ML20247D280
| 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: |
| 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
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,
.
- g nao
.4
UNITED STATES
og'q,
l
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
8
REGION lil
,
o
g
801 WARRENVILLE ROAD
%
l
e
LISLE, ILLINOIS 60532-4351
%
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
!
'
ADOCK 05000266
.O
.
__
_ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ - _ - - _ - _ _ _ _
l
l
.
.
'
l
-
.
S. Patuiski
-2-
!
'
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
,
the enclosed Notice when preparing your response. The NRC will use your response, in part, to
l
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
Enclosures:
1.
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
Wisconsin Public Service
i
Commission
,
State Liaison Officer
!
I
l
I
-
.
_ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
_._______________.o