Search Options
Index | Site Map | FAQ | Facility Info | Reading Rm | New | Help | Glossary | Contact Us

Protecting People and the EnvironmentUNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

• About NRC
  • The Commission
  • Statutory Authority
  • Strategic Plan
  • Budget &  Performance
  • Organization & Functions
  • Locations
  • History
  • Values
  • Policymaking
  • Radiation Protection
  • Fire Protection
  • How We Regulate
  • Grants
  • Civil Rights
  •  
• Nuclear
  Reactors
  • Operating Reactor Locations
  • Reactor Quick Links
  • Power Reactors
  • Research and Test Reactors
  • Operating Reactors
  • Operator Licensing
  • New Reactors
  • Operator Licensing for New Reactors
  • Reactor Safety Research
  • Advisory Comm (ACRS)
  • Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities
  •  
• Nuclear
  Materials
  • Fuel Cycle Facility Locations
  • Uranium Recovery Locations
  • Materials Quick Links
  • Special Nuclear Material
  • Source Material
  • Byproduct Material
  • Med, Academic & Ind Uses
  • Source Materials Facilities
  • Uranium Recovery
  • Fuel Cycle Facilities
  • Materials Transportation
  • Materials Research
  • Advisory Comm (ACMUI)
  • Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities
  • Materials Environmental Reviews
  •  
• Radioactive
  Waste
  • Waste Quick Links
  • Low-Level Waste
  • High-Level Waste
  • Uranium Mill Tailings
  • LLW Disposal
  • HLW Disposal
  • Spent Fuel Storage
  • Spent Fuel Transport
  • Waste Research
  • Advisory Comm (ACNW&M)
  •  
• Nuclear
  Security
  • Security Spotlight
  • NRC Responsibilities
  • Domestic Safeguards
  • Radioactive Material Security
  • Facility Protection
  • Nuclear Material Control
  • International Safeguards
  • Information Security
  • Emergency Preparedness
  • &;
• Public Meetings
  & Involvement
  • Public Meeting Schedule
  • Commission Schedule
  • Conferences & Symposia
  • Documents for Comment
  • Brochures & Fact Sheets
  • Involving Stakeholders
  • Info Quality Guidelines
  • Rulemaking Process
  • Licensing
  • Enforcement
  • Hearing Process
  • Hearing Applications
  •  

Home > Electronic Reading Room > Document Collections > Commission Documents > Commission Meetings, Slides, Transcripts, Meeting SRMs, and Full Written Explanation for Closed Meetings > 1997 > Meeting SRM M970129A

IN RESPONSE, PLEASE
REFER TO: M970129A

February 14, 1997

The Commission was briefed by the NRC staff on status of operating reactors and fuel facilities.

The Commission encouraged the staff to continue its review of the processes used for the evaluation of plant performance, specifically the Senior Management Meeting (SMM) process including identifying objective, meaningful, leading performance indicators and monitoring licensee actions to ensure that safety performance problems have actually been corrected. The process should be made more readily transparent, especially to the public. As part of this review, the staff should conduct a detailed peer review of the Arthur Andersen methodology (both its use of performance indicators and its selection criteria), compare the results of the application of that methodology to the results of the recent SMM, and evaluate and describe the reasons for any differences. The staff should address whether the Arthur Andersen methodology is more appropriate at the screening meetings or the Senior Management Meetings themselves. The Commission recognizes that the studies and analyses requested here may involve a discussion or description of a significant portion of the internal, predecisional deliberations from the most recent Senior Management Meeting process which are normally (and properly) withheld from public disclosure. The staff's documentation of the analyses requested here should similarly be withheld from public disclosure if the staff requests withholding on that basis.

The staff should evaluate the efficacy of defining and formalizing a unified licensee performance assessment program that integrates the various separate processes being utilized (i.e., SALP, plant performance reviews (PPRs),and SMMs). In doing so, staff should reexamine the role of SALP as it is currently understood and implemented in light of periodic PPRs and SMMs to determine its value in representing accurate and current assessments of licensee performance, and examine the need for, and structure of, numerical categorization of plants. The staff should consider the advisability of reissuing adverse trend letters at each SMM for which they are left in effect as well as issuing trending letters between SMMs (or some other defined evaluation interval) in warranted situations. Staff should provide the Commission with the results of its evaluation; any recommended changes in policy should be brought to the Commission for approval.

The Commission requested a briefing on the staff's evaluation of Commonwealth Edison's response to the 50.54(f) letter dated January 29, 1997, and specifically requested that Commonwealth Edison be invited to discuss their response with the Commission.

The Commission requests that the staff examine the significance of the notable increase in the number of plants placed on the watch list, and the reason for some plants apparently being placed on the list with little prior indication of a decline in performance. Relevant questions include (1) whether the increased number of plants on the list is supported by declines in other industry performance indicators, (2) whether NRC evaluation processes are failing to identify early signs of declining performance, and (3) whether the current results of the Senior Management Meeting are due to changes in the evaluation process or criteria. In addition, since the purpose of the watch list categories 2 and 3 is to identify plants with weaknesses that warrant increased NRC attention, the Commission also requests that the staff examine past data on actual inspection hours expended at various licensee facilities to determine whether there has been a "de facto" watch list different from the announced watch list and determine whether the consideration that resulted in the increased inspection efforts for these facilities should be factored into the formal watch list deliberations.