ML20237J999

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Safety Evaluation Re Industrial Safety Category of Special Employee Concern Program for Plant Based on 870203 Audit of Case Files & Repts.Employee Concerns Adequately Addressed. Minor Changes Recommended in Case Files
ML20237J999
Person / Time
Site: Sequoyah  Tennessee Valley Authority icon.png
Issue date: 08/24/1987
From:
NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To:
Shared Package
ML20237J996 List:
References
TAC-M83202, NUDOCS 8708270002
Download: ML20237J999 (3)


Text

i q>'l M G UNITED STATES

[

f,,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y

)g g

WASMNGTON, D. C. 20555 r,,

y y**~*j SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS RELATING TO EMPLOYEE CONCERNS--INDUSTRIAL SAFETY CATEGORY TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET N05. 50-327/328 1.

SUBJECT The subject of this safety evaluation is the staff's review of the Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA) evaluation of employee concerns in the Industrial Safety Category of the Employee Concern Special Program (ECSP) for Sequoyah to determine if they constituted a nuclear safety related issue.

If any concerns of a ECSP category are safety related, TVA's resolution of the concerns in that category will be reviewed and evaluated by NRC.

II. BACKGROUND Numerous TVA Employee Concerns have been identified by TVA which encompass potentially safety-related issues.

These concerns are being investigated by TVA in the ECSP. Many are applicable to Sequoyah.

TVA has divided these concerns into the following nine categories:

quality assurance / quality control; material control; management and personnel; intimidation, harassment, and wrongdoing; operations; welding; construction; industrial safety and engineering. The industrial safety category address concerns related to the working environment and controls which protect the health and safety of employees in the work place, excluding health physics and radiation exposure.

Health physics and radiation exposure concerns are included in the operations category.

III.

SUMMARY

OF ISSUE i

The licensee determined that a report to the NRC would not be submitted in the industrial safety category because there were no nuclear cafety-related concerns in this category.

On February 3, 1987, an NRC team audited case files stored at the Watts Bar site related to this category to determine whether TVA properly applied the nuclear safety related criteria to the concerns in this category and properly documented their evaluations, i

I l

8708270002 870s24 l

PDR ADOCK 05000327

{

P PDR l

l 1

1 1

i

. IV. EVALUATION TVA Employee Concerns Task Group (ECTG) review of concerns in the Industrial Safety Category determined that no nuclear safety-related concerns existed at Sequoyah in this category.

Specifically, the status list of employee concerns dated August 9, 1986, indicated that the concerns previously determined to be nuclear safety-related were either transferred to other categories or determined not to be nuclear safety-related. This determination was based on the nuclear safety related criteria of Attachment ~C to ECTG Pro-cedure M.1 of the program description and implementing procedures for the ECTG program submitted by TVA in a letter dated August 29, 1986.

The foliceing were comments made at the exit interview of the inspection of February 3, 1987 on these files:

1.

XX-85-031-001 The concern is the dumping of hazardous material at the Sequoyah site in an uncontrolled manner. The Quality Technology'Co. (QTC) had investigated this concern and determined that the radiological concern was not valid but the environmental concern was substantiated. Therefore, TVA recategorized this concern to non-nuclear safety-related. We found this acceptable.

2.

DLJ-85-004 This concern regards adeauate lighting about the condensate storage tank at the time of maintenance work.

The case file did not address the means to implement the corrective action which was not to schedule jobs during the night shift in that vicinity.

3.

SQM-86-012-001 and WBM-86-008-001 These concerns are identical and are related to fire hazard in the rad-chem laboratory.

The audit team was satisfied with TVA's technical resolution; however, the case file did not contain documentation of a phone call between TVA and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) concerning personnel egress from the area. The Element Report No. 90500 which addresses these concerns states that this conversation took place. The resolution of these concerns is based on the NFPA discussion.

4.

00-85-001-002 This concern relates to equipment at the Kentucky dam power station.

This was evaluated for applicability to Sequoyah plant and found not to be applicable. We concurred with this conclusion.

1 1

, i 4

I The nuclear safety-related criteria in Attachment'C to ECTG Procedure M.1 and used by TVA was found acceptable by NRC as a means to determine if an employee concern was nuclear safety-related in the staff's letter dated July 31, 1987.

The audit team spot checked a sample of non-nuclear safety-related concerns and I

found only one concern, 50N-85-001-001, related to Health Physics problems, which the team questioned TVA why the concern had been categorized as non-nuclear safety. The team was satisfied that this concern was being adequately addressed in Elenent Report 31106 of the Operations Category of ECSP. The staff will review TVA's corrective action for Report 31106 in its review of the Operations Category.

V.

CONCLUSION The criteria to determine the nuclear safety-related concerns as stated in ECTG Procedure M.1 of the ECTG program description were reviewed and determined to be acceptable. By an audit, the staff determinud that the implementing procedures for the ECTG were properly applied, Therefore, on this basis, the staff concludes that the employee concerns for Sequoyah in the Industrial Safety Category are not nuclear safety-related and the staff does not need to review TVA's resolution of these concerns.

During the exit interview on February 5, 1987, the comments as discussed in Item III above were discussed with TVA.

TVA agreed to incorporate the comments in its case files and reports for completeness. The revision of the case files will not have an impact on our conclusions.

PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTORS:

B. K. Singh and M. W. Branch I

_._..._...-_------__a.___.___-----_J