ML20235S824

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors.Proposed Rule Alternatives Would Reduce to Nothing Reactor Operators Advancing to Senior Operator
ML20235S824
Person / Time
Site: Dresden  
Issue date: 02/27/1989
From: Putyl R
AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:
NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
References
FRN-53FR52716, RULE-PR-50, RULE-PR-55 53FR52716-00134, 53FR52716-134, NUDOCS 8903080030
Download: ML20235S824 (1)


Text

e vm

-@s-

~(

b.

4; w

' qM

$g' PRO 0 SED ULE:p3

. wg.

DOCKET HUMBER j ](j/ ~

.4

-53 /f.f 2'7/dx 2

'89 FEB 27 ~ P2 :45 Mesmv 5rnncu b$i?

WC l-mcchts TLL l

. The Secretary of' the Ccumission

' U.S.. Nuclear,, Regulatog Conmission Washington,.DC 20555;

~

~

Attention; Docketing and Service Branch' K

Dear Sirs:

I am writing to connent on proposed rule changes to 10CFR Parts 50 and 55; Education and Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators and Supervisors at Nuclear Pow r Plants.

. i t la my i > pin liin l lHL.t lie n i t.-s ant s ws j ee.. mee t wi l l ic.t loi lle a ensure the protectior( of the public nor will it enhance the capability of the. operating staff.Ito respond to accidents or restore the reactor to a safe andstablegonditiondNeitheralternativeshouldbeenactedas~ rule.

I My greatest; objection to both altematives is that they would ;

eventualy reduce' to nothing the nunter of Reactor Operators (Ros)l advancing

.to Senior. Operator (sos). Contrary to the tines. stated in the notice, it typicaly would take an RO 7 to 8 years to obtain a BS.. degree wtille continuing to work on a rotating shift as an RO. Few people find themselves in a position to nuke this type of conmitannt for that anount of. tine. The net result would be sos obtained by hiring and-training degrcul individuals with little operating experience,. reducing the operating experience level of sos. This will block career advanconent at the RO level. This career stagnation at the RO level will make it inore difficult to find pr.,tivcted people to fill both Auxiliary Operator (AO) and RO

. positions.

Both alternatives to the proposed rule change provide no enhancerrent of reactor safety. Both alternatives will-reduce.tle ex1;erience level of sos. Both alternatives will cause career stagnation mvl aninosity among ROs and AOs. For these reasons neitber alternative siv o b' '- anvrt"!

as rule.

3

~

t V.f? M a r,.

e i

8903080030 890227 o v' C

PDR PR V

50 53FR52716 PDR,

_