ML19037A080: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:ATTACHMENT 3.1-3 TO RMPP 3.1, REVISION 0 ALLEGATION SCREENING FORM a)   Is there an immediate safety concern that must be quickly addressed?
{{#Wiki_filter:Attachment 3.1-3 Revision 0 ATTACHMENT 3.1-3 TO RMPP 3.1, REVISION 0 ALLEGATION SCREENING FORM a)
b)   Is the allegation a specific safety or quality issue or a generalized concern?
Is there an immediate safety concern that must be quickly addressed?
c)   Has the staff previously addressed this issue or a similar issue?
b)
d)   Have there been a substantial number of allegations on similar concerns?
Is the allegation a specific safety or quality issue or a generalized concern?
e)   What is the time sensitivity of the allegation and what immediate actions are necessary?
c)
f)   What is the potential for wrongdoing and will investigative assistance be needed?
Has the staff previously addressed this issue or a similar issue?
g)   Does the allegation package contain sufficient information for a thorough evaluation? If not, identify the additional information needed.
d)
h)   Can the issues be adequately addressed by a routine technical inspection? If not, determine the best way to address the issues.
Have there been a substantial number of allegations on similar concerns?
i)   Is the identity of the alleger necessary for a thorough evaluation?
e)
j)   Identify any peripheral issues that could develop.
What is the time sensitivity of the allegation and what immediate actions are necessary?
k)   Are any licensing actions or enforcement actions pending that could be affected by the allegation? When an allegation involves a case with pending licensing action, the Radiological Health Specialist working on the case should be promptly notified.
f)
l)   Can inspection resources be effectively utilized pursuing the issue or is the allegation too vague or frivolous?
What is the potential for wrongdoing and will investigative assistance be needed?
m)   Is further consideration of the allegation required? If not, inform the alleger in a courteous and diplomatic manner of the rationale for not considering it further. Consult the Radiation Control Program Director, Radioactive Materials Program Manager, and the Department of Health Legal Division before doing so.                                     Commented [SJ1]: Edited to make consistent with 3.1.6. It is also not clear who in RMP has the final say in dispositioning allegations. Please clarify and revise text accordingly.
g)
n)    Can licensee resources reasonably be used in resolving the allegation to conserve staff resources?
Does the allegation package contain sufficient information for a thorough evaluation? If not, identify the additional information needed.
o)    Does the allegation have the potential to require escalated enforcement action? .1-3                                                                        Revision 0}}
h)
Can the issues be adequately addressed by a routine technical inspection? If not, determine the best way to address the issues.
i)
Is the identity of the alleger necessary for a thorough evaluation?
j)
Identify any peripheral issues that could develop.
k)
Are any licensing actions or enforcement actions pending that could be affected by the allegation? When an allegation involves a case with pending licensing action, the Radiological Health Specialist working on the case should be promptly notified.
l)
Can inspection resources be effectively utilized pursuing the issue or is the allegation too vague or frivolous?
m)
Is further consideration of the allegation required? If not, inform the alleger in a courteous and diplomatic manner of the rationale for not considering it further. Consult the Radiation Control Program Director, Radioactive Materials Program Manager, and the Department of Health Legal Division before doing so.
n)
Can licensee resources reasonably be used in resolving the allegation to conserve staff resources?
o)
Does the allegation have the potential to require escalated enforcement action?
Commented [SJ1]: Edited to make consistent with 3.1.6. It is also not clear who in RMP has the final say in dispositioning allegations. Please clarify and revise text accordingly.}}

Latest revision as of 05:21, 5 January 2025

Rmpp 3.1 Attachment 3.1-3 Allegation Screening Form
ML19037A080
Person / Time
Issue date: 02/08/2019
From: White A
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
To:
State of VT
Shared Package
ML19037A060 List:
References
Download: ML19037A080 (1)


Text

Attachment 3.1-3 Revision 0 ATTACHMENT 3.1-3 TO RMPP 3.1, REVISION 0 ALLEGATION SCREENING FORM a)

Is there an immediate safety concern that must be quickly addressed?

b)

Is the allegation a specific safety or quality issue or a generalized concern?

c)

Has the staff previously addressed this issue or a similar issue?

d)

Have there been a substantial number of allegations on similar concerns?

e)

What is the time sensitivity of the allegation and what immediate actions are necessary?

f)

What is the potential for wrongdoing and will investigative assistance be needed?

g)

Does the allegation package contain sufficient information for a thorough evaluation? If not, identify the additional information needed.

h)

Can the issues be adequately addressed by a routine technical inspection? If not, determine the best way to address the issues.

i)

Is the identity of the alleger necessary for a thorough evaluation?

j)

Identify any peripheral issues that could develop.

k)

Are any licensing actions or enforcement actions pending that could be affected by the allegation? When an allegation involves a case with pending licensing action, the Radiological Health Specialist working on the case should be promptly notified.

l)

Can inspection resources be effectively utilized pursuing the issue or is the allegation too vague or frivolous?

m)

Is further consideration of the allegation required? If not, inform the alleger in a courteous and diplomatic manner of the rationale for not considering it further. Consult the Radiation Control Program Director, Radioactive Materials Program Manager, and the Department of Health Legal Division before doing so.

n)

Can licensee resources reasonably be used in resolving the allegation to conserve staff resources?

o)

Does the allegation have the potential to require escalated enforcement action?

Commented [SJ1]: Edited to make consistent with 3.1.6. It is also not clear who in RMP has the final say in dispositioning allegations. Please clarify and revise text accordingly.