ML20134G517
| ML20134G517 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/07/1996 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Miraglia F, Paperiello C NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned), NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20133N901 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-96-488 NUDOCS 9611130247 | |
| Download: ML20134G517 (4) | |
Text
- - - - ~
d u iLc4 s s.
L ,
'f"%
g i UNITED STATES Luiw
- - [j '
)
- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t WASHINGTON, D.C. 20556-0001
- ,o November 7, 1996 MEMORANDUM TO: Frank J. Miraglia, Acting Director office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ;
l Carl A. Paperiello, Director l Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards '
Regional Administra ors FROM: James M. Taylor Executive Directo r pe at ns
SUBJECT:
RECORDING OF TIME EXPENDED ON ALLEGATIONS Attached is a copy of the Agency Allegation Advisor's Annual Report on the Status of the Allegation Program. Recommendation 3 in the report states that management should increase the emphasis placed on properly documenting time spent on allegations. The report provides a comparison of allegation werkload, as indicated by the number of allegations received and closed, and the number of hours expended on allegation follow-up, as recorded in RITS. -
The comparison indicates that all NRC employees may not be properly allegations.
documenting the time spent reviewing and resolving Graphs 8 and 10 in the report indicate that Regions II and IV, respectively, experienced a significant rise in l
allegations received and allegations closed between July 1995 and June 1996. However, Graph 15 indicates that the number of hours expended per allegations between October 1995 and April 1996 in these two regions decreased. While this could be intepreted to imply more efficient processing of allegations in Regions II and IV, it could also mean that the time spent in the reviews has not been properly documented. Based on discussions between regional management and the Agency Allegation Advisor, the latter appears to be the case.
With the increased emphasis on improving both the quality of the staff's review of allegations, and the quality and timeliness of communications with allegers, an accurate account of the hours ,
expended on allegation follow-up is essential to understanding the associated resource imM= -Eggife- - , , ; _ rc -
( 1 qucted tc emphasize tne importance of properly documenting- DA (time snent on allegations to your manmoement and staff. /
Additionally, for allegations closed in Ju W hugus ( and h-dI J September of this year, please review the time reported by the individuals assigned to esolve them and determine whether the b,Ck time reported accurately. reflects the time expended resolving the allegations.
N
) On A )
~ ,yy' 2e
&I%dh4D
, i.
.' o O
Multiple Addresses Please inform me of the results of your review within 45 days of the date of this memorandum. If you determine that time expended on allegation follow-up is not being properly documented, please include the corrective actions you have taken in your response.
Attachment:
As stated i
l