ML20042C319

Twenty-third Set of Interrogatories & Request to Produce. Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20042C319
Person / Time
Site:	Clinch River
Issue date:	03/26/1982
From:	Finamore B, Greenberg E, Weiss E National Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club
To:	NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
References
NUDOCS 8203310211
Download: ML20042C319 (14)

Text

<~~. , ,

l

. 9, Before the \ go t "r UNITED STATES *gp  %

g f~,,4 2,9 p

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ,,

ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD #bCCiE"iO 9 Washing ton , D.C. 20555 k- I-

2 MAR 3 01932*

nam e:am% 3 In the Matter of )

)

""7 2 s

//

i' UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ) 4

~

PROJECT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION )

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY ) Docket No. 50-537

)

(Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant) )

)

INTERVENORS', NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC.

AND SIERRA CLUB, TWENTY-THIRD SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO THE STAFF Pursuant to 10 CPR S2.740b., Intervenors, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. and the Sierra Club, request that the following Interrogatories relating - to Contention 5 be answered '

fully, in writing and under oath, by one or more of ficers or employees of'the Staff who has personal knowledge thereof. If the Interrogatories are answered by more than one person, whether or not h,e or she verified the answers, and whether or not The or she.

is an official or employee of the Staff, such person's name and title should be set forth together with an identification of which Interrogatories he er she is responsible for answering.

In answering these Interrogatories, the agreed Protocol, dated March 4, 1982, should be followed. However, in addition to 8203310211 820326 /roj PDR ADOCK 05000537 G PDR gU g,

L

-~ -

identifying documents which serve as a basis for or pertain to any answer, the Staff should treat certain interrogatories, where so stated, as a request, pursuant to 10 CPR S2.741, that the Staff produce and permit Intervenors to inspect and copy such documents at such time and in such manner as may be agreed upon by the parties.

Definitions As used in these Interrogatories, the following terms shall have the following meanings:

A. "CRBR" means the Clinch River Breeder Reactor.

B. " Document" means any written, printed, recorded, typed, or other graphic or photographic matter of any kind or nature, and all mechanical or electronic sound recordings or transcripts thereof, any other sound reproductions, however produced or reproduced, and all copies of documents, by whatever means made, now or formerly in the possession, custody, or control of any of the Staff or known by any of them to exist.

C. " DOE" means the Department of Energy and its predecessor agencies.

D. "GAO" means the United States General Accounting Office.

E. "IAEA" means the International Atomic Energy Agency.

P. " Identify" means:

1. . With respect to a natural person, his name, address, title and job description; 4

k_ i

• e

2. With respect to governmental agency, bureau, department, division, interdepartmental committee, advisory committee , or working group, formal or informal, its proper designation and location;

3. With respect to a corporation, partnership or other legal entity, its name, principal place of business, and nature of its business;

4. With respect to a document, the type of document (e.g., regulation, manual, directive, letter, memorandum, list, study, report, etc.), date, the name of the person who prepared t).e document, the name of the person for whom the document was prepared or to whom it was delivered, and the name, address, and title of the person who -presently has possession or control of the document; and

5. With respect to a communication other than a document, the type of communication (e.g., telephone, in-person, etc.), date, participants, and any notes, memoranda, records of conversations, diary or calendar entries or other documents or notations memorializing such communication.

II . - "NRC" means the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. '

Interrogatories

1. Which of the following new technologies, techniques aor safeguard systems, referred to'in DOE, Draft Environmental-

~

_4-Impact Statement (Supplement ERDA-1535, December 1975) Liquid Metal Past Breeder Reactor Program (December 1981), are planned to be utilized at the CRBR plant and' supporting fuel cycle facilities:

(a) Electronic ( fiberoptic and/or acoustically read )

seals; (b) Microwave, ultrasonic and/or buried cable motion detectors; (c) Computerized alarm d!. splay systems; (d) Continuous surveillance (video -- closed circuit television) cameras; (e) Automated computerized measurement systems;

( f) Multiple integrated laser engagement systems; (g) DYMAC and RETIMAC systems; (h) Burnup calculations and isotopic correlation techniques; (i) Non-destructive analysis (NDA techniques)?

With respect to each such technology, technique or safeguards system, identify and produce any and all documents in ~ the possession of the Staff which describe their deployment and operation and/or provide an assessment of the effectiveness thereof.

2. lias the Staf f become aware since April 25, 1977 of-any evidence that the following failures have or may have occurred at nuclear facilities in the United States and abroad:

4

r-- 3 (a) Seal failure; (b) Camera failure; (c) Blockage of camera field of view; (d) Dosimeter failure; (e) Light or other electrical failure; (f) Computer measurement failure; (g) Failures in any other containment / surveillance device?

If the answer to any part of this Interrogatory is yes, describe such evidence and identify and produce any and all documents in the possession of the Staf f relating thereto.

3. lias the Staff become aware since April 25, 1977,.of any evidence that for any camera system either (1) a photograph of a viewed scene has been placed in front of a camera or (2) a transmission cable has been tapped to feed a picture from a source other than a camera, or (3) other means have been devised to defeat the camera or video systems? If so, describe such evidence and identify and produce any and all . documents . in the ' possession of the Staff relating thereto.

4.  !!as the Staf f become aware since April 25, 1977, of any evidence that threats, extortion attempts, actual security breaches, theft or diversion, sabotage.or physical attacks, and/or the threat of the-use of nuclear materials, have occurred at-nuclear facilities in the United States'and abroad? If the answer-to this interrogatory is yes, describe such evidence and identify

[.

~

and produce any and all documents in the possession of the Staff relating thereto.

5. In its report to Congress of April 7, 1977, entitled Security at Nuclear Power Plants - At Best, Inadequate, the GAO noted the following problems with guard forces at commercial and nuclear facilities: ". . . weak allegiance, high turnover rate, poor background checks, poor supervision, inferior equipment, weak legal authority, poor rapport with local police, poor mobility, no uniform standards for physical fitness, low public confidence , and little training." Id. at 9.

(a) State what measures have been or will be taken in light of this report to remedy such deficiencies at the CRBR and supporting fuel cycle facilities.

(b) State what measures have been considered but not taken.

6. In tuotimony delivered May 2, 1977, before the Subcommittee on Energy and Power of the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, Monte J. Canfield, Jr., Director, -'

Energy and Minerals Division,.GAO, tes t if ied .- that the following physical security system weaknesses existed.at commercial nuclear power plants:

". . . - security alarms that were -improperly tested; unclear requirements as to where armed guards should be placed; -poor personnel search and access control practices; and a lack of emergency. lighting in certain k'ye security areas."

(a) State what measures have been or will be taken in light of this report to remedy such deficiencies at the CRBR and supporting fuel cycle facilities.

( (b) State what measures have been considered but not taken.

7. (a) Ilas the Government ever been able to determine with confidence that special nuclear material was not stolen from l

l (i) the NUMEC plant in Pennsylvania in the 1960's or the (ii) i j Kerr-McGee plant in Oklahoma in the 1970's?

l l (b) Are all the federal agencies which have investigated 1

j these possible thefts in agreement with respect to what happened?

l (c) If not, describe the position taken by each agency l

l and what differences exist.

l

8. What is the current calculated uncertainty in measuring small amounts of plutonium in fuel assembly and bulk j handling plants?

l 9. In a letter dated May 5, 1978, to John Dingell, l

Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy and Power, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce (B-157767), the Comptroller General noted significant disparities between MUF data presented in August, 1977 NRC and DOE reports and data formally provided previously to the GAO and Congresc.

(a) What measures have been taken since May, 1978, to improve reliability of MUF data and eliminate imprecision and

subjective judgments involved in accounting for MUP at the CRBR and supporting fuel cycle facilities?

(b) What measures have been considered but not taken?

10. Has the possibility of an aerial attack been considered in designing and developing physical security and/or safety systems for the CRBR and supporting fuel cycle facilities?

If the answer to this interrogatory is yes, identify and produce any and all documents in the possession of the Staf f relating thereto.

11. Have any assessments been undertaken to compare the advantages of alternative transportation modes for unirradiated and irradiated CRBR fuel in order to determine which mode overall provides the highest levels of security and public safety necessary at the least cost? See letter, dated August 1,'1979, for the GAO to Secretary of Defense Harold Brown and Secretary of Energy James Schlesinger (B-164105). If the answer to this interrogatory is yes, identify ar.d produce such assessments and any and all documents in the possession of the Staf f relating thereto.

12. (a) What actions have been taken to implement the recommendations set forth in the GAO report, Federal Actions are Needed to Improve Safety and Security of Nuclear Materials Transportation (May 7, 1979), at pages 23-24, as they relate to the CRBR and supporting fuel cycle facilities?

(b) What actions have been considered but not taken? j

~

13. The NASAP 1! study states (at 1-24), "Techno-logically more advanced and comprehensive safeguards and physical security systems will be required to handle plutonium-bearing materials, particularly in bulk. These may include plutonium management systems such as inventory reduction as well as improved instrumentation for accounting, and containment and surveillance."

(a) What measures have been undertaken at the CRBR and supporting fuel cycle facilities, since release of the NASAP report, to achieve these objectives?

(b) What measures have been considered but not taken?

14. (a) What measures have been or will be taken with respect to chemical dilution and the provision of a radioactive barrier by radioactive contamination, as recommended by NASAP, to reduce risks associated with CRBR fuel? See NASAP report at 1-4, 2-25.

(b) What measures have been considered but not taken?

15. Were current NRC safeguards and physical security requirements, e.g. , 10 CPR pts. 70, 73, developed with the view to their appliction to reactors such as the CRBR which operate on plutonium-based fuels?

16. Would possible changes in 10 CFR pt. 73, see 46 Ped.

- Reg. 45144 (Sept. 10, 1981), be based on a dif ferent assessment of II 2 DOE, Nuclear Proliferation and Civilian Nuclear

. Power (DOE /NE 0001/2) (June.1980).

l l

1 L_

what constitutes a design basis threat? If so, what are the reasons for that changing judgment?

17. The Department of Defense, the GAO and the NRC have recently expressed reservations about the effectiveness of IAEA safeguards, and, more particularly, their ability to detect i diversion in at least some types of facilities. In what ways are the surveillance and detection system at the CRBR and supporting fuel cycle f6cilities the same as the IAEA system? In what ways are they different?

18. lias Staff undertaken any analysis of safeguards regimes and physical security regimes at foreign breeders? If the answer to this interrogatory is yes, identify and produce any and all documents in the possession of the Staff which describe the dif fere5ces between the CRBR regime and such foreign regimes.

19. To the extent that fuel used in the CRBR will either be transported to or from facilities in foreign countries, what dif ferent safeguards and physical security measures will apply when the fuel is in the United States as opposed to when it is outside the United States? What controls, it any, will the U.S.

Government exercise over such fuel when it is outside the U.S.

territorial jurisdiction?

20. What system, if any, has been developed to provide for continuing, timely review of safeguards and physical security requirements to take into account " dynamic factors at work in

~

society"? If such a system has been developed, explain how it has I

been applied with reference to events occurring since April 25, 1977. What does the Staff con 21 der to be a reasonable time in a dynamic system to respond to changes in the nature and scope of the threat to nuclear facilities?

Respectfully submitted, Eldon V. C. Greenbegg TUTTLE & TAYLOR #

1901 L Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 861-0606 E)/y~ n. GUJ (8y %)

Ellyn R. Weiss HARMON & WEISS 1725 Eye Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 (2Q2) 833-9070 8~k A.Finamore Barbara A.

S- (0J'M /

S. Jacob Scherr Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

1725 Eye Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 223-8210 Attorneys for Intervenors Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. and the Sierra Club Dated: March 26, 1982 Washington, D.C.

s

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregcing "INTERVENORS', NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC. AND THE SIERRA CLUB, TWENTY-THIRD SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO THE STAFF" was delivered by hand this 26th day of March 1982 to:

Daniel Swanson, Esquire Stuart Treby, Esquire Bradley W. Jones, Esquire Office of Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Maryland National Bank Building 7735 Old Georgetown Road Bethesda, Maryland 20814 R. Tenney Johnson, Esquire Leon Silverstrom, Esquire Warran E. Bergoholz, Jr., Esquire Michael D. Oldak, Esquire L. Dow Davis , Esquire Office of General Counsel U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20585 George L. Edgar, Esquire Irvin N. Shapell, Esquire Thomas A. Schmutz, Esquire Gregg A. Day, Esquire Frank K. Peterson, Esquire Morgan, Lewis & Bockius 1800 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 And by mail, postage prepaid, to the following:

Marshall E. Miller, Esquire Chairman Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4350 East West Highway Bethesda, Maryland 20814

)

~

Mr. Gustave A. Linenberger Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4350 East West Highway Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Dr. Cadet H. Hand, Jr.

Director Bodega Marine Laboratory University of California P.O. Box 247 Bodega Bay, California 94923 Atomic Safety & Licensing Appeal Board

'J . S . Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Docketing & Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 (3 copies)

Herbert S. Sanger, Jr., Esquire Lewis E. Wallace, Esquire James F. Burger, Esquire W. Walker LaRoche, . Esquire Edward J. Vigluicci Office of the General Counsel Tennessee Valley Authority 400 Commerce Avenue Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 William B. Hubbard, Esquire Assistant Attorney General State of Tennessee Office of the Attorney General 422 Supreme Court Building Nashville , . Tennessee 37219

--~

Lawson McGhee Public Library i 500 West Church Street Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 William E. Lantrip, Esquire City Attorney Municipal Building P.O. Box 1 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Oak Ridge Public Library Civic Center Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37820 Mr. Joe H. Walker 401 Roane Street Harriman, Tennessee 37748 Commissioner James Cotham Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development Andrew Jackson Building, Sutie 1007 Nashville, Tennessee 32219

__/

Eldon V. C. Greenbe 4 t-9 t