ML20216F534

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Concurs W/Proposed Rule Package Re Initial Operator Exam Requirements,Amends to 10CFR55,as Revised in Attached Markup
ML20216F534
Person / Time
Issue date: 03/18/1997
From: Collins S
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To: Morrison D
NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES)
Shared Package
ML20216F483 List:
References
FRN-62FR42426, RULE-PR-55 AF62-1-007, AF62-1-7, NUDOCS 9709120016
Download: ML20216F534 (40)
v • d • e


Text

- . . _ - . -. _. . - . - ._ -.- --

cc: Mrris sonow mrtin

[  % UNITE!D STATES g j 2

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 90%&#101 k(assian

  1. A P 5' *I

Harch 18,1997 i

i HEMORANDVH 10: David L. Morrison, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research FROM: . hirector Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

^

SUBJECT:

PROPOSED RULE - INITIAL OPERATOR EXAMINATION REQUIREMENTS, AMENDMENTS TO 10 CFR PART 55 As requested in your memorandum of March 4, 1997, NRR has reviewed the subject rulemaking package and concurs with the package as revised in the attached markup.

The most significant changes are to include in the Comission paper a brief discussion of a pilot-style examination that did not meet NRR's expectations with regard to quality and level of difficulty and to revise the discussion in the federal Register Notice regarding the cost savings that facility licensees may realize under the new examination process.

If you have any questions, please contact Stuart Richards, Chief, Operator Licensing Branch, NRR, at 415-1031.

Attachment:

As stated 91gD16970904 55 62FR42426 PDR-

k I

P

[QB The Commissioners

[BQM L. Joseph Callan Executive Director for Operations EUhJICI: PROPOSED RULE - INITIAL LICENSED OPERATOR EXAMINATION REQUIREMENTS IE20SE

-To obtain Commission approval to publish in the rederal Reaister a proposed ,

rule that would amend 10 CFR Part 55 to require power reactor facility  ;

licensees to prepare the entire initial examination for reactor operators (R0s) and senior reactor operators (SR0s) and to proctor the written portion of the examination.

BACKGaQUNQ:

On March 24, 1995, SECY-95-075, " Proposed Changes to the NRC Operator Licensing Program," informed the Commission of the staff's intent to revise the operator licensing program to allow greater participation by facility licensees and to elim'nate contractor assistance in this area, in a staff requirements memorandum (SRM) dated April 18, 1995, the Commission approved the staff's proposal to tnitiate a transition process to revise the operator licensing program and directed the staff to carefully consider experience from pilot examinations before fully im)1ementing the changes. On August 15, 1995, the staff issued Generic Letter (G.) 95-06, " Changes in the Operator Licensing Program," outlining the revised process for developing examinations and soliciting volunteers to participate in pilot examinations to evaluate and refine the methodology.

CONTACT:

Siegfried Guenther, NRR '

-(301)415-1056 Harry S.-Tovmassian, RES (301) 415-6231

The Commissioners Between October 1, 1995, and April 5, 1996, the staff reviewed and approved 22 operator licensing examinations that had been prepared by facility licensees in accordance with Revision 7 of NUREG-1021, " Operator Licensing Examiner Standards" (June 1994), as supplemented by guidance contained in GL 95-06.

These examinations were then used to test 146 R0 and SR0 applicants.

The staff documented the results of the pilot examinations in SECY-96-123,

" Proposed Changes to the NRC Operator Licensing Program," and briefed the Comission on June 18, 1996. In an SRM dated July 23, 1996, the Commission directed the staff to prepare a rulemaking plan to justify the changes to 10 CfR Part 55 and to provide additional information regarding a number of issues related to the revised examination process.

On September 25, 1996, the staff issued SECY-96-206, "Rulemaking Plan for Amendments to 10 CFR Part 55 To Change Licensed Operator Examination Requirements." The Commission approved the rulemaking plan in an SRM dated December 17, 1996.

Q11G1110B Pursuant to the SRM of December 17, 1996, in february 1997, the staff issued an interim version of Revision 8 of NUREG-1021, which has been retitled

" Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactorsn " -The staff will implement the interim revision on a voluntary basis until the rulemaking is complete. NUREG-1021 was updated to incorporate lessons learned during the pilot examination program and will be further revised, as necessary, based on industry and public coments in response to the enclosed Federal Reqister notice. The staff has also issued a supplement to GL 95-06 to inform power reactor facility licensees of the results of the pilot examination program and the NRC's decision to change-the epwatee-14eens4ng precosscontinue the pilot

~

process oW a voluntaryibasisising' interim" Revision 8 of NUREG-1021, while in parallel; pursuing mandatory implementation by;the. industry.

As directed by the Commission, NRR has continued to monitor the results of the facility-prepared examinations for indications that might dissuade the Comission f rom approving the proposed rulemaking. As an extension of the original pilot program, NRR has asked the NRC examiners to respond to a survey on various aspects of the revised examination process. Furthermore, as noted in SECY-96-206, NRR will continue to audit and review the level of knowledge and the level of difficulty of selected written examinations and operating tests.

Between August 19, 1990, when the staff resumed conducting pilot-style examinations, and the end of December 1996, the staff reviewed, approved, and administered 12 examinations that were developed by facility licensees based on the guidance in GL 95-06. This raised the total number of examinations completed using the pilot process to 34, including the 22 examinations that were conducted under the original pilot program between October 1, 1995, and April 5, 1996, facility-prepared examinations were administered to 84 R0 applicants and 144 SR0 applicants during the pilot program ^through December 31,21994. The results of these examinations are summarized below; the power reactor licensing examination results for fiscal year 1995 are provided for

, 4' The Commissioners comparison. The pass rates for the facility-prepared examinations administered did not vary significantly from those prepared by the NRC, Power Reactor Pass Rates am nadons SR0 R0 R0 R0 SR0 SR0 Written Operating Total Written Operating Total Facility-Prepared 93% 95% 88% 9H% 96% 901%

Since October 1, 1995 Fiscal Year 1995 94% 98% 92% 95% 95% 92%

"aig. ^: Ea^ : :r:tir4-test-4*41:r: :nd 2 5"^ =tt4+n-fethres-have ken appealed ;:nd tr: :till und: ricing r:viewr enemin: tion discrim!**4+sThe most common problem identified by the NRC examiners regarding tha facility-prepared examinations was that the level of knowledge and difficulty of the submitted examinations did not consistently discriminate at the appropriate level and tha; considerable effort was required to work with the facility lictnsee to revise the examinations to correct this condition. As noted in SECY-96-206, NUREG-1021 has been modified to establish a standard that at least half of the examination questions be written at the comprehension or analysis level. This criterion will take effect when Revision 8 of NUREG-1021 is implemented and should help improve the level of knowledge tested by the submitted examinations.

Although NUREG-1021 contains criteria that should help establish an appropriate level of difficulty for the examinations, the personal experience and judgment of the author and reviewer of the examination remain the most important factors in controlling the level of difficulty. Traditionally, an NRC or contract examiner established the level of difficulty of the examination and the facility licensee was given an opportunity to review the examination before it was administered. In most cases the review with tha facility licensee focused on technical issues, which the NRC examiner and facility reviewer could easily resolve. On occasion, the facility reviewers have complained that an examination was too difficult, but the facility reviewers seldom recommended changes that would increase the difficulty of the examination if it was )erceived to be easier than normal. Under the revised examination process, tie facility licensee will establish the level of difficulty of the examination, and the NRC examiner will have to work with the facility author to make whatever changes are necessary to ensure that the examination discriminates at the appropriate level. C6nse^qu'ently, :the 14 because cense _of'thetfacility licensees'jdit}..: sh' ths is of:fac il i ty@

general-tendency et-to resist the NRC examiners' efforts to make the examinations more difficulti', the leve17f '"C cffert-4 en:ere examtwat-ten :deq :py t+-not-empee4+d-4+-k :tsnif4 :ntlyuck - v significantly changed thiifocusioh:d.FThe re^'ised and increased the_examinstion' process level of difficulty of has the examiners'utas C Nevertheless,;mNdst NRC examiners who responded to the NRA: survey; continue'.tLbelisve that~the revised examinatian~ process is as effective as the traditional method.

e The Commissioners - 4-itiWd WlWfuMtMT W7MS'WtemtMd3 hat 17ef'that12 tjamseendestedsteet.veauet :thelprograel1n' August;1996 1 isttei euer: l level;thaaitsJeerfonti the nore forlHRC .er f enastsattons. IARiesestuded ithe:saastnation.sttil en' conducted V NRCRestenal-office <mes.;usakte basts ifalladite for licensteg identify and thefepp isants

'eerrect sinumbertef;testtitensithat; sere tes:staplistic forfuse on a' licensing esamteatten. JTho' Regists: tay19eenttagia eerrective action plan,Jwith .

oversight by 85.; furthemore,i to:: ;to the SNI of December;17, 1996 NRR(hastissued-amemorandumteethe:Regone(Adataistratersiemphastringth 1 <ef~assigningJadequatefresourcesttei Leut1thei rator iconsing' ta cesplettagia thereugh re few,ef-every: fact 11 ' -

examination,;and not stving egyTexaminatten thetidees'not meet-18C ards for quality >and leveltof;stfrtculty.z isitet new14e the pilotiezaminat :In"clostagll4t?should:be on processiand neted;that-thatfsimilar;this3 type of- problem deficiencies have beennoted16the;pasten; t examinations;preparedbytNRC examiners or tegttactersy C0 ORDINATION:

The Office of the General Counsel has no legal objection. The Office of the Chief financial Officer concurs that there will be no resource impacts. The Office of the Chief Information Officer concurs that there will be no information technology impacts.

REC 0fMNDATION:

That the Commission:

1. Anorove the notice of proposed rulemaking (Enclosure 1) for publication in the Federal Reaister.
2. Certify that this rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities to satisfy the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
3. Determine that the backfit rule 10 CFR 50.109 does not apply to this proposed rule.
4. Determine that neither an environmental impact statement nor an environmental assessment has been prepared because this proposed rule is eligible for a categorical exclusion as defined in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(1).
5. Hgig:
a. This rulemaking will be published in the Federal Reaister for a 75-day public comment period;
b. The Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration will be informed of the certification regarding economic impact on small entitles and the reasons for it as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act;

+ w- 4- -ai- w- ---ww'

. l The Commissioners '

c. The proposed rule contains information collection requirements that are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB);
d. A regulatory analysis has been prepared (Enclosure 2);
e. The appropriate Congressional committees will be informed (Enclosure 3); ,
f. A public announcement will be issued (Enclosure 4); and
g. Copies of the notice of proposed rulemaking will be distributed to all licensees. The notice will be sent to other interested parties upon request.

L. Joseph Callan Executive Director for Operations

Enclosures:

1. FRN of Proposed Rule
2. Regulatory Analysis
3. Congressional letters
4. Public Announcement l

l l

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

The Commissioners c. The proposed rule contains information collection requirements that are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB);

d. A regulatory analysis has been prepared (Enclosure 2);
e. The appropriate Congressional committees will be informed (Enclosure 3);
f. A public announcement will be issued (Enclosure 4); and
g. Copies of the notice of proposed rulemaking will be distributed to all licensees. The notice will be sent to other interested parties upon request.

L. Joseph Callan Executive Director for Operations

Enclosures:

1. FRN of Proposed Rule
2. Regulatory Analysis
3. Congressional Letters
4. Public Announcement

9 4

e ENCLOSURE 1 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE 1

[7590-01-P)

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION 10 CFR Part 55  !

RIN 3150-AF62 Initial Licensed Operator Examination Requirements AGENCYs Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

4 ACTION: Proposed rule.

s SUMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend its regulations to require that power plant facility licensees prepare the written examb.ations and operating tests that the NRC currently uses to evaluate the competence of individuals applying for operator licenses at those plants. The proposed amendment would require the licensee to submit each examination and test for the NRC's review and approval and would preserve the NRC's authority to prepare the examinations and tests, as necessary. The proposed rule would allow the NRC to invoke its authority if it lost confidence in a facility licensee's ability to prepare these examinations acceptably, or to maintain the proficiency of its own license examiners. This proposed action would allow the NRC to eliminate between $3 million and $4 million in contractor support for pr;;:r: tic; : d 9 tal:tr: tic Of : = in tion: 5peHtoflicensing

$ [ M MtIEt Wltisi.

DATES: Submit comments by (Insert the date 75 days after publication in the Federal Register). Comments received after this date will be considered if it

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

,,.x_.._,,-.-..

is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to assure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. ,

ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Attn: Docketing and Service Branch. Hand deliver comments to 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryltnd, between 7:30 am and 4: 15 pm on Federal workdays. For information on submitting comments electronically, see the discussion under Electronic Access in the Supplementary Information section.

Single copies of this proposed rulemaking may be obtained by written request or telefax ((301) 415-2260) from Harry S. Tovmassian, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555. Certain documents related to this rulemaking, including comments received, may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW (Lower Level), Washington, DC. These same documents may also be viewed and downloaded electronically vf a the Electronic Bulletin Board established by NRC for this rulemaking as indicated in the Supplementary Information section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harry S. Tovmassian, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, telephone (301) 415-6231; e-mail hst9nrc. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

2 l

{

Section 107 of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954, as amended, requires i

the NRC ts determine the qualifications of individuals applying for an

operator license, to prescribe uniform conditions for licensing such 1  :

Pursuant to the AEA, individuals, and to issue licenses as appropriate.

10 CFR Part 55 requires applicants for operator licenses to pass an  :

examination that satisfies the basic content requirements specified in the i regulation. Although neither the AEA nor Part 55 specify who must prepare, administer, or grade these examinations, the NRC has traditionally performed

  • those tasks itself or through its contract examiners. The NRC and its contract examiners use the guidance in NUREG-1021, " Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors,' to prepare the initial operator licensing examinations. This document has been revised as experience has been acquired in preparing these examinations. The current version is designated as Interim Revision 8.' i a The intended modifications to Part 55 would allow facility licensees to have greater participation in the initial operator licensing process and enable the NRC to eliminate contractor assistance in this area. Between $3 million and $4 million in contractor support for the preparation and administration of the initial operator licensing examinations 'and'for support 5f[f64Eillf W4(t W @ iliij k tibisiwould be eliminated. On April 18, 1995, the Commission approved the NRC staff's proposal to initiate a transition process to revise the operator licensing program and directed the staff to carefully consider experience from pilot examinations before fully

' Copies are available for inspection or copying for a. fee from the NRC Public Document-Room at 2120-L Street NW.,_he7 Washington DCP20555fthe:PDR's e"Q^ ~ MIWW8tWLG4ilit41epho iis1H(tateratestHen;AJs141oo avat1461elfo(202)L W rJownloadtng;from.the;Internet 63h3273;t fax _-

el k..%%M M 888 M 98?I.

3 i

i

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

_ _ _ _ __ _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ _. ._ _. _ _ .~ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

4 implementing the changes. On August 15, 1996, the NRC staff issued Generic Letter (GL) 95-06, ' Changes in-the Operator Licensing Program.. outlining the revised examination development process and soliciting volunteers to  ;

i participate in pilot cxaminations to evaluate and refine the methodology.

Between October 1, 1995, and April 5, 1996, the NRC staff reviewed and

approved 22 operator licensing examinations e _ .... ., -. .......y i
t h
:::::),-including both the written examinations and the operating tests.

that were prepared by facility licensees. These examinations were prepared using the guidance in Revision 7 (Supplement 1) of NUREG-1021 and the additional guidance in GL 95-06. These examinations were used to test 146 reactor operator and senior reactor operator applicants.

3 Discussion The pilot program demonstrated that the revised examination development process can be both effective and efficient. Comments from the NRC staff and l

industry personnel who participated in the pilot examinations were generally favorable. The quality of the licensee-developed examinations (as modified by ,

! the NRC) was generally comparable to the examinations prepared by the NRC

, staff or its contractors. However, several of the examinations submitted by  ;

facility licensees required significant rework, indicating that some licensees enem4*ees did not fully understand the criteria for preparing examinations

' Copies are available for inspection or copying for a fee from the NRC Public Document Room at 2120 L Street NW., Washington, DCit0555; the PDR's '

. mailing address is Nail Stop LL-6, "::h! ; ten, DC 20555; telephone (202) 634-3273; fax.(202) 634-3343, 4

-g wm., ,-,,em.,-. , ~w w. w, , , , , . _,,,-,,---vee-n-w-,g., .y ,-n,.,,n.,.....~,,,,- -,.,, ,, ,

- + - - - - - a+ s > , , , a6_s - L --w- A-m4-+ +4.s6- -- -AL m' which meet NRC standards. With training and experience, it is expected that i i

the industry will gain proftetency in preparing the examinations.

Availability of Guidance Document for L' 2nse Exanination Preparation Although Part 55 does not specify who will prepare, administer, and grade the written examinations and operating tests for reactor operator and senior reactor operator licenses, the NRC or its contract examiners have traditionally performed these tasks. As a consequence of performing the tasks associated with preparing and administering the initial licensing examinations, the NRC has developed a substantial body of guidance, which has been published in various versions of NUREG-1021 to aid both NRC and its contract examiners. The latest version of NUREG-1021 (Interim Revision 8) incorporates the pilot examination criteria in GL 95-06, lessons learned during the pilot examinations, and a number of refinements prompted by the industry recommendations submitted in response to the Federal Register notice

, dated February 22,1996(61FR6869),whichsolicitedpubliccommentsonthe proposed NUREG changes. A copy of Interim Revision 8 of NUREG-102145-being M6beiEImalledtoeachfacilitylicensee. Copies may be inspected and/or copied for a fee at the NRC's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW (Lower Level), Washington,DC. NUREG-1021 is also electronically available for downloading from the Internet at "http://www.nrc. gov." All interested parties are invited to comment on Interim Revision 8 of NUREG-1021 in addition to the proposed rule. These public comments will be addressed, and Revision 8 will be published as a final NUREG document.

5

The NRC plans to prepare, administer, and grade initial operator liter # ng ex oinations at least four times per year, using NUREG-1021 as guidance. Licenseeswould))Mbeexpectedtousetheguidancecontainedin i NUREG-1021 to prepare R1$Mdijip! examinations! and the NRC staff will re71ew and approve any deviations. However, the NRC will not approve any deviation that would compromise its statutory responsibility of prescribing uniform conditions for the operator licensing examinations. Examples of un nceptable dctiations include, but may not be limited to, the use of essay cuestions in place of r.,ultiple choice questions and the administration of open book exeminations.

Proposed Rule Yhis proposed regulation will add a new section, i 55.40, "impixantation," to Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 55. The reouirement for power reactor facility iternsees to prepare the written examinations and operating tests, to submit them to the NRC for review and approval, and to proctor and Fede]the written test: iihminatlosCwould be contained in il 55.40(a)(1),

(2), and (3), respectively.

Each power reactor facility licensee would be required to prepare and submit the proposed examinations (including the written examination, the wal<-

through, and the dynamic simulator tests) to the NRC consistent with the guidancs contained in NUREG-1021. The NRC staff will review the entire examination and direct whatever changes are necessary to ensure that adequate levels of quality, difficulty, and consistency are maintained. After the NRC staff reviews and approves an examination, the facility licensee would proctor 6

e and grade the written portion consistent with the guidance in NUREG-1021. The NRC staff will continue to independently administer and grade the operating tests, review and approve the written examination results, and make the final licensing decisions. The facility licensee will not conduct parallel operator evaluations during the dynamic simulator or the walk-through tests.  :

Pursuant to proposed requirements in i 55.40(b), the NRC staff would maintain the authority to prepare the examinations and tests and to proctor R RiW( the site-specific written examinations. This would allow NRC to maintain its staff capability to do so. Also, if the NRC has reason to question a licensee's ability to prepare an acceptable examination, 5 55.40 givc: it the authority to prepare and administer the examinations and tests itself.

Paragraph (c) of i 55.40 reasserts that the NRC would continue to prepare and administer the written examinations and operating tests at non-power reactor facilities.

Electronic Access Comments may be submitted electronically, in either ASCII text or Wordperfect format (version 5.1 or later), by calling the NRC Electronic Bulletin Board (BBS) on FedWorld. The bulletin board may be accessed using a personal computer, a modem, and one of the commonly available communications software packages, or directly via Internet. Background documents on the rulemaking are also available, as practical, for downloading and viewing on the bulletin board.

If using a personal computer and modem, the NRC rulemaking subsystem on FedWorld can be accessed directly by dialing the toll free number (800) 303-  !

l 7 .

l l

, _. _ _ _ _ _ _ , .. _ _ _ __ .=_.______._..______._.__._.__U

9672. Communication software parameters should be set as follows: parity to none, data bits to 8, and stop bits to 1 (N,8,1). Using ANSI or VT-100 terminal emulation, the NRC rulemaking subsystem can then be accessed by 1 selecting the " Rules Menu" option from the 'NRC Nain Menu." Users will find the "fedWorld Online User's Guides' particularly helpful. Many NRC subsystems and data basos also have a ' Help /information Center" option that is tailored to the particular subsystem.

The NRC subsystem on fedWorld can also be accassed by a direct dial phonenumberforthemainfedWorldBBS,(703)321-3339, or by using Telnet via Internett fedworld. gov. If using (703) 321-3339 to contact fedWorld, the NRC subsystem will be accessed from the main fedWorld menu by selecting the

" Regulatory, Government Administration and State Systems," then selecting

" Regulatory Information Mall." At that point, a menu will be displayed that has an option "U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission" that will take you to the 4

NRC Online main menu. The NRC Online area also can be accessed directly by typing "/go nrc" at a fedWorld command line, if you access NRC from fedWorld's main menu, you may return to fedWorld by selecting the " Return to fedWorld" option from the NRC Online Main Menu. However, if you access NRC at fedWorld by using NRC's toll-free number, you will have full access to all NRC systems, but you will not have access to the main fedWorld system, if you contact fedWorld using Telnet, you will see the NRC area and menus, including the Rules Menu. Although you will be able te download documents and leave me> rages, you will not be able to write comments or upload files (comments).. If you contact fedWorld using FTP, all files can be accessed and downloaded but uploads are not allowed; al'i you will see is a

. list of flies without descriptions (normal Gopher look). An index file 8

listing all files within a subdirectory, with descriptions, is available. ,

There is a 15-minute time limit for FTP access.

Although FedWorld also can be accessed through the World Wide Web, like ,

FTP that mode only provides access for downloading files and does not display i i

the NRC Rules Menu. ,

i For more information on NRC bulletin boards call Mr. Arthur Davis, Systems Integration and Development Branch, NRC, Washington, DC 20555, i telephone (301)415-5780; e-mail axd39nrc. gov.

Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion The NRC has determined that this proposed rule is the type of action described as a categorical exclusion in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(1). Therefore, neither an environmental impact statement nor an environmental assessment has been prepared for this proposed regulation.

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement This proposed rule amends information collection requirements that are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (s} U.S.C. 3501 et seq). This rule has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for review and approval of the information collection requirements.

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to Tverage 500 hours0.00579 days <br />0.139 hours <br />8.267196e-4 weeks <br />1.9025e-4 months <br /> per= response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information (i.e.,

9

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

l preparing the examinations). The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is  ;

seeking public comment on the potential impact of the collection of l l

information contained in the proposed rule and on the following issues  !

i i

I j

l. -Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the proper  !

performance of the functions of the NRC, including whether the information  !

will have practical utility?  !

2. Is the estimate of burden accurate?  !
3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the j L - information to be collected?  ;

r

4. How can the burden of the collection of information be minimized,

. including the use of automated collection techniques? l h Send comments on any aspect of this proposed collection of information, j including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Information and Records

Management Branch (T-6F-33), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, '

DC 20555-0001, or by Internet electronic mail at bjs19nrc. gov; and to the Desk  ;

[ officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, NE08-10202, (3150-  ;

0018,and3150-0101), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. l i

Comments to OMB on the collections of information or on the above issues i should be submitted by (insert date 30 days after publication in the Federal

. Register). Comments received after this date will be considered if it is  ;

4 practical to do so but assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments j

- received after this date.  ;

4 b-10 e g g c y t. - e re we *=,,..--c- r- y--.y,-y~ y or <e-~er-,,w.--,-,yvw, -,ym,-.- ,ww w wer wm -w.,-. ww -

)

Public Protection Notification The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid DM8 control number.

Regulatory Analysis The Commission has prepared a draft regulatory analysis on this proposed regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the alternatives considered by the Commission. The draft analysis is available for inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW (Lower Level), Washington, DC. Single copies of the analysis may be obtained from Harry S. Tovmassian at (301) 415-6231.

The Commission requests public comment on the draft regulatory analysis.

Comments on the draft analysis may be submitted to the NRC as indicated under the ADDRESSES heading.

Regulatory Flexibility Certification in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, (5 U.S.C.

605(b)), the Commission certifies that this rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

This proposed _ rule affects only the licensing and operation of nuclear power plants. The companies that own these plants do not fall within the scope of the definition of 'small entities" set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act 11

i or the Small Business Size Standards set out in regulations issued by the Small Business Administration at 13 CFR Part 121.

Backfit Analysis The Commission has concluded that requiring the facility licensees to prepare the initial operator licensing examinations would not be a backfit pursuant to 10 CFR 50.109.  ;

The proposed change does not result in a modification of or an addition ,

to systems, structures, components, or the design of a facility. The change i

does not affect the design approval or manufacturing license for a facility.

.The procedures required to design or operate a facility will not be affected by the proposed change. The proposed change would require each nuclear power plant licensee to develop the tests that are used to qualify, in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 55, those nuclear power plant operators whom the nuclear power plant licensee wishes to employ. Development of such tests are not considered to be " procedures... required to... operate a facility." The tests are not applied to the facility licensee, but rather to the operator license applicants. Further, any procedure necessary to develop the test would not be useful in actually " operating" the facility, even if one broadly interprets " operating" as including any action necessary to comply with the Commission's regulations with respect to operation. The organization required to design or operate a facility will not be affected because all facility licensees already have a training staff to train and evaluate  !

applicants for operator licenses and to train other members of the plant 12 w- gg--.- w -g  % w .-.wmyei%-9.m-.. .-pw- -

wa-

_ _ . .._ _ .. _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . . _ _ . _ . ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ ~ _ _ . _

. r t

staff, as required by 10 CFR Part 55 and by 10 CFR 50.120._ Therefore, an ,

i organizational change is not required because of this process change.  ;

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 55 i

Criminal penalties, Manpower training programs, Nuclear power plants and reactors Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. ,

for the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, j as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC proposes to adopt the following i

amendments to 10 CFR Part 55. ,

PART 5S--0PERATOR'S LICENSES i

1. The authority citation for Part 55 continues to read as follows: ,

AUTHORITY: Secs. 107, 161, 182, 68 Stat. 939, 948, 953 , as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2137, 2201, 2232, 2282); secs. ,

201, as amended 202, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842).

Sections 55.41, 55.43, 55.45, and 55.59 also issued under sec. 306, Pub.

L.97-425,96 Stat.2262(42U.S.C.10226).Section55.61alsoissuedunder secs. 186, 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C._2236, 2237).  ;

i

~

2. In 5J55.8 paragraph-(c)(4) is revised to_ read as follows:

6 55.8 Information Collection Reauirements: OMB Anoroval.

-(c)*  :*

  • 131

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

(4) In $$ 55.40, 55.41, 55.43, 55.45, and 55.59, clearance is approved undercontrolnumber{ 3150-010l[ R 3 H0i4 HS. <

3. A new i 55.40 is added to read as follows:

6 55.40 Imol-- ntatiSD.

(a) Power reactor facility licensees shall --

(1) Prepare the required site-specific written examinations and operating tests.

(2) Submit the written examinations and operating tests to the Commission for review and approval.

(3) Proctorh(dl,jEsdsithesite-specificwrittenexaminations.

(b) In lieu of requiring a power reactor facility licensee to prepare theexaminationsandtestsortoproctori#d,"gFade]thesite-specificwritten examinations, the Commission may elect to perform those tasks.

(c) The Commission will prepare and administer the written examinations and operating tests at non-pewer reactor facilities.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of , 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John C. Hoyle, Secretary of the Commission.

14

  • I ENCLOSURE 2 REGULATORY ANALYSIS l

1 l

l l

4 i

l l

l I

, l l

PROPOSED RESULATORY ANALYSIS FOR RULEMAKING ON REQUIRENENTS FOR INITIAL LICENSED OPERATOR EXAMINATIONS ,

i 1.- Statement of Problem and Objective s

Section107oftheAtomicEnergyActof1954(AEA),asamended, requires ,

the NRC to determine the qualifications of individuals applying for an operator license, to prescribe uniform conditions for licensing such individuals, and to issue licenses as appropriate. Operator license applicants are required by 10 CFR Part 55, " Operators' Licenses;" to pass an examination satisfying the basic content requirements that are i also specified in the regulation. Although neither the AEA nor Part 55

specify who must prepare, administer, or grade these examinations, the NRC has traditionally performed those tasks itself or through its contract examiners. Because this has been a costly process in terms of ,

staff manpower and c e actual support, the staff has evaluated an alternative approach ..; :h would require nuclear power plant licensees to prepare the examinations and submit them to the NRC for review and approval. This approach has been tested and assessed through a i voluntary pilot program and has been deemed by the staff to be feasible.

Thus the NRC is proposing to amend 10 CFR Part 55 to require nuclear

, power ant li IijithiF SWjiM_censees.

~

to prepare these examinations and has published l 43fiNUREG-1021,"OperatorLicensingExamination

$tind s for Power Reactors," as guidance. This proposed action will (

eliminate the need for $3 million to $4 million in contractual support l to the NRC. j 1 l The staff's primary objective in shifting responsibility for preparing i

. the initial operator licensing examinations to the power reactor J facility licensees is to reduce the amount of NRC resources used in this  !

I area = d ::ti:fy h f;;tery : = tr:i;;ts. This change in policy is part s of the NRC's continuing effort to streamline the functions of the l Federal Government consistent with the Admir.istration's initiatives and to accommodate NRC resource reductions. Pursuant to the provisions of the AEA, the NRC will ensure that the quality of the operator licensing

+

examinations,- and the effectiveness of the operator linnsing program ,

are maintained. These changes are not intended to affect the format, I content, length, and level of difficulty of the examinations, thereby l minimizing the impact of the rule change on the operator license applicants.

i 2. Background

~

4*-10 CFR 55.31(a)(3) requires the applicant for an operator's license

. to submit a written request from an authorized representative of the facility licensee that the written examination and the operating test be administered to the applicant. Furthermore, 10 CFR 55.33(a)(2) states that-the Commission will approve an initial application for a license if it finds that the applicant has passed the requisite written examination i and operating test in accordance with il 55.41 and 55.45 or 55.43 and 1

55.45. These written examinations and o>erating tests determine whether the applicant for an operator's license las learned to operate a facility competently and safely, and additionally, in the case of a senior operator, whether the applicant has learned to direct the licensed activities of licensed opers, tors competently and safely.

As stated above, the NRC or its contract examiners have traditionally prepared, administered, and gradeo the written examinations and operating tests. In recent years, the NRC has spent between $3 million and $4 million per year to retain contractor support for the operator licensing program. In accordance with 10 CFR 170.12(+1), the NRC staff and cor.tractual costs are recovered from the facility licensees that receive examination services.

The proposed rule would change the current practice that the 'RC prepare and proctor the initial examination for reactor operators at :enior reactor operators and, instead, require each power reactor fa ility licensee to >repare the entire examination and proctor the written portion of tie initial examination. A backfit analysis has been performed, and this action does not constitute a backfit pursuant to 10 CFR 50.109,

3. Identification and Preliminary Analysis of Alternative Approaches 3.1 Alternative 1 - Take No Action As discussed in SECY-96-206, the proposed change allows the staff to eliminate between $3 million and $4 million in contractor support for examinationpreparationandadministrationfinffsflinspectionisdpport.

The budget request for fiscal years (FYs) 1997"hud'1998 is~chnsistent with this proposal and reflects the reduction and eventual elimination of contract support for initi:1 :=inations. If the Commission decides not to amend 10 CFR Part 55 as proposed by the staff, it would require

?)ency resources to be raprogrammed to increase the contract support for the operator licensing program or direct examiner resources in each regional office to satisfy the demand for initial licensing examinations and to conduct the licensed operator requalification inspections.

3.2 Alternative 2 - Provide Regulatory Guidance This alternative was rejected because the staff considers implementation of the new process on a voluntary basis alone unworkable over the long term. Should the NRC refrain from requiring that facility licensees prepare the initial operator licensing examinations, there would be no guarantee that each licensee would elect to prepare these examinations.

Thu:, th "I ::ald ::ntine: to requir : level of centractual support

..n,... . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . With the elimination of contractor support and the increased uncertainty about examination quality, the staff may no longer have sufficient examiner resources to prepare examinations consistent with the scheduling needs of facility licensees. This resource problem is further compounded by the unpredictable nature of the examination workload and by other unanticipated demands on the examiner work force, such as the increase in the number of examination appeals during the pilot examination program.

2 l

- . =. - __.

i l

l l 3.3 Alternative 3 - Amend 10 CFR Part 55 This alternative would require every power reactor facility licensee to i prepare the initial operator licensing examinations and to proctor the written portion of the examination. This would enable the NRC to eliminate the use of contractors in the operator licensing program (with the exception of the generic fundamentals examinations) and result in an estimated savings of $3 million to $4 million per year. Under this alternative, the NRC staff i = tid be reli=:d of =:= leet 4en pr:p:r ti= d: ties-would undertake other tasks that are currently performed b contractors, including examination administration and inspections of licensee administration of requalification examinat4 ens W99f5

4. Regulatory Impact - Qualitative Costs and Benefits Facility Licensees The NRC currently depends on NRC employees and contractors to prepare and administer the initial operator licensing examinations required by 10 CF Part 55., NRC contractors also assist in th

___,R d:te4etration of

.ai... _ 4. the inspection of facility licensee administration of requalification examinations. In accordance with 10 CFR 170.12(11),

the cost of NRC time spent and any related contractual costs are billed directly to the facility licensees that receive the examination services.

Under the proposed change, each power reactor facility licensee will .

assume responsibility for preparing the site-specific initial operator l licensing examinations at its facilities, thereby allowing the NRC to 1

discontinue the use of contract examiners for that purpose-and-to-diveet.

..........n,.......m. t=k: =rrently perfomed by contractors.

Facility licensees will be expected to prepare and submit proposed examinations (including the written examination, the walk-through, and the dynamic simulator tests) to the NRC based on the guidance contained in NUREG-1021.

The training staffs at power reactor facilities already have the basic  ;

knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to evaluate operator '

performance and develop test items for the initial licensing l examination. During the mid-to-late-1980s, the industry's emphasis in the training area increased significantly. All power reactor licensees established formal training programs that were based on a systems  !

approach to training (SAT) and accredited by the National A:ademy for l Nuclear Training. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.120 and 55.4, SAT-based l training programs must include the evaluation of the trainee's mastery of training objectives. NRC inspections of licensee requalification l programs for licensed operators have also found that training staffs ,

generally possess the skills needed to evaluate the trainee's knowledge.  !

Af ter th: ""C r=*=: =d :ppr:n: = =::inati:n, th: f;;ility licen;;c will prc:t:r =d gr:d: the eritten perti= bred on the guidance

=t:in:d in "" REC 1021. The ""C- st ff will :=tinu: t: dminister and r:d: th: :p;r ting te:t , rai= =d :pprs= the written =aminat4en rnalt: r= :- :nd:d by th: f;;'lity lic=:=, =d ::he th: fir. 1 3

l

l l

li::3MM i ht=. TheNRCwillreviewandapprovethese!faillitys examinations consistent with the guidance provided^in NOREG-02 T~Eowever, the NRC will not approve any examination which would have the effect of compromising its statutory responsibility of prescribing uniform conditions for these examinations. Examples of unacceptable deviations include, but may not be limited to, the use of essay questions in lieu of multiple choice and the administration of op-

. en- rather than closed-book examinations. Aft # tlHFNRC 7eviews Thd p3 ,

the withper%lessbased;enftheiguidanceTcentainedlin NUREG-1021MThe Kstay wf)) ese41 pee _itotedsiststen andtgrade?theToperatinyttestsE ~

review W approps<the writteesexaminattentresultstrocommendedlbyithe fac1Utyl jconsee&andlankeithslitaaldi_censingJecisions t feedback from the pilot examination program indicates that the average time spent by a facility licensee to prepare the written examination and operating tests was approximately 600 to 800 staff-hours. A portion of that time (about 200 hours0.00231 days <br />0.0556 hours <br />3.306878e-4 weeks <br />7.61e-5 months <br />) would have been spent reviewing and assisting with the administration of NRC-developed examinations under the process now in place and should be subtracted from the total. The resulting average burden of approximately 400 to 600 staff-hours was somewhat higher than the 400 hours0.00463 days <br />0.111 hours <br />6.613757e-4 weeks <br />1.522e-4 months <br /> that NRC staff or its contract examiners typically take to prepare an examination. The extra burden is generally attributable to the facility licensees' lack of familiarity with specific NRC examination expectations and to the additional administrative requirements, such as documenting the source of the examination questions, that are required to maintain examination integrity. It should be noted that some of the facility licensees that participated in the pilot program expended less time than is coronly used by NRC contractors to prepare the examinations. Furthermo.', in a few cases, the examinations that facility licensees submitted for review and appraval were, in the judgment of NRC chief examiners as good or better than those prepared by an NRC cont; actor. The staff expects that most facility licensees will eventually be able to prepare quality examinations in less time than the NRC or a contractor because the facility employees have more detailed knowledge of their facility and ,

easier access to the reference materials required to prepare the examinations.  ;

The fact that contract examiners will not be used by the NRC in the 4

revised examination process will eliminate the need for duplicate sets of reference materials to be provided to the NRC staff and to its l contractors by facility licensees. Feedback from the industry in I response to the staff's solicitation of public comments on the draft revision of NUREG-1021 indicated that facility licensees had been spending from an additional 80 to 160 hours0.00185 days <br />0.0444 hours <br />2.645503e-4 weeks <br />6.088e-5 months <br /> to prepare and ship the reference materials under the existing examination process. Under the proposed process, the facility licensee will geserillyssubmit only materials which are needed to verify the accurRy"of the examination questions. This is considered to be a significant reduction but has not been quantified in this analysis.

The additional burden of having to prepare the site-specific initial operator licensing examinations is expected to be offset by reductions in Part 55 review fees billed to the facility licensees pursuant to 10 4

CFR170.12(4{}.- Each facility licensu will be billed only for the time '

that-the NRC staff spends to review the examination prepared by the.

facility licensee and to rework the examination, as necessary, to bring-it-up to NRC standards. Although several of the draft pilot examinations were of poor quality and took the NRC staff more time-than expected to review and rework, the staff-believes that additional cost reductions will-be realized as facility licensees gain experience with the NRC examination requirements and the quality of the facility developed examinations-improves.

This rule change will give facility licensees more control over the cost of their exa=ination services because they will be in a position to manage the quality of the product that is submitted to the NRC. The higher the quality of the examination that the facility licensee submits, the lower the resulting charges. Under the existing examination process, facility licensees are responsible for the entire cost of preparing _the examination, even if the NRC contractor's submittal is of poor quality and requires significant rework by the NRC staff before it can be administered.

Facility licensees will have the option of retaining the services of a contractor to prepare the license examination as the NRC often does under the current examination >rocess. The staff understands that the NRC's examination contractors tave expressed an interest in providing

-their services directly to facility licensees.

In summary, the present system for developing licensing examinations relies primarily on NRC contractors to develop the examinations, with the cost then billed-to the licensees. These particular examinations are highly plant specific, requiring time for familiarization with plant procedures and equipment and for the collection and transfer of information (library of procedures and documents) to enable this process to occur. Hence, to appropriately prepare and administer the examinations, the NRC staff and contractors must learn the details of the operation-of each specific plant. In effect, this necessitates that the examining staff duplicate expertise already resident at each site simply to prepare the examinations. Clearly, efficiency could be gained if the NRC efforts were focused on the appropriate scope and depth of the examinations, leaving the > reparation of the detailed material to the licensee who is in a much >etter position-to do so. The proposed rule would eliminate these inefficiencies by placing the responsibility for preparing the examinations with each licensee. Licensees would still have the option of using contractor assistance in preparing the examinations. There may be an initial period of inefficiency while licensees leara the process for preparing these examinations, but this is expected to be short as the practice of relying on licensee personnel

- or their contractors-to prepare this highly technical, plant specific examination becomes routine. It.is expected that with experience the facility licensee will be preparing high:r quality examinations requiring less NRC review resources to be used with a larger potential savings to the licensee.

Th: fell: ing t:hl: " comp performing this funcDon :areeliEIif 7ra.tif is the approximate annual costs of pl@tC % =n : ::d:r th: ;;ndeK.the?tiFaiditishl?WHuEthe.1QsuggestsLthatith d

5

i 1 .

m Ay h.th_e,- a 4. b_outy

,:: &: c;uspet _entj kt_elsai_i_the3Jtdu_s.r m. .: $4w,8,, = &v,em, $c mil.liom w .ma,4.mi  :. 4p_er_;y_ eats-i

..a 1 ...v.n .... ..

r =. r. ..1. . ._... .. .. ,.

...... . w .i ww .i n_J-_

.....i .... r-i.-

AL. -

v >'-%

-.sw, s assumed that

. m._u. _ i. m, w. &. 2 -u mm - - . .v...iv...

.. EAA L-o--

.. . . . . . . vv

..w...4. .J7.1,m..j;f?it wwv ..

.=.&. i,the;< facillty ItschileEist11Me04stellyWebl47W- - - Th,s,-taationsninithe e.

lampiateenttsfatteelthat?the D Ci ' ' '  ? etsittsicentract examin_ers SopfgeltheitasMbeMelprput11 , .s) tend ~that1theiti.ne' ~ ' '

wil be equally ' distributed >etween contrac ors and the licensee's own in-house staff at labor rates of $120 per hour and $60 per hour, respectively. Fit ~seuld translates 1

^: = b; S^ --- *- -- p dustry_b_ur_ den of $2,78 A r y ds =f  !$0.ioxamistibn. si, per Pn..to an. in,t.h_eseisasetesamt_as.ti ,6 m_illionTes.i.elvi oaf ifs s uere'evealp  ;

between+,NRC costNictorsiatfeiferecoverabeilaberfrateoff8120
perJhouriand;NRC enaminers atsaMcurrwetlyiproposed)iratfef!$131!portbeeMit:wouldi_

penslateante anfindustryfeestteftabout!$$!st111eaRFac111ty!11censees.

eenid Isith"jrealtze; whichithe great Tcani ~erfordesser}savingsidependtagimpseithetefficiency renare?the'examinatientiand the? hourly cost' of Ihe.f, g ,ir.teChGiCa Ak a,..n.m.. ., ,a ,,;n.=n.,e.r 4.c::A m.ni,4rvvev,ww z a. E, #u :.1 -se e,yy g7 7staf N unv. v, nw. y e ..y. .:

g ,, ,, , ,, ,, _,33,_ ,,_ ,_

r-*="*'== *- *='* ----* --*- *- we*- -

A--- Ji- &* 4L. - - . . ----- , f. 4 1 1. ' --"r*'J-=

,' 1 -- mu. 4 - = 4 4 - - ,' "O v ivy . ... ww s yrw n w .,

yvwwwwe i vi un 4, wv= & 4 .1, iswvnavny s num v ivu v i vn a mJ L 1mu -.o L. mote- .. 1.--- ., ,L-m- L-..o.m 1.mJ v erw Is .w. w&. ww ww ww mwy -m v vv e. ww 5=v,w .. i we gw we .vvwwn wwwww w O

---4-=,4ust v.4114 i ieivn- wvvvwi J 11.-,e f &L. di 4. 4-J J t, e, A m- .1iwnw N =ws Oe4- .,. f i -, 6, ,

1 ei, w urv ww ww y t A, i vs wvviw i uw suu T

...--a ammi ..J-. _.6. s.- ...a.4a- une &_ 4 ,-- e .mo 14

. .r r - ' * ' ' ' * ' * ***** "**'**8

' " ' 1 4 . . - . . . "t .3 " , ' " *

' TL

' '

  • r. *, * * ' M"*

m u m

- i nw 1 - . 4.vv Am . m. g v ,..n a

"" *l. o L,o w

- - A. L.w.

. wwwn.ww , 4. w.avf t . ins,w n.

  • 4.s l u, l e. d o , u 1 1 1, s w es -i .= v.

1, m L. -- f J Am o une ---1mm.1 A- , .L km J. . 1 ...=14f4mJ &

ww rwv vwumww wy .,. ivyv u. v .w-&,v. i ,. -,.- .

o1i1 wi i s wv www1 3==ie: iww 54 v vv.7 rwi v r.-i m 6..Ls. w A..

.w r.

v w.. . .- o. v sv.a - u. , .. -. vv 13 e-....v,",

.ww a.

account for the savings anticipated by significa,This ntly reducing analysis the need does not to prepare and ship an extensive amount of reference materials to enable preparation of the examination by the NRC or its contractors.

1 E - o d .a . $ , 4 s & mJ Ui&L & im . h . -,aJ n . . }a r$in.m . wwI

. .m. ... waY T Y Tw d MdMWsvhbww wY h vi b YTs I I wwweF%M T7w.b

[.4, I! uh, mm n--Am.m wwM%M wY .wtA- Y hRI J YTw I Y vssJM

[ m am & a , & a O , , am - m a & [- f S &A Au wwn = 1 ww s v'

  • f #' ' T

f i ww m 2,1 i I .. " r r " ' '

i v1 & ,o wwwwn.ww wnwminw

..mm

' 'fu". .'.1 - . &, 4swum-n---. .&amm wvi

  • i w y wi ww n--

P ww,=.

,4, IlJ--

.u--i i i .. .-..J

.w-nulm nuis m mL & . . A mm .- A mm,.A h a wwvy w r ww ww w m .w u. v v w vv er t w g m. a e 1 :

Im Li - . i . m f.7.=n= & faia E.m414&u an ..w=** " "rr" * '"' ' "**J lE 4, w- - - =, .= . Eb 5,u Msv v vl =.'.b I. wii w 1i

&Im-n *=== *Adm-y v w ywi mi wwn l

n.a coma _, a su i su v w . mwm. . a av=m i, w=v vnya w e wi s a e vi i unet mm. 1o,4, ... 1..J.. &L. -----,mA -. 1 m -- o14, 4 .

T=vL.s. n.iw . ... iyav, wwn iwwww A.nu L . 6, en= e uvw iuauvwa yv.7wwww in u

- & - J..a2-- ro a L . &L. . 4 ,&.4..&m-u ...4-- -4 rw.wnma.1.1 van m m , &,

wwa v=====ivne a we uNip view s w wh nv. ewwww wi y v s gu s i wmwii w

&L6 une f.- 4km,m &..L. -J &L. une ,&=fr Loi 4 mom, &Lse &km wuww &.nwL . .u.= ywi i vi m nwew swene =v vw onw now wwuv i vuvuwwwa siv u s s usw

.AL4114o &. ----.-- .J .J 4 I,&- &L. mu- I- 44mm. - - .

w

  • r " l' * ' '. a' .' 1 i . .. 6,'m4&L & L . " 1 4 ,"'- -

'*J ** r V " ' * "' " "'"'***' *^"***'V"" * " '

  • i.----- m .

r r ' 'V " ** ', ***** "'*' *'" **"****

6

Doerator License Acolicants To the extent possible, the format, content, length, and level of difficulty of the examinations will remain unchanged, thereby minimizing the impact of the rule change on the operator license applicants. NRC examiners will continue to review and approve every written examination and operating test before it is administered. The examiners will work with the facility licensee's staff to modify the submitted examinations, as necessary, to ensure that the guidance contained in NUREG-1021 is met and to maintain consistency with prior licensing examinations at both that facility as well as among all other facilities.

If the NRC decides to pre)are the examination in lieu of accepting an examination prepared by tie facility licensee, the NRC examiners will use the same procedures and guidance (i.e., NUREG-1021) that the facility licensee would have used to prepare the examination.

NRC Staff As noted in SECY-96-123, the NRC examiners required an average of about 350 hours0.00405 days <br />0.0972 hours <br />5.787037e-4 weeks <br />1.33175e-4 months <br /> to review, prepare for, administer, grade, and document each of the 22 pilot examinations. Assuming the same resource utilization rate and a stable examination workload, the staff should be able to implement the new examination process and the requalification inspection program at all power reactor facilities with the same level of direct NRC resources as is currently allotted to the operator licensing pro no contractor support should be required" 1(with"the exception of Jhe;g ram;hM(5dmintheximisatiori4 gene The variable nature of the examination workload was evident during the pilot examination program, when the number of examination appeals increased unexpectedly, thereby placing a significant burden on the examiner work force to review and resolve the applicants' concerns.

Curr=tly"JfoWitaittiigitMlillotioxsmistionitransition" process, the examiners % Wrkload 4s-was1sharedipprokimat'eli equ' ally between the NRC staff and'its contractoW." Therefore, discontinuance of operator licensing contracts could limit the staff's ability to assign personnel

-to meet peaks in facility licensee requests for examinations. The impact of the les of examiners due to reassignments, transfers, promotions, and other personnel actions will also be larger without the contract examiners available to offset the loss. Furthermore siialitfifTan?hdiktionTphiip&ed!bfT i faEllitillicenseevis ',11f the significantly!defi cientMittwillibe difficultxtoipredict;the am6untTof timeesecessary'itoTreviewlorimodify3the examinationiso;that: 1tJmeets'NRC standards &Thihiwasjthelcaselwithiseveral?off the pilotiexaminations; and :the i stafflespectsithat th i s 8 probl em "may, ekpand : as 'moreif aci l i tys preparodiexminattensfaretsubmitted'forlNRC4 review,Jihis:untertaintyfin

. helexaminationTreview?pr'oce'ss t could(increase'

~ ' " ' ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~~ ~

the Lrisk of: broken bxaminatio[commitesnjsj To address this issue, the NRC plans to have a larger pool of examiners available at each regional office. The exact number of examiners has not yet been determined and will vary from region to region depending on the number and major type of reactors involved. However, it is 1

7 I i

l

unticipated that an approximate increase of 10-20% in the number of 1 examiners may be necessary. This will be accomplished by training other I staff members performing inspection activities to also be qualified as J examiners. As mentioned above, although the overall expenditure of NRC l

qualifiedexaminerswouldhelptoallevuat]epeaksinscheduling. resources in Furthr=r:, if th z='d:y f = ==t=ti= prrred by : f=ility it=== dui:.t= :t atf t:=tly fra th ==;t:bi: :t=d=d:, it-wiM h difff =lt to pr:dI:t th r=t f ti= :===ry t: raicw cr =dHy 4

th ==inti: :: th t it = :t: ""I :t=d d:. Tht: == the == wHh nnr:1 Of th pil:t ==inti=:, =d th :t:ff up=t; thi th4*

pr:bl= =, =;_d = =r: f=ility pr ;ned ==inti=: =: =h t t4+d fr"" r=f=, Tht: =nrt:S:ty f a t.g: ==!=t!= rn!: pr:::::

= 14 i=r:=: th rt:h f br:in ==inti= ::rit= ts. Inerns4*g th Mn :f ;=lif t:d ==t =: in :nh r ;i= ;=1d :h: help te

+11=t:t: thi: 2e e nr-This rulemaking is expected to take approximately 0.5 staff years to complete, and no contractor support will be needed.

5. Decision Rationale The proposed amendments to 10 CFR Part 55 will require pssidrireactor facility licensees to prepare the entire initial operator licensing examinations and proctor the written portion of the examinations. The qualitative assessment of costs and benefits discussed above, leads the NRC to the conclusion that the overall impact of the rulemaking will not i significantly increase licensee costs and could result in a savings to licensees over time as they become more familiar with the NRC examination guidelines. The improvements in efficiency would be primarily due to the facility employees' better understanding of the plant design and operating characteristics and their ready access to the I reference materials required to pre)are and validate the examinations, i Based on the fact that this action las the potential to pro /ide a cost savings to facility licensees as they become proficient in preparing the examinations, has negligible impact upon operator license applicants, i and provides a substantial cost savings to the NRC, Alternative 3 has  :

been selected as the preferred alternative. I

)

6. Implementation I

6.1 Schedule l

No implementation problems are expected. No effect on other schedules is anticipated, l

1 l

8

4 4

J ENCLOSURE 3 CONGRESSIONAL LETTERS l

l

l 2 -=

i A

The Honorable Dan-Schaefer, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Power Committee on Commerce United States House of Representatives .

Washington,-DC 20515 +

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The NRC has sent to the Office of the Federal Register for publication the' enclosed proposed amendments to the Commission's rules in 10 CFR Part 55.

This rulemaking,-if promulgated, will require facility licensees to pre)are

- these initial operator and senior operator license examinations and -su)mit

- them to the NRC for review and approval and would preserve the NRC's authority to prepare _the examination and tests, as necessary. This proposed action would allow the NRCinate to eliml.

between $3 million to-jad $4 million in contractor support annually.

Section 107 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA), as amended, requires the NRC to determine the qualifications of individuals applying for an operator license, to. prescribe uniform conditions-for licensing >>c.h individuals, and to issue licenses as appropriate. Operator license applicants are required by 10 CFR Part 55, " Operators' Licenses," to pass an r. amination satisfying-the basic-content requirements that are also specified in the regulation.

. Although the AEA is not specific as to who will prepare and administer the examination, the NRC has traditionally perform 3d these functions through its staff or contract examiners.

Sincerely, 1 -

Dennis K.-Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs

Enclosure:

Federal-Register Notice cc: . Representative Ralph 11:11 4

4 i

c-..,.. .,w ,..e.,v ~-., - - - ----

e-t

..- y 2

-The Honorable Dan Schaefer, Chairman

Subcommittee on Energy and Power Committee on Commerce i United States House of Representatives Washington, DC- 20515. r

~

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The NRC has sent to'the Office of the Federal Register for publication the i enclosed proposed amendments-to the Commission's rules in 10 CFR Part-55.

This rulemaking, if promulgated,= will require facility licensees to prepare these initial operator and senior operator license examinations-and -submit' them to the NRC for review and approval and would preserve the NRC's authority to prepare the examination and tests, as necessary; This proposed action would allow the NRC to elimlinate between $3 million.4+-)iid $4 i contracter support annually Section'107 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.(AEA), as amended, requires the i- NRC to determine the qualifications of individuals applying for an operator license, to prescribe uniform conditions for licensing such individuals,- and

-to issue licenses as appropriate. Operator license' applicants are required by +

10 CFR Part 55,." Operators' Licenses," to-pass an examination satisfying the basic content requirements that are also specified in the regulation.

Although the AEA is not-specific as to who will prepare and administer the examination, the NRC has traditionally performed these functions through its

[ staff or contract examiners.

j Sincerely, L

Dennis K. Rathbun, Director

[ office of Congressional Affairs i

Enclosure:

ll Federal Register Notice cc:. Representative Ralph Hall ,

-Distribution

, RD8/Rdg/Subj/ central, RAuluck, EDO R/F g DOCUMENT-NAME:(0:\T0VMASSI\ILDE\ CONGRESS \LOE]

y ~ T3 smeetue a espy of then h Imensen he the bon: 'C' = Copy without atteshment/enoisewe 'E" = Copy with attachment / enclosure

'N' s No copy si _ ___

1 0FFICE RD8:DRA* l RDB:DRA*- I D:DRA l OCA l l NAME: HTovmassian TMartin BMorris DKRathbun DATE- 02/05/97- 02/05/97 / -/97 / -/97 OFFICIA. RECO'a COPY

[ (RES File Code) RES-

-- u . . .- = .- , - --

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

_ . . _ _ _ ~ . . . . _ _ _ . _ . . . _ _ _ . _ . _ . . _ _

e.

-[f"hQ_ '

- A. ,

-~ UNITED STATES :

r g- NUCLEAR REEULATORY COMMISSION -

-i

.W ASHINoToN,' o,C. 306eH001

,,,,, j 6

: h

- The Hunerable James N.'Inhofe,ichainnan -

Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private, Property and Nuclear Safety _

Committee on Environment and Public Works' ,

, __ United-States Senate -

Washingtonc DC- 20510

Dear Mr. Chairman:

t The NRC has'sent to the Office of the Federal Register for publication the 4 enclosed proposed amendments to the Commission's rules in 10 CFR Part 55.

L This rulemaking, if promulgated,. will require facility licensees to pre >are these initial operator and senior operator license examinations and -su)mit

'them to the NRC for review and approval and would preserve the NRC's authority-

> to prepare the examination and tests, as necessary. This proposed action-iwould allow the NRC to eli inate between $3 million te-sil $4 million in "~~

c ~ .ractor support _ annually.-

Section 107 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954-(AEA), as amended, requires the NRC to determine the qualifications of-individuals applying for an operator license, to-prescribe uniform conditions for -licensing such individuals, and

, to issue licenses as appropriate. Operktor license applicants are required by _ ,

10 CFR Part 55, " Operators' Licenses," to pass an examination satisfying the basic content requirements that are also specified in the regulation.

Although the AEA is not specific as to who will pr pare and administer the

. examination, the NRC.has traditionally performed t ese functions through its staff or contract examiners.

L I , Sincerely, i j e <

[

1

~ Dennis K. Rathbun, Director

! Office of. Congressional ^ Affairs c .

Enclosure:

Federal Register Notice '

L cc:: Senator-Bob Graham; l:  :

} .-

- g

\ \

!? ,

l

  • o w l e  ;

' ^

,, .4.,-.. ., . . . , . ~ , .,-..l . .. a:- a

+ . . . , . ~ ,:L- -

+

t The Honorable James M. Inhofe, Chaiman Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private, Property and Nuclear Safety Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate i Washington, DC 20510

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The NRC has sent to the Office of the Federal Register for publication the

- enclosed proposed amendments to the Commission's rules in 10 CFR Part 55.

, This rulemaking, if promulgated, will require facility licensees to prepare these initial operator and senior operator license examinations and -submit them to the NRC for review and approval and would preserve the NRC's authority to prepare the examination and tests, as necessary. This proposed action would allow the NRC contractor support annually.

m to eli]inate between $3 million Q $4 million Section 107 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA), as amended, requires the NRC to determine the qualifications of individuals applying for an operator

, license, to prescribe uniform conditions for licensing such individuals, and to issue licenses as appropriate. Operator license applicants are required by 10 CFR Part 55,-" Operators' Licenses," to pass an examination satisfying the basic content requirements that are also specified in the regulation.

t Although-the AEA is not specific as to who will prepare-and administer the examination, the NRC has traditionally performed these functions through its staff or contract examiners.

4 SincerMy, l Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs

Enclosure:

Federal Register Notice

cc
Senator Bob Graham l l

Distribution: i R06/Rdg/Subj/ central, RAuluck, EDO R/F

\

DOCUMENT NAME:[0:\T0VNASSI\IL0E\ CONGRESS \L0E]

Ta seeehe e espy of them sleeuseesst,ineneen in the ham: 'C' = copy without ettechment/encioeure "E* = Copy with attachrnent/ enclosure "N* = No copy see pseviou. eencunen .

OFFICE RD8:0RA* l RDB:DRA* l D:DRA l OCA l NAME HTovmassian TMartin 8 Morris OKRathbun l

DATE 02/05/97 02/05/97- / /97 / /97 4

0FFICIA. RECORD COPY (RES File Code) RES 4.- - -

?

ENCLOSURE 4 PUBLIC ANNOUNCENENT

4 s

COM4ISSION PUBLISHES PROPOSED RULE FOR UTILITY ROLE IN INITIAL REACTOR OPERATOR LICENSE EXAMINATIONS The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has published a proposed rule in the Federal Register which would require that all nuclear power plant licensees prepare initial reactor operator license examinations subject to NRC approval.

Until a final rule is adopted, applicants for operator licenses will continue to be examined by using either NRC-prepared tes! L or those prepared by utilities participating voluntarily in an NRC-supervised pilot program begun 4

in 1995.

Reactor operator applicants seeking a license to manipulate the controls of a nuclear power plant must pass both a comprehensive, site-specific multiple-choice, written examination and a practical, hands-on, operating test, lhe generic fundamentals examination, a separate written test that each applicant must pass to be considered for the site-specific license examination, will continue to be written and administered by the NRC.

The NRC will continue to administer and grade the operating portion of the test, including a de control room simulator examination and a one-on-one demonstration of specific operating tasks. All examinations drafted by utilities will be subject to review, modification, and approval by NRC examiners before the tests are given. NRC will have the option of preparing a test Kissii@sMii]in lieu of accepting or modifying one prepared by a utility.

e

, e n

in order for the examinations to be approved by the NRC, they must comply with detailed NRC guidance which deals with such matters as the appropriate level of difficulty, maintenance of examination security, and restrictions on test preparation by those significantly involved in training the license applicants. The guidance document, " Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors" (NUREG-1021), has been revised to implement the new process.

Once the revised licensing examination process has become fully operational, the NRC staff will prepare at least one examination annually in each of the agency's fout regions to ensure that the staff maintains its proficiency in examination writing and to serve as a quality check on the prccess.

Historically, either NRC staff examiners or NRC contractors have prepared and administered all operator license tests. But in April 1995, the Commission approved a staff proposal to begin a pilot program wherein certain nuclear power plant licensees would prepare the tests under NRC oversight.

The Commission took this action to recognize substantial improvements in industry training programs, to make the operator licensing program more efficient, and to realize budgetary savings.

The staff solicited volunteers for a pilot program in a letter sent to all nuclear utilities in August 1995, and launched the program two months later. Between October 1995 and April 1996, the staff reviewed and approved 22 operator licensing examinations prepared by utilities in accordance with 2

. _ _ _ _ _. _... _ _ _ _ _ ._ _ ___ ~ _.

. t 9

published NRC guidance. -These examinations were used to test 146 applicants for reactor operator and senior reactor operator licenses.

Based on information provided in a staff briefing in June 1996, and the '

rulemaking plan in September 1996, the Commission in December 1996, authorized 4

continuation of the pilot program on a voluntary basis to provide time for the ,

rulemaking process.

. It is estimated that the proposed license examination process will permit the NRC to save between $3 million and $4 million paid annually to contractors for support of operator licensing and requalification inspection programs.

Unaffected by the new rule would be the licensing of operators for research and test reactors, who will continue to-be examined by the NRC. Also unchanged is the present system whereby utilities prepare and administer requalification examinations to licensed operators as part of an NRC-approved training program.

q l

3

.. . - - . . . .

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20216F534&oldid=3206868"