| |
Search Options | |||
| Index | Site Map | FAQ | Facility Info | Reading Rm | New | Help | Glossary | Contact Us | |
|||
SECY-96-054
March13, 1996
| FOR: | The Commissioners |
| FROM: | James M. Taylor /s/ Executive Director for Operations |
| SUBJECT: | STATUS OF CERTIFICATION OF THE U. S. ENRICHMENT CORPORATION'S GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANTS |
PURPOSE:
To inform the Commission of the status and schedule of the certification of the U. S. Enrichment Corporation's (USEC's) gaseous diffusion plants (GDPs).
BACKGROUND:
The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (the Act) amended the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to establish USEC for the purpose of leasing and operating the uranium
enrichment enterprise owned and previously operated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE 
). The Act provided that within two years after enactment of the
legislation, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was to promulgate standards for the two operating plants to protect the public health and safety from
radiological hazards and to provide for the common defense and security. In September 1994, NRC issued 10 CFR Part 76, which specified the standards and
certification process for the two GDPs, located at Portsmouth, Ohio, and Paducah, Kentucky.
The certification process calls for NRC's certification of the USEC's compliance with Part 76, based on the staff's review of USEC's application and compliance plan submittals. The application for each GDP must describe how USEC will comply with NRC's safety, safeguards, and security requirements. Each compliance plan, which is to be prepared by DOE and submitted by USEC, describes how and when the plants will be brought into compliance with NRC requirements in instances where compliance is lacking at the time of certification. The compliance plan sets forth the safety and safeguards basis, including compensatory actions, that justifies continued operation until compliance is achieved.
Following the initial applications that were rejected by the staff in May 1995, USEC submitted substantially revised applications on September 15, 1995. The corresponding compliance plans were submitted on November 7, 1995. Note that the DOE compliance plan was accompanied by a USEC letter with various unexpected USEC comments and exceptions to the DOE plan. DOE currently regulates the plants, and will continue to do so until NRC assumes jurisdiction following a planned 120-day transition period after the initial certification.
DISCUSSION:
The staff began an expedited review upon receipt of USEC's revised certification applications in September 1995, arranging numerous meetings and exchanging correspondence with USEC and DOE. The staff originally projected the initial certification to be completed by February 29, 1996, but that schedule was delayed (as discussed in SECY-95-279) to resolve such issues as worker protection, quality assurance requirements, technical safety requirements, DOE-owned material in USEC-leased space, elevated enrichment levels, seismic safety, and upgrade of the safety analysis report and implementation of its findings for both GDPs. Also, USEC has taken longer than originally projected to prepare revised submittals in response to NRC staff comments. Additional discussion of significant issues is provided in the Attachment. For some of the issues, the USEC and NRC staffs have reached oral understandings in meetings, subject to USEC submittal of written revisions to the application for verification and approval by the NRC staff. However, some of the issues require further discussion with USEC, and the staff is making every effort to expedite resolution.
The NRC staff used several means to publicize the certification process, obtain
public comments, and coordinate with other interested government agencies. These
means included: publication of Federal Register notices providing separate 45-day
public comment periods for the certification application and for the compliance
plan, establishment of local public document rooms near each site, press releases,
notices of technical meetings with USEC open to the public in accordance with
NRC policy, paid advertisements in local newspapers, transcribed public meetings
at each site, media interviews, individual letters seeking comments from interested
parties, meetings with labor union representatives, and meetings with State
officials, local officials, DOE, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA
),
and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA
).
The staff received 10 comment letters of a relatively minor nature. The subject matter of these comments had already been considered by the staff as part of its review. The written staff responses to the public comments will be provided as part of the staff's Compliance Evaluation Report (CER).
The Act specifically requires NRC to consult with the EPA regarding certification of the USEC GDPs. The staff met and held several discussions with EPA headquarters, EPA-Atlanta, which has jurisdiction over the Paducah plant, and EPA-Chicago, which has jurisdiction over the Portsmouth plant. EPA did not identify any significant issues.
The staff is in the final stages of negotiating a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with OSHA, to coordinate regulation of worker protection matters and avoid unnecessary duplication of effort relative to the USEC GDPs. The staff will provide a separate paper to the Commission in the near future concerning the MOU.
The staff is having frequent discussions with USEC to expedite resolution of the remaining certification issues so that USEC can promptly submit final revisions to its certification application. Assuming that expedited resolution is reached, and by early April, 1996, USEC submits acceptable written revisions to the GDP applications which reflect oral understandings, the staff believes that it can promptly complete initial certification recommendations to the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) for his certification decision, following consultation with the Commission. USEC is projected to submit the final version of the DOE-prepared compliance plan within 45 days after the application review process is essentially complete. The staff anticipates USEC's submittal of the DOE-prepared compliance plan in May 1996. The staff currently projects its decision to be issued in June 1996, followed by a 120-day transition period to allow NRC requirements to be implemented at each GDP. This assumes that USEC will not submit exceptions to the DOE compliance plan.
The certification decision will be based on the application, the compliance plan, and any conditions as documented in the staff's Compliance Evaluation Report, similar to a licensing safety evaluation report (SER). The NRC's determination to issue a certificate of compliance will be set out in a decision by the NMSS Director. A Federal Register notice will be issued announcing the Director's decision, and Congressional committees will be notified by letter. Interested parties (USEC or any person who previously has participated in a manner described in 10 CFR 76.62(c)) have the right to petition the Commission within 15 days requesting review of the Director's decision. DOE will continue to regulate the GDPs until NRC assumes jurisdiction at the end of the 120-day transition period.
COORDINATION:
The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed this paper and has no legal objection.
| James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations |
| Contact: | Carl Sawyer, NMSS 415-8174 |
| Attachment: | Discussion of Technical Issues |