ML042250024
| ML042250024 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 08/03/2004 |
| From: | Curran D Harmon, Curran, Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, LLP |
| To: | Fernandez A NRC/OGC |
| Byrdsong A T | |
| References | |
| 50-413-0LA, 50-414-OLA, ASLBP 03-815-03-OLA, RAS 8267 | |
| Download: ML042250024 (2) | |
Text
.
1
SAS F5.2 &7 pMT DHREAPONd HARMON, CURRAN, SPIELBERG EISENBERG, LLP
'1726 M Street, NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20036
\\.
e(2O2) 328-3500 (202) 328-6918 fax 11 August 3, 2004 BY FAX TO: 301/415-3725 Antonio Fernindez, Esq.
Office of General Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11555 Rockville Pike Washington, D.C. 20852 DOCKETED USNRC August 10, 2004 (11:36AM)
OFFICE OF SECRETARY RULEMAKINGS AND ADJUDICATIONS STAFF
SUBJECT:
Discovery in MOXLTA Proceeding
Dear Antonio,
In our conversation with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board this morning, Judge Young asked the parties to identify any documents they expect to request in the second round of discovery which might turn out to be the subject of a need-to-know determination. As we discussed, BREDL plans to request copies of certain NRC guidance documents "for the design basis threat for theft or diversion" which are identified in the attached March 13, 2000 letter from Michael F. Weber to Peter Hastings.
We believe these documents are relevant to Contention 5 because they appear to provide generic guidance for interpretation of NRC's current security regulations regarding theft or diversion of Category I quantities of SSNM. Even if the guidance documents were specially prepared for the MOX Facility, they are relevant because they are likely to provide useful insight into the NRC Staff's interpretation of the security regulations. If the NRC Staff has any objection to the release of these documents, please identify the problem as soon as possible so that we can attempt to resolve it expeditiously.
If, before the second round of discovery begins, we identify other documents that are likely to require a need-to-know determination, we will inform you as soon as possible.
In our conversation with the ASLB, I believe you stated that you expect the Staff to release redacted portions of Duke's security plan to us in the first round of discovery. If you do decide to redact portions of the plan, please provide us with a description of the information that has been redacted and the grounds for redacting the information. That will help us evaluate whether to file a motion to compel.
Thank you for your assistance in these matters.
eurran
Attachment:
as stated cc w/enclosure: Service list I -
plate =sc V-C)S/3 oci
all UNYTED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 29555-CO1 WCNFIDENTIAL March 1X3, 2000 Duuke Engineering & SerAces, Inc.
ATTN: Mr. Peter Hastings P. 0. Box 20091 Charlotte, NO 28202
SUBJECT:
DESIGN BASIS THREAT GUI$DANCE APPLICABLE TO THE MIXED OXIDE FUEL FABRICATION FACILITY
Dear Mr. Hastings:
Enclosed are the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) guidance documents for the design basis threat (DOT) for theft or diversion and the DBT for radiological sabotage to be used In the design of the mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility (MOX FFF) with respect to safeguards and security.
Both documents are classified as confidentall and should be treated accordrngly.
It you have any questions, please call the MOX FFF Project Manager, Mr. Andrew Persinko, at (301) 415-6522.
Sincerely.
Michael F. Weber, Director Divislon at Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Docket: 70-3098
Enclosures:
- 1) Design Basis Threat For Theft or Diversion Guidance (confidential)
- 2) Design Basis Threat For Radiological Sabotage Guidance (confidential)
Upon removal of Enclosure, this document Is nol classified.
CONFIDENTIAL