ML20205H716
| ML20205H716 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/19/1988 |
| From: | Murley T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NRRL-908, NUDOCS 8810310148 | |
| Download: ML20205H716 (7) | |
Text
.
[.....
UNITED STATES I
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/
e i
I wAssmaTon, o, c, som
.....)
- 5 October 19, 1988 MEMORANDUM FOR:
All NRR Employees FRON:
Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
NRR OFFICE LETTER NO. 908 PROCESSING OF ESCALATED ENFORCEMENT CASES PURPOSE This office letter establishes the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) procedures for processing of escalated enforcement actions and coordinating reviews with the Office of Enforcement (OE) and the regional offices.
Employees should refer to NRC Manual Chapter 0400, "Enforcement Program " and 10 CFR 2 Appendix C, for additional information. Specific enforcement policy regarding violation of 10 CFR 50.49 (i.e., requirements pertaining to environmental qualification (EQ) of electrical equipment) at plants licensed before November 30, 1985, is provided in Generic Letter 88-07. Furthermore, specific guidance on handling enforcement cases involving (1) disc.rimination, harassment, or intimidation. (2) environmental qualification, and (3) fire protection are provided in Office of Enforcement guidance memoranda 88-01, 87-02, and 86-04, respectively.
To ensure timely processing by NRR of proposed escalated enforcement actions, appropriate project, technical, and management personnel should become involved at an early stage (i.e., during the regional office's initial review of the identifiedviolation).
It is expected that the NRR staff will consolidate their views on the technical and regulatory significance of the violation and convey l
them to the regional office as early as possible before the enforcement conference.
RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITIES The principal objective of the NRR review is to ensure that the significance of the violation with respect to reactor safety has been properly evaluated from an overall Agency perspective.
the NRR review regarding proposed escalated enforcement actions.ger (PM) leads The responsible NRR project mana Technical i
support from other NRR divisions and other NRC offices is obtained as needed.
Fcroal review of the enforcement action package is documented in a memorandum to the Director of the Office of Enforcement that is prepared by the NRR project manager and signed by the NRR Associate Director for Projects.
CONTACT:
j j, ;,6 M' M. Caruso NRR 492-1362 y
y 'f ~ g L
f(
?M 'bRb* MU"
.o F 03 CORRESFONDENCE FDC
All NRR Employees October 19, 1988 BASIC REQUIREMENTS (1) Upon early notification by the regional section chief of a potential escalated enforcement issue, the project manager (PM) obtains as much information as is available from reports (e.g., the inspection report or the licensee's event report) and any ongoing NRC followup activities. The PM should also ask to be included by telephone in any significant deliberative discussions initiated in the regional office during the development of the case. The PM, in conjunction with his or her project director, determines whether or not input from technical branches is needed, determines which technical personnel should be contacted, and prepares the appropriate work revest for Priority Level 2 work.
Time should be recorded against Regulatory Information Track-ing System (RITS) Code 3BA2, "Escalated Enforcement" on the RITS Staff Inspection Report Form. A technical assignment control (TAC) number should not be established. Also, the docket number and the inspection report number s1.- Q be entered on the RITS form.
M) ihe FM and other technical reviewers, as necessary, should attend all significant enforcement conferences. However, in cases involving sensitive management issues, it may be necessary for the NRR project director and the technical reviewer's branch chief to also attend the conference. Adequate travel time must be allowed for NRR personnel to attend both the pre-conference and post-conference meetings of NRC Headquarters and reginnal staff.
(3) As early as possible in the course of developing the enforcement action, the PM should make his or her nanagement aware of the planned erforcement action, including severity level, and any significant safety or regulatory issues or differences among the NRC staff that need to be resolved in order for NRR to concur on the enforcement package.
(4) The NRR project manager and tne technical staff perform their review, keeping in mind that the principal objective is to ensure that the significance of the violation with respect to reactor safety has been properly evaluated. Standard guidance is enclosed to assist the PM and the technical staff to perf)rm their review and to make positive contri-butions to the development of ar appropriate enforrement action. To ensure a timely review by NRR, the PM and the NRR technical staff should review the draft enforcement action documentation prepated by the regional office.
(5)
In accordance with OE guidance, the enforcemen: conference is normally conducted approximately 4 weeks af ter completion of the inspection.
The regional office transmits the escalated enforcement package to OE, with copies to NRR and the Office of General Counsel, approximately 1 week af ter the enforcement conference. Upon receipt of the enforcement package, NRR has 5 days to review it and provide their coments on it. NRR's prin 1 pal role is to ensure that technical and regulatory assetsments are souno and accurate and that the significance of the violation with respect to reactor safety has i
r j
1 I
I All NRR Employees October 19, 1988 l
teen properly evaluated. The PM should also verify that the package h4s been appropriately marked to indicate limited distribution. The project manager will prepare a memorandum to the Director, Office of Enforcement, f
i from the Associate Director for Projects The l
PH is to consult with the technical staff,NRR, giving NRR's connents.
j if appropriate, and note the r
j consultation in the memorandum. This memorandum must express NRR's position as a whole, not the projects staff's and the technical staff's sositions separately.
Every effort should be made tu resolve differences before issuing the memorandum, in addition to internal hRR distribution.
l a copy shall be provided to the appropriate regional administrator and the i
1 appropriate Enforcement Officer.
[
\\
t
]
(6) Every week the NRR division directors for reactor projects (or their designees), meet with OE to discuss c e escalated enforcement cases that l
7 3
NRR has on hand for connent. NRR project managers should be prepared to
}
brief their division director on tie status of an ongoing case before the j
weekly meeting, j
(7) For cases in which the licensee contests the proposed civil paalty t
i because the licensee believes that the violation (s) did not occur and, e
}
j a lesser extent, when a licensee argues for mitigation of the proposed civil penalty, review by NRR will be necessary to ensure that a sound I
regulatory decision is reached with regard to the merits of the licensee's arguments. NRR will normally be provided a copy of the licensee's response through the licensee, the regione' offica, or OE. The NRR project manager J
j should work closely with the NRR f.wt
- 41 staff, if appropriate, and i
regional personnel to form an appropriate viewpoint regarding the licensee's i
argurents. The regional office will trans. nit a draf t response. usually in i
the fenn of an Order imposing Civil Monetary Penalty and an ap:,$tadir describirg j
NRC's conclusions in detail, to OE, with cop (ies t*,,NRR and OGL.5)and(6)forap; The process 1
I is then the same as that described in items enforcement package.
EFFECTIVE DATE 1
This office letter is effective innediately.
l 19ndh Thomas E. Murley, Director I
I 0?fice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1
]
En:losure:
As stat <d
[
cc-V. Stello, E00 D. Holody, R1 J. Taylor, EDO OGC f
l J. Partlov, 05F(70) G. Jenkins, RI!
J. Lieberman, OE i
l W. Russell, RI J. Grobe, R!!!
J. Grace, RI!
[
l A. Davis, RI!!
G. Sandborn, RIV R. Martin, RIV r'
J. Martin, RV A. Johnson, RV SECY l
H. Kong OE NRC PDR C. Anderson, R!l!
l a
l DCT 19 W3 11 HRR Employees been properly evaluated. The PM should also verify that the package has been appropriately marked to indicate limited distribution. The project manager will prepare a memorandum to the Director, Office of Enforcement, I
from the Associate Director for Projects, NRR, giving NRR's coments. The PM is to consult with the technical staff, if appropriate, and note the consultation in the memorandism. This memorandum must express NRR's posit'un as a whole, not the projects staff's and the technical staff's l
positions separately.
Every effort should be made to resolve differences before issuing the memoranaum.
In addition to iriternal NRR distribution, a copy shall be provided to the appropriate regional administrator and the appropriate Enforcement Officer.
l (6) Every week the NRR division directors for reactor projects (or their designees), meet with OE to discuss the e.ecalated enforcement cases that I
NRR has on hand for comment. NRR projec< managers should be prepared to brief their division director on the statt.s of an ongoing case before the weekly meeting.
(7)
For cases in which the licensee contests the prop (osed civil penalty because the licensee believes that the violation s) did not occur and, to a lesser extent, when a licensee argues for mitigation of the proposed civil penalty, review by NRR will be necessary to ensure that a sound regulatory decision is reached with regard to the merits of the licensee's arguments. NRR will normally be provided a copy of the licensee's response i
through the licensee, the regional office, or OE, The NRR project manager I
should work closely with the NRR technical staff, if appropriate, and l
regional personnel to form an appropriate viewpoint regarding the licensee's arguments. The regional office will transmit a draft response, usually in the form of an Order Imposing Civil Monetary Penalty and an appendix describing NRC's conclusions in detail, to OE, with cop (ies to NRR and OGC.5) and (6) for a p The process is then the same as that described in items l
enforcement package.
EFFECTIVE DATE l
This ottice letter is effective imediately.g Tho=a3 E. Murley Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated l
cc:
V. Stello, EDO D. Holody, RI J. Taylor, EDO OGC J. Partlow, OSP(70) G. Jenkins, Ri!
J. Lieberman, OE W. Russell, RI J. Grobe, RIII J. Grace, RI!
A. Davis, Rill G. Sandborn, RIV R. Martin, RIV J. Martin, RV A. Johnson, RV SECY H. Wong, OE NRC PDR C. Anderson, RI!!
DISTRIBUTION
/
EEFTRAL FILE MCARUS0 FMIRAGLIA SVARGA MVIRGILIO GHOLAHAN CTHOMAS JJi31.EY NRC PDR
- PREVIOUSLY CONCURRED
- H. SMITH 9/13/88
/ 4r MVIRGILIOC'f dA$:
(A)AD:DRSP3j DRSF TECH:ED.*
CHIEF:PTSB TA:DRSP:AD35*
1/Jr.,/88 4h' k 1 /M,HAN GHOLA BCALURE CTHOMAS MCARUSO:mk
/88 9/6/88
/ /88 9 6/88
.,e
/88 l0/ft/E8 IV /}J.E.88 IMUR Y 4
Ut L
IELD/
V
f All NRR Employees been properly evaluated. The PM should also verify that the package has been appropriately marked to indicate limited distribution. The project manager will prepare a memorandum to the Director, Office of Enforcement, from the Associate Director for Projects, NRR, giving NRR's coments.
The PM is to consult with the technical staff, if appropriate, and note the consultation in the memorandum. This memorandum must express NRR's position as a whole, not the projects staff's and the technical staff's positio'ns sepr.rately.
Every effort should be made to resolve differences before issuing the memorandum.
In addition to internal NRR dist,-ibution, a copy shall be provided to the appropriate regional administrator and the appropriate Enforcement Officer.
(6) Every week,\\the NRR division directors (or their designees) meet with OE to discuss the escalated enforcement cases that NRR has on hand for coment.
The NRR project manager and appropriate technical staff members should be prepared to brief their division directors on the status of an ongoing case before the weekly meeting.
(7) because the licensee,he licensee contests the pro osed civil penaltysbelieves that the For cases in which t a lesser extent, when\\a licensee argues for mitigation of the proposed civil penalty, review by NRR will be necessary to ensure that a sound regulatory decision is reached with regard to the merits of the licensee's arguments.
NRR will normally be provided a copy of the licensee's response through the licensee, the regional office, or OE. The NRR project manager should work closely with th6 NRR technical staff, if appropriate, and s
regional personnel to form an appropriate viewpoint regarding the licensee's s
arguments. The regional office will transmit a draft response, usually in the form of an Order Imposing Civil Monetary Penalty and an appendix describing The process NRC's conclusions in detail, to OE, with cop (ies to NRR and OGC.6) and (7) for a p is then the same as that describedsin items enforcement package.
i EFTECTIVE DATE This office letter is effective immediately.
l Thomas E. Murley, Director M +
bJ~.T Ff f' Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation tr k
Enclosure:
As stated cc:
V. Stello, EDO D. Holody, RI J. Taylor, EDO OGC J. Partlow, OSP(70) G. Jenkins, RIl J. Lieberman, OE W. Russell, RI J. Grobe, RIII J. Grace, RII
^
A. Davis, RI!!
G. Sandborn, RIV R. Martin, RIV J. Martin, RV A. Johnson, RV SECY i
H. Wong, OE NRC PDR C. Anderson, Rl!!
DISTRIBUTION CENTRAL FILE MCARUS0 FM ARGA MVIRGILIO GHOLAHAN CTHOMAS TMURLEY NRC-PDR
- PREVIOUSLY CONCURRED
/
TECH:ED.*
CHIEF:P1 DRSPp k (A)AD:DRSP35 (A)D:DRSP BCALURE CTHOMAS MCARUSU:mk MVIRGILIO GHOLAHAN 9/6/88
/ /88 9/6/88
/ /88
/ /88 D:DRP (A)ADP 0:0NRR SVARGA DCRUTCHFIELD TMURLEY
/ /88
/ /88
/ /88
h
'All NRR Employees *
(7) For cases in which the licensee contests the proposed civil penalty becausa the licensee believes that the violation (s) did not occur and,'to a lesser extent, when a-licensee argues for mitigation of the proposed civil penalty, review by NRR wil'1 be necessary to ensure that a sound regulatory decision is reached with regard to the merits of the licensee's arguments. NRR wil,l normally be provided a copy of the licensee's response through the licens e,.the regional office, or OE. The NRR project manager a
f should work closely with the NRR technical staff, if appropriate, and_
regional personnel to form an appropriate viewpoint regarding the licensee's arguments. The regional office will transmit a draft response, usually in the form of an Ordeh Imposing Civil Monttary Penalty and an appendix describing NRC's conclusions in detail, to OE, with copies to NRR and OGC, The process l
is then the same as that de cribed in items (6) and (7) for a proposed enforcement package.
EFFECTIVE DATE This office letter is effective upon issuance.
l Thomas E. Murley, Director j
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc:
V. Stello, EDO D. Holody, RI J. Taylor, ED0 j
J. Partlow, OSP G. Jenkins, RII J. Lieberman, OE W. Russell, RI J..Grobe, RIII J. Grace, Ril A. Davis, RIII G. Sandborn, RIV R. Martin, RIV J. Martin, RV A. Johnson, RV SECY
,,\\
H. Wong, OE NRC PDR C. Anderson, RIII Q(i DISTRIBUTION CENTRAL FILE MCARUS0 FMIRAGLIA SVARGA MVIRGILIO GHOLAHAN CTHOMAS THURLEY Nf C - V3 q j
TE Ep.
CHIEF:PTSB TA:DRSP (A)AD:DRSP35 (A)D:DRSP 4-Oute.
CTHOMAS MCARUS :mk MVIRGILIO GHOLAHAN 9
-/88
/ /88 y///88
/ /88
/ /88 D:CRP (A)ADP D:0NRR SVARGA DCRUTCHFIELD THURLEY
/ /88
/ /88
/ /88
- - ~ - ~ ~
Enclosure NRR COMMENTS ON REGIONAL ENFORCEMENT RECOMMENDATION EA-Were the violations technically and legally accurate and factual?
Were the root causes of the violations identified and are the corrective actions adequate?
Were the licensee's prior and current performance and prior notice of the violations properly reflected?
Is the safety significance of the violations or root causes properly evaluated?
Is the licensee's position regarding the violations, if known, properly reflected?
Is the message given to the licensee appropriate to the situation?
Suspension, etc.)y different type of enforcement action appropriate (Order).
Is a significantl and if so, why? [not amount of penalty or severity level Any other connents on factual or technical issues:
Project Manager:
NRRTechnicalReviewer(ifappropriate):
Date:
NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION FROM DIRECTOR, OE