ML20247D280

Forwards Insp Repts 50-266/98-06 & 50-301/98-06 on 980303-0413 & Nov.Three Violations Identified Involving Failure of Maint Workers to Follow Prescribed Procedures During Removal of Unit 1 Reactor Vessel Lower Internals

ML20247D280
Person / Time
Site:	Point Beach
Issue date:	05/05/1998
From:	Grant G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:	Patulski S WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO.
Shared Package
ML20247D285	List: ML20247D280 ML20247D296
References
RTR-NUREG-1600 50-266-98-06, 50-266-98-6, 50-301-98-06, 50-301-98-6, NUDOCS 9805140325
Download: ML20247D280 (2)

See also: IR 05000266/1998006

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _______________________

, .

.4 UNITED STATES

l

1. g nao og'q, *

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

8 ,

o REGION lil

g

e

801 WARRENVILLE ROAD

LISLE, ILLINOIS 60532-4351  %% l

k...../ May 5, 1998

1

l

1

Mr. S. A. Patuiski

Site Vice President

Point Beach Nuclear Plant

6610 Nuclear Road

Two Rivers, WI 54241

SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-266/98006(DRP); 50-301/98006(DRP) AND

NOTICE OF VIOLATION FOR THE POINT BEACH NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

Dear Mr. Patulski:

l

On April 13,1998, the NRC completed an inspection at your Point Beach 1 and 2 reactor

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

During this inspection period, Unit i refueling activities were conducted in a safe manner.

'

Facility management exhibited safety-focused, conservative decision-making in the shutdown of

Unit 2 based on operability issues involving the component cooling water system. The Unit 2

shutdown was conducted in a safe and methodical manner. Likewise, the subsequent restart of

the Unit 2 reactor later in the inspection period was conducted with the same level of safety

consciousness.

Three violations of NRC requirements were identified during this period. The first violation I

involved the failure of maintenance workers to follow prescribed procedures during the removal

of the Unit i reactor vessellower intemals. This issue is a concem because it and other

observations, discussed in the attached inspection report, indicated inconsistent application of

administrative controls in the maintenance department. Also, the corrective actions taken for this

issue focused on procedural revisions and did not include reinforcing procedure compliance

expectations with maintenance personnel. In your response to this violation, we request that you

discuss what broad actions, if any, you are taking to ensure that administrative controls are j

consistently applied.

The second violation involved the failure to update battery loading calculations following plant

modifications that affected the design basis of the 125-volt direct current system. The attached \

report also describes other concems associated with controls for design basis information. In 1

your response to the second violation, we request that you discuss what controls you have in g

place to ensure that changes to the design basis of plant systems, including those resulting from

new or revised analyses, are properly documented and communicated.

The third violation involved the failure of a reactor operator to remain within designated

surveillance areas in the control room. This issue is a concem because a senior reactor

operator, in addition to the reactor operator, failed to recognize that the conduct-of-operations

procedure did not permit the reactor operator's actions.

I

\

/t

.

9805140325 990505  !

'

PDR ADOCK 05000266

.O PM .

__ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ - _ - - _ - _ _ _ _

l l

l . .  :

- '

.

l

S. Patuiski -2-

! I

'

l

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

l circumstances surrounding the violations are described in detail in the enclosed report. Please

,

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

l 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

requirements.

i

! In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its

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

Sincerely,

l

Geoffrey E. Grant, Director

Division of Reactor Projects

Docket Nos.: 50-266, 50-301

License Nos.: DPR-24, DPR-27

Enclosures: 1. Notice of Violation

2. Inspection Report.

No. 50-266/98006(DRP);

50-301/98006(DRP)

l cc w/encis: R. R. Grigg, President and Chief

Operating Officer, WEPCO

M. E. Reddeman, Plant Manager

B. D. Burks, P.E., Director

Bureau of Field Operations

Cheryl L. Parrino, Chairman

i

Wisconsin Public Service

Commission ,

I

State Liaison Officer

!

I

l

I

-

.

_ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _._______________.o