ML20202E933

Forwards Insp Repts 50-266/97-26 & 50-301/97-26 on 971201- 980120 & Nov.Violation Involved Inadequacy in Operations Dept Procedure Governing Operator Use of Emergency & Abnormal Operating Procedures

ML20202E933
Person / Time
Site:	Point Beach
Issue date:	02/10/1998
From:	Grant G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:	Patulski S WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO.
Shared Package
ML20202E939	List: ML20202E933 ML20202E964 ML20202E981
References
50-266-97-26, 50-301-97-26, NUDOCS 9802190090
Download: ML20202E933 (3)

See also: IR 05000266/1997026

Text

'

UNITED STATES

/g* *8%'o,, NUCLEAR CE;ULATORY COMMISSION

8 REGION 111

,

{ 601 WARRENVn LE ROAD

LISLE. tLLINOIS 60532 4351

• g*.**

February 10,1998

Mr. S. A. Patulski

Site Vice President

Point Beach Nuclear Plant

6610 Nuclear Road

Two Rivers, WI 54241

SUBJECT: POINT BEACH NRC NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND INSPECTION REPORT

NO. 50 266/97026(DRP); 50 301/97026fDRP)

Dear Mr. Patutski:

On January 20,1998, the NRC completed an inspection at your Point Beach 1 and 2 reactor

facilities. The enclosed report presents the results of that inspection.

The facility was coerated in a safe and controlled manner throughout this inspection period.

Operators were challenged by a loss of power to the normal supply for the Unit 1 safety related

electrical distribution buses on January 8,1998. The operators and all safety related equipment

responded appropriately to the event. A facility incident investigation team was established

promptly, and performed a thorough and insightful review of the event and its causes. Two

issues associated with the loss of power event were characterizod as violations of NRC

requirements.

The first violation involved the failure of an operating crew to recognize that a Tech nal

Specification (TS) Limiting Condition for Operation was not being met and that the existing

equipment status was more limiting than the applicable " permissible conditions." As a result, the

crew failed to enter TS 15.3.0 as was required for such a condition. Entry into TS 15.3.0

required that within one hour action be initiated to place the operating unit in bot shutdown within

seven hours. After one hour, but before seven hours elapsed, a permissible condition was

established and TS 15.3.0 no longer applied, in essessing this issue, the incident investigation

team determined that the operator weakness in identifying the applicability of TS 15.3.0 was not

limited to the crew involved with the loss of power event. Broad corrective actions we.te being

discussed at the end of the inspection per od.

The second violation involved an NRC identified inadequacy in an operations department

procedure governing operator use of emergency and abnormal operating procedures. This

violation was of concern because the procedure in question authonzed deviations from the

sequence of steps specified in emergency and abnormal operating procedures without first

obtaining the procedure change approvals required by TSs and the Quahty Assurance Program.

A third violation was identified involving the failure to provide adequate test controls for

conducting peiformance testing of the containment accident fan coolers. An inadequate test

procedure was originally identified by the NRC in 1995, and your staff had indicated that

appropriate testing of the fan coolers would be performed when containment temperatures

allowed, following Unit 2 restart in August 1997. However, the NRC identified in November 1997

that the testing had not been performed. The reason for this violation (inadequate test procedure j f

"

9002I9'OOib 900210

PDR '/

ADOCK 05000266

o

.

'

.

S. Patuiski 2-

used in 1995) has been discussed in docketed correspondence. The reply to the attached Notice

of Violation need not address these details, but should include, among other things, an

explanation of why the required testing was not completed following the August 1997 restart, and

whether there were any other restart items which were delayed until after the Unit 2 restart which

were not performed promptly,

The violations identified above are cited in the enclosed Notice of Violation (Notice), and the

circumstances surrounding the violations are described in detailin the enclosed report. Please

note that you are required to respond to this letter ano should follow the instructions specified in

the enclosed Notice when preparing your response. The NRC will use your response, in part, to

determine whether further enforcement action is necessary to ensure compliance with regulatory

req)ltements.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of thk 'stter, its

enclosures, and your response will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.

Sincerely,

/s/ Marc L. Dapas for

Geoffrey E. Grant, Director

I

Division of Reactor Projects

Docket Nos.: 50 266;50 301, ,

License Nos.: DPR 24; DPR 27 l

Enclosures: 1. Not:ce of Violation

2. Inspection Report

No. 50 266/97026(DRP);

50 301/97026(DRP).

.

See Attached Distribution

DOCUMENT NAME: R:\insprpts\ powers \poin\ poi 97026.drp

v. eu c.., ne w. enum.no inse.i. in o wi c . coe, iouivi .n.cw.na r . con, with .ti.co.nci *N a N. copy

OFFICE Rlll f Rlll 6 Rlli -

NAME Kunowski: McCorrNck b 8I[et Grant 8 dr

DATE 02//o/98 02//e/98 02/#/98

-OFFICIAL. RECORD COPY

--

i

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _

_ __

_ _ _ _ _ - _ -___ ______ __-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - -

0- ,

=,

,

!

i

!

8. Patuiski 3 j

,

,

cc w/encls: R, R. Grigg, President and Chief  :

Operating Officer, WEPCO

A. J. Cayla, Plant Manager i

B. D. Burks, P.E., Director  :

Bureau of Field Operations i

Cheryl L Parrino, Chairman  ;

Wisconsin Public Service .:

Commission

State Liaison Officer

Distribution:  !

. Docket File w/encls SRI Point Beach w/encls *

PUBLIC IE 01 w/encls Rill Enf. Coordinator w/encls j

A. B. Beach w/encts - CAA1 w/encls (E mail) l

Deputy RA w/encls ORP wlencls

Project Manager, NRR, w/encls - DRS (2) w/encls ,

Rlli PRR w/encls DOCDESK (E mail) y

TSS w/encls '

.

k

P

.