Regulatory Information Conference 2017 feedback forms

Dear RIC 2017 attendees:

Thank you for making the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) 29th Annual Regulatory Information Conference (RIC) such a success! We really appreciate your participation and support this year.

In an effort to build on achievements and to address any challenges from our 2017 conference, we are asking you to complete this short survey. Please note that this survey takes approximately five (5) minutes to complete, and that your responses are kept confidential. Data will only be presented in aggregate form.

Once again, we thank you for your support of the RIC!

SECTION 1: GENERAL

1. Including this year, how many NRC Regulatory Information Conferences have you attended?

□ 1. This year was my first conference

□ 2. This year was my second conference

□ 3. I have attended 3 to 5 conferences

□ 4. I have attended more than 5 conferences

2. What best describes your employment affiliation?

□ 1. NRC Employee

□ 2. A company or government agency other than the NRC

2. Is your work position primarily technical or administrative?

□ 1. Technical

□ 2. Administrative

4. Please respond to each of the following statements about why you attended this year’s conference.

I attended the 2017 NRC RIC because…
	Strongly disagree	Disagree	Agree	Strongly agree	Not applicable
The conference provides updated information on nuclear regulation.	□	□	□	□	□
I could get the latest research information by attending the conference.	□	□	□	□	□
The conference addressed issues of nuclear safety.	□	□	□	□	□
The conference addressed issues of nuclear security.	□	□	□	□	□
The conference is easily accessible.	□	□	□	□	□
I wanted the opportunity to network with others in my field.	□	□	□	□	□
I believe that attending this conference is helpful to my future career goals and advancement.	□	□	□	□	□
I can voice my opinions to those in the field of nuclear regulation.	□	□	□	□	□

5. How much did each of the following factors influence your decision to attend this year’s conference?

	Not at all	Only a little	Somewhat	Very much
The metro accessibility of the conference	□	□	□	□
The free registration of the conference	□	□	□	□
The cost of the hotel	□	□	□	□

SECTION 2: PLENARY SESSIONS

6. Please evaluate the following:

	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent	Did not attend
The conference overall	□	□	□	□
The opening session	□	□	□	□	□
The plenary sessions overall	□	□	□	□	□

SECTION 3: TECHNICAL SESSIONS

7. Please respond to the following about the technical sessions.

	Strongly disagree	Disagree	Agree	Strongly Agree	Not applicable
The technical sessions met my expectations based on how they were promoted.	□	□	□	□	□
The information presented was specific enough to be useful to me in my work.	□	□	□	□	□
There was enough time for me to ask questions during the technical sessions.	□	□	□	□	□

SECTION 4: MATERIALS AND SUPPORT

8. How much do you agree or disagree with each of the following?

	Strongly disagree	Disagree	Agree	Strongly Agree	Not applicable
Conference information on the RIC website was timely.	□	□	□	□	□
The printed program for the RIC helped me to navigate the conference.	□	□	□	□	□
The RIC mobile optimized agenda was helpful.	□	□	□	□	□
I followed social media (NRC Blog, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Flickr) for information about the conference.	□	□	□	□	□
The RIC technical poster and tabletop presentations were relevant to my work.	□	□	□	□	□
Touring the NRC Headquarters Operations Center was useful for me.	□	□	□	□	□
The online registration and automated confirmation system was easy to use.	□	□	□	□	□

SECTION 5: TOURS

9. Please respond to the following about the tours.

	Strongly disagree	Disagree	Agree	Strongly Agree	Not applicable
The tours met my expectations based on how they were promoted.	□	□	□	□	□
The information presented was specific enough to be useful to me in my work.	□	□	□	□	□
There was enough time for me to ask questions during the tours.	□	□	□	□	□

SECTION 6: OVERALL

10. The RIC’s overall objectives are to: “provide a communication forum and to encourage openness in areas regarding nuclear safety and security initiatives and regulatory issues”, and “to provide attendees with new, important, pertinent and useful information.” How much do you agree or disagree that these objectives were met:

□ Strongly Disagree □ Disagree □ Agree □ Strongly Agree

11. How would you rate your overall experience at this year’s RIC:

□ Needs Improvement □ Satisfactory □ Good □ Excellent

In conclusion, please feel free to use the space below to: 1) elaborate on any of your responses, 2) suggest a topic for consideration, or 3) simply share any feedback that would be helpful to RIC organizers in planning the next RIC:

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

The estimated burden to respond to this voluntary information collection is five (5) minutes. The information provided will be used to determine areas of improvement for future conferences. If a means used to impose an information collection does not display a currently valid OMB control number, the NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person not required to respond to, the information collection.

OMB NO. 3150-0217 EXPIRES: 12/31/2019

Thank you for your time and we look forward to seeing you at next year’s RIC.

6