ML20205M362
| ML20205M362 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/25/1999 |
| From: | Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Vietticook A NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20205M354 | List: |
| References | |
| SECY-99-071-C, SECY-99-71-C, NUDOCS 9904150239 | |
| Download: ML20205M362 (2) | |
Text
.
NOTATION VOTE RESPONSE SHEET j
TO:
Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary FROM:
CHAIRMAN JACKSON l
l
SUBJECT:
SECY-99-071 - ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE l
ALLEGATION PROGRAM FROM REVIEW OF SURVEY l
FORMS SENT TO ALLEGERS in part in part Approved X
Disapproved X
Abstain Not Participating COMMENTS:
i l
SEE ATTACHED COMMENT b
SIGNATURE March 25, 1999 DATE Entered on "AS" Yes x
No 9904150239 990414 RES E
E PDR 99as / 5 07s y s
E Chairman Jackson's Comments on SECY-99-071 Obtaining feedback from our stakeholders on issues that affect them must be an important aspect of any program that involves direct communications with stakeholders (e.g. allegations,10 CFR 2.206). I approve staff option 1 of the subject paper, which would provide for the inclusion of feedback forms in all allegation closure correspondence; however, I do not approve of that portion of the option which j
calls for adopting this practice for a one-year trial period. My basis for this position is as follows:
While the staff points out that feedback is encouraged in the closure correspondence that is sent
{
currently to allegers, the structured nature of a form encourages user participation and ensures that the NRC receives information in areas important to program efficiency and effectiveness in addition to any extemporaneous information the individual wishes to provide. The staff notes that feedback from the most recent periodic survey on allegation program performance indicates that a point of diminishing returns may have been reached in terms of a survey instrument identifying new areas for improvement. Whether or not this is true, continuous sanipling is necessary to detect negdve program performance trends and allows for rapid detection of unintended consequences that may result from programmatic changes. For this teason, I believe that offering a user-friendly form to provide feedback should be a program element indefinitely.
l For the allegation management program, it is important that the NRC determine not only how
=
agency performance is rated in terms of timeliness and identity protection, but that we, if fact, addressed the problem the alleger had in mind when he or she contacted the NRC. In my judgement, option I describes an excellent n:ethod for obtaining such information. The staff l
points out that a resource burden will be associated with possible re-reviews of particular allegations due to feedback obtained under the proposed option. I would argue that revisiting a safety issue in the face of new information goes directly to what we are about as a health and safety regulators; such a practice is in best interest of safety, is in the public interest, and may enhance public confidence. The ager.cy should encourage allegers in any way it can to provide any clarifications that would impact on the NRC review of a safety concern. To the extent that l
this requires additional resources, staff should request those required resources through the l
PBPM process.
l l
l l
j l