ML20042D695
| ML20042D695 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/26/1990 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| TASK-PINC, TASK-SE SECY-90-116, NUDOCS 9004050053 | |
| Download: ML20042D695 (7) | |
Text
VMMMMMM 4
/
'%s RELEASED TO THE PDR p
I
- h dAt3/90
%,,,,,,j we ges POLICY ISSUE March 26, 1990 (NEGATIVE CONSENT) srCY-90-116 for:
The Comissioners From:
James M. Taylur Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
REPORT OH EXPERIENCE OF INVESTIGATION PRIORITY REVIEW GROUP
Purpose:
To provide historical information on the Investigation Priority Review Group (IPRG), brief the Comission on the experience of IPRG, and recomend alternative handling of investigation priorities.
Background:
On August 4,1986, the Executive Director for Operations
~~
proposed the establishment of an " Investigation Referral Board (IRB) to review all referrals to 01 and to assign Priorities and schedules comensurate with individual program and agency-wide needs.".This IRB was formed on November 10, 1986 and in accordance with a recomendation by the Ip.B.
wastermInatedonJune5,1987andreplacedbythe Investigation Priority Review Group (IPRG) on September 15, 1907. Since that time, the IPRG has met five times.
Discussion:
The IRB set priorities for each investigation by reviewing each investigation request before 01 opened the case. One of the reasons the IRB was terminated was because the EDO did not consider it an appropriate utilization of management resources.
In a June 8,1987 memorandum to the Comission, the EDO recommended that reviewing the quality of investiga-tion requests be carried out by the organization making the referral. Further, he recomended that an intra-agency Investigation Priority Review Group be established to periodically review referrals to assure that priorities are current with agtney-wide needs.
The IPRG was established to satisfy that last recommendation /
by the EDO. Enclosure 1 is the IPRG charter. The IPRG relied on the office requesting the investigation to set the initial priority, and then met periodically to examine the priorities established for all these.new cases and consider thern on a national basis. At these meetings the IRPG also considered whether ary existing investigations with prioritits already reviewed by the IFRG needed to have the priority adjusted cue to new information, preliminary findings of the investigation or changing circurrstances at the plant, e.g., near-term ifcensing. The national pricrity I
NOTE:
TO DE MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE contact: James Lieberman, OE, 20741 wngs 7ng prunt sng is gang Ben B. Hayes, 01, 20373 gynyngstg D Sofooff g
D F,o 3-MAWMMMMA
o' The Commissioners l l-list that was thus created was intended to assist 01 in i
l balancing their resources on a national scale.
The increased exposure of Headquarters and Regional staffs to the IPRG process and the national investigative needs have resulted in a better understanding of t1e 6ppropriate l
priority to 6ssign new cases. As participants in all IPRG meetings, the Regional Administrators and their staffs have become familiar with the possible range of requests for. investigation and are now able to assign priorities with a sense of the placement of that request in the national list of priorities. This experience has resulted i
in the IPRG changing fewer of the priorities assigned by tht Pegions, obviating the need for an agency-wide review..
\\
A monthly report of open investigations is issued by 01 which includes a short description of each case, the assigned priority, and estimated completion date. This report is forwarded to the Commission with copies to the Directors of OE, NRR and NMSS and the Regional Acniinistrators and serves to assist them in staying abreast of the current investigativt workload and priorities.
In addition, with closer involvement of NRR and NMSS in operationti matters.
I there is more communication between the Region ahd' Headquarters in setting the priorities, so that the Region's request for investigation often reflects the opinions of the headquarters sto'f offices Similarly,he same staffs that would t
support the IPRG.
priority changes that arc necessitated b3 rreliminary investigative findings or changing circumstances are now sometimes made without waiting for a review by the IPRG because the Regions, through discussions with the headquarters offices, have determined that the current priority is no longer warrar.ted by the facts.
The principal purposes of the IPRG were to provide a.
l.
national forum for assigning priorities to investigations and to allow for adjustments to those priorities over time.
In doing this, the IPRG clarified the process and pointed out the nced for sensitivity to other investigations going on in other Regions.
Due to this experience, the need for the IPRG has been diminished. At this time, the expenditure of resources by 1
senior management to sup) ort the 1PRG is no longer warranted. The process las required extensive offort by thrte staff members for up to a nionth' prior to the meeting, one to two staff-days of effort by senior mancgers in Headquarters and the Regions, including r
Directors of HRR, N?tSS, 01, and OE and Regional l
Administrators, and up to one full day for preparation by Safeguards and Operttional Support.the Deputy Executive Director v
This effort
0; r
The Comissioners,
expended for each meeting, up to three times per year, and experience has shown that few of the existing priorities are changed as a result.
i The staf f reconsnends that the IPRG be dissolved and that the investigation priorities be established by the requesting office. Theprogramoffice(NRR,HMSS,OE) will review the priorities of cases within its area of responsibility.
The monthly report as discussed above will maintain a list of all open investigations and their prioritics. If an Office Director or Regional Administrator wantc to change one of the priorities, it should be done in accordance with liRC Hanual Chapter 0517, Part III, Sections B.4 and B.S.
The Office of Enforcement intends to. review the success of this recommendation af ter one year and Will make a report to the Consnission.
Coordination:
The Regional Acministrators as well as the Directors of NRR, NHS$, 01, and OE agree with this recomendation.
Reconsnendation:
Unless directed otherwise by the Commission within 10 working days, I intend to discontinue the IPRG. A report of the experience of establishing investigation priorities without the IPRG will be prepared by the staff in one year and forwarded to the Comission.
7 I
f a s H. T or i
E cutive rector for Operations e
Enclosure:
IPRG Charter
+
SECY NOTE:
In the absence of instructions to the contrary, SECY will notify the staff on Monday, April 9, 1990, that the Commission, by negativo consent, assents to the proposed in this paper.
DISTRIDUTION 2 Commissioners EDO OGC ACRS OIG ACNW GPA ASLBP REGIONAL OFTICES ASLAP SECY
ej
.i i
/
'g umiso sTATss I
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N t
o
{
was.eemstow. o. c. nues j
\\*...*,
SEP ! 51987 i
t NEMORANDUM FOR:
Those on Attached List j
FROM:
Victor'Ste110. Jr.
Executive Director for Operations j
$UBJECT:
$YSTEM FOR PER!001CALLY PRIORIT!!!NG INVESTIGATIONS 4
The Investigation Priority Review Group (IPRG) is being established to consider i
the priorities for investigations of wrongdoing on a national basis. Matters of ' wrongdoing involve varying degrees of potential or actual safety significance.
Therefore. NRC limited investigatory resources make a periodic agency wide review of investigation priorities necessary to assure that the 'nvestigatory resources are focused on:the sost important safety issues..
The cosposition and responsibilities of the IPRG are set out in the attached i
investigation Priority Review Group Charter.
Inittel working arrangements for the IRPG are also attached to this Mesorandum. The IRPG Chairman any revise these initial working arrangements as necessary. The Office of Investigations has been involved in developing the plans for the IPRS and the Director of 0!' supports this approach.
1 The Investigation Priority Review Group and the system for periodically.
reviewing and priorjtizing requests for investigations will be effective i
September 30, 1987, hs y f#b, Y ctor St Executive Director. Tor Operations
Enclosures:
.As stated cc:
B. Hayes 01 S. Connelly, OIA T. Rehm, ED0 b
i
" - ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
0;
- \\
i w
1 WORKING ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE INVESTIGATION PRIORITY REVIEW GROUP (IP
\\
The Director, OE, will provide staff support for the !PRG. This support i
will include (1) providing the reference and working materials necessary for the functioning of the Group. (2) preparing IPRG reports for the approval of the Group Chairman, and (3) performing such other IPRG functions as the Group Chairman may direct.
The IPRG will meet during the first month of each calendar quarter as scheduled by the Deputy EDO. At least 30 days before the scheduled quarterly setting OE will provide Region 61 Administrators and Office Directors a copy of the last national ranking made by the IPRG and a list of referrals made by the region or j
office since the last national ranking. The last national ranking developed by i
the IR8 will be used for the initial Group meeting. The list of referrals will i
be grouped by the priorities designated in Manual Chapter 0517. Regional-i A&inistrators and Office Directors will review the 0! referrals made by them on the list provided by OE and further rank the referrals using the following guidance. Within the High priority, rank according to Upper, Medium, and Lower. Within the Norma priority, rank according to Upper and Lower. No further ranking of cases within the Low priority 's necessary. Outstanding O! '
case will also be reprioritized by the Regional Administrators and Office Directors who originally made the referra'.
The Regional Administrators and Office Directors will also request from the appropriate 01 Field Office Ofrector, a status for 0! investigations regarding (1) whether the case is a full investigation or an inquiry (Q case), (2) the percent of field investigative work completed for all outstanding 01 cases.
(3) a list of the 01. cases cle ed, and (4) cases opened since last IPRG meeting)with assigned priority. Regional Aministrators and Office Directors will (1 annotate the national ranking lists provided by OE with the priority.
information regarding new referrals, (2) annotate the status of 01 cases including the percent of field work completed, and (3) return the annotated lists to OE by the close of business,10 days before the scheduled IPRG meeting.
Prior to the IPRG meeting, DE will prepam a ' straw man' new national ranking list using the annotated lists from the Regional Aetnistrators and Office Directors.
In preparing the straw men list, OE will include the percent of the field investigative work completed, line out those cases that haye been completed or eministratively closed since the last national ranking, and include a brief 'one line" description of the cases.
1 At the IPRG' meeting, Group members will review the straw man national ranking i
list and develop a revised national ranking. After the IPRG meeting OE wil prepare a report of the Group meeting, including the new national ranking, and issue a report, after approval by the IPRG Chairman, to the organizations indicated in the IPRG Charter.
l l
\\
-.-._.7,_
R Attached List J. M. Taylor. DED0 H. L. Thompson, l#tSS T. E. Murley, NRR E. S. Beckjord, RES W. T. Russell, RI J. N. Grace R!l A. B. Davis, RIII R. D. Martin, RIV J. B. Martin, RV J. G. Keppler, OSP W. Parler, OGC W. G. Mcdonald, ARM H. Denton, GPA E. L. Jordan, AE00 J. Lieberman, OE
- 5. Schinki, 0GC i
)
1
4 Charter for the Investigation Priority Review Group 1.
PURPOSE To review quarterly each open investigation:
1.
The assigned priority (high, normal.. low). and assure the priority is consistent with program and overall agency-needs, and 2.
The schedule when the results of the investigation are needed to support regulatory action.
!!. Membership Deputy Executive Director for Operations (Group Chaiman)
Office Director NMSS Office Director, NRR Director, O!
Assistant General Counsel for Enforcement, OGC (Advisory Member)
Director, OE (Advisory Member)
If Group members are unable to attend a meeting,they should appoint their deputies or acting office directors to substitute for them.
III. Meetinos Meetings will be conducted quarterly during the first month of each calendar quarter as scheduled by the Group Chairman.
It is expected that the meeting will include Regional Administrators, Director Field Office Directors representation, via conference call, OSP, and 01 IV. Staff'SvDDort The Office of Enforcement will provide staff support for the Investigation Priority Review Group.
Thissupportwillinclude(1)advisinitheGroup regarding the application of the policies in Manual Chapter 0517 Appendix..
Part 111. (2) providing the reference and working materials neces,sary for the functioning of the Group. (3) preparing the Group quarterly report for the approv'al of the Group Chaiman functions as the Group Chairman may, direct.and (4) performing such other IPRG V.
Report A quarterly report will be provided to the EDO.
The report will sumarize the prioritization of open investigations, sununarize the status of outstanding investigations, and identify any problems or potential problem areas. Copies of the report to the EDO will be provided to the Comissioners, the Directors. NRR, NMSS, 0GC, OE, 01, OSP, and the five Regional Administrators.