ML20059N572
| ML20059N572 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/29/1990 |
| From: | Curtiss J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9010160213 | |
| Download: ML20059N572 (9) | |
Text
_ _ _
i l
4 i
TRANSM:TTAL TO:
Document Control Desk, Pl-24 l
ADVANCE COPY 10:
Public Document Room
- j l
DATE:
/s//// 9o j
SECY,Operationsbranch[d FROM:
Attached are copies of SECY papers and related documents.
They are being forwarded for entry on the Daily Accession List and placement in the Public Document Room.
No other distribution is i
requested or required.
- 1. /'/"/
11.
t
^?A m k 90- A 17 l
- 2. &
_ /A*//90 12.
A. / '
'm i
l 3 QA.A.t A.
V0'3 ~? 7 13.
/%, ewnJa f
g 4 M A h d - # 7'/ 14.
- 5. M _ Je 7 1s.
W M 90-307
- 6. M 9/2f/90 16.
4
\\
- 7. W Vd*33A 17.
/
$0 'N Y 19.
8.
//
- ' N E-j 9.
19.
i Y
10.
20.
C 202 1
- PDR is advanced two copies of each SECY paper and one copy of each related document.
9010160213 900829 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PNV l*
DFp 1
,a
N0TATI0N V 0 I.E,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
1 RELEASED TO THE PDR I~
RESPONSE SHEET i
fo/n/oo (b
I ^ ~ d5te /
Indi
- * * * * * *
- e........ %.s i
T0:
SAMUEL J. CHILK, SECRETARY OF THE COMMISSION FROM:
C0MISSIONER CURTISS
SUBJECT:
SECY-90-277 - PROPOSED RULEMAKING FOR 10 CFR PART-74 TO REQUIRE MATERIAL CONTROL AND ACCOUNTING AT URANIUM ENRICHMENT FACILITIES i
APPROVED w/co ents DISAPPROVED
. ABSTAIN NOT PARTICIPATING REQUEST DISCUSSION COMENTS:
see attached comments.
b b
- g. /Am U
SIGNATURE RELEASE VOTE
/ x /
8/29/90 DATE WITHHOLD VOTE
/
/
ENTERED ON AS" YEs x
NO
~.,.,,,cw.._%.,4,1m,..
,_-...--v.._v-y..m...
,. -,,..,,.y,.,,_.,,,,,..
w..,_,,
,.r.-..
...y,,,,,,._um,.,
e m__._u____ _ _ _., -
m...
..w,-,e
1 1
1 Commissioner Curtiss' comments on SECY-90-277 l
While I generally believe that the approach proposed by the staff in the subject paper is a reasonable one, I think the proposed notice is sparse on background and explanation.
For the public to make informed comment, the discussion should provide a clear picture of the basis and nature of the modifications.
The i
following examples illustrate areas where additional discussion would be helpful:
1)
The licensing framework for the enrichment facility should be summarized.
In particular, the 1988 advanca j
notice for the' abandoned new Part 76 should be j
referenced and the current regulatory requirements described.
As I understand the current situation, a two-step licensing under 10 CFR Part 50 is contemplated.
That process will involve the issuance-of a construction permit, followed by an operating license.
Either the construction permit or the operating license ';111 include a license to receive and possess source mLterial pursuant to 10 CFR Part'40 and a license to roceive and possess special nuclear material pursuant to Part 70.
Once this framework is explained, the reader can better understand the proposed changes and the applicability of Part 70 requirements.
2)
This particular rulemaking is only a part of the safeguards and physical security that must be addressed for an enrichment facility.
This context should be presented.
For example, the centrifuges will need to be protected from theft,. unauthorized viewing, or unauthorized use once they are received at the site, whether or not the authority to receive and possess source or special nuclear material has been granted.
The proposed rule in SECY-90-277 does not address security at all and appears to address safeguards only when routine production is authorized.
See the discussion on page 5-1 of Enclosure 3, the Draft Regulatory Analysis, for a list of safeguards and security topics which remain to be addressed.
The special problems that will be associated with the modular construction to add additional units after operations begin is not addressed.
The proposed notice should indicate how the topics listed in the Draft Regulatory Analysis and any other unresolved safeguards and security matters will be addressed in subsequent rulemakings, orders, or license conditions.
3)
The proposed amendments to.Section 74.17 (page 21 of' l ) change reporting from_the Regional Offices to Headquarters, but this change is not identified in the notice.
I could find no other change in paragraphs (b) and (c).
I have-no basis to object to the change,
t but it should be identified.
4)
The discussion of the differences between 10 CFR 74.31 and the proposed new 10 CFR 74.33 in the notice is discussed only very briefly.
An amplified discussion 4
would be helpful.
For example, the rationale for a 24-hour startup phase for centrifuge facilities does not discuss the basis for a 24-hour period versus some other time period.
It also doesn't discuss why similar requirements aren't needed for other types of.
enrichment facilities.
A major new feature of the program is the need to account for all of the uranium-235 on site, whether in natural, depleted, or enriched uranium.
The provisions in the rule hinge on the total uranium-235 contained in all source material and I
special nuclear material present at the site.
This point should be discussed more fully in-the notice and emphasized and clarified in.the rule.
Additional editorial comments and suggested clarifications are attached.
I r
i 1
j
~
T paperwork Reduction Act Statement
]
l This proposed rule amends information collection requirements that l
are sub,iect to the Papemork Reduction. Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The t
recordkeeping and reporting requirements in this rulemaking have been l
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for review and approval of the papemork requirements.
Public reporti urden for this collection of information is esti-mated to averag rs per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, se ching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and ' completing and reviewing the collection of infoms-l tion. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the Infomation and Records Management Branch MNBB-7714, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555; and to the Desk j
Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, NE08-3019 j
(3150-0123), Office of Management and Budget Washington, DC 20503.
Draft Regulatory Analysis The NRC has prepared a draft regulatory analysis on this proposed regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the alternatives considered by the NRC.
The Commission requests public comments on the draft regulatory analysis. Comments on the draft analysis may be submitted to the NRC as indicated under the ADDRESSES heading.
6 bhu Gnre l
(c) Each licensee subject to the requirements of i 74.51 shall l
submit a completed special Nuclear Material Physical Inventory Summary Report on NRC Form 327 not later than 45 calendar days from the start of the physical inventory required by i 74.59(f). The licensee shall mport j
l the inventory msults by plant and total facility to the Director, Office l
of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, liashington, DC 20555.
- 18. A new I 74.33 is added to read as follows:
l 1
)
l 74.33 Nuclear material control and accounting for uranium enrichment 1
facilities authorized to produce special nuclear material of low
]
strategic significance.
g
( hhh% L..% Re eug.u,.,,
V*~snd n.3&),P H., p. h ]
(a) General oorformance ob.iectives.hch licensee who is autho ized by this chapter to possess equipment capable of enriching uranium or operate an enrichment facility, and produce, possess, or use more than one effective kilogram of special nuclear material of low strategic significance at any site or contigstous sites, subject to control by the licensee, shall establish, implement, and maintain a comunission-approved material control and accounting system that will achieve the following objectives:
(1) Maintain accurate, current, and reliable knowledge of source material and special nuclear material-(2) Protect against and detect any production of uranium enriched to 10 percent or more in the isotope U-235; 22 c nebs.cei 1
+W-e
=...
-m ee-ew,%-,-m-r w. m
--.---,---e w
,-wr,--+-w-,m-==,-
- w w-
-m,5--e w---b--m--wr*
w w -e 'v w w - =
O (3) Protect against and detect unauthorized production of uranium of low strategic significance (4) Resolve indications of missing uranium; (5) Resolve indications of asty production of uranium enriched to 10 i
t percent or more in the isotope U-235; and j
(6) Resolve indications. of unauthorized production of uranium of low strategic signifiunce.
)
(b)
Isoleur.itation dates. Each applicant for a license who would, i
upon issuanes of a license pursuant to any part of this chapter, be i
subject to the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section shall:=
(1) No'1ater than 2 years prior to facility start up, submit a fun-
~
damental nuclear material contvol plan describing how the performance objectives and the system features and capabilities of i 74.33(c) will be met; and (2) Implement the approved plan submitted pursuant to paragraph sf I of-rior to (a) heel knee s'ae.<repeipt of more than
,4, 00 grams of (b)(1)ofthissecton g
o' naknl le C'#"[se,( 2$5 or (b) bele er e n r.'s U-e RC's ssuance of a licens (As leo b **~ oreenl* *n 4
(c) System features and capabilities. To meet the general enrM.,,d A. /. y./
1 perfomance objectives of paragraph (a) of this section, the mater a
/l i
l l
control and accounting (MC&A) system must include the features and capabilities described in paragraphs (c)(1) through (8) of this section.
The licensee shall establish, document, and maintain:
i (1) A management structure that assures:
i (1) clear overall responsibility for MC&A functions; (ii) independence of MC&A management from production responsibilitiest (iii) separation of key MC&A responsibilities from each other; and 6nd,,,,,re./
l 23
i j
o
)
/
(iv) use of approved written MC&A procedures and periodic review of those procedures; (2) A measurement program that assures that all quantities of 1
j source material and special nuclear material-in the' accounting records I
are based on accurately' measured values; I
(3) A measurement control program that assures that:
l (1) measurement bias is estimated, minimized through the measurement control program, and any significant biases are eliminated'from inventory difference values of record; (ii) all MC&A measurement systems are controlled so that twice the standard error of the inventory difference is less than the greater of 4
5,000 grams of U-235 or 0.25 percent of the active inventory for each total plant material balance; and (iii) any measurements performed under contract are controlled so that the licensee can satisfy this requirement; (4) An inventory p gram that assures that accurate, current, and reliable knouledge ofy.... pee, / nas/aae sowco as s
,, a k,*< /
- is maintained, and that includes
(1) performing, unless otherwise required to satisfy Part 75 of this chapter,'a dynamic (nonshutdown) physical inventory of in-process uranium 1
and U-235 at least every 65 days,tsht hem:ssand perfom4ng a tatic$hysint, 1 le snb
',s n p
inventory of all other uranium and U-235pocarsa vuoice or
.n het sel
\\ u n s.%.s enrichment processing equipment at least every 370 calendar days, witn i
static physical inventories being conducted in conjunction with a' dynamic physical inventory of in-process uranium and U-235 so as to provide a
{
total plant unterial balance at least every 370 calendar days; and (ii) reconciling and adjusting the book inventory to the results of the static physical inventory and resolving, or reporting an inability to' Envlosue l
.b
l l
uranium enrichment plants producing uranium enriched to less than 10 percent in the U-235 isotope.
I j
Two alternatives to the proposed amendments were examined. The l
first was to take no action and regulate uranium enrichment facilities l
l using existing mquirements in 10 CFR Part 70.51(b),(c), and (d). This i
alternative was rejected because the existing regulations would not i
i
)
provide adequate safeguards commensurate with the potential danger of I
operating enrichment facilities. The second alternative was to regulate i
uranium enrichsent facilities by license condition. This alternative was rejected because it would provide neither the benefits of a comprehensive internal NRC review nor the benefits of public notice and comment.
1 V.
Alternative use of Resources 4
l The NRC will use abou 7
staff years to review and approve the j
MC&A system for a commercial uranium enrichment facility, as documented I
by the license or applicant in its fundamental nuclear material control l
plan.
l VI. Agencies and Persons Consulted During development of the proposed amendments, the Commission staff has consulted with personnel from the joint venture which has indicated intent to apply for a license to build and operate a commercial uranium enrichment plant. Also consulted were personnel with extensive uranium enrichment knowledge from Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. (Dak Ridge TN), which operates a Department of Energy enrichment facility.
A bhu OCd f
,