ML20212J901
| ML20212J901 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/24/1985 |
| From: | Brady R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Shropshire A, Uryc B, Weil C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212J882 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-215 NUDOCS 8608140430 | |
| Download: ML20212J901 (61) | |
Text
.
.)
FEB 241985 NOTE T0: A. Shropshire, RI.
- 8. Uryc, RI!
C. Well, RI!!
M. Emerson, RIV A. Johnson, RV E. Fox, IE R. O'Connell, NMSS DRAFT MANUAL CHAPTER 0517. MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS Enclosed is an advance copy of 0517 for your review. The draft is being reviewed by NRR management and will be officially distributed for comments in the near future.
Rca . a r Program
. Manager for Alle ons NRR Encl: As stated cc: J. Lieberman, ELD R. Fortuna, O!
G. Edles OIA i
i g al g o 060007 GARDE 06-215 PDR
ti
. .,c ,
h I 1./1 / ^
e2
\
, % 9zo? n' c
,l m/S 'f60V re Ali
\ J ;q ',
p*
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NRC MANUAL Volume: 0000 General Administration Part : 0500 Health and Safety NRR Oh// Woocah [oa Of A who,d:*a CHAPTER 0517 MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS SYh'[. '
0517-01 COVERAGE This chapter and its appendices define the policy and procedures for the proper receipt, processing, control, and disposition of allegations received for resolution by NRC offices that concern NRC-regulated activities conducted by NRC licensees and their contractors;and-the policy and procedures for ,
Ji dealing s
W with individuals who provide Informatip4 Mfp"90wJ.m gJ %eftzAy' *a. A 6ft a q h % & - (cf)-
- c. p fM hp QC . : y W fL [.g
.I l 0517-02 OBJECTIVES 021 To establish the policy for the receipt, processing, control, and disposition of allegations and to define procedures by which the receipt, status, and disposition of allegations are tracked through the Allegation Management System (AMS), thereby assuring that:
- a. allegations are properly assigned for processing and assessed for safety significance to pennit ranking and resolution in a timely manner;
- b. timely and accurate information on all allegations is maintained and made available to NRC Offices and Regions on a need-to-know basis;
- c. all allegations not resolved by other formal means are processed in accordance with these procedures and the resolution c,f all allegations is properly documented; 02? To assure that individuals making allegations to the NRC are
., properly treated, their identity protected where appropriate and possible, and notified of the resolution.
023 To assure that issues raised are promitly and adequately ir;vesti-gated.
L ?WA ,} >
o.1y n Yo , my p ]- 4 M =fJ %. .p> q. 9 u4gamqwm pw; -
-. u a p., as puc k -l~ 4w Wg ll & 6M oT-%% +a. a
y NRC-0517-03 MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS 0517-03 RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITIES
- % c bs 'M, 031 Executive Director for Operations (EDO) '~
AQe4j.A g th.,
Set policy and procedures for the receipt, processing, control, d and disposition of allegationysnd in con,lunction with the Directors of the Office of Investigations and the Office of NL+
% pLL, Inspector and Auditor implement policy for protecting the $cs identity of those who provide information to the NRC. For h,wich, those matters within the purview of OI and OIA, only set policy CIA 6s and procedures governing their interfaces with other Offices ej 'st%
and Regions, n, 032 All Office Directors / Regional Administrators E J
- a. Establish internal procedures so that all employees are aware of */
requirements for receipt, processing, control, and disposition of allegations and for the accurate and timely updating of the O.Al%/ ,v status of those allegations for which their office is the Action 4) d,hy,y%
,N Office. * ' / J. , */
b.
Yi , b.}.' . .
Appoint an Office Allegation Coord' ator (0AC) who serves as ,
. administrative point of contact for employees and other Offices l and the Regions. The OAC will:
- 1. Ensure that the appropriate parts of the Allegation Data Fonn (NRC Form 307 Exhibit 1) are completed for all allega-tions received within the Office or Region and that the data are accurate and timely.
- 2. Detennine the appropriate Action Office and, if applicable, coordinate with the OAC of the affected Office or Region on i each allegation received.
i
~
) 3. Forward the Allegation Data Form to the respective Action i j
Office'OAC when the Office or Region is not the Action J
Office.
4 When the receiving Office or Region is the Action Office, i
ensure that the allegation is entered into the AMS within 10
, working days of receipt. (For power reactors, during the period from 30 days prior to the construction completion date untti the Commission meeting on full-power authorization, the Receiving Office or Action Office for any allegation will,
! within 2 working days, telephonically notify the NRR Pro,iect i Manager of its receipt and the identification of the Action 1
Office in addition to completing the Allegation Data Fonn.)
i 1
r 2
l
- s' j
'lAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS NRC 0517-032b5
- 5. Ensure that allegations received from other Offices or Regions are entered into the AMS within 10 workdays of receipt.
- 6. Acquireinputdataonnewallegations(includingthose referred to 011 from the staff within the Office or Region and ensure this infomation is entered in the AMS.
- 7. Ensure that all open allegations in the AMS are reviewed and updated as necessary on a monthly basis.
- 8. Ensure the preparation of reports as described in Appendix 1 Part IX, 4 9. and h.
- 9. Maintain records of individuals granted confidential source status and records of NRC personnel within the Region or Office who have been found to have a need to know information which would reveal the identity of a confidential source.
- 10. Maintain secure files when such files contain information which would reveal the identity of an alleger.
- c. Detemine the safety significance and generic implications of those allegations that fall within the programmatic responsibi-lity of that Office or Region and establish schedules for the
) processing of allegations with the ob.fective of resniving them i as promptly as resources allow and prior to any applicable licen-sing decision date.
- d. Review those allegations for which it is the Action Office for potential board notification and recomend such notification to i
l
- e. Refer all
!"y A g,wL.,. w h be k
-t 1Tnvo1 Mag we ;&N, except those involving / [0 @"k %q and provide technical assistance to 01 for investigatin4 allega% K/NR tions as requested.
f.
gug gg { $ %
Refer all allegations of wrongdoing by NRC employees or NRC con-4 N,
tractnrs to the Office of Inspector and Auditor.
i Manual Chapter 0702).
(
Reference:
NRC \
be 9 Prior to takino a major action such as a licensing decision or 40 N escalated enforcement, review the status and resolution of #
allegations for that project in the AMS especially those related to the action. ,**.
p ,.
- h. For technical concerns with generic implications, consider the I need to inform other affected Offices for further action (e.g.,
AE00 for operational data, RES for concerns affecting research activities,etc.)
3
. j MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS NRC 0517-03?i
- 1. For discrimination complaints received concerning possible violation of Section 210(a) of the Energy Reorganization Act, refer the complainant to DOL and promptly notify DOL to ensure their awareness of the complaint and to determine DOL's investigative intent. Determination of the need for an NRC investigation rests with 01.
.f . Ensure that the Commission's Policy Statement on Confidentiality is implemented and that all NRC personnel take all necessary steps to protect the identity of confidential sources and reason-able steps to protect the identity of othe ,lle rs.
033 Director, Office of Investigations
)4 (p W
- a. Investigate allegat rongdoing by other than NRC employees
! and NRC contractort Conduct interface responsibilities with the j Offices and Regions as described herein.
- b. Implement, in con.iunction with the Executive Director for Operations l i and the Director of the Office of Inspector and Auditor, policy for i Drotecting the identity of those who provide information to the NRC.
C. Nt 034 Director, Office g .,of 6Inspector J h Eac and Auditor ra. b ,. tis 4- jn % L .p 4 ;y' m Ls),s a.
Implement, in con.iunction with the Executive Director of Operations
- f'*.A.,,
"d*k d.a and the Director of the Office of Investigations, policy for pro- % .(;,
tecting the identity of those who provide information to the NRC. A/
- b. Investigate allegations of wrongdoing by NRC employees and NRC contractors. Such allegations do not fall under the purview of k7% 3k'l ,
this manual chapter and are not entered in the AMS. %
rh ,
1 035 Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement
- a. Resolve allegations.affecting matters for which it is the respon-sible office including those that involve vendors of that are generic in nature in coordination with NRR or NMSS.
- b. Monitor the allocation of resources for allegation management by the Regions.
- t. \% k % m.t .p b e ...s. l.n. . ,. c l 036 Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor..dRegulatinn .. r. l . 4 ws).s., o '.w h m p.w'. A./~; te w tis / J
%.,, t , g ,
- a. Propose to the EDO for approval agency-wide policy and-bproce- f 44 o g-i u, dures regarding the processing of allegations. For those 4 4 y. t'/ ^
allegations that fall under the purview of OI. propose policy and procedures governing their interface with other Offices and Regions.
x .. g %"..
,4 g%.j'%
o%
g, 4 Ng "f
,k,,nua.. .w ~tw aa ~.qag a m y . s ,. , >
ap..t 6 oz %<A.u. a u .uca
.a-~ c.p.,s .in.,4 ys or m M. .'-
nx .., ,
c t.s~JasLk.9 o.nu ,
l
\
l
NRC-0517-04 MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS
- b. Review allegations concerning NRR licensees in coordination with the Action Office for potential board notification and make such notification, if required.
- c. Evaluate implications of allegations relative to licensing dect-sions and plant safety cencerning NRR licensees in coordination with IE and the Region (s).
- d. Resolve those allegations pertaining to reactor licensing issues assigned to NRR.
- e. Maintain the AMS and any necessary improvements to modify its capabilities, in coordination with RM.
- f. Conduct progrannatic reviews of all action offices to assure
~ c. Iimplementation of NRC policy on allegations.
h . h 04 uu...,t. g .e , h ,,, ,L M A , m,u ,',ta ,.e....,dJ (b 6 u -t b7 Director, Office of Nuclear Material .' fety and Safeguards W-
' % Lah,
- a. Review allegations concerning NMSS licensees in coordination with
' fk notification the Action if required.
Office for potential board notification b g *g,eand DW h m N
I
- b. Evaluate imp 1tcations of allegations relative to licensing deci- ')
j sions concerning NMSS licensees in coordination with IE and the Region (s). %4h% b
- N, x c. Resolve those allegations for which N ~
s'J d , D.Ci (cur i., .c . , h 'bhe a ) MSS is the action office.
l 038 Office of Resobree' Manage ent (RM)
7
- b. Provide special reports to Offices and Regions as requested. .
- c. Provide assi' stance to the NRR Program Manager for Allegations in making modifications and improvements to the AMS.
0517-04 DEFINITIONS 041 Action Office. The NRC Office or Region that is responsible for reviewing tion, and taking action, as appropriate, to resnive an allega-i 042 Action Office contact. The staff member in the Action Office who is assigned the responsibility for resolving an allegation.
k )
'e 039 flVayva. k w u.4 % a x g.g %,,. ,7
- a. _h a 4 s - . w n , a......; p a w _ ..... , \
s , t% . > . < /v .L e) saib w k S, 0jpe,4+ mt,.d...,, , l L:_ ? A 5 & ?!_ d ~ U + #'
-_L
+, ,.
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS NRC 0517-043 043 Allegation. A declaration, statement, or assertion of impro-4 priety or inadequacy associated with NRC-regulated activities, the 1
/s ' validity of which has not been established. This includes all 4,/
safety concerns identified by sources such as the media, indi-viduals or organizations outside the NRC, and technical audit efforts from Federal, State or local government offices 1s regarding activities at a licensee's site. Excluded from this
/{/y.f' v
u definition are matters being handled by more fomal processes such as 10 CFR 2.206 petitions, hearing boards, appeal boards, 1
- ' etc. Allegations that may result from these fomal processes and are not resolved within these processes shall be subject to
,4 treatment under this manual chapter.
\ N K 044 Allegation Management System (AMS). A computerized infomation a system that contains a summary of significant data pertinent to y each allegation.
3
' 45 A11eger. An individual or organization who makes allegations.
- The individual or organization may be a concerned private citi-zen; a public interest group; a licensee, vendor or contractor 3 employee; or a representative of a local, State, or Federal agency.
(NRC employees should be aware of procedures for pre-senting differing professional opinions, NRC Manual Chapter 4125).
046 Confidentiality. The tem that refers to the protection of data that directly, or otherwise, could identify a confidential source by name. It is not intended to deny staff members access to the identity of a confidential source when such identification is required by staff members to evaluate and resolve allegations.
047 Confidential Source. An alleger who has executed, or has orally represented that he/she will execute, a Confidentiality Agreement.
(Exhibit 2).
048 Inouiry. An. activity involving minimal effort to determine the appropriate response to infomation reported to the NRC. Typi-cally, an inquiry entails the use of the telephone or written correspondence rather than formal interviews or other investi-gative measures; however, fomal interviews will be conducted if reovired.
049 Jnvestigation. For purposes of this Manual Chapter, a special activity that is undertaken by an Office or Region as a result of an allegation and used to evaluate and resolve the allegation.
fA d-4 4, A="'
6
- e y NRC-0517-0410 MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS l
l 1
0410 Office Allegation Coordinator (0AC). A designated staff member !
in each Office or Region who serves as the administrative point of contact for that Office or Region regarding the processing of ]
allegations. ' l l
0411 Receiving Office. The Office or Region that initially receives an allegation. In some cases, the Actinn Office and Receiving Office will be the same if the allegation falls within the functional responsibility of the Receiving Office.
0412 _ Safety Significant. For purposes of this Manual Chaoter, an allegation will be considered safety significant if the allegation would, if true (1) raise a significant question about the ability of a particular structure, system, or component to perfonn its intended safety function or (2) raise a significant question of management competence, integrity, or conduct or about implementa-tion of the quality assurance program, sufficient to raise a legitimate doubt as to the ability to operate the plant safely.
Allegations which are not safety significant will be resolved in the normal coijrse of business 1, dependent of license issuance.
0413 Sanitization. The process of ensuring that any NRC document developed as a result of an allegation does not reveal the identity of the alleger.
0414 Secure Files. Files which are locked when not in use and to which
' "- ^--
yaccess is w. controlled on a need to know bases,. ~>+->w
>7--- 2 4_ _ . y - ---
"-n' i.a which wouldal reve% the identity files of ashall be marked confidential source" and "Contains con- informa trols shall include a sign-out procedure.
0415 Wrongdoing For the purposes of this manual chapter, t 'nchis tters wherp regul tory violatVons appear to hay curred with so intent'o purpo e to viola 1. require nts i vio tions in lying tror or ove sight. h ontrast rm hould ocon-
\
strue broadly q capt0 e cases wh e thef gmay be inten to '
affirma ively vioT te re(guire a ~ well a an int 9t not comply w h requir re demon rated carele s disre ard or reckle s n iff ce f regulato requi ments.
/
mf.n- u.. ~ .
.. k 4 g g , g , ( (g v
u f o-au 161. k..(;, e ..
w .. n ,, ,. L. a f wL h > , .
&M Tr-x e ; . ? ,, ,1 0,, , , , . ,, ,,., , gi J yv.G I e .g v., p , e c , , , . .L % , 4 , . , a g ,,e,, , 4, q J sosa .. *.s L s. '. )\ pn bc[a [
, . , , .v., (, f,,, , ,.
bou lla h.cus,A..u. .w ,,,,j,,,',,(,*4 , u ( ,, 7 ,. , ' .
,,) u s.; M .h i.. ,f . Aa, 6 /a. t , *.
w ,. .u b.t+ ;(3et ,6,9. a ,,,,.a ,,,,.
n ., .m .,J,0. t > , +. . . , ; , , , r,' ma.
M A' c l'h o y s- sE],lt .2 e g,, U.g (\; , , , ej,. g m u s.,,, f. ,
- , p MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS NRC 0517-05 0517-05 BASIC REQUIREMENTS 3
051 Applicability. The provisions of this chapter and appendices are applicable to, and shall be followed by, all NRC employee .
052. Wrongdoing. ations o'f'wtongdoingitqNRC-regula d facil-i-ties, assopposed hose involving technftaPis' 57-fe4*Lthin purview of the 0 e of Inve'stigationsla} egations-of.,
wrongdoing by NRC employe or NRC contractgs\falJ within the purview of OIA nd are not Region will enter allegations (ofered wron into h'e AMSh LThe Office or oing into the AMS using s
infonnation received from the all r or prov.14ed by O! (see Appendigg1 art gate g- _ m M s g f ,gfghigaMhapterW O! will investi-or a sumary of its fi md...m.gandprovideeitherareport n to the requet ing Office or Region.
Allegations involvin rongdoing for which a Region is the Action Office will be nated by the Region OAC with the OI Field Office Direc in that Region. Allegations invo7 ing wrongdoing for w a Headquarters Office is the Action Offic ill be co-ord nated with 01 Headquarters. (See also Appendix 1, artIV.6.)
053 Action Office Assignments. Allegations submitted by any source concernino NRC-regulated activities should be transmitted by the Receiving Office OAC to the OAC in the appropriate Office or Region for processing.
054 Identity of Allegers. As a general rule, the need-to-know principle should be implemented for allegers. Generally, this means avoidance of unnecessary use of the identity of the alleger and other identifying infonnation in discussions and in documents. With the exception of reports prepared by the Office of Investigations, reports should normally not contain infonnation which would reveal the identity of an alleger. "'" _ _ _ . : ' ; ' '- - " ' - - -O-M
._.. , ..~_ ~ . _ __ r= e. Individuals using documents containing 1,nformattore which could reveal the identity of an alleger are responsible for controlling such documents, such as by placing them in closed storage when not under the individual's persnnal con-trol. If asked whether a person is an alleger, NRC staff should respond that it is NRC policy not to identify an alleger unless it is clear that the individual concerned has no objection.
Higher standards of control are to apply when an alleger has been granted confidential source status. Confidential source status is granted when a Confidentiality Agreement (Exhibit 2) is executed by the NRC and the alleger. Guidance with respect to granting confi-dentiality, revoking confidentiality, and providing the identity of a confidential source outside the NRC is contained in Appendix 2.
The identity of a confidential source must be protected by not referring to the name or other identifying information in internal 8 ,
l O b y
- g
..a e='*
For those matters where there is a reasonable basis for belief of wrongdoing, as opposed to those involving technical issues, and for which the staff concludes an investigation is necessary to determine whether enforcement or other regulatory action is required should be referred to the Office of Investigations following the procedures set forth in Appendix 3 of this manual chapter. Allegations of wrongdoing by NRC employees or NRC contractors fall within the purview of OIA and are not entered into the AMS. O! will notify the requester within 30 days whether the matter has been accepted for investigation and, if so, the priority of the investigation and the estimated schedule. If a request is not accepted, OI will provide the requester with the basis for its decision. Any differences between the staff and 0! on the need for or priority of an investigation shall be resolved in accordance with the process described in Appendix 3 of this manual chapter. Tht. Office or Region will enter allegations of wrongdoing into the AMS using information received from the alleger or provided by 01 (see Appendix 1, Part IX.2 of this manual chapter). O! will provide either a report or a summary of its findings of those matters which it investigates to the requesting Office or Region. Allegations involving wrongdoing for which a Reginn is the Actiop0ffice will be coordinated by the Region OAC with the 01 Field Office Director in that Region. Allegations involving wrongdoing for which a Headquarters Office is the Action Office will be coordinated with 01 Headquarters (see also Appendix 1, Part IV.6.)
NRC-0517-055 MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS NRC discussions unless absolutely necessary, and by expurgating the name and other identifying infomation from documents before disseminating these to the staff. Files and documents which con-tain infomation which could reveal the identity of a confidentia]l -
i source areofto the identity be markedsource."
a confidential "Contains information which would reve
% , , , . g . 6.i a 5 '
Files containing such information shall be secure files. Access to ;
such files shall be detemined by a senior Office or Region staff ;
member at the Branch Chief level or above on a need-to-know basis ;
d and the1AGaWgintain a record of those individuals who have J O} been granted access tgthe files. The infomation in these files shall not be reproduced. A sign-out procedure to control access to C the files will be followed. Implementation will be the responsi-I
\} s bility of the OAC. NRC personnel who have access to such files shall take all necessary steps to protect the information they con'
[\lh
"P tain ir.cluding maintaining documents in locked storage when not' under the individv31's personal control. f N_ /
,b
)
f f[ (d j Information which4an reveal the identity of a confidential source may be withheld under the Freedom of Infomation Act from public disclosure pursuant to 10 CFR 6 9.5(a)(7)(iv). Infomation which Jg g could reveal the identity of an alleger who has not been granted confidential source status may also be withheld under appropriate
}r circumstances, but this may not always be the case.
W{ng{>
055 Responding to A11egers. Those who provide allegations to NRC staff 7;4 k A must be treated with. respect, consideration, and tact. Under no h,c circumstances should they be dealt with brusquely or abusively.
- d When allegations are received in writing, a prompt attempt. to make p C- personal contact must ordinarily be made in each case either by a
.y Q *. ' letter, telephone call or earnest and professional. personalThe allegermeeting.
shouldContact be promptlyshouldadvisedbe of the results of followup action and, in instances of unusual delay in providing the results, should be advised of the status periodically so that there is an awareness that the allegation is being pursued.
056 Screening of Allegations. Allegations should be screened for significance to safety and the more serious ones should be addres-sed first. All allegations should be addressed as promptly as resources wfIl allow and as the need is identified. Screening of allegations should be considered diligently to the point whera some may be dismissed early in the process for logical reasons (i.e., lack of specificity after reasonable followup, lack of safety significance, etc.) to conserve staff resources. Followup on allegations, whether they are general or specific, should focus not only on the specific allegation but on the overall area of 9
, o m . N.
NRC-0517-057 [bbh
- MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS cog rn, including the potential for generic implications as well as p h' d W ivit3es. In this regard, note that an allegatfor, directed toward a non-safety item or activity may, through generic considerations, affect a safety item or activity. Further guidance on screening is found in Section 059, below. (See also Appendix 1, Part IV.)
When a number of allegations point to or reinforce indications of a broader problem, prompt action to broaden the scope of the inquiry should then be taken to determine whether or not such is the case. While the safety significance of an allegation is an important factor in determining the extent and promptness of staff resources connitment, it should not affect the staff treatment of the alleger as discussed in section 055, above.
057 Timeliness of Resolving Allegations. The Action Office should resolve all allegations in a manner which is timely under the circumstances (taking into consideration the schedule and/or stage of licensing) and professional in scope and depth. Allegations having relatively high safety significance should be addressed expeditiously. Less significant allegations should be addressed as priorities and resources permit, but usually within 6 months of receipt. If it is appropriate, an investigation should be made.
A plant visit with the person making the allegation may be made if necessary and if the individual is willing to make such a visit to find the exact location of a problem. Access issues should be addressed on a case-by-case basis. Travel costs for the individual only can be offered, if necessary, and are borne by the Office or Region extending the offer. Care should be taken,I to avoid embarrassment or abuse of the individual, e.g., schedule visit on off-shift / weekend, etc.
058 Involvement of Licensees or Other Affected Organization. -
For allegati,ons involving a potentially significant and immediate impact on the public health and safety, the affected organization should be promptly informed to assure proper and timely action.
For other allegations, once infonnation from allegers is received and understood by the Office / Region and if it is deemed appropriate by the Office Director / Regional Administrator, the licensee / vendor should be advised specifically by letter of the area of concern and should be requested to address it, sub.fect to further audit by NRC, in crder teminimim th^ c;;p;r.d!!"-c ' " "
In all instances, however, the identity of an alleger should not be revealed unless it is clear he has no objections and the effective-ness of investigations / inspections should not be compromised, such as by premsturely releasing or appearina to release an NRC inspection report (noceexceptionsdiscussedbelow). The alleger must be infnrmed that this is not handing a matter over to the affected 10
- . A MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS NRC 0517-059 organization, but that NRC will review and evaluate the activities as r ecessary. The affected organization should be informed regarding the resolutica of the allegation if appropriate (See Appendix I Part VIII).
! As noted above, there are two exceptions to the involvement of the licensee or vendor in the resolution process. The first exception is where the informaticn cannot be released in sufficient detail to be of use to the licensee or vendor without compromising the identity l of an alleger. In such cases release should normally not be made i
unless the release is necessary to prevent an imminent threat to the public health and safety. The EDO shall be consulted in all cases where it appears there is a need to release the identity of a con-fidential source and the appropriate Regional Administrator or Office Director shall be consulted in the case of all other allegers.
The second exception is where a licensee / vendor could compromise an investigation or inspection becau'se of knowledge gained from the release of information, especially if wrongdoing is involved. In these cases, the decision to release the information to the licensee shall be made by the Director of the Action Office, the Regional Administrator or the Director of the Office of Investigations. In determining whether to refer the allegation to a Itcensee, considera-i tion should be given to the licensee's past record in dealing with allegations, that is, the likelihood that the licensee will
! effectively identify, investigate, document and resolve the allegation.
Release of inform tion to a licensee / vendor is expected to be the
! excaption for 0I investigations.
! Note that 10 CFR 19.16(a), involving radiological working condi-tions, requires that a worker's request for inspection be in writing and be made available to the licensee no later than at the time of
, inspection, and that confidentiality be provided at the worker's request. In addition to expurgating names and other identifying information, protection of confidentiality could also involve retyping an alleger's handwritten notice. In the event the potential for wrongdoing is involved, the matter should be co- ,
i ordinated with OI prior to the inspection and providing any infor-mation to the licensee.
059 Late-filed Allegations. Ideally, all allegations concerning a particular facility will be resolved before any license is authorized.
If, however, because of the number of allegations and/or their tardy submission all allegations cannot be resolved in a timeframe con-sistent with reasonable and responsible licensing action, it may be i
I I
I t
j 11
'e y \
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS NRC 0517-059 necessary to give priority to those allegations which, because of their potential impact on safety, must be resolved before licensing action can be taken.
In reviewing allegations, the Acticn Office will first determine whether, if true, the allegations art material to the licensing decision in that they would require denial of the license sought, the imposition of additional conditions on such license, or further analysis or investigation. Allegations which, even if true, are not material to any ifcensing decision or which on their face or after initial inquiry are determined to be frivolous or too vague or general in nature to provide sufficient infomation for the staff to investigate will receive no further consideration.
As to allegations which are material to the licensing decision, the Action Office will next determine whether the information presented is new in the sense of raising a matter not previously considered or tending to corroborate previously received but not yet resolved allegations. In making this determination all infor-mation available to the NRC will be considered, including that previously provided by an applicant or licensee and that obtained by the Agency in the course of its review and inspection efforts or from its investigation of prior allegations. In some cases, information already available to the NRC may be sufficient to resolve certain allegations. However, if an allegation is found i
to be both material and new, the staff will investigate the allega-tion further. If the Action Office detemines that, as a result of the number of allegations or the timeframe in which they are received it appears likely that full consideration of all allega-tions cannot be accomplished consistent with reasonable and timely Commission action, the Action Office will conduct a further screening of the allegations to determine their significance to safety and therefore what priority should be assigned relative to the activity to be authorized. The following screening criteria will be cons,idered:
- 1. The likelihood that the allegation is correct, taking '
' into consideration all available information including the appar-ent level of knowledge, expertise, and reliability of the indivi-dual submitting the allegation in terms of the allegation submitted and the possible existence of more credible contrary information.
- 2. The need for prompt consideration of the allegation recogniz-ing the public interest in avoiding undue delay. If the staff determines that an allegation raises a significant safety concern regarding, for example, the design, construction, or operation of a facility or about quality assurance or control or management conduct, which brings into question the safe operation of the facility at a given stage of operation, the allegation must be addressed prior to authorizing that stage. For purposes of this 12
.., s MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS NRC 0517-060 Manual Chapter, an allegation will be considered safety significant if the allegation would, if true. (1) raise a significant question about the ability of a particular structure, system, or component to perform its intended safety function or (2) raise a significant question of management competence, integrity, or conduct or about implementation of the quality assurance program, sufficient to raise a legitimate doubt as to the ability to operate the plant safely. Allegations which are not safety sionificant will be resolved in the normal course of business independent of license issuance.
060 Appendix 1. This appendix provides procedures for receipt, control, processing, and disposition of allegations assigned to NkC Offices or Regions and the procedures and guidelines used to record the receipt, status, and disposition of allegations in the AMS.
- 061 Appendix 2. This appendix provides guidance for granting and i
revoking confidentiality and for disclosing the identity of a con-fidential source outside of the NRC.
OM hP'hx3, % a772,4 A tu 6.c,.__
J p%-, L } ,.:us.~, aaa~s
&~o 45:'ym.m
% hw e a) suu 3r k > kw d~b 1
i 1
13 I
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 1, NRC 0517 PROCEDURES FOR RECEIVING, SCREENING, ASSESSING, AND CONTROLLING ALLEGATIONS AND FOR THE ALLEGATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (AMSl Part I: General i
This part establishes procedural guidance for receiving, screening, assessing, and controlling allegations that come to the attention of the NRC staff.
These functions are to be established within each Region and Office under the control of an individual Office Allegation Coordinator (OAC), or a panel of staff personnel or other appropriate staff. The Regions and Offices will establish procedures consistent with this guidance and where appropriate provide the required training to ensure that their staffs are fully informed regarding the proper management of allegations.
Allegations pertaining to NRC-licensed facilities and activities may come to the attention of the NRC staff by telephone, letter, news media reports, or by direct verbal contact at sites, in offices, at meetings, and even at social functions. All allegations, no matter how originated, are subject to processing in accordance with this manual chapter. It is imperative I
tnat allegations be recognized as such by staff members and processed pro- ;
fessionally, promptly, and with consistent treatment.
It is very important to note that where safety is involved, the NRC does not recognize the term "off-the-record." Allegers who wish to provide off-the-record information must be clearly advised that information impor-tant to safety cannot be treated off the record, but that the information will be accepted officially and acted upon as necessary.
As a general rule, the needgto V with the protection of an alle~gknow ger's principle identity. should However, be used when unless dealing a Confidenti-ality Agreement (Exhibit 2) has been executed making the alleger a confi-dential source, an alleger's identity may have to be revealed. Extending a Confidentiality Agreement to an alleger will provide the maximum protection i regarding an alleger's identity. The guidelines in Appendix 2 should be j followed in extending or revoking a Confidentiality Agreement.
Appendix 2 also provides guidance as to when a confidential source's identity may be revealed outside of the NRC. i NRC employees, particularly resident and regional inspectors, regional supervisors, and 0ACs who are expected to receive the majority of allega-tions, thould become fully familiar with the prescribed policies and proce-dures to ensure that the required actions are performed.
It is the responsibility of all employees who receive allegations to take whatever c,teps are necessary to ensure that an appropriate OAC is promptly l
{
informed. Whenever possible, the person making the allegation should be '
referred to either the OAC, other individuals as designated by the Region or Office, or arrangements should be made for the OAC or designated staff member to recontact the individual.
Al-1 ;
, i, -
l NRC 0517, APPENDIX 1 MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS l
Part II: The Office Allegation Coordinator (OAC)
- 1. The initial responsibility of the OAC is to identify the proper Action Office to which the allegation should be assigned for evaluation and resolution in coordination with other 0ACs (either in the Offices or Regions).
- 2. The OAC serves as a focal point for administrative processing and con-trol of all allegations assigned to the Regions and Offices. The OAC is responsible for:
- a. Entering allegations into the AMS;
- b. Tracking allegations from initial receipt to final resolution;
- c. Assuring establishment and maintenance of files that clearly identify allegations assigned to the Pegion or Office;
- d. Occumenting actions initiated to resolve allegations;
- e. Ensuring that management and cognizant staff are informed of allegations under their purview;
- f. Maintaining the current status of allegations in the AMS; ,
j
- g. Ensuring that the final resolution of allegations is 1 properly documented. l
- 3. The OAC assists technical staff members who are reviewing allegation !
information, primarily in the form of coordinating activities neces- l sary to resolve issues. In addition, the OAC may assist in the !'
formulation of a course of action to resolve issues.
- 4. A panel, which includes the OAC as a member, may be designated with the primary responsibility to ensure that all allegations are promptly !
assigned and properly evaluated, and that the actions taken to resolve the allegation, as well as the resolution, are properly documented and l j
transmitted to the alleger and the affected organization as appro-priate. .
- 5. The OAC will serve as the point of contact with the Department of Labor on matters involving discrimination under Section 210(a) of the Energy Reorganization Act and will coordinate as necessary with OI and the Enforcement Staffs.
Part III: Receipt of an Allegation
- 1. Allegations Received by Telephone or Personal Visit Any NRC employee who receives a telephone call from someone who wishes to make an allegation should have the caller transferred to the OAC or appropriate technical staff member in the Office or Region.
Likewise, if an individual appears in person at an NRC Office, the individual should be referred to the OAC or other technical staff wember. Technical employees, when unable to refer the telephone call or the visitor as described, shall obtain as much information as Al-2
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 1, NRC 0517 possible from the individual (see item 3, below). When unable to locate the OAC or other technical staff member, administrative em-ployees should refer an individual to a technical staff supervisor.
- 2. Allegations Received by Mail Personnel responsible for distribution of mail will forward cor-respondence that appears to contain an allegation to the OAC. Both letters and envelopes will be forwarded and no copies will be made.
An employee who receives direct correspondence, including internal NRC memoranda, that contains allegations shall forward the correspondence to the OAC. All personnel who may come into possession of this type of correspondence also should be made aware that correspondence con-taining information which could reveal the identity of an alleger should l be transmitted in a sealed envelope marked "To Be Opened by Addressee 1 Only;" for expedited transmittals (e.g., electronically), such information should be deleted from correspondence.
- 3. Discussions with Alleger Any employee receiving a telephone call or visit, as discussed in item 1, shall attempt to obtain as much information as possible from the individual. It is crucial to identify:
- a. full name
- b. complete mailing address
- c. telephone number where the individual may be contacted
- d. position or relationship to facility or activity involved
- e. nature of allegation, If the alleger declines to provide the above information, attempt to establish the reason (s) using the following guidan Explain that Public Law 95-601 affords protectio o V2-
- lieger by prohibiting an employer from discriminating agai st an employee for contacting the NRC. If the alleger continues t be reluctant to provide sufficient infomation to evaluate his/he ' cac rn or expressly requests confidentiality, a Confidentiality Agreement (Edhibit 2) may be extended in accordance with the guidelines in Appendix 2a Basic Requirement 054 provides further information regarding protection of confidentiality.
The alleger may be infomed that the NRC employee with whom he/she is in contact does not have the capability to evaluate the information, to determine follow-up action, or to establish NRC .furisdiction; therefore, it may be necessary that someone else contact the alleger for additional information.
The alleger should be informed also, that--unless an ob,iection is registered--he/she will be recontacted as soon as possible regarding the allegation. This may be done by telephone, personal visit, or by e let to lhe alieger, at an address designated, which will also acknowledge the receipt of the allegation. This process will permit Al-3
NRC 0517, APPENDIX 1 MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS the alleger to review the information with the NRC to provide maximum assurance that the infomation has been correctly interpreted and understood.
If the alleger persists in not offering identification after the above explanations, document the allegation in as much detail as possible and advise the alleger that he/she may contact the OAC or designated staff member in 30 days or any other agreed upon period, for infomation on the status of any actions being taken on the information supplied.
For allegations of discrimination that fall under Section 210(a) of the Energy Reorganization Act, inform the allegers that NRC will look into the complaint and any safety concerns identified by the alleger, and that appropriate enforcement actions will be taken against the employer if the allegation is substantiated. To assure personal employee rights are protected, advise the alleger that the complaint must be filed with the Department of Labor within 30 days of the occurrence of the discrimination event. The same coritrols that apply to allegations received by mail and discussed above shall apply to allegations received by telephone.
Part IV: Action by the Receiving Employee and the Office Allegation Coordinator (OAC)
- 1. When an allegation concerning an NRC-regulated activity is received, the employee receiving the allegation will provide the information obtained to the Receiving Office OAC who will complete an NRC Form 307, Alle-gation Data Fom. The Ac. tion Office is then identified and the completed fonn and all documentation regarding the allegation will be forwarded by the Receiving Office OAC to the Action Office OAC.
- 2. The Action Office OAC will enter the pertinent information in the AMS in -
accordance with these procedures. All allegations must be entered into the AMS. In this way an " audit trail" will be established so that NRC actions can be pr'operly monitored and completed. The OAC or other designated staff member will ensure that the alleger is properly contacted to acknow: edge receipt of the allegation and to confirm the specifics of the allegation. Depending on the nature of an allegation, the OAC will provide copies of the sanitized allegation documentation and the letter sent to the alleger (with the alleger's identity and identifying informa-tion concealed) to the cognizant technical staff supervisor for evaluation <
and initiation of action. To the extent NRC staff need to know the iden- i tity of an alleger, a need-to-know detemination must be made. If the alleger is a confidential source, the determination must be documented.
See Appendix 2. When responsibility for the handling of an allegation is transferred from one organizational unit to another, the alleger should be notified of the new point of contact (name and telephone number) by the individual who is relieved as contact in order to assure continuity. A single point of contact should be the rule.
Al-4
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 1, NRC 0517 The OAC will follow up on the allegation with the cognizant technical staff supervisor at periodic intervals until the matter has been satisfactorily resolved. When the case is closed, an update should be made to that effect in the AMS. l
- 3. The OAC will coordinate allegation infomatinn with the technical staff and may assist in detemining whether the infomation is suffi-cient to identify the issues. If the infomation is determined to be insufficient, the OAC or designated staff member will assist in further contact with the alleger. A single point of contact with an alleger provides a means of better controlling communications, aids in developing rapport, establishes continuity in the flow of information between the Regions and other NRC Offices, and aids in protection of l the alleger's identity. '
- 4. The OAC assists the cognizant technical staff in identifying and separating the issues involved in an allegation into one of the follow-ing categories:
- a. Allegations that involve hnical matters, such as:
inadequacies in procedures, qualifications, or training; inade-quate implementation of procedures; or inadequate corrective -
actions; or overexposure (s) to radiation. W L-Q v.,'uxGu.Ma L w lL b m W N Lb W A ^ h-
- b. Allegations = : vvniv* Erongde % TDch as: reTOMi~faliff -
cation; willful or deliberate violations; material false state- 'MU f OMw ments; discrimination under Section 210(a) of the Energy Reorganization Act; or other improper conduct. "?%W Q)%
W%
- c. Allegations that involve matters outside the jurisdiction of NRC. $
- )b
- 5. Technical issues in category 4a involving failure to meet requirements have the potential for being willful or deliberate violations. However, 8 in the absence of specific allegations of willfulness or deliberateness, l
such issues will ,normally be tracked separately as technical issues and ;
resolved using program resources. If an allegation covers issues that affect other Regions or Offices, follow-up activities will be coordin- 1 ated with the affected Offices and a Lead Office will be designated. The '
OAC will contact the affected Offices which should result in a mutual agreement as to which Office or Region should have the lead. If agree-ment cannot be reached at the OAC level, then the Regional Adminis-trators or Office Directors will resolve which Office or Region should
.)"W- g' take the lead.
p a 6. should be_re.ferred 'to_01. Field or . Head-Allegations ouar_ters Officein cate ory 4b(those fdvolving NRC\ employees or NRC cept _for
. g .
contractorsD-( ee' 10, below). 01's~ review of such allegations should tu v 6 k ,, be documen.ed. -If 01 is requested to investigate? the " Request for 4 N %g,., cated on ',the form. Investigation"
- form (Exhibit 3)d must be used,*and d,istributed as indi i
I ~
m'"
- Al-5 J
. I 2_
Insert B, page Al-5 Allegations in category 4b, except for those involving NRC employees or NRC contractors (see 10, below), should be referred to 01 Field or Headquarters Offices in accordance with the guidelines in Appendix 3 of this manual chapter. Requests for an investigation by 01 must be made using the
" Request for Investigation" form (Exhibit 3 to this manual chapter) and distributed as indicated on the form. Upon receipt of the completed form, 01 will evaluate the request and conduct consultations as necessary with the requesting office. If a request is not accepted, 01 will provide the requester with the basis for its decision. Any differences between the staff and 0I on the need for or priority of an investigation shall be resolved in accordance with the process described in Appendix 3 of this manual chapter.
l
~
9 I
- , i l
NRC 0517, APPENDIX 1 MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS
- 7. When applicable and after coordination, the Action Office should notify other agencies such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, DOE, etc. in dealing with allegations in category 4c. Notification to other Federal law enforcement agencies and State and local jurisdictions ~7 ~9 ,
appropriate 01 Office or the Office of Inspector and Auditor (for matters ? g/
1 i
falling within its purview only). N t.
- 8. Allegations involving discrimination under Section 210 should be entered in the AMS. The OAC assures that a complainant is advised that any dis-
\l )
i crimination complaint under Section 210 of the Energy Reorganization Act must be filed with the Department of Labor within 30 days of the dis- l crimination. Complaints should be filed with the Office of the Adninis- l trator, Wage and Hour Division, Employment Standards Adninistration, U. S. i Department of Labor, Room 53502, 200 Constitution Avenue, N. W., 1 i Washington, D. C. 20210. The OAC also maintains awareness of DOL's in-vestigative intent, and ensures NRC consideration of the need for its own investigation by timely referral to 01. The OAC will. take reasonable l steps to facilitate D0L's investigation by assisting DOL in obtaining ,
access to licensed facilities and any necessary security clearances. l Regional Counsel or OELD/R0ED should be contacted on access problems. j
! 9. If an allegation is determined to have generic implications, other Offices and/or Regions with responsibilities that may be affected will l 4
be appropriately notified by the Action Office (e.g., AE00 for opera-l tional data, RES for concerns affecting research activities, etc.) l
- 10. Allegations regarding suspected improper conduct by NRC employees and NRC contractors will be brought to the attention of appropriate N management for possible referral to the Office of Inspector and :
Auditor (01A). Allegations of this nature are not entered into the AMS. !
l
(
Reference:
NRC Manual Chapter 0702). j i
}
Fart V: Documenting Allegations -
l i 1. When an allegation is received and the action office identified, a
) working file should be established to contain all related documentation j concerning the alicgation, including all correspondence, memorandum to files, interviews, and sumaries of telephone conversations, discus-sions, and meetings. This file shall be maintained in the official files of thI Action Office in an officially designated location and shall be a fecure file. The allegation source document must be main-tained in this file and clearly marked with the allegation number. To l ensure proper evaluation, full and complete information should be docu-4 4
mented about each allegation. In addition to obtaining basic informa-tion, attempts should be made to expand and clarify the information so that the issue is well defined. All allegations, regardless of source or how received, must be documented. Access to the official files is to be controlled. Files are to be locked when not in use. In addition, I
records or files containing the name of a confidential source or other t
! Al-6 l
i- __ . . _ -
I
- i. .
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 1, NRC 0517 identifying information should be stamped "Contains information which would reveal the identity of a confidential source" and access should be controlled with a sign-out procedure. The information in these file gf
[r shall not be reproduced without authorization of the OAC. g . "$
- 2. There will be occasions when the allegations obviously have no sub-stance and appear to represent a distortion of facts. However, even in these cases, documentation is necessary that identifies the con-6 g/fit i
tact, the general content of any communications, and the basis for a gi/ N conclusion that the matter need not be pursued. Instances such as I these will be coordinated with the appropriate technical staff by fg the OAC to ensure proper disposition. O eg .
- 3. The importance of obtaining and documenting all pertinent information about an allegation cannot be overemphasized. Evaluation and screen- i s ing of the allegation, as well as the proposed course of action that will be adopted to resolve the issue, will be based primarily on this information. In some cases, a personal interview with the alleger may be warranted. In these cases, the OAC will consult with NRC management to detemine the best way to obtain the details re- 4 quired. Depending on the nature of the allegation and the time sensi- !
tivity, assistance from the Office of Investigations (OI) or other l resources may be requested. !
i
- 4. As soon as possible after receiving an allegation or becoming aware of information that indicates inadequate or improper activities, the person receiving the allegation shall notify the OAC. Nomally, no action will be taken to verify the validity of the allegations, nor shall such matters be discussed with licensees, if necessary, until after the OAC or designated staff member has briefed appropriate NRC management.
- 5. The OAC or other designated staff member is responsible for reviewing all 'information received in conjunction with an allegation and for-ensuring that manpgement and cognizant technical staff members are fully informed.
- 6. Allegations normally should not be addressed in Preliminary Notifica-tions (PNs) or Daily Reports (DRs); however, if it is determined that PN or DR entries are appropriate, the approval of an Office Director or a Regional Administrator should be obtained.
- 7. If allegation documents which would reveal the identity of an alleger i must be sent to other NRC personnel, the documents should be securely wrapped and marked "To be Opened by Addressee Only." The sender must ;
ensure that the recipient has a need to know. In the case of a l
confidential source, the sender must verify the recipient is included on the list of individuals with a need to know maintained by the OAC. All Al-7
NRC 0517, APPENDIX 1 MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS NRC personnel are to take reasonable steps to ensure that the identity of an alleger is not revealed and all necessary steps to ensure that the identity of a confidential source is not revealed. (See Basic Require-ment 054.)
Part VI: Evaluation by Cognizant Technical Staff
- 1. When an allegation package is received, the technical staff within the Office or Region will review the documentation to detemine if there is a safety concern that requires immediate action. The technical staff is responsible for development, initiation, and follow-through on corrective actions. Allegations or documents containing a substantial number of allegations once entered in the AMS can be screened using the following criteria:
- a. Is there an immediate safety concern which must be quickly addressed?
- b. Is the allegation a specific safety or quality issue or a gener- !
alized concern?
l
- c. Has the staff previously addressed this issue?
- d. Does the allegation package contain sufficient infomation for a thorough evaluation? If it does not, identify the additional information that is needed.
- e. Are all aspects of the allegation adequately defined and described to permit or allow a meaningful and extensive evaluation. .This is a screening process that may result in a decision not to consider the allegation further. If the latter is the decided course of action, ,
the alleger should be so informed in a courteous and diplomatic manner i along with the rationale for not considering it further. The potential l for adverse . publicity must be recognized when taking this action.
- f. Is the identity of the alleger necessary for a thorough evaluation?
- g. What specific issues are involved in the allegation? Can the issues be adequately addressed by a technical inspection?
- h. Can the allegation be examined and resolved by investigation or during a scheduled inspection? If this is not possible, determine the best way to address the issues,
- i. Can licensee / vendor resources reasonably be used in resolving the allegation to conserve staff resources? Consider potential problems associated with involving the licensee in the resolution process. j
- j. Does the allegation have the potential to require escalated enforcement action?
l Al-8 l L__ _ _ .-. . _
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 1, NRC 0517
- k. What is the time sensitivity of the allegation, and what imed-iate actions are necessary?
- 1. Will investigative assistance be needed?
- m. Identify peripheral issues that could develop.
- n. Are any licensing actions or board proceedings pending which could be influenced or affected by the allegation. When an allegation involves a case pending before a licensing or appeal board or the Commission, infomation concerning it should be provided to NRR or NMSS as soon as possible to assist in the determination of whether or not a board notification should be made. This decision must be made promptly by NRR or NMSS in accordance with office procedures.
- o. Should other NRC Offices be notified?
- p. As soon as possible after the receipt of an allegation and the relevant information has been reviewed and evaluated, the Action t
Office will make a preliminary determination of the safety signi-ficance of the item and the need for imediate regulatory action. I
- q. Establish a schedule for the resolution of each allegation which is consistent with the licensing schedule, if applicable,
- r. Notify the OAC or designated staff member when the status changes or action (s) is complete.
- 2. It is the responsibility of the technical staff within the Office or Region to resolve each allegation that falls under its jurisdic. tion, and subsequently, to notify the OAC or designated staff member of the action taken so that the status of each allegation can be tracked to closeout. Final resolution of an allegation shall be documented and placed in the working file along with all supporting documentation. The final report should state the facts clearly, in a style that does not belittle or disparage the alleger.
- 3. For those allegations resulting in the need for corrective action, the affected organization (s) shall be properly informed recognizing the need to protect the identity of the alleger.
4.
A reasonable disposition effort mustofbetheir or resolution made to notify concern s). (all Theallegers of the official file NRC's must contain documentation of this effort.
Part VII: Allegation Resolution Documentation
- 1. Allegation resolution documentation officially closes the file for that case and shall be placed in the working file which now beco-es a closed case file.
Al-9
NRC 0517, APPENDIX 1 MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS
- 2. A final report or document should be prepared that sets forth the facts about the allegation and its resolution clearly and conclusively. The final report can be a memorandum for a relatively minor matter, a report of investigation, an inspection report, or a technical paper for a com-plex or major generic matter. It can be an SER supplement for multiple allegations proximate to OL issuance. It should not contain the name of, or material that could be used to identify, the alleger (See Basic Requirenent 054).
- 3. The final report shoulo include a summary of the concern, a descrip-tion of the evaluation perfonned and the conclusions drawn. It should be written in a style that does not belittle or disparage the alleger.
- 4. Appropriate entries should be made in the AMS to close out the allega-tion.
- 5. When the final report has been approved (i.e., the case is closed), all allegation documentation is subject to release under the FOIA with appropriate precautions to protect confidentiality. Until that time, )
all allegation documentation is exempt from release under the FOIA in accordance with 10 CFR 9.5 Exemption (7) due to actual, or the potential for, law enforcement action. An FOIA request received during the open stage, however, will " freeze" those documents in the file at that time for FOIA processing. In the absence of an F0IA request, management may freely review case files when an allegation is closed and retain only those documents necessary to account for official action.
- 6. Reports issued by the Office of Investigations will be complete reports ~
suitable for referral to the Department of Justice (D0J) or NRC Offices or Regions for enforcement action. As such, they will often contain infor-mation which would eveal the identify of confidential sources a'nd al'egers. Transmi l letters referring OI reports to the Department of Justice should cle ly indicate that the reports reveal the identity of f confidential sources and allegers and request that DOJ closely control the reports. Mempranda to the ED0 and Regional Administrators should also clearly indicate if a report contains information which would reveal the identity of a confidential source or alleger. The EDO and Regional Administrators will make determinations regarding further distributions of such reports on a need-to-know basis. Detenninations regarding a confidential source shall be documented.
In addition, Of reports which would reveal the identity of a confidential source should be stamped "Contains information which would reveal the identity of a confidential source."
Part VIII: Dissemination of Final Report
- 1. A copy of the final report shall be sent to the alleger and, if appro-priate, to the affected outside organizathn(s). A transmittal letter may be needed to summarize the ...dtter.
Al-10 1
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 1, NRC 0517
- 2. As in Part VII.1 above, copies of the final report shall be placed in the NRC records system, and should be treated so as not to reveal the identity of the alleger.
- 3. The foregoing does not apply to 01 investigative reports. However, if an 01 report is the primary document relied upon in the resolution of an allegation, the alleger should be provided with a summary of the report.
PART IX: Allegation Management System
- 1. General
- a. For purposes of the Allegation Management System (AMS) the defini-tion provided for an allegation is very general and broad. The significance or nonsignificance of an allegation will be judged during the Action Office review and follow-up activities. There is to be no screening of allegations for possible deletion prior to entering them into the system (except of course for duplication of entries). The AMS should provide a vehicle for collecting, storing and retrieving all key information regarding all allega-tions. The Action Office determines the necessary action to be taken based upon the specifics of the case. Some allegations may be received and closed out the same day.
- b. The AMS provides basic descriptive and status information and serves as a referral system. It identifies the office and staff to contact for more specifics on an allegation. Aoditionally, it keeps the staff informed as to how the allegation was resolved and provides reference to the close out documentation.
- c. When an allegation is received, it is not necessary to identify by separate entry into the AMS every component or subset of the allegation. For example, if an allegation is received that con-sists of 15 separate concerns of wrongdoing and technical defi-ciencies, th,e allegation may be entered as one allegation. However, the description of the allegation should include the number of separate concerns and their subject area. In some cases there may be a distinct grouping of concerns, for example, in two areas such l as training and quality assurance. In such a case it may be l appropriate to enter two allegations. A main objective is to ensure that the receipt of an allegation is entered and tracked in I the system. An allegation is not completed and closed until an Action Office supervisor determines that appropriate action has been taken.
- d. Sensitive information such as the names of persons making allega-tions shall not be entered in the system. All information entered on the form shall be unclassified and shall not contain any safe-guards information or any proprietary or conmercial (2.790) infor-mation.
4 Al-11 i
NRC 0517, APPENDIX 1 MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS
- e. Some allegations may require action by two or more offices. For purposes of entering the allegation into the AMS either separate ,
entries should be made for each Action Office for their assigned '
action or one entry may be made with the involved 0ACs agreeing l on the lead Action Office for followup of the allegation. If I another Office is involved in responding to an allegation, it _.
should be so indicated in the " remarks" section. ~~ h. . g,-
2.
Interfaces with the yOffice of Investigations-d Ahi.,Ag A:
- a. The Office of In s-> - .
} h4 c of wrongdoin tTgations has jurisdication ovEr~~all 'alligafi~oir) t those involving NRC employees or NRC W .
@An M contractors and will forward all allegations of a technical nature
% /xla/
m.,
to the apprupriate Office or Region. The Office or Region will be k l responsible for entering all allegations--even those under the purview of 01--into the AMS usir9 a Region or Office AMS number.
- b. For those allegations of wrongdoing, except those involving NRC employees or NRC contractors, assigned to the Region or Office:
(1) The Region or Office OAC will coordinate with the 01 Field Director or 01 Headquarters representative to determine if sensitive information is included which should not be placed into the AMS. All sensitive information is to be deleted and the word " sensitive" put in its place. However an attempt should be made to provide descriptive material to assist the AMS user to the maximum extent possible.
(2) The Region or Office OAC will assign a Region or Office AHS number. The 01 assigned number should be entered in the AMS as a cross-reference.
(3) The name and phone number of the OI Field Director or 01 Headquarters representative will be placed in the appropriate section of the form as the Action Office contact.
(4) The 01 Field Director will keep the Region or Office OAC apprised of the status of the allegation investigation and provide timely information necessary to determine the safety significance of the allegation to appropriate Regional or Office management and for use in updating the AMS.
(5) The allegation will be considered closed when the investiga-tion report has been issued and as long as no technical issues remain. If technical issues or an investigation remain, the allegation remains open, reference is made to the technical l report or 01 investigation report if either is complete, and a '
schedule for resolution of the allegation is placed in the AMS. j 1
i Al-12 i _
J. ,
I MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 1, NRC 0517
- c. For allegations of wrongdoing received by 01, the OI Headquarters or Field Director will coordinate with the respective Office or Region OAC to complete the items 2.b(1) through (5), above.
- d. For allegations of a technical nature received by 01, the O! Head-quarters or Field Director will contact the respective Office or Region and fnllow the procedures as indicated in item 3 below for the Receiving Office.
'e re sha 1 docu- [
- 3. Receiving Office Upon receipt of an allegation involving an NRC-regulated activity, the person receiving the allegation will provide the infomation rela-tive to the allegation (see Exhibit 1) to the OAC who will initiate steps required to identify the Action Office and to enter the alle-gation into the AMS.
i The Receiving Office OAC should, in addition to determining the appro-priate Action Office, coordinate with the Action Office, and receive concurrence from the Action Office before transfer of responsibility.
- 4. Action Office. The Action Office shall :
- a. Complete that portion of the Allegation Data Fom marked " Action Office," assign an allegation number to it, and enter the allegation /
into the AMS within 10 working days of the date of receipt of the allegationA
- b. Review and, where necessary, update the status of all open allega-tions in the AMS on a monthly basis.
- c. As soon as possible after the receipt of an allegation and relevant infomation has been reviewed and evaluated, make a preliminary detemination of safety significance and the need for any regu-latory action.
- d. Schedule the resolution of each allegation to be consistent with the licensing schedule and the safety significance of the alle-gation.
- e. Make a detemination regarding the need for a board notification to NRR or NMSS. If the initial board notification is preliminary in nature, a follow-up notification is sent to boards when evaluation is completed, or whenever significant relevant infoma-tion is identified during the course of evaluating the allegation.
This determination should be made as soon as possible in accordance with the Action Office board notification procedures.
Al-13
o .'
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 1, NRC 0517
- f. Develop and maintain a working file for each allegation, which will contain all related documentation. For those allegations comprised of multiple concerns, separate working files may be needed for each Concern.
- g. Thirty days prior to the construction completion date (appli-cant's estimate) for each pending OL, each Action Office will forward to the appr'priate licensing organization in NRR, an eval-uation of the safety significance of all allegations not scheduled to be resolved before the construction completion date, with a recommendation as to whether any or all of them constitute grounds for delaying issuance of (or otherwise restricting) an operating license. (See 059.)
- h. Thirty days prior to a Commission decision on authorizing full-power operation, a report similar to item g., above, will be prepared.
- i. Protect the identity of all allegers and, when confidentiality is requested, assure that the added controls in this Manual Chapter are implemented.
- a. In coordination with ORM, is responsible for the maintenance and upgrading of the AMS. ,
- b. Authorizes and requests that special reports be prepared from the AMS database for use by individuals other than those involved in allegation resolution.
- c. Is responsible for conducting programmatic reviews of the implementation of the policies and procedures in this Manual Ch3pter.
1 Al-14
- . 1 MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 2, NRC 0517 PROCEDURES FOR GPANTING AND REV0 KING CONFIDENTIALITY AND DETERMINING WHEN THE IDENTITY OF A CONFIDENTIAL SOURCE MAY BE RELEASED OUTSIDE OF THE NRC.
Part I: General On November 25, 1985, the Comission issued its Statement of Policy on Confidentiality confidentiality. (Policy Statment) 50 Fed. to p(rovide Reg. 48506 a clear, November 25,1985). agency-wide There, the policy on Comission recognized that its inspection and investigatory programs rely in part on individuals voluntarily coming forward with information. Some individuals will come forward only if they believe their identities will be protected from public disclosure, i.e., only if they are given confidenti-ality. Safeguarding the identities of confidential sources is, therefore, a significant factor in assuring the voluntary flow of such information. The Policy Statement applies to all Comission offices and directs those offices to make their best efforts to protect the identity of a confidential source.
The following procedures are to be followed in implementing the Commission's Policy Statement.
Part II: Granting Confidentiality
- 1. Confidentiality is not to be granted as a routine matter. Rather, confidentiality should be granted only when necessary to acquire information related to th9 Comission's responsibilities. It should ordinarily not be granted when the individual is willing to provide the information without being given confidentiality. Consequently, if an alleger is providing information willingly, confidentiality should not be granted and the individual should not be advised of its availability.
- 2. If an explicit request for confidentiality is made, the request should !
not be automatically granted. Rather, information should be sought from the alleger to make a determination as to whether the grant of confi-dentiality is warranted in the particular circumstances at hand. The following information should be solicited from the alleger to assist in making this detennination. '
- a. Has the alleger provided the information to anyone else, i.e., is the information already widely known with the alleger as the source?
- b. Is the NRC already knowledgeable of the information, thereby obviating the need for a particular confidential source i.e., why
' subject the NRC to the terms of a Confidentiality Agreement unless necessary?
- c. Does the alleger have a past record which would weigh either in favor of or against granting confidentiality in this instance i.e.,
has an alleger abused grants of confidentiality in the past?
t A2-1
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 2, NRC 0517
- d. Is the information which the alleger offers to provide within the jurisdiction of the NRC, i.e. should he be referred to another agency?
- e. Why does the alleger desire confidential source status, i.e., what would be the consequences to him if his identity were revealed?
Depending on the infonnation gathered by the authorized NRC employee, a determination should be made as to whether granting confidential source status would be in the best interest of the agency.
- 3. When an alleger does not expressly request confidential source status, an authorized NRC employee may raise the issue of con-fidentiality in certain circumstances. Such circumstances can vary widely. Authorized NRC employees have discretion to raise the issue of confidentiality when, in their judgment, it is appropriate.
Considerations in making this judgment would include:
- a. When it becomes apparent that an individual is not providing information because of a fear that his/her identity will be disclosed,
- b. When the surrounding circumstances suggest the desire on the part of the alleger that his/her identity remain confidential, e.g., is the interview being conducted in a secretive manner or is the alleger refusing to identify himself?-
Once the issue of confidentiality is raised with the alleger and he/she a indicates a desire for confidential scurce status, the same considera-tions that apply to an explicit request for confidentiality would apply here. See Paragraph 2 above.
- 4. When granting confidentialith the following points should be discussed with the alleger. .
- a. The sensitivity of the information being provided by the source should be explored with a view to determining whether the infonnation itself could reveal the source's identity.
- b. The source should be informed that, due to the tight cen:rols imposed on the release of his identity within the NRC, he should not expect others within the NRC to be aware of his confidential source status and it would be his responsibility to bring it to the attention of NRC personnel if he desires similar treatment for the information provided them.
- c. If inquiries are made of the NRC regarding his status as a confi-dential source, the agency will neither confirm nor deny his status.
- d. The basic points of the standard Confidentiality Agreement should be reviewed if it is not possible to provide the individual with a copy to read.
l A2-2 i
I. .
l l
PMNAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 2, NRC 0517 l
- 5. An NRC employee wishing to grant confidentiality must either be expressly delegated to do so or must seek authorization from the appropriate Office or Regional official. Authorization can be prearranged as circumstances warrant. This might include a planned meeting with an alleger. Office Directors and Regional Administrators are authorized to designate which NRC employees may grant confidential source status and/or further delegate.
the authority to do so. Generally, this should not be delegated below the level of 0AC, a Section Chief, or a Senior Resident Inspector.
Authority to grant confidential source status is to be documented in writing either through a standing delegation or an ad hoc authorization.
In special circumstances, an oral authorization is permissible if l
confimed in writing. The standard Confidentiality Agreement (Exhibit 2) j is to be executed. The circumstances surrounding a grant of confi- ;
dentiality must be documented in a memorandum to the OAC. '
- 6. In those circumstances where it is impossible to s% ign a Confidenti-ality Agreement at the time the infomation is obtained, e.g., when the information is obtained over the telephone, or in a location not conducive to passing papers, confidentiality may be given orally pending i signing of the Confidentiality Agreement within a reasonable amount of time, generally two weeks. If confidentiality is granted orally, this must be noted in the memorandum to the OAC.
- 7. Office Directors and Regional Administrators must be informed of each grant of confidentiality. These senior officials must also approve any variance to the standard Confidentiality Agreement and each denial of confidentiality.
- 8. The OAC of each Office and Region will maintain an accurate status regarding grants of cor.fidentiality made by the particular Office or Region to include copies of signed Confidentiality Agreements. 'This j i file will be a Privacy Act System of Records and all normal security U procedures for the protection of sensitive unclassified information will A be applicable. A confidential source will be revealed within the NRC on a need-to-know basis only. (See Basic Requirement 054.) With regard n to protecting a source, an account should be taken of disclosing infor-Q .
\ mation which may reveal the source. Normally, the removal of the source 3 1
' name and identifiers will be adequate, but circumstances might exist Y <
where particular infomation itself may reveal the source, e.
A determination regarding need-to-know is to be made by W D
-Directer er Divi 3ien Di. ecte. er-Deputy-tmder d=c hi.hm.ii.y cenfi- I entiality ms gente4r the-Office 4irectorar niv<s9- W+nr nr_ s
)
Deputy-of-the-sc44en-office-deahng-with-the-aHcw;Uns. iThe indi- '
vidual making the need-to-know detemination shall provide Ithe OAC with a record of persons to whom access has been granted. The OAC i iso q responsible for maintaining secure files when files contain' rmation l N
which would reveal the identity of a confidential source anh marki'g f,7 such files "Contains information which would reveal the ide' io a '
confidential source." Each employee who has access to info would reveal a confio. .tia'. .;ou.ce, i.e. , has been found to haveion a whi'ch .1 '
i 0' l / . .
A2-3 l , 'y j
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 2, NRC 0517 need-to-know, shall take all necessary steps to prevent disclosure of the infomation to unauthorized personnel. For example, when written infoma-tion which would reveal a source is not being used, or is not within personal control of the NRC employee, it shall be kept in locked storage. l
- 9. If at any time for any reason confidentiality is breached or jeopardized, the appropriate Regional Administrator or Office Director should be informed. The confidential source should be advised. l
~:h
~ ~
Part III. Revocation of Confidentiality
- 1. A decision to revoke confidentiality can only be made by the Comission, the EDO, or the Director of OI or OIA. In each case, only the office i t
originally granting confidentiality can revoke that grant except that the Commission may revoke a grant made by any office. Confidentiality will be revoked only in the most extreme cases. Cases for consideration include where a confidentiality agreement is not signed within a rea-sonable time following an oral grant of confidentiality, or where a I confidential source personally takes some action so inconsistent with the grant of confidentiality that the action overrides the purpose of the confidentiality, e.g., disclosing publicdly information which has revealed his status as a confidential source or intentionally providing '
, false information to the NRC.
Before revoking confidentiality, the NRC will attempt to notify the confidential source and provide him/her with an opportunity to explain why confidentiality should not be revoked. All written communications '
with a confidential source which require / request a reply are to be sent CERTIFIED MAIL-RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED.
Part IV: Official Disclosures
- 1. Disclosure to the. Licensee or other Affected Organization:
If the information provided by confidential source involves a potentially significant and imediate impact on the public health and safety, the affected organization should be promptly informed to assure ,
proper and timely action. In some cases, release of the infomation will compromise the identity of the confidential source. In such cases, release should normally not be made unless the release is necessary to prevent an iminent threat to public health and safety. In such cases, the EDO shall be consulted and efforts will be made to contact the
] confidential source and explain the need for disclosure. Consistent I with the Comission's Policy Statement, however, disclosing information which would reveal the identity of a confidential source will be made only following best efforts by the agency to protect or limit the possibility of disclosure.
/
< +,
Y g, yV f & h '- + % A2.A
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 2, NRC 0517
- 2. Other Disclosures:
i NRC employees may be requested by Congress, State or Federal Agencies to provide information which may reveal the identity of a confidential source. Each such request will be handled on a case-by-case basis.
Points to consider, however, are discussed below: ,
l
- a. Congress:
Disclosure to Congress may be required in response to a ;
written Congressional request. The Consnission will disclose the '
identity of a confidential source to Congress only if the request is in writing and it will make its best efforts to have any such disclosure limited to the extent possible. This might include assuring that the request is by Congress in its official, and not personal, capacity; the hand delivery of requested information '
directly to the affected Congress person; and attempting to satisfy :
the request for information by not revealing the identity of the ;
confidential source.
- b. Federal and State Agencies: !
If another agency demonstrates that it requires the identify of a confidential source or information which would reveal a source's identity in furtherance of its statutory responsibilities and that agency agrees to provide the same protections to the source's identity that the NRC promised when it granted confidentiality, the action office OAC will make a reasonable effort to contact the source to determine if he/she ob.iects to the release. If the source does not object, Office Directors or Regional Administrators, are authorized to provide the information or the identity to the other agency. .
If the source cannot be reached or objects to the release of his/her identity, the source's identity may not be released without Commission approval. The affected agency may then reouest that the Consnission itself release the identity. Ordinarily, the source's identity will not be provided to another agency over the source's objection. In extraordinary circumstances where furtherance of the public interest requires a release, the Commission may release the identity of a confidential source to another agency over the objections i
of the source. In those cases, however, the other agency must agree to provide the same protections to the source's identity that were promised by the NRC.
9 A2-5
h O
- a s Doctanent Name:
MANAGDDTr OF AUKATimS Requestor's ID:
CYR Author's Name:
Docunent Cmments:
Of N
~
{\S J reci of cg 706 g 6 bs
% h wa DmM
% tL 55 ao fa %,n
. tb hl "ckbA ca gc~Lc S )
4 9
w 1
l
\
I I
i j MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 3, NRC 0517 GUIDANCE FOR INITIATION, ESTABLISHMENT OF PRIORITIES AND TERMINATION OF INVESTIGATIONS
- PART I
- General On January 10, 1986, the Commission approved the guidelines proposed
} by the Staff and the Office of Investigations for initiation, establishment of I
priorities and termination of investigations. The Commission concluded that i uniform guidelines should be used by both the Staff and OI in establishing priorities for investigations and that staff views on the need for and priority of an investigation were an integral part of the investigation process. The j following procedures are to be followed in implementing the guidelines.
i PART II: Referral of Matters for Investigation by the Staff
- 1. Regional Administrators and Office Directors, the latter through the EDO, shall refer to the Office of Investigations for possible investigation all matters where: 1) there is a reasonable basis for belief of wrongdoing, as that term is defined elsewhere in this Manual Chapter; and 2) the staff determines an investigation is necessary for it to decide whether enforcement or other regulatory action is required. Matters for which there is not a reasonable basis to believe wrongdoing is involved or matters which may involve wrongdoing but for which an investigation !
would be unnecessary to determine the appropriate course of action !
should not be referred to OI for investigation. For example, where a licensee discovers that a low-level employee deliberately violated a requirement or falsified a document, disciplines the employee and takes appropriate corrective action which the Staff has reviewed, the Staff may conclude that further NRC action is unnecessary.
- 2. All referrals to OI shall be made using the " Request for Investigation" form, Exhibit 3 to this Manual Chapter. A priority of high, normal or low will be assigned to the requested investigation using the examples set forth below as guidance. Each request shall be coordinated with regional counsel or OELD as appropriate. Copies of the completed request forms shall be distributed as indicated on the form, i
1
i
- 3. As indicated above, the staff will recommend a high, normal or low priority for each matter referred to OI. The following examples may serve as guidance in assigning priorities. It should be recognized that these examples are just that. Judgment must still be exercised in each
- case to assure that the appropriate priority is established.
I l_I_Ighl A. Current manager, licensed operator or other employee involved in deliberate violation of requirements having high safety significance, eg, 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 to be reported to the NRC, where the situation involved presents an immediate and continuing health and safety concern, e.g.,
- 1. falsification of records having high safety significance, such as falsifications which conceal a repeated failure to perform a required test;
- 2. alleged withholding of significant design flaw or seismic criteria information for an operating facility; or
- 3. level of individual involved in the alleged withholding of information or falsification is such that a serious question of the willingness of management to conduct safe operations is raised.
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.
E. Allegations of wrongdoing where immediate investigation is necessary to ensure preservation and availability of evidence or which are in some other way time perishable.
Normal A. Allegations of intimidation or harassment of QC inspectors or workers on safety-related equipment at a facility under construction.
i l
. = ,
B. Allegations of deliberate violations of NRC requirements where there is no indication the violation is recurring or causing immediate and direct health and safety impact on the general public or employees.
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. An NRC investigation is needed to determine the degree of culpability only if there is evidence of a deliberate violation of NRC requirements.
B. Allegations of deliberate violation of NRC requirements at an operating facility where there is no near-term safety concern, eA, the reactor is in long-term shutdown.
- 4. Program offices are responsible to the EDO for assuring that within their areas of responsibilities necessary investigations are conducted. If the program office believes that a priority for a matter should be different than that requested by the region , the region should be contacted immediately to resolve the matter. OI should be contacted within 15 days of the original referral if the priority is changed from the initial request.
- 5. Once a matter has been accepted by OI for investigation, if the requestor of the investigation determines that the need for or priority of an investigatiori has changed, that information will be provided to the Direc, tor, OI for his consideration.
PART III: Initiation of an Investigation by 01
- 1. Upon receipt of the " Request for Investigation" form, OI will evaluate the request and conduct consultations as necessary with the requesting office. 01 will initiate an investigation if:
- a. 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 jurisidiction; and 1
- b. The Director, OI determines that there is a reasonable basis to believe that the matter involves wrongdoing; and i
a.' o
, o c.
The Director, 01 determines that there is sufficient information available to support the allegation to warrant initiation of an investigation.
- 2. If upon 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 normally conduct an investigation unless the requester indicates that the matter requires application of OI resources because there are major regulatory implications and the Director, OI concurs with this judgment.
3.
01 will seek Commission approval prior to initiating an investigation I relating to the character / integrity of an individual within OI jurisdiction.
- 4. 01 will notify the requester within 30 days of receipt of the request whether the matter has been accepted for investigation and, if so, the priority assigned to the matter and the estimated completion. schedule for If a matter is not accepted for investigation, OI will provide
} the requester with the basis for its decision. Copies of OI correspondence on scheduling and priorities will be sent to all those who received a copy of the original request as indicated on the request form.
PART IV: Resolution of Differences Between Staff and 01 1.
Following 01 notification of its action on a request for investigation, if the Regional Administrator'has concerns about the priority or schedule assigned shall to the matter or the declination of OI to investigate at all, he promptly his concern.
notify the Director of the appropriate program office of 2.
The Director of the responsible program office will review disputed matters referred by the Regional Administrator and the priorities and schedules assigned on matters referred to OI directly by the program office.
If the Director determines that an investigation priority or schedule established by OI or the lack thereof does not meet regulatory needs, and the matter cannot be resolved with the Director, OI, he will promptly notify the EDO. I 3.
The EDO will schedules resolve all differences over the need for and priority and for investigations resolution. with the Director, OI or seek Commission 1
PART V: Termination of Investigations 1.
The will decision by OI to terminate an investigation which has been initiated normally be made outside the context of the investigative
y **, .*
- a I
priority /threshhold system. OI will normally continue an investigation to 1 its conclusion if there is a reasonable basis for a belief that the matter being investigated involves a deliberate violation of NRC requirements.
The decision to terminate an investigation will be a case-by-case assessment by the Director, OI of such issues as whether the relevant facts necessary to resolve the matter under investigation have been gathered, whether allegations of events or conditions are so old that witnesses are unavailable or could no longer be expected to recall pertinent information, or whether continued investigation would be nonproductive or otherwise not serve the agency's interests.
- 2. As indicated in section 11.5 above, if the requester of an investigation determines that the need for or priority of an investigation has changed, that information will be provided to the Director, OI for his consideration.
- 3. For low and normal priority cases, OI may close a case if its projection of resource allocations indicates that the investigation could not be initiated within a reasonable period of time which will generally be six months. OI may close a case following its initial evaluation if at that time OI is able 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.
- 4. OI will notify the staff in writing when it formally closes a case because of lack of resources to pursue it.
Part VI: Resolution of Those Matters Returned to the Staff By 01 Without Investigation
- 1. Those matters' which are returned to the Staff by OI without investigation (see V.3) will be handled by the staff as part of its normal process to resolve inspection findings. This may include additional inspections, written requests for information from the licensee, meetings between the staff and licensee or proceeding with enforcement action as appropriate on the basis of the original or supplemented inspection findings or such other actions as appropriate. If, af ter development of supplemental information or reassessment of the original findings, an investigation is still needed, the matter may be referred to OI again for investigation in accordance with the procedures in this chapter. The staff will not use its resources to conduc' nn investigation of the matters referred back to the staff by OI.
l l
l l
O-e N.ec i n .e- sop u s. sxCLt Am KetutAtoav Cowuessiom
=*c= a " *'
ALLEGATlaN DATA INPUT '
A. R ECEIVINf3 OF FICE
- 9. F ACILITY 00Cu e i Nuwet a Newt toe r==oreen,#
N$dn DOCKE T NuW5tR N AME I'08h'weersi m
, , ,a ,,,..-
c.e
.IIIIII11 111Il11 t ill!lllIll t illl!IlllllIlllIll! I "IIllllll IIIIl111IIIllll11IIllil 11111111111IIll1 111IllII I t i l l 1111 ll ! I I f I l I I ll i I I l l i i 11 l il l l l l l I dlIllllIl 11ll11111Illi1111lIlllI111IllIllllIIllI _ .
- 2. TYPE OF REGULATED ACTIVITY (Chece oilapptece6de beser/
e OTHea
. staCTOa e vENoca e MaTiniAts 4 sartouanos l I I l l l [ l l I I I I I I i 1 1 I I I I I I I (se=j g , , g g g g , g g g g g g g , , 9 g g g g g , g 3 MATE RIAL LICENSE I' l' I' I*
- NUMu Risi
- ; ; l g ; ; ; ; ; ; j g l l l l l l g ; ; ; ; ; l ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; g l l [ g l l [
'4 FUNCTION AL ARE Als)(Chere artapps.ce6/e/
$ y"y'" , ]' ra ]
e O*t a 4 7 s0 4 t CONST RUCTION c SAFEGUARDS CfmNS ( '
a TnaNsponi ateom e sugnGENCv PREPamf DNES$ s ONSITE NEaLTM aN0 5af tTV d k e Of 85sts wtaLTw aNO Sattiv I fgO"r I I I II I III I I I l lI l Il 1 I I ll l 1 I l l l l l ll l l l ll l l l lll l l ll ll m
l I 'i.- . '
.m
- 4 Of SCmet son ssopca c eyes
'7. SOURCE (Chece onef *8 CO g tgegetv e COntmaCYuntuatovEt e a ponwa m CC,NinaCTOR EMPLOVEt e aNONvuOUS ,0 "**f{ *g T *' [# g , 9 g 9 g g g g 9 y g y , g g g g g e. vis e LeCEN$tt Ew'LOVEt e NEWSMEDea
,"[" t No e 80awtm L8 CENSE t twPLOvit n PasvaTE CIT 8EEN e OTME R isperafyj ! f f t f f ! I f t i ! t SMPL Il D
'9 DATE lvtan woNT* oav *10 EMPLOYEE RECElvlNG ALLE GATION (tarse twe eneress, tast neme) ' 0 p eCe me Ce iv.
ALLEGATaOA jNG a'LLeca rsom 4.
.A. r -
l l -g - Qt y hytfp.?e]
4;f y .pr 3J ub% ygrurw RE CE IVE D g l l 1 l l l l l l l l , >,Af'YJsk,.k*p';/.h.3Q t Fy*Qt.c,t.h! 7 B. ACTION OFFICE
- ALLEG ATION NUMBE R
- 2. CON T AC? tfersr twe nwesets. last nemet '3. CONTACT 1 TE LEPHONE '4 SAF E T Y SIGNIF ICANCE l vtan 5. BOARD NOTIF ICATION ans a coot muuse n a was RECOMMENDED l l l ll -lAl-l l l l t No
]e uNuNowN l l l I l-l 1 l l
'8. STATUS la.YES l l b. NO ,
s T ALLEGATION WAS SUBSTANTIATED sg. ALLEGER NOTIFIED
] e 0,g N DATE #0*T" DA'
] e CLOSED eDATE M 04' OF GMEM COMPL E TION
! NEDULED l'tA" l l CLOSED l'888 l ONT"I - a vis de tamflaLLv l 1 l l l l g ; ; l l m No ITI 9 e,t M AR KS tog . cherectorn. use nsurronelpep oinecessaryl la.VES l l b. NO x e-o e-o H
i
- e 2
M O
O 10 0B ACTION .U1
- ILEOutMED ENTRIES l l a VES l l h NO l s t. OI REPOR T NUM8E R lg g g g g g g g g g g g l %. '-( Ig.,, _ ] W.=* j.(f M y ,
eKEOulRED IF STATUS IS CLOSED i
h ,* E MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS EXHIBIT 2, NRC 0517 CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT I have information that I wish to provide in confidence to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC). I request an express pledge of confidentiality as a condition of providing this information to the NRC.
It is my understanding that, consistent with its legal obligations, the NRC, by agreeing to this confidentiality, will adhere to the following conditions.
(1) During the course of an inquiry or investigation, the NRC will make its best effort to avoid actions which would clearly be expected to result in disclosure of my identity to persons subsequently coming in contact with the NRC.
(2) Except as necessary to assure public health and safety and except as necessary to inform Congress or State or Federal agencies in furtherance of their responsibilities under law.or public trust, the NRC will not identify me by name or personal identifier in any conversation, comunication or NRC-initiated document released outside the NRC. The NRC will use its best effort to minimize any
/ disclosures made outside of the NRC.
(3) The NRC will disclose my identify inside the NRC only on a
[!1.f need-to-know basis to the extent required for the conduct of
} NRC-related activities. Consequently, I acknowledge that if I have further contacts with NRC personnel, I cannot expect that those people will be cognizant of this Confidentiality Agreement and it will be my responsibility to bring that point to their attention if I desire similar treatment for the infonnation provided to them.
(4) Even though the NRC will make its best effort to protect my identity, my identification could be compelled by orders or subpoenas issued by courts of law, hearing boards, Administrative Law Judges, or similar legal entities. In such cases, the basis
' for granting this promise of confidentiality and any other relevant facts will he comunicated by the NRC to the authority ordering the disclosure in an effort to maintain my confidentiality.
I also understand that the NRC will consider me to have waived my right to confidentiality if I take, or have taken, any action so inconsistent with the grant of confidentiality that the action overrides the purpose behind the confidentiality such as (1) disclosing publically information which reveals my status as a confidential source or (2) intentionally providing false information to the NRC. The NRC will attempt to notify me of its intent to revoke confidentiality and provide me an opportunity to explain why such action should not be taken.
l l _ _ _ _ ---
3 '
.s. .
- ~
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS EXHIBIT 2, NRC 0517 Other Conditions: (if any)
I have read and fully understand the contents of this agreement. I i agree with its provisions.
Date: Name:
Address:
Agreed to on behalf of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Date: Signature:
Name:
Title:
9
. s p ,. g MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS EXHIBIT 3, NRC 0517 LIMITED DISTRIBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Request No.
-1 (Region-year-No.)
h
~
'TO:
FROM REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION Licensee / Vendor / Applicant Docket No.
Facility or Site Location Regional Administrator / Office Date A. Request s
What is the matter that is being requested for investigation (be as specific as possible regarding the underlying incident). .
B. Purpose of Investigation
- 1. Wat=wrons L % %hcS-w ^-d, eexphrt tLa, ICQ ( d A (be as spicific as pos he-bas-it-for this v4e)w- .
b
'%ww v. A +h% 4 s % M un m ) W'2,9 mue.L.L
-- 0_
, W
% k 4r~
^M LIMITED DISTRIBUTION-- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSUR 1 "041 ADPROVAL R-E3-1 Approved:
s
.J, , &_ w =pr
o- .
o , . o .o
, .. o MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS EXHIBIT 3, NRC 0517 LIMITED DISTRIBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
- 2. What are the potential regulatory requirements that may have been violated?
- 3. If no violation is suspected, what is the specific regulatory I concern?
i 4.
N If ailegationhr.e involkd- i s wthad alle a ion occurred?x1fkely'occurr g
d hs the , not sure . f likely, expla'in the basis for thatJiew. b hWLA M 4 q E % ,'q h 5 C. Requester's Priority
- 1. Is the priority of th investigation high, nomal, 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 dependent on the out-come of the investigation?
l LIMITED DISTRIBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE W/0 01 APPROVAL 9
o r :s f ?
S'
.. ea a MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS EXHIBIT 3, NRC 0517 4
LIMITED DISTRIBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE D. Contact
- 1. Staff members:
- 2. Allegers identification with address and telephone ncmber if not confidential. (Indicate if any confidential sources are involved and who may be contacted for the identifying details.)
- F. Other Relevant Information 1
1
, Signature cc: 01 LB. Hayes) */
ED0'~tW.J. Direls W NRR/NMSS as appropriate (Denton/ Davis) */, **/
IE (Taylor) */, ***/ ~
OELD (Cunningham)
Regional Administrator **/, ***/
l l
- / If generated by region.
T*/ If generated by IE.
TT*/ If generated by NRR/NMSS LIMITED DISTRIBUTION -- NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE W/0 OI APPROVAL
Wt p
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 3, NRC 0517 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; */ and 2) the staff determines an investigation is necessary for it to decide whether enforcement or other regulatory action is required should be referred to the Office of Investigations (01). Matters not involving wrongdoing should normally neither be referred to nor accepted by 01 for investigation. Upon receipt of a completed request form (Exhibit 3, NRC 0517),
01 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 ar.d security, protection of the environment, or antitrust laws provided that these matters are within NRC jurisdiction; and
- 2) The Director. 01 determines 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 Comission guidance, 0I would seek Cormiission approval prior to initiating an' investigation relating to the character / integrity of an individual within 01 jurisdiction.
01 will 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 the estimated schedule. If on review of the request, there is a reasonable
- / Wrongdoing consists of both intentional violations of regulatory require-ments and violations resulting from careless disregard of or reckless indifference to regulatory requirements amounting to intent. A reasonable )
basis for oelief 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.
. Fo1A %-26 B)4
0 /
. /.
belief that the alleged wrongdoing is solely a product of careless disregard or reckless indifference, 01 will not normally 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. 01 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. The program offices are responsible to the EDO for assuring that necessary investigations are conducted within their area of responsibilities.
Regional Administrators will notify the Director of the responsible program office between the staff and 01 on priorities and scheduling. 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. The EDO will resolve any differences with the Director, 01.
1 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 01 will be assigned a priority of high, normal or low by 01. 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 to be reported to the NRC, where the situation involved presents an immediate and continuing health and safety concern, e.g.,
- 1. falsification of records having high safety significance, such as falsifications which conceal a repeated failure to perform a required test;
- 2. alleged withholding of significant design flaw or seismic criteria information for an operating facility; or
- 3. level of individual involved in the alleged withholding of information or falsification is such that a serious question of the willingness of management to conduct safe operations is raised.
l
1
' ~
)
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.
E. Allegations of wrongdoing where immediate investigation is necessary to ensure preservation and availability of evidence or which are in some other way time perishable.
Normal A. Allegations of intimidation or harassment of QC 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 immediate and direct health and safety impact on the general public or employees.
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 under-taken corrective action. An NRC investigation is needed to determine the degree of culpability only if there is evidence of a deliberate violation of NRC requirements.
B. Allegations of deliberate violation of NRC requirements at an operating facility where there is no near-tem safety concern, e.g., the reactor is in long-term shutdown.
Termination of Investigations For low and nomal priority cases, 01 may close a case if its projection of resource allocations indicates that the investigation could not be initiated within a reasonable period of time which will generally be six months. 01 may close a case following its initial evaluation if at that time OI is able 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. 01 will nomally continue an investigation only if there is a reasonable basis for a belief that the matter being investigated involves a deliberate violation of NRC requirements.
The decision to teminate an investigation will be a case-by-case assessment by l
a s e ,
-4_
r the Director, 0I of such issues as whether the relevant facts necessary to resolve the matter under investigation have been gathered, whether allegations of events or conditions are so old that witnesses are unavailable or could no longer be 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 priority of an investigation has changed, that information will be provided to the Director. 01 for his consideration.
e 4
- ~
I
?
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 3, NRC 0517 GUIDANCE FOR INITIATION, ESTABLISHMENT OF PRIORITIES AND TERMINATION OF INVESTIGATIONS PARTI: General On January 10, 1986, the Commission approved the guidelines proposed ;
by the Staff and the Office of Investigations for initiation, establishment of priorities and termination of investigations. The Commission concluded that uniform guidelines should be used by both the Staff and OI in establishing priorities for investigations and that staff views on the need for and priority 1 of an investigation were an integral part of the investigation process. The following procedures are to be followed in implementing the guidelines.
PART II: Referral of Matters for Investigation by the Staff
- 1. Regional Administrators and Office Directors, the latter through the EDO, shall refer to the Office of Investigations for possible investigation all matters where: 1) there is a reasonable basis for belief of !
wrongdoing, as that term is defined elsewhere in this Manual Chapter; and 2) the staff determines an investigation is necessary for it to decide whether enforcement or other regulatory action is required. Matters for which there is not a reasonable basis to believe wrongdoing is involved or matters which may involve wrongdoing but for which an investigation would be unnecessary to determine the appropriate course of action should not be referred to 01 for investigation. For example, where a licensee discovers that a low-level employee deliberately violated a requirement or falsified a document, disciplines the employee and takes appropriate corrective action which the Staff has reviewed, the Staff may conclude that further NRC action is unnecessary.
- 2. All referrals to 01 shall be made using the " Request for Investigation" form, Exhibit 3 to this Manual Chapter. A priority of high, normal or low will be assigned to the requested investigation using the examples set forth below as guidance. Each request shall be coordinated with regional counsel or OELD as appropriate. Copies of the completed request forms shall be distributed as indicate.1 on the form.
i
/-
/
- 3. As indicated above, the staff will recommend a high, normal or low priority for each matter referred to OI. The following examples may serve as guidance in assigning priorities. It should be recognized that these examples are just that. Judgment must still be exercised in each case to assure that the appropriate priority is established.
Ifigh 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 cubmittals to the NRC or deliberate withholding of information required to be reported to the NRC, where the situation involved presents an immediate and continuing health and safety concern, e
h, -
- 1. falsification of records having high safety significance, such as falsifications which conceal a repeated failure to perform a required test;
- 2. alleged withholding of significant design flaw or seismic criteria information for an operating facility; or
- 3. level of individual involved in the alleged withholding of information or falsification is such that a serious question of the willingness of management to conduct safe operations is raised.
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.
E. Allegations of wrongdoing where immediate investigation is necessary to ensure preservation and availability of evidence or which are in some other way time perishable.
Normal A. Allegations of intimidation or harassment of QC inspectors or workers on safety-related equipment at a facility under construction.
r -
\ .
i ,
I
! l B. Allegations of deliberate violations of NRC requirements where there is no indication the violation is recurring or causing immediate and i direct health and safety impact on the general public or employees.
C. Allegations of falsification of records available for NRC inspection or 4 deliberate violation of NRC requirements of safety concern in the licensing process.
I l Low A. Allegations of deliberate violations of NRC requirements, falsification )
of records or submittals to NRC, or harassment or intimidation of l workers where the licensee is aware of the allegation and has i already undertaken corrective action. An NRC investigation is l j needed to determine the degree of culpability only if there is l evidence of a deliberate violation of NRC requirements.
i B. Allegations of deliberate ~ violation of NRC requirements at an j l
operating facility where there is no near-term safety concern, cA, the reactor is in long-term shutdown. ,
! 4. Program offices are responsible to the EDO for assuring that within their )
! areas of responsibilities necessary investigations are conducted. If the 1 I
l program office believes that a priority for a matter should be different l than that requested by the region, the region should be contacted j immediately to resolve the matter. OI should be contacted within 15 )
l days of the original referral if the priority is changed from the initial i request.
l 5. Once a matter has been accepted by OI for investigation, if the j requestor of the investigation determines that the need for or priority of l an investigatiori has changed, that information will be provided to the
! Director, OI for his consideration.
4 PART III: Initiation of an Investigation by OI
- 1. Upon receipt of the " Request for Investigation" form, OI will evaluate i the request and conduct consultations as necessary with the requesting
)
office. OI will initiate an investigation if:
l
- a. The staff has found that the alleged wrongdoing has had or could 1
) have an impact on the public health and safety, the common defense j and security, protection of the environment, or antitrust laws
- provided that these matters are within NRC jurisidiction; and _
- b. The Director, OI determines that there is a reasonable basis to believe that the matter involves wrongdoing; and
l 1
- c. The Director, OI determines that there is sufficient information available to support the allegation to warrant initiation of an investigation.
- 2. If upon review of the request, there is a reasonable belief that the alleged wrongdoing is solely a product of careless disregard or reckless
- i ifference, OI will not normally conduct an investigation unless the M r uester indicates that the matter requires application of 01 resources because there are major regulatory implications and the Director, OI concurs with this judgment.
- 3. OI will seek Commission approval prior to initiating an investigation relating to the character /integMty of an individual within OI jurisdiction.
- 4. 01 will notify the requester within 30 days of receipt of the request whether the matter has been accepted for investigation and, if so, the priority assigned to the matter and the estimated schedule for completion. If a matter is not accepted for investigation, OI will provide the requester with the basis for its decision. Copies of OI correspondence on scheduling and priorities will be sent to all those who received a copy of the original request as indicated on the request form.
PART IV: Resolution of Differences Between Staff and 01
- 1. Following OI notification of its action on a request for investigation, if the Regional Administrator has concerns about the priority or schedule assigned to the matter or the declination of OI to investigate at all, he shall promptly notify the Director of the appropriate program office of his concern.
- 2. The Director of the responsible program office will review disputed matters referred by the Regional Administr and the priorities and schedules assigned on matters referred to irectly by the program effice. If the Director determines that a investigation priority or schedule established by 01 or the lack thereof does not meet regulatory he will promptly notify the EDO.
needs, \M% % ent %., WAA M 01,
, 3. The EDO will resolve all differences over the need for and priority and schedules for investigations with the Director, 014 o r i ex k. 0.o m m I ssi on r<sola.f os, PART V: Termination of Investigations
- 1. The decision by 01 to terminate an investigation which has been initiated will normally be made outside the context of the investigative priority /threshhold system. O! will normally continue an investigation to its conclusion if there is a reasonable basis for a belief that the matter i
.s,.
1
/ being investigated involves a deliberate violation of NRC requirements.
The decision to terminate an investigation will be a case-by-case assessment by the Director, OI of such issues as whether the relevant facts necessary to resolve the matter under investigation have been gathered, whether allegations of events or conditions are so old that witnesses are unavailable or could no longer be expected to recall pertinent information, or whether continued investigation would be nonproductive or otherwise not serve the agency's interests.
- 2. As indicated in section 11.5 above, if the requester of an investigation determines that the need for or priority of an investigation has changed, t that information will be provided to the Director, O! for his consideration. l
- 3. For low and normal priority cases, OI may close a case if its projection of resource allocations indicates that the investigation could not be initiated within a reasonable period of time which will generally be six months . OI may close a case following its initial evaluation if at that time OI is able to make a projection of its resource allocations and the case would not be initiated within a reasonable period of time, eg , six c months.
- 4. OI will notify the staff in writing when it formally closes a case because of lack of resources to pursue it.
Part VI: Resolution of Those Matters Rcturned to the Staff By OI Without Investigation
- 1. Those matters which are returned to the Staff by 01 without investigation (see V.3) will be handled by the staff as part of its normal process to resolve inspection findings. This may include additional inspections, written requests for information from the licensee, meetings between the staff and licensee or proceeding with enforcement action as appropriate on the basis of the original or supplemented inspection findinad A h; a;;and --- ,Tfaf ter development of supplemental information or reassessment of the original findings,Mhe matter may be referred to OI aga,in for investigation in accordance w the procedures in this chapter. L M J A.o/ .444a.' de NM vu g .
m,. +
- e ~ c w
- e w % d m M N // 1A 4,w _a.y 9 or.
A
%Q>
I.
l 1
l
MANAGEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS APPENDIX 3. NRC 0517 GUIDANCE FOR INITIATION, ESTABLISilMENT OF PRIORITIES AND TERMINATION OF INVESTIGATIONS PART1: General On January 10, 1986, the Commission approved the guidelines proposed by the Staff and the Office of Investigations for initiation, establishment of priorities and termination of investigations. The Commission concluded that uniform guidelines should be used by both the Staff and OI in establishing priorities for investigations and that staff views on the need for and priority of an investigation were an integral part of the investigation process. The following procedures are to be followed in implementing the guidelines.
PART II: Referral of Matters for Investigation by the Staff
- 1. Regional Administrators and Office Directors, the latter through the EDO, shall refer to the Office of Investigations for possible investigation all matters where: 1) there is a reasonable basis for belief of wrongdoing, as that term is defined elsewhere in this Manual Chapter; and 2) the staff determines an investigation is necessary for it to decide whether enforcement or other regulatory action is required. Matters for which there is not a reasonable basis to believe wrongdoing is involved l
. or matters which may involve wrongdoing but for which an investigation !
would be unnecessary to determine the appropriate course of action should not be referred to 01 for investigation. For example, where n ,
licensee discovers that a low-level employee deliberately violated a i requirement or falsified a document, disciplines the employee and takes appropriate corrective action which the Staff has reviewed, the Staff may conclude that further NRC action is unnecessary.
. All referrals to 01 shall be made using the " Request for Investigation" form, Exhibit 3 to this Manual Chapter. A priority of ght h, normal or low will be assigned to the requested investigation using tne examples set forth below as guidance. Each request shall be coordinated with regional counsel or OELD as appropriate. Copies of the completed request forms shall be distributed as indicated on the form.
p ..
- 3. As indicated above, the staff will recommend a high , normal or low priority for each matter referred to 01. The following examples may serve as guidance in assigning priorities. It should be recognized that these examples are just that. Judgment must still be exercised in each case to assure that the appropriate priority is established.
Ugh, A. Current manager, licensed operator or other employee involved in deliberate violation of requirements having high safety significance, le.., 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 to be reported to the NRC, where the situation involved presents an immediate and continuing health and safety concern, !
s, e -
r
- 1. falsification of records having high safety significance, such as falsifications which conceal a repeated failure to perform a required test;
- 2. alleged withholding of significant design flaw or seismic criteria information for an operating facility; or
- 3. level of individual involved in the alleged withholding of '
information or falsification is such that a serious question of 1 the willingness of management to conduct safe operations is I raised.
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.
E. Allegations of wrongdoing where immediate investigation is necessary to ensure preservation and availability of evidence or which are in some other way time perishable.
Normal A. Allegations of intimidation or harassment of QC 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 immediate and direct health and safety impact on the general public or employees.
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. An NRC investigation is needed to determine th e degree of culpability only if there is evidence of a deliberate violation of NRC requirements.
B. Allegations of deliberate violation of NRC requirements at an operating facility where there is no near-term safety concern, e.g.,
the reactor is in long-term shutdown.
- 4. Program offices are responsible to the EDO for assuring that within their areas of responsibilities necessary investigations are conducted. If the program office believes that a priority for a matter should be different than that requested by the region, the region should be contacted immediately to resolve the matter. OI should be contacted within 15 days of the original referral if the priority is changed from the initial request.
- 5. Once a matter has been accepted by 01 for investigation, if the requestor of the investigation determines that the need for or priority of an investigatfori has changed, that information will be provided to the Director, O! for his consideration.
PART III: Initiation of an Investigation by OI
- 1. Upon receipt of the " Request for Investigation" form, O! will evaluate the request and conduct consultations as necessary with the requesting office. 01 will initiate an investigation if:
- a. 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 jurisidiction; and
- b. The Director, 01 determines that there is a reasonable besis to believe that the matter involves wrongdoings and
(
/
/
- c. The Director, OI determines that there is sufficient information available to support the allegation to warrant initiation of an investigation.
- 2. If upon review of the request, there is a reasonable belief that the alleged wrongdoing is solely a product of careless disregard or reckless i ifference, OI will not normally conduct an investigation unless the r uester indicates that the matter requires application of OI resources because there are major regulatory implications and the Director, OI concurs with this judgment.
- 3. OI will seek Commission approval prior to initiating an investigation relating to the character / integrity of an individual within OI jurisdiction.
- 4. O! will notify the requester within 30 days of receipt of the request whether the matter has been accepted for investigation and, if so, the priority assigned to the matter and the estimated schedule for completion. If a matter is not accepted for investigation, OI will provide the requester with the basis for its decision. Copies of OI correspondence on scheduling and priorities will be sent to all those who received a copy of the original request as indicated on the request form.
P ART IV : Resolution of Differences Between Staff and OI
- 1. Following OI notification of its action on a request for investigation, if the Regional Administrator has concerns about the priority or schedule assigned to the matter or the declination of OI to investigate at all, he shall promptly notify the Director of the appropriate program office of his concern.
- 2. The Director of the responsible program office will review disputed matters referred by the Regional Administrat r and the priorities and schedules assigned on matters referred to directly by the program /
office. If the Director determines that an investigation priority or schedule established by OI or the lack thereof does not meet regulatory needs,)he will rpromptly notify
"'tthe EDO.
Rui, ~
r -
- 3. The I;DO illl re' solve All differences over the need for and priority and schedules for investigations with the Director, OIn gw% wgs 1 PART V: Termination of Investigations
- 1. The decision by O! to terminate an investigation which has been initiated '
will normally be made outside the context of the investigative priority /threshhold system. O! will normally continue an investigation to its conclusion if there is a reasonable basis for a belief that the matter l
B
/ !
being investigated involves a deliberate violation of NRC requirements.
The decision to terminate an investigation will be a case-by-case assessment by the Director, OI of such issues as whether the relevant facts necessary to resolve the matter under investigation have been ;
gathered , whether allegations of events or conditions are so old that witnesses are unavailable or could no longer be expected to recall pertinent information, or whether continued investigation would be nonproductive or otherwise not serve the agency's interests.
- 2. As indicated in section 11.5 above, if the requester of an investigation determines that the need for or priority of an investigation has changed, that information will be provided to the Director, 01 for his )
consideration. )
- 3. For low and normal priority cases, OI may close a case if its projection of resource allocations indicates that the investigation could not be initiated within a reasonable period of time which will generally be six months. OI may close a case following its initial evaluation if at that time OI is able to make a projection of its resource allocations and the case would not be initiated within a reasonable period of time, eg, six months.
- 4. OI will notify the staff in writing when it formally closes a case because of lack of resources to pursue it.
Part VI: Resolution of Those biatters Returned to the Staff By 01 Without Investigation
- 1. Those matters which are returned to the Staff by OI without investigation (s.ee V.3) will be handled by the staff as part of its normal process to resolve inspection findings. This may include additional inspections, written requests for information from the licensee, meetings between the staff and licensee or proceeding with enforcement action as appropriate on the basis of the original or supplemented inspection findings. In_ *- "a M 6I after development of supplemental l inf mailon or reassessment %f- original findings the matter may bo l eferred to 01 again for investigation ccordance ith the procedures l in this chapter % .4 yd T '
$aM i M kO f Y 'N N 1 g ,f, aV el M
P.9 '
<