[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 47 (Thursday, March 11, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12184-12185]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-6061]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket 70-7002]
Amendment to Certificate of Compliance GDP-2 for the U.S.
Enrichment Corporation, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Piketon, OH
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 Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has reviewed the
certificate amendment application and concluded that it provides
reasonable assurance of adequate safety, safeguards, and
[[Page 12185]]
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
Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PORTS). 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.
The United States Enrichment Corporation (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 of the
Commission, 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: December 23, 1998.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment involves deleting a
commitment in the PORTS Compliance Plan Issue A.2, Action 3, regarding
physical modifications to the existing UF6 cylinder sampling autoclaves
and installation of new UF6 cylinder sampling autoclaves at PORTS. When
Issue A.2 was developed, it was determined that to meet NRC sampling
requirements for 2.5-ton enriched UF6 cylinders received from Russian
plants, it would be necessary to install additional sampling autoclaves
at PORTS. An alternative scheme was subsequently implemented as of
April 1998, whereby a USEC-contractor would witness the filling of
sample cylinders at the same time the material was also being placed
into a product cylinder in Russia. This allows USEC to not have to draw
liquid UF6 samples at PORTS from Russian receipts and thereby reduces
the need for additional autoclave sampling capacity at PORTS.
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 amendment, which involves deleting a commitment
regarding physical modifications to UF6 sampling autoclaves at PORTS
would not increase the amounts of any effluents that may be released
offsite or result in any impact to the environment.
2. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant increase
in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The proposed amendment does not introduce operations that could
significantly increase individual or cumulative occupational radiation
exposure.
3. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant
construction impact.
The proposed change will not result in any construction, therefore,
there will be no construction impact.
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 amendment reduces the probability of a UF6 release by
reducing the number of liquid UF6 operations at PORTS. Therefore, the
proposed amendment will not result in a significant increase in the
potential for, or radiological or chemical consequences from,
previously analyzed accidents.
5. The proposed amendment will not result in the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident.
The proposed amendment involves deleting a commitment to install
additional UF6 sampling capacity at PORTS. Therefore, this change will
not result in the possibility of a new or different kind of accident.
6. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant
reduction in any margin of safety.
The proposed amendment reduces the probability of a UF6 release by
reducing the number of liquid UF6 operations at PORTS. Therefore, the
proposed change does not represent a reduction in any margin 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.
The proposed amendment only involves deleting a commitment to
install additional UF6 sampling capacity at PORTS. USEC has committed
to implementing an alternative witnessed UF6 cylinder sampling program.
Therefore, the proposed amendment will not result in an overall
decrease in the effectiveness of the plant's safety, safeguards or
security programs.
Effective date: The amendment to GDP-2 will become effective upon
issuance by NRC.
Certificate of Compliance No. GDP-2: This amendment will revise
Issue A.2 of the PORTS Compliance Plan.
Local Public Document Room location: Portsmouth Public Library,
1220 Gallia Street, Portsmouth, Ohio 45662.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of March 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carl J. Paperiello,
Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 99-6061 Filed 3-10-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
