22,800,000 approximately. I must say, if they chew up 100 folk in *CO --- 25 i lt i p L ll

39 1 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: You are talking about the 2 numbers in NRR? 3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. I l 4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: '817 5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. 6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I think I would hold them 7 back. 8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, an additional 80 in '81 9 seems excessive to me. l 10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: They will be doing nothing f 11 but interviewing people for two years. For every one you hire, 12 you have to interview 4. ) 13 CH, AIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes, and I think you are going l 14 to have trouble --- b 15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: They won't be learning lessons j F 16 r issuing licenses. They will just be interviewing. 8 77 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: There was an option I hadn't thought, { yg The third alternative is that this budget is based on f Peter. 19 interviewing ~, mostly. l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I just remember the --- 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Furthermore, without going through j 21 i the decision units and saying plus here, minus there, what one j 22 1 notes is that the chunk of people out of the plus -- net-plus h '80 are in operating reactors, then there are pluses and minuses a up and down the line with plus 19 in technical projects, but the 25 l o o

a 40 1 big chunk is the operating reactors. Indeed, there is a growing 2 business in operating reactors in a sense of an apparent 3 amendment actions, but I contint ; Increase in 'the number of license 4 to think we simply have to find a way to process those license 5 amendment matters some way other than hand crafting each one. 6 If we hand craft them, then you can look down the line and see, 7 you know, in 1992 we'are going to need 10,000 people in 8 operating reactors or..whatever they think it is. You know, it 9 just can't work that way. 10 ' COMMISSIONER. KENNEDY: Why not, it does in all kinds of 11 other agencies. 12 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: The British Colonial office is the model. 1^4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You mean as the colonies disappear, 15 why the numbers increase? 16 I:have been. talking to Harold off and on, every since 17 before he took the office, and he agrees that in looking for wiys, 18 one of the things which I think we will end up doing 11s writing-19 the technical specifications in such a way that it doesn't require -20' a formal. license amendment action with all of the processing steps 21 that involves,in order to do fairly mundane adjustments to things-22 that are cited in the' technical' specs. j i 23 You have got a Westinghouse pump in and you don't' h,.. 24 l[ 211ke it or it busts and you now put a Byron-Jackson in, it now l 1 i 25 requires a~1icense amendment in many cases. I don't think things ) !+ r 1!

41 1 need to be specified in that way. We need also a way of 2 processing where we decide that on each of the 70 operating 3 plants they ought to do a certain thing. We will have to 4 devise ways, in effect, mass processing of a uniform changeover 5 of all these. But I think those things have got to be done, 6 and rather than throw another 80 people at them in '81 in there, 7 I would choose some intermediate number and look again at the 8 next budget review as he begins to hire in the 100 in '80, why 9 we would just see what --- 10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I agree. He proposed a stricter 11 approach with respect to enforcement as a substitute for the kind 12 of work that has been done and an extension of the kind of work 13 that has been going on in NRR. 0 14, CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. 15 But having said all of that, I'm not quite sure what l 8 16 to trim, how I would take the trim. I have been thinking about { c 17 numbers for increased staffing between 40 and 60, because --- . l-l 18 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Forty sounds fine to me. 19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I think there will be a case made 20 and I don' t want to zap it out all together, but I don't have a -- t 21 Let's see, I asked 40 to 60, here's 40 -- What was 22 your's John? 23 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, what I have done is made li 1 l. a few adjustments. I put an additional 4 people into operator 24 i 25 . licensing, then I had taken 10 people out frcm the operation and cn l ll 1

ll 42 'l surveillance and transferred it to the EDO's office. He had 2 15 people in that, and I sort of viewed that that really would-3 have been appropriate if that operational surveillance office 4 had been formed in NRR, it is going to have to be formed in EDO. 5 So I transferred 10 of those people. 6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Waic, wait. Steady. 7 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: The concept, however was? 8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: He still had five people in it. 9 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I can't visualize that you 10 can do that if you have got an office in the EDO that's two or 11 three-times that size. Ultimately, NRR is the outfit that is going 12 to have to do something about all of this and the office in the 13 EDO is only. going to generate the work, it isn't going to do it. 14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: No, it is going to do a. lot of 15 analysis. 16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: They do a lot of the analysis, 17 but having done it isn't going to do anything. It has got to 18 get done, it has got to get implemented and that is the NRR's 19 job. 3 t 20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, but they have a certain j i 21 amount of that work that is going on now, since it is not done fi 22 systematically. People are reviewing these LERs and the reason [ we want to get an office is because we want to have more 23, l' 24 dedicated and systematic approach to it. 1 25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Yes. I understand that. I'm not \\l i: 9o

43 1 saying that. It is only a question of how many people. 2 John is making it a much smaller office than I would visualize. 3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Wait, wait, wait. Let me get 4 straight on something. 5 It was my understanding that the evaluation office, 6 under Lee, that the people for that in number of about what, 7 25? g MR. GOSSICK: Well, 15 to 20 was the number that we 9 used in planning. 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: But those people were being covered 11 in this budget out in these offices and these things would be transferred. 12 13-COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Right. And I'm just saying that in looking at the '81 budget, it seems to me an appropriate place _.[ 14 to do some of that transferring. 9 15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I think that was all that was 6 l-contemplated. i ' 7 i MR. GOSSICK: Yes, that's right. g COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. g CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: And the question is: Is it the whole 21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: And I 'ait, no, not 15, 10 of i 22 B j the 15. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: If it la 10 of the 15, where does the rest of the office manning coming from?

i v

44 l l l-1 I 1 MR. GOSSICK: We are going to have to take one or two 2 k i out of NMSS, one or two out of I&E, figured at --- 3 i COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I would think you would take j' 4 I more out of I&E. { 5 k' MR. GOSSICK: Probably, yes, a bit more than that, 6 As was pointed out, they still have to maintain their part of 7 the in-house operation that this group will interface with, but 8 allegedly, this is going on now and it is disbursed all through. 9 Very frankly, I think this 15 got put in here when Option 3 I I 10 was being presented and recommended to be under NRR. They will 11 deny that now, I think, which is normal. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, I have been regarding the whole 13 15 as subjec't to transfer to that office. 14 MR. GOSSICK: I think we could take the larger part of 15 it and not really suffer. 16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, let me ask you: When do l o 17 you plan to form the effice? I~ \\ 18 MR. GOSSICK: As soon as I can get agreement on where l 1 19 we go with the direccor. _l 1 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: It will be formed in FY '80. 21 MR. GOSSICK: Right. f 22 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: So I'm not sure what it would do 23 !! in the FY '80 supplemental, probably nothing, but certainly in b 24 ; FY '81, I think we ought to just show it as a line, and that's why i 25 I'm reducing -- my proposal is to reduce some of NRR manpower. f ? 1

1-45 1 I also was accepting safeguards transfer to NMSS further 2 transfers, so I have reduced an additional 8 people. I took 3 another 6 out for contract management fund reduction and put in 4 26 for the set aside for the non-NRR support. I took out 4 in 5 advanced reactors. Then only gave them half of the increase in 6 operation reactors that they had asked for, and took twice as-much out in casework, arguing that by '81 they would be addressing 7 both of those in a different way than they do now, which ended up 8 f with-738 for their number. 9 5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: That would be plus 8 for '81. f 10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: (Nods in the affirmative.) 'll COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Plus what 8? 12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Plus 8 people. 3 l i COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That's right. 4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Above 731. I 15 ( COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: All together. i 16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Yes, but also, in the numbers 17 i we were talking about there were another 10 or 15 or so --- i 18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: There were another 10, so it would i 19 [ correspond to 18 on our scale, f -20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: 18 as opposed to 40. COMMISSIONER APEARNE: (Nods in the affirmative.) 22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: A little thin, I think, for overall 23! I purposes. 24 ! MR. BARRY: I had some numbers in there for increased, 25 t 1 'l

46 1 operator efficiency. 2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes, I had put in 4 or 5. 3 They had 6, .nd on top of their original submission they came 4 back in in their briefing and put on an additional 4. t 5 MR. BARRY: But you have covered that area? That's good. 6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Let's see, what happens with 3 7 these set asides. You have included all of that? 8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: The 26 set aside, yes, I did those.I 9 -l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: You accepted those? 10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I accepted those. 11 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: And what does that mean? 12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Most of that set aside was for j 13 support for NMSS, and some of it was support for IP. 22 of the 14 26 were set aside for NMSS. My argument is that most of that really is just a question of the seismic and geological effort. 16 There is an organizational question and they have to eventually j 17 address it, but isn't a manpower question. } 18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Let's see, is it clear that 19 it isn't a manpower question? That is, the same number of people 20 would have to do that amount of work if it were being done in NMSS?, e CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Probably more, h

21 22 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

Leaving the organizational 9 23 biases aside. I 24 MR. GOSSICK: The claim is they can do it with what i. 25 they have got, almost, with fewer people, but it is a long subject. bl - H D O og

9 t ' I 47 l i 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: The 26 are mostly people now t.n 2 board, I think. 3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. t 4 CHAIRMAM HENDRIE: So you are just talking about whether 5 existing seismologist and geologist and foundation engineers and 6 soils people ought to be in NRR or NMSS or some in a third ( 7 institution. It is not whether they should be in the agency 8 or not. They, for the most part, I think, unless there is some g 9 growth in there, are in the agency and working hard. They have j f 10 l been.in NRR. I see no reason why --- f f 11 l MR. GOSSICK: As you recall, Harold's reclama was for i 12 4 of those -- 4 or 6, and he said he literally had to have them t 13 to do other than NMSS work that he is responsible for. COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: There is certainly always the 14 ,5 ; suspicion that when you have an office whose workload is declining 16 and it is picking up work on the outside, before you tran,sfer out y u can probably get by with fewer people. But that's nothing 17, m re than a suspicion. 18 :t ~9 ; COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I think a lower number is -- I 3 don't know whether John's number is the right number, but 20 t it is not unreasonable. I'll just sort of pick the lower end of 21 your range. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Okay. John will go down to 18, and j I guess I'd have to get down into decision units and we will have i to argue a little bit about some of those. I would stick in the 25 t t p

i il j 0 48 1 40 to 60 range. Peter, where did you come out? 2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, I need some time to dwell [ I 3 on John's precise place of getting there. I think I agree f; 4 with the general tendency to try to get down, but I want to look [ 5 back over that particular list. 6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: All right, and you are somewhere in 7 the 20 to 40 range? g COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: (Nods in the af firmative.) 9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let me note an 18 to 60 range for 10 People and we will -- I would think we would want to have some more discussion about that. We might want to have Harold around 11 for that, or would you prefer not? 12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Fine. 13 I MR. GOSSICK: He's at Harvard, you know. He is up 14 there for that three week Harvard course. He left this morning. 15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: He and Kevin? 16 MR. GOSSICK: Yes. 77 I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: That's right. I told him to go up yg l there and --- yg COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: One other as well? 20 MR. GOSSICK: No. Bill Dircks backed out at the last minute. i COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: He is the one I would have thoughi 23 11 h.I would have gone. 24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: That's right, I remember. Harold h. 25 t 'i

i 49 1 promised to-come back with an oil sheik's hat and clear 2 knowledge of how to price petroleum. 3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, we can talk to Ed. 4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes, we can talk to Ed and the 5 budget -- NRR budget type. 6 They may have some additional things that they [ 7 may have thought about when we get dcwn and talk about decision 8 units. 9 On the dollars, they have come along at the EDO mark 10 of $22,773,000 in '81. Now, what do I remember about adds to 11 that? 12 MR. GOSSICK: There'were no set asides in dollars. 13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: No, I was thinking about that ] { 14 computer business, but we will deal with that when we get down I I I in Admin Support. j 15 ll l MR. COOPER: There is a follow on to that $200,000 16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. 37 MR.' COOPER: -- There may be some confusion because l 18 y u have a preliminary that came from my office, then a final 19 fr m Harold. In the final, he mentions that the '81 effort to 20 f 11 w n to the $200,000 is in the neighborhood of 1 manyear 21 plus $300,000. I'm not sure --- 22 23 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: This is to the human factor thing? l'! MR. COOPER: Yes, sir. 24 : CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: God, the thing I've got says the ~ l !i'; a

50 1 study would be started and completed in FY '80 at an estimated 2 cost of $200K. No additional resource needs are anticipated 3 for FY ' 81 or the out years. 4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: There is a later paper. 5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I suggest that if we don't take 6 final action immediately, by this afternoon, why this will be 7 a multi-million dollar program. 8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I had it listed as a million 9 in that program. 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: A million is too much for these guys 11 in '81. If it is a million in '81, it ought to be in Research. 12 For these guys, a couple hundred "k" type of thing is about the 13 right amount *. 14 I also am not sure that you can see $200K in $22,700,000. 15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I don't think you can either. 16 COKMISSIONER AHEARNE: You may not be able to see it, buti i 17 you can certainly see a program if you say, yes, you ought to do i 1 18 that. 19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, what is it they want, 300 in 20 there? 21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. I 22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, I won't object to chunking i i 23 I 300 in there. It would then be $23,073,000 down from Fiscal 1,, 24 ! '80. 25-l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Wait, there is more. o O 31 e 8

51 1 The FY '81 for long-term TMI actions, the BRG have 2 pointed out,'t'ey were only taking into account the " lessons 3 learned" impact -- the short-term " lessons learned" impact. 4 There are the long-term " lessons learned," there is the 5 Kemeny_ commission and our own effort, which may lead to 6 substantial amendments in operating reactors. 7 What NRR had proposed was almost $4 million in '81 and 8 then $3 million in '82 to follow on those efforts. So that 9 would be $4 million. 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Who proposed that? Where? COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: NRR. 12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Where? 13 ME. HALLER: Their proposal for FY '81, this new 14 revised budget that they have come in with would add another 15 $7 million and another 57 people on top of what you are already 16 talking about. That's the. bottom line. 17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: But in the EDO's mark, the l 'l 18 July 23rd NRR, it said they preferred $4.7 million in '81. 19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I'm sorry. Do me again. 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: In the EDO's mark they had -- 21 it mentioned the EDO had $4.7 million for FY '81. The amount i 22 l that NRR had requested to cover the NRC Investigation, the [ 23 Presidential Investigation and the long-term " lessons learned," \\ + I 24 the additional actions, and the monies that the EDO had allowed 25 t it only take into account the actions on the short terms. l! i

O 52 l 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Right. 2 Now, how much of a planning --- 3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I was putting in $4 million for 4 that. 5 Now, I noticed that between July 23rd and August 3rd l 6 it has gone up S200,000. But anyway, I would have put in $4 7 million as a planning figure. 8 MR. COOPER: I believe, Norm, you can ccrrect me, but 9 I believe you are talking about $7 million now as opposed to the 1 l 10 $4 million. it { 11 MR. HALLER: Yes, but the new totals are $7 million f 12 and 57 people. Summary line item "D" on the Enclosure 1 of 13 the NRR budget, the latest. i 14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes, but that just goes on l i 15 to casework. I i 16 MR. COOPER: Right, you are just talking about operating 17 reactors. 18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes, I was just talking about l 19 operating reactors. g h 20 MR. COOPER: Which is correct, yes. 21 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: $4.9 million or $4 million? 22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I was just going to put in $4. 23 !! CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. 1 24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That really drives more toward I a positive planning approach. After all, they have made up their ~ 25 lll ed k It

53 1 estimate numbers'which you can adjust-10 to 9, 5 to 4,H2l0 to 19. 2 'That's.all roughed out. -3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: What do you.--- 4 MR. GOSSICK: This is an alternate with the idea of 5 going in with an '81 supplement after we find out more clearly 6 what vn --- l 7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That's right. I still believe 8 that when we go in for our initial budget we ought to start i 9 incorporating some estimate number. i 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Okay. You take it at $4 million. 11 Actually, $4.3 million. COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, not quite, because I would 12 then strike $350,000 for advance reactors. 13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Where is that? 14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: They have s line i em which I 15 would leave $700,000 for Fort St. Vrain and FFTF, but I would g strike the remaining $350,000. l 17 ^ Y9 18 [ ^ ^ 19 philosophical approach which I'm trying to take throughout the 20 whole budget, because it is really reducing significantly on i 21 funding and the pecple going to advanced reactors. 22 COMMISSIONER DRADFORD: Right, I wasjust wondering f what these particular people were doing? ~ COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: These are dollars. 25- _;b. a ,l'

54 1 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Yes, but what are these 2-dollars covering currently? 3 MR. BARRY: Advance reactors. It is the combination of 4 support to the fast flux test facility and the ACHR at St. Vrain. 5 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, didn't John just say 6 that that --- 7 MR. GOSSICK: You would not rule that out. 8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes, I would leave that $700,000. 9 MR. GOSSICK: For the advance reactors. 10 MR. BARRY: Oh, the other $300,000? 11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. MR. BARRY: I think that is their thoughts on alternate 12 13 reactor concepts. I MR. GOSSICK: They are.still, a little bit, expec ting 14 the FMP, or have they reduced that area? yg 16 lI COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, there is a pre-application 1 7 j for an HTGR, then there are' some additional NASAP work and tdun1 3 r a l yg l the floating nuclear plant. es, in their budget presentation, they 19 showed $200K on the floating nuclear plant, $150K on the FFTF, 20 ~ $300K on NASAP and $400K on Fort St. Vrain. As I understood it, you would leave the Fort St. Vrain and FFTF and that would be. j $550,000. There are, among the other items, $500K lef t on the --- ; j. y COMMCSSIONER AHEARNE: What I would really end up doing 24 n L is trying to squeeze down that budget amount and shuffle some ~ P. things. Y:

1 55 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: It looks like we will go up around 2 $26-27 in program support with argument over details. Let me 3 put it at that for the moment and see if I can drudge ahead. 4 On I&E --- 5 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: What was that? I'm sorry. 6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, this one ends up with the -- 7 For NRR, Dick, this one ends up with a wider range and we 8 haven't really sorted and settled it. On the people side 9 you start, you come out of '80 at 730 people, and then the 10 range of the opinion is plus 18 to plus 60. That is, John would 11 say plus --- 12 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: As contrasted with EDO's 54. 13 CHAIRMAN EENDRIE: As contrasted with the --- 14 .MR. GOSSICK: Counting the set aside it would be 80. 15 FHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes, 80 is the number that I was 16 thinking about, because I think the set aside people.that are 17 on board,-the question is should they be in NRR or some other t 18 organization. 19 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Yes. l-20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: On the dollar side the range then, l { 21 was you have got the office and the EDO agreed at $22,700,000 { without any allowance for trying to put someching into the 22 budget to cover some of the long term actions and the results 23 l i f the inquiries coming out at the end of the year. The office e 24 says they can use up to 57 peo'ple and $7 million and change for 25 J lie it U

1) l t 56 1-that addition, and it seems --- 2 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Without any idea of what it 3 is? 4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, you know, they passed the hand 5 over tb/. field there. 6 -COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I must say that that sounds 7 to me like this can be supplemental, in fact, there are 8 specific things which arise out of inquiries not yet completed 9 or articulated, and those things then have to be done. It seems 10 to me that is the kind of thing one goes forward promply to the 11 Congress and says we've got a bunch of new tasks and there are 12 all of these wonderful people, including yourselves, you have 13 just asked us to take on and in order to do that it is going to take this bill. 14 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, that's certainly a possibility. 15 l John was going to put $4 million and no people in as a - r 16 I COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I surely wouldn't put in any y7 people, but I woul 18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:,I would' expect that as we go yg i .throughth'efallthatthosedetailsbec}omeclearerandclearer, 20 j 4 nd-I just.think you are better off.' going in to OMB at this l 21 ~ time with that alrea(y inco,rpo' rats 6 in the. budget. 2,- i MR. BARRY:.< We. can ad.just, tihis kith 'OMBi. even saf ter 23 h their mark, before we. submit ou'r budg5t to the. President, { as soon as.we hear from the findin'gs of both?.the Commissio'n and ~ 25 h i .h e.

I f 57 i l i 1 I 1 ourself. 2 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Well, I don' t care if it is 3 $4 million or whatever. 4 MR. BARRY: That just puts OMB on notice that there 5 is something there. 6 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: That's all right, sure. 7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Anyway, there wera increments of P us ;,d minus 300 in there that we will need to sort out the l 8 9 details. So it looks to me like --- 10 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Plus or minus 300 out of 11, $30 million, you know, I have difficulty in coming to grips with 12 it. I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I wasn't trying to settle on a number 13 here, but just pointing out the program support. It looks like 14, they would have come out around 26 --- 15 MR. BARRY: $26,700,000. 16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Sounds fine to me. 17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: -- Let that stand as a --- yg COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Where did I lose track of 19 10 people? John was saying 738 and you were saying John was 20 saying plus 18, 21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That's because I've got the 22 q i 10 transferred out of the NRR over to EDO. 3 l' i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Whereas, my numbers of 40 to 60 contemplated that there was going to be 10 or 15 slots in there .f ~ a e

'l 58 1 which would go into this evaluation function and be transferred 2 elsewhere in due time, but for purposes of this budget, would 3 stay here. So on a comparable scale, why his number is -- on 4 my scale his number is 18 and on his scale my number is 30 to 50. 5 MR. COOPER: Commissioner Ahearne, let me ask just 6 one quick question. Are you comfortable with just' dealing with 7 operating reactors in terms of the wedge and not the case work, 8 tech projects that they have asked for? 9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. 10 CRAIRMAN HENDRIE: On I&E, they go into -- they have 11 got 715 now, 146 in the appropriations bill fer '80. That takes 12 them up to 861 authorized in '80. 13 They would like to have -- Let's see. 14 MR. BARRY: They would like to have 1,037, I believe i 15 and we held them, at least for the moment, to 1,019. 16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: They would like to rise yet further I [ 17 in '80 to 952, which is -- dear me, what is that -- another 89 18 l people or.what iu it? My God, it's another 91 people. i l 19 .My view is that it is going to be hard enough to 20 recruit 146 yeople and that the end of Fiscal '80 will come and they will still have slots open and be recruiting against them l 21 and I think it is nutty as a fruit cake to --- 22 l COMMISSIOMER KENNEDY: And this would also be like 23 il ~' Victor's notion that the entire organization would be busy 24 11 interviewing and have little time to do any inspecting. 25 il a 9

i I i t 59 j. d t D j .L 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Now on the Fiscal '80 supplement I I 2 I people request from I&E, there are a couple of places that 3 I regard as perfectly rational. Another 6 people in headquarters i 4 to help out covering the Response Center and so on, okay. But I j 5 would say if you have got authorization for 146 new hires in 6 Fiscal '80, why that can include all of these other little 7 helps that you may need. So I would propose not to add more. 8 people in the Fiscal '80 supplement. If I can keep talking for g i 9 f a moment about people and carry it on to '81, they would then ask l 10 ll for 176 people, that's against the 861 authorized and bring them j 11 ll up to a grand total of 1,037. I must say, there may be a basis i i f 12 h for personnel growth in '81 in I&E. I wouldn' t say that there ( 6 13 wasn't, but,it seems to me that another 176 on top of the 146 d 14 il is getting into substantially larger numbers than I think i 1 5.; I&E should expand in '80. a 16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: On the other hand -- i i 17. ' CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: And I would look for an '81 growth i a 15 :! then more down in the 40 to 80 range. 19l.. COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: On the other hand, if.one is j 20 1 oking to a program like that which they laid out, it takes 2 1 ;: you 12 to 18 months lead time before you can get those people recruited and trained and put out on the job. 22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. I think we are recruiting and 23 -l putting out on the job -- the 146 gives us unit inspectors in good 24 shape. 25

'l t, 1 60 l l~ COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Can I make a couple of comments? 2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I'd be happy to have you make a 3 couple of comments, then anybody else.co, after that. 4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I'd like to propose four 5 changes. Two adds, two reductions. 6 As far as minor adds, and again, it is not the number 7 so much as the point. I think that they are providing adequate 8 coverage of the spent fuel and fuel facilities. I don't like 9 that in about removing the resident inspectors from the fuel 10 facilities, and I agree with some of the criticism that was 11 made in the buget review process, the inadequate coverage on 12 spent fuel. So I would have added two people in '80 and 6 people 13 in ' 81 focus *ed on those two items. 14 The mailed review was a set aside, and I think that those

5 1

people ought to be added in. I'm not sure whether that's the 16 appropriate thing, but the idea right now of doing nothing, I think 17 this is inappropriate. 18 I would slip the PAT one year. They had asked, at 19 least in the EDO number, there was 14 for the -- which was a 20 -question of set aside, and I would not accept that. That is, l 21 I would agree that that ought to' be slipped. l 22 Then the --- 23-COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Why would you slip that one? 24-COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Because PAT really hasn't had 25 a year's trial in it. The theory was that it would have a year's l L l'

f-k. 61 ~1 trial-and then be examined. Well, because of the slowness in 2 getting it started, and then the TMI, everybody being pulled 3 off, I don' t think it is appropriate to agree to that increase.- 4 So I would just really -- pushing it off a year almost is the 5 same as saying it is a year behind. 6 Then, as far as inspectors go, I'm still reluctant 7 to agree with the concept as proposed. I would be much more ~ 8 willing to support one inspector per plant, and now, on that 9 basis, in trying to make some rough estimates of how many people that would mean and what is the training that goes with it, I 10 ] 11 end up with 832 in FY '60 and 916 in FY '81. MR. GOSSICK: Is that the same as Alternative 2 in 12 Vick's paper? ( 13 o COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, no, because Vick really 14 t eien. t do the -- it may be. 1s MR. GOSSICK: I think he said, inspector per unit, 16 r whether it be a resident --- 1 7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: The description is the same, 18 whether the. numbers track, since I just got those numbers, I --- g MR. GOSSICK: Oh, okay. But the idea is the same. t 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: The idea is the same. 21 MR. GOSSICK: Be it a resident or a unit' inspector, one per operating unit -- per unit. ) COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: (Nods in the affirmative. ) .4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I think the '80 number comes out to 25 I il N q-

62 'l be sort of moot, that is, you would be actually under what will 2 be an authorized ceiling in the thing. 3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That's right. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Okay, so they have got some slots 5 if they can fill them for other things or --- 0 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Or the agency has. 7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Then you would get to 9 --- O COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: That, of course, depends on the 9 language of the report. 10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes, that gets to 916 in '81. 11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: 916, which would put you at plus 55. 12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: With respect to the 861? 13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. I think that's in my shooting 14 range and I would like to go back with you across the decision 15 units. 16 Peter, do you --- [ t 17 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: How many people are involved in i 18 the PAT deferral? 19I MR. BARRY: Fourteen. 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Is it 14 or more than that? I 21 MR. BARRY: Well, the 14, I think, is the Delta number. j t 22 The increase -- the total number --- ,i 23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let's see, this is under the 24 reactor construction decision unit. PAT comes in there. It is l' 25 ] not the easiest thing to sort out. 1 J k ?

I I

63 l- !f-1 Let's see, I&E said they would drop the request for 2 14 for PAT growth and reassess it for '82. So you are taking t I 3 that? 4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. 5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Now, did I read you to be pushing 6 back the program PAT growth of 10 and the residents for problem 7 sites or.whatever, 3? There were another 13 people in this thing. 8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: No, no. 9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: So you weren't pushing that off, that 10 was --- 11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: No, it was at 14. 12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: That was included? Okay, well, I, 13 in fact, agr,ee with the 14. i MR. COOPER: According to our records, they have a [ 14 I I level of about 10 manyears on PAT and the 14 would have taken themI 15 to 24, now we are leaving it at 10. i 16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: The 182 in that decision unit takes 17 I I that 14 out. 18 j COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That could well be. I was using yg Vick's briefing chart. 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes, that's what I'm looking at too. 21 His '81 request to the EDO was 196 and there is reconsideration 22 j coming to the Commission was at 182. 23 l' COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That's right. o 24 i l COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: John, what number are you using 25 c 1.

.ii n

'8 i l

ll 64 I 1 for the end result of the site resident program? 2-COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, what I have done is, I 3 have some rough numbers which are based upcn going to one per 4 unit..So it is a reduction off of the propoeal. I don't know 5 whether those numbers automatically track the ones that may 6_ hawa come today with, it may and it may not. But there.was also 7 _a reduction on the training part too that tracked with the g correspondence. 9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let's see, yours would correspond 10 to Vick's Alternative 2 in this paper that has been passed out. COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: The description would. Whether 11 the -- I'm not -- since I haven't seen those numbers, I'm not 12 sure. .It should be approximately the same. l 13 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Call for 106 in '81 and rising 14 i gently-on the out years. 15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: (Nods in the affimative.) 16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Other comments on manpower? 17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What sort of numbers are you yg thinking? l 19 t CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, they have got '80 -- they have 20 got plus 146 in '80, in the law. 21 t COMMISSIONER GIL'NSKY: And I was taking it to a smaller J amount in '80. 23 !l h COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Reducing from that? 24 - l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: (Nods in the affirmative.) 25 q N li

. :1!; v. (1 I! 65 x COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: To what, about? 2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: 832. 3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Which is just about.this number -4 without the set aside. .5 MR. COOPER: No, it's the '81 number. ~ 6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:.Yes, it is roughly the '81 number 7 without the set aside. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:That's more of a coincidence more than 8 9 anything significant. 10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: 'Yes. 11 CRAIRMAN HENDRIE:.Then for '81 --- COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I had 916. 12-CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: John had 916 which would be plus 13 55, over 861, which I continue to stick to because I think it is 14 g ing.to be in the law. 15 The office had requested plus 176 over the 861. I was 16 saying somewhere in the plus 40 to plus 80 because I didn't seem 17 D ~~~ 18 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: But he's going down, right? 19 HAIM HENDRIE: Yes. 20 MR. BARRY He's going up in '81 as compared with '80. 21 i Only in '80 did he come out with a requirement of less than 861. i 21 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Oh, sorry. It is in the '80 3 diat _ you would' have them grow more slowly. 0 4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. n '. I ,o

l-66 1 MR. BARRY: What it would permit is an extra 30 guys 2 to keep training as you go in to '81. 3' COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: B,ecause basically, I'm more 4 _nterested in the program where you have one inspector per 5 reactor. Those are my numbers. 6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKy: But what do you go to in 1981? + 7 COMMISSIONER AHEARN3: 916. 8 MR. COOPER: I guess I'm a little concerned about going 9 below the Congressional mark. In '80, however, we may be buying 10 ourselves some problems. At this point in time, you may want to 11 reprogram later. 12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, one, it depends on the 13 language, but two, I guess there is a fundamental point that 14 is predicated upon some of our staff going to the Congress and 15 proposing a program that wasn't proposed to us. And I'm not 16 sure how well drught out it is, and so to some people in the I 17 Congress, here's a great idea. j. s 18 MR. COOPER: I understand, but the language I have 19 read, and it is very specific, 146 and it even says unit 20 inspectors, as a matter of fact, and it comes up with a total 21 for I&E with a 146. So I just thought I would bring that to your ' i 22 attention at this point in time. f 23l CEAIRMAN HENDRIE: Other expressions of interest in I! u I view in the '81 people number? ( 24 o 25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What was your comment about the b 11 a v

I i 67 l 1 training program? 2 MR. BARRY: My comment was --- j i 3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Let me see. if I can just make i 4 one. 5 The program I am proposing is a unit inspector, with 6 one inspector for every unit. 7 MR. COOPER: But lower than the Congressional mandated 8 ceiling. 9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: What is the Congressional ceiling 10 based on? COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: They say that I&E should be at 11 961. 12 MR. COOPER: I believe they say 861, but what they 13 ! definitely say is 146 plus, definitely. I'm not sure where 14, I they come out. 15 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: What does that represent in 16 terms of inspectors per unit? 77 MR. COOPER: Was it somethJ.ng like 1. --- yg MR. BARRY: It represented an undefined unit inspection 19 Program, but at least one guy per unit. 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You could make -- the coverage would end up with about 98 inspectors on site. There is some j regional clerical help, you need some training people to go with 24~!

that, some management for it.

It is of the order of 100 inspectors on station'. Out of that --- 25 i N

68 1 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Does it corollate to one of 2 the five options or is it just a number taken independently of 3 the --- 4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: It clearly was a number which 5_ our staff gave to the Congress. They went to the Congress and 6 proposed 146 people. ongress what 7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Or got asked by the c 8 an addition to the inspector program would look like. 9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, I'm not sure. It was just 10 interesting to see the number coming in from Congress before we 11 9 t a paper describing that same number. MR. GOSSICK: Wasn't it-in the supplement that I sent 12 down to you, the draft that John sent to me right after TMI and 13 said, here's th supplement and asked the Commission, would you 14 like to have this ahead of the rest of the budget stuff,-because 15 there had been a lot of interest. 6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: The number va3 already floating 17 in the Congress, before we got that paper. MR. GOSSICK: I wasn't aware of that. g CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I don't think so. I think it came ~ out at about the same time. 21 i MR. BARRY: I think the difference between 861 and 830 I'- 22 back in time simply was if you perpetuated the site resident h[ program and then added in a unit on top of that, you come up with 24 a little' higher number. What we are saying now is that if you i 25 i I n 9l i l o

~ p 69 1 didn't do that you could go with the lower number, as John 2 suggests. But when the information, however it happened, went 3 to the Congress, either on solicitation or otherwise, they were 4 assuming that perpetuating a site program and on top of that 5 a unit program. So you have a bit bigger numbers. 6 Thus, if you had 146 inspectors as unit inspectors, with 7 ' the logistics support, meaning people in the Region, training 8 and so on, it came out to 146 more than whatever your base line 9 was. Your base line was a site-- the resident program was 10 already in effect. 11 Now, if you say you don' t need both to that whole - degree, it gets down to what. Commissioner Ahearne is saying, about 12 l I 832 in '80 is all you need. In '81, though, it goes up. Now 13 1 14li you have got more units. You go from 98 units to 100 and'some-odd units. So in '81 you do have to have more people, but not in '80. 15 i COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: But I'm not proposing that we go f 16 l i back and try to argue with the '80 number. What I'm trying to l 7 i say is that that's the consistent scope as I see it, which is 8 19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. 20 i Other comments? I 4 21 MR. GOSSICK: That would leave us 29 spaces to do f 22 nomething else with. f; COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Maybe yes, maybe no. g. ~ MR. GOSSICK: Yes, you are going to have to move them 25 l; ,1 d 1

E 70 1 1 if you are going to show a lower line. You either have to go 2-back and get the authorization changed or account for them in 3 some other f ashion, because --- 4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Or not use them. 5 MR. GOSSICK: Well. 6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: They may not be able to hire 7 at that rate anyway. g MR. GOSSICK: Well, there is that possibility. 9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I think that's a fair possibility 10 and --- COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: And, of course, that's the 11 strength at the end of the year, your authorized strength. So 12 just depending on how you hire them will make up the difference. 13 1 MR. BARRY: The next day you would start climbing to 14 15-the bigger numbers. COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: The more important question 16 i really is what'is the program. i 17 t MR. GOSSICK: Yes. And they will certainly clear this 18 on that when we go over to the budget hearings in asking us how _yg we are doing against. manning against the supplemental increase. 20 If we are not doing very well, they are likely to take that { _21 into account in our '31 request. If you can't hire them, we [ l won't give them to you. P' CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. '24 f 25 [ Okay, let me note the 916, let me note my range that ,1 O h o"

t 71 1. goes up to 941 and runs below too. 2 On the dollar side, first of all, in the -- let's 3 note that we are talking only about program support. The 4 decision units in I&E also list administrative support and 5 equipment, but on the total sheets, the latter two are consolidated 6 with administrative support and equipment from other offices 7 into a single line. So we are talking here about program 8 support. 9 It appears to me that $1,064,000 is the appropriate 10 number in -- as an '80 supplement, provided one wants to go 11 along with the 4-wheel drive vehicles. 12 How did that get under Specialized Technical Traning, 13 anyway? 1 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Why do they have 4-wheel 14 drive down there? 15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I think the reason they need j 16 4-wheel drive vehicles is because what they really want is a 17 car for the inspector, but they don't believe they can get GSA l 18 t approve a car for the inspector that he can take home with him. 19 However, if they call it a 4-wheel drive vehicle, f 20 i now as a special NRC vehicle, then it can be bought and supported 21 under the composite. ( 22 MR. GOSSICK: It is really a communications package j l' that has to be mounted into a vehicle of some sort, which --- o 24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes, but it could just as well ei U

72 1 be mounted into a regular car, Lee. 2 MR. GOSSICK: Yes, I know. But there might be --- 3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I think it is important to have 4 a car for the inspector. I agree with that, therefore, I think 5 we ought to ask for the money for a car for the inspector that 6 he can drive back and forth, or that she can drive back and 7 forth to work. I don' t think that trying -- I really doubt that 8 the $8,000 4-wheel drive vehicle would be --- 9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I think they have a point with 10 their 4-wheel drives. 11 Indeed, much of what you said is part of the argument, but for getting around sites and getting to some of the places { 12 1 n the stations and around the stations that you might want to get 13 I to in some circumstances, why --- 14 MR. GOSSICK: Before the roads are cleared from snow, 15 sometimes that 4-wheel drive comes in awful handy. 16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Sure. I'm not saying that it 17 18, isn' t useful, but there is an alternative that should be proposed, i then, but the Congress. If it is a 4-wheel drive vehicle that 19 is really needed on the site, then we will leave it at the site. 20 MR. GOSSICK: It doesn't do any good if he is at home at night and has to,all of a sudden,go dashing out to some j accident if there is a snow storm going on. He really needs g access to the vehicle 24 hours a day, I think, is the rationale. COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I know what the rationale is. 25 l d a u p l ,e

i 73 1 MR. GOSSICK: The best justificacion we could come up 2 with. 3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes, that's what it sounds like. 4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Is there one of these per site 5 or does everyone of the inspectors have one. 6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, the_ original approach, I 7 think, was --- 8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: 'It's one per site, I think. 9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: See, what you are really 10 automatically precluding by using that as your primary juatifi-11 cation, any hopes of getting a vehicle is for more than one inspector at the site. 13 So if the primary justification is that these people 14 I have a hard-life, so you are trying to give them a vehicle to use, i 15 l you will lose the argument as you make it. 16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Has that justification been 17 proposed? 18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I believe that's the primary 19 justification, and certainly when I talked to John Davis, and 20 also to Vick,. the impression I came up with is that that's the i 21 primary justification. i I 22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: That's what, just as a inducement! 23 ! or --- l,i T24 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: It's not an inducement. It is e 1 25 h a benefit to counteract some of the negative sides. li J a

r 74 i COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Is it to pake the inspector 2 happier? i 3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:. Not so much to make him happier 4 as it is a higher strain economic situation. i 5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I thought the point was to get 6 a car with some communications equipment in it. 7 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: That's what I thought. 8 Do you mean if we couldn't get the communications we 9 would still get the car -- I mean the vehicle? 10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: If you couldn' t get the 4-wheel 11 drive he would still get a vehicle. With the communications 12 package, it would certainly be necessary for that. 13 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: My question was: If we couldn't. [ 14 get the communications package you would still get the vehicle? COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I think that's probably true. 9

6 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:

That's certainly not the way j 17 i I understood it, as I understood it as Vick suggested, as a 18 currier for'a communications package. 19 COMMISSIOFER GILINSKY: It seems to me that we 20 just can' t go around.just giving out cars as far as expenses --- } 21-COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes you can. You can conclude [ 22 l that the difficulty in being a resident inspector and the 7 23 economic burden is one that concludes you from getting the high ] 24 'll quality people. [ i 25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, you can raise the q + i: j s

l 1 75 I l 1 grade or the pay. 2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, you are raising the pay 3 in order to subsidize the car. It is probably cheaper and more 4 direct for the government to have a car. That person, after 5 a few years in resident is going to go some place else and if 6 you put him into a higher grade based on the quality of the 7 . individual, then you are building in other problems, l 8 MR. GOSSICK: I think you really have the best chance 9 of selling this, though, as far as Congress is concerned, based 10 upon the communications capability and responsiveness. 11 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Are you telling me that what we are selling is a vehicle for the inspector? MR*. GOSSICK: That's a factor in it. 4 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: We need to decide what it is. l MR. GOSSICK: I don't think you rule that out as one 16 of the points that is involved. 17 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: It may be a rub-off benefit. 18 Is it or is it not the justification is the question. 19 MR. GOSSICK: As I said, I think the primary justification 20 is based on the communications and the ability of the inspector, 21 regardless of the time of day or night and whether his wife is 22 there with a car or not, can immediately leave and get to the 23 plant or wherever else he might be called upon to go. I 24 MR. BARRY: The primary justification made to the BRG 25 q was-a communications platform. a'l 1!

76 1 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: And the fact that the guy has 2 to have a car available to him at all times. Then it is not 3 reasonable, in some circumstances, to demand of him that he me.ke 4 his own personal vehicle available for government business at 5 all times, 24 hours a day. That's not the same thing, though, 6 as saying you are doing this just to make it pleasant and 7 convenient for the guy. 8 MR. GOSSICK: But-in doing --- 9 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: That's saying that it is government 10 business that requires that vehicle. i 11 MR. GOSSICK: But if you can do this it relieves some 12 of the burden that he is now imposed with in having to use 13 his car in this fashion at considerable expense. 14 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Lee, how would this work on a 15 site then where, say the N-minus one formula were in effect and 16 you had 3 people that were --- MR. GOSSICK: I don't know. It is my understanding 13 that they are not talking about a vehicle for each inspector, 19 whether he be a site or unit inspector. 20 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Then that doesn't track with what I just got through saying. l ~ 21 l 22 MR. GOSSICK: Except that depending on which configuratiog I you buy here, how many inspectors, it may be possible for them 23. 24 to work out an arrangement where the car is available at all times. ' i 25 l] to one or the other of your inspectors. But I don' t think that i h h ll u

I N j 77 t 1 f really has been completely thought-through. 2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: If we want to get this sold, 3 as we want in the Congress, I think we ought to have a good l 4 guidance system for the case. 5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let's see, I suspect, John, that if 6 you went the route that it is rational to try to provide 7 transportation for these people, and in at least -- if you have 8 I several inspectors -- at least one senior guy's car as 9 a transportation package, and you did it with regular cars but 10 i tried to give each inspector one, you would end up with dollars 11 ! that are about this much. 12 jt COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That's true. t

3 3

L CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: In fact, you would probably end up with more dollars. O COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: But every inspector would have one. L 0 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: But every inspector would have one. ( 17 I'm not trying to settle any argument or difference a 18 y one way or another --- 1 19 ! COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: That's an argument about whether i 20 the vehicle should be a 4-wheel drive vehicle. j 21 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes,that's right. 22 ll COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: That's another point.

i 23 !!

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: All I was trying to get to was to if 24 see if I could get away without loud cries of objection and rage' 25 with the statement that for I&E for the '80 supplement on l 1 .s

i 78-1 program support dollars, it looks to me as though we will end up 2 somewhere around $1 million and change mark. 3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I wasn't even going to raise the 4 automobile issue entil you raised it. But I was going to raise 5 a different issue on it. 6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: All right, raise a different issue on 7 it. 8 COMMISSIONER AREARNE: It might be that it is the wrong 9 line item-that you point out, maybe, but if, consistent with my 10 approach that I'm proposing for how we do the inspection, one for 11 cach unit, a true unit inspection program, then I would think that there is a reduc ion in the program support in-line items 12 13 and I'm not,sure how much that is. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Not a hell of a lot in Fiscal '80, 14 I w uld think. 15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I'm not sure, because I wasn't 16 17-really sure when I looked at the set asides that tracked with it. l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Because in Fiscal '80, we are not yg about to have sites that have got more than one person on them. 9 MR. BARRY: You are right. There is, like for 20 instance, S764,000 in program support for training of unit 21 inspe tors. And within the 146 mark, you have got --- 22 t t CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Wait, wait, wait. Where are you? i ,3.l 24 l' The $764,000, Okay. MR. BARRY: But if you hold it at 146, within your l 25 i i p a i 3

l

i 79 1 SS million you have money to take care of unit' training in '80. 2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That was the one item. 3 The other was, I think that they need some program 4 support -- some additional program support in '80, because I 5 believe they have got to. improve the Response Center significantly 6 more than their current plans for improving it. 7 So I would have put in a'few hundred thousand dollars, 8 S300,000 to improve the Response Center. And I would put in an 9 additional $500,000 in equipment, down in the equipment line in 10 '80, and $3 million in equipment in '81. 11 MR. COOPER: Maybe one possible way of looking at this j 12 whole scenario is if, instead you allow the 146, you say that's a Congressional mandate per our earlier discussion, but do not hire 13 f ~ the full 146, hire the last increment between your mark and 14, 15. the 146 toward the end of the year, as an increment toward your i '81, then you would be right in saying that if you followed that i i 16 scenario you would still reduce the training pipe-line in '80, f 17 t because you really didn' t have that many people on board. [ 18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. yg MR. BARRY: In your $2 million set--- j 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You are talking about 20 percent out of the 146 increment, at best. g MR. COOPER: That's right. That's all you are talking I about. r t a 24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: What are you going to do, cut training [i 25 1 - l N, 4

o 80 g P 1l' staff? I don't think you are going to be able to. f 1 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, no, at slower-increases. 2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: In what? 3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: In the training staffs. 4 MR. COOPER: You would have some administrative support 5 in terms of travel --- 6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I've got a notion that your training 7 staff increment is what, something like 11? 8 MR. COOPER : Eleven. 9 MR. GOSSICK: And I think you can cut that much if -10 you are going to train this number of people. 11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: In '80, you are going to hire as 12 fast as you can, 120 people, in that program, train them as i 13 fast as you can, versus 146. I bet you you don't make much of j I' 14 an impression on the 11 people for training. I-15 MR. COOPER: That's probably true. In the training I i 'c 16 there are things like travel and administrative support that would[ 17 be affected by not having those people on board earlier. U I f' 18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: But those things don' t come under j program support. They come under administrative support and travel 20 and training. 21 MR. COOPER: That's correct. I was just making the 22 point that there would be some reduction. That sort of --- l 23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: But not in program support. 24 I MR. COOPER: Not in program support. You might want to

1 N

25-put that all together --- 1 e

81 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Jesus, all I want to talk about 2 is program support. Let me do that. 3 It may come up higher. 4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: As I say, I don't know. 5 The one thing, though, I do believe we ought to add 6 in program support money for imploving the Emergency Response 7 Center, not equipment, but I think they have to have a more 8 thorough and I think they are gcing to have to hire someone to 9 come in an tell them how to do it. 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Architectural changes or equipment? 11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, later I would have 12 equipment. Then I would have a big clug of money in '81 for } 13 the equipment. } CHAIBMAN HENDRIE: You are thinking now in terms l 14 about --- 15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: In '80 I'm thinking about f 16 l designs --- 17 [ I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Process monitoring and such things. ig COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That's right. 19 CHAIRMAN HEEDRIE: Sort of a little Houston, j 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, if you want to put it that g way. I i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Okay. 23 li i l'j Now, that would throw some doe into the ' 80 supplement. o il Anybody know what that might be? 5 i!

82 1 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That was more of a gue.es. I 2 don't know. It could go as high as 500. 3 MR. BARRY: Yes. 4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Then something like $3 million out 5 in --- 6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: In '81. 7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: But that would be in the equipment 8 column. 9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I would put $5.691 million as 11 Vick Stello's request to the Commission for '81. Where is my l 12 long sheet. Is that what was on that thing too? The program support dollers in I&E. 14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I see $7 million. MR. GOSSICK: $7.031, it says, request. ~6 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I see a mixed number with a l 17 set aside and so on. But Vick --- 18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I had $6.9. 19 MR. BARRY: Yes, that's what I've got. 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Why.$6.9 instead of $6.69. Where 21 the other two? was 22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: A million out on modified 23 l4 l. inspection, I think. 24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Stello's amended request as given 25 j in his briefing sheets to the Commission was for $6.691 million. e si F

i 83 ' l' MR. GOSSICK: Yes, it is, it is $6.691. 2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Now, the EDO mark had $5.6 million 3 and a'S2.3 million set aside. The set aside had mostly to do 4 with -- somebody remind me? Had mostly to do with the unit 5 inspector program and leaves,me totally confused because.the 6 Congress has mandated a thing, so I found it difficult to go back j 7 and forth across the numbers and ended up sticking to Stello's 8 thing. Okay, I've got a nod there. S6.669 plus appropriate j 9 Response Center stuff. Does that sound okay? 10 Vick came down under his previous request. I think 11 the sheet you are looking at, Peter, shows an office request of 12 S7.031, and Vick modified that af ter the EDO scrub on it to i $6.691, which, I think, comes out nicely in the middle and I 13 left a check-mark by that one. 14, l MR. BARRY: Plus the doe for equipment. 15 i 16 l . CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, when we get to equipment, why, I 17 ; yes, I think we need to do something out there. 18 i Now, would you like to quit or go on with one more? MR. BARRY: Where did we finish on the supplemental 19 Program support? 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: It's going to be in the neighborhood 21, f a milli n to a million five is my guess, with details to be 22 settled. 23 :ll' d MR. BARRY: A million, a million-five. o 34 H O CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, it is a $1.64 million on 3 o. 1 ,I +

84 .s 1 their request. That might go down a little bit.. 2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I tried to.st'ick in'some mbney pn 3 program support. 4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. 5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: The Emergenc'7 Response Center. 6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You were putting in'some' Response 7 Center contract money, get an architect and those type of people 8 who worry about Response Centers, to. plan. Therewasalsohhe 9 question with, what? Depending on how the transportation que'stion 10 came out, you might be talking about more or.less--money'for 11 transportation. There was a possible slight reduction in' training costs 12 if ne went, slower on the unit inspection programe-It just 13 doesn' t seem to me that that's going to be muc.h dollars --- 14 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: You are focusing.on our f 15 l if Response Center. This is not the site response center? f ).. ~' COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Our Responsea Cente'.ri.- I'thinkN' 17 that we can focus on improving the site response, but I think--- l ~ 18 CHAIRRNM HENDRIE: I found it very difficu.lt to w.ork,. 19 in I&E with the BRG because you treated the 146 peop.le as a' ) 20 ? set aside, and' God damn it, theCongressissayinjf;ligeupy 92 l s lute and do this. That is a very peculiar set aside to be' 23j presented with. h COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, I've"got to endorse.the 24 t 25 la BRG's position in a sense that they were trying to say that I I 't 1; v

I 85 1 believe that the Commission has not decided on what a unit 2 inspector on quote " program" is. It is very difficult for 3-them to say here are the monies and --- 4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes, I agree, and I don't apply 5 criticism here for the people putting it down this way. 6 On the oth6r hand, if I'm trying to get a column 7 of numbers, which when I add them, I'm going te represent a -8 request in the '80 supplement, there is very little point in 9 my putting in the cost for 146 people in there and so on, you 10 know, that is in the 363, 340 and 80, it is already there. It is not a supplement. 12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Although it wasn't definitely i sure that it was going to be there when the BRG was doing its f 13 I 14 work. l 15 i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, that's right. If you go back l i .14'.. - ~ to ;the '.beginning of the budget review process, things were a e, j .t 17 l$t shhkier than that now. Absolutely, absolutely, i 9 n . h0i I'm just saying that from the standpoint of making l t9 lQ_ thi's.,p.res.e.Nt sheet, why I find it confusing and so I'm f ~A-2p. , clut?c$ing Stello's,vugraphs here. ,f'.,..

W '

.B' " .;.f.:. l t,'-. 2 b. Le t 'y,,See. Do you want to quit? Have you had enough { i for'an iEitial stretch at--this. I.22- ~ - y s.,fj- ^ c -~ . - Ah.- v.. '7 g '2CO{p1ISSIONEWAHEARNE: Gea, i don't know. It's great 7,y 65.$:.',, - '2 4 !.

s..t.$f'f5

..e.OMMISSION.ER iGI.IN.SKIi'*rfohncanstaywithit. Don't 2.5; - y -&. -:,. M.- - C p, , p. ,.. ~{. ' . 'ps . l. 5:- ,'c M ; ' ' e 3-.' ', - Y - 'f(-]',,,p., '~ .j., n:- s2...:r. .sj .v._

.i .o 86 1 let John cool down. Keep him running to our zero hour. 2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: When we hit our stride on the ~ 3 budget, why we will have work schedules in which John will be 4 kept working by at least two other Commissioners at all times, 5 but if we trade back and forth, why --- 6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What do you call it when you 7 keep the turbine rotating. 8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Spinning reserve. 9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Spinning reserve. 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: A question. Tomorrow, we, in 11 addition to grinding on the Budget, we have got to go back and 12 grind on the TMI-l Order. 13 (At this point, the Commission went into an agenda 14 planning session terminating this meeting at 12:15 p.m.) 15 16 l 17 18 19 20 21 i 22 i 23 l i' .l l 24 { l 25 c i <}}

ML19338G495

Text

Navigation menu

Search