ML20125C174

From kanterella
Revision as of 01:35, 13 July 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Advises of Change in Vote on SECY-83-495 to Increase Ceiling for Routine Insp of Power Reactors,Based on Dircks 840417 Memo
ML20125C174
Person / Time
Issue date: 04/19/1984
From: Asselstine J
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To: Chilk S
NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
Shared Package
ML20125C017 List:
References
FOIA-84-564 NUDOCS 8506110679
Download: ML20125C174 (1)


Text

[

  • UNITED STATas 'p Dircks Ror i

fN NUCLEAR REGULATSRY COMMISSION C!ASHINITON, D.C. 20555 Rehm I I  ;

  • b4 Stello l Norry 1

.' Q**QT *** (_B.ill--MRI e r .

OFFICE OF THE l COMMISSIONE R April 19, 1984 l l

MEMORANDUM FOR: Samuel Chilk, SECY FROM: James K. Asselstine

SUBJECT:

SECY-83-495 --LICENSE FEES Based on Bill Dircks' April 17, 1984 memorandum I have decided to change my vote on SECY-83-495 to increase the ceiling for routine inspection of power reactors from $160,100 to $300,000. The proposed ceiling of $160,000 was based on approximately six months of FY 81 data where 3,135 hours0.00156 days <br />0.0375 hours <br />2.232143e-4 weeks <br />5.13675e-5 months <br /> appeared to be the upper limit. The -

list of actual inspection hours for FY 81 shows an actual upper limit of 5.872 hours0.0101 days <br />0.242 hours <br />0.00144 weeks <br />3.31796e-4 months <br />. This number multiplied by $53 totals $311,216..

I would settle for a ceiling of $300,000 for routine inspections at power reactors. Under this revised fonnulation, we would be saving the federal government as much as $12 million. In fact, I suspect that the number of routine inspection hours in FY 84 is closer to or perhaps more than the upper bound of 5,872 than to 3,135.

  • cc: Chaiman Palladino
  • Comissioner Gilinsky Comissioner Roberts  :

Comissioner Bernthal

'~

OGC OPE u ..

QO :e O

8506110679 841231 PDR FOIA REYNOLD84-564 PDR A/4

V to ,

J i

LAW OFFICES OF BISHOP, LIBERMAN, COOK, PURCELL & REYNOLDS laOO SEVENTEENTH STREET, N. W, IN NEWv0RK WASHINGTON, D. C. aOO36 SISMOP. LIBERMAN & COOM as anomoway (aCa) es7-eaoo wEw vonn NEw vonn sooo.

TELEX 440674 INTLAW UI (ala) 243- se co TELEM 222767 I i

I

/ July 6, 1984 Mr. J. M. Pelton pggggggg Director ACT REQUEST office of Administration U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission M -U-g4 y washington, D.C. 20555

% f8 7-/O-#y RE: Freedom of Information Act Request

Dear Mr. Felton:

Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. $552) and the NRC's reg'ulations (10 C.F.R. $9.3, et seq.), Bishop, Liberman, Cook, Purcell and Reynolds requests copies of all letters, reports, meeting minutes, manuals, memoranda, guidelines, testimony or other documents related to the NRC's plans, policies, and procedures for implementing newly promulgated 10 C.F.R. Part 170, 49 Fed. Reg. 21293 (May 21, 1984).

The regulation establishes that many license and inspection fees will be based on actual costs, as calculated from a total of professional staff hours and associated support and contractual service costa expended in performing the review or inspection.

This request includes but is not limited to the following:

1. Documents which reflect preliminary or final views en which HRC personnel and expenses will be included as charges in license and inspection fees based on actual costs.
2. Documents which establish the preliminary or final plans, policies, or procedures for recording and attributing NRC professional hours and associated support hours for inclusion in license or inspection fees.
3. Documents which reflect preliminary or final views on which NRC expenses related to contested licensing hearings will be included in license or inspection fees.

9!P, ,

v/

y 7 .

b _

w- .

    • s

. ..y.

BISHOP, LIBERMAN, COOK, PURCELL & REYNOLDS Mr. J. M. Felton July 7, 1984 Page 2 9

4. Documents uhich establish the preliminary or final plans, policies, or procedures for recording and attributing professional hours and expenses related to multiple unit license application reviews for inclusion in license fees. ,s
5. Documents dhich,refl6ct preliminary or final views on which NRC reactive inspections will be subject to inspo.'c tion f ees .

We would appreciate your prompt response to this request as provided by 10 C.F.R. $9.e. ,

Sindere y i

t l

Nichold S Reynolds-Partne ,

~NSR/ sea

'w &

s I k De r

+

k w

E i e l-I 'h

.g t,sa

, - __ _. . . - . _ . , _ - _ _ . -, _ _ _ . -