. >> if the staff or outside people, miss svinicki had made express concerns that were validated and you felt would create a risk, would you have voted differently? >> yes, senator. i, again, as my colleagues have acknowledged, it was a very complex, large record. it was voluminous, and i think each of us spent a considerable amount of time in evaluating that. the nrc staff indicated that they did a 30-year survey of other studies and research, and so it was a fullsome record. it was maybe a lot of material to go through, but i think most of us who supported the staff's recommendations did so based on a thorough review of the matter before us. >> would you say that the commissioner is working better under chairman macfarlane than some of the difficulties you had previously? >> i do appreciate the acknowledgement from some of the members of the committee of chairman macfarlane's leadership as the longest serving member of the commission. i really commend her. she and i don't agree all the time, but her leadership has been tremendous and the collegial tone she has set for our work i th

commissioner kristine svinicki, is it correct that we are talking about some changes that are made with your permission, if an exemption is granted when a site goes from being an operating nuclear facility to a facility that is shut down? we are talking about how changes made presumably to reflect the fact of those are two very different animals. is that what we are talking about generally? >> yes. as the chairman noted in our regulations and some assistance is there is not a provision for whether the reactor is operating or in the process of decommissioning. the nrc historically has had a heavy reliance on the use of exemptions to reflect the changes in the facility as it is decommissioned and the changes in risk. >> thank you. i am not suggesting and and and you aren't either that a plan that has been shut down, you can just walk away from that and not worry about it. i am not suggesting that. it does seem reasonable that there is a significant difference between a nuclear plan that is operating in a nuclear plan to shut down and presumably these exemptions -- and again, i think a lot

the honorable kristin svinicki. >> the commission's chairman and her statement on behalf of the commissionhas provided a comprehensive description of key agency challenges in carrying out nrc's mission. the nrc continues to implement safety significant lessons learned from the fukishima accident in accordance with established agency processes and procedures, also maintaining our focus on ensuring the safe operations of nuclear facilities and the safe use of nuclear materials across the country. the next period of implementation of fukishima-related tier one regulatory action lasting several years will require discipline and focus from the nrc staff experts as they review and oversees a large body of complex interrelated work. i am confident that the nrc's dedicated professional staff members are up to the task of meeting these challenges. i thank them once again for their sustained commitment to the agency and to its work. i appreciate the opportunity to appear today and look forward to your questions. thank you. >> thank you. >> chairman boxer and members of the committee, good morning. t

. >> commission or svinicki. spare would request the opportunity to respond for the record. >> i won't have any trouble doing that. >> at my confirmation hearing i promise to make my calendar available. i have done that from the moment i have been on the commission that i have published my calendar continuously and i have not made a practice of putting a lot of detail on my calendar. >> thank you because it's important we know who you are meeting with. >> chairman boxer my calendar paintings is on my web site. >> excellent. that's excellent. commissioner magwood travel records you provided to this committee indicate you spend 127 days on international travel since 2010. they also indicate before you leave the commission the summer you'll be spending more than three weeks visiting the united arab emirates malaysia japan and brazil. do you think this nrcc commissioned to have a traveling the world just before you sign sign -- resign your seat? >> but the indicate that i'm not doing brazil. that was an invitation th

kristinorable svinicki.the commission's chairman and her statement on behalf of the commission has provided a comprehensive ascription of key agency, shirts and challenges in carrying out nrc's mission. the nrc continues to implement safety significant lessons learned from the fukishima accident in accordance with established agency processes and procedures, also maintaining our focus on ensuring the safe operations of nuclear facilities and the safe use of nuclear materials across the country. the next period of implementation of fukishima-related tier one regulatory action lasting several years will require discipline and focus from the they reviewperts as and oversees a large body of complex interrelated work. i am confident that the nrc's dedicated professional staff members are up to the task of meeting these challenges. i thank them once again for their sustained commitment to the agency and to its work. i appreciate the opportunity to appear today and look forward to your questions. thank you. >> than

svinicki we had not had an oversight hearing in 10 years and of course we started having them and now we of course we are having to in a matter of weeks about the same topic decommissioning. since 1997 we have increased our oversight hearings successfully and i'm not worried about that. oversight is a good thing but the aim of the committee seems to be to put the committee out of business to ensure that the nrc is conducting appropriate oversight or the nrc rightly looked into the issue of expediting spent fuel pools to dry cast following the fukushima disaster. the staff ultimately determined the united states fleet risk of radiological release from the compromise of the spent fuel pool and i'm quoting now is very low, about one time in 10 million years or lower and the study predicted no early fatalities attributable to radiation exposure. now that was the report of the staff and i think the majority of the commissioners. according to researchers at nasa that means it's less than a likelihood the earth will be struck by its civilization threatening meteor which has a risk of occurri