ML20211Q130
| ML20211Q130 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/17/1999 |
| From: | Mcgaffigan E NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Vietticook A NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20211Q113 | List: |
| References | |
| SECY-99-176-C, NUDOCS 9909140204 | |
| Download: ML20211Q130 (2) | |
Text
.
NOTATION VOTE RESPONSE SHEET i
TO: Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary FROM: COMMISSIONER MCGAFFIGAN
SUBJECT:
SECY-99-176 - PLANS FOR PURSUING PERFORMANCE-BASED INITIATIVES Approved X Disapproved Abstain Not Participating COMMENTS:
See attached comments.
v <
SIGN TURE l 17, liii DATE l Entered on "AS" Yes X No 9909140204 990913 RE F
I L
1 1
Commissioner McGaffiaan's Comments on SECY-99-176
'I approve the staff activities described in this paper. As my Commission colleagues have pointed out, the paper lacks definitive schedules, milestones or goals (although these have
' been provided separately to the Commission for many of the activities with performance-based elements described in the paper). What this paper lays out is essentially a case-by-case approach until the staff has dealt with enough cases to provide a general framework for going forward. The~ paper does describe a generally sound approach to continue assessing and studying possible approaches to and applications of performance-based regulatory initiatives.
Our strategic plan commits the Commission to " risk-informed and, where appropriate, performance-based regulations." As I said in my vote on SECY-98-132, the precursor to this paper, the staff and the Commission both have been struggling with the concept of performance-based regulation and where it would be appropriate to utilize that approach instead of prescriptive regulation. I noted the lack of a foundation for performance-based regulation compared to risk-informed regulation. The May 1999 " White Paper on Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulation" gave the staff very little guidance on where performance-based approaches are appropriate to use. From the stakeholder meetings, it is also clear that stakeholders are also struggling with this concep..
Thus, I am not surprised at the staff's case-by-case approach to performance-based regulation.
Indeed, both NRR and NMSS clearly have a significant number of actMties underway in which performance-based initiatives are being pursued. Also, where appropriate, the staff is planning 1 to seek stakeholder comment in each new proposed rule on whether the proposed rule is unnecessarily prescriptive and can be more performance-based. All of these activities should eventually yield a firmer foundation for performance-based regulation without diverting resources from higher priority risk-informed initiatives.
This said, I am not opposed to Chairman Dicus' recommendation that the staff provide an
! annual update on performance-based initiatives. I would caution, however, against any expectations that the staff can deliver an annual" Performance-Based Regulation implementation Plan" similar to the "PRA Implementation Plan" which we use as a tool to pursue risk-informed regulation. The two concepts of " risk-informed regulation" and j
" performance-based regulation" are far apart in their rel,ative maturity. l 1
l I
l
$