ML20236F826
| ML20236F826 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/28/1987 |
| From: | Hayes B NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (OI) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236F801 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-87-614 NUDOCS 8711020308 | |
| Download: ML20236F826 (8) | |
Text
F.
h l
i l
'0FFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS l
BEN B. HAYES I
INTRODUCTION:
1.
Who Are We 2.
Why Are We
' II HOW WE DO BUSINESS:
1.
Source of Allegations (a)
Inquiry (b)- Full Scale 2.
Investigation Objectives--Provide Facts to Decision Makers (a) Objectivity--thoroughness (b) Provide facts for informed decisions (c)
No license or enforcement decision (d) Willful--intent--deliberate (e) Refer to appropriate Federal / local agency (f) Safe-Team--01 investigation
'(g) Advesary relationship with industry l
III 01 POLICIES:
1.
Confidential
'l 2.
A.ttorney Present g
,'s ttyN N s y e, M y:
$. M '"Y M.
V IV COMPLETED CASES:
g l
an w
1.
Not Routinely Made Public 2.
Respond to FOIA requests 3.
Statistics j
DW/198503/ speech (Pgs. 3 & 4)
)
8711020308 871028 PDR FDIA FELTONB7-614 PDR
}*?
,i f,
.,_ 4 i
i SPEECH OUTLINE-j
}
WHO WE ARE:
l l
A Comission-level, centrally directed field organization with the primary mission of conducting investigations of wrongdoing by employees l
l of NRC licensees and applicants', and their contractors or vendors.
Consists of a.small(about a dozen) headquarters staff located in Bethesda, Md. and five field offices collocated with NRC regional offices.
Each field office independent of the host NRC Region; 0 Field Office i
Directors report directly to 01:HQ.
q Authorized strength of 01 is 4f FTE as of October 1, 1987; current i
strengthis%FTE.
l All 01 investigators are highly experienced - none have less than 5 l
years investigative experience. All have been drawn over the years from l
the ranks of various (over_a dozen) federal agencies such as DEA, FBI, j
NIS, IR$, Postal Inspectors etc.
{
4 All 01 investigators are college graduates; a substantial number hold 1
Masters or law degrees.
WHY WE ARE:
e Prior to 01, investigative function was decentralized and staffed in many instances by persons lacking formal investigative training or experience.
It received little emphasis or oversight by HQ; what little
)
there was was exercised by a 3 person unit at IE:HQ.
l j
Problems began to become apparent in the way that NRC was able to handle l
instances of wrongdoing. Although adequate 'to deal' with technical FotA4n-W T> 2
p issues, the, staff was unable.to deal with investigative fundamentals such as motive and' intent, collection of evidence, in-depth interviews, and focus on elements of proof.
Program deficiencies'became increasingly obvious to Congressional oversight comittees.. After a series of hearings and discussions, in.
April,'1982,the Commission elected to establish 01 as a Commission-level.
office.
01 became operational on July 19, 1982.
HOW WE 00 BUSINESS:-
The overwhelming ma'jority of O! investigations are requested by.the NRC
- Staff as a result of either outside allegations or staff-developed
'information indicating possible wrongdoing. With'the exception of. cases
~
developed as a result of OI program evaluations, 01 undertakes virtually no proactive -investigations.
1 Typical response is the conduct of an inquiry in order to determine the l
appropriate NRC response.
Inquiries can " grow" into full scale inves-I l
tigations or sufficiently resolve an issue to obviate the need for further 01 involvement, l
Emphasis in 01 efforts is' in thoroughness and objectivity. Agents are enjoined to be alert equally to exculpatory as well as inculpatory evidence.
01 is even-handed. We treat allegers and licensees the same way. We insist that we receive unfettered access to information we deem relevant l
to an investigation.
l l
01 does not provide information regarding ongoing investigations outside l
the NRC. As noted above, this includes allegers as well as licensees.
i 1
~
L i
_'t i
- 'y s'm
.p.
s.-
_ l j; ',
^ %;
f
. i; (
p.
l.
'N Y f gr:
~
.,.x v
01 maintains a professional and c*opd' I relat/onship with interveners
- - l 4., ' l s
L
/
'i 1
<tw r
t
' andirelated groups in order-to enture Me"flod of important information X(
L.
..h. [' to 01. This should not be construed as a bias for these groups or '
I 4
.c j
=
'l
.i L
- e p' q
l
' g' fi appAbst the. industry.
f F
j d,/C hi n
j M;
i;u f.,' 0q, i.. }
i 01 investigations.are conducted to enab W the NRC to make informed L
regulatory decisions.
In practice, these are normally enforcement or
,j
};
j'.
.r
' )1( Q licensing 4ecisions.
1,.
8-
,t v
.,y
'li,/ r n
Q 7
'0!uis fact 19nder only. We do not make enforcement or licensing reep;,. d1>.
/
U.
3" v
d
[
6 4'
commendations..
i r
u
).
FG t
'iriaccordance with Cormnission holi$y, 01 - refers,nv. tees ^ to the. Depart-ment of. Justice for proseru,tive determination that ap' pear to indicate
[casestoD0Jsincel'Od[outofa. total criminality. 01 has~ referred
' caseload of D U J-Ia Cases are nCW J1y referre$ only on completion. The Director 0! has been authphed topsgrpe to D0J requests for 01 investigative assistance td' pe/fect further any referred cgses.
This is relatively rare, and 0I participat'15n is' limited to certain types of activities by 0I policy.
3 j
- b 01 investigative reports' are not rot.tiryly made public.
Nonetheless,
~
they receive treme'ndous scrutiny fsn within and without the NRC.
- Thus, 01 is concerned that the. investigative' outcome, whether inculpatory or exculpatory, be credible.aan4 defensible. This,is one main reason why we insistonconductingfuesligationsinamannerconsistent'withthe isormal practices of a erfedEralinvestigativeagencies.
, vY l
{p J
?
j 4
rr ROBLEM AREAS:
.,s
-.l s
.i -
l>
- +
Attempts to coaliticia access to records or docunots: OI occasionally
^
encounters this in one guise.or another such as': -
-f
- 1) pre-screening of records before access is granted
- 2) failure to' allow contracifors to provide records.
/
7
,r f
/
l
}
l s
p
,1 i
[,"
A
/ '"
~
~
- 3) attempting to prever;t copying / removal of copies The primary impact of this is delay and the appearance of obstruction.
4
'The NRC cannot allow its inspection / investigative authority to be eroded. Thus, 01 will always, when negotiation fails, resort to com-pelled process.
Noonebenefitsby{orcingthatcourseofaction.
\\
Attempts to insert company counsel into investigative interviews:
This is a controversial area. 01 will not object when the interviewee is an officer of the corporation / company, but will when it involves a low or mid level employee.
Depending on the circumstances, 0I will:
- 1) Not conduct the interview
- 2) Subpoena the employee
- 3) Conduct the interview, but establish on the record, the circumstances of the multiple representation.
-4) Take whatever course of action needed to remove the company
. counsel from the proceedings.
4 4
CLOSING:
N It is no secret that 01 has serious resource constraints that forces many important issues to languish. Anything that serves to delay or impede an investigation exacerbates this condition. This is seldom to the advantage of the industry which can ill afford either the, untoward delay _or the unfavorable appearance of obstructing or slowing up an 01
~
,,3 investigation.
Thus we urge that your clients be encouraged to cooperate fully with O!
by:'
1
- 1) Not insisting that company counsel be present during most interviews.
f
- 2) Facilitating access to needed information.
&/a c,S nes w diwes% iw 5 N "E
'4 d
I 4
9 j
ygg L
4 g,s t,'
- 3, faun.
i l
1
_m--
.j a,
L CASE STATUS TOTALS - CALENDAR YEAR 1980 THROUGH AUGUST 31. 1967.
1 I
Number of. Cases Opened:
805 (Supplements-15)
(Interim
.9)
Number of Assists:
34 Number of Cases Closed:
729 (Lack of Resources - 36)
Number of Cases Referred to 00J:
69 (Convictions 8)
(Acquittals 0)
(Declined
- 35)
(Evaluation- - 17)
(Grand Juries - 5) l Number of Cases Self-Initiated:
281 1
-l k
Number of Cases 0pened at Request of EDO:
24 Number of Cases Opened at Request of RA:
543 l
Number of Cases Opened at Request of COM:
13 Number of Cases,Not Being Worked Due to Lack of Resources:
57 DW/ SETUPS / Case Status Totals l
l J
IT OFTEN BECOMES IMPOSSIBLE, AMIDST MUTUAL ACCUSATIONS, TO DETERMINE ON WHOM THEBLAMEORTHEPUNISHMENTOFAPERNICIOUSMEASURE,ORSERIESOFPERNJIg MEASURES, OUGHT REALLY TO FALL.
IT IS SHIFTED FROM ONE TO ANOTHER WITH S0 MUCH DEXTERITY, AND UNDER SUCH. PLAUSIBLE APPEARANCES, THAT THE PUBLIC OPINIO'N IS LEFT IN SUSPENSE'ABOUT THE REAL AUTHOR. THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH MAY HAVE LED TO ANY NATIONAL MISCARRIAGE OR MISFORTUNE ARE SOMETIMES S0 COMPLICATED THAT WHERE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF ACTORS WHO MAY HAVE HAD DIFFERENT DEGREES AND KINDS OF AGENCY, THOUGH WE MAY CLEARLY SEE UPON THE WHOLE THAT THERE HAS BEEN MISMANAGEMENT, YET IT MAY BE IMPRACTICABLE TO PRONOUNCE TO WHOSE ACCOUNT THE EVIL WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN INCURRED IS TRULY CHARGEABLE.
g u~
g3 nsr-aor
. Sew {oek,/#'j'&
n v 7 a bI")A A Nb'ME i)-,
S p 4 # *""'7 " "
p u s e, w,,, a 77g tijg/c 60 f
y 4,z s w th#0 c
o
CASE STATUS - JANUARY 1 THROJGH AUGUST 31, 1987 i
l f
53 Number of Cases Opened:
l (Supplements - 0)
(Interin
- 0) 3 Number of Assists:
58,
J Number of Cases Closed:
(Lack of Resources - 27)
I 12 l
Number of Cases Referred to D0J:
I (Convictions - 0) 0)
( Acquittals 1)
(Declined 9) j Evaluation (Grand Juries - 0)
(
14 q
Humber of Cases Self-Initiated:
)
2 Number of Cases Opened at Request of EDO:
39 Number of Cases Opened at Request of RA:
j 1
f 0
Number of Cases Opened at Request of COM:
4 j
77 l
)
(o#1 fo1AM/y l
., C1c,,, Case,t tus 1,1, i
i
NUCLEAR LICENSING REPORTS Executive Offices:
Mall Order Address:
200-A Monroe Street, Suite 105 P.O. Box 10866 Rockville, Maryland 20850 Rockville, Maryland 20850 (301) 424-4132 September 16, 1987 ACT REQUEST f0ZA Wt,/
%d 9-/ 2 -27 Mr. Donnie Grimsley Director, Division of Rules and Records U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
Dear Mr.~Grimsely:
Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, I request copies of-any ords distributed or used by Messrs. Briggs, Cotter, Hayes, Lieberman, and Olmstead at the ALI-ABA course on Atomic Energy Licensing and~ Regulation on September 14-15, 1987. Excluded from this request are any records made available under F01A-87-573.
I request a waiver of all fees for'the reasons set forth in John Potter's letter to you of June 25, 1987 and my letter to Victor Stello of September 16, 1987, both of which are incorporated herein by reference, and request that the records be sent to me at the above office address.
Sin
- ely, 4
seph M. Felton
/
l
[
\\ f L
l L__________._________.______________.__.__..__
. - - - -