ML20127G410
| ML20127G410 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/09/1992 |
| From: | Grimsley D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Walker N SIERRA CLUB LEGAL DEFENSE FUND, INC. |
| References | |
| FOIA-92-327 NUDOCS 9301210250 | |
| Download: ML20127G410 (2) | |
Text
-- -
y ggg gg FOlA 32 ?
/.
e RESPONSE TYPE W-
- RESPONSE TO FREEDOM'OF-Iwt Pdr^ati^t N. e'"s /../-
SEP S - 1932 INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST.
o^u g
OOCKit NVV8t f415 t/r mlablet e
kg.
Q PART L-AGENCY RECORDS RELE ASED OR NOT LOCATED ISee chec4;f bcae51 No agency records subject to the request have been located.
No additional agency records subject to the request have been located.
Requested records are available through another pubhc distribution progeam. See Comments section.
Agency records subject to the request that are identified in' Append.a(es) 8 are already available for pubhc inspection and copying at the NRC Pubhc Document Room. 2120 L Street, N.W, Washington, DC.
Agency records subiect to the request that are identified in Appendix fes) are being made avai!able for public inspection and copying -
at the NRC Pubhc Document Room. 2120 L Street. N W.. Washington, DC, in a folder urnier this F OI A number.
The nonpropnetary version of the proposal (s) that you agned to accept in a telephone conversation with a member of my staff is now being made available for pubhc inspection and copying at the NRC Pubhc Document Room. 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC, m a folder under this FO!A number.
Agency records subject to the request that are identified in Appendix (es)-.
may be inspected and copied at the N RC Local Pubhc Document Room identified in the Comments section.
E nclosed is mformation on how you may obte n access to and the tha'gi's for (npying records located at the NRC Pubuc Document Room,2120 L Street, NW4 Washington, DC.
g Agency records subject to the request are endosed.
Records subsect to the reqmt have been referred to another Federc agencybes) for review and direct response to you.
Fees You will be bWed by the NRC for fees totahng $
You will receive a refund from the N RC in the amount of $
In yten of N RC's response to this request, no further action is being taken on appeal letter dated
. No.
PART li, A-INFORMATION WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Certain information in the reavested records is being withheld from public disclosure pursuant to the exemptions described in and for the reasons stated in Part If, B C, and D. Any reieased portions of the documents for which only part of the record is being Cthheid are bein; made available for public inspection and copying in the NRC Public Document Room,2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC in a folder under this FOt A number,-
COMME NTS 9301210250 920909 PDR FOIA WALKER 92 ;327 PDR SIG ~
HL, DIRECTOR, Olv SiON OF IEOGY OF INFORMATION AND PUBLICATIONS SERVICES W
._GSm 0 hd/_A /CA O
/
~v
,.n,,,
Re:
FOIA-92-327 APPENDIX D RI1C_ORDS MAINT21HED AMOl[G PDR FILES
}{l! MITER DAT_E DESCRIPTION 1.
6/25/91 Letter to W.
H.
Arnold from C.
J.
liaughney re: Questions and Request for Additional Information with enclosure (10 pages) ANO 9106270277 mumm
-I
~
FV N
SIERRA CLUB LEGAL DEFENSE FUND, INC.
w The law Firmpr the Enuronmentalbement
^'
d bl.
In ms, Mt M.Ka!<y Aniel Mam 4oo Maguine Street Sune 40: New Orleans, LA 7o:3o (5o4) 5221394 fax (so4) 566 7242 FREEDOM 0F INFORMATi%
mena. o no na,h a, n r a n July 1, 1992 ACT REQUEST -
M ws"*t^a*"O f
Ref: 00013
+.
bhen B winut h
g y
5'dfA""*O O8-814 Sharon Can Hamnpon Commmt, Luhon Ikrae wana B ^<mmas Mr. Donnie H.
- Grimsley, ot&< ^fas" Director Df"ision of Freedom of Information and Publications HOME Of f H:t s.n F,,nemo cen.'
Office of Administration U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
.mosuonmu Washington, D.C.
20555 pense, cotonao Honouu.H m..
Ja= ^1*A' RE:
Freedom of Information E1N$f'7 Act Request:
Louisiana nhmpon. D c Energy Service's proposed uranium enrichment plant in Claiborne Parish, Homer, LA
Dear Mr. Grimsley:
In accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C.
551 gi seq.,
commonly known as the Freedom of Information Act, I hereby request a copy of any and_all_.
documents which contain lists of ques 7TcTrs aTFIgques f31 aca'itional information which were prepared by_any, employee of the Nucle.ar Eggulatory Commission andDich wnre directed toJoui s i n n a "nargy services, L.P.
in connection with the above-ref erenced proposed facility.
The term " document" means all correspondence, electronic mail messages, memoranda, reports, notes, and any other writings or documents which are under the control of or in the possession of any office of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, Inc. ("SCLDF")
is a non-profit environmental organization. Disclosure
~
cf the information sought by this request is in the p.iblic interest because it -is likely-to contribute significantly to SCLDF's and the general public's understanding of the operations and activities of the
'Y' Nuclear Regulatory Commission as they pertain to the I//n 12 0 O n mif QVi / 'l U O '
, -% cu ms %,,
/
/
o bove-re f ere r.ced proposed facility; disclosure of the requested information is not primarily in the commercial interest of SCLDF.
Accordingly, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. S 552, I request a waiver of any fees connected with this request.
If you determine that my request for information cannot be sent free of charge, I request that I be notified immediately of the reasons for such a determination, and that I be given an-estimate of the cost that will be involved, prior.t02 ADY.capying.
I do not waive my right to appeal your determination.
Please be advised that I do not believe that the requested information falls within any of the exemptions to disclosure contained in the Freedom of Information Act.
References in documents to data and facts, as oppused to references to opinions or advice, do not fall within the " deliberative process" exception to FOIA disclosure.
Should you decide, however, that any of the requested material is not to be disclosed, please fully describe the material withheld and specify the statutory or administrative basis for withholding it.
All non-exempt portions of the documents should be provided.
Pursua rit to 5 U.S.C.
5 552, I will anticipate a response within ten days of your receipt of this request.
Thank you for your assistance, and please call me if you have any questions.
Very truly yours, O
Nathalie M. Walker l
l l
l homer \\fola3.NRC J
5d55l5&k&b5N I
e.
t i e
JUN $ 51991 Docket No. 70-3070 Louisiana Energy Services ATTN:
W. Howard Arnold President 600 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W.
Suite 404 Washington, DC 20037 Gentlemen:
We have completed a detailed review of portions of your application, dated January 31, 1991, for a license for the Claiborne Enrichment Center.
These portions include the topics of emergency planning, decommissioning funding, financial qualifications, liability insurance, and quality assurance, all of which appear to be logically separable from the remainder of the application.
Based on this detailed review, we have prepared a list of questions and request for additional information on these topics.
The list is enclosed.
Your careful attention and response to these questions and request for additional information will enable us to continue our review of these topics.
We understand that you are preparing revisions to your environmental report and safety analysis report, at least in part based on our preliminary review of your application, the results of which were transmitted in my letter to you dated March 21, 1991, and discussed at a meeting on April 3, 1991.
At the same time, we are continuing our detailed review of the remainder of the application.
We are concerned that the timing of our subsequent questions and request for additional information may coincide with that of your revisions.
Therefore, please keep us advised of your schedule for submittal of the revisions so that we may determine the most appropriate action to take on these subsequent questions and request for additional information.
If you have any questions about these matters, please contact Mr. Peter Loysen at (301) 492-0685.
Sincerely, NM M D/
Jwry J. Dwt%
Marles J. Haughney, Chief Fuel Cycle Safety Branch l
Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards cc:
Peter G. LeRoy J. Michael McGarry III Distribution:
Docket No. 70-3070 IMAF R/F PDR/LPDR NRC File Center EShum HMSS R/F IMSB R/F TCombs, GPA RWilson CNilsen, RES STurk, OGC RFonner, OGC ADatta RBrady, SEC DKasun, SG PTing, SG RWood RDHurt JSwift Ploysen IDinitz FBrown WFisher, RIV JSpraul g
C h.)
bec:
R. Wascom, LADEQ PL/LES RAI
..b.
.........[
..........[
.[
k
b Enclosure Questions and Request for Additional Information EMERGENCY PLAN 1.
Introduction Please provide the names of the off-site emergency response organizations that you requested to comment on the emergency plan and the specific comments that were received.
2.
2.1.1.2 Nuclear Criticality Although nuclear criticality may be an unlikely event, it is a postulated accident for emergency plan purposes, and any special emergency response measures for such an event should be included in the plan.
3.
2.2 Is section 2.2 missing, or is section 2.3 misnumbered?
4.
3.1.1 Alert and 3.1.2 Site Area Emergency The rationale for setting a release of 1000 kilograms of UF as the break c
point between an alert and a site area emergency should be Established.
5.
3.2.1 Alert and 3.2.2 Site Area Emergency How does a person judge a release to be more than 1 kilogram?; more than 1000-kilograms? Many.of the topics in these sections may be more appropriately discussed in section 5.0, Emergency Response-Heasures.
Regardless, a predetermined recovery practice (re-entry with appropriate respiratory protection) may not be appropriate, and should not be stipulated in the classification and notification of accidents.
6.
3.3 Information to be Communicated and Table 3-1 Alert / Site Area Emergency Report Form What are " warning points / individuals," and what are their relationships to LES personnel having emergency response functions and to off-site response organizations (other than tne State and Parish warning points shown in Figure 3-1)? Table 3-1 should have spaces for indicating the percent U-235 enrichment involved in an event and any protective actions recommended.
Is the form to be completed once, or multiple times, for an event? What is the-relationship of the form to the "UF Release Incident Report" referred to in g
section 8.0, Records and Reports? Figure 3-1 suggests that LES will notify and coordinate exclusively with the NRC, the Louisiana Office of Emergency.
4
.g.
Preparedness, and the Claiborne Parish Sheriff Department in an emergency.
This would appear to be unrealistic, particularly if off-site protective actions are being recommended and other participating agencias need to coordinate their actions with LES.
7.
4.2 Facility Organization During Emergency Condition This section and Table 4.2-1 indicate that a large number of persons are needed to staff the CEC during emergency conditions.
However, the operating shift crew can be as few as 4 to 6 persons (depending on the number of plant units extant), some of whom would not be qualified for emergency response positions.
When the CEC is operating with a minimum crew, how is the_ facility organization during emergency conditions staffed?
8.
4.3 Lucal Off-Site Assistance to the CEC and 7.7 Verification of Emergency Telephone Numbers Will the current telephone listing of all off-site response organizations be maintained as part of the emergency plan or the emergency plan implementing procedures, or both? There should be a more thorough discussion of the functions and services that each of the off-site response organizations is expected to perform or provide, the specific locations of-these organizations, and how LES would communicate with them if the telephone lines are inoperative.
There should also be a discussion of special training and equipment that local police and fire departments might need to deal witn UF6 releases and that local hospitals might need to deal with exposures to UF reaction products.
Forthehospitals,someoftheinformationiscontainhdin letters-in the Appendix; however, it should all be described systematically, either in section 4.3 or the emergency plan implementing proceduras.-
9.
4.4 Coordination with Participating Government Agencies The authority of each participating agency, its expected role in an emergency, and its capabilities in terms of personnel and equipment, should be described.
10.
5.0 Emergency Response Measures The emergency plan should include provisions by which members of the public and the media can obtain information during an emergency.
11.
5.3 Mitigating Actions The steps involved and the time required to accomplish safe shutdown for each of the postulated accidents, especially those for which manual operations are necessary, should be discussed.
The specific procedures for accomplishing safe shutdown may be described in the emergency plan imp */ementing procedures.
~.
~..
l 3
12.
5.4 Protective Actions The described on-site protective actions do not appear to be either appropriate or easily extended for of f-site emergency response purposes.
Modified or additional protective actions, including warning, sheltering, evacuation, surveys, and bioassays, for recommending to off-site emergency response organizations should be described.
13.
5.4.1 Personnel Evacuation and Accountability The criteria that would be used to determine if evacuation is necessary and to determine the evacuation routes that personnel would follow should be i
discussed.
i 14.
5.4.2 Use of Protective Equipment and Supplies 4
The locations, types, and quantities of protective equipment and supplies, including respiratory protection equipment and protective clothing, should be detailed in the emergency plan implementing procedures.
15.
5.5.1.2 Exposure Guidelines In addition to the guideline of 25 rems whole body radiation exposure, a guideline for uranium intake should be provided.
The non-lifesaving operations appear to be the same as the lifesaving operations, and the radiation and chemical exposure guidelines are the same for both.
Please explain.
16, 5.5.2-Decontaminstion of Personnel The action levels for determining the need for personnel decontamination should be included in the specifications section of the license application.
These levels, means for personnel decontamination, supplies, instruments, and equipment should also be specified in the emergency plan implementing procedures.
17.
6.4 Emergency Monitoring Equipment In addition to the normally available equipment described, portable and transportable emergency equipment for monitoring, sampling, and surveying should also be described in_this.section and specified in the emergency plan implementing procedures.
I 18, 7.0 Maintenance of-Radiological Contingency Preparedness Capability-3 The emergency plan should contain' provisions for an annual audit by an independent person.
-w e
.+,,w,..
.-..i.,e,em y
r-e-em-y..,-
a e-
,Ams---.,
-m.,-,
.-w=4
-..W-
-w-
-w-ew-w, w
v..re-
.,=----**.w-v-
1 4
19.
7.3 Drills and Exercises The biennial frequency for conducting emergency response exercises appears to be inconsistent with the annual frequency for participation stated in the September 26, 1990, letter to Homer Hemorial Hospital.
Please clarify.
20.
8.1 Records of incidents The stated standards for incident recs <ds maintenance are unclear.
All such records related to emergencies should be maintained, including records of abnormal events, accidents, and equipment f ailures involved in incidents.
Where contamination has occurred from incidents, records should also be maintained in a deconmissioning records file.
21.
Appendix Please clarify the names of the organizations that submitted the undated LLEA Assistance Letters.
EXHIBIT I - DECOMMISSIONING FUNDING PLAN 1.
Deconnissioning Cost Estimate The cost estimate is stated to have been derived from current experience at a Urenco facility in Europe, adjusted for United States differences, and addit' aci information.
This experience and information or a detailed cost estimate based on the use of a cost estimating table such as that included as Appendix F to Regulatory Guide 3.66, Standard format and Content Guide for financial Assurance Mechanisms Required for Decommissioning Under 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, 70, and 72, should be provided in support of the summary of deconnissioning costs.
Contrary to Regulatory Guide 3.66, the summary of decommissioning costs includes credit for salvage value from the sale of potential assets.
This item should be deleted from the cost estimate, or its inclusion justified.
The decommissioning cost estimate does not include costs for the disposition of uranium hexafluoride tails, but it is stated that that LES intends to provide for the projected annual costs for disposal of any remaining uranium tails (projected annual costs of $9.5 million per year of tails production).
Please explain why these costs are not included in the decommissioning cost estimate, how they are te be funded, and the basis for the annual costs.
The decommissioning cost estimate includes an item for restoration of contaminated ground but, based on section 11.8.1.2.1 of the Safety Analysis Report, contamination of the holding pond or land areas is not anticipated.
Please explain this apparent discrepancy.
Based on NRC experience at other licensed facilities, the holding pond and land areas will have to be remediated, and LES snould include costs for their remediation and for disposal of contaminated soil from remediation.
~ %&n 3 e s,4QW~
2.
Decommissioning Funding Mechanisms The model documentation for financial instruments is essentially in accordance with Regulatory Guide 3.66.
In section 5. of each of the trust funds, however, a statement should be added that no withdrawal from the fund can exceed 10 percent of the outstanding balance of the fund unless written NRC approval is attached.
The Guide specifies that the executed financial instruments should be submitted with the license application.
Therefore, the instruments should be completed and executed, including statements that they will become effective at the time LES ta6es possession of licensed material, and submitted along with the other documentation noted in Exhibits 3-5 and 3-6 of Regulatory Guide 3.66.
LIABILITY INSURANCE 1.
The amount of liability insurance ($120 million proposed) to be purchased and maintained should be justified in terms of a reasonable evaluation of the risks required to be covered.
LES needs not, however, provide an amount greater than the manimum arnount available from commercial nuclear energy liability insurers which, at present, is $200 million.
2.
If the form of liability insurance will be other than an effective facility form (non-indemnified facility) policy of nuclear energy liability insurance from American Nuclear Insurers and/or Mutual Atomic Energy Liability Underwriters, such form should be provided.
The effective date for the policy should be no later than the date that LES takes possessian of licensed material.
FINANCIAL QUAllFICATIONS 1.
What is the projected budget beyond the venture phase (i.e., expected annual contributions and expenditures)?
2.
For the construction phase, what are the projected equity contributions of each general partner and each limited partner? Documentation of the sources of funds for each partner should be provided (i.e., recent financial statements of those entities providing equity).
3.
How will financing / capital costs be provided prior to start of operation of the facility?
4.
What will be the source of funds if construction costs exceed the $800 million estimate indicated in the application? Are any contingency costs included in the $800 million estimate?
5.
Has an underwriter been selected for the debt portion of financing? What is the anticipated interest rate payable, either absolutely or relatively compared to debt issues of analo0ous projects? Are there contingency plans if interest costs exceed estimates?
t
6-6.
Since Section 13.2 of the Partnership Agreement states.that the Management Comittee shall not have the power to require a Partner to provide funds in excess of its agreed capital commitJnent, what would be the source of funds for safety and safeguards activities if operating costs are not fully covered by revenues during operation of the facility?
Is there a procedure for requiring contributions for such necessary activities?
QUALITY ASSURANCE 1.
SAR section 1.4 identifies contractors and agents employed by LES and briefly describes their responsibilities.
Identify the System Class I activities performed and items supplied by these contractors and agents.
Describe how LES will ensure the quality of these activities and items.
2.
SAR section 10.0 commits LES to follow the guidelines (that is, the introduction, basic requirements, supplements, and appendices) of ASME NQA-1-1989.
Similarly address ASME NQA-2-1989, the ASME NQA-2a-1990 Addenda, and the ASME HQA la Addenda, or justify not doing so.
Consider adding a reference to NQA-2 in other SAR locations where only NQA-1 is now referenced.
3.
SAR section 10.0 mentions the application of a graded quality program to some items that are not Quality Assurance Level 1.
Consider whether a " graded QA program" is more correct and describe the program, its scope, and its elements.
4.
SAR section 10.0 refers to reducing the " effectiveness of the QA Program requirements." Consider whether reducing the "QA 3rogram comitments" is more Correct.
5.
The facility Manager in SAR section 10.1.1:1s shown as the CEC Hanager on Tables 10.1-2 and -3.
SAR section 10.1.3 refers to the " Facility Marsiger (or CEC Manager)." Clarify whether this is one or two positions (indiviuuals).
6.
SAR section 10.1.2 states that the Engineering and Contracts Manager is responsible for all aspects of the facility design, preparation for construction, construction, and preparation for operation.
SAR section 10.1.4 states that the LES QA organization is responsible for verifying the quality of activities during design and construction.
Clarify the fact that these responsibilities appear to overlap.
7.
Clarify whether the LES QA organization's responsibilities for verifying quality (as specified in SAR section 10.1.4a, b, c, and f) extend beyond
" activities" into the actual hardware, software, and documents.
Also clarify or eliminate sono duplication in sections 10.1.4c and f.
8.
Identify the activities, plans, and programs occurring during the operations phase of the CEC that will be under the pertinent control of the;
=
+
l t
Exemples include plant operation, maintenance, modifications, security, emergency planning, material control, and personnel training and qualification.
9.
Identify the on-site and off-site organizational elements shown on Tables 10.1-1, -2, and -3, and describe the criteria for determining the size of the QA organization, including the inspection staff, during the construction phase and during the operations phase.
Table 10.1-3 shows only inspectors and auditors reporting to the QA Manager.
Clarify whether there will be QA engineers or specialists in the QA organization.
10.
Clarify whether, during the construction phase and during the operations phase, QA personnel are involved in day-to-day activities involving safety.
For example, do QA personnel routinely attend and participate in daily work schedule and status meetings to ensure that they are aware of work assignments throughout the plant?
11.
Identify, by position title, the individual at the plant site responsible for directing and managing the site QA program during the construction phase.
Briefly describe how this responsibility is met and interfaces are controlled considering the numerous organizations involved in the design and construction process.
12.
Clarify the unclear first sentence of the fifth paragraph of SAR section 10.2 (Personnel performing....).
13.
Clarify what aspects of the QA program described in chapter 10 of the SAR will be applied to the fire detection / protection system for System Class I items.
14.
Describe how the LES President regularly assesses the scope, status, adequacy, and regulatory compliance of the QA program during the design and construction of the CEC (in addition to the annual assessment described in section 10.18.2 of the SAR),
15.
Clarify whether quality-related activities such as design, procurement, and site investigations, started before NRC acceptance of the QA program described in the SAR, are controlled by SAR QA commitments.
16.
The fourth paragraph of SAR section 10.3 addresses " independent" design verification by a designer's supervisor.
Provide a commitment that such verification will not result in the supervisor's review of his/her own design constraints, design input, or design work.
17.
SAR section 11.1.2 addresses design responsibilities before the operations phase.
Address design responsibilities in like fashion for maintenance and modifications during the operations phase.
18.
Discuss the timeliness of as-built documentation throughout plant life.
I
1.
19.
Describe organizational responsibilities, including interfaces between design, procurement, and QA, for the control of purchased items during the operations phase.
20.
Describe measures that ensure the procurement of spare and replacement parts to QA controls in effect at the time of procurement and to appropriate technical requirements.
21.
Clarify whether the procurement of comercial grade items for use as System Class I items will be in accordance with Generic Letter 89-02, or describe an alternative for NRC review.
22.
The fourth paragraph of SAR section 10.7 indicates that approved vendors will be reevaluated annually.
Briefly describe how this will be done.
Also describe briefly how LES will determine the validity of certificates of conformance from suppliers.
23.
Describe criteria for determining which processes are controlled as special processes.
Also describe organizational responsibilities for qualifying special processes, equipment, and personnel during the operations phase.
24.
If " inspection personnel" and " inspectors" in the second paragraph of SAR section 10.10 refer to the same individuals in the QA organization, the same term should be used.
25.
Describe organizational responsibilities for establishing, implementing, and ensuring effectiveness of the program for calibration of measuring and test equipment during the operations phase.
26.
Describe measures that ensure suitable training of individuals involved in special handling, preservation, storage, cleaning, packaging, and shipping of items during the operations phase.
27.
Clarify whether changing the sequence of inspections, tests, and other activities involving safety requires the same controls as the original review and approval.
28.
Expand upon or delete the term "when appropriate" in the first sentence of the second paragraph and the term "at the facility" in the second sentence of the third paragraph of SAR section 10.15.
29.
Identify the position (s) or groups (s) within LES with authority to disposition nonconforming items.
30.
Clarify that an audit plan that identifies audits to be performed and their schedules is prepared, maintained, and applied.
31.
Clarify that audit team members have no responsibilities in the areas audited.
e'.
9 32.
Describe measures that ensure that the LES QA program for operations is implemented at least 90 days before the receipt of licensed material at the plant site.
33.
Since part of the CEC will be operating while part is being constructed, provide a commitment that the LES QA program for design, construction, and preoperational testing will continue simultaneously with the QA program for the operations phase while these activities are ongoing.
34.
Clarify what records will be treated as QA records during the operations phase.
QA records should include those such as operating logs (or equivalent),
maintenance and modifications procedures and related inspection results, reportable occurrences, and other records required by license conditions.
35.
Clarify whether field tests (in the third paragraph of SAR section 10.11) include pre-operational tests and post-maintenance / modifications tests to demonstrate plant operability and to identify any conditions adverse to quality / safety, as well as operational tests to verify acceptable operation.
36.
Clarify that the measuring and test equipment controls described in SAR section 10.12 apply to process-related instrumentation and controls having safety significance, i.
__