ML19171A004
| ML19171A004 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/30/2019 |
| From: | NRC/OCM |
| To: | |
| Beall, Robert 301-415-3874 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19140A031 | List: |
| References | |
| 10 CFR Part 73, 20190542, NRC-0364, NRC-2011-0015, NRC-2011-0018, RIN 3150-AI49 | |
| Download: ML19171A004 (52) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Enhanced Weapons, Firearms Background Checks, and Security Event Notifications Rulemaking Public Meeting Docket Number:
(n/a)
Location:
Rockville, Maryland Date:
Thursday, May 30, 2019 Work Order No.:
NRC-0364 Pages 1-51 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
1 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
+ + + + +
ENHANCED WEAPONS, FIREARMS BACKGROUND CHECKS, AND SECURITY EVENT NOTIFICATIONS RULEMAKING
+ + + + +
PUBLIC MEETING
+ + + + +
THURSDAY MAY 30, 2019
+ + + + +
ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND
+ + + + +
The Public Meeting convened at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Three White Flint North, Room 08-A28, 11601 Landsdown Street, at 1:00 p.m., Robert Beall, Moderator, presiding.
NRC STAFF PRESENT:
ROBERT BEALL, NMSS, Moderator PHIL BROCHMAN, NSIR NORM ST. AMOUR, OGC ANTHONY MCMURTRAY, NMSS KEVIN RAMSEY, NMSS GLENNA LAPPERT, NMSS MARK LOMBARD, NSIR
2 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 ALSO PRESENT:
DAN CRONIN, University of Florida
- HILARY LANE, Nuclear Energy Institute EDWIN LYMAN, Union of Concerned Scientists
- JANET SCHLUETER, Nuclear Energy Institute TIM TATE, Framatome
- BOB WILLIAMS, Private Citizen *
- Present via telephone
3 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 P R O C E E D I N G S 1
1:00 p.m.
2 MR. BEALL: Good afternoon. I'd like to 3
thank all of you for your interest in today's public 4
meeting. My name is Bob Beall. Im the rulemaking 5
project manager in the Office of Nuclear Material 6
Safety and Safeguards, and I am also the project 7
manager for the enhanced weapons rule, or as the 8
formal name is the Firearms Background Checks, 9
Security Notifications, and Enhanced Weapons Rule.
10 I'll also be acting as the facilitator 11 for today's meeting. At this public meeting, the 12 NRC staff will present planned changes to the draft 13 final rule text that clarifies the applicability of 14 the enhanced weapons rule to Agreement State and NRC 15 licensees that possess or transport Category II or 16 III quantities of special nuclear material.
17 Before we begin, I would like to cover a 18 few of the meeting logistics.
For those 19 participating via the webinar and the bridge line, 20 there will be designated points during the meeting 21 that you will be invited to ask questions.
22 We have a number of people participating 23 by phone and the webinar today. So I am going to do 24 my best to allow everyone to participate in the 25
4 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 meeting.
1 Everyone should be able to follow the 2
discussions as we will always have time to ask 3
questions. I ask those participating here in the 4
room to please turn off or silence your cell phones 5
and other -- any other electronic devices you may 6
have.
7 I would also like to ask those on the 8
phone to please mute your phones to minimize any 9
background noises during the meeting.
10 If you don't have a mute button on your 11 phone you can press *6 and that should silence your 12 line. We will first take comments from the room and 13 then from those on the phone, and then from the 14 webinar participants.
15 The webinar participants can also type 16 questions into the chat function of the webinar 17 while the other groups are asking questions.
18 All speakers here in the room as well as 19 those on the phone, please identify yourself and 20 provide the name of the company or the group that 21 you are with so when you speak everyone knows who 22 you are talking to -- who will be talking, and 23 please be respective of the other speakers.
24 I also would like to remind visitors in 25
5 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 this room that you must be escorted at all times 1
above the first floor of this building. If you need 2
to leave the room for any reason, please leave by 3
the rear door to my left.
4 Okay. Hey, Ted?
5 OPERATOR: Yes?
6 MR. BEALL: Can you hear static coming 7
from your end?
8 OPERATOR: Not right now. There was a 9
little bit earlier. It sounds okay right now.
10 MR. BEALL: Okay. We had a couple 11 people on the line said there was static coming 12 over. Like that. Did you just hear that?
13 OPERATOR: Not on this end, sir.
14 MR. BEALL: Okay. All right. Slide 3.
15 Okay. The purpose of today's meeting is 16 to enable stakeholders to understand the staff's 17 plan changes to the May 2018 draft final enhanced 18 weapons rule.
19 This is a Category III public meeting, 20 which means that public participation is actively 21 sought.
22 The meeting is not designed nor intended 23 to solicit or receive comments on the draft final 24 enhanced weapons rule.
25
6 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Also, no regulatory decisions will be 1
made at today's meeting.
2 Next slide, please.
3 This meeting is scheduled to run from 4
1:00 to 3:00 p.m. Once the introductions are 5
complete, the NRC staff will discuss the planned 6
changes to the draft final enhanced weapons rule.
7 The public may ask questions on the 8
planned changes during the discussion session of 9
this meeting. Please hold any discussions to this 10 period during the meeting.
11 Next slide.
12 For those who are attending in person, 13 please sign in before you leave today. The sign-in 14 sheet is on the table. There's a couple -- there's 15 a clipboard going around.
16 So if you haven't signed that, please 17 sign in. The public meeting summary will be 18 prepared for today's meeting and will be made 19 publicly available.
20 Copies of the presentation slides can be 21 found in the back of the room if you don't have one 22 in front of you.
23 Also, a transcript is being recorded of 24 today's meeting and will be made public. We would 25
7 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 appreciate any feedback you may have that would help 1
us improve our public meetings.
2 If you'd like to provide any feedback on 3
this
- meeting, you may email them to me at 4
robert.beall@nrc.gov.
5 I'd finally like to ask speakers to 6
please remember to speak loud enough to ensure that 7
those on the phone can hear you.
8 For those on the phone, if at any point 9
you're not able to hear the meeting discussion 10 please let us know.
11 Are there any questions about the 12 logistics and purpose of today's meeting? Anybody?
13 MS. LANE: Yes. When we are talking do 14 we need to move that in or just -- microphones or 15 anything?
16 MR. BEALL: Hopefully, everybody should 17 be able to hear you. There's a pretty wide area of 18 microphones. So but Phil, can you see if that one's 19 on or not? The light should be lit.
20 MR. BROCHMAN: It's not.
21 MR. BEALL: It's not lit? Okay.
22 MR. BROCHMAN: Can you -- can anyone --
23 can anyone hear me on the phone circuit?
24 MR. BEALL: Ted, can you open the phones 25
8 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 for one second, please?
1 OPERATOR: Yes. Uh-huh.
2 MR. BEALL: Go ahead, Phil.
3 MR. BROCHMAN: I am going to see if this 4
remote mic, whether it's working or not, can we hear 5
-- anybody out there in the listening world hear 6
what I am saying?
7 MR.
CRONIN:
Yes.
Dan
- Cronin, 8
University of Florida, we can -- I can hear you.
9 But it sounds -- it's an echo and there's a lot of 10 static and screeching.
11 MR. BEALL: Okay, Dan. Thank you very 12 much.
13 It's on our end, too. There's not much 14
-- I don't think there's much we can do about it 15 here. We tried to move all our cell phones away.
16 So all right, Ted. You can close the 17 lines again, please.
18 OPERATOR: Lines are now muted.
19 MR. BEALL: Okay.
20 MS. SCHLUETER: Bob?
21 MR. BEALL: Yes.
22 MS. SCHLUETER: Will you be taking 23 questions by the slide or are you trying to get 24 through the --
25
9 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. BEALL: I want to get through the 1
slides, show all the changes, then we can -- we can 2
go back to any slide you wish. Okay?
3 Okay. So the purpose of the enhanced 4
weapons rule was to -- was published -- excuse me.
5 The proposed enhanced weapons rule was published for 6
public comment on February 3rd, 2011.
7 The public comment period was 180 days 8
and the staff had one public meeting during the 9
public comment period. The NRC also published two 10 supplemental proposed rules for public comment on 11 January 10th, 2013, and September 22nd, 2015, 12 respectively.
13 Public comments on the proposed rule and 14 the two supplemental proposed rules have been 15 address in a public response document.
16 Next slide.
17 As mentioned
- earlier, the staff 18 submitted the draft final enhanced weapons rule to 19 the Commission for review on May 22nd, 2018.
20 The staff is planning to make a limited 21 number of changes to the draft final package.
22 First, the staff, in exempting certain Agreement 23 State and NRC licensees possessing strategic special 24 nuclear material of low strategic significance, also 25
10 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 referred to as Category III quantities of strategic 1
special nuclear
- material, from the suspicious 2
activity reporting requirements.
3
- Second, the staff is revising and 4
clarifying the applicability of the physical 5
security event notification and record keeping 6
requirements.
7 Finally, the staff is making minor 8
administrative and editorial changes. The following 9
slides discuss in more detail these planned changes.
10 Change one. In the current regulations, 11 an Agreement State or NRC licensee possessing a 12 Category III quantity of strategic special nuclear 13 material are subject to the physical security 14 requirements of 10 CFR 73.67.
15 Accordingly, these licensees would also 16 be subject to the suspicious activity reporting 17 requirements in the new 10 CFR 73.1215 of the draft 18 final enhanced weapons rule.
19 The staff is planning to exempt the 20 reporting of suspicious activities for these 21 licensees, given the low risk posed by the form, 22 type, and quantity of the material possessed by 23 these licensees.
24 This exemption will not apply to NRC 25
11 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 licensees possessing more than a critical mass of 1
such material.
2 Next slide.
3 Change two. The staff has determined 4
that in the draft final enhanced weapons rule 5
certain licensees currently subject to reporting 6
physical security events and record keeping 7
requirements will be subject to additional physical 8
security event notifications.
9 These additional reporting requirements 10 were not recognized as new requirements in the May 11 2018 draft final rule.
12 The staff has reassessed the application 13 of specific physical security event notifications to 14 these licensees.
15 The following slides discuss the planned 16 changes to the physical security event notification 17 and record keeping requirements.
18 Next slide.
19 In Section 73.1200 of the draft final 20 enhanced weapon rule includes physical security 21 event notification requirements applicable to 22 licensees possessing or shipping Category III 23 quantities of special nuclear material.
24 The staff has determined that licensees 25
12 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 that possess or ship this type of material should be 1
exempt from physical security event notification 2
requirements for the following for events 3
involving the actual or attempted introduction of 4
contraband into a Category III licensee's controlled 5
access area and accidental criticality resulting 6
from tampering and damage or unauthorized access to 7
the transport vehicle, the transport package, or the 8
transport material occurring during the shipment of 9
a Category III quantity of special nuclear material 10 under 10 CFR 73.67.
11 Next slide.
12 Section 73.1210 of the draft final 13 enhanced weapons rule would impose safeguards event 14 record keeping requirements on licensees that 15 possess or ship Category III quantities of special 16 nuclear material.
17 The staff has determined that the 18 imposition of certain record keeping requirements on 19 licensees that possess or ship this type of material 20 is not warranted, given the low security risk 21 associated with this material.
22 Accordingly, the staff is planning to 23 revise the draft final rule to exempt licensees 24 possessing or shipping Category III quantities of 25
13 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 special nuclear material from some, but not all, 1
safeguard event record keeping requirements.
2 Next slide.
3 The draft final enhanced weapon rule 4
would impose new physical security event 5
notifications to safeguard event log-keeping 6
requirements upon licensees possessing Category II 7
quantities of strategic special nuclear material or 8
Category II quantities of special nuclear material.
9 However, the discussion in the draft 10 final rule did not identify these notifications and 11 record keeping requirements as new requirements for 12 these licensees.
13 Accordingly, the staff is planning to 14 revise the discussion and the statement of 15 considerations in the draft final rule to clarify 16 that licensees possessing or shipping Category II 17 quantities of special nuclear material -- strategic 18 special nuclear material or special nuclear material 19 are subject to these new physical security event 20 notification and safeguard requirements and record 21 keeping requirements.
22 No changes no change to the 23 regulatory text in the draft final rule was 24 required.
25
14 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Next slide.
1 The last planned change is the terms 2
non-power production or utilization facility, or 3
NPUF, are being removed from the draft final 4
enhanced weapons rule documents.
5 This is being done to avoid confusion 6
with the draft final NPUF license renewal 7
rulemaking. Additionally, the staff is planning to 8
make minor administrative and editorial corrections 9
to the draft final enhanced weapon rule documents to 10 correct title, spacing, and typographical errors.
11 So at this time, I'd like to offer 12 members of the public and stakeholders the 13 opportunity to discuss the plan changes. I'd also 14 like to remind everyone that the public comment 15 period on the proposed enhanced weapon rule has 16 closed.
17 Therefore, the NRC is not accepting 18 comments at this meeting right now.
19 First, I'd like to open the floor to 20 participants in the room and then those on the 21 phone.
22 So Janet, you had some questions?
23 MS. SCHLUETER: Just -- Janet Schlueter, 24 NEI -- one sort of high-level process question. So 25
15 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 what are -- what is in the contents of the 1
supplemental SECY?
2 Obviously, you have an explanation to 3
the Commission as to the contents that you're 4
proposing for a revised draft final rule, right?
5 MR. BEALL: Right.
6 MS. SCHLUETER: And then are there 7
supplemental documents like a revised final reg 8
analysis or anything else that we should look for 9
when that SECY becomes public?
10 MR. BEALL: Yes. There will be -- the 11 revised FRN was what was made public.
12 MS. SCHLUETER: Right.
13 MR.
BEALL:
- Okay, and then the 14 appropriate conforming changes will be made in the 15 other documents that's in that package.
16 MS. SCHLUETER: Okay.
17 MR. BEALL: That's currently at -- on 18 regulations.gov.
19 MS. SCHLUETER: Okay. And then do you 20 have any idea -- I realize it's a little unknown --
21 when it might actually go from staff at EDO to the 22 Commission, but some ballpark that we could --
23 MR. BEALL: A few of my -- a couple 24 slides later I say it's going to be this summer.
25
16 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
[Laughter.]
1 MS.
SCHLUETER:
That's a
broad 2
definition.
3 MR. BEALL: I know it is but that --
4 MS. LANE: So let me ask a clarifying 5
question from what Janet asked.
6 MS. SCHLUETER: Okay.
7 MS. LANE: So I saw a couple days ago on 8
regulations.gov there were a couple new documents 9
that were added for the reg
- analysis, the 10 environmental assessment. Those were dated 2018 so 11 those are still the older versions --
12 MR. BEALL: That's correct.
13 MS. LANE: -- that you just re-uploaded 14 just for awareness and --
15 MR. BEALL: Just to make sure everybody 16 was there, right. Yes.
17 MS. LANE: Okay. And then --
18 MR. BEALL: It's the same thing that was 19 made public in September.
20 MS. LANE: Okay. So you uploaded it.
21 MR. BEALL: I just went ahead and re-22 uploaded the exact same documents.
23 MS. LANE: Got it.
24 MR. BEALL: I wanted to make sure we had 25
17 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 everything covered. Okay.
1 MS. LANE: Mm-hmm. So we will expect 2
new revised documents on the reg analysis and the 3
environmental --
4 MS. SCHLUETER: To reflect this.
5 MS. LANE: -- to reflect this new 6
language?
7 MR. BEALL: Yes. Any -- any changes 8
that we found that we need to make conforming 9
changes to any of these documents will be uploaded.
10 MS. SCHLUETER: Okay.
11 MS. LANE: Later in the summer.
12 MR. BEALL: Later in the summer, yes.
13 MS. SCHLUETER: Thank you.
14 MS. LANE: I'll ask another process-15 related question. I noticed in the markup of the 16 draft final rule language there was some red line 17 text and some blue line text, I am guessing just for 18 the purposes of us reading there's no major 19 distinction between red line and blue line?
20 MR. BEALL: That's correct.
21 MS. LANE: Okay.
22 MR. BEALL: Yes.
23 MS. LANE: Okay.
24 MR. BEALL: Right.
25
18 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MS. LANE: One more process question.
1 So last year the NRC put out this very helpful 2
applicability matrix. Just kind of takes a somewhat 3
complicated rule, puts it down into one table, one 4
page. Is there any language in the new rule text 5
that would then change or revise this table?
6 MR. BEALL: I don't think so. No, I 7
don't --
8 MS. LANE: Okay. I would just maybe 9
recommend it if you guys want to take another look 10 at this.
11 MR. BEALL: Yeah.
12 MS. LANE: It's possible that it may 13 have and which, you know, maybe we just put out a 14 new table. There's also no date on the tables. If 15 we did out a new table, possibly dating the table.
16 And then another comment I got from the industry was 17 the X marks are somewhat confusing because you don't 18 know if the X is representing yes, I fall under this 19 category, or no, I am X-ed out.
20 MR. BEALL: Okay. Okay.
21
[Laughter.]
22 MS. LANE: So maybe perhaps a check mark 23 or some other way --
24 MS. SCHLUETER: Or A applicable 25
19 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 versus N/A, not applicable, or something.
1 MR. BEALL: Okay. All right. Gotcha.
2 MS. LANE: A demarcation other than an 3
X because has been very confusing. I've gotten 4
several questions on that.
5 MR. ST. AMOUR: So just to clarify, you 6
would like us to determine, one, if any of the 7
proposed changes would result in a change of the 8
applicability to the table.
9 But even if it doesn't, you would see 10 value in revising the table to make sure that it's 11 dated properly, clarified what it means.
12 MS. LANE: Yes.
13 MR. ST. AMOUR: So one of the --
14 MS. SCHLUETER: A key code, you know, 15 some sort --
16 MR. ST. AMOUR: One of the takeaways for 17 us is to look at the applicability table and revise 18 it to clarify the Xes and that kind of thing 19 even if there is no changes as a result of -- no 20 changes to applicability as a result of these 21 changes?
22 MS. LANE: Right, because this table is 23 already highly utilized and it's very helpful.
25
20 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MS. LANE: So if we can make any other 1
clarifying changes that would make it even better 2
that'd be great. Yeah.
3 MR. ST. AMOUR: Okay. Thank you.
4 MR. BROCHMAN: Bob, just for a point of 5
clarification, the reg analysis I know has tables in 6
it that indicate for each particular provision of 7
the regulation who are the licensees that it applies 8
to.
9 So I wasn't sure where you were, if this 10 table was a separate --
11 MS. LANE: This was just provided by 12 staff separately.
13 MR. BROCHMAN: So it was a separate 14 stand-alone document but it wasn't --
15 MR. BEALL: That was the table we handed 16 out in 2018.
17 MR. BROCHMAN: That's -- just wanted to 18 make sure I understood where it came from.
19 MR. BEALL: Okay. Okay.
20 MS. LAPPERT: Okay. We have a question 21 from --
22 MS. SCHLUETER: Yeah.
23 MR. BEALL: Okay.
24 MS. LAPPERT: So this question comes 25
21 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 from Robert Link. What is the regulatory basis for 1
imposing the additional event logging for the 2
Category III licensees?
3 There appears, based on the performance 4
and risk of these materials and licenses --
5 licensees this is unwarranted. So there you go.
6 And that's from Robert.
7 MR. BEALL: Can you read that again?
8 MS. SCHLUETER: Yeah. I think he's just 9
-- I mean, maybe we could ask him directly but it 10 sounds like he's just asking for the regulatory 11 bases for imposing those requirements on Cat III.
12 MS. LANE: So I could probably clarify 13 that even further. So that refers back to slide 11 14 of the PowerPoint.
15 So the wording here that the NRC uses, I 16 am sure, is very intentional. But it's interesting 17 because they say they are exempting licensees from 18 some but not all record keeping requirements.
19 So it kind of begs the question why not 20 all. How did -- how did staff come to that 21 determination. Was there a threshold used and what 22 was, you know, the technical basis behind the 23 exemption of some requirements but not all as the 24 staff says here in the slide.
25
22 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. BROCHMAN: Right now -- yeah, I will 1
try to answer this. Right now, the Category III 2
licensees are subject to some requirements, both 3
from a physical security event notification and 4
safeguards log.
5 The staff, as part of this effort, 6
looked at what the proposed language was and 7
compared it to the current regulations in 73.71 and 8
Appendix G, particularly with respect to Category 9
III licensees, and we said is this something that 10 can be accomplished and is it something that is 11 necessary.
12 So what an example -- let me give you an 13 example what is a requirement remains, theft or loss 14 of material. The base requirement for physical 15 security event notifications for SNM is retained.
16 There are other examples that we removed 17 as not being applicable or not in the current 18 regulations. So that's what we were -- what we were 19 trying to convey here was not everything went away 20 but, in essence, we are backing off -- we are 21 backing down from what was in the draft final rule 22 of last year as opposed to creating new 23 requirements.
24 The requirements that were -- that are 25
23 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 in there are articulated as to what the basis is in 1
that document that went up last year.
2 MS. SCHLUETER: Can you clarify when you 3
said in the document that went up last year?
4 MR. BROCHMAN: Yeah. So for each 5
particular provision --
6 MS. SCHLUETER: Right.
7 MR. BROCHMAN: -- and I am trying to 8
keep this focused on Category III requirements 9
rather than something like Category -- the 15-minute 10 actual -- in other words, where -- things where we 11 said here there's a need for this --
12 MS. SCHLUETER: You mean the earlier 13 SECY? Is that what you're referring to?
14 MR. BROCHMAN: Yeah, the earlier SECY.
15 That's what I am saying is the earlier SECY there's 16 a basis articulated for each of the provisions.
17 MS. SCHLUETER: Right.
18 MR. BROCHMAN: And especially where it's 19 a new provision. What we talked about in one of the 20 other slides is, for example, where we recognize 21 that there was a new requirement being created and 22 we had not articulated that it was a new requirement 23 and there was a need for it, the example being 24 Category III SNM.
25
24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 We had -- we have gone back and 1
clarified that. But my recollection is for most of 2
the CAT III items what we have done is actually 3
removed things from what we had proposed in the May 4
2018 draft final rule.
5 MR. ST. AMOUR: Essentially what we did 6
is we looked at the security significance of the 7
event being reported and we determined whether or 8
not that significant security significance 9
justified the reporting requirement, and in some 10 cases we said, you know, this is of such a low 11 significance that even if the event happened there 12 was no need to -- for Category III licensees there 13 was not need to have them report this event to the 14 NRC.
15 Or alternatively -- and correct me if I 16 am wrong on this, Phil -- there might have been 17 other duplicative reporting requirements in the regs 18 already so we didn't need to impose it again through 19 this regulation.
20 I don't know about that for a fact for 21 Category III. But we ran into certain situations.
22 So what we are doing when we are saying there are 23 certain reporting requirements that were in the 2018 24 rule we reassessed.
25
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 We looked at the security significance 1
and we determined whether or not that justified the 2
reporting requirements and determined that it did 3
not.
4 MS. SCHLUETER: Right. So I am going to 5
presume that Bob's not finding that information in 6
the current red line version of the Federal Register 7
Notice that he's reading. He needs to go back to 8
the 2018 SECY that went up with the draft final rule 9
to read that regulatory bases for any requirements 10 that remain.
11 MS. LANE: I guess to ask it in another 12 way, there were the exemptions, but for those that 13 were not exempted those record keeping requirements 14
-- those reporting requirements -- can the staff 15 kind of explain a little bit more what they felt is 16 broken that's not happening today?
17 Because this -- there will be new, you 18 know, requirements here for the CAT III's that will 19 add, you know, significant cost in terms of 20 reporting and record keeping aside from the 21 exemptions.
22 So what's -- so what's broken today that 23 we are not doing today?
24 MR. BROCHMAN: I am not -- I am not sure 25
26 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 that we would say that there's going to be 1
significant new requirements in terms of -- in terms 2
of the events that are actually being required to be 3
reported.
4 There's the new processes the 5
clarifications on the processes about the timing and 6
et cetera, but in terms of the number of events or 7
the particular events, my recollection is that we 8
have actually scaled back.
9 MS. LANE: Well, say, in terms of the 10 record keeping.
11 MR. BROCHMAN: So --
12 MS. LANE: So that's new --
13 MR. BROCHMAN: No.
14 MS. LANE: -- in terms of what they are 15 doing now today from -- you know, aside from the 16 2011 rule before that?
17 MR. BROCHMAN: I thought -- we can go 18 back and check that. But my understanding is 73.71 19 currently requires safeguards event log requirements 20 for Category III SNM for a particular event --
21 particular events.
22 MS. LANE: Okay. We will have to -- we 23 will have to check on that.
24 MR. BROCHMAN: And so the what -- as 25
27 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Norm said what the staff did is it went back and it 1
compared the current regulation, 73.17 and Appendix 2
G and it would be Section 3 of Appendix G -- against 3
what the proposed rule was saying and going, okay, 4
is there something new that was brought into play, 5
and as Norm said, if it was, we looked at it to say 6
was it necessary or was there a rationale that could 7
be applied and said due to the -- due to the lower 8
risk imposed by this type of material we didn't need 9
to -- we didn't need to impose either a security 10 requirement or a record keeping requirement.
11 Now, from a record keeping standpoint, 12 just so everybody understands the context, for the 13 most part the record keeping deals with events where 14 there was no actual or potential consequence.
15 For example, a compensatory -- a system 16 was degraded and compensatory measures were 17 implemented within the required time period.
18 An event notification would be an 19 instance where systems were degraded and the 20 compensatory measures were not implemented within 21 the required time period. That would be an example.
22 So, essentially, you had the same core 23 event. The difference is whether or not the 24 licensee was able to identify it and implement 25
28 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 measures within the required time period or not.
1 And so a lot of these events get -- go 2
into a pathway of being documented in the safeguards 3
event log.
4 MR. BEALL: I think what we are going to 5
see a lot of times with a reporting requirement is 6
that we try to relax the requirement from what --
7 everything right now is one hour and, you know, 8
you've noticed in the final rule, even in the May 9
18th one -- 2018 one -- is that a lot of those 10 reporting requirements now are either four hours or 11 eight hours.
12 So there's been a number of relaxations 13 from that aspect of it. Okay.
14 MS. SCHLUETER: Can you check and see if 15 there's any -- if Bob wants to ask --
16 MR. BEALL: Sure.
17 MS. SCHLUETER: -- a clarifying question 18 or anybody else might want to weigh in on that?
19 MR. BEALL: Hey, Ted, can you please 20 open the phone lines?
21 OPERATOR: Yes. There are a few 22 comments in the queue. The first one is from Edwin.
23 Your line is open.
24 MR. BEALL: Okay.
25
29 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. LYMAN: Yes. Thank you.
1 This is Ed Lyman from Union of Concerned 2
Scientists. I just have a question. I think I 3
don't understand something. But when you say you 4
are exempting tampering that would result in 5
accidental criticality as a reporting -- an event 6
that's reportable for Category III, do I understand 7
that correctly, that if someone commits sabotage at 8
a Category III facility and causes a criticality 9
event that wouldn't be reportable?
10 MR.
BROCHMAN:
Ed, this is Phil 11 Brochman. I'll clarify it this way. Right now, 12 accidental criticalities at fuel cycle facilities 13 licensed under 10 CFR Part 70 require a safety-based 14 event notification under 70.52.
15 The proposed revision would only apply a 16 security-based requirement based on tampering to 17 Category I facilities and that's based upon the need 18 to conduct further follow-up because of some other 19 statutes than the Atomic Energy Act.
20 So there would be a notification --
21 bottom line is there would be a notification for any 22 accidental criticality first for the part 70 safety-23 based requirement and there could be a supplemental 24 notification if there is a tampering indication.
25
30 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 That applies only to Cat I's.
1 MR. LYMAN: Right. But if there -- I 2
can't -- I mean, the consequence of a criticality 3
is, you know, would be the same whether it's a 4
Category I or Category III. So why would there be -
5
- I mean, I would think the NRC would want to know 6
if someone was able to successfully commit a 7
sabotage act you know, whatever class of facility.
8 I mean, it doesn't make sense to me, or am I missing 9
something?
10 MR. BEALL: Ed, any criticality is 11 reportable --
12 MR. LYMAN: Right.
13 MR. BEALL: -- whether it's a Category 14 III to a I.
15 MR. LYMAN: So but I don't -- so but 16 what is the distinction here whether it's a security 17 reportable event or not, right?
18 I mean, if there's an accident resulting 19 in a criticality it's reportable. It's just a 20 question of whether it's deliberate, right?
21
[Telephonic interference.]
22 MR. BROCHMAN: As I -- as I said 23 espalier, the rationale --
24 MR. LYMAN: The static on the line is 25
31 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 unbearable so I think -- I'll think I'll submit this 1
in writing. I am going to hang up now.
2 MR. BROCHMAN: Okay. As I said a moment 3
ago, the basis for requiring -- proposing to require 4
a tampering event for Category I facilities is based 5
upon a
separate the need to potentially 6
investigate this under a separate criminal statute 7
or statutes in the Atomic Energy Act.
8 The parallel example is a tampering 9
event -- this is in the current regs -- a tampering 10 event that causes the loss of production capability 11 for an operating nuclear power plant.
12 OPERATOR: I believe we have another 13 comment on the phone lines from Dan. Your line is 14 open.
15 MR. CRONIN: Yeah, hi. This is Dan 16 Cronin, University of Florida.
17 I think -- I am also somewhat confused 18 reading these slides.
When you talk about 19 exemptions you're talking -- are you talking about 20 making exemptions to the draft rule or making 21 exemptions -- current rules?
22 MR. BEALL: It would be -- hey, Ed, this 23 is Bob Beall. We will be submitting a -- these 24 changes to the Commission to modify the draft final 25
32 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 rule that's currently with the Commission that was 1
submitted in May of 2018.
2 So these changes will come out when the 3
-- if the Commission approves the draft final rule 4
and will be published in the Federal Register as a 5
final rule.
6 MR. CRONIN: So is the draft final rule 7
for CAT III for -- when we talk about exemptions 8
here -- does it eliminate some of the reporting 9
requirements in the current rule or does it add any 10 reporting requirements to the current rule or does 11 it stay the same for CAT III?
12 MR. BEALL: It removes some of the 13 reporting requirements that's currently with the 14 Commission -- the one that was sent up in May of 15 2018.
16 MS. SCHLUETER: So Dan, this is Janet at 17 NEI. So there were -- there was the current rule 18 but the draft final rule that's with the Commission 19 right now had proposed to add some requirements for 20 CAT III.
21 The exemptions that the staff is 22 referring to are exemptions to that draft final rule 23 that's before the Commission.
24 So it increased. It's being cut back.
25
33 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 It's still above what is required in some cases 1
today for CAT III's.
2 MR. CRONIN: So they still do require -
3 MS. SCHLUETER: Yes, some are.
4 MR. CRONIN: And so a follow-up question 5
then. Were those new requirements evaluated against 6
the 104c in the Atomic Energy Act to make sure that 7
they went through some kind of a process that 8
justifies the additional burden?
9 MR. BEALL: Yes. The draft final rule 10 spells out and is the justification for all the 11 changes we make.
12 MS. LANE: I think in his case for 13 research in test reactors for the minimum 14 regulation.
15 MR. BEALL: Right. Right. They have 16 the Atomic Energy Act's minimum regulation. Exactly 17 right.
18 MS.
LANE:
That was taken into 19 consideration with that?
20 MR. BEALL: Yes. Yes, we can -- we 21 consulted -- we have people in our working group 22 that are from -- the folks at oversee the non-power 23 reactors so to make sure that they are taken into 24 account.
25
34 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. CRONIN: Well, is that documented 1
within the regulatory basis -- that evaluation?
2 MS. SCHLUETER: Yeah. Dan, I think in 3
some cases -- you're getting back to the point that 4
we all had to kind of sort out earlier and that is 5
that the regulatory bases for some of these 6
requirements is sitting back in that 2018 SECY 7
that's before the Commission right now.
8 But you're not seeing it in this Federal 9
Register notice -- the red line strikeout that we 10 are looking at in preparation for this meeting. So 11 in some cases we have got to peel that one open 12 again.
13 MR. BEALL: Right. You have to go back 14 and look at some of the initial documents.
15 MS. SCHLUETER: Yeah. Right.
16 MR. CRONIN: Well, how about give an 17 example of what's staying versus what's going for 18 CAT III specifically?
19 You said that some items were exempted 20 but some are not. What was not? Is there one 21 example you can give?
22 MR. BROCHMAN: Well, the -- this is Phil 23 Brochman. The -- an example of something that's 24 staying that's in the current rules is theft or loss 25
35 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 of material. I am talking about a facility.
1 That's an example of something that's 2
unchanged from the current regulation as opposed to 3
the -- as opposed to the draft final rule.
4 An example of something that's been 5
removed is actual or attempted introduction of 6
contraband into a controlled access area.
7 So the question you were posing was on 8
Category III and that was moved because the 9
recognition that Category III licensees don't 10 require searches prior to entry -- entry of material 11 into a controlled access area.
12 An example of something that was 13 retained is unauthorized identification of 14 unauthorized personnel into a controlled access 15 area. That is a requirement that's in the current 16 regulations and that was retained.
17 MR. CRONIN: Again, I am really more 18 interested -- I can read the current regulations.
19 But we have a procedure for all current regulations 20 so I know what those reporting requirements are.
21 What I am trying to figure out is what 22 are the new ones going to be.
23 MR. BEALL: Well, the -- this is Bob 24 Beall again -- hopefully, the redline strikeout of 25
36 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 the Federal Register notice -- the rule text is in 1
there and how we have modified it.
2 So that should tell you what changes we 3
made that would impact the Category III facilities.
4 MS. SCHLUETER: Yeah, but that's a 5
redline strike out compared to the draft final rule 6
that's before the Commission --
7 MR. BEALL: Right.
8 MS. SCHLUETER: -- not what is in place 9
today. He's looking for the delta --
10 MR. BEALL: Right.
11 MS. SCHLUETER: -- between what's in 12 place today and the current rule and what you guys 13 are not proposing in May of 2019.
14 MR. BEALL: Right. Okay.
15 MS. SCHLUETER: Can that be succinctly 16 described?
17 G: So take a clean version of the 2018 18 and mark it up to the 2019 --
19 MS. SCHLUETER: Well, I am just asking -
20 21 MR. BEALL: No. No. That --
22 MS. SCHLUETER: -- that these guys are, 23 you know, just --
24 MR. BEALL: That's what -- that's what 25
37 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 this is here. This would be --
1 MS. SCHLUETER: -- this is -- this is 2
their thing. So --
3 MR. BEALL: -- this is what we strike 4
out between what was '18 and '19. But you're 5
looking at for what's current. Right. Currently 6
enforced.
7 MS. SCHLUETER: Current. Current.
8 That's really the delta that's in play right now.
9 MR. BEALL: Right.
10 MS. SCHLUETER: What are they subject to 11 today versus if the Commission approves this what 12 will go forward and be implemented.
13 MR. BEALL: Right.
14 MR. ST. AMOUR: The new requirements 15 would be -- the way to determine the delta would be 16 to look at the 2018 rule and determine what is added 17 new, and this was all discussed in the package that 18 was sent out to the Commission in 2018. And then 19 take a look at the 2019 redline strikeout taken out.
20 MS. SCHLUETER: I know. It's just 21 tangled. You know, it's just -- it's just kind of -
22
- you know, it's a little tangled and a little 23 complicated and I think people are just looking for 24 something --
25
38 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. ST. AMOUR: This is a complex rule, 1
I think --
2 MS. SCHLUETER: -- very black and white 3
that gives the delta. You know, even a chart. You 4
know, what is it today versus what is it that the 5
staff's proposing in a supplemental SECY if it goes 6
into place with the Commission.
7 That's the -- we shouldn't have to spend 8
hours sort of untangling the verbiage because it's 9
been as you all said, you know, a proposed rule, two 10 supplementals, 2018 version.
11 Now that's being tweaked. It's just a 12 little hard for people to follow when they are busy 13 and they are coming in and out of the rulemaking 14 process.
15 MS. LANE: I have another clarifying 16 question. So there's several areas in this 17 strikeout version that take the term controlled 18 access area, CAA, and strike it out in several 19 areas.
20 So that terminology is specific to some 21 fuel cycle facilities.
22 MR. BROCHMAN: Yes.
23 MS. LANE: But they don't use a PA or an 24 MA or what have you. They just use a CAA. So we 25
39 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 determined that in those areas where CAA is striked 1
out that the fuel cycle facilities that use just 2
that terminology that requirement would not apply to 3
them if CAA is striked out.
4 MR. BROCHMAN: You are correct.
5 MS.
LANE:
Okay.
That's a
big 6
clarification.
7 MR. BROCHMAN: That was the -- that was 8
the intent.
9 MS. LANE: Okay.
10 MR. BROCHMAN: And the example I was 11 going to give you was did you look at the event on 12 unauthorized access of personnel versus the --
13 versus the introduction of contraband.
14 If you look at those two line examples 15 you'll see the distinction between one has the CAA 16 included, the other doesn't and that was -- that was 17 the intent of striking CAA out.
18 MS. LANE: Right. And even in the 19 notifications it's there as well. So -- right.
20 MR. BROCHMAN: That's why they are in 21 the notifications as well as the --
22 MS. LANE: Yeah. Okay. Good. Thank 23 you.
24 MR. BEALL: Are there any additional 25
40 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 questions on the phone?
1 OPERATOR: Yes. There is a comment from 2
Bob Williams.
3
[Telephonic interference.]
4 MR. WILLIAMS: This is Bob Williams. I 5
am not sure that I was in the queue because the 6
static was so bad. But can you hear me?
7 MR. BEALL: Yes, we hear you, Bob.
8 MS. SCHLUETER: Yes.
9 MR. WILLIAMS: Okay. Thank you, and 10 just to -- I am representing -- I am a member of the 11 public and a consultant to the industry. I am not 12 necessarily affiliated with any licensee or 13 organization at this time per my comments. I 14 thought the person from Florida asked the pertinent 15 questions and although I did not get, in my mind, a 16 very eloquent or clear answer because my reading of 17 the redline version, which I'll call the now new 18 final draft, compared to the existing regulation, 19 that kind of confused it with anything intermediate.
20 There still is imposed additional 21 reporting requirements on CAT III licensees which 22 will require procedures, methods for communication 23 be established in a timely basis to support the rule 24 requirements.
25
41 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Also, the event logging requirement 1
addition to CAT III facilities while seemingly minor 2
can result in significant expenditures of procedure 3
- writing, establishment, trying to ensure the 4
personnel are trained adequately, and record 5
maintenance.
6 And if you add electronic versions of 7
this, electronic versions are very expensive to put 8
into place and there also comes with additional 9
cybersecurity aspects.
10 So I don't read -- and this is based on 11 my previous somewhat dated reading of the reg 12 analysis for the first back rule -- I guess I did 13 not see the regulatory basis nor accurate analysis -
14
- reg analysis regarding those additional burdens on 15 the CAT III facilities.
16 MR. BEALL: Okay. Thank you, Bob.
17 Are there any additional questions?
18 OPERATOR: I am showing no further 19 comments at this time.
20 MR. BEALL: Okay. Anything else on the 21 22 MS. LAPPERT: Nuh-uh. No. You're free.
23 MR. BEALL: Janet, do you guys have any 24 other questions?
25
42 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MS. SCHLUETER: Nuh-uh. No.
1 MR. BEALL: Okay. So as this slides 2
shows, the staff has revised the draft final 3
enhanced weapons rule. We are expected to submit it 4
to the Commission during the summer -- the summer of 5
2019, and as of this time the staff is not 6
scheduling any additional public meetings on this 7
draft final rule.
8 Please remember to monitor for 9
information posted on regulations.gov.
All 10 activities related to this -- to the enhanced 11 weapons rule making is posted under Docket ID number 12 NRC-2011-0018, and if you have any questions about 13 this rulemaking please feel free to contact me or 14 Phil, and --
15 MS. SCHLUETER: Can I ask something -- I 16 am sorry -- before you completely close?
17 MR. BEALL: Yes, ma'am.
18 MS. SCHLUETER: Because as you were 19 reading that it just made me have a process 20 question.
21 So, obviously, you know, there wasn't a 22 lot of ground, you know, to really cover in the 23 meeting here and we asked clarifying questions and 24 yada, yada, yada. Gave you some food for thought 25
43 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 perhaps on a couple issues.
1 It's being recorded. So then what next 2
step does the staff take? Do you actually review 3
that recording later to ensure that if you've 4
identified any action items or tasks you decide on 5
their disposition and possibly make changes to the 6
paper that's in the works? Or what happens?
7 MR. BEALL: We will -- we will put out a 8
meeting summary and, of course, we will take a look 9
at the transcripts and review all of the public 10 discussions we just had here at this meeting, and 11 then we will determine the appropriate actions at 12 that time.
13 MS. SCHLUETER: Can you give an estimate 14 for the time line for revising the matrix or putting 15 out a new matrix? I know you guys are aiming for 16 summer to get this out to the Commission, finalize 17 everything.
Would that be, you know, 18 reasonable to think that we could see a new matrix 19 this summer, possibly sooner?
20 MR. BEALL: Oh. Yeah. It would.
21 MS. SCHLUETER: Okay.
22 MR. BEALL: Yeah, we will put something 23
-- you'll have something similar to it. Okay.
24 Any additional questions?
25
44 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MS. SCHLUETER: Maybe you could check 1
the phone again.
2 MR. BEALL: Yeah. Ted, anything on the 3
phone?
4 OPERATOR: Yes. There is a comment on 5
the phone from --
6
[Telephonic interference.]
7 MS. SCHLUETER: From who?
8 MR. TATE: This is Tim Tate, Framatome.
9 I have a question. The static is very bad, by the 10 way. It's very hard to understand what's going on.
11 I heard -- I think I heard you earlier 12 state that Category III licensees are subject to 13 73.71 reporting of safeguard events
- and, 14 specifically, to Section C, which requires them to 15 logbook within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> which pushes you to Appendix 16 D -- 2A and D. Is that correct? You stated that we 17 are currently subject to that?
18 MR. BROCHMAN: I'll pull my regulations 19 out but I thought that's what I said.
20 MR. TATE: Okay. So I would be 21 interested to find out how we are subject to that 22 because specifically C only states 73.67(d) and (d) 23 refers to material of moderately strategic 24 significance.
25
45 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 So there's, obviously, a disconnect for 1
what we are currently actually doing and what you 2
believe the regulation currently states.
3 MR.
BROCHMAN:
I understand his 4
question. It's the base issue on the -- there's 5
three sentences in that paragraph. One sentence 6
applies to one type of event. Paragraph, the second 7
sentence applies to -- the first sentence includes 8
all licensees subject to 73.67.
9 Second sentence only applies to 10 licensees subject to 73.67(d), possessing strategic 11 special nuclear material. And the third sentence is 12 other -- some other facilities. I don't even think 13 73.67 is even included in the third sentence.
14 So the answer is the first sentence does 15 apply, the second sentence doesn't, and the third 16 sentence doesn't, and depending on where you look in 17 those three sentences where they point to in 18 Appendix G, it takes you to different types of 19 events.
20 MR. BEALL: So we will take that back 21 and look at it.
22 MR. TATE: Yeah. Currently, you're 23 talking about B(1), which pushes us to IA(1) which 24 is reporting of theft or attempted theft of special 25
46 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 nuclear material, and that does apply to us and that 1
applies to all of us.
2 Sentence two and three do not. But 3
specifically for logbook in Section C is where it 4
points to that 24-hour log booking and it only 5
applies to 73.67(d) as I read it and what we are 6
currently inspected to. So that was my -- I just 7
wanted to clarify that's what you said, that these 8
are these that applied to us.
9 MR. BEALL: Okay.
10 MR. TATE: I also have a question on 11 vehicle barrier systems. On your red line strikeout 12 you refer to facilities or licensees with vehicle 13 barrier systems protecting their facilities.
14 We currently have a vehicle barrier 15 system, and then it goes into words that we don't 16 have like protected areas and adversary 17 characteristics and things like this.
18 So are you referring to Category I 19 facilities when you're referring to vehicle barrier 20 systems?
21 MR. BROCHMAN: No, we weren't there but 22 that's -- you raise a good -- you raise a good 23 question. Let me ask you a question.
24 Is your vehicle barrier system required 25
47 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 by order or have you committed to it in your 1
physical security plan?
2 MR. TATE: I don't believe so.
3 MR. BROCHMAN: Okay.
4 MR. TATE: There was no -- there was no 5
designation here on what category of licensee it 6
applied to. That's why I asked the question.
7 MR. BROCHMAN: No, so --
8 MS. LANE: Or no CAA reference possibly.
9 MR. BROCHMAN: Yeah. It's --
10 MR. BEALL: We have had this discussion.
11 MR. BROCHMAN: We have had -- we have 12 had this discussion but it sounds like you have a 13 vehicle barrier system that's there at your own 14 choosing but it's not a regulatory requirement.
15 So my initial statement is what we 16 discussed, is if it's not required by a regulation 17 then challenges to the vehicle barrier system are 18 not necessarily reportable but we take your point 19 that the revised regulations may need to be 20 clarified to make sure that point is clear, you 21 know, is my -- yeah.
22 MR. ST. AMOUR: You can say it. You 23 don't have to --
24 MR. BROCHMAN: Yeah. No, it was pointed 25
48 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433
-- as someone just reminded me, we also have a 1
guidance document, a reg guide that will accompany 2
this -- that'll accompany the final rule, and issues 3
such as that where there's a clarification between 4
whether something applies or doesn't apply can also 5
be -- can also be maybe clarified in the guidance as 6
opposed to the regulatory text.
7 MR. ST. AMOUR: These issues have been 8
discussed by the working group and it's the problem 9
you have when you've got a generic rule making and 10 you're trying to apply it to specific situations.
11 And so a lot of the clarifying details, 12 the applicability will hopefully be adequately 13 addressed with the guidance document that's being 14 developed along with this rule making to address 15 exactly the type of question that you just asked --
16 who is this applicable to.
17 We have got a vehicle barrier system.
18 It's nothing required by regulations. We are not a 19 CAT I facility. We don't have a protected area. Is 20 this applying to us?
21 That's in many in certain 22 situations those are the kinds of details that 23 cannot be adequately addressed and it's difficult to 24 adequately address them in rule language.
25
49 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MS. SCHLUETER: Yeah. That's where FAQs 1
come in handy sometimes.
2 MR. ST. AMOUR: Oftentimes, yes.
3 MR. BROCHMAN: Janet, I am glad you 4
mentioned FAQs because remember the other item is 5
that we are going to have a Q&A workshop after the 6
close of the compliance period.
7 The NUREG
- 1304, which is the Q&A 8
workshop on physical security event notifications, 9
this was discussed in the CER meeting, which was 10 held in 2015.
11 We are going to have a Q&A workshop.
12 It's going to revise NUREG 1304 and then another one 13 on dealing with suspicious activity reporting.
14 But that's the type of thing where we 15 will -- where if there are questions that come out 16 of implementation FAQ equivalents will have that --
17 the ability for people to ask questions.
18 MR. BEALL: Do we have any other 19 questions on the phone?
20 OPERATOR:
No, sir.
No further 21 comments.
22 MR. BEALL: Okay. Well, I'd like to 23 thank everybody for the discussion today. Your 24 questions have been very helpful for us.
25
50 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 And so, like I said, please keep your 1
eye on NRC -- Docket ID NRC-2011-0018 and we plan, 2
like I said, to submit the supplemental Commission 3
paper this summer.
4 Okay.
5 So if that's -- nobody has anything 6
else, I adjourn this meeting and thank you very much 7
for your participation.
8 MS. SCHLUETER: Okay. Thank you.
9 Thanks for holding it.
10 MR. BEALL: No problem, Janet.
11
[Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 12 concluded at 1:53 p.m.]
13 14 15 16 17 18 19