[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 58 (Wednesday, March 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14477-14478]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7639]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 70-7002]


Amendment to Certificate of Compliance for the U.S. Enrichment 
Corporation Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Portsmouth, 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, 
previous 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, safe guards or security programs. The basis for 
this determination for the amendment request is described 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 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 satisfied 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.
    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 the filing of the petition.

[[Page 14478]]

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: Docketing and Services Branch, or may be delivered to 
the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L 
Street, 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, 1996.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment, in accordance with a 
commitment made in the USEC certificate application, changes the 
administrative Technical Safety Requirement (TSR) that limits the 
working hours of facility staff who perform safety functions.
    Basic 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.
    Administrative TSR 3.2.2.b limits working hours of facility staff 
who perform safety functions (operators, health physics personnel, 
maintenance personnel, etc.). The proposed change revises TSR 3.2.2.b.2 
as specified in Issue 37 of DOE/ORO-2027 Revision 3, Change A, Plan for 
Achieving Compliance with NRC Regulations at the Portsmouth Gaseous 
Diffusion Plant, by reducing the currently authorized limits, excluding 
shift turnover time, of 32 hours in any 48 hour period and 80 hours in 
any 7 day period, to 24 hours in any 48 hour period and 72 hours in any 
7 day period, respectively These two 8-hour reductions in overtime 
limits may enhance safety by reducing occupational stresses and burdens 
on facility staff who perform safety functions. Therefore, this TSR 
amendment will not result in significant amounts 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.
    Operations at PORTS do not result in significant occupational 
radiation exposures. Some of the reasons being that (1) occupancy 
factors are low, (2) distances from radioactive sources are generally 
high, (3) significant shielding is provided by solid and liquid UF6 
(self-shielding) and by piping and equipment, (4) depleted and low 
enriched uranium has low specific activities and are also comparatively 
low gamma radiation emitters, (5) most of the uranium in process is in 
gaseous form (low density), and (6) UF6 is confined within quality 
controlled cylinders, equipment and piping. The proposed reductions in 
overtime limits would not significantly affect any of these six 
reasons. Therefore, reducing overtime limits, as described in the 
assessment of criterion 1, will not measurably modify individual or 
cumulative occupational radiation exposures.
    3. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant 
construction impact.
    Since the proposed changes do 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 changes which involve reductions in overtime limits 
will not result in a significant increase in the potential for UF6 
releases. The proposed changes will also not result in a significant 
increase for, or radiological consequences from previously evaluated 
critical accidents. In fact, the reductions in overtime limits 
described in the assessment of criterion 1, may enhance safety by 
reducing occupational stresses and burdens on facility staff who 
perform safety functions. Therefore, this TSR 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 changes will not result in the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident. In fact, the reductions in overtime limits 
described in the assessment of criterion 1, may enhance safety by 
reducing occupational stresses and burdens on facility staff who 
perform safety functions.
    6. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant 
reduction in any margin of safety.
    The proposed change, which is described in the assessment of 
criterion 1, will not result in the violation of any limiting condition 
of operation. Therefore, it will not significantly reduce 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.
    Reductions in limits to overtime would not result in a decrease in 
the overall effectiveness of the plant's safety program. In fact, as 
discussed in the assessment of criterion 1, it may enhance the 
effectiveness of the plant's safety program.
    The staff has not identified any safeguards or security related 
implications from the proposed amendment. Therefore reducing the limits 
on overtime as discussed in the assessment of criterion 1 will not 
result in an overall decrease in the effectiveness of the plant's 
safeguards or security programs.
    Effective date: 30 days after issuance.
    Certificate of Compliance No. GDP-2: Amendment will revise the 
Technical Safety Requirements.
    Local Public Document Room location: Portsmouth Public Library, 
1220 Gallia Street, Portsmouth, Ohio 45662.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of March 1997.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John T. Greeves,
Acting Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 97-7639 Filed 3-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P