ML20059C947
| ML20059C947 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/06/1993 |
| From: | Wilkins J Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| References | |
| ACRS-2893, NUDOCS 9311020068 | |
| Download: ML20059C947 (37) | |
Text
'
's
'hd[OM[f 3 CERTIFIED l'P6 By J. E. Wilkins, Jr.
Chairman, ACRS August 6, 1993 Summary of Minutes ACRS Planning & Procedures Subcommittee Meeting August 4, 1993 Room P-422, Bethesda, Maryland Attendees ACPS J.
E. Wilkins, Jr, Chairman J.
C.
Carroll W.
J.
Lindblad ACRS Staff J.
T.
Larkins, Executive Director R.
P.
Savio S.
Duraiswamy M.
F.
Lee M. L. MacWilliams Purpose To discuss aspects of ACRS activities related to:
1.
Members 2.
Meeting with Mr. Beckjord 3.
Meeting with the Chairman 4.
Proposed letter on Dr. Murley's remarks to the Commission 5.
ACRS/ACNW Resources 6.
ACRS Fellowship Program 7.
ACRS Retreat in 1994 8.
Frequent Flyer IG Report 9.
Proposed Amendment to ACRS Bylaws 10.
Status of Multilateral Meeting 11.
Status of Activities on Internet 12.
Response on Ethics Letter
- .7 v,yfctn ORIGIKAL
.i. t ' ri o d I'y-~
/
9311020068 930806 D
2893 PDR i
'4 2
13.
Proposed study by Dr.
Quintiere, ACRS consultant on fire issues 14.
Dr Lewis Comments on certification of Subcommittee minutes 15.
Future Agenda Additional Matters Discussed 1)
Future meeting with Office Directors 2)
Direct Deposit Program 1)
MEMBERS (Open)
The current status of Dr. Shack's appointment was reviewed.
Personnel is processing his paperwork which will make him a member as of August 1.
2)
MEETING WITH MR. BECKJORD (Open)
The Subcommittee discussed Dr. Wilkins' July 21, 1993 meeting with Mr. Beckjord, Director, RES.
Dr. Wilkins described his discussions as cordial and useful. Although there was concern expressed about the Committee interaction with the RES staff, it did not appear to be a dominate stumbling block in the ability of RES to work with the ACRS.
There was also a discussion of the relationship between the NSRRC and the ACRS.
3)
MEETING WITH CHAIRMAN (Open)
The Subcommittee discussed Dr. Wilkins' meeting with Chairman Selin.
The meeting originally scheduled for July 26 was changed to August 4.
Dr. Larkins also attended the meeting.
Dr. Wilkins and Chairman Selin discussed the interactions between the Committee and the NRC staff, the Quadripartite Meeting, the impact of FTE reductions on the ACRS and the ACRS Fellowship program.
4)
PROPOSED LETTER ON DR. MURLEY'S REMARKS TO THE COMMISSION (Open)
Mr. Carroll prepared a draft letter that might be used as a Committee response to the remarks that Dr. Murley made to the Commission on May 14, 1993.
(pp 1-4) i I
s s'
s 3
5)
ACRS/ACNW RESOURCES (Open)
As per the Committee's decision during the July 1993 ACRS
- meeting, Dr.
Wilkins sent a
letter to Chairman Selin-i describing Committee concerns related to the impact of the Committee's staff resource reductions.
(pp. 25-28) 6)
ACRS FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM (Open)
The Planning and Procedures Subcommittee discussed the future-direction of the Fellowship Program. During the July meeting, Dr. Larkins was tasked to prepare a draft Manual Chapter for-the Fellowship Program.
A draft outline is expected to be available for discussion at the September meeting.
7)
ACRS RETREAT IN 1994 (Open)
The Committee members discussed whether a
Committee retreat / planning session might be appropriate in early 1994.
No decision has been made for an agenda, dates or a location.
During the July meeting, Dr.
Wilkins requested that the members identify discussion topics for the retreat.
Two members have provided suggested topics.
8)
FREOUENT FLYER IG REPORT (Open)
Mr. Carroll suggested that the Committee members might like to read the IG audit report on Frequent Flyer Benefits.
(pp 5-15) 9)
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ACRS BYLAWS (Open)
Mr. Carroll submitted a proposed amendment to the Bylaws to the Committee during the July meeting.
According to the Bylaws, the Committee could vote on this proposed amendment no earlier than the August meeting.
Since Dr. Lewis will not be attending the August meeting, the Committee may consider postponing the discussions and vote on this proposed amendment until the September meeting when all of the members are expected to be present.
(pp 16 - 17) 10)
STATUS OF MULTILATERAL MEETING (Open)
Members traveling to the meeting should give the completed Registration Forms and a check for $840 to Tanya Winfrey or Mike MacWilliams before the end of the August meeting.
1 Copies of the papers to be presented by members should be available at the August meeting so that they can be forwarded to the French.Dr. Wilkins met with Dr. Birkhofer on July 21, 1993 and discussed details of the October 11-15, 1993 meeting.
l
4 11)
STATUS OF ACTIVITIES ON INTERNET (Open)
In early June the ACRS issued a formal request for INTERNET access for the staff and committee members via our Sun Workstations and their connected PCs.
Recently IRM responded to our request by describing options available for connecting our UNIX network to INTERNET.
These options are described in the attached memorandum from Mark Stella.
We anticipate further interactions with IRM in the near future on thic subject.
(pp 18-21) 12)
RESPONSE ON ETHICS LETTER (Open)
The noted the Memorandum dated July 30, 1993 for William C.
Parler, General Counsel, from Samuel J.
Chilk, Secretary,
Subject:
SECY-93-157 - Supplemental Ethics Regulations and Implementing Management Directives.
The memo proposes a.new agency policy on security ownership.
(pp. 22-24) 13)
SPECIAL STUDY BY DR. OUINTIERE. ACRS CONSULTANT ON FIRE ISSUES (Open)
Dr. Catton has requested that Dr. Quintiere perform a Special Study on fire issues and provide a report on his findings to the ACRS Subcommittee on Auxiliary and Secondary Systems.
A brief scope of work for this study has been prepared by the staf f and submitted to Dr. Catton.
The Subcommittee wants Dr.
Catton to discuss this matter with the committee before it recommends a course of action.
(p. 29) 14)
DR. LEWIS'S COMMENTS ON CERTIFICATION OF SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES (Open)
In the attached BBS message (p. 30), Dr. Lewis has raised two issues with regard to the following:
e Accuracy of the meetina transcripts /Disclaiper in the ACRS meetina transcripts vs.
Commission meetina transcriots Dr.
Lewis was concerned about the fidelity of the transcript of the July 21, 1993 Subcommittee Meeting for Computers in Nuclear Power Plant Operations.
Based on conversation with Ann Riley (owner of the Ann Riley and Associates), it appears that the person who transcribed the proceedings of this meeting was new and this was her first ACRS meeting.
Ms. Riley has promised to take steps to avoid recurrence of such an incident in the future.
O
~
)
5 i
i The transcript is being retyped and a revised copy will be provided to the ACRS very soon.
Dr. Lewis questions why the ACRS meeting transcripts shouldn't have a disclaimer similar to that in the transcripts of the Commission meetings.
Copies of the disclaimers in the Commission meeting transcripts and ACRS meeting transcripts are attached (pp 31-32).
The Subcommittee discussed the matter.
Lecal Responsibility for Certifyino the Minutes of the
.{
ACRS Subcommittee Meetinas Dr. Lewis is wondering whether the Subcommittee chairman has actually the legal responsibility to certify the minutes of the Subcommittee meetings for accuracy.
He suggests that the ACRS staff has the legal
- i responsibility.
10 CFR Section 7.13,
" Minutes of Advisory Committee
{
Meetings," (p. 33) includes the following requirement:
"The chairperson of an NRC advisory committee shall certify to the accuracy of the minutes of each of the Committee's meetings.
In the case of a
subgroup of an advisory ~ committee, the chairperson of the subgroup shall certify to the accuracy of.
the minutes."
Paragraph 9.3 of the ACRS Bylaws (p 34) states the following:
"A working copy of the minutes will be prepared by the -cognizant ACRS staff engineers, and made available as soon as practicable to the Chairman of the full Committee or Subcommittee, and to other members.
After review, and preferably within a month, the minutes will be certified by the full Committee or Subcommittee Chairman, as appropriate.
By certifying the minutes, the cognizant Chairman attests to the best of his knowledge to the completeness and technical accuracy of the minutes."
The Subcommittee reviewed current practicos.
6
-l 1
l 15)
FUTURE ACTIVITIES (Open)
The Subcommittee reviewed the expected agendas for future meetings.
(See separate Handout - Tab 13)
Additional Matters Discussed 1)
FUTURE MEETING WITH OFFICE DIRECTORS (Open)
Dr. Wilkins will be meeting with Mr. Jordan on August 6.
In a conversation with Mr. Sniezek, it was suggested that the full Committee meet with the Deputy Executive Director for Operations and Office Directors in the near. future to discuss "Their view of future Agency activities".
2)
DIRECT DEPOSIT (Open)
There was a discussion of the recent memo requiring members to sign up for direct deposit of compensation payments.
Susan Fonner of OGC is preparing a response to Dr.
Lewis' BBS message.
i I
t.
3
~ 1.
e c
t 8
g.
i I
=$
p 1
i ATTACHMENT - PAGES 1-3 DELETION FOIA EX(b) (5) r 2
m i
i P
I I
?
h 9
b r
4 M
i I
.l l
i
.I _
g OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL g
US NUCLEAR g
REGULATORY COMMISSION REVIEW OF NRC'S POUCY AND E
PRACTICE REGARDING THE USE OF FREQUENT FLYER BENEFITS I
OIG/92A-15 October 15,1992 AEDIT RE? ORT I
c9gR REG'%s j
1 q
O L_
g
-B
,Q flb g
- +
G 8
%+m+/
E 5
E
y
)
+
l pm *
- C uq
- y%
UNITED STATES c ';.
g j
/ i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[
WASHINGTON. D C. 20565 j
October 15,1992 I
MEMORANDUM FOR: James M. Taylor I
Executive Director Operations i
% haak; FROM:
Thomas J.
rchi Assistant Inspector General for Audits i
I
SUBJECT:
REVIEW OF N R C*S POLICY AND PRACTICE l
REGARDING THE USE OF FREQUENT FLYER BENEFITS l
Attached is the Office of the Inspector General's audit report on " Review of NRC's Policy and Practice Regarding the Use of Frequent Flyer Benefits". On October 7,1992, the Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear Materials Safety, Safeguards and Operations l
Support, provided his comments on a draft of our report. He agreed with three of the recommendations and agreed in part with the fourth recommendation.
l We will review the effect of the implementation of this recommendation at a later date to determine whether it meets the intent of the recommendation.
l
Attachment:
As stated cc:
H. Thompson, EDO J. Sniezek, EDO S. Chilk, SECY I
W. Parler, OGC D. Rathbun, GPA I
T. Murley, NRR E. Jordan, AEOD E. Beckjord, RES R. Scrnera, NMSS P. Norry, ADM R. Scroggins, OC g
P. Bird, OP T. Manin, RI j
i S. Ebneter, RII l
A. B. Davis, RIII j
J. Milhoan, RIV i
J. Martin, RV l
J. Blaha, EDO J. Funches, ICC I
Rwiew of Frequent Flyer Benefits-I INTRODUCTION I
l We have completed a review of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) policy and practice concerning benefits resulting from official travel I
by NRC personnel. This review was initiated in response to the Commission's concern regarding the potential misuse of such benefits that stemmed from an investigation by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). We interviewed l
officials at NRC Headquarters, General Services Administration (GSA), and the General Accounting Office (GAO). We also reviewed the pertinent regulations and other documents that address the frequent flyer program.
l This review was conducted in accordance with generally accepted Government i
Auditing Standards.
BACKGROUND l
OIG conducted an investigation of allegations that agency personnel had used frequent flyer beneSts derived from official travel for personal use. During I.
the course of the investigation it became apparent that NRC's program to manage and administer frequent flyer bene 5ts, as part of its overall travel program, was not as effective as it could be.
I
]
Federal Travel Regulations (FTR) and decisions of the Comptroller General l
provide that all frequent traveler benefits carned in connection with official j
travel are the property of the Government and may not be retained by the employee. The FTR provides that, " Agencies should encourage employees I
who travel frequently to participate in various frequent traveler programs offered by airlines, hotels, and rental car vendors." Such participation can reduce an agency's overall travel costs since frequent flyer benefits can be l
redeemed to obtain free airline tickets, rooms, and rental vehicles. The regulations, however, also allow agency officials to authorize employees to use I
frequent flyer benefits to upgrade airline accommodations to first class.
I l
I 7
4
1 g
a Review of Frequent Flyer Benefits FINDINGS Our review of NRCs frequent flyer program found that it is not as effective or economical as it could be. Although the agency has established policy and guidance regarding the use of benefits resulting from frequent Dyer programs, it has not emphasized that such benefits could be used to reduce the overall travel costs to the Agency. We found that Headquarters and the Regional Offices are using frequent Oyer benefits primarily for upgrading airline accommodations.
NRCs travel regulations and supplemental guidance generally reflects the intent of the FTR and the decisions of the Comptroller General, but they do not convey that frequent flyer benefits could be used to reduce the overall travel costs to the Agency.
NRC of5cials responsible for managing and administering the Agency's travel program said that, although such benefits could be used to reduce travel costs, Headquarters has not provided the direction to implement a program. Most believe it would be an administrative burden to try to implement. They stated that the frequent Oyer program is difficult to administer because the airlines that provide the benefits consider them to be the property of the traveler regardless of who paid for the ticket. NRC officials said that the airlines issue periodic statements to the traveler informing them of the mileage benefits accrued. It is up to the traveler to inform his or her respective travel official of the frequent flyer benefits.
NRC travel of5cials said that they do accept and utilize frequent Oyer benefits, but they do not have a process that continuously monitors the accumulation of each traveler's beneSts. Some officials expressed concern that the cost to establish an active program to monitor such benefits cotdd outweigh the benefits to be derived.
We also discussed this matter with a GAO official who said that based on his cursory review of the frequent Oyer program throughout the Government, there is no department-wide program in place.
Rather, he said be understands that units within some agencies have established programs with cost-saving results.
i oK3/92A-15 hoe 2 7
0 Review of Frequem Flyer Benefts l
NRC travel officiEls stated that frequent flyer benefits are currently used to upgrade the travelers accommodations to fir.'. class. NRC travel officials E
believe that the FTR allow fregt:ent flyer ber.chts :o be used either for obtaining free tickets or for upgrades. They said this is consistent with the Agency's policy and the FTR. NRCs position was confirmed by GSA. Senior g
transportation management ofScials from GSA told us that the FTR allow agencies the discretion for determining how they want to use frequent Byer benefits obtained by employees through official travel.
E CONCLUSION liig We believe the Agency's policy and practices governing the frequent flyer program are not as effective or economical as they could be. NRCs travel regulations do not encourage employees to use frequent flyer beneSts to g
reduce overall travel costs to the Agency. As a result, potential reductions to travel costs are not being realized. We recogmze that the FTR and NRCs regulations allow frequent Dyer benefits to be used for upgrading travelers l
accommodations, but we believe such decisions should be weighed against the benefit to the Government first.
h RECOMMENDATIONS In order to clarify the Agency's policy on the use of the frequent flyer program, we recommend that the Controller:
1.
Revise NRCs travel policy to clearly reDect its expectations regarding the use of frequent Dyer benefits for reducing the overall travel costs to the Agency rather than for upgrading travel accommodations.
2.
Assure that the policy clearly states that all benefits derived from official travel belong to the Government; their subsequent use is for official travel only; and that personal use of such benefits is a criminal violation subject to the penalties of the law.
osarnA-15 r,3
\\
Review of Frequent Flyer Benefits 3.
Develop adntinistrative procedures for NRCs travel management f
officials to implement NRCs policy regarding the use of frequent Oyer benefits earned by its employees. The procedures should provide p
guidance on establishing a process to receive, monitor, and utilize l i benefits turned in by employees. Also, the procedures should clearly reflect that the intent of the frequent Dyer program is to reduce the j;
overall travel costs to the Agency to the extent that it is practical and possible.
li 4.
Develop an informational guidance document for distribution to all employees informing them of NRCs policy regarding frequent Dyer a:
benefits. This guidance should clearly inform NRC employees of the I:
intent c' the frequent flyer program and NRCs expectations of travel.s who participate in a program. The guidance should provide l-t participants a clear understanding of the process for turning in benefits received and for using them for official travel at a later date.
I:
AGENCY COMMENTS lai On October 7,1992, the Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear Materials g
Safety, Safeguards and Operations Support (DEDO), provided comments on E
our draft report. The DEDO agreed to three of the four recommendations and agreed in part to the other recommendation. We will review the effect l
of the DEDO's implementation of this latter recommendation in a follow-up review to determine whether it meets the intent of our initial recommendation. The full text of the DEDO's response is included as l
Appendix I of this report.
I I
I I
oto/92A-ts rap 4 Ml
.~
i l
\\
Appendkl ReAew of Frequent Flyer Benents l
/,...,[o, I
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION UNITED STATES l
WASHHeGf DN, O C. 70565 October 7. 1992 I
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Thomas J. Barchi i
Assistant Inspector General I
for Audits i
Office of the Inspector General FROM:
Hugh L. Thompson, Jr.
I Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear Materials Safety, Safeguards and Operations Support
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE TO DRAFT REPORT ON FREQUENT FLYER BENEFITS I
We have reviewed the subject draft audit report and offer the following comments.
Recommendatim1_1:
Revise NRC's travel policy to clearly reflect its expectations I
regarding the use of frequent flyer benefits for reducing the overall travel costs to the Agency rat *,4er than for upgrading i
travel accommodations.
Response
i Agree.
We are consider 14;g =everal policy options for the use of frequent flyer benefits to reduce overall travel costs to the I
Agency.
It should be noted, however, that the Senior Executives Association has requested a decision from the General Accounting office on whether frequent flyer benefits are the property of the I
defer implementing any changes to our policy.
government.
Until GAo makes its final determination, we will Recommendation 2:
Assure that the policy clearly states that all benefits derived from official travel belong to the Government; their subsequent use is for official travel only; and that personal use of such I.
benefits is a criminal violation subject to the penalties of J
the law.
OeG A 15 Pase 1 d 3 i
I
/f i
3 9 Appendtx I Redew of Frequent Ryer Benefits
Response
Agree.
Although Manual Chapter 1501 clearly states that all benefits derived f rom official travel are the property of the government and that they cannot be used by the traveler for personal use, we will strengthen the Manual Chapter to make it clear that subsequent use of benefits is f or of ficial travel only and that personal use of such benefits is a criminal violation subject to the penalties of the law.
The Manual Chapter will be revised by May 30, 1993.
We will also emphasize this policy in the employee announcement mentioned in the response to recommendation 4.
Recommendation 3:
Develop administrative procedures for NRC's travel management of ficials to implement NRC's policy regarding the use of f requent flyer ber.efits earned by its employees.
The procedures should provide guidance on establishing a process to receive, monitor, and utilize benefits turned in by employees.
Also, the procedures should clearly reflect that the intent of the frequent flyer program is to reduce the overall travel costs to the Agency to the extent that it is practical and possible.
Response
Agree in part.
We will strengthen our administrative procedures to ensure that travelers and travel management officials clearly understand their responsibilities with r3spect to frequent flyer benefits.
The new procedures will clarify the Agency's existing policy for turning in and utilizing these benefits.
Based on our analysis of a formal tracking system, however, we do not believe that implementation of a system to monitor benefits would be cost effective at this time.
Our administrative procedures will be finalized and implemented within 90 days from the date of this memorandum.
Any changes to the Agency's policy necessitated by the results of the pending GAO decision will aise be incorporated into our administrative procedures.
Recommendation 4:
Develop an infortational guidance document for distribution to all employees informing them of NRC's policy regarding frequent flyer benefits. This guidance should clearly inform NRC's employees of the intent of the frequent flyer program and NRC's expectations of travelers who participate in a program.
The guidance should provide participants a clear understanding of the process for turning in benefits received and for using them for official travel at a later date.
N,%5 Page 2 or 3
)
/L
E Appendbc l Review of Frequent Flyer Benents 5
pesconse:
Agree.
The Office of the Controlle; will issue an all employee announcement clarifying the Agency's current policy with respect to the frequent flyer program within 90 days of the date of this E
memorandum.
This announcement will detail administrative procedures for turning in and utilizing frequent flyer benefits.
/
/1/1 g
L. Thomp n,
5 De ty Execut ve i ector for lear Materia afsty, Safequards and Operations Support E
E E
E N
E gg OU Page 3 of 3 g
(3
i i
e 4
h j
Apperdtx 11 Review of Frequent Flyer Beneh l
U.S. NRC FUNCTIONAL ORGANIZATION CHART i
i g
optRA ftourt I
.=.-
I I
I
._Tm***.'.L*." ~.~~
- ?m" *,M "
~ ~ ~ ',.".
~
m i
i i
i i,
i i
I.I"
-= E
~'""n "O
El
~*
-l n."'"
l 2EE
_ = - -
= ?E=.
- =. 1 :-.
~
I
. _ =., _
_=,
~ ~ ~
a a c.
w.
M9 6.fkaarta 8
I
.a.aeAs _.
~
l I
E h
E 8
g Q
d
'I I
Review of Frequent Flyer Benefits I
I MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT I
I Richard Donovan, Special Assistant to the Assistant Inspector General for Audits I
I I
I I
I I
i I
I t
I I
g
~,,,
g
/f
I g u PROPOSED CHANGES TO ACRS BYLAWS DTD. 5/11/93 BY J. C. CARROLL l
There will be occasions on which a member feels a subject 4.4 2
is of safety significance, but is unable to persuade the 3
majority of the Committee that it warrants a Committee 4
report.
In such cases, the vehicle for dissent that is 5
provided above is of no value, yet a subject deemed of 6
safety significance to a member of the Committee ought 7
not to be left unaddressed.
In such cases, the =c=ber 8
should make a good-f aith ef fort to persuade the Committee 9
to take action, whether by writing a report on the 10 subject, or by directing a Subcommittee to conduct an 11 exploration.
If the Ccenittec-decide tc do neither, or 12 if the member involved fccic that the impcrtance of the 13 cubject ucrrant prompt action, he in then fecc tc writ-e an individual repcrt - cn the cubject.
Cuch a repces 15 chculd clearly ctate, up frcnt, that the :cnbcr ic not 16 cpeaking for the Ocnmittec, and thit the Oct-ittec hac 17 declined to act te hiWicfaction on the cubjectr 18 After the Committee makas a. final decis.tcr. c,.. the matter 19 and,'if"thatfdecision is to'take.no action, the member inv__olve_d Ti_s?then ~ free. to vrite Lan individual: report on 20
~
21 g{!sgiejt2 Extraordinary: cases?may-f ariseE where the 22 BEEljigliiyylved believes that the matter'has' imediat's 23 and?important ~ nuclear. safety significance and warrants
~
24 action prior to the time the committee plans to make a 25 final' decision.- In such cas'es, theLaember hay write an individualfraport: but must state [up;frontG~JJn his report that the Committeeiis continuing (to consider the~ matter, e/
a;ngprovide~ his rationale for departing from either m
normaliCommittee practice of functioning as a collegial 29 30 body. In either case, the member's report should clearly 31 state, up front, that the member is not speaking for the 32 Committee.
A member using this mechanism should make 33 every effort to apply the same professional standards to 34 his individual communication as is fair to expect from 35 the Committee as a whole.
The Committee in turn will 36 make every effort to protect members' opportunities to 37 address individual views.
j a" "' %q'o, f
UNITED STATES l'
'g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
)g f
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS r
,f WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 R' %-
j' July 16,.1993 MEMORANDUM FOR:
J.
T.
Larkins, Executive Director ACRS/ACNW I'
FROM:
Mark E.
Stellaf f's l /f.
~
~
s
~
SUBJECT:
INTERNET
,e I met Wednesday, July 14 with Jack.Schnapper, John Badrian, and Steve Smith of IRM to discuss the recent Advisory Committee office request for INTERNET connectivity.
This memo documents the discussions held during the meeting.
I have also listed a few ACRS staff actions required to facilitate implementation of the INTERNET installation by IRM, and suggested responsibilities.
INTERNET INSTALLATION PLAN IRM committed to develop a detailed plan (including wiring and hardware / software changes needed) to connect the office to INTERNET through our Sun ACE network.
This plan will be presented formally to the ACRS/ACNW staff in a meeting to be scheduled later.
After our acceptance of the plan, IRM is to proceed as rapidly as possible to complete physical and software modifications needed to provide INTERNET connectivity.
ALTERNATE INTERNET CONFIGURATIONS BEING CONSIDERED The final configuration of our INTERNET connection has not yet been determined.
IRM proposes to connect us directly to the Phillips Building NRC INTERNET host by installing a token ring adapter card in our second Sun workstation (ACE 2, located in room P-428) and using installed AUTOS wiring.
Our existing IP addresses for both Sun units and their eight connected PCs must be modified to be compatible with the basic NRC INTERNET address scheme.
The estimated cost of the token ring adapter for the Sun workstation is $1000, which must be borne by our own office budget.
An alternate configuration is the direct connection of our own Ethernet hub (for the ACE network) to the hub on the Phillips-Building INTERNET host.
This can be done without additional
/5
9 J. T.
Larkins 2
July 16, 1993 equipment, except for the wiring between hubs.
However, IRM does i
not consider this to be a feasible alternative because of fears over a potential incompatibility between the network management software installed on the IRM host (used mainly for network error detection and diagnosis) and our particular Ethernet hub type.
IRM will consider a direct hub-to-hub Ethernet connection if we agree to replace our current Cabletron hub with a Synoptics hub, which is identical to the unit used on the IRM INTERNET host.
A new Synoptics hub is estimated to cost $2500.
INTERNET USAGE AND SECURITY The proposed installation will offer INTERNET mail capability to all users.
<Telnet> (in and out) and FTP capability will also be provided.
IRM asks that we voluntarily restrict our <telnet-in>
usage to no more than 5 or 6 users, which does not appear to be a prob,lem at this time.
Remote <telnet> operation of codes on our Sun ACE network has been proposed only by Ivan Catton among ACRS members; we need to survey ACNW members to obtain their desired i
INTERNET usage profiles.
INTERNET communications from the Phillips Building host are currently carried over a single 56 kilobit /sec line to OWFN before being routed via NIH to the University of Maryland node on INTERNET.
This arrangement may
.ause us to have to impose certain constraints on connection cimes and access to Sun ACE, especially for outside <telnet>
users, until we move to the TWFN facility with its much improved communications capabilities.
I suggest that we first obtain the INTERNET capability and develop any needed administrative control procedures on the basis of experience with our first few weeks of use.
LLNL is developing an INTERNET security plan for NRC.
By late September, we expect to have a " bastion host" machine interposed between the NIH host and all NRC users.
The security provisions will maintain complete INTERNET mail service but require the use of FTP drop-off and pickup through the facilities of the " bastion host" for files leaving NRC hosts.
Until such time as the security system is operational, ACRS/ACNW must remain responsible j
for the security of data maintained on our systems connected to INTERNET.
Part of the security upgrade is the implementation of fully-integrated E-mail service.
NRC AUTOS users will be able to use AUTOS E-mail to drop off and receive mail through INTERNET.
John Badrian of IRM has been assigned responsibility for development of our INTERNET plan.
I intend to maintain close
4 J.
T.
Larkins 3
July 16, 1993 communication with him during its development.
When the final plan is available, I will schedule a meeting with IRM to allow cognizant personnel in the office to review-it in detail and, if acceptable, formally agree to proceed.
UNIX SYSTEM MANAGEMENT IRM has also requested that we eliminate system superuser privileges for office staff members, except for our designated ACE network administrator. IRM UNIX support personnel will continue to have superuser privileges.
This change is not related to, nor is it required by, the software or hardware changes needed to complete our INTERNET connection.
It is entirely for IRM convenience, but IRM personnel made it clear that they would not consider further our request for INTERNET access unless we agreed to this change.
Such a change makes our ACE. user permission profile consistent with current IRM policy regarding access to UNIX system kernels and configuration files.
I recommend that we agree to this stipulation.
ACRSl&CNW STAFF ACTIONS REOtITRED (nrior to acceotance of clan) 1.
Verify availability of funds to purchase required token ring adapter card (or other required hardware) for INTERNET installation. - Opera,tions Support Group 2.
Obtain information on ACRS and ACNW member expected INTERNET usage profiles.
- ACE System Administrator 3.
Support John Badrian's development of INTERNET installation plan by confirming existing ACE network configuration _and operability.
ACE System Administrator 7
4.
Review plan and schedule for conversion of ACE user permissions to IRM standard.
Provide office agreement (if plan is acceptable).
- ACE System Administrator cc:
R.
P.
Savio R.
K. Major M.
L. MacWilliams G.
N. Gnugnoli W.
N. Thompson J.
Badrian, IRM S.
E. Mays P.
Kruzic, IRM H.
S.
Schofer S.
Duraiswamy
()
I
L From:
John H. Badrian (JHB)
To:
MES2 Date:
Wednesday, July 28, 1993 5:38 pm subject:
ACRS INTERNET ACCESS
- Mark, As you recall from our meeting earlier this month our first choice was to install a token ring card in your Slave Sparc station so it could act as a bridge to the wide area network and thus to Internet.
We have recently established an arrangement somewhat like this at.Research.
Some things are different about the Research environment and as a consequence there have been some problems - most of which we have-solved.
It is our wish in the Network Development Section to hold off on the installation of your environment until late August while we monitor the situation at Research.
Coupled with our desire to wait a month is the fact of August vacation schedules.
We prefer to have all hands on board when we tackle your installation and that will not occur until then.
We have the appropriate Token Rina Card (borrowed from NMSS) and lnformation from Stan which is needed for bonafide IP Addresses.
Late in the second week of August I nian to send you a Draft, ImDlementation Plan / Schedule which will include issues such as
'the inclusion of IP Addresses on all of your ACE machines, installation of the Token Ring Card in the Slave server, testing procedures, the use of PC/TCP on one DOS machine, etc.
John CC:
JSS, MLM4, HSS i
M st/
~
i 1
pa lf Gq%
l y
y
.\\
UNITED STATES j
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t
WASHINGTON. D C. 2066lWD1 i
gs y
July 30, 1993 hNM' MEMORANDUM FOR:
William C.
Parler General Counsel FROM:
Samuel J.
Chilk, Secretary
/s/
SUBJECT:
SECY-93-157 - SUPPLEMENTAL ETHICS REGULATIONS AND IMPLEMENTING MANAGEMENT DIRECTIVES This is to advise you that the Commission (with all Commissioners agreeing) has approved the submittal of the proposed final rule to OGE subject to:
1.
The considerations for granting exemptions from the security ownership restriction to the ACRS and ACNW members should be incorporated into Handbook 7.7 so that they are readily available.
2.
The list of positions covered by the prohibited securities rule should include Commissioner's technical and legal assistants at GG-15 and below, and all attorneys in the Office of the Inspector General.
3.
The argument in the draft Federal Register notice on behalf of the prohibited securities rule should be strengthened.
Page 3 of the notice rightly says that the agency does not want a reasonable observer to suspect that an NRC decision affecting a large number of licensees was based in part on the effects the decision might have on the personal finances of NRC employees.
However, the force of this argument is somewhat diluted by being made only in defense of the proposition that the rule should cover spouses and minor children.
A potentially stronger defense of the prohibited securities rule appears on page 6 of the SECY paper, where OGC says, Obviously, the fewer ties that advisory committee members have with the commercial nuclear industry, the fewer the conflict of interest problems that may arise and the greater the credibility of the committee as an objective, independent body.
SECY NOTE:
THIS SRM, SECY-93-157, AND THE VOTE SHEETS OF ALL COMMISSIONERS WILL BE MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE 10 WORKING DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS SRM.
- =
. =.
~
. This argument puts forward more reasons for the prohibition than the argument in the draft Federal Register, and, generalized to include all NRC employees covered by the prohibition, would make a useful addition to the notice.
i 4.
Handbook 7.7 should be revised to give employees and the chairman some guidance on how to determine whether application of the prohibition would be " inequitable".
Neither the Federal Register notice nor the Handbook say anything more than that the Chairman may exempt an employee from the restriction when application of it would be
" inequitable".
While the very nature of " equity" makes it impossible to say in advance which applications of the restriction are " inequitable", the agency has sufficient experience in making exemption decisions to be able to say which kinds of exemption request are typically granted and which not.
A brief written description of some typical cases would be helpful to employees.
5.
With respect to the security ownership restrictions, 5 CFR section 5801, 102 (b) (7) should be revised to include not only energy sector mutual funds but also utility sector mutual funds.
Conforming changes should be made as appropriate to Management Directive 7.7.
The prohibited security list, which is published at least once each year by the agency, shall include a list of energy or utility sector investment funds that employees would be precluded from owning under the regulation.
OGC shall make a reasonable effort to determine which funds should be listed.
The list should include a statement that because of the changing portfolios of mutual funds, some of the funds listed may not be prohibited and that there may be others not listed that employees may not own under that regulation.
Employees should be advised to review the prospectuses or annual reports of energy or utility se-tor funds and consult with the Office of the General Counsel, as appropriate.
The list i
should also include OGC advice concerning (a) the responsibility, if any, of NRC employees to monitor the composition of their energy sector investment funds throughout the year and (b) what action Lhey must take if the composition of the fund fails to meet the stated criteria at any time during the year.
The final rules should be forwarded for OGE concurrence and returned for Commission affirmation.
(OGC)
(SECY Suspense:
TBD - depends upon completion of OGE review) d
,__m_
J i
e i cc:
The Chairman Commissioner Rogers i
Commissioner Remick Commissioner de Planque EDO OIG OCA OCAA Office' Directors, Regions, ACRS, ASLBP (via E-Mail) 1 4
i
- g..%
j/.
~
f UNITED STATES i
O'
~ 7, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
.i AoVISoRY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARoS
[
W ASHINGTON. D. C. 20555
/
)
l l
July 26,1993 The Honorable Ivan Selin Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
Dear Chairman Selin:
SUBJECT:
ACRS/ACNW STAFF RESOURCES Re ACRS is concerned with the Commission's current plan to reduce ACRS/ACNW FTE for the period FY 1994 through FY 1995. As you know, the ACRS and ACNW are separate orgagdzations, but the technical, managerial, and administrative support is provided by one staff."' Originally, this staff supported only the ACRS. which was established as a statutorv committee in 1957 by the Atomic Energy Act, as amended. In 1973 it began to hold its meetings in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Among other things, this Act states that "Each agency shall be r,esponsible for providing support services for each advisory committee established by or reporting to it 7 The ACRS has become an integral part of the agency's regulatory process and adequate resources are necessary if the Committee is to remain an effective organization.
In 1988 the NRC proposed and esf3blished the ACNW. This was accomplished within the existing ACRS resources of 38 FfTi (reduced from the FY 1988 level of 39 FTE); the 38 FTE has remained constant to the present. Although the ACNW budgeted resource level is 7.0 FTE, in reality the ACNW uses more than that amount because managerial and administrative suppon is provided by a shared support organization. On the surface, this reallocation did not appear detrimental to the ACRS. Nevertheless, it has contributed to the gradual erosion of technical expertise available to the ACRS and provided little more than the necessary critical mass for the ACNW.
The mere existence of another organization with meetings to suppon has greatly strained and stretched the staffs of the ACRS/ACNW. In an April 28, 1989, memorandum to Chairman Zech from Victor Stello (then EDO) on the subject " Analysis of the Sucoort Staff Recuirements of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safecuards and the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste,"it was concluded that the ACRS/ACNW could benefit from one additional FTE if the Commission finds that the current level of advice is to be maintained. This conclusion came at a time of resource constraints, but also at a time when
' Federal Advisory Committee Act. (Sec.12 (b))
dR 2
2 the ACRS was budgeted at 39 FTE, not at 38 FTE as ACRS/ACNW are today, nor at the proposed 34 FTE level projected for FY 1995, The strategy of a combined staff with no additional resources effectively reduced the ACRS's resources (38 FTE) relative to FY 1989 (formation of ACNW) by 7 FTE or by 18.4% in FY 1989. Additionally, it is important to delineate the reductions the ACRS had taken prior to FY 1989:
FY 1985 56 -> 50 FTE 10.7Fc reduction FY 1986 50 -> 42 FTE 16.09'c reduction FY 1987 42 -> 39 FTE 7.1Fc reduction FY 1988 39 - > 38 FTE 2.0Fc reduction FY 1989 33 - > 31 FTE ISAFc reduction These numbers become even more dramatic when you consider that 6.5 of the 31 FTE are used for ACRS members and consultants, which leaves 24.5 FTE for ACRS technical.
magerial, and administrative support. The ACRS has in the past requested additional resources to cope with these cuts, but as you know these requests have been denied, with the exception of a proposed one FTE increase in FY 1994, which we lost in the first round I
of Commission cuts. If the proposed, ACRS cut of an additional 2 FTE in FY 1995 is realized, the effect would leave only 22.5 FTE of staff support for this independent, statutors l
advisory committee.
l The previous reductions and the prospect of the proposed further reductions have strained and will continue to hinder the Committee's ability to maintain an adequate level of technical and management support'necessary for its effective operation. The quality of the technical advice thatany advisory'tommittee can provide is a function of the capacity to collect and analyze information. It is essential that an adequate level of technical, adminis-I trative, and managerial resources be available. This is particularly critical because of the part time and intermittent nature of member work and schedules. Without such resources, the ACRS is in jeopardy of losing continuity in its deliberations and clarity in its communications with all concerned.
Over the years, these reductions have ravaged the ACRS Fellowship program, reducing it from 15 to 3 slots since 1985. The ACRS Fellows significantly enhance the Committee's capacity to identify key technical issues for Committee review and comment and allows the Committee to function much more effectively and efficiently. Die ACRS Fellows provide a high level of analytical and technical support to the Committee and have proven to be an invaluable resource.
Based on the continuing level of safety reviews and anticipated increases in the ACRS workload associated with standard reactor design and reactor licensing renewal activity (among others), the ACRS cannot be expected to perform its mission as effectively with a
O 3
small cadre of technical staff that would be available if the proposed reductions are imple.
mented. Major areas that may be adversely impacted include review of: 2 Technical policy and safety-related issues relative to the licensing of evolutionary and i
passive standard reactor designs. This activity includes issues identified by the NRC i
staff and issues identified independently by the ACRS.
i Standard reactor design applications and industry initiatives directed at establishing design standards (e.g., ABWR, CESSAR System 80+, SBWR. AP600).
Test programs to support design certification for the AP600 and SBWR designs.
Policy and implementation issues associated with the use of design acceptance criteria; and inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria'for new standard reactor designs.
I
% Regulatory guides needed to support 10 CFR Part 52 regulations.
Severe Accident Rulemaking for standard reac:or design <
^
Analyses and methodology used to support licensing positions for standard reactor a
design applications (e.g., thermal hydraulic code analyses).
Issues associated with the use of computers for control and safety functions, includir:g identification of failure m,o, des, software quality assurance and environmental qualification 1
Identification, prioritization, and resolution of generic safety issues.
Matters related to the development of performance-based regulations and risk based tec' nical specifications.
a i
Evaluations of reactor operational experience and implementation of the letsons learned.
Matters related to the implementation of the maintenance rule.
Issues associated with the renewal of licenses for existing plants. including aging and degradation of components and systems.
2 As noted in the Five-Year Plan, there are a number of other areas where the ACRS will be actively involved over the next few years.
c0
- ,. t.
4 Selected elements of the reactor safety research program and related budget. Addse the Commission and the Congress, as appropriate. An overview of the overall program will also be considered by the ACRS.
Implementation of the Commission's Safety Goal Poliev.
Matters related to the use of probabilistic risk analysis in the regulatory decision-making process.
Existing DOE / Department of Defense nonpower reactor projects per the current DOE /NRC Memorandum of Understanding (e.g., naval reactors).
Beyond these p tricular areas are those special reviews or new initiatives the Commission sometimes asks the Committee to review. Without the requisite technical expertise and flexibility afforded by adequate resources, the Committee will be much less able to accommodate these requests. As previously mentioned. further reductions would bring into qqtion the agency's responsibility for providing adequate support services for each adviscrc committee established by or reporting to it. This is true for both committees. but particular-ly for the ACRS. The ACNW reductions will undoubtedly affect the ACRS as well.
The proposed reduction of four FTE frorn FY 1993 through FY 1995 will primarily impact support staff. This represents a very significant 13.3% cut in the support staff.
We ask that the Commission reconsider the proposed staff reduction.
Although we understand the resource constraints the NRC is facing, we believe that we are absorbing disproportionate percentage of the. reductions. The ACRS has surely reached a point vehere not only the fat, but also some of,the muscle of the ACRS support staff has been lost. We suggest that the Commission maihtain the FY 1993 staff level for the ACRS through FY 1996.
Sincerely, f
b
~
J. Ernest Wilkins, Jr.
Chairman Commissioner Rogers ec:
Commissioner Remick Commissioner de Planque b
. - _ ~.
p 3,.
TASK ACTION PLAN FOR DR. QUINTIERE (FIRE PROTECTION)
Dr. Quintiere has been requested to perform a special study for the Auxiliary and Secondary Systems Subcommittee.
lie _.EAS BEEN ASKED TO:
1.
Review the adequacy of existing standards for fire barriers for nuclear power plant application. This should include their ability to isolate adjacent areas from smoke as well as heat and the impact of pressure.
2.
Determine industry practice for oil fire barriers. In particular, its adequacy for a diesel fuel fire in the diesel engine room.
Dr. Quintiere estimates five (5) working days for this study. The estimated completion time would be the end of September 1993.
Dr. Quintiere has been requested to prepare a report and discuss his findings at a Subcommittee meeting. A total uf six (6) days are required.
i.
p 4
From HAL LEWIS Number 2879 of 2904 J
To
- ERNEST WILKINS Date 07/29/93 g: 02nq Subiect records Reference : NONE Head NO (REPLIES)
Private No 000 - ACRS Groun cont Ernest The fiasco about the transcript of the mornine session of the Comon t e r Subcommittee raised in mv mind.a batch of more eeneral cuestions. on which we mav be runnine on habit and momentum, and oerhaps shouldn't.
First transcricts. We sav that thev are unofficial, and are only convenient, but in fact we sponsor the activitv. and the announcement each of us is asked to make savs that a transcrint is beine kent I
think it's a bit facile to nretend that we have no responsibilitt for what comes out. even if it's a leca]1v defensible position. The commission transcrins have a cover pace that emphasizes that the commission takes no resnonsibilitv for the accurac..
etc...
vet their
'ranscrints are nrettv Jood Inn-i.e r roc r. but prettv ecodl. hhv don't we have such a cover sheat* And what is the compant coing to do about that one' Who pavs them, and who authorizes navment when the product is worse than' worthless?
But the ne :t ounction i2 our lecal responsthilitv tn provide an accurate record of our meetines. public or closed. I don't know about you. but know that some members review the minutes of the meetings ther chair with more attention than others. II'm in the verv Jow categorv.) Whose real legal responsibility is it to maintain such records? mv cuess ts that it is not the members who are responsible, but that the resoonsibility was shifted to the members in some dark corner of historv. 1 think that a.iob which is essentially clerical should not be accepted bv the members. We"4hould have the option to read the minutes i
for accuraev. but the legar' responsibility should be on the staff. I'll bet it alreadv is, and that we've been conned for vears. I know i've often signed off on minutes I haven't read..and am now rebelling. To put it bluntiv. I think that checking minutes of meetines is below our par cr8de. I'd like to see some lega) and practical attention devoted to the resnonsibility and the practice.
I think we've gotten into some habits; and it's never too late to reform. On everv other committee on which I've ever served (and that's ouite a few). it's been the staff responsibility to provide accurate j
minutes. Let's open un this mess of pottare. I'll bet a nickel that Hillary doesn't certify the minutes of her committee meetings, nor Bill of Cabinet meetings, nor Selin of Commission meetings.
Cheers.
Hal JO m
m
p,,,.
4 C 0 e m sn o >f,.'
DISCLAIMER This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on May 14, 1993, in the Commission's office at One White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland.
The meeting was open to public attendance and observation.
This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected or edited, and it may g
contain inaceutacies.
The transe'ript is intended solely for general informational purposes.
As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the matters discu'ssed, Expressions of opinion in this transcript do.not necessarily reflect final determination or beliefs.
No pleading or other paper may be filed with the commission in any proceeding 'as the result of, or 3
addressed to, any statement or argument contained herein, except as the commission may authorise.
e MtAL R. G R O S$
cover awcetens me tammennens
}/
taas anoes mLee Avenue,n.w.
mm wMLM-
~
4, D.
- 7C(21 i
PUBLIC NOTICE BY THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS j
i DATE:
June 11, 1993 i
'N The contents of this transcript of the proceedings of the U'nited State's Nuclear Regulatory Couission's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, (date) l June 11, 1993 as Reported herein, are a record of the discussions recorded at the meeting held on the above date.
This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected or edited, and it may contain inaccuracies.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
~a-
~
,o l
~
t 7.13 10 CFR Ch. I (1 193 Editioq file a written statement with an NRC Wd I
(2i A hst cf the attendees at the advisory committee regardmg any j
matter discussed at a meeting of the meeting w ho bre advisory comrnattee rK' committee. The committee chairman members or stLff, agency employe,3 at P 4
or members of the public who Jtesent.
1 may also permit members of the W
ed oral or w ritten statements; tF#
public to speak at meetmgs of the (3) l committee in accordance with proce An estimate of the number of g-
{
dures estabitsbed by the committee other members of the public who were present; (c) Except when the President or his designee determines in writmg that no The extent of pubhc participa.
- [\\
(4) tion. and notice should be published for reasons i
I of national security, at least 15 days An accurate description of each (5) prior to an NRC advisory committee matter discussed during the meetmg i
i meeting, a notice that includes the fol.
and its resolution. if any, by the cor:.
lowing information shall be pubbshed mittee.
t ste h
in the FrcrRAt, REctsTrn:
(b) The minutes of an NRC advisor)
. r.
committee rnecting shai! include a c.cs l (1) The exact name of the advisory j
committee as chartered; copy of each report or other document ChL !
t (2) The time, date, place, and pur-received. assued, or approved by the crc-pose of the meeting.
committee in connection with the p:::
j meeting. If it is impracticable to sar l
(3) A summary of the agenda of the meetmg; and attach a document to the minutes, the te j
- 44) Whether all or part of the meet-mmutes shall describe the document ret e mg is open to the public.
m sufficient detail to permit it to te NR' identified readtly.
If any part of the meeting is closed.
the nottce shall provide the rea. sons (ci The chairperson of an NRC advt-sI' sory committee shall certify to the ac-er!
for the closure, citing the spec:he curacy of the mmutes of each of the i
'**~
1 matter that has been determmed to committee's meetings In the case of a t h i *-
1 Justif y the closure under 17.15.
subgroup of an advisory committee.
cic
<d)
In exceptional circumstances the chairperson of the subgroup shati G-less than 15 days notice of an advisory certify to the accuracy of the minutes.
tne committee meeting may be given, pro.
(d) A verbatim transcript of an adtt-d vided that there is as much prior sory committee meeting may be substi-de54 l
l the shorter time are included in the tuted for minutes required by this sec.
UCl#
notice as possible and the reasons for i
committee meetmg notice pubbshed in tion, providing that the use of such a cf a I
transcript is in accordance with the re-W# '
Quirements of paragraphs (a). (b), and tne -
(e) In addition to notice required by (c) of this section.
d3 r
I paragraph (c) of this section, the NRC may also qe other forms of notice. 6 7.14 Pubhc information on adnsor; such as p,ublic releases and notice by ques.
committees.
Ell O mall. to trfform the public of advisory i
}
committee meet ngs. To that end the t a) The Nuclear Regulatory Commis-Designated Federal Officer of each sion shall maintain systematic infor.
j p'
NRC advisory committee will, to the mation on the nature, functions, and men i
extent practicable, maintain lists of operations of each NRC advisory com-g ni people and organizations interested in mittee. A complete set of the charters (e f 1
of NRC advisory committees and
{
j 'l that advisory committee and notify sion them of meetings by mall.
copies of the annual reports required func-by 17.11(a) shall be maint.ained for public inspection in the NRC Public of tr 5 7.13 Minutes of advisory committ" l
"#"f*'
Document Room.
Com' ers a (b) Subject to the provisions of the (a) Detailed minutes shall be kept of Freedom of Information Act (5 UAC.
shall each NRC advisory committee meet-552) and NRC's Freedom of Informa-close ing. The minutes shall include the fol-lowing information:
tion Act Regulations (10 CFR part 9.
i i.16 subpart A). copies of NRC advisory l
(1) The time, date, and place of the tai commit. tees' records, reports, tran-meeting; sien l
scripts, minutes, appendices, workiDi hens.
4 226 I
r
\\
L l
/
l I
33
\\
1
- - - - ~
1 i
.$ },
4 9
MINUTES 9.1 The ACRS office will prepare minutes of all ACRS meetings, including Subcommittee meetings.
9.2 When factual information with potential archival value is being presented to the Committee or to a Subcommittee, during a meeting that is open to public attendance, the presentation will normally be transcribed.
Deliberative sessions will normally not be transcribed.
m
[ 9. 3 A working copy of the minutes will be prepared by the cognizant ACRS staff engineers, and made available as soon as practicable to the chairman of the full Committee or Subcommittee, and to other members. Af ter review, and pref erably within a month, the minutes will be certified by the full Committee or Subcommittee Chairman, as j
appropriate.
By certifying the minutes, the cognizant
/
\\
Chairman attests to the best of his knowledge to tne
/
completeness and technical accuracy of the minutes.
/
9.4 Copies of the certified minutes will normally be distributed to the ACRS members and to Committee consultants when appropriate.
They will then be forwarded to the Public Document Room, with only those deletions required by law.
s 8
<~
c Jr 16 i