March 30, 2016 

MEMORANDUM TO: Michael Junge, Chief 

Human Performance, Operator Licensing 

 and ITAAC Branch 

Division of Construction Inspection 

 & Operational Programs 

Office of New Reactors 

FROM: Jim Kellum /RA/

Human Performance, Operator Licensing 

 and ITAAC Branch 

Division of Construction, Inspection 

 & Operational Programs 

Office of New Reactors 

SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF MARCH 2, 2016, PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE NUCLEAR 

ENERGY INSTITUTE OPERATOR LICENSING FOCUS GROUP FOR NEW 

REACTORS 

On March 2, 2016, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff held a category 2 public meeting with 

the NEI Operator Licensing Focus Group on New Reactor Operator Licensing at the NRC Headquarters in 

Rockville, MD. This meeting is typically held on a quarterly basis to discuss scheduling and ongoing issues 

and challenges to administering licensed operator examinations for new reactors. Enclosure 1 lists the 

attendees at the meeting. Enclosure 2 is the meeting agenda. 

The staff provided an update on the status of Revision 11 to NUREG-1021, Operator Licensing Examinations 

Standards for Power Reactor. He stated that Rev. 11 was issued for public comment on February 11, 2016, 

with a 45 day public comment period but that two additional changes resulting from the NRC’s Project AIM 

were made to the draft, that those changes will be published in the Federal Register, and that the public 

comment period would be extended until April 5, 2016. The targeted issue date for Revision 11 is the fall of 

2016, then, per 10 CFR 55.40, the revision does become effective for six months. He also stated there is 

going to be a Regulatory Information Conference session discussing the revision on March 9, 2016. 

Next, the meeting agenda offered an opportunity for the AP-1000 Owners Group (APOG) to provide an update 

from their monthly meeting and initiate discussion on topics from the APOG meeting. This segment of the 

meeting was prefaced by the NRC staff with the comment that there are several topics that are pre-decisional 

and as such the NRC staff would not be able to discuss information associated with those items. SCANA 

inquired about the approval status of the Vogtle Commission Approved Simulator (CAS) safety evaluation and 

exemptions being pursued by Vogtle for their operator licensing exam scheduled for April 2016. The staff 

stated that Vogtle’s CAS request was under review and that he could not share any information on exemptions 

or the safety evaluation and stated that the NUREG-1021 process would have to be used. He also stated that, 

in lieu of a PRS, facility licensees would need to have a Commission-approved simulation facility pursuant to 

the requirements of 10 CFR 55.46, in order to commence administration of the initial licensed operator exam. 

CONTACT: Jim Kellum, NRO/DCIP 

 (301) 415-5305
M. Junge - 2 - 

SCANA stated that they were planning to submit a CAS facility request in March 2016, similar to the Vogtle 

submittal, and that SCANA was trying to understand the exemption process and what will be needed. SCANA 

followed up by asking if there was a path forward, with or without exemptions, that the staff would be at liberty 

to discuss and explained that SCANA, in general, had less familiarity with the exemption process, including the 

types and levels of approval within the NRC and associated timelines. SCANA also stated that they were 

trying to get a sense of the time frame for exam planning purposes. The staff provided a high-level overview of 

the exemption process described in Part 55, citing 10 CFR 55.11, “Specific exemptions,” as the governing 

regulation and stated that the AP1000 operator licensing effort is a “first-of-a-kind” undertaking that has, and 

continues to evolve. It was emphasized that SCANA’s path forward, relative to the exemption process, should 

be informed by interaction between the staff and SCANA Nuclear Licensing and stated that there are no 

defined timelines for exemptions, but that we were expecting to know something soon about the Vogtle 

exemptions. It was noted that simple exemptions, like the one written to allow Rev 10 of NUREG-1021, since it 

had been less than six months since issue, to be used for the AP1000 exam preparation for a potential May 

2015 exam, took approximately three weeks. The Region II Operator Licensing Branch Chief affirmed that RII 

will be prepared to administer exams provided all the right pieces are in place and that he will not allow any 

exam to start unless everything is lined up, and also stated RII is working issues in parallel. 

SCANA asked if there are time limits for which exemptions are valid. The staff stated exemptions can have 

sunset provisions and that each exemption is only applicable to the licensee to whom it was granted and may 

or may not be the same between licensees. SCANA also asked if exemptions would impact the 398s 

(Licensed Operator Application Form) for the first class of applicants at VC Summer and the staff responded 

that they would. 

SCANA inquired about the continuing training program following an initial operator licensing exam and what 

the process would entail. The staff explained that the gap training and the continuing learning program 

concept, as originally envisioned, is not a plausible option because only one licensing exam is allowed to be 

administered for licensing purposes. Licensees will enter into a SAT-based licensed operator requalification 

program (LOR) and the RII operator licensing branch chief stated they would perform a 71111.11 inspection of 

the licensees SAT-based LOR Program prior to initial fuel load. 

SCANA asked if IP 41502, “Nuclear Power Plant Simulation Facilities,” inspection had to be completed prior to 

exam administration and was informed by the branch chiefs that IP 41502 does not have to be completed in its 

entirety prior to the exam. Performance testing satisfactorily conducted and inspected under the 41502 partial 

inspection conducted in the early 2015 is sufficient for exam administration. 

SCANA asked if it would be possible to meet the requirements of a PRS prior to actual completion of the 

integrated system validation (ISV) process, by fixing and retesting the high priority HEDs and then performing 

ANSI 3.5 testing. The NRC staff explained that the testing described by SCANA did not fully meet the type of 

testing performed under the ISV process and provided an example of what the differences might look like. The 

staff also provided additional insight into the DAC process relative to the SCANA question. The staff stated 

that the ISV process had to be completed including successful performance of ANSI 3.5 testing, in order to 

meet the requirements of a PRS. The staff stated the ITAAC has to be completed through the ISV for the 

design to be complete. SCANA asked if it would be acceptable to declare the design complete and therefore 

have a PRS prior to issuance of the licensee’s ITAAC closure letter(s), which can potentially add an additional 

6 months to the process, if the discrepancies identified in the ISV report were sufficiently addressed and all of 

the appropriate testing satisfactorily performed (i.e., ISV and ANSI 3.5 testing). The staff replied that would 

require further discussion. 

Southern raised the possibility of eliminating the STA position requirement at Vogtle Units 3 and 4, and 

inquired as to the best way for this to be accomplished. The staff replied that a license amendment request 

would need to be submitted for consideration to remove the STA requirement. 
M. Junge - 3 - 

It was noted that Charles Sawyer, who had been the NEI/APOG point of contact for many years, was retiring in 

March, 2016 and his replacement would be Richard Grumbir. 
M. Junge - 3 - 

It was noted that Charles Sawyer, who had been the NEI/APOG point of contact for many years, was retiring in 

March, 2016 and his replacement would be Richard Grumbir 

Enclosures: As stated 

1. NRC/APOG AP-1000 OWNERS GROUP 

 Meeting Attendees 

2. Agenda 

DISTRIBUTION: 

See next page 

ADAMS Accession Number: ML16081A463 NRO-001 

OFFICE DCIP/HOIB DCIP/HOIB 

NAME JKellum MJunge 

DATE 03/29/2015 03/30/2015 

 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 
DISTRIBUTION:

Region II Receptionist (hard copy) 

RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter 

RidsOgcMailCenter 

RidsEDOMailCenter 

RidsNroDcipColp 

RidsNroDcip 

RidsNroOd 

ADAMS/PUBLIC 

RidsOpaMailResource 

BSmith, RI 

DLew, RI 

DJackson. RI 

RLorson, RI 

AGody, RII 

MMiller, RII 

GMcCoy, RII 

EGuthrie, RII 

LDudes, RII 

ROlikowski, RIII 

MCheok, DCIP 

BAndersen, DCIP 

KO’Brien, RIII 

DRoberts, RIII 

MShuaibi, RIII 

JClark, RIV 

KKennedy, RIV 

VGaddy, RIV 

AVegel, RIV 

SRutledge, TTC 

SCochrum, TTC 

REgli, TTC 

Richard Grumbir <Rich@rsconsultgrp.com> 

 
Enclosure 1 

NRC/APOG AP-1000 OWNERS GROUP ON 

NEW REACTOR OPERATOR LICENSING 

MARCH 2, 2016 

Name Organization 

Gene Guthrie NRC / R-II 

Jim Kellum NRC / NRO 

Charles Sawyer Duke Energy 

Joe DeMarshall NRC / NRO 

Michael Junge NRC / NRO 

David Lavigne SGE&G 

Melinda Bogart GEH 

Frank Maciuska Westinghouse 

Terry McCool FPL 

Richard Browder Duke Energy 

Al Harris SCE & G 

John Austin SNC 

Paul Mothena SCANA 

Jason Weathersby SCANA 

Wes Sparkman SNC 

Greg Crosby SNC 

Andy Barbee SCANA 

Richard Grumbir APOG 

Mark Verbeck SNC 

April Rice SCE & G 

Paul Kallan NRC / NRO 

Steve Aiken INPO 

Tim Dennis Member of Public 

Guy Martin Member of Public 

Jana Bergman Curtiss-Wright 

Paul Pieringer NRC / NRO 

Lauren Kent NRC / NRO 

Scott Sloan NRC / NRR 

Rick Pelton NRC / NRO 

Christopher Whitfield SNC 

Scott Bauer NEI 

Leon Ray SNC 
Enclosure 2 

AGENDA FOR THE CATEGORY 2 PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE

NEI LICENSED OPERATOR FOCUS GROUP FOR NEW REACTORS 

 Wednesday, March 2, 2016 

12:30 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. 

 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Two White Flint Rm, TWFN-7A01 

11545Rockville Pike 

 Rockville, MD 20852 

Bridge Line Information: Phone: (877)883-6132, Passcode 42566 

TOPIC LEAD 

Introductions and opening remarks NRC 

Public input Public 

• NUREG-1021 Rev. 11 Update NRC 

• Update/discussion from monthly APOG meetings APOG

• Miscellaneous/Emergent topics NRC/APOG 

Public input Public 

Summary / Conclusion / Action item review NRC