ML20195F839

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Establishment of Investigation Referral Board to Review Requests for Investigations,Provide Central Focus for Referrals to Ofc of Investigations & Assign Priorities & Schedules Commensurate W/Agencywide Needs
ML20195F839
Person / Time
Issue date: 10/20/1986
From: Stello V
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To: Jennifer Davis, Harold Denton, Taylor J
NRC
Shared Package
ML20154D958 List:
References
FOIA-88-237 NUDOCS 8610240061
Download: ML20195F839 (5)
v • d • e


Text

. - _ _ _ _

--m.., ,

/ ,

useireo rf Area f ,  ; -etVCt.E AR RECIULATORY COMMIS$10N

.uom.oeo=, o. e smesu l

( OCT 2 0 %

.....,/

I i .

H[ MOP.aNCUM FOR: These on Attached List FRCW: Victor Stello Jr.

Executive Director for Operations SVSJECT:

SYSTIM FOR C0CROINATING, REY 1EVING AND AePR0h1NG l

l REQUESTS FOR INVESTIGATIONS

) (

The Cornission has concurred in wy plan to estabitsh the investigation Referral Icard. My main reasoft for recermondir.9 the establisWnt of the l

Scard is that ! do not believe the prestrit tystem for referrini Ntters to i 0! for investigation assures, from an agencywife perspective, that the priorities and schedules assigned to investiget,1cas uset both individual 4 program needs and agencywide regulatory neeJs. The new Investigation Referral Board will review all staff-requested investigations, provide a central focus for all referrals t9 01, and assign priorities end. schedules careensurate with agenceride neids. The Charter for the Investigatten j Aeferral Icard is enclosed.

] The teard will be chaired by the'Oesvty Director. !!, and will include

! the Deputy Office Directors of HR and NWSS, the Director of the Regional f Craratices and Generic Requirteents Staf f, and the Assistant General Counsel for Enforcement. I espect !! te provide staff support to the

) Chaiman of the Investigation Referral leded. The loErd will be estab-i itsbed for a 6 month trial period to determine if the new review process provides, ir 4 timely and efficient manner, the desired assurnnee that the priorities and schedules for referrals to 0! art coepensurate with agency.

I wide nteds. Near the end of the 6-month period ( Acril 1957), I will decide, j based en the etccamendations of the leard. 01, and headevarters and regional i offices, en any further modifications to the Board or the referral process.

, The Peard Chairman shell previte as with a cumocsite esecrt regarding this j matter.

l The elevation of the ri erral f process to an integrated senter manage-we.t j review board is an indication of the irportance C # investigations in Netieg the reguistory mission and of the need to assure that agency pricrities 'ce

) investigations are met. The establistrent of the !oerd does not relieve the l Pegional Aeinistrat:r er Office Directer of the rescensibility to crepare l Cuality retutsts for investigatten or to assurt referrals are Ortcarte in j c:nfer-ance with the thresneld and priorities established by the Corriss':P.

i e hte er has a cr0Visi:P to alicw t*e Gegic'41 l eiristrat0F t: *ake l

re'errals directly te t*e Oirect:r of t*e 01 Field O"ice er the Mce Director t: r.ake refer"als directly t0 the Direct:r 0: thrcugh '.he IOC **

t o2-certain situations which recuire pror'ot O! action. The eegional Administrata= '

cr Office Director should promptly advise the Board of such rtfer,ral anc ,

l describe the reason for direct referral.

As indicated in the Charter, 0! will be invited to attend feard mestiegs, and I espect this process will result in imoreved cocrdination and inta*' ace l with 0!. The Charter maietains the existing lines of coreunication to C1 '

for ref errals. Board decisions and reconsnendations for referrals to 01 fror l the regions will be returned to the Regional Aministrator for tr,ansmittal

' to the Directer of the 01 Field Office, while headcuarters refear:1s will te

' returned to the headquarters office for transmittal to the Directer. 01

) through the t00. If the requesting office disagrees with the leard's recce.

mendation, the requesting office thculd discuss the referral with the feard Chaiman and, if appropriata, resubmit the referral with accompanying eev

' supporting information for reconsideration by the Board. If no new sucsceting

infomation is available or the leerd's recosswedation from the second review i is unacceptable to the requesting office, the matter should be brought to the d attention of DEDROGP for resciution, j The new Investigation Referral Peard should not affect the staff interactions, j especially in the regions, with 01 staff. ! enrect that regional staff and C1 field staff will centinue to meet frequently to review the status of ongoing and planned investigations and that in many cases the staff and O! will have j

preliminary discussions to review new allegations and issues of potential wrongdoing.

4 In implemeeting the new referral program, regional effices and headquarters

! cffices sheuld centinue to use the guidelines previded in the Staff 1

Requirements Fecoranduri of January 10,1986, SECY 85 369, ' Threshold and

Priertties for Cenducting Investigations,' in recoemending matters fer

! re'erral to 01, in reviewing the regulatory need for the investigatien, and in assigning recuested priorities to each propeted rt'erral. Hewever, cecies of all regional and headquarters requests fer siivestigation should new he forwarded free the requesting Office 01rtetoridegicnal Administrater to the Chaiman of the Investigation Deferral Scard and feard members. Ccotes of each recuest sheutd also be forvaried by the regions to the 01 Field Office and by headquarters to the Otrector. 01. The office or region 'mking the i

etcuest is respcasible for assuring that there is sufficient infomatien in i

the request to pemit the Scard to reach a detemination as to whether there is a reasonable basis te believe the matter involves wrongdoing and to whetnee j there is a regulatory Peed for the invest.igaticn. However, sensitive in'cr-i ratien (such as ccnfidential allegers identity) thculd be expunged f ree. the J infer-ation previded to the Board to the extent 4D recriate. The ! card ra,v recuest additiceal infomation as my be needed te succert the review cf recuests.

I i

1 l .

3  ;

i t .

l The Investigation Referral Board and the reviewed crocess for making sta** '

referrals to O! will be effective Noveber 10. 1986. MC 0517 rv e e< ret :, i revised untti coepletion of the trial program.

J .-s f .

~

u :. . N' "

Victor tello, Jr. p Decutive Director -  ;

for Operations i

Enclosure:

Charter of the Investigation Referral Peard cc: J. H. Sniezek f

8. Hayes. 0!  !
5. Connelly l l T. RePp. ECC  !
R. Brady, MRR >

i  !

1 1

i i

]

A i 1

  • 4 1 f l

! I i

4 i 6

i

i 1

1 I

i i 1 l

CNARTER mR TNg !MYESTICJTich strtaRAL 301 0

r. . r ,e A. To review each regional or headcuarters proposed referral tc O! 'cr investigation to:
1. Assure there is a regulatory nead fer the investigatien.

2i Determine if there is a reasonable basis for belief of cetential w rongeo t ng ,

3. ee view the referral in r:1stien to other referrals te Ci and in relation to agency =ide prioritits.

4 Review the asskgned priority (high, noma 1, low), and assure the priority is censistent with program and overall agency notes, and

5. ee view the schedule when the results of the investigation art needed to support regulatory action.

B. To review periedically the status of all outstanding referrals to O!

for investigation, to reest/,blish the priorities or continued need

'or the outstanding rt errels f (in-ccesultatien with the Regien41 Adriinistrators), and to provide the repricritization to 01.

Generally, this rtview shculd be perfomed ovarterly.

!!. Meetershio Otputy Cffice Directer, !E (feard Chairvan)

Deputy Office Dirteter, NW55 Cecuty Office Director, MRR Directer. Regional Operations and Generic Reewirements Staff Assistant General Counsel for En'orcegnt, CGC If Icard reabers are unable to atteed a Peard meeting. they sheuld ac:cint an alternate to substitute for them. Alterrates shculd nor . ally te Civision Directors or above. If the 9eard Chaiman is unable to atteed a Board reeting, the Chatman sball designate a ! card certer to te acting Chairman for the setting. l

!!!. Meetinos The Scard Chair *ar will be rescensible fer scheduling and conducting tre rtetings. Mettings shcW ld to be sCPtcJled as t?e Scard Chair *.an cetts l a:Prepriate censidering the safety significance of the r4tters to tt i Pt#erred. Otrerally. all ref erals t shculd he reviewed within 2 gegg cf rectigt by the Icard. lt is e10ectge that the Icard inclygtlec'"d "tfl1 W "*. via cen't'eate call, in t*t discussicat seg review V ~gy t 8 tre Investigatien re't"als.

2 1

For purposes of conducting a meeting, a minisun of three Icars eg.g ,g q necessary to constitute a quorum. Cecilices c' the Scard will 64 ,4g, y# i a ra,4crity vote of the leerd members present at the retting. .

l 0! sheuld be invited to attend the meetings as se observe' and cretici.

l j

pant but O! will not be a voting newter of the Scard.

l

!Y. Feedback to eequestino Office and eeferrals to Of The Icard Chairman will be responsible for infoming the recuestieg effice l of the Icard's decisten on each referral for invest,igation set for reture- ,

ing the referral for investigat,ien to the originating office with the Board's recorrendation regarding referral to 01, tech of fice will then te responsible for forwarding these rt'errels approved by th3 8 card to 01  ;

i threugh the establishN channels (through the (DC to the Director. QI for i

! headcuarters offices and to the Otrteter of the 01 Field Office from the l Regional Administrator for regional offices). I

) In an esgrgency, the Regional A&inistrator or Office Dirteter my make referrals directly to K through the established channels. The 8egienal Ahinistrator or Office Mrector should presetly advise thq toard Chairwm j t

) of the rtferral and describe the emergency event and rationale for the j

' re ferral . ,

I '

In instances where the requesting office and the leerd disagree en the recorrendation for referral to 0. and either the requesting office has no 4

new inferestion to suppcrt reccesi6eration by the leard or the Scard has i reconsidered the referral and there is still disagreement on etferral to l j 01, the Board Chairman should bring the matter to the C(C'0GR for resolution. i f

! Y. Status Reports A cuarterly status report will be artvided to the 100. The rescet util (

i surr. art:e the reviews cos91sted during the quarter (including the I 1 reprioritizatien of outstanding referrals); surrarite the status of all I l outstanding referrals to 01; identify coselete4 O! investigat, ions; and

) - identify these referrals not accepted by 0! and returmed to the staff fer action. The report should also identify any prtblees er petential pretlem i j

l areas. Any prtblems or issues which cannet te rescived b.v the

  • card j should be brcught to the attentien of the ICC. l l

The ! Card Chairman utl1 b4 responsible #0r preCara', ion and dispatch of the j ltatus retcrt. CCpies Cf the ettert to the ICC shculd be pr?vided to t*e CEC #03R. Directors c' kRe. W13 !!, 0GC, O! the five Regieral Ac inis.

l traters, and the Scard r44et's.

1 1

j l

5 l

l

  • ......m.. 1

[ emtTso sts

  • / o NUCLE AR RIOULATOh. -m.m vn age

{ ' -

I g as eeiston.e 4. m as em W '

  • ...* s e

.,,,s e, m January 2o, 1su )

secastasy g4;m >

g ,g, n ,

o '1-MEMcRANDUM FOR: Victor Stello, Jt., Acting Executive Director for Operations 1 Ben 3. Rayes, Director '

of fice of Investigations

)

FROM: Sanuel J. Chilk, Secreta

}

SU3JZCT: S T AF F R.E QU I RIM ENTS -- S t r".K 8 5 - 3 6 9 ,

i

  • THRISHOLD AND PRIORIT!!S' FOR CONDUCTING INVISTICATIONS*

i ,

I The Cemission, by c vote of 4-1, approved the appendix

(*Cuidance for 2nitiation, Establishment of Priorities and j

Terzination of Investigation') to SECY-85-369, pending the l modifications enclosed.

The Comission expects the guidelines will be incorporated 4

l into the appropriate NRC Manual chapters or Procedural Manu-als.

4 i

The coactission expects 01 and t.he staf f to use these guide-i lines to deal with the pending large inventory of inves-  !

]

4 tigation requests which have been areund for scoe years with-out any work being initiated.

i In addition, if there is 01 disagreement on setting priorities based on these guidelines,

! the Comission should be prpeptly informed.

-! t l Comissioner with Asselstine approved the guidelines as preposed two s'odifications.  !

modified by the Comission.Re does net approve the guide.ines as I

l j Enclosure 3 As Stated i Copies Chair:.an Palladino i

Cemissioner Roberts cer issioner Asselstine Comissioner Bernthal j

Cemissioner tech i

Comission Staf f of fices .

Regienal offices f. tid M.ggg

,1 0 'g g l ASL3P

\

gg,y C'..*.*{'k,h.."

w I

l l

l c,,-.m -

, , JJ iWS J '

n i

\

APP (N011 Gul0ANCC FOR INITIAfl0N. ($ fart.19eENT OF PRIORiflCS AMD TERMlhAf!ON OF INYESTIGATIONS Thresholds for Investigations l I

i 4

All instances where: 1) there is a reasonable basis for beller of  ;

wrongdoing; 'f and 2) the staff determines an investigation is necessary for j it to decide whether enforcecent or other regulatory action is required should  ;

j be referred to the Office of Investigations LO!). Matters not involving '

wrongdoing should normally rwither be referred to nor accepted by 01 for investigation. Upon receipt of a corvileted request fors (see the [00's )

j hly 5.1985 Memorandum) 01 will initiate an investigation if:

i

1) The staff has found that the alleged wrongdoing has had or could have an impact on the public health and safety. the comon defense and security, protection of the environment. or an',itrvst laws

.. provided.that these matters are within NRC jurisdiction; and

2) The Director. 01 deterstnes that there is a reasonable basis to j believe that the matter involves wrongdoing; and 4

j 3) The Director. O! deterr.ines that there is sufficient infory.ation l available to support the allegation to warrant initiation of an 4

i investigation.

In accordance with current Cemission guidance. 01 would seek Coer.ission i

approval prior to initiating an investigation relating to the character / integrity of an individual within O! jurisdiction. i I

i 0! will notify the requester within 30 days as to whether the matter has  !

been acceptee for investigation and if so, the priority of the investigation '

and the estimated schedule. If on review of the request, there is a reasonable I ,

l 1

  • /

i Wrongdoing consists of bnth intentioral violations of regulatory requirements and violations resulting~(rom careless disregard of or reckless indif ference

! to regulatory requirements amounting te intent. A reasonable tesis for belit

' c'f wrongdoing esists shen, from the circumstances surrounding it, a violatier cf a regulatcry requirrent appears roce likely to have been intenticrsl or l f o have resulttd free r.areless disregarc or reckless indifference than frm

] cerer or oversight.

3 l

1 I

J

.g.

[

belief that the alleged wron or reckless indifference. 0!gdoing is olel will not norm. ly conduct an investigationa produc  ;

unless the requester indicates that the matter rsquires applicattoo of 01 !

1 resources concurs withbecause thert are major regulatcry implica tions and the Otrector this judgment.

0! will nottfy the requester if there is a , 01 substantial change in the estimated schedule for Corioletion of an t i

If aitsrequest for decision. is not accepted. 0! wil) provide the requester with the bal . l i Any differences between the staf f and Cl on the need for or priority of an investigation shall be resolved in accordance with the ,

process described in the (00's July 5,1985 Meecrandum. >

i priorities for_tavestications ,

t The staf f will recmsnend a high, normal or low referred to 01. priority for each case '

(

priority of high Each norvalcase or low accepted by 01. for investigatson by 0! will be assigned a 3 as guidance in es,tablishing the pricrity of a case for investigation.The

)

4 M19h

.; A. 1 Current manager, licensed operator or othee eeployee involved in deliberate violatten of requirements having high safety signtficance ,

or eersbers of the public.e.e.. continuing potential for unnecessary rad!

j 8. l Suspected taScering with vital equipment at a cover reactor. \

a C.,

i Allegations of falsificattun of records availatie for MRC i j

, of information required to be reported to the htC, wi situation involved j j and safety concers, presents en tunedtate end continuing bealth

Ae ,

i 1 1.

j

)

falsifications which conceal a repeated f ailure 1

required test;

) 2.

) alleged withholding of significant design flaw cr seismic criteria information for an operating facility; cr  !

k 3.

1 level of individual involved in the allegte withholding of

{ infermation or falsification is such that a sennus question  ;

i of the willingness of management to condv:

raised.

1 safe ocerstions is 0.

er ee11 berate Colat,1ons cT WRC Yequirements S t.gnificant sa fety concern for 4 fcensing.

l i i

1 1

2 1 l l

1

3. '. -

, l I

C. i Allegations of wroegdoing where ~iseediate investigation is necessary to ensure preservation and availability of evidence or which are in some other way time perishable.

Nomal A.

Allegations of intimidation or harassent of QC laspectors or workers on safety related equipment at a facility under construction, 8.

Allegations of deliberate violations of MRC requirements where i there is no indication the violation is recurring or causing tenediate or and direct health and safety impact on the general public eeployees.

C.

Allegations of falsification of records available for MC inspection or deliberate licensing violation of NRC requirteents of safety concern in the process.

LS".

A.

Allegations of

  • deliberate' violations of hitC requirements falsification of records or submit;als to MC or harassment or intimidation of workers I where the licenses is aware o,f the allegation and has already enter.

taken corrective action. 4a RftC investigation is needed to detarsine the tegree of WRC of culpability only if thert is evidence of 3W1tberate Stel4 tion tequirements. l

8. l Allegations in long ters shutdown of deliberate violation of HC requ.treme l

Temination of Investications

~

For low and nonnal priority cases,~01 may close a case if its projection of resource allocations indicates that the investigation could not be initiated within a reasonable Mriod of time which will generally be sin months. O! may close a case following its initial evaluation if at that tire 01 is able to within 46 a reasonatale reriod of ttee, eg. Sin renths. The d investigation which has been initiated will nomally be etade outside the contest of the investigative priority / threshold systea.. 01 will nortally l continue an investigation only if there is a reasonable basis for a belief that }

i the matter being investigated involves a celiterate violation of htC retwirteemts .

the Oirector. Of of such issues as whether the releva resolve the rJ t ter under l

i invest,igation have been ga thered, whether allegatiers i

, , 4. .

f

(

of events or conditions are so old that witnelles are unavailable or c no longer be espected to recall Ptrtinent information, or whether continued  ;

investigation would be nonproductive or otherwise not serve the agency's interests.

r i

If the requester of an investigation detervines that the need for i or priority of an investigation has charged, that information will be provteed to the Of rector. O! for his coesideration.

l l

! Attachmen t: Memorandum from W. J. Otrcks to I Office Directors and Regional Aomtnistrators, dated July 5.1985. PRMEDURE FOR REQUC5 TING

  • 01 INVESTIGATION 5 t I

f l

i f .

l i

l l

i f

,

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20195F839&oldid=3345889"