ML20136D695

Forwards Cost Analysis Group Review of Regulatory Impact Analyses of Proposed Insider Rulemaking

ML20136D695
Person / Time
Issue date:	03/26/1985
From:	Triner E NRC OFFICE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (ORM)
To:	Wilde R NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
Shared Package
ML20136C160	List: IA-85-361, Forwards Cost Analysis Group Rept Re Cost Analysis in Support of Proposed Revs to 10CFR50,App J,Per Dec 1984 Request.Proposes That Rept Be Issued as Nureg.App J Revs Will Result in Cost Savings.W/O Rept ML20136C156 ML20136C289 ML20136C414 ML20136C458 ML20136C476 ML20136C501 ML20136C519 ML20136C549 ML20136C951 ML20136C957 ML20136C967 ML20136C986 ML20136D017 ML20136D045 ML20136D070 ML20136D108 ML20136D124 ML20136D226 ML20136D242 ML20136D266 ML20136D294 ML20136D311 ML20136D328 ML20136D345 ML20136D376 ML20136D400 ML20136D428 ML20136D598 ML20136D614 ML20136D622 ML20136D647 ML20136D670 ML20136D695 ML20136D709 ML20136D731 ML20136D743 ML20136E335 ML20136E359 ML20136E376 NUREG/CR-4025, Preliminary Review of Cost Analysis Contained in NUREG/CR-4025 Concerning Proposed Design Mods to Gessar
References
FOIA-85-361, FRN-49FR30726 AA36-2-014, AA36-2-14, AB17-2-12, NUDOCS 8511210347
Download: ML20136D695 (1)

Text

- - - - -

I

-l NR 2 6 :985 i

MEMORANDUM FOR: Ralph M. Wilde, Program Assistant to the Director

. Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety

]

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards FRCM:

Edwin G. Triner, Director Division of Budget and Analysis Office of Resource Management

SUBJECT:

THE COST ANALYSIS GRCUP'S REVIEW OF THE REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED INSIDER SAFEGUARDS RULES Please find attached the Cost Analysis Group's (CAG) comments on the cost analysis portions of the regulatory impact analyses of the Proposed Insider Safeguards Rules. There are three proposed rules within this action:

1)

Access Authorization Rule (Screening Requirements), 2) Search Requirements Rule (Pat-Down Search Issue), and 3) Miscellaneous Safeguards-Related Amend-ments (Access Controls, Vital Area Designation, etc).

Each contains its own value impact analysis, but some of our comments hold for all of the analyses.

For example, some of the data used is outdated and therefore the resulting

~

cost estimates are not as current as they should be. Another oroblem is that future costs are not discounted. Lastly, while the cost burrien resulting frem paperwork is considered in the cost estimates, a special section under Statutory Considerations addressing that issue should be included.

Should you have any questions concerning this review, please contact Brian Richter X27770.

MginalSigned bf F511210347 851022 M O. Tricer (ELB i

n er, cW 361 PM Division of Budget and Analysis Office of Resource Management

Attachment:

Nw n t't': L. Barry, RM c

bec w attac n

3 g r f.

E. Trinur, RM/B RM/BR Reading File - CA R. Shumway, RM/B RM/BR Staff (7)

J oenM RM/B Suspense File N. Monaco, RM/BP l

RM/BReadingFile(5)

L. Schaub, RM/BOS L. Bar.1e g RM/BR (Acting)

D'isLCcde:

BRIAN 1 - NMSS Report 2 watcliter,.:RWHill R. Scroggins, RM l

S. Feld, RM/BR u RM/B l RM/BR

, RM BR

. RM/B lRM/B

/~

......................-..~....-.s.......

ETrine O I,.. w/...

cJBRic

phlSFeld LBa ett

• RShumway

....... 9J

+=d3/f,p/85 3/

L/85 3/

85 3/..* /85.,.3/ G o/85 l

- -