![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Operator License Eligibility and Use of Simulation Facilities in Operator Licensing
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: July 3, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 128)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 41021-41029]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03jy00-37]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 55
RIN 3150-AG40
Operator License Eligibility and Use of Simulation Facilities in
Operator Licensing
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend
its regulations by allowing applicants for operator and senior operator
licenses to fulfill a portion of the experience prerequisites for
license eligibility by manipulating a plant-referenced simulator as an
alternative to use of the actual plant. The proposed rule would allow
applicants for operator and senior operator licenses to fulfill a
portion of the experience prerequisites by manipulating a plant-
referenced simulator as an alternative to use of the actual plant. In
addition, the proposed rule would remove current requirements for
certification of simulation facilities and routine submittal of
simulator performance test reports to the NRC for review. Also, the
proposed rule would revise the definitions of ``Performance testing,''
``Plant-referenced simulator,'' and ``Simulator facility.''
DATES: Submit comments by September 18, 2000. Comments received after
this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the
Commission is able to assure consideration only for comments received
on or before this date.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, Mail Stop O-16C1. Deliver written
comments to One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays.
You may also provide comments via the NRC's interactive rulemaking
website through the NRC home page (http://www.nrc.gov). This site
provides the capability to upload comments as files (any format), if
your web browser supports that function. For information about the
interactive rulemaking website, contact Ms. Carol Gallagher, (301) 415-
5905 (e-mail: cag@nrc.gov). Copies of any comments received and certain
documents related to this rulemaking may be examined at the NRC Public
Document Room, 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC. These
same documents may be viewed and downloaded electronically via the
rulemaking website.
Documents created or received at the NRC after April 1, 2000, are
also available electronically at the NRC's Public Electronic Reading
room on the internet at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html. From
this site, the public can gain entry into the NRC's Agency Document
Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image
files of NRC's public documents. For more information, contact the NRC
Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 202-634-3273 or toll-free
at 1-800-397-4209, or by e-mail at pdr@nrc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Glenn Tracey, Operator Licensing,
Human Performance and Plant Support Branch, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001; telephone: (301) 415-1031; or by Internet electronic mail to
gmt@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
Section 107 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C.
2137), requires the NRC to prescribe uniform conditions for licensing
individuals as operators of production and utilization facilities to
determine the qualifications
[[Page 41022]]
of these individuals, and to issue licenses to these individuals. The
regulations implementing these requirements are set out in Part 55 of
Title 10, Chapter 1, of the Code of Federal Regulations. To assist
licensees and others, the Commission has issued regulatory guides and
generic letters that provide guidance on acceptable methods of meeting
these regulatory requirements.
The Commission has become increasingly aware of the need to update
its operator licensing regulations and related regulatory guides. These
revisions are needed to clarify the extent to which applicants for
operator and senior operator licenses may fulfill a portion of the
experience prerequisites for license eligibility with the performance
of five significant control manipulations on a plant-referenced
simulator as an alternative to use of the actual plant, and to remove
current requirements for certification of simulation facilities and
routine submittal of simulator performance test reports to the NRC for
review. The proposed rule changes would improve the operator licensing
process. If adopted, these revisions would achieve the following
objectives: (1) Allow applicants for operator and senior operator
licenses to fulfill a portion of the experience prerequisites by
performing five significant control manipulations on a plant-referenced
simulator and/or the actual plant facility for which a license is
sought; (2) maintain training integrity through a requirement that
ensures adequate simulator replication of the plant and demonstrated
fidelity for those simulators used to provide control manipulation
experience; (3) remove current requirements for certification of
simulation facilities; (4) eliminate routine submittal of simulator
performance test reports to the NRC for review; and (5) maintain safety
through NRC reviews to ensure simulator suitability for providing
effective training in performance assessment of operator license
applicants.
Background
On March 25, 1987 (52 FR 9453), the Commission published a final
rule in the Federal Register that amended 10 CFR Part 55 and became
effective May 26, 1987. The amendment requires that an applicant
successfully manipulate the controls of the facility for which a
license is sought. Five significant control manipulations must be
performed which affect reactivity or power level. The final rule also
included requirements for the use of simulators in the qualification
and requalification of nuclear power plant operators, and required
certification of simulation facilities.
Discussion of Proposed Rule Changes
Subpart A--Revision of Sec. 55.4, Definitions
Three definitions would be revised. The definition of ``Performance
testing,'' which is testing conducted to verify a simulation facility's
performance as compared to actual or predicted reference plant
performance, would be revised in a manner that would not impose
additional requirements on licensees, to comport with the definition
for such testing in the most recent edition of the industry standard
for use of nuclear plant simulators in operator training and
examination (ANSI/ANS-3.5-1998). The definition of a ``Plant-referenced
simulator,'' which is a simulator modeling the systems of the reference
plant, would be revised to reference within the definition existing
simulator requirements in Part 55, and the proposed revision allowing
completion of certain on-the-job training prerequisites for license
applicant eligibility on the simulator. The definition of ``Simulation
facility,'' which describes the components that alone, or in
combination, can be used for partial conduct of operating tests, would
be revised to include part-task and limited-scope simulator devices
because these devices are now referenced in the most recent edition of
ANSI/ANS-3.5, and a request could be received for Commission approval
of their use.
Conforming Changes to Sec. 55.8 Information Collection Requirements:
OMB Approval
As a result of the previously described proposed changes to
Sec. 55.45(b) that eliminate the simulator certification requirement, a
conforming change to Sec. 55.8(c)(3) would delete Form 474,
``Simulation Facility Certification,'' OMB approval No. 3150-0138, as
currently referred to Sec. 55.45(b)(1)(iii) and Sec. 55.45(b)(3)(iii).
Section 55.8(c)(4) would be deleted because its requirements have
been incorporated into this 10 CFR part.
Subpart D--Revision of Sec. 55.31 To Allow Performance of Control
Manipulations on the Plant-Referenced Simulator
Section 55.31(a)(5), currently requires that five significant
control manipulations that affect reactivity or power level be
performed on the actual plant would be revised to allow those
manipulations to be performed either on a plant-referenced simulator or
on the actual plant, at the facility licensee's discretion. Eligibility
for an operator license encompasses education, training, and experience
factors. Reactivity manipulations are an operating experience
requirement addressed by on-the-job training (OJT). Use of a plant-
referenced simulator of appropriate fidelity for these manipulations is
appropriate based upon improvements in simulator technology and 13
years of successful experience in using plant-specific simulation
facilities since the 1987 final rule. Modern plant-referenced
simulation facilities in operation today are providing accurate and
validated operator training and examination scenarios that convey
realism in reactivity manipulations, other normal and abnormal
procedure operations, complex plant operations, and emergency operating
procedure evolutions, including simultaneous task management and
faulted conditions. The proposed rule change would allow part of the
plant operating experience requirement for license eligibility to be
fully satisfied in a timely manner within the facility's accredited
training program without impacting operation of the actual plant.
The requirement of Sec. 55.31(a)(4) to complete the facility
licensee's program of education, experience, and OJT as a prerequisite
of license eligibility would not be affected by the proposed rule
change. Performance of control manipulations that affect reactivity or
power level constitutes only a small part of an applicant's
preparedness to perform licensed duties and would continue to be
implemented as a subset of OJT. If adopted, the proposed rule would
alternatively allow use of the actual plant and/or the plant-referenced
simulator for control manipulations, thus broadening the range of
options available to facility licensees for selecting the most
advantageous training method.
Although facility licensees' simulation facilities are, for the
most part, state-of-the-art, the NRC has identified two areas of
concern with respect to considering a plant-referenced simulator
suitable for fulfilling the experience requirements of a license
applicant. First, recognizing that the simulator may differ to a degree
from the reference unit and to provide experience essentially
replicating that obtained from control manipulations on the plant,
reasonable measures should be taken to ensure that the simulated
reactor core, at least for the directly associated models such as those
for nuclear and thermal-hydraulic
[[Page 41023]]
characteristics, represents the actual reactor core that will exist in
the plant at the time the applicant is tested for a license. Second,
the performance of the nuclear and thermal-hydraulic characteristics
models must be tested to ensure that the simulator is capable of being
used to satisfy predetermined objectives without significant
performance discrepancies or deviation from the approved scenario
sequence. To address these concerns and thereby maintain plant safety,
the proposed rule would add a requirement under Sec. 55.45(b) for
licensees using a plant-referenced simulator to satisfy reactivity
manipulation experience requirements to ensure that: Simulator models
relating to nuclear and thermal-hydraulic characteristics replicate the
core load that exists in the nuclear power unit for which a license is
being sought at the time of the applicant's operating test; and
simulator fidelity has been demonstrated so that significant control
manipulations are completed without procedural exceptions, simulator
performance exceptions, or deviations from the approved training
scenario sequence. This provision in the proposed rule thus links
Sec. 55.45(b) with the proposed Sec. 55.31(a)(5).
Subpart E--Revision of Sec. 55.45 To Remove Current Requirements for
Simulator Certification and Routine Submittal of Performance Test
Reports
The proposed rule would delete requirements that have become
outdated and burdensome to the facility licensees and are of limited
value to the NRC in the following areas of Sec. 55.45(b): (1)
Certification of simulation facilities; (2) submittal of test schedule
information; and (3) submittal of quadrennial test reports.
The March 25, 1987, final rule provided a phased implementation
schedule for the requirement that facility licensees who propose to use
a simulation facility consisting solely of a plant-referenced simulator
certify, by means of NRC Form 474, ``Simulation Facility
Certification,'' the availability of a simulation facility meeting
Commission regulations. The certification requirement also contained
associated requirements for submittal of test documentation and test
schedules on a quadrennial basis. Licensees have certified plant-
referenced simulators at all power reactor facilities, and the NRC
staff's experience has shown the quadrennial reports to be of minimal
value in assessing simulator suitability for testing of operators.
The proposed rule would, by means of an alternative regulatory
approach that would not change substantive existing requirements,
eliminate the need for certification and quadrennial reports. Absent
certification, assurance of simulator suitability would be provided
through NRC reviews and validation of operating test scenarios, with
review of performance test results, and uncorrected modeling or
hardware discrepancies, if needed. If the simulator is found by this
review to be unsuitable, the simulator may not be used to conduct an
operating test, requalification training, or for performing control
manipulations to establish license applicant eligibility. The current
requirement for more recent simulator test and performance data to
remain onsite would not be changed.
Facility licensees proposing to use a simulator facility meeting
the definition in Sec. 55.4 for a plant-referenced simulator are not
required to submit an application for Commission approval of that
simulator.
For cases in which licensees propose to use a simulation facility
not meeting the definition of a plant-referenced simulator, the
Commission would require additional information to determine the
acceptability of the simulator, and thus would require an application
for Commission approval.
Since 1987, the last time the Commission amended its regulations
regarding the use of simulators, facility licensees have trained
licensed operators and applicants for operator and senior operator
licenses on plant-referenced simulators that were certified in
accordance with the 1985 edition of ANSI/ANS-3.5. This standard
specifies full-scope, stand-alone testing of system models and
simulator training capabilities as part of initial simulator acceptance
testing. Licensees continue to test their plant-referenced simulators
in the manner of initial development and to submit test schedules and
reports on a quadrennial basis to comply with the 1987 final rule that
requires periodic scheduling and reporting of test results to the NRC.
The industry's approach to computer software development and simulator
testing has changed considerably since 1987, and a new approach has
been codified though the issuance of the 1998 version of ANSI/ANS-3.5,
Nuclear Power Plant Simulators for Use in Operator Training and
Examination. The standard has moved away from continued full-scope,
stand-alone testing of system models and simulator training
capabilities toward a scenario-based testing and quality control
philosophy that is associated with the facility's planned simulator
usage.
The proposed rule would eliminate the need for certification of
simulation facilities to the NRC and the associated testing and
reporting requirements that have been become outdated by the 1998
revision of the national consensus standard ANSI/ANS-3.5.
The proposed rule would eliminate duplicate testing for those
licensees that choose to adopt the revised national standard. The
proposed rule changes would neither require facility licensees to adopt
a newly revised version of the national consensus standard, nor would
it require facility licensees to modify existing simulator support
programs or practices. The proposed rule changes would not impose
additional burden or increase the risks to the health and safety of any
segment of the nuclear industry or the public.
The proposed rule would allow facility licensees to voluntarily
adjust their performance test programs consistent with end-user needs
as defined by their accredited systems-approach-to-training (SAT)
programs or to voluntarily conform existing simulation facility
programs to new revisions of ANSI/ANS-3.5. Facility licensees' plant-
referenced simulators are continually in the update and maintenance
mode of their life-cycle as new computer technology and new plant
information is incorporated into the simulation facility. Earlier
revisions of the national consensus standard were not intended for
today's highly technical, very complex, and sophisticated computer
simulation programs that routinely encompass verification, validation,
and documentation of a simulator's performance. Identification and
resolution of discrepancies are a function of the licensees discrepancy
reporting and resolution practices. The proposed rule and associated
proposed Regulatory Guide 1.149, ``Nuclear Power Simulation Facilities
for Use in License Examinations,'' which would endorse ANSI/ANS-3.5-
1998 without exception, would reduce apparent inconsistencies between
the operational needs of facility licensee programs and simulator
testing requirements, thereby relieving unnecessary regulatory burden
and freeing resources for more effective developmental and validation
testing associated with either simulator modification programs or the
operator licensing training and examination processes.
Subpart F--Licenses
Conforming Changes to Sec. 55.59, Requalification
As a result of the proposed changes to Sec. 55.45(b) that would
eliminate the simulator certification requirement, a
[[Page 41024]]
conforming change to Sec. 55.59(c)(4)(iv) is proposed that would delete
the terms ``certified or approved'' when referring to a simulation
facility in this section.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Subpart D--Revisions To Allow Performance of Control Manipulations on
the Plant-Referenced Simulator
The proposed rule would add a statement that ``The Commission may
accept evidence of satisfactory performance of control manipulations as
part of a Commission-approved training program by a trainee on a plant-
referenced simulator acceptable to the Commission under Section
55.45(b) of this part in lieu of use of the actual plant. Control
manipulations performed on the simulator may be chosen from a
representative sampling of the control manipulations and plant
evolutions described in Section 55.59(c)(3)(A-F), (R), (T), (W), and
(X) of this part, as applicable to the design of the plant for which
the license application is submitted.''
By providing an option for licensee to use plant-referenced
simulators for control manipulations, the proposed rule obviates the
need for current provisions in Section 55.31(a)(5) addressing the use
of simulators for performance of control manipulations for facilities
that have not yet completed pre-operational testing and initial startup
test programs and provisions addressing plants in extended shutdowns.
Thus those provisions are removed.
Subpart E--Remove Current Requirements for Simulator Certification and
Routine Submittal of Performance Test Reports
10 CFR 55.45(b) provides regulations associated with the
implementation and use of simulation facilities in operator licensing.
Section 55.45(b)(1) addresses ``Administration'' of the operating test
on a simulation facility. Section 55.45(b)(2) addresses ``Schedule for
facility licensees'' with respect to submitting a plan by which its
simulation facility will be developed and by which an application will
be submitted for its use. Section 55.45(b)(3) addresses ``Schedule for
facility applicants'' with respect to submitting a plan which
identifies whether its simulation facility will conform with paragraph
(b)(1)(i) or (b)(1)(ii) of this section at the time of application.
Section 55.45(b)(4) addresses ``Application for and approval of
simulation facilities'' with respect to using a simulation facility
that is other than solely a plant-referenced simulator as defined in
Sec. 55.4. Section 55.45(b)(5) addresses ``Certification of simulation
facilities'' with respect to those facility licensees which propose, in
accordance with paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section, to use a
simulation facility consisting solely of a plant-referenced simulator.
Facility licensees have communicated to the NRC and the NRC agrees that
some or portions of the rule provisions discussed and identified in
this paragraph are unnecessarily burdensome.
Section 55.45(b)(1)(ii) requires that, ``A simulation facility
consisting solely of a plant-reference simulator which has been
certified to the Commission'' be used in administering the operating
test. The proposed rule would eliminate the requirement for
certification of the simulation facility and more appropriately refer
to the definition of a simulation facility as described in Sec. 55.4.
Section 55.45(b)(2) discusses, ``Schedule for facility licenses.''
The proposed rule would eliminate this outdated item in its entirety.
Section 55.45(b)(2)(i) requires that, ``Within one year after the
effective date of this part, each facility licensee which proposes to
use a simulation facility pursuant to paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this
section, except test and research reactors, shall submit a plan by
which its simulation facility will be developed and by which an
application will be submitted for its use'' The proposed rule would
eliminate in its entirety this requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(2)(ii) requires that, ``Those facility licensees
which propose to conform with paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, not
later than 42 months after the effective date of this rule, shall
submit an application for use of this simulation facility to the
Commission, in accordance with paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section''
The proposed rule would eliminate in its entirety this requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(2)(iii) requires that, ``Those facility licensees
which propose to conform with paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section, not
later than 46 months after the effective date of this rule, shall
submit a certification for use of this simulation facility to the
Commission on Form NRC-474, ``Simulation Facility Certification,''
available from Records and Reports Management Branch, Division of
Information Support Services, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555, in accordance with paragraph (b)(5)(i) of this
section.'' The proposed rule would eliminate in its entirety this
requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(2)(iv) requires that, ``The simulation facility
portion of the operating test will not be administered on other than a
certified or an approved simulation facility after May 26, 1991.'' The
proposed rule would eliminate in its entirety this requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(3) discusses, ``Schedule for facility
applicants.'' The proposed rule would eliminate this outdated item in
its entirety.
Section 55.45(b)(3)(i) requires that, ``For facility licensee
applications after the effective date of this rule, except test and
research reactors, the applicant shall submit a plan which identifies
whether its simulation facility will conform with paragraph (b)(1)(i)
or (b)(1)(ii) of this section at the time of application.'' The
proposed rule would eliminate in its entirety this requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(3)(ii) requires that, ``Those applicants which
propose to conform with paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, not later
than 180 days before the date when the applicant proposes that the
Commission conduct operating tests, shall submit an application for use
of its simulation facility to the NRC, in accordance with paragraph
(b)(4)(i) of this section.'' The proposed rule would eliminate in its
entirety this requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(3)(iii) requires that, ``Those applicants which
propose to conform with paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section, not later
than 60 days before the date when the applicant proposes that NRC
conduct operating tests, shall submit a certification for use of its
simulation facility to the Commission on Form NRC-474, in accordance
with paragraph (b)(5)(i) of this section.'' The proposed rule would
eliminate in its entirety this requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(4) requires that, ``Application for and approval
of simulation facilities. Those facility licensees which propose, in
accordance with paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, to use a
simulation facility that is other than solely a plant-referenced
simulator as defined in Sec. 55.4 shall--.'' The proposed rule would
eliminate in its entirety this requirement and replace it with language
to address ``Commission-approved simulation facilities'' whereby the
Commission would approve a simulation facility if it finds that the
simulation facility and its proposed use are suitable for the conduct
of operating test for the facility licensee's reference plant, in
accordance with paragraph (a) of this section.
Section 55.45(b)(4)(i) requires that, ``In accordance with the plan
submitted pursuant to paragraph (b)(2)(i) or (b)(3)(i) of this section,
as applicable,
[[Page 41025]]
submit an application for approval of the simulation facility to the
Commission, in accordance with the schedule in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) or
(b)(3)(ii) of this section, as appropriate. This application must
include:'' The proposed rule would eliminate the phrases ``In
accordance with the plan submitted pursuant to paragraph (b)(2)(i) or
(b)(3)(i) of this section, as applicable'' and `` * * * in accordance
with the schedule in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) or (b)(3)(ii) of this
section, as appropriate.'' and replace its language to address those
facility licensees that propose, in accordance with paragraph (b)(1)(i)
of this section, to use a simulation facility that is other than solely
a plant-referenced simulator as defined in Sec. 55.4 and to also submit
an application for approval of the simulation facility to the
Commission that include certain items as described in
Sec. 55.45(b)(2)(i)(A), (B), and (C).
Section 55.45(b)(4)(i)(A) requires that, ``A statement that the
simulation facility meets the plan submitted to the Commission pursuant
to paragraph (b)(2)(i) or (b)(3)(i) of this section, as applicable;''
The proposed rule would eliminate in its entirety this requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(4)(ii) requires that, ``The Commission will
approve a simulation facility if it finds that the simulation facility
and its proposed use are suitable for the conduct of operating tests
for the facility licensee's reference plant, in accordance with
paragraph (a) of this section.'' The proposed rule would eliminate in
its entirety this requirement and replace it with language applicable
to those facility licensees which use a plant-referenced simulator to
establish prerequisites for operator license eligibility in accordance
with Sec. 55.31(a)(5) and to provide in addition to existing
performance testing required for significant control manipulations
which affect reactivity; that simulator models relating to nuclear and
thermal-hydraulic characteristics replicate the core load that exist in
the nuclear power unit for which a license is being sought at the time
of the applicants's operating test and that simulator fidelity has been
demonstrated so that significant control manipulations are completed
without procedural exceptions, simulator performance exceptions, or
deviation from the approved training scenario sequence.
Section 55.45(b)(4)(iii) requires that facility licensees,
``Submit, every four years on the anniversary of the application, a
report to the Commission which identifies any uncorrected performance
test failures, and submit a schedule for correction of these
performance test failures, if any.'' The proposed rule would eliminate
in its entirety this requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(4)(iv) requires that facility licensees, ``Retain
the results of the performance test conducted until four years after
the submittal of the application under paragraph (b)(4)(i), each report
pursuant to paragraph (b)(4)(iii), or any reapplication under paragraph
(b)(4)(iv) of this section, as appropriate.'' The proposed rule would
eliminate in its entirety this requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(4)(v) requires that, ``If the Commission
determines, based upon the results of performance testing, that an
approved simulation facility does not meet the requirements of this
part, the simulation facility may not be used to conduct operating
tests.'' The proposed rule would eliminate in its entirety this
requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(4)(vi) requires that, ``If the Commission
determines, pursuant to paragraph (b)(4)(v) of this section, that an
approved simulation facility does not meet the requirements of this
part, the facility licensee may again submit an application for
approval. This application must include a description of corrective
actions taken, including results of completed performance testing as
required for approval.'' The proposed rule would eliminate in its
entirety this requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(4)(vii) requires that, ``Any application or report
submitted pursuant to paragraphs (b)(4)(i), (b)(4)(iii) and (b)(4)(vi)
of this section must include a description of the performance testing
completed for the simulation facility, and must include a description
of performance tests, if different, to be conducted on the simulation
facility during the subsequent four-year period, and a schedule for the
conduct of approximately 25 percent of the performance tests per year
for the subsequent four years.'' The proposed rule would eliminate in
its entirety this requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(5), ``Certification of simulation facilities''
requires that, ``Those facility licensees which propose, in accordance
with paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section, to use a simulation facility
that is other than solely a plant-referenced simulator as defined in
Sec. 55.4 shall--.'' The proposed rule would eliminate in its entirety
this requirement and replace it with language to address
``Acceptability of simulation facilities'' such that facility licensees
which maintain a simulation facility for the conduct of operating test
shall conform to the revised proposed rule and to provide assurance
that approved or certified simulation facilities remain acceptable over
a period time to meet the requirements paragraph (a) of this section.
Section 55.45(b)(5)(i) requires that facility licensees, ``Submit a
certification to the Commission that the simulation facility meets the
Commission's regulations. The facility licensee shall provide this
certification on Form NRC 474 in accordance with the schedule in
paragraph (b)(2)(iii) or (b)(3)(iii) of this section, as applicable.''
The proposed rule would eliminate in its entirety this requirement.
Section 55.45(b)(5)(ii) requires that facility licensees, ``Submit,
every four years on the anniversary of the certification, a report to
the Commission which identifies any uncorrected performance test
failures, and submit a schedule for correction of such performance test
failures, if any.'' The proposed rule would partially eliminate this
requirement. The facility licensee would have to make available for NRC
review, prior to or concurrent with preparations for each operator
licensing operating test or requalification program inspection results
of any uncorrected performance test failures that will exist at the
time of the operating test or requalification program inspection.
Section 55.45(b)(5)(iii) requires that facility licensees, ``Retain
the results of the performance test conducted until four years after
the submittal of certification under paragraph (b)(5)(i), each report
pursuant to paragraph (b)(5)(ii), or recertification under paragraph
(b)(5)(v) of this section, as applicable.'' The proposed rule would
revise the rule to require facility licensees to provide recurring
assurance of fidelity by performance testing throughout the life of the
simulation facility consistent with paragraphs 55.45(b)(2)(ii) and
55.45(b)(3)(i)(B) and only retain the results of performance test
conducted for four years or until superseded by updated test results.
The proposed rule would require the inclusion of provisions for
maintaining examination and test integrity consistent with Sec. 55.49.
Section 55.45(b)(5)(iv) requires that, ``If the Commission
determines, based upon the results of performance testing, that a
certified simulation facility does not meet the requirements of this
part, the simulation facility may not be used to conduct operating
tests.'' The proposed rule revises the language such that if the
Commission determines, based upon the results of pre-examination
scenario validation, a review of performance testing results, or
[[Page 41026]]
uncorrected modeling or hardware discrepancies, that a simulation
facility consisting solely of a plant-referenced simulator does not
meet the requirements of this part as defined in Sec. 55.4 or the
criteria in Sec. 55.45(b)(2)(ii), then the plant-referenced simulator
may not be used to conduct operating tests, requalification, or control
manipulations as described in Secs. 55.31(a), 55.45(b)(1), and
55.59(c)(3) of this part. Facility licensees proposing to use
simulation facilities meeting the definition in Sec. 55.4 of a plant-
referenced facility would not be required to submit an application for
Commission approval.
Section 55.45(b)(5)(v) requires that, ``If the Commission
determines, pursuant to paragraph (b)(5)(iv) of this section, that a
certified simulation facility does not meet the requirements of this
part, the facility licensee may submit a recertification to the
Commission on Form NRC--474. This recertification must include a
description of corrective actions taken, including results of completed
performance testing as required for recertification.'' The proposed
rule eliminates this provision.
Section 55.45(b)(5)(vi) requires that, ``Any certification report,
or recertification submitted pursuant to paragraph (b)(5)(i),
(b)(5)(ii) or (b)(5)(v) of this section must include a description of
performance testing completed for the simulation facility, and must
include a description of the performance tests, if different, to be
conducted on the simulation facility during the subsequent four-year
period, and a schedule for the conduct of approximately 25 percent of
the performance tests per year for the subsequent four years.'' The
proposed rule would eliminate in its entirety this requirement.
The proposed rule requirements associated with the implementation
and use of simulation facilities would significantly reduce unnecessary
burden for facility licensees and the NRC. The proposed rule would
allow facility licensees greater flexibility to adjust their
performance test programs consistent with user needs as defined by
their accredited training programs, and encourage implementation of
improved revisions of the national standard which, as endorsed by the
NRC, would improve focus on the training and examination environment in
which the plant-referenced simulator is used. In addition, the proposed
rule would allow facility licensees to reduce cost.
Since Sec. 55.45(b) was last revised on March 25, 1987 (52 FR
9453), facility licensees have continually improved and implemented
sophisticated simulator modeling and replaced outdated computer
hardware to ensure that operator and senior operator applicants as well
as licensed operators are trained and qualified on a plant-referenced
simulator.
Subpart A--Revisions of Sec. 55.4 Definitions
Section 55.4 defines performance testing as ``Performance testing
means testing conducted to verify a simulation facility's performance
as compared to actual or predicted reference plant performance.'' The
proposed rule would redefine performance testing as ``Performance
testing means validation, scenario-based, or operability testing
conducted to verify a simulation facility's performance as compared to
actual or predicted reference plant performance.''
Section 55.4 defines plant-referenced simulator as ``Plant-
referenced simulator means a simulator modeling the systems of the
reference plant with which the operator interfaces in the control room,
including operating consoles, and which permits use of the reference
plant's procedures. A plant-referenced simulator demonstrates expected
plant response to operator input, and to normal, transient, and
accident conditions to which the simulator has been designed to
respond.'' The proposed rule would enhance the definition of plant-
referenced simulator as ``Plant-referenced simulator means a simulator
modeling the systems of the reference plant with which the operator
interfaces in the control room, including operating consoles, and which
permits use of the reference plant's procedures. A plant-referenced
simulator demonstrates expected plant response to operator input, and
to normal, transient, and accident conditions to which the simulator
has been designed to respond. A plant-referenced simulator is designed,
implemented, and maintained such that it: (1) Is sufficient in scope
and fidelity to allow conduct of the evolutions listed in paragraphs
55.45(a)(1) through (13), and 55.59(c)(3)(i)(A) through (AA), as
applicable to the design of the reference unit; (2) allows for the
completion of on-the-job training experience prerequisites for license
operator eligibility consistent with paragraph 55.45(b)(2)(ii).''
Section 55.4 defines simulation facility as ``Simulation facility
means one or more of the following components, alone or in combination,
used for the partial conduct of operating tests for operators, senior
operators, and candidates: (1) The plant, (2) a plant-referenced
simulator, (3) another simulation device.'' The proposed rule would
update the definition of simulation facility to ``Simulation facility
means one or more of the following components, alone or in combination,
used for the partial conduct of operating tests for operators, senior
operators, and license applicants: (1) The plant, (2) a plant-
referenced simulator, (3) a Commission-approved simulator in accordance
with Sec. 55.45(b)(2), (4) another simulation device, including part-
task and limited scope simulation devices.''
Subpart A--General Provisions, Sec. 55.8 Information Collection
Requirements: OMB Approval
Section 55.8(c)(3) identifies the information collection
requirement and the control number under which the requirement is
approved for NRC Form 474, ``Simulation Facility Certification,'' OMB
approval No. 3150-0138. If adopted, the proposed rule would eliminate
the need for the certification form.
Section 55.8(c)(4) would be deleted because its requirements have
been incorporated into this 10 CFR part.
Subpart F--Licenses, Sec. 55.59, Requalification
Section 55.59(c)(4)(iv) requires that, ``* * * After the provisions
of Sec. 55.45(b) have been implemented at a facility, the certified or
approved simulation facility must be used to comply with this
paragraph.'' The proposed rule would eliminate the words ``certified or
approved'' as a result of eliminating the certification requirement as
described in the proposed rule Sec. 55.45(b).
Issues for Public Comment
Comments concerning the content, level of detail specified, and the
implementation of the proposed amendments are encouraged. Suggestions
of alternatives other than those described in this notice and estimates
of cost for implementation are encouraged. Because the intent of the
proposed rule changes to Sec. 55.31(a)(5) and Sec. 55.45(b)(1) is to
reduce unnecessary regulatory burden by providing acceptable methods to
comply with the Commission's regulations, the NRC is particularly
interested in receiving from the public comments on the following
issues related to this proposed rule:
1. Are there rulemaking alternatives to this proposed rule that
were not considered in the regulatory analysis for this proposed rule?
2. Are the revised definitions as used in Sec. 55.4 clearly
defined?
[[Page 41027]]
3. Would the revised requirements permitting control manipulations
to be performed on a plant-referenced simulator as prescribed in
Sec. 55.31(a)(5) reduce unnecessary regulatory burden associated with
establishing license eligibility for operators and senior operators and
yet continue to maintain safety by ensuring that experience gained on
the simulator essentially replicates that obtained from control
manipulations on the plant?
4. Would the revised requirements in Sec. 55.45 to eliminate the
need for certification of simulation facilities and duplicate testing
and reporting requirements accomplish their intended purpose of
eliminating unnecessary regulatory burden?
5. Would the proposed NRC reviews of simulators ensure requisite
simulator suitability to support effective training and operator
performance assessment and thereby maintain plant safety?
Related Regulatory Activity
NRC Endorsement of ANSI/ANS 3.5-1998
The NRC staff has reviewed ANSI/ANS 3.5-1998 with respect to the
revision of Regulatory Guide 1.149, ``Nuclear Power Plant Simulation
Facilities for Use in License Examinations.'' The 1998 revision of the
standard was developed with full NRC participation and insight.
Accordingly, the staff believes that those testing and fidelity
concerns that have required exceptions and clarifications in the
regulatory positions of the previous revisions of Regulatory Guide
1.149, are adequately addressed in this latest revision of the
standard. The staff further believes that industry's concerns have been
addressed in this latest revision of the standard. As noted in the
introductory paragraph to the standard, ``the consensus committee was
balanced to ensure that competent, concerned, and varied interests have
had an opportunity to participate.'' The staff is considering endorsing
ANSI/ANS 3.5-1998 without the exceptions or clarifications that have
characterized NRC's endorsement of previous revisions.
The staff published in the Federal Register for public comment a
notice of availability of Draft Guide DG-1080 (proposed Revision 3 of
Regulatory Guide 1.149) on August 23, 1999 (64 FR 162). The public
comment period closed on November 12, 1999. NRC Form 474 and the
associated OMB clearance will also be modified to reflect NRC's
endorsement of the 1998 revision of the standard upon final issuance of
Regulatory Guide 1.149 and final Commission action on changes described
in this proposed rule.
Facility licensees would not be required to automatically adopt the
new standard. The 1993 revision is still recognized by ANS, and the
1985 revision is considered to be a ``historical'' standard.
Simultaneous endorsement of more than one version of the standard is
consistent with both the NRC policy of evaluating the latest version of
national consensus standards in terms of their suitability for
endorsement by regulations or regulatory guides and the established
regulatory position regarding simulators, allowing industry to
establish recommended and required capabilities and acceptability
criteria.
Referenced Documents
Copies of SECY-99-0225, DG-1080 (Proposed Revision 3 to Regulatory
Guide 1.149), NRC Form 474, NUREG-1262, NUREG-1258, and NUREG-1021 are
available for inspection and copying for a fee at the NRC Public
Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC.
Plain Language
The Presidential memorandum dated June 1, 1998, entitled, ``Plain
Language in Government Writing,'' directed the government's writing be
in plain language. This memorandum was published June 10, 1998 (63 FR
31883). In complying with this directive, editoral changes have been
made in this proposed amendment to improve readability of the existing
language of the provisions being revised. These types of changes are
not discussed further in this document. The NRC requests comment on the
proposed rule specifically with respect to the clarity and
effectiveness of the language used. Comments should be sent to the
address listed under the ADDRESSES caption of the preamble.
Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion
The NRC has determined that this proposed rule is the type of
action described as a categorical exclusion in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(1).
Therefore, neither an environmental impact statement nor an
environmental assessment has been prepared for this proposed
regulation.
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
This proposed rule amends information collection requirements that
are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.). This rule has been submitted to the Office of Management and
Budget for review and approval of the paperwork requirements.
Because the rule will reduce existing information collection
requirements, the public burden for this information collection is
expected to be decreased by 120 hours per licensee. This reduction
includes the time required for reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and
completing and reviewing the information collection. The U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission is seeking public comment on the potential impact
of the information collections contained in the proposed rule and on
the following issues:
1. Is the proposed information collection necessary for the
proper performance of the functions of the NRC, including whether
the information will have practical utility?
2. Is the estimate of burden accurate?
3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information to be collected?
4. How can the burden of the information collection be
minimized, including the use of automated collection techniques?
Send comments on any aspect of this proposed information
collection, including suggestions for further reducing the burden, to
the Records Management Branch (T-6 E6), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by Internet electronic mail
at BJS1@NRC.GOV; and to the Desk Officer, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, NEOB-10202, (3150-0138), Office of Management and
Budget, Washington, DC 20503.
Comments to OMB on the information collections or on the above
issues should be submitted by August 2, 2000. Comments received after
this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance
of consideration cannot be given to comments received after this date.
Public Protection Notification
If a means used to impose an information collection does not
display a currently valid OMB control number, the NRC may not conduct
or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, the information
collection.
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act Statement
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995,
Public Law 104-113, requires that Federal agencies use technical
standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies unless the use of such a standard is inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise
[[Page 41028]]
impractical. Regulatory Guide 1.149 describes an acceptable method by
which facility licensees might implement specific parts of this
proposed rule and references the 1985, 1993, and 1998, revisions of
voluntary standard American National Standards Institute/American
Nuclear Society (ANSI/ANS) 3.5, ``Nuclear Power Plant Simulators for
Use in Operator Training and Examination.''
Comments are being solicited, particularly with respect to effects
of application of ANSI/ANS 3.5-1998 on existing simulator support and
operator training programs and perceived compatibility with the
proposed regulations. Comments are also being solicited with respect to
applicability of earlier versions of ANSI/ANS 3.5 or applicability of
standards and guidance other than ANSI/ANS 3.5 for use in training and
examination of operators at nuclear power plants.
Regulatory Analysis
The Commission has prepared a regulatory analysis on this proposed
regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the
alternatives considered by the Commission. The regulatory analysis is
available for inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street
NW (Lower Level), Washington, DC. Single copies of the analysis may be
obtained from the Branch Chief, Operator Licensing, Human Performance
and Plant Support Branch, Office Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S.
Regulatory Commission, at 301-415-3173 or by e-mail at jfc@nrc.gov. The
Commission requests public comment on the regulatory analysis. Comments
on the analysis may be submitted to the NRC as indicated under the
ADDRESSES heading.
Regulatory Flexibility Certification
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C.
605(b)), the Commission certifies that this rule will not, if issued,
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This proposed rule affects only the licensing and operation
of nuclear power plants. The companies that own these plants do not
fall within the scope of the definition of ``small entities'' set forth
in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the Small Business Size Standards
set out in regulations issued by the Small Business Administration at
13 CFR Part 121.
Backfit Analysis
The NRC has determined that the backfit rule does not apply to this
proposed rule; therefore, a backfit analysis is not required for this
proposed rule because these amendments do not involve any provisions
that would impose backfits as defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1).
List of Subjects in Part 55
Criminal penalties, Manpower training programs, Nuclear power
plants and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization
Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 553; the NRC is proposing to
adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR Part 55.
PART 55--OPERATOR'S LICENSES
1. The authority citation for Part 55 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 107, 161, 182, 68 Stat. 939, 948, 953, as
amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2137, 2201,
2232, 2282); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended,
1244 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842).
Sections 55.41, 55.43, 55.45, and 55.59 also issued under sec.
306, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2262 (42 U.S.C. 10226). Section 55.61
also issued under secs. 186, 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2236,
2237).
2. In Sec. 55.4, the terms ``Performance testing,'' ``Plant-
referenced simulator,'' and ``Simulation facility,'' are revised to
read as follows:
Sec. 55.4 Definitions.
* * * * *
Performance testing means validation, scenario-based, or
operability testing conducted to verify a simulation facility's
performance as compared to actual or predicted reference plant
performance.
* * * * *
Plant-referenced simulator means a simulator modeling the systems
of the reference plant with which the operator interfaces in the
control room, including operating consoles, and which permits use of
the reference plant's procedures. A plant-referenced simulator
demonstrates expected plant response to operator input, and to normal,
transient, and accident conditions to which the simulator has been
designed to respond. A plant-referenced simulator is designed and
implemented such that it:
(1) Is sufficient in scope and fidelity to allow conduct of the
evolutions listed in Secs. 55.45(a)(1) through (13), and
55.59(c)(3)(i)(A) through (AA), as applicable to the design of the
reference unit, and
(2) Allows for the completion of on-the-job training experience
prerequisites for licensed operator applicant eligibility consistent
with Sec. 55.45(b)(3)(i).
* * * * *
Simulation facility means one or more of the following components,
alone or in combination, used for the partial conduct of operating
tests for operators, senior operators, and license applicants, or to
establish on-the-job training experience prerequisites for operator
license eligibility:
(1) The plant;
(2) A plant-referenced simulator;
(3) A Commission-approved simulator in accordance with
Sec. 55.45(b)(2); and
(4) Another simulation device, including part-task and limited
scope simulation devices.
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 55.8, paragraphs (c)(3) and (c)(4) are removed and
paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 55.8 Information collection requirements: OMB approval.
* * * * *
(b) The approved information collection requirements contained in
this part appear in Secs. 55.11, 55.23, 55.25, 55.27, 55.31, 55.35,
55.40, 55.41, 55.43, 55.45, 55.47, 55.53, 55.57, and 55.59.
* * * * *
4. In Sec. 55.31, paragraph (a)(5) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 55.31 How to apply.
(a) * * *
(5) Provide evidence that the applicant, as a trainee, has
successfully manipulated the controls of the facility for which a
license is sought. At a minimum, five significant control manipulations
must be performed that affect reactivity or power level. Evidence of
satisfactory performance of control manipulations may be demonstrated
on a plant-referenced simulator that meets the requirements of
Sec. 55.45(b)(3). Control manipulations performed on the simulator may
be chosen from a representative sampling of the control manipulations
and plant evolutions described in Sec. 55.59(c)(3)(A-F), (R), (T), (W),
and (X) of this part, as applicable to the design of the plant for
which the license application is submitted. For licensed operators
applying for a senior operator license, certification that the operator
has successfully operated the controls of the facility as a licensed
operator shall be accepted; and
* * * * *
[[Page 41029]]
5. In Sec. 55.45, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 55.45 Operating tests.
* * * * *
(b) Implementation-- (1) Administration. The operating test will be
administered in a plant walkthrough and in either--
(i) A simulation facility which the Commission has approved for use
after application has been made by the facility licensee; or
(ii) A plant-referenced simulator as defined in Sec. 55.4.
(2) Commission-approved simulation facilities. (i) Facility
licensees who propose to use a simulation facility in the
administration of the operating test in accordance with paragraph
(b)(1)(i) of this section, shall submit an application for approval of
the simulation facility to the Commission. This application must
include:
(A) A description of the components of the simulation facility that
are intended to be used for each part of the operating test, unless
previously approved;
(B) A description of the performance tests as part of the
application, and the results of these tests; and
(C) A description of the procedures for maintaining examination and
test integrity consistent with the requirements of Sec. 55.49.
(ii) The Commission will approve a simulation facility if it finds
that the simulation facility and its proposed use are suitable for the
conduct of operating tests for the facility licensee's reference plant
under paragraph (a) of this section.
(3) Plant-referenced simulators. (i) Facility licensees which
propose to use a plant-referenced simulator to meet the experience
requirements in Sec. 55.31(a)(5) must ensure that:
(A) The plant-referenced simulator uses models relating to nuclear
and thermal-hydraulic characteristics that replicate the core load that
exists in the nuclear power unit for which a license is being sought at
the time of the applicant's operating test; and
(B) Simulator fidelity has been demonstrated so that significant
control manipulations are completed without procedural exceptions,
simulator performance exceptions, or deviation from the approved
training scenario sequence.
(ii) If the Commission determines that a simulation facility
consisting solely of a plant-referenced simulator does not meet either
the definition of a plant-referenced simulator as defined in Sec. 55.4,
or the criteria in Sec. 55.45(b)(4)(A) and (D), the Commission will not
accept the plant-referenced simulator for conducting operating tests as
described in Sec. 55.45(b)(1) of this part, requalification training as
described in Sec. 55.59(c)(3) of this part, or performing control
manipulations that affect reactivity to establish eligibility for an
operator's license as described in Sec. 55.31(a)(5).
(4) Continued assurance of simulator fidelity. Facility licensees
that maintain a simulation facility shall:
(A) Conduct performance testing throughout the life of the
simulation facility in a manner sufficient to assure that the criteria
of paragraphs 55.45(b)(4)(C) and 55.45(b)(3)(i)(B) as applicable, are
met. The results of performance tests must be retained for four years
after the completion of each performance test or until superseded by
updated test results;
(B) Correct scenario validation, performance test, modeling , and
hardware discrepancies;
(C) Make available for NRC review, before or concurrent with
preparations for each operator licensing operating test or
requalification program inspection, results of any uncorrected
performance test failures that may exist at the time of the operating
test or requalification program inspection; and
(D) Maintain the provisions for examination and test integrity
consistent with Sec. 55.49.
* * * * *
6. In Sec. 55.59, paragraph (c)(4)(iv) is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 55.59 Requalification.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(4) * * *
(iv) Simulation of emergency or abnormal conditions that may be
accomplished by using the control panel of the facility involved or by
using a simulator. Where the control panel of the facility is used for
simulation, the actions taken or to be taken for the emergency or
abnormal condition must be discussed; actual manipulation of the plant
controls is not required. If a simulator is used in meeting the
requirements of paragraph (c)(4)(iii) of this section, it must
accurately reproduce the operating characteristics of the facility
involved and the arrangement of the instrumentation and controls of the
simulator must closely parallel that of the facility involved. After
the provisions of Sec. 55.45(b) have been implemented at a facility,
the simulation facility must be used to comply with this paragraph.
* * * * *
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of June, 2000.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 00-16751 Filed 6-30-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-U