IR 05000373/2014502

IR 05000373-14-502, 05000374-14-502; on 05/19/2014 - 05/23/2014; LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2; Baseline Emergency Preparedness Exercise Evaluation - Hostile Action Event; Exercise Evaluation Scenario Review; Performance Indicator V

ML14162A274
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	06/11/2014
From:	Richard Skokowski Plant Support Branch II
To:	Pacilio M Exelon Generation Co, Exelon Nuclear
Robert Jickling
References
IR-14-502
Download: ML14162A274 (12)

Text

une 11, 2014

SUBJECT:

LASALLE COUNTY STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 BASELINE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS BIENNIAL EXERCISE INSPECTION REPORT 05000373/2014502; 05000374/2014502

Dear Mr. Pacilio:

On May 23, 2014, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at your LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2. The enclosed report documents the results of this inspection which were discussed on May 23, 2014, with Mr. H. Vinyard and other members of your 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. No findings were identified during this inspection.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and 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 System (PARS)

component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS),

accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Sincerely,

/RA Donald Funk Acting for/

Richard A. Skokowski, Chief Plant Support Branch Division of Reactor Safety Docket Nos. 50-373; 50-374 License Nos. NPF-11; NPF-18

Enclosure:

IR 05000373/2014502; 05000374/2014502 w/Attachment: Supplemental Information

REGION III==

Docket No: 50-373; 50-374 License No: NPF-11; NPF-18 Report No: 05000373/2014502; 05000374/2014502 Licensee: Exelon Generation Company, LLC Facility: LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2 Location: Marseilles, IL Dates: May 19 - 23, 2014 Inspectors: R. Jickling, Senior Emergency Preparedness Inspector J. Beavers, Emergency Preparedness Inspector J. Maynen, Senior Physical Security Inspector G. Roach, Senior Resident Inspector M. Ziolkowski, Reactor Engineer Approved by: R. Skokowski, Chief Plant Support Branch Division of Reactor Safety Enclosure

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

IR 05000373/2014502, 05000374/2014502; 05/19/2014 - 05/23/2014; LaSalle County Station,

Units 1 and 2; Baseline Emergency Preparedness Exercise Evaluation - Hostile Action Event;

Exercise Evaluation Scenario Review; Performance Indicator Verification.

This report covers a one-week period of announced baseline inspection by four regional inspectors and one resident inspector. The significance of most findings is indicated by their color (i.e., Green, White, Yellow, and Red) using Inspection Manual Chapter 0609, Significance Determination Process (SDP). Findings for which the SDP does not apply may be Green or be assigned a severity level after NRC management review. The NRCs program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 5, dated February 2014.

NRC-Identified

and Self-Revealed Findings

Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness

No findings were identified.

Licensee-Identified Violations

None

REPORT DETAILS

1EP7 Exercise Evaluation - Hostile Action Event

.1 Exercise Evaluation

a. Inspection Scope

Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 50, Appendix E,Section IV.F.2.j, requires, in part, that nuclear power reactor licensees, in each eight calendar year exercise cycle, provide the opportunity for their Emergency Response Organization (ERO) to demonstrate proficiency in the key skills necessary to respond to a Hostile Action (HA) event directed at the plant site. LaSalle County Station designed the May 21, 2014, exercise to satisfy this requirement, and the NRC inspected the LaSalle County Station HA event exercise to assess the licensees ability to effectively implement their Emergency Plan during a HA event and adequately protect public health and safety.

The exercise evaluation consisted of the following reviews and assessments:

• The adequacy of the licensees performance in the biennial exercise conducted on May 21, 2014, regarding the implementation of the Risk-Significant Planning Standards in 10 CFR 50.47 (b)(4), (5), (9), and (10), which address emergency classification, offsite notification, radiological assessment, and Protective Action Recommendations (PARs), 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, Alternative Emergency Response Facility, Incident Command Post, Central Alarm Station, and the Emergency Operations Facility.

• A review of other performance areas such as the licensee EROs recognition of abnormal plant conditions; command and control, including interactions with site security staff; intra and inter-facility communications; prioritization of mitigating activities; utilization of repair and field monitoring teams; interface with offsite agencies, including local law enforcement agencies; staffing and procedure adequacy; and the overall implementation of the Emergency Plan and its implementing procedures.

• Past performance issues from NRC inspection reports to determine the effectiveness of corrective actions, as demonstrated during this exercise, to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 50.47(b)(14).

• The adequacy of the licensees post-exercise critiques, to evaluate LaSalle County Stations self-assessment of its ERO performance during the May 21, 2014, exercise and to ensure compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.F.2.g.

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

This exercise evaluation inspection constituted one sample as defined in Inspection Procedure (IP) 71114.07-06.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

1EP8 Exercise Evaluation - Scenario Review

a. Inspection Scope

Prior to the inspection activity, the inspectors conducted an in-office review of the exercise objectives and scenarios submitted to the NRC using IP 71114.08, Exercise Evaluation - Scenario Review, to determine if the exercise would test major elements of the Emergency Plan as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(14). This inspection activity represents one sample on a biennial cycle.

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

This review of the exercise objectives and scenario constituted one sample as defined in IP 71114.08-06.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

4OA1 Performance Indicator Verification

.1 Drill/Exercise Performance

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors sampled licensee submittals for the Drill/Exercise Performance (DEP)

Performance Indicator (PI) for the period from the second quarter 2013 through the first quarter 2014. To determine the accuracy of the DEP data reported during those periods, PI definitions and guidance contained in the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)document NEI 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 7, was 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 DEP sample as defined in IP 71151-05.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

.2 Emergency Response Organization Drill Participation

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors sampled licensee submittals for the ERO Drill Participation PI for the period from the second quarter 2013 through the first quarter 2014. To determine the accuracy of the PI data reported during those periods, PI definitions and guidance contained in NEI 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 7, was 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 2013 and 2014 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 71151-05.

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 second quarter 2013 through the first quarter 2014. To determine the accuracy of the PI data reported during those periods, PI definitions and guidance contained in NEI 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 7, was 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 71151-05.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

4OA6 Management Meetings

.1 Exit Meeting Summary

On May 23, 2014, the inspectors presented the biennial exercise inspection results to Mr. H. Vinyard 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

H. Vinyard, Plant Manager

G. Buckley, Corporate Senior Emergency Preparedness Specialist

G. Butz, Site Security Operations Manager

A. Daniels, Corporate Emergency Preparedness Manager

G. Ford, Regulatory Affairs Manager

M. Hayworth, Emergency Preparedness Manager

J. Houston, Nuclear Oversight Manager

C. Howard, Radiation Protection Technical Support Manager

J. Hughes, Emergency Preparedness Coordinator

J. Keenan, Operations Shift Operations Supervisor

J. Kowalski, Engineering Director

J. Kutches, Maintenance Director

M. Martin, Chemistry Manager

J. Williams, Work Management Director

G. Wood, Training Support Manager

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

R. Ruiz, Senior Resident Inspector

J. Robbins, Resident Inspector

LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED

Opened, Closed, and Discussed

None