ML20138J465
| ML20138J465 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/13/1997 |
| From: | Dicus G NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Hoyle J NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138J441 | List: |
| References | |
| SECY-96-147-C, SECY-96-249-C, NUDOCS 9702070282 | |
| Download: ML20138J465 (2) | |
Text
.- . . - . - . -
.- l l
l l
I NOTATION VOTE RESPONSE SHEET TO: John C. Hoyle Secretary of the Commission i
r l FROM: COMMISSIONER DICUS l
l
SUBJECT:
SECY-96-249 - STAFF RESPONSE TO SRM ON SECY-96-147 REGARDING REDUCING NEED FOR EXEMPTIONS AND CONSISTENCY OF THE EXEMPTION PROCESS l
Approved x w/ comments Disapproved _ _ Kostain Not Participating Request Discussion COMMENTS: See Attached ab be i rz o Y V dIGNATURE Release Vote / X_/
l (j [ DATE Withhold Vote / / j
( Entered on "AS" Yes A No i
, 9702070282 970129 l PDR COMMS NRCC l CORRESPONDENCE PDR
1 Commissioner Dicus Comments to SECY-96-249 l
- 1. I concur with Cmr. McGaffigan's comments. In addition, I also believe that the Chairman's initiative to examine regulatory improvements in the area of exemptions was needed, and was beneficial.
$ 2. I agree that the exemption review process as described in the paper should be retained,
< insofar as it closely mimics that of the established review and approval process .'or license amendments, and to the extent that the process remains a staff activity. I believe that the granting or denial of Exemptions is purely Staffs responsibility, and these determinations should not be influenced by, or involve, the Commission, as a general practice.
i !
In addition, the review process for exemptions should be formalized and documented.
.i d
i t
.