IR 05000266/2012007

IR 05000266-12-007, 05000301-12-007; 04/16/2012 05/03/2012; Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2; Evaluations of Changes, Tests, or Experiments and Permanent Plant Modifications

ML12132A221
Person / Time
Site:	Point Beach
Issue date:	05/10/2012
From:	Hironori Peterson Engineering Branch 3
To:	Meyer L Point Beach
Alan Dahbur
References
IR-12-007
Download: ML12132A221 (14)

Text

May 10, 2012

SUBJECT:

POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2, EVALUATIONS OF CHANGES, TESTS, OR EXPERIMENTS ANDPERMANENT PLANT MODIFICATIONS BASELINE INSPECTION REPORT 05000266/2012007(DRS);

05000301/2012007(DRS)

Dear Mr. Meyer:

On May 3, 2012, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an Evaluations of Changes, Tests, or Experiments and Permanent Plant Modifications Inspection at your Point Beach Nuclear Plant. The enclosed inspection report documents the inspection results which were discussed on May 3, 2012, 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 Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 50, Section 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any), 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 website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Sincerely,

/RA/

Hironori Peterson, Acting Chief Engineering Branch 3 Division of Reactor Safety Docket Nos.: 50-266; 50-301 License Nos.: DPR-24; DPR-27

Enclosure:

Inspection Report 05000266/2012007(DRS); 05000301/2012007(DRS)

w/Attachment: Supplemental Information

REGION III==

Docket Nos.: 50-266; 50-301 License Nos.: DPR-24; DPR-27 Report No: 05000266/2012007(DRS); 05000301/2012007(DRS)

Licensee: NextEra Energy Point Beach, LLC Facility: Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 Location: Two Rivers, WI Dates: April 16, 2012, through May 3, 2012 Inspectors: Alan Dahbur, Senior Reactor Inspector (Lead)

George Hausman, Senior Reactor Inspector Dariusz Szwarc, Reactor Inspector Approved by: Hironori Peterson, Acting Chief Engineering Branch 3 Division of Reactor Safety Enclosure

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

IR 05000266/2012007(DRS), 05000301/2012007(DRS); 04/16/2012 - 05/03/2012; Point Beach

Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2; Evaluations of Changes, Tests, or Experiments and Permanent Plant Modifications.

This report covers a two-week announced baseline inspection on evaluations of changes, tests, or experiments and permanent plant modifications. The inspection was conducted by Region III based engineering inspectors. Based on the results of this inspection, no findings of significance were identified. 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.

NRC-Identified

and Self-Revealed Findings

Cornerstone: Initiating Events, Mitigating Systems, and Barrier Integrity

No significance findings were identified.

Licensee-Identified Violations

No violations of significance were identified.

REPORT DETAILS

1R17 Evaluations of Changes, Tests, or Experiments and Permanent Plant Modifications

.1 Evaluation of Changes, Tests, or Experiments

a. Inspection Scope

From April 16, 2012, through May 3, 2012, the inspectors reviewed seven safety evaluations performed pursuant to Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 50, Section 59 to determine if the evaluations were adequate and that prior NRC approval was obtained as appropriate. The inspectors also reviewed 16 screenings where licensee personnel had determined that a 10 CFR 50.59 evaluation was not necessary.

The inspectors reviewed these documents to determine if:

• the changes, tests, or experiments performed were evaluated in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 and that sufficient documentation existed to confirm that a license amendment was not required;

• the safety issue requiring the change, tests or experiment was resolved;

• the licensee conclusions for evaluations of changes, tests, or experiments were correct and consistent with 10 CFR 50.59; and

• the design and licensing basis documentation was updated to reflect the change.

The inspectors used, in part, Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 96-07, Guidelines for 10 CFR 50.59 Implementation, Revision 1, to determine acceptability of the completed evaluations, and screenings. The NEI document was endorsed by the NRC in Regulatory Guide 1.187, Guidance for Implementation of 10 CFR 50.59, Changes, Tests, and Experiments, dated November 2000. The inspectors also consulted Part 9900 of the NRC Inspection Manual, 10 CFR Guidance for 10 CFR 50.59, Changes, Tests, and Experiments.

This inspection constituted seven samples of evaluations and 16 samples of changes as defined in IP 71111.17-04.

b. Findings

No findings of significance were identified.

.2 Permanent Plant Modifications

a. Inspection Scope

From April 16, 2012, through May 3, 2012, the inspectors reviewed eight permanent plant modifications that had been installed in the plant during the last three years.

This review included in-plant walkdowns for portions of the emergency diesel generators G-01 and G-02 heat exchangers replacement modification; the removal of boric acid heat trace equipment; the removal of racks RK-52J and RK-52-L and reroute of transformer 1X04 low voltage side power cables modification. The modifications were selected based upon risk-significance, safety significance, and complexity. The inspectors reviewed the modifications selected to determine if:

• the supporting design and licensing basis documentation was updated;

• the changes were in accordance with the specified design requirements;

• the procedures and training plans affected by the modification have been adequately updated;

• the test documentation as required by the applicable test programs has been updated; and

• post-modification testing adequately verified system operability and/or functionality.

The inspectors also used applicable industry standards to evaluate acceptability of the modifications. The list of modifications and other documents reviewed by the inspectors is included as an Attachment to this report.

This inspection constituted eight permanent plant modification samples as defined in IP 71111.17-04.

b. Findings

No findings of significance were identified.

4OA2 Problem Identification and Resolution

.1 Routine Review of Condition Reports

a. Inspection Scope

From April 16, 2012, through May 3, 2012, the inspectors reviewed various corrective action process documents that identified or were related to 10 CFR 50.59 evaluations and permanent plant modifications. The inspectors reviewed these documents to evaluate the effectiveness of corrective actions related to evaluations of changes, tests, or experiments and permanent plant modifications. In addition, corrective action documents written on issues identified during the inspection were reviewed to verify adequate problem identification and incorporation of the problems into the corrective action system. The specific corrective action documents that were sampled and reviewed by the inspectors are listed in the Attachment to this report.

b. Findings

No findings of significance were identified.

4OA5 Power Uprate

.1 Evaluation of Changes, Tests, or Experiments (2 Samples)

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors reviewed safety evaluations for those implemented for the extended power uprate.

• Safety Evaluation 2011-003, Raise EOP Setpoint 0.2 (RWST Level to Stop Spray Pumps) to 17 percent - Radiological Consequences; and

• Safety Evaluation 2011-004, Raise EOP Setpoint 0.2 (RWST Level to Stop Spray Pumps) to 17 percent - Ctmt Pressure and Temp.

b. Findings

No findings of significance were identified.

4OA6 Meetings

.1 Exit Meeting Summary

On May 3, 2012, the inspectors presented the inspection results to Mr. Meyer and other members of the licensee staff. The licensee personnel acknowledged the inspection results presented and did not identify any proprietary content. The inspectors confirmed that all proprietary material reviewed during the inspection was returned to the licensee staff.

ATTACHMENT:

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

KEY POINTS OF CONTACT

Licensee

L. Meyer, Site Vice President

C. Trezise, Engineering Director

P. Wild, Design Engineering Manager

B. Woyak, Design Engineering Supervisor

F. Hennessy, Excellence Manager

B. Scherwinski, Licensing

B. Hennessy, Licensing

V. Kanal, Engineering Supervisor

C. Ford, Maintenance Supervisor

J. Niffenegger, Electrical Design Engineering

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

S. Burton, Senior Resident Inspector

LIST OF ITEMS

OPENED, CLOSED AND DISCUSSED

Opened, Closed and

Discussed

None.

Attachment