Text

County, Limerick, Oyster Creek, Peach Bottom, Quad Cities, Three Mile Island, 30-Day Response to NRC Bulletin 2011-01, Mitigating Strategies.
	ML111600096
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom, Oyster Creek, Byron, Three Mile Island, Braidwood, Limerick, Clinton, Quad Cities, LaSalle
Issue date:	06/08/2011
From:	Jury K; Exelon Generation Co, Exelon Nuclear
To:	; Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
	BL-11-001, RA-11-004, RS-11-086, TMI-11-094
	Download: ML111600096 (24)
	v • d • e

Exelon Exelon Generation Generation www.exeloncorp.com Exelon Exekn.

13QO Winfield in e Road oa Nuclear uc a Warrenville, ILIL 60555 Warrenville, 6o 10 CFR 50.54(f)

RS..11 RS-1 1-086..086 RA..11 RA-1 1-004..004 TMI-1 1-094 TMI-11-094 June 8,2011 June 8, 2011 U.S. Nuclear U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk ATTN:

11555 Rockville 11555 Rockville Pike Pike Rockville, MD Rockville, MD 20852 Braidwood Station, Units 11 and 2 Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-72 and NPF-77 Facility NRC Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50..457 50-457 Byron Station, Units 11 and 2 Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-37 and NPF-66 Facility NRC Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50-455 Clinton Power Station, Unit 1 1 Facility Operating License No. NPF-62 NRC Docket No. 50-461 Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3 Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-19 and DPR-25 NRC Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249 LaSalle County Station, Units 1 1 and 2 NPF-1 1 and NPF-18 Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-11 NPF-1 8 NRC Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374 Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 1 and 2 Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-39 and NPF-85 NRC Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353 Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-16 NRC Docket No. 50-219 Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-44 and DPR-56 NRC Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01 June 8, 2011 Page 2 Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-29 and DPR-30 NRC Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265 Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-50 NRC Docket No. 50-289

Subject:

30-Day Response to NRC Bulletin 2011-01, "Mitigating Strategies"

Reference:

NRC Bulletin 2011-01, "Mitigating Strategies," dated May 11, 2011 On May 11, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 2011-01, "Mitigating Strategies" (Reference). The NRC issued this bulletin to achieve the following objectives:

1. To require that addressees provide a comprehensive verification of their compliance with the regulatory requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)

Section 50.54(hh)(2),

2. To notify addressees about the NRC staff's need for information associated with licensee mitigating strategies under 10 CFR 50.54(hh)(2) in light of the recent events at Japans Fukushima-Daiichi facility in order to determine if 1) additional assessment of program implementation is needed, 2) the current inspection program should be enhanced, or 3) further regulatory action is warranted, and

3. To require that addressees provide a written response to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f).

The bulletin requested that within 30 days of the date of this bulletin, licensees provide the following information on their mitigating strategies programs:

1. Is the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in your submittals to the NRC, available and capable of performing its intended function?

2. Are the guidance and strategies implemented capable of being executed considering the current configuration of your facility and current staffing and skill levels of the staff?

The attachments to this letter contain the 30-day response to the requested information pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(f) for each applicable Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon) facility.

U.S.

U.S. Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Regulatory Commission Commission 30-Day 30-Day Response Response to to Bulletin Bulletin 2011-01 2011-01 June 8, 2011 June 8,2011 Page 33 Page There are There are no no regulatory regulatory commitments commitments contained in this letter.

there are IfIf there are any any questions questions concerning concerning this letter, please contact David P. Helker at (610) 765-5525.

5525.

II declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on the 8th declare under day of June day June 2011.

Respectfully, Respectfully,

~£,~

Keith R. Jury President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs Vice President -

Exelon Generation Company, LLC 1 - Braidwood Station 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01 Attachment 2 - Byron Station 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01

- - Clinton Power Station 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01

- - Dresden Nuclear Power Station 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01

- - LaSalle County Station 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01

- - Limerick Generating Station 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01

- - Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01

- - Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01

- - Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01

- 0 - Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1

- 1 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01 June 8, 2011 Page 4 cc: Regional Administrator - NRC Region I Regional Administrator - NRC Region III NRC Senior Resident Inspector - Braidwood Station NRC Senior Resident Inspector - Byron Station NRC Senior Resident Inspector - Clinton Power Station NRC Senior Resident Inspector - Dresden Nuclear Power Station NRC Senior Resident Inspector - LaSalle County Station NRC Senior Resident Inspector - Limerick Generating Station NRC Senior Resident Inspector - Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station NRC Senior Resident Inspector - Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station NRC Senior Resident Inspector - Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station NRC Senior Resident Inspector - Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 NRC Project Manager, NRR - Braidwood Station NRC Project Manager, NRR - Byron Station NRC Project Manager, NRR - Clinton Power Station NRC Project Manager, NRR - Dresden Nuclear Power Station NRC Project Manager, NRR - LaSalle County Station NRC Project Manager, NRR - Limerick Generating Station NRC Project Manager, NRR - Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station NRC Project Manager, NRR - Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station NRC Project Manager, NRR - Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station NRC Project Manager, NRR - Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Illinois Emergency Management Agency - Division of Nuclear Safety Director, Bureau of Radiation Protection - Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources Director, Bureau of Nuclear Engineering - New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Chairman, Board of County Commissioners of Dauphin County, PA Chairman, Board of Supervisors of Londonderry Township, PA Mayor of Lacey Township, Forked River, NJ S. T. Gray, State of Maryland R. R. Janati, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

ATTACHMENT 1 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01 Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2 On May 11, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 2011-01, "Mitigating Strategies." The NRC is issuing this bulletin to achieve the following objectives:

1. To require that addressees provide a comprehensive verification of their compliance with the regulatory requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)

Section 50.54(hh)(2),

2. To notify addressees about the NRC staffs need for information associated with licensee mitigating strategies under 10 CFR 50.54(hh)(2) in light of the recent events at Japans Fukushima-Daiichi facility in order to determine if 1) additional assessment of program implementation is needed, 2) the current inspection program should be enhanced, or 3) further regulatory action is warranted, and

3. To require that addressees provide a written response to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f).

The bulletin requested that within 30 days of the date of this bulletin, licensees provide information on their NRC mitigating strategies programs. The NRC questions related to the 30-day response are restated below followed by the Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon) response for the Braidwood Station.

1. Is the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in your submittals to the NRC, available and capable of performing its intended function?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in our submittals to the NRC (References 1 through 5) and as reviewed and approved by the NRC (Reference 6), is available and capable of performing its intended function at Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2.

2. Are the guidance and strategies implemented capable of being executed considering the current configuration of your facility and current staffing and skill levels of the staff?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the guidance and strategies being implemented at Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, are capable of being executed considering the current configuration of the facilities and current staffing and skill levels of the Exelon personnel. Page 1 of 2

References

1. Letter from Jeffrey A. Benjamin, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated May 31, 2005.

2. Letter from Pamela B. Cowan, Director - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Request for Additional Information - NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated September 29, 2005.

3. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated February 23, 2006.

4. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Supplemental Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated May 3, 2006.

5. Letter from Keith R. Jury, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response Providing Information Regarding Implementation Details for the B.5.b Phases 2 and 3 Mitigation Strategies, including Responses to Requests for Additional Information," dated May 16, 2007.

6. Letter from Robert F. Kuntz, Project Manager, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Christopher M. Crane, Exelon Generation Company, LLC - "Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, and Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2 - Conforming License Amendments to Incorporate the Mitigation Strategies Required by Section B.5.b of Commission Order EA-02-026 (TAC Nos. MD4502, MD4503, MD4500, and MD4501)," dated June 27, 2007. Page 2 of 2

ATTACHMENT 2 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01 Byron Station, Units 1 and 2 On May 11, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 2011-01, "Mitigating Strategies." The NRC is issuing this bulletin to achieve the following objectives:

1. To require that addressees provide a comprehensive verification of their compliance with the regulatory requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)

Section 50.54(hh)(2),

2. To notify addressees about the NRC staffs need for information associated with licensee mitigating strategies under 10 CFR 50.54(hh)(2) in light of the recent events at Japans Fukushima-Daiichi facility in order to determine if 1) additional assessment of program implementation is needed, 2) the current inspection program should be enhanced, or 3) further regulatory action is warranted, and

3. To require that addressees provide a written response to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f).

The bulletin requested that within 30 days of the date of this bulletin, licensees provide information on their NRC mitigating strategies programs. The NRC questions related to the 30-day response are restated below followed by the Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon) response for the Byron Station.

1. Is the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in your submittals to the NRC, available and capable of performing its intended function?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in our submittals to the NRC (References 1 through 5) and as reviewed and approved by the NRC (Reference 6), is available and capable of performing its intended function at Byron Station, Units 1 and 2.

2. Are the guidance and strategies implemented capable of being executed considering the current configuration of your facility and current staffing and skill levels of the staff?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the guidance and strategies being implemented at Byron Station, Units 1 and 2, are capable of being executed considering the current configuration of the facilities and current staffing and skill levels of the Exelon personnel. Page 1 of 2

References

1. Letter from Jeffrey A. Benjamin, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated May 31, 2005.

2. Letter from Pamela B. Cowan, Director - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Request for Additional Information - NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated September 29, 2005.

3. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated February 23, 2006.

4. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Supplemental Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated May 3, 2006.

5. Letter from Keith R. Jury, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response Providing Information Regarding Implementation Details for the B.5.b Phases 2 and 3 Mitigation Strategies, including Responses to Requests for Additional Information," dated May 16, 2007.

6. Letter from Robert F. Kuntz, Project Manager, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Christopher M. Crane, Exelon Generation Company, LLC - "Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, and Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2 - Conforming License Amendments to Incorporate the Mitigation Strategies Required by Section B.5.b of Commission Order EA-02-026 (TAC Nos. MD4502, MD4503, MD4500, and MD4501)," dated June 27, 2007. Page 2 of 2

ATTACHMENT 3 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01 Clinton Power Station, Unit 1 On May 11, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 2011-01, "Mitigating Strategies." The NRC is issuing this bulletin to achieve the following objectives:

1. To require that addressees provide a comprehensive verification of their compliance with the regulatory requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)

Section 50.54(hh)(2),

2. To notify addressees about the NRC staffs need for information associated with licensee mitigating strategies under 10 CFR 50.54(hh)(2) in light of the recent events at Japans Fukushima-Daiichi facility in order to determine if 1) additional assessment of program implementation is needed, 2) the current inspection program should be enhanced, or 3) further regulatory action is warranted, and

3. To require that addressees provide a written response to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f).

The bulletin requested that within 30 days of the date of this bulletin, licensees provide information on their NRC mitigating strategies programs. The NRC questions related to the 30-day response are restated below followed by the Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon) response for the Clinton Station.

1. Is the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in your submittals to the NRC, available and capable of performing its intended function?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in our submittals to the NRC (References 1 through 5) and as reviewed and approved by the NRC (Reference 6), is available and capable of performing its intended function at Clinton Power Station, Unit 1.

2. Are the guidance and strategies implemented capable of being executed considering the current configuration of your facility and current staffing and skill levels of the staff?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the guidance and strategies being implemented at Clinton Power Station, Unit 1, are capable of being executed considering the current configuration of the facility and current staffing and skill levels of the Exelon personnel. Page 1 of 2

References

1. Letter from Jeffrey A. Benjamin, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated May 31, 2005.

2. Letter from Pamela B. Cowan, Director - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Request for Additional Information - NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated September 29, 2005.

3. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated February 23, 2006.

4. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Supplemental Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated May 3, 2006.

5. Letter from Keith R. Jury, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response Providing Information Regarding Implementation Details for the B.5.b Phases 2 and 3 Mitigation Strategies, including Responses to Requests for Additional Information," dated May 16, 2007.

6. Letter from Stephen P. Sands, Project Manager, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Christopher M. Crane, AmerGen Energy Company, LLC - "Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1

- Conforming License Amendment to Incorporate the Mitigation Strategies Required by Section B.5.b of Commission Order EA-02-026 (TAC No. MD4579)," dated July 26, 2007. Page 2 of 2

ATTACHMENT 4 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01 Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3 On May 11, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 2011-01, "Mitigating Strategies." The NRC is issuing this bulletin to achieve the following objectives:

1. To require that addressees provide a comprehensive verification of their compliance with the regulatory requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)

Section 50.54(hh)(2),

2. To notify addressees about the NRC staffs need for information associated with licensee mitigating strategies under 10 CFR 50.54(hh)(2) in light of the recent events at Japans Fukushima-Daiichi facility in order to determine if 1) additional assessment of program implementation is needed, 2) the current inspection program should be enhanced, or 3) further regulatory action is warranted, and

3. To require that addressees provide a written response to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f).

The bulletin requested that within 30 days of the date of this bulletin, licensees provide information on their NRC mitigating strategies programs. The NRC questions related to the 30-day response are restated below followed by the Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon) response for the Dresden Nuclear Power Station.

1. Is the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in your submittals to the NRC, available and capable of performing its intended function?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in our submittals to the NRC (References 1 through 5) and as reviewed and approved by the NRC (Reference 6), is available and capable of performing its intended function at Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3.

2. Are the guidance and strategies implemented capable of being executed considering the current configuration of your facility and current staffing and skill levels of the staff?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the guidance and strategies being implemented at Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2 and 3, are capable of being executed considering the current configuration of the facilities and current staffing and skill levels of the Exelon personnel. Page 1 of 2

References

1. Letter from Jeffrey A. Benjamin, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated May 31, 2005.

2. Letter from Pamela B. Cowan, Director - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Request for Additional Information - NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated September 29, 2005.

3. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated February 23, 2006.

4. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Supplemental Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated May 3, 2006.

5. Letter from Keith R. Jury, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response Providing Information Regarding Implementation Details for the B.5.b Phases 2 and 3 Mitigation Strategies, including Responses to Requests for Additional Information," dated May 16, 2007.

6. Letter from Christopher Gratton, Senior Project Manager, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Christopher M. Crane, Exelon Generation Company, LLC - "Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3 - Conforming License Amendments to Incorporate the Mitigation Strategies Required by Section B.5.b of Commission Order EA-02-026 and the Radiological Protection Mitigation Strategies Required by Commission Order EA-06-137 (TAC Nos. MD4504 and MD4505)," dated August 23, 2007. Page 2 of 2

ATTACHMENT 5 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01 LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2 On May 11, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 2011-01, "Mitigating Strategies." The NRC is issuing this bulletin to achieve the following objectives:

1. To require that addressees provide a comprehensive verification of their compliance with the regulatory requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)

Section 50.54(hh)(2),

2. To notify addressees about the NRC staffs need for information associated with licensee mitigating strategies under 10 CFR 50.54(hh)(2) in light of the recent events at Japans Fukushima-Daiichi facility in order to determine if 1) additional assessment of program implementation is needed, 2) the current inspection program should be enhanced, or 3) further regulatory action is warranted, and

3. To require that addressees provide a written response to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f).

The bulletin requested that within 30 days of the date of this bulletin, licensees provide information on their NRC mitigating strategies programs. The NRC questions related to the 30-day response are restated below followed by the Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon) response for the LaSalle County Station.

1. Is the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in your submittals to the NRC, available and capable of performing its intended function?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in our submittals to the NRC (References 1 through 5) and as reviewed and approved by the NRC (Reference 6), is available and capable of performing its intended function at LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2.

2. Are the guidance and strategies implemented capable of being executed considering the current configuration of your facility and current staffing and skill levels of the staff?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the guidance and strategies being implemented at LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2, are capable of being executed considering the current configuration of the facilities and current staffing and skill levels of the Exelon personnel. Page 1 of 2

References

1. Letter from Jeffrey A. Benjamin, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated May 31, 2005.

2. Letter from Pamela B. Cowan, Director - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Request for Additional Information - NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated September 29, 2005.

3. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated February 23, 2006.

4. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Supplemental Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated May 3, 2006.

5. Letter from Keith R. Jury, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response Providing Information Regarding Implementation Details for the B.5.b Phases 2 and 3 Mitigation Strategies, including Responses to Requests for Additional Information," dated May 16, 2007.

6. Letter from Stephen P. Sands, Project Manager, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Christopher M. Crane, Exelon Generation Company, LLC - "LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2 - Conforming License Amendments to Incorporate the Mitigation Strategies Required by Section B.5.b of Commission Order EA-02-026 and the Radiological Protection Mitigation Strategies Required by Commission Order EA-06-137 (TAC Nos. MD4506 and MD4507),"

dated August 9, 2007. Page 2 of 2

ATTACHMENT 6 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01 Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 On May 11, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 2011-01, "Mitigating Strategies." The NRC is issuing this bulletin to achieve the following objectives:

1. To require that addressees provide a comprehensive verification of their compliance with the regulatory requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)

Section 50.54(hh)(2),

2. To notify addressees about the NRC staffs need for information associated with licensee mitigating strategies under 10 CFR 50.54(hh)(2) in light of the recent events at Japans Fukushima-Daiichi facility in order to determine if 1) additional assessment of program implementation is needed, 2) the current inspection program should be enhanced, or 3) further regulatory action is warranted, and

3. To require that addressees provide a written response to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f).

The bulletin requested that within 30 days of the date of this bulletin, licensees provide information on their NRC mitigating strategies programs. The NRC questions related to the 30-day response are restated below followed by the Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon) response for the Limerick Generating Station.

1. Is the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in your submittals to the NRC, available and capable of performing its intended function?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in our submittals to the NRC (References 1 through 5) and as reviewed and approved by the NRC (Reference 6), is available and capable of performing its intended function at Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2.

2. Are the guidance and strategies implemented capable of being executed considering the current configuration of your facility and current staffing and skill levels of the staff?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the guidance and strategies being implemented at Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, are capable of being executed considering the current configuration of the facilities and current staffing and skill levels of the Exelon personnel. Page 1 of 2

References

1. Letter from Jeffrey A. Benjamin, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated May 31, 2005.

2. Letter from Pamela B. Cowan, Director - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Request for Additional Information - NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated September 29, 2005.

3. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated February 23, 2006.

4. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Supplemental Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated May 3, 2006.

5. Letter from Keith R. Jury, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response Providing Information Regarding Implementation Details for the B.5.b Phases 2 and 3 Mitigation Strategies, including Responses to Requests for Additional Information," dated May 16, 2007.

6. Letter from Peter J. Bamford, Project Manager, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Christopher M. Crane, Exelon Generation Company, LLC - "Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 - Conforming License Amendments to Incorporate the Mitigation Strategies Required by Section B.5.b of Commission Order EA-02-026 and the Radiological Protection Mitigation Strategies Required by Commission Order EA-06-137 (TAC Nos. MD4508 and MD4509)," dated August 9, 2007. Page 2 of 2

ATTACHMENT 7 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01 Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station On May 11, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 2011-01, "Mitigating Strategies." The NRC is issuing this bulletin to achieve the following objectives:

1. To require that addressees provide a comprehensive verification of their compliance with the regulatory requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)

Section 50.54(hh)(2),

2. To notify addressees about the NRC staffs need for information associated with licensee mitigating strategies under 10 CFR 50.54(hh)(2) in light of the recent events at Japans Fukushima-Daiichi facility in order to determine if 1) additional assessment of program implementation is needed, 2) the current inspection program should be enhanced, or 3) further regulatory action is warranted, and

3. To require that addressees provide a written response to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f).

The bulletin requested that within 30 days of the date of this bulletin, licensees provide information on their NRC mitigating strategies programs. The NRC questions related to the 30-day response are restated below followed by the Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon) response for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station.

1. Is the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in your submittals to the NRC, available and capable of performing its intended function?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in our submittals to the NRC (References 1 through 5) and as reviewed and approved by the NRC (Reference 6), is available and capable of performing its intended function at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station.

2. Are the guidance and strategies implemented capable of being executed considering the current configuration of your facility and current staffing and skill levels of the staff?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the guidance and strategies being implemented at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station are capable of being executed considering the current configuration of the facility and current staffing and skill levels of the Exelon personnel. Page 1 of 2

References

1. Letter from Jeffrey A. Benjamin, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC/ AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated May 31, 2005.

2. Letter from Pamela B. Cowan, Director - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Request for Additional Information - NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated September 29, 2005.

3. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated February 23, 2006.

4. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Supplemental Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated May 3, 2006.

5. Letter from Keith R. Jury, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response Providing Information Regarding Implementation Details for the B.5.b Phases 2 and 3 Mitigation Strategies, including Responses to Requests for Additional Information," dated May 16, 2007.

6. Letter from Ed Miller, Project Manager, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Christopher M. Crane, AmerGen Energy Company, LLC - "Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station -

Conforming License Amendment to Incorporate the Mitigation Strategies Required by Section B.5.b of Commission Order EA-02-026 and the Radiological Protection Mitigation Strategies Required by Commission Order EA-06-137 (TAC No. MD4510)," dated August 9, 2007. Page 2 of 2

ATTACHMENT 8 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01 Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 On May 11, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 2011-01, "Mitigating Strategies." The NRC is issuing this bulletin to achieve the following objectives:

1. To require that addressees provide a comprehensive verification of their compliance with the regulatory requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)

Section 50.54(hh)(2),

2. To notify addressees about the NRC staffs need for information associated with licensee mitigating strategies under 10 CFR 50.54(hh)(2) in light of the recent events at Japans Fukushima-Daiichi facility in order to determine if 1) additional assessment of program implementation is needed, 2) the current inspection program should be enhanced, or 3) further regulatory action is warranted, and

3. To require that addressees provide a written response to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f).

The bulletin requested that within 30 days of the date of this bulletin, licensees provide information on their NRC mitigating strategies programs. The NRC questions related to the 30-day response are restated below followed by the Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon) response for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station.

1. Is the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in your submittals to the NRC, available and capable of performing its intended function?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in our submittals to the NRC (References 1 through 5) and as reviewed and approved by the NRC (Reference 6), is available and capable of performing its intended function at Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3.

2. Are the guidance and strategies implemented capable of being executed considering the current configuration of your facility and current staffing and skill levels of the staff?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the guidance and strategies being implemented at Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, are capable of being executed considering the current configuration of the facility and current staffing and skill levels of the Exelon personnel. Page 1 of 2

References

1. Letter from Jeffrey A. Benjamin, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated May 31, 2005.

2. Letter from Pamela B. Cowan, Director - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Request for Additional Information - NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated September 29, 2005.

3. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated February 23, 2006.

4. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Supplemental Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated May 3, 2006.

5. Letter from Keith R. Jury, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response Providing Information Regarding Implementation Details for the B.5.b Phases 2 and 3 Mitigation Strategies, including Responses to Requests for Additional Information," dated May 16, 2007.

6. Letter from John D. Hughey, Project Manager, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Christopher M. Crane, Exelon Generation Company, LLC - "Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, - Conforming License Amendments to Incorporate the Mitigation Strategies Required by Section B.5.b of Commission Order EA-02-026 and the Radiological Protection Mitigation Strategies Required by Commission Order EA-06-137 (TAC Nos.

MD4511 and MD4512)," dated August 9, 2007. Page 2 of 2

ATTACHMENT 9 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01 Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 On May 11, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 2011-01, "Mitigating Strategies." The NRC is issuing this bulletin to achieve the following objectives:

1. To require that addressees provide a comprehensive verification of their compliance with the regulatory requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)

Section 50.54(hh)(2),

2. To notify addressees about the NRC staffs need for information associated with licensee mitigating strategies under 10 CFR 50.54(hh)(2) in light of the recent events at Japans Fukushima-Daiichi facility in order to determine if 1) additional assessment of program implementation is needed, 2) the current inspection program should be enhanced, or 3) further regulatory action is warranted, and

3. To require that addressees provide a written response to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f).

The bulletin requested that within 30 days of the date of this bulletin, licensees provide information on their NRC mitigating strategies programs. The NRC questions related to the 30-day response are restated below followed by the Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon) response for the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station.

1. Is the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in your submittals to the NRC, available and capable of performing its intended function?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in our submittals to the NRC (References 1 through 6) and as reviewed and approved by the NRC (Reference 7), is available and capable of performing its intended function at Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2.

2. Are the guidance and strategies implemented capable of being executed considering the current configuration of your facility and current staffing and skill levels of the staff?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the guidance and strategies being implemented at Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, are capable of being executed considering the current configuration of the facility and current staffing and skill levels of the Exelon personnel. Page 1 of 2

References

1. Letter from Jeffrey A. Benjamin, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated May 31, 2005.

2. Letter from Pamela B. Cowan, Director - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Request for Additional Information - NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated September 29, 2005.

3. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated February 23, 2006.

4. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Supplemental Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated May 3, 2006.

5. Letter from Keith R. Jury, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response Providing Information Regarding Implementation Details for the B.5.b Phases 2 and 3 Mitigation Strategies, including Responses to Requests for Additional Information," dated May 16, 2007.

6. Letter from Timothy J. Tulon, Site Vice President - Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Exelon Generation Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Regulatory Commitment Change Summary Report," dated June 9, 2009.

7. Letter from Meghan Thorpe-Kavanaugh, Project Manager, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Christopher M. Crane, Exelon Generation Company, LLC - "Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, - Conforming License Amendments to Incorporate the Mitigation Strategies Required by Section B.5.b of Commission Order EA-02-026 and the Radiological Protection Mitigation Strategies Required by Commission Order EA-06-137 (TAC Nos. MD4513 and MD4514)," dated August 9, 2007. Page 2 of 2

ATTACHMENT 10 30-Day Response to Bulletin 2011-01 Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 On May 11, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 2011-01, "Mitigating Strategies." The NRC is issuing this bulletin to achieve the following objectives:

1. To require that addressees provide a comprehensive verification of their compliance with the regulatory requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)

Section 50.54(hh)(2),

2. To notify addressees about the NRC staffs need for information associated with licensee mitigating strategies under 10 CFR 50.54(hh)(2) in light of the recent events at Japans Fukushima-Daiichi facility in order to determine if 1) additional assessment of program implementation is needed, 2) the current inspection program should be enhanced, or 3) further regulatory action is warranted, and

3. To require that addressees provide a written response to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f).

The bulletin requested that within 30 days of the date of this bulletin, licensees provide information on their NRC mitigating strategies programs. The NRC questions related to the 30-day response are restated below followed by the Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon) response for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1.

1. Is the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in your submittals to the NRC, available and capable of performing its intended function?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the equipment necessary to execute the mitigating strategies, as described in our submittals to the NRC (References 1 through 6) and as reviewed and approved by the NRC (Reference 7), is available and capable of performing its intended function at Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1.

2. Are the guidance and strategies implemented capable of being executed considering the current configuration of your facility and current staffing and skill levels of the staff?

Response

Exelon has confirmed that the guidance and strategies being implemented at Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1, are capable of being executed considering the current configuration of the facility and current staffing and skill levels of the Exelon personnel. 0 Page 1 of 2

References

1. Letter from Jeffrey A. Benjamin, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated May 31, 2005.

2. Letter from Pamela B. Cowan, Director - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Request for Additional Information - NRC Guidance Regarding Mitigation Strategies," dated September 29, 2005.

3. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated February 23, 2006.

4. Letter from Thomas S. O'Neill, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Supplemental Response to Reports of Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Safeguards Interim Compensatory Measure - Section B.5.b," dated May 3, 2006.

5. Letter from Keith R. Jury, Vice President - Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Exelon Generation Company, LLC / AmerGen Energy Company, LLC to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Response Providing Information Regarding Implementation Details for the B.5.b Phases 2 and 3 Mitigation Strategies, including Responses to Requests for Additional Information," dated May 16, 2007.

6. Letter from Russell G. West, Vice President - TMI, Unit 1 to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - "Supplement to Response Providing Information Regarding Implementation Details for the B.5.b Phases 2 and 3 Mitigation Strategies - Commitment Change Notification," dated December 27, 2007.

7. Letter from Peter J. Bamford, Project Manager, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Christopher M. Crane, AmerGen Energy Company, LLC - "Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 - Conforming License Amendment to Incorporate the Mitigation Strategies Required by Section B.5.b of Commission Order EA-02-026 (TAC No. MD4515)," dated July 18, 2007. 0 Page 2 of 2