ML091480768

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Draft Ltr from R, Conte of USNRC to C. Pardee of Exelon Generation Company, Llc., Regarding Oyster Creek Generation Station - NRC License Renewal Follow-up Inspection Report 0500219-08-007
ML091480768
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 05/06/2009
From: Conte R
Engineering Region 1 Branch 1
To: Pardee C
Exelon Generation Co
References
FOIA/PA-2009-0070 IR-08-007
Download: ML091480768 (23)


See also: IR 05000219/2008007

Text

ý1_

Mr. Charles G. Pardee

Chief Nuclear Officer (CNO) and Senior Vice President

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

200 Exelon Way

Kennett Square, PA 19348

SUBJECT:

OYSTER CREEK GENERATING STATION - NRC LICENSE RENEWAL

FOLLOW-UP INSPECTION REPORT 05000219/2008007

Dear Mr. Pardee

On November 14, 2008, the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an

inspection at your Oyster Creek Generating Station. The enclosed report documents the

inspection results, which were discussed on December 23, 2008, with Mr. T. Rausch, Site Vice

President, Mr. M. Gallagher, Vice President License Renewal, and other members of your staff,

The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety and

compliance with the Commission's rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license.

In addition, this inspection also examined the plant activities and documents that supported

proposed license renewal commitments of Oyster Creek Generating Station. The inspectors

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

Based on the results of this inspection,

C. Pardee

3

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its

enclosure 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 Web-site at

http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Sincerely,

Richard Conte, Chief

Engineering Branch 1

Division of Reactor Safety

Docket No.

50-219

License No.

DPR-16

Enclosure:

Inspection Report No. 05000219/2008007

C. Pardee

4

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its

enclosure 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 Web-site at

http://wwwnrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Sincerely,

Richard Conte, Chief

Engineering Branch 1

Division of Reactor Safety

Docket No.

License No.

Enclosure:

50-219

DPR-16

Inspection Report No. 05000219/2008007

SUNSI Review Complete:

_

(Reviewer's Initials)

ADAMS ACCESSION NO.

DOCUMENT NAME: C:\\Doc\\_.OC LRI 2008-07\\. Report\\OC 2008-07 LRI.doc

After declaring this document "An Official Agency Record" it will be released to the Public.

To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box:

"C" = Copy without attachment/enclosure

"E" = Copy with attachment/enclosure

"N" = No copy

OFFICE

RI/DRS

RI/DRS

RI/DRP

RI/DRS

NAME

JRichmond/

RConte/

RBellamy/

DRoberts/

DATE

//09

//09

//09

//09

OIFIPIýL RqCIRp Cp)IY

C. Pardee

3

Distribution w/encl:

C. Pardee

4

Distribution w/encl: (VIA E-MAIL)

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Docket No.:

License No.:

Report No.:

Licensee:

Facility:

Location:

Dates:

Inspectors:

Approved by:

50-219

DPR-16

05000219/2008007

Exelon, LLC

Oyster Creek Generating Station

Forked River, New Jersey

October 27 - November xxx, 2008

J. Richmond, Lead

M. Modes, Senior Reactor Engineer

G. Meyer, Senior Reactor Engineer

T. O'Hara, Reactor Inspector

J. Heinly, Reactor Engineer

Richard Conte, Chief

Engineering Branch 1

Division of Reactor Safety

ii

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

IR 05000219/2008007; 10/27/2008 - 11/14/2008; Exelon, LLC, Oyster Creek

Generating Station; License Renewal Follow-up

The report covers a 3 week inspection of license renewal follow-up items. It was conducted by

five region based engineering inspectors. The inspection was conducted in accordance with

Inspection Procedure 71003 "Post-Approval Site Inspection for License Renewal." Because a

renewed license has not been granted for Oyster Creek, the standards used to judge the

adequacy of selected IP 71003 inspection samples do not apply. The report records the

inspector's observations, absent any conclusions of adequacy, pending the final decision of the

Commissioners on the appeal of the renewed license.

2

REPORT DETAILS

4.

OTHER ACTIVITIES (OA)

40A2 License Renewal Follow-up (IP 71003)

1.

Inspection Sample Selection Process

This inspection was conducted in order to observe AmerGen's continuing license

renewal activities during the last refueling outage prior to Oyster Creek (OC) entering

the extended period of operation. The inspection team selected a number of inspection

samples for review, using the NRC accepted guidance based on their importance in the

license renewal application process, in order to gauge the plant's state-of-readiness to

enter the extended period of operation.

Because a renewed license has not been granted for Oyster Creek, the standards used

to judge the adequacy of selected IP 71003 inspection samples do not apply. The

inspectors recorded important observations, and reported them absent any conclusions

of adequacy, pending the final decision of the Commissioners on the appeal of the

renewed license.

  • Observed selected activities described in SER Appendix-A, "Commitments for LR"
  • Because the application for a Renewed License remains under Commission review for final

decision -- With respect to proposed SER commitments:

  • No assessment of implementation or effectiveness will be documented
  • Factual Based Observations of activities will be documented

" Inspection observations were considered, in light of:

  • Part 50 existing requirements (e.g., CLB)

e Pending Part 54 commitments

  • Programmatic performance under on-going implementation of Part 50 requirements

" The conclusions of PNO-1-08-012 remain unchanged

The reviewed commitments were selected based on the several attributes including: the risk

significance using insights gained from sources such as the NRC's "Significance Determination

Process Risk Informed Inspection Notebooks," Revision 2; the extent and results of previous

license renewal audits and inspections of aging management programs; the extent of a

commitment; and the extent that baseline inspection programs will inspect an SSC or

commodity group.

For each commitment and on a sampling basis, the inspectors reviewed supporting documents

including completed surveillances, conducted interviews, performed visual inspection of

structures and components including those not accessible during power operation, and

observed selected activities described below. The inspectors also reviewed selected corrective

actions taken as a consequence of previous license renewal inspections.

2.

Detailed Reviews

2.1

Drywell Floor Trench Inspections

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 27, ASME Section XI, Subsection IWE Enhancements

(5, 16, & 20), stated:

Perform visual (VT) and ultrasonic (UT) examinations of the drywell shell inside

the drywell floor inspection trenches in. bay 5 and bay 17 during the 2008

refueling outage, at the same locations that were examined in 2006. In addition,

monitor the trenches for the presence of water during refueling outages.

The inspectors independently performed direct field observations of the conditions in the

trenches on multiple occasions during the outage and reviewed selected VT and UT

examination records. The inspectors compared UT data results to licensee established

acceptance criteria in Specification IS-318227-004, revision 14, Functional

Requirements for Drywell Containment Vessel Thickness Examinations."

The inspectors reviewed Technical Evaluation 330592.27.43, "Evaluation of 2008 UT

Data of the Sand Bed Trenches," dated 11/8/08. The Evaluation determined that the UT

thickness values satisfied minimum wall thickness values for general uniform thickness

(e.g., average thickness .of an area) and for locally thinned areas (e.g., areas 2 inches or

less in diameter), as applicable. For UT data sets, such as 7x7 arrays (i.e., 49 UT

readings in a 6 inch by 6 inch grid), the Evaluation calculated, mean values, standard

deviation, standard error, skewness, and kurtosis and determined that the data sets had

a normal distribution. The Evaluation also compared the data set values to the

corresponding 2006 values and concluded there were no significant differences and no

observable on-going corrosion. The inspectors independently compared the UT data to

the corresponding 2006 data values and to minimum thickness values established by

design analysis and calculations.

The inspectors reviewed Exelon UT examination procedures, interviewed nondestructive

examination (NDE) technicians, reviewed NDE technician qualifications and

certifications, and reviewed records of trench inspections performed during two forced

plant outages during the last operating cycle.

b.

Observations

  • Remove & reinstall lower 6" of grout at bottom of Bay 5 trench

" Inspect caulk sealant (trench edge where concrete meets shell)

  • Verify no water accumulation

2.2

Reactor Cavity Liner Strippable Coating

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 27, ASME Section XI, Subsection IWE Enhancement

(2), stated:

A strippable coating will be applied to the reactor cavity liner to prevent water

intrusion into the gap between the drywell shield wall and the drywell shell during

periods when the reactor cavity is flooded. Refueling outages prior to and during

the period of extended operation.

The inspectors reviewed work order R2098682-06, "Coating application to cavity walls

and floors."

b.

Observations

Strippable Coating De-lamination

  • From October 29 to November 6, the strippable coating limited leakage into the cavity
  • trough drain at less than 1 gallon per minute (gpm)
  • On November 6, the observed leakage rate in the cavity trough drain took a step

change to 4 to 6 gpm

  • Water puddles were subsequently identified in 4 sand bed bays
  • AmerGen identified several likely or contributing causes:
  • A portable water filtration unit was improperly placed in the reactor cavity,

which resulted in flow discharged directly on the strippable coating

" An oil spill into the cavity may have affected the coating integrity

  • No post installation inspection of the coating had been performed
  • AmerGen stated follow-up UTs will re-evaluate the drywell shell next outage

2.3

Reactor Cavity Trough Drain Inspection for Blockage

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 27, ASME Section XI, Subsection IWE Enhancement

(13), stated:

The reactor cavity concrete trough drain will be verified to be clear from blockage

once per refueling cycle. Any identified issues will be addressed via the

corrective action process. Once per refueling cycle.

The inspectors reviewed a video recording record of a boroscope inspection of the

cavity trough drain line.

b.

Observations

See observations in section 2.4 below.

2.4

Reactor Cavity Trough Drain Monitoring

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 27, ASME Section X., Subsection IWE Enhancement

(3), stated:

The reactor cavity seal leakage trough drains and the drywell sand bed region

drains will be monitored for leakage. Periodically.

In addition, the inspectors reviewed AmerGen's drain flow, monitoring plan and

pre-approved Action Plan. The plan was based on a calculation that determined

cavity trough drain flow of less than 60 gpm would not result in trough overflow

into the gap between the drywell concrete shield wall and the drywell steel shell.

The plan had pre-established actions at various cavity drain flow rates, as

follows:

  • If drain flow exceeds 5 gpm, then monitor the flow every 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />.

o If drain flow exceeds 12 gpm, then monitor the sand bed poly bottles

every 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />.

o If drain flow exceeds 12 gpm and water is found in a sand bed poly

bottle, then enter and inspect the sand bed bays.

b.

Observations

Cavity Trough Drain Line Found Isolated On Oct. 27, the cavity drain line was isolated

to install a tygon hose to allow drain flow to be monitored. On Oct. 28, the reactor cavity

was filled. Drain line flow was monitored frequently during cavity flood-up, and daily

thereafter. On Oct. 29, a boroscope examination of the drain line identified that the

isolation valve had been left closed. When the drain line isolation valve was opened,

about 3 gallons of water drained out, then the drain flow subsided to about an 1/8 inch

stream (less than 1 gpm).

Water Found in Sand Bed Bays On Nov. 6, the reactor cavity liner strippable coating

started to de-laminate. The cavity trough drain flow took a step change from less than 1

gpm to approximately 4 to 6 gpm. AmerGen increased monitoring of the trough drain to

every 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and sand bed poly bottles to every 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />. On Nov. 8, NDE technicians

inside sand bed bay 11 identified dripping water. Subsequently, water puddles were

identified in 4 sand bed bays. After cavity was drained, all sand bed bays were

inspected; no deficiencies identified. The sand bed bays were originally scheduled to

have been closed by Nov. 2. In addition, on Nov. 15, after cavity was drained, water

was found in the sand bed bay 11 poly bottle.

2.5

Drvwell Sand Bed Region Drains Monitoring

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 27, ASME Section XI, Subsection IWE Enhancement

(3), stated:

The sand bed region drains will be monitored daily during refueling outages.

There is one drain line for each two sand bed bays (five total). A poly bottle was

attached via tygon tubing to a funnel hung below each drain line. AmerGen performed

the drain line monitoring by checking the poly bottles.

The inspectors independently checked the poly bottles during the outage, and

accompanied AmerGen personnel during routine daily checks. The inspectors also

reviewed the written monitoring logs.

b.

Observations

The sand bed drains were not directly observed and were not visible from the outer area

of the torus room, where the poly bottles were located. After the reactor cavity was

drained, 2 of the 5 tygon tubes were found disconnected, laying on the floor. In

addition, sand bed bay 11 drain poly bottle was empty during each daily check until Nov.

15 (cavity was drained on Nov 12), when it was found full (greater than 4 gallons). Bay

11 was entered within a few hours, visually inspected, and found dry.

2.6

Moisture Barrier Seal Inspection (inside sand bed bays)

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 27, ASME Section XI, Subsection IWE Enhancements

(12 & 21), stated:

Inspect the [moisture barrier] seal at the junction between the sand bed region

concrete [sand bed floor] and the embedded drywell shell. During the 2008

refueling outage and every other refueling outage thereafter.

The inspectors performed the following:

" Independently inspected portions of the moisture barrier in 7 sand bed bays

  • Reviewed VT-1 examination records for each sand bed bay

" Observed AmerGen's activities to evaluate the moisture barrier seals

b.

Observations

  • AmerGen identified deficiencies in 7 of the 10 sand bed bays, including
  • Surface cracks
  • Partial separation of the seal from the shell,.or the floor
  • AmerGen determined the moisture barrier function was not impaired, because no cracks or

separation fully penetrated the seal. All deficiencies were repaired.

Sand Bed Bay 3 Seal Crack and Rust Stain

" Observed activities to evaluate and repair the moisture barrier seal in Bay 3

" The seal had rust stains on the surface, below the identified crack

  • When the seal was excavated, some drywell shell surface corrosion was identified
  • Seal crack and surface rust were repaired
  • Laboratory analysis determined there was inadequate epoxy cure, an original 1992

installation issue

2006 Inspection Did Not Identify Any Seal Cracks

  • During 2006 seal inspections, no deficiencies were identified

2.7

Drywell Shell External Coatings Inspection (inside sand bed bays)

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 27, ASME Section XI, Subsection IWE Enhancements

(4 & 21), stated:

Perform visual inspections of the drywell external shell epoxy coating in all 10

sand bed bays. During the 2008 refueling outage and every other refueling

outage thereafter.

The inspectors performed the following:

  • Independently inspected portions of the epoxy coating in 7 sand bed bays
  • Reviewed VT-1 examination records for each sand bed bay
  • Observed AmerGen's activities to evaluate the epoxy coating in bay 11

b.

Observations

Sand Bed Bay 11 Blisters

" Observed activities to evaluate and repair blisters found in Bay 11

  • 1 small 1/4 inch broken blister identified, with a 6" rust stain
  • 3 smaller unbroken blisters were identified by the NRC, during initial investigation
  • All 4 blisters were within a 1-2 inches square area, and all were evaluated and fixed

" For extent of condition, 4 bays re-inspected by different NDE level-Il

-- AmerGen reported that No deficiencies were identified

  • AmerGen estimated corrosion of - 3 mils had occurred over about a 16 year period

Sand Bed Bay 9 Coating Deficiency

9 AmerGen identified and re-coated a area approximately 8" x 8" area because of a difference

in epoxy color which could have been indicative of only 2 layers instead of 3.

2006 Inspection Did Not Identify the Bay 11 Rust Stain or the Bay 9 Coating Deficiency

  • AmerGen reviewed a 2006 video and identified the same 6" rust stain in the 2006 video of

Bay 11

  • CR 844815 stated the Bay 9 coating deficiency was most probably an original 1992

installation issue

  • During the 2006 coatings inspection, these 2 deficiencies were not identified

2.8

Drywell Shell Thickness Measurements

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 27, ASME Section XI, Subsection IWE Enhancements

(1,,9, 14, and 21), stated:

Perform full scope drywell inspections, including UT thickness measurements of

the drywell shell, from inside and outside the drywell. During the 2008 refueling

outage and every other refueling outage thereafter. This included:

  • 19 locations inside the drywell, at the sand bed region elevation
  • UT examinations in all 10 sand bed bays (drywell external, total 106 locations)

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 27, ASME Section XI, Subsection IWE Enhancements

(7, 10, and 11 ) stated:

Conduct UT thickness measurements in the upper regions of the drywell shell.

Prior to the period of extended operation and two refueling outages later. This

included:

  • 9 locations inside the drywell, at elevations between 50 to 87 foot
  • 4 locations inside the drywell, at 23.foot elevation (bottom to middle spherical

plate transition)

  • 4 locations inside the drywell, at 71 foot elevation (knuckle area)

" Observed actions to evaluate primary containment structural integrity

  • Observed AmerGen perform drywell shell UT thickness measurements

" Observed field collection and recording of UT data

  • Observed AmerGen evaluate the UT data (2000 separate UT readings)

" Reviewed UT examination records

  • Reviewed AmerGen's Technical Evaluations of the UT data

b.

Observations

" AmerGen determined that all of the UT data satisfied acceptance criteria, based on current

licensing basis design requirements, for the thickness of the steel plate

9 AmerGen did not identify any significant conditions affecting the drywell shell structural

integrity

9 AmerGen did not identify any on-going corrosion or corrosion trend, based on the UT

examinations

  • AmerGen did not'identify any statistically significant deviations from 2006 UT data values

2.9

Moisture Barrier Seal Inspection (inside drywell)

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 27, ASME Section X1, Subsection IWE Enhancement

(17), stated:

Perform visual inspection of the moisture barrier seal between the drywell shell

and, the concrete floor curb, installed inside the drywell during the October 2006

refueling outage, in accordance with ASME Code.

The inspectors reviewed xxx

b.

Observations

None.

2.10

"B" Isolation Condenser Shell Inspection

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 24, One Time Inspection Program Item (2), stated:

To confirm the effectiveness of the Water Chemistry program to manage the

loss of material and crack initiation and growth aging effects. A one-time UT

inspection of the "B" Isolation Condenser shell below the waterline will be

conducted looking for pitting corrosion. Perform prior to the period of extended

operation.

The inspectors observed NDE examinations performed on the interiorof the "B"

isolation condenser shell (work order C2017561-11). The inspectors observed a visual

inspection of the shell interior, UT thickness measurements in two locations that were

previously tested in 1996 and 2002, additional UT testing in areas of identified pitting

and corrosion, and spark testing of the final interior shell coating. The inspectors

reviewed the UT data records, and compared the UT data results to the established

minimum wall thickness criteria for the isolation condenser shell, and compared the UT

data results with previously UT data measurements from 1996 and 2002

b.

Observations

None.

2.11

Periodic Inspections

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 41, Periodic Inspection Program, stated:

Activities consist of a periodic inspection of selected systems and components to

verify integrity and confirm the absence of identified aging effects. Perform prior

to the period of extended operation.

The inspectors observed the following activities:

9 Condensate system pipe expansion joint inspection

b.

Observations

None.

2.12

Circulating Water Intake Tunnel & Expansion Joint Inspection

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 31, Structures Monitoring Program Enhancement (1),

stated:

Buildings, structural components and commodities that are not in scope of

maintenance rule but have been determined to be in the scope of license

renewal. Perform prior to the period of extended operation.

The inspectors observed.the following activity:

  • Structural inspection of the circulating water intake tunnel and expansion joints

b.

Observations

None.

2.13

Buried ESW Pipe Replacement

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 63, Buried Piping, stated:

Replace the previously un-replaced, buried safety-related ESW piping prior to

the period of extended operation. Perform prior to the period of extended

operation.

The inspectors observed the following activities:

b.

Observations

None.

2.14

Electrical Cable Inspection inside Drywell

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 34, Electrical Cables and Connections, stated:

A representative sample of accessible cables and connections located in

adverse localized environments will be visually inspected at least once every 10

years for indications of accelerated insulation aging. Perform prior to the period

of extended operation.

The inspectors directly observed xxx

b.

Observations

None.

2.15

Drvwell Shell Internal Coatinas InsDection (inside drvwell)

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 33, Protective Coating Monitoring and Maintenance

Program, stated:

The program provides for aging management of Service Level I coatings inside

the primary containment, in accordance with ASME Code.

The inspectors reviewed xxx

b.

Observations

None.

2.16

Inaccessible Medium Voltage Cable Test

a.

Scope of Inspection

Proposed SER Appendix-A Item 36, Inaccessible Medium Voltage Cables, stated:

In addition, the cable circuits will be tested using a proven test for detecting

deterioration of the insulation system due to wetting, such as power factor or

partial discharge, as described in EPRI TR-103834-P1-2, or other testing that is

state of the art at the time the test is performed. Perform prior to the period of

extended operation.

The inspectors reviewed the licensee's activities to implement commitment item number xxx, of

the NRC Safety Evaluation Report related to the Oyster Creek License Renewal. This

commitment added medium-voltage cables M0089 and M0108 into the scope of OC license

renewal. In addition, it required the licensee to develop an aging management program

consistent with NUREG-1 801, "Generic Aging Lessons Learned,"Section XI.E3.

NUREG-1801 Section XI.E3, Inaccessible Medium-Voltage Cables Not Subject To 10 CFR 50.49 Environmental Qualification Requirements, recommended the licensee determine a

specific type of test to be performed prior to the initial test [at the time just prior to or at the time

of the period of extended operations], and that it should be a proven test for detecting

deterioration of the insulation system due to wetting, such as power factor, partial discharge, or

polarization index, as described in EPRI TR-103834-P1-2. NUREG-1801 also recommended

that the first test be completed before the period of extended operation.

The inspectors observed field testing (work order xxx) of electrical cable xxx, 4 kV feeder cable

to Bus xxx transformer xxx, and independently reviewed the test results. A Doble test of the

transformer, with the cable connected to the transformer secondary, was performed, in part, to

detect deterioration of the cable insulation. In addition, the inspectors interviewed plant

electrical engineering and maintenance personnel.

b.

Observations

None.

2.17

Fatigue Monitoring Program

a.

Scope of Inspection

On the basis of a projection of the number of design transients, the licensee concluded, during

the license renewal application process, the existing fatigue analyses of the RCS components

remain valid for the extended period of operation (See NRC Safety Evaluation Report NUREG 1728 Section 4.3). Constellation however indicated that, prior to the expiration of the current

operating license, a Fatigue Monitoring Program will be implemented as a confirmatory program

as discussed in Section B.3.2 of their original license renewal application.

The licensee proposed using the Fatigue Monitoring Program to provide assurance that the

number of design cycles will not be exceeded during the period of extended operation. It was

on this basis that the staff found licensee's Fatigue Monitoring Program provided an acceptable

basis for monitoring the fatigue usage of reactor coolant system components, in accordance

with the requirements of 10 CFR 54.21 (c)(1)(iii).

Subsequent to the application, the NRC staff became aware of a simplified assumption used in

the EPRI program for fatigue monitoring called FatiguePro. The inspectors reviewed the

current status of the fatigue monitoring program for the licensee. The inspectors also

determined if the computational shortcut was present in the program and what response the

licensee was planning to the NRC's concern that the simplified assumption might result in a

non-conservative prognosis of fatigue. The inspectors interviewed the responsible engineer

staff and reviewed the results of the fatigue program in place at the facility. The inspectors

reviewed the procedures and computational methodology to determine the status of current

fatigue limits on reactor coolant system components.

b.

Observations

None.

3.

Commitment Management Program

a.

Scope of Inspection

The inspectors evaluated Exelon procedures used to manage and revise regulatory

commitments to determine whether they were consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59, NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2000-17, "Managing Regulatory

Commitments," and the guidance in Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99-04, "Guidelines

for Managing NRC Commitment Changes." In addition, the inspectors reviewed the

procedures to assess whether adequate administrative controls were in-place to ensure

commitment revisions or the elimination of commitments altogether would be properly

evaluated, approved, and reported to the NRC. The inspectors also reviewed Exelon's

current licensing basis commitment tracking program to evaluate its effectiveness. In

addition, the following commitment change evaluation packages were reviewed:

  • Commitment Change 08-003, OC Bolting Integrity Program

" Commitment Change 08-004, RPV Axial Weld Examination Relief

b.

Observations

None.

4.

NRC Unresolved Item

  • An Unresolved Item (URI) will be opened to evaluate whether existing current

licensing basis commitments were adequately performed and; if necessary, assess the

safety significance for any related performance deficiency.

  • The issues for follow-up include the strippable coating de-lamination, reactor cavity

trough drain monitoring, and sand bed drain monitoring.

  • The commitment tracking, implementation, and work control processes will be

reviewed, based on corrective actions resulting from AmerGen's review of deficiencies

and operating experience, as a Part 50 activity.

40A6 Meetings, Includingq Exit Meeting

Exit Meeting Summary

The inspectors presented the results of this inspection to Mr. T. Rausch, Site Vice

President, Mr. M. Gallagher, Vice President License Renewal, and other members of

Exelon's staff on December 23, 2008..

No proprietary information is present in this inspection report.

A-1

ATTACHMENT

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

KEY POINTS OF CONTACT

Licensee Personnel

P. Tamburro, Site License Renewal Lead

C. Albert,

J. Kandasamy, Manager Regulatory Affairs

C. Taylor, Regulatory Affairs

C. Hawkins, NDE Level III Technician

R. Pruthi, Electrical Design Engineer

R. McGee,

S. Schwartz, System Engineer,

J. Cavallo, Corrosion Control Consultants & labs, Inc.

M. Gallagher, Vice President License Renewal

F. Polaski, Exelon License Renewal

J. hufnagel, Exelon License Renewal

NRC Personnel

S. Pindale, Acting Senior Resident Inspector, Oyster Creek

J. Kulp, Resident Inspector, Oyster Creek

L. Regner, License Renewal Project Manager, NRR

D. Pelton, Chief - License Renewal Projects Branch 1

M. Baty, Counsel for NRC Staff

J. Davis, Senior Materials Engineer, NRR

Observers

R. Pinney, State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

R. Zak, State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

R. Leski, Nine Mile Point License Renewal Manager

M. Fallin, Constellation License Renewal Manager

LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED

Opened/Closed

None.

Opened

05000219/2008007-01

URI

xxx

Closed

None.

A-2

LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED

License renewal Proqram Documents

Drawings

Plant Procedures

LS-AA-104-1002, 50.59 Applicability Review, Rev 3

LS-AA-1 10, Commitment Change management, Rev 6

Condition Reports (CRS)

  • = CRs written as a result of the NRC inspection

Maintenance Requests & Work Orders

Miscellaneous Documents

NRC Documents

Industry Documents

  • = documents referenced within NUREG-1801 as providing acceptable guidance for specific

aging management programs

A-3

LIST OF ACRONYMS

EPRI

Electric Power Research Institute

NDE

Non-destructive Examination

NEI

Nuclear Energy Institute

SSC

Systems, Structures, and Components

SDP

Significance Determination Process

TR

Technical Report

UFSAR

Updated Final Safety Analysis Report