ML20058H352
| ML20058H352 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/09/1993 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Machtley R HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058H353 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-58FR21662, RULE-PR-170, RULE-PR-171 CCS, NUDOCS 9312130054 | |
| Download: ML20058H352 (2) | |
Text
._.
~
].
~ f* *'%e,$\\
UNITED STATES
.,[
Z[~ j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION c
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20555-0001
% '.%s ]
i November 9, 1993 The Honorable Ron Machtley United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
20515-3901
Dear Congressman Machtley:
f I am responding to your letter of Septer 3r 24, 1993, written on behalf of your constituent, Grinnell Corporation, regarding NRC's fee structure for FY 1993.
As part of its ongoing inspection procedures, the NRC has not identified instances of licensees failing to obtain or use safety equipment because of NRC fees.
Grinnell Corporation did not identify a specific safety concern in t
i this matter. Although NRC fees have increased substantially for radiography since full cost recovery was first initiated, the fees represent a relatively small cost for larger companies and smaller companies qualify for substantially smaller annual fees. Therefore, we continue to believe the causes of poor performance that have been and continue to be observed in a fraction of radiography inspections are more likely related to the more traditional causes of inadequate training, insufficient management oversight or a lackadaisical commitment to follow NRC regulations.
The NRC will continue to apply its inspection and enforcement program in order to identify.
and deter violations of safety requirements.
i The NRC is currently in the process of considering a Petition for Rulemaking to require that organizations perform radiography with a minimum of two trained persons. A major consideration of the NRC will be the additional costs that radiography licensees would assume as the result of such a rule.
Either the imposition of this new requirement or the conducting of more i
frequent inspections of field activities by NRC would increase costs to radiography licensees. We will carefully consider the likely benefits of such changes against the possibility that increased costs might cause licensees to consider cutting corners in their safety programs.
If I can be of further assistance, please let me know.
i d
Sincerely, fM}0.> {
James
. Taylor Executive Director 1
for Operations 4
h 9312130054 931109 PDR PR' b
l 170 SOFR21662 PDR
Nove nber 9,1993 The Honorable Ron Machtley
' ~
United States House of Representatives Bashington, D.C.
20515-3901
Dear tongressman Machtley:
I am responding to your letter of September 24, 1993, written on behalf of your constituent, Grinnell Corporation, regarding NRC's fee structure for FY 1993.
f As part of its ongoing inspection procedures, the NRC has not identified instances of licensees failing to obtain or use safety equipment because of NRC fees.
Grinnell Corporation did not identify a specific safety concern in this matter. Although NRC fees have increased substantially for radiography since full cost recovery was first initiated, the fees represent a relatively i
small cost for larger companies and smaller companies qualify for substantially smaller annual fees.
Therefore, we continue to believe the l
causes of poor performance that have been and continue to be observed in a fraction of radiography inspections are more likely related to the more traditional causes of inadequate training, insufficient management oversight or a lackadaisical commitment to follow NRC regulations.
The NRC will j
continue to apply its inspection and enforcement program in order to identify and deter violations of safety requirements.
The NRC is currently in the process of considering a Petition for Rulemaking i
to require that organizations perform radiography with a minimum of two trained persons. A major consideration of the NRC will be the additional costs that radiography licensees would assume as the result of such a rule.
Either the imposition of this new requirement or the conducting of more frequent inspections of field activities by NRC would increase costs to radiography licensees. We will carefully consider the likely benefits of such changes against the possibility that increased costs might cause licensees to consider cutting corners in their safety programs.
If I can be of further assistance, please let me know.
g gtyj ct
' T; Sincerely, g y 3. n Jr.
q James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations l
DISTRIBUTION:
Congressional Correspondence FY 1993 RScroggins JFunches DC-93-418 OC R/F CRC-93-0882 SECY ED0-9396 j
EDO R/F EBlack DDandois GJackson LFDCB R/F (2)
DAF R/F
- See previous concurrences
[,
0FFICE: LFDCB*
DAF*
DAF*
OC*
OC*
(
N NAME:
DDandois EBlack LHiller JFunches RScroggins JMTa lor DATE:
11/01/93 11/01/93 11/01/93 11/02/93 11/02/93
///
DBD/A:\\E009396
.