IR 05000266/1978024

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
IE Insp Repts 50-266/78-24 & 50-301/78-25 on 781211-15.No Noncompliance Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Plant Operations, Cleaniness,Review & Audit,Surveillance Testing,Nonroutine Followup,Ie Circular Followup, & Independent Insp
ML19274D770
Person / Time
Site: Point Beach  NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 01/08/1979
From: Choules N, Warnick R
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML19274D767 List:
References
50-266-78-24, 50-301-78-25, NUDOCS 7902260104
Download: ML19274D770 (6)


Text

.

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COM'!ISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

REGION III

Y Report No. 50-266/7B-24; 50-301/78-25

-

Docket No. 50-266/ 50-301 License No. DPR-24; DPR-27 Licensee: Wisconsin Electric Power Company 231 West Michigan Milwaukee, WI 53203 Facility Name:

Point Beach Unit 1&2 Inspection At:

Two Creeks, WI Inspection Conducted: December 11-15, 1978

/

7J Inspector:

h C u

.

/

'

R FIDM Approved By-R. F. Warnick, Chief l-8-79 Reactor Projects Section 2 Inspection Sun. mary Inspection on December 11-15,_1978 (Report No. 50-266/78-24 and No. 50-301/78-25)

Areas Inspected:

Routine, unannounced inspection of plant opera-tions, cleanliness, review and audit, surveillance testing, non-routine event followup, IE Circular followup, and independent inspection. The inspection involved 30 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.

Results: No items of noncompliance were identified.

790226010%

.

.

DETAILS 1.

Persons Contacted

  • G. A. Reed, ypnager, Nuclear Power Division
  • J.

Greenwood, Assistant to the Manager 8"

F. T. Rhodes [. Operation Superintendent

.g-J. Zach, Reactor Engineer T. F. Deddins, Maintenance Engineer C. M. Krieser, Project Engineer, Quality Assurance C. H. Harris, Radicchemical Engineer

  • F.

Zeman, Office Supervisor The inspector aise talked with and interviewed members of the operations and maintenance sections.

  • Denotes those attending the exit interview on December 15, 1978.

2.

Plant Operations a.

Plant Tour (1) The inspector performed a plant tour accompanied by a licensee representative.

(2) During this tour, selected " DANGER" tags were reviewed for proper approval and the Status log was reviewed to determine if the tags were properly accounted for.

No discrepancies were noted.

(3) Selected electrical breakers for the RHR, SI and core spray pumps were checked for proper alignment and no discrepancies were noted.

(4) The inspector visually inspected the spent fuel pit and the spent fuel pit leakage detection area. Water level and water temperg acceptable levels.

Aspreviouslyreportedpurewereat a small leak (about a cup a day) apparently from the south pool has been detected.

The licensee is collecting the leakage and performing analysis to determine if the water is pool water, ground water or a combination.

1/ IE Inspection Report No. 50-266/78-15 and No. 50-301/78-20.

-2-

.

b.

Jum,ar Log The Jumper and Bypass log was reviewed and no discrepancies were noted.

p c.

Logbooks f

h f

The inspector reviewed Unit 1 and 2 control room logs, station log, and the safeguards log for selected days during the past three months, and confirmed that entries were filled out and initialed to identify the action taken, and that the Operations Superintendent or his assistant is reviewing and initialing the station log sheets indicating his review.

d.

Special Orders and Operations Group Standing Orders The current subject orders were reviewed and no discrepan-cies were noted.

e.

Significant Opera;ing Events The inspector reviewed SOE's 50-266/78-07 and 50-301/78-03.

No items of concern were identified.

f.

Reactor Coolant and Steam Generator Chemistry Subject sarveillance records consisting of primary and secondary log sheets were reviewed for the past three months.

Review of reactor coolant logs indicated no evidence of fuel failure. Oxygen and fluoride concentrations were well below the acceptable limits.

The concentration of chlorides in Unit 1 exceeded r.ormally accepted levels on two occassions after a common solvent which contained chlorides was used to clean the internals of a charging pump.

The licensee has withdrawn the solvent from use.

Review of steam generator logs showed two leaking Unit 1 condenser tubes were plugged, one on October 17, 1978, and the other on November ^6, 1978.

-3-

.

.

3.

Cleanliness The inspector visually inspected the housekeeping and cleanli-ness during the plant tour.

The housekeeping was found to be very good.

I 4.

ReviewandAudkts

-

.

Review of'the minutes of the licensee's Onsite (manager's

jE a.

supervisory staff) and Offsite Review Committees for the past year verified that both committees are meeting the licensee's Technical Specifications requirments as follows:

(1) Meeting frequency for Onsite and Offsite Review Committee.

(2) Meeting memberships and quorum requirements.

(3) Technical Specifications changes are reviewed as required.

(4) Reportable occurrences are reviewed as required.

(5) Violations of facility Technical Specifications are reviewed.

(6) Plant operations are reviewed for industrial and nuclear safety hazards by manager's staff.

i b.

The inspector reviewed the audits conducted by the Off-site Review Committee, the corporate Quality Assurance group, and the plant Quality Assurance Coordinator, and determined that audits are being conducted as required by the Technical Specifications and the licensee's administrative instructions.

The insnector noted that the Corporate QA audits had been broadened in scope from audits performed in previous years.

5.

Surveillance Testing The inspector reviewed ccmpleted surveillance test PT-R-1, Main Steam and Pressurizer Safety Valve Setpoints, and verified-4-

.

that the Unit 1 safety valves had been set as required by the Technical Specifications during the last refueling outage.

6.

Reportable Occurences The following Yeportable occurrences were reviewed by examina-tion of logs, qecords, and through discussions with plant p'.

personnel. 06currences were reviewed for completion of report-ing requirements, compliance with Technical Specifications,

'"

investigation and determination of cause, proposed corrective measures, and/or completion of corrective action.

2/

a.

R050-266/78-15 Inoperable shock suppressor.

b.

R050-266/78-16 Safeguards bus tie breaker trip.

Review of these occurrences indicated the licensee's corrective actions appear to be adequate and no concerns were identified by the inspector.

c.

R0's 50-266/78-17 and 50-301/78-12 of which only the prompt reports had been received at the time of inspection were reviewed for any items of immediate concern. No items of such were identified.

These occurrences will be reviewed further after the licensee's 14 day reports are received.

7.

IE Circular No. 78-18 Followup The inspector determined fram review of the Manger's Supervi-sory Staff minutes that the subject circular was reviewed.

No further action is planned by the licensee in regards to the circular.

8.

Outstanding and Miscellaneous items In a previous inspection 4/ it was indicated that the onsite a.

safety review committee was to resolve control bank worth discrepancies prior to reaching 100% power equilibrium.

The inspector verified '. hat this was accomplished from review of the Manger's Supervisory Staf f minutes.

2/ LER 50-266/78-15, dated October 23, 1978.

3/ LER 50-266/78-16, dated November 17, 1978.

}/IEInspectionReportNo. 50-266/78-20.

- 5-

.

E that training and b.

The inspector previously determined fuel inventory records were stored in temporary office storage locations with no second copies. The licensee has completed microfilming these records such that at least twofcopies of the records now exist.

The inspebtor reviewed the licensee program of controlling

  1. '

c.

-I oil and grease lubricants. Call up cards for the various equipment in the plant specifies the type of lubricant to be used.

Lubricants are stored in a separate oil storage room.

The containers are marked as to what type of lubri-cant they contain. No items of concern were identified in the r2 view of the above.

9.

Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on December 15, 1978.

The inspector summarizcd the scope and findings of the inspection.

5/ IE Inspection Report No. 50-266/78-21 and No. 50-301/78-22.

.

-6-