ML20059J002
| ML20059J002 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/07/1994 |
| From: | Rogers K NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Foley T HOUSE OF REP., SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059H995 | List: |
| References | |
| CCS, NUDOCS 9401310282 | |
| Download: ML20059J002 (3) | |
Text
<
pR REC y
ik UNITED STATES
? p y,)g),.1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'o[(Ds, u f f WASHINGTON, D.C. 20556 j
....+
CHAIRMAN The Honorable Albert Gore, Jr.
President of the United States Senate Washington, D.C.
20510
Dear Mr. President:
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has evaluated its management control and financial management systems for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1993, as required by the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act of 1982 (EHFIA).
The Commission believes this evaluation provides reasonable assurance that the NRC, as a whole, is in compliance with Sections 2 and 4 of the FMFIA.
We have four material weaknesses that, when considered together, are not sufficiently serious to prevent overall assurance that the NRC is in compliance with the FMFIA.
The NRC performed 19 management control reviews in FY 1993.
Licensing and inspection programs reviewed included power reactor license maintenance and safety evaluations, early site permit regulations and reviews, and high-level waste repository prelicensing.
Research programs reviewed included generic safety issue resolution, high-level waste research,~and earth sciences and reactor plant responses to seismic and other external events.
Administrative and other support areas reviewed included property management, document control dissemination and information, and telecommunications support.
The NRC's evaluation of management controls was performed in accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) " Guidelines for the Evaluation and Improvement of and Reporting on Internal Control Systems in the Federal Government," dated December 1982, as required by OMB Circular A-123, " Internal Control Systems."
In FY 1992, we reported four material weaknesses.
The NRC took corrective action in FY 1993 to resolve two of these weaknesses involving the NRC's general ledger and the approval process for reimbursement for work performed by Department of Energy (DOE) national laboratories.
We expect to complete corrective action on the two remaining material weaknesses, computer security and management of DOE national laboratory agreements, in calendar year 1994.
9401310293 940107 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR
3 l
l In FY 1993, the NRC continued to strengthen its management control program.
We improved instructions for performing risk assessments and management control reviews.
Through a study of our management control program, we identified the need for increased involvement of senior level managers, additional i
emphasis on programmatic controls, and a process that encourages more self-examination and reporting of management control weaknesses.
In December 1993, the Executive Director for Operations established an Executive Committee to evaluate various aspects of the management control program and to determine the best management control process for the agency.
The results of our continuing evaluation are discussed in the enclosures.
Respectfully,
(
-lMk Kenneth C.
Rogers Acting Chairman
Enclosures:
r A.
Statistical Summary of Performance B.
Progress Report on High Risk Areas C.
Material Weaknesses--Schedule of Corrective Actions D.
Material Non-conformances--Schedule of Corrective Actions
't s
2 In FY 1993, the Inspector General designated two additional areas as caterial weaknesses.
The first weakness involves compliance with the Department of Treasury requirement to bill licensees within five business days after services are rendered.
Billing our licensees for fees for NRC services within five business days is not feasible or cost effective.
Therefore, NRC will seek a waiver from the Department of the Treasury.for this requirement.
The second material weakness relates to audit coverage of DOE national laboratories.
The NRC Inspector General found that, because of a lack of audit coverage at the national laboratories by the DOE's Office of Inspector General, the DOE Inspector General was unable to provide assurance to NRC that monies spent by DOE and DOE Management and Operating Contractors on NRC's behalf were expended in conformance with applicable laws and regulations.
DOE has reported this as a material weakness.
Remedy of this weakness is outside the control of the NRC.
The NRC has four financial systems.
In FY 1993, the NRC performed a detailed review of its accounts receivable system and more 13mited reviews of its portion of the Federal Financial l
Srstem (FFS), the payroll system, and the allotment / financial 1
plan system.
These evaluations were performed in accordance with OMB " Guidelines for Evaluating Financial Management / Accounting Systems," dated May 1985, as required by OMB Circular A-127,
" Financial Management Systems."
The NRC identified no material non-conformances during these reviews.
The Department of the Treasury is reporting a material non-conformance in FFS, a system that NRC uses through an interagency agreement with the Department of the Treasury.
The material non-conformance results from the lack of adequate disaster recovery capabilities, in the event of a natural disaster, of the Data Center located in Hyattsville, Maryland.
This non-conformance is beyond the control of the NRC, and we understand that the Depart =ent of the Treasury will correct this inadequacy in FY 1994.
Additionally, NRC has one area of concern that we are carefully monitoring.
The General Accounting Office (GAO) pointed out a number of areas in the nuclear materials program that need improvement.
This program is implemented by NRC and the 29 Agreement St>29.s.
NRC has a comprehensive evaluation program for reviewing t'.i 6!c,nacy of both NRC and Agreement State material licensing i u ' i or programs.
We are taking actions to improve our ability t ocia ent the results of our evaluations and to ensure time.y ;.orrective actions of identified problems.