ML20009B976
| ML20009B976 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/27/1978 |
| From: | Hendrie J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | PRESIDENT OF U.S. & EXECUTIVE OFFICES |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20009B970 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8107200107 | |
| Download: ML20009B976 (1) | |
Text
-[p" ? ,,%,
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- w..
t wasmNoTon, o c. 2:555
- $m I
g k,['.... j' April 27, 1978 CH AIRM AN The President The White House Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
Thank you for your letter of March 23 concerning you-recent Executive Order for the improvement of govern-ment regulations.
The Commission recognizes thtt simplification and clarification of government regulations is an important part of your program to reform the regulatory process, l
and joins in the spirit of your Order to accomplish i
this obje::tive.
As.you have requested, we will report our progress to you and to the Congress in this area by k"c 30,1978.
Respectfully, j
I Lu 4 ~1tu
~
Joseph M. Hendrie l
l l
1 l
l 8107200107 8106d8 PDR COMMS NRCC j
CORRESPOPOENCE PDR
I,c#
UNITED STATES
= [,,h
,, \\
NUCLE AR REGULATORY COV. MISSION II' E WASritNGTON D. C. 2055!
5 t
3 &?;w July 21, 1978
\\[ ,O% ',.I 4
CH AI R*.*.Ah The President The White House Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
I am pleased to transmit the NRC report of progress in improving its regulations as requested by your letter of March 23 accompanying Exe-cutive Order 120?4. We fully support the basic objectives of the Order and believe that the preparation of clearer and less complex regulations is a necessary prerequisite for satisfying these objectives.
We have carefully examined the provisions of the Executive Order 12044 to determine how current NRC procedures compare. We have found that, for the most part, our, procedures a_ppear to satisfy the requirements of the Order, or at least will satisff its intent upon suitable modifica-tion.
In one area.(Section 4) further study is needed to determine our position.
The NRC is fully cognizant of the importance of eliminating unnecessary burdens upon those being regulated, and of reducing as far as possible the economic cost of government regulation.
The following quote from the NRC's Value-Impact Guidelines, adopted by the r.ommission in January 1978, illustrates our commitment to these ideals:
l "The policy of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is that j
value-impact' analysis be conducted for any proposed regu-latory actions that might impose a significant burden on the public (where the term public is defined in its broadest sense).
Such policy is not to be construed to mean that cost considerations take precedence over considerations of health, safety, environment, or national security.
These i
factors remain paramount.
However, where there are alter-l native means of realizing equivalent benefits in regulatory l
matters, cost should be a prime consideration.
Enclosed is a section-by-section response to the provisions of Executive Order 120?4.
In each case we outline briefly our current procedures and i
1
, 3
The Presider.:
2 plans for some future changes in certain areas.
In our comments on Section 4 we indicate why further study is needed.
Respectfully,
\\
C u Es.id
's s_.
Joseph i:. Hendrie
Enclosure:
Analysis 1
e b
',b
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF EXECUilVE ORDER 12044 SECTION 2(a)
Recuirements publish semi-annual agenda of regulations under development or review.
Each item should include a staff contact.
- ~ ~ ~ ~
Comment SECTION 2(a)
The NRC now employs four separate procedures which seek to achieve the goals of this section:
d
.l (1)
NRC publishes an agenda of petitions for rulemaking c
I i
currently under review;
~%
~
(2)
NRC publishes proposed regulations for public comment; (3)
A status summary report listing, among other things, those regulations under development by the Office of Standards Development (*.he " Green Book") is published cuarterly and is available to,the public on request; (4)
Commission staff papers, which are discussed in Commission meetings open to public attendance, are placed in the Wash-ingtor. Public Document Rocm on the-day of the Commissicn meecing.
l
2 The !!RC proposes to publish a semiannual list of significant regulations under review by the staff, in addition to the p-ocedures already in place.
A staff contact will be listed where possible.
SECTION 2(b)
Recuirements Agency head must review issues and alternatives before staff initiates development of significant new regulations.
Comment i
The Commission is kept informed of current staff efforts.
"Predevelop--
f ment" reviews are conducted only selectively by the Commission.
- However, i
the staff generally prepares prel'minary regulatory analyses of signi-ficant regulations in early stages of their development.
SECTION 2(c)
Recuirements 1.
provide opportunity for public participation.
2.
Allow 60 days for comments.
3.
Notify interested parties directly if necessary.
Under present NRC procedures public comment an propcsed regulations is inci;ec u:cn pub'licaticn in the Federal Recister.
.ost Commission l
l.
3 meetings on proposed regulations are open to the public.
Current prac-tice is to allow 45 days for public comments.
The 60-day period for public comment can be implemented without diffi-culty.
In certain rare cases immediate action must be taken for safety, security, or other reasons, and a regulation may then be issued prior to the expiration of time for public comment.
In such cases the need for immediate implementation is explained in the publi'shed notice of the new regulation.
Certain licensees "who may not have immediate access to the Federal Register (e.g., physicians and radiographers) are generally notified-by.
i 1
direct mail of proposed regulations affe'cting them.
i i
SECTION 2(d)
Recuirements 1.
Agency head or designee shall review and approve significant regu-lations before publication in Federal Register.
The review shall include analysis of alternatives and impacts, including any burdens imposed by reporting requirements.
2.
Agency head or designee shall determine that regulation is written in plain English and is understandable to licensees.
3.
A pian shall be developed for evaluating a regula-ion after it has been implemented.
I
l
~
4 Comment f
The Commission reviews all significant regulations prior to their pub-lication for comment in the Federal Reaister, and would consider most of the listed factors.
The tiRC Office of Inspection ar.d Enforcement takes such additional steps as directly contacting affected parties to assure that licensees correctly understand the intent of our i
regulations.
The Commission does not at this time require a formal plan for evaluat-l ing the regulation.after its_ issuance (#8).
Such evaluation is per-formed on a continuing basis by the regulatory and enforcement staff, particularly in regard to new regulations of uncertain impact.
(See 9
coments below on a related requirement in Section 4.)
SECTI0t1S 2(e), 3(a), 3(b), and 3(c) 4 Reauirements l
l l'.
Establish criteria for evaluating regulations and analyze alter-l natives.
[
l l
2.
Publish the analyses.
Com ent
[
r3 a=
- = -
Sections 2(e). 3(a):
The value-impact ana. lysis currently performed by the i:RC staff for most proposed regulations weighs many of the listed factors, where applicable to the NRC situation.
The NRC does not have a formal set of criteria to determine which regulations are "significant".
The guidelines for the value-impact analysis stipulate only that all proposed regulatory actions which are non-recurring or non-routine should be examined.
[His-torically, value-impact analyses have been performed on about 80% of 1
significant proposed regulations.
Under the Commission's new Value-Impact Guidelinese adopted in danuary 1978, this figure is expected to increase.]
In certain cases a more extensive Environmental Impact I
c Assessment may be prepared which will consider the listed factors in
^
greater detail.
i Current NRC criteria for the value-impact analysis are more restrictive than those required by the Order, that is, the NRC performs an analysis of many regulations whose total economic impact is far less tnan 5100 million.
Similarly an analysis may be performed on regulations having only a minor economic effe,ct on the nuclear industry and hence on elec-tric consumers.
The Commission may, of course, order that an analysis be performed on any proposed regulation or other staff action.
In our view the NRC is in compliance with this section.
. a a.
--m
6 Section 3(b):
At this time some proposed regulations are published accompanied by the value-impact analysis.
It will be NRC policy in the future to make any value-impact analyses available for public review at the time proposed.
or final regulations are published.
5ection 3(c):
The NRC Office of Standards Development now places in the Public Docu-l ment Room a final value-impact analysis if there have been any modifi-cations or changes since the proposal was first published for comment.
This procedure will be extended to all regulations subjected to value-c impact analysis.
SECTION 4 9
Recuirements i
Periodically review existing significant regulations for continued need, burden, simplicity, duplication, and changes in economic or technical conditions.
Ccament The ;RC does not at :nis time have a comprehensive plan for review of existing regulat-icns.
Scme regulatiens are reviewed if a par-icular j
tr:gri-is uncer revie'.: (for exs.:le, current safe;uards regulaticns};
7 others may be reviewed due to external events (such as petitions fcr rul emaking ).
Finally, there are staff-init'iated reviews, such as the current plan to r,eview significant fuel cycle regulations beginning in FY 1978.
The Commission soon will be discussing witn its staff reasonable and i
resource-effective methods, involving full opportunity for public input, for periodically r "* ewing our reaulations as outlined in Section 4.
SECTION 5 Recuirements 1.
prepare a draft report outlining (i) process for develo;nng regu-d 3
lations and any proposed changes thereon, (2) criteria for iden-tifying significant regulations, or regulations requ' iring regu-latory analysis; and (3) proposed criteria for identifying regu-lations to be included in the ceriodic review; publish report in Federal Register and send report to Office of Management and Budget.
2.
After revising report in light of public ccmments, send to OMS for apcroval before final publication in Federal Register.
{
l
~
. ~
\\
8 Comment f;RC will voluntarily comply with the reporting requirements of this sec-tion and submit the report to'0MB for co : ment.
With suitable modifica-tion this section-by-section analysis will constitute the.dre_ft repo.tt.
Secause the Order does not apply to i;RC, an independent regulatory agency, we do not believe that OMB approval of our report should.be required.
t J
+
I i.
2 i
e e
1 1
i
...----...._,1
.,-..-,,,-,,r_..