ML19340E232
| ML19340E232 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/11/1980 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19295E744 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7, RULE-PR-50, RULE-PR-51 SECY-80-491, NUDOCS 8101060699 | |
| Download: ML19340E232 (45) | |
Text
I 3-
@D"@P I
^^""^T "Y C "ISS oSL g CO!21ISSION MEETING
(
In h.%N* d:
DISCUSSION OF SECY-80-491 - PROPOSED RULEliAKING, " QUALIFICATION OF REACTOR l
OPERATOR" l
l l
DATE: December 11, 1980 PAGZs:
1 - 43
(,
g.
Washington,'D. C.
~
~
t
~
1 g,;.
O-l o
Q, r.
L
,5 5
~
OZ;::~
~
mo sr
=
(
i?
s
,.. ~
Q S
a e3 7s E'
REPtMIT1.YG ALDEA%Y
[b.;
~
(
l 400 Virgisia Ave., S.W. Wasningten, D. C.
2002'4
>;r - 1,1
- alachena: (202) 554-2345 t
, ;, s
.1 s-x;.um IN._N,W
.810306 d;
.m 1
(
JWB ach l
stRC 1
12-11-80 l
l UNITED STATES OF AFERICA 1
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
3 DISCUSSION OF SECY-80-491 - PROPOSED RULEMAKING, 4
" QUALIFICATION OF REACTOR OPERATOR" f
2 5
S j
6,
{
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, S
7 Commissioners' Conference Room, j
1717 H Street, Northwest, M
Washington, D.C.
d" 9
~.
Thursday, 11 December 1980.
c h
10 The meeting was convened, pursuant to notice, at 2:04 p.m.,
5 IIl 4
BEFORE:
B N
I2 JOHN F.
AHEARNE, Chairman VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner 13 5
PETER A. BRADFORD, Commissioner JOSEPH M. HENDRIE, Commissioner
~
3 14 ALSO PRESENT:
E 15 x
Samuel J.
Chilk, Edward Hanrahan, William Dircks,
)
'0 l s
I Stephen H. Hanauer, Edward C. Wenzinger, Paul F. Collins, a
E Guy A. Arlotto, and Steve Richardson, w
18 5
l 19 2n l
20 l
l 21 t
22,
i 23 '
i
[
24 !
l t
25 l
r k
]
5 U
DIS ~ 1 m his is as c= official. ::a=sc:1pc oI a. =aae' g af 2a U:1:ad S:a:as Nuciaar Zagulaccry Cc=::issica held on. Oedem I~ /.2. /'fF6 in ha Cc==ission's officas ac 1717 E Stranc, N. '4., 'Jashir.g:cu, D. C.
h e.=mac1=g u s open cm puht'+ atta=da=ca a=d obserracion.
- " is. ::ansc=17e has see been raviewed, cc::ac:ad, or edi:ad, a=i 1: :::a7 cc= 21=.i=ac===acias.
l na : m=scripe is i=:sedad sola17 for gn=arsi # #c:=a:1c=al purposes.
As p;cvidad by 10 CZ2. 9.103, is i.s =ce pa:: of de fc:=al or i=fs--=1 raccri of decision of da =ac:ars disc =ssad.
Izprassions of opd dc= is -6d=
- anscripe da so: sacassaril7 raflac: fi=al deca==i=aticus or beliafs.
Yo plaadi=g or other paper =ar be. ! ad 'ri:h da Ccz=rissic=.1: any p ccandi=g as -J:a
- sstiL: of or add:assed a any sca:a=c== or a.ra=: contai=ad.
hara1=, excape as the Cen=tissics =ay au:he:f:a.
\\
O i
O O
e
I jwb 2
I EEEEEEE1EEE I
1 2
(2:04 p.m.)
3i CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
The Commission meets this 4
afternoon to hear at least a discussion on the paper which has I
s 5'
come before us.
It regards the qualifications of operators.
E j
6 This is a series of actions that flowed from reexamination of j
R 7
one area of the Commission's responsibility.
That is:
Who s
j 8'
ought to, and what level ought they to have of capabilities d
9 who ought to be allowed to operate nuclear power plants in the 3
10 sense of operators.
z=
i j
11 l Shortly after the Three Mile Island accident, the 5
i I
g-12 l Commission made some preliminary decision with respect to E
i j
13 i upgrading that.
Certainly many of the reviews of the accident
=
m i
14 concentrated on the federal regulatory side and the management t
$j 15 side, but they also mentioned the, in many cases, weaknesses
=
j 16,
that existed in the development of requirements and the i
(
17 training of operators.
e f
18,
We have established a new organisation in the P
I r
19 ;.
structure of NRR which focuses upon such things relating to g
M l
20 l the human factors, and this afternoon we will hear from some
(
l 21 of the people in that group and will discuss some of the l
i 22 issues relating to this.
23 '
I don't expect us to reach a vote on this this i
24 l afternoon, but I thought it was essential that we at least try j
25 to get a little clearer picture of some of the issues.
t
o I
I jwb 3
I I William?
f 2
MR. DIRCKS:
As you pointed out, it is a discussion 3
of the proposed rule.
I think you will see, as we get into it, I
4! there are still spots that at least I have some feelings on, 5
g but I have more feelings of insecurity than I do have feelings S
i j
6'I of answers that I can provide.
R*S 7
As Steve will point out, this is a beginning and a s5 8
a response to many of the Commissioners' suggestions and approvals d"
9
~.
over the past year or so, and the proposed rule serves as a E
10l handy vehicle to get into many of these points.
=
II When we get into the qualifications and the 3
12 E
prequalifications of reactor operators, and so on, that's I
=
(
g 13 I think where we can stand some discussion on that one issue.
=
m E
I4 Steve, would you pick up from that point?
E
{g 15 MR. IIANAUER:
There's hardly anything left.
=
y 16 Mr. Chairman, to Mr. Dircks' right is w
i I7 Mr. Wenzinger, head of the Reactor Systems Standards Branch --
E 18 this is a Standards ' papet.
To his right is Paul Collins, head
+"
19 of Operator Licensing Branch, well known at this table.
g i
n 20 This, as people have said, is a snapshot of a moving 21 target.
You made some decisions roughly a year ago which are 22 being implemented now -- some of them already in force, and 23 a y of them being phased in at a schedule consistent with the 24 [l m n l availability of people, and the requirements of safety.
25,,
The proposed rule, with some minor additions, codifies s
i ALDERSON REPORTING. COMPANY lNC.
t
1 jwb 4
1 !
the decisions that have already been made.
So that instead of I
2' somebody's letter, we have the rules which say what our 3
requirements are.
s 4
Since those decisions were made, we.are a year older e
5 and a year smarter.
There have been a number of discussions E
j 6
that show that --
R l
S 7
CHAIR!iAN AHEARNE:
I certainly agree on the first aj 8
one.
d 9
fir. HANAUER:
Yes.
10 (Laughter. )
E l
11 MR. HANAUER:
I don't know how much smarter a year M
d 12 is.
E=
(
_E 13 There are a number of soft places in the proposed
=
z g
14 i rule as it is now drawn.
We have had some discussions in the t
l 15 staff and with you, and I think some of them are rather highly x
=
g 16 i controversial and deserve the rulemaking process to resolve s
d 17 !
them.
5 18 -
The thing we would urge is that sufficient decisions
-[
19 :
be made to get on with -- namely, the publish "a" proposed n
20 l rule and find out what kind of public considerations there 21 are, either the ones that we know about, or even more impor-22 tantly the ones that we don't yet fully understand.
23 '
Mr. Uenzinger will present the content of the rule, 24 l and in accordance with the Commission's request Mr. Collins i
25 j has put together some second-hand knowledge about < hat is going.
f i
ALDERSON REPO.RTING CO.MPANY. INC.
jwb 5
l 1l on in other countries, which you can have at whatever depth i
2l we can provide.
3 MR. WENZINGER:
Good afternoon, gentlemen.
4f My name is Edward Wenninger, and I am Chief of Reactor Systems 5l S tandards Branch in the Of fice of S tandards Development.
e O
j 6l I will be talking to you today on the subject of R
7j nuclear power plant operator licensing covering education, s
j 8
experience, training, and other qualification requirements.
d d
9 Our proposals are in the form of a number of Y
10 proposed revisions to Title 10, Part 55, and one small change 3
11 to Part 50.
j s
y 12 Mr. Collins, to my right, will speak on the E
I i
13 l subject of what people are doing in other countries.
~=
l 14 l The proposals that I will talk to you about today u
I l
=
2 15 l are as a result of the Commission's actions in SECY-79-330E and z
=
g 16 the implementing memorandum from Mr. Chilk, which gave w
y 17 direction to the staff regarding the recommendations in x
=
t 5
18 !
SECY-79-330E.
l l
9
{
19 ;
A number of the Commission's recommendations in 20l; this regard have already bec.1 implemented by letter from 21!
Mr. Denton to all nuclear plant licensees.
This was done in h
i 22 E March of this year.
l i
23 ;
SECY Paper 30-491, which is the one that is
(
24 before you now, was submitted to you and gives you our l
25 specific proposals for the proposed rule changes to Part 50 and a
w ee
l 0
jwb 6
l l
1 i 55, to implement the direction you've given to us on operator I
2 qualifications.
3 Could I have slide number one, please?
4 (Slide. )
i 5l The proposals staff has made cover nuclear power e
E I
N 3
6e plant operator qualification requirements in the areas of a
N i
g 7i education, experience, and training.
It covers these areas s
5 8
for both senior reactor operators, abbreviated "SRO," and N
d=
9j reactor operators, abbreviated "Ros."
)
I l
E 10 l Requirements on the use of simulators in operator 5
i 11 !
training and requalification, and restrictions on the type of
<S d
12 simulators to be used are also included in the rule change.
5=
d 13 l There are also requirements on periodic requalifica-5 E
14 '
tion of both reactor operators and senior reactor operators.
7 d
15 Not only have we made specific proposals for codifying specific 5
3 16 I Commission decisions, but we have also made some additional i
n 1
\\
l
^
g 17 related proposals which staff believes are necessary in order G
[
~
i l
E 18 to specify adequately reactor operator and senior rearcor i
E 19 operator qualifications.
x A
t 20 l CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
And you are going to --
21,
MR. WENZ' sER:
I'll go through those.
22 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
-- highlight that.
k I
23 MR. WEUZINGER:
I will briefly cover those 24 j provisions -- those previous decisions, and I will also specify 25 what additional things that we are proposing separately in n
x 2
i jwb 7
1 !
subsequent slides.
1 2l The proposals we have made to you in SECY-80-491 l
3 f also include one change to Part 50.
I would just mention what l
4j that is, now.
It requires that a condition of the facility I
e 5l license be that administrative procedures be developed by the 9
j 6l licensee in order to ensure the reactor operators and senior R
l 5
7I reactor operators are familiar with current plant conditions.
l 8!
The reason that is a separate item is because the licensee d
9 provisions are in Part 50, and the operators are in Part 55.
Y 10 j We are requesting your approval to issue the staff's z
i
=
j 11 j proposal of SECY-80-491 for public comment at this time, as 3
y 12 l Steve mentioned.
=
E' 13 !
Could I have slide two, please?
1 E
I A
14 !
(Slide. )
0 l
b f
15 !
This slide covers in summary form the principal 5
j 16 items in the proposed rule change which the Commission has A
y 17 '
previously requested.
Included are:
Operator and senior x
=
l G
18 reactor operator experience requirements -- that's the first E
l 19 l two major items on the slide; mandatory use of simulators for 6
i 20 !
three items:
initial training, annual requalification; and 21l for recertification of operators after they've had a period of 1
0 22) inactivity.
.i 23 )-
The third item on the slide is NRC administration 24 ;
of the requalification examinations to be given annually.
1 1
25 i The fourth item --
~
i
'i 1
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
jwb l
8 l
i jl C11 AIRMAN NIEARNE:
Could you -- I guess I had i
l 2l forgotten the second part of that.
Refresh my memorny on the "unless facility licensee is directed to do so"?
3 t
MR. HANAUER:
That is a hedge.
We have resource t
4
[
troubles, and we don't see them magically vanishing on the f
e 5
E I
s 6j ef fective date of this rule.
We see a situation at some future e
r i
time when we simply don't get there, and want an escape-valve.
j 7
OIAIRMAN MIEARNE:
I guess what I am trying to 8
c J
understand, then, is that -- This is a codification of the g
9 i
I 10 previous Comission decision.
Was the previous Commission fl jj !
decision --
c3 MR. HANAUER:
It wasn't in that much detail.
It l
d 12 13 said, we should give them; and we ' re getting ready to.
h E
I CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
All right.
I guess it --
L i
14 U
15 l MR. HANAUER:
But we could see -- we could see a N
5 16 !
situation where --
- r!
OIAIRMAN MIEARNE:
S teve, I don' t argue with the
-g j7 d
I E
18 escape valve, the " hedge" need; what I was trying to refresh i
my memory on was I didn't recall that in the previous f
{
19 A
Commission decision, which is the title of that chart.
20 MR. HANAUER:
You are correct.
l gj
?
CIIAIRMAN MIEARNE:
Thank you.
[
22 t
I i
MR. WENZINGER:
The last item on the slide has to y
23 do with the scope of examinations, and expanding these 24 examinations to include therr.odynamics and hydraulics.
25j i
(
d d
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
f
I jwb j 9
l 1l Could I have the next slide, please?
I 2
(S lide. )
3 I will summari::e the additional proposals that 4
we have made on this slide, and then I can discuss each of them I
e 5i if you like.
Other than that, if you like, we could then go S
l 3
6l on to Mr. Collins' presentation; or we can go through the 67 7
details of this.
~
j 8
Let me first give you an overall look at it.
The r)
I d
9 items we have added include:
education requirements for senior Y
10 operators; education and experience requirements for reactor Ej 11 operators; specifications on the type of simulato,rs that are 3
to be used for operator training and testing; and requirements y
12 i
=
13,
regarding operator knowledge of plant conditions.
That is the i
14 !
item in Part 50.
E E
15 We would like -- Would you like me now to go on to 5
y 16 !
the details of these?
Or would you like to hear from
-s y
17 Mr. Collins?
E i
5 18 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Why don' t you cover the details f
19 ;
of what you have.
n 1
20 l MR. WEMZINGER:
Okay.
i 21 !
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
And I gather what Paul is going 22 h to do is then contrast that with it.
23 MR. COLLINS:
Yes.
24 ;
MR. WENZIMGER:
Sure.
25,l CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
So why don' t we hear you, firs t.
t..
_ ALDERSON. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
I jwb !
10 1
MR. WEN 7INGER:
Be glad to.
Okay, could I have i
2l slide number four, then, please?
3 (S lide. )
l 4!
Education requirements for senior reactor operators c
5l include 60 semester hours of college-level courses, which is 8
j 6i the same educational requirements that we have imposed for the R
7 shift technical advisors, and the subjects are listed on the A
j 8;
slide.
d 9l Regulatory Guide 1.8, which has just been completed 2
10 and out for public comment -- in fact, the public comment 5
j 11 period finished on the 5th of December-- covers the details of
's Y
12 l operator selection and training.
4 I
g 13 I In Reg Guide 1.8, the staff has recommended that a
=
14 BS degree that includes 60 semester hours of training as a
$j 15 l minimum educational requirement for a plant shift supervisor.
16 I might note that a plant shift supervisor is required to have s
N 17 !
a senior reactor operator's license.
5 i
h 18 l CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Now, 1.8 would, in addition to C
6 h
19 l the degree, it also covers this kind of background and degree?
a 20 [
MR. WEU?,INGER:
Yes, it does.
That's correct.
21 l Could I have tne next slide, please?
h 22 l (S lide. )
!l 23 MR. DIRCKS:
Could I -- I think yesterday I received 4
24l a letter from Admiral Wilkinson saying that INPO was reviewing i
25l 1.8, and they wanted more time to work on that subject, and d
1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANYo INC.
i I
l
(
jwb j 11 j
r I
l 1 !
they were asking for an extension of some sort.
I have not l
l 2i looked into this matter.
l l
3:
S teve, I don't know whether you've -- You got the 4
same letter I got?
(
l e
5, MR. !!ANAUER:
I got the same letter.
INPO made a i
E.
e j
6' very strong representation to the President's oversight R
i 7j Committee that training requirements were disorganized, and I
i 8l have formed a committee to organize them.
I am an NRC observer l
t 0
9!
on this Committee.
I will know af ter the first --
i
{
=
i i-10 !
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
These are our training i'
E i
=
A 11 l requirements?
I i
d 12 :
MR. HANAUER:
Yes, our training requirements.
z i
E s
13 I don 't have any particulars from them.
They f
l 14 l complain loudly, but so far not specifically.
We are meeting l
t:
[
15 !
on the 13th, and I will know whether they want a one-month or ti
)
16 l a one-year delay, and make a recommendation at that time.
~i d
17 MR. WENZINGER:
In fact, they have --
5 5
18 '
MR. HANAUER:
Maybe I will get some specifics.
=
i-
}
19 l MR. WENZINGER:
They have not commented on the n
20 {
Guide itself at all.
They have simply asked that we delay 21 l issuing the Guide until they have had time to make specific t
22 ]
proposals to us.
'I 23 :
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Is part of their specific 24j proposal, do you know, that they would like to be proposing 25,
that we certify them?
i t
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
c jwb i
12 1 i MR. HANAUER:
I have heard nothing along those, or I
2i any other specifig lines.
3 (S lide. )
I 4j MR. WENZINGER:
On the next slide, which is on the I
5, g
screen now, we note that reactor operators will be required to u
j 6l have a high school diploma, or a General Educational Development R
7l 5
Certificate.
N l
8{
COM!iISSIONER GILINSKY :
What is that?
d 9l CHAIRIiAN AHEARNE:
It is what I hope to get them to 2
i O
i y
10l strike.
But go ahead and explain what it is.
E h
11 !
t!R. UENZINGER:
Okay, it is an examination given 3
i j
12 l to people who have not completed the normal high school 5
i
_E 13 i curriculum and received a diploma from an ordinary high school
=
g'It 14 {
at any place in the United States.
It is an examination which t
t:
=
i 15 l is given that, if passed, is considered to be the equivalent g
16 '
j of a high school diploma.
A y
17 CHAIRMAN A!!EARNE:
In some cases is considered.
5 5
18 !
liR. WENZINGER:
Yes.
E h
l9,l COf1MISSIONER GILINSKY:
These are state e::ams?
n i
20l MR. WENZINGER:
Yes.
21 CHAIRIiAN AHEARNE:
The reason I would like to have J
22 i us s trike that is that -- and one can always find cases to 23 i say, well, I know X, or I know Y, o r I ' m Z -- b ut at least i
24 )
when I know the Defense Department, and particularly the Army, 1
25l went through what ought they to require in order to address J
d ALD_ERSONREEORIING_COMEANXJMC,
l jwb l 13 I
i j!
problems they were having with respect to getting people to l
2 go through their training program and stay in and perform 3
adequately, they dropped the General Educational Development 4
Certificate as equivalent to a high school diploma, and now e
5 just have "high school degree graduates."
R=
i 3
6:
The argument really was that they had found, e
l 8
7 through the experience of going through their data, that having E
8 gotten the diploma indicates a certain ability to discipline N
d 9j oneself, to stick with something, to be able to work in a set c
N 1
E 10 of environments with regulations.
And I think, just as in their i
I 11 environment it turned out to be a valuable discriminator, I
<3 d
12 i think in what we're going for it also ought to be.
z E
I d
13 i So I don ' t think it is equivalent.
E i
E 14 !
COMMISSIONER HENDRJ.:
What do you do with the E
l u!
15 l operator:s who are presently 1: ~ ensed and serving satisfactorily 5
I
)
16 f who do not have high school diplomas?
Have you now removed E
l 17 i their livelihoods?
5 E
18 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Well, (a) I don't think we've 3
I 19 at least, certainly in the briefing we haven't yet addressed i
i 20 !
the backfit questions.
But just as with respect to a reactor, i
21l I think also with respect to a reactor operator, we have to I
h 22 try to decide what we think are the appropriate requirements, 1
i 23 and then address to what extent, or how do we take into 24 3 consideration either plants or people who don't meet that J
- i 25 :!
requirement.
1 1
1
I jwb ;
14 l
l 1 !
MR. WENZINGER:
In the proposed rule, we did intend I
i 2l th at the requirements spelled out would be backfit.
That 3,
would include of course if a GED were acceptible, an alterna-4l tive for an individual who had not yet achieved a high school i'
e 5
diploma.
Removing that would clearly create a problem.
~
N N
6i CIAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Or one obvious solution would be c
R
?;
7' that for anyone who currently holds -the license and does not s
5 8,
have a diploma, then they would have to get the GED.
I would u
e
- i 9
point out t ) you that if a person doesn't have a GED right now, Y
10 that he would still have to, under your proposal, have to go z=
t E
11 '!
and get it.
B i
d 12 '
MR. UENZINGER:
That's correct.
z I
=
i 5
13 l OIAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I don' t think the backfit issue E
14 i is an unworkable problem.
I just would -- at least I would i'i i
l 15 l intend to propose striking that.
N i
J 16 i MR. WENZINGER:
Hell, it would seem to me, if the G
17 GED alternative were to be deleted, the backfit problem would
=
i 5
18 '
be created.
U C
19 i CIAIRMAN AHEARNE:
The backfit problem, unless you x
i E
i 20 l can verify that everyone who is now an operator has either a 21!
GED or a high school diploma, there is some backfit problem 22
{
automatically.
23 '
MR. WENZINGER:
"Some, " yes.
But you create --
24 j CIAIRMAN AHEARNE:
How many of the current operators 1
25 l don' t have high school diplomas ?
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
1 jwb )
15 I
MR. COLLINS:
A small number.
I cannot recal1 the 2'
last time I saw an application that indicated lack of a high 3
school education.
i 4;
CHAIRMAN AllEARNE:
So I'm not saying that it is not I
g 5l a problem, but I am saying it is a workable problem.
H i
j 6l MR. WENZI!IGER:
Okay?
a 7
COMMISSIONER GILIIISKn What are the standards for 3
8 pilots?
d 9
MR. DIRCKS:
You mean a commercial airline pilot?
Y 10 l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Yes.
3 h
Il MR. COLLINS:
A high school education is the 3
y 12 l maximum formal education they could require.
E I
j 13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
But is it --
i z
I4 l MR. COLLIUS:
They couldn't j ustify to the EEO
{
15 Commission that a college degree was necessary.
i y
16 l MR. DIRCKS :
Right now, I would wager daat most of M
i b.
17 '
the commercial airline pilots come out of the military programs,
x=
{
18 and I don't think you get into the pilot training school without 19 g
a college degree.
M
\\
20 CIIAIRMAIT AHEARNE:
Righ t now, that 's right.
You 21 j.
need a college education, a batchelor's degree to get into i.
22 military pilot training.
23 MR. COLLINS:
But the federal standards still 24,
accepts a hign school education, the FAA Standards on a
25j requirements.
J 1
3 1
i jwb 16 1
1!
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Does it accept less than a l'
2 high school education?
3 MR. COLLINS:
No.
i i
4!
MR. WENZINGER:
The rest of the slide shows the e
5 experience requirements both' at ordinary power plants, at a E
j 6
facility for which a license is sought, and experience as an R
8 7
unlicensed operator at the facility --
8 8
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY :
What can an unlicensed d
=
9 operator do?
What is he permitted to do?
z h
10 l MR. IfENZINGER:
It depends on whether he is being z
i i
11 l supervised or not supervised.
If he is being supervised by a
=
E 0
12 i licensed operator, then he's permitted to do the things that a z
i 5
i s
13 i licensed operator is permitted to do.
j 14 If he is not being supervised b y a licensed I
t 15 ope rator, then he may do those other things.
5 MR. COLLINS:
Let me qualify that.
That's as he is j
16 l s
6 17 being trained.
You can't take an unlicensed man and say:
E k
5 18 :
All right, become an operator -- just because there is another
=
l H
i E
19 operator in the room.
~
5 l
20 l What we are saying is, he has to manipulate controls.
21 !
He has to do the operator's job in part of his training program, i
h 22 j and this must be done under the direct supervision of a licensed ii d
23 -
man.
24,
MR. WENZINGER:
Correct.
1 25.;
MR. COLLINS:
I didn't want to give a wrong l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
jwb 4 17 h
1 j impression that unlicensed people can do anything an operator i
2 can do, just because there is another operator present.
3 COMMISSIONER HENDRIO:
Every shif t has what are 4!
called " auxiliary operators," or whatever, that don ' t normally I
e 5'
step to the console to manipulate reactor controls, but do all 9
6' sorts of useful jobs in the plant associated with the shif t.
o R
s 7i MR. COLLINS:
Operate equipment locally outside of I
L' I
5 8!
the control room.
n i
d i
d 9
COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Yes.
I O
MR. COLLINS:
Perform surveillance tests; check the y
10 j z=
3 11 :
local guages on oil levels, and jobs of that nature; operate S
i d
12 !
the rad waste system.
The auxiliary operators operate the rad z
i E
i I
d 13 i waste systems.
I E
A 14 l MR. WENZINGER:
But as part of his training, he is t
e E
15 '
required to do some of the things that the licensed operator N
j 16 l would do.
The first time he operates as a " licensed operator" r:
y 17 is not the first time he touches the controls.
s Could I have the next slide, ple ase?
E 18 :
r E
19 (S lide. )
3
+
M l
20 '
On the las. slide that I have, it covers the i
21l subject of simulator applicability.
In the proposed rule, i
22 i simulators are required to be used in operator training, in 23j operator requalification, and for recertification of operators 24]
after periods of inactivity.
25,
The proposed rule would require that the simulator
- i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPAMY, WC.
4 i
jwb $
18 1
used for these purposes have the characteristics licted on 1
2j this slide.
That is,the same plant, same type control room, W
3l same type steam generator, and so on.
4 I should note that these requirements may' well I
e 5,
change, perhaps, as a result of public comments, and perhaps E
j 6!
by further study of the NRC staff.
It is possible in the j
s 7
. future that simulators duplicata the plant for which training j
8l is sought might be required.
At the present time, the proposed d=
9 rule does not call for that.
i Ob 10 This concludes my prepared portion of the presenta-z=
2 11 l' tion.
Mr. Paul Collins. of the Operator Licensing Branch,
<3 d
12 will now discuss with you a comparison of U.S.
and foreign Z
=
d 13 i practices -- unless you have other questions.
E 14,
COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Before you get to that, Ed, w
b i
15 i does this leave anybody without a sinulator?
How about Fort 1
x m
J 16 S t.
Vrain?
E I
d 17 !
MR. COLLINS:
I was just going to mention --
N G
18 l MR. HANAUER:
Fort St. Vrain, Big Rock, Humboldt Bay, 1
19 g Lacrosse, don' t have available simulators which --
5 20 !
COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Meet these --
t 21l MR. HANAUER:
-- meet these requirements in any k
22 3 realistic way.
There are so-called " generic simulators," which i
23 '
may be the answer for some of those small plants.
I don't 24 ]
think anyone has looked very hard.
It is my personal view 25 that those operators have got to train on some simulator aad k
Ji ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
f jwb 19 I
1 i get a leve'. of competence, but that it might not be necessary i
2l to build an S8 million machine to do it.
I think they will 3
have to come to us with some kind of a proposal on how they 4!
plan to do a better job on simulator training.
i e
5 !
!!R. COLLINS:
In the case of Fort St. Vrain, I was E
I j
6; informed the other day by people at the plant that it would 7ll C
M be a S13 million simulator for their facility.
Since they s
j 8
were a one-of-the-kind, all the models would have to be remade.
d I
- i 9i Coll!!ISSIONER HENDRIE:
Uhat about the --
i l
=y 10 ;
CHAIRf!AN AHEARNE:
You have told us that it's a l
~
l 2
11 :
safer plant, so --
l j
12 l COIlliISSIONER HENDRIE:
Hell, it's a smaller plant 5
i d
13 l and, at the moment, and for some time probably, one of a kind,
=
i l
14 j and I think some particular form of exemption from this general b
i 15 !
regulation could be necessary for them, and for the other small u
l j
16 l ones.
5 l
17 j MR. COLLINS:
They did address in this conversation
- a
=
si 18 !
with me that they were coming up with a plan for more manipula-
=
i i-
. l
}
19 ;
tion of controls at the facility requiring the men to perform n
20 !
specific exercises each year, as an alternative to a simulator.
I i
21 i I told them I couldn't do anything; that they should really I
I 22 'j wait until they see this rule change, or this proposed rule il 23 '
change, and make their comments in conjunction with that.
24 COI1!!ISSIONER IIENDRIE:
Is there any comment in the g
4 25j supplementary information directed' to these guys?
d I!,
W ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
jwb 20 l
MR. WENZINGER:
No.
No, the re 's not.
2l COMMISSIONER IIENDRIE:
I would suggest that there 3
might be some indication of the intent with regard to these i
t 4
plants.
e 5,
I also wanted to ask about the two-loop BURS.
Is E
j 6!
there a two-loop simulator?
E 6
7 fir. COLLINS:
No, sir.
~
8l COMfiISSIONER HENDRIE:
So there a series of those d
9 Westinghouse two-loops that --
l 2=
y 10 l HR. COLLINS :
Three plants, I believe:
Genoea --
z I
lI j!
E COli!!ISSIONER HENDRIE:
Robinson --
Q 3:
i N
12 MR. HANAUER:
That's three.
-5 l
13 I "R. COLLINS :
Th at 's a th ree.
Robinson is a three-
=
g'A 14
- loop, j
15 MR. HANAUER:
Point Beach --
E j
16 l CO!!MISSIONER HENDRIE:
Genoea, Point Leach, and
- r5 d'
17 :
Kewaunee.
I believe those are the three.
- s 2
I 18 j MR. HANAUER:
I think it is our view that they
- e I
C l
19 l ought to get a two-loop simulator.
There are five units; they i
g
=
20 ought to manage.
21!
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I would think so.
22 1 Go ahead, Paul.
1 23 MR. COLLINS :
Yes.
We made a review of a paper 24]
submitted to Commissioner Gilinsky and Commissioner Bradford I
l 1
25 by James Shea of the Office of International Programs that had l
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
1 jwb j 21 1
two enclosures, one from Muclear Engineering International, 2
and another enclosure from a paper presented at the Stockholm 3
meeting on how foreign countries -- the requirements for 4,
operators, and what I'll have to term " senior operators,"
5' although there's many different terminole,gies used among the n
3 j
6 countries -- compare with our particular requirements.
i R
7 I had forwarded down to the Commission a matrix of
~
j 8
the comparisons, and I was planning on showing a few of the d
y 9
comparisons on formal education, job-related experience, and
?
l 10 examinations, to get a flavor of how the various programs are 3
11 I going, because I will be able to show you all the slides if
@B l
j 12 !
you would want a total comparison.
i g
13 May I have the first slide, please?
=
m 5
14 (Slide. )
E E
15 The first area that has been of concern is the w
3 g
16 l formal education for reactor operators.
We can look across I
f 17 i and we find that in all of the industrial countries, they do N5 18 accept a secondary school grad --
=
l 19 CHAIRMAN AHEARME:
Now, wait.
This is not "all" of l
=
20 the industrial countries.
l 21 l MR. COLLINS:
In these four -- excuse me.
l l
22l (Laugh ter. )
l 23 '
MR. COLLIMS :
In theae four countries, secondary 24 f school graduate is the entry level for reactor operators, with
]
25 the exception of the proposed rule which provides for a i
A
- I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC L
s
,f 22 jwb 1i GED Certificate.
l 2l COli!!ISSIONER GILINSKY :
Let's see.
Do the British 3
require both?
4 MR. COLLINS:
Excuse me.
I'm sorry.
That's 5l "either/or."
They have professional engineers who are reactor e
9 l
s 6i operators; and they have secondary school graduates who are R
I g
7 reactor operators.
n 8
8 COMIiISSIONER GILINSKY :
So they've got professional N
d
- i 9
engineers who aren't secondary school graduates?
I 1
E 10 MR. COLLINS :
Yes.
They accept -- They recruit from E
5 11 both areas.
c3
- i 12 l COliMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Are all these secondary Z
_b 13 schools equivalent?
Because I suspect German secondary schools -
E it depends upon when you're talking about a Technische I
E 14 l you know,
.c!
15,
Hochschule, or something.
It's kind of a different --
N
\\
J 16 l fir. COLLINS:
In this case, I would say "yes,"
E l
{
17 l because when we get to the senior, the requi rements for a M
18,
formal education of the senior, you will see the words,
l C"
19 l
" technical high schools," and " technical colleges" --
n n
20 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Are these drawn from those two 21l papers?
Or have you had --
i 22 ll fir. COLLIUS:
Yes --
!i 23 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
-- discussions with --
24 i MR. COLLINS :
-- they ' re drawn from the two papers,
'l 25 1 and we did make some telephone calls with Canadar and we made 3
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
I jwb :
23 I
1' a telephone call with the Br_tish Embassy to determine that we I
2l were interpreting this formal education requirement.
3 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
But you have not actually, 4,
yourself, spoken with any of the people from these countries?
I e
5i MR. COLLINS:
We didn't;*no.
Just the Embassy.
E I
n s
6l COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Paul --
(
7 fir. COLLINS:
We did speak to people in Canada.
-3 5
8!
Steve Richardson made the contact with the Canadians, n
d:!
9 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
The British professional si E
10 l engineers, the term that is used here, is that an " engineer" E
i i
11 j the way --
2
- 5 12 l MR. COLLINS:
Yes, I would consider it a four-year E:;
E 13 graduate.
i E
i E
14 COM!iISSIONER HENDRIE:
-- my New York garbage man i.'i 15 is a " sanitary engineer'"?
I MR. COLLINS :
No, no, sir.
j 16 38 r
l 4
l
\\
p 17 l COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
Or in the sense of --
z i
MR. COLLINS:
That would be the equivalent of a
}
18 l
?
1 E
19 college-degreed engineer.
x i
6 i
l 20l The next slide, please?
I 21l (S lide. )
i l
22k One of the other items that we investigated was i
b l
23'{
the job-related experience.
Once again, under Great Britain i
i 24 ]
we make a distinction between the experience required between i
j 25 a "special engineer" and a " secondary school graduate."
The
.i il l
l a
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
I jwb 24 I
jl more formal education you have, the less training, or the less I
2j experience.
3 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Where you have the 4-1/2 years of 4
post-graduate training for the secondary school, what kind of --
5l MR. COLLINS:
I'm talking about a combination of e
R I
e d
6l on-the-job training and academic training for these people.
=
Er i
g 7l CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I see.
_~
\\
8 MR. COLLINS :
It's difficult to break out from the M
l l
5 9l papers how much academic training they were receiving, and how I
E 10 much on-the-job in this area.
E 11 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
But it is theoretically possible c3 ti 12 to make contact with someone in their --
E 5
13 l MR. COLLINS:
Oh, yes.
Yes.
Yes.
=
h 14 I CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Uhat is a "craftman"?
i'i i
M 1
15 l MR. COLLINS:
This would be, under the West German?
l 16 l This would be a man who --
3 2
p 17 !
COMMISSIONER HENDRIE:
'A " craftsman" with only one i'i l
18 {
skill.
=
r 1
I 19,
(" Laughter. )
x 5
il 20 !
MR. COLLINS:
Yes -- Well, not really.
Just like I
21I our maintenance type people, and they can come from conventional i
22); operations, or a private business, or from nuclear power plants.
23 But they accept these people --
24,
MR. DIRCKS :
You have to realize that in bountry l
25 like G'ermany that you have a different set of requirements to s
il ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
l jwb 25 i
l 1!
be a craftsman.
There you have to serve an apprenticeship 2
over a number of years; you move to journeyman;' and then you 3
move to the Master Craf tsman.
So it is a slightly different, l
i 4
more formal requirement than craftsman.
s 5
CHAIRMAN AIIEARNE:
And I guess because the papers s
h 6,
didn't address Japan, we didn't have Japan?
7l E
i MR. COLLINS :
No.
I've seen -- Well, I've seen the E
~
-f8 Japanese training programs.
I can address those.
They are a d
d 9
carbon copy of our --
E 10 CIIAIRMA!! AIIEARNE:
Ours ?
i_j 11 MR. COLLINS:
-- American training program; yes.
I 3
y 12 spent a lot of money translating the Japanese techs into E
j 13 English, and found out I could have used the Westinghouse Manual
=
6 l
14 I and read it in English to begin with.
5 l
2 15 (Laughter.)
5 g
16 MR. COLLINS :
They had taken it from Westinghouse e
i d
17 to Japan and translated it into Japanese, and --
a E
18 !
CHAIRMAN AIIEARNE:
Maybe a brief discussion with 5
l'9,
some of the Japanese would have saved the translation.
5 l
20 l MR. COLLIMS:
They were brought back to me from a 21 conference over there.
22 The next slide, pleas e?
23 (S lide. )
24 l I thought it would be of interest to take a look at
- i 25,
the licensing procedures, and the involvement of the regulatory i
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
jwb 26 j.l bodies in the various programs.
He are intimately involved l
2 with the examinations.
We administer 'them, grade them, and 3
prepare them.
In Canada, it is slightly different.
The facility 4
e 5
administers the examination, and there is no oral examination.
E i
n 8
6 <l These licensing people make up one of the examinations when e
l E
7l the utility tella them the man is ready for that section of 8
the exam.
They mail it to the facility.
The man takes it, and d
d 9
mails it back to the licensing board.
i h
10 In Great Britain, they have no external licensing 5
5 11 program.
The men take periodic exams throughout their training
<3 d
12 program.
These results are reported to the station management, z
E I
d 13 !
and they then in turn certify these men to the governing body.
E i
E 14 The German program is more comparable to ours than w
C k
15 the others, except the utility does administer the examination 5
16 based on the federal guidelines which are very comparable to 3M g
17 j 10 CFR 55, the " Scope of Examinations" sections,
w=
5 18 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY :
Nell, it is understandable
~
E 19 >
that Canada and Britain might handle it differently, because a
r 20 l they are not dealing with 60-odd utilities the way we are.
t n
21 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
It's a semi government body.
22 MR. COLLINS :
May I see the next slide, please?
23 l (Slide.)
24,
I would like to review the same three subjects, as 25 f ar as the senior operator is concerned.
Once again, two paths i
I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
jwb 27 1 i are offered in the other countries.
2l CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Is the " senior reactor operator" 3
in concept similar to these various countries?
4 MR. COLLINS:
Yes.
And they seem to be using the e
5 same three categories we do, " operator," " senior operator" --
1 j
6{
which is turning into " control room supervisor" -- and the R
l 8
7
" shift supervisor."
And all of the shif t supervisors must be s
j 8
licensed as a " senior."
d d
9 In our proposed revision, we presently have a high I
I 10 school education or the GED, but we do plan to require operators E
5 11 to have technical training at the college level by 19 86.
I 6
d 12 believe that's the correct date there.
E E
13 In Canada and Great Britain, and West Germany, they 5
l 14 recognize -- either take " graduate engineers," or " secondary
$j 15 school graduates," or in the case of Germany, an operator may
=
g 16 advance to the senior operator position.
w d
17 !
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
What is a "kraf twerker"?
N 5
18 MR. COLLINS:
That's their title for the " operator."
1 l
}
19 4 I should have put that in.
A " reactor operator" is called a n
l 20 "k ra f twe rker. "
21l CHAIRMAN AIEARNE:- So that their qualification to k
l 22 be a senior reactor operator --
23 MR. COLLINS:
Firs t, as an operator.
l 24 i CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
And then you have to be a graduate i
25,
of the technical high school?
1 l
l
_ ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANYg INC.
1 e
28 jwb 1l MR. WENZINGER:
"Either/or," isn't it?
I 2;
MR. COLLINS:
Beg your pardon?
3 CHAIRMAN AIIEARNE:
A technical high school?
I 4l COMMISSIONER IIENDRIE:
A secondary school.
l 5l
!!R. WENZINGER:
It's "either/or, " isn ' t it?
e E
I.
n j
6l MR. COLLINS :
" Ei the r/o r.
Either/or, excuse me.
R E
7i I'm sorry.
One and two are "either/or."
s 8
8 CHAIRMAN AllEARNE:
Right.
You could be --
i d
=
9 MR. COLLINS:
You could cone from the operator 10,
ranks.
z i
=
i 3
11 '
CHAIRMAN AliEARNE:
You could be a graduate of a i
j 12 l technical high school, and then become a senior reactor 5
i d
13 l operator.
E 14 f MR. COLLINS :
Instantly; right.
Go into the training 2
15 i program for a senior operator; not serve time as an operator.
5 g
16 Next slide, please ?
A i
d 17.
( S lide. )
18 l 5
l 5
Once again we see the comparison of the education.
i l
4
}
19 {
The numbers preceding it in each case, we see more experience j
5 i
i 20 l required -- that is, for the people with the lesser formal 21 education.
The most experience required is in Canada with 22 the ten years ' relevant experience for a secondary school i
i 23 graduate to become a senior operator.
24 l The next slide, please?
l 25 (S lide. )
I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
I jwb !
29 1
This is the examinations.
An interesting --
2l CHAIRMAN AIIEARNE:
Paul, let me just recall 3.
something on your previous -- you don't have to go back to i
i 4;
the slide -- but in a number of places there you had a footnote i
l
\\
c 5;
and said " Navy Equivalent."
1 0
l j
6l MR. COLLINS :
" Navy Equivalent, " us, yes, for our R
5 7
program.
We accept Navy experience as a reactor operator, or n
j 8
as an engineering officer of the watch, as being equivalent of l
d d
9I X number of years of power plant experience on a one-for-one I
5 10 l basis.
z i
i
=
I CHAIRMAU A!!EARNE:
I see.
If a man were to come j
11j 3
l g
12 l f rom another power plant, and you are now -- I gather that i
3 I
j 13 1 going from say a Commonwealth Edison to a Consolidated Edison, j
=
l 14 l experience is satisfied by being at another plant?
Is that w
I e
E 15 l correct?
6 l
g 16 '
MR. COLLINS :
Not all of it.
We have a minimum 17 amount of time at dhat facility.
=
\\
18 l CHAIRMAN AIIEARNE:
But as f ar as the basic background
=H I
19 !
experience, it is satisfied?
5 1
20 l MR. COLLINS :
Yes.
I 21 !
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Is there anything that would 22 enable you to disqualify the person if he had not performed t
23 I well at that previous plant?
Or is " good experience" just no 24(
more valuable than " bad experience"?
25 MR. COLLINS:
We have a means of keeping a record
}
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
jwb 30 t
1 on poor performance of the operator.
Now he -- If he was out
\\
l 2
of the field for four years or more, that record would be 3
destroyed.
4 CHAIR!iAN AHEARNE:
But if he was coming directly?
e 5
MR. COLLINS:
But if he went directly and made an 9
6, application for a 'ecord, we would go back to his previous r
R 7
docket and be able to review this.information.
K j
8 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
But how would we use that d
d 9
information?
icy 10 1 21R. COLLINS:
Depending upon the severity of the z
I
=
l j
11 incident, or the actions that he was involved in --
3 y
12 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
S ubjectively?
5 y
13 fir. COLLINS:
Yes.
tie haven't got a firm criteria m
l 14 o f --
E 15 CHAIR!iAN AHEARNE:
Okay, do we, when a person quotes 5y g
16 a Navy experience, do we ask the Navy.for their background f
A
!;[
17 information?
5 5
18 liR. COLLINS :
No, sir; we never have,:no.
j i
2
(
19 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Why?
l 5
i i
20 MR. COLLINS :
No, we haven't.
No, I have no answer l
l 21 to the "why," we just never have made an investigation of i
22 !
previous Navy experience.
l i
23 '
CHAI1EiAN AHEARNE:
So that we automatically assume i
I l-24 i that's good?
l
(
25,
PiR. COLLINS:
Yes.
1 l
)
l 31 jwb :
l 1'
CIIAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Okay.
2 MR. COLLINS:
On the examinations, it is an 3
interesting item.
It doesn 't show on the chart, but an operator i
4I can become -- in Canada, an operator can become a senior I
5l operator without taking an additional examination.
He can s
U l
5 6l move, if 'you will, fran the " operator" in the control room, to R
8 7
the " control room supervisor," and not take another examination.
f8 The time he is subject to an examination is if he e
d 9
becomes a shift supervisor.
Then he must take this six-part Y
10 l written examination at 7 higher level similar to our senior z
h 11 examination.
3 j
12 l Once again, the British do not get involved with 5
13 l examining; it's left up to the station manager.
z i
3 14 !
Once again, the Uest German program is very similar b
E 15 l to ours as f ar as the examination is concerned.
x i
j 16 i Those were the three areas that I planned to talk l
n d
17 i about.
If you want to talk about other items on these charts, E
18!
I would be' glad to expand on them, r
i i
19,
CHAIR!iAN AHEARNE:
Did anybody else want to ask 5
20l about those comparisons?
21l CO!1MISSIONER BRADFORD:
Let's see.
Did I miss I
22 h something?
Why was France not up there?
23 a CIIAIRMAN AHEARNE:
It's.not in the report.
l 24j MR. COLLIUS:
It's not in the report.
1 25 i CHAIRMAU AIIEARNE :
For the same reason that Japan is J
6 i
1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
jwb 32 1!
not v.9 there.
I 2
CO!!MISSIONER GILINSKY :
Japan's not the re, either, 3
and Switzerland is not there.
4 CHAIR!iAN AHEARNE:
It's a limited subset of e
5 industrialized nations.
U j
6!
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Actually, this strikes ne as R
F; 7
a useful subject for an investigation in our Research program --
N j
8 CHAIRfiAN AHEARNE:
Mell, sone branch --
c3 9
CO!!MISSIONER GILINSKY:
-- or some part of our --
Ei 10
!!R. COLLINS :
I'll go.
j 11
( Laugh ter. )
3 g
12 COlif1ISSIONER GILINSKY :
-- of our enterprise.
It
_f 13 l seems it would be useful to know more about what others are
=
i l
14 l doing.
I 2
15 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Well, I thought I was trying to Y
j 16 get at that when I asked that question, but I didn't quite get j
d l
l 6
17 there.
5 18 MR. DIRCKS :
I think, too, you have to look beyond i
P l
[
19 l what is a " secondary school graduate" in Germany, compared to l
M 20 a secondary schooi graduate here.
I 21 i COlifiISSIONER GILINSKY:
In fact, it might be a l
I 22 l useful subject for a meeting, rather than 1etting a contract 23l and having pecple go all over the place, and we could just invite 24; people --
25 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I was thinking of sending i
i e
l jwb 33 1!
Hanrahan on a world tour.
I 2
( Laughter. )
3i
!!R. HAMRAIIAII:
That sounds like a good idea.
4 CHAIRI!AN AHEARNE:
!!cwever, we do ha"e to get that c
5 in formation.
n l
j 6!
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY :
Nell, we can do both.
R 8
7!
MR. DIRCKS:
Is that --
l I
"j 8:
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Well, I have a bunch of d
i 9l questions.
z 0
I g
10 MR. DIRCKS:
I'm sure you do.
z 3
l 11 (Laughter. )
3 p
12 li MR. DIRCKS :
I guess I just have to re-emphasize at
=
g 13 !
the beginning of it, I think this is just the beginning of
=
i y) i g
14 I looking at this problem.
I think I share many of your own t:
15 !
questions.
g 16,
. CIIAIRM.S.!! AIIEARNE:
Do you, S teve, or Paul, or Bill, w
I ti 17 address this question of cert.ification?
That is, we are x
=
l 5
18 :
laying out a series of requirements which include a number of i
E 19 ;
requirements on education.
To what extent do you see, in years l
5 l
20 to come, us transferring the certification of, "yes, that 21 f person has met at least the educational portions," to some other ;
i i
22 l organization, or schools?
I 3
233 MR. HANAUER:
I would think that as we accredit j
j 24 :
programs, that with the proper kinds of accreditation audits, 25 we could delegate that.
0
jwb 34 o
1, CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Do you see that delegation being 2l for the whole thing?
In other words, the accreditation being,'
3, "yes, that person is now an accredited operator"?
?
4 MR. HANAUER:
Gee, you sort of changed the subject.
g 5
There will be --
i A
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
No, no, I --
6!
e k7 !
MR. HANAUER:
There will be education and training 1
E institutions, and we are developing ways to assure that they 8
M i
i
,3 e
9 have the adequate quality and standards.
And that is an i
i ic accreditation process of an educational institution, an E
11 l institution of power reactor operators and senior operators.
1
's d
12 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
You would then --
j 13,
MR. HANAUER:
I thought we were -- we could talk E
I E
14 about two things.
a 2
15 One is --
5 16 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I was just wondering how far I
i I
g 17 i down that path you were.
e
~
N I
g 18 MR. HANAUER:
Yes.
Well, we have -- there are two
=
h 19 paths being followed.
We have an advisory group who has met l
5 l
20 with us a few time who includes some educators and some nuclear i
plant people, who have been advising us on some of the i
21li I
I 22 l requirements and factors in accreditation.
.I 23 INPO has been pursuing a sinilar program, and these j
\\
have now been harmonized.
We have a draft which is a set of 24,
25 methods and requirements for accrediting operator training a
1
jwb 35 o
1 institutions.
I thought you were asking about entrance 2'
requirements.
Presumably an accredited institution could --
3, CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I was going to get to that.
4 MR. HANAUER:
-- be delegated the authority, and would ' ave to be audited in some way, to do its own looking h
e 5
Ea i
6!
into its entrance requirements.
e Rg 7
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
But then you would see that a A
E 8
graduate of this -- or the person, whatever you want to call N
d d
9 it -- who has successfully completed those courses would not Y
10 yet have met -- get our stamp of approval as an operator.
They E
5 11 would still have to go through our examinations, our simulator
<3 d
12 approval?
E=
5 13 !
MR. HANAUER:
We would have to decide.
But my E
l 14 present thinking is that at some point -- and that seems to be t
f 15 a good point -- that we should still impose an examination.
=
J 16 They do it for the Bar, and I don't guess they still have M*
I j
17 j teacher certification exams in most states --
5 18 CHAIRMMI AHEABNE:
I think they are going back to E
I 19 I it.
A 20 i MR. HANAUER:
Yes, they are.
21 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
At some point, the NRC, I w'ould 22 l think, would give its own exam.
23 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Now I noticed, I guess you had 24l earlier called our attention to the Memphis State presentation 25 to the Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee.
Have we been working il a
jwb 36 4
with them?
They say they've been developing a program for six j
1 !
2 years and are now about to put in place at n'ine reactors --
3 tiR. HANAUER:
There were two things the re.
There is 4
at Memphis State an educational program for the education s
5 and training of nuclear power plant operators and senior N
6i operators.
Their graduates have taken and passed our examina-R l
g 7'
tions.
l 8
They have been asked to devise education and dd 9
training programs to be given at nuclear power plant sites, and z
10 I don't know -- Do you know the present status of those?
Have i!
11 we seen any of their graduates, yet?
<3 MR. COLLINS:
No, no.
d 12 l' 3c d
13 MR. HANAUER:
I didn ' t think s o.
~=
E 14 MR. COLLINS :
They've just started offering these 5=
2 15 programs.
w=
16 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
But have they been developing Bm p
17 l independently of us?
w 18 l MR. COLLINS :
Dr. Jones has been in and out of my 5
5 t
19 office continuously throughout the development of this.
A 20 CHAIR'iAN AHEARNE:
Okay So at least to the --
21 MR. COLLINS:
I have been giving them informal i
22 i comments on it, yes.
23 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Okay.
So this, at least in the i
24j direction it was going, it was going to -- it was in track with 4
25 '
the educational requirements?
!i a
4
jwb 37 l
} !
tiR. COLLINS :
Yes.
2 MR. HANAUER:.
The obvious candidate for accreditation 3
are, first of all, the schools run by the vendors -- GE and 4I Westinghouse, and so on; and secondly, some schools run by I
e 5
some of the larger utilities.
And thirdly, such programs as s
N 6,
the Memphis State.
9 8
7 MR. COLLINS:
The Memphis State program, I migh t 8,
add, goes along with the thinking of the consultant examiners d
i y
9l and our university professors that are on my staff.
They look z
b 10 at the 60 credit hours ' requirements, and I saw a shudder.
E 11 i They have visions of people going to a college
<m d
12,
catalogue and grabbing this, and grabbing that.
They feel that z
=
E 13 the progran for the shift supervisors, and for the senior o=
E 14 l operators, should be a structured program; and it shouldn't w
t b
I 15 just be a hodgepodge of 60 credit hours.
16 But Dr. Jones indicates, I believe in his paper, or 3
i M
p 17 '
at least he has to me, that he couldn't use the standard 5
5 18 '
university text; that he had to rewrite them to direct them E
I I
19 :
towards the operation of an operator.
This was an impressive 2
t 5
20 part of his program.
2)
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Now in that, the way you've got 22 f the rule structured, you would be imposing this kind of 23 '
educational requirements over a graduated time period.
Why don't you make it immediately effective for all new applicants?
24 1 MR. COLLINS:
The pipeline, I guess, is quite a few 25 j I
a
l jwb l
38 I
1 :
years long.
I 2l MR. WENZINGER:
Yes.
The implementation section 3
isn't ready.
I 4!
MR. HANAUER:
The basic reason is that the new k
i s
5i applicants who are ready don' t have this ; and the re was a 5
l 6l desire not to completely disrupt the flow'of new applicants.
R 7
MR. WENZINGER:
It does call for new applicants to j
8 meet the requirements by December ' 81 for ordinary reactor d:!
9 operators.
And for seniors, by ' 84.
For renewals for ordinary i
10 l operators, by December '81 --
3
{
l1 l CHAIRMAN AHEARLE:
And your concern is that if you is y
12 :
made it any sooner, you would be turning off the flow?
Or is E
d 13 it a concern that you would be unfair to people that are in the
=
i E
14 l system?
d I
'=
E 15 j HR. HANAUER-Both.
5 y
16 i CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I guess I am -- it would sound
^
l 6
17 very callous, obviously -- I am much less concerned about being 5
E 18 fcir to people who are in the pipeline, as I am to making sure 2
19 the plants are operated correctly.
=
20l MR. COLLINS:
Ue have tried to take this into i
21 !
consideration by having.the shift technical advisor, who is a i
I 22 F college-trained individual, on the shift.
l 23 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Yes, I just heard at length about 24,
that; yes.
4 1
25 :
MR. COLLINS:
But this was one tack that we had I
4 r
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC,
s jwb 39 o
1 taken.
I I
2' CHAIR!1AN AHEARNE:
Could you speak anything to your 3,
thoughts about -- and this gets back to something that you i
4 mentioned, Steve -- the screening that might go into those who 5
would be allowed to become entrants into the training program?
e R
N 3
6:
MR. HANAUER:
The companies screen them.
I think e
E 5
7 most of the companies screen dhem for something that is not in Nj 8
our rules that is very important.
Namely, temperamental d
=
9 suitability for this kind of stressful work, i
i h
10 l They give them -- it varies -- batteries of tests --
3 1
5 11 MR. COLLINS:
Mechanical apptitude tests --
<3 d
12 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Now is that for entrants into z
5 5
13 j the training program, or --
E E
14 l MR. COLLINS :
Entrants into the utility.
x 1
b!
15,
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
-- training program.
5 I
J 16l MR. COLLINS:
Yes.
2 i
d 17l CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Why don't we require that?
w=
MR. HANAUER:
It is more than just not having gotten 18 l E
y 19 l around to it, although that is part of it.
5 i
20 l (Laughter. )
l 21 i MR. HANAUER:
There is a difficulty in -- there has 22 so far been a difficulty in deciding what to specify.
The i
23 idea has been that we are going to test these people very 24]
rigorously after they have completed a rigorous education and
!i 25j training requirement, and we rather left it to the companies
)
i
jwb l
40 1
to decide how economical they should be with their training 2
resources with regard to things like mechanical apptitude.
3l Now with regard to stress, there was a terrible 4
struggle over this when we got out the regulatory guide.
It e
5 went back and forth to various parts of the Commission, and R
N 8
6l what survived was what I will characterize as a very feeble e
R R
7 idea that the medical examination should include some thought Z
E 8
on the doctor's part about emotional stability, but in fact I n
d
=
9 think very little of the screening that's applied.
Y 10 l CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I see.
E 5
11 i Is that because you personally don' t believe that i
3 it is necessary to test for stress?
Or that you are not clear f
12 E
I d
13 l on how it could be effectively done?
E E
14 MR. HANAUER:
We didn't have, at the time we had 2
15 this lates t struggle -- which was what?
about two years ago?
5 16,
MR. COLLINS:
On the medical regulatory guide?
E^
I i
17 i MR. HANAUER:
Yes.
5 I
18 MR. COLLINS :
No, that was about four years ago.
=
H E
19.i The background on that was the physicians on the panel that x5 l
20 l were drawing up the medical standards all indicated that the 21 most difficult psychological screening to do is on the initial 22j physical examination.
And it's much easier, af ter several 23 years of getting behavioral reports from a man's supervision 24 {
and so forth.
l 1
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Are they saying -- Well, firs t,
25 l' e
[
i
jwb !
41 1:
that was four years ago.
2 But second, is the issue bkat you can' t be sure 3
that you are being fair to everybody?
Or that you can' t be 4
sure you actually let people through who really would react well e
5 under stress?
E l
n 8
6.!
MR. ~ COLLINS :
I think it's the latter, because of e
7l R
the depth of testing you would. have to do, according to these 8
8 8
physicians.
l d
I o
9l MR. HANAUER:
It is worth another look, in my i
i 10 l opinion, to see whether there are validated tests that have any i
=
i E
11 use in predicting this.
l
<3 6
12,
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
You don ' t have, then, any z
5 5
13 l fundamental objection to doing prescreening?
=
i E
14 l MR. HANAUER:
My personal view is that I would be d
I l
r much more severe on postscreening, and more lenient on pre-l 2
15 x
=
y 16 l screening.
This is a prejudice of.mine.
What you pay for I
w i
i i
17 this is training resources, rather than the safety of the public.
5 1
18 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
In an ideal world, in a world in
=H s
E 19 ;
which the fact -- I guess an analogous: situation is:
Once it E
I M
20l is built, it may be harder to find that it's not appropriate.
I 1
21 j MR. HANAUER:
Yes.
i 22 l CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Once the guy has gone through the 23.)
whole training program, it may be harder to find that it is not 24 ;
appropriate.
)
l 25 MR. HANAUER:
I would presume we were adequately l
jwb 42 I
1l tough.
I 2l CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
The last question I have -- and 3.
I see way back in the back of the room the General Counsel, so l
4l I will ask this question --
e 5
( Laugh ter. )
~
n h
6 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
He had raised a comment on, I n
i s
7i guess, how do we actually reach operators?
And, Bill, you had s
8 8
responded.
Do you want to expand on that at all?
l d
I d
9!
MR. DIRCKS:
No.
No, I would have to do -- I keep z
h 10 l saying we need to do more work here, which is.obviously the z=
i E
11 '
direction, so I will have to get something back to you on that.
<3
- i 12 !
MR. HANAUER:
I didn 't understand the question.
z i
E I
d 13 !
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Well, OGC had draf ted --
E i
{
14 l MR. DIRCKS:
It's a memorandum from the OCG of E
15 j November 13th.
E l
g 16 j CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Right, and you got back -- What vi g
17 '
you said is :
You have no objection to the comments.
And I'm t
=
5 18 not sure if you agree with the second comment.
Do you feel
=
H I
[
19,
that that has adequately been handled from the questions you 5
t
=
n 20 l raised?
i 21l MR. HANAUER:
I'm sorry, sir; I haven't seen the l!
22 ;l document.
23 ;
CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Ch.
- i 24 g MR. COLLINS:
No, I haven't, eithe r.
I 25 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
All right, then maybe we can l
i 1
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC-
.'.O 43 jwb j
1 1l share the document.
2 MR. DIRCKS:
We'll have to get back to you.
3 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
I see.
I was responded to by 1
I
,i 4j ELD, so I guess this cycle --
5f
( Laughter. )
s s
i j
6l MR. HANAUER:
Yes, we do.
R l
5 7l CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:
Well, you guys can take a look at s
i j
8l it back and forth, d
l 9l Joe?
Peter?
I 10 i (No response.)
z i
=
11l CIAIRMAN AHEARNE:
All right, I am sure we will be Sc j
12 l providing you with some comments on this rule, and we will
=l 13,
hopefully be able to get it out.
=
l "J3 1
5 14 Thank you.
b
,{
15 l (Whereupon, at 3:02 p.m.,
the meeting was recessed i
g 16 i to other business.)
W l
17 x
~
5 18,
E I
19 I 5
20 ;;
i 21 22,
23 24 25 l 1
ALDERSON REPORTING, COMPANY. INC.
,o
=
s NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO.WISSION This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the COMMISSION MEETING in the matter of: Discussion of SECY-80-491 - PROPOSED RULEMAKING,
" Qualification of Reactor Operator"
- Date of Proceeding:
December 11, 1980 Docket llumber:
Place of Proceeding: Washington, D.
C.
were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the Commission.,
Jane Beach Official Reporter (Typed) f.
,7
~
(
/
/
^
l 1
N
\\Qg /
j q/
/
Official Reporter (Signature) 1 e
e l
UNITED STATES November 4,1980 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION SECY-80-491 WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM For:
The Commissioners From:
Robert B. Minogue, Director
)
Office of Standards-Development 4 cLS Thru:
W. J. Dircks, Executive Director for Ope ions
Subject:
PROPOSED RULEMAKING, " QUALIFICATION OF REACTOR OPERATORS" Purcose:
To obtain Commission approval of a notice of proposed rulemaking to l
improve the operator licensing program in the areas of (1) experience, l
education, and training of operators and senior operators, (2) use of simulators in training programs, and (3) requalification of licensed operators and senior operators.
Also included are several editorial changes to the present regulations that support or are related to the above areas.
, Issue:
The implementation of the Commissioners' action on SECY-79-330E dated l
July 30, 1979 and SECY-79-330F dated September 11, 1979.
Alternatives:
Since the Commissioners in their response to SECY-79-330E/F have directed that specific amendments to the regulations be prepared, no alternatives are given to those amendments resulting from previous l
Commission action.
The staff is recommending additional requirements in some areas to provide consistency within the regulations, to reflect recommendations of various reviews of the TMI accident such as the Lessons Learned Task Force, and to reflect work done in these
- areas for other documents such as Regulatory Guide 1.8, " Personnel l
Qualification and Training." Where significant technical issues are raised, alternatives for the additional amendments are given in' Enclosure "B".
Discussion:
In SECY-79-330E, dated July 30, 1979, the staff documented a detailed review of the Operator Licensing Program and presented several recom-mendations for Commission consideration.
In SECY-79-330F, dated September 11, 1979, NRR proposed a method for implementation of the recommendations.
The memorandum from S. J. Chilk to L. V. Gossick, dated November 27, 1979, presented the Commissioners' approval of the recommendations as modified by their comments.
The above documents were used as a basis for preparing the proposed amendments to the regu-la 9 draft revision of stand-Training of Personnel for 2 Lessons Learned Task Force DUPLICATE DOCUMENT Register Notice of Proposed "A" to identify the purpose Entire document previously nd and discussion is necessar, entered into system under:
losure "B", " Background
Contact:
ANO DOM S. D. Richardson, No. of pages:
$O 443-5913
..