ML20196D888

Provides Results of Review of Dpv That Was Expressed in 961017 Memo Re Dynamic Testing of Instrumentation Channels at Braidwood

ML20196D888
Person / Time
Site:	Braidwood
Issue date:	01/02/1997
From:	Miraglia F NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Sheron B NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
NUDOCS 9812020347
Download: ML20196D888 (1)

Text

January 2, 1997 fD b MEMORANDUM TO: Brian W. Sheron, Acting Associate Director for Technical Review FROM: Frank J. Miraglia, Acting Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS TO NRR DPV REVIEW PANEL ON DYNAMIC TESTING OF INSTRUMENTATION CHANNELS AT BRAIDWOOD 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 their review is enclosed.

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 its accident analyses, including dynamic components in channels other than the overtemperature delta-T trip, and the staff should verify that Braidwood's use of dynamic testing and its acceptance criteria are bounded by its accident analyses. (ADT 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. (ADT 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 requirements resulting from this review are subject to the backfit considerations contained in 10 CFR 50.109. (ADT due: 10/97)

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

Attachment:

As stated 8 [C//

Distribution Scollins ACThadani SPeterson VBeaston FMiraglia PFoust FBurrows *SEE PREVIOUS PAGE FOR CONCURRENCE OFFICE: ADT:NRR * ):NRR NAME: BWSheron kJMiragNa DATE: 12/ 17 /96 II/ h/97 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY DOCUMENT NAME:a':taskbws.dpv 9812O20347 970102 PDR ADOCK 05000456 P PDR 020037