ML20035A428

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Advises of Critical Need for Action by DOE Re NRC Assumption of Responsibility for Safety & Safeguards Oversight of Gaseous Diffusion Plants Under U Enrichment Provisions of Energy Policy Act of 1992
ML20035A428
Person / Time
Issue date: 03/22/1993
From: Selin I, The Chairman
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To: Oleary H
ENERGY, DEPT. OF
References
NUDOCS 9303260048
Download: ML20035A428 (2)


Text

.-

D12 i

. L g ne o

UNITED STATES

~

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i

[

m WASMNGTON, D. C. 23555

, r, y

%...g /

March 22, 1993 j

CHAIRMAN i

i The Honorable Hazel O' Leary Secretary of Energy j[

Washington, D.C. 20585 i

Dear Secretary O' Leary:

The purpose of this letter-is to advise you of the critical need for action by j

the Department of Energy concerning the Nuclear Regulatory Comission's assumption of responsibility for safety and safeguards oversight of the

{

gaseous diffusion plants. As you are aware, the uranium enrichment provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 contemplate that the NRC will exercise this regulatory responsibility.

j

^>

Section 1701(a) of the Atomic Energy Act, as amended by the Energy Policy Act, l

provides that NRC will issue standards for the diffusion plants within two

.i years (by October 1994). However, the Act specifies a July'1, 1993. transition date for DOE to begin leasing the plants to the U.S. Enrichment Corporation (USEC), while Section 1701(d) states that USEC cannot' operate the plants until l

NRC certifies that USEC is in compliance with the new NRC standards or NRC i

approves a compliance plan prepared by D0E.

l Since October 1992, our staff has worked closely with DOE personnel toward an.

f objective of NRC assumption of regulatory responsibility.for the plants by l

July 1, 1993.

This collaborative effort assumed that DOE would submit a satisfactory compliance plan by March 15, 1993,.early enough for NRC review and approval prior to July 1.

for NRC to approve the compliance plan, it must l

be more than an umbrella plan or a general justification for continued operations. Essential elements include the following:

a) identification of all applicable DOE orders, b) an assessment of the extent of compliance with the terms of those orders, and c) a~ description of how compliance will be-l achieved where the facilities do not now comply.

i The planned submittal date of March 15, which was based on our need for a 3-4 month review effort, has now passed.. Furthermore, based on frequent discus-i sions with the DOE staff, we are concerned that the submittal will not have-t the essential elements which would enable us to approve it by July 1,1993.

Nevertheless, we will continue to work with your staff even after that date to develop a satisfactory _ compliance plan.

However, NRC cannot take regulatory oversight of USEC operation of the i

diffusion plants-until a suitable compliance plan has been approved by NRC or l

until after NRC issues standards in late 1994 and, after review of an j

-[ /k j

9303260048 930322

[1 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR g p L

.?

t 1

i application against those standards, issues a certificate of compliance.

Therefore, it is important that the Department notify us of its proposed course of action as soon as possible.

f We will continue to draft the NRC standards as expeditiously as possible to meet our obligation of having such standards in place by October 24, 1994, and i

will continue to cooperate with your staff on all matters related to regula-tion of the plants.

3 Sincerely, il fyo Ivan Selin 4

cc:

The Honorable Leon Panetta, Director Office of Management and Budget l

4 i

i I

i h

L

-