Copyright 1999 Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.
Federal Document Clearing House Congressional Testimony
July 21, 1999
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 10870 words
HEADLINE:
TESTIMONY July 21, 1999 GRETA JOY DICUS HOUSE COMMERCE ENERGY
AND POWER NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AUTHORIZATION
BODY:
Statement of The Honorable Greta Joy Dicus
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION FISCAL YEAR 2000 AUTHORIZATION AND
LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS Introduction Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee,
the Commission is pleased to appear before you to discuss the agencys
authorization for Fiscal Year (FY) 2000 as well as the NRCs legislative
proposals. I am pleased to be accompanied today by my colleagues, Commissioner
Edward McGaffigan, Jr., and Commissioner Jeffrey Merrifield. Commissioner Nils
Diaz regretfully was unable to attend today due to prior engagements. I will
begin by providing the Subcommittee with a summary of ongoing NRC efforts
designed to increase our efficiency and effectiveness in nuclear safety
regulation. Summary The highest NRC priority is to fulfill our fundamental
mission of ensuring the adequate protection of public health and safety and the
environment. Our main focus in FY 2000 will be to achieve the following
performance goals for our regulatory program: maintaining safety; reducing
unnecessary regulatory burden; enhancing public confidence; and increasing our
operational effectiveness, efficiency, and realism. Congressional and
stakeholder interest has served to reinforce, accelerate, and expand our efforts
to review and improve our regulatory programs, and to pursue further change to
achieve these four performance goals. The NRC is improving its internal
efficiency and effectiveness, streamlining its operations, and consolidating its
functions. We are changing our regulations to be more risk-informed. We are
making improvements in the areas of power reactor license renewal, license
transfers, spent fuel dry cask storage, decommissioning, uranium recovery, fuel
cycle facility licensing, and medical use. We have streamlined our hearing
process for reactor license renewals and license transfers, and are considering
broader changes. We are consolidating and streamlining NRC organizations and
operations. We also have integrated our Performance Plan and our budget, in a
manner that links agency performance goals, strategies, performance measures,
and resources, consistent with the Government Performance and Results Act
(GPRA). Significant Accomplishments In testimony last year, the Commission
described a broad range of proposed improvements to our regulatory programs.
Examples of the substantial progress we have made since that time include the
following: Developing a comprehensive revision to the NRC reactor assessment,
inspection, and enforcement programs; Establishing and adhering to an aggressive
schedule for processing license renewal and license transfer applications;
Issuing guidance for streamlining NRC adjudicatory proceedings; Providing
expanded opportunities for stakeholder participation in NRC rulemakings, policy
development, and program changes; Approving the issuance of proposed
risk-informed, performance-based regulations for medical use, fuel cycle
facilities, and high-level waste disposal, and taking initial steps toward
risk-informing our reactor regulations; Completing research to support the
revision of an industry standard on reactor pressure and temperature limits,
which would reduce licensee burden by expanding the operational window for plant
startups and shutdowns. Reducing unnecessary NRC and licensee burdens associated
with low-level enforcement issues; Determining, in a timely fashion, that the
proposed privatization of the U.S. Enrichment Corporation met regulatory
requirements; Completing the review of several dual- purpose spent fuel cask
designs; Realigning the three major NRC program offices, achieving an overall
8:1 staff-to-manager ratio, and reducing our overall staffing and resource
requirements; and Achieving Year 2000 readiness in NRC information systems, 54
days ahead of schedule, and overseeing the successful industry efforts to ensure
Y2K readiness for all nuclear power plant systems that support safe plant
operations. Planning, Budgeting, and Performance Management Implementation As
part of our efforts to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of agency
operations, as well as our implementation of GRPA, the NRC has implemented the
Planning, Budgeting, and Performance Management (PBPM) process. The result has
been (1) the establishment of a sensible, reliable process for defining agency
goals and establishing strategic direction; (2) cost-effective strategies for
achieving those goals; (3) effective resource allocations linked directly to
implementing our strategic direction; and (4) the ability to measure and assess
our progress and overall performance. This system both fosters the flexibility
needed to respond to emerging changes and ensures the durability of current
regulatory reforms. The NRC has continued to make significant progress in
implementing the PBPM process. Revisions to the NRC Strategic Plan and the
development of the integrated FY 2000 Budget/Performance Plan were the initial
PBPM efforts. The integrated FY 2001 Budget Request/FY 2001 Performance Plan
will reflect the continued evolution of this process. An evaluation of the NRCs
PBPM process conducted by an external consultant found that the process is sound
and that it has improved our integrated planning process. We are continuing to
refine the implementation of the PBPM process in order to strengthen the linkage
between our performance goals, strategies, and resource requirements in
developing our FY 2001 budget request. A review of the initial NRC Strategic
Plan (FY 1997-FY 2002) was conducted during the Fall of 1998. As a result of
that review, the agency is further refining the Strategic Plan to reflect our
regulatory reform efforts. The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, aided by an
external consultant, initiated a systematic review of the desired outcomes and
specific measurements for success. The same disciplined review has since been
completed in the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research and in the Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (high-level waste program). These efforts
have identified performance goals and strategies, and those key activities that
contribute most to meeting our goals. Progress on Streamlining the Organization
As part of our effort to be more effective and efficient and to reduce
supervisory overhead, the Commission has realigned its major program offices. As
an examples, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) has reduced from
seven divisions to five, resulting in a net reduction of 15 supervisory
positions. The other major program offices have achieved similar reductions, and
we have reduced overhead even further by eliminating the Office for Analysis and
Evaluation of Operational Data (AEOD) and transferring its functions to other
offices. In total, these and other NRC office realignments will result in the
elimination of 88 managerial and supervisory positions. The Commission has made
notable progress in improving the NRC staff-to-manager ratio. When this effort
was initiated in September 1993, the NRC had slightly over 700 managers and
supervisors. That number has steadily declined, and the realignments described
above will reduce it to about 330 by the end of FY 1999, thereby achieving our
stated goal of an 8:1 staff- to-manager ratio. We also have continued to reduce
at a controlled pace the overall number of NRC employees, expressed in terms of
full-time equivalent (FTE) staff years, using buyouts, early retirements, and
attrition. By the end of this fiscal year, actual NRC staffing levels are
projected to be approximately 2835 FTE, the lowest level in more than 20 years,
down 600 FTE since 1993. The NRC FY 2000 budget request of $471.4 million and
2810 FTE, as submitted to Congress, will allow us to continue the important
regulatory changes discussed in this testimony, while continuing to ensure the
fulfillment of our public health and safety mission. We will continue to look
for ways to increase operational and regulatory efficiency; however, further
reductions may not be possible without compromising our fundamental mission.
Legislative Proposals The Commission has submitted a number of legislative
proposals for the consideration of the 106th Congress. We are pleased to
acknowledge that the Chairman of this Subcommittee, Mr. Barton, has by NRC
request introduced both our reauthorization bill and our legislative proposals.
We urge the approval of several amendments that could help to deter terrorist
activity related to nuclear facilities and special nuclear material: (1) to
authorize guards at Commission-designated facilities to carry and use firearms
where needed to prevent radiological sabotage of the facility or to prevent
theft of materials that could be used for nuclear explosives; (2) to make it a
Federal crime to bring unauthorized dangerous weapons or explosives into
NRC-licensed facilities; and (3) to clearly extend our prohibitions on sabotage
to cover the construction phase of production, utilization, and waste storage
facilities. We also propose a number of amendments designed to increase
Commission efficiency and flexibility: (1) allow continuation of a Commissioners
service past term expiration, under certain circumstances, to maintain a
Commission quorum and to offset delays in the confirmation process; (2) provide
flexibility on hearings associated with Commission licensing of uranium
enrichment facilities; (3) make explicit that the duration of a combined
construction and operating license would allow up to 40 years of operation; and
(4) eliminate the requirement for the NRC to maintain an office in the District
of Columbia. Two proposed amendments are designed to eliminate duplicative
regulatory roles: (1) eliminating NRC antitrust reviews; and (2) establishing
NRC and Agreement State jurisdiction over radiological cleanup criteria for
facilities licensed by them. The last two amendments would relax unnecessary or
outdated provisions: (1) eliminating prohibitions on foreign ownership of power
and research reactors; and (2) providing general gift acceptance authority
commensurate with the provisions of other agencies. FY 2000 Authorization
Request Highlights On May 4, 1999, the NRC submitted proposed legislation which
would authorize appropriations for FY 2000. The proposed legislation would
authorize an FY 2000 NRC budget of $471,400,000, including $465,400,000 for
Salaries and Expenses Appropriation, and $6,000,000 for the Inspector General
Appropriation. The NRC continues to recognize the high priority on reducing
Federal spending emphasized by the Administration and the Congress. This budget,
when adjusted for inflation, represents the lowest budget in the history of the
NRCBa 25 percent reduction over the past seven years. In spite of the
constrained fiscal environment, this budget fully supports the NRC ability to
fulfill our fundamental health and safety mission, while continuing the most
comprehensive reform effort in the history of the agency. Again, however, we
urge caution in contemplating further reductions. A budget summary is located in
Appendix (1). The resources for the Nuclear Reactor Safety Arena support a
comprehensive oversight program, including reactor inspection and reactor
licensing activities for 103 operating reactors and a safety research program.
The reactor oversight program will continue to bear a strong relationship to
facility performance. However, we expect that these programs will change as a
result of our on-going reevaluation of the reactor regulatory program. In
anticipation of these changes, a reduction in event assessment/incident response
activities has been included in the budget estimates. In addition, the budget
estimates reflect anticipated reductions in reactor inspection activities due to
continued improved plant safety performance and expected efficiencies to be
gained from improvements in the inspection process. The budget includes funding
for the review of two new reactor license renewal applications in FY 2000. The
Nuclear Materials Safety Arena supports an increase primarily from costs
associated with making our materials, fuel cycle, and waste regulations more
risk-informed and, where appropriate, performance-based; development and
implementation of the new NRC registration program for certain industrial
devices; initiation of research into the development and demonstration of risk
assessment methods for dry cask storage; and enhanced efforts to develop the
technical basis for performance criteria of dry storage casks under seismic
loading conditions. The increase is partially offset by reductions associated
with Ohio becoming an Agreement State. The Nuclear Waste Safety Arena supports
an increase primarily in the NRC high-level waste repository program activities,
and ongoing decommissioning activities to work off the licensing backlog, to
complete the Standard Review Plan for decommissioning, and to support an
increased level of rulemaking activity. The increase is partially offset by a
reduction in the number of inspections needed at uranium recovery facilities.
The International Nuclear Safety Support Arena reflects a change in how program
funding is obtained. For FY 1999, the NRC renegotiated its reimbursable
agreements with the Agency for International Development (AID) to recover NRC
FTE costs for providing nuclear safety assistance to the countries of the Former
Soviet Union (FSU). In FY 2000, the NRC will include the AID-related FTE costs
for support of FSU and Central and Eastern European countries within the general
fund portion of the requested appropriation. The Management and Support Arena
supports a decrease primarily based on agency-wide program reductions and
efficiencies. Funding also decreases in information technology and management,
as investments in the design and start-up of the Agency-Wide Document Access and
Management System (ADAMS) are completed and the agency moves to a new integrated
financial and resource management system (STARFIRE). User Fees The Omnibus
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 currently requires the NRC to collect
approximately 100 percent of its budget (less the appropriations from the
Nuclear Waste Fund) from user fees. This requirement expires at the end of FY
1999 and reverts to 33 percent. The NRCs authorization bill, which is consistent
with the Presidents budget, includes a legislative proposal to extend the
requirement for 100 percent fee recovery through FY 2004. The Commission
continues to be sensitive to the fairness and equity concerns that 100 percent
fee recovery entails for our licensees. Our authorization bill also will permit
the NRC to charge other Federal agencies Part 170 inspection and licensing fees,
thereby helping to mitigate, to a very small degree, some of the fairness and
equity concerns expressed by the NRC, the Congress, and NRC licensees. The
discussions that follow provide the Subcommittee with further details of NRCs
program activities and a description of our legislative recommendations. Summary
of Program Activities by Arena Nuclear Reactor Safety In the nuclear reactor
arena, maintaining the safety of 103 operating nuclear power reactors remains
our highest priority. In this context, the Commission intends to reinforce,
accelerate, and expand efforts to improve NRC efficiency and effectiveness, to
streamline our operations, and to consolidate our functions where appropriate.
We are committed to making these improvements without compromising our mission
of protecting public health and safety and the environment. We also are
committed to the goal of using risk information and risk analysis as part of a
policy framework that applies to all phases of our nuclear regulatory oversight,
including licensing, inspection, assessment, enforcement, and rulemaking.
Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulation The Commission is making substantial
modifications to the NRC regulatory approach to become more risk-informed and,
where appropriate, performance-based; to enhance our safety focus; to eliminate
unnecessary regulatory burden; to improve the effectiveness, efficiency,
predictability, and transparency of our processes; and to maintain public
confidence in what we do. Recent accomplishments include increasing stakeholder
involvement, refining NRC internal practices, completing NRC pilot programs, and
laying the foundation for risk-informing NRC reactor regulations over the longer
term. Reactor Performance Assessment, Inspection, and Enforcement (The Oversight
Process) As previously stated, the Commission is taking a more risk- informed
and, where appropriate, performance-based approach in the oversight of nuclear
reactors. We have made considerable progress in identifying necessary changes to
the assessment, inspection, and enforcement processes to improve their
objectivity; to make them more understandable, predictable, and risk-informed;
and to focus on aspects of performance that have the greatest impact on safe
plant operation. These efforts have been guided, in part, by four performance
goals, as previously stated, used as "filters" to evaluate, prioritize, and
sunset activities. Each activity is examined to see how it: (1) maintains public
safety; (2) eliminates unnecessary NRC and licensee burden; (3) enhances public
confidence; and (4) makes NRC activities more effective, efficient, and
realistic. The NRC staff has proposed to the Commission a new power reactor
assessment framework, which builds upon the cornerstones of licensee performance
that must be monitored to ensure that nuclear power reactor operations do not
pose unacceptable risks to the public. The cornerstones support the NRC mission
by ensuring that: (1) initiating events are reduced; (2) mitigation systems are
available, reliable, and capable of performing their intended functions; (3)
barriers are sufficient to limit the release of radioactivity; (4) adequate
emergency preparedness functions are maintained; (5) licensees have implemented
adequate programs to protect the public and workers from radiation; and (6)
security measures are in place to protect against radiological sabotage. As part
of the assessment framework, the NRC staff has identified performance
indicators, performance indicator thresholds, and risk-informed inspections that
would supplement and verify the validity of the performance indicator data. This
assessment framework provides a natural basis for a risk- informed baseline
inspection program, one that identifies the minimum level of inspection
required, regardless of licensee performance, to ensure adequate NRC oversight
and independent assessment of licensee performance. Developed using a risk-
informed approach, the proposed baseline inspection program includes a
comprehensive list of inspectable areas within each cornerstone of the
assessment framework. The Commission also has developed an interim Enforcement
Policy that is integrated with the risk-informed inspection and assessment
processes. The new reactor oversight process will integrate assessment of the
performance indicators with the results of the risk-informed baseline
inspections. This integration will allow the NRC to make objective, predictable,
and timely conclusions regarding licensee safety performance, and to communicate
these results effectively to the licensees and to the public. The process
includes specific thresholds Btied to the cornerstones of safety- that will
trigger commensurate licensee and/or NRC action if they are exceeded. We have
made considerable progress in reshaping these NRC regulatory programs. Pilot
inspections were begun in June 1999. Our intent is to make major process changes
incrementally, to allow testing and adjustment during piloting and
implementation. Much of the work that remains in FY 1999 and FY 2000 relates to
bench-marking, conducting pilots, developing procedures, and training the NRC
staff in the new processes. Enforcement Program Changes In parallel with these
long-term improvements to the oversight process, the NRC has made several
short-term changes to its enforcement program to reduce unnecessary NRC and
licensee burden. On July 27, 1998, we issued enforcement guidance to clarify our
existing Enforcement Policy. The changes ensure that: (1) licensees are given
appropriate credit for identifying and correcting violations; (2) NRC and
licensee resources are not expended on violations that do not warrant formal
citations; (3) written responses to Notices of Violation are not required when
necessary information already is docketed elsewhere; and (4) cases involving
multiple examples of the same violation are treated consistently. The
agency-wide implementation of this guidance has resulted in a significant
reduction in the number of low-level (Severity Level IV) violations, which
otherwise would absorb NRC and licensee resources in amounts disproportionate to
the safety significance of the violations. On January 22, 1999, the Commission
approved a change to the Enforcement Policy that will expand the use of
non-cited violations. The change was published in the Federal Register February
9, 1999, and became effective March 11, 1999. Except in limited circumstances,
individual Severity Level IV violations now will not be cited, so long as they
have been entered into the licensee corrective action program. Accordingly, the
NRC inspection program will place more emphasis on assessing the effectiveness
of licensee corrective action programs. This is consistent with the thrust of
the risk-informed inspection process described earlier. In addition, in June
1999, the Commission approved changes to the Enforcement Policy that will
address the use of risk considerations in enforcement decisions and eliminate
the use of regulatory significance, which was not well-defined as an escalating
factor for certain enforcement actions. Reactor Licensing By better focusing
resources and improving internal procedures, the NRC has greatly reduced its
licensing action backlog in FY 1999, and expects to eliminate this backlog
completely in FY 2000. We are working with our stakeholders to improve the
license amendment review process and shorten the review time. We have also
initiated improvements to our 10 CFR 2.206 process for allowing the public to
petition the NRC to take certain actions at licensed facilities. As part of our
commitment to risk-informed regulation, we have changed internal NRC operating
practices. This has included providing additional guidance, training, and
management attention to ensure that risk-informed licensing actions are given
the appropriate priority. The completion of numerous plant-specific
risk-informed licensing reviews in FY 1999 has helped to sharpen the focus on
safety while reducing unnecessary regulatory burden. We also have worked to
improve and clarify our requirements and guidance for facility changes, as well
as our guidance for maintaining updates to plant final safety analysis reports
(FSARs), which are used as reference documents for safety analyses. The
Commission considers the progress made to date in these areas a significant
regulatory success, because the NRC and many of its stakeholders worked closely
in developing processes that both maintain safety and eliminate unnecessary NRC
and licensee burden. The NRC has improved the timeliness of reviews for
converting power reactor licenses to improved standard technical specifications.
This conversion improves consistency in interpreting and applying these
requirements. In total, licensees for approximately 89 reactors have decided to
convert to the new technical specifications, which licensees have projected will
save from $150,000 to over $1,000,000 annually per site. To date, applications
to convert have been received from 58 units, of which 49 units have been given
approval, 23 since July 1998, which has eliminated the large backlog of
applications under review over the last two years. We expect to issue approvals
for an additional 4 units during the remainder of FY 1999. Work on applications
will continue through FY 2000. Reactor License Renewal Establishing a stable,
predictable, and timely license renewal process is a top NRC priority. The
Commission has issued a policy statement laying out its expectations for a
focused review of license renewal applications, built upon our license renewal
regulations. To date, all milestones for the license renewal reviews have been
met. Using case-specific orders, the Commission has established an aggressive
but reasonable adjudicatory schedule for reviewing the Calvert Cliffs and Oconee
applications. Revised goals are to complete the license renewal process in 30
months. We also have prepared procedures to control the reviews and to resolve
generic renewal issues. NRC management meets monthly with the applicants to
monitor progress and the resources expended, and to resolve renewal issues. We
also understand that we will receive the next license renewal application in
December 1999 from Entergy for their Arkansas Nuclear One plant. Other
applications from the Hatch and Turkey Point plants are expected in 2000, and we
have asked for sufficient resources in our FY 2000 budget to handle the
anticipated new applications. Lessons learned from the initial reviews may help
to streamline later reviews even further. License Transfers and Adjudicatory
Processes The Commission has issued a final rule to establish an informal
streamlined hearing process for license transfers. Under this newly-adopted rule
(Subpart M to 10 CFR Part 2), the Commission expects to complete informal
hearings and issue final decisions on most license transfer applications within
about 6-8 months of when the application is filed. The NRC has completed final
Standard Review Plans (SRPs) for antitrust and financial qualifications reviews,
and a draft SRP for foreign ownership issues. A final SRP for foreign ownership
issues is currently being considered by the Commission. SRPs document the
process and criteria to be used by the NRC staff in performing its reviews,
which improves the focus, effectiveness, predictability, timeliness, and
efficiency of the process. In April 1999, the NRC completed its review and
approval of the license transfer requests for Three Mile Island Unit 1 and the
Pilgrim station. The Commission currently is developing a proposed rule that
would provide a more comprehensive streamlining of its adjudicatory processes.
Concurrently, the Commission has been monitoring closely its adjudicatory
tribunals to ensure appropriate adherence to the substantive and schedular
provisions of the Commission Rules of Practice. Reactor Safety Research The NRC
research program continues to contribute in a significant way to our success in
achieving performance goals in the reactor arena. Research efforts are underway
to resolve important safety issues such as the operation of air-operated valves,
which could result in a safety problem if key valves failed when called upon to
perform a safety function. The program also facilitates NRC support for industry
initiatives and contributes to the reduction of unnecessary burden. For example,
working cooperatively with the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME),
NRC- sponsored research established the technical bases for changing the basic
fracture toughness curves for determining nuclear plant pressure and temperature
limits. This provided a significant burden reduction for the majority of
operating plants. In addition, current research is re-evaluating pressurized
thermal shock for reactor pressure vessels (RPVs). Work in this area has shown
significant potential for reduction of unnecessary burden through technical
advancements in materials assessment, fracture mechanics, and non-destructive
evaluation. The research program also is enhancing our understanding of new
nuclear technologies, such as proposals to increase fuel burn-up without
increasing the risk to the public health and safety. We are working to
consolidate the several computer programs now used for thermal-hydraulic and
severe accident analysis. Our research also is supporting the framework for
moving to a more risk-informed and, where appropriate, performance-based
regulatory approach through pioneering work in probabilistic risk assessment.
Building on a long history of advancing PRA technology and recent successes such
as risk-informing reactor piping inspection processes, we are focusing our
research efforts on providing the technical bases for risk-informing NRCs
reactor regulations. Other Significant Reactor Rulemakings The Commission also
has underway other significant rulemakings affecting reactor licensees. The
first is a revision to Appendix K of 10 CFR Part 50, which recognizes the
ability of new flowmeter technologies to more accurately measure water flow
rates. We have informed OMB that this rule will likely constitute a major rule
because it will provide more than $100 million in annual benefits to our
licensees, by allowing them to increase their electrical generating capacity by
one percent. This is an example of NRC recognizing the advantage of updated
technology. The second rulemaking is a revision to Part 50 to allow reactor
licensees to use revised source terms in design basis accident radiological
analyses. This rule is also expected to reduce unnecessary regulatory burden,
reduce worker radiation exposure, and improve overall safety. It is the result
of extensive NRC research and analysis over the past twenty years, which has led
to a much better understanding of accident source terms. Nuclear Materials
Safety In a manner similar to initiatives evolving in the reactor safety arena,
we are enhancing our regulatory programs for nuclear materials safety. The NRC
and Agreement States regulate more than 23,000 specific users of radioactive
materials in medical, academic, industrial, and commercial applications, in
addition to more than 100,000 general licensees. Thirty States currently are
Agreement States. Ohio is likely to become an Agreement State later this year,
with Oklahoma and Pennsylvania expected to become Agreement States in FY 2000,
Minnesota in FY 2002, and Wisconsin in FY 2003. Our testimony highlights some of
the many and diverse program improvements underway in the nuclear materials
arena. Medical Regulation The NRC staff is reviewing public comments on our
proposed revisions to the medical use regulations in 10 CFR Part 35. The
revision of Part 35 will achieve several specific improvements in the medical
use regulatory program. These improvements would make the rule more
performance-based and would focus the regulations on medical procedures that
pose the highest risk, from a radiation safety aspect, with a corresponding
decrease in the oversight and regulatory burden for lower risk activities. The
proposed revision of the Medical Policy Statement and a proposed revision to
Part 35 were published in the Federal Register for public comment on August 13,
1998, and we have had the benefit of many stakeholder interactions since that
time. The Commission will be reviewing a final draft rule this summer, and we
expect to complete this rulemaking in early 2000. The revisions to Part 35 are
being developed using an enhanced participatory process, which is intended to
develop a final rule that will be accepted broadly, and includes participation
by several medical professional organizations, the Organization of Agreement
States, the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, the NRC Advisory
Committee on the Medical Use of Isotopes, and other stakeholders. We have
solicited early public input through Federal Register notices, public meetings
with medical professional societies and boards, open meetings of the groups
developing the revised policy statement and rule language, public workshops, and
Internet postings of relevant background documents. Spent Fuel Storage The NRC
has made significant progress in its review of dual- purpose cask systems for
spent fuel storage and transportation. By December 2000, we anticipate that all
six of the dual purpose cask system reviews in process and two of the
transportation reviews should be completed. The NRC issued a license to the DOE
for the TMI-2 fuel debris storage facility at the DOE Idaho Operations Office
(DOE-ID) in March 1999. That same month, we issued a license to Portland General
Electric (Trojan) for an independent spent fuel storage facility, and we expect
to issue another to Rancho Seco prior to the end of 1999. We transferred the
Fort St. Vrain independent spent fuel storage installation license to the DOE-ID
in June 1999. We will continue to maintain an aggressive licensing review
schedule for the proposed Private Fuel Storage facility located on the Skull
Valley Band of Goshute Indian Reservation in Utah. We also are continuing to
work with the DOE on projects involving spent fuel storage and management. As in
other arenas, we have worked to make our spent fuel storage oversight more
effective and timely while ensuring safety. We have initiated process changes to
enhance and focus technical reviews, to develop guidance for those reviews, to
reduce the time-frame for storage cask certification rulemakings, to enhance our
reviews based on lessons learned, to ensure consistency in licensee change
processes, and to improve communication with internal and external stakeholders.
Mixed Oxide Fuel (MOX) In accordance with the regulatory oversight
responsibility for mixed oxide (MOX) fuel assigned to the NRC in the Strom
Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law
105-261), the Commission has initiated preparatory activities for the licensing
of a MOX fuel fabrication facility and subsequent irradiation of the fuel in
commercial reactors. The Commission notes that the NRC FY 2000 budget request
did not include resources to conduct work related to the DOE MOX fuel program
because, at that time, the NRC had planned to continue to carry out such work
through its reimbursable agreement with the DOE. However, because Public Law
105-261 subsequently gave NRC the authority to license a MOX facility, this work
is now a part of the NRC mission. As a result, the NRC must use its appropriated
funds to carry out this effort, and will not continue its reimbursable agreement
with the DOE. We are making changes to our budget to accommodate this new
responsibility. These appropriated resources will be used to meet with the MOX
applicant and to review topical programs related to the license application for
the fuel fabrication facility, such as safeguards, criticality safety, radiation
protection, and quality assurance, as well as early issues related to
environmental review and the use of MOX fuel in commercial power reactors. A
license application is anticipated in November 2000, and, given current
projections for the licensing review (including the completion of an
environmental impact analysis), we would expect final licensing to occur in FY
2003. We also have determined those aspects of MOX fuel irradiation that
necessitate beginning research in FY 2000 to support the licensing action.
External Regulation of the Department of Energy (DOE) The Commission recognizes
the position of the Secretary of Energy in his recent letter to Congress,
withdrawing support for external regulation of DOE facilities by the NRC.
However, based on the preliminary results of the pilot projects and our
observations to date, the Commission continues to believe that the NRC could
regulate substantial portions of DOE in a manner that would be cost-effective
and relatively straightforward, and that would accomplish the objectives of
external regulation. The cost to the DOE could be minimized Band could even
result in a net savings by reducing the level of DOE oversight to a level
consistent with a corporate oversight model. The NRC had substantial technical
and policy differences with the views presented by the DOE in its March 31, 1999
report to Congress on the results of the pilot program. Consequently, we did not
concur in this report, and instead have recently issued an independent report to
Congress and other stakeholders. Research Contributions Research is contributing
significantly to performance goals in the nuclear material safety arena. For
example, research provides the technical basis to address licensing questions
related to the structural integrity of dry cask storage systems. Research also
is being conducted to provide the technical basis to grant credit for fuel
burn-up in the licensing of spent fuel transportation casks. Hanford Tank Waste
Remediation System Program The NRC continues to assist the DOE in its River
Protection Project - Privatization (formerly known as the Hanford Tank Waste
Remediation System (TWRS) program). In conjunction with this effort, we have
recruited highly competent staff with waste solidification and vitrification
expertise and experience; gained extensive understanding of the DOE plans for
removal and vitrification of the radioactive and highly toxic wastes from the
underground storage tanks; and developed a licensing Standard Review Plan and
regulatory basis for the possible future NRC licensing of the DOE Hanford
vitrification facility. However, the Department of Energy has made significant
changes in its approach to this project in the past year, which in turn have
significant implications for the timing of any NRC licensing of any phase of
this project. The Commission recently directed the staff to consult with the
appropriate Congressional committees, including of course this committee, on how
and whether to continue NRCs involvement in light of the DOE changes. Nuclear
Waste Safety The NRC has launched similar initiatives to improve the
effectiveness and efficiency of our regulatory programs in the nuclear waste
safety arena. The NRC continues to progress in its reviews and pre-licensing
consultation under existing law related to the DOE program to develop a
high-level radioactive waste repository. The Commission firmly believes that a
permanent geologic repository is the appropriate mechanism for the nation
ultimately to manage spent fuel and other high-level radioactive waste (HLW). In
accordance with the statutory direction in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and the
Energy Policy Act of 1992, the NRC, before licensing a repository, must consult
extensively with the DOE to develop a regulatory framework. Further, if the DOE
recommends a site for a repository, the NRC must evaluate the adequacy of the
DOE site characterization and waste form proposal. Ultimately, if the DOE
submits a license application for a repository, the NRC must determine whether
it can authorize repository construction, receipt of waste, and final repository
closure. The NRC is also making significant progress in its programs for nuclear
facility decommissioning, uranium recovery, and low-level waste management.
High-Level Waste - Yucca Mountain Status and Key Issues In FY
2000, the NRC expects to finalize a performance-based regulatory framework by
issuing 10 CFR Part 63. As called for by the Energy Policy Act of 1992, Part 63
would implement health- based standards that would apply solely to the proposed
Yucca Mountain repository. The proposed Part 63, which we
published for public comment on February 22, 1999, establishes licensing
criteria to evaluate the performance of the repository system at Yucca
Mountain, Nevada. Over the course of the public comment period (which
was extended in response to stakeholder requests), we have conducted five public
meetings in Nevada on the proposed technical criteria. In parallel with the
development of Part 63, the NRC continues to develop a Yucca
Mountain review plan and to resolve key technical issues to prepare for
reviewing the DOE license application expected in 2002. These activities aid in
the ongoing review of the DOE draft license application and provide guidance to
the DOE on what is needed for a complete and high quality application. To that
end, we will continue to evaluate the implementation of the DOE quality
assurance program. We expect to complete our review of the DOE draft
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Yucca Mountain
site in FY 2000. The NRC staff has prepared a plan for EIS review that will
include the consideration of public concerns in the preparation of NRC comments.
Decommissioning Program Decommissioning involves removing radioactive
contamination in buildings, equipment, groundwater, and soils to such levels
that a facility can be released for either unrestricted or restricted use. The
NRC is continuing to encourage timely cleanup of approximately 40 material and
fuel cycle facility sites through the implementation of its Site Decommissioning
Management Plan (SDMP). The NRC expects to remove at least three sites from the
SDMP list in FY 1999 and FY 2000. The NRC also will continue to oversee the
decommissioning of 19 commercial power reactors and hundreds of other licensed
facilities. The NRC monitors licensee actions to store or dismantle and
decontaminate the facilities in a safe manner while maintaining the licensed
configuration of the facility and managing the use of decommissioning funds as
described in the regulations. The NRC will continue to enhance the
decommissioning program to add stability, predictability, and efficiency to the
process by incorporating additional experience into rules and guidance
documents. In FY 1999, the NRC initiated the consideration of a rulemaking to
establish criteria for release of solid materials with low levels of radioactive
contamination, in order to establish a regulatory framework more consistent with
existing requirements for air and liquid releases. The process will include
facilitated public meetings to obtain early stakeholder input on major issues
associated with such a rulemaking, including conducting a scoping process
related to the scope of environmental impacts. In addition, last month we
published an issues paper in the Federal Register for public review, to provide
background information in preparation for public workshops in the Fall of 1999
and analysis of stakeholder views in FY 2000. In parallel with these activities,
we will continue to develop the technical basis, draft environmental impact
statement, draft regulatory analysis, and draft regulatory guidance needed to
accompany any proposed action. In FY 2000, the NRC will finalize decommissioning
guidance to provide an overall framework for dose assessment and decision-
making at sites undergoing decommissioning. We will continue development of a
Standard Review Plan for decommissioning materials sites and power reactor
license termination plans, to facilitate the NRC staff review of licensee
submittals in a manner that is timely, efficient, consistent, and ensures the
protection of public health and safety. In addition, we will continue a pilot
study during FY 2000 involving five materials sites. Based on this experience,
recommendations will be made to streamline the decommissioning submittal and
review process for materials sites. International Nuclear Safety Support The NRC
carries out a low-cost but high-impact program of international nuclear safety
activities that supports United States domestic and foreign policy interests in
the safe, secure, and environmentally acceptable use of nuclear materials,
energy, and in nuclear non-proliferation. This program ensures, through active
participation in mutually beneficial bilateral and other international efforts,
that the NRC supports the U.S. policy of strengthening nuclear regulatory
regimes abroad and fostering a global nuclear safety culture, as well as
ensuring the security of strategic special nuclear material. The public and NRC
licensees derive tangible and intangible benefits from these international
activities. Public confidence in nuclear energy as a technology is strongly
impacted by the public perception of how safely nuclear operations are conducted
whether domestically or abroad. In addition, as a major supplier of nuclear
fuel, equipment, and technical services, the United States depends on an orderly
and predictable export licensing regime to maintain marketability. NRC
assistance also helps in the prevention or mitigation of problems in countries
with weak or embryonic nuclear safety and nuclear regulatory cultures. NRC
participation in international safeguards and non-proliferation activities
directly supports the assessment of potential threats against the U.S.
Cooperation with foreign countries in the area of nuclear safety provides a
considerably larger operational experience base than exists in the United States
alone. As one aspect of this cooperation, the NRC maintains extensive research
agreements with organizations in many foreign countries. This cooperative
approach helps to leverage our research resources, and recognizes the inherently
international character of the nuclear business. The resultant resolution of
safety issues leads to benefits for the U.S. nuclear power industry and, more
importantly, aids considerably in the prevention of nuclear accidents in
countries with weak or embryonic nuclear safety cultures. Export Licensing and
Non-Proliferation Activities The NRC reviews and takes action on approximately
75 to 100 import and export license applications per year. In addition, the NRC
actively participates in international export control through groups such as the
Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Zangger Committee, to ensure that export
policies are consistent among nuclear supplier states. The NRC also helps the
U.S. to meet its obligations under Article IV of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty, including support for bilateral and International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) sponsored exchanges of equipment, materials, and scientific and
technological information on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Within the
limits of available resources, the NRC also provides technical assistance to
U.S. policy makers in connection with (1) the U.S.-Russia agreement to make
permanent the cessation of plutonium production for nuclear weapons; (2) the
U.S.-Russia-IAEA Trilateral Verification Initiative on excess weapons material;
(3) the process of making decisions on how to dispose of excess plutonium; and
(4) the Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty. Finally, the NRC is working closely
with the Executive Branch to facilitate the effective implementation of the
Strengthened Safeguards System of the IAEA. Bilateral and Multilateral
Activities Since the demise of the Soviet Union, particular emphasis has been
placed by the United States and the international community on addressing both
nuclear safety and nuclear materials safeguards concerns in the countries of the
former Soviet Union (FSU) and in central and eastern European countries (CEE).
The NRC strongly supports these efforts, and has focused its role primarily on
strengthening the nuclear regulatory authorities of these countries. We conduct
programs (funded primarily through the U.S. Agency for International Development
(AID), DOD, and DOE) to train regulators from FSU and CEE countries on the
creation and/or strengthening of their regulatory capabilities. We continue to
see positive results from our assistance efforts with the Russian, Ukrainian,
Kazakh, Armenian, Czech, Slovak, Lithuanian, Bulgarian, and Hungarian
regulators. Much of this success can be attributed to their own willingness and
desire to enhance their nuclear safety and regulatory infrastructure, and their
growing expertise in the application of Western safety and safeguards review
tools. Vice-Presidential Commissions Two examples of high-level Commission
opportunities to focus on nuclear safety with top U.S. and foreign government
officials are the U.S.-Russian Joint Commission on Economic and Technological
Cooperation, chaired by the U.S. Vice President and the Russian Prime Minister,
and the U.S.-South African Binational Commission (BNC), chaired by the Vice
President and the South African Deputy President. Both commissions have achieved
measurable results in enhancing nuclear safety, and we look forward to continued
cooperative efforts in this area. International Safety Conventions The NRC has
worked extensively in the development of the Convention on Nuclear Safety (CNS)
the first instrument to address directly the safety of nuclear power plants
worldwide. This Convention obliges contracting parties to establish and maintain
proper legislative and regulatory frameworks to govern safety. On April 11,
1999, the United States became a party to the Convention, and participated in
the final plenary of the first Review Meeting in April 1999. The U.S. also
deposited its National Report, which had been prepared by the NRC. We anticipate
fully participating in all aspects of the Conventions preparatory,
organizational and review meetings in the future. International conventions on
waste management and liability also have been negotiated, as integral parts of
U.S. efforts to enhance global nuclear safety . These conventions are undergoing
Executive Branch review and likely will be forwarded by the President to the
Senate for its advice and consent to ratification in calendar year 1999.
Management and Support Arena As stated earlier, our FY 2000 budget request
supports a decrease in the area of management and support, primarily based on
agency- wide program reductions and efficiencies, with additional decreases due
to the completion of milestones in information technology and management. A
particular area of emphasis, which I will cover in more detail, is our effort to
resolve Year 2000 computer issues. Year 2000 Implementation All 88 of our
internal mission-critical, business-essential and non-critical systems have been
examined and, as needed, fixed with regard to the Year 2000 (Y2K) problem. This
work was accomplished almost two months ahead of the OMB-established milestone,
and well under budget. The one NRC mission-critical system that is directly
linked to operating nuclear power plants is our Emergency Response Data System
(ERDS). This application performs the communication and data transmission
functions that provide near real-time data to NRC incident response personnel
during declared emergencies. We have verified that this system has been made Y2K
compliant and that the interface of the system with licensed facilities is
functional. Externally, the NRC is working with nuclear power plants and our
other licensees to ensure Y2K readiness for those systems needed to operate and
shut down plants safely, recognizing the importance of ensuring electrical grid
reliability and the safety and security of radioactive materials. Based on the
results of our audits, we have concluded that licensee management oversight of
the Y2K readiness programs generally has been aggressive and is contributing to
the success of nuclear facility Y2K readiness efforts. Nonetheless, NRC
inspectors assigned to power reactor sites have reviewed licensees Y2K programs
to ensure that all facilities are taking appropriate actions. Based on our
reviews, we believe that our licensees are devoting the necessary resources to
their programs to meet their readiness schedules. In July 1999, the NRC received
reports from all 103 operating nuclear power plants indicating that there are no
Y2K-related problems that directly affect the performance of safety systems.
Sixty-eight of these plants indicated that all of their computer systems are
AY2K ready. The remaining 35 plants reported that they have additional work to
complete on a few non-safety computer systems or devices to be fully Y2K ready,
and provided their schedules for completing this work. Of the 35 plants, about
one-third have remaining work involving systems needed for power generation.
Other plants have work that deals with plant monitoring and administrative
systems. I would emphasize that none of the remaining work affects the ability
of the plants to shut down safely, if needed. Typically, the remaining Y2K work
to be completed after July 1 of this year is dependent on a scheduled plant
outage this fall, or the delivery of a replacement component. The NRC will
continue to monitor the progress at those plants that have remaining items of
work, and will independently verify completion of these items, including Y2K
contingency plans procedures for dealing with unexpected events. All licensees
are expected to be Y2K ready and to have contingency plans in place before
December 31. If, by the end of September, we believe that any needed Y2K
readiness activities will not be completed in advance of the December 31 to
January 1 transition, we will take appropriate action, including the issuance of
shutdown orders, if necessary. Legislative Proposals to the 106th Congress The
Commission has submitted a number of legislative proposals for the consideration
of the 106th Congress. We are pleased to acknowledge that the Chairman of this
Subcommittee, Mr. Barton, has by NRC request introduced both our reauthorization
bill and our legislative proposals. These proposals are designed to improve our
safeguards provisions, to increase our efficiency and flexibility, to eliminate
duplicative regulatory roles, and to relax unnecessary or outdated provisions.
Each of the individual proposals is discussed below. Improvements to NRC
Safeguards Provisions Carrying of Firearms by Licensee Employees: This amendment
would authorize guards to carry firearms at Commission-designated facilities
owned or operated by a Commission licensee or certificate holder, at any
NRC-licensed or certified facility where there are special nuclear materials
present, and while engaged in transporting special nuclear materials. The guards
would be authorized to use the weapons, in circumstances defined by Commission
regulations and guidelines, where necessary to prevent sabotage of a facility
designated by the Commission or to prevent theft of materials capable of being
used for nuclear explosives. The purpose of the amendment is to help mitigate
licensee guards reluctance to use their weapons in defending such facilities and
transports against attack because of fear of prosecution under State laws that
provide that weapons may be used only to protect the users own life or the life
of another. The amendment could provide the possibility of shielding the guards
against prosecution by state authorities for discharge of firearms in the
performance of official duties. The authority that would be provided by this
amendment already exists with respect to guards at Department of Energy
facilities and DOE guards transporting special nuclear materials. Unauthorized
Introduction of Dangerous Weapons: This amendment would allow the Commission to
issue regulations that would, in effect, make it a Federal crime for an
individual who has not received prior authorization to bring any dangerous
weapon, explosive, or other dangerous instrument likely to produce substantial
injury or damage into facilities subject to NRC licensing authority. Currently,
the NRC may impose sanctions against the licensee, but no Federal law permits
imposing criminal sanctions against the individual responsible for bringing the
weapon or other dangerous instrument on site. Enactment of this amendment would
assist NRC licensees in their efforts to safeguard licensed nuclear facilities
and materials against nuclear theft or radiological sabotage. Sabotage of
Production, Utilization, Uranium Enrichment, Fuel Fabrication, or Waste
Facilities: Section 236 of the Atomic Energy Act currently addresses sabotage or
attempted sabotage of production, utilization, and waste storage facilities.
However, it can be argued that this provision is not applicable during the
construction phase of such facilities. Past events have indicated that sabotage
can occur during the construction phase that is not discovered until the
operational phase, and thereby has the potential to impact public health and
safety. This amendment would make it a Federal crime to sabotage such facilities
during the construction phase, if the sabotaging action could jeopardize public
health and safety. In addition, this amendment would extend these sabotage
provisions - for all phases - to other types of facilities, including (1) waste
treatment facilities, (2) waste disposal facilities, and (3) uranium enrichment
and nuclear fuel fabrication facilities licensed or certified by the NRC.
Enacting criminal sanctions to help deter sabotage and increasing the range of
facilities covered will provide further protection of the public health and
safety. Increased Efficiency and Flexibility Continuation of Commissioner
Service: This amendment would allow a Commissioner whose term has expired to
continue in office (subject to the removal power of the President) until
whichever of the following occurs first: (1) his or her successor is sworn in,
or (2) the expiration of the next session in Congress after the expiration of
the Commissioners fixed term of office. Enactment of this amendment would, in
most circumstances, allow the Commission to maintain a quorum of at least three
individuals, even when the terms of several successive Commissioners have
expired without their reappointment, thus avoiding the potential disruption of
agency business due to the loss of a quorum. It would also be helpful for cases
in which a Commissioner is renominated, but with insufficient time for the
Senate to act before the expiration of the prior term. Such a holdover provision
would enable the Commission to operate in accordance with the intent expressed
by the Congress in the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, that the NRC should
have a 5- member Commission. Holdover provisions are found in the organizational
statutes of the majority of independent regulatory agencies. Hearings on
Licensing Uranium Enrichment Facilities: This amendment would improve the
hearing process associated with NRC licensing of uranium enrichment facilities
by eliminating the requirement for such a hearing to be on the record. Hearings
that are required to be on the record must conform to the more elaborate
formalities prescribed by the Administrative Procedure Act. Such hearings, if
not appropriately disciplined, can be inefficient, protracted, and costly. This
amendment would not eliminate the possibility that the Commission might
determine that a formal hearing is appropriate for the licensing of uranium
enrichment facilities, but it would give the Commission the flexibility to
determine which type of hearing is most suitable. Duration of Combined
Construction and Operating Licenses: The Commission is seeking a technical
correction that would make the duration of a combined construction and operating
license consistent with the duration of a license for an initial operating
license under the circumstances where the construction and operating phases are
licensed separately. The Atomic Energy Act authorizes the NRC to specify a
duration of up to 40 years for any commercial license it issues, including an
initial operating license for a nuclear power plant. The Energy Policy Act of
1992 amended the Atomic Energy Act to make explicit that the NRC can issue a
combined license for construction and operation of a nuclear power plant.
However, the Energy Policy Act did not make explicit that the duration of a
combined license should allow for up to 40 years of operation. In the absence of
such an explicit provision, it might be argued that the period of operation
under a combined license is limited to 40 years from the time authorization is
given to construct the plant. There is no safety reason for such a limit. Office
Location: This amendment would change the requirement that the NRC maintain an
office for the services of process and papers with the District of Columbia
(DC). The Atomic Energy Act requirement that the NRC maintain such an office was
enacted before the Commission consolidated the agency in Rockville, Maryland,
and there is no longer a sound reason for maintaining the DC office. The
elimination of the requirement could result in a monetary savings for the agency
because it would eliminate the need to maintain a DC address for hand or mail
delivery of documents. Commission efficiency could be enhanced if this statutory
requirement were eliminated. Elimination of Duplicative Regulatory Roles
Elimination of NRC Antitrust Reviews: This amendment would eliminate the
Commissions antitrust review authority with respect to pending or future
applications for a license to construct or operate a utilization or production
facility. At the time of enactment of the Atomic Energy Act provisions requiring
NRC antitrust reviews in connection with application for a Commission license to
construct or operate a commercial utilization or production facility, the NRC
appeared to be in a unique position to ensure that the licensed activities of
nuclear utilities would not create a situation inconsistent with the nations
antitrust laws. Today, however, the NRCs antitrust reviews unnecessarily
duplicate other agencies efforts, particularly those of the Department of
Justice and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The amendment would
preserve the Commissions authority to enforce antitrust conditions in licenses
issued before the amendment became effective, and it would not affect the
Commissions legal authority with respect to those conditions. Actions Relating
to Source, Byproduct and Special Nuclear Material: The Commission has issued
regulations that establish radiological criteria for the termination of licenses
that fall under its regulatory authority and are protective of public health and
safety. Creation of an additional cleanup standard by Federal statute or
regulation may make it extremely difficult for the cleanup of a site to reach
finality. This amendment of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) would make clear that the
standards issued by the Commission and its Agreement States would govern cleanup
of Atomic Energy Act material at facilities licensed by them. There would,
however, be an exception that will allow the Commission or an Agreement State to
invoke the application of CERCLA in the rare circumstance where that is
necessary to effect adequate cleanup. This amendment would also include in the
CERCLA definition of Federally permitted release Atomic Energy Act material that
is released in accordance with NRC regulations following termination of a
license issued by the Commission or by an Agreement State. This would make the
treatment of such releases consistent with the treatment of releases under a
current NRC license. Relaxation of Unnecessary or Outdated Provisions
Elimination of Foreign Ownership Prohibitions: These amendments would eliminate
the current restrictions on foreign ownership of utilization facilities (power
and research reactors). These restrictions were originally enacted at a time
when commercial development of nuclear power was in its very early stages, but
the situation has changed significantly since then. Today, commercial use of
nuclear power is common in many countries, and the underlying technology is
widely known. The Commission would continue to scrutinize applicants for
licenses to ensure that issuance of a license to a new owner would not be
inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the
public. Gift Acceptance Authority: This amendment would provide the NRC with
general gift acceptance authority. To implement this new authority, the
Commission would be required to establish criteria to ensure that the acceptance
of a gift would not compromise the integrity of the work of the agency. The
issue of NRC gift acceptance authority has arisen a number of times in recent
years, primarily with respect to acceptance of library and training materials
from outside sources. Many other government agencies currently have such
authority. Conclusion Over the past few years, we have made substantial progress
in improving our regulatory programs, and we have accelerated that progress in
the past year. Our interactions with this Subcommittee have contributed to this
success, and we welcome your continued constructive oversight. With sufficient
resources, strong leadership, and broad support, we plan to continue our efforts
to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the NRC by pursuing the paths
that already have been charted. The Commission fully expects that new areas will
continue to arise, requiring attention and additional effort. As with current
areas of reform, we will continue to ensure stakeholder involvement in the
change process. We believe that we have laid the groundwork not only for
significant short-term adjustments, but for enduring improvements to the NRC
regulatory paradigm, institutionalized and stabilized through incorporation into
our performance-based planning process.
LOAD-DATE: July
23, 1999