ML20248B608
| ML20248B608 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 03/14/1989 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Coleman E HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20248B613 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-53FR52716, RULE-PR-50, RULE-PR-55 CCS, NUDOCS 8904110013 | |
| Download: ML20248B608 (13) | |
Text
-
u e
. ga 'Ha,
u f['
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\***"}j g.
March 14,1989 The Honorable E. Thomas Coleman United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515
Dear Congressman Coleman:
Your constituent Mr. Wes Baruth, inquired about an amendment that we have recently proposed to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's regulations.
This 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 and to effectively restore the reactor to a safe and stable condition.
These alternatives are.
explained in a bit more detail below and a copy of the Federal Register Notice -
on this proposal is enclosed for additional information.
The first alternative would apply to senior reactor operators.
It would require 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.
The second alternative would apply to persons who have supervisory responsibilities, such as shift supervisors or senior managers.
It would require that they have enhanced educational credentials and experience over that which is normally required for senior reactor operators. The desired educational credentials are: a bachelor's degree from a program accredited by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology; a professional engineer license issued by a state government; or a bachelor's degree and an Engineer-in-Training certificate that indicates one has passed a state administered examination.
The second alternative would achieve our objective of upgrading by combining engineering expertise and operating experience in the shift supervisor position.
The second alternative does not currently apply to the position held by your constituent, Mr. Baruth.
Even if the first alternative were selected for final promulgation, your constituent would be exempt (grandfathered) from the degree requirement if he maintains his senior reactor operator license. The first alternative would become effective four years after final rule promulgation.
The exmption applies to persons who hold a senior reactor operator license on the date four years after final rule prcrulgation.
This exemption would ensure that the experience of the current senior reactor operators is retained.
Delaying the implementation cf the first alternative by four years allows time for those reactor operators who want to become senior reactor operators to take the necessary examination and complete all requirements for the senior reactor operator license.
g e,5 %
a904110o1a e9o314 1f FULL TEXT AScil SCAN
,I PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDC
t t-The Honorable.E. Thomas Coleman 2
i Concurrently with the amended final rule on this matter, the Commission intends to publish a policy statement which encourages nuclear power plant licensees to:
- 1) implement personnel. policies that emphasize the opportunities for licensed senior reactor operators to assume positions of increased management responsibility;
- 2) develop programs that would enable currently. licensed senior reactor operators, l
reactor operators, and shift supervisors to obtain college degrees; and 3) obtain college credit for appropriate nuclear power plant training and work experience 1
through arrangements with the academic sector.
Finally, I would emphasize that the concerns of your constituent, Mr...Baruth,-
will be considered-during our analysis of the'public-comments received on this i
matter.
I trust that the above information is responsive to your request.
l Sincerely, Q
.J
\\
WW'
/
ictorstello,J Executive Director for Operations
Enclosure:
Federal Register notice l
3
______1______._________._.____
52nC Federal Reglat:r / Vcl. $3. No. 250 / Thursday. Decembrr 29, 1968 / Propossd Ruls:
or 4 importers'would be involved. These -
- 2. Paragraph (a) of 6 94 9 would be soon as practicable. the Comadesian has importations are insignificant when revised to read as follows:
decided to extend the comment period for en additional thirty days. The compared with the 300.000 or most o an pod extended comment period now expires swine that were imported into the ehahm United States in 1987.
on February 27.1000.
In addauor Croat Britain has no pork (s) Hog cholera la known to exist in all countries of the world except oats:The comment period has been processing plants that are approved by Australia. Canada. Denm ark. Dominican extended and now expires February 27.
the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection 1989. Commente received after this date Service. Derefore, even if Gevat Britain Republic. Finland, Great Britain were to be recognized as being free of (England. Scotland. Wules, and Isle of will be considered if it is practical to do bog cholera oommerical shipments of Man),loeland. New Zealand Northern so, but assurance of consideration.
Ireland. Norway, the Republic of cannot be given except as to commente rk products frass that country to b nited States would still be prohibited.
Ireland, Sweden, and Trust Territory of received on or before this date.
'Thus, while individuals would be the Pacific lalands?
Aconstsas: Mall written comments to:
cllowed to import small quantities of Secretary. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Washington. DC 20555.
p rk and pork products for personal 9
0 (Ammidl Attention: Docketing and Service consumption, commercial shipments
- 3. Section 94.10 would be amended by Branch. Copies of comments received would continue to be ineligible for adding " Great Britain (England.
may be examined at the NRC Public importation.
Scutland. Wales, and Isle of Man)."
Document Room. 2120 L Street NW for these reasons. the amount of pork I
end pork products imported into b imnwdia tely after " Finland.".
Washington, DC.
l United States from Great Britain would Dune in Washington. DC this 2.2 day of Deliver comments to:11155 Rockville remain very small, and would have no December suaa-Pike. Rockville. MD between 7:30 a.m.
significant impact on U.S. swine James W. 01oeser, and 4:15 p.m. weekdays.
producers.
Administmtor. AnimalandMantHealth pon punTHan essvonnaison CONTACT:
Admmer these circumstances, the Und Inspection Service-Moni Dey. Office of Nuclear Regulatory istrator of the Animal and Plant
[FR Doc. 86-29tM2 Fded 12-26-4a. 8.45 aml Research.U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Heatth inpsection Service has saunocoot m H64 Commission. Washington, DC 20555.
determined that this action would not Telephone (301) 492-3730.
have a significant economicimpact on a Dated at Rockville. Maryland this 22nd day substantial number of small entfues.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY of December,igas, COMMISSION P:pe work Reduction Act For the Nuclear Regulatory Commiselon.
De regulations in this proposal 10 CFR Part 50 John C Hoyle, contain no information collection or Actitte Secretaryfor the Cornmission.
recordkeeping requirements under the Ensuring the Effectiveness of (FR Doc. 86-29992 Fded 1248-aa, s.45 am)
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 Maintenance Programa for Nuclear U.S.C. 3501 et seg.).
Power Planta; Extension of Comment Esecuuve Order 12372 10 CFR Parts 50 and 55 aopcy: Nuclear Regulatory This program / activity la listed in the Comunission.
Catslog of FederalDomestic Assistance Educauon and Esperience under No.10.025 and la subject to Actiosc Proposed rule: Extension of Requirements for Senior Reactor F.xecutive Order 12372. which requires comment period.
Operators and Supervisors at Nuclear intergovernmental consultation with sussuany: On November 28,1988 (53 FR Power Plants state and local ofGcials. (See 7 CFR Part I b Com M
4 hc commen 3015. Subpart V.)
pu r et t ould C
i Litt of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 94 require commercial nuclear power plant licensees to strengthen their actioss: Proposed rule.
Animal diseases. Hog cholera. Import.
maintenance activities in order to Livestock and livestock products. Meat suessaany:%e Nuclear Regulstor) and mest products. Milk. poultry and (a
Commission is prcrosing to amend its re u eh ea d
regulations te ardmg educational poultry products.
maintenance. The comment period for requirements for operating personnel at Accordingly.9 CFR Part 94 would be amended as follows; this proposed rule was to have expired nuclear power lants.The osed on january 27,1989,'Ite Nuclear
" endments would require additional PART 94-RINDERPEST, FOOT ANO.
Management and Resources Council MOUTH DISEAS,E FOWL PEST (FOWL (NUMARC) has requested a sixty. day jduC8U n 8nd eApenence requuements i Seni i perators and supervisors. In PLAGUE). NEWCASTLE OLSEASE extension of the comment period. In promulgating the proposed amendments,
( AYl AN PNEUMOENCEPHAUTIS),
view of the importance of the proposed I e Commission has identified Iwo AFRICAN SWINE FEVER, AND HOO rule, the amnunt of time that the
- g#"*" "
CHOLER /e PROHIDITED AND NUMARC suggests is required in order HESTRICT EO IMPORTATIONS to provide rneanfngful comments on iInJet the first alternathe. the behalf of its member utilities. and the proposed amendment would apply to
- 1. The authority citation for Part 94 desirability of developing a final rule as senior operators. It would require that
%ould Continue to read as follows:
cJch applicant for a senior operator
! r. ente to operate a nuclear power Autburity: 7 US C 147s 150ce.16b 162.
' k sh Wr Wons oN em nd Peru 450,19 U S C 130G. 21 US C 111.114a. u44.
s2 es. sa and m of tNe cbspiar ter oth,,
reactor have a bachelor's degree in 134b. n4c and 134L 31 US C 9701 41 US C prohib.iurne.nd ruinchone upo, unport.non or engineering. engineering technology, or 4ut. 4332. 7 cm 217. 2 51. end 371.2(d).
emne and thrar products the physical sciences from an accredited
Federal Register / Vcl. 53. No. 250 / Thursday Deccaber 29. 1988 / Proposed Rules 82717 university or college.ne proposed l suem.sasserrany esponesanoes an alternate means of providing the necessary technical and academic -
amendment would upgrade the Backs ound knowledge to the shift crew. Option 1 of operating, engineering, and accident management expertise provided on shift Since the Three Mile Island Unit the Polley Statement permits an -
by combining enginwring expertise and (nU-2) accident on March 28,1979,in individualto serve in the combined opereting experience la me 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 occident. the issue of academic bdds either a hchelofs degru in proposed amendment would apply to requirements for reactor operators has,
Wneering. usinadas techad[,
persons who have supervisory been a major concern of the Nuclear physical science, or a profession responsibilities, such as shift Regulatory Commiselon (NRC). In July.
,,,gn,,,.s license. Option 2 permits supervisors or senior managers. It would 1979 'TMI-2Imssons14arnedTask continuation of the separate STA who require that they have enhanced Force Status Report and Short. Term rotates with the shift and holds a educational credentials and expedence Recommendations."(NUREG-0678)8 backlor's dogm Wh w over that which is normally required for made specific recommendations for a -
meets the criteria as stated in l
senior reactor operators.The proposed Shift Technical Advisor (STA)to Clarification of ht! Action 115 i
amendment would upgrade the provide engineering and accident -
Re9uirements."(NUREG4737) The opersting engineering and accident assessment expertise during other than Comsninion ajso enemagn the shift l
management expertise provided on shift normal operating condiuons. On supervisor to serve in the dual-role ex October 30,1979, the NRC notified all e shstise and operating nuclear power licensees of the Position, and the STA to take an actin by combining enginee '
operating experience in t
role in shift activides.
supervisor position.
~ short. term STA requinments.l.e that The Commission believes that STAS should be on shift by January On May 30.1986, the NRC published adoption of either of the alternatives, for 1980. and that they should be fully an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (heANPRM was to extend ANPRM)(51 FR 19501).The senior operators or shift supervisors, trained by January 1981. In November purpose of t would further ensure the protection of 1980 "Clarificadon of 30 Aedon Plan the health and safety of the public by Requirements." (NUREG4737).
the currentlevelof engineering enhancing the capability of the provided further details to licennes expertise on thiR. as decribed in the opersting staff to espond to accidents regardingimplementation of the STA Commission's Policy Statement on and restore the reactor to a safe and position. It identified the STA as a
' Engineering Expertin on ShiR (50 FR stable condition.
temporary position pending a 43621)and to ensure that senior oatus: Comment period expires Commission decision regardinglong operatore have opereting experience on February 27.1900. Comments received range upgrading of reactor operator and a commert.ial nuclear reactor 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 86-16).no ANPRM was the comments aceived on or before this Idarned Task Force." (NUREG-0685).
result of a Commission decision to date.
the 1980 Rogovin report. "%ree Mile consider an amendment toits maa==amme. Mail comunents to: De Island: A Report to the Commissioners regulations (Parts 50 and 66)and to Secretary of the Commission. U.S.
and to the Public." (NUREC/CR-1240),
obtain coaunents on the contemplated Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the 1982. " Report of the Peer action to upgrade the levels of operating.
Washington, DC 20565. Attention:
Advisory Panel and the Nuclear engineering, and accident management Docketing and Service Branch.
Regulstory Commission on Operator expertise on shift.
Deliver comments to: One White Flint Qualificauons."(SECY 82-162).'
In addition to describing the proposed Although the 1982 report recommended rule in general, the ANPRM presented a North.11556 Rockville Pike Rockville.
assinstimposition of a degree list of twenty questions concerning i
Maryland, between 7:30 as and 4:15 mquimmut,the conwnsus among these various aspects and implications of the pm Comments may also be delinrod to i
the NRC Public Document Room. 2130 L reports was that stor technical and proposed rule.Two hundred letters were academic knowl among shift receivedin response to the ANPRM. A Street, Lower Level.NW Washington, DC between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 pa OPersti perso would be beneficial summary and analysis of the comments Examine comments received, the to the se ety of nuclear power plants.
are included in SECY 47-101 dated On October 28,1985, the NRC April 16.1987. The NRC has reviewed, in environmentalassessmentand An4ing Published in the Federal Register (50 FR detail, sil the commenis made on the of no significant impact and the 43621) e Analpolicy sistmut on ANPRM as wellas comments received regulatory analysis at the NRC Public uginwring expertise on shift to aHow since that time. In general the Document Room. 2120 L Street.!awer level.NW Washington.DC.
comments were opposed to a degree Obtain single copies of the 8 gf eD Nim 2CS nimneed swy tw regulrement for senior operstom. The Q M y [, $ "".Po.nonswa"""Q'1 proposed amendments in this notiet environmental assessment and finding g.s covernswni rnnuns otra reflect in detail many of the comments of no significant impact and the regulatory analysis from M.R.
Wuhinston. DC amnMoor. Copm may peo tw and responses to the questions posed.
Fleishman. Office of Nuclear Regulatory purchued from the National Technical Informaban Apart from the detailed comments on Research. Washington, DC 20555
@jg"NginegPoM the proposed contents of the rule, a telephone (301) 492-3794, availabk for inspecuan w copytne tw a fee in da number of general comments were FOR PURTMsA leePOResAT1088 C00ffACT:
NRC Public Document Reum, um L Stml. leu provided regarding the possible adverse M R. Fleishman. Office of Nuclear ineN. washinsion. Dc effects of requiring degrees for senior U N E s M'"* *Sd*et operators.The public comments as well Regulatory Research. U.S. Nuclear cene e
Regulatory Commission. Washington.
de NRC Pubhc Document Room et nao 1. stmt.
es those raised during NRC staff teview.
DC 2D555 telephone (301) 492-3794.
imu inel. Nw. weeluneton, DC can be categorized as follows:
_________.m._____
v 52718
- Fedirtl.Re!:Ister / Vol. 51. No. 250 / Thursday. December 20. 1988 / Proposed Rules i
- 1. The proposed rule is nnt nev;po Concurrent Policy Statement respond to cornplex transients and
- 2. Expertence is more important than a The CenMon will publah accidents and thereby further ensure the 3
p se rule w li Lma a r.*eative concurrently with the fmal rule a policy prol tion of the health and safety of the impact on safety 1/
sblemont which encouruges tsuclear p
/
4 1 ric propodd ruleN!t in a rester power plant beenacel working with the The pohcy statement on engineenng b
eperstor turnmer raie nuclear industry, to:
expertise on,sbift pubbshed in the 5 The proposed rule will basically block s
- 1. Implement personnel puhcies that Federal Register on October 28.1985 (50 the career path of reactor orcrators. resulting emphasac the opportunines for licensed FR 43621) provided an intenm melbod of j
in lower morale, 6 There will be less overall exponence on operators to assume positions ofincreased achieving more engineering capability i
shift due to the promotion of sos into management responsibility; on shift. Essentially, with Alternatis e 1 i
- 2. Develop programs that would enable the NRC is movmg from interim m:nagement positions.
currently bcensed senior operators. rtactor requirements which provide engineering The Advisory Committee on Reactor operators and shift supervisors to obtain capability for accident conditions (the Sa feguards (ACRS) also considered the
,Ellegferedit for appropnate prcposed requirement and discussed it nale.r powe. plant traimas and work ca il ty n nc po plat at several meetings in 1986 and 1987 expenence through arranaernents with the operating experience,in the same The ACRS strongly supported the academic sector concept of having engineering expertise ndisidual(the 50)y g
g on each shift. However, they did not Discussion amendment would require each agree that requiring a degree for senior The NRC is concerned that operator applicant for a senior operator 50) license to operate a nuclear rea(ctor, cperators was the best approach. though quahficatmos to deal with accidents they agreed that specific technical beyond design basis conditions warrant after l4 years following the effective knowledge should be required. They improvement. Operator training date of the rule. to have a believed that, because of the concern programs and related emergancy degree in engm)eermg. engm, bachelor's eering about advarse effects raised by many operating procedures generally do not technology, or the phyelcal sciences knowledgeable individuals. the consider accident conditions be3 nnd frorn an oceredited university or college.
proposed rule should be reconsidered.
inadequate core coobng. Here is a Applicants with other bachelor's The Commission has carefully general consensus that well qualified degrees from an accredited institution. '
considered the numerous comments operators can substantially mitigate the or from a foreign college or university, rec 2ived on the ANPRM as well as the effects of severe accidents.The industry would be considered on a case by case recommendations of the ACRS. During Degraded Core Rulemaking Program basis if the utility (licensee) 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 engineenng expertise and high po,tential following three options regarding could substantially reduce the risk for the 50 position. The Commission improving engineering expertise on shift; posed by these conditions.The NRC is does not want to prevent individuals l
- 1. Proceed with the contemplated degree considering the need for more extensive with excellent engineering experience.
rule and concumnt pobey statement es severe accident training and emergency but with nontechnical degrees, from operating procedures as weU as becoming sos; however, degree n tfe one ter oNor engineering qualifications for senior equivalency will no longer be accepted.
in a les :
Operators on shift who have bachelor's opera tors.
An accredited un!venity or coDege is dneses Rere are numerous approaches that defined as an educational institution in
- 2. Propose a rule to require a degreed may be taken regarding the issue of the United States which has been individual on shift similar to e Senior improved operator capabilities; the approved by a regional accrediting Manzger, as described m SECY-84-m Commission has decided to request body.
'Troposed Rulemsking Concerruns comments on two approaches. The The proposed amendment would Requirernents for Senior Managers
- proposed amendments would on)) affect apply to applicants for a SO to operate a
- 3. Arnend the Puhey Statement on Ereneerins Expertise on Shift (50 rR 4E1) persons assocated with nuclest power nuclear power reactor. People who held je"d e'p tehetors. They would not affect personn SO licenses on [4 yean following the h*
ro !s associated with non. power nuclear effective date of the rule] wo,uld be ead o
re corr. toned SO/STA opuoc and to phase out reactors such as research and test exempt ficm the degree requirement.
use of orparate STA.
reactors. Each alternative approach will Thus, those persons who hold a senior be considered in parallel. Each approach operator license on [4 years following The Commission has decided to is discussed separately.Much of the the effective date of the rule) would be proposed two attemative amendirents discussion of Alternative 2 duplicates "gra ndfathered" (i.e., a lifetime for consideration and public comment that of Alternative 1 so that each may be exemption) by the proposed with the understanding that.followmg viewed on its own ments.
the public comment period, only one amendment. Even if they were to lose alternative would be selected for final Allemative 1-Requirements for Sen.
their SO license in the future. e g. due to
/
or promulgation. The siternatives proposed O p on a change in jobs chlants, they could still reapply for a new SO license are similar to Options 1 und 2 but with The purpose of this proposed withom satisfying the degree significant differences based on alternative is to upgrade the operating.
requirement. It is recognized that comments and further considerations by engineering. and accident management "grandfathering" current sos could the Comrrussion following the ANpRM.
expertise provided on shift by result in sos without degrees for en Although comments received on the combining both engineering expertisc extended period of time. Since the ANpRM were generally unfavorable, the and operating experience in the senior Commission's intent is to maintain at Commission beheves that i'l would be operator function. The NRC bebeves this least the same degrae of engineering beneficiel to hab e a full public airing of approach willenhance the capability of expertise on shift as currently exists. the views on these)f proposals.
the operating staff to analyze and STA policy described under options 1
-M e'
c y
I rederal Register / Vol. 53, No. 250 / Thursday. December 29, 1988 / Proptsed Rules 33719 1*
_a ahd 2 of 6 October 28,1985 policy of " hot" and at leset 3 yests tota!
on educational criteria, would have to statement (80 FR 43621) would continue operating experience fer each applicant be revised to reflect this amendment..
a in effect. Thus, if Iwo "gundfathered" for a SO license. A RO heense is -
The concurrent policy statement is j
- sos are used on shift'the facihty required in order to get " hot" control intended to encourage licensees beensee would be required to have a room operating expenence: thus, the
. (utilities) and the nuclear industry to separate individual on shift who has the proposed amendment expands the provide incentives and management STA education and experience current NRC policy, described in opportunities for sos as well as to described in NUREG-0737.If one of the Regulatory Guide 1.3, Revision 2 dated '
1:nprove the engineerms capabilities of.
1
~ sos has a degne and one la April 1987, " Qualification and Training the on shift crew.he SO with a dayee
" grandfathered." Option 1 of the policy of Personnel for Nuclear Power plants,"
and shift operating experience can
)
statement would be satisfied. When all to usure that SOe with degrees have become a valuable personnel resource 80s have depen. the policy statement sufficient operating experience.
for the utility, one who combines shift would no longer be needed.
Regulatory Guide 1.4,in position C.1.e-operational management experience The concurnat policy statement will allows an applicant for a SO bcense with the potential for gruter encourage previously beensed sos to with a degree to have only 2 years of management responsibility The policy obtain degrees. In the past the NRC has responsible power plant experience, statement among other things, w!!!
accepted " equivalents" to the bachelor's none of which needs to be os a reacto' encourage licensees to provide that degree for a separate STA.The cperstur, Thus, Rmdatery Guide 1.s career path.
equivalents were based upon will be revised if the poposed ne Commission believes tha
i specialized utility tretrJng or other work amendment is adopted. The proposed requiring a degree will contribute to the experiences. For the proposed amendment would require the SO gos.1 of having sos who base amendment, however, equivalency applicant with a degree to serve as a RO operational experience, technical and would not be acceptable to the NRC in at greater than 20 rcent power for at academic knowledge, and educational lieu of a degree. Because the least 1 year.This oes not mean that the credentials that should improve their Commission is not in a position to reactor must be at power 100 percent of P'rf #"'"C' perators and possibly evaluhle the academic equivalency of the time during the year, however. the 1 oPen career pat!s from which th may utihty training. It encourages utilities to year time period should not include have been excluded la the past. e sos seek out academic tastitutions who will periods of significant downtime for a should be evaluate the training programs and grant maintenance or refueling (i.e perioda hth e togond g
course credit for such equivalency based that exceed 6 weeks duration). Special there will be increased tra' cover
)
upon work experience or specialized provisions are proposed in order to accident conditions, training is not training.Thus the concurnat policy accommodate those applicacts from sufficient. It is impossible to cover every statement will encourage efforts to have facilities that are unable to operate
- Ventuality during training.De the training accepted by the colleges for above twenty percent power doe either operators must have sufficient partial credit toward fulfilling the to (a) the facilities not having completed understanding of basic engineering requirements of an accredited degree.
their initial startup program and being The degree requirement would not licensed to run at power, or (b) the Principles, and detailed knowledge of apply to ucensed reactor operators facilities being in an extended shutdown nuclear deafsn and operation to (ROs). However, the concurrent policy mode. In the case of the facilities not yet appropriately respond to situations that statament will encourage ROa to obtain licensed to run at power, alternative have not been previously covered in degrees so that they can propeas to the approaches to meet the twenty percent training sessions. In addition, sos with degrees will have greater + hey will ha Mdty for SO position and to other utihty power requirement may be approved by professional growth since t positions.The Cornmission believes a the Commission. In the case of facilities degree requirement for sos on shift, in extended shutdown, the Commission the qualifications needed to advance to -
along with the concurrent policy may process the application and managerial positions. With the chance statement. will not only enhance public administer the written and operating for Personal growth should come greater health and safety, but wdi also enhance tests but would deferissuance of the
{b satisfaction.ne validity of these promotion opportunities for sos.
senior operating license untd the twenty liefs has been reenforced by the The cutoff date of four years following percent power requirement is fulfilled.
- Perlences of h,eensed operators the effective date of the rule for This proposed requirement for a SO participating in an ongoing utility apphcation for a SO license by applicant with a degree also implies that sponsored program similar to what is individuals who do not have degrees is an applicant for a RO license with a beins proposed herein. De Comndssion chosen for three reasons. First. it will degree must only have 2 years of related alsobelieves that migration of sos allow operators now in training nuclear power plant experience. This is upward into plant management wil!
sufficient time and notice to complete a a change to the guidance in Regulatory contribute to improved plant safety.-
der ee before application.Second it Guide 1.8 rhich endorses the American Alternative t-Requirements for should not cause undue hardship on Netional Standard, ANSl/ANS-3.1-1901, Supervisors cperators who are now in the process of
" Selection. Qualification and Training of preparing and training for the sector personnel for Nuclear Power Plants."
He p'irpose of this proposed operator heense, and third. licensecs The standard indicates that a RO attemative is to upg-ade the operating.
have been encouraged by the Policy applicant must have a mini num of 3 engineering. and accident management Statement on Engineering Expertise on years of power plant experience of expertise provided on shift by shift (Option 1) to move toward a dual, which at least 1 year shall be nuclear combining both engineering expertise tcle SO/STA position. Furthermore, power experience. If the proposed and operating experience in the shift those operstors who are licensed as sos amendment is adopted. it wouhl supervisor or senior manger function er. the cutoff date would be.
supersede the Fuidance in Regulatory described in l 50.54(m)(2)(ii) of the
" grandfathered "
Guide 1.8 and necessitate hs revision in regulations.The NRC believes this will in Altemative 1.the proposed accord with the amendment. Also, enhance the capabihty of the operatirg amendment would also require one year position C.1.d of Rc;;ulatory Guide 18.
sicff to analyze and respond to evnplex
v
.52726' Federal Register / Vol. 53. Ns. 250 /11mersday. December T3.1988 / Proposed Rules trahsients and accidents and thereby under options 1 and 2 in the October 2a.
operating experience for each shift further onsure the protection of the y 965 policy stehtaent (80 FR 43621)
- C or senior manager.De health and safety of the public.
' would be eliminated since the shift proposed amendment changes the The policy etstement on engir.eering supervisor would be provwhng the current NRC policy, desenbod in expertise on shift pubbshed in the engineering expertise on shaft and there Regulatory Guide 1.4. Revision 2. dated Fodseel Regletar on October 38.1986 40 would be no need for the STA.
April 1987. "Quahfication and Training nt 43621) provided an interim' method of in the past the NRC has accepted of personnel for Nuclear power plants."
schievins rnora engineering capability
" equivalents" to the bachelor's degree Regulatory Guide 1.s. In position C.1.d, on shift. Ess"absPy' with Alternative 2.
for a separete STA.ne equivalents -
states that a shift supervisor only needs the NRC is inas frominterim were besed upon specialized utility a hiah school diploma. Dus. Regulatory requirements which provide engineering trainmg or other work experiences. For-Guide 1.s will be revised,if the proposed capabihty for accident conditions (the -
the proposed amendment, however.
='namanaat is adopted. to reflect the STA) to requiring engineering equivalency would not be acceptable to new educationalcredentials and capability, and nucl ear 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 years experience with '
superesor or senior manager.
not in a position to evaluate the 1 year as a RO).The proposed in Alternative 2. the proposed acadernic equivalency of utility training, amendment would require the shift amendment would revise $ 50.54.
11 encouropes utilities to seek out supervisor to serve as a RO at greater Conditions of licenses, regarding the academic trutitutions aho will evaluate than 20 percent power for at least 2 requirements for a shift supervisor or the training programs and grant course year. This does not snean that the senior rnanoper. It makes a distinction credit for such equivalency based upon reactor must be at power 100 percent of betw een power plant sites with one work experience or specialized training.
the time during the year; however, the 1 centrol room and those with two or Thus the concurrent policy statement year time period should notinclude more control rooms.The interit of the wul encourage efforts to have the periods of significant downtime for I
proposed amendment is to ensure that training accepted by the colleges for snaintenance or refueling (i.e.. periods there is a separate shift supervisor for partial credit toward fulfilling the that exceed 6 weeks duration). Special each control room who is responsible educational requirements for the shift provisions are proposed in order to j
for overall operation of all fueled units supervisors.
accommodate shift supervisors from operated by the contrcl room at all times The educational credential facilities that are unable to operate I
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 l
the one supervisor per controlroom operators (sos). De concurrent policy initialstartup program and being amendment, on a case.by case basis. for statement will encourage all ROs and licensed to run at power. For such l-those situations where control rooms sos to obtain the ershanced educational facilities, alternative approaches to meet may be close to each other.ne credentials so that they can propen to the twenty percent power requirement proposed e.mendment would require the shift supervisor position and to other may be approved by the Commlulon.
each shift superv' or, after [4 years utility positions.The Commission ne concurrent policy statement is believes that the educational intended to encourage licensees following the effective date of the rule). / require i for shift supervisors. along (utilities) and the nuclear industry to to have one or more of the followira enhanced educational credentials: A V with th ni policy statement, will provide incentives and management bachelor's degree from a program not oni enhance public health and opportunities for shift supervisors as accredited by the Accreditation Board safety. but will also provide a route for well as to improve the engineering for Engineering and Technology (ABET); promoting ROs and sos.By restricting capabihties of the on shifa crew.The a professional engineer bcense issued the requirement to shift supervisors. the shift supervisor with enhanced
(
by a state government; or, a bachelor's Commission believes that the normal educational credentials and shift degree and an Engineer in. Training progression from RO to 50 can be operating experience can become a (EIT) certificate that indicates one has retained for those ROs and sos who do valuable personnelresource for the passed an examination administered by not wish to obtain the enhanced utility, one who combines shift a state or other recognized authority.
educational credentials and who has e operational mensgement experience This requirement will ensure a minimum no desire to enter management.
with the potential for greater les el of engineering expertise for each The date of four years following the management responsibility. The policy shift supervisor.The bachelor's degrec effective date of the rule fer statement. among other things, will with the EIT would not necessarily have impicmentation of the educational encourage licensees to provide that to be in a technical discipline.provided credentials requirement for shift career path; both for shi4 supervisors the person meets the state education supervisors is chosen for two reasons.
and other operating personnel who and e xperience criteria for First,it will allow shift supervisors obtain enhanced educational ad.-.imstration of the EIT.The NRC sufficient time and notice to complete a credentials.
recopires that in some states it may not degree. Second. it should not cause The Commission believes that be possible to be registered as a undue hardship on shift supervisors requiring enhanced educational professional engineer or receive an EIT since licensees have been encouraged credentials will contribute to the goal of cert.hcate without having received by the policy Statement on Engineering having shift supervisors who have either a bachelor's degree from an ABET Expertise on Shift (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 indiuduals 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 adtr.inistaring an EIT equivslant amendment would also require one year excluded in the past. The shift examination. The STA policy described of" hot" and at least 3 years total supervisors should te able to respond
v J
Feder:1 Regi:ter / Vcl. 53 No. 250 / Thursday. Decernber 29. 1988 / Proposed Rules 52721 4
better to off Aormalincidents. While and throughout the utihty with a safety; others were dancussed and there will be increased training to cover resultant improvement in plant safety.
dropped because no basis was found to secJdent conditions. tratrur:3 stone is not support them. The proposal for denmrad IM udonk Co m s aff!clent. it is impossible to cover every operators was an example of the ta:ter.
es er.tuality during training. The shift in view of the unusual nature of this It is unfortunate that this issue supervisors most have sumcient.
notice of proposed rulemaking. in which continues to surface. As reflected in the l
understandmg of basic engineering two altematives are proposed. the earlier public comments on this issue.
)
prmciples and detailed knowledge of Commission specifically encourages the mere potential for imposition of this i
nuclear design and opersuon to comments regardmg comparison of the requirement is having a nogetive impact appropriately respond to situations that alternauves. Comments are particularly on operator morale.1 continae to belnve
)
have not been pre"lously covered in solicited in regard to:
a requirement for degreed senior j
training sessions. In addition, shaft
.. WhH Mtemative :s preferable eseuming OPerstors is ill advised. Not only is there l
supervisors with enhanced educational on. -m ue ulectedt no demonstrated safety benefit from ties credentials wdl have greater opportunity
- 2. What are the potential impacts of each of action but there is a significant potential for professional growth since they will the ettemativu on hcenm stafrmet for negative safety triplications. To once have the qualifica0ons needed to a Regardmg implementation of the again publish this proposal will only J
advance to rnansgerW positions.The alternatives, would then be a mo" continue the negative impact this issue l
Commission M.m ' that m1'6rstion appropriate traneidon period fee each is having on operator morale.
of shift supervisors upward into plant
- 1(em "[
s pro E b t
d S e nt in 1981. the Commission formed a manspement will contribute to improved methods for demonstrating technical Peer review panel to consider j
overau plant safety, expertise with educauonal credenuals.
specifically reactor operstar j
Cocclusion Would some other method be desirable for qualifications including whether a BS this purposef Are there other attemauve leveldegree should be required for Although the Commisston believes
=sys to Gemoostrete baowledge of senior operators. This peer nyiew panel there is a net benefit of the pro,
appropriate engineering fundamentals for concluded (ref. SECY-42-182) that not u
amendments a enhancing pub c health people who may be inehgible to take the Err only was een'no evideme est a and safety,it acknowledges that this examination judgment is based on a qualitative
- 8. Should a requirement be imposed formal degree was necessary for job aseesament of the relative contributions requiring all senior operatore to pass en Performance but that " imposition ci of vanous factors, some with potential Engineerms in Training or equivalent such a requirement, without evidence sitive is acts and othere with examinsuon as a mneum o basic technical est ee mquinmentla needed to Poteritt e *-, impacts.The most axpertin in additton to. or instud M. ibe two perform the job, is likely to result in a proposals in this notice? If such a decrement in overall performance and significant positive g,clor is ge requirement were in pleos, would it be thus impairpublic safety"(amphasis enhanced capabilit of the shift neousary to require enhanced educations!
8dded). !8 8pite of numerous studies i
operating staff to e ectively manage credentials for shift sapervleeruf i
accidents. Increased operstmg
- a. Independent of a degree requirement. le conducted by the staff since 1982, there experience of plant managemeu is also there a need for the expertenemquirements la still no evidence that a BS degree is an anticipated longer term beneht.
to be inerened for the shift supervisar needed to perform the job of senior However, there are possible postuont he the proposed requirements operator. In fact, in the recent report disa dvants ges. For Altemative 1. they called br in the two attemeuvn eufnetenti entitled " Human Factors Research and include (1) the potential for lower Additional Views of Commissioner clear Safety". ee National Ruearch Council Panel on Human Factors morale among reactor operators without Roberts degrees whose natural career path, Research NeeC,a in Nuclear Regulatory i
promotion to the SO level. ls blocked.
In this proposed rulemaking the Research recommended research in this and (2) the potential reduction of overall Commission is considering two area prior to mrking a degree operating exper'ence on shift as sos alternatives regarding educational mandatory. The panel considered this with degrees move to other work. For requirements for operating personnel.
research a high priority as "(s)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 senior operstcrs without degrees whose requirement in senior operators. The recruiting without necessarily improving promotion to the shift supervisor level is s*cond attemative would require r afety."
theked.
enhanced educational credentials for Although ! agree that it la valuable to Upon consideration of these and other supervisory personnel. Although I have have personnel with operating f actors,'such as those identified by the not reached a judgment on the need for experience in utility management, it is pblic comment process on the ANpRM. supervisory personnel to have enhanced inappropriate to attempt to accomplish the Commission concludes, at this time, educational credentials.1 am supporting this objective by so severely penalizirig that the overall effect of the proposed the publishing of the second alternative reactor operators and senior operators I c nendments would be beneficial and in order to obtsin the benefit of the do not believe that one obtains the w ould result in greater plant safety. This public's comments. In the case of the motivation and abilities that makes an benefit will be achieved over time by degreed operator proposal,I cannot do individual a good manager merely by improved quahty of the operational so.
obtaining a degree.Those individuals personnel and by plant management Since I have 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 qualifications.
unique operational problems associated proposals dealing with the size.
There are currently a significant number with nuclear power reactor operations.
qualifications 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 increasing the educationallevelof the Several of these proposals were adopted individuals resulting in an infusion of operating staff willincrease by the Commission because it was operating exerience into utility p ofessionalism both in the control room determined that they would enhance management.
4 I
I
t, 52722 Federal Register / Vol. 53. No. 250 / Thursday. December 29. 1988 / Proposed Rules i beheve that the Commission and the Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et compared to larger organizations in the ame f
industry have put in place a number of seg ). Existing requirements were buemen commumty, propams which have upgraded and will approved by the Office of Management
- 2. How the proposed regulations could be cor. tin e to upgrade the quehfications of and Budget approval numbers 3150-modined to take into account their diffenna l
reactor operators. In addition, the 0011,3150-0018 and 3150-4000
,Pa Mercased recognition of the importance Regulatory Analysis detriments that would be avoided. tf the of w ell quahfied operators will continue propowd regulations were modined as to pay dwidends in the future. A number The Commission has prepared a draft sussated by the commenter.
of utthtse s are providing opportunities regulatory analysis for this proposed 4 How the proposed regulations, as for their operators to further their regulation.The analysis examines the modined, would more closely equalise the cducation. I fully support and encourage costs and benefits of the alternatives impact of NRC regulauons or crute more these initiatives. These programs will considered by the Commission. The equal acones to the benellta of Federal ellow those with abihty and desire to draft regulatory analysis is available for programs as opposed to providias special progress up the management chain.1 am inspection and copying for a fee at the advantages to say individuals or groupe.
j confident thet these imtistives will NRC Public Document Room. 2120 L
- 5. How the proposed regulations, u enhance the safe operation of our Street. Lower Level. NW., Washington,
,",jfAgd i 'd'9 81*ly Protect the J
ds k -
nuclear power plants. However, one can DC. Single copies of the analysis may be
]
not expect immediate results These obtained from M. R. Fleishman. Office of ne comments should be sent to the 4
initiatnes take time to show Nuclear Regulatory Research.
Secmtary of the Comminion, U.S.
1 Wa shington. DC 20555. telephone (301)
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, j
improvements.
When commenting on Altemative 2 of 492-3794.
Washington. DC 20555. Attention:
the proposed rulemaking I will be The Commission requests public Docketing and Service Stanch.
particularly interested in comments comment on the draft analysis.
concerning the viability of this proposal.
Comments on the draft analysis may be Backfit Analycis To be viable, this propo al must allow submitted to the NRC as indicated under As required by to CFR 50.109, the for the orderly progression of operating the Aponesses hesdmg.
Commission has completed a backfit personnel through the ranks from Regulatory Flexibility Certification analysis for the proposed rule.The Commission has determined. based 60 cusibary operator to shift supervisor so As required by the Regulatory this analysis, that backfitting to comply ce to ensure experienced personnel on shift. Specifically, I would like to know, Flexibility Act of 1980. 5 U.S.C. 605(b),
with the requirements of this d
the Commission certifies that this rule. lf rule willprovide a subst u
from the perspective of cuvent operating personnel, how rccessible are promulgated. will not have a significant in protection to ublic health and safety ABET accredited engineering programs?
economic impact upon a substantial or the common fense an/ security at a If the PE or EIT options are selected, number of small entities.His proposed cost which is justified by the substantial which states allow registration and/or rule affects only the licensing and inensw.'Ib W Wym a e ration of nuclear power plants. It this determination is based roads as classification as an EIT without an ofso affects individuals licensed as a
gagin,,
ABl*1' accredited degree? In hght of the fact that states require work experience operators at these plants.The 1 gt,fement of thepfic objectives i
to be registered as a PE and, with a non. companies that own these plants and accredited engineering or related degree, the individual plant employees licensed oc{t the proposed ha fit is designed to 3
jera.
often require work experience to be to operate them do not fall within the classified as an EIT, will state scope of the definition of"small The objective of the proposed rule is registration boards grant credit for entities" set forth in the Regulatory to upgrade the operating, engineering, operating experience as " acceptable Flexibility Act or the Small Business and accident management expertise professional experience... of a grade Size Standards set out in regulations provided on shift by combining both and character indicating that the issued by the Small Business engineering expertise and operating Administration in 13 CFR Part 121. Since experience ?.be senior operator or shift applicant may be competent to practice these companies are dominant in their supervisor runctions.
engineering"7 !! credit is granted for envice amas, this proposed rule does
- 2. Genero1 description of the activity operating experience, does this not fall within the purview of the Act.
that would be required by the licensee experience have to be acquired after However, because there may be now or opphcontin order to complete the receiving a degreef I will also be interested in comments of in.the future small entities which will bacAfit.
in response to Questions 4. 5 and 6 of provide licensed operators to nuclear The proposed rule, under Alternative power 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 wiu affect them nuclear power reactor, after [4 years Excl a n and how the regulations may be tiared 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 stringent requirements on them while engineering, engineering technology, or described in categorical exclusion 10 still adequately protecting the public the physical sciences from an accredited CFR 51.22(c)(t). Therefore, neither an health and safety. Those small entities university or college. Applicants with which offer comments on how the other bachelor's degrees from an environmental impact statement nor en 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 Paperwork Redut. tion Act Statement olio ng i ems the utility (licensee) certifies that the This proposed rule does not contain a 1.The size of their business and how the applicant has demonstrated engineering new or amended information collection proposed regulations would result in a expertise and high potential for the SO reoutrement subject to the Paperwork signdicant economic burden upon them as position.he Commission does not want
Federal Registee / Vcl. 53. N:. 250 / Thursday. December 29, 1968 / Prop: sed Ruhs 52723 to ptevent individuals with excellent power nuclear reactors such as research operators must have sufficient engineering experience, but with and test reactors. Exemptions to t.ke one understanding of basic engineering nontechnical degrees. from becoming supervisor per control room principles. and detailed knowledge of i
sos; however degree equivalency will requirement, may be permitted. on a nuclear design and operetion 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 en where control moms may be close to have not been previously covered in educa tional institution in the United each other. Each shift supervisor, after training sessions. 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 rule). would need to have one or enhanced educational credentials will The proposed amendment would more of the following enhanced have greater opportunity for i
apply only to applicants for a 50 license educational credentials: A bachelor's professional growth since they will have J
to operate a nuclear power reactor.
degree from a program accredited by the the qualifications needed to advance to People who hold SO bcenses on [4 years Accreditation Board of Engineering and managerial positions.The Commission 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 heense issued by a state improvement in plant safety as sos or requirement. Those persons who hold a government; or, a bachelor's degree and shift supervisors migrate upward into senior operator license on [4 years an Engineer.in-Trainir,g (EIT) certificate plant management although this following the effective date of the rule]
that indicates one has passed an improvement could be counter balanced.
would 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 50 requirement will ensure a minimum sos with degrees c.ove 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. Potentic/ impact on radiological reactors.1.fcensed reactor operator with the EIT would not necessarily have e*Posure offacility employees.
(ROs) would not be required to have a to be in a technical discipline provided There is not expected to be any degree. The proposed rule would also the person meets the state education significan: change in the radiological require one year of " hot"(i.e. as an RO and experience criteria for exposure of facility employees due to l
st greater that 20 percent powerl and at administration of the EIT.' Die proposed the proposed rule except for the least 3 years total operating experience rule would also require one year of unqucutifiable reduction in the for each applicant for a SO llcense.
" hot" and at least 3 years total operating probab!!ity 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 i
above 20 percent power.
those applicants from facilities that are associatrd with the backfit. including The proposed requirements of unable to operate above 20 percent the cost o/ facility downtime or the cost Alternative 1 would only apply to power power-of construction de/oy.
reactor licensees indirectly. There
- 3. Pbtentio/chonse in the risk to the One of the questions posed in the May would be no modification of or addition public fmm the occidentolof[-site 30,1986 ANPRM. relative to Alternative I
to the organization. I e. administrative irlease ofmdioactwe morenal.
- 2. concerned what the implementation and functional structure, required to 11is not feasible to quantitatively and operation costs of the proposed operate a nuclear power reactor as a evaluate the change in risk to the public amendment would be to the utilities.
result of thir proposed amendment as a result of the proposed rule. That le.
because:
the effect of the SO or shift supervisor The cost estimates received ranged from negligible to prohibitive. Various a d ((g[$' I scenarios for achieving the desired P ba
- 1. the person to whom the Sos report
[ciden gh hbil d
f staffing level of sos with degrees were would noi changeh sos per shift would not
- 2. the number o assumed. These varied from hiring e a resu feu ng e r
3.Yhe' totel number of operstors per shift the 50 to have a bachelc s degree or individuals with degrees and passing e
- ould not change; the shift supervisor to have enhanced them thmugh the normal utility training
- 4. the trairung requirements, written educational credentials is not known.
programs to taking ROs and sending eneminationa and operstms tests for a SO The Commission believes that requiring them to college while either paying them would not change: and degrees for sos or enhanced at overtime rates or hiring replacement t the tasks performed by a So would not educational credentials for shift ROs. A utility could also implement an "h*"8
supervisors will contribute to the goal of onsite college degree program for its llowever, the power reactor heensees having sos or shift supervisors who operators, for er. ample, a program would have to get new sos from a group have operational experience and currently being run for an operating of individuals who stready 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 educa tional opportunity for their own operators and possibly open career on>1te program are estimated to vary employees to obtain a degree.
paths from which they may have been from 5250.000 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 for overall operation of all should be able to respond better to off it is clear that there are nurnerous fueled units operued by the control normal incidents. 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 range the units. The requirement would only conditions, training alone is not of costs depending on the method apply to power reactor licensees:it sufficient. lt is impossible to cover every adopted. It would be a utility's choice as would not apply to licensees for non-eventuahty during training.The to which method to adopt. taking into l
- 5'2724
- Fodseal Reg 6stae / Yol. 53. No. 250 / Thursday. December 29, 1988 / Proposed Rules account the various cost and personnel
- 8. Depotentialimpoet of dfennees under sec.19:a es Stat. saa as amendwd f42 consideration.
In facility type. design or age on the USC. 33011o)>
- e. Thepotentialsafetyimpact of relevancy andpmcticality of the
- 2. In l 55.4 a new definition la added choMes in plant or operational proposed backfit.
in alphabetical order to read as follows.
conqplexity, including the effect on other ne proposed rule only appbes to SO 1
pmposed and existing regulatory appbcants for operation of a nuclear I ha^
D**'***ne-requirements, power reactor or to shift supervisors, it nere 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 means an educationalinstitution in the bence, no potential safety im act related reactors such as research and test United States which has been approved to them. However, there wo d be an reactors.
by a regional accrediting body effect on the guidance provided M He facility type, design or age abould Regulatory Guide 1.8. Relative to have no relevancy to the impact or
- 1. In 156.31. a new paragraph (e) la Alternative 1 the guidance in practicality of the proposed backfit. For added to read as follows F.egulatory Guide 1.s allows an Alternative 1. the depee to which each appbcant for a SO license with a degree utility licensee has aiready implemented l 96.31 How to appy.
to have only 2 years of responsible an educational program would be most power plant experience, none of which important.Those facilities which have (e) Each applicant for a senior i
mede 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 backSt power reactor, after (4 years following 2 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 Alternative 2. the number of a bachelor's depee 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 2 year. Furthermore, the guidance facihties which have 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. Whether theproposedbockfitis university, will be considered on a case.
be nuclear powet experience. This interim orfinoland ifinterim, the by case basis if the reactor p1 ant would have to be revised since it is justipcotton for icposing the proposed licensee certifies that the applicant has inconsistent with the proposed bocAfit on on infarim basis, demonstrated engineering expertise and amendment which implies that an The proposed rule. wh'en 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 rnust 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 Alternative 1-Requirements for Senlo' 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 tht of Subjectsin to Cnt Part 55 imust have at least three years of educational requirement for a SO.
phrating experience at a nuclear power o
candidate rather than a high school blanpower training programs. Nuclear f which me year's experbea diploma. Relative to Altemative 2, power plants and reactors. Penalty, must be as alicensed control room current guidance in Regulatory Guide Reporting and recordkeeping operator for a nuclear power reactor 1.8. Revision 2, April 1967 requirements.
operating at greater than twenty percent
" Qualification and Training of Personnel For the reasons set out in the power. At least 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 diploma. This would have to be revised, the Energy Reorganization Act of str/4*
seeks the license. An authorized if Alternath e 2 is adopted, to reflect the as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC representative of the facility licensee new educational credentials and is proposing to adopt the followmg will verify that the requirements of this experience required to become a shift amendments to 10 CFR part $5.
para aph have been met as a part of supervisor (i.e 3 years experience with PART 55-OPERATORS' LICENSES cert ying the applicant's qualifications 1 year as a RO).
pursuant to paragraph (a)(4) of this
- 7. The estimated resource burdenin 1.The authority citation for Part 55 section. Any person holding a senior the NRC cssociated with the proposed continues to read as follows:
operator license on (4 years folla ving bacAfit andthecrollabilityofsuch Authority: Secs.107.101.182,88 Stat. 939, the effective date of the rule)is exempt 94s. 953. as amended, sec 234. 83 Stat. 444. es from the requirement to have a resoumes.
It is anticipated that there will be amended (42 U.S C. 2137,2201. 2232. 2282):
bachelor's degree, relativtly minor impact on NRC staff sees 201, as amended. 202.se Stat 1242.as (1) For each applicant from a facility resources as a result ofimplementing amended.1244 (42 U.S C 5841. 5842),
that has not completed preoperational the proposed rule. For Alternative 1.
Sectmns 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 97-.425. 96 Stat.
program as described in its Final Safety number of applications to process and 2262 (42 U.S C.1022c). Secuan 55.61 also Ar.alysis Report, as amended and ued der s
.106.187. 68 Stat 955 (42 tests to administer.because of the
{'g g approved by the Commission, and has attempts of current ROs to become sos For the purposes of sec. 223. 68 Stat. 9sa. as not yet been licensed to operate at prior to the cut off date, but this should amended (42 U.S.C. 2273): fil 55.3. 53.21, power, the Commission may approve not cause a significant impact on the 55 49. and $5 53 are issued under sec. 1611.68 alternatives that provide experience NRC staff. No new resource Stat. 949. as amended (42 U.S C. 2231(ill: and equivalent to operation at twenty requirements are expected.
Il 55 9. 55.23. 55.25. and 55.53(f) are issued percent power.
Tsderal Register / Vol. 53. No. 250 / Thursday Dec2mber 29,1968 / Proposed Rults 52725 (2) For each spplicant from a facihty and (c). So 44. 5o 46. 50 48. 50.54. and so.co(s) plant that has not completed that has (il completed preoperational are inued under sec.1ette. ea Sist. e4a. as preoperational testing and an initial testing as described in its Fmal Safety amended (42 U.S.C 22tn(b)); il 50.10(b) and startup test program as described in its
'd e
l I *"d,80
'g'd i42 U "mtb e Fiaal Safety Analysis Report, as
[y,4 Analysis Report, as amended and e
2 approved by the Commission, and (ii)is il 50 e. muu), soM). mro. m72, art, avnended and approved by the in an extended shutdown which 50.73, and 5o.78 are issued under sec.161o. 66 Commission, and has not yet been precludes operation at greater than Stat. 950. as amended (42 U.S.C. 220tto)).
licensed to operate at power. the twenty percent power, the Commission
- 2. in i 50.54, paragraph (m)(3) is Commission may approve alternatives may process tne application and may removed and the introductory text to that provide experience equivalent to administer the wntten examination and p
h ( )(2) and P ph peration at twenty percent power.
operating te.9 aquired by ll 55.43 and are W d to a foU m 55.45 of this part, but may not issue the Dated at Rockvilla. Maryland this tard day license until the required evidence of I 50.54 conditions of scenaea, of December. toes.
operation at greater than twenty percent For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
power is supplied.
(m)***
John C Hoyle.
Alternative 3-Requirements for (2) Notwithstanding any other Actins Secretary /or the commission.
Supervisors provisions of this section. licensees of (rR Doc. 29993 Filed 12-26-68. 0.45 am)
Ust of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 50 fo"! wi req $"re nta Antitrust. Classified information. Fire (i) * *
- 3 rotection. Incorporation by reference.
(ii)(A) For single unit sites or multiple intergovernmental relations. Nuclcar unit sites with one control room the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION power plants and reactors. Penalty, licensee shall have at its site a person Federal Aviation Administration Radiation protection. Reactor alting 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 any unit.
[ Airspace pocket No, as-AEA-4) preamble and under the authority of the (B) Fcr multiple unit sites with two or Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. more control rooms, the licensee shall Proposed Afteration of Restricted the Energy Reorganization Act of1974.
have at its site a person for each control Area R-4601 Fort A.P. Hill, VA as acended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC room who: bolds a senior operator AGENew Federal Aviation is proposing to adopt the following license for all fueled units operated by amendments to 10 CFR Part 50.
the control room: and la responsible for Administradon (FAA). DOT.
overall operation of these units at all Actioec Notice of prcposed rulemaking.
PART 50--DOMESTIC UCENSING OF timse there is fuelin any of them.
m uAnn a n dce pmposes to altu PRODUCTION AND UTluZATION Exemptions may be considered on a the boundaries and change the FACluTIES case by case basis taking into account c ntrolling agency for Restricted Area
- 1. The authority citation for part 50 the physicallocation of the control R-6601 Fort A.P. Hill. VA. The continues to read as follows:
80g8Me yeus follW 6e Department of the Army has requested 1a3. see. too, as Stat. sae. 037 saa sta, ess '
eflective date of the rule)* each 'rson an enlargement of R-6001 to Authority: Secs. lo2.103.104 lo5.181.182 P
954.955.956. as amended, sec. 234. 83 Stat' described in paragraphs (m)(2)(ii)(A) accommodate additionel training 1244, as amended (42 USC 2132. 2133,2134, and (m)(2)(li)(B) of this section must requirements. In addition, the proposed action would revise the assigned 2135, 2201, 2232. 2233, 223a. r239. 22a21: seca.
have one or more of the following
- "tmlli"I '8'"CY' 201, n amended. 202. 20s. es Stat 1242. as educational credentials: A bechelor's OAfts: Comments must be received on amended.1244.124e (42 U.S.C. Sa41. 5842.
degree from a program accredited by the 6846)-
Accreditation Board for Engineering and or befom February 13.1989.
Section 50.7 also tuued under Pub.1. 95-Technology (ABET): a professional]
ADORESSES: Send comments on the engineer license issued by a slate proposal in triplicate to: Director. FAA.
c'ti$n 50 0 also e d
,185.
en Sta t. e36A55, as amended (42 U.S C 2131.
government; or, a bachelor,s degme and Eastem Region. Attention: Manager. Air 2235); sec. il 2. Pub. L 91 190. 83 Stat. 853 (42 an Engineer in Training (EIT) certificate Traffic Division. Docket No.88 AEA.4.
U.S C 4332) Sections 50.23, 50.35. 50.55, and that indicates one has passed an Federal Aviation Administration, p'K 50.56 also is sued under sec.185.68 Stat. 955 examination administered by a state or International Airport.The Fitzgerald (42 U.S C. 2.35). Sections 50 33a. 50 55a and oti.er recognized authority.
Federal Building. Jamaica. NY 11430 Appendia f 4 also issued under sec.102. Pub.
(D) Except as noted below, after (4 The official docket may be examined L 91-190. 83 Stat. 853 (42 USC 4332).
years following the effective date of the in the Rules Docket, weekdays, except 04!ae aI12 2 L St rule), each persen described in Fedetal holidays, between 8.30 a.m. and c
Sections 50.58. 5091, a nd 50.92 also issued paragraphs (m)(2)(ii)(A) and (m)(2)(ii)(B) 5:00 p.m.The FAA Rules Docket is under Pub. L 97-415. 90 Stat. 2073 (42 0SC.
of this section must have at least three located in the Office of the Chief 2239). Section 50.78 also issued under sec.
years of operating experience at a Counsel. Room 916,000 Independence n2. es Stat. e39 (42 U.S.C 2152). Sections nuclear power plant, of which one year's Avenue.SW Washington.DC.
So.no-50 at also inued under sec.1st, on 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 durin normalbusiness hours (42.
21Y8fA p nd reactor opusung at gmatu &an twenty at 6e omce of e Regional Air Trame IaNen s
inued under sec.187. se Stat. 955 (42 U S C.
percent power. At least s,x months of Division.
i the nuclear power plant experience must FOR FURTHrA INFoRMATION CONTACT'.
g 373, For the purposes of sec. 223. es Stat. 958, as be at the plant for which the person has Paul Callant. Altspace Branch (ATO-amended (42 U.S.C. 2273): il So.to(s). (b).
responsibility. For each person at a 240). Altspace-Rules and Aeronautical 1
i l
March 14, 1989 The Honorable E. Thomas Coleman United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515
Dear Congressman Coleman:
Your constituent, Mr. Wes Baruth, inquired about an amendment that we have recently proposed to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's regulations. This 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 and to effectively restore the reactor to a safe and stable condition.
These alternatives are explained in a bit more detail below and a copy of the Federal Register Notice on this proposal is enclosed for additional information.
The first alternative would apply to senior reactor operators.
It would requir'e that each applicant for a senior reactor operator license have a bechelor'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.
The second alternative would apply to persons who have supervisory responsibilities, such as shift supervisors or senior managers.
It would require that they have enhanced educational credentials and experience over that which is normally required for senior reactor operators.
The desired educational credentials are:
a bachelor's degree from a program accredited by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology; a professional enginee-license issued by a state government; or a bachelor's degree and an Engined-in-Training certificate tha_t.. indicates one has oassed a state administered examination. The second JTelford MFleishman ED0 Rdg.
SECY(CRC-89-0120)
MBridges (EDO #4264)
PDorm DFRoss CA
- See Attached for Previous Concurrence Offc:
RDR1DRA:RES RDB:DRA:RES RDB:DRA:RES DRA:RES DD/R:RES D:RES Name: Tehford*:jp WLahs*
Rosztoczy*
Morris
- TPSpeis*
ESBeckjord*
Date:
2/z4/89 2/24 9 2/24/89 2/27/89 2/27/89 2/27/89 ED7 OC L
VS;d/89 3//4/89hy6 t llo JB 9 bur 3/
0FFICIAL RECOPP COPY
_ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ - _ - _ _ __ _ _ _ _ - _ _