Our Crystal River commitment states that we follow ANSI 18.1 and all subsequent 
revisions.    So, we require 3 years experience with a requirement that they 
have increasing responsibilities during that period to qualify as ANSI 3.1.  
Related education can be substituted for up to one year of experience.   
Contractor HP techs also have to pass the North East Utilities exam.

My opinion.   Craft have a 4 year apprentice program with associated training 
documented.   So, do we really want to turn over our RP programs to a tech with 
2 years field experience that may not be able to verify performance at tasks 
with increasing responsibility.  I believe the 3 year requirement is 
appropriate for an HP tech.

Thanks, Bryant

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
[email protected]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 4:52 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Powernet: ANSI Standards for HP Techs

Hey folks,  I have a question I'd like to bounce off you'all.  I've been asked 
several times over the years about the "two" different ANSI standards for HP 
Techs - N18.1 and 3.1.  The common belief is that N18.1 requires 2 years of 
experience and 3.1 requires 3 years.  After researching as much as I can find, 
I've come to this conclusion and wanted to know if I'm offbase.

ANSI N18.1-1971 Section 4.5.2 Technicians:  Technicians in responsible 
positions shall have a minimum of two years of working experience in their 
specialty.  These personnel should have a minimum of one year of related 
technical training in addition to their experience.

ANSI/ANS 3.1 has gone through several revisions.  The 1978 version was the most 
restrictive with Section 4.5.2 that stated:  Technicians shall have three years 
of working experience in their specialty of which one year should be related 
technical training.

The 1987 version of 3.1 itemized qualifications as:  High School Diploma, 2 
years of Radiation Protection experience of which 1 year is Nuclear Power Plant 
and 3 months is On-site experience.

The 1993 version of ANSI/ANS 3.1-1993 Section 4.5.3.2 stated the same as the 
1987 requirements.  I gather the '93 revision was reaffirmed in '99.  No 
changes?

Anyway, my conclusion is that some of us older plants are committed in Tech 
Specs to N18.1-1971 and newer plants are committed to ANS-3.1-1978.  So newer 
plants may have the "3 year" requirement even though the newer revisions of the 
ANSI/ANS standard itself backed off from the experience requirement.

Does that make sense or am I all wet (again)?   And I'm not going to even try 
to address how the experience time is determined for supplemental staff.
Thanks, Eric

Eric M. Goldin, CHP
Southern California Edison
<[email protected]> ----------------------------------- Powernet - a service 
of the Health Physics Society Power Reactor Section Powernet archives at 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Reply to: [email protected] If 
Questions, contact Mike Russell, CHP at [email protected]

Reply via email to