ML20148J637
| ML20148J637 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/12/1987 |
| From: | Bradburne J NRC OFFICE OF CONGRESSIONAL AFFAIRS (OCA) |
| To: | Asselstine, Bernthal, Zech NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8803300331 | |
| Download: ML20148J637 (11) | |
Text
r Qh 0
,1 og
- putauq'o l
UNITED STATES "g
8" NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
h' E
WASHINGTON, D C. 20555 g,
,f May 12, 1987
%,...../
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Chairman Zech Comissioner Asselstine Comissioner Bernthal Commissioner Carr
]/
FROM:
John C. Bradburne, irectbr Congressional Affa rs, G
SUBJECT:
SOUTH AFRICAN URANIUM IMPORTS Attached for your information are several letters addressed to the Department of the Treasury providing the coments of various members of Congress regarding Treasury's interim rule implementing Section 309 of the Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986 (dealing with imports of South African uranium). is a letter signed by 24 members of the Senate expressing their support for Treasury's interim rule. Attachments 2 and 3 are separate letters from Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM) providing personal coments to Treasury on the interim rule. These three letters support the Treasury rule position with respect to shipments of uranium ore to the United States for processing and reexport. is a letter drafted by Representative Howard Wolpe (D-MI),
Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcomittee on Africa. Mr. Wolpe is circulating this letter to his colleagues in order to obtain additional signers. According to his staff, he has about two dozen House members to date. The Wolpe letter's bottom line is that, "There is ample legislative history in the floor debate in both Houses in addition to the plain language of the Act to make clear that Section 309 was intended to ban all South African uranium imports."
It is our understanding that a number of senators have comunicated or are planning to comunicate similar views to Treasury.
CONTACT: Steve Kent 4-1443 Attachments:
As stated 8803300331 070512 PDR MISC PDR
(%033o033t
p-
)
I 2-1 cc:
E00 OGC GPA/Denton GPA/SLITP
~ GPA/IP GPA/PA SECY (2) 4 t ~
- 1 l
l l
l l
[
s l
Cweoans,ta saceE 'su=0 Cardw&*
Ag
_=
e n :. w :.: x ::'
m:. = :' = '.'-
'!*';i!!.7."?'.'c't"'
- %'.elc'12','it" :.','e','
55?fif'ff 5555I Enittd 5tatts #5tnatt Esl',*$,*'f.77c COMMITTEE oN FOREIGN RELATIONS War.smoTot DC 20510 g o,og g. g =,s,r,.ll,o y-ea, May 7, 1987 The Honorable James Baker, III Secretary Department of Treasury Washington, D.C. 20220
Dear Secretary Baker:
In response to your request for public comment, we are writing to express our support for the Treasury Department's interim rule regarding Section 309 of the Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986.
We strongly urge you to make this ruling permanent.
We believe the Treasury Department's interim interpretation is consisterit with Congressional intent explicitly stated prior to final passage of the legislation.
As noted in the regulations, "The domestic conversion industry and the Federal government 's enrichment industry could be seriously-injured in a manner unintended by the Congress if the section 309 import ban on uranium ore and uranium oxide were implemented to bar imports for processing and export through a mistaken interpretation."
No member of Congress intended for the legislation to cost American jobs, damaga a vital American industry, or allow South Arcican uranium to be converted by our foreign competit ics with the potential for eventual use by American utilities..s_,
Specifical57, we are concerned that without some provision for temporary entry of uranium for processing and reexport, foreign customers with long term uranium supply contracts with South Africa will simply shift their processing business to Europe and the Soviet Union.
This would inflict serious, unintended damage on the U.S. conversion, enrichment and f abrication industries,
while having no sanction effect on South Africa.
h The Honorable James Baker, III May 7, 1987 Page 2 We appreciate this opportunity to clarify Congressional intent regarding Section 309 We concur with the Treasury Department's interim decision which preserves the public and private domestic uranium processing industry.
In the interest of assuring the industry's future, we urge you to make the ruling permanent.
Sincerely, I.,t..c[C,L(
kb --.%
AN ED STATES SENATOR UNITED STATES SENAT0i?
d 0642 i.
EDSTATESSENp0R DNITE STATES SENATOR UN
/
W
/b
_ et //
UNITED STATES SENATOR NI ~
STATES NATOR o
UNITED STAT Fr5 SENATOR N 9f W 5e 7.>TATES SENATOR
/
W j
~~ UNITED STATES SENATOR UNIED STATES SENATOR
.y a.
V u? Qdd&.
&c/
x4)
D
/g UMno"STATES SEN ATOR UNITED STATES SENAT0fr[
- a (>
GLa m UNITED STATES gi ATOR UNITED STATES SENATOR 1-_
UNITED STATES SENATOR UNITED STATES SENATOR
,,,,esae @fP.4E-Abn.
- - ~ -
. - -. ~. -
2 The Honorable James Baker, III May 7, 1987 Page 3 UNEM STATES SENATOR UNITED S ATES SENATOR dh M ~ RA STATES SENATOR UNITED STATES SENATOR k J ~ hr,u da, w id UTTITED STATES SENATOR UNITEQ STATES SENATOR CM S
,]
g UNI'4" D STATES SENATOR UNITED STATES SENATOR S
w4 e
A non 4 as2em n.:. u. i c
, i p
gg e r g
wh,
_ a T 2 Wittili!statts $01ste hj{
e wu4o wasHINcToN. cC 20s to March 20, 1987 The Honorable James Baker, III Secretary Department of the Tressary 15th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Washin5 ton, DC 20220 Dear Soorstery Baker This letter is in response to the invitation to comment on the ninterim rule uranium in any form for further processing and transsh (a) would not penalize vent.
that prohibiting such transshipment South Africa in that the materisi would simply be processed at the same time, would osuse commeroisa abroad, and (b) injury to the U.S. conversion and enrichment indust measures.which do not sanction South Afric, but ins industries.
Accord-sim ly harm, or potentially harm, U.S.ing y, I support Tre wit regard to the transahipment issue.
At the same time, I strenuously object to Treasury 8s nt nsl rule" Which allows domestic use of South Afriosn This uranium as long as it is converted to UF6 abroad.
interpretation allows easy circumvention of Section 309 and severely yeakens it es an effective sanction against South At the, Africa, contrary to obvious Congressional intent. industries in that it same time, it harms U.S.
stimulate domestic sales of natural uranium and may' provoke
'oss of domestic sales of conversion.
Mr. Sacrotary, Treasury has looked to funds-n ninterim rule In short, mental policy and effectiveness in issuing itsThe same attentio on transshipmenn.tiveness require a revision of the "finsi rula," at least to s nt
. ll t
~
.: 7 -- e 7 ro o e a 4 : 1 s P ti ti o e i i e,2 i i P.03 f
e e
The Honorable James Baker, III Harch 20, 1987 Page 2 ts to allow impor-545 425, which purpor in any form the peint of delecinstation for domestio use of South African urani produced from uranium ore and oxide.
Sincerely,
/
/,
Jeff BLnganan United States Senator, JB/ mfd Office of Toreign Assets Control oo:
e O
4 s
t 6
4 g
6 wh*
4 Ir eO
\\
_e s. s
N AA Q 3 Couutetts PtTE V. Dow(NICI gyccry
.<wuuco annormatio%s Snited Statts Etnatt
""'"o^"""'"
a WASHINGTON. DC 20510 May 8, 1987 The Honorable James A.
Baker, III Secretary of the Treasury 15th and Pennsylvania Av. NW Washington, DC 20220
Dear Mr. Secretary:
I as writing to comment on the Treasury Department's interim rule amending the South African Transaction Regulations.
This interim rule, published on March 10 and codified at 545 C.F.R.
545.427, seeks to interpret the prohibition on the importation of South African uranium ore and uranium oxide contained in in Section 309 of the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986.
The Department's interis rule allows t he importation in bond of South African uraniu= ore and uranius oxide when the i=portation is made solely for processing in the United States and export of the processed products.
The 1sportation sust be authori:ed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and properly classified under the United States Tariff Schedules.
The Department's interpretation accurately reflects the intent of Congress in enacting Section 3.09 I encourage the Depart =ent to adopt this interim rule as a final rule.
South Africa's apartheid systa= is sorally reprehensible.
Social and political change is in ev it ab le in Sout h Af rica, anc it is preferable that the United States play a positive role in bringing about de=ocratic change in South Africa.
The Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986 is the product o f the reali:ation that the United States has tne ability to e f fect change in South Africa through economic sanctions because of the close econoEic relationship that our two nations have established.
In adopting the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid A c't, Congress sought to prohibit the importation o f South Af rican product s into the United States which were intended to be consumed in the United States.
The Act sends a clear message to the South African government that the practice of apartheid runs counter to the moral value s o f the Unit ed States and that we as a natio n will not stand by idly while this practice c o n t in ue s.
However, it was never the intent of Congress to ban the te=porary 1: port a tio n o f South African uranius ore and oxide for processing and export, as such an action would seriously ispair U.S.
industries and would have no effect on the Scuth African econo =y.
Barring the temporary importation of uranius ore and oxide for processing and export would seriously damage the vitality of
s The Honorable J.1 o:
A.
Sakor, :**
May 8,_1937 Paco 2 the Unitod Stato urania: p r o c o s : in.; industry, which is alcoady struggling to meet the challonio of f oroian coupe tition.
Since so:t_uraniu: processin.3 in conducted pursuan to long-;er:
pro ossing to our foreign contract, the snifting of uraniu:
c co:potitors will resul; in lana-toru damago to Ono vitality of :he U.S.
uraniu: processing indu:;ry.
Additionally, prohibiting :no tosporary 1:portation of Souta Af rican uraniua oro and oxide for procoscing and export will not i: pair the South African uraniu industry, a: European nation: and :no Sovio: Union will undertake the procoscing of South African uranium cro and oxide.
AlthouGh it is out side :ho scope of :nis concent p e r io d, I uould also like to voice y oppo:ition :o the final rule found at 31 C.F.R. 545.425.
This s ec t io n a llo'ws the continued 1:p o r: a t io n for do:estic consu=ption of the products of South African uraniu:
ore and uraniu: oxido, sucn as uraniua hexafluorido, so long a:
Oney have been convortod acroad.
The Depart:ent's final culo is contrary to the intent of Congress.
It allows :ne continued consusp:1on in :ne United St ates o f South Af rican urantun produc: ;
- thu s under:ine: One
- aaotions against South Africa.
Additional;y, the Departmen;'s final rule will hav.e an advarse effoct on the United Sta:e:
uraniu and conversion induu:rtea.
I encoucage ne Depart:en to reconsider it ado ption o f tai f in a l rule.
I sum, per=itting t h e t e ap o r a r y i=portation of uraniu: cre and uraniu: oxide in:o the United Sta:e: for :ne lici;ed purpose of processing and export is con:isten; with the intent of Congress in enacting the Co:prehencive Anti-Apartneid Ac: of 1936, while allowing tho 1:portation into the United States of :ne produe:: of South African uraniua,or.e and uranium oxide fo.' Jonestic consu=ption 6: not.
! 5'elieve that porsit ng :ae o porary importa ion of uranius oro and oxido under.:n; licitation:
establisned by the Depar;:ent of tne Trescury and barring :no i=portation fo r do:o: tc consusp; ion o f p rodue:: of Sca:n African t
urar u: ore and oxide will ;uarantee :nat no Souta African uraniuu is con:used in ho United State: unilo a llowing :nc U.S.
uraniu:
procos:ing indu:try :o renaan visolo.
Thank you for the opportunity to precon: ay views on :a;;
subject to you.
[ ace.'oly.
l
\\
c' = ' - %
ae V.
Docon;01 Unt ed State: Sena:or y
m...
8 kort 4 #N h C 8.a.**
g-n _
kunf.rdth Onpu:
....w.....u..
- n.....,. x.
?C.e..e......
a..
t 31 64 C'-ce. von........ a.
.s.. a g. ;- t....
0 e..
D&
. o. +
- pi.,,.,,
ow ; 0 e o..g s.i....c ac,.....
- c. u. e.,.. > >. o :...,..
xe...........
-o..,...
Ommittti Oil Orti airs c"..'..:..=........,...
- n ~..
.....u............
c,:..,......
, ;... :... c.
aust a rtstmatiDts x.1
. n. u.,.. n.......
c.-
a............
x.. e.g.........G........c.
a..
u.
amq nn, m 3n, m st p.
was N w e Jij W gs
' f t.D.3 g.5.a.ee.e 1'5 4
c t e.aAm.t..e..
g,ggg,,, g g,,,
~
..c~...
=o.aa n..a.* -i.~..,.
c i.n.nv c o..i... -
n
- m.. s v.~.. m.
s u,o,..
.s. o
. s-.u. s.
o JCD J. 6943.
J.
May 5,1987 c=
2 e Honorable Janes Baker Secretar/
Departrent of the Treasury 15th St. & Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20220
Dear Mr. Secretary:
On October 2,1986 the U.S. Congress, in a strong biprtisan vote, overrode the President's veto of H.R. 4863 and put into law a series of sanctions against the racist South African Govern. ent.
Me-te rs speaking in support of the bill unaninously decried tre apartheid policy of the South African Government and advocated strong, meaningful sanctions; sanctions which would enable ;,.erican policy to turn away from the failure of W constructive engagement.
A:nong the sarctions provided in the Anti-Aprtheid Act is Section 309(a) which bans the i port of South African uraniu-cre and uranium oxide into the United States.
The Treasarf t>epr ent, which has responsibility within tne Executive branch for i.plemnting tne Act in recard to South Af rican uraniu. imports, issued an interim rule per.itting South African uraniu. to be brought into the U.S. for further prccessing ard re-export until June 30, 1987.
Tne stated p;.rpose for this gra e period is to enable Congress to clarif.its intent on tre legislation.
Mr. Secretary, so that there is to further
.isinterpretation, when anact.ing Section 309 we intended to bar all South African uianitr.5 ether intended for co su pticn in the LY.ited States or for re-ixport to other rations.
Se Anti-Aprtheid Act also calls for a ban cn the impcrtation of coal, steel, textiles and agricultral prcducts.
Nom of these articles are sub]ec to t9e purpor ed re-expor: exreption. When pssing H.R. 4868 ve intended to t~ eat all the articles consistently--
a total ban. Tnis intent is manifested in Congressran Ho.3rd Walpe's state ent cn the House floor when he stated ".... H.R. 4868, as a.~ ended by the Senate, bans imports of textiles, agricultural prcducts, coal, uranium, and steel f rce South Africa, as well as any predtrts produced, ranufactured, marketed, or otherwise exported by South African parastatal agencies."
s According to the Departmnt of Energy's Nuclear Paterial Control Division, al.ost two-thirds of the South Af rican ura. e igcrted between 1981 and 1986 into the United States ws proressed for re-export to foreign custcrers. (DOE /tOCD) Cons truin: tM ban to apply only to era.iu, intended for U.S. consu ption wuld s; ve te nullif y the ura.iu-ban ena:ted of Congress.
The Treasury Department bas also draf ted mgulations pendtting imports of uranium hexafluoride (UT6) origirating in South Africa. We are appalled at this development.
This regulation also runs directly contrary to the intent of Congress.
The ef feet of this. regulation is to mnder the uranium sanction totally inef fe:tive and meaningless.
The Cepartmnt's position is that LT6 represents a "s;bstantial transfomation" of the original South African uranie and is rot af fected by the ban on uranium ore an3 ox.ide. Hcwever, Bruce Tucker dr*d$rT/rtJ..
of S'#JCO, a leading expert in the industry has stated that conversion ~
from an exide po.eder to a flouride gas in the precess of raking fuel F
does not involve a substantial transfomation of uran;u.. (S'#JCO, Report No. 72, Jan. 1937)
The process to convert ura. um oxide in*a uranium hexafluoride is neither expensive ror difficult. The cost of conversicr. to uranium hexsflouride represents only about 2% of the overall cost of nuclear fuel. (COE/ Energy Infor ation Ad. ministration, Proiected Costs.of Electricity f rce Nuclear and Coal-Tired Pcwer Plants, Srt. 1982)
It ns-sis to be stressed tnat ura.:r. ore has virtually no :arket value until it is converted into '?6.
The purpose of the Act to sanction South Af rica is only served if the provision is interpreted to cover ccr;cunds into which the oxide ay be readily trans forw.-d.
Evidence exists that Congressional ef forts to stop ths importation of South Africa. origin uraniu am already being circu-tsnted.
In 1985 and 1956 ura.iu. hexaflutride c:r prised no more tna. '.' and 22 per cent of ur:niu-igerts f ro-Secth Af rica respe tive'... DCE'tm)
Since the Art ttck ef fe:t o. January 1,1987, applications received by the NR: indicate that hexafluoride igorts would a c; t to 73% of the uraniu. i.:orted. (Nuclear ruel, 2/23/87)
Tnis ets-::i: increase in proposed '.TE igerts suggests that industry cust rers plan to use Treesury's icophole to evade the Congressioral tan cr. ura.iu-1. ports.
.v a.
Tnere is a ple 1,egislative history in the ficc debau in both Houses in addition to tne plain language of the Act te ake :. ear that Section 3'.9 was interded :: ba. all South Africa u r r igerts.
Indeed, a.y other interpretation.culd render Sertio-D9 -eaningless and w:u'.d te contrary to tM clear inte.: of Cr.: rest ai pting this provisic.
Sincerely, k/oMC j ad e [
p,y,gua emsnoM A 'G aCwv9 o Ea wg