[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 181 (Friday, September 18, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49932-49933]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-25064]
[[Page 49932]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket 70-7002]
Notice of Amendment to Certificate of Compliance GDP-2 for the
U.S. Enrichment Corporation Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant
Portsmouth, Ohio
The Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
(NMSS), 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 security, and
compliance with NRC requirements. Therefore, the Director, NMSS, is
prepared to issue an amendment to the Certificate of Compliance for the
Portsmouth 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.
Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact
statement or environmental assessment need be prepared for this
amendment.
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, 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: March 16, 1998.
Brief description of amendment: On March 16, 1998, USEC submitted a
certification amendment request to revise the Technical Safety
Requirement (TSR) surveillances for the two freon degraders in TSR
2.7.3.9, Freon Degrader Fluorine Flow. The new (Cell Floor) Freon
Degrader surveillance for calibration of the capillary tubes
controlling fluorine flow was changed to reflect the as-built
configuration of the freon degrader. Initial design had four tubes
calibrated at a fluorine flow rate of 100 standard cubic feet per day
(scfd) for each tube for a total of 400 scfd. The final design and as-
built had four tubes, one for 25 scfd, one for 50 scfd, one for 100
scfd, and one for 200 scfd for a combined flow rate of 375 scfd. The
surveillance was also amended to have the fluorine fore pressure set at
5 pounds per square inch gauge (psig) from the previous 9.5 psig. The
other surveillance change for the new (Cell Floor) Freon Degrader was
lowering the setpoint for the high high pressure fluorine trip from 20
psig to 5 psig. Two surveillances were added for the old (Operating
Floor) Freon Degrader for calibrating and testing the high fluorine
pressure trip.
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 does not propose any new or unanalyzed
activity for the facility. The amendment would lower the fluorine flow
rate possible in the new (Cell Floor) Freon Degrader and lower the
safety system trip point. The lowering of the flow rate and trip point
decreases the possibility of an accident which could result in toxic
releases of any effluents offsite.
2. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant increase
in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
For the reasons provided in number 1 above, the proposed amendment
will not result in a significant increase in individual or cumulative
occupational radiation exposure. In fact, the proposed amendment will
likely decrease the risk of releases thereby decreasing the risk of
individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
3. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant
construction impact.
The proposed amendment does not involve 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 amendment does not propose any new or unanalyzed
activity for the facility. The amendment would lower the fluorine flow
rate possible in the new (Cell Floor) Freon Degrader and lower the
safety system trip point. The lowering of the flow rate and trip point
decreases the possibility of an accident. Therefore, the amendment
would not result in a significant increase in the potential for, or
radiological or chemical consequences from previously analyzed
accidents.
[[Page 49933]]
5. The proposed amendment will not result in the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident.
The proposed amendment does not propose any new or unanalyzed
activity for the facility. Therefore, the amendment does not raise 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 amendment would lower the fluorine flow rate possible in the
new (Cell Floor) Freon Degrader and lower the safety system trip point.
The lowering of the flow rate and trip point decreases the possibility
of an accident and would increase 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 would lower the fluorine flow rate possible
in the new (Cell Floor) Freon Degrader and lower the safety system trip
point and does not change the frequency of surveillances. Therefore, it
does not decrease the effectiveness of the plant's safety program. The
staff has not identified any safeguards or security related
implications from the proposed amendment. Therefore, the proposed
amendment will not result in an overall decrease in the effectiveness
of the plant's safeguards or security programs.
Effective date: The amendment to GDP-2 will become effective 60
days after issuance by NRC.
Certificate of Compliance No. GDP-2: Amendment will revise TSR
2.7.3.9.
Local Public Document Room location: Portsmouth Public Library,
1220 Gallia Street, Portsmouth, Ohio 45662.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of September 1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carl J. Paperiello,
Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 98-25064 Filed 9-17-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
