ML20216F542

Requests Implementation of Commission Directive by Arranging for Publication of Encl Proposed Rule in Fr.Also Encl,Draft Requlatory Analysis to Be Forwarded to Public Document Room & Congressional Ltr Package

ML20216F542
Person / Time
Issue date:	07/25/1997
From:	Bahadur S NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES)
To:	Meyer D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
Shared Package
ML20216F483	List: ML20216F480 ML20216F496 ML20216F508 ML20216F518 ML20216F534 ML20216F542 ML20216F561 ML20216F582 ML20216F587 ML20216F606 ML20216F627 ML20216F726 ML20216F751 ML20216F759 ML20216F776 ML20216F809 ML20216F867 ML20216F949
References
FRN-62FR42426, RULE-PR-55 AF62-1-008, AF62-1-8, NUDOCS 9709120018
Download: ML20216F542 (40)

Text

O e

Af41-1 July 25, 1997 pp g MEMORANDUM 70: David L. Meyer, Chief Rules Review & Directives Branch Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services Office of Administration j FROM: Sher Bahadur, Acting Chief j Regulation Development Branch Division of Regulatory Applications Office of Nuclear Regulatorj Researc',-

SUBJECT:

IMPLEMENTATION OF DIRECTION FROM THE COMMISSION:

PROPOSED RULE By a Staff Rcquirements Memorandum (SRM) dated June 26, 1997, the Commission has approved for publication a proposed rule to amending 10 CFR Part 55 to add a new section 5 55.40. " Implementation." This new section would require power reactor facility licensees to prepare the entire initial examination for reactor operators and senior reactor operators and to proctor and grade the written portion of the examination.

Please implement the Commission's directive by arranging for the publication of the attached proposed rule in the Federal Reaister.

Also attached is a copy of the draft Regulatory Analysis to be forwarded to the NRC Public Document Room, a Conge tsional letter package to be forwarded to the Office of Congressional Affati , and a public announcement to be forwarded to the Office of Public Affairs.

Attachments:

1. Proposed Rule +3 copies & diskette

2. Draft Regulatory Analysis

3. Congressional Letter Package

4. Draft Public Announcement

5. SRM CONTACT:

Harry S. Tovmassian,. DRA/ PES (301)415-6231 DISTRIBUTION:

Central f/c RDB r/f EJordan/AThadani JMurphy/FCostanzi RAuluck/LRiani CGallagher/DMendola gyl19)RT giTEl* e7... q. c .u. .uw mios , ir m.,

P "r@#" P ;T? "

"* "Eth cm us. td A 9709120018 970904 62 42426 PDR

[7590-01-P)

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 55 RIN 3150-AF62

!aitial Licensed Operator Examination Rcquirements AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend its regulations to require all nuclear power facility licensees to prepare, proctor, and grade the written examinations and prepare the 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, if it loses confidence in a licensee's ability to prepare these examinations acceptably, in addition, the NRC would periodically invoke this authority in order to maintain the proficiency of its own license examiners.

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

s

,4 '

' ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent to: Secretary. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Washington, DC 20555. Attn: Doc.ket'ing and Service Branch, Hand deliver commerits to 11545 Rockville Pike. Rockville. Maryland 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 via 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-nail hst@nrc. gov.

4 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 107 of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954. as amended, requires the NRC to determine the qualifications of individuals applying for an operator. license, to prescribe uniform conditions for licensing such 2

T

t Individuals.Jandtoissuellicensesasappropriate. Pursuant-to.the AEA.

110 CFR Part:55 requires applicants for operator licensees toLpass an examination that satisfies the basic content requ1_rements specified in the  ;

regulation. Although neither<the- AEA nor Part 55 specifies who must prepare,

+

s

proctor, or grade these_ examinations the NRC has traditionally performed-those tasks itselfior through its contract examiners. In accordance with-

-10_CFR 170( ). NRC staff and contractual costs are recovered from facility.

4-licensees who receive examination services. The NRC and its contract

examiners have used'the guidance in NUREG 1021. " Operator Licensing 4

' ~

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 Interim Revision 8.1 4

.The intended modifications-to 10 CFR 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 of requalification program inspections would 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 NRC staff to carefully consider experience from pilot examinationsbeforefullyf.implementingthechanges. On August 15. 1995, the-t

" Copies are available_for inspection or copying for a fee from the NRC 1Public Document-Room at 2120 L Street NW..-Washington.-DC 20555: the PDR*s -.

4 . mailing address is Mail Stop LL-6:-telephone (202) 634-3273: fax (202) 634-0 3343. Interim Revision 8 is a h o available for downloading from the Internet at "httpi//ww.nrc. gov."' ,

3 j.

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

p J NRC staff issued Generic Letter (GL) 95 06. " Changes in-the Operator Licensing Program."' outlining the revised examination development process and -

~

-_ soliciting volunteers to participate in pilot examinations to evaluate and l refine the methodology.

Between October 1. 1995. and April 5, 1996, the NRC staff reviewed and i approved 22 operator licensing examinations. including both the written

-examinations and the operating tests, prepared by facility' licensees as part

~

of a pilot program. Tnese examinations were prepared using the guidance:in Revision 7- (Supplement 1) of NUREG-1021 1

and the additional guidance in GL 95-

?06.8' These examinations were used to. test 146 reactor operator (RO) and senior reactor'operato_r (SRO) applicants.

The results of the_ pilot examinations were discussed in SECY-96 123.

" Proposed Changes to the NRC Operator Licensing Program." dated June 10, 1996.

- Based on the results of the pilot program, the staff recommended that the Comission approve the implementation of the new examination process on a voluntary basis until rulemaking could be completed to require all power reactor facility licensees to prepare the entire initial examination for reactor operators and senior reactor operators and to proctor the written portion of the examination. On July-23, 1996, the Comission authorized the

-staff to continue the pilot examination process on a voluntary basis and requested the staff to develop a detailed rulemaking plan to justify the changes.that may be necessary to 10 CFR Part 55. The Commission also directed the. staff to address a number.of additional items (e.g.. pros, cons, and .

' Copies are available for inspection or copying for a fee from the NRCl -

Public Document Room at 2120 L Street NW., Washington. DC 20555: the PDR's mailing address is Mail Stop LL-6.: telephone-(202T 634-3273: fax (202) 634-3343.

4 L

v w - e . - - - +- + -

-'-- t je =

vulnerabilities)'regarding the revised examination process to! facilitate a Commission decision on whether

to implement the revised process on an industry-wide basis; .

-On September 25, 1996, the staff-forwarded the reques ad rulemaking plan >

and a response to the additional items to the Commission in SECY 96-206..

"Rulemaking Plan for Amendments to 10 CFR Part 55 to Change Licensed Operator _

Examination Requirements." On December 17, 1996, the Commission directed the staff to proceed with the proposed rulemaking.

With Commission approval, the staff resumed conducting pilot-style

-examinations on August 19. 1996, and by the end of_ December 1996 had reviewed.

. approved, and administered 12 additional 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 and the number of applicants tested to 84 R0s and 144 SR0s.

Discussion The pilot program demonstrated that the revised process, using licensee developed examination; can ce both effective and efficient, Comments from the.NRC staff and 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. All of the

. licensee-developed examinations required some modifications subsequent to NRC review:' however. several of these examinations reovired significant r.ework.

indicating that some licensees did not fully understand the criteria for 5

_ _.- _ -_ . _ _ _ .= __ _

q4 =

= preparing examinations which meet NRC standards. With training and- ,

experience > it is expected that- the industry would gain proficiency in ,

+

preparing'the examinations. The monitoring and assessment of this~ voluntary-  ;

pilot program has demonstrated that facility licensee developed examinations,

'as modified by th,e NRC, are comparable in terms of their quality-to those 1 prepared by the NRC and its contract examiners under the existing process:

therefore, the safe operation of the facility in question is in no way compromised. The fact that the pass / fail results on the 34 pilot examinations o adrtinistered to the 84 R0s and 144 SR0s through the end of December 1996 were. .

comparable to the power reactor licensing examination results during Fiscal Year 1995, when all the examinations were prepared by the NRC or its t _ contractors, supports this conclusion. The provisions of the proposed rule-in 5 55.40(a)(2), which require NRC staff review and approval of facility licensee developed tests and examinations, should facilitate the monitoring of the quality of the submittals and the modification of those which do not meet NRC standards, The fact that NRC examiners will be administering all of the operating tests without contractor assistance is expected to improve the NRC staff's

-focus on operator performance and its core of experience because every applicant will be directly observed by an NRC employee. Before beginning the l transition process, contract examiners administered about half of the

. operating: tests and collected the observations that formed the basis for the

'NRC's licensing actions. The contractors' efforts focused primarily on task

completion. so any broader' insights and' experience that might have been gained Ewhile_giving the examinations was of little benefit to the NRCc 6

w ,y. p v, - - .,y,_, , _9,,,. ,.

The. Comission' has assessed the pros and cons associated with the.

~ revised. examination process as; discussed in SECY-96-206. and considered the

- measures that the NRC staff has' taken to. mitigate the vuln~erabilities. The Commission acknowledges that the. revised examination process increases the-risk of_ lapses in examination quality (incluaing level-of difficulty),

consistency. and security-and wishes to emphasize the NRC's resolve to

~

- maintain the existing standards of performance in each'of these areas.

-With regard.to examiaation security, in particular, applicants, licensees (operators), and facility licensees are reminded that 10 CFR 55,49

- prohibits their engagement in any activity that compromises the integrity (security) of any application. test, or examination required by 10 CFR Part 55 and that examination will need to be proctored in accordance with  :

10 CFR 55,40. These provisions require facility licensees to maintain proper

' examination security. The Commission expects that licensees will net the security provisions in ES-201 and ES-402 of NUREG 1021 or similar NRC-approved standards. Consistent with NUREG-1021. facility employees with specific knowledge of any NRC examination before it is given may not communicate the examination contents to unauthorized individuals and may not participate in any. further instructior. of the st" dents scheduled to take the examination.

Before they are 'ven access to the examination, the facility employee 4 are

- expected to sign a statement acknowledging their understanding of the

- restrictions and the potential consequences of noncomplir.nce and sign a post-examination statement certifying that they did not kn mingly compromise the-

= examination. In addition to the restrictions'on. personnel. NUREG-1021.also discusses'a number of physical security precautions, including protecting and

- mailing the examination materials and simulator considerations. The guidance

. 7 s

aww,- y- c y ~y .* vv- m -- +

also cautions NRC examiners to be attentive to examination. security measures; ,

and- requires them to review the security expectations with the facility f

licensee at the' time the, examination arrangements are confirmed.

- The Commission considers a violation of-10 CFR 55.49 for compromising'an_  :

examination has occurred when (1) a failure to control the integrity of an

~~

examination occurs such that there is a potential for an applicant to have an-

, unauthorized advantage in the examination process or (2) an applicant obtains  ;

an unauthorized advantage. Both facility licensees and applicants for examinations may be subject to enforcement action for violations of 10 CFR  ;

E5;49 commensurate with the' nature and seriousness'of the compromise.

As part of the final rulemaking in this matter. the comission intends to modify its " General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement <

l.

Actions" (Enforcement Policy). NUREG-1600. Security compromises will normally.

be considered at least at Severity-Level IV. A violation where it was likely that an applicant obtained unauthorized access to examination material will be considered a significant regulatory concern and categorized at least at Severity Level III. The NRC intends to utilize its full enforcement authority including. as warranted, civil-penalties and orders against persons found to

-have been involved in. willful compromises of examinations in violation-of.-

10 CFR 55.49. This will include use of the rule on Deliberate Misconduct . ,

(10.'CFR 50.5), In addition. cases involving willful violations-will be

referred to the' Department of Justice.

~

8

-,+mir

" zr -

p nNT- < - p 9 4

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

. ~. _.__._ -..

- - .; t..

-t

.~

1

- Availability of Guidance Document: for License Examination PreparationE i Although 10 CFR Part 55 does not specify who will prepare.: administer.

and gradeLthe written examinations and_ operating tests for reactor operator- _

an_d_ senior reactor operator licenses, the NRC o'r its contract' examiners have

traditionally perforined 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): f incorporates the pilot examination criteria in GL 95 06, lessons learned

- during the pilot examinations, and a number of refinements prompted by the f '

y comments submitted in response to the Federal Register notice dated February.22, 1996 (61 FR 6869) which solicited public. comments on the

proposed NUREG changes. A copy-of Interim Revision 8 of NUREG 1021- has been

- mailed to each facility licensee. 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 arc. gov." All interested parties are invdted

' 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 i publishedias a final NUREG document.

The NRC plans to. prepare, administer, and grade initial operator Ll'icensing examinations.at least four times per year, using NUREG-1021 as guidance,1 Licensees would also be' expected to use;the guidance contained in

NUR$G-1021--to'preparethelicensingexaminations.. The NRC staff would review t .9~ -

y y Eeh -t * +.e g m may r 5 y w -w - - - - - v - -- n ,,e-, e-cw-t- r ..--- -- * -

• e

and approve any deviatiens from this guidance. The NRC will not approve any deviation that would compromise its statutory responsibility of prescribing

' uniform conditions for the operator licensing examinations. Examples of

~

unacceptable' deviations include, but are not limited to, the use~of essay .

questions in place of multiple choice questions and the administration of open ,,

book examinations.

Proposed Rule This proposed regulation would add a new section. 5 55.40.

• 1mplementation." to Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 55 which would require power reactor facility licensees to prepare the written examinations and operating tests, to submit them to the NRC for review and approval, and to proctor and grade the written examinations. These requirements would 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 walk-through, and the dynamic simulator tests) to the NRC consistent with the guidance contained in NUREG 1021. The NRC staff r uld review the entire examination and direct whatever changes are necessary to ensure that adequate levels of quality. difficulty, and consistency are maintained. Aft y the NRC staff reviews and approves an examination, the facility licensee would pr,ctor and grade the written portion consistent with the guidance in NUREG 1021. The NRC staff would continue to independently administer and grade the operating tests, review and approve the written examination results. and make the . final 10

,, , , - - . _ . . - . , , , - - - . - . . - , . .__s- ,_ . - - . . . . , . _ _ , , , . , , _ , ,,

licensing l decisions. The_ facility licensee would not conduct parallel operator ~ evaluations during the dynamic simulator of the W lk+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

- and grade the site specific written examinations. - This proposed rule would allow NRC to maintain its staff capability to perform these activities. Also, if the NRC has Nason to question a licensee's ability to prepare an acceptable examination. 5 55.40 (b)- provides the NRC authority to prepare and administer the examinations and tests.

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. The NRC has taken this position because the non.

power reactor community does not have an accreditation process for training and qualification or the resources to prepare the examinations, However, the process will be implemented using only NRC examiners thereby allowing the elimination of all routine contract assistance in that area.

Electronic Access Comments may be submitted electronically. in either ASCll text or

~ Wordperfect format (version 5.1 or'later). by calling.the NRC Electronic

, Bulletin Board 1885) on FedWorld or connecting to the NRC interactive rulemaking web site. "Rulemaking. Forum." The bulletin board may be accessed; using a personal computer, a modem, and one of the commonly available comunications software packages, or directly via Internet. Background 11

b h

documents on the rulemaking are also available. as practical. for downloading and viewing on the bulletin board. I jf esing a personal computer and modem, the NRC rulemaking subsystem on FedWorld can be accessed directly by dialing the toll free number (800) 303-9672. Communication software indicators 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 i

terminal emulation, the NRC rulemaking subsystem can then be accessed by selecting the " Rules Menu" option from the "NRC Main Menu." Users will find

- the *fedWorld Online User's Guides" particularly helpful. Many NRC subsystems and data bases also have a " Help /information Center" option that is tailored to the particular subsystem.

The NRC subsystem on FedWorld can also be accessed by a direct dial phone number for the main FedWorld BBS. (703) 321 3339, or by using Telnet via Internet: 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 NRC Online main menu. ihe 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 contatt fedWorld using Telnet, you will see the NRC area and menus, including the Rules Menu. O though you will be able to download 12 r --w-- y re -

4 +e- y e-e- -v ----s -rm'e-y--.:.,e- m-w--, wa-% -a. r- --

y  % g- --w -- - -

documents and leave messages, you will not be able to write comments or upload files (conments), if you contact FedWorld using FTP all files can be accessed and downloaded but upl_oads are not allowed: all you will see is a list of files without descriptions (normal Gopher look). An index file 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 1he__NRC Rules Menu.

You'may also access the NRC's interactive rulemaking web site through the NRC home p' age '(http://ww.nrc. gov). This site provides the same access as the FedWorld bulletin board, including the facility to upload comments as files (any format), if your web browser supports that function.

For more information on NRC bulletin boards call Mr. Arthur Davis.

Systems Integration and Development Branch. NRC Washington, DC 20555 0001, telephone (301) 415 5780: e mail AXD3@nrc. gov. For information about the interactive rulemaking site, contact Ms. Carol Gallagher. (301) 415 5905:

e mail CAG@nrc. 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 statenent nor an environmental assessment has been prepared for this proposed regulation. .

13-

P Paperwork Reduction Act Statement This proposed rule amends information collection requirements that are ,

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 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 average 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 datd sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information (i.e.,

preparing the examinations), The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is seeking public comment on the potential impact of the collection of information contained in the proposed rule and on the following issues:

1, is the proposed collection of information necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the NRC, including whether the information will have prar'ical utility? '

2. Is the estimate of burden accurate?

3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity on tne information to oc collected?

4. How can the burden of the collection of information be minimized, including the use of automated collection techniques?

Send comments on any aspect of this proposed collection of information.

including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Information and Records Management Branch (T 6F-33), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 14 w ,, ,- - , , ---,--,ee -- -----n

i DC 20555 0001. or by Internet electronic mail at bjs10nrc. gov: and to the Desk ,

Officer. Office of information and Regulatory Affairs. NE0B 10202.-(3150 0018 f and 3150 0101).- Off' ice of Management and Budget. Washington. DC 20503, f 1

Coments to OM, on the collections of information or on the above issues

• 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 practical to do so but assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments received after this cate, 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 OMB control number.

Regulatory Analysis The Comission h.s prepared a draft regulatory analysis on this propostd regulation. Tt* analysis examines tre costs and benefits of the alter stives considered by the Comission, 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 and the; following specific questions.

15

1. Are there portions of the operator exams that are comon to all licensees, and would therefore be more efficiently developed by the NRC?

2. 15 the conclusion in the regulatory analysis correct that it would be less costly for each licensee to prepare their own initial operator examinations to be reviewed, revised, argi. administered by the NRC, than to have one NRC contractor prepare these exams for all licensed operators with the costs to be reimbursed by licensee fees, 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 or he Sr.all Businer: Size Standards set cut in regulations issued by the Small Business Administration at 13 CFR Part 121.

Backfit Analysis The pertinent part of 10 CFR 50,109 (a)(1) defines backfitting as "the modification of or addition to .. the procedures or organization required to

,, operate a facility: any of which may result from a new or amended 16

e provision in the Conrnission rules or the imposition of a regulatory staf f 90sition interpreting the Commission rules that is either new or different from a previously applicable staff position...." AlthoughPart55 addresses  ;

the qualifications and requirements for operators' licenses and changes are not per se subject to the backfit rule in Part 50, changes to these requirements could be included within the backfit definition of " procedure:, or organization required to ... operate a facility." However, in this case, the proposed shift of responsibility from the NRC staff (or its contractors) to the facility licensee for developing and administering the initial written examination for the operator license exam would not constitute a " modification of the procedures required to operate a facility" within the scope of the ,

backfit rule; therefore, no backfit analysis needs to be prepared.

The proposed rule doer, not affect the basic procedures for operator license qualification. i.e., the required training programs, the required testing, the content and format of the exams, tne grading of the exams, or the basis for issuing an operator license. The shift in responsibility for preparing the initial exam does not affect the content or format of the axam. ,

The proposed rule it designeJ to ensure that the format, content, and quality of the initial written examination will not be modified. The proposed rule requires the NRC to provide oversight of facility licensees' development and administration of initial written examinations. The NRC would also retain its discretion to determine whether to administer the initial written examination itself, as well as continuing to determine whether to grant or deny an application fo.* an RO or SR0 license and to consider candidates' appeals.

17

,- - ..y, -ewg-,- , - , y -. ww--,-- --,- , , - --.,,",- --

The licensee's organizational structure required to operate the facility [

will not be modified. All reactor licensees have a training component as part of their organizational structure, and the proposed rule does not alter that organizational structure. Although, the proposed rule could have an "effect" on the licensee's organization, it does not require any modification to the organizational structure.

Finally, the proposed rule does not impose any new costs on licensees since the NRC's costs to develop examinations are presently recovered in the fee base. Tnese costs are basically the same as the costs that will be incurred by licensees to develop the examinations under the proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 55 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, as amended: and 5 U.S.C. 553: the NRC proposes to adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR Part 55.

PART 55- OPERATOR'S LICENSES 18

, , , , ,. . , , - - . - w c.,7

e

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

AUTHORilY: 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.

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

Sections 55.41,55.43.55.45,in'd55.59alsoissuedundersec.306. Pub.

L. 97 425. 96 Stat. 2262 (42 U.S.C. 10226). Section 55.61 also issued under l secs. 186. 187. 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2236, 2237).

2. In i 55.8 paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:

i 55.8 Information Collection Reauirements: OMB Acoroval, 1

(b) The approved information collection requirements contained in this part appear in El 55.31. 55.40. 55.45, 55.53, and 55.59.

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

.LSL40 Imolementation, (a) Power reactor facility licensees shall -

(1) Prepare th. e equired site-spcu fic written examinations and operating tests; (2) Submit the written examinations and operating tests to the Connission for review and approval: and (3) Proctor and grade the NRC approved site specific written examinations.

19

4

-4 (b) In lieu of requiring a specific power reactor facility licensee to [

prepare the examinations and tests or to proctor and grade the site specific written examinations, the Commission'may elect to perform those tasks.

(c) The Commission will prepare and administer the written examinations and operating tests at non power reactor facilities. I Dated at Rockville. Maryland, this day of . 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

i John C. Hoyle.

Secretary of the Commission.

20

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

-. , , ,, . . - . - -, . - -,,-wr,.,, .,, - , , . - - -

,,,.,-,-g,. . - , - - . -

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

PROPOSED REGULATORY ANALYSIS FOR RULEMAKING ON REQUIREMENTS FOR INITIAL LICENSED OPERATOR EXAMINATIONS

1. Statement of Problem and Objective r

Section 107 of the Atomic Eneroy 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 " ~ ' i individuals, and to issue licenses as appropriate. To implement this ,

statutor mandate, o  :

Part 55.y" Operators'perator Licenses." to pass license applicants a written examination areand required an by 10 CF, operating test. The written examination mutt satisfy the basic content l requirements that are specified in the regulation. Although neither the AEA nor Part 55 specifies 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 NRC staff manpower and contractual support the NRC staff-has evaluated an alternative approach which 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 voluntary pilot program and has been deemed by the NRC staff to be feasible. The monitoring and assessment of this voluntary pilot program has demonstrated that facility lit.ensee prepared examinations.  :'

as modified by the NRC. are comparable in terms of their quality to those prepared by the NRC and its contract examiners under the existing process. thereforo, the safe operation of the facility in question is not compromised. Thus, the NRC is proposing to amend 10 CFR Part 55 to require nuclear power plant licensees to prepare these examinations and has published Interim Revision 8 of NUREG 1021. " Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors." as guidance. This proposed action would eliminate the need for $3 million to $4 million in contractual support to the NRC. The fiscal year (FY) 1997 and FY 1998 budget request is consistent with this proposal and reflects the elimination of contract support for the operator licensing program.

The NRC staff's primary objective in shifting responsibility for preparing the initial operator licensing examinations to the power reactor facility licensces is to reduce the amount of NRC resources used in this area. This change in policy is part of the NRC's continuing effort to streamline the functions of the Federal Government consistent with the Administration'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 licensing program are maintained. These changes are not intended to affect the format, content length, and level of difficulty cf the examinations, thereby minimizing the impact of-the rule change on the operator license applicants. ,

2. Background 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 and operating test in accordance with il 55.41 and 55.45 or 55.43 and 55.45. These written examinations and o)erating tests determine whether the fpplicant 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 operators competently and safely.

As stated above, the NRC or its contract examiners have traditionally prepared, administered, and graded 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 o>erator licensing program, in accordance with 10 CFR 170.12(i) the NRC staff and contractual costs are recovered from the facility licensees that receive examination services.

The proposed rule would change the current practice in which the NRC prepares and proctors the initial examination for reactor operators and senior reactor operators and. Instead, would require each power reactor facility licensee to prepare the entire examination and proctor the written portion of the initial examination. This action does not constitute a backfit pursuant to 10 cpl 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 would allow the NRC staff to eliminate between $3 million and $4 million in contractor support for examination preparation and administration and for inspection sup) ort. The budget request for FYs 1997 and 1998 is consistent wit 1 this proposal and reflects the current reduction (due to savings made possible by the ongoing pilot program) and eventual

. elimination of contract sup) ort. If the Commission decides not to amend 10 CFR Part 55 as proposed )y the NRC staff, it would require agency resources to be reprogrammed to increase the contract support for the operator licensing program or the direct examiner resources in each regional office to satisfy the demand for initial licensing examinations and to conduct the licensed operator requalification inspections,

?

--g,

3.2 - Alternative 2 Provide Regulatory Guidance j i

This alternative was rejected because the NRC staff considers t

implementation of the new process on a voluntary basis alone unworkable over the long tera. lf the NRC does not require facility licensees to prepare the initial operator licensing examinations, there would be no ,

guarantee that each licensee would elect to prepare these examinations. ,

1 With the elimination of contractor support and the increased uncertainty about examination quality, the NRC staff may no longer have sufficient i 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, 3.3 Alternative 3 Amend 10 CFR Part 55 This alternative would require every power reactoc facility licensee to 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 would undertake other tasks that are currently performed by contractors, including examination administration

.and inspections of licensee administration of requalification programs, t

4. Regulatory Impact - Qualitative Costs and Benefits facility Licensees .

The NRC currently depends on NRC employees and contractors to prepare and administer the initial aperator licensing examinations required by 10 CFR Part 55. NRC contractors also assist in the inspection of 4 facility licensee administration of requalification examinations, in accordance with 10 CFR 170.12(1), the cost of NRC time spent and any <

related contractual costs are billed directly to the facility licensees that receive the exenination services.

Under the proposed change, each power reactor facility licer.see would assume responsibility for preparing the site-specific initial operator licensing examinations at its facilities, thereby allowing the NRC to discontinue the use of contract examiners for that purpose. Facility licensees would 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 Inowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to evaluate operator-performance and develop test items for the initial licensing 3

.w. _ e ..e. .,r. .-..,._..m., ,_ , . , me.--e, ,_,.,.,.y - - - .-,,,_.-g -

i.m, .,.,m,,,.m.%.,.,.ye,,_,,w%. ,,,,wn. .,.-m,y, ug -

. . r examination. During the mid to late 1980s the Industry's emphasis in .

4 - the training area increased significantly. All power reactor licensees l established formal training programs that were based on a systems  !

approach to training (SAT) and accredited ~by the National Academy for Nuclear Training. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.120 and 55.4. SAT-based I training programs must include the evaluation of the trainee's mastery of training objectives. NRC ins)ections of licensee requalification programs for licensed o>erators lave also found that training staffs i generally possess the s(ills needed to evaluate the trainee's knowledge. [

t

The NRC would review and approve the facInty prepdred examinations  ;

consistent with the guidance provided in NUREG 1021. However, the NRC  ;

~

will not approve any examinstion which would have the effect of compromising its statutory reipunsibility 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 open rather than closed-book examinations. After the NRC reviews and a> proves an examination, 1 l the facility licensee would proctor and grade tie written portion based  !

on the guidance contained in NUREG 1021. The NRC staff will continue to administer and grade the operating tests, review and approve the written examination results recommended by the facility lictnsee, and make the final licensing decisions.

Feedback from the pilot examination program indicates that the average time spent by a facility licensee to prepare the written examination and o)erating tests was a) proximately 600 to 800 staff hours. A portion of  !

t1at time (about 200 lours) 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 a> proximately 400 to 600 staff hours was *

! somewhat higher than the 400 1ours 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 ex)ectations and to the additional administrative requirements, suc1 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 pi:ot p-> gram ex) ended less time than is commonly i

used by NRC contractors to prepare t1e examinations. Furthermore, in a

~

few cases, the examinations that facility licensees submitted for review ,

and approval were, in the judgment of NRC chief examiners, as good as or better than those prepared by an NRC contractor. The NRC 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 8

examinations.

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

revised examination process will eliminate the need for duplicate sets of reference materials to be provided to the NRC staff and to its 4

i f

J contractors by facility licensees. Feedback from the industry in i response to the NRC staff's solicitation of public comments on the draft i revision of NUREG 1021 indicated that facility licensees had been i t

spending 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 would generally submit only materials e which are needed to verify the accuracy of the examination questions. j This is considered to be a significant reduction but has not been .

t quantified in this analysis, Hie ~ddditional burden of having to prepare the site specific initial I operator licensing examinations is expected to be offset by reductions in 10 CFR Part 55 review fees billed to the facility licensees pursuant to 10 CFR 170.12(i). Each facility licensee would 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 would be realized as facility licensees gain experience with the NRC examination requirements and the quality of the facility  :

developed examinations improves. ,

This rule change would give facility licensees more control over the *

' cost of their examination services because they would 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 4

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 rewcrk by the NRC staff before it can be administered.

Facility licensees would 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 NRC staff understands that NRC's examination contractors lave expressed an interest in providing their services directly to facility licensees, in summary. the present system for developing licensing examinations  :

relies prim:rily 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 1 f the.NRC efforts were focused on the appropriate scopo and depth of the examinations, leaving the preparation of the detailed material to 5

4

,.,m,,., , , n.e,,-- r- -e.-..n---.v,e,,, ,--,.en<. ,e..,mmms-,,nen- _ ,,~,r,,,, -,,.<,,e a ...r.,,m..,m,.,,nn, um.-, nv mw,m,.----,.ns,.,..

t

'the licensee. The preposed rule would eliminate these inefficiencies by placing the responsibility for preparing the examinations upon each  :

licensee. Licensees would still have the option of using contractor l assistance in preparing the examinations. There may be an initial period of inef ficiency while licensees learn the process for 3reparing i these examinations, Ilowever, this period is expected to be slort as the i practice of relying on licensee personnel or their contractors to i prepare this highly technical, plant specific examination becones r routine. It is expected that with experience the facility licensee would be preparing quality examinations requiring less NRC review l resources to be used with a larger potential savings to the licensee,  ;

An accurate cost savings to the industry is difficult to quantify because the NRC does not have a basis to estimate the magnitude of the efficiencies that might be gained by having the licensee and/or its contractors prepare the examinations. .However, if it is assumed that 4

the facility licensees can prepare the examinations in the same amount of time that the NRC currently allots its contract examiners to perform the task (i.e., approximately 400 hours0.00463 days <br />0.111 hours <br />6.613757e-4 weeks <br />1.522e-4 months <br />) and that the time would be equally distributed between contractors and the licensee's own in house staff at en incremental cost of $120 per hour and $60 per hour, respectively, it would translate into an industry burden of $2.16 million, assuming-60 examinations per year. This would be roughly the same cost if the NRC were to prepare the examinations relying e4ually on >

in house and contractor staff efforts, Assuming that the facility licensees will be able to avail themselves of the aforementioned 4

efficiencies and that a 10% reduction in the burden is attained, there l would be a small industry wide savings of about 50,22 million per year.

The staff also anticipates that a small savings may accrue because of

• the reduced need for the facility licensee to prepare and ship a large amount of reference materials to the NRC to enable the Commission and/or its contractors to prepare the examinations. l Ooerator License Acolicants The format, content, length, and level of difficulty of the examinations would remain unchanged, thereby minimizing the impact of the rule change on the operator license applit. ants, NRC examiners would continue to review and approve every written eramination and operating test before it is administered. The examiners would work with the facility licensee's staff to modify the submitted examinations, as necessary, based on the guidance contained in NUREG 1021 in order 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 would use the same procedures and guidance (i,e., NUREG 1021) that the facility licensee would have used to prepare the examination.

6-t e

I

. , , - . . - - . . , ~ . . . -,_.~.,.____m_,.____.--,, y , . . ~ , . , ,,,_,,,,_..,1 , ,.m._,- _ _ , . . - , , , , , , - - _ _ .

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 NRC staff should be able to implement the new examination process and the requalification inspection 1rogram at all power reactor facilities with the same level of direct 1RC resources as is currently allotted to the operator licensing program; no contractor support should be retuired i (with the exception of the generic fundamentals examinations).

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.

Before starting the pilot examination transition process, the examiners' workload was shared approximately equally between the NRC staff and its <

contractors. Therefore, discontinuance of operator licensing contracts could limit the NRC staff's ability to assign personnel to meet peaks in ,

facility licensee requests for examinations. The impact of the loss of ,

examiners due to reassignments, transfers, promotions, and other personnel actions will fiave a greater impact without the contract examiners available to offset the loss. Furthermore. if the quality of an examination prepared by a facility licensee is significantly deficient, it will be difficult to predict the amount of time necessary to review or modify the examination so that it meets NRC standards.

This was the case with several of the pilot examinations, and the staff expects that this problem may ex)and as more facility prepared examinations are subinitted for NRC review. This uncertainty in the examination review process could increase the risk of broken examination commitments.

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 anticipated that an approximate increase of 10 20 percent in the number of examiners may be necessary. This would be accomp'.ished by training other staff members performing inspection activities to also be qualifled as examiners. As mentioned above, although the overall expenditure of NRC resources in this area should remain about the same, having additional qualified examiners would help to alleviate peaks in scheduling.

The voluntary pilot program demonstrated that the revised process, using licensee developed examinations, can be both effective and efficient.

The )ilot exar.iinations, as modified by the NRC, were comparable in terms of t1eir quality to those prelared by the NRC and its contract examiners under the existing process: t1erefore, the safe o)eration of the facilities was in no way compromised. The fact t1at the pass / fail results on the 34 pilot examinations administered to the 84 R0s and 144 7

l r SR0s through the end of December 1996 were comparable to the power r i reactor licensing examination results during FY 1995. when all the l

examinations were prapared by the NRC or its contrartors, supports this conclusion.

The NRC staff believes that its abilit to focus on operator performance

- and its core of experience may actuall improve if the pilot process is  !

implemented on an industry wide basis ecause every applicant will be i

directly observed by an NhC employee. Before beginning the transition <

process, contract examiners administered about half of the operating tests and collected the observations that formed the basis for the NRC's licensing actions. The contractors' efforts focused primarily on task completion, so any broader insights and experience that might have been gained while giving the examinations was of little benefit to the NRC, ,

This rulemaking is expected to take approximately 0.5 NRC staff years to j L complete and needs no contractor support. .

t

5. Decision Rationale The proposed amendments to 10 CFR Part 55 would require power reactor facility licensees to prepare the entire initial operator licensing examinations and proctor and grade the written portion of the examinations. The qualitative assessment of costs and benefits discussed above, leads the NRC to the conclusion that tne overall impact of the rulemaking would not significantly increase licensee costs and could result in a savings to licensees over time as they become more ,

a familiar with the NRC examination guidelines. The improvements in i' efficiency would be primarily due to the facility employees' better understanding of the plant design and operating characteristics and their ready access to the reference materials required to prepare and validate the examinations. Based on the fact that this action has the-potential to provide a cost savings to facility licensees as they become  :

proficient in preparing the examinations, has negligible impact upon o)erator license applicants, provides a substantial cost savings to the NRC, and has no adverse effect on safety (with the )otenttal for a slight improvement in the staff's experience and ab'lity to focus on operator performance) Alternative 3 has been selected as the preferred alternative.

6. Implementation 6.1 Schedule -

No implementation probiems are expected. No effect on other schedules is anticipated, i

i 8

Y

,r-,, yr3 m , +--,--,v,1,.-,w. v n, .r-c,~, ,e---,nn, ~,%- .,,nym,,-,,. ,r --,-,,r,~,.-r,-r--, v.,~-- . r , , e, . . - - - , .

, )

I ga at:g g% 4 UNITED STATES

u. 1; NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

• W ASHINQYON, D.C. 3066H001

\,.....'/j' l

, i The Honorable Dan Schaefer, Chairman -

Subcommtttee on Energy and Power Conrnittee on Commerce

. United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The NRC has sent the enclosed pro)osed amendments to the Commission's rules in ,

10 CFR Part 55 to the Office of tie Federal Register for publication, This rulemaking, if promulgated, would require facility licensees to prepare the ,

entire initial examination for reactor operators and senior reactor oDerators  :

and to proctor and grade the written portion of the examination, fadlity licensees would be required to submit the examinations and tests to the NRC t for reviev, and approval. This rulemaking would preserve the NRC's authority to prepare the examinations and tests, as necessary. Historically, the NRC has spent between $3 million and 54 million annually on contractor support for the operat.or licensing program, 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.

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. The Commission now proposes to have facility licensees prepare and administer the site specific written examinations in recognition of the substantial impronments in industry training programs, to make the oparator licensing program more officient, and to realize budg(;ary savings for the Federal government.

After promulgation of the final rules, the NRC will continue to (1) prepare and administer the generic fundamentals examination to operator license candidates, (2) administer and grade the operating portions of the site-C t

S ww, m no--s wna- - - - - ~~w-.c r , - - -

-e- --

r vv-m g- , w-n, <

specific examination, including a control room simulator examination and a one on one demonstration of specific operating tasks, and (3) prepare and administer at least one site specific written examination annually in each of the Nf'.C's four Regions.

Sincerely.

Dennis K. Rathbun. Director Office of Congressional Affairs

Enclosure:

Federal Register Notice cc: Representative Ralph Hall

The lionorable Dan Schaefer Chairman Subcomittee on Energy and Power Committee on Commerce United States llouse of Representatives .

- Washington. DC 20515 -

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The NRC has sent the enclosed pro >osed amendments to the Commission's rules in 10 CFR Part 55 to the Office of tie Federal Register for publication. This rulenuking."cr' promulgated, would require facility licensees to prepare the entire initial examination for reactor operators and senior reactor operators and to proctor and grade the written portion of the examination. Facility licensees would be required to submit the examinations and tests to the NRC for review and approval. This rulemaking would preserve the NRC's authority to prepare the cxaminations and tests, as necessary. Historically, the NRC

- has spent between $3 million and $4 million annually on contractor support for the operator licensing program.

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.

Although the AEA is not specific as to who will prepare and administer the examin6 tion, the NRC has traditionally performed these functions through its staff or contract examiners. The Commission now proposes to have facility

. licenses prepare and administer the site specific written examinations in recognition of the substantial improvements in industry training programs, to make the operator licensing program more efficient, and to realize budgetary savings for the federal government.

After promulgation of the final rules. the NRC will continue to (1) prepare and administer the generic fundamentals examination to operator license candidates. (2) administer and grade the operating portions of the site-9 e . , - .m e , ,w. . - - . , , ,-..,,e .,e, , y--, ,. , . , - - , , , - - - -

.4 -

specific examination including a control room simulator examination and a one on-one demonstration of specific operating tasks, and (3) prepare and administer at least one site specific written examination annually in each of the NRC's four Regions.

Sincerely.

Dennis K. Rathbun. Director Office of Congressional Affairs

Enclosure:

Federal Register Notice cc: Representative Ralph Hall

)lsliibution:

<DB/Rdg/Subj/ central RAuluck. E00 R/F DOCUMENT NAME:(0:\10VMASSI\IL0E\ CONGRESS \LOE) v 2,.. . . ..n .e w. on ni. **.... w w., c - c.,y ->.oi .n.cnn ne.nci .. r - con wan en.chn nv nci.... N - N een s.. .. coneon.nc..

OFFICE IRDB:DRA* RDB:DRA* 0:DRA* OCA l NAME HTovmassian 1Martiti BMorris DKRathbun

• DATE 02/05/97 02/05/9/ 02/2_8/97 / /97 OFFICIA RECURD COPY (RES File Code) RES

[

\ n UNITED STATES

. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION b  ! wasniwotow. p.c. seesweet i k...e+ f 1

i The Honorable James M. Inhofe Chairman Subcommittee on Clean Air. Wetlands. Private Property and Nuclear Safety - --

Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 .

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The NRC has sent the enclosed pro msed amendments to the Commission's rules in

.10 CFR Part 55 to the Office of tie Federal Register for publication. This

• rulemaking. If promulgated, would require facility licensees to prepare the entire initial examination for reactor operators and senior reactor operators and to proctor and grade the written portion of the examination. Facility licensees would be required to submit the examinations and tests to the NRC for review and approval. This rulemaking would preserve the NRC's authority to prepare the examinations and tests. as necessar Historically, the NRC hasspentbetween$3millionand$4millionannualfy. contractor support for on the operator licensing program.

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 sucf1 individuals, and to issue licenses as approp'riate. 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. The Commission now proposes to have facility licensees prepare and administer the site specific written examinations in recognition of the substantial improvements in industry training programs, to maka the operator licensing progi'm more efficient, and to realize budgetary savings for the Federal government.

After promulgation of the final rules, the NRC will continue to (1) prepare and administer the generic fundamentals examination to operator license candidates.-(2). administer and grade the operating portions of the site-s

specific examination, including a control room simulator examination and a one on one demonstration of specific operating tasks, and (3) prepare and administer at least one site specific written examination annually in each of the NRC's four Regions.

Sincerely.

Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs

Enclosure:

Federal Register Notice cc: Senator Bob Graham

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

f t

i

... j 1he lionorable James H. Inhofe. Chairman Subcommittee on Clean Air. Wetlands. Private Prooerty and Nuclear Safety  !

CommdteeonEnvironmentandPublicWorks -

+

Unite 1 States Senate Washiagton. DC 20510

{

Dear Mr. Chairman:

t The NRC has sent the enclosed pro)osed amendments to the Commission's rules in

10 CFR Part 55 to the Office of t1e Federal Register for publication. This rt.lemaking, if promulgated, would require facility licensees to prepare the entire initial examination for reactor operators and senior reactor operators and to proctor and grade the written portion of the examination. Facility i licensees would be required to submit the examinations and tests to the NRC f for review and approval. This rulemaking would preserve the NRC's authority-to prepare the examinations and tests as necessary. Historically, the NRC has spent between $3 million and $4 million annually on contractor support for '

the operator licensing program.

Section'107 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA). as amended, requires-the-NRC to determine the qualifications of individuals applyino for an operator license, to prescribe uniform conditions for licensing sucf1 individuals, and to issue licenses as approp'riate. Operator license applicants are required by 10 CFR Part 55, " Operators Licenses," to basic content requirements that are ecified also s;inpass an examination satisfying the regulation.

Although the AEA is not specific as to wno will prepare and administer the examination, the NRC has traditionally performed these functions through its 3 staff or contract examiners. The Commission now proposes to have facility  ;

licensees prepare and administer the site specific written examinations in i recognition of the substantial improvements in industry training programs, to make the operator licensing program more efficient, and to realize budgetary i savings for-the federal government.- l After promulgation of the final rules. the NRC will continue to (1) prepare and administer the generic fundamentals examination to operatar license candidates, (2) administer and grade the operating portions of the site- j i

+

f

~

, ,=;- - - -- ..__, ~ - .- . -, = -. - - - - -.. _ .- -, .

l specific examination. including a control room simulator examination and a i one on one demonstration of specific operating tasks, and (3) prepare and administer at least one site specific written examination annually in each of  !

the NRC's four Regions.  ;

Sincerely, f i

Dennis K. Rathbun. Director

~

Office of Congressional Affairs [

Enclosure:

Federal Register Notice cc: Senator Bob Graham i.

)istribution:

1DB/Adg/Su)j/ central. RAuluck. E00 R/F DOCU.

v. . . nMENT

.e . NAME:[0:\T0VM.ASSI\.ILOE\

.m m . .i c .c.n ..n.

w ,,..- ..n.,,

CONGRESS ov.a c . c.n \L0E) oi.n nv.n =- . u. ..n Of FICE RDB:DRA* RDB:DRA* D:DRA* l OCA l l ,

NAME Hiovmassian 1 Martin BMorris DKRathbun DATE 02/05/97 02/06/97 02/28/97 / /97 UttICIA. RLLUKU LUPY f

(RES File Code) RES f

4

~ ,--. ,+ - -

--w- - --

,n-----*--

-m - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

C0ttilSS10N PUBLISHES PROPOSEf RULE FOR UT',L11Y ROLE IN INITIAL' REACTOR OPERAT0f. LICENSE FXAMINATIONS The Nuclear Regulatory Comission has proposed an amendment to its regd ations requiring that all nuclear power plant licensees prepare, proctor, ,

and grade their initial reactor operator license examinations and prepare theiroperatingtestssubjecttoNRCapproval. The Commission is also asking for public comment on the proposed rule.

Until a final rule is adopted, applicants for operator licenses will continue to be examined by using either NRC prepared tests or those prepared by utilities participating voluntarily in an NRC supervised pilot program begun in 1995.

Reactor vparator applicants seeking a license to manipulate the controls of a nuclear power plant must pass both a comprehensive, multiple choice written test ano a practical, hands on examination. The generic fundamentals examination, a separate written test th::, each applicant must pass to be considered for the final license exarination, will continue to be written and administered by the NRC.

All examinations drafted by utilities and tailored to their specific plants would be subject to review, modification, and approval by NRC examiners before the tests are given. If the submitted test or examination fails to meet NRC's quality standards, the NRC would have the option of preparing the test or examination in lieu of accepting or modifying one prepared by a utility. The NRC will continue to administer and grade the hands-on portion

0 I

- of the' test. : including a cMtrol' room simulator examination and a^ one on one

. denonstration.of specific ' operating tasks.: ,

LIn' order f(r the examinations to be approved by the NRC they_must-comply with detailed NRC guidance which deals with matters as the appropriate level of knowledge and difficulty, maintenance of examination ' security and

-- restrictions on test. preparation by those significantly involved ir. triining 1

- license applicants. Operator t.icensing Examination Standards for Power

- Reactors" (NVREG 1021)~ has been revised as guidance for implementation of the new process.

I e After the revised licensing examination process has become fully operational, the NRC staff will prepare at least one examination annually in each of Lthe agency's four regions to ensure that proficiency in examination

- writing is maintained and to serve as a quality check on the process.

4 Historically: either NRC staff examiners or NRC contractors have prepared and administered all operator license tests. In April 1995, the Commission approved a staff pmposal to begin a pilot program in which nuclear

power plant license x wo41d prepare the tests under NRC oversight. The

Commission took this action'in recognition of the substantial improvements in industry training progrey . a m ke the operator licensing program more

_ efficient, and to. realize budgetary savings.

'Th'e NRC' staff solicited Volunteers for a: pilot program in August 1995, 2 and_ launched the program'2 "onths later. Between October 1995 and April 1996.

-2 g- a yy .w ---yy- --,r-y y,eer,----

Y the staf f reviewed and approved 22 operator licensing examinations prepared by utilities in accordance with published NRC guidance. These examinations were used to test 146 applicants for reactor operator and senior reactor apcrat?

licenses.

Historically the NRC has spent between $3 million aM 54 million annually on contractor support for the operator licensing pngram. Licensing of operators for research and test reactors who will contini.a to be examined by the NRC would be unaffected by this proposed rule. Also unchanged would be the present system whereby utilities prepare and administer requalification examinations to licensed operators as part of an NRC-approved training program.

Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted by . They may be sent to: Secretary. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555. Attn: Docketing and Service Branch. Comments may be hand-delivered to 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD. between 7:30 a. m. and 4:15p. m. on Fedarf warkdays.

Full details of tt proposed rule are included in a notice published in the edition of the Federal Register.

3