[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 126 (Thursday, June 30, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42745-42756]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15547]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026; NRC-2008-0252]


Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Unit 3; Southern Nuclear 
Operating Company, Inc.; Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe Power 
Corporation, MEAG Power SPVM, LLC., MEAG Power SPVJ, LLC., MEAG Power 
SPVP, LLC., and the City of Dalton, Georgia

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Grant of exemption; approval of alternative.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is granting an 
exemption from the requirements of the Commission's regulations that 
require a portion of the operating test, which is part of the operator 
licensing examination, to be administered in a plant walk-through and 
approving alternative examination criteria in response to a May 27, 
2016, request from Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC or facility 
licensee).

DATES: This exemption is effective as of June 24, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2008-0252 when contacting the 
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You 
may obtain publicly available information related to this document 
using any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2008-0252. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact 
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and 
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, 
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]. The 
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available 
in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is referenced. The 
facility licensee's exemption request was submitted to the NRC by 
letter dated May 27, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16148A484).
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Kallan, Office of New Reactors, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; 
telephone: 301-415-2809; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (SNC or facility 
licensee); Georgia Power Company; Oglethorpe Power Corporation; MEAG 
Power SPVM, LLC.; MEAG Power SPVJ, LLC.; MEAG Power SPVP, LLC.; and the 
City of Dalton, Georgia (together, the ``VEGP Owners''); are the 
holders of Combined License (COL) Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92, which 
authorize the construction and operation of VEGP Units 3 and 4, 
respectively.\1\ VEGP Units 3 and 4 are Westinghouse AP1000 
pressurized-water reactors under construction in Burke County, Georgia. 
They are co-located with VEGP Units 1 and 2, which are two operating 
Westinghouse four-loop pressurized-water reactors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ SNC is authorized by the VEGP Owners to exercise 
responsibility and control over the physical construction, 
operation, and maintenance of the facility, and is the ``facility 
licensee'' as defined in 10 CFR 55.4 for purposes of this 
evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    VEGP Unit 3 is under construction and most of the plant systems 
have not been built. The facility licensee requests an exemption from 
the portion of section 55.45(b) of title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR), requiring that the ``the [operator and senior 
operator] operating test will be administered in a plant walkthrough.'' 
Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.11, the ``Commission may, upon application by an 
interested person, or upon its own initiative, grant such exemptions 
from the requirements of the regulations in this part as it determines 
are authorized by law and will not endanger life or property and are 
otherwise in the public interest.''

[[Page 42746]]

    As an alternative to the in-plant methods of testing described in 
NUREG-1021, ``Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power 
Reactors,'' the facility licensee proposed that applicants for operator 
and senior operator licenses at VEGP Unit 3 be tested using discussion 
and performance methods in combination with plant layout diagrams, 
maps, equipment diagrams, pictures, and mock-ups. Approval of proposed 
alternatives is addressed in NUREG-1021, ES-201, ``Initial Operator 
Licensing Examination Process,'' Section B, ``Background.'' As stated 
therein,

    Facility licensees may propose alternatives to the examination 
criteria contained here and evaluate how the proposed alternatives 
provide an acceptable method of complying with the Commission's 
regulations. The NRC staff will review any proposed alternatives and 
make a decision regarding their acceptability. The NRC will not 
approve any alternative that would compromise the agency's statutory 
responsibility to prescribe uniform conditions for the operator 
licensing examinations.

    The facility licensee also requested an exemption from 10 CFR 
55.40(a) and (b), which require, in part, the Commission and facility 
licensees to prepare the operating tests required by 10 CFR 55.45 in 
accordance with the criteria in NUREG-1021, because ES-301, Section 
D.4.a requires in-plant system job performance measures (JPMs) be 
performed in the plant and Section D.4.b requires that one JPM be 
performed in the radiologically controlled area (RCA) as part of the 
walk-through administered to applicants during the operating test. 
However, the NRC staff determined that no exemption to the requirement 
to use the examination criteria in NUREG-1021, as stated in 10 CFR 
55.40(a) and (b), is necessary because ES-201 allows for the 
consideration of alternatives. In other words, NUREG-1021 allows 
alternative testing methods to be used as long as an alternative does 
not compromise the agency's statutory responsibility to prescribe 
uniform conditions.

Requirements for Operator Licensing Examinations

    The Commission's regulations in 10 CFR part 55, ``Operators' 
Licenses,'' in part establish procedures and criteria for the issuance 
of licenses to operators and senior operators of utilization facilities 
licensed under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and 10 CFR 
part 52, ``Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power 
Plants.'' Per 10 CFR 55.51, ``Issuance of Licenses,'' ``If the 
Commission determines that an applicant for an operator license or a 
senior operator license meets the requirements of the Act and its 
regulations, it will issue a license in the form and containing any 
conditions and limitations it considers appropriate and necessary.'' 
Section 55.33(a) states in part that the Commission will approve an 
initial application for a license if it finds that (1) the applicant's 
health is sufficient and (2) the applicant has passed the requisite 
written examination and operating test in accordance with 10 CFR 55.41, 
``Written Examination: Operators,'' or 10 CFR 55.43, ``Written 
Examination: Senior Operators,'' and 10 CFR 55.45, ``Operating Tests.'' 
These examinations and tests determine whether the applicant for an 
operator license has learned to operate a facility competently and 
safely, and additionally, in the case of a senior operator, whether the 
applicant has learned to direct the licensed activities of licensed 
operators competently and safely.
    The regulations in 10 CFR 55.40(a) require the Commission to use 
the criteria in NUREG-1021, ``Operator Licensing Examination Standards 
for Power Reactors,'' in effect 6 months before the examination date to 
prepare the written examinations required by 10 CFR 55.41 and 55.43 and 
the operating tests required by 10 CFR 55.45; 10 CFR 55.40(a) also 
requires the Commission to use the criteria in NUREG-1021 to evaluate 
the written examinations and operating tests prepared by power reactor 
facility licensees pursuant to 10 CFR 55.40(b).
    As stated in 10 CFR 55.40(b), power reactor facility licensees may 
prepare, proctor, and grade the written examinations required by 10 CFR 
55.41 and 55.43 and may prepare the operating tests required by 10 CFR 
55.45, subject to the following conditions: (1) They shall prepare the 
required examinations and tests in accordance with the criteria in 
NUREG-1021 as described in 10 CFR 55.40(a); (2) pursuant to 10 CFR 
55.49, they shall establish, implement, and maintain procedures to 
control examination security and integrity; (3) an authorized 
representative of the facility licensee shall approve the required 
examinations and tests before they are submitted to the Commission for 
review and approval; and (4) they must receive Commission approval of 
their proposed written examinations and operating tests.
    In accordance with 10 CFR 55.45(a), ``[t]he operating test, to the 
extent applicable, requires the applicant to demonstrate an 
understanding of and the ability to perform the actions necessary to 
accomplish a representative sample from among . . . 13 [listed] 
items.'' In accordance with 10 CFR 55.45(b):
    Implementation--Administration. The operating test will be 
administered in a plant walkthrough and in either--
    (1) A simulation facility that the Commission has approved for use 
after application has been made by the facility licensee under Sec.  
55.46(b);
    (2) A plant-referenced simulator (Sec.  55.46(c)); or
    (3) The plant, if approved for use in the administration of the 
operating test by the Commission under Sec.  55.46(b).
The ``in a plant walkthrough'' portion of 10 CFR 55.45(b) is the 
subject of the exemption request.
    NUREG-1021, Revision 10 (December 2014) (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML14352A297) establishes the policies, procedures, and practices for 
examining applicants for operator and senior operator licenses and 
licensees pursuant to 10 CFR part 55; it contains the examination 
standards that ensure the equitable and consistent administration of 
operator licensing examinations. NUREG-1021 is organized by topic into 
chapters designated with ``ES,'' which stands for ``examination 
standard.'' As relevant here, Chapter 2 (ES-2xx) addresses initial pre-
examination activities and Chapter 3 (ES-3xx) addresses initial 
operating tests. Chapter 3 includes ES-301, ``Preparing Initial 
Operating Tests,'' and ES-302, ``Administering Operating Tests to 
Initial License Applicants.''
    NRC examiners and facility licensees use NUREG-1021 together with 
the applicable NRC knowledge and abilities (K/A) catalog. NUREG-2103, 
``Knowledge and Abilities Catalog for Nuclear Power Plant Operators: 
Westinghouse AP1000 Pressurized-Water Reactors,'' was developed 
specifically to address the passive nature of the Westinghouse AP1000 
design. The NRC K/A catalogs provide the basis for the development of 
content-valid operator licensing examinations. NUREG-1021, Appendix A, 
``Overview of Generic Examination Concepts,'' Section C.1, ``Content 
Validity,'' describes that a content-valid examination establishes a 
link between the examination and the duties that the applicants will 
perform on the job. Also, this section states,

    Test items selected for inclusion in an NRC examination should 
be based on K/As contained in the appropriate K/A catalog. Testing 
outside the documented K/As can jeopardize the content validity of 
the examination. Content validity can also be

[[Page 42747]]

reduced if important K/As are omitted from the examination.

The NRC K/A catalogs contain K/A statements that have been rated for 
their importance with respect to the safe operation of the plant. An 
importance rating less than 2.5 represents a K/A statement of limited 
importance for the safe operation of a plant. Such statements are 
generally considered as inappropriate content for NRC licensing 
examinations.
    Operator licensing examinations developed using the applicable NRC 
K/A catalog along with the guidance in NUREG-1021 will sample the 13 
items listed in 10 CFR 55.45(a) and also ensure that exam topics are 
associated with K/A statements of significant importance for the safe 
operation of the plant. Thus, the examinations will be content-valid.

The Operating Test

    NUREG-1021, Revision 10, ES-301, ``Preparing Initial Operating 
Tests,'' Section B, ``Background,'' describes that the requirements in 
10 CFR 55.45 for the operating test are met by administering a 
simulator test and a walk-through.
    The simulator test is typically administered in a team format with 
up to three applicants in the main control room simulator. It 
implements Items 1-8 and 11-13 of 10 CFR 55.45(a) and is the most 
performance-based aspect of the operating test. NRC examiners use the 
simulator test to evaluate each applicant's ability to safely operate 
the plant systems under dynamic, integrated conditions.
    In contrast, the NRC examiners administer the walk-through to 
applicants one-on-one. The walk-through consists of two parts: 
Administrative topics and control room/in-plant systems. The 
administrative topics part of the walk-through implements Items 9-12 of 
10 CFR 55.45(a) and covers K/As associated with administrative control 
of the plant. The control room/in-plant systems part of the walk-
through implements the requirements of Items 3, 4, 7, 8, and 9 of 10 
CFR 55.45(a) and encompasses several types of systems, including 
primary coolant, emergency coolant, decay heat removal, auxiliary, 
radiation monitoring, and instrumentation and control. ES-301 describes 
that the control room/in-plant systems part of the walk-through is used 
to determine whether the applicant has an adequate knowledge of plant 
system design and is able to safely operate those systems. This part of 
the walk-through focuses primarily on those systems with which licensed 
operators are most involved (i.e., those having controls and 
indications in the main control room). To a lesser extent, it also 
ensures that the applicant is familiar with the design and operation of 
systems located outside the main control room.
    To evaluate an applicant's knowledge and abilities relative to 
control room/in-plant systems and competence in the administrative 
topics, the NRC examiners administer JPMs and, when necessary, ask 
specific follow-up questions based on the applicant's performance of 
the JPM. NUREG-1021 defines a JPM as ``[a]n evaluation tool that 
requires the applicant to perform (or simulate) a task that is 
applicable to the license level of the examination.''
    Tasks are selected for evaluation in accordance with ES-301, 
Section D.4, ``Specific Instructions for the `Control Room/In-Plant 
Systems' Walk-Through.'' This section directs NRC examiners and 
facility licensees to select plant systems from the nine safety 
functions listed in the applicable NRC K/A Catalog. Table 1, ``Plant 
Systems by Safety Function,'' in NUREG-2103 contains a list of the 
AP1000 plant systems that are important to each of the nine major 
safety functions. ES-301, Section D.4.a, directs exam writers to (1) 
select plant systems from among the nine safety functions and then (2) 
for each plant system selected, select from either the NRC K/A catalog 
or the facility licensee's site-specific task list a task for which a 
JPM exists or can be developed. NUREG-1021, Appendix C, ``Job 
Performance Measure Guidelines,'' contains Form ES-C-2, ``Job 
Performance Measure Quality Checklist,'' (i.e., the JPM Checklist), 
which states that every JPM should, among other things, (1) be 
supported by the facility's job task analysis (i.e., the JPM must 
require applicants to perform tasks that are included in the facility 
licensee's site-specific task list, which is the product of its job 
task analysis) and (2) be ``operationally important.'' To be 
``operationally important,'' the JPM Checklist states that a JPM must 
meet the threshold criterion of 2.5 in NUREG-2103 (i.e., the K/A 
statement associated with the JPM must have an importance rating of 2.5 
of higher), or as determined by the facility and agreed to by the NRC.
    Additionally, ES-301, Section E.2.a, ``NRC Examiner Review,'' 
directs examiners to independently review each operating test for 
content, wording, operational validity (i.e., test items address an 
actual or conceivable mental or psychomotor activity performed on the 
job), and level of difficulty using Form ES-301-3, ``Operating Test 
Quality Checklist.'' JPMs must satisfy the criteria on Form ES-301-3 
and the JPM Checklist to be administered as part of an operating test.
    Per 10 CFR 55.45(b), the operating test will be administered in 
part in a plant walk-through. Further requirements for the plant walk-
through (i.e., the in-plant portion of the operating test) are given in 
ES-301, Section D.3, ``Specific Instructions for the `Administrative 
Topics' Walk-through,'' and Section D.4, ``Specific Instructions for 
the `Control Room/In-Plant Systems' Walk-Through.'' Concerning in-plant 
testing (i.e. ``plant walk-through''), ES-301, Section D.4.a. states 
that from the nine safety function groupings identified in the K/A 
catalog, the appropriate number of systems to be evaluated based on the 
applicant's license level is given by the following table: \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In the column labeled ``License Level,'' ``RO'' means 
``reactor operator'' or ``operator; ``SRO-I'' means ``senior reactor 
operator--instant'' or ``senior operator;'' and ``SRO-U'' means 
``senior reactor operator--upgrade,'' and refers to an operator 
applying to upgrade to a senior operator license.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              License level                      Control room                  In-plant                Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RO......................................  8.........................  3.........................              11
SRO-I...................................  7.........................  3.........................              10
SRO-U...................................  2 or 3....................  3 or 2....................               5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, ES-301, Section D.4.a states: ``Each of the control 
room systems and evolutions (and separately each of the in-plant 
systems and evolutions) selected for RO and SRO-I applicants should 
evaluate a different safety function, and the same system or evolution 
should not be used to evaluate more than one safety function in each 
location.''
    Also, ES-301, Section D.4.b states, ``at least one of the tasks 
conducted in the plant shall evaluate the applicant's ability to 
implement actions required during an emergency or abnormal

[[Page 42748]]

condition, and another shall require the applicant to enter the RCA.''
    Taken together, the statements in ES-301, Sections D.4.a and D.4.b 
show that, for purposes of testing, the control room is separate from 
the plant. Control room system JPMs are typically performed in the 
control room simulator. Because plant equipment is not controlled from 
the simulator, applicants can demonstrate knowledge and abilities by 
using the simulator to perform the actions necessary to accomplish the 
task during the JPM. The simulator provides feedback to the applicant 
about the actions that he or she takes during performance of the task. 
For example, if the applicant operates a switch to start a pump, the 
simulator provides indications to the applicant that will allow him or 
her to determine whether the pump has started.

Administration of In-Plant JPM

    Typically, each JPM begins with the NRC examiner providing the 
applicant with a cue sheet, which contains the cue for the applicant to 
begin to perform the task. The cue sheet also provides the applicant 
with any initial conditions that he or she should assume have been 
established. After receiving the cue sheet, the applicant leads the NRC 
examiner to the location in the plant where the task will be performed. 
Once the applicant arrives at the correct location in the plant, he or 
she uses the appropriate plant procedure and the plant equipment in 
that location as a prop to describe to the NRC examiner exactly how he 
or she would perform the task. The task is not actually performed 
because applicants are not permitted to operate plant equipment while 
performing a JPM; only licensed control room operators can direct the 
operation of plant equipment (i.e., an NRC examiner cannot direct the 
operation of plant equipment). Therefore, as stated in NUREG-1021, ES-
301, Attachment 2, Page 21, to successfully complete a JPM in the 
plant, the applicant must ``describe exactly what it takes to perform 
an action.'' As described in NUREG-1021, Appendix C, ``Job Performance 
Measure Guidelines,'' Section B.4, ``Develop Examiner Cues,'' the NRC 
examiners develop scripted cues to provide the applicant with specific 
feedback on the equipment's response(s) to actions the applicant 
describes that he or she would take. These cues are necessary during 
JPMs performed in the plant because the applicant is not actually 
operating any equipment in the plant, and therefore the applicant will 
not have available the normal indications that would be observed during 
actual task performance.
    Consider the following example. An NRC examiner provides the 
applicant with a cue sheet that directs him or her to start a standby 
diesel generator from its local control panel, which is located in the 
plant (i.e., outside of the main control room), for a monthly equipment 
performance test. The applicant first must demonstrate to the NRC 
examiner that he or she can locate that particular local control panel 
in the plant by walking the NRC examiner to it. Once at the local 
control panel, the applicant must then verbally describe exactly how he 
or she would operate the control panel to perform the task of starting 
the standby diesel generator. The applicant will use the local control 
panel as a prop during this discussion (e.g., the applicant could point 
to a control switch on the control panel to show the NRC examiner that 
he or she knows which one must be operated during actual task 
performance to raise the speed of the diesel generator). The applicant 
would also need to describe how he or she would expect the standby 
diesel generator to respond to his or her actions and the indications 
that he or she would use to monitor whether the standby diesel 
generator responded as expected. Because the equipment is not actually 
being operated during an in-plant JPM, the NRC examiner provides 
specific feedback regarding the equipment's reactions to the actions 
the applicant says that he or she would take.
    If the applicant correctly locates the equipment in the plant and 
describes what it takes to perform the task, then the applicant will 
successfully complete the JPM. If the applicant demonstrates a lack of 
understanding of the equipment and procedures, then the NRC examiner 
will ask follow-up questions, as necessary, to confirm whether the 
applicant is familiar with the design and operation of that plant 
system.
    Additionally, at least one JPM must be performed in the RCA. This 
provides an opportunity for the applicant to demonstrate knowledge of 
significant radiation hazards located in radiation and/or contamination 
areas inside the RCA and the ability to perform procedures to reduce 
excessive levels of radiation and to guard against personnel exposure.

Cold Licensing Process

    NUREG-1021, ES-202, Section D.4, ``Cold License Eligibility,'' 
states, ``[c]old licensing is the process used prior to fuel load that 
provides a consistent method for operations personnel to acquire the 
knowledge and experience required for licensed operator duties 
following fuel load.'' The cold licensing process is described in 
Appendix A, ``Cold License Training Plan,'' of NEI 06-13A, ``Template 
for an Industry Training Program Description,'' Revision 2 (ADAMS 
Accession No. ML090910554). ``Final Safety Evaluation for Topical 
Report NEI 06-13A, `Template for an Industry Training Program 
Description,' '' Revision 1, dated December 5, 2008 (ADAMS Accession 
No. ML082950140), documents the NRC staff's approval of NEI 06-13A for 
use in combined license applications. The facility licensee 
incorporated NEI 06-13A, Revision 2, in its entirety into the VEGP 
Units 3 and 4 Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), Chapter 13, 
``Conduct of Operation'' (ADAMS Accession No. ML15194A468). Section 
13.2A.3, ``Conduct of On-the-Job Training (OJT),'' of the VEGP Units 3 
and 4 UFSAR states, ``[u]ntil plant construction is completed, 
acceptable methods for the conduct of on-the-job training include 
discussion, simulation, and use of mockup equipment and virtual reality 
technology.'' Section 13.2A.6, ``Cold Licensing Process Applicability 
and Termination,'' provides additional guidance on the conduct of OJT:

    As plant systems, components, and structures are completed, and 
as integrated plant operations begin, the systematic approach to 
training process will be used to adjust cold license class training 
methods . . . The purpose is to optimize student learning using 
actual in-plant training and experience opportunities as they become 
available.

    Additionally, Section 13.2A.7, ``Initial Licensed Operator 
Examination Schedule,'' states, ``[a]dministration of [initial] 
licensed operator examinations begins approximately 18 months prior to 
fuel load.''

II. Request/Action

    By letter from Ms. Karen Fili, Site Vice President, VEGP Units 3 
and 4, to the NRC dated May 27, 2016, ``Southern Nuclear Operating 
Company Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP) Units 3 and 4 Revised 
Request for Exemption and RAI Response: Operator Licensing'' ND-16-0747 
(ADAMS Accession No. ML16148A484) (``May 27 letter''), the facility 
licensee stated that it seeks to begin operator licensing examinations 
in July 2016. The May 27 letter superseded the letter from Ms. Karen 
Fili, Site Vice President, VEGP Units 3 and 4, to the NRC dated April 
15, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16109A013) (i.e., the April 15 letter). 
The May 27 letter also incorporated the facility licensee's responses 
to two requests for

[[Page 42749]]

additional information (RAIs) issued in response to the April 15 
letter: RAI #9 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16112A425) and RAI #10 (ADAMS 
Accession No. ML16118A183).
    The facility licensee (1) applied for exemptions from the 
requirements in 10 CFR part 55 that require using a plant walk-through 
as part of the operating test (i.e., in-plant testing); and (2) 
proposed alternative examination criteria and methods.

Application for Exemption

    Because VEGP Unit 3 is under construction and most of the plant 
systems have not yet been built, the facility licensee requests an 
exemption from the requirement in 10 CFR 55.45(b) to administer a 
portion of the operating test ``in a plant walkthrough.'' The facility 
licensee also requests an exemption from 10 CFR 55.40(a) and (b), which 
require, in part, the Commission and facility licensees to prepare the 
operating tests required by 10 CFR 55.45 in accordance with the 
criteria in NUREG-1021, because ES-301, Section D.4.a and D.4.b require 
that in-plant system JPMs be performed in the plant (and also that one 
JPM be performed in the RCA) as part of the walk-through administered 
to applicants during the operating test. However, with respect to 
exemptions from 10 CFR 55.40(a) and (b), the Commission determined that 
none were necessary because the Commission and the facility license 
would continue to follow NUREG-1021, as required by 10 CFR 55.40(a) and 
(b), when the Commission and facility licensee used alternative 
examination criteria pursuant to ES-201, Section B, ``Background,'' of 
NUREG-1021. The proposed alternative is discussed below.

Proposed Alternative

    The facility licensee proposes an alternative to administering in-
plant system JPMs in the plant: It proposes to use ``cold license 
training plan evaluation methods'' to administer in-plant system JPMs. 
Specifically, in Enclosure 1, ``Plant Walkthrough Exemptions,'' Section 
3.1, ``Administration of In-Plant JPMs Using Cold License Training Plan 
Methods,'' and Section 3.2, ``RCA Mockup Alternative to RCA Entry,'' of 
the May 27 letter, the facility licensee proposes using the following 
``cold license training plan evaluation methods'' in lieu of the plant 
and plant equipment to administer in-plant system JPMs on an operating 
test:
     Plant layout diagrams,\3\ equipment diagrams and plant 
maps--these documents will be used as necessary and/or as appropriate 
to allow an applicant to demonstrate knowledge of plant and equipment 
locations. Applicants will use these tools to describe how they would 
get to the location of the equipment that is the subject of the JPM and 
to identify the building, elevation, and room number in the plant where 
that equipment will be located when construction is complete.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A plant layout diagrams typically include building names, 
building elevations, and room numbers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Breaker Lab--VEGP has a breaker lab that contains 6.9kV 
and 480V breakers that can be operated by applicants.
     Maintenance Flow Loop--contains generic plant equipment, 
such as pumps, valves, and instruments for demonstrating the 
fundamental knowledge of operation and monitoring of plant equipment.
     Remote Shutdown Workstation--The VEGP Units 3 & 4 
simulation facility includes a Remote Shutdown Workstation that 
simulates the controls located in the Remote Shutdown Room.
     RCA mock-up--A training environment that allows applicants 
to demonstrate knowledge of radiation control subjects. Standards for 
entry into the mock-up RCA are identical to the actual RCA. The mock-up 
is used to train outage workers at VEGP Units 1 and 2. It contains 
simulated radiation areas and contaminated areas.
     Discuss method--using the procedure and props such as 
plant layout drawings, mock-ups, maps and pictures of equipment, the 
applicant will describe the actions he or she would take to operate 
equipment and explain how the equipment should respond to these 
actions. Discussion can cover required personal protective equipment 
(PPE), actions, system response and location. Location information can 
include specifics such as building, elevation, and room.
     Perform method--if the JPM is administered in the breaker 
lab, the flow loop trainer, or the remote shutdown room mock-up, 
applicants can perform actions during the JPM as well as discuss.
     Plant location drawings and pictures of plant components 
not directly related to the task that is the subject of the JPM will 
also be made available to maintain discriminatory value (i.e., the 
applicant has the same opportunity to fail as with an in-plant JPM by 
choosing the incorrect component or by incorrectly simulating the 
operation of the correct component).

Expiration of Exemptions and Alternative

    The facility licensee requested that the exemption expire after the 
Commission makes its finding in accordance with 10 CFR 52.103(g) (``The 
licensee shall not operate the facility until the Commission makes a 
finding that the acceptance criteria in the combined license are met, 
except for those acceptance criteria that the Commission found were met 
under Sec.  52.97(a)(2)'') for VEGP Unit 3.

III. Discussion

Granting of Exemption

    Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.11, the Commission may, upon application by 
an interested person, or upon its own initiative, grant exemptions from 
the requirements of 10 CFR part 55 as it determines are (1) authorized 
by law and (2) will not endanger life or property and (3) are otherwise 
in the public interest.
1. The Exemption Is Authorized by Law
    Exemptions are authorized by law where they are not expressly 
prohibited by statute or regulation. A proposed exemption is implicitly 
``authorized by law'' if all of the conditions listed therein are met 
(i.e., will not endanger life or property and is otherwise in the 
public interest), and no other provision prohibits, or otherwise 
restricts, its application. No provisions in law restrict or prohibit 
an exemption to the requirements concerning the plant walk-through 
portion of the operating test; the ``endanger'' and ``public interest'' 
factors are addressed later in this evaluation.
    The regulations in 10 CFR part 55 implement Section 107 of the 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA), which sets requirements 
upon the Commission concerning operators' licenses and states, in part, 
that the Commission shall ``prescribe uniform conditions for licensing 
individuals as operators of any of the various classes of . . . 
utilization facilities licensed'' by the NRC. These requirements in the 
AEA do not expressly prohibit exemptions to the portion of 10 CFR 
55.45(b) addressing in-plant JPMs and plant walk-throughs.
    Preparing and evaluating operator examinations using the criteria 
in NUREG-1021 is a means of ensuring the equitable and consistent 
administration of operator licensing examinations for all applicants 
and thus helps to ensure uniform conditions exist for the

[[Page 42750]]

operator licensing examinations administered as part of the licensing 
process. If the exemption is granted, there will be no changes to the 
preparation and grading of the written examinations, including the 
generic fundamentals examinations. There will be no changes to the 
preparation and evaluation of the simulator portions of the operating 
test. There will be no changes to the administrative portion of the 
operating tests. Although under the exemption part of the in-plant test 
will not be administered in the plant, the preparation and grading of 
the in-plant portion will be unchanged.
    Upon balancing the overall effect on uniformity and consistency 
under the exemption, the NRC staff concludes that the uniform 
conditions will be maintained; the differences in the testing under the 
exemption will not prevent equitable administration of the operator 
licensing examinations or challenge the basis for the NRC examiners' 
licensing decisions. Accordingly, the testing will continue to comply 
with Section 107 of the AEA. Accordingly, the NRC staff has determined 
that granting of the facility licensee's proposed exemption will not 
result in a violation of the AEA, or the Commission's regulations. 
Therefore, the exemption is authorized by law.
2. The Exemption Will Not Endanger Life or Property
    The exemption will not change the fundamental findings needed to 
issue an operator's or senior operator's license to an applicant. As 
stated in 10 CFR 55.33 ``Disposition of an initial application,''

    (a) Requirements for the approval of an initial application. The 
Commission will approve an initial application for a license 
pursuant to the regulations in this part, if it finds that--
    . . .
    (2) Written examination and operating test. The applicant has 
passed the requisite written examination and operating test in 
accordance with Sec. Sec.  55.41 and 55.45 or 55.43 and 55.45. These 
examinations and tests determine whether the applicant for an 
operator's license has learned to operate a facility competently and 
safely, and additionally, in the case of a senior operator, whether 
the applicant has learned to direct the licensed activities of 
licensed operators competently and safely.

    Competent and safe operators protect against endangerment of life 
or property. Accordingly, where the tests adequately determine who is 
competent, those tests are protective of and do not endanger life or 
property.
    The exemption from the requirement in 10 CFR 55.45(b) that the 
operating test be administered partially ``in a plant walkthrough'' 
will not endanger life or property mainly because 10 CFR 55.45(a) will 
still require the applicant to demonstrate an understanding of and the 
ability to perform the actions necessary to accomplish a representative 
sample of tasks. As required by 10 CFR 55.45(a), the content of the 
operating test will continue to be identified, in part, from learning 
objectives derived from a systematic analysis of licensed operator or 
senior operator duties performed by each facility licensee and 
contained in its training program and from information in the Final 
Safety Analysis Report, system description manuals and operating 
procedures, facility license and license amendments, Licensee Event 
Reports, and other materials requested from the facility licensee by 
the Commission. Although applicants will not be tested while physically 
located in front of installed in-plant equipment until the Commission 
makes its finding in accordance with 52.103(g), the knowledge and 
abilities applicants must demonstrate to pass the operating test will 
not change.
    Accordingly, there is no endangerment of life or property as a 
result of the exemption.
3. The Exemption Is Otherwise in the Public Interest
    The Commission's values guide the NRC in maintaining certain 
principles as it carries out regulatory activities. These principles 
focus the NRC on ensuring safety and security while appropriately 
balancing the interests of the NRC's stakeholders, including the public 
and licensees. These principles include Independence, Openness, 
Efficiency, Clarity, and Reliability. Whether granting of an exemption 
to the requirement to perform in-plant system JPMs in the plant would 
be in the public interest depends on consideration and balancing of the 
foregoing factors.

Efficiency

    The public and licensees are all entitled to the best possible 
management and administration of regulatory activities. Regulatory 
activities should be consistent with the degree of risk reduction they 
achieve. Where several effective alternatives are available, the option 
that minimizes the use of resources should be adopted.
    The NRC staff considered two options to determine whether one would 
minimize the use of resources and/or minimize risk: (1) Grant the 
exemption to the plant walk-through requirement and administer operator 
licensing examinations prior to completion of VEGP Unit 3, or (2) deny 
the exemption and wait until the completion of construction to 
administer the operator licensing examinations. For either option, the 
same number of NRC examiners will be required to administer the 
operator licensing examinations at VEGP Unit 3 prior to fuel load. 
Thus, the use of resources is not minimized by administering exams 
before the plant is built. Accordingly, the exemption is neutral with 
respect to the public's interest in efficiency.

Clarity

    Regulations should be coherent, logical, and practical. There 
should be a clear nexus between regulations and agency goals and 
objectives whether explicitly or implicitly stated. Here, the goal of 
the agency is to determine whether applicants for a license have 
learned to operate a facility competently and safely. Because the 
applicants must still demonstrate familiarity with the design and 
operation of systems located outside the main control room using the 
method proposed by the facility licensee, it is not necessary to 
perform the in-plant system JPMs within the completed VEGP Unit 3 to 
achieve this goal. Accordingly, this factor shows that the exemption 
maintains the public interest in clarity.

Reliability

    Regulations should be based on the best available knowledge from 
research and operational experience. Systems interactions, 
technological uncertainties, and the diversity of licensees and 
regulatory activities must all be taken into account so that risks are 
maintained at an acceptably low level. Once established, regulation 
should be perceived to be reliable and not unjustifiably in a state of 
transition. Regulatory actions should always be fully consistent with 
written regulations and should be promptly, fairly, and decisively 
administered so as to lend stability to the nuclear operational and 
planning processes.
    If a sufficient number of applicants do not pass the exams, then 
the facility licensee may not have a sufficient number of personnel 
available for fuel load. If exams commenced in June 2018, and fuel load 
was scheduled for late 2018, then there would only be at most 6 months 
between the time when licensing decisions would be made and fuel load. 
As stated in Enclosure 1, Section 6.3, ``Otherwise in the Public 
Interest,'' of the May 27 letter, initial license training lasts 
approximately 24 months; therefore, 6 months is not sufficient to 
license additional applicants if the needed number of applicants do not 
pass the examinations. Commencing

[[Page 42751]]

examinations now allows the facility licensee to better prepare for 
contingencies and have more assurance that a sufficient number of 
licensed operators will be available for fuel load. If a sufficient 
number of applicants do not pass the operating test, the facility 
licensee can factor the pass/fail decisions into its operational 
schedules starting in 2016, which will provide a sufficient amount of 
time for retraining applicants who do not pass the exam or training a 
new class of applicants. Thus, granting the exemption will lend 
stability to the nuclear operational and planning process in that the 
individual operator licensing decisions will be made much sooner than 
otherwise would be possible.
    With respect to risk reduction, granting of the exemption will not 
require the NRC examiners or the applicants to enter the RCA, and 
therefore, the risk of radiation exposure for applicants and NRC 
examiners will be reduced to zero. Although NRC examiners and 
applicants typically do not receive any significant exposure to 
radiation or contamination during the conduct of operating tests 
administered inside the RCA, the NRC staff concludes that reducing the 
risk of exposure to zero aligns with the agency's goal of maintaining 
exposure to ionizing radiation as low as is reasonably achievable 
(ALARA). Accordingly, this factor shows that the exemption favors the 
public's interest in reliability.

Independence

    Nothing but the highest possible standards of ethical performance 
and professionalism should influence regulation. However, independence 
does not imply isolation. All available facts and opinions must be 
sought openly from licensees and other interested members of the 
public. The many and possibly conflicting public interests involved 
must be considered. Final decisions must be based on objective, 
unbiased assessments of all information, and must be documented with 
reasons explicitly stated.
    With the granting of this exemption, the NRC staff will still 
continue to independently assess whether the applicants at VEGP Unit 3 
have the skills, knowledge, and abilities necessary to operate the 
plant safely and competently. The operator licensing decisions will 
continue to be based on the NRC examiners' objective, unbiased 
assessments of each applicant's performance, which will be documented 
in accordance with NUREG-1021, ES-303, ``Documenting and Grading 
Initial Operating Tests.'' Accordingly, this factor shows that the 
exemption maintains the public interest in independence.

Openness

    Nuclear regulation is the public's business, and it must be 
transacted publicly and candidly. The public must be informed about and 
have the opportunity to participate in the regulatory processes as 
required by law. Open channels of communication must be maintained with 
Congress, other government agencies, licensees, and the public, as well 
as with the international nuclear community.
    Granting the exemption allows the portion of the operating test 
that would otherwise be performed in the plant to be administered in a 
location other than the plant. The operator licensing examination 
process described in NUREG-1021 will still be followed using the 
alternate method proposed by the facility licensee. Therefore, this 
factor shows that the exemption maintains the public's interest in 
openness.

Balancing of Factors

    Accordingly, the balancing of these factors shows that the 
exemption is otherwise in the public interest.

Conclusion

    The Commission concludes that the exemption is (1) authorized by 
law and (2) will not endanger life or property and (3) is otherwise in 
the public interest. Therefore, the Commission grants SNC an exemption 
from the requirement of 10 CFR 55.45(b) to administer a portion of the 
operating test ``in a plant walkthrough.''

Approval of Alternative

    NUREG-1021, ES-201, Section B, ``Background,'' states,

    Facility licensees may propose alternatives to the examination 
criteria contained here and evaluate how the proposed alternatives 
provide an acceptable method of complying with the Commission's 
regulations. The NRC staff will review any proposed alternatives and 
make a decision regarding their acceptability. The NRC will not 
approve any alternative that would compromise the agency's statutory 
responsibility to prescribe uniform conditions for the operator 
licensing examinations.

    As discussed below, the facility licensee's proposed alternatives 
provide an acceptable method of complying with the Commission's 
regulations and will not compromise the agency's statutory 
responsibility to prescribe uniform conditions for the operator 
licensing examinations.
    NUREG-1021, Appendix A, ``Overview of Generic Examination 
Concepts,'' Section B, ``Background,'' discusses internal and external 
attributes of an examination and their relationship to uniform 
conditions. The internal attributes of an examination include its level 
of knowledge (LOK), level of difficulty (LOD), and the use of exam 
question banks. The external attributes of an examination include the 
number and types of items, the length of the examination, security 
procedures, and proctoring instructions. Appendix A states,

    If the internal and external attributes of examinations are 
allowed to vary significantly, the uniform conditions that are 
required by Section 107 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended, and the basis upon which the NRC's licensing decisions rest 
are challenged. The NRC must reasonably control and structure the 
examination processes to ensure the integrity of the licenses it 
issues.

    In order to determine whether uniform conditions for licensing 
individuals as operators and senior operators at VEGP Unit 3 will be 
maintained using the method proposed by the facility licensee, the NRC 
staff performed two actions. First, the NRC staff identified the 
differences between performing in-plant system JPMs in the plant and 
the facility licensee's proposed method of performing in-plant system 
JPMs. These are listed in the table below.

                         Summary of Differences
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Performing in-plant
      #         system JPMs in the   Facility licensee's proposed method
                      plant          of performing  in-plant system JPMs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...........  Applicants             In lieu of walking the NRC examiner
               demonstrate            to the equipment that is the
               knowledge of           subject of the JPM, applicants
               equipment locations    demonstrate knowledge of equipment
               by walking the NRC     locations by using plant layout
               examiner to the        diagrams, equipment diagrams, and
               location of the        maps to describe to the NRC
               equipment that is      examiner how they would get to the
               the subject of the     location of the plant equipment
               JPM in the plant.      that is the subject of the JPM.
                                      Applicants identify the building,
                                      elevation, and room number
                                      associated with the plant
                                      equipment that is the subject of
                                      the JPM.

[[Page 42752]]

 
2...........  Applicants use the     In lieu of using plant equipment as
               plant equipment as a   a prop, applicants use pictures of
               prop while they        equipment or a mock-up of the
               describe and how to    equipment as a prop while they
               operate the            describe and simulate how to
               equipment to perform   operate the equipment to perform
               the task..             the task.
3...........  Applicants must enter  In lieu of entering the RCA in the
               the RCA for at least   plant, applicants enter a mock-up
               one JPM..              RCA for at least one JPM.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the NRC staff evaluated whether the differences could cause 
the internal and external attributes of the in-plant system JPMs 
administered to applicants at VEGP Unit 3 prior to the completion of 
plant construction to vary significantly from those administered to 
applicants at VEGP Unit 3 after the completion of construction. The 
evaluation is documented below.

Evaluation of Internal Attributes

    Level of Knowledge: As stated in NUREG-1021, Appendix A, Section 
C.3.c, ``Level of Knowledge Versus Level of Difficulty,'' LOK 
represents the range of mental demands required to answer a question or 
perform a task. It is a continuum of mental rigor that ranges from 
retrieving fundamental knowledge, which is a low LOK, to retrieving 
that knowledge and also understanding, analyzing, and synthesizing that 
knowledge with other knowledge, which is a high LOK. Test items that 
require a high LOK require multiple mental processing steps, which are 
usually the recall and integration of two or more pieces of data.
    In-plant system JPMs performed in the plant are high LOK test items 
because they require applicants to recall knowledge such as the 
location of plant equipment, which was acquired during the initial 
training program, and also to demonstrate, by walking the NRC examiner 
to the correct equipment in the plant and by describing the actions 
that they would take to operate the equipment, an understanding of and 
familiarity with the design and operation of that equipment. Applicants 
must also respond to the cues provided by the NRC examiner during the 
JPM. To successfully complete the JPM, the applicant must be able to 
analyze the information provided by these cues, apply knowledge of the 
design and operation of the equipment to determine the appropriate 
action(s), and then describe the action(s) to the NRC examiner.
    The NRC staff determined that the three differences listed in Table 
2 do not cause the LOK that an applicant at VEGP Unit 3 must 
demonstrate during in-plant system JPMs administered prior to the 
completion of plant construction to vary significantly from the LOK 
that an applicant must demonstrate during in-plant system JPMs 
performed after the completion of construction at VEGP Unit 3 for the 
following reasons.
     As shown in Difference #1 in Table 2, the facility 
licensee proposes that applicants at VEGP Unit 3 demonstrate knowledge 
of equipment locations by using plant layout diagrams, equipment 
diagrams, and/or maps to show the NRC examiner how they would get to 
the location in the plant where the task would be performed. The 
facility licensee stated in Enclosure 1, ``Plant Walkthrough 
Exemptions,'' Section 5.5, ``Conclusion,'' of the May 27 letter that 
the proposed method of performing in-plant system JPMs will ``not 
impact the ability to maintain equitable and consistent testing under 
uniform conditions because license applicants will be evaluated using 
the same methods employed during their training.'' As described in 
Section 13.2A.1, ``Licensed Operator Experience Requirements Prior To 
Commercial Operation,'' of the VEGP Units 3 and 4 UFSAR, initial 
license training for all applicants at VEGP Unit 3 includes a site 
layout course, which is described in NEI 06-13A, Appendix A as a site 
familiarization course. Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that this 
method will require applicants at VEGP Unit 3 to recall and demonstrate 
knowledge of plant equipment location(s), which were addressed in the 
training program, to successfully complete the JPM even though the JPM 
will not be performed in the plant.
     As shown in Difference #2 in Table 2, the facility 
licensee proposes that applicants at VEGP Unit 3 describe how they will 
operate the equipment and explain how they expect the equipment and 
systems to respond to their actions using props such as pictures of the 
equipment or a mock-up equipment in lieu of the actual equipment in the 
plant. Just as during a JPM in the plant, NRC examiners will need to 
provide scripted cues to the applicants in response to the actions the 
applicants say that they would take. The applicants will have to 
analyze the information provided by these cues, apply knowledge of the 
design and operation of the equipment to determine the appropriate 
action(s), and then describe the action(s) to the NRC examiner. 
Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that this method will require 
applicants at VEGP Unit 3 to describe the actions that they would take 
to operate the equipment and analyze information provided by cues to 
successfully complete the JPM even though the JPM will not be performed 
in the plant.
     As shown in Difference #3 in Table 2, applicants at VEGP 
Unit 3 will be required to demonstrate how to enter the RCA. The 
facility licensee has established a mock-up of the RCA that contains 
simulated radiation control areas and contaminated areas, and 
``standards for entry into the mockup RCA are identical to an actual 
RCA.'' Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that this method will require 
applicants at VEGP Unit 3 to demonstrate knowledge of significant 
radiation hazards located in radiation and/or contamination areas 
inside the RCA and the ability to perform procedures to reduce 
excessive levels of radiation and to guard against personnel exposure 
even though the JPM will not be performed in the plant.
    Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes that the facility licensee's 
proposed method of performing in-plant system JPMs will not cause the 
LOK of the in-plant system JPMs administered to applicants at VEGP Unit 
3 prior to the completion of plant construction to vary significantly 
from those administered to applicants at VEGP Unit 3 after the 
completion of construction.
    Level of Difficulty: As stated in NUREG-1021, Appendix A, Section 
C.3.c, ``Level of Knowledge Versus Level of Difficulty,'' the NRC 
examiners evaluate a test item's LOD ``to ensure that the item can help 
discriminate between safe and unsafe operators.'' ``Safe operators'' 
are the applicants who pass all portions of the operator licensing 
examination with a score of 80% or higher. Thus, NUREG-1021 recommends 
that the difficulty for individual test items range between 70% and 90% 
(i.e., 70-90% of applicants could successfully perform the test item). 
To achieve this, NUREG-1021 states that the NRC examiners must 
integrate the following concepts:

[[Page 42753]]

The LOK of the test item, the operational validity of the test item 
(i.e., the test item requires applicants to perform mental or 
psychomotor activities that they will have to perform on the job), the 
ability of distractors to distract the examinees, and the examinees' 
past performance on items of similar difficulty. Appendix A 
acknowledges that ``assigning a level of difficulty rating to an 
individual test item is a somewhat subjective process.''
    The NRC staff determined that the three differences listed in Table 
2 do not cause the LOD that an applicant at VEGP Unit 3 must 
demonstrate during in-plant system JPMs administered prior to the 
completion of plant construction to vary significantly from the LOD 
that an applicant must demonstrate during in-plant system JPMs 
performed after the completion of construction at VEGP Unit 3 for the 
following reasons.
     As shown in Difference #1 in Table 2, the facility 
licensee proposes that applicants at VEGP Unit 3 demonstrate knowledge 
of equipment locations by using plant layout diagrams, equipment 
diagrams, and/or maps to (1) to describe to the NRC examiner how they 
would get to the location of the plant equipment that is the subject of 
the JPM and to (2) correctly identify the building, elevation of the 
building, and room number where the equipment will be located in VEGP 
Unit 3. Additionally, the facility licensee proposes that ``plant 
layout diagrams and/or pictures of components not directly related to 
the task will also be made available to the applicant to maintain 
discriminatory value . . .''
    When an in-plant system JPM is performed in the plant, applicants 
must physically walk the NRC examiner to the correct location in the 
plant where the task will be performed. Applicants must choose the 
correct location from among all of the other accessible plant 
locations. Similarly, applicants at VEGP Unit 3 must choose the correct 
plant layout diagram(s), equipment diagrams and/or map(s) from a set of 
diagrams in order to show the NRC examiner how they would locate the 
equipment in the plant.
    If an applicant at an operating reactor has spent a sufficient 
amount of time in the plant becoming familiar with its layout and the 
location of plant equipment, then walking the NRC examiner to the 
correct location during a JPM in the plant will be a relatively easy 
task. Otherwise, this will be a relatively difficult task, and the 
applicant may not be able to perform if he or she cannot find the 
equipment that is the subject of the JPM. Similarly, if an applicant at 
VEGP Unit 3 has spent a sufficient amount of time becoming familiar 
with the plant layout diagrams and maps, then using these tools to show 
the NRC examiner how he or she would access the equipment will be a 
relatively easy task. Otherwise, this will be a relatively difficult 
task, and the applicant may not be able to continue with the JPM 
because he or she will not successfully demonstrate the ability to 
access the equipment. In both cases, the applicants will either be able 
to demonstrate knowledge to the NRC examiner, or they will not be able 
to demonstrate knowledge. The NRC staff concludes that both methods 
require applicants to select the correct location of plant equipment 
from among other choices, and therefore the NRC examiners will still be 
able to discriminate between operators that have this knowledge and 
those that do not, and thus the LOD of the two methods is comparable.
    Also, the NRC staff considered the implications for the testing 
process of physically walking in the plant to a specific location as 
compared to using plant layout diagrams and/or maps to show and 
describe the route that would be taken to find the correct location 
impacted LOD. Both methods require an applicant to recall and show 
knowledge of plant locations to the NRC examiner. However, applicants 
at plants that have been constructed will have spent time becoming 
familiar with the routes through the plant that they must take to 
access equipment during the conduct of OJT in the plant. During an in-
plant system JPM in the plant, they will likely be able to recall the 
route(s) they have previously traveled by relying on unique visual 
clues available in the plant such as signage and various access control 
points that they must pass through to navigate their path to the 
equipment that is the subject of the JPM. They may also possibly rely 
on muscle memory to some extent to locate the equipment that is the 
subject of the JPM. Additionally, NUREG-1021, Appendix E, ``Policies 
and Guidelines for Taking NRC Examinations,'' contains directions that 
NRC examiners provide to applicants and licensed operators prior to 
every NRC examination. Appendix E, Section C.3, states,

    The operating test is considered ``open reference.'' The 
reference materials that are normally available to operators in the 
facility and control room (including calibration curves, previous 
log entries, piping and instrumentation diagrams, calculation 
sheets, and procedures) are also available to you during the 
operating test.

Plant layout diagrams and site maps are normally available to 
operators. Thus, applicants at plants that have been constructed may 
use plant layout diagrams and site maps to help them to locate the 
equipment that is the subject of the JPM if they cannot recall the 
location of the equipment from memory.
    Unlike applicants at plants that have been constructed, the 
applicants at VEGP Unit 3 that take operator licensing examinations 
prior to the completion of plant construction will only use plant 
layout diagrams and maps to describe the route they would take to 
access the plant equipment. This method requires applicants to stand in 
front of a document and trace or identify the route that would be 
taken. This method is different from actually walking to a location in 
the plant because (1) visual clues that would be available to 
applicants in the plant will not be available, and (2) this method 
requires applicants to use fewer motor skills, and thus it is not 
likely that applicants will be able to use any muscle memory. This may 
increase the LOD. However, Section 13.2A.1, ``Licensed Operator 
Experience Requirements Prior To Commercial Operation,'' of the VEGP 
Units 3 and 4 UFSAR states that all applicants at VEGP Unit 3 must 
complete a site layout course. Also, the facility licensee stated in 
Enclosure 1, ``Plant Walkthrough Exemptions,'' Section 5.5, 
``Conclusion,'' of the May 27 letter that the proposed method of 
performing in-plant system JPMs will ``not impact the ability to 
maintain equitable and consistent testing under uniform conditions 
because license applicants will be evaluated using the same methods 
employed during their training.'' The NRC staff concludes that any 
increase in LOD as a result of only using plant layout diagrams and 
maps to demonstrate knowledge of locations will be offset by the fact 
that the applicants will have been specifically trained on the 
locations of plant equipment with these tools.
     As shown in Difference #2 in Table 2, applicants will use 
pictures of equipment or a mock-up of the equipment as a prop while 
they describe and simulate how to operate the equipment to perform the 
task. Instead of pointing to a piece of equipment in the plant and 
verbally describing how to operate it, the applicant will either point 
to a diagram or picture of the equipment as a prop while describing how 
to operate it or use a piece of mock-up equipment to actually perform 
the task required by the JPM. The facility licensee proposes that 
diagrams and pictures of components not directly related to the task 
will also be made available to the applicant so that the applicant must 
make a choice. The NRC staff determined that the facility

[[Page 42754]]

licensee's proposed method of performing in-plant system JPMs will 
require an applicant to select the correct piece of equipment from 
among other options, which is similar to having to make that selection 
in the plant. Therefore, the NRC examiners will still be able to 
discriminate between operators that have this knowledge and those that 
do not, and thus the LOD of the two methods is comparable.
    The NRC staff also considered the difference in the quality of the 
props used in the facility licensee's proposed method of performing in-
plant system JPMs compared to the quality of the plant equipment as a 
prop. Enclosure 2, ``Response to NRC Request for Additional Information 
No.9,'' contains Table E2-1, which lists tasks from the VEGP Units 3 
and 4 site-specific task list that could be a JPM. The NRC staff 
reviewed Table E2-1 and determined that the breaker lab, the 
maintenance flow loop trainer, the RCA mock-up, and the Remote Shutdown 
Workstation available in the VEGP training facilities could be used as 
props during some JPMs. These tools are realistic representations of 
certain pieces of plant equipment and are therefore equivalent to the 
actual plant equipment.
    However, these tools will not be able to be used for every in-plant 
system JPM that could be developed because the tasks listed in Table 
E2-1 include tasks unrelated to breaker operation, remote shutdown, or 
plant components modeled in the flow loop trainer (e.g., Table E2-1 
includes a task to ``startup the in core instrument system''). In these 
instances, the facility licensee proposes to use equipment diagrams or 
pictures of plant equipment as props. In these cases, the pictures may 
not be the same size as the actual plant equipment, or, in the case of 
equipment diagrams, they might not provide the same visual detail to an 
applicant that would be provided by the actual plant equipment. This 
could make these props more difficult to use compared to the actual 
plant equipment. However, because the facility licensee proposes to use 
the same props during the administration of in-plant system JPMs that 
have been used in the training program, the NRC staff concludes that 
any increase in LOD as a result of using pictures or equipment diagrams 
to demonstrate knowledge will be offset by the fact that the applicants 
have used these props during their training.
     As shown in Difference #3 in Table 2, applicants will have 
to enter a mock-up of the RCA for at least one in-plant JPM. As stated 
in the facility licensee's submittal, the ``standards for entry into 
the mockup RCA are identical to an actual RCA.'' Therefore, the NRC 
staff concludes that this difference has no impact on the LOD of the 
in-plant system JPMs because there is no difference between 
demonstrating the ability to enter the actual RCA and demonstrating the 
ability to enter a mock-up of the RCA.
    Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes that the facility licensee's 
proposed method of performing in-plant system JPMs will not cause the 
LOD of the in-plant system JPMs administered to applicants at VEGP Unit 
3 prior to the completion of plant construction to vary significantly 
from those administered to applicants at VEGP Unit 3 after the 
completion of construction.
    Use of Exam Banks: NUREG-1021, Form ES-301-2, ``Control Room/In-
Plant Systems Outline,'' contains criteria for the use of JPMs in the 
facility licensee's exam bank that may be used on operator licensing 
examinations. In Enclosure 1, ``Plant Walkthrough Exemptions,'' Section 
5.3, ``Discrimination Validity,'' the facility licensee stated, ``[a]ny 
questions, discussions, or other cold licensing methods used for task 
evaluation will have no impact on how the examination bank is used.'' 
The NRC staff also concluded that the facility licensee's proposed 
method of performing in-plant system JPMs does not impact the use of 
exam banks because the facility licensee's proposed method of 
administering JPMs has nothing to do with the selection of JPMs from 
its exam bank.
    In summary, the NRC staff concludes that the facility licensee's 
proposed method of performing in-plant system JPMs does not 
significantly impact the internal attributes of the in-plant system 
JPMs that will be administered to applicants at VEGP Unit 3 prior to 
the completion of plant construction as compared to the in-plant system 
JPMs administered to applicants at plants that have been constructed.

Evaluation of External Attributes

    The external attributes of an examination include the number and 
types of items (e.g., in-plant system JPMs), the length of the 
examination, security procedures, and proctoring instructions. The 
facility licensee is not proposing to alter the number or types of 
items, the length of the examination, security procedures, or 
proctoring instructions for any part of the operator licensing 
examination. Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that the external 
attributes of the operator licensing examinations that will be 
administered to applicants at VEGP Unit 3 prior to the completion of 
plant construction will be the same external attributes of the operator 
licensing examinations administered to applicants at plants that have 
been constructed.

Summary of Evaluation of Internal and External Attributes

    In summary, the NRC staff concludes that the facility licensee's 
proposed method of performing in-plant system JPMs does not cause the 
internal and external attributes of the in-plant system JPMs 
administered to applicants at VEGP Unit 3 prior to the completion of 
plant construction to vary significantly from those administered to 
applicants at VEGP Unit 3 after the completion of construction. Because 
in-plant system JPMs are a portion of the operator licensing 
examination, the NRC staff also concludes that the facility licensee's 
proposed method does not cause the internal or external attributes of 
the operator licensing examinations that will be administered to 
applicants at VEGP Unit 3 prior to the completion of plant construction 
to vary significantly from those administered to applicants at VEGP 
Unit 3 after the completion of construction.

Impact of Plant Construction on Developing Content-Valid Exams

    In Enclosure 2, ``Response to NRC Request for Additional 
Information No. 9'' of the May 27 letter, the facility licensee stated 
that some in-plant tasks on the site-specific task list that have an 
importance rating of 2.5 or higher cannot be used to develop a JPM at 
this time. Because not all plant systems have been constructed or 
turned over to the facility licensee from the vendor, some procedures 
are not available at this time. A JPM cannot be performed without a 
procedure. If the pool of in-plant tasks that could be used to develop 
a JPM is limited, then it is possible that important K/As could be 
omitted from the operating test, which would reduce the content 
validity of the exam.
    In Enclosure 2 of the May 27 letter, the facility licensee provided 
Table E2-1. Of the tasks that the facility licensee included in Table 
E2-1, the NRC staff found that 101 of 109 possible tasks have 
procedures available at this time and therefore can be used to develop 
an in-plant system JPM; only eight tasks do not have procedures 
available at this time and thus cannot be used to develop an in-plant 
system JPM. Of these eight tasks, the NRC staff compared the safety 
functions listed for each of the eight tasks with the safety functions 
listed in Table 1, ``Plant Systems by Safety Function,'' in NUREG-2103. 
The NRC staff found that of the eight tasks, two are associated with 
plant systems

[[Page 42755]]

related to Safety Function #6, Electrical; five are associated with 
plant service systems related to Safety Function #8, Plant Service 
Systems; and one is associated with a plant system related to Safety 
Function #4, Heat Removal from the Reactor Core.
    The NRC staff reviewed the 101 tasks that do have procedures 
available at this time and found that multiple tasks associated with 
the plant systems related to these safety functions as well as the 
other safety functions listed in Table 1 in NUREG-2103 can be used at 
this time to develop an in-plant system JPM. Thus, although these eight 
tasks may be excluded from the sample at this time, there is still a 
diverse set of other tasks that can be used to test an applicant's 
knowledge and abilities related to the operation of plant systems 
associated with each of the nine safety functions. Additionally, 
because the plant systems associated with Safety Functions #4, 6, and 8 
are primarily operated from the main control room, the criteria in 
NUREG-1021, ES-301, Section D.4.a, which states that ``each of the 
control room systems and evolutions (and separately each of the in-
plant systems and evolutions) selected . . . should evaluate a 
different safety function . . .,'' will still be followed, thus 
ensuring that the content of each operating test sufficiently samples 
the safety functions and K/As. Thus, the NRC staff concludes that the 
elimination of these eight tasks from the possible pool of in-plant 
system JPMs at this time does not result in any omission of K/As from 
the operator licensing examinations administered to applicants at VEGP 
Unit 3 at this time. Therefore, the examinations administered to 
applicants at VEGP Unit 3 at this time will be content-valid 
examinations.

Impact of Alternative Method on Knowledge Retention and Learning New 
Knowledge

    The NRC staff has assurance that all applicants who become licensed 
at VEGP Unit 3 will be trained and tested on new procedures and tasks 
as they become available. This is because all licensed operators are 
subject to the requalification requirements of 10 CFR 55.59. These 
requirements include additional operating tests as follows:

    (a) Requalification requirements. Each licensee shall--
    (1) Successfully complete a requalification program developed by 
the facility licensee that has been approved by the Commission. This 
program shall be conducted for a continuous period not to exceed 24 
months in duration.
    (2) Pass a comprehensive requalification written examination and 
an annual operating test.
    (i) The written examination will sample the items specified in 
Sec. Sec.  55.41 and 55.43 of this part, to the extent applicable to 
the facility, the licensee, and any limitation of the license under 
Sec.  55.53(c) of this part.
    (ii) The operating test will require the operator or senior 
operator to demonstrate an understanding of and the ability to 
perform the actions necessary to accomplish a comprehensive sample 
of items specified in Sec.  55.45(a) (2) through (13) inclusive to 
the extent applicable to the facility.

In other words, the applicants who receive a license will be required 
to take additional operating tests to maintain the license as part of 
the licensed operator requalification program. Therefore, the 
requalification program gives the NRC staff additional confidence that, 
as the plant is completed, operators will be continually trained and 
tested on operationally-important in-plant systems and tasks directed 
by procedures that have not been developed yet.
    NUREG-1021 provides guidance for applicants transitioning from the 
initial license program to the requalification program: ES-605, Section 
C.1.b, states, ``Newly licensed operators must enter the 
requalification training and examination program promptly upon 
receiving their licenses.'' Also, ES-204 states that the region may 
administer a license examination to an applicant who has not satisfied 
the applicable training or experience requirements at the time of the 
examination, but is expected to complete them shortly thereafter. These 
requirements in NUREG-1021 help to ensure that the period of time 
between completing all of the requirements to be licensed, which 
includes completing the initial license training program and passing 
the operator licensing examination, and entering a requalification 
program that meets the requirements of 10 CFR 55.59 is minimized so 
that applicants (1) receive refresher training on topics learned in the 
initial training program, which ensures knowledge retention of 
operationally-important topics, and (2) receive training on new 
operationally-important topics as they become available (e.g., new 
procedures and tasks).
    In Enclosure 1, ``Plant Walkthrough Exemptions,'' Section 6.3, 
``Otherwise in the Public Interest,'' of the May 27 letter, the 
facility licensee stated that applicants ``enrolled in an initial 
license training (ILT) program are training as a full-time job and 
cannot participate in completing the required 6 months of meaningful 
work experience.'' As described in NEI 06-13A, Appendix A, applicants 
in the cold licensing process must complete at least 6 months of 
``practical and meaningful work experience'' as part of the experience 
requirements for an operator's license. Applicants that do not complete 
any of a portion of the 6 months of practical and meaningful work 
assignments prior to enrolling in the ILT program will have to do so 
before the NRC issues a license. Therefore, some applicants at VEGP 
Unit 3 may not complete the requirements to be licensed ``shortly'' 
after taking the operator licensing examination. Because these 
applicants would not yet be licensed, under NRC regulations they would 
not be required to be enrolled in a training program that meets the 
requirements of 10 CFR 55.59, ``Requalification.''
    Although these applicants will be participating in practical and 
meaningful work assignments to gain experience with the AP1000 design, 
these assignments do not necessarily ensure that these applicants will 
receive refresher training on topics learned in the ILT program or 
receive training on new topics as they become available. In accordance 
with 10 CFR 55.51,

    If the Commission determines that an applicant for an operator 
license or a senior operator license meets the requirements of the 
Act and its regulations, it will issue a license in the form and 
containing any conditions and limitations it considers appropriate 
and necessary.

Therefore, the Commission may find it necessary to issue licenses with 
any conditions or limitations that may be necessary to ensure that the 
applicants have retained knowledge and learned new operationally-
important topics during the time between completion of the operator 
licensing examination and issuance of the license.
    In summary, as allowed by NUREG-1021, ES-201, Section B, 
``Background,'' with its exemption request, the facility licensee 
proposed alternatives to the examination criteria contained in NUREG-
1021 with respect to the in-plant/plant walk-through portions of the 
operating test. The NRC staff reviewed the proposed method of 
administering in-plant system JPMs described in Enclosure 1 of the May 
27 letter. For the reasons described above, the NRC staff concluded 
that the proposed alternatives provide an acceptable method of 
complying with the Commission's regulations, as exempted.
    If, in the future, the facility licensee desires to implement an 
approach that differs from the alternative described in the May 27 
letter, then it should seek approval from the NRC.

[[Page 42756]]

Limitations and Expiration

    The facility licensee requested the exemption from the regulation 
that requires the operating test to be administered in a plant walk-
through because of the incomplete construction of the plant. As 
construction of different sections of the facility becomes 
substantially complete and in-plant systems, components, and structures 
(SSCs) near completion, usage of this exemption will become unnecessary 
for those areas and SSCs. Accordingly, on a case-by-case basis, for 
those tasks that are selected to be part of an operating task in 
accordance with NUREG-1021, ES-301, Section D.4.a and Section D.4.b, 
where it is possible to both perform on-the-job training in the plant 
and administer part of an operating test in a plant walk-through, as 
determined by the NRC examiners, this exemption may not be used. 
Furthermore, this exemption will finally expire and may no longer be 
used upon the Commission's finding for VEGP Unit 3 in accordance with 
10 CFR 52.103(g) (``The licensee shall not operate the facility until 
the Commission makes a finding that the acceptance criteria in the 
combined license are met, except for those acceptance criteria that the 
Commission found were met under Sec.  52.97(a)(2).'').

Environmental Consideration

    This exemption allows one, two, or three of the required in-plant 
system JPMs to be performed using discussion and performance methods in 
combination with plant layout diagrams, maps, equipment diagrams, 
pictures, and mock-ups in lieu of plant equipment. The NRC staff 
evaluated whether there would be significant environmental impacts 
associated with the issuance of the requested exemptions. The NRC staff 
determined the proposed action fits a category of actions that do not 
require an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.
    For the following reasons, this exemption meets the eligibility 
criteria of 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25) for a categorical exclusion. There is 
no significant hazards consideration related to this exemption. The NRC 
staff has also determined that the exemption involves no significant 
increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any 
effluents that may be released offsite; that there is no significant 
increase in individual or cumulative public or occupational radiation 
exposure; that there is no significant construction impact; and that 
there is no significant increase in the potential for or consequences 
from radiological accidents. Finally, the requirements to which the 
exemption applies involve qualification requirements. Accordingly, the 
exemption meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set 
forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no 
environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be 
prepared in connection with the issuance of the exemption.

IV. Conclusion

    Accordingly, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR 
55.11, issuing this exemption from the requirement in 55.45(b) to 
administer a portion of the operating test in a plant walk-through is 
authorized by law and will not endanger life or property and is 
otherwise in the public interest. The Commission also has approved the 
facility licensee's proposed alternative to the examination criteria in 
NUREG-1021, ES-301, Section D.4.a and Section D.4.b and therefore will 
allow one, two, or three of the required in-plant system JPMs to be 
performed using discussion and performance methods in combination with 
plant layout diagrams, maps, equipment diagrams, pictures, and mock-ups 
in lieu of plant equipment until the Commission makes a finding for 
VEGP Unit 3 that acceptance criteria in the combined license are met in 
accordance with 10 CFR 52.103(g).

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of June, 2016.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Samuel S. Lee,
Acting Deputy Director, Division of New Reactor Licensing, Office of 
New Reactors.
[FR Doc. 2016-15547 Filed 6-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7590-01-P