[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 240 (Tuesday, December 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69120-69121]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-33204]



[[Page 69120]]

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

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: November 5, 1998.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment proposes to change 
the completion dates for Compliance Plan Issues 46 and 50. The 
completion dates are being changed from December 15, 1998, to January 
18, 2000. These issues require plant modifications to ensure that the 
criticality accident alarm system (CAAS) alarm horns are capable of 
being heard throughout the affected areas of the process buildings and 
to provide CAAS alarm horns for those unalarmed facilities within the 
evacuation area of other buildings. USEC will provide alternative means 
of personnel notification in the event of a CAAS alarm. The amendment 
also proposes criteria for determining audibility of the CAAS alarm 
horns.
    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 Compliance Plan completion dates and 
the addition of criteria for determining alarm horn audibility will 
have no effect on the generation or disposition of effluents. 
Therefore, the proposed changes 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 is not increased. However, in the unlikely 
event a criticality did occur, the personnel notification might not be 
as prompt as relying on the CAAS horns. 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 
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 CAAS system is not involved in any precursor to an evaluated 
accident. Extension of the completion dates for the modifications to 
improve CAAS audibility has no effect on the probability of occurrence 
of a criticality accident. The consequences of a potential criticality 
accident will not be significantly increased since the ability of the 
CAAS to detect a criticality is unchanged and the compensatory measures 
currently in place will remain in place until the modifications are 
completed. It is possible that personnel exposure could be slightly 
increased due to possible short delays in personnel notification. The 
addition of acceptance criteria for subjectively measuring audibility 
will not alter either the probability or the

[[Page 69121]]

consequences. Therefore, 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 CAAS is used to mitigate the consequences of a criticality 
accident. The proposed changes do not introduce any new or different 
accidents than those previously analyzed. Therefore, the proposed 
changes will not create the possibility of a new or different type of 
equipment malfunction or 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 to the completion dates for the CAAS 
modifications extend the period for having areas of the plant not 
covered by the audible alarm horn, however, the compensatory measures 
provided in Compliance Plan Issues 46 and 50 will remain in place. 
These include use of building howlers for the process buildings and the 
use of radios in unalarmed buildings. These measures will provide 
adequate notification in the event of a criticality accident. The 
proposed acceptance criteria for determining audibility provide a 
subjective means for ensuring audibility. Therefore, the changes do not 
result in a significant decrease in 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.
    The proposed changes do not change the safeguards or security 
programs. The CAAS audibility acceptance criteria provide a subjective 
means of determining audibility and may improve the effectiveness of 
the safety program. The continued use of alternative methods of 
notification for the CAAS alarms (building howlers and radios) due to 
the extension of the completion dates for Compliance Plan Issues 46 and 
50 will ensure that personnel are promptly notified of CAAS alarms. 
Therefore, the overall effectiveness of the safety, safeguards, and 
security programs is not decreased.
    Effective date: The amendment to Certificate of Compliance GDP-1 
becomes effective immediately after being signed by the Director, 
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
    Certificate of Compliance No. GDP-1: Amendment will revise 
Compliance Plan Issues 46 and 50 to reflect the new completion dates of 
January 18, 2000. The amendment will also add acceptance criteria for 
determining CAAS alarm horn audibility.
    Local Public Document Room location: Paducah Public Library, 555 
Washington Street, Paducah, Kentucky 42003.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of December, 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carl J. Paperiello,
Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 98-33204 Filed 12-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P