ML20202D857
| ML20202D857 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/19/1997 |
| From: | Mcgaffigan E NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Hoyle J NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20202D804 | List: |
| References | |
| SECY-97-183-C, NUDOCS 9712050170 | |
| Download: ML20202D857 (8) | |
Text
- - - _- - __-_-
<.1 ep;;
NOT ATION VOTE l
RESPONSE SHEET l
TO:
John C. Hoyle, Secretary FROM:
COMMISSIONER MCGAFFIGAN
SUBJECT:
SECY-97-183 - CRITCRIA FOR FUNDING AGREEMENT STATE TRAINING, TRAVEL AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Approved i ) c d -
o Disapproved Abstain Not Participating Request Discussion COMMENTS:
a-s.
SIGNATURE j[
U
!/9 17 Release Vote IX /
DATE
/
Withhold Vote /
/
Entered on "AS" Yes X
No
?!s*98??8?lsh*'
c.
CORRESPONDENCE PDR
I COMMISSIONER McGAFFIGAN'S COMMENTS ON SECY-97-183:
I approve the staff's proposed approach for addressing Agreement State requests for technical assistance on a case-by-case basis.
I approve the staff's proposed r.riteria for evaluating Agreement State requests for NRC funding of training and travel subject to the following comments.
I continue to believe that the ultimate solution to NRC funding of Agreement State training and travel is for NRC to request that Congress enact legislation to exclude these NRC costs from the fee base end provide a separate appropriation to cover them. to this SECY paper states that "the NRC staff has prepared an updated request to be sent to the Office of Managen'ent and Budget (OMB) requesting that two p.rograms (International and State programs) be taken off the fee base " When that long-delayed fee paper is finally presented to the Commission. I intend to vote to move the 5450.000 budgeted for Agreement State training and travel (and most. if not all, of International Programs) in the FY 1999 request to the general fund appropriation.
If we can achieve that shift, equity issues will largely be resolved and much of the extraordinary policy attention that now must be given to a relatively small expenditure of funds will no longer be required.
I also suggest several changes to the criteria in Attachment 2 in the attached marked-up pages. The most important of these changes relates to the relative priority for class admission of students from Agreement States that ultimately meet the criteria for NRC support.
The ED0's memorandum of October 3. 1996.
states that Agreement States that are willing to pay tuition will receive priority in class admission.
I believe that policy should be preserved.-and further that those Agreement States that meet the criteria for NRC funding support and those Agreement States that attend on a space available basis and pay the travel costs should be considered equal for class admission selection.
l i
CRITERIA TO EVALUATE AGREEMENT STATE TRAINING AND TRAVEL FUNDING NEEDS By SRM dated March 19,1997, the Commission directed the staff to develop criteria to determine when Agreement States have demonstrated that State funds are not available or cannot be used for the purposes of training, travel, and technical assistance. The direction was that the criteria should be stringent enough to provide adequate assurance to the Commission that the State has thoroughly explored funding alternatives available to the State and a determinatien by a high ranking State official (e.g., State agency head or chief financial officer) has been made that funds are riot available, in such cases, States should also explore partial funding of costs. Such an e9proach must be designed to ensure that such certifications are not " pro forma" and that use of NRC-licensee funds for these purposes is in the public interest. The staff's proposals should provide for funding and should be provided to the Commission in a time frame that would allow implementation of the modified policy beginning in fiscal year 1998. Otherwise, training should be made available on a " space available" basils with Agreement States funding their own travel and per diem costs.
The staff has considered the area of technical assistance (defined for the purpose of NRC funding support as NRC inspection of Agreement State licensees or NRC completing Agreement State licensing actions) to Agreement States in the conduct of their licensing and inspection programs. Since the NRC has not been requested to provide any such direct technical assistance in the last 3 years, the staff has removed any further discussion of technical assistance from the criteria and will address any such requests on a case-by-case basis if they occur in the future. Assistance on other technical matters should be a cooperative effort among regulators and cost reimbursement is not a consideration.
The staff understanding is that as a minimum the NRC will make training available to the Agreement States on a space available oasis with NRC funding (at least in part) for States that have met the criteria developed by the staff. Students from an Agreement State agreeing to pay tuition for attendance at NRC training courses ud zi :: tr CL::s
_ e!9
-~4 =am *u"~;
x;;:S 40 n N"O would be considered the vs..
- m. _
same as an NRC student for purposes of selection. Slots remaining after selection of NRC and Agreement State students in the above category would be filled by Agreement State staff on a " space available" basis. State staflattending on a " space available" basis would pay all travel and per diem costs
- %C44 b Oo8e 5 Nde^h Fne sus vi th y
a.pprevd. Wo% M M5s oc;olb d Mk 594-6 AMC.
The staff will schedule the training courses to meet N C tr uning needs and tne needs of Agreement States tnat will pay any tuition, costs or[Aceive NRC approved funding suppc:t x
for training and associated trave! costs cp6 tinge kt on availability of funds-D*We!
n r i ::: 01 f.;;: ; nent Ot;t; eJm t attend on oniy o ":;tre eveh*" huit would-not-brn.m.i.d;;;d m an:n yat mig}39 The staff does not plan to schedule m e p!:-
additional courses in the future less the de and would fill the additional courses.
ha ATTACHMENT 2
[
w if(
x y ero g
{*'"'
Q f tf d w tcC L
Has the State evaluated other alternatives to meet their training need?
Did the State find no alternatives or the alternatives do not meet State needs?
d.
Documented financial information that includes y e&q (q.w: hu. n we %pu0 The numbe of individuals that need specific training courses not available in-y house.
The number of courses and spaces in courses that the State can fund and those that cannot be funded given the current budget allocation for training and travel.
The total training and travel budget approved for the RCP and the portion of this budget allocated for the radioactive materials program. This should be presented in total dollars and in the percentage of the budgeted amount and the percentage of the anticipated need.
2.
DEMONSTRATION OF STATE NEED FOR NRC FL NOING The Agreement State should submit a certification by a high ranking official (agency a.
head, chief financial officer, or an equivalent official) that funds are not availabic.
This would need to be done each State fiscal year following the legislative approval and signing of the budget appropriation for the RCP.
This certification should include certain demonstrations by the RCP such as:
The State has authority to spend funds en training and out-of-State travel, or has requested such authority.
The budget submitted to the legislature for the RCP included requests for the funds to meet the training and travel needs of the program.
The agency management supported the budget submittal.
The legislature has taken action on the budget submittal, but failed to approve the budget request in the training and travel area, or approved only a portion of this budget area.
b.
The submission of the demonstration of need will need to be done each State fiscal year, at a minimum, following the legislative approval and signing of the budget for the RCP. This would allow the maximum time for NRC planning before actual training or travel requests would be submitted. The Statep submit background x
information used to develop their budget, if the budget dojts not contain a line for training and travel.
{W 3
~
The timing for the State's submission of the information needed by NRC to c.
complete evaluation of the request should be as soon as possible after the legislature or administration approval decisions or when another unfunded training need is identified. Considerations include:
Most State fiscal years do not coincide with the NRC fiscal year. Thus, the NRC will need to allocate funds for States based on the State fiscal year or it may leave gaps in the training for individual States.
When a State receives a decision on their budget and funding for training and travel and they identify it's not sufficient, they willlikely not have much time prior to the beginning of their fiscal year.
Any other time they identify a training need which cannot be met or fulfilled, they willlikely not have any significant lead time.
3.
EVALUATION OF STATE REQUESTS / DEMONSTRATION OF NEED AGAINST NRC CRITERIA yQ W& fp SOA-s k fLJ cW C+lndw.) %) d-The NRC sty ould first evaluate the State's request / demonstration of need for NRC X
funding tobeteun nu whether e.c StetJhas legal authority to spend State funds for training and travel. Requests from States that have authority, or have requested authority, would then be evaluated against a set of additional criteria. The flow diagram (see page 61 presents the logic flow to be applied. The evaluation will be made against the following criteria.
Evaluation Criteria The State has submitted a copy of its training and qualifications policy and program a.
which documents the objectives of this policy and program are consistent with NRC Inspection Manual Chapter 1246, Formal Qualification Programs in the Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Program Area, b.
The Agreement State has legal authority to spend State funds for training and travel out-of-State. In cases where en Agreement State does not have legal authority, the Agreement State hes reque aed authority to spend State funds for out-of State training and travel.
Agreement State programs that do not have authority tr) spend State funds on training and out-of State travel, and do not request such authority, will not be
.unded, and would not be evaluated further. NRC would further evaluate requests from Agreement States having legal authority and Agreement States that have requested, but have been denied, authority to spend State funds for this purpose.
Requests would be evaluated applying each of the additional criteria below.
Amounts would be based on NRC review of the State's estimate based on their documented program.
4 i
-____________m.____
4 The Agreement State has requested funding to cover the required training and travel c.
funds, but was denied funding for training and travei cut-of-State, in whole or in I
- part, d.
The State agency head (cabinet level) or chief financial odicer for the State has made and submitted a determination that State funds are ret available for trainir; and out-of-State travel, or are insufficient as described in Cnterion e. below. Af ter review, NRC concurs that funds available for out-of-State training and travel are insufficient to sa:isfy Agreement State program training needs, The Agreement State RCP has limited funds. Of the requested budget amount of e.
for Agreement State program training and out-of State travei, the State funded
, and, therefore, the RCP can fund percent of its needed training and travel expenses.
The NRC will evaluate each Agreernent State's funding request that submits the information needed to make the above findings. The approval for full or partial funding will be limited to the State's budget period (1 or 2 years). Without submittal of new budget information, the NRC funding for training and travel for that State will terminate. The NRC will considet unanticipated 9aining needs when fully supported by documentation and cost estimates, if the need covers several years, the need should be incorporated into the next year's budget estimate for the RCP.
4.
DETERMINATION OF AVAILABILITY OF NRC FUNDS Approvals for NRC funding support for Agreement State train:'g and associated travel costs will be in the form of identifying numbers of students attending designated NRC sponsored courses without the need to pay tuition. Travel costs will be paid by NRC through the approval of NRC travel authorizations and vouchers for invitational travel, if the total cost of valid requests for training and assuciated travel funding support from NRC exceeds the NRC budgeted amount, the approvals will be prorated using the following considerations:
(
Evenness of distribution, such as assuring that all requesting States have the same et a_
percentage of their total need satisfied.
gn,1 Urgency of need. Ranking distribution based on 11) new staff meeting minimum training requirements, (2) specialty training to meet a program deficiency. (3) special training to broaden the program depth, and (4) refresher training for experienced staf f.
The NRC staff considers that the number of approvals, based on the percentage of the training need being met togethet with urgency of need, as the most equitable method of distribution of funds if the total need exceeds the budgeted amount. The staff intends to provide approvals on a course by course basis and will use the information submitted by the State to determine, in conjunction with the State, the highest priority courses for each State.
5 1
LOGIC FLOW DIAGRAM FOR FUNDING OF AGREEMENT STATE P
TRAININGgRAVEL-AND TECHNICAL ASSiSTANGE OAS-Does the State have a documented N0 training and qualifications policy and program that contains objectives consistent with innC 12467 kf n
Does the State ha Iuthority N0 Has the RCP u
No NRC NO funding to fund training veland a requested n
technicalissistenelf?
authort fund assistance.
trainin ravel andtehn!ce!*
YES
-eesiehnee?
YES Has the State request 9d NO
(]
funding for training 7avel,#.
end techn!ce! :::!:t:ne??
=
YES
' I h Il 9,as ud g
Was the request fully YES
(}
dbisstefx4 k supported through r a g ni bue.,
appropriation?
gc p
, ;s,, c, 4" '
Sh O*"
n%"+'#aa - up.
NO
% Ms, h A#c. c4 cu, e-nas a high ranking State NO te 3. - is W w r
official certified need for a 6.aArestre t.
A assistance from. JC7 g
YES v
NRC will consider funding the difference between appropriated amount and budget IMC -Inspection Manual Chapter request amount. Funding will be limited to RCP - Radiation Control Program,
a prorated amount if the total from all States is greater than OSP's budgeted amount.
OSP - Office of State Programs 6
STATE' Cgic ASP Bdst' TRNo Est' TRNo Bdge' Comments' i
i 1T.NNEsSEE 1,s.
TEXAS BRC 2.2.711 TEXAS 1HRCC 2.2.7'l 171 All 1.1.
WA511TNoToN 1.2.7/1 oHlo 1.2 OKLAHOMA 1,1.
PENNSY1.VANIA 1.1 The States listed are current Agreement States and the last three are those States which have submitted a letter of intent to become an Agreement State.
This column includes the legislative cycle, the budget cycle, and the beginning date 3
for the budget, respectively (L,B,M/D). An M in the B space indicates that the State has a mixed budget cycle and NRC needs additional information from the State to determine whether the RCP budget is on an annual or biennial cycle.
ASP Bdgt This column is for the Agreement State Program (ASP) Budget within 3
the Radiatron Control program.
TRNG EST This column is for the estimate of the training costs for the Agreement State program We recognize that this will only be a portion of the overall training g
costs for the C however, NRC will only address this aspect of the RCP training program under this assessment.
Gdm(Nej k 54 et rf}wsk b Ne $talt lep4 Nre TRNG Bdgt This column contains the amount the RCP budgeted for the Agreement State program training.
% This column will contain the percent *]e of the estimated training budget that was funded by the State. This wili give the NRC a quick estimate of those States that might need assistance in funding their training, travel and technical assistance.
Comments - This column is reserved for comments such as special conditions or special haroships that have been identified by the State.
9
-_ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - -