ML042450021

Environmental Assessment Intake Structure Pump Room Appendix R Exemption Request

ML042450021
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	10/13/2004
From:	Padovan L NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD3
To:	Thomas J. Palmisano Nuclear Management Co
Padovan L, NRR/DLPM, 415-1423
References
TAC MC1803
Download: ML042450021 (7)

Text

October 13, 2004 Mr. Thomas J. Palmisano Site Vice President Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Nuclear Management Company, LLC 2807 West County Road 75 Monticello, MN 55362-9637

SUBJECT:

MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT RE: INTAKE STRUCTURE PUMP ROOM APPENDIX R EXEMPTION REQUEST (TAC NO. MC1803)

Dear Mr. Palmisano:

Enclosed is a copy of the Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact related to your exemption request of November 17, 2003, as supplemented July 16, 2004. You requested the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to authorize a permanent exemption from the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50, Appendix R,Section III.G.2.b, as it applies to Fire Area IX/Fire Zone 23A at the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant.

In particular, you requested an exemption from the requirement to separate cables and equipment and associated non-safety circuits of redundant trains by a horizontal distance of more than 20 feet with no intervening combustibles or fire hazards. You indicated that although redundant safe shutdown components and cables within this fire zone are separated by more than 20 feet, permanent intervening combustibles or fire hazards exist within the separating space.

The assessment is being forwarded to the Office of the Federal Register for publication.

Sincerely,

/RA/

L. Mark Padovan, Project Manager, Section 1 Project Directorate III Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-263

Enclosure:

Environmental Assessment cc w/encls: See next page

ML042450021 OFFICE PDIII-1/PM PDIII-1/LA RLEP/SC OGC PDIII-1/SC NAME LPadovan THarris JTappert RHoefling LRaghavan DATE 09/01/04 09/01/04 09/13/04 10/05/04 10/13/04 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant cc:

Jonathan Rogoff, Esquire Commissioner Vice President, Counsel & Secretary Minnesota Department of Commerce Nuclear Management Company, LLC 121 Seventh Place East 700 First Street Suite 200 Hudson, WI 54016 St. Paul, MN 55101-2145 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Manager - Environmental Protection Division Resident Inspectors Office Minnesota Attorney Generals Office 2807 W. County Road 75 445 Minnesota St., Suite 900 Monticello, MN 55362 St. Paul, MN 55101-2127 Manager, Regulatory Affairs John Paul Cowan Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Executive Vice President & Chief Nuclear Nuclear Management Company, LLC Officer 2807 West County Road 75 Nuclear Management Company, LLC Monticello, MN 55362-9637 700 First Street Hudson, WI 54016 Robert Nelson, President Minnesota Environmental Control Nuclear Asset Manager Citizens Association (MECCA) Xcel Energy, Inc.

1051 South McKnight Road 414 Nicollet Mall, R.S. 8 St. Paul, MN 55119 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Commissioner Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN 55155-4194 Regional Administrator, Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 801 Warrenville Road Lisle, IL 60532-4351 Commissioner Minnesota Department of Health 717 Delaware Street, S. E.

Minneapolis, MN 55440 Douglas M. Gruber, Auditor/Treasurer Wright County Government Center 10 NW Second Street Buffalo, MN 55313 October 2003

7590-01-P UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC DOCKET NO. 50-263 MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an exemption from the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Part 50, Appendix R,Section III.G.2.b for Facility Operating License No. DPR-22, issued to Nuclear Management Company, LLC (NMC), for operation of the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP), located in Wright County, Minnesota. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action:

The proposed action would authorize a permanent exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.2.b, as it applies to Fire Area IX/Fire Zone 23A, the intake structure pump room at MNGP. The proposed action is in accordance with NMCs exemption request of November 17, 2003, as supplemented July 16, 2004.

The Need for the Proposed Action:

NMC requested this exemption from the requirement to separate cables and equipment and associated non-safety circuits of redundant trains by a horizontal distance of more than 20 feet with no intervening combustibles or fire hazards. NMC indicated that although redundant safe shutdown components and cables within this fire zone are separated by more than 20 feet, permanent intervening combustibles or fire hazards exist within the separating space.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:

The NRC staff reviewed NMCs exemption request and will issue a safety evaluation documenting its review. The NRC staff analyzed the following items in the intake structure pump room at MNGP to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 50.12 for granting the exemption from the automatic suppression system requirements of Appendix R,Section III.G.2.b:

• safe shutdown equipment

• fixed and transient combustibles

• chemical hazards

• existing fire protection features

• intervening combustibles

• impact of Regulatory Issue Summary 2004-03, Risk-Informed Approach for Post-Fire Safe-Shutdown Associated Circuit Inspections, dated March 2, 2004 The following attributes of the intake structure pump room at MNGP supported the NRC staffs basis for approval of the requested exemption:

• Greater than 20 feet of separation exists between redundant safe shutdown components and cables.

• Early-warning ionization detection, installed above the residual heat removal service water (SW) and SW pumps, provides an alarm to the control room.

• Activation of the pre-action valve via the thermal detectors results in a "system actuated" signal to the control room.

• Transient combustibles and hot work in the area are administratively controlled.

• The fire load in the zone satisfies the criteria for a low fire load designation.

The NRC staff concluded that the requested exemption for Fire Area IX/Fire Zone 23A provided reasonable assurance that one train of redundant safe shutdown equipment would remain free of fire damage. This is the equivalent of meeting the requirements of

10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, Section IlI.G.2.b, since the underlying purpose of Section III.G.2.b is to assure that one train of redundant safe shutdown equipment will be maintained free of fire damage.

The details of the NRC staffs safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption that will be issued as part of the letter to NMC approving the exemption to the regulation.

The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released off site.

There is no significant increase in the amount of effluent being released offsite. There is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action:

As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the no-action alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources:

The action does not involve the use of any different resource than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for Monticello dated November 1972.

Agencies and Persons Consulted:

On October 15, 2004, the staff consulted with the Minnesota State official, Nancy Campbell of the Department of Commerce, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action.

For further details with respect to the proposed action, see NMCs exemption request of November 17, 2003, as supplemented July 16, 2004. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRCs Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of October 2004.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

/RA/

L. Raghavan, Chief, Section 1 Project Directorate III Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation