ML20134J388
| ML20134J388 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/19/1996 |
| From: | Dicus NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Shirley Ann Jackson, Rogers, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20134B619 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-96-493 COMGD-96-001, COMGD-96-1, NUDOCS 9702120109 | |
| Download: ML20134J388 (1) | |
Text
. - - -. .. .- ..- -- . - .
A '
' ' / \ UNITED STATES
- d, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W ASHIN GTON, D.C. 20555 h,
July 19, 1996 COMGD-96-001 f! s
[
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONE R MEMORANDUM TO: The Chairman Commissioner Rogers t
FROM: Commissioner Dicus
SUBJECT:
NUCLEAR SAFETY PROPOSAL I have no objection to the introduction of a new matrix, nuclear j safety, in discussions with the Energy Commission of the Gore-1 Mbeki commission. It should be made clear, however, that any commitments of NRC that arise from the discussions are subject to b Commission review and approval.
I wish to note that the July 12, 1996, letter to Mr. Annan concerning this matter (attached) was not discussed with me or
! reviewed by me prior to its dispatch.
2.
I also wish to note my concern over the existing policy of l offering NRC training for foreign students without charge and to seek funding for their travel and per diem from other Federal sources. This issue is generic in nature and its genesis is not I
the current proposal related to South Africs. At this time, NRC staff is moving forward with implementation of a policy beginning next fiscal year of requiring Agreement States to fund the travel and per diem of.their students attending NRC training courses and to reimburse the NRC for the training costs. I intend to l
formally raise this issue in the near future because of the l
obvious issue of inequity - requiring Agreement States to pay for NRC provided training while using NRC licensee fees or seeking i U.S. taxpayer funds to pay for NRC provided training of foreign i students.
3, Finally, I must emphasize the need to consult with the Commission in a timely manner on issues with significant policy In implications this and correspondence conveying Commission positions.
instance, a letter was sent out from the agency purportedly I presenting a " formal proposal froin the Nuclear Regulatory Commission" which was not, in fact, reviewed by or concurred in by the Commission. I recommend that immediate action be taken to remind all officials within the agency that they may not represent views as being " Commission positions" absent Commission concurrence. Such a communication might also remind employees that official Commission directions to the staff take the form of 2
I_