NukeWorker Forum

Career Path => Nuclear Operator => Topic started by: jasonmsmith on Apr 19, 2005, 11:01

Title: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: jasonmsmith on Apr 19, 2005, 11:01
I am a Naval Submarine Officer that is planning on leaving the navy within a year.  I would like to get into the training pipeline for an SRO license.  Is this an easy transition to make???  I have an engineering background in college, which hopefully will help me. 

I would also like to settle in the upper midwest, what do people think about the plants in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan?


Thanks for the info.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Nuclear NASCAR on Apr 19, 2005, 01:18
The first thing to do is a search of the site using SRO as a criteria.  You'll probably find most of the answers you're looking for.  If you've still got questions feel free to post them and someone will have the answer.  Welcome to Nukeworker.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: halflifer on Apr 19, 2005, 03:11
I'm assuming that you are a Nuke officer. In any event, the most common path to SRO is to do time as an Aux Operator (kind of like standing and engine room or AMR watch), then you can become an ACRO (Alternate Control Room Operator) and CRO/RO (Control Room Operator or Reactor Operator - different plants call them different things). CRO/RO are licenced positions, but are still Bargaining Unit Positions at Union plants. Then, after several yrs as CRO/RO, you may be selected by management for SRO. This whole process will probably take you at least 6 yrs (probably more since most plants are top heavy with CRO/RO types.
I once saw an individual who was hired at a plant as a Simulator Instructor. He got a Plant RO Cert (not the same as a licence) and then was selected by the plant for SRO. Since the plant had quite a few SRO's who were in their 40's and there wasn't a lot of upward mobility, this created a lot of animosity. He did not work out well as an SRO.
Another path may be to come in as a Shift Engineer and try to work your way in from there.
Good luck
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Apr 19, 2005, 03:33
Most utilities won't hire you in as a direct (Instant) SRO because you don't have any experience managing a real reactor. They used to make that mistake, but with the INPO Criteria for SRO selection fewer and fewer are going down that dangerous path.

Hire in the Engineering Department then cross over.

Mike

Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: jasonmsmith on Apr 20, 2005, 02:01
I am qualified EOOW (SRO) on two different naval reactor plants, S5W and S8G.  Does Naval qualifications carry much weight in the civilian world. 
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Nuclear NASCAR on Apr 20, 2005, 02:49
I am qualified EOOW (SRO) on two different naval reactor plants, S5W and S8G.  Does Naval qualifications carry much weight in the civilian world. 

They carry enough weight to get you in the door, but you'll still have to work your way through the ranks to get up to SRO.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Apr 20, 2005, 04:01
Read my previous post. All you've ever operated is a Start Up Source.

Most likely you can hire in as a Non Licensed Operator or in Engineering. Then work your way up or cross over.

An EOOW is not equivalent to an SRO. It's not equivalent to a Reactor Operator in a Commercial Plant.


Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: halflifer on Apr 20, 2005, 10:27
Read my previous post. All you've ever operated is a Start Up Source.

Most likely you can hire in as a Non Licensed Operator or in Engineering. Then work your way up or cross over.

An EOOW is not equivalent to an SRO. It's not equivalent to a Reactor Operator in a Commercial Plant.


Mike

It seems that Mike has a sore spot with Navy Nukes but he does make a valid point. Commercial plants are much larger and complex than Navy plants......imagine my surprise when, at my first outage, I was sent to cover RCP seal removal and was told that the workers would be STANDING IN THE SEAL CAV !!!!!! :o
It's a bit like comparing a Porche to a Kenworth....a big, HOT Kenworth
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Nuclear NASCAR on Apr 20, 2005, 10:40
It seems that Mike has a sore spot with Navy Nukes but he does make a valid point. Commercial plants are much larger and complex than Navy plants......imagine my surprise when, at my first outage, I was sent to cover RCP seal removal and was told that the workers would be STANDING IN THE SEAL CAV !!!!!! :o
It's a bit like comparing a Porche to a Kenworth....a big, HOT Kenworth

I wouldn't call it a sore spot, more just telling it like it is.  He is, as I recall a former Navy Nuke. 

I'm not ex-Navy but I can second the size of things at the plant.  I used to work at a 600 megawatt dirt-burner.  I was blown away by the 1200 megawatt turbine-generator at our plant the first time I saw it. 
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: shayne on Apr 20, 2005, 11:04
Yes he was former Navy Nuke.  Started at the bottom of operations and worked his way up to Shift Manager.  So he does have the background to tell it like it is.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: RDTroja on Apr 21, 2005, 07:47
I'm not ex-Navy but I can second the size of things at the plant.  I used to work at a 600 megawatt dirt-burner.  I was blown away by the 1200 megawatt turbine-generator at our plant the first time I saw it. 

I can relate to that... in reverse. I worked all commercial plants, first in the 500 to 600 MW range and then on to the bigger 1100 and up monsters and then went to Big Rock Point -- 61 MW. It was like working in a toy or a scale model at best. When I got my tour and we walked past the turbine I asked 'What's that?" When my tourguide told me it was the main turbine, I didn't believe him. But what a sweet plant! Shame to see it go.

Now, with my apologies, back on topic.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: jasonmsmith on Apr 21, 2005, 11:04
It seems that I pissed some people off by comparing an EOOW to an SRO.  I realize that the size of the plant is significantly different, but from an operations standpoint, it seems that Naval plants require more oversight due to the constant power flucuations (transients), ie. speed changes of the submarine. 

Ultimately an EOOW is in charge of an operating nuclear reactor, same as an SRO.  He has a reactor operator working directly for him, along with an electrical operator and throttleman, along with all of the engineering watchstanders in the engineroom.  To say that an " EOOW is not equivalent to an SRO. It's not equivalent to a Reactor Operator in a Commercial Plant." seem a bit inaccurate, but what do I know. 

Looking forward to the process of transitioning from Submarines to civilian nuclear power.


Thanks for the input guys!!!!!


 
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Apr 21, 2005, 03:59
OPS, I didn't mean to sound harsh. I'm hoping the Lt joins our fine industry and does well. So please don't take what I say as discouragement.

I am a former Navy nuke , and like Shayne says I started as an NLO and worked my way up. During that time I saw virtually every Navy officer we hired as an SRO fail in the position. Again, Jason has never operated anything that's greater than a startup source, A commercial Reactor Operator has forgotten more about Nukes than Jason knows at this point. The Navy teaches a bunch of miscxonceptions and presents them as fact, these officers then apply the misconceptions and end up in BIG trouble. I consider a deconner or Jr RP Tech with 1 year commercial experience more qualified to be an SRO than a Naval Officer. They know the system, they know how the industry works and they tend to be far more flexible in thought.

In fact the Navy required more oversight simply because that's the way they set up their system. Quite frankly a Naval plant is so forgiving a trained monkey could operate it. It took care of itself the plant was designed to be that forgiving and simple. . Once started up they could have gotten rid of the RO and EOOW and ran simply with a throttleman and a power meter. I was a qualified EOOW in the Navy, so I should know.

I don't mean to be harsh, I'm just telling things the way I see them, and I consider myself to be an extremely successful SRO.

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: jasonmsmith on Apr 22, 2005, 04:12
Wow Mike,

So every Naval Officer has failed in an SRO billet, I find that highly doubtful, but if such an "experienced" person says it's true, it must be.  If Naval Officers were so bad, then Nuke Plants would not actively recruit us, would they.

"A trained monkey can operate a Naval Plant" huh.  Why don't you get a clue before you start saying stupid things like this. 

Also your quote "The Navy teaches a bunch of miscxonceptions and presents them as fact".  If that was actually fact, I doubt that the DOE would certify each EOOW as a Reactor Operator.

If you were qualified EOOW in the Navy, than you must have been a Naval Officer, or a **** hot first or Chief at Prototype.  You seem to have done pretty well with a Navy background.  Why all of the hostility??

My guess is that you have never stood watch in the engineroom on a nuclear submarine while on mission.  Why don't you try to become more educated on the subject before you start spouting off at the mouth about how bad the navy is. 
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Nuclear NASCAR on Apr 22, 2005, 05:21
Please note the forum rules which can be found here:http://www.nukeworker.com/forum/index.php/topic,4700.0.html

In particular rule #4:  4. Please learn to be respectful, tolerate and support each other. NukeWorker.com’s goal is to help others, not see how many people we can annoy. Do not initiate arguments or tension. This will only cause the triggering of other members and make this site less professional.

Let's play nice boys.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Apr 22, 2005, 06:36
NASCAR is correct :)

I didn't mean to cause any tension.

However, I stood many engineroom watches, and at A1W quite a few EOOW watches. Compared to ERLL it wasn't all that hard to qualify.

I speak from 6 years naval experience and 15 years Commercial Experience. I've obtained RO and SRO Licenses from the NRC, and I'm curently obtaining another SRO License.

I ACED Nuke School and my RO Test. I went through 6 years of Navy training and missed ONE point on a test the whole time I was in. So when I say a monkey can operate a Naval plant I speak from experience.

I have nothing against Navy nukes. It's a great Kindergarten primer on how Nuke plants work, however the Navy teaches a LOT of misconceptions on how nuke plants work, the reason being they have to keep it simple. In the Civilian world we get the cream of the crop so we teach a lot more in depth, and teach how the machines really work.

NOTE you said the DOE certifies you as an RO. This is not the same as LICENSING you as an RO. In fact the reason the Navy Officers cannot be Shift Supervisors at the prototypes is they don't get the training necessary to obtain a DOE License. They're operating under someone elses License. A Certification is an order of magnitude below a license.

I'm not trying to cause any troubles, I'm trying to lay out for the Lt how it is in the real world. He might trake exception to this and for that I'm sory. But to compare being an EOOW to having a SRO License is preposterous at best, laughable at the minimum.

The record in the industry shows Naval Officers tend to do poorly as SROs. It's a simple fact of life. If it weren't they'd be beating down the Naval Doors recruiting short time officers. The fact they don't should tell you everything you need to know.

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: halflifer on Apr 23, 2005, 09:37
On the subject of DOE certifications, I was a NavNuc, then a contract HP, then commercial AO, ACRO. I couldn't stand the shift work so I went back to HP/RCT. I don't know what it takes for DOE to 'certify' you as an operator, but I know that all you have to do to be 'certified' as an RCT is pass one (that's right count 'em ....1) test, with no experience or proof of practical knowlege whatsoever and DOE will 'certify' you as an RCT. I sure hope it's not a similar non-process.
As for this subject, as I've said, Mike raises some good points, re: Naval vs Commercial plant ops...but I still think the Naval Nuclear Power Program gives you a good background for commercial plants.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: 20 Years Gone on Apr 23, 2005, 10:36
Sequoyah,  you managed to push almost all of my buttons.  I'll leave it for now at....
1.  I went through NPS around the same time as you did... About 19 years ago.  They had these little plaques on the walls on the Orlando NPS quarterdeck showing the top 3 GPA's for MMs, EMs, and ETs.  They must have left you off, because no one, and I mean NO ONE, ever aced NPS at that time, nor when I returned years later as an instructor.
2.  How, in a six year tour, did you get through the pipeline, go to sea, return to AIW, and qualify EOOW?  Were you a SPU who went from ERLL to EOOW?
3.  Where did you get the idea that commercial power plants get the cream of the crop as operators?

OK, LT, as I've only been out a year, and I'll readily admit that my commercial experience is limited, there is some truth to be found here in other posts.  You can certainly hire into operations in some plants, if they are hiring at all.  However, you'll have a much better chance going into system engineering, getting your feet on the ground, finding out what's what in the commercial world, then transfering into OPS as a instant SRO/RO.  There are many RO's here at Wolf Creek who've worked there way up from NLOs, then gone to License class.  Some get their degrees, then go on and go SRO, and work there way up through shift manager.  You have great experience, and although a little more complex, a reactor is a reactor.  Sure, the fuel isn't enriched, and they care about fast fission more, but reactivity is reactivity, NI's work almost exactly the same (well, ex-core) they operate with rods at the top, and control reactivity with Boron... All these things make sense to you, I'm sure, as they don't build commercial reactors on mars with this massively different technology.  I would not sell yourself short by hiring in as a NLO.  You've got the degree, and loads of experience which has a good value out here.  You have proven leadership... Also a value... But, don't close off your options and only look for a direct path to SRO... There are many ways to reach that goal.

Bill
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Apr 23, 2005, 11:41
Actually they work quite a bit differently and so far as Fast Fission, no we don't care about it much more than the Navy did,

Boron and Doppler really throw things askew. You have one year in commercial reactors. I have over 15, in Operations. Reactivity is reactivity I'll agree. What you do with it is different and handling a plant in a transient is a FAR cry from the tinker toy reactors the Lt is used to operating.

I'll debate a Naval Officer has any leadership skills. But it's been said we're here to help. I used to LOVE putting newly discharged Naval "leaders" in a room full of union guys and watch them get their heads ripped off while attempting their unique brand of Leadership with people who aren't captives. I'll go this far, a Naval Lt has no leadership skills because they haven;t had a chance to practice them and aren't far above having to do as they've been told. It's the Navy way. Might as well say a Seaman Apprentice is has practiced leadership.

There is no such legal thing as an Instant RO. One must qualify as an NLO prior to getting an RO License.

I gave the Lt a proven success path to getting an SRO License. Look into Engineering. Become a good engineer and hang out with ops. Let your ears dry some, them bid over into an Operations job. Most plants, and INPO are starting to require that path for a Naval officer anyways.

And please don't try to compare running an Naval Plant to being an SRO in the commercial world. It's not even close and the officers who used to work for me will tell you the same thing. I didn't make up the trained monkey thing on my own. I got that from a Commander who got an SRO License at Fermi. His words, not mine.

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: JnyMac on Apr 24, 2005, 12:30
I'll have to agree with Mike.  Palo Verde as far as I know will not hire you in as an Instant RO/SRO.  Training only wants prior SRO licensed individuals.  They do have training guys without SRO Licenses but they do have SRO Certification.  Our ladder works like this.  You must be a fully qualified AO before they will even let you submit your name for RO class.  2 supervisors then have to recommend you for class.  You take a 100 question exam that is 50 question plant specific and 50 GFES.  Then all of our Shift Managers with input from their crews rate you on performance, professionalism, and attitude.  This combined with the test gets you in.  A point to make here is smarts, leadership skills, and a degree may not matter.  We had a guy in try to get in our last class that has a degree, 18years commercial exp. and was a Navy Officer.  He got an 87 on the entrance exam.  He was rated 18th of 18 because of his arrogance and attitude.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: justme on Apr 24, 2005, 03:23
Now as to how to become one, Nine Mile in Oswego, Ny is now looking for Auxilliary operators.  They are also looking for ROs and SROs.  At most plants, you can be an AO for 10 years or more before getting a chance at RO or higher.  Here, because there is a shortage of ROs (reactor operators), it can be a fast track.  6 months AO training, about a year or so as AO, Then the oportunity to go for training to get your license as an RO.  I know some operators there that made RO in 4 years, and were asked to go on to be SRO.     Will be many retiring there in the next 5 years.  Hope this helps.  Oh, the area is similiar to the Midwest,  I grew up in Wisconsin.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: justme on Apr 24, 2005, 03:29
My husband is a RO, hired in about 4 years ago.  He says the degree is good, and will help alot.  Send me an email if you want more info.   
By the way, the winters here are not as frigid as the midwest, little more snow, but you can move that. 
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Apr 24, 2005, 06:24
Who owns NiMo now???

It's in a gorgeous area, I'll give you that. If I wasn't tired of snow, cold, and taxes  I wouldn't have minded going there.

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: shayne on Apr 24, 2005, 07:10
Niagara Mohawk?  I believe they are still in business.  They are in transmission and not power production.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Apr 24, 2005, 09:49
Oops. Back in the early 90s we called Nine Mile Point NiMo. I forgot Niagra Mohawk was somehow involved.

So who owns Nine Mile Point?

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: astronuke on Apr 25, 2005, 03:04
Nine Mile Point, along with Ginna and Calvert Cliffs, are owned by Constellation Energy.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: nukeET1 on Apr 25, 2005, 04:22
Wow... talking about a can of worms opened!  I thought there was going to be boxing gloves and a ring pretty soon!  I will try to throw my two cents in while I am at it.  Please do not mind my typing/english grammer as I just got up from mids :)

Here is my background info.
10 years Navy.
5 years RO
2 years EWS/EDPO
3 years instructor at NFAS

Finished my degree while I was in.

There were quite a few jobs out there at various power plants it really depended on where you wanted to go.  I had job offers on the table for I+C instructor, NLO job near Raleigh, Ionization implant supervisor something ruther (forget the exact title) but that was near Boston, and SRO (instant) at the big OC.

Things I have observed so far:


1. EOOW to SRO comparison does not exist.  Forget the leadership tactics that worked in the Navy.  The "Do it because I am telling you to" flies like a box of bricks on sunday in the shade.   There are some similar aspects depending on your experience with personel but not many. 
2.  The Navy designs are all similar and all VERY easy to manipulate/run.  I would estimate there are probably at least 80-100 more systems in a civilian plant. Everything from the normal systems to support systems (air, oil, H2, zinc, etc etc) to support to the support systems (fuel oil, Hvac, rad waste, rad waste support systems) to environmental systems.  Its like comparing a Yugo to a Huge slow moving Dump Truck... there is no comparison.
3.  The amount of knowledge required to become a SRO is overwhelming coming from the military.  The systems part mentioned in #2 is really the easy part.  That is all just memorization and you were correct in your post they really are not all that different in theory.  I would not worry about the systems.  The real challenge is EVERYTHING else.  Knowing how to get things done, who to call, where to go, what the solutions are for every day things as well as when things break.  When you are dealing with a support staff of 400+ people ( sorry.. not support staf... umm Engineering, I+C, mechanical, electrical, station services, FIN, etc etc) knowing who to call is pretty important and takes an immense time to learn.
4.  Running drills in the simulator (which is amazingly similar if not exactly like the actual plant) is ALOT harder then any drills we ever ran in the Navy.  The command and control necessary to be successful is amazing. Every Reactor Scram drill lights up around 100-150 alarms.  Which ones are important?  :)  It makes running a slow leak drill on the Navy reactors... kinda like running a light bulb burned out at your house....The Navy design was simple.  Did I mention that there are no two Civilian plants alike.


The good observations:
  There are quite a few instant SRO that have their licenses here and two are SM.  So being and instant SRO is possible and can be done. It really depends on where you end up.  Some plants do not allow Instants, others I have heard have ALOT of animocity towards them, and others want to see you succeed and do well since they need people.  The Nuclear industry IMO is at a turning point right now.  There is going to be an huge turn over of people in the next few years (5-10) because of the retirement of the older operators.   Does it take an immense amount of work?  Yeah absolutly.  You basically have to forget a lot of the leadership BS the Navy burned into your head and actually start using some common sense.
I, personally, would not put down what Mike (Sequoyah 1&2) was telling you.  He is a Shift manager and has his SRO/RO license.  That right there tells you a lot.  Although his tact may need some honing, his opinion on the whole trying to compare Navy to Civilian is correct (there just isn't).



I'll debate a Naval Officer has any leadership skills. But it's been said we're here to help. I used to LOVE putting newly discharged Naval "leaders" in a room full of union guys and watch them get their heads ripped off while attempting their unique brand of Leadership with people who aren't captives

It is a good thing I was not eating while reading this... I think I would have to do some "Sea turtle" resucitation on myself... If that is not the truth I do not know what is....


How to get to SRO.
Common option:
1. Get a job as an NLO (20-23/hour to start, 30-32/hr plus overtime/doubletime once qualified .... about 12-14 months).  Go from NLO to SRO (possible depending on the company and ROs that want SRO.  Some places uses the seniority aspect because of the union.  Check that before you take the job)  Depending on the licensing and need for people classes run every 18-24 months (maybe).
Semi Common option:
2. Get a job as a system engineer.  Make a good reputation for yourself.  See what operations actually does, how the plant runs, and overall dynamics of the operation.
Rare and illusive position:
3.  Get a job as an "instant" SRO. Make a good reputation for yourself.  Learn everything you can possibly learn prior to class (6 month on site requirements for SRO).  Listen to the SRO/RO/NLOs and learn.

 Like I said before we have several SROs that work here and were instants..... and several SM.  They are all licensed and for the most part if I did not ask their background you would not know the difference.  The ability to learn is a powerful thing.  .
One thing I will say... there are both good, medium and bad people that work in all plants/corporations.  To say that the civilian industry has the "creme of the crop" was BS.  I work with all types of people and I trully beleive the diffence b/w good SRO/RO/NLO is their attitude.

GL with  your job search and do not limit yourself to just one type of work.  The military experience is good, your degree helps, but once you get out.. its a WHOLE new world :)

ex-nukeet1

PS:  One thing I found amazing.... they actually have sick days :)   You can call in.. and say hey.. I am sick LOL (without a doctor note or a bottle of Motrin).  Anyone else find that amazing after they got out of the Navy?

Another cool thing... is that the fuel glows blue after it comes out of the core... I always thought that was pure Hollywood BS.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Apr 25, 2005, 04:47
Good Post Et1. NOTE I did not say Navy Nukes aren't capable of becoming good SROs.
I said Naval Officers tend to be worse at it. Those who qualified EWS usually tend to do quite well.

Also, an Instant with no previous Commercial Nuclear Experience tends to do worse than an upgrade. I'm talking long term and prospects of becoming a Shift Manager. Most SMs in this business started as NLOs.

I will stand behind my statement the Commercial world gets the cream of the crop. WE can be selective, much more than the Navy, and in my 15 years of commercial experience I've found the average commercial nuke is an order of magnitude better than the average Navy nuke, AND the Outstanding Commercial nukes are far above the Outstanding Naval Nukes. The knowledge level is broader and more in depth.

Right now, go to an MM on your boat, give him the Breaker Scematic and ask him to read it. My guess is he couldn't do so, yet this is a skill we consider BASE level for an NLO in the commercial world.

By the way Et1, I guess I'm properly EX LICENSED now. I officially got the word my license for Fermi2 is now non valid. So until I license again in 2006 I'm more corectly a former SRO :)

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: halflifer on Apr 26, 2005, 09:50
Now as to how to become one, Nine Mile in Oswego, Ny is now looking for Auxilliary operators.  They are also looking for ROs and SROs. 
\

Who do we get in contact with on this?
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: jasonmsmith on Apr 26, 2005, 04:22
Justme,

Thanks for the info.  It definitely sounds like a nice area.

Thanks Again,

Jason
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: BillyJ on May 01, 2005, 09:48
I work at Watts Bar which I'm sure most of you know is a TVA plant along with Sequoyah and Browns Ferry.  I'm an ex-navy nuke and I am now a SRO/Shift Technical advisor/Unit Supervisor.  I have a BSNE which along with my naval time of 6 years and 10 years commercial and DOE experience in several different jobs after the navy, mostly contract positions (chemistry, radcon, project management, training, technical writing, etc).  I guess all that added up to the Ops Manager at Watts Bar offering me a position in one of their License classes as an Instant SRO.  By the way, this same guy is now Sequoyah's Plant Manager so he must have hired this Mike fellow also.  Sequoyah is about 60 miles away and is a practically identical apprx 1220 MW 4 loop Westinghouse Ice condenser plant.  Mike makes some valid points in what he says and is full of @#$% with some of his other comments.  I have been through the Naval Nuclear program, gotten a BS in Nuclear Engineering, and made it through NRC License class.  I personally believe that Naval Nuclear Power School was the most difficult.  Maybe I just had a lot more experience and knowledge when I got the NRC License.  However, with that said, there were 15 individuals in my License class (9 SRO and 6 RO), only 5 of us got licenses (4 SRO and 1 RO).  There were 8 instant SRO candidates (3 instant SRO candidates that already worked at Watts Bar in different capacities and 5 they brought in from outside) and 1 RO to SRO upgrade.  Of the 8 instant SRO candidates only 3 of us got licensed.  We all had one thing in common, we were ex-navy.  None of the other 5 that failed out were ex-navy.  However, since so many of the Instant SROs failed this class Watts Bar now prefers, but not demands, ex-SRO licensed individuals for Instant SRO condidates. 

Don't get me wrong, Mike has a good point, it is a world of difference between navy nuclear power and commercial nuclear power.  The things that navy nukes have going for them is 1) They have already been screened many different ways by the naval program.  2) The ones that made it all the way through school, prototype, and sea duty have proven they can learn well, adapt to Bull%*$t well, take tests well (extremely important!!!!!), and stay out of trouble. 3) Have a good GENERAL knowledge of Reactors, equipment (although smaller scale), and some of the same systems that are at PWRs. 

It is still hard to make it through License class for any Instant SRO candidate.  The hardest part is the simulator.  I have seen some amazingly intelligent individuals fall completely apart when it comes to simulator training.  This gets more people than the systems or any other part of the class.  It is pretty difficult sometimes to know exactly what is going wrong in a simulated scenario when there are literally hundreds of malfunctions that can be programmed into the simulator.  You have to have almost instantaneous recognition of exactly what's going wrong and what to do RIGHT NOW to control the entire plant and have the command and control to look like you do to instructors/NRC/Evaluators.  One mistake can cost you 18 months to 2 years of your life if you make it during the NRC exam.  There is no room for error.  One mistake during requal training (every 5 weeks by the way) can get you pulled from license duties.  Enough babbling here are some facts:

1) Ex-Navy personnel without degrees will not generally get a shot at Instant SRO, they have to go up through the ranks starting as a Auxillary Unit Operator (equipment operator) kinda like MMs in nuclear navy.
2) Ex-Navy personnel with degrees have a pretty good chance of at least getting an interview for an Instant SRO position (at least at Watts Bar).  Do not have a "I know everything about nuclear power" attitude because when it really comes down to it you really don't.  Swallow your pride like I did and admit it and go from there.  We have an Ex-Master Chief that became an SRO that came in with this "just give me a license I already know this crap" attitude and it was ugly for him before it was all said and done.
3) We are having hell keeping up with the attrition of SROs due to retirement.  We are currently 12 SROs short of full SRO staffing.  And there aren't enough ROs that can be cut loose to upgrade to SRO.  This means Instant SRO positions will be filled.
4) Ex-Navy personnel are the highest achievers in our last 4 license and non-licensed operator classes since I've been there.  This is not just my opinion this is fact.
5) Individuals from other departments on a particular site do well also (Engineering, chemistry, radcon, etc)  They already have a great deal of system experience.
6) The GFE exam is almost as hard as the written NRC exam.  If you don't know what GFE is and want to get a license, trust me, find out and study!!! I don't know if the NRC website still has information on GFE but I know they used to.
7) If you were relatively high ranked in the navy, yes LT this includes you, but also E-7, E-8, E-9, and are used to "my way or the highway".  Don't even go there.  That stuff only works in the military.  Believe me when I say "your operators under you can make or break you".  You have to be the boss but you better know how to be a boss!!

Anyone who has any other questions can email me at bwjohnson1@tva.gov  I would be glad to help.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: halflifer on May 02, 2005, 06:54
Excellent post, BiilJ. Just one point.....you talked about school/training/getting the license. What about success in the Control Room? Getting the license isn't the same as running the plant.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: jasonmsmith on May 02, 2005, 11:21
BillyJ,

Thank you for the great information.  This is exactly what I was looking for when I started this Subject.  It is good to see how passionate everyone seems to be on this subject.  I am also glad to see all of the ex navy nukes out there in commercial nuclear power field.

Jason
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on May 02, 2005, 01:59
I never said a Naval Officer couldn't get an SRO License. I said they make crappy Senior Reactor Operators. There is a difference. 12 years of havingt a License the last 7 of which was an SRO License gives me plenty of proof they're crappy at running a Control Room. That's a fact. I've had Navy guys on my shifts, and non navy guys. The Non Navy guys did just as well as the Navy guys, in many cases better. Then again I was never exposed to all that many bright Naval Officers.


I had an Navy Lt come into Fermi and tell me all the reasons why a BWR couldn't work, which was odd because even as this Naval Genius spoke the Big Pig was generating 3292 MW th.

By the way, is Watts Bar going to recruit SRO Talent from the Industry?

AND, can you imagine how that conversation went when some Engineer at WEstinghouse said he had the answer to making a smaller containment, then said "We'll out Ice in it?"

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: jasonmsmith on May 02, 2005, 03:44
Mike,

Your last reply was definitely "below the belt" in regards to Naval Officers, and naval personnel in general.  Why in the world you talk this way about people who serve this great country of ours is beyond me. 
If I ever post a question again on this site, please do not respond.  I am not at all interested in what you have to say.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Nuclear NASCAR on May 02, 2005, 04:18
If you gentlemen have a disagreement please handle it via PM.  Thank You.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: kwicslvr on May 03, 2005, 07:59
Mike,

Your last reply was definitely "below the belt" in regards to Naval Officers, and naval personnel in general.  Why in the world you talk this way about people who serve this great country of ours is beyond me. 
If I ever post a question again on this site, please do not respond.  I am not at all interested in what you have to say.


Hang in there Jason.  Don't let one bad egg here get to you.  There is a lot of good people here with a lot of good information.  You can definately learn a lot here.  A lot of good info has been written in this thread to give you a good heads up and ideas as were to start.  I myself left the Navy 2 years ago after 12 years.   Civilian plants are easier to work at then military mainly because of less BS.  Same amount of politics pretty much.  My best advice.  When you get hired on somewhere, be humble, be open minded and be eager to learn.  There will be a lot for you to learn.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: shayne on May 03, 2005, 08:43
The simple fact that you were EOOW qualified in the Navy does not mean that you are qualified to be a licensed SRO.  Just as a ELT is not qualified to be a Sr. RCT or an ET/RO in the Navy is not qualified to be RO at a commercial plant.  If you want to be a sucessful SRO, start at the Non Licensed Level.  Spend a few years there learning the plant and work your way up to licensed RO.  Just as was posted earlier, it could take many years.  Your leadership and supervisor skills will also need some tuning.  Your officer uniform will not give you the respect to be a sucessful leader outside of the Navy.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: kwicslvr on May 03, 2005, 03:45
  Your officer uniform will not give you the respect to be a sucessful leader outside of the Navy.
 

Hehe...unless you are a ring knocker going to a plant where a lot of management are ring knockers also! 8) :P
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Roll Tide on May 03, 2005, 07:34
Why in the world you talk this way about people who serve this great country of ours is beyond me. 


First, let me say "THANKS" to you and all those that are serving today. Without you, we would not have the freedoms we enjoy in this country.

Now that that's out of the way, let me explain a few things that many have to learn by experience:

Navy plants are not physically operated like commercial plants.
Commercial workers are not like Sailors: the operators do not do maintenance, and the crafts do not operate systems and equipment.
No one cares how you did it in the Navy.
The quickest way to evaporate any good will from your future subordinates is a condescending attitude. Are you aware there is a difference in officer to enlisted relationships when comparing submarine nuke and surface deck departments? The relationship of SRO to other Nukeworkers in commercial nukes has a greater contrast!
When you are the new guy at the commercial nuclear power plant, remember that YOU ARE THE NEW GUY!

If you learn these things from my gentle suggestions, it will be much less painful than learning it by experience. A few years down the road, you can verbalize your Navy experiences in light of your commercial experience without any problems.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on May 04, 2005, 12:55
Ok wait a minute. I never said Jason didn't have a chance at being an SRO or whatever position he desires. For all I know he'll be great. At least he had the common sense to ask, now I hope he gains the maturity to take it well when someone presents him with answers he might not like.

I'm in no position to doubt his  ability or sincerity, I've never served with the man, nor has he ever worked for me. I only opposed to the notion that being an EOOW is anywhere near the same as being an SRO, it's not, it's not even equivalent to being an RO. It's a kindergarten version of both, BUT we all had to start somewhere.

Also, the same skills that make one a successful "Naval leader" are not the same ones that will make one a successful leader in the commercial industry. He needed to hear that on this forum, otherwise he'd get slaughtered in the commercial world.

I'm not a tactful person, Shayne will attest to that, but I am an outstanding SRO, I know that because my management at Fermi thought so, and my management here thinks so. I worked my way up from the bottom and learned this industry inside and out. So please excuse me if when I see Navy on a resume my first thought is Entry Level, because that's what it means to me.

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: JnyMac on May 04, 2005, 02:44
I think the Idea of starting out at the bottom is great.  Our plant manager was an AO at TMI when the S@%T hit the fan.  He is a great guy to work for and has an appreciation for the job the frontline does.  You can call him up and go sit in his office and talk to him and he listens.  Some of the other managment only wants to talk down to you.  The better SROs I deal with are the ones that worked their way up.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: BeenThereDoneThatSRO on May 05, 2005, 09:22
I've seen lots of military officers come into the industry. Some do quite well while others struggle. As mentioned, the key is attitude. Yeah the Union folks will eat you for lunch if your attitude is "I am the boss therefore I must be the brightest one here." I've been around a long time (over 20 years with a license) and let me tell you those Assistant Unit Operators out in the plant will make you or break you. If you don't listen to those folks out in the factory you just won't make it. To make it as a supervisor, you need a healthy dose of humility, a concern and respect for your people and be willing to wait it out until you earn their respect. I'd say anyone successful in the Navy nuclear program has the brains the make it. All that is needed will be the right attitude and the willingness to let those working for you ...... help you.
P.S. Mike is right .... get into the engineering group first, learn the plant and then jump into the instant SRO program. The folks I've seen go that route have been very successful. There are success stories with others straight off the boat, but they are the minority.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Rad Sponge on May 09, 2005, 12:48
After reading this whole discussion its obvious that the "big brain/big boss" mentality is not a Navy nuke thing or commericial nuke thing, its a plain old nuke thing.

So I pose this question for all you salty civilians...

If an interviewer was to as me "How do you feel your Navy training has prepared you for a career in commercial nuclear power?" how would you respond,,,

Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: NuclearJoe on May 09, 2005, 01:58
I've worked at a plant in Michigan for about 13 years now, and I came here after 8 years as an enlisted EM nuc. From what I've seen, the Navy label only means you're trainable. If you go to a BWR there are drastic differences in the operational theory, so don't think your EOOW will carry much weight. If you go to a PWR the theory is basically the same. There are two ways that I see former officers get into my plant (a BWR); as a non-licensed operator or as a system engineer.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: NuclearJoe on May 09, 2005, 02:02
After reading this whole discussion its obvious that the "big brain/big boss" mentality is not a Navy nuke thing or commericial nuke thing, its a plain old nuke thing.

So I pose this question for all you salty civilians...

If an interviewer was to as me "How do you feel your Navy training has prepared you for a career in commercial nuclear power?" how would you respond,,,



I'd say that it taught me the basics of plant / reactor operations. But more importantly, I learned the process of qualifying on a plant.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Roll Tide on May 10, 2005, 02:39
If an interviewer was to ask me "How do you feel your Navy training has prepared you for a career in commercial nuclear power?"

Here is what you should say:
"As a former Navy Nuke, I know more about the job I am interviewing for than the people doing the interviews. Get out of my way and I will go save commercial nuclear power in the same manner I singlehandedly saved naval nuclear power!"

That is assuming you are putting in for the same job I am.   :o

If it is a different job, then you should say:
"I learned how to accomplish complex evolutions within a team setting. I learned how important attention to detail is. And I learned to always train the new guy right, because he will be the one relieving me down the road."

(On second thought, you can use the good answer if they are hiring more than one person!)  ;)
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on May 10, 2005, 05:33
There's a couple RX theory differences in a commercial PWR. Power follows Steam Demand but one has to do some manipulations with Tave. Doppler and the Fuel design sort of skew things a bit.

The concept which really blew my mind was PDIL for Control Rods. For a given power you have to ensure the Control Rods are withdrawn enough to shutdown the reactor. That was quite a concept that actually makes sense once you learn the theory.

And Boron... Putting acid in a reactor. Who'd of thunk it!!

Tell an interviewer the Navy Nuke program taught you how to learn quickly, have discipline, work accurately even when no one is watching, and how to identify when something is going wrong so you can take action to corect it. It does all those things quite well.



Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: nukeET1 on May 10, 2005, 09:38
Speaking of theory.  If you do happen to go to a BWR, forget everything you have ever learned about reactor theory (well ok, not everything but most!)

Boilling in the core, void fractions?, lowering reactor water level on purpose???  Rx power does not follow steam demand,   Everything is contaminated!!!  WHY, WHY would they do such at thing!!! Blasphomy in Navy standards! 
137 control rods.... and you can only move ONE at a time!!!! (SLOOOOOW Startups... easy as you go)
I still have to tell myself there is no secondary... no secondary.. only primary... even steam = primary.  Very strange indeed.

ex-nukeet1
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on May 11, 2005, 03:04
Boiling actually occurs in a PWR core, not a whole lot of it but it occurs.

I remember when I first started getting my license at a BWR and they told me under certain conditions you lower water level below top of active fuel to control power. My first thought was INSANITY!!. Now it makes perfect sense why, but  after being ingrained with the Navies Thou Shalt Now Let The Core Uncover....

At first I thought only 137 Control Rods, what type of BWR is nukeET1 at. Then I remembered Oyster Creek is a smaller boiler with 5 REcirc Loops, no Jet Pumps.

I'm not sure how far along you are in your training but I'm sort of assuming Oyster Creek has an ADS as part of their ECCS. Basically I think they just put that system in there as a Test Question Generator because the very first thing you do in the Emergency Procedures is turn it off!!!

The Reactor side is called the NSSS, the "Secondary" side is the BOP.

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: JnyMac on May 11, 2005, 06:02
No thanks to the BWR.  I like doing secondary rounds without RP coverage.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: PapaBear765 on Jul 14, 2006, 07:48
I concur with Mike (Broadzilla) that monkeys are the ideal operators of choice for naval submarines.  I repeat the common the phrase around here: I have the experience to know.  I stood RO on my boat for my spring '03 deployment in the Gulf region... for those who knows what that means I won't elucidate.

The LT who started the thread thinks too highly of naval operators.  I've known a lot of officers who live another world; unbeknownst to them, their engine room watch standers know more than they do.

Donovan, ET1(SS)
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: M1Ark on Jul 14, 2006, 10:13
No thanks to the BWR.  I like doing secondary rounds without RP coverage.

You've obviously never been to a BWR.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: M1Ark on Jul 14, 2006, 10:18
I am qualified EOOW (SRO) on two different naval reactor plants, S5W and S8G.  Does Naval qualifications carry much weight in the civilian world. 

Much, much simpler in design.  The truly tough part of the commercial SRO position is learning all of the legal aspects of the job.  Technical specifications (legal document) Nuregs, Reg Guides, ACADS, ODCM...etc.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: M1Ark on Jul 14, 2006, 10:37
It seems that I pissed some people off by comparing an EOOW to an SRO.  I realize that the size of the plant is significantly different, but from an operations standpoint, it seems that Naval plants require more oversight due to the constant power flucuations (transients), ie. speed changes of the submarine. 

LOL...10 minutes later...LOL

Good one.

Ultimately an EOOW is in charge of an operating nuclear reactor, same as an SRO.  He has a reactor operator working directly for him, along with an electrical operator and throttleman, along with all of the engineering watchstanders in the engineroom.  To say that an " EOOW is not equivalent to an SRO. It's not equivalent to a Reactor Operator in a Commercial Plant." seem a bit inaccurate, but what do I know

Yeah!  What do you know?

You barked out orders to the RO, EO, Throttleman, EWS and the ERS.  They made it happen.  They were the ones that actually knew what was going on and who knew how to run the unit.  It's alot easier to say,"ERS make the Main Engines ready to answer all bells", than it is to actually do it.

The next time you're on watch as the almighty EOOW.  Take a good look at your watchstanders.  Half of them are smarter than you and could qualify EOOW and be a better watch officer than you. Also, when the Eng gives you an order thats a turd, you tell the chief who tells the leading first of the division who sells it to his crew of 34 disgruntled E-5's and E-4's and gets them to do it without anarchy.  Who in that chain was the real leader?

You?

You earn your way in the commercial world.  How good are you at wiping up lube oil?
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Jul 15, 2006, 12:03
During my whole life as a BWR sailor I never needed Rad Con coverage to go into areas covered by rounds. In fact I've found I need Rad Con coverage more in the PWR world to go into areas that I could have accessed in the BWR world.

Until the advent of HWC I could go just about anywhere in a Boiler.

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: hamsamich on Jul 15, 2006, 01:07
That's not entirely fair.  There are plenty of good EOOWs out there.  Alot of them realized they could float thru on the backs of blueshirts, but some of them were good, and I knew this because our EOs and ROs would say whether or not they could handle things or not.  I bet plenty of Ex Navy EOs, ROs and EOOWs would make fine SROs in todays commercial world.  And even though it doesn't suit me, the fact that EOOWs had to play more of the political BS game and deal with all the other officers gives them some help in the management games played in some operations dept.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Jul 15, 2006, 04:52
I think M1Ark realizes there are good EOOWs who would and have made good SROs in the commercial world after all a good nuke is a good nuke regardless of pedigree. The original poster tried to imply that being an EOOW is equivalent to being an SRO and that's the issue. It's not and it's not even close.

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: ChiefRocscooter on Aug 04, 2006, 03:13
OK here is another point of view via a "Real no s____ sea story".
On My boat after the CO qualified a JO as EOOW, the skipper would come back during that EOOWs 1st watch and scram the plant from AMR2 UL (with ENG and ETT in tow).
I was stand RO when this rather pompus (ring knocker) JO took the watch then proceded to tell us he knew what the CO was going to do , and that we were not to try and make him look bad by doing things without his orders/concurance (no suggestion!!! "I am the EOOW and Know what to DO!!).
After the wink wink nudge nudge bretween RO/EO/Th man we were AYE AYE sir yes sir!
So.... Skipper scram plant and wanders into manuvering in time to see me shifting pumps and cutting out alarms (EO tripping TG shifting MGs to Gen, maning phones (and so on).  Once we completed our immediate actions we stood (well sat actually) by for orders, actuall the TH man was barking out questions he was getting from the Conn, while the EO was braking out the reports from the space (me and the AMR2 UL watch were on the phone telling jokes (ok not really).
During this time the "EOOW" was fumbling thru the RPM and trying to repeat all the reports (not doing very because the EO (who did a great Bill Murry) just kept droning on :D
This last for about 60 seconds (those who know realize that 60 sec is like a life time when the skipper is staringat you!!).  The only thing getting hotter was the CO (guessin he was putting hot more decay heat than the core, second to him was the ENG.  (heres the good part)
SO now knowing what was going on (he was smart and figured out quickly) the CO told the "EOOW", "You are relieved, I have the watch as EOOW , THrottleman roport to Conn that CO has the watch as EOOW" (wish I could of had a picture of the OOD's face then.  HE continued on "MR Blak___ you are to report to my stateroom now!"  about a second later he says" belay that you just stand there and watch this!"
He then ordered me as RO to take charge of manuvering and conduct a FRS" (he even made the ENG plot the board while the JO watched!)
OK so I, the EO, Th man did just that got plant back to green band, answering the ordered bell with TG's online.  All done with no input from CO, ENG, or "EOOW".  Once we secured the phones the CO ordered the ENG to assume the watch and told JO that NOW he could report to his stateroom!
The JO left and CO chewed our butts for how 2 mins, his point was that we were never to let the EOOW fail no matter how big a pompus ass he was (skipper knew the JO, like I said he was bright man).
The JO had to stand U/I under every watch station (Ithink it was two watches each) before he could stand EOOW.
Moral of the story: EOOW is optional in most cases, operators know what to do without them,  Officer have thier purposes but they do not "operate" nuclear power plants!! (In fact if one tried to touch my control rods I was alway told I could slap thier hand!! :) :)
A good EOOW is part of the team not tell it what to do (the best EOOWs are the one that listen for the problems and point them out, usually we solve them once we catch them)

OK that was quite long but thought it offered perspective given this thread.

Rob
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Aug 04, 2006, 03:52
The real big picture on this is

1: If you can keep your head when things fall apart

2: Process information quickly and prioritize what is relevant and needs to be acted upon

3: Accept input from your watchstanders.

4: Have a good feel for what happened to the plant and where it is heading BEFORE it gets there.


You should be able to supervise a control room regardless of your background. Those by the way are the BARE minimum skills for an SRO.

To say a Navy EOOW can do this simply because he is an EOOW is preposterous and unrealistic.

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: MLew44 on Aug 06, 2006, 05:03
I was a Navy EOOW (enlisted). I'm now an SRO at a PWR. In my view, each position has its challenges. However, you can learn a Navy plant in a couple of years, inside & out; not possible at a commercial plant no matter how smart you (think you) are. I think the complexity of commercial plant makes it much tougher to rely SOLELY on your own judgment, knowledge, experience.  As a licensed SRO, it would be disastrous for me to think I could do that. I try to constantly get advice from others I work with -- that includes non-licensed operators, ROs, I&C, Chemistry, HP, Maintenance, dozens of others. I'm real interested in not screwing up.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: ET2Nuke on Sep 29, 2006, 12:32
Hey, man. You still see it. I ended up going to BOOST and then ROTC. Didn't have to go back in b/c of the drawdown. Now going to b-school here in Chicago. So, I went to a consulting firm presentation (McKinsey) and found out one of the consultants was a nuke officer at one time. I thought we would have a good time talking, etc. Once he finds out I was enlisted, conversation definitely turns for the worse. What a j**k. Things never change.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Sep 29, 2006, 02:14
Hey, man. You still see it. I ended up going to BOOST and then ROTC. Didn't have to go back in b/c of the drawdown. Now going to b-school here in Chicago. So, I went to a consulting firm presentation (McKinsey) and found out one of the consultants was a nuke officer at one time. I thought we would have a good time talking, etc. Once he finds out I was enlisted, conversation definitely turns for the worse. What a j**k. Things never change.


I think you're being hypsersensitive.

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Marlin on Sep 29, 2006, 03:03
I thought we would have a good time talking, etc. Once he finds out I was enlisted, conversation definitely turns for the worse. What a j**k. Things never change.

Lets not condemn everyone for the actions of a few. We all experienced officers that were jerks but in my experience no more than other enlisted I worked with. While in Newport News I played in a local Rugby club that had three Navy sub officers and one Airforce fighter pilot. There was no social barrier between any of us (away from the base) we even liked the lawyer who played with us. In fact the most personable man on the team was a LtCommander from one of the other boats in overhaul he knew more socially unacceptable rugby songs than anyone else in the club.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: ChiefRocscooter on Sep 29, 2006, 03:30
Come on now Marlin, are you saying the % of jerks was equal from E to O ???  I agree with you that there were plenty of jerks to go around, but the snobbery and high browed'ness that often came from the wardroom was far in excess of anything that came from the messdecks.  Afterall they had it programed into them, thier leadership training actually used to tell them how they were better than enlisteds, most especially them ring knockers! The best Officers were the ones who saw thru that crap and became part of the crew insted of insisting on being over the crew.  I learned to over many years that most could be shown they were humans too and that some were jerks (and likely were before Navy too) and nothing could change that!!

Rob
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Marlin on Sep 29, 2006, 04:36
That was my experience on the boats, my Navy was staffed during the "Draft" years which may have made a difference. I also think people remember the jerks they can't ignore, another enlisted can easily be avoided and forgotten. If you were from the nose cone you probably thought the nukes aft were jerks even though we didn't think that way about ourselves. If you were an ELT the rest of M-Div thought you were a prima donna. Its all perspective.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: ET2Nuke on Sep 29, 2006, 05:14
True, I may have been hypersensitive, but this guy was a bit snobbish. Was kind of a downer. He even graduated from the USNA with a few of my BOOST classmates. When I mentioned their names, he really didn't want to talk much about it even though they were in the same regiment. Whatever, no big deal.

Here is a few stories for you. When I was a 4th class in ROTC, the battalion commander went nuke.  Was a realy pompous dude. Story makes its way back to the unit that while at prototype, he starts freaking out during quals and says to the MM1, "I order you give me the answer!" or something like that. While it could be an urban legend, I and this other nuke mid (surface guy) just shook our heads and laughed. Pretty sad at the same time and we COULD picture him saying that.

While in Holy Loch, a certain BM3 who was the coxswain of the LCM8 was trying to steer the boat in pretty heavy weather. An 0-5 was in the pilot house with him and asked the cox a question. Being pretty busy, the BM3 said, "What?" because he didn't hear him. Ends up, the 0-5 lays into him right there. Later, the Div O at boat ops brings the BM3 down to the squadron offices at the commanders request. In front of everyone there the cdr makes the bm3 apologize for saying "What?" and not, "What, sir?" This story is a no-sh**ter. I was down there visiting a friend from BE/E. I saw the apology and asked my friend what was up. That was when he told me the story.

Yes I met some excellent officers, guys who really cared, and I worked hard for those guys. Still, the ones that can ruin your day (or make you get out all together) are the ones you remember.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Sep 29, 2006, 07:55
It's cool. I know the frustration of being talked down to by someone who thinks he's superior by pedigree vice ability. It's not just confined with to Naval Officers. I know many find that shocking coming from me given what I've said in the past about Naval Officers so I feel I should explain something that those who know me in person know quite well. I have NOTHING againsy Naval Officers at all. In fact one of my favorite people at my old plant was a Naval Commander who at one time was my STA. He was an Academy grad and I loved having him on shift. He could take a joke and give it back quite well. In fact he once told me he never felt accepted there until he came to Ops. His biggest personality fault was being a U of M fan. I currently work with at least two ex Naval Officers. One works as a Unit Supervisor on another shift, the other works as the SM of the shift on which I'm currently doing my 520 Hours Under Instruction time in order to get my brandy newey SRO License. Both are EXCELLENT guys who I like and respect very much. Since I've been working with the SM I've come to respect his judgement and ability to apply pure common sense. It appears to me those who have been working for him seem to like being on his shift.

What I DO resent and WILL refute 100% of the time regardless of anyones feelings is when someone thinks a Naval Officer is equivalent to being an SRO because it's not even close, quite simply they are not. I will also challenge when some hot shot think just because he did well in the Navy means he/she will automatically do well in he commercial world. It's the same as thinking the guy who gained a 1000 yards as a Freshman in High School Division Podunk will gain 1000 in the NFL the next year. While the games are essentially the same the way they are played is different and at a different pace.

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: bigcris99 on Feb 10, 2007, 06:35
Broadzilla said he was an enlisted qualified EOOW, but he also stated that he was in the Navy for only six years which is impossible.  You would have to be in the Navy a minimum of seven years as enlisted to qualify EOOW.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: ExDetailer on Feb 10, 2007, 08:25
Not true, I was qualified EOOW less than seven years. As a matter of fact, I know of alot of people that were qualified EOOW less than seven years.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Fermi2 on Feb 11, 2007, 11:29
At A1W when I showed up in 1985 there were 4 Enlisted EOOWs with 4 or 5 years experience. When I left there were 6, 2 with under 4 years experience.

Mike
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: M1Ark on Feb 11, 2007, 06:19
As far as standing Control Room Supervisor (SRO) being difficult, well once you get sentenced out to be a Ops Work Liaison or CRS Admin or whatever the equivalent is that deals with scheduling and protective tagging and support and maintenance and planning and engineering implementation, CRS is a joke and you realize that a severely retarded drunken monkey could stand as the onshift SRO. 

A drunken monkey could perform the job of a Control Room Supervisor if the CRS Admin as you described is performing their job flawlessly.  This is rarely the case and a GOOD CRS not only has to do their own job but also track every move and decision the CRS Admin is doing to protect himself and the crew.  Not only does a good CRS track the CRS Admin but also the I&C Supervisor, the Electrical Maint. Supervisor and all of the techs working on the Unit.

Also it boils down to responsibility.  The Control Room Supervisor goes down in flames for every decision he/she makes as well as decisions being made without his knowledge.  More than once I was seconds from a reactor scram due to a "good idea" concocted by a well-intentioned CRS Admin.


The following sentence could be said for any job of responsibility.
A drunken monkey could perform the job <insert job here>.

Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Roll Tide on Feb 12, 2007, 01:57
As far as standing Control Room Supervisor (SRO) being difficult, well once you get sentenced out to be a Ops Work Liaison or CRS Admin or whatever the equivalent is that deals with scheduling and protective tagging and support and maintenance and planning and engineering implementation, CRS is a joke and you realize that a severely retarded drunken monkey could stand as the onshift SRO.  CRSA cannot be believed until you have the job, I didn't believe that comment but now I do.  Now I believe that CRS in the control room is normally a pretty easy job (sometimes hectic but nothing like the other one). 

I will give you the benefit of the doubt: IF OPS has such ownership of the scheduling process that all of the feedback previously given regarding the schedule is flawlessly implemented, the CRS job would feel easier than a scheduling job. But when things are ugly, like most plants, then every OPS signature means your reputation is on the line. At most plants, only the SRO that actually signs for it will have real consequences for the OOPS that takes the unit off line.

Ask your favorite NRC resident how they view Scheduling vs. OPS.
Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: Len61 on Feb 14, 2007, 09:32
"I have to agree with the majority comments in that as a Chief Machinery Operator I could have started up the entire secondary plant by myself without a procedure."

Hey 30378wby, as a former CMO, I have to say that it was very satisfying to know I could take the entire engine room from cold to underway almost single handedly. Actually given the state of the watch team after liberty call in one French port I did just that.
Really loved that part of my job in the Nav, it was all the other BS that sucked.
By the way, Nuke school class 8507, prototype 8601 (NY, MARF), CVN 69 (IB to all you IKE sailors out there).

Title: Re: Senior Reactor Operator
Post by: rlbinc on Feb 14, 2007, 10:01
"Enlisted men are stupid, but they are sly, cunning, and bear considerable watching."
-1910 US Naval Officers Manual

I would rather have a root canal than train an Engineer in a simulator. The problem with most ex-Officers is that they are typical Engineers. They lock in and analyze the crap out of an Auto Trip annunciator, but can't tell what Power, Pressure, and Level is, and have no idea which safety systems have actuated or failed to actuate.

There's some gas on the campfire, huh?

And, uh, yeah. I still respect your service , Sir.