ML20042F992
| ML20042F992 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/28/1990 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | Lloyd M HOUSE OF REP., SCIENCE, SPACE & TECHNOLOGY (FORMERLY |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20042F991 | List: |
| References | |
| CCS, LLOYD-900228, NUDOCS 9005100271 | |
| Download: ML20042F992 (1) | |
Text
i e-
- 1 QUESTION 1.
You have stated in your testimony that the NRC is re-evaluating the: review schedules for. ALWR's and some delays'will be likely.
We are aware that NRC Chairman Carr has been concerned about the I
review priority due to the' limited resources.
How many full time employees (FTE's) has the Commission budgeted i
for the certification review?
What-it the optimum number of FTE's for the Commission to maintain the current schedule?
l ANSWER.
The Commission has budgeted the following resources for both evolutionary and i
advanced reactor. reviews as well as the Electric Power Research Institute's Requirements Document' for evolutionary LWR's.
YEAR DIRECT FTE-PROGRAM SUPPORT i
(INMILLIONS) 1990 24 1.6 1991 35 1.3 The Commission, as noted in my testimony, is currently re-evaluating the current certification schedules. Budgeted resources for these reviews will be considered in this re-evaluation. The staff has preliminarily. determined that the recently established review process will likely result in some schedule slippage for the two certification reviews in progress. Allocating additional resources to these reviews ~will not maintain the current schedule, 90051oo2n 900*
PDR ORG NOP2
.