Text

Request for OMB Review & Supporting Statement Re NRC Survey Assessment of NRC Operator Licensing Program & Followup Interview. Estimated Respondent Burden Is 84 H
	ML20127M765
Person / Time
Issue date:	01/19/1993
From:	Cranford G; NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
To:	;
References
	OMB-3150-0013, OMB-3150-13, NUDOCS 9301290007
	Download: ML20127M765 (18)
	v • d • e

/--

l'

.j J

q.../

. m enn u matw,

'Regilest fo: 0MB Reviewma nfbgggf }

p.s c3

.m

~

-=

,e a

t 1

-o.

.". o. ? 6. np.et r for Do r c at t* e ymt '. 0 t er c t'ree top.e5 a.i t, s tv-e r e ee,.. 3 t +.e e-

.e..e :me o L ec.t.e 0 oer p??91 *e..e6 re ar mi s v-t ape'avr* -tn'e+ e mes c' tre sace

r 6's'c:s w

't f.ne* # o e = e !! (

Att

a

,c

.,est c.*s a Part 4 in s recsest 5 6 eve ^ v ae. [ c 3'N e e' m6 tat y ano Pepo 6 a

" < " ' * * " 8 7' e " P' b F'.', ?-

'.?? : m em r t ti er ct st* the 'e;. ret.r. re-*ca'.

""t

~

e

- 1e"te Dmei td8's h"

a -

a pern's T eubte k t e"c f JF w t 9 tt: t.e a*icer trs a

.. 6 0 m v e.e art m ed sy "t : a;r# o - cr i t =.ct' V4 6 h*E*'>'

?"< 2 ' 50?

r hie.- Como:ete This Part for M Requestr

.n m, r: i a., a7m. ne.

a. g-i U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 3

1 5 1

a

,,1 n u n se.c a u w s

,.v.

, w s:.

new...,.a George Usova

.301,_ _504-1064__

. - e.,m..w s c.,,,,,,,

v NRC Survey: " Assessment of NRC Operator Licensing Program and Follow-up Interview 5,,

.e_

e w

c, - -.,

42 10226

<>. oc-

?

s'

i..

.~

..n R111 - *ompatte itus Part On!y a t'.c husveu is for OMB Review tinder becut se Order 120H 2 e..,...

- .ae*_

r a.,1....,,....,,,

e s. <

.s

Sine c erreut.ve~t

~~

~

_ m

_ =

m; s

3-y

(

A

,,. ' 2, LL..

.d

..,;. ~ __

-. n..,. -..

..-~m

.. ~.....--~.

..E.,

1

.e,_

. <. m. ~,, m e,., s a,-, s r...,

<=m.m.

- we e m.m.s,4.e

.m

-w

-eas'.--.*.

u**-e+-*

m.,=

~

.ei.

2700a~0 J

..... ~.. m m.

f

$ 11__

n..n ue u.,

l' 935'129000k930119

~

"""'" E N.T 9dk PDR ORO EUSOMB t:'a a ret:.ra.

PDR

l

'j PART lit.-C:mpi-te This Part Only if the Request s for Accrov3' of a Coilettion cf interrnation Und:r the Pac.ir* ora Recac on 4t in e 5 Cr* U. 20.

u. acem--ree te -ee n.m ec e e+= c - !:. m.

c: Survey, Operator Licensing, Examinations" a

NRC plans to conduct a survey and followupinterviews with a sample of nuclear industry p:rsonnel as part of an evaluation of the Nuclear operator licensing program. The primary objectives of the survey are to identify problems with examination consistency, identify the advantages and disadvantages of a centralized versus decentralized approach, and identify

~ottigr recentral,irattygi>,,ssues.

,, < :,, ;* e q

,1 nt ;n.:tympgf 19l rw g g

] ;,.j

...p

- e.

=

rov,.

...s.

. c, w. c ~ e. c i, e m

. w ;c,

n.,

v er-

.c

* ~ '-

<~,u,

... <. e v. s - +

(Expedited Review)

~ -, -er - y : % u m.,- erm..: -

.34., oe,

~.u.. vc v > :

v*, e, ac

..e

~

1. c r n

e a cut y q % ::

}

U..r sn e ? e,-.- - : r e.,~ s.

e

.s :

i.... c g.

e,

. c g r.. c.~.

1 er..'

,c -,.

..o

... : s. ~:- a... ci : : en as.< ~, n o::

Not applicable

~..-

.y..,a x

,r...,..

. :me rc e.::

..s., -, c _.r m.,

120.

3-

.r.,v;

'si-e.,.,

1.2.

x.

s.

y..

.c c.c w.,.....,.

p,,,,,.,. m.....

_. 144_ _ _

t - :a.e.wie

.58 1>

84 a.,' cu r

+ ey m e r

.. *,....:, :., e e A. 4c...

.mc.e:y y.:c, g w.

. %~ ;e

.t

- +;enes C#:

" * *' r i e c+rt.rs n

c _a - es t e * :. r.*

3 *,

.:poa 3 *c,*a - s _. '3 ne:n g '. 3 t,

n a.

4sr.

.n....

1

,He d ' c*a' :

.a 1. w

,~

84

=

Re: .+ *eo Pr ;7 !: x ee i 8 7

' __.. s e9 a

.retC'B-r.e ~,

. -- ;e -vu,

3 0 f+e eve Pme I ass. m 1;

+04

' [ a m,a -

Lap a aty.n et J#erasce t e c s, 9

+

?

+84 4LTr ' e e s,_.-

ss; :t s

c.v r

20. C#r t west rece10 0'.'9 Et :n a.imw r comment r. oer N. 7 mc :ru :t"pt er to ca.'.y 'c9e r*e serrgte c' ~

..x w:w, h w re:. c ecn:;e

+,..e:uau-

.ca s i a.en One year from date of approval

2..: r.

it ec en: men :u rw comtione nenc.es s wte - s e we :- -3 :. wee = w < + ee: n '*ces m:cmos'r e Z > X

[boen "e sgrew ae name mg to sciect respere:S as coes tme cr:f N: w rc :. : ncnte e m y se: g y utistrai ara f::s x.

. m :c n r c "t(. r*'f a trcL'y '*' trie **ormaboa codecLOr n

v ? e,ste: w

.ca v_

Eapowoe Certthcaten~

a s :- 6g

3 't@est 0f OYB n*'0 43. 'Be 5?ency *1Jc

,e se y c" ;.* 3 42t'r :co 'ec tse tat we te't" et t"ti t'e -'t WF'e% 'i*

8 w. c, e :tr m rew:$ :

c.o

-: te, :me..

4e.o

- n m s: r c.

a.g. we : awa-m.

I, c... __ _ -, 1-r w

ie y e ( qe,

~

1 erat

-.dt@ jet k o'r0fficialforiRM N

fr i

b 7*

.6

.i.-

1

p, SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR NRC SURVEY:

" ASSESSMENT OF THE NRC OPERATOR LICENSING PROGRAM" AND FOLLOW-UP INTERVIEW (OMB Clearance No. 3150-

)

DESCRIPTION OF INFORMATION C0ttECTION i

The NRC plans to conduct a survey and follow-up interview: regarding its operator licensing program as part of a study to ascertain whether the operator licensing function should be recentralized.

The survey and interviews will sample nuclear plant personnel and members of nuclear industry professional groups about the implementation of the NRC operator licensing examination program. The survey and follow-up interviews w!11 also include all NRC examiners and managers, and NRC contract examiners and associated managers.

Survey participants will be asked to give-their views, attitudes, and beliefs about the advantages and disadvantages of recentralization.

The results of this survey will form the basis for the recentralization study findings to support or refute claims against decentralization.

The survey and follow-up interviews will also provide a source of information to develop suggestions for improving the operator licensing program and recommendations for resolving recentralization issues.

To complete the independent and impartial assessment of the operator licensing recentralization issue, the NRC will employ an independent contractor (yet to be determined) who will review and administer an NRC-developed survey Instrument in accordance with the NRC statement of work requirements.

The contractor will then sample a small percentage of the survey respondents using personal interviews. The contractor will evaluate the results and formulate findings and recommendations.

The Commission directed the NRC staff to institute the study using a contracted organization.

In accordance with the Statement of Work for Solicitation Number RS-NRR-93-029, " Study to Assess the feasibility of Recentralizing the Operator Licensing function," the contractor will have 15 days from the contract award to draft the survey questionnaire and 30 days from contract award to complete the survey. The contract is scheduled to be awarded by February 19, 1993.

Expedited OMB review is requested to support the scheduled contract award date and contract performance schedule.

A.

JUSTIFICATION 1._

Need for Collection of Information As a result of the decentralization of the cperator licensing responsibilities in the 1982-1983 time-frame, it is claimed that some adverse consequences have occurred. The most significant relate to the claims'of inconsistencies in the administration of the licensing exams. Claims of inconsistencies fall into three categories:

(1) Uneven exam quality - although all of the regions utilize NUREG 1021, the Examiner Standards that guide exam development and administration, there is " room for interpretation" of'the standards

---i&

esw-

rs e-

. t among regions as well as among examiners; as a consequence, some believe that regions and/or examiners employ unwritten rules for-giving the exam, which causes a variation in either quality and/or scope and depth among regions.

(2) Uneven number of examiners - regionalization has resulted in unevenness in the number of examiners.in each region which is further claimed to have resulted in an unevenness of quality of examiners in each region.

9 (3) Program philosophy - it is also claimed that regionalization has resulted in different emphases put on exams in each region.

The Commission, in a staff reauirements memorandum, instructed that the NRC conduct a study of the advantages and disadvantages of.

recentralizing the operator licensing functiun. - A critical part of-this study will be the sam; ling of nuclear plant personnel and nuclear industry professional group members using survey and personal interviews. The results of the survey will be used to formulate findings and recommendations regarding operator licensing recentralization issues.

2.

Aaency Use of Information i

The information obtained from the survey and follow-up interviews will be evaluated and used as the basis for recommendations to improve the NRC operator licensing program resulting from the recentralization study.

3.

Sgduction of Burden Throuah Information Technoloa_y There is no legal obstacle to the. use of information technology; however, the survey format is not normally conducive to the use of modern information technologies.

4.

Effort to Identify Duplicatina This information does not duplicate nor o erlap information collections made by the NRC or other government agencies.

i 5.

Effort to Use Similar Information No similar information is available to the NRC staff.

.6.

Effort-to Reduce Small Business-Borden Small business is not affected by.this information collection.

7.

Consecuences of less Frecuent Collection l

This information will be collected only once for purposes of this' evaluation of operator licensing functions _.

l-a

-. --.... ~..

m e

s. s,

...m

. 8.

CircRM1]Lnces Which Justify Variations from OMB Guidelines This information collection does not vary from OMB guidelines.

9.

(pnsultations Outside the NRC There have been no outside consultation regarding this survey.

10. ConfiJentiality of Infonation The results of this survey will be used to assist the NRC in evaluating the PROS and C0 tis of recentralizing the operator licensing function.

All information provided will be treated as confidential. Only members of the survey team and designated analysts will be permitted access to the questionnaire data.

Individual responses will be grouped with all other respondents for purposes of analysis and will not be reported as individual answers.

11. Justification for Sensitive Quetijimi No sensitive questions will be used in the survey instrument or follow-up interviews.

12. Estimated One-Time Co_st to the Federal Government The survey and the resulting recentralization study will be administered by an outside contractor.

The Federal cost of using a contractor to review the t1RC-developed survey instrument, conduct the survey and follow-up interviews, analyze the data and prepare the final recommendations is estimated to be approximately $350,000.

The technical monitoring and review time by the Operator Licensing Branch of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, including guidance and direction to the contractor and review and approval of interim and final deliverables is estimated to be 30 hours3.472222e-4 days 0.00833 hours 4.960317e-5 weeks 1.1415e-5 months for each of the five contract phases or 150 hours0.00174 days 0.0417 hours 2.480159e-4 weeks 5.7075e-5 months .

Thus, the annual Federal cost for technical monitoring and review is 18,450 (150 x $123).

Approximately 206 t1RC. employees and contractors be asked to respond to the survey; approximately 30 minutes will be required by each person to complete the survey.

Of this group, approximately 46 will be interviewed, requiring an additional one hour per interview.

Therefore, the federal cost for responding to the survey and follow-up interviews is $18,327 (149 x $123)

The total one-time cost to the federal government is $386,777

($350,000 + $18,450 + $18,327).

13. Estimate of One-Time Industry Burden and Co.s1 Approximately 120 industry personnel will receive the survey questionnaire; approximately 30 minutes will be required by each person to respond to this questionnaire.

Of this group, 24 (20

y A percent) will also be interviewed, requiring an additional hour for-each interview.

Therefore, the total industry burden-is expected to be 84 hours9.722222e-4 days 0.0233 hours 1.388889e-4 weeks 3.1962e-5 months (60 hours6.944444e-4 days 0.0167 hours 9.920635e-5 weeks 2.283e-5 months for questionnaires + 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months for interviews) at Lan annual cost of approximately $10,332 (84 x $123).

14. Reasons for Chance in Burde.D Not applicable.

15. Publications for Statistical Use-None.

B.

COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS The survey will also sample nuclear industry personnel; including -

members of the Professional Reactor Operator Society,- the Institute for Nuclear Power Operations, and a cross-section of reactor plant personnel.

The actual method of sampling these groups has not been-determined at this time.

The contractor performing the study will recommend the sampling methods as a task under the-statement of -

work.

The names and telephone numbers of the contractor who will actually collect and analyze the information cannot be provided until after award of the contract, i

i '

l.

1 f

I 1

4'

)5 1:

...,,. - - - ~..

.-.., -. - _.. - - -. - - -. _... ~.

'"*** *4P *

/e=.\\

'f! t'#aT".n"J'.* C'.,N.'ini%

gg,.c. 7,.n..T..J.A.T.:".

h Vlaa',"

'=

g

\\...../;

i o

v n

NRC SURVEY: ASSESSMENT OF THE NRC

\\

OPERATOR LICENSING PROGRAM

\\

LICENSEE NAAIE OR INDUSTRY GROUP.*

DATE SURVEY COAfPLETED:

Opemtor licensing responsibilities were decentmil:ed during 1982 and 1983. The NRC is now exploring recentmlidng the opemtor licensingfunction and is conducting this survey to obtain yourperceptions of the pms and cons of recentmlidng the opemtor licensing function. The results of this survey will sen e as one input to an ovemil study of this issue being carried out under contmct to the NRC.

It will take about 30 rninutes ofyour tirne to complete this survey. \\Vhen you have finished, please return the cornpleted survey in the attachedpre-addressed envelope. Your response is voluntary.

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEh!ENT: Tile RESULTS OF Tills SURVEY 1 VILL BB USED TO ASSIST Tile NRC IN EVALUATING Tile PROS AND CONS OF RECENTRALIZING Tile OPERATOR LICENSING FUNCTION. ALL INFORAIATION PROYlDED n'lLL BE TREATED AS CONFIDENTIAL. ONLY AfEAfBERS OF Tile SURVEY TEAAf AND DESIGNATED ANALYSTS WILL BE PERAll1TED ACCESS TO Tile QUESTIONNAIRE DATA. YOUR RESPONSES

\\ VILL BE GROUPED \\\\'ITil ALL OTilER RESPONDENTS FOR PURPOSES OF ANALYSIS AND \\YlLL NOT BE REPORTED AS INDIVIDUAL ANS1YERS.

QUESTIONNAIRE NUAfBER t

.t.

l 1

q SECTION 1.

BACK ROUND INFORMATION l

TIIE FIRST SECTION OF THIS QUESTIONNAIRE REQUES13 GI INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR WORK HISTORY. THIS INFOR BE USED TO ANALYZE THE EFFECT OF WORK EXPERIENCE U j

ATTITUDES AND BELIEFS ALL INI'ORMATION WILL BE TREAT CONFIDENTIAL AND YOUR ANSWERS WILL ONLY BE REPOR AGGREGATE WITH ALL OTHER RESPONSES,

1. What is the name of your organization?

t

2. What is the title of your current position?

~

3.

How long have you held this position? PLACE A CHECK MARK (/) BY THE ANSWER WHICH MOST CLOSELY REPRESENTS THE CORRECT

' ANSWER FOR YOU.

Under 1 year 1-2 years 3-5 years

~

6 9 years 10 20 years

._. Over 20 years

.-3

4. Do you possess a current license to operate a nuclear power plant?

y.

no a

IF YES: What is the date you received your license?

4 i

S I :.

r

,-ce.1

.+.--r

,..-*.----w,r.-w..-..w%

%w~,..m

,, - ~. - -., - -

,y

-,r,m,-ev-,r--,%-y-ww s,v yw-..

-,.l.,

,-y I

.._.m.

.._.__..m-3 l

i

5. Have you ever taken an NRC administered operator nqualification licensing exam?

I yes

- DO Please list the year (s) in which you took an NRC administered exam.

- t L

6. Ilow many years of nuclear power plant experience do you have?

Under 1 year 12 years 3-5 years 69 years 10 20 years Over 20 years Section 11.

CONSISTENCY OF TIIE LICENSING PROCESS The purpose of this section of the questionnaire is to determine your views regarding the issue of consistency in the NRC's' administration of the operator licensing examination.

PLEASE PLACE A CIIECK MARK (/) BEFORE THE ANSWER WHICH BEST EXPRESSES YOUR OPINION ON EACH QUESTION.

L 7.

How would you describe your current level of knowledge of the NRC operator licensing examination process? Would you say it is:

Very high

., _ About average 14w 8.a.

In my experience, operator __lleensing exams have been developed and -

admiulstered in a consistent fashion.

Strongly Agree Agree.

Disagree Strongly Disagree Don't Know l

k m.

4

)

8.b. In my experience, operator licensing exams have a consistent level of dimculty.

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Don't Know 8.c.

In my experlence, the operator licensing exam is developed with a consistent quality from examination to examination.

Strongly Agree Agrec Disagrec Strongly Disagree Don't Know 8.d.

In my experlene, operator licensing exams are administered in a similar manner, regardless of the facility in which they are taken.

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Don't Know 8.e.

In my experience, operator licensing exams are administered in a similar fashion, regardless of which NRC examiner conducts the examination?

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Don't Know 9.

If you answered " disagree" or "strongly disagree" to questions 8 a through 8.e, please provide examples of specific experience you have had with these aspects of operator licensing.

e 10.

The operator licensing process is required by lawi however, if you could make one change to the operator licensing process, what would that be?

SECTION III.

TIIE IMPACT OF REGIONALIZATION ON TIIE OPERATOR LICENSING ITNCTION Since 1981, the NRC has carried out the operator licensing examination process from its 5 regional offices. ' Die purpose of the next set of questions is to detennine if and how regionalization of the operator licensing function has affected the conduct of exams.

11.

All In all, I would describe the effect of regionalization on the operator licensing process as:

Very positive Somewhat positive Somewhat negative Very negative lt has had no impact on the process Don't know l WlIY IS TIIAT7 2.

Regionalization has allowed the exams to be better tailored to plant each Individual facility?

Strongly agree Agree Strongly Disagrec Disagrte Don't know

s_...

6 i

13.

In thinking over the hDPact of regl0nalkallDR on the operator licensing process, on a scale of 110, with 1 being very negative and 10 being tery positive, please circle the number which best expresses how you feel:

NO NEGATIVE IMPACT POSITIVE F

Impact on exam quality 1

2 3

4 5

s 7

s 9

to Impact on exam consistency 1

2 3

4 5

s-7 s

9 to Impact on exam administration 1 2

3 4

5 s

7 s

e to Please provide examples (xplaining your score for each selection:

14.

Can you identify spe:lfic difficulties you have encountered in the process as a result of a regionalized approach to operator licertsing?

yes no don't know l

IF YES: What were they?

l 15.

In your experience, have the licertse examiners asked clear questions?

yes no don't know IF NO: Please give examples:

16.

In your experience, have the license examiners asked reasonable questions?

yes no don't know IF NO: Please give examples:

l

9 7

17.

In your experience, have NRC examiners have asked for Irrelevant Information on examinations?

yes no don't know l

IF YES: Please give examples:

_l IF YOU ANSWERED YES TO ANY OF QUESTIONS 1517, DO YOU BELIEVE TIIAT CENTRALIZATION OF TIIE OPERATOR LICENSING PROCESS WOULD IIELP ALLEVIATE TIIIS?

yes no don't know VIIY IS TIIAT?

18.

Do you feel the NRC's licensing examination process has improved, declined or stayed about the same over the past 1012 years?

huproved declined stayed the same

-3 don't know l WIIY IS TIIAT?

l l

u i

l l

u s.

8 i

19.

Itave you had the opportunity to read NUREG 1021 " Operator Licensing Examiner Standards?"

j

.__ yes no Section IV.

TIIE IMPACT OF RECENTRALIZATION ON TiiE OPERATOR LICENSING FUNCTION One of the options the NRC is currently evalual;ng, is to recentralize the operator licensing function thls section of the questionnaire asks you to provide your views on if and how recentralizing the operator licensing function would either help or hinder the process.

20.

Recentralizing the operator licensing functions will have the following effect on exam quality.

._._ Very positive

__ Somewhat positive Somewhat negative

._._ Very negative

_ lt wil1 have no effect on exam quality 3

._ Don't know l WIIY"lS TIIAT?

l v

l 21.

Ilow would recentralization affect managemect and control of exams?

L

_ Very positive j

Somewhat positive

_ Somewhat negative L

Very negative-t

_ It will have no effect on management oversight and control

_ Don't know Please explain:

.__.7..

- 9 I

j I

22.

Recentralization of the operator licensing process would not affect exam consistency.

Strongly Agree Agree Undecided Disagree.

Strongly disagree Please explain:

4 T

23.. All in all, the benefits of recentralization outweigh the benefits of regionalization-regarding the operator licensing function.

Strongly Agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree Please explain:

24.

Please make any additional comments which you think will help the NRC in its evaluation of the effect of regionalization on the operator licensing function. -

4 I

1' We would like to thank you for parilcipating in this survey. Your input will be very_

- valuable in assis:Ing us in evaluating the various aspects of this complex topic..If you -

would like to provide your name so that we could. contact you in the event we need to follow up on any of your avsponses, plea % do so in the space below,o It is completely optional.

t l

NAME q

i-A

--M

-f 3aes W

-N-t

'ru mawe e

-te.

P ry

-15 i-

--y-maa sw p newv, e.

syip m

pye igy.y r-egg

~.--ris

.Mg.i.G.-gyd+g, ems ap m

gmy---9.,g

[7590-01)

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0HMISS10N Documents Containing Reporting or Recordkeeping Requirements:

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review AGENCY:

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

ACTION:

Notice of the OMB review of information collection.

SUMMARY

The NRC has recently submitted to the OMB for review the following proposal for the collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

1.

Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: New (Expedited OMB review requested within 30 days) 2.

The title of the information collection: NRC Survey:

" Assessment of the NRC Operator Licensing Program," and follow-up interview.

3.

The form number if applicable:

Not applicable.

4.

How often the collection is required: One time for the initial survey and:one time for a follow-up interview with a small percentage of ine. survey respondents.

5.

Who will be asked to report:

A sample of nuclear industry personnel; including members of the Professional Reactor Operator Society (PROS), the Nuclear Management Resource Council (NUMARC), and the Institute for Nuclear Power Operations (INPO); as well as a cross-section of plant facility personnel.

6.

An estimate of the number of responses annually:

144-(120 survey responses and 24 interviews).

7.

An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request:

84 hours9.722222e-4 days 0.0233 hours 1.388889e-4 weeks 3.1962e-5 months .(30 minutes per survey and one hour per interview).

8.

An indication of whether Section 3504(h), Pub. L 96-5.1 applies: Not applicable.

9.

Abstract: NRC plans'to conduct'a voluntary survey and l

follow-up interviews with a sample of nuclear industry L

personnel as part of an evaluation of the NRC operator licensing program. The primary objectives of the survey are to:

(1)

Identify problems with examination consistency, l

l l'

quality, efficiency, and management of the operator l

l

=-

. licensing program and determine whether these problems are the result of decentralization.

(2)

Identify the advantages and disadvantages of a centralized versus a decentralized approach to operator licensing.

(3)

Identify other recentralization issues; such as, transfer of responsibility, and relocation of employees.

Copies of the submittal may be inspected or obtained for a fee from the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW.

(Lower Level), Washington, DC.

Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer:

Ronald Minsk Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-

)

NE0B-3019 Office of Management and Budget Washington, DC 20503

. Comments can also be submitted by telephone at (202) 395-3084.

l The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda Jo Shelto7, (301) 492-8132.

Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this / [ b day of.

-1993.

t For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ml R

n

/

b

' Gerald F. Cr&nford

/)

}

Designated Senior Officia'l for Information Resources Management e

l I

I.

-

ML20127M765

Text

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search