ADAMS USER GROUP MEETING

January 12, 2005

1:00-3:00 p.m.

NRC Headquarters: Room T2 B1

Agenda for ADAMS User Group Meeting #10

1. Opening remarks - Tom Smith, Moderator (1:05-1:10 p.m.)

General announcements and introductions (1:10-1:15 p.m.)

2. Action items from the 06/04 meeting update (1:15-1:45 p.m.)

3. Technical issues related to ADAMS (1:45-2:00 p.m.)

Break (2 -2:10 p.m.)

4. What is the status of the Web-based Legacy Library?

5. What is the status of future upgrades to Citrix and WEB-based ADAMS? 

6. New business (2:55-3 p.m.)

 • Plans for next meeting

 • Set a date ( July 20, 2005?)

7. Adjournment (3 p.m.) 

Meeting Minutes

1. Opening remarks - Tom Smith, Moderator (1:05-1:10 p.m.)

Tom Smith opened the meeting at 1:04 p.m. and introduced NRC staff present. These included

Francine Goldberg, Chief of Information and Records Services Division; Susan Johnson, the

Chief of the Information Services Branch (the branch that operates ADAMS and the NRC public

Web site); Beth Hayden from the Office of Public Affairs; Bill Reckley, NRR. 

 He then asked the users on the telephone bridge to introduce themselves. He briefly described 

the recent OCIO organizational change, noting the reassignments for Jackie Silber (CIO) and

Ed Baker (Deputy CIO). He explained that Ed Baker would attend the AUG meeting on behalf

of Ms. Silber but was delayed for a few minutes. Therefore the meeting beginning with item

number two: Technical issues related to ADAMS.

2. Technical Issues related to ADAMS (1:10-2 p.m.)

(e) When we do a docket run, we would like to be able to know which documents are part of a

package. Right now, if we run a listing for a particular docket, we are returned x hits. Some of

those x hits, however, are really part of one document. When we run a report, there is no
longer an A, B, C designation (as in BRS) at the end of an ACN number to show us that it is

part of a package. Is there any way of having a report show that?

Mr. Smith said it is still possible to see the linkages in the Legacy Library when creating a report

since all of the formats include the package number. When using Web-based PARS, the

citations will show if a document is part of a package but only links to the package when the

"package member" icon is clicked. In Citrix-based PARS, the only way to see the linkage is by

looking at the properties and clicking on packages for individual documents in a list.

Unfortunately, changing this would require prohibitively expensive custom coding.

 

(f) Discuss the particulars of the new PDR document reproduction contract.

Mr. Smith handed out the latest price list of for Best Copy and Printing, Inc., the PDR’s new

document reproduction contractor. He noted that after short notice from the previous contractor,

the PDR was able to move in record time to obtain a new contractor. If you have any questions

or concerns about the quality of work or other related issues, you are welcome to contact either

Tom Smith or Richard Smith in the PDR. 

(g) Is it possible to have the text of a FOIA request linked to the FOIA response? Now, all too

often, you can know the response but not be able to access the question."

It was noted that the head of NRC’s Freedom of Information team sees no reason why the NRC

can't accommodate this request. We cannot make the incoming request available until we

respond, but that is not an issue because the request is to link the response to the incoming

request, which would not occur until the response. Depending on the content of the incoming

letter(it may contain the presence of personal identifiers such as the SSN), the link might be to

a redacted copy of the incoming letter. 

So the response to this request is yes and the NRC will work out the mechanics of how to best

do this. (One option is to include the following sentence in the comment section of each

response: The incoming FOIA/PA request is located in ADAMS at MLxxxxxxxxx')

(h) Can you discuss issues related to EIE? 

Recently, some general questions came to Mr. Smith related to the Electronic Information

Exchange (EIE). In addition to the general guidance available on the Web, he said that if you

have further questions you are welcome to send them to Thomas Smith or use the Contact Us

page found at: http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/eie.html. 

(I) The NRC asked for EIE. When a document is received in paper and on a CD, why does

NRC scan the paper copy? 

Normally, under these circumstances, the NRC would process the electronic version of the

document into ADAMS. However. in some cases, the electronic version is not compliant with

the NRC's electronic submission guidance. In those instances, the paper copy is scanned and

added to ADAMS and the submitter is notified of the deficiencies in the electronic version. 

(j) Can you discuss the display time for large documents in Web-based ADAMS?
To correct this problem, “byte-serving” for large documents is planned for Web-based ADAMS.

We are planning to implement this feature as soon as possible. This feature is only valid for

PDF files. We are starting to convert large TIFF files into PDF as time permits. In regard to byte

serving, a user present in the group with experience with “byte-serving” noted that pop ups

about document size appear on the screen. Fran Goldberg suggested e-mailing examples of

this to Tom Smith who will investigate. 

After a short break, Ed Baker was introduced and agenda items 2a through 2d were addressed. 

Those questions, submitted in advance, were:

(a) Can you give us a schedule for the return to ADAMS of the non-Docket 50 Document types

(such as NUREGs, Regulatory Guides, Management Directives)? So very many noncontroversial but essential regulatory information documents simply do not appear in Citrix as it

now stands. Has anyone organized screening criteria, a team, and a schedule for the

resurrection of the non-Docket 50 document types?

(b) The absence of Web-based ADAMS causes great pain to so many people who had come to

depend upon it. Can you suggest a realistic date for the return of Web-based ADAMS?

©) Can we have a ballpark figure of the number of documents removed from ADAMS as a

result of the most recent document review?

(d) What is the status and net effect of the recent security review of ADAMS? That is, what will

be different from before? How many records were removed, if any? What kinds of records

were removed, if any? Were any changes made to the process for releasing documents to the

public, to the search software, or to anything else that might affect users?

A last minute question:

(e) Were any documents that underwent review redacted? For example, if only one page of a

document was deemed sensitive, was the entire document removed from ADAMS?

Mr. Baker chose to answer the questions together. His overview presented the current status

of the document security review and what the NRC is doing, what the NRC has done, and

where the NRC is going. He apologized for being late for the meeting and thanked the

attendees for participating in the meeting. Mr. Baker said that he was aware of the concerns

that the AUG members had and appreciated their patience while the document security review

was underway. He stressed that as soon as the review process was complete, the rest of the

documents would be made public again. When asked how many documents so far were

actually withheld, Mr. Reckley from NRC’s Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation stated so far

about 400 reactor-related documents were removed in the review process. Mr. Baker then

made the following point that the Web access to PARS should be available by the end of

January. He also said that there was a plan to repopulate the public ADAMS database and that

the documents for reinstatement would be reviewed in the following priority: (a) reactor related

(b) hearing related c) non-docketed (with sub-priorities within the group) and (d) materials

cases. After Mr. Baker’s explanation, attendees asked the following questions.

Q. What documents are reactor-related documents? 

A. The answer given was that Part 50 and 52 (Power Reactors and Advanced Reactors) were

considered to be reactor-related documents. 
Q. What documents are considered to be non-docketed?

A. Those would be records that are not associated with a specific plant or docket such as

NUREGs, Regulatory Guides, and Generic Communications.

Q. Did the SISP review affect the Legacy Library?

A. No, it did not. The document security review impacted only the ADAMS Publicly Available

Records System (PARS).

Q. Does NRC intend to review the Legacy Library?

A. No, there are no plans to review the Legacy Library at this time.

Q. Can ADAMS users get hard copies of documents?

A. As before, public users in need of a printed copy of a document can still print documents at

their workstation either from ADAMS directly or from a saved file. This includes all documents

on the public server. Should you have difficulty in printing any document, please contact the

PDR at 1-800-397-4209.

Q. Where is NRC going with this review process?

A. The security review, once completed, is intended to ensure that documents which might

provide assistance to terrorists will be inaccessible while maintaining public access to

information regarding NRC activities. 

Q. Are vendor-docketed materials considered non-docketed?

A. Yes and no. It depends on the document. If the document deals with generic issues then

it's non-docketed. If the document is specific to an NRC licensee, it may be docket-specific

(e.g. Pt.21 deficiency report). 

Q. Why were 400 reactor documents mentioned earlier not restored to ADAMS?

A. These documents did not meet the criteria for release to the public.

Q. How will NRC communicate to licensees that they need to self-screen documents?

A. We are working with licensees to let them know what information is to be made public.

Q. Can NRC establish criteria soon to tell licensees what to look for as they self-screen

documents?

A. We are continuing to work on this issue. 

Q. Is there a set time by which documents are released to the public?

A. Yes, it is usually five days. This delay intentional and is based on instructions to NRC staff. It

is designed to prevent responses to licensees being made public before the licensee has a

chance to receive the NRC response. 

Q. Where are some documents going if they are supposed to be in ADAMS and yet they can’t

be found?

A. They are being held until the document review is complete.

Q. How are non-docketed items reviewed in the SISP process? By document type?

A. Documents are being reviewed by the NRC offices responsible for the document. It can be

by document type, originating organization, or other factors. 
Break (2 pm-2:10 p.m.)

The meeting continued after a 10 minute break.

(k) Given the release of Version 7 of Adobe's Acrobat software, what are the NRC’s plans with

respect to the use of Acrobat and ADAMS? At what point does the NRC plan to move to a

post-Version 5 release of Adobe Acrobat?

Mr. Smith said that the public server currently uses Adobe Acrobat Version 5.0. The NRC will

be upgrading to 6.0 in the near future. The NRC does try to keep the current version running

on ADAMS. 

3. Action items from the 06/04 meeting update (2:10-2:55 p.m.)

a) What is the status of the proposed Web-based Legacy Library ?

This product is still on NRC’s wish list. There are limited resources and we are trying use them

as best we can to achieve the agency’s goals.

(b) Discuss any information about refining a second search in Web-based ADAMS.

Mr. Smith said that someone who is working on another Convera application suggested that the

best way to refine search results would be as follows:

1. Select search criteria on the Advanced Search page.

2. Instead of using the Refine Results checkbox, use the Advanced Search page link at 

 the top of the Results page to navigate back to your criteria.

3. Refine your search using the “Filter With” box on the Advanced Search page. This box

serves as a Boolean filter for the results and can handle multiple values. For example, if your

text search "nuclear" returned a results set that was too broad, you could add a “Filter With”

value of "license". In this case all of the documents returned would all be related to "nuclear"

(and its related terms if you're in Concept mode) and will include the word “license” as well.

4. If you need to refine that results set, you could repeat the same process over and over since

your criteria are saved on the advanced search page until you clear them. Ms. Goldberg

recommended that the PDR staff to publish this as an FAQ on the PDR Web page.

4. Discuss the results of the ADAMS Public Satisfaction Survey.

The AUG members were told that the objective of the survey was to determine whether 

ADAMS meets the public’s information needs; the public prefers Citrix-based ADAMS or Webbased ADAMS; or if the public has suggestions for system enhancements.

 
Mr. Smith said that the first combined Web- and Citrix-based ADAMS Public User Survey was

released to the public on 5/13/04 and was closed on 6/30/04, a duration of approximately 7

weeks. The survey contained questions about user satisfaction with ADAMS and related

services as well as users level of experience with the system. A total of 167 respondents ;The

survey results will be published in a semi-annual a report on ADAMS.

He said that the survey results from this first poll for both Citrix- and Web-based ADAMS

generally were a mix of praise and criticism. There were some strong suggestions for

improvements. Although several respondents noted that ADAMS is better than when originally

released to the public, clearly they felt that there is room for improvement. Issues needing

improvement included:

• System response time. 

• Author affiliation lists take too long to display. 

• Conversion of ADAMS’ TIFF files to PDFs. (As of June 2003, the NRC only uses a PDF

format for new documents in ADAMS. There are plans to convert the remaining TIFF

files to PDFs in FY05. 

• Delays opening PDF files. Byte-serving capability being introduced in Web-based

ADAMS should correct this problem. 

• Retrofitting older documents into ADAMS, specifically NUREGs, Branch Technical

Position Papers, and LERs.

A complete report will be posted on the ADAMS Web page. It will be an attachment to the

ADAMS semi-annual report.

5. What is the status of up future upgrades to Citrix and Web-based ADAMS? 

As for Citrix-based ADAMS, the NRC plans to deploy ADAMS Release 4.3 later this year. The

only major change for the public is that there will be a new viewer. The NRC also expects to

release an upgraded version of Web-based ADAMS by the end of the month. The current

version is Convera’s release 7.0.1. This will be upgraded to 7.0.3. There should be no major

changes in functionality. There were two questions about theses upgrades: What will happen

at the end of January relative to the 7.0.3 upgrade and the response was there should be no

apparent changes in the look and feel of Web-based PARS. Another question was: Would the

system be taken down for reindexing? Mr. Smith responded that Web-based PARS would be

totally reindexed before being redeployed to the public.

6. New business (2:55-3 p.m.)

 • Plans for next meeting

 • Set a date (Proposed July 20, 2005?)

It was decided that the next meeting will be held on July 20, from 1 to 3PM. One member of the

group asked if there could be a written update on the status of the review of documents. It was

agreed that this update would be done in time for the Regulatory Information Conference (RIC)
to be held March 8-10, 2005, and that the update be posted to the RIC Web site. NRC staff

promised to provide this update and to look into the request to post it to the Web site. 

7. Adjournment 

The meeting was adjourned at 2:20 pm.