ML25195A220
| ML25195A220 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/11/1979 |
| From: | Carbon M Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Ahearne J NRC/Chairman |
| References | |
| Download: ML25195A220 (1) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 December 11, 1979 Honorable John F. Ahearne Chairman
- u. s. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
Dear Dr. Ahearne:
The following comments are provided in response to your letter of October 3, 1979 regarding the adequacy of procedures for transmitting recommendations and questions generated by the ACRS, its subcommittees, and its individual members to the NRC Staff and the subsequent staff responses.
The ACRS realizes that its procedures and practices for transmitting rec-ommendations and questi~ns to the NRC Staff, and to the Commission itself, have been deficient in some respects. Steps have been and are being taken to correct this, both by the ACRS itself and in cooperati-on with the NRC Staff. For example, in 1976 the Committee and the then Director of Licens-ing agreed on a procedure to obtain clarification of AffiS recommendations
'ffflen needed. This procedure has been used only sparingly by the NRC Staff.
The Committee is aware of the need to indicate priorities more specifically and to describe more clearly the basis for its concerns and questions and the degree of importance that it attaches to them.
Although there have been significant problems with the nature and timeliness of the NRC Staff's response to ACRS concerns, the Committee believes that changes in its procedures, together with one or more of the changes in the NRC Staff's procedures now being considered, will be of help in improving the present situation.
It must be noted, however, that many of the ACRS recommendations are for-mally addressed to the Commission itself, in accordance with the statu-tory requirement that the ACRS advise the Commission.
In many cases, these reports are simply referred by the Commission to the NRC Staff for action or response.
In most of these cases, this procedure is appropriate.
However, there are some circumstances in which the recommendations involve matters of policy or are such that action or specific attention by the Com-mission itself, particularly an indication of priority and authorization of appropriate resources; is required. The degree to 'ffflich these reports receive the attention of the Commission has not always been apparent.
Max W. Carbon Chairman 2820