[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 240 (Tuesday, December 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69121-69122]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-33208]


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


NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
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: September 15, 1997

[[Page 69122]]

    Brief description of amendment: The amendment proposes to revise 
Technical Safety Requirement (TSR) 2.3.4.7, Criticality Accident Alarm 
System (CAAS), Required Action A.1.5 to provide additional time to 
operate the withdrawal station in normal steady state operation should 
the alarm system be declared inoperable. This would allow the 
accumulators in the product withdrawal area to be filled while the CAAS 
was inoperable instead of immediately placing the cascade into the 
recycle mode.
    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 TSR to provide additional time to 
conduct operations when the CAAS is inoperable will have no effect on 
the generation or disposition of effluents. Therefore, the proposed TSR 
modification 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 during the period of CAAS inoperability is 
not increased. Personnel access during the period of inoperability is 
limited and individuals are required to have an alternate means of 
criticality alarm notification. However, in the unlikely event a 
criticality did occur during this period, the personnel notification 
might not be as prompt as the CAAS. 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 radiation 
exposure.
    3. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant 
construction impact.
    The proposed changes will not result in 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 change to TSR 2.3.4.7 to allow the accumulators to be 
filed in the event of CAAS inoperability does not increase the 
probability of any accident. It is possible that personnel exposure 
could be slightly increased due to possible short delays in personnel 
notification. For personnel in the immediate vicinity of any 
criticality, the consequences would not be expected to change. 
Consequences to the facility would not be changed. 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 proposed TSR modification will allow the routine operation of 
filling an accumulator to occur while the CAAS is inoperable. This 
change does not introduce any new or different accidents than those 
previously analyzed. Therefore, the proposed changes will not create 
the possibility of a different type of equipment malfunction or a 
different type of accident.
    6. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant 
reduction in any margin of safety.
    The proposed changes do not change the types of accidents that 
could occur or the probability of any accidents. The margin of safety 
for withdrawal related operations is not changed. Criticality detection 
would be provided through the use of personnel alarming devices. The 
changes do not significantly decrease 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.
    Implementation of the proposed changes do not change the safety, 
safeguards, or security programs. Therefore, the effectiveness of the 
safety, safeguards, and security programs is not decreased.
    Effective date: The amendment to Certificate of Compliance GDP-1 
becomes effective 15 days after being signed by the Director, Office of 
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
    Certificate of Compliance No. GDP-1: Amendment will revise TSR 
2.3.4.7 to provide additional time to operate the withdrawal station in 
normal steady state operation should the CAAS be declared inoperable.
    Local Public Document Room location: Paducah Public Library, 555 
Washington Street, Paducah, Kentucky 42003.

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

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carl J. Paperiello,
Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 98-33208 Filed 12-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P