ML20141C844
| ML20141C844 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant |
| Issue date: | 03/14/1997 |
| From: | Jazel Parks ENERGY, DEPT. OF |
| To: | Ten Eyck E NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9705190241 | |
| Download: ML20141C844 (2) | |
Text
ff 78 N wr 7# ' f Department of Energy I[ /
/
Oak Ridge Operations P.O. Box 2001 y' ' d Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-March 14, 1997 1
1 Ms. Elizabeth 0. Ten Eyck Director. Division Of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission MS T8A33 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland 20852
Dear Ms. Ten Eyck:
CRITICALITY ACCIDENT ALARM SYSTEM EXEMPTION FOR CYLINDER STORAGE YARDS AT THE GASE0US DIFFUSION PLANTS The United States Enrichment Corporations (USEC), as well as the Department of Energy (DOE), have acknowledged that the requirements of 10 CFR Part 76.89 pertaining to criticality monitoring and alarm coverage have not been met. As a result, the USEC certification applications included provisions for allowing USEC to request NRC approval for specific areas to be excluded from criticality accident alarm system coverage.
S)ecifically, Issue 11 of the Portsmouth Compliance Plan and Issue 8 of the Jaducah Compliance Plan addressed this area of noncompliance and offered compensatory measures to be used in the interim until the issue is fully resolved.
USEC has previously i
submitted a request for an exception to the 10 CFR Part 76.89 requirements for a criticality accident alarm system for certain cylinder yards at the Portsmouth and Paducah sites. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) letter to USEC (Pierson to Miller), dated February 28. 1997, indicated the Comp's review of the USEC requests.liance Plan's compensatory measures to be a NRC The resolution of this issue represents a potentially significant financial liability to DOE. As such, DOE would appreciate an opportunity to offer additional information on USEC's exception request to criticality accident alarm system coverage the specific areas identified in the USEC submittal and to work with the staff to resolve this issue.
Our approach would likely involve developing a technical report which includes many of the USEC arguments with additional clarification and technical justification supported
/
by technical arguments, and added administrative controls.
D Implementation of this approach would require approximately eight (8) weeks from receipt of your concurrence.
Therefore, we request your consideration and timely concurrence with our proposed approach.
/v'
/
?
l l.ill.lil.ll.lIl.Li.llE. I.F gggg 9705190241 970314 7 l
+*
l Ms. Elizabeth Q. Ten Eyck March 14. 1997 If you have any questions regarding this approach, please contact me at (423) l 576-0892 or Randall DeVault at (423) 241-4497.
Sincerely.
l l
\\m W O W. Parks Assistant Manager for Enrichment Facilities 1
cc:
G. P. Rifakes. USEC. Bethesda R. M. DeVault. EF-20/OSTI ORO l
I I
l l