IR 05000413/2012502

IR 05000413-12-502, 05000414-12-502, 10/29/2012 - 11/01/2012, Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 and 2, Emergency Preparedness Baseline Inspection

ML12338A287
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	11/29/2012
From:	Brian Bonser NRC/RGN-II/DRS/PSB1
To:	Henderson K Duke Energy Carolinas
References
IR-12-502
Download: ML12338A287 (10)

Text

UNITED STATES ber 29, 2012

SUBJECT:

CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION - EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS INSPECTION REPORT 05000413/2012502 AND 05000414/2012502

Dear Mr. Henderson:

On November 1, 2012, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an emergency preparedness inspection at the Catawba Nuclear Station. The enclosed inspection report documents the inspection results, which were discussed on November 1, 2012, with Mr.

S. Batson and other members of plant staff.

The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commissions rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license.

The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel.

Based on the results of this inspection, no findings were identified.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response, if any, will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Sincerely,

/RA/

Brian Bonser, Chief Plant Support Branch 1 Division of Reactor Safety Docket No. 50-413, 50-414 License No. NPF-35, NPF-52

Enclosure:

IR 05000413/2012502 & 05000414/2012502 w/Att.: Supplemental Information

REGION II==

Docket Nos.: 05000413, 05000414 License Nos.: NPF-35, NPF-52 Report No.: 05000413/2012502, 05000414/2012502 Licensee: Duke Power Company LLC.

Facility: Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 Location: York, SC Dates: October 29, 2012, through November 1, 2012 Inspectors: M. Speck, Senior Emergency Preparedness Inspector D. Berkshire, Emergency Preparedness Inspector W. Loo, Senior Health Physicist M. Endress, Resident Inspector - Oconee P. Glenn, Fuel Facility Inspector Approved by: Brian Bonser, Chief Plant Support Branch 1 Division of Reactor Safety Enclosure

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

IR 05000413/2012502; 05000414/2012502; 10/29/2012 - 11/01/2012; Catawba Nuclear

Station, Unit 1 and 2; Emergency Preparedness Baseline Inspection The report covered an announced inspection by two emergency preparedness inspectors, one senior health physicist, one fuel facility inspector, and one resident inspector. No findings were identified. The NRCs program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 4.

REPORT DETAILS

REACTOR SAFETY

Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness

1EP1 Exercise Evaluation

a. Inspection Scope

Prior to the arrival onsite, the inspectors conducted an in-office review of the exercise objectives and scenario submitted to the NRC to determine if the exercise would test major elements of the emergency plan as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(14).

The onsite inspection consisted of the following review and assessment:

• The adequacy of the licensees performance in the biennial exercise, conducted on October 30, 2012, was reviewed and assessed regarding the implementation of the Risk Significant Planning Standards (RSPS) in 10 CFR 50.47 (b)(4), (5), (9), and (10)which address emergency classification, offsite notification, radiological assessment, and protective action recommendations, respectively.

• The overall adequacy of the licensees emergency response facilities with regard to NUREG-0696, Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities and Emergency Plan commitments. The facilities assessed were the Control Room Simulator, Technical Support Center (TSC), Operations Support Center (OSC), and Emergency Operations Facility (EOF).

• Other performance areas, such as: the emergency response organizations (ERO)recognition of abnormal plant conditions; command and control, intra- and inter-facility communications; prioritization of mitigation activities; utilization of repair and field monitoring teams; interface with offsite agencies; and the overall implementation of the emergency plan and its implementing procedures.

• Past performance issues from NRC inspection reports and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)/Department of Homeland Security (DHS) exercise reports to determine the effectiveness of corrective actions as demonstrated during this exercise to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 50.47(b)(14).

• The post-exercise critique process and the presentation to the licensee's senior management conducted on November 1, 2012, to evaluate the licensees self-assessment of its ERO performance during the exercise and to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, Subsection IV.F.2.g.

The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment. This inspection activity satisfied one inspection sample for the exercise evaluation on a biennial basis.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

4OA1 Performance Indicator Verification

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors sampled licensee submittals relative to the Performance Indicators (PIs)listed below for the period January 1, 2011, through September 30, 2012. To verify the accuracy of the PI data reported during that period, PI definitions and guidance contained in NEI 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 6, were used to confirm the reporting basis for each data element.

Emergency Preparedness Cornerstone

• Emergency Response Organization Drill/Exercise Performance (DEP)

• Emergency Response Organization Readiness (ERO)

• Alert and Notification System Reliability (ANS)

For the specified review period, the inspectors examined data reported to the NRC, procedural guidance for reporting PI information, and records used by the licensee to identify potential PI occurrences. The inspectors verified the accuracy of the DEP through review of a sample of drill and event records. The inspectors reviewed selected training records to verify the accuracy of the ERO PI for personnel assigned to key positions in the ERO. The inspectors verified the accuracy of the PI for ANS reliability through review of a sample of the licensees records of periodic system tests. Licensee procedures, records, and other documents reviewed within this inspection area are listed in the Attachment.

The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment. This inspection activity satisfied one inspection sample for each of the three Emergency Preparedness PIs, i.e., DEP, ERO, and ANS, on an annual basis.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit

On November 1, 2012, the lead inspector presented the inspection results to Mr. S.

Batson and other members of the plant staff. The inspectors confirmed that proprietary information was not provided during the inspection.

ATTACHMENT:

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

KEY POINTS OF CONTACT

Licensee personnel

K. Henderson, Site Vice President

S. Batson, Station Manager

T. Arlow, Emergency Preparedness Manager

M. Austin, Fleet Emergency Preparedness Manager

T. Kuhr, Fleet Emergency Preparedness Engineer

M. Lee, Emergency Preparedness staff

G. McCracken, Emergency Planning staff

T. Pasour, Regulatory Compliance staff

S. Putnam, Organizational Effectiveness Manager