IR 05000219/2013005: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
| issue date = 01/30/2014
| issue date = 01/30/2014
| title = IR 05000219-13-005; 10/01/2013 - 12/31/2013; Exelon Energy Company, LLC, Oyster Creek Generating Station
| title = IR 05000219-13-005; 10/01/2013 - 12/31/2013; Exelon Energy Company, LLC, Oyster Creek Generating Station
| author name = Cook W A
| author name = Cook W
| author affiliation = NRC/RGN-I/DRP/PB6
| author affiliation = NRC/RGN-I/DRP/PB6
| addressee name = Pacilio M J
| addressee name = Pacilio M
| addressee affiliation = Exelon Nuclear
| addressee affiliation = Exelon Nuclear
| docket = 05000219
| docket = 05000219
Line 20: Line 20:
{{#Wiki_filter:January 30, 2014
{{#Wiki_filter:January 30, 2014


SUBJECT: OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION - NRC INTEGRATED INSPECTION REPORT 05000219/2013005
==SUBJECT:==
OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION - NRC INTEGRATED INSPECTION REPORT 05000219/2013005


==Dear Mr. Pacilio:==
==Dear Mr. Pacilio:==
On December 31, 2013, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at your Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. The enclosed inspection report documents the inspection results, which were discussed on January 16, 2014 with Mr. G. Stathes, Site Vice President, and other members of your staff. The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety and The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel. Based upon the results of this inspection, no findings were identified. As a result of the Safety Culture Common Language Initiative, the terminology and coding of cross-cutting aspects were revised beginning in calendar year (CY) 2014. New cross-cutting aspects identified in CY 2014 will be coded under the latest revision to IMC 0310. Cross-cutting aspects identified in the last six months of 2013 using the previous terminology will be converted to the latest revision in accordance with the cross-reference in IMC 0310. The revised cross-cutting aspects will be evaluated for cross-cutting themes and potential substantive cross-cutting issues in accordance with IMC 0305 starting with the CY 2014 mid-cycle assessment review. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.enclosure, and your response (if any) will be available electronically for public inspection in the Agencywide Documents Access Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
On December 31, 2013, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at your Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. The enclosed inspection report documents the inspection results, which were discussed on January 16, 2014 with Mr. G.
 
Stathes, Site Vice President, 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.
 
Based upon the results of this inspection, no findings were identified.
 
As a result of the Safety Culture Common Language Initiative, the terminology and coding of cross-cutting aspects were revised beginning in calendar year (CY) 2014. New cross-cutting aspects identified in CY 2014 will be coded under the latest revision to IMC 0310. Cross-cutting aspects identified in the last six months of 2013 using the previous terminology will be converted to the latest revision in accordance with the cross-reference in IMC 0310. The revised cross-cutting aspects will be evaluated for cross-cutting themes and potential substantive cross-cutting issues in accordance with IMC 0305 starting with the CY 2014 mid-cycle assessment review.
 
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRCs Rules of Practice, a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRCs Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records component of the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).


Sincerely,
Sincerely,
/RA/ William A. Cook, Acting Chief Reactor Projects Branch 6 Division of Reactor Projects Docket Nos.: 50-219 License Nos.: DPR-16 Enclosure: Inspection Report 05000219/2013005 w/Attachment: Supplementary Information cc w/encl: Distribution via ListServ
/RA/  
 
William A. Cook, Acting Chief Reactor Projects Branch 6 Division of Reactor Projects  
 
Docket Nos.: 50-219 License Nos.: DPR-16  
 
===Enclosure:===
Inspection Report 05000219/2013005  
 
w/Attachment: Supplementary Information  
 
REGION I==
Docket Nos.:
50-219
 
License Nos.:
DPR-16
 
Report No.:
 
05000219/2013005
 
Exelon:  
 
Exelon Nuclear
 
Facility:
 
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station
 
Location:
 
Forked River, New Jersey
 
Dates:
 
October 1, 2013 - December 31, 2013
 
Inspectors:
 
J. Kulp, Senior Resident Inspector
 
A. Patel, Resident Inspector J. Schoppy, Senior Reactor Inspector T. OHara, Reactor Inspector B. Dionne, Health Physicists Inspector E. Burket, Emergency Preparedness Specialist
 
Approved By:
William A. Cook, Acting Chief


ML 14030A332 SUNSI Review Non-Sensitive Sensitive Publicly Available Non-Publicly Available OFFICE RI/DRP RI/DRP RI/DRP NAME mmt JKulp/WAC for LCline/ LC WCook/WAC DATE 01/29/14 01/ 30/14 01/30/14 1 Enclosure U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I Docket Nos.: 50-219 License Nos.: DPR-16 Report No.: 05000219/2013005 Exelon: Exelon Nuclear Facility: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Location: Forked River, New Jersey Dates: October 1, 2013 December 31, 2013 Inspectors: J. Kulp, Senior Resident Inspector A. Patel, Resident Inspector J. Schoppy, Senior Reactor Inspector Reactor Inspector B. Dionne, Health Physicists Inspector E. Burket, Emergency Preparedness Specialist Approved By: William A. Cook, Acting Chief Reactor Projects Branch 6 Division of Reactor Projects 2 Enclosure  
Reactor Projects Branch 6  
 
Division of Reactor Projects  
 
Enclosure  


=SUMMARY OF FINDINGS=
=SUMMARY OF FINDINGS=
IR 05000219/2013005; 10/01/2013 12/31/2013; Exelon Energy Company, LLC, Oyster Creek Generating Station; This report covered a three-month period of inspection by resident inspectors and announced operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-ember 2006. No findings were identified.
IR 05000219/2013005; 10/01/2013 - 12/31/2013; Exelon Energy Company, LLC, Oyster Creek  
 
Generating Station;  
 
This report covered a three-month period of inspection by resident inspectors and announced inspections performed by regional inspectors. The NRCs program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 4, dated December 2006.
 
No findings were identified.


=REPORT DETAILS=
=REPORT DETAILS=
Summary of Plant Status Oyster Creek began the inspection period in the 1M30 maintenance outage and commenced reactor startup on October 3, 2013. On October 3, 2013 during power ascension following criticality, an automatic scram occurred due to intermediate range monitor high flux scram signal while withdrawing source range detectors. On October 6, 2013 during power ascension, operators manually scrammed the reactor due to loss of condenser vacuum and Oyster Creek entered a forced outage (1F31). After repairs to the condenser, Oyster Creek commenced startup on October 7 and returned to full power operation on October 11, 2013. On November 3, 2013, Oyster Creek experienced an unexpected trip of the E recirculation pump and reactor power stabilized at 92% power. On November 3, 2013, Oyster Creek achieved 100% power with the four remaining recirculation pumps. On November 16, 2013, operators shutdown the reactor and Oyster Creek entered a planned maintenance outage (1M32) to repair the E recirculation pump. On November 21, 2013, Oyster Creek commenced startup and returned to full power on November 23, 2013. On December 14, 2013 during turbine valve testing, operators manually scrammed the reactor due to high reactor pressure and Oyster Creek entered a forced outage (1F33). After repairs to the turbine control system, Oyster Creek commenced startup on December 18, 2013 and returned to full power operation on December 20,
 
===Summary of Plant Status===
Oyster Creek began the inspection period in the 1M30 maintenance outage and commenced reactor startup on October 3, 2013. On October 3, 2013 during power ascension following criticality, an automatic scram occurred due to intermediate range monitor high flux scram signal while withdrawing source range detectors. On October 6, 2013 during power ascension, operators manually scrammed the reactor due to loss of condenser vacuum and Oyster Creek entered a forced outage (1F31). After repairs to the condenser, Oyster Creek commenced startup on October 7 and returned to full power operation on October 11, 2013. On November 3, 2013, Oyster Creek experienced an unexpected trip of the E recirculation pump and reactor power stabilized at 92% power. On November 3, 2013, Oyster Creek achieved 100% power with the four remaining recirculation pumps. On November 16, 2013, operators shutdown the reactor and Oyster Creek entered a planned maintenance outage (1M32) to repair the E recirculation pump. On November 21, 2013, Oyster Creek commenced startup and returned to full power on November 23, 2013. On December 14, 2013 during turbine valve testing, operators manually scrammed the reactor due to high reactor pressure and Oyster Creek entered a forced outage (1F33). After repairs to the turbine control system, Oyster Creek commenced startup on December 18, 2013 and returned to full power operation on December 20,


==REACTOR SAFETY==
==REACTOR SAFETY==
Cornerstones: Initiating Events, Mitigating Systems, and Barrier Integrity  
Cornerstones: Initiating Events, Mitigating Systems, and Barrier Integrity  
{{a|1R01}}
 
{{a|1R01}}
 
==1R01 Adverse Weather Protection==
==1R01 Adverse Weather Protection==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.01|count=1}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.01|count=1}}


===.1 Readiness for Seasonal Extreme Weather Conditions===
===.1 Readiness for Seasonal Extreme Weather Conditions===
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors performed a review of Exelons readiness for the onset of seasonal cold temperatures. The review focused on the intake structure and the emergency diesel generators (EDGs). The inspectors reviewed the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), technical specifications, control room logs, and the corrective action program to determine what temperatures or other seasonal weather could challenge these systems, and to ensure Exelon personnel had adequately prepared for these challenges.


====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed station procedures, including Exelons seasonal weather preparation procedure and applicable operating procedures. The inspectors performed walkdowns of the selected systems to ensure station personnel identified issues that could challenge the operability of the systems during cold weather conditions.
temperatures. The review focused on the intake structure and the emergency diesel generators (EDGs). The inspectors reviewed the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), technical specifications, control room logs, and the corrective action program to determine what temperatures or other seasonal weather could challenge these systems, and to ensure Exelon personnel had adequately prepared for these challenges. The preparation procedure and applicable operating procedures. The inspectors performed walkdowns of the selected systems to ensure station personnel identified issues that could challenge the operability of the systems during cold weather conditions.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings were identified.
No findings were identified. {{a|1R04}}
{{a|1R04}}
 
==1R04 Equipment Alignment==
==1R04 Equipment Alignment


==
===.1 Partial System Walkdowns===
===.1 Partial System Walkdowns===
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.04Q|count=2}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.04Q|count=2}}


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors performed partial walkdowns of the following systems:   Standby gas treatment system #1 on November 5, 2013 B control rod drive pump on November 25, 2013 The inspectors selected these systems based on their risk-significance relative to the reactor safety cornerstones at the time they were inspected. The inspectors reviewed applicable operating procedures, system diagrams, the UFSAR, technical specifications, work orders, condition reports, and the impact of ongoing work activities on redundant trains of equipment in order to identify conditions that could have impacted system performance of their intended safety functions. The inspectors also performed field walkdowns of accessible portions of the systems to verify system components and support equipment were aligned correctly and were operable. The inspectors examined the material condition of the components and observed operating parameters of equipment to verify that there were no deficiencies. The inspectors also reviewed whether Exelon staff had properly identified equipment issues and entered them into the corrective action program for resolution with the appropriate significance characterization.
The inspectors performed partial walkdowns of the following systems:  
 
Standby gas treatment system #1 on November 5, 2013  
 
B control rod drive pump on November 25, 2013  
 
The inspectors selected these systems based on their risk-significance relative to the reactor safety cornerstones at the time they were inspected. The inspectors reviewed applicable operating procedures, system diagrams, the UFSAR, technical specifications, work orders, condition reports, and the impact of ongoing work activities on redundant trains of equipment in order to identify conditions that could have impacted system performance of their intended safety functions. The inspectors also performed field walkdowns of accessible portions of the systems to verify system components and support equipment were aligned correctly and were operable. The inspectors examined the material condition of the components and observed operating parameters of equipment to verify that there were no deficiencies. The inspectors also reviewed whether Exelon staff had properly identified equipment issues and entered them into the corrective action program for resolution with the appropriate significance characterization.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
Line 65: Line 145:


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
On October 22 and 23, 2013, the inspectors performed a complete system walkdown of accessible portions of the #1 emergency diesel generator to verify the existing equipment lineup was correct. The inspectors reviewed operating procedures, surveillance tests, drawings, equipment line-up check-off lists, and the UFSAR to verify the system was aligned to perform its required safety functions. The inspectors also reviewed electrical power availability, component lubrication and equipment cooling, hangar and support functionality, and operability of support systems. The inspectors performed field walkdowns of accessible portions of the systems to verify system components and support equipment were aligned correctly and operable. The inspectors examined the material condition of the components and observed operating parameters of equipment to verify that there were no deficiencies. Additionally, the inspectors reviewed a sample of related condition reports and work orders to ensure Exelon appropriately evaluated and resolved any deficiencies.
On October 22 and 23, 2013, the inspectors performed a complete system walkdown of accessible portions of the #1 emergency diesel generator to verify the existing equipment lineup was correct. The inspectors reviewed operating procedures, surveillance tests, drawings, equipment line-up check-off lists, and the UFSAR to verify the system was aligned to perform its required safety functions. The inspectors also reviewed electrical power availability, component lubrication and equipment cooling, hangar and support functionality, and operability of support systems. The inspectors performed field walkdowns of accessible portions of the systems to verify system components and support equipment were aligned correctly and operable. The inspectors examined the material condition of the components and observed operating parameters of equipment to verify that there were no deficiencies. Additionally, the inspectors reviewed a sample of related condition reports and work orders to ensure Exelon appropriately evaluated and resolved any deficiencies.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings were identified.
No findings were identified. {{a|1R05}}
{{a|1R05}}
 
==1R05 Fire Protection==
==1R05 Fire Protection


==
===.1 Resident Inspector Quarterly Walkdowns===
===.1 Resident Inspector Quarterly Walkdowns===
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.05Q|count=4}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.05Q|count=4}}
Line 78: Line 159:
The inspectors conducted tours of the areas listed below to assess the material condition and operational status of fire protection features. The inspectors verified that Exelon controlled combustible materials and ignition sources in accordance with administrative procedures. The inspectors verified that fire protection and suppression equipment was available for use as specified in the area pre-fire plan, and passive fire barriers were maintained in good material condition. The inspectors also verified that station personnel implemented compensatory measures for out of service, degraded, or inoperable fire protection equipment, as applicable, in accordance with procedures.
The inspectors conducted tours of the areas listed below to assess the material condition and operational status of fire protection features. The inspectors verified that Exelon controlled combustible materials and ignition sources in accordance with administrative procedures. The inspectors verified that fire protection and suppression equipment was available for use as specified in the area pre-fire plan, and passive fire barriers were maintained in good material condition. The inspectors also verified that station personnel implemented compensatory measures for out of service, degraded, or inoperable fire protection equipment, as applicable, in accordance with procedures.


Motor-generator set room on October 30, 2013 Emergency diesel generator room #2 on October 30,2013   4160 volt switchgear room and C battery room on October 30,2013
Motor-generator set room on October 30, 2013  
 
Emergency diesel generator room #2 on October 30,2013  
 
Reactor building 23 elevation on October 30, 2013
 
4160 volt switchgear room and C battery room on October 30,2013


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings were identified.  
No findings were identified.
{{a|1R12}}
 
{{a|1R12}}
 
==1R12 Maintenance Effectiveness==
==1R12 Maintenance Effectiveness==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.12|count=3}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.12|count=3}}
Line 89: Line 178:
The inspectors reviewed the samples listed below to assess the effectiveness of maintenance activities on systems, structures and components (SSC) performance and reliability. The inspectors reviewed system health reports, corrective action program documents, maintenance work orders, and maintenance rule basis documents to ensure that Exelon was identifying and properly evaluating performance problems within the scope of the maintenance rule. For each sample selected, the inspectors verified that the SSC was properly scoped into the maintenance rule in accordance with 10 CFR 50.65 and verified that the (a)(2) performance criteria established by Exelon staff was reasonable. As applicable, for SSCs classified as (a)(1), the inspectors assessed the adequacy of goals and corrective actions to return these SSCs to (a)(2). Additionally, the inspectors ensured that Exelon staff was identifying and addressing common cause failures that occurred within and across maintenance rule system boundaries.
The inspectors reviewed the samples listed below to assess the effectiveness of maintenance activities on systems, structures and components (SSC) performance and reliability. The inspectors reviewed system health reports, corrective action program documents, maintenance work orders, and maintenance rule basis documents to ensure that Exelon was identifying and properly evaluating performance problems within the scope of the maintenance rule. For each sample selected, the inspectors verified that the SSC was properly scoped into the maintenance rule in accordance with 10 CFR 50.65 and verified that the (a)(2) performance criteria established by Exelon staff was reasonable. As applicable, for SSCs classified as (a)(1), the inspectors assessed the adequacy of goals and corrective actions to return these SSCs to (a)(2). Additionally, the inspectors ensured that Exelon staff was identifying and addressing common cause failures that occurred within and across maintenance rule system boundaries.


Reactor protection system blown fuse issues on October 29, 2013   Standby liquid control system relief valve as-found lift pressure issues on November 4, 2013 Main feedwater regulating valve failures root cause evaluation on November 5, 2013
Reactor protection system blown fuse issues on October 29, 2013  
 
Standby liquid control system relief valve as-found lift pressure issues on November 4, 2013  
 
Main feedwater regulating valve failures root cause evaluation on November 5, 2013


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings were identified.  
No findings were identified.
{{a|1R13}}
 
{{a|1R13}}
 
==1R13 Maintenance Risk Assessments and Emergent Work Control==
==1R13 Maintenance Risk Assessments and Emergent Work Control==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.13|count=2}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.13|count=2}}


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed station evaluation and management of plant risk for the maintenance and emergent work activities listed below to verify that Exelon performed the appropriate risk assessments prior to removing equipment for work. The inspectors selected these activities based on potential risk significance relative to the reactor safety cornerstones. As applicable for each activity, the inspectors verified that Exelon personnel performed risk assessments as required by 10 CFR 50.65(a)(4) and that the assessments were accurate and complete. When Exelon performed emergent work, the inspectors verified that operations personnel promptly assessed and managed plant risk. The inspectors reviewed the scope of maintenance work and discussed the results of were consistent with the risk assessment. The inspectors also reviewed the technical specification requirements and inspected portions of redundant safety systems, when applicable, to verify risk analysis assumptions were valid and applicable requirements were met.
The inspectors reviewed station evaluation and management of plant risk for the maintenance and emergent work activities listed below to verify that Exelon performed the appropriate risk assessments prior to removing equipment for work. The inspectors selected these activities based on potential risk significance relative to the reactor safety cornerstones. As applicable for each activity, the inspectors verified that Exelon personnel performed risk assessments as required by 10 CFR 50.65(a)(4) and that the assessments were accurate and complete. When Exelon performed emergent work, the inspectors verified that operations personnel promptly assessed and managed plant risk.
 
The inspectors reviewed the scope of maintenance work and discussed the results of the assessment with the stations probabilistic risk analyst to verify plant conditions were consistent with the risk assessment. The inspectors also reviewed the technical specification requirements and inspected portions of redundant safety systems, when applicable, to verify risk analysis assumptions were valid and applicable requirements were met.


Containment spray system #1 and emergency service water system #1 out of service for planned surveillance testing on October 16, 2013   Planned maintenance on emergency diesel generator #2 from October 21 to 25, 2013
Containment spray system #1 and emergency service water system #1 out of service for planned surveillance testing on October 16, 2013  
 
Planned maintenance on emergency diesel generator #2 from October 21 to 25, 2013


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings were identified.  
No findings were identified.
{{a|1R15}}
 
{{a|1R15}}
 
==1R15 Operability Determinations and Functionality Assessments==
==1R15 Operability Determinations and Functionality Assessments==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.15|count=2}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.15|count=2}}


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed operability determinations for the following degraded or non-conforming conditions:   C emergency service water system piping degradation on November 12, 2013 Bank 6 startup transformer C phase voltage regulator not in automatic on         November 14, 2013 The inspectors selected these issues based on the risk significance of the associated components and systems. The inspectors evaluated the technical adequacy of the operability determinations to assess whether technical specification operability was properly justified and the subject component or system remained available such that no unrecognized increase in risk occurred. The inspectors compared the operability and design criteria in the appropriate sections of the technical specifications and UFSAR to tions to determine whether the components or systems were operable. Where compensatory measures were required to maintain operability, the inspectors determined whether the measures in place would function as intended and were properly controlled by Exelon. The inspectors determined, where appropriate, compliance with bounding limitations associated with the evaluations.
The inspectors reviewed operability determinations for the following degraded or non-conforming conditions:  
 
C emergency service water system piping degradation on November 12, 2013  
 
Bank 6 startup transformer C phase voltage regulator not in automatic on  
 
November 14, 2013  
 
The inspectors selected these issues based on the risk significance of the associated components and systems. The inspectors evaluated the technical adequacy of the operability determinations to assess whether technical specification operability was properly justified and the subject component or system remained available such that no unrecognized increase in risk occurred. The inspectors compared the operability and design criteria in the appropriate sections of the technical specifications and UFSAR to Exelons evaluations to determine whether the components or systems were operable.
 
Where compensatory measures were required to maintain operability, the inspectors determined whether the measures in place would function as intended and were properly controlled by Exelon. The inspectors determined, where appropriate, compliance with bounding limitations associated with the evaluations.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings were identified.
No findings were identified.


{{a|1R19}}
{{a|1R19}}
 
==1R19 Post-Maintenance Testing==
==1R19 Post-Maintenance Testing==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.19|count=6}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.19|count=6}}


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed the post-maintenance tests for the maintenance activities listed below to verify that procedures and test activities ensured system operability and functional capability. The inspectors reviewed the test procedure to verify that the procedure adequately tested the safety functions that may have been affected by the maintenance activity, that the acceptance criteria in the procedure was consistent with the information in the applicable licensing basis and/or design basis documents, and that the procedure had been properly reviewed and approved. The inspectors also witnessed the test or reviewed test data to verify that the test results adequately demonstrated restoration of the affected safety functions.
The inspectors reviewed the post-maintenance tests for the maintenance activities listed below to verify that procedures and test activities ensured system operability and functional capability. The inspectors reviewed the test procedure to verify that the procedure adequately tested the safety functions that may have been affected by the maintenance activity, that the acceptance criteria in the procedure was consistent with the information in the applicable licensing basis and/or design basis documents, and that the procedure had been properly reviewed and approved. The inspectors also witnessed the test or reviewed test data to verify that the test results adequately demonstrated restoration of the affected safety functions.
 
Main turbine overspeed trip device after speed relay replacement (M2337118) on October 10, 2013
 
Average power range monitor #4 after power supply replacement (C2030995) on October 15, 2013
 
Containment spray system #2 after drywell discharge valve planned maintenance (R2098132) on October 15, 2013
 
Emergency diesel generator #2 after planned 24 month overhaul (R2228091) on October 25, 2013
 
Standby gas treatment system #2 after filter replacement (R2118737) on November 7, 2013


Main turbine overspeed trip device after speed relay replacement (M2337118) on October 10, 2013  Average power range monitor #4 after power supply replacement (C2030995) on October 15, 2013  Containment spray system #2 after drywell discharge valve planned maintenance (R2098132) on October 15, 2013  Emergency diesel generator #2 after planned 24 month overhaul (R2228091) on October 25, 2013  Standby gas treatment system #2 after filter replacement (R2118737) on  November 7, 2013  Electromatic relief valve (EMRV) temperature monitors after EMRV temperature monitor switch replacement (C2031260) on November 20, 2013
Electromatic relief valve (EMRV) temperature monitors after EMRV temperature monitor switch replacement (C2031260) on November 20, 2013


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings were identified.  
No findings were identified.
{{a|1R20}}
 
{{a|1R20}}
 
==1R20 Refueling and Other Outage Activities==
==1R20 Refueling and Other Outage Activities==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.20|count=1}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.20|count=1}}


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
sk plan for planned maintenance outage 1M32. On November 16, 2013, operators shutdown the reactor entered planned maintenance outage 1M32. On November 21, 2013, Oyster Creek commenced startup and returned to full power on November 23, 2013.
The inspectors reviewed the stations work schedule and outage risk plan for planned maintenance outage 1M32. On November 16, 2013, operators shutdown the reactor entered planned maintenance outage 1M32. On November 21, 2013, Oyster Creek commenced startup and returned to full power on November 23, 2013.
 
The inspectors reviewed Exelons development and implementation of outage plans and schedules to verify that risk, industry experience, previous site-specific problems, and defense-in-depth were considered. During the outage, the inspectors observed portions of the shutdown and cooldown processes and monitored controls associated with the following outage activities:
 
Configuration management, including maintenance of defense-in-depth, commensurate with the outage plan for the key safety functions and compliance with the applicable technical specifications when taking equipment out of service Implementation of clearance activities and confirmation that tags were properly hung and that equipment was appropriately configured to safely support the associated work or testing
 
Status and configuration of electrical systems and switchyard activities to ensure that technical specifications were met
 
Monitoring of decay heat removal operations
 
Reactor water inventory controls, including flow paths, configurations, alternative means for inventory additions, and controls to prevent inventory loss
 
Activities that could affect reactivity
 
Maintenance of secondary containment as required by technical specifications


The inspectschedules to verify that risk, industry experience, previous site-specific problems, and defense-in-depth were considered. During the outage, the inspectors observed portions of the shutdown and cooldown processes and monitored controls associated with the following outage activities:  Configuration management, including maintenance of defense-in-depth, commensurate with the outage plan for the key safety functions and compliance  with the applicable technical specifications when taking equipment out of service Implementation of clearance activities and confirmation that tags were properly hung and that equipment was appropriately configured to safely support the associated work or testing  Status and configuration of electrical systems and switchyard activities to ensure that technical specifications were met  Monitoring of decay heat removal operations  Reactor water inventory controls, including flow paths, configurations, alternative means for inventory additions, and controls to prevent inventory loss  Activities that could affect reactivity  Maintenance of secondary containment as required by technical specifications  Identification and resolution of problems related to outage activities
Identification and resolution of problems related to outage activities


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings were identified.  
No findings were identified.
{{a|1R22}}
 
{{a|1R22}}
 
==1R22 Surveillance Testing==
==1R22 Surveillance Testing==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.22|count=4}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.22|count=4}}


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors observed performance of surveillance tests and/or reviewed test data of selected risk-significant SSCs to assess whether test results satisfied technical specifications, the UFSAR, and Exelon procedure requirements. The inspectors verified that test acceptance criteria were clear, tests demonstrated operational readiness and were consistent with design documentation, test instrumentation had current calibrations and the range and accuracy for the application, tests were performed as written, and applicable test prerequisites were satisfied. Upon test completion, the inspectors considered whether the test results supported that equipment was capable of performing the required safety functions. The inspectors reviewed the following surveillance tests:   Unidentified leak rate verification on October 16, 2013   B emergency service water pump in-service test on October 17, 2013   Emergency diesel generator #1 fast start test on November 11, 2013   Torus to drywell vacuum breaker operability test on November 14, 2013
The inspectors observed performance of surveillance tests and/or reviewed test data of selected risk-significant SSCs to assess whether test results satisfied technical specifications, the UFSAR, and Exelon procedure requirements. The inspectors verified that test acceptance criteria were clear, tests demonstrated operational readiness and were consistent with design documentation, test instrumentation had current calibrations and the range and accuracy for the application, tests were performed as written, and applicable test prerequisites were satisfied. Upon test completion, the inspectors considered whether the test results supported that equipment was capable of performing the required safety functions. The inspectors reviewed the following surveillance tests:  
 
Unidentified leak rate verification on October 16, 2013  
 
B emergency service water pump in-service test on October 17, 2013  
 
Emergency diesel generator #1 fast start test on November 11, 2013  
 
Torus to drywell vacuum breaker operability test on November 14, 2013


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
Line 147: Line 295:


==RADIATION SAFETY==
==RADIATION SAFETY==
Cornerstones: Public Radiation Safety and Occupational Radiation Safety  
Cornerstones: Public Radiation Safety and Occupational Radiation Safety  
{{a|2RS5}}
 
{{a|2RS5}}
 
==2RS5 Radiation Monitoring Instrumentation==
==2RS5 Radiation Monitoring Instrumentation==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71124.05|count=1}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71124.05|count=1}}
a. The inspectors reviewed maintenance records, testing records, source check records, calibration records, alarm setpoint calculations and walked down a sample of various radiation monitors including whole-internal contamination to verify proper setup and operation. The inspectors reviewed Exelon and third-party evaluation reports of the radiation monitoring program since the last inspection to look for trends. The inspectors reviewed procedures that govern instrument source checks and calibrations, focusing on instruments used for monitoring transient high radiological conditions, including instruments used for underwater surveys. monitoring systems and observed Exelon personnel conducting source checks to verify proper operation of the monitors. The inspectors walked down area radiation monitors and continuous air monitors to determine whether they are appropriately positioned relative to the radiation sources or areas they were intended to monitor.
 
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed maintenance records, testing records, source check records, calibration records, alarm setpoint calculations and walked down a sample of various radiation monitors including whole-body counters used to detect workers surface and internal contamination to verify proper setup and operation. The inspectors reviewed Exelon and third-party evaluation reports of the radiation monitoring program since the last inspection to look for trends. The inspectors reviewed procedures that govern instrument source checks and calibrations, focusing on instruments used for monitoring transient high radiological conditions, including instruments used for underwater surveys.
 
The inspectors walked down a representative sample of Exelons effluent radiation monitoring systems and observed Exelon personnel conducting source checks to verify proper operation of the monitors. The inspectors walked down area radiation monitors and continuous air monitors to determine whether they are appropriately positioned relative to the radiation sources or areas they were intended to monitor.


The inspectors reviewed daily performance checks and calibration data to show that the frequency of the calibrations is adequate and there were no indications of degraded performance of laboratory analytical instruments used for radiological analyses.
The inspectors reviewed daily performance checks and calibration data to show that the frequency of the calibrations is adequate and there were no indications of degraded performance of laboratory analytical instruments used for radiological analyses.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings were identified.  
No findings were identified.
{{a|2RS6}}
 
{{a|2RS6}}
 
==2RS6 Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Treatment==
==2RS6 Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Treatment==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71124.06|count=1}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71124.06|count=1}}


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors verified that gaseous and liquid effluent processing systems are maintained so radiological discharges are properly reduced, monitored, and released. The inspectors also verified the accuracy of the calculations for effluent releases and resultant public doses. The inspectors reviewed Licensee Event Reports, event reports, and/or special reports related to the effluent program to identify any additional focus areas for the inspection based on the scope/breadth of problems described in these reports. The inspectors reviewed Standby Gas Treatment System surveillance test data and walked down portions of the system to assess the material condition and to verify that there were no conditions, improper alignment, or system installation issues that would impact the performance of the system. The inspectors reviewed the methodology Exelon used to determine the effluent stack and vent flow rates.
The inspectors verified that gaseous and liquid effluent processing systems are maintained so radiological discharges are properly reduced, monitored, and released.


The inspectors verified that the calculated monthly, quarterly, and annual doses were within the 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, and Technical Specification dose criteria. Additionally, the inspectors reviewed records of abnormal discharges to ensure that that an evaluation was made of the discharge to satisfy 10 CFR 20.1501, and account for the source term and projected doses to the public.
The inspectors also verified the accuracy of the calculations for effluent releases and resultant public doses. The inspectors reviewed Licensee Event Reports, event reports, and/or special reports related to the effluent program to identify any additional focus areas for the inspection based on the scope/breadth of problems described in these reports. The inspectors reviewed Standby Gas Treatment System surveillance test data and walked down portions of the system to assess the material condition and to verify that there were no conditions, improper alignment, or system installation issues that would impact the performance of the system. The inspectors reviewed the methodology Exelon used to determine the effluent stack and vent flow rates.
 
The inspectors verified that the calculated monthly, quarterly, and annual doses were within the 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, and Technical Specification dose criteria.
 
Additionally, the inspectors reviewed records of abnormal discharges to ensure that that an evaluation was made of the discharge to satisfy 10 CFR 20.1501, and account for the source term and projected doses to the public.


The inspectors reviewed reported groundwater monitoring results, remediation efforts, changes to the program for identifying and controlling contaminated spills/leaks to groundwater and walked down the remediation facility.
The inspectors reviewed reported groundwater monitoring results, remediation efforts, changes to the program for identifying and controlling contaminated spills/leaks to groundwater and walked down the remediation facility.
Line 171: Line 331:
No findings were identified.
No findings were identified.


{{a|2RS7}}
{{a|2RS7}}
 
==2RS7 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP)==
==2RS7 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP)==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71124.07|count=1}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71124.07|count=1}}
a.


The inspectors reviewed the annual radiological environmental and effluent operating reports and the results of Exelon assessments since the last inspection, to verify that the REMP was implemented in accordance with technical specifications and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM). This review included, monitoring and measurement frequencies, land use census, inter-laboratory comparison program, and analysis of environmental sampling data including reporting the cause of any positive radioactivity detected and any elevated environmental dosimeter results. The inspectors walked down one air sampling station to determine whether it was located as described in the Oyster Creek ODCM, whether it provided a representative sample, and to determine the equipment material condition. The inspectors review-laboratory and intra-laboratory comparison program to verify the adequacy of determination of any bias to the data and the overall effect on the REMP.
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed the annual radiological environmental and effluent operating reports and the results of Exelon assessments since the last inspection, to verify that the REMP was implemented in accordance with technical specifications and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM). This review included, monitoring and measurement frequencies, land use census, inter-laboratory comparison program, and analysis of environmental sampling data including reporting the cause of any positive radioactivity detected and any elevated environmental dosimeter results. The inspectors walked down one air sampling station to determine whether it was located as described in the Oyster Creek ODCM, whether it provided a representative sample, and to determine the equipment material condition. The inspectors reviewed the results of Exelons inter-laboratory and intra-laboratory comparison program to verify the adequacy of environmental sample analyses performed by Exelon. The inspectors reviewed Exelons determination of any bias to the data and the overall effect on the REMP.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
Line 183: Line 344:
==OTHER ACTIVITIES==
==OTHER ACTIVITIES==
{{a|4OA1}}
{{a|4OA1}}
==4OA1 Performance Indicator Verification==
==4OA1 Performance Indicator Verification==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71151}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71151}}
===.1 Mitigating Systems Performance Index (5 samples)===
===.1 Mitigating Systems Performance Index (5 samples)===
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed Exelons submittal of the Mitigating Systems Performance Index for the following systems for the period of October 1, 2012 through September 30, 2013:
Emergency AC Power System
High Pressure Injection System
Heat Removal - Isolation Condensers


====a. Inspection Scope====
RHR - Containment Spray  
Index for the following systems for the period of October 1, 2012 through September 30, 2013:    Emergency AC Power System  High Pressure Injection System  Heat Removal  Isolation Condensers  RHR - Containment Spray Cooling Water System To determine the accuracy of the performance indicator data reported during those periods, the inspectors used definitions and guidance contained in Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Document 99-02, condition reports, mitigating systems performance index derivation reports, event reports, and NRC integrated inspection reports to validate the accuracy of the submittals.
 
Cooling Water System  
 
To determine the accuracy of the performance indicator data reported during those periods, the inspectors used definitions and guidance contained in Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Document 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 7. The inspectors also reviewed Exelons operator narrative logs, condition reports, mitigating systems performance index derivation reports, event reports, and NRC integrated inspection reports to validate the accuracy of the submittals.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
Line 194: Line 368:


===.2 Emergency Preparedness Performance Indicators (3 Samples)===
===.2 Emergency Preparedness Performance Indicators (3 Samples)===
====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed data for the following three emergency preparedness Performance Indicators (PI):
The inspectors reviewed data for the following three emergency preparedness Performance Indicators (PI):
Line 205: Line 378:


===.3 Occupational Exposure Control Effectiveness (1 sample)===
===.3 Occupational Exposure Control Effectiveness (1 sample)===
====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed implementation of the Occupational Exposure Control Effectiveness performance indicator program. The inspectors reviewed corrective action program records for occurrences involving high radiation areas, very high radiation areas, and unplanned personnel radiation exposures since the last inspection in this area. The review was against the applicable criteria specified in NEI 99-02. The purpose of this review was to verify that occurrences that met NEI criteria were recognized and identified as performance indicators.
The inspectors reviewed implementation of the Occupational Exposure Control Effectiveness performance indicator program. The inspectors reviewed corrective action program records for occurrences involving high radiation areas, very high radiation areas, and unplanned personnel radiation exposures since the last inspection in this area. The review was against the applicable criteria specified in NEI 99-02. The purpose of this review was to verify that occurrences that met NEI criteria were recognized and identified as performance indicators.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
Line 213: Line 385:


===.4 Radiological Effluent Technical Specification/Offsite Dose Calculation Manual===
===.4 Radiological Effluent Technical Specification/Offsite Dose Calculation Manual===
Radiological Effluent Occurrences (1 sample)
===Radiological Effluent Occurrences (1 sample)===
 
====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed the implementation of the Radiological Effluents Technical Specification/Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (RETS/ODCM) performance indicator program. The inspectors reviewed corrective action program records and projected monthly and quarterly dose assessment results due to radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent releases for the past four complete quarters. The review was against the applicable criteria specified in NEI 99-02. The purpose of this review was to verify that occurrences that met NEI criteria were recognized and identified as performance indicators.
The inspectors reviewed the implementation of the Radiological Effluents Technical Specification/Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (RETS/ODCM) performance indicator program. The inspectors reviewed corrective action program records and projected monthly and quarterly dose assessment results due to radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent releases for the past four complete quarters. The review was against the applicable criteria specified in NEI 99-02. The purpose of this review was to verify that occurrences that met NEI criteria were recognized and identified as performance indicators.


assessments associated with identification of localized ground water contamination within the restricted area.
As part of this review, the inspectors also reviewed Exelons evaluations and public dose assessments associated with identification of localized ground water contamination within the restricted area.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings were identified.  
No findings were identified.
{{a|4OA2}}
 
{{a|4OA2}}
 
==4OA2 Problem Identification and Resolution==
==4OA2 Problem Identification and Resolution==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71152|count=3}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71152|count=3}}


===.1 Routine Review of Problem Identification and Resolution Activities===
===.1 Routine Review of Problem Identification and Resolution Activities===
====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
inspectors routinely reviewed issues during baseline inspection activities and plant status reviews to verify that Exelon entered issues into the corrective action program at an appropriate threshold, gave adequate attention to timely corrective actions, and identified and addressed adverse trends. In order to assist with the identification of repetitive equipment failures and specific human performance issues for follow-up, the inspectors performed a daily screening of items entered into the corrective action program and periodically attended condition report screening meetings.
As required by Inspection Procedure 71152, Problem Identification and Resolution, the inspectors routinely reviewed issues during baseline inspection activities and plant status reviews to verify that Exelon entered issues into the corrective action program at an appropriate threshold, gave adequate attention to timely corrective actions, and identified and addressed adverse trends. In order to assist with the identification of repetitive equipment failures and specific human performance issues for follow-up, the inspectors performed a daily screening of items entered into the corrective action program and periodically attended condition report screening meetings.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
Line 235: Line 407:


===.2 Semi-Annual Trend Review===
===.2 Semi-Annual Trend Review===
====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors performed a semi-annual review of site issues, as required by Inspection indicate the existence of more significant safety issues. The inspectors performed a focused review on issue reports screened as human performance issues to determine if there were trends or precursors and to review the effectiveness of corrective actions.
The inspectors performed a semi-annual review of site issues, as required by Inspection Procedure 71152, Problem Identification and Resolution, to identify trends that might indicate the existence of more significant safety issues. The inspectors performed a focused review on issue reports screened as human performance issues to determine if there were trends or precursors and to review the effectiveness of corrective actions.


The inspectors reviewed issue reports generated during the third and fourth quarter of 2013 to determine if the issue reports were screened and investigated in accordance with Exelon procedures. The inspectors also reviewed issue reports for the third and fourth quarters of 2013 to assess if trends exist in various subject areas (equipment problems, human performance issues, etc.), as well as individual issues identified during the NRC daily condition report review (Section 4OA2.1).
The inspectors reviewed issue reports generated during the third and fourth quarter of 2013 to determine if the issue reports were screened and investigated in accordance with Exelon procedures. The inspectors also reviewed issue reports for the third and fourth quarters of 2013 to assess if trends exist in various subject areas (equipment problems, human performance issues, etc.), as well as individual issues identified during the NRC daily condition report review (Section 4OA2.1).


====b. Findings and Observations====
====b. Findings and Observations====
No findings were identified. The inspectors noted that Oyster Creek is generating issue reports at an appropriate rate and threshold. No discernable new trends were identified.
No findings were identified.
 
The inspectors noted that Oyster Creek is generating issue reports at an appropriate rate and threshold. No discernable new trends were identified.


The inspectors noted that issues were generally screened appropriately and investigations were assigned in accordance with Exelon corrective action program procedures.
The inspectors noted that issues were generally screened appropriately and investigations were assigned in accordance with Exelon corrective action program procedures.


The inspectors noted that issue reports pertaining to the feed and condensate systems were properly screened and evaluated resulting in this system being placed in a(1) monitoring status in accordance with the maintenance rule.
The inspectors noted that issue reports pertaining to the feed and condensate systems were properly screened and evaluated resulting in this system being placed in a(1)monitoring status in accordance with the maintenance rule.
 
The inspectors noted that human performance issues were generally self-identified by the department effected by the issue. The inspectors also noted that for the operations department, approximately 40 percent of the issues were identified by oversight organizations, which was at a higher percentage when compared to other departments.


The inspectors noted that human performance issues were generally self-identified by the department effected by the issue. The inspectors also noted that for the operations department, approximately 40 percent of the issues were identified by oversight organizations, which was at a higher percentage when compared to other departments. The issues identified by the oversight organizations tended to be more insightful than those that were self-identified. For example, oversight organizations were responsible for identification of all the human performance issues related to operability and functionality determinations. The inspectors discussed with plant management that operations department could be more self-critical when reviewing their performance.
The issues identified by the oversight organizations tended to be more insightful than those that were self-identified. For example, oversight organizations were responsible for identification of all the human performance issues related to operability and functionality determinations. The inspectors discussed with plant management that operations department could be more self-critical when reviewing their performance.


===.3 Annual Sample: Review of the Operator Work-Around Program===
===.3 Annual Sample: Review of the Operator Work-Around Program===
====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed the cumulative effects of the existing operator workarounds, operator burdens, existing operator aids and disabled alarms, and open main control room deficiencies to identify any effect on emergency operating procedure operator actions, and any impact on possible initiating events and mitigating systems. The inspectors evaluated whether station personnel had identified, assessed, and reviewed operator workarounds as specified in Exelon procedure OP-AA-102-103, Operator Work-Around Program.
The inspectors reviewed the cumulative effects of the existing operator workarounds, operator burdens, existing operator aids and disabled alarms, and open main control room deficiencies to identify any effect on emergency operating procedure operator actions, and any impact on possible initiating events and mitigating systems. The inspectors evaluated whether station personnel had identified, assessed, and reviewed operator workarounds as specified in Exelon procedure OP-AA-102-103, Operator Work-Around Program.


room distractions to minimize operator burdens. The inspectors reviewed the system used to track these operator workarounds and recent Exelon self-assessments of the program. The inspectors also toured the control room and discussed the current operator workarounds with the operators to ensure the items were being addressed on a schedule consistent with their relative safety significance.
The inspectors reviewed Exelons process to identify, prioritize and resolve main control room distractions to minimize operator burdens. The inspectors reviewed the system used to track these operator workarounds and recent Exelon self-assessments of the program. The inspectors also toured the control room and discussed the current operator workarounds with the operators to ensure the items were being addressed on a schedule consistent with their relative safety significance.


====b. Findings and Observations====
====b. Findings and Observations====
No findings were identified.
No findings were identified.


The inspectors determined that the issues reviewed did not adversely affect the capability of the operators to implement abnormal or emergency operating procedures. The inspectors also verified that Exelon entered operator workarounds and burdens into the corrective action program at an appropriate threshold and planned or implemented corrective actions commensurate with their safety significance.  
The inspectors determined that the issues reviewed did not adversely affect the capability of the operators to implement abnormal or emergency operating procedures.
 
The inspectors also verified that Exelon entered operator workarounds and burdens into the corrective action program at an appropriate threshold and planned or implemented corrective actions commensurate with their safety significance.
 
{{a|4OA3}}
{{a|4OA3}}
==4OA3 Follow-Up of Events and Notices of Enforcement Discretion==
==4OA3 Follow-Up of Events and Notices of Enforcement Discretion==
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71153|count=2}}
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71153|count=2}}


===.1 Plant Events===
===.1 Plant Events===
====a. Inspection Scope====
For the plant events listed below, the inspectors reviewed and/or observed plant parameters, reviewed personnel performance, and evaluated performance of mitigating systems. The inspectors communicated the plant events to appropriate regional personnel, and compared the event details with criteria contained in IMC 0309, Reactive Inspection Decision Basis for Reactors, for consideration of potential reactive inspection activities. As applicable, the inspectors verified that Exelon made appropriate emergency classification assessments and properly reported the event in accordance with 10 CFR Parts 50.72 and 50.73. The inspectors reviewed Exelons follow-up actions related to the events to assure that Exelon implemented appropriate corrective actions commensurate with their safety significance.


====a. Inspection Scope====
Loss of vacuum scram during startup from maintenance outage on October 6, 2013
For the plant events listed below, the inspectors reviewed and/or observed plant parameters, reviewed personnel performance, and evaluated performance of mitigating systems. The inspectors communicated the plant events to appropriate regional personnel, and compared the event details with criteria contained in IMC 0309,  inspection activities. As applicable, the inspectors verified that Exelon made appropriate emergency classification assessments and properly reported the event in accordance -up actions related to the events to assure that Exelon implemented appropriate corrective actions commensurate with their safety significance.


Loss of vacuum scram during startup from maintenance outage on October 6, 2013  High pressure manual scram during turbine valve testing on December 14, 2013.
High pressure manual scram during turbine valve testing on December 14, 2013.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings were identified.  
No findings were identified.
{{a|4OA5}}
 
{{a|4OA5}}
 
==4OA5 Other Activities==
==4OA5 Other Activities==
===.1 Buried Piping, TI-2515/182, Phase 2 (1 sample)===
===.1 Buried Piping, TI-2515/182, Phase 2 (1 sample)===
====a. Inspection Scope====
The licensees buried piping and underground piping and tanks program was inspected in accordance with paragraphs 03.02.a of the Temporary Instruction (TI) 2515/182, and it was confirmed that activities which correspond to the completion dates, specified in the program, which have passed since the Phase 1 inspection was conducted, have been completed.


====a. Inspection Scope====
The licensees buried piping and underground piping and tanks program was inspected in accordance with paragraph 03.02.b of the TI and responses to specific questions found in www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops-experience/buried-pipe-ti-phase-2-insp-req-2011-11-16.pdf were submitted to the NRC headquarters staff.
underground piping and tanks program was inspected in accordance with paragraphs 03.02.a of the Temporary Instruction (TI) 2515/182, and it was confirmed that activities which correspond to the completion dates, specified in the program, which have passed since the Phase 1 inspection was conducted, have been completed. in accordance with paragraph 03.02.b of the TI and responses to specific questions found in www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops-experience/buried-pipe-ti-phase-2-insp-req-2011-11-16.pdf were submitted to the NRC headquarters staff.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings were identified.  
No findings were identified.
{{a|4OA6}}
 
{{a|4OA6}}
 
==4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit==
==4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit==
On January 16, 2014, the inspectors presented the inspection results to Mr. G. Stathes, Site Vice President, and other members of the Oyster Creek staff. The inspectors verified that no proprietary information was retained by the inspectors or documented in this report.
On January 16, 2014, the inspectors presented the inspection results to Mr. G. Stathes, Site Vice President, and other members of the Oyster Creek staff. The inspectors verified that no proprietary information was retained by the inspectors or documented in this report.
Line 293: Line 476:


==KEY POINTS OF CONTACT==
==KEY POINTS OF CONTACT==
Exelon Personnel
Exelon Personnel  
: [[contact::G. Stathes]], Site Vice-President  
: [[contact::G. Stathes]], Site Vice-President  
: [[contact::R. Peak]], Plant Manager  
: [[contact::R. Peak]], Plant Manager  
: [[contact::M. Ford]], Director, Operations
: [[contact::M. Ford]], Director, Operations  
: [[contact::G. Malone]], Director, Engineering  
: [[contact::G. Malone]], Director, Engineering  
: [[contact::J. Dostal]], Director, Maintenance  
: [[contact::J. Dostal]], Director, Maintenance  
: [[contact::C. Symonds]], Director, Training  
: [[contact::C. Symonds]], Director, Training  
: [[contact::D. DiCello]], Director, Work Management  
: [[contact::D. DiCello]], Director, Work Management  
: [[contact::M. McAllister]], Engineering Programs
: [[contact::J. McCarthy]], Certified Health Physicist
: [[contact::M. McKenna]], Manager, Regulatory Assurance  
: [[contact::M. McKenna]], Manager, Regulatory Assurance  
: [[contact::M. Nixon]], Chemistry Specialist  
: [[contact::M. Nixon]], Chemistry Specialist  
: [[contact::M. Chanda]], Emergency Preparedness Manager  
: [[contact::M. Chanda]], Emergency Preparedness Manager  
: [[contact::T. Farenga]], Radiation Protection Manager
: [[contact::T. Farenga]], Radiation Protection Manager  
: [[contact::J. Renda]], Manager, Environmental/Chemistry  
: [[contact::J. Renda]], Manager, Environmental/Chemistry  
: [[contact::T. Keenan]], Manager, Site Security  
: [[contact::T. Keenan]], Manager, Site Security  
: [[contact::P. Bloss]], Senior Manager, Plant Engineering  
: [[contact::P. Bloss]], Senior Manager, Plant Engineering  
: [[contact::H. Ray]], Senior Manager, Design Engineering
: [[contact::H. Ray]], Senior Manager, Design Engineering  
: [[contact::H. Ray]], Manager Engineering Programs
: [[contact::E. Swain]], Shift Operations Superintendent  
: [[contact::E. Swain]], Shift Operations Superintendent  
: [[contact::J. Chrisley]], Regulatory Assurance Specialist  
: [[contact::J. Chrisley]], Regulatory Assurance Specialist  
: [[contact::D. Moore]], Regulatory Assurance Specialist  
: [[contact::D. Moore]], Regulatory Assurance Specialist  
: [[contact::K. Paez]], Regulatory Assurance Specialist    
: [[contact::K. Paez]], Regulatory Assurance Specialist  
: [[contact::K. Wolf]], Radiological Engineering Supervisor
: [[contact::J. Bills]], Chemistry Supervisor
: [[contact::J. Murphy]], Radiological Engineer
 
==LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, DISCUSSED, AND UPDATED==
==LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, DISCUSSED, AND UPDATED==
None  
None  
 
==LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED==
==LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED==
==Section 1R01: Adverse Weather Protection==
===Procedures===
: WC-AA-107, Seasonal Readiness, Revision 12
: OP-OC-108-109-1002, Cold Weather Freeze Inspection, Revision 4 322, Service Water System, Revision 83 341, Emergency Diesel Generator Operation, Revision 105   
: Attachment
===Condition Reports===
(IRs)
: 1161509
: 1169462
: Maintenance Orders/Work Orders
: C2029675 A2326235 A2238096 A2321889
===Miscellaneous===
: Oyster Creek Winter Execution Morning Plant Status Report, dated December 13, 2013 Oyster Creek Certification of 2013-2014 Winter Readiness, dated November 15, 2013
==Section 1R04: Equipment Alignment==
===Procedures===
: 341, Emergency Diesel Generator Operation, Revision 105
: 330, Standby Gas Treatment System, Revision 56 302.1, Control Rod Drive System, Revision 114
===Miscellaneous===
: 3E-862-21-1000, Emergency Diesel Generator Diesel Fuel Oil Start and Transfer System,
: Revision 24 3E-861-21-1000, Emergency Diesel Generator Air Cooling System, Revision 11 3E-861-21-1001, Emergency Diesel Generator Water Cooling System, Revision 11 3E-861-21-1002, Emergency Diesel Generator Lube Oil System, Revision 12
==Section 1R05: Fire Protection==
===Procedures===
: CC-AA-211, Fire Protection Program, Revision 3 101.2, Oyster Creek Site Fire Protection Program, Revision 69
: OP-OC-201-008-1014, MG Set Room/Mechanical Equipment room, Revision 0
: OP-OC-201-008-1036, Emergency Diesel Generator Room #2, Revision 2
: OP-OC-201-008- OP-OC-201-008-
==Section 1R12: Maintenance Effectiveness==
===Procedures===
: 612.4.002, Standby Liquid Control System Functional Test, Revision 35
: ER-AA-310, Implementation of the Maintenance Rule, Revision 9
: ER-AA-310-1001, Maintenance Rule Scoping, Revision 4
: ER-AA-310-1003, Maintenance Rule
: Performance Criteria Selection, Revision 4
: ER-AA-310-1005, Maintenance Rule
: Dispositioning between (A1) and (A2), Revision 6
: ABN-17, Feedwater System Abnormal Conditions, Revision 15
===Condition Reports===
(IRs)
: 1545751
: 1487564
: 1574025
: 1575781
: 1430006
: 1537985
: 1549410
: 1550330
: 1550576
: 1549950
: 1551933
: 1555619
: 1530337
: 1394422
: 1518353
: 1520090
: 1520128
: 1521234
: Maintenance Orders/Work Orders R2179280 R2179273 R2179400
: C2030411 A2331315 A2330990 
: Attachment
===Miscellaneous===
: Maintenance Rule Scoping Document, Revision 28 Reactor Protection System Health Report, Q2-2013
==Section 1R13: Maintenance Risk Assessments and Emergent Work Control==
===Procedures===
: OP-OC-108-117-1000, Oyster Creek Protected Equipment Program, Revision 4
: 310, Containment Spray System Operation, Revision 106
: 341, Emergency Diesel Generator Operation, Revision 105
===Condition Reports===
(IRs)
: AR-01574410
: AR-01574497
===Miscellaneous===
: Plant Status/Integrated Work Schedule for October 21, 2013
==Section 1R15: Operability Determinations and Functionality Assessments==
===Procedures===
: 337, 4160 Volt Electrical System, Revision 97 681.4.005, Substation Tour Sheet, Revision 33
===Calculations===
: C-1302-532-E310-050, ESW Elbow Minwall Assessment for the First Elbow off of Pump P-3-3A on the intake structure, Revision 0
===Condition Reports===
(IRs)
: 1581863
: 1584415
: Maintenance Orders/Work Orders
: C2022271
===Miscellaneous===
: VM-OC-5134, JFR Distribution Step Voltage Regulator and
: MJ-XL Voltage Regulator Control Panel, Revision 4
==Section 1R19: Post-Maintenance Testing==
===Procedures===
: 625.4.001, Turbine Over Speed Test and Calibration, Revision 19
: SP-13-001, Test of the Turbine Controls Load Limit at Power, Revision 0 636.4.013, Diesel Generator #2 Load Test, Revision 38
: MA-OC-741-101, Diesel Generator Inspection (24 Month) - Electrical, Revision 11
: MA-AA-716-012, Post Maintenance Testing, Revision 19
: MA-OC-741-103, EDG #2 24 Month Inspection SU and T and Operation, Revision 7 651.4.003, Standby Gas Treatment System
: 10 hour run System 2, Revision 9
===Drawings===
: 233R309, Steam Turbine, Revision 0 
: Attachment
===Condition Reports===
(IRs)
: 1568421
: 1567079
: 1553363
: 1568276
: 1561274
: 1575340
: 1575045
: 1576907
: 1576883
: 1576790
: 1577001
: 1580976
: 1588078
: 1587785
: Maintenance Orders/Work Orders M2337118
: C2030995 R2098132 R2191838 R2068964 R2119244 R2119244 R2151725 R2195797 R2190697 R2190622 R2228091 R2228332 C2031260
==Section 1R20: Refueling and Other Outage Activities==
===Procedures===
: 201, Plant Startup, Revision 86
: SP-13-002, Reactor Recirc Pump Seal Leakage Assessment, Revision 0
: OP-AA-108-108, Unit Restart Review, Revision 15
: OU-OC-103-1001. Shutdown Safety Management Program, Revision 8
===Condition Reports===
(IRs)
: 1587785
: 1580321
: 1588576
: 1588580
: 1588468
: 1588459
: 1588396
: 1588093
: 1588086
: 1588078
: 1588010
: 1587785
: 1587944
: 1587951
: 1588008
: 1586470
: 1500241
: 1586480
: 1586473
: 1586521
: 1586564
: 1586547
: 1586484
: 1586475
: 1586474
: 1586436
: 1586431
: 1586430
: 1586417
: 1586372
: 1586364
: 1586355
===Miscellaneous===
: Departmental Startup Checklists, dated December 17, 2013
==Section 1R22: Surveillance Testing==
===Procedures===
: 312.9, Primary Containment Control, Revision 58
: ER-AB-331-1006, BWR Reactor Coolant System Leakage Monitoring and Action Plan,
: Revision 2 604.4.016, Torus to Drywell Vacuum Breaker Operability and In-Service Test, Revision 1 636.4.015, Diesel Generator #1 Fast Start Test, Revision 20
===Calculations===
: C-1302-243-5310--to-Drywell Vacuum Breaker
: Verification of Test
===Procedure===
# 604.4.016, Revision 0
===Work Orders===
: R2228005 R2223664
===Condition Reports===
(IRs)
: 1585233
: 1585230
: 1585224
: 1585222
: 1585214   
: Attachment
===Miscellaneous===
: Technical Specification Log Sheet, dated October 16, 2013 Process Plant Computer Unidentified Leak Rate Trending Data, dated October 16, 2013 Adverse Condition Monitoring and Contingency Plan, Drywell Leakage Monitoring, Revision 4 1-8 Sump Chemical and Radiochemical Analysis data from December 2012 through October 2013
: Section 2RSO5: Radiation Monitoring Instrumentation
===Procedures===
: CY-AA-170-200, Radioactive Effluent Control Program, Revision 1
: CY-AA-130-201, Radiochemistry Quality Control, Revision 2
: CY-AA-170-301, Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Revision 5
: CY-AA-170-1100, Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Program, Revision 1
: CY-AA-170-3010, Cross Reference of Technical Specification, ODCM Requirements and Compliance Requirements, Revision 3
: ER-AA-310, Implementation of Maintenance Rule, Revision 9
: ER-AA-310-1001, Maintenance Rule
: Scoping, Revision 4
: ER-AA-310-1004, Maintenance Rule
: Performance Monitoring, Revision 11
: Audits, Self-Assessments, and Surveillances
: Attachment 3,
: ER-AA-310-1005 (a)(1) Determination Issue Report Number
: 1425606; 661 Area Radiation Monitoring, TB and Stack RAGEMS, dated May 3, 2013
===Condition Reports===
(IRs)
: 1425606
: 1580366
: 1580369
: 1509752
: 1582324
===Miscellaneous===
: Oyster Creek Generating Station Updated Final Safety Analysis Report
: Section 2RSO6:
: Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Treatment
===Procedures===
: OP-831.10, Operation of the G.E. Post-accident Sampling System.
: Post-accident Contingency Procedure, Revision 30
: OP -420, Instrumentation Setpoints, Revision 12
: CY-AA-170-000, Radioactive Effluent and Environmental Monitoring Program, Revision 5
: CY-AA-170-200, Radioactive Effluent Control Program, Revision 1
: CY-AA-170-301, Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Revision 5
: EN-AA-408-4000, Radiological Ground Water Protection Program Implementation, Revision 0
: RP-AA-228, 10CFR 50.75(g) and 10CFR 72.30 (d), Revision 1
: Audits, Self-Assessments, and Surveillances EPRI Groundwater Protection Program: Groundwater Protection Initiative Self-assessment Exelon Oyster Creek Generating Station, October 2013 Oyster Creek
: NEI-07-07 Groundwater Protection Initiative- NEI PEIR Assessment Report, dated February 10, 2010
===Condition Reports===
(IRs)
: 1312660
: 1443464
: 1469681
: 1468818
: 1453970
: 1479674
: 1555060
: 1542396
: 1581846   
: Attachment
===Miscellaneous===
: Oyster Creek Generating Station Updated Final Safety Analysis Report
: RP-AA-228, Rev 1 Attachment 1 Item 33 Isolation Condenser Actuation, dated July 23, 2012
: OC-12-06 Radiation Protection Calculation and Position Paper
: 2012 to 2013 10
: CFR 61 Waste Stream Analysis, dated September 17, 2012
: RP-AA-228, List of 10
: CFR 50.75(g) Decommissioning Records, dated April 9, 2013
: Section 2RSO7:
: Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program
===Procedures===
: CY-AA-170-000, Radioactive Effluent and Environmental Monitoring Program, Revision 5
: CY-AA-170-100, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, Revision 2
: CY-AA-170-1000, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program and Meteorological Program Implementation, Revision 7
: CY-AA-170-301, Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Revision 5
: Audits, Self-Assessments, and Surveillances
: LS-AA-126-1005 Check-in Self-Assessments
: 1134291-02 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, dated May 18, 2011
===Condition Reports===
(IRs)
: 1581832
: 1557078
: 1534600
===Miscellaneous===
: Oyster Creek Generating Station Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Revision 18
==Section 4OA1: Performance Indicator Verification==
===Procedures===
: LS-AA-2001, Collecting and Reporting of NRC Performance Indicator Data, Revision 14
: LS-AA-2200, Mitigating System Performance Index Data Acquisition and Reporting, Revision 5
: LS-AA-2150, Monthly Data Elements for RETS/ODCM Radiological Effluent Occurrences, Revision 5
: LS-AA-2140, Monthly Data Elements for NRC Occupational Exposure Control Effectiveness, Revision 5
: EP-AA-125-1001, EP Performance Indicator Guidance, Revision 7
: EP-AA-125-1002, ERO Performance
: Performance Indicators Guidance, Revision 9
: LS-AA-2110, Monthly Data Elements for NRC Emergency Response Organization (ERO) Drill Participation, Revision 6
: LS-AA-2130, Monthly Data Elements for NRC Alert and Notification System (ANS) Reliability, Revision 5
===Condition Reports===
(IRs)
: 1436174
===Miscellaneous===
: Nuclear Energy Institute Document 99- Oyster Creek MSPI Basis Document Oyster Creek Unit 1 - 4Q2012
: 3Q20123MSPI Data, dated December 11, 2013 MSPI Margin Monthly Reports
: 4Q2012
: 3Q2012   
: Attachment
==Section 4OA2: Problem Identification and Resolution==
===Procedures===
: 307, Isolation Condenser System, Revision 123 308, Emergency Core Cooling System Operation, Revision 92 337, 4160 Volt Electrical System, Revision 97 341, Emergency Diesel Generator Operation, Revision 105
: ABN-32, Abnormal Intake Level, Revision 24
: OP-AA-102-103, Operator Work-Around Program, Revision 3
: OP-AA-102-103-1001, Operator Burden and Plant Significant Decisions Impact Assessment Program, Revision 4
: OP-AA-108-101, Control of Equipment and System Status, Revision 11
: OP-AA-115-101, Operator Aid Postings, Revision 2
: OP-OC-102-106-1001, Control of Time Critical Operator Actions at Oyster Creek, Revision 0
: LS-AA-125, Corrective Action Program (CAP) Procedure, Revision 17
: OP-AA-108-105, Equipment Deficiency Identification and Documentation, Revision 10
: OP-AA-101-113-1001, Station Event Free Clock, EFC) Program, Revision 16
: LS-AA-120, Issue Identification and Screening Process, Revision 15
===Condition Reports===
(IRs)
: 0565487
: 1273243
: 1344380
: 1461904
: 1463788
: 1466576
: 1474941
: 1485213
: 1488156
: 1513542
: 1535091
: 1553363
: 1574846
: 1574924
: 1575324
: 1575369
: 1576211
: 1598442
: 1567320
: 1568481
: 1597924
: 1569381
: 1581832
: 1563637
: 1544687
: 1544688
: 1567320
: 1567196
: 1568503
: 1586470
: 1565753
: 1597041
: 1480587
: 1487918
: 1589698
: 1594080
: 1595362
: 1596853
: 1597328
: 1598669
: 1575333
: 1477563
: 1213021
: 1339099
: 1484402
: 1521677
: 1544060
===Miscellaneous===
: Abnormal Component Position Notebook, dated 10/22/13
: AR 01431041-01, Recurring Quarterly Operations Burden Review, dated January 17, 2013
: AR 01466172-01, Recurring Quarterly Operations Burden Review, dated March 26, 2013
: AR 01505813-01, Recurring Quarterly Operations Burden Review, dated July 22, 2013 Control Room Degraded Components Database, dated October 24, 2013 Control Room Narrative Log, dated October 14, 2013 through October 25, 2013
: Disabled Alarms Database, dated October 24, 2013 Post 1R24 Elevated Off gas Flow Rates Adverse Condition Monitoring and Contingency Plan, Revision 1 MWe Indication in the MCR Adverse Condition Monitoring and Contingency Plan, Revision 3 Drywell Leakage Monitoring Adverse Condition Monitoring and Contingency Plan, Revision 5 CWP 1-4 FAP Elevated Temperature Adverse Condition Monitoring and Contingency Plan, Revision 1 Adverse Condition Monitoring and Contingency Plan, Revision 2 Main Control Room Deficiencies Database, dated October 24, 2013 Main Control Room Distractions Database, dated October 24, 2013
: OP-AA-102-103-1001 Attachment 1, Operator Burden Aggregate Assessment, dated
: August 20, 2013
: OP-AA-106-101-1006, Operational and Technical Decision Making Process Notebook,  dated October 23, 2013
: OP-AA-108-115-1001, Operability Determination Notebook, dated October 23, 2013
: OP-AA-108-101, Temporary Configuration Change Notebook, dated October 23, 2013 
: Attachment
: Operator Aids Notebook, dated October 23, 2013 Operator Challenge Database, dated October 24, 2013 Operator Work-Around Database, dated October 24, 2013
==Section 4OA3: Follow-up of Events and Notices of Enforcement Discretion==
===Procedures===
: ABN-9, Electric Pressure Regulator Malfunction, Revision 8
: EMG-SP11, Alternate Pressure Control Systems
: Isolation Condensers, Revision 1
: EMG-SP3, CRD System Operation, Revision 0
: EMG-SP2, Feed and Condensate System Operation, Revision 0
: AD-OC-103, EOP/SAM Program Control, Revision 7
: ABN-1, Reactor Scram, Revision 11 2000-BAS-
: ABN-10, Turbine Generator Trip, Revision 13 625.4.002, Main Turbine Surveillances, Revision 91
: RAP-J2b, Cond Vac Lo/Turb Trip II, Revision 0
: EP-AA-1010, Radiological Emergency Plan Annex for Oyster Creek Station, Revision 7
===Drawings===
: 233R309, Turbine Control System, Revision 13
===Condition Reports===
(IRs)
: 1597207
: 1597206
: 1597572
: 1597041
: 1597144
: 1597136
: 1597234
: 1597215
: 1597278
===Miscellaneous===
: Post Transient Review Package for IR1597041 Post Transient Walkdown for Feedwater System, dated December 14. 2013 Post Transient Walkdown for Condensate System, dated December 14. 2013 Post Transient Walkdown for Isolation Condenser System, dated December 14. 2013 Reactor Coolant Temperature Heatup/Cooldown Plot, dated December 14, 2013 Oyster Creek Operations Logs for December 14, 2013
: NEI 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 7 Prompt Investigation for
: IR 1597041 Event Notice 49633
: NUREG-1022, Event Report Guidelines 10CFR50.72 and 50.73, Revision 3


==Section 4OA5: Other Activities==
: ProcedureER-AA-5400, Exelon Nuclear Buried Piping and RAW Water Corrosion Program Guide, Revision 5
: ER-AA-5400-1003, BPRWCP Performance Indicators, Revision 4
===Miscellaneous===
: NRC Temporary Instruction 2515/182, 08/08/13; Review of the Implementation of the Industry Initiative to Control Degradation of Underground Piping and Tanks
: EPRI document, Recommendations for an Effective Program to Control the Degradation of
: Buried Pipe, December 2008
: EPRI document, Recommendations for an Effective Program to Control the Degradation of Buried and Underground Piping and Tanks (1016456, Revision 1, 2010) 
: Attachment
: NEI 09-14 (Initial Issue), November 2009 Guideline for the Management of Underground
: Piping and Tank Integrity -  -- --  - -    -
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 23:32, 10 January 2025

IR 05000219-13-005; 10/01/2013 - 12/31/2013; Exelon Energy Company, LLC, Oyster Creek Generating Station
ML14030A332
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 01/30/2014
From: Cook W
NRC/RGN-I/DRP/PB6
To: Pacilio M
Exelon Nuclear
COOK, WA
References
IR-13-005
Download: ML14030A332 (27)
v • d • e


Text

January 30, 2014

SUBJECT:

OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION - NRC INTEGRATED INSPECTION REPORT 05000219/2013005

Dear Mr. Pacilio:

On December 31, 2013, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at your Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. The enclosed inspection report documents the inspection results, which were discussed on January 16, 2014 with Mr. G.

Stathes, Site Vice President, 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.

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

As a result of the Safety Culture Common Language Initiative, the terminology and coding of cross-cutting aspects were revised beginning in calendar year (CY) 2014. New cross-cutting aspects identified in CY 2014 will be coded under the latest revision to IMC 0310. Cross-cutting aspects identified in the last six months of 2013 using the previous terminology will be converted to the latest revision in accordance with the cross-reference in IMC 0310. The revised cross-cutting aspects will be evaluated for cross-cutting themes and potential substantive cross-cutting issues in accordance with IMC 0305 starting with the CY 2014 mid-cycle assessment review.

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

Sincerely,

/RA/

William A. Cook, Acting Chief Reactor Projects Branch 6 Division of Reactor Projects

Docket Nos.: 50-219 License Nos.: DPR-16

Enclosure:

Inspection Report 05000219/2013005

w/Attachment: Supplementary Information

REGION I==

Docket Nos.:

50-219

License Nos.:

DPR-16

Report No.:

05000219/2013005

Exelon:

Exelon Nuclear

Facility:

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station

Location:

Forked River, New Jersey

Dates:

October 1, 2013 - December 31, 2013

Inspectors:

J. Kulp, Senior Resident Inspector

A. Patel, Resident Inspector J. Schoppy, Senior Reactor Inspector T. OHara, Reactor Inspector B. Dionne, Health Physicists Inspector E. Burket, Emergency Preparedness Specialist

Approved By:

William A. Cook, Acting Chief

Reactor Projects Branch 6

Division of Reactor Projects

Enclosure

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

IR 05000219/2013005; 10/01/2013 - 12/31/2013; Exelon Energy Company, LLC, Oyster Creek

Generating Station;

This report covered a three-month period of inspection by resident inspectors and announced inspections performed by regional inspectors. The NRCs program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 4, dated December 2006.

No findings were identified.

REPORT DETAILS

Summary of Plant Status

Oyster Creek began the inspection period in the 1M30 maintenance outage and commenced reactor startup on October 3, 2013. On October 3, 2013 during power ascension following criticality, an automatic scram occurred due to intermediate range monitor high flux scram signal while withdrawing source range detectors. On October 6, 2013 during power ascension, operators manually scrammed the reactor due to loss of condenser vacuum and Oyster Creek entered a forced outage (1F31). After repairs to the condenser, Oyster Creek commenced startup on October 7 and returned to full power operation on October 11, 2013. On November 3, 2013, Oyster Creek experienced an unexpected trip of the E recirculation pump and reactor power stabilized at 92% power. On November 3, 2013, Oyster Creek achieved 100% power with the four remaining recirculation pumps. On November 16, 2013, operators shutdown the reactor and Oyster Creek entered a planned maintenance outage (1M32) to repair the E recirculation pump. On November 21, 2013, Oyster Creek commenced startup and returned to full power on November 23, 2013. On December 14, 2013 during turbine valve testing, operators manually scrammed the reactor due to high reactor pressure and Oyster Creek entered a forced outage (1F33). After repairs to the turbine control system, Oyster Creek commenced startup on December 18, 2013 and returned to full power operation on December 20,

REACTOR SAFETY

Cornerstones: Initiating Events, Mitigating Systems, and Barrier Integrity

1R01 Adverse Weather Protection

Main article: IP 71111.01

.1 Readiness for Seasonal Extreme Weather Conditions

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors performed a review of Exelons readiness for the onset of seasonal cold temperatures. The review focused on the intake structure and the emergency diesel generators (EDGs). The inspectors reviewed the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), technical specifications, control room logs, and the corrective action program to determine what temperatures or other seasonal weather could challenge these systems, and to ensure Exelon personnel had adequately prepared for these challenges.

The inspectors reviewed station procedures, including Exelons seasonal weather preparation procedure and applicable operating procedures. The inspectors performed walkdowns of the selected systems to ensure station personnel identified issues that could challenge the operability of the systems during cold weather conditions.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

==1R04 Equipment Alignment

==

.1 Partial System Walkdowns

Main article: IP 71111.04Q

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors performed partial walkdowns of the following systems:

Standby gas treatment system #1 on November 5, 2013

B control rod drive pump on November 25, 2013

The inspectors selected these systems based on their risk-significance relative to the reactor safety cornerstones at the time they were inspected. The inspectors reviewed applicable operating procedures, system diagrams, the UFSAR, technical specifications, work orders, condition reports, and the impact of ongoing work activities on redundant trains of equipment in order to identify conditions that could have impacted system performance of their intended safety functions. The inspectors also performed field walkdowns of accessible portions of the systems to verify system components and support equipment were aligned correctly and were operable. The inspectors examined the material condition of the components and observed operating parameters of equipment to verify that there were no deficiencies. The inspectors also reviewed whether Exelon staff had properly identified equipment issues and entered them into the corrective action program for resolution with the appropriate significance characterization.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

.2 Full System Walkdown

Main article: IP 71111.04S

a. Inspection Scope

On October 22 and 23, 2013, the inspectors performed a complete system walkdown of accessible portions of the #1 emergency diesel generator to verify the existing equipment lineup was correct. The inspectors reviewed operating procedures, surveillance tests, drawings, equipment line-up check-off lists, and the UFSAR to verify the system was aligned to perform its required safety functions. The inspectors also reviewed electrical power availability, component lubrication and equipment cooling, hangar and support functionality, and operability of support systems. The inspectors performed field walkdowns of accessible portions of the systems to verify system components and support equipment were aligned correctly and operable. The inspectors examined the material condition of the components and observed operating parameters of equipment to verify that there were no deficiencies. Additionally, the inspectors reviewed a sample of related condition reports and work orders to ensure Exelon appropriately evaluated and resolved any deficiencies.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

==1R05 Fire Protection

==

.1 Resident Inspector Quarterly Walkdowns

Main article: IP 71111.05Q

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors conducted tours of the areas listed below to assess the material condition and operational status of fire protection features. The inspectors verified that Exelon controlled combustible materials and ignition sources in accordance with administrative procedures. The inspectors verified that fire protection and suppression equipment was available for use as specified in the area pre-fire plan, and passive fire barriers were maintained in good material condition. The inspectors also verified that station personnel implemented compensatory measures for out of service, degraded, or inoperable fire protection equipment, as applicable, in accordance with procedures.

Motor-generator set room on October 30, 2013

Emergency diesel generator room #2 on October 30,2013

Reactor building 23 elevation on October 30, 2013

4160 volt switchgear room and C battery room on October 30,2013

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

1R12 Maintenance Effectiveness

Main article: IP 71111.12

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed the samples listed below to assess the effectiveness of maintenance activities on systems, structures and components (SSC) performance and reliability. The inspectors reviewed system health reports, corrective action program documents, maintenance work orders, and maintenance rule basis documents to ensure that Exelon was identifying and properly evaluating performance problems within the scope of the maintenance rule. For each sample selected, the inspectors verified that the SSC was properly scoped into the maintenance rule in accordance with 10 CFR 50.65 and verified that the (a)(2) performance criteria established by Exelon staff was reasonable. As applicable, for SSCs classified as (a)(1), the inspectors assessed the adequacy of goals and corrective actions to return these SSCs to (a)(2). Additionally, the inspectors ensured that Exelon staff was identifying and addressing common cause failures that occurred within and across maintenance rule system boundaries.

Reactor protection system blown fuse issues on October 29, 2013

Standby liquid control system relief valve as-found lift pressure issues on November 4, 2013

Main feedwater regulating valve failures root cause evaluation on November 5, 2013

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

1R13 Maintenance Risk Assessments and Emergent Work Control

Main article: IP 71111.13

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed station evaluation and management of plant risk for the maintenance and emergent work activities listed below to verify that Exelon performed the appropriate risk assessments prior to removing equipment for work. The inspectors selected these activities based on potential risk significance relative to the reactor safety cornerstones. As applicable for each activity, the inspectors verified that Exelon personnel performed risk assessments as required by 10 CFR 50.65(a)(4) and that the assessments were accurate and complete. When Exelon performed emergent work, the inspectors verified that operations personnel promptly assessed and managed plant risk.

The inspectors reviewed the scope of maintenance work and discussed the results of the assessment with the stations probabilistic risk analyst to verify plant conditions were consistent with the risk assessment. The inspectors also reviewed the technical specification requirements and inspected portions of redundant safety systems, when applicable, to verify risk analysis assumptions were valid and applicable requirements were met.

Containment spray system #1 and emergency service water system #1 out of service for planned surveillance testing on October 16, 2013

Planned maintenance on emergency diesel generator #2 from October 21 to 25, 2013

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

1R15 Operability Determinations and Functionality Assessments

Main article: IP 71111.15

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed operability determinations for the following degraded or non-conforming conditions:

C emergency service water system piping degradation on November 12, 2013

Bank 6 startup transformer C phase voltage regulator not in automatic on

November 14, 2013

The inspectors selected these issues based on the risk significance of the associated components and systems. The inspectors evaluated the technical adequacy of the operability determinations to assess whether technical specification operability was properly justified and the subject component or system remained available such that no unrecognized increase in risk occurred. The inspectors compared the operability and design criteria in the appropriate sections of the technical specifications and UFSAR to Exelons evaluations to determine whether the components or systems were operable.

Where compensatory measures were required to maintain operability, the inspectors determined whether the measures in place would function as intended and were properly controlled by Exelon. The inspectors determined, where appropriate, compliance with bounding limitations associated with the evaluations.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

1R19 Post-Maintenance Testing

Main article: IP 71111.19

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed the post-maintenance tests for the maintenance activities listed below to verify that procedures and test activities ensured system operability and functional capability. The inspectors reviewed the test procedure to verify that the procedure adequately tested the safety functions that may have been affected by the maintenance activity, that the acceptance criteria in the procedure was consistent with the information in the applicable licensing basis and/or design basis documents, and that the procedure had been properly reviewed and approved. The inspectors also witnessed the test or reviewed test data to verify that the test results adequately demonstrated restoration of the affected safety functions.

Main turbine overspeed trip device after speed relay replacement (M2337118) on October 10, 2013

Average power range monitor #4 after power supply replacement (C2030995) on October 15, 2013

Containment spray system #2 after drywell discharge valve planned maintenance (R2098132) on October 15, 2013

Emergency diesel generator #2 after planned 24 month overhaul (R2228091) on October 25, 2013

Standby gas treatment system #2 after filter replacement (R2118737) on November 7, 2013

Electromatic relief valve (EMRV) temperature monitors after EMRV temperature monitor switch replacement (C2031260) on November 20, 2013

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

1R20 Refueling and Other Outage Activities

Main article: IP 71111.20

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed the stations work schedule and outage risk plan for planned maintenance outage 1M32. On November 16, 2013, operators shutdown the reactor entered planned maintenance outage 1M32. On November 21, 2013, Oyster Creek commenced startup and returned to full power on November 23, 2013.

The inspectors reviewed Exelons development and implementation of outage plans and schedules to verify that risk, industry experience, previous site-specific problems, and defense-in-depth were considered. During the outage, the inspectors observed portions of the shutdown and cooldown processes and monitored controls associated with the following outage activities:

Configuration management, including maintenance of defense-in-depth, commensurate with the outage plan for the key safety functions and compliance with the applicable technical specifications when taking equipment out of service Implementation of clearance activities and confirmation that tags were properly hung and that equipment was appropriately configured to safely support the associated work or testing

Status and configuration of electrical systems and switchyard activities to ensure that technical specifications were met

Monitoring of decay heat removal operations

Reactor water inventory controls, including flow paths, configurations, alternative means for inventory additions, and controls to prevent inventory loss

Activities that could affect reactivity

Maintenance of secondary containment as required by technical specifications

Identification and resolution of problems related to outage activities

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

1R22 Surveillance Testing

Main article: IP 71111.22

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors observed performance of surveillance tests and/or reviewed test data of selected risk-significant SSCs to assess whether test results satisfied technical specifications, the UFSAR, and Exelon procedure requirements. The inspectors verified that test acceptance criteria were clear, tests demonstrated operational readiness and were consistent with design documentation, test instrumentation had current calibrations and the range and accuracy for the application, tests were performed as written, and applicable test prerequisites were satisfied. Upon test completion, the inspectors considered whether the test results supported that equipment was capable of performing the required safety functions. The inspectors reviewed the following surveillance tests:

Unidentified leak rate verification on October 16, 2013

B emergency service water pump in-service test on October 17, 2013

Emergency diesel generator #1 fast start test on November 11, 2013

Torus to drywell vacuum breaker operability test on November 14, 2013

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

RADIATION SAFETY

Cornerstones: Public Radiation Safety and Occupational Radiation Safety

2RS5 Radiation Monitoring Instrumentation

Main article: IP 71124.05

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed maintenance records, testing records, source check records, calibration records, alarm setpoint calculations and walked down a sample of various radiation monitors including whole-body counters used to detect workers surface and internal contamination to verify proper setup and operation. The inspectors reviewed Exelon and third-party evaluation reports of the radiation monitoring program since the last inspection to look for trends. The inspectors reviewed procedures that govern instrument source checks and calibrations, focusing on instruments used for monitoring transient high radiological conditions, including instruments used for underwater surveys.

The inspectors walked down a representative sample of Exelons effluent radiation monitoring systems and observed Exelon personnel conducting source checks to verify proper operation of the monitors. The inspectors walked down area radiation monitors and continuous air monitors to determine whether they are appropriately positioned relative to the radiation sources or areas they were intended to monitor.

The inspectors reviewed daily performance checks and calibration data to show that the frequency of the calibrations is adequate and there were no indications of degraded performance of laboratory analytical instruments used for radiological analyses.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

2RS6 Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Treatment

Main article: IP 71124.06

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors verified that gaseous and liquid effluent processing systems are maintained so radiological discharges are properly reduced, monitored, and released.

The inspectors also verified the accuracy of the calculations for effluent releases and resultant public doses. The inspectors reviewed Licensee Event Reports, event reports, and/or special reports related to the effluent program to identify any additional focus areas for the inspection based on the scope/breadth of problems described in these reports. The inspectors reviewed Standby Gas Treatment System surveillance test data and walked down portions of the system to assess the material condition and to verify that there were no conditions, improper alignment, or system installation issues that would impact the performance of the system. The inspectors reviewed the methodology Exelon used to determine the effluent stack and vent flow rates.

The inspectors verified that the calculated monthly, quarterly, and annual doses were within the 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, and Technical Specification dose criteria.

Additionally, the inspectors reviewed records of abnormal discharges to ensure that that an evaluation was made of the discharge to satisfy 10 CFR 20.1501, and account for the source term and projected doses to the public.

The inspectors reviewed reported groundwater monitoring results, remediation efforts, changes to the program for identifying and controlling contaminated spills/leaks to groundwater and walked down the remediation facility.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

2RS7 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP)

Main article: IP 71124.07

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed the annual radiological environmental and effluent operating reports and the results of Exelon assessments since the last inspection, to verify that the REMP was implemented in accordance with technical specifications and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM). This review included, monitoring and measurement frequencies, land use census, inter-laboratory comparison program, and analysis of environmental sampling data including reporting the cause of any positive radioactivity detected and any elevated environmental dosimeter results. The inspectors walked down one air sampling station to determine whether it was located as described in the Oyster Creek ODCM, whether it provided a representative sample, and to determine the equipment material condition. The inspectors reviewed the results of Exelons inter-laboratory and intra-laboratory comparison program to verify the adequacy of environmental sample analyses performed by Exelon. The inspectors reviewed Exelons determination of any bias to the data and the overall effect on the REMP.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

OTHER ACTIVITIES

4OA1 Performance Indicator Verification

Main article: IP 71151

.1 Mitigating Systems Performance Index (5 samples)

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed Exelons submittal of the Mitigating Systems Performance Index for the following systems for the period of October 1, 2012 through September 30, 2013:

Emergency AC Power System

High Pressure Injection System

Heat Removal - Isolation Condensers

RHR - Containment Spray

Cooling Water System

To determine the accuracy of the performance indicator data reported during those periods, the inspectors used definitions and guidance contained in Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Document 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 7. The inspectors also reviewed Exelons operator narrative logs, condition reports, mitigating systems performance index derivation reports, event reports, and NRC integrated inspection reports to validate the accuracy of the submittals.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

.2 Emergency Preparedness Performance Indicators (3 Samples)

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed data for the following three emergency preparedness Performance Indicators (PI):

(1) drill and exercise performance;
(2) emergency response organization drill participation; and,
(3) alert and notification system reliability. The last NRC emergency preparedness inspection at Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Station was conducted in the fourth calendar quarter of 2012. Therefore, the inspectors reviewed supporting documentation from emergency preparedness drills and equipment tests from the fourth calendar quarter of 2012 through the third calendar quarter of 2013 to verify the accuracy of the reported PI data. The review of the PIs was conducted in accordance with NRC Inspection Procedure 71151. The acceptance criteria documented in NEI 99-02, was used as reference criteria.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

.3 Occupational Exposure Control Effectiveness (1 sample)

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed implementation of the Occupational Exposure Control Effectiveness performance indicator program. The inspectors reviewed corrective action program records for occurrences involving high radiation areas, very high radiation areas, and unplanned personnel radiation exposures since the last inspection in this area. The review was against the applicable criteria specified in NEI 99-02. The purpose of this review was to verify that occurrences that met NEI criteria were recognized and identified as performance indicators.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

.4 Radiological Effluent Technical Specification/Offsite Dose Calculation Manual

Radiological Effluent Occurrences (1 sample)

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed the implementation of the Radiological Effluents Technical Specification/Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (RETS/ODCM) performance indicator program. The inspectors reviewed corrective action program records and projected monthly and quarterly dose assessment results due to radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent releases for the past four complete quarters. The review was against the applicable criteria specified in NEI 99-02. The purpose of this review was to verify that occurrences that met NEI criteria were recognized and identified as performance indicators.

As part of this review, the inspectors also reviewed Exelons evaluations and public dose assessments associated with identification of localized ground water contamination within the restricted area.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

4OA2 Problem Identification and Resolution

Main article: IP 71152

.1 Routine Review of Problem Identification and Resolution Activities

a. Inspection Scope

As required by Inspection Procedure 71152, Problem Identification and Resolution, the inspectors routinely reviewed issues during baseline inspection activities and plant status reviews to verify that Exelon entered issues into the corrective action program at an appropriate threshold, gave adequate attention to timely corrective actions, and identified and addressed adverse trends. In order to assist with the identification of repetitive equipment failures and specific human performance issues for follow-up, the inspectors performed a daily screening of items entered into the corrective action program and periodically attended condition report screening meetings.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

.2 Semi-Annual Trend Review

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors performed a semi-annual review of site issues, as required by Inspection Procedure 71152, Problem Identification and Resolution, to identify trends that might indicate the existence of more significant safety issues. The inspectors performed a focused review on issue reports screened as human performance issues to determine if there were trends or precursors and to review the effectiveness of corrective actions.

The inspectors reviewed issue reports generated during the third and fourth quarter of 2013 to determine if the issue reports were screened and investigated in accordance with Exelon procedures. The inspectors also reviewed issue reports for the third and fourth quarters of 2013 to assess if trends exist in various subject areas (equipment problems, human performance issues, etc.), as well as individual issues identified during the NRC daily condition report review (Section 4OA2.1).

b. Findings and Observations

No findings were identified.

The inspectors noted that Oyster Creek is generating issue reports at an appropriate rate and threshold. No discernable new trends were identified.

The inspectors noted that issues were generally screened appropriately and investigations were assigned in accordance with Exelon corrective action program procedures.

The inspectors noted that issue reports pertaining to the feed and condensate systems were properly screened and evaluated resulting in this system being placed in a(1)monitoring status in accordance with the maintenance rule.

The inspectors noted that human performance issues were generally self-identified by the department effected by the issue. The inspectors also noted that for the operations department, approximately 40 percent of the issues were identified by oversight organizations, which was at a higher percentage when compared to other departments.

The issues identified by the oversight organizations tended to be more insightful than those that were self-identified. For example, oversight organizations were responsible for identification of all the human performance issues related to operability and functionality determinations. The inspectors discussed with plant management that operations department could be more self-critical when reviewing their performance.

.3 Annual Sample: Review of the Operator Work-Around Program

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed the cumulative effects of the existing operator workarounds, operator burdens, existing operator aids and disabled alarms, and open main control room deficiencies to identify any effect on emergency operating procedure operator actions, and any impact on possible initiating events and mitigating systems. The inspectors evaluated whether station personnel had identified, assessed, and reviewed operator workarounds as specified in Exelon procedure OP-AA-102-103, Operator Work-Around Program.

The inspectors reviewed Exelons process to identify, prioritize and resolve main control room distractions to minimize operator burdens. The inspectors reviewed the system used to track these operator workarounds and recent Exelon self-assessments of the program. The inspectors also toured the control room and discussed the current operator workarounds with the operators to ensure the items were being addressed on a schedule consistent with their relative safety significance.

b. Findings and Observations

No findings were identified.

The inspectors determined that the issues reviewed did not adversely affect the capability of the operators to implement abnormal or emergency operating procedures.

The inspectors also verified that Exelon entered operator workarounds and burdens into the corrective action program at an appropriate threshold and planned or implemented corrective actions commensurate with their safety significance.

4OA3 Follow-Up of Events and Notices of Enforcement Discretion

Main article: IP 71153

.1 Plant Events

a. Inspection Scope

For the plant events listed below, the inspectors reviewed and/or observed plant parameters, reviewed personnel performance, and evaluated performance of mitigating systems. The inspectors communicated the plant events to appropriate regional personnel, and compared the event details with criteria contained in IMC 0309, Reactive Inspection Decision Basis for Reactors, for consideration of potential reactive inspection activities. As applicable, the inspectors verified that Exelon made appropriate emergency classification assessments and properly reported the event in accordance with 10 CFR Parts 50.72 and 50.73. The inspectors reviewed Exelons follow-up actions related to the events to assure that Exelon implemented appropriate corrective actions commensurate with their safety significance.

Loss of vacuum scram during startup from maintenance outage on October 6, 2013

High pressure manual scram during turbine valve testing on December 14, 2013.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

4OA5 Other Activities

.1 Buried Piping, TI-2515/182, Phase 2 (1 sample)

a. Inspection Scope

The licensees buried piping and underground piping and tanks program was inspected in accordance with paragraphs 03.02.a of the Temporary Instruction (TI) 2515/182, and it was confirmed that activities which correspond to the completion dates, specified in the program, which have passed since the Phase 1 inspection was conducted, have been completed.

The licensees buried piping and underground piping and tanks program was inspected in accordance with paragraph 03.02.b of the TI and responses to specific questions found in www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops-experience/buried-pipe-ti-phase-2-insp-req-2011-11-16.pdf were submitted to the NRC headquarters staff.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit

On January 16, 2014, the inspectors presented the inspection results to Mr. G. Stathes, Site Vice President, and other members of the Oyster Creek staff. The inspectors verified that no proprietary information was retained by the inspectors or documented in this report.

ATTACHMENT:

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

KEY POINTS OF CONTACT

Exelon Personnel

G. Stathes, Site Vice-President
R. Peak, Plant Manager
M. Ford, Director, Operations
G. Malone, Director, Engineering
J. Dostal, Director, Maintenance
C. Symonds, Director, Training
D. DiCello, Director, Work Management
M. McAllister, Engineering Programs
J. McCarthy, Certified Health Physicist
M. McKenna, Manager, Regulatory Assurance
M. Nixon, Chemistry Specialist
M. Chanda, Emergency Preparedness Manager
T. Farenga, Radiation Protection Manager
J. Renda, Manager, Environmental/Chemistry
T. Keenan, Manager, Site Security
P. Bloss, Senior Manager, Plant Engineering
H. Ray, Senior Manager, Design Engineering
H. Ray, Manager Engineering Programs
E. Swain, Shift Operations Superintendent
J. Chrisley, Regulatory Assurance Specialist
D. Moore, Regulatory Assurance Specialist
K. Paez, Regulatory Assurance Specialist
K. Wolf, Radiological Engineering Supervisor
J. Bills, Chemistry Supervisor
J. Murphy, Radiological Engineer

LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, DISCUSSED, AND UPDATED

None

LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=IR_05000219/2013005&oldid=5216304"