NukeWorker Forum
Career Path => Nuclear Operator => Topic started by: johnnyhqle on Jun 25, 2013, 06:49
-
Hey everyone,
I know acquiring your RO and SRO license is about 3-7 years but lets say you have acquired a license and you decide to move to another utility. Would you have to start over as an AO/NLO/NEO and move up through the ranks again or can you go instant RO/SRO?
I've been applying to a few plants around my area as an AO/NLO/NEO. I'm worried if I accept an offer and decide to move to another plant some years down the road I would have to start over.
Thanks all :)
-
This last class, we brought in from another utility a previously licensed RO and SRO for direct SROs.
While there is talk about a Direct-RO, we haven't done that.
-
Hey everyone,
I know acquiring your RO and SRO license is about 3-7 years but lets say you have acquired a license and you decide to move to another utility. Would you have to start over as an AO/NLO/NEO and move up through the ranks again or can you go instant RO/SRO?
I've been applying to a few plants around my area as an AO/NLO/NEO. I'm worried if I accept an offer and decide to move to another plant some years down the road I would have to start over.
Thanks all :)
If you license RO/SRO at the plant you have applied for and later decide to move to another plant, you would have to go through a licensing process at the new plant. The degree of difficulty would depend on the plant design for the utility you move to. Each utility has their own process for licensing previously licensed RO/SROs.
With that said, the important thing is that you would have completed the process once and proven your ability to license and you would have a better understanding of what it takes to get a license. Also the theory and technology knowledge you would have learned would give you a muchless stressful life going for a second license.
The part of this about having to relicense is a fact that you can take to the bank. The difficulty in getting a license the second time is opinion but I believe can be backed up by several here that have gone through the process.
I hope it helps you with your decisions.
-
If you license RO/SRO at the plant you have applied for and later decide to move to another plant, you would have to go through a licensing process at the new plant. The degree of difficulty would depend on the plant design for the utility you move to. Each utility has their own process for licensing previously licensed RO/SROs.
With that said, the important thing is that you would have completed the process once and proven your ability to license and you would have a better understanding of what it takes to get a license. Also the theory and technology knowledge you would have learned would give you a muchless stressful life going for a second license.
The part of this about having to relicense is a fact that you can take to the bank. The difficulty in getting a license the second time is opinion but I believe can be backed up by several here that have gone through the process.
I hope it helps you with your decisions.
So based on this, it may be more beneficial to find a utility and stay there.
-
If you license RO/SRO at the plant you have applied for and later decide to move to another plant, you would have to go through a licensing process at the new plant.
The only exception to this rule is if you were to get a license at an AP1000 plant. A license on one is good at any AP1000. That is why Southern is looking at retention bonuses to keep SCANA from stealing Vogtle folks once they are licensed. At least they were looking at that when I interviewed there awhile back.
-
The only exception to this rule is if you were to get a license at an AP1000 plant. A license on one is good at any AP1000. That is why Southern is looking at retention bonuses to keep SCANA from stealing Vogtle folks once they are licensed. At least they were looking at that when I interviewed there awhile back.
Not true. Nothing in 10CFR supports this. You always have to go through licensing class on whatever reactor you license on. So no, one AP1000 license does not fit all.
-
That's not the word on the street. I have heard one AP1000 is the same as the next.
-
That's not the word on the street. I have heard one AP1000 is the same as the next.
It sounds good in theory but the law(10CFR) still controls the process. With that said the law can be changed but the machine that makes that happen is very slow to make sweeping changes. There are still some design issues that I believe Westinghouse will make modifications to in the future if more of these plants are built. If that happens all AP-1000's would not be the same.
Also things like switchyards, electrical distribution, water sources may be different from plant to plant. Although they may not be high hit questions on exams the fact that they are different could make the knowledge required for exams be different therefore requiring testing to verify knowledge of the specific plant.
Although not perfect, Mike is rarely wrong on these type issues. He has a wealth of knowledge and practical application to draw from.
-
The AP1000 is simply a "standard plant design". The layout, systems, comand and control functions, etc will be the same from site to site. But, that only applies to the reactor building/turbine building systems and components. Everything outside of that bubble can and will be different.
To top it off, some info quoted from 10 CFR 55.53
Each license contains and is subject to the following conditions whether stated in the license or not:
(a) Neither the license nor any right under the license may be assigned or otherwise transferred.
(b) The license is limited to the facility for which it is issued.
(c) The license is limited to those controls of the facility specified in the license.
So, per the above portions of 55.53, a licensed operator at our facility (VC Summer) could not go to Vogtle and simply start working as a licensed operator. The qualification process would begin anew.
-
I'll venture a big guess. The Turbine building components will not be standard. They'll be according to the various utility wishes and design criteria.
Also items like electrical distribution, emergency power, instrument power, radiation monitoring et al will not be the same utility to utility.
-
That's not the word on the street. I have heard one AP1000 is the same as the next.
The word on the street doesn't trump federal law. As of now, there have been no changes to the CFR to allow a guy to walk from one AP1000 to the next. I know that was one of the hopes, but again, it simply isn't the case.
Justin
-
I understand the law trumps all. I was just thinking the fact that part of the process being somewhat standardized might speed the licensing process up a bit. Just a thought, nothing more.
-
I'll venture a big guess. The Turbine building components will not be standard. They'll be according to the various utility wishes and design criteria.
Also items like electrical distribution, emergency power, instrument power, radiation monitoring et al will not be the same utility to utility.
Absolutely.
The intent of the standard plant, from WEC's perspective, was never to make things easier for operators going plant to plant or to make the licensing process easier or more streamlined when shifting from one AP1000 to another.
WEC's intent was to create a standardized plant design that made construction easier, quicker (relatively) and more cost effective. A standardized plant also makes things like Construction Experience directly applicable to any other AP1000 project.
Getting a single new design approved by the NRC was also a major reason behind the standard plant design.