Enclosed are the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's nominations for the 1987 Presidential Rank Award. Because the Commission is nominating more than one individual for each rank, I am enclosing a list with our order of priority.

I strongly support each of these nominations. I am particularly pleased
to nominate three of our agency's executives for Distinguished Presidential
Rank Awards: Victor Stello, Jr., James G. Keppler and James M. Taylor.
These three executives are extremely dedicated and valuable public
servants. They are responsible on a daily basis for decisions that play a
great role in ensuring health and safety of the American public. All those
we are nominating are exemplary senior executives and their performances
reflect high achievements and unusual dedication to serving their fellow

citizens.

I am also enclosing the appropriate funds code for ceremonial items connected with these awards. The Commission is pleased to participate in this important feature of the Senior Executive Service program.

Sincerely,

Lardow Zeck Jr.

Lando W. Zech Jr.

Enclosures:

1. Order of Priority List

2. Billing Address

for Ceremonial Items

ORDER OF PRIORITY

1987 PRESIDENTIAL RANK AWARD NOMINEES

Distinguished

Victor Stello, Jr.

James G. Keppler
James M. Taylor

Meritorious

James H. Sniezek
Edward L. Jordan

Hugh L. Thompson, Jr.
Frank J. Miraglia, Jr.

Guy A. Arlotto

James G. Partlow

Edward L. Halman

Robert M. Bernero
Lawrence C. Shao

Thomas A. Rehm

John B. Martin

James P. Murray

James A. Fitzgerald

Robert E. Browning

The bill for ceremonial items should be sent to the following address citing funds code AA0404:

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Division of Accounting and Finance
Washington, DC 20555

Mail Stop: MNBB 11104

Mr. DEFAZIO. I guess that is where I have a problem. I don't look at professional staff as mediators. Once you have been through a public process, once the courts have tested that public process and found it to be legal, once it has been interpreted by the professionals, I don't believe it is to be mediated; it is to be complied with. That is regulation. That is compliance. Not mediation. Not further revisiting of vital standards.

What I fear here is that we will be sitting tragically before a much larger crowd here some day revisiting this issue because we are going to have another tragic fire which is going to disable the shutdown equipment or it is going to disable the backup equipment or whatever. Any compromise in those areas is a violation of the public trust.

I think the preponderance of evidence here leads us to believe that we accommodated the industry; we didn't regulate them. You can differ on that, but with that I will yield back to the chairman. Mr. ZECH. May I say something, just very briefly?

I respect Mr. DeFazio's views, but there are other views on the Commission. There are those of us who feel that Mr. Stello is an outstanding public servant who is given very great responsibilities, who shows all the integrity and honesty that he can possibly muster, who is called upon daily to referee between the various parts of the staff on differing professional opinions.

And I, for one, have great confidence in his ability. I would like, Mr. Chairman, if I may, since his name has been brought up so much in this, as I earlier indicated, to allow him the opportunity to add to the record with a statement to respond to some of these things that have been talked about and to complete the record.

I think he deserves that, and I would respectfully request that. Mr. GEJDENSON. We would be happy to take a statement concurred in by the Chairman from Mr. Stello for the record to the committee.

Mr. GEJDENSON. We would be pleased to do that. Thank you, sir. [EDITOR'S NOTE.-Additional correspondence follows. Statement by Victor Stello is available in subcommittee files:]

In a recent letter to the Commission you indicated an interest in whether the Commission endorsed Victor Stello's August 11, 1987 reply to issues raised in the June 11, 1987 Subcommittee hearing. Mr. Stello's letter addressed in some detail four subjects covered at the hearing.

It would not be appropriate for the Commission itself to
comment on the actions by NRC Region IV in regard to the
Comanche Peak Nuclear Plant. This is because safety issues
regarding Comanche Peak are pending before an Atomic Safety
and Licensing Board in a contested, formal adjudicatory
proceeding in which the Commission itself may eventually need
to make the final decision, and because these matters are also
the subject of an ongoing, independent investigation.
other hand, it is not inappropriate for Mr. Stello, as a
member of the NRC staff, to comment on this matter.

The Commission has confidence in Mr. Stello's professional ability and believes that Mr. Stello's discussion of the other three subjects is in accord with the Commission's regulatory policies.

An independent Office of the General Counsel (OGC) legal analysis of Appendix R fire protection demonstrated that past interpretations were not always in accord with the original intent of the regulation. Accordingly, the Commission agrees that there was a need to reconsider the previous NRC interpretations of its fire protection regulations.

The Commission carefully considers whether reliance on industry initiatives is the appropriate method for achieving regulatory goals. One important regulatory goal is to assure that persons operating nuclear power plants are fit for duty and are not impaired by drug use, alcohol use, or any other factor. The Commission continues to believe that the fastest way to have the industry begin to address this issue was the policy statement issued last year. As indicated in that