ML20137L398
| ML20137L398 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/30/1997 |
| From: | Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Diaz N, Dicus G, Mcgaffigan E, Rogers K NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137L372 | List: |
| References | |
| COMSECY-96-065, COMSECY-96-65, DSI-21, SECY-96-065-C, SECY-96-65-C, NUDOCS 9704070216 | |
| Download: ML20137L398 (2) | |
Text
_
. ~. - -
~.
[
- ee........
RELEASED TO THE pos
~ 8
{
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIOlQ c
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20666
- cau, m
January 30, 1997
************>e.......'j CHAIRMAN i
MEMORANDUM T0:
Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Dicus 4
Commissioner Diaz 1
Commissioner McGaffigan FROM:
SUBJECT:
COMSECY-96-065: DSI 21-FEES DIRECTION SETTING ISSUE Based on a review of the Stakeholder Interaction Report and public comments, I continue to support the Commission's preliminary view in response to the i
Direction-Setting Issue - Option 2 " Programmatic decisions in response to NRC l
mandates will not be driven by fees. Specific activities conducted by tne NRC will be evaluated for efficiency and effectiveness."
Although I do agree with Commissioner Rogers that the comment on early
~
decommissioning identified in the Stakeholder Interaction Report on page 3-126 raises a valid concern about fewer licensees subject to fees, I do not believe l
that any additional statement addressing the need for the Commission to adjust expenses is necessary.
I believe this is already addressed in the portion of Option 2 which states that " specific activities conducted by the NRC will be i
i evaluated for efficiency and effectiveness." Changes in programmatic decisions and workload resulting from ' decommissioning, the mix of licensees, and the number of licensees should always be considered in developing NRC's programs and resource requirements. However, language which specifically addresses adjusting expenses could create the impression that the Commission's decisions would be based on cost to licensees rather than programmatic needs j
j to provide adequate protection of public health and safety.
ASSOCIATED ISSUES 1
There were two associated issues raised in the options paper which presented the Direction-Setting Issue.
i On the first issue:
Fundina Mechanism - I agree with Commissioner Rogers in his statement which supports the Commission's preliminary view of Funding Mechanism 2.
Commissioner Rogers states that "the Commission believes that it is required to carry out the intent of Congress by implemen+'
fee policy within existing law. The Commission has on several occas.v...ade known its pasition with respect to OBRA-90 and the 100 percent fee collection."
}
However, the last NRC analysis on fee policy options, which outlined the Commission's position, was in 1994. Changes in external and internal factors since April 1994 may identify rationale for changes to OBRA-90 which were not 9704070216 970403 i
2 contained in the April 1994 report.
I believe that the staff should prepare an update of the " Report To The Congress on the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Licensee Fee Policy Review Required by the Energy Policy Act of 1992." This update should consider comments received on the strategic assessment and rebaselining Direction Setting Issues (DSI's) and the final decisions on all of the DSI's.
On the second associated issue:
FTE Considerations - I continue to support the identification of FTE's associated with reimbursable work as business-like 1
activities. The staff should provide the Commission with an action plan for identifying business-like activities as part of the budget planning process.
cc:
ED0 OGC SECY i
CF0 CIO
)
0 f
1 I
i 4
i i
<