ML19345F476
| ML19345F476 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/13/1981 |
| From: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS (OIP) |
| References | |
| CLI-81-2, NUDOCS 8102170549 | |
| Download: ML19345F476 (9) | |
Text
- %
N
'g' fg %
~
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA cf t-q,,g of fy/p NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
F9 Y.th #
h 4'
COMMISSIONERS:
N s
S ff ^ U g#
n st$
John F. Ahearne 6
i Q
gES Victor Gilinsky H "%, $
J'7 1987 % 7 p8 p
87J Joseph M. Hendrie 7
%n,
?
Peter A. Bradford j
/
m, i me -
In the Matter of
)
Application No. XR-135
)
Docket flo. 11001075 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY
)
)
Application No. XSNM-01662 (Exports to Taiwan)
)
Docket No. 11001076
)
In the Matter of Application No. XR-136
)
Docket No. 11002058 WESTItlGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY
)
)
Application No. XSNM-01719 (Exports to Taiwan)
)
Docket No. 11002175
)
)
Application No XR-137 In the Matter of
)
Docket No. 11002252 COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC.
Application No. XSNM-01753
)
Docket No. 11002253 (Exports to Taiwan)
)
)
Application No. XSNM-01754 Docket No. 11002254 l
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CLI-81 -2 w.
c;,.
I.
Backcround
.3
~-
The Taiwan Power Company seeks to purchase two nuclear pow'er rea'ctor's '
l which will be sited in Yen 11ao, about 50 kilometers east of Taipei.
In soliciting bias, the utility stated that the contract would not be awarded to a supplier unless that ccmpany had already received authorization from its
~
- Oate p
\\
810217oS4q
2 i
government to export the reactors, the initial fuel core, and one full reload.
The General Electric Company, the Westinghouse Electric Corporation, and Com-bustion Engineering, Inc., have each filed applications with the Comission seeking authorization to export to Taiwan two nuclear reactors, the initial fuel cores, and one full reload. O The Center for Development Policy has filed petitions seeking leave to intervene and requesting a public hearing on the applications.
Petitioner requests that the NRC hold public hearings on the following issues:
1.
The nature and magnitude of the seismic risks :nd dangers posed by the reactors' site and the effects on the global commons; t
2.
The nature and magnitude of the volcanic risk and dangers posed by the reactors' site and the effects on the global commons; i
3.
The nature and magnitude of the risks and dangers posed by the high population density around the reactors' site; 4.
The risk to the common defense and security of the United States due to the lack of legally binding non-proliferation agreements; 5.
Dangers to the health and safety of Taiwanese citizens; 6.
The likely environmental impact on the global comons of the pro-posed reactors and disposition of spent fuel; and 7.
Generic safety questions posed by all nuclear power plants.
E General Electric filed its applications for authorization to export two boiling water reactors and the fuel on March 7,1980. Westinghouse filed its application covering two pressurized water reactors on April 23, 1980.
It submitted its fuel application on August 14, 1980.
Combustion Engineering filed its applications for two pressurized water reactors and the fuel on October 9,1980.
The Commission published notice of the receipt of the reactor applications in the Federal Registers of April 15, 1980 (45 Fed. Reg. 25560), June 24,1980 (45 Fed. Reg. 42431), and Novem-ber 18,1980 (45 Fed. Reg. 76306).
~
3 Petitioner requests the Commission to defer action on the pending export applications until the Commission:
(a) has made publicly available all pertinent data within its possession that relates to the issues raised; and (b) has held an adjudicatory hearing on these issues, commencing no earlier than 90 days after the requested infonnation had been mada available to the public. Petitioner aise asks that the Commission's staff assist it to analyze and evaluate the inton.;;. tic, provided.
In addition, petitioner urges the Commission to request the United States Geological Survey to prepare a volcanic and seismic assessment of risks the proposed reactors would pose to the environment of the global commons, and also to develop guidelines which would govern the siting of reac-tors near volcanoes.
Finally, petitioner requests the Commission to prepare a revised environmental impact statement assessing the impact U.S. nuclear exports have on the global environment. The statement would update the " Final Environ-mental Statement on U.S. Nuclear Power Export Activities" published by the Energy Research and Development Administration in April,1976 (ERDA-1542).
The NRC staff, the State Department (speaking on behalf of the Execu-tive Branch) and the applicants filed responses with the Commission recom-mending that the petitions be denied.
E ave also submitted documents The NRC staff E and the Executive Branch h
to the Commission in which they conclude that the license applications meet all the applicable export licensing criteria and rect.,,nmend issuance of the licenses.
However, both recommend that the licenses be made effective only upon the award of a contract by the Taiwan Power Company to one of the United States applicants E
Memorandum to the Commission from William J. Dircks, Executive Director for Operations, ?!RC, dated January 14,1981, SECY-81-34.
E Memorandum for James R. Shea, Director, Office of International Programs, NRC, from Louis V. Nosenzo, Ceputy Assistant Secretary of State, dated December 12, 1980.
4 for constructing the reactor.
The Executive Branch submission included a
" Concise Environmental Review of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, Units 7 and 8 on Taiwan"; the staff submission included an " Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Staff Evaluation of the Potential Radiological Impact on the Global Commons of the Export of Taiwan Nuclear Units 7 and 8."
II.
The Hearino Recuest (a) Hearings as matter of richt The Center for Development Policy (CDP) is a project of the International Center, a District of Columbia nonprofit corporation.
The functions of CDP are to monitor the flow of resources to developing nations, conduct research and analysis of development policies and their implementation, and disseminate the results to the public and public officials.
The interests petitioners assert and the issues they raise are virtually identical to those contained in CDP's ecrlier petition challenging the export of two nuclear reactors to South Korea.
The Commission deniod that interven-i tion request, detenrining that petitioner had failed to establish that it was entitled to a hearing as a matter of right under Section 189(a) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
In the Matter of Westinghouse Electric Corp.
(Export to South Korea), CLI-80-30,12 NRC 253 (1980).
For the reasons set forth in that opinion, the Commission has determined that petitioner is not 1
l entitled to a hearing as a matter of right in the present case.
i
5 (b) Hearing as a matter of discretion Eve though petitioner is not entitled to a hear 179 as e matter of right, the Commission can order a public hearing if it detemines that a hearing would be in the public interest and would assist the Commission in making the statu-tory deteminations required by the Atomic Energy Act.
10 CFR 110.84(a). The Commission is unable to make such a detemination here.
Four of the issues raised by petitioners pertain to matters which the Commission has stated it will not consider in making its export licensing derisions. These are:
(1) the seismic risks posed by the reactors' site; (2) the volcanic risk posed by the reactors' site; (3) the risks posed by the high population density around the reactors' site; and (4) dangers to the health and safety of Taiwanese citizens.
The export licensing process is also an inappropriate forum to consider a fifth issue, the generic safety questions raised by nuclear power plants.
In the Matter of Westinghouse Electric Comoany (Exports to the Philippines), CLI-80-14,11 NRC 631 (1980);
Westinghouse Electric Company (Exports te the Philippines, CLI-80-15,11 NRC 672 (1980); Westinghouse Electric Comoany, CLI-80-30,12 NRC 253 (1980).
The remaining issues raised by petitioner -- whether U.S. Agreements with Taiwan on non-proliferation matters are binding in light of the United States' China policy and the likely environmental impact on the global commons of the proposed reactor exports and disposition of spent fuel -- fall within the Cratssion's jurisdiction and may be considered by the Commission in its export licensing determinations. The issue petitioner raises regarding the status of U.S. nuclear agreements was explicitly addressed by the Congress in the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, 22 U.S.C. Sec. 3301, g seq.
In that Act Congress made it clear that agreements entered into between the United States
6 and the governing authorities on Taiwan possess a legally binding character and l
that severence of United States diplomatic relations with Taiwan does not pro-vide a basis for denying nuclear export applications.
See 42 U.S.C. 3303.
Therefore, this issue need not be considered further by the Commission.
With respect to the impact of the proposed reacter exports upon the global commons, both the Executive Branch and the NRC staff have addressed the issue in their submissions to the Commission.
As noted previously, the NRC staff prepared an analysis of the radiological impacts of the proposed exports upon the global commons and the Executive Branch in its Concise Environmental Review has also addressed impacts of the reactor exports upon the global commons.
There is no indication in its pleadings that petitioner possesses expertise on assessing impacts on the global commons or that they have infor-mation not presently available to the Commission on the matter.
Instead petitioner has requested that the Commission provide it with pertinent infor-mation and then assh t it to analyze and evaluate the data. We have no reason to bei Sve that such an effort would result in the development of significant new insights or a more comprehensive analysis of the issues than that already submitted by the NRC staff and the Executive Branch. We also find no reason to seek additional analyses from the U.S. Geological Survey or to request the Executive Branch to update ERDA-1542 before acting on the merits of the pending l
l applications.
In the absence of evidence that a hearing would generate significant new analyses, a public hearing would be inconsistent with one of the major purposes of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978 -- that United States agencies enhance the nation's reputation as a reliable supplier of nuclear l
I
7 materials to nations which adhere to our non-proliferation standards by acting upon export license applications in a timely fashion. #/ A hearing would delay the Commission's decision on the applications for several months.
Therefore, we conclude that a public hearing would not be in the public interest or assist the Commission in making its statutory deterninations.
III. The Taiwan Exoort License Aoplications The Ccmmission has issued export licenses authorizing exports of power reactors and low enriched uranium to Taiwan since enactment of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act, specifically XR-ll3 (two power reactors) and XSNM-01341 (low enriched uranium). These licenses were issued on June 8,1979.
Under these circumstances, Section 126a.(2)(b) of the Atomic Energy Act and 10 CFR 110.44(a)(2) of the Commission's implementing regulations adthorize the Commission to issue licenses to Taiwan by detennining that there are no material changed circumstances associated with the applications under considera-tion here from those existing at the time of issuance of the earlier licenses.
In determining whether material changed circumstances have occurred since issuance of a previous license, the Commission examines whether any events have adversely affected the adequacy of the assurances given by the recipient nation on the t
j matters covered by sections 127 and 128 of the Atomic Energy Act, and whether there have been any significant changes in the recipient nation's non-prolifera-tion policies.
I The Commission has reviewed the submissions of the Executive Branch, the
{
NRC staff and the petitioner and has concluded that there have been no material l
O See Section 2(b) of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act, 22 U.S.C.
l 3201(b).
l l
8 changed circumstances regarding the adequacy of the assurances given to the United States by Taiwan and that there have been no changes in Taiwan's non-proliferation policies that would cause it to alter its previous deteminations.
We therefore direct the Assistant Director for Export-Import and Internation6i Safeguards, Office of International Programs, to issue license XR-135 and XSNM-01662 to the General Electric Company, licenses XR-136 and XSNM-01719 to the Westingho sse Electric Corporation, and XR-137, XStN-01753, and XStN-01754 to Combustion Engineering, Inc.
Each of the power reactor licenses shall expire on January 31, 2002.
This will permit shipment of warranty replacements and other items needed to assure safe and efficient operation of the reactors.
Each of the fuel applications shall expire on January 31, 1995.
Each of the seven licenses shall also be conditioned to provide that they shall become effective, only upon award to the licensee of the contract for Taiwan Power Company Units 7 and 8.
It is so ORDERED.
c#" "ECI4 For the Commission 6\\
o f
3 o
?,N@"Y. $[$
hdl.lLJC 0
- i[
SAMUEL J. CHILK 3
% % + & +0 Secretary of e Comission' Dated at Washington, D.C.
this 13 thday of February
, 1981, s
i 1
SEPARATE OPINION OF COMMISSIONER BRADFORD I concur in the denial of the intervention petition, but dissent from the issnance of the licenses.
For reasons set forth in the recent Philippine case 1/ and reiterated in the Korean case, 1/ I believe a more extensive review is required.
I know of no reason why these applications would not pass such a review, but none has been done.
- should also note that a review of tha type I have advocated would not necessarily preclude the issuance of a license when, as here, the contract has not been awarded.
However, some additional information on the type (s) of reactor under consideration would be necessary.
1/
Westinghouse Elg:tric Corp., CLI-80-14, 11 NRC 631, 666 (1980).
SI Westinghouse Electric Corp., CLI-80-30, 12 NRC 253, 263 T1380).
l
,-r