United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Protecting People and the Environment

Request for Voluntary Comment on the Pilot Program for NRC Recognition of Good Performance by Nuclear Power Plants

	 
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555

September 7, 1994


NRC ADMINISTRATIVE LETTER 94-11:REQUEST FOR VOLUNTARY COMMENT ON THE PILOT
PROGRAM FOR NRC RECOGNITION OF GOOD
PERFORMANCE BY NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS


Addressees

All holders of operating licenses for nuclear power reactors.

Purpose

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this administrative
letter to request industry comment, on a voluntary basis, on the Pilot Program
for NRC Recognition of Good Performance by Nuclear Power Plants.  The
submittal of this information is strictly voluntary.  No specific action or
written response is required.

Background

In March 1990, the Commission asked the staff to develop a pilot program to
recognize outstanding safety performance in the industry.  In August 1990, the
Commission approved a program proposed by the staff for trial implementation.
At the January 1991 senior management meeting NRC senior managers discussed
implementation of the Good Performer Program, and recommended several
improvements to the process.  Good performers were first recognized at the
June 1991 senior management meeting.  Since June 1991, the NRC has recognized
16 nuclear power plants that have demonstrated outstanding performance.

The staff sent the Commission an update on the status of the pilot program on
March 18, 1994 (SECY-94-071).  The current staff guidelines for the NRC Good
Performer Program and an account of its results are attached to this
administrative letter.

Discussion

During the periodic briefing on operating reactors and fuel facilities on
June 23, 1994, the Commission asked the staff to solicit industry comment on
the Good Performer Program.  The staff has developed a set of questions for
the industry to consider in reviewing the program and in formulating responses
to the administrative letter.  These questions are:

(1)Should the NRC continue the Good Performer Program?

(2)What changes, if any, would enhance the current program?

(3)What attributes should the NRC consider in assessing licensees for good
performer recognition?

9409070087                                            AL 94-11
                                            September 7, 1994
                                            Page 2 of 3


(4)What other programs can the NRC use to provide positive reinforcement or
recognize good performance?

(5)What other NRC programs should be modified to support the Good Performer
Program?

(6)Has the NRC Good Performer Program selected the outstanding plants?

(7)Do licensees consider recognition by the Good Performer Program as an
organizational goal?

(8)Are there any adverse effects, real or perceived, from being placed on
the NRC Good Performer list?

(9)Are there any indications of "rising standards" for Good Performer
recognition since 1991?

(10)Has the industry benefited or been penalized from the use of Good
Performer Program results by external organizations?

(11)What benefits, if any, have been realized by the licensees recognized
for good performance?

The NRC will study responses to this request to further analyze the pilot
program and make a final recommendation to the Commission.  The NRC is also
soliciting public comment through a Federal Register notice (59 FR 45315).

Requested Information

All holders of operating licenses for nuclear power reactors are requested to
voluntarily submit comments on the Good Performer Program.  Responses
referenced to the specific questions would be appreciated.  Responses
submitted by October 3, 1994, will be used by the NRC staff in its analysis.

Address the voluntary response to this request for information to the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN:  Document Control Desk, Washington,
D.C. 20555-0001.

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

The voluntary information collections contained in this request are covered by
the Office of Management and Budget clearance number 3150-011, which expires
July 31, 1997.  The public reporting burden for this voluntary collection of
information is estimated to average 4 hours per response, including the time
for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of
information.  Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect
                                            AL 94-11
                                            September 7, 1994
                                            Page 3 of 3


of this voluntary collection of information, including suggestions for
reducing this burden, to the Information and Records Management Branch
(T-6F33), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001, and
to the Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, NEOB-10202
(3150-011), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, D.C. 20503.

This administrative letter requires no specific action or written response.
If you have any questions about this letter, please contact one of the
contacts listed below.

  /S/'D BY BKGRIMES


    Brian K. Grimes, Director
    Division of Operating Reactor Support
    Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation



Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 29, 2012