IR 05000266/2013001: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
Line 18: Line 18:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:rch 4, 2014
{{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES rch 4, 2014


==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
ANNUAL ASSESSMENT LETTER FOR POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 (REPORT 05000266/201300 1; 05000301/201300 1)
ANNUAL ASSESSMENT LETTER FOR POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 (REPORT 05000266/2013001; 05000301/2013001)


==Dear Mr. McCartney:==
==Dear Mr. McCartney:==
On February 12 , 2014, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed its end-of-cycle performance review of Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. The NRC reviewed the most recent quarterly performance indicators (PIs) in addition to inspection results and enforcement actions from January 1, 20 13, through December 31, 20 13. This letter informs you of the NRC's assessment of your facility during this period and its plans for future inspections at your facility.
On February 12, 2014, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed its end-of-cycle performance review of Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. The NRC reviewed the most recent quarterly performance indicators (PIs) in addition to inspection results and enforcement actions from January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013. This letter informs you of the NRCs assessment of your facility during this period and its plans for future inspections at your facility.


The NRC determined the performance at Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 , during the most recent quarter was within the Degraded Cornerstone Column (Column 3) of the NRC
The NRC determined the performance at Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, during the most recent quarter was within the Degraded Cornerstone Column (Column 3) of the NRCs Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) Action Matrix because of two inspection findings classified as having low to moderate safety significance (i.e. White) in the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone. One White finding was associated with a coupling failure on the Unit 1 turbine-driven auxiliary feedwater pump that was identified in the fourth quarter of 2012. The other White finding was associated with your failure to implement external flooding wave run-up protection design features as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and was identified in the first quarter of 2013. This finding was associated with Unit 1 and Unit 2. By letter dated August 9, 2013, NRC Inspection Report 05000266/2013012 and 05000301/2013012, (ADAMS Ascension Number ML13221A187) the NRC notified you of the final significance of the failure to implement external flooding features and advised you that Unit 1 was assessed to be in the Degraded Cornerstone column due to having two White findings in the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone as of the first quarter of 2013.
's Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) Action Matrix because of two inspection finding s classified as having low to moderate safety significance (i.e.


White) in the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone. One White finding was associated with a coupling failure on the Unit 1 turbine-driven auxiliary feedwater pump that was identified in the fourth quarter of 2012. The other White finding was associated with you r failure to implement external flooding wave run-up protection design features as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and was identified in the first quarter of 2013. This finding was associated with Unit 1 and Unit 2.
By letter dated April 16, 2013 (ML13108A121), you notified the NRC that you had completed the evaluation of the circumstances surrounding the degraded performance associated with the Unit 1 coupling failure and were ready for the NRC to assess your evaluation and subsequent corrective actions. On August 9, 2013, the NRC completed a supplemental inspection pursuant to Inspection Procedure 95001, Supplemental Inspection for One or Two White Inputs in a Strategic Performance Area. The NRC Inspection Report 05000266/2013009 (ML13262A523)
was transmitted by letter dated September 19, 2013, and stated that although the coupling failure finding would not be considered in the Action Matrix after the third quarter of 2013, closure of the finding did not change the status of Unit 1; Unit 1 would remain in the Degraded Cornerstone Column of the ROP Action Matrix until successful completion of an NRC supplemental inspection using Inspection Procedure 95002, Supplemental Inspection for One Degraded Cornerstone or Any Three White Inputs in a Strategic Performance Area.


By letter dated August 9, 2013, NRC Inspection Report 05000266/2013012 and 05000301/2013012 , (ADAMS Ascension Number ML13221A187)
By letter dated October 29, 2013 (ML13303B690), your staff advised the NRC of your readiness for an NRC Supplemental Inspection using Inspection Procedure 95002. This inspection is conducted to provide assurance that the root cause and contributing causes of risk significant performance issues are understood, the extent of condition and the extent of cause are identified, and the corrective actions are sufficient to prevent recurrence. That inspection commenced at Point Beach on February 3, 2014. As of the date of this annual assessment letter, the inspection report from that inspection has not been issued and Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, remains in the Degraded Cornerstone Column of the NRCs ROP Action Matrix.
the NRC notified you of the final significance of the failure to implement external flooding features and advised you that Unit 1 was assessed to be in the Degraded Cornerstone column due to having two White findings in the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone as of the first quarter of 2013.


By letter dated April 16, 2013 (ML13108A121), you notified the NRC that you had completed the evaluation of the circumstances surrounding the degraded performance associated with the Unit 1 coupling failure and were ready for the NRC to assess your evaluation and subsequent corrective actions. On August 9, 2013, the NRC completed a supplemental inspection pursuant to Inspection Procedure 95001, "Supplemental Inspection for One or Two White Inputs in a Strategic Performance Area." The NRC Inspection Report 05000266/2013009 (ML13262A523) was transmitted by letter dated September 19, 2013, and stated that although the coupling failure finding would not be considered in the Action Matrix after the third quarter of 2013, closure of the finding did not change the status of Unit 1; Unit 1 would remain in the Degraded Cornerstone Column of the ROP Action Matrix until successful completion of an NRC supplemental inspection using Inspection Procedure 95002, "Supplemental Inspection for One Degraded Cornerstone or Any Three White Inputs in a Strategic Performance Area."
The NRC determined the performance at Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, during the most recent quarter was within the Regulatory Response Column (Column 2) of the NRCs ROP Action Matrix because of one inspection finding classified as having low to moderate safety significance. (i.e. White) in the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone associated with your failure to implement external flooding wave run-up protection design features as described in the FSAR and was identified in the first quarter of 2013. The Unit 2 status of this finding relative to Unit 2 is being assessed as part of the supplemental inspection that commenced on February 3, 2014.


By letter dated October 29, 2013 (ML13303B690), your staff advised the NRC of your readiness for an NRC Supplemental Inspection using Inspection Procedure 95002. This inspection is conducted to provide assurance that the root cause and contributing causes of risk significant performance issues are understood, the extent of condition and the extent of cause are identified, and the corrective actions are sufficient to prevent recurrence. That inspection commenced at Point Beach on February 3, 2014. As of the date of this annual assessment letter, the inspection report from that inspection has not been issued and Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, remains in the Degraded Cornerstone Column of the NRC
Until successful completion of the supplemental inspection, Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, remains in the Regulatory Response Column of the NRCs ROP Action Matrix.
's ROP Action Matrix
. The NRC determined the performance at Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, during the most recent quarter was within the Regulatory Response Column (Column 2) of the NRC
's ROP Action Matrix because of one inspection finding classified as having low to moderate safety significance. (i.e. White) in the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone associated with your failure to implement external flooding wave run-up protection design features as described in the FSAR and was identified in the first quarter of 2013. The Unit 2 status of this finding relative to Unit 2 is being assessed as part of the supplemental inspection that commenced on February 3, 2014.


Until successful completion of the supplemental inspection, Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, remains in the Regulatory Response Column of the NRC's ROP Action Matrix.
As a result of the Safety Culture Common Language Initiative, the terminology and coding of cross-cutting aspects were revised. All cross-cutting aspects identified during inspections conducted in calendar year 2014 will reflect this revision to Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 0310. The CY 2013 end-of-cycle assessments were conducted using the IMC 0310 guidance in effect in CY 2013 (dated October 28, 2011). Cross-cutting aspects identified in 2013 using the 2013 terminology will be converted to the latest revision in accordance with the cross-reference in IMC 0310 during the mid-cycle assessment review and evaluated for cross-cutting themes and potential substantive cross-cutting issues in accordance with IMC 0305.


As a result of the Safety Culture Common Language Initiative, the terminology and coding of cross-cutting aspects were revised. All cross-cutting aspects identified during inspections conducted in calendar year 2014 will reflect this revision to Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 0310. The CY 2013 end-of-cycle assessments were conducted using the IMC 0310 guidance in effect in CY 2013 (dated October 28, 2011). Cross-cutting aspects identified in 2013 using the 2013 terminology will be converted to the latest revision in accordance with the cross-reference in IMC 0310 during the mid-cycle assessment review and evaluated for cross-cutting themes and potential substantive cross-cutting issues in accordance with IMC 0305
The enclosed inspection plan lists the inspections scheduled through June 30, 2015. Routine inspections performed by resident inspectors are not included in the inspection plan. The inspections listed during the last nine months of the inspection plan are tentative and may be revised at the mid-cycle performance review. The NRC provides the inspection plan to allow for the resolution of any scheduling conflicts and personnel availability issues. The NRC will contact you as soon as possible to discuss changes to the inspection plan should circumstances warrant any changes. This inspection plan does not include security related inspections, which will be sent via separate, non-publicly available correspondence.
.
The enclosed inspection plan lists the inspections scheduled through June 30, 20 15. Routine inspections performed by resident inspectors are not included in the inspection plan. The inspections listed during the last nine months of the inspection plan are tentative and may be revised at the mid-cycle performance review. The NRC provides the inspection plan to allow for the resolution of any scheduling conflicts and personnel availability issues. The NRC will contact you as soon as possible to discuss changes to the inspection plan should circumstances warrant any changes.


This inspection plan does not include security related inspections, which will be sent via separate, non-publicly available correspondence.
From January 1 to December 31, 2013, the NRC issued three Severity Level IV traditional enforcement violations associated with impeding the regulatory process. Therefore, the NRC plans to conduct Inspection Procedure 92723, Follow Up Inspection for Three or More Severity Level IV Traditional Enforcement Violations in the Same Area in a 12-Month Period, to follow-up on these violations. 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 System (PARS) component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
 
From January 1 to December 31, 20 13, the NRC issued three Severity Level IV traditional enforcement violations associated with impeding the regulatory process
. Therefore, the NRC plans to conduct Inspection Procedure 92723 , "Follow Up Inspection for Three or More Severity Level IV Traditional Enforcement Violations in the Same Area in a 12-Month Period
," to follow-up on these violation s. 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 System (PARS) component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).


Please contact Mr. Jamnes Cameron, at 630-829-9833, with any questions you have regarding this letter.
Please contact Mr. Jamnes Cameron, at 630-829-9833, with any questions you have regarding this letter.


Sincerely,
Sincerely,
/RA/ Cynthia D. Pederson Regional Administrator Docket Nos.
/RA/
 
Cynthia D. Pederson Regional Administrator Docket Nos. 50-266; 50-301 License Nos. DPR-24; DPR-27 Enclosure:
50-266; 50-301 License Nos.
Point Beach Nuclear Plant Inspection/Activity Plan cc w/encl: Distribution via ListServTM
 
DPR-24; DPR-27 Enclosure:
Point Beach Nuclear Plant Inspection/Activity Plan cc w/encl: Distribution via ListServ TM
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 07:22, 4 November 2019

Annual Assessment Letter for Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Report 05000266/2013001; 05000301/2013001)
ML14063A288
Person / Time
Site: Point Beach  NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 03/04/2014
From: Pederson C
NRC/RGN-III
To: Mccartney E
Point Beach
References
IR-13-001
Download: ML14063A288 (7)
v • d • e


Text

UNITED STATES rch 4, 2014

SUBJECT:

ANNUAL ASSESSMENT LETTER FOR POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 (REPORT 05000266/2013001; 05000301/2013001)

Dear Mr. McCartney:

On February 12, 2014, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed its end-of-cycle performance review of Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. The NRC reviewed the most recent quarterly performance indicators (PIs) in addition to inspection results and enforcement actions from January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013. This letter informs you of the NRCs assessment of your facility during this period and its plans for future inspections at your facility.

The NRC determined the performance at Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, during the most recent quarter was within the Degraded Cornerstone Column (Column 3) of the NRCs Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) Action Matrix because of two inspection findings classified as having low to moderate safety significance (i.e. White) in the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone. One White finding was associated with a coupling failure on the Unit 1 turbine-driven auxiliary feedwater pump that was identified in the fourth quarter of 2012. The other White finding was associated with your failure to implement external flooding wave run-up protection design features as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and was identified in the first quarter of 2013. This finding was associated with Unit 1 and Unit 2. By letter dated August 9, 2013, NRC Inspection Report 05000266/2013012 and 05000301/2013012, (ADAMS Ascension Number ML13221A187) the NRC notified you of the final significance of the failure to implement external flooding features and advised you that Unit 1 was assessed to be in the Degraded Cornerstone column due to having two White findings in the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone as of the first quarter of 2013.

By letter dated April 16, 2013 (ML13108A121), you notified the NRC that you had completed the evaluation of the circumstances surrounding the degraded performance associated with the Unit 1 coupling failure and were ready for the NRC to assess your evaluation and subsequent corrective actions. On August 9, 2013, the NRC completed a supplemental inspection pursuant to Inspection Procedure 95001, Supplemental Inspection for One or Two White Inputs in a Strategic Performance Area. The NRC Inspection Report 05000266/2013009 (ML13262A523)

was transmitted by letter dated September 19, 2013, and stated that although the coupling failure finding would not be considered in the Action Matrix after the third quarter of 2013, closure of the finding did not change the status of Unit 1; Unit 1 would remain in the Degraded Cornerstone Column of the ROP Action Matrix until successful completion of an NRC supplemental inspection using Inspection Procedure 95002, Supplemental Inspection for One Degraded Cornerstone or Any Three White Inputs in a Strategic Performance Area.

By letter dated October 29, 2013 (ML13303B690), your staff advised the NRC of your readiness for an NRC Supplemental Inspection using Inspection Procedure 95002. This inspection is conducted to provide assurance that the root cause and contributing causes of risk significant performance issues are understood, the extent of condition and the extent of cause are identified, and the corrective actions are sufficient to prevent recurrence. That inspection commenced at Point Beach on February 3, 2014. As of the date of this annual assessment letter, the inspection report from that inspection has not been issued and Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, remains in the Degraded Cornerstone Column of the NRCs ROP Action Matrix.

The NRC determined the performance at Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, during the most recent quarter was within the Regulatory Response Column (Column 2) of the NRCs ROP Action Matrix because of one inspection finding classified as having low to moderate safety significance. (i.e. White) in the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone associated with your failure to implement external flooding wave run-up protection design features as described in the FSAR and was identified in the first quarter of 2013. The Unit 2 status of this finding relative to Unit 2 is being assessed as part of the supplemental inspection that commenced on February 3, 2014.

Until successful completion of the supplemental inspection, Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, remains in the Regulatory Response Column of the NRCs ROP Action Matrix.

As a result of the Safety Culture Common Language Initiative, the terminology and coding of cross-cutting aspects were revised. All cross-cutting aspects identified during inspections conducted in calendar year 2014 will reflect this revision to Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 0310. The CY 2013 end-of-cycle assessments were conducted using the IMC 0310 guidance in effect in CY 2013 (dated October 28, 2011). Cross-cutting aspects identified in 2013 using the 2013 terminology will be converted to the latest revision in accordance with the cross-reference in IMC 0310 during the mid-cycle assessment review and evaluated for cross-cutting themes and potential substantive cross-cutting issues in accordance with IMC 0305.

The enclosed inspection plan lists the inspections scheduled through June 30, 2015. Routine inspections performed by resident inspectors are not included in the inspection plan. The inspections listed during the last nine months of the inspection plan are tentative and may be revised at the mid-cycle performance review. The NRC provides the inspection plan to allow for the resolution of any scheduling conflicts and personnel availability issues. The NRC will contact you as soon as possible to discuss changes to the inspection plan should circumstances warrant any changes. This inspection plan does not include security related inspections, which will be sent via separate, non-publicly available correspondence.

From January 1 to December 31, 2013, the NRC issued three Severity Level IV traditional enforcement violations associated with impeding the regulatory process. Therefore, the NRC plans to conduct Inspection Procedure 92723, Follow Up Inspection for Three or More Severity Level IV Traditional Enforcement Violations in the Same Area in a 12-Month Period, to follow-up on these violations. 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 System (PARS) component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Please contact Mr. Jamnes Cameron, at 630-829-9833, with any questions you have regarding this letter.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Cynthia D. Pederson Regional Administrator Docket Nos. 50-266; 50-301 License Nos. DPR-24; DPR-27 Enclosure:

Point Beach Nuclear Plant Inspection/Activity Plan cc w/encl: Distribution via ListServTM

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=IR_05000266/2013001&oldid=2052269"