Off the floor, house and Senate Conferees will meet to negotiate the differences between the two tax reform bills passed separately out of each chamber. You can follow the house live here on cspan when members return at noon eastern. Right now, though, until they come back, well take you live to a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on oversight committees at the Nuclear Regulatory commission. I was general counsel from early 2009 to 2012. They dont prohibit Foreign Ownership and uranium milling operations. It is again, milan as opposed. Go ahead. Mr. Burns yes. You dont have the prohibition for production utilization facilities. However, as with all licensing you have to reach the finding ininmicale. Thats a finding you have to make in licensing determinations. Senator carper correct lee me if im wrong but its the n. R. C. Staff and not the commissioners when it comes to the transfer of milling in our licensing or the export license, is that correct . Mr. Burns i think thats generally true. There are circumstances to which you might if you had a contested matter which the adjudicatory ts role i will have to refresh myself as we prepare to answer senator barrassos question. I dont think that was the case there was a contested or an a decision that came before the commission. Senator carper my memory is not what it used to be either but if you find you want to add something for the record in response to my questions that will be fine. I would ask you also for the record, do you believe that the n. R. C. Staff followed all appropriate regulations and guidance for uranium one and reviews and decisions and if you want to respond to that now you may or may respond for the record . Mr. Burns i think ill respond for the record because having just seen the letter come in i dont have a robust recollection of the particular circumstances at that time. Id appreciate the opportunity to do that. Senator carper lets talk a little bit about morale. Used to be the top of the charts. Number one. Down to number 11. Think went down to 12, maybe 11. Youre coming up in the right direction. Number 11 with a bullet, as i hope. Commissioner, can you take a minute, tell us about the impact of the recent budget cuts. Can the n. R. C. Complete the work that it needs to do in a timely manner . Well, thank you for the question. I think youre right that the effort and the budget cuts have had an impact on morale. I think its primarily there are few opportunities for promotion, often reduced training, rotational opportunities. We need to make sure at the agency that we retain the tremendous talent that we have. Its really a terrific work force. Its still a great place to work. And im hopeful that one of the things we can do with strategic Work Force Planning tools is to help the staff better see if they want to get to a position in a few years, what particular skills they need to work on, the training, the rotational opportunities to get themselves in position to advance to that position, to move into those positions. I think given the staff a better sense, what are the opportunities at n. R. C. , and what do they need to do themselves to get themselves in position to take advantage of those opportunities will help morale further. I think we are starting to head in the right direction but its been a challenging time. Senator carper i have more questions. Maybe about new reactors. Interested asking questions about that but thanks for your responses. I look for your responses for the record, mr. Burns, thank you. Thank you, senator carper. Senator capito. Senator capito thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, all, for being here today. On march 8, which was the very same day that we had a legislative hearing on the Bipartisan NuclearEnergy Innovation and modernization act, which we joined together on, the g. A. O. Published a report on the n. R. C. s budget structure and justifications. In my view, part of the one of the things i found troubling in the report it seems as though the n. R. C. Is keeping two sets of books, and i quote, one to formulate its budget, and another obligate funds based on its appropriations for congress. To put it another way, the n. R. C. Has budget in its budget it creates a public consumption for congress but then operates under a separate budget under its internal operations, making it tough for authorizers and appropriators, which i am an appropriator, and obviously we are the authorizers, to discern how the n. R. C. Is actually spending taxpayers dollars. So as an example, according to the n. R. C. s monthly report, 3,2100. Had a had in time equifflents equivalents this past september. If you kind of multiply that out, thats about 25 Million Dollars in, quoteunquote, extra funding. In other words, f. T. E. s that were budgeted for but not actually filled. I believe mr. Baran mentioned that the work force is down 12 . I would like to know an speculation of where is where are these extra dollars that were actually appropriated that were not fulfilled by the f. T. E. s that were actually n. R. C. . At the n. R. So some flushing out where that is and does that mean your budget requests in the future will be lower because you were able to roll this money over . How does that work. Ms. Svinicki thank you for the question, senator. If i could supplement this for the record because there are a lot of moving parts here, it is true that over the course of the last budget year we were conducting a reduction in force and we were through attrition getting smaller in the area of f. T. E. The difference in funding i would forecast probably will has shown up as carryover money from one budget year to the next. If our Staffing Levels at the end of the year ended up being lower than the requested budget, some of that would likely materialize as carryover funding into the fiscal 2018, the current fiscal year. And its difficult as we develop the Agency Budgets two years in advance since we are reducing in employment levels, its difficult for us when we submit the budget to forecast the exact difference. Again, we were under the period youre discussing was a period of continued decline in Staffing Levels. So we probably hit a little bit under the target and had fewer staff at the end of the fiscal year. So i think in general its a forecasting error but the money likely would show up as carryover. Senator capito so when you say carryover, does that mean you carry over to the next year and subtract that from your budget request the upcoming fiscal year . Ms. Svinicki well, i can check for this fall but often appropriations clerks will ask us for updated carryovers as we approach the end of the fiscal year. Sometimes appropriators make an adjustment in the enacted level based on the carryover since we tend to have the enacted levels after the start of the fiscal year now. Senator capito do you know if the f. R. C. Treats this carryover or extra amount that you have at the end of the year, is that a fungible line item, does it have to go to f. T. E. s, how do you treat that . Svincki i dont know if thats consistent year to year. If i could take that for the record. Senator capito yes. I will say you are not the only Government Agency thats falling into this into this category. Ive always sort of you know, i dont know. According to the g. A. O. It was not a it was not a satisfactory way to actually present the reality of where your budget is and where the actual spending is and what happens to this extra extra or carryover amount. I think that needs to be tracked, it needs to be accounted for. Any Additional Information you can give me in written form would be much appreciated. Ms. Svinicki i will say in response to that g. A. O. Report both house and Senate Appropriations have instituted basically additional control points for the execution of our budget. And the monthly report you cite, too, is one of the outgrowth of our monthly reporting to our consistency with those budgetary control points. Senator capito i would say in october of 2017 you budgeted for 3293. In actuality its 31037. The pattern is still continuing. Realizing you cant get it down to the one or two, i get that. But its significant the numbers i think is 156. So with that i would just ask if we could maybe either, a, submit a question, or our staff could get with you to get more details on this. Thank you. Thank you, senator capito. Senator markey. Senator markey thank you, mr. Chairman. Commissioner baran, right now the United States has restarted negotiations with saudi arabia on nuclear cooperation. Both during the campaign it turns out and after becoming president Trumps National security advisor, flynn was beginning that process. So far we have not met the legal requirement to keep us informed of any negotiations relating to a new and amended agreement as required by the Atomic Energy act. Last week Trumps Energy secretary rick perry visited saudi arabia to discuss their bids to build new Nuclear Reactors. Its been reported that these deals may allow for enrichment of uranium which all previous u. S. Agreements have prohibited. The n. R. C. Has oversight responsibility over the export of nurke source materials and Technology Nuclear source materials and technology. Has the n. R. C. Been consulted on the export of these sensitive technologies . Commissioner baran so as part of the 123 agreement process, n. R. C. , as you mentioned, has a role. It comes later in the process when there are certain statutory findings the Commission Must make in order tore 123 agreement recommendation to go to the president. We are not at that stage yet. Senator markey so if the agreement does allow for the enrichment of uranium or reprocessing of plutonium, do you think that could pose a proliferation and safety risk . Commissioner baran well, its challenging to answer that question without having any sense of whats actually agreed to. I know that senator markey does a country need to be able to enrich enrich or reprocess in order to have a civilian Nuclear Power program or can they bring the uranium in from commissioner baran its not necessary. Senator markey the nuclear regular regget staff granted the power station and exemption from the requirement that a seismic probabilistic Risk Assessment be performed. They saw a bigger increase in seismic risk during the postfukushima. Pilgrim has a seismic hazard that is significant higher than the plant was designed to withstand. Seismic assessments are very important. These are used to evaluate our safe Nuclear Sites are from earthquakes and can be used to determine what improvements and changes need to be made to protect the sites and surrounding communities from disaster. Commissioner baran, while the n. R. C. Staff decided the pilgrim is not required to do this assessment, do you think that station should voluntarily perform a seismic analysis . Commissioner baran this was, as you mentioned, a staff decision. I think the staff in this case made the wrong decision given the particular set of situations at pilgrim. I think n. R. C. Should have asked for the assessment that should have been completed by the end of the year. Senator markey i agree with you. Since 2015 pilgrim has been assessed as having multiple reat the time tiff repetitive safety violations. The n. R. C. Is taking a rulemaking to decommissioning of plants. As pilgrim decommission, do you have any insight how that will take safety into account . Commissioner baran you know, with regard to pilgrim, the rulemaking is complete prior or after pilgrim has is already shut down so it may not be directly applicable to pilgrim depending what the ultimate timing is. I think the staff is aiming to complete a rulemaking package or draft final rule by the end of 2019. But i think its as i mentioned in my opening remarks, i think its going to be a very good move to move away from this exemption, regulation by exemption approach that can he currently have going on that we currently have going on. I think it makes sense a detailed list of the regulatory requirements, safety and security requirements that apply to a permanently defueled decommissioning plant. We dont have that right now. This rulemaking would accomplish that, and i think thats a good senator markey its imperative that the rules on decommissioning have safety and security long after they stop generating electricity. I have to say at the state of this industry, westinghouse went bankrupt while trying to complete the local plants. And thats not because of any tempts by granola frumping tree hugging liberals trying to stop the plant. It is very hard and very expensive to build Nuclear Power plants that are safe and theyre under tremendous pressure, obviously, from the wind and the Solar Industries which there is an attempt by the fans of all these alternative generating sources to take away the benefits for those competing sources of energy. I will say in response to the gentleman from oklahoma when he talked about the war and the Obama Administration on coal, gas and oil that there was a dramatic, historic rise in oil and natural Gas Production during the Obama Administration rise, dramatic rise. And amongst other things, the drop in the price of natural gas is what has led to wind and solar, the very difficult Economic Conditions within which the Nuclear Power industry is trying to survive. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator. Senator fischer. Senator fischer thank you, mr. Chairman. Madam chair, as i understand wyoming will likely become an n. R. C. Agreement state in 2018. As a result, the state of wyoming will begin regulating its uranium Recovery Facilities in place of the n. R. C. To do that. Seven of the nine uranium Recovery Facilities who paid fees to the n. R. C. In 2017 are located in wyoming. The other two are located in south dakota and my home state of nebraska. The n. R. C. Determines its uranium recovery annual fees by dividing by the number of facilities. So how will the n. R. C. Maintain the uranium Recovery Office to ensure the two remaining licensees are not unfairly burdened with an extreme increase in those regulatory costs . Ms. Svinicki thank you, senator, for this question. Although our commission has not grappled with this, i have been monitoring the potential impact that wyoming would have in the financial structure of how we recover costs and so i will speak for myself and not for my colleagues. This is a management challenge and i appreciate that you raised it. Already our director of the relevant office and our chief Financial Officer are looking at this question and so i think that there will be with wyoming taking a significant number of the entities now paying fees for uranium recovery regulation, this will be a step change for us. And so this isnt a small change. This will be something that were going to have to look at the structure of how were recovering these costs. I would like to maybe provide a fuller answer to you for the record on exactly where the chief Financial Officers examination of the question resides. Again, its a definite issue. So but im confident were foreseeing it and looking at it now. Senator fischer i appreciate you responding for the record. That would be helpful. I would also appreciate if you could keep our office informed on the progress that youre making on that before you announce any decisions publicly so that we would be able to have son input and also review with you. Also, madam chair, this committee has tasked the g. A. O. With reviewing the n. R. C. Cost estimating practices in the wake of concerns that the n. R. C. Significantly underestimated the cost of implementing its filtered vents proposal. In december of 2014, the g. A. O. Released a report that was fairly critical of the n. R. C. S Development of cost estimates stating the n. R. C. s procedures, quote, do not adequately support the creation of reliable cost estimates and that the cost estimate did not fully or substantially meet any of the four characteristics of a reliable cost estimate, end quote. The g. A. O. Recommended that the n. R. C. Alignment cost estimating procedures with relevant cost estimating best practices identified in the report. Miss fischer there are no objectives in place to look at the analysis. My question would be what basis does the n. R. C. Have for assessing whether the cost benefit analysis used by the commission for decisionmaking re, in fact, reliable . The g. A. O. Thank recommendations. And i dont dispute your description of the intervening time period, the g. A. O. But we been informed by the agency staff that they are the staff is updating the cost benefit guidance documents and among the changes that are being incorporated, they include recommendations from 2014 report findings, including that the agency adopt relevant cost estimating best practices identified in the 2014 report findings, including that the agency g. A. O. s 2009 guide or authoritative best practices that the g. A. O. Referred to. This is the staff communication to the commission of their current activities under way. We will look forward to updating you on dont have a date here for when that would be published. I think its 2018. But we can provide that answer for the record. Ms. Fischer i have a couple questions i would like to submit for the record. Chairman barrasso when senator markey was referring to tree hugging, i know that didnt apply to anyone any specific member, but with that let me recognize senator whitehouse. Senator whitehouse i resent that remark. Chairman barrasso represent. Senator whitehouse i would like to focus on the question of advanced reactor licensing. As you know i have been persisten