ML20057E125

Proposed Tech Specs Errata Pages 4-55a,4-55g & 6-5

ML20057E125
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	10/01/1993
From:	GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML20057E121	List: ML20057E120 ML20057E123 ML20057E125
References
NUDOCS 9310070323
Download: ML20057E125 (3)

Text

.

Bases

. Pressure drop across the combined HEPA filters and charcoal adsorbers of less than 6 inches of water at the system design flow rate will indicate that the filters and adsorbers are not clogged by excessive amounts of foreign matter.

Pressure drop should be determined at least once per refueling cycle to show system performance capability.

The frequency of tests and sample analysis are necessary to show that the HEPA filters and charcoal adsorbers can perform as evaluated. Tests of the charcoal adsorbers with halogenated hydrocarbon shall be performed in accordance with '

approved test procedures. Replacement adsorbent should be qualified according to Regulatory Guide 1.52 March 1978. The charcoal adsorber efficiency test procedures should allow for the removal of one adsorber tray, emptying of one bed from the tray, mixing the adsorbent thoroughly and obtaining at least two samples. Each sample should be at least two inches in diameter and a length equal to the thickness of the bed. If test results are unacceptable all adsorbent in the system shall be replaced. Tests of the HEPA filters with DOP aerosol shall also be performed in accordance with approved test procedures.

Any HEPA filters found defective should be replaced with filters qualified according to Regulatory Guide 1.52 March 1978.

Operation of the system for 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br /> every month will demonstrate operability l of the filters and adsorber system and remove excessive moisture built up on ,

the adsorber. l If significant painting, steam, fire or chemical release occurs such that the ,

HEPA filter or charcoal adsorber could become contaminated from the fumes, l

chemicals or foreign materials, the same tests and sample analysis shall be performed as required for operational use. The determination of significance shall be made by the Director, Operations and Maintenance, TMI.

i Demonstration of the automatic initiation of the recirculation mode of operation is necessary to assure system performance capability.

l j 4-55a i

Amendment No. 55

~

, . i

! )

i Bases '

i

! The FHB'ESF Air Treatment System is a system which is normally kept in a  !

" standby" operating status. Tests and sample analysis assure that the HEPA i

filters and charcoal adsorbers can perform as evaluated. The charcoal adsorber i efficiency test procedure should allow for the removal of a sample from one I adsorber test canister. Each sample should be at least two inches in diameter and a length equal to the thickness of the bed. The in-place test criteria and l laboratory test criteria for activated charcoal will meet the guidelines of '

ANSI-N510-1980. If test results are-unacceptable, all adsorbent in the system  :

shall be replaced with an adsorbent qualified in accordance with '

ANSI-N509-1980. Any HEPA filters found defective will be replaced with filters qualified in accordance with ANSI-N509-1980.

Pressure drop across the entire filtration unit of less than 7.0 inches of water at the system design flow rate will indicate that the filters and adsorbers are not clogged by excessive amounts of foreign matter. ,

Operation of the system for 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br /> every month will demonstrate operability of the filters and adsorber system and remove excessive moisture buildup on the adsorbers and HEPA filters.

If significant painting, steam, fire, or chemical release occurs such that the HEPA filter or charcoal adsorber could become contaminated from the fumes, chemicals or foreign material, the same tests and sample analysis shall be performed as required for operational movement of irradiated fuel. The determination of what is significant shall be made by the Director, Operations  :'

and Maintenance, TMI.

t l .

i i

l l

4-55g Amendment flo. JEE, 157 l

6.5.1.9 The Emergency Plan and implementing procedures shall be reviewed by '

a knowledgeable individual (s)/ group other than the  !

. individual (s)/ group which prepared them.

6.5.1.10 A knowledgeable individual (s)/ group shall review every unplanned onsite release of radioactive material to the environs including the preparation ar;d forwarding of reports to the Vice President TMI l covering evaluations, recommendations and disposition of the ,

corrective action to prevent recurrence.

6.5.1.11 Major changes to radwaste systems shall be reviewed by a knowledgeable individual {s)/ group other than the ,

individuals (s)/ group which prepared them.

6.5.1.12 Individuals responsible for reviews performed in accordance with ,

l 6.5.1.1 through 6.5.1.4 shall include a determination of whether or

! not additional cross-disciplinary review is necessary. If deemed  ;

necessary, such review shall be performed by the appropriate '

personnel. Individuals responsible for reviews considered under 6.5.1.1 through 6.5.1.5 shall render determinations in writing with regard to whether or not 6.5.1.1 through 6.5.1.5 constitute an unreviewed safety question.

RECORDS l

6.5.1.13 Written records of activities performed under Specifications 6.5.1.1 through 6.5.1.11 shall be maintained. -

l OVALIFICATIONS 6.5.1.14 Responsible Technical Reviewers shall meet or exceed the qualifications of ANSI /ANS 3.1 of 1978 Section 4.6, or 4.4 for i applicable disciplines, or have 7 years of appropriate experience in

( the field of his specialty. Credit toward experience will be given i for advanced degrees on a one-to-one basis up to a maximum of two  :

years. Responsible Technical Reviewers shall be designated in i writing.

6.5.2 INDEPENDENT SAFETY REVIEW FUNCTION 6.5.2.1 The Vice President of each division within GPU Nuclear Corporation shall be responsible for ensuring the independent safety review of

! the subjects described in 6.5.2.5 within his assigned area of safety l review responsibility, as assigned in the GPUN Review and Approval l Matrix.

i 6.5.2.2 Independent safety review shall be completed by an individual / group not having direct responsibility for the performance of the activities under review, but who may be from-the same functionally l cognizant organization as the individual / group performing the original work.

6.5.2.3 GPU Nuclear Corporation shall collectively have or have access to the experience and competence required to independently review subjects in the following areas:

6-5 Amendment No. JJ, EE, 77, I U , 19 ,

,