ML20035E815
| ML20035E815 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/14/1993 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| SECY-93-099, SECY-93-99, NUDOCS 9304190282 | |
| Download: ML20035E815 (4) | |
Text
i RELEASED TO THE PDR l
r/uu a
f(
ms$.,
..................$.s l
'ca#
initi g
g
- =
^!
a,s*..../
POLICY ISSUE (Information) nori, u, igg,-
f_0R:
The Commissioners 0
FROM:
James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
ENHANCED PERFORMAfiCE If4DICATOR REPORT PURPOSE:
To respond to the Commission's directions to clarify the enhanced Performance Indicator (PI) Report and to answer questions regarding its distribution and use.
BACKGROUND:
On March 12, 1993, the Commission approved the use of the enhanced Performance Indicator Report with certain clarifications and a request for additional information.
This paper describes the clarifications that have been made and provider the requested information.
DISCUSSION:
In the Ltaff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) that approved the use of the enhanced Performance Indicator (PI) Report, the Commission expressed concern that the column headings "Below/Above" in the display of " Deviations from Peer Group Median" could be confusing. Those headings have been changed to
" Worse /Better" as directed by the Commission.
The Commission also directed the staff to clearly state on the Trends and Deviations pages of the report that the nominal intervals used for measuring plant self-trends are shorter NOTE:
TO BE MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE IN 10 WORKING DAYS FROM THE
Contact:
Donald E. Hickman, AE0D DATE OF THIS PAPER 492-4431 100061
- [ E 3f. l W f o Z R 1 3 ht
V i
T The Commissioners 2
i than those used for measuring deviations from peer group medians. This was I
done by adding "Short Term" to the title of the Plant Self-Trend column, and "Long Term" to the title of the Deviations From Peer Group Median column.
In j
addition, a note was added to the bottom of each Trends and Deviations page i
that directs the reader to Table 8 in Part 11 for the specific time frames used in the calculations.
l t
The Commission also requested to know who in the NRC will be routinely l
receiving the enhanced reports, how they are expected to make use of them, and l
what plans are anticipated for explair.ing the new features to NRC and industry l
users.
Approximately one hundred copies of each PI report are distributed within the NRC. Almost half of these are sent to managers in NRR, while the others are distributed to managers and staff in other offices and the regions.
I Performance indicator data are also separated by site and sent to each senior resident inspector. Attached is a list of those in the NRC who routinely receive reports.
In addition, PI reports are sent to INPO, and a senior manager of each nuclear utility receives the data for that utility's plant (s).
l Guidance on the use of performance indicators is provider 1 in Announcement 200, dated November 28, 1989, a copy of which is included in every PI report.
Performance indicators are intended as a tool for senior NRC management to monitor trends in overall performance for a given plant.
The indicators for a l
given plant should be viewed as a set to provide an additional measure of
-l plant performance. They are intended to be one of several tools for use by senior NRC management in decision-making regarding plant-specific regulatory programs. The indicators can also be of use to resident inspectors, licensing l
project managers, and other NRC staff. They provide trend information which l
may not be apparent from looking at individual event reports. Cause codes i
identify trends in programmatic areas of plant operations, and the enhanced report provides trend information during operations and shutdown periods separately.
Such data can be used to direct NRC inspection effort into areas 4
of potential problems. When used in this manner, it is important that the staff adhere to the precautions contained in Announcement 200:.PIs should not i
be used in communications with licensees as a measure of performance level, they should not be overemphasized in relation to other measures of safety.
performance, they do not provide a valid basis for ranking plants and should i
not be presented in such a way as to imply " problem facility" status for individual plants, and no regulatory action should be taken on the basis of Pls alone. The-underlying causes of the performance trends must be carefully.
assessed, evaluated, and understood (factoring'in other available information).
l
_i Performance indicators have many other uses as well.. Annual industry averages for each indicator are used to identify trends in industry performance. These averages are published in-the AE0D Annual Report, the NRC Annual Report, the NRC Information Digest, and the NRC Annual financial Statement. Graphical i
4 F
ii r
I i
l The Commissioners 3
j 4
displays of the annual industry averages have been used in meetings with OMB j
and in Congressional hearings, as well as meetings with individual licensees, i
owner's groups, !!4PO, and NUMARC. This information has also been used to measure itRC performance, on the premise that improving trends in industry j
performance are associated with good regulatory oversight.
1 The Commission also requested to be informed of plans for explaining the new j
features of the report to f;RC users and industry.
The enhanced PI report will replace the current report beginning with the first quarter 1993 report.
Each recipient of the current fourth quarter 1992 i
report also received a draft copy of the enhanced report for the. fourth quarter, which contains a description of the display and computational methods
?
used in the report.
This description will be included in all future reports.
Through the Interoffice Task Group on Performance Indicators, all f(RC regions i
and offices that use the report have provided input into the development of the methodology.
In addition, AEOD will explain the new features to regional i
personnel at the next available resident inspector counterpart meetings, and will discuss with fiRR the possibility of a similar presentation.
Licensees were also provided a draf t copy of the enhanced fourth quarter 1992 report.
The transmittal letters accompanying these reports included an explanation of the enhancements. Also enclosed with each licensee data package was the text l
portion which describes the new features.
t I
pj /
41.A$
\\
Ja...es M. 1 41or
,/ decutive Director J
i V
for Operations
Attachment:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
Commissioners OGC.
f..
4 ATTACHMENT I NRC RECIPIENTS OF THE PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REPORT Commissioners AEOD:
SECY Division Directors ACRS Branch Chiefs OGC NRR:
EDO Deputy Director DEDS Associate Directors DEDR Division Directors NRR Director Project Directors RES Director Selected Branch Chiefs NMSS Director Public Doc Branch Chief l
AE0D Director Doc Management Branch Chief OE Director Central Files 0SP Director OIP Director t
+
01 Director OPP Director Inspector General l
Controller Regional Administrators Regional Coordinators Resident Inspectors (site PIs only)
.i i
i 1
f I
a 1
f I
f
. :}