ML20247P551: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:J' | {{#Wiki_filter:J' May 20, 1998 - | ||
Mr. James H.~ Miller L | Mr. James H.~ Miller L | ||
- Vice President, Production U. S. Enrichment Corporation i | |||
- E Democracy Center 6903 Rockledge Drive Bethesda, MD. 20817 | |||
==SUBJECT:== | ==SUBJECT:== | ||
| Line 27: | Line 28: | ||
==Dear Mr. Miller:== | ==Dear Mr. Miller:== | ||
This refers to your application dated April 24,1998, requesting an amendment to Certi'icate of Compliance GDP-1 for the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant to revise Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) 2.1.5.2 and 2.3.5.2 which specify the C-310, C-315, and C-360 facilities crane design features credited for safety. | This refers to your application dated April 24,1998, requesting an amendment to Certi'icate of Compliance GDP-1 for the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant to revise Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) 2.1.5.2 and 2.3.5.2 which specify the C-310, C-315, and C-360 facilities crane design features credited for safety. | ||
Our review of your application has identified additional information that is needed before final action can be taken on your request. The additional information, specified in the enclosure, | Our review of your application has identified additional information that is needed before final action can be taken on your request. The additional information, specified in the enclosure, | ||
- should be provided within 30 days of this letter. Please reference the above TAC No. In future correspondence related to this rcquest. | |||
if you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (301) 415-8126. | if you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (301) 415-8126. | ||
Sincerely, WWBY Merri Hom Project Manager Enrichment Section | Sincerely, WWBY Merri Hom Project Manager Enrichment Section | ||
- Special Projects Branch Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, NMSS Docket 70-7001 Certificate GDP-1 | |||
==Enclosure:== | ==Enclosure:== | ||
As stated cc: Mr. Steve Polston, PGDP Mr. Randall DeVault, DOE DISTRIBUTION: w/ encl. (Control No. 390S) | As stated cc: Mr. Steve Polston, PGDP Mr. Randall DeVault, DOE DISTRIBUTION: w/ encl. (Control No. 390S) | ||
Docket 70-7001 | Docket 70-7001 lMRC File Center !# | ||
DATE | PUBLIC Rlli KO'Brien, Rlli NMSS r/f FCSS r/f. SPB r/f - | ||
C = COVER | PHiland, Rlli p:raicrn.mh OFC SPB E | ||
OSPB | |||
[ | |||
SP L NAME | |||
' MH rn Hoadley in f | |||
DATE | |||
' J'//Jf 9,r | |||
.hb N | |||
~ | |||
C = COVER F. - COVER & ENCLOSURE N = NO COPY OFFICIAL RECORD COPY thf 9905290046 980520 y | |||
~PDR ADOCK 07007001 a C | |||
PDR Q | |||
s | |||
o O | o O | ||
Request for Additional Information Application Dated April 24, 1998 United States Enrichment Corporation Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant Docket 70-7001 Please provide the following information: | Request for Additional Information Application Dated April 24, 1998 United States Enrichment Corporation Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant Docket 70-7001 Please provide the following information: | ||
1. | |||
Chapter 1, Appendix A of the Safety Analysis Report only lists portions of the standard which Paducah satisfies, however, there is no clear commitment to the standard. Since two new cranes are being installed, USEC should commit to the entire standard for the new cranes. If USEC is unwilling to commit to the complete standard for the new cranes, please explain why not, providing an explanation for each section/ subsection to which you are not willing to commit. | What is the reference code or standard to which the new cranes will be designed, operated, and maintained? The proposed revision to the TSRs only commits to having two hoist brakes that meet the requirements of ANSI B30.2, 1990 edition. | ||
The TSR does not address other portions of the standard. | |||
raised during the review of Amendment 2 on the feed facilities crane design features. During the review, the staff asked USEC to explain why the commitment to the standard was limited to specific portions. Although, USEC did not provide the explanation, the staff deferred resolution of the issue because of the pending Compliance Plan Issue 45 on codes and standards. This compliance Plan issue has yet to be resolved, therefore the staff believes it appropriate to reopen the discussion on code commitment for the existing cranes. Please provide an explanation for each section/ subsection for which USEC is not willing to commit for the existing cranes at the facility. | Chapter 1, Appendix A of the Safety Analysis Report only lists portions of the standard which Paducah satisfies, however, there is no clear commitment to the standard. | ||
Since two new cranes are being installed, USEC should commit to the entire standard for the new cranes. | |||
If USEC is unwilling to commit to the complete standard for the new cranes, please explain why not, providing an explanation for each section/ subsection to which you are not willing to commit. | |||
2. | |||
The issue of code commitment in relation to the cranes was originally raised during the review of Amendment 2 on the feed facilities crane design features. During the review, the staff asked USEC to explain why the commitment to the standard was limited to specific portions. Although, USEC did not provide the explanation, the staff deferred resolution of the issue because of the pending Compliance Plan Issue 45 on codes and standards. This compliance Plan issue has yet to be resolved, therefore the staff believes it appropriate to reopen the discussion on code commitment for the existing cranes. | |||
Please provide an explanation for each section/ subsection for which USEC is not willing to commit for the existing cranes at the facility. | |||
3. | |||
As part of the March 10, 1997, response for additional information on Amendment 2, USEC informed the staff that it was undertaking an initiative to determine if further application of industry codes and standardo at the GDPs was warranted. What is the status of this review? | |||
l l | l l | ||
ENCLOSURE | ENCLOSURE | ||
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _}} | |||
Latest revision as of 19:18, 1 December 2024
| ML20247P551 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant |
| Issue date: | 05/20/1998 |
| From: | Horn M NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | John Miller UNITED STATES ENRICHMENT CORP. (USEC) |
| References | |
| TAC-L32066, NUDOCS 9805280046 | |
| Download: ML20247P551 (2) | |
Text
J' May 20, 1998 -
Mr. James H.~ Miller L
- Vice President, Production U. S. Enrichment Corporation i
- E Democracy Center 6903 Rockledge Drive Bethesda, MD. 20817
SUBJECT:
PADUCAH CERTIFICATE AMENDMENT REQUEST - CYLINDER CRANE UPGRADES, TSRS 2.1.5.2 AND 2.3.5.2 (TAC NO. L32066) i:
J
Dear Mr. Miller:
This refers to your application dated April 24,1998, requesting an amendment to Certi'icate of Compliance GDP-1 for the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant to revise Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) 2.1.5.2 and 2.3.5.2 which specify the C-310, C-315, and C-360 facilities crane design features credited for safety.
Our review of your application has identified additional information that is needed before final action can be taken on your request. The additional information, specified in the enclosure,
- should be provided within 30 days of this letter. Please reference the above TAC No. In future correspondence related to this rcquest.
if you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (301) 415-8126.
Sincerely, WWBY Merri Hom Project Manager Enrichment Section
- Special Projects Branch Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, NMSS Docket 70-7001 Certificate GDP-1
Enclosure:
As stated cc: Mr. Steve Polston, PGDP Mr. Randall DeVault, DOE DISTRIBUTION: w/ encl. (Control No. 390S)
Docket 70-7001 lMRC File Center !#
PUBLIC Rlli KO'Brien, Rlli NMSS r/f FCSS r/f. SPB r/f -
PHiland, Rlli p:raicrn.mh OFC SPB E
OSPB
[
SP L NAME
' MH rn Hoadley in f
DATE
' J'//Jf 9,r
.hb N
~
C = COVER F. - COVER & ENCLOSURE N = NO COPY OFFICIAL RECORD COPY thf 9905290046 980520 y
~PDR ADOCK 07007001 a C
PDR Q
s
o O
Request for Additional Information Application Dated April 24, 1998 United States Enrichment Corporation Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant Docket 70-7001 Please provide the following information:
1.
What is the reference code or standard to which the new cranes will be designed, operated, and maintained? The proposed revision to the TSRs only commits to having two hoist brakes that meet the requirements of ANSI B30.2, 1990 edition.
The TSR does not address other portions of the standard.
Chapter 1, Appendix A of the Safety Analysis Report only lists portions of the standard which Paducah satisfies, however, there is no clear commitment to the standard.
Since two new cranes are being installed, USEC should commit to the entire standard for the new cranes.
If USEC is unwilling to commit to the complete standard for the new cranes, please explain why not, providing an explanation for each section/ subsection to which you are not willing to commit.
2.
The issue of code commitment in relation to the cranes was originally raised during the review of Amendment 2 on the feed facilities crane design features. During the review, the staff asked USEC to explain why the commitment to the standard was limited to specific portions. Although, USEC did not provide the explanation, the staff deferred resolution of the issue because of the pending Compliance Plan Issue 45 on codes and standards. This compliance Plan issue has yet to be resolved, therefore the staff believes it appropriate to reopen the discussion on code commitment for the existing cranes.
Please provide an explanation for each section/ subsection for which USEC is not willing to commit for the existing cranes at the facility.
3.
As part of the March 10, 1997, response for additional information on Amendment 2, USEC informed the staff that it was undertaking an initiative to determine if further application of industry codes and standardo at the GDPs was warranted. What is the status of this review?
l l
ENCLOSURE
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _