ML050840141
| ML050840141 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 06/07/2004 |
| From: | Cwalina G NRC/NRR/DIPM/IPSB |
| To: | |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2004-0282, NRR-2004-A-0026 | |
| Download: ML050840141 (6) | |
Text
I.
1s.1=9S)
NRCP~D322 U
u.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REQUEST FQR-REGSTERED, CERTIFIED, AND RETURN RECEIPT MAILING INSTRUCTIONS:
REQUESTING OFFICE.
'HEADQUARTERS MAILSERVICES SECTION~YSTAFF:
- 1. Prepare NRC Form 47. original only, for each Item of maN to be
- 1. Complete processing by assigning registered or certiled number and registered or certified. If proof of delivery Is required, request a return recetpt, If requested.
return receipL-
- 2. Securely attach Ihe form to the item of mall and foiward it to
- 2. Record the date of mullng.
Headquarters Mall Services Section. OWFN Room P1-37.
- 3.
Retumn the original form to the offce of odglgn.
REQUESTER
.OfFICEUVlSIONIBiSNCH MAIL 5TOF GCwalina NRR/D1 PMIIEPB 06-1F-2 TYPE OF MAIUNG REQUESTED (Check appopdfae box orboxes)
DO NOT USE THIS BLOCK REGISTERED i
CERTIFIED IF CLASSIFIED,
-i CASSIIEDTHE ITEM OF MAIL MUST
_I CLASSIFIED g
RETURN RECEIPT BE REOISTERED.
UNCLASSIFIED
- EGISTERED NUMBER CERTIFIED NUMBER ADORESS Fw m u nc "C s.
]
I.
DATE D
DATE MAID
'I I
I
._ ~
2004-26 13-FO, 4
19599 l.fP
.l
_..L M
s lhs tesm wus d1siarSna UUIq tfMW
R- -
- UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 0
gWASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 June 4, 2004
SUBJECT:
ALLEGATION NO. NRR-2004-A-0026 Dea This letter refers to the May 21, 2004, and May 27, 2004, email messages that you transmitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). In your May 21, 2004, transmittal, you expressed concerns about safety-related activities at the Point Beach Nuclear Plant (PBNP) regarding non-destructive examinations performed on the Point Beach, Unit 1, Reactor Vessel head penetrations as required by NRC Order. In your May 27, 2004, transmittal, you stated that a PBNP fracture mechanics analysis' used to support Code relief contained suspiciously small and arbitrary flaw size assumptions. to this letter documents your concerns as we understand them. We have Initiated
.actions to examine the facts and circumstances on the basis of our understanding of your concerns. If the' description' of your concerns in the enclosure is not accurate, please contact me so'that I can assure that we correctly understand your concerns as we continue our review.
Your concerns regarding "NRC's lack of performance In dealings with safety issues (as identified in'the recent GAO assess'men't)... ard lackf'f assertiveness in ensuring that PBNP operates without recurrings'afety significant events will be referred to the NRC Office of the Inspector General (OiG). If you have any questions'or other comments on these m'atters, please contact the OIG directly, toill-free, at 1-800-233-3497. is an NRC brochure'entitled "Reporting Safety Concerns to the NRC," which contains information that you may find helpful in understanding our process for revieW of safety concerns. It includes an Important discussion (on pages.5-7-) of our identity protection procedures and limitations. Please read that section. Thank you for notifying us 'of your concernss; We will advise ybu when we have completed our're'view of these' matters. However, should you have any quiestions or cornmehts during the Interim reg'arding these mia'tters,'please call Mr. Frank Talbot, the technical reviewer responsible for your'issue, or me at (800) 368-5642.
Sincerel Gregory C. Cwalina, SeniorAllegations Coordinator Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
As stated CERTIFIED MAIL mr-o o test r r-er-inr nor-i-L-tcrn
S 0
ALLEGATION NO. NRR-2004-A-0026 STATEMENT OF CONCERNS BACKGROUND FOR CONCERNS First revised NRC Order EA-03-009 required specific inspections of the reactor pressure vessel head and associated penetration nozzles at PWRs. The frequency of required inspections depend upon a calculated susceptibility to primary water stress corrosion cracking (PWSSC).
However, all licensees are required to perform a visual inspection and either (1) ultrasonic testing (UT), (2) eddy current or dye penetrant testing (PT), or (3) a combination of (1) and (2).
To comply with Order EA-03-009, Point Beach performed bare metal visual examinations and UT examinations of the vessel head penetration nozzles.
CONCERN 1 A UT examination of Point Beach Nuclear Plant (PBNP) Unit 1 penetration 26 "J" groove weld was not capable of finding the damage discovered within (as identified by a surface penetrant test), and that PWSCC damage probably exists In other penetration J" groove welds in the PBNP reactor pressure vessel head. Despite the results of the surface PT exam, the licensee will not pursue the PT examinations of other JV groove welds because of the potential for finding additional evidence of PWSCC damage. The NRC should provide a technical justification why the NRC has not required PBNP to "PT" a reasonable sample of other high
- stress penetration's uJ" groove welds...
CONCERN 2 A Point Beach reactor vessel head nozzle fracture mechanics analysis was performed to support a code relief request (verbally granted to PBNP on May 26, 2004) for the temporary repair of Unit 1 penetration 26. The fracture mechanics analysis assumed flaw size for PBNP is arbitrary and "suspiciously small" in order to allow achieving a calculated operational life greater than a plant operational cycle. The NRC should provide written justification that the assumed PBNP flaw size contained in the fracture mechanics analyses for the temporary repair is in fact bounding for any and all potential existing flaws.
ENCLOSURE 1
- 1'
.. '4, June 4, 2004 f"1Lr(
J.;,
SUBJECT:
ALLEGATION NO. NRR-2004-A-0026 Deal.
This letter refers to the May 21, 2004, and May 27, 2004, email messages that you transmitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). In your May 21, 2004, transmittal, you expressed.concerns about safety-related activities at the Point Beach Nuclear'Plant (PBNP) regarding non-destructive examinations performed on the Point Beach, Unit 1, Reactor Vessel head penetrations as required by NRC Order. in your May 27, 2004, transmittal, you stated that, a PBNP fracture mechanics analysis used to support Code relief contained suspiciously small and arbitrary flaw size assumptions.
Enclosure I to this letter documents your concerns as we understand them. We have initiated actions to examine the facts and circumsfanrces on the basis of our understanding of your concerns. If the description of your concerns in the enclosure is not accurate, please contact me so that I can assure that we correctly understand your concerns as we continue our review.
Your concerns regarding "NRC's lack of performance in dealings with safety issues (as identified in the recent GAO assessment)... -and lack of assertiveness in ensuring that PBNP operates without recurring safety significant events".will be referred to thie NRC Office of the
.Inspector.General (OIG). If you have any questions or other comments on these matters, please ntact'theOlG diectly, toll-free, at 1-800-233-3497. is an NRC brochure.entitled "Reporting Safety Concerns to the NRC,!" which contains information that you may find helpful in understanding our processfor review of safety concerns. It includes an important discussion (on'a.ne g
5-7)ofour'identi fprortevtiown' procedures and limitations. Please read that section. Thank you for notifying us of your concerns. We will advise you when we have completed our review of these' mtters. However, should you have any questions or comments during the interim regarding these matters, please call Mr. Frank Talbot, the technical reviewer responsible for your issue, or rme at (800) 368-5642.
Sincerely,
/RA/ Joseph Petrosino for.
Gregory C. Cwalina, Senior Allegations Coordinator Office of Nu'clear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
OAC Files DISK/DOCUMENT NAME:
G:ADIPM legations\\2004-26Acknoned ment Letter 2004-26.wpd See previaos concurrence(s)
OFC I PSB:DIPM:NRR IPSS:DIPM:NRR EMCB:DSSA:NRR
.OAC:NRR z.
NAME FXTalbot:jc DFThatcher WHsateman GCCwalla DATE l 0612/04 062104*
0613/04*
06!
04 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
'2~
.1 i -,..
SUBJECT:
ALLEGATION NO. NRR-2004-A-0026 DeaU3..
This letter refers to the May 21, 2004, and May 27, 2004, email messages that you transmitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). In your May 21,2004, transmittal, you expressed concerns about safety-related activities at the Point Beach Nuclear Plant (PBNP) regarding the adequacy of an NRC Order requiring nondestructive examination requirements.
In your May 27, 2004, transmittal, you stated that a PBNP afracture mechanics analysis' used to support Code relief of Inspection elements contained in the same NRC Order contained suspiciously small and arbitrary flaw size assumptions. to this letter documents your concerns as we understand them. We have initiated actions to examine the facts and circumstances on the basis 6f our understanding of your concerns. If the description'of your concerns In the enclosure Is not accurate, please contact mqe so that I can assure that we correctly Understand your concerns as we continue our review.
Your concemrs regarding "NRC's.lack of performancedIn dealings with'safety Issues (as identified in the recent GAO assessment)... and lack of-assertiveness In ensuring that PBNP,
.opbreateis withoUt'recutring' safety significant events' will be referred to the NRC Office of the Inspecor General COIG). If you havehany questions or other comments on these matters,
'pleas coitocGt the (iG directly, teli fmrate 1rs-233-349.- is an NRC brochure'entitied "Reporting Safety Concerns to the-NRC," which c6'ntains1informatlon that you maytfind helpful in understannding our'process forreview of safety con6&ms. It Includes an Important discussion n pages 5-7) of our Identity protectpon procedures and limitations. Please read that section'. Thank you for notifying us of your concers. We will advise you when we have completed our reyulew of these matters. However, should you have any questions or commerns during the interim regarding these rnatters, please call Mr. Frank Talbot, the technical reviewer responsible for your Issue, or me at (800) 368-5642.
Sincerely, Gregory C. Cwalina, Senior Allegations Coordinator Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
As stated DiSTRIBUTION:
OAC Files DISKIDOCUMENT NAME:
G:\\DIPM\\AflegaUons\\2004-26\\Acknowledmemnt Letter 2.*
See previous concxmrenafts OFC lIPSB:DIPM:NRR IPSB:DIPM:NRR EM Cs: i A:
OAC:NRR NAME FXTalbotjc DFThatcher G
DATE l06/2104 06/2104 ai/ 104 3104 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY CERTIFIED MAIL i
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED :.. :
- w 9{ W
SUBJECT:
ALLEGATION NO. NRR-2004-A-0026 De a
This letter refers to your May 21, 2004, and May 27. 2004, messages that you transmitted to the' U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Allegation E-Mail address. n your May 21, 2004 transmittil, you expressed concerns about safety-related activities at Poi t-Beach Nuclear Plant (PBNP) regarding the adequacy of an NRC Order requiring bipn ructive examination requirements. In your May'27, 2004 e-;maiI, you stated that a P fracture mechanics analysis used to support Code relief of Inspection elements c6ntained in the same NRC Order contained suspiciously small and arbitrary flaw size consi fations.
Enclosure I to this letter documents a synopsis of your concerns we understand them.' If the description of your concerns In the enclosure Is not accurate, pied se contact me so that I can.
assure that we correctly understand your concerns before we ontinue our review.
Your concerns regarding "NRC's lack of performance In dealings with safety Issues (as identified in the recent GAO assessment)... and lackp assertiveness in ensuring that PBNP operates without iecurring safety significant events vilI be referred to the NRC Office of the Inspector General (OIG). If y6u have any questionkshr other comments on these matters, please contact the OIG directly,toII-free, at -8Opi33-3497.
Enciosure 2 Is an NRC brochure entitled "Rqrtirig Safety 'Concerns to the NRC," which contairi§ information that you may firid helpful In understanding our process for review of safety concerns. It includes an important discusison (on'pages 5-7)'of'our identity protection procedures and limitations. Please read that section. Thank youfor notifying us of your concerns. We will advise you whence have completed our review' ofthese'rafters. However, should you have any questions or mments during the Interim regarding these mailers, please call Mr. Frank Talbot, the technc'al reviewer responsible for your Issue,' or me at (800) 368-5642.
Sincerely, Gregory C. Cwalina, Senlor'Allegations Coordinator Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation'
Enclosures:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
OAC Files
)IS KIDOCU MENT NAME:
GADIPM\\Alleaations\\2004-26\\Ackovowledament Letter 2004-26.wDd OFC IPSB:DIPM:NRR EMCB:DSSA:NRR IPSB:DIPM:NRR OAC:NRR OCM NAME FXTalbot:Jc pE1 WHBateman jFThatc he'r GCCwalina DATE i/4Ilg!i4//4 61 /04 S.'.
- 'OFFIC AL ECORD COPY
- 1ki §;.