ML20206Q377

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Informs That Author Reviewed Circumstances Surrounding Dpv Re TS Setpoints & Allowable Values for Instrumentation & Determined That Dpv Process Has Not Been Brought to Conclusion.Dpo Being Returned for Processing with Open Dpv
ML20206Q377
Person / Time
Issue date: 06/04/1999
From: Callan L
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To: Collins S
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
Shared Package
ML20206Q280 List:
References
NUDOCS 9905190113
Download: ML20206Q377 (1)


Text

' hi l

....,.g.,,.

l D- -e '

, ' Sa aso uq :

j */ UNITED STATES j NUOLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20665 0001

\.,++ 4 June 4, 1998 4 g MEMORANDUM TO: Samuel J. Collins, Director )

Office of Nuclear Reac or Regulation FROM: L. Joseph Callan ' ,

/ *

[

Executive director for O rations

SUBJECT:

DIFFERING PROFESSIONAL OPINION REGARDING TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION SETPOINTS AND ALLOWABLE VALUES FOR INSTRUMENTATION

' The attached memorandum, from Frederick H. Burrows, dated May 21,1998, was submitted to me under the formal Differing Professional Opin!cn (DPO) procedures. I have reviewed the circumstances surrounding his Differing Professional View (DPV) on the same subject and have determined that the DPV process has not been brought to conclusion. The staff has not responded to the DPV panel's recommendations by determining action items and schedules for completion, as you requested in your memorandum dated October 21,1997. Therefore, I am returning this DPO to you for processing with the still-open DPV.

Please provide to me, with a copy to Frederick Burrows, the action items that NRR deems J necessary to close this issue with scheduled completion dates for each one. Your memorandum j to Brian Sheron and Roy Zimmerman dated October 31,1997, has eight recommendations from the review panel; these should be addressed as a minimum. As in the case of the DPV on dynamic response time testing at Braidwood, I would expect a high priority to be placed on closure, given the age of this issue and, in this case, the possibility that additional approvals of  ;

Improved Standard Technical Specifications in the period before closure of the issue may )

exacerbate the Agency's problem.

Attachment:

As stated .]

l l

l l

l 1

l 9905190113 990513 I ..

PDR ORG NETg l

I Dlh