ML20198N869
| ML20198N869 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 01/14/1998 |
| From: | Beach A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Patulski S WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20198N875 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-266-97-01, 50-266-97-1, 50-301-97-01, 50-301-97-1, NUDOCS 9801210241 | |
| Download: ML20198N869 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000266/1997001
Text
~
__
47 %
y
-
.;
t
-
,
-
. ;
,
ye ~ na ne%
UNITEb STATES :
~5
,
-
b
7
Y
.
NUCLEM REGULATORY CoutessioN -
-
w
,
-c
a
m ,,,
.
,
.
'
4
.
801WumstMuf FIOAD-
' T
. ueu. iunas es=-smu
q
.
,
0;; ? *****
Vanuary:14W1998-
j
'
.
.
,
1
M
A
t
a
,
.
.-
,
.
_tl
s
4
.
-
Mr. 8. A. Patuised '
~
'
~ Site Vice President
Point Beach Nuclear Plant '
Di
.8610 Nuclear Road =
Two Rivers, WI 54241
j
l
'EDear Mi, Patuiski:
.
c
.
' Enclosed for your review is the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) . Report _
,
'
'
~ 5 for the Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant covering the period April 28, igg 6, through
SNovember 2gl 10g7. This assessment period was extended to allow a period of sustained
^
operation after the restart of the Point Beach facility following its extended shutdown. This report
~
will be discussed with Wisconsin Electric at a public reeeting at the Holiday Inn in Manitowoc,
, ,
Wisconsin, scheduled for January 28,1998, at 10:00 a.m. (C8T). During this meeting you are
encouraged to candidly discuss any comments you may have regarding our report.
L in'accordance with Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) policy, I have reviewed the results of
" the SALP Board assessment and concur with the recommended ratings. The functional areas of.
Plant Operations, Maintenance, and Plant Support were rated Category 2. The functional area of
'
- -
Engineeing was rated Category 3. Although this appears to be a decline in performance since
the last assessment period, in retrospect, it is my view that our previous assessment did not
'
.,
'
._ accurately reflect Wisconsin Electric's actual performance in the operations, maintenance, and
c
. engineering areas.
l-
During this assessment period, the root cause of many identified issues were directly related to
longstanding weaknesses in these areas, improvement in the performance in these areas
.
z
4,
- occurred during the latter portion of this assessment perind and the improvement initiatives .
-
- undertaken over the last year have resulted in generally good conduct of nuclear activities at the
Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant. ' Much of the improvement can ba attributed to the resolve and
+
- focussed attention of Wisconsin Electric senior management. This included the assignment of
Chief Nuclear Officer duties to the President of Wisconsin Electric, the extensive use of
'
.
, L experienced nucle' r personnel from outside the Wisconsin Electric system, and the delay of -
.
e
g
reactor restarts to ensure the satisfactory completion of improvement initiatives and the
"
^
resolution of emergent issues The details of our assessment are provided in the enclosed
,
,;
..- ~
.
.-
L EArty'in the assessment period,'the NRC identified concems in a number of areas.~ As a result,
f
"
ip ,
enforcement actions' wore taken, and following tho' January 19g7 senior monagtment meeting, a
1
letter was'sent to. Wisconsin Electric discussing our concems with Wisconsin Electric's '
~
. performancesThe NRC established an Oversight Panel, chaired by a senior NRC manager, to
,
L
5 closely monitor Wisconsin Electric's initiatives to address the performance problems at Point -
'
4
_
Beach.(Wisconsin Electric implemented a comprehensive plan prior to restart of Unit 2 to -
-
'
%
address NRC concems and other issues identified by the Point Beach staff. Following a number
- <
Lof pubik
sment meetings and several special inspections and ongoing resident
Q,,
hN.
'
g
!-
E
M *iB8c'A o*so &
-
Ellll Ellll'l'l lllll
fc'LO
'
-w
-
- - - -
u.
e
,
'
~
w p-
% a_.:.
-
-
.
i
'
'
s-
, ,
en .
c w .
.n . , + , , , ,
-n..
n-,.
_ _ _ _ _ _
jp ' '
,
y
lM
' 8. 'Patuisid ;
-2-
!
'
'
l
inspections, the NRC concluded that Wisconsin Electric successfully accomplished the actions to
q
support Unit 2 restart and the subsequent Unit i restart.' While both units have successfully? _
_
restarted and operabd for a time, we recognize that a number of improvement initiatives are still
,
ongoing
.
.
Improvements were noted in the conduct of operations toward the end of the assessment period
resulting from a strong management commitment to improve performance and to implement
'
improved standards. Dunng recent operations activities, the NRC has observed good command -
and control, effective communications, operator awareness of plant conditions, and thorough -
shift tumovers. In addition, we observed improved procedural adherence and generally good
i<
equipment configuration control. The long-term effost to upgrade the quality and usability of the
operations procedures is an example of Wisconsin Electric's continued commitment to improving
performance in this area.
i
. High quality workmanship by maintenance stan is a strength at Point Beach. In addition,
,
Wisconsin Electric initiated efforts to address performance issues identified earty in the
assessment period, including conducting a comprehensive review of past work activities,
lowering the threshold for writing condition repc:ts, and conducting effective System Engineering
Review Board (SERB) and Outage Review Committee (ORC) activities. These efforts resulted in
l
the identification of a large number of equipment issues that were addressed durbg the
assessment period. These and other initiatives have substantially improved the material
condition of the plant. In addition, the initiatives resulted in a large volume of lower prionty,
previously unidentified problems that have significantly challenged Wisconsin Electric's current
work control system. This an6 other maintenance program problems have resulted in several
- recent initiatives to increase maintenance staff, overhaul the work control system, and improve
maintenanca administrative and implementation procedures. Followup inspections and recent
- observations have indicated that the corrective actions for problems with the performance of
surveillance and post-maintenance testing, identified early in the assessment period, have
-
resulted in improved testing programs.
Performance in engineering improved during the latter portion of the assessment period and was
acceptable overall. Early in the assessment period, significant weaknesses were identified in the
engineering area. In response to the issues, Wisconsin Electric management brought in outside
resources to help assess the extent of the problems. Engineering support to other plant
nrganizations was normally adequate and system ownership improved significantly with the
c
'
addition of permanent and contract resources and the implementation of a system engineering -
group. The SERB and ORC efforts to support restart of Units 1 and 2 resulted in a thorough
review of each plant system and the identification of a large number of design and hardware-
'
related issues, including some issues that required resolution prior to restart of the units. Early in
.
- the period, weaknesses in engineering staff efforts to maintain the design bases of the plant
]
y,
were identified. This was due, in part, to a lack of well documented and understood design-
!
bases and a lack of rigor by engineering personnel. Although actions were taken to address
-'
these problems, examples of poorly suppotied operability determinations and safety evaluations
'
continued to be identified throughout the period. While problems with the inservice testing -
~'
s program identified early la the assessment period appear to have been resolved, they were not
q
initially addressed in a thorough or timely manner.
,
n
1
.
,
o
-
>
s
m .- . -.
-- - -.
. .
.
._..;_
. _. _ _ ._. _ _ . _ ,
.
. . . . . _ . . . . . -
_ . _
.. _ . _ _ - -
. _ . -
. .
_ _ _ . _ _ . _ - . .
. _ _ _ m y._
. _ . -
+ -
a
~
,
.
- 8. Patuiski;
-3--
' : Overall, performance in the ' plant support area was good, but declined during the assessment
5: period as a result of initially ineffective corrective actions for high radiation area control problems, :-
radiation instrumord and dosimeter _ calibration problems, and problems with secunty_
compensatory actions and vehicle searches.: Fire protection performance was good; although.
r
x
shutdown rebaselining effort." Emergency prsparedness performance was very good, and
.
3
chemistry, environmental rnonitoring, radioactive waste, and radioactive materials transportation L
p
programs were_ good.
-
1
' As stated earlier, an Oversight Panel was formed during this assessment period to closely'-
_ ;
monitor Wisconsin Electric's performance improvement initiatives. The activities of that panel s
t
were based on the Oversight Plan documented in a letter to Mr. Richard R. Grigg, dated
- February 12,1997. L The Oversight Panel closely monitored Wisconsin Eioctric's initiatives to -
'
support restart of Unit 2 and later Unit 1.' As discussed in my letter to Mr. Grigg dated :
'
January 14,1998, based on the adequate completion of the items necessary to support restart of
each unit, the successful and generally event free restart of both units,' and our conclusion that
j
~
tWisconsin Electric's overall performance has been generally good, we discontinued the
,
- additior'al NRC management oversight provided by the Panel. We will continue, however, to , _ _
' closely monitor the performance improvement activities Wisconsin Electric is implementing and -
' may conduct periodic management meetings to discuss progress with Wisconsin Electric
'
'
'
- management.
At the SALP meeting, Wisconsin Electric should be prepared to discuss our assessments and
Wisconsin Electric plans to improve performance in the area of engineering. Additionally, you
p
are requested to respond in writing within 30 days after the meeting, specifically addressing
!-
corrective actions planned to improve performance in the area of engineering.
,
Ir: accordance with Section 2.7g0 of the NRC " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of
Federal Regulations, e ccpy of this letter, the SALP report, and your response to this letter will be
placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
,
L
.
L
- Should you have any questions concoming the SALP report, we would be pleased to discuss
D
them with you.-
Sincerely,
'
/s/A. Bill Beach
A. Bill Beach
Regionil Administrator
Docket No. 50-266
Docket No. 50-301
!'
Enclosure:
_ SALP 13 Report
- No. 50-266/g7001; 50-301/97001
,
See Attached Distnbution
-
i
See Previous Concurrence
g
-
DOCUMENT NAMER G:\\SALP\\ Poi 97001. sip.-
To ,seelve e sepy of this emeweisnt,indleste bi the ben 'C' = copy witaiout metesh,nont/eneleewe *E' a Copy smith attachusent/enoisewe
,
- $1" = the seev
"
OFFICE -
Rill
NRR-
Rlli
f,,
Rlli
R%-
'
_
,
Grob['
.Dapas*-
Bokh
f4AME L
JMcBMpt
Hannorf
.
t
DATE
01/ /98 -
01/ /98'
01M
01/ /98
01AV98
- ?
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
e
.
-
>
1
I
e
T
ll-
lt
s
4
-'ht-
r+km
.dee'
em
tv.,a-
. + - . -
sv.-
<
<
w
-.-w-
! ww i-
v
,
=
=
v
_ _ _
_ ._
_ _ _ ~ _. _. _ _ _ _._ . _ . _ _ -
. .
. . _ _ -
_ _ _ - . ~ . _ _ . _ .
.
. ..
l -
.
.
,
"
8. P.tuiski
31
.;
i
- As stated endier, an ' Oversight' Panel was formed durin,
is assessment period to closely
monitor Wisconsin Electric's performance improvement initiatives. The activities of that panel
-
were based on the oversight Plan documented in a letter to Mr Richard R. Grigg, dated ;
- -
February 12,1997. The oversight Panel closely monitored Wisconsin Electric's initiatives to
support restart of Unit 2 and later Unit 1. Based on the adequate compietion of the items -
I
necessary to support restart of each unit, the successful and genera #y event free restart of both-
. un s, an our conclusion that Wiscons.n Electric's overall performance has been generally good, -
-}
it
d
l have decided to discontmue the additional NRC management oversight provided by the panel.
We will continus to closely monitor the performance improvement activities Wisconsin Electric is
'
..
implementing and may conduct periodic management meetings to discuss progress with
. Wiscusin Electric management.
At the SALP meetino, Wisconsin Electric should be prepared to discuss our assessments and
' plans to improve performance in the area of engineering. Additionally, you are requested to
respond in writing within 30 days after the meeting, specifically addressing corrective actions
'
planned to improve performance in tne area of engineering.
in accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of
,
- Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter, the SALP report, and your c,sponse to this letter will be
placed in the NRC's Public Document Roo n.
.
.
. Should you have any questions concoming the SALP report, we would be pleased to discuss
.
them with you.
Sincerely,
4
' A. Bill Beach
Regional Administrator
.
'
Docket No. 50-266
Docket No. 50-301 -
.
Enclosure:
SALP 13 Repori
- No. 50-266/97001; 50 301/97001
'
See Attached Distnbution
.DOCUMENTNAME: G:\\SALP\\ Poi 97001. sip
,
v. .eeehe . .m .e w.
e em. weem. w m. 6= c - em wMi.m .ne.hmeeWesuteouse P - Cm wMi enseimnesWeswiseuse
m - meee.e
OFFICE -
Rilli
E
c
Rill 1
Rlil
. Rill
,
Depa M
NAME
JMcB:dp pd daNi$rfh
Beach
G
01/ /98
01/h98\\
C1F/I98
01/ /98-
DATE'
01/4/98
9
-0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
.g
. . .
-w,
. - .
-
- . - .
- . . . -
-.
-. . ..
.
- -,,
.. ___
-. .
.
.
-
'
..
s
S. Patuiski
-4-
.
.
cc w/ encl:
R. R. Grigg, President and Chief
Operating Omcor, WEPCO
A. J. Cayia, Plant Manager
B. D. Burks, P.E., Director
Bureau of Field Operations
Cheryl L' Parrino, Chairman
.
Wicconsin Public Service -
Commission
'
State Liaison Officer
Qigiribution
Chairman Jackson
Commissioner Dicus
Commissioner Diaz
Commissioner McGaffigan
J. Callan, EDO
.
J. Lieberman, Director, Office of Enforcement
R. Zimmerman, Associate Director for Projects, NRR
B. Sheron, Acting Associate Director for Technical Review, NRR
E. Adensam, Acting Director, Division of Resctor Projects lil/IV, NRR
SALP Program Mancger, NRR (2 copies)
~
,
DRP Division Directors RI, Ril, RIV
J. Caldwell, Rlli
J, Hannon, NRR
TSS, Rlli
-
Docket F"e
PUBLIC IE-40
SRI Point Beach
- CAA1 (E-Mail)
RlliPRR
Rill Enf. Coordinator
DRS (2)
DOCDESK (E-Mail)
.
--
.
-
--
.
_ _ , _ . _ _ _
-
-
-