ML20126F943 - Revision history

StriderTol: StriderTol Bot change

2024-12-12T23:51:34Z

StriderTol Bot change

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:51, 12 December 2024
Line 21:		Line 21:
	=Text=		=Text=
	{{#Wiki_filter:,		{{#Wiki_filter:,
	pn etou,,		.o pn etou,,
	.o ~f' D (?		~f' D (?
	lf f'>n<		lf
	~~?,,~~		?,
	e ~~UNITED STATES~~ g ( '" . ~~gj NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION~~ WASHINGTON. D C. 23%6 g~~, ,~~,		UNITED STATES f'>n<
	ODCember 16, 1992 CHAIRMAN The Honorable George Miller Chairman, Committee on Interior an insular Affairs United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515		e NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g ( '". j WASHINGTON. D C. 23%6 g,
			g ODCember 16, 1992 CHAIRMAN The Honorable George Miller Chairman, Committee on Interior an insular Affairs United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
			20515

	==Dear Mr. Chairman:==		==Dear Mr. Chairman:==
			I am providing an interim response to your {{letter dated\|date=November 23, 1992\|text=November 23, 1992 letter}} on the subject of Transnuclear incorporated's application for a license to export irradiated fuel from the Shoreham nuclear power plant in New York to Cogema in France.
	I am providing an interim response to your {{letter dated\|date=November 23, 1992\|text=November 23, 1992 letter}} on the subject of Transnuclear incorporated's application for a license to export irradiated fuel from the Shoreham nuclear power plant in New York to Cogema in France. Because the Executive Branch has not yet-decided how to respond to Transnuclear's application (see enclosed letter from the Department of Defense to the Department of State, dated December 8, 1992), we are not in a position to consider the application or your request for a hearing. When we are informed of the Executive Branch's position, we will let you know and at that time, formally respond to your request that a hearing be held on the application.		Because the Executive Branch has not yet-decided how to respond to Transnuclear's application (see enclosed letter from the Department of Defense to the Department of State, dated December 8, 1992), we are not in a position to consider the application or your request for a hearing.
	Sincerely, u V Ivan Selin		When we are informed of the Executive Branch's position, we will let you know and at that time, formally respond to your request that a hearing be held on the application.
			Sincerely, V
			u Ivan Selin

	==Enclosure:==		==Enclosure:==
			Ltr to R.J.K. Stratford, DOS, fm H.D. Sokolski, 000, dtd December 8, 1992 cc:
	Ltr to R.J.K. Stratford, DOS, fm H.D. Sokolski, 000, dtd December 8, 1992 cc: Representative Don Young 1		Representative Don Young 1
	200004 1		200004 1
	9212310209 921216 ~~PDR CDMMS NRCC~~		9212310209 921216
	[ l>		[
	CORRESPONDENCE PDR- ,		l>
			PDR CDMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR-

	-____-_y__-		-____-_y__-
	g t e		g t
	* g7 OFFICE OF THE assistant ScCRETAQY OF DEFENSE WA5HINGTON, D C. 10301 1400 December 8,1992		e g7 OFFICE OF THE assistant ScCRETAQY OF DEFENSE WA5HINGTON, D C. 10301 1400 December 8,1992
	.;TTllU' l':.;,		.;TTllU' l':.;,
	Mr. Richard J. K. Stratford Deputy Assistant Secretary Nuclear Energy & Energy Technology Affairs Department of State Washington, D.C. 20520 i		Mr. Richard J. K. Stratford Deputy Assistant Secretary Nuclear Energy & Energy Technology Affairs Department of State Washington, D.C. 20520 i

	==Dear Mr. Stratford:==		==Dear Mr. Stratford:==
			\\
	\
	Your letter of October 26, 1992, responds to Mr. Harold R.		Your letter of October 26, 1992, responds to Mr. Harold R.
	' Denton's request of August 5,1992 for the views of the Executive Branch concerning NRC No. XSNM02702, an application by Transnuclear. Inc. for authorization to export 560 irradiated nuclear power reactor fuel assemblies from the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit I to Cogema. France for reprocessing. Because of an administrative misunderstanding, the Department of Defense was noted as having concurred in your proposed letter when, in fact, it did not. This letter provides the Defense Department's views which differ substantially with those in your letter to the NRC.		' Denton's request of August 5,1992 for the views of the Executive Branch concerning NRC No. XSNM02702, an application by Transnuclear. Inc. for authorization to export 560 irradiated nuclear power reactor fuel assemblies from the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit I to Cogema. France for reprocessing.
			Because of an administrative misunderstanding, the Department of Defense was noted as having concurred in your proposed letter when, in fact, it did not.
			This letter provides the Defense Department's views which differ substantially with those in your letter to the NRC.
	If granted, this license would result in the separation of plutonium from a U.S. licensed reactor at a time when worldwide trends are strongly away from reprocessing and a growing inventory of separated plutonium from both military and civil sources are increasing proliferation concerns.		If granted, this license would result in the separation of plutonium from a U.S. licensed reactor at a time when worldwide trends are strongly away from reprocessing and a growing inventory of separated plutonium from both military and civil sources are increasing proliferation concerns.
	Although the amount of plutonium involved is small, this case will set a precedent that could encourage other U.S. utilities to seek similar approvals, giving rise to potentially far more significant quantities of separated plutonium.		Although the amount of plutonium involved is small, this case will set a precedent that could encourage other U.S. utilities to seek similar approvals, giving rise to potentially far more significant quantities of separated plutonium.
	Of even greater concern to the Department of Defense however, is the unfortunate and extremely damaging signal this approval would send to other countries. The United States would be declaring that the proliferation risks posed by reprocessing and separated plutonium under international safeguards are acceptably low, in the Defense Department's view, they are not.		Of even greater concern to the Department of Defense however, is the unfortunate and extremely damaging signal this approval would send to other countries.
			The United States would be declaring that the proliferation risks posed by reprocessing and separated plutonium under international safeguards are acceptably low, in the Defense Department's view, they are not.
	l		l

	Indeed, it is the policy of the United States that the proliferation risks from both reprocessing and enrichment on the Korean Peninsula are unacceptable. To prevent these risks, the Unite,J States gained bilateral agreement that these technologies would not be pursued even under IAEA Safeguards. For the Executive Branch to now endorse-reprocessing as an acceptable means to deal with spent fuel could seriously undermine our no reprocessing policy on the Korean Peninsula. It would also have a deleterious effect on achieving our national security objectives by making it more difficult for the United States to oppose reprocessing in other regions of proliferation concern where similar restraint would be desirable.		Indeed, it is the policy of the United States that the proliferation risks from both reprocessing and enrichment on the Korean Peninsula are unacceptable.
			To prevent these risks, the Unite,J States gained bilateral agreement that these technologies would not be pursued even under IAEA Safeguards.
			For the Executive Branch to now endorse-reprocessing as an acceptable means to deal with spent fuel could seriously undermine our no reprocessing policy on the Korean Peninsula.
			It would also have a deleterious effect on achieving our national security objectives by making it more difficult for the United States to oppose reprocessing in other regions of proliferation concern where similar restraint would be desirable.
	Finally, approval of this application would foreclose more economic and proliferation resistar.t storage options which are available for the disposition of spent reactor fuel.		Finally, approval of this application would foreclose more economic and proliferation resistar.t storage options which are available for the disposition of spent reactor fuel.
	For the reasons set forth above, the Department of Defense believes granting this export license would be* inimical to the common defense and security of the United States."		For the reasons set forth above, the Department of Defense believes granting this export license would be* inimical to the common defense and security of the United States."
	Sincerely, 1 D. Sokolski Deputy for Non Proliferation Policy L		Sincerely, 1
			D. Sokolski Deputy for Non Proliferation Policy L
	CC: T. Hart, DOE R. DeLaBarre, DOS M. Rosenthal, ACDA S. Dhir, DOC D. Poneman, NSC H. Denton, NRC		CC: T. Hart, DOE R. DeLaBarre, DOS M. Rosenthal, ACDA S. Dhir, DOC D. Poneman, NSC H. Denton, NRC
	;}}		;}}

StriderTol: StriderTol Bot change

2022-08-22T15:59:44Z

StriderTol Bot change

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:59, 22 August 2022
Line 2:		Line 2:
	\| number = ML20126F943		\| number = ML20126F943
	\| issue date = 12/16/1992		\| issue date = 12/16/1992
	\| title = Provides Interim Response to ~~921123 Ltr~~ Re Transnuclear Inc Application for License to Export Irradiated Fuel from Facility in New York to Cogema in France		\| title = Provides Interim Response to Re Transnuclear Inc Application for License to Export Irradiated Fuel from Facility in New York to Cogema in France
	\| author name = Selin I, The Chairman		\| author name = Selin I, The Chairman
	\| author affiliation = NRC COMMISSION (OCM)		\| author affiliation = NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Line 11:		Line 11:
	\| contact person =		\| contact person =
	\| document report number = CCS, NUDOCS 9212310209		\| document report number = CCS, NUDOCS 9212310209
			\| title reference date = 11-23-1992
	\| package number = ML20126F948		\| package number = ML20126F948
	\| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE		\| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
	\| page count = 3		\| page count = 3
			\| project =
			\| stage = Other
	}}		}}

Line 27:		Line 30:
	==Dear Mr. Chairman:==		==Dear Mr. Chairman:==

	I am providing an interim response to your November 23, 1992 letter on the subject of Transnuclear incorporated's application for a license to export irradiated fuel from the Shoreham nuclear power plant in New York to Cogema in France. Because the Executive Branch has not yet-decided how to respond to Transnuclear's application (see enclosed letter from the Department of Defense to the Department of State, dated December 8, 1992), we are not in a position to consider the application or your request for a hearing. When we are informed of the Executive Branch's position, we will let you know and at that time, formally respond to your request that a hearing be held on the application.		I am providing an interim response to your {{letter dated\|date=November 23, 1992\|text=November 23, 1992 letter}} on the subject of Transnuclear incorporated's application for a license to export irradiated fuel from the Shoreham nuclear power plant in New York to Cogema in France. Because the Executive Branch has not yet-decided how to respond to Transnuclear's application (see enclosed letter from the Department of Defense to the Department of State, dated December 8, 1992), we are not in a position to consider the application or your request for a hearing. When we are informed of the Executive Branch's position, we will let you know and at that time, formally respond to your request that a hearing be held on the application.
	Sincerely, u V Ivan Selin		Sincerely, u V Ivan Selin

StriderTol: StriderTol Bot insert

2020-07-12T01:42:06Z

StriderTol Bot insert

New page

{{Adams
| number = ML20126F943
| issue date = 12/16/1992
| title = Provides Interim Response to 921123 Ltr Re Transnuclear Inc Application for License to Export Irradiated Fuel from Facility in New York to Cogema in France
| author name = Selin I, The Chairman
| author affiliation = NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
| addressee name = Miller G
| addressee affiliation = HOUSE OF REP., INTERIOR & INSULAR AFFAIRS
| docket = 05000322
| license number =
| contact person =
| document report number = CCS, NUDOCS 9212310209
| package number = ML20126F948
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| page count = 3
}}

=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:,
pn etou,,
.o ~f' D (?
lf f'>n<
?,,
e UNITED STATES g ( '" . gj NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D C. 23%6 g, ,,
ODCember 16, 1992 CHAIRMAN The Honorable George Miller Chairman, Committee on Interior an insular Affairs United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515

==Dear Mr. Chairman:==

I am providing an interim response to your November 23, 1992 letter on the subject of Transnuclear incorporated's application for a license to export irradiated fuel from the Shoreham nuclear power plant in New York to Cogema in France. Because the Executive Branch has not yet-decided how to respond to Transnuclear's application (see enclosed letter from the Department of Defense to the Department of State, dated December 8, 1992), we are not in a position to consider the application or your request for a hearing. When we are informed of the Executive Branch's position, we will let you know and at that time, formally respond to your request that a hearing be held on the application.
Sincerely, u V Ivan Selin

==Enclosure:==

Ltr to R.J.K. Stratford, DOS, fm H.D. Sokolski, 000, dtd December 8, 1992 cc: Representative Don Young 1
200004 1
9212310209 921216 PDR CDMMS NRCC
[ l>
CORRESPONDENCE PDR- ,

-____-_y__-
g t e
* g7 OFFICE OF THE assistant ScCRETAQY OF DEFENSE WA5HINGTON, D C. 10301 1400 December 8,1992
.;TTllU' l':.;,
Mr. Richard J. K. Stratford Deputy Assistant Secretary Nuclear Energy & Energy Technology Affairs Department of State Washington, D.C. 20520 i

==Dear Mr. Stratford:==

\
Your letter of October 26, 1992, responds to Mr. Harold R.
' Denton's request of August 5,1992 for the views of the Executive Branch concerning NRC No. XSNM02702, an application by Transnuclear. Inc. for authorization to export 560 irradiated nuclear power reactor fuel assemblies from the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit I to Cogema. France for reprocessing. Because of an administrative misunderstanding, the Department of Defense was noted as having concurred in your proposed letter when, in fact, it did not. This letter provides the Defense Department's views which differ substantially with those in your letter to the NRC.
If granted, this license would result in the separation of plutonium from a U.S. licensed reactor at a time when worldwide trends are strongly away from reprocessing and a growing inventory of separated plutonium from both military and civil sources are increasing proliferation concerns.
Although the amount of plutonium involved is small, this case will set a precedent that could encourage other U.S. utilities to seek similar approvals, giving rise to potentially far more significant quantities of separated plutonium.
Of even greater concern to the Department of Defense however, is the unfortunate and extremely damaging signal this approval would send to other countries. The United States would be declaring that the proliferation risks posed by reprocessing and separated plutonium under international safeguards are acceptably low, in the Defense Department's view, they are not.
l

Indeed, it is the policy of the United States that the proliferation risks from both reprocessing and enrichment on the Korean Peninsula are unacceptable. To prevent these risks, the Unite,J States gained bilateral agreement that these technologies would not be pursued even under IAEA Safeguards. For the Executive Branch to now endorse-reprocessing as an acceptable means to deal with spent fuel could seriously undermine our no reprocessing policy on the Korean Peninsula. It would also have a deleterious effect on achieving our national security objectives by making it more difficult for the United States to oppose reprocessing in other regions of proliferation concern where similar restraint would be desirable.
Finally, approval of this application would foreclose more economic and proliferation resistar.t storage options which are available for the disposition of spent reactor fuel.
For the reasons set forth above, the Department of Defense believes granting this export license would be* inimical to the common defense and security of the United States."
Sincerely, 1 D. Sokolski Deputy for Non Proliferation Policy L
CC: T. Hart, DOE R. DeLaBarre, DOS M. Rosenthal, ACDA S. Dhir, DOC D. Poneman, NSC H. Denton, NRC
;}}