IR 05000237/2017502: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| issue date = 05/16/2017 | | issue date = 05/16/2017 | ||
| title = Baseline Emergency Preparedness Biennial Exercise Inspection Report 05000237/2017502; 05000249/2017502 (Gph) | | title = Baseline Emergency Preparedness Biennial Exercise Inspection Report 05000237/2017502; 05000249/2017502 (Gph) | ||
| author name = Orth S | | author name = Orth S | ||
| author affiliation = NRC/RGN-III/DRS/PSB | | author affiliation = NRC/RGN-III/DRS/PSB | ||
| addressee name = Hanson B | | addressee name = Hanson B | ||
| addressee affiliation = Exelon Generation Co, LLC, Exelon Nuclear | | addressee affiliation = Exelon Generation Co, LLC, Exelon Nuclear | ||
| docket = 05000237, 05000249 | | docket = 05000237, 05000249 | ||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES | {{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES May 16, 2017 | ||
SUBJECT: DRESDEN NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3 | ==SUBJECT:== | ||
DRESDEN NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3 - BASELINE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS BIENNIAL EXERCISE INSPECTION REPORT 05000237/2017502; 05000249/2017502 | |||
==Dear Mr. Hanson:== | ==Dear Mr. Hanson:== | ||
On April 20, | On April 20, 2017, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3, and the NRC inspectors discussed the results of this inspection with Mr. P. Karaba and other members of your staff. The results of the inspection are documented in the enclosed report. | ||
The results of the inspection are documented in the enclosed report. | |||
The NRC inspectors did not identify any finding or violation of more than minor significance. | The NRC inspectors did not identify any finding or violation of more than minor significance. | ||
This letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be made available for public inspection and copying at http://www.nrc.gov/reading | This letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be made available for public inspection and copying at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html and at the NRC Public Document Room in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 2.390, Public Inspections, Exemptions, Requests for Withholding. | ||
-rm/adams.html and at the NRC Public Document Room in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal | |||
Sincerely,/RA/ Steven K. Orth, Chief Plant Support Branch | Sincerely, | ||
/RA/ | |||
Steven K. Orth, Chief Plant Support Branch Division of Reactor Safety Docket Nos. 50-237, 50-249 License Nos. DPR-19; DPR-25 Enclosure: | |||
IR 05000237/2017502; 05000249/2017502 cc: Distribution via LISTSERV | |||
=SUMMARY= | |||
IR 05000237/2017502; 05000249/2017502; 04/17/2017 - 04/20/2017; Dresden Nuclear Power | |||
- | |||
Station, Units 2 and 3; Baseline Emergency Preparedness Biennial Exercise Inspection; | |||
Exercise Evaluation Scenario Review; Performance Indicator Verification. | |||
This report covers a 1-week period of announced baseline inspection by four regional inspectors. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissions program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, | |||
Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 5, dated February 201 | |||
-1649, | |||
===NRC-Identified=== | ===NRC-Identified=== | ||
Line 56: | Line 51: | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. | ||
=== | ===Licensee-Identified Violations=== | ||
Licensee-Identified Violations=== | |||
None | None | ||
=REPORT DETAILS= | =REPORT DETAILS= | ||
Line 65: | Line 59: | ||
==REACTOR SAFETY== | ==REACTOR SAFETY== | ||
===Cornerstone:=== | ===Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness=== | ||
{{a|1EP1}} | |||
==1EP1 Exercise Evaluation== | |||
{{a| | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71114.01}} | ||
== | |||
===.1 Exercise Evaluation=== | ===.1 Exercise Evaluation=== | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
The inspectors reviewed the April 19, 2017, Biennial Emergency Preparedness | The inspectors reviewed the April 19, 2017, Biennial Emergency Preparedness Exercises objectives and scenario to ensure that the exercise would acceptably test major elements of the licensees Emergency Plan and to verify that the exercises simulated problems provided an acceptable framework to support demonstration of the licensees capability to implement its plan. The inspectors also reviewed records of other drills and exercises conducted from 2015 through 2017, to verify that those drills scenarios were sufficiently different from the scenario used in the April 19, 2017, exercise. | ||
, exercise. The inspectors evaluated the | |||
Control Room Simulator; Technical Support Center (TSC); | The inspectors evaluated the licensees exercise performance, focusing on the risk-significant activities of emergency classification, notification, and protective action decision-making, implementation of accident mitigation strategies, and correction of past exercise weaknesses in the following emergency response facilities: | ||
* Control Room Simulator; | |||
* Technical Support Center (TSC); | |||
* Operations Support Center (OSC); and | |||
* Emergency Operations Facility. | |||
The inspectors also assessed the | The inspectors also assessed the licensees recognition of abnormal plant conditions, transfer of responsibilities between facilities, internal communications, interfaces with offsite officials, readiness of emergency facilities and related equipment, and overall implementation of the licensees Emergency Plan. | ||
The inspectors attended post | The inspectors attended post-exercise critiques in the control room simulator, TSC, OSC, and emergency operations facility to evaluate the licensees initial self-assessment of its exercise performance. The inspectors later met with the licensees lead exercise evaluators and managers to obtain the licensees findings and assessments of its exercise participants performances. These self-assessments were then compared with the inspectors independent observations and assessments to assess the licensees ability to adequately critique its exercise performance. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment to this report. | ||
-exercise critiques in the control room simulator , TSC , OSC, and emergency operations facility to evaluate the | |||
-assessment of its exercise performance. The inspectors later met with the | |||
-assessments were then compared with the inspectors | |||
This exercise evaluation inspection constituted one sample as defined in Inspection Procedure (IP) 71114.01. | This exercise evaluation inspection constituted one sample as defined in Inspection Procedure (IP) 71114.01. | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified | No findings were identified. {{a|1EP8}} | ||
. | ==1EP8 Exercise Evaluation - Scenario Review== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71114.08}} | |||
{{a| | |||
== | |||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
Prior to the inspection activity on | Prior to the inspection activity on-site, the inspectors conducted an in-office review of the exercise objectives and scenarios submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission using IP 71114.08, Exercise Evaluation - Scenario Review, to determine if the exercise would test major elements of the Emergency Plan as required by Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50.47(b)(14). Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment to this report. | ||
-site, the inspectors conducted an in | |||
-office review of the exercise objectives and scenarios submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission using IP 71114.08, | |||
- Scenario Review, | |||
This review of the exercise objectives and scenario constituted one inspection sample as defined in IP 71114.08. | This review of the exercise objectives and scenario constituted one inspection sample as defined in IP 71114.08. | ||
Line 111: | Line 95: | ||
==OTHER ACTIVITIES== | ==OTHER ACTIVITIES== | ||
===Cornerstone:=== | ===Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness=== | ||
{{a|4OA1}} | {{a|4OA1}} | ||
==4OA1 Performance Indicator Verification== | ==4OA1 Performance Indicator Verification== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71151}} | |||
===.1 Drill/Exercise Performance=== | |||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | |||
The inspectors sampled licensee submittals for the Drill/Exercise Performance Indicator (PI) for the period from the first quarter of 2016 through fourth quarter of 2016. | |||
To determine the accuracy of the PI data reported during those periods, PI definitions and guidance contained in the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Document 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 7, were used. The inspectors reviewed the licensees records associated with the PI to verify that the licensee accurately reported the indicator in accordance with relevant procedures and the NEI guidance. Specifically, the inspectors reviewed licensee records and processes including procedural guidance on assessing opportunities for the PI; assessments of PI opportunities during pre-designated control room simulator training sessions, and performance during other drills. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment to this report. | |||
This inspection constituted one Drill/Exercise Performance sample as defined in IP 71151. | |||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
Line 133: | Line 114: | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
The inspectors sampled licensee submittals for the ERO Drill Participation PI for the period from the first quarter of 2016 through fourth quarter of 2016. To determine the accuracy of the PI data reported during those periods, PI definitions and guidance contained in the NEI Document 99 | The inspectors sampled licensee submittals for the ERO Drill Participation PI for the period from the first quarter of 2016 through fourth quarter of 2016. To determine the accuracy of the PI data reported during those periods, PI definitions and guidance contained in the NEI Document 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 7, were used. The inspectors reviewed the licensees records associated with the PI to verify that the licensee accurately reported the indicator in accordance with relevant procedures and the NEI guidance. Specifically, the inspectors reviewed licensee records and processes including procedural guidance on assessing opportunities for the PI; performance during the 2016 exercises and drills; and revisions of the roster of personnel assigned to key ERO positions. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment to this report. | ||
-02, | |||
This inspection constituted one ERO Drill Participation sample as defined in IP 71151. | |||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
Line 142: | Line 124: | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
The inspectors sampled licensee submittals for the Alert and Notification System (ANS) PI for the period from the first quarter of 2016 through fourth quarter of 2016. To determine the accuracy of the PI data reported during those periods, PI definitions and guidance contained in the NEI Document 99 | The inspectors sampled licensee submittals for the Alert and Notification System (ANS) PI for the period from the first quarter of 2016 through fourth quarter of 2016. To determine the accuracy of the PI data reported during those periods, PI definitions and guidance contained in the NEI Document 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 7, were used. The inspectors reviewed the licensees records associated with the PI to verify that the licensee accurately reported the indicator in accordance with relevant procedures and the NEI guidance. Specifically, the inspectors reviewed licensee records and processes including procedural guidance on assessing opportunities for the PI and results of periodic scheduled ANS operability tests. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment to this report. | ||
-02, | |||
This inspection constituted one ANS sample as defined in IP 71151. | This inspection constituted one ANS sample as defined in IP 71151. | ||
Line 149: | Line 130: | ||
====b. Findings==== | ====b. Findings==== | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. | ||
{{a|4OA6}} | |||
{{a|4OA6}} | |||
==4OA6 Management Meetings== | ==4OA6 Management Meetings== | ||
===.1 Exit Meeting Summary=== | ===.1 Exit Meeting Summary=== | ||
On April 20 , 2017, the inspectors presented the biennial exercise inspection results to Mr. P. Karaba , and other members of the licensee staff. The licensee acknowledged the issues presented. | On April 20, 2017, the inspectors presented the biennial exercise inspection results to Mr. P. Karaba, and other members of the licensee staff. The licensee acknowledged the issues presented. The inspectors confirmed that none of the potential report input discussed was considered proprietary. | ||
ATTACHMENT: | |||
=SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION= | |||
= | ==KEY POINTS OF CONTACT== | ||
Licensee | |||
: [[contact::P. Karaba]], Site Vice President | |||
: [[contact::P. Karaba ]], Site Vice President | : [[contact::J. Washko]], Plant Manager | ||
: [[contact::J. Washko]], Plant Manager | |||
: [[contact::B. Franzen]], Regulatory Assurance Manager | : [[contact::B. Franzen]], Regulatory Assurance Manager | ||
: [[contact::J. Quinn]], Maintenance Director | : [[contact::J. Quinn]], Maintenance Director | ||
: [[contact::T. Dean]], Training Director | : [[contact::T. Dean]], Training Director | ||
: [[contact::W. Remaisz]], Acting Work Management | : [[contact::W. Remaisz]], Acting Work Management Director | ||
Director | |||
: [[contact::A. Daniels]], Midwest Emergency Preparedness Manager | : [[contact::A. Daniels]], Midwest Emergency Preparedness Manager | ||
: [[contact::J. Feigl]], Engineering Manager | : [[contact::J. Feigl]], Engineering Manager | ||
Line 178: | Line 156: | ||
: [[contact::L. Antos]], Security Manager | : [[contact::L. Antos]], Security Manager | ||
: [[contact::R. Bauman]], Shift Operations Superintendent | : [[contact::R. Bauman]], Shift Operations Superintendent | ||
: [[contact::R. Miller ]], Emergency Preparedness | : [[contact::R. Miller]], Emergency Preparedness Specialist | ||
Specialist | |||
: [[contact::R. Martin]], Emergency Preparedness Specialist (Corporate) | : [[contact::R. Martin]], Emergency Preparedness Specialist (Corporate) | ||
: [[contact::E. Maloni ]], Emergency Preparedness Specialist (Corporate) | : [[contact::E. Maloni]], Emergency Preparedness Specialist (Corporate) | ||
: [[contact::C. Nelson ]], Emergency Preparedness Specialist (Corporate) | : [[contact::C. Nelson]], Emergency Preparedness Specialist (Corporate) | ||
: [[contact::D. Walker]], NRC Coordinator | : [[contact::D. Walker]], NRC Coordinator | ||
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory | U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission | ||
: [[contact::G. Roach]], Senior Resident Inspector | : [[contact::G. Roach]], Senior Resident Inspector | ||
: [[contact::J. Wojewoda ]], Resident Inspector, Acting LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND | : [[contact::J. Wojewoda]], Resident Inspector, Acting | ||
==LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED== | |||
===Opened, Closed, and Discussed=== | |||
None | None | ||
==LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED== | |||
}} | }} |
Latest revision as of 15:54, 19 December 2019
ML17136A358 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Dresden |
Issue date: | 05/16/2017 |
From: | Steven Orth Plant Support Branch II |
To: | Bryan Hanson Exelon Generation Co, Exelon Nuclear |
References | |
IR 2017502 | |
Download: ML17136A358 (12) | |
Text
UNITED STATES May 16, 2017
SUBJECT:
DRESDEN NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3 - BASELINE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS BIENNIAL EXERCISE INSPECTION REPORT 05000237/2017502; 05000249/2017502
Dear Mr. Hanson:
On April 20, 2017, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3, and the NRC inspectors discussed the results of this inspection with Mr. P. Karaba and other members of your staff. The results of the inspection are documented in the enclosed report.
The NRC inspectors did not identify any finding or violation of more than minor significance.
This letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be made available for public inspection and copying at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html and at the NRC Public Document Room in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 2.390, Public Inspections, Exemptions, Requests for Withholding.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Steven K. Orth, Chief Plant Support Branch Division of Reactor Safety Docket Nos. 50-237, 50-249 License Nos. DPR-19; DPR-25 Enclosure:
IR 05000237/2017502; 05000249/2017502 cc: Distribution via LISTSERV
SUMMARY
IR 05000237/2017502; 05000249/2017502; 04/17/2017 - 04/20/2017; Dresden Nuclear Power
Station, Units 2 and 3; Baseline Emergency Preparedness Biennial Exercise Inspection;
Exercise Evaluation Scenario Review; Performance Indicator Verification.
This report covers a 1-week period of announced baseline inspection by four regional inspectors. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissions program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649,
Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 5, dated February 201
NRC-Identified
and Self-Revealed Findings
Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness
No findings were identified.
Licensee-Identified Violations
None
REPORT DETAILS
REACTOR SAFETY
Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness
1EP1 Exercise Evaluation
.1 Exercise Evaluation
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors reviewed the April 19, 2017, Biennial Emergency Preparedness Exercises objectives and scenario to ensure that the exercise would acceptably test major elements of the licensees Emergency Plan and to verify that the exercises simulated problems provided an acceptable framework to support demonstration of the licensees capability to implement its plan. The inspectors also reviewed records of other drills and exercises conducted from 2015 through 2017, to verify that those drills scenarios were sufficiently different from the scenario used in the April 19, 2017, exercise.
The inspectors evaluated the licensees exercise performance, focusing on the risk-significant activities of emergency classification, notification, and protective action decision-making, implementation of accident mitigation strategies, and correction of past exercise weaknesses in the following emergency response facilities:
- Control Room Simulator;
- Operations Support Center (OSC); and
- Emergency Operations Facility.
The inspectors also assessed the licensees recognition of abnormal plant conditions, transfer of responsibilities between facilities, internal communications, interfaces with offsite officials, readiness of emergency facilities and related equipment, and overall implementation of the licensees Emergency Plan.
The inspectors attended post-exercise critiques in the control room simulator, TSC, OSC, and emergency operations facility to evaluate the licensees initial self-assessment of its exercise performance. The inspectors later met with the licensees lead exercise evaluators and managers to obtain the licensees findings and assessments of its exercise participants performances. These self-assessments were then compared with the inspectors independent observations and assessments to assess the licensees ability to adequately critique its exercise performance. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment to this report.
This exercise evaluation inspection constituted one sample as defined in Inspection Procedure (IP) 71114.01.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
1EP8 Exercise Evaluation - Scenario Review
a. Inspection Scope
Prior to the inspection activity on-site, the inspectors conducted an in-office review of the exercise objectives and scenarios submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission using IP 71114.08, Exercise Evaluation - Scenario Review, to determine if the exercise would test major elements of the Emergency Plan as required by Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50.47(b)(14). Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment to this report.
This review of the exercise objectives and scenario constituted one inspection sample as defined in IP 71114.08.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
OTHER ACTIVITIES
Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness
4OA1 Performance Indicator Verification
.1 Drill/Exercise Performance
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors sampled licensee submittals for the Drill/Exercise Performance Indicator (PI) for the period from the first quarter of 2016 through fourth quarter of 2016.
To determine the accuracy of the PI data reported during those periods, PI definitions and guidance contained in the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Document 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 7, were used. The inspectors reviewed the licensees records associated with the PI to verify that the licensee accurately reported the indicator in accordance with relevant procedures and the NEI guidance. Specifically, the inspectors reviewed licensee records and processes including procedural guidance on assessing opportunities for the PI; assessments of PI opportunities during pre-designated control room simulator training sessions, and performance during other drills. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment to this report.
This inspection constituted one Drill/Exercise Performance sample as defined in IP 71151.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
.2 Emergency Response Organization (ERO) Drill Participation
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors sampled licensee submittals for the ERO Drill Participation PI for the period from the first quarter of 2016 through fourth quarter of 2016. To determine the accuracy of the PI data reported during those periods, PI definitions and guidance contained in the NEI Document 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 7, were used. The inspectors reviewed the licensees records associated with the PI to verify that the licensee accurately reported the indicator in accordance with relevant procedures and the NEI guidance. Specifically, the inspectors reviewed licensee records and processes including procedural guidance on assessing opportunities for the PI; performance during the 2016 exercises and drills; and revisions of the roster of personnel assigned to key ERO positions. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment to this report.
This inspection constituted one ERO Drill Participation sample as defined in IP 71151.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
.3 Alert and Notification System
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors sampled licensee submittals for the Alert and Notification System (ANS) PI for the period from the first quarter of 2016 through fourth quarter of 2016. To determine the accuracy of the PI data reported during those periods, PI definitions and guidance contained in the NEI Document 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 7, were used. The inspectors reviewed the licensees records associated with the PI to verify that the licensee accurately reported the indicator in accordance with relevant procedures and the NEI guidance. Specifically, the inspectors reviewed licensee records and processes including procedural guidance on assessing opportunities for the PI and results of periodic scheduled ANS operability tests. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment to this report.
This inspection constituted one ANS sample as defined in IP 71151.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
4OA6 Management Meetings
.1 Exit Meeting Summary
On April 20, 2017, the inspectors presented the biennial exercise inspection results to Mr. P. Karaba, and other members of the licensee staff. The licensee acknowledged the issues presented. The inspectors confirmed that none of the potential report input discussed was considered proprietary.
ATTACHMENT:
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
KEY POINTS OF CONTACT
Licensee
- P. Karaba, Site Vice President
- J. Washko, Plant Manager
- B. Franzen, Regulatory Assurance Manager
- J. Quinn, Maintenance Director
- T. Dean, Training Director
- W. Remaisz, Acting Work Management Director
- A. Daniels, Midwest Emergency Preparedness Manager
- J. Feigl, Engineering Manager
- D. Doggett, Emergency Preparedness Manager
- L. Antos, Security Manager
- R. Bauman, Shift Operations Superintendent
- R. Miller, Emergency Preparedness Specialist
- R. Martin, Emergency Preparedness Specialist (Corporate)
- E. Maloni, Emergency Preparedness Specialist (Corporate)
- C. Nelson, Emergency Preparedness Specialist (Corporate)
- D. Walker, NRC Coordinator
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- G. Roach, Senior Resident Inspector
- J. Wojewoda, Resident Inspector, Acting
LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
Opened, Closed, and Discussed
None