ML20099E403
| ML20099E403 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 11/07/1984 |
| From: | Lainas G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20099E405 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8411210287 | |
| Download: ML20099E403 (4) | |
Text
i 7590-01 1
- l
-UNITED STATES NJCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
. NORTHER'.i STATES POWER COMPANY l
DOCKET N0. 50-263 NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING 0F NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT-The U.' S. Nuclear. Regulatory-Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an exemption from requirements of 10 CFR 50.54 to Northern States Power Company, the licensee for the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, located in Wright County, Minnesota.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action:
The exemption would grant an
- exemption to permit the shift supervisor's office to be considered part of the control room for purposes of meeting the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54.
The proposed exemption is in accordance with the licensee's request for exemption dated September 29, 1983, as supplemented March 23, 1984.
The Need for the Proposed Action: On July 11, 1983, the Commission published a revised Section 10 CFR 50.54 regarding shift staffing requirements for nuclear power plants.
Section 50.54(m)(2)(iii) of the revised rule requires that:
"When a nuclear power unit is in an operational mode other than cold shutdown or refueling, as defined by the unit's technical specifications, each licensee shall have a person holding a senior operator license for the nuclear power unit in the control room at all times."
In a letter dated September 29, 1983, and supplemented by letter dated March 23, 1984, Northern States Power Company described its plans for 8411210287 841107 PDR ADOCK 05000263 P
_2 modifying the shift supervisor's office at:the Monticello plant to nake'it suitable to be considered as part of the control room. Northern States Power Company requested that the Shift Supervisor's office be considered as part of the control ~ room for the purpose of meeting the requirements o'f the new shift staffing rule. The proposed modifications to the office are to be accomplished during the present extended outage.
The Shift Supervisor's office is a' different -room than the control room,- and therefore operating personnel in the Shift Superv_isor's office can not directly perceive the same information as is available in the control room or communicate directly with control room personnel.
Far this reason, we are treating this matter as an exemption request from the licensee.
Northern States Power Company stated that nine out of eleven persons holding senior operator licenses at the Monticello plant are supervisory personnel whose duties involve routine processing of work control, testing, and other documentation. Locating these persons in the control room introduces undesireable traffic into the small Monticello control room.
The licensee's plans for modifying the shift supervisor's office include provision of key visual and audible information and reliable prompt access to the control room, so that use of the shift supervisor's office for senior reactor operator occupancy is considered func
' ally acceptable by the licensee.
Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action:
The proposed exemption affects only the staffing requirements as related to the definition of the
T~
'h'
. control room and does not affect'the risk of facility accidents. Thus, post-accident radiological releases will not differ from those determined t
_previously, and the proposed relief does not otherwise affect facility
-radiological effluents', or any significant occupational exposures.
Likewise, the relief does'not affect plant non-radiological effluents and has no tcher environmental impact. Therefore, the Commission concludes there are no measurable radiological or non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable environmental impact associated with the proposed exemption, any alternatives either.will have no environmental impact or will have a greater environmental impact. The principal alternative to the exemption would be to require literal compliance with Section 50.54(m)(2) to 10 CFR Part 50. Such an action would not enhance the protection of the environment and would result in unnecessary staffing requirements and associated cost to the licensee.
. Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of resources not considered previously in connection with the. Final Environmental Statement relating to this facility, Final Environmental Statement Related to the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Docket No.
50-263, (November 1972).
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
The NRC staff did not consult other agencies or persons.
I
)
9
..m
o y.
a
~
.' FINDING 0F NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT _
The Commission has. determined not to prepare an environmental inpact-
- statement for the proposed exemption.
Based upon the environmental assessment, we conclude that the. proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
s For further details with respect to this action, see the request for exemption dated September 29, 1983, as supplemented March 23, 1984 which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N. W., Washington, D.C. and at the Environmental Conservation Library, Minneapolis Public Library, 300 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 7th day of November,1984.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION w/
Gus C. Lainas, Assistant Director
^
for Operating Reactors Division of Licensing
.I 6
h t
.- +
er r--
er
, -,-, - +,