[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 77 (Tuesday, April 22, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19631-19632]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-10326]


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

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, 
KY

    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. 
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 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, 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, 1996.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment changes the Technical 
Safety Requirement surveillance for the

[[Page 19632]]

Autoclave High Pressure Systems to reflect the ability to test all 
inner and outer penetration isolation valves.

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 TSR changes reflect the autoclave piping modifications 
that permit independent testing of the inner and outer penetration 
isolation valves. Testing of these valves demonstrates the ability to 
establish containment in the event of uranium hexafluoride leakage from 
the cylinder into the autoclave. The proposed changes provide enhanced 
assurance that the containment function will be available if needed. 
These changes have no impact on plant effluents and will not 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 changes provide enhanced assurance that the autoclave 
containment function will be available if needed. The changes will not 
result in increased individual or cumulative occupational radiation 
exposure.
    3. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant 
construction impact.
    The proposed changes will not result in any building 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 allow testing of the inner and outer 
penetration isolation valves. This testing of the autoclave containment 
function is not involved in any precursor to an evaluated event; 
therefore, the potential of occurrence of an evaluated event is 
unaffected. The proposed changes provide enhanced assurance that the 
function will be available if required; the consequences of previously 
evaluated accidents are not increased.
    5. The proposed amendment will not result in the possibility of a 
new or different kind of accident.
    The autoclave piping configuration modifications permit independent 
testing of the inner and outer penetration isolation valves to 
demonstrate the ability to establish containment in the event of a leak 
from the cylinder into the autoclave. The changes affect only the 
autoclave isolation valves and create no new operating conditions or 
new plant configuration that could lead to a new or different type of 
accident.
    6. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant 
reduction in any margin of safety.
    The proposed changes reflect modifications that permit independent 
testing of the inner and outer penetration isolation valves. The 
proposed changes enhance the availability of the autoclave containment 
function. There is no reduction in the 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 changes reflect the autoclave piping configuration 
modifications made to permit independent testing of inner and outer 
penetration isolation valves. Testing of these valves demonstrates the 
ability to establish containment in the event of uranium hexafluoride 
leakage from the cylinder into the autoclave. The changes do not affect 
any other equipment functions or administrative requirements. The 
testing of the autoclave containment function is not addressed in the 
safeguards and security programs. The effectiveness of the safety, 
safeguards, and security programs is not decreased.
    Effective date: June 23, 1997.
    Certificate of Compliance No. GDP-1: Amendment will revise the 
Technical Safety Requirements.
    Local Public Document Room location: Paducah Public Library, 555 
Washington Street, Paducah, Kentucky 42003.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of April 1997.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carl J. Paperiello,
Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 97-10326 Filed 4-21-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P