ML19325D440
| ML19325D440 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/21/1989 |
| From: | Carr K NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Markey E HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19325C171 | List: |
| References | |
| MARKEY-890721, NUDOCS 8910240113 | |
| Download: ML19325D440 (1) | |
Text
,
x s -. gu p
, C,,
J m
jg; i
L pt; 00ESTION 5:
'Does NRC-believe there'may be a need for.6 NRC requirement j
a.
.J Lf for safeguards:ois-tritium, given the fact that it is a key-
,m*
, component of modern nuclear weapons?c If not, why not? 'If '
i 1
[
~ so, what form should these safeguards take?
i ty
,hNSWER:
lIn 1981, the NRC. assessed the need for routine reporting-requirements for t
b' tritium and concluded.that they were not necessary. These reporting requirements-were then eliminated after a formal rulemaking action. -More recently, an assessment 4
- was made relative to whether tritium should be considered special nuclear-material and safeguarded accordingly. - As noted in our March 30,.1989 response-s
- to the Honorable Philip Sharp, NRC has' detennined that no specific safeguards.
- measures are 'necessary since' tritium can only-undergo fusion under very extreme lk,
. temperatures and pressure = such as those created in the detonation of a fission
-bomb. Reliable safeguards-on specialEnuclear materials that could be utilized to construct:a fission device make the sateguarding of tritium unnecessary.
k The staff, however, will review the DOE findings upon completion of their investication'as they may relate to NRC responsibilities regarding tritium.
g I
1 A
4 w
.-