ML20113G591
| ML20113G591 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000142 |
| Issue date: | 11/01/1983 |
| From: | Burnett R NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Jennifer Davis NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20113G428 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-84-198 NUDOCS 8501240424 | |
| Download: ML20113G591 (3) | |
Text
h y
NOV 01 '1983 MEMORANDUM FOR: John G. Davis, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards FROM:
Robert F. Burnett, Director Division of Safeguards, HMSS
SUBJECT:
HEARING BOARD FINDIt!GS ON UCLA One of the findings of the UCLA Hearing Board with respect to a contention by The Comittee to Bridge the Gap, the intervenor, was that NRC's regulations, namely 573.40(a), require UCLA to protect against sabotage.
If it stands, this finding undoubtedly will be. generalized to cover the entire non' power reactor comunity.
The staff has taken the position that 5 3.40(a) states that " physical security 7
systems shall be established...in accordance with security plans approved by the Huclear Regulatory Comission", that UCLA has an approved plan, and that the plan.provides sufficient protection to meet Part 73 requirements, including any concern about sabotage.
Further, the staff contends that the specific provisions of 373.67, as applied to non-power reactors, take prece-dence' over the general requirements of 573.40(a).
The Board holds that the Comission's failure to exempt non-power reactors from 573.40(a).when 373.67 was issued, results in a conclusion that the regula-tory requirement to protect against radiological sabotage in 573.40(a) applies to facilities otherwise covered by 573.67.
The Board further finds that, if technical studies show that certain classes of non-power reactors pose no sabotage threat to public health and safety, staff should exempt such classes from the requirements of 573.40(a).
Finally, the Board has found that, no specific measures have been promulgated with respect to sabotage for reactors covered by g73.67.
The staff has viewed sabotage as a lesser threat than theft for non-power reactors and, consequently, has reviewed licensees 'sphysical protection prograr:s from that perspective.
Moreover, the IAEA Pulletin (INFCIR 225) on which 173.67 is based, states that protection against both' theft and sabotage is provided by the provisions therein.
8501240424 e40725 kuw PDR FOIA lAFTERGOS4-198 PDR l
l
,v cw p...
l l
- 1..
T y
C 5--
y
.w m j
NOV 011983 2-1 Of the possible staff alternatives to bring this matter to a satisfactory i
resolution, two appear to be viable choices:
the first is to appeal the hearing and the second is.to clarify Part 73.
The HMSS staff and ELD prefer the latter.
The reasons for this are:
o Once an issue is a subject of a rulemaking proposal submitted to the Comission, the issue is not subject to litigation.
Consequently, an FR notice would take the issue out of contention and would provide the staff time to review the issue, obtain public comments, and make any needed corrections to Part 73.
o An appeal possibly would be lost and that decision would have to be appealed to the Comission, is a uncer in a time consuming process.
A n
+
3 Robert F. Burnett, Director Division of Safeguards, NtiSS DISTRIBilTION:
SGFF r/f & s/f CRONO Carlson Dube kloodhead Burnett
- See previ.ous concurrence l
3 k"c'>...... 'S G.F,F *
,,, [1.D *
,,$.G,,Jh,f,,,,,,,
x,,p.......B rown : mt Woodhead Burnett
).9/.7.1/.9..).9/.?.1/.8,3,,,,,,,6.0,/,g,3 ;,,,,,,,,
m::u vi no someu or.o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- u5 * { [ -' 2f
J p x.
i Of the possible staff alternatives to counter the Board's findings, two 7
appear to be viable choices: the first is to appeal the hearing and the second is to clarify Part 73.
The NHSS staff and ELD prefer the latter.
The reasons for this are:
o Once an issue is a subject of a rulemaking proposal submitted to the Commission, the issue is not subject to litigation.
Consequently, an FR notice would take the issue out of contention and would provide the staff time to review the issue, obtain public comments, and make any needed corrections to Part 73.
An appeal possibly would be lost and that decision would have to be o
appealed to the Commission.
This is an uncertain and time consuming process.
Robert F. Burnett, Director Division of Safeguards, RMSS DISTRIBUTION:
SGFF r/f & s/f CRONO Carlson Dube Woodhead Burnett j
l s
b L"'ce p ' s% 'n':' 'b' ' '
iio%' dhp'adohg' ' '
SG m
o
' 'B'u'r'n'e't't' ' ' ' '
- .suny.. Brow
'"h. 20/.. /83... 2092)<s2....
1.0/.. /.83.....
t
- .19 sia ocacs Nm:u c240 j