Technical Assistance to Improve the Performance of Its Operating Power Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) by Using a Monitoring Strategy to Enhance Consistency in Risk-Informed Decision-Making.

THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (NRC) is issuing this Sources Sought Synopsis as a means of conducting market research or as a market survey to determine the availability of potential qualified vendors with the technical capability to provide all management, supervision, administration, and labor for a Performance Monitoring Strategy to Enhance Consistency in Risk-Informed Decision-Making. The applicable North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code assigned to the above project is 541715. THERE IS NO SOLICITATION AT THIS TIME. This request for sources and vendor information does not constitute a request for proposal; submission of any information in response to this market survey is purely voluntary; the Government assumes no financial responsibility for any costs incurred. The purpose of this announcement is to provide potential sources the opportunity to submit information regarding their capabilities to perform work for the NRC free of conflict of interest (COI). For information on NRC COI regulations, visit NRC Acquisition Regulation Subpart 2009.5 (http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/contracting/48cfr-ch20.html). All interested parties, including all categories of small businesses (small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, 8(a) firms, women-owned small businesses, service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses, and HUBZone small businesses) are invited to submit a response. The capabilities package submitted by a vendor should demonstrate the firm's ability, capability, and responsibility to perform the principal components of work listed below. The package should also include past performance/experience regarding projects of similar scope listing the project title, general description, the dollar value of the contract, and name of the company, agency, or government entity for which the work was performed. Organizations responding to this market survey should keep in mind that only focused and pertinent information is requested. If significant subcontracting or teaming is anticipated in order to deliver technical capability, organizations should address the administrative and management structure of such arrangements. Submission of additional materials such as glossy brochures or videos is discouraged. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION: Technical Assistance to Improve the Performance of Its Operating Power Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) by Using a Monitoring Strategy to Enhance Consistency in Risk-Informed Decision-Making. OBJECTIVE: Technical Assistance to apply a novel approach for assessment of risk-informed decision-making related to the current operating reactor oversight program (ROP) and to identify opportunities for further enhancements to the current ROP self-assessment process. BACKGROUND: The NRC regulates commercial nuclear power plants that generate electricity. Only Pressurized Water Reactors (PWRs) and Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs) are in commercial operation in the United States. There are currently 93 nuclear power plants in the United States (62 PWRs and 31 BWRs), which generate about 20% of our nation's electrical use. Additional Information on PWRs and BWRs is available on the NRC public website. The ROP Evaluation consists of the following three items. Annual Self-Assessments Independent Evaluations Stakeholder Feedback Annual Self-Assessments On February 24, 2000, the staff issued SECY-00-0049, "Results of the Revised Reactor Oversight Process Pilot Program". https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1618/ML16180A453.pdf The resulting staff requirements memorandum (SRM), issued on March 28, 2000, approved initial implementation of the ROP as recommended by the staff. The initial implementation of the ROP began on April 2, 2000. In a follow-up SRM issued on May 17, 2000, the Commission directed the staff to report on the ROP results after the first year of implementation. The staff did so and documented the results in SECY-01-0114, "Results of the Initial Implementation of the New Reactor Oversight Process", https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0114/ML011410551.pdf issued June 25, 2001. SECY-01-0114 also noted the staff's intention to continue to perform an annual self-assessment of the ROP. The objectives and details of the ROP self-assessment program are contained in IMC-0307 (Inspection Manual Chapter 0307), "Reactor Oversight Process Self-Assessment Program" https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0903/ML090300565.pdf and its appendices. ROP self-assessment activities leverage data analysis and trending tools to: (1) assess program-wide uniformity and effectiveness of ROP implementation, (2) evaluate the effectiveness of recent significant changes to the ROP, (3) evaluate the NRC's response to significant licensee events and declining licensee performance, and (4) perform periodic in-depth reviews of specific areas of interest, including the baseline inspection program. These ROP self-assessment activities help the staff determine whether the ROP was implemented in accordance with current governance documents, whether it was implemented uniformly and effectively across the regions and headquarters, whether it met its pre-established ROP goals and intended outcomes, and whether it was implemented consistent with the NRC Principles of Good Regulation. Taken in aggregate, these determinations form the basis for the staff's annual evaluation of whether the ROP remains effective. Finally, the ROP self-assessment approach ensures that the staff appropriately invests resources in addressing lessons learned that improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the ROP. Each year, the staff issues an ROP performance metrics report and an ROP self-assessment Commission paper in support of the Agency Action Review Meeting (AARM). The staff also briefs the Commission on the ROP self-assessment results following the AARM. Independent Evaluations In addition to the ROP self-assessment program, several independent evaluations have been performed since the inception of the ROP to analyze its effectiveness and recommend improvements. Over the past several years, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Office of the Inspector General (OIG), the Advisory Committee for Reactor Safeguards (ACRS), the Davis-Besse Lessons Learned Task Force (DBLLTF), and the SDP Task Group have all performed evaluations of the ROP. Early on, two evaluation panels performed detailed reviews of the pilot program and initial implementation of the ROP. These evaluations have generally provided favorable results but have also suggested potential areas of improvement. Several recommendations from these independent evaluations have been or are being incorporated into the ROP as detailed in the annual self-assessments above and stakeholder feedback below. Stakeholder Feedback External Surveys/Feedback External stakeholder engagement opportunities are not limited to the following; however, these are the Primary Communication Events: Monthly Public Meetings: The staff conducts monthly public working-level meetings with the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), the industry, and interested stakeholders to discuss the status of ongoing refinements to the ROP. This is an opportunity to solicit for feedback from NEI, industry, and interested stakeholders on initiatives or status of projects. Local Public Meetings and Engagements in Vicinity of Each Operating Reactor: The staff conducts public meetings or other engagement activities in the vicinity of each operating reactor to discuss the results of the NRC's assessment of the licensee's performance. These annual engagements provide an opportunity to engage interested stakeholders on the NRC's role in ensuring safe and secure plant operations. Annual Regulatory Information Conference (RIC): The staff typically sponsors a technical session at the annual RIC focused on ROP-related issues and topics of interest or sponsors an interactive ROP exhibit so that interested stakeholders can gather information and ask questions about the ROP. Additional ROP topics are typically discussed during the regional technical session. External Feedback Forms: In addition to sharing staff perspectives and gathering feedback during public meeting discussions, the staff compiles feedback forms from ROP public meetings (i.e., the working group meetings, focused meetings/workshops, and annual assessment meetings) to evaluate the effectiveness of public communications and use of plain language. These feedback forms are used to inform external communication initiatives to ensure that external content and publications relative to the ROP are clear, comprehensible, and understandable. ROP - Contact Us Form: External stakeholders can provide feedback or ask questions regarding ROP implementation across a wide array of topic areas using the ROP - Contact Us link. Historical External Surveys: From the inception of the ROP through CY 2011, the staff published regular surveys in the Federal Register for external stakeholders to specifically provide feedback on the ROP. The staff has since discontinued this practice as discussed in SECY-14-0047. The general results of those surveys were discussed in the respective annual ROP self-assessment Commission papers. Internal Surveys/Feedback Internal stakeholder engagement opportunities are not limited to the following; however, these are the Primary Communication events: NRC staff and management conduct biweekly conference calls with regional management and staff to discuss current issues associated with the ROP. The staff also meets periodically with regional managers to discuss more complex ROP topics and issues. Headquarters staff participate in each region's inspector counterpart meeting and/or end-of-cycle meetings so that regional staff and management can provide feedback on ROP implementation. The ROP feedback process described in IMC-0801, Inspection Program Feedback Process. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1934/ML19343A777.pdf allows the NRC staff to identify concerns or issues and recommend improvements related to ROP governance or guidance documents. Responsible staff will respond to and address the feedback in accordance with the requirements and expectations of IMC 0801. CAPABLITY SOUGHT: Expertise in the psychology of decision making, including how system - noise and biases contribute to mean squared errors, and capabilities to measure those impacts Working level knowledge of design and operation of US commercial nuclear power plants (i.e., such that, with the assistance of NRC staff, realistic scenarios could be constructed for surveys) Expertise in statistical analysis General familiarity with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Reactor Oversight Process Prior experience (5 years or greater) in performing assessments of variability-in-decision-making for either companies or government agencies HOW TO RESPOND TO THIS SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE If your organization has the capability and capacity to perform, as a prime contractor, for the services described in this notice, then please respond to this notice and provide written responses to the following information. Please do not include any proprietary or otherwise sensitive information in the response, and do not submit a proposal. Proposals submitted in response to this notice will not be considered. Organization name, address, email address, Web site address and telephone number. What size is your organization with respect to NAICS code identified in this notice (i.e., "small" or "other than small")? If your organization is a small business under the aforementioned NAICS code, what type of small business (i.e., small disadvantaged business, woman-owned small business, economically disadvantaged woman-owned small business, veteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, 8(a), or HUBZone small business)? Specify all that apply. Although no geographic restriction is anticipated, if responding organizations are located outside the Washington Metropolitan area (Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia), indicate how the organization would coordinate with the NRC program office located in Rockville, Maryland to provide the support services. Separately and distinctly describe your organization's ability to meet the capabilities indicated in the above section, Capability Sought. Separately and distinctly describe your organizations past performance in the areas described above under the above section, Capability Sought. Please indicate your organization's role (prime contractor, first tier subcontractor, and/or supplier) in related contracts. Please also provide the contract number, contract type, customer name, address and point of contact phone number and email address, contract value, detailed description of supplies and services included in the scope of that contract, period of performance (for services) or delivery date (for products), and any other relevant information. Indicate whether your organization offers any of the required capabilities described in this notice on one or more of your company's own Federal Government contracts (i.e., GSA Federal Supply Schedule contract or Government wide Acquisition Contracts) that the NRC could order from and, if so, which services are offered. Also, provide the contract number(s) and indicate what is currently available for ordering from each of those contract(s). Is your organization currently performing or have in the past performed same or similar services as those listed above for any of the licensees regulated by the NRC? If so, which licensees? See http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/licensing.html for more information on NRC licensing. Has your organization previously faced organizational conflict of interest issues with NRC? If so, what were they and how were they mitigated or resolved? Interested organizations responding to this Sources Sought Synopsis are encouraged to structure capability statements in the order of the area of consideration noted above. All capability statements sent in response to this notice must be submitted electronically, via e-mail, to Jeffrey R. Mitchell, at contact@example.gov , either MS Word or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF), by Wednesday, March 1, 2023, at 1:00 PM EST. DISCLAIMER AND NOTES: Any organization responding to this notice should ensure that its response is complete and sufficiently detailed to allow the Government to determine the organization's potential capability and capacity to perform the subject work. Respondents are advised that the Government is under no obligation to acknowledge receipt of the information received or provide feedback to respondents with respect to any information submitted. After a review of the responses received, a pre-solicitation synopsis and solicitation may be published in Federal Business Opportunities. However, responses to this notice will not be considered adequate responses to a solicitation.