ML20207A660
| ML20207A660 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/17/1999 |
| From: | Diaz N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Cyr K NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9905270125 | |
| Download: ML20207A660 (2) | |
Text
[
RELEASEDTOTHEPDR E
UNITED STATES
/ N
,?f
'o,,
G
-e
(
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMlSSIOt(date initbl5 z
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 is.eeoeeeoeeeeeeeoeeoeo?
gg g j#
p*ee*V,/
6 e
commissioner May 17,1999 MEMOftANDUM TO:
Karen Cyr, OGC FROM:
Nils J. Diaz
SUBJECT:
SCRUTABILlLITY OF COMMISSION POLICY DECISION For the last two years, the Commission has been vigorously asking the staff to implement Commission decisions with accountability, clarity and consistency. Undoubtedly, the Commission wishes to adhere to the same principles. In fact, I believe the Commission, because of the distinct nature ofits policy decision-making obligation, which is exercised by majority vote, should make every possible effort to also make itt, decisions fully scrutable.
I am concerned with the possibility that the voting process anchoring Commission's decisions could be subject to challenge because of the not-always scrutable SRM development process.
It is apparent to me that the Commission's decision-making process has been altered to the point that recorded votes on SECY papers may be a mere indication of a Commissioner's full or ultimate position. Th's is not a criticism of the Secretariat. Actual positions are taken during the informal SRM process. Each and every one of us has contributed, or used this alternative to voting on the record, to varying degree. It creates confusion and added burden for the staff and the public in ascertaining the Commission position, frequently lengthens the resolution of issues, and reduces scrutability. In fact, a final SRM can reflect agreement derived informally and be different than the majority's on-the-record v'otes, thus raising issues of public accountability.
I recognize that the Commission needs administrative flexibility to clearly articulate its majority decisions. However, this flexibility should not be exercised at the expense of scrutability, especially now when non-Sunshine briefings and discussions could be soon allowed.
Scrutability is firmly anchored in votes and changes thereto. Each Commissioner's vote is his/her own and could be made public as such; on the other hand, the SRM need only state the majority position. This makes it difficult for our stakeholders,.ij., the public, members of Congress, and the licensees, to ascertain and understand a Commissioner's actual individual position.
" Openness in communications and decision-making"is one of the NRC Organizational Values.
Consistent with that commitment, and since SRMs involve rulemaking and other principal responsibilities, I would like to have the benefit of OGC's analysis of the legal requirements and supporting policies that affect the NRC's voting process and OGC's review of the consistency of the formal voting process and current SRM practice with those requirements and policies. The D
objectives would be to increase scrutability and thus increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the Commission's decision-making process.
T)Q 5
cc:
Chairman Jackson
~
Q ] ff-b G us 9905270125 9965i7
~
PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR k
1 T
Commissioner Dieus Commissioner McGaffigan Commissioner Merrifield SECY/PDR EDO 9
E o
a 4
l
.