ML20006D795
| ML20006D795 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/02/1990 |
| From: | David Williams NRC OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL (OIG) |
| To: | Carr, Roberts, Rogers NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20006B096 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-NRC-05-86-156, CON-NRC-05-86-158, CON-NRC-5-86-156, CON-NRC-5-86-158 NUDOCS 9002150076 | |
| Download: ML20006D795 (2) | |
Text
-.
.... =,.
l 9 aan,(~
e-
'q, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{
WASHINGTON, D.C. 30006 l
f m1 m
4 OFFICE OF THE l
INSPECTOR GENERAL i
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Chairman Carr Comissioner Roberts l
Comissioner Rogers Comissioner Curtiss 4
Comissioner Remick FROM:
David C. Williams Inspector General Office of the Inspector General
SUBJECT:
REVIEW OF THE MANAGEMENT OF NRC'S CONTRACTS WITH PARAMETER, INC.
l The Office of the Inspector General has completed a review of the Nuclea'r Regulatory Comission's (NRC) contracts with Parameter, Inc. The attached report contains the results of our review.
The purposes of our review were to determine the effectiveness of internal controls related to the management of the Parameter contracts and to review the appropriateness of NRC using a contractor to provide individuals with sMcific technical expertise, in addition, we assessed Parameter's use of former NRC employees for fulfilling the contracts' requirements relative to NRC's conflict of interest regulations.
Our review was conducted in accordance with generally accepted Government auditing standards. The review was performed at NRC Headquarters from November 1988 to April 1989.-
Conclusions and Recommendations Our review disclosed that NRC's administration of the Parameter contracts was generally satisfactory. However, we believe there are two internal control elements relating to the management of the contracts that need strengthening.
Specifically, we believe contractors should be used only when qualified NRC staff is not available.
In that regard, documentation should be available for each task order explaining NRC's use of a contractor rather than NRC staff.
Also, we believe the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation should document the reasons for not using or using only portions of a contractor's report. Our report contains two recomendations related to these findings.
CONTACT:
Fred Herr, OIG 49-27051 kh p\\
p
2 Acency Comments In commenting on a draft of this report the Executive Director for Operations (EDO) agreed that prior to issuing task orders, the reasons why NRC staff are not available would be documented. The EDO did not agree to document why a contractor's input was changed, partially used or not used at all because it would be too burdensome and because problems have never been encountered as a result of changing contractor input. While we believe such documentation would be prudent, we have no evidence that lack of docupantation has, to this time, led to problems or an inability to reconstruct why changes were made.
We have decided, therefore, to accept the ED0's connents as resolving our recommendation rather than elevate it to the Commission for resolution, kN 0.W!N5m David C. Williams Inspector General Office of the Inspector General
Attachment:
As stated cc:
J. Taylor, EDO S. Chilk, SECY W. Parler, OGC T. Murley, NRR P. Norry, ADM E. Halman, ADM J. Blaha, EDO L. Hiller, ICC
~7)ucocS, & n & d b Gi b khasaMdAv WGA AffX/Y auadaAcu pasMa&,W al wv
/
Nt&L ?/W
.j u Hsu WG m
.