ML20032D462

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Agency Share in President Reagan Reduction Program in Budget Authority for FY82,83 & 84.Revised Budget Request for FY83/84 Encl
ML20032D462
Person / Time
Issue date: 10/22/1981
From: Palladino N
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To: Stockman D
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET
References
NUDOCS 8111170037
Download: ML20032D462 (21)
v • d • e


Text

^^

?

\\ ' A.'

~

a e

'o UNITED STATES

. I E' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION c

3g

+$....Y.je-WASHINGTON, D. C. 20S$5 October 22, 1981 CHAIRMAN

?

\\

'The Honorable David A. Stockman 4 NOV041984 Director, Office of Management and Budget

{, y,3, %S'*u %m,g Q

k'ashington, D. C.

20503

Dear Mr.' Stockman:

4 d

u a

We are in receipt of letters dated' September 30,.and October 9 81,

\\,-

which indicate that the Commission's share of the President's -reduction program in budget authority is $45 million for FY 1982.and $85 and $58 million respectively less, than.our recent FY 1983 and FY 1984 ' requests.

to OMB.

In. addition, the October 2 letter proposes significant reductions.

in NRC's personnel' ceiling in FY 1983 and FY'1984.

The Comission fully appreciates the' President's objective to bring the-federal budget expenditures in balance with receipts.. :We also re ognize the President's recent policy statement in which he anticipates that the NRC will facilitate the licensing of nuclear power plants and-the Clinch River

\\

Breeder Reactor (CRBR). '.

Coments on FY 1982 The funding cuts in FY 1982 can be achieved, but not without serious impacts to important licensing and safety related research programs --

even assuming that LOFT can be rapidly phased down.

We:will have even 4

more difficulty with a staffing ~1evel of 3,325 full-time equivalent pcC tions.

Last March our budget estimates for FY 1982 were reduced 46 positions from an end-strength of 3,396 to 3,350 (3,325 FTE-);

In addition, our recently initiated Licensing Recovery Program has required us to internally reallocate 113 positions which were not included in the President's budget for licensing, and we.now must also accommodate the CRBR.

Comments on FY 1983/84 Funding The proposed funding reduction of $85.million for FY 1983 is even more severe than FY 1982.

It would require that we eliminate CRBR safety research and uneconomically eliminate or defer other important research l

projects that have not yet reached the formative state of payoff.

However, we may be~able to accommodate.a reduction of about $56 million l

_ ith reasonable, expectation of-acceptable safety impact.

It would also w

accommodate the continuation into FY 1983.of the recent pay raise that was not in our budget request and it would also provide $10 million'for CRBR research.

On the basis of a $56.million reduction for'FY 1983, we believe we can accomodate the' proposed reduction for FY 1984, but will reserve the.right to reevaluate in conjunction with our FY 1984 -

FY 1985 request.

8111170037 01'105i2' l

PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPOf@ENCE PDR

; r.r

~

c.

.:.,7 a.:,. s i r,, [.

st Comments on.FY 1983/84 Personnel Ceiling The personnel reduction proposed for FY 1983 and FY 1984 presents us with an impossible situation.

During FY 1982, FY 1983,. and FY'1984 we project a potential increase of about 35 operating. power plants which will require pos~t license actions and inspection.

We believe that' for FY 1983 and FY 1984 we cannot reduce our permanent personnel strength below 3,350 and maintain these and other impor. tant safety-related programs as well as the CRBR.

Comments on Other than Full-Time permanent Ceiling for FY 1982/83/84 C

We..also request that Other Than Full-Time Permanent ceiling be increased from 123 to 191, starting in FY 1982.

This program is largely~ comprised of a Technical Licensing Review-Intern Program, Resident / Regional Inspector Trainee Program, NRC Technical Training Program, Honor Law Graduate Program, stmmer hire programs.and temporary employees at peak periods.

These programs are the principal sources of entry-level employees with technical, legal.and clerical disciplines, and they are major contributors to female and mincrity group representation: recruitment.

These pipeline programs have provided the trainees with professional and clerical experience while permitting more senior agency employees to s

concentrate their time on higher-level tasks.. Additionally, these programs give the NRC a primary and excellent recruitment source for entry-level candidates.

Thus, we have been able to bring.in.new scientific and technical employees, whom we would not have otherwise hired because of their limited experience, and have allowed them to gain the knowledge and experience required at the full performance level.

Summa ry The funding reduction proposed for this agency.in FY 1982 will preclude certain beneficial progrars designed to enhance effective nuclear regulation, and we are in the process of determining program impact that would result in order to accommodate the reduction.

The -funding reduction of

$85 million propcsed for FY 1983 and the reduction in personnel proposed for FY 1983 and FY 1984 will impose an excessive burden on the agency and will adversely impact safety programs', accelerated licensing, and CRBR review.

Therefore, for FY 1983 we believe that the NRC funding level should not be reduced more than $56 million-from our request of

$562 million, and that our full-time permanent personnel ceiling should be authorized at 3,350 for.both FY 1983 and FY 1984.

We also request that our other than full-time permanent ceiling be increased from 123 to 191.

O

_g m-

.,;3*3.

7

~

~~

n. 7..

~

,3

'yd[g* *

- -. _ -.s't.

r-s ii~-

~

3-As required by section 1311(b) of the Supplemental Appropriation. Act of 1955, as amended (31 U.S.C. (200(b)),1 am reporting that all. statements of obligations furnished to the Office of Management:and Budget in' con-nection with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission : requests for proposed appropriations for the FY 1983 consist of va.1.id obligations as defined in section 1311(a) of that act.

t Sincerely,

.c Nunzio J.

alladino

Enclosure:

NRC Revised Budget Request FY 1983/FY 1984 4

e

\\

O l

v s;

.).

y.

j e

e, h

FY 1983/1984 REVISED BUDGET REQUEST U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

.\\.

OCTOBER 27. 1981 4

l e

m

. W...Z, 7.

-J

~-

w.

. - ~..

\\

,- u NRC REVISED BUDGET REQUEST FUNDING FY 1983/FY 1984

($ in millions)

FY 1983 FY 1984 Office /

SEPT. 1 REVISEDM

'NRC OMB SEPT. 1 OMB/NRC D: cision Unit REQUEST RE~ COMMENDED REQUEST REVISED Program Support and Eouipment 1

NRR

,0per. Reactors 10.2 10.2

..10.2 14.1 14.1

, \\Sys.Saf. Eval. of 0.R.

3.2 3.2 3.2 3

3.2 3.2 Oper. Licensing 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.7 -

3.7

' Casework 13.7 14.7 14.7 9.0'

?-

9.0

,s l

1. Safety Tech.

12.5 12.5 12.5 10.3 10.3 l

TMI Cleanup-0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 l

MD&S 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 TOTAL 43.6 44.6 44.6 40.7 40.7 4

I II&E 1.8 2.3 2'. 3 React.Eng.& Con..

1.8 1.8 4,

React.0 prs..

2.2 2.2.

2.2

1. 5.,

1.5 Radiol. Safety 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.6

' 2.6 Safeguards 1.4 1.4 1.4 0.7 0.7 Emer. Prep.

2.6 2.3 2.3 4.9 4.1 Enfor. Invest. & S. P.

1.2 1.2 1.2 0.9 0.9 MD&S 0.4 0

0 0.4 0.4 Reg.Adm. Support 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 _

q Equipment 0.6 0.4 0.6 2.4 '

2.4 '

]

^

)

TOTAL

  • 20.0 19.1 19.3 23.0 22.2

(

J NHSS F.C.Lic 2.3 2.1 2.1 2.3 2.1 1

Transp.Sfty.

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 O.S.

Mat.Lic 1.3 0.7 1.0 0.5 0.5-Reae.Sfg.Lic.

1.2 0.9 0.9

. ~

' 1.2 0.7 L2 1.2 F.C.Fac.Sfg.Lic.

1.2 0.7 1.2 Sfgds.Transp.

0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 HLW 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.5 6.5

~

LLW 2.4 2.1 2.4 2.2 2. 2 '.

URL 2.1 1.5

.2.1 2.2 2.1 MD&S 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

- Al' TOTAL 18.1 15.6 17.3 17.0

.16.2

~

Also includes Regional Admin. Support 1

hRCREVISED'hpGETREQUE'3T(continued)

FUNDING l,

,1 FY.1983 FY 1984

' Office /

'I.

,3EPT,1 OMB NRC SEPT. 1 OMB/NRC REQUEST REVISED.I./

RECOMMENDED REQUEST-

_ REVISED Decisiori Unit Program SJpport and Equipment (continued) l l

RES LOCA & Trans.

(

31,0

'30.0 31.0 30.3' 29.3 LOFT 40,6

~15.0 15.0 14.1 5.0 Accident Ev,al.f 40.4 45.6 50.4 59.3 54.2 (Adv. Reactors J 23.5 2.5 13.0 26.5 13.0 React.& eac.Eng.s 38.2 38.2 38.2 40.8 40.8 1'

Fac.Oper.OSfgd.

16.8 15.8 15.8

~19.1 17.7 Waste Nanagement 19.6 17.0 18.0 19.6 17.5 Si' tin & Envir.

I 14.7 10.9 12.5 14.9 11.7 a

Sys & Rel. An'a1.

21.7 19.2 19.2 25.3 21.8 i 'MO&S 0

0 0

0 0

Equip.

8 '. 9 6.9 7.4 8.7 7.6 TOTAL

' 265.'4 201.1 220.5 258.6 213.6

)

PTS,T

> ;; y 3.3 3.3,

33 3.3 -

3.3 2.2

2. 2 -~

2.2 2.2 2.2 PDA's 4

TOTAL PROGRAM

~~352.[6 SUPPORTf5 EQUIP.*

285.9 307.2 344.8 303.2 Hq,Adm. Support 52.7 s

43.6 43.6 51.9 43.8 Salaries &lenefits 143.9 137'.1 144.2 **

143.4 144.2 **

t.

Travel 12.9 10.4

/

10.4 12.9 10.9 NRC TOTAL

$ 562.1 S 477.0 S'505.4 S 553.0 S'502.1

  • f,,, In$udes,1E siegional Admin. Support Includes'fY8?' Pay Raise $6.1M

(

- 1/

Nct recosnended - $<:twn per OMB rcouest'only to indicate how $85 million proposed,redntion')oyy0MB wouM De met.' '(See Chairman's letter dated October 22;(b81.'\\

,.. - q s

b r

f.

?

i

/ ~~

,-'T e

2 3

L

~

5, i^

k 3

p.

- (._

?;

Je,

,q

~

gp., 9, mc..s.

~-

s

=,

s

. ~.

7

-' -4

~

,g,-

.h 4 y;'

.. i

~

NRC_REVISTO BUDGET. REQUEST STA FING FY1983/FY1984 i

(IN FTE)

FY 1983 FY 1984

"' ' Of fice/

SEPT. 1 OMS NRC SEPT. 1 NRC Decision Unit REQUEST REVISED 3./ RECOMMENDED REQUEST REVISED

' NRR Oper. Reactors 156 266 266 316 312 Sys.Saf. Eval.of 0.R.

43 32 41 43 41 32 32-32 40 32-Oper. Licensing x

, Casework 231.

233 241 171-177

\\ Safety Tech.

103 87 95 103 95 TM1 Cleanup 17 13 17 15 15 MD&S 65 59 62

-- 6 5 62 TOTA!r 757 '

722 754 753 734

=1&E 192,

183 188 191 190

' -'c Aeact.Eng.& Con..

306

295 304 310 310 React.Oprs.

173' 168 170 181 180 NRadiol. Safety Safeguards--

86 83 83 88

. 85

^

72 72

'. -72 72

7 2. '

Emer.P rep.

107 107

~107 107 '

107-Enfor. Invest.& S.P.-

MD&S 81 73 77 81 77 TOTAL 1,017 981 1,001 1,030 1,021 NMSS

' F.C.Lic-41 38 38 41-38

.Transp; Safety 17-17 17 17 37 Hat.Lic 46

~43 -

45 46 46 Reac.Sfg.Lic.

38 37 37 38 37

~

Fcc.Fac.Sf g.L ic. -

35.

31 31 36 32 Sfgds.Transp.

19 19 19 18 18 HLW 41 40 41 41 41 LLW 30 26 30 30 30 URL 34' 31 34 34 33 MD&S 19 -

18 19 19

, 19 S

. TOTAL 320 300 311 320 311 W

5-

==,

9 3

/

s k

k-

w

'~)

~,'

i

+

NkC REVISED BUDGET REQUEST (continued)

STAFFING FY 1983 FY 1984 Office /

SEPT. 1 OMB NRC SEPT. 1 NRC

'"~

Decision Unit REOUEST REVISED.I/

RECOMMENDED REQUEST REVISED RES LOCA & Transient 17 16 17 17 17 LOFT 6

3 5

4 1

Accident Evaluation 27 26 26 28 27 '

-Advanced Reactors 9

3 8

9 10 Reactor & Fac. Engr.

57 55 57 57 57

\\.Far:. Oper. & Sfgd.

55 53

- 55 56 54-Waste. Management 28 25 25 28

_ 26 Siting & Environment 30 24 27 30 27

-Sys. & Rel. Analy:is 47 45 46 48 47 MD&S 25 23 24 24 24 TOTAL TDT 37 BF 70T BE PTS 318 304 306 311 306 PDA 727 662 688 727 688 s

'NRC TOTAL 3,4'40 3,242 3,350 3,442 3,350

  • OMB employment target for FTP/FTE = 3,158

-1/ Not reco.: mended - shown per 0MB request only to indicate how proposed reduction by OMB would be met.

(See Chairman's letter dated October 22, 1981.)

f 4

O

,~y n:p _.

_c

~--

~ ieu r;;

.. ;. h; ~~

~'

NRC REVISED BUDGET REQUEST FY 1983 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR RECULATION

($ in millions)

FY 83 SEPT.1 OMB NRC REQ..

REVISED CHG.

REVISED Operating Reactors SM 10.2 10.2 0

10.2 (Staff)

(266)

(266)

(0)

(266)

System Safety Eval of Operating Reactors 3.2 3.2 0

3.2 (43)

(32)

(-11)

(41)

Operator Licensing 3.6 3.6 0

3.6 l

(32)

(32).

(0)

(32) l

' Casework 13.7 14.7

+1.0 14.7

~

(231)

(233)

(+2)

(241)

Safety Technology 12.5 12.5 0

12.5 (103)

(87)

(-16)

(95)

TMI Cleanup 0.3 0.3 0

0.3 (17)

(13)

(-4)

(17)

Managemer$t Dir. & Support 0.1 0.1 0

0.1 (65)

(59)

(-6)

(62)

TOTAL 43.6 44.6

+1.0 44.6 (757)

(722)

(-35)

(754)

\\

5

~

m 3..

s,

-n.

~. -

"C

.g U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NRC REVISED BUDGET REQUEST (Dollars in Millions) j OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR 'tEGULATION FY 1983 SEPT. 1 OMB NRC Decision Unit REQUEST REVISED CHANGE REVISED Office Total -

+1.0 44.6 Program Support SM

$ 43.6 44.6 (Staff)

(757)

(722)

(-35)

(754)

Operating Reactors 10.2 10.2 0

10.2 (266)

(266)

(0)

(266)

Sys. Safety Eval. of Oper. Reactors (43)

(32)

(-11)

(41) 3.2 3.2 0

3.2 SEP Phases II and III will continue with some schedule delays.

(9 SY needed to eliminate NRC resource impact on SEP Phase II and to allow initiation of SEP Phase III.)*

x Operator Licensing 3.6 3.6 0

3.6 (32)

(32)

(0)

(32)

Casework 13.7 14.7

+1.0 14.7 (231)

(233)

(+2)

(241)

LWR Casework schedule ~ changes require an increase of 10 SY in FY83.

This is accommo-dated by shifting 4 SY from CRBR licensing to LWR casework and allocating an addi-tional 6 SY to the decision unit.

The reduction of 4 SY for CRBR will allow com-pletion of the environmental review on schedule but delay the safety review by one year.

(4 SY needed to allow completion of safety reviews on schedule)*

Safety Technology 12.5 12.5 0

12.5 (103)

(87)

(-16)

(95)

FY83' reductions will allow work on priority I, higher priority II and III NUREG-0660 '

Items and a limited number of higher priority generic issues.

Narrative in parentheses indicates NRC Revised FY 1983 requirements 6

4

'?

I~ ~ ; Q

?;.-

+

. :a.;'

..l

?.*

  • ~,-,., '

~

4 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION (Continued)

FY 1983 SEPT. 1 OMB NRC D: cision Unit REQUEST REVISED CHANGE REVISED TMI Cleanup 0.3 0.3 0

0.3 (17)

(13)

(-4)

(17)

Staff reduction would eliminate 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> coverage for major cleanup activity, would-reduce participation and interface with interagency technical evaluation groups, and may introduce some delay in review and approval of cleanup activities.

(4 SY needed to allow for orderly progress of TMI Cleanup operations)*

Management Direction and Support 0.1 0.1 0

0.1 (65)

(59)

(-6)

(62) i Reduced staff development and training and correspondence tracking.

N Narrative in parentheses indicates NRC Revised FY 1983 requirements i

1 4

7

A

'.b

& ' ;y

~~

~

t:'

K~.

=

^

~. 3.

SUMMARY

TABLE OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT.

t, FY 1983 SEPT. 1 OMB NRC Dicision Unit REQUEST REVISED CHANGE REVISED f

Reactor Engineering &

Construction 1.8 1.8 0

1.8 (192)

(183)

(-9)

(188)

Reactor Operations 2.2 2.2 0

2.2 (306)

(295)

(-11)

(304)

Radiological Safety 2.5 2.5 0

2.5 (173)

(168)

(- 5)

(170)

Safeguards 1.4 1.4 0

1.4

( 86)

( 83)

(- 3)

( 83)

Emergency Preparedness 2.6 2.3

-0.3 2.3

( 72)

( 72)

( 0)

( 72)

Enforcement, Investigation and Special Programs 1.2 1.2 0

1.2 (107)

(107)

( 0)

(107)

Management Direction &

0.4 0

-0.4 0

Support

( 81)

( 73)

( -8)

( 77)

Regional Admin Support 7.3 7.3 0

7.3 Equipment 0.6 0.4

-0.2 0.6 TOTAL 20.0 19.1

- 0.9 19.3 (1,017)

(981)

(-36)

(1,001) 8

3 m wy:_q.

g;

~

.3'_3 z _,.

1

, 4l.

..g

. gg.

s.

-s.

)

~

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NRC REVISED BUDGET REQUEST (Dollars in Millions)

OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT; FY 1983 Office /

SEPT. 1 OMB NRC Decision Unit REQUEST REVISED CHANGE REVISED Office Total - Program Support & Regional Admin Support &

Equipment SM

$20.0 19.1

$-0.9 19.3 (Staff)

(1,017)

(981)

(-36)

(1,001)

Reactor Engineering and

^

Construction 1.8 1.8 0

1.8 (192)

(183)

( -9)

(188)

Staff ' reduction of 10 SY would eliminate coverage of resident inspectors at 6 construc-tion sites. 24 of 30 sites would have construction residents.

s (6 SY in FY837111 piovide resident inspectors at remaining construction sites.)

  • s Staff reductions would also postpone component audit review and inspection for CRBR.

(7 SY in FY83 will provide component audit review and inspection effort associated with the CRBR.)

  • Reactor Operations 2.2 2.2 0

2.2 (306)

(295)

(-11)

(304)

The number of residents would be reduced from 129 to 114, but all sites would have at least one resident and up to 37 high priority sites would have two residents.

(21 SY will allow the continuation of the currrent resident assignment policy and accommodate une increase in operating reactors.)

  • Radiological Safety 2.5 2.5 0

. 2.5 (173)

(168)

(-5)

(170)

Radiological safety inspections at reactors would be reduced by about 5%.

(2 SY will curtail the reduction in radiological safety inspections to 2%.)

  • Narrative in parentheses indicates NRC Revised FY 1983 requirements.

9

~

I'h

,ilfq~}.*%

.r;;

l ^

  • ,j 9;

~. -

AGid'

. h!V

2
-

.0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND' ENFORCEMENT (Continued)

FY 1983 SEPT. 1 OMB NRC D: cision Unit REQUEST REVISED CHANGE REVISED Safeguards 1.4 1.4 0

1.4 (86)

(83)

(-3)

(83)

Staff reduction would reduce safeguards inspections at reactors by about 10%

Emergency Preparednes's 2.6 2.3

-0.3 2.3 (72)

(72)

(0)

(72)

NDL development will be deferred during FY 83 with remaining funds of $0.4M used for nonnal operations center upgrades.

Enforcement, Investigation an~d Special Programs 1.2 1.2 0

1.2 (107)

(107)

(0)

(107)

Management Direction and Support 0.4 0

-0.4 0

(81)

(73)

(-8)

(77)

Funding reductions would defer management studies to FY 1984.

Staffing reductions of 5% would be accommodated by improved efficiencies Regional Administrative Support 7.3 7.3 0

7.3 Equipment 0.6 0.4

-0.2 0.6 Funding reductions would curtail upgrade of independent measurement equipment.

($0.2M in FY83 will provide the necessary upgrades of independent measurement equiment.)

  • 1 l
  • Narrative in parentheses indicates NRC Revised FY 1983 requirements.

)

l 10

se 5.

5.. Q.

. ' y f

- -~

3,, g A.sry s y.3:.q-

- u.ye. -:

.e' e.

=-

SUMMARY

TABLE

~

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS FY 1983 SEPT. 1 OMB NRC Decision Unit REQUEST REVISED CHANGE

. REVISED Fuel Cycle SM 2.3 2.1 0.2 2.1 Licensing (Staff)

( 41)

( 38)

( -3)

(36)

Transportation 0.5 0.5 0

0.5 Safety

( 17)

( 17)

(

0)

( 17)

Materials 1.3 0.7

-0.6 1.0 Licensing

( 46)

( 43)

( -3)

( 45)-

Reactors Safeguards 1.2 0.9

-0.3 0.9 Licensing

( 38)

( 37)

( -1)

(37)

Fuel Cycle Facilities 1.2 0.7

-0.5 1.2 Safeguards Licensing

( 35)

( 31)

( -4)

( 31)

. Safeguards Trans-0.3 0.3 0

0.3 portation & Export

( 19)

( 19)

(

0)

( 19)

Licensing High Level Waste 6.7 6.7 0

6.7 Management

( 41)

( 40)

( -1)

( 41)

Low Level Waste 2.4 2.1

-0.3 2.4 Management

( 30)

( 26)

( -4)

( 30)

Uranium Recovery 2.1 1.5

-0.6 2.1 Licensing

( 34)

( 31)

( -3)

( 34)

Management Direc. tion 0.1 0.1 0

0.1 and Support '

( 19)

-( 18)

( -1)

( 19)

TOTAL 18.1 15.6

-2.5 17.3 (320)

(300)

(-20)

(311) 11 4

-m'-

4 g

n.

+\\

..m

.3.

. z,. _

x

u. r...;,

2._

, g. y. n.jp,,.g

,.~

..,. o e

. $} 'l* '

,[, ',. -

-Jj::..,.

. g:j 37.,~ -

- :?

- U.S.. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NRC REVISED BUDGET REQUEST (Dollars in Millions)

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS FY 1983 SEPT. 1 OMB NRC Decision Unit REQUEST REVISED CHANGE REVISED I

Office Total -

$M 18.1 15.6

-2.5 17.3 Program Support (Staff)

(320)

(300)

(-20)

(311)

Fuel Cycle Licensing 2.3 2.1

-0.2 2.1 (41)

(38)

(-3)

(38)

Reductions would eliminate FY83 effort for periodic and systematic review of all fuel cycle regulations.

Transportation Safety 0.5 0.5 0

0.5 (17)

(17)

(0)

(17)

Materials Licensing 1.3 0.7

-0.6 1.0 (46)

(43)

(-3)

(45)

Reduction would delay implementation of recommendations coming out of current studies of generally licensed materials and consumer products.

(50.3M and 2 SY will provide the implementation of recommendations coming out of current studies of generally licensed materials and consumer products.)

  • Reactor Safeguards. Licensing 1.2 0.9

-0.3 0.9 (38)

(37)

(-1)

(37)

Reduction of funding and staff will decrease by 15% the number of on site reviews of safeguards regulations at reactor facilities and will reduce the review of safeguards issues.

~

  • - Narrative in parentheses indicates the NRC Revised FY 1983 requirements.

12

. iSgcc r.;,. W 3 W f M S.

'W M

..% ~

. y:;:% ~.T Y : =.

i.a.n.. ;.m;;:,+p

,.... e.u.

~.

M:y.

-w w,

.. s. - ;..:. :,.

g-

~d, i ;.f.y...t=:

..;.. g *.i.; M.F. y Q p f f R :-:

n

. 3 ;.L.

3

+.g.%

+: :;.v ~

u.

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND-SAFEGUARDS (Continued)

~

FY 1983 SEPT. 1 OMB NRC Decision Unit RE00EST REVISED CHANGE REVISED Fuel Cycle Facilities Safeguards Licensing 1.2 0.7

-0.5 1.2 (35)

(31)

(-4)

(31)

Reductions will decrease by 20% the number of on site reviews from 5 to 4 of the effectiveness of NRC's safeguards regulations at fuel cycle facilities and will reduce the review of safeguards issues by about 50%.

(30.5M will provide for all 5 on site reviews of the effectivenss of NRC's safe-guards regulations at fuel cycle facilities.)

  • SafeguaFds Transportation 0.3 0.3 0

0.3 and Export Licensing (19)

(19)

(0)

(19)

High Level Warte-6.7 6.7 0

6.7 Management (41)

(40)

(-1)

(41)

The FY 83 staff reduction and funding level will result in a limited review of DOE's Test and Evaluation Facility -(unbudgeted) and an inability to deal with the accelera-tion of the Administration's site characterization program.

(1 SY in FY83, when combined with reprogrammings from LLW & URL as indicated below, will provide for the review of the DOE Test & Evaluation Facility and better enable NRC to deal with the acceleration of the Administration's site characterization program.)

  • Low Level Waste Management 2.4 2.1

-0.3 2.4 (30)

(26)

(-4)

(30)

(SO.3M and 4 SY in FY83 will be reprogrammed to High Level Waste Management to provide for the review of the DOE Test & Evaluation Facility and better enable NRC to deal with th.e acceleration of the Administration's site characterization program.)

-0.6 2.1 (34)

(31)

(-3)

(34)

($0.6M and 3 SY will be reprogramed to High Level Waste Management to provide for the review of the DOE Test & Evaluation Facility and better enable NRC to deal with the acceleration of the Administration's site characterization program.)

  • Management Direction and Support 0.1 0.1 0

0.1 (19)

(18)

(-1)

(19)

Narrative in parentheses indicates NRC Revised FY 1983 requirements..

'T o

no

~f. x =3:

Ty

. };

.q...

SUMMARY

TABLES OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH FY 1983 Office /

SEPT. 1 OMB NRC Decision Unit REQUEST REVISED CHANGE REVISED t

LOCA &

SM S 31.0 30.0

-1.0 31.0 Transient (Staff)

( 17)

( 16)

( -1)

( 17)

LOFT 40.6 15.0

-25.6 15.0

(

6)

(

3)

(- 3)

( 5) 1 Accident Evaluation 50.4 45.6

-4.8 50.4 3

& Mitigation

( 27)

( 26)

( -1)

('26) i

. Advanced Reactors 23.5 2.5

-21.0 13.0

(

9)

(

3)

( -6)

( 8)

Reactor & Facility 38.2 38.2.

0 38.2.

Engineering

( 57)

( 55)

( -2)

( 57)

Facility Operations 16.8 15.8

-1.0 15.8

& Safeguards

( 55)

( 53)

( -2)

( 55)

Waste Mgt.

19.6 17.0

-2.6 18.0

( 28)

( 25)

( -3)

( 25)

Siting & Environment 14.7 10.9

-3.8 12.5

( 30)

( 24)

( -6)

( 27) 1 Systems & Reliability 21.7 19.2

-2.5 19.2 Analysis

( 47)

( 45)

( -2)

( 46)

Management Direction 0

0 0

0

& Support

( 25)

( 23)

( -2)

( 24)

Equipment 8.9 6.9

-2.0 7.4

. TOTAL 265.4 201.1

-64.3 220.5 (301)

(273)

(-28)

(290) 1 14 l

i

M,.h.a+ g%. % =.* M,:#

.:,12:n..!:.. at%,^ :=. r,

7-
'-- "y t..

.]

.., 5

..e lbh,$

v _. - -,. e

.m_..

?f

~*Q

~~

^"

i-l.l'

'}

~

g U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

. NRC Revised Budget Request-(Dollars in Millions) 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH FY 1983 Office /

SEPT. 1 OMB NRC D:; cision Unit REQUEST REVISED CHANGE REVISED Office Total - Program $M 265.4 201.1

-64.3 220.5 Support.& Equipment (Staff)

(301)

(273)

(-28)

(290)

LOCA and Transient 31.0 30.0

- 1.0 31.0 (17)

(16)

(-1)

(17)

FY 83 separate effects testing and model developmental research for large break LOCA analysis would be phased out.

($1M and 1 SY will provide for a more orderly phasecut of LOCA, separate effects and model development research)

LOFT 40.6 15.0

-25.6 15.0 (6)

(3)

(-3)

(5)

The LOFT facility will be placed in standby condition involving minimum' maintenance support of about 30 Staff and would require a 1 to 2 years reactivation period.

Accident Evaluation 50.4 45.6

- 4.8 50.4 and Mitigation (27)

(26)

(-1)

(26)

The reduction will involve greater reliance on planned industry programs (e.g., IDCOR) and reduction of in-pile testing programs.

($4.8M will provide the necessary resources to maintain the schedule for degraded core cooling rulemaking)

  • Advanced Reactors 23.5 2.5

-21.0 13.0 (9)

(3).

(-6)

(8)

The reduction provides $2.5M for HTGR program only.

($10.5M and'5 SY will provide for fast breeder research and for the timely resolution of CRBR safety issues to support licensing activities)

  • Reactor and 38.2 38.2 0

38.2.

Facility Engineering (57)

(55)

(-2)

(57)

Narrative in parentheses indicates NRC Revised FY 1983 requirements..

15

.- -.g 7

yg.,

y.

~...

p.

. ;g.

.. a.:.%

y=.

e x.

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (continued)

FY 1983 Office /

SEPT. 1 OMB NRC Decision Unit REQUEST REVISED CHANGE REVISED Facility Operations 16.8 15.8

- 1.0 15.8 and Safeguards (55)

(53)

(- 2)

(55)

MC&A research will be reduced significantly in FY 83 including the elimination of planned game theory research.

Waste Management 19.6 17.0

- 2.6 18.0 (28)

(25)

(-3)

(25)

This reduction would involve about a one-third reduction in FY 83 for HLW research primarily for evaluating site characterization for geologic repositories.

($1.0M will provide for a nominal increase in HLW research for defining the NRC criteria for evaluating proposed repository sites)

  • Siting and Environment 14.7 10.9

- 3.8 12.5 (30)

(24)

(-6)

(27)

-Health effects research will be reduced in FY 83.

The regional seismic research program (S2M) will be terminated.

Siting and environmental impact research will be reduced by about 50% with greater reliance on applicant information.

($1.6M will provide for continuation of the seismic regional program for networks having higher priority with regard to current reactor sites - e.g., Northeastern U.S., Charleston, etc. - and also provide continued support to the licensing i

staff for specific site environmental efforts)

Systems and 21.7 19.2

- 2.5 19.2 Reliability Analysis (47)

(45)

(-2)

(46)

SIM of the reduction would eliminate Transportation risk modeling.

Probabilistic R,isk Analysis methods development work would be reduced in FY 83 with greater use of applicant analysis.

Narrative in parentheses indicates NRC Revised FY 1983 requirements.

16 4

4.. x. : -g.' %m - %

' h -

  • ~

3

'?, '{

~

^'

- ?Nh"- :-. *

~.

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (Continued)

FY I?83 r

Office /

T(. 1 OMB Decision Unit NRC REQUEST REVISED CHANGE REVISED Management Direction 0

0 0

0 and Support (25)

(23)

(-2)

(24)

Equipment.

8.9 6.9

-2.0 7.4 LOFT equipment level is consistent with the revised LO Evaluation and Mitigation Program)

  • i a

4 i

i i

I a

Narrative in parentheses indicates NRC Revised FY 1983 r.equirements.

9 I

j 4

17 e

- a

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20032D462&oldid=4592158"