[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 27 (Wednesday, February 9, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-2927]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: February 9, 1994]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 55
RIN 3150-AE39
Renewal of Licenses and Requalification Requirements for Licensed
Operators
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its
regulations to delete the requirement that each licensed operator at
power, test, and research reactors pass a comprehensive requalification
written examination and an operating test conducted by the NRC during
the term of the operator's 6-year license as a prerequisite for license
renewal. The final rule requires that facility licensees shall have a
requalification program reviewed and approved by the Commission and
shall, upon request consistent with the needs of the Commission's
inspection program, submit to the Commission a copy of its annual
operating tests or comprehensive written examinations used for operator
requalification for review by the Commission. In addition, the final
rule amends the ``Scope'' provisions of the regulations pertaining to
operators' licenses to include facility licensees. The amendments will
improve operational safety at each facility by redirecting NRC
resources to administer the requalification program by inspecting and
overseeing facility requalification programs rather than conducting
requalification examinations. This, in turn, will reduce both licensee
and NRC costs related to the program.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 11, 1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony DiPalo, Office of Nuclear
Regulatory Research, telephone: (301) 492-3784, or Frank Collins,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555, telephone (301) 504-3173.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 306 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) of 1982
authorized and directed the NRC ``to promulgate regulations, or other
appropriate Commission regulatory guidance, for the training and
qualifications of civilian nuclear power plant operators, supervisors,
technicians and other appropriate operating personnel.'' The
regulations or guidance were to ``establish simulator training
requirements for applicants for civilian nuclear power plant operator
licenses and for operator requalification programs; requirements
governing NRC administration of requalification examinations;
requirements for operating tests at civilian nuclear power plant
simulators, and instructional requirements for civilian nuclear power
plant licensee personnel training programs.'' On March 25, 1987 (52 FR
9453), the Commission accomplished the objectives of the NWPA that were
related to licensed operators by publishing a final rule in the Federal
Register that amended 10 CFR part 55 and became effective May 26, 1987.
The amendment revised the licensed operator requalification program by
establishing (1) simulator training requirements, (2) requirements for
operating tests at simulators, and (3) instructional requirements for
the program (formerly appendix A to 10 CFR part 55). The final rule
also stipulated that in lieu of the Commission accepting certification
by the facility licensee that the licensee has passed written
examinations and operating tests given by the facility licensee within
its Commission approved program developed by using a systems approach
to training (SAT), the Commission may give a comprehensive
requalification written examination and an annual operating test. In
addition, the amended regulations required each licensed operator to
pass a comprehensive requalification written examination and an
operating test conducted by the NRC during the term of the operator's
6-year license as a prerequisite for license renewal.
Following the 1987 amendment to part 55, the NRC began conducting
operator requalification examinations for the purpose of license
renewal. As a result of conducting these examinations, the NRC
determined that the existing regulations have established a high
standard of licensee performance and that the NRC examiners were
largely duplicating tasks that were already required of, and routinely
performed by, the facility licensees.
The NRC revised its requalification examination procedures in 1988
to focus on performance-based evaluation criteria that closely
paralleled the training and evaluation process used for a SAT based
training program. This revision to the NRC requalification examination
process enabled the NRC to conduct comprehensive examinations for the
purpose of renewing an individual's license and, at the same time, use
the results of the examinations to determine the adequacy of the
facility licensee's requalification training program.
Since the NRC began conducting its requalification examination
program, the facility program and individual pass rates have improved
from 81 to 90 percent and from 83 to 91 percent, respectively, through
fiscal year 1991. The NRC has also observed a general improvement in
the quality of the facility licensees' testing materials and in the
performance of their operating test evaluators. Of the first 79 program
evaluations conducted, 10 programs were evaluated as unsatisfactory.
The NRC issued Information Notice No. 90-54, ``Summary of
Requalification Program Deficiencies,'' dated August 28, 1990, to
describe the technical deficiencies that contributed to the first 10
program failures. Since that time only 6 programs, of 120 subsequent
program evaluations, have been evaluated as unsatisfactory.
Pilot requalification examinations were conducted during the period
August through December 1991. The pilot test procedure directed the NRC
examiners to focus on the evaluation of crews, rather than individuals,
in the simulator portion of the operating test. In conducting the pilot
examinations, the NRC examiners and the facility evaluators
independently evaluated the crews and compared their results. The
results were found to be in agreement. Furthermore, the NRC examiners
noted that the facility evaluators were competent at evaluating crews
and individuals and were aggressive in finding deficiencies and
recommending remedial training for operators who exhibited weaknesses.
The performance of the facilities' evaluators during the pilot
examinations further confirmed that the facility licensees can find
deficiencies, provide remedial training, and retest their licensed
operators appropriately.
In June 1992, the Commission agreed with the staff to proceed with
initiation of rulemaking to eliminate the requirement for each licensed
operator to pass a comprehensive requalification written examination
and operating test administered by the Commission during the term of
the operator's 6-year license. On December 28, 1992, proposed
amendments to 10 CFR part 55 on renewal of licensees and
requalification requirements for licensed operators were submitted to
the Commission for approval.
On May 20, 1993 (58 FR 29366), the Commission published a proposed
rule in the Federal Register to amend 10 CFR part 55. The proposed
amendments were to:
1. Delete the requirement that each licensed operator pass an NRC-
administered requalification examination during the term of his or her
license.
2. Require that facility licensees submit to the NRC their annual
requalification operating tests and comprehensive requalification
written examinations at least 30 days prior to the conduct of these
tests and examinations.
3. Include ``Facility Licensees'' in the ``Scope'' of part 55.
The period for public comment on the proposed amendments ended on
July 20, 1993.
Summary of Public Comments
The NRC received 42 comments on the proposed rule. Based on
analysis of these comments, several changes have been made in the final
rule. A summary of the public comments and, where appropriate, a
description of the changes that resulted from them is discussed for
each of the proposed amendments to 10 CFR part 55.
1. Proposed Amendment: Delete the requirement that each licensed
operator pass an NRC-administered requalification examination during
the term of a licensed operator's 6-year license.
General Statement: Of the 42 comments received, 36 favored this
proposed amendment and 6 opposed its adoption. Most of the respondents
who favored the proposed change based their support on the expectation
that this change would reduce the regulatory burden on licensees and
would improve operational safety at nuclear facilities. One respondent
indicated that while the NRC's involvement has had a positive impact on
the content and conduct of licensee requalification, utilities have
proven their ability to develop and administer requalification
examinations that meet the requirements of 10 CFR 55.59(a)(2)(iii).
Another respondent representing the utility industry stated that, ``We
believe the performance-based inspection process will be an effective
means for ensuring high quality operator requalification programs.''
This respondent further stated, ``The proposed rule change will also
afford better operating crew continuity. Because personnel changes
occur over time, operating crews may be configured with individuals who
have or have not had an NRC administered exam. In the past, it has been
a common practice to reconfigure crews to accommodate the NRC-
administered requalification examination by putting together
individuals whose 6 years is about to end. Use of this practice to
facilitate the conduct of requalification exams may not be in the best
interest of crew coordination and teamwork.''
The six comments in opposition to the proposed amendment to delete
the NRC-conducted requalification examination varied in content. For
example, two public citizen respondents were against a rule change of
any kind on the basis it would give the public the perception that the
NRC's authority over the operation of power and non-power reactor
plants would be weakened. Two respondents, one representing a State
public service department with over-sight of a nuclear power plant and
a second representing a State nuclear safety department, urged that
from a defense-in-depth standpoint to reactor safety the proposed rule
should be reconsidered. The State of Vermont, in two separate comments,
indicated that it was because of the current regulation that the NRC
was able to detect the unsatisfactory requalification program at
Vermont Yankee and identify corrective actions to ensure safety of the
plant. The State of Illinois contended that the current regulations
provided incentive for licensees to maintain quality operator training
programs and that the likelihood of further improving or even
maintaining that quality without the periodic independent involvement
by the NRC is unlikely. The State of Illinois recommended a combination
of routine NRC inspections of crew examinations on a plant simulator
and a periodic independent test administered simultaneously to all
licensed operators every 6 years. Finally, one respondent was opposed
to this amendment, especially its application to test and research
reactors and suggested the existing rule be deleted because the
regulatory analysis for the 1987 rule stated that the rule would not
apply to non-power reactors (NPR). This same respondent believed it
important to maintain NRC staff competence in relation to NPR operator
licensing and felt this could be accomplished by maintaining a nucleus
of specialized qualified personnel, either as part of or in conjunction
with the NPR directorate, and through specialized training and
administration of initial examinations, which occur rather frequently.
Response: After reviewing the six comments opposing the proposed
regulation, the Commission has concluded that the basis for this
requirement remains sound and that it should be adopted. This
determination is based on the following considerations:
(i) The NRC believes that since the beginning of the
requalification program, experience indicates that weaknesses in
implementation of facility licensee's programs are generally the root
cause of deficiencies in the performance of operators.
(ii) The NRC believes if its resources were directed towards
inspection and oversight of facility licensee's requalification
programs rather than continuing to conduct individual operator
requalification examinations, the operational safety at each facility
will continue to be ensured and in fact, will be improved. A routine
inspection frequency of once per SALP cycle will ensure consistency
between inspection scheduling and licensee performance. A minimum
routine inspection frequency of at least once every 2 years will ensure
active NRC oversight of facility licensee's requalification programs.
For facility licensees with good performance, consideration will be
given to not performing an onsite inspection during the SALP period.
(iii) The NRC believes that the facility requalification programs
have been demonstrated to be basically sound during the pilot
examinations. Given the broad range of possible approaches built into
the inspection process, the NRC would only conduct examinations when
they are the most effective tool to evaluate and understand the
programmatic issues, or if the NRC loses confidence in the facility
licensee's ability to conduct its own examinations.
Examples which could result in a regional management decision for a
``for cause'' requalification examination include:
a. Requalification inspection results which indicate an ineffective
licensee requalification program;
b. Operational problems for which operator error is a major
contributor;
c. A SALP Category 3 rating in plant operations attributed to
operator performance; and
d. Allegations regarding significant training program deficiencies.
When conditions such as these exist, the NRC may initiate planning
to conduct requalification examinations during the next annual
examination cycle scheduled by the facility.
Regarding the comments from the State of Vermont, the proposed
inspection program includes reviews, observations, and parallel grading
of selected operating tests and written examinations by NRC examiners,
reviews of operational performance, interviews of facility personnel,
and a general inspection of the facility licensee's implementation of
its requalification training program. Application of the inspection
program in the case of Vermont Yankee would have disclosed
discrepancies in evaluation of operator performance and also would have
allowed insight to other, more programmatic, deficiencies. The
requalification inspection program implements routine NRC inspections
as recommended by the State of Illinois as well as ``for cause''
examinations.
The Commission believes the existing regulation should not be
deleted in the case of non-power reactors, as recommended in the public
comments. A continuing need exists for the regulation to apply to
operators of all types of reactors. The proposed amendment will
continue to ensure operational safety at non-power reactors by
inspecting facility requalification programs rather than conducting
requalification examinations. The NRC will maintain examiner
proficiency by conducting examinations for initial license applicants.
2. Proposed Amendment: Require that facility licensees submit to
the NRC their annual requalification operating tests and comprehensive
requalification written examinations at least 30 days prior to
conducting these tests and examinations.
General Statement: Of the 42 comments received, only 1 respondent
favored the amendment as proposed. This response came from a university
operated research reactor, stating that submitting requalification
examinations by the facility to the NRC for review prior to
administering the examination was less burdensome, by comparison, than
retaining the existing regulation. On the other hand, most respondents
stated that submitting all examinations and tests to the NRC 30 days
before their administration would place an undue burden on facility
licensees and the NRC with little return on the investment. Several
respondents offered alternatives that included shortening the lead
time, requiring that the examinations and tests be submitted after they
are administered, submitting the question banks from which the
examinations are developed, and simply having the examinations
available for on-site inspection.
Response: This requirement was included in the proposed regulation
so that the NRC could evaluate the proposed examination materials, in
conjunction with other information already available to the NRC, to
determine the scope of the on-site inspection. However, the pilot
inspection program has demonstrated that a facility's proposed
examinations are not an absolute necessity in preparing for the on-site
activities. In addition, those facility licensees' examination and
simulator scenario banks that were evaluated were found to be adequate
for an effective requalification program to be managed by the
licensees' staffs. Although being able to review the proposed
examinations at the NRC did save some on-site inspection effort, the
inspectors were still able to complete the Temporary Inspection
procedures within the time allowed (i.e., two inspectors on-site for 1
week).
The NRC believes that it will be advantageous to have selected
examinations available for review at NRC offices in addition to other
documentation customarily provided, consistent with the Commission's
inspection program needs. During the on-site inspection, the inspectors
will observe the facility evaluators administer written examinations
and operating tests to the crews being evaluated. Although the facility
examination may last several weeks, the NRC's on-site inspection
usually lasts only one week. Normally, the NRC intends to request that
the facility licensee submit only those written examinations or
operating tests that will be administered during the week of the NRC
inspection. Obtaining this examination material in advance of the
inspection will allow the inspectors to prepare for their on-site
inspection activities by reviewing the examinations or tests before
they travel to the facility. This advance preparation will result in a
more effective use of on-site inspection time and reduce the burden on
the facility licensee by placing fewer demands on their training staff
during the examination week. Therefore, the NRC will delete the
amendment to Sec. 55.59(c) as proposed from the final rulemaking and
will require instead that comprehensive written examinations or
operating tests be submitted upon request consistent with the
Commission's inspection program needs and sustained effectiveness of
the facility licensee's examination and simulator scenario banks.
3. Proposed Amendment: Include facility licensees in the scope of
10 CFR part 55, specifically Sec. 55.2, will be revised to include
facility licensees.
General Statement: Only 1 of the 42 respondents to the FRN
addressed and endorsed this provision of the proposed rulemaking.
Response: The NRC believes the absence of comments regarding this
proposal substantiates the NRC's position that this is simply an
administrative correction and does not materially change the intent of
the regulation. The NRC considers this amendment as an administrative
addition to these regulations. The NRC proposed this change to
eliminate the ambiguities between the regulations of parts 50 and 55.
Section 50.54 (i) through (m) already imposes part 55 requirements on
facility licensees, and part 55 already specifies requirements for
facility licensees. On this basis, the NRC has determined that the
requirement should be adopted.
Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability
The Commission has determined that under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in
subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, that this rule is not a major Federal
Action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment and
therefore, an environmental impact statement is not required.
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
This final rule amends information collection requirements that are
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.). These requirements were approved by the Office of Management and
Budget, approval number 3150-0101.
The rule will relax existing information collection requirements
for the separately cleared, ``Reactor Operator and Senior Reactor
Operator Licensing Training and Requalification Programs.'' The public
burden for this collection of information is expected to be reduced by
3 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 collection
of information. Send comments regarding the estimated burden reduction
or any other aspect of this collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden, to the Information and Records
Management Branch (MNBB-7714), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001; and to the Desk Officer, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, NEOB-3019, (3150-0101), Office of
Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503.
Regulatory Analysis
The Commission has prepared a regulatory analysis on this
regulation. The analysis examines the values (benefits) and impacts
(costs) of implementing the regulation for licensed operator
requalification. The 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 Anthony DiPalo,
Division of Regulatory Applications, Office of Nuclear Regulatory
Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555,
telephone (301) 492-3784.
Regulatory Flexibility Certification
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C.
605(b), the Commission certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small
entities. This rule primarily affects the companies that own and
operate light-water nuclear power reactors and non-power research
reactors. The companies that own and operate these reactors do not fall
within the scope of the definition of ``small entity'' set forth in the
Regulatory Flexibility Act or the Small Business Size Standards set out
in regulations issued by the Small Business Administration in 13 CFR
part 121.
Backfit Analysis
The staff believes that it could ensure and improve operational
safety at each facility by directing its resources to inspect and
oversee facility requalification programs rather than conducting
requalification examinations. The staff's experience since the
beginning of the requalification program indicates that weaknesses in
the implementation of the facility programs are generally the root
cause of significant deficiencies in the performance of licensed
operators. The staff could more effectively allocate its resources to
perform on-site inspections of facility requalification examination and
training programs in accordance with indicated programmatic performance
rather than scheduling examiners in accordance with the number of
individuals requiring license renewal. By re-directing the examiner
resources, the staff expects to find and correct programmatic
weaknesses earlier, and thus improve operational safety.
Currently, facility licensees assist in developing and coordinating
the NRC-conducted requalification examinations. The assistance includes
providing to the NRC the training material used for development of the
written examinations and operating tests and providing facility
personnel to work with the NRC during the development and conduct of
the examinations. The Commission has concluded on the basis of the
analysis required by 10 CFR 50.109, that complying with the
requirements of this final rule would reduce the regulatory burden on
the facility licensees by reducing the effort expended by the facility
licensees to assist the NRC in developing and conducting NRC
requalification examinations for licensed operators. A smaller increase
in regulatory burden is anticipated due to a need for the facility
licensee to provide data and support for periodic requalification
program inspections.
As part of the final rule, facility licensees shall have a
requalification program reviewed and approved by the Commission and
shall, upon request consistent with the Commission's inspection program
needs, submit a copy of its comprehensive written examinations or
annual operating tests to the Commission. The NRC has determined that
the pilot inspection program demonstrated that the facility's proposed
examinations are not an absolute necessity in preparing for the on-site
activities. Therefore, the NRC would request test submittal on a case-
by-case basis consistent with the Commission's test inspection program
needs and review these examinations for conformance with 10 CFR
55.59(a)(2)(i&ii). The NRC would continue to expect each facility to
meet all of the conditions required of a requalification program in
accordance with 10 CFR 55.59(c).
Licensed operators would not have to take any additional actions.
Each operator would be expected to continue to meet all the conditions
of his or her license described in 10 CFR 55.53, which includes passing
the facility requalification examinations for license renewal. Each
licensed operator would be expected to continue to meet the
requirements of the facility requalification training program. However,
the licensed operator would no longer be required to pass a
requalification examination conducted by the NRC during the term of his
or her license in addition to passing the facility licensee's
requalification examinations, as a condition of license renewal.
The ``Scope'' of part 55, 10 CFR 55.2, would be revised to include
facility licensees. This is an administrative addition to these
regulations. It eliminates currently existing ambiguities between the
regulations of parts 50 and 55. Part 50, in Sec. 50.54(i) through (m),
already imposes part 55 requirements on facility licensees, and part 55
already specifies requirements for facility licensees.
The Commission believes that licensed operators are one of the main
components and possibly the most critical component of continued safe
reactor operation, especially with respect to mitigating the
consequences of emergency conditions. Two-thirds of the requalification
programs that have been evaluated as ``unsatisfactory'' had significant
problems in the quality or implementation of the plant's emergency
operating procedures (EOPs). In some of these cases, the facility
licensees did not train their operators on challenging simulator
scenarios or did not retrain their operators after the EOPs were
revised. The Commission believes that it could have identified these
problems sooner by periodic inspection of facility requalification
training and examination programs. Facility licensees could have then
corrected these problems and improved overall operator job performance
sooner.
This final rule will improve operational safety by providing the
staff direction to find and correct weaknesses in facility licensee
requalification programs. The experience gained from conducting NRC
requalification examinations indicates that the NRC is largely
duplicating the efforts of the facility licensees to maintain a high
standard of operator performance. The NRC could now, by amending the
regulations, more effectively use its resources to oversee facility
licensee requalification programs rather than conducting individual
operator requalification examinations. In FY92, the NRC resources
committed to this program for NRC staff and contractor support were
approximately 12 FTE and $1.3 million (equivalent to 8 FTE),
respectively. The staff projects that a slightly larger average number
of examinations, requiring approximately 1.5 additional staff FTE and
an additional $200,000 contractual support (equivalent to 1.25 FTE),
would be conducted in future years if the NRC continues conducting
requalification examinations for all licensed operators. Thus, if it is
assumed that without the rule change, this program would continue into
the future, the relevant baseline NRC burden would approximate $2.85
(1.35 NRC + 1.5 contractor) million per year in 1992 dollars for FY93
through FY97. The 13.5 (12 + 1.5) NRC staff years (FTE) were converted
to $1.35 million ($100,000 per staff year) based on allowances for
composite wage rates and direct benefits.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\NRC labor costs presented here differ from those developed
under the NRC's license fee recovery program. For regulatory
analysis purposes, labor costs are developed under strict
incremental cost principles wherein only variable costs that are
directly related to the development, implementation, and operation
and maintenance of the proposed requirement are included. This
approach is consistent with guidance set forth in NUREG/CR-3568, ``A
Handbook for Value Impact Assessment,'' and general cost benefit
methodology. Alternatively, NRC labor costs for fee recovery
purposes are appropriately designed for full cost recovery of the
services rendered and, as such, include non-incremental costs (e.g.
overhead and administrative and logistical support costs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the final rule change, NRR's analysis indicates that NRC
staff could perform all necessary inspections of requalification exam
programs with 11 NRC FTEs and $300,000 in contractor support,
equivalent to 1.85 contractor FTEs, per year. At $100,000 per NRC FTE
and $162,000 per contractor FTE, this converts to an annual cost in
1992 dollars of $1.4 million. Thus, the annual savings in NRC operating
costs is estimated to be on the order of $1.45 million ($2.85 million
less $1.4 million). Over an assumed 25-year remaining life, based on a
5% real discount rate, the 1992 present worth savings in NRC resources
is estimated at about $20.25 million in 1992 dollars.
Each facility licensee would continue in its present manner of
conducting its licensed operator requalification program. However, this
final rule reduces the burden on the facility licensees because each
facility licensee would have its administrative and technical staff
expend fewer hours than are now needed to assist in developing and
conducting the NRC requalification examinations. Facility licensees are
expected to realize a combined annual operational cost savings of
approximately $1.24 million. Over an assumed 25-year remaining life,
based on a 5% real discount rate, the 1992 present worth industry
savings is estimated at about $17.48 million in 1992 dollars.
In summary, the final rule will result in improved operational
safety by providing more timely identification of weaknesses in
facility licensees' requalification programs. In addition, the final
rule would also reduce the resources expended by both the NRC and the
licensees. The Commission has, therefore, concluded that the final rule
meets the requirements of 10 CFR 50.109, that there would be a
substantial increase in the overall protection of public health and
safety and the cost of implementation is justified.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 55
Criminal penalty, Manpower training programs, Nuclear power plants
and reactors, Reporting and record-keeping 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; the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982; and 5
U.S.C. 552 and 553; the NRC is adopting the following amendments to 10
CFR part 55.
PART 55--OPERATORS' LICENSES
1. The authority citation for 10 CFR 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. 55.2, paragraph (c) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 55.2 Scope.
* * * * *
(c) Any facility licensee.
Sec. 55.57 [Amended]
3. Section 55.57 is amended by removing paragraph (b)(2)(iv).
4. In Sec. 55.59, the introductory text of paragraph (c) is revised
to read as follows:
Sec. 55.59 Requalification.
* * * * *
(c) Requalification program requirements. A facility licensee shall
have a requalification program reviewed and approved by the Commission
and shall, upon request consistent with the Commission's inspection
program needs, submit to the Commission a copy of its comprehensive
requalification written examinations or annual operating tests. The
requalification program must meet the requirements of paragraphs (c)
(1) through (7) of this section. In lieu of paragraphs (c) (2), (3),
and (4) of this section, the Commission may approve a program developed
by using a systems approach to training.
* * * * *
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of February, 1994.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Samuel J. Chilk,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 94-2927 Filed 2-8-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P