ML20206G034: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 14: Line 14:
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| page count = 5
| page count = 5
| project = TAC:M83202
| stage = Approval
}}
}}


Line 26: Line 28:
==Dear Mr. k' bite:==
==Dear Mr. k' bite:==


SUNECT:    SAFETY EVALUATICNS ON THE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY EMPLOYEE CONCEPNS ELEMENT REPORTS - SE000YAH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 2 AND 2 This letter fomerds our safety evaluations of the Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA) eierent reperts submitted as part of the Employee Concerns Special Procrm (ECSP). Our safety evaluations of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Unit 2 erployee concerns were transmitted to you in a letter dated March 11, 1988 and are also applicoble to Unit 1.
SUNECT:    SAFETY EVALUATICNS ON THE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY EMPLOYEE CONCEPNS ELEMENT REPORTS - SE000YAH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 2 AND 2 This letter fomerds our safety evaluations of the Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA) eierent reperts submitted as part of the Employee Concerns Special Procrm (ECSP). Our safety evaluations of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Unit 2 erployee concerns were transmitted to you in a {{letter dated|date=March 11, 1988|text=letter dated March 11, 1988}} and are also applicoble to Unit 1.
l I
l I
T'JA has divided all of the employee concerns in the ECSP into the nine functional catecories listed in Table 1 and has determined that about CCO cf the more *. Fan FR00 erployee concerns in the ECSP were potentially sa'ety related or safety significant to Sequoyah. Our safety evaluation on the prograrratic as;ects of the ECSP was transmitted to you in a letter cated Octohee (, 1987.
T'JA has divided all of the employee concerns in the ECSP into the nine functional catecories listed in Table 1 and has determined that about CCO cf the more *. Fan FR00 erployee concerns in the ECSP were potentially sa'ety related or safety significant to Sequoyah. Our safety evaluation on the prograrratic as;ects of the ECSP was transmitted to you in a letter cated Octohee (, 1987.

Latest revision as of 10:42, 6 December 2021

Forwards SERs Re TVA Employee Concerns Element Repts as Part of Employee Concerns Special Program.Tva Sufficiently Resolved Restart Employee Concerns to Support Restart of Unit 1
ML20206G034
Person / Time
Site: Sequoyah  Tennessee Valley Authority icon.png
Issue date: 11/04/1988
From: Black S
NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To: White S
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
Shared Package
ML20206G037 List: ... further results
References
TAC-M83202, NUDOCS 8811220011
Download: ML20206G034 (5)


Text

_ ,__

3

/ 'c, UNITED STATES I 'y *: NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION j g. ' s vv A 5HING T ON. D. C. 20555

\,* .O '

/

.... November 4, 1988 Ocche? r;os. 50-327/328 Mr. S. A. White Senior Vice President, Nucieer Power Tennessee Valley Authority 6N 38A Lockout Place 1101 Market Street Chattar.coga, Tenressee 37402-2801

Dear Mr. k' bite:

SUNECT: SAFETY EVALUATICNS ON THE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY EMPLOYEE CONCEPNS ELEMENT REPORTS - SE000YAH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 2 AND 2 This letter fomerds our safety evaluations of the Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA) eierent reperts submitted as part of the Employee Concerns Special Procrm (ECSP). Our safety evaluations of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Unit 2 erployee concerns were transmitted to you in a letter dated March 11, 1988 and are also applicoble to Unit 1.

l I

T'JA has divided all of the employee concerns in the ECSP into the nine functional catecories listed in Table 1 and has determined that about CCO cf the more *. Fan FR00 erployee concerns in the ECSP were potentially sa'ety related or safety significant to Sequoyah. Our safety evaluation on the prograrratic as;ects of the ECSP was transmitted to you in a letter cated Octohee (, 1987.

The staff's safety evaluations contained in Enclosure 2 and listed in Table 2, erver the Sequoyah employee concerns issues vhien the staff considered restart items recuired to be resolved before the restart of Saquoyah, Unit 2. Included is the staff's evaluation of an er.ployee concern whose erpurgated information was insufficient for a investigation according to TVA. The staff's safety evaluations coetained in Enclosure 3 and listed in Table 3 cover employee concerns issues which the staf' considered non-restart items. Table 4 lists the employee concerns eler.ent reports which are addressed in NUPEG-1232.

Volume 2. "Safety Evaluation Report on Tennessee Valley Authority: Sequoyah Nuclear Perfonnance Plan."

TVA's evaluations of the erployee concerns in the Pana9erent ar.d Personnel and Industrial Safety categories concluded that there vore no safety-related concerns in these categories. The staff's safety evaluations were forwarded in letters dated August 24, 1987 and recember 14, 1987 Enployee concerns ir the intinidation. Harassment and Krongdoing category were removed from thE Enr and assigned to the TVA Office of Ir.spector Gereral for in'.e tice*irr. We sis"'t evalua*ica cf the reso'utinn e' these e?ployea cente rr r is contair.t: ir e le* tar datec Octccer P,1087.

g1220011 saggo4 p ADOCK 05000327 g FD(;

November 4, 1988 Mr. S. A. White Based on the enclosed safety evaluations, the staff concludes that TVA has sufficiently resolved the restart employee concerns in the ECSP to support the restart of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Unit 1. This completes the staff's evaluation of the employee concerns element reports for Sequoyah.

Sincerely, Original Signed by Suzanne C. Black, Assistant Director for Projects TVA Projects Division Office of Special Projects J

Enclosures:

1. Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4
2. Safety Evaluations on Employee Concerns Eler.ent Reports (restart)
3. Safety Evaluations on Employee Concerns Elenent Reports (non-restart) cc w/ enclosures:

See next page Distribt. tion:

s Distribution w/ enclosure 1 only

' Docket File Projects Reading SON Peading File NRC PDR J. Partlow P. Cortland local PCR S. Richardson M. Sires PCortland S. Black E. Jordan B. D. Liaw D. Crutchfield F. McCoy B. Grires J. Donchew 0FC :0SP:TVA/LA :05P:TVA/FM :TVA:AD/P :TVA:D  :

~

~

"" bL SRichardson NkkE:kbIchfh: Co n *kD5a DATE:10/&f,/08 :10/ /88 :10/AT/p8 :10/1%/P8  :

OFFICI'L RECORD COPY pp-f qq o\t@

i l

e o e

N0verter 4, 1933 Mr. S. A. White r ased on the enclosed safety evaluations the staff concludes that TVA Fas sufficiently resolved the restart e*ployee concerns in the ECSP tc sL; pert t"e restart of Secuoyah Nuclear Plant, linit 1. This corpletes tFe sta"'s esaiustion of the employee concerns eier.ent reports for Secuoyah.

Sincerely.

y.

ha s+ w ( hk C!,

Su:arne C. Black, Assistant Director for Projects TVA Projects Division Office of Special Projects En:!csures:

1, Tables 1. 2. 3 and 4

2. Safet/ Evaluatiers et Erployee Cercerns Ele ent Reports (restert)
2. 53#et) E v 2 '. . 3 t i e r $ CF Erployee Corcerns Elerent Pe:cets (non-restart) c: w 'ee:1 r s tre s :

See reit p3:e

e e Mr. S. A. Krite Sequoyah huclear Plant ~~ ' ' ~

cc:

Ceneral Coursel Reoional Administrator, Region 11 Terressee Valley Authority U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission ACO West Su-*it H!11 Prive 101 Farietta Street, N.W.

Ell E33 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 rnov.ville, Tennessee 3790?

Resident inspectnr/Sequoyab NP Mr. R. L. Gridley c/o U.S. Nuclear Rtgulatory Comission Tennessee Valley Authority ?f00 Igou Ferry Road SN 157B Lookout Place Soddy Daisy, Tennessee 37379 Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801 Pr. Jchn T. Lapoir.t Mr. P,hael H. Mobley, Director Tennessee Valley Authority Division of Aadiological Health Sequoyah Nuclear Plant T.E.R.R.A. Building, 6th Floor P.O. Fcx 20CD 150 9th Avenue North Sod:y Daisy, Tenressee 37279 Nashville, Tennessee 37219-5404 Pr. P. Fe Dr. Henry Pyers, Science Advisor Tenressee Valley Authcrity Comittee on Interior Seouoyah Nuclear Plar.t an6 Insular Affairs P.O. Box 2000 U.S. House of Representatives Soddy Daisy, Tennessee 37379 Washington, D.C. 20515 "r. D. L. Willia's Tennessee Valley Authority Tennessee Valley Authority Rockville Office a00 kest Sun-dt Will Drive 11o21 Rockville Pike L10 F,P B Suite 402 Knoxville, Tennessee 379C2 Rockville, Maryland 20S52 Ccunty Judge Hamilton County Courthouse Chattanooga, Tennessee 374C?

e o ENCLOSURE 1_

Table 1 Erployee Concerns Functional Catecories Tatie ? TVA Employee Concerns Element Peports and Erployee Concerns Evaluated in Enclosure 2 Table .1 TVA Enployee Concerns Elenent R'eports Evaluated in Enclosure 3 Table 4 Employee Concerns Element Reports Addressed in NUREG-1232 9

l 1

i l

l b