ML20027D772
| ML20027D772 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Prairie Island  |
| Issue date: | 10/21/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20027D771 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8211090287 | |
| Download: ML20027D772 (21) | |
Text
gf UNITED STATES.
y g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
l WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 59 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-42 AND AMENDMENT N0. 53 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-60 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 D0CKET NOS. 50-282 AND 50-306
1.0 INTRODUCTION
To comply with Section V of Appendix I of 10 CFR Part 50, Northern States Power Company (the licensee) has filed with the Commission plans and proposed technical specifications developed for the purpose of keeping releases of radioactive materials to unrestricted areas during normal operations, including expected operational occurrences, as low as is reasonably achievable. The licensee filed this information with the Commission by letter dated June 1,1979 (revised August 13,1982) which requested changes to the Technical Specifications appended to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-42 and DPR-60 for the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant. The proposed technical specifications update those portions of the technical specifications addressing radioactive waste management and make them consistent with the current staff posi-tions expressed in NUREG-0472. These revised technical specifications would reasonably assure compliance, in radioactive waste management, with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.36a, as supplemented by Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50, with 10 CFR 20.105(c),106(g)and405(c);with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, General Design Criteria 60, 63 and 64; l
and with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B.
2.0 CACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION 2.1 Regulations 10 CFR Part 50, " Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," Section 50.36a, " Technical Specifications on Effluents from Nuclear Power Reactors," provides that each license authorizing operation of a nuclear power reactor will include technical speciff-cations that (1) require compliance with applicable provisions of 10 CFR Part 20.106, " Radioactivity in effluents to unrestricted areas,"
l (2) require that operating procedures developed for the control of I
l l
[L82'11090287 821021~~
j PDR ADOCK 05000282
~
j
- PDR,
_P.,
r,
effluents be established and followed and that'equiiWent in-stalled in the radioactive waste system be maintained and used, and (3) require the periodic submission of reports to the NRC specifying the quantity of each of the principal radionuclides released to un-restricted areas in liquid and gaseous effluents, any quantities of radioactive materials released that are significantly above design objectives, and such other information as may be required by the Commission to estimate maximum potential radiation dose to the public resulting from the effluent releases.
10 CFR Part 20, " Standards for Protection Against Radiation," Para-'
graphs 20.105(c), 20.106(g) and 20.405(c), require that nuclear power plant and other licensees comply with 40 CFR Part 190, " Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations," and submit reports to the NRC when the 40 CFR Part 190 limits have been or may be exceeded.
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A - General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants, contains Criterion 60, Control of releases of radioactive mat-erials to the environment; Criterion 63, Monitoring fuel and waste Criterion storage; and Criterion 64, Monitoring radioactivity releases.
60 requires that the nuclear power unit design include means to centrol suitably the release of radioactive materials in gaseous and liquid effluents and to handle radioactive solid wastes produced during nonnal reactor operation, including anticipated operational occurrences.
Criterion 63 requires that appropriate systems be provided in radio-active waste systems and associated handling areas to detect conditions that may result in excessive radiation levels and to initiate appropriate safety actions. Criterion 64 requires that means be provided for monitoring effluent discharge paths and the plant environs for radio-activity that may be released from normal operations, including antici-pated operational occurrences.
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, establishes quality assurance requirements for nuclear power plants.
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, Section IV, provides guides on technical specifications for limiting conditions for operation for light-water-cooled nuclear power reactors licensed under 10 CFR Part 50.
~ _. -.
1
- 2.2 Standard Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications NUREG-0472 provides standard radiological effluent technical specifi-cations for pressurized water reactors which the staff finds acceptable.
Further clarification of these acceptable methods is provided in NUREG-0133, "Preparartion of Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants". NUREG-0133 describes methods found acceptable by the staff for calculating certain key values required in the preparation of proposed radiological effluent technical specifications for light-water-NUREG-0133 also provides guidance to licen-cooled nuclear power plants.
sees in preparing requests for changes to existing radiological effluent It also describes technical specifications for operating reactors.
current staff positions on the methodology for estimating radiation exposure due to the release of radioactive materials in effluents and on the administrative control of radioactive waste treatment systems.
The above NUREG documents address all of the radiological effluent technical specifications needed to assure compliance with the guidance and requirements provided by the regulations previously cited. However, alternative approaches to the preparation of radiological effluent tech-nical specifications and alternative radiological effluent technical specifications may be acceptable if the staff determines that the alter-natives are in compliance with the regulations and with the intent of the regulatory guidance.
The standard radiological effluent technical specifications can be grouped under the following categories:
(1)
Instrumentation (2) Radioactive effluents (3) Radiological environmental monitoring (4) Design features (5) Administrative controls.
Each of the specifications under the first three categories are comprised the limiting condition for operation and the surveillance of two parts:
requirements. The limiting condition for operation provides a statement of the limiting condition, the times when-it is applicable, and the ac-tions to be taken in the event that the limiting condition is not met.
i l
l
I In general, the specifications established to assure compliance with 10 CFR Part 20 standards provide, in the event the limiting conditions of operation are exceeded, that without delay conditions are restored to within the limiting conditions.
In general, the specifications estab-lished to assure compliance with 10 CFR Part 50 provide that within speci-fied times corrective actions are taken when limiting conditions of opera-tion are exceeded, permit alternative means of system operation and requires submittal of certain reports to the NRC describing these conditions and actions.
Table 1 indicates the standard radiological effluent technical spe'ciff-cations that are needed to assure compliance with the particular provi-sions of the regulations described in Section 1.0.
3.0 EVALUATION 3.1 General Description of Radiological Effluent System This section briefly describes the radwaste liquid and gaseous effluent treatment and control systems installed at the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2.
3.1.1 Liquid Effluents Most of the water required for the operation of the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant Unit Nos. I and 2 is taken from the Mississippi River and returned to the river, or evaporated.
The liquid discharge pathways are shown in Figure 1.
The discharge point for all liquid affluent systems is the discharge canal. Any potential component cooling water releases would be via the service water system to the canal. The schematic diagram and flow path of the radioactive liquid waste system is shown in Figure 2.
The two liquid processing systems are the chemical and volume control system and the waste processing system.
Batch releases from both systems may be discharged to the river, although this is rarely done. The design of these systems was reviewed when this nuclear generating plant was licensed and was found acceptable.
3.1.2 Gaseous Effluents The building locations of the gaseous ef fluent discha'rge points are shown in Figure 3.
The five radioactive gaseous effluent discharge pathways are shown in Figure 4.
The waste gas processing system is vented to the
O
, Unit #2 auxiliary building exhaust for release. The turbine building ventilation exhaust is not shown in the diagram as this is not normally a release point for radioactive materials. The design of the gaseous effluent discharge pathways has been reviewed during the licensing process and found acceptable.
3.2 Radiological Effluent Technical Specification (RETS)
Our consultant EGG (Idaho) evaluated the licensee's proposed technical specifications against requirements of 10 CFR 50.36a as supplemented by Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50, with 10 CFR Part 20.105(c),106(g) and 405(c), with 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A, General Design Criteria 60, 63 and G4 and 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B.
Our consultant's evaluation in-cluded the following:
(1) a review of information provided in the licensee's June 1,1979 (revised January 24,1980) RETS submittal u,2,31, n
which included copies of the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (0DCM) and the Process Control Program (PCP), (2) the,[qsolution of problem areas in that submittal by means of a site visitN, (3)J review of the licen-see's April 26, 1982 revised draft RETS submittal N, (4) telephone con-ferences on May 26 and June 17, 1982/6,71 to discuss the reviewm,nd a
(5) review of the licensee's August 13, 1982 finalized revisionN.
A conference call was then held on August 30, 1982 with our consultant and the licensee to discuss deviations from the model requirements. All open questions were resolved at this time un a technical evaluation report (TER) was finalized for transmittalW.
EGG report NO-PHYS-6011 dated 9/10/82 concludes that the RETS for the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit Nos.1 and 2 meets the provisions of 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix I and the guidance provided by NUREG-0472 and NUREG-0133 except for minor modifications. These minor modifications have been discussed and agreed to by tha licensee and have been included as part of these proposed amendments.
3.2.1 Effluent Instrumentation The primary objective of the RETS with regard to effluent instrumenta-l l
tion is to ensure that all significant liquid and gaseous releases of radioactivity are monitored. The licensee's information documents that the liquid effluent release points are monitored. A continuous compo-site sampler has been added to the turbine building sumps rather than a continuous monitor; however, daily grab samples will be taken in the l
l I
- event that the primary-to-secondary leak rate exceeds 0.5 gpm and 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> grab samples if the secondary system contains >.01 Ci/ml dose equivalent I-131. This is an acceptable alternate method of monitoring the turbine building sumps as this release point has a very low potential for radio-active releases. The same requirement is used for the steam generator blowdown effluent line. The component cooling water system at Prairie Island does not require monitoring because this is a closed system and any potential releases would be via the service water system and the dis-charge canal which is monitored. The discharge canal monitor is an acceptable alternative to the service water system monitor as it is highly unlikely that radioactive effluents may enter the service water system.
Gaseous radioactive effluent releases from Prairie Island are monitored and have alarm functions. All release points have provisions for auto-matic termination of release with the exception of the radwaste building.
This building is not considered to have the potential for high level releases as all liquid waste is treated prior to transfer to the radwaste building and therefore, the automatic termination of release function is considered unnecessary. The functions of the waste gas processing system monitoring instrumentation are performed by the Unit #2 Auxiliary Building stack monitor. All other inplant systems, including the condanser air ejector, are monitored at the effluent release points.
In addition, the licensee prefers an acceptable alternative (i.e., maximum fan capacities) to the use of stack flowrate monitors. This method provides conservative exhaust duct flowrates, which we find acceptable.
3.2.2 Concentration and Dose Rates of Effluents The objective of the RETS with regard to concentration and dose rates of effluents is to ensure that offsite effluent concentrations do not exceed the maximum permissible concentrations (MPCs) established by 10 CFR Part 20, 1
Appendix B, Table II, Columns 1 and 2.
The licensee has stated that the concentration of radioactive material will be monitored "at all times," or I
"during releases" for batch releases. The setpoints of the monitors at each release point are pre-established to prevent exceeding the release l
concentrations or corresponding dose rates of 10 CFR Part 20 in unres-tricted areas. The concentration of liquid effluents.and the dose rate due to gaseous effluents will be determined in accordance with the ODCM, which we find acceptable.
y
V r The liquid effluent release pathways are the liquid radwaste effluent line, the turbine building sumps, ar.d the steam generator blowdown effluent line.
A composite sampler is required on the turbine building sump effluent line and daily sampling requirements are present in the event of a primary-to-secondary leak. Adequate assurance is therefore present that the 10 CFR Part 20 objectives will not be exceeded and any releases will be monitored.
The steam generator blowdown effluent line is also subject to the same daily sampling requirements.
In addition, all liquid release points are continuously monitored at the discharge canal prior to release to unres-tricted areas.
The gaseous monitoring systems, with the exception of the radwaste building which has an alarm function only, are equipped with automatic termination of effluents. Should concentrations be found to exceed the MPC specified in 10 CFR Part 20, based on monitoring setpoint values, release rates will immediately be decreased. The Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) for noble gas monitors at Prairie Island is specified as 10'* pC1/ml. We find this specified LLD acceptable since the detection limit is adequate to detect the MPCs specified by 10 CFR Part 20 and the proposed RETS.
The concentration of radioactive materials in releases will be determined as required by the model RETS. The ventilation exhaust systems will be monitored as required except for noble gas grab samples.
.The noble gas concentration in the plant exhaust is generally below minimum detection limits. Therefore, it is corsidered acceptable to use the NUREG-0017 l
isotopic ratios. Also, the r.ampling requirements for startups, shutdowns, and 15% power changes is considered excessive when a limited amount of failed fuel is present. Therefore, a daily sampling requirement is pro-posed when the dose equivalent I-131 concentration in the reactor coolant is greater than 1 pCi/gm until a pattern is established that can be used to predict gaseous radionuclide release rates. We find this sampling requirement acceptable since this is an adequate method of assuring that radioiodine spiking releases will not exceed the 10 CFR Part 20 dose design objectives.
3.2.3 Offsite Doses From Effluents The objective of the RETS with regard to offsite doses from effluents is to ensure that offsite doses are kept as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), are kept to a small fraction of the 10 CFR Part 20 limits, and are in accordance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I.
The licensee has i
/ committed to meet the quarterly and yearly dose criteria for liquid effluents and to use the 00CM methodology for determining the cumulative gaseous dose to individuals, thus meeting the intent of NUREG-0472. The licensee has committed to maintain the air doses in unrestricted areas, for noble gases, to those specified in Section 3.11.2.2 of the model RETS which we find acceptable. The licensee has also made a commitnent to main-tain the dose to an individual from release of Iodine-131, tritium and radioactive particulates with halflives greater than eight days at the values listed in Section 3.11.2.3 of the model RETS, thus satisfying the intent of NUREG-0472.
3.2.4 Effluent Treatment The objectives of the RETS with regard to effluent treatment are to ensure that wastes are treated to keep releases ALARA and to satisfy the require-mont for technical specifications governing the maintenance and use of radwaste treatment equipment. The licensee has committed to use the liquid and gaseous radwaste treatment system when the projected doses averaged over 31 days exceed 25% of the annual dose design objectives prorated monthly. As Prairie Island is a dual unit plant, the dose design objectives are double that of the liquid and gaseous radwaste treatment systems for a single unit plant. This meets the intent of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, Section II.D and is therefore acceptable. The licensee has also committed that the liquid radwaste system components shall be operable when required to precess waste. Also, a connitment has been made to make necessary dose projections in accordance with the ODCM, at least once per month.
Therefore, the licensee has met the intent of NUREG-0472.
3.2.5 Tank Inventory Limits The objective of the RETS with regard to tank inventory limits is to ensure that the rupture of a radwaste tank would not cause offsite doses greater than the limits set in 10 CFR Part 20 for non-occupational exposures. The licensee has put a curie limit on all temporary outside liquid tanks that are not diked and has committed to surveillance in accordance with NUREG-0472.
For liquid holdup tanks, this limit (i.e., < 10 curies) excludes tritium and dissolved or entrained noble gases. For waste gas storage tanks which are in constant use, a limit of 78,000 curies for noble. gases has been set.
Surveillance to determine gas storage tank inventory will be done via monthly grab samples, which, if the tank content exceeds 10,000 curies, sampling will be increased to daily. This is considered an acceptable surveillance method for determining that an unplanned release from a waste '
l
t gas decay tank could not exceed effluent release limits, as the quantity of radioactive gaseous waste that can be produced may be calculated.
3.2.6 Explosive Gas Mixtures The objective of the RETS with regard to explosive gas mixtures is to prevent hydrogen explosions in the waste gas treatment system. The licensee has committed to maintain a safe concentration of oxygen in this system as hydrogen is present in excess. The oxygen concentration will be maintained at < 2%.
If the concentration increases above this limit but is < 4%, it wTil be reduced to the acceptable limit within 48 h'ours.
If the concentration exceeds 4%, addition of waste gases will be halted and the concentration will be reduced to less than 2% within one hour.
The licensee will maintain a constant monitoring of 0, by using monitors upstream and downstream of the recombiner.
In additibn, other areas of the system will be monitored with a gas analyzer. The system will be in use only during system operation, which is adequate. The requirements of an explosion proof system (Section 3.11.2.5.B of the model RETS) are being mmet.
3.2.7 Solid Radwaste System The objective of the RETS with regard to the solid radwaste system is to ensure that radwaste will be properly processed and packaged before it is shipped to the burial site.
The licensee has committed to use the methods prescribed in the process control program (PCP) to ensure that the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20 and 10 CFR Part 71 are met prior to shipment of radwaste from the site. The plant will use the ATCOR waste solidification system and a Hittman waste processing program which we find acceptable.
3.2.8 Environmental Monitoring The objectives of the RETS with regard to environmental monitoring are to ensure that an adequate and full-area-coverage environmental monitoring program exists and that the 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I requirements for technical specifications on environmental monitoring are satisfied. The licensee has explicitly followed NUREG-0472, including the Branch Position statement dated November 1979. The licensee's methods of analysis and maintaining yearly records satisfy the requirements and meet the intent of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I.
The specification for the land-use census f satisfies the requirements of Section 3.12.2 of NUREG-0472 by providing i
for the census once a year in the areas specified. The specification for
+
r interlaboratory comparison satisfies the requirement of Section 3.12.3 of NUREG-0472 by committing to participate in an NRC approved program.
3.2.9 Audits and Reviews The objective of the RETS with regard to audits and reviews is to ensure that audits and reviews of the radwaste and environmental monitoring programs are properly conducted. The licensee's administrative struc-ture designates the Operations Committee (0C) and the Safety Audit Com-mittee (SAC) as the two groups responsible for the review and audit of the radiological environmental monitoring program, the ODCM, the PCP and a quality assurance (QA) program. The SAC is responsible for auditing those four programs, with the frequency of review to be equal to or greater than that required by NUREG-0472. The OC is responsible for reviewing every unplanned release of radioactive material; the review is to include an event description, remedial action to prevent recurrence, and correc-tive action.
The OC also reviews any changes in the ODCM and the PCP.
3.2.10 Procedures The objective of the RETS with regard to procedures is to establish a requirement for implementing the ODCM, the PCP and the QA program. The licensee has committed to establish, implement and maintain written pro-cedures for the PCP, ODCM and QA program.
3.2.11 Reports The objective of the RETS with regard to reports is to ensure that appro-priate periodic and special reports are submitted to the NRC, and that these reports meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.36a. The licensee has made commitments to issue annual and semi-annual reports as required under Section 6.9.1.12 and 6.9.1.9, respectively, of NUREG-0472. The licensee, in addition, has committed to issue special reports (Prompt Notification) when (1) offsite releases exceed the limits specified under paragraphs 3.11.1.1 and 3.11.2.1 of NUREG-0472, and (2) inventory limits for the t
storage tanks have exceeded those listed under Section 3.11.1.4 and l
3.11.2.6 of NUREG-0472.
3.3 Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (0DCM)
(
A brief discussion of the methodology and approach used by the licensee l
to calculate offsite dose and to maintain the operability of the effluent i
i
~ system is provided in this section. The methodology used by the licensee is evaluated for consistency against the methodology and guidelines set by the NRC staff. As a minimum, it is required that the ODCM provide equations and methodology for the following topics:
o alarm and trip setpoint on effluent instrumentaticn o liquid effluent concentration in unrestricted areas o gaseous effluent dose rate at or beyond the site boundary o liquid and gaseous effluent dose contributions o liquid and gaseous effluent dose projectons o description and location of samples for the environmental monitoring program In addition, it has been suggested, but not required, that flow diagrams defining the treatment paths and the components of the radioactive liquid, gaseous and solid waste management systems be included and reviewed for consistency against diagrams of the radwaste treatment systems. However, description and location of samples in support of the environmental moni-toring program has been provided in the ODCM, which we find acceptable.
3.3.1 Evaluation The licensee has followed the methodology of NUREG-bl33 and Reg. Guide 1.109 to determine the alarm and trip setpoints for the liquid and gaseous effluent monitors. A conservative factor is used for the setpoints, which ensures that maximum permissible concentrations (MPC) will not be exceeded.
Continuous releases of radioactive liquid effluents do not occur at Prairie i
Island, although they may occur via the steam generator blowdown effluent line.
The equations for calculating continuous release setpoints have been included.
The dose rate at or beyond the site boundary due to gaseous effluent release is in compliance with 10 CFR Part 20. Gaseous effluents are released from I
six release points for which conservative values of relative concentration i
and relative deposition for the average atmospheric dispersion conditions are used by the licensee.
The dose evaluation of pathways associated with the release of radioactive l
material in liquid effluents is in compliance with 10 CFR Part 50. For l
compliance, the releases from both units will be summed and the Appendix I limits doubled. The dose contributions are calculated once per 31 days.
l l
I Evaluation of noble gases released to the atmosphere include both beta and gama doses at site locations with highest calculated annual average concentrations of effluents from the plant vents assuring that the re-quirements of 10 CFR Part 20 are conservatively assessed against the site data.
For radiciodine, tritium and particulates the licensee shows an acceptable calculational methodology in the ODCM for calculating releases to unres-tricted areas in order to show that the design objective values for moni-toring an annual dose or dose commitment do not exceed 15 mrem to any organ of the maximum exposed individual.
In addition, the licensee has shown acceptable methods for calculating the dose using the highest calculated annual average relative concentration of effluents released via plant vents for any area at or beyond the site boundary, including the effects due to relative deposition for long-term release at the critical locations.
The licensee has committed to performing dose projections for both liquid and gaseous effluent releases once every 31 days to determine the use of appropriate portions of the radwaste system except where systems are in operation at all times. Also, the licensee is in compliance with 40 CFR Part 141 and 40 CFR Part 190 including dose from shine.
The licensee provides a complete description of the sample locations in the ODCM which includes site number identification, sector location, dis-tance from station center and sample point description. These sampling locations are also specified in the RETS which we find acceptable.
l 3.4 Summary of Technical Evaluation Table 2 contains a correspondence of major sections of NUREG-0472, the current technical specifications, and the licensee's proposal. The licensee's proposal was evaluated and the following conclusions were reached:
1.
The licensee's proposed RETS meets the intent of the NRC staff's Model Technical Specifications, NUREG-0472.
2.
In all cases, the licensee proposed RETS are equivalent to or are more restrictive than what is presently required by the exsiting technical specifications.
In addition, none of the requirements in the existing technical specifications have been deleted by the licensee's proposed RETS.
r 3.
The licensee's Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (0DCM) uses do:u-mented and approved methods that are consistent with our method-ology in NUREG-0133. The ODCM is also consistent with the techni-cal specifications. On this basis, we find the licensee's ODCM acceptable.
4.
The licensee submitted a Process Control Program (PCP) for processing solid radwaste using the ATCOR waste solidification system and Hittman waste processing program. We have reviewed the licensee's PCP and find it acceptable.
3.5 Conclusions The proposed changes to the radiological effluent technical specifications for the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit Nos.1 and 2 have been found to be in compliance with the express requirements of the NRC regulations or with the intent of NUREG-0133 and NUREG-0472 and thereby fulfill all the requirements of the regulations related to radiological effluent technical specifications.
The proposed changes will not remove nor relax any existing requirements related to the probability or consequences of accidents previously con-sidered and do not involve a significant hazards consideration.
The proposed changes will not remove nor relax any existing requirement l'
needed to provide reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner.
Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendments do not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendments l
involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of I
environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environ-mental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
l l
l
o I '
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendments do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, do not create the possibility of an accident of a type different from any evaluated previously, and do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, the amendments do not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the-proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date: October 21, 1982 Principal Contributors:
D. C. Dilanni F. Congel D. Akers I
e
~
'e N
sua.
m f
_b
= ~ ~
~7
,s g
INTAKE 3S I
EAST
=-
s SCREENilOUSE I
LWE kEARTHEN
]
O l
mM
[g f TTMANS
-g
- v.,r-
, j TEU iS'-@"{'
(
[ M i
- (!
O i
Fi ll RETURN PIPE Z
RADWASTE 4'
DISCHARGE
\\
L s
s l
- -COOLING DlHE e
TOWERS.
DISCHARGE
-i STRUGTURE s
4
/
LEGEND
SITE BOUNDARY FOR LIQUID EFFLUENTS s
sin-ido-isbo-2doo-Figure 1.
Liquid Effluent Discharge Points
Steam
- Reacto, Espihwnent iustaine
%g, cong,ng dealns condesesor generatos e dealti tank Oldy Contalewnent
.. _.L._
ii slepins sewngs L etdown Cruell"0 Cliemle:el aml W asta snaheup lint sleo'wof luelet togs lowers sysicm drain tanks tanh Can.1 J
i CVCS
~
pios lup Wasle Ishig Waste tank 88'ISC 88'al" '
CII"CII'a' lank innks penic acid Demlrunapters slowage taribs w,3g, w,,,,
noenmns sollilllicallon evagnwalews Z
s CVCS Cinicentrates ansic acid Disilltalo r
monlior Oli IHstilfele evaposalm g,,,g,
,gg,
,,c, g,,,
e sidgwnent lesas g
llelease lo rivet Spent lues DIsHnale pont densinespilsnes
. ~. -.
t_
"",]"""
g ruelpoos M*d'=
.H'****
sio ye cieanup
'a'* *
'a 'ha lana
(
lI i
. ieem l
Figure 2.
Liquid Radwaste System
,ei
M
~_7-~.'--l'--~~~--
P I
\\
s 's
\\
sg
'\\
WEST i
e s
s SHOAE LINE I
\\
\\'
l I
u l
N 3,
l, I;
SUB.
- ~
A I
1
_ex I
h SHOs4E LINE 1
1
.p 9
i
(,,,
~7
-r.qt" h
~
TWTTMINS e
c TunaisE e SL qp i
I s
VENT ELEV."I M
g b
h I
G l
,7 AEACTOR BLOG'G.'
[
0 N
VENT ELEv.BBO'MSL g
Aux. etDG.
l g
VENT ELEV."1WMSL GRADE I
g ELEst.
[,
g
's N ses nst i
Ns s
,N N I
Ns h,3's
%..____ _ ' N s
'NS,\\sx's 41-LEGEND s
s 1
l h=
s,
- - - site soundary for s
M i
's s Caseous Efflisents
' s.,
%'s-w/ Fence 8
x /no s yo
's,,
Property Line
' si
+.
Leo a j
1~
360- M is' o' rooo' V
o Figure 3. Gaseous Effluent Discharge Points 9
.D$
\\
1 o
t.
i P
4 a t
5 51
-F I*
i'5 2
l.
c DC t
i at
.i 1t 83 a
lE 3,
a-I-l l -t I-l 1
_1_!
.g-1 J
A
=
o I
I x
e o
- i. I
- sF 3
5 is it
-i s i
E f
i $.
D 3
et 3
a
=.
.8
.S
- s. e
- s. o a.
s R
r m
se e
- s. e o
ee
= =.
-5 3
n o
6A EE 5
55 c 2' su o
C5 m
w a
C Y
e L.
.3 CD w
I i
9 t
s E {n. 4 o" :r*0 b*E O
ev
- gg.3a.u*3tto eeee D
e i
tlao e
eo S
gg"E ghs " 0*A rr t t sn io E e3a,h:c e
inC a
s m
3'6s e
9 n d a
T o A
.Ea*3I 9
e i
N t
E a
3E4 o5 gId 9
U c
i
'L f
F i
gne F
s E
gr
. O T g,3.." n
$i u L
st e
A l
ea a De C
G ic f
I n
O h
rg c in S'gy,3I*Ia f h%-
e L
e vi O
T nr I
)
L o D 2
- Ea.,s v5s_
e t
t n
.i A 7 e d n i
S'gg,5h" 3 ;5 1a e
R 4 u n o FH e
0 l
f D -
f
.8
. t >.
9 R G E
A E D R 3 ; *
- U % 3 " '" s oe e9 ee la s
N U A N ic tn
- 3" 4o 9
e
%S" -
T
(
g e
S o u
. 34 8
e
{g;A.M :=
- t32w l
l s
S E R luT u ET
- j. o 4##
S S
9 I
o H O d
L e
T T
. ' a., a.
J T* ;D'
.*S G
999 a
s R
e a C
v G
.:3 3e "S
G 998 D A d
i
~ a "S
N E r
t a c A R d
a n o O2"&se=3Ks 3
S R a
l t
d d
u eke" 3 aa =3.Ss e##
e 9
8 N E S
a i
O T R
u T W tq
.Ba 4
8eG I
A
,o Eh5Ma.53. tea e
L AL D U E n
r_ga E* 4t
- 3.ia eee 4
e
. o G Z ui E
I rt R R t a r{a g* Jt" 3&*. 1e eoe e
i U
st m
nn E 3 ie l
S n
iT E r
R i
t e.
F P v
n t
vd O
r.
o n
ie 0
e e
t c R
r 9
y a
n co s
S O a
1 e
l t
r er N F s
e h
b a
o jp O
n l
R t
a dsr bol I
S io c
f n
.ti u
s C
o o
nv a
s S N t
n tt t
s ven nn n
V I
n la nn 0
a oue go o
O I
s ee 4
e rl ii i
i oo u
o um ses R
pf e st t
O T g r l p h
ige fh ea a
ti R A s
e f
fi t
tas s
oet dl c
P C di R
.f u i
ara i
t u
i ev s
eq w
moe a
nn ec f
i s
.ii
- hl i
I do l
t e
.tl se r
A sg sat a c
N F er a
n l
e E
I ep r
e om c
ad r
e eossaR c
e l ae t
w vrll eAd p
E C n
e u
. tt a
rrt y re n
d d
l i
o ipaarLey s
W E ee e
f ns l
e st r
l)t ii aAeb T P ri F
f oyr l
tf ai C
Acgrr
- c r
E S af e
cse o
iowv sReneed x.
e i
e AAjitt esej h
i f
h m
r B
tt o
n oet o
Csdt c
" Lbraat e b
t L
an,
o tt o C
enc n
Aoommcs so o
N A he e
6 s
nsaa a
t(
t iae
)
ga o
r a
nieeres.
t O C td d
s 0 sad e
gnvvtl os n
ewn c
i eli u H "e i o i i s e d e i
o n
1 e
I I
r a
(
sl ed s
s C
o smtt er d
m T N ne i
0sie 5
eeua s
l A H oh 0
t 2d vl 0
Drf r A
ob e ccr d
e t addaa npeo l
it 1
a eia 4
L C t
c ict u lf gg y
v noouett p
R T ct le i
ocn 0
aonn t
senaii ea m
E E ah ii t
if f ran 2
r ii i
eii ddftl e i
l cr i -
nooo a ldhheaao uc sopoa el rr l
ct crr ocn y
f w.
eoswdt
)
ertt u
u Ai n etl a l
i s
I Q
G wafds am l
cen ptt oan g
Gtti onuscr u
1 eco f
scll re
(
nnn l
. ooo sl a
t o
f pni o
aal s
6
. CfH eis nrff l
l el oe 0
sat B
1 seenioin o
E 1
A-i a s
arlfs,
avl o f
o t
L ell n
c us o
irnd t
0 a
a a
erti sft c B
hpu i
l i
l uit eer d
t n g neirdr 2
i034 A
c e s
h wliano d666 d
d est ag oe e
n T
ecr i
col ap n
n n r nint pt d
t v
epih e
)
ennn e
e had asea e
aee o
T wsnr c
pooo p
p ns uaherr crh r
ii
(
pill p
p ii qrcb t
fe f
i ut P
nl at 5
A rrr A
A al t s ds a
ibti 0
eee t b ti n 5lii 5
5 ina r mo 0tt t 0
0 nsf 6
aa nm 1
n t
eb t
e I ao 3
mtlb 0
RElis 2
tCCC t
t las n ue t
esau 0
err lE
[SD lo r
r r
f 5
O 5
a a
a 5
1 P
P P
TABLE 2.
CORRESPONDENCE OF PROVISIONS OF NUREG-0472 THE CURRENT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS AND THE LICENSEE'S PROPOSAL Current
+. '-
NUREG-Technical Licensee RETS 0472 Specifications Proposal Requirement (Section)
(Section)*
(Section) s Effluent 3.3.3.9 3.9.A.2.b 3.9.E.a Instrumentation 3.3.3.10 3.9.B.2 3.9.F.b Concentrations 3.11.1.1 3.9.1, 3.9.A 3.9.A.l.a 3.11.2.1 3.9.2, 3.9.B 3.9.8.1.a Offsite Doses 3.11.1.2 3.9.A.2.a 3.9.A.2.a 3.11.2.2 3.9.B.2 3.9.B.2.a 3.11.2.3 5.5 3.9.B.3.a 3.11.4 3.9.B.4.a Effluent 3.11.1.3 3.9.A.3.a 3.9.A.2.a Treatment 3.11.2.4 3.9.B.4.a 3.9.B.2 3.9.B.4.c 5.5 Tank Inventory 3.11.1.4 3.9.B.2.b 3.9.A.4.a Limits 3.11.2.6 3.9.B.4.f 3.9.B.4.c Explosive Gas 3.11.2.5 Mixtures Solid Radwas'te 3.11.3 3.9.B.3 3.9.C.1 Environmental 3.12.1 4.10 4.10.A Monitoring l
Audit and Review 6.5.1 6.2.A.6 6.2 6.5.2 6.2.8.4 Procedures 6.8 6.5 6.5.A Reports 6.9.1.6 6.7.A, B 6.7.A, B E.9.1.10 6.7.C.1 6.7.C.1
- Existing Sections effected by the Proposed RETS.
I
i
6.0 REFERENCES
N
\\
.', E' 1.
Northern,' States ~ Power Company,' letter of transmittal, Prairie Island r,'
RETS June 1.1979 and revised January 24, 1980._ The submittal was transmitted to NRC on Ncvember 25, 1981.
Included were copies of the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (00CM) Rev.1 dated April,1980, and the Process Control Program (PCP) which is stated as being submitted on June 1, 1979.
f F. B. Simpson, letter of transmittal, TransmitNal of Questions for the 2.
Prairie Island RETS Review - SIM-30-81, Noveder 24, 1981.
3.
F. B. Simpson, letter of transmittal, Transmittal of Questions for the 3
Prairie Island RETS Review - SIM-34-81, December 17, 1981.
4.
Prairie Island Plant visit, Review of Prairie _ Island Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications', February 3-4, 1982.
'l 5.
Northern States Power Cocpany, letter of transmittal, Revised Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant RETS Submittal, April 26, 1982.
6.
D. Dilanni (NRC), D. Musolf (NSP), and D. W. Akers (EG&3), telephone conference, May 26, 1982.
D. Dilanni (NRC), F. Congel (NRC), D. Musolf (NSP), J. W. Mandler (EG&G),
\\
.7.
and D. W. Akers (EG&G), telephone conference, June 17, 1992.
t Northern States Power Company, letter of transmittal, Rhision 1 to 8.
License Amendment Request dated June 1, 1979, August 13, 19S2.
r 9.
B. F. Saffell, letter of transmittal, Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant - Technical Evaluation Report, September 1982.
1 t
1
+
\\
+
\\
n'..
9