ML20140E524

Forwards Wordperfect Version as Requested

ML20140E524
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	10/29/1996
From:	Curtis Rapp NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Boland A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML20140E502	List: ML20140E497 ML20140E508 ML20140E514 ML20140E519 ML20140E524 ML20140E530 ML20140E536 ML20140E541 ML20140E557 ML20140E573 ML20140E580 ML20140E590 ML20140E594 ML20140E620 ML20140E652 ML20140E659 ML20140E667
References
FOIA-96-485 NUDOCS 9704290015
Download: ML20140E524 (2)

Text

. - . . - . ._ -_ _ _- . . _ _ - - . . _ - . _ - _ . - . .

l t t

From: Curtis Rapp, /ttg To: ATP2.ATB e4 doc 4wajgp -

Date: 10/29/9611:04am

Subject:

Additinal VIO for St. Lucie l Here is the Wordperfect version as you requested.  :

l I

l I

I i

l l

l J

/ 9704290015 970423 PDR FOIA BINDER 96-405 PDR L

s i

i The licensee also identified that BEACON was placed into service on Unit I without any benchmarking against IMPAX, the on-line core performance monitoring code BEACON was replacing. Instead, BEACON was installed on Unit 2 and benchmarked against CECORE, j

~

which did not require any modifications to accommodate the core midplane offset. Engineering .

Quality Instruction (QI) 3.7, Computer Software Control, revision 1, Section 5.4. requires that SQAl software shall be validated and verified (V&V'ed) in accordance with Section 5.6. .

Section 5.6 states that new software shall be V&V'ed prior to use. V&V includes the use of test  !

cases to ensure the new software produces correct results. Item 4 of Section 5.6 states that technical adequacy shall be determined by comparing the test case to results from altemative

' methods such as functionally equivalent and previcusly validated software. In the case of l BEACON, IMPAX would have been functionally equivalent software. Benchmarking .

BEACON against IMPAX may have identifed the design error concerning core midplane offset  !

because the two codes would not have yielded the same results. Contrary to this requirement, BEACON was placed into service on Unit I without benchmarking against IMPAX. This is a i Severity Level VI violation. l NOTE TO PANEL: This could be considered another example ofinadequte PMT as identified in  :

EA 95-182. V&V is the post-mod acceptance test for software.  ;

i l

i i

I 1

4