ML20210B996
| ML20210B996 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/31/1986 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20210B999 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-227 NUDOCS 8602130098 | |
| Download: ML20210B996 (1) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
l i
p*
'o UNITED STATES
^,'n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
WASHINGTON, D. C. 205S5 k... +,o 8
January 31, 1986
+
PEMORANDUM FOR:
All NRR Employees FROM:
Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation S R1ECT:
NRR OFFICE LETTER NO. 49:
PROCEDURES FOR REQUESTING OI INVESTIGATIONS The purpose of this Office Letter is to establish the NRR procedures for referring matters of potential wrongdoing to the Office of Investigations (01).
The Commission, in its response to SECY-85-369, Threshold and Priorities for Conducting Investigations, provided the following definition of wrongdoing:
Wrongdoing consists of both intentional violations of regulatory requirements and violations resulting from careless disregard of or reckless inHTfference to regulatory requirements amountina to intent. A reasonable basis for belief of wrongdoing exists when, from the circumstances surrounding it, a violation of a regulatory requirement appears more likely to have been intentional or to have resulted from careless disregard or reckless indifference than from error or oversicht.
l is a July 5,1985, memorandum from the E00 to Office Directors and Reaional Administrators which establishes the EDO policy for requesting OI investigations.
The EDO memorandum encloses a standard form that will be used for all OI referrals.
All reauests to 01 will be prepared for the signature of the EDO and concurred in by the Director, NRR.
The NRR Office Allegation Coordinator (OAC), Plannina and Program Analysis Staff (PPAS), is responsible for reviewina all 01 referral packages and, as such, must be included on concurrence for all 01 referrals. The OAC will maintain a log and numbering system and must be provided with one complete copy of all 01 referrals. (In addition, please provide the OAC with one copy of all OI referrals initiated in 1985.)
t Each 01 referral must include a recomendation on the priority of the
.I requested investiaation and the basis for that priority. Enclosure 2 is the Commission-approved " Guidance for Initiation, Establishment of Priorities and Temination of Investigations." This document orovides examples of the three i
priority levels and should be used as guidance in determining the criority of requests for investication.
/
- ) L,sl Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation L
l UNITED STATES
[
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION c
t.
I wasumovow, p.c.nossa 1
O
'%.,,,,/
July 5,1985 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Harold Denton, Director, NRR John Davis, Director, NMSS James Taylor Director, IE Thomas Murley, Regional Administrator, Region I Nelson Grace, Regional Administrator, Region II James Keppler, Regional Administrator, Region III 4
Robert Martin, Regional Administrator, Region IV John Martin, Regional Administrator, Region V FROM:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
PROCEDURE FOR REQUESTING 01 INVESTIGATIONS The purpose of this memorandum is to establish EDO policy for requesting investigations from OI.
The primary purpose of an 01 investigation is to provide infonnation to assist the staff in making licensing and enforcement decisions. The staff has a significant interest in assuring that it obtains information from investigations necessary for decisions on a schedule that is compatible with the staff's regulatory needs. The Office of Investigations (OI) at the same time is responsiole for the quality of investigations and, therefore, must staff and schedule investigations in a manner such that significant matters are thoroughly investigated on a timely basis.
In order far OI to understand the staff's investigatory requirements and to permit 01 to exercise its judgments in an informed manner, 01 must have sufficient information to enable it to reach informed decisions as to whether to initiate an investigation and, if so, to determine its schedule. The attached form has been developed to assist 01 in securing the necessary information to make its priority and scheduling decisions and to keep the various offices fully informed of requests for investigations. All applicable information must be provided on the fonn which should be reproduced and used when making requests. Copies should be sent to those indicated on the last page of the form. The requests should continue to be made by Regional Administrators to the 01 field office and by Office Directors through the EDO to the Director of 01.
Upon receipt of the completed form, OI will evaluate the request and conduct 1
consultations as necessary with the requesting office. OI intends to notify the requester within 30 days as to whether the matter has been accepted for investigation and, if so, the priority of the investigation and estimated schedule. OI will notify the riiquester if there is a substantial change in the estimated schedule.
If a request is not accepted. OI will provide the i
h
/
Edosure. I * /JRR (hb 4)
o requester with the basis for its decision. Copies of 01 correspondence on scheduling and priorities will be sent to those indicated on the request form.
Requests for investigations should continue to be made for allegations or staff concern of potential wrongdoing. Potential wrongdoing includes matters where regulatory violations appear to have occurred with some intent or purpose to violate requirements in contrast to violations involving error or oversight. The term should be construed brcadly to capture cases where there may be an intent to affirmatively violate requirements as well as an intent not to comply with requirements where demonstrated by careless disregard or reckless indifference for regulatory requirements.
Program offices in carrying out their oversight responsibilities must be aware within their program areas of matters being referred for investigations, the reasons for the referral, and the requested priorities. When offices initiate referrals, the appropriate regional or program office should be aware of the referral. Coordination and oversight are necessary since, due to resource constraints, all requested investigations may not be able to be conducted or at least not completed by schedules initially sought by the requester. The program offices are responsible to the EDO for assuring within their area of responsibilities that necessary investigations are conducted. Recognizing there may be differences between the staff and OI on priorities and scheduling, regional administrators should notify the Director of the responsible program office of concerns in that area. The Director of the responsible program office, if not satisfied that an investigation priority or schedule established by the OI Director meets regulatory needs, must promptly notify the EDO.
Questions concerning the above guidance should be referred to the Chief
~
Counsel, Regional Operations and Enforcement.
In addition informal comunications are encouraged between the staff and OI to further assist in achieving the goals of an effective investigation program providing information to serve the staff's needs.
In six months, OI and the staff will reevaluate the effectiveness of the attached form.
Q%
William. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
Attachment:
As stated cc:
G. Cunningham, ELD B. Hayes, 01
LIMITED DISTRIBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Request No.
(Region-year-No. )
TO:
FROM:
REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION Licensee / Vendor / Applicant Docket No..
Facility or Site Location Regional Administrator / Office Date Director A.
Request
'*i.L i= U.c ii.atter that is being requested for investigation (be as specific as possible regarding the underlying incident).
B.
Purpose of Investigation 1.
What wrongdoing is suspected; explain the basis for this view (be as specific as possible).
J
+
LIMITED DISTRIBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE W/0 OI APPROVAL
LIMITEDDISTRIBUTION--NOTFORPUBLICDISCL0hURE 2.
What are the potential regulatory requirements that may have been violated?
3.
If no violation is suspected, what is the specific regulatory concern?
4.
If allegations are involved, is there a v.iew that the allegation occurred? likely occurred
, not sure If likely, 4
explain the basis for that view.
C.
Requester's Priority 1.
Is the priority of the investigation high, normal, or low?-
2.
What is the estimated date when the results of the investigation are needed?
3.
What is the basis for the date and the impact of not meeting this date? (For example, is there an immediate safety issue that must be addressed or are the results necessary to resolve any ongoing regulatory issue and if so, what actions are j
dependent on the outcome of the investigation?)
t 9
e LIMITED DISTRIBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE W/0 01 APPROVAL
' LIMITED DISTRIBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
',' D.
Contact 1.
Staff members:
2.
A11egers identification with address and telephone number if not confidential.
(Indicate if any confidential sources are involved and who may be contacted for the identifying details.)
F.
Other Relevant Information Signature OI (B. Hayes) j* )
cc:
EDO (W.J. Dircks NRR/NMSSasappropriate(Denton/ Davis)*/,**/
IE (Taylor) j*, ***/
OELD(Cunningham)
Regional Administrator **/, ***/
- /
If generated by region.
/ If generated by IE.
/ If generated by NRR/NMSS LIMITED DISTRIBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE W/0 01 APPROVAL
1 o
GUIDANCE FOR INITIATION, ESTABLISHMENT OF PRIORITIES AND TERMINATION OF INVESTIGATIONS Thresholds for Investigations All instances where:
- 1) there is a reasonable basis for belief of wrongdoing; liide whether enforcement or other regulatory action is required
- / and 2) the staff determines an investigation is necessary for it to de should be referred to the Office of Investigations (01). Matters not involving wrongdoing should normally neither be referred to nor accepted by OI for investigation. Upon receipt of a completed request form (see the ED0's July 5, 1985 Memorandum) OI will initiate an investigation if:
1)
The staff has found that the alleged wrongdoing has had or could have an impact on the public health and safety, the common defense and security, protection of the environment, or antitrust laws provided that these matters are within NRC jurisdiction; and 2)
The Director, 01 detennines that there is a reasonable basis to believe that the matter involves wrongdoing; and 3)
The Director, 01 determines that there is sufficient information available to support the allegation to warrant initiation of an investigation.
In accordance with current Commission guidance, 0! would seek Comission approval prior to initiating an investigation relating to the character / integrity of an individual within 01 jurisdiction.
- /
Wrongdoing consists of both intentional violations of regulatory requirements and violations resulting from careless disregard of or reckless iiidTfference to regulatory requirements amounting to l
intent. A reasonable basis for belief of wrongdoing exists when, from the circumstances surrounding it, a violation of a regulatory requirement appears more likely to have been intentional or to have resulted from careless disregard or reckless indifference than from error or oversight.
i
--...,,..W
>$?Ss O ebt h AM OSilff o
OI will notify the requester within 30 days as to whetheY the matter has been accepted for investigation and, if so, the. priority of the investigation and the estimated schedule.
If on review of the request, there is a reasonable belief that the alleged wrongdoing is solely a product of careless disregard or reckless indifference, OI will not nomally conduct an investigation,unless the requester indicates that the matter requires application of OI resources because there are major regulatory implications and the Director, 01 concurs with this judgment. OI will notify the requester if there is a substantial change in the estimated schedule for completion of an investigation. If a request is not accepted, 01 will provide the requester with the basis for its decision. Any differences between the staff and OI on the need for or priority of an investigation shall be resolved in accordance with the process described in the ED0's July 5, 1985 Memorandum.
Priorities for Investigations The staff will recommend a high, normal or low priority for each case referred to 01. Each case accepted for investigation by OI will be assigned a priority of high, normal or low by OI. The following examples should be used as guidance in establishing the priority of a case for investigation.
High A.
Current manager, licensed operator or other employee involved in deliberate violation of requirements having high safety significance, e.g., continuing potential for unnecessary radiation exposure to employees or members of the public.
B.
Suspected tampering with vital equipment at a power reactor.
C.
Allegations of falsification of records available for NRC inspection or submittals to the NRC or deliberate withholding of information required l
to be reported to the NRC, where the situation involved presents an immediate and continuing health and safety concern, eg, 1.
falsification of records having high safety significance, such as falsifications which conceal a repeated failure to perfom a required test; 2.
alleged withholding of significant design flaw or seismic criteria information for an operating facility; or f
3.
level of individual involved in the alleged withholding of i
information or falsification is such that a serious question of the willingness of management to conduct safe operations is raised.
l l
D.
Allegation of falsification of records available for NRC inspection or deliberate violations of NRC requirements concerning an area of significant safety concern for licensing.
- l E.
Allegations of wrongdoing 0 w immediate 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 harassment of OC inspectors or workers on safety-related equipment at a facility under construction.
B.
Allegations of deliberate violations of NRC requirements where there is no indication the violation is recurring or causing imediate and direct health and safety impact on the general public.
C.
Allegations of falsification of records available for NRC inspection or deliberate violation of NRC requirements of safety concern in the licensing process.
Low A.
Allegations of deliberate violations of NRC requirements, falsification of records or submittals to NRC, or harassment or intimidation of workers where the licensee is aware of the allegation and has already undertaken corrective action.
of culpability only if there is evidence of a deliberate violation of NR requirements.
B.
Allegations of deliberate violation of NRC requirements at in long-tem shutdown Termination of Investigations For low and normal priority cases, 01 may close a case if its projection within a reasonable period of time which will generally be six mo may close a case following its initial evaluation if at that time 01 is able 01 to make a projection of its resource allocations and the case would not be initiated within a reasonable period of time, e.g., six months.
The decision to terminate an investigation which has been initiated will normally be made outside'the context of the investigative priority / threshold system.
nomally continue an investigation only if there is a reasonable basis for a OI will belief that the matter being investigated involves a deliberate violation of NRC requirements.
The decision to terminate an investination will be a case-by-case assessment by the Director, 01, of such issues as whether the relevant facts necessary to resolve the matter under investigation have been oathered, whether alleoations of events or conditions are so old that witnesses are unavailable or could no longer he expected to recall pertinent information, or whether continued investigation would be nonproductive or otherwise not serve the agency's interests.
If the requester of an investigation determines that the need for, or oriority of, an investigation has changed, that information will be provided to the Director, 01, for his consideration.
I l
- _ _ _ _ _ - _