ML20056H209
| ML20056H209 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/03/1993 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Pombo R HOUSE OF REP. |
| References | |
| CCS, NUDOCS 9309090001 | |
| Download: ML20056H209 (5) | |
Text
-...
4 a
ga arcw
/
UNITED STATES -
l
'[ h[ 1[ t
]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION C
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20666 0001
%s.,JiJ I
August 3, 1993 i
l The Honorable Richard W. Pombo l
Member, United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
20515 t
Dear Congressman Pombo:
This is in response to your letter on behalf of your constituent, Phillip M.
Qualls, regarding the possible realignment of our Region V office-in Walnut
[
Creek, California. The agency is currently examining the possible realignment, and I assure you that a final decision will not be made until all options are examined.
The agency's goal is to achieve greater efficiencies through optimum distribution of its human resources.
The agency has made a concerted effort i
to open this process to its affected employees and to allow these employees to i
personally express their views.
The agency has solicited cctmnts from all i
Region V employees and has permitted the employee union to present its views at a Commission meeting held on June 25, 1993.
The Chairman also held a lengthy meeting with Region V employees on July 21, 1993, to further di'scuss the matter and to foster a better understanding of the agency's concerns.
We can certainly appreciate the reaction of affected employees; however, there i
is no rush to judgement, political motivation or hidden agenda regarding this matter.
I can assure you that whatever decision the Commission makes relative to this matter will be done after due consideration of various options and alternatives and its effect on agency operations.
I i
l We appreciate your interest in this matter.
1
?
Sincerely, i
\\
yw h "j
James M. Taylor i
Executive Director d for. Operations i
\\
h
~
93090'70001 930803 I
PDR ORG NE E s
{
.s 4
i l
August 3, 1993 i
l l
I i
i i
i t
i l
t i
~
4 i
DISTRIBUTION:
OP r/f PLR r/f MJFox 1
4 DRIVE (NETWORK /DG/ LOCAL):
G I
DIRECTORY / SUBDIRECTORY _:
TICKETS DOCUMENT NAME COMPOMBO.RV WITS /ED0/0P TICKET NO.
ED0-9163 OP:PLR
- OPg0D, OPy EDQ TECH ED
@J '
MJFox%) JM h tt %
%for
'7xp90 07/p/93 07/ /93 07/10/93
(/M93
/ /
07/3t>/93
//
0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
-l
RICHARD W. PoMBO
. =,.
'5 's to cwoam aovse murs ean.=c r
n, o,ca.c, r...
o
- --.~c,o oc w... e,,
f COwuTE: CN.GRICULTunt
,;ro2+ 225-1se r
'$~o"21, c~. 2.~l'.".,'
COHgrC$$ 0f tIJc EnitCD 6(attn
= ~ ~ ~.. ~..
~
%0115c of Represtritatibes
.,J,O"_ m,,,,,,
,oo.ci o~,.v.:ive..crim..c.as
,,o....,
- c....
3Rashington, BC 20515-0511 July 2,1993 Mr. William Taylor Asst. Sec. For Congressional, Intergovernmental, and International Affairs i
U.S. Depanment of Energy Forrestal Building, Room 7B138 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20585 j
Dear Mr. Taylor:
The attached communication is sent for your consideration. Your investigation of the l
statements contained therein would be helpful. In addition, I would greatly appreciate any information necessary to make a satisfactory reply to my constituent.
Please send a written response to the attention of my Capitol Hill staff member, Jonathan Blyth, at the address listed below:
=
Congressman Richani Pombo l
United States House of Representatives 1519 I.ongworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Thank you for your cooperation in this regard. I look forward to hearing from you at your l
earliest opportunity.
l Sincerely, Richard W. Pombo i
Member of Congress i
i RWP:jb Enclosure 1
l
1w 3
~
9(
1TF@MW Cc01 E20 i
11339 Colony Road 7
Galt, CA 95632-8546 0
M 14 June 11, 1993 j
w U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer LIN
~
1700 Montgomery Street, Suite 305 San Francisco, CA 94111 Dear Senator Boxer As you may be aware, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission is seriously
[
considering closing the Region V office currently located in Walnut Creek and moving the jobs to Texas. This reduction is not being done to accomplish the four per cent staff reduction that the President required of all agencies.
According to our senior management, that reduction is already accomplished in l
the projected agency budgets.
If the agency had conducted an evaluation process similar to the military base closure committee, the closure would perhaps be justified as the most economical method of reducing the agency during a period of government l
retrenchment.
That has not been the case in this example. An evaluation was conducted by senior agency management.
The charter for the study was to l
consider only to close or significantly reduce the California office.
The i
study group relayed to employees that the study group was directed to consider no options which would adversely affect any of the other regional offices.
l The directive was made shortly after Mr. Clinton became president.
It came from our Executive Director for Operations.
The story is widely known throughout the agency that he is married to George Bush's niece and received this appointment shortly after Mr. Bush was inaugurated in 1989. The other offices are in Dallas, Philadelphia, Chicago, and Atlanta; these are all j
located in states which either voted Republican or were very closely contested i
in the recent election.
It seems that the California office is singled out by i
the party out of power as retaliation for the state's strong support of the j
President.
The above could just be " sour grapes"; however, at a staff meeting on June 8, 1993 the study group told the employees that the commission was in such a hurry to accomplish this closure that they were not allowed to delay the study for ene week, which they had requested, and produce a better product.
The Commission wants to have a CLOSED meeting on June 25 to decide the issue.
The Commission is NOT (unlike in virtually every other major decision it makes) i providing a time or avenue for public or state comment. The safety oversight i
by nearby NRC management of the California nuclear power plants at San Onofre j
and Diablo Canyon would be decreased.
Response times to potential emergency i
events not only at tne power reactors but at the test reactors in San Ramon,
[
Pleasanton, La Jolla and Irvine would significantly increase. The close relationship between California (with more than 10Y. of the US population) and the NRC could cease to exist.
I June 25 is an important date in that on June 30 the five year term of one of the Republican commissioners (Curtiss) expires.
There is much speculation within the agency that President Clinton will appoint the lady who chairs the Arkansas radiation protection program to the vacant seat.
The expectation is that he will also makes her Chairman (because the President designates the
w Chairman). The speculation is that this action would prompt Chairman Selin (a l
Bush appointee) to resign and result in another appointment for the President.
To delay the decision until the Commission is represented with an appointee of the current President's would render the closure unlikely.
I feel that is why the date of June 25 in a CLOSED meeting with N0 notification or comment was selected.
We were told that the office is being closed not to reduce staff from the agency but to provide more available persons to be used elsewhere in the agency. One example mentioned by the senior management in the study group was for the Advanced Reactor Program.
The agency was directed to drop this program after the President's State of the Union Address. The Chairman publicly did so but now Senior Management is closing the California office and one example given as to where the resources would go was to this program.
I wish to thank you for your time and attention.
Sincerely yours,
', Ag Phillip M. Qualls cc:
U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein Congressman Richard Pombo Congressman Vic Fazio Congressman Robert Matsui i
Congressman George Miller i
s f
l
CCNGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENCE SYSTEX DOCUMENT PREPARATION CHECKLIST j
i This checklist is be submitted with each document (or q cup of j
- s/As) sent for.
ing into the CCS.
1.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DOCCKINT(S)
/
'/
o M
\\ Correspendenses.
Neariaggy(GSp h i
2.
- TPE' CF* N r
3.
Doccx2NT CoNTacI.
sensitive (NRC Caly)
V' Non-semaitive 4.
CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE and SUBCCXMITTEES (if applicable)
Congressional Committee l
l subcommittee j
5.
SUBJECT CODES l
l (a) l (b) i (c) 6.
SOURCE OF DOCUMENTS l
(a) 5520 (document name (b)
Y scan.
(c)
Atlachments i
(4)
Rakey (e)
Other j
l 7.
SYSTEX LOG DATES 1-(a)
Cl! O Pl d Date OCA seat document to CCS 1
(b)
Date CCS receivees doounaat (c)
Data returned to OCA for additional information (d)
Data resubmitted by-CCA to CCS
~
(e)
Data entered into CCS by (f)
Date OCA notified that document is in CCS 8.
COMMENTS 03003L
-