ML20147J305
| ML20147J305 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/14/1978 |
| From: | Gilinsky V, Hendrie J, Kennedy R NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 7812280042 | |
| Download: ML20147J305 (78) | |
Text
-
%v O
NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION-IN THE MATTER OF:
PUBLIC MEETING BRIEFING ON FY 79 OPERATING PLANS Flace.
Washington, D. C.
Octe.
Thursday, 14 December 1978 Pcges 1-44 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS P00R QUALITY PAGES we,,.:
(:00) w.rco ACE. cr J.>ER.A.L RE?ORTERS,INC.
WRmomrs Lia Norm C:mitel Street 78122800 k We=hias=n. oc qcci NA71CNWICE CCVERACE. C ALLY
q
- a
,_m
~
e.
.icL e
1 l
CR17 8,7
\\
\\
s.
DISCLAIMER This -is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on Thursday,14 Decenbar 1978 in the Commission's offices at 1717 H Street, N. W., Washington, D. C.
The meeting was open to public attendance and observation.
Th'is transcript has not been reviewed, corrected, or edited, and it may contain inaccuracies.
. The transcript is intended solely for general informa'tfonal purposes.
As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the matters discussed.
Expressions of opinion in this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determinations or beliefs.
No pleading or other paper may be filed with the Commission in any proceeding as the result of or addressed to any statement or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may authorize.
e 4
e e
e G
e
a 2
os UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CR1787 1
HEER:mp NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION mask 2
3 PUBLIC MEETING 4
BRIEFING ON FY 79 OPERATING PLANS 5
6 Room 1130 7
1717 H Street, 6, W.
Washington, D.
C.
8 9
Thursday, 14 December 1978 10 The Commission met, pursuant to notice, at 11:10 a.m.
11 dEFORE:
12 DR. JOSEPH M.
HENDRIE, Chairman 13 VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner 14 RICHARD T.
KENNEDY, Commissioner 15 PETER A. BRADFO RD, Commissioner 16 JOHN F. AHEARNE, Commissioner 17 PRESENT:
18 Messrs. Gossick, Haller, Barry, Pederson, Kelley and 19 Cooper.
20 21 22 23 24 DFedcral Reporters, Inc.
25
.11 4
787.04.1 3
pv i
PR0CEEDINGS 2
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE Let's turn on to the 3
budget-review ma tters.
Okay, let us move on to the next 4
subject this morning, which is titled "A Briefing on '79 5
Operating Plans," and is intended to provide the Commission an 6
opportunity to look at the situation with regard to the '79 7
budget, where we're going, and also some questions about how 8
we're going to look at these things, ma.tter of fact, too.
9 Lee, why don't you go ahead?
10 MR. 00SSICK:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
11 As the chairman has indicated, this briefing is in 12 response to the Commission's request for review, periodic 13 review of our units and how best to track the expenditure of 14 our resources against the egency's objectives.
15 As you know, we do have a pilot project under way 16 to track selective units.
However, it is not our intent tob 17 brief you on that pilot program this morning.
You have been 18 individually briefed by Norm Haller in the past two or thr.ee 19 weeks with regard to wnat that program looks like.
20 What we would like to do this morning is to provide 21 you with our suggestions on a way for you to exert your 22 management control and oversight on c * '79 program during the 23 interim until we get this decision ar. a tracking system fully 24 implemented with the fiscal year '80 budget.
25 The brie fing is divided into two parts.
Len Barry ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
24 v.
4 787.04.2 pv 1
will f.irst summarize how we finished up in /78 from the 2
financial viewpoint, and our proposed aoplication of the 3
unobligated balance of '79 prior-year moneys.
This was a 4
. subject of a paper that is before the Commission, and, 5
depending upon your action on that, then, of course, we must 6
go to Congress for appropriate reprogramming authority.
~
7 Mr. Barry will also discuss the impact of how our
~
8 author.ization for fiscal year >79 and the appropriation 9
legislation will affect our >79 program.
10 After that, Mr. Haller will glve a summary of our 11 plans and the issues that are involved in the various programs 12 for fiscal year '79.
These issues are currently being 13 addressed by the staff.
And as Norm will indicate, we will be 14 back to you in January with the details on that.
15 In his presentation, though, we do have something 16 of.a.new approach that we would like to lay out.
It is new in 17 some ways or several ways.
First, it updates the decision 18 unit inf ormation to include events, guidance, legislative 19 changes that have happened since the budget was submitted to 20 OMB more than a year ago.
21 Previously,-the Commissioners have not, for the 22
.most part, had a total update on program content and 1
23J accomplishments until the next bud 7et deliberation that occurs 24 a year-later.
Because of this somewhat new approach, we do 25 need f eedback' from the Commission, particularly to determine ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERSr.INC. (202)347-3700 1
787.04.3 5
pv 1
which' areas, which. decision units, a_11 or selective ones that-2 you want to cover' in the reports that have been asked for, and 3
some indication of the depth of coverage that you wi.11 want to 4
go into.
5 Now, I intend to modify our briefings which we 6
carry on on a regularly scheduled bas is with the staf f to 7
monitor the ' accomplishments in the pilot decision units.
What 8
we're talking about here is not an added decision but a 9
.modific ation and, hopefully, an improvement in our staff 10 review of. program activities and assessments of our 11 performance.
12 This is a rather ambitious undertaking and, really, 13 the f.irst time that we have tried to present all of the 14 inf ormation sort of at one sitting in this f ashion.
I think, 15 though, we can go through it quickly, or as quickly as 16 possible.
And we have asked the line office directors to be 17 here to answer questions in their particular areas.
18 Unless there are questions. I will ask Glen to 19 start off with the /.78-79 picture.
20 MR. B A RRY.:
Okay, I will take you in and out of '78 21 pre tty quick.
You should have a chart in front of you that 22 shows that we received an appropriation in 1978 of a little 23 over $281~mL111on -
" budget authority" is what we call it now 24
-- and, in addition, received a pay raise supplemental during 25 the' year.
And if you will recall, we received an additional
. ACE-FEDERAL. REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
f87.04.4~
6 pv i
supplemental'for the revised inspection program and the NMSS 2-waste management.
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
These are all '78 do11ars?
4 MR. BARRY2 All >78 dollars.
5 It gave us a total obligation, a new budget 6
obligation authority, by the time the year was over, of $290 7
million.
You can-see by budget category about $84' -- a 8
little over s84 mi111on of that was for pay and benefits t 9
$181 million was for program support under contract to the 10 labs and private contracts with universities and so ont and s' 4 million for administration, training, s u ppo r t, and 11 about 2
12 travel.
13 The next chart shows you the program amounts, where 14 that money was dist'ributed, and the obligations that were 15 incurred during the year.
You.will notice there at the bo.ttom 16 of the first column, in addition to the $290 million, we had a 17
$2.5 mi.111on carryover from prior years.
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Is our money multi-year u til expended?
19 n
20 MR. B A RRY :
It is no-year money.
21 COMMISSIONER AHEARHE:
All of our money?
All of our money.
23 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Including personnel?
Yes.
That was part of the great debate 25 a couple of years ago.
We convince d the Congress tha t it 4
' ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.-(202)347-3700
... ~. -
I i
4 1
187.04.5 7
l pv 1
should be no-year money.
It is just one appropriation.
And l
f 2
we would be in trouble without it, I
3 You notice we dic obligate between the new budget l
1 4
authority of $290 million plus the prior-year money, we did q
5 obligate $278 million, and we had outlays of about $282 t
h 6
million.
t 7
One point I would make there:
You have read quite f
8 a bit where the Administration has been happy with so many of l
9 the agencies on missing their outlay mark, under-outlaying.
10 We have done pre tty well.
Our estimate was about $275 11 million, and we exceeded that by 56 m illion.
So, we did 12 pre tty we ll.
13 All right, if you want to turn to the next chart, 14 we did have as a result of the obligations versus the 15 availability a $4.8 million unobligated balance.
You can see 16 in the columns where they were in terms of the organizations.
17 We did have a little over S800,000 in commitments.
That was 18 money we were really trying to get under' contract, and we i
19 didn't make it.
But those amounts are now under contract.
20 In '79, the bottom line is it. gave us an availability f rom '78 21 in prior-year funds that we can use in FY '79, in addition to 22 our new budget author.ity in '79, of approximately $4 nillion.
23 You have a paper before the secretary now in which 24 we proposed how we use $3.1 million of that, and that is the 25
.first step in putting to use dollars in FY '79, and we did not
{
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC, (202)347-3700 i
4 F87.04.6 8
pv i
have -- that we did not have in our original program.
2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
That is S t.3 million of the 3
S3. 9 million available, and it f alls into the " Proposed Uses" 4
column.
5 MR. B A RRY:
Yes.
Which means we still have a 6
little over 3800, 000 of prior-year money, prior to '79, 7
available for further use, that we did not have earmarked in 8
the program as yet.
9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Where is the improved-safety 10 research coming?
11 MR. B A RRY:
The improved-safety research is part of 12 the $3.1 million.
Of the $1.4 mi.111on you see there, S400, 000 i
13 of that is to improve safety.
14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
A lot of this is a 15 reallocation because your unobligated balance does not track 16 very closely to your proposed usage.
17 Will much of that be treated as a preprogramming 18 action?
19 MR. BARRY:
It will be reprogrammed in the sense 20 that we will have to go to the congressional committ_ees 21 because these f unds for the uses intended were not previously 22 identified, so we must go back now to the congressional 23 committees and tell them how we propose to use these f unds.
24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Is it a combination of how 25 you propose to use them and also that you do not propose to ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
f 87.04. 7 9
pv i
cover se:e items that previously we had indicated would be 2
covered?
3 MR. BARRY:
No, it is just money that was not 4
necessary to finish out FY '78.
You may recall that we 5
received our supplemental on September 8, and that was pretty 6
late in the year, so sone of the things we were going to do 7
earlier were not possible.
)
8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Of that $4.8 m illion, 9
approximatley how much is potentially pay benefits?
10 MR. BARRY:
None of it.
Oh, do you mean how was it 11 generated?
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
13 MR. B ARRY:
If you look down there on that la st 14 item, " Program direction and administration," I would suspect 15 that probably about, I think --
(
16 Bruce, what, about $400,000?
17 MR. C.00PER:
It is about $ 400,000.
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
In PDA?
le MR. BA RRY:
Well, it is all lumped under there for 20 the purpose of this exercise.
21 CO MMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Your footnote says it's 22 spread.
Your footnote l says it is spread amongst the --
23 MR. COOPER :
Under the PDA, it is about $ 2 00,0 00.
l I
24 MR. B A RRY:
I see what you mean.
The total is 25
$400,000 of pay and cenefits that we did not use.
}
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700 I
J
l
'787.04.8 10 pv 1
Okay, the next chart shows you of the $3.1 m i.1110, 2
that we have that I mentioned before you what is proposed in 3
that (INAUDLBLE).
Two of -- well, in fact, most of the 4
amounts here are in consonance with the authorization 5
committee initiatives.
In the language and the legislative 6
history of their '79 authorization and the conf erence report, 7
they encouraged us to use money to take care of the backlog of 8
our amendments, our amended backlog.
That is the 5900,000 you 9
see under " Operating Reactors."
j i
10 They also encouraged us to do more in waste 11 management, and you see the $550,000 the re, which really is a 12 part of,the Livermore contract.
And you see $400,000 in l
13 improved reactor safety that will be blended with an l
1 14 a dditional s4DO,000, reprogrammed from research, f or a total 15 o f S 800, 000.
And that will start our improved safety research 16
'n fiscal year 1979.
17 And then, the million dollars you see at the bottom 18 of that page, again, is in sucport of the initiatives in the 19 authorization act for the alternate fuel cycle.
20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
May I point out, these 21 amounts are very much in consonance with the authoriz ing 22 committees.
Are they in any way in dissonance with the 23 appropriations conmittee?
24 MR. BARRY:
No.
There is nothing here that the 25 a ppropriations commi tt ees p ut a restr ict ion on.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC, (202)347-3700
787.04.9 11 pv i
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
When does the NASAP program 2
come to a conclusion?
3 MR. BA RRY:
At the end of fiscal year '79.
There 4
is no money in the '80 budget for NASAP support.
5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Is that true of DOE?
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE Well, DOE had tied NASAP to 7
ENJ, and since that is supposed to end in '79 -- but that was 8
the philosophy.
Now, whether DOE continues on that, we don't 9
know.
If you will turn to the next page, we 11 will go through several of these charts quic kly here.
The 12
. format of these charts -- and I have one chart f or each of the 13 major program categories -- was applied to program of fices and 14 the program directlon and administration and program support.
15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE By the way, when you say you 16 have a paper before us on these proposed uses --
17 MR. B ARRY:
Yes, it came down last week.
It was 18 634.
We would encourage pretty quick action on that, because 19 we would like to put that money to work.
20 MR. 00SSICK:
What is your estimate on the amount 21 of time it's going to take to get approval?
22 MR. BA RRY :
Well, I can't be prec ise.
I feel that 23 both houses will be receptive to it because it falls right 24 into particu.larly the authorization legislation.
25 COMMI SSIONER AHE ARNE :
Does it require a positive ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERSr INC. (202)347-3700
I I
1 12 787.04.10 a
pv 1
actinn on the part of the congressional committees, or is it i
2 lylng in wait?
l 3
MR. BARRY:
As far as I am concerned, it requires a q
l 4
positive action.
5 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
By the committees?
i 6
MR. BARRY:
Yes.
7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
They will have to write us a 8
letter.
It will be the appropriations committee.
9 MR. BARRY:
We are go ing to solicit all five j
10 committees.
11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
On reprogram actions, under
(
12 our statutes, does that require the authorizing committees or 13 the appropriating committees or coth to take action?
14 MR. BA RRY:
Normally, In the past it has required f
15 the authorization committee action.
But we have talked with i
16 the appropriation committees, and they also want to receive a 17 letter f rom us and pass judgment.
So, we are going to go to 18 all five committees.
19 CO MMI SSI ONER KENNEDY:
And in the event there is 20 a difference, as there so often is?
21 MR. BARRY:
We will have to work that out.
22 MR. GOSSICK2 tie have run into that before, if you Dnd#4 23 will recall.
24 25 l
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
CR'1787' 13 HEER:jwb
- 5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
My question, I think, was i
i 2
different.
You asked:
What was the right way of handling it?
3 And I understand that.
I 4
I was asking, more:
What is the legal requiremer.c?
i i
5 MR. BARRY:
I would have tu 9efer to Jim on that.
6 MR. KELLEY:
I can look it up and tell you.
7 MR. BARRY:
Commissioner, mostly we just normally l
I 3
just go to the authorization cownittees.
i i
9 Okay, let me go to these charts.
The purpose of 10 ! these charts is just to show you what we requested in our l
11 President's budget for '79; what the authorization action was; 12 what the appropriation action was; and we've got one of two i
13 types of line items.
i 14 One, where there is a different; and where there is 15 no difference, we just simply say "the balance of the program. "
16 And what I mean by that is that the differences really manifest l 17 themselves in the individual items, such as on the first page.
18 We requested S6.8 million for Standards.
The 19 Authorization Act came in and said we would like you to put i
20
$500,000 of our amount into immunological work.
And the l
21 appropriation action did not comment on it.
i 22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Do I interpret, though, your 23 line as'being that we identified low-level radiation studies in 24 our budget submission and asked for three people but no dollars?
sco Fedtrei Reporters, Inc. g 25 ;
MR. BARRY:
Yes.
That is correct.
i l
I i
5-2.jwb r
14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
And the authorizing then j
said:
In addition, put $500,000 in?
l 2
MR. BARRY:
In effect, they said:
You will use, of 3
your total amount, you will use $500,000 for that.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Except, according to this they !
3 i
also increased the total amount.
i 6
l MR. BARRY:
Yes; that is correct.
)
7
\\
In other words, the authorization was increased, but g
the appropriation was not.
So in fact, what we're doing is 9
10 ! doing it within the appropriation amount.
On each of the following pages is the same type of 11 situation.
You will also see where the Appropriation Committees 37 made a change.
l 13 As an example, on this page on I&E, you will note l
ja that in that case for the fuel facilities and materials, the 15 16 authorization action was the same as our request, but the Appropriation Committees reduced our amount by a total of 37 S200,000 -- $100,000 in fuel facilities, and $100,000 in 18 19 Safeguards.
They simply gave us a general reduction of $200,000 from our budget request, and that is where we are.
20 1 I
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I'm sorry?
They gave us --
21 MR. BARRY:
They reduced our budget by $200,000.
22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Did they focus it specifically.
23 24 on those two areas?
K)-Fedcrat Reporters, Inc.
25 MR. BARRY:
Yes, sir.
5-3 jwb 15 i
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
$100,000 each?
2 MR. BARRY:
Yes, sir.
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Now is it correct -- As I 4
went through your charts, I can only find one case where there S
was any people difference in any of the columns.
So on all 6
of these, is it correct that, with the exception of that one 7
situation, that neither committee addressed these people-l l
8 strength allocated?
i 9
MR. BARRY:
They did not, in the final report.
In 10 !
the Senate report before they went to conference, they did 11 address the numbers of people associated with the increase in l
l 12 dollars for the various initiatives.
l 13 When they went to conference, they were silent on l
i 14 people.
You could say:
Well, legislative history would say 13 they really meant for you to also put this number of people on 16 those programs, but we kind of talked to the House side, saying 17 it would be much more difficult for us to comply if you put the I
18 people on us in addition to the dollars.
19 And so the conference report, they took of f the i
20 PeoP e.
Would you J ike me to go through each one of these?
l 21 or are the charts self-explanatory enough to see what the problem 22 is?
Because the bottom line is --
l 23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I think, let's get to the bottom 24 line.
s> Federal Reporters, Inc, i
25 MR. BARRY:
The bottom line is that, in addition to
~
5-4.jwb g.
16 !
1 l
i i
the paper we have before you now which we are requesting you to l j
2 approve, the $3.1 million in the use of unobligated balances, 1
we also in the next 30 days are going to have to determine what l 3
our final financial plan is going to be in '79 to attempt to 4
comply with both the Senate and House initiatives, and the 5
l reductions that the Appropriation Committees gave us as to what 6
the best compromise is, and go up to the five committees with 7
that proposal and see what happens.
8 And we hope to have that done within 30 days.
And 9
10 ! assuming, for just a moment, that they were to approve our i
recommendations, thenourfinancialplanwouldbeputtobedfor; jj I
the year, j
12 So that is the second action tha't we will' have down 13 before you in terms of a proposal.
ja CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
And how soon will you have that 15 16 proposition down?
f MR. BARRY:
I'm hoping, by mid-January or earlier.
g We have to sit down with each of the program directors that are 18 affected -- particularly Research -- because we also have some 19 additional requirements within some of these programs, particu-20 larly Research, uhat were not even addressed in Congressional 21 initiatives that we might want to recommend to you.
7, So it is kind of a reprogramming exercise.
23 24 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, the sooner, the better.
O.60,al Roporters, Inc.
The more straightened out we can get in that regard, the better 25 i
5-5 jwb i
17 i
off.we will be.
And perhaps we can go forward with the budget
)
testimony early in February.
2r l
MR. BARRY:
I hope to have it all completad so we j
3.
I i
will have our baseline to talk from.
4 i
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Do you have in here the total l 5
i I
authorization and appropriation?
6 MR. BARRY:
Not on this handout.
I could certainly i
7 pr vide you with that.
8 The Authorization Committee, in effect, gave us 9
10 !
S3 million more than we requested in our budget.
That is, we came out with about $330 million, and they gave us $333 million, 11 and we actually came out with the Appropriation Committee at 12 i
S322 million.
i 13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So thers is about an $11 mil i
l ja lion dif ference be tween authorization and appropriation?
15 MR. BARRY:
That's right.
16 t
And then we have a pay raise on top of that, and 37 an unobligated balance on top of that.
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Could you give me just one 19 sheet which spreads this out?
20 MR. BARRY:
Yes.
We have that.
I just do not have 21 it with me.
22 MR. GOSSICK:
Okay for Part II?
23 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yes.
24 co-Fedual Reporters, Inc l MR. HALLER:
I believe you also have in front of you 25 I
5-6 jwb 18 i
the handout entitled " Initial '79 Operating Plan."
Page 1 of i
that handout is the outline for my discussion this morning.
2 First, I will talk a little about the background.
3 I
Second, we will talk about the new-approach 3
decision unit reviews.
We will try to discuss both the pilot 5
6 pr gram, as well as operating plans.
We will talk a little bit about the next steps, and then we'll go through a summary of f
7 the initial FY '79 operating plans, as well as issues that have 8
been developed by the staff.
9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Excuse me.
Just as a point 10
'l
' of clarification, what 3 c the :eason we are hearing this at this!
11 m ment?
12
- I And the related question is
If there is some time 13 ja pressure, I understand it.
If there is no time pressure, why l
15 didn't we get this so we could look through it before the hearing?
1 16 I
MR. GOSSICK:
The request was for a briefing to see j7 how the Commission could best track the decision units as they 18 19 changed throughout the year, and to give you, as best we can this morning, where we are in that process.
20 It wasn't worked up as a paper, and perhaps we are 21 tardy in getting the charts out.
22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I would appreciate it, just as 23 24 Len gave us the charts yesterday.
It just helps to be able to DFeosrtl Reporters, Inc. !have gone through them and gotten some general sense'and feel.
25 l
l
d-7'jwb i
19 '
MR. GOSSICK:
That is my fault.
We made a lot of changes, and we just did not get them finished in time.
2 i
MR. HALLER:
We got them reproduced last evening and f 3.
I i
brought them down this morning.
4 As part of the background, prior to FY '79 there were 5
before the Commission periodic financial reviews in which 6
spending was tracked over time versus the budget.
Financial
,l 7
t information was arrayed by Congressional Budget element by l
8 l*
office.
9 10 !
Now " budget elements" are not the same as " decision 11 units."
At least they have not been in the past, although now l
l we're working with the Comptroller's Office and the offices to i
12 have those aligned so that they are the same, or at least nearly 13
- 4 j
the same.
There were also, for the Commissioners, occasional 15 16 briefings on MBos.
There is, as you know, the Agency-wide I measure for objective structure.
Recently, the Commissioners j7 have asked for a decision unit review to relate plans to 18 39 accomplishments.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
The MBOs are a stranger to 20 me.
That must have been pre
'78.
f 21 MR. HALLER:
Yes, sir.
As you recall, we talked a 22 little bit about that when we briefed you before.
The structure 23 24 i for MBOs was first put in place in the fall of 1976 when there ca.Fecorst Reoorters, Inc. I I
25 were 12, or ll-or-so agency-wide objectives established at that i
5-8 jwb 20 I
time, and I believe another one has been added subsequent to 2
that.
l 3l COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But these occasional briefings 4
in fact must have died off not later than --
5 MR. HALLER:
I don't know when the last one was, but I 6
I have been told that there were briefings on such subjects as 7
waste management, and this type of thing.
i
\\
8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Item-by-item, sure; but that !
9 wasn't a review of the MBOs.
10 l MR. GOSSICK:
What we did, Commissioner Bradford, was; II to send down periodically the MBO revisions and say, in our i
I2 transmittal letter, what these were.
I3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What is the status of the j
l #-
MBO program?
15 MR. GOSSICK:
This, in large measure, takes the 16 place of the MBO.
17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
So we will be abandoning the i
18 MBO approach?
I9 MR. GOSSICK:
Unless the Commission feels there are 20 still areas where it is useful to do that.
We are sort of 21 hoping to get a singular way of treating this, and I think we 22 can do this, but that will depend upon your judgment after you 23 see this this morning.
24 The waste management area, one thing this may not OFemrol Flmorters, Inc.
25 do is:
It is something that cuts across all of the offices.
5-9 jwb 21 i
We either have to sit down and sort of review the entire pro-
)
2 Igrem, or sift out the decision units that all relate to the 3
degree that other offices are involved, and brief them on a I
l comparable basis.
4 I
I think we can do that.
5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
In a sense, just as the classic 6
problem of organization these days is to reorganize like 7
l disciplines or like projects, and in some places organize both 8
l.
ways and call it " matrix management," it is a question of how l
9 l
10 ! best to organize this.
l l
i 11 And I wouldn't be surprised but what it is hard to l
12 do away with either system, but plunge ahead, rapidly.
l l
MR. HALLER:
On page 3, let me talk about the pilot
[.
j3 l
)
14 program.
In fiscal '79, which is the first part of our decision!
i 15 unit reviews in the new approach, there are in the pilot pro-i i
16 gram 14 decision units from the line offices and ADM.
l I
I l
3 These decision units cover about 30 percent of NRC l
I j7 18 resources, both people and dollars.
Information is arrayed by 1
19 decision unit, both in terms of planned accomplishments as well l
1 as resources by office.
20 What we are working on is the capability -- trying to !
{
21 i
develop the capability to track planned versus actual performance 22 i
in terms of dollars, people, and accomplishments themselves.
23 24 Now this pilot program is the skeleton for a more j
l se..r oya nexnen, ine. !advanced system, a more comprehensive capability that we hope 25 I
i i
5-10 jwb i
22 to have in place in FY 1980, but we can't do it this year.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Do'you take these one at a 2
i time?
j 3l fl MR. HALLER:
Yes.
What we do is we have selected 3
I 14 decision units from the offices.
We are trying to break 5
6 them apart, in terms of fine-grained detail, and relate both what it is that the offices say they are going to do, as well 7
t as the resources that they say they are going to use to do it.
3 And we establish that in the beginning as a baseline, 9
10 ! and then during the year we would try to determine whether the i
11 accomplishment actually was obtained.
And also, we would try 12 to determine what amounts of resources were spent to obtain it.
13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, I'm just anticipating l
ja where you are going.
And I may be wrong, but what you are doingl l
15 is focusing on smaller pieces of the organization, and seeing 16 whether they are functioning the way they ought to be.
17 Whereas, I think the problem should be more in the 18 other direction:
to see if the larger questions are handled 19 the way they ought to be, where a number of offices are involved 20 1 and the business is all coordinated and we are heading down the I
I 21 road dealing with the problems as we should be.
i 22 MR. GOSSICK:
That goes back to kind of the MBO 23 l approach, where you take something that does cut across the 24 board.
And it may well be that the Commission, rather than DF:cmI Rmonm. inc. I 25 going through office-by-office and tracking their decision unit
5-11'jwb 23 performance, will' prefer to take topics like the overview
)
briefings that we have had from time to time on waste, and 2
export-import business --
l 3
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I think you are confusing --
4 I
I think there is a confusion between what you do with management 5
t 1s.
In that, it is not "either/or."
As I understand it --
6 if I understand this correctly, this is a technique to try and l
7 i
make sure that offices that have received budgets and have 8
indivi' dual plans, that some mechanism for tracking them -- that [
l 9
is an important thing.to make sure that it is being done, but 10 it doesn't really address the more fundamental question of the jg overall Agency's mission and 'whether it's objections are (a) 12 clear; (b) in a way that the individual programs that are hare l
13 being tracked mesh into those objectives; and then (c) whether l
ja those objectives are being tracked.
15 And that is what I think Vic is talking about, l
16 which is, in a way, a broader and probably a more fundamentally j7 important issue, but this is critical toward, once you have got 18
$300-and-some million, almost 3000 people doing things, to 39 try to keep track of what you're doing.
20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, in particular it is impor-21 tant to give these, the units in which we c&rry out the annual 22 budget review and preparation of the proposal for the next year, 23 that is the current rule of the game.
24
-c}Fedgal Resnrters, Inc. !
Peter's suggestion some time ago was that, rather 25 i
i I
5-12 jwb 24 1
than doing this once a year and then not see any of these deci-2 sion units until next July or August, was that about a couple of 3
times a year, every four months or so, to have a summary of I
I 4
how these things are going along.
l l
5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That is very valuable.
That l
6 is keeping track of how you are spending your money, and how 7
your. resources -- your people and dollar resources are being 8
used.
9 It is a budget control that is absolutely necessary, 10 but it doesn't get to the more fundamental question of:
Are 11 the Agency's major mission accomplishments being addressed?
12 Because the decision-unit structure and the budgeting structure i I,
13 really don't at the moment, seem appropriate to lending itself
+
l 14 to that kind of approach.
15 You need some sort of track and crosswalk approach, 16 and there does have to be that larger scale set of objectives, 8
17 l policy guidance, and tracking system.
But that is dif ferent 18 than this.
1 19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
It is different, and it is 20 clearly different as long as you're talking about a pilot pro-21 gram.
22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Well, it's even different if i
23 you have all of --
24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
If you had them all, then I b.Fecoret Reporters, Inc.
25 think the process of focusing on them all thoroughly, or whatever, I
i l
5-1,3 jwb I
25; g
would be involved in the other, as well.
I
)
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
You would get involved, j
2 l
Peter, but I think you would need something else.
l 3
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
And in the process of being l
4 inv lved, I think it would inevitably set forth the other l
5 i
l gl access.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But you can get there faster l
7 by doing it directly.
8 COMMISSIONER GOSSICK:
But by having this as a tool, 9
10 !
think it enables us to take a topic like waste management and I
11 go into NMSS with those parts of the decision units that deal with waste, and the standards, and the parts of those decision l
12 i
units that deal with waste, and give you a cross-cut.
13 l
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But I think the Commission j
ja 15 needs what I would view as a policy and programming document 16 that lays out fundamental policy which addresses these more 1 major issues and provided fundamental programming guidance.
37 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, that is the management-by-18 19 objective tack.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
No, I don't think so.
Manage-20 ment by objective is still a set of individual items.
I am 21 really speaking more of a document which addresses the overall 22 policies of the Agency, and in some way addresses the Agency's 23 24 goals in the framework of what everything is that is being done.
c.Fecifsl Rsporters, Inc. I 25 MR. GOSSICK:
We have attempted that with the five-year t
5-A4.jwb 26 plan and finally found that it was of no earthly use to any-
)
- body, 2
i COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
One of the problems is, when 3
you get an objective that everybody agrees on, then it becomes 4
i kind of vacuous.
l 5
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I would say that my policy 6
guidance is that there are people that have to in some way 7
i i
agree that those are the objectives.
Everyone doesn't have to.
8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
That's right.
It tends to 9
10 ! be harder here than in an Executive agency.
COMMISSIONER AEEARNE:
But I think we could get j) agreement among the five of us that that is what the objective 12 should be:
the policy guidance.
13 MR. HALLER:
The Commission may wish to review the i
ja list of Agency-wide objectives that exist now.
33 MR. BARRY:
This tracking is just what it says.
16 This is what you said you were going to do during the year; and j.7 are you doing it?
18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
But I think we have proven 19 the point I tried to make.
That is, that you can't get very 20 f ar into that without starting to discuss the Agency's objec-21 tives.
22 MR. BARRY:
Yes, that's right.
But you can put it on 23 l 1
24 j a little higher level, and we can develop ways to do that.
I tea. Federal Reporters, Inc.
25 know what you are getting at.
5-1,5 jwb 27 MR. PEDERSON:
One of the problems with the MBO
)
, system is that it inherently tends to build from the bottom up, 2
and even the Commission-level objectives really build from the l
3l-bottom up, as opposed to the Commission laying out the policy.
l 4
COMMISSIONER GOSSICK:
I don't know that I completely l 5
i agree with that, Ken.
6 We got into the fact, a year or so ago, that decom-7 missioning was a topic that sort of left Len here, and that was j
8 from the top down.
We got that thing together, and we've got 9
10 ! the pieces -- whereter they are in the Commission -- pretty well saddled.
11 And it is tracking as an overall effort on a given 12 objective.
Sort of a major topic that was developed the other 13 l
14 way.
MR. PEDERSON:
But I would argue that that is almost i 15 16 the exception.
l l
COMMISSIONER GOSSICK:
It could be.
a j7 MR. PEDERSON:
We created an objective to umbrella 18 those.
j9 MR. HALLER:
On Chart IV, we discussed the second 20 aspect of the new approach -- which is what we have termed i
21
" Initial FY '79 Operating Plans."
22 I
i I
Now in contrast to the pilot program where we are 23 24 working on 14 decision units and trying to get into those in O Feceral Reporters, Inc.
detail, the operating plans really cover about 50 decision 25 i
m
5-16 jwb 28 units, which include those in the pilot program.
And these j
50 decision units are from the line offices.
2 The coverage here is about 70 percent of NRC's 3
people, and nearly all of the programs support dollars for the 4
l Agency.
3 Now when we are reviewi.n at this level, we are going
)
6 to have coarser information than.
..t the pilot program.
For 7
example, the resources.
We can get at those by decision l
8 I
level right now.
9 10 And secondly, the planned accomplishments just aren't 11 as detailed as what we are trying to work on in the pilot 12 program.
I MR. PEDERSON:
Could I ask -- You get at this problem 13 of cross-walking from office programs to broader issues.
Do ja the operating plans, as you foresee them, will they include j
15 16 references to related programs ongoing in other offices?
Will j
i' there be any -- will they be helpful in making these ties?
j7 MR. HALLER:
Probably not that helpful, Ken, because,
18 39 the operating plans are principally an array of the decision units in each of the offices.
20 What we have is cases where several of the offices 21 1
may be working on an objective like waste management.
We just 22 l
don't have the s tructure, other than in some sort of a collec-l 23 I
end 05 24 tion of decision units in order to get at those bigger topics.
co FOC,al Re:mrter* Inc.
-25
29 f67.06.1 gsh 1
The operating plan would be the vehicle for providing the 2
details of that, out then you would have to crosswalk against 3
it or aggregate, say, the waste management work areas out 4
of each of those plans in order to come up with the total 5
picture of what is going on in the agency on waste management.
6 MR. GOSSICK:
And norm, isn't it true that you can 7
go. within the decision units and pick up the things that 8
relate to what is going on?
9 MR. HALLER: That's right.
One of the capabilities 10 we're trying to develop is this crosswalk, and I think what j
11 would be very useful to us is f eedback f rom the commi ssion 12 in that regard.
If the commission desires those kinds of 13 things, we ought to be focusing more on them.
14 COMMISSIONER AHE ARNE2 Is that the normal way you 15 develop the budget items, with what, four or five digits and 16 then you can do that cro.sswalk?
17 MR. HALLER:
That is what we're trying to do. That's IS right.
19 COMMISSIONER AHE ARNE:
So you ought to be able to 20 automatically get those crosswalks --
21 MR. 00SSICK: Fully implemented.
I would see no 22 reason why we can't.
23 COMMISSIONER AHE ARNE: Why would you want to de velop 24 the system without having the ability to do the crosswalks?
25 MR. GOSSICK: Please understand.
This thing that ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
30 787.06.2 gsh i
Norm is discussing now is what can we do beyond the pilot 2
program in '79 to try to get a leg up on full inplementation, 3
plus do as much as we can in keeping ourselves and the 4
commission informed?
5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: As I recall from other i
6 agencies, the dif f.iculty usually comes about that some of 7
the program people aren't particularly haopy sometimes in j
S having some of their moneys identified with sone digits on 9
it, and that can then be cro ssw __.ced.
10 MR. PEDERSON:
But my understanding of the program.
11 however, would be that when you get it all implemented, that 12 the basic unit will be, the examination will be the decision j
13 u it.
n 14 MR. GOSSI CK: That's correct.
15 MR. PEDERSON: Now since the crosswalking is 16 inevitably going to involve you in having to chop up 17 MR. GOSSICK: That is done on the 14 pilot programs.
13 MR. PEDERSON:
You will have the ability to cut 19 those decision units.
20 MR. HALLER: That's what we're trying to de velop.
21 That is correct.
22 For e xample, if the commission wanted to know what all 23 was going on in waste managenent, several of the offices have 24 waste management related activities.
What we would have to 25 do is break into each of those of fices into decision units ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC, (202)347-3700
237.06.3 gsh I
that involved waste management and pull out those areas.
2 COMMISSIONER GILIls' SKY: hhat you're doing is 3
assigning a number of indices to your decision units and 4
then combine them in var ious ways.
5 MR. HALLER: That's right.
6 MR. BARRY: We do that to some degree now with 7
cross-cuts.
3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
We used to do it on 9
selected issues.
But where is the mechmnism that's going to fo us on the things we want to do and look back at these 10 c
11 dec ision units?
12 MR. HA LLER :
I'm not sure quite I understand what l'
you mean.
MR. BARRY: For each decision unit, of which we have about 50 some, right now we go forward in a budget time and 16 we say, he re is the reason we want this amount of dollars 17 and pecole to do these things.
And if you give it to them, 18 they will do it.
And it is our scheme that through the 19 year, you can look at those objectives and look at what 20 we're doing and measure what we're doing against those 21 objectives, stated objectives.
22 MR. GOSSI CK: But that decision unit would boil down 23 to so many guides and so many standards on the f ollowing 24 sub jec ts.
And that would be the detail within a decision 25 unit with a schedule and the rate at which resources are ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
32 787.06.4 gsn 1
allocated.
2 COMMISSI0 DER GILINSKY:
Let me ask you this.
If 3
we ask about something like, oh, I don't know, is the 4
f eedback system f or operating reactors operating properly 5
for ge tting information back into the licensing system and 6
out to the licensees, would that involve discrete units or 7
would you then have to break into some of the units, or what?
8 MR. HALLER :
That is a pretty tough one right there.
i 9
COMMISSIONER GIL I NSKY: That would strike ne as an 10 important objective.
11 MR. GOSSI CK: But it is not set uo in that context.
12 MR. HA LLER:
Well, the re are e lements of it, of 13 course, but first of all, I think we have to define what we 14 mean by the f eedback system and get some articulation of 15 what we mean when we say, is it working properly?
And then 16 when we come up with some measurable quantities, then we 17 can go into the varJous decision units that involve that 18 activity and try to find out what is haopening.
19 First, we have to define it, though.
20 COMMISSIO.1ER GILINSKY:
So it might a c t ua ll y 21 involve pieces of decision units.
22 MR. HA LLE R :
Yes.
23 COMMISS10 DER AHEARNE: One of the critical things in 24 de veloping this kind of system, since you are basically going 25 to be limited to a certain number of digits that can allocate ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
33 787.06.5 gsh I
to any one of these subelements, is to decide what types of 2
cross-cuts that you will want to do.
3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
You mean labels of various 4
kinds.
5 COMMISSI0 DER AHE ARNE: Right.
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You might end up having an 8-digit 7
number, or something like that, that identifies a decision unit and a particular element of the decision unit and 9
certain charac te r tstics.
10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: It is like the genetic 11 code.
'l 2 COMMI SSIOJER AHEARNE: Once you have chosen tnet, 13 you have really chosen what kinds of cross-cut information you 14 can extract automatically.
And you have also, in a way, 15 chosen the way data is going to oe kept.
16 It doesn't mean that you can't get other information, but 17 it means that additional inf ormation is a manual search.
18 MR. GO.SSICK :
And you should be sole to recognize 19 why some thing didn't ha ppen, where those resources went, and 20 what else got accomplished.
21 MR. SARRY: Keep in mind this little program here is 22 a resource tracking system and it has its limitations. It 23 is a resource tracking system.
It says what you're going to 24 do and what it's going tc cost you and wh at you did.
25 COMMISSIOJER GILINSKY: In other words, you are ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
34 187.06.6 gsh I
providing some of the tools that can ce used f or looking 2
at agency problems and objectives.
3 MR. HALLER: That's correct, performance against 4
what was initially committed to be done and what actually 5
got done.
6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Of course you're going to 7
do.that, but I mean in terms of taking a larger view.
8 MR. HALLER: This would be the input into such a 9
thing.
10 COMMI SSI0 DER GILINSKY: But we don't at this po int ha e the mechanism for going beyond that.
11 v
12 MR. HALLER: No.
13 MR GO SSICK : Only on an ad hoc kind of a basis.
14 MR. HALLER: With the operating plants in '79, of 15 course, as we have discussad the capaoility to track.
16 perf ormance varies.
We can track most of the spending at 17 the decision unit level.
We can probably track some of the IS people through existing manpower systens and the 19 accomplishments.
20 Richt now we are only set up to track those which are in 21 the ; lot program.
22 I think it might be useful to say just a word at this 23 point about what is an operating plan.
I an going to use 24 an I&E, Office of Insoection and Enforcement, paner as an 25 example.
Right here is the operating plan, or at least a ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
35 187.06.7 gsh I
draft onerating plan f or the O ffice of Inspection and
}
2 Enf orcen ent.
l 3
Our v'fice, in connection with the comptroller, went in l
1 4
and tcck every decision unit, as well as the individual j
l 5
accomplishnents, out of the budget document that was 6
submitted to OMB about a year ago.
We la id that out, and 7
then for each decision unit, the comptroller put up there i
8 the dollars and manpower that we actually have available.
9 He also made whatever minor modifications he could to the i
10 accomplishments, but clearly, there is a lot of difference l
11 between what the o f fices originci y planned to do a year ago 12 and what they actually now can do, given the resources that 13 are available.
l4 So one of the joos we are working on is to try and work 15 with the of fices, and the o f fices have been looking et this 16 to try to align the present accomplishments with the 17 resources that are now availaole within those constreints.
18 Now next steps.
Mr. Gossick mentioned this and I also 19 want to be sure that we talk about it here.
We would like j
20 to obtain f eedback f rom the commission on this in terms of 21 are we giving you what you want? Is this the method of 22 presentation that you desire, or what method of presentation 23-do you desire?
What level of detail do you want to ;et 24 into this at, and so forth.
25 Right now, the way we are going is that the EDO staff and ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERSr INC. (202)347-3700
787.06.8 36 gsh 1
the offices are coing tc firm uo the plans and resolve 2
whate ver issues remain.
3 The intent is to provide written and updated plans like 4
this to the commission in January.
That will probably be 5
late January.
6 As Mr. Go ssick mentioned, the office performance appraisal 7
reports would be modified to include in those reports that 8
the office directors give their tracking of progress against 9
at lea st the pilot decision units that we're talking about.
10 Now the next thirdly report will be to the commission in 11 March or April, and at that time, we will talk about the 12 things like combining the financial reviews and,some of the 13 pilot program reviews and this type of thing.
14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Are you talking about going 15 through -- how many decision units do we have altogether?
16 MR. HALLER: It is on the next page, as a natter of 17 fact, Commi ssioner Gilins ky.
There are about 70 for the 18 agency overa.ll, but the 5 1.ine of f ic e s, the re is about 50 19 in those line of fices.
20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: So you are talking about 21 running through all of those with the commission.
22 MR. HALLER:
We.ll, this is the thing that we would 23 like some feedback on.
24 My personal opinion is that's going to be very difficult 25 to do.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
+..
37
?S7.'J6.V gsh 1
MR. BARRY: It will only take about 9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br /> of 2
your time.
3 MR. HALLER:
It depends uoon what level of detail 4
the commission wants to get into.
5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, I have my own view on 1
6 that, but I think this is a te.rribly inportant activity, but 7
one I would not expect the commission to get involved in 8
too frequently.
9 On the other hand, I'm very much. interested in looking at 10 across the board at a whole series of issues, probably le ss 11 than 70, but a fair number of them.
And at least for nyself.
12 I would think that would be the more interesting s oproach 13 for the commission.
14 COMMISSIONER AHE ARNE: My reaction would be that, 15 not at all di.ssimilar to Vic's. I believe this is a method 16 that has.to be put in place and I think that the tracking 17 that is able to be done with this is something that EDO has 18 to keep on top of and has to keep monitoring, and in 19 particular, be aware when there seems to be a strong problem 20 arising.
21 And at that tine, if the re is a very major problem, then 22 obviously, we would want to know about it.
23 But I think the more important thing f or us to focus on 24 is the larger, and I don't in any way mean to denigrate this 25 eff ort because I think it is en absolutely critical e fiort ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC, (202)347-3700
. "d i 4s 9
987'.06.10 38 "gsh l
that really is needed and certainly, would want to provide 2
whatever encouragement I can give to getting on with it.
j 3
But as far as the time that I think is important for us 4
to spend, it is on this broader, which are the sort of 5
integration of a number of these now.
6 You can't really take the step of being detailed resource analysis in the broader issue without having this kind 7
use 8
of a system.
It has to be a-tcol that goes into it.
9 But as far as our time, I think it would be better spent 10 on the broader i.ssue.
11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I'm sure that is true as a 12 general proposition. I think the first time I'm going to be 13 interested in going through it in about as much detail as 14 is possible.
But that is something I could do apart from 15 commissior +tme as a whole.
16 MR. GOSSICK: What I might suggest, as we get the 17 system in place, and even now we're doing it -- eech Friday 18 we have one or more PAR briefings at our staff meeting. And 19 we would be happy to turnish 'you with a schedule of these 20 things and let you know if there is one of high interest, 21 or whatever.
And you could Jit in with us on these things.
22 But back to the other point, Jhough.
The commission sort 23 of has to decide what are these cro;s-cuts or high interest 24 topics that you would perceive as impoltant for you to track 25 in some orderly way.
You c'n either do
't by an exception ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
...,'4 39 F87.06.ll gsh I
basis, which might not be all that helpf ul. But on the 2
other. hand, I gue ss that ls the kind of f eedback we're looking 3
for.
4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, I would try to 5
reiterate.
And I'm sure -- I know Norm knows-what I'm
]
6 talking about, and I think Lee and Len also know -- we need 7
a policy and planning guidance document that will end up 8
identifying those high interest areas.
9 MR. HALLER: Let me say a f ew words about Chart 6, 10 which is an a.ttempt to give an overview of the agency, as 11 well as show what parts of it are covered by the operating 12 plans.that we're talking about.
13 The operating plans that we have developed so f ar, of 14 course, apply to the five offices which are above the 15 subtotal line.
I want to draw your attention particularly 16 to the first column under " people," which.is titled 17 "Recuest to OMB."
18 This.is the last time that the planned accomplishments
)
19 were laid out in a form like this, and it was in the budget 20 documents that went~to OMB about a year ago.
21 Now these -accomplishments were based on the resources that 22 are si.own in that column.
Clearly, when we got the-23 Congre.ssional mark, we did not get the resources that we 24 thought we were going to get before, and you can see that, 25 both in terms of people, as well as dollars.
ACE-FEDERAL ~ REPORTERS, INC, (202)347-3700 m
~
\\
40 P87.06.12 gsh i
The refore, what has to be done now is t revise the 2
initial accomplishments to fit the resource constraints that 3
actually are laid on the agency.
And this is what the sta.ff 4
is attempting to do at this time.
l 5
The re is a footnote there that I think brings up one 6
general issue that we ought to talk about just briefly.
You 7
notice that as of about the end of October, we had on board 8
in the NRC about 2656 people, and there were outstanding some 9
80 commitments.
I 10 Now if we ar e going to do what we plan to do in Fiscal '79, 11 we are going t'> try to hire up to aoout 2788 people.
So we 12 have to move from where we are now to the end of Fiscal '79 13 strength that is shown on the chart.
14 However, on the first page, page 7, there are a couple of 15 issues that I think it is important to bring to the attention 16 of the commission.
First, there is the Executive Branch 17 freeze which is in eff ect, which involves a 142 hiring 18 limitation, as well as, and that covers. I should say open 19 vacancies, as well a.s attrition-type things, and we are 20 looking now at attrition over the year.
21 This covers, as I understand, open vacancles, as well 22 as vacancies created by a ttrition.
23 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: It doesn't cover the 24 commitments, though, if you had already made a commitment.
25 MR. GOSSICK2 That's right.
i ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
..u.
41 I87.06.13 gsh 1
MR. HALLER: That is correct.
2 MR. GOSSICK2 It is primarily attrition only.
We 3
can't take space for the spaces we haven't filled.
You take yo r strength as of the date the freeze went on.
4 u
5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE : That's right.
So the fact 6
that it shows 2788, the important number is 2750.
7 MR. GOSSICK: Right.
8 MR. HALLER2 Another point to bring up to the 9
commission is that there was a point in the Civil Service 10 Ref orm Act which talks about employment limitations.
11 In other words, to, paraphrase, it said that the total 12 civilian employees in the Executive Branch at the end of 13
> 79, '80, and '81 must not be greater than those at the end 14 of Fiscal '77.
15 I understand that Len Barry, and I believe his men are 16 working on what the impacts of these things are. But if there 17 ls an impact on the agency that we can't hire the numbers IS of people that we had originally forecast, then that is going 19 to be another impact on the accomplishments that are in 20 these plans.
21 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Ar" these for Executive 22 Branch purposes?
23 MR BARRY: We are not working on that impact 24 because OMB has already told us we are not going to need them 25 until
>.77.
They are going to sustain the 2788.
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC, (202)347-3700
4..
.787.06.14 42 gsh 1
MR. 00SSICK2 We still don't have a signal to go 2
ahead and hire, do we?
3 In answering the question, I guess it's just like we have 4
.to go to OMB with a budget. We are more or le ss bound by 5
this.
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE2 I think Vic's question was, 7
as far as the law is concerned, are we bound by it?
8 MR. PEDERSON: With regard to hiring?
9 COMMISSIONER AHE ARNE : If the Civil Service Reform 10 Act limits the Executive to this level, are we included for 11 the purpose of that act?
12 MR. KELLEY:
That is another one I will look up 13 for you.
14 VOICE: Yes, we are.
15 MR. HALLER :
What we thought we would do now is go 16 into the first of the oper.ating plans and a discussion of the 17 Office of Inspection and Enforcement on pages 8, 9, and 10 o f j
18 your handout, and then at that point, that discussion should 19 be illustrative of the remaining items that are in the 20 package.
And we can go into the remaining items in whatever 21 detail you would like.
22 First, on page 8, we have arrayed the key --
23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEs Let's see. Maybe people would 24 prefer to stop at this point and scan the balance of the 25 handout individually.
What is your pleasure?
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC, (202)347-3700 i
.4.
M87.06.15 43 gsh 1
MR. 00SSICKJ I would like to point out to you there 2
are some issues that I think it might be helpful for you 3
to look-at the issues that we are in the process of resolving, 4
and then we can-come back and tell you how we have resolved 5
-them. Or if we run into a problem we can't resolve, we wi.11 6
come back to you for guidance.
7
_But there are a number of rather sticky wickets here that 8
we have got to shake out before we can put together this 9
overall financial plan.
10 I'm just saying I think they are more or less 11 self-explanatory.
But I would suggest you night want to just 12 glance at some of those.
13 COMMISSIONER AHE ARNE: Do you mean like Chart 10?
14 MR._HALLER: Right.
That's an e xample that's 15 correct.
j i
16 MR. GOSSICK And 13, NASS. There's one for each of l
17 he major programs.
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I would almost gue ss. I would i
10 like to have a d.iscussion of each of those.
But I don't 20 think we have the time.
21 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Not if anybody wants to prepare 22 for this af ternoon and have lunch.
23 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Several of those do look v ry sticky.
That almost looks worth a meeting.
24 e
25 CHAIRMAN-HENDRIE: Why don't we break at this point, 1
ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
r'..
o 44 787.06.I6 gsh I
and we can pick this up, in particular, focusing on the 2
irsues.
3 All right. Thank you very much.
4 (Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m.,
the hearing receased for 5
lunch.)
6 7
8 9
10 Jl 12 13 14 15 16 I7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. (202)347-3700
59 ;
Q N.
o<
$ ?x 0
s b E
%D N
INITIAL FY 79 PROGRAM OFFICE OPERATIttG PLAtlS T
9 OUTLINE BACKGROUNO NEW APPROCH - DECISION UNIT REVIEWS
-- PILOT PROGRAM
-- OPERATING PLANS l
NEXT STEPS
SUMMARY
OF INITIAL FY 79 OPERATING PLANS AND ISSUES 4
l
2 BACKGROUND PRIOR TO FY 79 - PERIODIC FINANCIAL REVIEWS TRACKED SPENDING OVER TIME VS BUDGET FINANCIAL INFORMATION ARRAYED CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ELEMENT BY OFFICE OCCASIONAL BRIEFINGS ON MB0s RECENTLY COMMISSIONERS IIAVE ASKED FOR DECISION UNIT REVIEWS TO RELATE PLANS TO ACCOMPLISilMENTS 3
4 1
3 f1EW APPROACll - DECISI0ft UNIT REVIEWS (PILOT PROGRAtt IN FY 79) 14 DECISION UNITS FROM LINE OFFICES AND Adit
. COVERS.--30% OF NRC RESOURCES ($ AND PEOPLE)
INFORMATI0fl ARRAYED BY DECISION UtilT, BOTil PLAtlNED ACCOMPLISilMENTS AND RESOURCES, BY OFFICE CAPABILITY TO TRACK PLANNED VS ACTUAL PERFORMAtiCE ($, PEOPLE, 4
ACCOMPLISilMENTS)
SKELET0ft FOR MORE C0t1PREllENSIVE SYSTEM IN FY 1980 i
4
4 NEW APPROACil - DECISION UNIT REVIEWS (INITIAL FY 79 OPERATING PLANS) 52 DECISION UNITS (INCLUDING THOSE IN PILOT) FROM LINE OFFICES COVERS ~ 70% OF NRC PEOPLE AND 97% OF PROGRAM SUPPORT DOLLARS COARSER INFORMATION TilAN PILOT, (RESOURCES ONLY BY DECISION UNIT: PLANNED ACCOMPLISHMENTS NOT AS DETAILED)
FY 79 CAPABILITY TO TRACK PERFORMANCE VARIES:
-- DOLLARS - CAN TRACK MOST SPENDING BY DECISION UNIT
-- PEOPLE - CAN TRACK SOME THROUGil MANPOWER SYSTEM
-- ACCOMPLISilMENTS - CAN TRACK ONLY Til0SE FROM PILOT I
~
S NEXT STEPS OBTAIN FEEDBACK FROM COMMISSION EDO AND OFFICES FIRM UP PLANS AND RESOLVE ISSUES WRITTEN PLANS TO COMMISSION IN JANUARY MODIFY OFFICE PARS TO INCLUDE NEW APPROACil (USE PILOT DECISION UNITS)
NEXT "TilIRDLY" REPORT TO COINISSION IN MARCll-APRIL (INCLUDE PILOT UNITS, MID-YEAR FINANCIAL REVIEW) i
6 f
FY 1979 OPERATING PLANS RESOURCE
SUMMARY
NUMBER OF PROGRAM SUPPORT OFFICE DECISION UNITS PEOPLE a/
($ MILLIONS)
Request to Congressional Request to Congressional OMB Mark OMB Mark IE 7
860 715 4.8 4.1 NMSS 15 302 293 13.0 12.8 SD 6
160 157 7.0 5.8 NRR 9
635 631 18.2 14.6 RES 15 170 162 162.0 142.6 SUBTOTAL 52 2,127 1,958 205.0 180.9 NRC TOTAL 72 2,999 2,788 209.8 180.'
a/
NRC strength as of 10-25-78: 2656 on board + 84 conmitments 1
l 7
NO I
TAT I
M I
L TN S
E E
M U
Y S
O S
L I
PM L
E E
N T
N E
C O
Z A
S E
R E
M E
R R
P F
O F
D l
E i
E C
R V
N L
A E
O R
C S
B I
E V
R E
R N
V E
U I
S TU L
C I
E V
X I
E C
s e
i
8 KEY PLANS - INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT e OPERATING REACTORS 2000 INSPECTIONS AND 87,000 ONSITE Il0URS e REACTORS IN CONSTRUCTION 1550 IriSPECTIONS AND 60,000 ONSITE 1800RS e LICENSEE CONTRACTORS AND VENDORS 215 INSPECTIONS AND 7,500 ONSITE il0VRS e FUEL FACILITIES 190 INSPECTIONS AND 14,000 ONSITE Il00RS e MATERIALS LICENSEES 2950 INSPECTIONS AND 16,500 ONSITE IIGilRS e SAFEGUARDS 540 INSPECTIONS AND 30,000 ONSITE !!OURS ESTABLISil AND ASSIGN RESIDENTS AT 49 SITES (45 REACTOR AND 4 Fi1EL FACILITY) e
+
9 0FFICE OF INSPECTION AllD Ef1FORCEf4Ef1T
($ Millions)
FY 1979 FY 1979 FY 1979 Decision Unit Request to OMB Current Allotment Operating Plan MY
$PS MY
$PS MY
$PS
- Reactor Construction Inspection 262
.3 Reactor Operations Inspection 348 1.5 Vendor Inspection 35
.07 Fuel Facility and Materials Inspection 98
.6 Safeguards 99 1.5 Management Direction and Support il/A Inspector Training 18
.8 TOTAL 860 4.8 715 4.1 t
10 ISSUES - INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT e RESIDENT PROGRAM SCllEDULE ORIGINAL FY 1979 PROJECTION 49 SITES CURRENTLY Otl SITE 18 INSPECTORS DESIGNATED, NOT YET ON SITE 4 INSPECTORS ASSESSING CURRENT PROGRAM DIFFICULTIES s
e QUALIFICATIONS CRITERIA e PERSONAL IMPACTS e UPCOMIrlG COMMISSION PAPER ON NEW PROGRAM SCllEDULE CONTINUE TO PURSUE FULL IMPLEMENTATION
~
II KEY PLANS - NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS LICENSING CASEWORK RULES Oft URANIUM MILLIllG (PUBLISH FINAL GEIS AND INITIATE RULEMAKING)
FINAL GEIS ON HANDLING AND STORAGE OF SPENT LWR FUEL IILW REGULATIONS: LLW REGULATION DEVELOPMENT ( s 20% COMPLETE)
DECISION REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION OF PilYSICAL PROTECTION UPGRADE RULE DRAFT UPGRADE ltVLES ON MATERIAL CONTROL AND ACCOUNTING PARTIALLY IMPLEMENT RADI0 ISOTOPES LICENSING FLOW STUDY
. SPECIAL STUDIES, e.g.
- WASTE MANAGEMENT LICENSING AUTil0RITY
- INSIDER TilREAT CilARACTERISTICS l
4 i
~
12 0FFICE OF i;UCLEAR flATERIALS SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS FY 1979 REQUEST FY 1979 FY 1979 DECISION UNITS TO OMB
_C_URRENT ALLOTMEN_T_
OPERATING PLAN MY
$PS MY
$PS MY
$PS URANIUM FUEL CYCLE 27 1.7 SPENT FUEL 16 1.0 TRANSPORTATION 17
.8 RADI0 ISOTOPES 47
.7 OPERATIONS & TECH.
28
.7 IIIGil LEVEL WASTE MGMT.
CONTINGENCY PLANNING 21
.8 INFO. ANALYSIS & EVAL.
23 1.0 INTERN'l SAFEGUARDS 13
.9 SAFEGUARDS LICENSING 30
.2 SAFEGUARDS REG. IMP.
24
.7 SAFEGUARDS TECllN0 LOGY 13
.3 TECH. PROG. ANALYSIS POLICY MANAGEMENT TOTAL 302
$13.0 294*
$12.3**
INCLUDES 1 SPACE TRANSFERRED TO NilSS FROM ED0 STAFF DCES NOT INCLUDE $.5 TRANSFERRED TO ADf:lil FOR ADP SUPPOP,T
13 ISSUES - NUCLEAR MATERIALS SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS Program Support $ for Fuel Cycle and Waste Management Divisions Combined Limited to $9.7M with Mandated $5.9M for Waste Management (Changes Requires Congressional Approval) 10 Positions Specified in '79 Authorization Act to Speed up Waste Management Regulation Development (Not Clear Whether Added to Agency Total or Whether Must be Absorbed).
. At least $1M Needed for Current ilLW Program (Exact Requirements Not Yet Defined).
J k
4
14 KEY PLANS - STANDARDS DEVELOPf1ENT ISSUANCE OF PROPOSED RULE FOR LICENSING llLW REPOSITORIES.
COMPLETE PRIMARY REACTOR DECOMMISSIONING STUDIES.
CONTRACT FOR FEASIBILITY / PLANNING STUDY FOR AN EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDY ON llEALTil EFFECTS OF LOW LEVEL IONIZING RADIATION.
AMEND 10 CFR -21 REPORTING OF DEFECTS AND NONCOMPLIANCE TO REMEDY PROBLEMS WIIll "SUBTIER SUPPLIERS."
ISSUE 10 CFR -72 LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR SPENT FUEL STORAGE IN AN INDEPENDENT SPENT FUEL STORAGE INSTALLATION REVISE 10 CFR 50.55a on ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODES.
PLANNED ACCOMPLISilMENTS FOR 1979 INCLUDE 36 REGULATIONS,1 EIS, 71 GUIDES, 24 NUREG REPORTS,10 PETITIONS FOR RULE MAKING AND 12 STANDARD REVIEW PLANS
OFFICE OF STAi1DARDS DEVELOPMENT 15
($ MILLI 0ftS)
FY 1979 FY 1979 FY 1979 DECISI0fl UNIT REQUEST TO OMB CURRENT ALL0lMEllT OPERATING PLAN fiY
$PS MY
$PS MY
$PS Power Facility Standards 73 1.9 Fuel-Facility & Material Stds.
36 1.6 Facility Operation and Material Utilization Standards 29 1.0 Safeguards Standards 17 2.5 International Standards 5
0 Management Direction & Support TOTAL 160 7.0 157 6.8 i
't 1
I t
I
16 ISSUES - STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT i
ACUTE Sil0RTAGE OF TECilNICAL STAFF (PRIMARILY IN REACTOR ENGINEERING) CAUSED BY:
- ABNORMAL NUMBER OF TRANSFERS TO OTilER OFFICES
- DEMANDS OF NRR ON DES STAFF
- IIIRING FREEZE
- LIMITED AVAILABILITY OF TECilNICAL SPECIALISTS NEED POLICY GUIDANCE FROM EPA IN SPECIFIC AREAS I
s 1
6
17 KEY PLAflS - HUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION Decrease Backlog of Licensing Actions.
Resolve Unresolved Safety Issues and Implement.
Complete Review of all Operating Power Reactors to Insure Compliance with 10 CFR 73.55.
Work Toward a 24 Month Safety and a 16 Month Environnental Review for 50 Per Cent of New cps Tendered in FY 1979.
Issue SERs Six (6) Months After PSAR is Docketed for a Limited Number of Cases, i.e., Palo Verde 4 & 5 and American Electric Power (Western Virginia).
1 Process at least 70 Topical Reports in FY 1979.
1 l
l
)
18 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
($ Millions)
FY 1979 FY 1979 FY 1979 Request to OMB Current Allotment Operating Plan Decision Units MY
$PS MY
$PS MY
$PS Operating Reactors -
Routine Effort 73 2.8 Operating Reactors -
Nonroutine 37 1.2 1
SEP 32
.4 Safeguards 16
.8 Casework 213 4.9 Technical Projects 210 7.1 Advanced Reactors and Non-Power Reactors 10
.8 Standards Assistance 22 0
Training and Correspondence 22
.2 Director's Office Total 635 18.2 631 14.6
19 ISSUES - f10 CLEAR REACTOR REGULAT10ft Operating Reactors Effort Increased to Reduce Backlog of Licensing Actions, Particularly License Anendments.
Casework Effort Increased Due to Large Increase in Labor Rates.
Generic Issue Effort Reduced to Support liigher Priority Tasks.
Standards Effort Reduced to Support fligher Priority Tasks.
~
20 KEY PLANS - NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH Complete UllI Testing in Semiscale
. Complete Commission-Directed Electrical Connector Tests Complete First Three Nuclear Tests in LOFT Complete RELAP-4/ MOD 7
. Release TRAC-PlA to Public and Compare Predictions Against LOFT Data Complete the Licensing Audit Code Package (WRAP)
Complete Vapor Explosion Experiments and Provide Information on Molten Core Interactions Perform 310CA and 2 RIA Tests in PBF Complete In-Pile Creep Tests and Issue Report Validate Warm Pre-Stressing to Preclude Vessel Fracture Under Thermal Shock Recommend Design Guides for Crack Arrest in LWRS A Best Estimate Tornado Model Will Be Developed for all Regions of the U.S.
A Complex Monte Carlo Seismic llazard Code vill be Developed Issue Super System Code (SSC) for Fast Peactors Perform Fast Reactor Fuel Aerosol Validation Tests i
21 KEY PLANS - NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH - CONTINUED L~
Continue to ~ Provide a Verified Technical Basis for Predicting Operational Characteristics i
and Assessing the Environmental Impacts of Nuclear' Power Plants i-Identify Sources and Effects of Fuel Cycle Occupational-Radiation Exposure i
Initiate Assessment of Adequacy of Existing High Level Waste Predictive Models and Data l
Determine Characteristics of Leachates in Shallow Burial Trenches Provide luiormation for GEIS on Mill Tailings Provide First-Generation Safeguards Effectiveness Evaluation Methods to User Offices Provide a Gericric Accounting Evaluation Method for the MCA Upgrade Rule Provide Supporting Risk Analysis and Evaluation on Generic Issues Issue Interim Report on Risk Assessment'of High Level Waste Disposal Train Various.NRC, DOE and Contractor Employees in Reliability and Safety Analysis, Human Error Analysis and Quantitative Reliability Analysis l
2 l
i Speci fy Design Criteria -for Improved Decay Heat Removal Systems
-l Improve Value/ Impact Assessment Methods for Improved Reactor Safety Concepts j
1 3
}
i 1
4
'22 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH
($ MILLIONS)
FY 1979 FY 1979 FY 1979 Request to OMB Current Allotment Operating Plan Decision Units MY
$PS MY
$PS fiY
$PS Systems Engineering 23 45.9 LOFT 16 28.0 Code Development 11 9.9 Fuel Behavior 15 24.1 Primary System Integrity 11 6.8 Site Technology 12 6.7 Fast Breeder Reactor 15 15.0 Advanced Converters 4
2.4 Reactor Environmental 9
4.5 E f fects Fuel Cycle & Environmental Research 15 9.1 1
Waste Management Sa fegua rds 13 6.2 i
Risk Assessment 26 3.4 Improved Reactor Safety Management Direction and Support Total 170 162.0 162 142.6
23 ISSUES - fiUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCil Resolution of FY 79 Proposed Reprogramming Actions by Commission and Congress Scope of Gas-Cooled Reactor Research in Light of FY 80 Budget Implementation of Improved Reactor Safety Research in Light of FY 80 Budget Effort Related to Alternative Fuel Cycles (NASAP/INFCE)
Implementation of Lewis Committee Recommendations Improve Effectiveness of User Requirement Procedure Through Clarifying Modification (SECY-77-1308,SECY-78-622) liigh Level Waste Management Resources in FY 1979 and FY 1980 T
u 4
I
.lj sj CHART 1 C
d y' 4
.aa5' o
COMPOSITION OF FY 1978 BUDGET yy AS APPP,0VED BY CONGRESS (Dollars in Thousands)
~~
b APPROPRIATED FUNDS b
DOLLARS PERCEtiT.
APPROPRIATION
$281,423 PAY RAISE SUPPLEMENTAL 5,000 BUDGET SUPPLEMENTAL 3,600
$290,023 BUDGET ALLOCATION i
PAY AND BENEFITS
$ 84,900 29 PROGRAM SUPPORT / EQUIPMENT 181,)69 62 ADM/ TRAINING / TRAVEL 23,954 9
$290,023 100 I
s
~
CHART 2 FY 1978 STATUS OF OBLIGATIONS & OUTLAYS (Dollars in Thousands)
NEW OBLIGATIONAL OFFICE AUTHORITY OBLIGATIONS OUTLAYS 2/
$ 15,117
$ 15,448
$ 15,449 SD 5,982 5,597 5,217 IE 9,119 8,432 8,639 NMSS 13,331 12,714 11,944
~
RES 133.225 134,480 133,407 PTS 1,712 1,515 1,338 PDA 1/
111,537 109,513 105,968 TOTAL
$290,023 + $2,465
$287,699
$281,962 Prior Year 1/ Includes Personnel Compensation and Benefits and Headquarters Administrative Support.
2/ Includes outlays incurred in 1978 for FY 1978 and prior year obligations.
i
CHART 3 FY 1978 UNOBLIGATED BALANCES (Dollars in Thousands)
Unobligated Balance Proposed Balance 1/
Commitments Available Uses NRR 291 291 1,060 SD 530 530
~
IE 1,486 400 1,086 NMSS 315 315 650 RES 73 73 1,400 PTS 321 321 PDA 1,789 456 1,333 TOTAL 4,805 5
856 3,949 3.110 2/
1/ Unobligated balance of Personnel Compensation, Benefits and Administrative Support is spread based on year end strength (FTP).
1 2/ $839 remains available for new unfunded requirements.
4 4
4
CHART 4 PROPOSED USE OF FY 1978 CARRYOVER FUNDS CONTAINED IN COMM ACTION PAPER (Dollars in Thousands)
UNFUNDED REQUIREMENT NRR OPERATING REACT 0RS...................................
900 TRAVEL...............................................
160 T0TAL..............................................
5 1,060 NMSS HIGH LEVEL WASTE MANAGEMENT..........................
650 J
RES IMPROVED REACTOR SAFETY..............................
400 RESEARCH ON NASAP REACTOR CONCEPTS...................
1,000 T0TAL..............................................
1,400
+
FY 1979 Comparison of NRC's Request to Congressional Action (Dollars in Thousands)
(Program Support $/ People)
~
NRC Authorization Appropriation Office of Standards Development Request Action Action
($/ People)
($/ People)
($/ People)
Low Level Radia tion Studies....................
0/ 3 500/ 3 0/ 3 B a l a n ce o f P rog ram.............................
6,800/154 6,765/154 6',800/154 Total........................................
$ 6,800/157 3
7,265/157 6,800,157 a
4 1
1 4
g I
1 i
T
FY 1979 Comparison of NRC's Request to Congressional Action (Dollars in Thousands)
(ProgramSupport'$/ People)
NRC Authorization Appropriation Office of Inspection and Enforcement Request Action Action
($/ People)
($/ People)
($/ People)
Fuel Facili ties and Materials...............
.565/ 98 565/ 98 465/ 98 Safeguards..................................
1,520/ 99 1,520/ 99 1,420/ 99 Balance of Program 2,225/518
^
2,225/518 2,225/518 T o ta l.....................................
$ 4,310/715 4,310/715 4,110/715 M
4 i
\\
l t
4 4
^
FY 1979 Comparison of NRC's Request to Congressional Action (Dollars in Thousands)
(Program Support $/ People)
NRC Authorization Appropriation Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Request Action Action
($/ People)
($/ People)
($/ People)
Technical Projects..............................
$ 5,800/126 5,800/126 5,000/126 Advanced Reactors...............................
850/ 10 1,200/ 18 1,350/ 10 B a l a n c e o f P ro g ram..............................
8,790/495
~
8,440/487 8,290/495 Total
$ 15,440/631 15,440/631 14,640/631 3
Includes $295K and 9 people for Alternate Fuel Cycle.
~
i a
1 i
1 m
a
1 1
FY 1979 3
Comparison of NRC's Request to Congressional Action j
(Dollars in Thousands)
(Program Support $/ People)
NRC Authorization Appropriation Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Request Action Action
($/ People)
(5/ People)
($/ People)
Transportation....................................,
750/ 15 5
750/ 15 450/ 15 Operations and Technology..........................
735/ 27 735/ 27*
735/ 27 1
International Sa feguards...........................
90/ 11 165/ 15 165/ ll Waste Management....................................
5,125/ 37 5,965/ 47 5,125/ 37 B a l a n c e o f P ro g ram.................................
6,320/203 6,045/189 6,320/203 Total............................................
$ 13,020/293 13,660/293
$ 12,795/293 Includes $85K and 8 people for Alternate Fuel Cycle.
I e
S i
l i
FY 1979 Comparison of ?!RC's Request to Congressional Action (Dollars in Thousands)
(Program Support $/ People)
NRC Authorization Appropriation Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Request Action Action
($/ People)
($/ People)
($/ People)
Systems Engineering............................
$ 35,600/ 21
$ 35,600/ 21
$ 33,000/ 21 4
Code Development...............................
9,900/ 8 9,900/ 8 9,330/ 8 Fuel Behavior..................................
22,800/ 9
~
22,800/ 9 22,500/ 9 Pri mary Sys tems I ntegri ty......................
8,400/ 8 8,400/ 8 7,600/ 8
~
12,600/1(15*,
Fa s t B reeder Reactors.........................
12,600/ 12 12,600/ 12 Advanced Converters............................
2,400/ 3 5,400/j a/
2,900/ 3 d/
S a fe g ua rd s.....................................
6,200/ 6 6,200/ 6 6,000/ 6 Waste Management...............................
4,100/ 2 7,000/ 7 5/
4,100/ 7 Risk Assessment................................
3,400/ 20 3,400/ 20 3,400/ 20 Improved Reactor Safety........................
-/ -
1,500/
E/
-/ -
Ba l a n c e o f P ro g ra m.............................
41,700/ 73 34,300/ 68 41,20Q/ 68 Total
$ 147,100/162
$ 147,100/162 S 142.630/162 Includes $135K and 1 person for Alternate Fuel Cycle.
5 4
i i
1
5 FY 1979 Comp 9rison of NRC's Request to Congressional Action (Dollars in Thousands)
(Program Support $/ People)
NRC Authorization Appropriation Program Direction and Administration Request Action Action
($/ People)
($/ People)
($/ People)
Office of Equal Employment Opportunity.......
20/ 3 95/ 4 20/ 3 0ther........................................
2,870/590 2,795/590 2,580/590 Total PDA..................................
$ 2,890/593
$ 2,890/594
-$ 2,600/593 Program Technical Support b
Office of International Programs.............
80/ 28 80/ 28
- 40/ 28,
0ther........................................
1,570/211 1,570/211 1,310/211 Total PTS..................................
$ 1,650/239
$ 1,730/239
$ 1,350/239 Include two people fior Alternate Fuel Cycle.
I
)
~ i