ML20059J595
| ML20059J595 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Claiborne |
| Issue date: | 01/18/1994 |
| From: | Kingsley O TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | Jim Hickey NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9402010085 | |
| Download: ML20059J595 (2) | |
Text
'
.r-
'yo -3 7o a
i 9,. -
A t
,w~c, a%.
me.
,s s
0: ge ox,ny;eyy Pt
'Q<0
- G".1.0 i
January 18, 1994 1
i e
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN Mr. John W. N. Hickey, Chief, Enrichment Branch y
Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Mail Stop 4-E-4 Washington, DC 20555 1
Dear Mr. Hickey:
NUREG-1484 - DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS)
CLAIBORNE ENRICHMENT CENTER (CEC)
TVA is pleased to provide comments on the subject draft EIS as noticed in the November 24, 1993, Federal Recister (58 FR 62148-62149).
At present, the United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC) is the only domestic supplier to the United States (U.S.) enrichment market. As a result of currency exchange rates and higher cost of production, the European enrichment suppliers are noncompetitive in the U.S. market. As a result, U.S. nuclear utilities are faced with an uncompetitive, inefficient market in which to procure enrichment services. Therefore, the U.S.
utilities are left with only one avenue to turn to for an alternate source of enrichment supply, i.e., the Louisiana Enrichment Services CEC.
The centrifuge technology to be used by CEC has been proven in
[
multinational use to be safe, environmentally friendly, energy efficient, and cost competitive. The establishment of a second domestic source of enrichment supply will provide the much needed competition, diversify supply sources, improve reliability, and
.2700d2 e/q, c 9402010085 940118 U
PDR ADOCK 07003070-j,0 C
PDR r
j-
/
3-e 4
8 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2 January 18, 1994 help the nuclear utilities provide a low-cost energy supply to the nation's ratepayers.
TVA supports NRC's conclusion that "the facility can be constructed and operated with small and acceptable impacts on the public and the environment" and the overall conclusions in the draft EIS.
It is for these reasons that TVA strongly urges NRC to move forward with licensing CEC at the earliest possible date.
In addition, as noticed, the proceeding is for a combination construction-operating license. We believe this is a positive step in the licensing of future nuclear facilities. We appreciate the opportunity to comment.
Sin ly
/
7
/
~
/
O. D.
Ings e r.
/