ML22230A118
| ML22230A118 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/15/1979 |
| From: | NRC/OCM |
| To: | |
| References | |
| Tran-M791015 | |
| Download: ML22230A118 (47) | |
Text
-
RETURN TO SECRETARIAT RECORDS I
II NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1*
i I
I I
IN THE MATTER OF:
PUBLIC HEARING DISCUSSION OF IMPROVING COM.MISSIONER PROCEDURES
& "FULL ACCESS" PROVISION Place - Washington, D.C.
Date - Monday, October 15, 1979 Pages 1 - 44 Telephone:
(202) 347-3700 ACE
- FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.
Official Reporters 444 North Capitol Street Washington, D.C. 20001 NAT10NWIDE COVERAGE.- DAILY
1 CR7702 DISCLAI:MER This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on*
- Monday, October 15, 1979 in the Commissions s offices at 1717 H Street, N. w., Washington, D. c. The 1
meeting was open to public attendance and observation. This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected, or edited, and it may contain
- . *inaccuracies.
The transcript is intended solely for general informational purposes. As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, i t is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the matters discussed. Expressions of opinion in this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determinations or beliefs. No pleading or other paper may be filed with the Commission in any proceeding as the result of or addressed to any statement or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may authorize.
CR 7702 AR:ar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA la 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
PUBLIC HEARING 4
DISCUSSION OF IMPROVING CO:r,.,1'..MISSION PROCEDURES 5
& "FULL ACCESS" PROVISION 6
7 8 Room 1130 1717 H Street Northwest 9 Washington, D.C.
10 Monday, October 15, 1979 11 The Commission met, pursuant to notice, at 3:40 12 p .m.
13 BEFORE:
14 DR. JOSEPH M. HENDRIE, Chairman.
15 RICHARDT. KENNEDY, Commissioner.
16 PETER A. BRADFORD, Commissioner.
17 JOHN AHEARNE, Commissioner.
18 ALSO PRESENT:
19 Messrs. Bickwit, Malsch, Ostrach, Rothschild and 20 Rathbun.
21 22 * *
- 23 24 Ace* eral Reporters, Inc.
25
2
" P R O C E E D I N G S
- 2 3
[Commissioner Kennedy not present.]
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Okay, let's come to order.
- 4 5
The Commission will get on with its discussion for improving its own procedures, if that's possible.
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: The discussion or the improv -
7 ment?
8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Also there is some aspects of 9 the full access provision that I dimly recall from an OGC 10 memorandum that I asked somebody to look into, and I guess 11 we'll have a report on those.
12 Let's talk a minute about the procedures that have
- 13 14 15 come up in this paper, and I detected from certain comments and voting sheets that they were not viewed with the uniform enthusiasm in all quarters.
16 [Commissioner Kennedy entered the room at 17 3:41 p.m.]
18 Why don't we talk a little bit about those.
19 Tell me what your sort of thrust on these things would be.
20 Clearly these things for the most part sort of 21 follow down that track that we adopted in the export area
- 22 23 where some time goes by and then once a majority of Commissioners have acted, there is then pressure put more formally on those who have not yet acted to do so, and so on.
Ace-- 24 ral Reporters, Inc.
25 And, I don't know, do you see other ways of trying to move
3
- things along or --
- 2 3
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: No, it's the conclusiveness at which things are moved along on this particular track.
4 That is obviously it makes sense when you have three or 5 four positions for the train to begin to move in that direction, 6 if it in fact it does.
7 But there will be a lot of situations, I think, 8 in which reasons of particular interest or other priorities 9 or what-have-you, the fourth or fifth Commissioner on the list*
10 will come in with items that turn out to be worth considering, 11 and a set of procedures that tends indiscriminately, that is 12 whether or not there's any high degree of urgency in getting
- 13 14 15 the item underway, to cut that process short seems to me --
is that me that's buzzing?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: No, somewhere we've got a mike 16 that's set a little too high and we've got a couple of them 17 feeding each other. Let us go down the line and turn off all 18 unused or mikes that aren't needed.
19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I have no difficulty with 20 this system that sets at least target deadlines, but I would 21 make it longer than these, and I would provide that they not 22 begin to run until we had all Staff and Commission office 23 comments in front of us in one paper, or at least in one --
where it could be put together and brought to bear on the Ace - ral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 subject in our office. I should think it would make sense
4 for the Commission time, for example, to run while the paper
- 2 is still -- or OGC is still --
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well~ in a sense all papers 3
4 are before OGC and OPE, sort of inde~initely. In another sens 5 they aren't. I have long since asked the Staff wherever 6 possible to get draft-papers to OPE and OPE in turn to get 7 at least draft comments that they think they want to make on 8 it back to the Staff so that where things work as one would 9 hope they would most of the time, things like OPE comments 10 are included in the paper. That is there's an OPE memo there 11 and a response and a Staff final paper or recommendations 12 may accommodate to them or reject them~ but at least it got
- 13 14 15 into the process.
Paper comes and lies before the Commission, I suppose in principle there could be further OPE comments or 16 OGC comments, but it's kind of hard to detect when and how 17 there are to be such specifically on a given paper.
18 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Excuse me. As a general rul ,
19 doesn't the Secretary, when he passes an action paper to the 20 Commissioners, note on the bottom the date on which OGC and 21 OPE comments, if any, are supposed to be provided to the 22 Commissioners?
23 So there is a date that's already been established.
24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Generally.
Ace--ral Reporters, Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Isn't. that the procedure?
5 I note the Secretary isn't here. I wonder if it's
- 2 because he has a lack of interest or is bored or tired or out of -- ~hich? That he's bored, tired?
3 4 [Laughter.]
5 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I wonder, Joe, we've got a 6 few vacant seats. Maybe we ought to let OGC in on the act.
7 MR. ROTHSCHILD: The procedures we've recommended here --
8 9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yeah, you want to come forward?
10 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Come on up and join us.
11 It doesn't look crowded.
12 MR. ROTHSCHILD: The procedures we are providing
- 13 14 15 here would start with Commissioner comments and would begin after that deadline for OGC and OPE comments.
Now if OGC and OPE are late with their comments, 16 which sometimes we are, then it would extend the Commission 17 time accordingly.
18 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: So that takes care of that 19 concern of yours, Peter, which I certainly would share.
20 There's no point in running -- start running against the 21 Commissioners' time when comments they might have desired
- 22 23 to review hadn't even been received. So that the time in thes papers runs after that set time for receipt of the office comments.
Ace
- 24 eral Reporters, Inc.
25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let's see, the proposition here
6 would be -- ah, somebody remind me. What does i t amount.to?
- 2 3
Eight days?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Eight days.
1-
- 4 5
Five on export matters.
CHAI.RMAN.HENDRIE: Five working days --
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That's what it is now.
7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Eight working days on other 8 matters.
9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: The Staff and Commission's 10 own offices have four days.
11 COMM.ISSIONER KENNEDY: So that makes a total of 12 12 days. 12 work days.
13 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: From what time?
14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: When it comes into SECY.
15 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Well, from when it's 16 distributed by SECY to the Commissioners. From the date 17 that's up on the corner of this paper that we get, which is 18 the same date that we get it. It's 12 days from that time it 19 would be expected -- four days Staff offices would provide 20 us comments, eight days, working days, for us to comment, 21 which is a total of 12 working days, or two and a half weeks.
- 22 23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
responsible for the procedures?
And the -- now let's see, who is COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: One and a half weeks. No, Ace-- ral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 I'm sorry, two and a half weeks. Okay.
7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yeah, two and a half. weeks.
- 2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes.
Let me put i t another way.
3 4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Especially, as Victor 5 would say, since he's not here, to what question is that 6 the answer?
7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: It's the --
8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: What kind of hammering at 9 the gates do we actually have in terms of people who feel that 10 major items are languishing here longer than they should?
11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: There periodically are occasions 12 when it does happen, and when there have been a majority of
- 13 14 15 votes to go one way or another, and when action is then prevented over a long, sometimes a long period of time, a few times it has been a long period of time, simply by failure 16 of any expression of opinion from the remaining offices, 17 neither for nor against. And the only resolution then is 18 to, without having ever any word from the offices who haven't 19 responded, just schedule it for a discussion and vote session, 20 which means another week or two down the line, because you 21 hardly feel at that stage able to justify short noticing,
- 22 23 and it just seems to me that we ought to be better able to move things than that.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: But without having a sense Ace - ral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 of the particular papers that are causing this concern, it's
8 sort of hard to respond. There's a sense, reading_ this, that's
- 2 3
what happening is that either Commissioners aren't-reading their mail or they're not coming to work, or they're
- 4 5
losing things in their drawers.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Or all of the above.
COMMISSI-ONER BRADFORD: All of the above. And 6
7 I wonder when one looks at the real problem papers of the 8 cases that have apparently caused difficulty, I wonder if 9 that's really what's holding them up.
10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I think in a few cases, they've 11 -- well, I can't say.
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I. thought another part, thoug,
- 13 14 15 of the point that was given an organization such as ours that operates with large volumes of papers flowing through, that at some point it makes sense to try to lay out a set of 16 procedures by which these papers will be handled. In the 17 absence of any specific set of problems, that in order to 18 have the people involved, the offices understand, what are 19 the ground rules under which they're operating.
20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: And to provide somewhat 21 propelling decisions forward.
22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Is there some way to propel 23 this meeting forward.
24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: We could ask for analysis of the Ace--ral Reporters, Inc.
25 records and so on, but I'm afraid it will show a number of r
9 occasions when there has been an extended period after three 2 Commissioners have acted before views could be extracted from 3 the other offices.
4 Now sometimes those views, you know, go with the 5 majority, and sometimes not; but i t does seem to me that if a 6 Commissioner -- if we get to the point where three have acted 7 and the eight day -- eight working days after receipt of OGC 8 and OPE comments has run out, two and a half weeks, and three 9 Commissioners have acted, then it appears to me that unless 10 there are some fairly pressing concerns on the part of one 11 of the remaining Commissioners who hasn't indicated a yea or 12 nay or abstention, it appears to me that the collegial body 13 ought to be able to move its business forward.
14 If. one of the Commissioners who hasn't indicated 15 a view by that time says, "Look, I want to discuss this," or, 16 "I need more time to ask some questions, or more irifo:r:imation,"
17 or something, why, then it seems to me that as we do on the 18 export side, that's appropriate.
19 But it just seems to me that silence on the paper, 20 on a paper, by the time you've gotten that far down the track, 21 is not a reasonable thing to prevent the collegial Commission 22 from working its will.
23 So that's why I've encouraged these propositions.
A 24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, in what areas can Ace--ral Repo;ters, Inc.
25 silence actually have that effect?
10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: At* the present*-t::.ime in any case
- 2 3
except the export area, where we have an explicit policy.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Not the adjudicatory cases 4 because eventually the time for review will run.
5 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: But that's the rules to that 6 COMMISSIONER BRADFOFD: Right, but that's a good 7 way to do it. That certainly does do it.
8 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: That's sort of what this 9 would do, it would codify procedures which are followed in 10 other aspects of our business, extend them to our general 11 business, rather than just the adjudicatory items and just 12 the export items, all the others uncovered.
-- 13 14 15 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: There are categories of papers other than export licenses and other than adjudicatory matters on which you from ti.me to time circulate notices 16 saying three Commissioners have concurred, and if we don't 17 hear from you by thus and such, I will take the following 18 action.
19 SECRETARY: CHILK*:* We'll do that in any case if 20 we have three votes, and we'll give you some 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> to answe,,
21 or 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br />, if we've got four votes, and close the issue if
- 22 23 we don't.
Now there are times when you others ask for information from the Staff which kind of sets up a different Ace-
- rat 24 Reporters, Inc.
25 situation, and then the question is do your colleagues
11 want to stay with you or whoever requested the information?
- 2 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
the way we do it now?
Are you saying that that's 3
4 SECRETARY CHILK: I am certainly saying that.
5 That's the way it's been done, yes.
6 MR. RATHBUN": ** Even before the eight days are up?
- 7 SECRETARY CHILK: After the eight days are up.
8 We don't close it out before the target date, but if we have 9 three votes after that time, we're going to attempt to close 10 it out, we're going to give them 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.
11 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: W~it.
12 SECRETARY CHILK: If they come back with another 13 question 14 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Are you doing that? Is 15 that what the Commission has agreed to do now?
16 SECRETARY CHILK: That's what the Commission's 17 been doing for -- ever since its existence.
18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: You're not being aware of 19 that does you credit, of course, Dick. What i t says is that 20 you always respond in time.
21 [Laughter.]
- 22 23 24 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
something is not accurate here.
SECRETARY CHILK:
And that is not accurate, so You've had your share of requests Ace-eral Reporters, Inc.
25 to either vote or be closed out.
12 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: On export matters and others,
- 2 3
but I -- you know. --
- CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: We're not doing this on all
- 4 5
papers, are we?
SECRETARY CHILK:
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
We certainly are.
Isn't it fascinating that 6
7 nobody knows about it but you?
8 [Laughter.]
9 I mean, you know, it's extraordinary, at least.
10 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: The delinquents among you 11 have a much greater sense of it than the rest of --
12 [Laughter.]
- 13 14 15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I have to conclude that you must be a little surprised because you didn't like the similar proposal in this paper.
16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: No.
17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Which appears to be the same 18 thing as 19 SECRET.ARY CHILK: - -- -- -,_- ~ No, I think general counsel 20 is suggesting in essence that you get three votes and you go 21 with it. When somebody's asking a question of the Staff,
- 22 23 24 that sets up an entirely ---*then for the most part the Commissioners are willing to wait and get the answer.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: That's right, and Sam's Ace--ral Reporters, Inc.
25 current notational system has one other dimension that I didn'
13 see here, and that is one can indicate on the flip side 2 how much longer* he needs to deal with the case, and as far as 3 I know., once you indicate that, you get it~
4 SECRETARY CHILK: None of you none of the 5 colleagues and none of the Commissioners are objecting to that 6 at this time. When they do, you don't get it.
7 MR. BICKWIT: Have you ever had occasion when a 8 Commissioner --
9 SECRETARY CHILK: Very seldom, if ever.
10 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I don't remember ever 11 encountering that.
12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: How about things like letters?
13 SECRETARY CHILK: Letters are entirely different, 14 Mr. Chairman, because there we keep going around with another 15 set of words each and every time.
16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Some of them so long, indeed 17 that the letter gets overtaken by several others and you 18 incorporate them all into a single reply, which of course 19 saves postage.
20 SECRETARY CHILK: I think the answer on letters 21 is that the Commission ought to agree to either collegially 22 answer those that involve policy or collegially agree to 23 answer those that are replies to your principal committees A 24 in Congress and delegate the au thori.ty, ask the Chairman to Ace--ral Reporters, Inc.
25 sign all the others. You will see them in the reading files.
14 And that will keep them out of your office.
-* 2 3 letters.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Let me just ask about I'm not sure -- I*either misunderstood the paper
- 4 5
or misunderstand the practice. The paper recommends -- the paper states the practice to be that letters go to OPE and 6 OCA before they come*to the Commission and that they are then 7 in some way edited and commented on and finalized in separate 8 Commissioner comments.
9 That makes sense, and I would vote for that, but I 10 think the actual practice is that tqey go to OPE and OCA 11 simultaneously with going to the Commission offices, and then 12 the Commissioners work them over for everything from grammar
- 13 14 15 to content, and OPE and OCA go to some effort to reconcile fiv different sets of comments.
I think it would be good if they were edited once 16 for plain English and whatever other corrections that either 17 OPE or OCA could work on before they came into the Commission 18 office, and that probably would mean that we'd have fewer 19 instances in which five sets of Commissioners corrected 20 the same awkward grammatical construction five different ways.
21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Could I 22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: We would throw into the process 23 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I hope it would shorten it, if I'm right, that it would save five different Commissioners Ace- - al Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 making five different corrections to one awkward sentence.
15 I would think it would save time.
- 2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Sam, is the time consumption in the. letter answering because of grammatical construction 3
4 problems, or -is it a:~-sunstantiv*e=..problem?
5 SECRETARY CHILK: Both. It's a matter of opiriion.
6 What is grammatical to me is substantive to you.
7 [Laughter.]
8 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: It is to be noted that I 9 almost know of no way to make a substantive correction in a 10 letter without somehow affecting its grarnrner.*
11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: That is true. The reverse 12 may not be, .but that is correct.
- 13 14 15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Sam applies it in the reverse.
Sam, I gather from your comment that you probably are not in agreement that this is 16 a necessary action, some of these steps~ is that correct?
17 SECRETARY CHILK: Let me --
18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You seem to be doing some of 19 this, Sam. Why don't we check off the : ones.*:: you are doing an 20 and worry about 21 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: And approve the ones you're 22 doing and make them a matter of record. That at least will 23 let all the Commissioners know that in fact you are doing it,
- 24 which none of us did.
Ace ral Reporters, Inc.
25 SECRETARY CHILK: I guess the question that was
16 asked me is whether I -- what I think of these, and I'm saying 2 let me start from the other end -- I think the procedures 3 are perfectly enforceable, and I have no objections to the
- 4 5
procedures the way they're written or in any other way.
But if the intent of the Commission is to expedite 6 the Commission decision process, then these procedures won't 7 do it any more than the export procedures did last year as 8 far as 'expediting the decision-making process.
9 It seems to me that what you really want to do is 10 determine what you want to delegate. Why look at all of the 11 letters? Only look at -a:--liinited niimb-er--of - letters and let -
12 :it.he Chairman answer the
- 13 14 15 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
It says here --
SECRETARY CHILK:
That's one of the procedures.
And that's a very good one.
16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: It says here 17 SECRRETARY CHILK: And that's a very good one, 18 you've got a recommendation --
19 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Page 9 --
20 SECRETARY CHILK: -- from Devine on exports to 21 try to delegate some of the exports. You need to get rid
- 22 23 24 of those things you can get rid of and then look at what you want to do to the rest.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
/
I Let me get down to that for Ace--ral Reporters, Inc.
25 the moment, but let me understand, as I did not understand
17 before, that on papers other than adjudicatory or export *
- 2 3
license papers, you are in fact, as soon as you get three votes and the eight working days have gone by after appropriate
- 4 5
date, you are in fact dunning Commissioners-with a sheet that says three have voted and you've got 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> to vote or 6 SECRETARY CHILK: Or tell me what else you want to 7 do.
8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Are you getting votes back in 9 that case, yea, nay, or some kind?
10 SECRETARY CHILK: Yes, you're getting something 11 back. I get either a yea or nay or I need seven more days 12 to answer this, or I've got seven questions of the Staff.
- 13 14 15 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
one of these things.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I can't remember even seeing I guess you've never been 16 dunned, Richard, which says a number of things.
17 MR. BICKWIT: You're talking about the second paper.
18 SECRETARY CHILK: We generally do not follow OGC 19 memos unless you've asked us to follow them, or somebody, 20 you know, wants them geared into the system, because we don't 21 get the reply.
- 22 23 MR. BICKWIT:
adopting that policy.
On OGC memos, we have not been MR. ROTHSCHILD: Let me make a couple of comments:
Ace - 24 rel Reporters, Inc.
25 One, I don't think all adjudicatory items are
18
" covered by comments now. For example, in writing adjudicatory
- 2 opinions after the Commission has taken review, there is no time limit for the Commission comments. In that case 3
4 we've had three votes, to let an adjudicatory order go, and 5 a substantial time period elapsed before we've been able to 6 get views from the fourth and fifth Commissioners.
7 We would like them covered by some procedure.
8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Again, which ones do you 9 have in mind?
10 MR. ROTHSCHILD: Which adjudicatory things?
11 COMMISSIONER BRA:DFORD: Yeah.
12 MR. ROTHSCHILD: I think there were some -- I'm
- 13 14 15 not the best one to* speak to that.
years there have been problems.
I know in the past few Maybe Offshore Power was a recent problem, where I know the opinion language was very 16 long time before it was issued. I don't know why. I was not 17 involved in that case at all. But I know there was a long 18 period, and I understand there were votes fairly quickly.
19 SECRETARY CHILK: Was it an OGC memo?
20 MR. ROTHSCHILD: Oh, yes 21 SECRETARY CHILK: I do not control those unless
- 22 23 you ask me to do that.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
the Secretary control --
Sounds like you ought to let Ace-- ral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 SECRETARY CHILK: I'm not looking for the business.
19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: T think the SECY should con tr 1
- 2 3
all of our actions so there would be one --
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yeah, I agree, *John, and 4 furthermore, where Commissioners would occasionally look to 5 dun an answer out on some questbn that they have asked, why, 6 if you put i t through Sam's machine, i t provides a mechanism 7 to do that.
8 Otherwise, you may get the -- you know, the lost 9 paper treatment and never hear.
10 MR. ROTHSCHILD: Sam, when we have a SECY paper 11 which is a request for answer and we get three comments, do 12 you send out 72-hour notices on items that require formal
- 13 14 15 Commission votes like that?
SECRETARY CHILK:
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
If it's a SECY paper If it's an OGC memo -- on 16 the other hand, if OGC comes to you and says do i t that way, 17 I recommend you do i t that way.
18 SECRETARY CHILK: No question about it. We've 19 just hesitated to try to run their business and get involved.
20 MR. ROTHSCHILD: We do see the language sometimes 21 on rules that we get a couple of votes ver.y quickly, and
- 22 23 then all of a sudden, weeks and months la~er we are still waiting for votes on the final rules.
SECRETARY CHILK: I think for the most part when Ace - 24 ral Reporters, Inc.
25 OGC has been in that -- some of that trouble, they've come
20 to us and we've gone to your office and said, hey, we need
- 2 some help to get something done.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Peter, what -- *you had 3
4 alluded to these as greasing the skids.
5 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Yes~ Well, that -- as I 6 said before, I found myself reluctant or uncqmfortable 7 with the concurrent sheet with which I have not concurred 8 with the document entitled "Including Commission Procedures."
9 When I thought about why not, I realized that I had changed 10 the title a little.
11 My concern with -- and what compelled me in the 12 direction of retitling is was this:* Papers come in from
- 13 14 15 the Staff.
Commission.
They get us an analysis. Then they come to the To the extent that one is relatively comfortable 16 with what the Staff has done, it's relatively easy to get 17 the paper out quickly, you know. But I think that a set 18 of tight deadlines reinforced by the automatic taking effect 19 or by majority denials of extensions is basically to increase 20 the momentum on the side of the Staff proposal, which I'm 21 sure isn't always a bad thing, but in some cases i t will be.
- 22 23 So what I*was concerned about in the deadlines, to the extent they went beyond the practice that Sam is already following, was that it seemed to me that they had a
- 24 Ace- era I Reporters, Inc.
25 momentum to Staff proposals in a way that I thought probably
~
21 was not altogether healthy.
2 On top of that, I thought ~the deadlines were too 3 tight,: and that there were problems like this business of I e 4 having OGC and OPE comment times possibly chewing into the 5 Commission time.
6 But the basic concern was that tight deadlines 7 tend to work against critical Commission office scrutiny of 8 the Staff papers, and absent some compelling showing that 9 we've got a problem in important areas of our work now, I 10 just felt that this went a lot further than I was prepared to 11 gq.
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Was i t primarily the 13 tightness of the deadlines or the imposition of deadlines?
14 In other words, could your problems be solved by 15 having a longer time, or was it the basic idea of 16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: In many cases, longer 17 times would do it.
18 I am troubled by -- though I recognize there's a 19 time in which it becomes necessary -- but essentially troubled 20 by the framework in which three Commissioners can in all cases 21 on a fairly routine basis take action while two other 22 Commissioners are still somewhere or another trying to come 23 to grips wi th,.-,whatever the problem is.
A 24 The present system allows that, but doesn't compel Ace-ral Reporters, Inc.
25 it, or doesn'tcompel the question to be -faced periodically.
22 And it seems to me that there are a lot of cases
- 2 that come before us in which for one reason or another time is really not of the essence. It may be that this *particular 3
I 4 activity is ongoing and the :>re:commendation is that i t 5 continue, but for some reason or another one or two 6 Commissioners have some doubts about* it and want to go back 7 and dig into the Staff papers.
8 Now no real harm in that case comes from the 9 decisions staying with the Commission for a while.
10 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Sam, could I just read off 11 a few things?
12 SECRETARY CHILK: Sure. I know what you're going 13 to read, but go ahead, be my guest.
14 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Status of consent calendar 15 before the Commission. I'm just going to read a few.
16 Item 1, SECY 78-674, suggested time periods for 17 issuance of initial decisions. Due date was 1/3/79. That's 18 January 3rd, 1979. That's nine months ago, I believe.
19 All comments were received, and then Mr. Hendrie 20 asked that one be held with a target date of 11/15. That's 21 not too bad.
22 SECRETARY CHILK: That target date keeps being 23 changed.
A 24 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: SECY 79-283, export of Ace--ral Reporters, Inc.
25 certain minor quantities of nuclear material. The due date
23 was May 3rd, 1979. Mr. Hendrie approved on July* 18th,* Mr.
- 2 3
Gilinsky commented on August 8th, Mr. Kennedy approved on 7/25, Mr. Ahearne approved on 6/5, and Mr. Bradford hasn't 4 had time to act on that one yet.
s CF.AIRMAN HENDRIE : That I s an export matter.
6 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: It's.a --
7 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: It's not an individual 8 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: It's a policy question.
9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: But at the same time, a 10 minor quantity --
11 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: The Fielka FOIA appeal.
12 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: It's not as though we've 13 stopped exporting all minor quantities.
14 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: The Fielka appeal -- I'm 15 just pointing out the facts, you know, I'm just suggesting 16 that here's a paper, the generic issue of financial 17 qualifications. The due date was May'.llth. All comments 18 were finally received on 8/1, and a revised memo was circulate 19 to the Commissioners on October 3rd, which ought to say some-20 thing. It took three months to make some sense out of the 21 Commissioners' comments, I guess.
22 At any rate, I suppose we will now anticipate --
23 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: August and September, two months.
Ace - ral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Two months, excuse me.
24 Well, I would now anticipate we will have two more
- 2 months while the commissioners consider it, and then two furthe months.while the comments on this revised draft are reviewed.
3 4 All I'm saying is this is not a system. This is a 5 chaotic exhibition of energy.
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: It takes a long time --
7 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I'm only pointing out 8 the sheet goes on and on in the same way, pages and ~ages, 9 that have been here for God knows how long, and i:s sitting 10 there waiting for one or possibly two, but usually one 11 Commissioner to act. Three of them already having vote~
12 months before, expressing a view, and I have some difficulty
- 13 14 15 in understanding what is the law contemplated.
I'm suggesting Commissioners -- that's right.
Many, many of them. Over and over. Page after page.
16 Now, whatever your system is, Sam, it doesn't 17 happen.
18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: No, but Sam's system does 19 give us a chance in fact to have sprung any of those items.
20 If we objected to Joe's putting the initial decisions on --
21 COMMISSiqNER KENNEDY: I don't ever r1:!call having
- 22 23 been asked whether I would desire that any of these matters go forward.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: But that one comes around Ace - raf Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 on Sam's list of items pending every two weeks. You know,
25 it says JH placed a hold beside it, and it seems to me 2 for months that if I objected very much to Joe's having placed 3 that one on hold, I could have raised it with a memo to the I 4* other Commissioners or by asking Sam -- I don't know what 5 Sam could do, but at least send a memo to the Commissioners.
6 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Look, Sam, are you telling 7 me now that on every one of these matters, you have gone out 8 with a memo that says unless you put a hold on this, we're 9 going to put it out in 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />?
10 SECRETARY CHILK: I would guess yes, that there is 11 a memo that has said that and there is some reason why the 12 matter is being held.
13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: What about the ones that say 14 no response? I understand the one that says JH requests hold, 15 that's fairly obvious, pending action by CIA, I understand 16 that, tentatively scheduled for Commission meeting, that's 17 clear. But no response, it doesn't seem to fit -*-
18 SECRETARY CHILK: I'm sure there either is a notice 19 that's gone out on it, or notice is about to go out on it, 20 or it's been closed out ever since the document was published, 21 one of the three. Or we blew it. You know, I guess that's
- 22 23 24 possible, too.
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I can only sugqest that all three of those must be at play here in substantial numbers.
Ace.rel Reporters, Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: As I interpret it, Steve, t
26 as I interpret it, what you are proposing is a system by which 2 once a majority had reached a position, the things would now 3 go forward with the sort of two kinds of exceptions:
4 One of the other Commissions who was not in the 5 majority had requested a meeting, then a meeting would go 6 forward.
7 Or if the minority could convince a member of the 8 majority to continue the delay.
9 MR. ROTHSCHILD: Yeah. We're 81.ifting the burden.
10 Right now the burden seems to be on the majority to grasp 11 the issue and to act on the paper, and now we' re ~Joing to 12 shift the burden and those who want to delay will have to 13 convince the majority of the Commission to delay.
14 MR. BICKWIT: Delay is sort of a pejorative word.
15 MR. OSTRACH: That's only after an initial period 16 of time in which any Commissioner by himself can request the 17 matter be set up for Commission discussion, provide input 18 to the Commission decision.
19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, the setting it up 20 for Commission discussion, of course, is that survives under 21 any system, and certainly it should. It would be a mistake 22 ever to make that the only way to get an extension. It's 23 silly to have to request that a meeting be scheduled 10 days from now in order to get an action.
IAce-ral Reporters, ~n~.
CHAI.RMAN HENDRIE: But at the moment we q.on I t 25
27 come around as we do* on exports and say --
2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, Sam does come around, 3 at l'east he does a pretty good percentage of the time.
4 What may not happen with any deal of regular.ity is that 5 the Commissioners in the majority are then.asked to approve 6 the extended period of time requested by whoever received the 7 dunning notice.
8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You think that every place on 9 here that a paper is. older than -- I don.' t know, three weeks 10 SECRETARY CHILK: I think there's a reasonable 11 explanation for it, in almost every case.
12 I think we could sit down with you and say here is 13 the reason and make some reasonable sense out of it.
14 But it.does not move papers as fast as what they're supposed 15 to do.
16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: But what I hear you saying, 17 Sam -- correct me if I'm wrong is that if some of the time 18 periods in the OGC's memo were adjusted, there would be the 19 same system you have.
20 If that is the case, then I don't think there 21 should be any problem with affirming the OGC's proposal.
22 SECRETARY CHILK: I'm not arguing for the OGC 23 proposal. I'm merely saying that if -- depending on what 1
A 24 your intent is, if your intent -- if you think it's going AceWeral Reporters, Inc.
25 to move papers out of the Commission faster, as a general rule,
28
~
then I'd say that it seems to me that is a better approach
- 2 3
to expedite the Commission decision.
COMMISS,IONER KENNEDY:. Tell me how i t would work
- 4 5
with any -- you know,.let's -- could we get some specifics.,
- Sam, and take a look at this page which is Commiss;ion Action Items Before the Commissioners? How would this bE~ helped?
6 7 I don't understand your proposition.
8 Are you suggesting that the Commissione~rs should 9 not*he: *dealing with those issues?
0 And if so, which. ones?
10 SECRETARY CHILK: . No, I'm suggesting that, A, that 11 Commissioners only address correspondence of certain types.
12 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: How is that going to he1p
- 13 14 15 anything on that page?
SECRETARY CHILK: I previously suggeste~d a method of negative consent, which the General Counsel have picked up.
16 -coMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Oh, so you favor that 17 proposition?
18 SECRETARY CHILK: I have favored it initially. I 19 recommended it several months ago, if I'm not mistaken.
20 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: So you do favor it?
21 That's what I'm trying to get at. Okay.
- 22 23 24 As to correspondence, that's a different question.
I'm talking only about Commission pape:r:s at the moment.
SECRETARY CHILK: I do think that in the final Ace-ral Reporters, Inc.
25 analysis there is a reason that almost every paper on here
- ~*
29 1 that's held is being held --
- 2 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
SECRETARY CH ILK:
Well, I'm And that 3
4 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I've no doubt*about that.
5 SECRETARY CHILK: You will, on any otheir system, 6 the delay will be approximately the same. or the lemgth of 7 time getting through the Commission will be approximately 8 the same.
9 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: We should have asked Mr.
10 Rogovin to be here. I think that's an important fact for 11 him to understand. And indeed I submit right now,, I suggest 12 we provide him with a copy of the transcript of this meeting.
- 13 14 15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I suggest the --
I would think his chores *;..._
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I suggest that may be one 16 of the problems.
17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I think his job is burdensome 18 enough without it.
19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, what troubles me is 20 not that the results under this sytem would be the same.
21 Obviously if I were sure they would, I would, as John
- 22 23 indicated, have no basis for objecting to it, but that they might be different, and it seems to me that the way in which they might be different would be in terms of decisions Ace - ral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 actually being made by three Commissioners while two others
30 still saw an aspect of the problem which merited looking into *
- 2 They might have questions outstanding to the Staff 3 that the other three thought didn't matter very much. I presum 4 we want some paper moved, and if those questions ought to drop 5 to""-a relatively low priority in the Staff since they' re now.
6 academic, if it were a process in which the extensions-were 7 easily granted, that I'm sure I'd have much less trouble 8 with.
9 But the fact is I think that there'll be a number 10 of cases in which for one reason or another the three or 11 four Commissions who have voted will vote to keep it moving, 12 and the questions of the remaining Commissioner will get 13 pretty short shrift or just won't get asked at all.
14 Now maybe as an alternative there is a way to 15 designate certain papers as priority items and to give them 16 something approximating this treatment. Obviously I don't 17 think any reasonable person could object to a system in 18 which matters which had a real urgency in the outside world 19 were treated expeditiously by the Commission.
20 But I would think that that's something different 21 from giving this approach, making this approach :standard
- 22 23 24 for every proposal.
Now I can go through it with an eye to specific sets of deadlines and specific sets of procedures and maybe Ace.era! Reporters, Inc.
25 critique it back. Maybe that would be a useful starting
31 point, but
- 2 3
4 MR. RATHBUN: It seems to me .you' re_ s a:ying something else, though, too, and I think that.is the questions
- that you might pose --
5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Could you use one of those 6 mikes?
7 MR. RATHBUN: -:-- the questions that you might pose 8 would carry answers which if received could change~ -- well, 9 could influence your position in a given matter, but perhaps 10 the others as well. Is that correct?
11 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: That's certainly the 12 point, I'm asking the question, that there's something
- 13 14 15 troublesome in this proposal.
MR. RATHBUN:
your decision.
Which would influence more than 16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Jl... t least the answer to 17 the question might, yeah.
18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: But I think the Staff 19 proposal, though, has a dimension, the concept that if they 20 have those kinds of questions, are able to be explained to 21 the extent that they could convince one of the majority to
- 22 23 also wait, then I see Peter's concern. The concern really is that a minority still has an outstanding problem, but cannot l
convince the majority, that that problem is sufficient to Ace - 24 ral Reporters, Inc.
25 warrant the continuing
32 MR. BICKWIT: I think that's a central issue here .
- 2 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: The fundamental question is really. what is a minority and majority.
3 4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: And for that I would sugges 5 there are a hierarchy in cases, certainly cases which have some 6
urgency outside of the Commission and the Commission's own procedures ought not to be able to be held up by any individual 7
Commissioner indefinitely, if three or four of hie; colleagues 8
9 feel that nothing wiil change their position.
10 So that added to that category of cases, some 11 sort of procedures may make sense, although as I say, I don't 12 know cases in which items of major public importance are
- 13 14 15 being withheld or even withheld by three Commiss:Loners who are bound and determined to go on it.
SECRETARY CHILK: There are papers, we have 16 papers being helld for others, . this one on the pa13"e which Mr.
17 Kennedy just gave me which shows the Staff communicat1ons 18 to the Commission of being held in conjunction with the 19 delegation of authority study.
20 The paper has been up here for some considerable 21 period of time, and there has been views of people that want
- 22 23 to tie the two together, and, you know -- so there are --
you look at it and it says, well, gee, fo"i.ir people have voted on it.
1 I - 24 Ace- ral Reporters, Inc.
25 But, on the other hand, i t has a different kind of a 1
,, ("' i 33 context .
- 2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Is that for 79.;,..84?
3 SECRETARY CHILK: That's 82, 79-82
- 4 There's 2 76, which deals with **eplacement of dacumen s 5 in the task force.
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, the status is listed 7 as Vic and John, no response.
8 SECRETARY CHILK: 79-82? I think Mr. Ahearne 9 has commented on it. Victor has not. But I do know the 10 reason that paper --
11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That was SECY's tabulation.
12 [Laughter.]
- 13 14 15 SECRETARY CHILK: I know the reason the paper is being held, I think that's the case, is that there has been a suggestion which has been discussed before, that the thing 16 be -- that we wait until we delegation of authority study 17 to consider how that one is going to fit in with the other.
18 And so I'm not trying to defend the system, I'm merely trying 19 to say that, you know, whatever it is, there are reasons for 20 them.
21 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I guess this sheet isn't as muc
- 22 23 24 help as I thought it was.
SECRETARY CHILK:
not if it's not right.
Not if it's not right.
I don't --
Certainly Ace-eral Reporters, Inc.
25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Maybe supplying me the large
-*' ..c--------cc~,-------~-c,-,-~,.,.....-,---.~--....,..,.,._ ____,,------,---,,----,---------
/
34 sheets .
- 2 SECRETARY CHILK: I think --- no, let me try to revise: that one to get you what I think --well, it tells you 3
4 the status of the votes, but i t doesn't always tell you that 5 some of the other underlying reasons why nothing i.s happening.
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
- What about:. trying to separate out 7 some of the -- to establish some sort of *hierarchy and separate 8 out some of the more routine ones?
9 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: That's one of the suggestions 10 here.
11 COMMISSION~R AHEARNE: One of the few suggestions 12 here with which I disagree with.
- 13 14 15 time.
SECRETARY CHILK:
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
That's why it didn't fly the last It's II No. 2, right?
16 SECRETARY CHILK: Right.
17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I'm not sure whether I'm for it 18 or agiri it, but I think I'm probably -- what was your objec-19 tion?
20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: My objection was that you 21 may recall last fall, they brought it up, and at that time
- 22 23 they also gave a list of the ones that they classed as contr.over.sial and then the ones that were noncontroversial.
And I found a couple of their so-called noncontroversial Ac.-e- 24 rel Reponers, Inc.
25 ones to be controversial, or at least in my mind quite
35 controversial .
- 2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: The controversial-noncon_troversial break is the wrong one, for just that reason.
3 4 COMMISSIONER.AHEARNE: The idea of a cl.ass that.
5 would have in some sense a Commission approval if a period 6 of time has gone by and nobody had acted on it, if'*it was 7 significant enough to bring to us, we had to act cm it, theref re 8 we ought to act on it.
9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: What I had in mind was a 10 different classification, sort of an urgent and a normal set 11 of tracks, and anything on the urgent track at thE= very least 12 it seems to me Commissioners would make every effort to
- 13 14 15 expedite what they did on them, and at most maybe there should be a set of procedures that are invokable to force it out.
16 But I do have misgivings about setting up a 17 procedure until somebody r.an show me an urgent. item that we're 18 incapable of getting out now.
19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I didn't really view these 20 as addressing so-called, for example, should an emergency crew 21 be sent, that type of question. I thought it was more than
- 22 23 24 the daily business or the weekly business, monthly business of the Commission.
SECRETARY CHILK: You've got to remember, you.
Ace.ral Reporters, Inc.
25 would still see them if you objected to the category, you
36 could request a change in the category at any time. That
- 2 may not invalidate the theory or a system that would allow papers: to go through without requiring any votes; because*
3 4 you could change if you said, hey, I want to vote on that.
5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I guess on the bottom on 6 that which shifts back to the other point, Sam,. is that I 7 think that if it is required for us to act, it's not delegated, 8 it's required for us to act 9 SECRETARY CHILK: That's why i t didn't fly the last 10 time. I understand that. But I still think it's a theory 11 to look at.
12 Somehow you got to get the Commission out of some
- 13 14 15 of these things, I guess is my thought .
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, I think the approach that Devine attempted to take is the right word. Some 16 categories of items ought to be reviewed for delegation.
17 I certainly agree that many of the Congressional letters or 18 the letters that get signed ought to be delegated, whether 19 that's to OCA or directly for EDO to sign out. And there 20 are sets of letters in that direction.
21 Most of the things, as Mr. Kennedy points out, on
- 22 23 this list, these are different types.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Congressional correspondence?
How about sortiIB out things like Ace- ral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: I think it's long needed.
37 80 percent of it doesn't need to come to us at all .
- 2 SECRETARY CHILK: You can reduce your work load by 66 percent if you come up with any reasonable limitation.
3 4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: What is the criterion now?
5 Joe signs all letters to Congress?
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Almost all.
7 SECRETARY CHILK: Well, I'd say, you know, 75 8 percent of them.
9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: A number of them there are a
- l 0 fraction that are just flat out ex parte sorts of things.
11 The executive director, response that you don't normally see 12 at all, and there -- yeah, and some of the constituent 13 14 15 referrals, OCA or Lee responds to.
But I sign an awful lot of Congressional correspon-dence, I must say.
16 MR. ROTHSCHILD: It's my understanding from 17 Congressional affairs that anything that is directed directly 18 to Chairman Hendrie, where he is the addressee, is generally 19 signed by the C_hairman, except with the constituents and the 20 ex parte problems, and that's --
21 VOICE: I think generally the correspondence 22 that's addressed to the Chairman has gone for your signature, 23 response for your signature, with the exception of obviously bucked-over correspondence which usually has a little slip on Ace--al Reporters, ~~-
25 it and is addressed to the Commission, or Congresi;ional Affair ,
38
- or ex part~ correspondence, that's usually addressed by EDO *
- 2 There is a lot of correspondence that comes to the Commission that's addressed to Congressional Affairs or 3
4 Staff or just the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's correspo.nden e, 5 and that's dealt with at the Staff level. There *i.s a lot of 6 correspondence that's addressed to the Chairman, frequently 7 with the assumption that if they address it to the Chairman, 8 it will get a speedier response. But that right'now is being 9 prepared for your signature, and when it's prepare~d for- your.
10 signature, I think almost always it's circulated around by 11 the Secretary with a yellow sheet on top of it.
12 VOICE: It seems to me that we're probably the 13 only..:. 9 gency in the government that automatically would have 14 you sign out letters that are addressed to you, l,eaving aside 15 those referrals. In any other agency they have a standard 16 procedure, you know, the Secretary has asked me to respond, 17 and send off, by the Congressional guy or by the substantive 18 guy, and, you know, if there's something of a substantive 19 nature that warrants going to the top, then you have to rely 20 on the judgment of the guy that gets it. This is true in 21 Defense and State.
- 22 23 24 SECRETARY CHILK: Otherwise it gets deilegated then and generally that's based on the individual that signed the correspondence. For example, you might say I want to Ace.rel Reporters, Inc.
25 personally sign letters to all of the chairmen of the Oversigh
39 Committees, that sort of thing, the President, the vice 2 President, the Cabinet members and so forth, and then the 3 distinction between policy and nonpolicy.
4 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: My recollection is that in 5 the very early days after the Commission was esEablished, 6 most of this correspondence was sent up here for the reason 7 that the Staff was looking for what is the policy thrust, 8 what approaches are we taking, and moreover is it the desire 9 to get the new Commission before the Committees even then, 10 even with the Joint Committee. Be sure that the recognization 11 that you have a new ball game in town was clear.
12 But it seems to me we just remained in that framewo k, 13 as the correspondence has,increased, the number o:E committees 14 trebled, and it's become an all but intolerable sort of 15 burden.
16 CHAIRJVl'..AN HENDRIE: The volume is way up, and it 17 isn't the most fun in the world going through those blasted 18 letters. It sure does slow it down.
19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: This is not an area that 20 I have the same types of concerns about. If we can agree 21 on a criterion for delegating, and as long as I'm sure that
- 22 23 somebody will read those letters and ask questions about them, one, are they written in language that is reasonably easy Ace--ral Reporters, ~~- to understand; and two, do they give a reasonably thorough 25 answer to all -- each and every one of the questions raised 1*
., 40
,. 2 in the incoming* letter, I would be content not to see a fair part of the correspondence.
3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I'd suggest that we adopt, until 4 we find reason to adjust it again, the policy about like that 5 recommended here, that is that inquiries not involving major 6 policy questions, the Secretary would either assi~rn them to 7 the Staff or direct response. They wouldn't come up to the 8 Commission.
9 The ones that would come to the Commission would be 10 responses to letters from the Oversight chairmen or, you know, 11 ranking members of the Oversight committees, where they're 12 clearly dealing on a piece of business between the agency
- 13 14 15 and the Oversight Committee, and letters that carry in them elements of policy decisions the Commission will want to keep track of.
16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: The one suggest.ion that I 17 would make in the change is I guess I would feel more 18 comfortable with OCA doing the screening on the direction.
19 They are likely to be a little more sensitive to the political 20 implications.
21 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Let me add also that in
- 22 23 24 doing this, we are not in any sense proposing that we're downgrading our response. It is only a recognition that CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: We're speeding it.
Ace. .ral Reporters, Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Yes, we're trying to improve
41 the way in which a response can be made, both in time and in
- 2 3
substance.
To that end,.- i t seems to me that even though the
- 4 5
correspondence is going to be responded to by the Staff, a copy of that response ought to go to OCA, which should look it over, to be sure. I'm not suggesting they even have todo it 6
7 ahead of time. All that correspondence ought to be reviewed
.8 by OCA to be sure that everything is consistent and not by 9 mistake or inadvertence begin to veer off on a track that 10 the Commission is not going.
11 VOICE: Right now all the correspondence is
,. 12 13 14 dispatched from --
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Fine, so long as OCA has read it before they dispatch it, my problem is taken care 15 of.
16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Sam, on Congressional stuff, 17 you should consult with OCA.
18 SECRETARY CHILK: I always do.
19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: But I still have my two 20 problems which are that we do get Congressional correspondence, 21 which seems to me to be virtually impenetrable, and we also
- 22 23 outgoing?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You mean the incoming or the COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I'll pass the incoming Ace-
- ral Reporters, 24 Inc.
25 for diplomatic reasons. The outgoing, which I have -- the
42 outgoing has that problem, and there are also times when the
- 2 outgoing response seems somehow to have passed the: complaining questions in the night, and somewhere in thatnecha.nism we' re 3
4 going to take the Commission out of it, there ought to be 5 something else introduced.
6 . COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Well, I guess my own view 7 is I think I would rely on OCA to do that, because~ at least 8 in the sense that I have of one of OCA's functions, which are 9 the link to the Congress, they are the ones who ought to 10 expect to receive the heat. If the answer is both impenetrable 11 and incomplete, in their view, I think i t would serve them well 12 to make sure that: Jboth of those problems are solved.
- 13 14 15 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: But it needs to be clear then that in giving OCA this function, we're also giving them the power to send the letter back to whatever branch of the 16 Staff and say --
17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes, right.
18 Joe, I'm sorry, I do have to leave. I have my 19 sort of vote on all of the paper and additional comments 20 which I'll have typed up and distributed to you people as 21 well as the originators and to SECY.
22 23 24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Thank you.
[Commissioner Ahearne left the room at 4:45 p.m.]
Ace eral Reporters, Inc.
25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: You hadn't planned to vote 1*
43
.,_ 2 afternoon, had you?
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: No, I'd like to do two*things:
First of all, to invite you to take a*cut at 3
4 some of these, because I think some further grinding on the s procedure would be helpful.
6 And secondly; to warn you that I propose, I'd say a 7 week or two down the line, and get some preparation in hand, 8 to have an administrative meeting, and I'll try to provide 9 you some useful summary materials on it, Sam's files beforehan.
10 But at that meeting one thing I propose~ to do 11 would be to march down this list of things that I get every 12 week.and affirm that's it paper by paper, issue by issue,
- 13 14 15 that wherever it's stuck in the proeess, that i t is in fact properly stuck; that there is a Commissioner who has a problem; and that we want to defer to it.
16 Inevitably part of that would be to point out 17 some areas where we want to outvote each others, perhaps, 18 on those holds. I don't know, but I would think that's 19 certainly one of the r'easons for having the meeting, or 20 possible reasons.
21 And with that, it seems to me I guess we've gone I
22 23 24 as far .as we can go._
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: We've only had half of this meeting, the important question, the possible questionable Ace- ral Reporters, Inc.
25 legality of our procedures or the way they are applied, and r
~- \.
44.
I'm very anxious to see that/discussed at some point, but I 2 think all Commissioners .should be present when we do.
3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I'm not sure whether to include 4 that in* our administrative whatever, the administrative s meeting --
6 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: It should be a public 7 meeting.
8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes, certainly. All the 9 administrative* meeting --"*maybe',"We cou'ld schedule one 10 right after the other.
11 In preparation for the administrative one, Sam, 12 we need some decipherable version of your tables, of what is 13 holding these papers up to distribute to Commissioners so that 14 we can sit there and see whether we agree that that's a fair 15 tabulation and summary, and what the reasons for.
16 We might even end up shaking a few loose, you 17 can't tell. Some of them I've forgotten, long since forgotten 18 what.~y view was, and I'd be interested to learn :it.
19 Okay. Thank you.
- 20 {Whereupon, at 4:47 p.m., the hearing was 21 adjourned.]
- -~-, 22 23 24 I
Ace- eral Reporters, *1nc.
25 r