 Well, as you know, I've been away from the NRC for about three years. And when I have returned in the last couple months, I continue to be impressed with the quality of the staff, the managers, and the ability of this agency to do its critical mission of public health and safety, common defense and security. I think that's really something that we've done well over the 40 years of our existence. One of the things I think we've done well is learn from experience, learn from our own mistakes. We're entering some challenging times, I think. We have some issues regarding what the future of the nuclear fleet will be, whether there's interest in new types of facilities. We have some issues regarding budget and right sizing of the agency. But again, I hark back to my prior experience and know that the staff of the agency and the leadership of the agency has always risen to the occasion and faced those challenges and met them, I think. So I look forward to working with my fellow commissioners and working with the staff to address the issues we will have in front of us in this environment. I joined the agency in 1978, about six months before the Three Mile Island accident. Came to the agency as an attorney through the honors program. And one of the great things I got to do over those 30 years is have experiences in almost every facet of the agency's operations. I worked on issues anywhere from the implementation of post Three Mile Island safety upgrades and requirements. I worked in the enforcement program with the investigative program. I also worked closely with the inspection staff on problems of construction quality. Other things I got to do when I went to the commission and worked as a legal assistant to Commissioner Carr, who later became the chairman of the agency, is work on things like Part 52, the then new licensing process that the agency was putting together and that we've in the last few years executed with the Vogel and the summer applications. I also worked after 9-11 with the security staff in the new ENSER office on implementing security improvements. The other thing I would say is I got a chance to work with many of the people who helped shape this agency and helped it succeed over the years. It's very humbling in a way and very gratifying to see people in the halls as I've returned to the agency greet me and I can think about a lot of them, some of them who have been here almost as long as I have on projects I worked with them. So that's been very rewarding. But I think what that also does is it helps prepare me in terms of thinking about what types of problems we need to address, how to move through some of the issues and prepare ourselves for the future because I've had experience with many of the programs. The high regard in which the NRC was held by others in the international community impressed me during my tenure at the OECD nuclear energy agency. When I was at conferences, when I was conducting seminars for our nuclear law education program, people wanted to come up to me and ask me about how NRC did things, why did it do things in a certain way because they knew of my prior affiliation with the NRC. And these were people from all kinds of countries, from countries with mature nuclear power programs like France or Japan or Korea, but also some developing countries who really needed to have a safety program for radioactive materials. That said, I think we have a lot to learn from the international community ourselves. We don't do things necessarily the same way. It doesn't mean that we do them better or worse. There are just differences, but there's a lot for us to share and to learn from other countries regarding their operating experience, problems that they've had with sources or material, how they deal with public engagement. So this is much more a global nuclear community, if you will, than it was or at least the impression I had that it was when I was a young attorney starting out in 1978. So what I've learned from that is that I think we need to keep engaged in the international community. We need to continue to share our experiences and to provide leadership when we can for effective nuclear regulation. Well I've just been back for about two months now and I'm still getting acclimated to the agency. Hard as it may be to believe, I found coming back, even though I had been here 30 years, I had about a three-year break while I was working at the NEA in Paris. So it still got some learning to do. I think what I could say is, as always, the safety and security are the paramount concerns for the agency and that's part, you know, the major focus at the very top level. Now having said that, what are some of the things that I see? I think an important area is for us to continue to make progress to bring the post Fukushima improvements to closure. The other thing is I come back to an environment in which the question of resources and the right sizing, if you will, of the agency is a question in the Congress. And I think the agency is taking on that question very responsibly. One other I would say is reflected in the recent commission direction to the staff to start down the path of decommissioning rulemaking. Some of the issues that have come up, and we've heard from stakeholders from any number of sides regarding the effectiveness of the current process for handling decommissioning issues and we're going to face that with plants in the coming years. I would have to say that I'm going to continue to work with my fellow commissioners to make sure that we're talking and that we're discussing issues and trying to build consensus and to give the staff good direction where the commission needs to give that direction. And I think the final thing too is probably I would see building our relationships externally, particularly with the Congress, with other agencies with whom we interface, that's important to me. I think a lot of these ideas will start to gel and come more together by the time I give the traditional speech of the Chairman to the regulatory information conference in early March. I think one of the biggest challenges is looking at the level of resources and the budget that the NRC has to accomplish its mission. Obviously, safety and security are the top priority for the agency. But things change, and so I think we have to make sure that we're agile, we're nimble about looking at how we apply resources, whether we're doing it effectively and focusing on the right things. And I think our external stakeholders, including particularly the Congress, expect us to do that. So that's one challenge. Another challenge I think is for us to bring the post Fukushima safety program to closure. From the standpoint of implementing the things we've identified that need to be implemented at plants, and also deciding whether we've achieved the right safety balance and focus in the things that we've requested, licensees, or ordered or required them to do. The last thing I'd mention at this time as a challenge is probably our readiness to meet potential future licensing or review requests for things like small modular reactors or generation four reactors. There's a lot more talk about whether those technologies will be brought to the NRC in the coming years. And I think we have to be ready to face the questions that those technologies present to us. Those are the challenges that have come to my mind as I have begun my tenure here at the NRC, partly informed by my discussion with stakeholders within the agency and outside the agency. And I'll continue to listen to what I hear from them as we move forward.