[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 240 (Tuesday, December 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69121-69122]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-33208]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket 70-7001]
Notice of Amendment to Certificate of Compliance GDP-1 for the
U.S. Enrichment Corporation (Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant), Paducah,
Kentucky
The Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, has
made a determination that the following amendment request is not
significant in accordance with 10 CFR 76.45. In making that
determination, the staff concluded that: (1) there is no change in the
types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may
be released offsite; (2) there is no significant increase in individual
or cumulative occupational radiation exposure; (3) there is no
significant construction impact; (4) there is no significant increase
in the potential for, or radiological or chemical consequences from,
previously analyzed accidents; (5) the proposed changes do not result
in the possibility of a new or different kind of accident; (6) there is
no significant reduction in any margin of safety; and (7) the proposed
changes will not result in an overall decrease in the effectiveness of
the plant's safety, safeguards or security programs. The basis for this
determination for the amendment request is shown below.
The NRC staff has reviewed the certificate amendment application
and concluded that it provides reasonable assurance of adequate safety,
safeguards, and security, and compliance with NRC requirements.
Therefore, the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards, is prepared to issue an amendment to the Certificate of
Compliance for the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. The staff has
prepared a Compliance Evaluation Report which provides details of the
staff's evaluation.
The NRC staff has determined that this amendment satisfies the
criteria for a categorical exclusion in accordance with 10 CFR
51.22(c)(19). Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental
impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared for this
amendment.
USEC or any person whose interest may be affected may file a
petition, not exceeding 30 pages, requesting review of the Director's
Decision. The petition must be filed with the Commission not later than
15 days after publication of this Federal Register Notice. A petition
for review of the Director's Decision shall set forth with
particularity the interest of the petitioner and how that interest may
be affected by the results of the decision. The petition should
specifically explain the reasons why review of the Decision should be
permitted with particular reference to the following factors: (1) the
interest of the petitioner; (2) how that interest may be affected by
the Decision, including the reasons why the petitioner should be
permitted a review of the Decision; and (3) the petitioner's areas of
concern about the activity that is the subject matter of the Decision.
Any person described in this paragraph (USEC or any person who filed a
petition) may file a response to any petition for review, not to exceed
30 pages, within 10 days after filing of the petition. If no petition
is received within the designated 15-day period, the Director will
issue the final amendment to the Certificate of Compliance without
further delay. If a petition for review is received, the decision on
the amendment application will become final in 60 days, unless the
Commission grants the petition for review or otherwise acts within 60
days after publication of this Federal Register Notice.
A petition for review must be filed with the Secretary, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the
Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street,
NW, Washington, DC, by the above date.
For further details with respect to the action see (1) the
application for amendment and (2) the Commission's Compliance
Evaluation Report. These items are available for public inspection at
the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L
Street, NW, Washington, DC, and at the Local Public Document Room.
Date of amendment request: September 15, 1997
[[Page 69122]]
Brief description of amendment: The amendment proposes to revise
Technical Safety Requirement (TSR) 2.3.4.7, Criticality Accident Alarm
System (CAAS), Required Action A.1.5 to provide additional time to
operate the withdrawal station in normal steady state operation should
the alarm system be declared inoperable. This would allow the
accumulators in the product withdrawal area to be filled while the CAAS
was inoperable instead of immediately placing the cascade into the
recycle mode.
Basis for finding of no significance: 1. The proposed amendment
will not result in a change in the types or significant increase in the
amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite.
The proposed changes to the TSR to provide additional time to
conduct operations when the CAAS is inoperable will have no effect on
the generation or disposition of effluents. Therefore, the proposed TSR
modification will not result in a change to the types or amount of
effluents that may be released offsite.
2. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant increase
in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The CAAS does not prevent criticality, therefore, the possibility
of a criticality occurring during the period of CAAS inoperability is
not increased. Personnel access during the period of inoperability is
limited and individuals are required to have an alternate means of
criticality alarm notification. However, in the unlikely event a
criticality did occur during this period, the personnel notification
might not be as prompt as the CAAS. Therefore, the potential radiation
exposure for an individual could be higher because the individual
remained in the area for a longer period of time. This slight chance
for increased exposure is not considered to be significant. The
proposed changes will not significantly increase any exposure to
radiation due to normal operations. Therefore, the changes will not
result in a significant increase in individual or cumulative radiation
exposure.
3. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant
construction impact.
The proposed changes will not result in any construction,
therefore, there will be no construction impacts.
4. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant increase
in the potential for, or radiological or chemical consequences from,
previously analyzed accidents.
The proposed change to TSR 2.3.4.7 to allow the accumulators to be
filed in the event of CAAS inoperability does not increase the
probability of any accident. It is possible that personnel exposure
could be slightly increased due to possible short delays in personnel
notification. For personnel in the immediate vicinity of any
criticality, the consequences would not be expected to change.
Consequences to the facility would not be changed. These changes will
not significantly increase the probability of occurrence or consequence
of any postulated accident currently identified in the safety analysis
report.
5. The proposed amendment will not result in the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident.
The proposed TSR modification will allow the routine operation of
filling an accumulator to occur while the CAAS is inoperable. This
change does not introduce any new or different accidents than those
previously analyzed. Therefore, the proposed changes will not create
the possibility of a different type of equipment malfunction or a
different type of accident.
6. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant
reduction in any margin of safety.
The proposed changes do not change the types of accidents that
could occur or the probability of any accidents. The margin of safety
for withdrawal related operations is not changed. Criticality detection
would be provided through the use of personnel alarming devices. The
changes do not significantly decrease the margins of safety.
7. The proposed amendment will not result in an overall decrease in
the effectiveness of the plant's safety, safeguards or security
programs.
Implementation of the proposed changes do not change the safety,
safeguards, or security programs. Therefore, the effectiveness of the
safety, safeguards, and security programs is not decreased.
Effective date: The amendment to Certificate of Compliance GDP-1
becomes effective 15 days after being signed by the Director, Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
Certificate of Compliance No. GDP-1: Amendment will revise TSR
2.3.4.7 to provide additional time to operate the withdrawal station in
normal steady state operation should the CAAS be declared inoperable.
Local Public Document Room location: Paducah Public Library, 555
Washington Street, Paducah, Kentucky 42003.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of 1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carl J. Paperiello,
Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 98-33208 Filed 12-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
