ML20195C159
| ML20195C159 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/25/1999 |
| From: | Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Donald D External (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9906080031 | |
| Download: ML20195C159 (1) | |
Text
3.D b UNITED STATES p
. I f
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20565-0001 5
tj k...../
May 25, 1999 CHAIRMAN Mr. Dennis Donald, Senior Associate The Keystone Center 637 Pine Street Boulder, Colorado 80302
Dear Mr. Donald:
Staff from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) have been attending meetings of the Keystone National Policy Dialogue on Commercial Nuclear Reactor Decommissioning issues since it began more than a year ago. We share the Center's desire to increase understanding of the impacts of restructuring of the electricity industry. We also look forward to the final report of the group and trust that it will provide information that will help Federal and State regulators to make better decisions on restructuring matters. At the same time, based on discussions with my staff, both staff and I would like to clarify the nature of our participation.
Ground rules for participation in the Dialogue require members to be involved as individuals rather than as spokespersons for their organizations and, as far as possible, work towards and agree to consensus recommendations in the final report. Based on our experience with such groups as consensus standards committees, we do not believe that it is advisable or appropriate for our staff to participate in this role.
The issues the Dialogue is addressing are wide-ranging and complex and include funding, management of spent fuel, public participation, standards for cleanup, low-level rhdioactive waste disposal, and others. A single NRC participant or even several members representing the agency cannot effectively address every issue and work on developing consensus recommendations. The NRC positions on many of these issues have involved years of staff analysis and consideration by the Commission. Many are policy issues, that, by their nature, are decided by the Commission, not the staff. Staff cannot realistically negotiate or formulate new policy issues that conflict with Commission direction. Therefore, it would be inappropriate for the staff to vote on new policy recommendations developed by the Dialogue.
However, in the future, we would offer to continue providing the background and context of the agency's point-of-view on issues discussed in the Dialogue, as our resources allow. In this way, we believe that the NRC can participate as Federal resources in these important discussions. We would, of course, appreciate the oppo'itunit'/ to review the final report to ensure that the NRC role in the discussions was clearly stated, as well as to provide you with a review of the accuracy of any material that described NRC regulations or policies.
Sincerely, l
O r m 33
/*
O AC/
9904,090031 990525 Shirley Ann Jackson PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR
,