ML20248C719

Responds to MG Lafleur Inquiries Re Proposed Amend to NRC Regulations Entitled, Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants. Fr Pages on Subj Encl

ML20248C719
Person / Time
Issue date:	03/29/1989
From:	Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:	Gejdenson S HOUSE OF REP.
Shared Package
ML20248C721	List: ML20248C719
References
FRN-53FR52716, RULE-PR-50, RULE-PR-55 CCS, NUDOCS 8904110299
Download: ML20248C719 (14)

Text

m ,

W

_g*%

4'

• 4 ,

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

,[" g Q j WASHINGTON, D. C, 20555 l

\ 4, , , March 29, 1989 1

l 1

l 1

The Honorable Sam Gejdenson

-United States House of ]

Representatives Washington, DC '20515 l l

Dear Congressman Gejdenson:

]

Your constituent, Mr. Michael G. LaFleur, inquired about an amendment that we have I recently proposed to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's regulations. This  !

proposed amendment is entitled " Education and Experience Requirements for l j

l Senior Reactor Operators and Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants," and it contains two alternatives. Both altern'atives are intended to upgrade the operating, 1 engineering, and accident management expertise provided on-shift at nuclear i power plants. This upgrade is expected to enhance the capability of the operating i staff to respond to potential accident situations and to effectively restore l the reactor to a safe and stable condition. These alternatives are explained 1 in a bit more detail below and a copy of the Federal Register Notice on this  !

proposal is enclosed for additional information. l

)

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 positiun.

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 I alternative.would achieve our objective of upgrading by combining engineering expertise and operating experience in the shift supervisor position.

If the first alternative were selected-for final promulgation, it would become effective four. years later. All persons who hold a senior reactor operator license on the date four years af ter. final rule promulgation would '

be exempt (grandfathered) from the degree requirement. This exemption

• ) @

g904ii0299 890329 '

E PDC FULLTEXT ASCll SCAN ,,

h RE u_ _

Honorable Sam Gejdenson 2 would ensure that the experience of all current senior reactor operators is retained. Delaying the implementation of the first alternative by four years l 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.

If the second alternative were selected for final promulgation, it would becomo effective four years later. This period would allow shift supervisors time to complete a degree. Furthermore, the opportunity to . complete a degree will be enhanced because concurrently with the aniended 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  ;

I would enable currently licensed senior reactor operators, reactor operators, l and shift supervisors to obtain college degrees; and 3) obtain college credit l for appropriate nuclear power plant training and work experience through arrangements with the academic sector.

Since the Three Mile Isiand accident on March 28, 1979, several reports, e.g., j "TMI-2 Lessons Learned Task Force Status Report and Short-Term Recommendations" l (NUREG-0578), " Lessons Learned Task Force" (NUREG-0585), "Three Mile Island: 1 A Report tc. the Commissioners and to the Public" (NUREG/CR-1240, the Rogovin report), and " Report of the Peer Advisory Panel and the Nuclear Regulatory .

I Commission 01 Operator Qualifications" (SECY-82-162) have addressed the issue of academic requirements for reactor operators. The consensus among these reports was that greater technical and academic knowledge among shift operating personne' would be beneficial to the safety of nuclear power plants. Training,  !

experien 'e, and a high school diploma may not be s'ufficient to cover every acc1 P t situation. The senior operator or the shift supervisor must have suf; c1ent understanding of basic engineering principles, and detailed k "wledge of nuclear desigh and operation to appropriately respond to situations m covered in training. The proposeo educational requirements would sati.f the need for greater technical and academic knowledge on shift. However, w, are aware of surveys by industry organizations which have identified possible adverse effects of requiring a degree. All the aforementioned studies and ~~

public comments, including those from the May 30, 1988 advance notice of proposed rulemaking and the December 29, 1988 proposed rulemaking, will be considered in the development of the final rule.

v.

' Honorable. Sam Gejdenson 3' l

1 j

Finally, I.would emphasize that'the-concerns expressed by your constituent, Mr. Lafleur, will be considered during our analysis'of the public' comments  :)

received on:this matter. l t ust that the above information.is responsive.. l

.to your request.

Sincerely, , .

/ / ) J

,Q_ .j

,A' ,

-Victor Ste'llo .Jr. 1l Executive' Director 'J for Operations _  !

I

Enclosure:

j Federal Register notice i

f i

1 i

J I

1 I

d l

__1_ . . --

. 52'71C ' Federal Regist:r / Vcl 53, No. 250 / Thursday. Decembsr 29, 1988 / Proposed Rules

.- er 4 importers would be involved. These 2. Paragraph (a) cf i N.9 wruld be soon as practicable, the Commisekm has importations are inreificant when revised to med as follows: decided to extend the comment period compared with the 300.000 er store for an additional thirty days. The swine that were imported into the **"*'** extended comment period now expires he"m* imere estets on February 27.1980.

United Statee in 1987. *.

In additaan. Great Britain has no pork (a o olu ,g a

• de OAft:The comment period has been processing plants that are approved by Australia. Canada. Denmark. Dominican extended and now expires February 27 Die USDA e Food Safety and inspectior. 1989. Comments received after this date  ;

Re ublic, Finland. Creat Britain (F gland. Scotland. Wales, and Isle of will be considered if it is practical to do I e o be re##8" ed as o so, but assurance of consideration Man),laeland New Zealand. Northern bog cholera, commerical shipments of Ireland Norway the Republic of cannot be given except as to comments Ireland. Sweden and Trust Territory of received on or before this date.

hre a w d ill nus,whileindividuals woubi be hi i d.

the Pacific Islands.8 Aconasses: Mail written comments to:

Secretary,U.S. Nuclear Regulatory cllowed to knport small quantities of Commission. Washington. DC 20555.

pork and pork products for personal consumption, commercial shipments l'88 IAm*"83 Attention: Docketing and Service

3. Section 94.10 would be amended by Branch. Copies of comments received would continue to be ineligible for ad " Great Britain end. may be examined at the NRC Public importation.

For these reasons, the amount of pork Scotl d. Wales, and Isle Document Room.2120 L Street NW.

immediately after " Finland., - Man)."

Washington, DC.

c.nd pork products imported into the United States from Great Britain would Done in Washington. DC this 22 day of Deliver comments 10:11155 Rockville remain very small, and would have no December 1eso. Pike. Rockville, MD between 7:30 a.m.

significant impact on U.S. ewise James W.closser, and 4:15 p.m. weekdays.

producers. Administmtor. An/mof ond Monr Health pon rustrMan eseroRMaTM CONTACT:

Under these circumstances, the Inspection Service. Moni Dey, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Administrator of the Animal and Plant (FR Doc. 86-29912 Filed 12-26-88,0.45 am) Research U.S.NuclearRegulatory Health inpsection Service has enuno cooe wie*a Commission. Washington, DC 20555.

determined that this action would not 3 Telephone (301) 492-3730. I have a significant economic impact on a Dated at Rockville. Maryland this 22nd day substantial number of small entitles. NUCLEAR REGULATORY of December, th Paperwork Reduction Act COMSSION For the Nuclear Reguletory Comminion.

De regulations in this proposal 10 CFR Part 50 lohn C Hoyle.

contain no information collectton or Actirr Secretaryfor the Cornmission.

ricordkeeping requirements under the Ensuring thy Effectiveness of (m Doc. as-29992 Filed 12-24-aa a.45 am]

l Paperwork Reduction Act of1980 (44 Maintenance Programs for Nuclear . , , , , ,

U.S.C. 3501 et seg.). Power Plants; Extension of Comment Ported Executive Order 13373 10 CFR Parts 50 and 55 Aosuct: Nuclear Regulatory This program / activity is listed in the Commission. Education and Experience Catslog of Federal Domestic Assistance under .No.10.025 and is subject to Acteose Proposed rule: Extension of Requirements for Senior Reactor Executive Order 12372, whleb requires comment period. Operators and Supervisors at Nuclear interge varnmental consultation with suuMAmy:On November 28,1988 ($3 FR Power Plants ea' n f!1cials. (See 7 CFR Part 47822) the Commission blished for 5.

A0 ENCY: Nuclear Regulatory pubhc corr. ment a rule at would Ccmmission.

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

Animaldiseases Hog cholera. import.

"'i s suumany:ne Nuclear Reguletory Uvestock and liveetock products, Meat and mest products. Milk, Pooltry and d bbe Commission is preposing to amend its events caused by the lack of effective regulations te arding educational poultry products. t anc e c mm n pe od f Accordingly,9 CFR Part 94 would be requirements or operating personnel at amended as follows-. g nuclear power plants.The proposed PART 94-RfNDERPEST,POOT AND. Management and Resources Council ,['[ '[a d"" e eq ne MOUTH DtSEASE, FOWL PEST (FOWL (NUMARC) has requested a sixty-day for senior operators and supervisors. In PLAGUE), NEWCASTLE DISEASE extension of the comment period. In promulgating the proposed smendments'

( AYlAN PNEUMOENCEPHALITIS), view of theimportance of the proposed the Comr:tission has identified two AFRICAN SENE FEVER, AND Hoc rule, the amnunt of time that the alternatives' CHOLERA: PROHIBITED AND NUMARC st:ggests is required in order to provide rneaningful comrnents on (Inhr the first shernative, the PESTRICTED IMPORTATIONS preposed amendment would apply to behalf of its member utilities. and the 1.The authority citstion for Part 94 desirability of developinn final rule as 8crilot operators. it would require th.t would continue to read as follows: each applicant for a senior operator Authority: 7 U S C 147e.150ee.181.162.

I cense to operate a nuclear power e s , eleo other pronsions of tbs part and parts

, 4So,19 U.S C 1300. 21 U.S.C.111.114a.1344. s2. 95. sa and sz7 of tNe chapter for eth,, reaetor bave a bachelor's degree in 134b.134c. a nd 134f. 31 U.S.C. stos; 42 U.S.C prohib.t.ons and risinci une upon import iion of engineering, engineering iechnolc gy, or 4131,4332,7 CTR 217,2.51. and 371.2(d). swine and their products. the physical sciences from an sectedited

)

1

-.f'ederal Regist:r / Vol. 63. No. 250 / Thursday, December 29, 1988 / Proposed Rules 82717 f 1

university or college.ne proposed supptsesastrany essenesAft0st an altvrnate means of providing the 1 j:

amendment would upgrade the necessary technical and academic Back 8 ""d knowledge to the shift crew. Option 1 of opereting. engineering and accident management expertise provided on shift Since the nrw Mile Island Unit the Policy Statement pennits as by combining engineerin$ expertise and (TMI-2) occident on March 28.1979, in individualto serve in the combined operating experience in the senior which human error, among ohr 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 holds either a bachelor's d in proposed amendment would apply to requirements for reactor operators bas ensinowing.enginewlag ,

persons who have supervisory been a major concern of the Nuclear physical moponsibilities, such as shift Regulatory Commission (NRC). In July ,,,g,,,, science, or a professie Boonse supervisors or senior managers. it would 1979, 'TMI-2 !assons IAarned Task continuation of the separate STA who require that they have enhanced Force Status Report and Short. Term rotates with the shift and bolds a educational credentials and experience Recommendations,"(NUREG-0678)8 over that which is normally required for made specific recommendations for a bublw's 5 Wh M eets the criteria as stated in, senior reactor operators.The proposed ShiftTechnical Advisor (STA to mClwificanon of TMIh PM amendment would upgrade the provide enginewing and accu)ent _

operating. engineering, and accident assessment expertise during other than R@me(NUREG473W Commission also encourages b shift management expert 3e provided on shift normal operating conditions.On supervisor to serve in the dual-role by combining enginee e rtise and October 30,1979, the NRC notified al]

operating experience in e t o rating nuclear power licensees of the - position, and the S,TA to take an active supervisor position. . sbrt. term STA requirements, i.e., that role in shift activitaes. I 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 senior operators or shift supewisors, trained by January 1981.In November would further ensure the protection of 1980," Clarification of TMI Action Plan rulemaking(he purpose of t ANpRM was to extendAN the health and safety of the public by Requirements." (NUREG-0737), the currentlevelof engineering enhancing the capability of the provided further details to licensees expertise on shift. as described in the operating staff to respond to accidents regardingimplementation of the STA Commission's Policy Statement on and restore the reactor to a safe and position. It ioentiBed the STA as a Engineering Expertise on Shift (50 PR stable condition. temporasy position pending a 43621)and to ensure that senior satss: Comment period expires Commission decision regardinglong operators have opereting experience on February 27,1989. Comments received range upgrading of reactor operator and a commercial nuclear reactor operating after this date will be considered if it is senior operator capabilities, at greater then twenty percent power, practical to do so, but the Commission is ne qualifications of operators were e.g.. " hot" opweting experience (Generic able to assure considwation only for also addressed by the 1979 "Isssons Latter 84-16).The ANPRM was the ,

comments received on or before this learned Task Force."(NUREG 4565). result of a Commission decision to l date. the 1980 Rogovin report. "%ree Mile consider an amendment toits Aconesses:Mailcomments to:%e leiend: A Report to the Commissioners regulations (Parts 50 and 55) and to Secretary of tim Commission.U.S. and to the Public." (NUREC/CR-1240). obtain comments on the contemplated Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the 1982," Report of the Peer action to upgrade the levels of operating.

Washington, DC 20555 Attention: Advisory Panel and the Nuclear engineering, and accident management Docketing and Service Branch. Regulatory Commission on Operator expertin on shift. .

Qualifications," (SECY 42-162).s In addition to describing the proposed Deliver comments to:One White Flint Although the 1982 report recommended North 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, rule in general, the ANPRM presented a against imposition of a degm list of twenty questions concerning Maryland, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Comments may also be delivered to nquinant, the connnsus amns thne sarious aspects and implications of the reports was that ster technical and preposed rule.Two hundred letins wm the NRC Pubtle Document Room.2120 L Street, Lower level, NW., Washington, academic knowl e among shift received in response to the ANPIU,4. A DC between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm. Operating personne would be beneficial summary and analysis of the commnts Examine comments received, the . toOn theOctobu safety28,1985, of nuclear power glanta. are included in SECY-4710t dated the NR April 16.1987. The NRC has teviewed. in environmental spessment and finding published in the Federal Register (50 FR detail. all the comments made on lla of no significant impact,and the 43621) e Anal policy statemnt on ANPRM as well as comments received regulatory analysis at the NRC Public D>cument Room. 2120 L Street,14wer engineering expertisc on shift to allow since that time.In general, the level. NW., Washington. DC. commenters were opposed to a degree Obtain single copies of the

• Copin of d NURECS refmnced may be requ{rement for senior operslors.The erivironmental assessment and finding P g g g y j @ ',"[",' M*$g, proposed amendments in this notice of no significantimpact and the US Conrnswnt Prinung OfLce. P.O.8cwost. reflect in detail many of the comments regulatory analysis from M.R. We wnston.Dc somwost. copia mey et o be and responses to the questions posed.

Fleishman. Office of Nuclear Regulatory parthased from the National Technical lnformauen Apart from the detalled comments on Research, Washing'on DC 20555, te?ephone (301) 492m1794.

[Q%%'y*$' 7'y";y, '" the proposed contents of the rule, a number of general comments were enileba for inspecuan or corytns for a in in the PC A FURTHER INFOAAAATION COsffACT*. NRC PutAc Document Room. n20 L 5trat. tmer provjded regarding the possible adverse M R. Fleishman, Office of Nuclear tant NW, WeeMastaa. DC effects of requiring degrees for senior Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear GenNe NNin$.N.7rfn'u".bInt operators.The public comments as well Regulatory Commission Washington. ihe NRc Pubte Document poem et nao L stint a s those raised during NRC staff review, DC 20555, telephone (304 492-3794. teer tant, hw. Wouneton. DC. can be categorized as follows:

I i

I

52718 Fedfral Register / Vol. 51 No. 250 / Thursday, December 29, 1938 / Proposed Rubs

1. De proposed rule is nM neu:sm Concurrent Policy Statement respond to complex transients and

2. Experience is more unportant trua a Tlie Comn.ission will Mlish accidents and thereby further ensure the s rule wsh tm e negative concurrently with the firu,1 rule a polic) p son of the health and safety of the 3 ,

impset on safet) statement w hich encouruges nuclear p

/ 4 lee p#opon i rule $cnlli.! m e gvster power plant bcensees, working with the T,ne policy statement on engineenng (perntur turnove rale b nuclear industry, to: expertise on shift published in the

5. The propnee rule wiU Lasically block t irr plement personnel pu!.cies that I t).c r.areer path of tactor orcralors resultin8 emphastre the opportunities for beensed FR 43621) provided an interun method of '

in lower morale. operators to assume positions ofincreased achieving more engineering capability e There will be le e overall experiacce on management responsibihty; on shift.Dsentially, with Alternative i shift due to the prom, non of sos into 2. Develop programs that would enable the NRC is moving from interim management positions currently bcensed senior operators. n-setor requirements which provide engineering '

The Advissy Committee on Reattor operators and shlft supervisors to obtain capability for accident conditions (the college degrees; and Safeguards (ACRS) also considered the STA). to req 2 inns engmeenns

s. Obtain college credit for appropriate preposed requirement and discussed it nutteer power plant trainmg and work capability, and nuclear power plant st several meetings in 1986 and 1987. expenence through arrangements with the operating experience,in the same ]

The ACRS strongly supported the academic sector 1 concept of having engmeeting expertise individual ggg (the SO)y g a D;5cussion on each shift. However, they d2d not amendment would re9uire cach agree that requir' a degree for senior The NRC is concemed that operator apphcant for a ren!or operator 50) eperators was th est approach. thou gh quahficatmos to deal with accidents license to operate a nuclear rea(ctor, they agreed that specific technical beyond design basis conditions warrant after [4 years foliowing the effective knowledge abould be required. They ireprovement. Operator training date rf <he rule], to have a '

believed that, because of the concern programs and related emergency degree m enginecting.eenng engm, bachelor's about adverse effects raised by many operating procedures generally do not technology, or the physical sciences i knowledgeable individuals, the consider accident conditions beyond froru en accredited university or colleFe proposed rula should be reconsidered. inadequate core cooling. There is a Applicants with other bachelor's The Commission has carefully general consensus that well qualified degrees from an accredited institution.

considered the numerous comrnents operators can substantially mitigate the or from a foreign college or university, i received on the ANPRM as well as the effects of severe accidents. The industry would be considered on a case by case 3 recommendeUons of the ACRS.During Degraded Core Rulemaking Program basis if the utility (licensee) certifies its deliberations subsequent to the UDCOR) industry group, for example, that the applicant has demonstrated ,

j ANpRM. the Commission considered the has developed a guments that operators enginunng expertise and high potential j following three options regardmg could substantially reduce the risk for the SO position.The Commiesloo improving en81ne > ring expertise on shift: posed by these conditions.The NRC is does not want to prevent individuals 3

considering the need for more extensive with excellent engineering experience, l

1. Proceed with the contemplated degree but with nontechnical degrees, from ruli and concurrent pobey etatement as severe accident training and emergency operating procedures as well n becoming sos: however, degree t long ter tn's les o or engineering qualifications fo' senior

. equivalency will no longer be accepted. j Operators on shift who have bachelor's operators. An accredited university or coDege la d: pees. There are numerous approaches that defined as an educational institution in 1 Propose a rule te 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 MInager, as described in SECY-66-Iorx Commission has decided to request body. l

'Troposed Rulemaking Conceming comments on two approaches.The The proposed amendment would Requirements for Senior Managers ~

1. Amend the Policy Statement on proposed amendments would onl) affect apply to applicants for a SO to operate =

persons associated with nuclear power nt. clear power reactor. People who held Etyrineering Expertise on Shtft (50 FR 43rc1) to exphcitly encourage licensecs to develop reactors. They would not affect persons SO licenses on [4 years following the prog' ems leadtng to degrees. to utatae the sissoc sted with non. power nuclear effective date of the rule] would be

" "' reactors such as research and test exempt ficm the degree requirement.

l ue sepa. ta STA reactors. Each alternative approach will Thus, those persons who hold a senior le considered in phrallel. Each approach operatorlicense on (4 years following i

The Commission has decided to {s discussed separately.Much of the the effective date of the rule), would be proposed two alternative amendirents dacussion of Alternative 2 duplicates "gra ndfathered" (i.e., a lifetime for consideration and public comment that of Alternative 1 so that each rnay be exemption) by the proposed with the understanding that,following viewed on its own merits. amendment.Even if they were tolose the p ublic comment period, only one alternative would be sc!ected for final Ahemative 1-Requirements for Sem.or their SO license in the future, e.g. due to '

a change in jobs c /

l promulgation. The alternatives proposed Omomrs , till reapply for new a SO 61license ants. they could l cre similar to Options 1 and 2 but with The purpose of this proposed without satisfying the degree i

significant differences based on alternative is to upgrade the operating. requirement. it is recognized that comments and further considerations by engineering, and accident reanagement "grandf athering" 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 co nbining both engineering expertisc extended period of time. Since the ANI'R'd were generally unfavorable, the and operatir:g experience in the senior Commission's intent is to maintain at Commission believes that it would be operator function. The NRC believes this least the same degree of engineering beneficial to ha ve a full public airing of approach will enhence the capability of expertise on shift as currently ex.ists, the l whws on these)f proposals. the operating staff to analyze and STA policy described under options 1 M

'. Federal Register / Vol. 53. No. 250 / Thursday. Decemb:r 29. 1986 / Proposed Rults sms

• and 2 of the October 28,1985 policy of hot" and at IIest 3 years tots! on educational criteria. would have t) operating experience fer esch applicant be revised to reflect this amendme::t.

statement (90 FR 4362 ) would continue in effect. Thus. If twegeendfathered" for a SO license. A RO heense is The concurrent policy states;ent is sos are used on shift.*the facihty required in order to get " hot' control intended to encourage licensees licensee would be required to han a room operating experience: thus, the (utihues) and the anclear 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 opportunitiu for sos as well as to described in NUREG-0737. lf one of the Regulatory Guide 1 A Revision 2. dated improve the engineerug capabilities of sos has a dogme and one is . April 1967, " Qualification and Treining the on shift crew, he SO with a dayee

" grandfathered." Option 1 of the policy of Personnel for Nuclear Power Piants." and shift operating experience can to ensure that sos with depees have become a valuable personnel resource statement would be satisfied. When all sos have degrus. the policy statement sufficient operating experience. foe the stility, one who combines shift would no longer be needed. Regulatory Guide 1 A in position C.1.e. operational management experience The concurrent policy statement wG allows an applicant for a SOlicense with the potential for greater encourage previously licensed 80s to with a degree to have only 2 years of management twsponsibWty.The policy obtain degrees. In the past the NRC has responsible power plant experiect statement, among other things, wm accepted " equivalents" to the bachelor's none of which needs to be as a reactor encourage licensees to provide that degrce for a separate STA.%e operator. Thua. Regulatory Golde 1.s career path, equivalents were based upon wm be revised if the proposed h Comminin klina b' specialized utility training or other work amendment is adopted.The proposed requMas e de wW catrikie 2 &

experiences. For the proposed amendment would require the SO goalof having sos who have amendment, however, equivalency appilcant with a depee to sene as a RO technical and i would not be acceptable to the NRC in at greater than 20 pecent power for at operational experience'nd acade'nic knowledge. a 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 pe,formance u 0perators and possibly evaluate the academic equivalency of the time during the year, however, the 1 open camer pa9,imm which eey may utility training. It encourages utilities to year time period should not include have been excluded in the past.The sos seek out academic instituuons who will periods of significam downtime for nd evaluate the training programs and grant maintenance or refueling (i.e. periods "I0deg}sshe g,,, norm be ble uts. toge course credit for such equivalency based that exceed 6 weeks duration). Special there will be incmased tre cover upon work experience or specialized provisions are proposed in order to accident conditions, training to not training.Thus the concurant policy accommodate those applicants from sufficient. It is impoulble to cover every statement will encourage efforts to have feellities that are unable to operste penwahty dudng training.h the training accepted by the co!!eges for above twenty percent power doe either operators must have sufficient .

partial credit toward fulfilling the to (a) the facilities not having completed ""derstandir.g of basic engineering uirements of an accredited degra. their initial startup program and being .

pnneiples, and detaded knowledge of degree requirement would not licensed to run at power, or (b) the apply to licensed reactor operators facilities being in an extended shutdown nuclear design and operation to (ROs). However, the concurrent policy mode. In the case of the facilities not yet appropriately respond to situations that have not been previody covered in statement will encourage ROs to obtain licensed to run at power, alternative .

training sessions. In aidition. sos with degrees so that they can progress to the approaches to meet the twenty percent power requirement may be approved by degrees will have gruter p.64 for SO position and to other utihty professional growth eince they will have positions. The Commission believas a the Commission. In the case of facilities the qualifications needed to advance to degne requirement for sos on shift, in extended shutdown, the Commission managerial positions. With the chance along with the concurrent policy may process the application and administer the written and operating for personal growth should come greater statement, will not only enhance public health and safety, but will also enhance tests but would deferissuance of the {bliefs satisfaction.The validity has been reenforced of these by the promotion opportunities for sos. senior operating license unti! the twenty experiences of h,eensed operators The cutoff date of four years following percent power requirement is fulfilled.

This proposed requirement for a SO participating in an ongoing utility the effective date of the rule for apphcation for a SO license by applicant with a degree also implies that sponsored program similar to what la individuals who do not have degrees is an applicant for a RO license with a beins proposed herein. The Commission chosen for three reasons Ftrst.it will degree must only have 2 years of related alsobelieves that migration of sos nuclear power plant experience. This la upward into plant management wil!

allow operators now in training contribute to improved plant safety,

• suffi: lent time end notice to complete a a change to the guidance in Regulatory dejrr ee before application. Second,it Guide 1.8 which endorses the Arrerican Alternalire 2-Requirementsfor '

should not cause undue hardship on National Standard, ANSI /ANS.-3.taget. Supervisors cperators who are now in the process of ** Selection, Qualification and Training of Personnelint Nuclear Power Plante - The purpose of this proposed preparing and training for %e ser' lor The standard indicates that a RO alternative is to upgrade the operating.

operator license, and third, licensees have been encouraged by the Policy applicant must have a minimum of 3 engineering. and accident management i Statement on Engneering Expertise on years of power plant experience of expertise provided on shift by Shift IOption 1) to move toward a dual- which at least 1 year shall be nuclear combining both engineering expertise rc,le SO/STA position. Furthermore, power experience. lf the proposed and operating experience in the shift those operators who are licensed as sos amendment is adopted. it wouhl supervisor or senior manger function cir, the cutoff date would be supersede the guidance in Regulatory described in i 50.54(m)(2)(li) of the Cuide 1.8 and necessitate its revision in regulations. The NRC believes this will

" grandfathered."

in Alternative 1, the proposed accord with the amendment. Also, enhance the capability of the operating amendment would also require one year position C.1.d of Regulatory Guide 1 a, stcff to analyze and respond to ccmplex i

l

• 8272h . Federal Register / Vol. 53. No. 250 / Thuredsy. December 29.'1988/ Proposed Rules

• transients and accidents and thereby under options 1 and 2 la the October 28. - operating experience for each shift further ensure the protection of the 1985 policy statement (80 FR 43621). supervisor or senior manager.N health and safety of the public. would be eliminated since the shift - proposed amendment changes b The policy statement on engineering supervisor would be providing the current NRC policy, described in -

expertise on shift published in the engineering supertise on shift and there Regulatory Guide 1.8. Revision 2. dated Federal Register on October 28,1965 (50 would be no need for tim STA. April 1967, " Qualification and Training in the past the NRC hse accepted of personnel for Nuclear power plants."

FR 43621) provided an interim method of

" equivalents" to the bachelor's degree - Regulatory Guide 1.4. in position C.1.d.,

schievintmore engineering capability on shift. Essentially, with Alternative 2. for a separate STA.The equivalents states that a shift supervisor only needs the NRCis moving frominterim were based ut on specialized utility _ a high school diploma.Thus Regulatory requirements which provide engineering training or other work experiences. For Guide 1.8 wiu be revised, if the proposed the proposed amendment, however, amendment is adopted, to reDect the capability for accident conditions (the STA), to mquiring engineering equivalency would not be acceptable to new educationalcredentials and .  !

capability, and nuclear power plant the NRC in lieu of one of the educational er.perience required to become a shift i credentials. Because the Commission is supervisor (i.e.,3 years experience with .

operating experience,in the shift I not in a position to evaluate the 1 year as a ROJ.The proposed .

supeMeor or senior manager.-

in Alternauve 2. the proposed academic equivalency of utility training, amendment would require the shift It encourages utilities to seek out supervisor to serve as a RO at greater amendment would revise i 30.54.

academic iretituuons who wiU evaluate than 20 percent power for at least 2 Conditions oflicenses, regarding the the training programs and grant course . year.This does not mean that the requirements for a shift supervisor or senior manager. lt makes a distinction credit for such equivalency based upon reactor must be at power 100 percent of work experience or specialized trainin5 the time during the year, however, the 1 between power plant sites with one Thus, the concurrent policy statement year time period should notinclude control room and those with two or periods of significant downtime for will encourage efforts to have the more control rooms.The intent of the maintenance or refueling (i.e., periods proposed amendment is to ensure that training accepted by the colleges foe there is a separate shift supervisor for partial credit toward fulfillms the that exceed 6 weeks duration). Special each controlroom who is responsible educational requirements for the shift provisions am proposedin order to supervisors. accommodate shift supervisors from for overall operatior: 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 act having completed their the one supervisor r'er control room operators (sos).De concurrent policy imtialstartup program and being amendment. on a case by. case basis, for statement will encourage all ROs and licensed to run at power. For sur.h sos to obtain the enhanced educational facilities, altemative approaches to meei those situations where control rooms may be close to each other.The credentials so that they can progress to the twenty percent power requirement proposed amendment would require the shift supervisor position and to other may be approved by the Commission.

each shift supervi6or, after [4 years utility positions.The Commission De concurrent policy statement is believes that the educational intended to encouragelicensees following to have one the effective or more date of the rule), / requirement for shift supervisors, of the following along (utilities) and the nuclear industry to enhanced educational credentials: A V with thlp(Irrent policy statement,will provide incentives and management bachelor's degree from a program not only 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 eng!neering for Engineering and Technology (ABET); promoting ROs and sos. By restricting ' capabihtles of the on shift crew.h a professional engineer license issued the requirement to shift supervisors, the shift supervisor with enhanced by a state government; or, a bachelor's Commission believes that the normal educationalcredentials and shift degree ano an Engineer in Training progression from RO to SO can be ' operating experience can become a retained for those ROs and sos who do valuable personnelresource 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 recornized authority, educational credentials and who have operational management experience This requirement will ensure a minimum no desire to enter managernent. with the potential for greater les el of engineerirw expertise for each The date of four years following the management responsibility.The policy shift supervisor.The bachelor's degree effective date of the rule for statement, among other things, will with the EIT would not necessarily have imphmentation 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 peaon meets the state education supervisors is chosen for two reasons. and other operating personnel who and experience crtieria for First. It will allow shift supervisors obtain enhanced educational adminstration of the EIT.ne NRC sufficient time and notice to complete a credentials.

recopires that in tome statesit may not degree. Second. it'should not cause The Commission believes that be possible to be registered as a undue har; hip on shift supervisors requiring enhanced educational professional engineer or receive an EIT since licewes have been encouraged credentials will contribute to the goal of cert;ficate 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 rnove operational experience, and technical accredited prograim or a bachelor's toward a dual. role SO/STA position; and academic knowledge, that should Jepee in a technics) discipline.For v.hich has frequently been assumed by improve their performance as indmduals in the se states, the NRC is the shift supervisor, supervisors and possibly open career considering other ootions available for in Altemative 2. the proposed paths from which they may have been adtr.inistering an EIT equivalent amendment would s!so require one year excluded in the past. The shift examination. The S TA policy described of" hot" and at least 3 years total supervisors should be able to respond

__m____.______ .

~

I, l

'.- ' Feder:1 Register /.Vcl.'53. No. 250 / Thuroday. Decernber as 1938 / Proposed Rules $2721

^

better to off noticalincidents. While' and throughout the utihty with a safetyt othere wm discussed and there will be increased training to cover resultant improvement in plant safety. dropped because no basis was found to support them.The proposal for degvd l accident conditions, training alone is not invitadon r to %,4 ,

. suffief ent. it is impossible to cover every operators was an example of the latter. l es er.tuality during training. %e shift in view of the unusual nature of this It is unfortunate that this issue l supervisors anst have sumcient notice of proposed rulemaking,in which continues to surface. As reflected in the understanding of basic engineering two altematives are proposed the earlier public comments on this issue, pnnciples. and detailed knowledge of Commission specifically encourages the mere potendal for impattion of this nuclear design and operation to ' comments regarding comparison of the requirement is having a negetive impact .

appropriately respond to situations that alternatives. Comments are particularly on operator morale.1 continue to bebeve I have not been previously covered in solicited in regard to: a requirement for degreed senior training sessions. In addition, shift 1, which attemative le preferable enuming operetors is ill advised. Not only is there supervisors with entenced odocational one will be selected? no demonstrated safety benefit from this cadentials will have greeter opportunity 3. whet ere the potentialimpacts of each of action but there is a significant potential for professional growth since they will the attemativu on licensee stafhng? for negative safety implications.To once have the qualifications needed to . 3 Regarding implernentation of the again publish this proposal wiu only I advance to managerial positions.The . attemauvu would there be a more continue the negative impac* this Isene Commission also believes that ' tion appropriate tranettion period for each is having on opeMor morale att of shift supervisors upward lato p nt management Mll contribute to improve tr 3 pr vfd i di5erent in 1981, the Commission fonned a peer review panel to consider

/

methods for demonstrate techhical overaU plant safety. experdu with education credentials. specifically reactor operator Cocclusloa would some other method be desirable for qualifications including whether a BS this purpose? Are there other attemative leveldegree should be required for Although the Commission believes there is a net benefit of the p d ways to demonstrate, knowledge of unfor Wm'I'W m%d amendments in enhancing pub c health appropriate people who may engineenne be inebsible fundamentals to take the E fo'concluded rr (ref. SECY 42-tet) that not oniy was eere no evidence that a and safety.it acknowledges that this examination formal degree was necessary for job judgment is based on a qualitative s.Should a requirement be imposed requiring all senior operators to pass an performance but that

• imposition of assessment of the relative contributions such a requirement, without evidence of various !sciors, some with potential Engineering in Training (Erf) or equivalent examination es a measure of besic technical that the requirements needed to sidve im acts and othen with expertise in addition to, or instud af, the two perform the job, is likely to result in a inntial negative impacts.%e most pr posats in this noticetif such a

,; Geant ositive factoris the decrement in overaD performance and enhanced pabill of the shift ,Y,',$$"[in k"$"N,,,3 8"e p p add ) N> spite o numerous studiessof operating staff to e ectively manage credentials for shift oorst accidents. Increased operating 8. Independent of egree requirement,is conducted by the staff since 1982, there experience of plant management is also there a need for the expertence mquiremente is still no evidence that a BS degree is an anticipated longer term benefit. to be increased Ior the shih supervisor needed to perform the job of senior However, there are possible Position? Are the propowd requhesments operator. In fact. in the recent report disadvantages.For Alternative 1.they called for in the two alternative sufficienti entitled " Human Factors Research and include (1) the potential for lower Nuclear Safety", the National Research Additional Vlows of CommI== toner morale among reactor operator 4 without Roberts Council Penalon Human Factors degrees whose natural career path. Research Needs in Nuclear Regulatory promotion to the SO level. is blocked. In this proposed rul==arig the Research recommended research in this and (2) the potential reduction of overall Commisalonis considering two area prior to making a degree -

operating experience on shift as sos alternatives regarding educational mandatory.The panel considered this with degrees move to other work.For requirements for operstmg personnel. research a high priority as "(a)n Alternative 2. the diesdvantages include The first attemative, which is an old injudicious regulauon couldlead to the potential for lower morale among proposal, would impose a degree problems with both morals and .

senior operators without degrees whose requirement in senior operators. The recruiting without necessarily improving promotion to the shift supervisor levelis second attemative would require , safety."

thcked. 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 operating f a ctors, 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 penalizing that the overall effect of the proposed the publishing of the second alternative reactor operators and senior operators.1 a r.er.dments would be beneficial and in order to obtain 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 snakes an benefit will be achieved over time by degreed operator proposal. I cannot do individual a good manager merely by improved quality of the operational oo. 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 15eir qualifications.

unique operational problems associated proposals dealing with the size, nere are currently a significant number with nuclear power reactor operations. qualifications and organization of the- of senior operstors who have degrees.

The Commission believes that operating crew at nuclear power plan'.s. This should provide a sufficient pool of increasing the educationallevel of the Several of these proposals were adopted individuals restdting in an infusion of operating staff willincrease by the Commission because it was operating exerlence into utility profes sionalism both in the control room determined that they would enhance management.

Sh22 Federal Registor / Vol. 53 No. 250 / Thursday. DGcembe? 29, 1968 / Proposed Rules Reduction Act of 1900 (44 U.S.C. 35m et compared te lesser organiutions in the wme

_ l beheve that the Commission and the businese coaununity.

industry have put in place a number of seq.). Existing requirements were J

& How the propowd regulations could be programs which have upgraded and will approved by the Office of Management cont nue to upgrade the qualifications of and Budget approval nurnbers 3150- modmed to take into account their diffenna reactor operators. In addition, the 0011,3150-0018 and 315f41000 *y hU Id mm b increa sed mcognition of the importance Regulatory Analysis detriments that would be avoided. tf the of well qualified operstors will continue propowd regulations were modined as The Commission has prepared a draft susseeted by the commenter.

to pay dividends in the future. A number of utihties are providing opportunities regulatory analysis for this proposed 4. How the propowd regulations, as  ;

for their operators to further their. regulation. The analysis examines the mod fied. would more closely equaina the 1 education. I fully support and encourage costs and benefits of the alternatives impact of NILC meulations or creets more considerr ; by the Commission. The equal soness to the benents of Federal these initiatives. These programs will allow those with ability and desire to draft regulatory analysis is available for programs as opposed to providing special advantasse to any individuals or groups.

progress up the management chain.1 em inspection and copying for a fee at the 5. How the prepowd sepulaticas as confident that these initiatives will NRC Public Document Room. 2120 L "

enhance the safe operation of our Street. Lower level. NW Washington. . ,jfleiw 3 st$agequately protect the nuclear power plants. However, one can DC. Single copies of the analysis may be l

obtained from M. R. Fleishman. Office of The comments should be sent to the I not expect immediate results.These .

Nuclear Regulatory Research. Secretary of the Commission. U.S. l initiatives take time to show Nuclear Regulatory Commission, improvements. Washington. DC 20555, telephone (301) i Whe*:t commenting on Alternative 2 of 492-3794. Washington.DC20555 Atteatioru  !

the proposed rulemakingI willbe The Commission requests public Docketing and Service Branch.

comment on the draft analysis.

particularly interested in comments Backat Analyels .

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

To be viable. this proposal must allow submitted to the NRC as indicated under As required by 10 CFR 50.100, the for the orderly progression of operating the ADDRESSa8 heading. Commission has completed a backfit personnel through the ranks from Regulatory Flexibility Certincation analysis for the proposed rule.The . I 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 shif t. Specifically. I would like to know. Flexibility Act of 1980. 5 U.S.C.905(b).

the Commission certifies that this rule,if with the requirements rule willprovide a substantfa of this ase bposed from the perspective of current operating personnel, how accessible are promulgated. will not have a significant ABET accredited engineering programs? economicimpact upon a substantial in protection or the commontobublic iense andhealth and security at asafety If the PE or EIT options are selected. number of small entities. nis proposed cost which is justified by the substantial l which states allow registration and/or rule affects only the licensing and increue.De beklimelysis Mch operation of nuclear power plants. !t this determination le based reads as classification as an EIT without an ABET accredited degreef in hght of the also affects individuals licensed as g,gg,,,;

fact that states requite work experience operators at these plants.De ,- t e . ob/ecte.res to be registered as a PE and, with a non. companies that own these plants and t accredited engineering or related degree, the individual plant em loyees licensed jg. p ;4sedbe[, fills des 4g 1 o often require work experience to be to operate them do not allwithin the scope of the definition of"small De objective of the proposed ruleis classiSed as an EIT will state entitles" set for*h in the Regulatory to upgrade the operating, enginuring, registration boards grant credit for and accident management expertise Flexibility Act or the Small Business operating e perience as" acceptable Provided on shift by combining both Size Standards set out in regulations professions experience . . . of a grade engineering expertise and operating and character indicating that the issued by the SmallBusiness  ;

Administration in 13 CFR Part 121. Since experience in the senior operator or ahlft applicant may be competent to practice these companies are dominant in their supervisor functions.

engineering"? If credit is granted for 2. Generoldescription of the octivity service areas, this proposed rule does operating experience does this not fall within the purview of the Act. that would be rencited by the licensee experience have to be acquired after Howevet. beceuse thete mey be now or opplicant in order to complete the '

tecetving a degrut or in the future small entities which will bockfit.

I will also be interested in comments provide !! censed operators to nuclear De proposed rule, under Alternative in response to Questions 4.5 and 6 of 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 Environmental 1mpact-Categorical to how the regulations will affect them nuclear power reactor, after [4 years Exclusion and how the regulations may be tiered following the effective date of the rule).

or otherwise modified toimpose less to have a bachelor's dsgree in The NRC has determined that this proposed regulation is the type of action stringent requirements on them while engineering. engineerin6 technology, or described in categorical exclusion to still adequately protecting the public the physical sciences fron an accredited CR 51.22(c)(1). Therefore, neither an health and safety. Those small entities university or college. Appreants with environmental impset statement nor an which offer comments on how the other bachelor's degrees frt.m an environmental assessment has been regulations could be modified to take accredited institution, or fron a foreign into account the differing needs of small college or university, would bi prepared for this proposed regulation.

entities should specifically discuss the considered on a case by caselasts if Paperwork Reduction Act Statement following items: the utility (licensee) certifies that the

%is proposed rule does not contain a 1.ne size of their business and how the applicant has demonstrated enghteering new or amended information collection proposed regulations would iesult in a expertise and high potential for the SO requirement subject to the paperwork significant economic burden upon them as position. The Commission does not want

. . .. . . . . . . . . . ...........a

- Federal Register / Vol. 53, Ns. 250 / Thursday December 29, 1988 / Proposed Rules '52723 to prevent individuals with excellent power nuclear reactors such as research operators must have sufficient

. engineering experience, but with and test reactors. Exemptions to the one understandmg of basic enginwring nontechnical degrees, from becoming supervisor per control room principles, and detailed knowledge of sos; however, degree equivalency will requirement, may be permitted, on a nuclest 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 ineutution in the United each other. Each shift supervisor, after training sesalons. 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 -

apply only to applicants for a SO license educational credentials: A bachelor's professional growth since they will have to operate a nuclear power reactor. degree from a program accredited by the the qualificadons needed to advance to people who hold SOlicenses 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 en would be exempt from the degree engineer license issued by a state improvement in plant safety as sos or requirement. Those persons who bold a government: or, a bachelor's degree and shift supervisors migrate upward into senior operator license on [4 years an Engineer in.Tralning (EIT) certificate plant management although this following the effective date of the rule) that indicates one has pas 6ed 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 methority.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 shift supervisor.The bachelor's degree 4.pbtentia/impoet on radiological reactors such as research and test reactors. IJcensed reactor operator with the EIT would not necessarily have eXPosum offacility employees.

(ROs) would not be r2 quired 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 - significant change in the radiological require one year of " hot"(i.e. as an RO and experience criteria for exposure of facliity employees due to  !

at greater than 20 percent power) and at administration of the EIT,He 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 'or a SO license.

• bot" and et least 3 years total operating probability and consequences of an Special provisions would be proposed to experience for each shift supervisor or oc Jent and the subsequent reduction accommodate those applican's from e@r manager. Special provisions ir posure. ..

facilities that are unable to operate wuld be proposed to accommodate e Insfollotion andcontinuing 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 the cost offocility downtime or the cost Alternative 1 would only apply to power Power- ofconstruction de/oy.

reactor licensees indirectly. There s.Pbtentio/changein the risk to the One of the questions posedits the May would be no modification of or addition publicfmnt the occidento/offsit' 30,1986 ANPRM. relative to Alternative to the organization, i.e. administrative ir/cose ofrodioactwa material. 1.concemed 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 public as a sult f the to a e at is, amendment would be to the utilities *

{sult of this proposed amendment Thec estimates ceiv d ran ed from on the probability and consequences of 88I P -

1. the person to whom the 80s sport scenarios f:t achieving the desired an accide nt, and the t.hange in the ab i end co seq n e of 8 '

e nu tEo$ Sos per shift would not [,8,

, g mirb's

3. the' total number of operators per shift the SO to have a bachelor's degree or individuals with degrees and passing w ould not chanse; the shift supervisor to have enhanced them through the normal utility training

4. the tre ming requirements, written educational credentists is not known. programs to taking ROs and sending en emiwiens and operatir:s tests for e SO The Commission believes that requiring them to college while either paying them would not change: and degrees for sos or enhar2ced at overtime rates or hiring replacement

6. the tasks performed by a SO wou4 act ROs. A utility could also implement an educational credentials for shift

" "8 supervisors will contribute to the goal of onslie college degree program for its However, the power reactorliensees having sos or shift supervisors siho operators, for example,a program would have to get new sos f*.,m a group have operational experience and currently being run for an operating of individuals who already have technical and academic knowledje that plant costs 3250.000 per year to educate appropriate degrees or else prsvide the should improve their performamot as 60 people. The vge of costs of such an educa tional opportunity for thec own operators and possibly open cart er onsite progrt.n are estimated to very employees to obtain a degree. paths from which they may have been from $250.000 to $480.000 per year. Th a The proposed rule, under Alternative excluded in the past. The sos wl:h cost to the utilities of Alternative 2

2. would require a separate shift deg.Hs or shift supervisors with would be less since there would be supervisor for each con' trol room who is enhanced educational credentials fewer shift supervisors to train, responsible for overall operation of all should be able to respond betwr io off it is clear that there are numerous fueled units operated by the control normal incidents. While there will be methods that can be used toimplement room at all times there is fuelin any of increased training to cover accidest the proposed rule with an extreme range the units.The requirement would only conditions, training alone la not of costs depending on the method apply to power reactor licensees:it sufficient. It is irrpossible to cover every adopted. It would be a utility's choice as would not apply to licensees for non- eventuality durittg training.The to which method to adopt, taking into

! Federal Register / Vd. 63 No. 250 / Thursday. December 29. 1988 / Proposed Rults

• 52734

, account the various cost and personnel 8. De potentialimpoet of differences under we. lets$ es Stat. sea, as asunded g conalderations. In facility type, design or age on the ULC.33M(0)>

e. Thepotent/of safetyimpact of relevoncyandpmeticalityof the 2. In i 55.4. a new definition la added l changes in plant or operational proposed backfit. in alphabetical order to read as follows: l costplexity, including the efect on other ne proposed rule only applies to SO ,

pmposed and existing ngulatory applicants for operation of a nuclear I**^********. i l requirements. power reactor or to shift supervisors. it nere would be no changes in the does not apply to 80 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 impact related reactors such as research and test United States which has been approved to them. However, them would be an reactors. .

by a regional accmditing body.

effect on the guidance provided b De facility type, design or age should * * * *

• 1 Regulatory Guide 14. Relative to have no relevancy to theimpact or 3. In i S&.3L a new paragraph (e)la l Altemative 1. the guidance in practicality of the propowd backfit. For added to read as follows:

- Regulatory Guide 1A allows an Altemative 1. the depee to which each applicant for a SO license with a degree utility licensee has already implemented IouI hw to app %

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

.. needs to be as a reactor operator.This implemented such a program will clearly operatorlicense to to a nuclear would have to be revised if Altemative be less affected by the proposed backfit power reactor, after years following i is adopted since the proposed than would those facilities that have the effectM sie of e 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 physkal 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 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 <!egrees 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 g. whether theproposedbackfit is university, will be considered on a case.

be nuclear power experience.nis interim orfinoland,ifinterim, the by. case basis if the reactor plant would have to be revised sinceitis / justification for laaposity the proposed licensee es-tifies that the applicant has inconsistent with the proposed backfit on an intarim basis, demonstrated engineering expertise and amendment which implies that an The proposed rule, when made high potential foi the senior operator applicant for a RO license with a degme 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, paragrapha (e)(1) and 19)(2) of this power plant experience. Finally. mction, after [4 years following the position C.1.d of the Regulator) Mda Alternative 1-Requirements for Sanlo' effective date of the rule), each would have to be revised to indice Operators applicant for a senior operator license that a bachelor's degree is the minimum IJat of Subjectsla la CFR Part gg must have at least three years of c ni ste a h ool Manpower training programs, Nuclear p T ,7 ,[ ,",",*y , j , 7 , M,,"

. diploma. Relative to Alternative 3, Power plants and reactors, Penalty, must be as alicensed controlroom curnnt guidance in Regulatory Guide Reporting and recordkeeping operator for a nuclear power reactor .

1 A Revision 2, April 1987 requirements. .

operating at greater than twenty percent

Qualification and Training of Personnel For the reasons set outin 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 diploma.This would have to be revised, the Energy Reorganization Act of1974, seeks the license. An authorized if Alternative 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 propoting to adopt the following will verify that the requirements of this .

experience required to become a shift amendments to 10 CFR Part 55. I paragraph have been met as a part of supervisor (i.e.,3 years experience with certifying the applicant's qualificauons  !

PART 55--OPERATORS' UCENSES 1 vear as a RO). pursvant to paragraph (a)(4) of this 7 The estimatedresource burden in 1.The authority citation for Part 55 section. Any person holding a senior 2he NRCassociated with thepmposed continues to read as follows: operstor license on (4 yes're following bocAffond the ovoilab//ity ofsuch Authority Sece.107,161.182. 08 Stat 939, the effective date of the rule Msoqs. 948. 953. as amended, sec. 234. 83 Stat. 444 as from the requirement ioa heve) is exempt It is ar,1cipated that there will be amended (42 US C. 2137,2201,2232,2282): bachelor's degree.

relstivsly ainor impact on NRC staff oces. 201, as amended. 202. 88 Stat.1242, as (t) For each applicant from a facility resources as a result of implementing amended.1244 (42 US.C. 5841. 5842). that has not completed preoperational the proposed xule. For Altemative 1, Secuons 55.41. 55 43. 55 45, and 55.59 also testing and an initial startup test there may be shne increase in the issued under sec. 306. Pub. L 97-425. 96 Stat. program as described in its Final Safety number of applidtions to process and 2262 (42 US C.10226). Secuon $5.61 also Analysis Report, as amented and tests to administei, because of the issued under sece.186.187,68 Stat. 955 (42 approved by the Commission, and has attempts rf current ROs to become sos $,f, 2,'s of sec. 223. es Stat.osa, as not W Mn licensd to operak at prior to the cut.oif date, but this should amended (42 US.C. 22731: ll 55.3 ss21, power, the Commission may approve not cause a significant impact on the 55.49, and 55.53 are issued under sec. teil. ee alternatives that provide emperience NRC staff. No new resource Siat. 94o. as smanded [42 US c. 2201(11); and equivalent to operation at twenty requirements are expected. Il 55r ' 3.23. 85.25. and 65.53(f) are lesued percent power.

h________-_______________ _

• . Fed:ral Register / Vol. 53. No. 250 / Thursday Dec2mber 29,1988 / Propossd Rules $2725

. (2) For each applicant from a facility and (c). so 44 so 46. 80 48. 50.54, and so.ao(s) plant that has not completed that has (i) completed preoperational are issued under sec.1 stb. es Stat, esa es preoperational testing and an initial amended (42 U.S.C 2aot(b)); i e so.to(b) and startup test p*ogram as described in its testing as described in its Final Safety '" 8' '

Analysis Report. as amended and [Iyg *"d, gyfd 42 C $1 d Final Safety Analysis Report, as approved by the Commission. and (ii)is Ig 50 e,224). 50Je(b) 270. m71. E72, amended and approved by the in an extended shutdown which m73, and 50.re are leeued under see. teio, se Commission, ano has not yet been precludes operation at greater than stat. eso, as amended (42 U.S.C 2201(o)). licensed to operate at power, the twenty percent power.the Commission Commission may approve alternatives may process the application and may admiruster the wntten examination and lai50.$4 ed W Qm h a aph

)i k that provide experience equivalent to operation at twenty percent power.

operating test required by ll 55.43 and e h(m)(2) d gg 55.45 of this part, but may not issue the {2 Deted at Rockville. Maryland this 23rd day license until the required evidence of of December. tees, I 80.54 Condhoons of Boonees.

operation at greater than twenty percent . * * *

• For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

power is supplied- (m) * *

• lehn C Hoyle.

Alternative S-Requirements for (2) Notwithstanding any other Actint Seestory/prtheCommission.

Supervisors provisions of this section, licensees of PR Doc. 29993 Filed 12-2H8. E45 arn)

IJat of Subjectsin to CFR Part 50 f,"jh' r qNhn Antitrust. Classified information. Fire (i) * *

• protection. Incorporation by reference. (ii)(A) For single unit sites or multiple unit sites with one control room, the DEPARTtfENT OF TRANSPORTATION Intergovernmental relations. Nuclear power plants and reactors. penalty, licensee shan have at its site a person - Federal Aviation Administration Radiation protection. Reactor siting holding a senior operator license for all enteria. Reporting and recordkeeping fueled units at the site who is assigned 14 CPR Part fg requirements. responsibility for everall plant operation For the reasons set outin the at all times there is fuelin any unit. (Airspese Doaket No. 86-AEA-4) 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 shall Proposed Alteration of Restricted Energy Reorganization Act of1974. have at its site a person for each control Area R-4401 Fort A.P.HIII, VA as amended. and a U.S.C. 653, the NRC room who: 9.'ds a senior operator AemectFederal Aviation is proposing to adopt the following IIcense for all fueled units operated by amendments to 10 CFR part 50. the control room; and is responsible for Administradon FAA). DOT.

overall operation of these units at ay Acticec Notice of proposed rulemaking.

PART 50-DOMESTIC LICEN$ LNG 0F times there is fuelin any of them. nonce pmpom k alter PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION Exemptions may be considered on a the boundaries and change the FACILITIES case-by case basis taking into account controlling agency for Restricted Area 1.The authority citation for part 50 the physicalIocation of the control R-4801 Fort A.P. Hill VA.The s

continues to read as follows: Departmentof the Armyhasrequested er H p foH W b "" '" #I'"'"I

• U Authority: Sece.102.103.1R 105.101.182 effective date of the rule), each reon l ta3 tea. too, se Stot. 936,937, est Ms. 853, ' accommodate additional training described in paragrepha (m)(2)(li)(A) 954,955,956. es amended. sec. 234. 83 Stat. requirements.In addition, the p posed 1244, as amended (42 US.C 2132. 2133. 21H. and (m)(2)(ti)(B) of this section must action would revise the assigne 2135. 2201. 2232. 2233. 2236. 2239. 22a21: seca.

have one or more of the following c " trolling '8'**Y' 2o1, es amended. 202,206. 88 Stat.1242. as educational credentials: A bachelor's amended.1244.1246 (42 US.C seat. sa42. degree from a program accredited by the OAfts: Comments must be received on )

Sa46). Accreditation Board for Engineering and or beim Febmary 13.198e. l Section 50.7 eleo issued under Pub.1 95- Technology (ABET); a professional ADonsases: Send comments on the e 8 (gMo s2 e,t; n .' 1 a5.

engineer government; license or, a issued bachelor's by a state degree and proposal in triplicate to: Director. FAA.

EasternRegion. Attention: Manager. Air  ;

es Stat. 936. ess, a, amended (42 USC 2131.

en Engineer.in Training (EIT) certificate Traffic Division. Docket No. 86-AEA-4.  !

22351: em.102. Pub. l.91-190. 83 Stat. 853 (42 US C 4332). Sections 50.23,50.35. 50.55, and that indicates one has passed an Federal Aviation Administration,pK 50.56 also issued under sec.185.48 Stat.955 examination administered by a state or International Airport.The Fitzgerald (42 U.S C 2235). Sections 50.33a, sc.55a and other recognized authority. Federal Building. Jamaica. NY 11430.

Appendim Q also issued under sec.102. Pub. (D) Except as noted below, after [4 The officialdocket may be examined 2 C years fo!!owing the effective date of the in the Rules Docket, weekdays, excr pt (81*190, g,a3 ste ,,.

rule), eoch person described in Federal holidays, between 8:30 a.m. and sec. 2o4. se Stat.1245 (42 US.C 5H4) 5:00 p.m.The FAA Rules Dociret is Sectione 50.58. 50 91, and 50.82 also issued - paragraphs (m)(2)(ii)(A) and (m)(2)(ii)(B) ,

under Pub. L 97-415. 90 Stat. 2073 (42 US.C of this section must have at least three locatedin the Office of the Chief d Counsel Room 916.800 Independence I 2239). Section 50.78 also issued under sec. years of operating experience at a 122. 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C 2152). Sectiona nuclear power plant. of which one year's Avenue, SW., Washington. DC.

50 so-50 81 also issued under sec.164. 66 Stat. experience must be as a licensed control An informal docket may also be 954 ae amended (42 U.S.C 2234) Section room operator for a nuclest power examined during normal business hours j reactor operating at greater than twenty at the office of the Regional AirTraffic  !

e en (42 ). A p nd x e Division.

leeued under sec.187, os Stet. 955 (42 U.S.C Percent power. At least six months of '

the nuclear power plant experience must rom FURTwan twomseAM00d CONTACT 223r).

For the purposes of sec. 223. es Stat. a$s, as be at the plant for which the person has paul Callant. Altspace Branch (ATO-amended (42 U.S.C. 2273): ll 301ola). (bl. responsibility. For each person at a 240). Altspace-Rules and Aeronautical

[," .

l L

Honorable Sam Gejdenson 3 Finally, I would emphasize that the concerns expressed by your constituent, Mr. LaFleur, 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.

l Sincerely, i

Original signed oy 1 Victor Stello, Jr. -!

Victor Stello, Jr.

Executive Director for Operations

Enclosure:

Federal Register notice Distribution: [ HONORABLE SAM GEJDENSON]

subj-circ-chron RDB Reading Files ESBeckjord  :

TPSpeis DFRoss BMorris ZRosztoczy. .

Wlahs  !

.1Telford MFleishman SECY CRC-89-0224 M8ridgers, E00-4331 EDO Reading TMurley, HRR PDorm, RES-890114  ;

I OCA l

l 1

)

Offc: RD RA:RES DbhRbES j Hame: Telford:jp ZRosztoczy  !

Date: 3$89 ,

Offc: DRA:RE DD RI:RES S E OCA Name: BMorris TPS is ckjord V tello JBradburne Date: E B'g/89 /J 3/AT/89 3$/89- 3/p'/89 9 3@FICIALRECOR W COPY

_ - - _ _ _ - - __ I]