|
|---|
Category:FACT Sheet
MONTHYEARML11301A2252011-07-21021 July 2011
Reference: Ohio Energy Fact Sheet
ML11174A2472011-05-31031 May 2011
for the Record-05-31-2011: NRC Chairman Gregory B. Jaczko'S Statement on Nrc'S Commitment to Safety
ML0925403362009-09-11011 September 2009
Fact Sheet: Improvements Resulting from the Davis Besse Incident
2011-07-21
[Table view]
Category:Memoranda
MONTHYEARML23129A6062023-05-0404 May 2023
Special Inspection Team Charters to Evaluate the Circumstances Surrounding the Ground Settling at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station
ML23044A3662023-02-15015 February 2023
Calendar Year 2022 Reactor Oversight Process Baseline Inspection Program Completion - Region III
ML21096A2282021-03-30030 March 2021
FEMA Disapproval of Davis-Besse Exercise Exemption
ML21070A3482021-03-15015 March 2021
March 3, 2021, Summary of Category 1 Public Teleconference to Discuss Westinghouse Request to Extend the AP1000 Design by 5 Years
ML19182A3562019-07-23023 July 2019
Quarterly Report on the Status of Public Petitions Under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 2.206 - April 1 to June 30, 2019
ML19162A0102019-06-0707 June 2019
Memorandum to File Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company'S Decommissioning Funding Plan Submitted in Accordance with 10 CFR 72.30(B) and 72.30(C) for Davis Besse ISFSI
ML16088A2042016-03-28028 March 2016
Memo T Bowers from s Ruffin, Technical Assistance Requests - Review 2015 Tri-Annual Decommissioning Funding Plans for Multiple Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations W/ Encl 2 (Template)
ML16088A2052016-03-28028 March 2016
Enclosure 1 - (72.30 DFP Reviews to Be Completed 2015) - Memo T Bowers from s Ruffin, Technial Assistance Requests - Review 2015 Tri-Annual Decommissioning Funding Plans for Multiple Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations
ML15205A1692015-08-0707 August 2015
ACRS Review of the Davis Besse Nuclear Plant LRA - Transmittal of the Sser
ML15182A1912015-07-16016 July 2015
Annual Financial Test for a Parent Company Guarantee Given by Firstenergy Solutions Corporation and Firstenergy Corporation
ML15089A1642015-04-27027 April 2015
Summary of February 25, 2015, Partially Closed Meeting with Industry Stakeholders Regarding the Babcock and Wilcox Loss of Coolant Accident Evaluation Model Analysis
IR 05000334/20004122014-07-0808 July 2014
NRC Staff'S Spot-Check Review of First Energy Nuclear Operating Company'S Ownership Interest in Beaver Valley, Units 1 and 2, Perry, and Davis-Besse, Docket No. 05000334, 05000412, 05000440, and 05000346, on June 10, 2014-Finding of No Pote
ML14099A4642014-05-0606 May 2014
Summary of Public Meetings to Discuss Draft Supplement 52 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants Regarding Davis-Besse Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1
ML13280A9062013-10-21021 October 2013
Forthcoming Meeting with Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) to Discuss Voluntary Risk Informed Fire Protection Amendment for Davis-Besse
ML13142A5122013-07-0202 July 2013
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on May 21, 2013, Between NRC and Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, Concerning RAI Pertaining to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, LRA
ML13171A2922013-06-13013 June 2013
LTR-13-0540 - Bill Hawkins and Vinod Arora Email San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) Lessons Learn for Davis-Besse
ML13154A4442013-06-0404 June 2013
Rai'S Following Ifib Analysis of Fenoc'S 2013 Decommissioning Funding Status Report for Davis-Besse and Perry
ML12199A2072012-07-17017 July 2012
Public Meeting Notice to Discuss the 2011 End-of-Cycle Performance Assessment
ML12158A4002012-06-0808 June 2012
6/26/2012 Forthcoming Meeting Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC)
ML1206901652012-03-0909 March 2012
Memo - Summary of Public Meeting with Industry Regarding Pwrog'S Boric Acid Corrosion Test Program
ML12018A1652012-01-27027 January 2012
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on November 9, 2011, Between the NRC and Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, Concerning RAI Pertaining to the Davis-Besse, LRA
ML14028A5462012-01-25025 January 2012
NRC Telecon Regarding Davis-Besse License Renewal Severe Accident Mitigation Alternatives Analysis Questions
ML11363A1712012-01-23023 January 2012
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on December 12, 2011 Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, Concerning Request for Additional Information
ML11355A0952011-12-29029 December 2011
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on December 8, 2011, Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, Concerning RAIs Pertaining to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, LRA
ML11348A0212011-12-21021 December 2011
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on November 1, 2011 Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, Concerning Requests for Additional Information Pertaining to the Davis Besse Nuclear Pow
ML11341A1182011-12-14014 December 2011
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on June 15, 2011 Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, Concerning Requests for Additional Information Pertaining to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power
ML11339A0862011-12-13013 December 2011
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, Concerning RAIs Pertaining to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station LRA
ML11327A0082011-12-0202 December 2011
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on September 29, 2011, Between the NRC and Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, Concerning RAI Pertaining to the Davis-Besse, LRA
ML11327A0792011-12-0202 December 2011
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, Concerning Requests for Additional Information Pertaining to the Davis Besse Nuclear Power Station
ML11327A0872011-12-0202 December 2011
Summary of Telephone Conference Call Held on July 27, 2011, Between the NRC and Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company Concerning RAI Pertaining to the Davis-Besse, LRA
ML11279A2182011-10-0606 October 2011
Memo - Task Interface Agreement - Evaluation of Compliance with Code for Examination of Flange Stud Holes on the Replacement Vessel Head at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station (TIA 2011-015)
ML11242A0032011-09-12012 September 2011
Summary of Conference Call Held on August 4, 2011, Between the NRC and FENOC Concerning Requests for Additional Information Pertaining to the Davis-Besse License Renewal Application
ML1122701392011-08-15015 August 2011
Request for Additional Information Response Clarification from Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station in Support of License Renewal Application Review
ML11173A2002011-08-0101 August 2011
Summary of Public Scoping Meetingsconducted Related to the Review of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, LRA
ML11193A2032011-07-26026 July 2011
Final Response to TIA 2011-001, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Safety-Related Batteries Electrical Separation Design and Licensing Bases
ML11174A2322011-06-21021 June 2011
for the Record-06-21-2011: NRC Ensures Public Safety Through Rigorous Oversight of Nuclear Power Plant Safety Standards
ML1108202762011-06-0303 June 2011
Summary of Site Audit Related to the Review of the License Renewal Application for Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1
ML11174A2472011-05-31031 May 2011
for the Record-05-31-2011: NRC Chairman Gregory B. Jaczko'S Statement on Nrc'S Commitment to Safety
ML1110806902011-04-20020 April 2011
Notice of Meeting with First Energy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) to Discuss a Proposed LAR to Delete Technical Specification 5.5.8g, Steam Generator (SG) Program Auxiliary Feedwater Header Inspections
ML1028702612010-10-22022 October 2010
11/04/10 Notice of Meeting to Discuss the License Renewal Process and Environmental Scoping for Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station License Renewal Application Review
ML1029106182010-10-14014 October 2010
Documentation of Telephone Conversation Between Mr. David Lochbaum Regarding Follow-Up Questions Related to NRC Letter Dated July 28, 2010 (ML102040807)
ML1028503032010-10-12012 October 2010
Acceptance of License Renewal Application, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station
ML0935101922009-12-14014 December 2009
Completion of Davis-Besse Lessons Learned Task Force Recommendation 3.3.4(8)
ML0825606772008-09-15015 September 2008
Presentation Disc
ML0814207532008-05-20020 May 2008
Summary of Public Meeting with Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company to Discuss the 2008 Davis-Besse End-of-Cycle Performance Assessment
ML0807400842008-03-14014 March 2008
Draft Regulatory Guide for Comment
ML0723302222007-08-28028 August 2007
09/12/2007 Notice of Meeting with Firstenergy to Discuss the August 3, 2007 License Amendment Request for Conversion to Improved Technical Specifications for Davis-Besse, Unit 1
ML0722108432007-08-0707 August 2007
Request for Renewal of Deviation to the Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix for Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station
ML0717103462007-06-21021 June 2007
Revised Notice of Meeting with Firstenergy to Discuss Response to Nrc'S 05/14/2007, Demand for Information Regarding Fenoc'S Re-analysis of the Timeline and Root Causes for the 2002 Davis-Besse Reactor Pressure Vessel Head Degradation Event
ML0716202122007-06-13013 June 2007
Notice of Meeting with Firstenergy Regarding May 14, 2007 Demand for Information Davis-Besse
2023-05-04
[Table view] |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 May 31, 2011
NRC CHAIRMAN GREGORY B. JACZKOS STATEMENT ON NRCS COMMITMENT TO SAFETY The tragic events in Japan have understandably shined a brighter spotlight on the safety of nuclear power in the United States and on the role and actions of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. As public servants, we pride ourselves on our transparency and openness and welcome the constructive dialogue about ensuring the facilities we license are operated safely and securely.
For more than six years I have served as a Commissioner and now Chairman of this independent federal government agency and I have personally seen the tremendous job the NRC staff does. Our employees are dedicated public servants who come to work every day to do one thing - ensure that nuclear power plants and nuclear materials are safe and secure. Most of our 4,000 employees make this a lifetime endeavor.
In the last several weeks, however, a skewed picture of the NRC has been painted in some stories -- one of missed opportunities and delayed enforcement suggesting an ineffectual regulator. Nothing could be further from the reality. Here are examples that demonstrate why I strongly disagree with these recent accounts.
First, about 18 months ago the NRC staff acted to resolve a significant design concern they identified with the Westinghouse AP1000 reactor design, proposed for construction in Georgia. This is a multi-billion dollar project, but the NRCs effort and focus has been on determining if the design meets our stringent safety requirements and at one point our staff experts determined that it did not. Consistent with our focus on safety the NRC experts told the plant designer that changes were needed or the staff would not approve the design. It was as simple as that. Because of forceful NRC action, the vendor made significant improvements. This took place in full view of the public, including a dissenting opinion by one of our staff members.
Despite this transparency, there was little public recognition that this highlighted the NRCs commitment to safety.
Second, also little noticed was our work on the reactor vessel head, the lid of the metal structure that holds the nuclear fuel, of a plant in Ohio known as Davis Besse. Last year, the licensee identified problems with the interim replacement head. The NRC immediately studied the safety significance of this defective component and made certain the plant owner did the
right thing. Far from being a passive regulator, the agency demanded the plant owner accelerate replacement of the component years before the owner wanted to do so. Although this decision requires considerable cost on the part of plant owner, that had no bearing for the NRC safety experts. They simply put safety above all else, just as they had done in the case of the AP1000 reactor design. This is another example of the agency doing the right thing - something routine for the NRC staff. But unfortunately this attracted limited media attention.
Third, during our Japan nuclear incident response, I approved a bold safety recommendation by our most senior, expert staffers. As we were monitoring the fluid situation in Japan, NRC staff became concerned that the situation could worsen and impact Americans living there. Using all of their training, the best available data, and centuries of combined nuclear safety experience, the staff recommended to me that we needed to advise American citizens to stay fifty miles away from the troubled nuclear site, recommendations that differed from the advice of the Japanese government. The staff did not focus on what might be popular with the nuclear industry but instead recommended action in the best interest of safety.
These three examples are just a few of the many ways the NRC staff works day-in and day-out to make sure nuclear power plants and nuclear materials will not cause harm to the public. I could fill the entire newspaper with just a fraction of the proactive safety measures taken by the staff in the last year. Yet as with most of our safety actions, these examples received little public attention.
Of course, we are not perfect. There are things we can do better. Among them is the need to better enforce our regulations designed to protect against the risk of fires at nuclear power plants, something the Commission continues to publicly debate. We are always striving to learn lessons and we will look to the tragedy in Japan to improve our programs, even though this event involved no U.S. nuclear facilities. In fact, just 12 days into the Japan incident the Commission created a task force to look at improvements to our regulations and oversight programs. That task force has already participated in one public meeting and is working systematically and methodically to make recommendations by July.
Ensuring nuclear safety is always challenging. We cannot guarantee the prevention of every possible accident and we seem to only make news when there are issues. But that is precisely our job - to find problems and ensure they are resolved. The knowledge that the dedicated women and men of the NRC are there to advise me and my colleagues on the Commission leaves me confident in our ability to continue to successfully protect the health and safety of the American people.
