ML20134L565
| ML20134L565 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/18/1996 |
| From: | Mcpherson G NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | NRC |
| References | |
| DSI-20-00014, DSI-20-14, NUDOCS 9611210083 | |
| Download: ML20134L565 (4) | |
Text
$ '.
Q.
Q Ru$e L
NOVf8g,y From:
G. D. McPherson g
To:
WND1.WNP2.JCH, WND1.WNP7.JWC1 gg Date:
11/18/9611:46am
,s
Subject:
Stategic Assessmeat and Rebaselining Initiative d,/
'y' '
The attachment to this message contains 3 proposals I wish to enter for consideration in th Strategic Assessment and Rebaselining Initiative.
Please contact me if with comments or for clarification.
Don McPherson,415-1246, E-Mail GDM CC:
GMH, MJV, WNP4.BWS, WNP4.ACT, TWD2.TWPO.DLM3, WND1..
1 a
9 4
1 h
j 1
9611210003 961118 3
/
i PDR NRCSA I
- p 20 PDR M
.10004 D313
.~
7 STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT and REBASEllNING INITIATIVE J
THREE PROPOSALS by Dr. E,. Donald McPherson OSSAINRR, November 18,1996 4
FIRST PROPOSAL This proposaladdresses 1
Issue Paper DSI 20 International Activities, Function 3: International Regulatory Information Exchange and issue Paper OSI 22 Research that portion dealing with the international research programs and international exchanges in I
research resultn The proposal would support both Options 3 and 5 of DSI 20, Function 3 (increased benefits to NRC and an expanded role for NRC), w little or no added FTE demand on the staff. Similarly,it would support Option 7 of DSI 22 (continue active participation in international Safety programs). The proposalis that NRC establish a cost to succort the foi!owino activities:
(a) increased technical and information exchanges with the larger regulatory organizations, (b) fuller participation in Cooperative International Projects, and (c) continuity of participation in DECD Nuclear Energy Agency activities The need for these improvements can be justified as f allows:
(a) The regulators with whom NRC has the most active exchanges are those of France, Germany, Japan, Sweden, Switzerlan and Britain. At any given time these organizations are developing positions and dealing with issues that directly or indirectly affect the atfairs of NRC, It is therefore important not only that we remain in close touch with these organizations through periodic visits and communications, but as NRC's resources decrease, we should increase these exchanges in ways that would further enlist contributions from out international colleagues towards collegial solutions of our common problems. A special post emphasizing this activity would permit us to decrease the number of foreign trips and maintain a more regular interface with the organizations concerned.
i (b) Cooperative International Projects contribute strongly towards the efficient use of NRC resources, for they involve sharing of the responsibilities for resources and management in carrying out projects that support NRC's goals. To obtain the best return on our i
investment it is important that we take our place at every rnesting of the technical and management committees of those projects, w currently we are finding increasingly difficult to do. The new post would provide greater opportunity for NRC to be represented a rnesting of the technical and management groups of these projects, with less time lost for this purpose by the appointed NRC representatives.
(c) OECD Nuclear Energy Agency activities involve the exchange of information among all NE A member countries with nuc j
power installations. Its Divisions of Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection / Waste Management support committees d reactor safety research (CSNI), reactor regulation (CNR A), waste managsment (RWMC) and radiation protection (CRPPHL jointly funded research projects at any given tirne. That NRC recognizes much value in NE A activities is demonstrat 4
participation in about 30 of the approximately 36 committees, working groups, task groups and projects, and by partic Acting Deputy Director of NRR as Vice Chairman of CNRA and the Director of RES as Chairman of CSNI. Unfortunately, resource constraints prevent regular attendance at the semi annual and annual meetings of these various groups, which often preclu influencing their activities to the degree that would otherwise be possible. The proposed new post would provide a greate I
for NRC to be represented at meetings of those groups we wish to influence in areas of specialinterest to NRC, with less this purpose by the NRC staff.
The benefits to NRC to be derived from the establishment of this post would include:
closer and more frequent interaction with our regulatory and research counterparts, more frequent participation in cooperative project rneetings and intormal visits to the sites of the cooperative research closer relations with the European members of NE A committees and working group, closer relations and a greater influence with the NE A secretariat in Paris, NRC participation in important meetings that our appointed representatives are unable to attend, increased NRC influence over cooperative research projects and the direction of NE A activities,
~---.. -. -..
~
~ -.--.-..-.
a 4
reduction in preparation and travel tirne by NRC's appointed representatives to the various projects and NE A groups, and to bi-lateral meetings with regulators; this is not to say that such contacts would cease, but that the new position would reduce significantly the frequency of these contacts.
IMPLEMENTATION i
a' l
Two major activities would occupy the incumbent: contacts with the :esponsible NRC staff members, and participating in the variou meetings abroad. It therefore seems reasonable that his/her tirne be split equally between Rockville and Europe. lSince the majo I
I interfaces abroad are in Europe, those in the f ar east should probably be handled as they are now, or at least separatelyJ
,c I would suggest we begin with temporary duty assignments to Europe for the Autumn and Spring, coinciding with the CNR A related rnestings). Summer and Winter could be spent at headquarters interf acing with those same staff members to develop strategies agenda for the forthcoming activities, and other related duties. The cost of this approach would be comparable to the reductions t have lately been imposed in FY'95 and FY'96 foreign travel costs and therefore have negligible budgetary impact. After a year or two, the contribution of this approach towards NRC's rnission could be assessed and the subsequent level of support decided.
f SECOND PROPOSAL i
This proposal addresses issue Paper OSI 20, International Activities, Function 4: Assist Other Countries by Strengthening their Regulatory Programs.
a Chairman Jackson has proposed the formation of an International Nuclear Reaulators Forum a body in which nuclear regulatory ofhcia j
could exchange views and coordinate approaches for the safe and secure use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. My pr j
that the OECD Nuclear EnerJy Agency's Senior Reaulators be used to provide that international nuclear reaulators forum.
Although the NE A's official membership currently excludes most countries of Eastern Europe, the Formar Soviet Union and T l
NE A committees nevertheless frequently invite officials of regulatory agencies of several of these countries, and their supporting resej i
organizations, to the NE A meetings where they participate as equals.
1 It would not require any change in NE A policy, to invite any number of targeted nuclear regulators to attend meetings of the Senio Regulators especially organized for this purpose, and to use the NE A secretariat and conference f acilities,if so desired. Furth i
j such meetings of the proposed Forum in this case, the Senior Regulators Forum would be free to discuss matters of polic
)
have done in the past, thus achieving the Chairman's purpose in proposing the Forum.
This approach has the particular advantage that information exchanges and cooperative projects among the brcader mem I
international regulators are already in progress through NE A committees that are chaired by members of the same organiza headed by the senior regulators. The benefits of this close-knit relationship would be lost if the proposed Forum were to be set u independent of the NEA Senior Regulators.
THIRD PROPOSAL Judging by the titles of the issue Papers, there is little in this assessment that deals with human resources. If this is the i this topic must be addressed in a parallel exercise, because there is bound to be much f all out from the current initiative the NRC staff Among the many subjects to be dealt with in the human resources document the following two subjects should be included.
The first deals with the problem that the reductions in NRC's staff combined with the unusually high numbers considering ret recently retired is causing a rapid and dramatic loss in our corporate memory. This problem could be addressed by e program whereby new retirees may continue to work for a significant length of time, on a part time basis irnmediat retirement. I realize that ad hoc arrangements of this nature already exist, but these should be formalized to ensure we have a consistently f air approach and well-rounded plan, and above all, to make all prospective retirees aware of such possibilities. The benefits of this initiative to both the agency and to the participating r sufficiently well recognized that they need not be repeated here.
I e
g e
f..
The second subject deals with financial planning for retirement for those in the FERS system. Generally speaking, FERS utiress will be
- dependent on their savings (TSP and other sources) to generate 50% and rnare of their retirement income. The Planning fot Ret'rement course too briefly covers the options for withdrawal from TSP, providing no assistance as to the pros, cons and risks assoc.ated with the options, including the influence of the existing financial conditions on those options. The retiree who may be responsible for1.nerating tens of thousands of dollars annually from savings of hundreds of thousands of dollars must be well equipped for this da.nting responsibility. This can be handled through an appropriate change in the Planning for Retirement course.
-