re: Agreement State - NRC relationship

[MVala@USCCMAIL.uscc.bms.com]

     Bill Pitchford wrote:

     As a former Agreement State Employee and seasoned veteran of State
     Government, I have genuine reasons to believe that the relationship
     between the NRC and Agreement States is a very important relationship
     to nurture and maintain.

     Without NRC provided training most Agreement State programs would dry
     up and blow away. (With a couple of notable exceptions.)

     Without NRC adequacy and compatability issues some programs might find
     it administratively impossible to conduct rule-makings and
     enforcement.

     Without NRC involvement some issues are beyond the technical
     capabilities of some Agreement State programs to efficiently and
     effectively handle. The technical assistance provided would be
     difficult to obtain from outside sources in a manner that would
     maintain objectivity.

     Without the NRC the exchange of regulatory and safety information
     could be impaired unless another entity (such as CRCPD) was utilized
     to facilitate this sharing of data and experience.

     ***********************

     I concur that the NRC provides valuable services to the Agreement
     State programs.  I think it's about time that the Agreement States pay
     for these services.  Since 1991, the NRC has been completely funded by
     NRC licensees through annual fees.  As a result all these services to
     Agreement States are subsidized by NRC licensees. According to the
     NRC, the fees are commensurate with the time required to maintain your
     licensed activities.  I see no reason why the NRC cannot charge the
     Agreement States for the service they provide the same way they do
     their licensees.

     Just my opinion,


     Happy Thanksgiving!

     Mike Vala
     Bristol-Myers Squibb
     mvala@usccmail.bms.com