Home > Electronic Reading Room > Document Collections > Congressional Documents > Congressional Testimony > 1999
> Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property
and Nuclear Safety
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 agency's authorization for Fiscal
Year (FY) 2000 as well as the NRC's 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 NRC's 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 Commissioner's 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 NRC-a
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 NRC's authorization
bill, which is consistent with the President's 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 NRC's 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-tied 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
NRC's 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-and 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 NRC's 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 Convention's 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 "Y2K 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 user's 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 Commissioner's 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
Commission's 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 nation's antitrust laws. Today, however, the NRC's
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 Commission's authority to enforce antitrust
conditions in licenses issued before the amendment became effective, and
it would not affect the Commission's 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.
Appendix (1)
FY 2000 BUDGET SUMMARY
(in thousands) |
Program |
FY 1998 |
FY 1999 |
FY 2000 |
Nuclear Reactor Safety |
224,009 |
210,350 |
210,043 |
Nuclear Materials Safety |
61,724 |
61,708 |
63,881 |
Nuclear Waste Safety |
32,635 |
38,742 |
42,143 |
International Nuclear Safety Support |
5,102 |
3,931 |
4,840 |
Management and Support |
148,530 |
150,269 |
144,493 |
Subtotal (S&E) |
472,000 |
465,000 |
465,400 |
Inspector General ($K) |
4,800 |
4,800 |
6,000 |
Total (NRC) |
476,800 |
469,800 |
471,400 |
|