ML20197G694

Notice of Amend to Coc GDP-1 for Usec Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant,Paducah,Ky

ML20197G694
Person / Time
Site:	07007001
Issue date:	12/07/1998
From:	Paperiello C NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:
Shared Package
ML20197G687	List: ML20197G681 ML20197G689 ML20197G694
References
NUDOCS 9812100107
Download: ML20197G694 (7)

Text

1 7590-01

• P U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NOTICE OF AMENDMENT TO CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE GDP-1 FOR THE U.S. ENRICHMENT CORPORATION PADUCAH GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANT PADUCAH, KENTUCKY DOCKET 70-7001 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 C.FR 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 Nucle;- 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.

9912100107 991207 $

PDR ADOCK 07007001 h C PDR A

l.".

• i l.. ,

2  ;

j The NRC staff has determined that this amendment satisfies the criteria for a categorical l 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 i

amendment. j i

! l USEC or any person whose interest may be affected may file a petition, not exceeding 30 l l pagr,s, requesting review of the Director's Decision. The petition must be filed with the f i

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 y 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  ;

l 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 willissue the final amendment to the Certificate of Compliance without further deby. 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.

l l

1 l

l L . , _ _

3 ,

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 t

delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, DC, by the above date.

l 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, t NW, Washington, DC, and at the Local Public Dccument Room.

Date of amendment request: September 15,1997 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 additiondi 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:

.o ,

4

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 l

cumulative occupational radiation exposure.

l f The CAAS does not prevent criticality, therefore, the possibility of a criticality occurring l

i ,

! during the period of CAAS inoperability is not increased. Personnel access during the period l l l l  !

l of inoperability is limited and individuals are required to have an alternate means of '

r l

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 l potential radiation exposure for an individual could be higher because the individual l

l remained in the area for a longer period of time. This slight chance for increased exposure i

f is not considered to be significant. The proposed changes will not significantly increase any  !

I i

! exposure to radiation due to normal operations. Therefore, the changes will not result in a significant increase in individual or cumulative radiation exposure.

I j

i

5

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 .ncrease 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.

l 6

- e i

6. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant reduction in any margin of safety.

t The proposed changes do not change the types of accidents that could occur or the i

probability of any accidents. The margin of safety for withdrawal related operations is not l I

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.

1 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 l additional time to operate the withdrawal station in normal steady state operation should the CAAS be declared inoperable.

. 7 Local Public Document Room location: Paducah Public Library,555 Washington Street, Paducah, Kentucky 42003.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this d 70 ay of h1998.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NU M %  !

Carl J. Paperiello, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards DISTRIBUTION:

NRC FILE CENTER PUBLIC NMSS r/f FCSS r/f SPB r/f K'OBrien, Rlli NMSS Dir. Off. r/f A:\FRNAMD18. PAD OFC SPB iSPB b SPB b SPB FSSS NMjiiS, ,

NAME Mkhr :ij Hoadley M ay Rhrson Eyck CP p r ello

/ T

//

DATE 10 / f/98 9/b/98 It /1098 11A/98 /h/ ~V88 11 77/98 C = COVER E = COVER & ENCLOSURE N = NO COPY OFFICIAL RECORD COPY IIbkfl+1 l

1 l

I i

o