ML20196D867

Submits Review of Ad Hoc NRR Dpv Review Panel Re 961017 Memo Dpv on Dynamic Testing of Instrumentation Channels at Braidwood

ML20196D867
Person / Time
Site:	Braidwood
Issue date:	01/02/1997
From:	Sheron B NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Boger B NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
NUDOCS 9812020343
Download: ML20196D867 (1)

Text

_ _ _ ____ _ _ . _ _ _ _ .. _ . _ _

@b MEMORANDUM T0: Bruce A. Boger, Director Division of Reactor Controls and Human Factors FROM: Brian W. Sheron, Acting Associate Director for Technical Review

SUBJECT:

FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS TO NRI DPV RE?IEW PANEL ON DYNAMIC TESTING OF INSTRUMENTATION CHANNELS AT 89AIDF In a memorandum dated October 17, 1996, a differing professional view (DPV) was expressed regarding dynamic testing of instrumentation channels at ,

Braidwood. The ad hoc NRR DPV Review Panel reviewed the DPV. The result of i their review is enclosed. I The review identified the following recommendations:

(1) The staff should formally review and document the acceptability of dynamic testing. The staff should review and approve Braidwood's method of accounting for dynamic component setpoint uncertainties in j

its accident analyses, including dynamic components in channels l other than the overtemperature delta-T trip, and t:e staff should verify that Braidwood's use of dynamic testing and its acceptance criteria are bounded by its accident analyses. (DRCH due: 6/97)

(2) After completing its review for Braidwood, the staff should document its position, including the technical basis, regarding how much  ;

uncertainty is acceptable when setting dynamic components in instrument channels (e.g., i 10% is acceptable to the staff) for all licensees. (DRCH due: 10/97)

(3) In completing the generic review, the staff should reexamine the acceptability of technical specifications that currently do not specify tolerances for dynamic component setpoints (i.e., time constants) and, if necessary, provide staff guidance on an acceptable licensee method to ensure the technical specification ,

setpoints are being satisfied. Any recommended changes to the I i requirements resulting from this review are subject to the backfit considerations contained in 10 CFR 50.109.(DRCH due: 10/97)

Please provide your responses to me for the above three recommendations by the I above listed completion dates. In addition, please provide a copy of the o staff's evaluation to Mr. Burrows upon completion.

Attachment:

As stated pft)/

Distribution 1 SPeterson Tbust FBurrows OFFICE: ADT:hd NAME: BWSheM DATE: U/ 3 /93 ~

0FFICIAL RECOR) COPY DOCUMENT NAME:a:taskbws.dpv  !

9812020343 970102

~

PDR ADOCK 05000456 P PDR 3 i