ML20248F199

Advises That Commission Has Authority to Spend Monies for Nuclear Data Link Prototype in FY83

ML20248F199
Person / Time
Issue date:	03/02/1983
From:	Plaine H NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
To:
References
TASK-PICM, TASK-SE SECY-83-087, SECY-83-087-01, SECY-83-87, SECY-83-87-1, NUDOCS 8910060265
Download: ML20248F199 (4)

Text

--

fDR

.f_ c ana,%,.

u i 'f%) s"( [.S 7,, O%

J; y s-

'%.'.\\*" (#p SECY-83-87 March 2, 1983 1

POLICY ISSUE (Commission Meeting)

For:

The Commissioners From:

Herzel H.. E. Plaine General Counsel

Subject:

AUTHORITY OF THE COMMISSION TO FUND THE NUCLEAR DATA LINK PROGRAM

Purpose:

To advise the Commission of its authority to spend monies for the Nuclear Data Link prototype in FY 83 Discussion:

It is our understanding that the Commission I

faces the question of whether or not it may spend funds to initiate the Nuclear Data Link

("NDL") program in FY 83.

In our opinion, the

. Commission may make expenditures for the NDL prototype subject to the strictures outlined in NRC's Authorization Act for FY 82-83, P.L.97-415, as discussed in SECY-83-58, p.

2.

A.

Authorization In FY 81, funds were authorized to the NRC to accommodate the Commission's Budget I

justification to Congress (Green Book) for S3 million to be allocated to IE for the NDL program.

The Act provided that the funds were to remain available until expended.

In FY 82-83, Congress authorized not more than 1

y CONTACT:

Beverly S. Segal, OGC 4-3224 l

l Qf67 8910060265 030302 PDR SECY pyg r(83-687

r 3

$200,000 of additional funds'for the NDL' prototype. 1/

B.

Appropriations In FY 81, $3 million was appropriated to the NRC for the NDL program..Approximately $2.2 million was reprogrammed in FY 81 to be spent on-other NRC programs of priority.. Congress approved this reprogramming of funds.

NRC carried over the remaining funds (approximately $800,000) into FY 82 and then added the additional FY 82 appropriation of

$200,000.

In FY 82, some of the remaining funds were reallocated within the NRC and the remainder (approximately $700,000 reddced from

$800,000 due to end of the year review) was again carried over into FY 83.

In the summer of 1982, Congressman Bevill, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy.and Water Development, Committee on Appropriations, requested a halt in the NDL contract procurement procedure until the Committee on Appropriations concluded its action on the FY 82 budget.

Similarly, a letter from Congressman Udall, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, requested a halt of the contracting process until the Conference Committee concluded its work on the NRC Authorization Bill for FY 82-83.

As a result, work on the NDL prototype was interrupted.

l-L f

1/

This authorization appeared in the NRC Authorization Act, P.L.97-415, Section 8 (cited in SECY-83-58, Enclosure 3).

~

3 i

During FY 83, the NRC is funded under a continuing resolution 2/ which dictates that J

authorized spending will be at FY 82 funding levels.

Therefore, the relevant language is the FY 82 appropriations legislation and legislative history which earmarked not more i

than S200,000 for the NDL prototype.

This amount may be added to the carry over funds from FY 81.

Thus, as a legal matter, funds for NDL, both authorized and appropriated and carried over from prior years are available for the NDL program, subject to the strictures of the Authorization Act, P.L.97-415 (as outlined in SECY 83-58).

It is apparent that the Commission has been authorized and has received appropriations for the acquisition and installation of equipment for the small test prototype Nuclear Data Link program.

The actual procurement of equipment does not appear to be required.

However, pursuant to the NRC Authorization Act, P.L.97-415, Section 8 (b) (1), it appears that the Commission is reauired to submit to Congress a detailed report of the results of the study and analysis authorized by Section 8 (a) (2) of P.L.97-415.

Her'el H. E. Plaine General Counsel l

2/

In FY 83, Congress did not agree on the NDL appropriation.

The House Committee did not want to appropriate additional funding for the NDL whereas the Senate Committee recommended such funding.

These differences were not resolved in a j

conference report; rather, the result was a continuing I

resolution for FY 83.

Therefore, the relevant language appears in the FY 82 appropriations legislation and legislative history.

1

n.

I,I,

'5 c;;

a

.:<y

a y,

y g..

4-et This.' paper.:is'. tentatively scheduled for consideration'n.at an-

[l:-

Open Meeting on_ Thursday, March 3,E1983.

-I

. DISTRIBUTION:-

- Commissioners m:

OGC;

-' OPE;

- OCA:

- OIA-

- opA

.e EDO

' ELD SECY

.h.

e 4

6 4

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. - _ _ - -. _ _. _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _