ML20210N322
| ML20210N322 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/09/1985 |
| From: | Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20210N307 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-96-398 SECY-85-271, SECY-85-271-R, NUDOCS 9708250184 | |
| Download: ML20210N322 (9) | |
Text
.
..c Nv Ey~ul keri' POLICY ISSUE (Notation Vote)
August 9,1985 SECY-85-271 For: The Comission From:-
William J. Dircks Executive Director Tor Operations
'(V)
Subject:
PR000 SED TECHNOLOGY TRANSFERS TO THE PEOPLE'SREPUBLICOFCHIMA(PRC)
(U) purpose: To (1) infonn the Comission of the DOE staff's decision to j d recomend that the Secretary of Energy approve a number of T requests to transfer U.S.-origin nuclear power plant technology to the PRC, and (2) recomend Commission aoproval of a proposed letter to the Department of Energy on this matter.
(U) Backaround: For sometime, the staff has been receiving from 00E requests for Comission views on some proposed transfers to the PRC of non-sensitive U.S.-origin nuclear power technology pursuant to 10 CFR Part 810. The staff has '
provided interim responses requesting a discussion of the Executive Branch's overell U.S. policy guidelines with respect to such transfers. While the Executive Branch has been reluctant to provide a written statement of policy, the Department of State agreed to provide th.is policy to the staff verbally on August 7, and reiterated it at an August 8 meeting of the Subgroup on Nuclear Export Controls.
CONTACT:
. '.I.H'9s..J.0NJ DOCWH OF EO 12958 HAS DEEN DECLASSlRED UNDER William Upshaw, IP WMway oL%ww.DAT 174g ,y,, ,
49-24724 $sdnesgoshn WDedeseEcehn_ 7/ay n 1 C: awned L:r .Ltr from DOS _to DOE dtd 8/2/
un0 eat s. c'J.un m0?'!iU0[N and tNEC Mtg of 87h/85
/ P::'upt on. 0ADR
[th6
.'u tro; > ; ' c ure ubject '.0 CC8* gy,,y; , , Tom Atini .t O . .r.t .'r' .103?. SW .j Or.s r.;;r : / , . - - , ~ gy. -
9708250184 970019 r 7 PDR FOIA STROBEL96-398 PDR
/
1
1 .
0; . ' -
The Commission 2 (C) Discussion: On August 5 the staff learned that State, by letter of August 2 to DOE (Appendix A), had concurred in approval of all but four of the proposed transfers. (Thesefour transfers involve the supply of equipment by U.S. companies or their foreign licensees to PRC projects. A copy of all i the re i SECY.) Also quests on received August 5,tothedate is was staff available for that advised review a in special meeting of the Subgroup on Nuclear Export Controls (SNEC) was being called for August 8 to obtain the final views of each member agency on these requests. DOE was advised that NRC could not provide its views on these transfers on such a short notice, particularly since the Executive Branch policy statement requested by 9RC has not been received and since the requests required Commission review. DOE then advised that its staff would continue to process these requests for the Secretary of Energy's approval, but that NRC would be advised prior to actual approval.
(C) At the August 8 SNEC meeting, DOS stated that current Executive Branch policy is to approve all requests for the transfer to the PRC of non-sensitive nuclear power plant technology. However, requests involving the supply of equipment that, if exported from the U.S., would require an NRC export license, and requests that would allow the retransfer of such equipment by a foreign licensee of a U.S.
company would not be approved at this time. State noted, however, of the four current requests still under review, one involving the transfer to the PRC of a pressure vessel by a Japanese subsidiary of Westinghouse may be approved on:
(1) the basis of urgency; (2) the fact that the Japanese have concluded a firm contract for the sale of this equipment, and (3) that the U.S. had assented to this transfer in C0COM. State also believes refusal to allow the transfer may have an adverse impact on U.S./ Japanese relations. State cautioned, however, that, while its current policy does not permit such transfers, it should not be assumed that State would not approve additional such transfers before the proposed U.S./PRC Agreement for Cooperation enters into force. State agreed to keep concerned agencies advised of any shift in its current position.
q ,
The Commission 3 (C) State also advised that on August 2, the House Committee on Science and Technology, the House Foreign Affairs Comit1.ae and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee were briefed on this policy and none of the Committees indicated opposition to the plans to approve these 810 cases. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee expressed concerns, however, about the pending agreement for cooperation. State, therefore, is convinced that approval of the 810 transfers will not adversely affect ultimate congressional consid. ration of the proposed agreement.
(C) Finally, while the Department of Defense was not present at the SNEC meeting, DOS stated that D0D had advised by telephone that it concurred in State's position. Comerce also concurred in State's position. The Ams Control Disarmament Agency agreed with State on all of the requests except one from Teledyne (number three on the list attached to State's letter), involving the transfer of butt welders from Canada. ACDA believes that since the butt welders could possibly be considered equipment subject to Section 109b controls under U.S. law, the Canadians should be asked what conditions, if any, they would impose on the transfer.
State agreed to approach the Canadians on this matter early next week and.00E agreed that if it was not possible to obtain a Canadian position, DOE's authorization would be conditioned to include the Section 109b "no nuclear explosives" and "no retransfer" requirements.
(U) The staff notes that the only statutory requirement for approval of these transfers is a determination by the Secretary of Energy that the exports will not be inimical to the interest of the United States. The staff notes further that the transfers in question are of minimal proliferation significance and believes that authorization of the exports would not be inconsistent with current U.S. policy as articulated by the Department of State.
(U) Recommendation: Accordingly, the staff recommends that the Commission authorize the dispatch of the draft response at Appendix B to DOE, which notes, without objection, DOE's plan to approve the twenty requests concurred in by State.
I
The Comission 4 (U) Review Date: DOE has requested that NRC expedtte its review of these requests since it would like to forward them to the Secretary of Energy no later than Wednesday, August 14.
W am ksh xecutive Director for Operations Appendices:
A. Ltr to DOE fnn DOS dtd 8/2/85 (C)
B. Draft Response to DOE (U) 1 In order to meet the above deadline of August 14, 1985, Commissioners' comments or consent should be provided directly to the Office of the Secretary ASAP.
DISTRIBUTIOll:
Commissioners OGC .
OPE EDO SECY
h* ,
Lg
.- p5
.g e k
APPENDIX B l
a ., ,
/ .
. '. . t)
Mr. Carl Thorne. Director Division of Politico-Military Security Aff airs Office of International Security Affairs U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585
Dear Mr. Thorne:
With reference to the various communications between the NRC and DOE staffs concerning the proposed transfers of U.S.-origin nuclear power plant technology to the People's Republic of China pursuant to 10 CFR Part 810, this is to advise you that the Commission notes, without objection DOE's staff's' plan (with the concurrence of the Deoartment of State) to recomend that the
, Secretary of Energy authorize the transfers identified in the attachment to State's August 2 letter to you.
Sincerely, James R. Shea, Director Office of International Programs
w.g.a... JUL 31 REC'0 a&& -
63 g RbSEARCHINFORMADON SERVICES, tNC.
oOCvuEur July 26,1996 RESEARCHA RETRIEVAL Freedom Of Information Act Officer IIcadc uarters, U.S. Department of Energy 1000 :ndependence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20585
[
Mo: gg?
%-3.7 M: Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request, N DateBec'd- / o '7-9 b
. c@g Action 0ff: hk To FOIA Officer, Related Case: - boE 4 C_
Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"),5 U.S.C., section 522, as amended, I hereby request the following information:
- All records pertaining to the Energy Secretary's determination, under 10 CFR Part 810, dated July, 21, 1987, conceming the application of Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation ("SWEC'), including without limitation the SWEC apphcation referred to in the Secretary's determination, all specific authorization documents provided to SWEC, all records concerning SWEC's capacity to " team" with any other entity pursuant to the authonty of that determination and specific authorization, and all meeting notes and correspondence concerning all the foregoing; g
- All records dated after January 1,1982, pertaining to an specific authorization under 10 CFR Part 810 sought by or granted to Westinghouse E[lectric Corporation or any affiliate thereof) concerning direct or indirect assistance to the production of spec nuclear material in the People's Republic of China (whether through manufactunng of nuclear fuel and/or equipment in China or in a third country (e.g., Japan, Spain, Belglupi)), including without limitation all records interpreting the scope of such specific authorization (s), all applications therefor, and all meeting records and correspondence concerning all the foregohr,; and ,
2
- All other records xrtaining to any determination by the Secretary.cflinergy, 1982, under 10 CFR Part 810 pursuant to whicli any person dated was or is onauthorized or after January to util ,ize U.S.-origin technology for the manufacture of nuclear power reactors (or their components) or the fabrication of nuclear power reactor fuel, for ultimate use in the Peo)le's Republic of China (regardless of whether such manufacture / fabrication woulc occur m China or a third country and regardless of whether the authodzation covered only China or other countries in addition to China),
meluding without limitation all records interpreting the scope of such authorizations, all applications therefor, and all meeting records and correspondence conceming all the foregoing, if this request is denied, I would like a detailed statement of the reasons for withholding the information in question. See Yanghn v. Rmen 484 F.2d 820 (DC Cir.1973), ccIL denied,415 US 977 (1974). I also request the name(s) of the person (s) responsible for denying the request.
MAIN OfflCE 717 O STREETNW, SUITE 200 WASHINGTON, DC 20004 2891 202 737-7111 800-542-3320 202 737 3324 FAX NEW YORK OFFICE LOS ANGELES OfflCE oELAWARE OFFICE SEC OfflCE 800 477-3320 800-766-3320 800 685-3320 800-866 3320 =<
f 212 349-4646 213-680 1972 302 426-9200 202-347 6666 ,
Ub __ _ _ _
1
- ., ,.? L* , .
.. s.
18 midi $4. Strobel
- July 26,1996 .
Page 2 In accordance with your ulations and with the tenns of the FOIA, I ajm to pay all reasonable search and copy - es upon pmmtation of an invoice, along wit) the requested -
material. I understand that in accordance with the regulations, a response to this request must be made by your office within ten (10) workiri . days of its receipt.
i I appreciate your attention to this matter. If you have any questions or problems, please contact
, me at (202) 737-7111.
Sincerely, W D5
- Heidi M. Strobel Director, legal Research-
- hms
/
e E 4 i
e 9 4
4
(
ar me .
t ,
Department cf Energy l
Washington, DC 20585 October 2, 1996 hir. Russell A. Powell OlA/PA REQUEST Chief. FOIA/LPDR Case No- '/4 -
g.a f I'd: M7- Wo Division of I reedom of Information and Publication Services g.g g.
pg.yg ,
x~ x U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
Dear Mr. Powell:
Enclosed is a Freedom of Information Act request from Ms. Ileidi Strobel and our response of September 25,1996. Ms. Strobel is seeking records pertaining to detenninations made by the Secretary of Energy, pursuant to Department of Energy r gulation 10 CFR, Part 810, for United States companies to ent ;c in nuclear activities ir. the People's Republic of China. Documents being sought in this request are similar to earlier requests that were forwarded to your agency for response from Tim Peckinpaugh (May 1995), Jay Baylon (March 1995), and Woody Voinche (June 1995).
We have informed Ms. Strobel that your agency will respond directly to her regarding any records originated by your agency falling within the scope of her request. We would appreciate receiving a copy of your response to Ms. Strobel.
Your cooperation and assistance in this matter are appreciated.
Sincerely, b.m z ,
Trisha Dedik Director Export Control Division Ofnce of Arms Control and Nonproliferation Enclosures geu m - .o==
bueu -
~ -
l ,
1 Departmentof Energy Washington, DC 20585 y ,
September 25,19%
Ms. lleldi M. Strobel .
Director, Legal Research Research Information Services, Inc.
717 D Street, N.W.
- Suite 200 Washington, D. C. 20004 2891
Dear Ms. Strobel:
Your Freedom ofInfonnation Act (FOIA) request of July 26,1996, to the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) has been referred to this office for reply.
In your letter you request, amot.g other things, records on Part 810 determinations for the People's Republic of China (PRC) after January 1,1982. In this regard, I wish to point out that specific detenninations by the Secretary of Energy authorizing nuclear cooperation with the PRC were suspended in February 1990. With the passage of Public Law 101-246, the Secretary of Energy was precluded from authorizing assistance to the PRC under Section 57b,(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 through its implementing regulation,10 CFR, Part 810. As a result,
, there have been no further Part 810 authorizations granted for the PRC since 1990.
During the past year, we have had other FOIA inquiries for records similar to that which you have requested. As a result, we have placed, with some exceptions, in the Freedom of Information Reading Room all re:ords pertaining to specific detenninations made by the Secretary of Energy authorizing U. S. firms, such as Westinghouse and Stone & Webster, to engage in specifically authorized activities in the PRC. The Reading Room is located at DOE lleadquarters, Room 1E-190,1000 Independence Ave., S.W., Washington, D.C. To insure that you have access to all 810 documents in the Reading Room, it is suggested that you direct your inquiries to Ms. Jennifer ifoughton in that ofIice at (202) 586 8050.
Excepted records, i.e., those records falling within the scope of your request that are not in ths DOE Reading Room, at this time, are those origin ,' by other Executive Bmnch agencies or designated as classified for national security reasons, and Stone & Webster's letter of application that led to the July 21,1987, determination by the Secretary of Energy.
Access to Part 810 records originated by other Executive Branch agencies can be requested specifically from each of the agencies involved. I have forwarded your inquiry to the following agencies with a request ihat each agency respond to you separately: Departments of State, Commerce, and Defense; the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; the Arms Control and ge ., % ,.,., w l
. . . - a
,e_ +4
.- - 2 Disannament Agency; and the CentralIntelligence Agency. Any DOE classified records pertaining to Part 810 detenninations falling within the scope of your request have either been declassified and placed in the Reading Room or are undergoing declassification review.
Once d-classified, any such documents will be placed in the Reading Room. Authority for withholding these two categories of records pending declassification review and review by other agencies is set forth in 10 CFR, Part 1004.4(f) and 6(c).
Records pertaining to Part 810 authorizations granted to Stone & Webster to conduct activities in the PRC are in the . Reading Room, albeit, most in redacted form. DOE made every effort to comply with FOIA regulations to make Stone & Webster's records publicly available, which explains the heavily redacted version of some of these documents now in the Reading Room. As noted above, Stone & Webster's application that led to the Secretary's July 21,1987, determination is not in the Reading Room. Stone & Webster states that the withheld letter of application and the other records before being redacted are proprietary and constitute commercial information that reflects the corporation's current business development plans for China's nuclear power service market and the types and scopes of services they can offer. As such, they state that the public rel~ ease of these records could cause substantial competitive harm by revealing key elements of business strategy.
DOE agrees with this and has determined that this information is commercial or financial infonnation obtained from persons that is privileged or confidential, the release of which would be likely to cause substantial hann to the competitive position of those persons. It is, therefore.
9 exempt from mandatory disclosure pursuant to Exemption 4 of the Freedom ofInformation Act, 5 U.S.C. section 552(b)(4),10 CFR Section 1004.10(b)(4). This information has been held in confidence by the persons to whom it pertains. It is of a type customarily held in confidence by those persons, and there is a reasonable basis for doing so. The information was transmitted to and received.by DOE in confidence; it is not available in public sources and, as previously stated, disclosure is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive positions of the persons from whom it was obtained. See 10 CFR Section 1004.11(f).
Discretionary disclosure of this information would not be in the public interest. Exemption 4 protects infonnation implicating private commercial interests that i.e not ordinarily subject to discretionary FOIA disclosure. In addition, the Tmde Secrets Act, ! 8 U.S.C. section 1905, a criminal statute effectively prohibiting the unauthorized disclosure of all data protected by Exemption 4, prohibits discretionary release of this information since no other law authorizes its release. .
The Denying Official for this determination is Kenneth N. Luongo, Senior Advisor to the Secretary for Nonproliferation Policy and Director of the Office of Arms Control and Nonprolifemtion.
Should you wish to appeal this decision, your written appeal should be sent within 30 working days of your receipt of this letter to the Director, Office oflicaring and Appeals,11G-1, U. S.
w
,; :, .: .?>, ....Al;.l.W.' '
'L :
. ~
, , ,' , e c
.. .. 3
'y .
Department of Energy,1000 L@nce Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20585. The written appeal, including envelope, must clearly indicate that a Freedom ofInformation appeal is being made, and the appeal icust contain all other elements required by Title 10, Code of Federal
. Regulations,'Section 1004.2. Judicial review will thereafter be available to you: (1) in the district where you reside; (2) where yo ; have your principal place of business; (3) where the DOE records are situated; or (4) in the District of Columbia.
Sincesely, h Kenneth N. Luongo .
Senior Advisor to the Secretary.
,for Nonproliferation and Policy and Director of the Office of Arms Control and Nonproliferation 4
e 6
4 y
_ _ _ . . . _ _ . . . _ . . .