It sure looks like Obama anticipated his lost of the senate...thus drastically reducing regulations. He is pulling a president Clinton, angling favoritism to the nuke industry as he lost popularity.
The deal with over regulation is when a plant gets into big troubles and it become public...as self protection with not earlier doing their job, they come back with new rules. If the NRC could anticipate problems and strongly interact with a plant to change their bad behaviors before the event...then you wouldn't need half the rules they got.
I can't think of one time in accident and a drastic decline in plant and corporate performance...there wasn't a prolong period of decline that the agency didn't act on before the plant got into a accident. These things give plenty of warning.
This follows similar political cycles with the NRC. The mad dog Republicans take over the Presidency, congress or all, there becomes a drastic reductions of regulations and oversight of the NRC in their cycle. When the Democrats get similar levels of power, they claw back minimal amounts of regulations and increased oversight. We have had declining levels of transparency,regulations and oversight for many decades...the public really see little with what is going on in a nuclear power plant.
As a tactic to destroy the Nuclear industry, maybe it is better to get the commissioners into pro nuclear profile and then they will destroy themselves with giving the utilities what they want.
New US NRC chairman says structure, safety, regulation among priorities for 2015
Washington (Platts)--9Jan2015/447 pm EST/2147 GMT
In the 33 years he served on the staff of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Stephen Burns says, he never imagined he would be appointed to the commission, let alone become its chairman.
Nonetheless, Burns was sworn in January 1 as the agency's 16th chairman, replacing Allison Macfarlane, who resigned to become a professor at George Washington University.
Burns discussed some of his near-term priorities for NRC in an interview Wednesday. He noted that he is "still in the process of getting reacclimated and learning the ropes" at the agency, which he left in April 2012 to serve as head of the legal affairs section in the secretariat at the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development's Nuclear Energy Agency, based in Paris.
Burns has held a variety of positions at NRC, most recently as general counsel from 2009 to 2012.
Burns said he is "trying to reach out to the other commissioners and talk about what's on their minds." A closed commission meeting will be held the week of January 12 "to kick around organizational issues and make sure I get their feedback on how I can be most effective in terms of helping them and helping the commission itself move forward," he said.
Some of his priorities for the coming year will include reviewing NRC's organizational structure to assess "how we're configured" and to consider whether the agency is "right-sized."
Continuing oversight of safety enhancements being made at nuclear power plants in response to lessons learned from the 2011 accident at Fukushima I in Japan will also require a good deal of time and attention, he said.
Burns also noted the importance of reviewing NRC's approach to regulation of power reactors undergoing decommissioning. On December 30, the commission unanimously approved staff's proposal to undertake a rulemaking on the matter. Currently, reactors in decommissioning must request exemptions from operating reactor regulations in areas such as security and emergency planning on a case-by-case basis. Staff will consider whether a better approach can be developed.
Burns said he has "heard a lot from the hill [Congress] and industry about whether it's time to really look at how we structure the decommissioning process." The new rulemaking will look at the decommissioning exemption process now being used, to see if it is "the right fit under the circumstances," he said.
EFFECTS OF REGULATION
Asked if he believed the US nuclear power industry is overregulated, Burns said, "Some are going to say they're overregulated, and some are going to say we're underregulated."
NRC staff is considering how the agency's decision-making process can address the so-called cumulative effects of regulation, Burns said.
"This is not only an issue for the nuclear industry; it's an issue in regulation generally," he said, noting that the White House Office of Management and Budget has also been looking at ways to address those effects
"Our ultimate responsibility is public health and safety, and common defense and security," he said. "Understanding that ultimately that's our mission, I think it is also incumbent on us to look at those criticisms" alleging overregulation.
The US Government Accountability Office said in a report last month that NRC does not always follow its own guidance when developing cost-benefit analyses of proposed regulations and suggested ways those analyses could be improved. Burns said he will read the report and consider its recommendations.
"That's something we need to take a serious look at," he said.
Burns said that "ultimately, questions of in terms of the economics [of nuclear power] are not issues the NRC can solve. I think we have to keep focused on the public health and safety, the safety and security mission of the agency. But we have to listen to the questions that come about the impact of regulation and ensure that we're doing a good job of understanding what those impacts are when those questions are raised."
WORKING WITH CONGRESS
Asked about criticisms by some members of Congress that NRC was withholding some information needed to oversee the agency, Burn said, "I want to make sure I understand what some of those issues are, because ... coming back in, I'm not sure I have a full appreciation of where some of the controversies have been."
Burns said that, "for the most part, Congress has got a lot of authority or power in terms of the information it should be able to get from the agency. And there is a general obligation for the agency to provide information to Congress. I think there are some areas -- and I think those are relatively few -- where there may be some, you know, controversy or some push and pull with respect to certain types of documents or information. I think we should try to minimize that.
Burns said he would seek "to make sure I understand what those issues are and try to work through them." He said he would emphasize "establishing good rapport with our oversight committees, with their members. That's what I'm trying to do in terms of reaching out."
"I don't think I can envision a perfect world of no conflicts, but I think we do our best to minimize" such conflicts, he said
No comments:
Post a Comment