No: 14-058 September 4, 2014

CONTACT: Dave McIntyre, 301-415-8200 

NRC Issues Mid-Cycle Assessments for Nation’s Nuclear Plants

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued mid-cycle assessment letters to the nation’s 

100 operating commercial nuclear power plants regarding their performance through the first half of 

2014. The mid-cycle assessment period concluded June 30, with 90 plants in the two highest 

performance categories.

“These assessment letters are the result of a systematic NRC review of performance indicators 

and inspection findings at each domestic power reactor facility,” said Scott Morris, director of the 

Division of Inspection and Regional Support in the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. “In addition 

to ensuring that the nation’s nuclear power plants are safe by inspecting them and rating their 

performance regularly, our goal in issuing these letters is to ensure all our stakeholders clearly 

understand the basis for our assessments of plant performance and the actions we are taking to address 

any identified performance deficiencies.”

Of the 90 highest-performing reactors, 78 fully met all safety and security performance 

objectives and were inspected by the NRC using the normal “baseline” inspection program. Twelve

reactors needed to resolve one or two items of low safety significance. For this performance level, 

regulatory oversight includes additional inspection and follow-up of corrective actions. Plants in this 

level are: Browns Ferry 3 (Ala.); Clinton (Ill.); Fermi 2 (Mich.); Fitzpatrick (N.Y.); Ginna (N.Y.); 

Grand Gulf (Miss.); LaSalle 2 (Ill.); Oconee 1 (S.C.); Point Beach 2 (Wisc.); Prairie Island 2 (Minn.);

Waterford (La.); and Wolf Creek (Kan.). (Grand Gulf and LaSalle 2 have resolved their issues since the

reporting period ended and have transitioned to the highest performing level.) 

Eight nuclear reactors were in the third performance category with a degraded level of 

performance. For this category, regulatory oversight includes more NRC inspections, senior 

management attention and oversight focused on the cause(s) of the degraded performance. These plants 

were Arkansas Nuclear One 1 and 2 (Ark.); Browns Ferry 2 (Ala.); Duane Arnold (Iowa); Monticello 

(Minn.); Pilgrim (Mass.); Point Beach 1 (Wisc.); and Susquehanna 2 (Pa.). (Browns Ferry 2 has 

resolved some of its issues since the reporting period ended and has transitioned to the second highest 

performing level. Duane Arnold has resolved its issues since the reporting period ended and has 

transitioned to the highest performance level.)

One reactor, Browns Ferry 1 in Alabama, was in the fourth performance category through the 

end of the mid-cycle assessment period and required increased oversight because of a safety finding of 

high significance. However, since then, Browns Ferry 1 has transitioned to the second highest 

performing level after resolving its significant performance issues. 
Page | 2

The Fort Calhoun plant in Nebraska is currently under a special NRC oversight program distinct 

from the normal performance levels because of an extended shutdown associated with significant 

performance issues. In December 2013, the NRC oversight panel cleared the unit to resume operations, 

but the plant will remain under special oversight until the panel returns it to regular oversight. 

Therefore, the plant will not receive a mid-cycle assessment letter. Further details on NRC’s oversight 

activities at Fort Calhoun are available on the NRC’s webpage on Special NRC Oversight at Fort 

Calhoun Station.

The NRC routinely updates information on each plant’s current performance and posts the latest 

information as it becomes available to the action matrix summary. The annual assessment letters sent to 

each operating reactor are also available through the NRC’s webpage on the Reactor Oversight Process. 

Annual construction oversight assessments for new reactors at the Vogtle and Summer sites and at 

Watts Bar 2 are also on the NRC website.

Every six months each plant receives either a mid-cycle or annual assessment letter along with 

an NRC inspection plan.