Help | Contact Us
NukeWorker.com
NukeWorker Menu ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.

Author Topic: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.  (Read 34698 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Higgs

  • SRO
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 1284
  • Gender: Male
  • Life has a melody...
ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« on: Aug 23, 2011, 05:04 »
Since these questions come up a bunch, I uploaded ACAD 10-001 to google docs. Here is the link.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_IdfepFgrrXMzZmZGMxN2UtYTRlYS00NGE5LWEzZDctMDYzZWNlNDVjMzdm/view?usp=sharing
« Last Edit: Nov 15, 2014, 12:46 by Higgs »
"How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic.” - Ted Nugent

FatherSheets

  • Guest
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #1 on: Dec 02, 2011, 04:24 »
When I am finally discharged from the Navy I will have been qualified Engineering Watch Supervisor for 1 year 11 months and 26 days. Not quite the "two years" required for direct SRO. Does anyone know if exceptions such as this are ever made? I also have my 4 year degree if that makes a difference. Thanks.

Offline Higgs

  • SRO
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 1284
  • Gender: Male
  • Life has a melody...
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #2 on: Dec 02, 2011, 04:34 »
When I am finally discharged from the Navy I will have been qualified Engineering Watch Supervisor for 1 year 11 months and 26 days. Not quite the "two years" required for direct SRO. Does anyone know if exceptions such as this are ever made? I also have my 4 year degree if that makes a difference. Thanks.

I've not heard of an exception.
"How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic.” - Ted Nugent

FatherSheets

  • Guest
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #3 on: Dec 02, 2011, 04:45 »
Thanks, guess I just need to think of a way to delay my discharge a week or so.

Offline HydroDave63

Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #4 on: Dec 02, 2011, 08:24 »
Thanks, guess I just need to think of a way to delay my discharge a week or so.

Extend for a Med cruise to Syria? ;)

Offline Higgs

  • SRO
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 1284
  • Gender: Male
  • Life has a melody...
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #5 on: Dec 02, 2011, 10:20 »
Thanks, guess I just need to think of a way to delay my discharge a week or so.

That may not be good enough. 2 years qualified is the minimum, but most places I've talked to take that to mean that you actually stood the watch for two years. However, there is exelon and they are very generous when it comes to that sort of thing. Just depends on how bad they need people.


Are you opposed to NLO starting out?
« Last Edit: Apr 05, 2015, 09:53 by Higgs »
"How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic.” - Ted Nugent

FatherSheets

  • Guest
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #6 on: Dec 04, 2011, 04:21 »
Not opposed to anything. I'm just trying to set my self up as best I can. I was aiming for direct SRO, but nothing is set in stone. What is your opinion of NLO? And thanks for the heads up.
« Last Edit: Dec 04, 2011, 04:22 by FatherSheets »

Offline Higgs

  • SRO
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 1284
  • Gender: Male
  • Life has a melody...
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #7 on: Dec 04, 2011, 07:05 »
I'm not saying don't try to get the two years, someone might pick you up with the min, and the degree will help.

I'm just suggesting not to be closed to NLO.

I will just say that If I had known about NLO when I got out, would have went that route.

However, with a degree and a desire to get a license... YOU WILL go to class eventually, and probably sooner than you think. Starting as an NLO won't prevent that, and if anything, it will make you a better SRO one day.

Good luck!
« Last Edit: Dec 04, 2011, 07:07 by Higgs »
"How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic.” - Ted Nugent

Offline elwood

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 131
  • Gender: Male
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #8 on: Dec 05, 2011, 04:43 »
Yes a MUCH better SRO by starting in the buildings.  Having worked for both instant and upgrade there is a huge difference in knowledge level.

Thank you for your service.

Elwood

FatherSheets

  • Guest
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #9 on: Dec 05, 2011, 05:06 »
Thanks for the advice.

Offline DiverTough2013

Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #10 on: Jan 30, 2012, 10:29 »
Within the instruction, I'm confused on what exactly it means by staff positions.  Specifically, for the degreed direct-SRO candidates, how does the typical company interpret this if they were trying to hire someone directly out of school or out of the Navy that may not meet the requisite military experience or compareable commerical experience, but has a degree.

What would be an example of one of these "staff" positions at your plant?  Is this referring to something along the lines of a training position where you earn the certification and not the license?

Offline Higgs

  • SRO
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 1284
  • Gender: Male
  • Life has a melody...
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #11 on: Jan 30, 2012, 10:34 »
Engineering and training are the ones I see most often. I also know one or two maintenance supervisors that crossed over as well. You can also go in as a degreed NLO and direct to SRO but there are other variables that come into play with that.

Justin
"How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic.” - Ted Nugent

Offline Higgs

  • SRO
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 1284
  • Gender: Male
  • Life has a melody...
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #12 on: Jan 30, 2012, 10:38 »
By the way, page 14 gives specific examples.
"How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic.” - Ted Nugent

jwhite

  • Guest
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #13 on: Oct 17, 2012, 09:19 »
I've seen Southernco send a guy to RO school with 6 months of qualified NLO time, some tech certificates, and they counted his time at a pulp mill plant because he ran the boiler there. It seems they can do whatever they want. Its not a rummor but straight from the horses mouth. Go figure! Gives me warm fuzzies.

Fermi2

  • Guest
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #14 on: Oct 18, 2012, 07:14 »
Did the NRC issue a license?

jwhite

  • Guest
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #15 on: Oct 20, 2012, 08:33 »
He's in a license class with other NPOIT's (RO) and SROIT's (SRO).

Fermi2

  • Guest
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #16 on: Oct 21, 2012, 12:39 »
That wasn't my question. Did they issue the license? My point is you can go to license class your first day on site. The NRC holds licenses in abeyance until you get the right amount of time EXCLUDING training.

Offline ATLNuke

Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #17 on: Mar 06, 2014, 12:05 »
Engineering and training are the ones I see most often. I also know one or two maintenance supervisors that crossed over as well. You can also go in as a degreed NLO and direct to SRO but there are other variables that come into play with that.

Justin

I'm curious if anyone who's experienced in the industry can give me a good explanation to this.

Say there are two equally qualified kids graduating from college with an engineering or other technical degree. One becomes an NLO, the other goes engineering. According to ACAD (if I'm reading it right), the kid who goes engineering could be qualified for ILT in as little as 18 months. The kid who goes in as an NLO isn't eligible until 18 months AFTER becoming fully qualified (~30-42 months total.) Now arguments aside about whether either of this is enough experience to go to ILT (more experience is obviously better in both situations), wouldn't the experience as an NLO be more applicable to becoming an SRO? So why would you need more time as an NLO (even if ~a year or two is unqualified time)?

In addition, why is the "Power Plant Experience" (eg engineering) applicable to both PWR and BWR, while qualified NLO experience is only applicable to a comparable plant (ie PWR OR BWR)?

Offline ChiefRocscooter

  • Heavy User
  • ****
  • Posts: 317
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 198
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #18 on: Mar 06, 2014, 01:41 »
The problem with your question is you are asking for a reason as to why someone way back when sent up the "min" standard.  You do realize that every case is going to be individually evaluated by the site and the INPO assumption is that if we give you a bare minimum you will put a little buffer on it.  Does not always happen but the min is set to keep the majority at a higher standard.  Think of it as speed limit of 65, heck we all drive 70ish now why not make the limit 70?  because then many will drive 75! 

Now as to the logic behind the question of course the 18 month fully qualified Engineer degreed NLO would likely have "more" experience that would be applicable to direct SRO, but how often (show of hands here) will plants send a 18 month right out of college engineer to class as direct SRO, not the nlo engineer, or ex-navy who got degree after navy but the true ~23 year old right out of college engineer?   My guess based on what I have seen in my limited time is chances are 0 but I will say slim to none cause there is an exception to every rule/case!

So to answer your question directly;  No, no one can give you a good explanation, just opinions!  :)
Being adept at being adaptable I look forward to every new challenge!

Offline ATLNuke

Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #19 on: Mar 06, 2014, 02:55 »
Yes, I was trying to word my question very carefully. Like you said, every site and company will obviously have their own standards for who they pick to go to ILT, and hopefully it's very strict. I was just trying to understand the underlying logic behind the ACAD, since that's technically the "minimum".

However, from my (very short) experience, I've actually seen people be picked up for class with very minimum requirements. Maybe it's just my site that needs personnel, but it seems like if you meet the requirements to go to ILT, they'll push you in that direction.

I in no way regret my decision to start at NLO. I've learned so much more in the last year that my degree never covered in the way a plant actually operates. I was just curious why the ACAD is the way it is I guess.

Offline ChiefRocscooter

  • Heavy User
  • ****
  • Posts: 317
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 198
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #20 on: Mar 06, 2014, 08:42 »
You went wrong when you started trying to understand the "logic" :o  Always remember that regulators are at heart part of the political machine that runs any given government organization, no political party slander intended here, left or right they still run on the same fuel!  That my friend is not logic!

As for your decision I agree and think in the long run you will find it for the best!  I made a few kind of like that and do not regret how things have turned, for the most part, would make them all again and stand by them, sure with 20/20 hindsight I might change some but that's life!
Being adept at being adaptable I look forward to every new challenge!

Offline Higgs

  • SRO
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 1284
  • Gender: Male
  • Life has a melody...
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #21 on: Mar 06, 2014, 10:13 »
It's not a perfect system.

Justin
"How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic.” - Ted Nugent

Offline ATLNuke

Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #22 on: Mar 07, 2014, 04:28 »
It's not a perfect system.

Justin

Understood. Just wanted to see if any more experienced guys had insight into this or if it was just the way things are.

Like I said, I'll most likely work well over the "minimum" requirements, there's a lot to learn about the plant that I didn't expect. And a lot of things you can really only learn by getting your hands dirty as an NLO.

Offline Higgs

  • SRO
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 1284
  • Gender: Male
  • Life has a melody...
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #23 on: Oct 19, 2014, 04:21 »
Just a bump and a caution not to try to sneak into an SRO class if you have <2 years EWS. The NRC WILL check. Simply listing EWS on your resume won't be good enough. You'll have to provide proof that it was >2 years.

Justin
« Last Edit: Oct 19, 2014, 04:24 by Higgs »
"How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic.” - Ted Nugent

Offline Higgs

  • SRO
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 1284
  • Gender: Male
  • Life has a melody...
Re: ACAD 10-001, guide to licensing qualifications.
« Reply #24 on: Oct 19, 2014, 04:22 »
...
« Last Edit: Apr 05, 2015, 09:55 by Higgs »
"How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic.” - Ted Nugent

 


NukeWorker ™ is a registered trademark of NukeWorker.com ™, LLC © 1996-2021 All rights reserved.
All material on this Web Site, including text, photographs, graphics, code and/or software, are protected by international copyright/trademark laws and treaties. Unauthorized use is not permitted. You may not modify, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit or distribute, in any manner, the material on this web site or any portion of it. Doing so will result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Spam Policy | Advertising Info | Contact Us | Forum Rules | Password Problem?