i'd respond, agree with commissioner magwood's comment. make two points here in addition. one is i asked my executive director for operations how he thought we should proceed. he supported having his office and those that work for him come back and give us an integrated list. as i said in the opening statement verages that was a key lesson learned when the agency did not do that. i think we'll get more bang for the buck, that will make a difference sooner by having this prioritized list. we call for that within 30 days. the second piece is all not all the recommendations are equal. some should be done right now and some require more information. >> all right. thank you. chairman yaz could he, a question on -- jaczko, a question on orders versus regulatory process. some of the regulatory tools that the commission's disposal are the rule making process and apparently the issuance of orders. could you just describe or compare both processes for us. for each what kind of opportunities are there for public comment and for stakeholders. >> well, generally the orders have more li

magwood? >> yes, i think i was the first to vote. >> so you aren't ready to immediately begin a discussion on the 12 discussions -- recommendations. >> senator, i think we are already. >> i'm glad to hear that. chairman jaczko, is the process ready to go? what am i missing here? >> we are stock in developing the process, rather than moving forward to actually begin the discussion and dialogue on the recommendations. right now, what we're talking about is the process to have that discussion. unfortunately, -- with the exception of commissioner ostendorff -- most of my colleagues have waited about the process -- >> and what about that specific process? >> they are not severe. they are minor. the difference is setting an expectation on when we can get completed. i have suggested that we were to get completed. our decisions within 90 days. i think that is what i hear as the biggest point. >> and miss svinicki? >> i agree with the chairman's statement. >> do you agree we can get this done within 90

a structure processing to the comments of commissioner magwood, ostendorff, and apostolakis, should achieve that." >> thank you. >> commissioners, welcome. this is a day when our economy could have melted down, and it looks like we could avoid that. we will make sure that the recommendations from the smart people that work at the nuclear regulatory commission -- we can somehow seize the opportunity to ensure we will not have a meltdown in our complex. i'm happy your hair. these are challenging times for the nrc, and they have been challenging for my colleagues and me as well. we will get through this day, and hopefully your recommendations. as many of you know, my interest in nuclear energy comes from a clean air and energy security perspective, and from 23 years of a naval flight officer. i have a lot of the debentures from that perspective. -- ventures from that perspective. nuclear power has helped to reduce air pollution that damages for our health and cause global warming. as we saw the crisis unfold at fukushima, one wrong step could have big and bad consequences. this crisis is a str

now we look to commission member william magwood iv. >> thank you. i appreciate the opportunity to appear before as soon as the seriousness of the events of folks shima became evident, the commission started a task force. they provided us with the recommendations we have discussed. i congratulate the six-person team, and also want to point out dr. charles miller, the chair, is with us. tomorrow is his retirement date. >> can we ask him to raise his hand? >> thank you, charlie. nevertheless, while the task force found that u.s. plants are safe, and the state that quite clearly, this is not licensed for complacency. if there are lessons that could further improve the regulatory framework, and the task force has made the 12 recommendations we've spoken of this morning. odyssey, they are limited in time and scope and ability to reach out to stakeholders -- obviously, they're limited in time and scope and ability to reach out to stakeholders. we were able to deal with issues that were not covered by the task force in an open and transparent manner. we mus

did i hear commissioner magwood say the half dozen? >> yes, sir. >> all right. >> real quick, i'll summarize some of those. there's six things i think could be done very quickly here and decided on in a matter of weeks. i put them in my vote from last week. first is reevaluate l flooding standards at all sites. second is perform seismic vulnerables and third, rule making of the long loss of power, the blackout rule we discussed at the last hearing. fourth, review b5v, our fire and flooding equipment to with stand a great event or flooding. also, additional equipment in a multidisaster. there's accessibility of vents and boiling water reactors, and six, maintain and train on severe accident guidelines. those are examples to be done right away. >> sixth one? >> severe acts of management guidelines that guide the licensees how to deal with catastrophic events and make sure they are in good order and people are fully trained in those is a high priority. >> all right. going down the line here, do you want to react to the half dozen, please?

of our commissioners, and i hope they dispel what i have heard, and that is commissioner svinicki, magwood, and ostendorff. if they want more study, review, and the late. i happen to have been here long enough to know what happens in this town when we want to postpone a study. it means that the issue will be swept under the rug. nothing will happen, and that is not acceptable. we need a commission focused on safety and acting on the task force recommendations in a swift and transparent manner. i believe we should all demand that the nrc commissioners commit to start action on recommendations within three months. delay is not an acceptable option. our look for to hearing from the commissioners. -- i look forward to hearing from the commissioners. >> senator alexander. >> thank you, chairwoman. thank you to the commissioners for their service. he is always useful to begin with a safety -- it is always useful to begin with a safety record -- no deaths on any nuclear reactor, navy reactor, and no one was hurt on three mile island. that is an enviable record. i would like to approach it differe

commissioner magwood. just a closing thought or two, please? >> i think commissioner ostendorff actually covered it. he said it quite well. the only thing i would add is i believe we'll move forward quickly. we're taking this very seriously. i think we all were talking to each other during the fukushima event and i think almost immediately began to think about what lessons were being learned as we're watching it unfold on television. i see this as the conclusion of what started back in march. i feel very positive that we'll get this done quickly and do the right thing. >> go ahead. >> i agree with my colleagues. i think the commission will act in a timely manner. it is just the details. i don't see any problem at all. >> i agree with what my colleagues have said thus far. in summary remarks there is a lot of overlap and commonality in the approach here. i believe it is possible to stroke the appropriate balance between urgency and moving forward and also being a thoughtful and getting it right. thank you. >> thank you. mr. chairman ? >> i would

commissioners and i hope they dispel what i read in the media and that is commissioner svinicki, magwood and ostendorff apparently as i understand it they want more study and review and delay. and i happen to know -- i've been here long enough to know what happens in this town when we, quote-unquote, delay. when we want to postpone a study. it means that the issue is going to be swept under the rug. that nothing is going to happen. and to me that is unacceptable. we need a commission focused on safety and acting on the task force recommendations in a swift and transparent manner. i believe we should all demand that the nrc commissioners today commit to start action on the safety recommendations within three months. delay is not an acceptable option and i look forward to hearing from the commissioners. thank you, madam chair >> thank you, senator. senator alexander? >> thank you, madam chairman and thank you for the hearing and thank you to the commissioners for their service. i think it's always useful since safety is our concern to begin with the safety record, no deaths of any commerci

magwood? >> as i see it so far, i see a great deal of commonality. so i think there is actually a consensus coming together quite quickly on a commission to move forward with this. as i stated earlier, i do think some of these recommendations can be implemented. >> do you agree with the chairman we can get moving? >> i think we can launch some of them sooner than 90 days. others may take longer. >> mr. osendorf? >> i believe we can act on most of these recommendations within 90 days. perhaps not all. but i think unfortunately in the press there's been a perception created there's great dissension among the commissioners on this topic which i quite frankly don't think is there. there is more consensus. everyone is ready to move forward. there is an agreement on a need to place this as the highest priority and i think there clearly is. >> madam chair, thank you. >> senator alexander? >> thank you madam chairman. a traffic policeman's job would be to keep the traffic safe and all five of you said public health and safety was your job, but if the traffic