ML20154S464
| ML20154S464 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/09/1998 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL (OIG) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20154S458 | List: |
| References | |
| OIG-98-07, OIG-98-7, OIG-98A-07, OIG-98A-7, NUDOCS 9810270410 | |
| Download: ML20154S464 (23) | |
Text
-l, . ' . :1._ .{ ' ' ; ~\; ., : ((Ej).y.-Q >" . ' y Q.:t. ,:Q %. j}* . . j :[., . [::-
d ' .f i t, .6_ ;- % '1. ,;)ll;:' i ' $' ,"' i -
'A , ,, ., 'm . V :s . . %', . . . - - ...: ' .'
'-l* .' -*
{U* ' J .; '. . l':[ '. .
..~...
l2. '. .- Q,: l ,: n',VL'l l-
- '% " .; 'w;4 C., ,.\ :> .:. 4 s. :,, :
- .4?Y. j. - *i ,t .
- . -
i i f:a . .
s q.. %; h.,l,,., i.. ~ !lr.f. . . .. . .'x' . i ;. Or .:w i s.:.[ ; t,fA' ,.;;....8.;.v.y: . e ':4. 4 q :.yl : :o, . . ';. gr.y. :< l. : ,,)l:, .% d.< . 3:9 M ,:'.3 .y;:Q; fl'. ., l. ' .V ,W
.,; s k . , : .f:. ' .,1 d:.T e },. :- [',a :q \. ;.c *:; a r . >.._ s',q . ill.. .+ , . .'?f. , :: ,3,, ,,. t..,,%,
i . . t . . :.- . >a .g n .
6':.. ' ,....... t P . c .-
'3
,. ,.,./: , - .f $y *.,w.
. .n..,.;.,
- n. q 0.; + l ,.;* %-;p . "r .i- , ',3.~ 9~j.^vh ,m,,.. 3 .,(; .W.. ..
n.' .. ..h.
>. .. ...: 7,.;; ;.\:.. .,;s.
..e, e . .uy,....<..s. .. s.: .3.,,
. , , ..'; ..,<sy 3
. . . . . , ~1, e,...,..
- ..v.g....,...,,.
4 . , , . ,.
....,.,, ,......s. ,.e...
.~#.
,s . . . ..
t, ,g , ~ ,s'
.~n. . . .
.','(...,%
' ." (: , - . e..o ~, . . . . - -
v : , ; x. .n . ,:'*, ,. . ., '....: . .. ~. , . %'.* '.f.} ( b . * : : . : . ,,. .'> .j s ' ' ; .'s, .,. i.
); :p, . ',, - Q,.: u .,is.
- +
- y. ;, . . h ; ., '. .;. ';. '.
- ?. i' , , ..
f , ;. ,.....,A*,.. ,a, , ,,'? ,. '. . .','3 .= A . p}$,-.
., ,. .: : - - Q ., . ., ~. ,. N ,. - .1 *
, .. .. a. ,: ,,*,. .. :..o .h.c
- .; .. , . . n. .
,' :. : , , , :. *. se , :+.
- < ,, .:. .,, . . .s y' .v... . o . 3 -- ? , . g!. . s
.*y. r . ..,.: . , , .* + n&< r .s ,p. ; ' 'g..
,.y.'y .
q'y,, .
- s. y : . .q;<o * ,. . . -.< . , s y,.A.( '*v .
- t , ., y .L.'. . . , y . . , , ,, * , y ' M.:. .
. , r. .. .iS
, ;' ,! 'i '- f*. ,
- h.Y: , -l. ,', , . *, $,. ,$. f.' ; s ; , ., . "'
l . b . .'l.'.
- f , ;;. '.' . .,. k. - .-[',,fl - 6.,.*,, .,,, ., ,.,,l'[l . ,-
- ,'?'
, > f<h, Y .l-l
~ . -.,',Y n:. s f , ,- . . .
.e
- j. ..< .c , , . , ., , . . . .
. .,....4......- y , +.. . c.s e: s .( . . - .. a3,,. ; 7. .. ,,,. ., . . . . .1 ,,: . ./
.f , ; , ,) .
l . . . .
. . ,. ., l
- '? . . ,'.
- .* ' .
5 .
- a. , . ., I ,l . . '.- [ . .
- f .' . s
- , ?
" ~~ *
., N ; - -
~ . ' .7[: . l . . , .
.? c
. . - ,. .. i- .- .... v - > ,. .. ..
- ,.ff, k.
,n,,..
- ..', y . . . , . , , .
f.l.l.4. .
< .ll..C : . ". n.m e.
. w. m.,
h,, .. ff, f kf.. < ~ .. . .f, . .{&$.,
. 4.,
\ ;
'. c.>. vL
'f., h. . . . k. , hf,, .;,:.l' . .-
.l . f.
49..
_I.] .{.f? *.l,:.'. h f
.,>.,q
> ' - . , '. ,. y. : *
-g
. :. 7 sm ,, ?
, g :~ . .,' .< * . -
., . . : : ,: ' v:~ . . .y.. 4. ..;,...,...... .. y.'1 -.. % .. . ., . , y .
,..,,1- ..,a. -m"*.,. . . . .: .,:-+,., .,>.. .. u. 4 +.:.; :.,'8, . n?. ,., r;- 'y ..c ; m. . \ r .-
- < y' s.... . .p,.., ; lO, .. . '...* -; ,,..;.,,',.
, :,.s . ' _ ,.
.: ' ,. , . , .; > ,;; ', . (>. .;.:;., , ,[ ._ s -t ;, a
.;,;. ,. ,. . . . , . ,. ,y
,. ; .:.,l, . y 3:
D* , ;, j ,, )
-.: , * .... ..'.. .,[.. ,.. .- ;g ', j' , ,.
. ._4
.yy. ,. ~..;..-)..p. .q .. 3, ._. , ,. .. ,- , < - , .. -,,)y.-
... ... , . .. , :- ( , ., > b .;. r . .. . . .,. . _ ;m ,...* , . g. c; .
va, , , ,, ( ,p.._
g: '.,.;
- .s y;,,-
% . , . ..',e . . ,**
.,->. ?',- ,< .,; , ,... ., ~. ,
1: c. , .
. .. - -- ., .~ ' .
.~.
.r.'..
Q h. . ' .': , ,.. . - . . , ~ / . . , , ,.;.'."',,.7 . ' , ' ~r.C,' . ..', 7.. ,*e - ', '.' . l(.. .. ..-
.. ,*'y'. . ...,. ,1, 4 ; >:. . . .t.,.....<. ,6 M.
- 1. I". . ?.q,;~.0. . .- , . J. p u . - ~ #'
. . - ,: .-- ...',,'...'.N.,...*:'.>:,.
,-P ,e.- - . is.
- ' . m. , . , ; - .- >s "..
4 .
- . . p ,::..
' .: -7
<* - : 's * *, -
.t- . - - , 3' . ,-
- f. ? .;: t ' ,. ;,;. '; , .c..[ %,
.m ,. , . . t -
m, . . .: .: :- ,,*: ,, s . h ,y _' . .;[, .%; - ,',.l, , -t : , . _ ,, ?,,...
. , , j.. ' , \, ; g . _ ,.. . ,,); ').
- s 3 . > ' ., ..,-.3.,.,4.,
".l-.
...'i.q
. .. .. >s . . .',.,.'g,- ..
,..... s ;
..., n..,,, ...m,.. : ,
. . , .. .:., ;-e., . :..c...,... . . . _ . - ,. . . .
~.
. . ~ .... . . . , ..;,>. ...
g s m.. ,-, ....
s -
,..,..., ..e.,. n s
.,. .- ,. . , - : . i,
,.2.. . ,
- ... l;. e: . ..~- ,.;,< ..:: .. .. .; .n. ; ,'
+ ;; . .s . . ...,.,:.,...'.';.' .- qE ;.'. y : ;
V. . . .;. - - ,
...; ,. - s. ;.. ._ .'. ,; . . -4 >m. ..-.. 1. - , ., '. \ -
..0,.
-r 2. . . ...Q ..,.
_ .?. . ;. ' '. , . .
. '. ~ .;-f, . . .. . . . .:
-M.e1.y. . , . uK. .
,' l : ,, ; ;. .,., . ;. , .. : - (':... ,
....,y,*
-,. ?,
, ' ,. g; , y ' 5. '..,.c * :. :, ,
,j , , , y,.' ' ' . , . , .; ,
- . . .g.,, y.4._;/ ' s , ! } . g < , ...', 3, ;. .c'.;,.. ,,3,., :j. .,,c . =,.Wy,9.,.,
. : / ..,,
, . , , . .> . . ,s . ".*,
, ,. ,,,..:; .',:. e.- . .,
- 3. . . 'w..A ., f. 8 .. A . - .,.i r,. , .r v.
- j,..
.a
.r- .. , .s- :. .. - ^i. ,;,
1- e 6., ,4
.'.',l > -, . .- t',,
' 1 ...A, : ,,. . V' .g . g
' . , . .4.- '.;.o.... - ' 9;,
. I :, i.
...,..).'.'.4-d. - . * . ..husen.n s.hs. .
,f p ,, .;f . , ;,...4.s. .,,,;,.-,,., ; . . . e.:
.., .s . c, : -
., .M. .e .....g.. : . .. ,, .., .-..h. , ..s.
J >L 4. >
s s
- . :- i. a. .@. k r.',,y
- g ,A , c,b . :1.
.,;g..,<., . . -
4 . p. : . ,. *,-
Y ,.%.
r
-.v.... .
e...,,.....,..- :. .. 7,,'. ;, . , .. , ;- s. .**..,..'a. n.-r,.~ J' q, .
..r.
s :,. m,.. . ): . . . . . . . ..'},....-
- '.1,.- ; :,
L
.. . *. .,-. ..e..s,. , . , ' . ' ..,n
.~,.$.'.0m e
i
. . . -f
...r,,, .,
,%,{
. -- . l o*n . ;. , - .: .. .. .q .......,..f.- . '
. g vy .;.
- ..( .1.- - , , . - : e. . , , , . - ..! , .L. -
2 . . .- a
:*?: .
s : ,--V1 ....
' ..:'.y:'-. i'.ali,i t.:.'.'.~....".
. .}:!.* m,4 , ; . * . v. ,c, s . ] '. ' ;' ;;":?., ' . . 4;~. ,. . i -a . . ..- ;>'
'. '. . f. .h. ' ?. ':;i. : \ -l' . '.= -l , f,..G . ;. ,s. '- :
.,'v' , ", .: y x-;;:;;1,.;: ..:. .'$ > . . %:d.- t~: N:. + . . -' , . y .- . ; ,' y ,i :* -i{.
,s. -; .;: i.
t g%.: .q,' . ,: <;. ,.: ., . .-
' . - . q ':L .-Q
. ; ' .:;.. . i . ~;> r ,.. %c. '. ,.. ..y:. .<r -. ..p .. .h:; ,.,?.,..
r.. ..'n. - e .t *. ,. ;v; :s; p.:
- y: : ,..<.l :. 5..y., . .....,.;',',y'. ~
. '::. , .j. .;. ,
. > s. , . - .u,. ::. .,. s . ..'.. ' % .:e-; ,'. -) ',s., c. .- .
.-' yl .o, . ,c' ,.y ,"z , .q.
s.* :
. .1 ' :. _ $ :- ][ .' (.:,\ S ,; : 7,:t;.*yl. .,Q.. ,w.?: ' . , R.L. ~ ,, .; y ; .'l, ; ' .' ,):;&';&}:".'; tf.' W;Q.,". ;
[;.: To ";i ll,(:.*$ ; . L ,*. : 9;;: W::l ;* :* r, . '.s . ,.,j ;. "'. *; Q %.lf4 .. . . l ';., ip' ) . .".l l.., ~?\ ; 91. * '; '*:32[;;. N . ,. ~. ..' *'- o;;.,:; ..
' . .,.&:.'y . -y. g.' .= l .lll..^"..?.. : '.". . :, ,M. . '.;p.. , V . p.y'3 n l ' .. 4*;.
<:, , L ? . Y ;. $q. a;'.' ..0.:;' .V 1 -
-) gd: , i. :s
..',',.4::..~~..Y.... . , .
. . s
- ' :h; .:. _, 'st. .'. ': ,': l*,' , t :; :.' ., .t::' .,,I...s(:. ^' . . ' V l" / ' . }: 'l lc i' ^f ' :y
{,. . .:.Q' . ,b O . :.'U. . ' . . .%,. > Q ,l (,
f fi l'.
t .
. ,. o; . ,' ^ '; . . - l fe:
1 ll - : -
l hh f', :: . , ; ., . : .' . '; ; .'i , , :
.' ' ! . y , . ..l...
~
L;f f > .. .ll'.f ..qlL ....N^
- 3,..! D. . ., ?.?,' 5, ' '.' ll. ;>$',. . , k. .,,. 5: f,0.'.$ i: V'.,;p'*.Y W'W
- g ( .L g..'4; 3.Q,,
,.a0. tT . ;'.' f ,: !f $.y..j- f .,'l < k.N.Y :N r *4 i,, ',:[.: E b. .? l
'?... .- 4 e,q, g- J - .':g.. j' . . % .*. .
-p:.,.', ,y; - ;wy 'g i) , . - g;. ,. 7, [, p
- ,.r: 'i .s,.i. ,' , ,yqr ., :: . ; ./s, .
y t j ;, .p .; . ( ; h, q y . - . ,e
- ". p , .y ;;M, ;. i. , . ./ ,
s,.
- h .p , ., ,{.). p ., ,... +3 ;s*., , gg.*L ...->; -
-r , l;: '...s asf:*
'.:,. ;;!*,;<.,.),,..~..:k,.
- <,lf;Q . . - . t y, .. -' , y , . ,
- , ,Y..'. . . . , . .w".. .'- ,... ,-
, r . .-
-r. a,
.*n.,y:. s 4 * . : ; n ,. .,.: . -
- t,,
":gi , ,,., ;'e ...a .b. .a :
.r . . ,
$ ;"..: ,r,7, +.
. . : . t;.; ' -
y; . *! v5y:p.;e ..';
? ;
.:n : %.,a> ..,.-l; .. .*...
. p. r , N.s(;y .. . . . ,L ,. , :. ..:n,, .....:.*L,.
-. ' : [ n ,:. ., ;: v - - - .. ...;,..-: - a.,.. :..,..R. ':; #, -.
p> - A}.g;
- . r . . ..g
- t ,
.;=.- :po, .,. . . _ . .- . , .;.. x ,a w . V.' . :. ;. , s.o s
. :::4:,. ,y w . .;; . , ei a:.
z
.~u....'.vc. w
'. 4
?
-.: n.!; . ~ x , . -
y: en: :. ':,
=..:
-gl ., <;:i.
6,..t .,,,***%r. . ' . . t :. t;. g,.t .: ,-
.; a. ..i.
.?3..,.. .-* .2 ;*-*' .. - - - .s - , ...
- .- p
.g,- :.. y 7,s . ;< wg-,,....C.f
.s,,- 3*V
. ..: .i ... ,.,u+.,..,....
(
- ,'2 38'zc.,...'.".
- * ? . o. f. 3
% e,
.*y,',,,,;r,,,,...x,.'r ,,; . : ;.: 3 (-
- , , - l * . ' : . \.:r *s..x- ,: :
.a..
e",' ,e,;. -* ',,.:2, # } ,y . ' , . -. T , '., f *] g [a.
. - .. l-
- {i '* g, 1.' .:;p e;.:
,l,..,
)
- ;.'+ . %, .p.'...,..l;,.-l,',l
- s , .
.i p .t 7.'*i,'.'~-.g*,,lt.,Y,p..,,..'....j, .' : ,'; ,a y *; . ., ,',1, 1 :, ..s ., e j j, . '.j :;*
- L
.- ?, .,-i,,y.: .* , ". ; n .f .. 'l4 - g y . ,%,:;. .'/ . ' . *t .)9{ a . .. . * .l.
.- ,f,'.
,.,...'r...m. s, ' . ... . .-
t - s. .- ..:*. ,.,.e ,
, . . 1 -4 3g e
, g,' .. n . a ;,. ..1".,.=,.fs. . -
- .:3 @*,Q,,: .
.9.- .
, l: * * *, ,s u, , . t .
4 .
f ..iI;..s,. ^ . , , .. . .. g, .. ,. , . -p,t ,o ,,,.g, f, .r
.t;, . < . . .h. s , .
t,.,, ,.:
, ,.i,,,,, . y
,, , ,,.;, .j . . . ., ., 3 ..
3
- Y .* %f . ' h l?,3 . :* 'I' l .. 'l,,,'.n .l -),
n' t',' -Y .h . .; $.. :l
.% { ; L.
j ' * \ *. .', ... ' .l'* 1. .'f. lg; .',. ':.", .? n' '. .... 2' _, :;b.
- ' L '
't*- . O f.' *4 *:
, h.:'"': : . l. .:.. :.;; ' i.h. . .'.?.c ..,. , yy:' h,: :y
-'o.?... -Q,. , * ,, ' iN..'. ., .:
,;, ; y v. l : .u : .. ...z.
. ' . . ,H c- ., . . . .
v...>
'. ,* G llJ y;.,., ., :,' I-l
,, ll - . ,.'
_.;4,'. ,, '; ' ,.
- f m.' * , ;,. . ,
." ^
u:2 *; ,s ):'A ',*,', =,g'. ..,. -yy:.g ,4., . .s. .-l,. ' -;b,tkA, -9. .s.hr,,r w ,,'r*., ' -
V ,_ r ; ,
.:) mg. % .p. z , , n' ,. . ' l=.s e
. e , . ' 4 , 9.I.'.,v. .-6,
< ';*> ; , ,- 2. '.
s,.
6
' , .) . [x' g.
,:'..,.:*'.; . , ; , ., n... t . ..., z a < :,. .v}., c , .
.;G' ..
. . , ,i ^t F .,.
's,,. . . , . , . st '-j
,g'.,..,=..s.&. *:-
-l
.',,,,1.gL.,: ;,
4 .'..'* *
,.a y.'G,. , : V-w'. - s:e *e.'
s, j .
. . . .. n . 3 .e A, : - ,, a :N.U k.h & N:..
. :Y ;,N. i.):Y ?':h N.
iS: .l.N 4. .';.i[. Yi %/v'. ff.'.\.'^v
- t. \ U.N * .' '"f ' i D#1# ' - [* ' l ;;9 ' ' ' $ idl%'.g. / . [ t gD.l
-k':' [ l' .f* y*qr:' fl$, , ' N. . .f
- D;'k.',l).'h.J :. E, 8 '., 'hif.
'l .d),. p , ' -.h t i\;.' *d,3,',,,"t ' y. 1[' $. {.7" .j.W. .Y Y
,,,,,(.'M
s'+:,, ' p" . N . - [.A .
4, ,'.}, .', 't."......'.IS
. . .r ,.-] 5 kr.,k 4 7, ' ' . *,./. b' 4A 3, h#. . bh .' [ . ^ .k hh'I'.,: .. 'M ','M*'"D t i'"h hl h, [b*[h . *; .'
- /ga.
. ,e N ,5.,h' '- . f.. (, , ': [ ' h/ * 'I ,' i S.' b. '
- h.k. ' .hh * .i . . ' T .ls Ice' " - ' ' ' : .
l, 'l * **. ,; . }. . . ,,0 . .. If ' ? s,',' *' . N fU ?.- - ^ f '.: :
.":*..b.n,f.M:-2 ;.i MN &; . -- :.1 5 " ' F. .
. .e' {% %" . ?::J ; M*.D. U .% nel yMG %i.'.\slG.' - : = G{! .l f,.',e.f, i .T lx ?;. 3 '%.o.%. h :Md,,
.? lr&:ll. ..: n rk
._:*:;>. -Q. .fgM ' ,, . '.:
. , R*
- ..) .l ,.,1 .G. D. , t
'),.'. .::. L'n,. B,. . :- ,i . (y4.5:i n:- ...,a',= -.Q* .<%a;' -
.,,.y-v.~.o,
-* , s .s
. . .**ys , . . , - ' ' . . '
y q -a y R g- -=-
- - 4 :",l:: D:
.: ",ul,.::.,' ~ ;\: ., p '. T %} %,,,;
.n.. , . --s j.r~J , .... . . . :, . .4 ._ z. z, .. ;
,, ,,.- ..,, , . ,, .i.., .. <
'n
..be '.l - es.',;..u,/-, K,- s
..wqs of. ;n, . - . y*. ,.g:g. . $$ -; & ., 'd .bi. ,k. f. % ' .. - J. ";lyQ.:y :k: ' *: .
f
.. . ,.- ;, . g, ..,.,s, .
<%,.,.:. , . , , . - , o:t
,a.
4, , e.;,.jf,.
,,ye,Y r;:, .., L .. { g. ',='.'yf.l- ~.y, ; - Q.* _.
...,e,.... : .9,;. ',
. . . . ' . . '.f ,y e . -s4.
..q,...g'
'..v O 'g-.' .; t".;, ,'p.'. .:/ ' '; . ;, : g , ,. .: '.. . ,.e; ; ,f.,gij , . y. 4 ..*y., . .,g,>'...,.,,g.
.,C,., . . . .
, e .
.,e s',. ]' z , , 'y} .l,. w, e g,r t i
- G.y a t',,. G,'*,.. .
'n *
, ,e i .- ', - g t, it ,' 4: , . . -
.,.,[- (( f # .,';. ' j ( 7[, , lb, s'l : , r ,#. '. - j. ',,r ; '[. ' [- 5 .. ' , (':g'. ; f. g,/ ., . ' , - *,",'.7+,k
{.,
- ' 4
,' ' .ig ,; i ', , '.t '.,",,',, '
N
.: e.. , : a' e
. . neV , . i,;;.v.;< . .' 4: ~:. a a : :q. :;a .: :v . y .v.,<. ?....'. :e ,.;. . . y .s n ;p:. ,.;. : . . . g. .: o . :: .. . ..; y. w .:, . . ,, . :n}4. . . r. =: . ;1.;.. ,: .: ::
, ; , ' ,.. .a %, .:.:.:',
gr , d'S,. , i*;; );: -y a:v * * * ';. :'
. . ' * * . . *-': . ' *:- . b . - '~s.'.%
. V .3. y>'. . :: . '. n:g* .Q '* * ' f :< . , l: ;. ;; .
1 .- :- i. i; *: ' s 't m: ::ql .. '.:.
I
.{ . . :
'* h e- ": .. id
' _ , . :..b
' ' s q' ',::; .,:' (,; /
- h
- : v. .'.' : ,:.Y .'. . .: . 'y'(n. ,: l' .. . y * : -' '. , . g (.
- -* ' ; n ';, _. '
- , : . .. j : ".:.t:; ;: _ . ;. ,'. . . ' ,t:.. r'u'~,- ...-v.'*\''.
s v: '*t,.:' ?':
. y g.; =V.'.,Q... *. . ,. . ;. .... , ..s
\: :;>. ..;; ,. .,.; s.. : ,. ; . .. .. . );, iSty . '%' < *
- .;..b'
)t., . . ,' ., ,
- . . . s, , - e *
. .a y-.
...,5>, .,e s ,4 ; , ' '.' * , 4-J,,~
- ..o in ,j ;. r, -e' W .f . ...e 'O. ", ?,f.,C .'.3 .e.;. .
- ..',....,..,-','..':.:~...,.s..'.21.^e,.. , . . . .' . .+ ... ; i !. .' .-t..'5 :n.' +s. .. ,i ' .'. < . ' *- d'n,d,., . . .y '?'....
s, X;...,./ s: . . . ,,. .. . i .,. . . ,
i.' . . .; ,
.h,sj i.. i;*.- s..' - * ' , ff .
- ., l ',5 .*
- ). ;:, . . , , , '
..t ;.' 1 -
~s > +: -
- r. . q
. ./ . a u . : : -j . .
. .,.7 ,'.:\ ,.
- g. .c . , 't ', ' .
- ,s;* %. .
- . ' ' . , , . " ,.. g ) , .' ';;;,' ' -' ~, .), ,% .Q* .] Q ' < s ' ,'i_'. , l ly ..,
.s
- Y JA: 2 _
. .':{.) -;';;~;-i.:r>:: ~ . ;'i ; ; . ' + ;: f '. ? ',. . . . . ', :%.' ' ': * ..(.h'
_ a > P[ '; .g ' :.~
.*,Jl.
) nGiG_ 9%}Q}? :yy.L:f %:! .l3:'if.T;.%.^;'W i .4 .W :;_ ;l , .y.$ in M.l; 0'. ',,? G . O_ ?.; 3 &,:9,, . .M;?
N *. . '[ ' '
[ I .* * ' .'.
. - . [' ' ..
, ' ' ' e' [g g *: .
I' . '
, " . -, , ,' 1: ;.'..* :y,".- ;)c' ; ; ~. 1. % n, f , . ' . ' , . '. < .'+ (,k' ? '.' : * ,
i - i, .: .
,,'*s,"{,' ' l ,s ,'.: T *,
- ,y ',;?'")dlg: 1- ^;'. %. ;' ' < . .' . -y .*' ' . w i ',.>....l.i;..'s.
,-: ',:.#,.- "%.e.',. ~,,'a;4, ' ' . ' , .' ;,..;,'^% ft lg."- .,
- ',-'.'.,
- ;>_ ::.,9.f ,', !, d;,.u : y;a .y' ',,--O.. . ,'?. - t Q. 4rtirI;'..'
.: ,h .
,g:',f .
. ' . ' v ' ) % a . . u.' ;;
- ,*,. ,L * ' ~ . .::c _.'_ '. ) f
.g , ,i - .. -r ,T ' '. fC
.> .y ;
, "@ .. s . 't f ' . ;.-r., : .
s'c.' he J , ,
,.~*.: '. *eI I
..' . l ..' . '-
r 1 .f . ~; ' 1 V'
y l ; ...:, . . 's
. ' , 'av
,g . , p ,-;., ..;;,,
. ,. '.. ' .,,..,, l % / g , , . -- +
n'g r } :. - ,, . ;4 ,; . . . ,.,:.,
6 , , ,,,r, . .
. , / l- r : .. ..,, . . .. g /
- v .. . . n.. . ' y ,s. . . . . - .:
.l .-
- M . h
..'.e ,4,.,... Uy :
.. i;.t., % ? u? . u .hf ,,i, , ,w ._ .. . , .'. . . , - ,. '..,, a. ~ ., ..c,. :. . ;.,- -, yt,,$. : ' 'y., c- % ~. . .t.
. . .,nD , . f*%"? "% .i...*s.. ,. %..:eQ^ . !::.'<l.:::, ? N,.
- y'. ,'. ..s
, y. f ' q. .lf. ! !. -\ ,: ;:V,.):g. '. . . ,,
s .'. u
., ;n h : '.* -*. ~,.. ,:...- %: .,';:2.
d:."' ',: '. . , . < *>
- .:T.:Q: r.- .n6-:K. 't.4 .}y. ~/ ..&. A'.Q'. .""3 ? i#. . ^'.%tf. . ..:.' ->/ ..
, :,.Y ) ' ' ' ...'..\,.',?.', .' s.k- $. }
'.'.*).?. ,.,!.",.l l ! $. E-t , ! ',l, .e c'.. ; .
- - r l , k # (,.: '. :.'. : * . , .). :. .. . ': T
.,?.b_ L' ' . > I
- 4
"'. $~
.' I,0J t s F's,
.3._
~. . ) , , b?V ',: .Kg% l;%',;,;';;'; #
& . i,. %
f : y:. ' .,ri *. :;, '.. gl1L ' $ .t t*
W. . . Q:,'yQl r.V:,?) 7: 4. . c',f"y 4 r r.
'.y.j' p - -
'; yl: .l.]:l. _ % ;.4 ,. l - l.: . :'
- .".. .;. g : .* ' . *:.*.g,+G * .
4 .
.,l,.,^ ** *
,,f,',., , ' . . .!,[ . .' . . !.
,I . ; ). . .
k ,, '. ;
"[.g.'5 : '-;b. I#. ' w . ' . 5 . d *; .' . .f
", /
. r/,.
' 1: 7
"[ , .; , '.%." ' C, ;. :. .w 3.. .: .[ 'g,. .((" . 3., g ...'- ..{[ 1.-k '.'* ;.f '-
- 'o',.....' , . *' ' ;9., '.", . '?.. h. :.N- ' ; ", -[; ,' _' ; 7 .f.. -'A :t'< ,s'.
, .'. g: y, [;t..,i ', )..(.E,2,. .
-:.....:=.c.. ~.;s. .. .,y
.: ...... , . , , = . ,, . ..,= :
, ~ .. .f..;.;;O. . -. -.-
... . . t ..%. 4. .s , .:- . . - .-
.n, , v ;.,: : .: as. . . : . .
. .- . . > . ..s. - .,, - ..+.
- ., . . ,
- :- - .,a
- . + ,,ar .. <;. ;;, :- :
- ;; o.A.....r
-1
- - .. 'b(.:R, ,.4.:.,:.m .,>;, p ; . ' .; ;, c., .;$,.,., ,l.. _'. : ,/,%,n,.. -',-. ,;,. - .;**;
t p.
g . '; . . s ,. - . , . :. ;' , ., - _ ~ :x , ;,y .,: , -q -... ..:, . .c .: - ..
c :
-";'..; .; :-.; r.z , , h %
Z: ' * ' s%;; , $. ': . .:.,c,.,f ,, r' .nu
<. ,- . . . . . ..s ',*5 [j &..y .. <y. - s .l.. .Q .y; -fR:
.,;a.. ':
- r.. , .f , . .. .
- ..:. 'l: .; .; .,.1:....,:.,},
cl ,,n
., ,b
.>; _- [
..: , .. . . %m_ .'. . ; . . .--
t :. .:.y . -
. . , ..* .M i '. ,<. . . . :. ;: .n
,.c. ; . :y;. . .. .4: .,y<y. .>. .. ... .,.a. .m3 :. , ..k.
. .: . .,.h ,. .. ,.,..... ;, , . .,;o . ;;_,.
- . ;.. ; :n . . v .'.~..c......n~.~..-
. * . ' -. ...;. ,a.q, . : . ~; ;. : e:. -. ..%. , : . p.
-.c.: .
.. u;:
. . , . + - . . . -- ;.
. . .n. 2. -
. 9.7:.
- 1. e4 ..
I' .h.f,.[' l. '.*
- L: .-. .. - ~. l f i . ;k . . ** ; . kff ..:- *. Y ,.f[
- k . 4m
- w ";,. m,.:: ~W :fQ: .': -*~a. f i'l. . : y, r. ;. . . v Q . dl,t.h. ' f.h.' . f f'Y. m. ','. . f'M
. 4...) . ._, :;.L
?'. : y ': '.31.*.
..,l~.'.'4
-^. i ' . . : <; ' .. -
- . :i . , U %.1 -:..?:
- i '; ' )if:. D 7.y:"a (, ; y, e. fd..'_.:1.:: ' .;' . Q. ,4 . r p ~ r .: ,:%. . '. .f :n'.':. i.1,Q . ',::f',ifl. z..(':;.&.Y..".;; . mG ,a l C _ - ; . ' LQR; . ().. g{ ' . .:...: . ' _ , g ::
- h. .e 1._% \ ".f.*. .: .
, , .. j , , , , . .
. , y s ,~. s r.u .....e.?... ..e . , . ..,n.. .'.n. ;. Q ,) ?;" c ,,ny . M.,
....r,.. ...a.:. v. .- ....;
4~....<% v
. . , ..: .,*ss..y : -n-
- .*.. s;;
- v. - t c ..:.- .- ..-;;.
..;:,{v. ,.s. .. ?,:,
- 4.r.. .oh
- . _ . .
. k' : s y
.- ..a.~.:. .;..*:. ; g. ,:, c. ,+.:.'..-.':...tw.y : s . . , d.
..,.,,- ; , .A .,
ne ;: : ...
.y . .
- .:. 7 ...-:. r. -. ~.,: c u
(. g: ..q ...v. , u. : . ; -
- .s. ; . r3. . g..f . f, ,,cv. . W . -
u,..w . .' .<. ., ._, ,. ;,-,w: .. - v..-. %. . 7. .,',:.4'.......,,..
- r. :, ' .. -(. .e 3. , . ,- .:.,.<
- - ; . . . y.g---. n:, .. y- ', .~
+
.A... .&$ -.- . -e;j ' ;.-.-*; , , -i *.>
. , .,. , . .. .y
,.u ..p . . .
' ..';' ,ff .l' ,[:$ 'h ' q,' S;l^f,f' } '.l; j','.lf:) . *
{. Y'
. ;w :w.,.
y F.:;fy (' ~ ' .) y 9.:!;g; 4.v..?!%;cn : %
$. mp:x.s. O. . n.; :.:pb.h@T .wy. , .G: ',y.G.. :Q.: .
vl; .'.;Rw b. :%_pL..
1(Q j
- L.
99 .:*
. Mg,: .
x M 3 W.:>;:t
. - a , J .o :: ; u q:w).' Q,:. ~ ?:'MG?:fM W.p.ym n .:q; . ;.. 3 e A y.:.b:s;MW.;n.
N'
. .-).
- . .kYNIhfN:
W"q 'e~A.
.l '
- Y .": . .
,.h,.9;.,;/i..>M' y 3 - r .p.. ;l ,,*
$ Yjid:
1
.h .s ' .f N'. :l.:' ",
NlNY.",,.'?.k[.i'.,ll L. 0 * *;;;^'' ' .o,1ss, Os.9:u \ 'i. d ?'
f.
W a.g"W . *, f$
Y lk ?. .'.f.?.f.'\..:.;Y
. !i f%,
~Y'
.: ,E.:
- Y ?'-
ie. .*
N?
- h
d;-' e. ]* ;_, ;x. , ' : p?._ ;
, . -' , ' . ( L - , , , . n, . '.
. . . .,,.,,....w . , , ':. * 'i
,; _ , b, *!
,. ; y. ,r * - - ; . . j._. ,. .. .
, ,, . :. ; ;f., ,
- .V
....s
[. s.
,.-, .'. . .*.[3_'.,.- . . '. .".. ,f g, .-.:y,c' . _. ;~,,. % '
, ,. 9. : ,,:.. : . : '.. , .
gz/. ;'*
M; . .- ) :_ .,
[. ,. . ..
. . c. .. .( . I
.I. , f: . -
. f Q;OD.5i *. '; >.' L ;.' . .* ' f . ' '.- ' ' . ' . ' '. , , .
~
- . . ' . L' k .. ( #
- ..J [ S.
, ..!, '. . ..: . . . ., . 4 > e
' .1 . ; p. :. '-c.- ..
..}+. -
?:
'>N...J-
-' I:f.s. .'- ;'. ::',. 4 .k. ;. f,'d .l . ' ' Y. ! <. A ;l ' * :'*',. '
. ; j/ '- ' ' -' '
"_ ~
e.:. ., g,
- ,ff .' f: l ^: ' . ;." . *. .. <
. .' . Y : '. f:' !
. . . pgl :... , * '
., . y I~.': .-:. @k.
.; ,y, N'1l, f,J :
- 3. - . .,~.'
..l.
. x., . .. -; .. . , ' Y]. . ,-
A.. .{. ;. ; ..:(
- g. .r. ..
' . _ :,. :., ,. O h* :c,,.., '.,: - .<',; . , . . ' .
, ,- ' .,:.;. , -- .:-w. 2, 8 .
.g; j .' :., k . '.: ; .;;9 ::' l > ?. N .
,, :. : U* .6 5. ... ,- ., c
' I f. . '
^'/
.' ' h ,
, . s : 3; . : t y * .. .' , ; '. . < '~. ' , .. , . s'.. . . .:..
1 .. ,
u.
- , ,....a
- ; ' v
- ': .* : ' . ' ,' ,-
- r. v.. .
-7 ?
. _ ; .. . ,, L;'.j y. ; ., , ..,eg-: .- ,'
, . . , 'a 4
s
'.' . .$(,[' : - ..
w,. / . . ; " J ', f .?.. ,. [. [.[.[
- s . . ;
.t ., ,';: . ' .
- k
~
[' ,.f , ( ,. . l t:-
. .,.1 -l '
- - ~... .
- .. g. .,
_' 1. - '
' *..,5...' i.- .- l.ymQ. . : .. U %:f s , ;,};l..
. : . l_ . * ' '
- 'f .."._ a.,.=.= I' '. ,-' ;' 'l ,.' . -. *',g
.'Q ,*.. s, :
' ' 'l % . &
li
'[,' ',.'
y'.'.d'?'*',,.
h'.,,','
C 3 q: . -
a, ;
} A. h,il;.c Q ,:, ,.. (t . _ . . 'l '~
)._'., : .- :._ . : ' _,' ' ' ' '
- \* , ' . -i.' ' ..
.' .. N , *: ' :' '? : . .
- l. .
'N': *: ;. :s * - ~~s'; '
L' 'WL_ ' -' ..: ' 'l' *..?'.'
- *. .c ( _; ,
- .g. :;- ..e x..' .) . '. ..
'- ' . . - ' ' l ' g ' '_ ^
- _ . .. , , :..- ..,'-^ '?
-r
-'. ,g. :v)W .; ,' .;h e .:,> . . y'f -,:;.: '.. .~ . ... -
.i .. . ~ >
.......,..':~.-
- g. ;
.Y .
9.y.4:., Q W.M;' .,: s'.. 1' y;; - :.
.' - .M _;
. '. , *: , .'~.n.: .
y, . e ; . -.:(:).. '.u,.\. ; .
. . i.; , v; '. ' .O: ',', .
r
' ; .:;* :-. ;L._*.
- ..n
.e . '. .,+ , . g g* ; n. . ..-.4 ;f. . ',-., . . .., X .* ~. %.>l .. .. . fy. ,. :. '- - - .*, ...; .~ . . . , . .
. . . . : P . .. ;, - lg ,;.: : .:l*: . ' ,. ' . *...'._;. ._ %.. ~
A.s,r . - - . ,. ,:.
.3,s . g .e
,y j ' y ".:. . . : . ;
- N',Q :p ;d, .s!* S. .; ,.' .:. .
" - ..' e .. l
- s.~+, . .
.n ,
3 , . - :-
- '. ;7
- . . - ., ,.._'._..\.v.
. '..j .J . : ? - :4 . - :~~ - : ... :: .~ 1 , . ,~ . :_. ;
- ?.
.]h: ' $] :lh.Q 3 h*l: n[;^lf .. ^ f i :" W: ~. ' l . c,.m r, s '.?
? :.
. . ::..' b , .' _' *. ~,,*:. . . - . 9
.'t n
?. ~ __ ' , .,'
,f ..
- Q.'.. > ' [.:_ . . .'.;. , *;
- . , klOF '. Q ?,s&.:'. * :n [l:~. ,5 ' _,. : **;* ". ';' *',:.: v... .$; *L .' ' ' '. "::' k :- l,A
. e.
_ ,4 ;
' .f ' _ ; * ? '
T*'.dT[..' ' '; y ....:' '.s f.?^.'; . ' ^'::. .-- '.
. ;* -l : A V:.'
- s..' .'A*. ,? '
. '. -.' *~' -
'2 '. - - ,
- ' ' . i ' '*
/. k*'.:g' y 1l9 .. "y' .j ;h. I , q; .;N ..s :
.s.
5.5 i ..,.....v..,i: -, *
,,s
...-l ,i,...
. ; ' ,[; .. .,, .. 4_ ' . :,:, . , ' :. L ') $. .. +l : '. ' _f ?. .. ;? ' :
. '. ;) .,; . , , . H. * , . * ; f.f* l'c-' " ' .,;hO.. -.'- .; # ~ [:l
.y -
,: - . I.
. f . , . ' ' - ;- ? ':
. j ,E .I '.] ,1 3 -': . . -l i
.e , . .- ...s.
- g. :* .
- l ' i' : f , ,';' .' . . $: . '.: L *;--
. J[ '.. (J - -i tA
'. .S' f. 4l , '.
c ; , ..:_l. ' ' P ';!. ' , ' l;; "' ' . .
1/ ; . , . ; ..
^
..: . ;. ic ' ;. " '.- '
- ' ~ ~ '
'3
.b~g.
...e. i $. A 6
.f, -
l,:, .?" . ~ \'
. ;'.sidl: : ': A T .[ l
.V..;Y..[.
l
- )ft!q k.g( ) );'.,J .p,, . * ' *-
b''"' r '~ ' " i } . '. ~ . .: . ( '- }
..'(' ;. l' * . . 5. ' * :..s..'.e. C.-
' s . .:"..- 'j . -'.' ' . . .' '
- ': rs . .: :.*s '
. ,' ' l )
?..,6 (f.,...,.-. ;:
~: - ..t
.l.-
g
, , ' .. , . . . ~ ~' .. 9f . .-f
- d. ' .;.ogi' 'r[$ J {I. : ,'
G ,' 5
' ' ' } _ * : _ I. ' _ ...m-
' ., $,' , y ... -M . . ',, . 4-- O !~[
. _ ..:.l ' g, .. .. .fl . ..;f.,::._.[, :
O '(
, ;;g :,
h.
.. s ' ._. - \.- . [l ' ;;
P.
. ,O ' . -
w f' :. .. '. ,.( j . -
. : ~
. ' [ J. ..' ..#[.; .t .
- .. ,1, ) ' -
.. . . '4,; 3 h f..i f l,1 :(' k [ ,, # '.i ..~-
, ^/ I '
,- - . : /. y., u* *;, , : '
s .
. , ' _ ". (;' .:[ }',.' , (' . . .' '- ,.^ "
ly-;eb ' : * , ? ; * :, ', .. s .; L '. G ' .') 's , . ^ ' ,
.,?. ,#
' ._ l... . . .
[f ?., . _ ' . ' ' '-...' . esyj ;.;. . ,...,'e pf,-.
y*;;v . .i.::' : - ..pA....... . ' _... - [} .[. -. '
- L. '
. . }
, 1"
-.,q.-
E
' ?; .i l . '.. f ':. ' .' >
" ;\::';: 'f..u ;' - l'.; ','.. ,.
- If: * ,9;;'
r
.t w R ' N, .. 6;q,y- \ _.
. .:;2 L . n.x, g:- M. .s rU. ??.;...
?,:
'l, l,',
c.
.. , % . . ' . . ' . . . . _,,...,'n-
_ . .../..- . . ' . '-
- ' ' -'_..C,.. ._.* *'.. '.. ';,3,.... .
- :'; _ ..\.',*'.,...*
..c..... _ ' ': i
. . _ . -'. ..... _ o f.:;......
- , <.;..' . , . -. . .*..........:...:- . ;' .. . : .. t e., ..; -
- .. 1.. .. . ...i','...'_;,a i M .' $( $y .
. ' . .fw w.. 1;;. ..:;;..
.* . .f.<;w.
. .%;i. _
- ..; ' a. ..j. . . . , . . >' '-
...g~."- ai' :
. ,1- - -
. ' . ' ' .- . + .G,.
- - +. ,, .
5.~,
- ( s-
. _. - ._: . :.'..r ... . ' . .
- '. ~.^^ . %:: :- ;.- 7 ;
. .:: . f,f,s.2. :h.-l?$< 'sN:'.a0 ' N' .:,'.' l l~)..; ;. .U~.- ' .E ' . Q .' jg*
- e. *l 3:.... ..'[:.l - . . ' . -: ,L.
-....- ..f ; ; ..:. : -.J.
- s. ..
l . .,') .s .- : :;> '...' . . _' d ,9 ..:'., . :'
0...:.1- '. , ,p -.: .
f.
a .
.' /l . f . . [ I. *'.._.'e.**
.5..;: b[O.$ '..*.;.,..,3. - --
' I i .$
.h. ' ' * ; ..
.. '. ? * . . . . . .. - . , - = ,' .' .i
[,
- : :. - . ' . ' k ,7 ; ' i . ' ,i 'l
- j , : ,
? .
.,,[' . \ ' . , , . '
~
N' -
[ .[ ..
.<[ .
l .# M f M f.'.:% * ', '1 ' .* * '
- . .' ' .( /
- . . . : . . J. ' G .:)
- 5:
'. . .Y E .
.; q s f..a~ d.: 7:. .- *'.. . . .
i '
.1 T ." ..C.
i_ .9*. ;, .i.' s!': ' 4
?
.?..- ' ' l
[.
i, . . -
. "Y
,,'t
'. % - ... . .. ,' ' f .,
.: *.: ;. . 'e - i ' . :: ,- - *. ' . ' . . .
. , - ~ ; - .
4 &
'.I .
?. e,_;. .-
.) \ ~': ' <* ' : . '4
.. -;s - . . ' . ' . . -
3 : -
- .);,,: 7, . .
8 s . ., .
- , ' Y ~ ;' . _1 l
- ' l ' ' ;. - '
- ..,.~.,.-
.'..i'
_ v:, . ,.-l'_ .' ' fo . _ ,;' o -
} ". g . .. . . ..
am % yg - . .l : .. .
" '" l.QC % '_::.y : t ' [' - :,..
- l'.
i,,.,,**,
-. :; _;' __' R*? :l . t;u Q, . , . , ..
.s
- .f:h : .9 - ..: - x
?.&y ).n,_ , ,-l9,Ly
,.4_.,'_ ' -
.' .lw . e b .: --g;q d :. ;: 2;t: .\ . .
\ ;. . .::
0.? ,,Y. ' _ _ : . $~~. ..
- ~ . . . .
- a. . .: , ..]; :.'. '"., . :. , ' ' *, * . . -
W.%c.. yl - ,'
_: w .. .** . . :.'. ; : ' '.::.' ;;',.
u
- .'.t N. ,* % .i -
.. -.*^- - _; ..
' ' ' [ . L ; }: <t: s' .;..'v ~Q&
- , :,.;, , . ;.; 3.b. y'. :. .:c ;; _.:. :,.
- - _(W.q;
.' 'a
'.,,u..?. w. ::;, ;[$ . .'
.'. . . ...f.: J, .
- , _ . ~ . . ,. q;;, ;:;
s ,,%:n. : . r. ' - ': * - ;...._ ; :.
- m: ; ' . \. -_.-' ?., q*_ %:.,' - ;'_ ~ .__ )", p ..+ .
Q.g .Q'; ^ 3. ,:%;Vr{h,;f5 c w.i
. ...:i ; [,, ., , s' n. ..y. .;t ',. '. '. f; . . . ,.'.,..;:'; _- ._ .. ,7.
- a' .' * .. . . . c, ;
- - _
. ,, ' , , . . . - *..wQ'p;r
~' - ",;'. ....g. .:, - - *. ;
.. , _ , ._. g . ,
f.i ~ . . \ .: . :: '.v I. .
- $ . f. [ . . . ' . ." J:N '
. . . . ' M . :, , , .:t:,',..
- y,
..y . 3. '. } ~. . _: ,.
- g. . ._
?q a.
hl. ~
..".'.j 'l' . .
. . lf - - .k. :h mwumawamm
I
-l OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL 1l- U.S. NUCLEAR
,g REGULATORY COMMISSION LI il REVIEW OF NRC'S CONTROLS OVER THE PC REFRESH PROGRAM OlG/98A-07 October 9,1998
.I
- I
' AUDIT REPORT
.i ABREGy
\I
/ A>o J $
!,I ,
,h $,
.I I
g orn40
)# g(OO/)
6F[
.q
- I
1
!I Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program REPORT SYNOPSIS I The Office of the inspector General (OlG) reviewed the management controls over the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) PC Refresh program. A Capital Planning and Investment Control document guides the program, which calls for replacing about 4,000 personal computers (PCs) with Pentium-class systems by the end of fiscal year 1999, at an approximate cost of $7.9 million.
While this report focuses on the Office of the Chief Information Officer's (OClO) management of the PC Refresh program, OlG has long been concerned with the I need for adequate management controls over information technology (IT) activities at NRC. OlG has previously reported on severalissues related to the control over IT projects. The concerns that we found with the PC Refresh program are similar I to management control shortcomings noted in several previous reports covering IT activities, in addition, we reviewed OClO's plan for upgrading the agency's operating system to Microsoft Windows NT (NT). 0C10 advised that they will place Pentiums on desktops in headquarters and then upgrade the machines with NT later. However, OClO's plan for regional and remote resident inspector sites is to install some Pentiums already upgraded with NT. We be!ieve that this one-step approach will result in fewer disruptions to NRC staff and lower agency costs.
Our report makes three recommendations to address the issues identified.
I I
I l
I lI r
olG/98A-07 Pagei I
I Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program TABLE OF CONTENTS R E PO RT SYNOPS I S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I NTRO D UCTI O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 BACKGROUND ....................... ..................... 1 FINDINGS....................................................2 I NRC CONTINUES TO LACK ADEQUATE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION FOR OVERSEEING IT PROJECTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 THE NT INSTALLATION PLAN SEEMS INEFFICIENT AND COSTLY , . . . . . . . . 5 CON C LUS I ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 R ECOM M E N DATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 A G E N CY C OM M E NTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 APPENDICES I 11 I Objectives, Scope, Ana Methodology Agency Comments lll Statistical Sample Review of the Office of Administration's Property Accounting System I IV Abbreviations and Acronyms V Major Contributors To This Report l
I E.
VI Glossary: Office of the Inspector General Products Gif4/98A-07 m
m
I Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program INTRODUCTION We reviewed the adequacy of management controls for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) PC Refresh program, which is managed by the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OClO). Under this program, the OClO acquires, configures, installs, and maintains new agency personal computers (PCs).
Appendix I contains additional information on our objectives, scope, and methodology.
BACKGROUND While this report focuses on OClO's management of the PC Refresh program, the Office of the inspector General (OlG) has long been concernea with the need for adequate management controls over information technology (IT) activities at NRC.
OlG has previously reported on shortcomings in the agency's controls over IT projects and contracts.
In a March 1993 report,' OlG found that the Office of Information Resources I
I Management (IRM)2 had not exercised adequate control over IT contracts and the activities of project officers. We reported that IRM had not established agency-wide policies and procedures needed to ensure that IT functions are performed I consistently and in accordance with applicable regulations. As a result, IRM exceeded specific procurement limits and made unauthorized commitments. Later, in April 1996, we conducted a special evaluation of a major agency IT contract and identified several lessons the agency needed to address to effectively develop systems and oversee IT contracts. We concluded that IRM's management control processes did not work as intended. In a September 1996 report,' OlG again reported that NRC lacked the controls to systematically provide NRC management with the information needed to assess the status ofIRM projects. To its credit, NRC has since taken several positive steps, including the appointment of a Chief Review ofIRM's Manacement ofits Contracts. OlG/92A 10, March 8,1993.
2 The ChiefInformation Officer restructured IRM and created OClO in 1997.
3 Selectine. Manacine. and Utilizine the M-Cubed Contract. OIG/96E 13, April 17,1996.
d lmt'rovements Needed in Acency Oversicht ofInformation Resources Manacement Activities.
O!G/96A 11, September 24,1996.
olG/98A-07 Page 1 I
F l
Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program Information Officer (ClO) on February 2,1997, and the creation of OClO. In addition, to improve " front-end" IT planning, OClO developed and implemented the Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) process.
Currently, OClO is in the midst of an agency-wide upgrade ofits PCs. Called PC Refresh, this effort is projected to cost about $7.9 million and is guided by the CPIC process. The PC Refresh program calls for upgrading approximately 93 percent of NRC's PCs with Pentium-class systems as follows: replace 40 percent in fiscal year (FY) 1997,26 percent in FY 1998, and 27 percent in FY 1999.
As OClO continues to refresh agency desktop PCs with Pentiums, it is also beginning to upgrade the agency's existing operating system to Microsoft Windows g NT (NT) using a two-step process. Its plan is to first place Pentiums on agency 5 desktops and then upgrade the operating system with NT at a later date.*
FINDINGS Similar to prior OlG findings, our review of the PC Refresh program disclosed that NRC continues to lack adequate management information for effectively overseeing IT projects. In addition, the planned two-step approach for installing the NT g operating system appears inefficient and may increase costs. These findings are 5 discussed in the following sections.
NRC CONTINUES TO LACK ADEQUATE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION FOR OVERSEEING IT PROJECTS NRC has taken a number of steps to strengthen oversight of information resources management projects. Howeva, OlG found that the PC Refresh program suffers E
from many of the same deficiencies that plagued previous IT projects we reviewed. g' While PC Refresh relies on CPIC guidance to provide estimates and budget information as baseline data for IT project management, we found that fundamental g
day-to-day information normally associated with overseeing a project's costs and W status was lacking.
I 8
The information presented in this report reflects the methodology and project status presented to us during our audit field work. After the audit was concluded, OClO preserted different scenarios =
for refreshing PCs and installing Windows NT. These scenarios concem the methodology for using a one or two-step process for PC Refresh and NT. The effect of this changing methodology on our conclusions is addressed in the Agency Comments section of the report.
olG/98A.07 Page 2 I
I
____ _ _ - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ -~ '-~
Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program As OlG previously reported,' IRM's (and now OClO's) management of project development focuses on achieving technical performance goals. Although we agree that successfully achieving technical performance is important, so is the need to effectively manage project costs and schedules and re-validate planned requirements. This aspect of project management is especially important given the agency's increasingly scarce resources.
To assess PC Refresh requirements, milestones, and project status, we asked OClO staff to provide information about the number of Pentiums needed, purchased, and installed. The OClO staff could not readily provide this information. They told us that obtaining the number of Pentiums installed would be a labor intensive process. Furthermore, 0C10 staff told us that they use the CPIC and a draft installation schedule to assess budget information, schedule installations, and assess progress. The CPIC calls for replacing about 4,000 PCs based on assumptions made in an April 1997 benefit-cost analysis. This estimate includes one PC for each NRC staff member, as well as PCs for non-staff requirements such as the TechnicalTraining Center and special projects. In June 1998,0C10 staff told us that 3,230 PCs had been refreshed with Pentiums. However, the continued need 3 to purchase 4,000 PCs has not been validated.
I At the conclusion of our fieldwork,0C10 staff informed us that they would conduct another review in August 1998 to firm up the number of Pentiums actually needed.
Without such a validation, the agency could potentially purchase more Pentiums than needed. For example, since the CPIC estimate was developed, reflecting a staff requirement for 3,300 Pentiums, agency staffing levels have declined. The full.
time equivalent ceiling for FY 1998 is only 2,985 and is projected to drop in FY 1999.
Therefore, if the CPIC includes more PCs than needed, OClO now has the opportunity to potentially achieve significant savings by purchasing less PCs. At a cost of $1,258 each, every 100 computers purchased that are not needed cost the I agency $125,800.
I Prior to teaming that OClO staff planned to validate PC Refresh requirements, we asked for the rationale upon which they based the need for about 4,000 computers.
OClO staff provided us with a list showing a need for 812 computers beyond staff requirements. They told us that there are a variety of uses for additional PCs such as training, special task forces, and contractor needs OClO staff acknowledged that their list of 812 PCs was only an estimate because they were unable to access the 6
u Imorovements Needed in Acency Oversicht ofInformation Resources Manacement Activities.
OlG/96A 11, September 24,1996, pp 3-4.
olG/98A-07 Page 3 L
W
Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program Office of Administration's (ADM) Property Accounting System (PAS) to provide more accurate information. However,0C10 staff had previously advised us that PAS data was inaccurate and could not be relied upon. Our own independent iests confirmed that the PC data in PAS was not reliable (see Appendix 111).
Also, OClO uses information supplied by IT csordinators to schedule PC upgrades.
IT coordinators serve as the liaison between office staff and OClO to ensure that IT services requests are completed. Furthermore, IT coordinators are supposed to have full responsibility for overseeing IT equipment assigned to their office property accounts. However, we found that IT coordinators use various methods, including PAS, to track PC inventory for their offices. 0C10 staff acknowledged that the information received from IT coordinators is not always accurate.
Nevertheless,0C10 uses information supplied by IT coordinators to schedule PC upgrades. As a result, Applied Management Systems, Inc. (AMS)7 contractor technicians are not always able to perform scheduled upgrades. PC tag numbers at agency workstations do not always match the information listed on the technicians' work orders. Our tests of the accuracy of PC location data in PAS confirmed these problems and disclosed an error rate of almost 50 percent. A
- representative from AMS confirmed that scheduling a PC to be refreshed is a significant problem for the technicians.
Each time a refresh cannot be completed, AMS charges the agency for the site visit E
time. An OClO staff member told us that the contractor technicians annotate their g l
work orders each time they are unable to do the work. However, OClO staff admitted that they have no reliable method for tracking each missed opportunity. g Therefore, 0C10 does not know how many times this has occurred or the cost to the B agency when AMS technicians cannot perform scheduled refreshes.
During the course of our audit, OClO issued a draft revision to the CPIC process ;
requiring the preparation of a Project Management Plan as part of the CPIC process.
This guidance underscores the importance of timely and accurate management '
i information concerning the cost, schedule, and performance of projects. However, the cuidance does not detail the project management data needed, such as, when l it is needed or how it is to be used. We believe it should include this critical I information. As the July 19980C10 presentation,lT/orManagers and Supervisors, 7
( Applied Management Systems, Inc. is the OCIO contractor providing NRC with microcomputer I
[ support services which include upgrading agency PCs under the PC Refresh program.
l olG/98A 07 Page 4 l
Il l
Il I
Review of N9C's Controls Over the PC Refresh Prograrn notes, a " successful" project is: on time, within budget, meets requirements, and is accepted by users.
THE NT INSTALL *, TION PLAN SEEMS lNEFFICIENT AND COSTLY OCIO was in the midst of refreshing agency PCs with Pentiums when they decided to use Microsoft Windows NT4.0 as the agency's standard operating system. The PC Refresh CPIC implies that NRC would save labor costs by providing Pentiums with the NT operating system already installed. However, OClO staff decided that they would continue to install Pentiums with the old operating system. OClO's planned approach is to revisit each work station and install NT rather than use a one-step process that is potentially less costly and disruptive. We ware told by OClO staff that installing a new Pentium upgraded with NT would be technically complex.
A two-step process results in repeat visits to agency workstations by contractor technicians and ultimately the agency willincur additional costs. OClO's installation contractor told us that the NRC could save about % to 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> perinstallation and an extra service call by doing the PC refresh and NT installation in one step. In addition, agency personnel will need to be at their workstations when contractor I technicians come back to install NT.
workstations increase disruptions to NRC staff.
Multiple contractor visits to agency At the conclusion of our fieldwork,0C10 staff advised us that they plan to use a one-step process for region and resident inspector sites by installing new Pentiums I already upgraded with NT at these locations. The rationale behind this decision was that it would reduce NRC travel costs. OlG inquired about OClO's rationale that installing a new machine upgraded with NT is too complex. OClO staff responded I that to overcome the technical complexity a higher skilled technician would perform such installations at remote sites. We believe this approach will be more cost effective by negating the need for multiple visits. We note that the contractor for the I Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data is also using the one-step process in the headquarters Operations Center.
u As is being done in the regions, resident inspector sites, and the headquarters Operations Center, we believe that it will be more cost effective and efficient for 0C10 to install new Pentiums already upgraded with flT in headquarters offices.
Further, it willlessen the disruptions to the NRC staff that rely on PCs to do their jobs.
OlG/98A 07 Page6
Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program CONCLUSION l
/.ithough PC Refresh may meet its implementation schedule, overall project management controls are weak. During our review,0C10 staff could not readily provide reliable and accurate project management information such as the number of PCs purchased, installations completed, and Pentiums still needed. By the~ g
- conclusion of our review, OClO staff advised that they had compiled some of this E information. We believe that effective project management requires on-going, up-to-date management information and it should not be labor intensive to obtain. Given the government's goal of obtaining measurable performance results, it would seem j that such management information would be an effective toolin assessing how well managers are ensuring that programs are efficient, economical, and effective.
Given the NRC's need to closely manage its increasingly scarce resources, g accurate requirements and reliable cost information are becoming more critical. g
, Also, because of the impact of information technology on the agency's operations.
it is important that implementation projects such as PC Refresh aN NT installations g
, be efficiently managed to ensure minimal staff disruptions. E Because PC Refresh program shortcomings are similar to those previously reported regarding inadequate management controls over IT activities, we plan to schedule and do follow-up audit work on the agency's implementation of corrective actions identified in this and previous OlG audits.
RECOMMENDATIONS To ensure that PC Refresh and future OClO projects are efficiently and effectively managed, we recommend that the ClO:
- 1. Require that Project Management Plans specify the management information and reporting requirements needed by managers to oversee a project through its life cycle.
- 2. Reconsider the planned two-step NT installation plan for the remainder of headquarters with a focus on minimizing cost and disruption.
I olG/98A-07 Page 6 I
I
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~
Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program If PAS is to be used for determining agency inventory, we recommend that the Director, ADM:
- 3. Develop a quality assurance process to periodically test PAS information to improve its accuracy and reliability.
AGENCY COMMENTS On September 3 and 10,1998 respectively, the ClO and the Director, ADM, responded to our draft report. We have included both responses in Appendix il of this report.
The CIO questioned the basis for our conclusions and some of the report's factual content. However, he agreed that a Project Management Plan should provide the details needed to manage projects effectively. We believe that when implemented, such Project Management Plans will address the intent of our recommendations.
The Director, ADM, agreed with our recommendations concerning the Property l Accounting System.
As with all audits, OlG relied on the informat, ion provided by the 0C10 staff and, where possible, OlG auditors attempted to validate the information. Throughout the I course of this audit, basic information concerning the current status of cost, schedule, and performance of the PC Refresh Program and the installation of the NT software was not available and/or changed. OlG auditors found it difficult, at I best, to obtain reliable data upon which to test the status of the effort. OClO staff continually referred us to the PC Refresh CPlC document as the criteria for cost and schedule information.
Furthermore, when OClO staff made information available, OlG found it was, at times, unreliable. For example, our concern about OClO's reliance on PAS information to identify the location of computers prompted us to test PAS. As we reported, we found an error rate of 49.3 percent. We also sought to validate how PC Refresh information was developed through other sources that the ClO cited, such ar. IT coordinators. We found, however, the potential for a high degree of inconsistency. Most IT coordinators did not have a clear understanding of their respective roles or responsibilities, including their roles in reporting this information.
Our attempts to validate the strategy for the NT installations was confusing because 0C10 staff continued to present different strategies. During the course of the audit, olG/98A 07 Page 7 I
u r
- - - - - ~ - - -
I Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program the Director, Information Technology Infrastructure Division, OClO, led us to believe that a two-step installation would be followed except for the PCs at resident inspector sites. (A two-step installation entails first the installation of the hardware (Pentium desktop computers) and then, at a later date, the NT installation). He reconfirmed this strategy at our exit briefing of June 9,1998. On June 10,1998, the Director advised that the regions would be refreshed under a one-step process, simultaneously receiving Pentiums upgraded with Windows NT. He stated this decision was made during the OClO budget preparation process in March or April.
Subsequently, the CIO's response to our draft report provides yet another strategy.
As we all agree, the need for accurate and timely information is critical to manage any project, especially one that has the potential to disrupt NRC employees' g productivity. OlG has expressed project management concerns in previous reports E relating to IT projects, and the concern remains today. The CIO acknowledges this need and states," improvement in readily accessing this data is needed and will be addressed by 0C10." We agree with his observation that basic information concerning the process was not " effectively communicated" to OlG staff. He also agrees that 0C10 staff should " improve its ability to quickly summarize, data from its record and tracking systems, and we will do so." Our experience has shown that this ability is characteristic of effective project management.
in his concluding comments, the CIO projects the successfulimplementation of the I
project, within budgeted cost. Given the uncertainty of the data that OClO staff g provided, we cannot validate this projection. We look forward to the ClO's E implementation of our recommendation that requires this information as an integral part of project management. As stated in the body of our report, we plan to schedule g and do follow-up audit work on the agency's implementation of corrective actions W identified in this and previous OlG audits.
I I
I I
olG/98A-07 Page 8 I
I
I I Appendix l Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program l
l l
l l OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY I
s The objectives of our audit were to (1) identify the management controls associated with the PC Refresh program and (2) determine if those controls are effective. The !
scope of our audit was limited to the Office of the Chief Information Officer's (OClO)
I upgrading of agency information technology (IT)inventoryin accordance with the PC Refresh program. The audit focused on OCIO's management controls over the program for refreshing about 4,000 agency desktop personal computers (PCs) with l Pentium-class systems and upgrading the agency's operating system with Microsoft '
Windows NT 4.0.
l We reviewed OClO's management controls and the effectiveness of those controls related to the PC Refresh program. We interviewed personnelin 0C10, the Office I of Administration (ADM), and the agency's IT coordinators. In addition, we reviewed the communication process between 0C10, ADM, and other agency offices to determine if the project is receiving appropriate support and involvement. We also I
l conducted a statistical sample activity to determine if agency computers are properly accounted for in ADM's inventory control system, the Property Accounting System. '
Furthermore, we reviewed previous Office of the inspector General reports related to the control over IT projects and contracts.
To evaluate if PC Refresh will meet the schedule to support new agency applications such as ADAMS, RPS, and STARFIRE, we reviewed NRC guidance and conducted interviews with personnelin OClO, ADM, and the agency's IT coordinators. We also I reviewed the PC Refresh program's approved plan (the Capital Planning and Investment Control document) to identify the project's milestones and budget. We did this to evaluate OCIO's internal control system over the PC Refresh program.
Our audit was conducted from March 1998 to June 1990 in accordance with generrully accepted Government auditing standards.
I I
I olG/98A-07 Page 1 of 1 I
Appendix 11 Riview of NRC's Controls OvIr the PC R;fr:sh Program 6 pa H%q[*t 3 UNITED STATES E I 1E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{h ,I WASHINGTON. D C. 20555-0001
\[ .
September 3, 1998 MEMORANDUM TO: Thomas J. Barchi Assistant inspector General for Audits Office of the Inspec or General FROM: A.J. Galant ChiefInform i n fficer
SUBJECT:
AUDIT OF THE PC REFRESH PROGRAM l am responding to the request for comments in your memorandum of August 7,1998, on draft audit report, " Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program." Having weighed both recommendations, I believe discussion of the following principal points, taken from your audit report, will clarify (1) the degree of the OClO's managerial control of the PC Refresh program and other projects and (2) the rationale for selecting either a one-step or two-step process for installing the NT operating system.
l 1. Applicability of Deficiencies Found in Previous Audits of IRM/OClO Projects to the PC Refresh Program
- 2. Requirements, Milestones, and Status of the PC Refresh Program
- 3. Schedules for the PC Refresh Program
- 4. . Capital Planning and investment Control Guidance
- 5. Use of a One-step or Two-step Process for Installation of the NT Operating System APPLICABILITY OF DEFICIENCIES FOUND IN PREVIOUS AUDITS OF IRM/OClO PROJECTS TO THE PC REFRESH PROGRAM in Appendix 1, the report states that the audit was limited to the OClO upgrading ofinformation technology (IT) inventory in accordance with the PC Refresh program. However, in the synopsis and introduction you mention that "the concerns that we found with the PC Refresh program are similar to management control shortcomings noted in several previous reports covenng IT
. activities."
Historical OlG Audits ofIRM/OClO Projects. In your March 8,1993, audit report regarding information Resources Management's (IRM's) IT contracts, you found that IRM lacked office-L wide policies and procedures covering the management of contracts and had exceeded procurement limits. These findings are not applicable to the PC Refresh program. Since 1993, office-wide policies and procedures governing the management of contracts have been
( developed. and the PC Refresh program team adhered to these policies Page 1 of 7
Appendix II l Rtview of NRC's Controls Ov:r ths PC W.fruQrogr!m _
Thomas J. Borchi 2-In your April 17,1996, audit report about the M-Cubed contract, you found that IRM needed to select a contractor qualified to perform the work required and to improve communications among the IRM staft the contractor, and the involved offices. These findings are not applicable to the PC Refresh program. American Management Systems (AMS), the PC Refresh contractor, has extensive experience with the type of work required for the refresh program and has performed work for NRC since 1992. The refresh program staff has established a ,
professional woiking relationship with AMS and agency offices, and has effectively communicated with them as is evidenced by the successful replacement of nearly a'l agency PCs with Pentiums. In fact, your April 1996 report notes that 'both DC (Division of Contracts]
and IRM personnel cited a recent agency-wide computer equipment update project as an example where the two offices [lRM and ADM] successfully used a teamwork approach."
In your September 24,1998, audit report about the need for agency oversight of IRM activities, you recommended that NRC develop cost and technical milestone plans for all projects and develop a Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) process, among other recommendations. These recommendations are not applicable to the PC Refresh program My staff completed a detailed CPIC analysis that outlined cost and technical milestones and developed performance measures for the agencywide upgrade of all desktop workstations to Pentium-class machines. After obtaining information from potential users, a replacement I schedule was developed to support the deployment of several major agency systems such as 5 STARFIRE, the Reactor Program System (RPS), and the Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS). The staff is implementing the entire program within the schedule and cost projections outlined in the CPIC analysis.
In summary, I see no basis for referencing prior IRM audit reports that are not applicable to the g PC Refresh program. The claim that the PC Refresh program has management control 3 shortcomings similar to those identified in previous audit reports is incorrect.
REQUIREMENTS, MILESTONES, AND STATUS OF THE PC REFRESH PROGRAM Scope and Cost of the PC Refresh Program. Some facts seem to be misconstrued in the g report's description of the scope and cost of the refresh program. A PC Refresh program was g launched in 1993 to maintain desktop workstations to support the programmatic, administrative, and automated information requirements of the agency. Historically, workstations were B
upgraded to keep pace with changing technology and to keep the agency workstation inventory from becoming outdated. However, this approach was changed to a business-driven approach E
whereby workstatwas are upgraded as required to support agency business applications and automation needs. We new substantiate the upgrade of agency workstations with the business need as evidenced by our CPIC process.
i The PC Refresh CPIC, dated April 15,1997, calls for 93 percent of NRC's approximately 4,000 computers to be Pentium-class machines by the end of FY 1999, assuming that 40 percent of them would already be replaced by the end of FY 1997 under an earlier PC Refresh program.
However, as a result of price reductions and effective negotiations, we have been able to accelerate their replacement to approximately 90 percent by the end of FY 1998 and 100 percent by the end of FY 1999. The $7.9 million estimate in the CPIC is only for FY 1998/1999, this amount does not include the cost of Pentium computers purchased prior to FY 1998.
olG/9BA 07 Page 2 of 7 I
Appendix !! i R; view of NRC's Controls Ov;r the PC RIfr:sh Progr'm l l
Thomas J. Berchi I am well aware of the potential savings involved in reducing the number of PC replacements and their cost. In fact, our financial records show that we decreased the funds budgeted for PC Refresh as a result of the CPIC analysis by approximately $1 million in FY 1998 and FY 1999 combined. This reduction was applied to other agency priorities.
Data on Which Pentium Purchases and Installations Are Based. The staff controlled its estimates and purchase of Pentiums in several ways. It did not rely solely on the Office of Administration's Property Accounting System (PAS) because that system was found to be somewhat unreliable, as your independent statistical sample demonstrated. We use the PAS information as a starting point to determine an initial workstation count. The final counts were derived from a variety of sources that include PAS inventory information, office contacts, and physicalinspection. You have recommended that the Director, Office of Administration, test PAS information to improve its accuracy and reliability.
The staff uses a uniform, comprehensive system to schedule, perform, and validate every PC Refresh. Using the names of users, NRC tag numbers. and locations of the machines in each office, which were both provided and verified by each office IT coordinator, the project manager produces work orders in the 0C10 customer support and work tracking system. Next, the AMS installer arranges with the user of each PC for the replacement. Each order specifies the tag number of the PC to be replaced. The installer notifies the project manager of any discrepancy between the work order and the actual PC, its tag number, user, or location. The AMS installer I documents each action, changes the OClO IT equipment configuration database information as necessary, and gives any changes to inventory staff for entry in PAS. Replaced PCs are returned to the NRC Project Officer who works with the Office of Administration property control staff to dispose of them.
Status reports of refresh actions are given to office IT coordinators during the implementation for I their office, and periodically to OClO managers, the Executive Council, Chairman Jackson and the Commission by the ClO. OClO managers approve all specific contractual agreements for acquiring and installing equipment and include allinvolved costs in OClO's budget. The PC I Refresh project manager maintains records on purchase and service agreements in accordance with the OClO Project Officer Desk Reference and updates monthly financial worksheets for each contract.
On the basis of this systematic process for refreshing PCs and recording refresh actions and costs, our current estimate is that about 400 of NRC's approximately 4.000 PC workstations still need to be refreshed. The number of Pentiums that we purchase to complete the project will be determined by the information verified by each office and by the OClO staff and its contractor, not by the estimate in the CPIC or the information in PAS.
SCHEDULES FOR THE PC REFRESH PROGRAM Oversight of the PC Refresh program, in terms of managing the project costs and schedules and revalidating planned requirements, those responsible for the PC Refresh program have -
e implemented a systematic process for workstation replacements;
. OlG/98A 07 Page 3 of 7
Appendix 11 l
=
R: view of NP.C's Controls Ov;r the PC Rifr:sh Program Thomas J. Barchi 4-e coordinated the schedule for replacements with the staff responsible for the Windows NT operating system RPS, ADAMS, and STARFIRE projects, which have driven the schedule; e determined the number of PCs required for each office as installations were scheduled for that office on the basis of current office staff, e documented the number of PCs purchased to provide an accurate accounting of the ;
number of PCs available for instal!ation and their cost; and a purchased only the requisite number of PCs needed for installation in a small number of offices at a time to eliminate storage of PCs and to acquire a price most advantageous to the Government as PC prices continued to decline.
I believe these controls address several of the IG's concerns. Through its systematic process, the staff's contractor recorded the status of workstation replacements and the project office g maintained these records. Additionally, costs were managed on the basis of office needs at the E time of replacement, thereby reassessing and revalidating agency needs for replacement before refreshing each office's PCs. Hence, revalidation recurred many times over the life of the project, as each business area was refreshed.
As you suggested, obtaining "up-to-date management information...should not be labor intensive," and the staff should have this information readily available. Improvement in readily accessing this data is needed and will be addressed by OClO.
CAPITAL PLANNING AND INVESTMENT CONTROL GUIDANCE The IT CPIC process was revised after its first year of use to strengthen requirements for a g Project Management Plan (PMP) that would provide detail consistent with the scope, complexity, g and risk involved in each project. We agree that these plans should specify the information and reporting requirements needed by managers; however, the requirements will not be the same
! for all projects. To be cost-effective, the approach followed by the project team should fit the
! scope and complexity of the individual project, and the degree of managerial monitoring of individual projects should be tailored to the scope, complexity, risk, cost, and importance of the project to the NRC mission. We plan to issue additional guidance in FY 1999 to outline additional details for the revised CPIC process. As you recommended, the guidance on the PMP will include details on the project management data needed, when it is needed, and how it should be used.
The PC Refresh CPIC demonstrated that managers had planned adequate resources and appropriate coordination with stakeho~lders in the ADAMS and RPS projects to ensure success of the PC Refresh project. We remain confident that PC Refresh will meet its pnmary goals of providing desktop PCs to effectively operate our systems within an appropnate time frame and at a %w and well-managed cost.
USE OF A ONE STEP OR TWO STEP PROCESS FOR INSTALLATION OF THE NT OPERATING SYSTEM As indicated in the scope and cost discussion for the PC Refresh program. the OCIO's goal is to maintain desktop workstations that meet the information requirements of the agercy. Hence, as OlG/98A-07 Page 4 of 7 I
Appendix il Rtview of NRC's Controls Ov:r the PC RifrIsh Program Thomas J. Barchi your audit states, "OClO was in the midst of refreshing agency PCs ...when they decided to use Microsoft Windows NT 4.0 as the agency's standard operating system." This decision was, of course, driven oy agency business application needs to accommodate a document management system and other systems important to the agency's mission.
On the surface it would seem that a one-step installation process is the optimum way to proceed with installation and would conserve time and costs, as the audit report suggests. In fact, that is not the case because many factors affect the decision to use a one-step or two-step installation process. These factors include scheduling the implementation based on operational and I programmatic requirements of the office; availability of contractor resources to complete the Windows NT, PC Refresh, and major agency application implementations; technical issues that may force a particular implementation approach; logistics related to the implementation, e.g.,
travel to regions and resident sites; and implementation schedules for ADAMS, STARFIRE, and I RPS. These factors may dictate a one-step, two-step, or other type of approach to achieve the Windows NT implementation in the most cost effective and least disruptive manner. We must compiete the Windows NT and PC Refresh implementations in sufficient time to allow the I ADAMS and STARFIRE implementations to proceed as scheduled. Accordingly we will implement Windows NT and PC Refresh in a manner that will allow us to support these major application implementation schedules, all factors considered.
Cost, another important factor, affected the decision to employ the two-step process for most Headquarters users. The cost for two-step installation is approximately 25 to 30 percent less than the cost for a one-step installation. Other variables also affect installation cost: two tnps rather than one to a region or to the Technical Training Center increases cost, and a senior technician is needed for one step installation; while more junior technicians specialized in hardware replacements and operating system upgrades, respectively, may perform the two steps.
I Disruption to the user, another factor. affects the decision about which process to employ. An OClO-conducted informal user survey yielded mixed responses as to which process would be more disruptive. However, it is less likely that a user's workstation would be unavailable for an I extended period (a day or more) with the two-step process, an important factor in an agency concerned with health and safety. This may not always be the case with a one-step process. A one-step process can increase unavailability and the time devoted to follow-up support.
I depending on the applications on the wcrkstation, because you are making several significant changes at one time that complicates troubleshooting problems. Our experience with the OWFN Re-stack effort demonstrated the user community's dissatisfaction with not having a PC available for a day or more. In the case of the Operations Center, the center has 25 I workstations that are allidentically configured without any customization permitted. This greatly simplifies the installation and allows thorough testing before implementation, making use of a one-step installation appropriate.
As you can see, one process is not appropriate for all situations. Hence, the OClO staff considered many factors in its decisions to use a one-step or two-step installation in any given I situation.
I I
Page 5 of 7
Appendix ll Review cf NRC's Controls Ovrr the PC Refr:sh Progr m l
I Thomas J. Barchi -
l l
In conclusion, it is unfortunate that this information about the PC Refresh program and NT installation projects was not effectively communicated to your staff, which I believe led to certain misconceptions about these projects stated in the audit report and affected the l recommendations. I agree that the OClO staff should, as you suggest, improve its ability to ;
quickly summarize data from its records and tracking systems, and we will do so. ;
in your report, you mention our criteria from the OClO IT training course for a successful project
- on time, within budget, meet requirements, and accepted by users. Based on these criteria, the PC Refresh and NT projects are ahead of schedule, under budget, fully meet agency requirements, and are widely accepted by agency users as follows.
e 90 percent of workstations will be installed by the end of FY 1998 compared to 66 percent in the plan.
e FY 1998 costs will be $4,379K rather than the planned 54,739K.
e Workstations support implementation of our major systems under development.
e Users enthusiastically prefer the new Pentiums to the 486 machines they replace.
We appreciate the opportunity to review the draft report. I trust the information I have provided will be reflected in your final report. Please contact James B. Schaeffer at 415-8720 if you have any questions regarding this response.
cc: E. Halman, ADM OlG/98A-07 Page 6 of 7
l Appendix Il
! W R;' view of NRC's Crntrols Ovir the PC R;fr:sh Program f mtog
[ t UNITED STATES t
!* }J.l t
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001-t September 10, 1998 l
MEMORANDUM TO: Thomas J. Barchi Assistant inspector General for Audits Office of the inspector General *
. FROM: Edward L. Halman, Dir Office of Administrati
SUBJECT:
REVIEW OF NRC'S CONTROLS OVER THE PC REFRESH PROGRAM I am responding to your August 7,1998, memorandum which requests comments on the draft Office of the Inspector General audit report entitled, " Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC I Refresh Program.' Our response addresses recommendation no. 3:
Recommendation i Develop a quality assurance process to periodically test PASS information to improve its accuracy and reliability.
Resoonse l Agree. During FY 1998, we have taken the following steps to improve the accuracy and reliability of IT equipment information recorded in the Property and Supply System (PASS): (1) The 1 g- Division of Contracts and Property Management (DCPM) and the Office of the Chief Information
-g Officer completed redistribution of approximately 13,000 items of IT equipment among individual l office property accounts; (2) DCPM conducted a complete physicalinventory of NRC controlled property and will reconcile inventory results with PASS information by September 30,1998; and (3) DCPM provided refresher training in the use of PASS to all Headquarters and Regional Property Custodians. To assure that PASS information remains accurate and reliable, DCPM will continue to conduct complete physicalinventories and reconcile inventory results with the PASS records every two years, Additionally, in years when complete physicalinventories are not
.I conducted, DCPM will perform a 100% inventory of capitalized equipment and will use statistical sampling techniques to validate data in PASS for non-capitalized property.
I cc: P. G. Norry, DEDM A. J. Galante, OClO CONTACT: Timothy F. Hagan, ADM/DCPM 301-415-7305 i~
i OlG/98A 07 Page 7 of 7 I
I .
I Appendix lil Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program l Statistical Sample Review of the Office of Administration's Property Accounting System (PAS)
The Office of Administration's Property Accounting System (PAS)is the official tracking system for NRC's property inventory. Agency property custodians have had access to their property accounts through PAS since June 1997 and are responsible for updating the system to keep their accounts current.
To determine the accuracy of personal computers (PCs) listed in PAS, the Office of the inspector g General selected a statistical sample to determine if PAS correctly accounts for agency computers.
3 Specifically, we selected a systematic random sample of 231 PCs from a universe size of 3,979 PCs. We used the following guidelines to set errors for this review: 1) NRC tag number I and/or room number do not match the PAS report; 2) no FC at the location cited on the PAS report; or,3) the location (room number) cited on the PAS report cannot be found.
Following is a compilation of the findings from our review of PCs at NRC's headquarters offices:
i 1Bulldingi , TWrong Tag #L No'PC1 LNo Location Total Errors OWFN 11 3 8 22 TWFN 24 67 1 92 TOTALS: 35 70 9 114 I Of the 231 PCs that we examined, PAS contained 114 or 49.3 percent errors. Therefore, with a 95 percent confidence rate, we can estimate, relative to a population of 3,97S PCs, that the locations of between 1,707 and 2,220 PCs are in error.
l olG/98A 07 Pagei of1
g Appendix IV g
Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ADAMS Agencywide Document Access and Management System ADM Office of Administration AMS Applied Management Systems, Inc.
CIO Chief information Officer CPIC Capital Planning and investment Control FY fiscal year IRM Office of Information Resources Management IT information technology NT Micrcsoft Windows NT 4.0 NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission OClO Office of the Chief Information Officer OlG Office of the Inspector General PAS Property Accounting System PC personal computer Pentium Pentium-class system RPS Reactor Program System STARFIRE Agencywide Financial & Resource Management Sysiem t
olG/94A-07 Page 1 of 1
- 3 Appendix V
!g j Review of NRC's Controls Over the PC Refresh Program 1-
!E 45
- MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT
!I<
! Anthony C. Lipuma Team Leader
^
Cheryl A. Miotia Management Analyst I
!I,
!I s
1 il l
i I.
II k
i I
t
!I I
OlG/98A47 Page 1 of 1
Appendix VI R;vi w of NRC's Controls Ovir ths PC R4 fresh Progrtm GLOSSARY: OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL PRODUCTS INVESTIGATIVE 1.
INVESTIGATIVEREPORT- WHITE COVER An investigative Report documents pertinent facts of a case and describes available evidence relevant to allegations against individuals, including aspects of an allegation not substantiated.
Investigative reports do not recommend disciplinary action against individual employees.
Investigative reports are sensitive documents and contain information subject to the Privacy Act restrictions. Reports are given to officials and managers who have a need to know in order to properly determine whether administrative action is warranted. The agency is expected to advise the OlG within 90 days of receiving the investigative report as to what disciplinary or other action has been taken in response to investigative report findings.
- 2. EVENTINQUIRY- GREEN COVER The Event inquiry is an investigative product that documents the examination of events or agency actions that do not focus specifically on individual misconduct. These reports identify institutional l
weaknesses that led to or allowed a problem to occur. The agency is requested to advise the OlG of managerial initiatives taken in response to issues identified in these reports but tracking its 1 recommendations is not required.
3.
MANA GEMENT IMPLICA TIONS REPOR T (MIR) - MEMORANDUM MIRs provide a " ROOT CAUSE" analysis sufficient for managers to facilitate correction of problems and to avoid similar issues in the future. Agency tracking of recommendations is not required.
AUDIT
- 4. AUDITREPORT- BLUE COVER m
An Audit Report is the documentation of the review, recommendations, and findings resulting from an objective assessment of a program, function, or activity. Audits follow a defined procedure that allows for agency review and comment on draft audit reports. The audit results are also reported in the OlG's " Semiannual Reped" to the Congress. Tracking of audit report recommendations and
{ '
agency response is required.
5.
SPECIAL EVALUATION REPORT- BURGUNDY COVER
( A Special Evaluation Report documents the results of short-term, limited assessments. It provides an initial, qu;ck response to a question or issue, and data to determine whether an in-depth independent audit should be planned. Agency tracking of recommendations is not required.
REGULATORY 6.
REGULATORY COMMENTARY- BROWN COVER Regulatory Commentary is the review of existing and proposed legislation, regulations, and policies so as to assist the agency in proventing and detecting fraud waste, and abuse in programs and operations. Commentaries cite the IG Act as authority for the review, state the specific law, regulation or policy examined, pertinent background information considered and identifies OlG concerns, observations, and objections. Significant observations regarding action or inaction by the agency are reported in the OlG Semiannual Report to Congress. Each report
{ indicates whether a response is required.
oIG/98A 07 h Page 1 of 1 I
l
- - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - -