August 11, 2009 

MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick D. Brown, Director 

 Division of Inspection and Regional Support (DIRS) 

 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 

FROM: John Munro, Acting Chief /RA/

 Operator Licensing and Human Performance Branch (IOLB) 

 Division of Inspection and Regional Support 

 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 

SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF THE JULY 13, 2009, PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE 

 INSTITUTE OF NUCLEAR POWER OPERATIONS TO DISCUSS 

 GUIDELINES FOR INITIAL TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION OF 

 LICENSED OPERATORS 

On July 13, 2009, the DIRS staff conducted a public meeting with the Institute of Nuclear Power 

Operations (INPO) at NRC Headquarters in Rockville, Maryland. INPO had requested the 

meeting to review a revision to the licensed operator eligibility criteria that are described in 

ACAD-09-001 (formerly ACAD-00-003), “Guidelines for Initial Training and Qualification of 

Licensed Operators,” a document published by the National Academy for Nuclear Training. A 

list of meeting attendees is enclosed. 

The discussion focused on the enclosed draft revision of the flowcharts used by facility 

licensees to determine whether reactor operator (RO) and direct senior reactor operator (SRO) 

candidates are eligible to enter the license training program. The staff generally supported 

INPO’s intent to combine the flowcharts for degreed plant staff engineers (Figure 2-3) with that 

for degreed supervisors and non-licensed operators (Figure 2-4). The staff noted that the 

combined flowchart limits the academic equivalence provision to 18 months, which exceeds the 

1-year limit in Regulatory Guide 1.8, Revision 3, “Qualification and Training of Personnel for 

Nuclear Power Plants,” but is a reduction from the 2-year limit in current Figure 2-3, and agreed 

to provide feedback if management does not support the change. The staff also provided 

feedback on the RO Eligibility flowchart (Figure 2-1) and some of the terminology used in the 

flowcharts (e.g., comparable facility, degree equivalence, and experience) to enhance 

consistency with other guidance documents such as ANSI/ANS-3.1, “American National 

Standard for Selection, Qualification, and Training of Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants,” 

which will also be undergoing revision. 

No final positions were taken during the meeting. INPO is considering the staff’s input and may 

request another meeting prior to finalizing its ACAD revision. 

Please let me know if you have any questions. 

Enclosures: As stated 

CONTACT: Sean Currie, NRR/DIRS/IOLB 

301-415-3967 
MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick D. Brown, Director 

 Division of Inspection and Regional Support (DIRS) 

 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 

FROM: John Munro, Acting Chief /RA/

 Operator Licensing and Human Performance Branch (IOLB) 

 Division of Inspection and Regional Support 

 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 

SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF THE JULY 13, 2009, PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE 

 INSTITUTE OF NUCLEAR POWER OPERATIONS TO DISCUSS 

 GUIDELINES FOR INITIAL TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION OF 

 LICENSED OPERATORS 

On July 13, 2009, the DIRS staff conducted a public meeting with the Institute of Nuclear Power 

Operations (INPO) at NRC Headquarters in Rockville, Maryland. INPO had requested the 

meeting to review a revision to the licensed operator eligibility criteria that are described in 

ACAD-09-001 (formerly ACAD-00-003), “Guidelines for Initial Training and Qualification of 

Licensed Operators,” a document published by the National Academy for Nuclear Training. A 

list of meeting attendees is enclosed. 

The discussion focused on the enclosed draft revision of the flowcharts used by facility 

licensees to determine whether reactor operator (RO) and direct senior reactor operator (SRO) 

candidates are eligible to enter the license training program. The staff generally supported 

INPO’s intent to combine the flowcharts for degreed plant staff engineers (Figure 2-3) with that 

for degreed supervisors and non-licensed operators (Figure 2-4). The staff noted that the 

combined flowchart limits the academic equivalence provision to 18 months, which exceeds the 

1-year limit in Regulatory Guide 1.8, Revision 3, “Qualification and Training of Personnel for 

Nuclear Power Plants,” but is a reduction from the 2-year limit in current Figure 2-3, and agreed 

to provide feedback if management does not support the change. The staff also provided 

feedback on the RO Eligibility flowchart (Figure 2-1) and some of the terminology used in the 

flowcharts (e.g., comparable facility, degree equivalence, and experience) to enhance 

consistency with other guidance documents such as ANSI/ANS-3.1, “American National 

Standard for Selection, Qualification, and Training of Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants,” 

which will also be undergoing revision. 

No final positions were taken during the meeting. INPO is considering the staff’s input and may 

request another meeting prior to finalizing its ACAD revision. 

Please let me know if you have any questions. 

Enclosures: As stated 

CONTACT: Sean Currie, NRR/DIRS/IOLB 

301-415-3967 

DISTRIBUTION:

See next page 

ADAMS Accession No. ML092151007 

OFFICE DIRS/IOLB DIRS/IOLB DD:DIRS

NAME SCurrie JMunro MCheok 

DATE 8/ 07/09 8/07 /09 8/11 /09 

 Official Record Copy
DISTRIBUTION:

Public 

COLP Reading File 

IOLB Reading File 

RidsNroDcip 

RidsNroDcipColp 

RidsEDOMailCenter 

RidsNrrAdro 

RidsNrrDirs 

RidsNrrDirsIolb 

SHansell, RI 

MWidmann, RII 

HPeterson, RIII 

RLantz, RIV 

RPelton, NRO 
ATTENDEES 

INPO-NRC Public Meeting, July 13, 2009 

Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 

Kent Hamlin 

Mike Llewellyn 

Industry (Operator Licensing Focus Group) 

Gregg Ludlam 

Chuck Sizemore 

Russell Smith 

ANS 

Timothy Dennis 

Areva 

Tom Graham 

Wolf Creek 

Mona Gier* 

Diane Smith* 

Curtiss-Wright 

Deanne Raleigh* 

South Texas 

Michael DeFrees* 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Michael Cheok 

John Munro 

Sam Hansell* 

Malcolm Widmann* 

Hironori Peterson* 

Ryan Lantz 

Fred Guenther 

Rick Pelton 

Jim Kellum 

Tim Kolb 

Sean Currie 

* Via teleconference 

Enclosure 1 
Definitions to be incorporated in ACAD 09-01 future revision:

Power Plant Experience -- Applicable work performed in fossil-fueled or nuclear fueled electric 

power production plant during preoperational, startup testing, or operational activities. 

Responsible Nuclear Power Plant Experience -- Responsible nuclear power plant experience 

for a Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) is having actively performed as a designated licensed 

nuclear control room operator (RO) or as power plant staff (described below) involved in the 

day-to-day activities at a commercial nuclear power plant facility. 

Power Plant Staff – A manager, supervisor, or staff engineer responsible for the coordination 

and implementation of any of the following at the current or a comparable (BWR/PWR) 

commercial nuclear power plant: 

• plant equipment controls, 

• integrated operations procedures, 

• operations, 

• maintenance, 

• radiological support, 

• reviews of plant modifications 

• maintenance planning for plant systems 

• work controls 

• chemistry 

• training 

Total Military Experience -- the start date for calculating total military experience is that date 

when military nuclear power plant-related initial training is completed. For United States Navy 

personnel, this is the date that the candidate graduates from nuclear power school prototype 

training. For other military personnel, similar dates for candidate training completion are used 

for calculation. End dates are calculated using military discharge dates or dates the candidate 

transferred to a non-nuclear power plant military position. 

Qualified Non-licensed Operator -- Qualified for all power block and safety systems operation 

at the current or a comparable (BWR/PWR) facility. 

Comparable (BWR/PWR) Facility – prior experience accepted for work at a commercial power 

reactor of either BWR or PWR design regardless of vendor or vintage within that reactor design 

type. 

Enclosure 2 
Figure 2-1: Reactor Operator Eligibility

NO

Does candidate have a high school diploma or equivalent? 

POWER PLANT EXPERIENCE: 

Commercial experience (months): 

 Nuclear _____ months 

 Fossil _____ months 

Total military experience (months)

2 _____ months 

Academic Equivalence: (18 months max credit) _____ months 

for candidates with BS degree or equivalent in engineering, engineering 

technology, or related sciences; or a professional engineer license 

 - OR - 

Academic Equivalence: (9 months max credit) _____ months 

for candidates with AS degree or equivalent in engineering, engineering 

technology, or related sciences 

TOTAL power plant experience _____ months

Is total power plant experience greater than 36 months?

Eligible for RO Training Not Eligible for RO Training

Does candidate have at least 6 months performing plant operational duties as a nonlicensed 

operator on site? (qualified for all power block and safety systems operational duties)

- OR - 

Does candidate have at least 12 months performing plant operational duties as a nonlicensed 

operator at a comparable (BWR/PWR) facility? (qualified for all power block and safety systems 

operational duties)

- OR - 

Does candidate have at least 6 months performing plant operational duties as a licensed reactor 

operator at a comparable (BWR/PWR) facility? 

- OR - 

Does candidate have at least 24 months in position equivalent to the reactor operator position at a 

military reactor? (qualified to manipulate or direct the manipulation of control rods)

• Reactor Operator 

• Engineering Officer of the Watch / Propulsion Plant Watch Officer 

• Engineering Watch Supervisor / Propulsion Plant Watch Supervisor 

NO

YES 

YES 

NO

YES NO

YES 

Does candidate have at least 6 months at the station for which the candidate 

will seek a license? 
NOTES: 

1. This flowchart aligns with direct SRO flowchart in that it allows 18 months academic 

credit towards the 36 month Power Plant Experience requirement for RO candidates 

with BS degree or equivalent in engineering, engineering technology, or related 

sciences; or a professional engineer license. 

2. This flowchart allows 9 months academic credit towards the 36 month Power Plant 

Experience requirement for RO candidates with AS degree or equivalent in engineering, 

engineering technology, or related sciences. 

3. The 6-months onsite requirement for the RO candidate matches that required for the 

SRO candidate. This is consistent with ANS 3.1 which requires 6-months onsite for the 

RO candidate. 

4. This flowchart allows candidates (1) with military ≥24 months as an RO or direct 

supervisor of an RO - or – (2) those candidates qualified for ≥12 months as an NLO at a 

comparable facility - or – (3) those candidates with a prior RO license for ≥6 months at a 

comparable facility, to NOT have to qualify as an NLO at the facility for which RO license 

is sought. These candidates would be allowed to enter RO program once they meet the 

6 months onsite requirement. 

5. A BS degree candidate hired upon graduation would need 18 months additional power 

plant experience (to get to 36 months required) and, during that 18-month period, would 

need to qualify and spend at least 6 months as a qualified NLO. 

6. An AS-degree candidate hired upon graduation would need 27 months additional power 

plant experience (to get to the 36 months required) and during that 27-month period, 

would need to qualify and spend at least 6 months as a qualified NLO. 
Figure 2-3 and Figure 2.4 Combined: 

Senior Reactor Operator Eligibility - Direct SRO for Degreed Personnel 

 

Does candidate have BS degree or equivalent in engineering, 

engineering technology, or related sciences; or does candidate have a 

professional engineer license? 

RESPONSIBLE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT EXPERIENCE:

Power Plant Staff: ____ months 

A manager, supervisor, or staff engineer responsible 

for the coordination and implementation of plant 

equipment controls, integrated operations procedures, 

operations, maintenance, radiological support, 

modifications, maintenance planning, work control, 

chemistry, or training at the current or a comparable 

(BWR/PWR) facility. 

Qualified Nonlicensed Operator: ____ months 

Qualified for all power block and safety systems 

operation at the current or a comparable (BWR/PWR) 

facility. 

Responsible Nuclear Power Plant Experience 

Total: ____ months 

Is Responsible Nuclear Power Plant Experience Total greater than 

18 months? 

Does candidate have at least 6 months at the station for which the 

candidate will seek a license? 

ELIGIBLE

FOR 

SRO TRAINING 

NOT ELIGIBLE

FOR 

SRO TRAINING 

NO 

NO 

YES 

YES 

YES 

NO 
NOTES: 

• This flowchart combines current Figure 2.3 and 2.4 flowcharts into one. 

• Changes word “physical” sciences to “related” sciences to align with ANS 3-1. 

• Power Plant Staff Experience definition more closely aligns with R.G. 1.8 definition of 

“Staff Engineer” with the exception that we are adding the “chemistry” and “training” 

functions to the list of eligibility. We have always included those two positions 

historically in our ACAD. Also, the chemistry position is recognized within this grouping 

in ANS.3-1. 

• Time required in position before becoming eligible for direct SRO in our current chart 2.3 

(for the engineer enrolled in the ESP accredited training program) would increase from 

12 months to 18 months. The new flowchart no longer ties staff engineer to enrollment 

in the accredited engineering training program. 

• Time required in position for Power Plant Staff personnel (managers, supervisors, and 

staff engineers) will recognize academic credit of 18 months for the specified BS degree, 

and thus will decrease from 36 months to 18 months (as compared with current chart 

2.4). 

• Flowchart would continue to require that all candidates have 6-months onsite before they 

enter class. 

• A college graduate with the specified BS degree hired upon graduation into a position 

covered under the definition of “Power Plant Staff” would be eligible to enter SRO 

training in 18 months onsite (would meet 6 months onsite within this period). 

• An experienced “Power Plant Staff” employee with the specified BS degree who is hired 

from another utility from a similar reactor type (BWR/PWR) and has 18 or more months 

in a “Power Plant Staff” position at the other utility would be eligible for SRO training 

after meeting the 6 months onsite criteria. If from a different reactor type – they must 

meet 18 months performing “Power Plant Staff” duties at the site before they are eligible 

for SRO training (would meet 6 months onsite within this period). 

• An experienced “Qualified NLO” employee with the specified BS degree who is hired 

from another utility from a similar reactor type (BWR/PWR) and has 18 or more as a 

“Qualified NLO” would be eligible for SRO training after meeting the 6 months onsite 

criteria. If from a different reactor type – they must meet 18 months performing “Power 

Plant Staff” duties (or may opt to qualify as an NLO and spend 18 months of “Qualified 

NLO” duties at the site) before they are eligible for SRO training (would meet 6 months 

onsite within this period). 

• An experienced employee with the specified BS degree who is hired from another utility 

from a similar reactor type (BWR/PWR) who has a combination of both “Power Plant 

Staff” time and “Qualified NLO” time that is equal to or greater than 18 months would be 

eligible for SRO training after meeting the 6 months onsite criteria. If from a different 

reactor type – they must meet 18 months performing “Power Plant Staff” duties or 

“Qualified NLO” duties at the site before he/she is eligible for SRO training (would meet 

6 months onsite within this period).