IR 05000327/2006008: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
| issue date = 09/22/2006
| issue date = 09/22/2006
| title = IR 05000327-06-008, 05000328-06-008 on 08/28-09/01/2006 for Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 & 2; Routine Baseline Inspection
| title = IR 05000327-06-008, 05000328-06-008 on 08/28-09/01/2006 for Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 & 2; Routine Baseline Inspection
| author name = Bonser B R
| author name = Bonser B
| author affiliation = NRC/RGN-II/DRS/PSB2
| author affiliation = NRC/RGN-II/DRS/PSB2
| addressee name = Singer K W
| addressee name = Singer K
| addressee affiliation = Tennessee Valley Authority
| addressee affiliation = Tennessee Valley Authority
| docket = 05000327, 05000328
| docket = 05000327, 05000328
Line 18: Line 18:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:
{{#Wiki_filter:September 22, 2006
[[Issue date::September 22, 2006]]


Tennessee Valley Authority ATTN:Mr. Karl W. SingerChief Nuclear Officer and Executive Vice President6A Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801
==SUBJECT:==
SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR POWER PLANT - NRC INSPECTION REPORT 05000327/2006008 AND 05000328/2006008


SUBJECT: SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR POWER PLANT - NRC INSPECTION REPORT 05000327/2006008 AND 05000328/2006008
==Dear Mr. Singer:==
On September 1, 2006, the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at your Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant. The enclosed inspection report documents the inspections results, which were discussed with you, 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.


==Dear Mr. Singer:==
Based on the results of this inspection no findings of significance were identified.
On September 1, 2006, the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed aninspection at your Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant. The enclosed inspection report documents the inspections results, which were discussed with you, and other members of your staff.The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety andcompliance with the Commission's rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license.


The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel.Based on the results of this inspection no findings of significance were identified.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).


In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and itsenclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public DocumentRoom or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact us.
Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact us.


Sincerely,\\RA\\
Sincerely,
Brian R. Bonser, ChiefPlant Support Branch 2 Division of Reactor SafetyDocket Nos. 50-327, 50-328License Nos. DPR-77, DPR-79
\\\\RA\\\\
Brian R. Bonser, Chief Plant Support Branch 2 Division of Reactor Safety Docket Nos. 50-327, 50-328 License Nos. DPR-77, DPR-79


===Enclosure:===
===Enclosure:===
(See page 2)
(See page 2)
DEC 2


===Enclosure:===
DEC
NRC Inspection Report 05000327/2006008 and 05000328/2006008
 
Enclosure:
NRC Inspection Report 05000327/2006008 and 05000328/2006008 w/Attachment: Supplemental Information


===w/Attachment:===
REGION II==
Supplemental Informationcc w/encl:Ashok S. Bhatnagar Senior Vice President Nuclear Operations Tennessee Valley Authority Electronic Mail DistributionChris WillinghamSenior Management Assistant Tennessee Valley Authority Electronic Mail DistributionPreston D. SwaffordSenior Vice President Nuclear Support Tennessee Valley Authority Electronic Mail DistributionLarry S. Bryant, Vice PresidentNuclear Engineering &
Docket Nos.:
Technical Services Tennessee Valley Authority Electronic Mail DistributionRandy DouetSite Vice President Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Electronic Mail DistributionGeneral CounselTennessee Valley Authority Electronic Mail DistributionJohn C. Fornicola, ManagerNuclear Assurance and Licensing Tennessee Valley Authority Electronic Mail DistributionGlenn W. Morris, ManagerCorporate Nuclear Licensing and Industry Affairs Tennessee Valley Authority Electronic Mail Distribution(cc w/encl cont'd - See page 3)
50-327, 50-328 License Nos.:
DEC 3(cc w/encl cont'd)Paul L. Pace, Manager Licensing and Industry Affairs ATTN: James D. Smith Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Tennessee Valley Authority Electronic Mail DistributionDavid A. Kulisek, Plant ManagerSequoyah Nuclear Plant Tennessee Valley Authority Electronic Mail DistributionLawrence E. Nanney, DirectorTN Dept. of Environment & Conservation Division of Radiological Health Electronic Mail DistributionCounty MayorHamilton County Courthouse Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801Ann Harris341 Swing Loop Rockwood, TN 37854 James H. Bassham, DirectorTennessee Emergency Management Agency Electronic Mail DistributionDistribution w/encl
DPR-77, DPR-79 Report No:
:Bob Pascarelli, NRR D. Pickett, NRR RIDSNRRDIRS PUBLIC EnclosureU. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIONREGION IIDocket Nos.:50-327, 50-328 License Nos.:DPR-77, DPR-79 Report No: 05000327, 05000328/2006-008 Licensee:Tennessee Valley Authority Facility: Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant Location:2600 Igou FerrySoddy-Daisy TN 37379Dates: August 28 - September 1, 2006 Inspectors:L. Miller, Senior Emergency Preparedness Inspector (Section 1EP1,1EP4)
05000327, 05000328/2006-008 Licensee:
Tennessee Valley Authority Facility:
Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant Location:
2600 Igou Ferry Soddy-Daisy TN 37379 Dates:
August 28 - September 1, 2006 Inspectors:
L. Miller, Senior Emergency Preparedness Inspector (Section 1EP1,1EP4)
J. Kreh, Emergency Preparedness Inspector (Section 1EP1, 4OA1)
J. Kreh, Emergency Preparedness Inspector (Section 1EP1, 4OA1)
S. Freeman, Senior Resident Inspector, (Section 1EP1)Approved by:Brian R. Bonser, ChiefPlant Support Branch 2 Division of Reactor Safety  
S. Freeman, Senior Resident Inspector, (Section 1EP1)
Approved by:
Brian R. Bonser, Chief Plant Support Branch 2 Division of Reactor Safety


=SUMMARY OF FINDINGS=
=SUMMARY OF FINDINGS=
IR 05000327/2006008, 05000328/2006008; 08/28-9/1/2006; Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant,
IR 05000327/2006008, 05000328/2006008; 08/28-9/1/2006; Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant,


Units 1 and 2; routine baseline inspection.The report covered an announced inspection by two emergency preparedness inspectors andone resident inspector. The NRC's program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, "Reactor Oversight Process," Revision 3, dated July 2000.A.
Units 1 and 2; routine baseline inspection.
 
The report covered an announced inspection by two emergency preparedness inspectors and one resident inspector. The NRCs program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 3, dated July 2000.


===NRC-Identified and Self-Revealing Findings===
===NRC-Identified and Self-Revealing Findings===
===Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness===
===Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness===
None
None


===B.Licensee-Identified Violations===
===Licensee-Identified Violations===
.
.
None
None


=REPORT DETAILS=
=REPORT DETAILS=
1.REACTOR SAFETYCornerstone: Emergency Preparedness1EP1Exercise Evaluation
 
==REACTOR SAFETY==
===Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness===
1EP1 Exercise Evaluation


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
Prior to the inspection activity, the inspectors conducted an in-office review of theexercise objectives and scenario submitted to the NRC to determine if the exercise would test major elements of the emergency plan as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(14).
Prior to the inspection activity, the inspectors conducted an in-office review of the exercise objectives and scenario submitted to the NRC to determine if the exercise would test major elements of the emergency plan as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(14).


This inspection activity represents one sample on a biennial cycle.The onsite inspection consisted of the following review and assessment:
This inspection activity represents one sample on a biennial cycle.
The adequacy of the licensee's performance in the biennial exercise conducted onAugust 30, 2006, was reviewed and assessed regarding the implementation of the Risk Significant Planning Standards (RSPSs) in 10 CFR 50.47 (b) (4), (5), (9), and (10), which are emergency classification, offsite notification, radiological assessment, and protective action recommendations, respectively.The overall adequacy of the licensee's emergency response facilities with regard toNUREG-0696, "Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities" and Emergency Plan commitments. The facilities assessed were the Control Room simulator, Technical Support Center (TSC), Operational Support Center (OSC) andCentral Emergency Control Center (CECC)/Emergency Operations Facility (EOF).Other performance areas besides the RSPS, such as the emergency responseorganization's (ERO) recognition of abnormal plant conditions, command and control, intra- and inter-facility communications, prioritization of mitigation activities, utilization of repair and field monitoring teams, interface with offsite agencies, and the overall implementation of the emergency plan and its implementing procedures.Past performance issues from NRC inspection reports and Federal EmergencyManagement Agency (FEMA)/Department of Homeland Security (DHS) exercise reports to determine effectiveness of corrective actions as demonstrated during this exercise to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 50.47(b)(14).The post-exercise critique conducted September 1, 2006, to evaluate the licensee'sself-assessment of its ERO performance during the exercise and to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 50 Appendix E.IV.F.2.g.The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment to thisreport.
 
The onsite inspection consisted of the following review and assessment:
* The adequacy of the licensees performance in the biennial exercise conducted on August 30, 2006, was reviewed and assessed regarding the implementation of the Risk Significant Planning Standards (RSPSs) in 10 CFR 50.47 (b) (4), (5), (9), and (10), which are emergency classification, offsite notification, radiological assessment, and protective action recommendations, respectively.
* The overall adequacy of the licensees emergency response facilities with regard to NUREG-0696, Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities and Emergency Plan commitments. The facilities assessed were the Control Room simulator, Technical Support Center (TSC), Operational Support Center (OSC) and Central Emergency Control Center (CECC)/Emergency Operations Facility (EOF).
* Other performance areas besides the RSPS, such as the emergency response organizations (ERO) recognition of abnormal plant conditions, command and control, intra-and inter-facility communications, prioritization of mitigation activities, utilization of repair and field monitoring teams, interface with offsite agencies, and the overall implementation of the emergency plan and its implementing procedures.
* Past performance issues from NRC inspection reports and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)/Department of Homeland Security (DHS) exercise reports to determine effectiveness of corrective actions as demonstrated during this exercise to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 50.47(b)(14).
* The post-exercise critique conducted September 1, 2006, to evaluate the licensees self-assessment of its ERO performance during the exercise and to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 50 Appendix E.IV.F.2.g.
 
The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment to this report.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings of significance were identified.
No findings of significance were identified.
1EP4 Emergency Action Level (EAL) and Emergency Plan Changes
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors review of revisions to the emergency plan, implementing procedures and EAL changes was performed to determine that changes had not decreased the effectiveness of the plan. The inspectors also evaluated the associated 10 CFR 50.54(q) reviews associated with non-administrative emergency plan, implementing procedures and EAL changes. The Radiological Emergency Plan (Generic part Revision 82 and the Appendix B Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Revision 80) were reviewed and covered the period from July 2005 to September 2006.


41EP4  Emergency Action Level (EAL) and Emergency Plan Changes
The inspection was conducted in accordance with NRC Inspection Procedure 71114, 04, Emergency Action Level and Emergency Plan Changes. The applicable planning standard (PS), 10 CFR 50.47(b)(4) and its related 10 CFR 50, Appendix E requirements were used as reference criteria. The criteria contained in NUREG-0654, Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants, Revision 1, NUMARC/NESP-007, Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels, Revision 2, and Regulatory Guide 1.101 were also used as references. This inspection activity represents one sample on an annual basis.


====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment to this report.
The inspector's review of revisions to the emergency plan, implementing proceduresand EAL changes was performed to determine that changes had not decreased the effectiveness of the plan. The inspectors also evaluated the associated 10 CFR 50.54(q) reviews associated with non-administrative emergency plan, implementing procedures and EAL changes. The Radiological Emergency Plan (Generic part Revision 82 and the Appendix B Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Revision 80) were reviewed and covered the period from July 2005 to September 2006. The inspection was conducted in accordance with NRC Inspection Procedure 71114,Attachment 04, "Emergency Action Level and Emergency Plan Changes."  The applicable planning standard (PS), 10 CFR 50.47(b)(4) and its related 10 CFR 50, Appendix E requirements were used as reference criteria. The criteria contained in NUREG-0654, "Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants," Revision 1, NUMARC/NESP-007, "Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels",
Revision 2
, and Regulatory Guide 1.101 were also used as references. This inspectionactivity represents one sample on an annual basis.The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment to thisreport.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings of significance were identified.4.OTHER ACTIVITIES 4OA1Performance Indicator (PI) Verification
No findings of significance were identified.
 
==OTHER ACTIVITIES==
{{a|4OA1}}


==4OA1 Performance Indicator (PI) Verification==
====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
The inspectors reviewed the licensee's procedure for developing the data for theEmergency Preparedness PIs which are:
The inspectors reviewed the licensees procedure for developing the data for the Emergency Preparedness PIs which are:
: (1) Drill/Exercise Performance (DEP);
: (1) Drill/Exercise Performance (DEP);
: (2) ERO Drill Participation; and
: (2) ERO Drill Participation; and
Line 95: Line 124:
Procedural guidance for reporting PI information and records used by the licensee to identify potential PI occurrences were also reviewed. The inspectors verified the accuracy of the PI for ERO DEP through review of a sample of drill and event records.
Procedural guidance for reporting PI information and records used by the licensee to identify potential PI occurrences were also reviewed. The inspectors verified the accuracy of the PI for ERO DEP through review of a sample of drill and event records.


The inspectors reviewed selected training records to verify the accuracy of the PI for ERO drill participation for personnel assigned to key positions in the ERO. The inspectors verified the accuracy of the PI for ANS reliability through review of a sample of the licensee's records of periodic system tests.
The inspectors reviewed selected training records to verify the accuracy of the PI for ERO drill participation for personnel assigned to key positions in the ERO. The inspectors verified the accuracy of the PI for ANS reliability through review of a sample of the licensees records of periodic system tests.
 
The inspection was conducted in accordance with NRC Inspection Procedure 71151, Performance Indicator Verification. The applicable planning standard, 10 CFR 50.9 and Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99-02, Revisions 3 and 4, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guidelines, were used as reference criteria. This inspection activity represents three samples on an annual basis.


5The inspection was conducted in accordance with NRC Inspection Procedure 71151,"Performance Indicator Verification."  The applicable planning standard, 10 CFR 50.9 and Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99-02, Revisions 3 and 4, "Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guidelines," were used as reference criteria. This inspection activity represents three samples on an annual basis.The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment to thisreport.
The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment to this report.


====b. Findings====
====b. Findings====
No findings of significance were identified.4OA6Meetings, including ExitOn September 1, 2006, the lead inspector for the emergency preparedness inspectionpresented the inspection results to L. Bryant, Vice President - Engineering and Technical Support, and other members of the licensee's staff. The inspectors confirmed that proprietary information was not provided or taken during the inspection.ATTACHMENT:  
No findings of significance were identified.
{{a|4OA6}}
 
==4OA6 Meetings, including Exit==
On September 1, 2006, the lead inspector for the emergency preparedness inspection presented the inspection results to L. Bryant, Vice President - Engineering and Technical Support, and other members of the licensees staff. The inspectors confirmed that proprietary information was not provided or taken during the inspection.
 
ATTACHMENT:  


=SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION=
=SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION=


==KEY POINTS OF CONTACT==
==KEY POINTS OF CONTACT==
===Licensee personnel===
===Licensee personnel===
: [[contact::L. Bryant]], Vice President - Engineering and Technical Support
: [[contact::L. Bryant]], Vice President - Engineering and Technical Support
Line 115: Line 151:
: [[contact::R. Proffitt]], Nuclear Engineer
: [[contact::R. Proffitt]], Nuclear Engineer
: [[contact::C. Mathes]], Operations/Nuclear Assurance
: [[contact::C. Mathes]], Operations/Nuclear Assurance
==LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED==
==LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED==
Opened None  
===Opened===
None
 
===Closed===
===Closed===
: None
None


===Discussed===
===Discussed===
None
None
A-Attachment
 
2
A-
 
==LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED==
==LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED==
==Section 1EP1: Exercise EvaluationPlans and ProceduresCECC==
: EPIP-1, Central Emergency Control Center (CECC) Operations, Revision 43CECC
: EPIP-3, Operations Duty Specialist Procedure for Alert, Revision 35
: CECC
: EPIP-7, CECC Radiological Assessment, Staff Procedure for Alert, Site Area Emergency, and General Emergency, Revision 30
: CECC
: EPIP-8, Dose Assessment Staff Activities during Nuclear Plant Radiological Emergencies, Revision 29
: EPIP-1, Emergency Plan Classification Matrix, Revision 37
: EPIP-2, Notification of Unusual Event, Revision 27
: EPIP-3, Alert, Revision 29
: EPIP-4, Site Area Emergency, Revision 29
: EPIP-5, General Emergency, Revision 36
: EPIP-6, Activation and Operation of the Technical Support Center, Revision 41Records and data from 08/30/2006 exercise CECC Director's LogCECC Sequence of Events (chronology)
: TSC Plant Status Log
: TSC Sequence of Events (chronology)
: Unit 1 Operations Log
: EPIP-3, Alert, Revision 29 record
: EPIP-4, Site Area Emergency, Revision 29 record
: EPIP-5, General Emergency, Revision 36 record
==Section 1EP4: Emergency Action Level (EAL) and Emergency Plan Changes ProceduresEPIL-1, Emergency Preparedness Instruction Letter - Procedures, Maps, and Drawings,==
: Revision 21Records and DataPlan Effectiveness Determination Package -EPIP-2, Revision 27Plan Effectiveness Determination Package -
: EPIP-3, Revision 29
: Plan Effectiveness Determination Package -
: EPIP-4, Revision 29
: Plan Effectiveness Determination Package -
: EPIP-5, Revision 36
: Plan Effectiveness Determination Package -
: EPIP-6, Revision 41
: Plan Effectiveness Determination Package -
: EPIP-7, Revision 25Plan Effectiveness Determination Package -
: EPIP-11, Revision 7Plan Effectiveness Determination Package -
: EPIP-13, Revision10Plan Effectiveness Determination Package - Generic REP Revision 80
: Plan Effectiveness Determination Package -
: NP-REP Appendix B Revision 80
: A-Attachment
: 3Plan Effectiveness Determination Package - Generic REP Revision 82


==Section 4OA1: Performance Indicator (PI) VerificationProceduresEPIL [Emergency Preparedness Instruction Letter] -15, Emergency Preparedness Performance==
: Indicators, Revision 10Records and DataDocumentation (scenario, time line, event notification forms) of ERO integrated drill on
: 02/22/2006
: Documentation of DEP opportunities from Operations Simulator evaluations in November-
: December 2005
: Selected training records of drill/exercise participation by ERO personnel during 2005-2006
: Siren weekly and monthly test records: 04/01/2005 - 06/30/2006Corrective Action DocumentsPER
: 109718, DEP Performance Indicator discrepancies
: A-Attachment
: 4
==LIST OF ACRONYMS==
ANSAlert and Notification System
: [[CECC]] [[Central Emergency Control Center]]
DEPDrill/Exercise Performance
DHSDepartment of Homeland Security
EALEmergency Action Level
EOFEmergency Operations Facility
: [[EROE]] [[mergency Response Organization]]
: [[FEMA]] [[Federal Emergency Management Agency]]
NEINuclear Energy Institute
OSCOperational Support Center
: [[PIP]] [[erformance Indicator]]
: [[PS]] [[Planning Standard]]
RSPSRisk Significant Planning Standard
: [[TSCT]] [[echnical Support Center]]
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 05:24, 15 January 2025

IR 05000327-06-008, 05000328-06-008 on 08/28-09/01/2006 for Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 & 2; Routine Baseline Inspection
ML063010015
Person / Time
Site: Sequoyah  Tennessee Valley Authority icon.png
Issue date: 09/22/2006
From: Brian Bonser
NRC/RGN-II/DRS/PSB2
To: Singer K
Tennessee Valley Authority
References
IR-06-008
Download: ML063010015 (13)
v • d • e


Text

September 22, 2006

SUBJECT:

SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR POWER PLANT - NRC INSPECTION REPORT 05000327/2006008 AND 05000328/2006008

Dear Mr. Singer:

On September 1, 2006, the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at your Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant. The enclosed inspection report documents the inspections results, which were discussed with you, 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 on the results of this inspection no findings of significance were identified.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact us.

Sincerely,

\\\\RA\\\\

Brian R. Bonser, Chief Plant Support Branch 2 Division of Reactor Safety Docket Nos. 50-327, 50-328 License Nos. DPR-77, DPR-79

Enclosure:

(See page 2)

DEC

Enclosure:

NRC Inspection Report 05000327/2006008 and 05000328/2006008 w/Attachment: Supplemental Information

REGION II==

Docket Nos.:

50-327, 50-328 License Nos.:

DPR-77, DPR-79 Report No:

05000327, 05000328/2006-008 Licensee:

Tennessee Valley Authority Facility:

Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant Location:

2600 Igou Ferry Soddy-Daisy TN 37379 Dates:

August 28 - September 1, 2006 Inspectors:

L. Miller, Senior Emergency Preparedness Inspector (Section 1EP1,1EP4)

J. Kreh, Emergency Preparedness Inspector (Section 1EP1, 4OA1)

S. Freeman, Senior Resident Inspector, (Section 1EP1)

Approved by:

Brian R. Bonser, Chief Plant Support Branch 2 Division of Reactor Safety

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

IR 05000327/2006008, 05000328/2006008; 08/28-9/1/2006; Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant,

Units 1 and 2; routine baseline inspection.

The report covered an announced inspection by two emergency preparedness inspectors and one resident inspector. The NRCs program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 3, dated July 2000.

NRC-Identified and Self-Revealing Findings

Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness

None

Licensee-Identified Violations

.

None

REPORT DETAILS

REACTOR SAFETY

Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness

1EP1 Exercise Evaluation

a. Inspection Scope

Prior to the inspection activity, the inspectors conducted an in-office review of the exercise objectives and scenario submitted to the NRC to determine if the exercise would test major elements of the emergency plan as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(14).

This inspection activity represents one sample on a biennial cycle.

The onsite inspection consisted of the following review and assessment:

  • The adequacy of the licensees performance in the biennial exercise conducted on August 30, 2006, was reviewed and assessed regarding the implementation of the Risk Significant Planning Standards (RSPSs) in 10 CFR 50.47 (b) (4), (5), (9), and (10), which are emergency classification, offsite notification, radiological assessment, and protective action recommendations, respectively.
  • The overall adequacy of the licensees emergency response facilities with regard to NUREG-0696, Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities and Emergency Plan commitments. The facilities assessed were the Control Room simulator, Technical Support Center (TSC), Operational Support Center (OSC) and Central Emergency Control Center (CECC)/Emergency Operations Facility (EOF).
  • Other performance areas besides the RSPS, such as the emergency response organizations (ERO) recognition of abnormal plant conditions, command and control, intra-and inter-facility communications, prioritization of mitigation activities, utilization of repair and field monitoring teams, interface with offsite agencies, and the overall implementation of the emergency plan and its implementing procedures.
  • The post-exercise critique conducted September 1, 2006, to evaluate the licensees self-assessment of its ERO performance during the exercise and to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 50 Appendix E.IV.F.2.g.

The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment to this report.

b. Findings

No findings of significance were identified.

1EP4 Emergency Action Level (EAL) and Emergency Plan Changes

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors review of revisions to the emergency plan, implementing procedures and EAL changes was performed to determine that changes had not decreased the effectiveness of the plan. The inspectors also evaluated the associated 10 CFR 50.54(q) reviews associated with non-administrative emergency plan, implementing procedures and EAL changes. The Radiological Emergency Plan (Generic part Revision 82 and the Appendix B Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Revision 80) were reviewed and covered the period from July 2005 to September 2006.

The inspection was conducted in accordance with NRC Inspection Procedure 71114, 04, Emergency Action Level and Emergency Plan Changes. The applicable planning standard (PS), 10 CFR 50.47(b)(4) and its related 10 CFR 50, Appendix E requirements were used as reference criteria. The criteria contained in NUREG-0654, Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants, Revision 1, NUMARC/NESP-007, Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels, Revision 2, and Regulatory Guide 1.101 were also used as references. This inspection activity represents one sample on an annual basis.

The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment to this report.

b. Findings

No findings of significance were identified.

OTHER ACTIVITIES

4OA1 Performance Indicator (PI) Verification

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed the licensees procedure for developing the data for the Emergency Preparedness PIs which are:

(1) Drill/Exercise Performance (DEP);
(2) ERO Drill Participation; and
(3) Alert and Notification System (ANS) Reliability. The inspectors examined data reported to the NRC for the period April, 2005 to June, 2006.

Procedural guidance for reporting PI information and records used by the licensee to identify potential PI occurrences were also reviewed. The inspectors verified the accuracy of the PI for ERO DEP through review of a sample of drill and event records.

The inspectors reviewed selected training records to verify the accuracy of the PI for ERO drill participation for personnel assigned to key positions in the ERO. The inspectors verified the accuracy of the PI for ANS reliability through review of a sample of the licensees records of periodic system tests.

The inspection was conducted in accordance with NRC Inspection Procedure 71151, Performance Indicator Verification. The applicable planning standard, 10 CFR 50.9 and Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99-02, Revisions 3 and 4, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guidelines, were used as reference criteria. This inspection activity represents three samples on an annual basis.

The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment to this report.

b. Findings

No findings of significance were identified.

4OA6 Meetings, including Exit

On September 1, 2006, the lead inspector for the emergency preparedness inspection presented the inspection results to L. Bryant, Vice President - Engineering and Technical Support, and other members of the licensees staff. The inspectors confirmed that proprietary information was not provided or taken during the inspection.

ATTACHMENT:

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

KEY POINTS OF CONTACT

Licensee personnel

L. Bryant, Vice President - Engineering and Technical Support
B. Marks Emergency Services Manager, Corporate
J. Wilkes, Emergency Preparedness Manager
R. Bruno, Training Manager
T. Niessen, Site Quality Manager
J. Smith, Licensing Supervisor
R. Proffitt, Nuclear Engineer
C. Mathes, Operations/Nuclear Assurance

LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED

Opened

None

Closed

None

Discussed

None

A-

LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=IR_05000327/2006008&oldid=5355985"