Text

NRC-2022-000184 - Resp 2 - Interim
	ML23180A073
Person / Time
Issue date:	06/10/2022
From:	; NRC/OCIO
To:	;
Shared Package
ML23180A070	List: ML23180A071; ML23180A072; ML23180A073;
References
	NRC-2022-000184
	Download: ML23180A073 (1)
	v • d • e

From:

Castelveter, David Sent:

To:

Tue, 13 Apr 202115:43:16 +0000 Harrington, Holly

Subject:

FW: CLOSE HOLD - Draft Phase 3 Guidance Please do not forward.

r:>civtvl A C-ClsteLveter l::i,S. Nuclecir Regulcitor11 C-o1M-1M,tsstoll\\,

Dtrector, off we of Publtc Aff citrs 1.1.555 Roci<?.vtlle PUR,e (MC!tL Sto:p 0-1.GD3)

RDc!R,vme. MD 2og,.s2 301.-:1:i.s-s;w o (o )

2:1:0-303-056.3 (C,) vlcivtvl.ccistelveter@ll\\,rc.gov www.ll\\,rc.gov Stay Connected to the NRC f ~ (I ** in ~

From: Hawkens, Roy <Roy.Hawkens@nrc.gov>

Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 07:31 PM To: Castelveter, David <David.Castelveter@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: CLOSE HOLD - Draft Phase 3 Guidance Hi David, FYI.

Best Wishes, Roy From: Hawkens, Roy Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 2:16 PM To: Roberts, Ashley <Ashley.Roberts@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: CLOSE HOLD - Draft Phase 3 Guidance Good Afternoon Ashley, Thank you for the opportunity to review your drafts. I have a few high-altitude observations.

As David correctly intimates in his email below, it will be a challenging (perhaps impossible) task to define a Phase 3 that will satisfy everyone. I support David's suggestion that (1) we need to assure employees that returning to the office is safe for everyone, including those who take public transportation and those who work in cubicles; (2) our policy should endeavor, in appearance and practice, to be reasonable,

impartial, even-handed, and fair -- from both an individual and institutional standpoint; (3) we should justify why in-person engagements are necessary to enhance or facilitate the fulfillment of our mission, and we should do this using objective, not anecdotal, evidence; and (4) it would be well to support our final position by reference to the policies of other agencies and organizations.

Also, although I recognize the need for well-defined rules, it is my impression that the rules, as drafted, may be viewed as unduly prescriptive and unnecessarily complicated.

The instructions in the memo, in addition to being more reader-friendly, also seemed to be more flexible, taking into account the differing needs of each office and the differing responsibilities of each Staff member.

Hang in there. Thank you for your efforts to formulate a process that will return us to the new normal.

Wishing you safety and health, Roy E. Roy Hawkens Chief Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel 301-415-5147 From: Castelveter, David <David.Castelveter@nrc.gov>

Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2021 5:24 PM To: Lamary, Mary <Mary.Lamary@nrc.gov>; Moore, Scott <Scott.Moore@nrc.gov>; Martin, Jody

<Jody.Martin@nrc.gov>; Dacus, Eugene <Eugene.Dacus@nrc.gov>; Decker, David

<David.Decker@nrc.gov>; Harrington, Holly <Holly.Harrington@nrc.gov>; Johnson, Cherish

<Cherish.Johnson@nrc.gov>; Ficks, Ben <Ben.Ficks@nrc.gov>; Zobler, Marian

<Marian.Zobler@nrc.gov>; Clark, Brooke <Brooke.Clark@nrc.gov>; Ammon, Bernice

<Bernice.Ammon@nrc.gov>; Mamish, Nader <Nader.Mamish@nrc.gov>; Skeen, David

<David.Skeen@nrc.gov>; Vietti-Cook, Annette <Annette.Vietti-Cook@nrc.gov>; Hawkens, Roy

<Roy.Hawkens@nrc.gov>

Cc: Roberts, Ashley <Ashley.Roberts@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: CLOSE HOLD - Draft Phase 3 Guidance Mary, thanks. I will provide editorial type comments to Ashley soon but a few early observations.

I recognize that this is a work in progress, and the newly proposed telework policy is in development and quite likely necessary, but the Phase 3 direction will go over like a lead brick in a deep pool.

Whether warranted or not, expectation by many employees are that they will be able to permanently telework or less than one, maybe two days per week. Many expect four days per week, if not more. Without OCHCO pre-approval, two-three days per week for many will be hard to swallow, despite prior policy and an anticipated return to pre-COVID conditions. Yes, at some point we need to define the new normal.

We should be sure to cite other organization policies, as leadership has commended staff for great and effective work in a telework posture. We need to justify why in-person engagements, not anecdotal but through studies, are more effective than the new anticipated norm. We also will need to assure employees that returning to the office is safe for all. Many corporations plan on a permanent telework environment for many of staff.

We will need to clarify if Office Directors, Deputies and SLAs will be expected to be in the office more than others to supervise the new posture.

We should discontinue use of the term Tour of Duty, as this is not the military. Some people believe we are too military in our approaches to workforce matters. This is optics more than anything and I am a military guy.

We MUST be consistent in the guidance to ALL that the approval of telework agreement do not enable validated allegations of favoritism, cronyism, or a return to old-habit beliefs. All should follow the same guidance in approving telework agreements.

This will be a difficult decision, especially if other government agencies allow a more relaxed posture.

I personally have opposed, historically, more than one-two days telework per pay period but I also have learned much during the Pandemic. We must find the right balance that is fair to all as what we are doing now, for the most part, seems to be working. Naturally, there will be circumstances where an employee is EXPECTED to be in the office for specific projects, events, meetings, etc.

A tough call.

Davtol A. c.asteLveter k<..S. Nuclear R.eguLatoq_i C01M.1M.tsstoll\\,

Dtrector, off we of PubLtc Affatrs 1.1.sssR.ocRvtlle PtRe (MatL sto:p o-1.GD3)

RQc!R,vtLLe, MI? 2og>.s2 301.-:'f:1.5-8'200 (o)

2:4:0-303-05G3 (C.)

-7

~

Gfavtc!.casteLveter@ll\\,rc.gov WWW.11\\,YC.gQ\\/

Stay Connected to the NRC f ~ t'g ** in 91 From: Lamary, Mary <Mary.Lamary@nrc.gov>

Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2021 04:19 PM

To: Moore, Scott <Scott.Moore@nrc.gov>; Martin, Jody <Jody.Martin@nrc.gov>; Dacus, Eugene

<Eugene.Dacus@nrc.gov>; Decker, David <David.Decker@nrc.gov>; Castelveter, David

<David.Castelveter@nrc.gov>; Harrington, Holly <Holly.Harrington@nrc.gov>; Johnson, Cherish

<Cherish.Johnson@nrc.gov>; Ficks, Ben <Ben.Ficks@nrc.gov>; Zobler, Marian

<Marian.Zobler@nrc.gov>; Clark, Brooke <Brooke.Clark@nrc.gov>; Ammon, Bernice

<Bernice.Ammon@nrc.gov>; Mamish, Nader <Nader.Mamish@nrc.gov>; Skeen, David

<David.Skeen@nrc.gov>; Vietti-Cook, Annette <Annette.Vietti-Cook@nrc.gov>; Hawkens, Roy

<Roy. Hawkens@nre.gov>

Cc: Roberts, Ashley <Ashley.Roberts@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: CLOSE HOLD - Draft Phase 3 Guidance Please see the message below; we invite your comments as well.

Thank you, Mary From: Lamary, Mary <Mary.Lamary@nrc.gov>

Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2021 3:07 PM To: OEDO ODs/DODs/RAs <OEDOODsDODsRAs@nrc.gov>

Subject:

CLOSE HOLD - Draft Phase 3 Guidance Good afternoon, Attached please find the proposed guidance for the first six months of Phase 3 in the NRC's COVID-19 Re-occupancy Plan. The guidance has been developed based on a variety of inputs, including the recent Office/Region post assessment briefs, lessons learned, research, and NRC senior leadership.

We are providing these materials and requesting your review and comments. As you conduct your review, please bear in mind the guidance covers the first 6-month period, following our movement to Phase 3. This may not apply to each location simultaneously. As we implement, we anticipate an iterative process that will be informed by our experience as locations enter Phase 3.

Please provide your comments to Ashley Roberts, no later than Friday, April 23. OCHOC will collect and aggregate the comments for OEDO's review and consideration, and final drafting of the guidance.

PLEASE DO NOT SHARE THIS DOCUMENT AS IT IS A DRAFT WORK IN PROGRESS DOCUMENT. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE, IT WILL BE SHARED WITH THE UNION.

Thank you in advance and please do not hesitate t o cont act Ashley or myself if you have any questions.

Regards, Mary

From:

Harrington, Holly Sent:

Thu, 28 Apr 2022 19:42:53 +0000 To:

Using, Jason;Lamary, Mary;Castelveter, David;Gibbs-Nicholson, Jawanza;Abraham, Susan;Dilworth, Eric

Subject:

RE: 2021 OPM FEVS Governmentwide Release Update Thanks, Jason.

For the record, Jason will pull together charts with the three major indices data for NRC, Government-wide and medium agencies so that I can look at the numbers and write some talking points either highlighting good or explaining the not-so-good as to how we stack up.

Holly From: Using, Jason <Jason.Using@nrc.gov>

Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2022 3:25 PM To: Harrington, Holly <Holly.Harrington@nrc.gov>; Lamary, Mary <Mary.Lamary@nrc.gov>; Castelveter, David <David.Castelveter@nrc.gov>; Gibbs-Nicholson, Jawanza <Jawanza.Gibbs-Nicholson@nrc.gov>;

Abraham, Susan <Susan.Abraham@nrc.gov>; Dilworth, Eric <Eric.Dilworth@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: 2021 OPM FEVS Governmentwide Release Update I'll call you Holly.

From: Harrington, Holly <Holly.Harrington@nrc.gov>

Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2022 3:22 PM To: Using, Jason <Jason.Lising@nrc.gov>; Lamary, Mary <Mary.Lamary@nrc.gov>; Castelveter, David

<David.Castelveter@nrc.gov>; Gibbs-Nicholson, Jawanza <Jawanza.Gibbs-Nicholson@nrc.gov>;

Abraham, Susan <Susan.Abraham@nrc.gov>; Dilworth, Eric <Eric.Dilworth@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: 2021 OPM FEVS Governmentwide Release Update Did I miss something? I didn't see anything agency-specific in the attached report. In which report of the many they have listed online do I find the data specific to how the agency ranks against other medium-sized agencies? To be clear, I need to see how we stack up against similar agencies and if that "stack up" is better or worse than in previous years. The part I've highlighted below in red is on the right track, but I don't see how the charts you're pasted below and the paragraph summary you wrote align.

Holly From: Li sing, Jason <Jason.Lising@nrc.gov>

Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2022 2:36 PM To: Lamary, Mary <Mary.Lamary@nrc.gov>; Harrington, Holly <Holly.Harrington@nrc.gov>; Castelveter, David <David.Castelveter@nrc.gov>; Gibbs-Nicholson, Jawanza <Jawanza.Gibbs-Nicholson@nrc.gov>;

Abraham, Susan <Susan.Abraham@nrc.gov>; Dilworth, Eric <Eric.Dilworth@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: 2021 OPM FEVS Governmentwide Release Update

Holly,

The reports OPM generate this year are not the traditional ones they've given in the past. The attached is now available on their website www.opm.gov/fevs.

There is a good news story to communicate - as in the past, NRC remains above the government averages in all major indices reported. NRC also is marks comparatively higher against the average mid-sized agencies except for in the global satisfaction index which is 1 %

below that average this year. NRC also scores well in the new performance confidence index.

(see OPM description below).

Gotta step away for about 30 minutes but will be back if you need anything further.

Regards, Jason "Performance Confidence is defined as The extent to which employees believe their organization has an outstanding competitive future, based on innovative, high quality products and services that are highly regarded by the marketplace.' Employee perceptions of their organization's performance, including customer service and work quality, have been linked with actual performance results."

Index 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Overall Engagement (An average of the responses for the 3 subindices below) 1-----1681----\\

Leaders Lead Supervisors Intrinsic Work Experience

Employee Engagement Index Scores by Agency Size I

~

G'wide Very Small Small Medium Index

(<100)

(100-999)

(1,000-9, 999)

Employee Engagement 71 81 76 77 Leaders Lead 60 73 66 67 Supervisors 80 88 84 85 Intrinsic Work Experience 73 82 78 78 Global Satisfaction Index Score Comparisons Index 2017 2018 2019 Overall Satisfaction (An average of the responses for the 4 items below)

Global Satisfaction Index Scores by Agency Size Index Global Satisfaction OPM Major Indices since 2018 FEVS Indices Engagement: Overall Leaders Lead Supervisors Intrinsic Work Experience Global Satisfaction Performance Confidence G'wide 64 2018 77 68 84 78 74 Very Small

(<100) 77 2019 74 65 82 76 72 Small (100-999) 70 2020 78 69 85 79 75 Medium (1,000-9,999) 71 2021 76 64 87 78 70 91 Large Very Large (10,000-74,999)

(>=75,000) 73 70 62 59 82 79 75 73 2020 2021 Large Very Large (10,000-74,999)

(>=75,000) 67 63

From: Lamary, Mary <Mary.Lamary@nrc.gov>

Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2022 9:39 AM To: Harrington, Holly <Holly.Harrington@nrc.gov>; Using, Jason <Jason.Using@nrc.gov>; Castelveter, David <David.Castelveter@nrc.gov>; Gibbs-Nicholson, Jawanza <Jawanza.Gibbs-Nicholson@nrc.gov>;

Abraham, Susan <Susan.Abraham@nrc.gov>; Dilworth, Eric <Eric.Dilworth@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: 2021 OPM FEVS Governmentwide Release Update Our pre-brief was on gwide data, no comparatives, so really nothing to help address how NRC stood against other agencies, etc.

From: Harrington, Holly <Holly.Harrington@nrc.gov>

Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2022 9:37 AM To: Lamary, Mary <Mary.Lamary@nrc.gov>; Using, Jason <Jason.Using@nrc.gov>; Castelveter, David

<David.Castelveter@nrc.gov>; Gibbs-Nicholson, Jawanza <Jawanza.Gibbs-Nicholson@nrc.gov>;

Abraham, Susan <Susan.Abraham@nrc.gov>; Dilworth, Eric <Eric.Dilworth@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: 2021 OPM FEVS Governmentwide Release Update It doesn't give us any time to develop responses if we get immediate questions. Based on your pre-brief, do you have a sense of what we could/should say, if asked?

Holly From: Lamary, Mary <Mary.Lamary@nrc.gov>

Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2022 9:36 AM To: Using, Jason <Jason.Using@nrc.gov>; Harrington, Holly <Holly.Harrington@nrc.gov>; Castelveter, David <David.Castelveter@nrc.gov>; Gibbs-Nicholson, Jawanza <Jawanza.Gibbs-Nicholson@nrc.gov>;

Abraham, Susan <Susan.Abraham@nrc.gov>; Dilworth, Eric <Eric.Dilworth@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: 2021 OPM FEVS Governmentwide Release Update Thanks, yes we got a prebrief last week, and were told the embargo was to be lifted the 25th, so I have been anxiously awaiting; there are some interesting data on TW From: Using, Jason <Jason.Using@nrc.gov>

Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2022 8:29 AM To: Harrington, Holly <Holly.Harrington@nrc.gov>; Castelveter, David <David.Castelveter@nrc.gov>;

Gibbs-Nicholson, Jawanza <Jawanza.Gibbs-Nicholson@nrc.gov>; Abraham, Susan

<Susan.Abraham@nrc.gov>; Dilworth, Eric <Eric.Dilworth@nrc.gov>; Lamary, Mary

<Mary.Lamary@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: 2021 OPM FEVS Governmentwide Release Update FYI OPA/OCHCO leadership, OPM will release the first set of comparative government-wide 2021 FEVS rankings this afternoon. This information was not included in the previous reports this year so this will be our first look at how NRC ranks against other agencies and should be followed by Partnership for Public Service's Best Place to Rankings in the following weeks.

Regards, A. Jason Lising Sr Organizational Development Specialist Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission jason.lising@nrc.gov 1301-287-05691 TWFN/ 03 B28 From: Rosales, Edgar <Edgar.Rosales@opm.gov>

Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2022 3:34 PM To: Pendleton, Aaron <Aaron.Pendleton@nlrb.gov>; Alice Macklin <amacklin@cftc.gov>; Antoine Dotson <adotson@imls.gov>; Armando Molina <armando.molina@ibwc.gov>; Cain, Brendan

<Brendan.Cain@nrc.gov>; Camille Parks <camille.parks@ncpc.gov>; Cassie Matos <MatosC@fca.gov>;

Cathy Shrestha <CShrestha@mmc.gov>; Christinia Thomas <Christinia Thomas@nigc.gov>; Crystal Kearney-Hennings <CrystalK@dnfsb.gov>; David Kotz <DKotz@usagm.gov>; Biscieglia, Debbie

<debbieb@DNFSB.gov>; Deon Fortune - Canada <DEON.FORTUNE-CANADA@EEOC.GOV>; Earlene Sesker <sesker@access-board.gov>; Elizabeth Lyons <elyons@imls.gov>; Erica A Barker

<erica.barker@prc.gov>; Hall, Debra <dhall@oshrc.gov>; Ingram, Shanyta <singram@fmcs.gov>; Jaimie Smyser <smyserj@abmc.gov>; Janice Minor <jminor@usccr.gov>; Using, Jason <Jason.Lising@nrc.gov>;

Gilliam, Jewel <jewel.gilliam@eeoc.gov>; Karen Hayden <KHayden@cpsc.gov>; Leigh Ann Massey

<lmassey@osc.gov>; Lesley Duncan <lduncan@iaf.gov>; Linda Beard <lbeard@oshrc.gov>; Lisa Lawn

<llawn@ustda.gov>; Michael Jerger <jerger@nmb.gov>; Nina Cox <NINA.COX@EEOC.GOV>; Noel Tarquinii <NJTarquinii@Kennedy-Center.org>; Olympia Hand <Olympia.Hand@usitc.gov>; Reid, Patrice

<Patrice.Reid@nrc.gov>; Patricia Midgett <pmidgett@flra.gov>; Paula Chandler <pchandler@flra.gov>;

Renee Fox <Renee Fox@nigc.gov>; Samantha Jones <Jones@nmb.gov>; Simpson, Donna

<dsimpson@cpsc.gov>; Tiffany Enoch <Tiffany R Enoch@ustr.eop.gov>; Toni Reddish

<ToniR@dnfsb.gov>; Vy Tran <Vy.Tran@FHFA.GOV>

Subject:

[External_Sender] 2021 OPM FEVS Governmentwide Release Update

Hello, For your awareness, the official OPM release of the 2021 OPM Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (OPM FEVS) Governmentwide Management Report and governmentwide results will be Thursday afternoon, April 28. The Governmentwide Management Report and governmentwide results will be available on our OPM FEVS website (www.opm.gov/fevs) under reports.

Let me know if you have any questions and I'll contact you as soon as possible if there are any changes to this schedule.

Thank you,

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

When will it be over?

Holly Harrington, Holly Wed, 9 Feb 2022 15:20:16 +0000 Burnell, Scott RE: Announcement from the Office of the Inspector General From: Burnell, Scott <Scott.Burnell@nrc.gov>

Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2022 10:20 AM To: Harrington, Holly <Holly. Harrington@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Announcement from the Office of the Inspector General Trying to keep track of the EPW hearing, how soon do we need to talk?

From: Harrington, Holly <Holly.Harrington@nrc.gov>

Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2022 10:16 AM To: Burnell, Scott <Scott.Burnell@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: Announcement from the Office of the Inspector General Close hold. This is what we need to talk about Holly From: Castelveter, David <David.Castelveter@nrc.gov>

Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2022 9:42 AM To: Harrington, Holly <Holly. Harrington@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Announcement from the Office of the Inspector General FYI 1Javil 1l Castefveter 1Jirecfor, Office of 'Pu6fic 1'.ffairs Nuclear ~ulatory Commission 1vfaif Stop 0-16112.o

((577 1<pckp;f/e 'Pik,, 1<pck,,;ffe, 1v(1] 20852.

www.nrc-3011 3Df-4(5-B2.oo Office 30f-4(5-82.0f 1Jes~

240--393-9563 Ce/{

Stay Connected to the NRC f W J; ** in p

Good morning, all, I hope you are well.

The attached report conveys the result of our special inquiry (OIG Case No. C20-022) into counterfeit, fraudulent, and suspect items in operating nuclear power plants. We respectfully request a response from your office on this matter by April 11, 2022.

The issuance of this report will coincide with that of an audit report of similar subject matter sent to you under separate cover (OIG-22-A-06, Audit of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Oversight of Counterfeit, Fraudulent, and Suspect Items at Nuclear Power Reactors).

Both reports will be made public through nrc.gov and a press release on Thursday, February 10.

Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions.

Best regards, l(b )(6) I Office of the Inspector General U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland 20852 Office Direct: lrb)(6)

Email:.....

l(b_)(_6) ______

1.'~

(I ~--

CJ C

~

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Castelveter, David Fri, 9 Apr 202113:48:37 +0000 Harrington, Holly Re: CLOSE HOLD - Draft Phase 3 Guidance I read it several time. It is poorly composed On: 09 April 2021 09:38, "Harrington, Holly" <Holly.Harrington@nrc.gov> wrote:

The guidance, as is typical for OCHCO, is quite dense. Among other issues, it switches back and forth between "per week" and "per pay period" verbiage, but these were my takeaways:

The office director has the authority to independently approve three days a week of telework. (I'm a little confused about how this applies to those on compressed schedules, though, as there was also verbiage about number of days per pay period in the office)

The office director AND OCH CO have to approve four telework days a week or full-time telework.

We're all going to have to take "hybrid work environment" training.

It appears that "supervisors" have to be in the office 30 percent of the time? I don't quite understand what "aim for optimal presence" means.

The guidance needlessly reiterates things like: employees shall maximize the use of technology to provide for a virtual work environment.

Most of the rest of this, as I read it, just applies to those without "portable" work. It does do away with some of the extra flexibilities that we've not been needing in our office, such as weekend hours and excused absence for childcare, etc.

It is not clear to me how this would affect Chris.

Since you've weighed in as office director and will be providing editorial comments, I'm going to refrain.

By the way, this was not pre-reviewed by the task force. My guess is this is OCHCO's first crack at a new telework policy and there will be significant discussion and rewriting to come.

Holly From : Castelveter, David <David.Castelveter@nrc.gov>