ML20033C163
| ML20033C163 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/18/1981 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8112020773 | |
| Download: ML20033C163 (91) | |
Text
g,* 7 UNITED STATES 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
3
- E W ASHIN GTON. D.C. 20555
,j
/
- 6Uulb hk I
November 18, 1981 NOV1 g gggtr _9g OFFICE OF THE i
SECRETARY gh g
\\'. d/
/
COMMISSION DETERMINATION REGARDING PUBLIC DISCLO UNDER THE GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE ACT OF:
Budget Session - Markup /Reclama, a.m. Session July 30, 1980 Pursuant to 10 CFR 9.108(c), the Commission, upon the advice of the General Counsel has determined that the subject transcript should be released,to the public in its entirety.
l 1
k
\\
..m 1J N
ilk O fice of th a Secretary l
l l
i s
m jg*?! W S2222e PDR L
I i
-268Fiu.
.. _... ~d....., _WWW. ec'n,.~..., N-l ww rCh-...
Ce
.y:4, k.M. c&.,. <,M.... rsh 'V. ' #,j,d., M5/..~6.,., _.
%.. m............,..
%&f;?-M ',r &&M
- t.'
- ,g 4
%, +r.re;,%a;*y..
. c
--t r
,, w g r..v. w.
4..
s w
.y c c. 9.?WW9:ml@i%.4 'M;d xWA ^i.vn~!,c a%g+*m:s pry:%e"r<.m.:4:v=4~'.m.:.*: ~9 m ~ w!' : + WW,.w', _
m*'?W
.,W.
- e m~W,
'up %. w w.".,n e.' NUCLEAR REGULATORT COMMISSION O
- s. w
,5
~
~~
~
(
\\
J COMMISSION MEETING v
^.r
, :..;., - <.3.,
., -> -y. w.L ~,.,. w w<u%.s Wr
,'r.;-o,.; ;,,.;. ;. ;.,.,
- e.e..
-z (:. t,
^
2. -.., 4.,> c, ;.
.;,,y..u
= -
??+_3
,,...... ~.
.. x. j;%, s :.f l'* % ..,. _.,.., c,,.
. ~.
t,.
t-m m... ~, e
~
, '4 a'
,s
.:).g
.ysry ;l en x
. (r.,, ~ ~..w.v '; ' q u. s :yp* :.., *. c..
,1%.:
-r
> V ; ~ -. ; ~;
,. a. -
- i:.x ;~
. m:,-lS &l.
% a: *
's, eK-
',p Gt.*A* y;;Q W. '.
- _ '
-*'a l g W r-2
}
,.x.._.~,y
, s.g:-..~
x%,, s.. ms..c,qs.: n.,w...:m. o. a :.. f NfM i'WMJ. t, 9 i y,X9 Q ;i.g6
'";Ji.Iir the-man cfE. CLOSED. MEETING
.g,; e
.m. ; p.,,e.gw _....., m +.y.m.. c, e.
-.r:
m.~. : :.:n.,7.., n n,
2 m
- c.r.
.z./;y u r.:.n. Sg. ;
.e
.. s r~,.,
p
. EXEMPTION ~9
'i o, q.,.
~, >~.
J BUDGET SESSION - MARKUP /RECI.AMA d. M.
.Q:..:.;w,
~
=,
.x
... u.
..m.
- v.., w,.c.4.
u.
,..2-4 ~
t-
,.,.-.y e s a..y..
=
74.,-
- t,;^,s p.
m..
.y.
A
,,.y.
0, 1980 1 - 89
.DATE:
pgggg
~
u,.
Washincton, D. C.-
..m.
v AIDERSON REP 1MTLYG f ~. \\.'
'b.
400 Virginia Ave., S.W. Washing:=n,
D, C.
20024 C
Telaphene : (202) 554-2345 l
{
%O"
= w.
\\
L 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2
NUCLEAR REGULATOEY COMMISSION
(~
3 4
5 CLOSED MEETING - EXEMPTION 9 6
EUDGET SESSION - MARKUP /RECLAMA 7
8 Nuclear Regulatory Commission 9
10 Room 1130 11 1717 H Street, N.
W.
12 Washington, D.
C.
20555 13 July 30, 1980
[
14 The Commission met, purs uan t to notice, at 9434 a.m,
'~'
15 BEFGRE:
16 JOHN AHEARNE, Chairman l'7 VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner i
l 18 JOSEPH HENDRIE, Commissioner i
l 19 PETER READFORD, Commissioner 20 STAFF PRESENT.
1 21 SAMUEL J. CHILK, Secretary i
i 22 L. B ARRY, Comptroller 23 J. FUNCHES 24 J. AUSTIN l
25 K.
CORNELL v
l
~
t ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
f p.
w, N-t 2
1 R. TWEED 2
D. EATMBUN
(1 3
W.
DIECKS 4
J. BROWN 5
- 2. MC OSKER 6
N. MONACO 7
L O'CONNELL 8
E. THCMPSON 9
H.
DENTON 10 F. MIRAGLIA 11 J. MARTIN 12 L. DONNELLY 13 T. MUELEY
/~ '
14 R.
BUDNITZ 15 R. SERNERO 16 B.
SCHOGGINS 17 Y. ST ELLO 18 J. DAVIS 19 5.
BASSETT 20 21 22 23 24 x _,.
25 l
ALCERSON REPORTING COMP ANY, lNC.
i
r 3-n 1
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
The Commisson meets this 2 mo rn ing to hear recla=as frem scme of the senior staf f cf I'.
3 th e ag e r.c y.
4 What we vould propose to do is to hear the 5 reclamas and then af ter hearing all of them to meet 6 ourselves to reach a decision as to how we should address 7~ reclamas.
8 Bill, did you have any comments you wanted to 9 make bef ore we started?
10 MR. DIRCKS:
I am not aware of what the 11 Commission did last night.
John Davis is on his var down 12 and I certainly will want to pitch in with John.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
We have an NMSS memo 13
~~
14 signed by 15 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
No, that was -- that was the 16 morning session.
That was the people decision.
The 17 dollar decision, the one l
18 MR. DIRCKS:
Somewhere along the line, I guess i
19 the Commisson 20 CHAIRMAN AREARNE:
The af ternoon.
Out cf NMSS.
21 MR. DIRCKS:
When John comes in, I w ill jump in.
22 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
You are saying the NMSS staff l
23 was infermed?
l 24 MR. RPRRY:
Yes.
25 MR. DIRCKS:
John is or. his way down.
I W
ALCERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
r a
4' 7~
1 CHAIRMAN AMEARNE:
The first reclama we were to 2 here from was IC E.
-3
/
3 MR. DIRCKS:
Fine.
4 CHAIRMA'N AHEARNE:
Vic is h ere.
5 MB. STELLO:
I think you should have received 6 the memo last night indicating the two particular items 7 th at we wanted to reclama.
let me cover the one, first, 8 that is f airly simply and straightf orward; that is the 9 in de p end ent 10 measurements.
11 The positions were cut out to perform the 12 inde pendent measur aments tha t we talked about, and I was left 13 with the impression that there was a feeling that we ought to
\\
~
14 go ahead and do it.
15 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
The Commission gave you a mark of 16 people It said in th a t mark of people certain things should 17 be done.
It did not cut out things.
18 MR. STELLO:
Well 19 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I think your reclama is:
civen 20 that level, this is what you would propose to do.
21 MR. STELL0s One of the things we would propose to 22 drop but would like to get put back in the budget, $550,000 23 fo r contracto r support.
24 We have looked, and I as reasonably sure we can go 25 out and get contractor help, go out and physically have them ALCERSON REPCRTING COMPANY, INC.
o 5
A.
f 1 make the measurements for us on the contract.
2 So we are a sking to have restored --
s
/
3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Can you remina me what kind 4 of measurements we are talking about?
5 MR. STElLO:
Magnetic particle radiography.
We can 6 co nt ract those out.
I think tha t is fairly straightforward.
7 The other item that we wanted to have the Commission 8 reconsider is the impact on the resident program by cutting 9 back in the way which we described to the Commisson.
We would 10 have to cut back to meet the mark.
11 CHAI3%A3 AREARNE:
As I read your memo, you would 12 keep the current residents at single unit rites.
13 MR. STELLO:
Yes. We have identified some facilities
,b' 14 where we think we could cut back.
Ihey are small, not 15 complicated.
We went back and we looked at every place where 16 se think we could without too much disruption cut back en the 17 program to bring down the numbers to -- what I tried to do was 18 bring it down to a number where, if l' had to take the next 19 step, then ! am going actually all the way.
20 And we looked at the three unit sites.
Cutting back 21 -- cutting back some of the sites th a t will be coming in with 22 units that are under construction, late construction, and 23 holding the residents over into the operations stage, convert 24 them over or drop the construction for them at that point, and 25 hold dcwn tne number in that manner.
ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
6
(~.
1 The reasons for wanting to do it
.r e fairly 2 obvious.
The program is new.
To trying and go in and have a I) 3 majce disruption now, the feeling that I think 'would be 4 conveyed to the people tha t are part of the program is t lack 5 of support for the program, which I find to be extremely 6 difficut.
7 As you are aware, it is a program that is dif ficult 8 to get staffed up.
9 Physically what it would amount to is we would have 10 a number of people out tuere that would not have even served a 11 tenure.
We have the financial burden of being directed to go 12 out to the sites, which is obviously a problem, and then 13 having to redirect them even before -- what they now v
144 understand is the commitment to stay for at least a minimum of 15 three years.
16 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Certainly.
But to some extent, 17 if the Commission mark holds, since this is towards 92, there 18 are a number of people that you would have been sending in FY 19 81 that you would not then send.
20 MR. STE110:
We are talking about people who are 21 already committed.
22' CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I understand.
I am saying -- we 23 are talking about the 32 mark; there would be people who in 24 81 would have been sent and would in 91 have incurred that 25 fin ncial drain; they would not be sent and thereby would not v
ALDER 1 SON REPCRTING COMPANY, INC.
7 1 incur the financial drain.
2 MR. STELLO:
Some of those would be true; how many
[T 3 of them, I could not tell you precisely. What we are trying to 4 do, as you recall, is trying to get the residents to stay 5 there for five years instead of three years.
and with the second resident, I 6
If it turns out 7 feel fairly comfortable we could do that, given that they have 8 -- I d:n't want to decide today that it vill te a 9 requirement.
It migh t be at the point where none of them 10 would have to come out by that time.
11 But it is disrupting a program that is beginning.
12 The concept of trying to keep at least tuc NBC people onsite 13 to the maximum extent that we can is one that I feel we ought 1-4 to try now at least initially.
15 The program is still in its very early implementing 16 stages.
?ost of it has gone on in this past year.
I would T7 rather not be in a position where we are just getting the 18 results and we have to plan now to make a fairly substantial 19 change to the program.
20 CHAIRMAN AHEAENE:
Well, one of the reasons the 21 budget cycle is over a year ahead and what it might entail is 22 freeing a program where some of those -- the two at one site 23 programs 24 MR. STE110 I understand that.
25 CHAI? MAN AHEAENE:
It is not necessa rily a co m ple t e ALOERSON REPCRTING COMPANY, INC.
-t 8
8 t
I re va m ping of the program.
It is a slowing down.
2 MR. STELL0s Not necessarily, but I think it is a
['
3 clear signal of a major change in the program.
v 4
I also feel that if there are two of them there, it 5 gives us a lot more flexibility when we do have problems and 6 incidents and we are looking for the short term, 24 :.our 7 co ve ra g e.
With two of them there we get it.
We are~able to 8 roll them over.
9 The feedback we are getting from the resident 10 prog ram now is very po siti ve.
We are seeing, in my view, some 11 significant improvements as a result of it.
12 COH5ISSIONER GILINSKY:
Did I miss something here?
13 I thought we were saying we were cutting back more than two.
C, 14 We were saying we thought *here ought to be two.
15 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Some of the single units --
16 ER. STELLO:
All of the single units sites, 35 of 17 them only have one resident.
If I have to stay within the 18 mark, they would all be with just one.
19 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKYs That is not the way I 20 remember our discussion going.
We did talk about flexibility.
21 CHAIRMAN AHEARNEs That's right, flexibility.
22 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKYs Depending on the 23 requirements of the site, on so on, not pulling them all out.
24 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
It is not pulling them all out, 25 it was that they need to all be covered; it was fle xibili t y.
w-
- ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
9
,~
1 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
That's right.
Vic is saying 2 he is pulling them all off.
/
3 CHAIRMAN [HEARNE:
Just a minute ago he answered he n
4 had gone through some of the single unit sites and concluded 5 that some of them 6
MR. SIELLO:
That's what I did; I.went back and 7 looked at where I thought we could pull.
8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I thought you said 35 sites o
9 would not be covered.
10 MR. STELLO:
If I live with the mark that is here in 11 82, in order to live with this mark; all of the single unit 12 sites would only have one resident.
13 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKYs But that was not the way our
'~
14 conversation went.
15 CHAIRMAN AREARNEs No.
16 MR. DIRCKS :
With his appeal --
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I understand 18 MR. STELLO:
That's what I would like to be able to 19 do, to try, except for these three 20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Within that number, that is 21 the way you would allocate your peo ple ?
22 MR. STELLO:
Within the number I have as a reclama.
23 CHAIRMAN AHEAENE:
Within 1010 you could not cover a
(
24 single unit site with a seccnd perscn?
25 MR. STELLO:
Ihat would be correct.
ALDERSCN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
10 1
MR. DONNELLY4 Definitely 2
COMMISSIONER HENDFIE You have to bilances you 3 could decide to go that way while you are deciding that 4 various other forces have te be manned up to some level befcre 5 the second person comes on at these sites..
6 After all, you are down to the point where you are 7 talking about 35 people out of 1000; 3 percent.
8 COMMISSIONER CILINSKY:
You are saying that 9
COMMISSIONER HENDRIE.
One finds it hard to believe 10 that if the second resident at a single unit site was regarded l 11 by everybody as very high priority, the other
-- whatever it 12 turns out to be -- 700-cdd folk in I E i could not somehow be 13 manipulated to yield up 35 slots.
14 Now, you know I recognire that that might not be the 15 choice, but it is not clear to me tha t it could not be the 16 ch oice.
I'7 The nature of the dircussion here the other day went 18 as follows, and it is dissociated in the sense it does not 19 lead in any obvious way to a particular total number of people 20 in the office, but the sort of guidance we ag reed on.
21 First, that increased NEC presence at the sites 22 contin ues to be the goal of the Commission.
Okay?
23 Second, in =aintaining that presence, we ought to 24 put e:phasis on getting, first of all, covering all the site:
25 with a resident.
ALDERSON REPORT lNG CCMPANY, INC.
11 1
Secondly, as we try to get more than one resident on 2 a site, to look toward coverage that would head toward two
[
3 residents per site or a resident unit inspector per site 4 rather than if a larger site staff up at three and four people 5 before those sites were covered with two.
6 Thirdly, that we do not see it as a compelling 7 proposition that every site has to have at least two people; 8 that is, it seems to me likely it is useful to have one person
'9 assigned to each site, but you have already identified people 10 like Yankee Howe, as I did the other day, where, unless there 11 is something going on I ha ve not heard about.recently, I don 't 12 know there is much poin t in ha ving a second resident.
13 Similarly, there are some better run stations around
,sC 14 where at least for the next couple of years, I wo uld be 15 willing to make due with a single resident.
16 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY' Can I interrupt?
I'7 COMMISSIONE3 HENDEIE:
Just because --
18 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
It sc. ems to me we were 19 providing a certain degree cf flexibility, but we are not 20 suggesting one was to be the rule; it was rather two is the 21 rule.
But we were allowing a certain flexibility.
22 It was not to be applied necessarily.
23 COMM!SSIONER HENDRIE:
It wax the rule in the sense 24 that that continued to be a goal of the Commission, but with 25 flexibility in it, and especially with flexibility in the ne xt ALOERSCN REPCRTING CCMPANY. INC.
12 1 couple of years.
2 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Hight.
/~' '
3 COMMISSIONER HENDFII:
And the fourth proposition 4 was:
we are concerned about the training level of the unit 5 inspectors.
Are we possibly moving faster than be really 6 should to put the second -
put the unit people out.
And 7 maybe we should slow the pace of the assignment a little bit 8 in order to improve the training and try to avoid a ssignment 9 of people to sites without some reasonable NRC experience and 10 training.
11 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I think that is a fair summary.
12
' COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Yes.
13 COMMISSIONEE HEND?IE:
One of the things that this
~
14 leads to is not what is contemplated here, the Commission 15 withdrawal from the proposition we agreed to more than a year 16 ago, that it was desirable to cover the sites, at least 17 eventually, with at least two people so that we did not 18 except in a f ew circumstances, Yank ee ?.c we, et cetera, for the 19 lone term have a single NBC guy sort of all ou by his lonesome.
20 Eut also the thought here was that the rate of rise 21 in personnel for I C E is extremely large.
No matter what we 22 say here, we have to recognize that up the line it is unlikely 23 to b e -- 200 or 300 people a year is unlik ely to be 24 forthcoming.
25 In p'rt, perhaps what we need to do is stretch out ALCERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
13
,m 1 the rate of assignment so bound with growth.
We have a bunch 2 of plants on line and other. plants are coming on line, and it
('
3 simply locks to me like it is going to take longer to get ry 4 to the two or two-plus manning at most sites that we have set 5 as an objective.
6 In particular, there is not a decision here, at 7 least that I have agreed to, that says that we withdraw from the two people principle 8 the double -- you know, the double 9 as a long term gotl or that we want to recast the resident 10 inspector program.
you kno w -- I dn ; t know whether 1010
~
11 And I think 12 is the -- precisely the right spot for this to come down, but 13 it looks like we are going to come out of the fiscal 81 14 appropria tions bill -- is it going to be 909 in there or are 15 there some people 16 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
We have reclama-ed 37.
17 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Fo r Vic.
So it is somewhere 18 between 909 and 946.
19 MH. BARRY:
Hight.
20 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
And --
21 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
We won 't know on that probably 22 un til the end of August.
23 MR. STELLO:
May I respond?
24 CHAIRZAN AHEARNE:
Yes.
25 MR. STELLO:
I n9ver had the understanding that the ALDERSoN REPCRTING COMPANY, INC.
s 14 t'
1 Commission was directing ze to change the resident inspector 2 program, but rather to say, if I had to live with this mark,
^
/ ^
3 what was the impact in my judgment.
4 The impact in my judgment is that the other program I cannot cut back any more than I ha ve, if I have'to live 5
6 within this mark.
7
'4 hat I am saying is that I do not believe tha t I can 8 wring out the additional personnel necessary to cover it.
I 9 have gone back and used essentially the guidance that 10 Commissioner Hendrie has described, gone back and looked at 11 th e resident program in order to achieve tha t goal.
12 I am trying to keep two,, essentially; it is going 13 to take the additicual positions.
I have used tha t g uid anc e.
r 14 But I as here to tell you --
15 CHAIRMAN AHIA3NE:
That is f air enough.
16 MR. STELL0s The impact, in my judgment -- t h a t I am 17 telling you is I may not be able to keep _two residents at 18 let me use the word, instead of being so absolute -- at most 19 at the single unit sites.
They will not be th e re.
t 20 I cannot cut back in other progra:s.
That was the l
l 21 intent of responding to the questions that were raised at our 22 first briefing, and the reason I as here today is to say, if I i
23 h a v',
to live within that mark, which you have to understand 24 I J.an't belive I can live within the mark and be able to mee t 25 that objective Tha t is what I would like to do.
i l
l l
ALCERSCN RE?CRTING COMPANY, INC.
t
f5 1
CRAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Fair enough.
2 MR.. STELLO:
I would have to cut back that way.
I
[^'
3 think it is very undesirable to do -- to make this cut, but 4 tha t ir wh a t I will do.
5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Just let.me pursue the point 6 Joe was making earlier.
You were talking about 30 out of 700 7 and some odd.
You were talking about most of the sites.
You 8 are, talking about 20 out of 700 and some odd.
Is there really-9 no possibility of doing that?
10 MR. STELLO:
In th e tim e I have had, that is what I 11 have done is to go back and look at where, in my judgment, we 12 would have to cut.
Remember, ve have cut back significantly 13 in terms of the number of people we thought we needed to do
\\
14 the work.
in 15 We had -- I hafe not come back and reclama-ed 16 NMSS ve finally resolved yesterday or the day before, and they 17 have come back with an understanding between the two,our 18 office and NMSS, that the work laad is in fact 10 more 19 positions than we got.
20 I am not reclama-ing those.
I am going to try and 21 cut back on the programs.
I cannot do it all.
This is the Z1 judgment --
23 COMMISSIONER GILINSXY:
That is obviously richt.
24 That is where you would set the priorities.
25 MR. STELLO:
Eight.
~..
ALCERSoN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
16 1
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
What --where does that leave 2 you in terms of the year in which you think you would have two
(
3 per site?
4 MR. STELLC Well, we have that now, and what I 5 would start is a collover program to start changing that 6 between now and 82.
If this is the number that I have to 7 live with, then I am going to start essentially now, and those 8 sites that do not hve two residents are going to have tc take 9 a real good hard look and starting today.
10 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
As far as when he could get to 11 that goal, I am sure that would depend upon what the final 12 number would look like.
13 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
You have, for example, the 14 FT 83 numbers, at least as we have set th em forth.
Are you 15 saying you would not make it in 83 either?
16 MR. STELLO:
No, absolutely not.
82 nor 83.
And I 1'7 hadve been hoping to be there this year, October 1.
What I 18 will have to do is, if these are the numbers, is to start to l
l l
19 change that.
i i
20 I will have to make adjustments starting now.
21 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
And roll these -- th e people 22 over.
'4here does that go, into the regional offices ?
23 MR. STELLO:
They would become regional inspectors, 24 which is where we have a great need.
I would start rolline m
25 them over into our other programs.
l l
l l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMP ANY, INC.
17 1
CHAIEMAN AHEARNE:
All regional inspectors?
2 MR. STELLO:
Yes.
That is where they came from.
/~}
3 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
All the unit inspectors?
v 4
MR..STELLO:
No, all the unit inspectors, all the 5 senior resident inspectors --
6 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Are the unit inspectors qualified?
7 MR. STELLO:
Yes.
They would all, obviously -- ther 8 are being trained now as inspectors, and they would -- very 9 suf f icien tly.
They are in the training program now.
That is 10 essentially what I am doing in the first year.
11 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Other questions of Vic?
12 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
No.
13 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Joe?
. r~
k' 14 COMMISSIONER HENDEIE I guess I still have trouble 15 with the arithmetic.
Do I remember a vu-graph on the resident 16 -- sort of a cross-cut on the re sid e n t program?
17 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I don't know if there was a 18 vu-graph; there was a later submittal.
19 MS. STELLO:
There was a submittal that came down.
20 My copy is undated -- Friday of last week.
It gave the 21 cross-cut for single unit sites, how many there would be, and 22 the va rio us alterna tives.
23 COMMISSIONER HEND3IE:
That is one that did not 24 reach me.
Let's see.
25 (Pause)
ALDERSON REPORTING CCMPANY, INC.
l l
18 1
CHAIRMAN AHEA ENE:
Can we hel'; you or can you hel; 2 us?
What are you getting a t, Jce?
Vic may have
('
3 COMMISSIONER HEND3IE:
Let's see; the construction ~
4 residents are coing to have 24 -- hev many residents do we 5 have aboard as of fiscal 80? -
6 MR. STELL0s The end of this year?
's end of 7
COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Well, I guess it i
8 year strength, because looking at fiscal 80 4
9 3R. DONNELLY:
I don t have the exact number.
10 COMMISSIONER HENCRII:
20?
307 407 11 MR. STELL0s Total residents?
12 COMMISSIONER HENDEIE:
Yes.
13 MR. STEL10s 100.
~
?'
14 MR. DONNELLY:
104 15 COMMISSIONER HENDR!Es In fiscal 30?
16 SR. STELLO:
Total construction, all of them.
17 MR. DONNELLY It was 161.
I am quessing 18 COMMISSIONER GILINSKYs There are 70 operatinc si t es.
I 19 MR. STELLO:
70 operating plants.
20 COMEISSIONER GILINSKY:
Operating plants.
That is 21 45 sites, something like that, 50 sites?
I 22 MR. STELLO:
There are 47 sites.
l 23 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY Okay.
So those account for 24 how many of the 1407 25 MR. STELLO:
Well l
l t
ALCERSoN REPORTING CCMPANY, INC.
F 19 1
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Roughly.
2 MR. STELLO:
Each one of them have at least two.
/
3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Each one has at least two 4 right now?
5-MR. STELLO:
Yes.
We are missing a couple.
6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
So you have two on every one 7 right now?
8 MR. STELLO:
Yes.
9 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
And --
10 MR. STELLO:
And on three unit sites we have three 11 -- f our -- four -- th ere are four three unit sites, and then 12 ve have 20 13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
We nov.tsve three on four 14 un it sites?
15 MR. STELLO:
There is one that does not.
16 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
As of June 30, you have 117 l'7 residents, 99 at operating reactors, 16 at construction, and i
18 two a'tffuel facilities.
13 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
How many, John?
20 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
117 onsite as of June 30.
7 I
21 CCMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
And there is some overhead, I 22 suppose, that is assignable to that.
You said 1u0?
23 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
There are 22 that have been 24 selected but are not yet on the site.
25 COMMISSIONER HENDEIE:
If they are on beard, why ALDERSON REPCRTING COMP ANY, INC.
20
'n e
1 they count.
2 The sort of number I am scratching for is something
,/~T 3 to see where the asymptotic program might be.
let me take it a
4 in the crudest possible way.
5
-Say, there will be 90 ractor sites; I suspect there 6 are so m e thing less than th a t, but if I 1cok in the " Brown T Book," there is something like 95 or 96 total sites listed, 8 and it includes ones like -- th a t have died off the list.
9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
As of when, Joe?
10 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Th e Brown book is May,80.
11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
By sites, you mean plants 12 under construction as well?
13 COMMISSIONER HENDCII:
Well, it is sort of the 14 everything list of reactors, under construction and hope to be 15 under construction.
16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I see, okay.
17 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Yes.
Most of it is, I think, 18 under construction, but Sterling is listed.
Okay.
19 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I think it is the sites that l
20 correspond to the front of the book.
l 21 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
And it is a list which gives 22 47 sites occupied by operating units as of May -- as of the 23 date cf the book.
24
~4 e l l, I am taking 90, and that is, you know, good 25 for the precision of this kind cf estimate:
tvc per site is ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
21' 1 180 and 1.4 is 252 plus 30 construction 29 construction and 2 one fuel cycle resident.
Ihat is 282 plus 12 for overhead on 3 that, 294 folk.
4 CHAIR 3AN.AHEARNE:
Tha t is a 4 percent overhead.
5 the f actor you applied, does that include administrative 6 support?
So you just don't -- you just dn't apply that to 7 residents unless you are trying to get towards the total --
8 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Yes.
9 CHAIRMAN AHEABNE:
Not just numbers of residents.
10 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
I want to know what the 11 resident inspector program entails.
So 294-plus or minus, you 12 know, some..
13 Now, if I take the 80 authorired strength of 873 and 14 you tell me that about 140 people are engaged in the resident 15 program, give or take 16 CHAIRMAN AHEA ENE:
That is no overhead.
I'7 MR. STElLO:
No overhead.
18 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
I am giving them the 19 overhead.
That means there are approximately 733 end of FY 80 20 strenth folk in I E E to do things other than the resident I
21 program.
Right?
22 Now, that sounds about right because you know the t
23 str+ngth of the office coming up over the last three or four 24 years or something like th a t hac had a base which would have 25 built to about 733 without the substantial additionial growth
.x_
l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
r 22 f,
1 of the residents.
2 So the numbers have about the right sire to them
(}
3 from an intuitive feel.
4 New, if I take 733 end of 80 non-resident activity 5 strength and add 300 people for the totality of the asymptotic 6 resident progens on the basis cif two people per reactor site 7 and the resident at the construction site contemplated in 8 your alternative two, I get 1030 *olk.
Okay?
9 Now, we came up with 1010 in 82 the other day.
04 10 the other hand, we won't have aal of those 90 sites operating 11 reactors by 82 either.
Those vill come in in 83 and 84 and 12 85.
Cur number out for 83, we are talking about 1010 in 82 13 and something like -- I wrote something 1030 or 35 in 83.
14 CHAIRMAN AHEARNEs Ihe 10u0 that ycu --
15 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
What did it come out to?
16 MR. SARRY:
1040.
17 COMMISSIONER HENDRIEs like my income tax form.
And 18 so sort of on the basis of f airly naive arthmetic, it see;s to 19 me sort of numbers we are shuffling around here vill get us by 20 83 the strength which would provide the asyr. ptotic manning of 21 th e resident program and would leave the rest of the office at 22 a coverage level of about comparable to the present.
23 That obv iously, then, does not take account of any 24 needed growth inspection activity in other areas.
But you 25 knoa --
ALDEFSoN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
23 m
1 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Does that lead you to a question 2 you would like to ask Vic?
3 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Well, you know his numbers to maintain the 4 are 1049 and 1089 in order to keep two folk 5 general principle, not necessarily on an absolute basis, but 6 the general principle of two at a site for increased 7 presence.
8 And I guess I am coming out -- scratching my head 9 and wondering.
It seems from the numbers, I make 10u0 in 82 10 and 11 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Could I suggest those are things 12 we ought to think about when we reach our final decision.
13 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE.
You need me to comment
(-
1-4 because I know you vant to throw him out and get the others-in.
15 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Right, you ha.ve it.
They're inn.
16 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
I been there myself.
I can l'7 sympathire, and I don't helro.
18 (Laughter) 19 MR. STELLO:
I have not done the arithmetic the same 20 way you do, but my judgment from the numbers that I do recall 21 is that with the 83 number we are at the asymptote, because we 22 will have all the sites covered ; with the few exceptions where 23 construction is not taking place a t the operating site, we use 24 the rollover number there.
Cur numbers are in agreement with v
25 your number.
w ALCERoON REPCRTING COMPANY, INC.
r 24 m
1 I don't see where we are that f ar apart.
I tried to 2 he a little bit more precise with coming up with a number, but
/~%
3 I don't think we are that far apart.
4 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Oksy.
All right.
Thank you, Vic.
5 Harold?
6 MR. DENTON:
I sent down a memo on people earlier 7 that said I plan to absorb the 20 peo ple in' the program 8' decision office and I would study the SEP and the Singham 9 amendment and see what it required.
10 So I would take the cut in the SEP program of 12 11 people in 83.
Phasee two of the SEP would be completed.
12 CHAIRMAN AHEAENE:
I think the fairest statement 13 correct me if I'm wrong -- the Commission position there was 14 that we assumed it included in the mark we gave you there was 15 enough people to do a Bingham amendment approach which would 16 he based upon maybe six to ten people -- man years.
I'7
?,nd there would have to be further discussion with 18 the Congress, and perhaps we would have to study the plan to 19 see whether additional resources would be required.
20 MR. DENTON:
That does leave approximately 12 21 people per year in the program f or that activity.
22 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Say th a t again.
23 MR. DENTON:
With a cut of 20 in 83, it leaves 12 24 people per year in th a t area to do tha t, the Binghmam, and phase threa of the SE? turns out to be.
25 whatever 31nchmam t
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
l
25
=
1 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Let 's see, on the approach 2 that John outlined, we are not talking about a nultiyear
<^
3 program.
4-CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Eight.
Commissioner Gilinsky's 5 belief is that the roughly six to ten people ought to be 6 enough to do it in ficial year 81.
I think that is an 7 adequate reflection of your position.
8 COMMTSSIONERGIlkNSKY That is what we call the 9 requiar sired Eingham program as opposed to the jumbo sire.
10 CHAIRXAN AHEARNE:
Ihat's what you call it. Others 11 called it the minimum approach.
But I prefer to call it the 12 Gilinsky version.
13 MR. DENTON:
In any event, I do not propose to 14 reclama that number.
15 I do propose to reclama the 2 million in 82 and 83 16 and show you where we have taken the cuts and allow you to 17 judge the significance.
18 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
We gave it to you within a 19 specific area.
20 MR. DENTON:
Right.
Safety technology.
And we 21 distributed it in that unit.
22 You can show the slide.
23 (Slide) 24 We are trying to maintain the safety technology up 25 at these levels because I think it is the key to some ALCERSON REPORTING CCMPANY, INC.
26 1 discipline and predictability in the process, and I commented 2 on what the impact would be in these four areas.
And it
(~
3 va ri es.
Q.
4 Some areas, I think, are more important than 5 others.
We would normally be spending in 82 550 on other 6 generic issues.
So the 200 cut is roughly 40 percentin that 7 area.
8 We hope to use that to work on those 100 issues.
9 But at the same time, even the 540 was not going to make a lot 10 of headway in it.
11 We were focusing our efforts on the unresolved 12 safety issues.
This-report is in those other generic issues.
13 The 900,00 I would cut out of risk assessment p ro g ra m s.
Tha t s'
14 is IREF.
That would mean extending the national reliability 15 assessment program a couple more years.
16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
That is 900 out of a total 17 of --
r 18 MR. DENTON:
3590 in 82 and 6 million in 83.
19 The program o rigin ally was designed --
20 MR. MIRAGLIA:
For a three year completion.
21 MR. DENTON:
So these cuts would be about a five 22 years approach on risk assessment --
23 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Could you go down -- this what is the base to which that 24 reduction applied to 25 reduction is applied?
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
27 1
MR. DINTON:
All right.
Same order.
It is 540, 2
3590, 900 and 1 million.
(~
3 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
And in the 83?
4
- 33. DENTON:
1.7 million, 6 million, 1200 and 5 1200.
So I think the cut in the risk assessment area vill 6 really turn it fron a three year program, probably, into a 7 five year program in the sense of getting a look at all the 8 operating plants' key parameters.
9 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
When you say the cut in risk 10 assessment, do you mean item two or item three?
11 MR. DENTON:
Item two, taking both years together.
12 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Yes.
13 MR. DENTON:
With a cut of a third.
14 MR. MIRAG1IA4 There is a subdivision unit in risk 15 technology.
Ihe bulk of the people and funds are associated 16 with the funds in the IEEP program.
I'7 MR. DENTON:
That is a fairly significant extension l
18 of that program.
I would take 300 out of operating i
l 19 experience.
That one does no.t bother me as much as item two 20 because I think the Commission has a lot of resources in 21 operating experience and it remains to be sorted out.
22 So I would cut tha t one-third and assume it *ould be 23 picked up somewhere in the organiration as necessary.
t 24 And the last itec was what we intended tc do, look l
s-i 25 at the extended review plan and see if we are really focusino l
r ALDERSON REPORTING COMP ANY, INC.
28 1 on the right aspects of the review and also perform c ratchet 2 committee function, do cost effective studies of new
/^
3 regulations, u
4 So I think that 600 out of-that is a fairly 5 significant impact in that area.
6 So in terms of ranking which ones are more important, 7 items to and four, I think are more significant to the program.
8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What were the items you lef t 9 alone in that program?
10 MR. DENTON:
I tried to leave alone --
11 MR. MIRAGLIA:
There are seven subdivisioin units in 12 that area; unresolved safety issues, research coordination.
13' There is one other.
(.
\\'
14 MR. DENTO N :
The ones I have IOUs --
15 MR. MIRAGLIA:
Generic studies.
16 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
What did they amount to?
17 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
The total was 10057.
18 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
About 4 million or something?
19 CHAIRMAY AHEARNE:
There is 8 million --
20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY; I was thinkinc about which 21 areas were untouched.
22 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
What was that?
23 COMMTESIONER GILINSKY:
How big they were.
24 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
9 million.
25 MR. RARRY:
There is another 5 million involved in ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
29 1 the items Harold had.
2 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
Approximately.
3 MR. DENTON:
Approxinately 5 million in areas where 4 I felt th e IO U s --
5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
About item four, what is the 6 relationship of two to four?
In other verds, can you do'four 7 before you have done two?
8 MR. DENTON:
We have started a small effort on 9 four, having Sandia look at the standard review plans as 10 against the contributors to risk in a typical plant and see if 11 the amount of effort going into any given system, like 12 component. cooling vater, really affects risk in a big way.
13 So it is an attempt to redistribute our manpower 14 internally vis-a-vis the high risk areas using th e prsent -
15 WASH-1400 for plants as a guide.
16 Obviously, as we de more and more of the risks on l'7 each plant, we vill get a little smarter about how to 18 redistribute the effort.
19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
This is to help quide your 20 own internal allocation of review effort?
21
- 33. DENTON:
Yes, on the standard review plan and 22 also to -- n e w issues are going to arise where the ratchet 23 committee function has to be done for some new identified
(
24 protlem.
v 25 And so we want to use some of that money to hel p.
ALDERSON REPCRTING COMPANY, INC.
~ _ _
30 1
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Do you have any other 2 efforts internally on reallocating your efforts or revising
(
3 the standard review plan?
v 4
MR. DENTON:
We have people whose job that is.
5 This would be just 6
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
This is contract support.
7 How extensive is the internal effort?
8 MR. MIRAGLIA:
15.
That is within the PPPG.
MR. DENTON:
We have a branch under 9
10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Roughly a dozen people.
11 MR. DENTON:
It handles all the issues that come in 12 that 13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
He would be recommending one s
\\
14 or another ar'ea needs more attention or less attention ?
15 MR MIRAGLIA:
15.6 people.
16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Is this a total contract l
l'7 effort?
18 MR. MIRAGLIA:
Yes.
19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Okay.
20 MR. DENTON:
So I think we were interested in 21 getting this sort of activity, discipline and rigor into the 22 process; by cutting 2 million here we ace just extending it 23 out rouchly from one-fourth to one-third in c.ach of these 24 areas.
it would still be possible to start some of the 25 eff.rts, and I guess I wou14 consider items two and four may 1
ALDERSCN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
~
31 1 be more more important than one and three, the big part.
2 MR. MIRAGLIA:
In addition, the standard reviev
/~
3 program has to be updated to fold in the kinds of activities v
4 th a t have been identified via the Action Plan.
5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Is it worth keeping $340,000 6 in the category one as applied to those 100 issues?
7 MR. DENTON:
That is my lowest-priority there.
We 8 have lived with that list for a long tim e.
We are continuing 9 to work away at it as people think it is important.
10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Is is sort of a token 11 MR. DENTON :
We are'always asked to bring one more 12 of those up.
13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY.
A few thousand dollars per 14 issue.
I wonder if in f act four is so important that one 15 could not shift that money over to number one?
16 MR. DENTON:
It is kind of like we have a request 17 from the ACES to elevate the seismic scram 18 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
By Gcd, if you do, your 19 budget ought to be cut.
20 (laughter) 21 To the best I remember, we have settled Ckrent into 22 the seismic scram at three year intervals for the last two 23 de ca.d e s.
24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
This is the result of u
25 l e ttin g him go to Japan.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
32 1
(Laughter) 2 COMMISSIONE-R HENDRIE:
Righ t.
And if we had cut g
3 down en travel, we would have saved that money and this.
^
4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I vant the record cleah that 5 I take no --
6 (Laughter) 7 MR, DENTON:
I don't want to belabor the cuts.
We 8 kept our resources committed to the things ve have ICDS -- we 9 re ally think are ISUs.
And I just want to show the results 10 and if you could possibly find the 2, you can see what you 11 could buy for it.
12 COMMISSIONER BRADFO RD s Harold, if instead we had 13 had to take a 2 millici cut in NRR and not directed you to
[N 1-4 this particular area, would you have distributed it 15 differently?
16 MR. DENTONs No.
I would have put it here too.
17 This is the area that has the least commitments in case work, 18 the cperator licensing, the operating action -- operating 19 reactors have to stay where we put th em, pre tty m uch.
20 So this is the appropriate unit.
I 21 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Joe?
22 (Pause) i 23 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Let's see.
There is 3u088 24 Cong sssional action in 81.
Your table with the current 25 estimate is probably as good as any here.
l l
ALDERSON AEPORTING COMPANY, INC.
n
3'3 1
MB. MIRAGLIA:
Which chart are you looking at, Dr.
2 Hendrie?
3 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Your chart would be that C.-
4 one.
Len 's chart has a blank column with only the total at 5 the bottom which is no'. Very helpful.
6 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Yes, but that is where the 7 Congress is at.
8 COMUISSIONER HENDRIE:
Yes, I know.
But in terms of 9 what -- you krow -- I need some numbers to see what I am 10 looking a t, the fact the prcgram support number hangs in here 11 fairly constant in 80 and 81; the EDO mark, 80 and 83 at 12 ab ou t 34 million plus change.
13 Now -- so what I want to look and see is if saf ety
(
1-4 technology is able to come up almost 4 million in 82, 15 something else must go down 4 million.
It is casework.
16 MR. HARRY:
Casework s do wn u million.
17 COMMISSIONER HENDHIE:
This is going down because of 18 what?
The 80-odd, the 90-odd to qu?
19 R. $ARRY:
Yes.
20 COMMISSIONER HENDEII:
And then it goes --
21 MR. MIRAGLIAs In 83 it disappears.
22 CHAIRMAN AREAFNE:
The assumption at the moment is 23 no lab loaner.
24 MR. MIRAGLIAt In 83 that is right.
s.
25 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
I am trying to get it sorted ALDERSCN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
34 1 out in my mind because one of the things tha t occurs to me is 2 the work in the licensing office; you know, we make our
(^
3 projections about which parts will go up and which parts will s,-
4 go down.
5 But overall the work in the office, I have not seen 6 any "2ry clear reasons why overall it ought to go down.
7 And so even though a case migh t be made for reducing 8 somewhat the sharp rise in the safety technology, why, I have 9 an uneasy feeling that because it drops money out of the 10 overall office budget, that when we get to 82 we may wish we 11 had not been so -- had not done tha t.
12 Not that we would use it in safety technology, but 13 we 'll be furiously transmitting it as always, feeding it, K-14 feeding the line troups on cases.
15 You know, it sort of --
16 MR. DENTON:
I can think of three occurrences this l'7 years the control room instrumentation ;
the steam buble at 18 St. Lucie; the control rod drives.
You sre always generating 19 unexpected needs.
20 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Okay. But I understand the 21 flo w of f unds with regard to the loaner program.
22 MR. DENTON:
You can take the slide down.
It does 23 say a constant program in terms of real dollars.
It does 24 begin to drop off.
t l
25 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
If the dollar numbers are the ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
~-
35 1 same across the horiron, why, it is dropping at 9 percent per 2 year.
3 CHAIRMAN AHEARNEs Wait, wait, wait.
8 2 and 83 are r
4 constant dollars.
Inflation has not been put into the 5 program.
They are not dropping.
6 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
The 80 dollars are in the 7 bank.
Okay?
8 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I am talking about 82 and 83.
9 MR. MIRAGlIAs In terms of 1980 dollars 10 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
We have the same dollars in 11 81 that we have apparently in th e b an k.
They are going to be 12 worth 9 percent less, all program support contracts, and -- so 13 it is fair to deflate it.
14 So we will do 9 percent less work in 81 in program 15 su ppor t for NER than we are able to do this year.
16 MR. MIRAGLIA:
We have had such experience.
l'7 COMMISSIONER HENDEII:
Similarly, it will be 9 18 percent less in 82 because the 82 dollars are equal in number 19 to what we have in th e ba nk now.
i 20 Now, you are right about the change from 82 to 83, I
i 21 but I have already got 18 percent deflation by the time we get l
ZZ. to 82 or the allowance for inflation or the allowance for 23 inflatien CMB in their wisdom may eventually make fer us, l
24 especially considering we are talking about two yea r 25 authorirations now.
l t
l
\\
ALCERSCN REPORTING CCMPANY, INC.
36 1
You know, we are talking about 18 -- clearly we are 2 talking about 18 percent less program support work for NRR in 3 82 than we are carrying on right nov.
^
w-4 And it seems to me -- I am not so sure that I care 5 to whack at it further than those inexorable economic forces 6 vill already, even though I don't know that'I can make any 7 particular detailed reason that item -- this 2,00,000 has great 8 particular merit.
9 I was just figuring we may plow that 200,000 across 10 onto some operating reactor problem by the time we get there.
11 End of speech.
12 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Any ques tions of Harold ?
13 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
No.
(s-14 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Peter?
15 COEhISSIONER BR ADFORD :
No.
16 CH AIRMAN AHEARNE:
Ihank you.
I'7 John?
18 John, did you end up or Jack, did you get the word 19 about the additional cuts?
20 MR. DAVISr.
We heard 55 million; we have not seen 21 any paper on anything.
22 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
All rigat.
There wasn't any.
23 MR. DAVIS:
We are reacting to the Commission mark 24 in vaste management, specifically high level vaste.
I do not 25 in t,nd to reclama the manpower cuts which are significant, but ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
37' m
1 I would hope to have the authority to redirect within the 2 tot?1 245 to allevia te the low waste management.
r
3 I sent down a piece of paper last evening that c
4 reacted to the -- that showed the impact of those cuts, and as 5 you will notice, of course, in summary what those manpower 6 cuts do is severely limit the NMSS planned interface with the 7' DOE and USGS program as they develop, which we think is quite 8 important in developing a na tional program.
9 The dollar cuts we heard about last evening 10 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKYs Which ones are you 11 particularly pointing to?
12 MR. DAVIS:
The high level vaste.
13 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
The difference in ten 14 positions.
15 MR. DAVIS:
It is a cut of five above the EDO mark, 16 which was five above our office request.
I'7 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE.
John, can you just give us -- if 18 ve could squeere it in there, your understanding of the result 19 of the House mark on the 81 budget.
20 MR. DAVISs I just happen to have a thing.
21 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
We have that, I guess; you sent 22 it out the o ther da y.
23 MR. DAVIS:
Now, this, the numbers in tha t House 24 mark the other day was on the assumption that we took the 25 whole manpower mark.
ALCERSCN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
38 m
1 It turns out that three of that cut was in Besearch.
2 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Research.
(~}
3 HR.. DAVIS:
Here is a redo of the House mark.
V 4
(Pause) 5 What I would like to emphasire, of course, is within 6 the overall ceiling, as I understood it, of manpower, I can 7 redirect some wha t to alleviate the waste situation.
8 However, with the $5 million cut in funds, I simply 9 do not have that flexibility with the office.
What this does 10 is it carries us beyond the program reducton of the staff 11 cuts, which begin to severly impact not only on our ability to 11 interface with COE and USGS as they develop their program, but 13 on our ability to provide the technical regulations -- the 14 technical reg guides necessary to guide the DOE program.
15 It severely impacts on tht and consequently we would A
16 not be able to meet the criteria that the national waste 17 program be developed according to previously established 18 quidelines.
19 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Could I interrupt a minute?
You 20 sent down on July 25 a response in which you had spread the 21 House mark.
22 MR. DAVIS:
What I had done in that, of course, is 23 to redirect from the other two divisions some manpower.
24 CHAIEMAN AHEABNE:
My question, I think is -- I am 25 just trying to understand the Fcuse mark if I can.
ALDERSCN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
39
,m 1
To start with, you have reduced the House mark from
- 2. th e previous '
you had 82 in the vaste management subtotal.
3 Now you are down to 78.
4 M3. DAVIS:
There is a redistribution of the 82 in 5 that.
? restored four from two other divisions.
6-CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I see.
But the House mark --
7~
MR. DAVIS:
The House mark is actually shown on this 8 piece of pa pe r.
9 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Now, the other thing is:
is the 10 House merk focused on high level vaste or vaste managecent?
11 MR. MARTIN:
The Fouse mark did not say anything.
12 It said the NMSS level.
It had no discussion at all other 13 than the --
'~
14 MR. DAVIS:
It commented on the vaste program on 15 th e vaste program, but with regard to high level waste 16 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Okay.
Because you have l'7 redistributed, then, within vaste management from this 18 previous l
19 MR. DAVIS:
Right.
20 MR. MARTIN:
The House mark had one sentence that l
AA-L 21 said waste management cannot be settled until processing is A
22 settled, but it gave no guidance.
Z3 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
It just gave it to NMES.
24 COMMISSIONER HENDsIE:
The 6235 House mark program 25 support, how do I sort that out versus the 8780 in the summary l
l i
l l
ALOERSCN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
b_
40 1 sheets?
2 I assume it has what, travel and equipment?
[~}
3 M3. BARRI:
Yes, the to tal f or-NhSS.
v 4
COMMISSIONER HENDEIE:
Yes.
And the subtotals, I 5 guess.
6 CH AIRM AN AHEARNE :
Just a minute.
then it is also 7 true that even restricting the 6235 in 81 is an interpretation 8 of the Fouse mark, th at they really have restricted NMSS?
9 MR. DAVIS:
Yes, sir.
The House did not says you 10 are to absorb this in waste management or in high level waste 11 managemen t.
12 What led us to that is the fact that the only remark 13 made, as they made the cut, was something to the effect that 14 you must get reprocessing settled before you deal with the 15 waste program.
16 CHAIEMAN AH EA RNE :
So it is an interpre ta tion.
l'7 ME. DAVISs Right.
18 MR..EARRY:
If you did the arithmetic with what the 19 House did, the increase in NMSS; the only decision units with 20 th e exception of vaste, they increased the uranium mill 21 tailings by what they a sked for and increased low level waste 22 by what they asked for; then you have an $5 million deficit.
23 That is exactly what the increased high level waste 24 was.
And so you can see how they did their arithmetic.
25
'4 h a t I am sayinc, Commissioner Hendrie, is they only ALCERSCN REPORTING COMPANY, INC,
r 41
,~.
1 gave us the bottom line total as you see on the chart here.
2 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
let me ask my question 3 another way, thens the House mark total was 13655, program
(/
4-support.
Okay?
5 Are those the same kind of dollars on the just 6 distributed sheet, the 6235?
7 MR. DAVIS:
Travel is back there, sir.
8 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
That is what I thought.
If 9 I add up numbers like that, I will not get 13655.
10 MR. DAVISs Right.
11 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Okay.
In fact, I should have 12 a number closer -- depending on how you apportion it -- but if 13 it stays around the 80 level, it would be around 87 14 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Travel is small.
15 MR. DAVIS:
Half a million dollars travel.
16 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE4 Yes.
I'7 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Half a million for all of NMSS.
18 MR. DAVIS:
Right.
19 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
It must be more than travel, thenc 20 MR. DAVIS:
The salaries -- that is just program 21 support.
The Congress backed out the to tal dolla rs.
22 MR. BARRYs There is no increase in people.
The 23 13665 is only program support.
(
24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Could you remind me acain 25 wh y -- pursing the high level waste program here -- why the ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
t 42 1 low level waste goes up by $4 million.
2 MR. DAVIS:
I'm sorry?
['
3 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
Between 81 and 82.
4 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Ihat is based on the assumption 5 that ycu are getting in a lot of --
6 MR.- MARTIN:
We are expecting 12 a pplications over 7 the next few years.
We are figuring two per year -- between 8 two and three a yea r.
9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Is that a reaso nable 10 expectation?
11 MR. MARTIN:
It looks reasonable f or the next couple 12 of years.
13 I would quess we would get between us and the 1-4 Agreement States at least three or four in the next two 15 years:
16 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
What is this money for?
17 MR. M ARTIN :
Environmental impact statements, 1
18 licensing review.
19 We are also assuming we will be providing assistance 20 to the Agreement States.
So in essence we will be dcing 21 rouchly the same amount of work.
l 22 Regardless, we estimate about 400,00 a crack, and 23 that is where the extra comes in.
l 24 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
400,000?
25
?R. MARTIN:
let's say in fiscal 81 we get five i
i ALCERSON REPORTING CCMPANY, INC.
{
43 I
1 applications.
2 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Gotcha.
3 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY You are saying three or four t
4 over the next two years?
5 MR. MARTIN:
Well, three or four; we assumed 6 between two and three Non-agreement S+_tes and Agreement 7 States.
So I think w assumed for fiscal 81, sometime during 8 that time period, we would get between four and five total, 9 maybe two in an Agreement State and three in Non-Agreemen t 10 States or some other combination.
11 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
Well, still, taking those 12 numhers, does that jibe with the 4 million?
13 MR., MARTIN:
That is most of the increase.
Then the 14 rest of the low level---
15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
You are saying 16 MR. MARTIN:
We had to do it anyway, working oin the 17 regulation, getting some regulatory guides put together, 18 continuing with the developing of models, and tha t sort of 19 thing.
20 So the incremental increase is what we expect to be 21 a pretty good case.
22 MR. D AVIS :
Basically what these cuts do is take us 23 of f the original program plan and if the na tional program is
(
24 off its plan, then of course we can react to that.
But if the 25 na tional program continues, we will be in very bad straits
- ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
~
44 1 primarily the dolla r cut where it really begins to erode in 2 our developing th e technical directives which we consider to
/"S 3 he a very central part of providing guidance to DCE.
y And, as I say, I simply do not have the resources 5 within NMSS to alleviate this to any great degree.
6 MR. MARTIN:
I would like to make a couple of 7 comments about this e valuation of the DOE program, which is 8 certainly discretionary for the Commission to do or not to 9 do.
It is nothing we are required to do by law, but it is 10 interesting that each of the areas we have probed into in any 11 depth, there just had to be major changes-made in the 12 Department of Energy's approach.
13 For example, in the vaste form area, there is one we 14 have gone into considerably, and I think we have seen over the 15 last year a very fundamental change in emphasis in that 16 program as a result.
17 Savannah River, even their defense program, as a
(
18 result of their comments, th ey have to tally revised their l
19 str$tegy and direction they are taking.
20 We have just taken a good hard look at the pregram 21 at Hanford.
We had a team out there for the last couple of 22 weeks, and we have not yet reviewed this in detail with the 23 DOE headquarters personnel.
But the conclusion that we came 24 tc is that their technical program they have underway to 25 support a license application have to be changed substantially l
ALDERSCN REPORTING CCMPANY, INC.
l
45 c
1 because they were no t developing the kinds of information that-2 stand up under scrutiny.
/~
3 An example is this near surface test facility.
That D}
4 may be good as a demonstration to squire visitors through, but 5 it is not developing any kind of information that would be 6 useful to substantiate a respository at that site.
7 A third area that we.are just getting into, but it 8 look s -- it looks lik e a real problem area is the geochemical 9 programs -- geochemistry programs that DOE has at virtually 10 each of the national labs.
11 All of the modeling studies that have ever been done 12 show that the geochemistry of the s'ite is the dominant 13 variable, yet th e types of programs that the department has u
14 underway are just, I guess, in a word, a shambles; they do 15 not hang together and they are not coordinated.
And if the r 16 don' t get on the track soon, I am not sure we will be able to, 117 allow a whole lot of credit f or geochemistry in any licensing 18 proceeding.
19 COMMISSIONER BRACEORD:
Jack, what is your sense of 20 what is gcing on there?
'4hr does it take us to tell them 21 these things?
22 MR. 5ARTIN:
I think it is a fundamental problem 23 with any big technical program.
If it is not scrutinized, it 24 just does not come together as well as it shocid.
25 COMMISSIONER GIIINSXY:
Are you saying there is no ALDE.9SCN REPCRTING COMPANY, INC.
'46
~
1 satisfactory self-scrutiny over there?
j 2
MR. MARTIN:
WelL, it is awfully hard to scrutinize
(~%.
3 a program, to self-scrutinize a program that you are reaply v
4 scrambling to put together.
5 In other words, if you loo,k at their growth rate -
6 over the last few years, it has been tremendous, and I,am 7 afraid that most of their efforts have been going in,to_try to 8 organize some kind of a program, getting the money committed, 9 and there has not been a componant of self-audit or 10 self -s crutin y.
11 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What I meant by that is:
12 our role seems to be more than simply a regulatory safety 13 rols.
It seems to be --
b 14 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Technical advisor.
15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Alsest a GAO 16 MR. DAVIS:
What Jack is trying to do is make sure l'7 the money and the efforts 00I is expending will in fact r
l 18 support their application.
19 MR. MARTIN:
What I don't want to have happen is in 20 four or five years get in a position of getting an application 21 that really is not supported the way you want it to be and be ZZ in the position of sending them back to the drawing board or 23 worse yet getting pressured into accepting compromises that 24 you really would not to -- really could have been avoided if ss 25 we had been in on it at the beginning.
l ALDERSoN RE?oRTING CCMPANY, INC.
47 n
1 The time frame is so long on developing this 2 information, that I think there is a lot of questions that are
. "N 3 best not put off until later, that are best raised now.
\\-
4 There again, that is a discretionary thing to do.
5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
How well defined is this EDO.
6 mark.-number in terms of just what you would do with it?'
I
/
7'mean, I realize there are categories and you discussed them.
/
8 MR. MARTINS I could tell you what we are going to
,9 do with every nickel of it.
10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Or not do with it.
t 11
'Wh y d on ' t you spend a couple of minutes doing that?
17.
MR. MARTINS If we start going up from the bottom,
'13 the first thing -- John, do you have this sheet that we could 14 pass cut?
15 Within the high level waste management program, I 16 have laid out the priorities -- this piece of paper here.
17 So what I have, starting at the bottom of the list 18 'is participation in the West Valley proceeding, which, as far cur' division goec, se would just drop out of that.
That l
19 as
\\
20 'is' Isomething -- whatever is done is done by the fuel cycle
[
21 p aple..And that was 1.5 man years.
We would reduce that to F
22 h'alf a ran year, just a nominal presence.
23 There is certainly things we vculd probably have to 24 do and could not back out of, but the main thing I would kncck
+
i 25 off next is;tha site screening reviews that DCE is doing nov.
1 2
ALDEASON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
f 48 t
1 1 In their proceeding submittal, ther have a schedule of 2 activities.
N 3
COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY When you said 1.5 man years, 4 what abot the dollar numbers?
5 MR-EABTIN.
I have no dollars for the West Valley.
6 So there I would reduce to one -- half a man year rather than 7 the 1.5 man years.
No dollars.
8 The next thing that would go would be the -- any 9 kind of review of the DOE site screening activities.
They 10 plan on submitting to us a site screening plan as a precursor 11 to the nite characteriration plan for review and comment.
12 We had planned on getting involved in their 13 screening activities ea rly.
For example, this is what we have
" C- -,
14 at Hanford, and some of the bore hole work they are doing, for 15 example, is not being done properly in our estimation and has f
e 16 to be changed around.
4 I'7 They are drilling these bore holes with drilling mud 18 and the hoics are becoming coated and caked with this mud, and 19 any kind of analyses of water that leaks in there for t
20 geochemical purposes for trying to assess the hydrology of the 2*
sita is just not representative.
22 It cannot be doue that way.
These are the kids of 23 things that we would act do; a couple of hundred thousand
(
24 involved in that.
25 So I woulc reduce that from six man years to two and ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
~
e 49 1 just eliminate the contractual assistance altogether.
We 2 vould hope to have the Corps of Engineers and the Cureau of 3 Mines help us on that.
That would go.
v 4
Th e next thing that would go would be number six, 5 which would be the evaluation of the DCE program.
I would 6 reduce that to two man years and eliminate the contrsctual
- 7. assistance.
8 There are two components to thats first of all, a 9 revie0 of the DCE progran to make sure that our program, the 10 USGS and DOE all -- that we trull have an integrated national 11 program that is addressing all of the issues and tha t the NRC 12 research and whatnot is not being done in isolation.
13 That would not be done.
~,
14 The critical scrutiny of their program to make sure 15 it is on the right track, that would not be done.
In 16 ad d i tion, they ave been putting out for years environmental 17 im pa ct statements on all aspects of waste management that we 18 just have not been involved in, have not looked at.
19 And there are several coming up, like the long term 20 waste management plan for the Hanford site; we would not get 21 involved in that.
The Defense Waste Production Facility at 22 Savannah River, we would not go in on that.
23 So that is an area that would be -- if in fa-e 24 EDO mark of 5 -- that eliminates, starting from the botto.
\\_
25 five of those, and then the Commisson mark would leave us then ALDERSON REPCRTING COMPANY. INC.
50
/
1 with only two people on priorities six and seven, which is 2 essentially reroing that effort out.
("'
3 Now, the T5 million backs all the way up to priority s_,
4 four where we lwind up with no money then to deal with 5 prio rity five, which here again is somewhat discretionary S except for the confidence proceeing.
7 There is a lot of other thins going on tha t we 8 should be involved in, like an active role in the state 9 planning counsels, an active role in the EPA rulemaking, an 10 active role in the national plan, an active role in the earth 11 sciences technical plan, an active role in the vaste form 12 characteriration cen ter; none of that will be undertaken.
13 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE.
John, is it your sense that if 14 the $5 million reduction was required in NMSS that all of it 15 should be allocated to high level waste ?
16 MB. DAVIS:
We have reacted in that way.
As I sa y,
17 of course, that is 20 percent of our total budget.
18 CHAIRMAN AHEA RNE :
Yes, I know.
19 MR. DAVIS:
And ensequently, I would have to 20 re-examine the other decision units and see what else I could 21 qive.
I am not confident I will be able to redo it.
22 MR. MARTIN:
For what it is worth, I have looked at 23 this carefully about where, if we had limited resources 24 what would you do to them relative to lov level waste and the 25 uranium area.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
5L 1
And my conclusion is not to tamper; high level 2 waste it an important issue, but it.is et hurting anybody 3 righ t nov a whereas the mill tailings and lov level vaste are 4 things that I do not think vu can back away from.
5
.My reaction would be to take it out of the high 6 level vaste area and just sort of -- I mean, there is not 7 really any health and saf ety aspect to it that I can see.
8 MR. D AVIS :
Imminent health and safety.
9 MR. ZARTIN:
You are ending up just with disruption 10 and delay.
11 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
John, did you have any more 12 points you wished to make?
13 MR. DAVIS:
No, sir.
14 MR. MARTIN:
Lastly, the total 5 rillion backs you 15 all the way up to taking all but 1.5 million out of priority 16 four, which winds up not providing ECE with attendant 17 regulatory guidance for their regulations, which, as John 18 pointed out, I thtak, conflicts with the fundamental tenet 19 that we are going to proceed on the basis that we 20 pr e -e stablish those kinds of guidance.
21 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Let me ask Joh n 's question 22 agains do you have any sense at all --
23 MR. DAVIS:
I have not gone through and scrutinired 24 th e rest of it.
My ingressionis in the o ther a reas, they are
~.
25 primarily safety related, and I would have a difficult time AW83SCN REPCRTING COMPANY, INC.
52 1 pulling large sums of money out.
2 3R. DIRCKS:
I don't think you can scrub that much.
3 iR. DAVIS:
No, no.
No way I can get 5 million.
{,
4 MR. DIRCKS:
When you put the guidance out, we vent 5 through this thing.
We vent through this thing when we 6 reviewed the budget.
You can talk about West Valley.
You 7 cannot cut West Valley here.
Iou cannot cut West Valley over 8 in Dick Cunningham 's side.
9 At this level of review, if you have to take it, you 10 hve to ta ke it.
11 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
The question I was really asking 12 wa s:
I was not sure whether John had viewed the 5 million 13 reduction we had laid on as focused solely on high level vaste.
14 MR. DAVIS:
That was my impression.
That was my 15 impression.
16 MR. DIRCTS:
If you are going to take a cut of that l'7 magnitude, the only place you are going to take it would be in 18 high level vaste.
19 MR. DAVIS:
20 percent.
20 MR. DIRCKS:
Unless the Commission says don 't take 21 it there; then you go back and cut everything.
22 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I am still trying to cet clear --
23 I think J ch n took our 5 million cut as being mandated in high I
(
24 level vaste as opposed to N Y.SS 's in terpre ta tion tha t that is m
25 the bes* place to take it.
I ALDERSON REFCETING COM 'ANY. INC.
53 1
Which of those is it?
2 5E. DAVIS:
My impression is tha t the cuts -- I 3 would not say mandated.
My impression is that the Commission
(-
4 intended tha t I take the cuts in high level vaste.
And that 5 was an association of the manpower cuts plus the money cuts.
6 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Now, let's see; let me get 7 straight on the guidance.
8 CHAIRMAN AREASNE:
I though t we had just taken it.
9 MR. DAVIS:
It may have been an assumption on my 10 part because that was the area, of course th a t 11 COMMISSIONER HENDFIE:
Actually, it is more than a 5 11 million cut.
It is 7.3, right?
13 MR. DAVIS Five.
(
14 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Five.
15 CCHMISSIONER HENDRIE:
The EDC mark for the total 16 office f or dolla rs was 27 million 315.
And I see in the l'7 column Een has got here th a t it is nov 20.
the difference 18 appears to me to be 7.315 million by an algebra that is 19 admittedly linear but nevertheless applicable.
20 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
The question -- the Commission 21 had marked at 25 previously; then had taken the five.
22 COMMISSIONER HENDPIE:
Yes, but to compare, you 23 know, go across the sheets, we keep comparing to the EDC 24 mark.
So it is fairly -- now 25 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Let me fccus once more to try and ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
54 1 make sure I understand.
2 If the Commission ended up at 20 million for program
/
3 su pport -- and I recognire you cannot make a judgment based on 4 a vary short review -- but is it your current belief that 5 most, if not the vast bulk of that, if it were to stick, would 6 have to end up being taken out of high level vaste?
7 MR. DAVIS:
Yes.
That is a correct statement.
Most 3 of it 9
COMMISSICNER HENDRIIs Even at the cost of reducing 10 the high level vaste program below the 80 level?
11 (Pause) 12 MR. DAVIS:
I would have to re-examine the 20 13 million ncv to see what we can do with it.
And since the 14 waste portion of it 15 CHAI3HAN AHEARNE:
I understand.
16 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
A comments the 20 -- if the if the House -- if we got nothing on reclama and the 17 House 18 House mark compelled in 81, then in NMSS you would be 19 operating in 81 at the same total program support level as you 20 are in 80, give or take $100,000.
21 HR. MARTIR:
That is not quite true; those figures 22 for 8C are what we got in the 80 appropriation.
There were, I 23 thin k, either two or three million forward f unded so the re al 24 80 program is considerably bigger than what shows on those 25 sheets.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
55 1
You know, I mean the real --
2 MR. DAVIS:
The amount of money --
3
.M R. MARTIN:
The amount of money we are dealing with j
J 4 this yeer.
5 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Fo rward funded?
6 MR. MARTIN:
' rom 79.
7 CH AIR M AN AHEARNE:
The 79 program -- what was the 79 8 pr og ra m ?
9 MR. MARTIN:
I do not recall offhand, but we did not 10 get all the money spent.
11 (Laughter) 12 CHAIRMAN AREARNE:
Okay.
13 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
That is, you carried into 80 14 15 MR. MARTIN:
A couple of million dollars from 79.
16 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
From 79.
I'7
- 32. MARTIN:
We were not very settled on what we 18 vanted to spend the money on.
19 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
More than a normal -- you 20 always have programs.
You have ongoing program support at the 21 end of an y fiscal yea r.
You always have a certain amount of 22 committed dollars flow forward; in fact, a fairly husky part if blue dollars come in 79, why you have blue 23 of any given 24 dollars in the bank that you are giving the people in 20 and s
25 91.
ALDERSON REPCRTING CCMPANY, INC.
5~6 rm 1
I think that is a perfectly standard feature.
2 MR. MANTIN:
I think it is on the order of a couple
(~ )
3 of million delles.
us 4
MR. DIRCKS:
79 was the year that things sort of 5 turned arcund.
We dropped we had the phasing out of a 6 major contractor, Livermore; pulling raney out of him and 7 transferring money.
8 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Really, a substantial change in 9 the program.
10 MR. DIRCKS:
Rethinking of program direction.
11 COMMISSIONER HENDRIIs It could be sore than the 12 normal amount shifted over to 80.
What that would mean, then, 13 if you had to live on the House appropriation mark in 81, you 14 would be overall for the office entracting.
15 MR. MARTIN:
We would be contracting considerably.
16 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Considerably, I am not so l'7 su re, because a number of the 80 dollars in turn vijl1 flow 18 forward to 81.
19 MR. MARTIN:
Yes.
Eventually you are going to get 20 caught.
21 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
You are just committing 22 programs 00 23 MR. MARTIN:
You may not f eel this contraction f or 24 several years.
25 COMMISSIONER ENDRIE:
Now, against that kind cf a ALCERSON REPCRTING CCMPANY, INC.
57 n
1 background, why 82 at 20 is at least an increase of some use.
2 On the other hand, if we get the reclama, you have asked for
(' )
3 S.2.
m 4
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
We asked for it in two ways:
5 depending on what they do with DOE, we asked for an additional 6
2.
The 2 was based upon DCE being refunded so that ther could 7 go ahead.
8 COMMISSIONER HENDEIE:
So it would be -- well, it.
9 would be 16.7 or 18.7 or.8 or something like that.
10 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Right.
11 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
And 18, you are still 12 substantially below the budget in 81; that is, if ve got the 13 recalama f or the 81 budget and program support came up to 14-about 18.8 or whatever it is for the office.
You are still 15 su bstan tially below the budget which we get th rou gh the OMB.
16 MR. DAVIS:
About l'7 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Not just the Commission mark, 18 but the OMB mark.
So if you had to operate at 18.8 in 81 19 and at the moment unless there are further supplementals --
20 you know -- an angel flies through the halls of Congress -- I 21 have not perceived yet why 18.8 is about as good as we are 22 likely to do.
I 23 That means you are still going to have to readjust l
l 24 the office assignments from the Presidential budget level for 25 81.
Okay.
I f
A, I
ALDERSON REFORTING CCMPANY, INC.
L
58 1
Are you really going to take it all out of high 2 level vaste?
r' 3
MR. DIRCKS:
That is where you have your flexibility.
~..
4 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Three or 4 million.
and I 5 vonder, are you really going to take it all out of high level 6 waste.
7 Tou know, the configuration that we are discussing 8 here has been sort of to hold harmless all other elements 9 except high level vaste and say they get their increases just 10 as we had planned in 91 and 82.
11 And the EDC mark in B2 and everything is going to 7^
12 come out of high level vaste.
We are going to have reo in A
13 there aat the rate we are going.
And I vender if that 14 MR. DIRCKS:
That is where studies are being done.
15 In the other aieas, the fuel cycle, you don't have studies 16 going on.
You have casework related material or you have, for 17 example, the 1.8 million increase.
18 I would guess this is due to the new regime of l
19 lice nsing that we have instituted for the Part 51 agreements.
I 20 That is $1.8 million; that is mandated that we have to do.
21 There are ways to maybe cut corners on that, but that is close 22 to a $2 million increase in program support noney to implement 23 that regulation.
24 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
That is what, now?
1 r
25 MR. RARRY:
Part 51, it extends the enviramental i
l ALOERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
59 i
.n i
1 review for certain materials licenses which have never been i.
2 subjected to this, about 250 of then.-
1
~
3
(
i
'~
i 4
I l
5 Lt
~ G b
7 l
i 8
t-i 10 l
'11 t
12 13 4
[\\
1 L'
14 i
l 15 16 i
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
~.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
60 l
MR. DIRCKS:
It is close to $2 million there.
It 2 costs about $1 million or $1.5 million fe
,est Valley.
It
/
3 was put in there on the basis of, I think, not a major 4
ef fo rt. I don't think we anticipated the bill being passed.
5 It may get passed and it may raise the requirements.
G Certainly if we have to go through a major option to 7 dissolve er change that Part 50 license up there, it is 8
going to be a big hearing and a big licensing action.
9 So, I think the point is, we have ongoing safety 10 issues.
You try to hold them exempt, and where you have 11 studies and are getting preparations to take a licensing 11 action that may or may not occur, then you say we will slip 13 it.
g l'
MR. DAVIS:
We do as ruch readjustment as we can.
15 CHAI3 MAN AREARNE:
Anything else?
16 (No response.)
17 CHAIEMAN AHEARNE:
Okay, John.
Thank you.
18 Research.
19 (Paure.)
20 MR. BUDN ITZ :
I was --
21 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Amongst the joys I was 22 referring to yesterday was that of having at the last minute 23 to try to raspond to another request of this group.
24 MR. EUDNITZ:
By the way, I was very crateful for 25 yesterday 's luncheon, and I wa n t to thank you all.
ALCERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
6L l
Secondly, the thing about SES appraisals is not a 2
joka.
Ihat is what I have to do on Friday.
Tnat is
(
3 August 1.
v, 4
CHAIHXAN AHEARNE:
The comments were no t meant to 6 be 6
ER. BUDNITZ:
If this meeting gets real boring, I 7 will write a limerick.
8 (General laughter. )
9 CHAIRMAN AHEA3NEs We will'do our best not to make 10 it hering.
11 M3. BUDNITZs Okay.
I have four points which I 12 wish to talk over with you, and I don 't have any of the 13 numbers. Eon ic here.
He can provide them.
He can provide i
14 them if I need them.
M Let me describe the four points and say what they 16 are, and th en we will come back, and by the way, I have 17 3assett, Murley, Scroggins, and Bernere here.
The first 18 poin t is our very strong feeling that we want te centinue 19 with LCET in 19 83.
We are willing to discuss this.
Murley 20 tells me that he thinks that terminating at the end of 1983, 21 which is earlier than the 1984 we were talking about, is Z2 probably feasible, but we want LOFT in 1983.
23 Secondly, we have some rationale for needing and 24 wanting a few more people.
I will tell you what that is.
25 Thirdly, we find it very difficult to arrange for ALDERSCN REPCRTING COMPANY, INC.
62 I
the sert of cuts that we have been told might ccme in the 2 three decision units that are predominantly th e 3
(
responsibility of our SAFER division.
There is some other 4
stutf in one of those decision unite.
The safeguards, tne 5
waste management, the fuel cycle, and siting and 6 environment.
And fourth, fast reactors.
7 So, I will talk about all four of those.
The 8 first is LOFT.
Your 1982 number of 237 includes the full 9
548 million for LOFT that we asked for, but your 1983 number 10 of 239 includes only $39 million, which is saying, okay, 11 termina te LOFT in 1983, and we want to ask for T9 million 12 more to make that 46, because -- 248, 748 million for LCFT 13 and T9 million more because we really believe that to close 14 LOFT off at the earlier date is a significant compromise of 15 long-range need in that whole area of understandinc 16 transients and LCCA's and I can discuss that if you want, 17 but let :ne just try to describe the basic rationale.
18 You see, in the area of cperational transients and 19 small breaks, we do not now have the computer codes that we 20 think we have in the large LOCA area, a com puter both that 21 has been developed, that has been benchmarked, that has been 22 ch ecke d out, that you can use to run.
That is a verified 23 code.
"e a re in the process of developing sophisticated 24 codes.
In fact, more than one that would enable us to run 25 the computer the engineering studies of the whole range on ALCERSoN REPCRTING CCMPANY, INC.
6'3 1
of operstional transients and small breaks, and by the way, 2 transient-induced b reaks, of which Th ree. tile Island was 3
one, that we think are going to be needed to understand the 4
phenomenon, the thermal hydraulics and the f uel behavior and 5 the like in these accidents.
9 Now, that code development effort cannot be m
7 complete, no matter whaft we do in a year or two.
It is a 8
two, three, four year effort.
It is just not something'we 9 can do.
We do rat have the research community -- we could 10 not tool up, no matter how much mon *y we had.
.M o s t 11 importantly is tha t numerous experimental pieces of 12 information have to be put into those codes that we do not 13 have.
We call them separate effects, the classic jargon of i
14 this game, separate effects axperiments, and then systems 15 experiments.
16 Separate effects experiments are the behavior of 17 pumps and certain flow machines, questions about two-phase 18 flow in pipes, heat tran s'f er, and the lik e, full blockage l
l 19 steam generation and the like, pressure dependence of 20 various phenomena.
21 Now, the separate effects studies are what is t
22 going on in the LOCA and transient decision unit.
That is 23 our largest one still, and which, although we are
/
i 24 supporting, is coming dcwn.
In effect you can see here it 25 is the small break, part of that, and by the way, this l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
L u
64
~
l th e rest of this is the se parate ef fects f or the large 2
break, and some things we are still trying to clear up, and 3
also some code work.
v 4
Now, it is our belief, our very strong belief th a t 5
doing only separate effects studies on the transients and 6 the small breaks and then the transient induced breaks is 7
not going to give us sufficient confidence that those codes 8
ve will have developed are adequate.
9 The reasons is that systems type phenomena can 10 occu r, in f act, we know, do occur, that we do not believe ve Il can model, no matter how hard we try, accurately enough to 12 their kind of real confidence you get from the kind of-get 13 large -- by the way, LOET is in this sense a large enough 14 facility.
15 What ? sean by systems phenomena is also in the 16 fargon what we call in-core pheno =ena, phenomena that occur l'7 because it is a reactor system.
Now, the 10FT program 18 consists of perhaps a dczen or so of these various kinds of 19 tests, one or two of each kind.
There is a simulated steam 20 generator break between primary and secondary.
There are 21 operational transients in which you lose feedvater, 22 operational transients in which you simulate the loss of 23 of f-site power, which means you canno t run the pumps and the 24 like, and it is our belief that if you do not do one or two 25 of these, of each of th ese several different categories, we ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
400 VIRGINIA AVE S.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024 (202)554 2345.
65 I
do nct get enough information to benchmark the large codes, 2
and the large ccdes cannot be developed with the sert of 3
('
confidence that in the long range we are going to need.
4' People vill be able to say, there may be these 5
systems types of things you have never icoked at, and that 6
is a vulnerability that we think is not resolvable withcut 7 integral tests.
8 Now, some integral tests can be performed without 9
a reactor.
LOFT is, after all, a reacter, but the problem 10 is -- by the'vay, the 3-D progran is an attempt to do 11 withcut a reacter some of the things in the large IOCA area, 12 and 3-D is now working on small breaks, too.
Some of the 13 things in a separa te eff ects -- full-scale, very large scale w/
.14 -- 3-D studies are costly as can be.
Between the Germans 15 and the Japanese, it is a couple of hundred million 16 dollars.
Our contribution is a fraction of that.
3-D U facilities are all at low pressure, and these operational 18 transients give us trouble at high pressure.
19 Much of the phenomena occur at high pressure and 20 most of the uncertainty is in the high pressure phenomena.
21 We de not see hev to do any of that with f acilities th a t are 22 in hand and if you really want to do non-reactor but 23 larce-scale things, high pressure is going to ccst more than 24 ve spend for LOFT in that evtra year, so it makes the best 25 economic sense to de the systems studies in the 107T we ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
Tiro
66 I
have.
That is the basic pitch.
2 Now, if we do not do it, what would we do?
- Well, 3 ve will probably develop the codes anyway as best we can, 4
and we will be left with some important u nce rtain tie s.
What 5
I mean by important uncertainties is that there will be some 6
phenomena where we will -- ! won ' t say we will never knew, 7 but where significant outstanding questions will remain.
8 Now, the willingness in the ligh t of this, you 9
know, great budget problem we have, to cut it off in 1983 is 10 th e f eeling that there are two or three or four tests less 11 urgent than the others which I still believe are highly 12 urgent, but the compromise in that other year, backing up 13 again, is too much, and I want to let ycu know not that you 14 don 't know that every year you buy it you are talking about 15
$50 =1111on of present effort.
I mean, there is inflaticn 16 in volved.
17 So, when I am talking about going from 39 to u8, I 18 am not talking about $9 million, because the 39 is th e next 19 year, but my feeling is., even in the context of a budget 20 crunch, and 550 million is a lot of money in this game 21 it is enormous -- my personal judgment is, not to spend that 22 is a significant compromise of our ability to understand 23 these things f:cm a phenomenological sense, and the rest of 24 our program, you know, here integrates two -- what, four or 25 #ive years -- integrates the 33C0 million, $200, I don't l
ALCERSGN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
l i-
67 I
know exactly, but it is clea r it is a big integral there, 2 and it requires that fo r the benchmark.
3
/
So, I have a suggestion which I want to pose to
- - s-4 and I will take personal debit.
you, and that is that 5
That is that it seems to me that the LOFT program deserves 6
and could easily use a kind of very thorough high level 7
review by a bunch of experts who could $1ve me and my 8 successor and you and the community a clearer picture of the 8 issues involved, the compromises in detail.
10 I want to say certainly -- the reason I say that 11 is, although we seek.their advice all the time, the 12 foreigners involved, and so on, it has not had that sort of 13 high level review.
I am not talking about the Lou _s l
[s 14 Committee f or a yea r.
I am talking about a dozen people, 15 in cluding people who are critical of what is going on and 16 defenders who could meet a couple of days two or three times 17 and do the whole thing in four weeks.
18 CHAIE%AN AHEARNE:
You obviously don't believe the 19 ACES 20 MR. BUDNITZ:
ACES has done the review that we 21 think is not comprehensive enough, although it is good.
I 22 mean, we sought the_r advice -- and was not penetrating 23 enough of the compromises and what could be done to fill the 24 compromises if 10FT were funded.
The reason I think it 25 could be done quickly is because there are lots of pecple ALDERSON REPORTING CCMPANY, INC.
68 I
out there interested in this, defenders and critics, and 2
secondly, it sure would be nice to have that by early fall, 3
(
so that if you came to a different conclusion based on their 4
advice, it is not too late.
5 I mean, 0:t3 is still there, and my belief is, the 6
community will strongly su p por t this.
That belief is based 7 on the strong support we have overseas, for example.
You 8
know, we have a $1 million contribution f rom the Japanese 9 and the Germans and the French are coming along, and those 10 people are contributing, because they think LCFT gives them 11 inf orm a tion that they cannot get any other way.
12 You could argue, well, maybe they ought to give us 13 more money to help support the darn thing.
That may be, but i
~ '
14 the fact is, they are strongly behind it.
It is a major 15 keystone of an international effort in LOCA and transients, 16 this decision unit.
That overseas has more money in it, 17 more or less, than we have.
Whatever we've got, there is 18 mora overseas, and their whole program includes LOFT as an 19 integral part of theirs, and curs, too, and I think that 20 th at overview could be very effective.
21 By the way, you would like ACES participation not 22 as a committee, but those members as scientists and 23 engineers. I would like to propose that, but to me, I am
(
24 convinced myself that to compromise it at this stage is too 25 gre:t a burden to place on the rest of the program to get to t
4 ALDERSCN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
69 I
the information that we need.
So, that is the pitch.
2 Now, there is one other point of special emphasis (M
3 which is that we still do not know for sure whether the $39 4
million either that year or the following year is the right 5
number.
There was a memo that we sent through to you about 6
that further decommissioning and the other costs.
Tom 7~ Murley has indicated his -- that he and his contractors and 8
members of our shop are going to pin that down ca ref ully as 9
soon as they can, a few weeks of effort.
10 So, in any event, if your decision is not to 11 and boy, I believe you really need to continue running it 12 that $39 million may not be right.
That would then 13 translate into the following year.
/
14 Secondly, I want to point out to you that in the 15 PPPG mark that we began with way back in May, there was a 16 number of $217 million which was our original target above 17 th e 217.
I was asked what would be the first thing I would 18 restore.
The las,t thing I would restore on that thing was 19 the fast reactor program a t the top of the list.
Therefore, 20 in some sense, it is the most vulnerable.
21 The thing that I would defend the greatest above 22 that FPPG mark was LOFT, and that would f all withit that, 23 and I still believe tha t, and I want to reiterate that.
(
24 The second point -- I will just switch gears, 25 unless you have any questions.
The second point, people.
I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
s 70 I
want to try to make a case that obviously every makes, and 2
that you had better not have sympathy with for everybody,
('
3 because the agency is not going to get 3,800 people or 3,500 L
4 people or whatever ve ask for, so I am special.
5 Let me make the case on two grounds.
The first is 6 that the nature of the program is changing. It ic becoming 7
more complex.
We are having more smaller projects, fewer of 8
the larger projects, and that is harder to manage.
Some of 9 th e people and the needs fo'r that I have more than two 10 things to say about that.
Second, the nature of the 11 disciplines involved is changing.
We are having needs for 12 the first time in human' factors and the like, and 13 instrumentation controls, and electrical systems.
We don't l'4 j
have people f or that.
We have needs for more risk
~'
j 15 assessment people.
We put that in.
We have needs in vaste 16 management.
17 That all aside, let me make another point which I l
"I did not make at the table but did make in a letter to you l
"I last week, and that is, I think we do as good a job as i
20 anybody in this place of managing our people.
I believe 21. th a t.
I am proud of it.
It is not my doing.
It was 22 Saul's, and Pon, and Tom F.urley, Frank, and so on.
What 23 I mean by th a t is, we are always running at our ceiling.
(,
24 Ih ere aren ' t too many places that can cay that.
25 Secondly, we made a concerted effort in research, l
l ALCERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
i
71 l
not necessarily, you know, every single ti m e, but as a 2
matter of trend we htve brought the number of secretaries 3
and administrative support down, and the number of technical
(
4 people up within the last year dramatically,.and I told you 5
that.
Th'ere are eicht more technical people and eight less 6 secretaries a'ad administrators than there were last year at 7
this time within the same total.
I don't remember what the 8
numbers are, like 106, 106 to 114 of tt se, and the others o
9 have come do*wn within the same 154 The numbers I just said 10 may be off by one or two, but eight is the right number.
11 I want to say th a t I think that' demonstrates 12 management intervention in part and some also -- there is a 13 lot of accident in this, because you cannot replace one of f-14 the others until they leave.
It has to be in the right 15 spot, after all.
You know, the director does need his 16 secretary and the like.
17 The point is, as a matter of management practice, 18 the f acts speak for themselves.
'de are doing a good job of 19 managing.
That is not true of a lot of the rest of this 20 agency.
A f ew extra billets would help us.
'Je need them in 21 waste manacement -- there are fours vaste management, ;1 ant ZZ op, safety, which is that whole new thrust, and the systems U reliability analysis, and I sure could use about four or 24 five more -- we asked for a lot more than that, but four or 25 five more than the number you gave us, which I think was ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
72
/
I 173.
It would really make a difference.
2 In tha following year, three or four more still, r
3
(
because the things we are doing in plant op, safety and the 4
like are growing in complexity, and I can see that coming.
5 Of course, the following year, I guess the people 6
-- you will look at that again next year.
So, as I said, 7
the pitch is on the basis that we manage our people well and 8
the program is changing in its* character, and then the third 9
thing is that the V.ickey Mouse in this place 15 getting 10 worse. and I will not say any more than that.
If you don't 11 believe it -- of course, I won 't say any more.
12 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
If all I have is that to 13 go on, I am not sure what I would try to eliminate.
14 ER. BUDNITZ:
I have some ideas.
You mean, about 15 the Mickey Mouse?
16 COMMISSIONER BR ADEORDs Define Mickey Mouse.
17 MR. BUDNITZ:
My guys claim that they spend much, l
18 much more on negotiating contracts with the division of 19 contracts than they did a couple of years ago, and that is a 20 sizeable part of the statement that I made before, the 21 amount of technical work they are doing, technical work 22 including the job they are supposed to do, which of course 23 includes some contracts, but that sort of thing is greving 24
(,.
by leaps and bounds relatively, and although it sounds like 25 a few ;ercent, it gets to add up.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
73 I
Secondly, there is -- I wrote this to somewhere in 2
one of my missiles.
The re is a continuing proliferation of 3
(
systems intended to provide information to upper management 4
which I never use.
Maybe others use them.
I don't know.
5 And if they do, great.
4 6
COMMISSIONER HEND?IEs The people who compiled it 7
and distriruted it to you after all use them.
8 (General laughter.)
9 MR. BUDNITZ:
I am not arguing tha t.
I am talking 10 about systems to watch what goes on, you know, and I mean 11 just to be blunt, okay, there was this limerick yesterday.
12 I spent hours trying to pore through that printout to figure 13 out if there is anything in there I can use.
There is not.
14 It is no good for me, but it is not the only thing.
'Je ha ve 15 a proliferation of stuff like tha t.
"I MR. DIRCKS:
I said the same thing, too.
I said 17 the same thin g.
'4e do have problems.
"I MR. BUDNITZ:
Yes, sure.
There is an attempt by everybody to 20 monitor everybody's programs with numbers that even the 21 branches do not want.
22 MR. SUDNITZ:
And thirdly, and this is not trivial 23 for the senior managers, it is something th a t was an 24 inevitable part of the legislation.
The Civil Service 25 Reform Act has put additional burdens on me to make sure it ALDERSON REPCRTING COMPANY, INC.
l
74
/r I
will work.
It is a lot of tine.
'J e k n e w i t.
Spotty 2
Campbell knew it, but it is true.
j 3
Finally, for some reason that I think is clear in v
4 my mind but which I don 't know what to do about, everybody 5
in this place' sends memos to everybody else on every 6
subject.
By the way, I talked to the Babbitt gang yesterday 7
afternoon.
I told them that I think it comes from the fact 8
that there is not enough trust for people to deal with each 8 other verbally enough so they have to write everything down.'
10 CHAIRMAN AREARNEs I tend to agree with you, 11 beccuse that is exactly the reactic.1 I had when I came'here.
12 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
There is a great yen to 13 estchlish in sets of record files, protection.
That is g_s 14 exactly right.
15 MR. B UD NITZ:
Hight.
16 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
People --
17 MR. BUDNITZ:
Everything is covered, and I am not 18 surprised when memos go from me to another office, NMSS, 19 NER, or the EDO staff offices, but I have to tell.you when 20 th e ABC branch in research is writing.a letter to the XYZ i
l 21 branch in research, I find that disturbing.
22 Nost of the time it goes on, and I don't k.n o.v 23 am leaving, but I want to let you Anow tnat it is real.
24 That is not why I am leaving, but it is real, and that 25 continuing burden of activity makes the staff less ALDERSoN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
9 75
(
s t
l
^
officient,and I want to say -- I remember saying this to u
2 tTill Dirkc5 a while back, but I want to say I think that the
'{r
'3 ageacy ought to pay careful attention -- I don't know how it i
can -- to some measure, poor as it might b e., to 5'
' CH AIREAN AHEAENE:
Different than numbers of memo.
6 MR. BUDNITZ:
I' don't know what productivity is it wh'n;I see it.
I am not sure we 7
exac tl y, but I know e
8 oucht to have a form, but it seems to me we ought to think 9
about the productivity impact on new procedures.
For
,'x ample, I said this.
If you make a plot of productivity 10 11 which is output versus a number of people working in the 12' United ' States, it -h as gone up 3 percent per year since the 13 Civil' War.
Three percent compounded.
That is why the 14 cot.atry is as great as l't is, thank Ccd.
15 I think the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ought to 3 \\
T sh::itself a goa'i of having a 3 percent productivity k7 incressEleach year.
I don 't know how to measure it, but it e
1,
\\
18, cu ch t to' be 10 or'20 percent over half a dozen years.
In 3V 19 orde'r,to achieve that, you'have to look at every single one i
\\'
b oft.hhes"e Mickey Mouse procedures, some of which you need,
' a 21 hn'd figure out 'whether you need it, what the impact is, and 1
c 22 whether the, impact l's vorth it.
y 4
23 9 s / If you, did G*.ha t, there would probably be a lot of i
,s ni r
24, th e s e thing s elis?.t, r2 t ed.
Enough said.
This is a budget 3
g; s
N 1
's T
'N' ' re al'a ma '. ; 4 s
q g
s
\\
T 3
g
,1 s
I
- k.
g s'
\\,
s.
i f
3 s
)
,I 3,
i 1
[
'y
,,i 6
s i
\\
g }
e 7
I
\\
4- 's t
N 1, g' k
i, ALDERSotJ REPORTING CCMPAN IN C.
s I
,s s
s
~
w
76 1
The third thing, I am grateful for the forum.
2 SAFER.
We were told last night that you are contemplating a
[)
3 reduction of more or less F5 million in three decision 4
ss 4
un its, siting and environment, waste management, and fuel 5
cycle, which are the decision units which comprise the S AFER 6
divisien program.
7 The rest of it is ipso f acto the S AFER area with 8 some other things goitg on, too, and some little admixtures, 9
and I want to say that I think that taking $5 million out of 10 th at is nct an acceptable way to come to some lower number 11 if that is what you are pointing to, and tha t if I were to 12 he given a lower number, I would mix it different.
That is, 13 although there is growth in each of those programs, si ting fs i -
14 and environment, safeguards and fuel cycle, and waste UE management, of course, that that grcwth is significantly 16 merited by the needs of NMSS in every area, vaste 17 management, f uel cycle area -- for example, there is a whole 18 question about cecupa tional protection which is gcing to 19 come to haunt us, and of course in the safeguards, where I 20 continue to b elie ve tha t the whole agency is low 11.
1 l
21 safeguards.
22 CHAIRMAN AHEERNE:
The whole agency what?
23 YR. BUDNITZ:
It is lower than I would like.
(
24 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY :
How big is the high level l
l 25 waste program?
1 l
ALDEBSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
L
77 1
MR. BUDNITZs In 1981, it is 7.2.
In 1982, it 2
would have been 13 within the 237.
That is what I have F'
3 here, which is the number we were working with until we
(
4 got 5
COMMISSIONER GII.INSKY s Thirteen?
6 CHAIRMAN.AHEARNE.
High level waste.-
7 MR. BARRY:
The 19 81 mark,
- 7. 2, you said, is that 8
in consideration of the House?
9 MR. BUDNITZs Yes, it is our understanding of what 10 the Houce Appropriations Committee would do.
Il MR. BARRY:
Based on your total cut?
12 MR. BUDNITZ : 'Whatever it is, that is how it comes 13 out.
g
~
14 MR. BARRY:
You would hold it at 7.2.
15 MR. BUDNITZ:
That is right, and at the 237, which 16 is befcre the suggestion we heard last night, that you would 17 like to consider takinc five more million out of the S AFER 18 areas.
It is 13.
I guess Jack Martin was just here.
I 19 missed it, but he obviously was making a pitch which.is in 20 congruence with tht;, because we have talked.
21 let me describe what the greblem is.
We have 22 selected or are about to select contractors to be the lead 3 groups in four different areas.
The fact is that we need 24
(
sig n if ica n t programs looking at site characteriration and 25 fuel -- I mean, vaste form performance and the like, and we ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
78 I
have selected four different, contractors.
2 One is Lawrence Livermore getting back on board 3 with us.
One of them is my own colleagues.
One other is 4
University of Arirona.
Another is the Geological Survey.
5 Sam, do you want to say anything about that?
It 6
is our f eeling to cut below that will compromise our program 7 in each of these four areas.
8 Time is really what we are buying here.
9 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY What is the relationship 10 of this program to the moneys that Jack would be spending?
11 MR. SUDNITZ I want to say something very 12 exciting to me, and that is that if you look at the 1979 13 program, the first year I got here there was a hell of a lot g
14 of research going on in NMSS.
That is not true,in 1981 and 15 1982.
Ihey cut the research out of theirs.
It is in us.
16 We are doing the research.
They are doing the technical 17 assistance, the wa y the agency ought to define those two 18 terms, somehow.
Th'er are looking at environmental impacts 19 th a t are needed
-- environmental statements to support a 20 rule, or developing procedural things and the like, and we 21 are doing th e research, the technical stuff.
22 Sam -- and I can no into what specific areas are, 23 if you wa nt.
24 MR. BASSETT:
We ere supplying research to tha 25 various aspects of the program.
There is a substantial ALDERSCN REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
79 I
amount of repository engineering that has to be understcod.
2 We have a serious and continuing interest in hydrogeology.
()
Hydrogeology is well under way at the University of Arizona, 3
4 but this effort is being expanded as a center of effort.
5 Ihe only way we can get the leverage to master these 6
technologies is to fan out using major centers.
7 The buildup that has been indicated is to 8
establish similar centers of excellence at Eerkeley.
In the 9
case of Livermore, it would be in repository engineering.
10 We expect to get support f rom the Corps of Engineers.
With 11 these activities, we will be able to fan out our effective 12. manpower, anich is relatively small in number, and amplify 13 it using these centers.
~
I4 I forgot to mention Brockhaven, which is where we 15 look at the vaste form and its variations.
16 COMMISSIONEE GIIINSKY:
This would then impact on 17 NMSS programs or begin to contribute to them, presumably.
18 MR. 34SSETTs Indeed.
All their work is b,ased i
19 on --
20 COMMISSIONEE GILINSKY:
Walt a minute.
I was 21 going to say 19 83, 1984, 198S.
22 MR. BUDNITZ:
It has to be by 1983.
23 MR. S ASS ETT s It has to be put in place starting 24 in late 1981, and then into 1982, and running f ully in 198 3.
25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
We are talking about the ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, l*;C.
80 l
1982 budget.
2 MR. BASSETT 1982 and 1983.
{~
COMMISSIONER GILINSKYs So you are going to put 3'
4 the work out in 1982.
5 MR. EUDNITZ 1981.
With this cut, we would n'ot' 6 do in 1981 what we would do to get started on that, because 7
would not be able to carry it through.
we 8
MR. BASSETT:
Not be able to build it to the 9
proper level.
Fight now we are talking to Berkeley trying 10 to get some idea of how things should be phased up.
Il COMMISSIONER GIIINSXT:
Without the cut, there 12 would be work continuing through 19827 13 MR. BASSETTs Yes.
14 MR. BUDNITZ:
It would have started in 1981 with 15 th e cu t.
16 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
You would start it in 1981 17 if the cut were not there.
18 MR. BASSETT:
In this connection, this idea of 19 fanning out our available manpower is absolutely essential, 20 because there are 30, 40 different intensely technical 21 specialties involved here.
Cn the other-hand, we can by 22 this le ve ra g e, and with the ability to place a reasonable 23 program at these major activities, get the leverage we 24 need.
As the program comes toward maturity, we can phase it 3
out again.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
%nuxnJErn
m 81 n
1 All of our prograns are negotiated with Jack 2
Martin, and they all have his full su pport, and this 3
()
includes the level that we had before this cut.-
4 3R. BUDNITZ There is another thing that it is 5
predicated on, and that is, it is predicated on the program 6
we had put together, the agency, with the philosophy that 7
the agency had been going forth with righ t along.
The whole 8 notion of a shift of philosophy in the last few weeks that 9 has been in the press, and tha t th e Hill m um ble's a bo u t, is 10 not incorporated here.
Thar would be a separate inpact, but 11 our planning assumption is that our -- not just our program, 12 but our philosophical basis for this is correct.
13 That is, we were going to have these several --
7-t k-1<4 the several barriers and the like, the fuel, the engineered 15 facility, the geology and so on, and the independent teams 16 wo rk in different disciplines and different areas.
I don't 17 know how we would be able to ccver all those bases.
18 MB. BASSETT The House Appropriations Committee 19 remark reflects this buildup thus far.
In 1981 they are 20 tracking with what we had in mind.
21 MR. BUDNITZ:
I can come back to my favorite hobby 22 horse, but it turns out I am a minority of one in this.
If 23 I had to take a cut, I would take it in low level rather 24 th an high level.
3 ME. BASSETT:
There is some disregard --
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
m
82 n
I MR. SUDNITZ:
Nobody else here thinks that.
2 (General laughter.)
3
()
MR. BUDNITZ:
My basic premise is, the high level 4
waste business is intimately tied in with the reactors and 5 the low level business is a little different.
If we did not 6 have research in low levels, I am not as convinced that the 7
world is going to fall apart.
8 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:
How much is there.
9 MB. SUDNITZ:
Three and a half in 1981 to five and 10 a half in our present plan.
Now, the guys have convinced me 11 it is defended.
Jack Martin needs it.
He does need it.
To 12 take it in high level compromises, to me, what is a far.more 13 important -- what the people out there think we are supposed g-t' 14 to be doing, and of course there are a lot of governors in 15 various states that would not agree with that, which means 16 have to do it, but I think the licensing capability is we l'7 not as compromised.
18 Jack may disagree with that, because that work is 19 needed so that new sites can be selected in these regional 20 centers, and so we know what to do with the sites that have 21 been closed, like Sheffield.
22 ME. DIRCKS:
Again, the present danger is the 23 future.
24 ME. BASSETT:
I would have to say that the SAFER 25 people are in general = ore of Jack Ma rt in 's b elie f.
The ALDERSON REPCRTING COMPANY, INC.
i
-w
--v_
~l j
83 I
low-level business is a constant source of difficulty, and 2
there is not a lot known about the low-level sites.
(}
3 MR. EUDNITZ:
I think it is important when the 4
director knows his staff is not b'ehind him at all to sa y 5
tha t right away.
6 (General laughter. )
7 MR. BUDNITZs I really think that that is an 8 unusual circumstance.
I can't think of anything aise here 9 -- I don't think there is a single thing else here where I 10 or one or two of us are a minority.
There is a unanimity 11 between us on this, although I have to say in the end the 12 decisions are mine, you know, as they have to be.
13 The last one, fast reactors, and I indicated that g~
tN-14 T did not touch upon it in the thing a again the issue 15 week ago, but I want to say, it is plain to me the 16 Congressional direction each year is, we should do it.
They 17 tell us to do it, and the Fresident signs it.
That is 18 important.
President Carter is not sending it up, but he is 19 signing it.
It becomes law.
And it just strikes me as 20 imprudent to leave it out and then have to eat it.
21 On the other hand, there is another argument which l
22 I believe in firmly and which I know has staff unanimity 23 here in my staff.
I am talking about our reactor people, 24 and that is, it ought to be funded on its merits, which
?. r e 25 that if the agency has no capability for fast reactor i
(
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
i
84 I
research and drops the capability nov in place, we are going 2
to be left with a very difficult job of responding if we 3
()
ever have to respond later.
4 let me describe what I mean by that.
If we had 5
never had any fast reactor research, and in 1983, by some 6
political decision, decided we are coing to have thes in the 7
NRC, better license them when they come along.
We would 8
build up a program.
It is going to be harder to build up a 9
program in 1982 if you cut it of f in 19 81 than if we never U3 had'one.
Cnce burned, twire shy.
Il There is a staff out there in my shop, and there 12 are people in Sandia and los Alamos and Ca k Ridge who are 13 vorking on this, who are interested in it, who are working 1
l'4 on us.
They are NRC breeder people.
They are no t 15 developmental people, and vascillations that we have had H5 over the years have caused very serious problems.
17 I wrote you a whole memo about that in the 18 springtime.
The phase-out plans have been modified some, 19 because House appropriations is putting some back, and the 20 quys are trying to figure out what to do.
21 I want to say that last year the Commission's 22 endo rsement of this, even though OME did not, was a vital U
part of maintaining the viability of that program, so when 24 the Hill came back with us, it was there.
If the Commission 25 does not endorse it, the bottom is going to fall cut faster l
\\
l l
l ALDERSON REDORTING COMPANY, INC.
85 I
than when they put it back, and it is not going to be well 2 spent, not to mention that putting it back and eating it are
)
3 involved.
4 This year, at least, OMB gave us $5 million, so S
when they gave us our eleven, we only had te eat six.
If it 6
had been zero, we would have had to eat eleven.
The thing 7 is complex.
8 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
But Bob, I thought in your 9* presentation you had said some of what was in last year's 10 endorsed five is now relabeled.
11 MR. BUDNITZ:
'Jater reactors, that is right.
Let 12 me try to indicate what the numbers are.
I am not sure I 13 have them exactly right.
Yurley will correct me if I am 14 wrong.
My recollection is that in this year's program I
15 not talking about next year -- of the five, about two or am 16 three is purely -- if we had to phase it out, stuff that I 17 call purely b reeder stuff, and the rest is both, and so we 18 are labeling that water reactors.
In this year's program, 19 which is, what, $15 million or something -- I don 't remember 20 what it i s, 12, 17.
It icoks like the stuf f that is not 21 related to water reactors, fast and gas, is 13 and some 22 ch ange.
23 I remember sa ying to Joe yesterda y it was 14, but 24 it is 13.
25 COMMISSIONER HENOFIE:
Ihat is fast and gas.
l l
l ALCERSON REPORTING CCMPANY, INC.
86 1
MR. BUDNITZ Eleven and a half and about 11.7.
I 2
thought it was a little higher than that.
That is this 3
()
year,1980, and that is the fast reactor stuff this year 4
that we say is not water reactor.
We are willing to take 5 that down to eight for LMF39's from eleven, but we think 6
that smaller than about eight is about as small as you can 7 co.
That eight and that two is LMFER work th a t is not water 8 reactor related.
It cannot be so labeled.
It has to do 9 with questions such as aerosol release and transport, 10 questions of the classical hypothetical core disruption 11 accident.-
I don't know why they call it hypothetical, 12 because we know they can occur.
Development of the advanced 13 codes for understanding that the whole simmer question, g,
14 containment response and the like.
15 My view is that unless you believe th a t th e 16 lik elihood is really, you know that any turn-around in 17 th e breeder will move to the mid or late eighties, it is 18 going to be hard to turn this around soon.
Several years 19 later, starting anew, it will be easier, because the memory 20 will not have been present, but that gang out there has got 21 it awful bad.
That is the way they are.
Is that worth $8 22 million?
I don't know, but I think it is worth it on is U me ri ts.
24 t
Obviously, it is a decision that we can only leave 3
to you.
I I
I ALDERSON REPORTING CCMPANY, INC.
87 1
CHAIEMAN AHEAENE:
You see the Commission having 2
already accepted the two?
(}
3 MR. BUDHITZ The inplication of what we heard 4
last night was that the two for gas was in there.
That is 5
ac. I understand it.
Again, you can redecide that, and tha t,
6 too, was for gas reacto rs, Fort St. Vrain, and also for some 7 that lo6k forward, but kind of a combination.
That was my 8 understanding.
9 CHAI35AN AHEARNE:
So that of the ten you 10 originally --
11 MR. SUDNIT2:
'J e are only talking about the 11 eight.
That is the breeder part.
The gas is separate.
I 13 understood yo.
sccepted that.
That is great.
Although I do g,
'4 have to tell you, the gas branch of two people is now down 15 to one.
16 CHAIEHAN AREARNE:
You had put in your recla a 17 that if we put in the two, we really ought to put in one 18 person.
19 MR. EUDNITZ:
That is right, and if you give us 20 the eight, I think it is four people.
21 ME. SCROGGINS:
Three.
U MR. BUDNITZ:
Three more.
23 CHAIPMAN A H E.1 : NE:
You agree with the eight.
24 M3. BUDNITZ4 Th re e and one.
I thought it was 25 four and one.
And as I said, the reason we are down to one ALCEBSON REPCRTING COMP ANY, INC.
88 m
I is, cf course, as I said -- finally, just one other thing, 2
and tha t has to do with the total.
The overall total that
( 'l 3 ve cre after in 19S3 we want the LCFT money back, so you 4
had given us, I think, 239 was the way it came down.
We 5
want nine more to make 248.
6 Now, if you ask me, do I want LOFT back within the 7
239, the answer is yes, and I will tell you what I will do.
8 I don't want that.
I want that extra nine for LCET, but of 9 course we don 't want that extra 55 million cut in SAFEE.
If 10 you went to cut some number, we would distribute it 11 differently, but whatever you give us, we will make do, and 12 it will be a goed program, ! can say that, except that I 13 really can't say that if we lose LOFT it is going to be bad.
I4 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Vic?
Joe?
"I COMM!SSIONER HENDRIE:
No questions.
"I CHAIRMAN AHEAENE:
Peter?
17 MR. EUDNITZ:
Are we the last ones?
U3 CHAIRMAN AHEARNEs I think so.
Anything else?
l 18 ME. 3 AERY:
That is it.
l 20 l
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Robert.
21 MR. BUDNITZ:
It is a pleasure.
l 22 CHAIEMAN AHEARNE:
Thank you.
t 23 MB. SUDNITZ4 I had a good time he re.
24 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE Very good, Ecbert.
Thank you.
25 7
propos= we come back at 2:00 o' clock.
All right.
l r
l ALDERSoN REPCRTING CCMPANY, INC.
89 1
('4 h ere upo n, at 11:53 a.m.,
the meeting was 2
adjourned.)
3
(-
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13
(.
'A s 14 15 16 17 lu 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ALCERSON REPCRTING COMPANY, INC.
^.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the m
/
Commission Meeting in the matter of: CLOSED MEETING - EXEMPTION 9 BUDGET SESSION - MARKUP /RECLAMA Date of Proceeding:
July 30, 1980 Docket !! umber :
Place of Proceeding:
Washington, D. C.
were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the Commissic" David S. Parker Official Reporter (Typed)
M.
N.+
(SIG!ATU?I 0F Fl?OEC 2) l 9
m m
w yy-,.y- - -.,,
y-
.2
-