ML20197A725
| ML20197A725 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/17/1998 |
| From: | Diaz N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Funches J NRC OFFICE OF THE CONTROLLER |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9803090359 | |
| Download: ML20197A725 (5) | |
Text
.
e ne%
/
o UNITED STATES
"'**'h'd j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
WAsMeweton, e.c. m comments.
February 2, 1998 g
NilsJL()az j 2/n /98
. n.....co.............
MEMORANDUM To:
Cha!rman Jh RELEASED TOTHE PDR N / "*h-)ff Chief Financial date
[ftJ FROM:
Jesse L Fur,ct.L
- r l
y tre e
SUBJECT:
FY 1999 PERFORMANCE P!.AN On October 2,1997, you submitted the proposed NRC FY 1999 Performance Plan to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Since that time, OMB has issued FY 1999 budget decisions and addnional Govemmon' Yde guidance for preparing performance plans. The attached Performance Plan is based on the budget decisions and this guidance.
According to OMB guidance, the Performance Plan should be submitted to the Congress in February 1998, soon after transmittal of the President's budget. We plan to submit the final version of the NRC's FY 1999 Performance Plan to the Congress by February 13,1998.
Therefore your comments on the attached draft are requested by Februar'r 9,1998. A redlinoletiikeout version of the revised FY 1999_ Performance Plan is attac wd for yciF7tyhw t
and comment.
CONTACT:
Sharon Connelty, OCFO 415 5646
Attachment:
As stated cc:
Commissioner Dicus Commissioner Diaz Coumissioner McGaffigan r
L J. Callan, EDO A. J. Galante, ClO J. Hoyle. SECY K. Cyr, GC
/
H. Bell,IG
. y, '[;
y;y
~
-; Ih o;,g F - 9 s,-
sg 9003090359 990217 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR l{R Hll%,II%$III h
e Comml==!mr Diar's ceTTe..".- on COMBECY ?!-M3r NRC's FY 1999 Performance PJan I approve the FY 1999 Performance Plan, subject to the resolutlori of the attached comments.
I am pleased that, since the previous version of this plan, the linkage between program outputs and the goals they support has been clarified, and look forward to further improvements during the FY 2000 strategic planning / budgeting cycle.
J
Attachment to Commissioner Diaz's Comments on COMSECY 98 003 Specific Comments on the FY 1999 Performance Flan 1.
Page 6 -In the first paragraph, the previous revision of the Performance Plan listed a total of 120 plants (106 + 14), while the current version lists 122 plants (104 + 18). The accuracy of the current figure should be venfied.
2.
There are several places in which the NRC Annual Report to Congress is listed as the source for performance Indicators. The sta.T should ensure that these references are harmonized with the actions that it will take, if a.1y, in response to SECY 97 288, ' Report to Congress on Abnormal Occurrences for Fisca! Year 1997.'
Specific references include:
- p. 7 Goals I.B and I.B.1
- p. 9 Goals ll.A.1, ll.A.1a, AND ll.A.2 p.10 Goal lil.A p.12 Goal IV.A p.14 Goal V.A
- p. 28 10th line
- p. 38 Last line.
3.
Page 16 - In the discussion for Goal VI.A. the plan to implement '.he Commission's decision on DSI 14 is listed as being due on December 31,1997. This date has been delayed, and the text should be revised to reflect the actual due date for the plan.
4.
Page 16 - In the last line, Appendix V should be referenced, instead of Appendix 1.
5.
Page 17 - In the discussion for Goal Vll.A, the due date of the regulatory excellence plan should be changed from December 31,1997 to reflect the plan's actual due date.
6.
Page 32 - The FY 1999 target for the last output measure (Assessment of the effect of high bumup fuel on source terms) states, ' Cont!nue assessment.' This is inconsistent with p. S8 of the FY 1999 Groen Book, which states that the assessment will be com91sted in FY 1999. The staff should resolve this inconsistency.
7.
Page 33 - At the top of the page, the target for the output measure for Development of Accident Sequence Precursor models is to ' Continue Deve!c, %nt.' This target should be made more specific.
t 8.
Page 35 - In the second line of the second paragraph, the phrase 'and are safeguarding special nuclear material'should be deleted consistent with the other deletions of references to safeguards in this section, 9.
Page 35 - Spell out USEC, "Recertification review for WGEGUS Enrichmont Cortorati.on "
l l
0 10.
Page 38 - Under Program Output: Medical Oversight, second sentence. "This eetivityregulation revision is being carried out pursuant to Commission direction..."
11.
Page 38 - First Line, title is not accurate and should be revised as follows to correspond to NUREG 1100:
Prcgram Output: lnt;;reted M; ten!; P;r';rm n;; Ev;!u;hn Program (MPEP) Agreement, State Program,'.. State Liaisor! and Performance Evaluation 17..
Page 38 - Output measure and FY 1999 Target for Agreement State Program shou!d be revised to be a timeliness goal as follows:
Output Measure:
Time _liness for.completionNumber of Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) reviews of Agreement States and NRC Regional Offices ecmp';ted.
FY 1999 Target:
Comp';t; 10 Agr;;mer! St;t; lMPEP rev::ve;, ;nd 2 NnO regier.; lMPEP rev::ve; ",0%.of finalIMPEP reports will be issued,within 104 days from the last pafof the review and no'tMPEP report will be lssued rnore tha.n;180_ days from;the last day.of tht!!
levieWi 13.
Page 38 - General comment on Agreement State Program, State Liaison and Performance Evaluation. There are no output measures for State Liaison program.
14.
Page 38 - Under Program Output: Independent Performance Evaluation, first paragraph, fourth line. The sentence should be revised as follows:
"This eetetyprogarn also ircludes mainte.ance of the..."
15.
Page 41 - Under Program Output: Materials Technical Training, last paragraph, second sentence should be revised as folkws:
" Training is also made available to Agreement State inspectorspersonnel.
16.
Page 48 - Under Program Output: High-Level Waste Repository Regulation, first full paragraph, first se itence should be revised as follows:
"Another ;;tivitylhis;p!ygrant will alsobe4e conduct observatic '
' audits..."
17.
Page 46 - Under Program Output: High Level Waste Repository Regulation, bottom of the page, FY 1999 Target. Although the target to "Begin review of DOE's draft environmentalimpact statement" and "Begin post-closure SRP..."is dependent on the DOE submittals, it will take very little to meet this goal as currently written for FY 1999.
A more specific target should be developed and placed in the Performance Plan.
18.
F.ge 47 - Under Program Output: Regulation of Low LevelWaste, second paragraph, third line. This sentence states tha-
'/elopment of the Branch Technical Position on LLW Disposal Facility Performance Assessmcat is a sperMc activity related to rulemaking. To er sure that readers are not confused about the fact that BTPs are not
{
rulemakings, the sentence should be revised as follows:
]
A :;;d'; ;tl#.-it; 4to RAT,;kl 4ln' order to maintain the regulatory i
jramework.for low-level waste disposalithis prograni will be4he devclopTa,; c' the Brarch Technical Position on LLW Disposal Position on LLW Disposal Facility Performance Assessment.
19.
Page 98 - In the first FY 1999 target statement, the phrase 'of 1996" should appear with the ' Clinger-Cohen Act' inside the parentheses.
)
1.
-