ML20003F326
| ML20003F326 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/18/1980 |
| From: | Ramos S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Berkow H Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19284C410 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-81-13 NUDOCS 8104200601 | |
| Download: ML20003F326 (1) | |
Text
v pMs%9
,4, m ([o,)
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION UNITED STATES
- .I. ~ /.
E WASHINGTCN, D. C. 20555 Ne r f
,gv j September 18, 1980 MEMORANDUM FOR: Herbert N. Berkow, Chief Management Analysis Branch Planning and Program Analysis Staff, NRR FROM:
Steve L. Ramos, Chief Emergency Preparedness Development Branch Emergency Preparedness Program Office, NRR
SUBJECT:
NRC'S DOCUMENT CONTROL SYSTEM The NP.C's Document Control System (DCS) appears to be of great benefit to the Document Control Division in maintaining control, inventory, and accountability of the numerous multifarious documents received daily by the NRC. As to the usefulness of EPP0 staff, to date it has been proven to be of little value. Perhaps this is because of lack of understanding by staff members in the features of the system, unavailability of getting a hard copy at the remote terminal closest to the EPP0 office, and proximity of tne docket room. For example, if you must go to the basem?nt anyway to get your hard copy, why not go to the docket file and review the document there.
It is easier and faster.
In a few inttances where we were attempt-ing to obtain the exact dates and determine if the licensee had responded to a request to submit new emergency plans, it proved useful; however, it did require several computer runs because of errors in the system.
In summary, if the docket files were r.ot accessible and a better understanding of the DCS were known, with emphasis on capabilities, ano hard copying capability available at each terminal; then it might be of some va.lue.
The following provide answers to your specific questions:
1.
Yes, except it appears to take a couple of days longer to receive documents than under the previous system.
2.
Cannot provide any estimate on savings as the system has not been used sufficiently to estimqte this factor.
3.
If the DCS were terminated, it would have no effect because of the lack of use. This is explained above.
4 Make the system more accessible, have hard copying capability at each terminal and have more terminals.
. eve 6.
amos, Chief mergency Preparedness Development Branch Emergency Preparedness Program Office, NRR 8104200601
yMan qk UNITED STATES
~
.e NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
E, ' '
f wAsMiNoToN. o. c. 20sss
'%."."..'.,/
ere1e ESO
-v MEMORANDUM FOR: Herbert N. Berkow, Chief Management Analysis Branch, PPAS, NRR FROM:
Bernard J. Snyder, Program Director Three Mile Island Program Office, NRR
SUBJECT:
NRC DOCUMENT CONTROL SYSTEM This is in response to the questions in E. Kevin Corr. ell's memorandum of September 9, and your transmittal of that memorandum, of September 15, subject as above.
In general, it is perceived that the NRC Docurn t.t Control System (DCS) has a e
cotential for savings of time and manpower wit $in the agency by eliminating the need to assemble, file and reproduce the majority of documents handled by the staff. In additien, being able to access new information more rapidly than in the cast, with the video capability and potentially rapid entry of documents into the DCS, could be expected to increase staff efficiencies in the future.
Unfortunately, the syr. tem has been essentially unavailable (with few exceptions) to the TMI Program Office staff because of the lack of terminals convenient to us. Were the DCS more available to us, we would definately utilize the system.
My specific resoonses to your ouestions follow:
Ques tion sl:
Are you satisfied with the services that the DCS has provided to your office?
Resoonse:
DCS services have been limited to this office since there are no convenient terminals nearby. However, experience with the DCS by some of my staff in pre-l vious assignments has been extensive. In that respect, the service was found to be adequate but could be improved:
l a.
The DCS teminals could be active from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., to l
coincide with flextime and personnel availability. The best time to use the DCS and to train on it would appear to be during the non-core time, 7:00 - 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 - 6:00 p.m., or later.
b.
In most cases, because our business is 100% TMI, the documents the TMI Program Office staff does search for are usually in the DCS.
Unfortunately, neither a video teminal or video copier are con-venient to my staff. And even though TMI-2 material is essen-tially 100% on the DCS, we note it still takes several days before new documents can be accessed. So, we remain dependent on our hard copy files.
W Ph D %h S%%
. Question #2:
To the extent possible, estimate the savings in terms of dollars or staff ears per year you achieve now or will achieve when the system is fully molemented.
Response
Dollar estimates of savings incurred or expected to be incurred are not possible in the limited time available to respond to your request. However, the DCS, if properly applied and supported by f!RC, has the potential for eliminating a majority of our files and the need for filing. We note GG-14 and 15s are expensive file clerks, but these personnel must often spend con-siderable time filing because no other suitable means are available. A sub-stantial dollar and man-year savings could be realized by the agency if the need for such filing and duplication were eliminated by the DCS.
Question e3:
If the DCS were terminated, what effect would that have on your office?
Resoonse:
Unfortunately, with tne system's limited use by this office, the present loss of the DCS would have little consequence to us at this time. However, we would utilize the DCS if it were more convenient.
Question =4:
What might be done to make the DCS more useful to your office?
Resoonse:
To make the DCS more useful to this office it must be made conveniently available to us. A total commitment must be made by NRC to provide full DCS service. The piecemeal way the system has been allowed to develop is indicative of an apparent lack of understanding and encouragement on the part of management and staff, and has rendered any real appreciation of the system somewhat limited. By total commitment, it is meant:
a.
Management must be fully behind implementation of the DCS. We must be committed to make the DCS work through the difficult adjustment and learning period. And, we must make the staff essentially deoendent on the DCS, or they will fall back on old ways.
b.
A sufficient number of terminals with video capability must be provided. This does 'ot mean one terminal for each floor. It means at least one te~minal for each section, branch, division, etc. In some cases (i.e. Project Managers and Licensing Assistants),
it could mean one terminal for each individuai.
. c.
The DCS files must be ccmplete and up to date. Every effort must be made to assure all documents for all licensing actions, etc.
are in the DCS in a timely manner. BaEkfitting must be completed in short order. All of the DCS files must also have video access.
d.
Training must ce provided to all personnel, and must be rigorous and frequent. Modern data aquisition systems are like foreign language skills, if they are not used constantly, the faculty cannot be maintained. The user becomes clumsy, reluctant to use the system further, and the system breaks down. Training and frequent use must be routine.
e.
There must be a means to safeguard information in the system, in order to ensure sensitive documents (such as some internal memo-randa) are not accessible by just any one who has access to a terminal.
Should you wish to discuss these remarks, please contact Oliver Lynch on X27258.
f p Bernard J. Snyder, P ogram Director Three Mile Island Program Office Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i
i I
-.