ML20128E556

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Gao Transmitting Draft Rept, Improvements Needed in NRC Ofc of Inspector & Auditor. Ofc Will Take Lead in Preparing Agency Comments on Draft. Proposed Response Will Be Submitted by 810501
ML20128E556
Person / Time
Issue date: 04/14/1981
From: Jamarl Cummings
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTOR & AUDITOR (OIA)
To: Hendrie
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20127A137 List:
References
FOIA-84-415 NUDOCS 8505290414
Download: ML20128E556 (1)
v • d • e


Text

_ _ _. _ _ _. _. _

p 4

u se

.T April 14, 1981

[%.

Chaiman Ifendrie

%:;lEg".

flEl'ORAllDUit FUR:

. Janes J. Cuncings, Director Office,0f Inspector and Auditor FR0r':

GAO DRAFT P.EPORT EI' TIT 1.E0 "IltPRO AllD NUCLEAP REGULATOPY C0f!!!ISSInt!'S OF Sim0ECTi AUDITOP" l 9,.1931.

The subject draft " report was distributed to yo itting their d for l'RC's draft to llRC. As indicated in the letter, OAD has askeby Pay e, 19 connents within 30 days of the date of the letter, or ffice to arrange In addition, GAO told us that they plan to contact your o If the Omnission so a briefing on the cajor findings in their report. des in order that any cuestions can be addressed jointly.

ceived from In the meantine, unless instructions to the contrary are re d in preparing agency the Corinission, this office will take the lea 11e plan to subnit the pr connents on the draft.

review and approval by !!ay 1, 1981.

Attachnent:

GAO ltr dtd 4/8/81,,

Connission (3) w/att cc:

Distribution _

DIA File 80A-36 l

$0 rdr Wiest i

l i

85d5290414 841227 PDR FOIA BAUSERB4-415 PDR C0f! TACT:

T. Ifiest DIA - 27051 OIA IA

......O...............

m.e c i......O..f.A.........

....... O..I..A..........

. soms), T.W...i.e..s.t../.b..a..b..

He..r.r............

...M..e..s.s..e. n.g,e.r.....

..... C.u.m..i..n.g s....

4/ /81

.. w.v.

4/ /.81 1.....................

.... 4/ /81 1

j.

'"m 1

9

o WSM5S$W5?&M

?/.

M

~ ;

l.D i

I unitan sTATas

)

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION innamassme.e.c. asses t

l'..:h**@,T s' s.

May 1.1981 a

g.,

h..-.,i.Db

. apenaminam.

L.lis$_

m.. -

A I :.'31 m 'e

~

. kN D.b

I.4 ' ~ ;'

The Honorable Milton J. $ccolar Acting Comptroller General of the United States s2 General Accounting office

=

t 'd '

Washingtoe. D.C.

20548

~

3"., ~.

Dear Mr. Socolar:

r g:+. y.

On April 8,1981 the Gene;al Accounting Office (640) icsued to us a draft report entitled " Improvements Needed in the Nuclear Regulatory Comuif ssion's Office t' Inspectar and Auditor" (0!A), and requested that v.u.-

we provide our casaments on the draft within thirty days, or by May 3, F..'

L.-

i 1981.

3.f-In reviewing the draft report, we have found what we consider to be numerous discrepancies and inaccuracies. Additionally, we have only p?

recently. April 21,1981, received verbal clarification from E0 as to the specificity of certain aspects of the report.

These cot.4ttions have required us to devote an unusually large twent of effort to the preparation of our consnents in order to support our We, therefore, be'lieve posture that GAO's analysis was deficient.

f:

that an extension in the time 41106td for preparation of our cceents Suen is necessary to enable us to adequately cossnent on this report.

i i

an extension will, in the end, benefit GA0 by enabling y'ou te more fairly and accurately present the facts in your final report, I

b As a result. I as hereby requesting an extension of thirty days be If you have any qucstions c' would J

granted in our ccanent period.

l like to discuss thh request, please contact James J. Cwrii})s, Direrter.

J OIA on 492-7301.

l I

We appreciate your consideration.

i 7' Sincerely.

\\

V A E.

'Josep' M. Hendrie l

l' -

'dihIHp'lW

===...w%,,,

w

__*-_____------------,-----------------*--e-.-----------m-w---%,

, =ww#---g-.----,.-a-

-"---&----*--*"'e""--w-

~

Fos ref:

g' "'*%

4

-A*

Unt1 ED::TAh5

[

.,5 NUC'IAR REGOLATONY COMMisslON I

,,j WASHINGTON. D. C. 20SSS I

  • AfM.Y /

September 8',1978 l

O'? ' 9

.L&WW

%, **, /

.. vi W:LLt A MEMORANDUM FOR: Chairman Hendrie Connissioner Gilinsky

/

Commissioner Kennedy Connissioner Bradford f

I Commissioner Ahearne 1

FROM:

0. Gene Abston, Acting Director Office of Inspector and Auditor

SUBJECT:

FINAL GA0 REPORT ENTITLED "THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NEEDS TO AGGRESSIVELY MONITOR AND INDEPENDENTLY EVALUATE NUCLEAR POWERPLANT CONSTRUCTION" In accordance with our August 25,1975 memorandum concerning coordination of GAO activities within NRC, the subject report is being sent for your infonnation.

It should be noted that reconnendations directed to the Chairman, NRC, are contained on pages 11, 23, and 29 of this report. As you know, Section 236 of.the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 requires the Chairman to submit a written statement on actions taken on GAO recom-mandations to the House and Senate Committees on Government Operations not later than 60 days after the date of the report. This statement should be submitted to the connittees by November 6,1978. The statement on NRC's actions will be coordinated and drafted by the EDO and should be presented to the Commission for review and approval no later than October 20, 1978.

Enclosure:

Subj Rpt cc:

L. Gossick R. Minogue S. Chilk S. Levine J. Kelley C. Smith C. Kannerer T. Rehm K. Pedersen E. Jordan J. Fouchard H. Thornburg H. Shapar Region Office f.9 la 1978 J. Davis Directors H. Denton

Contact:

Fred Herr, CIA

'E.

49-27051 y

.I f

-gqc2+<MM-

-m y

---,.-..--.-_...,e__

I

=

.,,e en em

  • k UNITED STATES i

"3 NUCLEAR RECULATORY COMMISSIOP.

v' I

J W ASHlasGTOse. O C. POMS e

e September 23, 1981 suenean The Honorable Morris X. Udall, Chairman Subconnittee on Energy and Envirorvnent Conmittee on Interior and Insular Affairs United States House of Represer:atives Washington, D.C.

20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

In accordance with Section 236 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, enclosed is NRC's response to the recomendations addressed to the Chairman, NRC, in the General Accounting Office's report entitled.

" Improvements Needed In Tne Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office of Inspector and Auditor," dated July 9,1981.

Sincerely, ts.

S NH Nu to J all.In Chairman

Enclosure:

Response to GA0 l-Recommendations i

cc: Rep. Manuel Lujan D

i b,

hff' Mutigm '

CMRgspONDENCE PDR

--..y#-..

_--w-7-ei,-~..-,

t

~

^

[

Eescon,c to Gr." Rep..-: Ent itiec *!r: mt ;;;:,,i::,. s.

tn tne Nucleae tecJater-On--isu c *5 O_"

, f ',

Insogtor anc Auct :: ~.

(cr..-E : -::)

Recennenda tior.

To improve 0!A's effectiveness, we recommer.: that the Cnat mn..v-::.

require the Director of that office to develop a systematic planning and prioritizatien pao:ess fer bc*.-

audit and investigative work which complies with OMS cetteria ar.:

' GA0 guidance;

Response

On June 15, 1981, the Coomission directed the Director, OIA, to "In :ne future, present the 01,% audit plan in a femat which mory closely folly, the guidance in CM8 Circular A-73."

Tnis will begin with the pre 1arattor.

of 0!A's calendar year 1982 tudit plan.

4 0!A's investigative program responds to allegations referred to OIA: OIA generally does not initiate investigations independently. As a result, OH8 and GA0 guidance cannot nomally be used in planning 01A's investi-gative workload.

Establishing -investigative priorities will revin a matter of judgement by O!A management based on factors such as healtr.

and safety implications, expressed Commission interest and statutory requirements.

Recomnendation concentrate its investigativt resources on wor' aimed at eliminning k

fraud and waste within NRC;

Response

I ile 6elieve CIA's investigative resources are already concentrated on eliminating fraud and waste in NRC. Nonetheless, 'n the future OIA will i

evaluate ways to improve efforts in there areas.

l Reccum.enda tion avoid assigning auditors to investigative work;

Response

It is the policy of the current 01A director that auditors will peiform

~ audits and inustigators will perform investigations unless there is a bona fide need for an auditor's expertise on an investigation. There have been few instances since 1918 in which auditors have been assigne,(

to investigations.

j

..-,.-,,..-,,_n-

.,m,.

t o

2

[*

Reccumenda tion A

1.'I.

establish a process of coordination between the audit and investi-gative groups in identifying possible assigrinents, and clearly Q ^J -.f;..4 comunanicate that process to the 0!A staff; Q ::.g

.y :

i.W.$'. M ',~

.; 3.y ;...

@j E.

O!A management will establish a policy whereby suggestions from the it'd '

audit group to investigative group, or vice versa. identifying potential p* Egi.;.. matters for investigation or audit will be more closely controlled and

_W.s.,

annitored. This process will be documented in the OIA handbook currently

( N.j; being developed for the guidance of the CIA staff.

4.

~h.. : Recommendation -

r+-e n.

-1 e g.

$>d '...f- ' ' develop formal guidance for the staff to follow in carrying out its yud

.c-

.orte

, g{$y'y p 'tl '

pp f

,~, Response f 7I!..

~

. An OIA handbook setting out DIA policies and procedures for the staff's a.gE -.,3,. 'guidance w*s under development at the time of the GA0 audit. DIA management is currently reviewing this handbook. The Comission has directed that the handbook be completed by December 31. 1981.

.f. 4 f q-N.N.,.

Recommendation institute a formalized system of control over assignments where

~

milestones and staff resources are established for completing (3

critical steps and periodic job reviews are held to evaluate the gg.:,.

status of arsignments; Y..

{.,. -

e.<:w..:'.,..

W

. An'0!A Audit Milestone and Resource Schedule, which provides for job 5:E7

' reviews, has been developed to schedule and monitor audits. This system

- W..

. isent_ into offact August 5. Ig81.

O,. 4 b-C.%;-Recommendation

}/J.%l p {'y...

.%9.p i

' establish and adhere to requirements regarding the follow-up on L

r ff@f5f"C.i

.l'.i audit reports. and see to it that office directors respond in i

a. +.: 6.:. writing to OIA investigative reports.

4 e 'c.

5.

3.

N [ " Resoinse.( 'l... #

b L

~

l T 9 ' 'On August 6 'Ig81. NRC revised its' audit report follow-up system to

%. :4 fully document conpliance with OMB Circular A-73. DIA's handbook, mentioned above, will establish requirements and guidance to the staff p~.. "....,.n coMucting. follow-up reviews on reports. A follow-up schedu o

Y

  • j

l..,.f.. &. ;-

~ ~~ '

L

- ::T

me w-...,

...,4

. g

h.,Ng;

?.-

f. 7.r 4

.f

'4

.*?

3

[

. 2 :.,..

s.,

w p.

c.

r.

a 1

b ' all reports will bs established, bus reasonable judgement must be used

3

' in adhering to the schedule because of the small size of the CIA staff

7.~
:/[ and the possibility of unplanned higher priority work.

0!A will perfom 4

'Nh!?.T.'more timely follow-up reviews in.the future, however.

C-y.-.

a M.'l.The' staff has established a procedure to assure that required responses

?y.L},.R.eto 01A investigative reports are made.

6fc k.3 p.. ?. h :. y.....

1 Recommendation,

~

r si '}n addition, we recommend that the Chairman, NRC, exple're the possibility

!yfg.' of assigning non-appropriata employee complaint cases and equal employ-

! ment opportunity allegations to some other NRC office. This will allow W,p" d. fraud and wasta within NRC,the CIA investigative sta

[

i Y*'

$?

W. < i :...

Mpj..p:LtemLnLt'?..h :( i '...!-

t.-

..e t.

it.The report does not support the finding that too much time has been e$he spent on emplo es complaint and EE0 cases. Furthermore GAO's recom-1,07'k' mandation simpiy proposes transferring work fro 4

.%I., unspecified office. If other offices had excess manpower it would be

?.-[ more appropriate to transfer staff. from that office to 01A rather than c

transfer.this function.

s.

i

.it.i W... - I ~:.w.. :. d;4 ~ -p..t v.

~

Rewndation # ; ;,.

..,:a-L.'p:. t.

.3..

Mlii j'-9. initiate immediate action to establish a more formal process for

. :R-seekinfi agency officials' connents on CIA draft reports. Any A?.ve??,', exceptton to this femal process--such as the use of an informal i%j y$

4 T.-

draft to $4tain conuents--should be clearly disclosed in the final Q.; r..!.: y.:.,.S.i W A.h E'F

  • fti.::si,'.".-;.,. /.. '...?j fk
y..

u -

..,. i 3.

l* (U:?e s ~ %'. '

.tr. '

i. Ressonse e - t..- n ~.::

W1.L:n V6.. ! The CIA handbook will document the fomal process for seeking agency

  • 'F.

couments on draft O!A audit reports. The undbook will also specify Li$ "' [, documentation requirements for the agency connent process in both th

.. report and work papers.- Exceptions to the formal process will be I

F.-

b-:f.'ti ' clearly documented in the work paper files and to the extent necessary W..Q. in the final report. ' *. 2 "

s.

M}

g.. c.R - s ~.q.

..,:.e hh.

. ' Recommendation },I, f:ff,',( m,). #h,' :..;

y.

.. -; ;. n

.s.

w;... I '...

. c. -

IQ.

M direct O!A ' o issue its reports if program officas are untimely in t

providing their comments and require OIA to reflect in its reports e

v#

F.. '. v.,

any changes made based on program office comments.

5 t

Q :*,

),, -

\\q:b'3y p..-

.~,

- ' ~.

c-

,3-

-l, _

. ;. l.;;. y. : Y:.

".. ^: %.V,.

-e.

q.,

,s,.-.-

g...-

. e

,. c :

..;. w.

.2

,3, F

. e e e m m e w s y s : m a w g a g g a s. g g ~,;

7.

-~

d a,'

d c....

f',

~

4 H

nes onse r.

-b E'

' OIA has issued and will continue to issue its reports without the V.

Executive Director for Operations' (EDO) connents if it is *>elieved ~

..... the ED0 is unreasonably delaying connents. 01A will not issue reports

[l.

'to the Commission without EDO comments only because the EDO mtsses a response deadline. That process would not fairly consider ott)er press.tres 3

,'on the program offices and the EDO and would result in too many issues being unnecessarily elevated to the Commission,

-?.'.. i -. DIA's final reports will identify significant changes made as a result

)

p h,.! of program office c ements.

s t

4 -. Recommendation P e discontinue the practice of CIA conducting ~ joint invastigations e

t 1 --

. 'f ;..

9 with other EC offices.

p.m.

y.

Ras h :,

. ponse

,,. c E

t during the TMI amergency, when the interview skills of DIA's r:1..,. scepaudit and invedcative staff were needed on the various NRC investigations

' %. : of the TMI accident, DIA has not conducted joint investigations. While

(

I we agree witti the general principle that DIA should not rr4stinely be m/ ' ~ involved in joint investigations with other NRC offices, we don't agree

, V. '~ : that this has been a ' practice" which nee.1s to be discontinued.

E s.

t.e b-

- }s..

b,4::.1sv.

~

%.l 1l)'

p w.h.

7-1.;. ' ] 'n

.s.... - t L'.

t lq*.>.l$':.f.- -y 1

a f,:,.. '.+g,'A r;&;U a

~;

,.b r,.

p.

61.-
..','.,....'S.

c.

.4*

c.

.r.b..- -

s..,

c.

c.,. -

,.m r.

~v.

  • 2s

. k.R. ' -

c

1. - b y.

'.2:"

... l... '.,,

-t

.. ;*p...-

... ~

e.-

v.

p - ;.]8

, _,., '.r....

. ~;

3 w.

7 s

.. y

-v..3

. i;.: -

~..

c.

- -. ~. _. r

o

'.jf g

4 ST s

'JUN l'2198f dEMORANDUMFOR:

R. C. DeYoun.g, Deputy Director, Office of Inspection and s

Enforcement FROM:

James G. Keppler, Director, Region III

SUBJECT:

STATUS OF ZIMMER INVESTIGATION t

e Per your request, attached is a summary for the Commission of the present status of the Zimmer investigation.

I i

/ '

James G. Keppler Director

Attachment:

As stated 4

r t

h' s

Ji2.$79QfL'31-

7
(

\\

RIII R

RIII 6

RIII Rfh J',t. i g-s ^ 1 l Str#eter/ p Warnick fgavis Jgper l1 6/12/81 0 0 (, /it /g : 3 4 /_,, a._ p _,_ j t a,

STATUS OF ZIMMER INVESTIGATION June 12, 1981 I By letter dated January 5,1981, to the Office of Personne1' Management, the Government. Accountability Project (GAP) of the Institute for Policy Studies (a non government agency) alleged improper construction and quality assurance - practices at Cincinnati. Gas and Electric Company's Zimmer construction site and charged that NRC (Region III) had failed to perform a thorough and com- ^ i .glete investigation of earlier allegations made by a Mr. Thomas Applegate. Nineteen allegations were contained in the GAP package. OIA was instructed by Chairman Ahearne to initiate an investigation into the performance of j Region III regarding the earlier allegations, and Region III initiated an i investigation into the nineteen allegations provided by GAP and some addi-tional related allegations provided by an ex-construction quality control inspector. From the start the overall investigation broadened c,onsiderably as a result of new allegations, learned,through interviews with workers and ex-workers and, to date, ten NRC inspectors and investigators have spent cver 1500 manhours onsite, and interviewed over 90 individuals in connection with the investigation. Thile some of the nineteen GAP allegations have been fully or partially sub-f stantiated, they have not proven to be of major safety importance. However, ' h c '. the broadened investigation has identified major quality assurance weaknesses k)h' and some construction deficiencies. The most significant construction problem identified to date involves unacceptable welds in structural beams.

However, another problem of major consequence involves widespread concerns regarding

^f-

he accuracy of many quality records and this matter iii being investigated oy OIA for nossible referral to the Denart=-nt af Astice.

Region III issued an~ Immediate Action Letter on April 8,.1981, to Cincinnati Gts and Electric Company for work remaining at the site to give increased assurance that the work is accomplished in accordance with regulatory requirements. It required substantially more involvement in quality control inspection and the quality assurance program by Cincinnati Gas and Electric Ccmpany personnel. Followup inspections by the Senior Resident Inspector and specialist inspectors from the Region III office have c6nfirmed implementation -of the requirements of the letter. The results of the ongoing investigation - will detemine if actions beyond those specified in our April 8,1981, letter are needed to assure that continuing construction is acceptable. By letter dated May 11, 1981, GkPinformallyrequestedtheRegionIIIDirector to recommend suspension o'f the Construction Permit. ' Based on assessment of the investigation findings to date and recent inspection findings, Region III l hss taken the position that suspension of construction activities is not warranted.[5Eovever, Region.III has determined that a comp l e i 111 be' required to verify the quality of existing construction. Actions to i . be taken by the licensee to verify the adequacy of past work, as well as gl \\ j independent mep urements to ha taba by hnc. m being developed. An interim investigation report, summarizing the important findings, is -expected to be issued in July. A news conference or public meeting, rel.ative to issuance of the report, is being considered. Completion of the overall investigation, including a final report, is not expected before this Fall. l w ,,,_,,,7 ~., _ _.. ~,._,_7 ,,,}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20128E556&oldid=4260204"