ML20128B472

Forwards Preliminary Questions & Comments Based on Review to Date of Plant

ML20128B472
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	03/20/1969
From:	Howe P US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:	Boyd R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
NUDOCS 9212030664
Download: ML20128B472 (4)

Text

_

4 d

MAR 2 01959 R. 3, Boyd, Assistant Diretter for Beaster Projects, DFL 1510:

• 8. Levine, Assistant Mreater for Roaster Toebentegy, ask nr.LtxrwARY Qesitows Ann ooseenTs - mwitCILLO - NORTEERN STATES PD.?tR COMFNIY - DOCf.ET 50. 50-263 Attached are our yveliminary questions and esements based opes our s

preliminary review to date of the Montieelle plant.

F. W. liwe, Chief Environmental & Radiatina safety Teeknelegy Aranch NIkb78:15 Division of Reactor Licenef ag

Enclosure:

Draf t Qatstions & Coissanta cer w/enei.

D. Muller, PP!1 U. Vasca114, RPf1 I

1 t

a :s 9212030664 690320 PDR ADOCK 05000263 A

PDR J6P4RtDRg_...M i

.El L...

omer > 36.S.TE.;.....

%\\

ss

/

. Ykler.th,c.3...L..Hnc una..,..... w....

sumur >

DATT>

3/ g /69

... 3/j 9 /69...............

3/17/69 3//p /69 Form Atc.)na tRev.9 53) AECM 0240 e a sovisasset movies ones : sees e-a en f'

4

~

)

s j

l j

NORTilERN STATES POWER COMPANY j

HONTICEL1,0 QUESTIONS i

DOCKET NO. 50-263 i

i i

a i

1.

Describe the exclusion zone for this facility.

Provide the distance from the plant stack to the nearest boundary of the exclusion zone.

l 2.

Based upon the population distribution data presented in Figures 2-2-3, j

2-2-4 and 2-2-5, state the available low population zone radius for this facility. Justify the stated low population zone radius.

?

l 3.

Apparently Figures 2-3-2, 2-3-4, 2-3-5, which are suppose to illustrate 4

j the site and its location within its 1 degree by I degree square, the 20 foot annual wind rose and 150 foot vind rose, respectively, s

have been inadvertently left out of the PSAR. Please provide copies of these figures.

0 4

It is stated in the FSAR that plant grade is 9 feet higher than the flood level that could result from the occurrence of the 1000 year i

flood. Please provide the flaod discharge and level that could result from the occurrence of the maximum probable flood. Provide the basis for these estimates.

Provide the flood protection level for all Class I equipment and structures.

5.

Since the peak sonna doses due to the routine gaseous releases from this facility will occur in the area of the exclusion zone boundaries

'j justify the location of only one gamma monitoring station on the exclusion zone perimeter.

6.

Will river water samples he taken from the intake to' the Minneapolis public drinking supply routinely as a part of this facility's y'

L radiation environmental monitoring. program? If not, justify this position..

If these samples will be taken, provide the frequency of sempling, types of analyses, etc.

7.

Delineate places downstream of the facility where river water is I

diverted for irrigation purposes.

State the crops grown using river 4 3 ',

water irrigation. Indicate the types of crop samples which are to be taken for the environmental monitoring program and where these

,l samples are to be taken.

8.

It is stated in the FSAR that the concentrations of liquid radioactive wastes released from the condenser discharge canal will be below the 10 CFR 20 levels on a batch by batch basis prier to discharge into the '

Mississippi River. The amount of radioactivity in the discharge-will vary according to the mode of operation for the cooling towers

-4

. ~.

I.

-}

4

+

which will be controlled according to river f1w.

Based upon the various modes of cooling tower operation with the appropriate liquid radweste release rates and river flows, calculate the radioactivity-levels that would occur at the Minneapolis and St. Paul public watei intakes _ due to the release of liquid wastes at the 10 CFR 20 levels on a batch by batch basis at condenser discharge outfall.

Justify the river dilution assumptions used in this analysis.

9.

Apparently, there are several potential release points at this facility for airborne radioactivity, res plant stack, reactor building vent, cooling towers, etc. Provide a list of all points within the facility where radioactivity could be released to the ambient atmosphere, the amounts of radioactivity that could be released from each point, the monitoring devices at each point with alarm and= isolation settings, and how the releases from each of these points will be factored into the routine gaseous effluent limit for the facility. Provide basis for the amounts of radioactivity, monitor set points and method of arriving = %. a l

at the joint effluent limit.

j

10. Provide the maximum radioactivity levels on an isotopic basis of the water contained within the condensate water storage. Justify the amount stated. Provide the basis for the maximum inventories of liquid radio-i active wastes listed in Table 9-2-1.

Provide an isotopic breakdown of the radioactivity contained within tanks in the turbine and radwaste l

building. _ Provide an analysis of the potential radioactivity levels

'f in the river and the nearest public drinking water _ intakes that could t

result from the release of the contents of all of the above tanks to the river during low river water flow conditions.

11. Provide the rate of release of stack effluents 'on an isotope by isotope i

basis of the radioactive isotopes that.would be released by this -

facility if_ it were. operating at the proposed technical specification

, release rates. Provide the basis for this breakdown. Since the proposed technical specification stack effluent release rate limit is based upon an assumed isotopic breakdown of the affluent provide how in actual practice when the plant is in operation that the applicant will establish-

-that the actual fission product mixture is as assumed in stack gas l

calculations and if necessary to possibly adjust the allowable release rate -,

l accordingly.

12. Provide detailed information on the use of precost filter in the liquid i

radwaste, i.e., how is coating material determined, how is coating done, who does the coating applicant or vendor, how it is determined.

l that a filter should be replaced, describe its use in the cleanup system, l

etc.

t 4

=--- - --

. L

I 4

p t i:

(>

.= )

f i

i 13.

Provide dose design criteria for the control room. Describe the ventilation system for the control room and describe its use during accident and routine conditions. Assuming a TID 14844 type accident with 100% of the noble gases, 25% of the halogens, and 1% of the solids Icaking from the primary containment.at the design Icak rate calculate

)'

the dose received by an operator in the control room during the course of such an accident.

14. Apparently, according to the FSAR, the design basis of the radwaste system and the shiciding for many portions of the facility are based upon a routine gcccous release rate of 0.3 c/sec.

The appifcant, a

however, is requesting a release limit of 0.48 c/ cec.

State the eff set that this higher proposed limit has on the systees already

)

designed for the lower limit.

l J

i i

4 s

..-~

1

-w'

.,,,, _.,