ML20247R899

Responds to Kr Baker Inquiry Re Proposed Amend to Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants. Amend Intended to Upgrade Mgt Expertise on Shift at Nuclear Plants

ML20247R899
Person / Time
Issue date:	04/21/1989
From:	Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:	Levin V SENATE
Shared Package
ML20247R896	List: ML20247R891 ML20247R899
References
NUDOCS 8906080016
Download: ML20247R899 (11)

Text

~ - - - - - - - - - - _ _ - _ _

e-O UNITED STATES -

g

- p, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20565 5 l

"+,***** April 21, 1989 The Honorable Car'.' Levin United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 .

Dear Senator Levin:

Your constituent, Mr. Kenneth R. Baker, inquired about an amendment that we have This recently proposed to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's regulations.

proposed amendment is entitled " Education and Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators and Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants" and it contains two alternatives. Both alternatives are intended to upgrade the operating, engineering, and accident management expertise provided on-shift at nuclear power plants. This upgrade is expected to enhance the capability of the operating staff to respond to potential accident situations These and to effectively alternatives restore are explained the reactor to a safe and stable condition.

in a bit more detail below and a copy of the Federal Register Notice on this proposal is enclosed for additional information.

It would require The first alternative would apply to senior reactor operators.

that each applicant for a senior reactor operator license have a bachelor's degree in engineering, engineering technology, or the physical sciences from an accredited college or university. The first alternative would achieve our objective of upgrading by combining engineering expertise and operating experience in the senior reactor operator position.

Yhe second alternat.ve would apply to persons who haverequire It would supervisory responsibilities, that they have such as shift supervisors or senior managers.

enhanced educational credentials and experience over that which is normally

....4 ..a s. . 4. ..,+a aanes+ ace The doc { rad mAnrafinnal erodontialc considered in the development of the final rule.

Furthermore I would emphasize that the specific concerns expressed by your constituent Mr. Baker, will be considered during our analysis of the public comments received on this matter. I trust that the above information is responsive to your request.

Sincerely, g 60 g 16 gogo jy/cio llo, Jr.

Execufive Director PDC for Operations

Enclosure:

Federal Register notice DISTRIBUTION ON LAST PAGE Offc: RDB:DRA:RES DRh C Of Name JTelford:jp ZROT oczy Date: 4/Q/894 4/n/89 ,h Q wq OCA N Offc: DRA: DD/QI:RES D:RESVJ Name:

RESf,LPSp>>is BMorris E5Beckford Vptello JBradbu A9 4/p/89 4//8/89 4/r /89 4bW89 4l Date: 4/jQ/89 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY

9 y 527 C- Feder:1 Register / Vol. 53. No. 250 / Thursday. December 29. 1988 / Proposed Rults t= =

or 4 importers would be involved. These 2. Parsgraph (a) of I 94 9 would be soon as practicable the Commission has importations are insignificant when revised to read as follows: decided to extend the comment period compared with the 300.000 or more for an additional thirty days The swine that were imported into the United States in 1987.

8 P

,,'d'" "8 P" [ extended comment period now expires on February 27.1989.

In addition. Great Britain has no pork (a) Hog chcleta is known to exat in all countries of the world except oatt: The comment period has been processing plants that are approved by Australia Canada. Denmark. Dommican extended and now expires February 27 the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection 1989. Comments received after this date Service. Herefore. even if Great Britain Republic. Finland. Great Bntam (England. Scotland. Wales. and Isle of will be considered if it is practical to do were to be recognized as being free of so.but assurance of consideration hog cholera. commerical shipments of Man), toeland. New Zealand. Northern Ireland. Norway, the Republic of cannot be given except es to comments pork products frorn that country to the received on or before this date.

United States would still be prohibited. Ireland. Sweden, and Trust Territory of Thus, while individuals would be the pacific Islands.' Anonesses: Mail written comments to; allowed to import small quantities of Secrete"y U.S. Nuclear Regulatory pork and pork products for personal Commission. Washington. DC 20555.

consumption, commercial shipments I"# I A*'"d"I Attention: Docketing and Service would contmue to be inehgible for 3. Section 94.10 would be amended by Branch. Copies of comments received imt'ortation. adding " Great Bntain (England. may be examined at the NRC Pubhc For these reasons. the amount of pork Scotland. Wales, and Isle of Man)." Document Room. 2120 L Street NW..

and pork products imported into the immediately after " Finland.". Washington. DC.

United States from Great Pritain would Dune m Washington. DC. the 7.2 day of Deliver comments to: 11155 Rockville remain very small and would have no December 1N Pike. Rockville. MD between 7:30 a.m.

significant impact on U.S. swine lames W. Ctosm. and 4:15 p.m. weekdays.

producers. Administ.vror. AmmolandMantHealth von vunintn sNronuArsoN coNTAci:

Under these circumstances, the Inspection Semce. Moni Dey Office of Nuclear Regulatory Adrmmstretor of the Animal and Plant [FR Doc .88-29912 Filed 12-28-88. 8 45 am} Research. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Heahh Inpsection Service has ow.o coog ws.sa_a Commission. Washington. DC 20555.

determined that this action would not - - _ _ - _ . _ Telephone (301) 492-3730.

have a significant economic impact on e Dated at Rockville. Maryland this 22nd day substantial number of small entities. NUCLEAR REGULATORY of December.19sa.

COMMISSION g Paperwork Reduction Act The regulations in this proposal 10 CFR Part 50 lohn C. Hoyle, contain no information collection or Actmg Secretaryfor the Commission.

recordkeeping requirements under the Ensuring the Effectiveness of (FR Doc. 88-29992 Filed 12-28-88. 8 45 sm)

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 Maintenance Programs for Nuclear , , , , , , , ,

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Power Plants; Extension of Comment Portod Executive Order 12372 10 CFR Parts 50 and 55 AoENcy: Nuclear Regulatory This program / activity is listed in the Commission. Education and Experience Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No.10.025 and is subject to AcTeosc Preposed rule: Extension of Requirements for Senior Reactor Executive Order 12372. which requires comment period. Operators and Supervisors at Nuclear intergovernmental consultation with suuuAny:On November 28.1988 (53 FR Power Plants te ce fficials. (See 7 CFR Part 47822) the Commisrion pubbshed for AoENcy: Nuclear Regulatory pubhc comment a rule that would Commission.

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 94 require commercial nuclear power plant licensees to strengthen their Actiow: Proposed rule.

Animal diseases. Hog cholera, import. maintenance activities in order t Livestock and livestock products. Meat suuuany: The Nuclear Regulatory eb Commission is proposing to amend its and rnest products. Milk. Poohry and po.iltry products.

[d ,

d regulations regarding educational mamtenance The comment pedod for requirements for operating personnel at At cordmgly. 9 CFR Part 94 would be amended as follows; nuclear power plants.The proposed is pl{)

I e[ aye expired amendments would require additional PART 94-R!NDERPEST, FOOT AND- Management and Resources Council education and experience requirements MOUTH DISEASE. FOWL PEST (FOWL (NUMARC) has requested a sixty-day for senior operators and superWsors. In PLAGUE), NEWCASTLE DtSEASE extension of the comment period. In promulgating the proposed amendmon4 (AVIAN PNEUMOENCEPHALITIS), uew of the importance of the proposed the Commiesion has identified in o AFRICAN EWINE FEVER, AND HOG rule, the amnunt of time that the alternatn es CHOLERA: PROHIDITED AND NUMARC wggests is required in order to provide mean nsful comnients on INJer the first alternatne. the PESTRICTED IMPORTATIONS pM' posed amendment would apply to behalf of it6 member utihties. and the

1. The authority citation for Part 94 de sirability of developing a fmal rule a6 senior operators. it would regane th.A would contmue to read as follcws: e.x.h apphcant for a senior operator lir nse to operate a nucleat power Autburity:7 U $ C.147s 150ee.161.152. . sy ago ms,., prm. n. or s, rari and P,*u. reactor hne a bachelor s degree in eso.19 U.S C.1300. 21 U.S C.111.114a.134a. w ,s 9tt and 3rr of tb,e d..pter for other 134b.134::. and 134f. 31 U.S.C. 9rol: 42 U 5 C. prohttwn. .nd ri.inc;...r upon impori.imn of engmeering. engmeermg iechnology, or 41.s1. 4 i32. 7 CFR 217. 211, and 3?12(d) smne and their products the physical sciences from an accredited

red;r:1 Regist:r / Vol. 53. No. 250 / Thursdty. Dec;mber 29. 1968 / Proposed Rul:s 52717 university or college. The proposed surpuestw7Amy sosposessaTec an alternate means of providing the amendment would upgrade the necessary technical and academic

Background

eperating, engineering. and accident knowledge to the shift crew. Option 1 of management expertise provided on shift Smce the Three Mile Island Unit the Policy Statement permits an by combining engineermg expertise and (TMI-2) accident on March 28,1979, in individual to serve in the combined operating experience in the senior which human error, among other factors. Senior Operator / Shift Technical operator position. contributed to the consequences of the Advisor (SO/STA) role if that individual Under the second alternative, the accident, the issue of academic requirements for reactor operators has holds either a bachelor's de8#ee in proposed amendment would apply to

• ugmeenng technology.

persons who have supervisory been a major concern of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). In July II c 8CieDCe r 8 professional responsibilities, such as shift engmeer.s bcense. Option 2 permits supervisors or senior managers. It would 1979. "TMI-2 Lessons learned Task c ntinuation of the separate STA who require that they have enhanced Force Status Report and Short-Term, r tates with the shift and holds a educational credentials and experience Recommendations." (NUREG-0578) bachelor's degree or equivalent and cver that which is normally required for made specific recommendations for a meets the criteria as stated in, senior reactor operators. The proposed Shift Technical Advisor (STA) to ' Clarification of BU Action Plan amendment would upgrade the provide engmeering and accident assessment expertise dunng other than Requimments."(MM37). The operating, engineering and accident management expertise provided on shift normal operstmg conditions. On Commission also encouraFes the shift October 30,1979, the NRC notified all 8upervisor to serve in the dual-role by combining engineermg expertise and operating experience in the shift operatmg nuclear power licensees of the position, and the STA to take an active short. term STA requirements. l.e that rde in shift scrivities.

supervisor position.

The Commission believes that STAS should be on shift by January On May 30.1988. the NRC published adoption of either of the alternatives, for 1980, and that they should be fully an advance notice of proposed senior operators or shift supervisors, trained by January 1981.In November rufemaking ( ANPRM) (51 FR 19561). The would further ensure the protectio!. of 1980 "Clanfication of TMI Action Plan purpose of the ANPRM was to extend the health and safety of the public by Requirements." (NUREG-0737), the current level of engineering enhancing the capabihty of the provided further details to licensees expertise on shift. as described in the operating staff to respond to accidents regarding implementation of the STA Commission's policy Statement on and restore the reactor to a safe and position. !t identified the STA as a Engineering Expertise on Shift (5017 stable condition. temporary position pending a 43621) and to ensure that ieenior parts: Comment period expires Commission decision regarding long operators have operating experience on February 27.1989. Comments received range upgrading of reactor operstor and a commercial nuclear rtactor operating after this date will be considered if it is senior operator capabilities. at greater than twenty percent power.

practical to do so, but the Commission is The qualifications of operators were e.g. " hot" operating experience (Generic able to assure consideration only for also addressed by the 1979. " lessons Letter 84-16).The ANPRM was the comments received on or beform this Learned Task Force." (NUREG.4585), result of a Commission decision to date. the 1980 Rogovin report. "Three Mile consider an amendment to its Island: A Report to the Commissioners regulations (Parts 50 and 55) and to Aoonessss: Mail comments to:The obtain comments on the contemplated Secretary of the Commission. U.S. and to the Public." (NUREC/CR-1240).

and the 1982. " Report of the Peer action to upgrade the levels of opr: ting.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Advisory Panel and the Nuclear enginc ering. and accident management Washington, DC 20555. Attention:

Regulatory Commission on Operator expertise on shift.

Docketing and Service Branch.

Qualifications." (SECY 82-162).' In addition to desenbing the proposed Deliver comments to: One White Flint Although the 1982 report recommended rule in general, the ANPRM presented a North.11555 Rockvdle Ptke. Rockville. against imposition of a degree list of twenty questions concerning Maryland, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 requnment, the consensus among these various aspects andimplications of the p.m. Comments may also be delivered to reports was that greater techmcal and proposed rule. Two hundred letters were the NRC Public Document Room. 2120 L academic knowledge among shift Street. Lower Level. NW., Washington. receivedin response to the ANpRM. A perating personnel would be beneficial summary and analysis of the comments DC between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. to the safety of maclear power plants.

Examine comments received, the are included in SECY-47-101 dated On October 28,1985, the NRC April 18,1987. The NRC has reviewed, in environmental assessment and finding published in the Federal Register (50 FR detail, all the comments made on the of no significant impact. and the 43621) a final pohey statement on regulatory analysis at the NRC Public AFPRM as well as comments received engineering expertise on shift to allow since that time. In general, the Document Room. 2120 L Street. Iower level. NW., Washington. DC. commenters were opposed to a degree Obtain single copies of the ' Copies of all NURECS referenced may be requirement for senior operators. The environmental assessment and finding proposed amendments in this notice of no significant impact and the

["[,'Qy"8fy,j@','"*'."

U S Gosernment Pnnuns Office.FO Bon rocQ'Q,reflect in detail many of the comments regulatory analysis from M.R. Wa: Won.oc 2actuaaz copies m.y siso te and responses to the questions posed.

Fleishman. Office of Nuclear Regulatory purchased from the National Techmcel informenon Apart from the detailed comments on Research. Washington, DC 20555.

S*

g,"j'g,[3$P'y*3L*N'7,gPo" * '

the proposed contents of the rule. a telephone (301) 492-3?94. esailable for mopection or coryms for a fee m the number of general comments were NRC Pubhc Document Room. rt20 L Street. Lower provided regatding the possible adverse FOR FURTHER INFORIsAT)ON CONTACT: Issel. NW., Washmgton DC. effects of requiring degrees for senior M.R. Fleishman. Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. U.S. Nuclear c,'nfn',d7d t, a din sIiUn'rI$a$. Net opuators. The public comments as well as those raised during NRC staff review.

Regulatory Commission. Washington. the NRC Public Document Room et rt:0 L Street.

DC 20555, telephone (301) 492-3794. tower Inel NW, Wasturfon. DC. can be categonzed as follows:

52718 Fed rd Register / Vol. 51. No. 250 / Thursday. December 29, 1988 / P*oposed Ruha t; The proposed ra!c is rnt uemsq. Concurrent Policy Statement respond to complex transients and E,xpenence is more important ttwa a WM h will ublah accidents and thereby further ensure the 3Tbpro rule mi:; bv a r.esative concurrently with the fmal rule a policy pmtectwn of the health and safet) of the st:,tement w hich entornes nutiror pubhc. .

/ impact on safety.4 'l uh re mprope=ed a g ever rulele.powery plant bcensees, working with the The policy statement on engmeenng operatur tarni4er rateP cuclearindustry to: expertise on shift pubhshed in the

5. The propneed rule will basicaDy block I ederal Register on October 281985 (50

1. Implement personnel pactes that the racer path of reactor orcrators. resultm8 emphastze the opportunities for heen.ed FR 4% 1) provided an intenm method of in lower mormte operators to assume positions of mereased achiermg more erynneenng capability 6 Thcre will be less o6erall expenence on management responsibihty; on shift. Essentially, with Alternata e 1 shift dae to the promotion of sos into 2. Develop programs that would enable management positions- the NRC is moving from interim currently bcensed seruor operators, rt actor opnat n and shift supervis rs to obtam requirements which provide engineering The Advisory Committee on Reactor capability for accident conditions (the i Safeguards (ACRS) also considered the e d'8t"8;and STA), to requiring engine ering preposed rec uirement and discussed it at several meetituts in 1986 and 1987.

nu e p: e ant a a Q *

expenence thmugh arrangements with the capabihty, and nuclear power pb.t operating experience,in the same The ACRS stronf ly supported the academic t.ector ndividual (the 50).

concept of having engmeenng expertise . .

In Alternative 1. the propord on each shift. However. they d.d not Discussma amendment would require each agree that regmring a degree for senior The NRC is concerned that operator applicant for a senior operator (50) operators was the best approach. though quahficatwns to deal with accidents Lcense to operate a nuclear reactor.

they agreed that specific technkul beyond design basis conditions warrant after [4 years following the effective knowledge should be required. They improvement. Operator training date of the rule), to have a bachelor's b1heved that, because of the concern programs and related emergency degree in engineering engineering about adverse effects raised by many operating procedures generally do not technology, or the physical sciences knowledgeable individuals, the from an accredited university or college consider ac::ident conditions bc3 ond proposed rule should be reconsidered. inadequate core cochng. There is a Applicants with other bachelor's The Commission has carefully general consensus that well quahfied degrees from an accredited institution.

considered the numerous comments operators can substantially mitigate the or from a foreign college or university.

received on the ANPRM as well as the effects of severe accidents.The industry would be considered on a case-by-case recommendations cf the ACRS. During Degraded Core Rulemaking Program basis if the utihty (hcensee) certifies its deliberations subsequent to the (IDCOR) industry group. for example, that the applicant has demonstrated ANPRM, the Commission considered the has developed arguments that operators engmeerms expertise and high potential following three options regardmg could substantially reduce the risk for the SO position.The Commission improving engineering expertise on shift: posed by these conditions.The NRC is does not want to prevent individuals considering the need for more extensive with excellent engmeenng expenence.

1. Proceed with the contemplated deg ee rule and concrarrent pobey statement as severe accident training and emergency but with nontechnical degrees, from operating procedures as well as becoming SDs: however, degree fn e long term in I as t o Nn or engineermg qualifications for senior equivalency will no longer be accepted.

Operators on shift who have bar.helor's operators. An accredited uruversity or college is degrees. There are numerous approaches that defined as s's educationalinstitution m

2. Propose a rule to require a degreed may be taken regarding the issue of the United States which has been indmdual on shift similar to a Senior improved operator capabilities; the approved by a regional accrediting Mzneger, as described m SECY-64-1% Commission has decided to request body.

" Proposed Rulemakmg Concerrung comments on two approaches. The The proposed amendment would Requirements for Senior Managers "

3. Amend the pobcy Statement on proposed amendments would onl) affect apply to applicants for a SO to operate Engmeering Expertise on Shafi 150 TR 436;11 persons assJciated with nuclear power nt.clent power reactor. People who held p

reactors. They would not affect persons SO bcenses on [4 years following the prog i d oYeg e o ut. e associated w;th non-power nuclear effective date of the rulej would be cor-tuned SO/STA option and to phase out reactors such as research and test esempt Ircm the degree requ:rement.

use of separate STA. reactors. Each alternat;ve approach will Thus, those persons who hold a scnwr be conside red in parallel. Each approach operator license on {4 years fcllowing The Commission has decided to is d:scussed separately. Much of the the effective date of the rulel, wedd be proposed two alternative amendtrents discussion of Alternative 2 dupbcates "gra ndf athered" (i e., a lifetime for consideration and p3lic cornment that of Alternative 1 so that each may be exemption) by the proposed with the understanding that. following siew ed on its own merits. amendment. Even if they were to lose the public comrnent period. only one their 50 license in the future. e p. due to alternative would be se!ected for fmal Alternative 1-Reqmtervents for S,enwr a change in jobs ($lanta. thty could /

promulgation. The alternatives proposed Op m m still reapply for a new SO license are similar to Options 1 and 2 but with The purpose of this proposed without satisfying the degree sigruhcant differences based on alternative is to upgrade the operating. requirement. It is recognized that comments and further considerations by copineenng. and accident management "grandfathering" current sos could the Commission following the ANPRM. expertise provided on shift by result in sos without degrees for an Although comments received on the combining both engineering expertise extended period of time. Since the ANPRM were generally unfavorable, the and operating experience in the senior Commission's intent is to rnaintatn at Commission believes that it would be operator function.The NRC beheses this least the same degree of engineering beneficial to have a full public airing of approach will enhance the capabihty of expertise on shift as currently exists. the views on these)p proposals. the operating staff to analyze and STA pohey described under opt;ons 1 M

i e Federal Regist r / Vol. S3, No. 250 / Thuroday December 29, 1988 / Proposed Rules 52M9 and 2 of the October 28,1965 policy of " hot" and at least 3 years tota' on educational enteria. would have to statement 150 FR 43621) would continue operating experience fer each appbcant be revised to reflect this amendment.

m effect. Thus. if two "g%ndfathered" for a SO bcense. A RO heense fe The concunent policy statement is sos are used on shift. the facihty required in order to get "het" contr,1 intended to encouraFe hcensees beensee wou!d be required to have a room operating expenence, thus the (utibties) and the nucle.r industry to separate individual on shift who has the proposed amendment expands the provide incentives and management STA education and experience current NRC pohey, described in opportunities for sos as well as to described in N1' REG-0737. If one of the Regulatory Guide 1.8. Revision 2. dated improve the engineermg capabilities of Sos has a degree and one is Apnl 1967. " Qualification and Trainin8 the on shift crew. The SO with a degree

" grandfathered." Option 1 of the pobey of personnel for Nuclear power plants." and shift operstmg experience can staterr.ent would be satisfied when ad to ensure that sos with degrees have become a valuable personnel resource sos have degrees, the pohey statement sufficient operating experience. for the utility, one who combir.es shift would no longer be needed. Regulatory Guide 1A in position C.1.e.- operational management experience The concurrent pohey statement will allows an applicant for a SO license with the potent al for greater encourage previously bcensed sos to with a degree to have only 2 years of management responsibility ne pohey obtain degrees. In the past the NRC has responsible power plant experience- statement. among other things, wdl accepted " equivalents" to the bachelor e none of which needs to be as a reactor encourage hcensees to provide that degree for a separate STA.The cperator. Thus Regulatory Guide 1.8 career path.

equiva:ents were based upon will be revised if the proposed Commnsion Wes 6st speciahzed utihty training or other work amendment is adopted.The proposed requiring a degree will coninbute to the experiences. For the proposed amendment would require the SO g al f adng sos who han ,

amendment, however, equivalency applicant with a degree to serve as a RO operational experience. techmcal and would not be acceptable to the NRC in at greater than 20 percent power for at academic knowledge. and educational lieu of a degree. Because the least 1 year.This does not mean that the credentials that should improve their Commission is not in a position to reactor must be at power 100 percent of performance as operators and possibly evaluate the academic equivalency of the time during the year, hcwever, the 1 pen career paths from which they may utihty training. It encourages utilities to year time period should not mclude have been excluded in the past. The sos seek out academic institutions who will penods of significant downtime for with degrees should be able to respond evaluate the training programs and grant maintenance or refueling (i.e penods better to off normalincidents.Whue course credit for such equivalency based that exceed 6 weeks duration). Special there will be increased tra to cover upon work experience or speciahzed provisions are proposed in order to accident conditions, training e is not training.Thus the concurrent policy accommodate those applicants from sufficient. It is impossible to cover every statement will encourage efforts to have fac.!ities that are unable to operate eventuality dunng training. The the trairung accepted by the co!!eges for above twenty percent power due either operators must have sufficient partial credit toward fulfillmg the to (a) the facilities not having completed understanding of basic engineering requirements of an accredited degree. their initial startup program and being pnnciples, and detailed knowledge of The degree requirement would not licensed to run at power, or [b) the nuclear design and operation to apply to licensed reactor operators facilities being in an extended shutdown appropriately respond to situations that (ROs). However, the corteurrent pobey mode. In the case of the facthties not yet have not been previously covered m statement will encourage ROs to obtam liceesed to run at power. alterna tive training sessions. In addition. sos with degrees so that they can progress to the approaches to meet the twenty percent degrees will have greater opportuntry for SO position and to other utzhty power requirement may be approved by professional growth rince they will ha ve positions. The Commission beheses a the Commission. In the case of faci!!t.es the quahfications needed to advance to degree require:nent for sos on shift. in extended shutdown, the Cortmission managerial positions. With the chance along with the concurrent policy may process the application and edminister the written and operatmg for personal growth should come greater statement, will not only enhance public job satisfaction. The validity of these health and safety but wdi also enhance tests but would defer issuance of the beliefs has been reenforced by the promotion opparturuties for sos. senior operating license unt;! the twenty expenences of licensed operators The cutoff date of four 3 ears foCowing percent power requirement is fulfilled.

This propcsed requirement for a SO participating in an ongoing utih*y the effective date of the rule for apphcation for a SO bcense by applicant with a degree also irnphes that sponsored program similar to what is being proposed herein. The Commission mdividuals who do not have depre es is an applicant for a RO licente with a chosen for three reasor.s. First. it will degree must ont> have 2 years of related also believes that migration of sos nuclear power plant experience. This is upward into plant management wil:

allow operators now m trainmg contribute to improved plant saftry.

suffi.:ient time and notice to cr mplete u a change to the Fuid.nce in Regulatory der ee before application. Second, it Guide 1.8 which endoraes the American Alternalit e 2-Requirements for '

should not cause undue hayship on National Standard. ANSI /ANS-31-1981* Supemsors eperators who are now in the process of " Selection. Qualification and Training of personnel for Nuclear pow er plants." The purpose of this proposed p:eparing and training for tha serior alternative is to upg ade the oper. f.np operator heense. and third. heensees The st mdard indicates that a RO ap;shtant must have a mini nam of 3 engneering. and accident management have been encouraged by the policy 3 ears of power plant expenence of expertise provided on sh:ft by St.4 ment on Ergmeenng Expertise on wh4ch at least 1 year sFall be nac!ccr combining both enF ineenng expert se Shift (Option 1) to rnose toward a dual- and operating experience m the sh:ft role SO/STA position. Furthermore. pcwer expenente. If the poped supervisor or senior manger f.mcten thnse operators who are licensed as sos amendment is adopted. it woulJ described in 150 54(m]p)fii) of t'e er, the cutoff date would be supct:ede the Fuidance in Reg @o 3 Guide 1.8 and necess: tate hs resision in regulations. The NRC behes es tS w.3

" grandfathered? enhante the tapabihty of the opntin:

In Alternatis e l, the proposed accord with the amendmett Also, amendment would also require one 3 ear position C 1 d of Rg,ulatory Cu;Je t 8. stcff to analyze and respond to o .ph

l

\

l 52720 Feder:1 Register / Vol. 53. No. 250 / Thursday. December 29. 1938 / Proposed Rulis transients and accidents and thereby under options 1 and 2 in the October 28. operating experience for each shift i I

further ensure the protection of the 1985 policy statement (50 FR 43621) supervisor or senior manager.The health and safety of the public. would be eliminated since the shift proposed amendment changes the The policy statement on engineering supervisor would be providing the current NRC policy, desenbed in expertise on shift published in the engineering expertise on shift and there Regulatory Guide 1.8. Resision 2. dated Federal Register on October 28.1985 (50 would be no need for the STA. Apn11987. " Qualification'and Training FR 43621) provided an interim method of In the past the NRC has accepted of Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants."

achieving more engineering capability " equivalents" to the bachelor's degree Regulatory Guide 1.8, in position C.1.d on shift. Essentially. with Alternative 2. for a separate STA.The equivalents states that a shift supervisor only needs ]

the NRC is moving from interim were based upon specialized utility a hfgh school diploma. Thus. Regulatory l 1

requirements which provide engineering training or other work experiences. For Guide 1.8 will be revised, if the proposed capabiliy fu scdlent conditions (the the propored amendment, however, amendment is adopted, to reflect the STA), to requiring engineering equivalency would not be acceptable to new educational credentials and capability, and nuclear power plant the NRC in lieu of one of the educational experience required to become a shift operating experience,in the shift credentials. Because the Commission is supervisor (i.e 3 yects experience with supenisor or senior manager. not in a position to evaluate the 1 year as a RO).The proposed in Alternative 2. the proposed academic equivalency of utility training, amendment would require the sluft amendment would revise i 50.54, it encourages utilities to seek out supervisor to serve as a RO at g* eater Conditions of hcenses, regarding the academic tratitutions who will evaluate than 20 percent power for at least 1 the training programs and grant course year.This does not mean that the requirements for a shift supervisor or senior manager. It makes a distinction credit for such equivalency based upon reactor must be at power 100 percent of work experience or speciahzed training. the time during the year. however, the l betw een power plant sites with one Thus, the concunent policy statement year time period should not include control room and those with two or periods of significant downtime for more control rooms. The intent of the will encourage efforts to have the training accepted by the colleges for maintenance or refueling (f.e.. periods proposed amendment is to ensure that partial credit toward fulfilling the that exceed 8 weeks duration). Special there is a separate shift supervisor for each control room who is responsible educational requirements for the shift provisions are proposed in order to supervisors. accommodate shift supervisors from for overall operation of all fueled units The educational credential facilities that are unable to operate operated by the control room at all times there is fuelin any of the units.The requirement would not apply to licensed above twenty percent power due to the Commission may permit exemptions to reactor operators (ROs) or senior facilities not having completed their the one supervisor per control room operators (sos).The concurrent policy initial startup program and being amendment. on a case-by-case basis. for statement will encourage all ROs and licensed to run at power. For sah sos to obtain the enhanced educational facilities. alternative approaches to meet those situations where control rooms the twenty percent power requirement may be close to each other. The credentials so that they can progress to proposed amendment would require the shift supervisor position and to other may be approved by the Commission.

each shift supeni.or. after [4 years utility positions.The Commission The concurrent policy statement is belieses that the educational intended to encourage licensees following to have one the effectne or more date of the rule), /requiregept for shift supervisors.

of the following along (utilities) and the nuclear industry to enhanced educationalcredentials: A / with thgttirrent policy statement. will provide incentives and management bachelor's degree from a program not only enhance public health and opportunities for shift supenisors as accredited by the Accreditation Board safety, but will also provide a route for well as to improve the engineering for Engineenng and Technology (ABET); promoting ROs and sos. By restricting capabilities of the on shift crew.The a professional engmeer license issued the requirement to shift supervisors. the shift supenisor with enhanced by a state government: or. s bachelor's Commission believes that the normal educationalcredentials and shift degree and an Engineer-in Training progression from RO to SO can be operating experietice can become a retamed for those RO. and sos who do valuable personnel resource for the (EIT) certificate that indicates one has utility one who combines shift passed an examination administered by not wish to obtain the enhanced a state or other recognized authonty. educational credentials and who has e operational management exper:en:e Th:s requirement wil! ensure a minimum no desire to enter management. with the potential for greater les el of engineenna expertise for each The date of four years followmg the management responsibihty. The pohcy sh?' rupervisor.The bachelor's degree effective date of the rule for statement, among other things. will w:th the EIT would not necessarily have imp!cmentation of the educational encourage bcensees to provide that ta be in a technical discipline. provided credentials requirernent for shift career path both for sh* supervisors supervisors is chosen for two reasons and other operating personnel w ho tir pr: son mecu the state education and operience cnteria for First,it will allow shift supenisors obtain enhanced educational sufficient time and notice to complete a credentials.

edra.mstration of the EIT.The NRC recct .:zes that m some states it may not degree. Second. It should not cause The Commission bdieves that be possible to be registered as a undue hardship on shift supervisors requiring enhanced educetmna!

professional engineer or receis e an EIT smce liceneees have been encouraged credentials will contribute to the goal of certf,cate without having received by the policy Statement on Engineering having shift supemsors a ho hase either a bachelor's degree from an ABET Expertise on Sh:ft (Option 1) to move operational experience. and technical accredited program or a bachelor's toward a dual-role SO/STA position; and academic knowledge that should depee in a technical discipline. For which has frequently been assumed by improve their performance as inda iduals in those states, the NRC is the shift supervisor. supervisors and possibly open career considering other options available for In Alternative 2.the proposed paths from which they may have been adrr.inistering en EIT equivalant amendment would also require one 3 ear excluded in the past. The shift exarninstion. The STA policy described of " hot" ar.d at least 3 years total supervisors should be able to respond

Feder:t Register / Vol. 53. No. 250 / Thursday. Decernber 29. 1968 / Proposed Rules 52721 better to off normalincidents. Whde and throughout the utihty with a safety; others were discussed and there will be mcreased training to cover resultant improvement in plant safety. dropped because no basis was found to acci;!ent conditions, traimng alone is not support them. The proposal for decread sufficient. It is impossible to cover every invitation to Comment operators was an example of the lauer.

es entua:ity during training. The shift in view of the unusual nature of this it is unfortunate that this 6ssue supervisors must have sufficient notice of proposed rulemaking,in which contmues to surface. As reflected in t9 understandmg of basic engineenng two alternatives are proposed the earlier public comments on this issue.

prmeip:es. and detailed knowledge of Commission specifically encourages the mere potential for imposition of this nuclear design and operation to comments regarding comparison of the requirement is having a negative impact

! appropriately respond to situations that alternatives. Comments are particularly on opera'.or morale. I continue to behoe have not been previously covered in solicited in regard to: a requirement for degreed semor j training sessions. In addition, shift 1M'hich ehernanve is preferable assuming OPerstors is ill advised. Not only is there

supervisors with enhanced educational one will be selected? no demonstrated safety benefit from this credentials will have greater opportunity 2. What are the potentialimpacts of each of action but there is a significant potential l

I for professional growth since they will the attematives on hcensee staffing? for negative safety implications. To once l has e the qualifications needed to 3 Regarding unplementation of the again publish this proposal will only advance to managenal positions.The attemauves. would there be a more continue the negative impact this issue Commission also believes that migration appropnate tranettion period far each is having on operator moraIe.

of shift supervisors upward into plant attemative than the one proposed?

( Altemauva 2 provides for three d.fferent in 1981 the Commission formed a management will contribute to improved methods for demonstratmg technical peer review panel to consider overall p jant safety. expert se with educat onal credentista, specifically reactor operator Conclusion would some other method be desirable for quahfications includmg whether a BS this purpose? Are there other attemative level degree should be required for Although the Commis on gievej wsys to demonstrate knowledge of senior operators. This peer review panel there is a net ene o e propose appropnate engmeenns fundamentals for amendments in enhancing public health people w ho may be ineligible to take the Err concluded (ref' SECY-82-162 that no

only was there no evidence that a and safety,it acknowledges that this exammationi

5. Should a requirement be irr. posed formal degree was necessary for job jud6 ment is based on a qualitative performance but that

• imposition of assessment of the relative contributions requinns all semor operators to pass an of Sanous factcrs, some with potential Engmeenng in Trainmg (EIT) or equivalent such a requirement, without evidence exammatmn as a measum of basic technical that the requirement is needed to positive impacts and others with expertise in addition to or uutead of. the two perform the job. is likely to result in a potential negative impacts.The most proposals in this notice? If such a decrement in overall performance and significant positive factor is the * 'b enhanced capability cf the shift n$ce'esary' r heNhad cauonal

• • P

• added). In spite of numerous studies operating staff to effectively manage credennals for shift supervssorst conducted by the staff since 1982, the:e accidents. Increased operating 6. Independent of a degree requirement,is there a need for the expenence requirements is still no evidence that a BS degree is experience of plant management is also to be mcreased for the shift supemsor needed to perform the job of senior an anticipated longer term ber.efit.

However, there are possible posioon? Are the proposed requirements operator. In fact, in the recent report disadvantages. For Alternative 1 they called for in the two attematives sufficient? entitled " Human Factors Research and Nuclear Safety". the National Research include (1) the potential for lower Additional Views of Commissioner morale among reactor operators without Couned Panel on Human Factors Roberts Research Needs in Nuclear Regulatory degrees whose natural career path.

promotion to the SO level. is blocked, in this proposed rulemaking the Research recommended research in this and (2) the potential reduction of overall Commission is considenng two area prior to making a degree alternatis es regarding educational mandatory. The panel considered this operating experience on shift as sos with degrees mos e to other work. For requirements for operating personnel. research a high priority as "(a)n Alternative 2. the disadvantages include The first alternative, which is an old injudicious regulation could lead to

~

the potential for lower morale among proposal. would impose a degree problems with both morale and semor operators without degrees whose requirement in senior operators. The recruitmg without necessardy impronng promotion to the shift supervisor level is second alternative would require safety."

a kel enhanced educational credentials for Although I agree that it is valuable to Upon consideration of these and other supervisory personnel. Although I have have personnel with operstmg futors, such as those identified by the not reached a judgment on the need for experience in utihty management, it is F.bhe comment process on the ANPRM. supervisory personnel to have enhanced inappropnate to attempt to accomphsh the Commission uncludes at this time, educational credentials.1 am supporting this objective by so severely penahrire that the overall effect of the proposed the publishing of the second alternative reactor operators and senior operaton I amer dments would be beneficial and in order to obtain the benefit of the do not bebeve that one obtains the w ould result in greater plant safety. This public's comments. In the case of the motivation and abihties that makes an benefit will be achiesed over time by degreed operator proposal.1 cannot do individual a good manager merely by improsed quahty of the operational so. obtaining a degree.Those indmduals rersonnel and b3 plant management Smce I hase been a member of the with motivation and ability will pursue that has a better understanding of the Commission, there have been numerous a degree to improve their quahfications.

unique operational problems associated proposals dealing with the size. There are currently a significant number with nuclear power reactor operations. quahfications and organization of the of senior operators who have degrees.

The Commission believes that operating crew at nuclear power plants. This should provide a sufficient pool of incressmg the educationallesel of the Several of these proposals were adopted individuals resulting in an infusion of operstmg staff willincrease by the Commission because it was operating exerience into utihty professionaham both in the control room determined that they would enhance management.

l

3

~ 52722 Feder:I Regist:r / Vol. 53. No. 250 / Thursday. December 29, 1988 / Propos1d Rul:s l

I believe that the Commission and the Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et compared to larger organizations in the same industry have put in place a number of seg ). Existing requirements were busmess commumty.

proFrams which have upg'aded and will approved by the Office of Management 2. How the proposed regulations could be contmue to upgrade the quahfications of and Budget approval numbers 3150 mod >fied to take into account their diffenng needs or capabihties.

reactor o erators. In addition. the 0011. 31504018 and 31504090 I e ! qualified ea rw co i Regulatory Analysis detnmen atwouldbIs oNi d gu atio a to pay dividends in the future. A number The Commission has prepared a draft ,',', y , c mmeNmodif3ed as of utihties are providing opportunities regulatory analysis for this proposed 4 How the proposed regulations. as for their operators to further their regulaticn. The analysis examines the modified, would more closely equahre the education. I fully support and encourage costs and benef>ts of the alternatives impact of NRC regulations or create more these initiatives. These programs will considered by the Commission. The equal access to the benefits of Federal allow those with ability and desire to draft regulatory analysis is available for programs as opposed to providing special progress up the management chain. I am inspection and copying for a fee at the advantages to any mdividuals or sroups.

NRC Public Document Room. 2120 L 5. How the proposed regulations, as confident that these imtlatives win m dified. would still adequately protect the enhance the safe operation of our Street. Lower level. NW., Washington, nuclear power plants. However, one can DC. Single copies of the analysis may be pubhc health and safety.

not expect immediate results. These obtained from M. R. Fleishman. Office of The comments should be sent to the init atives take time to show Nuclear Regulatory Researth. Secretary of the Commission.U.S.

improvements. Washington, DC 20555, telephone (301) Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

When commenting on Alternative 2 of 492-3794. Washington,DC20555. Attention:

the proposed rulemaking I will be The Commission requests public Docketing and Service Branch.

particularly interested in commente comment on the draft analysis.

Comments on the draft analysis may be Backfit Analysis concerning the viability of this proposal.

To be viable. this proposal must allow submitted to the NRC as indicated under As required by 10 CFR 50.109. the for the ortlerly progression of operating the Aoontsses headin8' Commission has completed a backfit personnel through the rankt, from Regulatory Flexibility Certification analysis for the proposed rule.The auxiliary operator to shift supervisor so Commission has determined, based on as to ensure experienced personnel on As required by the Regulatory this analysis, that backfitting to comply shift. Specifically I would like to know. Flexibility Act of 1980. 5 U.S.C. 605(b), with the requirements of this roposed from the perspective of current the Commission certifies that this rule,if rule will provide a substantisfincrease operating personnel, how accessible are promulgated, will not have a significant in protection to public health and safety ABET accredited engmeering programs? economic impact upon a substantial or the common defense and security at a If the PE or EIT options are selected. number of small entities.This proposed cost which is justified by the substantial which states allow registration and/or rule affects only the licensing and increase.'Ite backfit analysis on which classification as an EIT without an operation of nuclear power plants. It this determination is based reads as ABET accredited degree? In hght of the also affects individuals beensed as goggowy fact that states require work experience operators at these plants.The companies that own these plants and 1. Statement of the ' 'c objectives to be registered as a PE and, with a non. ,3a,,3e Pt0Posej bac is designed to accredited engineering or related degree, the individual plant employees licensed 8C l'"'-

often require work experience to be to operate them do not fall within the .

scope of the definition of "small The objective of the proposed rule is classified as an EIT. will state to upgrade the operating, engmeering.

registration boards grant credit for entities" set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the Small Business and accident management expertise l operating experience as " acceptable provided on shift by combining both professional experience . . . of a grade Size Standards set out in regulations I issued by the Small Business engineering expertise and operating and character indicating that the Administration in 13 CFR Part 121. Since expenence in the senior operator or shift applicant may be competent to practice supervisor functions.

these companies are dominant in their engineermg"? If credit is granted for 2. Generaldescription of the activity service areas. this proposed rule does operatmg experience, does this that would be equiredby thelicensee not fall within the purview of the Act.

experience have to be acquired after or opphcontin order to complete the However, because there may be now receivmg a degree?

I will also be interested in comments Of in.the future small entities which will backfit.

provide licensed operators to nuclear The proposed rule, under Alternative in response to Questions 4. 5 and 6 of powel plants on a contractual basis. the 1. would require each applicant for a the Invitation to Comment. NRC is specifically seeking comment as senior operator [SO) license to operate a EnvironmentalImpact-Categorical to how the regulations will affect them nuclear power reactor, after H years Exclusion and how the regulations may be tiered following the effective date of the rule).

The NRC has determined that this or otherwise modified to impose less to have a bachelor's degree in proposed regulation is the type of action strmgent requirements on them while engineering. engineering technology or described in categorical exclusion 10 still adequately protectmg the public the physical sciences from an accredited health and safety. Those small entities university or college. Applicants with CFR 51.22(c)(1). Therefore. n0ther an environmental impact statera nt nor an which offer comments on how the other bachelor's degrees from an environmental assessment has been regulations could be modified to take accredited institution, or from a foreign prepared for this proposed regulation. into account the differing needs of small college or university, would be entities should specifically discuss the considered on a case-by-case basis if Paperwork Reduction Act Statement follow ng items: the utility (licernee) certifies that the This proposed rule does not contam a 1.The site of their busmess and how the applicant has demonstrated engineering new or amended information collection proposed regulations would result in e expertise and high potential for the SO requirement subject to the paperwork significant economic burden upon them as position. The Commission does not w ant

Federal Register / Vol. 53, No. 250 / Thursday. December 29. 1998 / Propos:d Rul:s '52723 i- to prevent individuals with excellent power nuclear reactors such as research operators must have sufficient l engineering experience, but with and test reactors. Exemptions to the one understandmg of basic engineenng nontechnical degrees from becoming supervisor per control room principles. and detailed knowledge of sos: however, degree equivalency will requirement. may be permitted, on a nuclear design and operation to no longer be accepted. An accredited case-by-case basis, for those situations appropriately respond to situations that university or college is defined as an where control rooms may be close to have not been previously covered in educational institution in the United each other. Each shift supervisor, after training sections. In addition. sos with States which has been approved by a [4 years following the effective date of degrees or shift supervisors with regional accrediting body. the rulel, would need to have one or enhanced educational credentials will The proposed amendment would more of the following enhanced have greater opportunity for apply only to applicants for a SO license educational credentials: A bachelor's professional growth since they will have l to operate a nuclear power reactor. degree from a program accredited by the the qualifications needed to advance to i People who hold SO licenses on [4 years Accreditation Board of Engineerm' g and managerial positions. The Commission I following the effective date of the rule] Technology (ABET); a professional believes that there will also be an would be exempt from the degree engineer bcense issued by a state improvement in plant safety as sos or I

requirement. Those persons who hold a government; or, a bachelor's degree and shift supervisors migrate upward mto eenior operator license on [4 years an Engineer-in-Training (EIT) certificate plant management although this fo?owing the effective date of the rule] that indicates one has passed an improvement could be counter balanced.

wodd be grandfathered , by the examination administered by a state or in part, by a potential reduction in proposed rule. The proposed other recognized authority. This overall operating experience on shift as amendment would not apply to SO requirement will ensure a minimum sos with degrees move to other work applicants for non-power nuclear level of engineering expertise for each reactors such as research and test shift supervisor.The bachelor's degree 4.Potentiolimpact on radiological reactors. Licensed reactor operator with the EIT would not necessarily have exPosum offacihty employees.

(ROs) would not be required to have a to be in a technical ducipline provided There is not expected to be any degree.The proposed rule would also the person meets the state education significant change in the radiological require one year of" bot"(i.e. as an RO and experience criteria for exposure of facihty employees due to at greater than 20 percent power) and at administration of the EIT.The proposed the proposed rule except for the least 3 years total operating experience rule would also require one year of unquantifiable reduction in the for each applicant for a SO license. hot" and at least 3 years total operating probability and consequences of an Special provisions would be proposed to experience for each shift supervisor or accident and the subsequent reduction accommodate those applicants from senior manager. Special provisions in exposure.

facilities that are unable to operate would be proposed to accommodate 5. Installation and continuing costs above 20 percent power. those applicants from facilities that are associated with the backfit, including The proposed requirements of unable to operate above 20 percent ghe cost offacility downtime or the ccst Alternative 1 would only apply to power pswer. of construction delay.

rsector licensees indirectly. There 3. Potentialchange in the risk to the One of the questions posed in the Mav would be no modification of or addition Publicfrom the accidentaloff site 30.1986 ANPRM. relative to Alternative' to the organization,i.e. administrative release ofrodioactive material. 1. concerned what the implementation and functional structure, required to It is not feasible to quantitatively and operation costs of the proposed operate a nuclear power reactor as a evaluate the change in risk to the pub,h. c amendment would be to the utilities.

result of this proposed amendment as a result of the proposed rule.That is.

the effect of the SO or shift supervisor The cost estimates received ranFed from because: negligible to prohibitive. Various p 8

1. the person to whom the sos report th c ange ir t e scenarios for achieving the desired would not change;

[ta cidc t staffing level of sos with degrees were

2. the number of sos per shift would not probability and consequences of an '

accident as a result of requiring either assumed. These varied from hirin8 ch # .

individuals with degrees and passmg 3Yth). total number of operators per shift the 50 to have a bachelor's degree or the shift supervisor to have enhanced them through the normal utihty trainmg s ould not change:

4. the trammg requirements, wntten educational credentials is not known. programs to takmg ROs and sendmg examinations and operstmg tests for a 50 The Commission believes that requiring them to co!'ege while either paymg them would not change: and degrees for sos or enhanced at overtime rates or hiring replacement

s. the tasks performed by a 50 wou'd not educational credentials for shift ROs. A utility could also implernent an change. supervisors will contribute to the goal ol onsite college degree program for its  ;

flowever, the power reactor licensees hasing sos or shift supervisors who operators. for example, a program .

would have to get new sos from a group have operational experience and currently being run for an operating of individuals who already have technical and academic knowledge that plant costs $250.000 per year to educate appropriate degrees or else provide the should improve their performance as 60 people.The range of costs of such an educational opportunity for their own operators and possibly open career onnte program are estimated to vary employees to obtain a degree. paths from which they may have been from $250.000 to $480.000 per year. The The proposed rule, under Alternative excluded in the past. The sos with cost to the utilities of Alternative 2

2. would require a separate shift degrees or shift supervisors with would be less since there would be supervisor for each control room who is enhanced educational credentials fewer shift supervisors to train.

responsible fer overall operation of all should be able to respond better to off it is clear that there are numerea fueled units operated by the control normalincidents. While there will be methods that can be used to implement  !

room at all times there is fuelin any of increased training to cover accident the proposed rule with an extreme rang" )

the units. The requirement would only conditions, training alone is not of ccsts depending on the method apply to power reactor licensees:it sufficient. It is impossible to cos er every adopted. It would be a utility's choice as j would not apply to licensees for non- eventuality during training. The to which method to adopt, taking into

i M2k Fedecal Reglotee / Vol 53 No. 2.50 / Thursday. Dexmber 29, 1988 / Proposed Rules

• T account the various cost and personnel 8. Thepotentialimpoet ofdifemnces under sec. telo. 88 Stat. sec es amended (42 considerations. in facihty type, design or age on the U 5 C. 33nioll.

6. The potentialsafetyimpact of relevancy andpmcticolity of the 2. In i 55.4 a new definition is added changes inplant or opemtsonal proposed backfit. in alphabetical order to read as follows:

complexity, including the effect on other The proposed rule only applies to SO proposed and existing regulatory applicants for operstion of a nuclear i 56.4 Demeans.

requimments. power reactor or to shift supervisors. It There would be no changes in the does not apply to SO applicants or shift " Accredited university or college" plant or operational complexity and supervisors for non-power nuclear meanu an educationalinstitution in the hen:e. no potential safety impact related reactors such as research and test United States which has been approved to them. However, there would be an reactors. by a regional accrediting body effect on the guidance provided in The facility type, design or age should * * * *

• Regulatory Guide 1.8. Relative to have no relevancy to the impact or 3. In i 55.31. a new paragraph (e) is Alternative 1. the guidance in practicality of the proposed backfit. For added to read as follows:

a.gulatory Guide 1.s allows an Alternative 1. the degree to which each applicant for a 50 bcense with a degree utility licensee has already implemented I 84.31 *

• How to app %

to have only 2 years of responsible an educational program would be most power plant expenencA none of which important.Those facilities which have (e) Each applicant for a senior needs to be as a reactor operator.This implemented such a program will clearly operator license to operate a nuclear would have to be revised if Alternative be less affected by the proposed backfit power reactor, after [4 years following t is adopted since the proposed than would those facilities that have the effective date of the rule). must have amendment would require a SO not. For Altemative 2. the number of a bachelor's degree in engineering.

applicant with a degree to serve as a RO reactors and control rooms on a site engineering technology, or the physical at greater than 20 percent power for at would have greater significance.Those sciences from an accredited university least 1 year. Furthermore, the guidance facilities which hase only one control or college. Applicants with other indicates that a RO applicant must have room on their site would be least bachelor's degrees from an accredited a minimum of 3 years of power plant affected by the proposed rule. institution, or from a foreign college or experence of which at least 1 year shall 9. Irhether theproposedbackfitis university, will be considered on a case.

be nuclear power experience.This interim orfinaland,ifinterim, the by<ase basis if the reactor plant would have to be revised since it is justification for imposing the proposed licensee certifies that the applicant has inconsistent with the proposed backfit on on interim bosis, demonstrated engineering expertise and amendment which implies that an The proposed rule, when made high potential for the senior operator applicant for a RO license with a degree effective, would be in final form and not position. In addition, except as noted in must have 2 years of related nuclear on an interim basis. paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) of this power plant experience. Finally. section after [4 years following the position C.1.d of the Regulatory Guide Attemative 1-Requirements for Sem.or effective date of the rule), each ,

would have to be revised to indicate Operators applicant for a senior operator license that a bachelor's degree is the minimum List of Subjects in le CFR Part 55 must have at least three years of educational requirement for a SO . operating experience at a nuclear power candidate rather than a high school Manpower training pmgrams Nuclear plant, of which one year's experience power plants and reactors. Penalty" must be as a licensed control room diploma. Relative to Alternative 2. Reporting and recordkeeping current guidance in Regulatory Guide operator for a nuclear power reactor 1.B. Revision 2, April 1967 requaments, operating at greater than twenty percent

" Qualification and Training of Personnel For the reasons set out in the power. Atleast six months of the for Nuclear power Plants." states that a preamble and under the authority of the nuclear power plant experience must be shift supervisor only needs a high school Atomic Energy Act of 1954. as amended. at the plant for which the applicant the Energy Reorganization Act of1974, seeks the license. An authorized diploma. This would have to be revised, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC if Alternatis e 2 is adopted, to reflect the representative of the facility licensee is pmpoSing to adopt the following will verify that the requirements of this new educational credentials and experience required to become a shift amencments to 10 CFR Part 55. paragraph have been met as a part of supervicor (i e. 3 years experience with certifying the applicant's qualifications PART 55-OPERATOR $' LICENSES pesuant to paragraph (a)(4) of this 1 year as a RO).

7. The estimated resowre burdenin 1.The authonty citation for part 55 section. Any person holdmg a senior the NRC associated with theproposed continues to read as follows: operator license on [4 years following bocAfit and the availability ofsuch the effective date of the rule)is exempt Authonty: Se o. m.1ct. n . es Stat 939.

resourtes-from the requirement to have a 948 953 es emended. sec. 234. 83 Stot. 444. es It is anticipated that there will be bachelor's degree.

amended (4:U.S C. 2137. 2001. 2:32. 2:a:1 relatively minor impact on NRC staff secs 201. es amended. :o2. 88 Stat 1242. es [t) For each applicant from a facihty resources as a result ofimplementing amended.1044 [42 U.S C. 5M1. 5842). thdt has not completed preoperational the proposed ruit.For Alternative 1, S.<:mr.s 55 41. 55 43. 55 45. and 55.59 also testing and an initial startup test there may be some increase in the issued under sec. 306 Pub. L 9%4:5. % Stat. program as described in its Final Safety number of applications to process and 2:c2 (42 ti.S C.102:01. Sectwn 55.016150 Aralysis Report. as amended and a.187.68 Stat 6.,

tests to administer, because of the "'

['5 C der9g3sy approved by the Commission, and has attempts of current ROs to become sos not yet been licensed to operate at For the purposes of sec. 2:3. 68 Stat.95B. as prior to the cut-off date, but this should amended (42 U.5 C. 273); il 55.3. 55 :1. power. the Commission may approve not cause a significant impact on the 55 49. and 55 53 ere issued under sec.1811. 68 alternatives that provide experience NRC staff. No new resource Stat. 949. as aniended (42 U.S C 22olbil; and eqmalent to operation at twenty requirements are expected. Il 55 9. 55.23,55.05. and 55.53(f) are issued percent power.

. Feders! Register / Vol. 53. No. 250 / Thursday, Dee:mber 29, 1988 / Proposed Rul:s 52725 (2) For eoch applicant from a facility and (c). 50 44. 50 40. 50 48. 50 54. and so.ao(s) plant that has not completed that has (i) completed preoperational are issued under sec.1 stb. 68 Stat. 948, es preoperational testing and an initial amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(b)); il 50.10(b) and startup test program as described in its testing as described in its Final Safety d ' 'd "" '

Analysis Report as amended and [1;8",,, "jj'3,"d (42 U l); nd Mnal Safety Analysie Report. as approved by the Commission. and (ii)is amended and approved by the Ii 50 9. M5Me). E59(b). E70. E71. E72.

in an extended shutdown which 50.73. and 50.78 are iesued under sec. telo. 68 Commission, and has not yet been precludes operation at greater than Stat. 950. as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(o)). licensed to operate at power the twenty percent power, the Commission Commission may approve alternatives 2 hlM h i that provide expenence equivalent to may process the application and,may removed and e administer the wntten examination and o uc 'Y text to operation at twenty percent power-paragraph (m)(2) and paragrsph , , ,

operating test required by Ii 55.43 and (m)(2)(ii) are revised, to read as follows:

55.45 of this part, but may not issue the Dated at Rockville. Maryland this 23rd day license until the required evidence of g 50.54 Condit6cne of Econnes. of December.1988.

operation at greater than twenty percent . . . .

• For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

power is supplied. (m) * *

• John C. Hoyle, Alternative 2-Requirements for (2) Norvithstanding any other Acting Secirtaryfor zhe commission.

Supervisors provisions of this section, licensees of [FR Doc. 29933 Filed 12-26 68. 8.45 aml List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 50 ,((q$i, f,f meet de com r,.m ,

Antitrust, Classified information, Fire (i) * *

• protection, Incorporation by reference. (ii)(A) For single unit sites or multiple unit sites with one control room, the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Intergovernmental relations. Nuclear power plants and reactors, Penalty. licensee shall have at its site a person Federal Aviation Administration Radiation protection, Reactor siting holding a senior operator license for all criteria. Reporting and recordkeeping fueled units at the site who is assigned 14 CFR Part 73 requirements. responsibility for overall plant operation For the reasons set out in the at all times there is fuelin acy unit.  ! Airspace Docket No. 88-AEA-41 l preamble and under the authority of the (B) For multiple unit sites with two or Atomic Energy Act of1954, as amended, more control rooms. the licensee aliall Proposed Alteration of Restricted the Energy Reorganization Act of1974. have at its site a person for cech control Area R-4601 Fort A.P. Hill, VA as amended, and 5 U.E C. 553, the NRC room who: holds a senior operator AGEncr. Federal Aviation is proposing to adopt the following license for all fueled units operated by amendments to to CFR Part 50. the control room; and is responsible for Administrabon WAA) E overall operation of these units at al3 ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

PART 50-DOMESTIC UCENSING OF times there is fuelin any of them. .

suesssastr.This notice proposes to altu PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION Exemptions may be considered on a e un anes and change b FACluTIES case-by-case basis taking into account

. controlling agency for Restricted Area 1.The authority citation for Part 50 the phy,sicallocation of the control R-6001 Fort A.P. Hill, VA. The to ms Department of the Army has requested continues to read as follows: g Authority: Secs.102,103,104,105,181.182* an e argement d-6601 to effective date of the rule]. each person accommodate additional training 183.186.189, e8 Stat. 936. 937. 938. 948, 953.

954,955,956, as amended sec. 234. 83 Stat.

described in paragraphs (m)(2)(ii)(A) requirements. In addition, the proposed 1244, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2132. r133. 2134. and (m)(2)(ii)(B) of this section must action would revise the assigned 2135, 2201. 2232. 2233. 2236, 2239. 2282); secs. have one or more of the following controlling agency' 201, as amended. 202. 206. 88 Stat.1242. as educational credentials: A bachelor's amended.1244.1246 (42 U.S C 5841. 5842. degree from a program accredited by the DATES: Comments must be received on 56461- Accreditation Board for Engineering and or before February 13,1989.

Section 50.7 also issued under Pub. L 99 Technology (ABET): a professional ADosttssts: Send comments on the oct, sec.10. 92 Stat. 2951 (42 U.S.C 5851). proposal in triplicate to: Director FAA.

engineer hcense issued by a state government; or, a bachelor's degree and Eastern Region. Attention: Manager. Air 6a St t 9 95 a a end 42 U S 3 an Engineer.in. Training (EIT) certificate Traffic Division. Docket No. 88-AEA-4.

2235). sec.102. Pub. L 91-190. 83 Stat. 853 [42 U.S.C. 4332). Sect ons 50.23. 50.35. 50.55 and that indicates one has passed an Federal Aviation Administration.JFK I

50 50 also issued under sec.185. 68 Stat. 955 examination administered by a state or International Airport,The Fitzgerald (42 U.S C 2235) Sections 50 33a.50.55a and other recognized authority. Fedetal Building. Jamaica. NY 11430 Appendim Q also issued under sec.102. Pub. (D) Except as noted below, after 14 The official docket may be examined L 91-190. 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C 4332). years following the effective date of the in the Rules Docket, weekdays except

" Federal holidays, between 8.30 a.m. and 5 a012 21 S$ rule]. each person described in paragraphs (m)(2)(iil(A) and (m)(2)(ii)(B) 5:00 p.m. The FAA Rules Docket is sections 50.58. 50 91. and 50 92 also issued located in the Office of the Chief under Pub. L 97-41 A 96 Stat. 2073142 U.S.C. of this section must have at least three years of operating experience at a Counsel. Room 916,800 Independence 2:39). Section 50.78 also issued under sec. 122. 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C 2152). Sections nuclear power plant. of which one year's Avenue. SW., Washington. DC.

I 50 80-50 81 also issued under sec.184. 68 Stat. experience must be as a licensed control An informal docket may also be 954, as amended (42 U.S C. 2234). Section room operator for a nuclear power examined during normal business hours 50.103 also issued under sec.108. 68 Stat. 939. reactor operating at greater than twenty at the office of the Regional Air Traffic as amended (42 U.S C. 2138). Appendix F also sued under sec.187. 68 Stat. 955 [42 U S C.

e M1 m ei Division.

For the purposes of sec.223.ea Stat.958. as be at the plant for which the person has Paul Gallant. Airspace Branch (ATO-amended 142 U.S C. 2273); iI So tata). (b). responsibility. For each person at a 240). Airspace-Rules and Aeronautical L-_-______-_____