ML20212M101
| ML20212M101 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/20/1999 |
| From: | Dicus G, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Domenici P, Inhofe J, Thompson F SENATE, APPROPRIATIONS, SENATE, ENVIRONMENT & PUBLIC WORKS, SENATE, GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212M106 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9910080166 | |
| Download: ML20212M101 (6) | |
Text
,
,j
'~PDR N
[
4,%,
UNITED STATES p
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, Dr. 206 % -0001 e
.(
/
September 20, 1999 CHARMAN
' The Honorable Fred Thompson, Chairman
. Committee on Governmental Affairs United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
On August 3,1999, S.1214, the " Federalism Accountability Act of 1999," was ordered to be reported by the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs. The NRC is committed to exercising its regulatory authority in a manner that promotes the integrity and effectiveness of the Federal system, clarifies the extent of preemption of State and local authority by Federal laws and rules, and assures consultation and cooperation with State and local authorities in connection with the development and implementation of Federal agency policy. Yet, the NRC is concerned about the unsetti;ng impacts that enactment of this bill could have on NRC programs and on the regulation of the use of byproduct, source, and special nuclear material to protect the public health and safety in the United States.
Congress has long given close attention to the respective roles of the States and the Federal government in the regulation of civilian nuclear usos, in establishing the framework for regulating a new and complex technology, Congress made a conscious apportionment of State and Federal authority and did not encroach upon well-established areas of State regulation.
The existing system of preemption, under which nuclear power plant regulation is assigned exclusively to the NRC, while States may regulate certain nuclear materials when they choose to assume those responsibilities under the framework of an Agreement State program, is testimony to Congress's concern to accommodate State and nationalinterests. In addition, low *evel radioactive waste compacts that States have entered into pursuant to the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act provide further involvement of States in nuclear regulatory issues.
However, Congress recognized from the first that decisions on licensing and operational safety of nuclear power plants should be made at the Federallevel.
S.1214 could introduce uncertainty into interpretation of the preemptive effect of the Atomic Energy Act, at least until the courts had an opportunity to clarify the preemptive effect of the Act in light of S.1214. This is because the Act does not explicitly state that it preempts State and local regulation of nuclear safety; rather, that principle was established by court decisims. In particular, enactment of S.1214, because it applies to new rules issued under existing statutes, could create uncertainty regarding the preemptive effect of new NRC rules (or even l
amendment of existing rules) promulgated pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act and intended to have uniform national application. In addition, it is not immediately obvious how the legislation would be applied in regard to new additions to the Atomic Energy Agt or amendments of current provisions and the effect of such changes in the law on parts or all of the Atomic Energy Act.
t We also note that the Department of Justice has raised a number of interpretive and litigative J
)
' difficulties in its June 29,1999 letter commenting on a similar Bill -- H.R. 2245.
l f
m a ro n M *DR CORRESPONDENCE P 1
'O
. Finally, the NRC already devotes extensive resources to its evaluation of its proposed actions and their impacts on State, local and tribal governments. Thus, it is questionable whether the benefit conferred by the requirements in S.1214 as applied to every NRC rulemaking would outweigh the cost in agency resources. In this regard, the NRC already has in place polidas and procedures for soliciting State views at an early stage in the rulemaking process.
The Commission therefore recommends that the Committee consider adding an amendment to S.1214 to clarify that it does not apply to the regulation of the possession and use of byproduct, source, and special nuclear mate rials under the jurisdiction of the NRC.
Sincerely, O
.J eta Joy Dicus cc: Senator Joseph I. Lieberman Members, Committee on Governmental Affairs
)
l
c
/
UNITED STATES p
- 4 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4.
WASHINGTON, D C. 20665 0001 e
\\
/
September 20, 1999 CHARMAN The Honorable James M. Inhofe, Chairman Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property and Nuclear Safety Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
On August 3,1999, S.1214, the " Federalism Accountability Act of 1999," was ordered to be reported by the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs. The NRC is committed to exercising its regulatory authority in a rnanner that promotes the integrity and effectiveness of the Federal system, clarifies the extent of preemption of State and local authority by Federal laws and rules, and assures consultation and cooperation with State and local authorities in connection with the development and implementation of Federal agency policy. Yet, the NRC is I
concerned about the unsettling impacts that enactment of this bill could have on NRC programs and on the regulation of the use of byproduct, source, and special nuclear material to protect 4
the public health and safety in the United States.
{
Congress has long given close attention to the respective roles of the States and the Federal government in the regulation of civilian nuclear uses. In establishing the framework for
)
regulating a new and complex technology, Congress made a conscious apportionment of State i
and Federal authority and did not encroach upon well-established areas of State regulation.
The existing system of preemption, under which nuclear power plant regulation is assigned exclusively to the NRC, while States may regulate certain nuclear materials when they choose to assume those responsibilities under the framework of an Agreement State program, is testimony to Congress's concern to accommodate State and nationalinterests, in addition, low-level radioactive waste compacts that States have entered into pursuant to the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act provide further involvement of States in nuclear regulatory issues.
However, Congress recognized from the first that decisions on licensing and operational safety of nuclear power plants should be made at the Federal level.
S.1214 could introduce uncertainty into interpretation of the preemptive effect of the Atomic Energy Act, at least until the courts had an opportunity to clarify the preemptive effect of the Act in light of S.1214. This is because the Act does not explicitly state that it preempts State and local regulation of nuclear safety; rather, that principle was established by court decisions. In particular, enactment of S.1214, because it applies to new rules issued under existing statutes, could create uncertainty regarding the preemptive effect of new NRC rules (or even amendment of existing rules) promulgated pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act and intended to have uniform national application, in addition, it is not immediately obvious how the legislation would be applied in regard to new additions to the Atomic Energy Act or amendments of current
. provisions and the effect of such changes in the law on parts or all of the Atomic Energy Act.
We also note that the Department of Justice has raised a number of interpretive and litigative difficulties in its June 29,1999 letter commenting on a similar Bill -- H.R. 2245.
i 2-Finally, the NRC already devotes extensive resources to its evaluation of its proposed actions and their impacts on State, local and tribal governments. Thus, it is questionable whether the benefit conferred by the requirements in S.1214 as applied to every NRC rulemaking would outweigh the cost in agency resources. In this regard, the NRC already has in place policies and procedures for soliciting State views at an early stage in the rulemaking process.
The Commission therefore recommends that the Committee consider adding an amendment to S.1214 to clarify that it does not apply to the regulation of the possession and use of byproduct, source, and special nuclear materials under the jurisdiction of the NRC.
Sincerely, A$
LM reta Joy Dicus cc: Senator Bob Graham l
i l
4
%(
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION p
l g
WASHINGTON. IV 2065H001 September 20. 1999-CHAIRMAN The Honorable Pete V. Domenici, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Committee on Appropriations-United States Senate ~
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
On August 3,1999, S.1214, the " Federalism Accountability Act of 1999," was ordered to be reported by the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs. The NRC is committed to exercising its regulatory authority in a manner that promotes the integrity and effectiveness of the Federal system, clarifies the extent of preemption of State and local authority by Federal laws and rules, and assures consultation and cooperation with State and local authorities in connection with the development and implementation of Federal agency policy. Yet, the NRC is concerned about the unsettling impacts that enactment of this bill could have on NRC programs and on the regulation of the use of byproduct, source, and special nuclear material to protect the public health and safety in the United States.
Congress has long given close attention to the respective roles of the States and the Federal govemment in the regulation of civilian nuclear uses. In establishing the framework for regulating a new and complex technology, Congress made a consciom apportionment of State and Foderal authority and did not encroach upon well-established areas of State regulation.
The existing system of preemption, under which nuclear power plant regulation is assigned exclusively to the NRC, while States may regulate certain nuclear materials when they choose to assume those responsibilities under the framework of an Agreement State program, is testimony to Congress's concem to accommodate State and nationalinterests. In addition, low-level radioactive waste compacte that States have entered into pursuant to the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act provide further involvement of States in nuclear regulatory issues.
However, Congress recognized from the first that decisions on licensing and operational safety of nuclear power plants should be made at the Federal level.
S.1214 could introduce uncertainty into interpretation of the preemptive effect of the Atomic j
Energy Act, at least until the courts had an opportunity to clarify the preemptive effect of the Act in light of S.1214. This is because the Act does not explicitly state that it preempts State and local regulation of nuclear safety; rather, that principle was established by court decisions. In particular, enactment of S.1214, because it applies to new rules issued under existing statutes, could create uncertainty regarding the preemptive effect of new NRC rules (or even amendment of existing rules) promulgated pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act and intended to have uniform national application. In addition, it is not immediately obvious how the legislation would be applied in regard to new additions to the Atomic Energy Act or amendments of current pmvisions and the effect of such changes in the law on parts or all of the Atomic Energy Act.
V, also note that the Department of Justice has raised a number of interpretive and litigative difficulties in its June 29,1999 letter commenting on a similar Bill -- H.R. 2245.
r=
f
' Finally, the NRC already devotes extensive resources to its evaluation of its proposed actions '
and their impacts on State, local and tribal governments. Thus, it is questionable whether the benefit conferred by the requirements in S.1214 as applied to every NRC rulemaking would outweigh the cost in agency resources. In this regard, the NRC already has in place policies and procedures for soliciting State views at an early stage in the rulemaking process.
The Commission therefore recommends that the Committee consider adding an amendment to S.1214 to clarify that it does not apply to the regulation of the possession and use of byproduct, source, and special nuclear materials under the jurisdiction of the NRC.
Sincerely,
/]k
- 6 cdo u
Meta Joy Dicus cc: Senator Harry Reid
.