ML20133G351
| ML20133G351 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/31/1996 |
| From: | Hoyle J NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20133G353 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 SECY-96-139-C, SECY-96-221-C, NUDOCS 9701160002 | |
| Download: ML20133G351 (2) | |
Text
. _.. -. _. - - -...
I
[
4'
'o UNITED STATES y
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
j WASHINGTON. D.C 20555-0001 e
\\*****/
December 31, 1996 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY COMMISSION VOTING RECORD DECISION ITEM:
SECY-96-221 TITLE:
IMPROVING NRC'S CONTROL OVER, AND LICENSEES' ACCOUNTABILITY FOR, GENERALLY AND SPECIFICALLY LICENSED DEVICES The Commission approved the staff's recommendation to implement alternative number 3 but disapproved the proposed pilot program until more details are available.
The results are recorded in the Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) of December 31, 1996 This Record contains a summary of voting on this matter together with the individual vote sheets, views and comments of the Chairman and Commissioners, and the SRM of December 31, 1996, y
/
,i
/
hn C. Hoyle Sec tary of the Commission i
Attachments:
- 1. Voting Summary
- 2. Commissioner Vote Sheets
- 3. Final SRM i
cc:
Chairman Jackson
{
Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Dicus N
Commissioner Diaz b
Commissioner McGaffigan DO PDR DCS 9701160002 961231 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR
1 4
'n i
l I
I l
VOTING
SUMMARY
- SECY-96-221 I
~
1 RECORDED VOTES i
a NOT APRVD DISAPRVD ABSTAIN PARTICIP COMMENTS DATE i
l CHRM. JACKSON X
X X
11/21/96 i
COMR. ROGERS X
X X
11/27/96 i
i I
COMR. DICUS X
X X
11/22/96 COMR. DIAZ X
X 11/22/96 COMR. McGAFFIGAN X X
X-12/4/96 I
r 8
i I
i COMMENT RESOLUTION In their vote sheets, all Commissioners approved staff f
3 development of an action plan, but the Chairman and Commissioners j
l Rogers, Dicus, and McGaffigan disapproved the implementation of a Commissioner Diaz pilot program until more details are provided.
i would have permitted the staff to go forward with the pilot program and he also provided an example of a framework that the j
staff could use categorize licensing requirements for various l
Subsequently, the comments of the majority of j
types of devices.
j the Commission were incorporated into the guidance to staff as j
i reflected in the SRM issued on December 31, 1996.
1
-